"Yeah, I'm thinking I'm back!"

OK, so I'm not exactly John Wick, but after a two-and-a-half-year-long absence from this blog I thought my return required a little drama. No promises going forward; we'll just see how regularly I am motivated to post.

Since my last post referenced Phil Barker, the author of the DBX rules system, it seemed appropriate to focus this post on the most recently published addition to the DBX family: De Bellis Fantasiae. 

De Bellis Fantasiae (DBF) is the result of the continued development work of the authors of D3H2, which was itself the attempt, with Phil Barker's approval, to bring the Hordes of the Things 2.0 (HOTT) fantasy elements into line with the then-new DBA 3.0 revised mechanics. You may see my previous posts on D3H2 for a fuller explanation, but the big changes to HOTT included measurement in base-widths instead of "paces," the ability to apply "Fast" and "Solid" characteristics to HOTT's fantasy elements and an amended points system to determine element (unit) cost. DBF has furthered this evolution. After "publishing" D3H2, the authors continued to make "improvements" to the DBX system in regards to ease of play, plausibility of historical results and even presentation.

Presentation has been overhauled. Since the book is a Lulu print page-count is less of an issue, so full-color has been used throughout, type is bigger and diagrams have been placed alongside the relevant text. Extra words were used to help better explain rules in an attempt to reduce the "Barkerese" that some people have complained about over the years. FYI, I never had a problem with the writing style.

The element point system has been completely revamped, ranging from the expensive Aerial Hero at 17 points down to Skirmishers, Hordes and Light Mounted at 3 points. Making an element a General costs an additional 10 points. Mages (Magicians) are purchased at Levels from 1 to 5, and a new Magic system allows for some varied spells at escalating PIP costs.

The new point system lets you play small DBA-style games at around 75 to 100 points as well as larger "Big Battle-style" games with multiple commands/generals in the 200-300 point range.

Combat resolution is basically unchanged, but there are some new tactical factors and some "Special Rules" (traits related to training or specific weapon use) that change some interactions. Some of these are tied to specific fantasy army lists - 60 different lists from literature and mythology are included in the book - but all could be applied to other fantasy, or even historical armies as the user sees fit. Indeed, using DBA and/or DBMM army lists as reference these rules can be used to build and play with historical armies as well as fantasy. I consider DBF a great new "toolbox," and really like all the changes.

Oh, and there are new campaign rules, too. If you like the DBX system (I do!), you should check out DBF.

 
 

Dark Age DBA 3.0

Bruce suggested a little DBA 3.0 "Book 3" Dark Ages action and provided the representative armies.

Bruce commanded Nikephorian Byzantines (III/65) and I ran Khurasanians (III/43). The Byzantines feature a core of Skoutatoi (8Bw) and Kavallarioi (3Cv) with some exotics like Klibanophoroi (6Kn) and Varangian mercenaries (4Bd), supported by foot and mounted light troops.

The Khurasanians are based around the Ghulam infantry (4Sp) and cavalry (3Cv), supported by some archers (4Bw) and various tribal light troops. Both armies deployed with infantry centers and mounted wings.

The Khurasanians were defending their Dry (terrain type) homeland from Byzantine invasion; as the defender I had to deploy first, so tried to roll up defensible terrain. We ended up with Scrub (Rough Going) on my right flank, and Woods (Difficult Going) on my left. I deployed the largest command, the spear-armed infantry in the center, with a mounted command on each wing, with the light troops holding the Rough and Difficult terrain. I needed a balanced deployment that could hopefully delay the strong Byzantine mounted wings while the center infantry proved decisive.

Both armies began with a general advance, while the Khurasanians maneuvered the left-wing cavalry around the woods to block the Byzantine right-flank mounted advance.

As the main lines drew near each other, seeing the Byzantines on the ends of their center line formed up unnecessarily deep, and liking the match-up between the 4Sp and the Byzantine 8Bw in close combat, I pushed the center into contact.

The good match-ups and the deep Byzantine formations that made recoils impossible led to eliminations in the Byzantine center and left flank commands.

Some good (lucky?) shooting from the archers on the Khurasanian right flank led to the demoralization of the Byzantine left flank, and the Khurasanians began to wheel toward the center to keep up the pressure. FYI that is the Byzantine "dead pile" visible in the upper left of the second of the following photos.

A little more pressure demoralized the Byzantine center command a couple bounds later, signaling their defeat.

The Khurasanian left flank held off the Byzantine onslaught, even as the Klibanophoroi drove deep into their mounted opponents. Thanks for a fun game, Bruce!


Now, what do I want to do for Recruits next month?

Lord Kha-Ris battles The Army From Heck

Two Undead armies clashed at Castle FusterCluck this past weekend in a Big Battle of D3H2 (DBA 3.0 with HOTT additions). We tried to play the rules as straight up as we could, since Bruce and I were coaching Aaron and Steve in their very first game.

Each army totaled 72 points divided into 3 commands. Lord Kha-Ris (MY Undead) fielded a large command of mainly Replaceable Hordes and Behemoths. Aaron led a mounted right wing command of Knights, Beasts and Heroes. I also led a third smaller command of Aerials, an Aerial Hero (Cruella, of course) supported by 4 Flyers.

