Dux Britanniarum (via Lion Rampant) in 15mm

[CATenWolde]

Hi gents,

I thought I would share a very successful project that I've finally gotten going at full speed over the past few months.

I've been slowly building and playtesting forces for Dux Britanniarum in 15mm, using mass based units for a more epic look. The general idea is to mount 12 HI on a 60mm frontage base, modelling shieldwalls or warbands as appropriate. You can see the results of my initial efforts in the album here:

https://flic.kr/s/aHsm1KM53W

I'll have to update the album soon, as I've added units of HC, MC, and LC for the Britons (including a mounted noble), more warbands and skirmishers, and "upgraded" the command stands with LBMS banners.

Starting this autumn, I started using Lion Rampant (with house rules) to play the actual tabletop battles within the Dux Brit campaign framework, and it's worked very well. Aside from tweaking unit stats for the period, in order to fit the spirit and format of the Dux Brit scenarios I've added: random unit activation via cards (replacing the LR activation rules), random movement distances (generally 3d6 for HI), and tweaked the leader characteristics.

After an inconclusive first year of raiding, the Saxons recently scored a bloody victory that allowed them to contest the border town of Suloniacis in Verulamium (west of London). We'll soon have our first pitched battle as the Britons attempt to relieve the town and throw them back!

Cheers,

Christopher

[SteveBurt]

What advantage did you find from using Lion Rampant instead of Dux Brit for the battles?

[Mr.J]

Very nice. I did a WOTR retinue for LR in 15mm and love how the smaller scale looks.

Just FYI, it's generally encouraged to add a couple of photos rather than just a link to your own site.

[CATenWolde]

What advantage did you find from using Lion Rampant instead of Dux Brit for the battles?

Hi Steve,

Well, the advantages are bound to personal, and I don't want to imply that Dux Brit aren't good rules. My main issues with the DB tabletop rules was that they had this contrast of rather sloggish combat mechanics and fiddly fatigue counting on one hand, and "thunderbolt" moments on the other hand as players stacked their hands for maximum impact on a key charge. I realize that the portrayal of combat may in fact be quite good, and that the cards were added to balance that shieldwall-grind quality with moments of heroics and more game-friendly actions, but it somehow never clicked with us.

So, LR is specifically designed for small raids and brawls, and plays much more quickly as a result of more streamlined rules and generally more decisive combats. It's main weakness for Dux Brit style scenarios was the activation system, which won't work unless forces start out staring at each other, and in DB you often have forces split in two and traveling to-and-fro across he tabletop. So, I stole the unit activation and random movement rules from the venerable The Sword and the Flame, and the resulting decision/chaos balance has been great. Playing LR with 3 leaders rather than 1, all of which have their own characteristics, also adds to play, especially as the campaign progresses.

My particular situation is that I often game with a "new generation' of gamers (my son and his friends), as well as gamers who jump in and out of the campaign games as this isn't really their period, so that had its impact on choosing the simpler LR as well.

Cheers,

Christopher

[CATenWolde]

Very nice. I did a WOTR retinue for LR in 15mm and love how the smaller scale looks.

Just FYI, it's generally encouraged to add a couple of photos rather than just a link to your own site.

Thanks. It's not so much a site as the way I had a large number of photographs organized (back when I was still trying to post on archaic TMP), but I'll keep that in mind.

Cheers,

Christopher

[SteveBurt]

Hi Steve,

Well, the advantages are bound to personal, and I don't want to imply that Dux Brit aren't good rules. My main issues with the DB tabletop rules was that they had this contrast of rather sloggish combat mechanics and fiddly fatigue counting on one hand, and "thunderbolt" moments on the other hand as players stacked their hands for maximum impact on a key charge. I realize that the portrayal of combat may in fact be quite good, and that the cards were added to balance that shieldwall-grind quality with moments of heroics and more game-friendly actions, but it somehow never clicked with us.

Thanks - I phrased my question carefully :-)
Speed is certainly one advantage of LR. I'm fond of Dux Brit, and I think it's a good depiction of Dark Age combat, but it isn't the fastest or simplest set around.

[CATenWolde]

Now that I think about it, I think it really comes down to the fact that "Arthurian" games really run a broad gamut of types, from high fantasy to gritty dark age. I favor what you might call "Heroic Last Stand" Late Roman, which influences the rules I prefer for the period. For instance, as I look at the AdlG army lists for the period, I'm much more likely to build my "Arthurian" armies based on Late Roman or Patrician Roman lists, modified to reflect what was "possibly" in the field. It's great to have good options for thee different types of games!