Left to the Stomach…Right to the Head… He's Down! The following two games have been floating around the Great Ether for some time. We sent them out separately for our version of Double Blind Testing. The unfortunate results are displayed below. Popes & Princes Reviewed by James Cobb A type of game exists which is so bad that players become bonded through the attempt to play it. They share the agony of making sense of opaque mechanics; the laughs of the rule oxymoron; and the joy of making moves despite the seemingly insurmountable obstacles thrown up by the game. Popes & Princes, a multi-player (3-15!!) political/economic product posing as a Hundred Years War game, is such a game. My friends who helped me play it, veteran Medievalists all, swear that they feel a special kinship for having struggled with it … much like surviving The Black Death. None remain unscarred. The first sense of impending torture comes with the physical components. The monochrome maps show a version of Western Europe from Scotland to Italy and the Pyrennes to the Rhine that resembles nothing less than an inflated string bean. It is marked with a crazy-quilt representation of medieval kingdoms, duchies, county and states. Unnamed rivers are added for no real purposes, and sixteen sea zones are represented where six would have sufficed. Cities, ports, and archbishoprics are marked by crude black smudges, images not seen since the Neanderthal days of one of the great, forgotten Third-Worlders of yore, the original Mercenary. The defense values of the cities are barely legible, thus giving them an edge over the city value and odds charts shown on the map. Unfortunately, the map is good compared to the paper-thin, uncut leader and event cards and the tiny unit counters representing leaders, infantry, calvary, ships, fortification, control and status markers … all done in six pastel shades, two of which are indistinguishable from each other and the map board. Cutting these took sixteen person-hours. Simply ripping them would have been faster… and more rewarding. The essential component is the twelve-page rule book. Its brevity was accomplished by leaving several vital concepts virtually unexplained. Lacking a comprehensive sequence of play, mental exercise is gained by flipping back and forth through the rules to see who does what, when and how. Take the election of the Pope. This concept first raises its head in a discussion of special possession cards. It is then dropped for six pages, only to be described without mentioning how popes are nominated if the Grand Tribune of the Consistory card isn't drawn. We winged it. Game play starts by each player being dealt a leader card and then rolling for his military ability. This process instantly destroys any pretense that this game has any historical basis whatsoever in its stated subject: alliances are built by proximity, not history, and the military prowess which is a key to success is absolutely random. This ahistorical aspect of the game is reinforced by the random dealing of possession cards so that the Duke of Norfolk can have holdings stretching from Sicily to Scotland. Possession cards represent provinces which have troop and building points as well as archbishoprics. Some cards are limited to off-map nobility and clerics of different rank. Troop strength represents how many units can be built using the possession, while building points limit the amount of troops, ships, fortification or economic improvements that can be built … although "economic improvements" are never explained. Through a mind-twisting system of computations - let's see, I got 12 T points and 25 B point so if I build 2 calvary armies of 2 points each I can have 8 T points and 1 B point left so I can... - players build and place armies and ships while improving fortifications. The strength of armies are kept on paper, hidden by the players … much as the intent of most of the rules are similarly closeted by the designers. Right, let's fight! Nope, first we elect a Pope, one of the more interesting aspects of the system. Every player has a number of votes based upon archbishops, who are cardinals, 24 in all. The Pope has incredible power: appointing the five-member of the Papal Curia when such offices become vacant, receiving 10% of all players' budgets, appointing cardinals, excommunicating archbishops and nobles, interdicting areas and granting exemptions to these and conducting inquisitions in heretical areas. The Curia consists of the Chamberlain of the Camera Apostlica ,who proposes which Cardinals get some of the papal treasury; Treasurer of the Papal Curia, who determines the amount given to cardinals and can override the Chamberlain; Chancellor of the Papal Curia, who submits a list of new cardinals to the Pope; Grand Tribune of the Consistory, who nominate papal and cardinal candidates; and Grand Penitentiary, who can lift excommunications and interdiction. All clerical actions cost action points, expressed as ranges in hexes. Thus, the Pope has an unlimited range (unless there is more than one pope) but an AP limit of 9; curia members have a limit of 7; cardinals of 5; and archbishoprics of 3. The clerical subsystem can be complicated by the Papal Nuncio, secular interference in the investiture of cardinals, and schism, wherein twelve dissatisfied cardinals can elect a second pope. The bargaining possibilities for players in the clerical sub-game are fascinating and have tremendous impact on the game. They are also far more complicated than necessary and stretch the game to incredible lengths. The Curse of the Game-in-a-Game. Actual play begins with the drawing of event cards before each player's turn. Events run the gamut of papal/prelate deaths, storms, heresy and plagues. Early in the game, players will want to attack neutral cities to improve any base they were lucky enough to draw. Move your army onto one and then check out the combat system. After modifications for fortification and leaders (troop types have no impact on combat), roll two dice, pick the lowest number, turn it into a percent, apply that to your own troop strength