Sunday, July 9, 2017

Rules Review - Ronin



Ronin was another Samurai skirmish ruleset that I wanted to review.  It's a ruleset from Osprey Publishing that came out a couple of years ago.  Despite picking this rulebook up literally days after it was available, I had never sat down and actually read the rules.

Scale of Game & List Building:
The rulebook states that Ronin is intended for 4-20 miniatures per side and suggesting that 100 points should equate to < 10 figures and about an hour of game time.  So it sounds in line with my taste.

The force composition rules are not as simple to summarize though.  The first thing to understand that each potential member of your force can have a Rank of 0 through 5.

  • Rank 0:  Basically a peasant that has picked up arms
  • Rank 1/2:  Basic troop
  • Rank 3/4:  Elite troop
  • Rank 5:  Best of the best
Depending on the faction you choose to play, you will get various composition requirements based on the ranks above.  For instance, one faction may say that you can only have one Rank 3 troop, per every Rank 1 troops your force has.  Additionally, many forces dictate that no more than 50% of your force may be armed with missile weapons and no more than 25% of force can have a teppo (flintlock rifles).

Given the typical composition rules, it would seem to me that no matter the point total you and your opponent agree upon, you will probably tend toward the higher end of model counts.  Still, 20 figures is within my preference level.


Standard Rules:
Ronin is basically an alternating activation system, although this occurs at the phase level.  There are 5 phases to each turn:  Priority, Move, Combat, Action, End.  The Priority phase simple determines who can go first for each of the Move, Combat and Action phases and is handled with a simple d6 roll off.  As far as I recall, nothing else factors into this roll off (it would have been nice to see some modifiers/something that added a little more depth than just a random roll).  Morale is also handled during this phase.  The End phase is simply a maintenance/clean up phase, so timing is simultaneous.

The Move phase is actually exactly how it sounds, although there is one exception.  Movement is standard for all troops:  6 inch standard move, 9 inch run with modifiers for certain conditions.  The interesting part of the Move phase is that it is an "opportunity" to shoot.  I say opportunity, because you can also shoot range weapons in the Action phase.  Even if you shot during the Move phase.  Yes, you can shoot twice per turn (this is potentially ok though, as I will eventually discuss) unless it is a weapon that requires reloading (teppo).  Shooting during the Move phase is considered a hurried shot and suffers a penalty.

The Combat and Action phases are also exactly what they sound like.  Combat resolves all the melee combats and the Action phase is where actions are performed, including standard shooting.

In each the Move, Combat and Action phases the player with priority determines who goes first.  After the first players action, it alternates to the other player and so on until all models have acted or passed.

Since shooting can first occur during the Move phase, let's discuss how that is resolved.  Shooting is simply a 2d6+characteristic+/-modifiers against a target number of 6.  If successful, the damage is equal to the difference.

Combat, is actually resolved a little differently and is little shocking at first.  The Ranks of the models involved determines each sides combat pool.  This combat pool is secretly divided between Offense and Defense.  Initiative is determined for each model involved in the melee with a d6+modifier roll and the highest initiative get an opportunity to to attack.  If the model does attack, it removes a Offense token for his sides pool.  It's then a 2d6+modifiers roll against the targets 1d6+modifier roll.  This is where I was scratching my head a bit, since that seems a bit "unfair."  Well, the reason is each side actually gets a chance to "enhance" their roll by removing another appropriate token from their pool and if you are paying attention, the defender has not spent any tokens yet.  So if the target has no defense tokens, or chooses not to use them, then I guess the philosophy is that it's not trying very hard to defend itself and therefore should be easier to hit.  Interesting.

Note though, I said each side can "enhance" their attack.  If the attacker does enhance its offense for that attack they get an additional die, bringing it up to 3d6, but can only keep the best 2 results so its not quite as huge of an advantage as a straight 3d6.  Like shooting, if successful the damage is determined by the difference.  Then you move to the model with the next highest initiative and basically wrap and repeat until no offense tokens remain.

Damage is also kind of interesting, as models do not have a number of wounds.  Which seems really weird given I have just been talking about damage being the difference between 2 numbers.  This is because damage equates to a level of wounds, and wounds stack up to higher level wounds:

  • Damage 1:  Stunned
  • Damage 2/3:  Light
  • Damage 4/5:  Grievous
  • Damage 6:  Critical (killed/out of action)
While stuns do not "stack" in the sense of a cumlative effect, you do track each stun because during the end phase a variable amount of them are removed.  A light wound on top of a light wound is upgraded to grevious.  A model with a grevious wound that suffers any wound (even stun it appears) is upgraded to critical. Note my wording in these, it appears intentional that if a model has a light wound and then suffers a grevious wound then it only has a grevious wound.  Appears is the key word though.  Wounds also impart modifiers on several things (movement, combat modifiers, etc).

Beyond that, the rules allow for basic special rules (kinda like key words), mounted models, special attacks (disarm or subdue), and weapon specific modifiers and special rules.


Other Things:
The rulebook is fairly well laid out although there are a couple of minor issues, IMO.  The first is my (and a lot of other gamers) typical gripe in that there is no index.  Yes, it kind of does not need one since it is fairly short the Table of Contents does manage fairly well.  Still, when will people learn that "we" want indexes.  The second is the rules could be better broken into clearly distinct sections.  Things just seems to roll from one topic into another without much notice, making it slightly confusing (or making me just an easily confused old man).

There are a lot of different factions to choose from that can be very distinct just from the composition rules alone.  There is a suggestion for a campaign advancement system but nothing strictly laid out.  There are also advance rules for adding in another tactical layer via fatigue and a resilience stat, which seem kind of odd to me to have these as an advance rule as the game overall seems simple enough to tolerate this additional layer.

The scenarios seem a bit of an after thought.  VPs for a scenario are primarily driven by the Rank of the models killed.  But each player also randomly determines a secondary objective for the game, worth 5 VP.  Which is certainly enough to swing the game, it just does not seem like enough to back off the typical kill everything you can approach.

Some Issues:
I really not seeing any major/obvious issues with the rules.  In fact, I am pretty interesting to see how the entire combat pool thing works out for melee.  I may not like it though, its a little tough to say.  I am also still a little concerned that archers can shoot twice in one turn and damage is determined against a static number (that is slight below the mean for 2d6 rolls).  I believe that most factions limiting the number of range weapons to 50% is an attempt to offset this.  I also think that it maybe balances that melee guys can technically attack multiple times in a turn if they have a high combat pool and allocate it to offense.

I think the rules are really crying out for an expansion.  I would love to see better scenarios that really drive the encounter, rather than after thoughts.  A better advancement system would be great to, as would be a nice narrative campaign system wrapping around all of it.  Top of that expansion book with some options to add more fantastical elements to the game.  That being said, the game has been out for a couple of years now and we have not seen any additional support so I would not hold my breath.

Conclusions:
I think if you are interested in Samurai skirmish games, I think Ronin is worth trying out.  Given its one of the Osprey wargaming books, it is pretty cheap (I think I paid $14?).  I'm interested to see how the combat pool mechanic works out.  That being said, I am not particularly excited to try it and I can't really figure out why.  The only thing I can think of is;  If I threw down pirate models and changed the names of weapons and armor, then there would be nothing "samurai-ish" left to make it feel like I was playing with the wrong models.  What would make a game, any, feel "samurai-ish"?  I don't know.

Anyway, with this being my third review for samurai skirmish rules, you would think I had a bunch of models painted up waiting to go.  Wrong.  LOL.

