Fate of Battle: Look, Sarge, No Charts: Napoleonic Wars released

[surdu]

We just released a set of rules that has been under development for three years:  Fate of Battle:  Look, Sarge, No Charts: Napoleonic Wars.  We're very happy with the rules.  People who have sworn off the Napoleonic Wars as the domain of grognards and haters like these rules.  People new to the period also like them. 



The rules are currently available as a .pdf download from RPGNow.  In the next few weeks the paper books will be available as well.



For more information, see http://www.bucksurdu.com/Buck_Surdu/Look,_Sarge,_No_Charts.html

I have also posted snippets of information on my blog during development.  See www.bucksurdu.com/blog.

Buck Surdu

[nevermore]

Will have a look at the links thanx...did you know that Napoleon was hit by a artillery shell once, its true thats how he got his name Napoleon Blown Apart.

[joroas]

did you know that Napoleon was hit by a artillery shell once, its true thats how he got his name Napoleon Blown Apart.

Don't forget your coat on the way out! 

[Jakar Nilson]

I read that as "Face of Battle: Look Sarge, No Charts!" A collaboration between Mike Ball and the G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. crew. A bit of an oxymoron.

[nevermore]

Don't forget your coat on the way out! 

I got a camouflage jacket i'll be damned if i can find the bugger though.

[surdu]

Corny humor aside, the response to these rules was quite good last weekend at the Fall In gaming convention in Lancaster, PA, USA.  One of the guys who played in one of the games later posted: "My next purchase is going to be the Naps rules. As I have said before, I always liked the period but hated the rules and a lot of the baggage. Yep, I will be playing Naps again after a 30 year hiatus."

Friday night we had so many people on the standby list for my six-player game that my co-author threw an impromptu, eight-player game on the table.  We had several people who played in one of the games come back for a second game later in the convention.

From those who have actually played the game, we've been gratified by the response.

Buck Surdu
(co author)

[Conquistador]

Boring mechanics questions:

So this is a D6 based game where you have to attach labels to the dice to create unique to the era dice?

Combat resolution, how does this work?  You consult values from unit labels and/or roll the custom dice to get the result?

Activation is accomplished how?  Trying imagine how a "double random" dice and cards process works...

Movement is standard for units of the same type always (adjusted for terrain and/or some kind of "morale/cohesion" status I assume) or is it variable?

Gracias,

Glenn

[surdu]

So this is a D6 based game where you have to attach labels to the dice to create unique to the era dice?

Combat resolution, how does this work?  You consult values from unit labels and/or roll the custom dice to get the result?

Activation is accomplished how?  Trying imagine how a "double random" dice and cards process works...

Movement is standard for units of the same type always (adjusted for terrain and/or some kind of "morale/cohesion" status I assume) or is it variable?

Glenn:

  Not exactly.  Combat is conducted using d10.  You roll a d10, add the appropriate attack factor (short range fire, long range fire, or melee), and compare the modified roll to the enemy's defense factor.  All of that information is on the unit labels.  There are of course nuances, but that is the basic mechanism.

  The special dice are used for morale checks, rolls to stand or close, and cavalry breakthrough.  Units have different morale values, depending on their formation.  In most cases, for instance, infantry has a better morale value in column than line.  As an example of rolling to stand, you roll a d10.  If this is greater than the unit's morale value in its current formation, you consult a branch specific die.  For infantry this tells you whether you may change formation, how effective your defensive fire will be, etc.  If the result on the d10 is NOT greater than your morale value, you consult a different d6 that tells you what the unit may do.  In this way a lot of variation in unit response is handled through a single roll of (two or three) dice.  It really streamlines resolution of activity without the need for large charts and tables with lots of modifiers that provide the illusion of fidelity but are in fact merely detail.

  Movement is standard, as you mention.  There is enough randomness in the activation scheme.  We didn't need additional randomness to movement; although, I've used partially random movement in another set of Napoleonic rules, Wellington Rules.

  Activation is one of the hallmarks of the LSNC system.  You roll a d6 at the beginning of each turn for each headquarters.  Each turn, a headquarters may have a different number on his d6.  Then you draw cards from a "game deck," which has red cards numbered 1 to 6, black cards numbered 1 to 6, and a joker.  There is a nuance to the red and black cards, but basically when you draw a card from the deck, all units whose d6 matches activate.  In this way, unlike other card-based games, many people aren't watching a single person do stuff.  The two sources of randomness make it difficult to guess when your units will activate.  When the joker is drawn, the turn is over.  In this way, units may activate once, twice, or never in an given turn.

  Skirmish combat is quite unique in this game as well.  I won't describe the mechanic, but you get the EFFECTS of skirmishers without them overbalancing a game.  I will tell you, however, that when you are an army with few or no skirmishers, it sucks to be fighting one that has them.

  I hope this helps and entices you to give them a try.  I've designed many games over the years.  This is my third set of Napoleonic rules.  My BIASED opinion is that not only are these my best rules design effort to date, but I think they are the best set of Napoleonic rules for this scale of combat.  Folks in our club and at conventions who have sworn never to play Napoleonics again, enjoy these rules very much.

Buck Surdu

P.S.  You may also enjoy the ACW and WWII versions as well.  In addition, we have already begun development of the next set in this series, LSCN: Fantasy, Ancients, Mediaeval.  Early play tests have been quite satisfying.

[Conquistador]

Thank you for the reply.  I found some unexpected time in between my post and now (and access to my laptop) and judicious exploration of the blog link and the game report link (on either the announcement link o the blog, forget which,) provided information also.

