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 have recently purchased many Infinity models - I absolutely love the sculpts! However, after glancing at the rules, I am not convinced at how the gameplay is. It seems overly complex for a minis game and not entirely well written, either.

To that end, I have started to write my own set of mini rules that I hope to use with a group at my LGS. I am however running in to several stumbling points.

What do people what in their miniatures gaming? simplicity? ease of learning? flexibility? a nice balance? something that is quick to learn, but has room to expand?

Write now I have two main objectives: 1. to implement a game mechanic for responses - if you have ever played Magic: The Gathering you know about responding to your opponent's actions.
and 2. to implement a "co-op" game type, where you and your friends can team up and play against a common enemy that is controlled through random behaviors, or by a "DM", to create narrative missions or campaigns. I know that Chain Reaction and Nuts! have something similar to this.

Am I being too ambitious? Does anyone have any thoughts on what I should implement to make a good game? Should I stick with D6? Do you like the "to hit" and "to wound" mechanics of Warhammer over the "Attack" and "Damage" mechanics of Warmachine/Hordes (IE: Single D6's with a fixed number to achieve, or 2d6/3d6 with modifiers to meet or beat the opponent's defense stat)? When does a game become too complex? Should I start off with really simple game mechanics and then expand upon those? Some of these questions are with the assumption that at some point I might take it outside the LGS and maybe post them online, or even further.

So I ask you Dakka - what do you want in a minis game? What would you like to see that hasn't been done yet?

Thanks to all, in advance!

~G

You could play the whole thing with D10s. a system based on 10 is very intuitive, and easy to mathhammer to help you balence things.

As for being able to react to your opponent. That sounds fantastic, but be very careful. As a magic player, I'm not sure I've ever met anybody who fully understands the rules. Once you get into the nitty-gritty of the stack, things can get rediculous. I can see this working best for a skirmish level game.

Just the two thoughts I pulled out of my upon seeing this.

Hot chicks

For me.. #1 I want hella cool models that are fun to build and paint. #2, I want people to play with.

Rules? bah, what are they? I've been playing 40k for almost 15 years now and i still don't know what I'm doing. But I try to make my armies look cool.. that's all that matters

Necros wrote:For me.. #1 I want hella cool models that are fun to build and paint. #2, I want people to play with.

Rules? bah, what are they? I've been playing 40k for almost 15 years now and i still don't know what I'm doing. But I try to make my armies look cool.. that's all that matters

very well put

try to avoid the 'roll a bucket of dice, 3 times', per squad' effect. If you can simplify and keep it from becoming too generic you'll be okay.

Disclaimer: I've only really looked at the rules for Infinity.

Infinity isn't a war game. You're playing with a small number
of models on the table that is (hopefully) filled with LOS
blocking terrain and elevations. While I didn't "get" the
game from just reading the rulebook, I did understand that
the reaction effect is one of the key aspects of the game.
You maneuver your troops to get the most LOS on your
opponent while avoiding LOS from him because the instant
someone breaks cover, the game becomes a shooting
match.

This is a theoretical view on the game.

Build a 'sandbox' version first, a very simple game that can be written down on two sides of a sheet of paper. Make sure the core mechanics are sound, play fast, and involve the players fairly equally. Make sure all the rules you'll add to this sandbox version follow from the same set of design concepts: they should extend existing rules and their applications rather than bolt new structures onto the existing game. Finally, take a look at Arty Conliffe's "Crossfire" game to get an idea of what you can do when you leave legacy concepts like fixed turns behind.

Actually, before you write anything down, sit down with some models, some terrain, and play with them. Literally, play a game of Calvinball (aka "Nom") with a friend, and that'll get your creative juices flowing better than sitting down and trying to plan it out from scratch.

Gabe wrote:I have recently purchased many Infinity models - I absolutely love the sculpts! However, after glancing at the rules, I am not convinced at how the gameplay is.

So it's like 40k? OK.

Personally, I look for:
1. Good-looking models. If the armies look like VOID, it doesn't matter how good the rules are, I'm not playing it.
2. *Interesting* models. That means giant robots or *something* different. I have plenty of ordinary dudes, don't need more.
3. Adequate rules. I'm past the point where I have the time and patience to create comprehensive rulesets for FREE.
4. Simplicity. I don't need things dressed up with polyhedral dice or other fancy mechanics. If I want a RPG, I'll play DnD 4. If I want complex wargaming, there's ASL.

Given that you've got Infinity, I might suggest you start with Necromunda or some other small, skirmish game as your baseline.

