Still Tinkering With X Wing 1e

Of the many X Wing 1e sub-variants we use, just to keep it alive for us, “Classic” is the clear favourite.

The primary objective of modifying 1e X Wing is to fix the over reach of later X Wing 1e and at the same time to try to capture the elegance of the early game, the rock-paper-scissors dynamic.

Classic does this by only using the elements drawn from the first three movies.

Crew slots are limited, but they make the ships that can take them all the more attractive, as are Droids and rare Systems.

Weapons are heavily reduced in availablilty and choice with several of the strongest ones dropped completely or faction limited.

The base of some of the really strong builds are there, but the known unbeatables are avoided (Palpatine/Soontir, The fully loaded Falcon) by not allowing Titles, Mods or EPT’s, just core ships, Pilots and limited Crew, Ordnance, Illicit, Mech and Systems upgrades.

No effort has been made to limit pilot options for the included ships except for the Scum, who are only allowed the bounty hunters from The Empire Strikes Back, but these can be played also as mercs in the Imperial faction limited to a single ship, or as many as wanted if played as “Krayts Claw”.

The Empire

The Imperials get the usual suspects. The basic Tie, Tie Advanced, Tie Interceptor, Tie Bomber and Lambda. For crew, they are allowed the Emperor, Vader and the Fleet and Systems officers and Rebel Captive (who does nothing vs Scum).

Limited in options, the Imperials are allowed the Heavy Laser Cannon and Homing Missiles as their faction specific weapon edges, with the Cannon, most Systems and all Crew limited to the Lambda, with Advanced Targetting Comp, a Tie Advanced only upgrade at 5 pts. This makes the Lambda a useful addition as a support ship and heavy weapons platform as originally introduced and the Advanced truly Advanced.

The Bomber becomes the ordnance king of the table, again making it a point of tactical interest and variation for the fairly one dimensional Imperials (but with no Unguided Rockets).

As they were early in the game, these allow the Imperials some strong builds and become genuinely attractive in this space.

They have no Turret options, either built in or added.

• The Advanced gets the option of Advanced Targetting Comp and Homing Missiles and actually stands out as the true superiority/line fighter of the Imperials.

• The Lambda gets Crew, Systems and the Heavy Laser Cannon (which fits the model). A form of the classic Palp mobile, a Vader combo or a simple Gun platform are all possible.

• The Bomber is the only specialist Ordnance platform in this game, with Cluster, Concussion, Cruise or Homing Missiles available to it as well as Proton and Plasma Torps. It can also take 2 of the 3 Bombs included, Thermal Detonators and Proximity Mines.

• The Interceptor is the Action Bar supremo with no peer.

• The Tie Fighter is the only true swarmer in the game, no other ship offerring it’s price to power ratio. Weak as they are 8 Tie Fighters are a force in this game.

This fits well with the initial roll-out of the Imperials. The Lambda and Bomber add the wild card and support options, the rest are just different interpretations of the interceptor-pursuit fighter.

The Rebels

As you would assume, the Rebels get the A, B, Y and X wings, all multi role specialists and the named (no Title) Millenium Falcon. The Bomb Loadout option has not been included as that would open up the whole Rogue One thing, nor are Ion Weapons for simplicity.

Crew and Droid synergies are a strong area and they have the Y, X, B Wing and Falcon to house them. Team work is key with the Pilot/Droid/Crew or Pilot/System/Crew combinations.

The Rebels lack access to Bombs, but they get exclusive access to the Proton Rocket, Advanced Proton Torps and two Turret options (Synched and Auto-blaster).

• The B Wing is the Rebel platform for Systems, Crew and Cannon combinations. The B Wing is unique here as it can be the cheap thug, fielding 4, the support ship enabling Crew and the gunship/brawler.

• The Falcon is a crew support monster with a rare Turret primary and is the toughest ship in the game. Options are many with 2 crew slots making the Falcon a many striped beast. The thug, supporter, blocker, a mic=x of all of these, it is hard not to include it, but if used, it tends to limit the Rebels to 3 ships maximum.

• The Y Wing is the Turret and Torpedo king, balancing out it’s poor movement (although R2’s help). Droids do not include FAA or Targetting, just the core types and the bulk of period correct named ones. Fully loading these limits the Rebels to three in a squad, but to be honest, their best use is in a mixed squad.

• The A Wing is the Proton Rocket and speed master and Action king. A force thanks to exclusive access to Proton Rockets and good Pilot abilities. The A Wing is the only Rebel that can be fielded in a pack of 6 (2 with Proton Rockets) or used as a filler ship.

• The humble X Wing is stronger in this game, offering the option of Rebel-limited Advanced Proton Torps on a semi-manoeuvrable ship, it sits in a comfortable points range to always be the third ship of any squad. These can be some of the the hardest hitting ships and take plenty of punishment as well, but rely on Pilot/Droid combos for any edges they have. Adding the S-Foil option as a built in feature is an option here also.

So, the Rebels have the three core fighters (fast-fast/tough-versatile/tough-work horse) with a new tech superiority option and the Falcon as king of the table.

The Scum

The Scum in this game are actually the scum Pilots, ships and Crew of the movies. The ships are all the Titled ones (without Title upgrades) and crew are limited to direct connections to these and generics. Illicit upgrades are exclusive as you would expect, each ship getting one option.

The Scum have exclusive access to the nasty and cheap Flechette Torp and Mangler Cannon, which just seem to fit, being “lesser” weapons, but still lethal.

Crew choices can be limiting as the Pilots and Crew are often the same and limited to the actual characters, and Pilots are limited to one per ship except for the Mist Hunter, so taking interesting combinations often limits other ship combinations.

• The Mist Hunter gets System, Crew, Illicit and an Evade with two pilot options. This has the potential to be the sneaky one of the pack, being the natural home of the Cloaking Device and probably the Collision Detector or Advanced Sensors. Two pilots also gives it a range of roles.

• The Hound’s Tooth “party bus” is as advertised, with Bossk the sole Pilot option. All of the known faces can make this a surprise packet and like the Falcon, it plays a few roles. This is a tough and toothy ship with the highest Shields, a wide angle primary and another Cannon option (as well as a potentially a re-usable Illicit slot i.e. Hot-Shot Blaster or Cargo Drop), which may help it keep it’s enemies to the front.

• Punishing One (as originally printed) is a beast. The only other turreted Primary other than the Falcon, it is also the only one that can take a Salvaged Droid (which are kept to 4 Generics) and Crew. With its odd manoeuvre dial and S-Loop, it actually has the most mamoeuvre choices in the game.

• IG-2000 and IG88A is the slowest ship in the game, but has the best action bar and Evade in the Scum faction the most green manoeuvres in the game and the rare and Scum limited S-Loop making it the Scum manoeuvre monster. It also has dual Cannons and Systems which can lead to some devastating combinations. The close Brawler of the game.

• Slave-1, with only Boba Fett, is versatile, brutal and tough, with the destincion of being the second dearest Scum ship in this game. Without Title still makes the Slave-1 a decent ordnance platform and like the other Scum ships, it is tricky and unpredictable.

The Scum generally build either a 2 ship “maxed out” squad or a 3 ship “Bare Bones” one. Either are tough, but 100 Pts, with only a single version of each ship tends to push them, so often 120pt sqauds are used (The Mist Hunter is the only ship that generally comes in under 35 pts). The Empire may take a single Merc in their squad, which really mixes things up, especially when they are pitted against a Scum squad.

Other Upgrades

No generic crew are available, just the faction specific ones, mostly named characters with a few thematically faction specifics like Gonk, System Officer etc (or who would Vader scare the S*#t out of?), which is not a real issue as the slots are limited.

I have 2 Lambda’s , but even then, there is always a left-over crew option and the Rebels can field a maximum of 4 in a squad so their relatively huge cast are always varied (especially with a few being shared Droid/Pilot options).

The Scum have a few Crew specific characters, but otherwise most share Pilot and Crew roles, but again, they rarely field more than 2-3 ships a game even if the Empire take their option of a single Merc in their squad.

• Cluster, Concussion and Cruise missiles are generic as available as are Plasma Torps, Auto-Blaster Cannons, Proximity mines and Thermal Detonators.

• The Empire get the toothy Heavy Laser Cannon for the Lambda and Homing Missiles for the Advanced.

• The Rebels get Advanced Proton Torps, Proton Rockets.

• The Scum get Flechette Torps, Seismic Charges and Mangler Cannons as “cheap and nasty” options. We had Ion weapons in the Rebel arsenal, but they added complication and too much advantage, but may be slotted back in.

• All Turrets are limited to the Y Wing and the Rebels get no Bombs.

It still amazes me, that even with over three quarters of the game stripped away and severe limitations imposed, there are near infinite options available. What has happenned of course is “lesser” upgrades, rarely used ships, Pilos and squad builds have been re-enabled, proving again that X Wing is a layered game, that does not change at it’s core when a different layer is used.

We have seen for a while now that the game has many faces, the “full noise”, all options applied one is only one and the one most likely to loose sight of the games’ elegance and strong roots.

Two Birds, One Savage Stone

Pathfinder.

Savage Worlds.

Both good systems and both, at one time or another, large parts of my RPG collection.

Both were also, for my uses, quite flawed so they are mostly gone now.

Think of them like two family friends you like, but never really mesh with on any level beyond distant admiration, positive here-say from other friends and the occassional gathering.

My massive 1e Pathfinder collection went to another gamer a few years ago. I liked it in a way, but knew I would never play it. Too much of too much, especially when I have never been a strong d20 advocate. As an E6 vehicle (D&D limited to 6th level characters, more in keeping with a true Tolkien inspired level of power and avoiding the issues of higher level play), it was intriguing, but by definition mostly a wasted resource, so it went in favour of my d100 games and the even more OTT, but far less crufty 13th Age.

Pathfinder to me was a light feeling game that was far from light. 13th Age manages to be lighter effortlessly and my collection of d100 games ranges from very lite to very heavy and realistic, but Pathfinder was to me, a brick laden faux-light experience.

Savage Worlds has held a much different place in my gaming life. I have never warmed to it, but have stayed open minded and until recently had a decent Explorers/Deluxe Edition collection. This went also in several drafts, but is now reduced to the new base book of the latest (slickest) SWADE edition, kept just in case.

I have an unscratched itch left over from my last SW collection. I liked, but failed to use the Sci Fi and Supers companions to do a Guardians of the Galaxy like mash-up. Maybe if they release improved and updated versions of these, I will try again.

Savage Worlds is basically the opposite of Pathfinder. Too light and gimmicky for me to be take seriously, but also too crunchy and abstract to be mindless fun, used as a foil to my d100 games, it was far too successful, being basically the opposite of what I like in most ways. I especially struggled with many of the SW themed games I had. Some were excellent fits, many near misses and some, just not a fit.

Solomon Kane for example, should have been (can be/is) a great theme for a d100 game based on CoC, Clockwork and Chivalry or Pendragon. It just fits those systems and more importantly the feel of these far better than the limited scope and gamey, abstract feel of SW.

I can play light games with d100, but still retain a logic and realism. Shifting to a more abstract platform is fine, as long as it delivers what it says it will, simplicity, fun and the right feel. In most cases SWs’ simplicity just seems overly abstract and mechanically obvious. To me, only pulpy supers-sci-fi and pulp-fantasy games fit it well and only some of those. Horror themes just seem to lack that brooding menace.

Achtung Cthulhu is a great example here. It came with both SW Deluxe and 6e CoC stats in every book, but I never felt like using the SW version. You cannot do pulpy as well with CoC, but the horror and real fear factor are largely lost with SW’s “cute” mechanics. All d100 games share one thing in common, a feeling of character fragility, which helps add menace to realistic horror themed games immensely.

What it does do though is provide a more lethal and unpredictable game than the regular d20 system.

So, why the sudden interest in Pathfinder for Savage Worlds?

If you take the undisputedly wonderful art and deeply fleshed out world that is the Pathfinder legacy, strip back the massive rules density, using the realitively slick and playful SW rules (the other game system that heroes all those polyhedral die), then you potentially have a match made in heaven.

SW gets its parameters defined and is relatively clean and lighter systemically, while Pathfinder gets a friendlier game engine using a clean core and flexibility instead of layers of detail.

I have received the PDF for the Advanced Players Guide and it is all there. The highly inspirational art, all the classic Pathfinder conventions and the genuine Savage Worlds feeling of playability that make such a super cohesive pair. A bit like 13th Age, this combination is over the top fun, rather than dense rules based on old school abstractions.

Where 13th Age takes the d20 system and candidly dumps all the bits gamers tend to house rule out of the way anyway, SW-Pf uses the SW system in much the same way and one I feel works best for pulp fantasy (Wayne Reynolds illustration style pulp). I still find it extrordinary that much of the Pathfinder 1e cruft is handled by such a simple system in a few undersized books.

Gone are all those levels, using only 5 tiers of play with 20 incremental advances (realistic, constrained and workable “levelling”). Like a d100 game it is largely skills based, quite lethal at any power level and very open in character development. There are classes, but they are more like career paths, not restricting life parameters and your character is not confined to them.

Like a d20 game, it uses simple abstractions to get some things done and still adheres to the feel of a levels style game. Unlike a d20 game, it feels light and casual.

It just feels like a perfect combination of the two systems strengths.

Would I buy Pathfinder again in another, d20 form?

No, that road has been taken and rejected. I have plenty of fantasy games that either feel better or do it’s job in a way that is more to my liking.

How about SW?

A very tentative maybe, but limited to just what works for the system for me. The afore mentioned Supers and Sci-Fi companions, maybe a pulpy game, but otherwise, just Pathfinder.

Many of the map packs from the adventure paths (not the adventures, just the maps), kept from my old Pathfinder set because you never know when a good map will come in handy. These are gold along with….

I also have a wealth of useful maps and other bits I kept when I sold the bulk of my d20 stuff.

I have the Pathfinder and 3-4e map packs, 4e card and paper battle maps and counters and some other fluff. This all fits perfectly into a Savage Worlds style Pathfinder game.

……….6 boxes of 4e character, monster and terrain counters, terrain panels, dozens of 3-4e small maps. Everything a hybrid SW-Pathfinder gamer could need.

I always wanted to like SW and Pathfinder for that matter, but cast them aside in favour of a semi-unified collection based on variations of the d100 core.

So, getting back to my analogy above, these two friends have started dating and guess what? Everyone now finds the pair of them much more likeable and approachable as a couple.

SW-PF allows me to dip a toe back into two old ideas at the same time with the salve each needs and all that collateral I have hoarded gets used……finally.

Attack Wing By The Generations pt2.

Now we come to the “Big guns”.

The later series' are split into two scale classes, “Skirmish” (Voyager and DS9) and “Battle” (TNG, Dominion war). This is for making sense of the highy exaggerated scales in these ranges and to show the quite different feel the two scales have. I just cannot handle the 890m Scimitar facing off against a 15m Delta flyer (the models are only about 1:10 apart) on the table. Even taking gaming abstractions into account, they just look ridiculous. Also, the two scales play differently so doing them separately seems right.

many upgrades can be often be used in either (though not always), so there is great depth of options.

TNG

Battle Scale

The Federation. This is a massive fleet coming in at over 300pts with generic ships. 3 Galaxy class, 1 Sovereign, 2 Nebula, the Promethius, 3 older Excelsiors, an Akira, Constellation and 2 Attack Fighter squadrons (as squadrons each). It goes without saying, there are a ton of upgrades as well with several Picards, Rikers etc and a ton of weapons and tech. Scale is a little vague here, especially with the Oberth and Akira, but they slip in-just, simply because of generally unclear actual size perceptions and their roles in the series. The Defiant, Voyager, Equinox however, do not. The little Constellation is great to add a feeling of scale.

Romulan/Reman. The amazing Scimitar, 3 fighter swarms (represent squadrons), 3 D’Deridex, 2 Valdore make for a tough fleet with a ton of upgrades. Hypothetical Reman control is one option, or as the enemy is another, or just fielding the regular Romulans is still pretty strong.

The Dominion allied fleet. The Jem’hadar have 3 battleships, 2 Battle cruisers, the Breen 3 Cruisers and the Cardassians 2 Keldons and 3 Galors, with a Dreadnaught and 3 fighter wings for depth. At a minimum of about 400 pts, even the full Federation fleet needs some help. If split up (Cardassian separate), they are each capable on their own and can give each other a scare. The little patrol ships are kept for the skirmish scale.

The Klingons are at thier strongest, if least interesting in this group. a single Negh’Var commands 4 Vor’Cha, 3-4 K’Vort (the big BoP), and a few D-7’s from the reserve if needed. Their full Klingon fleet is a match for the Romulan/Remans, close to the Feds and even the Borg.

The Borg. Coming in at 250 pts just for generic ships, seems a little under done when you are actually facing a Queen vessel, 3 Spheres, a Tac Cube, a Scout and the Soong vessel. Regeneration and Drones make for interesting tactical choices and this strong fleet is competitive against all comers with the exception of………

Species 8742. The Borg hate these guys, but my fleet of 4 Bioships is not strong enough to take them all on. Point for point though, these guys beat out the Borg as they are ideally suited to combat them and are another interesting option against the other fleets.

Ferengi. A late inclusion, I have three ships for this faction and the extra card pack. Maybe a minor, unreliable ally?

This is really the “big batlle” game, often played without damage cards (just hull hits) and with base ship types only for big fights. It ideally suits solo play using cards for activation sequence. Any single faction can be strong, several fleets allied are monstrous and a yet to be played head to head game (Borg and Dominion vs all comers?) is beaconing.

DS9/TNG

Skirmish

Apart from the Dominion war, much of DS9 was small scale and so are the ships. Many upgrades from this and the battle set can be shared, meaning upgrade options far outnumber the ships available.

Federation. The Federation get 2 Defiant class (unfortunately not the Valiant, but an ISS ring-in), the Robinson-possibly up to 3 captured ships, 2 Nova class, the dominant Intrepid class, Oberth, Akira and 2 Attack Fighters (as wings). The Oberth and Akira feel better scaled here, but either option works. Still the strongest fleet by far, they have variety and options.

Up to three of the patrol ships could be pressed into service as Feds.

Dominion. The Dominion fleet is a clutch of up to 4 patrol vessels and 3 Cardassian fighter squads. Solid, is the word here, not exciting. These guys also benefit from a huge backlog of characters from the larger scale.

Bajoran. The second biggest single faction, a Scout leads out 4 Interceptors and the Lightship. The last is a scenario driver, but adds some good upgrades and a little colour to the table.

Marquis. The Marquis can field 3 raiders which is barely competitive against the other factions, but their hit and run underdog status suits this. If the Voyager linked crew are used, they get even better.

Romulan/Reman. Combined, this is a decent swarm of 3 fighter flights with 4 scout/science ships and a few nasty tricks. I have fattened it up with some excess upgrades from the larger scale fleet.

A couple of a near endless supply of B’Rel BoP available (seems like most factions have one somewhere), The Romulans have managed to provide 4 (!) different paint jobs for their scout/science ship, but their scary little fighters are uniformly stealth-black. The Fegengi have another Shuttle coming and their own BoP.

The Ferengi. Not a huge fan of these guys and I felt scatterred personalities through the other factions and the Shuttle expansion could represent them well enough. In the “battle” scale game I felt it would have been hard to build up a competitive fleet and did not really want to, but at this scale, the shuttle is another good scenario driver and the upgrades in this one pack are legion! It has now been joined by a B’Rel and second shuttle.

Update; bought more mainly because in a brain fade moment I bought the expansion card pack (thought it was Vulcan!?) and because I already had a shuttle, I went looking for the Kreetcha to use it. I found a decently priced Ferengi boxed set (and the Kreetcha). I now have 2 Shuttles, 3 Marauders and a Bird of Prey with the extra card pack. So much for not wanting to do these guys!

Klingon. The smaller B’Rel BoP is a monster at this scale. Hitting as hard as the Intrepid class, moving like the Defiant, but much cheaper than either, which means the Klingon player can field a decent 100pt fleet with some depth and real punch.

Borg. Throwing the Borg in seems a bit much at this scale, but my single Tac cube as an oversized (correctly scaled?) scout, would put the wind up most of these fleets.

Species 8742. Same goes here. Two Bioships would be a match for most, and 4 could wipe the floor with even the full Fed list.

ISS. A theoretical 2-3 ship list (using Fed dials). Not sure here, but at least I picked up a second Defiant class.

Much smaller and cheaper fleets than the “Battle” option, this is a great scenario space and it has Sisko for the Feds, some of the Voyager crew as Marquis the rest potentially on the Voyager with Worf as a Klingon or Fed!

Voyager

Skirmish

Federation (aka Delta quadrant alliance). The Voyager on her own is a strong ship (always played as named), but fights with just her are predictable and single faceted, even with a ton of upgrade available. If some hypotheticals are applied, the Federation presence becomes a “motley fleet” dynamic, a little like Battlestar Galactica. The Delta Flyer (or two?), Dauntless taken on as an ally, a more open and honest Equinox, a repaired Val Jean, even a long lost D-7 Klingon, all offer possibilities to grow the fleet (The Voyager and any 2 others makes a good 100pt fleet).

The Delta fleet could theoretically be this big. More repainting of Kazons, probably the dull orange of the top right raider. Scaling is still an issue, but bearable.

Kazon. The poor Kazon, not even of interest to the Borg, can field 1 Predator and 3 raiders. This is actually pretty tough for a single dimensional fleet, giving the Kremin or Hirogens a run.

Hirogan. I have 4 hunters and the extra card expansion. The Hirogens are now a match for the Voyager fleet or even another allied ship.

The gorgeous Hyrogen wins the “most fragile” award. Just after I glued on a wing spar for this shoot, I noticed another had lost a top bracket. Still nice though. The Kremin have two ships for depth and they came with two captains. A token Sp 8742 ship is harbinger of a full fleet of 4 if wanted.

Kremin. I bought 2 time ships to make them a viable faction and make the most of the two captains. Not yet put them through their paces, but interesting potential and cool models. You can just squeak a 90pt fleet out of them.

Species 8742 gets a special mention here as this is their origin series. Two make for a tough match up for most and 4 are probably too much even for the full hypothetical Fed fleet. They can take on the Borg though with the same dynamic as the TNG “battle” set, so some type of big battle game is possible.

The Borg are fully developed and to some extent de-clawed/mystified in Voyager. Even a little bit is still too much for Voyager alone, but with the Delta Flyer or another ally, a single Sphere can be beaten. Used sparingly, they are once again the “big bad” of the Delta Quadrant and scenario options are many.

Another favourite and the ships are generally well scaled and presented. The Vidiians were avoided (not a fan), but otherwise the Delta Quadrant is a full and lethal environment. 100pt squads usually top out your options, but then again, Klingons and Romulans are present in small numbers, even the Dominion might have a look in.

Attack Wing By The Generations Part 1.

My Attack Wing collection, rather than shrinking, is growing with the bargains available at the moment. This is it for the game I feel. Wizkids are releasing their boxed sets, but most are simply rehashing old ships with new cards and annoyingly new paint jobs (pick one and stick to it guys!). Expensive way to continue for someone with a decent set now and they are selling through quickly, seemingly never to return.

Looking at the periods and scale mix limits I have imposed on the ships I have, the question has to be I guess, can they stand on their own or are they a little too thin to be viable. The reality that quickly becomes apparent is, each period needs a fully evolved fleet with as many options as you can find to fill them out. One of each ship will often not make the grade here. I am a great fan of the depth of AW for one on one ship battles, but this is by no means Star Fleet Battles. One on one fights quickly grow tiresome, so 100pt fleets minimum need to be addressed. In the earlier periods, this is often not as easy as it looks. It takes 5 Tholian vessels to get even close to that figure.

Lets see what I have to offer. My collection is not exhaustive, because I was slack or unaware and missed some.

The first, because it has to be, is;

The original TV series or TOS

The Federation has up to 4 Constitution class ships (1 is the ISS Enterprise, but they can be played either way), the famous crew and several support cast. The ships are physically small but powerful, the upgrades even more so and the crew dominates as they should. This period has some very powerful elite talents, good enough to warrant the purchase of the relatively weak ship for tournament play, but when limited to their own universe, they are real game breakers. The Federation seem to be the strongest and most advanced, not the soft or defensive minded option like later periods.

The Gorn. I have 4 Gorn ships and the extra card pack. The ship is cheap enough (especially if you accept the adjusted point values in the Gorn card expansion) and it is not rubbish with the best shields in TOS at 3 and 3 attack and the array of upgrades rivals the Federation.

The Tholians have 5 ships for balance and it seems to fit. Webs are a pain to play against in most periods, especially in scenario games, but in TOS they are brutal. Five ships weaving webs in this set are a bit like playing against an electrified Chinese puzzle, as long as there is a point and a plan to it.

The Klingons also have 4 ships, all D-7’s. The old enemy are here in force. Sans ridges and roughness, they are a wall of simple but tough aggression, if maybe a little more cunning and quaint than later on.

I have some re-painting to do, getting a few D-7’s into dull grey for the Klingons (or lighter grey for the Roms) and the two Constitution class into off white, but the Romulans are covered.

The Romulans have 5 ships, with the nasty oddity that is a cloaking Klingon D-7 (x2) and their own Bird of Prey (3). Because of the hard limit of 4 actions for any ship, they are less battle oriented, but are tricky and complicated, and they do pack the Plasma torpedo. They are as mysterious and dangerous as they were in the shows. The Romulan D-7 is arguably the Federations’ biggest threat if well used.

The ISS can have two ships and their upgrades can be wild cards in a game where the enemy is expecting squeaky clean Feds. Maybe 2 Feds vs 2 ISS would be interesting, with some allies for fun.

With the exception of the ISS, each faction can play a balanced 80-100pt list and each has their defined “thing”. If only generic ships are used, there are enough to spread a selection of their upgrades through a fleet, but if named ships are used, pretty much all the upgrade options can be used and squads reach closer to 100-120 pts. Even allied fleets can be fielded for less than 200pts.

The Original Movies or TOM

This hasless width in factions, but is deeper within them, pitting the Federation against only Khan and the Klingons with D-7’s and Birds of Prey. The Klingons now have cloaking and Khan could conceivably be fielded on any ship and take on, or ally with, either enemy. This set screams scenario play to me.

The Federation has more choice here. The Excelsior class (3), refit or original Constitution (3), a Miranda, Constellation and an Oberth (The Oberth card expansion back-dates the ship to the periods’ Grissom).

The Klingons, now with cloaking, can take on the roles of both the Romulans and their brutal, war-like selves with a choice of newer Birds of Prey and older but slighly better than the previous K’T’inga D-7’s. With cloaking they are tricky and mean and they have the hardest hitting ships. This is where the Klingon theme of fragile, but agile and “toothy” ships starts to show through.

