dachda wrote:
Same company also does Duty & Honour. While Beat to Quarters lets the players be officers/crew on a British warship in the Napoleonic era, Duty & Honour lets the players be army officer/soldiers. If the first lets you be Horatio Hornblower or Jack Aubrey, the latter lets you be Richard Sharpe. Duty & Honour also has a few almanacs, which add new rules and setting info. Haven't played them yet, but they both look well done. http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_i ... s_id=58749
Cross-post from anotehr thread...
Does anybody have any experience with this game? Does anybody own the pdfs? I have been looking for a game that can handle a Napoleonic (particularly naval) RPG setting. I had never heard of these before and now I am intrgued.
What's the scoop, gentlemen?
~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@ VAE VICTUS! >> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<
Does anybody have any experience with this game? Does anybody own the pdfs? I have been looking for a game that can handle a Napoleonic (particularly naval) RPG setting. I had never heard of these before and now I am intrgued.
What's the scoop, gentlemen?
~O
It's on my own list of stuff to buy someday. I'm a big fan of the Jack Aubrey and Richard Sharpe books so am hoping this game is good. Check out the company's blog here: http://www.omnihedron.co.uk/dutyandhonour/?page_id=88 They blog about creating characters and starting a campaign so you'll get a sense of the game. I noticed they also sell via Lulu if you want a physical copy.
Yeah, Nothing better then Lucky Jack, Sharpe's Rifles and even a little Horatio Hornblower! These stories certainly inspire many RPG ideas. Thanks for the links!
~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@ VAE VICTUS! >> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<
Thanks Stainless. Haven't seen that one either. I never knew the glory days of Napoleonic Roleplaying were here!
~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@ VAE VICTUS! >> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<
Privateers & Gentlemen sort of maintained its head above water largely because the miniature rules, "Heart of Oak", have continued to be used long after the RPG slid into obscurity.
If you're interested in age of sail miniatures rules to slip into your RPG game, I can't recommend more highly Rod Langton's "Signal close action: Fast play" set. Really rules light but very elegant. If you want real crunch there are Rod's full "Signal close action" rules. His miniatures are top-notch as well. http://www.rodlangton.com/napoleonic/sca.htm
Indeed. Some time ago I used to play a lot of Age of Sail miniature games, some homebrew, some not. I do like Trafalgar a great deal, and don't find it that crunchy. But I have been having a hard time trying to fin players who will play a Warhammer Historicals game.
I don't think I have played Signal Close Action as I used to play in the mid to late 90s. I'll have to look into it though. Thank you Stainless, very informative.
~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@ VAE VICTUS! >> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<
Thanks for the interest and kind words about Duty & Honour/Beat to Quarters.
Pretty much all of my alternate recommendations have been covered in this thread, but I would second the mention of 'In Harm's Way' by Flying Mice Games. It definitely sits at the opposite end of the horrid 'indie-trad' spectrum to BtQ, but as I see it - one great flavour, two great tastes!
There are a collection of reviews of both BtQ and D&H on my site under the reviews section. (I'll link to it when I have more posts!)
If you have any questions about either game, where you can get them or ... well, anything else ask away, or drop into the Omnihedron forums and ask there.
Nice of you to drop by Mr Gow. I have a question for you. The only thing stopping me from buying both games is the group narative aspect. My understanding is that the players as well as the GM design the secenarios, add descriptions during play, make decisions on how the NPCs react, etc. (maybe I haven't fully comprehended the idea).
My question is, how easy is it to strip that out of the system and have an 'old school' game where the GM does all the design and controls all/most of the world directly outside the players? If that aspect is removed, does it make the game awkward, break it, or is it seamless?
_________________
Drug of choice...coffee
OK, first off, I'm not of the belief that games exist on some sort of artificial continuum between 'story games' and 'trad games' - I'm more of a belief that games are played using a number of techniques which can be imported into the way people like to play. For example, we use a load of narrative techniques in D&D4e but we also added some rules to Primetime Adventures to make it a little more GM-orientated. Its horses for courses.
So, how does this apply to D&H?
First off, here is how the game plays out.
1. Players have a Military Mission and any number of Personal Missions. These missions form the framework around which the game is played. So, for example:
Mission: Disrupt the French Supply Line
Objective: Scout the French column to the north and delay it, so that their garrison in the town of San Fuerto cannot be reinforced.
Challenges: 6
Deadline: 4
Reward:
Failure:
So, this is as laid down by the GM. 'Challenges' is the number of mission-critical encounters the players must succeed in to 'win', 'Deadline' is the number they can afford to lose before 'failure'.
'Reward' is what the characters get when they succeed. So the Missions provide the advancement system as well. The things that they can get here are proportional to the number of Challenges required in the Mission. More challenges, more time needed to succeed, more rewards. These are defined by the player, with some input by the GM. For example, the player might want to increase their Awareness skill in the above mission, as a reflection of the scouting. This allows the player to get, within reason, the character development they want. The Failure results are the reverse, penalities that are imposed for not succeeding and these are defined by the GM.
Personal Missions are defined in exactly the same way except they are authored by the player, rather than the GM. So, you may have an interest in having your handsome officer become romantically involved with the cowardly Major's beautiful young wife. So you write a Personal Mission to reflect this. It will have a Reward (probably a reputation with the woman) and a failure (almost certainly something involving the husband or a loss of face for attempting to cuckold a superior officer)
OK with that?
