HomeFAQSearchRegisterUsergroupsBlogLog inGolden Tom 2014 Thread!

Share | 
 

 Designing a variation of Mordheim

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
KupoFIN
Youngblood
Youngblood


Posts : 13
Trading Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-01-02

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Dwarfs Dwarfs
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: Designing a variation of Mordheim   Wed 2 Jan 2013 - 12:19

Edit 10.02.2013 I've not given up working on this! The Finnish defence forces have kept me busy, but somehow I've found time to tinker on rules. I've decided that the initial setting of this project will be a frontier-type area of a newly-discovered land, and players will assume a position of a group of settlers looking for fortune. Right now I'm taking little steps, and hopefully this project will eventually grow into something Smile

---

Hi everyone. I've been lurking these forums for a long time and finally decided to register. About myself: 19 yo guy from Finland, miniature enthusiast for almost 5 years, and actually going to army in 4 days Razz that'll be some different war games, for sure Very Happy Mordheim became my interest almost immediately after I discovered warhammer, and nowadays is my absolute #1 game. I have warbands for Reiklanders, Eshin, Skryre, 2 dwarf warbands, and a WIP Chaos Dwarf warband. Maybe I post them here sometime but we'll see Smile

SO, to the point: I've always been quite fond of tinkering with different homebrewn rule mechanics, mainly being inspired by video games and a will to represent those things on my TV on a tabletop. That being said, I've never finished anything.. silent However, lately I've been rolling around a modification of, what else, Mordheim! Inspired not only by the existing modifications like MODheim, I'd say that games like Malifaux, Carnevale and Gloire have also had an impact. The core, the heart and the soul of the game, I'd still like to remain true to Mordheim.

In case of tl:dr, skip here. This idea of mine doesn't feature any dice, but instead a deck of cards to determine randomness of the game. Friends of Malifaux will instantly recognize this concept: there's no point hiding how I came up with the basic idea.

Currently, I have written the basic rules for model activation, moving, shooting and combat (we'll come to those later perhaps..) and yes - you read right: In my idea of "revised" tabletop skirmish game the model should be activated independently, and every model should be viewed as a heroic character. My idea features less models, perhaps up to six or seven per team and a greater emphasis on role-playing aspect playing as this band of individuals. Also, I've envisioned an expanded set of attributes for characters, including weapon skills for different types of weapons and characteristics for skills like Acrobatics and Influence. KD/S/OoA will not likely exist in my version of the game. It'll instead be replaced by wounds in body parts and will affect how effectively a model can use its attributes.

"So are you gonna rewrite and redesign all the rules of this game" you may ask.
Yeah. I am. Or not. With some help, perhaps?

Keep in mind that this isn't a complete ruleset, but merely a place for geeks like myself to epress my ideas. The first thing I'd like to present is the basic idea of taking characteristic tests with cards. For clarification, close combat is not resolved with both sides taking action at the same time, but instead each model strikes only when it's time for their activation.

Quote :
TAKING TESTS

The basic idea in tests is to compare the specific stats of two models and then draw cards from the deck to see which model won. 'Drawing' always refers to drawing (duh) card(s) from the deck when taking a test.

- If both models have the same exact value in corresponding stats (say, weapon skill), both players draw 1 card and compare the results. The player who's activation turn it is always has the disadvatage - s/he has to score a bigger value in order to succeed. This basically means that the player who 'triggers' the test has to score higher in order to win it.

Example: If model A attacks model B, then model A must draw a bigger valued card in order to hit model B, because he has attacked (and therefore caused, triggered) the test. Model B can block the attack if he draws at least equal numbered card with model A. However, when model B attacks, he must score higher value this time, because as an attacker he has 'triggered' the test.

- If the corresponding stats of the models are not equal, the model with higher stat value can draw an extra card for every point his/her stat exceeds the other model's. S/he can now choose the highest value card of the ones drawn and use it with the test, obviously giving better chances to score well.

