PDA

View Full Version : Midieval Wargame



Maelstrom
02-05-2008, 05:57 AM
Way back in the day, I started building a wargame based around the concept of full customization of a middle ages army. Each unit consists of ten men at full strength, and can be equipped with armor and weapons. I'll work out some of the information I used back and the day and post them here later.

First of all, need a better name than the Battle for Colain. Any ideas?

Maelstrom
02-05-2008, 06:11 AM
Some more ideas:

Darkage Warlord
The Knights of Colain
The Battlelord Chronicles
Age of War
Feudal Warlord

Mulsiphix
02-05-2008, 06:18 AM
Feudal immediately makes me think of samurai's and Japan. Not sure what Colain is. Age Of War is pretty tasty but sounds more like a prefix for a product line.

Age Of War: Middle Ages
Age Of War: Feudal Japan
Age Of War: Roman Conquest
Age Of War: Nopoleon's Wrath

I'm a big fan of using the word Chronicles and it would be a great word if you planned on making several expansions or supplements that continued a timeline for the setting. Darkage Warlord is awesome if being a Warlord is something very desirable or high ranking in the game.

Basically more information would be awesome :)

Maelstrom
02-05-2008, 08:34 AM
Colain is the land I made up where the battles take place. I made it fictional so as to avoid it becoming a historical wargame *wince*.

I like Age of War: Dark Ages. I can see how this system could be transitioned to other settings as well, but again I don't want to tie it too much historically.

rabkala
02-05-2008, 09:48 AM
How about Warlords of Colon?

Maelstrom
02-05-2008, 10:34 AM
Colain, not Colon, gahh!

Warlords of Colain has a nice ring to it.

Mulsiphix
02-05-2008, 10:40 AM
How about Warlords of Colon?Poor taste sir, just bad altogether :(

Maelstrom
02-05-2008, 07:56 PM
Here are some of the mechanics of the game. I've since lost my notes, so this is as close I can think they were from the top of my head, in a fresh untested and unbalanced state.

The basic concept is that each unit has four characteristics that determine its equipment and skills:

Weapons - Any number of weapons
Defenses - Armor and/or Shield
Mount - Whether this unit is mounted or not, and which type of mount
Training - If time is spent training the unit rather than deploying them immediately, they get bonuses1) Weapons. They have the following characteristics:

Att+ - A bonus to attack rolls, representing armor piercing ability.
Damage - How much damage the weapon does per successful hit.
Bulk - How heavy and bulky the weapon is. Affects the movement rate of the unit.
Range - How many hexes of range the weapon has.
Cost - Cost of materials used to make the weapons for this unit.
Hands - How many hands this weapon uses. If it is 2 handed, no shield can be used. No other affect.

Weapon | Att+ | Dmg | Bulk | Range | Cost | Hands | Special
Club | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Short Sword | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Axe | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Single use when used for ranged attack
Long Sword | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
Halberd | 2 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 2 | Cannot be used on horseback
Lance | 2 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | Can only be used when charging on horseback
Spear | 1 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | +2 damage when set for charge
Javelin | 1 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 1 | Single use weapon
Longbow | 0 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 2 | 2 |
Crossbow | 1 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 4 | 1 | Single use if using Large Shield


2) Defenses.

Def+ - Bonus to defense.
Bulk - How heavy/bulky the defense is.
Cost - Cost in materials.

Armor | Def+ | Bulk | Cost |
Light | 1 | 2 | 1 |
Medium | 2 | 3 | 3 |
Heavy | 3 | 5 | 6 |
Small Shield | 1 | 2 | 2 |
Large Shield | 2 | 3 | 4 |



3) Mount

Spd+ - Bonus to the unit's speed.
Att+ - Penalty to attack from this mount (unless trained).
Bulk - Represents how much weight this horse can take before slowing down. Add this to the total bulk of the character to determine movement. Light Warhorses have a higher bulk rating indicating that they cannot bear as much weight as heavy warhorses.
Cost - Material cost for this horse.

Mount | Spd+ | Att+ | Bulk | Cost |
Heavy Warhorse | 1 | -1 | 0 | 5 |
Light Warhorse | 3 | -2 | 3 | 4 |


4) Training

Att+ - Bonus to Attack rolls this unit receives.
Def+ - Bonus to Defense rolls this unit receives.
Time - Time in turns that it takes to train this unit.

Training | Att+ | Def+ | Time | Special
Conscript | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Green | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Veteran | 1 | 1 | 3 |
Elite | 2 | 2 | - | Can only be attained through combat exp
Mounted Melee | - | - | 1 | +2 Att Melee on Horseback
Mounted Ranged | - | - | 2 | +2 Att Ranged on Horseback
Ranger | - | - | 1 | No provisions needed in forest, +1 move forest
Mountainman | - | - | 1 | No provisions needed in mountain, +1 move mountain/hills


Once all equipment and training has been assigned to a unit, calculate its speed according to its bulk, according to the following chart. Then add the horse bonus speed for the final value.



