Dinosaur Cowboys skirmish game

[bosky]

Hi, first post here. I've been developing a game for a while now and it feels pretty solid and playable by this point. I haven't had much luck getting ideas or feedback from the vast internet community, but this site seems to be great for helping just that.

Basically the setting is dinosaurs and cowboys. The idea came about when I was writing Nanowrimo in 2009, and thinking of cowboys riding t-rexes, herding triceratops, etc. really sparked some childish glee in me. I have some background information of WHY there are cowboys and dinosaurs, but more or less the year is 2285, society collapsed and was rebuilt, and dinosaurs escaped an "underground vault" at Yellowstone. The science doesn't really have to fit, all I wanted was an excuse to have laser six-shooters.
Originally I designed it as a rules-light RPG with skirmish elements, and then after playtesting a few campaigns I realized the system was doing neither very well. So instead I dropped the majority of the RPG elements and went pretty much pure skirmish. This was back in November 2010, and since then I've been a busy bee crafting rules, stat sheets, etc. I'm now at the playtesting stage, and thankfully the game is feeling finished enough that most of my playtests are just "plays", where I realize I'm not changing much between each game and instead just enjoying playing it.

So anyways I would really appreciate some review of the rules. I know just asking for that and posting a 50 page PDF isn't the best idea on this forum, so let me break down some of the mechanics and problem areas I see.

The game is based on two Posses (composed of some variant of 1 Leader, 2-4 Members, 1 Dinosaur) fighting each other, either in a straight up fight or an objective based game. The action takes place over a tabletop populated with the usual smattering of hills and trees and so on. Every Posse member has their own statline, including traits (to make them unique) and weapons. The idea is Posse building is very flexible. You can improve your different statistics using a limited pool of Improvement Points.

For combat I'm super duper happy with the system I've devised. Each weapon has an Attack and Damage value, like 4-1. 4 Attacks in this case would mean rolling 4D12, and you try to roll above a target number. That number is based on the Ranged Miss Chance of the character who's doing the attack, with a base of 8. So you'd roll the 4D12 and count any dice above 8 as a success, then add the Damage value (1 in this case). This means you can have weapons that only roll 1D12 but add a bunch of Damage (like a 1A-7D weapon). Then the usual tricks like Critical Hits (count any natural 12 as 2 hits). "Fumbles" (natural 1s) are how Reloading is done, so if the weapon has a Reload Value of 2x1 (two 1s) and you roll two or more 1s in your attack, the gun is empty and needs to be reloaded. The nice part of this is I can easily apply modifiers (+1 Attack, for example, or harder to hit by modifying the Ranged Miss Chance), and my favorite of all is being able to use the system for both ranged AND melee combat.

Anyways dinosaurs add their own unique element to the game, plus the usual skirmish "trappings" like initiative, movement, bravery tests, etc.

So some of the problems:
- No art (yet?). For a while I was considering using old western photographs from the Library of Congress archives, just with a sepia tone for consistency. I never really got around to putting those in the rulebook though.
- Not a lot of outside review. I've wrangled my wife into a game or two plus a few friends (who aren't hugely into games so they couldn't provide a ton of feedback), but really I just need some more eyes on the system. When I playtest I find I can get into "ruts" where I end up with similar Posses because it's hard to force myself to think outside my usual strategies and tactics, and therefore hard to test the game in it's entirety.
- Editing and clarity could use some work. This is especially true in the whole Creating a Posse / Creating a Character section of the rulebook...to ME it makes sense, but to someone with no history in the game it might look like unclear garbage. I think the Combat section is fairly clear, as is the ending sections of the rulebook...but yeah everything in between feels vaguely jumbled to me.
- Formatting is another big concern of mine. Right now I'm using the standard full page layout that I used and loved when I was 13 years old. Should two columns be used instead? Should I add some themed borders of some sort to each page?

Phew long winded post, but this seems like the kind of place where verbosity is (for once!) not frowned upon. Anyways I love having a pet project like this on the go, it's so good to keep the brain active and see the game grow and evolve, and I'd really like to take it to that "polished" level, both in terms of content and layout.

In terms of links I have a main blog for the project: http://dinosaurcowboys.wordpress.com/
The rulebook itself can be downloaded at: http://dinosaurcowboys.wordpress.com/rules/
And I have a general outline of good posts in the blog: http://dinosaurcowboys.wordpress.com/2011/06/01/what-to-read/
For an idea of how it plays you can see: http://dinosaurcowboys.wordpress.com/category/game-sessions/

[Kyles Games]

Ok, I have a lot of your issues with Orchestra, despite it being a fairly different animal, so I'll address them one at a time.

No art (yet?). For a while I was considering using old western photographs from the Library of Congress archives, just with a sepia tone for consistency. I never really got around to putting those in the rulebook though.

Yes, use old public domain photos that fit! Do it! Also, if you want, you may wanna Photoshop them a little if you find any that could be "action shots" with a laser drawn on. Drop me a line (PM is fine) if you want me to help with this (I'll do it for free and all, since I'm intrigued by the idea).

Not a lot of outside review. I've wrangled my wife into a game or two plus a few friends (who aren't hugely into games so they couldn't provide a ton of feedback), but really I just need some more eyes on the system. When I playtest I find I can get into "ruts" where I end up with similar Posses because it's hard to force myself to think outside my usual strategies and tactics, and therefore hard to test the game in it's entirety.

Solicit everywhere you can and use a program like MapTool or Gametable (or heck, even Minecraft) to play over the internet. Don't feel too bad if the playtest session is canceled at the very last minute (sometimes without notice to you) or there's time zone confusion and stuff never gets done, just try again. Also, these ruts are normal. I can't tell you how many times I've played Battletech with my main 'Mech being an Awesome with a ton (or forty) of ERPPC's. Just force yourself to try something else.

Editing and clarity could use some work. This is especially true in the whole Creating a Posse / Creating a Character section of the rulebook...to ME it makes sense, but to someone with no history in the game it might look like unclear garbage. I think the Combat section is fairly clear, as is the ending sections of the rulebook...but yeah everything in between feels vaguely jumbled to me.

Formatting is another big concern of mine. Right now I'm using the standard full page layout that I used and loved when I was 13 years old. Should two columns be used instead? Should I add some themed borders of some sort to each page?

I hear you. I've done the same thing with Orchestra, though it is transitioning to wiki form. There's not really a right or wrong way to do this, I've seen both ways. Two columns is more of a "professional" look, but sometimes all that means is that it's pretentious. I've definitely seen some stellar games written using both, and ultimately it doesn't make a giant difference. Part of the nice thing about two columns is that inserting art doesn't break the page up as much. As far as themed borders- feel free, but use taste. Also, if you want typesetting stuff, feel free to ask me (I'd be delighted to since I'm having a metric crapton of trouble getting Orchestra's art assets ready and I want something I can do well).

Now on to my advice from reading- The page numbers probably could be shifted over (unless you want to print bound copies, in which case keep it centered and it'll save you no end of distress), and you don't need "X of 50".

I like the examples (as evidenced by the falling damage rules, initiative, etc.), they're super helpful (though the rules are actually pretty clear to me). The mechanics are also really good- simple enough for them to be used a lot, but nice and crunchy.

Nitpicky: Advancing a dinosaur (Horned dinosaurs are listed at 22 health, but the example acts like it's a 3 point increase to 23) has a little error.

And actually, that's the only real critique I can give right now. It's a pretty good system, the setting's interesting, I like it.

[bosky]

Thanks for the feedback, it's much appreciated!

Yes, use old public domain photos that fit! Do it! Also, if you want, you may wanna Photoshop them a little if you find any that could be "action shots" with a laser drawn on. Drop me a line (PM is fine) if you want me to help with this (I'll do it for free and all, since I'm intrigued by the idea).

The images I was planning on using are viewable here, and I had also considered taking my own photos of miniatures + dinosaurs and then sepia toning those. After seeing the images do you think Photoshopping anything into them is worthwhile? A lot of them give me an old west feel but definitely not a sci-fi or dinosaur sense to them.

Solicit everywhere you can and use a program like MapTool or Gametable (or heck, even Minecraft) to play over the internet. Don't feel too bad if the playtest session is canceled at the very last minute (sometimes without notice to you) or there's time zone confusion and stuff never gets done, just try again. Also, these ruts are normal. I can't tell you how many times I've played Battletech with my main 'Mech being an Awesome with a ton (or forty) of ERPPC's. Just force yourself to try something else.

Mentioning Battletech made me nostalgic. Anyways this is a good idea and one I hadn't thought of. I was more aiming to get people with existing Warhammer 40,000 or other miniature collections to give it a go, but a software tool might be more easily accessible and lower investment for people to try. I haven't use MapTool or GameTable before so I'll have to research, but I take it you can just move pieces/images around on a board or something?

I hear you. I've done the same thing with Orchestra, though it is transitioning to wiki form. There's not really a right or wrong way to do this, I've seen both ways. Two columns is more of a "professional" look, but sometimes all that means is that it's pretentious. I've definitely seen some stellar games written using both, and ultimately it doesn't make a giant difference. Part of the nice thing about two columns is that inserting art doesn't break the page up as much. As far as themed borders- feel free, but use taste. Also, if you want typesetting stuff, feel free to ask me (I'd be delighted to since I'm having a metric crapton of trouble getting Orchestra's art assets ready and I want something I can do well).

So far I've stayed away from the two column approach because some of the examples or statelines or tables tend to bleed pretty far across the page. I just find two columns to be a bit cramped. I haven't printed a hardcopy in a while though so maybe I'll try adding the images and printing it to see how it looks.

Now on to my advice from reading- The page numbers probably could be shifted over (unless you want to print bound copies, in which case keep it centered and it'll save you no end of distress), and you don't need "X of 50".

I like the examples (as evidenced by the falling damage rules, initiative, etc.), they're super helpful (though the rules are actually pretty clear to me). The mechanics are also really good- simple enough for them to be used a lot, but nice and crunchy.

Nitpicky: Advancing a dinosaur (Horned dinosaurs are listed at 22 health, but the example acts like it's a 3 point increase to 23) has a little error.

Thanks for these ideas, I've removed the Page X of Y to be just be Page X (kind of a "duh" moment on my behalf ) and also fixed that Advancing a Dinosaur example. Good catch! Thanks again for the read through!

[Daniel36]

Heya Bosky,
Love the idea, downloaded the rules. I like how it feels familiar. It kind of feels like Necromunda but with cowboys and dinosaurs. Win win situation if you ask me. I have absolutely no trouble with the formatting. I understand that two columns looks more profesional, but this doesn't bother me at all.

On art, I am of the opinion that you will only force a specific feel to your game that might not jive well with people. Let them feel the game for themselves... The map you supplied is all the art I need... But that can be a matter of taste.

I can't really help with reviewing right now, I have a ton of things to do right now, so my free time mostly heads to Chronicles, but I am setting up a games club where I live, so I might be able to turn a couple of try out games once that starts running... Mind you, this won't be any time soon... But I wouldn't mind playtesting...

[Kyles Games]

Thanks for the feedback, it's much appreciated!


The images I was planning on using are viewable here, and I had also considered taking my own photos of miniatures + dinosaurs and then sepia toning those. After seeing the images do you think Photoshopping anything into them is worthwhile? A lot of them give me an old west feel but definitely not a sci-fi or dinosaur sense to them.

Mentioning Battletech made me nostalgic. Anyways this is a good idea and one I hadn't thought of. I was more aiming to get people with existing Warhammer 40,000 or other miniature collections to give it a go, but a software tool might be more easily accessible and lower investment for people to try. I haven't use MapTool or GameTable before so I'll have to research, but I take it you can just move pieces/images around on a board or something?

So far I've stayed away from the two column approach because some of the examples or statelines or tables tend to bleed pretty far across the page. I just find two columns to be a bit cramped. I haven't printed a hardcopy in a while though so maybe I'll try adding the images and printing it to see how it looks.

Thanks for these ideas, I've removed the Page X of Y to be just be Page X (kind of a "duh" moment on my behalf ) and also fixed that Advancing a Dinosaur example. Good catch! Thanks again for the read through!

Actually, now that I see the images, they're fine right now. I wouldn't take pictures of miniatures because it's usually pretty obvious they're photos of miniatures (this absolutely killed me when I was getting into CBT and a lot of the Games Workshop things).

And yes, solicit WH40K and especially Necromunda players. That's what it reminded me of but I couldn't come up with the title of. The MapTool/Gametable communities should also be a place you can recruit people.

