RPGPundit Reviews: Richard III

This is something new for the RPGPundit, the first time I've ever reviewed a wargame.

Richard III is not an RPG you've never heard of, its a board game, a war game, from Columbia Games (the great folks who do the Harn material, and have made quite a few very successful wargames).  It came out not very long ago, and has already been generating quite a buzz.

Now, does this mean you're going to see me reviewing Advanced Squad Leader here? No.
But I wanted to do a review of Richard III for a few reasons, and the folks at Columbia were nice enough to humour me.

In the first place, I'm a fan, in a manner of speaking, of a much older wargame known as Kingmaker. Kingmaker was an Avalon Hill game with the same theme as Richard III: The war of the Roses.  For those who might not know, the War of the Roses might sound like a bad soap opera, but it was actually a bloody and lengthy civil war that happened in England that was started as the finishing off of the Hundred Years War, and that ended as the finishing off of the entire Plantagenet dynasty.  That's right, the Plantagenets started brutally slaughtering one another until Henry Tudor came along and decided to round things off by taking England for himself.

Back in the 70s, Avalon Hill made the aforementioned Kingmaker as a simulation of the War of the Roses, and in many ways it was a brilliant game. Each side had its forces of nobles, you got to fight each other and build up armies and privileges, and political power (through parliament sessions) was just as important as military force.  Some of this was really radical stuff, at least it was for me back when I first bought it; it wasn't like any other wargame I'd ever played.  Unfortunately, it also suffered from some serious flaws: it was slow, and ponderous, and often the game degenerated into everyone just piling up (stacking) all their armies and roaming the countryside until one side died of the (randomly generated) plague.  My friend Alejo is fond of describing it as "periods of a few minutes of intense excitement separated by hours and hours of tedium".

So I wanted to see if Richard III did a better job.

Secondly, I'm not just any fan, I'm an historian, and while I went on to look at other areas, my undergraduate studies in history were ostensibly Tudor history. The War of the Roses is right in my area of expertise; so I wanted to see just how good a job Richard III did of really simulating the period.

Third, I'm the Pundit.  That's what I said when the Columbia people asked me why I should review their game. Apparently, they were wise enough to get that this is a pretty damn good reason.

So how does Richard III fare, both in terms of its historical value, its playability, and in comparison to Kingmaker?

Pretty freaking good, actually.

For starters, it keeps a great deal of what was awesome about Kingmaker, and almost none of what wasn't. Its a simpler game, without being simplistic.  It goes to certain lengths to reflect history (for example, the various nobles are initially aligned more or less according to historical allegiances, and not randomly), but it never puts historical simulation ahead of being a good game (a big plus in my book). It looks sexy, and its great fun.

What you get for your investment in the game is a nice box set with a lovely cover; a cover that is actually a slipcase for the box that lies within. In the box you get dice, the rulebook, a very nice (quite large!) full colour map of England, some cards (used in the game to determine initiative, action points, and special events), stickers, and a bunch of red and white wooden blocks (and one black one, for the "rebels").
The map is beautiful, the sort of thing you could hang up on your wall. Unfortunately, it doesn't look very durable (its just some relatively hard paper) and I might end up deciding to laminate it or something.
The wooden blocks are awesome, and the process of applying the stickers to each block is actually a very clever way of getting the players to become acquainted with the different units, so this is one of the few instances where I'd not be totally against the idea of "some assembly required". The stickers themselves are very well designed, with lovely full-colour heraldic shields, and the various elements of game information presented in a very clever way.

Richard III is a game for two players, where one plays the Lancastrians and the other the Yorkists (the two sides of the royal family that were at odds with each other for the throne of England). The object of the game is for your side to end up with the King, which can happen in one of two ways: first, if at any point in the game one side loses all five of its potential heirs, the other side is declared victor (because there is no longer an opposing line to pretend to the Throne).  Second, if no one manages to wipe out the entirety of the other royal line (which from what I've seen is not very easy to accomplish) then the game ends at its allotted time, after the 3 campaign turns have been played. At that point, the player with the greatest amount of political influence is declared King and wins the game.

The game plays through 3 campaign turns, each turn having 7 rounds of play. In between each campaign turn, and at the end of the last turn, there is a "political turn" where various forces are reset, returned to their territories, and an assessment is made of each side's political power.  The Lancastrians begin the game as King and the Yorks as Pretender, but in each political turn the relative political influence of each side (the number of nobles and bishops they have on their side in England, plus who controls london) is counted up, and if the Pretender is dominant, he now becomes King and the other side becomes the Pretender. As I mentioned above, if all 3 campaigns are played without one lineage being wiped out, the last political turn is what decides who wins the game as King.

The whole game is very fast-playing, apart from the complexity of the initial set-up and the necessity of explaining rules to newbies; excepting the latter and taking the former into account, the actual play of Richard III between two experienced players (assuming neither player is one of those guys who takes an hour to think about how to move) should only take about two or three hours. And there are definitely no "long periods of tedium" here.

