Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Do you REALLY want to affect GW? Stop buying their product. Just walk away. As far as I can see it there are only three reasons to stick with GW:
1) player base size
2) length the games have been around
3) there is no other scifi game like 40k

So let's work on making a new scifi game on the same scale (28mm large-scale skirmish) as 40k and take away one of those reasons. Hell we can even have playtesters.

I second this idea. We could get one of the many model companies making bitz for 40k to make the models as well.

I've been working on a Sci Fi 28mm game for a while, it's pretty shaky right now as it's in Alpha testing but I did post it up on Scribd.

The only thing is that it is a D12 system and as such requires D12's, but I'm sure I could whip up a D6 incarnation.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/45248801/Crimson-Galaxy-Ruleset

It needs some drastic reworking (that will be in the next edition!) but that's it for right now. : )

I should not that the system is kind of 40k-ish. Has powered armor and the fluff is sort of grim-dark and has an old-school sci-fi feel.

Hmm this is an interesting idea, to have the entire community brainstorm about their ideal game.
For my part what I would want most is to need no more than one of anything for any particular list. If I really like it maybe I will get a second. One unit of 10 guys is enough, I'll be happier to move on to a different unit type than spam(or worse, be forced to spam) the same thing.
I also don't want some forced army construction device to limit my diversity.

I'm eager to see how this pans out. I hope it can be taken seriously.

You would be forced to take some kind of multiple unit to show that the army has grunts, at least if you wanted a somewhat realistic representation.

The largest obstacle would be likely be getting people to agree to the rules as well as rule disputes. The main problem with homebrew being if multiple people share the writing and authority gak hits the fan when there is a disagreement. I feel it would become very fractured very fast.

If we could get Gwar then rule problems would probably be solved. The guy's like an Error-seeking Missile.

I like the idea of a game where you could have more stuff to do during your opponents turn, rather than just twiddling thumbs. I'm not sure what though.

I also think taking it in turns to move squads rather than whole armies, would do wonders to mitigate First Turn Advantage. And possibly keep things more interesting.

I've always wondered how it would be if you could move both armies before shooting took place, and both armies shot at the same time (or went in order of initiative).

What you can't do:

Say "Hey guys, lets all get together and write a collaborative ruleset that will keep everybody happy and appeal to all different types of gamer despite having no miniatures or manufacturing capability and no concepts or concept art".

What you can do:

1: Come up with a concept for your setting (hint, it needs to be detailed, original and internally consistent - I recommend reading Karl Kocher's 'Master of Middle Earth' for an insight into the thought process involved).
2: Find a good artist or three who can render a 'vision' for your setting.
3: Decide on the scale of game (how many combatants per side does the game represent), the scale of the minis you will want to use (how many mm tall is an average person) and the size of gaming area you plan to use - note that these decisions in historicals often lead to 1 figure equalling 10s or 100s of troops in mass combat games.
4: Write your rules. Note this can be a 'collaborative' process where people are invited to submit ideas and test data but this must be co-ordinated by a strong editor who has the final say and ensure that the rules are representative of the vision for the game.
5: Unless you want to set up your own sculpting and casting facility, you will need to approach mini manufacturers with your ideas, see if any are willing to take on your game - be professional, ask for test sculpts/castings that if you like you can then use to further advertise your game, then go back to your supplier with a big order.


In short - do it right or don't bother. Being hazy and saying 'wouldn't it be great if...' will not a game make

Doesn't Stargrunt have a universal system that can be used?

I would definatley like to see a new game, that wouldn't be as expensive as GW but still just as good game wise.

I would agree with 28mm scale.

Chimera_Calvin wrote:What you can't do:

Say "Hey guys, lets all get together and write a collaborative ruleset that will keep everybody happy and appeal to all different types of gamer despite having no miniatures or manufacturing capability and no concepts or concept art".

What you can do:

1: Come up with a concept for your setting (hint, it needs to be detailed, original and internally consistent - I recommend reading Karl Kocher's 'Master of Middle Earth' for an insight into the thought process involved).
2: Find a good artist or three who can render a 'vision' for your setting.
3: Decide on the scale of game (how many combatants per side does the game represent), the scale of the minis you will want to use (how many mm tall is an average person) and the size of gaming area you plan to use - note that these decisions in historicals often lead to 1 figure equalling 10s or 100s of troops in mass combat games.
4: Write your rules. Note this can be a 'collaborative' process where people are invited to submit ideas and test data but this must be co-ordinated by a strong editor who has the final say and ensure that the rules are representative of the vision for the game.
5: Unless you want to set up your own sculpting and casting facility, you will need to approach mini manufacturers with your ideas, see if any are willing to take on your game - be professional, ask for test sculpts/castings that if you like you can then use to further advertise your game, then go back to your supplier with a big order.


