Recommend me a Ruleset

[Golan2072]

I know FAD really well, and was on its forums until they stopped working recently. Is it, in your opinion, more fun to play than, say, Chain Reaction or Force on Force?

[Pentaro]

Is it, in your opinion, more fun to play than, say, Chain Reaction or Force on Force?

I don't know, I have tried CR only a couple of times with a friend and we always got lost in the rules. I haven't tied FoF but it looks (even) faster and simpler than FAD.

[aliensurfer]

Fubar, Forge of War, Warengine - all very good. I've bought some of the THW stuff, i just don't like the way the mechanisms work - unless we read it wrong, a gunfightstarted, with each play reacting and just went on and on...

I've love to get Crossfire, is there a new version due out, as it's harder to get hold of than dodo poo at the moment 

[Commander Vyper]

Fubar for the mulitple Genre angles, ARSE for zed games and simplicity.

[matakishi]

Caliver Books have Crossfire and version 2 is delayed. However, all the other Arty rule sets that have been updated that I've seen have suffered from it so I'm not too bothered about the wait.

[dijit]

For platoon level games I quite like FAD4, it's simple, tactical, fast and best of all free! THW games seem to be 'love or hate' things, try Chain reaction first, if you don't like that, then stay away from the rest as they're versions of the same principle and from what I hear equally badly written.
Duncan

[Golan2072]

Hmmm... I'm currently leaning towards either FAD4 or Force on Force; I know FAD4, but how well-written is Force on Force?

[dijit]

I have Force on Force too, not played it mind, but have read it. The rulesystem seems to be a little more complicated than FAD4, which in return requires more complex rules, but the writing seems to be good and well explained, so I reckon after a game or two you should have a handle on the basic rules. One of the things I found difficult with Force on Force was balancing the forces as there are no points values given. I know they want to stay away from competition gaming, but they do help people balance forces reasonably ok for quick games where there isn't time to scenario test, etc.

[Hrothgar]

Personally, having played both a number of times, I would go with FAD4 any day over Force on Force. FAD moves on at a nice pace and all the relevant rules are easy to get at and review in the manual. There are things I like about Force on Force, but searching through the cluttered manual for just the right rule (or exception) as opposed to a dozen similar is not my idea of fun. FAD's advanced stuff like vehicle design and campaign construction are ridiculously easy to use as well.

 

[Golan2072]

Alright, I'll go with FAD 4, then...

[Eldorf.Dragonsbane]

THW games seem to be 'love or hate' things, try Chain reaction first, if you don't like that, then stay away from the rest as they're versions of the same principle and from what I hear equally badly written.
Duncan

One reason why the THW rules seem to be a "love or hate" thing is probably because of the layout of the rules, and the fact that the system operates differently from what most people are familiar with, most the time you want to roll a lower number, in order to activate you want to roll your rep or lower, and when passing a test you want to roll the Rep or lower too. First Ed. ATZ was laid out poorly and had poor editing, but once you got the gist of the rules the layout seemed less of a factor, 2nd Ed ATZ (All Things Zombie: Better Dead Then Zed) actually is laid out a lot better and has better editing. Since THW has grown since Chain Reaction 1st ed and even Chain Reaction 2 came out, Ed has been able to have someone do the editing, and he even has rules, and rule supplements that were written by people other then him.

As I mentioned in my previous post the best way to get the hang of the Chain Reaction system is through a series of "mini" games, in which you initially focus on one of the games mechanics, ie ranged combat, then move onto another mechanic, ie melee combat, and slowly add to what you have done, ie start the characters say 24 inches apart and then have them move into melee, with one of them do the charging test and the other doing the taking charge test. Then start them both out of sight and have one move in sight of the other so you know how the in-sight tests work. Next "game" add another hostile figure so you have 2 on 1, and repeat the Ranged combat, then melee, etc... By playing these "mini" games where you are focusing on one or two main mechanics, you should have a solid grasp of the rules system by the time you play your first game.

