| |
Ok, I've been kicked off my duff by Evil Stevie himself to write my final
postmortem. We haven't seen any additional comments for a while.
I'll discuss various areas as they come to me.
PREPARATION:
The game requires much more preparation that I had realized. I spent several
evenings the week before building ships, and we still didn't really have
enough cutters. Hopefully this will not be an issue the next time and I will
have all my ships built. I also didn't get a chance to pre-build any
islands. Packing was also an issue. The pirate ships are hard to pack. This
may limit how many big ships I bring to future games (which may not be an
issue - we never really needed the big ships). Thanks to everyone who
supplied stuff for bases (Shiri for her inn, Chris Weeks for a couple
islands, and Stephen Campbell for his base - I hope I didn't miss anyone,
thanks to Stephen Roberts for supplying his own cutter, and supplying a
backup of stock ships had we needed them [did anyone else bring cutters?],
Stephen Campbell also brought some bigger ships which we didn't use). I also
needed to be more prepared with materials (copies of the record sheets, read
the rules, etc).
One good thing which came out of my forgetting to bring tape measures. We
used range sticks made out of LEGO bricks. These worked nicely, and look
great in the pictures. It would be real nice if TLC would re-release the 1x1
bricks with numbers and letters so we could mark the sticks...
FACILITIES:
We had a space about 20'x30'. It would have been nicer to have a larger
space. It would have been MUCH nicer to have a lockable or otherwise secure
space. It was nice that we were not closed off in a back room (it's a shame
the castle folks were off in a back room, I don't think I made it there
until Saturday). Had we had a secure space, we could have set up (and
perhaps even started) Friday night. After playing, I definitely want to
stress that a carpeted space is more important than a bigger space. We spent
a lot of time kneeling or laying on the floor. The cafeteria would have
rapidly become uncomfortable. Also, the carpeting presents less worry about
scuffing the bottom of the ships. A major problem was that the space was
seriously under-air-conditioned. By 6:00 PM when we basically stopped, I
was essentially wiped out, largely due to heat issues (it took all evening
for me to pack, mostly because I just didn't want to deal with it). As a
result of all of this, we ended up with only about 6 hours of game play. Due
to the cramped quarters, we elected to change the 2' range of cannon to 18".
This worked well.
SCHEDULING:
The scheduling was a bit chaotic which caused problems. There was one point
where the game was abandoned for a demo. Several people were missed in the
call for lunch take out. Dinner arrived while we were trying to finish the
last couple of turns, and by the time we got to the cafeteria, the pizza was
almost gone.
GMING:
Major problem - we only had one GM. This was in part caused by my looking
around as we were setting up and seeing only 4-6 players. By the time we
actually started, we had more like 12 (Chris Weeks, Stephen Roberts, Lindsay
Braun, Jackie and Andy Lynch, Shiri Dori, Jeff Stembel, Tim Courtney, Mike
Shamus, Jameson, Abe Friedman - ok, so that's 11, 10 actual ships), a few
people started later (Stephen Campbell arrived just as we started, and
joined in turn 5, Nathan McDowell took over for Jackie and Andy, Inbal Dori
took over Abe's ship later in the game). The fact that no one had played
before also led to some slowness. Some major errors I made were forgetting
the initiative rules, forgetting to plot the NPC ships, and forgetting about
the chase rules. My estimation of the NPC ships movement also was annoying
to one player. One bonus that helped was that the players who were
experienced gamers took it upon themselves to resolve some of the movement
issues, and resolve some combat (like rolling to hit, and then telling me
when I got over, "no one hit"). One issue later in the game was how to work
with a younger player. Inbal was probably able to understand the game, but
the pace was definitely frustrating to her (in general, people were
constantly worried that their turns had been skipped).
Some thoughts for future GM assistants:
- deputize some of the players to oversee combats which are not near and
dear to them
- let some assistant GMs run a bunch of NPC ships. This would let those
ships be run a little more carefully yet still be fun. Each assistant could
take a merchant or two as needed, and a military ship (perhaps each could
have a military ship for the whole game, and try and chase down rumors of
the pirates or something), each assistant could also take on suttler duties
for one or two of the ports.
Steve Jackson has confirmed that this is the first time a large scale game
has been run by someone other than himself as far as he is aware of.
RULES:
There is a lot to understand of the rules. Some large charts to put on the
walls would help. Simpler damage charts for NPC ships would help (the PC
ships have the combat charts, so the NPC ships just have to have compas
diagram and damage boxes, with a few lines for comments). The wind didn't
change enough.
One player commented that he thought that characters wandering about the
islands would play more of a role. The problem with the invincible
alligators contributed to this problem. The scale of treasure may be a
problem also (taking a prize probably gains you much more than just finding
treasure). Probably it needs to be harder to take a prize (but the game also
has to move at a pace such that over the course of a few hours, islands get
plundered, ships get robbed of their cargo, and an occasional prize is
taken). I think that the island action should be important (it gives players
another reason to sail around).
The weather was a real drag. We played almost the entire game under a light
wind from the west. I used the pre-generated chart, and several times, even
though the 5 or 6 roll to change the weather came up, the next line on the
chart was the same.
Things like turning radius and pursuit rules perhaps should appear on the
record sheets (need to think about some rules to summarize on the record
sheets)
I ran something which was a meld of the battle game and the campaign game.
Some of the affects of this were that the islands were pretty much always
there (I guess I could have introduced new islands which someone
discovered). Another effect was that the battles occurred at the same pace
as ship movement, so it was possible to sail into a battle. I don't think
this is bad for a game (even though it is mighty unrealistic from a campaign
point of view).
I liked the way I ran skeletons. The skeletons moved and attacked after live
characters. Their attack was a throttle (though they could pick up weapons).
When hit, the skeletons got a save, the save was a 1-4 on a d6 for gun fire
and 1-2 or 1-3 (I forget) for cutlass attacks. I didn't allow cannon fire at
the skeletons other than grapeshot (which could be shot at a cluster within
a couple inches).
