I'm just going to say it, I have a pretty awesome collection of 25mm metal miniatures. They cover almost everything we game with/in/about. I'm about to go to a convention where I could get more of any sort I might want.
Yet I'm getting this bizarre maddening desire to start buying plastic miniatures. Either in the large 54mm toy soldier size, or the smaller HO (20mm) size. For no danged reason. They wouldn't mix with what I've got. This sort of soft plastic doesn't paint nearly as well as metal. Sure, they're cheaper, but I don't really need to go cheaper. It's just plain madness on my part. Hopefully it will pass.
Look at this bucket of guys you can get from Toys R Us:
http://www.toysrus.com/product/index.jsp?productId=19789896&cp=&parentPage=search
I had already been sorting through sites with the smaller guys.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
Thursday, October 10, 2013
The Tinker's Compulsion
What was kind of neat about Mutants and Muskets for me was that I was completely out of the Tinker Zone, and entirely in the Play Zone. I'd spend an hour or two tops getting reading for a session and just play, that was the extent of my involvement. It was a well needed break. Eventually, I went deep into Tinker mode for the ACKS game.
Now, I've been in both Play Mode and Tinker mode for the last month with ACKS. However, I've sort of outstripped the campaign at this point. When I completed Skull Mountain I got myself to a place that there's little I can do until the players have done a lot more mucking about and have decided they're done there and have another objective.
That leaves my mind dangerously unoccupied. So, it wanders. I've been reading and poking around with the early RPG stuff I have, and have been doing some thought experiments (Don't think I'm contemplating another game anytime in the near or even long term future, I'm just keeping the brain busy).
I was wondering what it would be like to do as the old ones did. Start with a fantasy miniatures campaign with really stripped down rules, but with the general principal--anything can be attempted. Then just start to add stuff as we went by piling up "rulings" created as they were needed. Maybe it'd just be a mess. Maybe we're all too much a product of our RPG experience to come up with something that looked different. Maybe it'd be awesome. Maybe preferences would be too at odds to gel things properly.
Again, it's just a product of looking at old things and wondering.
Now, I've been in both Play Mode and Tinker mode for the last month with ACKS. However, I've sort of outstripped the campaign at this point. When I completed Skull Mountain I got myself to a place that there's little I can do until the players have done a lot more mucking about and have decided they're done there and have another objective.
That leaves my mind dangerously unoccupied. So, it wanders. I've been reading and poking around with the early RPG stuff I have, and have been doing some thought experiments (Don't think I'm contemplating another game anytime in the near or even long term future, I'm just keeping the brain busy).
I was wondering what it would be like to do as the old ones did. Start with a fantasy miniatures campaign with really stripped down rules, but with the general principal--anything can be attempted. Then just start to add stuff as we went by piling up "rulings" created as they were needed. Maybe it'd just be a mess. Maybe we're all too much a product of our RPG experience to come up with something that looked different. Maybe it'd be awesome. Maybe preferences would be too at odds to gel things properly.
Again, it's just a product of looking at old things and wondering.
Monday, October 7, 2013
Interesting Idea for Magic Users
The following post on RPG.net has some interesting ideas about magic-users in D&D
MU tweaks
Basically, you can give up the power to cast a spell to make a permanent magic talisman which can cast a spell 3 times per day. So, a first level mage could give up his single spell slot in exchange for a talisman that could cast 3 sleep spells per day, for example. The good news is better fire power, the bad news is he loses the ability to change spells for that slot and he risks having the talisman lost or stolen.
The same sort of trade could be made for a "Sanctum" a sort of magic HQ, or a Familiar (of various sorts or powers).
There are more details, of course, but it is really pretty cool.
MU tweaks
Basically, you can give up the power to cast a spell to make a permanent magic talisman which can cast a spell 3 times per day. So, a first level mage could give up his single spell slot in exchange for a talisman that could cast 3 sleep spells per day, for example. The good news is better fire power, the bad news is he loses the ability to change spells for that slot and he risks having the talisman lost or stolen.
The same sort of trade could be made for a "Sanctum" a sort of magic HQ, or a Familiar (of various sorts or powers).
There are more details, of course, but it is really pretty cool.
Sunday, October 6, 2013
Chainmail: post melee morale
I've been reading over my printout of my legal PDF copy of the original "Chainmail" miniatures rules (Gygax and Perren, TSR Hobbies, 3rd editon 1975 --original edition was from Guidon games, 1970). Most of it is pretty straight forward, rules for moving, attack charts, and so forth. However, there is one rule procedure which is pretty weird and complex, but I can see how it goes a long way toward making the results of a melee more realistic. After every melee turn, both sides must make a special morale check. I'll quote the rule:
"POST MELEE MORALE
1. The side with the fewer casualties determines the positive difference between their losses and those suffered by the enemy. This number is then multiplied by the score of a die roll and the total noted.
2. The side with the greater number of surviving troops which were involved in the melee determines the positive difference between the number of of his troops and those of the enemy. This number is noted.
3. Each side now multiplies their surviving figures, separating them by type of more than one type is involved, by the following "Morale Rating" factors:
Peasants 3 Light Horse 6
Light Foot/Levies 4 Armored Foot, Janissaries 7
Heavy Foot 5 Medium Horse, Landsknechte 8
Elite Heavy Foot 6 Heavy Horse, Swiss Pikemen 9
4. Both sides total the scores arrived at in steps 1-3 above, and the side with the lower total immediately reacts as follows:
0-19 difference--melee continues
20-39 difference--back 1/2 move, good order
40-59 difference--back 1 move, good order
60-79 difference--retreat 1 move
80-99 difference--1-1/2 move rout
100&+ difference--surrender
For melees involving 20 figures per side or less, double all totals."
