Adapting 'Hammer of the Scots' for Exalted

[Flagg]

Note: This is mainly aimed at lowguppy and SiD, but anyone else familiar with HoS should feel free to chime in.


You might be aware from another thread that I'm running a game where the PCs are aiding a peasant rebellion in a Threshold satrapy.


My players definitely want to get involved with the strategic aspects of things, but I've been struggling to find a good system for adjudicating military logistics and large-scale battles. My players aren't too keen on the mass combat rules.


This past weekend, while playing Hammer of the Scots with lowguppy and SiD, I was struck with the idea of adapting the system a bit to work in my game.


I already have a map of Geald broken out into separate territories as a game board. Here are some thoughts I had about modifications:

• Set in the North, there should only be 3 seasons (Fire, Wood, Earth) which allow for troop movements and battles. Air and Water (on my revised Imperial Calendar) will be considered the "winter".
  
• Each turn will be one season, thus making each year three turns long.
  
• Instead of cards, each side will get an Attribute+War roll, difficulty 5. Each success allows for one movement. Events are unnecessary, as this kind of stuff will be roleplayed and stunted instead.
  
• As this is a popular rebellion, certain territories may erupt into war spontaneously. On the first turn of each year, the PCs can roll 1 die for each victory they acheived in the previous year. Each success allows them to gain a new infantry unit, at full strength, and place it in any enemy held territory on the map. This will be resolved as a normal battle, and will effectively  pin the enemy units.
  
• Finally, instead of rolling 2d6, each unit will have an attack pool, and a DV. The attacking unit rolls its attack against the defender's DV. If they get at least one success, it damages the enemy unit. This will allow me some flexibility in assigning stunt bonuses for well described battle strategies. Units will also have a speed rating (similar to HoS's ABC rating) which determines the order of attacks.

Thoughts?


-S

 

[wordman]

Do the Mandate of Heaven rules in ST Comp cover this kind of stuff? (That's a question; I haven't read them.)

 

[Silence In Daylight]

It can be; MoH is somewhat more comprehensive than that, so there's less emphasis on pure combat.


 I like the spontaneous rebellion idea, though I'd suggest that it'd be treated more as a recurring event that the PCs can interact with than a random army bushwacking the occupying forces. This way, once the PCs know that there's an uprising about to happen (or in progress), they can decide whether to let it succeed or fail by itself, or intervene.

 

[Flagg]

It can be; MoH is somewhat more comprehensive than that' date=' so there's less emphasis on pure combat.[/quote']
I'll have to take a gander at MoH.

I like the spontaneous rebellion idea' date=' though I'd suggest that it'd be treated more as a recurring event that the PCs can interact with than a random army bushwacking the occupying forces.[/quote']
Please elaborate.


-S

 

[Silence In Daylight]

Making the troop strength of the rebellion dependent on multiple factors--PC interference included--is my main idea. The population of the domain, the repressiveness of the regime, and so on. The generic one infantry unit is useful for a 'typical' rebellion, but any that the PCs get involved with should be anything but typical.

 

[Flagg]

Well, my thought was that these would be independent uprisings that the PCs could then interact with if/when they survive the first turn.


-S

 

[Silence In Daylight]

If they're on the other side of the kingdom, sure. If they're in the adjacent province, some word may leak to the PCs--or at least, a situation may arise where the PCs may get involved before the flag goes up. A weapons shipment across the province they're in, going to the to-be-rebellion, that the PCs stumble across? Or 'someone' stumbles across, and the PCs hear about it?

 

[Flagg]

I guess this basically boils down to how I'm going to integrate the roleplaying timeline with the wargaming timeline. I'm not 100% certain how I'm going to do this yet.


If each turn is one season, that obviously leaves the PCs with a LOT of time on their hands to affect the outcome while the armies are moving around and fighting. Having a Lunar in the party means that aerial surveillance of the entire province is trivial, and so the PCs will have good, current intelligence on the major events throughout the region.


I'm certainly planning on letting the PCs' actions affect the outcome of the battle rolls, in the form of stunts. I'm also of the opinion that roleplayed events should take precedece over the strategic rules.


