Blood and Plunder Rules Review(s)?

[Mako]

The vessels and minis for this look gorgeous, so, I'm just wondering about the general consensus on the rules, and what people think of them, for naval battles, land battles, and boarding actions?

Would love to hear what people like and dislike about the rules.

Appears you need a set of cards for each faction you wish to use in the game, in order to play, in addition to the rule book and minis.  Is that correct?

[Munindk]

I have the rulebook but I havent played yet, since I missed the first kickstarter and I am now awaiting models from the second kickstarter.

From my own reading of the rules and the battle reports I've seen and read its a decent set of rules, but a but clunky. I think thats because they lean towards simulation rather than abstraction and the fact that black powder weapons are a pain to use. I bought into the game to play boarding actions and it looks solid for that.

All the faction decks identical apart from the decoration on the back, so you just need a deck per side in any given battle.

[Julfdi]

Activation mechanics is cool.
I don't really like one way melee resolution, but the results it produces are not too bad.
Loading reloading mechanics I kind of like.
So far I have only played land battles with infantry against infantry.

[SteveBurt]

I have the rules (I already have loads of pirate figures and ships all painted up - although not from the kickstarter).
The rules look OK from a read-through. Hard to say exactly how they will play until we try them, but I need more pirates for that; you need about 50 figures a side for these rules, and I currently have rather less pirates than that.
(I reckon about 6 units each with 8 figures. Unit cost is 30 to 50 points, so that would give around 200 points, which is the recommended size for a 2 hour game)
The activation mechanic is neat.
The command system is neat.
The rules cover both land and sea (and amphibious) actions.
The melee system is odd; it's pretty unusual for only the attacker to get to do anything (the defender gets to go when they get activated). It may work better than it reads. We'll see how it works when we try the rules.

[Mako]

Thanks for the info.

Good to know on the cards.

Would love to hear opinions, once you've had a chance to play.

[Furt]

I ran demo games of Blood & Plunder at our local convention http://adventuresinlead.blogspot.com.au/2017/10/blood-plunder-moab-2017.html

The rules work brilliantly for land, amphibious landings and sea battles; all seamlessly melding.

Melee is not a problem in my opinion. Being charged feels like a real threat and the combats are usually very brutal and decisive.

Also you can have a perfectly good game with a starter box of 25 figures, although more figures of differing types allow the rules to really shine.   

I couldn't recommend it enough. It comes in PDF also if you want to test the waters.

[Hunter776]

I have played the game extensively, and ran it at Historicon.

I think it's wrong to see it as a pirate skirmish game, actually it's excellent for all combat in the 17th and 18th century in a skirmish setting.

It's very approachable and easy to teach to beginners, but it has some fun tactical twists, with traditional questions such as when to fire given reloading being a necessity. Cover is appropriately important, and neither melee nor fire dominates.

Initiative is indeed done in a fun way, and leadership can be critically important if used properly.

I find the sea combat even more fun than the land, and overall, there's just a great balance between (lack of) complication and detail.

It is NOT correct that you need some specialist card set to play. Each side needs one regular deck of cards including jokers. The game company sells decks, but they are simply regular decks with some rules reminders written on them for ease of play. Nice to have, but definitely in no way mandatory for the game.

[Antonio J Carrasco]

Just finished a reading of the rules. It has been a fast reading, to get the "feel" of the rules. What I have seen gives me good wargaming vibes. I particularly liked the activation system, especially the compromise you need to accept between acting first, but having less actions allocated to your activated unit, or waiting until last and having more actions available. I think it's an elegant way to represent the option of acting fast but unprepared, or choosing to take your time to plan what you are going to do, but surrendering initiative to your opponent.

[SteveBurt]

Played our first game last night. 180 points (ish) in the 'raid' scenario; just using land forces to keep things simple.
Spanish defenders had 5 x 8 figure units (1 lanceros, 1 militia, 2 sailors, 1 native)
English attackers had 4 units (2 pirates, 1 forlorn hope, 1 buccaneer)
It was a fun game; misplayed a few things, but nothing serious.
The rules seem sound, and give the feeling of a chaotic brawl. Melee works fine (defensive fire mitigates the effect of only the attacker hitting).
Played to a conclusion in about 2 hours - English had accumulated 2 strike points more than the Spanish and failed their test at the end of turn 5.
The unit cards are very useful as you have all the info you need, plus all the special rules for each unit on the back of the card.
Now we understand how the rules work, we'll have a better idea of what to do next time. We'll do an amphibious game with an attempt to capture a ship (perhaps the 'escape from Cuba' scenario in the latest WI). That way we'll get to try artillery and guns.
Then I'll try a sea game with boarding actions to try the ship rules; the big attraction of these rules is the integration of land and sea into one set.

[Hunter776]

I think you'll really enjoy how unified everything feels (artillery, amphibious, boats, etc)

My advice as you try the amphibious rules is to make sure you understand the extreme time constraints. First time I played them, I had men in my ship getting into the boats (which took a turn), then rowing in to land (which took a couple turns), then debarking (which took a turn), so there wasn't a lot of leeway to get much done while ashore given the average six turn scenario.

In the example on Youtube, they sail up to a dock and get off, which is fine, but if everyone is getting into long boats, you might want to extend the scenario by a couple turns.

[SteveBurt]

We had another game last night. After the unsuccessful English raid on the Spanish camp, the English were followed back to their ship.
The Spanish had to try and capture the ship - the English had only a skeleton crew defending it (including two swivel guns with crews), and the rest of the figures entered on a dice roll (less than or equal to turn number on a d4). Game was 6 turns long, English got a Strike point for each section of deck (3 in total) on the ship captured by the Spanish. Spanish would get strike points if they had no figures within 4" of the ship at the end of turn 4 or later. It was a bloody, exciting struggle, with things swaying to and fro. The Spanish took the ship, but in the last turn the English managed to sneak back on board, so holding the game to a draw. The English survived one strike test.
Excellent rules; the only thing we didn't quite agree with was that figures defending a structure (e.g. the ship) get no advantage in melee. I think next game we'll give anyone defending a structure a re-roll on their melee saves.
I attach a couple of pictures of the action. Nice to see boarding pikes being used for their intended purpose!

[Hunter776]

Nice report and great looking figures, but I believe you've overlooked something if you say there's no benefit for defending the ship.

Looking at p. 51 in the pdf rules, because a ship counts as hard cover, all defenders get a -1 to their save die roll. This is pretty substantial and makes a nice difference. I would recommend trying the RAW before branching out and trying something else.

Anyway, great looking game.

[SteveBurt]

Aha, I thought we might have missed something. Yes, a -1 save bonus is probably enough

[Hunter776]

Yep, I was skeptical about that seemingly small effect, but in practice it seemed just about right.

[SteveBurt]

It's there on page 51 of my printed rulebook - but it's so discrete I hand't noticed it (and it is not mentioned at all in the section on structures).
Not on the QRS either.