Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1038867Yes it was, and it all pivoted on those fateful words... "Chirine, does that look like Mar to you off on the horizon?"

Yep; you took one look at the battle map that Phil had drawn, figured out what we needed to do, and we were off and running.

Role-playing, with miniatures on the table, just like we'd always done...

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1038889Yep; you took one look at the battle map that Phil had drawn, figured out what we needed to do, and we were off and running.

Role-playing, with miniatures on the table, just like we'd always done...

What?? You USED MINIATURES IN YOUR RPG??? Well that's not playing it right. In fact, it's badwrongfun!!!! I'm sure that Gary Gygax, and Dave Arneson, and Prof. Barker never, ever, ever, EVER  used miniatures when they played. :rolleyes: I'm positive that this was the case. I heard it somewhere. This would be exclusionary, and prevent the non-miniaturists from enjoying Tekumel.
Sorry Chirine, I just couldn't help myself. I was channeling some of the BS on a couple of the other threads (over on the other side of the room).


What I wouldn't give to have been part of that battle. It would have been great fun, I'm sure.
Whatever happened to tactics and roleplaying games? I'm currently running a Basic D&D game (i.e. the one after the brown box, Blackmoor, Eldritch Wizardy, etc), set in my own campaign world. I don't think they will be ready for Tekumel for a while yet. Two of the three players are essentially complete newbs, and it was only by the greatest of luck that they survived. Bushwacked by 6 goblins they were on horseback yet decided to stand still and be pin-cushioned. The first round the MU was down, the second round the cleric and the fighter decide that they will dismount and go after them on foot. By the fourth round the cleric is down, and the fighter has 2 HP left. and has just killed her third goblin, but is now locked in combat with the leader. They dance around for two more rounds (he rolls a 4 and a 6) and she rolls an 8, but finally kills the bugger with a natural 20. The remaining two gobbos fail their morale and high tail it out of there, either to hide or get reinforcements. It's at this point that she decides to throw her two comrades on the back of their horses, grab the reigns of both horses and head for safety. I asked the cleric and fighter (the "newbs") why they didn't ride away or ride down the goblins, and they just looked at me and said simultaneously "Oh ya, we were on horseback." The MU (a 30+ year veteran of my campaigns) almost pissed himself laughing at their response.    

Shemek.

Quote from: Shemek hiTankolel;1038890What?? You USED MINIATURES IN YOUR RPG??? Well that's not playing it right. In fact, it's badwrongfun!!!! I'm sure that Gary Gygax, and Dave Arneson, and Prof. Barker never, ever, ever, EVER  used miniatures when they played. :rolleyes: I'm positive that this was the case. I heard it somewhere. This would be exclusionary, and prevent the non-miniaturists from enjoying Tekumel.
Sorry Chirine, I just couldn't help myself. I was channeling some of the BS on a couple of the other threads (over on the other side of the room).


What I wouldn't give to have been part of that battle. It would have been great fun, I'm sure.
Whatever happened to tactics and roleplaying games? I'm currently running a Basic D&D game (i.e. the one after the brown box, Blackmoor, Eldritch Wizardy, etc), set in my own campaign world. I don't think they will be ready for Tekumel for a while yet. Two of the three players are essentially complete newbs, and it was only by the greatest of luck that they survived. Bushwacked by 6 goblins they were on horseback yet decided to stand still and be pin-cushioned. The first round the MU was down, the second round the cleric and the fighter decide that they will dismount and go after them on foot. By the fourth round the cleric is down, and the fighter has 2 HP left. and has just killed her third goblin, but is now locked in combat with the leader. They dance around for two more rounds (he rolls a 4 and a 6) and she rolls an 8, but finally kills the bugger with a natural 20. The remaining two gobbos fail their morale and high tail it out of there, either to hide or get reinforcements. It's at this point that she decides to throw her two comrades on the back of their horses, grab the reigns of both horses and head for safety. I asked the cleric and fighter (the "newbs") why they didn't ride away or ride down the goblins, and they just looked at me and said simultaneously "Oh ya, we were on horseback." The MU (a 30+ year veteran of my campaigns) almost pissed himself laughing at their response.    

Shemek.

