…twice
…and I was ignored both times by both parties. Consequently I have deleted the post with all the bickering in the comments.
Reading a litany of snide comments and sly digs is not amusing or helpful. In fact, it’s wasted a load of my time that could have been better spent answering FAQs. I really don’t care which of you has the last word.
If you can’t behave like gentlemen then please don’t bother posting here.
Morning all.
I’m reorganising the pages on the site and rewriting a bunch of them today, so things will appear and disappear. Don’t fret. It’s all for the Greater Good. Trust me.
It’s been a long while since I did this and lots has happened in the last year. What I’d planned to do on Quirkworthy and what I’ve actually done have been rather different and the site needs updating to reflect the reality a bit better.
Does this count as my “Sunday Support” article? No. I’ll be tackling some of the FAQs and adding a DB Card Commentary for that.
This is the first step in a series of articles about DzC (as Dropzone Commander is apparently known to its friends). I will be looking at the book, the models and the game play of the beast in due course. However, before we delve into all that, I’d like to talk about something I’ve heard a lot in conversation about the game: “it’s pretty, but it’s expensive”. This seems to be a general reason for people not trying the game. I thought it bore a bit closer examination.
Firstly, I’ll agree that it’s pretty. We can come back to that later though. What I’m really interested in here is the notion that it’s expensive. To start with, expensive is a comparator – you can’t be expensive in isolation. So what is it supposed to be expensive in relation to? I thought I’d make a few assumptions and then do some back of an envelope calculations to see whether that criticism holds up.
How Long is That String?
You and I both know that most figure games don’t have an end to the armies you can collect. The company responsible will keep adding cool stuff and you can always find room for another unit in your force. So where do we stop? If we’re going to say something is expensive or cheap, modestly priced or extortionate we need some idea of what we are measuring. We need some ground rules so we can compare DzC to anything else.
My suggestion is that we compare the ante: what does it cost to “buy into” this game? How much do I need to spend before I can sit at the table with an army and any rulebooks, army lists and suchlike I will need? That sort of minimal game is seldom if ever the “real” game, but it’s enough to get the hang of the core mechanics and try the thing out. Note that I’m talking about the full game rather than any cut down “try this out” version that may be available. I think that in order to really get to grips with a game you need the full rules and the full army lists (and card decks, special dice, etc for your faction – but not normal dice or tape measures as I’ll assume you probably have those anyway). You can always buy another model, but this is about the basics. The ante, for me, is all the paper products required plus enough models to make a start.
I’ll be using the RRPs in pounds to make these comparisons. Currency fluctuations, varying discounts and so on make this a less than exact science, though in general the relationships between games should hold true. Don’t worry about the details too much. I’ll also assume that you’re going to buy all of this at once so you can take advantage of whatever starter sets, etc are on offer.
Oh, and while I’m discussing ground rules, I should say that Hawk Wargames (who make DzC) kindly supplied the review copy (thanks Hawk!). I don’t think that’s going to make a jot of difference to the review, I just thought I’d say in case you were wondering.
The Ante for Dropzone Commander
This is the easiest of all the calculations here. It’s £83.
Hawk sell 3 levels of starter set for each of the 4 factions. What you need to get going is the rulebook (£15) plus any one of the smallest starter sets (£68). That gives you the full rules, all four army lists plus the faction specific card deck and just over 500 points of models. This will be a very small game, to be sure, but it’s a game. 500 points is the smallest game they define in their sizes of battle.
It’s worth mentioning that they also have a set of free pdfs of buildings for you to print out and make into a city to fight over. Always helps to have a battlefield.
So, £83 to get you going with DzC.
Compared To… ?
Dropzone Commander is a 10mm scale battle game where the eponymous dropships cart your battlegroups about a tabletop, depositing them where they can rush in to seize objectives and suchlike. Well, that’s what I read. I’ve not played it yet. Either way, it’s obviously not a 32mm skirmish game with half a dozen models a side, so comparing it to them is nonsense.
DreadBall is just £49.99, so does that make DzC expensive? Again, I’d say that it’s not a reasonable comparison. DB is a board game, not a tabletop battle game.
I think we should compare Dropzone to 40K and Epic from GW as they’re both well known SF battle games – one in a larger scale and one smaller.
Spartan have recently put out Planetfall as their 10mm bit of Firestorm Invasion and it would make a very good comparator. That’s a 10mm SF mass battle game too. Let’s start with that.
Planetfall
This is fairly new, so there isn’t a lot out for it yet. However, they do sell starter sets that include a small force which is described in the rules as being tailored for their smallest size battles, very much as the DzC ones are. These include a bunch of models, a set of rules and the cards you need for the force. They cost £45.
It is worth noting that according to the Studio Sparta site, Planetfall is currently being sold at “very special introductory prices”, and so presumably £45 is not their “real” price. Still, it’s a lot less than DzC.
Epic
As we’ve been talking about physical rule books so far, it seems only fair to keep that going with Epic. The rules then, are £35 on their own. They are available as a free pdf though (as is Planetfall), but that’s not an even comparison.
You’ll need some order dice at £7.20.
The Space Marine models to play one of the sides in the combined arms training mission (a very small game) would set you back £55.10 (with some models left over to build some more basic infantry units).
This comes to a total of £62.30 with only digital rules, or £97.30 with the softback book (which I think is a fairer comparison).
Exactly how big a battle you’re getting to play and whether it’s (a) representative of the game and (b) a fair comparison is hard to judge, though it’s probably enough to give you a flavour and will do for our purposes here. It is also true that the equivalent size (in points) of mass armies such as Imperial Guard or Orks will cost a lot more cash than this. Space Marines generally have nice, compact forces. On the other hand, DzC forces all cost the same to ante up on.
40K
Well it’s a bigger scale and that makes a difference in some ways. However, for the basic principle of getting enough to make a start at a mass battle game I think the nominal scale of the figures is less of an issue than it might at first seem.
The obvious starting place for 40K is the Dark Vengeance boxed set. This comes with a mini rule book and two small armies for £61.50. Are they enough for a scrap? I think it’s enough to get a general idea of the game.
Unfortunately, that’s not all you need though. To match the other games I’ve talked about you’ll need the codex for your army which will be either £25 or £30 depending on which side you pick. This makes it £86.50 or £91.50 depending. That said, you’re getting both sides here, not just one, which makes the comparison fuzzier.
Thoughts
Obviously you could choose all sorts of other things to compare DzC to. In historical games, DBA and a 15mm army (the most popular scale) would cost a lot less, but a Warhammer Ancients or Hail Caesar army and rules would probably be more expensive. Partly that’s because they are usually 28mm scale games, but it’s also that they field big regiments. Anything modern enough to have vehicles starts getting expensive for that reason. Flames of War, for example, has a £35 rulebook. You can get an infantry company for the same sort of price, but if you’re buying a combined arms army you could triple that.
One thing I haven’t mentioned is the quality involved. A Lada and a Ferrari are both cars. Ferraris seem very expensive when compared to Ladas if you ignore everything except the actual price tag. Here we enter the muddy realm of personal preference. What I think we can perhaps agree on is that the whole presentation of DzC (and all of the Hawk Wargames stuff) says that they want to position themselves at the high quality end of the market. You don’t go to them to buy a mixed bag of discount toy soldiers. They are claiming quality and naturally have a price tag to match.
Their price tag seems to me to be about on par with GW, which seems to me to make sense when you look at the quality and detail of their offerings. They are more costly than Planetfall, and even if that bounces up in cost when the offer disappears I suspect they will remain cheaper than DzC. However, I think they look like they should be. Their whole presentation is not on a par, and whilst I’m sure it will be popular it is not trying to aim for quite the same niche. What I seem to be talking myself round to is that Hawk seem to have looked at the market and decided that they can sit next to GW on quality and therefore charge the same sort of price.
Having said that, I think that GW is actually more expensive than DzC will be in the medium and long term. This is especially true of 40K which has a very heavily discounted starter set. The prices you’ll be paying to build up those starter armies will not change much with Dropzone, but will jump up sharply with 40K.
So do I think that Dropzone Commander is expensive for what you get?
No, not really. It’s a lump of money to drop in one go, but not especially out of the ordinary for starting a new game.
Painting an army was what I mentioned the other day. Absolutely. So what’s the first step? Well, before I can pick up a brush, I first have to decide which army I’m going to collect and for what game. Models, basing and colour schemes all need to know such things.
To take the second part first, that’s easy. I’m going to collect a new army for my own 28mm fantasy rules – God of Battles. They aren’t out yet, but I know what the lists are and it’ll be good to have a shiny new army ready for when they are released. That way I can do some battle reports and suchlike to demonstrate how things work. But I’m getting ahead of myself.
To appreciate why this is a tricky question for me you might need to re-read this. Go ahead. I’ll wait here.
Back? Cool. So, that’s a starting point. How do I narrow this down? Well because it’s not out yet I haven’t got access to models for all of the ranges. Some of the armies are a bit… unusual. That’s actually a big help in this case. Whilst I’d like all the armies eventually I need to pick one to start with and being able to cross off a couple because the models aren’t to hand narrows the field. Looking at a list and being broad in my interpretation of “not got the models” I can actually discount 5 options. A further one can be put aside for now as it’s a favourite of a friend of mine and if he does an army it will be them. It’d be silly to have 2 armies between us that were both the same.
Of the four remaining armies I have probably got enough models in the lead mountain to build 90% or more of any of them. You know how it is.
I won’t go into detail about what they are as I told Foundry I’d keep such things under wraps till they were ready. Partly for that reason I’ve gone for the greenskins as they will be familiar to all. To be fair, I’m not sure how else I’d have picked between them.
It’s probably also worth mentioning at this stage that I am more than a little picky about models. For example, I don’t build armies with duplicate models in.* Yes, this does make life harder, but then it also makes the army look better (I think), so you pays your money and takes your choice.
I’ve built, painted and sold a load of armies over the years and have come to the conclusion that I don’t want to have to go through that rigmarole many more times. From now on, when I paint an army I will make it one that won’t need replacing. If that means I spend a bit more money and time doing it right then so be it. I’d rather get it right than have the feeling that I cut some corners when I look at them. I’ve done that before and I hated it. Every time I put that particular Undead army on the table I was willing the enemy to kill them just so I could put them back in their cases, out of sight. I doubt that made me play better.
That bilious army was an experiment, and as you follow my adventures in army painting I’m sure I’ll have a few more. I do like to tinker. Sometimes it is a horrible mess and other times it works brilliantly. All part of the learning curve.
I’ve also had an idea about bases, which is to see whether it’s possible to use clear bases for all the models in an army. Crazy? Possibly. My thinking here is based on the ideal I have in mind. In a perfect world, I’d like a tabletop wargame to look like a diorama that can be moved about. Very, very often the basing of armies is completely different from the table they fight over, separating them visually when they should look like they belong. I’m fighting back a rant about terrain, but let me just say that terrain and the way that models interact with it is a sadly neglected topic. If the models had clear bases then perhaps they would blend in better. Worth a try, I reckon. If it works it would also have the benefit of them blending in better with every tabletop, making it well worth making more specific model scenery for different battles, themes or campaigns. No more snow based models on green tables, or vice versa. It’s an idea. If it doesn’t work, I have a plan B 🙂
Choosing the models is next. I’ve picked a game and an army – next time I’ll look at which models to conscript. Greenskins are blessed with a great deal of variety from a plethora of companies and there is a quite bewildering array of options to choose between.
*This is also a convenient excuse to do a bunch of conversions, which I enjoy.
Serves me right for trying to be clever.
This was, of course, supposed to be published yesterday as a Sunday Support article, but when I did the clever scheduling thing I went and set it for the wrong date…
When one player Slams another the rules list a specific sequence to follow for the results. What I’ve seen a couple of times now is Coaches cutting some corners in this and I’d just like to point out why I think that this isn’t such a good idea.
DreadBall is, at its heart, a game about positioning. Somethings this is a general and broad concept – have you got a model at that end of the pitch? Mostly though, the positioning in DreadBall is a matter of details – are you in this hex or one to the left? Which side of the hex are you facing? How many hexes are you from that Strike Zone?These details matter for threat hexes, Evades, ranges of movement and Throws, etc, etc, and as you learn the game and develop your tactical skill you will find yourself thinking about the exact positioning of your players more and more.
The corner that people sometimes cut is to roll armour for a player that is knocked down before their opponent decides whether to follow up or not (instead of after). This is a bad idea because it takes away an important tactical decision on the part of the winner. Do you follow up or not?
The sequence in the rules asks you to make this decision when you know that you’ve knocked your opponent down and you know he’s got to roll for his armour, but you do not know whether he will make the roll or not. You must decide if you want to follow up, placing a threat hex on the fallen player, thus making it more difficult for them to stand up if they remain on the pitch. Or, do you remain in your current hex and risk leaving the opposing player on the pitch and unmarked so they can stand up and run off to do mischief without hindrance in their next Rush. Whether the opponent remains on the pitch or in the Sin Bin is critical to your decision, but you don’t know whether they will or not so you have to evaluate the current situation and weigh the risk. The exact positioning of your player can be very important depending on what’s going on around them at the time. Making this decision a risk to be weighed by the Coach was a conscious design choice on my part and I think it’s a real shame to lose it.
If you roll the armour before you choose to follow up then the decision is simple and without risk. In other words, dull and uninteresting.
It’s a detail, to be sure, and some might not think it important. However, it’s a collection of this sort of detail which goes together to make DreadBall a game of tactical skill, and whilst you may find it saves a second or two to cut the corner I think you’ll find the loss of the tactical choice a poor trade in the long run.
Just got back after another day’s testing the new teams. Had a different group of playtesters over this time and it worked very well indeed. Building on what we had the first time, plus other games in-between, I think we have the teams pretty close to being done now. This won’t stop me testing them, but it is nice to feel like they’re getting close.
I’ve rewritten the Judwan and the Z’zor so they’re more challenging as well as more fun. The initial draft of both worked mechanically, but neither was as good as it could have been. The Judwan just weren’t fun, and the Z’zor suffered from being bland, which is a shocking crime. Not any more. They now have the biggest and nastiest Guard going, bar none, as well as having Can’t Feel a Thing across the board. Them bugs takes a lickin’ and keeps on tickin’ 🙂
The Judwan have ended up with an ability which lets them try to move their opponents about, and this helped to give them more to think about. Most players didn’t use it a lot, but I think it was good to have on hand if needed. Interestingly, the last game we played saw it used a lot more, and I think it will come out a great deal more against certain styles of play and certain teams. It’s not quite what I had in mind for them when I first envisaged the team, and is a good example of the kind of compromise which is commonplace. “Compromise” makes this sound bad, which it isn’t. I’d have preferred them to work as I’d imagined, but they didn’t. Far better that they work and are close than they are perfect and unplayable.
The robots’ transforming ability is another feature which takes some getting used to. In some ways it’s a bit of a tease. The temptation is to use it just because it’s there, but in fact the ‘bots probably work best when you’re more restrained. It does, however, offer them a whole new realm of options which makes them rather more thinky to play.
The teams are also highlighting some awkward little wrinkles in the league system, which need a few additions. Structured leagues (and campaigns) are notoriously tricky to balance, and often have very different issues at the beginning, middle and end as teams mature and the balance of power shifts. DreadBall is no different, so I’ll be adding some extra league options in Season 2 to try and balance out some of the more common problems.
All told, it was an entertaining day, and kudos to the guys who travelled for hours to take part. Much appreciated 🙂
I dunno. I turn away for 5 seconds and when I get back my inbox is overflowing again!
As you may have noticed, apart form the odd comment from my iPad, I’ve been AFK for the last couple of days, sorting dull RL rubbish. This weekend I’ve got lots of playtesting and gaming booked, so it’s going to be a little while before I catch up again. I keep saying that…
To dump some more random thoughts, I’ve been thinking that it might help if I introduced a little more structure around here. Folk seem to like having regular topics on specific days, so I thought I’d give it a try. Might make me more organised, and it might not. We’ll see how we go. Here’s the plan:
Tuesdays
This day is named for the god Tiw, who was probably the original father of the gods, back in the mists of the (s0-called) Dark Ages. Over time he was gradually demoted to a son of Woden/Odin and was somewhat marginalised, though he was never entirely forgotten. His appearance as one-handed harks back to his courage which allowed the gods to bind the great wolf Fenrir (a jolly useful thing to do). He is also known as the sponsor of the althing. This makes him a funny mix of wisdom and courage.
Starting to paint again after many years of not, and picking a whole army to do it with, is an act of foolishness akin to sticking your hand in the mouth of a giant wolf. At least, that’s my tenuous reasoning to put articles about building, painting and similar army diary entries here. Basically Tuesdays will be for anything to do with making both models and board game components. The link is the making.
Thursdays
Thor is the god in question here, and he is best known as the brash and dramatic god of thunder. Loud and brash? Hmm, what fits here?
I’m going to use Thursdays for reviews, starting a series that will look at games and gaming goodies in a rather more in depth way than is common on the internet. You’ve seen the sort of thing I mean with Dreadfleet – my coverage of which runs into many thousands of words. I don’t expect or intend to cover many different games, but when I do look at something it will be over several stages and from different angles. Doubtless I will like some and dislike others. We’ll have to see.
I read many reviews online and most of them are too brief and superficial for my taste. Of course, it takes very little time to write 50 words about the art in the new rules being pretty, and repeated plays over several days to write a proper review, so it’s obvious why there are fewer of those about. However, as a gamer I want to know what something is really like before I buy into it, and that means something deeper than a precis of the rules and “it looks really good”. Lots of games look really good. Let’s hear about what it’s like in play, and in detail? What are the best bits? Where have they let themselves down? is it easy to learn? Can you find a rule when you need it mid-game? Are they clearly written in the first place? What about support? Do they seem to care? Have they produced a full game with terrain, QR sheets and all the other gubbins that’s needed? Are all the models out yet? Are you left to fend for yourself and finish off their good ideas for them? Just a few of the questions I think a really good review should answer.
Sundays
The day of the Sun was the late Roman day of rest. The invincible sun, Sol Invictus, is the one honoured here.
The plan is to use Sunday as a day to provide some support for one (or more) of my published games. Whether this is expanded rules or (more often) an updated FAQ, a tactics article or something else entirely, the aim is to provide an additional free resource for the handsome, charming and generally talented and lovely folk who play my games. Granted, if I’m feeling obscure it might be for Lost Patrol or even Battle of the Halji – you’ll never know till you drop by to check 🙂
In General
Even though I am going to try these specific days, I’ll still be posting the odd thing in-between, as and when I feel the urge. This post, for example, wouldn’t fit those categories. Perhaps that is why I am posting it on a Friday 😉
In other words, the regular days are intended to provide a framework with which I can provide a bit more clarity for both you and me. It won’t stop me from posting other things, but much of what I do will fit into those broad categories.
Let’s see how we go.
My head feels like it has something in it to express, though I am not sure what that may be. Possibly it’s just full of things and needs a release valve. So excuse me while I unload some of the accumulated gubbins.
It’s been a busy weekend gaming with a friend visiting from out of town. He’s been putting up with my experimental game designs for years, and we used to play every week. Since his work relocated him to another town our gaming sessions have become rather rarer, though perhaps even more fun for all that. So whilst he was down we have been catching up and alternating between playing the old favourites and trying out some of my latest work.
By “old favourites” I mean things like Nuclear War, Lost Cities and Naval War – none of which require so much brain that you can’t chat while you obliterate each other (and curse the Dark Hand of Reiner). We also had a long discussion about Dropzone Commander which I have got and read most of, but haven’t played yet. I’ll be doing a series of articles about that soon enough, and it was interesting to go through the rules with him to see what his reaction was. Of course, we also tried our hand at some unpublished stuff, including the latest project that shall not be spoken of. As has so often been the way, we ended up playing a game where everything was pretending to be something else because the models simply don’t exist yet. It does keep the imagination exercised though 🙂
Speaking of imagination, I’m looking at painting again, partly because of DzC, but mainly for a fantasy army. As many of you will know, I haven’t painted in years and so the notion of me painting an army is not to be taken with anything other than a large sack of salt. Still, the intention has to be the first step. I’ve also been sorting through stacks of stuff and need to put a bunch of things on Ebay to clear some room (probably for more toys). Considering what was worth keeping and what I was ever going to use was the main driver to actually make something out of the bits I’ve been collecting for army X or army Y over the years.
Painting has always been a problem as I don’t like the results when I paint fast, but don’t get much done when I paint well. I have painted quite a few armies over the years, though never as many as I wanted to, so I know I can do it if I put my mind to it. What I need to do is devise a process for painting which produces acceptable results in a realistic time. The Holy Grail of army painting, if you will. Of course, what constitutes an acceptable quality and a reasonable speed depend on who you ask, and I’ve not really decided myself. I’ll know it when I see it though.
There’s more rolling round among my little grey cells, DreadBall included, but I’ll spare you for now. There’s loads of real work to be doing, and I’ve got another meeting first thing tomorrow so I should make sure I’m ready for that.
One last thought before I go. Are people looking forward to Christmas? For me it’s generally a huge time sink which threatens deadlines, but that’s probably just being a freelancer. Or Scrooge. I forget. Will you get lots of cool toys and play fun games? Is it a season to be jolly?
It all started with the Warlock of Firetop Mountain.
The history of adventure game books is 30 years old this year, and to celebrate that fact a friend of mine has organised a Kickstarter to finish his book on the subject.
I’ll leave a full description to Jonathan over on KS. I just thought I’d tell you why I paid for a copy.
Firstly, it’s an odd purchase for me. It’s not a game, nor a model, nor even funny dice; it’s not a nice selection of new paints, a T-shirt with amusing geek humour or anything remotely “useful” for actually gaming. That makes it a bit of an odd one for me. Most of the stuff I buy which can remotely be described as for my hobby is directly useful. However, this promises to be that rarest of items: an account of modern gaming history that I don’t already know.
There aren’t many books on the subject of recent gaming history, and sadly all the ones I have read have been fairly poor. I’m sure I missed a few, but this has been largely because I was so put off by the feeble efforts of the ones I have wasted hours trawling through. Mostly the authors seemed to know less than I did from simply being a customer at the time. You Are The Hero promises to be different as the author is not only a professional writer, but is also the author of several game books himself. He does proper research (increasingly a rather splendid novelty), rather than just using Wikipedia and guesswork and knows the business from both sides of the fence. These are all Good Things.
What I am hoping and expecting to end up with is an interesting and well illustrated read with lashings of nostalgia and some choice pieces of evocative art from my early days in gaming. I’m hoping to find out some amusing anecdotes along the way. So I’ve pledged my $30 for a copy. I’m even wondering where my battered copy of Warlock is lurking, and my pristine copy of Titan. Perhaps I’ll have one more bash at nabbing the old geezer’s loot…
Does anyone else remember the heyday of the game book? Does anyone play them regularly now?
Wildcard is one of the Season 2 MVPs, and as such shouldn’t really be out and about for months yet. However, KickStarts being the odd things they are, and Ronnie having trouble keeping shiny toys to himself, more than a few of you are going to have a model for this young lass before Santa comes down the chimney 🙂
Because new models are always more fun when you can play with them, I’ve got a sneak peek of her rules from an early draft of Season 2. These still have more playtesting to survive through, though I think she’ll work fine like this. She’s certainly worth trying out.
So without further ado… ladies and gentlemen, I give you…
WILDCARD!
One of the current favourites of the crowd is the dazzling Wildcard. Like Lucky Logan, she appears in all the most fashionable commercials, and also like Logan she specialises in pulling victory from the jaws of defeat.
| Role | Move | Strength | Speed | Skill | Armour | Min Cost per Game | Notes |
| Jack | 6 | 4+ | 3+ | 4+ | 4+ | 9mc | Even the Odds, Slide |
Plays for: genetically pure human teams or Asterians.
Wildcard is a fast and agile human, with a distinctive uniform and a flashing smile. She is a boon to the cameras which often focus on her even when the ball is elsewhere on the pitch.
Her appearance is unlike most of the teams she plays with, with a uniform that is more akin to Asterian body suits in general cut than a normal human DreadBall suit. Her clothing also seems to offer a similar level of defence to Asterian smartsuits, becoming rigid in response to kinetic energy. This allows her to appear only lightly protected, which can encourage unwary foes closer than is usually good for them.
Her playing style and philosophy echoes the lithe and enigmatic aliens too, and she has been known to play alongside them on the few occasions they sought outside aid. On the pitch her movements are almost languid when her team is winning, but as soon as things go awry she redoubles her efforts. Every opposing move is scrutinised for weak points and she is quick to exploit any that she finds. However, as soon as the crisis is over she slips back into a more relaxed style of play. It is almost like she wants to keep the game in balance rather than win it outright.
Even the Odds (Jack)
This ability is exactly the same as Running Interference (see page 42 of the main rules), with the exception of when it can be used.
Instead of a limit of once per match, Even the Odds can be used once in any opposing Rush that begins with the opposing team having a score greater than zero.
Slide (Jack)
The player may Dash as part of any action that allows them to move at least 1 hex.
Note: “Genetically Pure Humans”
In a universe largely populated by aliens and mutants, the term “genetically pure human” simply means what it says: neither mutant nor alien. In the case of who an MVP will play for, genetically pure human teams are currently limited to the Trontek 29ers and the Void Sirens.
Now it’s entirely possible that the table will go a little screwy for some folk, depending on which browser is being used. The internet is like that. So I’ve got a pdf for you as well. It’s the same thing as above, but perhaps in an easier format:
Quirkworthy 