As for the columns- it depends whether you're putting them in line or not. If it's at the end of a page after text it's ok, but if it'll be in text it'd look best at the top left or bottom right if you were just going full-page text (in my opinion). There's nothing wrong with pictures and full page, but they work best as background or a page conclusion.

[bosky]

@Daniel36: Thanks for the feedback. The idea of no art and using descriptive text is an interesting one. I am hoping to eventually write some supporting fiction and I had considered adding little "blurbs" throughout the rulebook to help immersion. Any help with playtesting is very much appreciated, and should be a low barrier of entry to try since you can proxy figures and use existing 28mm scale terrain.

@Kyles Games: Yeah I didn't know how much could be photoshopped onto the images, and since I don't actually have a big cowboy collection (yet) pictures of minis in set battles wouldn't work regardless. I'll try to drum up some Necromunda players, but their community already seems pretty small and tight knit (at least around here).

----
Aside from formatting I ran into another question in regards to the core rules. I'm having a hard time choosing between game balance, rules simplicity, and real world believability (as far as dinosaurs and modern people can be believed...). This is specifically in regards to the dinosaurs themselves. Right now they are treated sort of like big cowboys in the sense that they move and attack the same way, and are really only differentiated by their massive amount of HP, ability to transport others, and lack of equipment. I was thinking of maybe trying to split their rules a bit further. Maybe make dinosaurs not take Bravery Tests because of their massive size. Also maybe they can ignore difficult terrain (like trees and hills) since they can just smash right through them. But splitting their rules starts to complicate the game, even if it helps portray dinosaurs more realistically.
So I guess my question is: Do you think the way dinosaurs are handled needs to be changed? Do they need to be "spiced up" and differentiated further at the cost of simplicity and the potential cost of balance?

[Kyles Games]

One consideration for dinosaurs might be making bravery tests based on noise (firearms) as opposed to just damage, making certain weapons have a bravery effect on dinosaurs (or everyone) beyond just their damage? Similarly, maybe make bravery be a turn-based thing instead of a one-hit thing (though I may have read that wrong). Also, Dinosaurs should probably still have bravery tests, but based on size, something like 5/size category from smallest to largest? Similarly, dinosaurs could have facing require movement distance input (maybe like 1/4" for up to a full 180 turn). They should definitely mind terrain less than a human (at least the larger ones) due to size. On the topic of rules I'd suggest going with rules simplicity- which I think you're already doing well enough at- since I think you've got a self-balancing situation going on here (one strategy will always fall prey to a counter strategy).

Dinosaur handling is fine now, but you could certainly make them a little more distinguished since right now they're not terribly distinguished from a heavy hand-to-hand fighter.

[bosky]

Hmm all good considerations, thanks for the ideas. For Bravery Tests you are correct that they are based on one-shot damage instead of total per turn. The reason being that otherwise damage per turn would have to be tracked or remembered somehow, like "Well I hit him for 4, but I think I hit him for 8 earlier too right? No no that was last turn, wasn't it?". But as it stands the larger dinosaurs basically don't take Bravery Tests already since it's very hard to do half of 35 HP of damage in a single attack.
I sort of visualized the dinosaurs as bred and trained as warmounts, so firing wouldn't distract them as much. Although what kind of rule method did you have in mind for deciding noise and how it affects dinosaurs? I'm more concerned about people firing while mounted since if dinosaurs are skittish that wouldn't work as well. Hmm maybe just dinosaurs could take a Bravery Test based on the total damage per turn instead of in one-shot, so then players get into a case of "Bring the beast down!" and focus firing to try to get it to flee.
I was also considering changing a failed Bravery Test to use a chart (like 1-2: Flee, 3-4: Stunned, 5-6: Berserk) and then I could use a different chart of dinosaurs.

I'm trying to avoid making dinosaurs have to move like vehicles in other games with turning arcs and the like (flashes of Car Wars here). Although I almost wonder if different "classes" of dinosaurs could behave differently, which would have the bonus of differentiating them beyond just statistics. Like small dinosaurs being more agile and light whereas big dinosaurs are ponderous in their movement. Smalls could dart through terrain while big ones destroy it, etc.

Now that I've opened this can of worms I definitely need to think on it a bit more. If only there was an elegant movement solution that wasn't too different, but just different enough to be flavorful and easy to use.

