When the hurley-burley’s done - Part 1

At some point last year I decided to start looking for something different on the war games front, something other than the  ECW and my usual dark age stuff. 

My requirements were fairly simple, it had to be something without too many horses (a total time sink for those like me who’d rather be gaming than painting) and preferably something  that no one else was really into. 

After a little digging around I began to gravitate towards the late medieval period, and the War of The Roses in particular. 

A fair amount of research found nothing to put me off. Not a lot of horses, check. Something no one else really seemed into... check. 

The miniatures were easy to locate but of the four rule sets I purchased none really grabbed me. With a frisson of dread I realised I was going to end up writing my own...again...

I was three parts of the way through writing and play testing when I decided a new blog would be a good way to diarise and review my progress. It was never intended to be for public consumption, but old habits die hard. Having tentatively and incrementally dipped my toe back into the blogosphere I discovered that once again the Gods had vomited on my eiderdown. While I had been sweating through the creation of my own home brew rules a new set, that would’ve spared me all the effort, called “Never Mind The Billhooks” had been published. Far from the WOTR being niche it seemed the wargaming cognoscenti were now all over it! Doh!

Naturally the basing regimen I had adopted for my home brew rules was not compatible with “Billhooks”, forcing me to continue to plough my own furrow. I suppose that if I was to look on the  bright side (not something I’m really known for) I could at least console myself with the thought that I’ve crafted a set of rules that work for me, i.e. specifically for the solo gamer and one using hexes to regulate movement and range. Unfortunately for you dear reader I’m going to attempt to share them with you.

*************************************PARENTAL ADVISORY*******************************************

The following wargame rules have been rated as PG and contain absolutely no scenes of leadership points or command ranges. Readers should be aware of the writers graphic use of zones of control and the explicit lack of saving throws or generic social class distinctions.

************************************************************************************************************

Okay then, In the next post I’ll walk you through my latest play test as a way to try and explain things in context, but this one will just be a sort of rant, thinly disguised as a justification for my abandonment of some of the conventions we hold dear in the hobby.

The first question I asked myself is why do I actually “do”wargaming? I’m sure the answer will be different for everyone but for me it is a means of solitary entertainment, a story I create as a game unfolds. As long as the outcome has a grounding in reality, the more unpredictable the ride the more amusement I derive from it. Unburdened by a need to win I enjoy the journey almost as much as the eventual  destination. 

Another bug bear of mine, that I had a chance to address by writing my own rules is book keeping and table clutter. As a consequence of experimentation I have had cause to question and even abandon a few of the hobbies “sacred cows”. You can be pretty sure that having challenged some aspects of our collective gaming orthodoxy I’ll be shown to be a bloomin’ fool...again. 

Lol.

Okay then, eyes down for a full house.

Command and control: On the modern battlefield a commander will be getting real time information on the progress and status of his troops. He and they will probably have drone footage of the terrain they are fighting in and up to date intelligence on an enemy’s whereabouts and composition. Whatever period we are actually “into“ I suspect we end up fighting many of our tabletop battles in the same fashion. My goal became to introduce a little confusion, unpredictability and helplessness as events threaten to spiral out of control. Don’t forget Napoleon didn’t want good generals he wanted lucky ones.

If we compare the modern information overload to the reality of late medieval warfare, things couldn’t be any more different. Command was often appointed on a social rather than a meritocratic basis, and an enemy’s whereabouts or force composition was usually a matter of educated guesswork. The other major difference is that the commander of a force was expected to fight amongst the front ranks of his men. To reflect this there are no separate command stands in my rules, all leaders are based within their own suitably beflagged retinue of men at arms. They cannot dash about the battlefield influencing things and they cannot sit back out of harms way taking a measured look at how things are going.

None of my leaders have a command rating. Not only is a historical figures military capability often open to argument, I believe that military “greats” can sometimes have a bad day, while utter fools can occasionally get lucky. Why constrain the delights of chance with a restrictive “modifier”?

Having tried peering through our letterbox for five minutes, (I know, right...) I would submit that it’s pretty difficult to get a sense of what’s going on on the battlefield when your vision is restricted to a narrow slit in a helmet, especially when a group of opposing maniacs are trying to hack you limb from limb. For this reason I have limited the overall army commanders input to a quick pre battle conflab with his subordinate ward leaders where he (you) hands out specific orders for them to follow. Once the fighting starts, and he’s in the thick of it, he would find it very difficult to change those orders - even if he knew they needed changing!

Sadly the course of a battle rarely goes as planned and the subordinate commanders in my rule set will often change their orders if casualties mount or the men become unwilling to do as they are bid. Sometimes the new orders your subordinates select will not be to your liking!