Example: Weapon skill 3 warrior attacks weapon skill 2 grunt. Both draw a card to represent their attacking and defending respectively, but the warrior with weapon skill 3 may draw an additional card because of his higher skill. The attacking warrior now has two chances to draw a card bigger than his opponent.

- If the corredponding stat of model is double compared to that of opposing model, he draws as many cards as he usually would, but can use two cards instead in the test against the enemy model - and the enemy must exceed the both scores. Naturally, the model with much weaker skill would normally only draw 1 card in the test, but in situation like this he must always draw as many cards as the more skilled opponent has used in the test.

Example: Weapon skill 5 warrior attacks weapon skill 2 grunt. Both draw their cards, but the more skilled warrior draws 3 additional cards to represent his superior talent. Because 5 is more than double compared to 2, he can use the two highest drawn cards - and the opposing grunt must now exceed them both if he hopes to block the attack. Therefore he draws an additional card in addition to one he normally uses for defending.

Now. PLEASE give your comments and thoughts. What would you change? What did you like? Will I post more of my mad ideas here? Wink


Last edited by KupoFIN on Sun 10 Feb 2013 - 3:21; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Pervavita
Venerable Ancient
Venerable Ancient


Posts : 719
Trading Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-09-12
Age : 35
Location : Seattle WA (USA)

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Amazons (Unofficial) Amazons (Unofficial)
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: Re: Designing a variation of Mordheim   Wed 2 Jan 2013 - 13:24

Welcome to the forum KupoFIN. Glad to have you.
Also enjoy your time in the Army and good luck.

As to the concept here.

Cards: not as bad an idea (in practice I can't say) as I thought when I first read the idea. But after reading it it's not so bad.
How will cards work for non opposed test?
Leadership rolls, magic, climbing, ext
As non of these numbers that are standard can fit with in the confines of a 1-13 range (cards).

Warband size: 6-7 may be too large in this idea. Why? your going to over complicate the wounding part of the rules and add a lot of stats (WS-Slashing, WS-Blunt, WS-Stabing, ext) and will make a lot of things to remember in the game for a lot of guys.
What I would say is if your going to mimic the core Mordheim game with warbands I would take and use the core warbands starting number and devide it by 4. So Skaven (20) is now 5, Mercs (15) is now 3.75 or 4, and Witch Hunters (12) is now 3.
I am only using warbands from the base rule book not because others are not good but rather to suggest that you start with the most basic warbands for this project to launch it and balance it then add other warbands after some work.
I would also remove animals (wardogs, dire wolves, giant rats) and other basic non growth warband members (Zombies). Have these be able to be added to the warbands in other means as "extras", like animals are equipment (per the rules) and do not add to the warband size but do have the restriction of no more then 1 non riden animal per hero. maybe a skill to have them?
Zombies (and other such) would directly link to skills.
Large guys (Troll, Rat Ogre, ext) would also need there own investigation into how to make them work. But I would not include them in the starting concept as it will for now be too complex IMHO.

Also a Rout test with smaller warbands, how will you handle this? almost all will need a rout test after losing just 1 model or two if lucky. Will this in this model stay true?
I would say yes at least for now with in the concept for at least a few test games.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
KupoFIN
Youngblood
Youngblood


Posts : 13
Trading Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-01-02

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Dwarfs Dwarfs
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: Re: Designing a variation of Mordheim   Wed 2 Jan 2013 - 14:04

Wow, thanks for a quick and comprehensive answer Pervavita! Also thanks for kind words, I'm pretty excited with the army as I have very little idea of what's ahead. Wink

Non-opposed tests have been a concern, yes. At the moment, I'm thinking that the LD tests are taken against something, like opponent's influence, or perhaps WS, as there's that specific something that the model must test its courage/morale against. Be it an intimidating, or deadfully skilled enemy.