[bosky]

Harkening back to Battletech a bit here, but what about a "Fear Scale" (similar to the Heat Scale from BTech) that each Dinosaur has to maintain. Getting hit for massive damage, getting charged, having an ally die, etc. could all add "Fear". Then at certain points Bravery Tests are needed, and also their Movement changes based on the Fear level. I was considering random movement lengths (like D6" instead of a flat 4") with the die type changing or modifiers being added/removed as the Fear increases. So basically as the dinosaur becomes more fearful they are harder to control and predict and so their movement maximum becomes more and more random.

Or really just flat random movement in general for dinosaurs...again not in the sense of random direction, but random distance. Honestly I've never been a huge fan of unpredictable movement since then you can't reliably assume "Model X is going to be at spot Y in 3 turns" so planning and strategy are harder. I know some games swear by it though (The Sword and The Flame comes to mind). Adding a few more hitpoints and a random MV would probably help differentiate them enough, both showing their wild, primal nature and still falling inside the same movement framework.

[Kyles Games]

Hmm all good considerations, thanks for the ideas. For Bravery Tests you are correct that they are based on one-shot damage instead of total per turn. The reason being that otherwise damage per turn would have to be tracked or remembered somehow, like "Well I hit him for 4, but I think I hit him for 8 earlier too right? No no that was last turn, wasn't it?". But as it stands the larger dinosaurs basically don't take Bravery Tests already since it's very hard to do half of 35 HP of damage in a single attack.
I sort of visualized the dinosaurs as bred and trained as warmounts, so firing wouldn't distract them as much. Although what kind of rule method did you have in mind for deciding noise and how it affects dinosaurs? I'm more concerned about people firing while mounted since if dinosaurs are skittish that wouldn't work as well. Hmm maybe just dinosaurs could take a Bravery Test based on the total damage per turn instead of in one-shot, so then players get into a case of "Bring the beast down!" and focus firing to try to get it to flee.
I was also considering changing a failed Bravery Test to use a chart (like 1-2: Flee, 3-4: Stunned, 5-6: Berserk) and then I could use a different chart of dinosaurs.

I'm trying to avoid making dinosaurs have to move like vehicles in other games with turning arcs and the like (flashes of Car Wars here). Although I almost wonder if different "classes" of dinosaurs could behave differently, which would have the bonus of differentiating them beyond just statistics. Like small dinosaurs being more agile and light whereas big dinosaurs are ponderous in their movement. Smalls could dart through terrain while big ones destroy it, etc.

Now that I've opened this can of worms I definitely need to think on it a bit more. If only there was an elegant movement solution that wasn't too different, but just different enough to be flavorful and easy to use.

For sound, I would've just done a flat number per weapon used that tracks neighboring tiles and riders, as well as incoming fire. For the most part they wouldn't be so skittish as to run away from a gun shot, but they could panic in fights with a lot of guns going off. Sound could even just track any ranged weapon other than unpowered ones (and maybe lasers depending on how they're handled) used on the battlefield, making it important as a balance issue between using a dino or bringing a Gatling gun (individual shots count, not the weapon type).

Maybe training could be a bonus (or flaw in the case it's standard but lacking on some) to resist panic? Similarly, bravery damage could be modified by certain weapons/a modifier could be applied (flamethrowers, for instance, plasma weapons?).

Definitely don't make dinosaurs like vehicles, they are living entities. That said, they should definitely be bulkier than people, so their facing should be more important since they can't turn as quick. Maybe add additional bravery damage to attacks from behind dinosaurs?

Harkening back to Battletech a bit here, but what about a "Fear Scale" (similar to the Heat Scale from BTech) that each Dinosaur has to maintain. Getting hit for massive damage, getting charged, having an ally die, etc. could all add "Fear". Then at certain points Bravery Tests are needed, and also their Movement changes based on the Fear level. I was considering random movement lengths (like D6" instead of a flat 4") with the die type changing or modifiers being added/removed as the Fear increases. So basically as the dinosaur becomes more fearful they are harder to control and predict and so their movement maximum becomes more and more random.

Or really just flat random movement in general for dinosaurs...again not in the sense of random direction, but random distance. Honestly I've never been a huge fan of unpredictable movement since then you can't reliably assume "Model X is going to be at spot Y in 3 turns" so planning and strategy are harder. I know some games swear by it though (The Sword and The Flame comes to mind). Adding a few more hitpoints and a random MV would probably help differentiate them enough, both showing their wild, primal nature and still falling inside the same movement framework.

