Napoleon Foundry Rules

[Aradyon]

What do you guys think of this new rules set?

My friend got it recently and, well, to be honest, I don't think much.

-Units are treated as units with no individual characters in them which personally, I find horrible.

-Artillery have a naff rule where one piece on the table counts as two pieces firing.

-Columns don't move any faster than lines for some reason.

-Skirmishers don't even get models to represent them but are 'just there' somehow.

-Canister and Howitzer fire have really irritating mechanics..

There are good things about the rules, like the order cards are nice and reserves and format of troops. However, the whole thing is mainly glossy pictures and advertisement and the rules just don't do the period justice IMO. Has anyone else here seen the rules? Am I being super critical? It just seems to me that they really don't add up.

I am definitely waiting for Black Powder, a system that I have heard negative about so far.

Just as a side note, with their uber high prices and variable sclupting, do you think Foundry are really behind? I mean Warlord and Perries bring cheaper, generally better sculpted models that are often in plastic, shouldn't forget to mention Victix there either. Foundry just seem to be still set years ago, reluctant to make plastics and still believing that they have manopoly on the market

Sorry if that last bit seems like a rant, I just found that I would quite like some British 12pdrs but was shocked by how expensive they were.

[marshalney2000]

Interesting post which is like the curates egg good in bits but less so in others.

Firstly i think your commenton characters would take the game back to warhammer standard. I don't think outside general level characters should have any part in Napoleonic or any other serious wargame for that matter. I would hate to see my sergeant in the 42nd suddenly force back a French unit by using a ring of power or hav elightening bolts out of his posterior. Lets face it a hero in Napoleonic was as likely to have his head taken off by a cannonball as the worst recruit. They didn't require more than one point of damage either.

With regard to guns most rules have an artillery model representing more than one gun and I suspect Back powder will be the same unless you want to paint up six normal field pieces and 2 howitzers to represent your typical french battery or 12 pieces for russians. You talked about expense well there you really have it even with 1 per 2 scale.

I like the layout of the Foundry rules but came away with the feeling that they had been rushed out with some army lists tacked on. There are for example no Waterloo lists partly because I suspect all the allies and their ratings was going to get very complex. the rules themselves I have not yet played but suspect they will be good fun but not yet too sure how historical the outcome will be.

I too am waiting for Black powder with great interest although I don't expect many characters in the unit ranks .

As a final point, I got the feeling from your post that you maybe don't know too much about the Napoleonic period and have principally come from a warhammer background. (I apologise if I am wrong in this conclusion but then I never claimed to be Sherlock Homes.) If I am correct then even with back powder you might find it useful to get an understanding of Napoleonic warfare and the steructure of units. Sorry but Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe doesn't count.

John

[Aradyon]

Hi, thanks for replying and you raise some interesting points.

As to my personal understanding of Nepoleonic, it is reasonable. I know a lot more about the AWI and Peninsular campaign than I do about the Wartaloo Campaign/Hundred Days, but as to unit structure, I have a fair understanding. I have read a lot on Nepoleonic strategy and have always been very interested in how tactics and strategies very quickly evolved during the period as equipment improved at such an increased rate.

I should clear up some of my points about what I said as I did not mean 'characters' in that sense.

When I say characters, what I really meant was individuals. They don't have to be unique in any way, but I like having, the last five men hold against ten against all odds and I generally feel that having a sergeant alive instead of dead should change something like say, -1 to morale to represent the decline in the chain of command. Its not the multi-wound killing machine that I miss, its the feeling that your force is made up of a lot of small components instead of full of a few big components. When I say characters, I mean things like, private's that gain a character through the battle by always missing or always hitting. I agree totally that there is no place for a mighty sword wielding hero in the era, I actually more believe that they shouldn't play a big role in Fantasy or 40k but thats a different issue.

When it comes to artillery, units are are not at 1:2 scale if a company is 36 men with the Perry box. Surely, 3 guns and a howitzer would fairly represent a french formation which is exactly the same as the Napoleon system except that you actually have as many guns as you can see and it makes record keeping a lot easier instead of continually replacing coutners eveerywhere, working out if there are one or two cannons on that particular model.

When it comes to my comments on price, its not the overall price I was talking about, but rather the bang for your buck. Foundry charges a lot for, no where near as much as other manufacturers.

It was somewhat offputting how many pages were full of glossy advertisement and how many were just rules.

I agree that the rules feel rushed in general.

Basically, I will be holding out for Black Powder.

[zedeyejoe]

“-Skirmishers don't even get models to represent them but are 'just there' somehow.”

Its called abstraction, where it something is not considered important enough to simulate.

From my reading of Napoleonic tactics, French attacks were precided by a 'cloud' of skirmishers who protected the attack from enemy musket fire. The trick was to shoot down the Frensh skirmishers (drive them off) to expose the main infantry to attack. With abstraction you might consider that successful/unsuccessful and then not have to bother with it.

Am I going to buy the Foundry rules, no. See

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=172818

Prices, basically not important. Foundry or anyone else puts their products on the market and we buy or not as we see fit. The only people that sales are important to are the ones doing the selling.

[Gallowglass]

-Units are treated as units with no individual characters in them which personally, I find horrible.

-Artillery have a naff rule where one piece on the table counts as two pieces firing.

Both of those are pretty common traits of "Big Battalion" horse and musket gaming. I can think of several sets - In the Grand Manner, British Grenadier, Guns at Gettysburg, General de Brigade etc - where that is pretty much the case.

