- 1830, the classic train game that spawned a huge line of games (well, not quite accurate--1829 actually pre-dates 1830, but 1830 was the first 18XX game published in the U.S., and it's the game that generated the insane love for the series). Mayfair Games will be reprinting it, apparently with some variant rules. I own the AH original, so I'm not interested in this one, but it's nice to see the game will be available again. Of course, the fact that several dozen 18XX games are already in print diminishes the excitement for this one, I suspect, but I think a lot of people will still pick this up.
- Breakout: Normandy, long regarded as the best of the area/impulse games (and according to some the best Normandy campaign game), has been out of print for years. L2 Design Group will be reprinting in time for WBC. This is a game I'd love to try, but given their other games I expect this will be very expensive, so I doubt I'll get it. Of course if someone wants to donate it to me, I'd humbly accept.
Friday, February 18, 2011
Reprints
Two games with huge reputations are being reprinted this year (at least according to the companies reprinting them). One I already have, but the other . . .
Monday, February 14, 2011
Tom Waits and the World of Darkness
In an earlier posting, I talked about how King Crimson's music (especially the album "Beat") fit my view of Over the Edge. Another musical association I make is between Tom Waits (especially "Rain Dogs") and the World of Darkness. Why?
- Waits describes life in the underbelly of a big city; his cast of characters included criminals, bartenders, and struggling workers. The screwed up nature of these characters' lives reminds me of the WoD.
- The people in Waits' songs are often desperate and crazed, covering these up with bravado and violence. And alcohol. If there's an official songwriter of drinking, it's Tom Waits.
- The world Waits describes is seedy and decaying.
A World of Darkness Campaign Frame
I've been thinking for a while about a campaign framework for a World of Darkness game for a group of players who know virtually nothing about the setting. That lack of knowledge makes running a Vampire or Werewolf game very hard, but straight-up Hunter doesn't exactly fit what I want either. I've come up with several different ones, but recently I came up with one that I think has legs.
The setting of the campaign is Chicago, mostly in the neighborhood of Rogers Park (where I lived for 7 years). Since I love the city, and think it's a great WoD setting, this makes sense. The PCs are newly assigned members of a gang crime task force that includes the Chicago police, the prosecutor's office, and several federal agencies. In particular, the players are assigned to the section of the task force dealing with Russian gangs in the Rogers Park area.
However, all is not as it seems--the PCs are acting as undercover agents because the Feds suspect corruption. Someone on the task force--maybe several people--has been bought by the gangs, and is sabotaging the task force. So the PCs' real job is to find out who the corrupt people are, and take them down.
How is this a World of Darkness game? Lurking in the background are supernatural forces. The PCs don't know about this, and neither do the players, which makes it good for WoD newcomers. It also presents all kinds of opportunities for intrigue and deception, which is what a good WoD game should have (at least I think so).
The setting of the campaign is Chicago, mostly in the neighborhood of Rogers Park (where I lived for 7 years). Since I love the city, and think it's a great WoD setting, this makes sense. The PCs are newly assigned members of a gang crime task force that includes the Chicago police, the prosecutor's office, and several federal agencies. In particular, the players are assigned to the section of the task force dealing with Russian gangs in the Rogers Park area.
However, all is not as it seems--the PCs are acting as undercover agents because the Feds suspect corruption. Someone on the task force--maybe several people--has been bought by the gangs, and is sabotaging the task force. So the PCs' real job is to find out who the corrupt people are, and take them down.
How is this a World of Darkness game? Lurking in the background are supernatural forces. The PCs don't know about this, and neither do the players, which makes it good for WoD newcomers. It also presents all kinds of opportunities for intrigue and deception, which is what a good WoD game should have (at least I think so).
Thursday, February 10, 2011
It's the CRT, stupid
As I've probably mentioned in this blog (and I've certainly said it in my podcast), I'm not very good at most wargames. It takes me longer to get a decent understanding of how to play than most people, I think. I've figured out one reason why this is the case--the CRT (Combat Results Table). The CRT is a staple of many wargames--usually you calculate the odds of an attack, roll a die (or dice) and cross-reference the roll with the appropriate odds column on the CRT to figure out what happens. Most results are fairly standard--units are damaged or eliminated, retreats, etc.
However, every game has a different CRT, and when learning a new game you need to actually study the CRT. Different CRTs can produce wildly different results. I tend to think all CRTs are like the classic Avalon Hill ones, like in The Russian Campaign, so I tend to play that way. Which often leads to bad results.
For example, the CRT in the excellent game A Victory Lost is pretty mild--even at high odds, most attacks don't directly damage or kill units. Instead, retreats are by far the most common result. Since eliminating units is a key way to earn victory points in that game, you really need to know that about the CRT and adjust your play accordingly. Other games have much deadlier CRTs, or ones that favor the attack or defense. I have a feeling if I studied CRTs more diligently, I'd probably be a little bit better at some of these games.
However, every game has a different CRT, and when learning a new game you need to actually study the CRT. Different CRTs can produce wildly different results. I tend to think all CRTs are like the classic Avalon Hill ones, like in The Russian Campaign, so I tend to play that way. Which often leads to bad results.
For example, the CRT in the excellent game A Victory Lost is pretty mild--even at high odds, most attacks don't directly damage or kill units. Instead, retreats are by far the most common result. Since eliminating units is a key way to earn victory points in that game, you really need to know that about the CRT and adjust your play accordingly. Other games have much deadlier CRTs, or ones that favor the attack or defense. I have a feeling if I studied CRTs more diligently, I'd probably be a little bit better at some of these games.
Friday, January 28, 2011
PBEM, anyone?
Basically the only gaming I get to do these days is play by email, especially using Vassal. I haven't actually played a PBEM game in a while, and I'd like to get back into it. So I'm wondering if anyone out there is interested in playing any of the following, using Vassal (and ACTS, if appropriate):
- A Victory Lost
- The Russian Campaign
- WWII: Barbarossa to Berlin
- Fire in the Sky
- Victory in the Pacific
- Hannibal: Rome v Carthage
Keep in mind that with the exception of TRC, I pretty much suck at all of these games, and want to play to improve. So if you're looking for a challenging opponent in these games, look somewhere else.
Also, because of my very tight schedule, I may only be able to do a turn or two a week (that's a cardplay or two a week in a CDG). Some weeks I'll be able to do much more, but sometimes I simply won't be able to do that. So if you're looking for a really fast game, look somewhere else.
If anyone is interested, let me know.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
An idea for magic
For a number of years, I've thought about trying out a simple but (I think) interesting system for magic in a fantasy RPG (although I suppose it could be used for other genres as well). It's based on the idea that a gifted person can twist probability in his favor, but there are consequences to this action.
The basic idea is simple: the gifted character can, at any time, gain a bonus to a die roll affecting them (or any die roll, depending on how magic works in the game). The bonus can be any size (although the system you're using will obviously affect the size and meaning of the bonus). The GM keeps a running tally of the bonuses used by the character. At any time that he feels like it, the GM can then use some or all of this tally as penalties against the character. The GM can parcel out the penalties in dribs and drabs, or one huge whammy. Do whatever is dramatically appropriate.
For example, in a Fudge style game, a PC takes a +1 bonus during a battle in which he fears for his life. Later, he takes a couple of +1 bonuses to healing checks to recover from the battle. So the tally is now +3. Later in the session, the PC tries to use diplomacy to get an NPC to cooperate, and the GM drops the whammy--a -3 penalty, which leads to catastrophic failure of diplomacy.
I think this system could be adapted in many different rules systems without a problem. And it is balanced if the GM does in fact use the tally to penalize the player. I think it could be a lot of fun.
The basic idea is simple: the gifted character can, at any time, gain a bonus to a die roll affecting them (or any die roll, depending on how magic works in the game). The bonus can be any size (although the system you're using will obviously affect the size and meaning of the bonus). The GM keeps a running tally of the bonuses used by the character. At any time that he feels like it, the GM can then use some or all of this tally as penalties against the character. The GM can parcel out the penalties in dribs and drabs, or one huge whammy. Do whatever is dramatically appropriate.
For example, in a Fudge style game, a PC takes a +1 bonus during a battle in which he fears for his life. Later, he takes a couple of +1 bonuses to healing checks to recover from the battle. So the tally is now +3. Later in the session, the PC tries to use diplomacy to get an NPC to cooperate, and the GM drops the whammy--a -3 penalty, which leads to catastrophic failure of diplomacy.
I think this system could be adapted in many different rules systems without a problem. And it is balanced if the GM does in fact use the tally to penalize the player. I think it could be a lot of fun.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
The Battle for Moscow
I've spent a bit of time lately toying around with Battle for Moscow, a small and freely available wargame covering Operation Typhoon at the end of 1942. The game was originally published by GDW back in 1986 as a free giveaway to get people in to wargaming. I have no idea if it succeeded at that, but it did succeed as a fun and quick-playing wargame. I think you could probably finish this one in two hours or less, especially after you get to know the rules (not that they're particularly complicated).
As much as I like longer wargames (e.g. The Russian Campaign, maybe the greatest wargame ever), it is nice to have a game like this that moves quickly and can be played in a short period of time. Especially now that I have kids, time is very precious, and I can get the wargaming fix in a short time.
By the way, Victory Point Games recently published a new and cleaned up version of this one. And VPG has also published several other games by Frank Chadwick using a fine-tuned version of this system.
As much as I like longer wargames (e.g. The Russian Campaign, maybe the greatest wargame ever), it is nice to have a game like this that moves quickly and can be played in a short period of time. Especially now that I have kids, time is very precious, and I can get the wargaming fix in a short time.
By the way, Victory Point Games recently published a new and cleaned up version of this one. And VPG has also published several other games by Frank Chadwick using a fine-tuned version of this system.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)