Adding this to the list of games of this genre:  Samurai Skirmish

Friday, July 7, 2017

June Recap

So the month of June was pretty good hobby wise.  Due to an influx of TV shows hitting Netflix, I actually got a lot hobby time in.  The amount of hobby time also seemed to stem from juggling 3 projects at the same time.  Odd that would work better for me, but if I was burned out on one, I could just switch to one of the others.  I should be ready to share all 3 of these projects in July.  But here is progress on Tail Feathers:

New phone with better camera soon, I hope.
I also got back in the habit of going to the local game days that occur every two weeks.  The first one was a bust:  I brought Star Wars Armada stuff to demo for a friend of one of the local regulars but the guy did not show.  But at least it got me out of the house.  The second one, I participated in a 2v2 game of Konflikt 47, playing a borrowed Russian list.  It was a pretty fun game and I have since gotten in a second game.  I might post up some thoughts on the game/rules.

I continued to get a few board games in June too.  After a few more plays of Tsuro, my daughter has learned another level to playing:  "Stay away from daddy's piece."  lol  We also tried out a new game (for us) called Doodle Quest.  I was not actually interested in Doodle Quest for myself, but it is a game that could improve her hand-eye development a lot, or at least it would seem to me to have that potential, so I picked it up for her.

Other than that, I'm headed to the beach on "vacation" next week.  Anyway, hopefully it will give me a chance to post up my thoughts so far on Konflikt 47 and I've got a couple more rulesets I want to read through.

Oh yeah, one last thing.  There was a kickstarter that almost broke me out of my anti-kickstarter shell:  John Wick launched a kickstarter for a board game called War of the Cross.  Set in the world of 7th Sea, I was really interested in this one but the kickstarter kinda fell flat.  It has since been pulled and hopefully will return stronger and better.

I also made this:


I keep all my paints in a drawer, so I thought this would be pretty helpful when try to color match or determining color schemes.  It was partly motivated by my vacation next week too:  I've got a couple of color schemes I want to think through and thought this would be helpful in figuring them out.  I have tried something like this out before, just with a simple journal, but did not like it because it was hard to add things where I wanted them and also it would (sometimes) not allow me to compare things side by side (unless I wanted to rip one of the sheets out).  I can also hold these pieces right next to a painted sample for a better look.  At the very least it was a good diversion one night when I didn't feel like doing "real" hobbying.

Anyway, hopefully some more updates/etc coming soon.

Saturday, June 10, 2017

Tail Feathers - Ratling Foot Troops

So, just a quick (hopefully) update on some painted models.  I finished my first batch of Tail Feather models:  6 ratling foot troops.  I'm not really excited about how they turned out, although I am not that displeased either:  I was just trying to get something decent ready for the table.  I still have to figure out what I am going to do for the basing but I think it is probably just going to be a standard flocking.


Anyway, in case I need to refer back to it in the future (doubtful):

Basecoat:


  • Pants:  
    • RMS Templar Blue (2 figs)
    • Vallejo Dark Rubber (2 figs)
    • Vallejo Light Rubber (2 figs)
  • Fur:  
    • RMS Aged Bone (for white rats)
    • RMS Dark Skin (for brown rats)
  • Skin/Flesh:  
    • RMS Aged Bone + RMS Carnage Red (for white rats)
    • RMS Tanned Skin (for brown rats)
  • Backpack:  RMS Uniform Brown*
  • Armor:  Dave Taylor's Polished Steel Recipe*
  • Leather:  RMS Earth Brown
  • Crossbow:  RMS Rich Leather
  • Eyes/Arrow Feather:  RMS Carnage Red
  • Teeth/Claws:  RMS Faded Khaki
  • Arrow Shaft:  RMS Earth Brown
  • Bones:  RMS Aged Bone
Highlights:
  • Pants:  None
  • Fur:  Worked up to
    • RMS Polished Bone (for white rats)
    • RMS Dark Skin + RMS Aged Bone* (for brown rats)
  • Skin/Flesh:  None
  • Backpack:  Several washes of RMS Green Ochre*
  • Armor:  Dave Taylor's Polished Steel Recipe
  • Leather:  Worked up to RMS Leather Brown
  • Crossbow:  RMS Polished Brown
  • Eyes/Arrow Feather:  None
  • Teeth/Claws:  None
  • Arrow Shaft:  None
  • Bones:  RMS Polished Bone
Shading:
  • All:  Thinned AP Strong Tone Wash, several controlled applications
It was a conscious decision to skip a lot of highlighting in certain areas and a bit of a test to see how that would turn out.  The lower parts of the body and small details, for what I was trying to achieve (passable tabletop), just did not seem worth the time investment.  Similarly, I also wanted to see how the AP Strong Tone wash would turn out and if I would be happy with "cutting that corner."  I think the results are "ok."  I do wish they had turned out a little better and I am still not happy with how long it took to get them done.  I of course will try again on the next batch (Tail Feather mousling foot troops).  My daughter though is very happy with how they turned out and the purpose of painting these up are to play with her, so I guess that is a big win!

