My favorite form of combat resolution is a combination of cards AND dice, with the former, few in number, modifying the latter.  An example in a wargame is Academy Games' Conflict of Heroes, a WWII Russian front game.  Cards can "personalize" a battle in ways dice cannot, but I love the physical act of rolling the dice.  Actually, the best might be a combination of regular 6-sided dice, special "story" dice similar to Warhammer Fantasy Role Play 3 or for that matter DOOM (where dice introduce elements of range and ammunition), and cards.  If I have a necromancer in my army, I use a special necromancer die that offers varying outcomes, a regular 6-sided die for overall combat resolution, and a card or two that introduces some special tactical element, one that could modify either of the other dice.  If I have necromancers AND special knights, maybe I have two special "story" dice, etc.  An opponent might be able to play an event card that would prevent me from using the necromancer die in a particular battle, and so on.

This is just really off-topic, as Runewars has no dice; I was just illustrating what for me would be a fun and intriguing combat resolution system.  I was someone who had problems with Starcraft's card system for combat but I love the use of cards in MEQ.  So I'm assuming Runewars will be just as intriguing and involving and not devolve into just drawing a random card to determine combat. That would lose a lot of flavor for me.  I'm already sorry the heroes can't be used to influence battles, even though the quest game sounds interesting and fun.

MeisterH said:

Depends what you consider a wargame.

Vinci and Small World would come to my mind.

BTW - a question from my side: Does anyone know how Runewars compares to Warcraft the Boardgame (the old one, not either of the WOW games). I wonder if they scratch the same itch or wether they are sufficiently different.

I haven't played Warcraft the board game for awhile but as I remember, it scratches a very different itch.  i wouldn't think of the two of them as comparable except in both treating fantasy themes.

A game with no luck?

Diplomacy.  No cards, no dice, nothing but you and your "allies".

kilrah said:

You're freaking joking right?  Or were you one of those who actually voted for Small World as a Wargame on BGG?  Won't devolve into insults here...trying not  too...but Small World is NOT A FREAKING WARGAME....

If that's the mindset of what composes a wargame, and that goes to what the FFG believes to be a wargame...if RW was to be a wargame (I'm under the impression it's not really a wargame...but I could be wrong too) we are in BIG trouble...though it may explain more strongly some of their reasonings of going with the card mechanics they've described (and Wargamers ARE a small group...a niche in a niche...so understandably FFG would go for a BIGGER group of the niche group of Boardgamers)...but...Small World is NOT a wargame...I think it created quite the sensational fury at BGG between the real wargamers and those who had no idea what wargames were.

Or, I suppose if we will call Small World a Wargame, we can therefore call Twlight Imperium a full fledged Role Playing Game (Note: I'm NOT callingTI an RPG, just pointing out an absurdity...at least in my opinion).

GreyLord said:

Sure it is...depending on which definition a person adheres to. 

I do agree that this argument not need spill from the BBG forums to here though.

AKA George said:

Just like TI3e is an RPG depending on definition, and Ingenius is one too...all depends on the  definition...

I'll digress though.

kilrah said:

From what I've seen in FFG's previews, Runewars has some elements of a wargame (army building, territory conquest) and also some elements of an adventure game (heroes go on quests and collect "rewards")  It certainly won't be a traditional wargame, but my hope is it will combine the best of a tactical battle game with the best of a high fantasy questing/adventure game.  Sort of like Runebound, plus armies. =)

I think you just did.