An Ancient Campaign - Part 12 - Wrap up notes

This is a wrap up post on the ancient campaign I have been playing over the last two weeks. It involved  creating a campaign map, narrative background, and playing a total of five tabletop games as the campaign progressed.

The questions I will try to answer are:

• How effective was the campaign structure and whether it provided the necessary prompts for crafting a background narrative for the games played?
• How the use of the AI tool - ChatGPT - helped with generating the narrative both for the games and the campaign details?
• How did the modifications to the One-Hour Wargames Ancient Rules work out?

A quick recap…

The campaign used a game format similar to a children's "race to the finish" style board game, as shown on in the photograph below. The objective was for the Carthaginian army to get from the starting point to the finish at the city of Aurelia by rolling a dice and advancing their army token along the road squares. The number of turns they take to reach Aurelia, impacted the readiness of the Roman army for a final and decisive battle. 

Whenever the Carthaginians passed through a city, a tabletop battle game would be played. A Carthaginian victory in these battles would enhance their army's readiness in the decisive battle. Along the road to Aurelia, fate could intervene through various advantages and disadvantages triggered by specific road squares. 

Upon reaching Aurelia, the campaign outcome would be decided by a final tabletop game where each armies’ readiness would come into play.

Campaign map setup at the start of the campaign.

In order to create the background for the campaign, including the names of the Roman client state, cities, and commanders, I used the free online AI tool, ChatGPT. I also used ChatGPT to take my brief game notes from each of the tabletop game and help write a battle narrative.

This mini campaign had a total of five tabletop games, including the decisive final game, connected by a campaign narrative to help set the scene for each game. One-Hour Wargames scenarios were selected based upon the narrative where possible, else a straightforward pitch battle was used.

A game underway

The tabletop games were played using the Ancient Rules from the book “One-Hour Wargames” by Neil Thomas. These included additional rules for: War Elephants, Gaul Warbands, and veteran units, along with modifications to movement rules.

Did the campaign help to provide a narrative for the games?

The campaign structure certainly helped to provide the narrative and context for when battles were transferred to tabletop games. There were three areas where I found it useful:

• Adding specific details about the hypothetical client state of Rome, Luminaria, such as its cities and their individual characteristics, helped contribute to setting the scene. This context added depth to the games, giving them a purpose beyond simply achieving a scenario’s objectives.
• The process of designing the campaign map, apart from being enjoyable, helps to reinforce the connection between the narrative and games.
• Adding fate squares with descriptions, such as “Army Rested” advance 2 squares, introduced an element of unpredictability to Carthage’s campaign march, and in some cases influenced the selection of scenarios from One-Hour Wargames.

The second game underway.

A couple of adjustments were made to the campaign rules. While not being specifically related to the campaign narrative, it is worth noting them:

• Initially, the rules allowed for additional chance cards for both armies to be used during the final decisive battle. However, I thought this might be too chaotic in the games. So instead, a number of units would be designated as veteran units, thereby providing advantages in the final battle.
• Another modification involved the decision not to reduce the Roman battle readiness by 3 steps following any loss. Since the Carthaginians had already gained one veteran status unit for each game they won. It seemed unnecessary to impose an additional penalty on the Roman forces.

Did the AI tool - ChatGPT - help with generating narrative?

I used ChatGPT for: 

1. Creating the campaign background and the hypothetical country of Luminaria.
2. Writing the campaign narrative as each map turn progresses.
3. Writing battle reports.

ChatGPT proved to be a very useful resource for creating background for Luminaria, its cities, and the underlying cause of the conflict. I simply requested a hypothetical Mediterranean country from 200BC and a list of 15 cities, the tool generated the information within a matter of minutes. Similarly, when seeking names and backgrounds for the commanders, it delivered a list of 5 names from which I could pick the ones I liked best. Although some rewriting (retyping) of the generated text is necessary, the process is straightforward and significantly reduced the time and effort required to develop the campaign background.

A remotely played game in progress.

The approach used for writing the campaign narratives and battle reports was slightly different. Initially, I write a series of statements outlining a campaign turn’s progress or actions when describing the tabletop games. These statements are copied and inputted into ChatGPT, where the tool is asked to reword the content. Adjustments were always necessary to refine the generated text. However, this approach did reduce the time I typically require for writing up a game report. I also think the overall quality is an improvement on what I would typically produce. 

Anyway, definitely time saving and useful for developing narrative backgrounds.

Did the modifications to the OHW Ancient Rules work out?

I opted to use OHW Ancient rules for the games as I often use these, or variation of the rules, with my games. They are my favourite rules. However, certain additions were necessary to the book rules to accommodate War Elephants, Gaul Warbands, and Catapults. 

While the answer to the question is yes, it is worthwhile just listing down the rule additions for those interested:

Gaul Warbands: These units have a movement range of 9 inches, and can move through woods and difficult terrain. In combat, Gaul Warbands roll a D6+2. They are considered unarmored.

Catapults: These are allocated to infantry units, and can shoot up to 36 inches distance. When determining hits, roll a D6+2 and ignore armour. However, once the infantry unit they were assigned to moves or is engaged in combat, they are removed from play.

War Elephants: These units have a movement range of 9 inches. They cannot move through woods or difficult terrain. In combat, they rolled a standard D6, and they ignore armour. Elephants are considered armoured. Upon elimination, War Elephants may go berserk. This was determined by rolling a D6:

• A result of 1 or 2 results in an immediate charge against the nearest friendly unit within a 12-inch radius, inflicting D6 hits before being removed from play.
• A result of 3 or 4 results in an immediate charge against the nearest enemy unit within a 12-inch radius, inflicting D6 hits before being removed from play.
• A result of 5 or 6 results in no berserk action, and the elephant unit was removed from play like any other unit.

Other non-unit changes I made include:

Movement: Any unit that makes a pivot at the beginning and end of their movement will have their overall movement reduced by 3 inches. No deductions for just one pivot.

Veteran units (Only for Heavy Infantry and Cavalry) - Whenever a veteran unit is involved in combat with a non-veteran unit, they will roll two dice and choose the highest scoring dice, discarding the lower scoring one. This modification aims to reflect the enhanced skill and effectiveness of the veteran unit in battle.

Note - a quick thank you for comments on the veteran rule. I had originally always used the higher dice, but it was highlighted that out two opposing veteran unit would be over too quickly. The suggested option to only apply the rule when a veteran opposes a non-veteran unit works very well.

A photo from the first game.

I also used chance cards to introduce unpredictability. Each chance card is resolved during the turn it is drawn and cannot be carried forward to subsequent turns. The 15 cards are:

• 5 x No Event. Nothing happens
• 3 x Confusion. A player’s units cannot move, but are allowed to pivot.
• 1 x Clash of Shields. All combat this turn can re-roll the D6, but must accept the second result.
• 1 x Darken the Skies. A player’s units when shooting this turn add 2 to their D6 scores.
• 2 x Initiative. One unit immediately makes a move, shoots, or conducts a round of combat if already engaged in combat. The unit can still be activated as normal later.
• 2 x Rally. A player halves one unit’s hits round up (eg. 9 hits reduced to 5). The same unit cannot be rallied twice in a game.
• 1 x Panic. The unit with the most hits takes another D6 hits. Where there is more than one unit to choose from, the player chooses.