Khan Sing. Hypotheticals abound here. What if Khan captured an Excelsior class or a BoP? Changs’ BoP with Khan at the helm and torpedoes while cloaked? He can even fight Klingons or what about Khan on the Enterprise vs Kirk on the Miranda? Fun times. In the non-tournament world, this is a rare case of acceptable cross-polinating*.

For this period, a few other elite upgrades have been added from the TOS and later (from a huge surplus) and the house rule of all upgrades are hidden until used. This adds back in the cat-and-mouse feel of the movies and beef’s up the slender games. I also like the multiple card captain/crew “flip” option like the Kelvin set and even the “buy them as you use them” upgrade point pool house rule.

Enterprise

One of my favourites, which like lovers of Voyager puts me in a minority, this period brings us a range of early antagonists, some flavourful, emerging favourites and the Xindi as a whole universe of hurt. The ships are generally well scaled, look great and are factionally flavoured. None are super fast, but agility is high and lower point costs balance these generally weaker ships offensively and defensively.

Terran (not the Federation yet). Three ships (1 ISS version). I am not a huge fan of the choices Wizkids made, such as obvious captain choices missed, but there is enough to crew all three ships for early fleet actions. A lack of shields is off-set by top of the period agility and some awesome crew. Their role is quite different to the TOS dynamic. The NX curiously has the same base stats as an X Wing Tie fighter (2-3-3-0) even with a similar dial (except speed, but even better turns), but unlike the Tie it can take a huge array of upgrades, especially as the Enterprise, which make for a different style of game and unique Fed style ship. I would assume, three Tie Fighters would be needed to beat the fully crewed Enterprise.

I do have two more of the bigger Vulcan ships coming, but I think these may be used as alternate, later period Vulcans for the TOS set (reasonable?), as they unbalance my fleet and are guess what….. painted differently.

Andorian. Two cruisers makes for a decent showing, three would have been better (Motley Fleet expansion would be ideal, but all gone). Stronger individually than the Terrans, the Andorian ships make useful allies or lethal enemies.

Vulcan. The Vulcans get 4 ships and the strongest single fleet outside of the combined Xindi, with 2 smaller Suurok and 2 (or 4) bigger D’Kyr. As tough as the Andorians, the Vulcans fatten out an allied fleet against the Xindi or can take on any others in the period on their own.

Xindi. I missed the Weapon Zero expansion, but have 2 Reptilian, 3 Insectoid and 2 Aquatic ships, which makes for a powerful and varied fleet (with the Aquatic standing out as the one really poorly scaled ship in this range, more a fish bowl than a lake). Hypothetically, they can also fight amongst themselves, but either way, they add the bulk the period needs and each feels quite different to the others.

No Weapon Zero, but still a match for any other allied faction.

Romulans. My fleet for the mysterious early Romulans is actually quite big. Two Drones with card expansion (like the show) and 2 BoP, again, like the show. Drones take the prize as the best ships made by Wizkids and it is a truly scary beast. Competitive even in later periods, it is just a harbinger of doom in this period. The upgrades available are many and the fleet, if fielded all at once, is very tough. Early Cloaking, Drone manoeuvring and good captains mean this small fleet can even give the Xindi a scare.

Decent fleets, lots of diversity for the Romulans, but a bit thin for the Klingons.

Klingons. Like the Romulans, the Klingons probably get a bigger fleet than their very occassional appearances in the series deserve, but after picking up the bonus card expansion, it became possible to field 4 ships with a choice of applications. They are also dirt cheap and relatively weak, so several are needed to make a decent showing.

ISS. The mirror universe can be fielded with all three NX ships if Terran dials and a base token are used, so a full “we hate the universe” alternative game is possible. Archer vs Archer is also tempting, maybe with alternate allied fleets or Borg/8742/Tholians (as was). Either way, a little fun. The mirrior universe fleets are often a bit of a waste as they are never fleshed out (and often can’t be), but they are a good way of getting some card variety, scenario ideas and cheap ships (they are universally unpopular, so are ofetn on clearance) and I usually throw in a few other MU upgrades just for fun.

Hypotheticals. Technically the Tholians did make an appearance, but in the ISS universe. That aside, I find it very plausible to let the time travelling Borg, Dimension traversing Species 8472 and the enigmatic Tholians into this period. The Tholians can field their whole 5 ship fleet, the others should be limited to single ship “first contact” scenarios, or small representative fleets against entire allied fleets, but as a decent replacement to the Weapon Zero option, my single Borg Tac Cube or even a single sphere can be a “Weapon Zero” like fleet killer.

Kelvin Timeline

This is a tough one.

2 Federation ships, 2 Klingons with mostly hypothetical crew, the options are limited, but if you like the new movies (I do) and the massive, gorgeous ships (I do) and the double sided cards (I do and have house ruled multi purchases of various crew and captains to be used similarly), then there is some hope.

I have added to the upgrade options just a little, to help with depth and a little cross-over theming. A good introductory game option. Like the Enterprise series, I wish they would add a little more to this (The Romulan mining vessel as a huge ship, Kralls’ mining drone ships, the massive Vengence and a Khan option, maybe even the little Klingon patrol ships), but I doubt there will be anything coming and to honest even as I write this I cannot see many realistically balanced scenarios playing out.

A Kelvin Enterprise vs Borg campaign might be fun.

*In a faction limited environment, chances to share, on a very limited basis, Captains or upgrades in non-canon combinations is limited, but in some scenarios, allied fleets may share, such as Terran-Andorian and Terran-Vulcan vs Xindi, Federation-Romulan-Klingon in the Dominion War etc.

A Good Game Deserves....... A Good Game

We caught up with friends of ours the other week and had a great game of “Cartographer”. The game was partly print and play and partly home made as the PnP is not complete.

Lots of fun and seeing as the actual game has hand-drawn mapping as the theme, a PnP version changed little.

I felt in the mood for another board game, one that was in my realm of interest, but also very play-able for others.

Two that have been circling for a while are Star Wars Rebellion and The Battle of Five Armies.

Rebellion is a long game and one that needs two reasonably well versed players, but I have heard great things about it. Nick, a gaming friend of huge proportions (in games, not girth….), said after two games, both had come down to the last turn. Rare and precious that.

TBoFA on the other hand is a smaller, shorter game, one I wanted from day one, but when I discovered it, it was long out of print.

Well, it is back and today I will be getting a copy.

The smaller, more tactical cousin of the War of the Ring, I like the theming, scale and time commitment more, so it was a no-brainer. I also like the reviews that pointed out some small refinements were made and the game has deeper combat mechanics.

Painting is the thing that often brings me down with games like this. I find it hard to love a game with nicely done figs, that are unsightly bright red, blue or green*, but on the other hand, I am still only half way through painting Zombicide, so another 100+ figures does not appeal.

Cunning plan.

I think I may try a metallic look for the figs. The “good” side can be silver based, with bright silver for heroes, down to dull metallic-tin for minor players, the baddies can be more dirty-copper-bronze-brass, all with a wash to look like metal collectibles, that should match well with the board graphics and theme. This means the whole lot can be done in a day! If I then want to go further, I can add what is needed to this base cote of metallics.

Not sure till I see it, but it is a plan!

ed. On arrival I am torn. The figs are gorgeous, well moulded and proportioned coming in at about 20mm head to foot (claw), but I think I will still do this, as following through with more detail would be even easier.

*My copy of Cthulhu Pandemic and some of Zombicide are done, Batman Talisman is on the list and my Armada fighters are started, but far from finished. I tend to shy away from games with nice figs if I can because of this, but sometimes my resolve breaks down.

ACTA:SF Rises To The Top (With Help)

It looks like ACTA:SF is the favoured option (until the FASA game comes anyway).

The yellow one, front right. Crummy image taken to sell the lot, but thankfully I did not.

What I Like;

• Dilithium chambers are mentioned. ADB filled a lot of holes as needed early on and had little to work with, but some things are just mandatory.

• The game is not purely energy allocation based, but has “orders” which do a good job of folding in energy and other actions without tracking and feels a lot more Trek to me. This seems more Kirk on the bridge than energy accountant.

• It uses minis on a table, but can use counters on a map or a combo of either.

• It is flexible and has room for changes, unlike many of the other ADB games that rely on printed resources and are structured around inflexible mechanics that generally lack a looseness that is needed. These I will play as they come, ACTA feels less fixed in stone.

• The movement rules are more straight forward and intuitive.

But;

• The rules are a hot mess. Specialist functions and terminology are scatterred around the book, seemingly unlinked to their subject matter and the index is not as helpful as it could be. There’s not a lot to the rules, but they still take some wrangling. I have 17 (!) post-it tabs and dozens of hand written notes in my copy and still cannot find some things when needed. You tend to come across a refence to something you were not aware of, back-track to find the rule, give up in frustration, then stumble over it somewhere else.

• Things are still more SFU than Trek canon. For example Drones will be dropped from most factions, reserved for Kzinti and/or maybe Gorn. This adherence to the SFU is not unexpected, but I have several games that are linked to it and this is the one that can shift easily enough.

Fixes;

• A single well organised weapons table*, even a faction specific one, can absorb about 90% of the key word exceptions. “Accurate”, “Energy Bleed”, “Devastating”, “Multiple Damage” etc are all just overly wordy descriptions for simple mods found not in the combat section, but under “Special Traits”. Some ships can have a half dozen of these and sure they add flavour, but they also clag up the works (why the ship rosters don’t just have pre-modified weapon stats is an oversight easily fixed). When I first gave this game a go back in the day, my opponent and I spent the bulk of the game searching for and applying mods that more often than not netted a big fat “0”. It will also drop some redundency because it seems most weapons have “Accuracy”, so the exceptions are the rule If the designers just shifted the “To Hit” value down one, this entire mod would often be unnecessary. I understand the +/- of mods can stretch past the maximum and minimum range, but this is rare enough to be ignored or these can be the exceptions.

• Another unified table of orders, movement and other bits* will effectively make the rules book redundant after the first read. A good table can never be under estimated as a practical resource and this accounts for the other 10% of exceptions. When making my own games I often start here, fleshing out the game in reverse. basically, if the charts are useless and the numbers don’t match up, then there is no point in going further and a good chart or charts should be all you need after a few games.

It turns out everything needed will fit on a single double sided sheet (I will do one for each faction). How hard would it have been to include that and make the whole game vastly easier to pick up and play? The games’ core is clean and simple, but the application of exceptions is excessive when often the paragraph of words represent a simple +/- mod.

• Change some ship stats to make the ships less warlike (reduce weaponry). The SFU is a war game in a warlike universe. I want to wind this back a tad to allow for more “Kzinti and mouse” tactics, where a clever captian of a small ship does not get creamed in the first exchange by a bigger ship. This will also allow me to reduce the number or ship variations andm increase the spread between them.

• Simplify the facing rules to four, 90 degree angles (F/S/P/A), using square bases, which allow for Fed Comm 1” counters on a smaller mat as a travel or large fleet version and re-align the weapon facings to fit these. I can also use Attack Wing ships on their supplied bases. This will generally simplify measurements and movement gauges.

• Expand the orders mechanic and choices to include repairing of systems taken off-line etc and add in some faction specific tactics to add flavour and depth (ala Attack Wing).

• Add in Kzinti gunboats (fighters) because I “mistakenly” bought a carrier :). Basically these will be armed shuttles or small police-like ships.

• Change the messy and random “Boost Energy To Shields” order and tracking to a replacement of lost shields (possibly a fixed number if the core is on line) up to the current maximum, because shields could recover, but there must be limitations imposed like slower speed, no other special maneouvres or energy weapon fire etc.

• I will add in shield emitter damage by facing, effectively giving the game shield “facings” without having to use four different facing tracks. This is a system on/off line or emitter destruction.

• Change the crew tests to 2d6, so they are not so twitchy.

• The crit table with have a “7” column, so the more lethal weapons have a truly devasting option (which was the 6 column), but removing them from lesser weapon crit ranges. Removing the “tiny ship blew up my Dreadnaught” with a lucky roll. The table will also have some changes of effect and a smoother spread with multiple effects per entry. Precise will also be a shift on the crit table, which is closer to “Target X”.

• Toss the book. Just kidding, no but really, when your done…..toss the book.

*The second path was to just do a set of charts with all terms consolidated, but that still required qualifications that amounted to re-wording and repeating much of the book.

Star Trek Games Stocktake

Not despatched yet, but assuming it is, I have a new Star Trek game coming, it is probably time to look at my options and what this means and see how they pass the “Miranda test” (how well they can do the battle in Wrath of Khan).

Attack Wing

This covers nearly every Star Trek franchise apart from Discovery/Strange New Worlds, but that is fine as I do not count Discovery as a thing and Strange New Worlds is basically TOS.

The game play is thematic if a little simplified, but to give it it’s due, this mechanic also powers X Wing and both have had world championship level tournaments, so it is clearly a thing.

Miranda Test; Quite well with some house rules, but can be predictable without these if you stick to only the actual options available. My house rule is to allow the respective captains to take all their possible upgrades (one Captian, one maximum of each other), but be limited to a points pool for what they can choose in a single game. This means all crew, elite and weapon choices are available, but not all at once.

Star Fleet Battles

I have the basic rules, probably will never play them, but they are there. This is the polar opposite to AW. Deep, very deep, rewarding players who delve into tomes of rules and master their fictional space ships to a level second only to their make believe avatars. A lifestyle choice for some and a tiny bit of me gets it, but no time for just one game in my life and who would play it with me?

Miranda Test; Ok tactically, except the actual ships and their capabilities need to change to match the movie.

Many options, but all limited in some form or other.

