PDA

View Full Version : Interviews with Alessio Cavatore and Gav Thorpe



eldargal
12-08-2010, 08:29 AM
Courtesy of reds8n on Warseer, shamelessly lifted from there:
from behindtherules.com



Alessio Cavatore is a games design veteran, and has put his mark on the Games Workshop hobby. He wrote the current edition of Warhammer 40,000, as well as the 7th edition of Warhammer, not to mention The current edition of the Lord of the Rings strategy battle game and numerous army books and codexes. You’ll find his name inside almost every current Games Workshop rulebook you pick up. Since leaving Games Workshop earlier this year, Alessio has been concentrating on his own game, Shuuro (and its new expansion Turanga), published by his company River Horse, and has written a new wargames system for Kings of War, published by Mantic Games. I met up with Alessio for breakfast, shortly before he set off on a two-week trip around European toy fairs to promote his wares. We talked about his time at Games Workshop, 8th Ed Warhammer, Dark Eldar, how to win tournaments, Kings of War, Shuuro, Turanga, and more besides. In fact I’ve ended up splitting my write-up of our chat into three parts, to keep things manageable.

How did you get started in Games Development?

I started with Games Workshop as a translator, working on books from the likes of Rick Priestley and Tuomas Pirinen in the Design Studio. As you translate, you have to look at every word in such close detail that you often spot technical rules problems that have been missed. So I built up a good relationship with them, pointing out that this doesn’t work, that doesn’t work. I won the staff tournament that year too, which helped, and I wrote a few stories that got used in the Dogs of War book. And when the position of Games Designer came up they gave it to me!

Who did you learn from? Who were your mentors?

At the beginning it was mostly Tuomas – he was my boss. Also Jervis Johnson, Andy Chambers, Nigel Stillman, Gav Thorpe and Rick Priestley himself.

What is your favourite book that you’ve worked on?

Before Kings of War, I think 40k V – Warhammer 40,000 5th edition – was the best thing I’d done. It’s now the most successful wargame in the world!

In retrospect is there anything you’re not happy about with the game?

I could have been more radical. Some things are still too cumbersome and I wasn’t brave enough to cut the rules back even further. I chopped a lot – the rules are 10,000 words shorter than the previous edition – and at the time it felt very brave. But having now written a new game system for Mantic in just 12 pages, it makes you realise that there’s probably more to cut! [More on this in Part 2.]

What is your least favourite book that you worked on?

From a professional point of view it has to be the Skaven army book (the previous version to the latest edition), even though personally it is one of my favourite armies. It is the most over-powered book I’ve written – they were just far too shooty. There was simply not enough playtesting because we started working on The Two Towers, and Skaven was pushed to the side. So as it turned out, the Warp Lightning spell and the Ratling Gun were way too good.

What are your feelings about the new edition of Warhammer?

Mixed. There are bits that I like and bits I don’t. The book itself is fantastic, full of gravitas – you can feel the years of development that have gone into Warhammer. In terms of the rules, my favourite part is the alteration to the core combat mechanics – something we wanted to change for 7th edition but weren’t allowed. The way that before if you got charged, and your front rank got killed, you got no attacks back – the new version is much more satisfying to play. What I’m less keen on is the random charge – I don’t like the lack of control. Admittedly I’m a control freak. I’m quite happy to play an occasional game where you might lose control of your models because it’s funny, but I don’t want to play like that all the time. Magic may be another problem – because it’s been ‘fluffed up’ a bit, it may have ended up too powerful. Certainly from what I hear of people playing Warhammer tournaments with the new system, the Magic phase is definitely more important – there are battle-winning spells that just mean game-over if you get them off.

And what do you think of the new Dark Eldar codex?

It’s one of those armies that is very difficult to get right because they’re very fragile, but very dangerous. Dark Eldar can do all this amazing stuff – but not if they’re dead! So they’re a tough one to balance correctly. All types of elves have the same problem, and pointing them is always a pain. It’s not at all forgiving for the designer or the player. Any time you’re at the extremes of the system you risk creating a force that is either completely unbeatable or utterly useless. But Phil [Kelly] is good at that, his Eldar book is looking very solid!

How well do you think the current army books handle the conflict, or tension, between serious tournament-style play and the more ‘fluffy’, friendly approach?

