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.

I really like Blood Bowl. So I'm in the process of developing a set of skirmish rules based on the Blood Bowl rules. I suppose that in computer game jargon I'm in 'beta-testing', busy playing games. Anyhow, I'd suggest it's well worth checking out, and trying a game or two.

Here's a good scenario for trying the game out: Red vs Blue. Imperial Guard or Space Marines attempt to capture and hold a piece of terrain about 6 square inches in area. I like to use a bunker. The game lasts twenty turns, ten turns a side, with fire extra turns each of over-time without re-rolls if neither side controls the terrain. Each side has six re-rolls or strategy points. The Squad-level rules are not used. 

If playing an Imperial Guard Squad then the player controls fifteen Guardsmen. Guardsmen all have a profile of Sp 6, Ag 3, Ar 1, Dg 1 and all have the grappling 'weapon' and are equipped with frag grenades. Three Guardsmen will be the NCOs, having the leader skill, and armed with a chainsword and laspistol. A different three Guardsman will either be grenadiers or firemen and be armed with a grenade launcher or a flamethrower respectively. The final nine Guardsmen are all riflemen and are armed with lasguns and bayonets.

Frag. Grenade, Small Arms Ff Temp1 6", 1, 0, 1
Grappling, Small Arms Cc, 1, 0, 2
Bayonet, Small Arms Cc, 2, 0, 2
Chainsword, Small Arms Cc, 3, 0, 1
Laspistol, Small Arms Ff, 1, 0, 3
Lasgun, Small Arms Ff, 2, 0, 3
Grenade Launcher, Small Arms Ff Temp1, 1, 0, 2
Flame Thrower, Small Arms Ff Temp3, 4, 0, 2

If playing an Imperial Space Marines then the player controls five Space Marines. Space Marines all have a profile of Sp6, Ag 3, Ar 4, Dg 2, all have the grit skill, all are equipped with jump packs and comm-equipment, all have the iron fist 'weapon' and all are equipped with frag grenades. One has a bolt pistol and  a power sword. Three have bolters and combat knives. One has a meltagun and a combat knife.

Frag. Grenade, Small Arms Ff Temp1 6", 1, 0, 1
Iron Fist, Small Arms Cc, 2, 0, 3
Combat Knife, Small Arms Cc, 2, 0, 2
Powersword, Small Arms Cc, 3, +1, 3
Bolt Pistol, Small Arms Ff, 2, 0, 2
Bolt Carbine, Small Arms Ff, 3, 0, 2
Meltagun, Small Arms Ff Temp1, 1, +1, 1

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54808

PS: How does one go about attaching documents to posts around here?

Comments? Suggestions? Vile slanders?

You have to be a DCM (dakka contributing member) to attach files.

I enjoy the BB rules as well, and a quick scan over your rules seems like this could be rather fun. I almost kind of wish it was played on a board with 'squares' like BB as it would allow you to make the rules more precise.

Unfortunately, I don't have any time right now to try something like this out (too busy painting), even though I'd like to.

On other piece of constructive criticism: I know this is just a beta rules document, but your rules writing tends to be so minimalist (just covering the facts) that it gets a little confusing. A few examples or references to other areas of the rules would make it immensely easier for a first-time reader to wrap their head around.

I'm sure that once someone is familiar with the rules, the writing style would be fine, but as a document to introudcue players to the game it makes things a bit daunting, despite being only 9 pages long.

Yakface:

Thanks for the feedback. How does one become a DCM, by the by?

I suppose you could play on a board defined by squares, but I've found that this isn't an issue of precision in the articulation of rules. People tend to think of boards defined as a set of discrete areas as more 'precise' because they seem to squeeze out all avenues by which to argue position. But that's because having predefined discrete areas lets people measure before they make a move. These same arguments are precluded in games using 'open' boards where players are allowed to measure position before making a move. I should probably note that players can pre-measure in the rules eh?

In terms of examples, I'm working up a document with examples but those always work better when they're accompanied by pictures and I don't have a camera and photos appeal better than pictures rended in MS Paint! Also, I was hoping that people would be less daunted by a short and tight set of rules. The non-wargamers I produced this for rather appreciated the brevity, although an example document would be best for people I can't personally run an introductory game for.

For info on becoming a DCM, go to the buttons at the top of the page under "Services" and click on "DCM".


As for defined spaces, its not just an issue of pre-measurement (which you should definitely clarify in the rules if you haven't already), but the defined spaces also make it easy at a glance (without checking each model with a tape measure) where possible moves are.

That's one of the fun things about Blood Bowl, is that you can sit and plan your move (partially) during an opponent's turn just by looking at the board.

Now, obviously this is only a minor personal preference and doesn't truly affect the enjoyment level of your game much at all.


As for the density of the rules, I can see that once a player is onboard and testing the game out, the brevity of everything would be useful and easy to use.

What I'm saying, is that even to get someone to play the game, they usually (unless a friend introduces them) have to read the rules themselves, first and then decide the game is worth trying.

That is where I think your document could use some work because in order to get more people interested in trying it out, they have to be able to get through reading it. And frankly, it's a pretty tough 9 pages to comprehend without getting out some minis and actually trying the game out.

Ultimately, I think the best chance for feedback is to (as it sounds like you've been doing) personally introduce people to the game.


I just wish I had some more time right now, but I'm in a painting crunch trying to get stuff finished for Adepticon.

Ah, so I need dollars to contribute. I think I'll hang around a while to kick the tires a bit first. Still, Dakkadakka seems pretty promising.

I'll add a note about measuring in the next iteration of the rules. In terms of being able to eyeball it Bloodbowl certainly makes it easy to premeasure. It's like playing on a table with a built-in measuring stick! Playtesting has just reiterated what I already know: beginners furiously measure everything until they internalize the distances and get used to eyeballing the distances. When we play assaults on installations and tunnel complexes I use my old Warhammer Quest dungeon tiles (incidentally I wrote a version of Warhammer Quest using the Bloodbowl rules called "Bloodquest" which were partly the inspiration for Bloodshot) with the caveat that 1" = 1 square. This means that models have a Cc zone of control of 2 squares and that pushed back models get pushed back one square. So really there's nothing stopping you from trying it out with squares, but likewise nothing stopping you if you don't own board with squares. Maybe another note to go in the rules eh?

But when you say: "And frankly, it's a pretty tough 9 pages to comprehend without getting out some minis and actually trying the game out." does that mean the rules are difficult to read or unclear or something? Or do they just need illustrative examples?

In terms of feedback on gameplay I already have a group of people, none of whom are wargamers although all are into board games, for that and we're all pretty satisfied with it. The thing right now is making it available for popular consumption. Don't worry about not having the time to try it right now, although like Bloodbowl it plays pretty quick (especially 5-10 a side on a 2'x2' board). Important things first. It won't disappear!

So, feedback so far:

1. Add examples for explication. Response: I'm working on a document. I think I'll fudge the pictures and creative types can send in photographs matching them if they want (or I can take them when I find a spare camera lying around!)

2. Add caveat about pre-measuring. Response: I'll add it in the next iteration of the rules.

3. Add note about conversion to squares. Response: As #2.

Hey,

I've updated the rules document with the suggestions, given it a table of contents, and rearranged the content slightly so the progression is slightly clearer. I'll be following it with an appendix document of examples in the near future.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54808

Right, I've got a bunch of diagrams drawn up. Some feedback about how these diagrams could be improved and whether more are needed would be appreciated.