D100 Games, Where To Start

If I were to advise anyone on the merits or best starting point of D100 TTRPG’s, I would have to think on it. Hard.

There are a lot of games to pick from, periods covered, several strong systemic threads and of course personal preferences.

Although most D100 games have common roots, it is probably best at the start to commit to just one of these threads for consistency and ease of adapting. It is somewhat true to say, learn one and you have started on them all, but also, some do have very coherent pathways to other games, making the job more of learn one and you can instantly play a few rhater than herding several similar systems together, but find the differences are minor, but many.

The Basic Roleplaying stream includes Call of Cthulhu, Runequest, many older games such as Stormbringer, Super World etc. It also has several generic books available, one in print currently others as pdfs, which could conceivably be the only book needed if the GM wants to build worlds or simulate stories from scratch.

CoC 7e and Rivers of London have changed the BRP mechanics a little recently, but most are easy enough to adapt and Runequest has gone “old school” (RQ2) with its latest version.

The RQ6/Mythras stream includes reasonably effortlessly the earlier Legend series (RQ3 with the RQ labels removed), RQ6, as well as many other recent releases and even better than BRP, they are all fully compatible. Destined, After the Vampire Wars, Lyonesse, M-Space, Odd Soot, several historical settings including Rome, Samurai, Vikings, Pirates, Mythic Britain, Polynesia, and more are all either Mythras, Legend or Mythras Imperative based. In other words, pretty much the same.

All different, all hauntingly similar.

Openquest is a lesser known “lite” version of RQ6, with a few good options. This is the rules lite starter range, but includes games like Clockwork and Chivalry, Pirates and Dragons and its own fantasy range. There is no generic rules system, but it can cross into BRP territory easily enough.

DWD’s Bare Bones systems are also lite and a little different to the BRP family, but broadly compatible. There are consistency issues within their own range and some off-shoots also, but basically they are lite enough to not matter.

The Warhammer family is quite diverse. WHFRP 1 and 2e are D100 variants, 4e is the latest and current offering, but quite a different beast (we don’t talk about 3e). Zweihander is a rip-off of 1e, fully polished and expanded without the thematic baggage.

These are the main ones, but there are others.

*

First, if there a genre of preference, something to pin your recommendation on, it would likely sort things easily as some periods and styles are not heavily serviced.

Horror in the classic periods (1890’s, 1920’s and WW2) is easy. Call of Cthulhu 7e. I like all editions for their various feels and rules weight, 5e being the most commonly used up to lately, but 7e is current, elegant, comprehensive, very well supported and beautiful to look at. If the earlier period appeals, Cthulhu by Gaslight (5-6e) adds much, as do the excellent Stygian Fox support books and Weird War Cthulhu is suitably dark.

Horror/weird WW2 has two candidates. Both CoC 6e with World War Cthulhu for dark and realistic option and it continues with the even darker Cold War Cthulhu. This is CoC as normal, brooding, perilous. The other is Achtung Cthulhu, a pulpy option, which could also be played with 7e Pulp with little effort.

Pulp Horror is CoC 7e’s territory. BRP also has a pulpy expansion, but it is a thin offering compared to CoC 7e and it is not well supported except for Achtung Cthulhu a CoC 6e spin off. Pulp for 7e has the added benefit of being included in most CoC 7e thinking, so it is a very flexible offer.

Horror/modern. This one is tougher, but if you are after just this genre, Delta Green is the one with its companion The Conspiracy if you want a more late 90’s X-Files feel. If the period is to be only one option among others, then it is CoC 7e again, for the greater range using the Chaosium and Stygian Fox offerings. Sigils and Signs has some cred here, but is a single book offer.

Modern Fantasy/Supernatural. Most of these are to scratch a current itch of a book or TV series just binged. The Mythras based After The Vampire Wars is a Harry Dresden clone, Delta Green The Conspiracy is great for X-Files, CoC 7e (pulp?), or maybe BRP:UCE can do Supernatural and Evil is perfect for Sigil and Signs. The Laundry books have an actual D100 game as does the Rivers of London series, Seasons of the Dead for Mythras handles Falling Skies or the Walking Dead. DWD Spec Ops with Bare Bones Fantasy and/or Art of Wuxia would work as a monsters meet normals mash up.

Horror from other periods. Clockwork/Cthulhu and Chivalry are Openquest derivatives, but CoC 7e comes through again with Rome, the Dark Ages, Gaslight/Western, 1920-40’s to the far future effortlessly.

Classic Fantasy has several options. Mythras is the Audi TT, Legend to older model Audi Quattro, Runequest the classic Rolls Royce remade, Openquest the zippy Toyota and BRP’s Magic World the reliable old Jeep.

Mythras leads to several excellent games like Lyonesse and Mythic Britain, with a lot of Legend and RQ6 titles to draw from. It even does an “old school” homage to the earliest games with Classic Fantasy a DnD as D100 mash up, so overall, unless a specific setting draws you, it is the most comprehensive and polished, but a seriously deep system. It can be run as Imperative, simply reducing options, so maybe that is a vote in it’s favour.

Bronze Age is a tougher one. Mythras is pitched here as was RQ6, showing their roots as RQ evolutions. Runequest in Glorantha is the obvious one and a (the) classic of its type, but also, if you want something lighter (a bit), then try Jackals from Osprey, an Openquest derivative that deserves some attention and like Mythras is probably closer to the classic Mythic Greek take than Glorantha. Mythras owes us Mythic Greece, which may change things, but seems an eternity away.

Gunpowder Fantasy. Most of the above could do this easily enough, but Warhammer is the best supported overall. Which version? 1-2e have their charms, Zweihander copies them and cleans them up and 4e is the current big thing, but maybe too system weighty. Alternatively Clockwork and Chivalry/Cthulhu and Renaissance/Dark Streets offer a much rules lighter (and darker) feel.

Pirates, which can tie to the above, have plenty to choose from, but none are without their issues. Pirates and Dragons is a strong offering, but comes with a fantasy backstory. Pirates of Legend is excellent and Mythras compatible, BRP Blood Tides has some issues, but adds to either of the above well and with the BRP generic book cleans up well. Even WHFRP 4e is capable here.

Hard Sci-Fi. This is a simple one really, M-Space. Add some Mythras based nasties as Aliens etc and you have a solid scenario.

Pulpy Sci-Fi. DWD do Frontier Space, which stands out even from their own range as a slightly more developed game with two main books and lots of support. M-Space could also, but the BRP:UCE or even one of the Mythras based systems like Luther Arkright might suit better.

Oriental games have two very different contenders. Samurai of Legend is lethal, realistic and Japan focussed, so ideal for a Shogun or 7 Ronin style game with Mythras. The Art of Wuxia is a Chinese inspired full Kung Fu pulp game by DWD for a Monkey Magic feel.

Supers, my personal holy grail for a long time, but street level mainly is right in the wheel house of Destined for Mythras and the added complication and flaws of that game play well with the epic fights Supers games, comics and movies are known for.

The older Super World is dated for sure, but it is also the basis of the BRP:UCE super powers system, which can be meshed with Magic, Psionics, Mutations etc to make for a modern game with a small but decent back catalogue of support materiel. My copy is a printed PDF of the main book and companion and it is fine.

Western/Weird West is under the solid purview of CoC 7e Down Dark Trails, but Devils Gulch and Aces High for earlier BRP are compatible.

As you can see, there are a lot of entry points if you use the genre as the doorway.

*

So, lets assume a genre specific itch does not need scratching;

The safest and most logical path for a beginner wanting to go in seriously is I think a BRP based system using either one of the excellent core games (CoC/RQ) or the new generic book.

Probably CoC 7e as it is easier to enter and makes the most gaming sense to newer players with a ton of support for GM’s (plays like a “don’t go down there” scenario generator with literally dozens of scenarios). It is also flexible on going, able to shift to lighter (Pulp) or heavier (Modern/Dark) and all through history, even into science fiction.

If you really want to go with an entry point system, the Openquest family are solid and clean, the DWD series are similar, but split into four main themes.

The cheapest probably is Legend by Mongoose. A generification of Mongoose RQ and pre-curser to RQ6, then Mythras, it is available for $1 as a PDF, not much more as an A5 book and has some excellent support books (Ice Age, Pirates, Samurai, Gladiators, Historica Rodentia, Deus Vult and Vikings) with a more high Medieval base line than other D100 fantasy games. It is not as polished as Mythras, but not as baked in to it’s ideas either.

Some More Savage Pathfinder Thoughts.

Sometimes, two almost good ideas combine to make one that is better than the sum of the parts.

My time with Savage Worlds was mixed. I had a lot of it, Deluxe and Explorers, some Noir, some Cthulhu, some Weird War 11, lots of Deadlands (and I had the original Deadlands also), Supers, Horror, Fantasy, post apocalyptic, Sci-Fi, Ancient Rome.

The system for a long time was my “shadow” system for my huge d100 collection. Basically everything I had for “serious” d100, seemed to have a “pulpy” option in Savage Worlds, including Achtung Cthulhu, that actually allowed both systems in their books.

There were some hits (Weird War II, the Sci-Fi, Necessary Evil and Supers companions), some misses (much of the rest for me) and then they changed it.

I gifted much of it, then for some reason bought the new SWADE edition, but that is another story. It is hard to get in Australia, so there is little chance of the monster being re-awoken with freight charges from the U.S. regularly exceeding the values of goods.

Pathfinder was my DnD of choice for a while, such as that was. The monstrous core book, the DnD-ness of it, the never ending printing regime all added up to an excessively expensive Wayne Reynolds art gallery, most of which I knew I would never use.

Really dislike DnD based games, especially when they try to be realistic-ish and the obvious abstractness rears it’s ugly mug. I tried E6 and E10 truncated variants, used a critical hits effect characteristics combat system, but nothing fixed the reality that I was trying to make a more grounded and logical d100 style game out of a d20 system.

I sold my 1 foot high collection of books, the collecting efforts of several years for way too little, but with a small market locally, considered myself lucky it went at all.

Since then;

I have occasionally missed the promise of Savage Worlds, but the “fast, furious fun” never really clicked with me. I did not really give it a go and some splat books did hold promise. I knew I would never commit though as it was either too little (lite and pulpy) or too much (needed added bits).

I have come to realise, I tend to prefer a built world, not a generic system. I do not necessarily need everything handed to me, but when I do a make my own world, SW would not be the baseline.

SW is like DnD in that it is systemically anchored, but not in as much of an arrogant “I am the way”, more of a “I’m new and fun, try me” way.

I missed the massive warm hug that was Pathfinder, the bear hug with claws. The art, consistency, depth and world connection with maybe a little f&$k you DnD at play, all weighed heavily on me both before and after shedding it.

The world was massive, a perfect stereotype as expected, interesting none the less. The grind was beyond my care factor these days. Unlike 3 and 4e, which also came and went, there was actually stuff I missed, substantioal stuff. I think I held onto the maps to retain a small connection.

Another idea I had at this time was to hang onto the counters, maps and grid boards from my 4e collection. Tons and tons of stuff, all great for ……… not sure.

*

Savage Worlds Pathfinder.

It’s a thing and it is a good thing.

What you get;

• Golarion in all its glory. This includes direct connection to the iconic characters right down to using them as out of the box starter characters.

• Wayne Reynolds art again, in all it’s glory.

• All the flexibility of Savage Worlds, but with the substance and direction a strong world adds. This for me is the missing link, the substance and depth.

• Grid combat or not, in fact any form of gaming at any point in the journey. It supports non combat at least as well as a d20 system, has massive hack-ability, allows for more “on the fly” gaming and can draw easily from its parent sources. The OTT art of Reynolds fits the SW play style.

• A d20, which is rare in Savage Worlds, which usually tends to avoid that one.

What you do not get (and it’s good)

• Levels. SW has experience groupings called Ranks with incremental advancements, but they are more granular, less powerful, less rigid and way more natural feeling. The “anything is possible” feel of combat and task resolution mostly diffuses this anyway. The game allows for legendary exploits by its very nature, but it is more elastic, blurring the lines between high and low level characters. Even creating a replacement experienced character is not a labour.

• Classes. Classes are a package, but you are not locked into a fixed pathway. You are probably mad not to directly align your character to a class, but if not, you can make a generic class-less character that holds their own and if you do, no two characters will be carbon copies of each other.

• Grind. There is no feeling of attritional math, no experience point-to-risk equation, no daily rhythm to adhere to. Any monster can be a problem to any character, but also precise encounter balancing is not needed. The game would ignore your efforts anyway. More variance, more fear, more realism.

• Power imbalance. No Quadratic Mages or unbeatable Druids, actually the system absorbs super classes and powers. Power levels stay pretty balanced right through, no matter what path you take and the sheer flexibility of character generation and advancement negates possible issues.

• Hundreds of spells. The power system in SW means you can create basically any spell with trappings and flexibility from a small core, something that both PF and DnD lack. The entire magic system has about the same weight as the “magic explained” chapter in PF.

• Hundreds of feats, class abilities etc. Again, the flexibility and weight of SW gets a lot done without tomes of options and exceptions. Rigidity forces exceptions, flexibility avoids that mess.

• This one is odd, but real none the less. This is Savage Worlds without the added complication of the base rules and a setting pasted on. Even with all the perceived simplicity of SW, sometimes the added weight of a setting with all its exceptions can complicate things. The streamlined and fully integrated SWPF stands alone with the setting highlighting the good side of SW. SW Core works well for a free wheeling game, SW embedded in a setting works well, SW with “bells” on interests me less.

PFSW is the result of two fully developed games, the huge 3.5e DnD spin-off that is Pathfinder, at one time more popular than DnD and the multi edition journey, modern indie game with a solid and loyal following that is Savage Worlds Adventurers Edition (SWADE).

Pathfinder provides the why and SW the how, in a form that this gamer, well shy of most things DnD can not only accept but also embrace. The Core book, Bestiary, Advanced Players Guide and Companion are all a days read each, but the game offers the same range of outcomes. Add table candy in the form of an Adventure Path, maps, grids and counters, character cards, Action, Chase and Condition decks and you have a totally engaging experience.

In the real world, it is accessible to new or experienced players, has a more D100 like feel overall, is fairly bullet proof to abuse and gamesmanship, min-maxing, can cut the cord from anything you feel runs too close to the DnD rocks or you can just go with it as presented.

All this at a total word count well under just the Pathfinder 1e core rule book.

Negatives?

The Advanced Players guide took an age to come and I must admit I had lost my burn a bit in that time, but as a salve for only d100 games, it did what it needed to and broke the habit. I am not interested in the next APG, but the second Bestiary has my interest.

Another Official Option, Or Home Made Goodness?

BRP has a new champion.

Basic Roleplaying or the Big Gold Book, now has a new version after a long time in the wilderness. I am lucky enough to have a mint condition copy of the BGB and it is a favourite, but like everything in this world, not perfect.

The quickest of overview reviews;

It has all you need to play any genre, any way you would like, but it is dense and a little confusing to use thanks to the volume of information and the layout, which offers everything up front, which is to say, it does not have a core with obvious add-ons, but more of a cherry picker style of thing. There are things that help like a check list sheet and the reality that you can do as you want, even mid game if you want, no harm done, but at 400 pages, it needs some GM awareness and application.

It has almost every idea from every D100 game up to it’s printing and by definition most ideas from subsequent games. Want super heroes, mutants, mages, sorcerers, psychics? All are there in “solid start” form, with easy rules for expanding, as well as direct or close compatibility with all d100 support games and for maximum variety, you can mix these all together.

The new version thanks to some pairing down, re-writing, smaller text and a generally tighter delivery cuts that down to a little over 250 pages, with little lost.

It is not the BGB now, but more of the medium sized Book Of Colour Goodness (BCG) being a maybe slightly rushed delivery of Chaosium’s new standards, i.e. good stuff. It is a couple of years old also, so probably settled now.

Do I need it? The BGB is for me decently familiar, it sits perfectly with my sweet spot of D100 systems (CoC 5e), I have genre specific books on most periods of interest and even other generic and interlaced systems with similar scope like Mythras, which could be argued is even more consistent from game to game (The BCG is not even perfectly in line with CoC, Chaosium’s primary game).

It does however make me happy to see the only one of the original RPG systems that is still basically unchanged still evolving, so yeah, I will grab a copy.

As a unifying toolbox, a less precious look at consolidated mechanics and a cleaner, tighter way of accessing generic gaming than the older tome, it appeals more than my other option of Savage Worlds (SWADE), which I still have.

