As I mentioned earlier this week one project I’m undertaking is a total conversion of Memoir ’44 to a company level Cold War system. While I don’t think the mechanics will present a problem, one aspect that I knew would be problematic was how to physically represent the units.

My initial thought was to use 1/285 miniatures, but that would get far too expensive. Next, I thought of going the Ancients route and use blocks. This actually showed promise, as wooden blocks are fairly inexpensive for the quantity I would need. The only hitch would be creating the unit labels, but even that shouldn’t pose too much of a problem, and once done the labels could be printed as needed. It’s a lot quicker slapping stickers on a set of blocks than painting an entire new army, after all. But then again, miniatures are just so much cooler looking.

At this point I started to examine Oddzial Osmy’s line of miniatures. Oddzial Osmy is a Polish-based manufacturer of 1/600 scale modern and WW2 miniatures. They looked good, and best of all the price was right, especially since I would probably end up needing a couple hundred minis all total. The only problem was at the time I’d have to import them and I hate putting up with that hassle.

Thankfully they now have a distributor here in the States. PicoArmor carries the entire line of Oddzial Osmy miniatures. Run by a very helpful fellow named John Siewenie, if you’ve ever wanted to experiment with 1/600 miniatures I urge you to stop by PicoArmor. I’ve found their customer service to be excellent, with John more than willing to answer questions about his products in an informative manner, and the turn around time from placing and order to receiving it couldn’t have been quicker. All in all an excellent experience.

Today I just primed some American forces and hopefully will have time to start painting them over the weekend (which, considering their size, will probably lead to my going blind by Monday). I’m very impressed with Oddzial Osmy’s craftsmanship. Detail on the minis is surprisingly crisp, and flash was kept to a minimum with some excess spikes that were easily removed with a knife. Looking forward to increasing my force pool.

As mentioned over at Ogrecave Black Industries is an early lead in the 2008 WTF award. For those of you who haven’t seen the news, basically they manage to sell out of the new Warhammer 40K pen and paper RPG, Dark Heresy, on pre-order. Now, you would think that kind of news would bring them champagne wishes and caviar dreams, but instead of celebrating Black Industries is getting out of the PnP business and solely concentrating on Warhammer novels.

I can’t think of another situation quite like this. I mean, I know of companies that shifted direction when a product underperformed, but never when something ended up a raging success. Without being a fly on the wall in their corporate offices who knows what drove them to the decision, but one obvious thing is that’s one less PnP RPG line on the market.

From speaking with retailers that I know there’s been a very marked downturn in RPGs since around 2000. Even third edition D&D, with its flood of splatbooks, only ended up doing just okay. The fact that Black Industries is bailing out of the RPG market even before really getting into it (and this, with a hot and well known IP like Warhammer), seems to indicate that there is definitely trouble in the world of RPGs.

The common boogeyman of course is World of Warcraft, and before that Everquest. Look how scared WOTC and the Hasborg are of WoW; they’re going so far as to mimic the MMORPG experience right down to a monthly fee subscription for DDI (funny how they rarely bring that part of 4E up in interviews).

I don’t buy it. MMORPGs are completely different beasts than tabletop RPGs. While yes, there is crossover, I don’t believe for a second that everyone who plays World of Warcraft would be slinging polys if given the chance. The majority probably have never had an experience with a tabletop RPG, nor would want to. To them it’s just a social game that just happens to have some elements of RPGs.

So what’s killing RPGs today? The lack of imagination.

My first exposure to RPGs came in the late ‘70s. At the time I was a voracious reader and had just discovered the world of high fantasy literature, a world that could unfold in my head. When I was introduced to AD&D I took to it like the rust monster to the knight in shining armor. Here was a game that lived entirely in the imagination, much like those novels I liked, but with one important difference: it was an active story, not passive.

Sitting around a table with a bunch of friends you could go anyplace, be anyone, and live out epic tales without boundaries. Besides reading there was nothing remotely similar. Fantasy movies were rare, and those that existed were cheap and cheesy (although I still have fond memories of The Sword and the Sorcerer, although I’m thinking if I saw it today my reaction would be rather different). There were no fantasy television shows, and computer gaming consisted of green and black blocks, or dragons that looked like ducks. RPGs provided myself and gamers everywhere a form of entertainment that couldn’t be matched by the rest of the world.