Some thoughts have been raised about rule changes:
- initiative randomizer (I think this would add too much complexity, I also
don't see a problem with the pirates early on having a dramatic initiative
advantage)
- things like swivel guns (probably a complexity add)
- siege mortars
- Different range penalties for grapeshot (may add complexity, need to look
at the suggestion)
- wind speed variation seemed to add complexity without much value (wind
direction change on the other hand is worthwhile)
- should hull hits affect speed (if they did, some of that speed loss could
be kept until the ship is properly repaired, this would reduce the need for
the hidden damage chart)
- it has been discussed to have the combats run asynchronously (sorry - I'm
a techy) to ship movement (I don't think this would be good - if we speed
things up, I think it will be less of a problem
- another suggestion was to change the measurement from 4 studs (close to an
inch) to 3 studs. (I don't think this would be good, pistols already are
hard to use with -1 per full inch of range, reducing that would make them
almost useless).
- maximum ranges for cannon might be worthwhile, though no one ever tried to
shoot from one side of the ocean to the other, in fact, only a few shots
were ever taken at more than 18", and I think 30" or so was the maximum
range a shot was ever fired at.
OVERALL:
More GMs, some provision for GM relief, lockable facility (even if not
available the whole weekend), and better AC would have allowed running the
game all weekend which would have suited several of the hard core players,
and might have allowed fewer players at once since the players who wanted to
play for a few hours or so could come in at any time.
SUGGESTED CHANGES:
- Modify the wind chart so direction changes more, perhaps eliminate some of
the wind speed categories
- Make alligators easier to kill on land, and have them not automatically
kill characters
- Detail out the rules for all the creatures (these need not be revealed of
course)
- Swivel guns could be added. Quantity as reasonable to fit on ship. Used
for personal combat, similar to longarm, -1 per 4", can kill crocodiles and
sharks easier (as well as other large creatures)
- Siege mortars (see separate rules Lindsay has proposed - I'll be
commenting on them also)
- need smaller rulers for personal combat
---------------
I'm sure there's stuff I missed, but I'm running out of energy for tonight.
Frank
|
|
| |
"Frank Filz" wrote
> and we still didn't really have enough cutters
> we never really needed the big ships
> also brought some bigger ships which we didn't use
<<hoping this is not a stupid question but>>
How come the emphasis on the cutters, and not the big ships?
Richard
Still baldly going...
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Richard Parsons writes:
> How come the emphasis on the cutters, and not the big ships?
You start out the game with a cutter... you're supposed to move on to bigger
ships later, but most of us didn't get that far in the game.
-Shiri
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> I also
> needed to be more prepared with materials (copies of the record sheets, read
> the rules, etc).
Don't forget pens. :-)
We had a rough time with that.
-Shiri
|
|
| |
Shiri Dori wrote:
>
> In lugnet.fun.gaming, Richard Parsons writes:
> > How come the emphasis on the cutters, and not the big ships?
>
> You start out the game with a cutter... you're supposed to move on to bigger
> ships later, but most of us didn't get that far in the game.
Correct. We were playing something more akin to the campaign game where
you start with a cutter and move up. In addition to the potential for
interesting play, this also had the advantage of giving the players a
less complicated ship to deal with initially. With the battle game, one
would distribute a bunch of ships, and unless there were enough big
ships for everyone, some people would be running several smaller ships.
Had we played the battle game, I think turns would have taken MUCH
longer, and the whole game would have needed to be more coordinated
(with the campaign game, people were able to move pretty independantly).
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
Shiri Dori wrote:
>
> In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> > I also
> > needed to be more prepared with materials (copies of the record sheets, read
> > the rules, etc).
>
> Don't forget pens. :-)
> We had a rough time with that.
And dice and pirate props. Good point. I will need to make a check list
for preperation and packing.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
"Frank Filz" <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Ok, I've been kicked off my duff by Evil Stevie himself to write my final
> postmortem. We haven't seen any additional comments for a while.
>
> I'll discuss various areas as they come to me.
>
> PREPARATION:
>
> The game requires much more preparation that I had realized. I spent several
> evenings the week before building ships, and we still didn't really have
> enough cutters. Hopefully this will not be an issue the next time and I will
> have all my ships built. I also didn't get a chance to pre-build any
> islands. Packing was also an issue. The pirate ships are hard to pack. This
> may limit how many big ships I bring to future games (which may not be an
> issue - we never really needed the big ships). Thanks to everyone who
> supplied stuff for bases (Shiri for her inn, Chris Weeks for a couple
> islands, and Stephen Campbell for his base - I hope I didn't miss anyone,
> thanks to Stephen Roberts for supplying his own cutter, and supplying a
> backup of stock ships had we needed them [did anyone else bring cutters?],
> Stephen Campbell also brought some bigger ships which we didn't use). I also
> needed to be more prepared with materials (copies of the record sheets, read
> the rules, etc).
...BTW: I thought your 'instant cutters' with 2 end to end boat pieces worked quite well.
U should ship off pics to Evil Stevie for reference in emergencies like we had (too few
cutters!)
> One good thing which came out of my forgetting to bring tape measures. We
> used range sticks made out of LEGO bricks. These worked nicely, and look
> great in the pictures. It would be real nice if TLC would re-release the 1x1
> bricks with numbers and letters so we could mark the sticks...
>
> FACILITIES:
>
> We had a space about 20'x30'. It would have been nicer to have a larger
> space. It would have been MUCH nicer to have a lockable or otherwise secure
> space. It was nice that we were not closed off in a back room (it's a shame
> the castle folks were off in a back room, I don't think I made it there
> until Saturday). Had we had a secure space, we could have set up (and
> perhaps even started) Friday night. After playing, I definitely want to
> stress that a carpeted space is more important than a bigger space. We spent
> a lot of time kneeling or laying on the floor. The cafeteria would have
> rapidly become uncomfortable. Also, the carpeting presents less worry about
> scuffing the bottom of the ships. A major problem was that the space was
> seriously under-air-conditioned. By 6:00 PM when we basically stopped, I
> was essentially wiped out, largely due to heat issues (it took all evening
> for me to pack, mostly because I just didn't want to deal with it). As a
> result of all of this, we ended up with only about 6 hours of game play. Due
> to the cramped quarters, we elected to change the 2' range of cannon to 18".
