Sunday 25 November 2012

Miniature Games vs Board Games

So what is the difference between a board game and a table top wargame? Apart from the obvious that is. Actually, that bears some examination, because there are some games that have boards that feel very much like tabletop mini games. Bloodbowl and Dreadball are obvious examples, then there's Space Hulk, Warhammer Quest, Mantic's Dwarf King's hold and Project Pandora and of course Dust Tactics. Does Dreadfleet's battle mat count as a board? And Anima Tactics, intended as a TMG its appendix includes rules for using a board, so is it a board game when you use the board and a TMG at other times?

Going the other way, I have always thought of as medieval-themed tile game Carcassone a board game, but do its brightly coloured tiles qualify as a board?

I have to say at this point I don't spend a large a lot of time pondering this issue. I'm not one of those pedantic types who defines myself as a wargamer or a boardgamer and insists that never the twain shall meet. The question only interests me because it says something about the way we use language and the way we think about games.

With that in mind, I have got what I think is a slightly better definition. To my mind a board game is an essentially self-contained product in a way that a wargame is not. Obviously this requires a little more explanation as there is no shortage of expansions for board games. Frankly, the back catalogue of some board game expansions is enough to keep some companies afloat by themselves cough#Munchkin#cough.

What I mean, is that the intent of a board game is that a single person can buy a copy, and the optional expansions if they so choose, and have a self-contained product that can be played with a group. There is no intent for each player to bring their own copy. In contrast, in a TMG each player is expected to collect their own army/warband/gang/crew/team of models. Of course some players like to collect multiple armies so that players with no army of their own can still join in, but the clear intent is that each player brings their own models.

The funny thing about this definition is that Blood Bowl and Dreadball would be considered TMGs while Space Hulk, Dwarf King's Hold and Dreadfleet would be board games.

I have been reasonably happy with my home made definition for a while now, but this past weekend something happened that gave me a different perspective.

Last Saturday was Warfare Reading, Reading's premiere, and indeed only, Wargames event. Unusually for me my target wasn't new miniatures, but board games, specifically the Zombie apocalypse themed Last Night on Earth and Zombicide. Both games involve the killing of Zombies, but approach this theme quite differently. Last night on Earth is strongly atmospheric and tactical, while Zombicide focuses on straightforward cartoony action.

Most boardgames, particularly the more expensive ones, are packaged so that the game components can be easily be stored in the box. Usually this is some kind of plastic tray molded to hold the cards and counters specific to the game. Small World from Days of Wonder has one of the most elaborate. In addition to the specially molded tray, it also includes a separate removable tray specifically for the large collection of counters the game requires.



Not all games go quite this far, the aforementioned Carcasonne simply has a cardboard insert. Nevertheless, there is sense that the game and the box are part of a single self contained product.



Last night on Earth follows this pattern exactly.


When you open up Zombicide you get something quite different.


The two large boxes contain the plastic trays of miniatures.



There is a seperate plastic holder for the cards, dice and experience markers, but the cards bulge over the top. This is fine when they are still sealed in plastic, but they start to spread out when put in loosely.


The miniatures and board sections fit quite snuggly, but there is also a single sheet of card counters which sits on top. Unfortunately, once the counters are punched out there is nowhere for them to go.

As I rummaged around for a plastic sandwich bag to store the counters I remembered that I had had to do the same thing with my copies of Blood Bowl, Space Hulk and Warhammer Quest. Although Games Workshop have produced a number of games that are arguably board games they have never followed the board game convention of including a means of storing the components. Mantic have followed the same pattern with Dwarf King's Hold and Project Pandora. When companies focused on TMG games produce board games they tend to treat the boxes the same way as boxes of miniatures, as a mechanism of transporting the miniatures without them falling all over the floor.

This leads me to wonder if Zombicide was produced with more of a TMG sensibility than a board game sensibility. It also leads me to wonder how Dreadball will be packaged when it is ready.

But what is really strange about all this is that, until now, packaging never entered my head when considering the definition of a game and yet I come away from this feeling as though Last Night on Earth is a board game and Zombicide is a table top miniature game.

