File: Denizens of the DEEP.png (4.41 MB, 2728x2728)

4.41 MB PNG

>TL;DR Doc (WIP) This needs a bit more fleshing out
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LxdaGoBlJRTMuziMDupG5TeeFwNDnsIW2pfaRAcFDgA
> Lore Doc
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bRrxdD1BMLmcMDFeszwqg2Rcjrt8DDo7tjAxoOB6KQ8
> Rules Doc I think the anon maintaining this is MIA
>https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ZpHhEyUbjt-SCx2xuAd0lyh7Rs4J7rK5kHkljqykhk/
> Unit Spreadsheet
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rcleQtrT4Q0INiBW50-kq2ZXWJ-cjLOeVTLTJg_oX5E

Please note that the old Rules doc was not being maintained, if the anon maintaining it comes back we'll re-add it.

File: LAYER_3.png (387 KB, 1500x740)

387 KB PNG

To start things off, a radical anon last thread put together a map of Layer 3. I propose we discuss mapping in this thread, both
>Developing the actual in-lore layer maps
AND
>How we handle terrain placement on the skirmish hexgrid.

File: Overmap2.png (4.31 MB, 3825x2228)

4.31 MB PNG

>>88778363
>>Developing the actual in-lore layer maps
Vertical hexgrid anon reporting, standing by to modify. Also, anyone feel free to suggest another hexgrid system if you know a better one.
>>How we handle terrain placement on the skirmish hexgrid.
If you mean physically the same type of paper cutouts that come in the BT box would be the obvious choice.
> BUT
Are the maps like in BT, a huge repository predefined maps that you can modify with the cut outs, or blank and you roll to add terrain parts (would be complex if we need to account for specific terrain types), or something in between?
> Also
If we end up integrating these in these vertical hexmaps into the gameplay, do we keep a single overmap like this one (makes for weird placement) or do we use something like >>88778363 picrel as the "overworld" for placement, and have multiple of the vertical hexmaps under?

>>88778638
>Also, anyone feel free to suggest another hexgrid system if you know a better one.
I honestly absolutely fucking love the idea of a vertical hexgrid. Can't think of another game that has ever done it, and it fits this one perfectly.

>>88778638
>picrel as the "overworld" for placement, and have multiple of the vertical hexmaps under?
My thoughts are that the vertical hexgrid is the "campaign" map where you spend action points to dig toward treasures?
Before sending out an Expedition, you assign troops to it that can't be modified later without "converging" different armies by having them contact each other, at which point you can swap troops around.
Maybe each Objective has a "minimum army size" to obtain or control?

Then you open a Skirmish map to fight it out if two armies reach each other.

Then if you encounter another army,

File: 1683576361724018.png (397 KB, 1500x740)

397 KB PNG

>>88778363
Dam anon didn't put the territory size change in the map with legends >>88765669

>>88778738
lmao woops

File: default(1).png (661 KB, 2400x2772)

661 KB PNG

>>88778681
>>88778717
Let's say we have regional vertical hexgrids, so as not to scram Tokyo and Paris in the same map, or have to make a 999x999 grid, what locations should be on the one that include Paris? London, obviously, the Italians too right? What are their Capital?
Germany?

>>88779523
Its possible that the actual in-game "vertical hexgrid" is varied, representing only a section of the underground where groups of expeditions are pushing through?

>>88779609
I agree, if we want to see this thing be playable at all we would have to have a small chunk as a playable campaign.
Another thing is that excavation is hard, in 1870's especially.
Making large tunnels in solid stone would be borderline impossible, even with advancements in schizo-tech. So most traversal would have to be made through the natural caves that occur everywhere and seem to frequently change on their own (e.g. what happened to France).
And here's where the expeditions come in - they're small, cheap, comparatively fast and your faction is not gonna miss them if they disappear below the earth.

I proposed a few threads back that campaigns should take place on a 3d view of mini-layers, with 6-mile hexes in and ~1 mile between layers. You can't really bust a hole through a solid rock to the next layer, but you would have lots of passages to traverse, some requiring workers to clear

>>88780025
>Another thing is that excavation is hard, in 1870's especially.
We are including retro-futurist Vernian tech so its easier than it would be in reality, but absolutely.
With your notes about caves, a LOT of caving is widening already-existing caves so you can fit through.
"Excavation" could be just that. Finding caves that are too small to march through and widening openings / punching through walls.

File: 3rdlayerconcept4.png (358 KB, 1500x740)

358 KB PNG

I've actually revamped the map a bit.
Reasoning:
Mt. Snaesomethingsomething is actually on the far western end of Iceland.
Need to accomodate possible new entrance in Transylvania.
Satsuma closer to jungle zone, since they ride dinos.
Just cleaner and more readable all around.
Also put the Ionian entrance (used by Husks if I got that right) through solid rock as well.

>>88779523
Sicilian/Italian capital seems to be Naples.

>>88780287
Really nice anon, I'm sure Nero found a way to sail on the Neo Thethys ocean.
I would maybe put some little bits of "Volcanic plains" and jungle" in small spots other than the two big ones, to give biome variety.

File: Digenes-Akritas-Credit-Di(...).png (839 KB, 816x720)

839 KB PNG

Atlantis. Last beacon of civilization. Last hope of Greece.

>>88780287
>Austrian locked between the even more schizo french and the russian
Sasuga, Austria-san

>>88780598
Some things never change.

File: 662040aea06a924e90c0222f6(...).jpg (94 KB, 735x472)

94 KB JPG

>>88778257
>>88778257
>Please note that the old Rules doc was not being maintained, if the anon maintaining it comes back we'll re-add it.
Just to clarify, I am here. But we will be mowing to this new document because its better formatted. 90% of the stuff from the old doc has been moved here, so its ok to place this down as default rules doc. Also it wasn't alack of maintenance but the fact that no one contributed anything new for me to add.

>>88780287
Anon can you just use photoshop skills and overlay the world mad with this one so we could maybe make some adjustments to this one? I do realize its not meant to be 1:1 and that underworld layers should be 'smaller' but still, I think it would be nice. But so far, the mat looks amazing

>>88780507
>Last hope of Greece.
*Lost hope of the Eastern Roman Empire

>>88781061
>Just to clarify, I am here. But we will be mowing to this new document because its better formatted.
Clarified and noted. Thanks for your contributions mate.

>>88781061
>Also it wasn't alack of maintenance but the fact that no one contributed anything new for me to add.
Also the old doc was in Suggest Edits mode and not open edits mode so it was annoying as fuck to edit the old one. New doc is open so that's another upgrade.

File: underworld enteranceses o(...).png (674 KB, 798x712)

674 KB PNG

>>88781094
Are these all the Underworld entrances in Europe? Did I miss any? I added Paris and Istanbul as entrances too. The one in Balkan at the Prokletije 'Cursed' mountains is largely unknown and kept a secret. And the one in Romania at Transylvania is just an example of were it can be for when Austro-Hungary eventually finds its own way in. There are some interesting cave systems in north-west of Spain and south east of Norway but no one has mentioned them as factions so I dint want to put them on the map. But they could be potential entrances if we want to expand the setting.

>>88780287
>>88781363
I replied to the wrong thing. I know these don't have to be 1:1 spot on, as things can move around a bit, but I was Istanbul is missing and we just cant have that.

>>88780287
i know sky people are our meme faction but do they really control so little of the underground?

>>88781866
this is a map of the floor, anon
they control the entire roof

File: ca2e3a288b74d12bad328e1c6(...).jpg (31 KB, 372x361)

31 KB JPG

>>88781116
>Lost? Eastern Rome?
>You hit your head pretty hard, Stratos.
>anyways, how's this new sword?

File: overlay.png (408 KB, 1500x740)

408 KB PNG

>>88781094
This should give a rough idea. I actually realized that Doggerland was a little misplaced.

File: overlaycorrected.png (359 KB, 1500x740)

359 KB PNG

Yeah, unless Istanbul is also going to the 4th layer, we'll be needing another revision.

>>88782372
Is Istanbul not still on the surface?

>>88782354
>Ack and Ook influenced ancient Middle Eastern religion

While we are on the subject of terrain, perhaps we could figure out in-game movement too. Since the basis is hexes, how many hexes, should an average unit move? Or, in other terms, how many turns before Melee units can engage each other over an average map. Mnymrw

>>88783061
>While we are on the subject of terrain, perhaps we could figure out in-game movement too. Since the basis is hexes, how many hexes, should an average unit move?
Let's go with 3-4 hexes per turn for average units and also just set Movement attribute to "Number of hexes it can move" to keep things simple.

