|
|
Post by tdenmark on Oct 13, 2014 6:33:34 GMT -6
My copy of Chainmail was getting pretty beat up with use, and I was looking around at copies on ebay but they have gotten very expensive. So I decided to type Chainmail into a txt document. I was going to scan it in and use OCR, but the text can get pretty messy with a lot of typos and bad formatting. I enjoy typing anyway. It only took a few hours to do it. Once I got the text in I started laying out the file in Indesign, and realized it was a good opportunity to improve the formatting for legibility. I thought I'd post some of the results of my efforts. When I'm done I think I'll print it out at a local copy shop and bind it so I can have a good working copy. That way I can keep my original in a safe place. Here is the Spell Complexity table reformatted:  |
|
|
|
Post by Merctime on Oct 13, 2014 7:54:23 GMT -6
This is a bold work, tdenmark! The lazy guy in me is quite looking forward to seeing your finished copy! Seriously, this is a wonderful idea. Like you, I find the older material to be superior to gaming, but oft-times far too expensive to get hold of. I do appreciate your efforts here! |
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Oct 13, 2014 9:51:22 GMT -6
Very nice!
|
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Oct 13, 2014 11:59:41 GMT -6
Ooooohhhh!! Shiny!! I've been wanting to do the same thing for years.
|
|
|
|
Post by dizzysaxophone on Oct 13, 2014 12:21:30 GMT -6
I've been thinking about doing the same thing. My copy isn't very flexible (and in general I'm not a fan of comb binding), and everytime I use it I'm worried about bending other pages, or the binding doing something weird. I've often though about typing it up and having it spiral bound but haven't done so yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Oct 13, 2014 14:10:01 GMT -6
If I were more knowledgeable about page layout programs I'd have done this long ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Oct 13, 2014 17:12:29 GMT -6
The trick, IMHO, is getting it formatted so it can be booklet printed. The LBB's and their ilk were just perfect sizes for the table. Many of today's large volumes, including 1e, are so detrimental to table space and unwieldy!
|
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Oct 13, 2014 19:32:36 GMT -6
what edition did you use? Also, I agree with Sean - it would be best if it printed out at digest size.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Oct 13, 2014 21:21:44 GMT -6
what edition did you use? Also, I agree with Sean - it would be best if it printed out at digest size. Thanks! I've been wanting to do this for a while. Edition is 3rd, but I also have a pdf version with the Tolkien stuff in there. Is there a list of changes throughout the editions anywhere? My plan is to create 2 layouts. One deluxe sized with lots of room for notes and another that is LBB digest sized. Currently this is standard 8 1/2" x 11" Fortunately I have some familiarity with layout, so once all the paragraph styles and tables are set up, making different sized booklets shouldn't be overly difficult. It would really be fun to do an annotated version that illuminates obscurities in the rules. I'd need help with that though, I'm familiar, but not an expert with the rules. Or something even more ambitious that reorganized it in a way that removed redundancies and grouped relevant information together better. Making good progress so far. For these pages I had to recreate the diagrams for Method of Fire.  |
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Oct 13, 2014 21:40:21 GMT -6
Looks great! In my experience, the only difficulties in moving to a digest size for formatting is the tables and charts re-sizing and re-wrapping the text and repagination instead of just shrinking everything to fit the page but rendered less readable.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Oct 13, 2014 21:46:47 GMT -6
Looks great! In my experience, the only difficulties in moving to a digest size for formatting is the tables and charts re-sizing and re-wrapping the text and repagination instead of just shrinking everything to fit the page but rendered less readable. Yeah, the charts and pagination will be the biggest hassle. I will say after having printed a few of the reformatted pages at this size, it makes me notice all the more how tiny and cramped a lot of the text and tables are in the original CM. Also, not much art. I need to find some good medieval warfare clip art to fill the spaces. |
