Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Pulp => Topic started by: P_Clapham on October 05, 2010, 04:22:47 AM
-
This isn't a battle report really, partly because I didn't bring a camera and my photography skills are rubbish. It's more my impressions on the game and system. I've played Goalsystem games before, The Supersystem and Goalsystem Fantasy. However I wasn't able to rope anyone into Chaos in Cairo until last Monday.
It was a three man free for all. My friend Josh running Heroic Archeologists, Sam playing the Mummies, and myself Nazi Treasure hunters. My warband being a Hybrid of the Treasure Hunters and Monster Hunters Carpathia warband. The Archeologists group was made entirely of characters, the Mummies with two groups of eternal slaves, and myself with one group of Brownshirts (The Authorities). At the last moment I spotted the extra fate rule when facing mummies and Josh got a big boost. Given that I was playing a equally monstrous side, I opted to go without the extra fate. That and the rules do not mention treasure hunters.
The game was very fun, and would have been a bit faster if we knew the rules a bit better, and used a smaller board. The Mummies started in the center at a crumbling pyramid, with the two human warbands on either side. Same split his forces down the middle, sending the two groups at each of us. It ended as a two vs one game, as myself and Josh never came to blows or shots against each other. Two Sam's credit he nearly wiped both of us out, but some bad rolls near the end finished off some of his big hitters.
Several things occurred to me in the game's aftermath.
First that Mummies are a scary #$%& warband. Their resistance to damage is obscene. The two re-rolls in ranged and close combat combined with a high DV made them almost impossible to kill. Neither of us had taken Holy Water or Canoptic Jars. The Archeologists did have torches, which were semi effective. Unless we were reading the rules incorrectly the only advantage to using a torch vs mummies is a +1D to hit, and they cannot use their DR re-rolls. I think a +1D damage bringing it to a 3D melee weapon would have been more useful and in character.
Given the amount of time spent looking up rules, weapons and special abilities I decided to put together some equipment and ability cards for faster play. I'm pretty sure there is a fast play sheet out there, if that isn't the case I'll put one of those together as well. We are also strongly considering changing the torch rule to giving the +1D damage vs mummies as well.
Overall we enjoyed the game thoroughly. I began to put together some additional warbands and re-tool the ones used. A gun happy Brotherhood of Ra gang and French Legionaries are my next two projects.
-
Sounds good. Have the 1st Ed. of the rules, and always wanted more freedom in chosing the antagonists.
-
I really want a copy of the 1st edition rules. :)
Sounds good. Have the 1st Ed. of the rules, and always wanted more freedom in chosing the antagonists.
-
really interesting, thanks for sharing.
I'm working on my scenery and as soon I have it finished we will start playing some games, and if works fine, probably a campaing.
-
If I didn't have all of this schoolwork to do, that's what I'd be doing. Josh and Sam keep bugging me about another game. ;)
really interesting, thanks for sharing.
I'm working on my scenery and as soon I have it finished we will start playing some games, and if works fine, probably a campaing.
-
what i really wonder about the game it's the funniest way to plan a campaing.
option A. each player has his own warband to develope playing random scenarios against others
option B. a story plot of linked scenarios GMastered, with some players managing the main warband (nice for players enjoying to see the rooster evolve) and other players playing the bad guys (nice for people always looking for new things) for instance:
round 1 archaeologist vs cultist
round 2 archaeologist vs tuaregs
round 3 archaeologist vs mummy
From your monday experience, when playing more than two people whats better? to split a one warband for two players? or try to play a game with 3 warbands?
-
I love me some Chaos in Cairo
Great game, great genre, and with Blue Moon, RAFM, West Wind and others, great figures
-
I love me some Chaos in Cairo
Great game, great genre, and with Blue Moon, RAFM, West Wind and others, great figures
Don't forget Pulp Figures, and Copplestone Castings!! :D
-
Mr Clapham
I am sure I have the original rules pamphlet somewhere - are you interested?
-
A hard copy? Absolutely. :)
Mr Clapham
I am sure I have the original rules pamphlet somewhere - are you interested?
-
A hard copy? Absolutely. :)
Should I stop what I'm doing, then?
-
A friend and myself have also picked up a copy of Chaos in Cairo and will played story based linked campaign.The real challange I see in playing is Terrain/scenario building as the miniature requirement is quite low.I figure we will get started sometime next year.
Christopher
-
The real challange I see in playing is Terrain/scenario building as the miniature requirement is quite low.
