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?