MiB Profiles?

[cheetor]

I am planning to play my inaugural game of Flying Lead in eight days.

I have played SoBH and MDRG before so the basics of the game are already reasonably set in my head, so I don’t foresee any major difficulties with the rules.

That said, I don’t want to bite off more than I can chew straight off, so I am planning to play a scenario from the basic rulebook, tweaked a little to suit my own miniature collection. I plan to play the Stargate inspired scenario but with the SG team replaced with MiB and the G’Ori swapped out for Little Green Men, as seen below.


Diplomatic Envoy Flarz


Some cannon fodder.

I think that the rules for the G’Ori can be transferred to the LGMs pretty much as is: I would like there to be a high alien body count and I have enough models to represent the Never Ending Cannon Fodder rule adequately, so that’s a done deal.

I am not sure what direction to take with statting up the MiBs, however. Without experience of how FL plays, I don’t really know what sort of stats they should have.

I would love to hear some opinions and some discussion about MiB profiles and armament. Alternatively, if someone has already statted up some MiBs, then I would love to have a look.

For the record I have four MiB figures as seen below. Maybe they will serve as inspiration for the skills sets:


Agent B & Agent C



Agent P & Agent G


Freddie the Bulldog will be the interstellar envoy in peril (the Macguffin).




So, any opinions or ideas for MiB stats?

[richjones]

Very cool idea ... will stat them up as I would do them over the weekend.

All you will have to watch out for is the ranged combat changes and the leader group rolls really.

Are any of those weapons special ?

[cheetor]

Hi Rich, thanks for the response!

Mar 12, 2010 21:21:25 GMT 1 richjones said:

Very cool idea

I reckon that the adventures of the MiB are flexible enough to use a very large amount of my miniature collection (Robots, Bugs, Space Elves, Zombies, Doctor Who etc) in lots of games.

As a result, I think that having a definitive stat line for them would be a fun way to re-explore my miniature collection in a narrative-y, skirmish-y, Flying Lead-y way

Mar 12, 2010 21:21:25 GMT 1 richjones said:

... will stat them up as I would do them over the weekend.

Thats sounds really great, thank you

I look forward to seeing what you come up with. I hope to have another look at FL on Sunday (after my Mothers Day duties of course) and to see what I figure is appropriate. Hopefully we can compare notes!

Mar 12, 2010 21:21:25 GMT 1 richjones said:

All you will have to watch out for is the ranged combat changes and the leader group rolls really.

I plan to re-read the FL rules a couple of times before the game, but it is good to have a heads up regarding the particular areas to watch out for. Nice one.

Mar 12, 2010 21:21:25 GMT 1 richjones said:

Are any of those weapons special ?

In the MiB movies the weapons all have pretty much the same effect regardless of size or appearance. The "Noisy Cricket" that Will Smith is embarassed about seems to have a roughly equal effect on its targets to that which the "Series Four De-Atomiser" has on both spaceships and giant alien cockroaches later on in the movie. With that in mind, the plan when sticking the various weapons to the MiB miniatures was to keep them pretty generic.

All the same, Agent B (the first guy, next to the female agent) is quite a large figure. I deliberately equipped him with a slightly larger weapon just in case I thought that it was necessary to have a "heavy" MiB in games.

If a heavy/special weapon type character is required then I think that "B" will be the guy who takes it on

[richjones]

I have been meaning to make a list of the differences for people, off hand:
COMBAT
Ranged - new rules for ranges (no real max except for a small smaller weapons and flamers etc) so negatives on roll for range after first 2.
New effects - winning on even makes a figure shaken which is down and out of action until the character spends 2 actions to recover. Models being pinned. On an odd win the figure ducks back to cover or dropes prone.
HTH COMBAT - in FL a figure which is pushed back can be followed up by the winner. Also weapons have a positive effect (better weapon) in HTH.

Leaders - can split activations - so can give more than one group action. Groups do not necessarily have to be touching base to base and if they have personal comms they do not have to be within LOS.

C value is more an individual thing and doesn't include weapons and armour like in SOBH, the weapon adds to it and armour helps the wearer when being hit. This means a crap C value but big ass weapon can still do damage but get them into hth and they are mincemeat.

Also there is the whole weapon and bigger support weapon.

Hope this helps
Rich

[cheetor]

This is what I have come up with so far.

I have been looking at the stats for other characters in FL and I figure that the following would apply to the MiB.

I would very much like some input from anyone with some experience making characters for FL as I am having a little trouble gauging what seems right until I have a few games under my belt.



Stats and Skills

All MiB are Personalities.

I think that MiB are Q3, C3, approximately of the same efficacy as the SG1 crew. If desired, each two-man team could have a rookie and a veteran, like in the movies. In that case there is a case for reducing one of these characteristics for the “Rookie”.

I think that Personal Communication Devices are standard issue.

There is a case for Hero and/or Fearless for any number of members. A Leader or NCO for the senior member of each two man team seems likely to me too.

A sprinkling of skills like Specialist, Crack Shot, QCB Specialist, Danger Sense, Elite etc could be fun to give some identity to one or more of the characters.

