Other Rules

A few posts ago I said things about the rule system Piquet that were not filled with glowing praise. Apparently I'm supposed to consider this rule system to be the be-all and end-all of gaming, and to say otherwise constitutes heresy.

Sorry, no.

Piquet is one of those rules that you either like or dislike. There is no middle ground. I, based upon my experiences, have joined the 'dislike' side. Actually, I take that back. The rules writer has done some very clever things, and it gives a good game. I just won't play it again.

Several years ago I went to Tacoma to play Cartouche, the module for the Horse & Musket period. Most of the time my boys and I stood around watching while my opponent won dice throw after dice throw giving him the initiative. After several turns in which my troops got to move just a little, I opened a book I'd bought before the game and spent most of the rest of the game reading. Once in a while I got to do something, but I've had a more active time watching paint dry on a figure.

The problem I have is that I and the dice have this agreement. They will attempt to screw me over at every opportunity, and I will do my best to make the numbers they produce irrelevant. It's bad enough dicing for how many stands movement in HoTTs or DBA (but you can group the stands so when you throw a 1 you can move more than 1 stand), and dice are used quite a lot in King's War for resolving morale and combat, but dicing for initiative is asking for trouble. A table might say I might have a 95% chance of getting the initiative; the reality is that in that case, 8 or 9 times out of 10 my opponent will get it.

There is phrase I hear a lot in the local wargaming group: "Jeeze, I can't believe how bad your dice throws are!"

Now I've been wrong on rules before. Several years ago Jeff and I took part in a game of Volley & Bayonet, a set of rules that is simple in writing, but conceptually quite elegant. The battle was Quatre Bras, and the gamesmaster putting it on is a nice guy. He shouldn't be running a game, especially if he doesn't know the rules very well. Jeff and I ran all over him. We turned it into what Quatre Bras was shaping up into before a good chunk of Wellington's Army showed up. I had such a time that I vowed not to play VnB again. In my view I should not have been able to get away with what I did. Jeff's opinion was even lower.

A couple of years later I got the chance to play VnB under the guidance of someone who was very familiar with all of the ins and outs of the rules. We did Napoleonics again, and I had a blast. Tactics worked. Grand tactics worked(!). Combined arms worked very well, thank you. I was hot-diced, but my Prussians managed to (barely) hold on to the main objective long enough for a Russian Corps to arrive and relieve us.

I liked my experience so much I cut out a whole mess of 3" x 1.5" stands and took them to the game store for a Marlburian bash with my figures (normal VnB stands are brigades on 3" x 3" stands; the half-sized stands are regimental stands). It was stiff, formal, and maneuvering the foot was difficult at best. I had a terrific time. I completely revised my opinion of VnB (and though it doesn't matter, I lost the battle). I permanently based half my Napoleonic figures for VnB, and based all of my Marlburians for those rules, and I persuaded the guys in my wargaming group to give them a try.

I tried Piquet twice more, once Napoleonic and once American Civil War. I did not enjoy myself. Quite frankly I was bored stiff. I thought longingly of other things I could be doing.

I don't dislike Piquet, I just won't play it again. Three times is enough.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now for something completely different.

I've now added links to my website. You can now read the first chapter of several different stories. I added a page on ideas, and another to several stories that I have in the queue. There's more coming.