d12Finity - Mantic vs GW, Checklists and New Rules

 Well my New Years goals are being ticked off already and it's only March.

1. Create 3 terrain sets. Done. I think I'm on 4?

2. Assemble 2 warbands of minis off old sprues. Buy new minis only after equivalent amount painted.

3. Design a new set of rules, print off indie/free rules* Do some battle reports - OK not done I'll get there.

4. 2 blog posts a month. Already on 13.

5. Paint 100 minis/always paint more existing models than new acquisitions. I'm on 130 already.

6. Budget. $350. OK I just spent another $50 for some GW Skitarri so we're on $60 terrain + $20 printing + $60 BB team so we're on $190. Eeek, well under but we've 9 months to go...

7. Downsize 3 IKEA boxes of wargaming terrain/stuff. Exceeded.

Main outstanding tasks are pretty much wallet related:   

Buy new rules for an existing project. Buy a new cool rulebook.

Some rules PDFs are interesting but colossally overpriced. I mean - $25 for an electronic file + $10 to print and bind it in B&W means it compares unfavourably with say a lovely glossy secondhand GW ME:SBG sourcebook.

 

I used my Mantic dwarves to test my bronze paint ahead of possible Greek ancient shenanigans...

I'm open to suggestions for new rules to try. Blog regulars probably know my biases by now...

Some unused minis that could do with as set of rules to reinvigorate them are feudal Japan, 7-YW, and ancient Greece, though I may end up using a ME:SBG adaption for the former. Talking about ME:SBG - I was eyeing off the Pillage rules until I realised it was just ME:SBG with the numbers filed off. 

I have some (a lot?) of lovely old Confrontation C3 minis which I am rebasing on 25mm or 32mm circles (square bases are revolting, fight me!). Maybe the latter 32mm size so they can fit in with my many metal Warmachine which have never been used for their intended system. OK, add fantasy rules to possible rulebooks to try.

Dwarves on motorbikes are cool but not enough to offset the vastly lower quality of Mantic sculpts... 

Something with zombies might be good inspiration for my post apoc vikings vs zombies homebrew rules. The Last Days? Does Silver Bayonet use the shitty boring system Frostgrave does? I've always felt I should own Napoleonics but they are just so dull to paint. $1 says both rules have hitpoints. Maybe... what's that magazine that has the rules in it - Blaster? any good rules in that? Some non-PDF actual printed rules would be nice, but not if I'm paying $50 for ship it from the USA.

These clippers I got for 3D printing but they have been the best sprue removal tools I've got.  Not sure what they are called? These West Wind werewolves were quickies to get me to 100 models, but I'm now on 130. At this rate I'll do 720 this year. I think my best year was 2023 with ~750 (I did 466 LoTR alone) so it isn't as silly as it sounds... Despite additonal purchases I've eroded my 1200-1500 mini lead mountain down by a LOT over the last few years.

Mantic vs GW vs Boutique Startups

In my painting I've really noticed the huuuge gap in quality between GW and Mantic. Maybe in UK Mantic is a much cheaper option but in Australia they are (a) not readily available and (b) similar in price, especially after P&P. Mantic had a 50% sale, I wanted some were-jaguars, but even in bulk they were the same as the equivalent GW models. The sculpts are meh, the plastic is soapy and on one occasion (my Mantic skaven cyborgs) the plastic got tacky when I spray painted it, like a toy-store dinosaur.

I've mentioned USA postage making it a literal no-fly zone for even books, but some of the boutique models are insanely expensive, even 3D printed. I noticed BLKOUT (rules I recommend) is for sale in Australia. Yay! Affordable? 15x 3D printed models, and a rulebook for $207, not including postage. Kill Team starter with the same gear from my local game shop was $118. Are these guys expecting to retire millionaires from making wargames? I know there is economy of scale, but come on.

I always love Kroot but they lack variety in gear and weapons (or did when I got them a decade ago). maybe a search on ebay for those animals (Krootox?) -they ride on? My daughter asked for some blue Na'vi Kroot.

d12Finity (Main project)

This is my current main project - a quicker 'opposed roll' Infinity that actually plays without needing the rulebook and has a manageable amount of rules, allowing me to use my abandoned 40K, Infinity and Mantic minis alongside my daughter's Necromunda.

This has lots of momentum as (a) I have lots of unused 40K and Mantic in small, squad-sized packages (I intended to play Shadow War Armageddon/2018 oldskool KT back in the day) which are fun to paint and (b) I can read my old rulebooks for ideas when I am way from the house like on boring car trips (my wife drives our family sedan, I only like my 'funner to drive' n54 135i).

I like d12s as they adapt perfectly to d6s and also align fairly well with d20s, keeping lots on the dice and avoiding the extreme 'swinginess' of d20s.  

Remember: the mechanics are irrelevant (besides being simple and consistent) - it's the RNG % the rolls generate that matter. 

Here is an example of how I can replicate 40K kill percentages using a single d12 vs two d6 rolls.

A STR3 lasgun vs a Tough 4, Armour Save 6+ Imperial Guardsman is two rolls of .50 x .83 = 42% chance of a kill, once hit.

In my version, there is a single "Defence" roll where the defender rolls under a stat to save. The defence save is 1-6 for 'Tough 3' equivalent, and +1 each level of armour save. So the defender needs a 7 or less on d12 i.e. .58 to 'save'. Which means a 42% to be killed.

Two different systems. Identical results 'in the end'. 

 

My daughter and I are currently working on Esher and Skitarri Rangers respectively. She is mulling over punk hairdos for her "Pink Ladies." The purple fidget is great for mixing paint as when it dries you just pop the tried paint out. d12s sitting out from testing 'd12Finity.'

Tankmunda (Side Project)

My tank-Mordhiem with post apocalyptic. Currently (thanks Tim from comments) I have just added a bunch of ragged Peter Pig resistance and civilians to be my dirty post apoc 1930s scavengers. Still on the lookout for 15mm zombies/werewolves/monsters that don't require paying extortionate US postage.