Friday 16 November 2012

The Battle of Wurtbad - the Defenders of Wurtbad

After our brief interlude into other things, it's back to the fate of the town of Wurtbad. Having worked out an army list for our Nurgle alliance it was time to sort one out for the valiant, or foolhardy, defenders of the town.

We were already planning to use MLB's Empire army, made from a mix of Perry Miniatures War of the Roses plastics and some Games Workshop models. The army is still in its early stages, so we were pretty sure we would have to take almost all of it, but we still had to consider army lists.

Games Workshop actually published two different Empire army lists during the reign of Warhammer 3rd edition. The first was one of the lists included in the Warhammer Armies book. The units are mostly given mad cod-german names, but much of it is still pretty recognisable. We have mountetriad Knights, Halberdies, Hand gunners and even Flaggelents. But some of the more distinctive Empire elements such as detachments and Steam Tanks were still some way off.


The second list was released in White Dwarf 147 [check] and is a very different beast. It was timed to coincide with the release of a large number of new models from the Perry brothers and, in retrospect, is fairly obviously a trial run for Warhammer 4th edition which was then only six months away. It includes almost all of the elements associated with the modern Empire army and a few that were common but have since fallen by the wayside, such as Kislev horse archers. It also features a few 4th edition specific features, such as the elimination of cool, intelligence and willpower in favour of simply having leadership handle everything.



It also has a few features all of its own. Units are bought in blocks of five or ten, with command groups and champions included automatically if the unit could have them at all. Additional troops also had to be added in blocks. This particular decision proved so unpopular that White Dwarf published points for individual models a couple of months later and the idea was dropped from all fourth edition armies.

In the end we decided to go with earlier army list. Partly this was because MLB's army included a large unit of pikemen and there are no pikemen in the later army list. We could have used them as spearmen, but it seemed a shame to compromise. Secondly, the cheapest independent character in the army was an Elector Count, which felt too high ranking to take part in what was effectively a minor skirmish.

The final reason was that part of the appeal of this was the opportunity to play a larger scale game of Warhammer 3rd edition. And that wasn't very compatible with using an army list that was effectively a preview of fourth edition.

In the end we had to use almost all of MLB's Perry models. We also added a cannon and a recently acquired mounted Wizard he had picked up from the bring and buy stand at a convention. A more recent Empire character was drafted in to lead the army. With Balios set at Level 15 it seemed appropriate to match him with an equivalent hero of the Empire. And we kitted him out with a magic hammer to give him a little more punch.

 

The Defenders of Wurtbad


Adolphus Von Rachhoff – Margraf (Level 15 Hero) (80)

M
WS
BS
S
T
W
I
A
Ld
Int
Cl
WP
4
5
4
4
4
3
5
3
9+2
7
8+1
8+1

Magic Hammer (Mighty Strike (1 Strength 10 hit per game) (5), Enchanted Strike (2 wounds)) (10), Pistol (2), Heavy Armour (3)

Total 100 points

Johannes Breckner – Schwarzmantel (Level 10 Wizard) (85)

M
WS
BS
S
T
W
I
A
Ld
Int
Cl
WP
4
4
3
4
3
2
4
1
8+1
9+2
8+1
9+2

Hand Weapon, Horse (3)

Total 88 points

Captain Borgern – Graf (Level 5 Hero) (30)

M
WS
BS
S
T
W
I
A
Ld
Int
Cl
WP
4
4
4
4
3
1
4
2
7
7
7
7

Halberd (2), Light Armour (2)

Total 34 points

10 Armbrutschutzen (10 x 10)

M
WS
BS
S
T
W
I
A
Ld
Int
Cl
WP
4
3
3
3
3
1
3
1
7
7
7
7

Crossbow and Hand Weapon

Total 100 points

20 Helblitzen (9 x 20)

M
WS
BS
S
T
W
I
A
Ld
Int
Cl
WP
4
3
3
3
3
1
3
1
7
7
7
7

Halberds and Light Armour, Standard (9) and Musician (9)

Total 198 points

 

10 Hakbutschutzen (8 x 10)

M
WS
BS
S
T
W
I
A
Ld
Int
Cl
WP
4
3
3
3
3
1
3
1
7
7
7
7

Hand Weapons and Arquebus

Total 80 points

 