Federation Commander

SFB “modernised”. Enough for many, too much for some and not enough for others, FC has the un-enviable job of drawing in new players, keeping and converting old ones and generally flying the flag for a niche within a niche a niche. I like it, but still find it a little clunky for my tastes. Energy management is the key as with many Trek games. This has been supported by way too much support materiel, but thankfully, it has other uses.

Miranda Test; As above, but less involved for better or worse.

A Call To Arms Star Fleet

I must admit I am torn with this one. I only have the first book, but I have the metal minis to cover it nearly perfectly (basiclly the same as the first sets of Fed Comm). This uses minis on an open mat, but can be done with counters and/or hexes. The book itself does my head in. So many hard roads and odd oversights when easier ones could have been taken, but it is a vastly simplified and nicely thematic version of FC’s universe. I like this as a WW2 ship combat game, but the ADB processes are clumsily applied with mods negating other mods, when each ship could simply have a better stat sheet designed with mods built in.

Miranda Test; Better than the other SFB based games, but still needs a replacement Miranda.

Starmada Engine

A generic system, like ACTA, properly converted but not as cleanly done. The rules come in the generic form, then you apply the exceptions. If you are only interested in the Trek version, this seems to be a lot of double dipping including changes of terminology you jus learned (Shields > Screens > Shields), but the play can be fast and decisive even with squadrons a side. If you want to go even bigger, I have Fleet Ops, but this has zero conversions, so you need to go from scratch (as does everyone else I guess), which is ironically easier than the learn/unlearn dynamic of Starmada. I intend to re-write the rules for Trek only, learning as I go and having a better share-able resource at the same time. This will also allow me to try some later periods.

Miranda Test; Poor. Not granular enough, needs substitute Miranda and has some non-Trek feeling mechanics.

FASA Star Trek Tactical Simulatior

From their RPG and seamlessly compatible, this is often compared to SFB, coming from the same period, sharing the same style of energy allocation system, but with much simpler mechanics and thanks to a short lived but comprehensive licence, it stick closer to true Trek. The community is active and capable and includes some updates through to the latest movies, so for a more Trek style game, this one kicks goals. I can also do this with AW ships.

Miranda Test; Good to perfect from the ships to the play. This is close to post TOS Trek reality and the RPG element could even add more in.

M-Space

An RPG that has a very flexible ship design system, this one could work, using the above for info.

Miranda Test; Potentially excellent I guess, but specifics will have to be taken on face value.

Star Trek Adventures

The elephant in the room is the newer Star Trek RPG. I am curious how this handles ship battles just as a tactical game. A big commitment if it is too RPG reliant and not an area I am keen to go into.

*

Overall I have saturated this genre, but have I actually got what I want?

Can I do Star Trek with the feeling of the genre (AW, ACTA, FASA) and tactical depth to make it absorbing (FC, FASA) and play larger games (Starmada, ACTA)? My hope is to either clean up ACTA or hopefully when the FASA game arrives use that as my primary.

FC also has some house rules that slightly streamline play and you can drop non canon Drones and other bits to stream line play (although some factions would whither on the vine).

Starmada went from a front liner to a reserve with the doubling up of learning the game, then unlearning many aspects and terminology to suit Trek, still no idea why.

I am also looking at a home made game using the bits I like from each, but that is in line with lots of other projects and flies in the face of all this work done by others.

The Sales And Tidying Up Loose Ends

X wing 1e, Malifaux 1 and 2e, Attack Wing, Armada, are all in run-out mode with most suppliers. Pickings are slim, but the prices are tempting.

I have been grabbing those things that are nice to add, but not justifiable at full price, like another AW USS Robinson so it can be represented separately and fight the squadron of 3 Jem H’adar Raiders I can field.

Ships like the Bajoran Light Ship, Ferengi Shuttle, a fourth Hirogen Hunter, two more Klingon Raptors for Enterprise, to balance points or add interest, then a mass of bits from others just to get them while they are around (16 ships in total and 2 card boosters for about $200au). I am not as interested in the later sets because they have changed the paint jobs (again), so to me they are just expensive card packs.

Also my lust for 1e Malifaux figs is far from exhausted, although the choices seem to nearly be. I have managed to get the whole 2e landscape of cards and rules to support my figures, but i have a feeling, they will end up being pressed into my own game.

A recent find and on my long term wish list was Klingon Attack for Fed Commander. This is one of the “big four” box sets. Annoyingly hard to get for a long time due apparently to a lack of hard board cutting facilities. I have most of the ships from booster packs, but the maps, scenarios and some extras for depth are always welcome.

When grabbing this from Noble Knight, I picked up Legend RPG Gladiators, the one theme book missed. I actually wanted Invictus for CoC for Rome, with Mythras Rome as a support source, but Gladiators completes the set and will add lots of useful detail to a Legend sandbox. I also have a three era suppliment for some ancient Cthulhu love (hate?).

Just grabbed a copy of the FASA Star Trek Tactical Combat Simulator, 2003 edition. It’s used and the box is quite worn but the game itself nearly all unpunched. This was expensive in a way, but not much dearer than buying it new now and it is a well respected take on the more traditional TOS and later periods. I was surprised how well supported this game is even now and it ties into their RPG seemlessly.

Unlike ADB Trek games, this one is tied more closely to canon Trek.

Not bad for such an old game.

Fun stuff, with slightly mixed feelings as I have come to realise most of my favourite games are falling off the radar. Still good games worth playing then, are worth playing now, but the industry seems to have become more fickle and transient lately, always moving to the next big thing. Friends are into Crisis Protocol and similar, but I will stick with past projects until they are exhausted, as much to save money and get off the “hamster wheel”.

The Home Brew RPG Continues To Evolve

The core of my RPG is evolving naturally. It feels good.

I had a close call with (horror of horrors) a 3d6 roll over variant, simply to reduce the math, and this is still lurking as an option, but otherwise, all is on track.

The characteristic tree is something I have been playing with for what seems like an eternity, but is finally stable and seems pretty bullet proof. This is a re-hash of an earlier article, just a little more settled.

These are not necessarily locked in as the one option for the core of each skill, but more a test type option. Firearms for example may have several applications such as Reflexes for quick draw, Wisdom for interpreting danger posed by a weapon in a situation or Perception for determining it’s condition or preciousness, Prowess for auto fire and Balance for aimed fire.

Using the basis of 2x chrs as the “familiar” or “basic training” base level of all tests, they roll out like this.

Paired in connected opposites;

Strength/Dexterity. Gross force and fine motor skills.

Endurance/Agilty. Physical conditioning and build, also indicating health and stature.

Reason/Intuition. Logic and instinct based mental prowess.

Will/Presence. Personality and character.

From here, at the leisure of the players or as needed (and in obscurity if needed by the GM) are the following groupings. More can be used as desired, but these are the logical and therefore most common ones.

First up, the pures (2x the primary above);

2x Str = Might. Strength, pure, brute strength for things that do not move easily.

2x Dex = Manipulation. Fine motor skills for fiddly things.

2x End = Stamina. Pure physical endurance. This is expected to be a fairly dynamic attribute as fitness and health change.

2x Agl = Flexibility. General elasticity, again quite dynamic.

2x Rsn = Wisdom. Analytical thought, no emotions invited.

2x Int = Instinct. The opposite of above, a “thin” stat for some games and even some players. This may get a re-name in some games, like Luck or if the skill spread does not fit (a bit like Power in most d100 games).

2x Will = Discipline. Like Stamina and Wisdom, this is rigid resolve without flexibility.

2x Pre = Charisma. Unfettered outward projection of personality. It may or may not mask a lack of personal depth, with surface veneer of impressiveness.

*

ok, now lets look at combining these within their matched pairs (Str+Dex, Rsn + Int etc). These are important and often compromised as the generation system is a sharing of random die between the two, so unless unusually lucky, the average character will wind up average here.

Str + Dex = Control. This is the combining of gross and fine motor skills. An example may be the focussed lethal strike of a master martial artist or the thrusting of a weapon into a precise location with force.

Agl + End = Conditioning. The overall finess and healthiness of the character. Both these chrs are quite dynamic, being effected by life style effort and age, so this one will change a lot.

Rsn + Int = Perception. A characters ability to notice and interpret the world around them. This juggling match is what defines a persons’ awareness (which was an optional title).

Wil + Pre = Passion. If Will and a projection of self are combined, they are interpreted as a passion for a task or sometimes aggression if the situation fits. Immersive acting, artistic obsession or charismatic leadership come to mind.

*

Now, we mix the pairs of chrs from the physical or non-physical groups. These are some of my favourite combos and cover a few of the core attributes from many other systems.

End + Str = Constitution. This regular in gaming is better represented I feel as a combined attribute.

Str + Agl = Prowess. This is a chr I have often used in smaller spreads to represent all things physical, but the mix of strength and agility is a better defined thing. This separates the more skillful Conan for the Brutish thug.

Agl + Dex = Coordination. Combining the bodies overall flexibility with fine motor skills. This is often ust covered by Dex as Con covers overall robustness, but I feel it falls short with characters like adroit gamers, not in the best of health or Olympic acrobats who are a little clumsy and ham fisted.

Rsn + Will = Concentration. Mental focus and application. Just one or the other falls short of this chr, both are needed to make it work.

Rsn + Pre = Persuasion. Talking people into things can take some charisma, but also needs some smarts.

Pre + Int = Empathy. The softest and most flexible of mental attibutes, Empathy covers emotional connections with other living creatures, but may also include artistic appreciation and a sixth sense for things.

*

Now for some common combinations that are a mix of physical and mental attributes, but may at first seen ounter intuitive. Lets see what comes from them. Each chr is represented twice, but others are likely possible.

Rsn + Str = Leverage. The application of brute strength intelligently.

Int + Dex = Reflexes. Instinct and hand speed. This is probably a common one in combat based campaigns.

Wil + Str = Tenacity. Strength aplied with that less obvious perconal grit that often splits the try-hards from the winners in tests of strength.

Pre + Dex = Finesse. An odd one maybe, but a representation of the smooth confidence and skill someone can exibit when performing some hand based tasks that require a little something to impress or confuse, like a sleight of hand magician, thief, grafter, seductress or cocky cocktail bar tender.

Rsn + End = Determination. Sticking to a task, staying physically alert, resisting distractions or temptations to achieve a specific task. May come in handy in an already crowded field.

Will + End = Resilience. Different to Tenacity which is an application of strength, or Determination which is more about choosing to apply one’s logical self pro-actively, this is more about passive resistance to physical stresses and discomfort, as well as healing and restraint. I guess the easiest way to look at it is, an unconsciuos person could test their inner Resilience, where Determination requires active thought.

Int + Agl = Balance. A crucial one for many acrobatic tasks Balance combines the physical and instictive self for Balanced skill and general calmness. It will be a staple for weapons handling, acrobatics, jumping etc.

Agl + Pre = Poise. Like Finesse, but more athletic, Poise is the skill a character moves with, their Deportment, also eluding to the characters’ physical stature and build. Like Finesse, this is more about impressing others with actions than the actual practical result of the action which brings to mind a secondary or combined test process (did it, but well enough to impress?). Again like Dex vs Agl, Poise vs Grace can be extremely different to each other due to physical considerations.

Balance, Finesse, Poise, Coordination? All in the story telling.

This is the core of the system in action.

Determine the test needed, the skill and the chrs that are applicable and test. Skills are generalised (like General Practice Medicine), tests more specificly aligned to personal abilites, which I hope will result in a more realistic system. Unlike a lot of RPG’s characters will be less defined, more maleable and careers less about specific skills, more about their application.

Example;

Determine if the rope will suffice for a tight-rope style negotiation of an alley;

Acrobatics or climbing and Perception.

Use the rope to cross the gap;

Same skills and Balance.

React to a fired arrow while doing the above;

Dodge and Reflexes.

Regain balance after dodging the arrow;

Acrobatics or climbing and Balance.

Do it with some panache;

Acrobatics and finesse

If any failed attempt, test to grab the rope or other option, or land well.

Acrobatics or climbing and Prowess.

One reason I was tempted to switch to a 3d6 roll over system was simply to reduce the math invlved. Simple +/- values are quick to add up, but the system overall lacked the smooth d100 simplicity, but I will still continue to look at this.

X Wing 2e, A New Hope?

AMG have effectively scrapped the Armada game (except they did reprint the Raider allowing me to complete my set!), but they do seem to be interested enough in the X Wing game to keep working on it. Realistically, X Wing is on the decline. For example of the two main stream games shops in Hobart I visited this week, only one actually stocked anything and that was not front and centre.

With fresh eyes, the game is being changed fairly dramatically at its roots and apart from the resentful sniping of the early weeks, things seem to be starting to be accepted.

ROAD (Random initiative Order After Dial selection) has its good and bad points, but every argument against it seems to highlight dissatisfaction with the current system or the bulk of the alternatives.

Constant discussion keeps the game in the minds of the gaming community, but too much and it may seem unfixable….again.

My take, for what it is worth.

I really, really like the 20 point squads with limited loadouts. This brings the game back into the same place for me as 1e’s simpler form, simpler even, which is something I can accept for casual and tournament games. If anything, it seems to be the more logical way of representing the specifc pilots within the system and a perfect balance between the “quick pick” cards and the 1e points dynamic.

I even made a 1/5th scale point system myself, but this was rudimentary, time consuming and not ideal. This should also reduce constant micro managing of points lists, while still leaving room to correct unforseen “super” builds. The previous system seems in retrospect like trying to control a car by only using the accelerator, the new one is more gas and breaks together.

Scenarios are more in line with my play style, but time will tell. More scenarios would be cool, but I understand the balance that has to be struck.