That's what small-scale skirmish gaming is all about: You can focus on the visual impact of each game/scenario making the experience even better for all involved, on top of having fun from the gaming itself. And, of course, the RPG-ish feel to gaming with a single or a small group of characters and her/their sidekicks - SO much different from the more alienated feeling of larger fights with focus on units/groups.
-
Mr Clapham,
Thank you for posting your recent encounters; I have the CIC rules and I am looking forward to playing them. I'm following your postings about CoC crossover and looking forward to reading your results in due course, but I know your busy ATM.
I didn't want to "hijack" the thread but in response to Axebreaker's comment about terrain, I have posted some pics of my main terrain piece here http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=22967.0 (http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=22967.0)
... and I agree with Argonor's comments about small-scale skirmishing - very different to "mass battles".
RMZ
-
That's what small-scale skirmish gaming is all about: You can focus on the visual impact of each game/scenario making the experience even better for all involved, on top of having fun from the gaming itself. And, of course, the RPG-ish feel to gaming with a single or a small group of characters and her/their sidekicks - SO much different from the more alienated feeling of larger fights with focus on units/groups.
Oh this I get very well and was just making an observation(obvious one it appears)and already started listing the scenes in my notes that I've conjured up.I've done some small scale skirmishing with LOTOW which you can view on my blog if your interested.This system appears to be even slightly smaller with a storyline being even more important for a successful run at the rules.I'm curious how it plays out. :)
Christopher
-
Oh this I get very well and was just making an observation(obvious one it appears)and already started listing the scenes in my notes that I've conjured up.I've done some small scale skirmishing with LOTOW which you can view on my blog if your interested.This system appears to be even slightly smaller with a storyline being even more important for a successful run at the rules.I'm curious how it plays out. :)
Christopher
I wasn't having a go at you :) just stating what we all discover, when we delve into this kind of gaming. Try having a look at jet's CiCar* games, for instance here (if you haven't already), and you'll see what I mean: http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=22499.0
Actually, I find that it to be able to use the same few minis for a series of encounters/adventures set in all kinds of settings motivates me to expand heavily on my terrain collection, and not just be content with a couple of hills and a few trees. Which in turn is a benefit for all the games I play :)
If I could only make my brain appreciate the fact, that I do not need to buy as many minis for this kind of game as for more conventional wargames, my wallet would be happy.... ::)
*) I suggest we stop writing CiC, and instead use CiCai for Chaos in Cairo, CiCar for Chaos in Carpathia, CiChr for Chaos in Chronos, and CiChi for Chaos in Chicago (if that title is ever hitting the webstores - it WAS announced som years ago...). CiC is a bit ambiguous with more titles being abbreviated that way...
-
*) I suggest we stop writing CiC, and instead use CiCai for Chaos in Cairo, CiCar for Chaos in Carpathia, CiChr for Chaos in Chronos, and CiChi for Chaos in Chicago (if that title is ever hitting the webstores - it WAS announced som years ago...). CiC is a bit ambiguous with more titles being abbreviated that way...
Good idea. Now tell me more about CiChi. Gangster warbands, etc?
-
For me CiCar stands for Chaos in Cardiff: The day I got arrested at Ninian Park. Could also apply to a Torchwood supplement. lol
-
Good idea. Now tell me more about CiChi. Gangster warbands, etc?
Yes, it was meant to be about gangsters / police / booze runners, etc., probably also with the supernatural/chulhoid twist seen in the other sets. I don't know what happened to the plans, though... Would have LOVED it... well, .45A, Pulp Alley, Astounding Tales - all can be used to recreate some prohibition gangland action (and wasn't there a set called 'Prohibition Wars'?).
-
For me CiCar stands for Chaos in Cardiff: The day I got arrested at Ninian Park. Could also apply to a Torchwood supplement. lol
Always suspected you were a bit of a rascal lol
-
Try having a look at jet's CiCar* games, for instance here (if you haven't already)
Oh indeed I know his work and I'm an avid follower of his blog.He's the reason I got the rules! Marvellous stuff! :-*Although I decided CinCai was more for me in terms of background as I really like the Archaeologists angle.
*) I suggest we stop writing CiC, and instead use CiCai for Chaos in Cairo, CiCar for Chaos in Carpathia, CiChr for Chaos in Chronos, and CiChi for Chaos in Chicago (if that title is ever hitting the webstores - it WAS announced som years ago...). CiC is a bit ambiguous with more titles being abbreviated that way...
