The battle of Glentaise is a window into a fascinating part of Ballycastle (and North Antrim) history - seeing Shane O'Neill's Irish bring low James McDonnell's Antrim Scots, but inadvertantly clearing the way for the rise of Sorely Boy McDonnell who's life reads like a Boys' Own adventure and would have a lasting legacy in the area.
Chatting with Jon form the Men's Shed, I suggested that Fantastic Battles would give the flexibility needed to replay the battle. He invited me to demo a game up at the Shed, and with the agreement of my manager, away we went.
This time we weren't using armies of the correct period - just a trial run using my Classical Macedonians vs Thessalian Greeks (c.650 points per side), but it was a start to help the gents come to terms with the core concepts of wargaming and get a feel for 10mm models as a scale.
For what it's worth, the Macedonians won the day, scattering the Thessalian cavalry and supporting light infantry, leaving the hoplites exposed and surrounded.
Through Ballycastle Museum we'll be supporting the project as it comes together and hope to exhibit the finished table/diorama in the museum when the current refurbishment project is finished.
It was a simple scenario with five treasures of randondom value (worth 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 victory points respectively). Each of us too a wee party - my kobolds, Jim with Clachtoll & Nigg, my wyvern-goblin duo, and Andrew with a party of brawny orcs supported by a troll and a clutch of goblins.
Most aspects of the rules worked well, a number need more testing, and there a few changes that are definately required. All in all, it was great to get testing underway.
Fantastic Scuffles sounds interesting Nic. Will there be rules to develop your warband after games?
ReplyDeleteGreat stuff...very nice of you to donate your time to the Men's Shed, and I'm very keen to see more of Fantastic Scuffles as it develops....will it be a campaign style game in that parties will gain experience from one game to the next and can hire replacements, or will it be designed more as a pick-up-and-play one-off game of battle scenarios?
ReplyDeleteRe: Fantastic Scuffles.
ReplyDeleteThe intention is that they will be usable for balanced pick-up games, and for campaigns, but structured in such a way that, in multi-party campaigns, one party doesn't advance so much that they become unstoppable. There are draft campaign ideas in place, but until the core mechanics are perfected, they won't be tested.
There is no ETA for FS. Each character has 12 variables which all interact to create their profile. With the silly number of options in the draft, I think that leads to something like 8.19 quadrillion possible combinations (4 archetypes x 4 sizes x 4 traits [80x79x78x77] x 2 'hands' (18x18) x 16 missile weapons x 4 armour x 2 misc [26x25]) there will need to be a significant amount of testing to try and achieve something resembling balance!
Thanks for the info mate. Finding game balance is always the hardest part I guess :)
DeleteWe’ve found Fantastic Battles to be a very flexible, enjoyable system that is easy for new gamers to understand. As we introduce new people to the rules, some interesting questions come up. I’m hoping I can post them here (since none of us has a Facebook account).
ReplyDeleteWe are playing character-companies like a company with a character permanently attached. So they are affected by scattering units and can become impetuous, even if the character-company is your warlord. Is that the correct way to play them? Can unattached characters be targeted by spells? Can unattached characters move into contact and melee an opposing unattached character? Does using a Prophesy die use the Mage’s action? Can the Curse spell reduce a company’s melee die to zero so it rolls no melee die (because it is a spell and not in the melee modifier table) or will a company always roll at least one melee die after all modifiers, including spell modifiers, are applied?
A procedure question. When a unit has an attached character, do you roll the opposing company’s attack separately so you can tell if there are 2 Resolve losses on that company? If so, how would this work in shooting (i.e. can shooting companies target the attached leader’s company)? We’ve just been rolling the entire unit shooting/melee dice at once (after totaling dice and modifiers for each attacking company in the unit) and assuming hits are evenly distributed on the target companies. We do not roll to kill the leader unless there are two hits per company in the combat (i.e. 6 hits with 3 companies in combat). But the rules do seem to imply dice rolling by company. Is there a correct way to do this?
There is also one observation we wanted to share and get your thoughts on. A Mage using a level 3 spell, rolls three die per Cast action. But if a Mage selects three level 1 spells, they only roll one die per Cast action. The diversity of spells does not seem to compensate for the lack of die rolled. What are your thoughts on allowing a Mage to roll three spell dice per Cast action? For example, casting three level 1 spells or one level 3 spell per Cast action? Or alternatively, lowering the spell difficulty for higher spell levels rather than adding die per level.
Q1) I’m hoping I can post them here (since none of us has a Facebook account).
DeleteA1) Certainly!
Q2) We are playing character-companies like a company with a character permanently attached. So they are affected by scattering units and can become impetuous, even if the character-company is your warlord. Is that the correct way to play them?
A2) Yes, that’s right. And remember that during mishaps, they will get a +1 for having a character ‘attached’ as well.
Q3) Can unattached characters be targeted by spells?
A3) Only by magic missile, because that spell functions just like a normal shooting attack. And then, it would need to be within 2bw as characters can only be targeted by shooting at short range.
Q4) Can unattached characters move into contact and melee an opposing unattached character?
A4) Yes, certainly.
Q5) Does using a Prophesy die use the Mage’s action?
A5) No.
Q6) Can the Curse spell reduce a company’s melee die to zero so it rolls no melee die (because it is a spell and not in the melee modifier table) or will a company always roll at least one melee die after all modifiers, including spell modifiers, are applied?
A6) No, a company will always have 1 Att.
Q7) A procedure question. When a unit has an attached character, do you roll the opposing company’s attack separately so you can tell if there are 2 Resolve losses on that company? If so, how would this work in shooting (i.e. can shooting companies target the attached leader’s company)? We’ve just been rolling the entire unit shooting/melee dice at once (after totaling dice and modifiers for each attacking company in the unit) and assuming hits are evenly distributed on the target companies.
A7) The intention is to roll all the attacks against a unit together. If the ‘unit’ suffers two or more resolve loss, and the character was attached to a company that was engaged in melee, then there is a risk to the character.
With shooting it is resolved the same – roll all shooting dice against the unit. If two or more resolve loss is caused, and the character is attached to a company that was exposed to the shooting, then they are at risk. I.e. if the character is attached to a company that was outside of shooting range, or beyond line of sight, they are not at risk, regardless of the resolve loss suffered by the unit.
Q8) We do not roll to kill the leader unless there are two hits per company in the combat (i.e. 6 hits with 3 companies in combat). But the rules do seem to imply dice rolling by company. Is there a correct way to do this?
A8) No, as in A7, the risk point is two resolve loss across the unit.
Q9) There is also one observation we wanted to share and get your thoughts on. A Mage using a level 3 spell, rolls three die per Cast action. But if a Mage selects three level 1 spells, they only roll one die per Cast action. The diversity of spells does not seem to compensate for the lack of die rolled. What are your thoughts on allowing a Mage to roll three spell dice per Cast action? For example, casting three level 1 spells or one level 3 spell per Cast action? Or alternatively, lowering the spell difficulty for higher spell levels rather than adding die per level.
A9) The player choice around spells is whether to specialise and be good at one thing, or diversify and give yourself flexibility in the spells chosen. Through playtesting it was decided that this was the best approach. However, I have always maintained that FB is a toolkit game system. If you and your opponents agree that you’d like to try modifying an element of it, that’s fully endorsed! If you though, I’d always love to hear how you get on. 😊