> This worked well.
...I agree the 18" worked great as a way to limit ranges well without making rifles and
pistols overpowerful. A thought on the cool range sticks would be to build them with diff
colours to 'mark' key ranges (easier to calculate range mods).
...Locked room is definitely a good thing! And I agree about carpet. I didn't think it
would be that important, but after playing, carpet is a _good_ thing (tho with the stoopid
AC in that building, playing on tile floor would have kept us cooler :-)
> SCHEDULING:
>
> The scheduling was a bit chaotic which caused problems. There was one point
> where the game was abandoned for a demo. Several people were missed in the
> call for lunch take out. Dinner arrived while we were trying to finish the
> last couple of turns, and by the time we got to the cafeteria, the pizza was
> almost gone.
...lol! I suspect with a big event like pirates, scheduling will always be a problem.
People will come and go throughout. One possible way to improve the situation would be to
try and make sure turns end just before popular demos (which would be hard, true, but a
good goal to wurk towards).
> GMING:
>
> Major problem - we only had one GM. This was in part caused by my looking
> around as we were setting up and seeing only 4-6 players. By the time we
> actually started, we had more like 12 (Chris Weeks, Stephen Roberts, Lindsay
> Braun, Jackie and Andy Lynch, Shiri Dori, Jeff Stembel, Tim Courtney, Mike
> Shamus, Jameson, Abe Friedman - ok, so that's 11, 10 actual ships), a few
> people started later (Stephen Campbell arrived just as we started, and
> joined in turn 5, Nathan McDowell took over for Jackie and Andy, Inbal Dori
> took over Abe's ship later in the game). The fact that no one had played
> before also led to some slowness. Some major errors I made were forgetting
> the initiative rules, forgetting to plot the NPC ships, and forgetting about
> the chase rules. My estimation of the NPC ships movement also was annoying
> to one player. One bonus that helped was that the players who were
> experienced gamers took it upon themselves to resolve some of the movement
> issues, and resolve some combat (like rolling to hit, and then telling me
> when I got over, "no one hit"). One issue later in the game was how to work
> with a younger player. Inbal was probably able to understand the game, but
> the pace was definitely frustrating to her (in general, people were
> constantly worried that their turns had been skipped).
>
> Some thoughts for future GM assistants:
>
> - deputize some of the players to oversee combats which are not near and
> dear to them
>
> - let some assistant GMs run a bunch of NPC ships. This would let those
> ships be run a little more carefully yet still be fun. Each assistant could
> take a merchant or two as needed, and a military ship (perhaps each could
> have a military ship for the whole game, and try and chase down rumors of
> the pirates or something), each assistant could also take on suttler duties
> for one or two of the ports.
...Another idea would be to have some more experienced players to run just 1 other NPC
ship. For example, the 1st merchant was on the other side of the world from me, so I could
have run it without too much 'conflict of interest' (perhaps a glance or two from the GM
to make sure I wasn't trying to steer it to an ally or towards myself.
> Steve Jackson has confirmed that this is the first time a large scale game
> has been run by someone other than himself as far as he is aware of.
...Woohoo! I think we did pretty good with it too (he'd have been proud :-)
> RULES:
>
> There is a lot to understand of the rules. Some large charts to put on the
> walls would help. Simpler damage charts for NPC ships would help (the PC
> ships have the combat charts, so the NPC ships just have to have compas
> diagram and damage boxes, with a few lines for comments). The wind didn't
> change enough.
...I agree about simpler damage for NPC ships. Perhaps a 'reaction chart' for them. After
X hits of any type, they stop in place, after Y hits, they sink. Simplify say for every 2
hits they lose 1 crew or similar.
> One player commented that he thought that characters wandering about the
> islands would play more of a role. The problem with the invincible
> alligators contributed to this problem. The scale of treasure may be a
> problem also (taking a prize probably gains you much more than just finding
> treasure). Probably it needs to be harder to take a prize (but the game also
> has to move at a pace such that over the course of a few hours, islands get
> plundered, ships get robbed of their cargo, and an occasional prize is
> taken). I think that the island action should be important (it gives players
> another reason to sail around).
>
> The weather was a real drag. We played almost the entire game under a light
> wind from the west. I used the pre-generated chart, and several times, even
> though the 5 or 6 roll to change the weather came up, the next line on the
> chart was the same.
...Perhaps keep with the pregen, but change on 4-6?
> Things like turning radius and pursuit rules perhaps should appear on the
> record sheets (need to think about some rules to summarize on the record
> sheets)
>
> I ran something which was a meld of the battle game and the campaign game.
> Some of the affects of this were that the islands were pretty much always
> there (I guess I could have introduced new islands which someone
> discovered). Another effect was that the battles occurred at the same pace
> as ship movement, so it was possible to sail into a battle. I don't think
> this is bad for a game (even though it is mighty unrealistic from a campaign
> point of view).
...It did slow down the 'outside' world (ie, the parts not in battles) :-/ I do like
keeping the battles there, but think we should experiment with a separate time scale for
the 'outside world'.
...An idea on 'invincible' animals would be to let them be killed (perhaps even by pistols
if enuf hit in 1 turn), but they 'regenerate' after a random time (ie, are replaced with
new alligators). This would make getting on the island easier, but possibly more
dangerous.
>
> I liked the way I ran skeletons. The skeletons moved and attacked after live
> characters. Their attack was a throttle (though they could pick up weapons).
> When hit, the skeletons got a save, the save was a 1-4 on a d6 for gun fire
> and 1-2 or 1-3 (I forget) for cutlass attacks. I didn't allow cannon fire at
> the skeletons other than grapeshot (which could be shot at a cluster within
> a couple inches).
