Idea for an Aztec v. Conquistador Scenario

[Doc Twilight]

A little tired, but having some issues with sleep lately, so going to type this up now. Forgive me if some of this is a little foggy as a result.

I've been trying for some time to come up with a game for a local convention that I'm fond of. Originally, I had intended to do a KKBB style "attack on the secret base" style game using .45, but frankly the economics of building the base have got me snookered, and at any rate, I think I'd like to wait on those lines to develope a bit further before adding to my collection and going all out with a big project.

So I went thumbing through my "notebook o'ideas", and came across an idea I had a few years ago. It's this idea that prompted my previous question regarding Gloire and Aztecs v. Conquistadors.

Ok, here's the concept. Would really appreciate your thoughts on it, and whether it would work. It has some of the same concepts I had intended to use for my other project, albeit transposed to a different period.

Essentially, I'm thinking something along the lines of "La Noche Triste" (although it occurs to me that a game of the sacking of Tenochtitlan would also work similarly.)

Each player in the game controls a party of Spaniards and/or Allies trying to get out of the capital before he is skewered. Each player's goal is to gain as many victory points as possible by carrying loot/rescuing friendlies/escorting native allies, etc. That said, however, there can only be one winner of the game. And because the stereotypical Conquistador is a gold loving savage, we have to assume that he is more interested in looking out for his own best interests than those of his comrades (a few exceptional types excluded from the general stereotype).

Unfortunately, despite being greedy bastards, the Conquistadors also have a sense of honor and brotherhood, and will not -directly- attack another ally or Conquistador.

As such, each player will, in addition to his/her Spanish "team" also control a party of Aztecs. The Aztecs, of course, win by stopping as many Conquistadors as they can from leaving the sacred city (or, alternatively, from looting it, if going with the Tenochtitlan scenario). They can do this by killing the Conquistadors or Capturing them, and simply by slowing them down to the point that they cannot realistically escape.

Because each player is controlling a team from both sides, and because he cannot attack fellow Spaniards, he might well be prompted to use his Aztecs to delay/harass other allies as long as possible and earn all the glory for himself. (That's sort of the idea here.)
Ultimately, the game would have one Conquistador winner and one Aztec winner. But it could be a very interesting sort of fight, regardless, because the players are representing -both- sides on the field, which will make for some interesting skullduggery.

Throw into this a series of traps, perhaps, and other dangers.

Does any of this make sense? Do you think it would work with Gloire? Am I thinking of the wrong type of game here? Perhaps this should be a pulp game pitting teams of rival archaeologists against each other?

Just wanted to get this out. Hope to get some feedback.

-Doc

[Operator5]

It's an interesting idea. I would make one change to the rules to jeep things moving along. Each band (say 3 models---a Grade 3 and two Grade 1s) is assigned a playing card. The models all activate when that card is drawn. This will speed up play and keep players from constantly having to determine who activates next.

Other than that, you would just have to make sure that players do not control an Aztec band near their conquistador band. Otherwise, they could just choose not to attack themselves.

It could be a lot of fun.

[Aaron]

It sounds like a blast! I don't see why it couldn't also work with archeologists also though.

[PeteMurray]

Sounds like a great plan!

One thing you might try is having each Aztec band have a particular grudge against a specific Conquistador band. So for example: Coatl's retinue might have a grudge against Martinez's conquistadors, and earns double victory points for beating them. Coatl's retinue would get normal victory points for fighting Lopar's conquistadors, but maybe Jaguar's retinue would get double victory points against Lopar's conquistadors. As long as each player is getting double victory points for whacking on the other player's conquistadors, that might work well.

[Doc Twilight]

Pete, Aaron, and Op5 -

Thank you all for your kind words and suggestions. I'm really honored that you like my idea! I think I'm going to give it a shot.
A few more questions, if you don't mind. I have read the rules, but I haven't had the chance to play around with them much, so I'll defer to the judgement of my experienced peers here:

I guess my first thought is that I wonder which setting - La Noche Triste or the looting of Tenochtitlan, would work better as a setting. I am leaning towards the lotting bit - easier to balance out as a scenario, I'm guessing, but I could go either way. Which do you think would work better for my proposed idea?

I think Richard/Op5's suggestions would work well with the card activations system. Would you think that the game could work with slightly larger bands than three characters, especially on the Aztec front? What do you think would be an ideal number say, for a game of between 6 and 10 players?

I also like Pete's idea of the different motivations/goals, which is something I'd been thinking about adding in some capacity. One interesting twist might be to add one Spanish character who is a genuine "good guy" - somebody who wants to preserve as many lives as possible and isn't much interested in gold. Perhaps a knight, or a particularly pious priest. It might throw an interesting curveball their way when one player is busy saving lives or negotiating rather than constantly looking to get himself and his goods out of town. Perhaps he might be willing to kill (or incapacitate/wound) in the defense of those innocents, of course, just to keep things exciting for him.

Finally, how big a playing area do you think I should be aiming for? I have roughly assumed enough terrain to cover, say, a 6x4 at the largest, but as I'm not experienced with the rules, I concede that I may be thinking too large, or perhaps too small for a game with a minimum of six players.

At some point, I'm going to have to get Solomon Kane involved in this milieu as well.. will have to resist that temptation;)

Thanks again, guys,

Doc

[PeteMurray]

You're quite welcome, of course.

Looting will be much easier to handle as a one-off Scenario or short campaign, and if you're leaning that way then that's probably your better instincts telling you how to go.

For a large game (or even a small game!) keep the forces to no more than 4 models a side (say one Grade 2 and three Grade 1 models) particularly for new players. Keep in mind combat and wounding is more detailed than most games you've played. Veterans from Gloire make decent Grade 2 Conquistadors.