Fast forward to today. Fantasy movies are billion dollar pieces of entertainment, with special effects that match. Finding fantasy elements, or general geek stuff, on the television is easy. Digital gaming is ripe with choices. Not only that, it’s in everyone’s home, unlike the early days when owning a computer was the exception, not the norm. What it all adds up to is that there’s no reason today for a group of gamers to get together and imagine themselves in Faerun, or Oerth, or Tékumel when they can have their imagination handed to them.

See, we’re basically living in an passively active world. Take a CRPG for example. While most will say that it’s active entertainment, how active is it really? You’re surrounded by walls from the very beginning of what type of character you will play. In reality there is only the illusion of being an active participant when really it’s a passive piece of entertainment. How much freedom is there? How much true choice? Ultimately, it’s a “Choose Your Own Adventure” novel updated to the computer age.

And for many gamers, this is all they know. They don’t know or understand that the games they play are just an pale illusion of what the power of the human mind can unleash.

Or maybe part of it is that it’s just far easier today to be force fed entertainment. Running a pen and paper game, participating in one, well, it involves a commitment. It involves thought, creativity, and time. In today’s instant gratification world why bother with all that? Just log on and take whatever someone else dishes out, bland as it may be.

Like wargaming it’s doubtful RPGs are ever in danger of becoming completely extinct, but rather the odds increase of becoming more and more of a niche pastime as time goes on. And like wargaming, those that continue to keep the genre alive will be an older crowd. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that there is a hunger for old school systems like Castles and Crusades and Hackmaster. The folks playing them are the folks who grew up on similar systems.
Turn off the computer. Order some pizza. Roll up a character. And most importantly…

Keep your imagination alive.

[Note: Yes, another crummy webcam shot. ‘Tis a shame too, since the detail on the figures is quite excellent. Not that you can tell here.]

Recently I’ve begun work on a couple of variants for Memoir ’44. The first is a slightly ambitious total conversion entitled Memoir ’94 (or I may go with ’88). It will be a company level modern game focusing on NATO versus Russia (or Warsaw Pact, depending on the timeline). As a total conversion it will have new dice and new cards. The second variant is meant to avoid adding anything new component-wise, and instead simply create a new experience using what is currently available for the system. This is the variant I will be sharing tonight.

Memoir: OIF is a squad level variant focusing on the current Middle Eastern conflict. At the moment the basic rules are done, along with a test scenario. Once I’m satisfied that the core system works I’ll move on to adding more crunch to the basic rules.

I’m posting the rules here, but you will also find them, along with the test scenario, as a PDF on our forums (since there’s no way to attach files within the blog that I’m aware of). The file will be located under Shrapnel Community/Intel Forum Bar & Grill.

If you are a Memoir ’44 player and have a few minutes I hope you’ll try it out and let me know your thoughts on the variant. So far nothing seems radically broken, but until you have a larger group of folks picking something apart you never know for sure. My test team is pretty devious, but there are always even more devious gamers out there.

***

Components needed

For the variant players will need access to the base Memoir ’44 game, along with its expansions. For aesthetic purposes players may wish to replace the standard game miniatures with more appropriate ones. Caesar Miniatures has excellent modern 1/72 figures that will work with Memoir: OIF, and it is highly recommended for the full experience that players should pick up their Modern US Army (History 030) and Terrorists (History 031) figure sets.

Important change

With the goal of this variant to represent squad based actions all units are represented by infantry units, but all units are not classified as infantry units. Clear as mud, right? Essentially certain types of units will be considered either ARMOR or ARTILLERY for purposes of card activation and taking damage. All units though use the INFANTRY effects for terrain.

The units

Memoir: OIF’s forces represent two groups: US or Iraqi. The following describes the units.

Iraqi Insurgent Unit: (4 Figures). Represents common insurgency troops. May move 0, 1, 2 hexes. May attack at 3-2-1 if moved 0, 1 hexes. Must retreat 2 hexes per flag rolled against them. When moving into an urban hex MAY attack that turn. Activated and targeted as INFANTRY.

al-Qaeda Unit: (3 Figures). Represents foreign terrorists, Iranian troops, etc. May move 0, 1, 2, 3 hexes. May attack at 3-3-3 regardless of how far they move. When moving into an urban hex MAY attack that turn. Activated and targeted as ARMOR (no follow-up attacks though).

