I bought the Titanicus rules out of interest (though I'll never afford the minis!) and when experimenting with them I found myself thinking "this is really cinematic!"
But... what is "cinematic" (n: similar to what you will see in a film) in a wargame?
In Titanicus, it when the titan is destroyed it doesn't just get removed from the table, but it can be:
Silenced - grinds to a halt, weapons hanging slack, engines silenced - any further hits knock it over
Laid Low - stumbles like drunkard, then fells - move randomly, then falls - possibly colliding with other units
Wild Fire - fires indiscriminately, crashes to ground - spins in a random direction, then fires each weapon into the closest target (friend or foe!)
Detonation - ripped apart in cascade of explosions - roll a ton of damage and apply to all titans close by
Catastrophic Meltdown - reactor breach, containment fields collapse, titan goes supernova - even bigger boom!
This is cinematic. It tells a story - or allows you to tell a story.You can picture what is happening. It brings the plastic minis to life in your head. Even when your unit dies, something cool happens - a mini story is told. Like in Battlefleet Gothic - when a ship can explode and take nearby ships with it. It's a "wow" moment even if you are the one bearing the brunt. I'm not a huge fan of the Doomed/Grimlite (so abstract it's barely a game) - but it does something interesting with its hit mechanics. Pretty much every hit causes a critical (or shall we say 'cinematic effect'?). A damaging hit can even trigger positive effects - free actions for the victim ("crawl away" "opportunity attack") or allies ("saviour"/"vengeance") as well as giving more normal status effects ("push back" "knock down" "bleeding"). Getting hit is interesting. It's not just ticking off hitpoints or removing models from a block of troops. It's like a Bloodbowl player tripping just before the touchdown and injuring themselves.
So does "cinematic" just mean having a good critical hit table?
Well, no. It's the story attached to the action. You don't just remove a titan in a sterile manner; it spins, wildly spraying lasercannon blasts into an ally, which then explodes. Kaboom! The rules allow and encourage you to create a story.
Movement can be cinematic. Carnivale doesn't have crits but it does have parkour - movement and jumping rules which allow you to chain jumps (and get free jumps) so you can do Prince of Persia/Assassin's Creed stunts to cross the table. A mini can leap from a lamp post to a gondola back to a rooftop - it doesn't need descriptive text to picture it in your head. Being pushed and falling off buildings in Necromunda and Mordhiem create some of the most memorable moments.
Interacting with terrain can be cinematic. My sleeper pick of last year (Zone Raiders) has not only cinematic movement (wallrunning, ziplines/grapels, and power assisted jumps) but also a focus on toxic and hazardous terrain and monsters, sentries, triggers space-hulk swarms, gravity changes and time warps; giant machinery can shake models off catwalks and ladders.
Activation can be cinematic. In ME:SGB, heroes can alter the activation sequence and go first, with any nearby allies: "Yelling dwarvish insults, Gimli lead his kinsmen into the goblins before they could react." Plain predictable IGOUGO is considerably less cinematic.
Morale can be cinematic. OK memory is hazy here, but in old-school Song of Blades, a model who died due to a critical/overkill triggered a morale test in nearby allies. Basically, the model died so messily it freaked out its buddies. It's very easy to assign a mental "story" to this merely based on who is doing the damage - "the troll tore the adventurer in half, showering his companions in gore" or "the greatsword ripped into the goblin from shoulder to navel - his companions chittering and cowering back in fear." While not specifically cinematic, it certainly encouraged assigning a story to an action.
Some things are more cinematic than others...
Some mechanics aren't naturally cinematic. Hitpoints (OK, you knew I would say this) aren't. "The adventurer lost 9 of 12 hitpoints" isn't particularly cinematic. It's kinda sterile and mathematical. Like watching damage numbers on a videogame RPG. Satisfying, maybe? But not cinematic.
Saving throws (ok, mechanically they are a bit clunky) can be quite cinematic - you can assign a story to the save "He throws a 6 - not just effortlessly dodging the arrow, but swatting it from the air with his sword." Given the defender often throws the save dice, it gives a feeling of agency - even if you are unlucky. "He throws a 1 - the arrow hits him right though the eye socket of his helmet." While saves aren't cinematic in themselves, like say the Titanicus crits, they allow you to be cinematic.
