Slitherine

Any chance we will see a Module for Fantasy in FoG, PC Version?

Lee

Don't hold your breath for it. There is a forum in the forum index for a FOG fantasy TT rule set, but it is at the bottom of the list as far as I know for being done. next up is renaissance followed by napoleonics, depending on how the TT rules sell Slitherine will decide if it warrants being made into a PC game.
That is my best guess based on how things have gone down so far

A shame...I have been hoping for a fantasy based FOG! Guess I'll have to be satisfied with the FOG/ROR/SOA that is already sucking up most of my free time!

If we have an editor that allow to upload image and create DAG army, that should be enough.

For example, you don't need special rule to play most of the battle in LOTR or battle from the warhammer world. You just need the battle group image and an army list. As Fantasy world are so numerous a specific rule set is not the best solution. As I don't play the TT, I really like an editor to make fantasy army.

The complicated part are magic, but for most it can be abstract as a mobile artillery/missile unit.

From HOTT, I know that they added Sorcerer, Hero, Beast, behemoth and Dragons to their list of unit and a rule for flying and swimming unit. You see not much more.

With the current anarchy rules, how much more "fantasy" could you want?

Magic can be so much more than just artillery. It could affect movement, morale, weapons usage, POA's, terrain, armor, etc etc. I would be surprised if it could reasonably worked into the present system.

I did not say it is perfect. I just say that we could do fine with a way to create our own army (ie import graphics and give stat and design our army list). I did that with a hex version of DBM (I used graphics from warcraft) and it just ended great (with NO rule change).

Of course for magic, you need to have an editor that allow to script the effect of each spell. But as much as each weapons and combat style are very different they end up within the define of the rule. Magic is the same, their is a lot of spell but most result will fell inside the normal rules. A unit has healing spell? make it superior or Elite even if their combat skill does not deserve it and so on...

Btw I don't think the narchy rule is broken, I am yet to see my french knight slaughter their crossbow men to charge the english line... well it might be broken if the french knight don't do that. So MORE ANARCHY! (is more realism)

How many of you would be interested in fantasy? Maybe we'll start a poll

iainmcneil wrote:How many of you would be interested in fantasy? Maybe we'll start a poll

I would be, if the fantasy is tempered by 'realism' , if that makes sense

I'd be interested.

Yes, let's start a Poll.


I am happy I managed to raised interest on this matter. The only real problem is the unit graphics as there are so many licence...

For unit : I will list the unit of HOTT and speak of addition, but again it is not mandatory.
For magic : I would not suggest that we make a set of rules if we want a generic fantasy game. I would advocate something very bold : to let players edit there spell through a script editor. The rational is that Magic differ so much from a world to another that nothing can be set in stone. Example : Nearly no magical spell in LOTR (Elves are just better they don't cast spell), same for DnD spell, the more powerful are just artillery shot, all the other are nearly meaning less at this scale (I ran some test several years ago and now they are even less powerful), nearly no spell in Elric either, but in Willow the whole army is turn to pigs by one sorceress.

To Gray mouser, look at the battle of LOTR they are quite realist for the kind of army used. Except the most fantastic/chtullian chose creatures, most fantasy creatures are very easy to portray in a realistic matter. The system will be realist (veri-similtude is the correct word) because the system is just not made to represent super-hero capable to destroy a whole army by themselves. Beside if we want to fight the battle with FOG it is because the numbers matters, because each soldiers has its importance, that moral and cohesion play a part and so on.

I wonder if allowing a RPG unit would be possible : result for combat for this group will be decided by the player (this is actually to let the DM solve the combat using a RPG system for the group of heroes then implementing the result on the table.

quote from Skanvak
:To Gray mouser, look at the battle of LOTR they are quite realist for the kind of army used. Except the most fantastic/chtullian chose creatures, most fantasy creatures are very easy to portray in a realistic matter. The system will be realist (veri-similtude is the correct word) because the system is just not made to represent super-hero capable to destroy a whole army by themselves. Beside if we want to fight the battle with FOG it is because the numbers matters, because each soldiers has its importance, that moral and cohesion play a part and so on. "

Thats what I mean by fantasy w an edge of realism... I have no issue in a fantasy game of 100 foot tall Mumakils, however they should interact vs other units in a realistic way... so that being said, the shear terror of such a beast would be the true power of such a unit..it might , in fog terms, disorder cavalry units multiple hexes away, perhaps even auto routing them at contact

you never want to see anything get auto routed on contact, thats just no fun for the other guy, causing them to act like elephants makes more sense. Give your opponent a reason to keep his distance. My personal favorite fantasy game was Fantasy General based on the popular Panzer General game. It had individual heroes who were a neat touch and historical troop types like archers (human) and pike men along with fantasy types, steam guns, steam cannons, centaurs, elves etc.

deadtorius wrote:you never want to see anything get auto routed on contact, thats just no fun for the other guy, causing them to act like elephants makes more sense. Give your opponent a reason to keep his distance. My personal favorite fantasy game was Fantasy General based on the popular Panzer General game. It had individual heroes who were a neat touch and historical troop types like archers (human) and pike men along with fantasy types, steam guns, steam cannons, centaurs, elves etc.

Well, what do you think horses would do when a 100 foot high beast charges into them! Perhaps auto evade w a cohesion hit instead

FG was a very fun game, I was interested in its spiritual succesor F Wars, but that game got too cute for its own good with the ridiculously high system specs needed for a turn based game, and it had nothing like the variety of FG .

I am a major amature military historian and am all for realism, but I love my brief breaks into a good fantasy, alternate history, historical fiction type story, book or game! Let's do it!

iainmcneil wrote:How many of you would be interested in fantasy? Maybe we'll start a poll

Raises hand (me me me)

Can I add my voice to the support for this?

I think it would be a commercial success, opening up a new audience for FOG.....from what I see at my local club, TT fantasy gaming is bigger than Napoleonic (and I am a Napoleonic fan!) But many of the gamers recruited would graduate to ancients and up!

Perhaps Slitherine can do this with minimal resources by calling on the community?
For non-magic fantasy, all you'd need to get going would be to be able to upload new units types, graphics and army lists.
I like the idea of a mod-able magic system, but since the fun is in multiplayer, options/settings might be better.

I was a FG fan too - the real test of the men from the boys was if you managed to finish the campaign? With the Magician leader? Without Save and Reload?
What made it special was the emotional attachment you developed to your elite units.......

Yes I hated to lose those special heroes you would unlock by "rescuing" them from certain locations. The other troops could be upgraded but they always stayed the same, it was always sad to see them go down fighting. I had to restart many campaigns due to that.

The campaign system is what made all the 5 star games great... Do you push fwrd for the decisive win and risk possibly losing your best most experianced troops ?

A simple campain structure, ie having loss carry over, being able to rebulid your army between batles, upgrade units would be great and i think needed feature

Thought on magic: magic in most games is usually treated like artillery, ie long range punishing attacks, nothing really special
I think it would be relatively easy to program more "original magic"
examples cast a spell that causes the closest shock troops to go "rabid" and get a additional POA when they charge home for one turn, maybe casting a terrian feature, like an impassible wall of fire extending 2-4 hexes in front of an advancing line of troops.. of course there could be an invisibilty spell, unit is unspotable 2-3 turns to strike the enemy from behind... all kinds of things could be possible in lieu of the classic "fireball" or lightning strike attack.

100% in for fantasy. I'll post some thoughts regarding it after work tonight.