Play has been changed with new obstacle rules, so good flying is more important than ever. Less predictability equals fairer play, less funnelling of builds into “one fits all” and allows the game mechanic itself to add variety, without having to add more and more ships into the mix.

Change the field and you change the team.

As to the new rules for bumping etc, I cannot really comment as I am no expert. They seem to be well intentioned, but I worry AMG is re-learning the lessons their predecessors learned, going down the rabbit hole, maybe never to come back. KISS principal is probably the best way here.

Love them to death in 1e, but 2e has its own appeal.

Crabbok on his YouTube channel has pointed out that overall, the changes seem at odds with the companies statement to “take the game back to it’s roots”, but aside from that specific complaint, I feel the changes are mostly good.

Overall, the desire to fix and change is mostly good and seems to be addressing the communities spoken and sometimes unspoken desires.

*

On another note, I may be dipping my toe into the earlier period of X Wing. I cannot and will not force myself to go down the Clone Wars road entirely (although with my time over, I would have instead of the curtailed Armada route!), but I have intentions of collecting all the ships with Scum connections.

This allows me to cover all the in-fighting through the entire scope of the Star Wars saga, without having to field the main players and lets face it, the rogues are where the fun lies. I can have the Razor Crest, the Rogue fighter and others and they can all basically fight each other. Outer Rim, X Wing style if you will.

Few other ships are appealing, although I will keep getting new TFA era ships as I am only doing these only in 2e as representatives of the best mechanics, coverage and in turn these are I feel the better factions to call these out, but Scum keep adding in names and ships with a fun element I would like to tap and time in this space is less defined.

Attack Wing Reversal, Dreadful Pennies And Lucky Finds.

The bulk of my Attack Wing collection was up for sale recently and if it were not for distance and freighting the large collection, it would have gone, but I did suffer some regrets when packing it up.

I was splitting out a decent little Delta Quadrant and Enterprise era set, neither wanted by the buyer. This would be seeded with some hypotheticals and variants (Species 8472, Tholian and Borg who tend to get everywhere) and as much of their own stuff as I had along with any duplicate mission or upgrade cards not needed in the sold portion.

Like a lot of things, I got the jitters about selling it so cheaply, but more than that, I started to actually fall back into full fan mode.

Yesterday I managed to pick up a few ships that have been only mildly desirable until now, but with sale prices about, it was time to go forwards, not backwards. These were all about $10au.

The Donerios Lightship, a scenario driver and source of some decent Bajoran upgrades. This is it for Bajor, a major player in DS9.

Quarks Treasure. Another scenario driver, a small, but usefull representative of the Ferengi and their role in the game. Not my favorite faction, but this ship fits into the game nicely for me and effectively covers these nasty little guys.

These two add variety to my skirmish scale DS9/TNG set.

Another Nistrim Raider. This makes three raiders, which in the relatively lethal Delta Quadrant, is reasonable and brings the Kazon closer to the same level as the other factions.

ISS Avenger. A third NX, but with a twist. These guys are the ones who encountered the Tholians, so it fits and the chance of playing three regular or two mirror NX’s is tempting.

If I could get them, the Montgolfier and Valiant would also be good, both for the skirmish level game, but I think these are now long gone.

Maybe not now travelling back to an empty Quadrant?

*

Following on in the sale period of bargains, my wife and I hit the stores in Hobart and I picked up 4 of the 7 wave 1 Malifaux 2e arsenal packs, the rules, a Penny Dreadful, 2 sets of Shifting Loyalties campaign pack and 2 of the wave 2 packs for $3 each! Best $30 I have ever spent and full retail came in at about $300au.

My figs are 1e and I intended to re-purpose them, but the 2e system and cards appeal and now I have an official upgrade from 1e. The rules and suppliments are free on the Wyrd website, but for $3, the cards are cheaper than printing the book pages on plain paper and cutting them out! I then spent a little too much at Noble Knight on the missing ones, just getting the full set, all for about $200au, including the above. Not too bad.

*

In a final pair of wins, although the Osprey RPG’s have bitten me before, I got Sigil and Shadow, the DWD based modern occult game that is a fusion of Bare Bones Fantasy and Covert Ops, both favourites and a project that caught my attention a year or so ago, then seemed to disappear.

I went in looking for “Jackals”, an Openquest derivative, set in a stylised version of Ancient fantasy, but even at the same price for a bigger page count, it was not as instantly appealing as S & S. I still bought Jackals.

For modern cross-over games though, S & S will add something to a more favoured period. I have The Laundry Files (as itself), Delta Green (like the X Files), After the Vampire Wars (like The Dresden Files), Seasons of the Dead (like The Walking Dead, War of the Worlds or Skyfall) but this one is a different beast, a bit more like “Supernatural” or “Fright Night”.

For Bronze Age games I do have the original Mythras range, all basically set in this earlier period, including Runequest Essentials 6e, Mythras Rome and the long promised Greece suppliment coming and to be frank, this is enough, but Jackals called and the art is gorgeous.

Like all D100 games, anything added can cross boundaries to other games easily enough. It could even be re-aligned to real Greek history.

Jackals scratches an itch, S & S was a gift from the ether.

D100 Systems And The "Retro" Label

I often read reviews on D100 RPG’s, partly because I may be interested in buying them, sometimes because I have them and I am interested in someone else’s point of view and sometimes, just becasue I like them.

The term “retro” tends to come up a lot and it makes me bristle. It should not, but from a D100 fans perspective, thsi terminology, possibly a deterent to others, is both redundant and misleading.

The reasons for this calling out a difference between a modern and retro RPG system eludes me.

You sit arounfd a table with friends, play the roles of some made up characters, and roll dice (or occassionally play some cards) to resolve the effects of your and other characters’ actions. Conceptually, no RPG strays from this paradigm, even if the actual mechanic changes slightly;

Player intent > character action > random element > effect > interpret for story.

There are variations that change player role, remove the GM even, but at the end of the day, that is it.

As retro as they come, but still fully valid, only slightly different to and compatible with more recent releases.

So, why is a D100 system considered “retro” or old fashioned?

If it comes to the “bones” themselves, D6’s and the like mostly pre-date d10’s, and “The Worlds First/Favourite RPG” uses all available die including d100’s, so mechanically D100 systems are as relevant as any. I guess it may be a “stigma” attached to it’s lineage. So why does “TWFRPG” not get the same treatment when it is (1) older, (2) more dated and abstract in mechanics and concept and (3) less consistant over time, just to end up close to where it started?

Traveller, one of the original “genesis” games uses 2d6 (with some mid 90’s exceptions) and many “new” style games have simply moved to a dice “pool” style to soften the curve a little, but other than that die are die, so again “retro” or not is not about the tools used. For these games, a small change to process like advantage die seems to be earth shattering enough for most, so why can’t the same be said for a more stable mechanic when something similar happens.

If not the die, as assumed by the title of the post, them maybe the mechanics themselves?

Fair play, there are older and newer systemic evolutions or in some cases de-volutions involved. Keep in mind though, the negative comments made by some reviewers are a direct result of the systems’ over arching robustness, something that other systems, TWFRPG in particular have never been able to achieve. D100 systems work, make sense and are more grounded than many others and that is a bullet proof fact. Teaching d100 games is as simple as a game can be and then the concepts can be transferred to other similar games, periods and feels.

Something I really appreciate about them is the “invisibleness” of the system. Once understood, the actual role playing can be gotten on with, the system just moves out of the way. On a personal note, overly mechanical or systemic games tend to put me off. Role playing is a simple task, made harder by games that try to own the space in the name of story telling support or proxy. The One Ring is a good example of a game that forces processes on the GM and players to make them game Tolkein as it should, in their opinion, be played. If you want to play it true to theme, then play it that way, if not make it your game. Converting the game to d100 or another format means nothing unless you want it to.

The latest Runequest for example has revived not only the ancient games’ thematic feel, but also some of its mechanical clumsiness. The resistance table is a relic, but it is also part of the heritage of the game system, so forgiveable. It also works fine and fixes a few problems, but there are newer ways to achieve the same.

The things that for me mechanically separate “retro” d100 games from new ones are;

• Critical results on doubles (good and bad), giving a more logical spread of a 10% chance of extraordinary results, tied to skill level not just set at fixed values.

• Die arrangement, which can reduce or remove the need for hard mod levels, which in turn can lead to imbalance in chance spread. A +20% mod to a 10% skilled character is proportionately enormous compared to a 70% skilled character.

• “Failing forward” or a similar mechanic to soften the hard pass/fail dynamic, which D100 games with their linear non-curve are known for. Good role playing aside, this is a reality of most games. Some fixes have been too complicated (Warhammer 4e), but there are simpler ones such as halving or doubling hard pass/fails, the grey area used as pass/fail results “with complications”. At some point all systems have to make a stand here, D100 systems are not exceptions.

• Limiting character growth towards the top end, sometimes capping skills at 99%.

• Add a meta currency. This means no means yep, ok you spend a “x” and get a “get out of jail” pass. This ties in directly to new games as a true call out to player control.

Some of these are simply logical evolutions, some are there to remove partly erroneous interpretations. The linnear nature of d100 rolling is something I have been aware of since day one, but when you look at it, the “curve” some die systems use is actually an irrelevance.

2d6 rolls have 36 result combinations, 6 of which result in a 7 and only 1 each for 2 and 12 . This curve gives the player a feelng of a semi predictable average, which only actually makes any difference to a 50% chance on d100’s when applying mods. In curve based games, mods have a massive effect. A mod of +1 in a 2d6 system shifts the entire curve one digit to the right and it is only 11 number wide. 8 is now the average, 3 and 13 the extremes. In a d100 game +5% is a flat +5%. More importantly, +1% is not irrelevant, just very granular.

Don’t get me started on the d20 vs d100 argument. The d20 is simply a d100 limited to 5% levels. The actual difference in mechanics is a “roll over” rather than “roll under” system base, although there are exceptions to both. The psychological effect of roll over systems, where all good things are plusses is genuine and the open ended-ness of that system is seen as a good thing, but it also leads to impossible odds for some tests. The flat 5% auto fail/crit of d20 games is identical to the 10% crit range of modern d100 games, but less flexible and far less representative of true skill. A skill level of 70% has 6 chances of a good critical, 4 of a bad one and even that can be granular with the very extremes being “soft” crits, the middle values, where skill makes a real difference, is where the “hard” crits hide.

Personally, I have come to prefer the high % percentage = good over high mods added to a die roll = good, feel.

Ok, so after lookng at the percieved bad sides of d100, lets look at the positives.

D100 games are very granular, but in a simple, logical way. No other game system can offer an easy to interpret system with 100+ range of results. 3D6 has more, but needs simple arithmetic and again has the curve effect with mods (and often uses roll under) and some pool based games are just clumsy or overly “flat”.

The only time a d100 game becomes cumbersome is when a roll over system is used, requiring mod to be added to large numbers like Role Master (Harn), or a system that allows skill levels of over 100, with mods applied then another variant like die arrangement. This is still logcal to explain and interpret, just loess clean in process.

Alternatives in “modern” games can offer up monsters like the Star Wars dice pool system where you have not only a lot of bespoke die to interpret, but then have to interprtet their meanings in relation to each other. This is a mechanical replacement for role playing and although cool in concept, does not actually add anything new.

A Personal Ranking Of (my) D100 RPG's

Committing to D100 RPG’s as my main squeeze, has created a medium sized collection and a few formed opinions. If I had to rank them from “probably only a resource” to “most likely to be played”, then it would go something like this;

1. Open Quest. The most “fundamental” of the serious systems I own. It is pretty much pure D100, minimum fluff.

2. M Space. Using Mythras Imperative as a base, M Space is a new take on the venerable, Traveller style of game. It is to me more emotive, deeper feeling and by far more mysterious, which for my preferred style of sci-fi fits the bill. Traveller had that, but has more recently turned into more of a modern squeaky clean sci-fi stereotype. M-Space has a harder edge.

3 Call of Cthulhu (5-6e). The original d100 RPG for me and still a balance of the best the system dynamic has to offer. Fragile characters lucky to survive a day, but capabe of amazing deeds? CoC is the one. Achtung Cthulhu and Weird War 2 also need to be included and do the earlier period expansions, but CoC standard is still the king.

4. Zweihander Engine (including Dark Astral and Flames of Freedom). A combined entry, but they are all linked by system and intent. These three genres cover several of my favourite genres with just the right theming, all missing more or less from my other D100 systems. Dark Astral gives me far future grim-ness and Flames is such a strong period resource, I am using it as an AWI source book.

5. The Art of Wuxia. A surprise choice as my Wuxia interest is limited to growing up with re-runs of “Monkey” as a teenager and some Manga, but the game just gets me into the groove and is my favourite version of the “Bare Bones” engine.

6. Destined. Risky adding a very new game, one I have not even read entirely, but the genre is an eternal itch needing a good long scratch. Supers are an over serviced, under realised theme for me. At one stage I had probably close to 30 supers games, but none reigned supreme. A d100 game (Super World) was always there, but pickings were otherwise slim. Destined marries the theme with a modern d100 game engine, that I think is ideally matched.

7. Warhammer 1e. Flawed and dated perhaps, but so, so good. A complete game in a book is not a new thing now, but it was then and still holds up. It is still viable and for me, it holds so many great memories.

8. Clockwork and Chivalry/Cthulhu. Using the Openquest system, this combines my love of the English Civil War period with the weird science, hedge magicks and supernatural themes. There are only a few games with multiple cross-overs so harmonious (Heroes of Normandie for one). I am lucky enough to have all that was printed including the revised edition.

Just reminding myself there is more to life :).

9. Mouse Guard (converted to d100). Not a D100 game, but a grounded and simple theme, so very easy to convert. The big vs small dynamic is also easy to convert, giving the little mice the ability to attack specific locations simply by being there, where the bigger critters have to catch them if they can.

10. The One Ring (converted to d100). Like Mouse Guard, TOR is easy enough to adapt to d100. This means those beautiful adventures and artwork are not going to waste, but the overly structured originals can be used mre as a guide than a stricture.

11. DWD fusion, which is Covert Ops, Bare Bones Fantasy, a little Wuxia and/or Sigils and Shadows, the official fusion of these.

12. All things Legend. Not the pinnacle of the Runequest evolution, the plain little black books, a random buy on a trip to Melbourne, have become a favourite. Basically a re-print (typo’s and all) of the RQ2 books, just with RQ filed off, they are great value and full of crunch. Deus Vult and Hitorica Rodentia are included in these also.

13. The Big Gold Book. If I could only have one…. . The Big gld book is not onky a useful tool kit, it also does a good job of representing all that came before. You basically have the skeletons of Elric/Stormbringer, Hawkmoon, Call of Cthulhu, Elf Quest, Runequest and the “Worlds” books in one place, to pick and choose from. From these roots, Astounding Adventures, the Monographs and one-off titles like Devils Gulch have spawned, broadneing and defining the BGB’s applicaton.

14. The Witcher. A project I may try, the deeply layered Witcher RPG is also a perfect cross-over for a game like Mythras of Legend.

X Wing et al, The Eternal Flame.

No other game can keep me hooked, even when it is not being played much, like X Wing (Attack Wing and Armada included).

Some, but not all are available in the various forms of the game.

Please note, there is a ton of stuff on this site about X Wing all versions, but just because the “fever” has hit me again, I thought I would revisit them again.

I can waste a ton of hours, just analysing the 1e landscape, come up with alternate forms of the games rosters and hypothetical play styles. Therapy in frustration sometimes, but therapeutic none the less.

As things stand there are a ton of carefully “reduced” versions I have at hand, each aimed at a different level and/or feel of the 1e game. My intention is not to disrespect the game. The opposite is true. I love the clean logic of the X Wing 1e game, but wish to avoid the things that over time, changed this purety, especually the action layering that defined the late game. The designers found a need to replace the game with a second edition to address these issues, so how irrelelvant or irreverent is it to de-evolve it to a workable form instead?

The main culprits are Elite Pilot Talents, Mods and Titles. EPT’s are at odds with the actual pilot talents that are printed on the cards and are much better aligned with Star Wars canon. Mods are the same, changing the inherent character of the ships and Titles were either an artificial game based representation of a named ships “special” capabilities, or a way of fixing the problems the above contributed to.

Flight School. Using the TFA TIe/fo and T-70 with no upgrades, just pilots, this is a great tool to familiarise a new player. You have a great representation of the X Wing the core game concepts, with full cover of manoeuvres, pilot abilities and base actions. The ships are also pretty rugged, so ships (games) seldom implode in front of players’ eyes.

Classic. Sticking to the ships and characters from the original three movies, this is the next step and a personal favourite. I would have been totally ok if X Wing the original game had stopped right here, but money needs to be made, fans sated. If it had, it would have stayed balanced and probably died quietly in a dignified, proud fashion. No EPT’s, titles or mods are used, just pilot talents and Crew upgrades are kept to named characters and other upgrades pulled back into a basic envelope.

Skeleton Crew. This form has seven defining ships per faction, nothing repeated, sticking again to the basic four actions only. Each faction gets a decent spread of capabilities with the true flavour of each coming through. Again, no EPT’s, no mods, slightly stripped back upgrades make for a decent game with variety, that’s easy to teach and balanced.

Bare Bones. This is skeleton crew expanded to all ships with the core four action profiles. The spread is now uneven and there starts to be some repetition (Y Wing, HWK) and named titles are included for flavour. This is the mid point of this grand experiment and the one that started it all. The idea was to strip back the excess, all the things that unbalanced and over complicated the game for casual play, especially between experienced players and new comers, where a little knowledge swayed things far in favour of the better versed player.

Expanded Bare Bones. This includes the rest of the non TFA ships from 1e with all actions as well as the single card Epic ships, but still excludes EPT’s, Mods and generic titles, but most other upgrades are included and the Epic ships get their named titles in lieu of pilots.

Fight Club. When the “all upgrades” itch needs a scratch, but some control is still desired, the top five fighters from each faction are thrown into the arena with all upgrades available. Work done late in the game to balance out these ships is realised with S-Foil, Integrated mech, Renegade refit X Wings vs Vaksai Kihraxz or X1 Tie Advanced. This is late X Wing 1e at its best, as long as you know what you are doing.

Aces High. Same as above, but only three ships are used (X Wing, Kihraxz, Advanced), the work horse line fighter representatives of each faction with all upgrades. I really like this one also. The Droid supported Rebels, System enhanced Imperials and multi Mod and Illicit tricky Scum, who between them manage to support almost every upgrade outside of Crew. Represent! We also have a slightly simplified version using the Interceptor for the Imperials.

Bottom of the Barrel. This is Bare Bones Expanded, but Scum only. The Scum are broken up into factions (Black Sun, Binayre Pirates with Cannons instead of Missiles on their Z95’s, Tansarii militia and free booters).

The variations are limitless, so more may come.

*

Attack Wing, the poorly named Trek equivalent gets similar treatment, but is more aligned to Era and scale (TOS, TOM, Kelvin, Enterprise, Delta Quadrant, TNG “Battle” and TNG “Skirmish”).

The only mechanical difference is to balance out my dislike of the Titled ships’ illogical difference to the generics (don’t like illogically semi “sentient” ships, so sue me).

I do two things here to mitigate my grumpiness.

I use the base ship classes only and secondly, but depending on the series used, allow the players to buy any upgrade types on the card (limited to one of each), up to the ships’ points value or from a pre-decided point “reserve”, but the player may only deploy the amount shown on the ship card (i.e. choose when you decide to use them, not lock them in before the game). This allows a budding “Kirk” to choose a surprise manoeuvre from any of those available to the period and when the time comes, rather than having to play to a pre-decided tactic.

This helps “thin” periods like the Kelvin or TOM series have that “surprise” factor, adding real tension and tactics. For bigger games like TNG Battle, just the base upgrade options are used normally, which are plenty in these bigger games. Some later inconsistencies like a choice of two Hydran Hunters or Gorn raiders are also fixed by simply removing the less likely ones.

My game, my way.

My Own RPG Vision, The Journey Continues

Writing your own game can be the work of years.

Mine has been an on and off process for decades and alwaysbstems from the same basic though; “I do not totally agree with the characteristics used by most games”.

My first two RPG ‘awrenesses” were the first editions of that ancient D20 game and Traveller. They had very different takes on characteristics, both with merit, but also both with issues for me.

Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma

vs

Strength, Dexterity, Endurance, Intelligence, Education and Social Standing

Three are agreed upon, one is re-worded, two are very different. The game themes are also very different though and within their own envelopes, pretty much ideal (although I have never settled with Soc). The reality is, you could get away with the Tri-stat like Body-Mind-Spirit/Soul and make these a base for more specific skills and abilities, but that for many is too vague.

My next and most enduring game paradigm came from D100 games who use a slightly different and often flexible set;

Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Size, Power, Charisma, Appearance or Education. The itialicised ones come and go, generally, but not always settling on just Size and Charisma.

Pow is the odd one for me. It is sometimes ideal (supers, fantasy, horror), sometimes just an odd one.

At first I tried to break it down to six defining, core chrs;

Prowess (Strength and Agility), Dexterity (fine motor skills), Reason (left brain), Intuition (right brain), Resilience (physical and mental) and Presence (the force of ones {“self”).

My main issue, that even with these six to me, perfectly balanced representation of a person or other being in a role playing environment*, there is little room to combine them into a 2x chr + skill vs d100 mechanic. They are too comprehensive and inherently over lapping, leaving little room for discreet definition. Goos for a different system, but not my needs.

I decided to go back to a more deterministic set of eight characteristics, allowing for more defined and flexible wording.

These are broken down into four sets of two (a rigid and flexible characteristic to each pair), each directly connected but effectively opposed;

Physicality.

Strength and Dexterity, (the physical realities of your body, that can be honed and even changed, but are generally a part of you from early on).

Physical Condition.

Endurance and Agility. These are more down to your age, activity level and general up keep.

Intellect.

Reason and Intution. The left/right brain, logic vs creativity pairing. Intact from the above six, these two have become entrenched in my thinking.

Personality.

Will and Presence. These two are a measure of inward and outward projection of personal strength or character. Like the others, the player character can excell at one, usually at the expense of the other, with rare individuals solid in both**.

By splitting Resilience and Prowess from above, I can now re-constitute them along with several other primary combinations as the building blocks for my d100 mechanic. The mechanic assumes 2x characteristics as the base with a skill level and experience value applied for a total vs a d100 roll in a roll under is better format.

This is not a one-off, fixed combination, but rather a “by circumstance” design, so gun skill may be applied to a quick draw (Reflexes), autofire (Prowess) steady aim (Balance) or knowledge of a weapon (Perception or Concentration) test. This allows the skill list to be reasonably broad, but realistically and individually applied, in other words, skills and chr tests are intertwined, but not exclusively connected and fully flexible.

From here we can generate combinations that are more or most common, so they will be worked out on the PC’s sheet as a helpful guide and to reduce wording later.

Combining them each with themselves gives us the pure chrs;

Physical Might, fine motor skill Manipulation, physical Stamina, physical Flexibility, intellectual Wisdom, inherent Luck, self Discipline and overall Charisma.

Combining the pairs of matched/opposed chrs defines the parent group;

Physical Focus, Physical Condition or Health, Intelligence or Perception and Character or Spirit.

Combining logical pairings within the same physical and non-physical groups.

Str + End = Consitution, Str + Agl = Prowess, Agl + Dex = Coordination.

Rsn + Wil = Concentration/Retention, Rsn + Pre = Persuasion, Pre + Int = Empathy.

Mixing the physical and non-physical groupings allows us to define another half dozen common pairings;

Str + Wil = Physical Tenacity, Int + Dex = Reflexes, Pre + Dex = Poise, Rsn + End = Determination, Wil + End = Resilience, Int + Agl = Balance.

These can also help define the core principals of the characteristics in players minds.

It is possible from here to define quite detailed character traits;

A charming, even glamourous character, devoid of empathy and clumsy both socially and physiclly could be high in Presence, Agility and Endurance, but lacking Dexterity, Intuition, Reason and Will.

A street wise tough, lacking in social graces from a 30’s Noir novel may display high levels of Will, Endurance, Intuition and Strength, but be low in Presence, Reason and Dexterity.

For NPC’s it may be as simple as generating the secondary stats only (2 graded averages take from a master list), so you know how well they shoot, fight or interact in their chosen forms. Of course the GM may simply assign skill values that make sense.

In theory, any two chrs may be combined, such as Wil + Dex for handling fine tools in a delicate, dangerous operation (a Starfleet doctor disarming a torpedo on the surface of a moon) or Agl + Pre for pulling off an alluring walk (any Bond femme fatale), but for the sake of expediency, the above work just fine as a base for most skill tests. The GM and players may work together to “work” the system, using good story telling to sell any concept within reason.

*

The skill system is a simple 1-4x level*** and +1 per year of experience as a % multiple of the base chr combo, so the skill is expressed as skill level (1-4, but 1 may also be only “aware”) + experience in years.

The “average” for a master of a skill is 84% (4x21), with rare cases of 100% can be reached (maximum), but only in some combinations. This gives a skill several ways of being applied, nuancing the system closer to reality.

Take a character dynamic like “The Good Doctor” as an example. A high level logic and analitical mind with poor to nearly non existant empathy can be effective in a team, even with a relatively low level of experience, but the other doctors, even if less skilled but more experienced or more skilled but less intelligent add the other dimensions needed to balance the team out.

Skill tetsts are applied using a pool of d10 die, assigned by difficulty (we use red and blue die);

Mundane. 3d10 (blue) take the best combination of 2. A test only rally used if failure can lead to consequences or drive the story.

Standard. 2d10 (blue) arranged as wanted. The base test assuming no direct opposition or pressures are applied.

Challenging. 2d10 (red/blue) arranged in pre determined order (red 10’s, blue 1’s). This is the base for most opposed tests without advantage.

Difficult. 2d10 (red) in worst possible order (Crit-any, highest fail, lowest pass). Pushing hard or without advantage.

Daunting. 3d10 (red) using worst two.

Improbable. 4d10 (red) using worst combination of two.

etc.

Familiarity without training usually adds 1 level of difficulty, sometimes more and occassionally no skill check is allowed (a recently discovered New Guinea tribesman trying to land a Jumbo jet).

• Doubles are critical successes or failures,

• an optional table of consequences can be used (low crit succusses and high crit failures are less dynamic than the opposite),

• higher success or lower fail rolls are better if opposed,

• “00” always fails and fumbles if not 100% chance.

*It can cover animals (highly intuitive, lower reasoning), automitons (the reverse), avoids blow-outs, like super strong types, by concentrating more on the coordination of physical characteristics and leaves plenty of room for interpretation (the difference between Darth Vaders and a super models Presence for example can be defined by other chrs).

**Chrs are usually generated by rolling a pool of 6d6 and assigning three to each chr. The player can then aim for a balanced share, or extremes. In some systems, the pool may be increased or decreased, the assigned split changed or limitations loosened.