>>88782372
>>88782713
Istanbul is still on the service, it's just husked due to the Sultan going gamer mode. AFAIK the only sunken parts of the surface are Paris and Satsuma.

>>88783273
>AFAIK the only sunken parts of the surface are Paris and Satsuma.
Yes that was my understanding too.

bump

>>88779523
This seems like a good idea. We can go Western Europe, Japan/Satsuma, America, etc. I personally think that down the line we should make full regional multi-layered maps, but that's probably once the basic skirmish game has been ironed out and we've got a solid foundation for more interesting game modes.

>>88785490
>but that's probably once the basic skirmish game has been ironed out and we've got a solid foundation for more interesting game modes.

Movement should be easy to work out. Damage is basically done.
We just need a few basic unit statblocks and to settle how cover/terrain works to start playtesting honestly.

>>88782748
>Eek
Indus Valley
>Ook
Sumer
>Ack
Egypt
All correspond to major centres of civilization.

>>88781866
>>88781889
Yeah, it's just a trading hub with the floor for them.

>>88786291
>Ancient humans betrayed the big brained neanderthals who helped them build civilisation and forced them underground

>>88786291
Deepest lore. Litteraly.

>>88786464
I imagine the Agarthan Neanderthals are the survivors/descendants of Neanderthals either forced underground or those who ended up there. There they've thrived and surpassed the surface peoples. then they made contact with them and the rest is mythology. Annunaki? Yeah. Neander-Apes from Below. Igigi rebellion? Aborted surface colonization attempt, after which Neanderthals decided to work through human proxies.

File: Hieronymus_wolf2.jpg (105 KB, 391x505)

105 KB JPG

>>88781894
>When Constantinople fell I thought we had lost all hope
>Believes the lies of Hieronymus Wolf and Corpus Historiae Byzantinae
>It was never called Byzantium while it existed. It was always called East Roman Empire
Its inhabitants were called Romans
Was there a big Greek influence? Yes over time it grew. Did anyone call them Byzantians or Greeks? No.
>Yeah the sword is good, its well balanced I like that. Thank you. I could really start wearing a better helmet

File: i_guess.png (146 KB, 528x499)

146 KB PNG

>>88782354
misplaced? Maybe. I think its ok as these layers would be a bit smaller then the maps and since this is a European centric map things being a bit off in other areas like US or Japan is ok. But you need to move Stromboli and Ionian (or tell me whats the lore behind that)
Also are gray bits like pillars? Like rocks with tunnels/caves inside? Put down Prokletije at the three borders of Serbia (Kosovo province), Albania and Montenegro
Also Istanbul is totally missing. That part around balkans needs to be reworked a bit

>>88783094
I second this. As for flore to floor, seeing that passages would be at least a couple km long we shouldnt really worry about that in the skirmish game

File: 323455_1_En_10_Fig4_HTML.png (270 KB, 685x395)

270 KB PNG

>>88783273
>IK the only sunken parts of the surface are Paris and Satsuma.
can we have Istanbul be like half sunken? This is the real geology and as you can see its fucked. Maybe like a part of the city is flooded fool of waterfalls from the seas near then that create rivers at the bottom. Some houses or taller buildings still peaking above the ground? The Theodosian walls being reversed, used a steps to get into Istanbul and to keep uncontrolled husks out. Think of the city as a giant entrance thats covered in the maze of the city.

>>88788358
Yeah, they are supposed to be extending up to the roof. I put entrances that go straight to the 4th layer through them. I imagine the Ionian entrance would have to end up in a pillar in the sea of the 4th layer, with Husks emerging at the bottom, since it's an underwater entrance. Stromboli, I think (?) is close enough, but Ionian Fault IS supposed to be a little further to the west. Is Istanbul itself an entrance or not? Opinions seem to be divided.

Frankly Istanbul makes for a better 4th layer entrance, in my opinion, since the Ionian one would put them a bit too close to Sicilians. Should Prokletje be a 3rd or a 4th layer entrance?

>>88788454
I imagine Istanbul more as a "sinking" city then a fallen one. I think it sinking all the way to layer 4 is too deep. But It can have some tunnels/spiral staircases that lead there. I don't think it should skip leaves.

File: austriarise.jpg (69 KB, 500x665)

69 KB JPG

Here's an alternate Austria-Hungary proposal based on all ideas suggested at some point or another. Maybe this could help find the compromise. 1/2
>Duosiclian Republic succesfully unifies most of Italy by the late '50s and proceeds to declare war on Austria
>Austrians get completely memed on with Volcano Bulshit and both Lombardy and Venetia are taken (more impressive than OTL wars of Italian Independence)
>To much chagrin the Duosicilian Republic becomes the United Kingdom of Italy and the Three Sicilies, as the Volcano Lord olligarchs' grasp on power becomes neigh absolute. They now elect a Tyrant from among themselves.
>("Italy" here corresponding to North Italy, Two Siciles to, well, Two Sicilies/Naples and the Third Sicily is the one Below. I tried maintaining name continuity, but we can just call it Italy. Republics degenerate into dictatorships all the time and being de facto ruled by human-sacrificing Volcano demigods probably doesn't help.)
>Prussia comes along and beats up Austrians like in OTL around '66.
>Austro-Hungarian compromise happens also more or less like OTL
>Desperate and having seen the wealth and power acquired by Italy in Agartha, they unexpectedly start talks with their enemies
>Italians happily agree to let them use the Stromboli access on somewhat exploitative terms

2/2
>The Pope is understandably not impressed by a huge Catholic empire mingling with the Neapolitan Antichrist. Franz Joseph the "Judas Emperor" is excommunicated and the Austro-Hungarian Church severs ties with Rome/Avignon. An antipope is set up in Vienna (or Budapest).
>"The Danubian Miracle" happens. As things are looking like they can't possibly get any worse for Austria-Hungary... they actually don't.
>Influx of Agarthan wealth stimulates the imperial economy and leads to the rise of state-affiliated Agarthic Sciences-based industries. They form a zaibatsu-like Central European Agartha Industrial Complex (this is building on the "German Industrial Complex" mentioned by the Paulistaen Syndicate wojak)
>The Huskification turns out to be a blessing in disguise. Austro-Hungarian arms industries are macking bank on supplying the Balkan rebels and the Slavic militants are now far more concerned with fighting the Husks in their homelands than destabilizing the empire.
>Desperate refugees from the Balkans and dissidents are thrown into Agartha as fodder and cheap labour.
>Austria-Hungary is now tirelessly looking for an entrance of their own.
>When they find it they can finally ditch the Italians and stand tall on their own.
>Maybe even have a shot at a rematch against Italy and Prussia/Germany?

>>88789409
>Balkan rebels
Or states or whatever the situation is.

>>88789941
Well if its the 1890s then they are already states. If its the 1870s we will just push history to make some events happen quicker then they did. It will make sense because the Balkan nations were only really waiting for Ottomans to be weak. And Istanbul sinking into the ground and people reanimating and becoming Husks seems like a nice event to start shit off.

>>88790151
Yeah, I figured some states could simply emerge in the ensuing chaos.

>>88790151
My personnal take is to put the game somewhere around June/July 1886.
At the celebration of the century of the USA, as Liberty Enlightening the World is revealed and inaugurated, Mu launch their attack of New York. The current point is shortly after that as consequences unfold. It's actually a teaser for 5e and the event of Mu launching it's invasion of Japan.

>>88790374
That sounds sick. I imagine the sinking is THE EVENT that kicks off the rest, so it shouldn't happen too far apart from the Italian and Indian shenanigans. Could go something like this:
>The Revolutions of '48 shake Europe but take on a very different turn in Italy as the Two Sicilies are somehow overrun by the local Carbonari. Mysterious fires inexplicably start in the fortifications and encampments of the royal troops. King Ferdinand II is executed in a twisted maner as the revolutionaries throw him into the Etna. The Count of Trani is reported to have been seen with his eyes glowing with flame, but this is dismissed as tall tales.
>The Duosicilian Republic is proclaimed and hopeful eyes of Italian nationalists turn to it, as the kingdom of Sardinia fails to oust Austria from Italy. Duosicilian-Papal war/crusade happens more or less like proposed before, but in the '50s. In the aftermath a wave of revolutions sweeps remaining Italian states and they join the Duosicilian Republic. More supernatural accidents are reported. Volcanoes thought dormant are erupting and earthquakes befall the crusader armies seemingly on purpose.
>Shorty after Papal league is defeated and Rome falls to the Sicilian armies, the sinking of Paris happens. Many connect the two events, thinking it a sign of the End Times.
>Meanwhile the Rebellion of 1857 breaks out in India. Mysterious figures that look like Hindu ascetics and Buddhist monks are seen in the company of rebels. In a great shock to all the rebels proceed to defeat the British army at every turn, almost like they can predict their foes' every move.
>Around 58-60 (?) Paris is rediscovered, Agartha's existence now becomes apparent to all. Stromboli entrance is opened after a great number of sacrifices are conducted.
>Around 65, with the end of the Civil War, Laboulaye comes up with the statue idea
The statue could be even constructed somewhat earlier this timeline, since Bartholdi doesn't have to fight in a war.

