IHMN Rule Clarification/Interpretation x3

[strawbuk]

Hi

1. By luck or skill (probably former!) me and my pals assumed from start that IHMN had a move phase where each player took turns to move one figure, then a shoot phase where each player took turns to shooot with one figure (or group for a volley) and then a fight phase etc (Somebody will now tell me this is wrong!)

For us it was fine for for 1vs1 and not too many figures.  But a bit slow and to easily forget who has run who hasn't etc . So for multiplayer games and/or games with big companies, we allow the player with intiative to move ALL their figures then the next player to move all theirs.

On the shooting/fight phases we have also allowed a player in big games to do all their shooting , though recognise this is a bit more problematic as who you shoot/fight first can matter! But not been a problem so far.  But anyway we are probably going to stick with mass moves as above and then the usual round robin of shooting/fighting.

2.  Volleys - great for incresaing chances of hitting a target.  But we then add together the pluck modifiers of all weaopons used.  ie a volley from 3 figures with military rifles that hit would be -3 pluck (-1 per rifle).   

Ditto for Fights and mobbing we total the pluck mods of weapons used.

Not clear if right or not.  But works for us and only way to bring down the big beasts or 'heros' with the grunts.

3.  Finally, and this more a house rule, we are tinkering with idea that a figure/group that has not moved yet AND declares it will not move, can shoot at figure moving into contact with the firer if the firer passes a pluck test. The firer can't fire again in same turn.  This is largely because people are being flattened by my charging Kerchak (Tarzan's gorilla stepdad ) who in my force is a rather supersized Papo figure
   
Cheers

[Silbuster]

1. You are right about the sequence in the rules. We use a blue counter for <3"; green for <6" and red for running. Yellow counters are used to show which figures have shot. All counters are then removed and yellow ones used for figures which have fought. I don't think we would go for the mass moves as the side with only pistols would be creamed.

2. Not a bad idea at all. We'll probably try that. However, it leaves weapons with a zero or positive pluck modifier at too much of a disadvantage. I would suggest that -1 is added to the primary shooter's pluck modifier for each additional shooter.

In combat, being surrounded by 3 blokes with two-handed swords would give a pluck modifier of -6! How about each additional weapon adds -1 to the pluck modifier of the primary fighter's weapon?

3. But if the figure has not moved yet and passes a pluck test after being charged by Kerchak then he can step back out of contact and blast him. What we do, if the enemy have some tough but expensive fighters is have some cheap pawns to bulk up the numbers which generally allows us to try to break off after all the enemy have moved.

[archdukek]

1. We normally play multi-player games with 6 or 7 players each with Companies of 8 or so figures. We also found it too slow to move one figure each. Now we usually operate by players moving or firing with pairs of figures. Combat is usually resolved one at a time but we allow the opponent to counter-Attack immediately and tend to resolve one combat completely before moving on to the next.
Rather than dice we draw chits to determine initiative order so it is possible to allow movement by two companies at once if their figures are on different sides of the board. We also draw the chits at the start of each phase rather than turn. So one company may get to move first but it can't guarantee that it will also get to fire or fight first as well. Makes for more exciting, less predictable turns.
2. We have been considering an additional pluck bonus for volley fire but have yet to implement it. It will make major characters mor vulnerable which could have negative consequences for the plot development in a campaign.

[strawbuk]

Thanks all. Food for thought!

[strawbuk]

After several more games , including the Bad Bob scenario from the book where Bob is a real toughie  and where neither he or anyone died,  we've decided on a change:  that those tactically astute enough to mass fire on or surround a target should get a pluck advantage.  We notice that many of real tough 2+ and 3+ pluck heroes also have good armor and other pluck bonus  advantages as well so just too hard.

So now, in same way that each additional firer or fighter  gives plus one to the hit roll in volleying or mobbing, each additional firer/fighter adds one to pluck role required. 

 just feels more real /balanced/right.

[wulfgar22]

A 2+ Pluck character is almost impossible to bring down. Fortunately, most scenarios can be won without having to bring that character down. That said, we almost never give anyone 2+ Pluck...3+ Pluck is plenty good enough. Nor do we usually have more than one or two characters per Company with 3+ or 4+ Pluck. And, lastly, we make sure we don't give Pluck boosting Talents and the like to anyone with a high Pluck.

[strawbuk]

yes but several of the 'canon' figures have 2/3+ pluck. heros should be heroic but... as you say.

[wulfgar22]

yes but several of the 'canon' figures have 2/3+ pluck. heros should be heroic but... as you say.

I re-did all the 'canon' companies we play with (all on my blog, if you're interested), minor adjustments to stats, a different weapon or talent here or a new character or 'soldier' type there...nothing major but one of the great things about IHMN is it's so easy to tinker.

[strawbuk]

I re-did all the 'canon' companies we play with (all on my blog, if you're interested), minor adjustments to stats, a different weapon or talent here or a new character or 'soldier' type there...nothing major but one of the great things about IHMN is it's so easy to tinker.

Nice!

[Craig]

I re-did all the 'canon' companies we play with (all on my blog, if you're interested), minor adjustments to stats, a different weapon or talent here or a new character or 'soldier' type there...nothing major but one of the great things about IHMN is it's so easy to tinker.

I do like it when people take our work and make it their own 

[Silbuster]

Re: 3.  "Finally, and this more a house rule, we are tinkering with idea that a figure/group that has not moved yet AND declares it will not move, can shoot at figure moving into contact with the firer if the firer passes a pluck test. The firer can't fire again in same turn.  This is largely because people are being flattened by my charging Kerchak (Tarzan's gorilla stepdad ) who in my force is a rather supersized Papo figure"

Actually, we have the reverse problem. Many of our group use companies of veteran (pluck 4) soldiers with inspirational commanders who almost always disengage from charging figures and then blow them away. I've been toying with the idea of forcing those who are charged by enemy figures to make an immediate test, if they wish to disengage, and to carry out the disengagement straight away as an out-of-sequence movement. It might not sound like much but, in reality, it gives the charging player much more of a chance to get and stay in contact. For example, after two figures have charged into contact and two disengaged (or failed to disengage), the charging player has moved a total of two figures whereas the disengaging player has moved four (two disengaging or failing to disengage and two more as part of the normal movement sequence). There is therefore a good chance that, after the disengaging player has moved all his figures,  the charging player will still have figures which have not yet charged and from which the other player cannot disengage.  It's not that radical a change since this already happens if the charger has the Terrifying talent but I think that it will be enough to give the quality shooty armies a severe headache.

[Genghis]

I'm always a fan of 2nd Ed 40K-style overwatch options.  How about overwatch being a state you go into in the shooting phase in lieu of shooting, which lets you fire at any point (even in the middle of the opponent's move) in the next movement phase (but also counts as your shot for that turn as well)?

There could be a penalty depending upon how long you have the target in your sights (<3" = -2 & <6" =-1) so a long charge across the open is an easy shot, but someone diving across an alley, or nipping around a corner to charge you is quite tricky.

[wulfgar22]

I'm always a fan of 2nd Ed 40K-style overwatch options.  How about overwatch being a state you go into in the shooting phase in lieu of shooting, which lets you fire at any point (even in the middle of the opponent's move) in the next movement phase (but also counts as your shot for that turn as well)?

There could be a penalty depending upon how long you have the target in your sights (<3" = -2 & <6" =-1) so a long charge across the open is an easy shot, but someone diving across an alley, or nipping around a corner to charge you is quite tricky.

I'm normally a fan of Overwatch as well but in IHMN I feel riflemen are plenty powerful enough already...giving them Overwatch would, I think, make them very hard to close with.