I was reading through the BFG campaign rules, and there is no way to incorporate Tyranids into a BFG campaign. I aim to change that. I'm making a new, simplified version of BFG campaigns that can tie into games of 40k if desired.
Here's my ideas on how such a campaign might go, try to stay with me:
Use a sub-sector map from the campaign section of BFG or one of the BFG supplements. Each player in the campaign rolls off, and in order from highest (re-rolling ties obviously) to lowest gets to pick the node that will be their starting node. Nodes that are not home bases are neutral nodes.
Each player rolls off again, to determine first campaign turn. Once the order is set, it remains that way for the rest of the campaign. Then each player takes their turn, in which they can attack adjacent nodes to their node. In order to take a system, the attack undergoes 3 phases: BFG Raid, BFG Planetary assault, 40k Battle, in that order (for the attacker). In his turn, each player make 2 attempts to advance his or her invasion of a system by a phase, or attempt to reverse another player's invasion, of a system that the player (who is taking his turn) owns, by a phase. Neutral systems skip the phase system, and instead determine the success of the invading fleet by rolling 2d6, which counts as one of the two attacks the player can make during his turn.
When rolling the 2d6 to determine if the attack was successful (and thus bringing the system under your control), you are successful if you roll equal to or below the highest leadership score in your fleet. If you roll snake eyes, it is an automatic success and does not take up one of the attacks you can make during your turn. If you roll above your leadership statistic, it is a failure, and you waste an attempt/attack. If you roll two 6's, the invasion is such a catastrophic failure that you can make no more attacks the rest of your player turn, no matter how many attacks you had remaining.
When making an attack on an enemy occupied system, the attack first begins at the BFG raid phase. Roll on the scenario table for raids and play the game that results. The attacker and defender are determined easily; the player commencing the invasion is the attacker and the player defending the system is the defender (duh!). The players then play the corresponding game. If the attacker is the winner, his invasion advances to the next phase. If the defender is the winner, the invasion is pushed back a phase. For example, if a player decided to attack a system, he would then play a Raid scenario against the system's owner. If the attacking player should win, he then has the option to play a second game that is a BFG Planetary Assault mission (since players can make two attacks per player turn). If he should win again, his invasion will advance to the next phase, which is the 40k game. Should he lose, his invasion stalls, and he'll remain in the BFG Planetary Assault phase when he takes his turn next (unless forced back, see below). Since he can only make 2 attempts to advance his invasion per his player turn, he would have to wait until his next turn to attempt to finish the assault.
In a player turn, a player can also choose to try to reverse the advance of an invading force into one of his occupied systems, using one of his 2 attacks for the turn. If another player's advance is at BFG planetary assault or 40k battle into the defender's system, the defender can go on the offensive during his turn to try and oust the invaders. In this case, the former defender becomes the attacker of the scenario. If the player wins, he forces the invasion back to its previous phase. If he loses, the invasion remains at its current phase.
Did I explain that well enough? Obviously this needs embellishing, clarifying, and defining, but I think this is a great basis for tying together BFG games with 40k games. My wife and I may be testing this out soon for ourselves.
Can anybody with experience running campaigns give me some feedback with this? BFG experience would be helpful as well.
Until then, it's late, so I need to turn in.
--FP135
No comments:
Post a Comment