Er. GOOF. I guess.

weazil

Moderator
GOOF.

The Group for Oldhammer in Oxford on Fridays.

And by Oxford, I mean Abingdon. But GOAF didn't roll of the tongue quite so well.

Anyway, if you don't know what the hell this is, its actually the continuation of a PM chat between a few 'locals' in that region. If you happen to think that getting to Abingdon on a Friday night is something you can do, then you can be a GOOF too.

So, first order of business - the game on Friday, 20th of January.

Go.

Regards
Gaj
 

mubo

Member
Sounds great.

As mentioned on the PM I have Dwarfs (old hammer) and undead (new hammer- shocker).

In my games with Grumdril I have been using a beastman force, but would really like to use some Empire I have been working on. At the moment it's just a few flagellants, ogres and a wizard.
 

Golgfag1

Moderator
Happy to run with the working title,

May I suggest a small game, with forces of 500, 750 or 1000 points (?) with hidden objectives/tasks for each player and the bonus of pairing up and fighting a skirmish, without knowing the objectives of the other players - should make for any interesting two to three hours. ;) If, anybody else joins-in - we simply diminish the points allocation and add more objectives and tasks.

examples of tasks objectives - ensure the player to the left of your initial starting position main character survives / dies; Leave the table with as much of your original force via the table edge directly opposite you deployment area or simply you can't use magic!

peeked your interest?

In hope

Paul / Golgfag1
 

weazil

Moderator
I like this idea.

So, how about we each craft 600 pt forces (flexible on this - use it as a guideline, but rule of cool wins, right), two a side - making each side _about_ 1200 points. We should be able to churn through that in three hours, surely?

As regards the hidden objectives - that's a nice idea. Sounds like we just need to create a random list, which we draw out on the night?

Other Paul suggested the presence of a GM, which this route precludes (that is, four players), but I think that's fine. I'm dead keen on gaming this time (as opposed to GMing) - its been a long while since I got to do that.
 

weazil

Moderator
In a pinch, we could use the 40k 2nd ed. mission cards as inspiration for missions:










Regards
Gaj
 

Attachments

  • Hold the Line.jpg
    Hold the Line.jpg
    25.1 KB · Views: 4,761
  • Reconnaisance.jpg
    Reconnaisance.jpg
    25.2 KB · Views: 4,761
  • Recovery.jpg
    Recovery.jpg
    28.6 KB · Views: 4,761
  • Orbital Assault.jpg
    Orbital Assault.jpg
    25.4 KB · Views: 4,761
  • War of Attrition.jpg
    War of Attrition.jpg
    25.9 KB · Views: 4,761
  • Assassination.jpg
    Assassination.jpg
    24.4 KB · Views: 4,761
  • Take & Hold.jpg
    Take & Hold.jpg
    27.8 KB · Views: 4,761
  • Sabotage.jpg
    Sabotage.jpg
    25 KB · Views: 4,761

mubo

Member
All this sounds great- thanks gents. I think Dragon rampant has some nice objectives like this (?) will take a look

I'm sure ~1200 points is doable in the 3 hour span.
 

Grumdril

Member
This is all sounding good.

It'd be great if we can set it up so that no one really knows what the other players are up to (for example if we were using the 40K cards I imagine we'd want to set up all of the possible objectives - so one in both deployment zones and one in the middle, for example - so as to not give the game away that someone wanted a certain objective to be placed). Not that it necessarily matters, if the teams are A and B versus C and D then A might have a "capture objective" mission and C and D might both have missions that don't fail just because A has captured their objective. I'm never quite sure to what degree you want direct opposition (you do want a battle after all) versus something a bit tangential (so it doesn't become just line-up-and-fight with the winner then getting their objective by default).

The Dragon Rampant type quests are a further possibility, things such as "I shall strike the first blow" are more of the nature of tie-breakers (or might mean that someone who narrowly lost the scenario actually ends up with the most points).


Looking forward to it.

Paul B
 

Golgfag1

Moderator
As an alternative we could always play catch the rat, or any other small animal - drop half a dozen (6) rats in the centre of the table(one has eaten a magic stone), which scatter in random directions and continue to do so though out the game, players start at edge of table & try to the catch rats, when a rat is caught, roll a D6 on a 6 - you've caught the one with the stone, you've then got the leave the table with the stone and then the fun begins ;) .

Paul / Golgfag1
 

weazil

Moderator
Perhaps the first question to ask is:

2-a-side?

Or each 'on his own'?

or even - 1 vs. 3?

...

Regarding the objective, when I proposed the mission cards, I had the Ticket To Ride boardgame mission mechanism in mind - you can choose how many missions you want to take - each one you complete gives you victory points - each one you fail causes you to lose victory points. So, you can take 1, or 2 or even 5 missions, but you have to make sure you can complete them!

So, going with the above, I was envisaging a 2 vs. 2 game (I suppose typically running along the good vs. evil axis, but hey - red vs. blue is just as useful) where each side has drawn their own objectives (that are not known to their opponents).
 

Golgfag1

Moderator
weazil":1pcq9o05 said:
Perhaps the first question to ask is:

2-a-side?

Or each 'on his own'?

or even - 1 vs. 3?


...

