VSF skirmish...what you want or don't want....

[Pappa Midnight]

When you're looking for VSF skirmish rules what are actually after?

1)Pre-made characters with minimal customisation ,"templates" with the ability to totally customise them or to make New types from scratch?
2)Small groups (5 models) or larger numbers(10+)
3)Different "factions" :Military, Police, Underworld, Scientists, Gentleman/Ladies clubs, Lower Classes etc each with distinctive styles of play?
4)Supernatural elements:Magick, Psionics, Vampyres, Ghosts, Werewolves, Golems, Zombies etc....
5)Basic vehicle rules for common conveyances or Extensive vehicle building rules? Horses and Carriages or outrageous steam tech?
6)One off games or campaign games with character advancement?
7)How important is the FLUFF and pretty pictures?
8)Story/scenario based play with objectives or simple head to head combat?

There is method to my madness, I'm just trying to get a feel for what gamers actually want rather than what a game designer likes.

Regards
PM

[JollyBob]

1) Templates to begin with, optional rules to customise or create from scratch.
2) 5 - 15 models depending on background of the force.
3) Yes to "factions", but limit the amount of special rules for them.
4) Yes.
5) Both. As per question 1, really.
6) Both. Pick up and Play scenarios included, but also rules on campaign management.
7) Very. If I'm not inspired by the artwork or world building, I'm not going to spend money on the book. I may as well make something up myself. The hook is all important.
Mix of both - the Mordheim scenarios were pretty good examples of this, although being GW, in practice they tended to end up as Top Trumps with figures. The idea was good, though.

Essentially, I'd like to see more games designed like Rogue Trader or the Realm of Chaos books for Warhammer - Here are some templates and ideas to get you started, where you take it from there is entirely up to you.    

Obviously some of the core rules in those books were a bit ropey, but I hope you understand what I mean when I hold them up as examples of clearly defined game worlds which still contained near infinite possibility for invention and customisation.

[Red Orc]

Not quite sure if you're after comments about a gang-development game, or a small-scale battlegame. So some answers might be a bit ambiguous; I'm kind of assuming a Necromunda-style gang-development game.

1)Pre-made characters with minimal customisation ,"templates" with the ability to totally customise them or to make New types from scratch?

A combination of all of them is good, but when it comes down to it, a couple of customisable templates for characters or units allows players to riff off the ideas much better than a totally open system (or a totally rigid one) allows them to get an idea of how things might work. I'd rather have some sample characters or some generic gangs already statted that I could use as a basis, than either be told 'this is what you must use' or 'well, it's up to you, you have 64,000 possible options'.

2)Small groups (5 models) or larger numbers(10+)

For gang size? I'd go somewhere in between. 'About 8' I'd say, but with the chances of expanding rather than having a max of 10 let's say.

3)Different "factions" :Military, Police, Underworld, Scientists, Gentleman/Ladies clubs, Lower Classes etc each with distinctive styles of play?

No so bothered. Going back to the idea of templates, different sample units (eg, the Hunt Club) could have slightly different stats to another unit (eg the Dockside Toughs). So the ability to theme a force, without the necessity to do so, is good; as a general principle, I'd rather chose a style of play than be forced into it. This is a big problem with GW's games for instance - this army uses these rules and those models and that playing style - but if I want to mix and match a force that includes Lord Footling-Twelp (crack shot with an elephant gun) and Scroat, his homicidal manservant (+3 with a cleaver and Extra Lurk Ability) I'd rather be able to do so, than only use M'Lord with the Hunt Club, and Scroat with the Dockside Toughs.

4)Supernatural elements:Magick, Psionics, Vampyres, Ghosts, Werewolves, Golems, Zombies etc....

Yes please. As add-ons rather than necessarily having to use them.

5)Basic vehicle rules for common conveyances or Extensive vehicle building rules? Horses and Carriages or outrageous steam tech?

Outrageous steam tech, but again as something that doesn't have to be used. If every game was a battle against Psionic Zombies on the back of Steam-powered Imperial Zeppelin, the thrill would probably wear of quite quickly.