I am in the process selling off other miniatures so I can buy 1/600th scale Napoleonics and ACW figures.  The current rules candidates for army and corps level games are Polemos Napoleonic Marcheal d'Empire by Peter Berry, Paintingshed Napoleonic Rules (free download for version 3.0,) and (remote chance - great for smaller games,) BONAPARTE by a local war gamer.  Your rules might be applicable but I am mostly interested in games where stands represent Brigades, Divisions, or at the least larger Regiments.  I am not sure your rules really address that level of play after a single read of the online materials.

My ACW plans revolve around the smaller battles above skirmish level that occurred or could have occurred in Missouri, Arkansas, New Mexico Territory, Kansas Territory, and the Unorganized ("Indian") Territory.  Right now the only rules I own for that are Mr. Lincoln's War which seems appropriate for the size of the historical battles.

Really not interested in "PDF only" format rules so I will have to wait until hardcopy is available before I make a decision.  I like PDF copies as backups to hardcopy just as I like my Nook as an alternative or backup to hardcopy books or Mapquest/my Tom Tom as an alternative to paper maps. 

Gracias,

Glenn

[Conquistador]

D10 good, D6 seems too flat a curve based on my gaming since (miniatures early 1970's, board games since 1959 - at least that is when my mother used to say I received my first war game (ACW based) and toy soldiers since I was old enough to not try and eat them.)

I really like opposed die roll games (SG 2, DS 2, etc.,) for more single figure based games.  But some people are allergic to D4/D6/D8/D10/D12 and especially the more esoteric D16/D20/D24/D30 dice mechanics.  

That activation system sounds interesting.

Gracias,

Glenn

[surdu]

I am mostly interested in games where stands represent Brigades, Divisions, or at the least larger Regiments.  I am not sure your rules really address that level of play after a single read of the online materials.

Yes, it sounds like you are looking for a different scale than our rules will provide.  Good luck in your search.

My ACW plans revolve around the smaller battles above skirmish level that occurred or could have occurred in Missouri, Arkansas, New Mexico Territory, Kansas Territory, and the Unorganized ("Indian") Territory.  Right now the only rules I own for that are Mr. Lincoln's War which seems appropriate for the size of the historical battles.

For ACW skirmish games I highly recommend Brother Against Brother.  It is a terrific set of rules.  The book itself is a little difficult to get through, but the rules are great.  I am particularly fond of the way morale is handled.

For slightly larger games, I really enjoy and oldie but goodie: Rally 'Round the Flag.  I has been out of print for many years, but I'm sure you can find a copy on line somewhere.

A Union So Tested: Look, Sarge, No Charts: ACW will work for this period and scale as well.  You can get them as both a .pdf and hard copy book.

Really not interested in "PDF only" format rules so I will have to wait until hardcopy is available before I make a decision.  I like PDF copies as backups to hardcopy just as I like my Nook as an alternative or backup to hardcopy books or Mapquest/my Tom Tom as an alternative to paper maps.

We're getting quotes on the book, but my hope is to have them available before Christmas.

Buck

[surdu]

We believe that the combination of rules mechanics, base labels, and special dice greatly streamline play without loss of fidelity.  Most people who have played games at conventions with the WWII, ACW, or Napoleonic versions have really enjoyed them.  Some of those who enjoy the games, however, have mentioned that they play the game at home with rosters they produce instead of the base labels -- especially for their first couple of games back home.  To aid them and to reduce the barrier to entry for others interested in trying the rules, we have posted rosters on our Web page.

The overall rules page is: http://www.bucksurdu.com/Buck_Surdu/Look,_Sarge,_No_Charts.html  You can click through to whichever set of rules interests you.  The direct link to the Napoleonic rules page is:  http://www.bucksurdu.com/Buck_Surdu/LSNC__Napoleonic.html

We still feel the labels and dice are the right way to go.  When the labels are printed in a neutral color, they virtually disappear on the table, but big pink A4 or Letter-sized sheets of charts spoil the aesthetics of your game.  In any event, we support either method of play.

Buck

[workerBee]

I wonder if there would be any interest in making actual dice for the rules instead of modifying the balance or aesthetics of the dice with labels.  I assume you looked into that option?

Gracias,

Glenn

[surdu]

I wonder if there would be any interest in making actual dice for the rules instead of modifying the balance or aesthetics of the dice with labels.  I assume you looked into that option?

Gracias,

Glenn

Glenn:

  As my dice are notoriously cold, I didn't think that there was really an issue with balance.     I can't vouch for the balance of the blank dice you can buy from a variety of manufacturers BEFORE I apply the labels.

  We did look into printing dice.  Unless we go with huge quantities, the price is prohibitive.  Even at $0.50 a die retail, each player needs seven.  Six players worth is more than most gamers are willing to pay it seems.  If the rules take off and become popular, we'll look at it again.

Buck

[Conquistador]

Glenn:

  As my dice are notoriously cold, I didn't think that there was really an issue with balance.     I can't vouch for the balance of the blank dice you can buy from a variety of manufacturers BEFORE I apply the labels.

 <snip>

Buck

I have a friend with that problem - cold dice - but they only fail when it is critical.

LOL.  I have an associate (note the term) who rolls dice until he feels he can determine if they roll high or low and has them in different small storage boxes.  We no longer let him provide his own dice.  I have seen them roll opposite of what he needs so I doubt they are fixed (just unbalanced) but the whole idea that he preselects to gain advantage is what got his personal dice banned.

Bad form thing...

Gracias,

Glenn