Chris Peers Plains Wars rules

[Harry von Fleischmann]

I think Chris Peers wrote a set of skirmish rules (“a good day to die”) but also a larger scale set (“too many to fight, too few to die”) which is apparently similar to Death in the Dark Continent”.

How did Chris handle the Plains Indian approach to morale and command and just as importantly, are the rules available anywhere?

[Hu Rhu]

I don't know about the Chris Peers ruleset but I have just written a non-commercial set which includes specific sections on command and morale.  I could let you have a copy if you are interested.

[Harry von Fleischmann]

Hi Hu,
Thank you- that would be very kind of you - I’ll get in touch by pm. The morale  and c&c for the Plains Indians is needs special rules I think
Cheers
harry Von f

[Harry von Fleischmann]

Hi Hu,

Thank you - I like what I’ve read.

I was thinking that there could be an escalation in the Indian actions from
- gestures, insults and just sitting on a ridge to
- cutting out a pony, maybe a coup and general nuisance value
- skirmishing (quite serious)
- full on attacks (very serious)

How much it was pressed home might depend on relative “ medicine” as a powerful brave might think he’d won if he challenged and no white replies- equally he might feel obliged to have a go so as to prove he still had it.

This gets a bit role play but does give a sense of uncertainty- you have some taunting braves on a ridge. What’s beyond in the draw? Nothing or the entire Cheyenne Nation?

[Hu Rhu]

I think it all depends on how you want the game to play out.  If you are looking for a more role playing game then the things you highlight make sensible suggestions.  You could balance this against the white eyes having an initial non-confrontational stance such as escorting a wagon train, cutting wood, herding cattle etc.

The Indian player could then escalate his actions in line with your suggestions until the white eye is provoked into retaliation. A simple chart might compare the indian actions against white eye retaliation, adjusted by a dice roll to allow miscalculation on both sides.

The problem with this is that the game there is little direct competition between players, at least at the beginning and might not be to everyone's taste.

My thoughts were to run the game more as a Western movie where the Redskins have already decided to attack (or are forced to defend) and thus combat is an intrinsic part of the game.  What I was trying to construct in the controlled/uncontrolled activation rule, was the Indians fickle nature to unhinge their plan and also to add a little western flavour such as riding round the wagon leaguer or charging in when success was unlikely. Once uncontrolled no one knew exactly what each band would do.  This is balanced by the Indians having more bands that the white eyes.

The indians method of counting coup (i.e. giving up attacks to score tokens)gives them benefits in combat similar to individuals showing off to their fellow braves, which in turn encourages the band to emulate them.

Finally I wanted the war chiefs and medicine men to have some individual traits that could influence their fellow braves but not to treat them as simply officers (which they certainly were not).

[Hu Rhu]

I think it all depends on how you want the game to play out.  If you are looking for a more role playing game then the things you highlight make sensible suggestions.  You could balance this against the white eyes having an initial non-confrontational stance such as escorting a wagon train, cutting wood, herding cattle etc.

The Indian player could then escalate his actions in line with your suggestions until the white eye is provoked into retaliation. A simple chart might compare the indian actions against white eye retaliation, adjusted by a dice roll to allow miscalculation on both sides.

The problem with this is that the game there is little direct competition between players, at least at the beginning and might not be to everyone's taste.

My thoughts were to run the game more as a Western movie where the Redskins have already decided to attack (or are forced to defend) and thus combat is an intrinsic part of the game.  What I was trying to construct in the controlled/uncontrolled activation rule, was the Indians fickle nature to unhinge their plan and also to add a little western flavour such as riding round the wagon leaguer or charging in when success was unlikely. Once uncontrolled no one knew exactly what each band would do.  This is balanced by the Indians having more bands that the white eyes.

The indians method of counting coup (i.e. giving up attacks to score tokens)gives them benefits in combat similar to individuals showing off to their fellow braves, which in turn encourages the band to emulate them.

[Harry von Fleischmann]

I think, Hu, you are right - a Hollywood style or influenced game gives you the look, vibe and importantly - a game both players can get their teeth into.

I’d say that there may be a limited appetite for a game in which the Wasichu are looking to bring in timber while the Dog Soldiers are out to gain a bit of reputation. Nothing might happen but if the loggers panic or a brave gets enthusiastic, the situation could escalate. That lends itself to a series of possibly quite short games in which nothing much happens and then one in which it all goes a bit Fetterman....”Bob’s Cheyenne only ever gesture and sit on the ridge......”