As a group, the Centurions have always been fascinated by the Napoleonic Wars. It is one of those periods that miniature wargamers seem destined to revisit time and again. The colorful uniforms, grand tactics, charismatic commanders, and sheer scale of the battles make it one of history's most compelling eras to recreate on the tabletop.
Over the years I have accumulated a few thousand Napoleonic figures.
And by "a few thousand," I mean somewhere between fifteen and twenty thousand.
At some point, you stop counting individual figures and start counting armies.
For General de Brigade, I own enough French to field two corps at full paper strength, complete with the Imperial Guard and Reserve Cavalry suitable for a Waterloo campaign. Opposing them is an equally large British and Allied force.
For Rank and File at 1:30, I have another substantial collection in 25mm, including two Austrian corps from the 1813 campaign, the Austrian Reserve Corps, and a sizeable French army.
Then there is my collection for Napoleon's Battles, where one figure represents approximately 120 men. For the 1809 campaign, I own the entire Austrian Army.
And when I say the entire army, I mean the entire army.
Every infantry regiment, every cavalry regiment, every artillery battery... even the Kaiser's Bodyguard.
The irony is that after all these years, the miniatures have never been the problem.
The rules have.
Like many Napoleonic gamers, I have a handful of favorite rulesets.
I still believe Napoleon's Battles, particularly the First and Second Editions, remains one of the finest systems for fighting truly large engagements. The later editions never quite captured the same magic for me.
For convention games or introducing new players, I enjoy Rank and File. It is easy to teach, plays quickly, and lets players focus on commanding troops instead of studying charts.
Then there is General de Brigade. There is simply nothing quite like seeing those magnificent 36-figure French battalions deployed across the table. Few rules capture the visual spectacle of the Napoleonic battlefield so well.
The problem is that my favorite rules are not necessarily everyone else's favorite rules.
Over the years, the Centurions have examined at least a dozen different Napoleonic rulesets. Some were too detailed. Others were too abstract. Some worked wonderfully for two players but struggled with six or eight. Others demanded that players become experts in the rules before they could simply enjoy the game.
When you're designing games for a club, the question isn't, "What is the best Napoleonic ruleset?"
The question is, "What is the best ruleset for our group?"
It needs to be easy enough that a new player can sit down and enjoy themselves after a short explanation. It needs enough tactical depth that experienced players remain challenged. It needs to handle large multiplayer games without bogging down, and it needs to reward sound battlefield decisions rather than mastery of obscure rules.
That is a surprisingly difficult balance to find.
Back in 2004, I decided to stop looking.
Instead, I wrote my own rules.
I called them Horse, Musket and Gun.
The goal was never to reinvent Napoleonic gaming. I simply wanted a set of rules that reflected how the Centurions enjoyed playing: brigade and divisional commanders making meaningful decisions, large battles that could be completed in an afternoon, and mechanics that stayed out of the players' way.
For a while, it looked promising.
The rules went through several revisions and numerous playtests. Then one of the playtesters discovered a significant flaw in one of the core mechanics. It wasn't a minor balance issue or a poorly worded rule. It exposed a weakness in the command system itself.
Correcting it required more than a simple errata.
It required redesigning the game from the ground up.
Like so many hobby projects, life intervened. Other historical periods caught our attention. Other rules demanded our time. Horse, Musket and Gun was quietly set aside, where it remained for more than fifteen years.
But the idea never really disappeared.
Every Napoleonic game I played over the next two decades became another playtest in disguise. Every ruleset taught me something. Some mechanics were worth borrowing. Others demonstrated exactly what I wanted to avoid.
Slowly, without realizing it, I had been rewriting the game in my head.
Now the Centurions are embarking on a new 10mm Napoleonic project, and it feels like the right time to dust off that old manuscript.
This isn't a revision.
It's a complete reimagining.
The original philosophy remains the same—put players in the role of brigade commanders, keep the focus on battlefield decisions, and make the rules support the game rather than dominate it—but everything else is open to reconsideration.
Twenty years of gaming experience, countless battles, and more Napoleonic rules than I can reasonably remember have all influenced this new version.
I'm still not trying to write the perfect Napoleonic rules.
There probably isn't such a thing.
I'm trying to write the rules that work for our club, our style of gaming, and our collection of miniatures.
Perhaps after all these years, Horse, Musket and Gun will finally become the game I set out to write back in 2004.
If nothing else, it's time to find out.
No comments:
Post a Comment