http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2014/11/14/immersing-yourself-in-your-game/ (http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2014/11/14/immersing-yourself-in-your-game/)
Came across this nifty little article on increasing immersion in mini wargaming. Apparently going to be an ongoing series. Thought it might be of interest to a fw folks here.
So, obviously anyone whose familiar with my posts here knows I'mpretty big into immersion in RPGs, but the prospect is much trickier in mini wargamming. It is the reason that I will only play with people who paint their minis, and that I put a lot of effort into scenery. What about yourself? Do you immerse while wargamming at all? How would you describe the difference between that and RPG immersion? Any helpful tips of your own to increase immersion?
How well do the minis have to be painted to satisfy you? I'm not very good, I can only manage one or two solid colors, some unmodified basic skin color, and a metal texture over weapons. stuff like facial details or a wooden grip on a gun, forget about it.
IMO an immersive minis wargame is a lot like an RPG. I've played 'immersive Warhammer Battle' - but it was immersive because I was essentially run RPG-style by myself and my son; eg the battles were from prior in-game events, the forces were not point-buy balanced but rather reflected what the sides should be able to field. A lot of emphasis on world-simulation over gaminess, I guess.
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;798788How well do the minis have to be painted to satisfy you? I'm not very good, I can only manage one or two solid colors, some unmodified basic skin color, and a metal texture over weapons. stuff like facial details or a wooden grip on a gun, forget about it.
Oh I don't have high standards. Most things are being viewed from a few feet away on a tabletop. I just don't want to see shiny metal or an entirely grey plastic army across from me. My game group has a "3 colours minimum" standard. Some guys are really into painting, others just make sure you can tell the difference between whats skin, fur, or metal, and I'm fine with that.
Quote from: TristramEvans;798782How would you describe the difference between that and RPG immersion? Any helpful tips of your own to increase immersion?
I think immersion happens whenever you see events in world-terms rather than as an abstract game, and it's a continuum rather than either/or. Chess is completely non-immersive, hex & chit wargames are usually only slightly immersive, 'sand table' type miniature wargames are more immersive, and single-character RPGs tend to be the most immersive.
There can be a sense of in-world immersion in a minis battle even where there is no real player identification with a single characer in the battle. What seems to matter is the sense that there is a world outside the battle and the battle represents events in-world. So campaigns tend to be more immersive than one-off battles. Point-buy balance reduces immersion - this is true with RPG 'CR balanced encounters' too.
BTW I remember playing the original Medieval Total War videogame and feeling 'immersed' during some of the battles - usually plausible events and a sense of dread/apprehension were major factors. I never got this feeling playing the later games, I think possibly the faster battles and weaker AI contributed; the better graphics made no difference - I'd agree that minis don't need to be beautifully painted for immersion.
Does you spend time looking at the battle at eye level (for the minis)? And if so does that increase your immersion?
Sadly, I was able to achieve more immersion with ASCII text Rogue than with Larn with its own custom character set. Perhaps there's something like the uncanny valley that blocks immersion more if something falls just short (like unpainted miniatures) rather than a lot short (like cardboard counters in hexes). We use miniatures in D&D really just to track and communicate where people are; but when the DM selects inappropriate miniatures it tends to be more distracting than when a die is used, and distracting is probably close to spoiling immersion.
Frankly I think that article is a load of drivel.
"We all create narratives in our minds about our little army men and women,"
Um... no, we don't. I'm playing a game. I depend on the referee to give me the context needed if any. Give me the situation, my forces, and the victory conditions.
Note that I am almost 100% a historical miniatures gamer. If you tell me I'm part of Patton's 3rd Army in January 1945, I know what that means.
"Focus" I'll buy. The article seems to use immersion to mean "building a story or backstory beyond the immediate game." And no, I don't do that.
Quote from: Bren;799045Does you spend time looking at the battle at eye level (for the minis)? And if so does that increase your immersion?
Scrolling in definitely increased immersion in Medieval Total War, :) but I pretty much keep a bird's-eye view playing Warhammer. Might get down for a street-view look very occasionally. Same with RPGs using minis.
