D@W Game in Progress

18 posts / 0 new
Last post
Ludanto
Ludanto's picture
Domains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters Backer
Joined: 2012-04-30 11:52
D@W Game in Progress

Ok, I'm playing against myself and also have no idea what I'm doing. This experience will probably be tactically painful for many of you.

Anyway, if this shares correctly, the first three turns of my D@W test.

Link: My D@W Turns

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

It says its private, at least to me. 

koewn
koewn's picture
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2012-07-17 20:11

How are you producing the screenshots of the battle? I've been setting up to do something like this but am highly embarrassed that my Heavy Infantry, for example, will be a text box saying "Heavy Infantry".

Ludanto
Ludanto's picture
Domains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters Backer
Joined: 2012-04-30 11:52

The magic of Adobe Photoshop! It looks better at higher resolution, but of course, that's a lot of screen-space.

Ludanto
Ludanto's picture
Domains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters Backer
Joined: 2012-04-30 11:52

Speaking of which, I've posted these somewhere where I have a little more control. The images are bigger, too!

My D@W Turns at DnDorks

I hope to have a few more turns today.

Ludanto
Ludanto's picture
Domains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters Backer
Joined: 2012-04-30 11:52

Added another turn.

Here's a question:
If my LOS runs along the hex-border of one of my own units, does that count as having to shoot over my own guys, or not? I can't find that particular distinction in the manual.

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10
Thanks for pointing out the hole in the rules. Here is a revised rule. NEW RULE (CLARIFIED): An attacker has line of sight if it can trace an imaginary line from the center of its hex to the center of the target’s hex without crossing a hex containing an obstacle. If the imaginary line touches the border of the hex containing the obstacle, but does not actually cross the hex containing the obstacle, line of sight is not blocked.
koewn
koewn's picture
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2012-07-17 20:11

Is there a corner case with this wording where, if you have 4 units all grouped up like so:


.A.
B|C
.D.

where the line that bisects B and C's hex goes from the bottom vertex of A to the top vertex of D technically wouldn't cross an obstacle (by benefit of never entering B or C's hex)

jedavis
Patreon SupporterPlayer's Companion BackerDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara Backer
Joined: 2012-03-08 01:21

I think I'd run with Space Hulk's rules there - LOS not blocked on an edge as long as one of the two hexes on that edge is non-blocking.

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Good catch. I'll revise.

Ludanto
Ludanto's picture
Domains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters Backer
Joined: 2012-04-30 11:52

Thanks! While I'm at it, does a rout count as a retreat? Mostly this is in reference to the free hex of follow-up movement.

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Yes. I have updated the text to correct for this ambiguity.

"If the target of a melee attack routs, retreats or withdraws, the attacker may advance into the just-vacated hex."

Ludanto
Ludanto's picture
Domains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters Backer
Joined: 2012-04-30 11:52

Sorry to keep bothering you with questions, but here I go:

On the shock table, one modifier is "Unit has taken damage of 50% or more of its uhp". Is that "starting" uhp again (which would be redundant unless there's magic involved), or does it mean "Unit has taken damage of 50% or more of the uhp it had before the attack"?

On the same note, another modifier is "Unit is disordered". Since a unit is always disordered upon taking damage (barring some special rule) are all Shock rolls made at -2, or does that only apply if they were disordered before they were damaged (or before they were attacked, even)?

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

In the absence of magic forcing the shock check, the unit will always be at 50% or less of its hp, and will be disordered, so both conditions will apply. 

I put the modifiers in because it makes it easier to understand what's going on (by way of the parallel to the morale chart on the next page), and because I thought there might be wierd edge cases where a spell might, e.g. "force a shock check" or something.

There's no trickery intended!

 

koewn
koewn's picture
Patreon SupporterDomains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters BackerBarbarian Conquerors of Kanahu BackerACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook Backer
Joined: 2012-07-17 20:11

Oh - OK. That's a good clarification - I'd taken it as meaning they'd literally just taken whatever damage would equal 50% of their current UHP, and what you're meaning is it's below 50% period, so it should be read "Unit is below 50% of its maximum UHP".

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

I'll work to clarify that in the text. 

Super-valuable feedback, thanks guys!

Ludanto
Ludanto's picture
Domains At War BackerSinister Stone of Sakkara BackerLairs And Encounters Backer
Joined: 2012-04-30 11:52

Ok, last one! The general went down, and the game was over. Obviously it's hard to play smart when you don't know what you're doing and trying to juggle both sides by yourself, so I'm not surprised that the Aurans lost this one. I probably should have mobbed their general. Oh well.

The Final Round

Also, and maybe this is more clear than I think:

Morale penalties kick in at "between 1/2 and 2/3" of starting forces, and then get worse at "2/3 or more". So, is there an overlap there at 2/3, or is it literally between 1/2 and 2/3 (non-inclusive)?

As an example, is 1/2 of lost forces penalty-free?

Alex
The Autarch
Joined: 2011-06-30 18:10

Sloppy writing on my part. I'll revise. It's 1/2 or more and less than 2/3; and 2/3 or more.