...I wish I could have seen the skeleton combat! Lots of people commented on it :-)
Skeletons would also be a good candidate for the 'resurrection' bit posted above! :-)
> Some thoughts have been raised about rule changes:
>
> - initiative randomizer (I think this would add too much complexity, I also
> don't see a problem with the pirates early on having a dramatic initiative
> advantage)
>
> - things like swivel guns (probably a complexity add)
...Swivel guns are a good idea. Maybe let them roll to hit like regular cannon, but always
only do 1 hit either to hull or rigging?
> - siege mortars
...This one is cool! We need to tinker with it to see how to make it wurk.
> - Different range penalties for grapeshot (may add complexity, need to look
> at the suggestion)
>
> - wind speed variation seemed to add complexity without much value (wind
> direction change on the other hand is worthwhile)
...Perhaps keep it 'normal' unless changes needed by the GM... at least for games of our
mixed battle/campaign type.
> ---------------
>
> I'm sure there's stuff I missed, but I'm running out of energy for tonight.
...Excellent report, Frank! And thanks again for running it and making it go :-)
...you can go back to ignoring me now...
wubwub
stephen f roberts
wamalug guy (http://wamalug.org)
Jain's Guide (http://wildlink.com/lego/jain)
Visit the wildlink (http://wildlink.com)
lugnet #160
|
|
| |
"Richard Parsons" <rparsons@hinet.net.au> wrote:
> "Frank Filz" wrote
>
> > and we still didn't really have enough cutters
>
> > we never really needed the big ships
>
> > also brought some bigger ships which we didn't use
>
> <<hoping this is not a stupid question but>>
>
> How come the emphasis on the cutters, and not the big ships?
...I think cutters worked well enuf for our general level of cluelessness :-) Tho perhaps
it would have been nicer with size 2 ships so we could at least have a spare gun about :-)
...you can go back to ignoring me now...
wubwub
stephen f roberts
wamalug guy (http://wamalug.org)
Jain's Guide (http://wildlink.com/lego/jain)
Visit the wildlink (http://wildlink.com)
lugnet #160
|
|
| |
Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Shiri Dori wrote:
> >
> > In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> > > I also
> > > needed to be more prepared with materials (copies of the record sheets, read
> > > the rules, etc).
> >
> > Don't forget pens. :-)
> > We had a rough time with that.
>
> And dice and pirate props. Good point. I will need to make a check list
> for preperation and packing.
...I still think we should have lunched at Long John Silver's to get lots of little paper
hats :-)
...you can go back to ignoring me now...
wubwub
stephen f roberts
wamalug guy (http://wamalug.org)
Jain's Guide (http://wildlink.com/lego/jain)
Visit the wildlink (http://wildlink.com)
lugnet #160
|
|
| |
One other thing, I'm working on a writeup of the game. I've looked at
all the pictures posted so far (has anyone yet to post pictures besides
myself?), and I got through about an hour or so worth of the web cam,
selecting out good pictures. I still need to get permission from a few
folks (I want to copy the pictures that I will use so that I need not
worry about their locations on Brickshelf changing as people manage
their own folders. I'll probably repeat my call for permission once I've
decided what to actually use. So far I've noted pictures from Abe,
Shiri, and a couple others).
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> (has anyone yet to post pictures besides myself?)
I have not yet done so. I might do it tomorrow morning...I'd meant to get it
done before now.
Chris
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
>
> > (has anyone yet to post pictures besides myself?)
>
> I have not yet done so. I might do it tomorrow morning...I'd meant to get it
> done before now.
Well, that makes two of us. I've actually hardly unpacked. I really need to
take a picture of my work area. My computer right now is in a little cozzy
cubby made up of all the boxes of stuff. I've maybe unpacked two boxes, and
then I've gotten almost that much more in purchases in the last week since I've
picked up the 2 UCS sets plus the big DUPLO dino set (the KB outlet had them so
I finally bit on that one). Then there's the non-LEGO stuff I bought (some neat
little modular space ship things from the KB outlet [I'll need to take pictures
of them and post to clone-brands, they actually work somewhat nicely, I'm
thinking of making up a simple game for them], a Palm Pilot, and a CD writer).
Frank
|
|
| |
Aha! It looks like I can now read/post to the Lugnet web interface! Unless of
course this message does not show up, in which case, ignore the above.
I enjoyed reading Frank's writeup. Yes, as far as I know, this is the first
major "blindtest" of the rules . . . interesting to see how they go when I'm not
around!
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
>
> The game requires much more preparation that I had realized.
No kidding :-\ Good thing we LIKE this stuff.
> range sticks made out of LEGO bricks.
Cool!
>
> FACILITIES:
>
> It would have been MUCH nicer to have a lockable or otherwise secure
> space.
Absolutely.
.
>
> GMING:
>
> Major problem - we only had one GM.
Congratulations on *surviving* . . .
> One issue later in the game was how to work with a younger player.
Yes, I continue to struggle with this. The young ones really enjoy themselves,
but sometimes they do things that annoy adults (e.g., pick up their ships and
walk around with them)
> - deputize some of the players to oversee combats which are not near and
> dear to them
In my experience, players will play fair once they understand the rules, and
combat referees are not really necessary.
> - let some assistant GMs run a bunch of NPC ships.
Yes. I've found that many people think that this is just as much fun as actually
playing. An assistant GM can control an Imperial warship, roleplay it fully, and
really enjoy himself, even though he can't be the "winner" of the game.
> RULES:
>
> Simpler damage charts for NPC ships would help
?? You can just ignore the parts you don't use . . .
>
> . . . the game also
> has to move at a pace such that over the course of a few hours, islands get
> plundered, ships get robbed of their cargo, and an occasional prize is
> taken).
Yes. As the game develops, I am throwing out more and more of the things that
don't directly contribute to ACTIVE sailing around, fighting and plundering.