Iraqi RPG/Mortar Unit: (2 Figures). Represents RPGs fired indirectly or light mortars. May either move 1 hex or fire. Attack at 3-3-2-2-1-1. Indirect fire, no LOS needed. Activated and targeted as ARTILLERY.

US Regular Unit: (4 Figures). Represents average American troops. May move 0, 1, 2 hexes. May attack at 3-2-1 if moved 0, 1 hexes. May ignore one flag rolled against them. Activated and targeted as INFANTRY.

US Elite Unit: (3 Figures). Represents Special Forces, attached SAS, etc. May move 0, 1, 2, 3 hexes. May attack at 3-3-3 regardless of how far they move. May ignore one flag rolled against them. Activated and targeted as ARMOR. May perform follow-up attacks like regular ARMOR in Memoir ’44.

US Sniper Unit: (2 Figures). Represents sniper teams armed with .50 caliber rifles. May either move 1 hex or fire. Attack at 4-4-3-3-2-2. Direct fire, but LOS is not blocked for intervening terrain. Instead, for each terrain hex between attacker and target (including any terrain the target is in) subtract one die from the attack roll. May ignore one flag rolled against them. Activated and targeted as ARTILLERY.

Card changes

Three cards are modified for Memoir: OIF. They are:

Dig In: The Iraqi player ignores the card’s effects and instead can only activate one unit by playing it.

Ambush: If used by the Iraqi player the unit attacks with a bonus die.

Air Power: For the US this represents helicopter support, for the Iraqis heavy mortars. Target hexes DO NOT have to be adjacent, rather players can target four hexes anywhere on the battlefield. The same target hex may be chosen multiple times (each time counting as one of the four target hexes).

Tannhaüser (Take On You/Fantasy Flight Games)

[Note: Apologies for the less than stellar photo. Unfortunately being without a digital camera I am dependent on others, and in this case I ended up having to use a friend’s crummy webcam since he couldn’t find his camera. One day I will get around to picking up a camera for myself to avoid such situations, but that day is not today.]

In the old days it wasn’t that uncommon for board games to become ported to computer games, especially wargames, since they were perfect for the mundane housekeeping chores such games created. Relatively recent (past ten years or so) there’s been an interesting desire to port computer games to the board game world. Unlike board to computer games though the impetus is usually not to help ease the mechanics, but rather provide the essence of a particular computer game (or genre), and bring it to the table top.

Tannhaüser from Take On You (published in the United States by Fantasy Flight Games) brings the world of first person shooters to your game room by way of plastic miniatures, handfuls of dice, and lots of cardboard.

At first blush the genre of first person shooters seems to be an odd choice to jump from digital to cardboard, until you consider that skirmish miniature gaming has been around in one form or another since the early days of the twentieth century. In fact, this isn’t even the first attempt at taking shooters and turning them into board games. Steve Jackson first did it with Frag!, and while a somewhat enjoyable romp it was marred by the usual overpriced poor production that Steve Jackson is famous for. Fantasy Flight Games fared better when they released the DOOM board game based on DOOM 3. While the computer game blew chunks, the board game was actually pretty good and paved the way for the much better Descent (a dungeon crawl game with no association with the old computer game).

Tannhaüser’s shooter influence is immediately apparent when you and your opponent (up to ten players can play, although it seems to work best with two) begin to set up a game. First, you choose the difficulty level of easy, normal, or hard. And yes, they actually call it a difficulty level. Sides always consist of heroes and troopers (lackeys), and the difficulty level impacts how many times your lackeys can respaw—err, reinforce.

Next, players decide on what type of game they wish to play: objective based story mode, death match, capture the flag, or domination. Assuming that you’ve at least played one first person shooter in your life, there’s no real need to delve into what the modes mean. What they sound like is exactly how they play.

And just in case even after all that someone is still wondering what Tannhaüser is supposed to play like the game even includes crates filled with goodies. Crates! Old Man Murray would be proud.