Now it may sound like I play only ATZ (or even Nuts! or FNG, or 5150, which are all Chain Reaction based games), that's not true. I do play an occasional game of Akula's AR:SE, Dead Will Walk, Xtreme Zombie Hunter (which it looks like the rules are unfortunately no longer available), Marines vs. Zombies, and a couple of other Zombie games. Out of all the rules systems I have I do prefer ATZ/Chain Reaction, while not the simplest rules, they do allow for your character(s) to do anything that you might be able to do in real live via a challenge test, so you want to see if you can jump that 6ft gap between building roofs, while you could do it in real life (I know I could have back in High School when I ran track and did the Long Jump as one of my events), in game all you need to do is pass the challenge test, which with it being a 6ft jump you might rule that if you pass 1 die you succeed but you don't land at the ready (standing/moving) and have to spend an activation getting back up. Or you want to rig a trap to take out a group of gangers or zombies, and not kill your team in the process, roll a challenge test, pass 0 dice you fail, the trap fails to work, pass 1 die the trap work but not as intended, you only get one or two individuals, now pass 2 dice you succeed and the trap performs as intended.

Also ATZ/Chain Reaction can be played in any scale, even though the rules state inches, if you play in 15mm or smaller just convert the inches to CM, 12inch=12cm, if you have larger figures say 50mm+ just double the measurements. All you need to actually play are the rules (which you wil need for any system), the figures (actual minis or even paper standees), a couple dice (6 sided, you can play with only 2 or 3, but figure at around 12 or more especially for ATZ and rolling for zombie generation, if possible have a couple that are different colors for use as activation dice, and assign each side a certain color for the activation dice), something to measure with (I use a 99 cent 60 inch retractable sewing ruler I bought at Hobby Lobby that is Metric on the one side and Inches on the other), and then the surface to play on. If you want you can include building, either card stock, model railroad/resin, or scratch built, or just use sheets of paper to represent buildings, and vehicles (again card stock, models, die cast, or small slips of paper with the type of vehicle written on them).

I myself primarily use 28mm minis (various manufactures ranging from Copplestone Castings to eM4 to Reaper to Hasslefree to Wargames Factory, the plastic zombies they have, to Flying Frog Productions, the Last Night on Earth survivors figures, etc...) and a combination of Die cast and cardstock vehicles, most my terrain is WWG Urban Mayhem (for an Urban or Suburban setting) or Ebbles Foldign Unit Structures (these can be used for warehouses to Military structures to workshops/barns in a rural setting). For the rest of the terrain dressing i will either use S/O scale model railroad scenery or scratch build.

Either way no matter what rule system you choose I am sure you can go wrong. The primary advantage I see with the Chain Reaction system other then that you can play the games solo, is that they are all inter changeable, and you can easily cross over from one to another, say you are playing Nuts!!! and want zombies (are they a Nazi project, American Project, a Japanese Project or a Soviet Project? who knows for sure), then throw in ATZ to handle the zombies. say you want to do a Roswell, NM scenario, for the Military use Nuts! and then use 5150 for the aliens. Playing ATZ and want a twist, bring in 5150 and introduce Aliens and futuristic technology, who knows maybe the aliens are there to eradicate the zombie infection like in the Spierig Brothers movie Undead.

Good Luck in what every system you ultimately choose.

[inrepose]

Thanks for the vote for Gruntz.. I am working on a Weird War II and generic WWII / Modern variation but the core rules are the focus at the moment.

[aliensurfer]

Caliver Books have Crossfire and version 2 is delayed. However, all the other Arty rule sets that have been updated that I've seen have suffered from it so I'm not too bothered about the wait.

cheers but whenever I look at their website they keep saying the book is out of stock and out of print :-(

Still, I can wait - my next rules will the the Gaslight compendium 

[A_Train]

Is there anyone that has played both Flying Lead and Chain Reaction 3 that have a preference?
I haven't had a chance to play either, but I have read both and have likes and dislikes there.  I'm looking to mostly play a gangers vs police (or other gangers) as my game type.
Or if anyone has any suggestions that would fit this type shout them out.

Not trying to hijack, but I didn't think I needed to create a similar thread for the same thing.

[dijit]

Flying Lead is pretty much SoBH with a few minor differences. It's simple and robust, but if you want detail then you need to look else where. It's the perfect game for a quick game and can model most scenarios reasonably well. I like the SoBH range, but they do have they're limits.
I'd go so far as to say that Flying Lead is loads quicker and easier to pick up than Chain Reaction and IMHO is the better game for it, but then again I'm no lover of chain reaction.
Duncan