There has certainly been a swing recently towards a little more ‘fluffiness’. I think the only way to resolve the two is through simplicity. Simpler rules mean fewer arguments. If the rules are simple and clear enough then arguing about them doesn’t even enter your head – nobody argues when they play chess, for example. Tournaments would become a much more pleasant and relaxed, and simple rules would certainly not hurt your friendly games.

As a keen tournament player and a former Grand Tournament winner, what advice can you give to gamers that want to lift trophies?

Oh, that’s very easy – practise. Play as many games as possible – twice a week as bare minimum, hardcore, competitive games. It literally is training, just like for any sport. The more you play, the more you know your army, how it plays, how to react in different situations. You also need to be playing various opponents and learning about different enemies. You can be the best player in the world, but if you don’t play regularly then you’ll make mistakes and you won’t be able to compete.

Our discussion moved on to the details of Alessio’s new wargame, Kings of War, published by Mantic Games.

Quote You’ve just finished Kings of War, a new game for Mantic Games. What brief did you write to, or set yourself?

The first step was to look at the Kings of War model range. It’s vital that the rules service the models. That’s one of the first things we say when River Horse [Alessio’s company] helps you with your game system is: do you have an existing range? It seems to surprise people when you start like that – they just expect you to write a set of rules, rather than rules that are designed for their models.

The other key aspect was the packaging, the way they sell their models – they sell them in tens, twenties and forties. A ten is called a Troop, twenty is called a Regiment and forty is a Horde. So the next question was: do you want a model-based game or a unit-based game? In other words, should the smallest element in the game be the individual models, who can be removed and killed, or should the unit as a whole have a stat line?

And what was the decision?

Because of the way the models are sold, I recommended unit-based. I’m also doing some work for Warlord Games on their coming expansions for Black Powder, which is unit-based, and it’s a method I really like. So what came out was a game that has elements of Black Powder, has elements of Warhammer, has elements of other games. In fact I had never written a new system completely from scratch, and I started thinking as I wrote: oh, this rule is a bit like that rule in that other system – maybe I shouldn’t use it. I was killing myself trying to write original mechanics that had never been used anywhere, and it got me nowhere. In the end I realised that with so many people dealing with the same problems, you’re going to end up with some similar solutions. So I decided not to worry about it, and just write rules that seemed to work well. Bizarrely, when I stopped worrying about it, I came out with quite a few original mechanics, that, mixed with some solidly established principles, that I’ve taken from other games I love, make for an interesting blend of newfangled and familiar, I think. But of course I’d say so!

So how does it differ from Warhammer? How do they compare?

When a Kings of War game starts, with the units deployed, it does inevitably look a lot like a Warhammer battle. However, once the game is underway it actually has very little to do with Warhammer. The biggest difference is: each unit has a profile – there is no removing of models as casualties – instead you put down markers to indicate damage, psychological as well as physical. And when enough damage has been done the unit breaks and is removed – there are no fleeing units. All of this means the game is much shorter than the equivalent Warhammer game.

How does the turn system work?

The system is: I move, I shoot, I attack your models in combat, then you do the same. It’s written so that I do everything in my turn, you do everything in yours, So in this game, if I do enough damage, I get to roll against your bravery or courage – I called it Nerve – and hopefully break your unit.

The interesting thing about this is that, if you want, you can decide to play the entire game with a chess clock or a timer. So in a tournament, or if you just like to experience the pressure of ‘real battle’, you can add in this time factor. Obviously you couldn’t do that in Warhammer because you do stuff in my turn. If you’re playing with a timer, you agree a time limit, say one or two hours, and when your time runs out your entire army breaks and runs – losing the game.

That’s quite novel for a full wargame.

I thought intellectually it would be an interesting thing to have, but there’s a big difference between writing a rule and playing it, and when I tried it out, it was very revealing. I’ve written a new system, it’s simple, it works, but it still feels like playing a tabletop wargame – Warhammer, Flames of War, whatever – the rules are different but it’s the same fundamental experience, one that I’m very familiar with. However, the moment we started using the chess clock, it was a different, new experience – you do different things, you feel different things. Almost like the difference between playing a turn-based computer game and a real time strategy game – there’s an element of genuine panic!

And you’ve kept the system short and sweet?

