From the German 'Kabinettskriege' - Cabinet Wars: a period of limited conflict from the Peace of Westphalia (1648) to the French Revolution (1789).
Showing posts with label Game System. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Game System. Show all posts

Lost in the Woods - aka - The Breaking of the Fellowship

[Pre-Cabinette Archives c.2018]

I couldn’t resist the Games Workshop figures based on the Lord of the Rings films but not wanting to buy, or paint, large armies I needed a smaller game that would only need a few figures.  I also wanted everyone to be a ‘goodie’ as the ‘baddies’ are harder to identify with and tend to rely on numbers rather than heroics to win.  

Ideally, something like Pony Wars (by Ian Beck) but with players controlling a couple of characters rather troops of cavalry and a structure that forced players to split up to make them more vulnerable to roving bands of orcs, etc.  I settled on a game set around the breaking of the Fellowship where the remaining eight characters (no Gandalf) are scattered in the woods trying to find Frodo after he has fled Boromir’s attempt to seize the Ring.  

The next problem was how to handle ‘hidden movement’ in the woods to stop players knowing the whereabouts of each other and the enemy.  Somewhere, and I can’t recall where, I read about a hidden movement system where the terrain is gridded but laid out on the table in a random fashion, i.e. the grid on the wargame table is not contiguous and when leaving one square the unit appears in another elsewhere on the table.  The umpire uses a master map of the grid, as it is really laid out, to tell players leaving one square which square they enter next.  

Explaining is easier with pictures.  The following figure shows the grid as seen by the players, numbered consecutively and with the points of the compass all aligned the same way.  The second view shows the grid as it appears on the umpire’s map of 'reality' (I’ve shown a 3x3 grid for simplicity but I use a 5x5 grid in the game).


Thus, when a player moves off a tile (or square), he tells the umpire “Leaving the east side of tile two” to which the umpire replies, “You enter the south side of tile six” and the player’s figures are placed at that location.  A player trying to leave the edge of the map (highlighted in red), e.g. “Leaving the south side of tile one” would be told “That way is impassable”.   

The position of the tiles on the umpire’s map is randomised for each game and I made a series of cardboard tiles that slot snugly into a cardboard frame to do this.  Nowadays I’d use magnetic tiles and steel paper.  Assembling the map like this is quicker and easier than drawing it out each time and avoids accidental duplication of numbered tiles (yes, I did do it once!). 

Now with the players having to cope with so much geo-spatial uncertainty I wanted a REALLY SIMPLE movement and combat system to keep the game moving.  For this I use playing cards, each player having a number of cards each turn they can use for movement or combat (unused cards are retained with players being dealt cards each turn to bring them back up to a total of 6 cards).  If a player is dealt a Joker at this stage a random event is diced for.  

To move, costs one card to advance a player’s figure(s) one spot on a tile – there is no measurement required.  Figures can be either at the centre or the centre of the edge of a tile as per the figure below (arrows represent a single card’s worth of movement).   


The above diagram is a single tile, the broken lines just delineate the 5 spaces that figures can occupy and move between.  Precise position on the tile is not important so long as it is clear which of the five spaces they are in i.e., the centre or one of the sides.  A player can spend up to three cards on movement (or two if moving Hobbits).  This means players cannot move far enough to both enter and leave a tile in the same turn (other than by doubling back).  I put trees in the unused corners of the tiles as all this is supposed to be happening in a forest.  Players attempting to cross an impassable tile edge still expend a card but stay where they are.   

Hobbits, until ‘convinced’ by other members of the Fellowship, and the enemy move 2 spaces at random.  Such figures will however move faster directly towards/away from others they are seeking to avoid or attack if they are on the same tile.  The roving Uruk Hai and Orcs will leave the table if they capture any Hobbits being moved towards their designated exit points by the umpire.

Combat, when it occurs, also uses cards, red suits to attack and black to defend.  For combat the score matters so players will expend low ranking cards for movement retaining higher ones for combat.  Player characters can make as many attacks as the player has red cards or at least one per figure.  If the attack card beats the enemy’s defence card, then a wound is inflicted; one wound is enough to kill most baddies but the Fellowship are made of sterner stuff.  The enemy figures which don’t have any cards in hand draw at random from a deck (ignoring the colour). Player characters can decide which card to play from their hand after seeing the enemy’s draw.  Player characters draw from the same deck as the enemy if the player has no cards of the appropriate colour in his hand.  Shooting is treated the same, with different modifiers, except figures only have to be on the same tiles as opposed to on the same spot for close combat.  Enemy figures will all make one attack if in position to do so.

