Has anyone else picked up De Bellis Fantasiae (DBF)?

[Hobgoblin]

I bought DBF a couple of weeks ago, having been alerted to it by DivisMal a while earlier. It's an update of the HOTT/DBA system to allow large fantasy battles with multiple commands.

Although I've yet to play a game, I've been very impressed by the rules. They combine most of the troop types from HOTT and DBA - so alongside the familiar Blades, Spears, Knights, Behemoths, etc., there are also Skirmishers, Pikes, Auxilia and Cavalry. And there are some new types too: Great Beasts (ogres, trolls and the like) and Infernal Machines (primitive tanks or armoured war wagons). Gods, Sneakers and Lurkers from HOTT aren't present, however.

On top of that, most troop types can be either Solid or Fast, which lends additional nuances to combat (Fast troops move faster than their Solid equivalents but recoil from Solid elements on a close-combat tie).

Magic has been expanded; alongside the traditional HOTT magical artillery attack, there are army-specific rituals too.

The most impressive thing, though, is the list of special rules. These are very nicely done and allow a wealth of flavourful tweaks to the standard troop classes without overcomplicating things (no additional dice rolls are required). For example, orcs might be given the Battle Frenzy special rule, which makes them more deadly but also more fragile in close combat. A common complaint about HOTT is that (e.g.) goblin Spears function identically to elven Spears. The special rules allow this to be addressed very elegantly. For example, your Elven spears might be Solid, Elite and have Heavy Armour whereas the goblin spears could be Fast and Poor with Battle Frenzy. Points costs use a different, more subtle scale than HOTT does, so these nuances can be costed appropriately.

The rules are also clearly written, with lots of diagrams - and, crucially, these are fully incorporated into the rules explanations. That makes DBF the most user-friendly of the DBX family.

The book includes a large number of army lists: some 'classic fantasy' and mythological lists as in HOTT, and some that are clearly designed for use with Warhammer or Kings of War figures. The assumption is that players will devise their own lists to reflect their armies and interests. This is necessarily more complex than in HOTT, as the game typically features multiple commands aside and is intended to use restrictive lists rather than the entirely open ones in HOTT (where any army can have any troop type). There's a campaign system too.

I don't think this is a replacement for HOTT; it's designed for longer, more involved games, so I can't see it being used for the same sort of tournaments or short-notice pick-up games as HOTT. On the other hand, it looks great for allowing an engrossing afternoon of gaming with much bigger armies and much greater depth. I also think there's plenty of scope for importing the special rules into HOTT - for example, by giving each player a budget of 6 or 12 DBF points for special rules on top of the standard 24AP.

All in all, it's a great-looking game. As someone who often stretches the HOTT rules to cover much bigger battles, I suspect I'm going to get a lot of use out of it.

[Pattus Magnus]

I had not heard of it, but will be checking it out, thanks for mentioning it! It would be a way to get my 15mm fantasy figures into action 

[Hobgoblin]

I had not heard of it, but will be checking it out, thanks for mentioning it! It would be a way to get my 15mm fantasy figures into action 

It would be a very good match for your orc and barbarian armies, I think. One problem with HOTT (much as I love it!) is that a battle between common fantasy armies can be a bit Warband-heavy and thus samey. In DBF, by contrast, the book lists treat large orcs as Auxilia with Battle Frenzy (or Warband with Battle Frenzy for 'savage' types) whereas barbarian infantry could be Fast or Solid Blades or Warband + Lethal (for berserkers). So there's much more room for differentiation, and the armies will feel much more distinct.

[Inkpaduta]

If I was more into Fantasy, 95% Historical here, I would think seriously about getting these.

[Hobgoblin]

If I was more into Fantasy, 95% Historical here, I would think seriously about getting these.

There are some nice pseudo-historical army lists in there: both high medieval and ancient, with just very slight fantastical twists: in some cases, just the presence of heroes or "paladins" (e.g. Joan of Arc).

[mikedemana]

We played HOTT for quite some time and enjoyed the system. We played DBA even longer, but eventually tired of it. It is interesting to see new life being injected into the rules this way. I'm not sure I am going to go out and purchase them, though. I sold all of my HOTT and DBA armies (no small amount) awhile back.

I'm more into the 28mm individually based games, like Lion Rampant, Saga, and when the new edition comes out, Dragon Rampant.

Thanks for the review! Very descriptive and informative. I had to click on the link to see who wrote the rules, as good old Phil was way too sparse with his wording to ever being considered clearly written...! 

Mike Demana

[Hobgoblin]

We played HOTT for quite some time and enjoyed the system. We played DBA even longer, but eventually tired of it. It is interesting to see new life being injected into the rules this way. I'm not sure I am going to go out and purchase them, though. I sold all of my HOTT and DBA armies (no small amount) awhile back.