Understood. I'm still baffled by this.

It was a very good battle, I thought, once I calmed down.

Lemme get this straight. You have three PCs on horses, bushwhacked by a half-dozen goblins, and they dismount? :eek:

Right then. I se it's time for Kindly Old Uncle Chirine to run some videos on simple survival...

Oh, I could be really, horribly cruel and point out that in my games, the horses would be on the table and kinda damn obvious. Heck, The Missus even went out and got me the right kind of horses for our adventures...

Gosh. I feel old, tonight.

Quote from: Shemek hiTankolel;1038890What?? You USED MINIATURES IN YOUR RPG??? Well that's not playing it right. In fact, it's badwrongfun!!!! I'm sure that Gary Gygax, and Dave Arneson, and Prof. Barker never, ever, ever, EVER  used miniatures when they played. :rolleyes: I'm positive that this was the case. I heard it somewhere. This would be exclusionary, and prevent the non-miniaturists from enjoying Tekumel.  

Shemek.

Funnily enough, I was just perusing through my copy of Eldritch Wizardry last night.  (That's the original D&D supplement that introduced psionics, demons, druids, and artifacts and relics to the original D&D rules).

Strangely enough, right on the front cover in big letters it says "Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures"

If people want to accuse anyone of playing in a heretical manner, it should be those using pens or markers instead of pencil!

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1038889Yep; you took one look at the battle map that Phil had drawn, figured out what we needed to do, and we were off and running.

Role-playing, with miniatures on the table, just like we'd always done...

When you were in a situation like this, did the group take a break while the scenery was set up, launch right into it with scenery being added to the table as needed, or stop the session there and pick up with the full stage the next week? I try to break so the Braunstein portion of it's own session.

Blaise

Quote from: Horu hiFa'asu;1038956Funnily enough, I was just perusing through my copy of Eldritch Wizardry last night.  (That's the original D&D supplement that introduced psionics, demons, druids, and artifacts and relics to the original D&D rules).

Strangely enough, right on the front cover in big letters it says "Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures"

If people want to accuse anyone of playing in a heretical manner, it should be those using pens or markers instead of pencil!

Exactly. Funny thing about that being on the cover.

Now, I certainly don't mind if folks choose not to use miniatures in their games - it's their game, after all! Want I have an issue with is when people chew my butt for doing it in my games...

Quote from: bconsidine;1038961When you were in a situation like this, did the group take a break while the scenery was set up, launch right into it with scenery being added to the table as needed, or stop the session there and pick up with the full stage the next week? I try to break so the Braunstein portion of it's own session.

Blaise

All three; we did what worked for the game session and what was happening in the adventure. In this case, we knew from the previous week' session that we were going to fight this battle, and Phil had asked me to bring my figures for the game as he preferred to use mine. So, I came in early, set everything up, and off we went. In other instances, Phil would toss me the keys to the miniatures cabinet, tell me what was needed, and I'd get to work setting the situation up while the rest of the group poured the drinks, put out the chips, and hit the bathroom. It usually took about ten-fifteen minutes for me to get the table ready, so it all worked out pretty nicely. In extreme cases, where something needed to be built for the action - with two dedicated modelers in the group, this did happen - we'd break and socialize until the next week's session. Phil was always good for a story or three...

Agreed; it's always easier to have a Braunstein that way, as it gives the GM a little breathing space too get ready for the thing.

Ah, what an evening 3rd Mar was.  Hairy as hell at the time, but in retrospect really satisfying.  I got us out of an almost certain deathtrap, and I did it with TACTICS, not dice rolling.

It really is a classic illustration of two very important precepts of war:

1)  Never trap your enemy in "death ground" -- we had nothing to lose.
2)  The first principle of warfare is OBJECTIVE!  Our OBJECTIVE was to reach Mar.  Not beat the entire Yan Koryani desert command.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1039004Ah, what an evening 3rd Mar was.  Hairy as hell at the time, but in retrospect really satisfying.  I got us out of an almost certain deathtrap, and I did it with TACTICS, not dice rolling.

It really is a classic illustration of two very important precepts of war:

1)  Never trap your enemy in "death ground" -- we had nothing to lose.
2)  The first principle of warfare is OBJECTIVE!  Our OBJECTIVE was to reach Mar.  Not beat the entire Yan Koryani desert command.