And so he wouldn't spend like 9 years making the Lion of Belfort. So he could maye have Liberty realised in the mid 70s? Could have also even used some Agarthan materials for it, so it's actually different, just like the earlier version of the "Eiffel Tower". And then the Mu attack.

>>88792053
>Lady Destiny
fuck liberty, we're here to MANIFEST, mothafuckas!

>>88791659
Though technically, I guess, many of the Sicilian revolutionaries wouldn't really be "Carbonari" at that point, but you know what I mean.

>>88792053
86 is the OTL date the statue was finished/inaugurated. That's why I used it.
Also Lion of Belfort is KINO

>>88793329
Yeah, I'm just thinking of the possibilities. And I'm not hating on the Lion, but clearly all that time and effort could have been used differently for alt-history purposes.

>>88792053
Like in 1876? Literally a century since the Declaration. Funded by the Underworld bucks, built on a Titanium frame (thanks, Eiffel), torch literally glowing because it was made from luminiscent Agarthan crystal.

File: statue-of-liberty-539318_640.jpg (80 KB, 640x426)

80 KB JPG

>>88794181
>torch literally glowing because it was made from luminiscent Agarthan crystal.
MINE EYES HAVE SEEN THE GLORY OF THE COMING OF THE LORD
HE IS TRAMPLING OUT THE VINTAGE WHERE THE GRAPES OF WRATH ARE STORED
HE HAS LOOSED THE FATEFUL LIGHTNING OF HIS TERRIBLE SWIFT SWORD
HIS TRUUUUTH IS MAAARCHING ON!

>>88790374
In 1886 there was the Serbo-Bulgarian war. Im guessing that it wouldn't actually happen if underground was involved but still thats a nice time period for the Balkans. But anoter question is left on the Balkans.
>When does Istanbul start to fall or "sink" as one anon put it?
What is the real Le funny Event the Sultan did? How long ago? Not too long I guess. Maybe around the start of 1880s? Because by the late 1870s Balkan nations freed them selves on their own in our timeline, no need to dark magic to fuck up the Ottomans. Some balkan Anon that knows this shit better should probably write this part of the story.
Also is the Falling of Paris the >inciting incident
For this setting?

>>88794181
>>88794238
Then it gets half destroyed by a terrorist attack on New York by Mu lead german spies who where hopping to get some of that sweet technology..

>>88786515
>>88786464
What if Neanderthals figured out that industrialization pollutes the First Layer and so intentionally kept themselves at Renessiance tech to ensure the Hyperboreans stay the fuck in the ceiling?

>>88796512
I kind of like the idea that the Neanderthals figured out a lot of stuff about how the layers work, but because they're fucking Neanderthals, nobody listens to them.

File: zaius_1.jpg (42 KB, 250x333)

42 KB JPG

>>88796824
>neanderthal doge's face when the British cross the wall again

>>88796831
Leading Neanderthal Wall Theorists are working overtime to prevent the war with the Atlans. They are ever vigilant, always a step ahead of the ever moving Wall.

>>88796824
>Incredibly intelligent
>Can only communicate through loud grunts and simple words
>The only other species that took their advice was the grogs

File: stinker_gorg_scan.png (204 KB, 347x400)

204 KB PNG

>>88797196
>>88796512
>REJECT MODERNITY
>RETURN TO GORG
WE GOT ANOTHER ONE, BOYS

>>88796512
This is why they're recruited as Roosevelt's Retards.

>>88796831
why didn't you embrace them
they could have saved you

Assuming we start playtesting on skirmish gamemode just as Extermination objective, what might some other objectives be?

>>88778638
You know, I came up with the idea a few threads ago, but I still really like the idea that the final straw to break Napoleon's mind was finding a perfect copy of St. Helena underground. Not that the island had sunken, as Paris had, but that there was another one there.
Waiting for him.
Welcoming him home.

>>88798695
There's several we could do. Grab the mcguffin, or several mcguffins. Take a piece of valuable territory from the enemy. Get the analytic engine/lemurian prophet/baron phosphorus to the other side of the map safely. We should probably focus on just the kill each other skirmish mode for now though.

>>88798768
some Lemurian Prophecy game mode with a puzzle attached to it could be interesting

>>88798695
Extermination
Resource control (King of the Hill)
Race for the Macguffin (uncover more clues than other players)

>>88783094
Do units spend movement points for changing facing like in BT too?

>>88799292
i think they should just have a Movement score, and spend action points or ability points or something for specific stuff like that

>>88798892
Like completing a set of seemingly arbitrary objectives (up to stuff like lose 4 units, but ONLY 4 units), whereas the opponent tries to prevent that?

File: BT-7.jpg (132 KB, 630x536)

132 KB JPG

>>88799292
idk Anon about stances and facings. If we add that I feel like it shouldn't use Movement.
My bigger problem is how are we going to actually play this. Either make a Discord for playtesting where we meme over MSpaint, Roll20 (ew) maybe? VTT sounds like the best option but know many people actually have VTT? And we all know that no one will play this thin irl for multiple reasons, so Online is the best thing we have

>>88798768
For play tests or stand alone games sure.
But I think they are quite unneeded for campaigns. Objectives should be more natural. E.g. I need money, I will take over this area that has ore. Logically if someone else already owns that ore field they will oppose me and defend it. (attack defence) Example two: I see that the enemy is has too many units. I will try to destroy as much of his units without taking too many losses on my side (destruction) Ex 3: rumors spread around about a artifact, ore fild or some other cool thing. People will race for it.

File: overlaycorrected2.png (468 KB, 1500x740)

468 KB PNG

Update. Prokletje, Necropolis and Giza included, more space added for the kids to play at in the northern part. Moved Ionian westwards and Russia eastwards. Thankfully, Siberia is large. I figured Giza could go lower since it's pretty crowded here already. Also added more jungle and volcanic areas as requested by one anon.

>>88801709
maybe its a good idea to add a legend to the map? im a bit confused with the layers and how they work. is this the map of 3rd and 4th layer? is each layer global or jus partial? im confused on that part

>>88801709
What happened to Tethys? Is the under-sea now a cool 2000s hacker/jesus stand in?

File: 3rdlayerlegend.png (478 KB, 1500x740)

478 KB PNG

>>88801800
It IS a good idea, yes. The map was rougly based on a global surface map, so most locations are roughly under where they should be. Though logically speaking, Underworld distances should contract.
>>88801911
Lol, missed this one.

>>88778228
So how would austria hungarys backwardsness translates to this?

>>88803329
Quite easily actually. Just keep most of History as it were. Austria constantly taking Ls and being left behind so they have to resort to drastic measures.

>>88804850
Are you cool with the most recent AH proposal?

>>88800337
So moving and changing facing are not done in the same "phase", or they have a different "cost"?
>>88801536
>idk Anon about stances and facings
Haven't mentionned stances, just facing. Imho it "feels" wrong to fully emulate BT facing changes (basically, each "tick" of facing changed cost 1 movement point at least), it's too "heavy", but then I dont know what's the point of an hexmap wargame if there is not some level of facing. And making it cost less than 1 for one "tick" creates more problems than it solves.
>My bigger problem is how are we going to actually play this
We are not there. Currently we need to settle on enough of the rules that making a "physical" version, however low-grade, allows you to see how the mechanics resolve.
Then we need to decide if we are pushing a kitbashing/modeling aspect to this, or if we skip that part entirely.
The comes the part where I shamelessly steal all of this and start myself a KS/Patreon and becomes rich on other people's back. Of someone else does it before me. I mea it'll happen it's just a question of who.

>>88807178
>So moving and changing facing are not done in the same "phase", or they have a different "cost"?
I say we put change face in with Movement, so you have generic Movement points ONLY for moving and changing face, with Ability/Action points for everything else.