Obviously, some genres tend to be more cinematic. A fantasy, quasi RPG skirmish game with its personalized, individually acting minis will probably more inbuilt storytelling ("cinema") than two regiments of Napoleonic troops firing at each other; and the rules should reflect this by allowing for cinematic moments.
So if being cinematic is the ability to create cool stories or movie-like moments in your imagination in a game....
What games (or game mechanics) are the most cinematic? What are the most sterile? Do you have ideas to make existing games more cinematic?
What mechanics are overtly cinematic (i.e. Titanicus crits explicitly describe the cascading explosions) and what others merely allow you to be cinematic (like a humble saving throw).
Chess has lots of cinematic drama moments in which the game is upset by a spectacular event that changes everything.
ReplyDeleteAs a general rule, GW does cinematic well, by design. The whole hit-wound-system builds stakes with each step, while the d6 has high variability. The crits and occasional critfail produce interesting results. I don't think any of their games are 'boring', but many easily become tedious due to unnecessary complication.
ReplyDeleteThings become a slog when it's hard to make meaningful progress. A large Necron army is a chore to fight, whereas Orks always have something interesting happening.
- GG
Hola
ReplyDeleteCreo que cinemático es muy subjetivo, puedo (o no) ver como algo cinemático que una unidad huya ante un ataque, pero pienso que es un efecto más adecuado para aplicarse a algo individual (como a los Titanes o para un juego tipo Mordheim).
Recuerdo en el viejo Merp o en Rolemaster los textos de los golpes críticos cuando realizabas un ataque y disfrutar con ellos en el juego. En un juego de "uno contra uno" puede ser interesante pero a nivel de grandes grupos creo que puede ser difícil y tedioso, y más aún sin la figura de un árbitro.
En gran medida puede influir también el cómo te explica una regla el manual, no es lo mismo que un reglamento te diga "fallas moral y no haces nada" que "fallas moral y tus hombres están aterrados pensando qué hacer". Por ejemplo mencionas que en Titanicus "Colapso catastrófico" es que el Titán explota como una supernova, no sería igual decir "retira del juego el Titán y daños a X unidades adyacentes" sin más explicaciones.
Esto además me hace pensar que en los wargames, las historias se hacen antes (antecedentes al enfrentamiento) o después de las batallas (consecuencias de la batalla), pero no suele haber historia "mientras tanto" o es una regla secundaria muy opcional.
Muchas gracias. Un saludo desde España.
MM
Genre & scale definitely effects what is "cinematic."
DeleteTitanicus is deliberately cinematic - as you say, rules are worded to encourage you to make it a story "titan goes supernova" vs "remove the model." Other rules 'allow' cinematic without being deliberately so - like a saving throw. Some rules, like hitpoints, seem more mathematic than cinematic!
I agree GW games usually do cinematic pretty well - most of my 'good' examples are GW! I've been fiddling with an aeronef game as well recently and I decided "I want to make this "more GW" - with chugging dice and saving throws, crits and BFG explosions."
-eM
Hola de nuevo
DeleteSi es un juego de aeronáutica de fantasía, podría funcionar un sistema con la idea de Battletech, donde ciertos impactos pueden destruir o inutilizar alguna parte de la aeronave (creo recordar que tu Tankheim también tenía algo así), aunque normalmente eso conlleva usar puntos de vida...
Hay juegos donde los atributos se miden por dados de diferentes caras y el daño recibido hace que el dado se reduzca (por ejemplo un D8 baja a un D6 o inferior) o donde el atributo es un número x de dados y el daño lo reduce; y cuando un atributo llega a cero esa figura es eliminada o sufre un efecto (¿Cinemático?). Puede ser una alternativa a los puntos de vida.
Siento si no le ayuda pero en España es de noche y me voy pronto a dormir, le escribo a ciegas y en piloto automático. Un saludo.
