[Ivan Sorensen]

Cheers and I am glad it went well!

A replacement for Lasalle? That’s high praise 🙂

Cav – Cav one side charges with a shock action – the target cavalry have to take the charge (no countercharges) and only fight if it goes to hand to hand, so the charger in a Cav -v Cav gets the advantage of a free opportunity to hit. This is what we played,is it correct.

You got it.
I recall we kicked around countercharges or not, but in the end, the current method makes movement more rewarding so we opted for it.

Cav v infantry – smooth bore period Squares – Cav charge infantry, infantry have 0 disarray.

If charged from the front they would have a base 2 plus 2 so 4 d6 to stop a charge from the front, if the charge came from the flank or rear is it just the 2 dice?

As written, yes, though you might want to just even out the dice to 3 on all sides.

If the charge went in frontally combat as normal, if it went in to the flank or rear would the cav get the flank or rear combat bonus. My thinking is that they would still be in square even if they failed to stop the charge….. help!

Yeah, squares could need an extra line or three of explanantion. They won’t have a flank in melee.

Any plans to write a battle system pre Black Power! Sure it would be great…

Not specifically, but now that you mention it…

[Ivan Sorensen]

In theory I do, but I rarely end up doing it.
Back when we played a lot of Crossfire, I did have sets of “allied” and “axis” dice: Speckled green and speckled grey D6’s respectively.

I noticed that after a few games, people would reach for dice, realize they were grabbing the “wrong” ones and then get the right dice.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Thanks! It’s been a crazy ride for sure

[Ivan Sorensen]

Hammer is based mainly on Core but with some deviations, which is the way going forward.

I’d like to update Trench Hammer specifically and if/when that happens, October Hammer will probably get folded in, if I can find a way to make that happen smoothly.
It’s not super high priority though.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Looks absolutely gorgeous and I am glad you had a great time!

[Ivan Sorensen]

Cheers
So the question is regarding character losses?

Yes, you check as long as ANY character is present, to represent sharp shooters etc.

You could make an exception if you are shooting at a unit that can’t shoot back f.x.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Cheers.

By treasure do you mean gold or other stuff you pick up along the way?

Money is just kind of kept generically available and can be used by anyone, as needed. Figure your avatar had the foresight to give the right henchmen a few coins that day.

(of course if you play in Glorantha, consider “1 gold coin” to be “a handful of Lunar silver” 🙂 )

For other items, see the Equipment rules (circa page 38 or so)

If its a campaign item, it’s always available.

If its a backpack item, its available while in town. If you go adventuring, you have to pack it but its not carried by a specific character.

Worn items are specific to the guy carrying them.

In the case of Silver Jewelry, its a campaign item if you just want to sell it, but if you want to use it for bribes, you have to pack it.

Hope that helps! If it didn’t rephrase the question since I may have misunderstood you.

On question 2:

It was originally meant to mean “if the villager doesn’t get injured in the battle”.
i.e. rolling on the table is enough.

However, I’ve always ended up playing it as “if they roll an 8+”, so you were correct.

[Ivan Sorensen]

I am tinkering with something. Do you mind if I borrow or adapt this?

[Ivan Sorensen]

Looks pretty solid, though I’d probably make Toughness a D3+3 instead and lower Speed to D3+3 to make it a bit more lumbering.

Would be tempting to have a short list of “monster abilities” to add to it. Hmmmm

[Ivan Sorensen]

So I /think/ I found three overlaps:

Character with PARRY skill and shield style just gets a 5+ save.

A character who is injured and has both greaves and vambraces gets a 5+ save and one of the two is destroyed.

A character with talisman and helmet when checking for post-game injuries gets a 5+ save but if you make it, your helmet breaks (i.e. its always a helmet hit then)

[Ivan Sorensen]

Glad to see you again!
I was just looking at your blog yesterday and wondering if something had happened.

[Ivan Sorensen]

I tend to go for the most common grunts, but I have a big soft spot for armies that put up a good showing despite having no hope (Polish in WW2 f.x.)

When I did WW2 Germans, I did a paratrooper platoon for the elite fix and a Volksgrenadier “Sturm” platoon for the “hapless conscripts” fix.
Of course for many armies, as Martin says, you can just say they are whatever they need to be for the scenario.

