My first impressions of The Silver Bayonet

[DivisMal]

Thank you for the interesting read!

I am really tempted to invest in those rules, but what I would like is to have a feeling of well at least Sharpe or Last of the Mohicans. It’s good to know how people are already houseruling, but for €30,- I would have expected a little bit more period flavor.

[Grumpy Gnome]

Thank you for the interesting read!

I am really tempted to invest in those rules, but what I would like is to have a feeling of well at least Sharpe or Last of the Mohicans. It’s good to know how people are already houseruling, but for €30,- I would have expected a little bit more period flavor.

You‘re welcome, I am glad you found it interesting and not a waste of your time.

To be fair to Joe, he has gotten off to a decent start in my opinion, it just needs its some polishing in some places and some more atmospheric background to add more flavorful Napoleonic era flavor.

[critsmash]

I share many of the same first impressions of this game. First and foremost I was hoping for more Solo/coop content. 4 scenarios is too few and 10 is too many for pvp, and it should have been the other way around in my opinion. Another thing is the advancements and rewards. I really like that each member get advancements, but with no remedy (as far as I can tell) for permanent injuries that could neutralize many of the same advancements, I'm not sure how rewarding that in itself will feel after a few games. I wish there was more treasure to be had and variation there as it is naturally a huge motivator in games like this. That the treasure found in the scenarios only can be used for that scenario and not kept for fighting more powerful foes later seems a strange choice to me. The only thing that drives the game forward right now is new scenarios and the advancements of the soldiers. Just speculating, but could it be that this aspect of the game has suffered due to the focus on balancing the game out in line with what many (not me!) seemed to have issues with in the previous games? To avoid making the game too swingy for pvp? I know about houserules and "its your game" etc. but in the current state there is not enough meat on the bone for me to get going with that. Setting is awesome, miniatures are great. I like the d10 system. This game has huge potential, especially in the solo/coop department. Lots of ideas pop up, which I suspect especially this author likes to see happen among players. Forexample, do you need to use your officer as the main protagonist in a coop game? What about a random officer orders table that could affect how you have to move your characters that turn if say, either player want to use a veteran hunter or even a doc as the main protagonist on "their" side and not have two officers in a warband. I've looked at changing the pvp scenarios to solo/coop and it should not be too difficult either, but the reward aspect is something I hope will be expanded upon in the next addition to the silver bayonet.       

[joe5mc]

Always interesting to read what people have to say! I agree with some of it, and disagree with some of it, but it's all helpful in understanding what players want and like.

That said, when working on a game, I tend to go with 'To thine own self be true', and go with what I think is fun or what I want from a specific game, and my preferences aren't always going to align with others. But, I'm not precious either, and believe house rules are the best rules as they tune the game to specific players. I've got some more stuff I'd like to do with the game, but I'd like to see what others get up to as well.

[tikitang]

I've always found it odd that gamers use their time on 'peripheral' things rather than concentrating on painting and playing.  AARs can be interesting and inspiring in some cases, WIP builds and model making/painting tips are useful too. However I struggle to see the value in long to and fro discussions about the theoretical colour of orc skin and what rules may or may not be like based on a read through.

I think part of the hobby, for some, is sharing and discussing abstract ideas. Some folks enjoy that. Not sure why that should seem odd? I myself also have very limited time to paint or play. In fact, at the moment I am only able to paint during work hours, three days a week, and only during coffee breaks. Sometimes I have to decide: "Do I want to spend this coffee break painting, or do I want to read or write about something on LAF?" There's naught wrong with either!

Personally, I've found this discussion interesting and inspiring of itself, and it's got me thinking more than any other thread about TSB so far. Though, I am looking forward to the day when I get to actually play TSB myself and post some AARs of my own.

By the way, Grumpy Gnome, I've modified my response to your thoughts on the previous page by actually adding in quotes from your blog-post to give my responses more context.

[Grumpy Gnome]

Critsmash, good idea on using the pvp scenarios for coop/solo. It is just a matter of tweaking the monsters to ensure it is a challenge. Maybe create NPCs “monsters” that are not exactly a directly opposed supernatural hunting warbands but instead are just soldiers of an opposing army that happen to be in the area. They are not focused on the objective and just follow the standard monster AI, maybe?

Great to hear your thoughts here Joe. I have a lot of respect for your work. Your attitude towards games and gamers is one reason I like supporting your games. Hopefully we will see more Silver Bayonet but given what you have said recently about the lack of financial interest in Ghost Archipelago I am not getting my hopes up too high. Do you think you will offer additional material in Spellcaster?

Tikitang, nicely said mate. I agree with you.

