Revised, Updated And Glorious, But Still Flawed.

Looking closely at my SciFi RPG options, some things have become evident.

Mongoose Traveller 2022 edition, was first cab off the rank, but it is unworkable and a shining example of a big, glossy, overpriced but under produced book that sits in my wheelhouse of things that most annoy me about this hobby.

The big glossy tome, with its main enemy behind.

Some background.

I love Traveller, like a person coming home from a long career travelling loves their home town, it was there when I first discovered my immediate world and flavoured my view of the rest. It was my first RPG (before TableTop needed to be inserted in front) when I got the little black box of three books and it was my favourite for a long time, a beacon of systemic logic when compared to D20 games, games I did not mesh with. I spent many a school lunch time with friends discovering our universe, such as it was.

It supported the fiction I was reading (A Mote in Gods Eye, The Stainless Steel Rat, 2000AD comics, Chronicle of the New Sun, Dark Tower), what I was watching (Star Wars, Blakes Seven, Blade Runner) and it was solidly grounded, but still open to much adaption. The original boxed set lacked any type of illustration, literally leaving it up to players to decide what it looked like, the front cover text of the beleagured Beowulf creating an emotive “mind picture”, but nothing else.

It was not until Call of Cthulhu (2-3e) that I discovered another system family that sat as well with me.

I have had almost every editions of Traveller, played Striker, 2300AD, Mega, some other spin-offs and generally feel content with their simple mechanics.

The 2008 or 1e edition was an automatic buy and it sat really well with me mechanically and aesthetically. It suited my preference for matt finish, low preciousness games, with retro mono art that reminded me of my roots in gaming.

Love the comic book style pics.

I like/need games I can tinker with and make notes in the margins of, games without overly strong opinions baked in (unless that was why I bought them*), nor all too precious high gloss pages that scream “leave me alone, I am perfect”. It was one of the games I would highlight when dissing the big glossy tomes I have a love-hate relationship with.

The 2016 2e edition of MT broke the golden rule of Traveller. The starship design rules were no longer included in the core book. Even with the pdf of High Guard at hand I mostly ignored it and recently gifted it when I got the newer version.

I assumed all would be good, I assumed a lot.

I recently chose MGT2.2022 as my main SciFi squeeze, until reality hit. There are no robot rules, not even an example of one, not even any real mention and worse, there are not even any drones listed in equipment (star ship ones are), but the Remote Op skill is.

There are some glaring omissions (Battledress is talked about but the actual listing of it is missing), some floor plans are wrong, lines of text missing or incorrect etc, which is just poor for a re-boot book with little time pressure on it.

Lovely illustration of Battledress armour, shame they forgot to include any specs of it in the actual book!

The book is sublime, which that makes it all the worse for being flawed and sorry, but errata does not cut it.

The 2008 version is actually better in many ways with some examples of drones and robots, more Alien races, less railroading of a look and fixed ideas (or ones that sit better with me), more of that old school pulpy feel and I can add notes in the matt paper borders (even mark errata points), which helps, because it does need some.

It lacks the harmonious mechanics of 2e, but has some clever sub-systems and it all works fine with a few tweaks.

A study in two styles, the later version is up to date by modern standards, but the older presentation has it’s own thing and for someone bought up on the art of 2000AD comics, Chris Foss and John Berkey art, it sews so many creative seeds.

Now don’t get me wrong, I want to like 2e and had a plan laid out to deal with no robots (a post Human vs AI ascendency war, resulting in a human win and suspicious anti-AI culture), but I am not spending over $100au per book just to then over-do some more robots, drones, vehicles, star ships and gear, also likely with their own annoying typos and omissions.

There should have been at least some skeletons, a few samples to build from in the core, like the 2008 version has plenty of, summed up in a single paragraph.

I am happy, I even prefer to do my own thing on the fly with some basic hints, but nothing at all is a little too much of a stretch.

MGT1e is tempting, but maybe a stretch for long term play and it looks like I have lost all my pdf’s of the support books.

Above are ship floor plans from MGT1e, M-Space and MGT2e. The first two are functional, the MGT2e ones are beautiful for sure, something I may use in another system. The MGT1e ones photo copy well and can be used with minis.

So, I am going with M-Space instead for a several reasons.

• It is more complete in scope in one book and open ended enough to accomodate my needs. What is missing has usually been covered in another compatible game and there are many. There is nothing to say Cthulhu, Mothership, Luther Arkwright or others cannot be integrated into an M-Space game effortlessly.

• It has low preciousness (but it is still beautiful). Matt printed with large margins, so notes can be added, even printed pages inserted (and I have two copies, three with the older edition with pdf’s, all for less than the Traveller 2e core book).

• The vibe of the book is more emotive than prescriptive. If you start with a story idea first, you do not hit that baked in Traveller 3rd Imperium thing.

• I can apply it to anything from alternate past (Tales from the Loop/Electric State/John Carter/HG Wells), the present (Dresden Files, X-Files, Laundry Files, in fact all the files), to Star Wars pulp, Star Trek utopian future or Sci Fantasy as is or by applying any number of other compatible games (The whole Mythras and BRP family or others).

• I prefer the art even though much of it is abstract and a little sparse. I get a Scandi-1980’s classic SciFi art feel from it, which is more my style, just the cover of the Companion gave me an adventure seed.

• The systems are more interesting and comprehensive, especially non combat systems, like extended conflicts and again, I can draw from so many other systems in the extended family.

• It is cheaper and less greedy, not needing you to buy whole books for small insights into elements that should be in some way in the core. Some stuff is even free and there is a direct line to the creator.

• I prefer how tech is handled, with a regular level of tech level 12-ish (Traveller measure) as standard, Q-tech as the optional “ancient” tech and no explicit measures. Sometimes the TL ratings in Traveller make little sense to me, especially with current advances where we may well have sentient AI before we have a settlement on the moon!

• MGT 1e can be used for inspiration.

The art in M-Space hits that “lived in” look of Star Wars, with a more up to date, if Scandi twist.

Once again, the ease of a D100 system with its comprehensive coverage of genre, intuitive and easy to grasp mechanics, multi game cross-compatibility and approachable offerings has won the day. They have even addressed the back story character gen of Classic Traveller in the Companion.

Art can be more than a stylised space suit, dogfight or street scene. It can be emotive, deep and thought provoking. The artists of the 1970’s to 2000’s and the current Scandi artists tend to add context, humanity and scale.

Sci Fi TTRPG's, What To Pick And Why

With the holidays on us, I am back into gaming as a good distractor and creative outlet.

Sci-Fi TTRPG’s have always been a favourite, but I tend to get stuck on rules sets.

M-Space is a D100, Mythras Imperative spin-off that really puts me in the right head space (so to speak), but it is a building block generic and hard edged game, less Star Wars (maybe a little Andor), more early Trek, Alien or Interstellar, so most games tend to lean towards dystopian futures, darker themes. I used to collect Sci-Fi art books in the 80’s like Trevor Webb or John Berley or the more recent scandi works by Simon Stalenhag and this reminds me of those (Clarence Redd, the author being one of those).

Mothership takes M-Space style gaming into an even darker space. The system is also D100 but simpler and the game more a one-shot or short campaign style. It is Alien with licence filed off, deadly, disheartening and highly xenophobic, ideal for what it is, if just a little limited in scope. Regardless of the system chosen, the scenarios available are excellent and highly adaptable.

Savage Worlds (Sci-Fi Companion). This one bothers me as it was meant to be “the one”, the pulpy Sci-Fi fix-all with direct connection to the SW system tree, but it has fallen away a little. I think that is down to me forgetting why I bought the companions in the first place.

Originally I only bought the companions to add to the core for things like kids-on-bikes, supers or supernatural pickup games that needed more…… stuff, but I now feel swamped by the weight of it all. It is a great, flexible and fun system and it and M-Space effectively cover the whole gamut of genre and styles, but neither add any specific theme.

I also have a fan based Star Wars hack, worth a look.

Traveller (2022 revision). This one is an old favourite in a well liked form*, a game I have owned every single version of except for Marc Millers T5, which looks more like a science reference book. The big thing that held me back was a lack of AI and robots without buying the specific book for them, but I guess in hind sight, that may be a good thing.

One tension I find hard to reconcile in Sci-Fi RPG’s and fiction is the continued ascendency of humanity over AI. Even now, that seems unlikely unless we as a race choose to retain control for no other reason than to protect our own relevance.

Using robots and computers as human controlled tools only, the Traveller core book champions biological races over AI in a homage to past SF tropes. The Robots book can add more options, but I am not keen on going down that rabbit hole ($100au+ per book, lots of books). The reality for our own world is already much less bio-autonomous.

I am reminded of the religious level tech rejection of Dune and the ascendency of the Human spirit mantra or the quaintly clumsy semi-sentient Droids in Star Wars**.

Traveller (2008 1e). I have a soft spot for this clunky, unpolished 80’s homage to the “little black box” OG version. The line drawings, the overall feel and layout all take me back and in some ways it is actually a little bit better than the new version, such as Robots and Drones actually getting a mention, basic rules even. The mechanics are crude when compared to the latest 2e print, but they work ok.

Star Wars (d6 WEG version probably ReUp). I have the anniversary original and ReUp pdf and some other bits for this. Might play it for fun, especially after seeing Bad Batch and Rebels.

BRP for a Dark Tower, Shadow of the Torturer style far future Earth fallen game. This has been boiling away for years, bringing together all the legacy D100 game styles (Hawkmoon, Elric, Future Earth etc) and anything else I want to add. BRP Creatures is on the way soon-ish, which may well cement this one.

Frontier Space, a D00 lite game is of some interest, but I feel the number of games before it will deny it seeing daylight.

Star Trek Adventures; Captains Log, is a solo adventure generator for the STA game and for me a gentle toe dip into a game that scares me, because I could very easily get eyeballs deep in this one. The 2d20 system does not appeal greatly, but the scenario generator does excite and it looks to be, at least in part, fairly system agnostic. I could also add the Core book for deeper mechanics, but I know where that could lead.

Things I do not have (yet).

Cortex Prime (on order). This is possibly the best generic game for Sci-Fi, offering both systemic and thematic flexibility as well as rounding out my Marvel Heroic RPG system (which lacks char-gen rules). This is a clever system that hits a sweet spot for me of being highly narrative, but at the same time mechanically sound and you basically build the game parameters as you go.

Scum and Villainy, is a Firefly, Star Wars, Dark Matter-like rogues in space game that appeals on many levels. Based on the Blades in the Dark, Forged in Darkness system, a game I have avoided so far, wishing to keep my system choices tight, it has hit a sweet spot for me with their SF and Military version Band of Blades, so maybe it’s a thing and unlike STA, it is contained.

Tales from the Loop/Electric State are Year Zero Engine systems that I do not have in any form, both based on firm favourite books I do own (with others). I feel M-Space/BRP/Cortex can do the hard, but grounded SF they are based on, no need to get the game books, just use the originals for inspiration and eye candy. I might get Electric State as a one-shot game generator and it has the easiest system in the series to grok. The reality of these is the original works of fiction (and others) are enough to get me going.

Alien, also using the YZE system from above, is effectively the same as Mothership and I do not need two versions of the same thing, even if the mechanics do look cool. Unfortunately I left my run a little late and it looks like the “Evolved” edition has lost some of the original’s clarity.

Games that will not be looked at;

Star Finder and Stars Without Number, are basically DnD in space so no interest here.

Anything else, because this is enough!

*

From here, it looks like M-Space or Cortex will be used for some grounded games (The Loop etc), Traveller 1e for a space cowboy sandbox in true ‘80’s SciFi style (with Drynax maybe) and Savage Worlds for a pulpier version, more Guardians of the Galaxy.

*It may be because I had the original “little black box”, but to me Traveller needs to be self contained, something they lost in the 2016 version, which I have since gifted. The 2022 revision is better in many ways and feels complete again, except for basically zero robot or drone rules (but I have pdf’s of the 2016 books).

**My take is the second Empire fell when biologicals rebelled against sentient AI (maybe the last Emperor was an AI and decided humanity was a servant race or surplus to requirements?), so after a protracted war and the collapse of all things civilised, the AI were beaten (a massive computer Virus maybe or something more kinetic) and humanity turned its back on all things non-biologically sentient, even limiting or banning cybernetic implants.

Robots are seen as tools only if allowed (anything in human guise is highly sensitive), computers have to be human controlled and non sentient/humanoid in nature and are heavy policed, with massive stigma and paranoia common and overt enforcement of these rules, some parts of the fractured Empire even going further.

This has resulted in a loosely cobbled together “Empire” limited to TL12, with slow, cautious advancement without the aide of AI. Any tech higher than this is preciously guarded and mysterious with little scope to repair or improve on it as the tech is too advanced to trust.

Ancient AI may be a good protagonist, rarities and story drivers, maybe even an AI enemy re-emerging from the depths (2nd Empire strikes back)?

The Trials And Tribulations Of Generic RPG's

Generic RPG’s are a terrific way to enter the TTRPG hobby, but they can also be a bit of a double edged sword.

One one hand you have the world (universe, alternate reality) at your finger tips, on the other hand you have to colour in the world picture yourself, sometimes even draw the lines.

I have found that quite often, generic games draw me in for their flexibility, their promise and their lack of constraints (hate constraints, but like guide lines and flexibility). I think that free-form structureless structure is my ideal.

The problem is, I usually stall at the creative bit, not because I am lazy (well, not only), not because I do not have any decent ideas, but because I often do not know where to start, where the lines need to be drawn. The BRP UGE is a prime example. It, like most generic games, has tools to help, but I find it hard to commit, ironically often turning to the ready made worlds on the lagger system tree like Cthulhu or Runequest.

Generic RPG’s often struggle to give you some character, a feeling of the type of game they are capable of providing without leaning too far one way or the other. Savage Worlds is a good example of a generic game that claims to be able to do any genre/mood/style, but is actually better at providing a pulpy style to any basically genre, other styles are very much down to player and GM pay-in.

The BRP UGE in contrast is better at realistic simulations. You can push either peg into either hole, but why force it?

This also realistically leads to some generic systems simply not being able to do some things well. Want to play a Guardians of the Galaxy style SciFi game, then Savage Worlds rocks. Want to do something more grounded like Tales of the Loop where action is less dynamic, but more threatening? Best look at a game like M-Space (Mythras) or BRP.

A themed game saves you much of the creative brain work, but paints you into the corner of having to learn its lore, adhere (mostly) to it’s requirements and tell your stories against a fleshed out backdrop made from another’s imagination.

Like most people I often come up with ideas when reading other peoples works.

I find alternate roads, ones that better suit me, but rarely find a perfect “as written” work. This is often rule zero of a game, the reality that players and GM’s will stray, so no issue really, I guess it is just a matter of where do you accept and where do you create.

Do I need to remake structure rather than build from the ground up to be truly free?

This tends to work best when you already like the theme, such as Tales from the Loop or Tolkien, but it can be a compromise in the worst way if the theme jangles and the mechanics are not worth the effort or worse, you break what you like.

My advice to myself, and to others if it helps, is to start small. Everything great started small by the very nature of things.

This is how we used to play. Small adventures with small characters that explored their world as it and they evolved into larger entities.

This is how Forgotten Realms or Runequest started, with a village, then a nearby forrest or row of hills housing a temple or ruin, then maybe a nearby city, a kingdom, then a continent or even another time or dimension and so on.

Savage Worlds is ideal here.

This system allows the players to start creating the feel of the game they want to play from minute one, the GM guiding and learning from them equally. The world, it’s parameters, its limitations will set themselves as they go, the massive depth of loosely themed companions are just there to draw from.

I have looked at several of the more themed sets like Deadlands and chosen against going into them, because apart from the price (hard to get in Australia and quite expensive, especially if you get drawn into all the fluff), the baked in theme does not hold me. I like SW for it’s “write it as you go” generic nature.

Sometimes though, worlds collide in the best way.

Haunted West popped onto my radar today, while circling Scum and Villainy and Electric State on a local website (Campaign Supplies), two game styles I know I can do with systems I have (Traveller, SW or M-Space), simply by adopting the theme and going from there.

Some games, as lovely and polished as they are, are really only a one-shot engine or short campaign at best. Other systems can mimic their domain without such constraints.

Anyway, back to Haunted West.

It is a D100 game, with the system modernised in the ways I like. It is much like Deadlands, but without the supernatural baked in so heavily to the theme (it tackles everything from ancient European Horrors to Aliens, but all are optional and their level of influence is up to the GM).

It also tackles a lot of mature themes maturely and it has a ton of background. Finally it also allows several play styles from crunchy miniatures and measurements to mostly narrative play.

It was a reflex buy and I anticipate its arrival immensely.

A little of this and a little bit of that, but nothing too heavy handed, almost a themed generic game.

The secret sauce was a generic enough game with a not overly opinionated theme, well produced and deep (800+ pages), well priced at less than twice the price of your average book (or as it goes, a single SW companion in Aus.) with more than twice the content, and an improved version of a system I like with play style options.

It is all in the mind I guess.

I tend to stumble with generic games through analysis paralysis and grind to a halt with themed ones faced with a wall of pre-made stuff I want to do differently or were simply insurmountable walls of text like the Iron Kingdoms RPG (with 100 pages of history up front). The trick is of course, to just play and let it work itself out.

Commitment to creativity is the key, setting boundaries and focussing on them is the lock.

When do generic games shine?

When the theme, no matter how compelling, is probably not enough to hold a full system or longer, deeper game. An argument could be made for example, that Mothership or Electric State are both games that are built around a single premise, one the space hulk monster hunt, the other a road trip across a perilous land. Both could easily be done as a single scenario in a bigger game, but that brings us to what makes themed games different.

Themed games are usually tighter and more on point.

Looking at the two mentioned above, they shine as one-shot games, the mechanics are honed to the theme, the theming itself is myopic, Mothership excelling in dark fatalism, Electric State feeding off the excellent inspiration provided by the book.

Simulating Mothership with for example M-Space is perfectly possible, nearly ideal even, but you need to set the scene and look to the rules for options. Electric state is much the same, M-Space could do it and Tales from the Loop or even The Labyrinth (a later book). There is of course a sub-theme effect of generic games.

Savage Worlds could cover a Mothership-style scenario, but it would be hard to avoid either a nihilistic or pulp-comedic vibe, because the mechanics promote that. It would be possible to darken the mood (as prescribed in the books), by removing some of the elasticity of the system, but it needs to be overtly done.

M-Space is already a harder, more realistic and therefore less forgiving game so it could be easily shifted to Mothership style, just adopt a Call of Cthulhu mentality, one where survival is not guaranteed, the adversary is not a push over or even beatable. It might even be a better game as the players may go in with a less “doomed” frame of mind from the start.

So, a good generic game is not only a decent set of flexible and comprehensive rules, but it must also be good at adapting to different themes. This is tough as art, font, previous history and any built in bias, intended or not, will influence the user from page one.

For me it often starts with a single picture.

A Jim Burns work from the 70’s. Plenty of inspiration here.

Ed. I have just purchased a second hand copy of the Cortex Prime system book. I was not in the mood or head space for more systems, but this one has me intrigued. The system is not only a generic set of rules, but a “building block” game system.

You actually design the game around the theme you want to support and it has a proven track record with games like Marvel Heroic Role Playing (A game I have what little was published, but it has no char-gen rules) and Firefly, a favourite series and a theme I had in mind with my hunt for a good SciFi game. I was never interested in Smallville, but I now get that that very asymmetrical dynamic could only be handled well by a handful of systems and this is one of them.

It uses a Savage Worlds style dice range in small pools, but the characteristics, groups of important stats, skills, affiliations, special abilities and motivations are up to the player and GM to design to suit the game. Want a game heavily influenced by interactions (Delta Green, Reign, Tale from the Loop), then add them and name them as suits (family, self, friends or company, state, family).

I have a feeling that the creative stall I suffer from is rooted more in setting the feel of the generic game than anything else, Cortex Prime sets the style in char-gen, so it may well fix that.

It also seems to be probably the easiest game to port other games across to, like Tale, or Electric State and adds the char-gen rules needed to add characters missing from their unfinished Marvel game.

Is this the ultimate any genre, any style, any mechanical platform game? We will see.

Into The Unknown, Knowing More, Wishing For Something Different.

The first expansion for Into The Unknown (ITU), is on the way finally. I have a great respect for this deep and well constructed game, but feel I may never get a chance to play it properly.

Gt my heart racing when I first saw it, but things have gone a little soft over time.

Unlike Captains Chair, a game designed to be played the same way 1v1 or solo, it is a game that may need two well versed players in both Trek, especially the Dominion War and the game mechanics to really shine.

The roll out is interesting and I feel a little odd.

The Enterprise makes sense as does the Defiant, although needing to buy the expansion just to complete the core cast is a little crap. No Riker and others on the Enterprise, especially one with the Hathaway included seems like a cash grab.

The Dominion make a decent opponent, but why not start with a less specific Klingon or Romulan adversary?

The expansion is equally vexing.

Another Defiant class?

Why not a Romulan Scout or Science ship to go with the Romulan included or even a K’Tinga or K’Vort for the Klingons instead of the B’Rel BOP (which they are offering separately)?

The next expansion is not on my must get list on any level. Cardassians and more Klingons. No thanks, I am done. Romulans maybe, but not more Klingons.

The separate ships are also strangely annoying.

A second Enterprise that does not match the other ships that could have been an Akira, an Excelsior, or maybe a Nebula, then a Bird of Prey with a cloaked version when more than one ship can cloak? With another B’Rel BOP coming in the next expansion I wonder if more variety could have been better?

Collectors pieces, not useful additions, with no other useful game additions included apart from the ship panel.

What would I have liked to have seen?

First up I would have made the ships smaller.

Why? Because the Borg, DS9, D’Deridex and some others ships will be prohibitively large, possibly never made because of it. This may have meant making some of the little ships slightly bigger, or not.

They are also lovely to look at, but after so much effort was applied to scale them correctly with each other, they are comically oversized on the play table. The game is good enough to stand on its merits with just some attention paid to avoiding the Attack Wing “scale all over the place” thing.

Star Wars X-Wing and Armada both made small compromises and got aways with it, they just avoided clangers like the Delta Flyer at 15% the size of the Scimitar or Borg Sphere or the TOS Enterprise about right to the TNG one, then other ships wildly off.

Personally, I would have loved them to do themed sets that could be integrated or not, as the player chooses or singles like Attack Wing with missions included. This would allow players like me to just cover periods of interest (TOS, TOM, Voyager).

I would pay for a core game and twice what they are asking for single ships if there was more value included in each and that way, I could build up faction specific sets and only repeat ships if I actually wanted to.

The future of this game will be interesting. It is an itch-scratcher, a dream come true for some, but I am not expecting it to end well.

Captains Chair is another I am loosing patience with.

Shran, but no Archer, Kirk, Khan and Pike, but no TOS Klingoons or Romulans, nothing Voyager or Borg mentioned at all, two Discovery captains, but both Federation, two Lower Decks captains and nothing Dominion yet. Way to milk it Wizkids, running out of care factor here, no matter how good the game is, this “scatter gun” coverage is tedious.

Really need a set with some TOS enemies, a Voyager blip and some Borg. Ideally some series specific sets like Xindi war, Voyager, TOS and TNG maybe.

The Fine Art Of Cutting Your Losses And (Hopefully) Increasing Your Gains

Game collecting, or I guess collecting of any type is sometimes a fine art.

Do you obsessively always get everything available or just the bits that interest? Do you go for the “maximum” experience or always seek better balance?

I try with all my heart to strike a balance. I am happy to stop at a point of sufficiency short of completeness as long as that point makes sense and feels right.

Examples;

My Eldritch Horror set has the core game and all three of the small expansions, but not one of the three “big box” ones. The pretty universal vibe from the community was the small expansions added much without growing the footprint of the game, one is even considered near mandatory to make the core game work*.

The larger expansions add table hogging extra boards, eat huge amounts of time and add complication and one is guilty of the “big empty box” syndrome common with some games.

The ideal starter or even end point would be the core and Forsaken Lore, then maybe a second small expansion, either Signs of Carcosa, Cities in Ruin or Strange Remnants. Opinions were divided which, so I went with all of them.

Everdell core got all the small expanded game card set expansions Rugwort, Extra, Extra! and Legends (through the BGG store as I missed them initially) and some Rugwort Rats from Etsy. I then picked up Bellfaire to open the core game up a little (the ideal example of an expansion to me, more options, no real change or improvement in core dynamic**) and then I waited for Mistwood for solo play. Mistwood adds an AI opponent, or a ghost player and no extra boards.

This felt just right, but I have just purchased Newleaf.

I was avoiding the big expansions that changed, rather than expanded the core game, but Newleaf comes with some extra useful content (core and legend cards, events), ways to play them with an integrated theme that sits ok with me.

I can take what I want, much the same as Bellfaire. It also has butterflies, bats and bees, love those guys.

Mostly enough.

Star Wars Villainous. This is a tough one. The game is far from balanced in any form, but SWV is probably the worst game I have for it. The characters play fine and to theme, but a strong character or a competent player versus a weaker character or player create a dead duck game every time. Some characters like Kylo need a higher player count and Count Dooku needs at least one nerf to have any chance at all.

I have the first two expansions, but I am struggling with the last (Thrawn and Dooku) as they are weaker than the rest. The game is a seldom play for us, so much so I have to re-read the rules from scratch most times, making the last expansion feel like a completists fools errand. The game also struggles with insert-itis**.

My Attack Wing, Armada and X-Wing sets could all have done with less range (ideally I would exchange my prequel Armada collection for the same value in X-Wing ships), but these suffered from a combination of late game clearance deals, then post production obsessive chasing.

Attack Wing originally bought to be “the one” to avoid the others and even within that I could have stopped at TOS/TOM/Enterprise/Voyager themed sets and skipped the TNG era completely (where many of the scale and bloat issues are found).

X-Wing was only picked up because of the mass dumping of TFA 1e starters (5 for $100au), with intentions of limiting myself to TFA fleets (and the 2e starters were even a perfect fit) and Armada was meant to be the prequel fix- and toe dip, which was never finished.

What happened to all of these after the initial “planned” bit is history and I regret nothing (well……….).

Zombicide is a mess, but I am actually ok with where I am.

Black Plague has plenty of depth, but it is not complete (no Green Hoard, no Oriental version), but I did get a few of the special edition character boxes, a few small box expansions and the kickstarter character box also.

Now, to where I would have gone if I had known.

DCeased is only getting the intro game and Gotham Knights (completes the character figures) and Marvel gets the core, which I picked up cheap and it’s Intro set for other bits. These are far from complete, but I refuse to spend another $500au to get them there. The game is not that compelling!

My Star Wars Destiny set, was bought simply because full blister and starter boxes could be had for peanuts when it was cancelled, but it did turn into a few silly card and dice chases (no luck getting a full Vader set in 4 full boxes!). I then split my sets into themed sub-sets and gifted the balance to avoid massive waste.

Another case of a curious and slightly infuriation mix of well themed starter boxes and luckless random blister buys, leading to real money spent for very little.

Tiny Epic games were a later discovery, when there were a dozen available. I was keen to get them all, then the flood gates opened. I have managed to stop buying them (Vikings was my last), no Cthulhu, Dungeon or Pirates and I even stopped collecting the originals. I am happy with about six different games with “deluxe” bits where relevant. I also bought a couple of Ultra-Tiny Epic games, which are quite amazing for what they are.

One thing of note with these is every single top ten list of TEG’s is different, making collecting them a hit and miss affair. I like Zombies, Vikings and Cowboys, have mixed feelings on the rest I have and no list I have ever read matches my tastes. It is also interesting to note that apart from their size, the value of the games locally ($50+ au) is often on par with similar “real” games (Cyclades Legendary edition is only twice that).

7 Wonders Dual for us was a much better buy than 7W regular as we most often play as a couple. The core game is a little unbalanced (few use green Science cards for victory and if they try, it is easy enough to spoil their plans in the late game), but the Pantheon expansion opens up more options and breaks the flow of play.

We have the Agora expansion also, but have never played it and would likely only play it with the base as a different feeling game to the Base + Pantheon game. I did get the Leader cards from Etsy (fan made content based on the Leaders expansion for 7W), which can open the game up almost like a Pantheon-lite expansion and is ideal for travel as they fit in the core box. I also like that specific leaders are called out, it adds some flavour and context to the civilisation you build.

Unmatched is getting the full treatment because it is fully and seamlessly inter-compatible and I just love it. This is the best and easiest intro game I have, one that can grow with the player, be played in teams and cooperatively and rewards you playing your character of choice, not just the best ones (basically the opposite of Villainous). The game is also a stand out in that even after over a dozen releases, the earliest characters are just as relevant as the new ones.

I did hold off on some boxes until recently (Witcher, Shakespeare), but now I intend to get Hell Boy and have TMNT on pre-order (maybe not Stars and Stripes or Ali v Lee, we will see).

In hind sight I could probably have skipped the Marvel sets as they add the least to the overall landscape and the elusive Deadpool single is a ghost these days.

Into the Unknown has just started and seems to be in a death spiral of slow expansion releases already. I really only want to complete the Enterprise and DS9 crews and add a small Romulan presence (really wish the second Defiant in Tensions Rising was a Romulan Scout or Science ship), so one more expansion will end that.

Away Missions is a little gem that has much to gain by grabbing the expansions. I did not go with the TOS sets, but I have the rest and each adds options to the game that keeps it interesting.

This is another case of a core game that some find unbalanced (The Borg can be hard to play, but make an ideal team for teaching or an experienced player to use to even things up a little), but one that opens up dramatically with Klingon, Romulan and more Federations teams.

Captains Chair is a bit like Unmatched in that it can be played in any combination, so I will get the two new sets and leave it at that (I really just want some TOS/Strange New Worlds love). I would have been ok with a TOS/TOM themed box only.

You see the pattern?

If logical boundaries can be found, I will set them. If a favourite period or logical stopping point is presented, I will grab it and stop there, but sometimes not it seems.

I like to add an expansion that increases options and improves balance first, but occasionally (and sometimes with intent) let it get out of control, especially when a game is ended. I have learned to avoid expansions that are just money grabs, add little (or are just bad value), or run the risk of ruining the core game.

Control tends to come with;

1. awareness of the landscape (including possible growth-future releases),

2. planning within that landscape to a satisfying conclusion,

3. being satisfied and moving on, because there are a lot of games out there.

If you have no idea what the landscape may be, which is to say, it is still a growing concern, then you cannot plan your “sanity fences” to fend off rampant expansionism. It does not help that companies like Wizkids tend to deliberatley mix things up so you cannot easily draw clean lines within the offer (again, Captains Chair with only TOS or TNG characters).

The perfect pain storm tends to be blind collecting (Destiny), which is both frustrating and wasteful, a limited release schedule with common instant collectibles (AW, XW), coming late to the game (most of the above) or waiting seemingly for ever for new releases (Into the Unknown, Captains Chair, Zombicide DC/Marvel). The last is probably tariff based, so way to go Trump and the new world order!

Wingspan is improved with the European expansion for all the right reasons, but we are yet to be tempted to run the Australian expansion (we have) or the South American one (we do not have). It is a beautiful game, but basically fine as is.

Sometimes, I can short circuit the process by just being patient.

Cyclaides was a big tempter especially with favourite reviewers like Board Game Bollocks rating it consistently in their top 2 games for years, but I still waited for the deluxe (Legendary) version, which promised to be a cleaner and smoother experience at reduced cost. The original basically needed at least 1 expansion to make it complete and 2 for a full experience. It was and is as I had hoped. I am not even bothered by the Maelstrom expansion coming later (or the need to buy the deluxe set to get both) as it is optional, cheap enough and coming soon after the core game.

I bought the Carcassonne big box, which did it justice well and truly and was much better value than buying a half dozen smaller expansions.

It turns out, I may have bought a better, or at least more efficient version of the Everdell experience with Silverfrost. It not only has a more dynamic and challenging core system (snow!), but also a simpler solo AI than Mistwood, a Spirequest sub-game and slicker mechanisms, but that falls into the “wait a very long time to see where things finally land”, category.

I bought it anyway as an Everdell variant with a Spirequest vibe. The simpler Farshore does not tempt, but Everdell Duo does.

*

For me the perfect expansion is one that expands on the core game without wholesale change, fixes needed balance issues, adds more of the good, makes the bits that do not work perfectly fit into the game more relevant and keep the footprint/shelf presence of the game under control.

Expansions like 7WD Pantheon (or the Leader cards), Everdell Bellfaire, Extra, Extra! & Legends, Eldritch Horror Forsaken Lore are ideal and near mandatory for those games. All are a small additions that add much and should really be included in future core releases or re-designs, like the Cyclades Legendary edition, which cherry picked the best of three expansions.

Everdell Pearl Brook/Spire Crest, EH Under the Pyramids and the other big box expansions are not on my wish list as they either add little, change the feel of the game or sometimes become a distracting sub-game in their own right. There are also some “big, but empty box” traps in there.

Other times, a little “where would I like to end up and how will I get there most efficiently” before I start a journey can be helpful.

If I limited my X-Wing collection to TFA period (1 and 2e), my Armada collection to the original series and my Attack Wing fleets to TOS, TOM, Voyager and Enterprise, I would have saved a lot, had the same overall experience and picked up some the bits I missed in the end (like Weapon Zero from the Enterprise series).

*Most games are pretty well designed, but sometimes elements are a little unbalanced from the start like uninspiring Science cards in 7WD, limited card selection in Eldritch Horror or the overly complicated Events in Everdell, that the designers may fix these with an expansion.

**Insert-itis is when the box insert refuses to accomodate sleeved cards, cannot fix it’s own components once assembles or has no room for small expansions that do not have their own box, like the three characters for Star Trek Expeditions (a massive box with no room for it’s micro expansion box). Villainous will not take sleeved cards and/or the needed token tray has to be carried separately.

Star Trek Attack Wing, Why Playing "Pure" Matters.

Star Trek Attack Wing is a big game with a decade of releases.

This tends to be the weight most competitive games struggle to handle. STAW also has a few other layers of complications, but these can be used to help balance the game, indeed, the designers may have intended this the whole time.

The designers of STAW sometimes seemed to me to be creating a game that requires timeline and faction specific alignment to make sense of their designs, which were then hijacked by the tournament circuit. That is to say, the ships they design are in balance if played to cannon, but the balance is thrown out when timelines and factions are mixed.

One of the game elements that STAW has over X-Wing is their ship Captains are separate from their ships. When abused (i.e. in competition), this makes for some really weird combinations, but when kept “pure” it adds needed variety in sometimes small fleets.

Then we come to relative ship strengths.

For tournament players, many lesser ships (i.e. from the older periods) were stripped of their cards then sat unused or were only added as cannon fodder or fillers in unlikely fleets.

Weak ships in AW are a relative thing and to their credit, the designers did balance ships within their own periods.

If you use these ships only against their contemporaries, their abilities are well themed and balance out properly. The only issue is some fleets are thin to say the least.

The Gorn are a scary proposition in a TOS fight with stats of 3-1-3-4 (highest Shields in TOS) and some funky upgrades, but drop them into a TNG game and they die quickly, unable to match even a Ferenghi Marauder. Right horse on the right course.

By separating my ships into faction and timeline pure fleets, I have achieved a form of unbalanced-balance that suits just fine. Kirk as captain of a Borg cube might be a powerful option, but not on my watch! Everything feels right, it fits and makes sense.

No more weak v strong ship comparisons or anomalies, such as the Vulcan D’Kyr ships from the Enterprise era having better stats the a D’Deridex in TNG!

This Enterprise from the Kelvin set is a monster, so a favourite of some tournament players, but totally unbalances the game unless kept in its patch. I have toyed with the idea of using one as the a USS Vengeance style ship for an “Into Darkness” style scenario, it is genuinely that much bigger than the Enterprise in the other image above with stats of 4-1-6-3 and speed 6!

This has also allowed me to re-purpose the many repeat cards you accumulate for more bespoke options. If you take a ship ability or name from one era and shift it to another, the game is not (has never been) so finely balanced that this causes problems, it just adds options and you avoid repeats. Indeed, this is only really possible thanks to pure timelines.

My TOS set for example includes the Federation Enterprise, Intrepid and Independent, the Gorn Gornarus, Go’Sorass and Gress’Sril, the Klingon K’Tinga Kronos One (without cloaking), D-7 Gr’oth and Somraw, Romulan BOP Gal Gath’Thong, Praetus, Vorta Vor, Kazara and D-7 Algeron. Six of those ships are recent “home made” add-ons, can you tell which?

X-Wing 1st Edition, Was It Really Broken?

The recent demise of 2e X-Wing was on the cards, but a shame and the reasons for it are laid plain, nothing new to sell, a tournament circuit fractured and dwindling, but mostly a lack of growth and new blood.

Second editions existence and the pain, or excitement it caused was felt necessary as 1e was deemed “broken”.

Broken?

Second edition addressed a few things, mostly to do with tournament play and evolution;

• The game had left some ships behind, specifically the first ships you would think of in a Star Wars game. The reality was, the iconic names of Star Wars were mostly redundant in the tournament game space.

• Point values and upgrade options were printed on the cards, meaning needed changes had to be applied via existing means. These fixes had become habitual, standardised even, but the options available were often a stretch of the system or even player acceptance.

• The elephant in the room of multiple time lines was becoming troublesome. The Prequels were never addressed and the sequels kept throwing up new ideas and hurdles (see above). That Star Wars Armada was doing a retrospective range only made this more obvious.

• There were too many ideas (upgrades) and the core concepts of the game were changing, the game dynamic even shifting. It is hard to un-make things once they are out there but equally, some options simply never made it to the table*.

The fixes were largely successful, if a little messy and all together too late. The X-Wing, namesake ship of the game, by the end of the 1e game was nimble, strong, tricky and well priced. The Kihraxz, it’s Scum equivalent, is a chameleon with multiple options and even the Tie Advanced had merit for pilots other than Vader.

To be honest, the simple clarity of 1e is the major draw for me, later game hi jinx accepted, I liked points on card and could live with either removing or modifying the bits that jarred. “Official” card reprints for the tournament circuit (like the Armada upgrade card box) would have sufficed for many and effectively “2e’d” the game.

Second edition did get a lot right.

Larger upgrade cards were nice for older eyes, no point or upgrade options printed on ship cards provided needed flexibility, an up to date and even design space for all ships, new upgrades like Force and Turret Gunner, mostly rationalised upgrades with fewer choices and some experimental mechanics, like Turret rotation, were settled.

Recently looking closely at 2e, I really like what they did with Droids and Ordnance, can live better with EPT’s and Mods, appreciate the logical choices made for some upgrades and reject a few overly wordy cards as I choose. It is a better game, but is it a better experience?

Dials got generally more exciting, “power” upgrades were dumped, but so were the “duds”, wording was tightened and the whole thing felt slicker, if a little weightier. There is more covered, so more going on. It seems sometimes like they evolved logically, other times like they “balanced it to death”.

Life is unbalanced and these unbalances make it fun. The rock-paper-scissors simplicity of 1e has been diluted, something that around here we deliberately reduce by removing the clutter.

What went wrong?

Timing sucked.

COVID put a dent in all things communal, even though it did boost board game sales. X-Wing had few solitaire options, so online play was the go, if that was your jam. If not, the flame slowly dwindled.

There were new ships to buy in the TFA and Prequel ranges, but many of the original ships were not reprinted. The Auzituck, Alpha Starwing (a ship I have never actually even seen), Star Viper, U-Wing and many more were supported in upgrade packs (rarely in the right numbers), but you needed to be part of the 1e to 2e migration upgrade dynamic or miss them, so no joy for new players.

Even now, it is sometimes possible to find some 1e clearance ships more easily than 2e packs and rare ones are costing as much as entire collections.

More K-Wings? Seems not. My second one was a Spanish language print with sourced cards and tokens. Picking up a third may cost me the same as buying into an entirely new game system.

The game was more popular than ever on the tournament circuit in later years, but casual and club players were shifting away to new games, or just away from X-Wing generally. An interesting point is Armada and Attack Wing have stayed mostly unchanged (1.5e shifts, not wholesale changes-with the exception f AW ship costs dropping) and have stayed relatively sound as a result.

The Ship and Upgrade cards with no printed point cost or upgrade bar are clean and flexible, but there was constant change, both of the costs and even the whole delivery system. The tournament circuit was constantly changing, the casual player resorted to pre-built “quick pick” cards or just gave up.

I wonder if many card based games would survive if they required a separate list of costs and conditions to play.

The feel is different.

Can’t explain this properly, but the feel of 1e still excites. 2e is like the pub band that has gone on to a more polished experience, but looses that special something along the way. Hard to fault the majority of decisions made, but no matter how much is good, something was lost.

For me they missed the golden opportunity to separate Pilots from ships.

This would have solved a few problems and added variety as well as adding that “what if” element to the game. AW has its Captains and even Wings of War added Aces in the late game. Luke flew an E-wing in later fiction, he could have flown a Y-Wing, A-Wing or even the Falcon, Han could have flown an X-Wing or YT2400. Why limit pilots to ships, then have them fly several other ships anyway (Hera, Vader) and what about Poe in a F/O Tie, which actually happened?

I guess it was death by a few deep-ish cuts.

Breaking with the old, then adoption of the new stifled by bad luck, resentment and confusion, some choices that split the field more clearly into the tournament and casual groups, then supporting only one of these properly, higher and limited entry costs, a feeling for new players of missing the “golden age”, then finally an older idea assailed by newer ones (Crisis Protocol etc).

People move on and nostalgia only satisfies a few, but if that is also gone with genuine change, then there is not much to hold on to for them.

For me a good game is a good game, so a reduced form of 1e is pitch perfect and a TFA period jaunt into 2e is developing.

STAW "Cut And Paste", Some Wins And Other Oddballs

My Attack Wing “craft” session has finished. I have run out of need, ideas and more importantly, cards to pirate for my sets.

The last boxed set arrived, fittingly an original starter I got from Wizkids for $20 usd. This surprised me with two cards I did not realise I had sold off and lots of fillers. The ships were old paint schemes, which in two cases would require a re-paint. This went in an unusual direction (see below).

The very last ship and I really got lucky here, was a print damaged Sao Paulo Defiant class (which I replaced), so I still had the bad card and the temptation to use it.

Name? I was really limited.

The Independent was favourite (same vibe as Defiant), but the only cards I had were Marquis generic captains and the font was way too big. The one copy I did have was on a re-purposed ISS Enterprise and I cannot remember where it came from. It refused to move after a little poking and I even damaged it slightly, (many do come off, but some are committed).

The Gorn had a surplus Disruptor Barrage card, so Disruptor was in the mix, but then I stumbled on a lone and unlikely missed Nistrim Raider, so U.S.S. Raider was born. I needed to extend the grey top banner a little as the name was shorter, but all good, done that before.

The ship text had two options left*, one from an original Delta Flyer I, which read “weapon upgrades up to 4 SP may be used” plus a “-1 attack in rear fire arc” option, the other was the NX Enterprise’s “Free Hull Plating”. I was loath to use the Plating card even though it fit the theme, as I only had 2 for the NX period and a re-named NX, the USS Federation had taken up the free hull plating option (I still needed one for the Enterprise).

The first option was chosen, but the first bit stumped me. In theme it was acceptable as I had added a weapon slot to the Raider, but it is only small so a limit fit and there were plenty of sub 5pt options, but then I remembered the “Experimental Torpedo Bay” card, which allows you to “hide” a Torpedo card (any cost) under that 2 pt upgrade.

The DS9 period got a little attention, but the TOS and TNG Battle scales did also. The Dominion was a marriage of an Enterprise-D card and a Dominion Dreadnaught on another Galaxy, but let’s assume it was named before the war. The other half of the Dreadnaught card was a good fit on the flagship Prometheus class, Ni’Var means “of two worlds” in Vulcan and the USS Hunter was a neat inclusion.

I then realised I only had one Enterprise re-fit, but if I used it, I could not use my Ent-B card, so the USS Spectre, a weapon heavy war ship was created out of an excess Akira class card I had been hanging onto (thought it might be a second Mirror universe Constitution class).

Before this lucky collision of scarce resources, my project was Borg started.

My Borg offer is a little thin. I did not buy the big Cube, then let my scout the Soong and a Sphere go in my purge. I found myself re-buying a cheap Soong vessel to get some depth, then a couple of OP sets with a Scout cube each (one re-named), so a little better, but not ideal.

I missed the Assimilated ships box**, but I did have an excess of Klingon K’Vort, Vor’Cha, Romulan D’Deridex and Fed Galaxy and Akira ships, most in old or alternate colour schemes, so a grey/green repaint is booked and their cards have been…..assimilated.

They have better shields, usually by 2 values, increased primary by one usually, a Borg action bar and suitable ship ability if necessary. This means three ships lost cloaking, but I figured the Borg would have assimilated and used that tech if it suited them, so maybe the added shields and regeneration draw too much power for their massive ships, or more likely they do not see the need to hide.

Points were adjusted in line with other Borg ships and suddenly my fleet of Borg is quite large (11 ships total).

Other excess ships are scattered through my sets, but the Klingons needed a lot of variety, so rule 1* was applied with vigour.

The Klingons needed some fillers. Somraw means “Muscle”, so appearing in a few periods makes sense. The Gornar was an excess Gornarus, Ves Batlh is a ceremonial sword, so again commonly used, Mulan came from…Romulan, but feels right for Klingons who also have the Ning’Tao. The Gath’Oth was made from my very last Gal Gath’Thong Romulan BOP and Gr’oth Klingon D-7. Easier to pronounce than some Klingon names.

This is obviously never going to float in a competitive space, but it was never meant to. It is merely a way of turning unwanted repeat cards into something useful.

*Rule 1 of cut and paste is no repeats in the same era or set.

**Ironically my X-Wing and Armada collection caused me problems keeping up with my AW set. It’s ironic because I originally got into AW to avoid those two.

Rules As Written or RAW

I have a lot of TTRPG rules. For handling ease, I have tried to keep them in three camps, D100 style for the bulk, Savage Worlds and “other”, so that they are able to support different play styles and tastes, but also to aide in the learning of all of these rules. This is often done in a relative vacuum (little opportunity to play-which reinforces knowledge, or lack there of) and the problem is…..well……I get distracted.

Not by other media, not by life or work, not even by other TTRPG’s. I get distracted by my desire to do stuff my way, to reinvent, tinker and experiment. This has always been me and it really stifles actual gaming. Start reading a book, get an idea, start writing a book, get bogged down and repeat.

I have a set of WW2 wargame rules that I started in the early 2000’s, that may never be finished, even though the ideas are well enough cemented that I could probably write many of them from memory.

D100 games are another example.

I never intended to run RQ RAW, just mine the resources and simplify play using BRP or similar. Maybe I will give it a crack. It’s not like they have not laid down a clear and pleasant path.

I have so many of them and they all have great content, but the mechanics are often dated in application. This is getting better as games evolve, but still, almost as soon as I start reading one, I become aware of better ideas than those posed. Better? Well to my mind better.

The reality is, most d100 mechanics are easily enough hacked, the flexibility of the d100 roll-under based system blesses us with that, so I could easily enough write a one sheet variant to apply to basically all d100 games.

The latest version of Call of Cthulhu is pretty clean and slick. It is modernised while sticking to it’s roots and pretty bullet proof. I still struggle with the core mechanic, even though it works and many others are fine with it.

The problem, and I know this from my transition from amateur photographer to professional, is that actually doing something for real tends to quieten the demons, while doing it “theoretically’ as an anticipation of the real thing, tends to make little things bigger than they need to be.

I used to sweat lens play, mount tightness, colour of lenses matching in sets, those sets making sense. I now just grab the gear that will do a job and short of a drop or other issues, just put it back on the shelf to use again. I have lenses that are loose, some that grind, the odd one that is loose on the mount, cameras with damage and some little quirks, even a couple well past their shutter life rating, but as long as they work, they get used. I recently packed four bags of kit for a long and busy day, all without duplication and still had gear left over. Nothing is wasted.

I remember the example often used of the two art classes given the same task, make a perfect pot. One can only work in theory until the pot is made at the end of the process, the other class is allowed to make and make pots until time runs out. The makers always beat the theorists in final product.

I need to stop being a theorist and thinking of RAW as “cement shoes”. I need to be a maker. I need to play these games and only house rule when I am sure of my facts and it is for the better-for real.

STAW Generics.

One of the many separate Star Wars Attack Wing sets I have assembled is TNG Battle scale-Generics.

This is the big ships from the TNG period, but only generics (no uniques, or named).

They are weaker and cheaper than the Uniques*, rely on squadron builds, all abilities coming from their Captain and faction limited upgrade choices. You can make some strong squads with just these ships generally with a lot more plastic on the table than unique ship games.

The 100 pt squads tend to be 3-4 ships with a mix of Captains and limited upgrades, making for a decent small battle scenario, very much like an old school 1e X-Wing match and easy for new players to pick up.

Most of these now get a run and being an older photo, there are now even more!

100 points can net you 5x K’Vort class Klingon Bird of Prey with generic captains, which is 20 red dice, 35 health with 1 agility in a simple and powerful squad, if a little bland. You could also get 6 K’Tinga with a decent leader, or a mix of 4 Neg’Var and Vor’Cha cruisers.

The Federation could have a mix of up to 5 Nebula and Excelsior class with room for a better Captain, up to 4 Akira, Galaxy or Prometheus class with a mix of Captains or upgrades, even squeeze 4 Sovereign class (25) in with generic captains.

The Romulans can field 2 Reman Warbirds (32) with a support and even the Borg can get a few ships on the table.

You can load up some ships with upgrades, but lacking inherent ship abilities and with 1 less shield value across the board, points are generally better spent on more ships and upgrades spread wider. The smaller upgrade bars also tend focus the ships into specific roles, like “tech support” or “weapons platform”.

You can field everyone you want, they might just be on different ships.

Unlike XW especially 2e***, AW is a lacking in post move Actions, which can make flying a little boring, but it does better simulate the “battle wagon” as opposed to dog-fight style of play.

This format allows for squadron tactics and synergies to off-set that slightly.

*Generics in AW generally lose a shield point, some upgrade slots and their bespoke ability, which is a big hit for only 2 points and some of the maths is well wonky (especially if a ship does not have shields!). This has never been a good fit for me and using generics only removes this. In other periods, I have upgraded the shield values to be all the same as that seems a reasonable concession for a 2 point bump.

**DS9 (uniques), TNG Battle (uniques for scenarios, generics for bigger battles), Voyager, Kelvin and Enterprise (a mix of uniques and generics-with shields adjusted), TOM and TOS (mostly named, but shields are adjusted when generics are used).

***XW 1e sits between. I often compare the NX Enterprise 2-3-3-0 to the Tie Fighter 2-3-3-0, pointing to the vastly deeper build potential of the NX, which when fully loaded is quite robust with multiple crew, ordnance, a choice of Captains and now the Prototype option), but compared to the Tie it is slow, has no Roll (or Boost with upgrade), although, rare for Feds it does have two K-turns and one is white.

X Wing 1st Edition, A Great Journey, But When Did It Go Wrong?

A lot of this post is drawn for the “Stay on the Leader” blog, as I was, unfortunately not there. I was aware of the game, but only jumped after Attack Wing and when 1e was being cleared and SotL became one of my favourite resources. I will ignore Huge ships for this post as they are largely irrelevant in this context.

The posts that inspired this are much better are here,

https://stayontheleader.blogspot.com/2018/03/the-six-ages-of-x-wing-1-jurassic-park.html

and here

https://stayontheleader.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-six-ages-of-x-wing-2-twin-laser.html

Unfortunately the planned six part blog string was interrupted by the announcement of 2nd edition, but the two posts he did finish are fun reading.

The journey of 1e X-Wing in the early days was a win for everyone concerned, it had enjoyable game play with a break through, slick game system, a great theme, excellent components and was tight enough to support a world tournament competition right to the end of its run, even if the cracks were starting to show.

Wave 1

Core Set, X and Y-Wing, Tie Fighter and Advanced.

After the Core set (X-Wing v Tie Fighter) came the needed X-Wing and Tie expansions, which added more pilots to the core ships and then the Y-Wing and Tie Advanced were added for variety (and Vader).

We have the two ships most thought of first, some recognised pilots, Droids, Elite talents, Mods, ordnance and enough to play a decent game with (especially with two Core sets), joined by more of the same, Vader’s Advanced and a tank-y Y-Wing with Turret upgrades.

The state of the game was rich with excitement for what was to come, which I suppose most people would have assumed would stick mostly to the three original movies. I guess there were several possibilities here. The designers could have gone with 2 then 3 threads, much as they did with the 2e, of the Republic, Empire and then First Order (to be realised) streams, but instead they stuck to one, expanding it into the greater Imperial universe.

Wave 2

Millenium Falcon, Slave 1, A-Wing, Tie Interceptor .

The first large base ship and something fast and agile for each faction. The Interceptor had the full range of manoeuvre Actions, the A-Wing was the fastest ship by a mile (or hundreds).

The choices are broadening, but the first miss-step is made with the Slave -1 as an Imperial large ship “filler” and one that was rarely if ever used after Wave 6.

Wave 3

HWK-290, Lambda Shuttle, B-Wing, Tie Bomber (Rebel Transport).

The Rebels get a second Crew carrier/Turret option and the only 1 Attack ship in the game, but for the first time in a ship from outside the movies. The Lambda arrives (possibly should have come before Slave-1) and Palpatine, the B-Wing and Tie Bomber appear as the final “must have” Movie ships and add some needed variety. The Transport brings our first Huge ship, more a scenario focus than serious tournament ship, but a sign of growing ambitions. It did add some useful Droids and Pilots.

My favourite ship (possibly tied with those nasty Interceptors), which means I am a jouster I guess, but the A-Wing was rarely worth running after Wave 5.

Wave 4

Z-95, Tie Defender, E-Wing, Tie Phantom, (Imperial Aces).

The Rebels get a filler and an A-Wing alternate, the Imperials score a super Interceptor and a cloaking wild card.

Now we are into expanded universe ships and the Imperials gain Cloaking. For me, sitting on the outside looking in, the tournament players must have been clawing at the walls every release schedule as the meta changed each wave and builds became more interesting or daunting, depending on your knowledge of the game, but that cycle was also the beginning of the end, even if only a few saw it at the time. For people like me with only a passing interest in Star Wars outside of the movies, we are now into the “I might just stick with what I have” period.

Wave 5

YT-2400, VT-49 Decimator (Tantive IV).

A thin wave, adding more expanded universe large ships and a second Huge ship with Leia and Han Crew and more Upgrades. Two Rebel Huge ships set an expectation for more, but which ones? In the films only Rebel ships are featured, so we expected more exploration into the expanded universe.

This was the time of Turrets vs Swarms, simple and effective.

Wave 6

StarViper, M3 Scyk, IG-2000, (Most Wanted), (Rebel Aces).

The Most Wanted pack was chock-full of goodies for the now separate Scum faction. They got their own version of the Y-Wing, Z-95 and some exclusive ships. The Rebels get the first of many bandaid fixes to earlier ships with the Aces pack, making the A-Wing and B-Wing more attractive.

The Scum are finally separated as the third faction with the “Most Wanted” pack and more ships (even if they and their pilots are quite obscure) and another Mercenary appears. The expanded universe is being plumbed more deeply, the ships becoming meta affecting and “fixes” for older ships are appearing in new products like Rebel Aces.

Wave 7

Hound’s Tooth, Kihraxz, K-Wing, Tie Punisher (Imperial Raider).

Another large ship mercenary, a Scum line fighter, A Rebel heavy bomber with SLAM action and an answering Punisher with a System upgrade. The Raider finally allows 1 on 1 Huge ship battles, the Tie Advanced also gets some help and Palpatine arrives (lethal until nerfed).

At this point, the releases are squarely aimed at the tournament circuit, with answers for each faction for balance, new mechanics (new Actions and manoeuvres even) and of course, more fixes. The meta is very much a slave to the release schedule now, older ships starting to show the strain with fixes a regular thing.

Wave 8

(Force Awaken Core Set), T-70 X-Wing, Tie/fo, Ghost, Inquisitor’s Tie, Mist Hunter, Punishing One, (Imperial Veterans), (Assault Carrier).

The TFA period is added to the earlier time line with no accounting for the timeline differences, with XT-70 and 65’s mixing, Poe and Luke or Kylo and Vader flying together and some other oddness. The tournament circuit respond to a better X-Wing and Tie, the Ghost and Inquisitor’s Tie from the Rebels series make an appearance as well as the last two mercs from The Empire Strikes Back. Imperial Vets make the Interceptor meaner (and prettier) and the Assault Carrier adds some Ties.

If the TFA period was split here, like in 2e, the game may have been able to share different threads and handle new rule additions, then the Republic period could have been added and 1e may have survived and even the simulation pundits would have been happy, but much of the damage was done. In some ways, X-Wing was a slave to the movie release schedule.

Wave 9

ARC-170, Special Forces Tie, Fang Fighter, Shadow Caster, (Heroes of the Resistance), (C-Roc Cruiser).