Let's go back to the rules, specifically wounds.
I like the first proposal from the doc more, since it's pretty simple and fast to resolve: get the number by which you beat your attack target and look at the table.
Currently we have 3 types:
>0-1: Scratch (1/2x)
>2-5: Normal (1x)
>6+: Critical (2x)
We haven't really discussed the way you actually calculate damage, so here's my proposal for it:
Have the damage be x/y, where x is damage and y is wound bonus.
e.g. a rifle has 2/2. You deal 2 wounds and you improve the wound table result by 2.
If we set a normal human to 4 wounds, it means that he will probably survive getting shot once. But any model with a ranged skill of 5 on a roll of 1 will instakill him, with difference of 4 getting upgraded to 6. This keeps the guns consistent, but not too deadly.

Also we need to determine how wounds impact the stats. For a start, a will check on activation when having less than half the wounds left seems reasonable
I'll add whatever we decide upon to the doc once I wake up tomorrow

>>88798695
Break through (Reach/Prevent from reaching a certain area)
Hold out (Survive N turns)
Raze (New-com Terror missions, one side protecting NPCs, other side trying to kill as many of them as possible)
Hunt (Kill a dangerous NPC, get its corpse/trophy to your side of the board)

>>88807840
>Hold out (Survive N turns)
Multiplayer mode where the players have static armies and you roll random charts to spawn waves of Morlock/Dinos every turn? Longest survivor wins?
Sounds good to me.

>>88807840
I like this damage proposal. So if you roll a Scratch result with a 2/2 weapon, it's 2 scratches, right?
>how wounds impact the stats
Scratch: No effect
At least one Normal: -1 move and to hit
At least one Critical: -1 AP, provided they're still alive
Will check at less than half total wounds also seems okay.
Personally, I don't think stacking maluses are needed for wounds. There is already a natural downside to stacking wounds: death.

>>88807840
Not a fan of have wound types and then converting them to health point values afterwards, it seems to me it's missing the point of using a track and not a health pool.

>>88808151
>At least one Critical: -1 AP and to hit, provided they're still alive
Meant that

>>88801709
>volcanoes under Boston

>>88808151
No, I think he's just using the wound type as a multiplcator for the amount of wounds removed from a model in the end. Maybe I'm wrong but otherwise wouldnt it be weird that weapons always deal more or less the same multiples of grazes/wounds/critical with no way to go in between?

>>88807840
Perhaps it would help to get consensus on how many rolls and checks we are aiming at for an full atack resolution. Rolls being dice rolls (obviously) and checks being all values needing to be referenced
For example the usual GW attack sequence takes 3~4 rolls and 7-8 checks if I'm not mistaken.

>>88809896
>Perhaps it would help to get consensus on how many rolls and checks we are aiming at for an full atack resolution
No more than 2 total I'd say, MAYBE 3.

>>88810375
Two seems doable but very limiting, could it at least be two face-to-face rolls?

>>88810542
One opposed roll seems perfectly fine.
What could you possibly gain from having more than one that isn't solved by a single roll?

Like, two dice rolls. great, you've moved the probability from linear to a bell curve I guess? Is that a huge deal? No, and if you want to weight roll results by bell curve just shift the ONE roll to 3d6/2d10 or another form of multiple rolls added together. Same result, less effort.

>>88807840
Scratch should be the most common type. If we're doing up to 6+, it should be
>0-3 scratch
>4-5 normal
>6+ Critical

>>88809690
Those would be under the Atlantic, I think.

File: Pale Dweller.png (154 KB, 791x631)

154 KB PNG

The Pale Dweller bumps the thread.

>>88809789
I've though about it and maybe scrapping damage multiplication all together would be better. Sadly I don't have any better ideas for now
You go down when you have no wounds left, no matter their type, so maybe criticals would give you a big debuff when rolling on Mordheim-style casualty table?

>>88815420
It is a good question, really: how to simulate damage differences between weapons if we don't have a damage roll. Just adjust the wound table?

>>88780025
>>88780046
why does everyone just assume it's 1870s? No retard in his functional mond would have this be the same timeline as Leviathan. 1880s actually allows plausibilty.

>>88817068
ffs, it's you again. We've decided on 1870s in the first thread
No one gives a shit about Leviathan

>>88817161
no one decided you apebrain nigger.

>>88780025
Don't forget a lot of territories are "open air" just underground. Great prehistoric jungles, rolling plains covered in monolithic ruins where ancient and strange animals live in herds, volcanic plains, etc.

File: zouave_pontifical_by_manu(...).jpg (130 KB, 668x1196)

130 KB JPG

here to say Volcano sicily anon missed out on making the Papal States bring light to the darkness.

>>88817388
Eh, someone DID use that catchphrase, but I think it was for Fallen-Paris.

File: 5lodis.png (71 KB, 472x471)

71 KB PNG

>>88817715
>fallen paris
>lava italy
>undead middle east

journey to the center of the earth?

File: 1521352000912.png (273 KB, 517x396)

273 KB PNG

>>88817068
Because it literally says so in every OP? Because it's based on a novel taking place in 1863, with events from it being literally canon in-universe? There are no "assumptions" going on here, those are more like "inferences" at this point.
>No retard in his functional mond would have this be the same timeline as Leviathan
I was not involved with Leviathan in any way, any particular reason I should care? From what I understand it takes place in a fictional universe. How relevant is it what decade/century it roughly corresponds to, really?

>>88817068
>why does everyone just assume it's 1870s?
>>88817209
>no one decided you apebrain nigger
I don't know, man, sure seems like enough people have decided to make you post.

>>88817068
>why does everyone just assume it's 1870s?
Because it has been 1870s the ENTIRE TIME.

>>88817209
We all did, literally every single one o fus but you apparently.

>>88818176
>journey to the center of the earth?
We... took some liberties.
and that's a good thing

>>88815405
Thank you, Pale Dweller.
Very cool!

It's always weird to recall that the surface has no supernature filter.

>>88818176
>"French disease"
>Belgian chocolate
>Irish Potato Famine

Colonization of America?

>>88815420
I'm sorry I've been working a lot this week because its crunch time, and I'm on vacation starting tomorrow so I had to pull extra weight on top of things or they would have hated me. I have a pretty set idea on how to do the whole thing, I'll post it tomorrow, it's probably a bit more complex than what most anons expect but honestly not by much.

File: gue_map.jpg (122 KB, 450x318)

122 KB JPG

Were the steppe nomad/middle eastern aesthetics of Mu intentional or was it just another happy accident common in these threads? Because Churchward DID write about ancient Uyghurs being descendants of Mu.

>>88817715
Yeah it was a play on the fact that the City of light had fallen down to the darkness of the underworld.

>>88806173
its cool, tho the first half talks more about Italy, that part needs to be rearranged but yeah, its more realistic now.

File: tali.jpg (72 KB, 692x827)

72 KB JPG

>>88807178
The only reason its on a hex map is so we can decide the position on characters on the map easily, is it not? Its hex because squares are weird with diagonal movement.
>>88807840
Im confused,
>x/y, where x is damage and y is wound bonus
Where? Who cares? wound Bonus?? What?
What happened to you take 2 shots you die? No real damage, its just deadly. Number of wounds = HP, that it. A weapon can do 1 or more wounds per hit. How much you beat the number is only there to tell you how good you hit him.
>>88808151
If you miss him, you do no damage, cuz you well, you missed. Getting hit in the shoulder will hurt you but it wont kill you, so thats what we would call a 'Scratch'. Adding extra debufs to wounded units is a nice idea but thats too much info to track and frankly its just annoying. Not only will you forget, you wont even track it half of the time. It will become a slog fest.
>>88808160
This anon is on the same page.
>>88812716
No it shouldn't, it will slow down the game needlessly, its good as it is.

File: 3FD3983F-0877-4096-B138-2(...).png (156 KB, 588x393)

156 KB PNG

Gorgpill me. What do we have so far on these funny little lads?

>>88823823
>Gorgpill me.
Remnant of 1e that was deleted and retconned in 2e for not being marketable. (Doing so was like seven different mistakes all at once, but anyways.)

When asked who their leader is, they all pointed to their good friend Lee-Dehr. Lee-Dehr doesn't know why the foreigners give him cool clothes and fancy shiny things now, but he's not about to complain.

>>88824562
Are their helmets mushrooms? Or are they some sort of emerald? I found some minis that are perfect Gorg lookalikes and I thought it would be fun to paint them

>>88824658
my theory has always been that it's either a mushroom-cap put over dried leather (the cap is from the kind they make stink-juice from) or it's some weird underground beastie with green skin that they find fashionable.

>>88824658
>Are their helmets mushrooms? Or are they some sort of emerald?
Considering that the Shroom Farmers (also retconned) were good friends of the Gorgs in 1e, its reasonable to assume they're some kind of hard mushroom with horns added later. Or just painted metal. 1e was a strange time, we don't have many details.