Bulk | Spd |
6 | 5 |
9 | 4 |
12 | 3 |
15 | 2 |

Maelstrom
02-05-2008, 08:16 PM
Here are some sample units, using the above rules:

Green Mounted Archers
Short Sword, Long Bow, Light Warhorse, Green training, Mounted Archer training
Attacks:
Short Sword -1 att/2 dmg
Long Bow +1 att/2 dmg/12 rng
Bulk 6 Speed 8 Def 0 Cost 7 Time 3
The ultimate in hit and run, these archers can stay out of the reach of their enemies (and they better!).

Veteran Heavy Skirmishers
2 Javelins, Long Sword, Heavy Armor, Large Shield, Veteran training
Attacks:
Javelin +2 att/3 dmg/5 rng
Long Sword +2 att/3 dmg
Bulk 12 Speed 3 Def 6 Cost 17 Time 3
Slow moving but powerful, the skirmishers' javelins soften up enemies before they engage.

Mulsiphix
02-06-2008, 05:00 AM
This looks very interestesing Maelstrom.
You mentioned weapons can take up hex(s) on their own if they are long enough. How much space does each hex represent?
How much time passes with each turn?
Are there facing rules?
Are there salvage rules for after battles?
How do you track unit experience (if at all)?

Maelstrom
02-06-2008, 07:56 AM
1,2)

I made a mistake with the spear weapon... it's range would be 1 hex (melee).

As far as time and hex space, this game is abstract, so those values aren't determined. A hex is large enough to hold 10 mounted soldiers, so I would expect that it would be about 20 ft from top to bottom (two ranks of 5 men). Since a lightly armed warhorse can move approx 12 MPH (17.6 fps) at a canter, and in this game they can move 8 hexes, each combat round is about 9 seconds.

Of course all of this is only for flavor, as rules will favor balance and strategy over realism.

3)
At the end of each move, units can specify their facing. If opposing units attack from the rear 3 hexes, they will get an attack bonus.

4)
Perhaps, if a simple rule could be specified, such as the victors get 1/5 value of defeated units. I would imagine after a battle much of the equipment on both sides would be damaged, and the victors would be able to salvage enough to replace their damaged equipment.

5)
This is to be determined. This is a very deadly game for units, as you will see as I reveal the mechanics. I would imagine that if a conscript unit survives their first battle they become green, and if green units survive a couple battles they become veterans. To become elite however, it will require a more difficult to reach metric.

All right, now for some of the metrics for combat:

Each unit that attacks will roll 2d6, adding their attack bonus and subtracting their opponent's defense bonus.

They then check this chart:

Find the number of men along the top row, then find the modified attack value to find the number of men that hit.



Hit Chart
----------------------------------------------
| Number Men |
----------------------------------------------|
Roll | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
----------------------------------------------|
2- | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
6 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
7 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
8 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 6 |
9 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
10 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
11 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
12+ | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
----------------------------------------------


Then damage is dealt to the opponent as Hits * Damage.

Each soldier has 5 hp, so every 5 damage kills one soldier, reducing the strength of that unit.

This was how it was specified when I created the game, but since then I've learned to loathe charts. If I could come up with a way that had the same concept without consulting a chart, that would be nice.

Mulsiphix
02-06-2008, 10:13 AM
I love charts. Simple math I can handle but when you hit algebra level equations I find it cumbersome. Sounds really good so far though. Do you have plans to really flesh it out further?

Maelstrom
02-06-2008, 11:05 AM
I love charts. Simple math I can handle but when you hit algebra level equations I find it cumbersome.

Charts work, but its one more thing to look up during play that slows it down. My concept for this game would be that you could have massive battles with tons of units, so the time it takes to look up a chart really bogs it down.

I've reallized that the 10s column could be done with 2d6 - 2 + att - def, with the final number being the number of soldiers which hit, but that doesn't translate to the other columns of the chart.

Of course if I make a computer version of this (which is one possibility), the chart could work as players wouldn't need to reference it other than to understand the mechanic.


Sounds really good so far though. Do you have plans to really flesh it out further?

I wish I had my notes from 15 years ago - I had all sorts of things mapped out and even tested. The rules I've given so far are just for battles... there was a whole strategic layer involving moving armies, maintaining supply lines, seiges, building ships, seige weapons, roads. When two opposing forces met, then they would enter a skirmish which would use the above rules on a local scale. I even had skirmish maps for different styles of terrain armies might meet on (small town, forest, road, etc). Most of the ideas are floating in my head, but they will have to be rebalanced because I can't remember specifics.

If there's an audience for it I'll expand on it. Unfortunately finding new gamers interested in a new wargame of this style is difficult. This game concept diverges from those that get more people excited, such as being based on existing fiction or based on history. The goal with this is to build a wargame based strongly in strategy, and there are plenty of well developed systems out there for people instead of spending effort on a new concept that doesn't excite them.