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Oct 14, 2014 19:08:21 GMT -6
what edition did you use? Also, I agree with Sean - it would be best if it printed out at digest size. Thanks! I've been wanting to do this for a while. Edition is 3rd, but I also have a pdf version with the Tolkien stuff in there. Is there a list of changes throughout the editions anywhere? My plan is to create 2 layouts. One deluxe sized with lots of room for notes and another that is LBB digest sized. Currently this is standard 8 1/2" x 11" Fortunately I have some familiarity with layout, so once all the paragraph styles and tables are set up, making different sized booklets shouldn't be overly difficult. It would really be fun to do an annotated version that illuminates obscurities in the rules. I'd need help with that though, I'm familiar, but not an expert with the rules. Or something even more ambitious that reorganized it in a way that removed redundancies and grouped relevant information together better. Making good progress so far. For these pages I had to recreate the diagrams for Method of Fire. has info on editions and printings. I agree that some kind of reorganization would be useful. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Oct 15, 2014 0:44:41 GMT -6
I agree that some kind of reorganization would be useful. One thing that would go a long way in making it easier to use during play would be to combine all the various information into 1 stat block for each unit. For example, there is a lot said about Landsknechte troops, but the information is scattered all over the place. Combining all of that into one entry it would read as:
LandsknechtePoint Value: 2 + Weapon value Attack as: Light Foot Defend as: Light Foot Move: 12” Charge move: 15” Morale Rating: 8 Takes no prisoners (treat prisoners as kills). Half penalties for facing. Fatigue in 6 melee rounds (not 3). Form hedgehog: If ten or more of these troops are in a square-type formation, pikes or pole arms facing outwards in all four directions, a “hedgehog” has been constituted. A hedgehog can be moved at one-half speed. It may never charge. A Hedgehog will never be drawn into neighboring melees. It may be attacked only by troops armed with like weapons (pikes or pole weapons). Landsknechte armed with pikes or pole arms facing the enemy automatically stand any charges. Landsknechte attacking in close formation (5x2 figures minimum) fight as Armored Foot, with extra die for weapons. For every two men so attacking an additional “mass shock” die is added. When defending in close order (1” or less apart), with pole arms facing the enemy, they are treated as Heavy Foot. If attacked in flank or rear, or when in open order, they are treated as Light Foot. Pike Charge: Because of the reputation and ferocity of these troops, an enemy charged by Landsknechte pikemen (other than like troops) must roll two dice and consult the Loss table, just as if they had suffered excess casualties. However, if the unit being attacked fails to score high enough it is not removed from play; rather, it retreats 1 1/2 moves, backs to the enemy, and must rally. If they are followed up by pikemen before they rally, the unit is totally eliminated. Note: The charging pike formation must be eligible to receive “max shock” dice (at least 10 figures in 5 x 2 formation) in order to force enemy units to check morale.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Oct 15, 2014 0:59:11 GMT -6
And the reformatted books are finished. It ended up being 2 sizes. Classic digest size to match the original and LBB's, and a full-sized 8.5"x11" version.  |
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Oct 15, 2014 6:37:16 GMT -6
That's a crazy pretty shiny thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merctime on Oct 15, 2014 8:48:07 GMT -6
tdenmark, your write-up of the Landsknechte is truly stunning. Geez, I knew I wanted to get chainmail, but now I really want it! Really gorgeous work on the reformatted books there, also. I wonder what little golden secrets you've gleaned out of the rules that were in places often missed? Much like the things you've collected for the above stated Landsknechte. I'm curious, as I've never read chainmail before. Hope you don't mind the question!