The TFA period gets some fleshing out with a new Falcon, Poe and a heavier Tie, but the rest of the releases are fringe at best, although the Fang becomes a favourite. The C-Roc gives some life to the Scyk, the Shadow Caster adds a rotating Turret, a sign of the future. The TFA period First Order pilots are mostly generics at this point as the releases are coming before the fiction can fill the gaps.

The Meta is straining now with multiple Jump Masters and other ships people had to research origins for becoming table dominant until nerfed by “official” rules. The JM in particular even needed a new card!

Wave 10

Sabine’s Tie, Upsilon Shuttle, Quad Jumper, U-Wing, Tie Striker.

Rounding out the Rebels with Sabine’s Tie was nice, the rest were Rogue One or TFA releases. The Tech upgrade becomes the new/old period threshold, the ships a mix of “must have” to fringe at best unless you are a competitive player where the best is picked off, the rest ignored.

The playing group is split even more now between casual players who make the older ships they want to fly, relevant again by ignoring the meta and “playing friendly”. The tournament circuit is hard edged, useless ships simply ignored for winning power builds.

Waze 11

Auzituck Gunship, Scurrg Bomber, Tie Aggressor.

The factions are getting more balancing ships, like the Aggressor, an Imperial Y-Wing, Scurrg as the Scum ordnance specialist (but all together too powerful) and the Wookie Gunship for good measure.

More new game mechanics are introduced, making a nonsense of some older ships and muddying the waters even further.

Wave 12

Alpha class Star Wing, Kimogila Fighter, Phantom II Expansion, (Guns for Hire).

Kihraxz and Viper fixes, Harpoon missiles and plenty of well liked upgrade cards make Guns for Hire the hot thing this wave. The elusive Star Wing, a cross between the Lambda and an Apache Helicopter (never actually seen one, the only ship to elude me), Kimogila and Phantom II are a mixed bag adding more mechancis, the last two can still be found on dusty shop shelves.

They are again mostly adjusting balance and filling in the cracks now. The game is healthy enough on the playing circuit, but the end is in sight for many.

Wave 13 (apparently this came before 12 for some reason?)

Resistance Bomber, Tie Silencer.

The needed depth for the TFA period, not that there was still any official period separation in the game.

For a slim time, my game was 5x TFA base sets and the half dozen other TFA ships on clearance.

The playing fraternity are at odds now. The new ships are powerful, but the game is coming apart at the seems.

Wave 14

(Saw’s Renegades), Tie Reaper (second edition is announced).

The last 1e releases are Rogue One fillers and Saw’s comes with an attempt to fix the X-Wing.

Too little-too late, the announcement of 2e and imminent conversion packs kills 1e for most or for some, the game all together. My feeble attempt at controlling the monster, sticking to TFA in 1e was turning out to be a good idea as the conversion kit fit perfectly with my collection and the period was a discreet range in 2e, but I bought a cheap 1e starter and the rest is history.

So, where did it go wrong?

The reality is, competitive needs ruled the release schedule, fated to be I guess by the 100 pt, head to head on a 3x3 mat structure of the game. Collecting ships, playing scenarios, simulating Star Wars and having fun all took a back seat to tournament play.

For many, Wave 6-7 was a high water mark with the release of Scum as a faction and action chains were emerging as the meta currency. Others stayed the course until Wave 10 or later, but for me, if I was buying and playing with the benefit of hind sight and as a simulation gamer with a strong need to play to canon, Wave 3 would have been plenty. Nothing was broken, everyone had their place and there was enough.

What could have been done differently?

If the initial launch had been four or five factions, with the Prequels and Scum factored in, then maybe the scope of the game would have been greater and later rules bloat avoided. I personally would have loved it if pilot cards were separate also, allowing for vastly more variety from the start (like Captains in Attack Wing, but that got well out of hand didn’t it!).

Was 2e the fix that was needed?

You could argue that all that needed doing was a reprint of some cards, dials and upgrades that needed updating or fixing, but instead they started from scratch.

2e was a decent fix, balance was back, you could theoretically fly any ship you wanted and be competitive and many of the miss-steps of the 1e game were removed or reworked, so what went wrong?

Cards without point values or upgrades had a mixed reception, especially when the app needed was twitchy. The flexibility of non-printed values did mean the game could be balanced and re-balanced as needed, but it was also obvious there was a kowtowing to the tournament player, the casual player was a bit lost and therefore lost interest.

Fantasy Flight and later Asmodee could not sell much except conversion kits and offered little new, so sales dropped, but I guess so did R & D, but the reality was, if you came in late and wanted to fill your fleet, you had to turn to 1e ships and conversion packs. A late surge helped but was too late to stem the tide and many realised, the promised re-prints were not to be.

The conversion packs were also rarely perfectly aligned with most players collections, either way too much or too little (usually 3 was the unlucky number). Personally I could have converted my TFA kit almost perfectly, but I went into the earlier period and broke that.

The community was healthy, the game strong and balanced, but the early magic was gone and with it much of the potential for growth. For me, the biggest sign of a failing game was the loss of many of the blogs I liked. SotL is one of the few still up even with little actual play being done.

I miss the rock-paper-scissors simplicity of the original game, so personally I regressed to re-capture a time and feeling I had basically missed first time around. Classic (movie ships), Bare Bones, Skeleton Crew, Aces and Eights, Expanded and Full Noise are all layers of 1e I enjoy, 2e is mostly languishing in reserve.

One fix that has a massive impact is to simply use 2e dials with 1e ships. This balances a lot of ships (more Talon Rolls, S-Loops and generally more speed, or sometimes less).

“Cut and paste as needed, the instructions are on the box”.

It is our game now, all ties with mother have been cut.

For many, especially non-competitive players, the latest take n 2e is a mess, a great big, over complicated, over nerfed, competiton driven mess. The answer according to some is “go back to it’s roots”, more specifically reduce, reduce, reduce.

For example, I personally dislike EPT’s and Mods* and have an allergic dislike for Titles**, feeling they take away from the already represented bespoke abilities of the Pilots and Ships and are the key villains in the exaggerated “action chain” economy of the late 1e game. As proof of this, most were absorbed by the 2e game.

If you look at most 1e power lists, EPT and Mod combo’s are at their core. Soontir and Palpatine (as written) or Han and Chewie/C3-PO/R2-D2 are all less fortress-like without these extras and Pilots like Jake, Tycho or Vader get to do things with Actions that others just don’t. The game feels more like the designers intended. The rock-paper-scissors dynamic meets squad building hijinks limited to call-out cases while simulating Star Wars as we want it.

If like me you have a ton of exquisite little plastic ships, bags of card board collateral and an undying desire to “fly Star Wars”, then what is to be done?

I guess we all need to make our own way.

As I have said above, my jam is reduced upgrade 1e, probably with 2e dials as the easiest way to upgrade older ships (1e dials saved for intro level games). I have lots of ships that are 2e only, so I guess there is a need to do something like the later 2e game, with base cost ships based on Pilot skill and “free” upgrades, but like 1e a lot of upgrade types will be banished. No EPT’s or Mods for a start, just ship and pilot abilities, ordnance and crew of all types (gunners, droids etc).

*We also play “full noise” with all the bits when the mood hits, especially in “Aces and Eights” a 60pt Ace + wingman fighter face-off.

**Especially the generic ones that are blatant fixes and the ones that hint at ship “sentience” and the same goes for Attack Wing.

Unmatched, Back On My Radar!

One of my favourite games and the easiest game I have to get to the table quickly with anyone, any time is Unmatched. It is so easy in fact, I can grab it after months away, look at the action card and just go.

Quick run down;

Players or teams each player using a main protagonist (usually 1 sometimes 2 or 3 characters) who sometimes have sidekicks (1-8), fight using a set number of cards (usually 30) on a small map until one side is beaten. Running out of cards equals exhaustion and likely defeat, so the game is limited in rounds, space and tactics.

I have no other game that can be set up in a minute, be played in 20-30, even with new players, can offer an even game no matter the player range (there are some easy to play characters and maybe sme handicapped ones), or just do a team-up game with Amazing Tales.

No matter how odd the match-up, most games I have played have been close, which is not nothing. Squirrel Girl vs T-Rex, Genie vs Robin Hood, different but equal.

It offers an almost infinite variety of matchups and something for all tastes from the goofy to hard boiled. There is even now a genuine solo option (one I am yet to beat convincingly in “easy” mode) and another to come.

Houdini decides whether to Boost his defence card, taking a mild hit if not. The maps are small (over half of this one is in the pic), but tricky and always different. The board above is in “stealth” mode, on the flip side to normal with less obvious ring colour, but I would prefer an alternate map.

I have almost all the sets, only missing the early (seem mythical to me) Deadpool and Bruce Lee singles and some of the newer ones are yet to be bought, but that is being rectified.

After stopping at Houdini/Genie, I grabbed Legends 3 on impulse, then the Shakespeare and two Witcher sets straight after based on reviews I came across while chasing ones for L3. Then I pre-ordered TMNT with the trimmings as I love Turtle stuff (I remember owning the very first comics and the RPG and some other stuff). I am sure Ali vs Lee, Hellboy and anything after are also likely.

One thing I love about this game, which flies in the face of many other competitive games like X-Wing, are the fixed character decks that lead to a friendly community ready to share ideas, game reports and opinions.

Like many tournament style games, there are player and character rankings, regional championships, but unlike most fighting games, a lot of people just enjoying the experience and champion less than optimal characters, because deck building and power teams simply do not exist. You play with what you get, as is, end of.

X-Wing 2e and the game on the whole died for me when all the design choices made, were clearly for tournament play. It was fine in 1e and I still love it, but to many it was “broken” competitively so 2e was born. Legion looks to be going the same way. Unmatched is more robust from the start, the design pressure is for balance not escalation. Some of the top rated tournament characters are some of the oldest available, which is a sign of a healthy game.

The game has fixed character/deck options, meaning there is no bulk buying then dumping of unwanted resources for the “perfect” deck. The decks are made to a flexible but stable formula and designed to represent their character theme, which they do really well. If you are playing Bloody Mary, Spiderman, Dr Tesla, The Genie or Big Foot, you know it, you feel it.

Dark doings in SoHo. Dracula and his brides (Etsy sourced alternate figs, normally the brides are coloured resin tokens and the toothy guy is more “civilised”), with a little help from a nasty looking Mr Hyde (alt) vs Holmes, Watson (alt) and The Invisible Man. Looks one sided, but like all Unmatched games, it ended with a narrow win to Dracula, coming back from early mauling and after Hyde was bested (as Dr Jekyll). The next game was Holmes v Raptors, a win to Holmes.

With over 50 characters available now and plans for more, everyone should find a favourite. You then master that character and try something new, but that may take a while and your opponent may be constantly changing.

Google “favourite or best Unmatched character/set/map” and you will rarely get the same answer. The same with “best set to start with” or “most fun character”. Even Deadpool, with a notoriously crippled hand made more for laughs than tournament play is widely sought after.

There are sentimental favourites and these can trump “better” characters even in the tournament circuit where power builds and favourites are usually found. As an example, the Buffy set is widely considered the weakest overall, but only if you go looking for trouble and play outside of that set and even then it still has many fans.

I use it as a themed set or for weaker characters to play against new players and still sometimes get a solid win (in fact one of my few wins against the Mothman AI was with an all Buffy crew).

Holmes the clever pugilist, Watson with his revolver and ability to heal, The Invisible man in the background, able to, you guessed it, dissapear and appear somewhere else.

No character is ever entirely useless or dominant. There is a rock-paper-scissors element to the game, but even then, random card draw, team composition and player skill can provide upsets.

You really can hero your crush character and answer that age old question, “in a fight between X and Y who would win?”, even if “X” is Red Riding Hood and “Y” is a giant T-Rex!

I tend to group my sets thematically (you probably saw that coming).

• Modern Mayhem, including Dino’s*, TMNT, Buffy etc plus the Amazing Tales Martians AI. The pending Hellboy set will go here to.

• Legends of History a mixed bag that is everything else that has no set theme like Achilles, Medusa, Black Beard, Bigfoot*, Sinbad and The Genie etc. This is Unmatched at it’s most random and truest to it’s roots.

• If you go down to the Woods has all the literary legends and fairytales with weird creatures all with a “anti-fairy tale” vibe that suits the Witcher sets like Red, Alice, Loki, Beowulf, Shakespeare, Arthur and Robin Hood.

• Amazing Tales set with all the 19th and early 20th century figs. Cobble & Fog, Houdini, Tesla, Bloody Mary, Golden Bat etc and the Amazing Tales Mothman AI.

*There are plenty of cross-overs (the Raptors tend to pop up anywhere as does the Genie), but otherwise I find it helps player buy-in to accept these groups and start their careers here.

Things I appreciate about the game is the room in each box for sleeved cards (Star Wars Villainous could learn from this) and the beautiful details. My only mild complaint is the sometimes missed opportunities with maps, when they print a less obvious movement ring version on the back of some instead of an alternate.

What would I love to see?

A Batman series, maybe 2-5 boxes with Bane + Thugs, Bat Man + Robin, Bat Woman + Bat Girl, Joker + Quinn, Nightwing, Riddler, Gordon + Harvey Dent, Green Arrow, Cat Woman, Scarecrow, Penguin, Red Hood, Death Stroke + Ravager, Poison Ivy, Mr Freeze, Two Face, Ra’s & Talia al Ghul, Deadshot, Poison Ivy etc. Every one of these just screams Unmatched (although many of them have parables in the game already).

Others?

The Three Musketeers, James Bond, Indiana Jones, a reprint of the game that it came from, Star Wars Epic Duels, The Lord of the Rings, the list can go on and on.

Why Savage Worlds Won.

So what won out?

I am referring to the post I did recently about looking to delve deeply into an RPG that I have already to re-introduce an old friend and once obsessed RPG-er, while getting myself properly up to speed with a game (you get rusty with neglect, just like any tool).

*

Ok, so I went with 13th Age, my one and only d20 fantasy game system, a DnD heart-breaker, the salve for jaded DnD players, a love letter to house rules.

Then I started reading the rules and realised, like many games I have rejected recently, it is a lot to take on board for a one single theme game and flies in the face of my current direction, which is to master a single system or pair of systems and play any period using it.

