Відео

I was thinking about using a deck of tarot cards for some campaign stuff for a game I was working on. As the base rules, there are no mages, but if your Warband has a mage, then your opponent also gets a mage, then there's kinda this drafting minigame before the battle, where the Minor Arcana cards are spells that can be cast during the battle, but the Major Arcana cards are scenarios/alternate rules, such as the Devil making the person with the most objective points lose the scenario, or the Lovers making two units on opposite sides unable to attack each other, or even attack friendly units over their "love."

This was a great episode and exactly what I needed to help me develop a good elevator pitch! I'm working on a pulp/dieselpunk sky pirate themed aerial dogfighting game focused on fast movement, judging risk vs reward, and outwitting your opponent. Players control two or more customizable aircraft with varied pilot skills and abilities with the objective of stealing and fighting their way to infamy and fortune. This is a diceless game that uses Blackjack as the core resolution mechanic and fits miniatures like Crimson Skies, Blood Red Skies, Aeronautica Imperialis (with some kitbashing), etc.

Every d6? can I use non cubical d6?

What's the legality on using dice as actual projectiles and yeeting them at models and dicestacks?

My favorite dexterity game is Clout. It's Magic the Gathering with the added challenge that all of your cards are poker chips that you have to toss onto the table. The area they land on determines what they can hit. If they fall off the table the chip is dead.

Could you play the game as a solo one faction against the drones and a "bot" faction?

One question that seems to always be causing debates due to how ots worded in the rulebooks, when setting down the veer and swerve templates, the name on the template must be towards the car? I believe that I have read that turns may be rotated. However, those 2 templates in specific must be flipped when choosing directions, not rotated 180°.

I just discovered your channel, excellent discussion. As someone fairly new into the world of miniature games, I was always confused by this whole competitive vs narrative dichotomy. For now, the difference for me is a competitive game is focusing more on balance, on the expense of having blander scenarios, while a narrative game is focusing on having more wild/whacky scenarios, on the expense of having a tight balance. Very interesting discussion, I would like to hear of it more.

1. Rerolling and being able to keep the original is equivalent to roll two dice and drop the worst, which is just a separate mechanic - so you don't see reroll and choose, because it's always worded as roll an extra dice and drop the worst, because that makes it easier to do. 2. Rerolling multiple times is heading off stacking rules, which can lead to unintended consequences - mostly by people who know they are stacking one particular thing - and it's better to cap accuracy at a certain point.

This was my first time viewing...I think. I've been sifting UA-cam for talks and takes on dice systems. No surprise I'm faffing about with my own game. I'm pretty secure in using d6 dice pools. Like Mike, I'm familiar with buckets-o-dice; the 'o' is for Orks. So, my question is: How many D6s are too many for a dice pool using numbers of success to scale the degree of success? We've been pretty set with 5 as an upper limit. If your 'hits' are 6s for instance.

I think I like the idea of the stones in the bag being a gamified version of the Commanders span of control. So a more skilled commander might take 6, but a particularly bad one may take less. So if players want to take a lot of units, then they have to buy a better commander, or maybe buy lieutenants or 2nd in commands, who can activate multiple units around them to pick up the slack.

I played troika (the rpg) which has a bag pull of, 2 of each players character, 1 of each enemy, 1 that ends the round and you put all chips back in. the idea is its meant to be more randomised. its fun, and mostly fine in rpg because there's a lot more you're doing than worrying about skipping a couple turns every some number of fights. we just used a deck of cards. The other bag pull i'm aware of is epic 40k 3rd edition. where there's 5 chips total, 3 for the side with "higher initiative" and you pull for each phase, to see who's entire force goes first in movement, then which small unit detachment fires first, then which war engine fires first, then who gets do do all melee combats and charges first. then you reshuffle

One "issue" with bag pull is that you cannot form a plan, there can be no plan from turn to turn, its total luck. It goes against the grain of command and control, what's the point of junior officers and NCOs if they have no function?

I used a bag pull system (like Bolt Action) for my 6mm miniature wargame rules ‘All Hell Let Loose’ because I feel it matches the violent, jerky, unpredictable nature of the fighting of the period. A platoon, a company, or a battalion are all roughly the same size in each army too. I wouldn’t use it for some other periods. E.g. in the American civil war, confederate divisions were often significantly larger than the union ones, but the union would have twice as many divisions on the battlefield. I’m not sure the game would work well with say 6 confederate dice in the bag but 10 union ones.

I like the cube/ball pull idea. It could be a large impact unit type, like artillery. Do you risk choosing artillery when it could be your game changing artillery, or your Opponents? A great risk/reward decision.