I find that HOTT is the game I always come back to. The DBF release has inspired me to switch from 1/72 back to 28mm - largely because it offers a way to get a lot of the old miniatures I own on the table at the same time (I've been beadily eyeing various unassembled chariots and the like!).

One of the things I like most about HOTT and its ilk is the way you can field huge monsters or gods or dragons with a minimum of fuss; they're appropriately powerful on the table, but you don't have to roll buckets of dice for them or remember hosts of special provisions.

[fred]

I don?t think I need another Fantasy rule set. I have too many already and the figures rarely get on the table, but?

A few questions as I?ve not played any DBx games over the years - which feels an oversight.

Basing - my 10mm fantasy is mainly on 40mm square bases, will these work fine, or does depth matter?

Combat results - how swingy are these - I read that doubling your opponent?s roll kills their stand - so if I roll a 6, do I have a 50% chance of killing the enemy stand? Are stands either dead or fine, there are no hit points?

Activation - is this a simple d6 per side which says how many units/groups of units you can activate, which again feels it could be very swingy?

[Rick]

I don?t think I need another Fantasy rule set. I have too many already and the figures rarely get on the table, but?

A few questions as I?ve not played any DBx games over the years - which feels an oversight.

Basing - my 10mm fantasy is mainly on 40mm square bases, will these work fine, or does depth matter?

Combat results - how swingy are these - I read that doubling your opponent?s roll kills their stand - so if I roll a 6, do I have a 50% chance of killing the enemy stand? Are stands either dead or fine, there are no hit points?

Activation - is this a simple d6 per side which says how many units/groups of units you can activate, which again feels it could be very swingy?

I used to play a bit of DBA back in the day - probably a very outmoded ruleset but the basic principles should still hold firm. As long as both sides use the same base size conventions then you should be ok but the system does have its own base sizes and there are good reasons for them - iirc the bases are usually around twice as long as they are wide meaning a flank envelopment will hit 2 units in the side, removing any bonuses from supporting. Which brings us quite neatly onto the combat - the units in combat roll off against each other - each side rolls a dice and adds modifiers (some weapon types versus others can add or subtract from the roll, as does being supported by bases to the rear or sides) - the loser usually recoils a base width if they can (the downside of being supported) or destroyed if the winning roll plus modifiers is more than double the losers dice roll plus modifiers. Some weapon types modify that rule and there is a lot more variation in the rules than I can outline here - getting the right combination of attacking weapon bases plus supports to maximise your dice rolls can be key and quite challenging to achieve. There are no hit points - a base may be forced to recoil away from an attacker or destroyed outright; there is no gradual erosion of a units performance.
It's an abstract system but still retains an awful lot of nuance and subtlety in the game - designing a good army is important but learning how to use it to its full advantage and, of course, good dice rolling can all be major factors, as with any rules system.

[Hobgoblin]

I don?t think I need another Fantasy rule set. I have too many already and the figures rarely get on the table, but?

A few questions as I?ve not played any DBx games over the years - which feels an oversight.

Basing - my 10mm fantasy is mainly on 40mm square bases, will these work fine, or does depth matter?

Combat results - how swingy are these - I read that doubling your opponent?s roll kills their stand - so if I roll a 6, do I have a 50% chance of killing the enemy stand? Are stands either dead or fine, there are no hit points?

Activation - is this a simple d6 per side which says how many units/groups of units you can activate, which again feels it could be very swingy?

Ah - now if you haven't played any DBx games, you can get loads of HOTT games in very quickly. It's probably the quickest mass-battle game to get on the table - a standard 24AP game means that you pick 12ish elements (most infantry and cavalry cost 2, Hordes cost 1, Behemoths, Heroes, Magicians, Dragons and Gods cost 4 and Aerial Heroes cost 6, and there are few funny ones that cost 3 - Clerics, for example; and you can't have more than 12AP of ones that cost more than 2) and get to it. You can create an army in a minute. A typical game takes about 45 minutes once you know the rules, so you can easily play a campaign in an evening.

To build on what Rick said above, basing depth doesn't really matter as long as the frontages are the same. All the DBx rules explicitly allow for some variation in depth according to figure size. So you could perfectly well have an army of different elements entirely based on 40 x 40 squares - that's how I'm basing my 15mm stuff, as I plan to use it principally for Fantastic Battles but for HOTT if I enter another 15mm tournament. There are both advantages and disadvantages to having deeper bases, so it all evens out.

The new game, DBF, is even more explicitly liberal on base sizes than previous iterations. 