Overall I think, as usual, I did not get enough contrast in the models and failed to push my highlights and shadows far enough.  I do think in a couple of areas I pushed further than I have in the past, so maybe there is hope for me in that regard.  lol

Anyway, I need to jump on the next batch.  Well, after a short (I hope) distraction.

*Notes:
  • Backpack:  The RMS Uniform Brown I used for the backpack totally failed me.  For some reason when the paint dried it was severally cracked.  Since I figured it was the paint going bad, I had to step "over" to using RMS Green Ochre, applying several thinned applications to "hide" the cracking.  This caused an overall color shift that left me a little unsatisfied but not unhappy enough to do anything about it.
  • Armor:  Dave Taylor's Polished Steel recipe was a bit of a mistake, I actually intended for a darker, grittier looking armor but for some reason used this recipe instead of his Dark Iron recipe.  I tried a few extra applications of AP Strong Tone to "shift" it in that direction but ultimately just decided to roll with it as you see.
  • Fur (brown rats);  RMS Dark Highlight produced no perceivable gradient shift from the RMS Dark Skin basecoat, so I tried adding in RMS Aged Bone.  It didn't really seem to work out all that great (or I did not push the contrast far enough).  A suggestion was to use a more "flesh" color than the aged bone, so I will try that next time I am in this situation.  
  • Varnishing:  The picture above is un-varnished.  Since it was taken, I have hit the models with a gloss coat to prepare for the basing and maybe just a bit of weathering.  This has really washed out any highlighting/shading on the them.  I know when I apply the dull coat they should "come back" but I'm holding my breath until then.

Wednesday, May 31, 2017

May Recap

Well, May was a month of some wins and losses on the hobby front.  I guess starting with the losses, I did not manage to make it to either of the local game days for the month.  I also missed CMON Expo, again.  And I have not made it nearly as far as I had hoped on the miniatures for the Tail Feather's game:  I had hoped (LOL) to have the whole thing done in May.  Part of the problem has been:


And yes, for those of you paying attention, that also means I now have a PS4.  And no, I did not get a PS4 just to play this game.  I got a PS4 just so I could play the new Tekken game that comes out at the end of the week!  Horizon Zero Dawn was just a pleasant, very pleasant, bonus.  Anyway, I've managed to curtail my playing back down to a decent level but I did lose a couple of weeks before I regained some focus.

For wins, while I still have not managed to get in a single board game at my work's regular Wednesday lunch-board game hour, I did show my daughter how to play Tsuro.  She liked it a lot and caught on very quickly.  We knocked out a few games of that one Saturday and then the next day took it over to my parents house for a few more plays.

And while I did not get the entire Tail Feathers game painted, I did get the first batch (6 ratlings on foot) done!  Not entirely pleased with how they turned out but I am calling them done so I can move on (the figures are not the greatest anyways and I missed a lot of mold lines, so why invest to much time into them).  I did get distracted after wrapping those minis up though, it is just a quick detour (I hope).  Anyway, I will post something up soon about those 2 things.