After all that players choose sides, playing either the forces of the evil Reich that traffic in things That Man Was Not Meant To Know, or the alien tech fetish Army of the Union. The game takes place in 1949 (the Union got their technology from the Roswell crash of ’47) and at this point you’re probably thinking it sounds like some sort of Return to Castle Wolfenstein/Weird War type game. Well mister, you’re wrong!

See, the Reich portrayed in Tannhaüser isn’t the Third Reich. No, rather it’s the Kaiser’s Reich, and the world is still fighting the Great War. Apparently everyone has a really, really good economy to continue fighting a world war for thirty five years. Why they went this route is anyone’s guess.

“Hey, let’s make a game with Nazis controlling magical forces.”

“Naw, that’s been done to death.”

“But Schmeissers are cool.”

“Yeah.”

“Okay, what if World War One never ended? Then we can have Schmeissers and evil Germans, but they’re not Nazis.”

“Dude, no one would see that twist! Let’s do it!”

Snarkiness aside, the designers do a decent enough job with flavor text to make a subject that has been done to death somewhat interesting. But like the majority of shooters you’ve ever played, the storyline isn’t what’s important, it’s killing people, and thankfully here Tannhaüser does quite well.

Each game, barring special scenarios, always involve a team of five characters per side (the ability to play with ten people derives from everyone playing a single character) consisting of heroes and troopers. Heroes have better stats and can take more hits than troopers. Heroes also cannot come back into play after being killed, while troopers may depending on the difficulty level chosen.

Gameplay is very straightforward. Before each turn an initiative roll is made, and then play passes between players as individual characters are activated. During a character’s activation they may move and perform one action phase, the action phase consisting of things such as attacking, attempting to push through an enemy unit’s space, gathering equipment, opening crates, and so on.

When combat occurs it is an opposed dice pool mechanic. The attacker rolls a handful of d10s, looking for a target number, and then the defender rolls a number of d10s to cancel out the attacker’s successes. Any attacking succeeding dice that aren’t negated are then taken as wounds by the defender. As someone takes wounds their stats change, much like the Clix-style games. Take too many wounds and the character is eliminated.

And that’s about it. One player activates a unit, moving and possibly attacking with it. The other player then does the same. Go back and forth until all units have moved, then repeat.

While the core gameplay is kept very streamlined Tannhaüser actually manages to layer quite a bit of strategy on top thanks to the equipment that every character equips before a game. Each character gets four pieces of equipment, although that’s really a misnomer as some “equipment” represents special skills. The possible equipment is tied into the character, with heroes having a choice between three different sets while troopers choose between two.

Sample pieces include the Mauser C96 that provides a bonus to every die rolled in combat, frag and smoke grenades, a heavy machine gun capable of instant kill, flak jackets, and skills that negate movement penalties and magical influences that can bring the fallen back to life. While there are many crossovers (e.g. grenades tend to show up across multiple equipment sets for the same character), there are still plenty of unique choices that will influence your strategy. Furthermore, one must not only think about what the best equipment for the character is, but how will it help the rest of the team.

While the turn unfolds with one unit moving, then another, knowing what unit to move when becomes quite important. Do you lead off with a character that can pop a smoke grenade, or try for the insta-kill with one of your heroes?

In keeping with the first person shooter theme many mechanics that are normally found in skirmish/tactical gaming are absent from Tannhaüser. There is no overwatch fire, nor different stances. In fact, for the most part cover doesn’t even exist. This may seem strange, but it definitely keeps the game moving, and really you don’t end up missing such mechanics. Besides, players usually have their hands full just trying to remember exactly what their units are capable of performing.

That’s probably the biggest issue with Tannhaüser. Until you learn all the equipment you can expect to spend quite a bit of time looking at the reference sheet, and even once you feel that you’ve learned everything you’ll discover that you forgot some game-changing effect of equipment Y that would have won the game for you in turn five.

One other issue lies in the map. Tannhaüser uses a mechanic dubbed the “Pathfinding System”. It’s somewhat clever. Instead of hexes, squares, or freeform movement measured with rulers, the double-sided map is marked off with colored circles. If one color matches another color the figures have line of sight. In practice it does what it’s supposed to do—eliminate the usual debates that crop up in tactical gaming—but at the expense of fixed maps. While attractive (though with a computer rendered feel) the maps will never change. Same entry points, same special terrain, same everything. Then again, maybe we’ve been spoiled by variable terrain maps. After all, it’s not like when playing a strategic game of World War II Europe changes.

