Points, Mass and Fantasy FMA NON-TOPIC, REALLY

2 posts ยท Dec 16 1996 to Dec 16 1996

From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@t...>

Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 07:44:37 -0500

Subject: Re: Points, Mass and Fantasy FMA NON-TOPIC, REALLY

Sorry for sending this to this list, but I've lost count on which people

could be interested:

> On Fri, 13 Dec 1996, Allan Goodall wrote:

> At 12:59 AM 12/13/96 -0500, you wrote:

Since armies are so small (usually 10-15 elements) and play so fast
(usually less than 1 hour), I don't see that as a real problem. Providing
unit grades a la DBM would unbalance things quite a lot - going from (O)

(Ordinary) to (I) (gets a -1 penalty if the opponent gets a better
result) means going from dying once in a while to dying a lot, and with so few
elements to lose... well, it's hard to get a very even fight then.

My solution has been to use DBM rules (and correspondingly larger armies); by
using some creative troop definitions (like equating wolfes with camels <g>)
and in some rare cases inventing new troop types (... all flying troops, for
instance) one can use DBMs grading system to full

effect.

You might want to use some sort of magic system, though; I'm mainly into

the Tolkien/Pratchett style of fighting, where magic doesn't normally
affect the battle directly.

> The armies are distinct as a whole, and the interaction

In DBM/Fantasy, I'd make the Elves Regular Spearmen(S) (for Superior -
adds 1 to the combat roll if beaten), Reg. Bow(S) and various mounted; all
these troop types are 'expensive' in the points system used. The
orcs would be irregulars - Hordes, Warbands, Bow(I), Camels(?!) and so
on
- cheap but brittle units. There's your outnumbering effect.

Of course, there are several DBM/Fantasy conversions floating around the

'net. Last time I checked there were some Middle-Earth army lists on Ed
Allen's DBM Homepage... and IIRC those lists don't use any special rules

whatsoever.

> >I've been planning on taking a small set of

They should be. DBA was written for historical battles, after all <G>

> The campaign rules would be part of a grand tactical set.

This I disagree with. A campaign system should be able to play out battles
using your favourite grand tactical rules set rather than being tied into one
single set; after all, how much people eat has little to do with how you
resolve their fights...

From: Adam Delafield <A.Delafield@b...>

Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 09:12:54 -0500

Subject: Re: Points, Mass and Fantasy FMA NON-TOPIC, REALLY

Date sent:  16-DEC-1996 14:03:36

> The campaign rules would be part of a grand tactical set.

> This I disagree with. A campaign system should be able to play out

> tied into one single set; after all, how much people eat has little

I like the HoTT campaign rules. Great! Abstract like crazy. Just draw your
grid on a map using mountain ranges, rivers forrests etc to divide the
'realms' and hey presto! Instant campaign, just add water. Non of this keeping
track of supply lines and dull stuff like that.

I even did this for FT/Star Trek once with Realms such as 'The Neutral
Zone', 'Earth', 'Romulus', 'The Bad Lands', 'The Antaris(sp) Nebula', 'Kronos'
etc.

Great fun.