To be clear, I have never been a DnD fan. Even in my earliest days, I played Traveller, Call of Cthulhu, D6 Star Wars and many, many others, but never really got the DnD bug. Ironically or more likely unwisely, I have owned a lot of it from the old Red and Blue basic books, ADnD to 5e as well as Pathfinder 1e (a mountain of), Iron Heroes and 13th Age, but most was sold off, hardly used.

13th Age has survived for two reasons.

It is an over the top, heroic version of the old game, designed by inner sanctum designers who house rule heavily and this is the result.

It is fun to read, fun to design/imagine up things and for it’s type, fun to play. Overall a much more pleasant version of DnD (for me).

But, it is still DnD and it is not my one game ideal.

It is still a heavy load in a busy life and at the end of the day, it is less interesting to me than other genres. I felt it might be a soft landing for a lapsed DnD gamer coming back, but he is lapsed and maybe that was for a reason, so let’s try something new!

So, I switched back to Savage Worlds (not D100, I will explain).

Savage Worlds won for the following reason.

It is the one set of consistent rules I can learn and apply to any game, even another existing game with a quick hack.

In a nutshell, I can do a 13th Age or other inspired scenario with one rule set if it is SW, but not the other way around.

No rule set is perfect, especially when you try to apply it to different themes.

Savage Worlds has a rep for being pulpy, swingy and lite*, all of which are true to some extent, but it also has the flexibility to curb or exaggerate any of these easily.

Want a darker and more gritty game?

The Benny, Wild and exploding dice systems are easily reduced, removed or can have added effects built in easily. Want a Benny spent to have a twist, a bit like a “fail forward”, want t limit the exploding dice to once only, want to drp the Wild dice to make characters very ordinary? Easily done.

Want a more heroic game like 13th Age?

Just escalate starting characters to Seasoned tier, which is basically what the 13a designers did. Then add the One Unique Thing, ICONs and the world parameters and you have it. No need even to use classes, just Race and concept, which tend to fall into standard tropes.

How about Rune Quest, SW style? Again, it is the world and background that are important. Character gen is key, especially with Rune Magic. The core of this is the desire to play a game that personifies the world you chose, nt find ways to break it with rule set “X” (or SW).

For me as a GM, there are some real benefits that cannot be over stated.

• Prep time can be very quick. On-the-go fixes are easy, even sandboxing a whole world is doable. Lift and drop from any source is a piece of cake. It is not impossible to play a “what would you like to do” game from scratch, building the world as you go, adding twists and turns as needed. Remember player agency is a creative tool not a hurdle.

• It can absorb almost any source materiel you might want.

• The rules are consistent, especially magic and powers, which tend to do my head in when a half dozen different systems need to be learned.

• Combat can be quick and “theatre of the mind” or a miniatures game.

• Combat is not the only way of getting things done.

What to do?

Learn the Core or Players rule book. This will let you reenact basically any book, graphic novel, RPG or movie you want with a little applied imagination and an open mind.

This was where it started for me. Looking for a Kids on Bikes vehicle, I stumbled across this about the same time the fourth and last (Sci-Fi) companions became available, led to a wholesale adoption of the thing right under my nose the whole time!

If you want to go deeper and into a specific genre, get a Companion, which will add some thematic guidance, more of everything you like and full bestiaries etc.

These, the GM Screen and Core Book and you are done. Over 1000 pages of more, more, more!

For added ease and table presence, there is a ton of official (or not) collateral like themed playing cards and dice, minis, maps, counters etc. My pick would be the accessory box, then get some correctly themed playing cards as extra action decks.

Even though I do have the oversized action deck for SW and SWPF, cheap themed card packs can add a lot.

If you want the work done for you, which switches the dynamic from making to learning, get a pre-made set, like RIFTs, Deadlands, Pathfinder etc. Nothing is ever wasted even if you cut away much of the background.

My one themed set, because it was my first and meant to be my last SWADE foray.

Games I will likely do in SW would be (with companions noted);

• Rivers of London style modern soft supernatural (RPG/Books). HC/FC

• Tales from the Loop/After the Flood/Electric State (books). SFC

• Kids on Bikes (movies). CB (they do Pinebox TX, but too much for what I need)

• The One Ring (RPG/Books). FC

• Delta Green, 1990’s X-Files game (DG, X Files, Cthulhu, Supernatural). HC, SFC

• Warmachine/Iron Kingdoms steam punk (RPG/war game), FC/SFC

• Malifaux weird west (based on the figure line)-possibly with the above. FC/HC

• Everdell (based on the board game). FC

• Mouse Guard (Graphic novels and RPG)-possibly combined with above. FC

• A 1960’s cool-Bond style game (Trouble Shooters RPG, early period Bond, Avengers and U.N.C.L.E books, movie and TV, Tin Tin etc). CB

• Heroes of Normandie Weird War II (based on the board game and Achting Cthulhu RPG-already done in SWeX). AC/HC

• Warhammer style gritty Gothic Renaissance fantasy (based on the 1e books). FC/HC

• A sci-fantasy 1889 style game with Jules Verne science (John Carter books, Space 1889 RPG, Tarzan, War of the Worlds). SFC

• Alien/Mothership hack (RPG’s & movies), more an experiment really. SFC/HC

• A Star Wars style space opera/supers cross over. SHC/SFC

• Guardians of the Galaxy/Marvel style supers game. SHC/SFC

• An Iron Heroes/Conan style Swords and Sorcery game (IH RPG and books). FC/PF

• A Malazan Book of the Fallen sci-fant military Campaign (Malazan Books). SFC/FC

• Starship Troopers style game (The book more than the movies). SFC

• An old school four colour supers game (Batman, Marvel etc). SHC

• A novelty supers game (Mystery Men, 1960’s spoof comics, Kick-Ass, new Fantastic Four movie, Watchmen-less dark). SHC

• A Highlander style “immortals are among us” game (movie, other stuff). SHC/FC

SHC Super Hero Comp, SFC Sci-Fi Comp, FC Fantasy comp, HC Horror Comp, CB Core Book (and nothing else), AC Achtung Cthulhu, PF SW Pathfinder.

Why not D100 games?

Because it they be my easy fall-back, my mood switcher, but unlike SW, the various games are each slightly different. I could have gone BRP UGE, and converted most others to that, but felt the lighter SW vibe was more approachable and converting D100 to SW would be easier than SW to D100.

* I guess the opposite of this is often hard, predictable and heavy.

Savage Worlds Math, It Works Fine

The original system that Savage Worlds came from was a pool of dice system and worked well, but the designers felt it could be easier, much easier.

They distilled the pool down to a single dice, with a “wild” dice as the PC/Villain equaliser, to add a curve. At first glance I felt it was too easy and slanted towards weaker characters as the “exploding” mechanism, is rolled was too easy, but I have come to change my mind on that.

The core roll to pass is 4, the Attribute dice range from D4 to D12 and the wild dice is D6 (50/50). Double ones crap out, we will call this a fumble and maximums on the chosen passing dice are an explode (re-roll and add).

The Math;

Rolling an exploding 4 on a d4 is 1/3 easier than rolling a 6 on a d6, but it also has a 75% chance of failing completely (the d6 wild dice is 50%) and the fumble chance is 1 in 24 as opposed to 1 in 36 with 2d6.

Double exploding the d4 is a 1 in 16 chance, 1 in 64 chance of reaching 12 (with 2 raises) and an explode. the 1d4 and 1d6 has a 25% + 50% chance of success, almost all down to the wild dice.

An exploding d6 can match the maximum potential of that d4 triple roll with one maximum (and explode), or a 1 in 36 chance (i.e. almost twice as often) of going again. It has an evens chance of a raise anyway and can reach 3 raises with another roll even without exploding, so more effect and more likely to happen. The 2d6 has 50% + 50% chance of success and 1 in 36 of fumbling.

Going to the extreme end, with a d12 roll, there is a 1 in 72 fumble chance, a 50% + 75% pass chance, less chance of an exploding roll, but a double raise is possible on a natural roll at 1 in 12 with an explode! The fumble drops to negligible (but not improbable, about double the chance of a 2d6 roll), so the good gets exponentially better, the wild dice goes from enabler to safety net.

Three raises (sometimes the practical maximum), can be reached by a d4 or d6 in three rolls, d8 and d10 in two rolls, a d12 can get there in two.

If you cap explode rolls to a single re-roll only for a less swingy game, the d4 can reach one, d6 only two, d8 and above can make three.

If, alternatively, you only allow the Wild dice to explode, there is a 1 in 6 chance of 1 explode with 1-2 raise potential, 1 in 36 of another re-roll, 1 in 216 chance of another and 1 in 1296 of another etc.

I also felt the +1 added after d12 was a patch fix (time the d16 became readily available as a step to the d20), but looking at the math above, it becomes a massive, but still controlled boost. The fumble and explode chance of the raw d12 remains, but the success chance goes up to about 50 + 84% at +1, 50 + 92% at +2 etc until rolls are only used to determine raises and fumble/fails and often only Strength is boosted anyway, meaning only damage dice are boosted.

Simple, clean and as it turns out, effective (seems I substituted a d4 for a d20, my bad).

On the surface, the 25% chance of an exploding d4 seems too good, but the reality is, it is limited in effect, more likely than not to fail and as increments of 4 are needed for raises, it has to explode every roll to make any real difference.

I would argue, the d4 benefit is a good levelling tool at the bottom of the tree for those desperate adventurers who “have a crack”, but are of little other real value and the d12 with a “+” bonus is a good way of capping increases.

The effect of wounds is an interesting side case. Wildcards get three wounds with a -1 to all rolls per wound. Extras or Mooks are down with 1 hit, which if you think about it, ties in with every fight scene in every action ever.

1 wound basically nullifies raw d4’s, meaning they must explode to pass and even the Wild dice is a 66% chance of failing. 2 wounds takes the Wild to 85% fail, the d4 an explode and 2+. 3 wounds means any dice under d8 must now explode to pass and even a d12 is at 50/50 chance.

Wounds then, like the subtle +1 after d12 are a logical way of simulating one of my favourite, but often overlooked issues with RPG combat, where wounds actually simulate shock, blood loss and damage, not just abstract hit points.

Rune Quest first used location hit points so an arm or leg could be crippled or a lucky hit to the head ending it quickly, then Traveller introduced a more abstract but equally effective hits that reduce characteristics model, but it all came with on-the-go math, where SW simply does it with wound counters.

For those who prefer the attritional grind of hit point pools, ask yourself if you are ok with rejecting reality for gamesmanship.

An Old Friend Revisiting Role Playing

A friend of mine, probably my main gaming partner at the moment was once a dedicated DnD gamer (1-2e I think), but it has been a while.

My own TTRPG gaming has become quite “hypothetical” lately as most of my gaming group was moved away over time (it’s not me I tell you, just life and such……)

He is a teacher and one of his duties is to mind a rainy day gaming group who, among other things, play 5e. He said to me, when I enquired if he would be interested in RPG-ing again, that it all looked like “too much stuff” compared to his gaming days.

He and I come from the “skinny book, big imagination” era, where most of your collateral was home made of very basic stuff (Traveller with zero illustrations or ADnD with worse than zero).

My first thought was Savage Worlds (my current crush), but immediately after came 13th Age (familiar to him) and after that a D100 game (familiar mechanics for me).

I felt instinctively that 5e would be a sterile, stereotypical and predictable evolution of his old school past and something he had already developed an aversion to (and I had ditched a while back), while 13th Age would both avoid the “too much stuff” issue and refresh the game into a much more mature game, being close to the “house ruled for common sense” version he likely played, all while retaining some familiarity.

Lets look at why;

• It is all in one book in 1e (2e is 2 books), every other book is optional.

• It is conversational, flexible and fun, a soft, but comfortable landing for a returning gamer.

• It is “theatre of the mind”, not a miniatures game in disguise, much like we used to play.

• It does have the main structure of later DnD for familiarity, but is not held back by all the old DnD rule oddities and those it has, make more sense.

• I can do Glorantha with it as a sub-state of existing 13th Age*.

• It is less swingy than SW can be (but does not have to be), so less character perilous. DnD style games are attrition based, a resource management system to support long term medium stress team play.

• I have two core books and there is a free SRD to down-load for him to study.

• 13th Age Glorantha could launch us into D100 games or even SW.

Cousins only, but a good enough connection.

I have little interest in 2e because to be honest, for the gaming I am likely to do, with the open ended “fix it if you don’t like it” mandate it already has and the ten years of player input out there, I do not think the added complication of changing would be justified**. Many reviews support this. There is nothing wrong with the 1e game, there are plenty of options available, 2e is just an “official” adoption of some of these.

Savage Worlds has it’s own advantages;

• A new and modern game with less mechanical depth up front (but no less depth internally). This possibly breaks pre-conceptions and opens a new gaming mind.

• It is also all in one book (of which I have several), with thematic expansions seamlessly slotting in.

• The ability to change genre, even in the same game with a “RIFTS” style multi setting.

• Easy GM-ing on the fly.

• A minis game side hustle, which plays into our other gaming and may solve some other problems.

• Pathfinder as an established world, fully supported by SW.

• Achtung Cthulhu 1e as another option (made for Explorers edition, but an easy fix).

• The ability to do the 13A world if I want, although of all the games I have, this would probably make the least sense.

The hobby has become very interconnected it seems.

Savage Worlds might be a good alternative if he is not as keen on anything DnD based after all. I could actually make it a tactical war game campaign engine (my weird west home brew with Malifaux figs or maybe some Supers), that organically grows into an RPG experience.

The last option, probably the easiest for me, is to do a D100 game, likely BRP or Cthulhu or even Mothership.

This has the advantages of;

• Some familiarity for him with Rune Quest, Cthulhu etc as they were around the same time as he last played and unlike DnD, have remained mostly unchanged.

• May entice others as both our wives could possibly be enticed into a “civilised” Cthulhu/Delta Green game more likely than any other genre.

• Has solo modules for him to try at home.

• Grounded and intuitive system. He and his wife are mathematicians, so a D% game would be a comfortable fit.

• Can also be used as a skirmish game, although this is softer.

• Cthulhu and co are by far my best supported games with 100+ adventures at hand. This is effectively the opposite dynamic to SW, which is very much a “make it as you go” game.

• Also has compatibility with Achtung Cthulhu (CoC 6e), so a mid campaign switch to/from SW could be made.

• I am personally most comfortable with D100 games. If I could have only one…..

• Feels more in keeping with his (my) past interests and reading.

Yes, he has heard of Ducks as characters.