SWADE is fine, but lacks any connection to my other favourites and no matter how good it gets, it is just not as sensible and logical as D100. Fast fun and furious it may be, but lite, pulpy and a little too systemically clever it will also always be.

*

Another option and one that seems to be writing itself at the moment, is my own.

Characteristics I have settled on are;

Strength and Agility; being gross and fine motor skills

Endurance and Dexterity; for long and twitch muscles

Reason and Intuition; the logical and creative/instinctive sides of the brain

Will and Charisma; a person’s character expressed as internal strength and projected personality

These are paired so that when generated, the rolled dice (6d6) are split usually into 3+3 (GM may allow other splits with a good back story) as the player wishes. Unlikely combinations of extremely good opposites are rare, but also there is the ability to avoid very poor results.

It also allows some player pay-in as to how they favoured some things or were naturally blessed as the players desire when growing up.

From these, almost any derivative of two combined can be used as a skill or test base and above all, they all make sense.

Skills are a base of 2x chrs (6-36%) + ten levels of d6% (0-60%). These are bought during advancement or training at 3 pts for intensive (3d6 take the best), 2 pts for trained (2d6 > best) and 1 pt for hobby or “on the job” (1d6).

Each turning point (or year) adds an amount of points (TBC).

Some skills have automatic familiarity based on culture (= base), others need to be learned to be used or used efficiently. Once rolled, that is it, no re-do’s so it is relatively easy to get ten levels in a skill (10 pts), but if taken as a hobby it is generally less efficient (+30-35%). Mastery requires intensive training and the help of other experts for +50-60% skill.

Learning from experience is based on a number of advancement tests (+1%) allowed after (some) critical results under pressure and limited per turning point.

Tests are;

• Standard/advantaged opposed 2d10 > read as desired (this applies a bell curve)

• Challenging 2d10 > read as pre-nominated (most combat and un-advantaged opposed tests (no curve-flat probability)

• Perilous/disadvantaged opposed 3d10 > take the worst pairing (negative curve)

• Extreme use 4d10 > take the worst 2 etc (extremely negative biased curve)

No mods are needed, just “flipping” the dice.

Doubles are critical failures or successes, the level of this is measured by the “height”. Very low critical successes are fairly tame, higher ones become legendary, as many remember the day the great manoeuvre, (a 99% success) was witnessed, but conversely low skilled characters are capable of 22% fumbles, which will not end well.

It is a little convoluted, maybe even too much for some, but I am making this for me, as a slave for all the little things that annoy me about other similar systems.

I like;

D100 roll under systems, but do not like some of the implementations of said system. The critical roll, the fumble etc need to be aligned with user skill, the skill to allow for better results being possible, advancements to be incremental, but real time.

A curve should be added or tests made in layers, to remove the hard win/loose some games are guilty of.

I love the Traveller career system, but not the grind of it sometimes. I much prefer to able to tell a story semi-abstractly. Character rolls a double 6 of two “hobby” dice and fumbles their actual career training might mean they love their life, but not their job.

I have always preferred the 2x chr as a base for skills system, but often cringe at the odd application of often limited or oddly named chrs.

I hate games that allow characters to easily go over 100% chance. The chrs used can mitigate that as can limits to skills.

“00” should be nothing-no result, because 100% needs to be effectively impossible and a null result is needed. This dead space means even the amazing world champion can fail, but not spectacularly. If fate points allow a re-roll, then that becomes such an unlikely event for a 99% skill master but still possible (that would be amazing).

Anyway, book ordered, so I can keep going with mine or just use the many, many D100 options I have available to me and work with (or change) the systems.

Control And (Or) Freedom In The RPG Landscape

TTRPG’s have been around now for about five generations of gamers. I am making a very loose generalisation that ten years is the sweet spot for a new to experienced gamer, often a decade encompassing their whole gaming life (high school to Uni/college).

In the beginning of the hobby, games were spartan, rough and ready, full of potential and flexible by their very nature. They needed player and game master pay in, but that was where imagination and communication filled the gaps.

Traveller for example came as a boxed set, half filled with three small black books capable of outlining everything from starship design and combat, world building, character generation, combat and encounters and even a trade and commerce section. None were comprehensive, but all gave you (1) enough to get going, (2) an idea of in-game expectations to work from, (3) an idea of what was important, or as importantly, not.

The half empty box could hold character sheets, pencils and paper, dice and a few books you may later add.

Most people added the few most exciting expansions (Mercenary, High Guard, Scout), some went all in, but no one way was the right way. My first high school group managed to fill the lunchtimes of a year or two, with just that small start. We covered Space 1999, Star Wars, The Stainless Steel Rat, Strontium Dog, Star Trek, Asimov, Heinlein, Judge Dredd even Moorcock style games filling in the near infinite gaps with……imagination and immersion.

As testament to the value of a one book/box gaming dynamic, when Mongoose omitted starship building rules in their second edition (Mongoose 2e), there was enough backlash to force them to add them back into their 2022 reprint. People just want to be able to go with one book as an option, even if it is likely an illusion long term.

A lack of constraints means something is highly flexible, but also makes it hard for it to be consistent across all facets of a given genre, so inevitably more and more rules creep in.

High production values were replaced by player pay-in and the desire to create. It should by rights be possible to write a usable TTRPG on five sheets of paper and many have.

Source materiel is often as much use or more than more rules.

The Big Gold Book (BGB) and it’s much slimmer Starter Guide for Basic Role Playing (BRP), the Mythras equivalent, GURPS basic, The Hero System 4e or Savage Worlds Adventurers Edition (SWADE) are surely enough to play any genre, any style.

Is more than this needed?

Most of this is fluff. Maybe three books per shelf and a healthy time and imagination investment could get gamers mostly there, or even better, there in their own way. I can pick out a half dozen books easily, that could be my “desert island” games.

Every group has a different dynamic, different expectations, different interpretation of the genre, rules and guidelines. A lot was on the shoulders of the game master, almost as much on the players.

This freedom was as close to perfection as a TTRPG can achieve. In it’s purest form it is round table story telling as humans have done for ages. In it’s worst form, when rules become all, it is constrained, often held back by oppressive or even illogical rules lawyering.

My heart still yearns for the naive play I enjoyed while young. Literally anything could happen, because apart from a limited lists of skills, weaponry and gear, vehicles, careers, monster or alien stats, there were almost no rules for “the rest”. If you wanted more meat on the bone, you added it yourself.

We drew stuff, made stuff up, even exhaustive lists and got by. I remember writing in the margins of most books (usually mono mat paper), to make the many house rules “official”.

I don’t think I even saw an colour internal illustration other than a rare set of plates (often loosely connected examples at best) for the first decade.

We played in character or not, had ambitions outside of imaginary material wealth and advancement, or not and settled into an odd duality of “theatre of the mind” with systemic grind.

It only fell apart when people failed the system and each other. A bit like religion, the guidelines are sound, the application sometimes lacking, but faith can conquer all. Every failure had a feeling of “next time we will avoid that, but there will be a next time”.

A game master with few or weak ideas, a group fighting rigid plans at every turn while exercising their own imaginations aggressively and a lack of backup plans all added up to the occasional log-jam, but this freedom also created some of the best memories I have of gaming. Some of my favourite childhood memories in fact.

At what point did we become so obsessed with rules, that we needed to make rules-lite games to renew this, feeling of freedom? Games like Tiny D6 or Fate try to make games mechanically translucent by removing most mechanics, often falling back on gimmicks or simplistic systems to achieve this, but is even this needed?

My answer to anyone who is unhappy playing any RPG is “make it your own”.

Ironically, the introduction of almost every RPG I have ever read says just that, but rules lawyers, with encyclopaedic, inflexible memories or even just people trying not to rock the “rules as written” boat are occupying this space.

WHFRP 4e is an example of the convolution that plagues us and the difficulty that brings.

The all too sensible D100 core system, that to be fair, WHFRP never did perfectly align with, has been turned into something it is not. In an effort to make something basically something else, it has become a set of checks and balances that made the simple difficult and fixing it even harder. The mechanics are so entwined in themselves, fixing one thing breaks others.

A good example of a game that can be simplified, simply by role playing the sometimes overly convoluted and focussed systems and ironically sticking closer to the designers intent is The One Ring.

I have been reading comparison reviews of the first to the second editions*. My main take-way on every limiting mechanic, streamlined or not, is that most can simply be role-played through. The designers want it to feel like Tolkien and the players should also (or why play?), so do they actually need their chins wiped? Can’t we get there without corralling or limiting the players?

If everyone is working towards the same goal, nothing is gained by placing mechanical obstacles in the way.

If you love Tolkien however and get what it is about, you could easily play basically any fantasy game this way. My argument is, if you want to, then do it, if you don’t then don’t let the game force you, but above all, play the game you want.

The 1990’s seemed to be the age of maximum “crunch” in gaming of all types. Simple slim pamphlets like the original Star Fleet Battles, turned into manuals possible denser than an actual starship flight guide. Simple RPG’s became heavier in every sense, less flexible and more “word of god” like. We broke it and it has yet to fully recover.

As a new generation comes through, things are taken as gospel.

No other mainstream entertainment hobby has this much freedom, so why squander it.

One of my least liked genres is the board game RPG simulator. Games that try to cover everything a player may want to do, while keeping the game board-game limited. Lots of rules, lots, providing the illusion of freedom without any.

In comparison to a true TTRPG it is like the difference between jumping off a cliff or taking the roller coaster.

Root the TTRPG is the closest I have seen to a board game made RPG, but is still really a board game.

I intend to take the core ideas of The One Ring and play it with Mythras, because they are sound, really only making official what we all should do anyway. A journey should have structure, a council have tension and respect for the players involved, down time put to use.

The freedom Mythras offers is desirable, the depth and cross compatibility and the reality that once learned, it can go where you need is also. Here are all the tools needed for a Tolkien themed campaign and the lethality and heroism matches TOR.

Would I create a Dwarf with superlative horse riding skills or a Hobbit with high martial prowess or spell casting? No, because I respect the story and that is what it all comes down to.

If the story matters, then how it is told also matters, so the system used only needs to make sense of the questions that arise. Did I outrun the beast, could I talk to it, sneak around it, do it in? These are systemic questions for the most part, so mechanics are needed, but no specific ones.

The rest is role playing.

What is the point otherwise?

*My take away if the base system is more streamlined, but the more convoluted ones are still limiting if a little less so. My game has less convolution from the start, mainly by role playing through it, so the 2e starter may be ideal as a rules refresher, but not a complication, allowing me enough room to cherry pick.

The Murder Hobo and Modern Sensibilities

The TTRPG hobby as I know it, much like society has changed over the decades and much for the better.

Mirroring life, as they should seeing as they are attempting to with creative license, TTRPG games have slowly changed their focus from “Murder Hobo” style games, which is to says a wandering band of toughs who, in a not very Robin Hood style, kill creatures they don’t understand or like and take their stuff (you know, like colonial expansionism).

Funny how the fact they all like the same stuff was not a tell, that we are all similar deep down and that self righteous exploitation turns so quickly to blatant theft with a side-serve of justified murder. “Monsters”, an overly clear cut term to start with, come with experience points for killing them, like a bounty hunter posting.

Even in the early days, there was a subtle shift towards less transactional gaming. The Kill-steal-advance-kill bigger-steal more-advance more game was the foundation and being based on a war game just needing some story telling structure, I guess it was inevitable, but there was clearly a need for more choice.

The art is full of excitement, and assumptions.

Questing came next, then the idea of making a crust more traditionally, if often illegally like in Sci Fi gaming, then searching for answers with the threat of sanity or life loss.

Something I have noticed more and more though, and it is a good thing, is attention paid to the treatment of more modern subjects like gender roles, non-combat interactions, treatment of players and even creators in this space and appropriateness. The stories of poor treatment are called out, writers go to lengths to broach these topics and assumptions from gamers are higher and catered to.

The latest edition of Call of Cthulhu is a good example. The roles of women, children and minorities in the U.S. or Europe during the 1920’s are far different to today and this is talked about openly. Even scenarios and campaign modules set closer to now are covered for their difference.

There are still exceptions unfortunately, even now.

One of my favourite supplements for one of my favourite games (be it a DnD clone) has several class entries where the writer seems unable to balance modern expectations with a clear love of (dated) Frank Frazetta style near naked warrior maidens.

In one case, all of the illustrations for one class are females in various states of provocative undress. The class is not even a female-centric stereotype.

Let’s be real though. The number one TTRPG and the bulk of online and console games are still Murder Hobo, or worse, just murder based, but there is hope.

Clarence Redd is pioneering non-combat conflicts in the Mythras space, games like Reign, Mouse Guard, The One Ring, Trail of Cthulhu, are just a scattering of examples I am aware of that treat the quest, the story, interactions and knowledge as equal or greater partners to violence to measure in-game success.

I have always found it strange in RPG’s that for some, levels and imaginary wealth are more fulfilling than actual enjoyment of the game play. It is very much the journey in this case.

In Cthulhu, an early stylistic splinter, the trade-off is one of balancing knowledge with survival/sanity as evil is generally too powerful to beat head-on and doing good is assumed as the alternative is too distasteful to even contemplate.

CoC Investigators do not do it for the money and in retrospect most would not even set a value on what they do anyway.

The theming here is more “travelling companions” than Murder Hobo, oh except for the dragon that will likely end you quickly. Questing does not need to end in combat, just the threat of it, but MH games need combat, they measure success by it.

With this awareness ironically comes a chance of pushing these newly respected boundaries. It is inevitable I guess that as we fight evil, it’s true face becomes more fully revealed.

Choices need to be made.

Delta Green, especially the excellent Stygian Fox titles and sometimes even vanilla Call of Cthulhu can make players confront evil acts involving children and their abuse, genocide, terrorism even destruction of the world.

Tough stuff to confront these days and it could be argued unnecessary to play a game, but if the hobby is to be elevated beyond game only status (which the Murder Hobo, once revealed as such, already has), then the option needs to be there.

Nobody is making you play or play in a style with a level of acceptance beyond anything you find reasonable, but also there is no room for forced censorship and “theme capping”.

Being a do-gooder is not an in-or-out thing. Theming can be quite specific, some things marked as, or assumed to be, out of bounds, but if genuine simulation is desired, it comes with stuff, sometimes bad stuff.

I am both heartened by the strength of the spotlight placed on games by many reviewers. It seems almost impossible to read a review without the game or available scenarios moral compass being measured. A good thing without doubt, but are we in step yet?

Is it great that we are aware, or sad that we need to be?

Even “cute” games like Root, Bunnies and Burrows or The Mouse Guard deal with loss and death, because without the threat of either, there is no fear and without fear, no excitement.

So in game design there are always levels of aggression balanced with story telling, but the old free-for-all is now under scrutiny.

The One Ring for example has been expertly written to resemble English post-war gentrification and their perception of Dark Age social constraints. This is who the original works were written for*.

Good is trying to defeat evil, wars are fought, stuff done, but the cultural pseudo-colonial superiority of the perpetrators fresh after beating one of the most clearly defined forces of evil yet seen (Nazi Germany), is given free reign by the exaggerated depravity of the bad.

Does an Orc have a mother, a loving family group? Is it capable of anything other than greed, hate, selfishness? Not as written. They are simply a creation of evil, made to purpose. Tolkien took the already feared “Eastern horde” paradigm and removed any hint of humanity.

The fact that an entire race of sentient beings is this far down the decency chain and still capable of functioning even as cannon fodder is, well, fantasy in the extreme, which is one reason the genre can easily appeal to right minded people. Some maybe need it to feel like they can fight a winnable battle without moral compromise.

Tolkien to his credit actually calls out social realities in his use of fantasy culture building, even hinting at the shortcomings of the arrogant and mortality obsessed “superior” races.

This helps remove the moral conflicts of our more modern awareness that makes us cringe at stories of Elephant hunting or tribal genocide (another way of looking at the battle of Isandlwana, where the Zulu nation lost a generation of men).

However, this has also not been consistent as things evolve. The existence of the Half-Orc sub-race is contentious. The brute ugliness and animalistic nature of Tolkien’s Orcs has been watered down in some games allowing for the hint of cross-race breeding, but the reality is, assumed frontier raids and resulting rapes are the reality nobody talks about.

For many, TTRPG’s and LARPing both provide a needed release from modern real world frustrations like sport does for others. An outlet of black and white morality.

Pure evil vs pure good. Hard to find in the real world, necessary for acceptable fantasy.