Yes. It’s very simple. The entire Kings of War rules are just 12 pages long, including all the special rules, the scenario, rules for alliances, timed games. I’ve been asked a few times when we’re bringing out the full version – people assume this is just the quick play summary sheet! But no, this is the entire game. We also made it quite humorous, particularly in the special rules with things like the Elven Sabretoothed *****cat and the Dwarf Throwing Mastiff.

Is there anything to stop me using my Warhammer models to try Kings of War?

Not at all. Mantic’s models are considerably cheaper than GW’s, so a lot of people buy them to bulk out their Warhammer armies. If gamers go the other way and use their Warhammer models to try out Kings of War, then I’ll be very chuffed. I’m told that fans on the forum have already started creating their own army lists for races that Mantic don’t yet produce – I hear there’s one for ‘Lizard-kin’ for example.

And how is the game being sold by Mantic?

They don’t sell it. It’s a free game that will be put inside boxed sets from Regiment size upwards and later on will be posted up as a free download. Then we will publish updates every year or so, to keep the rules polished and fresh.

From here, our chat turned to Shuuro – the game Alessio has designed and published through his own company, River Horse. We talked about the new supplement, Turanga, and his plans for the future. That will all be in the third and final part of the interview – coming soon!

eldargal
12-08-2010, 08:30 AM
Tuesday, December 7, 2010Gav Thorpe Interview



Gav Thorpe is a name that will be familiar to anyone acquainted with many of Games Workshop's various rule systems writing several himself, as well as being accredited with work in developing many others including the Lord of the Rings game. He is also a Warhammer novelist, regular contributor to White Dwarf and organiser of games at the Nottingham headquarters, however he has found time in his busy schedule to talk to us here at Gamer Heaven.

KD: When did your interest in wargaming first begin?

GT: When I was around eight or nine, I would say. I had lots of plastic toy soldiers, and a friend and I made up some rules for them. When I was ten years old or so I discovered several wargaming books in the local library, including a couple by Donald Featherstone, and I realised there was this whole hobby out there just waiting for me.

KD: How did your career at Games Workshop start, and what was the first project they had you work on?

GT: I started GW as an Assistant Games Developer in 1993, after speaking to Jervis at Games Day and sending in a letter and some stuff I had written. My very first job was pasting together mock-up wargear and psychic power cards for the playtests of Dark Millennium for 2nd ed 40K! Writing-wise it was the relaunch of the Citadel Journal, alongside Mark Hawkins and Ian Pickstock. My first ‘mainstream’ product was the Pit Fighter warrior pack for Warhammer Quest, and my first WD article was about the Squat Cyclops for Space Marine (Epic).

KD: Of all the codex's, Army books, Rule books you have worked on which is your favorite, which are you most proud of?

GT: Tough choice! I’m really proud of Codex: Sisters of Battle and Inquisitor, both of which allowed me to introduce all kinds of things to the 40K universe that are now taken as granted and seen everywhere, but were fresh and new at the time. I’m also quite pleased with my last two contributions – Vampire Counts and Dark Elves. As projects they were perhaps the most complete and rounded things I have worked on, combining background, miniatures, rules and art from concept to completion in a very pleasing way.

KD: Are there any of the codex's/ Army Books that you thought looking back "Oh I wish I had(n't) done this!" or "Damn I could have included/ changed that special rule"?

GT: Every single project contains a few things that you would tweak in retrospect. One that I usually bring up is the special bonus movement rule for the Blood Angels in 3rd ed. Originally the rule simply made the Blood Angels squad move forwards, but after a discussion with Jervis (who rightly said “players tend to forget rules that aren’t of benefit to them”) I changed it to a bonus movement and look where that ended up! As I said, there is always a points cost that can be modified, a rule worded better or changed, a magic item or piece of wargear that is under- or over-powered.
As a project, I think the rewrite of Chaos Space Marines could have benefitted from a bit more ‘grit’ and options, and we were overall too puritan at that time. I still think the principle of streamlining the list and rules was right, but we took it a little too far.

KD When working on the Army book/ Codex of one of your favorite armies is it hard to resist the temptation to make it especially hard so you will win more games?

GT: Not hard at all. My primary goal has always been to make an army interesting to collect, play and face, and you have to bring the same enthusiasm to every project. You find and angle that you think will work as a dynamic and stick with that. If you’re already deeply involved with an army it’s often tempting to write for only those people who have the same experience as you, but you have to be professional and remember that you are writing for newcomers as well as established players.
You can’t second-guess everybody, so you have to go with what feels fun and cool and hope that other players agree with you. Power-levels and all of that are part of what you need to keep an eye on, but blandness is a far more significant problem.