6)One off games or campaign games with character advancement?

Campaign games with character advancement. Again, if people don't want to use that, they don't have to. I would. Always always about telling stories with me.

7)How important is the FLUFF and pretty pictures?

They enhance a good set of rules, they don't make a bad set good. I can always find fluff (not necessarily pictures) from elsewhere. In fact, my head's full of fluff, just like Winnie the Pooh. Plots about sinister counts and their nefarious deeds in pursuit of the lost treasure that the heiress has discovered a key to hidden in the old painting that has now mysteriously disappeared from the upstairs hall where the ghost of the tragic wife of the lost earl who reputedly went mad on an expedition to Borneo is supposed to haunt the suitors of the daughters of the house... etc, are easy enough.

8)Story/scenario based play with objectives or simple head to head combat?

Story/scenario based (see above answers). I'd always rather have a plot; scenarios and campaigns go together like two things that go very well together. It's usually easier to not use rules that are there, than to use rules that aren't. If you have a game with scenarios, you can still play is a head-to-head. You can call it the 'Grudge Match' scenario if you like, where the objective is to destroy the other gang.

On the other hand, it's not so terribly hard to invent scenarios - take the high ground, collect the loot counters, get out alive, or whatever. But some scenarios that give you some idea of balancing forces would be cool, because some set-ups would seem to favour one side or the other.

Hope this is helpful to your endeavour, PM...

[Smith]

1)Pre-made characters with minimal customisation ,"templates" with the ability to totally customise them or to make New types from scratch?
I generally favour as much customizability as possible – especially for such small, character-driven games as this. With VSF/Pulp/Sci-Fi/Fantasy, there's really no limit to the players' imaginations, and I think the easier it is to incorporate new ideas or quirky elements, the better. SoBH does this well – the templates are there, as are the sample characters, but the creation system makes it really easy to develop new concepts in a short space of time.

2)Small groups (5 models) or larger numbers(10+)
Either small warbands (3–10 models), wherein every character is unique (e.g. Necromunda), or one where you have a few heroes and small units (c.2–5 models) of allies, mooks or generic cultists (e.g. Mordheim).

3)Different "factions" :Military, Police, Underworld, Scientists, Gentleman/Ladies clubs, Lower Classes etc each with distinctive styles of play?
Yes, but only as examples of what factions can be created by the player – I always like to develop factions that fit the characters, rather than characters that fit the faction – much more room for versatility. As for distinctive styles of play, I'm less bothered – like I say, the characters should drive the game, rather than the factions (e.g. if a player wants an occult Abberline, for example, they should be able to make a police 'gang' that accommodates that, rather than one that effectively penalizes them for not playing more to the police faction's strength or playing style revolving around hand-to-hand combat).

4)Supernatural elements:Magick, Psionics, Vampyres, Ghosts, Werewolves, Golems, Zombies etc....
Yes, again as examples that the player can develop/ignore/tweak as they see fit – without throwing game balance out the window.

5)Basic vehicle rules for common conveyances or Extensive vehicle building rules? Horses and Carriages or outrageous steam tech?
Sure – the more, the merrier! Again, the more generic the basic rules and character/unit creation, the more things can be accommodated.

6)One off games or campaign games with character advancement?
Character advancement, certainly. I don't think most people need to be shown how to play a campaign game. Still some scenarios and a scenario system are nice bonuses.

7)How important is the FLUFF and pretty pictures?
Nice, but unimportant. If I like the idea of VSF (which I do), I'll have my own ideas of what should be in the world or not. For example, I might want zombie cowboys because I like the Foundry models, but I might think that steamtech is silly. My opponent, by contrast, might really want steamtech because he's just painted some Steampunk Ottomans. A generic world allows everything to be incorporated. A 'set' world limits you (especially inasmuch as it dictates what the rules system can and can't handle).

8)Story/scenario based play with objectives or simple head to head combat?
Both. A set of rules that caters to the former doesn't preclude the latter. Conversely, a set designed just for head-to-head clashes is harder to develop into one that accommodates scenarios and story-based play.