The game sequence followed for all this is:
1. Deal cards to bring players up to 6 each (test for random event on Jokers).
2. Random movement (Hobbits, Uruks, Goblins, Gollum and Nazgûl).
3. Enemy movement if not random.
4. Fellowship movement.
5. Fellowship attacks (& Boromir’s horn).
6. Enemy Attacks.

So, putting all this together with some extra rules to drive the scenario along and a few special abilities for some characters I ran a game with my friends and surprisingly it worked a treat first time.  By sheer chance I seem to have got the balance just about right and unlike so many of my rule sets this one has hardly been tweaked at all.  

Chit Games – or how to equalise the inequitable

[Pre-Cabinette Archives c.2014]

As I'm planning to re-run a 'Chit Game' of the Battle of Barnet at an upcoming gaming session in a few weeks time I thought I would post a quick description of how this game system works as I think it offers something different. 

I enjoy wargaming two-a-side, but sometimes, real life intrudes and someone drops out at short notice, and the camaraderie doesn't seem the same with two against one.  To overcome this, I wanted a game that played down the competitive element.  I sought to do this by making each player's battlefield command assigned randomly for each turn by drawing chits from a container, which is why I call these ‘Chit Games’.

The concept is simple, and not very original; every battlefield command on both sides is represented by a chit placed in a container and each turn the players, in a fixed sequence, draw a chit and play that command for the current turn.  If there are fewer players than commands the drawing sequence is repeated until all commands have been played; the drawing sequence continues uninterrupted into the next turn – it is not restarted each turn.

This means that players can command any or all troops on the table at some point during the game.  While fun, this doesn’t give the player a clear objective.  To provide this each player has a secret identity as one of the commanders on the table-top; determined by the secret drawing of slips before the battle commences.  Each identity has its own historical (or fictional) objectives that earn victory points (VPs).  This gives the player something to strive for; VPs being totalled at the end of the game to determine which player has won.  A player can still win even if his alter ego on the table lost.

The final touch, to stop players deliberately playing 'badly' when playing a command opposing their secret identity, is the ‘Identity Challenge’.  At the end of the game each player writes down a guess for each player's secret identity.  A correct guess gains a player extra VPs, and being guessed results in the loss of VPs!   Consequently, deliberately commanding troops in such a way as to lose to your on-table persona can backfire by tipping off the other players.  All of this hopefully makes a bit more sense in the following examples for the Battle of Barnet which was the first chit game I ran back in 2016.

Table-top Commands: these can be printed out and cut up as slips to draw for secret identities.  As well as the commander identities, they include some special rules for Warwick's Reserve command, and each commander's allegiances which will determine VPs.


Deployment and OOBs: the flags can be printed onto card and cut out to use as chits.  These OOBs were for the DBM rules but other rule sets are available.


Victory Points (VPs): and scenario specific rules.

Battle of Barnet, 1471: as refought in 2016 - my first ever chit game using DBM rules adapted for hexes.  The odds favoured the Lancastrians, as in real life, but included a number of special rules to recreate some of the unusual features of this battle arising from the foggy conditions.  The re-fight initially followed historical precedent as the armies, on sighting each other through the fog, found themselves misaligned each overlapping the other’s left flank.  Again, as per history, Hasting’s command broke first leading to some blue-on-blue action within the Lancastrian ranks (see special rules).  That however, was where the game parted company with the history books.  Unfortunately for Edward IV, the Lancastrian in-fighting just failed (by one element) to break Montagu’s command and from here on in the Lancastrian numbers started to tell and the Yorkists ended up fleeing the field. 

My friends and I have played many chit games since and always found them fun and surprisingly often give a narrative that feels more 'historic' and less 'gamey'.  They are also good for very unbalanced games as everyone usually gets the chance to experience wielding overwhelming force or trying to resist it.

Give it a go, you might like it.