As far as board size, think smaller! 3x3 is about as big as you should go. That seems very counterintuitive but it will eliminate the first 45 minutes which is mostly just scrabbling for position. Keep your scenery simple (maybe just the buildings and streets of Tenochtitlan) for now.

Best of luck and keep us posted.

[Mad Doc Morris]

First thing I encountered when playing a Rattrap game: Games can be stunningly short. Hence you shouldn't be afraid to do a little campaign, maybe three scenarios in a row. That's, in my experience, quite more satisfying than an one-off, even for newbies.

Apart from that, we played a similar game in our Nibelungen campaign lately. Every player (2) controlled his party of heroes and an enemy fraction. Every round we draw an event card which brought randomly reinforcements for the heroes or their enemies or simply ended the turn; whenever one hero party had gotten all its reinforcements (3 available) we tested at the end of every round if the game was finished. That kept things going.
To avoid our heroes fighting themselves, every player controlled the enemies that started at the edge opposed to his heroes' starting position. We experienced that there was no need for any special rules as our heroes were fully occupied with fighting the waves of enemies. However, it was theoretically possible for the heroes to help their comrades by fighting their 'own' enemy party.
The odds were clearly against the heroes, starting with only a few enemies, that would however become heavily reinforced while we went on.

At the end we made a 'head count': Each enemy killed was worth his Grade in points by one, any one captured by two. That made for an exciting game. Although we tried to portray a small battle (we had about 30 figures on the table), it could be adapted for another setting as well.

PS: The number of models was increased by the use of the Squad rules, officially introduced in Broadsword Adventures, but maybe still available on the Rattrap forum.

[Doc Twilight]

Pete -

Thank you kindly for the advice and guidance. I'll see what I can cook up and keep you all informed.

Doc -

Some very good ideas. I'll look at Broadsword Adventures and consider the squad rules, too. I hadn't noticed them when I bought the rules a few months ago.

-D.T.

[Aaron]

Doc, it seems to me you have left out one vital detail. Where is this con? The more detail you give the more I want to play in it. I love the idea about having one "good" guy to vary things up a bit. It is a great way to spice up the game without adding more complexity.

[Doc Twilight]

Oh, sorry, forgot about that!

It's a con on the West Coast of the US called Kublacon in Burlingame, California. Held in May during Memorial Day Weekend. It's become one of the favorite haunts of historical gamers out here. I'd say it's roughly on par with Historicon in terms of size, but a good two thirds of it are given over to other subjects (RPGs, LARPs, Board Games, etc.);there are a growing number of miniatures gamers, and there are usually some very good games going on there.

There's also an even better con, though not as well promoted ironically, called Pacificon. Actually there are several cons called "Pacificon" out here, but this one is in Santa Clara in September. The cool thing about Pacificon is that it's in a great location, with lots of good food, and some cool history (not far from the Winchester Mystery House). It's also got a lot of great games, and because the group is more concentrated (read:smaller, but more focused), there is always a historical game of some kind going on, and usually some very good stuff indeed. I will probably run something there, too. Possibly this, or another game using the same terrain.

We've tried to support Kublacon every year since my wife and I moved out here by running a game. Our first year here we did the Battle for Kuwait City Airport; second year was a miniatures translation of the old Bar-Lev Boardgame, featuring the Golan and Sinai Fronts, and this year I'm doing this Aztec project and two Mexican-American War battles; she's doing a Napoleonic battle with Ottomans and Russians. This would be my first year running a game at Pacificon.

I used to run games at Historicon (and most Fall In and Cold Wars conventions) almost every year, so I'd like to get in the habit of doing bigger and better projects every year now that I'm out here.

-Doc

[sepoy1857]

I like the idea...could be applied to many different games...I might do an "escape from Delhi' scenario like that...get out of town quick and make your way through hostile countryside to Merut! Could have all kinds of aspects...Mutineers, firendly or not so friendly natives, dacoits, Gujars, and all manner of peril.

[Doc Twilight]

Sepoy -

By all means, feel free to use my idea. I've been cooking it up for a long time. I can see a lot of applications for it too, in a lot of different time periods. For example, it could make an Island battle in the Pacific very interesting, but it would also be a different way to do a traditional Colonial game, or even something involving Zombies.

My plan to use it this year was originally going to involve a KKBB scenario. Typical secret base attack situation from a "B" grade Spy Movie. Each player would control an agent and some assistants, along with an "Underling" and a group of jumpsuited/hardhatted Henchmen worth about a dime a dozen. Object would be the first to accomplish your objective (some might be to kill the main bad guy, others to deactive the insidious device, free a prisoner, turn one of the henchmen, etc.) I also thought about doing it in the typical "Storm the Castle" type Weird War II/Interwar Scenario. However, economics caught up with me in the case of the first (the cost of the furnishings alone would be quite high), and I have yet to find a castle that has enough interior space to work for the second. However, I haven't given up on the idea of doing one or both of them eventually.

I believe I first came across this weird scheme when trying to figure out how to handle the Santiago Heights Battles from the Spanish-American War; one of my favorite conflicts, but difficult to game due to the imbalance in numbers, etc. Or it may have something to do with my Roman stuff. Idunno, either way, please do feel free to use the idea. All I ask is that you let me know how it goes and maybe shoot a couple pictures my way.

I think the Mutiny stuff would work brilliantly. Wasn't there an engagement where the mutineers besieged a small group in a billard hall? That would be an interesting engagement to do, but so too would your idea about Delhi.

-Doc

[Aaron]

Sadly a California con is not in the cards for me any time soon! maybe when the boy is a bit older though...

The Indian mutiny is a great setting for it also. I'd be tempted to include a young Jonathan Small and the other members of the "Sign of the Four"!