I'm not a fan of doing random movement. Most people and animals can move at a reliable rate. The Fear Scale would work okay, but remember to note that fear can dissipate quicker than heat- maybe riders could help with this?

[Daniel36]

Apologies if this is already present, but I would like it if dinos would be unpredictable, in that they can go berserk. Perhaps a failed bravery test will mean they just attack the nearest (human) model, regardless of which side they are on?

[Kyles Games]

Apologies if this is already present, but I would like it if dinos would be unpredictable, in that they can go berserk. Perhaps a failed bravery test will mean they just attack the nearest (human) model, regardless of which side they are on?

The issue with this is that it would be more akin to bringing in a tiger on a leash versus riding a horse into battle which is what I believe the setting is currently set up for. A rider would probably be able to control all but the most bloodthirsty of mounts when it comes to preventing friendly fire.

That said, it's an awesome idea, but maybe not really terribly great since it means that having a couple humans with big guns would be better than the awesome power of a dino unless it's really unlikely, and then it's just more reading most of the time. Also, since it's not like dinos can make ranged attacks, you'd probably see a lot of battles where the dinos go in first and duel until one dies and then the humans move in.

[bosky]

For sound, I would've just done a flat number per weapon used that tracks neighboring tiles and riders, as well as incoming fire. For the most part they wouldn't be so skittish as to run away from a gun shot, but they could panic in fights with a lot of guns going off. Sound could even just track any ranged weapon other than unpowered ones (and maybe lasers depending on how they're handled) used on the battlefield, making it important as a balance issue between using a dino or bringing a Gatling gun (individual shots count, not the weapon type).

Maybe training could be a bonus (or flaw in the case it's standard but lacking on some) to resist panic? Similarly, bravery damage could be modified by certain weapons/a modifier could be applied (flamethrowers, for instance, plasma weapons?).

Definitely don't make dinosaurs like vehicles, they are living entities. That said, they should definitely be bulkier than people, so their facing should be more important since they can't turn as quick. Maybe add additional bravery damage to attacks from behind dinosaurs?

That is a LOT of added rules just for tracking sound and panic, and is honestly waaaaay too complicated for the simple skirmish system I'm going for. Plus I think you might have bled some of Orchestra Stamina system into "Bravery Damage" in this case.
Also note it's currently easier to get a Critical Hit (10+ instead of 12+) if attacking an entity from the back, so Facing is already handled in that regard. Right now setting Facing is done for free at the end of a move. Without getting into angles and turning keys though I don't see how Facing could reliably and accurately be changed for a dinosaur...remember the toys are unbased and some are awkwardly shaped as well.
I agree about random movement distance, since a well trained mount would have a predictable pace (even if they might buck at the harnesses every now and then).

Apologies if this is already present, but I would like it if dinos would be unpredictable, in that they can go berserk. Perhaps a failed bravery test will mean they just attack the nearest (human) model, regardless of which side they are on?

Currently the only outcome to failing a Bravery Test is Fleeing, which just means they move directly away from the nearest enemy at the start of their next Activation. I mentioned considering a chart for failed Bravery Test results a few posts back, so maybe I'll mock one of those up and playtest it. I do want to have the mounts generally reliable though (compared to say a Chaos Dreadnought in 40k), but in a situation of sheer panic where they are blinded with pain I could see them accidentally stomping on nearby allies. Not so much biting and snapping at allies, but that much weight and mass throwing itself around could hurt anyone mounted or nearby.

[Daniel36]

Good points. Perhaps they need to run in a straight line away from whoever caused the panic, any model if in the line of flight could get stomped on. Sounds like fun, gives the game a slightly unpredictable scary factor too.

[bosky]

Good points. Perhaps they need to run in a straight line away from whoever caused the panic, any model if in the line of flight could get stomped on. Sounds like fun, gives the game a slightly unpredictable scary factor too.

I bolded the line that I hadn't thought of, but that is really great for what I'm trying to achieve. It still fits inside the current Bravery Test framework (since they Flee in a straight line away from enemies already), but with an added bonus of being slightly different than humans and also reinforcing how bulky they are. I'll definitely had to add this element to the rules, thanks for the idea!