There is only basic descriptions of how head gear in eyewitness accounts, so this is historians and sculptors best attempts at recreating the headdress.

@bloodpigment5808 tracking...just looks a bit big...another odd head gear for scale is the one on Charles Vane figure...beenie looks odd...I plan on giving him a tricorn

We are going to test it one more time, but I don’t have plans to stream it. Would you be interested in a battle report, or a full length video? Doing a full length video could be pretty hard in the game store chaos!

@@bloodpigment5808 Hi, I enjoy full games in general run by players with good spirits, But Id take a battle report too

Things from the Basement! They’re great buildings for New England game tables!

They’re from Things from the Basement! Great little buildings for New England boards for Blood & Plunder.

They are straight from Firelock Games!

Not to our knowledge! This is errata for Blood & Plunder.

I was also pondering in my head if it would be worth putting a unit of muskets on your allies ship, so if yours sinks you still can plink at the enemy.

This scenario is in the Raise the Black expansion and you will need the core rulebook to get started. So, yes, I guess so!

🇬🇧

English Buccaneers, like Brethern of the Coast, but I could play them and still get points for my nation in Summer of Plunder.

Why have British when you can go Dutch? Hehehehhe

Thank you! I have 4 of them so I tried to shake it up a little

I'm sorry that part of the campaign didn't do anything for you and we see that it wasn't important for some players. That said, it was enjoyed by many! We realize this can't be the perfect event for every player. Happy to take this conversation to email if you would rather use our contact page on the blog. Do you mind if I ask a couple questions to better understand your perspective? 1. Did you read the campaign rules? Or did the national competition just not appeal to you at all? 2. Did you join the Discord channel for the campaign? That's where most of the player and player/commander interaction happened. 3. Did the national mini game detract from your experience, or was it something you could just ignore? 4. What part of the campaign was enjoyable for you?

@@bloodpigment5808 1. Yes, I read the rules. I honestly don't remember what they said about the national competition, but I was surprised when I started entering game results and there wasn't even a tally of who won or lost. The national competition didn't interest me because I didn't really feel like I was taking part in it. If I'd felt included, it would have interested me more. If I'd been taking part in any of the decisions being made, maybe the rules would have registered with me more. I think the full answer is "I read the rules at the start, they didn't seem to apply to me, so I promptly forgot about them, and nothing during the course of the campaign changed that." 2. I joined the Discord channel, but I didn't revisit it. I'm not a big fan of the Discord format, and though I'm a member of scores of channels, I really don't spend much time there. The whole "15 random conversations happening simultaneously" aspect of Discord just doesn't appeal to me. I prefer formats where questions and answers are organized sequentially, and different threads are kept separate. Also, I wound up playing English in every game, but that was somewhat random. I'm not sure I even checked out the specific English Discord channel, because I didn't know I'd be playing English when I first logged into the Discord, and I never returned to the Discord channel after that initial visit, which reinforced my general distaste for Discord. I introduced the game to a few new players, and I always gave them the choice of which nation they wanted to play. Then, we each stuck with our nation for the remainder of the games we played. So I was English, but I could have been multiple factions if that's what the new players had wanted. Given that players could play for multiple nations throughout the campaign, the individual Discord channels seemed a bit odd. Also, all the other campaign information was on the website and/or in emails. The national conversations were the only element of the campaign that required logging into Discord and sifting through all the chaff there. So I just didn't bother with them. The faction email updates really didn't seem like a conversation, they were just reports of results that didn't mean anything to me because they seemed like a different game that a select few insiders were playing alongside the large campaign. 3. Yes, the national mini game distracted from my experience. The weekly scenarios and goals were fun, but the realization that they were essentially meaningless, and there was a different game being played by insiders, and that's what all the updates were reporting, made the overall experience worse for me. It didn't actually feel like I was part of a campaign, and I eventually didn't even bother reading the email updates. My games themselves were fun, but that's where it ended for me. 4. The games themselves were fun, and it was fun trying out the different objectives each week. Also, I've used the multiplayer scenario from the campaign book, which arrived too late to actually use during the campaign, to run demo games, and it's great for that. Overall, I really appreciate the effort that you've all put into the Summer of Plunder, and I was finally motivated after a few summers of meaning to take part to actually play some regular games and report the results. I had fun, and that's because you organized the whole thing. So please don't take this as pure negativity. But you asked for feedback, and it sounded like I wasn't alone in finding the national campaign itself a bit of a dud. I think it was fun for the organizers and the national commanders, and those are the voices closest to you, so you may not realize how much it failed to engage the rest of us--certainly me, presumably others. In your video, that's how it sounded--you seemed surprised to have heard from players that didn't find it engaging, and it seemed like you felt that the failure was on our part. "Did you read the campaign rules?" certainly sounds like you think it's my fault for not being enamored of the campaign. I'm suggesting that you rethink that, and try to find a way for all players to feel like the games they played actually had some bearing on the overall campaign. Or just drop the idea of an overall campaign, and focus on the fun weekly scenarios for people to try out. But a mini strategy game among a handful of organizers that is tangentially related to the games played by a few hundred others really didn't seem like a successful multiplayer campaign to me.