Leadership: Does battlefield leadership emanate from one man over a specific distance? Does this amazing personage magically bestow the ability to dodge wounds or temporarily become fanatical ninjas. Nah, I don’t think so. Leadership comes from numerous sources, from the junior officers down to the grizzled veteran whose swift but possibly minor actions can sometimes save the day. I’m tired of a crushing blow, be it arrow points or a fusillade of bullets being suddenly negated by  some sort of invisible force field projected by a distant command figure. I’ve abandoned leadership points and their ability to fudge the often cruel outcomes of a die roll. Let the dice land where they fall and just suck it up. Your guys got killed. Deal with it.

Class and training distinctions: I’m sure we’ve all read of instances where notionally well equipped and well led troops (in various theatres and periods) have broken and run during battle and of course the opposite where raw troops have fought like lions when their backs are against the wall. I’ve abandoned the concept of “raw” or “levy” as a negative modifier since it presents yet another thing to be recorded and carries within it a potential to limit the possibility of that “exciting” hold out against all the odds outcome that’ll stick in your mind long after the games been put away.

Anywhoo...

Some basics before we set out.

Armies are broken down into wards, each of which is represented by a card in a deck. All of the wards will be drawn and activated during a turn but the order in which they are drawn is a matter of chance. The game is scalable and while most armies would field about three wards my rules can come with just one or two instead. All of the companies within a ward attempt to activate before the next ward card is drawn.

A laminated card for each ward is part of a deck that determines turn order.

There are four main orders types in play. Attack, Hold, Charge, Retire and reform. The overall commander (you) initially gets to issue one of these orders to each of your subordinate ward commanders at game start. Each order contains a set of standardised instructions that both you and what I term the A.O (absent opponent) must follow like this:

Attack: Missile units that have not fired may move if required or elect to overwatch. None missile units must maneuver with a view to closing with an enemy, not necessarily the closest. Units may not move voluntarily closer to their own base line. The order is acted upon where possible but becomes void if during its attempted execution:

 

o   2 or more bravery tests are failed within the ward by units ordered to move.

o   2 or more melee’s are lost OR won in one turn.

 

Charge: Missile units may not move, including bands with an archer component. None missile units rush toward the nearest enemy in order to melee. All units, receive +1mp and gain a dice bonus for their first turn in melee.

 

Order becomes void when:

 

o   2 or more bravery tests are failed within the ward prior to movement.

o   2 or melee’s are lost OR won in one turn.

o   6 or more cohesion points are lost to missile fire against Men at Arms, Mounted units, Pikes or Billmen within the charging ward in one turn.

 

Hold: Missile units in a ward may fire during the normal phase of their turn or hold their fire with a view to interdicting enemy units in an anticipated charge. Units effectively in overwatch may interdict charging opponents in any hex they traverse prior to melee, though the minimum distance of indirect archer fire still applies. None missile units may take part in melee if attacked but may not occupy a hex vacated by a defeated enemy. All none firing, none over watching units, may move towards advantageous defensive terrain only. No bravery tests are required for this move. The order becomes void if:

 

o   6 or more cohesion points are lost to missile fire from any units within the ward in one turn.

o   2 or more melee’s are lost in a turn.

 

Retire and reform: Missile units may not fire. All units within the ward must retire 1 hex towards their base edge where terrain or hex occupancy allows. Units are required to retire, take a bravery test, and if they fail immediately rout off the board regardless of their current cohesion level. If they pass the test they recover 2 cohesion points (not up to their pre game level). The order expires when:

o   all units within the ward have broken and run or all units within the ward have passed the morale test and attempted to retire.

The forces employed are drawn from a deck of unit cards and can, through the use of blanks, be slightly asymmetric in the number fighting on each side.

A few unit cards... on a very messy desk. 

There are no point costs or army lists other than the qualifier that each faction must start with one men at arms and one archer company.

Before the game starts each player will receive three “happenstance” cards, one of which the human player gets to choose. Some of these cards must be played at game start and some during the game. They look a bit like this:

Game changers...literally.

I’d originally chosen to use order counters, placed next to each commander but in my crusade against table clutter I’ve opted instead for a “dashboard” where you just mark and dry wipe when the orders change.

                  The orders dashboard. The juries still out on this one.

Obviously all this is likely to go horribly wrong and I’ll end up with egg on my face (which’ll be a bugger to get out of my beard I’m sure) but it should be good for a bit of schadenfreude if nothing else!

The next post will be the warts and all play test. 

Be still my beating heart!