Quote from: rawma;799073Sadly, I was able to achieve more immersion with ASCII text Rogue than with Larn with its own custom character set. Perhaps there's something like the uncanny valley that blocks immersion more if something falls just short (like unpainted miniatures) rather than a lot short (like cardboard counters in hexes).
I agree about uncanny valley effects - but I prefer the simple graphics on current version of ADOM (a Roguelike) to the old pure ASCII version, I guess that's my sweet spot. Anything much more detailed would be distracting - I suspect holographic minis would likewise hit the uncanny valley for me, but nicely painted ones are great and I don't really mind unpainted.
I agree that inappropriate minis can really hurt immersion. I keep some empty bases for when I don't have a good mini, they seem to work fine.
Quote from: Old Geezer;799079Frankly I think that article is a load of drivel.
"We all create narratives in our minds about our little army men and women,"
Um... no, we don't. I'm playing a game. I depend on the referee to give me the context needed if any. Give me the situation, my forces, and the victory conditions.
Note that I am almost 100% a historical miniatures gamer. If you tell me I'm part of Patton's 3rd Army in January 1945, I know what that means.
"Focus" I'll buy. The article seems to use immersion to mean "building a story or backstory beyond the immediate game." And no, I don't do that.
Okay, you don't do that. So it's obviously not aimed at you.
Weird from a guy whose all about OD&D.
Quote from: Bren;799045Does you spend time looking at the battle at eye level (for the minis)? And if so does that increase your immersion?
No not unless I'm checking for LoS. My "PoV" during a game is as a general surveying the battle I suppose.
Quote from: S'mon;798953I think immersion happens whenever you see events in world-terms rather than as an abstract game, and it's a continuum rather than either/or. Chess is completely non-immersive, hex & chit wargames are usually only slightly immersive, 'sand table' type miniature wargames are more immersive, and single-character RPGs tend to be the most immersive.
Yeah I'd concur with all that.
Quote from: rawma;799073Sadly, I was able to achieve more immersion with ASCII text Rogue than with Larn with its own custom character set. Perhaps there's something like the uncanny valley that blocks immersion more if something falls just short (like unpainted miniatures) rather than a lot short (like cardboard counters in hexes). We use miniatures in D&D really just to track and communicate where people are; but when the DM selects inappropriate miniatures it tends to be more distracting than when a die is used, and distracting is probably close to spoiling immersion.
See weird thing for me is I dont ever use minis in RPGs I find they distract from my immersion. But with Wargames I'm in a very different mode of thought I suppose.
Quote from: TristramEvans;799295See weird thing for me is I dont ever use minis in RPGs I find they distract from my immersion. But with Wargames I'm in a very different mode of thought I suppose.
THIS.
I totally get this. With mini wargaming well crafted terrain and painted minis help me connect with the forces and scenarios. I simply don't understand playing with unpainted (or half-assembled!) figs, books for hills and an upended oatmeal container as some kind of silo. You can get a far more satisfying experience from hex and counter games than a mess like that. Needless to say, I don't play much anymore- more painter and modeller these days now.
If I tried to do the same with rpgs, I would drive myself nuts. I'd feel like I'd have to model new terrain for many scenarios to satisfy the completionist in me. Plus, characters' gear changes as they advance, and I'd constantly be converting just to keep up. Too many variables involved and I prefer to picture the game in my mind's eye anyhow.
Quote from: TristramEvans;799130Okay, you don't do that. So it's obviously not aimed at you.
Weird from a guy whose all about OD&D.
I'm okay that other people are whom it's aimed at.
But I don't see a lot of connection between playing a historical miniatures game and playing OD&D. I play them specifically because I get different things out of them. I get different things out of model railroading than I get from either of them. I don't know why that should be weird.
I'm not a wargamer, but ... a possibly related thought?
When I make a character in a MMO, I often want to create a distinct look, 'personality,' and history of that character.
I then proceed to play the game ignoring all of it. I never RP, the most it impacts anything is maybe going for an item that works with my 'look.'
But having all those ideas around helps my enjoyment. It's almost 'implicit' roleplay.
I imagine that wargaming is like that in that you want the look, feel, and style that connects you to that period and those events. But... you don't roleplay or do any 'stories' beyond the actual rules. The style is spice, not the point.
Does that seem accurate, wargamers?
Quote from: Will;799355I'm not a wargamer, but ... a possibly related thought?
When I make a character in a MMO, I often want to create a distinct look, 'personality,' and history of that character.
I then proceed to play the game ignoring all of it. I never RP, the most it impacts anything is maybe going for an item that works with my 'look.'
But having all those ideas around helps my enjoyment. It's almost 'implicit' roleplay.
I imagine that wargaming is like that in that you want the look, feel, and style that connects you to that period and those events. But... you don't roleplay or do any 'stories' beyond the actual rules. The style is spice, not the point.
Does that seem accurate, wargamers?
I think you're on to something.
If I'm fighting a battle as the US in WWII I want Sherman tanks. I may have to live with the fact that the Easy Eights are, in fact, the same model as the M4A1 75, but I don't want to be using Matildas or Mk. IIIs for my Shermans. I'll applaud somebody who does even a halfassed job with card and knife to make a Priest model, but if a good Priest model is available that's better.
But once the game starts, I'm all about using my forces to achieve my objective. That tank is "that tank there," not "Sgt. Rock of Easy Company".
Quote from: Old Geezer;799352But I don't see a lot of connection between playing a historical miniatures game and playing OD&D.
Thats whats weird, since OD&D was born out of the style of wargaming being talked about and OD&D itself originally identified as a fantasy wargame.
(shrug) anyways, not suggesting you should play this way or that immersion should have anything to do with your historical wargames. Personally, I like treading the line between wargame and RPG, which is why my preferred system is WFB 3rd Ed.
Quote from: S'mon;798953There can be a sense of in-world immersion in a minis battle even where there is no real player identification with a single characer in the battle. What seems to matter is the sense that there is a world outside the battle and the battle represents events in-world. So campaigns tend to be more immersive than one-off battles. Point-buy balance reduces immersion - this is true with RPG 'CR balanced encounters' too.
You know, I was coming here to say much the same thing. For me, immersion in minis wargames is about running goals, tactics and troops, rather than rules and scenarios.
1) Campaigns is a good one. Replenishment can be anywhere between very generous and utterly awful (no new troops at all, or only green units to replace shot-up veterans). Suddenly the battle is no longer between the last three guys on the table...
With tougher replenishment rules, you find that in-game goals can become more fluid - fight or escape? Breakthrough or attrition? Force mauled - take to the battlefield, choose your defensive point, or offer token resistance at a chokepoint to inflict damage and slow the enemy?
2) Casualties. The little fellas are not just removed from the board when they're - someone has to get them out because they may have to fight in the next game. You want to get them off the board!
3) Imperfect command and control. Your guys refuse to charge a machine-gun nest, or are pinned down and desperate - what are you going to do Lieutenant?
4) Fog of War/no bird's eye view of the battlefield or scenario. Where are their troops? What reinforcements do they have?. Plays best on the computer, or a double-blind game (sadly you need a referee and three boards...), but scouting and uncertainty become important. You can also play multiplayer against a referee, or PBEM (Descent works a bit like this too).
A lot of modern games do try to include Command and Control and Fog of War effects. But there's always more you can try.
- Play with the lights out and the occasional burst of torchlight to reveal enemy units.
- Have a supreme commander on each side play with a map away from the board, and the actual table commanders move on his orders and relay the situation back to him verbally.
- Have games on multiple boards affect each other.
- Or... have multiple players on each side, and give each player different goals/orders/victory conditions. That can ruin any game from colonial expeditions to bug hunts. Bonus points for a scenario in which they have to co-operate in order to have ANY chance of winning...
When you read about some of the things that Paddy Griffiths and some of the more experimental rules groups got up to... only using periscopes to view the games table, or playing out tank battles sitting inside a cardboard box with small vision slits cut out... there's a lot you can do.
Honourable game mentions:Two Hour Wargames are run on reaction tables - you play as the leader, but your troops have their own idea about what's doable.
Science vs Pluck - British expedition to the Sudan against the Mahdi, playing out the entire campaign on a "rolling table" with multiple players against a gamesmaster. The tribesmen are out there in their thousands and are experts at ambush...
Two Fat Lardies rulesets use "blind" unit markers on the table. At the start of the game, all unit markers plus a couple of dummy markers move together on the turn of a single card. As units are "spotted" by the enemy, figures are placed on the board or the unit is revealed as a dummy. After that, the unit moves on its own card, not with the rest. A very elegant mechanism for "friction" and fog of war on the tabletop.
Quote from: Will;799355I'm not a wargamer, but ... a possibly related thought?
When I make a character in a MMO, I often want to create a distinct look, 'personality,' and history of that character.
I then proceed to play the game ignoring all of it. I never RP, the most it impacts anything is maybe going for an item that works with my 'look.'
But having all those ideas around helps my enjoyment. It's almost 'implicit' roleplay.
I imagine that wargaming is like that in that you want the look, feel, and style that connects you to that period and those events. But... you don't roleplay or do any 'stories' beyond the actual rules. The style is spice, not the point.
Does that seem accurate, wargamers?
Hmm, there's a strand of wargaming that sees the minis and the table as bringing your own private world to life. In that case, the rules themselves are, amongst other things, a vehicle to generate interaction and stories. It's a more structured story than, say, the Bronte kids' "Gondol" stories, which were also inspired by toy soldiers.
So yes, your nicely painted models and beautiful table are critical to your enjoyment of the thing, but there's a whole slew of backstory and campaign development. You see it in wargaming blogs - there's a continuum from sites that are purely for painting and building all the way through to those that are pure campaign writeups. I think there's a good reason that GW can sell books full of fake-historical "fluff", heraldry and special characters.
I wouldn't say that the "living narrative" aspect is particularly dominant, or even common, but it has its claws in many of us. Look at successful games like Mordheim and Necromunda and the depth of campaigns those can generate.
More recently, there's a delight of a game called Dux Britanniarum, which charts the rise and fall of petty warlords in the historical age of Arthur. Again, the battlefield action is central, but the spoils of battle can be used to fortify your homeland, hire mercenaries and aim for the throne. It's a game where you WANT to record the campaign as it progresses, with characters dying, new troops appearing, fortune and reversal from battle to battle.
Yknow, I didn't kill the thread on purpose...
Quote from: Momotaro;799459You know, I was coming here to say much the same thing. For me, immersion in minis wargames is about running goals, tactics and troops, rather than rules and scenarios.
1) Campaigns is a good one. Replenishment can be anywhere between very generous and utterly awful (no new troops at all, or only green units to replace shot-up veterans). Suddenly the battle is no longer between the last three guys on the table...
With tougher replenishment rules, you find that in-game goals can become more fluid - fight or escape? Breakthrough or attrition? Force mauled - take to the battlefield, choose your defensive point, or offer token resistance at a chokepoint to inflict damage and slow the enemy?
2) Casualties. The little fellas are not just removed from the board when they're - someone has to get them out because they may have to fight in the next game. You want to get them off the board!
3) Imperfect command and control. Your guys refuse to charge a machine-gun nest, or are pinned down and desperate - what are you going to do Lieutenant?
4) Fog of War/no bird's eye view of the battlefield or scenario. Where are their troops? What reinforcements do they have?. Plays best on the computer, or a double-blind game (sadly you need a referee and three boards...), but scouting and uncertainty become important. You can also play multiplayer against a referee, or PBEM (Descent works a bit like this too).
Campaigns do indeed add a whole new level to wargames. Anybody who wants to understand the gaming roots of D&D could do worse than to read Tony Bath's "Running a Wargames Campaign."
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;798788How well do the minis have to be painted to satisfy you? I'm not very good, I can only manage one or two solid colors, some unmodified basic skin color, and a metal texture over weapons. stuff like facial details or a wooden grip on a gun, forget about it.
Go micro-scale, and at usual viewing distance hardly anyone would notice if you did more! In most periods, that's also a more realistic approximation of what you would see as a general, as is the larger number of models per unit (and sometimes closer approach of ground scale to figure scale) that tiny pieces facilitate.
It may also make it affordable to have multiple depictions of a unit, more accurately representing various formations. One variation on that theme is diorama pieces with elements of both sides more appropriately arrayed for a given situation than more common fixed basing systems allow.
Quote from: Phillip;800458Go micro-scale, and at usual viewing distance hardly anyone would notice if you did more! In most periods, that's also a more realistic approximation of what you would see as a general, as is the larger number of models per unit (and sometimes closer approach of ground scale to figure scale) that tiny pieces facilitate.
It may also make it affordable to have multiple depictions of a unit, more accurately representing various formations. One variation on that theme is diorama pieces with elements of both sides more appropriately arrayed for a given situation than more common fixed basing systems allow.
I'm actually about to start a 15mm army of Ratmen (they are so crazy cheap my friends and I are seriously considering switching to 15mm for Warhammer), and I was wondering about painting. There seems to be precious few guides to painting 15mm models as opposed to 25/28mm. I was considering going with the Army Painter "Dipping" method.
Quote from: TristramEvans;800462I'm actually about to start a 15mm army of Ratmen (they are so crazy cheap my friends and I are seriously considering switching to 15mm for Warhammer), and I was wondering about painting. There seems to be precious few guides to painting 15mm models as opposed to 25/28mm. I was considering going with the Army Painter "Dipping" method.
As an aside in case it wasn't clear, by "micro-scale" I meant the neighborhood of 1/300, 1/285th, 6mm, etc., down to 2mm. The 10mm scale might be a splendid compromise if there's a suitable range for the subject.
Outside of fantasy, 15s have long been the predominant wargame figure scale. Here's a link to start:
http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=251629 (http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=251629)
Try "painting 15mm" in Google.
(For cheap, I went for plastic 1/72 myself, but it's not so cheap on table space and the selection is pretty limited.)
New here in general. But this is a topic I can comment on a lot, given I worked in a GW store for a while, and I am developing a wargame, while having played a number of different games and read a few more.
Immersion can happen, but it really does need a campaign, and a certain type of player, who is not out to win at all costs, and instead sees each battle as part of some on going narrative.
Now I think there are certain minis games that do this better than others, because the narrative is built in. For example, Journey Wrath of Demons, and Hybrid, have missions, which the players take control of opposing sides in (or which they are playing against a form of AI), and so playing through all the missions builds a narrative.
Now, for how this fits with other games. Well for stuff that GW makes, your own conversions, colour schemes and even the way you model the bases, builds a tone and theme for the army. They are all elements that say something about this army. Even not using certain units does the same.
In games like Warmachine and Hordes, this is a bit harder given Warcasters and Warlocks are all named characters. But themed forces, that get certain benefits are fun to play.
That brings me to the use of minis in rpgs. I really only got back into Warmachine and Hordes (and wargaming in general) after a 8 year break (having quit GW), thanks to the new edition of Iron Kingdoms. And there I have found having a selection of models, painted, with decent terrain (terraclips is great), has helped with immersion into the setting and the game. The models are not just generic fantasy figures. They are figures that are based directly on the setting. For my wife, this has helped, especially for combat scenes (the only time the models or terrain gets pulled out - IKRPG is not a dungeon crawl), because then she has a measure of where things are and what her character can do.
I would also posit that it is not just the game, but the individuals playing that game. I rarely don't want to be immersive, and if I get buy-in from the other players that's fantastic.
It's easier with some wargames than others, but in the right conditions (i.e. the right collection of other players, history, booze, whatever) I can even get immersive with something like Settlers of Catan.
I'm not me, I'm a representative of "Green", and our short history of oppression by 'Yellow' and 'Red' will shortly be avenged.
The buy in from all players is critical. To the point that you can enjoy your own misfortune. I have witnessed too many times grown men literally cry and storm off when their "unkillable" army featuring expensive Forgeworld tanks, gets annihilated in a round of shooting.
Quote from: dr_ether;804536The buy in from all players is critical. To the point that you can enjoy your own misfortune. I have witnessed too many times grown men literally cry and storm off when their "unkillable" army featuring expensive Forgeworld tanks, gets annihilated in a round of shooting.
Wow, wargamers vary.
I now play almost exclusively historical miniatures of the type with a referee. And bad die rolls or losses are accepted with grace and a shrug. Next time it will be your turn.
I find I don't mind losing as long as everyone is playing well. My team losing because somebody does something stupid (usually disobeying orders and ignoring all advice as they do so) makes me want to scream "I WISH THIS WAS A REAL WAR SO I COULD HAVE YOU SHOT YOU STUPID BASTARD."
I've just seen a lot of stupid shit happen working in a GW store, and worked a a few tournaments, and well, he level of player etiquette is appalling.
Now, I will say, if you want that sort of game, Warmachine and Hordes are great, given a very tight rules set and well developed tournament scene, with a good amount of focus on scenario play. But, tournament play is boring to me. Plus I just don't have the cash for it all. To play in that you need 2 good collection for armies, at least. While I have collected 6 armies that are much smaller (50 pts is standard tournament game size but I play 35 pts because it is quicker). And that means I have a fun collection of models for the rpg.
And given that my regular opponents are those that I have got into the hobby, it means we have developed and fostered a rather relaxed gaming atmosphere. Plus I have, where possible, made terrain, bought good quality terrain etc, which again all lends to making the game more interesting to watch.
Currently I am reading up on the rules for Rackham's game, Confrontation, as it has been years since I played it, and I now have a rather great model collection for those games.
Quote from: Bren;799045Does you spend time looking at the battle at eye level (for the minis)? And if so does that increase your immersion?
Yes, but I use my 'reverse' periscopes to save my aged back. And yes, I tend to be very immersed in my games.
- chirine
Quote from: Momotaro;799459- Play with the lights out and the occasional burst of torchlight to reveal enemy units.
- Have a supreme commander on each side play with a map away from the board, and the actual table commanders move on his orders and relay the situation back to him verbally.
- Have games on multiple boards affect each other.
- Or... have multiple players on each side, and give each player different goals/orders/victory conditions. That can ruin any game from colonial expeditions to bug hunts. Bonus points for a scenario in which they have to co-operate in order to have ANY chance of winning...
Your list is very good, but it's a lot older then most people might think...
1) naval night battles in 1978, and my recent night battle lit entirely by player-character lanterns - photos on my Photobucket page;
2) my space campaign at the University of Minnesota in 1980;
3) Prof. Barker's Tekumel game groups in the late 1970s;
4) 'Braunstein', by that nice Major Wesely.
Great post, too! Thank you!
- chirine
Quote from: chirine ba kal;804620Yes, but I use my 'reverse' periscopes to save my aged back. And yes, I tend to be very immersed in my games.
- chirine
:) So not just me then. For the looking that is. I haven't played miniatures since my back aged.
Quote from: chirine ba kal;8046211) naval night battles in 1978, and my recent night battle lit entirely by player-character lanterns - photos on my Photobucket page;
2) my space campaign at the University of Minnesota in 1980;
3) Prof. Barker's Tekumel game groups in the late 1970s;
4) 'Braunstein', by that nice Major Wesely.
Oh absolutely, these things go back ages! In many ways, the older I get the more revolutionary the Braunstein seems...
And I've seen the amazing photos of your games from way back (and am very jealous of your gaming room!).
Quote from: Bren;804624:) So not just me then. For the looking that is. I haven't played miniatures since my back aged.
I've found having a higher playing surface really helps. My miniatures table stands 3'8"; not having to half-bend over while moving makes things so much better. (I'm fortunate that my flgs has six 4'x8' tables at a similar height too.)
Quote from: Brasidas;804661I've found having a higher playing surface really helps. My miniatures table stands 3'8"; not having to half-bend over while moving makes things so much better. (I'm fortunate that my flgs has six 4'x8' tables at a similar height too.)
This. Being able to sit at the gaming table helps so much, both in terms of aches and pains, posture, and actually have more of a soldiers eye view in between your turns etc.
I put a good deal of work into scenery and paint all of my minis. Generally won't put them on the table unless I have a decent paint job on them. I'm not great at painting precision, but do very well with patterns and work at adding details and this is where the immersion comes in.
I also work at color coordination with wargames try to make the uniforms accurately depict what was really used with respect to color and detail. I also like adding lots of non-military detail.
For example the 1776 Cape Cod Saltbox house is properly grey with yellow lead-glass windows and a grey shingle roof. There are water barrels and chickens right next to the house, along with woodpiles and extra tools. There's a guy that looks a lot like Ben Franklin sitting on a log stump just outside the front door.
Details like this, with split rail fences, and farmland plots around the house really enhance the immersion...
Same with other games... Shots from my Traveller game last weekend for example:
(http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t90/awi1777/Traveller/Traveller3_zpsf379a216.jpg)
and
(http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t90/awi1777/Traveller/Traveller4_zpsd84e60f0.jpg)
(http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t90/awi1777/Traveller/Traveller5_zps20de7b34.jpg)
Sweet!
Same, I won't play with unpainted stuff typically.
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-qJ5pcT2je-M/U7l9LbRJjpI/AAAAAAAAX0c/WtICjIlmfpc/w983-h553-no/DSC_0033.JPG)
Hey, I see someone I wouldn't expect on this forum. I see you write for FASA now. Are all those books coming out for the Revised line of Fading Suns?
The miniatures look nice btw. A friend of mine maybe wants to get into wargaming, so I thought I might take a look at this topic.
Edit: Forgot to mention my name on Shadownessence was Red Devil.
Quote from: jan paparazzi;804775Hey, I see someone I wouldn't expect on this forum. I see you write for FASA now. Are all those books coming out for the Revised line of Fading Suns?
The miniatures look nice btw. A friend of mine maybe wants to get into wargaming, so I thought I might take a look at this topic.
Edit: Forgot to mention my name on Shadownessence was Red Devil.
Yeah I guessed :P
All the stuff I have written will be for Fading Suns Revised.
With regard to minis I have a whole load on my flickr (and on the podcast blog). Recently recorded a batrep for the minis board game Hybrid.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVQz95ElUOw&list=UUKWD_vN0XRJML_Wt0gw1eSQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NWh2nebksA&list=UUKWD_vN0XRJML_Wt0gw1eSQ
Nice. Well, I see you around. You can ventilate anything on here, because there is hardly any moderation. The most popular games on this forum are TSR D&D, Cthulhu, Star Wars D6 and Classic Traveller. And don't mind the Pundit when he is a bit hyperbole.
Quote from: chirine ba kal;804620Yes, but I use my 'reverse' periscopes to save my aged back. And yes, I tend to be very immersed in my games.
- chirine
Sadly, "immersion" is one of those words with no fixed definition and some very odd assumed meanings. Some people have said "I literally get so immersed I no longer see the room I am sitting in, I see the actual fantasy world," which sounds a trifle... peculiar.
I myself prefer the term "engrossment."
Quote from: Old Geezer;805602I myself prefer the term "engrossment."
"Engrossment." Well you've made that abundantly clear. But those aren't the sort of games we were talking about playing. :p
Quote from: Bren;805614"Engrossment." Well you've made that abundantly clear. But those aren't the sort of games we were talking about playing. :p
Har de fucking har.
(actually, that's pretty darn funny :D)
Quote from: Old Geezer;805602Sadly, "immersion" is one of those words with no fixed definition and some very odd assumed meanings. Some people have said "I literally get so immersed I no longer see the room I am sitting in, I see the actual fantasy world," which sounds a trifle... peculiar.
I myself prefer the term "engrossment."
Ah! Like the terms 'story gaming', 'story arcs', and 'railroading', all of which have specific meanings for me and for my gaming - but which have very different meanings to today's gamer? :)
Quote from: chirine ba kal;805700Ah! Like the terms 'story gaming', 'story arcs', and 'railroading', all of which have specific meanings for me and for my gaming - but which have very different meanings to today's gamer? :)
Pretty much, yeah. And like many of those terms, the definition changes based on if the speaker is fur it or agin it.
There's a reason our high school debate coaches taught us "first, define your terms."
And to me, 'railroading' involves track and flanged wheels...
Quote from: jan paparazzi;804775The miniatures look nice btw. A friend of mine maybe wants to get into wargaming, so I thought I might take a look at this topic.
One of the hobby's dirty little secrets is that it's far easier and cheaper to get into than many would have you believe.
Free or demo rules, couple of boxes of 1/72 plastic figures and some stones from the garden on a coloured tablecloth - you can start for $20.
Plenty of great boardgames will give you a complete start with a pile of figures and a printed card gaming surface for under $100.
Quote from: Momotaro;805872One of the hobby's dirty little secrets is that it's far easier and cheaper to get into than many would have you believe.
Free or demo rules, couple of boxes of 1/72 plastic figures and some stones from the garden on a coloured tablecloth - you can start for $20.
Plenty of great boardgames will give you a complete start with a pile of figures and a printed card gaming surface for under $100.
I resurrected Necromunda in my area at negligible cost. The rules are freely available online (improved by dedicated fans in fact) and have great depth, so it only took two boxes of plastic Catachan Imperial guard, two metal sergeant figures, and four metal heavy weapon figures. I painted up two gangs in red and blue and I lend one gang to visiting guests. I turn random household garbage into ruined underhive terrain. Cost about 80 bucks.
Of course, things are much cheaper if you're not a stickler for WYSIWYG.
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;805898I resurrected Necromunda in my area at negligible cost. The rules are freely available online (improved by dedicated fans in fact) and have great depth, so it only took two boxes of plastic Catachan Imperial guard, two metal sergeant figures, and four metal heavy weapon figures. I painted up two gangs in red and blue and I lend one gang to visiting guests. I turn random household garbage into ruined underhive terrain. Cost about 80 bucks.
Of course, things are much cheaper if you're not a stickler for WYSIWYG.
I will more than likely indulge in resurrecting Gorkamorka next year, given how damned easy it is to get Orks, and these days fair play to GW, the truk kits come with all the bits that you would use to upgrade your mob vehicles through a campaign. Muties and Diggas are easy. And I think we finally have some decent plastic grots for a rebel grot gang. Just need to do conversions for the vehicles for them.
Homemade scenery is always best - it's amazing what a lick of paint can do to tin cans, old electrical bits and food packaging :cool:
One of the big questions about immersion in wargaming is what makes a game "immersive"? Nicely painted minis and a good layout, player actions or rules?
On the rules front, we've been playing Lion Rampant from Osprey recently. Simple set of rules for medieval skirmishes, with about half a dozen generic special abilities for flavour. And we've played fantasy (minus magic) with them easily - brute strength armies, skirmisher armies, rabble armies all play just about right.
It has some player input right at the start - you can make boasts that win victory points if you achieve them ("I shall slay your captain", "My knights will draw first blood").
As I turn into an Old Git, I find big rulesets with tons of special cases and exceptions, designed to capture flavour, just don't to it for me any more. I want simple emulation and the tactics to come from troop types on the board - not army building and interaction with the rules.
Not that those special rules can't be fun - my favourite is the commisar rule from 40k, where you get to make another morale save if you kill one of your own troops...
And yes, I'm in it for beautiful tabletops - I can do a decent layout but I just don't have the space to store the beautiful gameboards I'd love to build. A couple of boxes of generic and genre-related scenery go a long way though.
Then one thing I find hardest to emulate is the mindset of the time. I've mentioned fog of war and limited control, but how many players would steamroller their own troops to get to the enemy (Hannibal at Zama). Or "Caedite eos...".
How do other folks like to get the "feel" of the game?