 

Bruce's Army of Heck was more balanced, Heroes supported by Spears, Shooters, Cavalry and Behemoths, with two small groups of Aerials integrated into the two wing commands. Steve commanded the left wing, so the New Guys faced each other.

The Army of Heck Defended, so chose terrain - Ploughed Felds, Gentle Hills and one patch of Scrub, so terrain played little part in the game - and took first bound. . . a general advance.

Kha-Ris responded in similar fashion. . . two masses of Undead trundling forward toward potential mutual destruction . .

When Bruce advanced his right wing Aerial Hero and Flyers, Cruella pounced, killing a Flyer and drawing first blood (presumably "true death" AND some kind of blood was involved). Cruella was then promptly set upon by the Heckish Aerial Hero and destroyed! 

Another Heckish Flyer was eliminated as the melee continued. . . until the Aerial Hero noticed another more enticing target . . . Kha-Ris, all by himself, on his zombie dragon mount.

Meanwhile the center commands embraced, and on the opposite flank, Kha-Ris' Beasts and the Heckish Flyers were at a stand-off.

 
Then the Heckish Aerial Hero pounced on Kha-Ris and the battle took a dramatic turn! The dice were rolled, and Kha-Ris lost by a single point! Death had come to Kha-Ris, the C-in-C of his army.

But wait! I remembered a rule in DBA Big Battle which entitles the C-in-C of each army to re-roll one die-roll per game after the results have been calculated. Only a re-roll of 6 would save Kha-Ris by causing a tie-score! 

"What?!" exclaimed Bruce, suspiciously. "Let's look that up." It is not unusual for us to check the rules several times a game, always in the spirit of fair play, so in we went. Turns out I was wrong. The rule actually states that the C-in-C can add +1 to his die-roll after the results have been calculated. . . so Kha-Ris gets an automatic draw instead of chancing a re-roll, as I wrongly "remembered" it. Thanks, Bruce! Kha-Ris survives another bound.

On my next bound, I got enough command PIPs to surround the Heckish Aerial Hero and send it back to Heck! Just in the nick of time, as Heckish archery sent another of my Flyers to its doom, breaking and demoralizing the Aerial command.

In the center, the relentless combination of Hordes, Behemoths and Knights, though sustaining its own losses, inflicted even more on the Heckish troops. On the right flank, the Beasts swept past the PIP-starved Heckish Flyers to fall on the flanks of the Heckish center.

While the Heckish right flank troops bore down on Kha-Ris, their center finally broke. A couple bounds later, the Heckish army reached its breakpoint (half its total element points) and fled the field. 

 Victory to Kha-Ris and his Undead. . . and to good sports, including the New Guys who said they'd be willing to play again.

What Am I Reading Now?

My Butterfly Brain is apparent in some of the books I've added to my reading list. I'm really looking forward to wading into Dr. Matthew's hefty book on the Macedonian pike phalanx. Also of "ancient" interest are new books on Rome and Syracusan tyrants, as well as a new set of fast-play wargame rules for classical naval battles from Osprey Publishing.

Here are a couple of new books on the French and Indian War. I highly recommend the new Osprey COMBAT  - it directly inspired my recent Black Powder game of La Belle Famille.

 Osprey just released a new Campaign book on the Gempei War, of course by Dr. Turnbull.

The recent wargaming "glossies" have relevant content, too. This one has a review of The Baron's Fistful of Lead rules by Lion and Dragon Rampant author Daniel Mersey, as well as a mention of his most excellent blog.

All have reviews of the new black-powder-era skirmish rules Sharp Practice 2 from Too Fat Lardies, which have a section devoted to the French and Indian War. The Norman Conquest issue features some Lion Rampant and Hail Caesar! articles to help scratch that Dark Ages itch.

 
See ya!
 

Lion Rampant?

Yup. And Dragon Rampant, too. Do I like em? Yup. Wanna know why? Because they remind me of DBA/HOTT. A lot. And you know coming from me that's high praise.

So how are they similar? Both games primary design goal was for a simple, fast game. DBA 3.0, in its introduction, says, "Our original intent was to provide the simplest possible set of wargames rules that retain the feel and generalship requirements of ancient or medieval battle." Similarly, Lion Rampant states,"Keep the rules simple, streamlined and abstracted where appropriate: don't make players continually thumb through the rulebook. Quick play and minimal record-keeping to allow multiple games in one session." DBA 3.0 concurs: "A game usually lasts less than an hour, so that a 6 round convention competition can be completed in one day. . ."

Significantly for me, their key similarity is the way the combatants are defined. As DBA 3.0 describes: "Wargamers pay more attention to weaponry than did ancient commanders. Surviving ancient manuals lump all foot skirmishers as psiloi whether armed with javelins, sling or bow, defining them by function rather than armament. We have applied the same principle throughout with no apparent loss of overall realism. Morale and training distinctions have also been discarded as linked with function. Thus, most knights are rash, all warbands are fierce but brittle, all skirmishers are timid."