My current dilemma bogging this project - I feel basing 15mm individually (like I do with sci fi) may work better for my game of small ragtag scavengers, but I do have lots of WW2 on FoW bigger bases and it kinda makes sense to keep all my WW2 era troops similar. Changing the bases midway means I can't use my existing troops with them without them looking dumb.... but the chances of me actually playing FoW itself ever again is pretty slim...

OK, it's getting late and I may still be able to sweet talk my wife into watching Predators (2018) with me. But before I go, here's my random thought:

You know those silica gel packs they are used to dry stuff out? For some reason there's one on our kitchen bench. It says "Do not eat"  Dessicant  Throw Out etc. But why the quotation marks next to "Do Not Eat"? Can I eat it or not? It's bothering me. Silicon should be pretty non toxic, it just won't break down...  A quick google and I found the answer on Facebook, the source of all wisdom.

 

Cya all.

d12 KillFinity NecroTeam

 I was looking through Infinity N5 (for use with my kids - my son has Star Wars and my daughter Necromunda). I must commend any company that releases free rules - if they are about selling minis, they should stand on their own. And they do - I own 100+ Infinity models because they are good models. Playing with them does not require $300+ of rulebooks (cough Necromunda cough).

While efforts seem to have been made to streamline the rules, they are still very chunky. Since my other rules I like (Zone Raiders) require adaption for anything but their rather niche game world, I decided it was homebrew time.

 

I thought I'd post it up my ideas as I play to do a battle report later and serve as an example of how to make a game without being original. Something I think isn't at all necessary for a good, fun game. Things like "strategic" "gives lots of decisions" "easily explained" "don't need the rulebook much" "has the right feel:" they are all good describing words for a game. 

But "original?" "unique?" nah - pah! Not important. Shakespeare was a hack.

Another +30 minis puts me at 96 for the year. My secret: I stop when I get bored. These Vostroyans need another wash and more highlights, but I'm tired of them and they are table-ready. I'll come back later sometime...

Mechanics

Basically roll a d12 vs a stat (target number). If it rolls under the stat, it succeeds, if it rolls exactly equal the stat, it is a critical success. A natural '12' is a fumble or auto fail and a '1' succeeds. I'm pretty blase about this as dice are just RNG and as long as the probabilities make sense, I don't care as long as the method is reasonably consistent.

If a roll is opposed, you only count the rolls that succeed (equal or under TN).

1.Highest crit wins or

2. Highest roll (under stat) wins 

Modifiers change the target number not the dice roll. 

Stats are pretty basic: Move, Shoot, Melee, Agility (alert/nimble), Physique (bulk/strength), Defence, Willpower (moral/magic). The human average is '6' i.e. 1-6 = 50%. Which aligns with say a STR3 T3 etc Imperial Guard. 

For example, an Imperial Guard (Shoot 6) fires at an Eldar (Shoot 7, Dodge 8). The Eldar has not acted yet so may choose to shoot back or dodge. Although a dodge is more likely to succeed, the Eldar shoots back. They roll d12s.  IG player gets a 3 and the Eldar a 4. Both succeed (under their stat) so the highest crit wins. There is no crit, so the Eldar wins with the highest score.

 

Activation

Each side alternates one model. It may move + take an action - the action can be shoot, or move again, or charge (move+melee), reload etc. Pretty standard. You can hold actions (overwatch) for later. 

You may reposition your model (move a base length/rotate the mini) without counting as a move. 

You can react to enemies in line of sight who have acted or at least moved half their movement. Enemies outside the front 180 are -2 to react to.

Re-action

If you have a hold action you can interrupt an enemies activation. You can also react if you are shot at - if you haven't activated yet (forfeiting your action later) by shooting back or dodging up to half a move.

Shooting & Fighting

Either an opposed or unopposed roll against the correct stat. Three range bands - effective, long, and CQB.

Few modifiers: -2 if attacked from rear, -2 long range, -3 if target in cover.  

The loser takes any hits first, if he survives, he shoots/fights back. A critical success would cause 2 wounds. If the winner dodged out of sight, then he might avoid all return fire.

 

In hunting through my GW boxes I found this... ....how I played BFG as a (poor) teenager. Many a fun game crouched on the floor (12 x 12+ ft table ftw) with planets and asteroids made of pieces of circular cardboard....

Damage

The player rolls against his Defence to save each hit. A critical success cancels two wounds. If all hits are blocked the defender is still pinned - losing his action next turn. Most human-sized targets have 1 wound unless they are a monster/mech/hero. 

A human is base Defence 6 but say for 40K comparisons, can add +1 each armour level; i.e. an IG with T3 and a '6+' save would be 6+1 = 7. A Space Marine T4 Save 3+ would have 7+4 = 11 Defence. 

Weapons have a Defence roll modifier.  

A lasgun (STR3) would have 0. A std bolter (STR4, -1AP) would have -2. A Space Marine would resist 90% of lasgun shots and 75% of bolter rounds; which would make him a walking tank.  An IG would resist only 58% of lasgun shots and 42% of bolter rounds; making him more realistically squishy. 

Converting from other systems (KT, Necromunda, Infinity)

As you can see the stats above are (imprecisely) based on the typical 40Kesque wargame of d6 4+ 50% chance to hit, d6 4+ 50%  chance to wound which should make melee somewhat viable, albeit less than 40K where reactive fire is not so powerful.

These base numbers will be tweaked and I may make Armour Piercing/Armour into its own thing. I can revise stats up or down depending on how I want the game to play - reducing base defence to 5 as the base would make players take cover more as they are squishier.

Basically, I have picked math that 'works' already; just adapted it to my d12 system. It also means I can quickly import stats and abilities etc without extensive playtesting if it is based on well-used mechanics. 

Using a 1-6 (50%) on d12 to hit, with -2 (17%) penalties for cover, range etc is just like a 4+ on a d6 (50%) with -1 (17%) penalties. In addition using d12 can fit more "on the dice" allowing me to do away with extra rolls AND allow a wider range of abilities without recourse to special rules.

Rifle range on most 40K-style games is 24" max (kinda ridiculous) so I have decided to make effective range 2/3rds that (16" effective range for rifle) with extreme range being double that at 32".

Whilst this is a major change and makes guns significantly more powerful than 40K, it aligns with Infinity's medium range (16-18") for a rifle, so I still have an existing frame of reference for how the game will 'feel.'

Special rules/abilities can be pretty 1:1 if the underlying math aligns. For example a weapon with rapid fire or sustained fire may 2 rolls at effective range. A heavy bolter (sustained 2) might get a hold action after it fires if it did not move: 2 extra free shots which to be used in overwatch? An assault weapon might get a +2 to hit in CQB range or maybe allowed a hipfire move+fire action at say -2.

 

Anyway, this is an example of how being unoriginal can be fast and convenient.

It took me less time to "invent" the rules than it did to type this up. More time was spent looking at my Infinity, Necromunda, KT books to see what the stats where that give the underlying math. I'm confident the game will work OK-ish - and just require tweaking i.e. make defence 1 weaker or make cover -2 not -3, decrease base move from 6" to 4" etc. 

I'm confident it will play very differently from Kill Team and Necromunda despite using the core math %. The generally higher defence stats and greater unit speed means it will also be different from Infinity despite the similar opposed rolls/dice mechanics. Original yet unoriginal. And to a time-poor dad with limited playtesting time, it's very convenient...

Beer n Pretzels Rant + Shadow War Armageddon vs Kill Team

My painting goal is now 66 out of my 100 minimum for 2026.  Which is good; as I've got +12 Bloodbowl in, and am about to have +80 or so 15mm arrive (I count them as .5 each). Must keep ahead of the incomings!

 

There are some space skaven (from Mantic judging by the bases); I have no idea what project I originally intended them for but nevermind; space rats are cool. 

My current d12 Infinity project had me dig out some 40K models and give them a quick basecoat. After thinking about how specific Zone Raiders was (to the point of having difficult-to-fulfill model requirements despite being minis agnostic) I wanted to make sure the rules encompassed popular models - or rather everything I have lying around the shed. These Eldar were only basecoated but I'll count them as I also tidied up/detailed an equivalent amount of other models (Necrons, IG, Tau etc).

In my "chuck out rules to make room" I came across these 40K rules which I looked at for reference.

I reckon Shadow War got done dirty. It was a 2nd edition(?)/Necromunda published in 2017 to allow kill teams to fight in a hive city.  You could use your 40K models (Kill Team) for not-Necromunda, basically, and the one book had profiles for every faction - everything you needed. Kinda both games combined.

GW promptly squatted it, releasing Necromunda later that year and Kill Team in 2018. Guess they couldn't make enough from SW:A rulebooks (a core+house rulebook for Necromunda in Australia is north of $200; add $88 each extra faction you want...) and it was too easy just to play with the 40K models you had. They probably couldn't monetize it effectively...

 

I had a lot more guardians but I swapped them years ago for some of those fur-hat coated Guards (Vostroyans?) in metal. I should dig em out and paint them - they're probably worth a squillion dollars now....

I'm not a fan of SW:A's IGOUGO and I'm not claiming it is peak game design or some hidden gem (it isn't - it's rejigged 2nd ed), but I have 2018 Kill Team too (I noped out in... 2021? once they got hitpoints and special rulers) and I find them an interesting contrast. Kinda a good example of the 'boardgameification' of wargames. 

Kill Team 2018 (presumably based on... 7th ed? 40K) had so much of the detail and narrative removed to make a more streamlined pick-up game/fairer competitive experience. It's smoother but blander.

There is more gimmicky 'gamey' strategems added as a layer on top; the weapons are more samey and abstract; the skills you can gain are very limited - restricted to only as few models and locked into minimalism path A or path B 'trees' for ease of balance. Kill Team finally moved away from IGOUGO into phases - but even then it was weird; each side moved all their models in the move phase, but alternated in the shoot phase. You can see the boardgame-y soullessness creeping in.

I'm not going into vast detail: I'm sure most readers have played a bucketload more than the few games of either I tried; but contrasting them side by side (published within a year of each other) was pretty interesting, as both seemed based on very different design philosophies/goals within a theoretically similar system and theme.

What is a beer and pretzels game?

I see it being bandied around a lot when I'm searching up new games to play. Wikipedia (the source of all wisdom) says:

A beer and pretzels game is any of a class of tabletop that are light on rules and strategy, feature a high amount of randomness and a light theme.  

This is in direct contrast to Eurogames, which involve complex rules and emphasize strategy over randomness. 

The term was originally coined to describe relatively simple wargames that did not require extraordinary focus to play. The name was then adopted by gamers to mean casual, short and easy to play games in general. 

Bold bits added by me.  I'd question that should complexity=strategy and simplicity=randomness as the quote seems to read. Some thoughts:

- Light on rules, easy to play (=easy to teach/learn/little reference to rulebook? Can be taught on the spot?)

- Light on strategy/more random than average (=not an insurmountable gap between veteran and newb)

- Short (obviously shorter than the average 2-3hrs)

- Casual, relaxed vibe (i.e. not super competitive Warmachine)

- Does not require deep focus to play (you can chat, drink etc and still 'keep up.')

For example, I often hear BLKOUT described as 'beer and pretzels.'  Games are short (30min or so). It has simple(ish) mechanics but it's activation sequence may be unfamiliar to the average 40K-raised wargamer. 

BLKOUT isn't random. Stand in the open; expect to get shot. A misplay will be lethally punished - you need focus. There's definitely strategy and difficult choices. You're unlikely to randomly roll your way to success.

I find it a bit irritating: for me, beer and pretzels is something light, casual, quick, random and requires little thought - kinda exactly in the first part of the quote. But every game I look up seems to be described as "beer and pretzels." It makes the term meaningless.

Is it a codeword for "there's nothing to this game?" or "random dice rolling" or "takes 30min or less?" Or does it mean you need to drink a lot for it to be fun?  Or is it saying how you played a game i.e. stuffing around with mates, drinking involved? A low barrier to entry? A game that allows you to chat by not requiring full mental commitment?

Is beer-and-pretzels just a state of mind? If so, stop using it to describe games!

Question for the audience: What are some examples of a beer and pretzels games for you? What leads you to class them as such? 

Annual Rules Clean Out 2026

As I add new rules (mostly home bound and printed PDFs) I must needs move on old rules (at least to a plastic box at the back of my shed).

Here are some of my discoveries who are heading to the "out tray."

Category: What the Hell was I thinking? 

 Daimyo

I have never got into rank and flank games. And a rank and flank set in ancient mythical Japan? With monsters, ninja and geisha? Circa Legend of Five Rings? Actually sounds kinda cool when I put it that way...

 ...Anyhow it's a proper hardback rulebook circa 2000 by Wizards of the Coast. Huh. Who knew. I'm not inclined to delve deep into its 300+ pages (has paint guides and everything) as I know I will never play it (heck having looked at how fiddly samurai armour is I'm procrastinating painting a skirmish warband) and I also doubt there is any innovative game design ideas I'm missing.

Anima Tactics

In my defense this was a friend's idea. The anime tropes of androgynous, edgy emo guys with giant swords and distastefully barely-pubescent girls are not my thing - I associate them with teenagers doodling in their textbooks - and that's about the art quality of this book. 

The minis were high quality though - finely detailed in a way that only Infinity at the time rivalled, and a nice change from the potato-headed giant-fisted GW designs of the time.  

The game itself was one of those overcomplicated wannabe CCGs where managing mana, hitpoints and triggering the powers of your 3-4 mins was the gameplay focus. Bonus points for using symbols instead of words where possible to necessitate flicking back through the book.

There are plenty who do like this sort of thing; so I am surprised it has vanished without a trace. 

 War Rocket

Futurama rockets vs flying saucers must've sounded good at the time. Movement was asymmetrical - each had a different means to travel a bit like Eldar vs Imperials in BFG. But each race only had 3 designs - big medium and small - and the damage system was weird. You placed handfuls of hit counters on the target THEN looked at a table THEN rolled a dice to see if the target was stunned or killed. It just seemed like terrible design - lot of hit counters cluttering the board to then use a table to just get a simple stunned/killed result. A convoluted and messy way to get something simple. After a test play I decided not to order the minis.

Category: Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time... 

 

 AE: WW2 - Weird War II with mutant gorillas, zombies and rocket troops - even had a sci fi spinoff which I played. It had alternate activation (in an era it was rare) and units had more actions the better they were - i.e. rookie 2 actions, a veteran 3 and a hero 4 - instead of being human tanks which was also common in that era. They had 180d facing. There was the odd multi-wound monster but no HP. For its time, it was quite progressive.

So why did I drop it?  Well the minis were weird. Some good, some really bad. I occasionally still find them in my bitz box. You know that weird health food your wife bought back in COVID but you somehow still find in the pantry? Yeah like that. Second reason is: I shortly after discovered Secrets of the Third Reich - which played skirmish AND platoon level with a style like 40K - so easy to remember - but better. I got use out of it - but it's time to move it on - and what made it 'good' is merely average now.

Random Thought: There was no 'good old days' of wargaming. We're in the golden age NOW. Rules, minis, etc - all amazingly accessible and improved on the 1990s and early 2000s stuff I remember.

Rezolution

Before Cyberpunk 2077 there was... Rezolution.  

Ninja, vampires, gangers, zombies, hackers - with alternate activation and even opposed rolls - a 'modern for the time' feel. The patchy model quality killed it for me. It was like a better Necromunda gameplay wise, but with much worse models  and no campaign system - so there wasn't enough reason to get people to swap to it, and no reason to collect models for their own sake. It might have done better today if launched with 3D print support etc.  Like AE:WW2 I still find random mis-proportioned models in my bitz box.  

Helldorado

The concept was epic. In the devastation of the Thirty Years War the literal mouth of Hell opens and conquistadors descend into the underworld to do battle with demons with pike and musket, to find saracens and Chinese already there. Various mercenaries and demon factions round out the roster. Hmm, I wonder if we could do a WW1 vs underworld version. I reckon we could call it Trench War.

The models were good (except the lizard demons which ironically are the minis I still use most). It was a bit too much special rules-and-hitpoints for me to enjoy it and I was busy making my own home rules when the rug was pulled and the game just.. vanished? 

A cool concept that did not commercially survive for whatever reason. 

 

 

 Dark Age: Genesis

Another alternate-activation skirmish (I always hated IGOUGO) which I bought because of the Dragyari -a caste of cool flea-like warriors who have something to do with slaves and ice? I liked the models. Unfortunately I disliked all the other models which seemed mostly in the leather S&M vein. I mean, what is it about the post-apocalyptic type worlds that attracts this? So many spikes, whips and unpleasantly phallic clubs with armour that looks like you ran a big magnet through a junkyard.  I'm pretty sure there has been a few attempts to re-launch this game as I've seen lonely box sets online in random clearance locations - even relatively recently.

Tomorrow's War

Along with Infinity, this launched my interest in activation/initiative and reaction systems and was one of my most-played games for years. So why is it on the discard pile?

It's basically Stargrunt with reactions - roll d6s, 8s or 10s (depending on your troop quality). Opposed rolls to see if you can react/who goes first; then for combat attacker rolls and keeps any 4+ rolls; defender could fire back/use armour (roll saves) and could cancel hits by equalling or beating dice. Simple yet innovative and interactive mechanics.  The game deliberately aligned to many metal 15mm minis which were cheap and great (GZG, Rebel, Khurasan). For $50-100 you could have the equivalent of a giant 40K army with lots of tanks and mechs.  

Besides a horrible rulebook that was almost impossible to use (the example page above is RULES not fluff!) the clever concept bogged down a lot in practice. There was convoluted reaction chains (reacting to reactions - ugh!) and a surprising amount of tokens/recording. For example, casualties were not as simple as removing models - at the start of each turn each mini hit has to roll on a casualty table (serious, light wounds) which again have various effects and have to be tracked. Fine for skirmish but not platoon level rules. Units ability to return fire could degrade throughout the turn, etc.

