The Regiment Alpha Playtest Kit 1.0

Anarchangel,

1) The social pressure I experienced mostly came from:

Player wants to Help.  Player's character has no obvious means to Help.  Player thinks up very creative way to Help.  Player feels clever.  Player congratulates self and picks up dice.

Once it's at that point, it's harder for me as MC to say no and get the player to feel okay about it.

2) "Dude, stop Helping with every friggin' roll!  Your character has no particular reason to care all that much, you're adding a lot of convoluted fiction to justify it, and it's just slowing down the momentum of the story and killing the balance of screen time.  Yes, it's neat that you can earn 20 advances in a session, now STOP."

That's exaggerated for effect.  That didn't actually happen.  But it was going in that direction more than I was comfortable with.

Yeah, I'm not sure if this'll work at your table but I was having similar issues at mine.

What I did was just state that as PCs, just tell me what you're doing; I'll be asking that a lot. If it's a Move, I'll call for it and decide which one.

Also, only having one Moves reference sheet at the table helped.

Obviously, canny players will still narrate with Moves in mind, but it switched from "I go aggo" and "I hack and slash" and "I help/interfere" to just answering the "What do you do?" question in in-character terms, then as the MC deciding if that qualified as a Move or not.

Sure, there's sometimes a little OOC back and forth but each time that's an opportunity to talk about expectations and negotiate a common culture of play. Helps if you have good rapport with everyone at the table.

Hell yeah, Nathan!  A group that accepted that would be my ideal AW group, as both player and MC.

Good points, all.

We definitely have our eye on the +1s floating around in the game right now. That will be something I'll add to the playtest questionnaire, too. We want assistance to be an important thing (warfare is done by teams) but too many +1s flying around ruins the tension.

I even have an alternate helping rule in my back pocket if we need it (something from Knife & Candle), but I'd like to see how the current toolkit shakes out first.

This is really great and it's a shame I hadn't discovered it earlier.
Couple of questions:
-Sorry to bring the balance issue, but was it intended, that Sarge's stats add up to +4 and Commando's stats to +5(two +2 stats in each set), while everyone else's stats add up to usual +3?
-Is there any move or smth about vehicle combat? I see only "how to destroy a vehicle". Is it because "regiment" is only about soldiers?
-Is the six playbooks considered to be all that needed, or will there be, e.g. Engineer?
-While I suppose that Sarge, Medic, Soldiers and possibly Sniper are usually all in one place, are Commando and Officer supposed to be away from the main unit at least half of the time(first infiltrating, second having command duties and all)?

- Yep, the Sergeant and Commando have better stats, on purpose.

- There will be a vehicle combat supplement, eventually, but for now the game is focused on dismounted infantry.

- There are more playbooks in the works, including an Engineer. But those six are the "core classes." Actually, the Commando isn't exactly a core class.

- The Officer is a Lieutenant, so they're with the platoon, out in the field. The Commando and the Sniper might be physically separated, but are also part of the platoon and are on the same mission as the rest of the teams.

1) Can you tell, why? I am obviously not trying to object your decision, I just would like to know, what kind of things has lead you to make it. I do some hacking myself, so it is quite interesting.

2,3) glad to hear that! also very much waiting on the Engineer.

4) I'm just thinking that instead of AW where people are usually have a lot of time separated, but their needs and GM's fronts usually press them to work together(or kill each other), you can have situation when whole game is played with three players in one group, and other two separately. How do you think it affects group dynamic and does it have any impact on the rules(and stats)?

Anyway, thanks for clear and quick answer

Hi

just downloaded the kit. Looks great. We are currently playing a story-centric Traveller Mercenary campaign using Bk4 and Mythic GME - would love to give it a whirl as "The Regiment". (a hack of a hack!)
Some questions/ideas:

* Is the soldier playbook too generic? ie should it be somehow split into FNGs, Loners, psychos, packrats, fixers, etc?