Units (the blocks) contain all the essential information you need to see in play, there's no need to consult any tables for combat. Likewise, the maps borders are quite simply colour-coded to describe the movement limits (some border areas allow for 4 troops to cross at once, others only 3, and some only 2). There is no theoretical limit at any given time as to how many blocks you can stack in one region of the map (the spaces are roughly divided into the british counties), but if you end a turn with more than 4 blocks in a space (5 in a space with a major city) then the "supply phase" causes all the forces in that area to suffer 1 hit of damage (from starvation, I'd assume).

Blocks are divided into categories: first you have your 5 royals. These are the "heirs", the highest ranking block of which is your current King or Pretender. You start the game with 3 of the 5 active, and the other two start the game as minors, who only enter into play after one of your current heirs dies. These 5 blocks (which are distinguished with crowns) can fight like any other unit, and benefit from certain terrain features (royal areas giving them bonuses to defense). They can also perform a special "heir charge", allowing them to try to strike directly at a specific noble (whereas normally where the damage is allotted is not determined by the attacker), at the risk of being hit himself. The King or Pretender (or the Duke of Warwick, known historically as the Kingmaker) has the additional power of being able to attempt a "treachery roll" in each battle; there are certain units that are subject to treachery, where they might (if the roll succeeds) switch sides and suddenly start fighting for the other guy.

Nobles are your standard unit, bearing their heraldic shield. They get bonuses to defense when fighting on their own lands. Some nobles are distinguished with a white or red rose (the symbols of the respective royal houses); these nobles are the ones who are always loyal, and will never betray their side. All other nobles feature a number value indicating just how easy or hard it is for them to switch allegiance.  Church blocks (the various bishops) are essentially identical in play to nobles; they too are capable of being subject to treachery.

After that you have city levies. These are fairly competent units in combat, though they have no political value; they also get a bonus to defend their home city. They do not switch sides.
Each side can also bring out a Bombard, a cannon. This unit is extremely powerful in the first round of any combat, but very good after that, reflecting an initial artillery bombardment. Mercenaries are also available: the Lancastrians have French, Scot, and Welsh mercenaries, while the Yorkists have Burgundian, French (Calais) and Irish mercenaries. They fight very well but (like the Bombard) have no political influence.
Finally, there's a single black block, which is the Rebels unit. The Rebels will always be available for recruitment to whatever side is currently the Pretender.

In actual play, units are all placed on the map with the blocks "standing up", so that (in true Stratego-style) you can see which blocks you have where, and you can see the enemies blocks, but only from the back so you don't know which blocks of his correspond to which units. This really adds a great deal of interesting uncertainty to the game; you have to really make an effort to try to keep track of where the other guy put which forces.
Units have "hit points", which are easily kept track of by having dots on the edges of the block's sticker. When a unit suffers a hit, it is rotated on its side; whichever set of dots is facing up is the current health of that unit. If you've rotated down to one dot and take another hit, the unit is eliminated: certain units (royals and loyal-nobles) are permanently killed when eliminated and removed from play; whereas all other units are only removed from play until the beginning of the next Campaign Turn.

You start the game with a certain amount of units in play (the Lancastrian player starting with his forces spread out in different areas of England, the Yorkist pretender with his all in "exile areas" in Ireland or Calais; later on, if the Lancastrian becomes the Pretender, his Exile areas are in France and Scotland).  In play, you can choose to use action points to recruit forces not yet in play from your "pool".

Actions are resolved in each Campaign in the following fashion: both sides receive 7 action cards, which they will play one for each round of the Campaign. The action cards sometimes just have a number on them (which is the amount of Action Points you would have to spend in that round), while others have special events ("Plague", "Piracy", "Treason", "Force March", "surprise" and "muster"). Regular cards give between 2-4 Action Points, special event cards can give as little as 0 Action Points, but whatever event they detail on the card takes place. In each round, the cards each player chose are compared; whoever "bid" the most action points gets to move first (but special event cards always get to go before regular cards; and in the event of a tie, the Pretender always gets to go first).

You can spend action points to move blocks (with one point allowing you to move all the blocks in one single area; they do not need to move in the same direction), to perform sea moves (one point per block to move from one coastal area to another on the same sea; or one point to move two blocks if you start and end in a major port), or to recruit a new troop from your pool (these troops usually appear either in an area where you already have troops or in their home space if unoccupied).

