Overstuffed market?

[Aart Brouwer]

Ok my tuppence worth, what makes a good set of rules

Very well - but what if no one in your area agrees with you?

This topic is not about anyone's preferred ruleset, it's about the insane amount of new rules and how to find your way in them. There are obviously a lot of clones out there and you don't want to spend your hard-earned money on yet another bland, generic ruleset interspersed with loads of eye-candy. Like I said my answer would be to compromise: talk to your gaming buddies, listen to the veterans, work out what suits all of you and then have fun together.

Cheers,
Aart

[GordonY]

Nice looking book Ben but like I say its trying to cover too much, at one end you have smooth bore muskets firing volleys and at the other water cooled machine guns, kinda hard to get rule mechanisms to cover those kinda differences in tactics.

Aart, mostly its solo gaming and a fortnightly visit to the local club, so anyone agreeing with me or not is fairly moot and my tuppence worth was really for Leon as he was asking for what people would buy.

The stupid amount of rulesets is getting even more stupid, for example first we had Saga, then strangely enough supported by Gripping Beast Dux Britaniarum then the same week Osprey release Dux Bellorum, I can see a lot of confusion going on with the last two titles.

[Aart Brouwer]

Aart, mostly its solo gaming and a fortnightly visit to the local club, so anyone agreeing with me or not is fairly moot.

I see. I like to go solo sometimes and then I'm very picky. For WWII I won't solo-play anything else but Crossfire, and I can't see myself solo-playing anything else but Maurice for the Nine Years' War. Hurrah for the many new rules of the last ten or fifteen years, I wouldn't want to be stuck with Scruby's or DBA.

Of course it takes some time to work out choices. I've been reading rulesets for the ECW/TYW for a year now and none seemed to have 'it'. Then Warlord came up with their fast-play Pike & Shotte rules, most of my mates were enthusiastic about them, so I decided to stick to P&S with a few tweaks.

So the huge number of rules on offer doesn't bother me at all. The more the merrier, as long as I can pick my favourites.

Cheers,
Aart

[sebigboss79]

Adding myself to the call. I want all rules in one book, preferably Hardcover. If it is SC I want a handy format like A5. Colour is optional but most of all I want the rules to be BALANCED. Not a Nottingham style "Ãœberarmy of the month because we want to make more $$ from you" game.

Works in the short run but looses serious gamers with budgets over time.

@Leon: I cannot speak for every potential rulewriter but both routes are viable.

If you are significantly new or different with your ruleset you have to convince people WHY those changes are good for the game and the gamer.

The easier route is to look around at the market and take all the good stuff, wrap it in a new ruleset (easier said than done) and sell it.

A good example of a fast to learn, easy yet good ruleset is done by Mantic with their Warpath ruleset.

[DaveH]

Got to say I'm amazed by the numbers of sets of rules being released these days.

Personally I want historical accuracy and period feel so I prefer period specific rules.

My main favourites are the Too Fat Lardies rules and RFCM rules from Peter Pig, though I do like some of the skirmish type games from Two Hour Wargames and Ganesha Games.

[Hertsblue]

Surely too much is better than too little? When I look back to when I got interested in wargaming in the mid-sixties there was Featherstone, Grant and who else? WRG were a breath of fresh air when they came along in the early seventies (and I write that in all seriousness). The plethora of rulesets now available reflects the interest in the hobby and nobody forces the wargamer to shell out megabucks for the latest offering. Try the freebies at www.freewargamesrules.co.uk and if nothing floats your boat, have a go at writing your own. 

[Malbork]

Interesting topic.

I tend to think that there are far too many rulesets floating about and certainly a lot them seem to be very derivative of what has gone before yet on the other hand this si probably better than the old days when there was just one or two.  When we started playing at school in the 70s, we had a choice Don Featherstone's H&M rules, WRG's and a set written by the history teacher and tweaked so that it was impossible for the French to win;  I also found a set published by Shire books by an Arthur Somebody which did away with dice and for some time my friend and I played these but they never caught on in a big way. Must have a moth-eaten copy somewhere.

Like many of us I buy quite a few rulesets to read and see what's new(ish). My ruleshelf is full of old sets which I've pilfered for ideas or army lists without ever actually using. Anyone remember Shieldwall? Bought it, readt it, never played it  Ditto retinue. I like DBM army list books but not the rules and still tend to play old Armati,; despite having invested in the eye-candy that is FoG. I agree with those who say that whatver the rules, they should be in one book/volume and not used as a revenue driver with lord knows how many supplements for this that and the other.  Piccies are good too; I bought the Warhammer Historical Waterloo set when it was on special offer and while I'm not sure I'll ever the use the rules as is, I've certainly drooled over the pics and made use of illustrations when painting Pendraken's Nappies.

Bascially when it comes down to it I'm with Sandinista. The main thing is to get the painted lead on the table, admire the set up and push them around for a bit while chucking a fair amount of dice (I like that ) and having some fun.

[Aart Brouwer]

I also found a set published by Shire books by an Arthur Somebody which did away with dice and for some time my friend and I played these but they never caught on in a big way.

That wouldn't be The Complete Brigadier by J. Grossman, a rare 1982 ruleset for the 1680-1880 period that did away with dice and other traditional trappings? It came in a box with roster sheets, an introductory booklet that contained Grossman's complete philosophy of wargaming, another booklet with battle rules, and a set of cardboard symbols for infantry, cavalry etcetera which you could use on a pre-printed map. I bought two box sets mainly because I was fascinated by his purist theory and mechanisms. They're still on my shelf, awaiting the day when someone in the neighourhood is caught by the same bug.

Probably a vain hope.  

Cheers,
Aart

[kustenjaeger]

Greetings

This is a topic I wonder about quite a bit.  There's a very wide range out there and they cater for very different tastes.

I started to list the rules I've bought over the last few years but stopped as it wouln't convey much other than my likes.   Given the price of rulesets I'm generally fairly picky and generaly like to see them first - though I'll get most TFL rules anyway as they are often good at inspiring new periods (as if I need that).   

It really does depend what you want.  I tend to prefer rules that are focused on playing scenarios, are fun to play but are firmly rooted in the history of the particular period.   For example, I was really put off the other day by an article on Warlord's new Bolt Action rules where Rick Priestley set out an example of a British force for the game - this was a mix of normal infantry and Royal Marine Commandos for a platoon level game.   Now obviously that's fixable by making sure you only use consistent forces but it's a bad sign for me and didn't encourage me to spend money on it.

Regards

Edward

[Ben Waterhouse]

That wouldn't be The Complete Brigadier by J. Grossman, a rare 1982 ruleset for the 1680-1880 period that did away with dice and other traditional trappings? It came in a box with roster sheets, an introductory booklet that contained Grossman's complete philosophy of wargaming, another booklet with battle rules, and a set of cardboard symbols for infantry, cavalry etcetera which you could use on a pre-printed map. I bought two box sets mainly because I was fascinated by his purist theory and mechanisms. They're still on my shelf, awaiting the day when someone in the neighourhood is caught by the same bug.

Probably a vain hope.  

Cheers,
Aart

Arthur Harman I seem to recall; I had a copy that disintegrated years ago. Shire also did "Wargames Stationary" Order sheets etc. - very high tech for 1972 or thereabouts...

[Ben Waterhouse]

The other thing is the financial balance between core spending -little lead men; and peripheral spending rules, uniform books yet more paint schemes etc. I have to concentrate spending on the core now...

But always better too many rules than not enough.

[Malbork]

Arthur Harman I seem to recall; I had a copy that disintegrated years ago. Shire also did "Wargames Stationary" Order sheets etc. - very high tech for 1972 or thereabouts

A bit of googling, since I'm not at home, has reminded me that is was in fact Arthur Taylor's Rules fro Wargaming and published in 1971.

I remember the Wargaming stationery - we could never afford it so tried to copy the sheets with pen and paper and get our dads to "xerox" them at work.  The rules consist of a general set of land warfare rules with period add ons - ECW, Marlborough, Nap, ACW, WWII and naval stuff too. He also sets out his philosophy of wargaming like Aart says Grossman does (have to google him next) - something along the lines that wargaming should be like chess, you learn a few basics for all time and then use them as best you can during the game.

Think I may dust them off and give them a try out for my new ECW venture. One thing I recall is that things seemed predictable in that a bigger unit would always defeat a smaller one no matter what but this could have been partially due to our teenage interpretation of the text, we didn't bother too much with tactics.

Another ruleset that the googling threw up was Shire's English Civil Wargaming, so I should try to find my copy of that too....

[Last Hussar]

That wouldn't be The Complete Brigadier by J. Grossman, a rare 1982 ruleset for the 1680-1880 period that did away with dice and other traditional trappings? It came in a box with roster sheets, an introductory booklet that contained Grossman's complete philosophy of wargaming, another booklet with battle rules, and a set of cardboard symbols for infantry, cavalry etcetera which you could use on a pre-printed map. I bought two box sets mainly because I was fascinated by his purist theory and mechanisms. They're still on my shelf, awaiting the day when someone in the neighourhood is caught by the same bug.

Probably a vain hope.  

Cheers,
Aart

That sound like a game I'd love to try - pity you're not closer.

[Bernie]

Just found my equally battered copy of Arthur Taylor's Rules for Wargaming. Packs a punch that in 68 pages you get 8 sets of rules for 40pence.

Arthur Harman was the prolific writer of all things Horse & Musket in wargame mages a few years back and still an afficianado of the Kriegspiel.

The Shire set of wargaming publications were far more easy to understand to a young kid (young once) than the legalise of the mainstream wargame rules of the time which tended to be written for competition games and tended to cover wide historical periods.

Even as a kid I thought rules needed to be specific to a war: ACW, Marlborough, Napoleonic.

[Hertsblue]

Arthur Harman was the prolific writer of all things Horse & Musket in wargame mages a few years back and still an afficianado of the Kriegspiel.

Wasn't he involved in the "Game of War" TV programme with Paddy Griffith some years ago?