20 Ersatzsolder (5 x 20)

M
WS
BS
S
T
W
I
A
Ld
Int
Cl
WP
4
3
3
3
3
1
3
1
7
7
7
7

Pikes (2), Light Armour (2), Standard Bearer (9), Musician (9)

Total 198 points

 

10 Bergjaeger (13 x 10)

M
WS
BS
S
T
W
I
A
Ld
Int
Cl
WP
4
3
3
3
3
1
3
1
7
7
7
7

Long Bow and Hand Weapon. Scouts

Total 130 points

 

Reiks Canone Batrerien – 1 Cannon (60)

M
WS
BS
S
T
W
I
A
Ld
Int
Cl
WP
4
3
3
3
3
1
3
1
7
7
7
7

3 crew

Total 60 points


Grand Total 988 points

Monday 5 November 2012

A true original?


Poor old Jake Thornton, no sooner does he announce plans to self-publish a new skirmish game then the first comment, the very first comment, assumes he will be ripping off Games Workshop. I can't say I blame him for writing a blog post on the subject. Since Dreadball a vocal part of the wargaming community seem to have decided that he is simply copies existing games.

That said, me writing a whole blog post on the subject probably doesn't help. So, before I go any further, I should say that I think his skirmish game Eternal Battles sounds very interesting. The plan is for a modular structure with the basic rules covered in one volume and multiple add on modules to cover different periods. I will be watching with interest.

I still want to talk about the "rip off" accusation though because it illustrates something quite interesting about the attitude of some gamers.

It's odd that Dreadball attracted such criticism, actually. There have been dozens of mass battle, dungeon crawl, space ship exploration and skirmish games released without anyone batting an eyelid. Maybe it's because Blood Bowl feels like one of Games Workshop's few truly original ideas. I say truly original, but even then it's a splice of two existing concepts, Warhammer Fantasy and American Football. Nevertheless, it does seem to be associated with Games Workshop more firmly than any other game concept ad has a lot of loyal fans.

Still, the attitude to Dreadball suggests that its critics believe there is only one legitimate route to design a game. That is to start with a totally original concept and then right rules to simulate it. That is certainly the route taken by some games; Malifaux and War Machine spring to mind. But this isn't the only route.

Take a look at historical gaming. There are games for all different periods and conflicts and the most popular periods are supported by multiple rules sets. Fields of Glory, Hail Caesar, Clash of Empires, War and Conquest, as well as others, all cover the ancient to medieval period, but all do so in a different way. Some rules focus in on a very particular period, such as Beneath the Lilly Banner, Killer Katanas or Saga, while others cover a much broader period, such as Pike and Shotte. When Warlord released Bolt Action recently Alessio Cavatore and Rick Priestly didn't receive any criticism for writing rules based on a period that has already been covered by other games. Not to say there wasn't any criticism, but not for that. Possibly this is because in historical gaming everything is based on actual history so no-one can be accused of ripping anyone else off based on this.

But historical gaming also illustrates a different approach to designing a game, namely looking at an existing period or concept and trying to simulate it with a different set of rules. As far as I can see, with Bolt Action the designers had a unique selling point based on the rules, the order dice, and built the game from there.

Why is this not an appropriate approach to take to Fantasy and Sci-Fi gaming. If a designer has a new way of simulating fantasy skirmish or mass battle or even sport why not build a game around it? Surely not every game has to be completely unique?

Now lets take a look at the current state of Blood Bowl. It is still formally available, but has been tucked away in the Specialist games area of the Games Workshop website, with no formal support and no new models for years. Many of the existing models haven't been updated since the mid 1990s. The game is effectively retired. So what is a designer with a good idea for a sports-based game supposed to do? Forget about it because Games Workshop have a game vaguely similar they hardly support? Whatever else you might say about Mantic they certainly have big plans for Dreadball with three supplements and twelve teams planned and no shortage of additional material.

So from the perspective of gamers Dreadball looks like good news. It's an interesting rules set and the game looks well supported. Should the whole concept have been dropped simply because it is vaguely similar to a game Games Workshop have all but abandoned? I think not.

I'm already signed up to Dreadball, I put money into the Kickstarter and will be keeping an eye on Eternal Battle and I hope that no good games are strangled at birth because tehy are judged insufficiently original.