The game was a great concept that got bogged down by confusing rules and a terrible rulebook. Each turn had a lot going on - three turns of TW might have more action and back-and-forth than six turns of say Bolt Action or FoW. However each turn took so long to resolve you may as well play six turns of the other games and have a usable rule book to boot, and (perhaps it was just my games) once the bullets started flying the units took cover/ground to a halt. There wasn't much fun maneuvering and tactics. Realistic perhaps, but not fun. And in sci fi, 'realistic' is relative.

A fallen favourite - great in concept, but I just don't have the time for this sort of game any more, nor the patience to fight with the rulebook. 

Nostalgia Goggles

My son has been playing Blood Bowl 2 on PC. I blame him for the peer pressure for these purchases.

While spectating him, I pointed out he needed to make all your non-risky/non dice moves first then go for blitzes or passes and that his cage was flaky. I then had to explain the cage then unwisely mentioned there was a tabletop version I played heaps as a kid (I had my own 6-team solo league using models I cut from ice cream lids - yes I was a poor kid). 

....A visit to the hobby shop later, and he has sand skellies and I have norse. I'm not au fait with current rules but looking at the team sheets I reckon the norse have more useful toys to win with. We both went with "what looked cool." Though he claims it was the ball-cats that decided him. At least neither of us got dwarves. They were never fun to play with or against. I think the pdf I have is the second-to-last rules version. 

 

....Not a huge fan of the 7+ piece models that build exactly the same linesman. Unlike say Necromunda where you at least get lots of variety in exchange for hours of farting around. It is nice to have pieces which fit neatly though. (Glares at Wargames Foundry yari on workbench).

Bloodbowl was, alongside Battlefleet Gothic, the GW game I played most as a kid. I think it aligned in time to 40K's 2nd edition.  In terms of other 'official' games, I had Battletech and Starfleet Batttles but I spent more time photocopying record sheets than playing either....  I think this is where I acquired my hatred of recording hitpoints...

Last year I bought some 3D printed Battlefleet Gothic minis off eBay - there's plenty of available/free STLs and they do lend themselves well to 3D printing, but I kinda found them a bit draining and fiddly to to paint. Also got that kinda decision paralysis when I (a) couldn't work out which weapon loadout for my cruisers (b) was too lazy to try to solve this by irksome job of drilling/magnetizing them. They currently sit in my 'procrastination pile.'

I've also had a mind to revive Mordhiem as the kids and I have played a lot of Vermintide 2 on PC together and atmosphere inspired me. I even printed out the rules and bought some secondhand Skaven off eBay; as well as some Frostgrave cultists. Unfortunately I re-read the rules after these purchases; and decided I was less enthusiastic than I thought: so they are also on the procrastination pile.

Finally on the 'GW nostalgia' pile of shame: I bought an Imperialis Aeronautica box as well. I could never afford that as a teen as well, but as soon as I indulged those GW swine "Squatted" my Tau before I even got to paint them so I kinda lost enthusiasm - I'm not paying a squillion on eBay to expand my now OOP faction. I feel I'm not at fault for this one.

My nostalgia-fueled purchases have not had a good strike rate so far, so we'll see how Bloodbowl goes. 

A possible pending distraction is my homebrew post-apoc 1930s pirate tank rules - my son and I like to vroom around with our 15mm tanks. My new MDF - the 3rd terrain collection since the start of the year - has revived this one. Current barrier is: I need some 15mm zombies and civilians/scavengers that I can afford. Some US manufacturers make them, but they are usually $50 for the minis and $50 P&P....

In other news, I have been distracted by making a homebrew Infinity-lite, using d12s, which are my new favourite dice size. D20s feel too swingy, and d12s have the advantage for being able to translate easily from d6s (modifiers etc are just doubled) if you want to use other existing games as a baseline, as well as converting from Infinity's +3/-3 modifers (15%) to a +2/-2 (16%) quite neatly. They also have lots of room "on the dice" so you can have very different stat lines and variation for different models without being confined to 3+, 4+, or 5+.

I downloaded Infinity N5 with the intent of playing it with my kids, but while there seems to be attempts to make it more accessible since N3 (my last foray); it is at best a learning wall rather than a learning cliff.

Zone Raiders should have 'the one', but it's curiously specific in terms of minis and weapons; and doesn't really have opposed roll/duel reactions which my kids would enjoy. (They like the opposed fight rolls of ME:SBG). I could have created my own weapons and stats, but that was a less fun exercise.

My aim is to vastly simplify the rules and mechanics, and change a few things that annoy me. I'm cutting the modifiers to 2 or 3 each for shooting/melee, and range bands to just three - "effective" "long" and "CQB" which groups by class; rifle, SMG, pistol etc - not individual sub-types having unique range bands. Having 10 different ammo types is also a no-no. The 100+ skills are being condensed to 20 or so and aligned with Necromunda so my daughters' Escher minis will work.

The vaunted Infinity activation is just IGOUGO disguised mostly by the lethality of reactions, and I'm not a fan of cheerleading or the convoluted fireteam rules. So they'll get tweaked.

The aim? An 'Infinity-a-like' my kids can play, and I can use any common sci fi miniatures. If I don't get distracted I'll run a playtest soon and post it up the battle report....

2026 Goal Check:

1. Terrain. 

Create 3 more terrain sets, but must be storable in A4 IKEA boxes. Already done!

2. Minis 

c) Buy minis for one new system, project or rule set but only after equivalent minis painted

I'm usually pretty good at this... 

3. Rules

a) Design and play-test one new home-brew system. I'd like to do a battle report.

d) Print out an existing old-school OOP rulebook or free indie set. Quite a few. Yet to review any in blog. 

4. Blog

Two posts per month.  So far.

5. Paint

a) Continue to follow my rule: Paint equal or more existing minis before I get new purchases i.e. if I paint 101 minis, I can buy 100 new minis.  24/100 minimum goal. On track.