KD: The career route of Games Developer to author seems to be quite popular (yourself, Graham McNeill to name a few) how did you go about writing and submitting your first novel/ short story.

GT: I was sat in the same department as Andy Jones when Black Library was started, so it was a simple matter of having a chat with him about writing a short story for the to-be-launched Inferno magazine. Rather bravely I pitched in with Birth of a Legend, telling the story of how Sigmar got his hammer! Later came the debut of Kage and the Last Chancers, which naturally led me into the novels when BL were looking to turn some of their Inferno characters into series. I’ve been very fortunate to have it this easy!

KD: So can you give us a quick list of the armies you collect yourself and which is your favorite?

GT: I must confess that I haven’t done much with my GW armies for a while now, they’ve sort of fallen fallow for the last couple of years. That said, I have Dwarfs for Warhammer, Eldar for 40K and Orcs and Easterling allies for LOTR. The Dwarfs have seen the most use, so I guess that says something about which I have the greatest love for.

KD: If you could introduce a new plotline or race to 40k who and or what would it be?

GT: This sorta follows from the last answers, but if I had a magic wand I would bring the Demiurg into full existence as an army and race. Various discussions over the years about making space dwarfs make me believe there is a fantastic image and background to be explored there. I came up with the Demiurg name, by the way, when we were trying not to use ‘Squats’.

KD: One of your biggest acheivements has to be the "Inquisitor" system. How did that come about? Did you pitch the idea to "Them" or did "They" approch you?

GT: There was a ‘slot’ open for a spring 2001 game. Games Dev got together and devised a bunch of pitches, including bringing back Man o’ War, recreating Space Hulk as a boarding actions game, doing Warhammer pirates, Adeptus Titanicus pitting Necron War Engines against Mechanicus armies on the surface of Mars, all kinds of stuff. Amongst them was a 54mm skirmish game. We had an Inquisition angle in mind, though nothing with any detail.
The idea of creating a highly collectible range of 54mm models appealed to the higher-ups and that option was taken. At that stage of my career is was felt my next step was to create a rules system, so I became lead designer and we went from there. The original idea was for the ‘sides’ to be Inquisitors and Chaos Magi, but after considering the somewhat small size of the range I came up with the puritans and radicals idea to allow the majority of miniatures to be used by any player.

KD: How would you respond to the comment that "the lack of balance/and power creep in all of gw's creations is spurred by an imbalanced need to sell than fun or for the good of the game."?

GT: I would say that power creep is not as prevalent as some gamers would like you to think, and that it exists not because of official policy but by the human nature of games developers. If power creep were enshrined in the games development strategy, you wouldn’t have some of the older armies still being more powerful, in some players’ eyes, than the new ones. There is imbalance, unfortunately, but there are only a couple of armies that are so out-of-whack it makes any difference outside of the narrow tournament mentality.
There are some factors inherent in 40K and Warhammer that favour certain army styles, but as can be seen with many of the other games systems like LOTR, Epic, Blood Bowl and so on, that’s more to do with the ‘inheritance’ of many years of constant development and the complexity of the basic system as anything any individual developer creates. At no point in any briefing I was part of or wrote did the words ‘This army has to be more powerful than the other ones’ appear. Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to incompetence!

KD: Have you ever played any non GW games systems? (Privateer Press, Battletech, Flames of War etc)

GT: I’ve toyed around with various other games. I wrote the ‘Open Fire!’ starter booklet for Flames of War, for instance. Recently I’ve been concentrating on creating some games systems of my own, just like it was when I started out, rather than off-the-shelf games systems already out there.

KD: If the answer is yes then was there any part of their systems that you thought "Wow thats good I wish we had thought of that" ?

GT: The examples you cited are all very different games trying to achieve a different gameplay. Particularly with 40K and Warhammer the style of the game has been established for so long you’re not going to do anything that radical to the underlying games system. I like all kinds of games, whether miniatures, roleplaying, board and card games, video games, and I always look for interesting ways of organising rules or mechanics for resolving certain things.

KD: To date (Nov 2010) you haven't written any full novels for the HH series. Is there any part of the HH that you think "I would sell my soul to Khorne to write about that" and if so what part?