***Familiar (as a base only with extra difficulty applied), trained, proficient, expert, master.

And The Road Goes Ever On

So, succumbing to the draw of Zweihander, has led me down other paths.

I am not obsessive about d100 RPG’s, I am just limiting myself to them. I really (no really…) do not want to collect them all, to chase up every edition of every game, or even try to find those old favourites that I let go of years ago (TMNT, Hawkmoon, Elf Quest) or even travel down some newly established d100 roads at all (Newest Rune Quest, CoC 7th, D100 Revolution), but I will chase up the best representative(s) I can of the genres I like.

Inevitable probably, because yes, I like.

Zweihander has a couple of spin-offs that really appeal and neither have direct equivalents in the d100 landscape. To be clear, it has not even arrived yet, but I have re-read a lot of older reviews and found many new ones and I am excited. This is not just a good remake of WHFRP 1-2e, but possibly a superior d100 core mechanic. If it is a good enough fit, I will run the Enemy Within campaign (1e or 4e) with it rather than the less cohesive WHFRPG 4e.

Flames of Freedom is a reimagining of the older “Colonial Gothic” line of games in a 600+ page tome, complete with rules. I have been tempted by this system before, so a Zweihander version in all its weighty glory is really calling. It also borrows heavily from the feel of that parent game. It is as grim and perilous, just in a different place and time, but still has the same vibe. I have always been drawn to the early American colonial “Sleepy Hollow” period or earlier. This is set around the AWI (another favourite).

Dark Astral is another game that fits well and has been ordered. Gene Wolfe’s “Book of the New Sun” far future dark sci-fantasy series was a favourite growing up. I loved it’s timeless feel. Dark Astral uses a similar theme. Zweihander again adds a darkness and peril that this needs. I do have a far future BRP expansion directly linked to Wolfe’s work “Chronices of Future Earth”, but DA adds the grit, the dread.

13Th Age, The Great Exception

When I did my recent post about converting games to d100 format, I had some real difficulty with 13th Age.

The question I kept asking myself was why?

Every other system could be and in some cases should be conerted for the reasons ststed (consistency, familiarity, simplicity, more fun), but converting 13A seemed like a retrograde move,like sewing legs back onto summer cut-offs for winter

The fact is 13th Age exists in my collection of systems as the ultimate “anti d100” game, the release valve or mindset change. 13A is d20 on steroids, a paragon of abstractness, even in comarison with other d20 games, so if the intent is to convert it back to a more “realistic” d100 base system, then its existence in my collection has to be questioned.

If anything, it plays dual roles, reminding me why I like d100 games and provides a real play style switch. Savage Worlds was meant to be that game, but failed to excite. 13A on the otherhand did it with bells on.

This was highlighted by two things.

The first is how pointless d100-ing 13A would be. Nothing fits in that dynamic. Plenty of games are like that, SW included, but with 13A, even the more rigid dynamics of 5e are stream-lined. The whole point of 13A is to translate years of d20 house rules into something usable by others. It is even a d20 alternative and exemplar in many ways of alternate play styles.

I know that the point of my conversion article was more about re-purposing a systems adventures etc, but even that seems to be at odds with the mindset I adopt when playing 13A.

The reality is any games, d100 or not, can liberally borrow concepts from 13A, but shoe-horning d100 mechanics into 13A does little but break it at it’s core.

The second point was highlighted by a 13A supplement, 13th Age Glorantha and the irony is not lost on me. I have never been overly interested in Glorantha as a d100 setting, which is heresy I guess as Rune Quest, the original Glorantha setting core game is the d100 elder, the progenitor of the whole family, but a version of the game I have never been interested in. Call of Cthulhu was my and many others first d100 contact and will always have a place. RQ was more of a DnD 1e competitor, which I did not play anyway, so it slipped past me. I have adopted Glorantha-free versions of the same evolved system (Legend, Mythras, RQ6 Essential), but never paid into the full thing.

In 13A I like it and feel it really fits like a glove. Again heresy I suppose, but with fresh eyes, the system fits the feel, screw the history. I bought 13AG simply to get more 13A, but fell into the world on offered seemlessly. Plenty of Glorantha fans, with deep roots in RQ can find 13AG interesting, maybe even flattering, but coming from the opposite perspective, I find it the only tolerable form of Glorantha for me.

This is heroic high fantasy, which I feel is much better served by this form of over the top d20 handling. Happy if you don’t, but for me Glorantha with 13A is fine, without it is just another form of d100 fantasy and I have tons I prefer.

Mouse Guard, AIME/TOR, Monsters and Other Childish Things, Traveller etc are all in the d100 parameters for easy conversion. 13A should not be.

The Beautiful Thing That Is "Blind" AIME

“Blind” play role-playing is a form of the game that I feel has genuine potential.

Blind play is a different take on role playing, one closer to original role playing, with its roots in free-form make believe, or original story telling. It just uses a strong frame work of RPG rules to make it work from a gaming perspective.

I am not a control freak, well I am a little, but in this particular case it is not about control. It is about players immersing themselves in their character rather than the governing system.

My earlier article on Blind role playing was a while ago so let’s look at the benefits.

The “other” version is also ok for this form of play, but the 5e compatible option is less rigid and better tiered for GM control and d20 also a cleaner fit for blind play.

For the player, they have a character description, not a character stat sheet. This sheet will have all of the stated skills and abilities noted and a deep, but number devoid decription of the character relative to their environment (there is room here for the GM to mislead the player, bth for character portrayal and story needs). They will know (roughly) how they rate physically, mentally and personally, what skill sets they can call on and their special abilities, but no set measures.

There will be no numerical values assigned to these on this sheet.

Players will roll their own dice, but only know if they have succeeded or failed, not specifically by how much. This removes gamesmanship and number crunching, allowing the player to (only) view their character as an alternative persona to themselves, with the same level of self perception we all share (relative, using educated guess work).

The GM holds the mechanical information at hand on their own work sheet.

This gives the GM several responsibilites, but less systemic transparency and some benefits.

Play is 100% story telling, no number crunching. There can be no min-maxing, no rules lawyering, no player manipulation of the math.

Rolls are used for tests, but the characters ability to know the odds is gone, so fudging, deliberately miss-leading and gently nudging are all invisible mechanics to the player.

Two massive campaigns just waiting to be completed.

The GM cannnot abuse this or the whole thing becomes an “us against the cruel world” thing, but if all are on board, play becomes effectively system agnostic from a players perspective. It could even be theoretically possible for a GM to switch systems mid campaign with little player awareness beyond new dice mechanics being employed. Even experienced players quickly divorce their need to control elements of the game from the role they are playing. The dynamic is the same, guestimation and trial and error, just coming from a less knowledgable base.

The first step as always, is character generation.

From the players end this is simple and as involving;

• Think up a character concept.

• Interact with the GM to cement these ideas in place (the GM makes the mechanical calculations).

• Characteristics are rolled in secret or a fixed set used, but assigned in the players pre-stated order

• Class/careers and a suite of extra abilities are offerred by name and description.

• Plan an ongoing development path so that the GM and player can work logically towards improvement within story context.

Interaction is key. The GM has to share options in terms of life skills, natural abilites and class/career proficiencies, using real, not game terminology and the player for their part has to be clear about their ideas.

Some systems lend themselves to this style of play, others not so much.

One of the best systems I have at hand is Adventure In Middle Earth, or Tolkein’s world for D&D 5e. I am on record as saying I do not love D&D in any edition, which must seem from someone who has over 40 years of role-playing under their belt, to be a bit of a contradiction, but to be clear, D&D is not the be all and end all of RPG’s, just one of the the biggest/oldest kids on the block, well tested and enjoying a revival. People say D&D like they used to say “Hoover” meaning all vaccuum cleaners.

Why AIME?

AIME has several elements that lend themselves to Blind play.

Character generation is simple and well directed.

• Roll characteristics based on a priority list from the player of Strong, Fast, Tough, Smart, Wise or Charismatic.

• Choose a culture (race and sub race) and a cultural virtue and you are half way there.

• Then a class is selected. The player must be offerred a list of proficiencies either overtly or as devined by the GM from the characters wishes as well as a choice of class abilities, but on the whole, choices are logical and tests are based on characteristic values.

At this point, the characters player sheet may look like a cross between a resume and diary. The first pages of a legendary story unfolding.

The GM’s sheets on the other hand are all math and stat values, unclutterred by niceties or fluff. Such is the lot of the mediator. The full group can be amalgamated into combat, travel and other interaction sheets.

*

Life is not a set of chance based values spelled out in front of us. We all have our own perceptions of our selves and our relative place in the world, but nothing is set in hard values. As we attempt different tasks success or failure may come, but when do we get any mathematical feedback of how much we missed by? Repeated poor showing in combat may be down to relatively poor kills (which may be inflated in the player characters view), or a run of bad luck, just like in life.

It comes down to this.

Would you rather this interaction;

“The beast turns to you and charges. You need a 17 to hit.” “Ok I got a 12 +3 for Strength so 15. I swung and missed, but was close. Can I add something to the roll to get me over the line?”. If you want to spend a Hope point we can make it work, but if you had rolled lower it would be a stretch”. “Cool, I will do that then”.

or

“The beast is huge and comes at you”. “I swing with all my might, which is great as I am usually the strongest person in the room” (player rolls medium-high, which has in previous fights been enough). “The blade slides off its hide, taking chips off as it runs down its side, but not embedding”. “We need this thing to go down or the party is in real danger and I am all that is standing in the way”. “Desperate times call for desperate measures”. “I dig deep and thrust back up in a loop from the missed blow, does it work?”. Yes, you find something more and change the miss into an upper cut and catch it from below” (the GM marks off a Hope point).

If you answered “B”, then Blind play may be worth your trying.

Other e lements of AIME that work are Virtues, Hope and Shadow points.

Virtues are almost automatic abilities, that are inherent to the character. Mechanically they are nearly irrelevant, so they play perfectly in this space. The GM may insist on a roll, then decide, based on that or not, to change the outcome. This is a good example where added fog of war can help the GM control story outcome.

Hope points allow the character to dig deep if the GM leaves the door open.

Shadow will allow the GM to force actions on the player that they may not naturally be going to role-play. Boromir loosing control, Frodo fighting the Ring etc. can become a tug of war between character and GM, one that both have mechanical in-put into, even if the player may feel frustrated.

Why not The One Ring?

The main reason for using AIME and not TOR is system cosistency.

Apart from the easier and more familiar system, AIME is a lot more consistent at this point in system and information roll-out.

TOR is also a little difficult to get a handle on, with mixed releases and sub-editions coming in a bit of a flurry, some replacing parts or all of others. Throw in the new second edition and a slight shift in time line and it all gets a little squiffy. This is less of an issue with blind play, but still less clean than AIME.

AIME on the other hand, coming in mid-stream, is a tight set of books, coherent and clean. It is also a conversion to an extensively tested existing set, not a newly developed set of rules, built from the ground up.

You get the Players Guide, which, in patnership with the free 5e basic rules, is all a player needs to create a character and play.

The GM’s Guide in turn give a GM all they need to start things up, again with the “how to play” section of the Basic rules.

Wilderland Adventures takes the players from levels 1-6 and links in well with the Mirkwood Campaign.

The Mirkwood Campaign is a full ride from around level 5 to as high as you want, in yearly doses with Eriador Adventures filling in the middle levels with a set of adventures on the “other side” of the mountains.

My intention is to start with Wilderland, blend it with low end Mirkwood, then do a cross-over set of lower level adventures in Eriadore, return to Mirkwood (getting the feel for the coming changes), back to Eriadore for the Gibbet King linked adventures and back to Mirkwood for the end game.

Each side of the mountain also gets a guide book that allows a GM to fill in and populate these adventures books with a “sandbox” tool kit. The full adversary and ally list with these two, the adventures and the GM guide are plenty.

Could not be clearer.

There are a couple of books I missed, choosing not to bother with them (for TOR or AIME) and a map set, that I already had for TOR. Apart from a re-purposed 5e GM screen, that is all she wrote.

D100 RPG Compatability And Conversions

I am literally sitting in front of my embarassingly big collection of RPG books. Embarassing because it is three 180cm long shelves left after another big clear out!

The good news for me though, is the content is much more streamlined and therefore more likely to be used. If a friend asked to play a game in a period, theme or even specific sub-genre, I am probably able to handle it without resorting to a non d100 system. Anthopomorphic animal characters? Pirates with supernatural themes? Zombie Apocolypse or Vampire plagues? Giant mechs? Maybe just some simple historical hack and slash? All good, all at hand.

But what if one of my rare survivors from the greater collection appeals and I want to run it as a d100 game because it is (a) more familiar to me and likely my players or (b) it is just better/easier/more coherent and flexible?

Lets look at what is on the shelf.

The Mouse Guard

One of the primary draws are hit locations, which makes big vs small creature fights possible.

Yes I can do anthropomorphic animals (Historia Rodentia, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or generic), but the charm of The Mouse Guard is a strong draw. The support materiel, which is the bulk of my complete collection is a fine place to start. Stories are stories and the power level and theming are perfect for a d100 style game (no-magic, low power, classic medieval, just mice).

Mythras Imperative fits, as does Legend or the BGB. Systemically, you are replacing “Wises” with skills and mentors with, well mentors and family background and The Guard with an organisation. These things can act as a guide, as they would in any game. I feel that even without the RPG’s (1 & 2e), just the comics would suffice for background.

