Wednesday, 9 March 2011

The portable wargame: All change ... no change … again!

I have to blame someone … and I blame Ross Mac!

There I was, trundling gently along, ‘pruning’ the latest draft of the modern version of the rules I am developing from Joseph Morschauser's originals to use with my portable wargame, pretty sure where I am going … and then Ross Mac makes this really, really, thought-provoking comment that makes me seriously re-think the turn sequence I am currently re-drafting. Furthermore, if I adopt his suggestion – and it is a very good suggestion – it will mean renaming the ‘movement dice’ back to what they were previously – ‘activation dice’.

So what should I do? Reject an excellent idea that would both simplify the rules and reinforce the need for each player to exhibit a degree of ‘generalship’ … or stick with what I was working on.

The answer is simple … go with the suggestion and ‘junk’ my half-framed (and currently incoherent) new draft turn sequence.

As Snoopy would have said, ‘Curse you, Ross Mac!’ (Not really, of course … it should be ‘Thank you, Ross Mac; you have been a great help to me!’)

10 comments:

  1. Bob,

    When you finally get to a point where the rules are where you'd like them to be, you should change the subheading to "Originally Inspired by Joseph Morschauser, But These Days...Not as Much."

    Just Kidding ;)

    Chris

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good Lord, the Cordery household is knee deep in terrible beauties these days.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I've played with Ross (well against him) and I will assure you that he is a very nice fellow.

    But more than that, I really enjoy reading his "think posts" (as I'll call them) on his "Battle Game of the Month" blog:

    http://gameofmonth.blogspot.com/


    -- Jeff

    ReplyDelete
  4. Conrad Kinch,

    Have you been spying on me? My whole house seems to be knee-deep in all sorts of things at the moment ... cats, old laptop computers, rejected wargames rules, etc., etc.

    All the best,

    Bob

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bluebear Jeff,

    My blog entry was intended to be tongue-in-cheek, but if that is not how it came over, then that is my mistake and I apologise to Ross Mac and yourself.

    I also enjoy reading Ross Mac's various blogs, and his continued input into the development of my current set of wargames rules is invaluable. Without it I would not be making the progress I am making. He has the ability to see through the cr*p to the essence of the problem that needs solving. I suspect that it might be a result of his military training, but wherever he acquired that skill, it is invaluable.

    By the time I have finished, the rules are going to be an amalgam of Joseph Morschauser, Bob Cordery, and Ross Mac … and in truth, I will not be too sure which bits of the rules will have come from which of its originators.

    All the best,

    Bob

    ReplyDelete
  6. No apology necessary, Bob. I did take your comments in the way you intended . . . I merely wished to "second" your comments about Ross.

    I might note that after he had played my rules, he gently offered me a very valuable tip that helped me to improve them quite a bit.

    He is a gentleman and valuable asset to our hobby . . . and I hope that more folks visit his website & blogs.


    -- Jeff

    ReplyDelete
  7. Bluebear Jeff,

    Thanks for your comment. I would not like to upset anyone, even inadvertently.

    I always listen to Ross Mac’s advice – as my most recent blog entry shows – because it is always helpful. In the latest case, it has solved several problems at the same time, and I am looking forward to play-testing the results sometime soon.

    I agree about his blogs. They are always worth reading, and should have a wider audience.

    All the best,

    Bob

    ReplyDelete
  8. In my previous comment about Cavalier 2011 I said how friendly and knowledgable people are; the same is true of you and the readers (including me!) of your blog.
    We are all striving to make the hobby more enjoyable for ourselves and others.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Paul,

    How very true! It is a far friendlier hobby than some others.

    All the best,

    Bob

    ReplyDelete