Of those that I have known well, only one other person matched my enthusiasm of attempting to build a game like this based on customizable strategy in a midieval setting. You may be the second.

Mulsiphix
02-06-2008, 11:50 AM
I love strategy which is why I'm such a big fan of wargames. The wargames that don't work for me are the ones that are more interested in realistic simulation than in fun. I'm all about strategy and fun but a person has to draw the line somewhere you know? The Dark Ages are one of my all time favorite parts in human history. The battles, the setting, the possibilities, metal casting being the height of technology, all the weapons, the war, the suffering... absolutely delicious from a story telling point of view.

I can't stand old or new WOD set in modern times. However, the Dark Ages expansions make that game one of my all time favorite story settings for any medium. I'd be more than interested in pursuing this with you. If we work this out we could even start a play by post game here on the forums. That would be an awesome way to promote the system and expand on its popularity. More gamers = more fun ;)

Maelstrom
02-06-2008, 01:39 PM
Fine by me... glad to find another enthusiast. We're a dying breed. I'll see what I can do about fleshing out the details as I get time, and feel free to let me know the kinds of things you'd like to see.

Playing by post sounds like an interesting start! It'll be slow and ponderous, but at least its something.

Mulsiphix
02-07-2008, 04:26 AM
Slow and ponderous is what wargames are about :D. I think more combat should be the biggest focus. Once actual wargaming is able to take place the game can expand in any direction (story elements, travel, campaigning rules, salvaging producing more than just recovering your losses, funding, politics, setting/background fleshing, etc...

From your point of view how far along is the combat? Is there a lot you would like to see added? Ideas you've considered implementing or defining further? I've got plenty of questions but want focus on what your most interested in fleshing out at this time.

I'm also good for play testing. Something like MapTool would be great. I could put together some maps from stuff I've found on the internet if you wanted to try that out. Very excited to see a wargame added to the play by post section here at PnPG. I've considered running a BattleTech game many times but just don't have the time right now.

Maelstrom
02-07-2008, 05:07 AM
Well, the above stats and rules are pretty much enough to play a skirmish. Only thing missing are actual movement rules and such. We need to specify what constitutes a charge, being set for a charge, bonuses for flanking, whether you can move when adjacent to an enemy, unit movement orders, etc.

I'm working on an army-building utility as we speak, so it won't be long before we can get a play by post thing going. In the past I've playtested the skirmish elements of the wargame by having two players each have an allotment of training time and material and trying to build an unbalanced force aso things could be rebalanced.

If you want to come up with a map to use that'd be great. We could start just with an open field. It just needs to be big enough so opposing sides can't hit with the longbow in the first turn or so (range 12), so 22+ hexes wide would work.

Mulsiphix
02-09-2008, 12:49 PM
I can easily create a map using Heavymetal Map (http://heavymetalpro.com/HMMap_Features.htm) which is a BattleTech map maker. I've sent you a PM. I think at this point we really need to touch base and play a couple games ourselves. Well I want to play anyway lol. Then we can move onto play by post. Just need to figure out a few of the specifics; how will players track movement in the play by post, dice rolling, some form of character or game session sheet, etc... Talk to you soon :cool:

Schmall
05-15-2008, 11:58 AM
New to P&PG, but not new to the world of gaming. Mostly played RPG games like D&D and such, but been reading and looking into wargames. This kind of game is right up my alley and like what I see hear. I am not able to access the map tools you guys have mentioned at work due to sonicwall. However, I can at home! So I am all for pitching in my thoughts and ideas to help out with the process of this game format. Would love to actually play too!

amardolem
05-15-2008, 05:11 PM
Did you'all ever maptool this yet? it seems with the macros and such it would be perfect (I play in a maptool d&d game) Ever play Fields of Glory? I stumbled onto a tournament last week, and it was pretty cool, (I kind of skimmed the rules above-at first I couldn't figure out what the thread was about because tho I swear I haven't checked it out, it started me on the second page...doh! But I'd be into this, with maybe just a little help now and again. I have the original "Chainmail" some where as well as "Swords and Spells" small book supplement to the original D&D, and the original Battlesystem (although It went almost completely unused due to a dearth of any interested players other than myself-there was no PnP games to find other freaks thru!)

Maelstrom
05-17-2008, 05:16 AM
I'm not very familiar with MapTool. If its anything like OpenRPG, which it sounds like it is, it would be a great avenue to play something like this. You just need a few stats for each unit on the field (probably 10 or so per side for a smaller skirmish). Having the built in dice rolling capabilities would be really nice.

Another program I considered is Vandal, which is what some people use to play D&D Minis online now. It allows turn-based gameplay where you can play though in one sitting or play by email, lets you create what ever rule system you need along the lines of a tabletop wargame, etc. It would take a bit of work to get it set up there though.

Make sure to take a look at the link in my signiture, as the rules here have been updated a bit. I also created a .NET army builder, so you can create an army: http://www.penandpapergames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5366