Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Org]

Well, I said that the crux of the rules is that both armies move simultaneously.  Players give orders to each unit or squad or whatever each turn, but if the unit runs into a situation that it's orders don't cover (target gone, ambushed, other stuff), it then has to act on it's own.  Initiative measures a model's ability to jump into action, Logic covers had competent that action is.

Say two units blunder into each other, a pack of Sabretooth Tigers and a squad of Dwarven Machinegunners.  The tigers would probably react first, leaping at the dwarves as animals do; while the dwarves would react with better strategy, shooting the leader or forming a defensive line.  A model with low scores in both would be dimwitted like an ogre and in need of good supervision, while some Elven SEALs would have high scores in both and could confidently be left to their own devices.  Obviously, reactions would rarely be automatic, relying on rolls, then tables or suchlike.

I understand much better now.

Sorry if I seemed unresponsive, my internets were down.

[Rysith]

I prefer the simplicity of Warhammer's very few Wounds system for tracking model hits.

I'm not familiar at all with Warhammer's Wounds system, but it seems like one of the strengths of this system would be that a (relatively) large amount of computation could be done between turns. Why not have models divided into sections (head, torso, limbs), each with their own "hp" pool and (potentially) separate armor values? Incoming fire could be distributed randomly (or, as a special ability, targeted?), resolved against the armor of that section, and then have effects such as slowed movement, lessened attack, instant death, and so on. Perhaps a bit more complicated, but resolving those wouldn't hold up gameplay (especially since I'd guess that we would be writing a perl script or something to auto-resolve things).

[Org]

I prefer the simplicity of Warhammer's very few Wounds system for tracking model hits.

I'm not familiar at all with Warhammer's Wounds system, but it seems like one of the strengths of this system would be that a (relatively) large amount of computation could be done between turns. Why not have models divided into sections (head, torso, limbs), each with their own "hp" pool and (potentially) separate armor values? Incoming fire could be distributed randomly (or, as a special ability, targeted?), resolved against the armor of that section, and then have effects such as slowed movement, lessened attack, instant death, and so on. Perhaps a bit more complicated, but resolving those wouldn't hold up gameplay (especially since I'd guess that we would be writing a perl script or something to auto-resolve things).

THe problem is if you are doing even a fairly small game, there are many many models usually, and it would take longer. I agree with Aqizzar in using Warhammer/LOTR wound system.

And on another note, Aqizzar, is there anything right now for hitting in combat/shooting?

[Aqizzar]

And on another note, Aqizzar, is there anything right now for hitting in combat/shooting?

Nope!

I'm not familiar at all with Warhammer's Wounds system, but it seems like one of the strengths of this system would be that a (relatively) large amount of computation could be done between turns. Why not have models divided into sections (head, torso, limbs), each with their own "hp" pool and (potentially) separate armor values? Incoming fire could be distributed randomly (or, as a special ability, targeted?), resolved against the armor of that section, and then have effects such as slowed movement, lessened attack, instant death, and so on. Perhaps a bit more complicated, but resolving those wouldn't hold up gameplay (especially since I'd guess that we would be writing a perl script or something to auto-resolve things).

For reference, GW games (Warhammer et al) track woulds with one number, most models having one wound.  If the model is hit, then wounded, then isn't saved by it's armor, then it's dead.  Models with multiple wounds don't fight any differently if they lose any wounds short of dieing.

I do think it would a little too easy to say "models are completely alive until all their wounds run out" and leave it there.  But anything more complicated would be just that.  Maybe a model wounded but not killed would fight at reduced effectiveness, with crappier accuracy and a random movement distance.  And maybe basic soldiers would have two wounds each, to represent the obvious scenario of squads having to drag around wounded but still viable fighters.  And larger weapons like swords and rifles (and on up) have a chance to cause multiple wounds, killing normal dudes outright.

are you going to want to model morale and organization into the units? such that as a fight wears on a unit may lose heart and quit the field, or become so disorganized it is unable to move around the battlefield effectively until it is given a chance to reorganize?

I don't know how I forgot about this, but yes morale has to be important.  It would interact with Initiative and Logic to determine whether a unit charges or stands when left on it's own, or bolts if bad stuff happens.

[Org]

Thinking of just using Weapon and`Ballistic Skill?

And are you using saves?

[Aqizzar]

I dunno.  I have now completely exhausted everything I thought of before hand.  This is all free-balling.