>
> The weather was a real drag. We played almost the entire game under a light
> wind from the west. I used the pre-generated chart, and several times, even
> though the 5 or 6 roll to change the weather came up, the next line on the
> chart was the same.
Arrrr. I thought I had rooted out all those. I just went back to my source and
found 3 and fixed them. Sorry . . . At any rate, if you find the wind is not
changing enough, you can make
it change on a 4-6, or just TELL the players it has changed :-)
> Things like turning radius and pursuit rules perhaps should appear on the
> record sheets (need to think about some rules to summarize on the record
> sheets)
Good point re: turning radius. I'm no longer using the pursuit rules at all ...
> ... the battles occurred at the same pace
> as ship movement, so it was possible to sail into a battle.
Yes, I think that's fun.
>
> I liked the way I ran skeletons.
That does sound like fun.
> Some thoughts have been raised about rule changes:
>
> - initiative randomizer (I think this would add too much complexity . . .
Agree.
> - things like swivel guns (probably a complexity add)
Yes. Had 'em in an early draft, took 'em out. Not only do they make the combat
charts longer, but (though they look neat in models) they don't travel well.
> - siege mortars
Yes. Though I was thinking of these as fort weapons that, with a good roll,
would drop a big fat ol' heated shot onto the deck of an attacking pirate. And
they could be pre-sighted on a spot in the ocean in hopes that a pirate would
end his turn there . . . giving a HUGE bonus to hit.
> - Different range penalties for grapeshot (may add complexity, need to look
> at the suggestion)
Grapeshot is broken right now, for sure.
> - wind speed variation seemed to add complexity without much value (wind
> direction change on the other hand is worthwhile)
Next time I revise the rules, I will double the "standard" wind speed. Makes
things move much faster, so to speak.
> - should hull hits affect speed (if they did, some of that speed loss could
> be kept until the ship is properly repaired, this would reduce the need for
> the hidden damage chart)
Hmm. I want to do SOMETHING to encourage people to shoot more at the hull.
> - it has been discussed to have the combats run asynchronously (sorry - I'm
> a techy) to ship movement (I don't think this would be good - if we speed
> things up, I think it will be less of a problem
I started off with asynchronous combat, and found it slowed things down.
> - maximum ranges for cannon might be worthwhile, though no one ever tried to
> shoot from one side of the ocean to the other, in fact, only a few shots
> were ever taken at more than 18", and I think 30" or so was the maximum
> range a shot was ever fired at.
A FAQ is "what's the maximum range?" As the rules are written, it just gets
harder and harder to hit . . . I really ought to figure out the utter absolute
all-bonuses-applied max range just so I can answer that question, but most
people are satisfied with "Beyond 3 feet it will take dumb luck to hit."
> SUGGESTED CHANGES:
> - Detail out the rules for all the creatures (these need not be revealed of
> course)
I thought I had detailed creature rules on the site. No?
> - need smaller rulers for personal combat
Heh. Send me your address and I'll send you a batch of the little 6" rulers SJ
Games made up for giveaways!
Darn, I have just GOT to make it to a Brickfest sometime . . . or maybe try to
host a Piratefest here in Austin. Wonder how many people would come to Austin
just for a weekend of brick-trading and Arrrrr! ??
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Steve Jackson writes:
> Aha! It looks like I can now read/post to the Lugnet web interface!
> Unless of course this message does not show up, in which case,
> ignore the above.
Ahoy, there Cap'n Steve! Welcome aboard!!! :-D
Franklin
|
|
| |
Steve Jackson wrote in message ...
> Aha! It looks like I can now read/post to the Lugnet web interface! Unless of
> course this message does not show up, in which case, ignore the above.
Hooray! Welcome aboard matey, or should that be captain...
> > One issue later in the game was how to work with a younger player.
>
> Yes, I continue to struggle with this. The young ones really enjoy themselves,
> but sometimes they do things that annoy adults (e.g., pick up their ships and
> walk around with them)
Probably the best thing to do is just let the younger player do as they will, so long as they don't do something which directly
affects another player. Having a special prize for younger players would also be good (have some spare pirate props, and a small set
just for them).
> > - let some assistant GMs run a bunch of NPC ships.
>
> Yes. I've found that many people think that this is just as much fun as actually
> playing. An assistant GM can control an Imperial warship, roleplay it fully, and
> really enjoy himself, even though he can't be the "winner" of the game.
Great. Of course no reason one can't have something prizelike to reward the best assistant(s). I think in many cases, one doesn't
need to have a "winner" of the game (at least if something like the campaign style is being done), so prizes will end up being
awarded to those who accomplished something, or just impressed the GM(s).
> > RULES:
> >
> > Simpler damage charts for NPC ships would help
>
> ?? You can just ignore the parts you don't use . . .
Hmm, not sure what I was getting at here...
Another note for ship record sheets, the effects of the various types of damage need to be listed. Also a quick reference to crew
actions (in fact, many of these things may be more imporant than the damage charts - unless one wants to customize the damage charts
to the particular ship (which could be good).
> > . . . the game also
> > has to move at a pace such that over the course of a few hours, islands get
> > plundered, ships get robbed of their cargo, and an occasional prize is
> > taken).
>
> Yes. As the game develops, I am throwing out more and more of the things that
> don't directly contribute to ACTIVE sailing around, fighting and plundering.
Will we be seeing a 2nd edition of the rules soon? If so, I suggest maintaining the 1st edition for those who might still want some
of the complex options (if you still have them, you might also want to publish the various rules you have removed as "optional"
rules or "fyi" notes, that can be useful in determining what NOT to go and add).
> > The weather was a real drag. We played almost the entire game under a light
> > wind from the west. I used the pre-generated chart, and several times, even
> > though the 5 or 6 roll to change the weather came up, the next line on the
> > chart was the same.