A key principle of the DBx stable is the "quick kill", which gives the game a lot of its flavour. In general, you need to double an opponent's score (base factor + dice roll) for a kill. But in a sort of extended rock/paper/scissors manner, certain units can kill others by simply beating their score (and the same is true when the defeated element has an enemy element attacking its flank or rear directly). The root of this mechanic is Blades vs Warband, which started with Roman legionaries (Blades) versus Gauls or Germans (Warband). Blades add 5 to the roll vs foot units; Warband adds 3. So Blades are more likely to double Warband, BUT Warband "quick-kills" Blades by simply beating them. By contrast, if Blades beat but do not double Warband, they push Warband back (and in HOTT, don't pursue, thus maintaining the integrity of their line - Warband elements DO pursue if they win a fight, so they break up their line quite easily).

As Rick says, there are various other factors that modify the rolls. If you've played Song of Blades and Heroes or its relations, you'll be familiar with that: overlapping or flanking elements reduce the enemy's score by 1 (making them easier to double as well as easier to beat); and terrain can modify combat outcomes too.

Also, each element type has different scores against foot and mounted troop types. So Blades are +5 vs foot but only + 3 vs mounted. In the new rules, Great Beasts are +3/+3 and (like Warband) quick-kill heavy infantry like Blades. But because they are classed as mounted, Blades are only +3 against them, which makes Great Beasts even more dangerous than Warband; all else being equal, Great Beasts fight on even terms with Blades and only need to beat them to kill them.

There are lots of variations on this with different combinations of opponents: for example, some types cause others to flee large distances rather than recoil when they beat them; Skirmishers are good against Behemoths and Great Beasts; Knights can sweep away many infantry types; Magicians and Heroes have special interactions in HOTT; Sneakers are good against generals; and so on.

So, if you roll a 6, it very much depends on which element you're rolling for, who it's fighting and what the circumstances are. There are no hit points, as Rick says, but elements can be "out of command" or "demoralised" in certain circumstances: respectively, harder to activate and capable of very little if activated. So there's a lot of depth.

[Cat]

I'll likely stick with HotT, and porting in the DBA big battle rules.  They've always worked fine.

[blacksoilbill]

I'd love to take a look at them, but the lack of a pdf option rules it out: 27gbp postage to Vanuatu is a touch steep!

[fred]

Thanks Rick and Hobgoblin - that gives me lots of info.

I do recall the negatives in SoBH being very effective as making it easier to double the opponents score.

I feel I need to do a little table to understand the Blade vs Warband example - I am assuming that results apply to both sides - so Blades vs Warband, where the Blades roll a 1 (which goes to 6) would be beaten (and killed) by Warband rolling 4+?

[Hobgoblin]

I feel I need to do a little table to understand the Blade vs Warband example - I am assuming that results apply to both sides - so Blades vs Warband, where the Blades roll a 1 (which goes to 6) would be beaten (and killed) by Warband rolling 4+?

Yes, exactly: and Blades rolling a 2 (7) would be beaten and killed by Warband rolling a 5 or 6 (8 or 9). Add in lines of Blades and Warband of uneven length, and you have a very interesting situation (especially - in HOTT at least - Warband pursue defeated foes and Blades don't). And of course there are opportunities to overlap or flank as the combat progresses.

Of all the fantasy mass-battle games I've played, I'd say HOTT is the one where battle lines are most important - which gives it a sense of realism that a lot of more complex games lack.

And there are always interesting tactical decisions to be made with the limited and uncertain budget of action points in each turn: you can generally move a group of elements for one point (as long as they're suitably aligned), so there are always risks associated with disrupting formations to flank (and aim for quick kills). And so on.

[Hobgoblin]

I'll likely stick with HotT, and porting in the DBA big battle rules.  They've always worked fine.

Yeah, HOTT is a stone-cold classic: I think the proof is in the fact that rules have hardly changed at all in 34 years (Shooters and Warband swapped movement after the first edition, and there was one other tiny tweak, but that's about it) and the game is still very widely played. Very few wargames have the same sort of staying power, and those that do are classics too (e.g. Diplomacy).

There is a lot of good stuff in DBF, though. We've had some great games of D3H2, the unofficial predecessor to DBF, which combines DBA 3 with HOTT 2. The addition of Skirmishers/Psiloi is a valuable one, and the introduction of Great Beasts in DBF solves the 'ogres vs giant' problem in HOTT - sometimes more of an aesthetic problem rather than anything else, when one person's giant is six times the size of the other's! There was a 'Brutes' house rule for HOTT floating around on the internet (+4/+4, 3AP), but the Great Beasts set-up is more elegant. And I think the special rules are just great (and easily ported into classic HOTT).

I also like the modelling possibilities that DBF offers. Skirmishers (two to a base) are a nice quick unit to paint up, and I realise that I already have some Infernal Machines (kitbashed for Kings of War) that could be swiftly rebased on a more suitably 60mm frontage ...