Alternatives to Frostgrave?

[Sangennaru]

What you are suggesting might work very well, but...

As for whipping up my own rules, i'm doing that already for another two gaming projects, and i rather wanted to have an already printed and solid ruleset for once.

Basically, i'm working on my Sci-Fi rules, they work rather well and keep me and my friends busy in the game-design part. We're also studying a long-term campaign system for SAGA as well, so for this game (that can become a nice campaign system for low-effort evenings) i'd like to have something ready made.

For this, Frostgrave seemed perfect, but the idea of having only wizards wasn't the best choice for all of us. It would be great to simply have a non-magic version of frostgrave, that's it! ^_^

[Major_Gilbear]

For this, Frostgrave seemed perfect, but the idea of having only wizards wasn't the best choice for all of us. It would be great to simply have a non-magic version of frostgrave, that's it! ^_^

Why not substitute the Wizard classes for Adventurer classes instead, and the Spells for Skills? That would be simple enough to do, and keeps all the other Frostgrave rules basically the same.

Each player would then have an Adventurer, a Sidekick/protégé, plus a band of hired henchmen to raid the ruins for valuable treasures... Sounds a little bit like Tomb Raider in some ways!

[danmer]

Another voice piping up for both Song of... and Otherworld. Song of... Has been around for a good few years and I find it a great little system; Otherworld came out around the same time as Frostgrave so I've only just started playing it, but I like what I see.

Neither system is great for building experience, however, if that's of interest to you?

[Sangennaru]

Neither system is great for building experience, however, if that's of interest to you?

at least in a sense, yes. I'd love to have a campaign - dungeon crawler with coop or versus players and no master... that requires a good point system (and SoBH has a terrible point system) and some ways to improve your troops without max-mins... i'm not saying i want it ironclad solid, but better than "use your imagination".

Why not substitute the Wizard classes for Adventurer classes instead, and the Spells for Skills? That would be simple enough to do, and keeps all the other Frostgrave rules basically the same.

Each player would then have an Adventurer, a Sidekick/protégé, plus a band of hired henchmen to raid the ruins for valuable treasures... Sounds a little bit like Tomb Raider in some ways!

Sounds great! is there any already proposed system for that? My point is that i don't want to invest my game-design time in that, since i've got already two already opened game developings...

[Hobgoblin]

at least in a sense, yes. I'd love to have a campaign - dungeon crawler with coop or versus players and no master... that requires a good point system (and SoBH has a terrible point system) and some ways to improve your troops without max-mins... i'm not saying i want it ironclad solid, but better than "use your imagination".

Out of interest, where do you find the SoBH points system breaks down? I've generally found that the vulnerability of any one "heavy" to numbers and missile fire means that it's harder than in most fantasy games to create an "unbreakable" hero or monster. (a bunch of goblins or kobolds with the Gregarious rule can swarm and bring down the nastiest monster pretty easily; ditto weak archers using Concentrated Fire).

The Advanced SoBH system is already out (in the form of Fightin' Fungi). I don't know if you've seen it, but it offers more combat detail than Frostgrave - naturally enough, given the latter's magical focus. So, ASoBH has three types of two-handed weapons, flails, warmers (armour-piercing), spears, javelins, short bows, crossbows, different types of martial art and so on.

I suppose where I'm puzzled is that most of Frostgrave's detail is in the magic. If you don't want the magic, it's a pretty basic system otherwise - and less detailed than many other skirmish games (no morale, few weapon types, rigid profiles). That's in no way a criticism of Frostgrave - it's great - but its emphasis seems to be on precisely what you don't want.

My solution for a "non-magical Frostgrave" would be to use ASoBH, but allow each starting warband just two personalities - one of up to 75 points and one of up to 50 points (in lieu of the magician and his apprentice). Each warband would be 300 points overall to begin with. Then you could set a ratio of victory points to warband points to allow upgrades in the form of either new troops or additional traits/stat advances. If the winner of each encounter received up to 25 points (and the loser less, obviously) that could either be saved or spent, you could get a really nice, slow progression.

So, you might start with a main character with Q3, C3, Leader, Short Bow for 70 points and a deputy with Q3, C4, Bludgeon. If the first battle went well, you might have 20 points to spend on upgrades. If no troops needed replaced, you could add Good Shot and Stealth to your leader for 12 points, and then give the deputy Block (shield) for 8 points. And so on. You could upgrade your regular troops as well. A further twist would be to allow the removal of traits and the taking of downgrades (perhaps the deputy's leg was injured in the last encounter, so he now has Short Move), to allow some rejuggling of points. (it's expensive, obviously). That could give a really nice narrative flow to the campaign. Given the number of traits in the Ganesha stable, you would have virtually endless options. You could upgrade C and Q too, of course (though that's expensive).

You could allocate victory points in groups of five for each objective during games. So a 5-point objective would give you 5 points to spend; achieving 5 out of 5 objectives in a single game would give you 25, but a mixed outcome might give one player 15 and another 10.

Just a few thoughts!

[Sangennaru]

Out of interest, where do you find the SoBH points system breaks down? I've generally found that the vulnerability of any one "heavy" to numbers and missile fire means that it's harder than in most fantasy games to create an "unbreakable" hero or monster. (a bunch of goblins or kobolds with the Gregarious rule can swarm and bring down the nastiest monster pretty easily; ditto weak archers using Concentrated Fire).

