Fraser McHarg: Britannia and The End of the Triumverate

I finally got around to playing both The End of the Triumvirate and Britannia over the weekend.  Vince was our only guest on Friday night and since we had three it seemed like a good time to break out The End of Triumvirate and he came back the next day with Richard to play Britannia.  Melissa used to play Britannia a lot during her uni days, but I had never played it before.

On the face of it they are very similar games, both involve constant jostling and battling for territory and position.  In End of the Triumvirate the control of the territories can reward you with gold and/or legions and the possibility of increasing your political or military skills.  In Britannia the control of territory is more historically scripted in that certain tribes or nations get more points for holding certain areas or destroying certain opponents.  There is an ongoing ebb and flow in both games as someone builds up a position of strength and is then smacked down by the other players trying to build up their own positions.

In The End of the Triumvirate there are three ways of winning.  Firstly political domination by being elected Consul twice, secondly military domination by holding nine regions or thirdly by increasing both your military and political competence.  Since the election of a consul is a regular event the game has a fixed end period where somebody must be elected consul for the second time, so it is a race to either be that person at the final election or before or to win one of the other ways.

Momentum seems to build as players get closer to achieving victory via one of the paths and the others are either desperately trying to stop them or beat them to the win.

In Britannia you will play a number of different tribes, races or nations that come and usually go through some of the history of Great Britain.  The game starts with the Roman invasion, and boy do they invade, and ends after the Norman invasion.  On my first play I was mainly concentrating on what victory points I could get, in the next game I will also be concentrating on what points I can deny to other players without great detriment to my own score.  The combat in Britannia involves dice, unlike The End of the Triumvirate, but there is still a similar feel.

I don’t profess to being a great student of either Roman or British history, but Britannia seemed to be much more themed than The End of the Triumvirate.  Perhaps it was just the multitude of tribes which enabled the jeering of the Romans “Romanus go home”, the Welsh gits, the Scots, the Picts, the Irish etc.  We could trash talk each other’s units all night long, and it did take all night too.  My first game, and Vince and Melissa had probably only played once in the last decade, so including a dinner break it took us around five hours.  It would be much quicker the next time.  That said, even though it was a long game, the time passed quickly enough, much like Die Macher there was usually always something to do or see and no periods of extended down time for anyone.

The End of the Triumvirate was not as thematically engaging, but it was much more concentrated and built up to a crescendo.  It also plays in about a quarter of the time which in some situations is going to be a definite plus.

Melissa enjoyed them both, although she did comment that they were more confrontational than she normally plays and although she would happily play them again, it would not be a weekly sort of thing.

© 2008 Fraser McHarg

---

Comments:

You must register with BGN in order to comment. Registration is free!

I remember playing Britannia and saying “this game helps you understand why British history turned out the way it did.” My friend Andy replied “Yes.  For example, the Welsh sacked York because they got 6 VP for it!” Posted by Eric Brosius on May 13, 2008 at 06:10 AM | #

Oh, I’d play Britannia again any time. Triumvirate was the one that I found way too confrontational (which is funny, because there’s at least as much confrontation in Britannia). I’d play it again, too, but am less excited about the prospect. Posted by Melissa Rogerson on May 13, 2008 at 06:42 AM | #

I used to play a lot of Brittania, mostly PBeM, and really enjoyed it until a PBeM game that wound up with one very bitter player.  It kind of fell off my regular play after that.  I did pick up a FF version and would like to try it, but first 7 Ages and now Through the Ages are our group’s “epic” games.  I was very disappointed in Maharaja because of the imbalance in positions, but still have hopes for Hispania.  I also wonder why no one has treated China to a similar game? Triumvirate seems too confrontational for my small Euro group (which is where my only play took place) and my warlike group prefers longer fare.  It seemed a decent enough game, but just doesn’t fit any of my current gaming niches. Posted by Scott Russell on May 13, 2008 at 09:24 AM | #

Scott said Triumvirate seems too confrontational for my small Euro group (which is where my only play took place) and my warlike group prefers longer fare.  It seemed a decent enough game, but just doesn’t fit any of my current gaming niches. Some of the wargamers at Gamers@Dockers have expressed interest in The End of the Triumvirate, so hopefully it should get a spin with them in the next few weeks and I can report back. Posted by Fraser McHarg on May 13, 2008 at 06:19 PM | #

Scott asks, “I also wonder why no one has treated China to a similar game?” They have:  The Dragon & The Pearl and China: The Middle Kingdom. I’m a fan of Britannia but don’t play it much because its “hard coded” for four players (it does have variants for other player numbers, which I guess I should try). Posted by Jeffrey Henning on May 13, 2008 at 10:20 PM | #

< Back Home