That's about it.  Looking forward to June, I want to make sure that detour is taken care of quickly and then jump back on the next batch of Tail Feathers.  Also looking to make the next couple of local game days.

Saturday, May 13, 2017

Rules Review - Torii



Continuing to tilt at windmills, specifically for a Samurai skirmish game, I just revisited the Torii rules by Zenit Miniatures.  I had flipped through the rules a while back and I did not recall anything that was explicitly a show stopper, at least for me, so I thought it was worth going back and reviewing a little further and capturing my thoughts.  The rules are available for free and can be found here or from the main page of the Zenit website.

Although not the purpose of this review, I should point out that Zenit also offers a Samurai oriented mass battle ruleset called Kensei.  They also offer an wonderful range of Samurai models, in fact their range is the one I want to use for whatever ruleset I converge on (if I ever get around to it).  Unless something better comes along before then.  Anyway...

Scale of Game & List Building:
The rules advertise it is a game of 8-12 models per side, consisting of 3 categories of troops you can use to build your force, with the following restrictions:
  • Hero:  Must include at least 1.  No more than 2 are allowed and they must be different.
  • Elites:  Up to 4 may be included into your warband
  • Warriors:  No restriction
  • No more than 12 models total
  • Only less than half of the warband can be equipped with ranged weapons
You have 100 points to build your warband as above.  You can also spend points to equip them with mounts or range weapons or you can purchase Offerings for the Gods (rerolls).

While each category of troop shares the same stat line, the "force lists" expand this vanilla approach by offering different choices of Warriors (for instance) with different skills depending on the Clan they represent.  There are also common troop choices available to ever clan.  I really like this approach in theory and it appears to alleviate my first impression that the game would be very bland due to so much parity via the statline.

Standard Rules:
Torii is what I would call a "I go, You go" with reaction system.  Typically not my favorite form of activation systems but at least it has a reaction component.  In this system, the active player starts issuing and resolving orders to their models, where an order represents one or more actions (coming back to this in a second).  If more than one action is permitted (more on that later), it can not be a duplicate of a previous action that miniature has taken during it's activation, nor can you have more than 1 combat action per activation.  Any model that has received an order (either the active player or the reactive player) is considered activated and can not be re-activated that turn.  The active player then continues to activate their other miniatures and once they have finished all of their activations, the second player then proceeds to activate their remaining eligible models.

What is a bit interesting in all this is that the number of actions a model may have is variable and not determined until the command roll is made at the beginning of a model's activation.  A command roll is simply a 1d6 + initiative roll.  On a 4+,the model gets 2 activations, otherwise it just gets 1.  This seems kind of interesting but may end up being a bit of a love it/hate it type mechanic, at least for some.  Lastly, on a command roll of a 6+ the model activates it's "Ki" (some skills may only be used if this has occurred).

Back to actions.  There are a fairly typical set of actions available to the active player and a limited set for the reactive player.  It is worth noting though that some actions to require 2 action points, hence the command roll could really hamper your plans.

Torii is a d6 based system and most rolls utilize the appropriate stat, rolling that number of d6s with a 4+ being considered a success.  Close combat is resolved by each miniature rolling the appropriate number of dice (with modifiers) and counting successes (multiple of the same rolls, that are a successes, cause a crush bonus to be applied during damage resolution if that miniature wins the combat).  The miniature with the higher number of success is the winner and causes a number of impacts equal to the difference.  To resolve the damage, you roll a 1d6 + the difference from the previous step + modifiers (like crush):  on 1-4 the target is stunned, 5 or 6 is a wound.  It is clearly stated that stunned tokens are removed at the beginning of the turn but I'm not sure of the affect otherwise (can't be activated?).  It would also seem, although not clear, that 2 stunned convert into a wound.

