April 17 Brikwar @ Jersey: More N@@bs

[Rev. Sylvanus]

Good points, Horseman. It's true that many of my armies lack two-handed weapons, but the most glaring problem for this game was my own army composition. Aside from my charging chariots, I had no way to deal with armor effectively (you'll see how I creatively deal with that problem in a few days). I also (stupidly) took the farthest-away deployment zone. My opponents, on the other hand, were within one-turn charge distance of each other, but opted for the position dance.

Interestingly, the three of us played an undocumented battle about a week and a half ago in which I fielded two size 2 "repeater crossbows." On a mobile mount with a full mind, armored foes just melted (working in conjunction with overlapping finger arcs).

[IVhorseman]

Chunks of scenery coming down and crushing armored opponents also works.

[Falk]

Chunks of scenery coming down and crushing armored opponents also works.

That's what WISG rolls are for.

[IVhorseman]

^^^^^ also, this. Easily the best medicine for broken bullshit.

[Rev. Sylvanus]

OP updated with pictures of the battle.

[Zupponn]

Wouldn't the combined fire of the Amazons be enough to overcome an enemies' armor?

[Rev. Sylvanus]

Wouldn't the combined fire of the Amazons be enough to overcome an enemies' armor?

In this case, no. Armor is now a little more ossum than that. Armor removes one damage die from each weapon used to attack the armored fig, not just from each attack.

[Zupponn]

Wouldn't the combined fire of the Amazons be enough to overcome an enemies' armor?

In this case, no. Armor is now a little more ossum than that. Armor removes one damage die from each weapon used to attack the armored fig, not just from each attack.

Well then, I'll still be using the old rules of +2 defense for armor.

[stubby]

I was secretly getting super-frustrated at my semi-lame opponents who kept complaining how long the game was taking while performing feats that inherently prolonged the game .

Yeah what was the deal with those? What kind of Cliche did they choose that had such lame feats attached?

[Rev. Sylvanus]

Ronald Reagan:
Crusader King Cliche (wish he would have taken it in a monty-python sort of direction)
- Game prolonging feats: praying for rain (twice) to extinguish my flaming arrows; requisitioning arab conscripts (i.e. giving himself more guys in the middle of the game); challenges to duel with the Cavalry Marshal (a pillow fight both times and left other units "out" of the fight) and several WISG decisions to force the Cavalry army to drop lances on charges when the Cavalry Marshal attempted some feat or other.

Paco:
Warrior-King Cliche (this is way too broad, I know, but I'm not gonna start fights with new people when I am just introducing the game to them...oh Catch 22)
- Game prolonging feats: frequent "rallying" feats to reposition his knights away from enemies, taunting shouts to make the Crusaders drop their charging lances, attempting to copy the Crusader's conscript feat, counter-seducing the Amazon's to keep them from attacking him (I only let it slide once).

In the end, I think I'm just going to have to go over what a narrow hero cliche is supposed to look like, and what a "heroic," "epic," "ossum" feat looks like, rather than these broad, generalized, meh, multi-unit buffing feats. But I digress. At least they like the game; that's a start .

[stubby]

Next time around, see if you have better luck by forcing them to stick to action hero cliches. Only the youngest kings usually get to be the action heroes in their movies. Lancelot's the action hero, Arthur's just a king - although Excalibur would count as a Heroic Weapon.

If anybody's in doubt, tell them that any character whose feats prevent action rather than amp it up is probably not an action hero.

[IVhorseman]

Warrior King could be cool if he did anything a warrior or a king would do. "Rallying" your men should be a reposition CLOSER to the enemy if anything. If he wants to run away, he should just call it a retreat.

Something some players at my table do is feats of "and then I burn the shit out of this guy AND KILL HIM," where a successful feat means that there are no damage rolls and the guy dies. These feats tend to have more dire consequences for failure than the "and then I attack this guy too" feats that actually do roll damage to see if they work. I've started to consider the former variant in bad taste because most of our fights are 4-5 minifigs total, but I do admit that they speed the hell up out of the game.

Alternatively, if people are just doing lame pansy feats and dragging the game too long, you could just try "meteors fall, everyone dies" feats.

[Zupponn]

Alternatively, if people are just doing lame pansy feats and dragging the game too long, you could just try "meteors fall, everyone dies" feats.

[Pwnerade]

How about saying that feats can only do things to the hero, not the rest of your army?

[Arkbrik]

That's boring, then I would never get the hilarious fails where my entire army runs in all directions.