Hit location based combat systems fill in the missing link, that is, how does a little mouse kill a giant beast without getting squashed? There are rules at hand for size differences, but something as simple as tiny creatures attack the location they are near means the little mice only have to maneoeuvre to the right place to hit where they need. Big creatures in turn, have a penaty to hit little targets (or little creatures can Dodge, big ones cannot), again already an option in some systems.

The One Ring

TOR is another system primed for conversion. The power level is again low and realistic and magic is in the world but no more prevalent for most than Mouse Guard. Characters are simply a matter of creating skill lists for each culture and handling “madness” or taint is right in the wheel house of CoC’s sanity rules (but the ones in TOR can basically work also). The dice mechanic is unique, but lines up quite well with a d100 game, even the fatigued rule can simply be an added level of difficulty (or reversing the dice?).

Monsters in TOR cannot be taken lightly, which is the same as any d100 game, but proabably a non-hit location combat style would be fine, like maybe Openquest or Magic World?

Both LOTR games offer the same background and attempt to align themselves to each other, so get one right and you have both covered

Adventures In Middle Earth (5e)

AIME is the 5e conversion of above, so the same applies, mostly. This is TWORPG* heavily restrained, so no real issues. The “softness” of a hit point pool and levels based game is replaced by the more realistic paradigm of a d100 system which can really only be good. The release from levels and classes gives a freedom that I always prefer and the source material is roughly identical to TOR, so either-or. Balancing encounters and rewards is actually not that hard, because in d100 games, everything is potentially a tough hurdle.

Of course, there is the now long defunct MERP/Rolemaster d100 system, still available in PDF.

Iron Heroes (3e)

This is a TWOPRG heart breaker, pushing things into the more heroic end of the hobby, so it is a tougher fit. Or is it? The gritty feel of Iron Heroes has always felt like a d100 game near miss. The inflated hit point totals can be mimicked by a base line of more hits and higher skills (Astounding Adventures has some good pulp ideas). The Heroes could have Siz+Con for hits (supporting cast x1/2) and with skills in the 70%+ range, they will be hard to best, but never impossible.

These two have much in common. Classic Fantasy is designed to simulate OST levels based games, so drop the magic and it can be very close. The basic flexibility of Mythras, Legend, Magic World or Openquest though fit even better. I would even say much better as the core of Iron Heroes is limited to re-imagining the Fighter and Rogue classes, something d100 skills based games do so very well without limits.

DC Adventures, Marvel Heroes, Champions etc.

A supers game about the DC universe using a d20 system or Marvel with a dice pool system. These are generally right in the Destined or Superworld wheel house, especially the Batman or Spiderman level. Using these as a guide (the reason I held onto them), it is a hobby in itself to regenerate these whole universes in Destined (for personal use only of course). Super World is an option, but Destined is the “new shiny”.

Most Supers games end up at the same place after travelling different roads. I have only skimmed Destined, but between it and Superworld, I have a few ways of travelling that road.

The Witcher

Very few game systems could do The Witcher justice as well as the origional game has. The lethality, depth of detail and gritty realism is very similar to Deus Vult, but any d100 game could handle it. Mythras/Legend in particular are good examples of strong and detailed one-on-one combat systems with enough crunch to feel right. The Witcher series or the RPG can provide all the necessary monster weaknesses and tricks, so converting is pretty straight forward. I feel there is even more room for creativity within the world provided using a d100 base using all the resources available, because most Witcher creatures are based on fairytale precedents.

Using a d100 game would allow the GM and players to replace some of the detail TWRPG is known for, with more open role playing. Many of the things the game forces on players are base requirements, just called out specifically, so it is really just up to the GM to set the level of detail and tone, such as equipment maintenance, daily expenses. All RPG’s go at a pace and with details set by the GM and to a lesser extent the players. Race into fights with superior enemies, worn or untried equipment, fail to learn lessons or do your home work and reap what you sew.

Games that feel the need to force extra processes and details on their players are fine if they hit the right chord, especially if they are simulating a specific flavour, but they can feel rail-roady if not. TOR, Mouse Guard and TWRPG can all feel a little “mechanically inflexible” , but the background and feel they provide are excellent to mine for information. One of the reasons I prefer AIME to TOR for example, is the slightly less controlling nature of the 5e converted game.

Zweihander, a new game, still on its way here, but a known commodity, would make a great Witcher adjacent game. If anything it is even darker and more violent.

Immersive, crunchy and lethal monster hunting with everything at stake.

Savage Worlds

For a long time, I wanted to use SW as my lite “pulpy” system, and d100’s for more realistic stories, to the extent that I was “mirroring” genres between them, an idea that does not seem to be just mine. Some games like Modiphius’s Achtung Cthulhu, even come as a CoC/SW cross-over system.

SW really fell out of favour with me during it’s latest edition update. I do still have the SWADE book, but probably not for long. If the SW Supers and Sci-fi expansions come out soon, there is a slim chance i will go back down this road, but probably not, considering my current direction. To be honest I never felt totally comfortable with the game, but grew it sometimes reluctanlty as my counter point to others. I even tried to slot it into my Malifaux rework, but again it just defied me.

Savage Worlds sells itself as the ultimate on-the-go RPG, but to be honest, I find d100 games even quicker. Explaining % mechanics comes pretty much immediately. Explaining “raises”, multiple die types, “wild” dice, card driven initiative and “Bennies” and when to use them can be less straight forward. The whole system is actually a collection of sub-systems.

Generally the only complaint d100 games generate are its relatively lethal (i.e. realistic) combat, which siimply makes players adapt their expectations and live a little in fear (all good), and a reputation amongst experienced gamers of being “swingy”, which is partly shared illusion and easily enough mitigated. It is not as swingy as SW though.

Tellingly, new RPG players rarely find either of these two things odd or hard to digest. Only players coming from other games get caught out.

13th Age

This one is tricky. I have 13A as basically my anti-d100 release valve. Converting it seems odd and ironic, as one of the few d100 games I have chosen not to explore is the new Runequest, the original d100 game. I feel the 13A version fits better for me! If I had to do the 13A world, it would use a simple system, probably Openquest with many of the same concepts used. I would expect to go through more characters though. The “One Unique Thing” and Icon relationship rules can be ported over wihout issue.

Again Classic gets another image share, because of levels etc, but Openquest would be cleaner and more “magical” and it has Ducks (for Runequest).

Warhammer 4e

Why swap out one d100 system for another d100 system? The source materiel is massive and engrossing and the feel second to none. The system however is dense and inconsistent. It often occurs to me, that all that stuff could be so easily handled by a more flexible and fluid d100 system, especially the convoluted dice mechanics. Re-making all the careers in d100 terms would be easy and fun and the power levels are similar. The reality is, games like WHFRP use constraints to focus character development and creation, that good old fashioned role playing can fill.

There is also Zweihander of course, which is an actual WHFRG replacement game.

I just ordered Zweihander, so this is probably a rendundant conversion, but easy enough done. Magic World does have Beastmen as does Openquest.

Monsters and Other Childish Things

An odd but cool little game that escaped the recent cull thanks to it’s theme and cool art. There are several d100 systems that could handle something like this. It could simply be the story of the early days of a super hero, as could have a conversion of Better Angels (a game where the player next to you plays your possessing demon and on around the table), a game from the same series I gifted recently.

The monster as alter-ego/companion/possessor/frenemy is a common theme in pop culture (ET, Will Robinson from Lost In Space to Venom as examples), so most supers or super natural systems can fit this in seemlessly. The games extra books add the inspiration, but systemically, nothing is hard to re-hash. MAOCT actally uses a pool of D10’s system. The red and blue dice I bought for it have been pressed into service for my d100 games, so conversion seems natural.

After The Vampire Wars, Destined, the BGB, Mythras Imperative, Bare Bones (any). So many options.

Mongoose Traveller 1 & 2e

This is too easy. M-Space is a clone of the original Traveller, which is exactly what the two Mongoose Traveller editions are. M-Space is less tied to a back story, is cleaner and more versatile and can be crossed over with any other Mythras style game or mechanic. I feel it is a better option all up. I also like the moody and minimalist art more (Trav 2e art leaves me cold). If I want a more pulpy game, Frontier Space is at hand as is the BGB.

There is even a “Pirates of Drinax” Traveller to M-Space conversion document available.

Percentage systems can feel a little mathematically heartless some times, something like the hand of the “cold hard universe” feel in hard sci-fi.

Hero System

One of the great RPG rivalries of the 80’s through to the early 2000’s was the one between the generic Hero/Champions system and BRP. Both are able to incorporate most concepts and styles and both are stable. It is interesting to note, they are both also roll under systems, one using d100, one d6’s.

My preference is for BRP for most “grounded”, fantasy or historical games, Hero for more contemporary and supers styles, but I do find hero a bit dry and mathy and even though it plays easily, character development is usually a full evening on its own and big fights can also hog a full session. With a BRP game, you can pretty much design a character, explain the basic processes (% roll under), whip up a scenario and play it with new players in the same evening. Many of my early CoC games had debutant players who generally slotted in seamlessly. Even early casualties could be replaced quickly enough.

Hero provides mathematical balance in the extreme, BRP supplies more character, with simplicity. This is less of a conversion than a choice, but even a Hero specific story can usually be converted in concept. Something that helps me pick d100 is the collection of games I own now. The latest Mythras and earlier BRP genre books cover so many bespoke story themes, I often have enough to work without going fully generic, which is always easier.

Over six editions, Hero has managed to leave huge back catalogues of resources out in the cold (4e in particular). D100 systems never seem to abandon older product entirely.

*The Worlds Oldest Role Playing Game (just).

All For One and One For All!

More d100 madness. I have decided to pull the trigger on Zweihander and it’s companion Main Gauche, which are super cheap on big bad Amazon at the moment. That’s 1000 pages of retro goodness for about $100au.

Zweihander is a slightly contraversial re-hash of Warhammer 1e, or to be kinder, it is a fan driven generic re-imagining and clean up of the 80’s system, made well after it was dropped by the makers. I am ok with that.

I also stumbled across a game that had blipped my radar a while ago, but dropped away soon after. Osprey’s Jackals is a fantasy take on ancient Greek/Egyptian/Persian mythology, using Open Quest as it’s base.

OG3 in turn, is my favourite implementation of all d100 systems. It uses the “doubles as criticals” option, caps skills at 100% and has generally a common sense approach to most things d100. If I were to make a d100 game, these would be the framework I would start with and with it’s open license, I actually can.

Mythras owes us a system defining Mythic Greece book, but until then, you have base Mythras, Runequest 6 Essentials and other bits to get by with. What took me about Jackals though, and I will accept the tag of hypocrite here after my last post, is the glossy art and world creation. It is gorgeous and close to its historical ties, but free of historical clutter. The great thing about any d100 game is of course, I can press any other d100 mechanic into service with little fuss. There is nothing to say the setting could not be used with full Mythras or other Open Quest elements added. ed. since cancelled because I do not need a glossy take on the same basic stock RQ6 already covers.

So, just how compatible are the d100 games?

Most, if you call “most” the main two groups of Runequest and Basic Role Playing games, use the same 6 core and a few flexible characteristics. Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Power, Size and any of Education, Appearance and/or Charisma, depending on the system. These are very similar to the original TWORPG’s 6.

Power is the only odd one, calling out a difference between a true supernatural/spiritual characteristic and a mental/personal one like Charisma or Wisdom. Sometimes Power is a perfect fit, sometimes an odd one, but it can be dropped or renamed if it wrankles.

The benefit though is a more flexible range of choices than the fixed six.

The mine of information and system options is deep and mature.

Almost all are skill based systems that eliminate two of my bugbears, classes and levels. This is the biggest selling point to me. I dislike the abstractness of levels and classes. They are game system controls, not reflections of reality. Ironically, TWORPG has always struggled with skills or proficiencies, d100 games thrive on them. Why can’t a thief sing, a fighter perform acrobatics or a magic user swing a sword? The reality is you cannot do eveything, but the reality is also, you cannot artificially restrict a characters path without a break in that same reality.

The basic roll-under system is also consistent, although how that is implemented varies. The cool thing is though, as long as you are consistent, you can always change it to a version of the system you prefer. I feel that the basic principals are continually evolving, always with forward pointing growth, but nothing is left behind. No edition wars here, just a constantly improving landscape.

Combat varies a little in two main areas. The first is the choice whether to use hit locations or not? Even if no hit locations are used, reverting to a more abstract style hit point pool, combat in d100 games is universally realistic, brutal and final. Massive hit point reserves are rarely used as a buffer against imminent doom. This does not have to be a d100 only paradigm, it just generally is. Possibly the desire to simulate reality as closely as possible and avoid abstractness generally, leads down this pathway, but what ever the reason, very few d100 systems are “soft”. I like this also.

It makes every interaction tense and dangerous or, more accurately, hyper realistic. TWORPG in particular can be simplistic and dull in combat, a mathematical exercise, sometimes barely worth slogging through. In most d100 games, a single lucky hit can be game changing, so no enemy can be brushed off as toothless.

The second element is less specific system “crunch”. For example the Mythras family has post-roll critical success choices, allowing the player to decide what it is they have done over and above just hitting. This opens the door for all sorts of special effects.

Magic on the other hand varies enormously. The beauty of the similar systems though is, you can mix and match to a certain extent. At last count, I have probably 15 bespoke magic systems at hand and that is not at all comprehensive. What I like is the variety both mechanically and thematically, which is often enough to define the feel of a game. Caution needs to be exercised with some combinations, but after a while you get a feel for what will work and what needs revising.

After this, there is always a ton of game behind each title no matter how small, but the core things that drive them are quite similar.

Basically, each addition to my d100 collection adds to all my d100 collection.

Handy.