Now comes the narrative bit. The GM asks the players what sort of stuff they think might come up in this mission. In my games I always ask 'What sort of cool shit would you like to do in this game?'
The players brainstorm the sort of things they would like to see. Remember, they have personal missions to fulfil as well, so they will be wanting to see some aspects of those appearing too. As a GM, you end up with a long list of ideas, scenes, tropes etc. that you then use to build into the game. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO USE THEM! but it really helps. I have seen this portrayed as 'the players writing the scenario' before and really it isn't. Its a way that the players inform the GM whats really important to them and then give the GM the tools to make good on those expectations. It doesn't have to happen exactly as the players want - in fact I go to great pains in the book to explain why this is a bad thing - but it can work really well.
So, for example, one player might want to have the patrol come across a French cavalry patrol. He says he wants to fight them and beat the Captain. Whoooooa! says the GM. You want to meet a patrol, lets leave it there, OK? Another player says he wants that Major's wife to be in peril.
The GM thinks for a moment and then plans in the game to have the Majors wife leave the camp with her servant in a buggy and have the buggy break in a small river ford and the players can rescue her, when they are set upon by the French patrol. Both players get what they want, both have a chance to shine, you have an excellent scene with the chance for iconic action (swordfights in calf-deep water seem to pop up in Sharpe all of the time). Awesome.
Challenges are the actual critical junctures in the Mission. Some people like to define them beforehand and use the player brainstorm as flavour. Thats fine. Some people like to have some set-pieces in mind which they pack out with player brainstormed scenes. Thats also cool. Some people like to wing it all and just go with the flow, running the game wholly on the cool stuff the players come up with. Also cool. All three work.
Me? I'm somewhere between the latter two, nearer the second one actually, as I like my set-pieces as a skeleton to hang the rest of the stuff from. As long as you can adapt your set-pieces, thats cool.
So, for another example, the above challenge might be 'Protect the Majors Wife from the French!' It would count against their Mission to stop the supply column. It would probably rely upon them winning the battle with the patrol. If they fail, the patrol can warn the column of their presence. However, the player who wants to seduce the Lady can also say 'Hey, I have a challenge for my Personal Mission as well - 'Impress the Lady with my Bravery'
BOTH of these challenges occur in the same scene. The impressing of the Lady becomes part of the rescue attempt. The characters personal mission and the military mission are now intertwined from a story point of view. This combining of challenges means that instead of the players pulling in different directions to have their moment in the sun, they are rewarded for layering their interests into the central story.
I always recommend that people watch Sharpe's Mission and see how the Personal Missions of the various characters, like Harris, are wound around the main story. Thats what I was attempting to emulate.
===
Combat is another area where things are a little different.
Combat is not done in a round-by-round method. It is resolved in one flop of the cards (the game uses playing cards because gentlemen use cards, cads play dice!)
You flop, the GM flops. One person wins but the card tell you what injuries each character has taken. The winner narrates how the fight players out. You might not have killed your opponent, but you will have defeated him and the narration takes account of that.
Consider Sharpe? He hacks and slashes through dozens of Frenchmen with barely a raising of the eyebrow until he reaches his foe and then the battle starts. He fights, gets knocked down, throws sand in the face, punches him in the jaw and then both men stagger back to their lines, wounded with a burning hatred for each other. The bad guy only dies at the end of the story.
If this was a scene in D&H, the character would have won the challenge with a result of both characters being injured. He narrates this scene of carnage being carved through the French ranks (no-one cares about the French dying. Its what they are there for, after all) and him meeting his nemesis on the field of battle. He narrates a Sharpe style battle and at the climax, he is slashed across the thigh and his opponent feels his blade bite into his upper arm. The battle then swoops around them and they are seperated but they know, this isn't over...
===
I hope this is a comprehensive enough illustration.
I think the game could be run with the narrative stuff turned down in Mission creation and the creation of challenges, but not in combat - it would be a DEADLY system if played in rounds of combat. A charnel house of PC death!
I'm absolutely not trying to paint D&H as anything other than a story-driven game. I would be doing you a dis-service if I did. If you are looking for a less narrative based mechanic for the same genre, look to 'In Harms Way' and Clash's upcoming army version. If you want to try something different, give mine a bash.
Oh and I notice you are in the UK? If you are at any cons, hunt me down at the Collective Endeavour stall and I will gladly run you through a demo.
Thanks Neil for that indepth description of the game. That is a very interesting approach to roleplay and goes a long way to providing an understanding of the game.
~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@ VAE VICTUS! >> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<
Thanks for the fulsome reply Neil. I'll digest it and probably discuss it with my Tue. evening group. It's probably only a matter of time before I buy the pdf versions from drivethrurpg, just to slake my curiosity. We sort of do this a bit in our games. e.g., only last Tue. in my Trail of Cthulhu game, the group went to Wichita to do some investigating. It so happened that it was the home town of one of the PCs so they dropped by his parents'/sister's house. He narrated to me the facts that his father lived with his sister and that his mother was in a sanatorium. He also made up a family friend, etc. on the spot. It worked very well, and I suppose what your system does is fomalise it somewhat and makes significantly more use of the technique.
Getting to a UK con where I can play in a game has been on my look-out list for a while. Annoyingly, most UK cons seem to be run on dates that I have prior committments on. Any chance you'll be going to Dragonmeet South West this year?
_________________
Drug of choice...coffee