The number of horns a Gorg helmet has signifies rank. Four horns is the highest rank, apparently.

>>88822095
Everything is coincidence, and also not. Other forces are at play here, guiding our hands as we write the lore. Now if only they'd do that for the rules too...

>>88824801
>Now if only they'd do that for the rules too...
The challenge is half the fun, my friend!
The forces at play inspire us, but they demand much from us too. We shall deliver.

File: 60C2CC51-B348-431A-BAAF-D(...).png (211 KB, 472x328)

211 KB PNG

>>88824692
>four is the highest rank

Fug.

The sculptors probably weren’t aware of that fact.

File: 1683936055067329.jpg (28 KB, 400x167)

28 KB JPG

>>88819250
>>88818410
>>88819056
people wanted teddy Roosevelt and the rough riders who weren't even a thing till the spanish-american war. They were allowed. Hotchkisses were referenced, we have tracked vehicles with 12 pounders being a thing since the very first fucking thread We have fucking leopold II, references to french expeditions in japan and vietnam which happened in the 1890s. I know it's fun to be contrarian faggots but maybe just admit people were being freeform with everything to begin with, you absolute fucking bandwagoners.

File: CHAOS.gif (1.23 MB, 300x182)

1.23 MB GIF

>>88825244
HE'S TOO POWERFUL!!!!
THE LEGENDARY SEVEN-HORNED GORG!!!!!!

>>88825613
bro its the 1870s and some fun shit happened a bit earlier
get over it

>>88825613
Kill yourself, complainigger. You contribute nothing to the threads other than whining, while the "bandwagoners" are actually making shit.

>>88826081
WHEN STINK JUICE RUNS DRY

WHEN THE GORGS ARE SURROUNDED ON ALL SIDES

HE WILL RISE.

>>88826511
>one Gorg thinks horns look are cool
>puts seven horns on his helmet for fun
>nobody from the tribes minds because Gorgs are cool like that
>rumours spread of the Seven-Horned Gorg
>legendary, immortal warrior
>enemies rout at his mere presence
>nobody fucks with the Gorgs because he's on their side
>In reality Gorgs just pass arpimd the cool seven-horned hat that Lay-Gond made so its just been present at every battle anyone has ever lost against the Gorgs
>they really like that hat, so they make sure its not ANYWHERE NEAR battles they might lose

File: stink gorg draft 2.png (74 KB, 792x1026)

74 KB PNG

Have a hastily drawn, unfinished, shamelessly traced SOVLful rendition of Stinker Gorgs fighting Skywaymen.

>>88826790
that's SCRAMBLE to the center of the earth, THANK you very much!
it got quads
that's the name

also, fuckin' beautiful bruv

>>88826794
Maybe it was Rush in 1e?

>>88826876
1e was just "Expedition" wasn't it?

File: BD1D1988-0846-4485-897A-3(...).jpg (212 KB, 786x1017)

212 KB JPG

>>88826794
Ah, fuck. I’ll have to change it if I ever “clean” up the image.

>>88826881
A rare, sought after rule book misprint?

File: Kokand Balls.jpg (1.19 MB, 3256x1050)

1.19 MB JPG

Did you guys know about the artifacts discovered in Kokand (modern Uzbekistan) in the XIX century by the Russians? They were large stone spheres covered in patterns, supposedly dating back to the Sogdians, but they don't really match any other artifacts from the time/region. Whenever we expand on Mu and Tsardom we should definitely utilize the Kokand Balls.

>>88826790
Brilliant work anon, exactly how I imagined a cover would be.

As an aside, what should the current ruleset be? 4e? 4.5e? We haven't done much work on Hyperborea, so we could easily have 4e as the foundation for the WIP ruleset we have, lore booklet and all.

>>88827878
> google Kokand balls
> stare 20 seconds at screen wondering why I'm getting CBT site
Not even mad you beautiful bastard, that laugh was a great start to my day.

>>88827878
don't you mean Kokand Bombs?

>>88826881
>>88826876
>>88826794
>>88826790
It was called "Rush" but that name was dropped when the production company tried to sue some band in Canada over trademark and lost big time.

>>88832650
fucking Geddy Lee that bloody son of a bitch

File: 24CC2A36-7D4C-41C2-9C6D-F(...).jpg (308 KB, 917x1200)

308 KB JPG

So question I want to help contribute but I just got here. I see in the rules fox it’s a skirmish game for 10-15 minis a player or so. Are the expedition miniatures single models as per a “standard” skirmish game. Or is it like a small group of multi base models? Because for me looking at the proposed three layer system Im imagining an expedition is larger than a few individuals. I’m imagining it’d be like Hordes of the Things where an expedition unit is, as previously stated, a base holding 2-5 smaller models representing an indeterminate number of members. With a group of 10-15 a side it would visually show a vast under taking of a faction, but still mechanically be a skirmish with the relatively small amount of units on the field.

Apologies if I’m rambling I’m just trying to get a grasp on things.

>>88833070
I think the last time we had this debate the sentiment was that we don't want multi-model units.

File: 0C998DDB-CBAF-4C33-8BFE-A(...).jpg (396 KB, 1055x1530)

396 KB JPG

>>88833964
Alrighty then! Well that answers my next question as to what I would be making for mock up standees. Once the rules are in a play testing state, I’ll have to drag my friend in for a test game, or do a solo match. Of course that’s a bit of a pipe dream right now

>>88833964
>I think the last time we had this debate the sentiment was that we don't want multi-model units.
I agree with this, would rather we just make a new unit if we want new things.

>>88834119
Looks like Fulgrim post-daemon ascension in drag.

File: isthislost.png (132 KB, 873x475)

132 KB PNG

So, we've got all these characters. What opinions do they have of each other?
Personally, I think Illinois Jack and Conrad beauchamp don't get along in the slightest.

4AM bump

File: IMG_20230513_102226.png (387 KB, 465x577)

387 KB PNG

>>88825613
>>88826091
It is around the 1870s. A couple years up or down doesn't really matter but it shouldn't go over 1890. So late 1880s at best. But the current year is 1885 I think.

>>88838356
We could go to like 80, but past that Charles LNB would be leaving a trail of dust. Maybe that's why he's friends with Akamnandag.

>>88820901
Still waiting for that proposal, cause I sure as fuck don't know how to do damage better.
Would the difference between weapons just be a wound table adjustment and penetration? So it determines your degree-of-succes-to-wounds ratio separately from skill basically.

Actually, we kinda need to go past 1877 a couple of years for Satsuma. So I suggest 1880 flat.

>>88834119
So snakes are back on the menu Bois??
Also I'm willing to do a game test. It's bare bones but I think we have enough stuff to do it.

>>88838356
I think keeping the date vague should suffice. There's no real need to keep a hard date beyond disallowing certain tech developments, like WWI weapons for instance, and it's a soft-sci fi setting anyway. I think a basic "It is the Late 19th century" should be all we need in terms of date.

>>88838786
>game test
What would be the best way to do it?
Tabletop sim is one way, but it's paid and setting it up could be a hassle
Roll20 is free, but requires an account and is clunky as hell
There's owlbear.rodeo, it's online, free, no account needed, runs pretty well, but has no chat (you can kinda use the notes tool in place of chat)

We still need to decide on damage calculation, it's the only real thing holding us back. Hopefully >>88820901 delivers, I've been busy with my Bachelor's and didn't have the energy to come up with anything.

>>88834119
>>88838786
You know, it would make sense for Lemuria to have Nagas...

>>88838647
Sorry, yesterday got away from me, and I've been at work since 6am today, I'll try to post it this afternoon if I'm not too burnt.
It's very much the same as before except it replaces armor modification with damage type determination. I've added a simple system for action points too in order to get a feel for reloading range weapons, and to implement a 'Dodging' mechanic.
Also, range is very simple, and pretty deadly, so if the "complexity" of melee combat scares you then just load up on bullets.

>>88839600
Thanks, mate. No pressure, I'm also swamped.

>>88827878
Damn, that’s a clever bait. You got me good.

File: Mort_du_prince_imperial_((...).jpg (118 KB, 690x495)

118 KB JPG

>>88838431
Well, there's always his son, who'd make a great Hero in his own right. Maybe with his father never realizing his Napoleonic ambitions, he picks up the torch and uses the expiditions to prove himself, build a following and potentially become the new emperor.
But Charles is pretty iconic at this point, so I understand the desire to keep him. I don't care if its 70s or like mid 80s too much, honestly, as long as we at least try to have shit make some sense. Is the anon who made Commander LNB still around? What do you think? Could old Nappy III have his rest?

