Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
3 Posts

Wilderness War» Forums » Rules

Subject: Question about raids rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Justin Nordstrom
United States
Drums
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Something I've never understood about WW. When raiding areas with a stockade, the table states:

Roll 1 (Raid fails, 1 step loss); Roll 2 (Raid fails, 1 step loss); Roll 3 No Effect; Roll 4 (Raid fails, 2 step loss), Roll 5 (Raid success, 1 step loss); Roll 6 (Raid Success), Roll 7+ (Raid Success)

So, if I conduct a raid with a lone Indian and roll a 3, nothing happens. But if I bring a leader with tactics rating "1" along, I suffer a loss. Same thing for the other column (without stockade) for rolling a 3 (adjusted to 4 with my leader).

What's the rationale of having the "4" row be more damaging than the "3" row on these tables? Personally, I could understand if the rules said a leader's tactics rating doesn't apply in a raid (ie their skills in battlefield maneuvers don't necessarily help in backwoods raids with irregular troops). But I don't really understand this structure. Any suggestions/thoughts?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Rubin
United States
Trenton
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
"It may be doubted whether so small a number of men ever employed so short a space of time with greater or more lasting effects upon the history of the world.” — Sir George Otto Trevelyan on the Battles of Trenton and Princeton
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
With the +1 modifier, the results run from 2 to 7 rather than 1 to 6. The 7 result is better than the 1 result, so, on average, you've improved your results. Since the decision whether to apply the drm occurs *before* the die is rolled, one accepts the better odds, even though the particular outcome is not guaranteed to be improved.

Just like in real life! A more capable commander is, on the whole, better to have. However, he might have enough initiative to get into trouble where a less capable commander would not.

As for the why (yes, I got there eventually!), well, I assume it's so that leader casualties are statistically associated with general casualties in the desired fashion. Leaders must check for premature death on 1's and 6's; if the results were well ordered, all leader casualties would be associated with extreme results. "Scrambling" the table is consistent with leader casualties not being too strongly correlated with the general level of casualties.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Worth
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
If I remember correctly, it was done that way so that raids with leaders still face the possibility of a failure and a loss.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.