Thinking about adapting historical rules for Fantasy elements

[Conquistador]

Well, sort of...

Over in Medieval Adventures and Age of Myths, Gods and Empires I raised some questions about adapting historical rules to allow for fantasy races "traits" but I realized those were not explicitly indicated.

Now that leads to the question(s) of what are those fantasy race/species traits?  Is there general consensus on what traits define a particular fantasy race/species?

I base my fantasy races on how they differ from the "norm" of generic human but that is not a hard and fast standard.

One of the non-weapon centric questions (using terms from the various rules I played for historical games back in the 1970's/1980s) would have to be:

What races/species are impetuous and how do you reflect that in a rules set?

What races/species are fierce and how do you reflect that in a rules set?

What races/species are  "brittle" and how do you reflect that in a rules set?  By "Brittle" I mean they might be fierce and/or impetuous but morale tests might be disastrous if failed.

More mechanics of the game oriented questions:

What What races/species get combat advantages in missile or melee and how do you reflect that in a rules set?

What races/species are more disciplined and how do you reflect that in a rules set?

And along those lines, how do you represent races/species with special abilities (like "invisibility" for sprites or "invisibility in woods" for halflings?)

While many of those questions and their answers will vary between rules sets i am more curious on what defines the fantasy races in most LAF'ers minds when they play a fantasy game.

Gracias,

Glenn

[Conquistador]

For example some rules (Fantasy Rules!) deduct a fixed amount (1/2" IIRC) from the movement of Dwarf units?  Is that reasonable or just a standard stereotype from earlier rules?  If Dwarf units are better disciplined (maybe even marching in step to a drummer) shouldn't they be able to move faster than undisciplined levies?

Should Elves be able to reduce or eliminate movement penalties in woods or jungles?  I have encountered that in rules.

Should long lived races be able to develop expertise in a life span of 100's or 1000's of ears that is reflected in missile or melee bonuses?

Are those kinds of race/species specific adjustments reasonable?

Gracias,

Glenn

[Faust23]

We've been in development of Epic Heroes: Skirmish Gaming in the Realms of Fantasy for more than a couple of years now.  We are adding it as a supplement to my main core rules system called Brink of Battle: Skirmish Gaming through the Ages, a fully Historical work.  I wanted to establish a sound platform for 'the real world' and then add on magic, monsters, etc for Fantasy, and psionics & HiTech gear for Sci-fi down the road. 

We have 273 different traits that cover everything from 'races and racial traits' called Inborn Traits, to Power, Champion (basically Martial maneuvers and such), and Vocation Traits which are meant to represent 'player character classes' or professions in case you want joe human to stand toe to toe with the Stout, Graceful, and Feral races out there.

I intentionally stayed away from having Elf, Dwarf, Orc, etc racial traits, and went for Graceful, Stout, Feral, Aquan, Insectoid, Reptilian, Avian, and Arborean Inborn Traits that allows the player to decide what the 'skin and hair' look like, without pidgeon-holing someone's imagination into a preset idea I may have.  I promise that you will be able to take these Traits, add new Gear and Prestige Abilities like Clerical Rites, Paladin Virtues, Fellguard Sanctions, and Witch Hunter Edicts and either recreate any existing game setting, use our two, or build your own. 

I use the experienced human soldier as the baseline for all modifications.  I also keep traits from becoming too debilitating because its no fun when your dwarf can't run.  But he is only able to Hustle two inches less than a Human, and four inches less than a Graceful model, if that's what you want from your Elf. 

So to answer your question, yes it is possible to quantify those elements and put them as an overlay onto an historical basis, IMO.   

[max]

In my fravorite rules of the moment, Dux Bellorum, each unit has stats and they could be changed to reflect different race types.
The stats are move, bravery, aggression, protection, cohesion.

So for brittle units, have a lower cohesion (meaning they are destroyed quicker) or bravery (meaning it is harder to move and they run first when half the force is lost).

For impetuous units there is a trait called impetuous meaning they have to check to see if they charge, even if you don't want them to.

For fierce, raise the aggression so they have more dice in combat.