Of course “elite” can also be up for debate. Some units just got lucky or never fought anyone that was a serious threat but as wargamers we love to classify 🙂

[Ivan Sorensen]

While I tinker with a diagram, this is the new explanation (with a few tweaks to reflect how it was meant to be played).
Let me know if that parses a bit better.

Concealment, Area Fire and Cover
Units are Concealed if they are on the edge of or directly behind any terrain feature.
This raises the Target Number by 2 points.
If the terrain feature is a purpose built fortification (such as a trench) or is made of stone, the unit benefits from Cover.
On any Hit roll that rolls the Target Number exactly, reduce Damage inflicted by 1 point.

Units located up to 3” into a terrain feature are Obscured.
Raise the Target Number by 2 points as above and all Damage is reduced by 1 point. Exception: Forest features do not reduce the damage from artillery fire.

Units may fire while Concealed or in Cover but not while Obscured.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Well, at that rate, I’d have to write rules for becoming a Sword of Humakt 🙂

Nothing off the top of my mind, but give me this weekend and I’ll see what I can suss out.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Yeah, for sure. Appreciate the help.

[Ivan Sorensen]

No, it’ll be added. I realized I have it on my notepad but it didn’t make it in the text so shame on me 🙁

[Ivan Sorensen]

Sorry, my bad.

If you are 4″ in, you cannot be targeted.

If you are 2″ in, you get the +2 target number and damage reduction.

If you are on the edge, you get concealment and cover.

Does that help?
Clearly I need to add an example or a diagram for this, so I’ll put that on the list.

On Defend, yes, you are correct and I’ll fix.

[Ivan Sorensen]

For units IN a feature, we assume they are not very visible and any shots at them are basically just pelting the area with gunfire.

So you can fire at troops within a forest area, but they’ll take pretty minimal damage.

If you are on the edge of the woods, you get Concealment (+2to hit) and the trench benefit.

Does that make sense?

Defending units MAY move but are not required to.

[Ivan Sorensen]

You flatter me friend 🙂

If the vehicle is hit, apply 1 damage to the passengers. if its knocked out, inflict 3 damage on them.

And yes, return fire for MG’s is only for dedicated MG teams, not squads with machine guns integral or vehicle MG

I’ll add to the list of clarifications and updates.

[Ivan Sorensen]

A rough first time out!

Those nomads are a pretty rough sort.

[Ivan Sorensen]

The reaction doesn’t have to be from the affected unit.

So your cavalry hesitates and the enemy might move up a unit to bolster the line or fire on the hesitating troops.

Hope that helps and thanks 🙂

[Ivan Sorensen]

Cheers and answers below:

Firstly a unit in the open wants to move into an area, it gets a discard so the enemy can react, does the unit now move into the area or cross a linear feature or stay where it is.

If it’s in the open and trying to enter the terrain, it will hesitate (triggering a reaction) and then move.

is there any difference once a unit in an area feature tries to move.

Yes. If you discard while IN the feature, you can’t move at all (the unit is tangled up in the terrain)

As far as I can tell the only time a unit would fail to move is if formed up with a -3 is this correct page 17 seems to imply there could be other situations. Rule Failure to move page 17 is what I an refering to.

There might be some traits that can trigger it too, but yes, the rule is mostly there to catch any eventualities or scenario rules.

Horse trying to charge formed up, the rules say count as moving in bad terrain is this area or very rugged 1-2 or 1-3, if the horse fail to they just stay in place or move after the enemy reacts.

My bad, this should be a 1-2.

I hope that helps!

[Ivan Sorensen]

Yes sir/ma’am/robot I certainly can.

The Skirmisher entry is written a bit wonky. It’s supposed to mean that both incoming and outgoing fire is capped at 4.
Its both a limitation and a benefit.

Dwarves should read as “remove 1 less figure” yes.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Deleted User wrote:

I have never competitively gamed. I am not going to be critical of those who do but it might be interesting to hear from TWW folk who do. I’ve heard the stereotypes so it’d be interesting to hear the reality.

Donald

Back in the day, I played quite a few warhammer 40K tournaments.

