Thane Morgan wrote:
> <snip-o-matic>
> Looney hates these ideas, but I think they make the game much more
> intersting
> and keeps the game from ending prematurely. We've played with the
> first system
> and it worked well, but have not playtested the second.
>
Actually the making the max. blast marker moral lost equal to the moral
of the unit is a good idea. Making the moral loss of blast markers
non-permanent is a so-so idea. I hate objectives, in a over all general
sense. If you have a scenario based on side x must do y by turn z to
win is one thing, playing capture the flag(s) with bolters is another
thing all together.
My basic concept on moral vs objective in games is use one or the other,
not both. Either the game should be "capture/hold this chunk of ground"
or it should be "seek, find and destroy the enemy", not some mutant mix.
Of course some fun games can be done where one side wants to
capture/hold terrain and the other side just wants to kill things.
--
Sillyness is the last refuse of the doomed. P. Opus
http://www.spellbooksoftware.com
--
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GAT d-- s:- a38 US++ P+ L+ E W+++ N++ K++ w++ O- M- V-- PS+ PE++ Y PGP
t++
5 X R+++ tv+ b++++ DI+++ D G+ e+ h--- r+++ y+++(**)
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Received on Sun Apr 26 1998 - 02:11:12 UTC