Kris Hall: Don Herndon and No Peace Without Spain

When a European power tries to militarily dominate the continent it is usually a memorable event.  Certainly many gamers (particularly wargamers) could explain the basics of the Napoleonic Wars, and could probably discuss Mr. Hitler’s more recent misadventure in even greater detail.  But ask someone about the War of the Spanish Succession, and you very likely will get a blank stare.  Louis XIV’s attempt to unite France and Spain was definitely an attempt to upset the balance of power, yet the event is about as obscure in the minds of many as the wars of medieval Africa.

For wargamers, this obscurity may end with the publication of Don Herndon’s No Peace Without Spain, a game currently in pre-order status on the Multiman Publishing website.  Mr. Herndon recently agreed to answer some questions about his game.

Kris: What drew you to the War of the Spanish Succession?  Many Americans would find this a rather obscure subject.

Don: After getting out of the Navy in 1993 I lived in Charlotte, NC for a year. I met a great group of wargamers while I was there, and one of their regular activities was 15mm War of Spanish Succession miniatures (hosted by Jim Brokaw – some readers may recognize the name), which was a blast to play and really got me interested in the war. My favorite period is 18th & 19th century, and this war is a fascinating study of evolutionary changes to battlefield tactics, weapons, etc. The personalities, politics, and peripheral events are also very interesting.

Kris: What are the basic mechanics that drive the game?  Is it a card-driven game in the same style as Hannibal or Paths of Glory?  Are the cards used to give players action points as in many of the Columbia block games such as Hammer of the Scots?

Don: The game engine is the action card, very similar in concept and inspired by the cards in the Columbia block games. Each player normally gets five cards, and with 1 to 3 actions per card you end up with 5-15 actions per game turn (a year), the average being 10 actions. I considered the card-driven style game engine where a card has an Ops Value and/or Event, but decided to go with something a little simpler. Instead there is a separate deck of 25 event cards, and both players draw one event card each turn and apply its affects as appropriate. Part of my thinking here was that there are relatively few actions to begin with given the game’s scale, and I didn’t want to force players to choose between a helpful event and an important action. I’m sure there would be other ways to tackle the problem but that’s how I decided to handle it.

Kris: What is the relative complexity level of the game?  How long will a game take to play?

Don: I would say this is a 5 complexity on a scale of 1-10. the game has potentially 12 turns unless it ends early – experienced players should be able to complete a turn in 20-30 minutes so a full game should last 4-6 hours.

Kris: What are the goals of each side?  The strengths and weaknesses of each side?

Don: The Alliance must amass enough VPs or take Paris to win the game. VPs are gained by taking enemy spaces and winning major battles (“Famous Victories”). Control of Madrid is another key factor, in that the side controlling the Spanish capital gets a shift of one victory level in their favor (for example an Alliance Minor Victory would become a Bourbon Minor Victory!).

As far as strengths and weaknesses, it’s a very interesting situation. The Alliance has advantages in resources, manpower, and naval capability, while the Bourbons have the interior lines of communication and the advantage of being on the strategic defensive since they merely need to prevent the Alliance from achieving its goals. Leadership is pretty even as well; the Alliance has Marlborough and Eugene, but the Bourbons can counter with Villars, Vendome, and Berwick. All in all a surprisingly balanced situation.

Kris: How does the game handle the naval war?

Don: The game primarily focuses on the land war, so the naval aspect, while important, is pretty abstract. For those that don’t know, both sides operated large battle fleets but there was only one major naval battle of the war, off the Spanish coast at Malaga in 1704. Basically the Alliance controls the Atlantic and can move forces by sea there at will. The Mediterranean is a different story. I am developing some rules to allow the Bourbons to deploy the French Toulon-based fleet to keep the Alliance from controlling the Med, which can significantly influence other events.

Kris: How did the game system evolve over time?

Don: Well, my first design had far fewer spaces, was far simpler and would have made for a lousy game. Adam, the developer, was willing to invest some time to critique and offer suggestions, so I went back to the drawing board and decided to completely rethink things. In essence, everything changed; the combat system, number of leaders, victory conditions, etc. From there it’s been a matter of getting playtester feedback and tweaking the things that need correction or clarification.

Kris: The War of the Spanish Succession seems to have been the war of a thousand sieges.  What special mechanics do you have to deal with sieges?

Don: Probably the biggest challenge in designing this game has been to make it fun and entertaining, but still highlight the importance (and prevalence) of sieges over battles. For instance, Marlborough commanded an army at five battles but prosecuted close to 30 major sieges. In game terms, Marlborough should only be in a battle every 2-3 years! In order to do this, it has to be very easy for the defender to avoid battle – in the game the defender can ALWAYS avoid battle if the army is in a friendly fortress space (i.e. hide behind the fortress).

The mechanics for battle and siege are entirely different. Battles are driven by a number of dice, usually looking for a 5-6 to hit. On the other hand sieges use a table with several possible modifiers, with the besieger looking to whittle down the garrison to zero at which time the fortress falls.

Kris: What are some of the more important event cards in the game?  Or your favorite event cards?

Don: Undoubtedly the most significant event card is the “Savoy Switches Sides” card. Historically Savoy joined the Bourbon cause in 1703, which completely altered the situation in Upper Italy and contributed significantly to the pro-Austrian outcome in that theater. I was tempted to make this an automatic event (like Bavaria joining the Bourbons on the first turn), but that would provide far too much hindsight and drive unrealistic behavior.

Kris: What was the biggest difficulty you had designing the game?  What are you most proud of in the design?

Don: The biggest difficulty has been trying to accommodate the numerous excellent ideas and suggestions by playtesters while keeping the playability and complexity of the game where it needs to be.

Well, I am very proud of the look and feel of the game, but that has as much to do with Knut Grunitz’s tremendous artistic skills and ability to read my mind as it does my own creativity. I do consider the battle and siege mechanics, and how they relate to the full and reduced strength corps, to be a simple but elegant way of handling combat.

Kris: When is the earliest that gamers could expect to see the game published?

Don: That’s tough for me to say. I would guess early 2009 but a lot depends on how quickly it reaches the pre-order number and MMP’s production que at that time.

Kris: What future games would you like to work on?

Don: With some modification the system could work well for Seven Years War, or perhaps even English Civil War or Thirty Years War. I’m also interested in working on a relatively simple Napoleonics Campaign system, but to be honest I can only focus on one game at a time right now!

Kris: Thanks for the interview.

Comments: