2019-01-22T11:39:48+00:00 Nick Drage urn:md5:49176 Dotclear urn:md5:cb162335085b1bf570b73f8846b5afde 2017-02-25T03:46:06+00:00 Paul <p>An interesting read Nick. I remember the need for more wargamers from a hobby background being flagged up at Connections 2015. This caused great excitement amongst those of us who weren't being paid to attend, but it seems to have gone quiet again.</p> <p>The idea of XP is a topical one as we were discussing victory points and suchlike with regard to megagames at the most recent Pennine meetup. It can be a bit mechanical but I think you could link it to story and effect in particular. Certainly ranking objectives on two axes might be useful, one looking at resource/effort and the other potential impact as prompts both for the red team and umpires. I think you'd have to look at condensing the 37 questions down, which you should be able to do.</p> <p>As an alternative to trait cards producing scores, you could instead consider using them to provide modifiers, as their operatives and assets are following doctrine. If the red team find they cannot utilise a trait then they will have to go against doctrine and are disadvantaged. As time goes by they should become more adept at using doctrine to achieve their aims. Also, in terms of reward, you get the bonus whether your action is successful or not.</p> <p>Thinking more about this I reckon you might have three sets of values (or words). In a recent megagame, I assigned words to describe people's abilities (artisans, assassins and spy networks) with the actual score being hidden. People had to decide whether a 'competent' assassin was good enough or cast around for 'discreet' or 'fanatical'. Firstly, you have the objectives for the briefing, which are ranked in order of importance, or split on a quadrant, Impact/Effort. Then you have several one word values, which might well work in a similar way to the traits in the Pendragon RPG. Finally, you have how stuff happens, which is another small hand of cards demonstrating doctrine. The red team may choose a different objective as circumstances change, or go against their inclination, or operate in a new way, but that would lose bonuses. Alternatively, you pick an original objective to focus on, which is in character and you assign the task in the same old way and you get three positive modifiers. In those circumstances the red team really has to justify to themselves a change of plan rather than an umpire asking the question and prompting them.</p> <p>This is actually giving me an idea for another game now, but it can wait until morning.</p>