In short - do it right or don't bother. Being hazy and saying 'wouldn't it be great if...' will not a game make

QFT - Best way.

legionaires wrote:some stuff

Or, you could check out the games that already exist and have a player base here.

Vladsimpaler wrote:I've been working on a Sci Fi 28mm game for a while, it's pretty shaky right now as it's in Alpha testing but I did post it up on Scribd.

The only thing is that it is a D12 system and as such requires D12's, but I'm sure I could whip up a D6 incarnation.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/45248801/Crimson-Galaxy-Ruleset

It needs some drastic reworking (that will be in the next edition!) but that's it for right now. : )

I should not that the system is kind of 40k-ish. Has powered armor and the fluff is sort of grim-dark and has an old-school sci-fi feel.

Hey. that's pretty good.

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:I've always wondered how it would be if you could move both armies before shooting took place, and both armies shot at the same time (or went in order of initiative).

You mean like Lord of the Rings? It works out pretty well.

Why just 40k why not a substitue for Fantasy as well?

Instead of writing a new system from scratch, why not just retro-clone the original Rogue Trader? I'm sure that there are alot of people on dakka who know both both its strengths and weaknesses as well as how to fix said weaknesses.

~~Yzz

Keep in mind that your idea needs to be original. You can't just take Space Marines, and re-name them something else and it be ok.

Also the rules need to be different enough from GW that you can't say you just copied (and fixed) their rules.

In short you need to come up with a whole new system for the game.

legionaires wrote:
3) there is no other scifi game like 40k

What is 'essential' to the 40k feel for you? The grimdark setting, the army scale, something with the rules, etc?

I would like to see a system where the races and rule sets are independent.

Make units 'generic' statlines and codexes combinations of statlines.

I feel the worst thing about 40k is the 3+ armorsave has to exist in so many codexes because of the 'fluff'. Why not make 'heavy trooper' 'medium trooper' 'light trooper' and let the player decide how he wants to model it?

I can fill this unit in with some terminators, some mega nobz, some tyranids, some space rats, some whatever model line I want, as long as the model represents the unit type.

Then less focus can be made on models and more made on balance of rules. If someone was going to make a fan-based rule system, i would try to limit the models and make it about a really well-designed rule system designed around competitive play.

Also, I would love to see a space mordhiem skirmish system which played as a smaller skirmish game.

well here is the problem, we can go back to previous editions of codices to ones where we think its fair. I got a buddy who played 3rd edition 40k all the way through 4th and jumped up to 5th with the rest of us.

I am strongly opposed to making a new game. I saw a sneak-peak of one that was being made--alien suns--and boy oh boy, i dropped out of the helping community pretty quick because I had issues with it up to my neck. Making a new game is very hard and bound to have teething problems

jbunny wrote:Keep in mind that your idea needs to be original. You can't just take Space Marines, and re-name them something else and it be ok.

I'm assuming this was adressed to me? In any case, I was suggesting that RT rules can be a basis for crunch, not fluff.

jbunny wrote:Also the rules need to be different enough from GW that you can't say you just copied (and fixed) their rules.

In short you need to come up with a whole new system for the game.

Retro-clones such as Labyrinth Lord, Mutant Future, Dark Dungeons, Swords & Wizardry, OSRIC, and Mazes & Minotaurs show that you do not need to write a new system to create a game. The only issue with retro-cloning RT is that unique terminology like WS & BS would have to be changed.

~~Yzz

We can all write tons of fluff, and have one person edit it all together.
Artists can be found on dakka and would probly be willing
Skirmish to medium battle is fine for scale as is 28mm
Rules again can be worked together and then edited and playtested
We can 'borrow' minis from other ranges to play for the time being.

nkelsch wrote:
Make units 'generic' statlines and codexes combinations of statlines.

I feel the worst thing about 40k is the 3+ armorsave has to exist in so many codexes because of the 'fluff'. Why not make 'heavy trooper' 'medium trooper' 'light trooper' and let the player decide how he wants to model it?
Too true
...

Then less focus can be made on models and more made on balance of rules. If someone was going to make a fan-based rule system, i would try to limit the models and make it about a really well-designed rule system designed around competitive play.
Like'd
Also, I would love to see a space mordhiem skirmish system which played as a smaller skirmish game.
Possible, maybe as a seperate supplement

This is a brilliant idea, having 'generic' profiles, then filling them with whatever model you liked, but this leads to the problem of weapons profiles too
The LoTR move-move, shoot-shoot, fight-fight system works very well, but this voids the idea of having actions in your opponents turn
I like how in other systems, infantry have a better role such as fortifying/digging-in, laying minefields etc
This system would also have to deal with the same problems as 40k tho, such as Tank>Infantry etc
I would quite happily write up some stuff if it meant getting a better ruleset

dunno if it is on topic, but arent mantic bringing out a sci fi range ??

that may be an alternative to GW products to go with either Mantics rules or ones that are created homebrew style?

just a though...