Chainmail, Gygax and Perren, page 15.
When I first re-read the rules recently, I basically said WTF!!!!
After carefully re-reading it several times, I finally figured it all out. It's neat how the overall number of troops, the quality of troops, the number inflicted and the number still standing are all factored in to determine who "won" or "lost" the actual fight.
This melee morale is also completely different than the "Instability from Excess Casualties" which is more like what we're used to in morale checks (basically rolling over a factor similar to the one given in step 3 above on 2d6 when 1/3 or 1/2 of the unit is defeated). You can fix the Post Melee Morale by rallying, but you can't fix the Excess Casualties morale, once that breaks the unit is lost.
I kind of think that there must have been a way to avoid all the counting, multiplying and subtracting after each turn of combat and still allowed the various factors to weigh, but also realize that there are fewer actual melee turns in a miniatures battle than in an RPG fight.
"POST MELEE MORALE
1. The side with the fewer casualties determines the positive difference between their losses and those suffered by the enemy. This number is then multiplied by the score of a die roll and the total noted.
2. The side with the greater number of surviving troops which were involved in the melee determines the positive difference between the number of of his troops and those of the enemy. This number is noted.
3. Each side now multiplies their surviving figures, separating them by type of more than one type is involved, by the following "Morale Rating" factors:
Peasants 3 Light Horse 6
Light Foot/Levies 4 Armored Foot, Janissaries 7
Heavy Foot 5 Medium Horse, Landsknechte 8
Elite Heavy Foot 6 Heavy Horse, Swiss Pikemen 9
4. Both sides total the scores arrived at in steps 1-3 above, and the side with the lower total immediately reacts as follows:
0-19 difference--melee continues
20-39 difference--back 1/2 move, good order
40-59 difference--back 1 move, good order
60-79 difference--retreat 1 move
80-99 difference--1-1/2 move rout
100&+ difference--surrender
For melees involving 20 figures per side or less, double all totals."
Chainmail, Gygax and Perren, page 15.
When I first re-read the rules recently, I basically said WTF!!!!
After carefully re-reading it several times, I finally figured it all out. It's neat how the overall number of troops, the quality of troops, the number inflicted and the number still standing are all factored in to determine who "won" or "lost" the actual fight.
This melee morale is also completely different than the "Instability from Excess Casualties" which is more like what we're used to in morale checks (basically rolling over a factor similar to the one given in step 3 above on 2d6 when 1/3 or 1/2 of the unit is defeated). You can fix the Post Melee Morale by rallying, but you can't fix the Excess Casualties morale, once that breaks the unit is lost.
I kind of think that there must have been a way to avoid all the counting, multiplying and subtracting after each turn of combat and still allowed the various factors to weigh, but also realize that there are fewer actual melee turns in a miniatures battle than in an RPG fight.
Saturday, October 5, 2013
Skull Mountain Design
The Old Workshop has been getting lighter posting lately. I guess part of that is I'm less involved in theory and long-term rule and setting type work, the kind of work that gets reflected in the workshop, and more on getting things squared away for the game in progress.
It's killing me not to blog more about Skull Mountain, but since the party is actually going through the mountain right now, I can't really discuss what's in it and why it's there.
I suppose I can say that it was obviously inspired by the dungeon-level cross-section "mountain with carved skull face" from the Holmes Basic D&D set from 1977. The levels don't really correspond to the levels on that map, so there are no spoilers that come from looking at that illustration
Like I said, you will gain nothing from looking for "the Pit" and you should not expect to find a domed city, but the picture was the inspiration.
I can say that I'm very pleased that the party is actually exploring the dungeon. I've designed 3-4 other old school megadungeons like this in the past, and people have perversely decided to avoid them, or poke their heads in once and wander off.
I tried to make it easy this time, putting it less than a day from a safe location (Wigred's house), and 2 days or so from town. but then they had to get themselves outlawed. Now there's nowhere to buy anything more expensive than a bag of cheese sandwiches and sailor sausage.
There are a few other features in the neighbourhood of the mountain that the players haven't yet explored, which may be of help for some of their needs, unless they think that Spunky's is the only safe place they need.
I hadn't ever considered the party might decide to move into the dungeon. I suppose if it worked for Presfen, it would work for them. Although, Presfen did just get wiped out by a band of particularly persistent "wandering monsters", so perhaps they ought to be on their guard.
It's killing me not to blog more about Skull Mountain, but since the party is actually going through the mountain right now, I can't really discuss what's in it and why it's there.
I suppose I can say that it was obviously inspired by the dungeon-level cross-section "mountain with carved skull face" from the Holmes Basic D&D set from 1977. The levels don't really correspond to the levels on that map, so there are no spoilers that come from looking at that illustration
Like I said, you will gain nothing from looking for "the Pit" and you should not expect to find a domed city, but the picture was the inspiration.
I can say that I'm very pleased that the party is actually exploring the dungeon. I've designed 3-4 other old school megadungeons like this in the past, and people have perversely decided to avoid them, or poke their heads in once and wander off.
I tried to make it easy this time, putting it less than a day from a safe location (Wigred's house), and 2 days or so from town. but then they had to get themselves outlawed. Now there's nowhere to buy anything more expensive than a bag of cheese sandwiches and sailor sausage.
There are a few other features in the neighbourhood of the mountain that the players haven't yet explored, which may be of help for some of their needs, unless they think that Spunky's is the only safe place they need.
I hadn't ever considered the party might decide to move into the dungeon. I suppose if it worked for Presfen, it would work for them. Although, Presfen did just get wiped out by a band of particularly persistent "wandering monsters", so perhaps they ought to be on their guard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)