Re: [DL] RE:Railwars

[Brett Dixon <balance@tubas.net>]

On Saturday, December 7, 2002, at 02:06  PM, Richard A Ranallo wrote:

> On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:31:48 -0500 "Chuck Pyle" <thepyles@airmail.net>
> writes:
>> Is anyone out there avidly playing Rail Wars?
>
> Pardon the expression, but Hell yes.  Just painted my fourth and fifth
> posses of Young Rattlers last night.  Seeing all of them sitting 
> together
> even scares me.

Love thee rules, but due to our FLGS closing last spring, my group 
doesn't have a big enough table for most war games, so we don't play 
that often, and experimentation is at an all-time low. I've got several 
posses for GRW that are in the midst of being primed to be painted, but 
at the moment finishing my Sisters of Battle has been more important, 
since I know more people that play Warhammer 40k at the moment... Note 
that that was 'play' not 'like' in the last sentence. That's important

> I can only speak for my personal experience, but I do know at least
> fifteen fairly die-hard GRW players in Illinois.  If there aren't any
> players in your area, it's OK, since it's and easy game to teach, so 
> you
> can make your own players pretty quickly.

That's how it looks.... Some features my local gamers seemed to like 
included the use of card-based initiative and the relatively detailed, 
but simple, set of rules.

Even with the 'western style' that annoys some gamers, the GRW rules 
are well-written from the standpoint of organization and clarity... So 
many companies write terribly organized rule-books, but GRW keeps it 
pretty clean. Deadlands even has some problems, mainly due to the use 
of a generic system across The Weird West and hell on Earth that has 
been patched and tweaked in both....