Even with the fixed maps Tannhaüser will provide you with plenty of diversity. Each type of game plays out differently, with different strategies that need to be taken into account depending on the game type. The variations with equipment adds another layer of strategy and variety. By keeping the core mechanics simple, the game moves at a rapid pace, but expect the pre-game team build to take almost as long as the game itself (at least in the beginning).

If you’re looking for some run-and-gun gameplay on your tabletop Tannhaüser is a welcome addition to your library. With deceptively simple gameplay, the game actually boasts a fairly deep amount of strategy, and with the designer’s intent to continue to add new units, maps, and equipment, this strategy should only increase over time.

Anyone who can remember the days of wargame counters being colored baby blue and soft pink can appreciate what a wonderful time we are living in. Production quality and general design elements have never looked better. Manuals are often readable. Subject choice is plentiful.

So it’s always amusing when someone who has never had any experience with wargames ends up being shocked at what a wargame consists of today.

“Ohmigawd, the map is cardstock! You play the game on a paper map? And the pieces…more paper. You have to punch them out? Look at all those numbers on them, too. And the rulebook! What is this, case numbering? Is it code reference or how to play the game?”

We of course shrug, secure in the knowledge that wargames were once truly utilitarian in nature, but those days are long gone. But for gamers who grew up on popular fare such as Monopoly, or whose gaming knowledge is derived from meeples and tickets to ride, these games seem so ghetto. Where are the wooden pieces? The mounted maps? The four page rulebook with 20 point typeface?

Imagine if they experienced a DTP game!

This same form of debate goes on in the computer gaming world. How often are indie games slagged because they don’t look as lovely as the AAA titles do, without regard to what actually makes them important, the game itself?

It’s interesting that the world of board gaming has the same type of player split. Those that are shocked by wargaming standards tend to be those whose experiences come about only through Eurogaming, just as those who look down on indie gaming have a background only in popular gaming.

Oh well, they don’t know what they’re missing.

Last weekend I saw Cloverfield. I first heard about the movie when the original viral marketing campaign hit, and little information was available. What information was available intrigued me; a first person monster movie a la Blair Witch. Other than that there was no news, unless you count the multitude of doofuses proclaiming it be about Cthulhu (thank Hastur that turned out to be not the case).

In the intervening months I avoided finding out anything more about the flick. I didn’t know what the monster would look like, how the plot would play out, or join in on any of the ARGs. I wanted to walk into the movie a blank slate, and be able to fully experience it without having my expectations already be predetermined.

Going in blind turned out great. Seeing the creature in all its glory for the first time was actually special, and not having a synopsis of the film from beginning to end meant anticipation when the movie was unfolding. The movie itself is quite excellent, almost perfect in spots, although like anything there are a few things that could have gone down differently. It will also definitely get you pumped for dusting off your copy of The Creature That Ate Sheboygan, and if you go see it with your gamer friends I would assume you’ll end up in a post-flick conversation like we had, with talk about creature hit points, damage reduction, and exactly how many d10s do you roll for a B-2 bomb run? Movies are always more fun seen through the eyes of a gamer.

The idea of seeing a movie (or for that matter, reading a novel) without prior intimate knowledge of the overall plot is something I think most people strive towards. Many things, such as the twist endings made popular by Rod Serling, only function when the audience does not already have foreknowledge of the end. J.K. Rowling became a multi-millionaire due to keeping her readers guessing. In the world of movies and books we don’t like spoilers.

So why do we embrace them in the world of gaming?

Before a game comes out we seek out designer diaries, unit lists, strategy guides. We read every interview we can with team members on the game, dissecting every sentence in an effort to figure out how exactly the game will unfold. Will combat bonuses stack with passive traits? How many skills are there? How many opponents? What type of AI modeling will the game use?

What is it that drive us to find out everything we can about a game prior to its release, and yet the idea of knowing beforehand that Bruce Willis is dead or Harry Potter lives feels (and usually is) wrong?