It is at this point that I find it hard to extrapolate further as to what other skills the MiB should either have or require.

Some guidance from some experienced players regarding this would be great



Weapons

I put together the following two MiB Weapons types: Noisy Cricket is intended to represent the standard MiB handgun. The Series 4 De-Atomiser represents a slightly bigger version of the same weapon and gives the MiB some increased range.

I gave the Noisy Cricket Medium range as while it is a pistol, I figured that it would be ok to give it a higher range band due to its sci-fi, hi-tech nature. Also, as most MiB would be armed with it I didnt want them to be heavily outgunned at range in every game.

As I envisage the MiB having to blow up the occasional robot, power armoured alien or small flying saucers (like in the movie), I gave the weapons high AT values. I don’t envision the MiB calling in heavy support: I see them as being self sufficient in most circumstances.

Are the AT values too high? Not high enough? Just right? I admit to guessing a bit here…

MiB Noisy Cricket
Points: 25
Anti-Tank 3, Combat +2, High Tech Ammo, Range: Medium

MiB Series 4 De-Atomiser
Points: 35
Anti-Tank 5, Combat +2, High Tech Ammo, Range: Long


Finally, I have one more question regarding the construction of FL characters in general.

Am I right in saying that a characters weapon is paid for separately to the characters skills?

In other words, weapons are bought almost as if they were another member of the force and then assigned to the character, rather than the cost of the weapon being factored into the formula for generating the characters cost. Is that correct?

Any and all feedback appreciated ;D

[richjones]

Hi
Sorry ran out of time at the weekend ... it was hectic to say the least.
Most things look OK but the AT values of the weapons are very high ... makes them the same as a medium German WWII tank! But then the weapons in the film are pretty awesome though I suppose.
I'd have them as C+3 which puts them on par with a machine gun and have make them have 'moving fire' or the MiB agents will be severly limited in what they can do and there are only a few of them.

Yeh the weapons are bolted on points wise.

With a very small group having them all as Q3 and doing away with a Leader is the way to go sometimes as they do not need the leader bonus really.

Combat fiend is the most important ability when there are only a few figures so they can blast away.
CQB specialist will be important with the pesky little aliens as well I think.

If you go with the rookie idea then make the Rookie eager and Q4 then they will be down to Q3 when they want to impress their 'handler'. Messing around with the abilities is the best way to model what you want. I am toying with the idea of doing a handler/character type thing for playing a 'Dollhouse' scenario.

Rich

[dex]

hi
Although the movies are based around the idea of a rookie and handler, we do see more experienced teams of Mibs like K and D at the start of the movie.
Also although one of the 2 characters in the team could be classed as a rookie they are recruited from the best of the best . Therefore i'd suggest that lowering their C rather than their Q might be the way to go.
thats my 2 pennys worth
dex

ps love the figures

[richjones]

My thinking was that they are the best of the best so their combat should be good - once they get going they will be as good. By lowering their quality and having eager it not only lowers the points cost but also makes them act like a good quality when near the handler (so they can ask questions, get shouted at etc) while they are learning the 'reality' not just the 'theory'

Hope that makes sense.

[cheetor]

Mar 16, 2010 8:19:20 GMT 1 richjones said:

Hope that makes sense.

It definitely does.

I will go for a second draft at some point today if I can. Once I get it finished I will post it up for you guys to take a look.

Thanks for all of your help so far

dex said:

ps love the figures

Thanks. I like how they turned out. I will get a kick out of it if I can get profiles for gaming with them that make them feel like the movies. Once I get the game played at the wekend I will post up some game-in-progress photos.

Although the "Eager" thing does clash a little with the the idea that the MiB are recruited from the "best of the best of the best (with honours)" I think that it will represent the prevalent dynamic in the movies quite well.

Once J is recruited, K also tells him that from here on in that his skills mean "precisely d1ck", so I am ok with the circumstantially lower Q in the context of guys dealing with unknown "alien" quantities

[cheetor]

So how does the following look? The MiB look very powerful to me (particularly when compared with SoBH creatures) but it appears that that is how the more "heroic" side of FL is supposed to work. They look approximately as effective as the Stargate guys from the scenario do to me.

I couldnt help but add a few thematic elements to the characters as I hope to use them in a finalised version for a variety of games and scenarios. To that end I made “G” a Born Driver so that he can drive my MiB vehicles with panache at a later date.

Similarly, I made “C” both Specialist and Medic (Professional), a bit like “L” in the first movie (the Doctor who worked in the morgue).

Those choices are unlikely to benefit the MiB in their upcoming game against the Little Green Men, but hopefully they should provide a semi-rounded force that can be used in a variety of scenarios. I would rather avoid going down the usual gaming min/max route but on the other hand I don’t really know if those MiBs look a little more like RPG characters with a few almost redundant abilities [SHRUG]

I also added Freddie as a team member, rather than an objective or similar. I based him loosely on a dog from one of the SoBH books, but I made him using exclusively FL skills etc. I don’t want to go mixing and matching that sort of thing just yet.

