Dominion of the Spear: Review

Unbelievable but Real!

3-Minute battles for $6 

that's only $2 a minute!

Play Caesar's conquest of Gaul in an evening - while drinking!

Play on the plane, or on the train - but not while you're driving....

BLUF

Dominion of the Spear is a tightly written set of high-level [big-battle] wargame rules that may be played anywhere, anyhow; solo / opposed, remote / present, electronic / table top. It's results-oriented mechanics show the effects of most [not ALL] historical battle narratives with either a simple mechanic or dice roll abstraction. This results in an extreme fast-play game of 5-10 minutes per battle, and regular good "feel" narrative moments. 

It is also:

- an easily printed black-and-white download, 

- very user-friendly, ideal for young and new gamers,

- a direct challenge to over-designed, complex rulesets, and therefore of significant interest to experienced gamers who need a mental re-set,

- at $6 the best deal of [global inflationary] 2024 in wargaming, 

- the perfect cross-over game for tabletop board and role-playing gamers. 

- a good [not complete or ideal] framework to resolve battle results from theater-level board or role-playing games,

- given all the above, HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!

Wow! You might be saying... is this really true, oh dubious blogger of the Western Hemisphere?  Well, brace yourself for a strong argument below, Dear Reader!

********************************** BREAK ******************************

This latest review may be blamed on a specific culprit, that Mad Processor of Wargame Mechanics, that scruffy nerf-herder of gaming, none other than Shawn Travers of Shaun's Wargaming with Miniatures. I don't closely follow him, as I'm afraid I'll get sucked into his obsessive search for the Perfect Ancients Game, something so tempting I went to 15 of 10 'recovering gamer' meetings to avoid it. As I never saw Shaun at any of the meetings, I can only conclude he's not interested in recovery, yet.  

So here we go again...

Kidding aside, Shaun is a gamer on a mission. His commitment to small fast-play ancients gaming processes is detailed enough that you can design games from it, albeit ones that he may not have intended you to design. His blog is a cross between a class with Dr. Phil Sabin and an extended overnight game development session fueled by sangria in a Spanish seaside resort - likely including a whopping hangover next day, as well.  However, I still like it better than going to classes!

Shaun is serving the ancient gaming community. Getting information on game design processes - the good, the bad, the ugly - isn't easy on the internet.  Most of what is posted doesn't include enough data from which to draw conclusions. And, frankly, a lot of people know what they like but they don't really know why or how it works. Shaun offers the reasoning behind his personal preferences, which definitely helps educate those gamers who are ignorant of wargame design processes. So, if you want to design or steal your own ancients rules, click the above link!

Shaun's latest fascination is the game "Dominion of the Spears: Fight Battles of the Ancient World - Solo Game" v.7, a $6 2024 WargameVault offering from Ork Publishing. The author goes by the street-name of "Steve" which is a good choice since just reading these rules will trigger 80-90% of wargamers into apoplectic fits of rage, so I strongly advise him to continue hiding far up in the North Country in a cave near Neil Thomas' secluded bastion [NOTE <-- humor].

The rules in booklet format printed easily at 32 pages, at 4 pages a sheet [2-sided] and took just a few seconds to staple and fold to create the rule booklet. I almost felt guilty at not spending another $50 on a set of wargame rules, clearly a result of social and consumer conditioning by the larger wargame companies.

The booklet could easily be printed as 8 pages with just the cover and rules [6 pages]. They contain

- a 4 page "example battle", 

- 14 pages of 196 Army Lists, 

- 2 pages of Designer Notes - which are definitely needed.  Why?  Excellent question, dear reader, which I will now elaborate upon in full...

Steve has made the most interesting ancients game since Phil Barker's "DBSA" was offered by that Madman of Distilled Syntax [God rest his soul and preserve his Legacy].  And I admit that it is proving as thought-provoking for me as DBA did, Lo' those Many Years Ago.

Basically, Steve has ruthlessly cut through ancient wargame design clutter and culture - and the redundant gaminess / cheesiness - and distilled it to its purest essence: 

1) pick your armies & determine the 'attacker',

2) deploy your armies, 

3) pray to your gods and roll the dice, committing reserves as Units are removed.

Yep, that's it.

Is this ALL there is to ancient warfare? Of course not. But if a bunch of ancient generals made a wargame that was the initial training tool for Aspiring Young Noble Generals, this would be it. They'd scratch it into the dirt and use rocks for Units.  And, I might add, they'd have plenty of interesting conversations for said students of generalship over watered-down wine at the end of a 25-mile march.

Aside from the shocking facts reported above, what is there to add?

- There are 4 troop types: Melee Infantry & Cavalry, Missile Infantry & Cavalry.

- There are 2 classifications: "Elite / Ferocious" gives a bonus for attacking, and "Armoured" gives a penalty against attacks.

- Altogether, there are 16 Unit types as you can combine Elite / Armoured.