@@bloodpigment5808 1. Yes, I read the rules. I honestly don't remember what they said about the national competition, but I was surprised when I started entering game results and there wasn't even a tally of who won or lost. The national competition didn't interest me because I didn't really feel like I was taking part in it. If I'd felt included, it would have interested me more. If I'd been taking part in any of the decisions being made, maybe the rules would have registered with me more. I think the full answer is "I read the rules at the start, they didn't seem to apply to me, so I promptly forgot about them, and nothing during the course of the campaign changed that." 2. I joined the Discord channel, but I didn't revisit it. I'm not a big fan of the Discord format, and though I'm a member of scores of channels, I really don't spend much time there. The whole "15 random conversations happening simultaneously" aspect of Discord just doesn't appeal to me. I prefer formats where questions and answers are organized sequentially, and different threads are kept separate. Also, I wound up playing English in every game, but that was somewhat random. I'm not sure I even checked out the specific English Discord channel, because I didn't know I'd be playing English when I first logged into the Discord, and I never returned to the Discord channel after that initial visit, which reinforced my general distaste for Discord. I introduced the game to a few new players, and I always gave them the choice of which nation they wanted to play. Then, we each stuck with our nation for the remainder of the games we played. So I was English, but I could have been multiple factions if that's what the new players had wanted. Given that players could play for multiple nations throughout the campaign, the individual Discord channels seemed a bit odd. Also, all the other campaign information was on the website and/or in emails. The national conversations were the only element of the campaign that required logging into Discord and sifting through all the chaff there. So I just didn't bother with them. The faction email updates really didn't seem like a conversation, they were just reports of results that didn't mean anything to me because they seemed like a different game that a select few insiders were playing alongside the large campaign. 3. Yes, the national mini game distracted from my experience. The weekly scenarios and goals were fun, but the realization that they were essentially meaningless, and there was a different game being played by insiders, and that's what all the updates were reporting, made the overall experience worse for me. It didn't actually feel like I was part of a campaign, and I eventually didn't even bother reading the email updates. My games themselves were fun, but that's where it ended for me. 4. The games themselves were fun, and it was fun trying out the different objectives each week. Also, I've used the multiplayer scenario from the campaign book, which arrived too late to actually use during the campaign, to run demo games, and it's great for that. Overall, I really appreciate the effort that you've all put into the Summer of Plunder, and I was finally motivated after a few summers of meaning to take part to actually play some regular games and report the results. I had fun, and that's because you organized the whole thing. So please don't take this as pure negativity. But you asked for feedback, and it sounded like I wasn't alone in finding the national campaign itself a bit of a dud. I think it was fun for the organizers and the national commanders, and those are the voices closest to you, so you may not realize how much it failed to engage the rest of us--certainly me, presumably others. In your video, that's how it sounded--you seemed surprised to have heard from players that didn't find it engaging, and it seemed like you felt that the failure was on our part. "Did you read the campaign rules?" certainly sounds like you think it's my fault for not being enamored of the campaign. I'm suggesting that you rethink that, and try to find a way for all players to feel like the games they played actually had some bearing on the overall campaign. Or just drop the idea of an overall campaign, and focus on the fun weekly scenarios for people to try out. But a mini strategy game among a handful of organizers that is tangentially related to the games played by a few hundred others really didn't seem like a successful multiplayer campaign to me.