Climbing - I've been rolling around a simple table where the difficulty of the climb will be presented as a 'Difficulty level' that is tested against. So the 'difficulty' functions the same way as opposing model's skill. This also goes with shooting, as matters such as range and cover determine the overall difficulty of the shot. Magics naturally would also have these difficulty levels, if I end up incorporating them into mechanics.

I actually agree with you when it comes to overall model count. The 6-7 was something I came up with because I didn't want to immediately alienate people from this project with too few models. I personally have never played PnP rpgs, but I think that the philosophy behind only a handful of models should be something similar - to encourage the player to give the characters their own stories and backgrounds. I'd also like the skill system to reflect this - a character with military or knightly background would benefit from horseback riding skills, etc. I believe it would be rewarding to play with a model you've put some thought into.

To be quite honest, I initially thought of this project for human-only warbands! So you see, I definitely agree with you what it comes to having a very limited number of warbands at first. For the core system it would be very wise to only include humans, as that would also give the benefit of being combatible with other settings, too. Actually, I'm not even that keen to explicitly make this project exclusively a Mordeim mod - it's just an undisputed fact that as so many aspects are blatantly copied from Mordheim, I felt the need to present this project essentially as an modification to the Original game. However it would be thrilling if the system would also bend to represent the wyrdstone-hunting mercenaries on the board, as well as other settings.. Smile

Rout tests, I'm not so sure about. I believe I must come up with another way to represent the overall battle morale of the warband.

I'll keep thinking, and probably will post something new following days. Some other elements of game will resemble Mordheim more closely - the card system is by far the biggest change to overall system.

-KupoFIN
Back to top Go down
View user profile
DeafNala
Honour Guard
Honour Guard


Posts : 17920
Trading Reputation : 8
Join date : 2008-04-03
Age : 69
Location : Horseshoe Bay, TX, USA

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Orcs & Goblins Orcs & Goblins
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: Re: Designing a variation of Mordheim   Wed 2 Jan 2013 - 16:27

I'm afraid I won't be any help with your Rules. HOWEVER, WELCOME to Fearless Leader Tom's Sleep Yet On Rare Occasions Cool Nonetheless Mordheim Forum. Have a FUN stay! cheers
Back to top Go down
View user profile
KupoFIN
Youngblood
Youngblood


Posts : 13
Trading Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-01-02

Personal Info
Primary Warband played: Dwarfs Dwarfs
Achievements earned: none

PostSubject: Re: Designing a variation of Mordheim   Wed 2 Jan 2013 - 17:20

Thank you! Wink



EDIT: I'll add the rules for model activations now.

Quote :
Activating the models

- "Activation" refers to when player picks up one of his/her models and declares to take action with it, whether it be moving, shooting, close combat, or another action.

After the warbands have been deployed and the terrain and objectives have been set, it's time to start the game. If the starting player isn't determined by the scenario, players can either flip a coin or roll a dice to see who makes the first activation.

- The players take turns to 'activate' their models one at time.

A player can either activate his/her models in Initiative order - (from highest to lowest) - when activated like this the opponent cannot interfere with activations.

A player can choose, however, to NOT to activate his/her models in Initiative order, but this gives the opponent a chance to "steal" the activation: If player A chooses to activate a model with lower Initiative than another of his/her unactivated models available, player B can use any of his/her own unactivated models with higher Initiative than the one that player A was about to activate, and declare that s/he tries to steal the activation.

The two models test their Initiative stats against each other, and if player B draws a higher valued card, s/he successfully "steals" the activation and may now activate his/her model normally. However, attempting to steal an activation is only allowed ONCE for a player per round.

Example: Player A has two unactivated models with Ini stats of 3 and 4. S/he declares that s/he wishes to activate INI 3 model, instead of the one with highest value. Player B also has two unactivated models with Ini stats of 3 and 4. S/he now attempts to "steal" the activation - player A's INI 3 is tested against player B's INI 4, and if player B manages to win the draw, s/he can activate his/her INI 4 model and take action with it. S/he CANNOT attempt to "steal" another activation this round.