 6. Budget 

On track. $65 spent so far (Bloodbowl team); +$20 binding various PDFs

7. Downsize/Storage

Get rid of 4+ A4 IKEA boxes of rules, minis, old terrain etc. 

Already done, but I'm eyeing off some rules boxes. Maybe I'll do a post "why these are getting the chuck?" My son has made some cool setups as he has 'acquisitioned' some old cardboard terrain on its way to the bin....

Boardgames - like Wargames but worse...

This is responding to a discussion in comments on a previous post ("why no boardgames or RPGs") and a parallel discussion I was having with my kids; who like me are unwilling participants in my wife's love of boardgames. So here goes. A rant article with little effort to appear even-handed in my coverage :-P

1.The toys suck.

I have a giant elephant with archer turrets. You have some wooden blocks.

You have a flat painted map on a piece of cardboard. I have a towering ancient city. 

We are not the same.

Even little kids know the difference. Unfortunately my 10 year old discovered this early and now rejects his expensive LEGO as not cool enough in order to use my equally expensive but much more fragile dad toys.

Boardgames can be cool too!  No they aren’t. They are wooden meeples and painted bits of cardboard about stuff like birds. If you insist on regarding painted 2D cardboard as artistic or cool, then I suggest a visiting a museum. Or collect Magic cards, if you want to ease storage as well as faster removal of your money.

But some hybrid boardgames - like Kingdom Death - have epic models! Well, if that’s your kink I’m not stopping you but a) a single 28mm model for $50 is GW territory b) it is still abstract, yet also very complex, token heavy with lots of book-keeping (see below). There’s better ways to get a cool toy fix.

 

With wargames, the toys are better.... 

2. Boardgames are better if you just want have a worse experience to play, not paint!

a) The hobby aspect is kinda vital to wargaming so you are obviously a filthy casual – the sort of person who takes their Toyota 86 to the track but can’t change the oil and should be thus gatekept

b) if the key aspect is ease of play – can I present videogames? Your humble mobile phone has you covered if you are not a member of the PC master race. But wait - people rarely play boardgames on their phones or PCs because – they’re not very fun!

The myth of the all-in-one expensive convenient box… You know who does this in tabletop wargames? Games Workshop. They also charge $300+ for the contents of the box. If you don’t enjoy the idea of working out a fun army and prioritise instant gameplay over hobby elements, I refer you to my point about mobile phone games.

If the box does have cool toys in it, expect to play more, for less quality. If it’s full of wooden meeples and printed cardboard, expect to pay a surprising amount anyway.

The boxes aren’t all that convenient, either. I can usually fit quite a 3-4 armies in the same space taken by a single boardgame. Given you can choose your own mini boxes, (unlike boardgames) they can be chosen to fit optimally in what is available.

If the best thing about a boardgame night is the players… can I just say lots of people can make anything seem cool. Even sports like volleyball. I mean, just hitting a ball over a rope and not letting it touch the ground? No wonder they introduced a bikini beach version. 

But boardgames were invented so socially inept people could pretend to interact while distracting themselves from the terror of conversation. A nerdy safe space, making it easy to gather the socially awkward. So if having lots of players is the selling point of a boardgame… ..who are you attracting?

On the other hand, playing regularly is often impossible. Then your 300 boardgame collection is worthless. That ‘ease of play’ and ‘everything in a box’ is pointless. In contrast, wargames have a vast ‘out of game experience’ – you can be having fun even when you’re not playing – collect, paint, kitbash, list-build, terrain.... Some boutique wargames even focus on this.

You’re lucky if you can play, though. Boardgame rulebooks are awful. They are incomprehensible pieces of folded A4. If you don’t have “that guy” to teach you you are screwed. Contrast this with your choice of glossy coffee table book or full colour digital PDF. Even the worst wargame rulebooks are leaps ahead of the best boardgame rulebooks (and RPG’s - but that’s a topic for another day…)

When you do play, boardgames are not as cinematic or memorable. My kids remember rounds of Hunt Showdown (PC game) from months ago. They recall specific incidents from wargames from years ago “the time we teamed up against dad and chased his Uruk Hai off the table” “When dad climbed over the wall with the goblins but we killed his troll...”

….You know what they don’t remember? Boardgames.
At best, it’s always a general observation about the game itself like “Cockroach Poker? That’s the one where mum loses cos she can’t lie well.”

3.Boardgames are about lame topics

Laying down tiles in a mosaic pattern. (grouting tiles!)

Birds, eggs and habitats (birdwatching! Even less cool than stamp collecting!)

Collecting wood, grain, bricks and sheep (chores!)

Trying to stop a disease (I’ve lived through COVID, so pass)

While these are a testament to people’s creativity imagination (and the wide spectrum of what people consider ‘fun’) I present to you an 8ft metahuman in armour sawing an alien in half with a chainsword. Yes, a chainsaw sword. I rest my case.

What about war board-games? Axis and Allies? They have boring toys and are too abstract. They are like proper tabletop wargames with the cool factor dialled down.

Even the ‘cutsiest’ wargame is cooler than a boardgame. Quar? Anteaters fighting WW1 with messenger squirrels driving mobile home tank tractors? Rather easily competes with Ticket-to-Ride's building abstract train lines.

4.Boardgames are too abstract

My 10 year old even recognizes this. He removes the RISK men off their official board and builds them bases out of LEGO so they can shoot and grapple hand to hand rather than swan about in an abstract way, zipping across a black line on a world map from Alaska to Siberia.

But you use Go as a good rules example all the time!

A bikini is also great example – e.g. of how to show everything while covering the minimal required. But I don’t wear a bikini either (except on dress up night). Go is a great example: of minimal rules, maximum strategy. But black and white pebbles on a square board still sucks. It was fine in 2000BC before injection-molded plastic.

5. Boardgames are the worse aspects of wargames

Collecting and arranging tokens? Counting up scores? These are the worst aspects of wargames. Sometimes, with boardgames, they are the whole game. It’s like saying the best part of motorbike riding is putting your helmet and all your gear on or off. In a boardgame you're sometimes literally a worker in an assembly line, maximising productivity. It’s busywork.