- The rules are clearly written in plain English - and I mean English, cuz they spell armor "armour" implying significant affection for armor. But I digress...

- There is a simple points system [that works].

- There are no "light troops" at all; they are assumed to be linked to the battle line Units behind them or large enough in numbers to qualify as an above Unit.

Deployment is onto a "game board" that has three sectors - left, center & right for each side, and behind both sides a Reserve sector. Whatever size your army is, 4-6 Units typically, you must deploy the entire army in those sectors. The battle line sectors may only have 1 Unit each, but the Reserve may have all the rest.

Combat resolution is by d6 with a few modifiers, with each Unit simultaneously attempting to roll a target number, which removes the target Unit.  If both sides succeed, both Units are 'removed' - the logic being one is destroyed and the other is 'pursuing' and therefore also no longer available to the general. 

-- Rout and pursuit rules...do you need them?

-- Maneuver, formation, angles, etc...do you need them, either?

There are  some interesting historical nuances to troop-type interactions. 

There is also the possibility to outflank enemy Units after the Unit's opponent has been removed. 

The only movement rules are for Reserve Units to the Battle Line Sectors.

Player Decisions

These are very limited in these core rules. You can:

1) Pick your Army and Deploy it,

2) Choose from Reinforcement Units,

3) Choose Flank attack opportunities.

2 and 3 are only episodic. 2 only comes up when you've a 5-6 Unit Army, and 3 only if your Center Sector Infantry defeats it's opponent, and both Flanks are still fighting. So these "core rules" are definitely in the "ancient generals have limited opportunities to affect battles" camp. There is a supplement that adds to this, however.

Game Play

Quickly [say, in under 2 minutes], a Side loses enough Units to have gaps in the battle line, and its Units take multiple attacks from flanking Units. That usually provides just enough edge to win the battle. In Steve's own words:

"The armies are deployed as left flank, centre, and right flank with extra units in the reserve. Then combat in each of these three sectors are resolved sector by sector. A six sided dice is used for each unit to hit and rout it's opponent with missile armed units firing first. Defeated units are replaced from the reserve. The fun and interest comes from the interaction of the different types of units with missile mounted units having an advantage over melee infantry, melee infantry having an advantage over missile infantry, missile infantry over melee mounted, and melee mounted over missile mounted. Then there are outflanking bonuses. A battle can be fought in around 10 minutes or less and with some imagination generates an amusing story. Brief rules are given for scaling up with a bigger battlefield and bigger armies. Really designed to be played solo." 

From WargameVault [CLICK].

Options

There is a Big Battle option explained at the very end of the rules, in the Designer Notes. This is well explained and a good guide for those who will certainly want to push the limited boundary of the core game.

Genius

The real genius of the whole thing is what is NOT in the rules, such as weapon differentiation [often fictitious false differentiation in wargame design].  Units are instead only defined by their main combat function - missile or melee - and their battlefield role - battleline [infantry] or maneuvering [mounted].

196 Army Lists are - as presented - plentiful but usually no options. 

Steve has determined clear limits which you are free to modify, and he explains how to do so in the Designer Notes.

As hinted above, the rules *just* short of perfection, IMHO. 

Criticisms:

There are no terrain rules.  The rules missed out on an easy - and obvious - opportunity. Many well-documented battles featured at least one piece of important terrain that served to limit the battlefield size and/or maneuvering, or enhance / penalize certain troop types. Indeed some armies are arguably terrain dependent, e.g. 100 Years War English v. French.

In the author's favor, however, one can argue:

- Most historical limiting terrain is implied, e.g. flanking terrain. You can't move into an outer 4th [or 4th and 5th!] sector, so terrain constricts the battlefield. 

- There are no "terrain dependent / sensitive" Units, so it doesn't matter. But there should be...shouldn't there? Wait...should there?? Again, one can *assume* that by giving battle, both sides have found enough terrain to make their army combat effective and have a chance to win, ergo the English longbowmen have found terrain / placed stakes to make them stronger on the defense. 

To use a DBx example, in a clash between a Blade army and an Auxilia army the latter needs rough terrain to reduce the Blade Units to an equal fighting factor of '3'. If one has not found that terrain, one ought not fight the battle at all as obviously one cannot win it...so why game that battle, anyway?

Accepting Steve's design goals and some obvious historical examples, I would still argue that a simple, limited terrain offering greatly enhances the game's design by offering players historical choices. For example, a 6-Unit 100YW French army is fighting a 4-Unit 100YW English army; making a smaller battlefield with a piece of impassible terrain reduces the chance of the English army being outflanked.  Alternatively, a hill might give the English Missile Infantry the "Armoured" advantage. Choosing which terrain piece to use is an interesting choice for the English player. The same *historical* argument can be made for many other Army Lists opponents. 

No difference between Elite and Ferocious so Ferocious is unnecessary. And "Ferocious Archers" sound a bit ridiculous...maybe they're orks?