Would you ever go into a game completely blind? Or does a $50 price tag automatically mean that investigating before purchase is mandatory?

IndieGames recently ran an interview with GameTunnel’s founder Russell Carroll. I’ve always liked GameTunnel and thought if any site focusing on indie games had a chance at really making an impact onto the public as sites like Gamespot and IGN do for the mainstream world (in terms of popularity, obviously quality is up there for debate), it would be GameTunnel. Sadly, from Russell’s disappointment in how their recent annual awards were received, it sounds like their impact is lessening, not greatening.

Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, the 2007 awards came off to the sound of crickets. Major websites, such as Slashdot, which in the past have given us front page coverage, didn’t cover us at all, not even in their games section. Watching stories about rumors and cakes in the shape of a DS showing up on all the major game blog sites while the awards were not covered was initially devastating.

The awards this year didn’t justify the amount of time I had to put into them. I don’t expect we’ll do another full blown awards through GameTunnel.

That’s a shame. But this got me thinking about what exactly is the state of indie games in 2008? To paraphrase a line politicians like to use, are we better off today than we were yesterday?

The obvious answer seems to be yes. The IGF competition boasted a record number of entries this year, and there is absolutely no shortage of indie games to be found online. And then there are the occasional indie games that make the leap to the bigger pond, such as the upcoming N+ for the NDS, PSP, and XBLA based on the N Flash game.

But have things truly changed that much? Or is it simply that we now boast more awareness?

Some observations about the state of affairs in 2008…

The indie scene has no one like Wright, Meier, Crawford, Carmack, or Molyneux. That is, there is no developer whose name strikes instant familiarity with gamers even if they aren’t fond of the work they produced. For example, all that Sims garbage isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but everyone knows who Will Wright is. In the indie world the few developers that have made a name for themselves still remain known only with that world. There is no widespread name recognition amongst the greater public.

The indie scene has no DOOM, Myst, Halo, or Guitar Hero. Again, much like above, there are mainstream games that everyone knows. At this point, even if you’ve never played a game in your life, nor do you want to, I’m willing to bet you at least know what Halo or Guitar Hero is. Try that with an indie game. Even the most popular games still hit a ceiling when being discussed by mainstream gamers. The Dominions series has been featured in everything from mainstream Scandinavian newspapers to Tom versus Bruce in CGW, and yet without telling your friends about it how many of them are able to name it?

The lack of publishers and the rise of portals is rather surprising. When Shrapnel was formed in 1999 it was originally meant to be more of a development studio with a goal to self-publish than a full-fledged publishing house. That rapidly changed though (and yes with it, All American), and here we are today. The genesis for both arose from a desire to buck the mainstream trend and go it alone. Why play by the mass market rules when you can create your own game?

Strangely with the exception of one or two others, there hasn’t been a rise in indie publishers. Instead we got a rise in portals. While portals offer developers a place to sell their game, that’s about all they offer. Often these portals lack any sense of identity, and in turn you can find the same game being sold at ten different locations. Nothing wrong with that per se, but if indie games are going to make an impact on the greater gaming world, shouldn’t they be treated with a little more care? I don’t know, portals have always reminded me of fast food while publishing houses are your finer dining establishments.

Journalism coverage is still restricted. While you’ll definitely see more indie games discussed in the media world than just a few years ago, the coverage still remains pretty pathetic. Some of that is partially due to the nature of the beast, as media coverage is usually tied directly into money. Indie developers don’t have the cash to make cover story articles worthwhile, or featured web articles. Another part is the sad fact that most gamers really don’t give a damn about indie games and the magazines and sites are just catering to their audience. Then again, maybe if said audience were made more aware of indie games they might start caring.

So yes, we have more indie games out there than ever before, and that’s a definite step forward, but in many respects indie games still have a long way to go. At least if the goal is to be seen as equals, and not lesser creatures, by the rest of the gaming world.

Is that the goal, though? Should indie games strive to mimic their mainstream counterparts? For all the talk about creativity, freedom, and forging our own path, the world of indie gaming still is wrapped up with sales metrics, sequels, and marketing analysis. Are we trying to recreate that which we came from because that’s all we know, or because secretly that’s who we want to be?