Board games align more with the competitive “meta” aspect of wargaming – which is what most people claim to enjoy less than narrative play and memorable moments. In fact boardgaming has slowly infiltrated wargames which were – originally – some dudes with an umpire mostly ad-libbing, with cool unexpected things being randomly added. Winning may be salvaging some troops from an unwinnable battle - not an even battle over points. Popular-but-bad games like 40K actually edge in to boardgame territory.

Boardgames are more about winning or losing than cool narratives....

“No they are not!” “Insertname is a great co-op game”

Boardgames tend to be either a (a) largely random (b) social engineering or (c) an optimally solvable puzzle. I see this with family – after about the fourth play though a meta (optimal) playstyle has emerged; once they notice it* the game tends to be abandoned. It’s like those citybuilder PC games. Once you’ve ‘solved’ the game there’s not much point lingering if there isn’t the hobby aspect (collect, paint models, build terrain etc.)  *No, I wouldn't point it out to a 10 year old, to sabotage the game because that would be wrong.  While wargames are a puzzle too the board (terrain) and often the sides (pieces) are usually random enough - usually the "meta" is to build around the strongest pieces. 

Tape measures are messy. Line of sight and coherency is not precise. There isn’t a grid or hex where figures are precisely fixed. Wargames are more fluid and ‘real’ than the sterile abstraction and ‘gameiness’ of boardgames

Boardgame gameplay can be very samey. Boardgames have exploded in popularity (and become more mainstream) but also stagnated. Often new games are just old ones with a bit added or removed. I can say to my wife “x is just the drafting phase of y game but with cavemen cards instead of a pirate theme.”

Of course you can claim this about wargames, but unlike boardgames they are not relying solely on gameplay mechanics but tend to be driven by the fluff/background/universe. No one is doing a deep lore dive into the Sagrada universe. No one is making a movie about Monopoly (OK they did about Battleships but the only thing in common with the grid game is the word ‘battleship.’)

---- 

...I could go on (and I might) but this is actually a pretty long rant already and I've had my fun and want to go skateboarding. I may pop back on and add more to this; so bear in mind this is subject to change, if I decide to more seriously expand on the topic.

Obviously this is pretty tongue in cheek; but the actual aim is it might provoke interesting discussions:

Can wargames learn anything from boardgames? Are there concepts and mechanics that would benefit/could be borrowed?   Or are boardgames just irremediably lame?

Game Design #113: Design Goals, Inspiration Blurbs and "Miniature Agnostic" vs "Completely Generic"

Underworld

Land of Darkness. Land of the Dead. Land of Ice and Fire.

In the deep abysses of the earth, there is another realm. It has many names:

Tartarus. Sheol. Yomi. Nifelhiem.

A place where the rules of death and death can be bent – and sometimes broken.

Where the natural and supernatural overlap. Where belief and will shape reality, and dreams and nightmares can take physical form.

Atlantis. Lemuria. Mu. Avalon. Lyonnesse. Ys. Shang-ri La. Agartha. Minonans. Mayans. Olmec.

It is a land of lost and forgotten things. A land of myth. A land of terror.

<---> 

 

I've now finished 1 of 3 terrain tables and 26 of 100 minis from my 2026 goals...

When I make homebrew rules I make myself a "inspiration blurb" and a set of "design goals."

This inspiration blurb is to give me a "feel" for the rules.  The above is an inspiration blurb for my current set I'm experimenting with. Kinda like the tagline of a movie or the back cover of a book. I wanted a reason to paint my vikings, samurai and Greeks and a "game world" where I could use them all together, on my new foam mat terrain. I'm kinda motivating myself with invented fluff. Luckily for me I only make games for myself so I don't need to worry about how cringey or terrible my prose as long as it inspires me.

Notice I'm making my fluff match my miniatures. Not always a consideration, but an important one. Are there actually suitable miniatures for what you are wanting to play? I'd love a urban horror Underworld vampires vs werewolves game but vampires and werewolves with machineguns (while some do exist) are not affordable nor readily available. So that project sits shelved.

 Making a "better 40K" was probably the first step of most game designers and there's a reason for that (besides the base 40K rules beg for improvement) - you and your mates already had access to the minis.

<--- >

Completely Generic Rules

Maybe 10-15 years ago there was a flood of what I'd call completely generic rules. Usually they trumpeted "can play anything with these from Roman soldiers to Napoleonics to Star Wars - One Ruleset to Rule Them All."  This concept is a little flawed and does not work all the time. 

While players like what they like (and not having to learn new mechanics is good!) and can be popular a la Insertname Rampant or the Noungrave of the week I'd say games that focus on melee vs those focussed on shooting probably should differ on a base level. So while Star Wars/40K fantasy sci fi can share a base with fantasy rules, viking shieldwall skirmish should probably not share the same mechanics/activation as a modern fire-and-maneuver squad shooter. 

The second issue is: if you have 101 generic rules - why should I play yours over the others?  Usually they have some sort of mechanics advantage - maybe it's a streamlined 40K with alternate movement and d10s. Maybe it has a cool push-your-luck activation mechanic. Maybe it has a super comprehensive army builder and point system. 

However the main reason we play games is we get hooked by the fluff/shiny things. The cool backstory. The weird. Like the idea of Napoleonic cultists in armour possessed by turnips?  A WW1-era ubdergrimdark crusades where you fight demons with swords and Lewis guns?  Some games seem to get by on merely a cool art style.  Having a rulebook that has NO fluff (reason to play) and merely "solid mechanics" kinda misses the motivation of most players. 

Usually fluff drives our gaming so that's why I create my own to drive my homebrew gaming and painting. That's the purpose of my inspiration blurb.

<--- >

...before I forget, let's back up to an earlier point: Are there actually miniatures for your game?