There are other things i could think of but they're off the top of my head.
I'm sure you can adapt other rules (Hail Caesar?) to your needs with a bit of creativity.

[Doomhippie]

The question is always how far do you want to go?

As an example a long time ago White Dwarf published an article about how strong the average space marine should really be compared to the average human. They turned out to be about as strong as the strongest champion the rules have nowadays. A single space marine should be easily stronger than 10 imperial guard soldiers. However, that would be completely unbalancing any game people played at that time.

If I take a look at Middle-Earth: There is nothing more terrible than the elvish armies. Since they are closer to the original idea of the world they excell in almost all areas of combat, easily besting any orc (including the uruk-hai who were according to the book the first orcs who were equal to human warriors) and probably better than dwarves and even Numenoreans.

You catch my drift. The more you want to Focus on the differences the wider the span of dice rolls or model stats have to be. Now I'm not familiar with any historic gaming systems so I have no idea how to actually change stats to keep a given system playable.

[Conquistador]

We've been in development of Epic Heroes: Skirmish Gaming <snip>

Thanks for your answer.

Honestly, I have followed from a distance your rules from word of mouth and while they sound good (which given my distrust of "universal rules" based on past experiences is actually high praise) for skirmish I have 8 krmulticase.com cardboard storage cases of dwarf figures alone so I realize I am thinking mass battles more than skirmish - which I didn't have as an explicit element of any of my questions initially but has explicitly come to the forefront of my thinking as these forum discussion have progressed.

Your answer is very helpful though, so again, thanks.

Gracias,

Glenn

[Conquistador]

The question is always how far do you want to go?

<snip>
If I take a look at Middle-Earth: There is nothing more terrible than the elvish armies. Since they are closer to the original idea of the world they excell in almost all areas of combat, easily besting any orc (including the uruk-hai who were according to the book the first orcs who were equal to human warriors) and probably better than dwarves and even Numenoreans.

You catch my drift. The more you want to Focus on the differences the wider the span of dice rolls or model stats have to be. Now I'm not familiar with any historic gaming systems so I have no idea how to actually change stats to keep a given system playable.

Great Question - which is why I a looking at what makes a fantasy race different from humans in game terms now.  What is it that I want to represent on the table.

Gracias,

Glenn

[Conquistador]

<snip>

I intentionally stayed away from having Elf, Dwarf, Orc, etc racial traits, and went for Graceful, Stout, Feral, Aquan, Insectoid, Reptilian, Avian, and Arborean Inborn Traits that allows the player to decide what the 'skin and hair' look like, without pidgeon-holing someone's imagination into a preset idea I may have.<snip>

But haven't you just put an adjective in place of a noun by doing this?  Unless I missed something you have just code-worded (is that a real word?  probably not.) a category/trope/stereotype of character.

Gracias,

Glenn

[Conquistador]

<snip>

If I take a look at Middle-Earth: There is nothing more terrible than the elvish armies. Since they are closer to the original idea of the world they excell in almost all areas of combat, easily besting any orc (including the uruk-hai who were according to the book the first orcs who were equal to human warriors) and probably better than dwarves and even Numenoreans.

<snip>

First Age, although by the latter years of the Third Age I see them as hiding, defending their realms by Operations Other Than War where possible, and reluctant to lose what has become a war of attrition,  probably true although I get the impression they lost a fair number of battles too.  I need to get out my books and start a new thread perhaps.

Gracias,

Glenn

[Doomhippie]

Great Question - which is why I a looking at what makes a fantasy race different from humans in game terms now.  What is it that I want to represent on the table.

Gracias,

Glenn

That of course depends on the game mechanics, doesn't it? Let me give it a try.
Looking at the good old GW skaven, they are ferocious - as long as they think they are winning. Once that is in question they have a tendency to run away. That would mean they have two aspects: ferocious assault (maybe a bonus for a first Charge, or charging in General) and weak-willed (maybe a malus if they are charged or have sustained a vertain amount of losses). Would that be what you are looking for?

Dwaves would be sturdy (harder to kill) and strong-willed (hard to break their moral).
Humans from "civilized" nations might be disciplined (with a general bonus for maneuvering in ranks and a steady moral), while barbarian tribes might be more like the skaven above.
Elves... now that is difficult as I am really biased here... they are just awesome and unbeatable!!!!! 

