Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[scott holder]

Posted here (and cross-posted under the Warrior Playtest section) are the barbarian rules we'll be playtesting at Cold Wars. We've factored in all the comments here and those I've recieved directly and these are what we want to focus on.

This isn't to say that some of the proposed rules not being used won't find their way into the Hcon Theme event, some probably will. But we want to playtest this stuff for the widest possible application in Warrior we can.

So everybody bring barbarians.

Also, one other item for the Mini: The rear zone will be 360p and game time will be 2.5 hours. Lemme repeat that, 2.5 hours. This is something NASAMW wants to try this year so be forewarned, all the events except the NICT at Hcon will be shortened by 30 minutes. We'll see how it plays out, then make a determination for next year.

For Cold Wars, the Doubles tourney will remain at 4 hours in length, although if everybody brings lots of barbarians, we won't need all that time. Wait, I'm sure somebody will.

scott

[Todd Kaeser]

Scott,

I am just expressing a concern regarding the shortened battles. I'm sure you (and others) thought long and hard about the changing of times. My concern is that there will be insufficient time to have a battle when you play against a newbee or a slow player who either takes forever to set up or move that LI unit. IMO this reduced format does not give the inexperienced a reasonable time to get through a complete battle.

I realize that they will then face the consequences of a 1-1, but then again so would the rest of those who face them.

The recent changes/modifications to table size in the Mini have changed what can and can't be played on the table. Now with the reduction of time it is impossible to conceive that that a foot army, especially close foot, can get into contact, nevermind grind it out in 2.5 hours on a 6x4 board in 15mm.

In my opinion the only viable armies are ones that you can get out there and reach your opponent quickly and decisively.

I also understand that the opposite is true if we ever were to return to the mini being on 4x4 table and 3 hours we could see Macedonians, Scots Common, etc... type armies.

I guess I'm also personally bummed that my gaming time will be reduced. I'm traveling, and many others are as well, 8+ hours and my gaming time is going to be reduced by 3 hours over 2 days. Big pile of Sad if you ask me.

I am also hoping that the rules changes, modifications, new list rules, etc... become the rare occurance rather then the common occurance of the past 3 years. I guess I'm tired of the single life of constant dating and would like to settle down and get to know WARRIOR in one form.

Just my 2 cents from an old veteran of 20 years.

Todd Kaeser

[Todd Kaeser]

Scott,

I want to restate that the above comments are my opinion and realize that this is for trial only this CW. If the time constraints prove too drastic would you consider going back to the 3 hour mini and 4 hour regular tournament???

Todd Kaeser

[Mark Stone]

Todd,

I agree with you on the shortened game time. In theory, when Warrior is played the way it "ought" to be played, a 1600 point battle between any two armies can come to decisive resolution in about 3 hours, and a 1200 point battle in under 2 hours. In reality, that theory seldom works out. New players, slow players, complex armies.... and ironically it isn't just the foot armies that slow things down. Watch a Mongol player still learning the army try and make mounted approach moves. It's a slow, painful, process.

Anyway, game time should allow for all these variables. And players should feel relaxed, comfortable, and able to socialize with their opponent (a big part of why we get together at these cons) rather than rushing through moves so that somebody gets more than 1 point.

As to the changing nature of the rules: in my opinion, there's real cause for hope here. Getting the "black" book out was a huge achievement, and I think we can expect little change in its contents over time. The next major step is the preparation for releasing all of the Warrior army lists in a single book. To do that, army lists need to undergo the kind of review and scrutiny the rules went through prior the the "black" book release.

Also, I'm willing to bet that early Army list books like Feudal Warrior and Dark Age Warrior were released before some of the list rules used in Classical Warrior were even conceived of. It's only fair, then, that all armies undergo some review in light of the current state of the art in list rules. I see this is a one time thing now that all the army list books are out, not a continuing process.

So hang in there. I suspect once the dust settles from the irregular foot list rules, we'll have a very stable rules system that will experience little more than tweaks for some years to come. And keep our changes in perspective, too. Here on the West Coast we are still benefiting from old timers returning to the WRG7-Warrior tradition after having suffered enough with other, less stable rules systems.


-Mark Stone

[Mark Stone]

I guess this topic should now be "Historicon Playtest Rules"... anyway:

Frank and I got in a game last night, and it seemed odd to me that the barbarian rules do not apply to the Varangians on the Nikephoran List. These are not only the same type of guys as on the Viking list, in most cases they are the very same guys (as a young man the future King Harald served in the Varangian Guard).

I realize it's easy to separate applicability of these rules by army list book, and I realize that figuring out where to draw the line in books like Holy Warrior is tough, but this seems like an obvious example where the rules should apply.

And yes, I know all this will be revisited before Historicon, just though I'd mention this while it's fresh in my mind.

By the way, Frank and I had a comical moment realizing that Irr E armed with bow have a tough time doing real damage as we watched an +2 prep shot become -2 due to being E class: "Yes. there's no way you'll ever do 2 CPF to my skirmishing slingers, even though you have 18 guys shooting."


-Mark Stone

[Todd Kaeser]

Mark,

The CW playtest of the quick setup went really well for the mini - at least with me. With the exception of one battle setup and terrain took about 20-25 minutes and I was able to get in around 6 bounds of play and the results were decisive. Especially in my battle (using Wallachian) with Dave Dietrich (Skythian). Dave had 3 commands and I had 2. Dave's flank march with over 40 scouting came on - I turned 3 units of HK to face it. While he looted my camp and broke a unit of knights I did break the command of 5. However, Dave was able to swarm me in the front. All in all every command of both sides broke and we killed about 1800 points in total (out of 2400). Tons of fun.

The teams took longer, especially w/ terrain placement - but that is to be expected with 2 people trying to think as one. I did notice that when crunch time came in the battle that time slowed down measurably. I believe the NICT needs to be kept at 4 hours with the minutia of play being what it is w/ the players involved.


Todd K

[Ambrose Coddington]

I think the rapid set up rules are a good idea though. Although for the NICT perhaps extend the alotted times to 15 minutes with 4 hour games?

The time limit will get the desired result of games starting rapidly but with 15 minutes you still have time to think a bit.

My 2c