Game mode proposal:
>Conquest
If your Leader unit gets to the far side of the hexgrid (farthest edge hex into the enemy's deployment zone.) and stays there for a full turn, it is a victory.

>>88840441
I mean, even if Charles dies of old age, he can still be an iconic lore character and Akamnandag's bro. "Tales of the Ineffable Deep" would then be Akamnandag reminiscing about his old friend, yet another one he had to outlive.

>>88838755
Just remember Japan is the latest edition.

>>88840441
It'd be interesting to have the descendants and pretenders of Napoleon to show up in each edition, I'd imagine their allegiance would switch between Colonials/independents/mercenary and always a leader character but based on which one it'll be differing stats and how they're meant to be used.

>>88841690
Honestly, if we spread the tmeline between editions, I can see the case for 5e taking place in mid 80s, for sure. Given how that's when Austria-Hunagry becomes a faction, Tesla will have enough time to rise to prominence and start doing some mad science.

>>88839004
I agree that a vague date is better. Leave specific dates to in-universe novels.
>>88838431
Have we considered the possibility of Charles having found some way to extend his lifespan underground? There seems to be plenty of people who’ve managed it already, maybe that could be a reason he’s even down there in the first place?

>>88842278
If everyone left and right is doing it, it kinda loses its significance. His original wojak implied he didn't even attempt the Strasbourg coup and he looks like he's at the prime of his life. I think he was conceived back when 50-70 period was considered by some people, and Paris would sink in like 20-30s.

>>88842479
That's, like, also why there's that bit about the restored monarchy in the French lore. It was supposed to be the Bourbon Monarchy restored post-Napoleon. So the timeline used to be potentially waaaay earlier and all over the fucking place in general, and I find it really funny how some people have the gall to come here and insult others for daring to stick to earlier dates like the 70s. Not that I'm opposed to the 80s, really. But whatever we do, as they say down in Sicily, sacrifices sometimes need to be made. You can't just handwave everything with immortality and "it happened earlier". I mean, you can, but should you? We can at least be creative about it.

>>88842903
I second >>88841997 proposal
By having the time line move up a bit every edition we can have older figures and the concepts attached to them stick around while allowing the newer concepts to come up when they roughly would.
Plus having events like the proposed attack on New York as a winding up for 5e thing already pushes for something along these lines.

>>88843181
Fair enough, I'm cool with it. 4.1e is supposed to tease Hyperborea and Japan for 5e, so we have earlier statue in 76, Satsuma falls in 77, Mu attack New York and Hokkaido and so 4.1 takes place in the unspecified period between that and the 80s. Then 5e takes us into the new decade. Tesla, general widespread electricity boom, but extra schizo and a little earlier, fullblown Hyperborean invasion, Japan fully integrated, Austro-Hungarian comeback, Tsardom. Basically everything currently on the backlog.

File: 1678024457822198.jpg (951 KB, 2789x4096)

951 KB JPG

>>88834186
True, kek
>>88838786
>VTT
Hands down bast option, but as you said it costs 20$
>Roll20
As you said clunky. Setting up an acc isn't really a hassle it takes like 5min, just connect it to your google or some shit. Sadly probably the best option
>owlbear.rodeo
I may be a retard but as far as I remember it doesn't let you bring in your own tokens and its really limiting. I hope its just me being retarded and limited because its not as clunky as Roll20. No VC is no problem as we can always just Discord to chat and shit.
But tell me anon, what about
>Quest Portal?
I played on it a couple times, idk its extends but seems good. You will need an ACC tho. It runs great and has all the important features that Roll20 does.
>>88839029
Lascivious Lemurian slut? Pic relate?
>>88838356
Idk where you got the 1885 from but sounds good to me.
>>88839004
Lore people need a specific date to ground in the world. If we say up until the 1890. Then we know where is the hard stop. We can pull some events rom that time so they happen earlier but there needs to be a hard stop. Just read the lore and you'll understand.

>>88839803
Sorry again, got really burnt and went to sleep straight after my shift, good news is I'm off for the week so I'll post some stuff tomorrow.

Must mention sorry for no new portraits either. Similar situation. Should be able to get to some soon though.

HUGE euro bump for the boys back home

>>88838431
Maybe thats why they keep pushing the heiress

Did we ever come to a consensus on what the difference is between the Altans and Atlantis?

>>88851262
>Atlantis
Pinnacle of civilized civilization under the earth, more refined and inspired both by classical greek depictions and an alternate tech advancement (different rifles and advanced targeting, madcap alchemy with greek fire, flamethrowers, ect) they are ruled by a king currently King Perseus II and have a nobility technically but also have strong democratic workings in their political system as all of those noble positions are elected.
>Atlan
Either a offshoot born during the fall or a former colony of Atlantis that declared independence long ago.
They came across a mystical ore they call Titanium and used its complex but highly durable and magical properties to direct the development of their nation. Due to this they have heavily armored élite warriors, slaves, and weird Titanium stuff like golems and priests that are slowly turning into more of the substance.
They are ruled by the Titanium King and war constantly using the justification of The Sacred Atlan Wall and have a nobility full of those that live to fight kill and conquer.

>>88851667
>Either a offshoot born during the fall or a former colony of Atlantis that declared independence long ago.
Could be both. A group of colonists in Yucatan find refuge in the entrance of the Chicxulub crater (that place was a sick idea by the Maya anon, might as well use it) during the Fall, as the Hyperboreans are destroying their civilization. They end up on the 4th Layer, while Atlantean hide in the air pocket tunnels after the sinking of Atlantis and their migrations take them to the 5th. When they meet, Atlanteans try to assert dominance over their former colonial subjects, but they are not amused.

>>88851262
>Atlantis
Greco-Roman, rational.
>Atlans
Mayan, completely schizo.

File: husked conquistador.png (395 KB, 1574x855)

395 KB PNG

>>88778228
>>88839803
>>88839019
HERE WE GO.
I'll post the ranged attacks and a bit more on the AP system, and a simplified campaign mode I've been thinking about. I know I've ventured myself quite a bit alone on something which is a group effort but its mostly because when you try to figure something another question pops up and its easier to frame the whole thing tentatively in order to rework it later. Honestly I'm pretty happy with how it comes out.

>>88853702
i'm pretty sure we settled on NOT using individual limb targeting?

>>88853702
oof, should have reread before posting, man I'm tired.
"The defender may not roll" on the 5th *--* should have been "the defender may NOW* roll"

>>88853702
My immediate feedback is that a string of If>Else statements is clunky as fuck, but this is a great start and its good to have stuff put together.

>>88853702
>I know I've ventured myself quite a bit alone on something which is a group effort but its mostly because when you try to figure something another question pops up and its easier to frame the whole thing tentatively in order to rework it later. H
Also great work man. I'll probably jump off of this and try to refine my own ideas.
I'd say go jump into the AP system, I'm going to refine what you posted here down a little if you don't mind.

>>88853702
First, I think we wanted to roll under, not over, but that's whatever.
Second, so you propose to have separate Defence rolls and Armor saves, right? I think a single to hit roll is enough. We kinda got rid of damage rolls to have less rolls, so having a Defense roll by default would just be taking a step backwards, no? If it hits, you just use degree of success, Strength/Pen (are they the same thing?) and the Armor Save to determine the Wound severity as proposed before (0-1 for Scratch, 2-5 for Wound, 6+ for Crit)
But I like the Dodge mechanic. It allows for different forms of damage mitigation for armorless units and it kinda fulfils the same purpose of the Defence roll, no? Except it actually costs you something, so you won't roll it constantly, especially if you limit its use (like, can you Dodge a bullet? Not unless you're somehow superhuman I bet). And units supposed to be agile/evasive can have advantages when it comes to Dodging specifically. Maybe we could also have some sort of Parrying system for melee that let's you roll your Melee skill for defensive purposes at the cost of AP?
>>88853724
I think the jury is still out on whether it'll be used for Heroes and Leaders. Personally, I'd scrap it or leave targeting with debuffs for hitting certain parts as a speial ability for some units.

File: thoughts.png (455 KB, 1574x855)

455 KB PNG

>>88853702
As the eternal advocate of simplicity I've been working to tie all the ideas so far together but never really had things click until I saw this.

I know what I'm posting is VERY different from what you posted, but seeing you put everything together let me assemble my ideas more clearly.

Two dice rolls. Attack vs Evasion, Armour vs Penetration. VERY simple near-boolean results of those rolls (Considering only whether the natural dice result OR the result + bonuses beats the target score, not by the actual amount they succeed by.) is seems very clean to me. Also gives potential for a lot of roll result and variety having serious impact. Suddenly 1d4 + 4 is VERY different from 1d8. 1d8 secures more crits, but 1d4+4 is more reliable for example. IF we move to using different dice classes across different weapons. No issue with sticking to d10s, just a proposal.