Option 1 is probably go with 13A as it would fit with his expectations, but have SW and D100 in the wings for later games, or a fast switch if it is just not taking.

*A “lost valley” or other continent, or maybe a gateway to another Age.

**Most stuff is backwards compatible, but some changes do not excite, some are easily done with awareness, some have already been and books like “Dark Alleys and Twisted Paths” or “13 True Ways” are already in the set for their mechanical options and are not as compatible. Basically, I am of the mind that the way I want to play it does not need micro management or “official” changes.

Getting Into Role Playing Games

Ok, this is inspired by this;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9NtdF51GWE

And should probably stay there as all I have to add really is…….. yeah, so that, do it, but it got me thinking about games I have, games I want to play and games I want to make.

So, why game, TTRPG’s specifically?

It is fun, easy, freeform, non-confrontational (if you do it right), flexible and again, fun.

The game requires a Game Master, who empowers the game world and one or more players who explore that world.

Being a GM can be daunting, but it does not have to be. As Quinns says, there is no winning or losing, just playing and interacting to tell a story and some of the best fun is had when you do it badly!

The point he made that hit me over the head like a big friendly nerf ball (with a reality brick inside) was, “the game does not belong to you, the GM, it belongs to the players”.

As a (mostly) reader, collector, reviewer and more occasionally gamer/GM, I needed to be reminded of that.

One example mechanic designed to facilitate this, is the 13th Age “one unique thing”.

The OUT is a true player empowerment tool, one of several in that game, designed to give a platform for players to influence the larger game. Icon relationships are another, backgrounds, even class choices, but OUT’s are the best option when the player tells a story, forms a foundation, that grows into a tree, then a wood, then maybe a whole world.

Too far?

Maybe not.

Character concept 1;

A White Dragon-Spawn Necromancer, who’s previous life was as custodian and soul chaperone to a White Dragon’s mausoleum, an usher to the other side. A speaker with the anointed dead and interpreter of their wishes on behalf of his pseudo-deceased master, she was a holder of many secrets, a cross-roads to two worlds. The catch is, The Stone Thief literally ate the mausoleum and cemetery condemning the souls contained inside to a fate unknown. Icon relationship may be positive or negative with the Necromancer.

This gives us a background (and career for skill generation), a story to evolve with and a reason to adventure, including a hook to the Eyes of the Stone Thief campaign.

Character concept 2;

A constructed sentinel (Forgeborn), freed from an age of silent guardianship by an event that destroyed the hold it was created to guard, left to wander the world looking for purpose. Maybe it is called by The Stone Thief, responsible for breaking the hold, maybe looters took it’s pledged treasure and it is compelled to find it, either way another reason to adventure, a back story and a career (silent sentinel of another age), which may grant some limited knowledge of many languages, customs, races and history as heard and absorbed in its semi-unconscious sentinel state.

Both of these are strong character driven story lines with motives and deep history to draw from. Neither directly affect the mechanics of the game, but they strongly influence the story.

The GM is now on notice of what the characters are looking for in the game, who they see their characters as and their role in the game/world. The GM now empowers these visions within the world as known. What the GM does not do is try to rail-road the player concept into the world as they see it.

As GM, you are physics, history and geography, you are social and political forces, interactions, the voice of many. You are the world, but the world is lived in, it does not control the beings in it, any more than we are controlled by an outer force.

Character concept 3;

You wake up in the desert, with just personal belongings including a magic item (unknown item) that seems to talk to your thoughts, whispering ideas both good and bad and no memory of who you are or why you are there. You do not know your class/career/origin etc, what you know until you try things, then they come naturally, or not.

This one flips the aegis to the GM and player to cooperate in the making of a character possibly of great importance, maybe in the middle of a time sensitive quest, but when will the breakthrough come, who are their enemies and who are their friends? When will the player and character know who they are and what happened to them?

One of my favourite character dynamics was that of Icarium and Mappo Runt from the Malazan Books. Icarium was a being of great power who could, when the compulsion took him, destroy empires. Being impervious to normal forces, the only “cure” found for him was to wipe his memory and provide him with a companion who kept him distracted and unaware through friendship and gentle guidance.

What these are examples of mainly are the need every game must accomodate for player involvement.

Why these examples and this feature?

You do not need just a few mechanics to force player agency. The OUT is an example of a process that can be fundamental to any role playing game.

To get into role playing games takes some commitment and resources for sure, but really getting them is simply realising that the game is made of interactions. Interactions are all it takes and whether they are rules perfect or not, they need to be two way. They need to be shared.

It is easy to fall into the premise that GM-ing is all about telling a story the players are expected to play their roles in, when in reality they are the story. It all revolves around them.

Take that load off, hand-ball some of the resposibilty for world building and story creation to the players themselves. Thus empowered, they will not only help with the creative process, but they will also feel like the world belongs to them, they are making it what it is, it is not just happening to them.

Lets face it, we all feel sometimes like the world is working against us, fighting us or at least not being super helpful. Why would you want to bring all that to the gaming table?

The best games sew seeds of ideas at every turn. 13th Age is for me an example of a game that does that well enough, even a single monster entry or magic item description can get me excited, that I forgive it it’s systemic foundation, the one game I generally dislike.

The Very Good Thing That Is The Savage Worlds Accessory Box

I have bought sooo much RPG stuff over the years and some stands out for both good and bad reasons.

The SW Accessory box is one of those things that just jumps out as a bargain pure and simple. You get;

• An over sized Action Deck. Granted the deck is basically a pack of cards, but still.

• A Status deck (with my only very minor complaint*).

• 25 hard resin Benny/Conviction counters, that cost almost as much as the whole box on their own and are still worth it.

• 4 Power Point discs.

• Some card stands, likely of no value to me, but I may be wrong. They are fragile and space hungry though.

• Templates for various effects (for miniatures).

• Status discs (for miniatures) that align with the Status deck.

• A set of Dice including “Savage Worlds” wild dice.

• A box the same size as the Pathfinder Adventure Path boxes and just as sturdy, which is to say, big enough to hold everything in it and plenty more for years of gaming.

It all costs just a little more than as one of the decks or the Benny counters, so seriusly if you are pondering getting any of these accessories, then spoil yourself to the whole box for a little more.

I realised after taking this I had forgotten the card stands and blast templates. The pack of thematic playing cards is there for scale (and I use them). The provided insert went west quickly, allowing room for a bunch of other stuff.

So, in the box I can fit;

• Action card deck

• Status card deck

• Power card deck

• 3x regular playing card packs

• The GM screen

• The Status counters and Bennys in a cardboard box

• 3x polyhedral dice sets and 4x Savage Worlds Wild dice in another box

• The Power point counters

• The Mini campaign guide

I think I will buy another one!

*My minor whinge is the Status deck box is to small for the deck when sleeved, which the Pathfinder one was not.

Picking A Ride, The Serious Scale Issues Of Star Trek Attack Wing

If you want to have a size accurate Star Trek Attack Wing game, then basically forget it. Many have tried, often resorting to 3D printing or re-purposing ships from different brands like Micro Machines etc, but realistically, you might as well play a different game, it’s easier.

Ship “X” should be bigger then ship “Y”, which is 1/4 the size of ship “Z” and so on, with suspended belief playing it’s role. This is normal I guess as the original designers of these ships do not have to abide by budgets, physics or common sense, CGI cares for none of these, just the desire to impress with their creations.

A 3km wide Borg Cube at correct scale to the Enterprise-D at 430m wide, means your inch and a bit Fed ship needs to face off against a cube 8 times or about 30cm wide and they come pretty close with the big cube, maybe 2/3rds of the way, but it dominates a table and changed the way the game is played and then, what if you want a Delta Flyer “speck” in the fight at roughly 1/344th the size of the cube?

This does not only apply to physical scale, but table presence also. A monster like the Scimitar has 6 primary attack dice, which is good, accounting for a mass of weaponry, “she’s a predator” as Picard said, so in-game comparisons to the Flyer with 3 primary and the ability to carry some serious ordnance make little sense. Even defence, a combination of agility and size can be illogical with monster ships like the D’Deridex and again, the Flyer sharing 2 defence dice.

Even upgrade bars are at odds. Some very small ships have weak upgrade bars, but on the whole size does not seem to matter (as makes sense to the franchise, but not in scale). The Robinson, captured Asssauly Ship has 4 Crew, the Enterprise-D only 3?

The Scimitar should be at least twice this size in comparison to the Ent-E and don’t even think of trying to justify a smaller ship.

The big problem is, there is often no solid info to go on anyway, so no matter what you do, there will be more than a seed of doubt sewn. DS9 was a high water mark in tricky scale manipulation, the “hero” ship Defiant playing the role of run-about, scout and battle wagon, it’s screen size seeming to fit the role it’s playing.

Among the biggest offenders were the Klingon Bird of Prey, but Cardassian, Romulan, Jem’Hadar of all sorts and even the Breen were tough to settle on a scale for.

Some timelines fix their own issues, the TOS and TOM ships aligning pretty well as a rule and little enough is known to contradict logical conclusions.

I have reconciled the above issues in my my collection to some extent by going faction and timeline pure, with only a few exceptions that just cannot be fixed, so they are simply ignored*.

This fixes to some extent both scale “to-the-eye” and relative table capability.

The only timeline I have split the field further is the TNG/DS9/Voyager period, split into “TNG battle” and “DS9 skirmish” scale, the Delta Quadrant a little less defined as skirmish, with issues, because (1) I can and (2) I really need to for my own piece of mind.

In DS9 skirmish scale, hull values average 2 to 3 with 4 at the top end (Intrepid, and the tough Cardassian Dreadnaught), shields range from 0 to 5 (again Intrepid, which outstrips even some capitol ships-in the bigger scale). Defence is usually 2 with several 3’s, something battle does not have. Primary attack ranges from 1 to 4, 2 to 3 nominally, with a 6 for the Dreadnaught and some full strength fighter squadrons as standouts. The Dreadnaught is a big model, but is actually pictured by some as quite tiny at 100m. The fighters are abstracted, hiding the fact they are either too large or small depending on the ships.

The feel of this scale is X-Wing like, with attack and defence in balance, hull and shields much lower, Crew holding battered little ship together with duct-tape and hope and manoeuvre means something.

In TNG battle scale, which can be either unique ships or simplified massed battle generics, primary attack is on average 4, with plenty higher. Defence is almost universally 1, occasionally 0 or rarely 2 unless depleted fighters which are at 3, but nearly useless by now. Hull starts at 4 and peaks at 9 for some Borg and shields range from 3 to 7 (2-6 in generic).

All these battlewagons are tough and hit hard, but are generally less agile with little fighters flitting amongst them.

So, Battle is a slugging match, skirmish is a dogfight. faction and timeline boundaries aside, I now have two distinct games.

The anomaly of the D’Deridex being more agile than some small ships is addressed when comparison is removed. Basically the Romulans are sneaky and agile, the Borg are punishment magnets and the rest get a token dice that is effectively doubled with an Evade action.

The Delta Quadrant is actually pretty well scaled, until it is not. A curious (infuriating) mix of skirmish scale with a few anomalies.

The monstrous Kremin ship, the Kazon carrier which can fit their raiders inside, the huge Vidiians cruiser and of course the Borg, are absorbed into a set that also accepts a mix of unique and generic ships, some quite small.

So, let’s look at some troublesome ones.

The Klingon Bird of Prey in the original movies had slight scale issues, but tends to settle on a smallish (closer to medium for the time) generic BOP or group of similar ships varying in size. In TNG, there are serious differences and they are even called out in scenes such as DS9 battle scenes with little and large BOP shown together.

The B’Rel is about 100-150m, probably close to the earlier ships, the Vorcha class is much, much bigger at 450m+. The models are identical as are the cards except for the obvious hull size differences, which is also problematic with a ship four times the size of another similarly designed vessel sharing the same fire power, agility and shield values and only being slightly more robust? This is an example of why the split fleet scales make sense.

• B’rel > DS9 as a tough and lethal ship used by many factions.

• Vorcha > TNG as a relatively cheap, nimble and powerful workhorse.

The Romulan Science and Scout ships are even less convincing. The Scout is always considered small, nimble and with a small crew, maybe even single pilot able. The Science ship is either the same size (same hull value) or same design, but bigger with a crew of 50-100. Opinions vary greatly.

In Attack Wing the scout is harder to hit, but it is a scout. The Science vessel is a non-combat ship so is likely not armoured, maybe explaining the hull value and size confusion? The Science ship is possibly a small enough model to go into the TNG fleet as a little utility ship, but the scout is too small.

On reflection, even though the Romulans could do with a little filler ship and even if it is bigger than the scout, it is still only a small ship with a nimble dial and 1-2-2-2 stats (nothing else in battle scale is this weak or as nimble). I will go with the “they all use the same hull” camp.

• Scout Vessel > DS9

• Science Vessel > DS9

Not even close to right. The D’Deridex should be 2-3 times the size of the Valdore, which may be close to right with the Science ship, or way too small depending on the version you go with. The fighters are accepted as an abstract representation. The Valdore is the only one close to right against the Feds.

The Miranda class is a big enough ship to give the Constitution Refit a scare***, but only with Khan as captain and some subterfuge employed. In DS9 they appear regularly as cheap cannon-fodder and fleet fillers (many died, seemingly exactly the same way!??) and are generally known to be smaller than an Intrepid class, which is the hull 4 “big bruiser” of DS9 skirmish. I am putting it at about the same length as the Nova and it shares the same stats and it fits with the AW model scale.

• Miranda > DS9 (and The Original Movies)

The Intrepid/Voyager. In DS9 skirmish and the Delta Quadrant set, the Intrepid class are “cock of the walk”, not because they are big, but they are powerful, fast and advanced. I cannot put the Intrepid class in TNG battle, because it is simply too small and to be honest too powerful for that set by size/cost. The Intrepid and Excelsior should not be used together, so they become the strongest/weakest ships in their respective sets.

• Intrepid > DS9 as the Fed flagship.

• Voyager > Delta Quadrant as the point of it all.

Queen of the DS9 skirmish seas, the Intrepid is the biggest, toughest and fastest ship in that set, even if the model is a little small. In TNG, it is close to the same length as the Galaxy and chunkier than the Excelsior, which is way too big.

The Excelsior. Only slightly bigger than the Intrepid, it is a smaller model, so fleet it is as the smallest Fed.