I'm not fond of the Mutual Destruction mechanic. Yes, I get that one Unit wasn't destroyed but is "pursuing and out of the fight". Still, don't like the feel of it. If a campaign game, I'd say the side that rolled higher won and the other unit was driven from the field.

Last Thoughts on the Design

Dominion destroys the notion that you need redundancies for an historical game. 

Redundancies are factors put into games for "feel" or "color" but that largely cancel out in execution of a "fair game". For example, in most wargame designs, weaker troop types are cheaper and therefore end up as larger Units. The net effect cancels out since most of those wargames use proportional casualties for morale checks. Ergo, the 16-figure Elite Legionary Unit fights - and costs - the same as 24-figure Gallic warband.  This is chrome that creates a false sense of historicity unless it results in ACTUAL differences on the battlefield. 

DBA got rid of most of it while also - interestingly - imposing a 12-Unit size on both sides. Triumph! got rid of identically sized sides, and DBM added numerous additional troop classifications, destroying an elegantly simple and effective design. ADLG appears to be more of the same DBM / DBMM problems. 

Even if one took any of those rulesets and limited each side to 4-6 Units, you couldn't possibly quickly play the game to an historical outcome, largely due to numerous questionable mechanics that clutter up the game. For example, "wheeling", a gamer fantasy for most ancient armies [cuz, like, dude, the Franks wheeled their Units by fixing one corner and maintaining a front while turning with the opposite corner, just like Frederick the Great's battalions did... yes, that's historical gaming in some people's minds].

To Conclude...

"Dominion of the Spear" is the complete mind-blowing reset that most gamers need.  It focuses players to think of the limited decisions available to a [typical non-genius] historical general and to closely evaluate battle history without adding in a lot more than we are certain about. While there are a couple of missed opportunities, perhaps, I admire Steve's determination to ruthlessly cull redundant wargame chrome down to the abstraction of a dice roll; few others have done so.

*********************************** BREAK **********************************

Well, that's the rules, so how does a game play out?  

With a strong narrative, and in 5 minutes, I found - repeatedly!

Below, the wonderful cards from "Battleground Historical Warfare: the Punic War" by Rattrap Games [CLICK] which I highly recommend for any wargamer to acquire, along with their terrain pack.  

The Romans are defending against the Carthaginians with 2 x Elite, Armoured Melee Infantry [Legions], 1 Melee Infantry [Italian Allies], 1 Melee Cavalry [Equites].  They have deployed the two strongest infantry in the battle line Sectors to their left, and their cavalry on their right Sector - this is to counter the Carthaginian attack sequence that will start on the Carthaginian right. In their Reserve Sector is the average Melee Infantry. Their plan is to have their best troops up front, win a succession of combats, then exploit with the Center Legion or Flank Cavalry.

Below, the attacking Carthaginians deploy second. They choose the best matchups they can with an inferior but larger army. From their right, they place Armoured Melee Cavalry [Elephants], Armoured Melee Infantry [Libyan spears], and Melee Cavalry [Numidians]. In the Reserve Sector they have a Melee Cavalry [Spanish] and Melee Infantry [Gauls]. Plan is to roll high on the right and center while winning with cavalry on the left, and wearing the Romans down.

First Round. The left Cavalry are mutually removed.

They are replaced by Reserves. The Romans use the Italian Foot, the only Reserve Unit they have. The Carthaginian General chooses the Spanish Cavalry. The Gauls remain in Reserve.

Second Round. The center Legion destroys the Libyans, the Gauls [must] replace from Reserve. Then the Italian Allies destroy the Spanish Cavalry - there is no more Reseves! It looks like Rome will be safe for a few months longer...

Third Round. Elephants destroy a Legion! Gloriously, the center Legion and the Flanking Italians fail to destroy the Gauls, so the game is tied, but with the advantage to the Carthaginians as combat is resolved Attacker's Right to Left. 

Fourth Round. Elephants destroy center Legion with a Flank Attack!

Everything rests on the Italian Allies at this point - they need a 4+ to destroy the Gauls, tie the game, and force a 5th round against the Elephants.  But their gods have failed them, barely!  They roll a '3' and the game ends as they have 1 Unit left, and fewer than their opponent. 

Example Game 2

I quickly played another game [actually, all the games are quick!] which went down like this: Round 1, Elephants and Legion mutually destroy each other. Italian Allies and Numidians replace from Reserves, respectively.

Then Spanish Cavalry destroy the Equites. No Replacements left for Rome.

Round 2. Numidians and Italian Allies also mutually destroy each other [or, Italian Allies drove Numidians from the field and pursued them since they rolled higher]. Replaced by the Gauls.

Round 2 continues, the Libyans hold off the Legion, but the Spanish Cavalry destroy them from a Flank.

Each battle took just about 3-4 minutes.  One can easily construct an historical narrative / battle report upon each of these battles. Doing so will take far longer than the actual game, of course!  Perfect for a campaign game or system.

I think this may be the best $6 I've ever spent!