If you want a 'reactive' game, check out Alzo Zero by Italeri.

For those who don't know its a 1/72 scale WWII game, played with cards as well as dice. Each turn players get cards to play for the actions of their squads. Each card has a number. If you have a card with a lower number, you can play it to interrupt your opponents action, then he can play one back (and so on).
All actions are then executed in numerical order.

I realise this sounds more complex than it actually is, but its a great way of representing things like the much-maligned overwatch rule (you don't always get it and even if you do your opponent may be able to use a cunning plan to avoid it).

Gabe wrote:I have recently purchased many Infinity models - I absolutely love the sculpts! However, after glancing at the rules, I am not convinced at how the gameplay is. It seems overly complex for a minis game and not entirely well written, either.

I bought the game for the same reason, but I've been lucky to get hold of a quick play booklet. Which although I've not used yet, does look like it could be the way to go to begin with.

Hellfury wrote:Hot chicks

Dude! You too?

BYE

Imagery. Plot. A universe that I can play in. Something where I can be creative with story and challenge myself and other people at the same time.


And tanks. Or bit robots killing each other.

I play 40K, Necromunda, Warhammer Quest, Space Hulk and BattleTech. All of these things have an abundance of the things I mentioned above (except Warhammer quest has no tanks or robots... but it has lots of potential plots).

That is why I play.

BYE

I've been playing Stargrunt with 40K minis since my own rant on the subject. The rules are great for simulating the battlefield experience, even if they aren't exactly epic. I've toyed around with a few rules sets as well and have hammered together some "calvinball" rules that work well, if a bit roughly. If you're interested we can trade notes!

It helps to periodically read through the rules section by section and ask yourself if you could explain any of the rules better with a lower word count. If a rule takes too long to read, the players will get frustrated and come up with their own broken interpretation or use the unecessary complication to rules lawyer their way to unearned victories. Also, keep a pad and pen with you at all times so whenever you have a brainstorm you can jot it down. It may seem like a stupid idea later on, but even a failed concept can sometimes lead to other, useful inspirations. Finally, keep the game mechanics simple, but give the players lots of options, so they can use whatever tactics feel right to them.

The Inifinity rules rock....but then I looked at those as an escape from WH40K, so in a way I WANTED them to work....and applied patience and time to getting them understood.

In response to your question. People are saying they want great miniatures etc etc....someone writing a bunch of homegrown rules in their spare time isn't going to go away and get specific sculpts and half the thing people are asking for. So I'm assuming the OP is asking the question based on a group of people playing in a private enviroment with a bunch of proxy miniatures....

From that perspective, I'd say the most important thing is background! Fluff, fluff and more fluff. Now writing good fluff is time consuming and quite frankly a painful task that will not be appreciated..much...

My advice is to base your rules on a gaming system that is already out there, and simply adapt the rules to how you would rather that game be played. The guys in my gaming group are currently working on WH40K "Fluff" Rules...where Marines are really like Marines are in the fluff etc etc....

Perhaps this is the way to go.

Models I like. If I don't like the models, I'm not going to put time into it.

Easy to find games with a variety of players. If I'm only ever going to play against the same three people, I'll get bored pretty quick.

Redbeard wrote:Models I like. If I don't like the models, I'm not going to put time into it.

Easy to find games with a variety of players. If I'm only ever going to play against the same three people, I'll get bored pretty quick.

I tend toward these things and I also need background I can identify with; something that sucks you in.

You're talking about standalone rules that can be used with your existing models.

Different people want different things from a game. The general rule is the larger the scale of the game, the more abstracted and less detailed the rules should be. For instance, you wouldn't want to roll a D6 three times for each shooter, to resolve the firing of a Napoleonic infantry division with 2,500 troops in it.

So you are looking at skirmish level games which are usually defined as 1 figure = 1 man. These generally use a fair bit of detail in terms of different weapons, cover rules and extra rules for searching, opening doors and so on. Morale and command and control are sometimes covered, though often in less detail than in big battle rules.

A good way to start is by looking at the rules that are already on the market

There are a number of skirmish level SF rulesets available. You already know Infinity, and Stargrunt was mentioned above. You could also look at Laserburn, 5150, AT43, Dirtside, Striker, Future Wars and Mongoose's Starship Troopers.

Pulp, modern, near future and Horror rules would also be worth reading -- check out Macho Women with Guns, Back of Beyond and Zombie Apocalypse for ideas.

Since you are writing these rules for your own use, my basic advice is to use stuff that you and your friends enjoy. It doesn't matter about commercial acceptability.