I've been thinking about this all day, and had one of those 'illuminating' moments. You were role-playing your character, the Glorious General, and thinking like a Tsolyani soldier would have in the same situation. Yes, it was for all intents and purposes a 'wargame', but you were looking at the table through Korunme's eyes. Phil wasn't, I think; I think he was looking at it through a WRG 6th player's eyes. Back in the day, he and the other 'serious gamers' who played Ancients at the Little Tin were all about 'winning the battle', usually through the largest amounts of miniature mayhem that could be devised. Remember the passion for bloody frontal assaults that those guys loved? Casualties were seen as a sign of manhood, in that it showed everybody that you and your miniature army were real manly men.

You, on the other hand, (and maybe me at Anch'ke, later on) didn't think in those terms; we used tactics to gain our objectives. We role-played...

Yeah, this is a situation where the line between "role playing game" and "wargame" can be thin.

Another way to look at it is "playing the period, not the rules."  We were SOLDIERS.  Soldiers attempt to achieve their objective.  At least my 2 years in ROTC taught me SOMETHING.

Like when I was in the tail end Russian tank and my platoon leader came under fire and buttoned up so he wasn't sending any signals.  The line between "what does my guy do" and "what is standard Russian 1941 doctrine for a single tank isolated from its platoon" is a thin one.

Or when Harley ran some WW I naval combat games.  British destroyers work better if you use them in accordance with British doctrine, and German destroyers work better using them in accordance with German doctrine.  Fancy that!

I honestly never understood the fondness of the cohorts at the Little Tin of the mass frontal assault.  Okay, some of them really were that dim, but Phil certainly wasn't.

You know what?  NEVER MIND.  The crust of forgetfulness just broke off my memories of WRG.  That game isn't based on tactics, it's based on "magic armies."

Much like Warhamburger.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1038962Exactly. Funny thing about that being on the cover.

Now, I certainly don't mind if folks choose not to use miniatures in their games - it's their game, after all! Want I have an issue with is when people chew my butt for doing it in my games...

If anyone chews you anything (that you mind being chewed) for what happens in those games, Uncle, just tell them to go to the Temple of Dlamelish and perform all the rites:)!

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1039072Or when Harley ran some WW I naval combat games.  British destroyers work better if you use them in accordance with British doctrine, and German destroyers work better using them in accordance with German doctrine.  Fancy that!

Le gasp! It must be a magic in action! The ghosts of long-dead crews came to your aide as soon as you faithfully recreated their ways of doing battle!
...Or do you mean that the doctrine was maybe written to achieve the best results with the preferred kind of ships those countries have, Glorious General? Or even, that the destroyers were (later, maybe) created to fit the doctrine?
Who would do that:D?

...Nah, it was obviously magic;).

QuoteYou know what?  NEVER MIND.  The crust of forgetfulness just broke off my memories of WRG.  That game isn't based on tactics, it's based on "magic armies."

Much like Warhamburger.

Do you mean that there are two kinds of wargames, Glorious General? Serious question - I returned to wargaming less than a year ago (thanks to the regulars of this thread, a book on wargaming you recommended, and Two-Hour Wargames), and my previous foray was even shallower.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1038908Lemme get this straight. You have three PCs on horses, bushwhacked by a half-dozen goblins, and they dismount? :eek:

Right then. I se it's time for Kindly Old Uncle Chirine to run some videos on simple survival...

Oh, I could be really, horribly cruel and point out that in my games, the horses would be on the table and kinda damn obvious. Heck, The Missus even went out and got me the right kind of horses for our adventures...

Gosh. I feel old, tonight.

Well, in all fairness, they are "newish players" who are probably spoiled by excessive exposure to video game RPG's. In all honesty, I think they forgot or did not appreciate the fact that they were on horseback, against attackers a foot, who also happen to be bullying and cowardly at heart. Had they ploughed into the the little snots I would have done a morale check (with a penalty) and they probably would have scattered without a fight. It goes back to what has been said on this thread before. People just don't read these days, especially the type of books that we have read. I had already read Caesar's Bellum Gallicum and Vegetius' De re militari while in High School, and once I hit university all of the great tactical treatises were "consumed" in due course, as well as dozens of histories on the Crusades, Alexander's campaigns, the Seven Years War, and the World Wars.  Besides, how many great movies have been made over the years showing what cavalry can do to undisciplined/untrained infantry?  
The good thing is that I seriously doubt that they will make the same mistake again.