Lion Rampant takes a similar approach: "Embrace medieval caricatures: knights should be headstrong, spearmen resolute, tribesmen fierce, and light cavalry agile. Performance is abstracted: make sure units 'feel' right." Unlike DBA, Rampant embraces unit training upgrades and downgrades, providing some differentiation between "green" and "veteran" units. Again unlike DBA, Rampant uses a point system to build equivalent opposing forces.

Here's a spreadsheet I built showing how the two game systems classify similar troop types in both "historical" and "fantastical" manner. . . I know.

Both games use about the same number of models to represent an "army;" about fifty figures, give or take a few, depending on the army. This permits one to collect a variety of different armies when one has budget or time constraints. Aesthetically, this works in Lion Rampant's favor, as it is designed to represent skirmishes, as opposed to DBA's focus on classic field battles. Another nod to the skirmish level of Rampant is the use of scenarios, which provides some variation from the classic "line 'em up and go at it" nature inherent to larger battles. Models are based individually in Rampant, instead of on "elements" of 2 or more representing larger units in DBA, and this also appeals to the "skirmish aesthetic" because terrain can be more complex and interesting when you don't have to accommodate large bases. I hope it's become apparent that building convincing terrain has become a big part of the hobby for me. 

HOTT (the fantasy companion of DBA) has been criticized (not by me) for an overly simplistic representation of magic, and if that is your assessment, you may like Dragon Rampant's simple but more detailed spell system.

Rampant uses an activation system that has become fairly common today; an activation roll on one or more dice, but gives it a nice nuance by rating each type of unit for movement, shooting, charging and morale, neatly giving each type (knights, spearmen, etc.) a personality and definite battlefield use.

What does all this mean? I am definitely not leaving DBA 3.0 for Ancients "army-scale" gaming, and may use 15mm to get more of that "massed army" feel, but for my Dark Age/Fantasy gaming I am seriously considering moving toward the Rampant family of rules and individual basing, and using some of my F&IW terrain in dual service. Individual bases also have the added advantage of permitting other skirmish rules to be played, too, should I get the opportunity.

And, because someone is bound to ask, "How does Dragon Rampant compare to Saga?" here is my take. I understand why the battleboard system, with special boards and dice for each Dark Age faction, is appealing to gamers of the period. In most wargames rules, one Dark Age warrior fights much like another, so the battleboards and faction-specific rules of Saga give each warband a unique personality. But for me, the system intrudes upon the game "experience;" I am too conscious of the game and its mechanics and less involved with the "narrative" unfolding. 

So we'll see if this goes anywhere. I am deep into the Great 54mm Basing Upgrade still. . .

See ya!




 

Recon, Recruits and Samurai

This weekend I visited Recon, a local "game event" held at the Geek Partnership Society in Minneapolis and organized by Mr. George Hord (Thanks, George!) Bruce and I planned to play some DBA/HOTT/D3H2, but Bruce wasn't feeling well so I decided to just go and see some friends. Mr. Hord was playing modern MicroArmor, Mr. James was playing 15mm American Civil War with Regimental Fire and Fury and Mr. Ladd was playing a 28mm Napoleonics game with "a new set of rules with an unpronounceable French name." 

Also got to watch a demo game of SAGA played between Jim (Vikings) and John (Norse-Gael). John hosted the game and provided both of the very-nicely-painted warbands. . . so I have to apologize for the lousy cell phone photo of the game above, which does not do it a semblance of justice, taken on the last turn when the game had come down to the feuding warlords and a handful of supporters. I have the rules and the dice, of course, and lots of figures waiting for paint. . . we'll see if this was enough inspiration to start applying that paint. John and Jim were both very welcoming and patient with my watching (er. . . questions). Thanks!

Still making progress on the F&IW game project for Recruits next month. Here are some "garden fields" I made from Build-A-Rama mats, which are also usable for DBA:

Here are the John Jenkins Indians and Rangers with their new basing:

I have a bit more terrain to finish up but the project seems to be well in hand now. I will post a map and a bit about the scenario next week. 

Friday the Steel Fist Miniatures Kickstarter order arrived. It's always fun getting "little guys" (as Lady Amok refers to them) in the mail! Between Perry and Steel Fist we now have all the important daimyo at Sekigahara in 28mm. 

The figures are quite good; well sculpted with some separate heads, weapons and banners. Even the packaging is nice - printed boxes with "matchbox" sleeves.

Steel Fist also has decal sheets for nobori and sashimonos, too. Gorgeous. A lot of the appeal of the Sengoku Jidai period for me is the graphic design. Here are some photos of the minis and decal sheets:

And, because someone I am sure is wondering how the Perry and Steel Fist minis compare, here is a photo. . . wait for it. . . comparison. Steel Fist on the left , Perry on the right. 

The humans work together nicely, with similar size proportions, even if the Steel Fist minis are just a tad heftier. Not so for the horses; the Steel Fist horses are "heroically larger" in proportion, though I think one could use them with Perry models as long as they weren't next to each other on the same stand. We'll definitely see about that sometime in the future. Definitely.

See ya!