To my mind the decision to use a bag over a deck of cards comes down to the physical element. A bag is better at handling small (4-8) number of items and is quicker to swap items into and out. A deck is quicker to do a single draw or series of draws if the configuration isn't going to change very often past the initial randomisation. A game where you are putting things in the bag as often as they come out would be quite tedious as a deck, due to constant shuffling.

Yes bag pulls do work. The bag can do more than just who goes next. Events, weather and other things that used to be a chart can be done with the bag, like an Age of Sail game that the wind direction matters, can have some pulls that call the shift. Bags opens up many options.

Glenn's reaction, to the thought of a colon being refuelled, tickled me.

I’m not sure for bag pulls for player turns but check out the board games Village and Quacks of Quedlinburg for bag pulling mechanics, also Arkham Horror LCG for bagpulls to resolve combats.

Miniwargaming's new game uses a bag pool and that seems oretty well done. I don't really like it as a mechanic though.

Loving your content. I'd love to hear your take on the Trench Crusade rules.

The Gates of Antares, which I believe is the same bag pull system as Bolt Action, has the advantage that the stones you pull double as markers that show that the unit has activated and what it did (thus allowing a record of that unit's status, individual reminder of potential modifiers when shooting at it). Although that moves the discussion outside of the activation discussion, it is worth observing the efficiencies that provides. Once you pull a stone, you don't have to fumble around for another token to show orders and status.

Personally, it would seem less "solitaire"-y if, after both Combat stones are pulled, the player who pulled fewer (or no) stones automatically get stones equal to the deficit before the round then ends. At least then, the player who potentially had gotten swarmed and attacked would have a chance to do something in the aftermath. Narratively, a retreat and regroup after a deadly assault or a countercharge that turns the tide.

The best bag pull things I've seen is the game called " The Duke". You are playing something like Chess with the ability to bring out more pieces from a bag.

Also... He said hammer and knife violence "would be" more frequent than gun violence. Pretty sure murder by knife in London exceeded murder by gun in New York a few years ago... Funny how reality is so much stranger than fiction...

This is actually why I decided to make my own game. Shooting mechanics are garbage. I want to make a game with a non-garbage shooting mechanic.

Warband-level Sword-and-Planet/Gunpowder Fantasy wargame, thematically somewhere between "John Carter of Mars" and Brian McClellan's "Powder Mage" trilogy. Activated units can perform an entire "action sequence" of long & short actions, which can be affected by orders & equipment, enemies reacting, and superhuman heroics!

"Rift" (working title) A far future where mankind has segmented into un-augmented, cyborgs, and machines battling over the ideals that make each group choose their path of guided-evolution. It is a tabletop wargame intended to be scaled from skirmish apocalypse using a simple, easy to learn rule set that can be expanded in depth and complexity. It uses a card system to help players keep track of each units skills, equipment, and special rules, and any level of complexity can be added or removed simply by using, or refraining from use of certain card decks.

It was 3rd edition WFB that sparked my interest in wargaming at age 12 (although Epic ended up being my first game). All that wonderful jank appealed to one part of my brain, that galaxy of art styles to another. I hated 4th and 5th because of the style of game they encouraged, but got huge mileage out of 6th (due in no small part to Ravening Hordes). I played Old World and it was a dreadful experience. As crunchy as 3rd but with no joy in any of it. Luckily Oathmark exists and is a delight, and my Skaven adapt to it well - although I will go back and play the odd game of 3rd just to revel in the "kitchen sink" approach.

I'm working on a rank and flank game called Bardiche that attempts to evoke sweeping fantasy battles on a 2'x2' playspace. Most units in the game are based on 40x40mm square bases to allow units to be grouped up in various configurations to create varied formations like pike and shot squares ect.

I'd love to see a Malifaux and WarmaHordes deeper dive

Ancient Greek mercenary skirmishing where you create your mercenary captain, recruit a warband of about 10, and seek glory and fortune. A couple sprues of Victrix will give you enough models for two warbands, which is way less than basically any Ancients game. Battles shift suddenly as you backstab your friends and get their men to betray them, just like the ancient world! Thanks for the video, guys, i'm getting ready to take my game to my first convention so this is helpful

Interesting as always guys, thanks. Another question to consider discussing (if you haven’t already): how necessary is it to have something unique in your game? I personally haven’t played tons of games, but I just find it hard to imagine all those hundreds of games I see at Spiel each year are gonna be anything I haven’t seen before. Same for large scale miniatures wargaming, for example the old world: if the old world hadn’t been a GW product, would it really grab anyone’s attention? The differences with older whfb editions is minimal imo, or the fanmade spin offs. So the question is, how original/unique/revolutionary should a game (ideally) be? Keep it up guys, loving your channel!