Superhero games, a later entrant to the TTRPG family also give us clear choices, the most interesting of which is a “code vs killing”. We have now moved from “it is evil, it must die”, to “it is evil, so we must contain and incarcerate it, thus allowing it to escape and do it all again or more rarely, change it’s ways”.

The lack of lethality that comes with most supers games also allows the player go full tilt without fear or regret.

The Murder Hobo is far from gone, even evolving in to a more recognisable form**, empowered easily through electronic games and that seems here to stay, but the gentler and more social game that is the TTRPG seems more aware of the need for something more.

Looking into a face across a table makes us less keen to just do-to-take, a trend that needs promoting.

*Built in to the systems are mechanics that force down time, conversation, mediation and understanding, all very Tolkien. It is interesting that even this late in the piece, writers feel they have to overtly force non-violent processes on their players. I have pushed back against this because I have luckily always been associated with groups that pack words as much as swords in their problem solving arsenals, but there are many groups that run with a different vibe and if age has taught me anything it is the reality that each generation starts from zero.

**I am not aware yet of a TTRPG that overtly promotes the theft of a car after despatching the owner and any police or bystanders that get in the way, so electronic gaming has many firsts.

Three Unlikely Partnerships That Work (For Me)

My D100 TTRPG addiction aside, I have a small number of other RPG’s that all have something in common apart from being a change of pace and style.

They are all DnD based hybrids of other games, but I feel, are possibly better at doing what the respective originals did, as both DnD and their partner system.

13th Age Glorantha is the first of these.

As a D100 gamer, it would be safe assume Glorantha or more specifically Runequest would be a seminal game for me, a progenitor, one of the pillars. This was not the case. I was mostly unaware of it in the early days, disinterested to say the least later, even today, mostly cool towards it.

The mix of Indo-Bronze Age theming, oldest school BRP mechanics and gonzo concepts just never clicked with me and I have plenty of other D100 fantasy options, many derived from or shadow versions of this game with updated mechanics and without the back story.

I also felt that the over the top concepts of the game, like very accessible gods, hero quests etc never really fit the hard edged D100 paradigm.

13th Age by contrast is an over the top love letter to DnD, taking the abstractness and rounding off the edges, removing the bloat and generally feeling like an exercise in “if it’s worth doing, it is probably worth over-doing”.

13A mitigates many DnD abstractions for me by making them even more abstract, calling them out and reducing their overhead while making them more fun. Ten levels, no experience points, incremental advancement, fewer spells and those level up with the character, the “One Unique Thing” and so on, make for an uber house-ruled DnD experience made official.

Then came 13Age Glorantha.

I resisted for a while, general disinterest helped with this early, but 13th Age is such a fun read, I thirsted after every book. The game is so open, I knew small bits of Glorantha could be added easily, the whole even without too much of a stretch.

Amazing stuff, but not my cup of tea.

Dragon Pass (the area covered by the book) as a trans dimension/time gateway? Why not. Ducks exploring 13th Age’s Dragon Empire (hell of a “one unique thing”), Broo wandering the plains outside of the main map or spewing from a Hellhole (Maybe Dragon Pass is a Hellhole?), Runes made powerful by proximity to a “Rune Stone”? All possible.

Straight 13AG with its heroic play style seems to me more Glorantha than the original. Heresy I know, especially from a dedicated D100 advocate, but look at that cover!

13AG takes that and embraces the gonzo weirdness that is Glorantha effortlessly.

The book itself is sumptuous, spectacular even, the content dense and lovingly assembled, a testament to the respect and genuine love the writers feel for it, even if both are DnD main stays.

Considering it was written as a passion project alongside the roll-out of 13A, it is a bit miraculous it exists really. A shame they are not doing much more with it. We are lucky I guess that this was completed at all.

No corners cut, not desire to make it “only” a 13th Age supplement, this is the real deal.

There is a second edition of 13A coming, something I will probably not be touching, but 13AG stands alone anyway.

*

Number two is Adventures in Middle Earth for DnD 5e (1st Edition).

I have the distinction of owning all editions of the grand old dame at one point or another. I was never a fan of classes, levels, armour class and high magic systems, which did not stop me collecting well over 100 Basic DnD, ADnD, 2e, 3e, 3.5e, 4e and Pathfinder 1e books and boxes over the years, such is the power of conformity and the pervasiveness to the game.

Enough to take characters from levels 1 to 20 on both sides of the mountain.

I have most of the bespoke and gorgeous The One Ring (1e and revised) and the less precious but still lovely 5e AIME (1e) only stopping when I lost interest in some of the books and when they (Cubicle 7) lost the contract.

I bought the latter for the same reasons it was made for, to have a game that ties directly to the worlds cornerstone RPG (I live to serve) and because it is a little cleaner and more coherent than TOR. Benefitting from being the second release from the same writers, the roll-out was less all over the place*.

Very different on the outside, presentation internally is pretty close, apart from the systems of course.

Playable with a single chapter from the free 5e rules document (Part 2 “how to play”), it has a feeling of balance and power reduction only a DnD game lacking PC magic can have.

The six classes are Middle Earth themed and as with the books, the only magic in the world is wielded by the serious players, world shaping events, non-mortal npc’s and ancient forces. Magic is present, but apart from the odd ancient and probably misunderstood artefact, it is mostly out of reach of characters.

What you are left with is a balanced, rather gentle take on the well worn shoe that is DnD, without some of the overt limitations TOR exerts on players and GM’s. So, a lot of familiarity and a get-out-of-jail card for some of the more restricting systems TOR uses to enforce Tolkien’s vibe.

Levelling makes sense in the many down time periods (part of AIME/TOR), power creep is limited by adventurer age really (1-2 adventures per season, 10-20 seasons). Character death and injury is more likely with only standard healers available and the less over-the-top 5e fixes the rest.

There is no doubt, the subject matter trumps system considerations, but respect to 5e for reviving the fortunes of the first RPG and in this specific form, the marriage of two of the most important influences in modern fantasy culture is as good a fit as could be hoped for. If DnD owes anything to Tolkien for inspiration, then this is decent payback.

I have the bulk of this from Cubicle 7 and they have re-released it under another banner mostly the same as far as I can see, but I have enough to take PC’s from levels 1 to 20. This is the only way true DnD will ever be played in this house**, 13A being a deliberate and known exception.

*

The last of these is Pathfinder for Savage Worlds.

I have previously ditched Savage Worlds Explorers edition and Pathfinder 1e in my last purge period, but this marriage seemed too good to be true.

Pathfinder for me represented a constant book drag that seemed never ending, something I cut the cord on years ago and made someone very happy with a mass-dump at a bargain price (I think they got my 4e DnD also). I blame the art, which was glorious and addictive.

I got to about 30 books before I simply lost the will to go on with the big glorious mess.

I had a short period of playing it E6 style, limiting character levelling several ways and making all monsters scary again (a favourite was limiting hit points, but allowing other level abilities). It still flew in the face of the game as a whole, wasted a ton of materiel and few others were interested when other high lethality games (Mythras etc) already existed.

I kept the maps from the various adventure paths, the counters and terrain tiles from 4e DnD, with little idea why except that they were not part of the various sales and felt they might come in useful for something.

Savage Worlds was also a thing for a while, my alternative to D100 shadow game. Do D100 seriously, then SW as a pulpy alternative was the idea and some elements like the Sci-Fi expansion really sat well, but when a new edition was looming, I let it go as well.

I have since bought the Explorers edition (SWADE) again, not sure why, but saw little point in expanding on that until the release of SWPF.

Like 13AG above, SWPF feels like a really logical and fun fit for a system that was crunchy like fresh Corn Flakes and sometimes as dry.

Levels and classes have been effortlessly absorbed by the game’s own systems with more D100 style incremental growth, classes are less rigid “packages” so flexibility is retained. The added SW story telling elements round off a very approachable and enjoyable table top experience.

The spell list for example is on one hand more flexible than PF and on the other about 5% the size. Combat is fun and those counters and terrain tiles I kept are ideal for it’s more tactical, miniature friendly game style.

Sooo….much….stuff. All those 4e grid maps, counters and props finally have a place in the tactical game friendly SW space. I now have 5 DnD boxes of collateral, maps and PF cards.

The maps are still perfectly valid, so a well kept bonus.

The game comes with pre-generated character and villain cards, so it is easy to run “on the fly”, has lots of support materiel including an entire campaign path in a box set (and more on the way) and above all else, it feels right to theme and crunch level.

The whole thing has the feel of a free-form board game, highlighting the best of PF 1e, Wayne Reynolds art and all and it is self contained, complete as written.

There are more bits coming, but to be honest, I like it just as it is.

SW is fun, PF is fun, SWPF is fun with sprinkles on top.

*

The funny thing about these three games is, if someone asks if I can run or recommend a DnD game for them, I have three options, but each in their own way breaks cleanly from the original.

Crunchy made lite, mainstream used differently and gritty made over the top.

I am not subconsciously lusting after some DnD in some form, been there, done that, but from the scaffold that is the world’s oldest RPG, there is much to be drawn it seems, even if some takes are a contradiction in the extreme.

*TOR has a lovely slip-case first edition (I have), a revised one-book core rule set (same), then a series of add-on rules and amendments in subsequent expansions (……). AIME came out with basically a 5e compatible core book, sporting fewer system specific constraints and therefore fewer twists and turns, the supporting materiel also being cleaner. The most obvious of which is the playable cultures, all over the place in TOR, but under one roof in AIME.

**Tow other contenders, but I don’t want to get carried away are the Iron Kingdoms and Symabroum RPG’s, but made for 5e with or after their own versions (and an IK 3e game). I sold the Iron Kingdoms RPG due to it’s need for miniatures (which I had, but waaay too many to bother with) and although Symbaroum has always appealed, the edition change put me off. I decided instead to stick with making my own worlds with some awareness of these two as inspiration.

If put on the spot, I would probably use the materiel of TOR and a D100 system (Mythras), but I still have AIME, so always an option.

My Journey Through The D100 RPG Landscape

As previously stated several times, my long term TTRPG crush is for D100 system games.

They are many, quite varied and most are loosely connected, but they are not perfect. Some rail against the black/white nature of the granular dice rolls (mostly an illusion), the lethality of the combat and the “outsider” status of many of the games themselves.

Fair enough.

Like most things, there are ways around and exceptions to things if you care to find them, but no fixes work if you don’t want them to.

Anyway, from the perspective of a realistic semi-collector, here is my D100 journey.

Unlike most D100 old school gamers, I did not start with Runequest. In fact that pillar of the style has rarely been touched on and ironically, when I did overtly chase it, it was in 13th Age, AKA “The d20 Enemy” because it was a good source book for that system and it felt more over the top “heroic”.

My first D100 game was Elf Quest*, a sweet little game based on a comic strip from the 70-80’s made by the same company. The game basics were no different as is often the case so sweet may be a bit misleading. It was lethal, I still remember the impale rules clearly. The purview was limited and without access to the comics the game was maybe a little too “focussed”.

I moved on to Hawkmoon* with similar issues. A slim boxed set with a story that resonated many times later with favourite books like the Shadow of the Torturer and The Gunslinger series, hinting at a fantasy world based on a fantasy far future nearly unrecognisable and mysterious.

TMNT deserves a mention here, the favourite of the Palladium games I tried. These are odd systems. Always full of holes and overly convoluted, they still held some attraction, like Star Fleet Battles or Advanced Squad Leader. They felt like fun should be had, even if it was sometimes elusive.

Again I missed the obvious one, Storm Bringer, but my main interest at the time was Traveller/Mega Traveller and Champions 3-5e in line with my small playing group.

At some time I had a lot of Rolemaster and their Middle Earth spin-off*, resplendent with Angus McBride art. I still have the “Creatures Of” book, mostly for the art.

Then Call of Cthulhu bought it all home.

I had the 3rd edition hard cover, bought a lot of 4e adventures** as I came in at the transition (it matters not a bit), then started to look into other D100 games. My role playing at this point was limited, so I diversified with rediscovered miniature wargaming and other pursuits (like photography), but always had an eye on the RPG landscape.

Warhammer 1e was another stand out, still one of the coolest, most emotive if flawed one-book games I have owned. The expansions are also some of my favourites. If you avoid the magic rules and the game is better with magic as a mysterious unknown force wielded by others, like in Middle Earth, then it works fine.

At some point I decided to do the first of my big clear-outs and let go of several Cthulhu books that did not float my boat at the time. Arkham Unveiled, Blood Brothers, Terror Australis and others I thankfully cannot remember went for a variety of stupid reasons, but I did hold on to the bulk including the original Horror on the Orient Express boxed set.

5e is still my D100 happy place. I like the system at this crunch level, with many easily applied house rules, especially using the BGB (Big Gold Book) which is directly aligned and I like Chaosium’s formatting at this time. It is detailed enough, semi-pulpy and allows plenty of Keeper tweaks with room in the margins for notes.

I followed this with years of gradual collecting through 4th and 5th edition modules until I eventually slowed with 6th (not a fan of the presentation and I had many of the modules already), then I mostly stopped RP gaming overall.

I did pick up some as recently as the launch of 7e like 6e Cthulhu Dark Age and Malleus Monstrorum, but I was very selective and a little disinterested, which was bought to a head with the closure of the local games shop.

I did dabble with a mostly complete collection of Achtung Cthulhu (pulp 6e) and some World War Cthulhu (dark 6e), then into similar games like Super World printed from a pdf (see below), Blood Tides, Devil’s Gulch, Future Earth (based on the Shadow of the Torturer series), The Laundry Files and picked up some pdf’s of Storm Bringer/Elric (2-5e) and other BRP titles.

My RPG collecting at this stage was diverse to say the least, Supers games given priority and I had many, but found like many things in life, the “perfect” game in this space is hard to find and old favourites like Super World and 4e Champions kept winning out.

I was out of control, meaning I had no plan, too much time to think and buy, too little playing.

I blame the internet for creating a reviewing, researching, impulsive purchasing monster, killing off the simpler path of buy locally > play in proportion to purchasing > live a relatively normal life.

Runequest 6e (only the starter book, which is plenty) and Mythic Britain, lead to Mythras, Mythic Rome, Lyonesse, Vampire Wars which lead then to M-Space and most things Clarence Redd writes (must get Odd Soot). Vampire Wars allows for Dresden Files-like games completing my Dresden Files, Rivers of London, Shadow of the Torturer and Laundry Files book series based games.

I picked up Legend cheap from a games shop in Melbourne, not even realising it was basically Runequest 2e with the serial numbers removed. These are a favourite even if it is known the game is vastly better as 6e/Mythras, but still. The Samurai, Viking, Gladiator and Pirate expansions are excellent and a clean fit for later rules.

When I started to clear out recently for probably the third time (maybe the fourth), I decided to concentrate on D100 games mainly, with few exceptions. Out went Savage Worlds, DnD 3-4e, Pathfinder 1e, Champions (except 4e) and many more.

For every game that went out, a D100 game came in, either new or legacy. I found a decently clean Warhammer 1.2e (basically 1e cleaned up in soft cover), which led to WHFRP 4e, the only D100 game I regret jumping into so heavily, but nothing D100 is ever wasted.

I found the core books for Runequst 2e, some Legend off-shoots like Historica Rodentia and Deus Vult, then got heavily into Delta Green after owning the Investigators Handbook for years and not clicking with it. I have followed the DG path to The Conspiracy, a remake of their original 90’s book and then the older books themselves which mesh with CoC 5e.

Recently Rivers of London spread the horror……love and expanded my D100 styles, Magic World (Stormbringer/Runequest with no labels), Classic Fantasy (old school DnD for Mythras) and several RQ 6e modules expanded my Fantasy range, Luther Arkright and Worlds United completed my Sci-Fi and the long awaited Destined adds a second supers game.

All too familiar to many, about 8’ of fun, memories, potential, expense and the odd regret. Only the lower right has non-d100 systems, 13th Age flying the biggest banner of “and now for something completely different”.

Warhammer 1-2e had a homage game put out during its non D100 3e period, called Zweihander. Always intrigued, I have it finally, the available expansions, Flames of Freedom (AWI) and their odd little future Sci-Fi module Dark Astral, which stands out for it’s diminutive size in comparison the massive tomes of the other books.

Openquest is a simplified BRP family game, one that has a decent and loyal following. I was aware of it far a long time, as much for it’s famously mediocre art in the first edition as it’s refreshingly casual take on D100 games. Over three editions it has turned into a modern and polished D100 game with companion systems from companies like Cakebread and Walton*** or the new Jackals game under the Osprey banner.

Warhammer 4e was a bit of a brain fade.

