Will Frostgrave work as a large multiplayer game?

[Xintao]

I was thinking of putting the game on down at my FLGS, but as a large multiplayer brawl. 6 to 8 players. Maybe 2 to 4 teams, or every Wizard for his self.

Can the rules handle it? Or do you think it would bog down too much?

Xin

[gorillacrab]

I've been in 2and 3-player games and will host a 5-6 player game tomorrow.

FG can definitely handle 3 players or teams - but I think it would bog down with 4 or more competing teams. Of course there are easy fixes:
- make "teams" with 1 player running Wizard and 1 player running Apprentice
- consider lowering 10-character maximum to 8 per warband
- use the popular variant to end the game after 5 or 6 turns (night falls, magic storm - whatever shuts it down)
- definitely bring pre-created spell lists and warbands as well as QRSs

Also, if playing with 3 teams I recommend altering setup area rules to avert having a middle player getting squeezed (ie west between north and south). I do this by restricting start area to half boards on the NE and SE edges, with the third player starting right in the middle of the west side (with 1/4 board width to either side). This creates a more balanced triangular start.
Good gaming.
GC

[robh]

Would be really interested to see how the multi-player goes.  After the initial 1 on 1 test games most of our attempts will be multiplayer. Mordheim worked best as multiplayer in an "allies" format when there were still only 2 sides, playing all vs all with individual gangs tended to result in pretty uninspiring games.

[Xintao]

Would be really interested to see how the multi-player goes.  After the initial 1 on 1 test games most of our attempts will be multiplayer. Mordheim worked best as multiplayer in an "allies" format when there were still only 2 sides, playing all vs all with individual gangs tended to result in pretty uninspiring games.

Did you allow betrayals within a given side? Meaning one player screws over his team mates to get more loot?

[robh]

When we played individual gangs as allies we didn't prohibit it, but it was not a frequent event.
Each player keeps the warpstone or trinkets he finds was the general practice.

The best games were non campaign, with double or triple sized warbands of one type against a like opposition, between us we could field multiples of all the basic gangs and a fair few of the Town Cryer expansions. Only real problem was the skaven band, its effectiveness increased out of proportion to any of the others as it got bigger.

[mweaver]

One advantage to multiplayer campaigns is that it is easier to dog-pile anyone who is pulling too far ahead.  I agree that Mordheim worked best multi-player.  I never found the big brawls uninspiring - quite the reverse, usually - but they could be slooow as all six or eight or whatever players took their independent turns.  Three or four-player campaigns generally worked fairly well, though.

My gaming group has played Mordheim very heavily through the years, and ultimately what we found the most fun was collaborative warbands working against a common foe (run by either a GM or collaboratively by the group).  I expect when we play Frostgrave, it will be along these lines as well (mostly we play RPGs, so working together is how we tend to think).

-Michael

[robh]

I agree that Mordheim worked best multi-player.  I never found the big brawls uninspiring - quite the reverse, usually - but they could be slooow as all six or eight or whatever players took their independent turns.

Good point, largely a function of the multiple die rolls of the Warhammer combat system. Frostgrave combat is very quick and bloody in comparison so does not drag like that. (Actually may be too quick and bloody.....but that is another discussion).

[Bodvoc]

We played a 5 player game last night which worked really well.

[fred]

We played our first game with 4 players - it kind of ended up with two 2v2 fights - but with some interaction between all the gangs

It all seemed to work well - each player's activation is fairly quick so there isn't too much waiting around - which can sometimes happen with too many players in a game - especially when each one is acting independently.

[Xintao]

So I think my format will be :
-8 players
-2 teams of "allies"
-each player with individual goals
-overall team goal
-6 x 4 table
-event cards, random monster/magic storm/building collapse/ etc

Xin

[gorillacrab]

We played a 5 player game last night which worked really well.

Bodvoc, can you provide more details? How was the table set up, how many warbands - how did you keep it flowing with that number?
Thanks.

[robh]

Xin:  That sounds like a good starting point. The individual objectives are always a good idea as they can encourage teamwork or bring a bit of rivalry.

Will you be playing the campaign rules or are these multiplayer sessions going to be one offs?

[Bodvoc]

For our 5 player game, we marked out 5 starting points which we then diced for, all random encounters/wandering monsters came on in the centre of the table plus a d10 inches random first move. Each player placed 3 treasure tokens before we diced for set up positions and that wad it really. Initiative went to the highest d20 throw each turn, playing in a clockwise manner from that player. It was really fun with various monsters coming for you whilst you made a desperate attempt to grab the treasure and trying to avoid all manner of spells and missiles from other wizards.

[Fenrir]

Speak for yourself, Bodvoc- you didn't have a Wraith, a Snow Troll and a Frost-Giant running towards your lads!! 

Seriously though, Frostgrave really seems to work well as a multiplayer game- sure it does slow down a little, but in my own experience most games do to some degree... Worth it though, for the sheer mayhem that ensues I always think!

[fred]

For our 5 player game, we marked out 5 starting points which we then diced for, all random encounters/wandering monsters came on in the centre of the table plus a d10 inches random first move. Each player placed 3 treasure tokens before we diced for set up positions and that wad it really. Initiative went to the highest d20 throw each turn, playing in a clockwise manner from that player. It was really fun with various monsters coming for you whilst you made a desperate attempt to grab the treasure and trying to avoid all manner of spells and missiles from other wizards.

For initiative - we went with the order of the d20 roll for all 4 players. I've played the clockwise initiative a few times before - and it means that you nearly always go before the same player irrespective of what you roll - which doesn't seem random enough for me!