GT: I’ll be starting my first HH novel after Christmas. I wouldn’t sell my soul for any particular subject, it just isn’t helpful to become wedded to a narrow idea, but I’m very happy to play in that big sandpit with the other authors.

KD: Apart from your own which is your favorite BL Book?

GT: Probably Execution Hour, by Gordon Rennie. Not only is it a cool 40K novel, it reminded me a lot of the Hornblower and Ramage novels I read as a teenager.

KD: And to continue my $h!t stirring. In his interview, Graham is convinced that if all the BL Authors got together for a session, he would be the last man standing (Air Guitaring). Do you agree with that statement?

GT: Hell no! McNeill is such a lightweight these days, he’s always falling asleep. Something about having a young kid, and all that... Not that I’m claiming the prize for myself either – three beers is about my limit these days. I think I used up all my ‘Resist Alcohol’ points in my youth.

KD: Do you have a preference when it comes to writing 40k or fantasy books?

GT: No. Both have their different appeals and challenges.

KD: If one of our readers was thinking of trying to get into the games development field what advice would you offer?

GT: Think of it as a whole, don’t fixate on working for a particular company or on a single games system. Opportunities are too few and far between to limit your options. Everyone I know that is a games designer or developer started out just doing it for themselves. You either have the urge to write games and scenarios and stories, or you don’t. If you get the chance to turn that into a career, all the better, but if you want a chance to make a decent living out of it, get into computer games!
Or found your own company...

KD: Do you get much time to play/ paint now or doesn't your timetable allow it?

GT: Not much time. I still play plenty of games, I just don’t have much time to do the painting. I’ve always been hot and cold in that respect, perhaps going on a binge for a few weeks before cooling off. If I ever get around to sorting out a permanent painting area, that might improve.

KD: What was the last model you painted and game you played?

GT: I can’t say... It’s a game I’m currently working on for a miniatures company!

KD: Did you win?

GT: I sort of did, but since I was just testing out the basic rules, it doesn’t really count.

KD: So finally can you give us a few hints on what you are working on now or will be in the near future?

GT: For Black Library, I’m just finishing Path of Seer. After Crimbo is the Horus Heresy, and rewrites for my Angry Robot novel The Crown of the Conqueror. There’s plenty of other Black Library stuff over the next couple of years!
On the games front, I’ve written/ am writing a couple of different rules systems at the moment; one a skirmish game, the other for slightly larger forces. That’s about all I can say at the moment until the information has been released by the companies involved.

KD: Well thanks for taking the time to answer these questions its been a pleasure as always. The next time you are in Ireland promoting a book or whatever the first drink is on me.

GT: Cheers, I’ll take you up on that!
http://gmr-hvn.blogspot.com/

HsojVvad
12-08-2010, 11:38 AM
Thanks for posting. It was an interesting read. I wouldn't have been able to read this if you didn't post. Thanks.

Lerra
12-08-2010, 01:05 PM
It’s one of those armies that is very difficult to get right because they’re very fragile, but very dangerous. Dark Eldar can do all this amazing stuff – but not if they’re dead! So they’re a tough one to balance correctly. All types of elves have the same problem, and pointing them is always a pain. It’s not at all forgiving for the designer or the player. Any time you’re at the extremes of the system you risk creating a force that is either completely unbeatable or utterly useless. But Phil [Kelly] is good at that, his Eldar book is looking very solid!

Hmm. This seems to imply that the Eldar codex is being play tested. Very nice :)

Defenestratus
12-08-2010, 02:42 PM
Hmm. This seems to imply that the Eldar codex is being play tested. Very nice :)

Either that or he's referring to the 4th edition codex - which is still quite "solid" yet lacks the "sparkle" of newer codexes for sure.

Sister Rosette Soulknyt
12-08-2010, 07:40 PM
Thanks Eldargal, it seems that with this love of Codex WH, i dont see them being put away, if he wrote them, i would guess that he would again be behind there new updates.

eldargal
12-08-2010, 11:48 PM
I had heard, and i have no source for this so take it with a grain of salt, that Mr Thorpe was really quite annoyed about Codex: Witch hunters and the way the SoB were lumped in with a bunch of twits in the Ordo Hereticus.

DarkLink
12-09-2010, 12:38 AM
Wouldn't surprise me, as a lot of Sisters players were pretty annoyed about that as well.