Yzz wrote:

jbunny wrote:Keep in mind that your idea needs to be original. You can't just take Space Marines, and re-name them something else and it be ok.

I'm assuming this was adressed to me? In any case, I was suggesting that RT rules can be a basis for crunch, not fluff.

jbunny wrote:Also the rules need to be different enough from GW that you can't say you just copied (and fixed) their rules.

In short you need to come up with a whole new system for the game.

Retro-clones such as Labyrinth Lord, Mutant Future, Dark Dungeons, Swords & Wizardry, OSRIC, and Mazes & Minotaurs show that you do not need to write a new system to create a game. The only issue with retro-cloning RT is that unique terminology like WS & BS would have to be changed.

~~Yzz

First I was not addressing anyone with my comments, just general statement.

To your second comment, Were any of those games owned or designed by GW? GW has proven time and time again that they will bury a company in legal fees and paperwork if it comes even remotely close to Copy Right Infringment.

I've been working on some mini game rules too.. but it's more like a small skirmish gang fight game, 5-10 models per side. I started it out with a wild west theme but now i'm updating it to be more generic, with add-on rules for different settings like sci fi or fantasy or whatever.

It's a campagin based game like Mordheim or Necromunda, but could also be played as single games at a certain point level for pick up games and that sort of thing.

Planning to release the final rules as interactive PDFs instead of printed.. and planning to have movies embedded showing how to move and shoot and all that, so you can read how to play or just watch designing mostly for e-readers and smart phones, and just plain ole web too.

The Zoat wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:I've been working on a Sci Fi 28mm game for a while, it's pretty shaky right now as it's in Alpha testing but I did post it up on Scribd.

The only thing is that it is a D12 system and as such requires D12's, but I'm sure I could whip up a D6 incarnation.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/45248801/Crimson-Galaxy-Ruleset

It needs some drastic reworking (that will be in the next edition!) but that's it for right now. : )

I should not that the system is kind of 40k-ish. Has powered armor and the fluff is sort of grim-dark and has an old-school sci-fi feel.

Hey. that's pretty good.

Thanks man. I'm having an overhaul of the turn system but for the most part it's remaining the exact same. I found that it worked better with one unit being activated and taking all of its actions at once.

HI all.
I have written a basic outline for a rule set that can be used for 28mm.
It covers all the basic interaction in a simple way.

I started with the current game paly of 40k, and striped it back to get the game play and rules complexity on a similar level.
(Rather than complicated rules and simplistic gamepaly of 40k.)

I have used 'order counters' to denote units actions for the next turn.
This allows alternating action game turn.

Eg
Player A takes first action with units.
Player B takes first action with all units.
player A takes second action with all units
Player B takes second action with all units.

Or you could use alternating unit activation if you want.

Its just a 14 page rough draught.Please feel free to discuss it , and use any ideas that may work in the end system.

(This is for modern -near future war , played at the platoon to company level.)

(As far as aquisition goes, targets stay aquired unitll the target moves out of LOS, or the attacking unit becomes supressed or worse.)

I am happy to answer questions, and discuss rules ideas at lenght.(Over 20 years of wargaming and playing over 30 systems means I know quite a lot of game mechanics which may prove useful. )

TTFN.

What I would like to see is a group of independent figure manufacturers getting behind one set of rules. Each manufacturer would then make 1 or 2 armies for it, that way all armies would have a ready made force in support of the rules instead of only having a small amount at launch date. That way the system would be up and running very quickly.
I just remembered that in september that a rule set called 'Tomorrow's War' are being released which sound very flexible in army makeup.

jbunny wrote:To your second comment, Were any of those games owned or designed by GW? GW has proven time and time again that they will bury a company in legal fees and paperwork if it comes even remotely close to Copy Right Infringment.

Well, if Wizards of the Coast is unable to issue a legal challenge to the half-dozen publications I mentioned, despite the fact that they are near-identical to OD&D/AD&D there is pretty good chance GW can recognize that. As many retro-clone publishers point out, (at least in the US) rules aren't copyrighted only, the terminology used to describe them is.
If you use "BS" and "WS" (or other GW-specific terms, say "Tactical Dreadnought Armour" or "Rhino APC") in a retro-clone you will be sued and rightfully so.
But if you use "Melee Attack", "Ranged Attack", "Heavy Assault Armor", or "Scarab APC", you're in amuch safer area.

~~Yzz