This article contains all the rules needed to run a matrix Game at a convention. The rules and explanations are directed towards beginnerg referees since at this point we are all beginners in this new genre. After reading this article a person should be able to go out and run a simple campaign game at a local convention. THE MATRIX The matrix is what provides structure to what happens in an MG. Take a look at the following list of ELEMENTS... Normal March Forced March Rally Skirmish Victory/Defeat Fatigued Rout Recruit/Desert Tactical Advantage Large Formation Weather Effect Motivation Love Fear Wild card Wild Card Normal March Rest/Prepare Ambush Open Battle Morale Increases/Drops Halt Retreat Tactical Advantage Terrain Effect Small Formation Supply Lines Battle Cry Anger Shame Wild Card These elements are place on cards for convention games, to make them more easily moved around. Notice that the ideas of each element are very familiar to wargamers, in fact most games take these ideas into account. The players will use the elements to make events happen in the game. MAKING EVENTS HAPPEN Matrix Games work off a very simple set of logic. Each turn each player in the game may try to make one ACTION lead to a RESULT. Both of these come from the matrix elements listed above. For example a player might want to have his men... Normal March = Open Battle "My men make a normal march and fight an open field battle with the enemy." or he might try... Normal March = Retreat "My men make a normal march Into the provence and the result Is that the enemy retreats to the next provence." or he might try Normal March = Ambush "The enemy makes a normal march into my provence and the result is that my men ambush them." This is very simple, is it not? Every player can try to make one event happen a turn. The event can be for his men to do something, for the other sides men to do something, or for anything the player wants to happen to happen (as long as it can be made using the elements from the matrix). Note: If a player chooses, his ACTION can also be the RESULT. For example a Normal March may result in a Normal March without using a second matrix card to describe the result. ARGUMENTS The scientific method teaches that there are REASONS for everything that happens. Matrix logic takes this into account by requiring that each ACTION = RESULT be justified by at least THREE REASONS. For example ... ACTION: Normal March "The enemy normal march into my provence." RESULT: Ambush "My men ambush them in a mountain pass." REASON: 1. Rest/Prepare "Because, my men were ready for them." 2. Battle Cry "we attack yelling cut them off at the pass." 3. Wild Card "And their commander is not very bright, so he walks into it." Note that all the reasons came from the matrix, just like the actions and results did. Any matrix element can be used as an action, result, or reason. The elements are generic enough to be pretty much what ever the player wants them to be. The creative player will be able to build off of the element idea into a very convincing SPOKEN ARGUMENT. RESOLVING A TURN Each player gets to make one ARGUMENT a turn. At first have the players roll off to see who gets to argue first. Then later have all the players of one side make their iIndividual arguments at the same time followed by the other side. It is an advantages to argue first because as the matrix cards are used they are no longer in the matrix (for that turn) so later players have fewer elements to chose from. All the players need one six sided die to resolve the turn. when all the players have made their arguments, go around the table and have each player tell the group what his argument is. This is a fun part of the game so it is Important to spend a little time with it. once all the arguments have been explained, have the players roll their die. If their roll is three or less then the argument happens. If the die roll is higher than three then the event did not happen. Failed events are those plans that never were carried out or ideas that no one followed up on. So why is the roll three or less? The basic rational is that in history it seems that almost any plan has about a 50/50 chance of happening. In game terms though, the "three" comes from the three reasons used to back up the argument. Consequently, if a player only has two reasons why his argument should happen then he must roll two or less to make it so. TWO ARGUMENTS FOR THE SAME UNIT It will happen that two or more players will make arguments for for the same unit (or group of units). In the same turn, only ONE argument can happen, since logically a unit can only do one thing at a time. The difference between this situation and uncontested arguments is that one of the arguments WILL happen this turn. Conflicting arguments are resolved by the players rolling off until only one argument is left. So if three players argue for the same unit, they each roll one six sided die and try to roll three and under. If a player rolls above three then he drops out of the roll off. The rolls continue until only one player has an argument that is still "IN". If all the arguments are ruled out by rolling over three, then begin again with all three players rolling off. Eventually it will happen that only one player's argument will still be in and that argument happens. Why have it so that one argument has to happen when two arguments conflict? The basic rationale for this is that if two or more players are arguing for the same unit then this must be a situation that is the "critical event". By their very nature something important happens in history as a result of critical events, consequently Matrix Games require that one argument happen in such situations. Note: Players will begin to make tactical use of this rule to aid their side. For example, one side make two identical arguments for their army to move. The critical event rationale still holds true here since the move was