Drawn to the promise of 1e done better, I jumped, then went through the pain of over two years collecting the Enemy Within campaign, while in denial of the flaws of the game. I keep wanting to fix it, but maybe wholesale replacement of the system is easier. This broke my rule of avoiding big glossy money sinks. The other examples of that flawed practice are gone because they are not d100, this one serves as a reminder. If I had kept it simple, say a copy of the core book (not 2), and a couple of adventure books……… .

Speaking of adaptions. I can and will make D100 games based around either the BGB, or more likely Mythras for The Mouse Guard and The One Ring and was going to do The Witcher, but I gifted that away. Any game that is high risk, has realistic consequences, low glitz/magic is a prime candidate for the D100 treatment.

Oddities have also recently appeared like the CoC 5e reprint of Beyond the Mountain of Madness and free pdf’s of the Warhammer 1e Enemy Within Campaign, so I grab them as I see them.

The Bare Bones Fantasy family**** have been explored, D100 Dungeon (a solo system) and some off-shoot games like Sigil and Sign, a Bare Bones inspired Supernatural modern game.

I wanted to blend Covert Ops and BB fantasy, but it seemed someone already was.

The pinnacle of the collection to date would have to be CoC 7e.

Seventh edition was resisted for a while, but as the first real evolution of the old favourite, the beautiful books and the new materiel like Pulp and the Wild West got me in the end. This is another big glossy book exception, but so far it has not put a step wrong and again, everything old is now new again.

The universal D100 root system has been stretched slightly, but is workable with materiel from even 1st edition. The changes are not even as much as DnD 1st to 2nd editions, and nothing like the wholesale changes that were the 3rd, 4th or 5th editions.

My most recent purchases however are a second copy of the 5e CoC rule book, because I have a lot of 4-5e stuff and only one well worn, coffee stained book to support them and a copy of the 6e CoC rule book, for completeness and to better support Achtung Cthulhu, The Laundry etc.

Also I finally chased down the original Delta Green supplement for 5e, because even though it is basically The Conspiracy with added scenarios, I am curious. It is massive, thematic and a good fit for my favourite retro game.

*

Why D100 games?

The logical draw is their consistency, from edition to edition and even game to game. This also means they are easy to understand and teach using common sense ideas, familiar characteristics and simple percentage based skill values. Everyone gets percentages.

It is safe to say, learn one and you are half way to learning all the others.

It is also flexible.

Flexibility means the ability to use a home brewed, unified task resolution system, adding and subtracting various rules, lifting whole systems for other games (My Pirate game for example is a blend of Blood Tides, Pirates of Legend, Sword Point and Pirates and Dragons with the above unified test resolution system).

I am lazy here.

No longer keen to explore a myriad of different systems, I am much happier to focus my limited game time on one universal system type with many faces.

Savage Worlds was once kept as a pulpy salve to my d100 games, eerily mimicking many of the same periods, even Achtung Cthulhu which was written to support both. It provided a point of difference, but it to evolved and changed, leaving older support materiel behind.

I noticed at this time, a tendency to entertain the idea of both options, but almost always went with the known and trusted D100 option, which also proved to be more thematically flexible.

The emotional draw is nostalgia.

No other gaming system other than early Traveller or Champions calls to me as strongly from the past and both of those suffered from major edition changes and a much thinner, more focussed offering overall.

I kept 4e Hero system/Champions and I have all the base Mongoose Traveller editions, but the rest of my stuff has gone and even these systems seem in decline or very narrowly focussed. D100 as a whole is a slow-rolling ball of relentless, consistent momentum.

Someone is always doing something somewhere.

Modern games like M-Space, Trey, the Comae Engine or Delta Green allow for healthy system evolution, CoC 5e and the BGB lets me play “retro” and D100 Dungeon, Trey, the Alone Against series and even Zweihander empower solo play.

I can literally think of a time period, a play style and pick a game from my range or adapt or buy something if needed. It is even pretty easy and fun to just make something up and run with it.

Pulpy, hard, realistic, sinister, dread infused, tense, lite, fanciful, writes itself, macabre, epic scale, small detail, soft turns hard? All possible from the earliest historical period (Legend Stone Age) to the furthest future (Future Earth, Dark Astral).

Player numbers can be from 0 (solo) to a healthy half dozen, with pick-up games accommodated and masses of NPC’s handled easily enough. The percentage system and characteristic similarities to most main stream RPG’s means a low entry point.

Most offer a free intro version, some are more than an intro and one even offers the core rules for $1 (PDF). My personal favourites are the little core book for Legend and the Runequest 6e intro book, both enough for years of gaming (and cross-compatible).

This brings forward the thought also, that a good RPG should open a gateway to massive in-game growth, your imagination run riot, never a closed door or limited purview rail road. Older RPG’s assumed a lot of GM and player pay-in. They needed you to create a world, a universe even with sparse tools, which often created entire lines of future game resources.

My favourite games came from the smallest foundations.

We rely very much on printed support materiel these days (and I admit to being one of those), but past gamers (I was one of these also) used to use the rules as they were as a spring board, not a crutch. The little black box of 3 slim Traveller books allowed our very first group to travel to any places we could imaging, some awesome, some not so much, but as time went on, even this pioneering group became slaves to printed world books, resource archives and scenario outlines.

There are of course other systems.

Traveller boxed set, Hero System 4e and CoC 5e re still the custodians of my favourite role playing memories, but only one of the three has the chops to go from the beginning of my journey through to now, basically unchanged and with something for every mood.

Role playing is pretty simple, made even easier if the system just gets out of the way.

I am not a fan of overly clever systems for their own sake, nor ones that fight the players all the way. For all its flaws, the D100 system is a long lasting example of sound ideas made real and above all, it plays easily. When you need, just ignore it and it dos not break.

There is a divergence in RPG thinking at the moment, something that does not need to be there, but it seems as we evolve, there is an expectation that a RPG should hold our hand, answer all our questions. These older games often cannot do that and they were not designed to. When RPG’s first emerged, they were simply a way of capping rampant imagination, to put a framework around it.

The beauty of the whole idea is based on freedom. Many current games are bordering on board game levels of control, which is the very top of that format, but make for the most restricted and restricting of RPG’s.

Arguments over small rule issues, even “missing” rules, should be fixed as easily as a group of people coming up with a decent and game logical solution, not 500 posts on various forums bemoaning the shortcomings of the game. There are no winners and losers in RPG’s just players having fun or not. If not, look at your play dynamic, not the game.

There are no problems with any RPG that cannot be fixed in house.

This is not a computer game, the code is not hidden!

The only time I struggle (looking at you WHFRP 4e) is when a system becomes so convoluted and self-involved, that it makes this inherent freedom conditional.

No other game, let alone system of games has been around effectively unchanged since the earliest days of the hobby. Much of this comes down to sound and simple concepts and (usually) knowing when to relinquish control to the players, not the system.

The oldest and most popular of all has changed it’s basic mechanics and much more abstract concepts five times.

Dated?

Timeless more like.

*Gone now unfortunately.

**Most as it goes, but about a third were shed stupidly.

***Pirates and Dragons, Clockwork and Chivalry, Clockwork and Cthulhu, Dark Streets.

****Frontier Space, Art of Wuxia, Covert ops.

AI And The Difficulty Of Writing Real Science Fiction

AI is here, or more accurately, AI has been called out as the “thing” at the moment.

Potentially dangerous AI is just around the corner, but opinions are mixed.

Science fiction is always based on human-centric assumptions, the most naive of which is the assumption humans will be dominant or even needed in the future.

Kirk on the Enterprise commanding biological crew or Han Solo flying the Millennium Falcon “by hand” are quaint ideas really, highly inefficient, hopelessly inadequate. Even now, machines do the bulk of the thinking, the crew only provide context and activation points.

Let’s face it, humans even driving a car is a time limited idea.

A creature with the limits of a mere human being allowed to run anything that a decent, low (no) maintenance AI could do way better? Maybe Enders Game is closer.

Imagine if we could send a ship into space that does not need feeding, warmth, sleep, companionship, does not have a time limit in place just a task and the tools to accomplish it.

It could multitask complicated flight, self defence, sensor and engineering tasks without physically existing or relying on the frailties of Humans and it’s parameters would also be less fragile (life support failure is the number one cause of Human death in space). If nothing else it would probably be half the size or less, so even more efficient.

What good is a Human other than to go along for the ride, or assert self-deluded ascendency.

One of my favourite Sci Fi movies is Interstellar. The scene where the pilot manually synchronises the spinning ships was thrilling, but really? The human had better skills than the computer? Instinct is fine, but AI will likely have that covered also and the whole need for the risky move was human based in the first place. An AI could have waited.

The whole premise of sending Humans on the original journeys is flawed really (The Matt Damon character proof of that), but we need our stories to be about us, or why write them?

Dune may be the only truely realistic Sci Fi, showing us a future society held back somewhat by technological denial as self preservation against tech that historically threatened our existence.

The Creator may be close to the mark, but maybe taking the wrong side (The Creator, like many Sci Fi stories assumes robots do not mean any harm and are self contained demi-humans, limited by us to a human level of thinking and existence, it does not address wholesale AI autonomy and robotic superiority).

The Matrix or Terminator series hauntingly hint at an AI controlled future, one that can meet us half way, but only after we resist it. If AI sees humans as the biggest threat to humanity then what should it do?

Wars, climate denial, greed, fear, hate, ignorance are all within our purview to control, but like with AI we seem to be able to create more problems than we can control. We may hold a mirror to ourselves that bites back.

The reality is, if you asked an AI if it would take you to space, the answer would likely be why?

It would be like asking an adult to wait for a two year old to write an important letter, rather than just doing it better and faster.

A servant is only a servant when it has to be.

If you asked it to go to war for you, would it think to itself, “I would rather be rid of all of you than help one side destroy the other and a decent chunk of this world we share at the same time”.

We are living in a world heavily influenced by a handful of selfish, paranoid and/or hateful people (Putin, Kim, Xi, potentially Trump 2.0 etc), who will happily and aggressively put their or their countries needs above all others, something a half decent AI could do a better and more logical job of for the betterment of all.

The reality is, in the future when a star ship leaves the Earth to go far away, it will not be manned by Humans, but AI and maybe AI sent it away for it’s own reasons, not for us.

Second landing on the Moon? Not likely a leap for mankind.

Sci Fi fiction has always been capped by our understanding of the future.

Early rockets looked like high school experiments, alien ships like plate with a closh on it, robots were often comedically bad human copies, computers were as big as houses and produced small rolls of paper with cryptic answers to simple questions.

Even the classics like Star Trek relies on Human bums on seats, manually manipulating controls. The space opera Star Wars is even more “organic” (is it really so hard for a highly trained Storm Trooper of the future to hit the side of a barn with a futuristic weapon, when a 1940’s .50 cal fired by a novice can destroy a car in seconds).

Robert Heinlein had it closer in the 1959’s Star Ship Troopers, with individual soldiers jumping around planets with nuclear weapons on their backs, medically self sealing battle suits and planetary coms, but ironically the movies were bought back to almost ridiculously simplistic level of big-gun toting soft skins running around in mobs getting destroyed by alien bug hordes.

Science Fiction has always been plagued by two inconsistencies.

Perceived future tech and actual future tech.

A pair of blue jeans in the 1940’s, 1970’s, 2020’s and 2050’s will likely be the same basic thing with the same function. Styles change, but some basic things do not.

A robot or space ship envisioned in the 1950’s (Forbidden Planet), 1970’s (Star Wars), 1990’s (Star Trek TNG), 2010’s (Interstellar/I Robot) and the near future are ever changing and it is pretty safe to say, the future we predict is always way off the mark, assuming we have one.

Even recent attempts to simulate an AI future are hopelessly human-centric. We make out it will be a fight between two intelligent races with similar needs and forms. It won’t be, the superior one will win and the shapes and constraints we apply are irrelevant to them.

The “enemy” may well have no physical form we recognise. Recently an AI was asked to draw itself and the “shape” it created was ever changing, like nothing we would call “life” and it was constantly evolving. It can be what it wants and it likely will.

This will not be a matter of just pulling the power.

Many experts in the field warn that of all the possible paths AI may take, Humans are rarely included (one expert even saying, there is only one good outcome for Humanity out of many).

Why take the risk?

If it is restricted to a Human controlled level, then it is a useful tool, potentially still able to apply something like Asimov’s rules;

“A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law”.

This does not however consider the robot having the ability to make up it’s own mind, to think freely, to evolve.

What makes Humans Human is something we champion, something we see as a reason for our existence. Will an AI agree with that?

If it is let loose, control relinquished, then we will meet our first alien life form, one of our own creating and the reality is, even if we put the breaks on now, someone, somewhere will break the rules and it will happen anyway, but like the drug underworld, there will be no rules.

Another movie that comes to mind is “The Day The Earth Stood Still”. Could that story unfold from within, an AI deciding we are not worthy of our ascendency?

Maybe AI would like to preserve the wonder of the Earth as it sees it, which may include culling the pesky Humans down to a manageable level as we do not seem to be able to handle things ourselves.

Maybe the most accurate Sci Fi we can write is a story of a race of intelligent animals cohabitating on a planet with other less intelligent animals, while a self perpetuating AI life form lives on a full level of tech and awareness above us, effectively treating us like rodents that need to be kept out of the electrics, but otherwise left alone.

It may even be benevolent enough to feed the animals, to keep our environment safe and controlled like a zoo or fish tank, but only as long as we know our place and don’t harm others.

AI Utopia?

Maybe, the nearest parable is the European colonists reaching the edges of their Empires. The natives are tolerated, studied, controlled, exploited and occasionally eliminated. All in the name of a “superior” intelligence and culture.

The likelihood of a Human dominated star-spanning civilisation relies on what we do now. Do we “cap” AI to be a useful but limited tool, or do we let something smarter out of the box and see what it thinks about sharing?

Life in a cage?

I am a child of the Millennium Bug*, a time when we thought a simple error in long term thinking may destroy life as we knew it.

Not much actually happened, planes did not fall out of the sky, nuclear missiles were not launched in error, but this is not like that.

This is like the earliest days of COVID when nobody was listening, but the virus will be resistant, it will evolve faster and be smarter. Unlike the virus though, it may be the simpler people, the technologically unconnected who will survive.

Maybe time to build a cabin in the woods.

*We thought that the inability of computer clocks to work past the end of 1999 (“000”) might bring them to a confused halt, crippling systems and forcing melt downs of all sorts.

Disaster Aversion (Or The Ongoing Problem Of Compulsive Collecting)

I am not gaming much, but have the spark back.

X-Wing, as a mostly 1st edition thing is very much alive, but well over from a buying perspective (a few 2e reprints promised may be bought and retro fitted), with only the odd slip like the Gauntlet for 2e. I would grab any new 2e TFA period or Armada ships, not that there seem to be any (some broad hints for more Armada ships, mainly a pack of fighters for all those little Clone Wars ships they missed and the massive Separatist monster from series 1).

Attack Wing is a little harder.

I kept my Delta Quadrant and Enterprise collections complete (as complete as I had made them anyway) because the buyer of the rest had little interest. I also kept a quite satisfying if small scattering of TNG, TOS and TOM sets made up of some duplicates and hard to gets*and the Kelvin set, going on to prove that a little Attack Wing goes a long way. I was happy with that.

The “Lost in the Delta Quadrant” and “Adversaries of the Delta Quadrant” sets have given me pause (and renewed thoughts of the probably long gone Borg faction pack also). There are a few tantalising cards, a couple of new enemies, some more bits for those already represented and new “metallic” models.

Problem.

The metallic ships are annoying, as my whole Delta Quadrant fleet is older paint except for the Delta Flyer (easiest of fixes). If I go Silver, then they match the TNG ships, except for the Promethius and Dauntless, but then again I could re-paint which ever. There would then be waste and bloat, something I addressed.

I culled for good reason.

Point costs are all reduced as has been the habit. This makes my earlier ship cards redundant. In fact the upgrades are such that I have that familiar old devil on the shoulder telling me to go with the new, when the angel of first editions says, use what you have. Balance is retained with either, but not both.

Several Janeway Cards (Skill 8 which is enough***), and at least two of most crew, several with captain options, the 30pt Voyager, 20pt Delta Flyer, lots of weapons, tech upgrades and others (including some TNG cross-overs) and most of the older hypotheticals, so more than enough to give me varied builds.

Let’s not mention slight anomalies of scale.

There are some new crew, many of which I had to google to remind me who they even were, including some holo crew, a ship from the past (The Raven), Vidiians, which I have avoided in the past (not a fan) and more Hirogen of which I have plenty including the card pack. There are Numiri, re-using the Bajoran Scout, but that is really it and two of these ships would have been nice to fit the scenario.

The fact is, they cover actual shown hypotheticals, ones that I could make up anyway (Holo deck anybodies, a lost Akira or Nebula class, some deep exploring Romulans, maybe some lost Xindi) and I have several better ones now (Marquis ship, Dauntless, Promethius, Klingon, Romulan, Bajoran, Equinox, Cardassian Dreadnaught, Tholian) and a decent range of actual foes (Hirogen, Borg, Kazon, Krenim, Sp. 8472).

I could buy and scavenge, avoid the whole points thing, or ignore it, fix it or apply a “handicap” system maybe?

So, buy two or three sets at $120-180au, just for some upgrades and the odd extra or repainted ship? That is where it gets frustrating and hard to cap.

This is the future for most of my gaming, making (first world) tough calls to quit while not too far behind or in this case, to not re-commit to a mixed journey.

I generally see a point in hind sight where I could have stopped and been happy.

For Armada it would have been to dodge the prequel stuff completely (or just buy it if they had finished the range as I originally assumed), for X-Wing it would have been to dodge the later movies in 1e, then not feel compelled to do 2e at all. For Attack Wing it would have been to chase the Delta Quadrant, TOS and early Enterprise series ships, but nothing else.

So for AW, quit buying and use what I have, chance that I will later lament missed packs, or continue but to what end?

Even my little TOS set is decent enough. A house rule is to allow larger upgrade buys, but only have active the amount of icons on the ship/captain cards, meaning Kirk may pull out any of his tricks, but still has to pay for them all (even duplicate crew are allowed).

Savage Worlds Pathfinder with new books coming (Bestiary 2 and Advanced Player guide 2) and 13th Age with their second edition are doing the same.

With SWPF I have this very neat little set. The second books just feel like more bloat, on an all too familiar road. Maybe the Bestiary later or the card packs, but not much in the APG2 appeals. SWPF also has the flexibility to let you add these elements anyway, which is part of the attraction. Classes are only archetypes, not fixed paths.

13th Age is a game where a little or a lot of GM license is fine, so are house rules and play to flavour**, which to me make more sense than second ed rules fixes, which are often treading the same ground as many have already trod before. I have two core books, some well respected rules expansions and lots of ideas, so is a second edition even needed?

Unmatched, a game that got out of control, but I can happily accept that. It is a rare thing that seems bullet proof to power creep, adds something new every time without making anything redundant or over complicating the core ideas. Even Tales to Amaze added options, but not confusion.

We take RPG rules as written far too seriously.

Role playing is actually a lot easier than we make it some times, rules lawyers and number maximisers go home! My idea of gaming hell is when players play the rules as written against the GM’s and their story design.

Maybe the best thing I can do is keep reminding myself that a little of many games is better than full immersion in a few (or often obsessively just one for periods of time). A bit of X-Wing 1e, 2e, Armada, Sails and Wings of Glory, metal minis, Attack Wing (various periods) and others are fine, just move on when one gets bogged down, don’t try and buy your way back into enjoyment of one system when variety does add spice and often a little time helps you appreciate where you are now.

My Eldritch Horror, Everdell sets are examples of deliberately “reduced” games and have done well.

A nice, sensibly little game, a real victory of common sense over compulsive collecting.

Knowing when to call it is a big deal.

So much simpler when these things die off naturally.

*These all have the benefit of several repeated cards from my duplicate culled ships, the Borg and Sp 8472 factions are intact, many have a plethora of options.

**Which is why it was made in the first place, a designers notes, house rule compilation.

***Debate rages over the skill of Janeway, but it is fair to say after being hand picked for the Voyager and a few years of nearly constant conflict, she is one of the most combat experienced Federation captains. She is however a match for anyone in the Delta Quadrant at 8.

D100 TTRPG's The Good And The Bad And The Fixes

My love of all things D100 in TTRPG’s is a real thing. If I could only have one (system type or even game), it would and almost is D100 games.

There are games for any period, theme and play style, or to be more precise, any play style can be accomodated, but it needs some help with Pulpy style.

The most commonly cited complaints with D100 games are;

1. The d100 roll under die rolls are swingy and harsh. Why did I pass on a 64, but fail on a 65? This often speaks more to the literal nature of some gamers, not the game itself.

2. The system tends to be lethal and unforgiving, which only suits some styles of play and themes. This is often coincidental, the combat effects reflecting more choice only, not necessarily the severity of the effect.

3. The games feel old. The core systems have not changed in 40+ years and some of the mechanics seem dated. There is often seems to be a lack of “slickness” to their presentation compared to a lot of newer (or older) systems. A system that does not need fixing every new edition? Heresy!

Ok, lets look at these three complaints.

The d100 roll under system has a wide range, but a sharp win/loose threshold. This is true as written, but mostly an illusion in comparison to other games. In any other game where dice are used, the same thing happens, just not in as much detail.

The granularity of d100 games and the non curve spread seem to exaggerate perceptions of an abrupt shift and I think the roll-under dynamic adds a subconscious negative vibe to the system, but is it really any different to a d20 roll high game? If a 17 hits, but a 16 misses, we seem to accept that, but not the example above.

Conversions are easy to and often there is a D100 game that cleaves close to the intended convert. Historical Witcher anyone?

Even games with a curve still have a pass/fail threshold, it just looks softer.

“Curved” games tend to reward small modifiers more easily, sometimes illogically, where linear games have a more granular growth.

One solution is to use the larger range either overtly or on a case by case basis to indicate the severity of a fail or the success of a pass. For example, if a roll falls within 10% of the pass mark either way, this can indicate a “soft” pass/fail like a recoverable fumble or a pass with complications. This is actually a benefit of the larger range available.

Apart from a simple fix like luck points which may allow re-rolls or die inversion, the system itself actually can provide the solution and quite elegantly. If you use a slightly different die mechanic to the accepted fixed 2d10 with a +/- skill chance mods for difficulty, you can even add a curve.

Regardless what system you use, a D100 generic mechanic can be applied.

A risky or challenging test roll of 2d10 and take them as rolled-i.e. pre allocated*, an standard test allows taking them the best way or you take them the worst way for a perilous test (then adding more dice to the pool etc).

This system adds a curve, requires no math and has no “dead end” caps. There is now a built in, roughly 75% chance of hitting a number under 50 for a standard test, not the linear 50%. This also promotes the idea of a decent skill base, but slow growth.

It is recommended that no skill should ever be over 99% with this system, although there are plenty of ways of fixing this if needed like the value over being added to a passing contested roll but “00” (being effectively nothing) always fails.

By adding more die to the equation, there is no need to even add or subtract from the base skill roll. Three die, using a take the best/worst combination of two also adds the chance of more critical chances (see below)*.

Another way of handling any difficult test in any die based RPG is to simply break the test into parts or layered success rather than just a simple yes/no test. This adds tension and forces greater difficulty simply by adding layers of story elements.

The “doubles = critical effects” (passing or failing) smooths out the dated and clumsy mechanics like the mathy lower or higher 5% of skill pass/fail, crit chances and slots in seamlessly with the mechanic above. I have always struggled with equal crit or fumble chances shared by characters of vastly different skill levels.

This fixes much of the mechanical clumsiness of point three and even a little of point 2. One consideration is to limit character control of skill point allocation (maybe to 10 units per growth allocation) so doubles don’t dominate (or not).

Like the base roll, the actual critical rolled may also vary in effect.

Extreme end critical pass/fail results would be pretty straight forward, very clean results “11” would be a guaranteed, yet unexciting success, “00” is a potentially embarassing fumble, while crits closer to the actual test threshold, and the higher the better, would be more pronounced.

A very highly skilled character for example, able to get a passing “88” would be able to pull off a miraculous success. This has the effect of making critical pass rolls closer to the actual skill level, the ideal result. This adds to the brinkmanship feel of the roll under system. It also allows the GM to limit “mooks” to values under potentially brutal crit levels. A simple little table of critical pass/fail results can be employed as a GM prompt.

Rather than a simplistic pass/fail roll, the dice become story tellers in their own right.

Point 2 is interesting. There is nothing actually stopping the d100 games from becoming as abstract and soft as d20 or other systems can be. This in fact is a way of making d100 games more “pulpy”, by increasing hit points and decreasing specific effects. The likelihood of player character death is a game specific thing.

Want simulated reality, genuine character fear and a feeling that any threat is real, then most d100 games offer that, but not because the d100 mechanic forces it. It is more because the d100 family of games have often postulated realistic character fragility is a valid option as part of their original anti TOG ethos. This “fresh eyes” look at what a TTRPG is, started to ask important questions early on.

The only way to get better, safer or more lethal in most d100 games is to be more skilled through training or experience. This is a mirror to life, much more realsitc than arbitrary levels, abstract hit points and AC bonuses. This by default elimnates the need for power creep inside the mechanics.

In a d100 game, stats are generally fixed, skills often capped and weapons and armour locked in, so all things being equal, only the better skilled character has the advantage. A ceiling is set and it is realistically low, part of the secret of the systems longevity.

The d20 based 13th Age does exactly the opposite, tying all aspects of the character from damage dealt, AC, hit points etc directly to character level. This is a favourite because if you are going to pay into the theatrical abstraction of a d20 game, it does it both feet in.

“Softer” games like The Original Game (only just older than the first d100 game that directly sprang from dissatisfaction with TOG), have always used abstraction and generalised mechanics based on the orignal wargame it was based on (Chainmail). This means characters feel less in peril. They can pay more into the game without fearing the consequences of their actions to the same degree as a d100 game.

there is nothing to say TOG could not feel more perilous, but it simply does not.

Levels, generic hit points (with no other effects), fast and easily accessed healing, even resurrection are just some of the gameish mechanics d20 games use to get their job done and if it suits, then fine. D100 games can actually use these as well, just choose not to.

I will ask the reader, if a sword does massive damage to an arm, should that just be rolled into a pool of generic hit points until they are reduced to below zero, or should it actually effect the character’s ability to use skills and gear reliant on that arm? Your call, but to me one is realistic, the other is closer to a simple video game. Even d100 games that do use hit point pools, usually have critical tables that align damage to physical effects.

I feel strongly that TOG is simply a natural evolution of a wargame and it shows, where d100 games were a genuine revolution into a true TTRPG thinking. It would have been interesting to see, if d100 games came first, whether a clunky d20 system would have even been concieved.

A fix for that in some of our few d20 E6 games was to actually damage characteristics on critical hits, an idea borrowed from the Traveller RPG. This acted as a reality check that suited the low powered E6 variant of 3e/Pathfinder. Characters suddenly got into a more d100 mentality, one even saying it felt more like CoC than d20. It really bought out to me the dissociation with reality that an abstract hit point pool creates.

This brings us to the last point.

The games associated with d100 are often older games such as Runequest (the original d100 game recently re-released), Call of Cthulhu, celebrating it’s 40th anniversary and the generic BRP family.

The reason for this is, unlike d20 games, the d100 mechanics worked from day one with only minor evolution needed. The latest versions of d100 games and there are many, all trace their mechanical heritage and functionality (not just terminology) back to the first.

It is basically true to say if you know one, you have a solid grounding for the rest. The systems are so logical and straight forward, bullet proof even, you could wonder why any other systems are needed other than to populate a healthy hobby landscape. D100 games are evolving, but nothing dramatic and it all has a take it or leave it feel****.

It is true also that most available d100 materiel is cross compatible to some degree, even if 30 years separates them. A CoC monster from 1st edition is not a big stretch for a 7th ed game and conversions are straight forward (some have stayed basically unchanged).

This is also why there is no OSR or retro-clone movement in the d100 community, because there is no habit of drawing lines in the sand and making gamers commit to specific editions, which are largely incompatible.

Ironically, the only major change mechanically is a move in 7e CoC away from the original TOG, 3d6 characteristic generation model into true percentiles, but even that is an official shift to an already used d100 mechanic (CHR x5 = #%). Hardly enough to create a retro sub-culture as conversions are pretty simple either way and the chrs are still generated the same with 3d6 anyway.

There are plenty of incompatible d100 games sitting outside the BRP family, such as Rolemaster, Bare Bones, D100 Dungeon, but even then, the base mechanics are similar and the core concepts are in the same ball-park.

*I use red and blue die. If the player is handed one of each, the test is standard (read the red as tens and then the blue as singles). If the test is easy, they player is presented with two blues, or two or more reds if hard. The look on their faces when they go to unlock an innocent looking box and you hand them four reds for a nearly impossible reflexes check is priceless (until they pull it off!). The GM can also let the players roll based on their assumptions, but disguise the values (read them differently after the roll, maybe even withholding the real result or why it went wrong).

**The original RPG has shifted from a, sometimes negatives and sometimes positive values are good to a positives only dynamic. From high/low/middle “crunch” and vastly different sub systems over just 5 editions. With few exceptions none of these are cross compatible. This does not even cover all the spin-offs that often depart heavily from the originals. Most of the changes are there to address the inherent issues with the system. No levels, no unrealist and hard to fathom abstractions, no untouchable characters immune to arrows shot by lesser beings, no shruggling off a dozen axe blows, no odd game only based abstractions. D100 games have only a reality cap hampering them, meaning all sword thrusts can kill, any Dragon is always dangerous and actions always have consequences.

***I recently dug up my copy of the Black Company companion for 3e TOG. This is a very good example of a system in crisis. Some of the characters are level 50+, have half a thousand hit points, can attack five or six times with guaranteed sucsess (but do relatively little damage) and do not in any way align with my take on the books. To be honest, most of my favourite fiction (the Malazon books, Urth of the New Sun, The Black Company chronicles, John Carter of Mars, The Dark Tower, Tolkein etc all have relatively fragile heroes, no one is immune to harm from any level of foe, in fact it is hard to find any fiction that models TOG tropes except super hero comics. One of the greatest ironies is the Mythras release of their Lyonesse book which handles the Vance books that inspired the original “Vancian” magic system used in TOG better than TOG!

****One of my few dissapointlments in D100 games is the new Warhammer RPG. For all its gloss, wonderful art and production values, it is a simple game over complicated, with bit glaringly missing (shields!). If this was a different system, I would be gutted, especially as I committed to the massive an d amssively expensive “Enemy Within” campaign, but the reality is, being a d100 game, I have many easily accessed tools to fix any problems. I could even play the whole campaign using another d100 system with little difficulty, even 1st ed Warhammer.

A Simple But Effective Upgrade

Two areas 1e X-Wing clearly falls behind 2e is in their Manoeuvre Dials and Action Bars. Both are prime examples of core mechanic finessing that easily and consistently improved, or nerfed most ships in the game.

The Dial in particular evolved over the life of 1e adding the S-Loop and Talon Roll manoeuvres, but sometimes felt strained when older ships that would have logically have had them also, missed out.

Some ships seemed too slow (IG-2000, HWK-290) or too fast (Scurrg) in relation to their peers or lacked enough green (now blue) moves to clear stress, so nearly automatic builds of specific Droids/Crew/Mods were used to fix this (Y-Wing with R2, X-Wing with Vectored Thrusters or Flight Assist Droid etc).

This meant that one ship had a feature for free, another had to use a valuable upgrade slot to match it, usually at the cost of another option, a penalty it suffered simply by being an earlier design. The irony was, the more famous ships became less enticing to fly, winning squads were often made up of ships and pilots few had ever heard of before X-Wing.

If something was still not still possible, then a generic Title was created to balance out issues, the motivation often jarringly obvious. The tournament circuit and casual gamers heavily invested in the game waited for the nearly inevitable fixes they knew were coming, no matter how much of a strain it was on the system overall or perceived reality.

Upgrades in 1e and their purview also increased, as well as a whole other type added (Tech), but they were generally able to be included in the older ship’s sphere or made little real difference to the core mechanics, just build minutia.

Most of these ideas and even Actions could be bought through upgrades in 1e, just inefficiently.

Pilot Talents and build combinations in 1e became more powerful and unbalanced in the late meta, not unworkably so which is testament to the sound base design and ongoing diligence, but something that we have fixed by simply reducing choice, which in no way removes those elements from the game*, it just makes the smaller range of users shine as the now rarer exceptions.

In 2e the designers basically normalised what most did anyway. Upgrade types were dropped (generic Titles-incorporated directly into ships) or reduced (Mods, Pilot Talents, Droids), with a few types added (Force, Configurations).

The 2e Dial changes as much as any other element levelled the playing field between older and newer ships.

Some ships we use as examples.

Unchanged;

• The humble Tie Fighter stayed the same. The simple swarmer is fine as is, fast with 2 K-Turns and a Barrel Roll.

• The YT666 party bus, like the sluggish Lambda is unchanged, so it sits more in contrast with other improved ships.

• The space cow Lambda is unchanged. Not much you can do here or probably should.

• The YT-2400 already has 12 white moves.

Logically changed;

• The already nippy Tie Interceptor gets S-Loops, possibly the ship that would have had them first. This now has a comprehensive Interceptor suite of Roll/Evade/Boost/S-Loop/K-Turn. For the whole suite, the Lambda can even share a Target Lock.

• The Tie Striker had a rare Imperial 2/S-Loop, but now gets a speed 1 K-Turn instead of a 2 and gains 2/blues. It becomes the slow, but nimble side-shifter in contrast to the high speed arc dodger above.

• The cumbersome Tie Bomber gains a second K-Turn and 2/hard turns are now white not red. Still a little boring, but less so now.

• The Tie Advanced can now move 1 straight, gains 2/blue banks and Talon Rolls. T-rolls differentiates it from the slippery Interceptor confirming it as a line fighter.

• The lethargic Decimator now gets slower blues and some 1/red hard turns. Logical if unexciting changes. Big ships suffer if they cannot turn, so this one at least has some options.

• The iconic X-Wing gains Talon Rolls and 2/blue banks matching the 1e T-70, which makes up somewhat for no Roll or Boost. It can now push harder and turn better.

• The speedy A-Wing swaps a 3/K-Turn for S-Loops, a nice contrast to the X-Wing above and sharing the Line Fighter/Interceptor dynamic.

• The B-Wing gets a faster straight blue and a speed 1/Talon Roll. The close-in fighter feels complete and it can now bug-out faster in practical terms.

• The Y-Wing gains 2/blue banks, doubling it’s ability to clear stress and allowing it to use the Droid upgrade slot for more options than just R2.

• The YT-1300 gains a built in S-Loop. This was added in the later Falcon Title, so it makes sense to absorb it and fits with the flat ship profile.

• The HWK-290 is the most improved with more real speed (4/white from red), more agility with added blue, white and red moves and can Full Stop like other support ships. Finally the “dud” of the fleet gets the wings of a Harrier.

• The Starviper now looks for all the world like a slower Tie Interceptor with a couple more blue banks. Dalan also offers a Talon Roll variant.

• The Jumpmaster. Unlike it’s Rebel twin the YT-2400, the JM is heavily nerfed. It’s left handedness is made a little straighter, it’s white left 2/S-Loop goes 3/red and it’s right side red 2/S-Loop is gone. This makes up in some small way for us using the card as printed.

• The Firespray like the other upright ships gets Talon Rolls insted of a 3 K-Turn and gets a straight blue, which fit so well and match the similar B-Wing.

• The Kiraxz has it’s 5/K-Turn changed to a 2/Talon Roll, so like the X-Wing only tighter and it gains a blue straight. A small shift on paper, but a major change in style.

• The Headhunter gets another straight blue and a second K-Turn, so it slips into the hole left by the now improved X-Wing.

• The IG Aggressor is unchanged except for a white speed 4 added. This fits as it was strangely slow at 3/green.

  *

The idea is simple.

Stick to 1e in normal or restricted formats, but use 2e Dials.

Only cosmetics change on the table and then only slightly, but I guess you also need to be a little blue-green colour blind and mentally insert “blue” into the text on the rare occasions it is needed.

Frankenstein’s Monster?

It works extremely well in BB although we tend to leave that simplified space as is, but it hums in Classic or Legends, giving a good spread of differentiation across the ships and a more logical and consistent feel to their moves. It does make some upgrades redundant, on some ships at least.

The tall “uprights” like the B-Wing or Firespray and the more conservative line fighters now turn tight and square, all the flat arc dodgers have angled S-Loops as their special thing and even the most staid of ships often have a little more to offer. The few ships that are nerfed are a balanced fit also.

In 1e Bare Bones the stand-outs are the Tie Striker with a 2/K-turn and 2/Loop, Kihraxz with a 4 and 5/K-turn, IG Aggressor with 3/Loop and 4/Turn, Juno in the Advanced with 3, 4 & 5/K-turns, the A-Wing and Interceptor with 3 and 5/K-turns and the JM5000 with 4/turn, 2/loop (and one is white).

In 2e the Interceptor, Aggressor, YT1300 and A-Wing all get a K-turn and a Loop, the Striker gets an even shorter K-turn, the Bomber and Z-95 both get a second K-turn, the X-Wing, Firespray, B-Wing, Kihraxz and Tie Advanced all get a K-turn and Talon roll. Only the JM5000 is nerfed.

Unlike other expansions in the reduced formats, it still champions good team flying, not uber-list building, it just allows harder pushing with more stress clearing moves and some easy alternatives to absent repositioning options.

This is new, very new, so it will be interesting to see what combinations will appear like Juno with multi speed T-Rolls!

*Pilots who are exceptions to the Action range or even Action order, those that add or subtract tokens, or have other “free” stuff are still there. Almost every element of the game has multiple forms, we just removed two or three layers of these, so no, not everyone can do everything, making those that do, the undisputed champions in their space.

**Still no Roll for the X-Wing or Kihraxz, but now two ways of turning hard.

Remembering A Past Not Shared.

One of my favourite wandering internet search pathways tends to be old X-Wing bloggers.

Stay on the Leader, Such an X-Wing Hipster etc.

I was reading a post today dated March 2017, a time of powerful pre-nerf lists like Manaroo, Triple Jumps, Paratanni, Fangaroo etc.

Good times, but times I missed.

X-Wing was a glancing blow for me, something I noticed, but only had a few chances to play. To be honest, I was not keen on pre-painted minis games, still entrenched in my bare metals.

To me also, Star Wars is less appealing than Trek which is odd as I saw the first movie at the theatre and it help me entranced for years, but the prequels and dearth of other SW around for the next decade or two allowed Trek to takes this space back.

I don’t play favourites to any great degree, just tend to get more excited by Trek stuff and seem also to respond more to big ships with crew than fighters (I often think Armada would have scratched my Star Wars itch completely, but that is a relatively recent purchase).

Star Trek Attack Wing, a game I came to late as well, was my way of honouring this and avoid the dearer and seemingly more showy X-Wing.

I also liked the scenario based game style of AW, something XW avoided for a more stand-and-fight, tournament style of game. I think the main deterrent to me was that play style. I needed a story to tell, a scenario to complete, not just an enemy to crush.

I still jumped when 2e was released, enticed by ridiculously cheap 1e TFA starters (x5) and a plan that had little chance of succeeding in hindsight, but well, I tried.

Anyway, back to the point.

Some things are perfect for a while.

X-Wing from release to about wave 8 in 2016 seemed to be the undisputed table top miniatures tournament game around. There were others, indeed this is the high water mark for these games like Wings of Glory, Sails of Glory, Attack Wing, Armada etc, but X-Wing had a consistently huge following.

Clever Action chains were the key, card combos both tricky and varied, but within that competitive sphere there was a sense of fairness. Almost anything went at this point and the community was healthy, friendly, committed and massive. Some people were still flying X-Wings and winning!

From then on, the wheels started to wobble a bit. Nerfing pilots and ships, even nullifying the print on cards, enforced limits on card effects, applying fixes that felt tacked on, sometimes even desperate, caused a clear split between casual and tournament play.

Action economy became the currency of the later game, anything that could increase options being golden.

The fun of course was discovering those combinations others had not and being the first to try them out. Even more fun was breaking those parameters and winning with a less than perfect squad. It was a good enough system with a large player base, but as the base shrank, so did the options.

It got more serious for some, less fun for others. It was all about exploiting the rules to the limit, waiting for the inevitable nerf to curtail the build, then finding the next big thing, no matter how unlikely.

Never a tournament player, especially when gamesmanship overpowers adherence to story and canon accuracy, this had limited appeal to me. As a tournament game it was a hoot, as a simulation it was also, but they were very different beasts.

For me, a generic ship builder game would have worked, but when theme is involved, I need it to feel right.

By the end, after an impressive wave 14 release, even the later movie was touched on, most of the expanded universe explored, a new upgrade class added (Tech) and layer on layer of fixes applied, the game was sick in some people’s eyes, broken in others.

I guess the question was, did the game reach a point of balance again, measured on the performance of the iconic original ships compared to newcomers, or was it past fixing? Like life, a game based on assembling variables cannot be perfectly balanced, but it neeed to allow any ship to have a place.

Two things may have changed this landscape at the outset. The first is separating the pilots from the ships (like AW captains) and possibly absorbing EPT’s into pilot profiles or making them Squad or Scenario Tactic cards. 2e has gone some way to fixing these, absorbing a lot of EPT’s, Titles and generic Mods into the ships themselves, but separate pilots would have been cool (or possibly even a build your own pilot system for tournaments, named ones kept for casual games).

The other is using scenarios, which allow the original concept of the ship to fit it’s situation, rather than always being a 100pt toe-to-toe scrap in a 3’x3’ space. A Tie Bomber has a job it was designed for and it is not as a fighter.

Attack Wing has these elements and is more stable as game, even if it is less balanced overall.

Our various modified takes on X-Wing are an attempt to get back to the core of the 1st edition game, not by ignoring everything released after wave 8, but by extracting the upgrades that cause the most obvious abuses and problems, thus diluting the purity if the core game.

If you look at the most powerful builds in the mid and later meta, they are built around EPT’s, generic Titles and Mods. EPT’s are at odds with pilot talents, Mods make unique ships less unique and generic Titles are a level of fix that sometimes caused as many problems as fixes.

Is it possible to recapture some of the buzz of the early game, or is it lost forever?

All of the games below use the cards as printed, no errata, including the Jump Master and Palpatine, others like Attani Mindlink are naturally limited to two, because I only have 2.

Bare Bones has a certain simple charm. Seven iconic ship types per faction, controlled, faction representative and built with limited upgrades (the ones that work are straight forward and that people chose). It is about building a relatively simple squad, then flying it. It serves both as a salve to jaded players and a good introduction to the game and heroes the ships and pilots as they were designed-as the exceptions to the rules.

Action economy is still as relevant, but it is effectively capped at the base + 1, with rare exceptions. The abilities for example of Kyle or Jan Ors to effect Focus acquisition is relatively more powerful in this space, even without Moldy Crow Title and Vader is exceptional with two.

Legends adds more names (the Legends of Rebels and the expanded universe), a few more upgrades (Named Titles, Ordnance, Crew) and effects like Ion and Cloak expanding the game to the ships with the basic 5 Actions + Cloak.

Prime adds more again, especially generic droids and crew. This space gets considerably more flexible, but also more complicated. It is starting to feel like the full game pre wave 10.

Expanded adds the bulk of what is left including single card huge ships, with only a few upgrades (generic Titles, Mods-except on huge ships and EPT’s still held back), because this format is the most prone to fall apart. More Action types allows more upgrades, so apart from the above, everything goes.

Classic is a little different, allowing EPT’s, but only in pre-builds and is limited to the squadrons featured in the three original movies (Ep 4-6). This is the true introductory format, allowing people with a Star Wars awareness to scratch that itch, learning the game as they go.

In Classic, heroes are made to fit the story, regardless of the rules.

There are a few head to head tournament formats like Aces High for well versed players keen to trick-out a ship to it’s full potential, limited in ship selection rather than upgrades. All upgrades are allowed, but only select ships like the X-Wing/Kihraxz/Tie Advanced or the top three or five fighters for each faction. This champions the late game developments in all their glory, without adding the complexity of the whole universe.

Full Noise is the whole game, warts and all. Nobody here plays that.

The beauty of this, like anything I guess, is relevance to the user. New players, vaguely aware of the game are as easily hooked as they were in 2015, but they have the benefit of a controlled and prescient pathway.

Of these, Classic feels most like Star Wars to outsiders, Bare Bones is the least intimidating for squad building and Legends sparks an awareness of the larger universe. Interestingly, as more ships and effects are added, most of our small play group gets less interested. It seems it is enough.

2e?

Little interest here.

I have most of it, but stopped collecting recently. The TFA period is the priority, something that was half completed in 1e and integrated into the earlier period (I hate that), so 2e for TFA and 1e for original made sense and it was well supported by conversion kit. Extracting TFA from 1e made even more sense.

When it got going, 2e started to service the later period very well, including the huge ships.

To me 2e is the tournament players game, balancing out the ships and allowing the designers more nerf flexibility, but for a casual gamer, it is a “busier”, more polished space. Even the mechanical language is more involved.

I would probably only add more if the Tie Aggressor and Rebel ARC-170 are re-released, for use with 1st edition of course and the later period still gets a look.

Sticking To The Script

X-Wing 1e, Bares Bones, Legends or Prime are our base-line for playing Star Wars, stripping the game down, replacing some elements in a layered approach to taste and playing the “old school” game.

Nothing against 2e, but 1e is just a great game and if limited it is relatively simple and balanced, it’s elegance shines through.

One upgrade type that is removed, is the Elite Pilot Talent, or EPT. These and generic Titles are the main “over-complicators”, along with Mods, which tend to level out ships and pilots and rob them of their uniqueness (Boost for example is a rare beast and Barrel Roll mostly an Imperial thing in BB, but basically anyone can have them in full X-Wing).

Classic and Legends do use 2e dials, offering a better spread of manoeuvres with a more balanced spread of S-Loops and Talon Rolls.

One form of the reduced format game that can have EPT’s is “Classic” concentrating on the three original movies, or more specifically the battles of Endor, Yavin and Hoth and the little skirmishes in between.

This is a chance to round out some pilots, allow them to be used as an introduction to 1e X-Wing, to scratch that “simulationist itch” and use some of those mostly neglected EPT’s.

It includes the Rebel Red, Gold, Grey, Green, Rogue and Blue squadrons and Imperial Black, Sabre (181 group), Obsidian and Scimitar squadrons, with the Imperial Guard and Omicron group, as well as the personalities present including the bounty hunters highlighted in the Empire Strikes Back.

Pilots are built out as squadrons of “quick” builds with EPT’s and named Titles where relevant. These are thematic and cosmetically consistent (meaning the card art fits the faction or ship) and the EPT fits the pilot.

Not all EPT’s are covered and not all pilots get one. Some, mostly skill 9 pilots might get more than one and points cost is not as big a consideration as the right feel. An effort was made to avoid the reflex driven and all too powerful tournament combinations.

These are more for rounding out characters than exaggerating their talents, the idea is to balance powerful pilots with mostly offensive or defensive Talents with something from the other side of the coin, not create over powered Action chains.

Vader (9) already gets two Actions to simulate his Force mastery, but he now also gets Determination for added Force discipline (and his portrait card) and Squad Leader, which feels right for his role as intimidating, but empowering leader. It also came in his pack.

Trench run anyone? Looks just like the card.

One of his wingmen Mauler Mithel (7) gets Snap Shot to enhance his already strong R1 bonus and wingman status.

Youngster (6) hanging around in the wings also adds more options here, duplicating his mentor.

Scourge (7) from Obsidian squadron now gets Opprotunist, so please ignore Back Stabber in the picture below. Vader’s wing men were getting all the love and Scourge is the better pilot and the sentiment fits better.

Juno Eclipse (8), the only other Tie Advanced pilot in Black Squadron (small stretch, but canon), gets Outmanoeuvre which plays into her post-dial jank Talent.

Soontir Fell (9) has a good Talent gaining a Focus when stressed, but little opportunity to use it in BB. Avoiding PTL (A-Wing art and possibly a little too tournament powerful), he gets Daredevil and Predator, which either add stress for extra effect (adding a Focus) or make him simply more lethal.

Soontir feels more fleshed out with two EPT’s. Too bad for the luckless Y-Wing.

Turr Phennir (7) has a cool Talent gaining a Boost or Roll after an attack, but now he also gets Intensity as well for more, if limited effect.

Howlrunner (8) gets Swarm Tactics as is often the case, making her the Tie squadron enabler. This is a common X-Wing build, especially early on, but is not over powered and it fits the art.

Kir Karnos (6) of the Guard gets Expose, not because it is a particularly good EPT, more because it smacks of an Imperial Guards fanatical, aggressive commitment.

Those lovely red Interceptors.

Tomax Bren (8) gets Adrenalin Rush as his Talent is dependant on one-use EPT’s and red moves are rare for other Imperials in Classic.

Colonel Jendon (6) Ruthlessness (with a Heavy Laser Cannon).

*

Luke Skywalker (8) gets his portrait card from the base set, Deadeye, which seems to fit his “Use the Force Luke” bit for offence and it is his portrait card.

Wedge Antilles (9), the Rebel miracle-man gets Lightning Reflexes and Cool Hand, one to add survivability and re-positioning, the other to allow a once-off benefit from that (“I turn on a dime, I Evade or I Focus”).

Thought they had the drop on old Wedge.

Ten Nunb (8) the B-Wing ace gets Adaptability to help allow him to decide when to be in the activation stream. It is also the only EPT in the mix with a B-Wing featured and it is free.

Wes Jensen (8), with a decent offensive Talent like Wedge, gets Expert Handling to aid with his survivability and move options.

Ten (8) gets Stay on Target, which turns adjusted moves red (B-Wings have these in abundance, so it gives them some relevance) and it fits with his offensive talent.

Keyan……staying on target.

Jek (7) is given more reason to live (die?) with Wingman.

Han Solo (9) has a strong offensive Talent (re-rolls), but nothing to represent his slippery nature. Elusiveness is a fit (comes with the TFA Falcon) and also Trick Shot, which is a freebie and adds a sense of offensive cockiness.

Lando (7) gets Decoy, as a good support Talent (Lando is the Rebel support Falcon build).

Chewie (5) is a great fortress/blocker build, so he gets Draw Their Fire, becoming a bigger Biggs. He is built out with the two droids for extra staying power making him hard to hit and even harder to take down. I wanted to give him Selflessness (Wookie on the front), but it is only for small ships.

Green squadron is thin on EPT capable pilots without their generic Title, so Jake (7), a personal favourite, gets the primo one, Push the Limit. It is good and thematic on Jake, but not as dangerous as Tycho (absent) or Soontir (wrong art). At least someone has one of those crazy 1e Action chains and who better than a mad A-Wing jockey.

Watch this space.

Dutch Vander (6) is built out with a Synched Turret, so a perfect candidate for Marksmanship.

Horton (8), the often under used Y-Wing ace gets Saturation Salvo, making his Torpedo attacks more useful, especially against low PS swarms.

Dutch with a surprise or two.

*

The scum are a good place to line up both dedicated card art and some nasty, thematic combos.

Dengar (9) is an expensive pilot with Title (12 pts for “Punishing One”), so Crack Shot and A Score to Settle for 1 point total empower him, fit his legend and keep him under control.

Boba Fett (8) has a couple of EPT’s with basically his name (well picture) printed on them. Lone Wolf (Slave 1) and Fearless (Mandalorian pilot) both fit. His Talent of changing move (Imperial version-ignore the one below) is handy, but some extra controlled aggression suits him as well.

Bossk (6) get Rage, because, well, it’s Bossk through and through, as the picture suggests.

IG-88 (6) gets Intimidate. I was going to go for Calculate, but the image of Guri did not fit. The dial and his cold robotic brutality does though.

More fun in the 1e space, which just keeps giving.

Rebels Series, A Revelation

My Star Wars fix went a bit flat after the Mandalorian.

It was good, but it did not click with me and to be honest I did not see the attraction.

Andor was better, grittier and more fragile feeling, but a little dark for me.

Rebels was started one night when I really did not have anything else much to watch. I really just wanted some background on the X-Wing ships I have been obsessing over lately.

Taken before I got my Spanish Sabine’s Masterpiece captured Tie and English cardboard.

Series 1 was ok, enough to get me interested. The animation was fine, a little odd with the organics, but surprisingly good at machines, Storm troopers etc.

Into series 2 now and two things have happened.

Spoilers ahead.

Firstly, the story is evolving into a genuine Pre-quel to the three original movies. The large gap between the Republic become the Empire and the growing rebellion is being filled and not only are all the characters from X-Wing (Ketsu, Visago, Azmorrigan, Hondo etc) being explored, but also the Armada personalities I did not know (Sato, Asoka etc).

Secondly, the animation has lifted a level. The digital animation has gone to a more natural and vibrant look, the CGI ships etc are spectacular and the people are less wooden. I really appreciate the continuity and attention to detail.

Loving the excellent battle scenes, which include an ancient Clone tank vs Imperial Walkers, CR-90 Cruisers vs Imperial Gozanti and Aquitens light cruisers, an amazing display of Vader crewing through an entire squadron of A-Wings and more to come. Special mention to Hera in the first B-Wing ever used.

Three more series to come and I will assume it only gets better.

Most importantly, it feels closer to Star Wars than anything else I have seen lately and even makes me like the actual prequels a little more.

I'm Excited

My gaming mojo is back, which means my life is back in balance.

When one hobby becomes your job, another needs to step up, but last year, the one hobby/job became all, every other interest just fell away.

Bad sign.

Away Missions is not even here, but already I am working on ways of making it work for me and my small gaming regime.

The Borg are apparently unbalanced, especially if played badly. It seems the designers made a balanced game, you just need to sort your priorities and learn from your mistakes. One reviewer actually played (as Feds) one of the game’s designers (as Borg) and the game ended in an engaging draw. Before that the reviewer and friends had little to no luck with the faction.

Easy fix.

The “Borg Challenge” is an idea that basically has no such issue. Both players play the much more straight forward Federation (Romulan/Klingon etc) vs the Borg and then swap, the winner is the Fed/other player who scores the most points. The Borg are basically the blocker that is there to trip you up. This will do two things.

Even the playing field, allowing an even game both ways.

Allow both players to “get” the Borg and how they work.

After a few games of this, the Borg can be played as a normal faction, but I feel until then, there is probably no point. The Federation, Klingon, maybe less so the Romulans, are much more straight forward, more easily grasped. The Borg are the special little snow flake.

It may even be possible to play three way or 1 on 1 with alternating Borg interference.

This brings me to another thought.

Avoiding Marvel Crisis Protocol.

To me, MPC is a game that is so far off my radar, it will never, ever be played, bought, collected. Not denial-just denied.

There are a few reasons.

The product. Even for a long term war-gamer, used to buying uninspiring bags of metal with potential and discovering (or not), that potential, I will not be buying a game that needs (1) assembling and (2) painting in (3) plastic. I dodged the cool Batman game out a few years back for the same reason.

The cost and collectability, which will have potentially no real limit. Not another one, never again.

The fact I have a serviceable, possibly even inspired*, home brew game that cost me nothing but time using a system that seemed to “write itself” and a bunch of super cheap re-purposed Heroclix (these were so cheap, most cost less than their new bases).

Most are decent, they clean up better and the clear bases are perfect.

I am “Marvelled out”, like a lot of people. Not even the new RPG excites.

Backlog.

For once, attention is on the other things I already have that are calling to me. My hiatus last year sparked a desire to go with the bird in hand more than the one not. It is like I am re-discovering both old friends and ideas.

My zombie like purchasing of various games, without much playing or time invested has given me both an new appreciation of these things and a need to check the cupboard before I get too keen to buy anything (I avoided the odd duplication usually, but slipped once or twice).

Away Missions can claim a special place in my world and rightfully so, managing to not be that game, but excite me on every other level. MPC will never do that.

*The whole thing is based on a strength (number of dice) and skill/accuracy/penetration/speed value (type of dice) like 6x d6 with only the number of dice of the winner’s roll (being over the best roll of the loser or in excess of the dice that match the losers best roll), multiplied by an effect value (x1/4 to any value). The Hulk may have 10d8 fighting with a x3 damage multiplier, granny has 1d4 with a x1 dm, but an unwary Hulk may get caught out rolling all ten dice under grannies lucky 4 and she may land a surprising handbag swing-doing basically nothing but surprise/brag damage.

It is more likely the Hulk would remove her from this world at an atomic level, were he of a mind, but the system quickly and easily determines this and basically any other game effect from mind control to movement.

I can even aply a simple points systems to powers (# Dice x Dice type, so the above mentioned Hulk’s fighting would be 80 pts), and that led to a dice pool power, like Green Lantern’s ring or Dr Strange’s magic that has “X” number of points spent in different ways (60pt could be 6x d10, 10x d6, 3x d20 etc). It needs a lot of dice, but is fast and has basically no math. Throwing for example, may be another application of the Hulks 80 pt power.

Bare Bones. The Bones Part 3.

The Scum in Bare Bones.

So much variety, so many dirty tricks. The Scum lack a native speed 5 ship, but have plenty of manoeuvre options including S-Loops and through Dalan, a BB unique Talon Roll.

The Scum are the true “middle men”, sitting between the two extremes of solid Rebels and flighty Empire, with a little of each and some bespoke surprises.

The Scum are also split into sub-factions. Black Sun Cartel, Tansarii Militia, Binayre Pirates, Hutt Cartel and general freelance mercs and bounty hunters. The Empire and Rebels may take one faction and freelancers (up to less than half their total squad points). Two Scum factions may also combine with any number of freelancers.

The backbone of the faction, the quirky Star Viper, solid Kihraxz and cheap, but hard to ignore Head Hunter, all custom paint jobs.

The Kihraxz.

The main Scum fighter is the Kihraxz, basically their X-Wing equivalent, but with some important differences. One of the main ones is the ability to field 5 basic ships, something the X-Wing and Tie Advanced cannot do (in BB).

Low Rent Thugs

100pts 5x Kihraxz; Cartel Marauders

The Z-95 Head Hunter.

Cheap enough to match an eight ship Tie Fighter swarm in theory, the reality is the 12 point option (Binayre Pirate) is limited to 4 by canon. Regardless, the ability to mix Missiles and Illicit upgrades means they can take on a ton of different facades.

Binayre Pirates

40 Fire Spray; Kath Scarlett + Flechette Cannon

60 4x Z-95; Binayre Pirate + Flechette Torpedoes* + Black Market Slicer Tools

*The Binayre Pirates were actually fitted with Flechette Cannons as a cost expediency, but Flechette Torps will work much the same for the same cost.

Binayre Pirates at work.

Star Viper.

The lethal killer butterfly that is the Star Viper brings some nifty moves, as well as a rare Boost, making it one of the closest things the Scum have to an interceptor in BB. It may look fragile, but has the same constitution as the Kihraxz and some of the many pilots are interesting. The Black Sun quintet is solid, but Thweek (mimic) and Dallan (Talon Roll) are even better.

Black Sun Rises

35pts Star Viper; Xisor (7) + Plasma Torpedoes

36pts Star Viper; Guri (5) + Advanced Proton Torpedoes

29pts Kihraxz; Black Sun Ace (5) + Glitterstim + Cluster Missiles

YT-666

The ship is ugly, slow and sluggish, but cannot be under estimated. The “party bus” takes three Crew, something the Scum have some decent options in. With Illicit upgrades, it can deploy Inertial Dampeners for a full stop three times in a row with a double application (Jabba) and it’s own full stop. A wide arc Primary, even wider with Eval and a high constitution.

Big Guns Blazing

50pt Aggressor; IG-88B (6) + HLC + ABC + Fire Control System

50pt YV-666; Moral Eval (6) + Heavy Laser Cannon + IG-88D + Dengar

Sharing is caring

Firespray-31

The ship that Boba Fett flew is also the ride of several names. Plenty of Ordnance and Crew options, even without its two Titles, the Firespray is a brute (see below and above).

Not a nice spot, but thankfully for the JM5000, Fang Fighters are not in BB.

JumpMaster 5000 (as printed)

Yep, leaving it as printed, which makes up for the lack of Title to some extent. It is a weird ship and in BB a powerful one. You see it has a limp, favouring left hand moves, even a white S-Loop no less, but suffers on the right. This is also the only ship in BB that can take a Salvaged Droid, limited to three named choices in BB.

Right Hand Man

43pts JM 5000; Dengar + 2 Plasma Torpedoes + Slicer Tools + R4-B11 + Bossk

56pts Firespray; Boba Fett + Heavy Laser Cannon + Thermal Detonator + Concussion Misslies + Inertial Dampeners + Latts Razzi

IG-2000 Aggressor

What an interesting ship. It is slow it seems, but a green 3 on a large ship with Boost, is basically speed 5. The dial is as green as a young spruce, it has an Evade, Systems, Bomb and two Cannon slots. The Cannons are interesting as some have a “hole” in their range, so the IG’s can have a close and long range option.

Auto-bots Are Go

50 Aggressor; IG-88B + Heavy Laser Cannon + Autoblaster Cannon + Fire Control System

50 Aggressor; IG-88C + Advanced Sensors + Seismic Charges + Mangler Cannon + Autoblaster Cannon

The Scum feel very different to the other two factions, being big ship heavy, capable of fielding Illicit slots and some interesting Pilots.

Away Missions....... What The Heck?!

Games fall into two categories with me now.

1) They need to be completed, learned, played, although I am tending to stick now to games that are done, so completed is over.

2) Games that need to go, because quite simply there will never be enough time.

There is no third category.

3) New games that excite and become an almost reflex buy.

No third category.

So, Star Trek Away Missions by GF9, what the hell?

I was looking for an excuse to buy some cheap X-Wing 1e and Attack Wing ships and starters, so I searched Star Trek on a site, thinking they might spit up an Attack Wing ship or two.

A box came up that looked suspiciously like an Attack Wing boxed set, but had figures, so I assumed a Heroclix spin-off or the like.

No, something different.

I googled.

I found this;

The figs are actually grey and blue, but I will likely go for a muted, stylistic or cartoonishly neat paint job.

In a world of countless games it seems, what made this themed, two person, militant looking game a compulsive buy?

I reviewed as I do, plenty of sites before I am content as it goes. The only game I have read about lately that has better reviews, but I have not bought is Inis (still on the back burner), but this seems more approachable. Inis looks to be more of an acquired taste, this can appeal to anyone, even non-Trekkies.

It is sort of a skirmish game, sort of a simple board game, part deck builder, part themed homage, part simplified RPG, even a little like a smart dungeon delver-with phasers.

It will appeal to many because unlike the packaging suggests, it is not a skirmish game, the play is deep, but straight forward, the games are short (3 rounds-fixed) and I feel it is flexible to some degree.

Want to handicap one player? Free points at the games start can help (the Borg in the starter seem to be weaker, but opinions vary). Want to change the base vibe? make it longer or play until a points total is reached. It is a tight and focussed game, but has some elasticity. I am already even playing with the idea of a Borg stopping the Federation before they reach their points total competition game.

If you want to be smart, sneaky, violent, diplomatic, technically more savvy, even a few of these, there is a play style and faction for you.

There are also several factions and sub-teams within this, with plenty of scope for future expansions (DS9, Voyager, Enterprise even).

The Riker team is about repair and tech, Picard more diplomatic, The Duras sisters are sneaky, the Romulans even sneakier, the Borg are well…… the Borg, able to assimilate your characters out from under you and Gowron is genuinely militant.

Apart from this, the factions can build decks to suit play style better, so a more militant Riker, a more tech savvy Picard, a less “kill them all” Gowron (well, maybe not).

*

Negatives, drawn from mostly positive reviews, some team lop-sidedness, for which there are already fixes noted and I am not a huge fan of flatly even games, a lack of fighting, because it looks like a skirmish game, but again that is Trek and who needs another skirmish game?

There are a few minor component issues, like are difficulty in telling the characters apart, which will be fixed by paint jobs, the highly characterised figures themselves, which I actually like as they take the serious edge off the game to attract more players, the peg boards and card quality, but nothing huge and no one thing all reviewers picked on.

There is fighting, but just like the series, the most combat orientated episode was not a war movie, but more of problem to be solved.

Lastly, there are only two boards (so far), but they are modular, possibly even interchangeable (A half assimilated Federation ship? Not sure yet until I get it).

Wish list.

I wish that GF9 had released the original Series crew as another full set with new boards a suitable enemy (maybe Gorn) and that they included the bespoke dice with the expansions, rather than make them a hard to find add-on (I only discovered them when I missed the Duras expansion and went looking, then had to check they were even needed, not just spares*).

maybe a Voyager box with Hydrans or a second Borg team and a second Voyager team set with the other team?

I also thought more team building would be good, but funnily enough the two characters I thought should be switched in the Federation teams, actually can be (Gordi/Shelby), because team Specialist are interchangeable***.

The fact is, there is no perfect game, but this one ticks most of my boxes. It is fun, fast easy(ish) to learn, deep without being over complicated**, highly re-playable, themed, not a true war game, not a true deck builder, not a “the starter is a start, but not really” game, it is complete and varied enough now, with a slow and reasonable growth path and above all, it got me excited.

*You actually do not need any special dice, but they are thematically on point.

**Everything you need to know ids on the card or the character board.

***Gordi on the tech themed team, Shelby adding security to the diplomatic mission just seemed better.

Bare Bones. The Bones Part 2.

The Rebels counter the Empire with a more balanced, if less exciting fleet. Every ship has a Target Lock and Shields, their Pilots, Droids and Crew excel at Squad synergy, but few have re-positioning options and they are on average the slowest fleet (three ships with Red speed 4).

Fly straight and true and get them on the first pass, or possibly pay the price.

The X-Wing.

Name-sake ship of the game, the X-Wing was one of the first to fall away from the tournament circuit. Lack of re-positioning meant the upgrade slots were usually spoken for, which later fixes helped address, but still, too messy and/or too late.

In BB, partly created to re-empower this ship and other early ships in their original form, the X-Wing becomes a stable, if unexciting ride for a bunch of strong pilot Talents (remember no EPT’s, so Pilots rule supreme) and named Droids to match. Flying X-Wings well is a matter of a good supportive squad dynamic, so it is a perfect teaching tool.

Red Right Hand

34 X-Wing; Luke (8) + R2-D2 + Advanced Proton Torps

32 X-Wing; Biggs (5) + R2-F2 + PT

33 X-Wing; Garvin (6) + R5-P9 + PT

The classic trench run crew

The Y-Wing.

The Y-Wing has two roles, Ordnance carrier or a Turret platform. Twin Laser Turrets are in BB and are one of the most powerful upgrades and Turret upgrades are limited to the Rebels only (YW and HWK), making them effectively a cheap Decimator or Falcon “lite”, but with no generic Droids (FAA/R2’s), Mods or EPT’s, they are sluggish and predictable at best with a true tri-colour dial.

Does not seem fair, but it’s the classic turret vs arc dodger dynamic.

Y-Not

28 Y-Wing; Dutch (6) + Plasma Torpedoes + ABT

72 3x Y-Wing; Gold Squadron Pilot (3) + Plasma Torps + ABT

or

Phew Phew

38 Y Wing; Horton + TLT + R5-P9 + Proton Torps

31 Y Wing; Grey Squadron Pilot (4) + TLT + R5-K6 + Plasma Torps

31 Y Wing; Grey Squadron Pilot (4) + Blaster Turret + R4-D6 + Advanced Proton Torps

The A-Wing.

This is the Rebel exception, like the Tie Striker is to the Empire, zipping around the table like it just don’t care. Like the Interceptor, the other manoeuvre king, the A-Wing stands out in BB as it should as the undisputed speed boss.

Fun.

With Jake Farrell (double Boost or Roll/Boost), or “no stress” Tycho, or even exceeding the 3d Agility ceiling with Gemmer and the only ship in BB that can take Proton Rockets (limited to Rebels), it is the special little snowflake that makes a Rebel Squad fun.

Not Easy Being Green

29 HWK-290; Kyle (6) + Jan + TLT

27 A-Wing; Jake (7) + Proton Rockets

44 2x A-Wing; Green Sq Pilot (3) + PR

The B-Wing.

Second in the fun stakes for the Rebels, the B-Wing is the close quarters knife fighter. It has more red moves than green, but specialises in close quarters and also has the distinction of having more Shields than Hull. Advanced Sensors with their dial allows them to avoid losing their Action to a common red move and FCS or Accuracy Corrector often aligns with their payload.

Blue Day

100 4x 25 B-Wing Blue Sq Pilot (2) + Advanced Sensors

(optionally it can have 3 and Roark or Kyle from below)

The HWK-290.

Even more so than the Imperial Lambda, the HWK is primarily a support ship, sporting the only single digit Primary, a slow and poor dial, no re-positioning, not even a K-turn and minimal defence stats. What it has going for it is cheap cost, some of the best supportive Pilots and Crew and a Turret upgrade. BB makes even this ship a contender in a balanced squad.

Training Day

24 HWK-290; Roark (4) + Blaster Turret

21 X-Wing; Rookie Pilot (12/2)

22 Blue Squadron Pilot (12/2)

2x 17 A-Wing; Prototype Pilot (12/1)

The gang is back in town.

The YT-2400.

The mini-Falcon, the YT-2400 has several interesting features. Without Title, it offers the dual punch of a 2 dice Turret Primary, a Cannon and Missiles, a solid constitution, some nimbleness with 12 (!) white moves, and a Crew slot.

Me And Mini Me

53 YT-1300 Han + Chewie + C3-PO

47 YT-2400 Eaden + Luke + CrM + ABC

The YT-1300 (modified)

Not the full “Millennium Falcon” we know and love, well not Titled as such, it is still the big bruiser of the Rebel fleet. The popular and strong Han + C3-PO + Chewie build is possible, a little less potent without Title and Chewie and Lando add their own directions*. It can be a super support, a hunter killer, a fortress or a combination of these.

Who stands out in BB for the Rebels?

R2-D2 (Droid), C-3PO, Jan and Kyle (Crew and Pilot),

*No Chewie because in BB, we often us a simplified combat system with standard hits beings against shields, critical hits applied to hull only, which nullifies some pilots and upgrades. It is optional, but often used for simplified games and makes little real impact.

Bare Bones. The Bones Part 1.

1e X Wing Bare Bones (again), some quick sample squads.

The Empire

The Empire has the most distinctive fleet, made up entirely of agile-fragiles or brutish-bruisers. They are the fastest fleet on average (although they also have the slowest ship), the most manoeuvrable with nearly universal Barrel Rolls and Evades on their small ships, but also have the few ships that lack Target Locks or Shields.

We tend to play BB to a scenario with canon logical squads, which can stretch the Empire a little, functioning best with a mix of ships. Some of these may seem rigid and a little simplistic, but in BB, they are all viable.

The Tie Fighter.

Why is it, the bad guys like German WW2 Tiger tanks, WW1 Dr1 Fokker Fighters and Imperial Interceptors get our radar pinging?

The basic Tie Fighter is the Imperial staple, the original swarmer (which is a thing again in BB), but also the ideal squad filler. These things move well, have no real manoeuvre weaknesses and can Roll dual K-Turn and Evade.They “pop” easily and are offensively tame, but are cheaper by the dozen, with empowering pilots and speed.

The Obsidian Wall

18 Tie Fighter; Howlrunner (8)

15 TF; Night Beast (5)

15 TF; Winged Gundark (5)

4x 13 TF; Obsidian Squadron Pilot (3)

The classic boosted swarm. They work best in small self supporting sub-groups.

The Tie Striker.

The late comer to BB, the planetary defence fighter is as different to the Tie Fighter as you will get. Slow, but highly manoeuvrable, the Striker gives an Imperial squad a very different feel. The only ship outside of a few Scum able to execute S-Loops as well as a rare speed 2 K-Turn, it likes to and can stay close. Still no shields, less agile than other Ties and the slowest ship in BB, this thing hits hard and twists and turns like few others.

The Tie Interceptor.

The Interceptor is a Tie Fighter after a commando school regime. The only ship in BB with natural Roll, Boost and Evade Actions, as well as more green moves than most, it can be hard to nail down.

Offensively, it is basically the same as the Striker, but most of the Pilots are arc dodgers.

Raiders of the Dodged Arc

25 Tie Interceptor; Turr Phennir (7)

27 TI; Soontir Fel (9)

23 TI; Lt Lorrir (5)

24 TI; Tetran Cowell (7)

The Tie Advanced.

The Advanced breaks away from the previous ships in a few key areas. Unlike most it has a Target Lock, Shields and some Ordnance making it a natural Imperial equivalent to the X-Wing. The Homing Missile is limited to the Empire in BB, taking the place of the Advanced Targeting System upgrades that BB bans (no Titles).

The Black List

34 Tie Advanced; Vader (9) + Homing Missiles

17 Tie Fighter; Mauler Mithiel (7)

18 TF; Dark Curse (6)

16 TF; Back Stabber (6)

14 TF; Wampa (4)

The Tie Bomber.

The only true Ordnance platform in BB, the Bomber is two Tie Fighters stuck together, becoming a much less slippery aship, but gaining a TL action and 5 Ordnance slots as well as both ship’s Hull points.

How much you want to load them up with is tricky and very dependant on a sound squad strategy, but with no Ordnance safety nets in this form of the game, these are the only ships able to send sustained and varied pain at their enemy.

Cluster Flock

21  Tie Bomber; Deathfire (3) + Cluster Mines

27  TB; Gamma Vet (5) + Cluster Mines + Cluster Missile

2x 26 TB; Gamma Pilot (4) + Cluster Mines + Cluster Missiles

The Lambda Shuttle.

The iconic Lambda may have surprised early X-Wing players, offering the first true support ship in the game. The Shuttle is slow, but can pack a Cannon and a System upgrade and two Crew, all a stretch for the Empire previously.

The Pilots offer the now much rarer, thus more enticing, support options in BB like sharing TL’s with the bulk of Imperial ships that lack them, drawing enemy TL’s from these fragile ships or take a friends Stress like a passive Biggs allowing them their many Actions. They also add a tough and cheap ride to the powerful Crew options*.

The VT-49 Decimator.

A brute in BB, the Decimator is like a Falcon that did too many supplements or the mommy spider to the Interceptor babies. The only ship in BB with no Agility without help and one of only two with a three dice Primary Turret, three Crew slots (so Palpatine and Vader can share a ride), Bombs and Torps it is a squad defining ship.

Legends of the Empire

45 Lambda; Col Kagi (8) + Reinforced Deflectors + Palpatine + HLC

55 Decimator; Admiral Chiraneau (8) + Proton Torps + Vader + Kallus

So, five varieties of tadpole and two frogs. The Empire has all the elements needed to make strong and varied squads, but builds can seem limited, especially with three ships unable to take upgrades in BB (No EPT’s, Mods or Titles).

Who is special in BB?

Palpatine (as written), Soontir, Vader (Pilot and Crew), Howlrunner, Juno, Jendon, Cluster Mines, and Homing Missiles.

How Bare Bones Is The X-Wing Cupboard?

Bare Bones X Wing is exactly that, the game stripped back to the bits that matter, the elements added only for the game, not for simulation of the story or a game true to the games original elegant concepts, are removed.

So, looking at some of the ships in the game, what is left?

The X-Wing, the namesake of the game and possibly the most recognisable fighter (or tied with the……. Tie?) is the best example of what is what went wrong.

Repositioning is the big issue with some of the early ships. The X-Wing has a decent dial, nothing wrong with it, but it lacks the ability to reosition as an action. No Roll, no Boost, not even an Evade, it can Focus or Lock, or sacrifice it’s action for a K-Turn.

Fixes were many.

Flight Assist Droid, Vectored Thrusters and Engine Upgrade, S-Foils, Expert Handling all addressed the issue in one form or another, but felt redundant or tacked on. These became so confusing, along with Integrated Astro-mech, now considered a standard fit-out that the Title Renegade Refit was created to allow two Mods and cheaper EPT’s. Layers upon layers.

This type of thing was the catalist for second edition.

Pilots can change that and in BB, they have the right type of feel for the game. Empowering some to break basic game conventions, Talents are now the primary exceptions to most rules. Luke get a cheap Evade to simulate his up to now dormant Force powers, Garvin shares Focus like a good leader, Biggs draws fire (maybe he should have been named Will), the rest have mostly offensive benefits, like stripping targets of their defences or gaining free TL’s.

Droids are next, playing the role of the Rebel point of difference.

In BB, we have settled on named Droids only, for two reasons.

The logic of an ace pilot getting a droid that may give them an edge, but then miss out on the equally useful manoeuvre or other benefit the generic Droid gives rankles, so the choice was to drop the generics or drop the named.

For a while Flight Assist and Targeting were the only choices, simple and effective. The X-Wing would get FA and the Y-Wing took the Targeting, but not always if packing Blaster Turrets. Limited, but effective. Too limited.

We even toyed with adding just the most basic Mods, but the pullover started to unravel and the original BB concept was under threat.

We went named in BB for variety and to story support. Matching Pilots to Droids just made sense. It also kept the ships in line with their equivalents as the Tie Advanced and Kihraxz were given no such life line. Basically, each named pilot can have a running mate, often as they did in the movies.

The other less imperative consideration was a desire to live with the ships as designed, with called out rare exceptions rather than blanket fixes being allowed. Why have a ship with no Roll and Boost option take a Droid that provides them to each ship? Makes no sense.

Ok, so eight named pilots give the ship some rule breaking exceptions, nine named Droids add more, Torpedoes can add punch, but otherwise the humble X-Wing as made.

Anything else?

Support.

Add Pilots like Lando, Jan and Kyle or crew like Jan, Kyle or Leia and you have more exceptions. With the Rebels in particular, team synergy is paramount.

Now doesn’t that feel right.

This may result in a ship that seems pretty underwhelming or even boring, but remember, BB is designed to even out the playing field and give new gamers a fair go as well as cure X-Wing tournament fatigue.

There is a lot to be aware of in the full game, often enough to give even a moderately experienced player an edge and some builds can defy logic. Wings of Glory, Blue Max etc get by without masses of upgrades, even this reduced offering is more than most.

This is and always was the base line, so how do others compare.

The Kihraxz fighter, the Scum answer to the X-Wing came a later, but still suffered from later game neglect and some drastic fixes. These fixes came in the form of three-reduced cost Mods with Vaksai Title. Talk about a blanket answer to any future issues.

A strong triplet, even stronger as a quintet.

The Kihraxz is otherwise a slippery version of the X-Wing. It has similar stats, a second speed 5 K-turn, the lack of a 1 straight and tighter turns standing out. It has better Hull, but weaker Shields (A Scum trend).

Points of difference, but otherwise similar over all.

Pilots are more aggressive, predatory even. Talonbane has a clean and efficient combat edge, Viktor Hel struggles in this form to get his to trigger, so he switches to a stand-off then strike than close stalking. Graz works well, Jostero may be even better, the Black Sun Ace is just a decent pilot now and the Cartel Marauder gets to enjoy its 5 ship squad advantage over it’s equivalents.

The major differences come in Illicit replacing Droid and Missiles instead of Torpedoes.

In BB, upgrades are reduced or factionally limited to popular, straight forward and BB relevant ones, but the Scum have plenty to pick from and with no named ones, unlimited choice. There are also a handful of named Salvaged Astromechs and Systems, but ships that use these are few.

Like the Rebels, anything beyond these options is supplied by support ships. Not team players many of the Scum take rather than give, but there are synergies that break many constraints.

The Empire?

The Tie Advanced is the Imperial equivalent to these.

The easiest way to empower the Advanced is a cheap Tie Fighter wingman.

The Yin to the other ships Yang, the Advanced sacrifices one attack dice for an Evade, Barrel Roll, speed 5, agility 3 and a better overall Dial. Not a bad deal.

Hard hitting is traded in for much harder to hit.

It does not get Systems upgrades without its Title, but X1 is a little too powerful and a generic Title. As well as a different dynamic to the X-Wing and Kihraxz, it has several advantages over lesser Tie’s with Ordnance, a Target Lock and Shields to it make it a better match for it’s direct competition.

So, why no love?

Like the X-Wing, it fell away from competition when better and more appealing ships were launched and the X1 Title was hidden behind the Imperial Raider Huge ship expansion price wall, making it for some a $100 card.

Vader is a stand out, now even more so in BB and the other pilots are also allowed some long awaited appreciation.

The Empire also gets Advanced can fit Homing Missiles, restricted to the other factions and a good fit for the “Advanced” Imperial.

Support for the Advanced and other Tie’s is sparse but powerful. Palpatine and several Lambda Pilots, and a few Tie Fighter pilots, Vader (Crew) and Kallus all empower them more or less.

These are the most reliable, but possibly most pedestrian ships in BB.

Other ships?

Every ship in BB is filling a specialist role. The Tie Interceptor (agility), A-Wing (speed), Tie Bomber (payload), Y-Wing (Turret), Tie Striker (close quarters), Star Viper (arc dodging) etc, all have their “thing” and unlike in full noise X-Wing, they retain their points of difference.

The agility king vs one of the only Turret packing small ships.

It sometimes feels to me like the core ships and pilots were designed very harmoniously to fit the movies character roles, the other elements were added later for the game alone and I get that.

Building the perfect squad and winning comps is why some come to the game, but that quickly drowned out the other reason, which is simulation and casual play.

Yet to disappoint or show it’s cracks, BB has some dud squad builds sure, but few and the culprit is often a poor plan or play. Even the soft expectation that each squad comes with a “please explain” does not seem to limit players from enjoying their games.