I'm not sure how much more obvious I could have been: "You guys are on horses riding north."

I think the root of the problem is their strategic/tactical  thinking, or in this case, the lack of it. Sucks for the players, but is a whole lot of fun for the DM.

Shemek.

P.S. I feel old too.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1039072Yeah, this is a situation where the line between "role playing game" and "wargame" can be thin.

Another way to look at it is "playing the period, not the rules."  We were SOLDIERS.  Soldiers attempt to achieve their objective.  At least my 2 years in ROTC taught me SOMETHING.

Like when I was in the tail end Russian tank and my platoon leader came under fire and buttoned up so he wasn't sending any signals.  The line between "what does my guy do" and "what is standard Russian 1941 doctrine for a single tank isolated from its platoon" is a thin one.

Or when Harley ran some WW I naval combat games.  British destroyers work better if you use them in accordance with British doctrine, and German destroyers work better using them in accordance with German doctrine.  Fancy that!

I honestly never understood the fondness of the cohorts at the Little Tin of the mass frontal assault.  Okay, some of them really were that dim, but Phil certainly wasn't.

You know what?  NEVER MIND.  The crust of forgetfulness just broke off my memories of WRG.  That game isn't based on tactics, it's based on "magic armies."

Much like Warhamburger.

Glorious General,

This is exactly what many players have forgotten or don't know: "playing the period, not the rules." I don't know how many times over the years I have won not by decimating an opponent's army, but by achieving my objective. As I used to say when I actively wargamed: "Read the fucking scenario! Understand what the purpose is!" Unless it stated that victory was determined by the number of enemy troops destroyed, I didn't waste time needlessly tieing up resources to destroy units that I didn't have to bother with otherwise. I don't think I would have lasted long, or been welcome for long at the Little Tin. For me a great victory was securing the objective, with minimal casualties. Kind of like in the real world, ne c'est pas?

Shemek.

Quote from: AsenRG;1039139Do you mean that there are two kinds of wargames, Glorious General? Serious question - I returned to wargaming less than a year ago (thanks to the regulars of this thread, a book on wargaming you recommended, and Two-Hour Wargames), and my previous foray was even shallower.

There are definitely miniatures wargames where the play of the game pivots around having the "correct" troop types rather than historical armies.  This is less intolerable in a non historical game.  Warhammer uses it to keep selling new figures.

Gotta run, we can discuss this more later.

Quote from: Shemek hiTankolel;1039193Well, in all fairness, they are "newish players" who are probably spoiled by excessive exposure to video game RPG's. In all honesty, I think they forgot or did not appreciate the fact that they were on horseback, against attackers a foot, who also happen to be bullying and cowardly at heart. Had they ploughed into the the little snots I would have done a morale check (with a penalty) and they probably would have scattered without a fight. It goes back to what has been said on this thread before. People just don't read these days, especially the type of books that we have read. I had already read Caesar's Bellum Gallicum and Vegetius' De re militari while in High School, and once I hit university all of the great tactical treatises were "consumed" in due course, as well as dozens of histories on the Crusades, Alexander's campaigns, the Seven Years War, and the World Wars.  Besides, how many great movies have been made over the years showing what cavalry can do to undisciplined/untrained infantry?  
The good thing is that I seriously doubt that they will make the same mistake again.

Well, Lord Shemek, there are two kinds of people. The first are interested in the past and taking lessons from it, and then there's the rest of them:D!

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1039202There are definitely miniatures wargames where the play of the game pivots around having the "correct" troop types rather than historical armies.  This is less intolerable in a non historical game.  Warhammer uses it to keep selling new figures.

Gotta run, we can discuss this more later.

What I mean is, don't tactics work just the same in this kind of games, regardless of "correct" or "incorrect" figures?

It's a forum, of course I can wait;).