Eric reminded me of this in a previous post on projects. I call this the "Zone Raiders conundrum."  Zone Raiders is probably the Necromunda replacement we've been waiting for. The simpler Infinity (OK, now BLKOUT may have stolen this). But you'll probably never play it. (And may not even have heard of it)

Zone Raiders is not a generic game. It has great fluff - a strong anime vibe that borrows heavily from the Blame! manga of a giant planet-sized megacity full of strange mysteries and killer guardians. A theme as strong as Necromunda, but with better rules. It has a good campaign system. The physical rulebook is great and the PDF is shiny - and it's all in the one book. No $200 of extra books like Necromunda. Winner, right?

But though the game is "miniatures agnostic" aka "use whatever you want" the game is weirdly specific. 

There are not the usual laser rifles, blasters and automatic weapons used in 99% of games from 40K to Star Wars. Instead it only uses Blame!-specific weapons like single-shot javelin spike airguns that have to be crank-reloaded. This means your 40K armies are probably useless (or at least kinda ridiculous for WYSIWYG) and half your Infinity models too.

The miniature profiles are also very specific with special rules. They ain't generic stereotypes you can add gear to based on what you have available; but the gear and traits come premade; in very specific configurations.  You can't just get heavy, medium or light armour which you could just eyeball approximate models to - no, no you get rigs, where that heavy armour automatically comes with jump jets and grapnels - which again narrows down the suitable minis.

Yes, you could say the AK47 on my Infinity Haqquislam is a singleshot compressed air rifle... ...but it just seems off. Why bother with such cool fluff if all your models and scenery contradict it? 

Another very cool aspect is the fights between warbands can trigger harvesters/reapers/immunocytes - robotic guardians who are sent by the world's AI to cleanse it of human parasites. This is very cool for scenarios however:

a) you need to have quite a lot of these robots of various types - extra cost

b) these robots are not readily available for sale - can't source them

Could I use Necrons?  Maybe, but again the profiles don't really align. 

In short, Zone Raiders is a good game, but there isn't the miniatures for it. It's got good fluff, and in theory it is miniatures agnostic "just use anything" - but in reality the very specific weapons and unit profiles in this "generic" rulebook are better suited to a game with a supported miniature line or at least a STL series. It's miniatures agnostic - if you happen to know how to source a specific type of miniature! 

If ZR had added more generic unit archetypes with more generic weapons (chainswords, laser rifles, shotguns, etc) rather than only overly setting-specific characters, weapons and gear it would be way more popular...  This is an example of good rules, good fluff - but no miniatures!

In contrast, with my homebrew rules I like to have a very clear set of miniatures in mind; in this case, Perry Samurai, Victrix/Gripping beast vikings, Fireforge undead peasants, Frostgrave cultists, Greek Wargames Atlantic skellies - maybe toss in some 3D printed mythological creatures like gorgons and yokai - which I've already checked my local 3D printer can provide. 

<--->

  

Design Goals 

Back to my own Underworld homegame, I also like to have clear design goals before I start.  I just realised I may have discussed this before - yep!

Since I've already devoted a big post to this (see link in sentence above); I'll expand on some points - re: the underlying math and how it can save you time.

If you can't be bothered to playtest much - use what already works! 

Since I don't like reinventing the wheel, I like to find rules that already do something similar to what I am attempting, especially ones I like. If it's a medieval game, maybe MESBG. WW2 tanks - Flames of War. Preferably a well-tested set where the math already works or you know the "feel" of the game.

Many GW-derived games have a 4+ to hit up to say 24" then maybe a 4+ to kill. That's 25% lethality. If there's a 4+ cover save, then that's 12.5% lethality.

So if I use a d12 (my current favourite) for Underworld I can say a 7+ hits and a 7+ kills. That's 25% lethality. But because we are using a d12 we can dispense with the extra cover save. Maybe cover just becomes a -3 modifier on the 7+ hit roll. If cover is 10+ to hit, 7+ kills the lethality is still 12.5%. Identical to MESBG.

Shooting may use different dice and mechanics but will play exactly the same - and is based on a very tried and tested melee-based fantasy/medieval rule set. That is based on a 6" move and 24" missile range. Obviously if I change these moves/ratios the feel will change - but I can still predict how the game will play. 

Usually I prefer to find the simplest rules possible. It's always way easier (and more fun) to add more crap in then to remove or simplify a process. As you'd know if you've ever sat in a work meeting...

So my design goals may also read: "Use MESG % as a base, but alternate activation?" - this gives me a starting point for how I know the game should play. 

For example I've been thinking about Zone Raiders and I could say "make a new game: uses traits, weapons and gear from Necromunda & Infinity (guaranteeing easy mini alignment) and BLKOUT/Zone Raiders simple mechanics and math adapted to d12" in the design brief to build a combined ultramodern/sci fi skirmish game. The underlying math could be ported from either game then modified to suit.

I prefer to fit the game mechanics to the setting. For example, reaction moves/shooting may fit a modern SWAT team game well, but may be tiresome for a mass skirmish game focussed on melee.

In my Underworld game, I may have groups of models move/shoot together (or divide into move/shoot phases like MESBG) to allow my viking/Greek shieldwalls to move together.  Whereas my d12 Necro Raiders hybrid would probably have individual soldiers moving and shooting; with either hold moves and/or limited reactions (to take cover/shoot back).

Design goals usually include:

"How do players take turns (activation/initiative)?"

"Melee vs missile focus/gameplay focus" (covered above^ i.e. what games/genres do I borrow from?) 

"Unique hook" (why don't I just use existing commercial rules?)

"How many miniatures/how fast play?" (You can have more details for 10 minis per side than 40..)

"Key decision points" (what agency/risk-reward/resource management allows players to influence game) 

...and a brief description of how the game should play in my mind. I.e.

"Focus on melee combat but minis move individually.. maybe together if within 1" coherency of another grunt or 6" of a hero... heroes have stamina, health and magic stat which can be drained - like a PC RPG - indicate by placing a green, red or blue counter under the mini if drained...  ...3-5 "heroes" RPG style, rest can be 10-12 simpler grunts who have no special bars or abilities and die in one hit. Heroes can roll against stat to sprint, do power attacks, heal etc and if fail roll it is drained until recover by rolling next turn..."

As I've covered design goals before in more detail - and my kids are invading my room to play games - I'll sign out...