From what I saw of the mock-up copy of Black Powder at Historicon, the two points highlighted above would be some of the features of the game - or something very similar.

if you don't mind me saying, Arcadyon, it strikes me that you're looking in the wrong place for rules to reflect what you're looking for out of a game. One figure doesn't represent one man in any of the rules listed above, but more like 20 men, or maybe even 50. A 36 figure french infantry battalion generally represents about 720 men at a model: historical strength scale of 1:20. That's why - given the level of abstraction - that you tend not to find the "individuals" such as the NCOs or privates that you've mentioned.

Now, I may well be mistaken in my interpretation of what it is that you want out of a Napoleonic game, but it seems to me that (given your emphasis on the 1:1 "gritty" aspects) that a large skirmish might be more to your taste? Have you takean a look at "Sharpe Practice"? Games are specifically aimed at forces from 30-100 figs per side, with plenty of character-based action in the Sharpe vein...

http://toofatlardies.co.uk/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=18&zenid=b5839c1124ffca46e23a223c29fb2bb7

They also have a scenario book:

http://toofatlardies.co.uk/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=19

That's not to say that you wouldn't enjoy Black Powder (from what I've seen of it), just that the game I've linked to seems to have more of what you want out of a Napoleonic game. Absolutely no reason you couldn't use the same figs for Black Powder and Sharpe Practice....I'll be buying Black Powder because it looks like it'll give me what I want from a "big battalion" game, but I'll also look to the likes of "Sharpe Practice" if I ever decide that I want to game out Sharpe, Harper and pals taking the French eagle - or maybe even game the specific incident at Talavera on which Cornwell based his story.

Just a few thoughts based on impressions received. Hope they're useful.

[marshalney2000]

Just looking again at the foundry rules and while skirmishing is abstracted in the basic game they do exist as an actual entity in the advanced rules.

Interestinglythe unit sizes for the Foundry rules appear as I understand them almost identical to Black powder so there is a bonus that you can use units for both.

I would also endorse the positive comments re Sharpe Practice.

John

[Colonel White]

AS a club we ere currently using the Napoleon Foundry Rules (basic rules & some advanced rules). WE are having great fun in using them and plan to incorporate more advanced rules as we gain experience.

WE are planning on using Black Powder( because of the Rick Priestly connection) as well when it is released as quite a few members are GW employees including a store manager .

We have gone Napoleonics mad at this club due to the plastic released by Perry's and Victrix. I see a business opportunity here for Warlord with these rules and perhaps they could consider entering the Naploeonics market themselves by looking at pruducing plastics for the other big "races" ie Russians ,Austrians and Prussians. All these I think would sell really well in this country and in Europe. Just a few thoughts

[grecian1959]

I second that last post - i feel Napoleonic plastics are gonna be a huge thing-also i agree re warlord games if they were to produce napoleonics in plastic to their high standards should look at doing the other main nations n some allies eg; Prussians/Russians/Austrians/Spanish etc and perhaps poles bavarians etc periods prob 1812-1814.As i feel the Perrys and victrix have the french/british covered(1809-15) or at least underway.I wont sleep tonight lol plastic austrians ranks n ranks of them oh i need to be an octopus to paint them all cheers Peter

[Aradyon]

Funny you should mention Sharpe's Practise. I already play it and indeed enjoy it.

However, I did want to move to a larger scale conflict.

In the couple of days seperating my last post, I have had a game however, and I agree that some of my points are very much wrong, though I find that some of my fears are true.

The removal of characters, does clean the game up at that size as you say, I would however like to be able to remove casualties during the game, it just saves space and makes it easy to tell how depleted units are.

I would also now say that the rules for skirmishers is very good. I admit, that it would be fiddly to include them, though I will definitely represent them when I start to play.

It is a shame that column adds nothing to movement however, it defeats the point. Line is far harder to retain over ground and I think this was an oversight by the writers.

I also stand on the fact that artillery is horrible. I personally dislike the 1 cannon fires for 2 cannon approach. If you have a unit of 36 models, they have 36 troops, they fire max 36 times, they do not fire 720, 120 or 72 times. I dislike how artillery are abstracted in this way, but this can be fixed, simply by using the cannons side by side, it shouldn't ruin anything. It also just makes it easier to see progress.

Canister and Howitzer fire is quite fiddly, I personally dislike the mechanic, but I believe this could be fixed with some house alterations.

I did not think much of the army lists, but you don't have to use them, so that is not too much of an issue.

The only other thing I have to mention is the morale system. You check at -1 per casualty. If you don't take casualties, you don't check. I would imagine that green troops or militia could run even without taking casualties and though streamline, I thnk were I to continue playing these rules, I would make a house rule to alter the morale system a little, however in general, they are reasonably enjoyable.

Ultimately, I will be hanging out for BP, as will the majority of my club, but I agree that I was far too pesemistic in my original approach. Other than canister and howitzer shooting, it is quite streamline and enjoyable.

As to plastics, they are a Napoleonic miniaturists dream. Looking forward to some more nations done in plastic. My brits are cool, but I would like to be able to field allied regiments.

[Colonel White]

At our club we have just finished our 4th game using these rules.

They are a fun set of rules to use and even though I was on the losing side ( again) and it was the first game without using a “Games Master”. I don't think these rules are for the Napoleonic “purist” and have taken a lot of criticism ( sometimes unfairly) on other website forums.

If fun is what you are looking for then these rules are a must particularly if you are playing in a group ( in our case there is usually 4 or 5 of us).

There are however some downsides:

One rule we are thinking of amending is the artillery casualties for infantry in line and columns. For some reason you take more casualties if you are in line formation and we think you should take more casualties in columns if hit by artillery.

In my opinion I think the book was rushed into printing as ther are many spelling mistakes and duplicated sentences eg the first sentence on the Russian Army of 1806-7.

I think Warlord are probably doing the right thing in taking their time over the Black Powder rules and eagerly await the release of these.

Any more news on the release of these rules would be much appreciated.