I think my overall conclusion would be: Be as generic and as all-accommodating as possible. The risk is there of the rules being a jack of all trades and master of none, but better that than something which puts off as many people as it attracts (unless of course, those number in the thousands, in which case the rules are selling like hotcakes and to hell with anyone who dislikes them!).

[Heldrak]

When you're looking for VSF skirmish rules what are actually after?

1)Pre-made characters with minimal customisation ,"templates" with the ability to totally customise them or to make New types from scratch?

For my part, I prefer total customization. I would always rather create my own characters than use pre-made ones. That being said, If you wanted to present some pre-made characters as examples, that certainly wouldn't be a problem.

2)Small groups (5 models) or larger numbers(10+)

I like small numbers, but I think that scalability is important. The ability to take a viable small group (5ish) and add to it for certain scenarios up to about 15ish would be ideal.

3)Different "factions" :Military, Police, Underworld, Scientists, Gentleman/Ladies clubs, Lower Classes etc each with distinctive styles of play?

Yes, please.

4)Supernatural elements:Magick, Psionics, Vampyres, Ghosts, Werewolves, Golems, Zombies etc....

Yes, please.

5)Basic vehicle rules for common conveyances or Extensive vehicle building rules? Horses and Carriages or outrageous steam tech?

For my own part, I would rather keep the vehicles pretty basic, otherwise you start wandering into G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. territory.

6)One off games or campaign games with character advancement?

I like both options.

7)How important is the FLUFF and pretty pictures?

Personally, I don't like an excessive amount of story text as it can make the rules feel like the efforts of a frustrated novelist (I think Malifaux errs on the side of too much text, for example).

8)Story/scenario based play with objectives or simple head to head combat?

I like a more scenario/narrative driven game, although having a default dust-up scenario is always a good idea for when time is short or you just want to bust heads.

There is method to my madness, I'm just trying to get a feel for what gamers actually want rather than what a game designer likes.

Regards
PM

[OSHIROmodels]

Everything apart from four 

cheers

James

[Malamute]

Everything apart from four 

cheers

James

No! I like four!

[Plynkes]

No! I like four!

Hear, hear. Four's the only one I'm interested in! Especially when applied to Zulu dwarf witchdoctors and their irresistible maiden assistants, Baboon-women, and immortal queens from lost cities.

[Conquistador]

When you're looking for VSF skirmish rules what are actually after?

1)Pre-made characters with minimal customisation ,"templates" with the ability to totally customise them or to make New types from scratch?

Um, Yes.  Prefer the second by a long shot but template characters are nice for examples and quick intro games.

2)Small groups (5 models) or larger numbers(10+)

Between 4 and 12 sounds good

3)Different "factions" :Military, Police, Underworld, Scientists, Gentleman/Ladies clubs, Lower Classes etc each with distinctive styles of play?

Maybe... Prefer to tweak my own designs though for PCs...

4)Supernatural elements:Magick, Psionics, Vampyres, Ghosts, Werewolves, Golems, Zombies etc....

Extremely limited, please this is VSF not VF

5)Basic vehicle rules for common conveyances or Extensive vehicle building rules? Horses and Carriages or outrageous steam tech?

Basic - both horse and steam powered

6)One off games or campaign games with character advancement?

Both but former would be most of my games.

7)How important is the FLUFF and pretty pictures?

Probably Zero.

8)Story/scenario based play with objectives or simple head to head combat?

Story/scenario driven - I can make those up pretty easily.  Prefer no canned campaigns though, my imagination works.


There is method to my madness, I'm just trying to get a feel for what gamers actually want rather than what a game designer likes.

Regards
PM

Gracias,

Glenn

[Dr. The Viking]

When you're looking for VSF skirmish rules what are actually after?

A game that is gameable... and not just random lottery. In a nice dressing of steam contraptions, colourful uniforms, fair ladies and snobbish high ranking officers.

1)Pre-made characters with minimal customisation ,"templates" with the ability to totally customise them or to make New types from scratch?

Both I think. Templates are great for getting into a game. When you've become familiar with you can construct your own things.

