From: goudswaa@fraser.sfu.ca (Peter Goudswaard)
Subject: Re: A&A House Rules
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 05:07:25 GMT

oberland@vax.sonoma.edu writes:

>I just thought of two things:
>1:why not use a d-12?
>If you want to add some/change the tech rolls, why not add them all?
>12 Choices= 1d12.

You are right, of course.  Being from an AD&D neighborhood, I have every
type of die you can name, but I didn't make reference just in case there
were players out there who didn't have them.

>2:why not post a synopsis of said rules/what's in the magazine.  I am 
>sure that you could either ask the publisher for permission, or ask 
>them if reprints are available, and post their address/etc.
>My experience is that most publishers are very obliging IF YOU ASK, 
>esp. if it is out of print/no reprints are available.

If you are hinting that I didn't ask for permission to include the
items, well, I didn't. (Sorry.)  I would like to include all 24 pages
of A&A variants, but I am understandably not prepared to type the
entire thing out.  Here is the address of the publisher of BATTLEPLAN:

	Diverse Talents, Inc.
	5374 Village Road
	Long Beach, CA  90808
	(213) 420-3675

Battleplan feedback address:

	BATTLEPLAN
	P.O. Box 8399
	Long Beach, CA  90808

This is from the inside jacket of the Jul/Aug 1987 issue, so I make no
guarantees.

>I have also tried the following myself:
>Add to taste:
>8-)
>1:Add a fighter in Hawaii, apply Battleship mod., and port defense.  
>NOW pearl harbor is realistic. Carrier is in West US, safe, but no 
>plane on it.

Great idea - we never carried the Pearl Harbor scenario far enough.

>2:add roll to subs when they get "trapped" by planes. roll seperate die if it 
>survives the first attack by plane(s), roll die. if roll 2 or better, 
>sub submerges to a deep enough depth to stay alive/not be killed.  
>Attack by plane unsuccessful.  Works ONLY when plane alone attacks or 
>plane and transport.  DOES NOT WORK WITH BOMBER
>reason:bombers/battleships/carriers can depth-charge. subs can attack 
>as usual.  Fighters and transports cannot depth-charge.

Hmmm, interesting.  But if a fighter pilot worth his salt can't sink or
disable a sub before it dives, he should go back to flying transports.
Although I haven't playtested this, I would give the sub a harder time,
perhaps a 3 or better.

>3:add Russian infantry to empty territories.  Except for Africa, 
>which is very far from Brit., Most spots controlled by countries have 
>men/something on them.  Add 1 infantry to "blank"Russian areas.
>Helps russia defend against Japan. 
>4:Add German Battleship to Germany sea area.  This is where the 
>BISMARK originated, afterall.

Logical.

>5:you can sink your own ships/scuttle them.
>reason:move a flak onto a transport, sink it ONE TURN LATER.(NOT same turn)
>This makes flak more valuable.

This is interesting, but in our variant, one would normally move the
flak back with a retreating front, back to a well-defended zone, or
perhaps to an allied zone to prevent the enemy from getting it.  This
in itself makes it less available to the enemy (and hence more valuable
by your definition?)  Even if we can't use all the flak on one zone,
at least our enemy doesn't have it.

>6:you can destory any factory you want, provided it is not one of the 
>original ones, and it is yours.  This helps anyone being overrun, and 
>is realistic. Cost to do so=3
>7:Allow kamakazi(sp?) attacks.  WWII was like this, and I have two choices:
>  A:allow it as usual  B:allow the planes to attack at 5, but loose 
>  them in said attack after 1 round of combat. (ifyou want really 
>  vicious realism, raise attack to 6, and follow rule B)

We mulled over this and similar kamikazi variants, and no one seemed too
comfortable with any of them.  I personally favored your rule B.

>8:THE BOMB
>  Add d-12 to tech rolls, and a 12 means Atomic weapons.
>  all else(7-11 don't do ANYTHING). Player chooses which type of die 
>  to roll if they get a tech. improvement.  Atomic weapons:
>      Need a bomber.  Flak gets 2 rolls if plane carryimg bomb is 
>      alone Hit=Same as usual.  If it is in a group of planes, any hit by 
>      flak takes out the bomb(NOT the bomber-ie:heavy flak, target lost),but
>      only one flak per plane.  Bomber with bomb MUST be launched from Capital.
>      It can carry the bomb indefinitely, but CANNOT attack unless it wants to
>      use the bomb.  Bombers attack as usual when they attack.
>      Bomb MUST originate in captial again/bomber return if unused.
>      EXCEPTION:ONE bomb per country at a time, heavy bombers do not attack
>      with 3 bombs.  Heavy bombers DO NOT Have above rules for flak, though.
>      The bomber that has the bomb MUST BE CHOSEN.
>      Said bomber is turned upside-down.
>      
Here we've seen 2 complementary nuke rules: tactical and strategic.
Tactical will kill all units on the zone, and strategic is used in
strategic bombing raids.  Here, there is a minimum die total equal to
5 times the number of attacking bombers.  Can't mix this with hvy bombers.

>      Effect of bomb:kill all enemies in territory.  Territory 
>      unuseable by attacker/cannot move into it.  Use by owner next turn as
>      usual, except that forces from both sides MUST roll as if there was a  
>      flak for EVERY piece, ground or air, for the next 2 turns, due to
>      radiation.

We rejected the radiation fallout rules -- too much bookkeeping for
our guys who were interested in "getting on with it, dammit!"

>9:Add propaganda to tech rolls.  Allows user to target up to 3 
>teritories per turn.  Said territories must take a "flak role" for 
>every enemy piece, due to third-collumn action.
>10:Every country gets 1 free tech. roll per turn, TO BE USED FOR, AND 
>ONLY FOR THIS PURPOSE.  Use D-12/12 different tech's rule.  If d-12 
>is used, choice for atomic bomb is a d-20, 13-19 being nothing.
>11:Give everyone three tech breakthroughs at beginning. 
>   Tech rolls afterwards cost 10.

In the Battleplan magazine, there were cards were cut-out and drawn at
the players' option before, and sometimes during, the game.  Some cards
included the above rules.

>Well, these are the house rules where I play.  Sometimes we use 
>them/one/some of them, and sometimes we don't...
>I am VERY interested in any other rules you may have.
>Joe

WOW,  I never thought there were others who played variants judging by
the articles I've read.  Great stuff here, Joe!

P*.*