The adventures of an 18th century imagination, located in Northern Europe formerly ruled over by joint rulers Duke Karl Frederick and Duchess Liv.Not to mention the American colony of Ny Tradgardland the 17th century Colony of New Tradgardstadt and the newly restored territory of the Shetland Isles.
Featuring a supporting bill of gaming in a diversity of times,places and scales.Hopefully something to interest all who pop by...
Tuesday, 14 July 2026
Ancients
Having a wee go at these rules, interested to see how they work out…
Having read through a copy I'm not sure they really simplify DBA3 that much! The biggest problem with DBA is who you play against IMHO and I could see as many problems with a "virtual grid" as the movement fiddlers in the original! There are inherent problems with DBA, mostly due to PB's particular hobby horses. The problem is most of the derivative sets don't fix them, just introduce that person's prejudices instead. If you have problems with DBA write your own set - you will discover how hard writing a set from scratch is, especially coming up with new or different mechanisms. Otherwise, tinker to fit your prejudices.... Neil
I know what you mean. Playing DBM regularly we have to debate the way blades die too easily to warband. How Rome ever conquered in the world l don’t know . They certainly !weren’t using DBA or dbm . So we don’t allow instant kills . All rules are ultimately a compromise l guess and reflect a world view. Complexity isn’t necessarily best . The quest for the holy grail, sorry wargaming rules, continues… Alan Tradgardland
The Romans v Gauls is a particular foible of PB. I think he bases it on the assumption that a ferocious charge "could sweep away" steady foot such as Romans, pikes and spears. I have say there is little evidence to support this as a regular event - note "could"; yet it is all but inevitable in the DBA / DBM stable and has influenced other sets. Back in 6th edition it was equally distortive with impetuous Legionaries charging nervous Celts! I would not allow rear support from other WB and allow Roman "blade" to ignore the quick kill if supported by a second element behind the first and instead recoil through, to simulate Roman multiple lines and relief systems. Neil
A gorgeous-looking game! I think you're spot on—every ruleset is ultimately a compromise of the author's worldview. Tinkering and house-ruling to fit your own group's prejudices is half the fun of the hobby anyway. I hope the playtest yields some good results!
I only played DBA when it first appeared but never liked the way a unit could fight and fight and never tire. And Phil's written and presentational style isn't that user friendly. I agree with Neil that a lot depends on who you play with. For me, writing rules is the most enjoyable (and challenging) part of the hobby. Trying to keep the mechanics simple but also to capture the flavour of the period is a great challenge. It does help to focus on a particular period / setting eg Napoleonic rather than eg 1700-1900. Brian
Awesome miniatures Alan. I have no experience with any DBA rules at all, but they seems to be popular since a lot of gamers play them. Perhaps it should go on my future to do list?
I love seeing your two armies on the field of battle, they look wonderful in the full array.
ReplyDeleteThey do look good/ fun/ spectacular don’t they.
DeleteAlan Tradgardland
Having read through a copy I'm not sure they really simplify DBA3 that much! The biggest problem with DBA is who you play against IMHO and I could see as many problems with a "virtual grid" as the movement fiddlers in the original!
ReplyDeleteThere are inherent problems with DBA, mostly due to PB's particular hobby horses. The problem is most of the derivative sets don't fix them, just introduce that person's prejudices instead.
If you have problems with DBA write your own set - you will discover how hard writing a set from scratch is, especially coming up with new or different mechanisms.
Otherwise, tinker to fit your prejudices....
Neil
I know what you mean. Playing DBM regularly we have to debate the way blades die too easily to warband. How Rome ever conquered in the world l don’t know . They certainly !weren’t using DBA or dbm . So we don’t allow instant kills . All rules are ultimately a compromise l guess and reflect a world view. Complexity isn’t necessarily best . The quest for the holy grail, sorry wargaming rules, continues…
DeleteAlan Tradgardland
The Romans v Gauls is a particular foible of PB. I think he bases it on the assumption that a ferocious charge "could sweep away" steady foot such as Romans, pikes and spears. I have say there is little evidence to support this as a regular event - note "could"; yet it is all but inevitable in the DBA / DBM stable and has influenced other sets. Back in 6th edition it was equally distortive with impetuous Legionaries charging nervous Celts!
DeleteI would not allow rear support from other WB and allow Roman "blade" to ignore the quick kill if supported by a second element behind the first and instead recoil through, to simulate Roman multiple lines and relief systems.
Neil
Hi Alan,
ReplyDeleteA gorgeous-looking game! I think you're spot on—every ruleset is ultimately a compromise of the author's worldview. Tinkering and house-ruling to fit your own group's prejudices is half the fun of the hobby anyway. I hope the playtest yields some good results!
Cheers, Andy
I only played DBA when it first appeared but never liked the way a unit could fight and fight and never tire. And Phil's written and presentational style isn't that user friendly. I agree with Neil that a lot depends on who you play with. For me, writing rules is the most enjoyable (and challenging) part of the hobby. Trying to keep the mechanics simple but also to capture the flavour of the period is a great challenge. It does help to focus on a particular period / setting eg Napoleonic rather than eg 1700-1900.
ReplyDeleteBrian
Awesome miniatures Alan. I have no experience with any DBA rules at all, but they seems to be popular since a lot of gamers play them. Perhaps it should go on my future to do list?
ReplyDelete