2)Small groups (5 models) or larger numbers(10+)

For skirmish type games I think AE Bounty style with 1-20 figs a side is good.


3)Different "factions" :Military, Police, Underworld, Scientists, Gentleman/Ladies clubs, Lower Classes etc each with distinctive styles of play?

I like that. I like gaming too... meaning that I like the idea of abilities that aren't entirely logic, but adds to the gaming element. Factions is a way of doing that.

4)Supernatural elements:Magick, Psionics, Vampyres, Ghosts, Werewolves, Golems, Zombies etc....

Sure! Make it an option. Don't make a game that can't live without it.

5)Basic vehicle rules for common conveyances or Extensive vehicle building rules? Horses and Carriages or outrageous steam tech?

I'll admit that steam contraptions feature rather high on my scale of 'what's proper' VSF

6)One off games or campaign games with character advancement?

I've yet to see character advancement that added to the game... but campaign games can be really good. I do not think it's something that the rules have to provide. A narrative and linked scenarios should be provided by the gamers themselves.

7)How important is the FLUFF and pretty pictures?

Important. It's sometimes the difference between readable and boring. A set of rules without fluff or pictures is just a bunch of numbers and mechanics.

8)Story/scenario based play with objectives or simple head to head combat?

[Pappa Midnight]

Thank you all for the feedback so far.

I've bought games in the past and have pretty much "always" found stuff which I wish was included.I suppose it comes down to a case of not pleasing all the people, all the time! I think a good core system with the facilty to add or take away as much as you like seems the way forward.

Interesting points about factions. I personally dislike "laid in stone" limits to characters (like old RPG games where certain classes possessed abilities that anyone could learn, given time, but weren't allowed to). I  personally see factions as a way of building a group with a common cause ( a group of footpads fighting for turf or soldiers defending the Realm), but I also like the idea of a free sytem where combinations of types can be made as long as they are plausible. I suppose even  police and criminals can have a truce whilst battling a Martian invasion!!

What about things like social class? Would Lord Smythe be happy to take orders from Tom Dogsbody or would he expect to be in charge due to breeding rather than skill? We are talking about the Victoran era where such things influenced people.

Regards
PM

[Smith]

I like the idea of social class affecting gameplay, but it would have to depend on the game system to incorporate it. I don't think being born in a Whitechapel slum would be too much of an impediment to ordering toffs around if you're packing a steam-gatling! VSF is a world turned upside down – there's always a rationale for 'reality' being subverted.

[Red Orc]

Even Lord Strangley-Minted would be allowed to be ordered to do something by a social inferior in certain circumstances - if he's got any brains at all, he'll defer to heads with more local knowledge, whether that's native guides on safari, his gamekeepers when he's at the pub in the village or the strange old longshoreman when he's trying to sneak around Limehouse at 2am. Otherwise he'll get himself killed.

On a bit of a tangent, organisations like the Masons gave people men from different social classes the opportunity to mix in a more democratic environment. Sometimes perhaps those sorts of relationships might be called upon outside the organisation.

[Ramshackle_Curtis]

I think that "factions" can be implemented by the players. Providing solid rules is more impotent.

Consider that there is little in game difference between a squad of royal marines, a unit of elite police and a martian rifle team. Basically, they all are units of well trained soldiers with guns. Maybe the Martians get access to some more wierd guns, but apart from that whats the difference?

So laying out a useful, customisable force building setup is more important than whether they wear green or brown.

Vehicles should be integral to the game, and not feel like an add on.

The way I figure it, you want

1. Leaders and personalities.

2. Squads, from grunt type combat units to super trooper

3. Small contraptions such as impervious suits.

4. Vehicles, from light transports to heavy tanks.

5. Artillery

6. Monsters

7. Civilians

8. Good Flying rules(applicable to all the above unit types)

I think they are the basic elements that would make a great VSF game.

[Alfrik]

Sounds like the begining of a RPG game.  With 10 or so figures on a side.... limiting to what kind of military units would send so few soldiers from their unit to scout Im thinking. So I would stay with under 10 figures, give them customization and play the games as an RPG. Just my 2 cents tossed in.