I modified the guns as per your guidelines Rich, does that seem a bit more measured to you?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Figures: 5
Personality Points: 428 (92%)
Warrior Points: 36 (8%)
Total Points: 464

Weapon total Points: 114
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agent G - Personality
Points:130 Quality:3 Combat:3
Born Driver, Combat Fiend, Elite, Hero, Personal Communication Device

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agent P - Personality
Points:110 Quality:4 Combat:3
Acrobat, CQB Specialist, Combat Fiend, Eager, Elite, Fearless, Hero, Personal Communication Device, Steady Under Fire

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agent B - Personality
Points:90 Quality:4 Combat:3
Eager, Elite, Fearless, Hero, Hit Man, Personal Communication Device, Strong

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agent C - Personality
Points:98 Quality:3 Combat:3
Crack Shot/Marksman, Elite, Hero, Medic (professional), Personal Communication Device, Specialist, Weapons Expert

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Freddie the Bulldog
Points:36 Quality:4 Combat:2
Danger Sense, Dashing, Light/Bushwacker, Stealth

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Noisy Cricket (x 3)
Points:25
Armor Piercing, Combat +3, Move & Shoot, Range: Medium

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Series 4 De-Atomiser
Points:39
Anti-Tank 4, Combat +3, Move & Shoot, Range: Long

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lastly, I have a couple of cars to function as MiB transports. I will attempt to write up stats for those at a later date, but as I think that they could potentially ruin the “Its What We Do…” scenario, I will leave them out for a while yet.

Feedback would be greatly appreciated. I am very much looking forward to playing some fun FL MiB games this weekend



Edit: I swapped out the Noisy Crickets Anti-Tank for Armor Piercing so that every MiB shot against troops wouldnt have to work out High Explosive.
I also dropped Hi-Tech Ammo as superfluous and because I thought that it meant Sci-Fi Ammo rather than ammo used by "most late WWII tanks"

[cheetor]

After the research that I did in this thread I played the MiB versus Little Green Man game a few months ago.

I got around to putting up a post about it on my blog yesterday if any of you guys are interested

[richjones]

Can't quite see the 'modifier' hassle - if you have the character with weapon combined as a C score the only modifiers often are -1 for cover, -1 for moving shot and range so not a lot of working out really, target only ever gets the one modifier if they are aimed at ... maybe it is a familiarity thing but we never even look at the QRS or rosters really.

Rich

Rich

[cheetor]

Jun 11, 2010 0:12:54 GMT 1 richjones said:

Can't quite see the 'modifier' hassle - if you have the character with weapon combined as a C score the only modifiers often are -1 for cover, -1 for moving shot and range so not a lot of working out really, target only ever gets the one modifier if they are aimed at ...

It depends what players are looking for from a game I think. My group have been playing tabletop miniature games and boardgames together for ~20 years, so its not that we lack experience. Similarly its not that we have a problem with any of the concepts involved.

What does bother my group is a large number of modifiers. A feature of Ganesha games is opposed attack rolls. Usually this means that regularly two results have to be worked out with modifiers for and against for each attack.

In particular, some modifiers are applied to the attacker by the attacker, some are applied to the defender by the attacker, some are applied to the defender by the defender and some are applied to the attacker by the defender. As the effects of doubling and tripling the results are important, these modifiers have to applied positively and negatively to both sides.

This is fiddly IMO, particularly in the context of the simple and streamlined approach taken with Ganesha games as a whole. It slows down the game and jars us from the "story" just when it should be getting tense and exciting.

For what its worth I am unsure as to how to remedy the issue.

For starters I think that modifiers from one participant in an attack (attacker or defender) should only be able to modify the opponents roll either positively or negatively, not both. I would also consider the possibility of reworking a particpants modifiers so that modifers only effect that participant.

Basically the feeling in my group is that there are simply to many different modifiers. YMMV and all that.

Jun 11, 2010 0:12:54 GMT 1 richjones said:

maybe it is a familiarity thing

Maybe. I hope so. Unfortunately it is an issue that my group has a problem with for all "Song" games that we have played so far (SoBH, MDRG, FL).

[boromirandkermit]

I'm sorry to hear that it didn't go quite as planned.

But I also don't quite understand what the problem is modifier wise.

There really isn't that many that come into play together.

I play several of the Ganesha Games with my primary school students and haven't run into any issues there.
Flying Lead admitedly has a few more as you incorporate the weapon as well, but not so many that it would add more than a few moments to resolve combat.

Compared to other rules, I feel Ganesha rules play very fast.

Obviously its just a case of personal taste. I hope you do give them another go and you find it more enjoyable.

Just for perspective, would it be possible to list other miniature games that you enjoy?

Cheers,
Ben.

[richjones]

I'm at a loss about what modifiers you are on about to be honest ... not sure you are playing it right by the sounds ... what modifiers from an attacker can effect the opponent positively and negatively ... the only one is the aimed shot which rarely happens and takes their combat down by one.

I have been playing and writing rules for over 42 years and what drew me too Ganesha stuff was the speed of play ... never mind though, horses for courses but just worries me you are going astray somewhere ... almost sounds like you are letting both sides 'shoot' at the same time.

Rich