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Oct 16, 2014 3:20:07 GMT -6
I wonder what little golden secrets you've gleaned out of the rules that were in places often missed? There are so many interesting little nuggets in there. Here are just a few that stood out We think of Marvel Super Heroes as being the first game with a "Column Shift" system, but Chainmail actually has this. It wasn't clear to me at first until I was struggling with laying out the Combat Table, and this is one area I strayed from the original text, I revised the table layout significantly so that it was more legible. (in all other places I was absolutely faithful to the text, being very careful not to add or take away anything). Here is the old table:  And here is the revised layout:  In some situations your unit will have an advantage or disadvantage and attack (or defend) as a unit type higher or lower. With the Combat Table layed out like this, it is clear that the system is essentially Column Shift. Another interesting point, we think of Vampire: the Masquerade as being the first Dice Pool system, but Chainmail actually uses dice pools in a simple effective way. Your unit rolls a number of dice per men and a certain number (usually a 6) is a "success" (kill). The new D&D has a concept called Advantage/Disadvantage. Basically you get to roll 2 dice in certain situations and if you have an advantage you get to choose the higher, if you have a disadvantage you get the lower. Chainmail has a similar die mechanic, not exactly the same, but it is somewhat analogous. Fire Optional: Roll two different colored dice. One color is for an over-shoot and the other is for an under-shoot. To decide which number to use you take the higher of the two. Miss is in inches, shown by dice spots. If they tie then the rock lands at the specified range. This method is simple but effective. So Chainmail was really ahead of its time in so many ways. |
|
|
|
Post by TheObligatorySQL on Oct 16, 2014 15:11:36 GMT -6
And the reformatted books are finished. It ended up being 2 sizes. Classic digest size to match the original and LBB's, and a full-sized 8.5"x11" version.  Dude, that is awesome... ...can I get one of those?  |
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Oct 16, 2014 15:15:37 GMT -6
yes, I want one too! help us out here!
|
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Oct 16, 2014 16:32:00 GMT -6
My G*d man! Just today I was reading through Chainmail and was thinking, "This needs to be re-edited into a modern printable format." You beat me to it (and saved me many hours of work  ). It looks like excellent work!If you intend to distribute this (and I'm SURE you don't... perish the thought), I would suggest NOT using the "stat block" idea. (Stat blocks... <shudders>  ) All right, to be fair, simple stat blocks are OK, I just hate the "later edition" implication -- TOO much unnecessary info for a ref, ya' know. |
|
|
|
Post by Mushgnome on Oct 16, 2014 16:50:48 GMT -6
Amazing work! I could have used something like this back when I ran my Chainmail Carcosa campaign on these boards. (Or, for future reference... hint, hint...)
|
|
|
|
Post by Merctime on Oct 16, 2014 17:09:13 GMT -6
Haha... I think there is a bit of the ol' 'Wink Wink Nudge Nudge' going on in this thread... |
|
|
|
Post by dizzysaxophone on Oct 16, 2014 18:39:25 GMT -6
Haha... I think there is a bit of the ol' 'Wink Wink Nudge Nudge' going on in this thread... Absolutely! This is one of the nicest ideas seen so far that I think everyone would love to do. |
|
|
|
Post by Mushgnome on Oct 16, 2014 19:28:03 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Oct 16, 2014 19:54:53 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Oct 16, 2014 23:38:35 GMT -6
If you intend to distribute this (and I'm SURE you don't... perish the thought), I would suggest NOT using the "stat block" idea. (Stat blocks... <shudders> ) All right, to be fair, simple stat blocks are OK, I just hate the "later edition" implication -- TOO much unnecessary info for a ref, ya' know. I don't think of it so much as stat blocks, as compiling the information into single entries for ease of use and reference. Anyway, I'm not reorganizing any of the text (in this version anyways), that would be a much bigger job. This is a straightforward faithful to the text reformat. If I was to reorganize (and I had so much fun doing this, it is quite possible) then it opens up a lot of questions like do I include various bits of errata, notes, and illuminating information? And if so how much? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2014 11:13:24 GMT -6
This is awesome. Like you, I'm afraid to handle the battered old copy I have.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcadon on Oct 20, 2014 21:42:54 GMT -6
Here is the old table: And here is the revised layout: I really like the new format. It looks way better then the messy Chainmail table. When I frist seen the old table, I had to analyze it by writing it on a table. What I end-up doing was make entries like this: xd/x;x+. That is, Medium Horse vs Light Food would be listed as: 2d/1;4+. The added notes leave no ambiguity to the chart, which suits my dyslexic eyes. |
|
|
|
Post by thorswulf on Oct 21, 2014 8:00:19 GMT -6
Nice work! A classic that was in desperate nedd of a more up to date layout for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Oct 21, 2014 11:50:22 GMT -6
What I end-up doing was make entries like this: xd/x;x+. That is, Medium Horse vs Light Foot would be listed as: 2d/1;4+. That is much better than how I formatted the data. I'm going to update that table in that format. Thanks! |
|
).
)