MM
Hmm I do use hit locations sometimes, but I wouldn't call them hitpoints. They are more like straight criticals i.e. each hit has a definite effect.
DeleteFor example, say we use d6 for tank hit location:
1,2 mobility = tank immobilized, then half speed if repair
3,4 turret/optics = no shooting, then shoot penalty if repair
5,6 crew = no action, but mild overall dice penalty if repair
(To stop things getting excessive, a second hit to a location knocks the tank out. )
'Something' happens each hit, so it's more a critical hit per se. There's no 'filler' damage of needless recording. It's possible to have a few status effects at once, but you could mark them with cotton wool 'smoke' of different shades, for example.
Because something (specific) happens, it's cinematic and easy to describe "roll 3 - a shell smashes into the turret, jamming the turret" "roll 2 - the Sherman lurched to a halt, smoke pouring from the engine" not "the Sherman now has 3 of 10 hitpoints remaining."
I'd define hitpoints as usually involving 6+ hits, often with nothing happening until certain thresholds are reached.
-eM
Rolling for hit location is like Car Wars, which further adjusts for the size of the potential area on a given facing.
DeleteYour system has to track damage by location, which amounts to 3 hitboxes.
Personally, I like things that need hp to have 6 hp so you can use a single d6 to track wounds. If you have 6+ hits, then you probably want a spindown d20. I very much dislike wound counters which add a lot more clutter.
- GG
I'm not sure we agree on what hitpoint is, though?
DeleteI don't think a hit location automatically = a hitpoint.
Here's my definition:
HITPOINT
In Battlefleet Gothic, a cruiser might have 8? hitpoints.
These hitpoints have no direct effect except as a proportional of a total (until they reach halfway: where a ship is crippled).
So only the halfway point has any meaning.
(By the way, I don't mind hitpoints when describing very large objects like a ship; there's a sensible need for fractional damage or gradual loss of buoyancy)
^This is what I'd define as a hitpoint.^
Like a health bar in a videogame.
NOT A HITPOINT
In BFG you can also take 'critical hits' - which have immediate effects like halving speed and weapons. I wouldn't call them hitpoints. They aren't always part of/integral to the sequential alive->dead sequence.
They happen optionally/randomly, and are non-sequential. Almost more like status effects in a videogame.
For example, in a Mordhiemesque skirmish game, if any gunshot rolled d6
'5-6' = instant kill
4 = leg shot, halve movement
3 = body shot, -1 all rolls
1,2 = stunned, skip a turn
...I wouldn't call that 'hitpoints' at all.
Even though it may be possible to take two hits (leg wound, body wound)... they are more akin to crits or status effects.
Having the mere 'possibility' you may survive a hit and thus take 2 hits to kill does not = 2 hitpoints, for me.
'Hitpoints' for the above example would be, sequentially:
1st hit = -1 to rolls
2nd hit = -1 to rolls, halve movement
3rd hit = dead
Even then it's not that egregious, as at least each point of damage has an actual effect on a human target.
I've found recording with a dice as annoying as ticking off boxes, personally; I only like it when you can change the score back up (like measuring altitude). Trying to find the right face on a d10, let alone a d20, is a PITA.
-eM
You have 3 locations and "a second hit to a location knocks the tank out", so that's 3 hit BOXES that need to be tracked as hit/unhit.
DeleteYou ALSO mentioned things having 6+ hit POINTS (distinct from BOXES), which I suggested should be capped at 6 HP instead. My mental model is that most things have 2 or 3 HP, but I am OK with elephants / dragons / giants having 6 HP.
Your Mordheimesque example has many hit BOXES (distinct from hit POINTS).
I dice beat boxes, because it's less paperwork. Personal preference. In my model, dice are for Monsters, as opposed to having a 'scratched / crippled' counter to split between "OK" and "dead". I suggested d6 because I know that finding the face of d10s is a pain, whereas d6 is easy. I also called out spindown d20s with adjacent numbers on adjacent faces (e.g. 19 is next to 18 and 20, 5 is next to 4 and 6); they're used as life counters in Magic: the Gathering and have been around for at least 20 years.
