A New Black Powder Skirmish Game

[Ahistorian]

Sounds like a fair deal! 

[Argonor]

The difference between the two dice rolled together to resolve the shot. Toughness is solely for combat, because no amount of fancy bayonetwork is going to save you from a bullet!

So if you are a Good shot firing a musket at a target in the open 12" away, you need a total of 6+, with a difference of 3+ between the two dice - as we call it, 6s & 3s. Therefore 5+1=6 is a killing hit, but 6+6=12 only causes a Panic.

That misunderstanding is a great idea though! Can I use it for another ruleset?

That's quite amusing - I made a (massed battle) nappie ruleset many years ago that used the difference between 2 dice to find the number of casualties inflicted.

I may have a go at this - I'd like to get me some highlanders to fight the cause of Bonnie Prince Charlie against the hated redcoats. 

[Ahistorian]

That's exactly the battle here I played here! http://ahwargaming.blogspot.co.uk/

[Emir of Askaristan]

Ok we tried the rules tonight, playtest fashion. This means very simple scenery and small number of figures just to get the feel of the mechanisms. I had read through the rules, my opponent had not.

We set up on a small table about 3ft square , a narrow defile in the hills, with some pine copses and scrub offering cover. Two forces, 8 Texian infantry lead by Hugh Samston and Capt Gonzales 6 Mexican Regulars and 4 praesidial cavalry, faced off each other at opposite ends of the defile.

Gonzales began first and together with 3 men ran to the high ground whilst the remaining 3 sought cover behind a stand of pines. The cavalry trotted forward.

Samston sent a lone skirmisher ahead to fire from behind a large bush while splitting the remaining force into two groups, on to the hills to the left, the other, led by himself to the right. So far so good. No problems with activation and movement.

The next turn brought us into range and the firing rules worked fine. The mechanism of using the difference between the two dice thrown to hit to determine if a wound is caused is a neat one and saves throwing another die. The differences between cover and shooting ability also worked out fine.

Samston and Gonzales men traded fire for a while until the first panic markers were taken.

Here it began to unravel.  We couldn't get our heads round the table for morale and activating a unit or fig with panic markers. The Texian behind the scrub was hit but not wounded twice - thus gaining two panics. I tried to activate him and due to my die throw he charged. Odd we thought, but being behind cover he never actually made it out due to rolling a 2 for his move.

The Mexicans came on and the Texians fired back picking them off slowly.

We played a few more turns . The cavalry charged but didn't have legs to contact so the Texians survived another round this time and got stuck in the following turn. Result - melee simple and straight forwards. Two praesidials killed.

What works - the difference die mechanism for firing mean you only throw one dice for hitting and wounding.

What doesn't work - the panic/morale test seems odd.

What were we doing wrong?

[Ahistorian]

Hi,

Sounds like a fun game despite any confusion.

What was it that you found odd about the morale checks?

[Emir of Askaristan]

The morale checks didn't seem to tally with any low bad-high good (or opposite) type of structure.

The difference between the two dice thrown could on referring to the chart lead to a number of actions. However the chart starts with the word "roll" rather than difference and the mods seem to involve plusses and minuses from the individual / group taking the test and their opponent.

For example my chap was behind a bush and was hit, but not wounded twice (2 panics). The morale test (2 dice) gave a difference which was modified by the presence of his leader (+1), and his second panic (-1) This result made him charge - an odd thing to do given that he'd got 2 panics and was behind cover, even if his commander was watching.

There was another example later in the game which was similar.

I'd have thought the smaller the difference between the dice scores the more likely the individual or group would act favourably and the higher the score then the more likely that things would go wrong. Ie an "act as you please" on 0 or 1 and a "Flee the Table" on 5+.

However I might have missed something given it was the first time I'd played.

[Ahistorian]

You're quite right, they don't. The effects are structured around the relative probabilities of each difference - which vary quite wildly compared to the 6 probabilities on a standard d6.

The effects are in different orders in the three morale tables to represent the different likelihoods of warriors acting in those ways (especially once the modifiers come into play). Remember that panic does not equal fear - it just means losing your head.

The reason there are six options (including "As Desired") is quite waffly and academic, but it boils down to "fight or flight" being a lot more complicated than that, and that the six morale results in the game represent the six broadly universal reactions to being in mortal danger - attack it, hide from it, move away from it, flee it, fire wildly and pray - or just crack on with your day.

It leads to "realistically" unexpected behaviour from your troops - like your gallant Texan bursting from cover to attack his enemies. It wasn't the wisest thing to do, but he failed a morale roll, panicked and did something silly! I was once in a 2-on-20 fight where we were holding a doorway with relative ease - until someone managed to land a punch on my face and I stormed into the crowd on reflex. Not a clever move, and without back-up arriving when it did, I would've taken a lot more damage. I realise anecdote is not the singular of data, but it's nice to humanise these sorts of things, I think. 

The modifiers give either you or your enemy a little control over what happens, depending on the situation you find yourself in. It's a bit like SAGA, where you can use the enemy's fatigue against them. In your Texan's case, since he had "-1" as a possible modifier, your opponent could have used that to modify either die, resulting (presuming that he was an Irregular) in two other options besides Charge. He would have been free to pick from (again presuming a difference of 4): Charge, Flee the Board and Retire. That's because the modifier is possible, and therefore optional, and applied to either die.

I hope all that helps. In hindsight, it feels quite longwinded.  I appreciate that the games I write are always a little bit "off the wall" in terms of usual wargaming S.O.P., and that not everyone likes the little tweaks I put in to amuse myself. If I can help with anything else, don't hesitate to ask.

Finally - you are quite right, it shouldn't really say "roll". You're the first person to pick up on that, so thank you! I will amend the file now.

[Emir of Askaristan]

I get what you mean and now I understand your references it makes sense. I think just a combination of unfamiliarity and first game jitters.

I spend a fair bit of time each week squeezing words into paragraphs or red penning and commenting on the work of others so I get how difficult it is to write clearly and concisely and have often had to explain what I think a sentence meant to those who get something else from it entirely so I appreciate you taking the time to get back to me.

I think another game is on the cards. This time with a little more effort for scenery and background....after all the Mexicans will want their revenge!

[Malamute]

I think another game is on the cards. This time with a little more effort for scenery and background....after all the Mexicans will want their revenge!

And photographs.

[Ahistorian]

Hurrah! I'm glad I could help, and I look forward to the photos 

[Emir of Askaristan]

Ok, but I'm gonna need some more kit for this one.

Malamute, stand by for a wee order.....

[Malamute]

Ok, but I'm gonna need some more kit for this one.

Malamute, stand by for a wee order.....

 

 

[Harry Faversham]

I was once in a 2-on-20 fight where we were holding a doorway with relative ease - until someone managed to land a punch on my face and I stormed into the crowd on reflex. Not a clever move, and without back-up arriving when it did, I would've taken a lot more damage. I realise anecdote is not the singular of data, but it's nice to humanise these sorts of things, I think. 

  Good job there wasn't a chump like you defending the gate at Hugomonte... innit!!!??? 

[Ahistorian]

Good job there wasn't a chump like you defending the gate at Hugomonte... innit!!!??? 

True, but I like to think that in that situation the crowd of angry Midlanders chanting "Black Coun-tree! Black Coun-tree!" would have been on my side anyway! 

[Emir of Askaristan]

Order placed

Now, where did I put that fort....