>
> Arrrr. I thought I had rooted out all those. I just went back to my source and
> found 3 and fixed them. Sorry . . . At any rate, if you find the wind is not
> changing enough, you can make
> it change on a 4-6, or just TELL the players it has changed :-)
Well, what do you know, it looks like the portion of the weather chart we ended up using had two of those three repeats... When I
have a chance to re-read the rules, I'll probably make some suggestions.
> > Things like turning radius and pursuit rules perhaps should appear on the
> > record sheets (need to think about some rules to summarize on the record
> > sheets)
>
> Good point re: turning radius. I'm no longer using the pursuit rules at all ...
Some kind of pursuit randomness would have helped in the chase we ended up with. It could be a simple thing though, if you have what
looks to be a chase which is going to get drawn out, simply roll 2d6:
2-3 ship in front gains 2"
4-5 ship in front gains 1"
6-8 no gains
9-10 ship in back gains 1"
11-12 ship in back gains 2"
A ship with some kind of skill advantage aboard would get to adjust the roll by one in their favor.
> > - wind speed variation seemed to add complexity without much value (wind
> > direction change on the other hand is worthwhile)
>
> Next time I revise the rules, I will double the "standard" wind speed. Makes
> things move much faster, so to speak.
For our play area, we didn't need to double the speeds, we just needed to not have a long period of time under a light wind. I'd be
real inclined to just have two wind speeds though.
> > - maximum ranges for cannon might be worthwhile, though no one ever tried to
> > shoot from one side of the ocean to the other, in fact, only a few shots
> > were ever taken at more than 18", and I think 30" or so was the maximum
> > range a shot was ever fired at.
>
> A FAQ is "what's the maximum range?" As the rules are written, it just gets
> harder and harder to hit . . . I really ought to figure out the utter absolute
> all-bonuses-applied max range just so I can answer that question, but most
> people are satisfied with "Beyond 3 feet it will take dumb luck to hit."
Yea, I don't think it's a problem.
> > SUGGESTED CHANGES:
>
> > - Detail out the rules for all the creatures (these need not be revealed of
> > course)
>
> I thought I had detailed creature rules on the site. No?
The rules cover the "normal" creatures, but not dinos and skeletons and other such fun things which might be added. I don't think
this is bad, I think this is an area for GM customization.
> > - need smaller rulers for personal combat
>
> Heh. Send me your address and I'll send you a batch of the little 6" rulers SJ
> Games made up for giveaways!
Ok, will do in an e-mail. Of course with the idea of the LEGO range sticks, I'll just make up a bunch of 6" range sticks which would
do the trick (well, 9" might be better).
> Darn, I have just GOT to make it to a Brickfest sometime . . . or maybe try to
> host a Piratefest here in Austin. Wonder how many people would come to Austin
> just for a weekend of brick-trading and Arrrrr! ??
Oh I'd think about coming. I'd have to fly, and thus wouldn't be able to bring much, but it would be fun.
Frank
|
|
| |
"Steve Jackson" <sj@io.com> wrote:
> Aha! It looks like I can now read/post to the Lugnet web interface! Unless of
> course this message does not show up, in which case, ignore the above.
...woohoo!
> I enjoyed reading Frank's writeup. Yes, as far as I know, this is the first
> major "blindtest" of the rules . . . interesting to see how they go when I'm not
> around!
...Well, despite all our missteps and problems, everyone seemed had fun, which is the #1
goal of the game. And most people seemed to accept the little problems as just part of the
game so didn't even mind them :-)
> > Simpler damage charts for NPC ships would help
>
> ?? You can just ignore the parts you don't use . . .
...After re-reading Frank's post, I think the NPC ships as well as crew actions should be
simplified. Like have a crew counter and as you mark off 'minimum' crew, you lose the
ability to do some things in simpler turns. For example, now u have to have 2 crew per
gun, + some minimum to just sail + some to stop... perhaps as you mark off below some
point (like 6 for a cutter), you would reach a point where 'cannon fire 1 per 2 turns',
'ship can only change course 1 "notch" per turn', 'ship sails at full speed or stop (ie,
no speed determination)' etc... This would cut down on dealing with just how crew are
being used and in particular for NPC ships make it a lot easier to deal with them...
...course, ymmv :-)
> > - should hull hits affect speed (if they did, some of that speed loss could
> > be kept until the ship is properly repaired, this would reduce the need for
> > the hidden damage chart)
>
> Hmm. I want to do SOMETHING to encourage people to shoot more at the hull.
...Maybe have some rigging hits don't do any damage at all (shot sailed rite thru). Given
the choice of maybe not doing any damage, people may choose to shoot at hull to at least
get 1 hit :-)
> Darn, I have just GOT to make it to a Brickfest sometime . . . or maybe try to
> host a Piratefest here in Austin. Wonder how many people would come to Austin
> just for a weekend of brick-trading and Arrrrr! ??
...Well, clear off the 3rd or 4th weekend in June next year :-) (we will likely decide on
a date next month and start coordinating for a _much_ better location (with AC!)) I hope
you can make it (I was excited that you even considered making it for this last one (ur
one of my heroes :-)
...you can go back to ignoring me now...
wubwub
stephen f roberts
wamalug guy (http://wamalug.org)
Jain's Guide (http://wildlink.com/lego/jain)
Visit the wildlink (http://wildlink.com)
lugnet #160
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
>
> Steve Jackson wrote in message ...
>
> > Darn, I have just GOT to make it to a Brickfest sometime . . . or maybe try • to
> > host a Piratefest here in Austin. Wonder how many people would come to Austin
> > just for a weekend of brick-trading and Arrrrr! ??
>
> Oh I'd think about coming. I'd have to fly, and thus wouldn't be able to bring • much, but it would be fun.
>
> Frank
Arr! Having faced the amassed fleet of Capt'n Stevie before, I can safely say
that ye won't be needing ta' bring anything but lots of caffinated beverages!
As a survivor of the 12 hour battle during Radcon '98, I'd love to face of with
the likes of Admiral Derek of the Imperial Navy again! He may have lost the
fort to ship battle, but I was the only scurvy dog left on my (class 6) ship!
Not to mention that outbreak of UPS-plague that claimed the lives (at least for
the weekend) of over 700 minifigs! The horror!
I'd be on a plane in no time to gather with other pirate/lego-philes! One
question though. Could it be in the fall/winter-ish time so those of us from
the great off-white north (like Seattle) could survive the Texas sun?
-The Mad Pirate Sean
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> Shiri Dori wrote:
> >
> > In lugnet.fun.gaming, Richard Parsons writes:
> > > How come the emphasis on the cutters, and not the big ships?
> >
> > You start out the game with a cutter... you're supposed to move on to bigger
> > ships later, but most of us didn't get that far in the game.
>
> Correct. We were playing something more akin to the campaign game where
> you start with a cutter and move up. In addition to the potential for
> interesting play, this also had the advantage of giving the players a
> less complicated ship to deal with initially.
Well put. The first campaign I played allowed for a Class 1 with a cannon or a
Class 2 without (this was Evil Stevie's fleet so there were no shortages) I
took a Class 2 with extra crew and intimidated a few fishermen into 'donating'
thier ships to me. I took the ships back to port and traded with the Sutler
for a class 4, then worked my way up to a Class 6. At the end of the 12 hours,
there were three of us at Class 6 and many at class 3 or 4.
> With the battle game, one would distribute a bunch of ships, and unless there • were enough big
> ships for everyone, some people would be running several smaller ships.
> Had we played the battle game, I think turns would have taken MUCH
> longer, and the whole game would have needed to be more coordinated
> (with the campaign game, people were able to move pretty independantly).
The larger the battle, the more expirienced the players need to be. At Radcon,
we had Steve and Derek playing an Imperial Fort (I'll try to find and post some
pictures of the base, mondo-terrific) with two Class 4 (I think) ships. The
united pirate army swept into the bay and eventually took the base, but at a
great loss. It took maybe 3-4 hours as I remember it, and most playing already
had a full grasp of the basics so didn't need much coaching. He still had
himself and two assistants ,Derek and Monica, and it was a big help.
-The Mad Pirate Sean
|
|
| |
Seattle? Well I'd like to try to get a game going this summer during PNLTC's big
train event at the Seattle Center. I figured since there will be a lot of AFOL's
here for the event we could have a Brickfest of sorts right along with it.
Interested? Anyone?
Tom
Sean Forbes wrote:
> I'd be on a plane in no time to gather with other pirate/lego-philes! One
> question though. Could it be in the fall/winter-ish time so those of us from
> the great off-white north (like Seattle) could survive the Texas sun?
>
> -The Mad Pirate Sean
--
Thomas's & Kristin's Home Page
http://home1.gte.net/trafert1/
PNLTC Member
http://www.pnltc.org/
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> Ok, I've been kicked off my duff by Evil Stevie himself to write my final
> postmortem. We haven't seen any additional comments for a while.
The writeup looks excellent. It really summarises everything
quite well.
One quick comment:
> - Siege mortars (see separate rules Lindsay has proposed - I'll be
> commenting on them also)
Just to get it on the table, as it were, I'm currently in MI
and so both the mortars and the digital camera are in NJ. I'm
not yet very facile with ldraw so I'll have to take a big ol'
mess o' digipix and hope that their simplicity seems obvious. I
ought to be able to take photos tomorrow night or Thursday; if
all want to see them, I'll post the URLs here, else I can email
them straight to Frank/Steve/whomever.
And to address said same Steve Jackson's comment regarding the
siege mortar and pre-sighting a chunk of ocean, I *love* the
diabolical possibilities! ;) The only problem, of course, will
be to find a way to specify a chunk of sea reliably without it
being such common knowledge that the pirates stay away like the
plague! (This is why I didn't include such a possibility, but
who knows...?) In any case, I'm counting on others to serve as
the brake upon my tendency to overenumerate rules in the name
of King Complexity of Accuracia.
best
Lindsay
|
|
| |
Mr L F Braun wrote:
> Just to get it on the table, as it were, I'm currently in MI
> and so both the mortars and the digital camera are in NJ. I'm
> not yet very facile with ldraw so I'll have to take a big ol'
> mess o' digipix and hope that their simplicity seems obvious. I
> ought to be able to take photos tomorrow night or Thursday; if
> all want to see them, I'll post the URLs here, else I can email
> them straight to Frank/Steve/whomever.
Go ahead and upload to Brickshelf. Please do some dissassembly if there
is anything which might not be clear from the final model.
> And to address said same Steve Jackson's comment regarding the
> siege mortar and pre-sighting a chunk of ocean, I *love* the
> diabolical possibilities! ;) The only problem, of course, will
> be to find a way to specify a chunk of sea reliably without it
> being such common knowledge that the pirates stay away like the
> plague! (This is why I didn't include such a possibility, but
> who knows...?) In any case, I'm counting on others to serve as
> the brake upon my tendency to overenumerate rules in the name
> of King Complexity of Accuracia.
At this point, it will be early July before I get a chance to read the
seige mortar rules in depth and comment on them (but I hope Steve will
get a chance to take a look, though his immediate future schedule is
probably almost as busy as mine with Dragoncon next weekend).
As far as pre-sighting a spot, I think the fortress player can have
everyone but the head GM turn away while pointing to a spot (or if the
head GM is playing the fort, he can point out the spot to a group of
players not involved with the fort). Another way would be to write the
spot down on paper (estimating ranges from landmarks - and it would
probably be fair to use a pirate ship as a landmark, you just need to
ask the pirate player to leave a marker where his ship was, pointing in
the direction of the ship - the way you would use this is specifying a
sighting like '12" in front of the Pink Princess', the idea being that
you are assuming the Pink Princess will continue straight for 12".
