Blame the TooFatLardies

[Derek H]

Is it just me watching my purse strings too closely, or are rules becoming ridiculously expensive. Even buying these as a pdf download they are forty quid as they insist on sending the hardback copy too - which seems to make the idea of downloading the pdf slightly pointless

The pdf version will be available on its own for £12.  

As somebody pointed out ages ago.  That will teach me to read the whole thread before commenting.

[Lardy Rich]

What an interesting thread! 

[Luddite]

Well, the TFL stable is very popular at my club and IABSM is regularly on at least one of the tables (almost every week it seems).

We tried them a good while ago in the (as yet) unfulfilled search for a decent 'platoon level' WWII ruleset....and, well, 'meh' summed it up.

Personally i hate the whole 'blinds' thing.  Like my toys on the table old boy.

However, one of my regular group has been persuaded to purchase the new & improved version and is currently absorbing its essence (in between rehearsals for his new band)...we'll be giving it a go (me with 'Eyebrow of Incredulity +5' firmly raised), so i'll let you know how we get on.

But as i said, rulesets are jolly expensive.  That said, i've splashed out about £100 on various rules this month and yet ended up playing a home-written set...  I must be mad...

[Lardy Rich]

Steve, I am not convinced that £20 for a set of full colour rules is expensive.  Gamers seem very happy to spend hundreds of pounds on figures, but when you ask them what game they are playing they answer "IABSM" or "Sharp Practice" (or FOW, or BKC or Rapid Fire).  In truth the rules that they are using are actually the cheapest part of the game.  The figures cost more, the terrain costs more, in some cases even the dice cost more.   Yet what is it that makes the game?  Surely the rules? 

Of course which rules you like is a matter of personal preference, I tend to find that people like the rules that reflect their own interpretation of warfare, so there will never be a "one size fits all" solution as we all interpret historical events in a different way.  I think that is a positive thing about the hobby, indeed I feel it displays a maturity that speaks well of wargaming generally. 

I can fully appreciate why you like to get your toys on the table ASAP, you have undoubtedly invested much time in getting them painted and based, so you want to see them in action.  From my perspective as a rule designer that doesn't really square with the concept of an "empty battlefield", so I am inclined to accept that troops remain hidden in a WWII game until they get into action, hence the Blinds.  That said, I do recognise that this is a matter of personal preference and I am not about to try to convince you that I am right and you are wrong.  In truth neither of us is right or wrong, we merely have different preferences. 

That said, "wooly 'back of a fag packet' rubbish" is a pretty harsh comment, especially when you have freely admitted that Lardy rules are played every week at Durham.  I suspect that is not a universally held view, would you concur? 

My own view on rules is that we are all paying far more than we need to pay.  Rules now seem to need to contain lots of pretty picture, lots of additional fluffy nonsense that actually achieves little (or indeed nothing) and we could actually return to black and white rules that sell for ten quicd (actually £12, I have the pecise costings) for about 64 pages.  However were I to produce such a product it would not get ANY reviews in the hobby press and it would therefore be starved of the oxygen of publicity that any commercial product needs to be successful.  I have long championed this position, but frankly I failed miserably.  So now we have produced a really high quality full colour set of rules (not a fag packet in sight, and most certainly not rubbish - please note Leon's report from Crisis whic tells you where the punters were packed around the table) and amazingly we are getting the reviews and the rules are selling like hot cakes.  So, don't blame the rule publishers for the prices, our production values are entirely customer lead.

Anyway, you feel free to have your eyebrow set at +5.  However, you may find that you enjoy the game more if you approach it with an open mind.  'tis your choice.  Either way, I hope you enjoy it. 

Cheers

Rich     

[Last Hussar]

I actually prefer the presentation of IABSM v3.  It is well laid out, the paper is good quality, and very readable.  Read Challenger II form the 80's.  Hopeless.May be cheap, but not good quality.

What I do like is there is fluff, but only to fill gaps.  Sure they could have started the next section, but this makes the layout much easier.

Go down the pubv with 6 mates.  Buy a round.  How much?

[Steve J]

Steve, I am not convinced that £20 for a set of full colour rules is expensive.  Gamers seem very happy to spend hundreds of pounds on figures, but when you ask them what game they are playing they answer "IABSM" or "Sharp Practice" (or FOW, or BKC or Rapid Fire).  In truth the rules that they are using are actually the cheapest part of the game.  The figures cost more, the terrain costs more, in some cases even the dice cost more.   Yet what is it that makes the game?  Surely the rules? 

I think £20 for a ruleset is good value for money, especially given the seemingly relentless way rules appear to be going down the GW route of a ruleset followed by inumerable supplements. This is especially true of FoW and by the look of it, Black Powder and Force-on-Force. But then these companies are businesses first and foremost, so I suppose this is how they can keep interest in their products and thus stay in business.

My personal favourite rules are the xxCommander series by Pete Jones; I get everything I need in one book for £20, there is no fluff and the core rules cover about 10 pages, the rest being examples of play and army lists. But then Pete has a full-time job so doesn't rely upon the series as his sole income. The rules are also backed up by a great Forum, with additional free downloads, FAQs etc. For me it just ticks all the boxes.

On the subject on the rules being the cheapest part of the game, a lot naturally depends upon the scale used and the size of games played. With FoW, the rules and supplements for one period, say NWE, would cost way more than a battlegroup if I was using Pendraken or H&R. I reckon I could still do it in 15mm with a bit of tweaking where the rules were 50%, the battlegroup 50% in terms of cost. When I bought RoE about 5 years ago, the rules and templates cost slightly less than than a re-inforced platoon with support in 28mm. Now if I did BP in 28mm, then the rules are by far and away the cheapest part of the game.

So, that's my two penneth for what it's worth .

I have had a look at the Lardies website as a result of this discussion, and I must admit the rulesets do look good. If I ever get the chance to watch a game in action, I will. No one down this neck of the woods plays any of the games I'm afraid.

TTFN.

Steve J. (Not sure if I'm the Steve at the start of your last post Rich?)

[sunjester]

I played the new edition of IABSM on Tuesday with Last Hussar, and I have to say I was very impressed. We played Scenario One "North of Caen"had an really enjoyable game (well I enjoyed it with my Germans).

My prefered WW2 rules are BKC in 10mm, although I do occasionally dabble with TW&T in 20mm. While i won't be chucking BKC out I can see myself playing IABSM quite a lot in the future. Next Friday we will be trying another scenario out with some tanks.