Regarding the objective, when I proposed the mission cards, I had the Ticket To Ride boardgame mission mechanism in mind - you can choose how many missions you want to take - each one you complete gives you victory points - each one you fail causes you to lose victory points. So, you can take 1, or 2 or even 5 missions, but you have to make sure you can complete them!

So, going with the above, I was envisaging a 2 vs. 2 game (I suppose typically running along the good vs. evil axis, but hey - red vs. blue is just as useful) where each side has drawn their own objectives (that are not known to their opponents).

For chase the rat - each to his own then all take one!

Objectives - or known to each other?

Paul Golgfag1
 

Grumdril

Member
Some relevant news from the game Nick and I had this Friday - it seems that the club opens at 6:30 not 7pm as I've always thought... :oops: Not sure how early people can realistically be there but just so you know the option's there.

In terms of sides I quite like the scheme of 2-a-side, except the two halves of each side have different objectives. So they're cooperating but for their own reason rather than because they're really one side. All my favourite GW scenarios back in the day had some short of shared objective but also individual ones (so like in Kremlo the Slann where the younger brothers would quite like Kremlo to die during the course of their side winning).

1 vs 3 and that sort of thing are great but needs somewhat more planning I feel (so probably a GM involved).


Paul B.
 

weazil

Moderator
Grumdril":263lpzrm said:
Some relevant news from the game Nick and I had this Friday - it seems that the club opens at 6:30 not 7pm as I've always thought... :oops: Not sure how early people can realistically be there but just so you know the option's there.

In terms of sides I quite like the scheme of 2-a-side, except the two halves of each side have different objectives. So they're cooperating but for their own reason rather than because they're really one side. All my favourite GW scenarios back in the day had some short of shared objective but also individual ones (so like in Kremlo the Slann where the younger brothers would quite like Kremlo to die during the course of their side winning).

1 vs 3 and that sort of thing are great but needs somewhat more planning I feel (so probably a GM involved).


Paul B.

I like the sound of this too. I think A reasonably simple 2v2 setup will be fun and easy and your idea that each half of a side has a unique objective is cool.

So, question of forces. I'm still a little conservative with my fantasy and struggle with force that traditionally (yes, I know ... traditionally according to _who_?) are opposed to each other.

That said, I could cope with it. But, assuming there was a nominal 'good' and 'bad' side, who wants to which side? I ask because I can take a role on either, so I'm less picky.

Also, the 18:30 is a huge advantage - provided rush hour traffic isn't crazy, that should make my life a bit easier too.
 

mubo

Member
Yes, I think that's a good idea. One shared "open" objective, and 1/2 private ones sounds great.

Even if others can't get there for 6.30, I should be able to, and can grab a table and at least start to get stuff set up.

To make it easier, how about I bring some chaos as a starting point? My empire are better left for BOYL I think!
 

Grumdril

Member
Realistically I can only field orcs at the moment, although hopefully soon chaos will become an option as well.

Paul B
 

Golgfag1

Moderator
Currently engaged in laying a new floor in the attic, which means I'm unable to say what I'll be bringing to this little party, apart from it'll more than likely be the first thing I find! :lol:

Paul / Golgfag1
 

Grumdril

Member
I've signed us up for tables at the club on Friday.

Is there anything else we need to do in preparation? Are we going with the 40K objective cards and/or do we need to brainstorm a bunch of objectives?


Looking forward to it,

Paul B
 

weazil

Moderator
Grumdril":3iurxj4d said:
I've signed us up for tables at the club on Friday.

Is there anything else we need to do in preparation? Are we going with the 40K objective cards and/or do we need to brainstorm a bunch of objectives?


Looking forward to it,

Paul B

:)

I'm not sure we're very prepared at all :)

But, then I must apologise - I'm on training this week, so I've just not had the time to focus on this.

I get the impression that there are two choices - chase the rat (all vs all) or objectes (2 vs 2). I prefer the latter (and, were we to vote, this is where the vote would fall), with each side having a 'joint objective', together with their own private objective. I'm happy to draw from the 40k ones as I think they can all be effected meaningfully in Fantasy.

Whichm if we chose option 2, means we just need to pick the forces and sides. 600 points per player?

@Mubo - I just ran through this thread again and I see you were dead set on using your Empire - I have a small cluster of Empire that we could combine together against the Pauls, if you like? Nothing glamorous, but enough grunt power to compliment your lot nicely.
 

mubo

Member
Hi there,

That sounds good thanks!

I would also vote for 2 on 2. With little prep I think it's the most likely to work well.

So, all I have painted emprire wise are 8 flagellants and 5 ogres. Can we make that work??
 

Golgfag1

Moderator
Golgfag1":2llgt9fu said:
Currently engaged in laying a new floor in the attic, which means I'm unable to say what I'll be bringing to this little party, apart from it'll more than likely be the first thing I find! :lol:

Paul / Golgfag1

OK, floor just about laid and the first/easiest thing I've found are my Dark Elves, so that'll be what I'll bringing to the party; see you all tomorrow - sometime after 18:30pm :grin:

Paul / Golgfag1
 

weazil

Moderator
Okay, so that sounds pretty grand - Dark elves & orcs vs. a cluster of Imperials - definitely up for that!

@Mubo - your little band will be just fine. Bring those.

I'll print out the objective cards and we can randomly draw them. Final question - just want to confirm that the thing is still at the Abingdon Conservative Club? It's been a while since I've been out there.

Regards
Gaj
 
Back
Top