Uhm... World of Erfcraft?

[Siralus]

I'm looking to GM a rules set for an Erfworld Empires-like game. I've used 'serious' terminology in the rules, mainly for the benefit of RL friends who seem difficult to persuade into reading webcomics. I dunno, go figure. But yeah, I've got two friends involved, but I'd like to, if possible, extend the number of involved players by at least a couple more. I'll post up the rules I plan to use shortly, along with the game map, and turn order.

Summary: Looking for a couple (or more) patient players to let me use them as guinea pigs in a large scale, Erfworld inspired rules set.

Also, looking for a way to break down large hex maps into grid references without going insane. (E.g. 80 *65 and such)

Edit:
I'll plan to run it via email and/or instant messenger, so as to preserve a Fog of War, but forum posts are acceptable if you don't mind other players knowing what you're doing.

[Siralus]

Full size in the link.

http://img34.imageshack.us/i/korazzji.png/

[Siralus]

And finally (last bump, mainly a saved slot for editing).


https://docs.google.com/document/edit?id=15npI9omRA7ge87aagU0cHvmYEhs-SsQGuFfg1rpwsQA&hl=en&authkey=CJL5p6IL

You'll have to excuse the file name, it was quite arbitrary. But those are the rules. I haven't checked through them thoroughly, if I'll be honest, but I did just scan them over. Its a 37kb file, by the way, so hopefully it won't stretch anyone's bandwidth.

Players will make a set list of faction units prior to game onset, something that isn't explained in those rules. Anyone playing will find out how it works.

Unit creation simplified here.

https://docs.google.com/document/edit?id=1jw1rJalR0SzD2idghLVZQKW1E26CpLGvNmEGdp-wi1M&hl=en

[Nihila]

Could you post the rules as maybe a google doc? I might be interested, but I'm not sure how to download the rules.

[Azgrut]

I am interested

[Siralus]

Ok, I added a (hopefully working) link to the rules in google doc. Don't maul me, I'm a one man circus here.

The text spacing in the google doc upload is quite uncomfortable - rectifying that now - (edit) done.

If you're already ready to throw your lot in and play, send me some contact details of some sort, and we can sort out your faction details.

[Crovius]

Interested, but the google link isn't working for me and my work computer blocks the other two links, so yea...

Also for hex grid, maybe make it a certain shape, you can make 4 "sided" shapes like a trapezoid or a parallelogram by having the hexes line up straight across (like if the Erfworld Wmpires map was turned on it's side). You could also make a very large Hexagon made up of the tiny hexagons and just say it's 20 hexes to a side. The number of hexes such a map would be... is gonna take me a while to calculate...

*does a lot of counting and stuff*

That's 1122 hexes.

[Siralus]

I've grid referenced it for now, its just a bit... Messy. And if none of the links are working, I can email it to you. If you want, naturally.

[Nihila]

Okay, read those rules. One suggestion: if cities need a Lv. 3 Character to build, why not have a Courtier character--6 Move, 4 Hits, 0 Attack, 0 Defense--that levels by managing cities? Then, cities would not need warlords or casters to build. Also, the rules for Casters' Juice/Mana are confusing.

[Siralus]

Okay, read those rules. One suggestion: if cities need a Lv. 3 Character to build, why not have a Courtier character--6 Move, 4 Hits, 0 Attack, 0 Defense--that levels by managing cities? Then, cities would not need warlords or casters to build. Also, the rules for Casters' Juice/Mana are confusing.

I'll look into non combat characters, I wanted cities to be a big investment, but I'm wondering if the level restriction is excessive. I'll mess around, see how it works with lower level combat characters, or higher level, non-combat characters.


And the casting rules are meant to be relatively simple. You have 30 max mana. You regain 10 (+ level per turn). A spell costs mana to cast. So a level 4 caster regains 14 mana per turn, enabling them to cast, typically, a spell every other turn, and 2 in a row once in a while, depending on what they're casting.

[Nihila]

And the casting rules are meant to be relatively simple. You have 30 max mana. You regain 10 (+ level per turn). A spell costs mana to cast. So a level 4 caster regains 14 mana per turn, enabling them to cast, typically, a spell every other turn, and 2 in a row once in a while, depending on what they're casting.

Oh, the 10+level was the regeneration per turn, not the max mana. That makes more sense. Are the numbers next to the specials added upkeep? What is the base upkeep of a unit, and what are a basic unit's base stats? And special units, for that matter?