Range combat works in a fairly similar way.  Except Line of Sight affects the target number for success:  4+ for clear LOS, 5+ for partially blocked LOS.  There are also modifiers to the number of dice you roll based on class of range weapon (ie, short range weapons like shurikens) and the range band it is firing at.  Outside of that, if the target reacted with an opportunity shot it is basically the same as close combat.  If not, then the difference in impacts is equal to the number of successes the attacker rolled.  If successful, then the damage is resolved.  Given the disparity in the number of impacts you can generate (versus Close Combat), it would seem that unopposed range combat could be very deadly.

In all cases, if a miniature is wounded it then must perform a Honor Test or it will attempt to flee the combat.  I would have liked to see some modifiers to this test, for instance if a warrior is within X of a Hero, it gets Y modifier to it's Honor Test.  Maybe it is buried in the skills.

Outside what I've already mentioned, the rest of the rules from there on seem pretty standard.

Missions:
There are 6 missions provided, each with a primary and secondary objectives and scoring.  A common primary mission is randomly determined and shared by both players.  Typically it offers 3 scoring elements of 1, 2 and 3 for a possible total of 6+ points.  Each player also receives a random and independent mission to score for their secondary objective, worth 2 points.  I am a big fan of this type of mission/objective approach.  My only concern is the disparity between primary scoring and secondary scoring would seem to make going for a secondary a very poor decision.  I would have to play through them multiple times to really tell though.

Other Things:
The rule book is fairly well laid out and would seem to flow well but I actually found myself searching around it a lot.  Something in the flow is just slightly off but I can figure out what.  That being said, from cover to cover it is only about 16 pages, if you exclude the skill list/definition and the force list, so it does not take long to find whatever you may need to look up.  There is no table of contents or index for the rules, but given how short the rules are I do not think this is a big issue.

It should also be noted, as written, that Torii does not allow pre-measuring prior to issuing orders, which is not a big issue for me but for some it may be.  Of course, you are likely to never to play this game in a tournament, so why don't you and your opponent just agree to play the way you want.  ;)

The rules also specifically call out that models should be mounted on square bases but honestly there is no mechanic that would seem to drive this.  I personally would consider this optional, just like the pre-measuring issue.

Weapons are handled fairly generically.  Close combat weapons are all considered similar.  Long combat weapons are just slightly different.  Range weapons are all fairly similar, only grouped into range categories.  Perhaps all that is for the best or perhaps it makes it a little to vanilla.

I should also mention the rules are in metric.  As a one time player and fan of Confrontation, this is really not an issue to me but I remember some people, at the time, were very adamant about their hatred of the metric system and unwilling to consider playing a game in metric.

As in Test of Honour, Torii appears to lack any fantastical elements.  Unless you consider the Ki triggering/allowing skills to take affect.  So this is a bit of a downside to me personally.  But in the case of Torii, I find this very odd (which I will come back to later).

Some Issues:
There are some slight issues with the rules, as presented.  I do not think there are any major holes in the rules, all the content seems to be there.  It is just I felt like I had to flip around a lot to find things.  For instance, as I stated above the close combat mentions "Crush", I figured that would be explained in the rules for resolving damage.  But it is not.  You find it in the skill section.  Which is fine, I understand this approach but they could have written "crush skill" or something that would have clued me in.  Also, I think the rules are simple enough to get away without having any diagrams or examples but I would I have still liked to have seen some.

As I mentioned when I covered range combat, it does seem on paper that range combat could be very deadly.  It is definitely good that the list building rules limit the amount of range weapons your force can be composed with.  But I still worry that it could be a little to deadly for my tastes.

The only other major issue I see is I am not sure of the support for this game.  I think it is great they are leveraging off of Kensei and the range of models they have for Torii.  But, why doesn't Torii have Clan profiles for all the great undead and Oni/monster models they released via crowd funding for Kensei?  And why are there no fantastical elements to the game rules to support this?  That hole leads me to have concerns about future support/intentions from Zenit for Torii.