It was still fairly relaxed, since at least at the time, you got scored for things like army composition and fair play, so it tended to temper the super hardcore people a little bit.

I enjoyed it at the time. Trying to build one army that would do well for an entire weekend against multiple opponents was fun, and you got to play people who didn’t have the same expectations as your usual group.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Cheers!

I have a stack of notes from back when we were working on it.
The problem we ran into was that there wasn’t a lot of interest at the time, so I wasn’t sure if it’d be financially viable.

I think there’s a lack for something light and quick in the fantasy market though, so watch this space.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Thank you for your hard work 🙂

Yeah, there’s definitely another step to the process once you have the feedback.

I can’t (and won’t) speculate on a specific competitors product of course, but I know it’s easy to get “hung up” on a favourite mechanic.
I’ve had a few instances where something I really thought was cool turned out to be really unpopular with testers, and I had to cut or change it. That sucked, but you have to trust that the game will be the better for it.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Yeah, a diverse group with every kind of gamer can be a real asset.

You want some guy who can power-game and find the loopholes as well as the peeps who can see the bigger picture.

Cheers!

[Ivan Sorensen]

With family and with friends.

Some of our RPG stuff is online with people we know that way.

I’m not much of a store gamer.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Cheers mate.

Yeah, that’s a risk as well.

A lot of people genuinely want to help, but realize that it’s a lot of time or they don’t realize that careful reading of a 100 page game is not something they actually have time for. On internet forums, most will be like that. Enthusiasm tends to crowd out realism 🙂

Hang on to the people who actually do provide the feedback and have something valuable to say.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Also, there is something brewing for the *hammer system by an associate, which I think will appeal to you specifically, actually 🙂

[Ivan Sorensen]

A new blog post was going to go up this week, but it’ll be today instead 🙂

In short, our lives got thrown upside down and we’re just getting back on top, but Hammer is very close and the Toolkit will follow afterwards.

The upside is that the delay has given more time for playtest feedback to come in for Hammer of Democracy, which will no doubt help the final product.

Appreciate the concern mate.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Remove a horsie 🙂

Cavalry is intentionally very fragile.

[Ivan Sorensen]

The former but eventually the latter 🙂

Setting out, I wanted to stay within the sword&sorcery sort of story where magic is something rare and frightening. I think the first legit spell caster you meet is in the goblin module.
I do have notes for some player-character witchery and divine shenanigans but I can’t give you a time frame on that yet.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Cheers!

yeah, it’s a bit of an abstraction.

In the bigger picture, the attacker is putting pressure on the enemy by advancing on them.
So having them move and fire reflects that. It’s sort of an abstraction of the big picture.

If you envision the game as a much smaller engagement, you may want to not allow firing on the move or otherwise toy with it a bit.

I hope that makes sense? It’s a bit awkward to explain.

[Ivan Sorensen]

I wouldn’t have an issue with it, but with 2mm mini’s I would be worried the normal movement speeds would look a bit silly.

Though reducing them too much could get fiddly too.

[Ivan Sorensen]

A few people have mentioned they’d like more fluff text in 5P, so I’ll definitely take that into account in the future!

UFA is not specifically intended for solo gaming, but as Jason demonstrated, it should work well enough if you don’t mind deciding what to do for each side.
Since battles are pretty small, it’s usually fairly obvious what a given character should do each turn though.

As far as campaigns, yeah, you get experience points and there’s various methods for figuring out the story line of a campaign.

[Ivan Sorensen]

Cheers!
1: If you attack the same unit, it would retreat again yeah. Typically you want to do this, to both force the enemy line to have a gap in it, and to inflict some casualties, but if the enemy is coming on strong, you may want to fire at something else.

2: The inactive player can’t trigger a counter-attack (counter-counter-attack?)
This could be a little clearer in the rulebook, I apologize.

[Ivan Sorensen]

No straightforward answers for sure, but an enlightening discussion none the less!

[Ivan Sorensen]

Thorsten – let me know if I can answer any questions.

Also Jason’s glossy dome helmets are some of my favorite scifi figures I’ve seen people do in a long time.

[Ivan Sorensen]

You could add in a 3+ (or so) die roll for the counter-battery, just to not make it too much of a sure thing

[Author]

Posts