BW 2010 feedback

Rules questions, suggestions, and discussion

Moderators: Pwnerade, IVhorseman

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by stubby » Sun May 22, 2016 4:45 pm

I'm thinking of just simplifying and condensing all the movement rates down a bunch.

Two-Legged Creatures: 5"
All other Creatures: 10"

Vehicles: 10"
Flying Vehicles: 15"

Anything above those speeds is bought as Thrust, which is directional and consumes Power if you use it.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
Zupponn
if you give us money we will give you product
if you give us money we will give you product
Posts: 5484
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:15 pm
Location: Formerly Wisconsin, Now Minnesota

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by Zupponn » Sun May 22, 2016 5:36 pm

There needs to be some joke between Thrust and MOM and POP.
Image

User avatar
Steel_Valkyrie
Also sounding like a whiny bitch
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 12:04 pm

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by Steel_Valkyrie » Sun May 22, 2016 6:19 pm

Would armor still halve the base speed?
Image

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by stubby » Mon May 23, 2016 8:46 am

Voin wrote:So if a 1" thruster is mounted on a size 2" creation - does it not have enough inches (w/o Gathering Power or some such) to make use of the whole 5" of Thrust? Say, if a minifig has a 1" jump-pack or 1" repulsor-gun or something like that.
That's right. A minifig-sized Thruster (size 1/2", 1cp, 2.5" thrust) would be enough to jump over walls and onto roofs. Not super useful, but since it's not true Flight, the minifig wouldn't be subject to the usual limitations on armor or power usage.

A full flight pack would be bought as a movement upgrade instead, 2.5cp to upgrade from 5" regular Move to 5" Flight.

The minifig would only be able to support 2" of Thrust because of his power limit of 2. Even less if he uses one of his weapons in the same turn. We used to have a Power Pack equipment item that took up one of the minifig's hands (and acted like an unstable explosive, before we had a separate category for that), but it added 1 Power to his supply.
Steel_Valkyrie wrote:Would armor still halve the base speed?
Armor reduces units to Half Speed, which means all their regular Movement costs twice the usual number of Move inches, but stuff like Thrust is unaffected. Also any non-movement actions that have movement penalties or otherwise cost move inches, although to be honest I've already removed movement inch costs almost entirely from the next revision update. It'll be either Half Speed or nothing from this point forward; keeping track of the -1"s and -2"s was too fiddly and took too much attention for something that ultimately just resulted in less action rather than more.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
*CRAZYHORSE*
Mega Blok
Posts: 1348
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:10 pm
Location: Procrasturbating.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by *CRAZYHORSE* » Mon May 23, 2016 9:16 am

stubby wrote:I'm thinking of just simplifying and condensing all the movement rates down a bunch.

Two-Legged Creatures: 5"
All other Creatures: 10"

Vehicles: 10"
Flying Vehicles: 15"

Anything above those speeds is bought as Thrust, which is directional and consumes Power if you use it.
Meh, movement never seemed like something overly complex for most people. Even first time players pick it up without any issues. "Oh so this unit can move this far, okay" is usually the last thing I hear about it form people. They might ask you to remind them of the move distance once or twice but that's it.

Besides I like the fact that a bicycle can move 8" and a motorcycle goes 10". I like the fact that a war hound might outrun a minifig but has a hard time catching up to a car.
I always felt that movement was one of the systems brikwars had figured out very well and it always seemed like it added a lot of the needed strategic elements to a otherwise quite goofy game.
Simplifying it just seems redundant at best and removing some strategic complexity at worst.

Simplifying is always good but I don't think the movement system is the place to win a lot of ground on this.
stubby wrote:You were inb4beluga.

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by stubby » Mon May 23, 2016 10:23 am

It's just one of the areas where I field the most questions. Maybe I can just add the 5" / 10" / 15" as a rule-of-thumb sidebar for people who have a hard time picking speeds.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by stubby » Mon May 23, 2016 3:02 pm

It got mopped up in one of the simplification pushes, along with stuff like whips and jetpacks. Not because they're bad ideas, but they were a little too specific for the intro equipment chapter. They might work their way back in to an expanded equipment chapter or supplement.