[BZ]

I pre-ordered the book, and was very hyped about it. After reading it, honestly, I was dissapointed... But with a little time, as my thoughts settled, I changed my mind a bit. Because at first, my expectations were clearly too high: a direct effect of hype... Next, the basics of the rules are great, its a fantastic evolution of the Grave-engine with a less swingy system (2xD10, although for me would have been more logical to use a meele and a ranged dice for calculating the damage), and some possibilites to save you from the worst rolls (fate dice). And at last, (almost) all the other problems (missing items, monsters, spells, coop/solo scenaios), can (and as we know the other games of Joe, we can pretty surely say, will) be fixed with supplements!
I understand, that somebody is missing the black powder feel, but in a game which is mostly 5-6 turns long, having a whole turn (2 activations) for reloading would make fire weapons pretty useless, and the game much slower. And remember, winding up a bigger crossbow takes also long, and there werent any complains about it in the other systems... Lamenting (sorry about the word, I dont mean it that harsh) about the ranges is the kind of same: its a small scale skirmish, not a big battle game, real ranges here would be pointless. A template for blunderbuss/volley gun is what I would like too, because 1 inch spread with a -1 handicap on hit seems a bit off for me, but I can live with it. Missing the horror aspect? I think it would be hard to really bring this in a PvP game, so Im hoping on more coop/solo, where they can appear more (and to be honest, this is a game with colorful toy soldiers, how sould I feel terrorized?  ).
All in all, I like Silver Bayonett, even without playing it! What, I didnt played a game, and I dare to have an opinion  ? No (and yes), because I dont have any napoleonic miniatures... But if there will be coop/solo oriented supplement (like Rangers of Shadow deep), I certainly have to invest (in a hungarian warband with a betyár and a huszár)!
(Now I used up my thoughts for a new blogpost, but as much time I had lately, its not a real loss... Sadly.)

I've always found it odd that gamers use their time on 'periphera'l things rather than concentrating on painting and playing.

I never understood people, who are setting their point of view as a general for everybody. It especially felt bad for me in such a nice and supporting community...

[Grumpy Gnome]

Well Joe did seem to come across as if there is a chance for more Silver Bayonet books in the future from what I saw in this interview…. I suspect it has a lot to do with whether sales of the core book supports more investment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-WC8IhpXG4

I hope my first impressions do not impede sales at all but instead encourages further growth.

BZ, it is great to hear your thoughts… even when we disagree… which, to be fair, is not all that often.

[BZ]

BZ, it is great to hear your thoughts… even when we disagree… which, to be fair, is not all that often.

Yes, I agree with You most of the time. But Im still happy, that we can have a conversation, even if we dont!
I really think, that Silver Bayonet is a good game, but the expectations (without knowing any facts) may mislead a lot of people... Its still a Grave-series game with an (in my opinion greatly) improved engine. And as this, its not a deep and specific rulest, but still an easy to play, fun game, mainly for PvP, and not for coop/solo. Yes, it feels incomplete, but I think this will be changed with supplements.
In my opinion, the setting could really shine with a story driven campaign (like in Rangers of Shadow deep), or with some generated monster hunting scenarios (like in the Dead or alive supplement for Stargrave). Maybe even both types competitive (like the military expeditons in Oathmark): which monter hunter team can catch the vampire first, or the most werewolf heads? I would love this!

[Bearwoodman]

BZ I think you are right that ones expectations (or hopes) are key to how positive ones first impression of the game is.

Personally my hopes were dialled at: "Frostgrave with a Napoleonic twist". By this I mean a fun flexible well-presented narrative skirmish game providing an excuse/inspiration to paint a few of the many beautiful Napoleonic figures that are out there. I think the author put it well in his WI interview posted above why the concept appeals to many wargamers who are new to this period - his explanation certainly applies to me!

As for supplements/campaigns I do hope that they are forthcoming. Based on my experience with Frostgrave I am less interested in lots of fiddly new rules than on an extended campaign that tells a story (and allows the players to tell the story of their unit) along the lines of how the Thaw of the Lich Lord supplement really brought the basic Frostgrave rules alive for my gaming group.

The Napoleonic setting provides so many possibilities for campaigns that intersect with historic events and local folklore (in Europe and beyond) in fun and interesting ways that it would be a shame if Mr McCullough was not given the opportunity to properly apply his talents to produce at least one.

[DivisMal]

Always interesting to read what people have to say! I agree with some of it, and disagree with some of it, but it's all helpful in understanding what players want and like.

That said, when working on a game, I tend to go with 'To thine own self be true', and go with what I think is fun or what I want from a specific game, and my preferences aren't always going to align with others. But, I'm not precious either, and believe house rules are the best rules as they tune the game to specific players. I've got some more stuff I'd like to do with the game, but I'd like to see what others get up to as well.

Never expected you to comment on our comments

Anyway, it was indeed the critical discussion that made me order a copy with Amazon. It arrived yesterday and even though my hobby time is limited due to pre-xmas stress and a nast cold that is generously shared between my spouse, my daughter and me, I found some time to go through the book:

It’s beautiful. No really, I love the design and layout. If I had to name some criticism, I’d say more pictures would have been nice.

The background story could use fleshing out. It’s not all bad, even though I’m not 100% bought on the harvestmen, but this could really profit from more background and a solo campaign like Rangers of Shadow Deep.

System: need to play it. It’s definitely intuitive for those of us coming from Frostgrave and its companion systems. I do like the 2d10 switch, but cannot judge it until I’ve played.

Now I need some good sources to give me nice models that arrive before Christmas…I’ve grown very fond of the various metal sets produced by the Perrys and think I’ll give them a try.

Florian

[Grumpy Gnome]

Yes, I agree with You most of the time. But Im still happy, that we can have a conversation, even if we dont!
I really think, that Silver Bayonet is a good game, but the expectations (without knowing any facts) may mislead a lot of people... Its still a Grave-series game with an (in my opinion greatly) improved engine. And as this, its not a deep and specific rulest, but still an easy to play, fun game, mainly for PvP, and not for coop/solo. Yes, it feels incomplete, but I think this will be changed with supplements.
In my opinion, the setting could really shine with a story driven campaign (like in Rangers of Shadow deep), or with some generated monster hunting scenarios (like in the Dead or alive supplement for Stargrave). Maybe even both types competitive (like the military expeditons in Oathmark): which monter hunter team can catch the vampire first, or the most werewolf heads? I would love this!

BZ, Again I like your ideas.

Bearwoodsman, Frostgrave created more atmosphere for me. Much more than I expected. It sold me on high fantasy magic, something I did not like before Frostgrave. I was hoping for the same sense of atmosphere from the Silver Bayonet but with a different flavor. I wanted it to sell me on Gothic Horror, something I have not normally been a big fan of.

Even my Tarnished Splendor project was focused more on exploration than Horror in my original conception.

Divismal, one thing I really appreciate about Joe is him getting involved in the community. I agree with you on the aesthetics of the Silver Bayonet rulebook being great. And the Power/Skill 2d10 is interesting.

I have been reading the Napoleonic skirmish rules for Song of Shakos and Bayonets to see what game mechanics they have used to replicate the feel of Napoleonic combat.

All weapons start loaded. To reload a musket two consecutive actions (ie, two actions performed in the same turn, one after the other) are required. For rifles you can not shoot and reload in the same turn, even if it has the required number of actions. So even if you have three actions you can not shoot and reload in one turn. I think this means with a rifle you also can not shoot with one action, half reload with one action in one turn then in the next turn finish reloading with one action and shoot again with the second action.

With blunderbusses it says models in base to base contact with the target and in line of sight are also hit it at +1 to hit.

The ranges in Song of Shakos and Bayonets seems off to me as well though.

Even though the Silver Bayonet is focused on small units I think it would be interesting to have a volley fire rule for the rare instances a player could more than one shooter to fire at once. Perhaps cause a courage check?  The volley fire rules in Song of Shakos and Bayonets treat it as one attack rolled with the stats of the worst weapon&shooter but causes -1 on the targets Combat score for every shooter beyond the first. But that is ofcourse in relation to opposed roll combat mechanics as in Frostgrave. It would need to work slightly different for the Silver Bayonet. Perhaps cause -1 per shooter beyond the first to the targets Defense stat?

[BZ]

Now I need some good sources to give me nice models that arrive before Christmas…I’ve grown very fond of the various metal sets produced by the Perrys and think I’ll give them a try.

I really like the Northstar miniatures, but the "Retreat from Moscow" line from the Perrys, is so beautiful!

[Patrice]

I really like the Northstar miniatures, but the "Retreat from Moscow" line from the Perrys, is so beautiful!

Yes... How well can they be mixed together?

Some of the other ranges linked with games from Osprey are as large as Copplestone or Pulp Figures (of other periods); others (Dracula's America) seem thinner as also are Brigade Games Napoleonics.

[BZ]

I dont know, but I have Perry miniatures (Agincourt and 100 year war) and various Northstar plastics, and as they dont seem off on the same table, but they look odd next to each other. And as I see this Perry line looks true scale too, and the ones from Northstar have pretty heroic proportions. But I would be happy if someone could post comparison pictures about them!