[Faust23]

But haven't you just put an adjective in place of a noun by doing this?  Unless I missed something you have just code-worded (is that a real word?  probably not.) a category/trope/stereotype of character.

Gracias,

Glenn

If I said Graceful was Elf, then someone who wanted a Human Ninja that was fast and agile would look at that and probably not take it because it is called 'Elf'. I know that sounds impossible, but I've been told that by too many gamers, and/or watched them not use something because its labeled differently.  In the main rules we have the Sword by any other Name concept which actively gives players permission to rename Traits whose mechanics do what they want, but whose name is different than what they think it should be.  Still, people won't give their Samurai the Gung Ho! Trait even if I tell them they can call it Bushido! and it does the same thing...... Its a strange thing that I've observed over the years.  So, I used the more flexible adjective for most of the bipedal land races who share similar physical qualities and then got more specific with non-mammalians like Aquans and Insectoids. Does that make more sense?

Now you can use Graceful for your Elves, and I'll use it for my Githzerai, and so forth.

[Brummie Thug]

Interesting thread. I really can't offer any tips other than 'do what works' for you. There so many different sterotypes for the different races these days its hard to give options when there is so much choice depending on what your setting or fiction that your games are based upon.

My only bugbear is I hate Dwarf's that have reduced movement.

[LawnRanger]

Hi Glenn
  Am a big fan of Fields Of Glory,and have used this set of rules with not much prob for fantasy ,in this set you a few type setting for movement   skirmishers , Drilled , undrilled cav or Lt chariots and others Undrilled (that's my orcs ).
then you have  troop types 11 in total from Light foot to Lt artillery ,

 The morale types poor,av, superior  (elfs )  ,elite
sup and elite get reroll on there morale test if they get a 1 for superior and 1,2 for elite and the Poor class chap have to reroll there  first 6 on combat shooting and morale this way you have a good side of morale it can cover your goblins at poor and your guard unit of elfs on elite ! 

combat is worked by on points of advantage the more ++  you get  the easier it is to hit from a ++ hitting on a 3,4,5,6, to a 5,6 hit on a-- a nice and simple way .

I find it a joy to play and not too much hard work has gone into placing  my orc army on the table top .

hope this helps LR
 

[workerBee]

Hi Glenn
  Am a big fan of Fields Of Glory,and have used this set of rules with not much prob for fantasy ,in this set you a few type setting for movement   skirmishers , Drilled , undrilled cav or Lt chariots and others Undrilled (that's my orcs ).
then you have  troop types 11 in total from Light foot to Lt artillery ,

 The morale types poor,av, superior  (elfs )  ,elite
sup and elite get reroll on there morale test if they get a 1 for superior and 1,2 for elite and the Poor class chap have to reroll there  first 6 on combat shooting and morale this way you have a good side of morale it can cover your goblins at poor and your guard unit of elfs on elite ! 

combat is worked by on points of advantage the more ++  you get  the easier it is to hit from a ++ hitting on a 3,4,5,6, to a 5,6 hit on a-- a nice and simple way .

I find it a joy to play and not too much hard work has gone into placing  my orc army on the table top .

hope this helps LR
 

Let me show my ignorance - is Fields of Glory multiple rule sets or a rules set with a lot of supplements?  Never seen the rules except when on the Osprey page looking for books on aircraft or colonial Spain.

Gracias,

Glenn

[LawnRanger]

Glenn
  Its one book written by Bodley Scott   that covers Ancient and medieval but you have supplements that cover army lists of the period so ,

swifter than eagles book will cover All Biblical middle east at war, 2 dozen + armies are in it I got mine at salute last year on bring and buy for a five quid 
rise of rome well cover mid- late rep ,,, and its EN ..ect

Its had such a warm welcome at are club that within a few months every player had changed from DBM DBMM ect to it.

All my local show hosts FOG comps now and very few DBX stuff..
Am surprized that they don't game it at shows over the water I thought that it was big over in the states as is here .

LR