The remaining models are then activated one after another. If player A would have already activated all of his/her models, and player B would still have multiple models to activate, s/he would now activate the rest of his/her models in any order s/he likes.

All the models MUST be activated, even if they only use their activation to do nothing. Once all of the models have been activated, the round ends. The first activation turn passes to player who'd normally come after the player who made the last activation last round. (In 2-player games, this means the other player, of course.)

Note that even after the opposing player has attempted (or succeeded) to 'steal' an activation, players are still free to activate his/her models in any order.

Also basic outlines for moving - not too different from Mordheim. Later I'd like like to add some skill-based special manoeuvres like Wall Run or Diving Attack. Moving section also introduces a new statistic I've been thinking about, namely Acrobatics. I've always found it a little awkward in Mordheim to have the same stat for attack speed, dexterity, lockpicking and who-knows-what.. scratch

Quote :
Moving

A model moves it's base MOV value in units (be it inches, centimeters, or something else). After a basic movement model can still shoot and perform different actions. (Also I'd like think that a skilled fighter could move freely in combat, luring opponent into certain direction, or pushing him back. Skill, perhaps?)

Running is MOV x2. This basically means using basic move twice, as model cannot do anything else in its activation. It can, however, Model cannot run if there's someone in distance to "charge".

Charging (or rather, "Moving into combat" - ambushing or casually stabbing opponent in the back also counts as charging, but can be hardly called something as heroic!) is also MOV x2. Like in Mordheim, it's declared at the very beginning of activation. Hitting and wounding enemy is resolved immediately.

Fleeing distance is MOV + INI values in units. We either assume that panicking model either stumbles while escaping or runs for his life even faster than he thought he could! This is why Fleeing distance isn't always the same as running.

Climbing up/down. Model can climb as a part of its basic movement. To determine the success of climbing attempt, we must first figure out the difficulty of the climb: 1 difficulty point per unit climbed. So, if a model climbed a wall of 4 unit high building, the difficulty would then be 4. The model tests its ACROBATICS - stat against the difficulty level. Once again, as a "triggerer" of the test, model must exceed the number drawn "by" difficulty. If he draws higher, he can climb. If not, he does not move, but doesn't hurt himself either (This is important to remember especially when climbing down.)

Model can also jump down from heights. This doesn't use up any of the models movement, but the model can possibly hurt himself if he fails to jump down safely. Determine the difficulty of the fall as when climbing, and test against ACR, but a failure results taking damage from the fall. The first 4 units fallen add 1 point to overall STR of damage taken, the units after 4 add 2 points.

Example: The warrior tries to jump from height of 6 units. The difficulty of the fall is 6, and the model fails to draw a card high enough to succeed. He then falls thw whole six units, and the damage is calculated: STR 4 hit from the first 4 units, and additional STR 4 of the 5th and 6th units fallen. So in total, the model takes STR 8 hit.

Leap: leaping uses up models MOV. Every unit leapt adds 1,5 to difficulty (round up), for example, leaping 5 units would be 7,5 = difficulty 8 tested against ACR. Failure means that the model falls exactly the same way as in "Jump down"-section.

Swimming: The distance swam is normally half of the MOV (no runnign allowed, although running on water would make an interesting skill...). If there's a current, swimming across is the normal half MOV, and swimming up- or downstream mean quarter MOV and double MOV respectively. Armor and swimming penalties I must think about later.


Last edited by KupoFIN on Thu 3 Jan 2013 - 7:53; edited 3 times in total (Reason for editing : add content)
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Designing a variation of Mordheim   Today at 11:16

Back to top Go down
 
Designing a variation of Mordheim
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Designing a variation of Mordheim
» A question of scale variation in mordheim.
» Roleplaying in Mordheim
» The Mordheim Stage Coach
» Flipchuck's Mordheim terrain

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Tom's Boring Mordheim Forum :: Shout it out! (free-for-all) :: Fantasy Wargames-
Jump to: