Prev: Re: [GZG] [SG] IAVRs Next: Re: [GZG] [SG] IAVRs

RE: [GZG] [SG] IAVRs

From: Adrian <adrian@s...>
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:20:00 -0500
Subject: RE: [GZG] [SG] IAVRs


>You got the general idea, anyway.

Oh, for sure.

It just struck me as a bit funny - more thinking about Sean Bean wilting

away in Ronin, than anything else.

I have a friend who is a serious Sean Bean fan, loves the Sharpe films, 
etc., and who got all excited when he heard Sean Bean was going to be in

Ronin as an "Ex-SAS Trooper".  When it turned out that the character was
a 
complete wanker, it was pretty funny watching my friend all
disappointed...

Mean of me, I suppose...

>I've played way too many wargames where dead vehicles providing cover
means
>the difference between winning and losing.  Of course I've also stopped
>playing those games as the rules are even more munchkin than they used
to
>be.

When I run games, I always travel with extra craters, so when a vehicle
is 
killed spectacularly, I take off the vehicle model and plonk down a 
crater.  Then there is no argument about whether or not it provides
cover...

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

Prev: Re: [GZG] [SG] IAVRs Next: Re: [GZG] [SG] IAVRs