Can you play SK scenarios with ASL rules?

[Reckall]

I know that it doesn't work the other way around (playing ASL scenarios with only SK rules). But today I was looking at my SK collection (which introduced me to ASL) and I wondered if I could replay their scenarios "Redux".

I guess that balance will go out of the door - but that would not be a priority in this case.

 

[Megaloman]

Yes, it's possible. The rules aren't that different.

It might actually be a good way to start learning the full rules. Add one new rule/element every time you start a new scenario.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Sans possible balance issues, it should not be a problem. You will need to assign SAN values.

 

[Megaloman]

Sans possible balance issues, it should not be a problem. You will need to assign SAN values.

I've read a recommendation somewhere that said that SAN 2 for the attacker and SAN 3 for the defender was the best way to do it with SK rules. Do you agree?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

I really have no idea. Perhaps a little higher in an urban setting?

 

[Reckall]

Well, it is another way to better learn the in and outs of a system. No less than Stanley Kubrick himself once said that, when studying something, it is important to understand not only "what" an author put in his work (book, movie, game...) but also "why". And this can be an opportunity to delve into the "whys" of the SAN rules

 

[Robin Reeve]

A Schwerpunkt "Rally Point" scenario pack presented scenarios which can be adapted to both sets of rules.
It could meet your need - with perhaps less possible balance issues.

 

[Megaloman]

A Schwerpunkt "Rally Point" scenario pack presented scenarios which can be adapted to both sets of rules.
It could meet your need - with perhaps less possible balance issues.

What a great suggestion!

It's Rally Point Volumes 2 & 6, they're called Starter Kit Study.

And this can be an opportunity to delve into the "whys" of the SAN rules

The best thing about them, when comparing rulesets, is that you won't shoot with just everything at every opportunity. SK has no real drawback (other than B#/X#) when making fire attacks, so why not go for that lucky 2 when you can? Prep Fire phases in SK go on forever. When having a very real threat to your dice rolls, you tend to only take your best shots, making Full ASL actually play faster, from my tiny experience at least.

 

[Reckall]

What a great suggestion!

It's Rally Point Volumes 2 & 6, they're called Starter Kit Study.

I have them (I bought everything SK-related before moving on to ASL). What happened is that today I dusted the corner where my SKs now are, and I wondered if also the original scenarios were feasible (with the caveat of balance problems). Beside having a bunch more, they could be used to teach ASL to a newbie more gradually without cutting the full rules (no 2-floor buildings, for example).

The best thing about them, when comparing rulesets, is that you won't shoot with just everything at every opportunity. SK has no real drawback (other than B#/X#) when making fire attacks, so why not go for that lucky 2 when you can? Prep Fire phases in SK go on forever. When having a very real threat to your dice rolls, you tend to only take your best shots, making Full ASL actually play faster, from my tiny experience at least.

I actually have the same feeling.

 

[horseshoe]

I purchased the SK HASL module, DaE, fully intending to use full ASL rules, We haven't played it yet, but it's definitely on our to play list.

 

[Robin Reeve]

I purchased the SK HASL module, DaE, fully intending to use full ASL rules, We haven't played it yet, but it's definitely on our to play list.

Daniel Takai played it with full ASL rules, and it was not a very good experience, as bypass and concealment really change the balance of the game and at CG level, it can be annoying.
I think that you could find his AAR in the AAR folder.

 

[horseshoe]

Daniel Takai played it with full ASL rules, and it was not a very good experience, as bypass and concealment really change the balance of the game and at CG level, it can be annoying.
I think that you could find his AAR in the AAR folder.

Well, we'll give it a go anyway and see for ourselves..<shrug>

 

[zgrose]

Bypass in Elst wasn't much of an issue as there isn't much bypassable terrain in the two games I played with full rules. Non-ground level buildings will have a much larger influence than concealment so you might want to "SSR" buildings to be ground level only.

Dealing with the probable fires and prisoners/heroes were the larger issues I ran into but you can probably crib together what seems reasonable to you and your opponent in under 10 minutes.

 

[Robin Reeve]

Well, we'll give it a go anyway and see for ourselves..<shrug>

Who could prevent you from doing what you want? <shrug, burp, sigh>

 

[Megaloman]

Dealing with the probable fires and prisoners/heroes were the larger issues I ran into but you can probably crib together what seems reasonable to you and your opponent in under 10 minutes.

Honest question: Why would you want to take prisoners in this campaign?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Honest question: Why would you want to take prisoners in this campaign?

To avoid invoking No Quarter perhaps.

 

[Robin Reeve]

Honest question: Why would you want to take prisoners in this campaign?

Brokies can rally and come back into the battle.
Prisoners have much less opportunities doing it.
No Quarter prevents mopping up, too.

 

[Megaloman]

Great replies. Thanks, guys!

 

[Blackcloud6]

I've read a recommendation somewhere that said that SAN 2 for the attacker and SAN 3 for the defender was the best way to do it with SK rules. Do you agree?

Yes, I agree. And this is what I have done.

 

[zgrose]

Brokies can rally and come back into the battle.
Prisoners have much less opportunities doing it.
No Quarter prevents mopping up, too.

All the standard reasons like the above apply.

There is also a Elst-specific reason in the CG, rule 4.513 MMC Replenishment.

Each side gets to bring back 25% (FRD) of all squad equivalents eliminated.

In my playings, we decided that it would be better to incentivize capturing (as well as make more sense) if prisoners were excluded from that pool of squad-equivalents to be restored.

You may or may not want to risk the same balance implications and just say " ... 25% of all squad equivalents eliminated/captured ..." instead.

I think it plays better with prisoners excluded but YMMV.