Re: [Epic] scenarios (long, also)

From: Brett Hollindale <agro_at_...>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 11:33:20 +0200 (MET DST)

At 02:07 AM 31/7/97 -0700, you wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [Epic] scenarios (long, also)
>> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2097 02:42:16 -0400
> ^^^^
> eh?
>> From: "Eugene E.W." <eug_at_...>
>>Reply-To: space-marine_at_...
>> To: <space-marine_at_...>
>>Incidentally, on tuesday, my friends and I played an epic 40k game with
>>FOUR separate sides. It was nuts, but it actually worked really well; it
>>was cooler in many ways than a three side game because everybody fought
>>everybody else. The epic 40k morale system really lends itself to
>>multi-side games, because instead of gaining points for breaking enemy
>>detachments (and the attendant difficulty of deciding which player gets the
>>points), the person who got shot up loses the points instead, meaning the
>>system can be used as is without tinkering. Initiative was the tricky part;
>>if people want, I can post the rules we used for the game at a later date.
>>Not now, though, now I have to go to sleep...
>>Regards, Eugene
>The system of morale instead of VPs is a definite point in E40k's
>favor. Do post your hack for 4 player initiative, I'm interested.

Alright, even _I_ have to admit it - "Moralle" instead of "VP" would be cool
for multi player games (and I love multiplayer games...)

This might be the first thing I like about EPIC (heresy) 40K...

Received on Thu Jan 01 1970 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:42 UTC