- GG
So you are using a 3rd criteria - "hitbox" which I read to mean a gamestate other than dead/alive that may need to be tracked in some way? Something that is 'possible' (but not certain) to trigger/damage?
DeleteI.e. if a game allows a character to be stunned (not just alive/dead) ....that stunned state also counts as a hitbox?
-eM
Sorry, I think things have gotten messy. I was simply reacting to having to track whether each of your 3 locations had been hit previously, which naturally implements as a set of checkboxes.
DeleteThen I went off on a tangent about other stuff.
WRT Stunned / Frozen / Confused, that's a mental / psychology state which generally doesn't result in a model dying, because most battle games are about physical combat. In this case, Stunned is akin to Crippled, where the model's (mental) combat actions are degraded / restricted as they stand at death's door. Within this context, consider a Scanners / Dark City type 'Mind War' / 'Dream War' game where the focus is on mental combat and damage distinct from how GW and D&D use Psykers and Psionics as Magic equivalent.
- GG
Gaslands is cinematic--certain maneuvers (as well as collisions) add hazard tokens to your vehicle dashboard; if you accumulate 6 or more, you crash. You then have a chance for a vehicle explosion, which may damage nearby vehicles. Vehicles can catch fire, which does not do damage but adds hazard tokens.
ReplyDelete(Then there are the ways to gain and audience approval, which feels more video-gamey than cinematic, but that's just me.)
That game sums it up best with it's Rule of Carnage: If a rule is unclear, choose the option that results in the most carnage for all concerned.
That should say "ways to gain and spend audience approval" above.
DeleteExcellent example! (coincidentally, Gaslands was one of the games that got me thinking about cinematic-ness in my last post!)
DeleteI found Gaslands surprisingly gluggy for a fast racing game, but certainly very cinematic/tells a story with 'cool' moments.
-eM
Off all the tabletop wargames that I played I would say that Warhammer 40k 2nd Edition is still the most cinematic. The detailed ruleset opened many avenues for an envolving story of a battle. I liked the data cards of the vehicles with the different results for hits based on the hits location and critical hit role. One of my favourite moments was a squad of Ravenwing bikers rushing at my Long Fangs. They were really hard to hit back in 2nd Edition but my Long Fangs were mighty sharp shooters. So they managed to hit the bikes and penetrate the armour, but one of the bikes got out of control and smashed into my Long Fangs killing a few of them. In the end the Dark Angels were celebrating. All the different gear and equipment could also lead to interesting situations. The Eldar Swooping Hawks were also really good in 2nd Edition with a flying movement of 36". We played often with special characters and I remember that a squad of Swooping Hawks appeared out of nowhere in Kharn the Betrayer´s view and killing him by throwing a bunch of grenades at him. Melee combat also felt like the combatans were duelling each other as every model had to fight each opponent in base contact. If you had really hard melee fighters like the Tyranid Hive Tyrant, Greater Demons or even Demon Princes, we often swarmed them with cannon fodder for distraction and then some heavy hitter who profited from every figher coming before them. Still, sometimes a whole Space Marine Squad plus special character could loose againt these hard hitters.
ReplyDeleteIf I would focus on what it made so cinematic it was:
- unpredictable events and outcomes
- crazy wargear
- detailed combat system
- awesome characters
When 3rd edition came out we were shocked how bland it was and somehow stopped playing 40k soon after...never to return.
40k 2E was more RPG than mass battle system, so that's to be expected. 40k 3E modernized 40k, made it accessible and scalable for large battles completely impractical under 40k 2E. 40k 3E was far more enjoyable game, simply because it flowed better. If you didn't play 40k 3E-5E, you really missed out on peak 40k. As time went on, 40k became much more bloated. If you miss the bloat of 2E, you really should jump back into 40k right now.
Delete- GG
I played a little bit in 3E and 4E. It was just boring (e.g. more accessible) in comparison to 2E. Nothing memorable happened within these games.
DeleteI would also argue that 28mm is not a good scale for mass battle systems as the standard 6x4 table gets crowded fast. Therefore, GW should have sticked to a more managable game size.
