Richard's game looks like a fun event. The 1494 scenario is suppose to work like Richard describes it, plenty of intrigue and backstabbing just like a Diplomacy game.
What is interesting to me is how similar Richards description of events sounds like what happens in the convention games I run. 10 turns in 4 hours generally constitutes a full game, and the players always pick up how to play after the first or second turn. As always some players are more dynamic in making arguments than others but all seem to have a good time. Richard, being a true WDer (member of Wargame Developments), came up with new rules as well. It makes since if one is not interested in fighting out battles to use a boardgame like dice rolling system. I generally like the visual effect of figures on the game table and gaming out some battles. Richards quick system will allow players to not have to play out every battle.
Richard's use of an alternative turn resolution system is more important to me. I stopped working on different MG turn resolution systems 3 years ago. The standard system I now use works very well, but has the disadvantage of being very referee dependent. It works out fine if the players are all reasonable and fun loving. Partisan players have complained about how turns are resolved. Richard gets around this by having the players vote on the arguments. In a 6 player game this would mean that for each vote cast the argument succeeds on that roll or less. So if 4 of the 6 vote for an argument then it happens on a roll of 4 or less on a d6. A strong argument.
If no one votes for the argument except the guy who made it then the roll to succeed is a 1. A very weak argument. This system should work well in all games that have 5 or 6 players. It might have some problems with fewer players, or games that are very large. still, I like it! I think I will try it out at convention games next year.
Maybe a table could be used to give equivalents from votes with off sized groups? For example: the number of votes needed to get a certain rating, with 6* being "automatic" (i.e. no roll needed):
| Group Size | Roll Result | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6* | |
| 1 | - | - | 1 | - | - | - |
| 2 | - | - | 1 | 2 | - | - |
| 3 | - | 1 | 2 | 3 | - | - |
| 4 | 1 | - | 2 | 3 | - | 4 |
| 5 | 1 | - | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| 6 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| 7 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 7 |
| 8 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 8 |
Back to Experimental Games Group # 22 Table of Contents
Back to Experimental Games Group List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1992 by Chris Engle
This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com