The seige mortar sighting should be made at the same time initiative 1
ships are plotting movement. I would also allow the seige mortar to take
opportunity fire. Actually, I'd allow any fortress cannon to take
opportunity fire, however, such fire should be limited to a target
within a narrow wedge in the direction the cannon is pointing at the
beginning of the turn (and the fortress owner can turn the cannon during
the initiative 1 movement plotting phase).
The actual effects of opportunity fire could not actually apply until
the cannon shooting phase (in otherwards, if a mast is toppled or the
ship loses enough crew that it is no longer able to be properly handled,
you would't take that into consideration, likewise if a cannon were
destroyed or cannon crew killed, the ship could still fire that cannon).
It might also be worthwhile to allow ships to use opportunity fire. We
had a few situations in the pirate game where ships passed each others
broadsides, but the final positions left a ship not able to bring their
broadside to bear. Unfortunately, this probably adds too much
complexity, and there is something to be said for skilled navigation to
allow avoidance of the enemies broadside.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> As far as pre-sighting a spot, I think the fortress player can have
> everyone but the head GM turn away while pointing to a spot (or if the
> head GM is playing the fort, he can point out the spot to a group of
> players not involved with the fort). Another way would be to write the
> spot down on paper (estimating ranges from landmarks - and it would
> probably be fair to use a pirate ship as a landmark, you just need to
> ask the pirate player to leave a marker where his ship was, pointing in
> the direction of the ship - the way you would use this is specifying a
> sighting like '12" in front of the Pink Princess', the idea being that
> you are assuming the Pink Princess will continue straight for 12".
>
> The seige mortar sighting should be made at the same time initiative 1
> ships are plotting movement. I would also allow the seige mortar to take
> opportunity fire. Actually, I'd allow any fortress cannon to take
> opportunity fire, however, such fire should be limited to a target
> within a narrow wedge in the direction the cannon is pointing at the
> beginning of the turn (and the fortress owner can turn the cannon during
> the initiative 1 movement plotting phase).
>
> The actual effects of opportunity fire could not actually apply until
> the cannon shooting phase (in otherwards, if a mast is toppled or the
> ship loses enough crew that it is no longer able to be properly handled,
> you would't take that into consideration, likewise if a cannon were
> destroyed or cannon crew killed, the ship could still fire that cannon).
>
> It might also be worthwhile to allow ships to use opportunity fire. We
> had a few situations in the pirate game where ships passed each others
> broadsides, but the final positions left a ship not able to bring their
> broadside to bear. Unfortunately, this probably adds too much
> complexity, and there is something to be said for skilled navigation to
> allow avoidance of the enemies broadside.
>
> --
> Frank Filz
I like the way the mortars are shaping up. Opportunity fire for a fort really
is an appropriate advantage, as long as normal initiative time between shots
isn't violated, simulating load/reload time.
Sean, the pirate mad
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Thomas P. Rafert writes:
> Seattle? Well I'd like to try to get a game going this summer during PNLTC's
big train event at the Seattle Center. I figured since there will be a lot of
AFOL's here for the event we could have a Brickfest of sorts right along with
it. Interested? Anyone?
>
> Tom
>
>
> --
> Thomas's & Kristin's Home Page
> http://home1.gte.net/trafert1/
> PNLTC Member
> http://www.pnltc.org/
I'd love to help out with a Pirate game at an event like that. I'm pretty
sure I can count in one or two more as well from the guys I play with. The
real trick, as covered in Frank's game is making sure there are enough ships
of the right types for what we want to do. Battle games are a lot easier as
you can bring whatever you want, and things are divided up to form fair
teams. Having played the campaign style as well, I'd be in favor of trying
that as it sound like we could have at least two our three refs to work with.
Steve: You see a sail
Guy before me: Uh, ok. Can I tell if they have guns or not?
Steve: No, you're too far away, you can only see the sail.
Guy: Ok, we'll attack!
Steve: Alright. As you get closer, you see it's an Imperial Armada Flagship,
go over to Derek and fight your battle with your Cutter.
Guy: D'oh!
Steve (after rolling): You see a sail.
Me: Uh, ok...Can I tell how big of a sail it is?
Steve: Yes, it looks to be about the same size as yours.
Me: Are there more than one?
Steve: No.
Me: Well, then we'll attack!
Steve: You find it's a fishing boat. <roleplay> They surrender when they see
the size of your crew, you now have another ship.
Me: Cool.
Steve: You see a sail.
Some other Guy: Uh, ok. How big is it?...
(I've never hear that question asked so many times by so many guys)
-Sean, Mad the pirate!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Sean Forbes writes:
>
> Steve: You see a sail
>
> Guy before me: Uh, ok. Can I tell if they have guns or not?
>
> Steve: No, you're too far away, you can only see the sail.
>
> Guy: Ok, we'll attack!
>
> Steve: Alright. As you get closer,
> you see it's an Imperial Armada Flagship,
> go over to Derek and fight your battle with your Cutter.
>
> Guy: D'oh!
Must..... restrain.... evil.... cackle.......
> Steve (after rolling): You see a sail.
>
> Me: Uh, ok...Can I tell how big of a sail it is?
>
> Steve: Yes, it looks to be about the same size as yours.
>
> Me: Are there more than one?
>
> Steve: No.
>
> Me: Well, then we'll attack!
>
> Steve: You find it's a fishing boat.
> <roleplay>
> They surrender when they see the size of your crew,
> you now have another ship.
>
> Me: Cool.
Plunder! Arrr!!!
> Steve: You see a sail.
>
> Some other Guy: Uh, ok.
> How big is it?...
Arrr! Y' see, matey, if'n y' lives long enou',
y' learn how t' keep on livin'!
Franklin
|
|
| |
OK, pics of the Pirate Game Siege Mortar are up:
http://www.msu.edu/user/braunli1/mortar.html
I'll provide more info if needed, but I'm dead tired right now...just back from
MI. I'm crossposting it to .build given all the questions I had about the things
at Brickfest, but followups will remain in .fun.gaming. Hey, maybe you
non-Pirates folks can find a use for this little whomper too...
best
Lindsay
|
|
|
