Combat Cards for Bloody Fields, Petty Kings

Despite the rather unassuming and unoriginal name these have worked quite well, so I have used the Magic Set Editor program to do up some better looking cards. So far there are twenty some different ones, the deck we used for today's  game had two of each plus a dozen of the Attack cards for 66 total.

I want to add some more as we play, ending up with 46 unique cards and 14 Attack cards.

While the above cards have fairly old artwork, most of these have art cheerfully purloined from the net so I won't post them but if anyone wants the working file let me know.

Bloody Fields, Petty Kings combat

Several more pseudo games have helped focus the combat system - it is still buckets of dice, but it works.

The changes and summary

The ratios have been tightened up with some smaller gradients on the upper end,
3/1↔5/2↔2/1↔3/2↔5/4↔1/1↔2/3↔1/2↔1/3↔1/4

Note that currently the highest is now only  3/1, that may yet need ratcheted down further. The problem is 3/1 works fine on an 8 figure unit, becomes cumbersome for 12, and for a 20 spear goblin unit is a pain, especially with retaining the exploding die. Of course to get goblins up there would take seven steps, so when would that actually happen.

Anyway, combat goes;

• Figure base ratios and apply situational modifiers
• Play combat cards, recalculate dice if needed
• Allocate combat dice between defense and attack
• Roll, both sides take casualties
• Morale
• Follow up

Combat is slower and some of the sample melees hung on for six or eight turns while others were knocked out in 1. As a result there are some new overrun rules and new rules for overlapping, and an overrun for when a combat collapses on the first round.

The casualty recovery has been retained, it can be tricky deciding when to try though.

I like the way this combat system has played out - once players are use to the system there is very little to look up and both players have a couple of decision points which are made at the same time, keeping things moving quickly.

Also, in an RPG there are few things more frustrating than an encounter which is preordained. You as a player cannot control when or even if it happens, what you do, and surely not how it will all turn out. You are just there to spectate. Such encounters leads to complaints of railroading and gnashing of teeth along with a heavy dose of resentment towards iron handed DMs.

It is far worse in a competitive  miniatures game where the other player can't try to use a position of impartiality to justify your helplessness. I know how mad I can feel and I have seen others actually quit a game in frustration.

So in designing a game how should this be handled?

First by giving players some control by giving them options. When charged or subjected to a spell a player should be able to do something that makes a difference or has a chance, even if it is small. For example a unit of archers is charged suddenly by a fast moving bunch of cavalry. What should the charged player be able to do?

• at minimum, stand and fight
• run, hoping to outdistance the charger
• rush with the bravest few as a forlorn hope while the rest run, again hoping not to be slaughtered.
• charge
• fire as they come

This is just musing on my part, but as I go forward it needs to be kept in mind.

Bloody Fields, Petty Kings

With the Game of Thrones campaign now at an end I am going forward with the rules as a more generic fantasy rules set, tentatively titled Bloody Fields, Petty Kings.

First - the focus; Like the GoT campaign, the rules will be for small level petty wars. Slightly larger than skirmish, but not mass battles. Too many fantasy rules try to include everything and I believe what is left out will be as important as what is left in. To that end it is assumed that;

1. The technology will be pre gunpowder, that sort of generic fantasy mish-mash time period.
2. The style of warfare is similar to all factions/races.
3. The battle rules should be able to play without campaign rules, but still be enhanced when they are included.

Also I need to remind myself of what I find engaging

1. The game should include both players at all times. Just rolling dice is not being included. There should be decision points at every stage of the turn and game.
2. All mechanisms should move the game forward and do so in a timely way.
3. Decisions should have meaning.
4. Tables are bad - I rely on them too much.

So what did I think worked last time?

1. The combat cards - I thought these worked well in concept (though bad in balance sometimes, ONSLAUGHT anybody?) because they allowed the player decision to be as important as the dice.
2. The surge - I still like the idea of limited command and control, even though I know it chaffed on others used to Warhammer.  For the initial move I want to go to what I discussed concerning an initial battle plan that has order chits - Hold, Take and Hold, Advance, and Withdraw probably. From there the game devolves into desperate measures to change the situation. To maintain this it is necessary for combat to be a tad bit less lethal.
3. Prebattle set up. It needs reworked for balance but the scouting and such seemed to flow smoothly.

And what didn't work?

• The combat was too lethal too fast and not very balanced.
• Army lists. These take a ton of balancing, so to help I would like to go with the broad asset method of selecting units.
• Rules on 3x5 cards. Sorry, this is purely a result of my distracted procrastination.
• Flying units - While the image of the charge of the Ghost Riders of Khos from Divine Right will forever be locked in my heart, flying is a powerful ability that has major implications for any game. Some brainstorming options to balance/hinder the ability include weaker units, can only fly once, easy to route,  hard to control, and high cost.
• Magic I am going to leave this one alone.
• Terrain needs to be better described in ability so that players are not too surprised.

As to new ideas;

1. Baggage
2. Unit cards
3. The storm of Doom