• Excelsior > TNG battle and TOM

The Jen’Hadar Attack ship is always shown as size comparable to the Defiant, which is ground zero for the DS9 fleet, so it should go there. The named Battle Cruiser gets a bonus if supported by one, but even Wizkids have shown the scaling up in their Into The Unknown game, so I am going to deal with the BC somehow (a fringe little fleet of 2 Jem’Hadar and a Breen in TNG anyway). There is also the issue of the lone blue paint job and 6 shiny new purple ones, so that is the Robinson, maybe having a longer run than in the series.

• Attack Ship > DS9

One of the worst offending factions. The Battle Cruiser is the biggest, but should be half the size of the Battleship. The Attack ship is even worse and the Breen is a bit of an unknown, but may be about right scaled to the Battleship.

The Hideki conundrum. Hideki fighters are roughly the same size as the Attack Ship, even close to the Defiant maybe. Wizkids made them multi-based fighters and smaller moulds, I guess because the only time they had any screen time was in swarm mode in DS9 and they had zero crew or upgrade highlights, so a tough one to add to the game. It raises some issues in a fleet with or without similarly sized ships. I need them in Fleet for depth and variety, but they also belong in DS9 as the only Cardassian small ship other than the Dreadnaught and Dukat’s BOP.

As fighters, they can go in both fleets, the squadron abstractness is much as Star Wars Armada forces on us and their role accepted as the exception.

• Hideki > both as a squadron

Cardassian Dreadnaught. This is a big, solid model as befits the high Hull and attack value and it’s “0” agility. Problem is, it only 100m long, so less than a third the size of Voyager. It seems Wizkids felt the need to make this and the Bioship below large models to fit their strong stats, but at odds with their actual size.

• Dreadnaught > DS9/Delta, but even then it is too big.

Species 8742 Bioship. Powerful and dangerous, a match for the Borg even, the bioship is a large model, but it is actually a small ship employed in numbers with possibly single crew, basically a giant integrated fighter.

I have always put it into the battle set as they are genuinely a threat to all factions even with small numbers (I have 5), with ship stats of 6-2-5-6. The 5 hull is probably indicative of their advanced and exotic nature not size, but it led me to believe they were fairly true to scale. According to several sources it is about half the size of Voyager at 200m, even though the actual model is actually larger. This is highly problematic.

Ignore the evidence and go with the stats for battle or make then an almost unstoppable powerhouse in a smaller scale Delta Quadrant game (where they were encountered) and ignore the massive scale issues everyone has with the Borg?

• Species 8742 Bioship > Delta Quadrant only

The Ferengi seem small-time enough for DS9 scale, but the D’Kora is too big to use there, so only the little shuttle and an acquired BOP get a run. The Ferengi are a little pointless, generally scenario players, but 3 D’Kora might bother someone.

The Delta Quadrant is the most problematic over all. With no capacity to split the field, some scale issues are unavoidable.

The Borg-all of them, are always too small, but they are what they are. The Sphere “Type 2” is close to ok in scale with a Galaxy, but still way too small compared to Voyager. I do not have the giant Cube, only the Tactical one, a rare medium sized ship in AW, but it is also tiny compared to other ships and a properly scaled cube would be twice the size of the one made.

The Kazon. The Carrier is bigger than a Jem’Hadar Battleship, but the Raider is about the size of an Attack Ship ship, so another impossible ask for the makers.

The Kremin Time Ship is similar in size to the Kazon carrier, the Vidiians are also huge, so the Delta Quadrant needs compromise..

As an exception across the board, the Borg are battle scale, except in the Delta Quadrant or any other hypothetical I might do** (they do get around a bit), with a little suspended belief applied.

These are all in denial of the scale issues still obvious in these more defined segregations, but at least tiny little Delta Flyers are not facing off against monstrous D’Deridex any more.

Ships that sit ok are the TNG battle Fed Galaxy, Nebula, Akira, Excelsior, Sovereign, the Klingons generally (with B’rels in DS9), the TOM ships, Kelvin, Enterprise, if you remove the Xindi Aquatic, DS9 generally.

*Delta Flyer, Kremin Time ship, Kazon carrier, Xindi Aquatic, the Borg generally, all so massive it is a case of accept them as they come or don’t use them.

**The Tac Cube used as a Scout sent to an earlier time line makes for a good “Weapon Zero” or “Planet Killer” David vs Goliath scenario.

***Which is considerably bigger than the pre-refit model.

Wish List Time

I have not played it, not even really had it out for a proper look, but a game that is sitting in an important place for me is “Into The Unknown” (ITU), by Wizkids.

Part board game, part war game, part RPG, it is a crowning achievement, the wish of many fulfilled. It is however, far from finished and the releases are tardy to say the least, but hope abides.

The second box is going to add Klingons and according to the illustration Romulans in some form, but no ships for them. There are some odd choices. Why a second Defiant class? I guess it will fit in with the game’s needs, but why not a Romulan Scout or Federation Sabre, Excelsior or Intrepid class?

What is next?

Lots of speculation, some wishful, some based on actual hints, but what would I like?

A real Romulan presence (my end point if they do it), which may be problematic as the “true to scale” adherence of the game would make a D’Deridex at least twice the size of the Jem’Hadar Battle Cruiser already done (below) or basically fill a box.

The Valdore is a different beast, but tied to the later Movies (with the truly enormous Scimitar). Boy, wouldn’t a special edition Scimitar be a good way to finish the TNG series!

A strong start, but more is expected. At odds with Attack Wing, the Enterprise is bigger, the Defiant smaller.

A Valdore, Enterprise-E and Scimitar would be interesting if a little one dimensional, but again, the Scimitar is likely out of the scope of the game. Ships the size of the D’Deridex, Scimitar and Jem’Hadar Battleship would be the size of the original box, so maybe saved for later special releases if the game takes long term.

On a different tangent, why not do;

• A Voyager starter with Voyager, Delta Flyer, several Hirogen ships, or a Kazon carrier and Raiders or a Borg sphere, (maybe an AI Sphere?).

• The Original Series “five year mission” campaign (Fed, Gorn, Romulan and Klingon one ship factions) with a Tholian web casting set as an add-on.

• The Original Movies (there is already a Reliant class and BOP), with the Excelsior, Enterprise refit, Bird of Prey, K’Tinga and Khan crew (that could take over any ship).

• An Enterprise vs Xindi campaign set (Enterprise, Reptillian, Insectoid, Mammalian shuttle and Andorian).

Something about the ITU style really speaks to me for earlier periods.

With a comprehensive set of crew and characters these could have as much depth as the first core and expansion.

The big advantage of all the earlier periods is, at the scales set, the ships are generally smaller so you could have more or a smaller box set. An original Enterprise would be half the size of the Ent-D and the NX is half of that, most ships in their own space are similar in size and the stories and factions are more character driven than ship dependent.

So, would I like them to continue on their TNG/Dominion War vein or maybe offer different sets?

Bespoke sets for me, but then I would probably wish I had waited and just done an earlier period.

Using Savage Worlds To Hack Another Or Original World

So, you want to “hack” another RPG, book, comic or other idea to run in Savage Worlds (or other generic game), how do you do it, where do you start?

Statement of intent. Do this, because you will be coming back to it for centring.

You want to call out what you are aiming for.

Define the theme, define what is in and out, how does the game facilitate what you need and how does it not. Once this is done, you can create a work list and get to it.

Theme.

This is crucial. You were drawn to a certain world for a reason, so keeping that on track is vital. How is theme defined? Graphics, artwork define the visual theme of a game and wording heroes the specifics. Games like Mork Borg, Mothership, The Mouse Guard or The One Ring are all built around strong visuals, a select style and careful wording.

As proof of this, the second edition of The One Ring is mechanically very similar to the first, but it is visually different enough, that the game feels different for it. The John Hodgson art, reminiscent of Angus McBrides work is aligned to the “old school English literature” look it represents, while the Free League version has the more modern “Scandi” hard and brutal look.

One feels like an homage to the literature, the other feels like a more precipitous, desperate take on the world, more in line with the modern movies. As an aside, that very Scandi-art draws me to Symbaroum, M-Space and others, but is not enough for me to re-buy basically the same game.

I must admit, good art sucks me into a world, my return to Pathfinder through Savage Worlds is in large part thanks to Wayne Reynolds art and some of my worst money sinks and near misses have been art based (Iron Kingdoms, Symbaroum, Tales from the Loop etc).

This then moves to fonts, graphic design and wording. If you want to engage people and keep them there (including yourself), then sticking to the feel of the original is important. Keep it on point, keep it brief, be fair and sympathetic to the original. The key I guess is to invisibly insinuate the new system into the original.

This may seem to be too much, but it is not really hard to do and helps keep the vibe on.

Mechanics.

Char-gen is logically first and most important aspect of the change. If you are making characters that fit into the world you want to play, half the battle is done as the mechanics will follow.

Like all games, Savage Worlds has its own mechanical structure. This is generally a boon for conversions, because it is designed to be used generically. It is not however a perfect fit for all themes without some work. The designers give you the tools, but they are choices that need to be made.

All I can say here is adhere to the limitations and feel of the original as much as possible. If you go full game “X” over all, then you are likely changing the original into something else entirely.

It is perfectly possible to make a realistic and dangerous world like Middle Earth fit with Savage Worlds, but the “look” may jangle. This is where theming comes in (see above).

Work out the parameters of your conversion, go back to your mission statement, make lists if required (what is in or out as suits).

Take for example, my own journey into Weird Western games inspired by my Malifaux miniature collection (all 1e metals). Deadlands by SW has some good ideas, but is not my cup of tea. I am especially not keen enough to dump massed clumps of money into a made world.

My version is a softer, more “New Orleans Noir” touch on similar themes. Weird inventions, some rare but genuinely powerful undead and monsters tied to Voodoo and Indian spirits, spirit magic etc, but not to the level of Deadlands. Basically, I want a more grounded but fantasy d100 take on Deadlands, but still use SW.

This is where SW shines. Take the core, turn to the Horror, Fantasy and even Supers or Sci-Fi companions when needed and you are set. Many of the monsters are even pre-made, or are only a few simple changes away.

Using the Companions and the Core only, I will lift out the elements that fit, maybe rename some to make sense to the world and remove what does not. This is easy, they show you how. It is the core of it.

Specific conversions of another work are also pretty easy generally, they just take understanding and effort. The simplicity of SW helps here.

Edges and Hindrances, skills, powers are there or if not can be added. Maybe rename some if you need, otherwise go as written.

Mouseguard for example, is a lovely system, but for a group familiar with SW especially for a quick game, it is just more to learn. It has “Wises” as skills, so I change the name. Parts of MG not represented are easily added, like sponsors and family, which then become elements of tests and other mechanics.

This is probably the most difficult bit, taking mechanics that are considered defining elements of another game and making them relevant in SW, such as the social and travel aspects of The One Ring. If in doubt, use the original as much as possible.

OK, putting it to the test.

Mothership hack for SW.

I will make a simple char-gen pamphlet or page inserts with basic mechanical changes to copy and replace the original. It is rules lite to start, so a replacement needs be no more. Most rule exceptions can be called out here such as the use of bennies etc.

To make the game feel perilous, I may remove the Wild Dice, Bennys, and/or remove/cap exploding dice.

The “classes” would be retained as backgrounds with skill packages, but some flexibility is allowed.

The Fear/Panic mechanic is a big element of MS, but the Fear mechanic in SW Horror is also fully developed, so I will go with the SW version for cosistency, but to be honest either would work.

The combat mechanic is actually pretty close with 3 wounds, but Bennys remove much of the “oh crap, your dead” vibe so probably none or fewer Bennys or a Benny-Fear test trade or just remove Benny wound soaks. Any of these may work, the system is flexible enough.

Styling is easy enough, it is graphic, stark and often duo-tone. The tone of the writing is similar, to the point and minimalist, with a little attitude. The Art is powerful stuff and for my own use*, I will re-use some or similar or just use the original source. You could even take any image and give it the “black and white line drawing filter” treatment. For adventures, all that is really needed is a major character and monster conversion sheet.

It would likely be easier to hack it for D100 I guess, seeing as it is a D100 derivative to start with, but I am looking for a different feel.

This works fine, just create the gear they are wearing in SW (most is in the Sci-Fi companion)! The key is in the visuals.

Why hack?

The reason is of course, so you can play the game you want with the rules that work for you, in my case a set of consistent rules that can be applied to a variety of genres. SW and D100 are my rides and both have generic rule sets available, you just need to fit the world to the rules and you are golden.

This is the only way I roll as a rule, always wanting to “improve” on the original anyway.

My “to hack” list;

• Mouse Guard in either*. Scale is a big deal in MG, the little mouse has to land a killing blow on the enormous snake or it is all over. SW can deal with that or a D100 (Mythras) game with hit locations maybe. SW with wild card normal sized characters vs “extras” monster sized animals could be an easy fix.

• The One Ring as D100 or SW*. D100 has the hard edge and feel, but SW can also do it as a wholistic switch.

• Trouble Shooters (a D100 game) to SW. The D100 version is good, but a SW version would have more character “squishiness”. This is a rare case when D100 tries to do SW, so a reverse makes sense.

• Tales from the Loop, Electric State (books) in D100 or SW*. The Loop is probably a SW fit with walkers etc, Electric State as more of a d100 gritty humanists game.

• Pulp Cthulhu done pulpier with SW. The Horror Companion even has a Cthulhu section and I once had a full Cthulhu splat book for Explorer edition.

• 13th Age to SW. This is similar to the PF variant, but with 13A elements. Basically do generic fantasy with 13th age bespoke bits like the “one unique thing”, Icon relationships, world influences etc. Ironically, this may even end up being more complicated than the original in places, but easier thanks to system consistency.

• Iron Heroes (a DnD 3.5 hack) to SW with Kev Crosley art. Most of what IH was about is in the wheel house of SW anyway.

• A Symbaroum inspired “giant ancient wood-meets corrosive, self interested society” game in either*.

• An Iron Kingdoms style steam punk game in SW (Sci-Fi/Fantasy companion), maybe with a Malifaux cross-over.

• Something with street level super heroes, possibly Marvel in SW and Batman in D100 (Destined).

• A John Carter-1889 Verne style game with either*, but SW makes the most sense.

• A Malifaux style weird west game (with above).

• Achtung Cthulhu (1e), which is a SW/Cthulhu 6e dual game already, just needs updating.

  Lots more of course, even fleeting ideas that float across my mind as I see things, but all easily done.

*interesting to see the difference.

*all this is for personal use, not to share or sell, so no laws broken.