[Siralus]

Oh, the 10+level was the regeneration per turn, not the max mana. That makes more sense. Are the numbers next to the specials added upkeep? What is the base upkeep of a unit, and what are a basic unit's base stats? And special units, for that matter?

All of that is in a seperate file, essentially. Each faction will make a set list of units before game start, consisting of: 3 basic units, 4 special units, and 2 naval units. The upkeep for basic and naval units is 30. The first two special units, A and B, have an upkeep cost of 45. The third, C, has an upkeep cost of 60, and and the fourth, D, has an upkeep cost of 75.

The numbers next to the specials are part of factoring in the cost of the unit. When players make their units, each basic unit gets 100 points to spend. Move, Hits, Attack, Defense, all cost exponentially more points as you spend more on them. Specials have a fixed cost, which is what is listed next to them in the rules.

I'll edit this with an example faction in a minute.




Darkovan: NPC Nation

Basic Units:
a) Pikemen: Move 6, Hits 7, Attack 3, Defense 6, Formations, Armoured, Polearms
b) Marksmen: Move 6, Hits 7, Attack 6, Defense 3, Formations, Ranged, Garrison
c) Jaguarille: Move 9, Hits 6, Attack 5, Defense 2, Mounts, Scout

100 points or less spent on each of those units.

Special Units:

a) Knights: Move 4, Hits 8, Attack 7, Defense 4, Rider, Armoured, Polearms (This unit cost 120 or less, has 45 upkeep)
b) Ballistae: Move 3, Hits 6, Attack 9, Defense 1, Long Ranged (This unit cost 120 or less, has 45 upkeep)
c) Gryphons: Move 11, Hits 8, Attack 6, Defense 2, Flying, Mounts (This unit cost 150 or less, has 60 upkeep)
d) Trebuchet: Move 3, Hits 7, Attack 11, Defense 1, Siege, Long Ranged, Armoured (This unit cost 180 or less, has 75 upkeep)

Naval Units:

a) Galley: Move 7, Hits 7, Attack 5, Defense 4, Vessel, Armoured (This unit cost 100 or less, and has 30 upkeep)
b) Galleon: Move 6, Hits 9, Attack 3, Defense 5, Vessel, Transport, Armoured (This unit cost 100 or less, and has 30 upkeep)

[Crovius]

Oh, for mounts and riders, I'm assuming you use the mounts speed instead of the Riders, but combine their other stats, yes?

[Siralus]

Oh, for mounts and riders, I'm assuming you use the mounts speed instead of the Riders, but combine their other stats, yes?

Correct. Making mounted units quite powerful. I'm not sure if I'll merge hits and have them die together or not though, since the combined hits pool would be rather considerable.

[Crovius]

We've seen mounts takes hits witht eh Rider undamaged, and vice-versa.

Unless the Rider is on a Flyign mount that's currently airborne...

[Siralus]

We've seen mounts takes hits witht eh Rider undamaged, and vice-versa.

Unless the Rider is on a Flyign mount that's currently airborne...

Aye, I think I'll have attackers target the units separately for the purposes of doling out the hits.

[Crovius]

In the spell compendium, when it says units, does it mean stack or indiviual units, because in some cases the cost of that spell cast on a "unit" seems unbalanced with the effect.

Also I think that some of the summoned creatures (the bone golem, cougars, maybe zombies) should last more than just one turn. Ar with the zombie,s maybe they can either make a bunch fo weak ones for 1 turns or a single zombie with good stats that lasts several turns.

[Siralus]

If the spell doesn't say stack, it doesn't mean stack.

Like fireball effects a stack, whereas say, vinebind effects one specific unit. But since you can pick the units you deal damage to in a stack, anything that lets you effect an individual unit should be able to let you break down a stack when you attack.

I think I'm tending to agree on summon spells. The problem is that, I look at some of them, and I think. This would be too powerful it lasted two turns. That is, after all, twice as long as one turn. I'll have a fiddle around, see how some mixed unit fights play out with different high level casters on each side.

Input appreciated.

Edit: When you say unbalanced, are you saying under, or over powered? And are there any specific examples?

[Nihila]

Siralus, about the defense thing I mentioned in WaterMonkey's thread, actually, defense would deal only half damage.

If we have two units with 4 attack and 2 defense fight, the attacker will deal, on average, 4-2=2 damage, but the defender will deal, on average, 2-1=1 damage. That's huge if multiplied by, say, 8 or 9.