Conclusions:
Torii may end up being a bit vanilla.  Maybe the simplified/unified statline utilizing skills approach will backfire, maybe it's a perfect solution.  But, since the rules are free and there is nothing that necessarily ties you to using Zenit's range of miniatures (therefore to me it seems fairly miniature agnostic), I think the game is worth trying out if you are interested in a Samurai skirmish game.  If it does not work out for you, you can always carry your miniatures over to another system (I suspect most rulesets for this genre that you will find are going to be miniature agnostic) and give it a try.

Update:
Right after I hit publish on this post, I found out Zenit has launched its Kickstarter for a second edition of Kensei (their mass battle Samurai rules).  Since I have not really looked into Kensei, I do not really have an opinion about it.  That being said, the Kickstarter does offer a lot of their miniatures and even a printed version of the Torii rules.  You can find the Kickstarter here.

Adding this to the list of games of this genre:  Samurai Skirmish

Friday, May 5, 2017

April Recap

Well, I really did not get as much as I hoped done for the month of April.  I had really hoped to finish at least the 13 ground troops for Tail Feathers, instead they are still on my table.  That being said, I did get some progress done:


After I got the base colors (mostly) blocked in on the 6 ratlings, I started to concentrate primarily on the 3 white rats above.  Various things have gone wrong or slowly with these guys but at least there has been some progress.

Sadly, I did not manage to play any games for the month.  And I'm already set to miss the first game day in May and CMON Expo.  *sigh*

I spent some money on a second/new hobby light for my airbrush station.  I had been making due just moving the one I had around but eventually got tired of that.  Anyway, I hope that it encourages me to jump on the airbrush a little more often and in general that should help my hobby output.

Lastly, some very exciting hobby news (for me at least) also dropped in April:


Oh my...  I had some reservations but from this Q&A over at Beasts of War, it would seem none of them still stand.  This is going to get pretty expense for me.



Ok, one more thing:  If you are vaguely interested and did not know, Fantasy Flight has been posting up a lot of things about the upcoming Legend of the Five Rings LCG.  As a fan of the old CCG I can tell you from my perspective, it looks fantastic.  Every major issue that I can conjure from my memory seems to be addressed/averted.  I even sent my wife some of the articles, the next thing I knew I had to tell her she couldn't buy it yet when she asked "Why can't I find it."  lol


Wednesday, April 12, 2017

March Recap

A little late with my March recap post but coming off the heels of my Adepticon day by day posts, I lacked the motivation to get this out promptly.  My March activity was mostly covered by those posts and the hot wheels conversion post but I also came back from Adepticon with a lot of hobby energy.  Before closing out March (yet after Adepticon), I managed to assemble my 3 new Guild Ball Mason models (Wrecker, Veteran Harmony and Granite) right off the bat.

In addition to those models, my daughter has been bugging me about the Tail Feathers game I picked up last year.  Apparently, for some unknown reason, she has gotten interested in playing that.  So I've been working on re-basing those models and trying only to do absolute necessary clean up on the models (I'm not going to paint them that well, so why invest lots of time on clean up).  Got all the models done except the birds.

I hopping to get those out of the way (Guild Ball and Tail Feathers) so I can start working on things for CMON Expo and/or the NOVA Open.  But, I have to decide what exactly I am going to work on.  Lots of things are floating around and I will have to pick 1 or 2 things to focus down on:
  • Dark Age - Saint Mary's
  • Wrath of Kings - Haddross 
  • Blood Bowl - Lizardmen
  • Arena Rex
  • DropFleet Commander - Scourge 
  • More Hot Wheel conversions
  • Or something else/random
I don't know.  LOL.  First thing first:  Finish off Guild Ball and Tail Feathers.  Hopefully in my next post I can show off the first batch of Tail Feathers miniatures.