Yes,that is a good idea and I'll try and remember that. :)
Christopher
-
Yesterday I played a small CiC test game with a friend and some doubts emerged, let me ask your advice.
-bull's eye lantern.
About throwing a bull's eye lantern, the item description says
"A lantern may also be thrown at an enemy model as an act of desperation. This counts as a normal combat action with a max range of 12"."
So, if the max range is 12" it has an ER of 6"? or is considered all their range of action as max range (so +DEF should be applied for the target)?
- Feared Foe - Mummies
A group of Professional Diggers with the trait Feared Foe - Mummies are charged by a Mummy and fails their TN3 resolve test, Mummy gets +1 Attack Die.
What happens next round?
Next round the Professional Diggers are engaged in combat with the mummy, they have to roll again the failed TN3 resolve test? or the Feared Foe trait has no longer effects after the charge round?
About ranged combat.
Rulebook says "Friendly models do not block line of site, but enemy models do."
What's about shooters firing from elevated positions targeting enemy models on the second line but really far from the enemy models in the front line do you still apply this rule?
We was considering a house rule conceding the possibility to shot when the shooter has an uninterrupted line of sight of the second line model from head to base. But i would like to know if someone fixed the issue in other ways, or didn't fixed it and keeps straight to the rules.
-
The Lantern: 12" ER sounds a bit too much considering a heavy pistol has a ER of 10". Looking at thrown weapons, Holy Water has a ER of 3" as well as Throwing Knives. Even a ER of 6" seems a bit much.
Feared Foe: Looking at the description of terrify, it sounds like the diggers use the same rules. They would then test every turn to see if they were still terrified.
Ranged Combat: Not sure about this. We played as if friendly models blocked line of site as well. When it came to elevated shooters, we just had them ignore cover.
Yesterday I played a small CiC test game with a friend and some doubts emerged, let me ask your advice.
-bull's eye lantern.
About throwing a bull's eye lantern, the item description says
"A lantern may also be thrown at an enemy model as an act of desperation. This counts as a normal combat action with a max range of 12"."
So, if the max range is 12" it has an ER of 6"? or is considered all their range of action as max range (so +DEF should be applied for the target)?
- Feared Foe - Mummies
A group of Professional Diggers with the trait Feared Foe - Mummies are charged by a Mummy and fails their TN3 resolve test, Mummy gets +1 Attack Die.
What happens next round?
Next round the Professional Diggers are engaged in combat with the mummy, they have to roll again the failed TN3 resolve test? or the Feared Foe trait has no longer effects after the charge round?
About ranged combat.
Rulebook says "Friendly models do not block line of site, but enemy models do."
What's about shooters firing from elevated positions targeting enemy models on the second line but really far from the enemy models in the front line do you still apply this rule?
We was considering a house rule conceding the possibility to shot when the shooter has an uninterrupted line of sight of the second line model from head to base. But i would like to know if someone fixed the issue in other ways, or didn't fixed it and keeps straight to the rules.
-
The Lantern: 12" ER sounds a bit too much considering a heavy pistol has a ER of 10".
That was exactly our comment when reading the rule, despite in our case was not a long throw. Sounds sensible to pick the holly water and throwing weapons as example to modify it.
Feared Foe: Looking at the description of terrify, it sounds like the diggers use the same rules. They would then test every turn to see if they were still terrified.
That was my big doubt, Terrifiyng Aura = Feared Foe? The description talks about FF on charge action, but no mention about what happens out of the charge. When a mummy with TA charges a group of Professional Diggers they should roll Resolve twice, first as soon they act in the 10" TA range of the mummy and later when they are charged, if they fail both rolls the mummy stacks +3 dices to attack roll the charge round to represent their panic; but I wonder if keep both Resolve rolls each turn until they succedd isn't a bit too hard.
-
Ooo... Feared Foe + Terrifying Aura, that sounds brutal. lol
Honestly the Mummies in our games don't need either. We just looked at their stat blocks and read the mummy special ability, that kept us terrified all game long. ;)
-
PM sent. ;)
Mr Clapham
I am sure I have the original rules pamphlet somewhere - are you interested?
-
For me CiCar stands for Chaos in Cardiff: The day I got arrested at Ninian Park. Could also apply to a Torchwood supplement. lol
Piece by piece we lay the puzzle that is Plynkes... :)