Is there a super system that is purpose built to integrate RPG scale, Skirmish, scale and wargame scale scenarios into one campaign?I think that would be pretty epic. You might first go on an rpg party scale infiltration mission to get some kind of advantage for the next session that is a wargame, where if you succeeded, maybe you can hide a unit anywhere on the tabletop.I think I heard people saying that it was kind of attempted in some Old DnD releases and ACKS, but it never seems to really be all that focused on or displayed in action much.Would totally be a niche gameplay style that would require a group both up for rpg's and wargames, but I think it could be pretty epic.
>>97173092I never checked if true but i happen to remember that you could convert your wfrp 1e character in whf wargame stats easily and officially.
>>97173092>Is there a super system that is purpose built to integrate RPG scale, Skirmish, scale and wargame scale scenarios into one campaign?cutting away everything else, this is the EXACT thing ACKS was written to do. the entirety of the economic engine in ACKS was built to support the wargaming and logistics of having classical armies. you'll start with small skirmishes and dungeon crawling, then end up with conflicts on the battle of marathon.what do you mean ACKS isn't focused on it or displays it in action very much? 5 (6 if you count the naval chapter) chapters out of a 12 chapter rulebook directly deal with domains and armies and warfare (though i prefer running the full domains at war wargame over the warmachine-esque battle system in core ACKS II).>Would totally be a niche gameplay style that would require a group both up for rpg's and wargames, but I think it could be pretty epic.its more epic than you can imagine lol
>>97174041Problem is ACKS is pure shit when it comes to its mass combat rules. Easily some of the worst rules ever written; it's comical how bad they are and how much time they waste with little to nothing to show for it. The rest of the system is full of terrible rule "procedures", but the mass combat ones are particularly bad and showcase how the designer doesn't even understand the most basic components of what good rule design looks like. It feels like what would happen if someone took tax codes for rule inspiration.If your primary goal is to hit a certain page count, you're gonna end up with rules that are a bloated mess.
>>97174041>what do you mean ACKS isn't focused on it or displays it in action very much?Ive never seen an ACKS combat report. Even though I have seen action reports for what seems like equally niche, but dedicated, wargames like Rangers of Shadow deep or Dragon Rampent.How does the wargame side play? like warhammer fantasy?>>97173855Thats pretty interesting, might check out.
>>97173092I done it, but I didn't stick to one system, had campaign start in BFG, go to epic, then to warhammer, from there one could easily go to kill-team and then any of assorted RPGs. One could do it in reverse of course, do RPG stuff and throw in random battle stuff, as warhammer rpgs generally aren't worst ones to convert into 40k with, in particular if you going renegade scout route where you got retro stats so you got entire statline just swap agility and iniative names and what not
>>97174217QRD, WTF BFG?
>>97174235NVM, battlefleet gothic?
>>97174167fuck off fishfag
>>97173092OD&D is a chainmail supplement for a reason.
>>97173092Mechwarrior with battletech integration, sorta kinda since it's skirmish tier either way
>>97174167There's good odds they were deliberately made as a joke.
>>97174167>>97174351samefag
>>97173092>super system designed to integrate RPG, skirmish and wargame Sort of. You already have some of it with the images you posted in your OP. There area few gaps like how rpg scale and skirmish scale are close enough to the same thing its not really distinguishable in meaningful ways I've found but that might be with the current wargaming descriptions of skirmmishes being a dozen or so models tops per side and smaller. You'd have to fuck up an rpg pretty badly if it couldn't handle that size conflict. Integrating larger scale battles with rpgs gets tricky after a certain size as well, essentially after a certain size individual character actions can't really matter too much. 28mm middlehammer aka herohammer might be your best bet really if you want something prefab you can just pick up. Never tried to mix the rpg in myself though. iirc there were a few white dwarf articles about converting their Hero Quest characters and campaigns to the 28mm battlefield as well. Otherwise, and even then, you're likely in a siutatuion where you're kludging together a few different systems and making it work through narrative campaign framework and communication. A lot of the older GW stuff has decent outlines of how narrative campaigns work. There's newer prints Tony Bath's Ancient Wargame campaigns and the like that are interesting reads as well.
>>97173092ACKS does it really well. You have:>different scales of combat: solo forays, division-scale, platoon-scale, army-scale.>thieves are able to do hijinks that impact combat, like torching supplies or making off with valuable intel. >line of sight and scouting is super important in ACKS warfare
>>97174186Is there any battle reports of ACKS?
>>97176110the >discord is full of them
As others have said, ACKS II is specifically designed to scale from the individual-level to skirmish-level to mass combat. The main issue I have with it is that the mass combat rules require a hex grid, which is annoying and hard to procure at the right size. Also the wargaming rules themselves are a bit verbose.
>>97174351That looks like shit.
>>97174351These are the abstracted battle resolution rules, not the wargaming rules. The wargaming rules are part of the Domains at War book.
