Shameless and Impudent Lords: The Rout of Ludford Bridge, 1459 – Onside Report

The final move before the Battle of Greenmoor Heath, 1460

Recently I have been working on several game ideas based on my interest in The Wars of the Roses. It has something to do with being semi-retired.

Why a boardgame?

This is prototype for a boardgame about The Wars of the Roses. And at this point should mention Kingmaker, both the 1974 and 2023 versions, and other WoRs board games The Cousins War, & Plantagenet.

So why make a new version? A good question.

I think that the current WoR games are missing a crucial factor. Military History is about groups of people working together, even if they sometimes disagree on aspects of what they are doing. At CLWG and at Megagames this is perhaps the central element to most of our games. I think this is the missing element from boardgames about WoRs and other games about military conflict.

And the modern world of board-gaming there has been the rise of the Cooperative Game like the famous Pandemic. This game also uses mechanics like Contract, where players set a target and attempt to achieve it by working together. There has also been the development of Team Based Games, like Codenames.

So I think there is an appetite for games that require players to deploy themselves into teams to achieve their goals. It is a niche market, but I think there is a market.

Creating a boardgame is a very different challenge from designing a typical Control run game. At CLWG we generally have the designer there to steer and direct the game, to explain and setup the game etc. A boardgame requires a very different discipline: a clear, precise and restrictive set of rules, with little room for interpretation. This is quite a challenge.

The Game Prototype

I went through many iterations – this was version 5. I was pleased that the set of rules I wrote managed to cram most of the rules onto one page – even if some mechanics were very sketchy.

What worked

I think the game map and moves were right-sized – the distance moved on the map seemed about right, enabling players to have enough uncertainty about outcome of their moves.
Simultaneous movement reflects the uncertainty I want the players to have. It is more difficult to implement. It mostly worked; and I have a refinement to improve this, that also adds some aspects of hidden movement.
I wanted each turn to resolve in under 10 minutes, with all players having something to do, even if that was communicating with the other players.

What didn’t work

The recruitment and mustering did not work well, especially the “remote” recruitment that was too unlikely to happen, so players avoided it.
I had not created the regions for recruitment on the map – I was using an old map. I need a better, bespoke map for the game.
In the rules I wrote that any battles or sieges would be resolved: “Control will roll dice / wave hands”. Obviously more work is required.

Play Through

I won’t quibble about who killed who; but I will just say that play-testing is a brilliant way to let the players show you the holes in your design. Players also come up with strategies I had not anticipated.

For example I was surprised how the Earl of Warwick and Earl of Salisbury decided that their only option was to leave Calais to recruit. This was based on my poor implementation of the rules for recruiting retainers remotely. I had made it an option, but with a very poor chance of success. In reality Warwick and company did organise their supporters in Kent so that when they landed they rallied to his standard in Canterbury! So my rules did not reflect historical reality.

Thanks

Thanks to the players who took part – I was a little surprised to have 3 online players and 4 in-person players, a grand total of 7. My guess is that the game might play best with 3 – 6 players.