Well, speaking of the "old" SoBH, it breaks down kinda immediately. Most of the heroic skills (expecially "tough") are overpowered for their point cost, and some (like "hero") can be easily used on a Q6 model for a rather cheap price. In general, even using the point system defined in the manual the unbalanced point system is rather obvious, but when you're allowed to customize your models (using the linear formula of the units generator) you can ways too easily max-min your troops.
That, in a way that makes the point system almost unusable. That was the same think that all my mate thoughts as well as most of the players i've met around. I kinda spent some time chatting with Sfiligoi (the SoBH creator), and he kinda admitted the flaws himself.

For what i care, SoBH is great even without a reliable point system, but i can't use that for a "serious game" in good faith.


About the fact that frostgrave doesn't have much other than mages... you might be right, i suppose... =(


Meanwhile, after almost three day spent painting my first warband miniature, i completely spoiled it by applying a hand of protective spray with something dusty nearby. Now i can also trow the mini away. At last it wasn't the hero... but still.

[mweaver]

"Meanwhile, after almost three day spent painting my first warband miniature, i completely spoiled it by..."

ArghhhhH!  Sorry to hear it!

-Michael

[Pijlie]

Meanwhile, after almost three day spent painting my first warband miniature, i completely spoiled it by applying a hand of protective spray with something dusty nearby. Now i can also trow the mini away. At last it wasn't the hero... but still.

Strip, rinse, repeat. 

[maxxev]

Out of curiosity what are your objections to Mordheim?

[YPU]

Am I the only one who feels a dedicated fantasy spin-of for Pulp alley would be a good idea?

[Sangennaru]

Ehh, i will most likely start all over again. It was the first 28mm i painted since a LONG time and it was turning out rather cool, now i'm a tad demotivated.

Out of curiosity what are your objections to Mordheim?

Mordheim is a great framework, but i really am not a fan of the combat mechanics. After all, it is probably not so different from the others, so it might be an option as well. ^_^

Am I the only one who feels a dedicated fantasy spin-of for Pulp alley would be a good idea?

If i'm not mistaken, the point system of PA isn't meant for competitive gaming, it's only there to have an idea of the troops in play. That might be a problem for a PvP campaign system?

Cheers
Jack

[Arundel]

Having Pulp Alley branch out with some pure fantasy rules seems like a very natural direction to me. While some people are using it for fantasy games already, without any modifications, it would still be great to have a slightly more detailed hth system, rules for armour, spells, some creatures' stats, etc. I hope this happens in the future!

[Sangennaru]

That would be something to watch for sure!

Personally i'm now attracted by BoB and D&D5 ed (the free edition is pretty much similar, with a LOT of content for free: https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules ), although i am curious to take a look at ASoBH... i hate that i can't read the manuals before i buy them. And i DO buy a lot of them, for sure.

[Hobgoblin]

Well, speaking of the "old" SoBH, it breaks down kinda immediately. Most of the heroic skills (expecially "tough") are overpowered for their point cost, and some (like "hero") can be easily used on a Q6 model for a rather cheap price. In general, even using the point system defined in the manual the unbalanced point system is rather obvious, but when you're allowed to customize your models (using the linear formula of the units generator) you can ways too easily max-min your troops.
That, in a way that makes the point system almost unusable. That was the same think that all my mate thoughts as well as most of the players i've met around. I kinda spent some time chatting with Sfiligoi (the SoBH creator), and he kinda admitted the flaws himself.

Interesting. But what particular use would a Q6 creature with the Hero trait be? At long distances, it would get the free move that anything else would. At closer ranges, you'd be guaranteed an attack or a shot, but with very little chance of a second or third action and a huge risk of a turnover if you rolled both dice. Moving and attacking in the same turn would be a rarity, and the characters would probably be exposed to missile fire a lot. They'd very rarely be able to take advantage of the Ambush rule.

And - most importantly - what miniature would fit such a profile? A rusty automaton or something? Or a very old undead hero? If your opponents are really trying to stat anything more run-of-the mill that way, the problem may not lie with the rules ...  

Also, Q6, C3, Hero is 15 points and a chunk of your 33% allowance for personalities. You can get Q3, C2 for just 5 points more without eating into your personality allowance - or C4, C2, Gregarious. Both are likely to allow much more effective use of ganging up, given the likelihood of more actions per turn. Given the freed-up personality points for leaders or powerful heroes, I'd go for the weaker but more disciplined standard troops every time.

With Tough, if you're going for something with C3, that's more than half your personality allowance in a standard 300-point warband if the model is Q3, and around half even if it's Q4. And that Q will worsen with each wound in standard SoBH, so there's little or no point taking a creature that's any worse than Q4. Also, unless the character has a high C score, there's a reasonable chance that he'll be killed outright in combat anyway (it's fairly easy to triple the score of an outnumbered foe with C of 2 or 3)

To put both options into context, if you want a Q3, C3 character with Tough and Hero, that's 90 points (so pretty much your full standard personality allowance). You could get six Q6/C3 characters with Hero, or seven Q6/C2 ones, but would they really be any better? I'd take the Q3/C3, Tough, Hero character every time - and probably give him Shooter: Medium to take the point cost up to 98 and give him a ranged attack. One more thing: in Advanced SoBH, your Q6 characters would hardly ever get to react (it's a quality roll), which would disadvantage them further.

Meanwhile, after almost three day spent painting my first warband miniature, i completely spoiled it by applying a hand of protective spray with something dusty nearby. Now i can also trow the mini away. At last it wasn't the hero... but still.

Sorry to hear that! It's the most infuriating thing when it happens (and the reason I never use spray cans now). Hope the salvage job goes well!