critical enough to use up two players arguments in the turn. STRONG AND WEAK ARGUMENTS Some arguments are Inherently stronger or weaker than others. In such cases an argument should have a greater or lesser chance of success. In MGs strong arguments happen on a four or less roll while weak arguments must roll a two or less. There are two ways to determine if an argument 1:3 -strong or weak. The simple way is for the referee to make these decisions. This method is generally fast and clean but eventually one player will object that the referee is being arbitrary. While it is important for the referee to have some reasons for how he rules arguing over "arbitrariness" is a losing position. The referee can take this opportunity to switch to the second method. The second method consists of the referee asking the players if there are any arguments that have just been spoken that they feel are strong or weak. If ONE person says he feels an argument is strong/weak then it is. The person need not have any reasons for believing this (of course reasons always help). If only ONE person disagrees with the ruling then it is not strong/weak and returns to normal. Again a person need not have ANY reasons for their disagreement. These rulings are not open to debate and it is perfectly okay for players to be partisan in their rulings. If the game boils down into a strictly partisan match then this method effectively nullifies strong/weak rulings and pulls everything toward the mean. It seems that while some players are rather partisan in their rulings, most are not. Quite often a player will sheepishly admit that his argument Is a long shot. The same is true well made arguments. STUPID ARGUMENTS Inevitably someone will make an argument that Is stupid. Some arguments are stupid because they call for events that are completely incongruous with the scenario. For example, a wizard appearing in a WWII game. Other arguments are bad because they are world wreckers. For example, saying "I win!". Lastly there are arguments that are so poorly made that no one really understands what the player is trying to do. In such situations it is up to the referee to settle the matter. If the referee so chooses, he may VETO any argument that he feels just doesn't fit in the game. It is important to use this sparingly. Whenever possible make an argument weak rather than veto it. To be sporting sometimes strange things happen. At the same time remember that it is the referee's Job to put on a fun game so if one player is being a jerk it is important to not allow that person to destroy everyone elses fun. AT THIS POINT YOU KNOW ALL THE RULES OF A MATRIX GAME! CAMPAIGN CONSIDERATIONS What follows are suggestions on how to run a campaign game at a convention. The suggestions come from my experiences at running such games. Feel free to use what you want and leave the rest. 1. Have the results of arguments tie back into the game. This can happen by causing moves or battles to happen. It can also happen by causing certain units to gain certain "statuses" like "out of supply", "fatigued", etc. Such statuses may then be used against a unit as a reason in a future argument. 2. whenever possible try to have results that give statuses defined in terms of the rules used to resolve the battles. So an out of supply unit might have a limit on the number of shots he can fire or maybe a decrease In his fire power. Units whose morale Is effected may gain positive or negative modifiers to morale checks. In effect the MG acts as a forum for rewriting the rules of wart 3. AREA MOVEMENT: My campaigns generally use an area movement system. Area maps are generally simple to read, easy to make, and can contain all the critical areas of a historical campaign without a lot of extraneous places. Whenever a unit makes a march order it starts to move, one area for a normal march, two areas for a forced march. The unit will continue to move until It reaches a stated destination, the player decides to stop, or another matrix argument makes it stop. 4. ONE ARGUMENT PER AREA: I have found that it is often helpful to keep games simple. By limiting arguments so that only one can happen per area it cuts out the possibility of a confusing set of events within a single area. Mind you, I am not hard and fast on this rule so ignore it if it makes no sense. 5. NO FIGHTS UNTIL AN ARGUMENT STARTS ONE: Enemy units can be In the same area for many turns and not have a fight. I only have battles when an argument says there is a fight. The argument will also tell what kind of a fight it 15. once the argument mandates a fight the referee can set out a simple battle scenario that fits the dictates of the argument. The players can then play out a battle. 6. USE ANY SET OF RULE TO RESOLVE BATTLES: The referee can use any set of miniatures rules to fight out the battles generated by the Matrix Campaign. Generally though I have found that simple quick rules are better for convention games than slow detailed ones. DBA is an excellent set of simple quick rules. Personally I use my own home grown "Stupid Simple Rules." It is common for a campaign to have several small battles and one critical battle. So whatever rules are used should be able to fight out this many battles in an afternoons time. 7. CONCLUSIONS: By their very nature, Matrix Games are open to change and variety. If you see a modification that you think might improve you game, by all means use Itl The basic philosophical underpinnings of MGs is one of exploration and change. So if the games are working well the players will naturally see ways In which it can be improved. I ask only that you write and tell me what you've done so that the rest of us can learn from your insights. Back to Experimental Games Group # 15 Table of Contents Back to Experimental Games Group List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1991 by Chris Engle This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com