Perhaps I should make each turn one month, instead of one season, which would allow the circumstances on the gameboard to reflect the actions of the PCs with more granularity?


-S

 

[Flagg]

BTW, I'm in the process of making a 3'x2' full color strtegic map of Geald. I need to pick up more glossy photo paper and supplies at Staples today. Hopefully I'll have a good picture of it tonight.


-S

 

[Flagg]

I just started work on a template for the game pieces. The six stats will be:


Speed: The "initiative" of the unit.


Attack: The attack dice pool


DV: The unti's static defense value


Movement: The number of moves per turn the unit can make


Valor: The general courage/morale of the unit


Strength: The unit's maximum "health levels"


Of the six, "Valor" will likely only be used in the case of PC actions and stunts, but will serve no official role in the combat rules.


Rather than have dots on each side of the piece to represent current "Strength", I'm going to use stacked poker chips beneath each piece.

-S

 

[Silence In Daylight]

The adaptation of seasons to months would likely be more helpful for your scenario; the 5-turn cap in HoS was for game balance, so that the English didn't gain an overwhelming advantage if Edward and Lancaster/York were in the levy.

 

[Flagg]

I think if I do set the turn length to one month, I'll need to boost the units' defense a bit, otherwise with 9 turns per year, the fight will be over blindingly fast. I'd like this to drag out a bit.


-S

 

[Flagg]

Here's a mock-up of a sample gamepiece:

-S

 

[Silence In Daylight]

I think if I do set the turn length to one month, I'll need to boost the units' defense a bit, otherwise with 9 turns per year, the fight will be over blindingly fast. I'd like this to drag out a bit.
-S

 Will need to look at 2nd Ed M&S more thoroughly before commenting on DV boosts or lowering attack pool...

 

[Flagg]

I've been poaching graphics from http://civfanatics.net and I've come up with a bunch of unit templates:

• 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

I'd also like to do some Beastmen and Warstrider Fang units. Perhaps a few others as well.


Here's the gameboard:

The numbers represent how many units each territory can support over winter.


-S


Edit: Added Ghost units

 

[Flagg]

I just had an idea for a special unit: Citadel.

• 

It would have zeros for all stats except DV and Strength, which would be at 4 each.


In HoS rules, you always apply damage to the unit with the most health first, so if one unit has 3 and two have 2, on a successful hit, the unit with a health of 3 is the one that takes the hit.


I have also decided that the units in a territory all use the highest DV of the units present for defense.


This means that units fighting in a territory with a Citadel would all have a DV of 4, and the Citadel would provide a damage buffer, simulating the difficulty of attacking an enemy which is defended by walls.


These would be rare units (probably only one or two on the map). If "killed", the Citadel automatically reverts to the attacker's control, at full Strength.


This will make territories with a Citadel very difficult to take over, and thus make them strategically important.


-S

 

[Flagg]

On second thought, that's way too harsh. Instead, the Citadel will have a Strength of N/A and a DV of 5.


It does NOT count against the number of units which can winter in the territory.


It lends its 5 DV to any units who control the territory.


-S

 

[Silence In Daylight]

Any troops native to their territories could potentially have one of two advantages (suitably renamed, natch):


1) The defending-noble boost.


2) The Scottish cathedral extra winter support.

 

[Flagg]

1) The defending-noble boost.

I think I'll go with this option.


Another unit:

• 

-S

 

[Silence In Daylight]

What about an artillery unit?

 

[Flagg]

What about an artillery unit?

Hmm... like what? Trebuchets? Ballistae?


I finally found a decent warstrider:

• 

-S

 

[Silence In Daylight]

Both Age of Sorrows artillery and Essence weaponry.

 

[Murdrak]

Hopefully there won't be too much of those types of units around.  After all this is a peasant rebellion against weakened realm forces made up of mostly local levies...

 

[Solfi]

What is it you're doing here exactly? Making a strategic boardgame for use in Mass Combat in Exalted? (never heard of 'Hammer of the Scots', so I don't know what you're talking about...).

 

[Flagg]

Yes.


-S