Lion Rampant: Hundred Years War Battle Report

[Maniacus]

Great looking game and figs.

I've been looking at doing a multi-player game at a convention, but I'm not sure if the activation rolls would cause some frustration. I've debated using a variation on the activation tests. Rather than a player's turn ending on a failed activation, that unit would not be able to activate. The player could continue to attempt to activate the other units in his/her command. What are your thoughts?

For our multi-player games of LR (multiple retinues on each side) we've played where a failed activation ends that player's turn with his retinue, but the remaining allied players on that side can continue on with their own retinues until they either finish or fail an activation.  Turns seem to progress quickly enough to keep everyone involved and not too much time is spent idle even if a player fails an activation early on.

However, I've noted that other groups play the way you suggest where a failed activation only means that that particular unit doesn't take an action and the player can still attempt to activate the remaining units in their retinue.  I think doing it this way might remove a little bit of the strategizing and drama about which unit(s) are the most important to attempt activating first, but otherwise it would work out okay.  And especially for a convention game where keeping players involved and engaged is important it should be just fine.

[Dr. Zombie]

I have run a 4 player game at a convention. I drev cards for player turns. Each player had two cards in the "activationdeck". So whenever an activation was failed I drew another card to see who was next. That both meant that players was a bit more engaged because it could be their turn any minute, and even if you failed an activation, you could get lucky and get another go right after.

We had several great moments where player A failed an activation to charge Player B, but was lucky to get another turn before Player B could get at chance to react. The activation draw became a very fun and sometimes tense feature.

[Atheling]

How do you rate the rules for larger games?

I ask as we will no doubt have some up and coming larger games on our Haggis Rampant Border Wars Campaign

Darrell.

[Dr. Zombie]

I have not really tried really big games. I am sure there is a breaking point where the game will bog down.

[Atheling]

I have not really tried really big games. I am sure there is a breaking point where the game will bog down.

I'll report back when we get to that stage then

Darrell.

[m4jumbo]

How do you rate the rules for larger games?

I ask as we will no doubt have some up and coming larger games on our Haggis Rampant Border Wars Campaign

Darrell.

As one of the participants in this game, and other multi player Lion Rampant games, the rules seem to work just fine for larger games.  This particular Hundred Years War game saw three, 20 point retinues on each side and everything seemed to run smoothly.   The way we did activations (see above) worked well and kept everyone involved even when activations were failed on a retinues first roll.

The one area of the rules that we feel doesn't work as well with larger games is the 3" separation rule if applied to all friendly units.  With larger games you simply run out of space pretty quickly to deploy and to move if you have to maintain that separation between all units.  

For larger games you might also have to modify the rule book scenarios a bit to account for the increase in units.  Things like set up zones, number of units left before rolling for end game, number of objective tokens etc might need some tweaking for larger games.

Let us know how your large game goes and if you have to modify anything.

[Le Korrigan]

Thank you for sharing this battle report! I am starting to build an army for HYW and looking forward to playing with it!

Your miniatures and terrain look fantastic 

[Nord]

The big problem with ignoring the activation rule is that it makes missile troops a little more powerful. You can activate them with impunity, no risk, whereas if they fail to fire and your turn ends, it does make you stop and think a bit more. Should I soften the enemy up with a volley, then charge in to finish them off? There's more drama, but can also be more frustration as you anticipate - some poor sod always seems to fail and spends most of the game spectating. The card deck idea sounds like a good compromise. We have also played the rule that the general allows a reroll of a failed activation - it's the number 7 trait - inpsiring? - plus we give them one more trait too.

[braxenk]

thanks for sharing. That's pretty much what all this hobby is about at its best, good rules, well painted figs, nice  terrain, pictures, fun.

good job!

[wrgmr1]

Beautifully painted figures, nice table. Great AAR, thanks for posting, very inspiring!

[Mr.J]

That's a lovely looking collection of miniatures.

[Marine0846]

Great looking game.
Looks like a good time was had by all.

[PAULSPENCE]

Bonjour,

What a great looking game!

Could you please let me know if they're metal or plastic and who the manufacturers are?

Cheers,

Paul

[Atheling]

Excellent and just what I wanted to hear m4jumbo

Thanks,
Darrell.

[m4jumbo]

Bonjour,

What a great looking game!

Could you please let me know if they're metal or plastic and who the manufacturers are?

Cheers,

Paul

The figures are metal and are a mix of Perry and Claymore Castings.