* In our campaign we play NCOs and junior/mid officers (but not the unit CO) and thus a large part of the command structure of our unit. I didn't see this listed as a mode of play but IMO it is a very natural one.

* civilians seem to be very low profile (except partisans), this may work for ww2 fiction but for many eras they may impinge more so maybe could provide some character options/hooks eg personal entanglements, contacts, ...

* suggest could have some downtime move for mercs to get a new job/ticket?

* in our campaign we've found media/PR to be an impt function of the (far future) merc unit. Obviously the current day has parallels with this too. This could be a new type or types of character but it also implies some inter-game move possibilities too - "manage coverage of past operation", etc

* vehicles should be vulnerable to small arms suppressive fire (esp APCs, half-tracks etc) I'm not sure if the current rules allow this. (I recall something about AP being required. I may be mis-remembering)

* should Molotov cocktails be AP?

* the vehicle stats make me a bit nervous that they are "too much" for narrative purposes, but we'll see what happens in actual play.

Thanks for your work on this.

rgds
rob

To Guns_n_Droids
1) The idea behind the Commando was that the commando is just plain better. John may be able to elaborate further. The Sergeant is the glue that holds the team together and most of the Sergeant moves are about helping the team, so giving that class one more stat point felt like throwing the player a bone.

2/3) As John mentioned, the vehicle section is in work. I’m hoping to start early tests with it with my gaming group soon.

4) Like AW, it actually seems to work pretty well. The roles naturally seem to split up into smaller teams and, as a GM, I like to split the PCs up a bit just so I can get some good NPCs in there with them.


To Robb
1) Maybe. The soldier is kinda  the “everything else” Playbook. At the heart of the soldier playbook, though, is the grunt who steps back into harm’s way to get the job done.

2) Yes, that is a way you can play. Most of the playbooks have starting rank options in the same ball park. If you have a specific story concept in mind, change the options to suit your needs.

3) That’s a good suggestion even for WW2. Having down time to Blow off Steam is an important move and part of the game. The hook there is “bond with another soldier.” It wouldn’t hurt to loosen that up.

4) Here’s how I think the existing moves cover your question. Let me know what you think. Assess the Situation lets you ask any question – use it to get what you need to know in order to get what you want. Make a battle plan lets you outline advantages that give you +1 forward to your moves. Scrounge for spoils has +Intel as an option, which is the Regiment’s equivalent of AW’s Open your Brain to the Maelstrom – use this to pry secrets out of the GM’s head. Use Petition up the Chain of Command to manipulate the bureaucracy and get your way. Use Seek Help from Partisans to get help from the locals – “help” could be a job, or intel, or whatever. As a GM, use your hard moves to push them towards needing something. Recruits, arms, fuel, medical supplies, or help from others. Don’t forget to respond with intermittent rewards too.

5) I saw a pretty cool playbook out there called the War Correspondent – it was definitely trying to capture media and propaganda. We encourage folks to come up with their own custom playbooks or custom moves to play the game the way you want to play it.

6) Stay tuned for the vehicle rules! The short answer is, yes small arms can be used against vehicles, but…

7) No, Molotov cocktails should not be AP. In the Regiment, AP has a specific meaning in conjunction with the Hard Target move. Hitting an armored vehicle with a Molotov cocktail probably falls under the Are you Crazy move. In the case where the passengers or crew are exposed, then you just attack them normally using the Attack the Enemy move (They may get cover or concealment, though). Hard Target / AP is only required if you can’t get to the vehicle crew or the vehicle systems short of going through the vehicle’s armor.

8) If you feel the vehicle stats are too clunky for your narrative approach, don’t use them. Ask the PCs what they do, tell them to make a move, and then tell them what the consequences are.

Hi Paul

thanks

Re: soldier
- Does that mean multiple players can have this playbook? (ie unlike AW)

rgds
rob

Yes, absolutely!

And they can  be customized with custom moves.