I'm also still excluding different location hits, but I don't mind the idea. I think we'd have to playtest to feel out whether the added visceral arms-blowing-off brutality is worth the extra complexity.

>>88854341
To illustrate
>Single roll To Hit, degree of success and STR/PEN vs Armor Save for damage
>Let's say your Melee is 5, Weapon skill bonus is 1, 2 PEN, target has an Armor of 6
>You need under 6 to hit. You roll a 3, that's a succes of 3, enough for a Wound.
>With 2 PEN, the target's Armor Save is counted as 4. Target rolls a 5, failure. Wounds equal to Wounds Per Attack weapon stat go through.
>Target rolls a 4, success. Wound turns into a Scratch and is not affected by Wounds Per Attack, so only one.
>Target rolls a 2, success. Your degree of success reduced to 1 (3-2), which would be a Scratch otherwise. But Armor soaks it completely.
>Defender can spend AP to Dodge, in which case it works like the proposed Defence roll. Some units can have specific bonuses to it or we could have a separate stat like Evasion.
>In melee, defender can spend AP to Parry, in which case it works like the proposed Defence roll BUT defender uses his Melee as if he was attacking, and you compare degrees of successes???
Also not sure if you should lose Armor only on 1s/10s, for every failed Armor Save or for every successful hit. Also I'm going with Armor=Armor Save her, but I remember some people wanting to separate them.

>>88854341
>Personally, I'd scrap it or leave targeting with debuffs for hitting certain parts as a speial ability for some units.
Spend extra AP / penalties to Attack roll to target a specific body part and add a debuff on Hit if you succeed perhaps?

File: thoughts.png (459 KB, 1574x855)

459 KB PNG

>>88854391
Actually, on second thought, modified Success vs Success to be a Scratch, since we already had a "Wound + armour damage" result.. This way we have six different results,

>No damage
>Scratch + Armour damage
>Scratch + no armour damage
>Two results with Wound + Armour damage (Critical vs Success or Success vs Fail)
>Wound with no armour damage
>Critical wound with Armour damage

>>88854391
>>88854341
>>88853724
To note, again, the individual hit location for Mooks only determine what's the Armor Save value used, you don't track what limbs or what legs took damage.
I still think hit locations for Characters make sense and do not add that much complexity, especially if you end up paying more for Characters than for Mooks (which would make sense). If the average Character costs as much as 2-4 Mooks, then actual comes out pretty much equal.

>>88854564
>I still think hit locations for Characters make sense and do not add that much complexity, especially if you end up paying more for Characters than for Mooks (which would make sense). If the average Character costs as much as 2-4 Mooks, then actual comes out pretty much equal.
Yeah for sure I don't mind the idea of named Characters being Black Knight meatpoint monsters swimming through battlefields in pools of their own blood. Mooks can die just fine, but the Titanium King must be shredded down to the last bone and small muscle group to take down. Makes sense to me.

>>88854479
I like it overall. If Evasion is just a stat attacker checks against (as opposed to against their own Ranged/Melee) and doesn't require a roll I don't see a problem. I also like having multiple dice instead of having Wounds Per Attack. The only thing we'd have to be wary about is to balance what types of attack dice weapons have against what kind of Evasion and Armor Dice units have, to make sure Crits don't happen too often. Would Armor Dice differ between units?

>>88854683
>to make sure Crits don't happen too often.
Yes this is a concern. I'd say the solution to this is opt for higher dice (lmao D10 turns out to be perfect) as the baseline with large modifiers.

So, "average" evasion would be around 7 or 8, average weapon dice is 1d10....

Perhaps a mechanic where bonuses to damage or "Crit Chance Bonus" instead increases the class of dice? (1d10 to 1d12, instead of just a numerical bonus)

>>88854683
>>88854727
Also, the other option is just have Armour values be quite large vs relatively low Penetration values.

We are dealing with lethal weapons, so allowing a good amount of "Critical" successes to go through on the Attack side isn't necissarily a bad thing, if we balance them out by defensive rolls very reliably reducing those crits down to regular Wounds.

It also means that if your Armour is gone, you're basically always taking huge, fucking brutal life-threatening wounds from, you know, bullets hitting your chest and swords hacking your arms off.

>>88854746
>>88854727
Maybe have the Crit need to strictly EXCEED the target?

>>88854894
Also an option yes. If we're doing roll over only and not equal or greater, then ALL rolls should follow that trend though to keep the mechanics consistent (Different rules across different rolls leads to confusion, especially for new players) and the math isn't different at all from just doing equal or greater, but bumping the numbers up by one.

One way we can fix anons conflicting rule systems is write each one as a different edition and anons can play each and every one from there.

>>88855306
lmfao that's perfect

File: 1498986252970.jpg (79 KB, 319x319)

79 KB JPG

>>88855306
>mfw 4e scrapped hitpoints because fucking casuals can't do basic math

>>88855879
bro it was Wounds in 1e, they added it in 2e to be more "marketable"
thank Gorg they reverted it

>>88854391
>>88853702
Between these two I'd say we have more than enough for the raw combat and attack resolution.

Onto abilities?
I think each "Mook" Unit should NEVER have more than a single ability, if it has one at all.

Assuming Move and Attack are common actions, are we including any other common actions that all units can do? Like.

>Aim
+1/2/3/? to next Attack roll this round.

>Grapple
Target can't Move, or Attack anything but the Grappler in melee, until next turn

Stuff like this? Or do we save more specialised stuff for abilities?

>>88854479
As the anon who sent the husked conquistador, as well as the first mention of "husked", it warms my heart to see how it has evolved

>>88857961
I'm still not sure if husks are actual undead through necromancy, or some kind of skeleton-puppet controlled for the greater good of the Istanbul Necropolis, but its mighty fine either way.

File: Mommy.png (44 KB, 500x445)

44 KB PNG

>>88858199
>Oh, you sweet little thing. You think death is some sort of hindrance to be overcome? On the contrary, the dead can walk because they are no longer burdened by life. But when one casts off such burdens, one should be careful not to lose what they might still have need for. A pity, what happened to them. But they did not have the Ancestor's Love and Wisdom to protect and guide them.

File: AHHHHHHHHHHHHH.jpg (90 KB, 770x962)

90 KB JPG

>>88858385
pls stop
i already died
i thought death would be peace

>>88857598
>Assuming Move and Attack are common actions, are we including any other common actions that all units can do? Like.
>>88857509
>Between these two I'd say we have more than enough for the raw combat and attack resolution.
Am>>88853702
What I thought for AP is,
> all models may move during their owner's turn, up to their move characteristics.
> players have an AP pool of 10, which replenishes at the beginning of their turn.
> models have an AP characteristic, this represent how much AP may be spent on them. Say 1 for a Husk, 2 for regular Mooks, more for Characters and high value models.
> If you dont spend all your 10 AP during your turn and a model who has not maxed out his AP Characteristic is targeted by an attack, you may spend 1 of your remaining AP to Dodge.

>>88858591
> players have an AP pool of 10, which replenishes at the beginning of their turn.
Tie AP pool to a Leader stat?
That way some leaders would be strong at leading smaller, powerful-unit armies while others could stretch thinner.

File: Untitled.png (2.17 MB, 2297x1438)

2.17 MB PNG

>>88858510
DID I JUST HEAR YOU MENTION PEACE, SKINSLAVE? THAT'S IT, YOU'RE GETTING FLENSED

>>88858604
Hmm I wasnt sure if there is going a Leader Class or it's just a Character (or even a nominated Mook), so I thought some Characters might have Special Rules granting more AP (or perhaps even lowering it).
I'm fine with both.

>>88858695
Another option would be to have each Unit given its own pool of generic actions per turn (2? 3?) and a Leader some stat that can be spent to give any unit an additional action in any given turn?

>>88858704
Old rules had an Order mechanic, which allows Leaders to basically transfer their AP.

>>88859220
>Old rules had an Order mechanic, which allows Leaders to basically transfer their AP.
Yeah that might be an interesting route to take honestly.

I prefer edging toward mechanics that promote long-term tactical thinking, so maybe Leaders get a pool of "transfer-able" AP that does NOT reset each turn. That is, you only get "Direct Order" that many points to spend over the course of the full game.

>>88858685
YES, WEAR HIS SKIN
WEAR HIS PAIN
WEAR HIS PLEASURE

>>88858685
>>88859278
What is this, Hyperborea?
Because that sounds like Hyperborea to me.
Our glorious Mother is far more visionary than that.

