Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Jon Cleaves, here, W. Author of Warrior.

<< how are you going to stop the arguing and multiple interps
from coming back.>>

I just got done at Historicon where I judged one Warrior tourney and played
in another. Quietest event of its kind in 15 years as far as rules judgments
go, and any we did have came from the players (who were heroes for doing it)
dealing with a playtest draft and not a finished copy.
We will continue to post official clarifications here if necessary and for
free after publication. In 28 years of gaming, I've never seen the perfect
rulebook, but we will be highly responsive to our players and get them
answers to the few things about the book that will not come out quite as
perfectly as we intend.

Realize too that 'millimeter players' will still exist and rulebooks can't
kill them. I did see quite a few instances of close calls solved by the
players using the old die roll method - something unheard of in past 7th
events.

<< I'm on your side and want to help, but convince me
that its worth my time.>>

Demanding, aren't we? :)

See email coming soon from me about player involvement in Warrior production.

Posting an example army list in advance of publication is actually a very
good idea - I'll talk to our list dude about it.
Jon

Hi,

I'm new to this group. I'm an old 7th edition player. They were the
first set of miniature rules I ever played and I still feel that
their demise created a gap in ancients, but 7th DIED A HORRIBLE DEATH
nearly 8 years ago.

I love these rules, but they were destroyed by people that argued
nonstop about millimeters, gaps, and too many rules interpretations.
The army lists were obsolete and too many people wrote their own
fairy tale list to win tournements. I have been playing Medivel
Warfare for the past few months. It has some of the good things that
7th did, but I don't like the combat tables much. I would love to
see these rules do well, but so far I have heard nothing but negative
comments about how the squabbling has immediately returned.

I'd love to buy these and help reintroduce real ancients. DBM sucks
and will always suck.

I just downloaded the playtest rules and didn't see any major
rewrites, how are you going to stop the arguing and multiple interps
from coming back. I'm on your side and want to help, but convince me
that its worth my time.

Thanks,
W Davis

PS. Are there any example army lists coming. The ones for Medival
Warfare are on line for the faithful (even though some are seriously
flawed). I'm ready to paint.

Yes, I guess I am demanding, but I have purchased at least 4
different ancient rule sets that were poor and way to many sets of
Napoleonic rules that were awful and I really don't want to be
disappointed by these. I've been searching for you guys on the
internet for nearly a year. Rules (at least for me) must represent
the historical flavor of the period they are trying to represent and
they must be playable (ie. easy for the average guy that graduated
high school to understand ... OK, maybe easy for the average guy to
understand after someone shows him how to play). 7th Edition did
represent the historical flavor, it was a fast paced game, and it
made me think about the way I played more than any other set of rules
I have ever played. All in all an excellent game that was fun. Its
drawback was that it was not easy (next to impossible somedays) to
interpret. I thought Warrior was going to be a full rewrite into
more easily understood language that would make interprets not as
necessary. I believe that having the need for interprets killed 7th
edition. It lent itself to house rules or the need for a judge with
todays interpretation posted 6 months in advanced for every
tournement. I guess I expected to see a more complete rewrite.

I all very happy to hear that things went well at historicon.
Hopefully, this rewrite will motivate me to bring my Rus, Arab
Empire, 100 year war English, Normans, Aztecs, and 4-5 more armies
out of retirement and introduce my two boys to them. I was afraid we
were sliding into old habits with the "what is a gap" question.

I don't want to complain and not offer to help. Although, like most
of us my time is limited, I am extending the offer to help in any
way. I do hope that Warrior can revive the hobby and destroy that
horrible menace DBM.

[Don Coon]

> I love these rules, but they were destroyed by people that argued
> nonstop about millimeters, gaps, and too many rules interpretations.
> The army lists were obsolete and too many people wrote their own
> fairy tale list to win tournements. I have been playing Medivel
> Warfare for the past few months. It has some of the good things that
> 7th did, but I don't like the combat tables much. I would love to
> see these rules do well, but so far I have heard nothing but negative
> comments about how the squabbling has immediately returned.

I as one of the squabblers would like to respond to this. Warrior is not
yet a fully defined product. Many of us on this list have been tapped as
playtesters for the new rules. The squabbling is our attempt to shake the
rules out. We put forth our opinions/comments people comment on those, and
the horsemen sift through the results and change/modify/leave alone the
rules. I for one will not behave the way I do now, once the rule set is
published. It will then be a rule set, and shall be played as written (as
much as possible). I am sure there will be discussion after publication, as
no rule set can get out the door clean. However, many of the discussions we
have had here prior to publication, will head of that nastly word "interp".

Don