I'm 2 years into developing my prototype and I just discovered this channel a couple of days ago. I've been binging the back catalog, these conversations are golden. My game is built entirely around a unique shooting mechanic, but I feel even more confident after watching this video that I've incorporated shooting in a really interesting way. I'm learning a lot from listening to you guys, this feels like a university level course in game design.

Sales pitch matters for selling a game to your friends (getting them to play when so many games are available). I find Billions Suns fairly easy to pitch but I can easily compare it to economic boardgames for 4x space games to most of my friends. I have largely changed the victory conditions and recalibrated the game however, partly so I can teach it more easily.

Excellent as usual

I'm developing a fantasy skirmish game called Bastard (temporary name, maybe) focused on cinematic, intimate, and dynamic combat designed in such a way that it's not just about the weapon in your hand, but how you use it. Whether that be an elaborate Link Attack you worked to set into motion, or charging headfirst into combat and trying to put an entire shield *through* someone.

Thanks, guys. Good thing to know for all game designers. Currently working on “ Never bet the Devil Your Head” a trick taking / betting card game, in which you draft cards for your final hand from a shrinking pool of cards. Inspired by the Edgar Allan Poe story of the same name. (This is my first attempt at an elevator pitch for this one) 🙂

Excellent review of what’s on offer with this intriguing game system… MANY THANKS!

good stuff, stil a better camera and mic would go along way in reaching a broader audience (with less tolerance for amateuristic video skills). Not meaning to be harsh, but it's really quite obvious. On the other hand your thinking and talking is way better than 90% of other youtubers on these kinds of topics, so i do enjoy it. Thanks

your discussions are always very interesting and im binging all of them right now, so thanks for that! Some constructive criticism: I really think you would get more views if you had some better audio, especially Glenn's audio is very painful to the ears. Might be a silly little thing, but it reflects on the overall quality. Just get some standing podcaster microphones and place them way nearer to your mouth, that's all it takes, you can get a blue yeti microphone for 100 bucks/euros/quid or so, nothing that will break the bank.

Are there plans for any more contract sets? I think 'frontier/fringe' was mentioned elsewhere?

I know I'm late to the party but that control card for each ship sounds really neat.

Well done 👏

Not been for a few years but looks like loads more minis stuff than there used to be. Seem to remember that the mini stuff (if any) was tucked away with the RPG and maybe larp stands. And maybe an xwing tournament in some other room

God damn it, I tried to get as many mini game demos in as I could and I didn't see the Bushido stand at all when I was there

Hi, just wondering what you guys think of one page rules and what changes you might make to increase strategy involved. I really lile the mini agnostic free rules as good for younger players but wiish there was a bit more to the decision of tactics.

Really enjoyed this video, ended up watching it a couple of times back to back. Absolutely love to convert miniatures, my favourite part of the hobby and am right at home in the Inq28/Blanchitsu miniatures space. I have been mulling over a system hack for Inq28 gaming for a while, the system I’m keen to try this with is ArcWorlde from Warp Miniatures. It’s a really fun and simple skirmish system with in-built rpg interaction elements, it also uses a standard card deck for its magic system (which I will also be using the John Blanche deck for). It also has prebuilt characters like Malifaux, so I need to figure out a way to make custom characters. So far it’s just been an idea floating around the old brain-pan, nothing committed to yet. Thanks for an insightful and inspiring video, carry on being awesome and take care.

Thanks for the review! I quite liked the Doomed as someone who’s not a big wargamer - it was perfectly suited to a bit of solo fun. Can’t believe the stick you’re getting in the comments here for sharing your thoughts, so I just wanted to say thanks for the video. Some of your criticisms absolutely land home with me, like the bit about Horrors having insufficient weight in campaign terms and the Unbound AI being quite frankly dumb in many cases. Some don’t - I *love* the meausureless movement and I resolved the “corners” problem using the game’s “be generous in judging short movements” rule. But it’s very good to hear a cogent and well-explained critical review.

I often think about this in relation to tournaments. Games can be played in tournaments but not all games are tournament games. Tournaments could use a bit of a rework to also follow your 70% rule, can the tournament itself be more of an over-game? It’s unfortunate when people drop after the first or second game because the outcome is known and hey, it’s just more fun to go grab a beer and play some filler game.