>>88859234
I can see maybe having a per-battle limited Order pull. Maybe tied to their Leadership?

>>88859387
>I can see maybe having a per-battle limited Order pull. Maybe tied to their Leadership?
Not sure how to implement it. Keeping Leader statblocks from being enormous bricks of numbers and letters is a good idea, so tying it to an existing stat is fine.

I would highly advocate including SOME game (not turn) limited tactical interaction. Encouraging long-term planning and careful resource management does wonders to enhance replayability.

Good morning, fellow Atlan chads!
Now that we have Damage figured out (okay there's still two great ideas to settle on one of but we're basically done it)

Today we sort out turn order, "AP", abilities etc.

I propose players don't get individual turns. Instead, turn order swaps between players for each type of Action.

>Phase 1 - Movement
Player A moves, then player B moves, alternating units until all legal moves have been made or no more are declared.

>Phase 2 - Abilities
Same as above, but for Ability activation

>Phase 3 - Melee Attacks
Obviously we're resolving melee BEFORE ranged, right?

>Phase 4 - Ranged attack
Same.

Etc. etc.

>>88860735
I'm pro alternating activations too, but it seems weird to split everything into phases when we're making a skirmish game.
Phases make sense for large-scale battles where every side has a chain of command, while what we have is around a dozen people on each side, with backgrounds ranging from veteran warriors to Joe Shmoes from a mining village.

The system that's currently in the doc is pretty simple:
> Leaders roll-off to see whose side gets to activate first
> Pick model, it gets 2 AP, use the AP
> The next player does this
> Repeat until all models have been activated
It may be too barebones, but I think giving leaders the ability to influence activation order using their stats could fix this

>>88860939
>I'm pro alternating activations too, but it seems weird to split everything into phases when we're making a skirmish game.
Acceptable. Just throwing out ideas.

Alternating activations in general is fine to jump off from.

>It may be too barebones, but I think giving leaders the ability to influence activation order using their stats could fix this

Honestly?
Just slapping on a "Leaders start the game with #AP (7?) that does not recover. Spend 1 AP to give a unit an additional AP at the start of the turn" or something spices that simple foundation up rather well.

I mean honestly just with that "barebones" (honestly that's perfect to make it a very easy pick-up-and-play game.) turn layout and the combat we have so far, we basically have a playable game right now.
Sure, cover and other things will play huge factors in the final product, but the core mechanics are... basically done?

>>88860939
I second this, the current system is fine.

>>88860978
If we're going to have a separate pool of points for Orders, why not just call them Command Points or something? I'm still not sure how well it'll work "per game", though I do get the point made before about long term planning.

>>88861037
>If we're going to have a separate pool of points for Orders, why not just call them Command Points or something
Yeah that's fair. But also "CP" is a rather terrible acronym and Warhammer is gay.

>>88861091
We can tie it to Leadership or something. So, say, with 7 Leadership you'd have 7 points to spend. We'd also need to revise Hyases gimmick, since he's supposed to have extra Orders. Maybe he can regain a point on kill or something.

Alright then, for Leaders, instead of having generic Command Points, how about each Leader has its own set of abilities that can each be used once per game. Similar to "Lifelines" or something in that vein.
Titanium King could
>Fully restore a Unit's Armour Durability
>Double a Unit's Movement for 1 turn
>Have a unit survive for one additional turn after being slain

for its "Lifelines"

This would be instead of, not in addition to, cum points/Orders/etc. More development work designing them all, but might be interesting how different leaders could play out tactically.

>>88861148
I like the current system we've got with some units in the doc where they all have three passives or abilities, but we could add a one once-per-game thing on top of it. Or have 2 regular gimmicks and one megagimmick. We have Traits, Passives and Abilities terminology-wise, how could we name them? Specials? Epics? Miracles?

>>88861231
I don't think we should add an excess of abilities to common units. I'd say, seriously (other than basic keywords like "undead" etc.), keep common units to 1 ability each maximum.

The complexity can be loaded onto Leader units, as those are the units that will command the most attention in the game anyways.

>>88861263
Yeah, I actually meant Leaders specifically.

But I think LP/Orders are fine, honestly, and we can go with a set per game amount if we want to have a more longterm focus. Just one singe-use "Lifeline" per Leader on top could also work. And with that combined with differing LP pools and other abilities they'd still be tactically different enough, I think.
But if LP can't be replenished outside of maybe some Leader-specific conditions, then Orders probably shouldn't cost AP to issue? Though a cap of 1 per turn seems reasonable. You'd be discouraged from burning through them anyway.

>>88861658
>But if LP can't be replenished outside of maybe some Leader-specific conditions, then Orders probably shouldn't cost AP to issue? Though a cap of 1 per turn seems reasonable. You'd be discouraged from burning through them anyway.
I feel like regular Units will already be handling the per-turn actions plenty fine.

whatever happens, we're not using Command Points (CP) as the name for anything
i invoke my veto power on that one
Do we have veto power?
Well I invoke it anyway.

File: FrenchForeignLegion.jpg (336 KB, 1714x847)

336 KB JPG

>>88853702
CONTINUED
Ranged attacks process. Told you it was simple.
>>88855306
I love this. >>88854391 what editions should we refer each other as? I have no preference.

>>88864263
lol fuck I really need to reread myself before posting this stuff, the example given for AP modification is wrong, if the FFL hits another FFL anywhere there is no Armor Save involved.
(also, I know the Lebel 1886 shouldn't be available yet whatever for now)

>>88860735
Normally I'd be all for alternative activations, however at 5 to 15 models the return of alternating activation lowers quite a bit.
I was also going to keep phases down to a minimum. As I first envisioned it, with a pool and IGOUGO, movement is not an AP action, all models may move. There's not really any phase either, you may spend AP before or after or during your movement.
As for the pool there are 3 proposals which I see.
> Infinity-style : Each side gets 10 AP, that's it.
Advantage is balance, simplicity and leveling the field between low-models and high-model armies. I see no disadvantage except in limitation.
> Warmachine-style : Leader determines the AP value.
Advantage is that we can characterise Leaders and Factions further, we can assign Leaders to more specific gameplay and develop them. This becomes a disadvantage if we don't have enough Leaders for a Faction.
> Mix : Each unit have their AP value which they can spend on themselves, and the Leader has an AP value which they can spend on others or themselves.
I'll be honest, this is my least favourite. It messes up the "pool" mechanic, as I see it units already have an AP cap value, so you don't get Infinity-style Rambos capping the whole enemy army by themselves.

Imho first or second options are pretty much of equal value at the moment.
>>88862970
I second this.
Also I think we should keep AP for special actions by Leaders, unless its something really OP which could be put down as a one time thing only.

Just a suggestion: but maybe some of the more bog standard infantry units on the charts could be turned into mounted infantry where appropriate.
I felt like there was a lack of cavalry in general.

>>88864462
What if everyone has AP, but Leaders can't spend their extra AP on themselves, only on ordering? That's kinda why it makes sense to separate that pool from AP.
I also think movement should cost AP. Since we have things like cover and abilities that rely on positioning (p.e. auras), movement is kinda important and so choosing between moving or doing something else is a legit tactical decision.

>>88862970
Leadership Points, Order Points, whatever, there are many names we could use. Certainly no need to use CP.

>>88865866
>What if everyone has AP, but Leaders can't spend their extra AP on themselves, only on ordering?
I don't see an advantage to this. The potential advantage of having an AP pool is to balance out turn time between players despite army build differences. The more we deviate from "both players have the same AP pool" the more we discard the point of doing this. Having a bonus or malus to represent Leaders being better at ordering than acting or vice versa is fine because we can cost it out easily, but spreading the whole thing across the entire army seems pointless and overcomplicated to me.
>>88865866
>I also think movement should cost AP
I am fine with it either ways.

Nightly bump

File: 6190E7CD-A869-43BC-B5BE-3(...).jpg (65 KB, 680x626)

65 KB JPG

Are there going to be generic leader/heroes or is it all named characters?

>>88868393
Scion doesn't really have a name, but he's a hero. What do you mean by generic, specifically? Leaders and heroes are by definition special. You only get one and if you lose them they are out of the game for the expedition, if not campaign.

>>88868393
There's at least some generic heroes, like the modern mah general. Though we probably could have more.

File: 48315B3F-5EDC-4262-A1B2-A(...).jpg (508 KB, 687x1000)

508 KB JPG

>>88868824
I meant in the sense of an unnamed unit that you could do /your dudes/ with

>>88869309
I'm sure we could incorporate rules for making /yourdudes/ out of hero characters, instead of just fielding the standard ones.