First, I am a sucker for 2d6 based games like Traveler and BoL.
Second, I am a sucker for historical RPGs.  So yeah, at this point I'm in.
Third, I think a game based on playing soldiers in a modern war is kind of limited.  For WWI or WWII, if the focus is on combat rather than character and adventure, the scope for long term play seems limited.  It seems like if you could expand it into the Napoleonic wars, or the French and Indian wars, etc. you might get more mileage out of it.  Maybe.

Quote from: Madprofessor;973574For WWI or WWII, if the focus is on combat rather than character and adventure, the scope for long term play seems limited.

I know, that's why no one was able to make any movies or novels about characters and adventure during WWI and WWII.

Quote from: Dumarest;973577I know, that's why no one was able to make any movies or novels about characters and adventure during WWI and WWII.

Ahh, sarcasm. I probably earned it.

The way the game Lars described it, "a brief mission or patrol and some random encounter tables to generate terrain and bad guys" (paraphrased) sounds like the game is designed around combat and tactical elements.  Its not only what you do, but what the game is about.  That's fine, but I think it is a pretty narrow scope for an RPG.  Now there is nothing wrong with a narrow focus, it can help you get into some depth about equipment, tactics, etc. but I don't think it's particularly well-suited for long-term play - IMO.  I would still play it, and maybe even run it, but it sounds to me like the kind of thing that is better suited towards a one shot, or short campaign, and maybe with miniatures.

I was just being a dick.

Quote from: Madprofessor;973588Ahh, sarcasm. I probably earned it.

The way the game Lars described it, "a brief mission or patrol and some random encounter tables to generate terrain and bad guys" (paraphrased) sounds like the game is designed around combat and tactical elements.  Its not only what you do, but what the game is about.  That's fine, but I think it is a pretty narrow scope for an RPG.  Now there is nothing wrong with a narrow focus, it can help you get into some depth about equipment, tactics, etc. but I don't think it's particularly well-suited for long-term play - IMO.  I would still play it, and maybe even run it, but it sounds to me like the kind of thing that is better suited towards a one shot, or short campaign, and maybe with miniatures.

Not true. I play - and design - these kinds of games all the time. I have two Napoleonic naval campaigns that have run for years, ditto for a WWII Naval Aviation game.

Wow, I had no idea BEL had gotten so expensive. I'm glad I rounded up all I could several years ago when it was cheap.

BEL and the related Delta Force by Task Force Games are very underrated games. They work great for their intended purpose of straddling the line between wargame and RPG, being detailed enough to satisfy the RPG elements, but quick to play and generate new characters when needed (as will likely be the case). They fall on the RPG side vs similar RPG / wargamey games of the 80s like Advanced Squad Leader and Firepower which were more wargames with RPG elements included.

There was also a version done by The Companions which shares little but name with the FASA game. The Companions version was a simple d20 system (this was long before the OSR d20 craze of the late 90s - early 2000s) and has little to recommend it other than the kind of cool military manuals style used for the rule books.  

For those looking for the game on the cheaper side Mystique offers a pdf version of the basic FASA BEL rules on Drive Thru RPG. The site is down for maintenance at the moment but I picked one up a few years back just to have a pdf version, and as I recall it was under $20.  


I think the rules would work just fine for WW1, I'll also give a plug to Clash's Aces in Spades which is definitely worth a look for a WW1 pilot based RPG.

Quote from: Madprofessor;973588Ahh, sarcasm. I probably earned it.

The way the game Lars described it, "a brief mission or patrol and some random encounter tables to generate terrain and bad guys" (paraphrased) sounds like the game is designed around combat and tactical elements.  Its not only what you do, but what the game is about.  That's fine, but I think it is a pretty narrow scope for an RPG.  Now there is nothing wrong with a narrow focus, it can help you get into some depth about equipment, tactics, etc. but I don't think it's particularly well-suited for long-term play - IMO.  I would still play it, and maybe even run it, but it sounds to me like the kind of thing that is better suited towards a one shot, or short campaign, and maybe with miniatures.

To be fair, I don't think you are that far off. The game could certainly be used for a long term campaign being based around more sneaky missions and social situations but I expect that just like much of the media based on war, in general most games involving much combat likely had a high body count. The system is fairly deadly, so perhaps not one shots but likely to resemble the Dirty Dozen or Band of Brothers where by the end most of the major PCs end up dead or badly wounded, with a relatively small number returning for the next episode / sequel. I think it is worth noting that the game had few rules for gaining experience in play which suggests they didn't expect characters to be around long enough to see major improvements in ability.

While there was a heavy emphasis on combat rules, they didn't ignore the less combative aspects. One could easily run a game with a partisan band, agents, escaped POWs or even some supply clerks running scams in the rear with the gear. One of the few published modules was based on the book / movie The Guns of Navarone so more sneaky behind the lines action, avoiding the enemy and dealing with friendly / unfriendly locals rather than a stand up infantry slog. Of course only about half the cast of that movie made it to the credits...