I had an idea that armor would be rolled into a model's general resilience.  The division would be actually hitting a target, and then damaging it.  Yes, that means agility or somesuch.  I can't immediately see any meaningful difference between armor-penetrating weapons and weapons of great force.

[Org]

I dunno.  I have now completely exhausted everything I thought of before hand.  This is all free-balling.

I had an idea that armor would be rolled into a model's general resilience.  The division would be actually hitting a target, and then damaging it.  Yes, that means agility or somesuch.  I can't immediately see any meaningful difference between armor-penetrating weapons and weapons of great force.

Hmmm...

And are there anythings other than stats and rules that carry over..Like magic?

[Rysith]

Thinking of just using Weapon and`Ballistic Skill?

I'm not sure why you wouldn't (or even just a single 'attack' skill), unless you wanted to include units looting weapons on the battlefield, which seems a) unlikely as a general case and b) handle-able with a generalized "-2 with an unfamiliar but similar weapon (M16 to AK-47, for example), -4 otherwise" type of rule. I could see separate melee and ranged values, but not much point beyond that.

I'd also think that having some kind of armor-penetrating effect would be good: molten lead poured off the top of a castle wall wouldn't do any more damage to an unarmored human than an armored one, but it wouldn't do significantly less damage to the armored one either. That said, I have no idea what molten lead would do to a naturally tough-skinned creature, and it might be fine if that had its "armor" reduced by such an attack as well.

[Org]

Thinking of just using Weapon and`Ballistic Skill?

I'm not sure why you wouldn't (or even just a single 'attack' skill), unless you wanted to include units looting weapons on the battlefield, which seems a) unlikely as a general case and b) handle-able with a generalized "-2 with an unfamiliar but similar weapon (M16 to AK-47, for example), -4 otherwise" type of rule. I could see separate melee and ranged values, but not much point beyond that.

I'd also think that having some kind of armor-penetrating effect would be good: molten lead poured off the top of a castle wall wouldn't do any more damage to an unarmored human than an armored one, but it wouldn't do significantly less damage to the armored one either. That said, I have no idea what molten lead would do to a naturally tough-skinned creature, and it might be fine if that had its "armor" reduced by such an attack as well.

I think you are confused on what I mean by Weapon or Ballistic Skill...

Or I am confused about what you said.

[Asheron]

For the weapon penetration thing, you could use some sort of a value. For example, you could set a normal sword to have a penetration of 5, and a plate armour would have a defense value of, say, 7. 7-5=2, so you minimally need to roll a 3 to penetrate the armour. For things like molten lead you could take a value of 15 or something, so it's guaranteed the penetration happens, no matter how sucky the roll. You might go as far as making different penetration classes, for example give an axe 7b ( blunt) and 2p ( penetration ) and give a shield 4b and 7p defense values. These are all random values, of course. 

[Rysith]

Thinking of just using Weapon and`Ballistic Skill?

I'm not sure why you wouldn't (or even just a single 'attack' skill), unless you wanted to include units looting weapons on the battlefield, which seems a) unlikely as a general case and b) handle-able with a generalized "-2 with an unfamiliar but similar weapon (M16 to AK-47, for example), -4 otherwise" type of rule. I could see separate melee and ranged values, but not much point beyond that.

I think you are confused on what I mean by Weapon or Ballistic Skill...

Or I am confused about what you said.

Either is quite possible, since I'm coming from a computer-TBS and PnP RPG background, rather than a wargaming background. What did you mean?

[Org]

In Warhammer, All units have a Weapon SKill, which is how good they are in hitting with a weapon, with most heroes having a high Weapon Skill, and lowly Guardsman having a very low Weapon Skill.

Ballistic Skill is the same, except it is for Shooting.

[Asheron]

In Warhammer, All units have a Weapon SKill, which is how good they are in hitting with a weapon, with most heroes having a high Weapon Skill, and lowly Guardsman having a very low Weapon Skill.

Ballistic Skill is the same, except it is for Shooting.

Hmm. This gave me an idea. In exchange for more points, you could buy a "trained" variant of models, which are basically models with more weapon skill, speed,... anything that you can learn with a more proper training.

[Org]

THat would be good. Except for some models.

I dont think you could train, say, Ogres in Speed. Or logic for that matter.

[Org]

I think my army is coming together. DF inspired. But with some cool ideas