The scaling issue is solved by requiring that they be exposed, like the shield generators on a star destroyer. Say it's a heat dissipation issue or whatever. You can have extra power, but it requires strapping unstable explosive devices to the outside of your vehicle.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

User avatar
Steel_Valkyrie
Also sounding like a whiny bitch
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 12:04 pm

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by Steel_Valkyrie » Mon May 23, 2016 5:00 pm

I like the idea of an advanced equipment chapter, for the stuff with no current concrete rules, like jetpacks, and some of the more imaginative weapons.
Image

User avatar
*CRAZYHORSE*
Mega Blok
Posts: 1348
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:10 pm
Location: Procrasturbating.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by *CRAZYHORSE* » Mon May 23, 2016 8:10 pm

stubby wrote:It's just one of the areas where I field the most questions. Maybe I can just add the 5" / 10" / 15" as a rule-of-thumb sidebar for people who have a hard time picking speeds.
That seems like a great idea. I think Brikwars works the best when it keep as much freedom as possible but has a lot of suggestive hand-holding for all the people that can't handle the freedom the game gives you.
stubby wrote:You were inb4beluga.

User avatar
*CRAZYHORSE*
Mega Blok
Posts: 1348
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:10 pm
Location: Procrasturbating.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by *CRAZYHORSE* » Tue May 24, 2016 6:39 am

I think such a chapter would be the best if it didn't contain any new sets of rules but rather shows you how you could possibly create such equipement with the existing rule.
A jetpack for example could easily be created from either the vehicle rules or the supernatural dice rules. The same thing counts for most more specialty weapons.
This way the player never has to relearn actual new mechanics but instead just reuse exiting mechanics in new novel ways and thus preventing the book from overflowing with rules and stats.
stubby wrote:You were inb4beluga.

User avatar
Tzan
Has anyone ever used those holes before?
Has anyone ever used those holes before?
Posts: 4710
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 4:41 pm
Location: Boston

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by Tzan » Tue May 24, 2016 11:53 am

A good rule book.

Image

User avatar
RedRover
I want you to be
I want you to be
Posts: 2662
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:36 pm
Location: CA
Contact:

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by RedRover » Tue May 24, 2016 12:17 pm

*CRAZYHORSE* wrote:I think such a chapter would be the best if it didn't contain any new sets of rules but rather shows you how you could possibly create such equipement with the existing rule.
A jetpack for example could easily be created from either the vehicle rules or the supernatural dice rules. The same thing counts for most more specialty weapons.
This way the player never has to relearn actual new mechanics but instead just reuse exiting mechanics in new novel ways and thus preventing the book from overflowing with rules and stats.
That is a great idea! I thought you could just make a jet pack (long distance) just giving a minifgure flight like a helicopter of something where as a jump pack could be a short burst that makes a sprinting mechanic (that can just vault over objects).

User avatar
*CRAZYHORSE*
Mega Blok
Posts: 1348
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:10 pm
Location: Procrasturbating.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by *CRAZYHORSE* » Wed May 25, 2016 5:53 am

RedRover wrote: That is a great idea! I thought you could just make a jet pack (long distance) just giving a minifgure flight like a helicopter of something where as a jump pack could be a short burst that makes a sprinting mechanic (that can just vault over objects).
Exactly. Specifically on the subject of jump packs I just always imagined them giving you a 'spider gymnastics' like sprint that isn't bound to a straight line but a parabolic trajectory instead.
Any specialty equipement chapter should just be a list of fine examples of how to combine and bend the existing rules to emulate what ever you want in simpel and novel ways.
stubby wrote:You were inb4beluga.

User avatar
*CRAZYHORSE*
Mega Blok
Posts: 1348
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:10 pm
Location: Procrasturbating.

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by *CRAZYHORSE* » Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:26 am

I'm very curious to what stubby has in thought for the 'skirmisher' units.
I imagine some kind of ability to allow them to hop in and out of CC without any big risks.
stubby wrote:You were inb4beluga.

User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
Posts: 5178
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: BW 2010 feedback

Post by stubby » Sat Jun 04, 2016 11:27 pm

That's right. Skirmishers can Withdraw from CC without drawing Counters.

I'm thinking of also letting them make ranged and CC attacks in the same turn as long as it's against the same target, but it may be more complicated than it's worth.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?

Post Reply
cron