Personally, I found the size of 40k 3E battles to be "just right", but if you really like small platoon scale games and rules bloat, 40k 2E is ok, I suppose. Too many models for a RPG, but too much clunk for mass battle like 40k 3E. It's pretty ridiculous to say nothing memorable happened when the core mechanics were the same, and I still remember the time I one-shotted a Land Raider.
DeleteFor all the tactical blandness that Frostgrave combat has it does cinematic well - there's nothing like having a thief slip past the Red Kings guards who are tying up your heavy hitters and rolling a miracle of miracles to one shot the big bad guy. The swinging of the combat system allows for wildly unexpected outcomes.
ReplyDeleteOverall the most cinematic games I've played are the same ones that I complain about the most despite enjoying them. The old MB Battle Masters is the king of this. The game plays itself - a four year old can play just as well as a game savvy grognard (I know, my dad, siblings, friends, and kids have played the game to death for over 30 years). But despite the lack of depth to the game play there is almost always a moment or two in each game that is heavily cinematic - heroic last stands or improbable victories - and it seems like a games ability to be cinematic is strongly linked to keeping outcomes beyond a players control.
Do you think limiting the players ability to influence the game results - through swingy combat or random results ala Titanicus death results - is needed to create cinematic moments for miniature games where chess-like surprise is difficult to pull off? (I've never played a miniatures game where my opponent made a move that truly caught me off guard, but chess often does that to me and can result in exciting moments of not exactly cinematic due to the abstractness of the game)
Hola de nuevo.
ReplyDeleteComo sugerencia, creo que un buen sistema puede ser algo como tirada de ataque contra número objetivo (que representa la dureza del objetivo) y si la tirada supera el número objetivo, que el objetivo sufra un efecto. Incluso podría afectar el cuanto superas el número objetivo a la tirada del efecto.
Un único comentario sobre esto, serví en el Ejército Español de tierra, como soldado de Infantería Mecanizada y tuve un Contact cercano con vehículos blindados, como tanques.
Normalmente un vehículo blindado que recibe un impacto de una unidad de infantería suele sufrir una de estas consecuencias:
1) El impacto se realiza con un arma que no tiene potencia para dañar al vehículo (un disparo de un rifle de asalto por ejemplo) y no pasa nada grave.
2) El impacto se realiza con un arma capaz de dañar al vehículo, y muy rara vez el vehículo no sufre un daño que lo haga menos operativo. El blindaje de un tanque es MUY duro y cuando usas un lanzacohetes (como el C90 Español) has de disparar a las orugas/ ruedas para intentar dañarlo.
No veo descabellado que cada impacto existoso con un arma adecuada cause un desperfecto que haga que el vehículo tenga una merma en su efectividad.
Un saludo desde España.
MM
Cinematic is often a goal of my games as I prefer Narrative story, finding out what happens, and spectacle in a game over the actual winning/losing of a game.
ReplyDeleteTwo games I wrote that I think capture this pretty well is "Castles in the Sky". Disabled ships start to fall out of the sky, crits can explode you, hits cause you to slow down, there is stalling, crashing, ramming, colliding, etc. In addition, when you penetrate armor you do not determine the results instantly. You wait until the end phase, which builds some suspense over what happened to your ship, did it just peel some armor, or is it going to pop?
The second is Under the Martian Yoke, which is a survival horror game set after the Martian Invasion of 1938. You have four survivors, but you don't pick them they are determined randomly and then you assign some stats. They have unique reasons for why they survived and that leads to what gear they start with, and it is possible to start with injuries and psychological effects! In addition, as the game goes injuries have different levels of impact. Plus as you fail rolls, the Danger level increases to attract more baddies and make things harder. It leans heavily into survival and horror and makes a good campaign game, if sometimes a bit terminal and a death spiral!
In general, I look for campaign elements to help make a game cinematic. After that, character models/leaders/Chrome that have an impact on the game. I prefer more Cinematic in Sci-fi/Fantasy and less in Historicals.
The above was Eric Farrington - Stupid Google Comments.....
Delete