Both players use all their action points in order, resolving all movement etc. on their turn, and then after both sides have resolved all movement, battles are resolved. Any time opposing blocks occupy the same area, battle must occur.
In combat, the different sides begin by revealing all their troops, laying the blocks down flat so that both players can see the units involved and their respective strengths.
Battle forces are divided into main attack forces and reserve forces. Main attack forces are those attackers that moved first into an area, or those defending forces that were already present; reserves are those that entered from other areas to try to back up the numbers for their side. Reserve forces cannot fight in the first round of battle, but after that they enter into the battle normally.
Combat is resolved by a series of exchanges; where each block has a combat rating listed as a letter and a number (ie. A3, C4, B1, D3, etc). In the battle, all the "A" units get to attack first, with the Defender's "A" units rolling their combat before the attacker's "A" units; then the Defender rolls his "B" units, then the Attacker his "B" units, and so on. One round of battle is completed when both sides have had all their units either fire, pass, or retreat (the third option not being allowed until the second battle round or later). Combat can last for a maximum of 4 battle rounds; on the 4th round, attackers MUST retreat if the battle is still ongoing.
Each unit that is choosing to attack rolls a number of dice equal to its current "strength" (its current "hit points").  They score a hit for each die where they roll equal or lower than their combat rating (the number after the letter; so for example a unit that is A3 with 4 dots of strength would get to roll 4 dice, and each die that got a result of 1-3 would score a hit). Damage is applied immediately to the highest-strength enemy unit (with the defender getting to pick which unit is hit in case he has more than one unit with the same highest strength value); any unit that is eliminated will not get to act. If a single attack scores more hits than is needed to eliminate a single opponent, all extra hits are applied to the second-strongest enemy unit, and so on.
The highest ranking Heir present at a battle may perform an "Heir charge" on their turn; while the King, Pretender, or Warwick, if present may use their turn to attempt a Treachery roll instead of attacking or retreating. If a Treachery roll is successful, the enemy unit that has been turned is immediately removed and replaced by the same unit of the other colour, which begins to fight at its current strength for the other side as of the next round of battle.
If all the blocks of one side have been eliminated or retreated to vacant or friendly neighbouring areas, the battle is over, and the winning player may now regroup, allowing any of his forces to move to any adjacent friendly or vacant area, within regular movement limits.

If the current King dies, the next highest royal heir becomes king at the end of the round, and the player controlling him must reveal his location. If an heir dies, the next (minor) heir not yet in play at the end of the round, entering play in a crown area (in the case of the side which has the King) or in the exile areas (in the case of the Pretender).

At the end of each round, the "supply phase" checks to make sure that no area is beyond its stacking limits, with the aforementioned penalty of every unit there present losing one point of strength from lack of supply.

You play seven rounds in each campaign, in this similar fashion, until both player's hands of cards are exhausted. At the end of each campaign, you enter the "Political turn", where you determine if the King is still the king or if he has been politically usurped by the pretender. To do this you count all the current nobles and bishops in england (NOT in exile or in the pool), and the player who controls London gets an extra point; whoever has the higher number of political points is King at the start of the next Campaign.
Levies and mercenaries disband (returning to their home areas or to the pool), the pretender's forces go into exile, the King and royal heirs are placed in one of their various lands, nobles and church forces return to their lands or to the pool if their lands are occupied. At the start of the new campaign, all forces return to full strength (except for those who are permanently killed if eliminated in battle), and the next Campaign begins with each player getting another hand of 7 cards.

In actual play, I found this a very easy game in the sense of getting a hang of the basic rules. At the same time, the strategy of the game is quite intricate, requiring some time to master. You have to decide carefully in each round, which card you will try to play; how important it is for you to go first, whether you want to use your higher cards earlier in the campaign or save them for later, or spread them out, when might be the best moment to play a special event.  You need to figure out very carefully when to risk combat with your opponent, and when to use points to recruit more nobles; likewise, whether you want to recruit the more powerful mercenaries, levies, or rebels, or nobles that might be less powerful but are worth political points to help you obtain or retain the Kingship. Fortunes can turn quickly in the game, if you manage to turn nobles to your side through Treachery, or win a crucial battle; but with the reset at the end of each campaign, the rules make certain that even if a player does really well in the early stages of the game it does not make the game a foregone conclusion. One side can be dominating the board in the first or second campaign, only to have his opponent stage an upsetting comeback through careful tactics in the final round. Leaving some of your royal heirs or weaker nobles in exile (where they cannot be attacked and killed) may seem like a worthwhile move, but this also means they won't be counted for usurpation in the political turn.

In summation, Richard III is a spectacular game; it is everything Kingmaker could have been 30 years ago. It finally a great, fast playing, easy to learn but complex-to-master wargame for the fantastically interesting War of the Roses. From an historical viewpoint, you can see the effort the designer made to be loyal to history in many respects, but without history trumping playability. Players who are familiar with the history of this period will be delighted by this game, but you can play and enjoy this game perfectly well without having any idea whatsoever about the history of the period.
I get the strong feeling, as well, that this game will stand up extremely well to repeated play; each game is likely to play out very differently from the last, as the variety of choices each player makes in the game leads to vastly different scenarios of play.

If you dig historical wargames, and want one that won't involve hours and hours of tedium, you will be very well served by Richard III. Its probably the best strategic game I've gotten my hands on in years.

RPGPundit

Currently Smoking: Raleigh Hawkbill + Planta's Image Latakia

I don't have an account at boardgamegeek. But if anyone would like to post this review there, I think that'd be just grand and grant full permission.

RPGPundit

Thanks for the nice, thorough review.

I will be sending Julius Caesar to the pundit shortly!

No membership on BGG.  Join and then you can post and comment about Richard III and Julius Caesar

Grant Dalgliesh
Columbia Games
//www.columbiagames.com

What I mean is I don't want to have to register there. But thanks for your approval of the review, and I look forward to checking out Julius Caesar.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;393089What I mean is I don't want to have to register there.

OK I will post it there for you.

Grant Dalgliesh
//www.columbiagames.com

Very good.

RPGPundit