[Siralus]

Siralus, about the defense thing I mentioned in WaterMonkey's thread, actually, defense would deal only half damage.

If we have two units with 4 attack and 2 defense fight, the attacker will deal, on average, 4-2=2 damage, but the defender will deal, on average, 2-1=1 damage. That's huge if multiplied by, say, 8 or 9.

Ok, scratch everything, because I've noticed my wits are comparable in dimness to a room with no light bulbs or windows. At midnight. Underground.

I just realised I've tried to account for the same thing twice in my rules, once near the very top, and once near the very bottom, and one of these rules needs to go or flip turned upside down. So, yes, I think I will scratch halving of retaliatory damage.

The other thing I did was make stack bonuses only apply for what you're doing, so attackers only gain attack, and defenders only gain defense, and that seems to pan out well.

Although I'll tell you now, 4/2 is pretty tame in this system. I'll just run an example ala flow of consciousness for myself and for everyone else here on how this runs by doing a couple of combat examples. (After removing the halving of retaliatory damage)

One, a single unit of stats 6/5 Attacks a single unit with 3/7. No modifiers whatsoever. So that attacker does 6+ d6 - the defender's defense (7). He needs to beat the defender's roll slightly to actually do damage, (i.e. by 2 or more). But the defender in turn, needs to beat the attacker's roll to deal retaliatory damage, by 3 or more. So, if the attacking unit expends lots of move just flailing madly against this defensive unit, it could probably break it down after a couple of lucky combats.

Now, lets try a very detailed example.

A stack of 8 knights from the nation of Darkovan riding Jaguarille (a few posts above now), led by a level 3 warlord, is attacking a heavily entrenched 9 unit stack of their own nation's (Yay, civil war!) pikemen, who are led by a masterful, level 6 warlord. Now, 8 special, mounted units in a stack, + the level 3 warlord, cost 705 gold per turn to maintain. This is a pricey, full on, super special stack on doom drugs which is here to deliver pain to your face. It'd take all of a level 4 city's income to keep this stack afloat.

The defender, comparatively, costs 405 gold per turn to upkeep, a sizeable chunk being spent on that super awesome warlord. Lets do some mathamancy now, shall we?

The attacker has 8*7 attack for the knights, and they gain +5 from their mounts, starting them at 12. They're rider units attacking with polearms, giving them +2. They've got +4 stack bonus, they've got +3 leadership bonus. This all adds up to a total 21, per unit. Giving them a grand sum of 8*21 = 168, plus the warlord's own 6+ stack bonus for another 10. So the attackers have 168. I'm rolling a real dice now... 3. So, 171.

The defenders, have 6 defense. They are fully stacked, for +4. They have the formations special, which will give them + 1. They have a massive +6 leadership bonus, and a further +1 from using polearms in an appropriately sized stack. That's 18 each, for 9 units. That's 9*18 = 162. This is actually quite close, isn't it? The warlord is here, offering up 11 more defense after stack bonus. That's 173. I'll roll my d6 178. The super drugged up doom stack has in fact, been trumped by superior positioning and leadership, it would seem. They've fallen just a sliver short of actually dealing damage to the ranked up pikemen pushing their cat mounts off the cliffs, cackling with delight as they watch the shining knights tumble all the way back down to the bottom of the cliff.

We may as well look at retaliatory damage. The attacker has 4 defense, +2 from mount, +3 from leadership. Oh my. Well, we're at 9 defense here, multiplied by 8 equates to 72. Plus the warlord's own 8, for 80, and the d6 says? 3. 83 then. Lets see what the defending unit is throwing back as damage. Well, they've got 3 basic, with + 1 from their formations bonus, and + 1 from their polearms type. Then they've got their +6 leadership bonus. Well. Oh dear. That's a total of 11 attack per unit. So that's 11*9 = 99. Plus the warlord's own extra 8, adding up to 107. Let's just roll my trusty d6 here... a 1,
Well, that's 108 then. This gives us an excess of 14 over the enemy's defense. We're doing 14 hits back then! Ah, but, some GM was clever enough to put the armoured special on these knights. Randomly allocating these 14 hits between 17 units has let us do a hit to the warlord, and one hit to each of 7 mount units, while the knights have happily deflected the blows of their enemies. So, despite the scale of combat, defensive positions and weapons have made light of the situation, and the knights are probably wary of charging up into the mountain ledges again.

This is more my concern. I was, quietly tempted to have a percentile reduction of final defense values so that every fight could be messier, but I'm not sure how I actually feel about that. Opinions?