and then subtract that from your opponent's forces. All this is simultaneous and continues until one force is eliminated, disengages or can no longer bear the headache of the mechanics, which are about as elegant as an Ernest movie. With the chance of plague looming and vital neutral cities having daunting defensive values, a player can choose either to decimate his armies by attacking two or three cities a turn or to ensure success by attacking one with everything he has. Both choices guarantee a long, sluggish game. P&P provides for maintenance of troops, assassins, raids, mercenaries, marauders, sieges, naval operations (troops in iron mail can wade out and attack ships at full strength … wonder if Dunnigan put that in his computer version?), ransoms, and a financial system. Much depends on the latter, as armies and navies can cost from half to two-thirds of their original cost of T and B points to keep in the field. Since T points are much lower than B points, players quickly resort to buying mercenaries and corsairs instead of building armies and navies. They do not require any T points but are very expensive in B points to recruit and maintain. Even worse, they do not go away if unpaid but can be moved by other players while doubling their strength, another neato rule lost, howling against the maelstrom of ineptness. Financial resources can easily be sapped through raids which allow a player to half the T and B value of any area while automatically losing 10% of their strength. A player who finds himself in dire financial straits can borrow one-third of his budget value from "banking houses" (non-playing elements) to be paid back over 6 turns at 20% interest. Defaults are possible, but cost the player 5% of his budget the rest of the game. Repayment of the principal is spread among all players, simulating the global consequences of stiffing bankers. As you can see, some of the chrome is interesting enough to make you wish someone with talent had assembled the rest of the game. Victory is determined by controlling cities, being Pope, conducting successful inquisitions, killing or capturing leaders, and having investiture points … none of which have anything to do with the Franco-British struggle of the subtitle. What we do have are the elements of an early Renaissance game. However, games are built around systems, not scattered concepts incomprehensibly presented. P&P does not really represent a game -- certainly not one on the Hundred Years War. There are few historical objectives or restraints. Players are basically in a role-playing game using generic, historical concepts. They are rewarded for unbridled opportunism, not for using the lessons of history. This would not be bad in itself, but the system is too difficult to enjoy regardless of the aim of the game or the two or three nice rules it contains. We do note that Ragnarok indicates that a new version will be out in the Summer of 1994. Watch this space before buying. CAPSULE COMMENTS Graphic Presentation: Crude, amateurish, outdated. Playability: None, except for those who find persistence the key to salvation. Solitaire? Only if you have at least 3-5 multiple personalities. Replayability: Well, if you can't play it once... Creativity: It's there, somewhere. Undisciplined. Historicity: The game bears no resemblance to the subject. Comparison: A Mighty Fortress by SPI was almost as bad a system. Anything is better than this. Overall: Designers for a multi-player game on the Hundred Years War should use this game as an example of what not to do. Four 18"x 11" maps, many uncut paper counters and cards, rule book. Last seen at: 3716 Robinson Avenue, Austin, TX 78722, although that seems to be non-operative. Try 512-472-6906. $16 Ed. You think THAT was bad? Read on … Middle Passage, Pacific Passage, and Passage to Cathay Reviewed by Terry Rooker A good simulation should have a focus, some aspect of the situation that the player controls. Many games fail to provide much satisfaction because they miss providing the right focus. Others give the players insufficient, or too much, control over the level they represent. And then there are those, such as this trio, that give the players so little detail or atmosphere that they are never quite sure exactly what it is they ARE controlling. Ragnarok is not known for publishing historical simulations (Ed. as we have just seen), and this set of three games will not change that reputation. The Passage Trio theoretically covers trade and piracy in the 17th thru 19th centuries. Each player begins the game as a fledgling shipping magnate with enough money to build and outfit one ship. Then it is up to you to make enough money to expand your empire. You have the option of trying to run a legitimate business, or you can have some of your hired help turn to piracy. The games, however, provide no really historical background or perspective for the time periods depicted. You set up and play the game exactly the same as if it is 1680, or 1860! So it's not an historical simulation, so what? Nowadays, ahistoricity has become an integral part of our hobby; cf. Avalon Hill's History of the World. Maybe it is an entertaining game... . Buried, deep in the rules, is a section entitled, "The Progress of the Game". Find this before you do anything else, because, despite what it sounds like it is actually the sequence of play. The game is played in 'rounds', each consisting of an individual turn for each player. Each player rolls for a random event for each ship he controls; he then moves his ships. In the second phase of his turn he can conduct one other activity, such as combat, repairs, loading/unloading cargo, etc. Each turn, the player who moved second in the previous round moves first. Movement is simple. The world's oceans are divided into areas, and each ship can move a specific number of areas per turn (up to 5). There is no time scale, so it is impossible to determine speed. It takes about one turn to move across the Atlantic, two turns to cross the Indian Ocean, and three (or more) to cross the Pacific. For sailing vessels this might be monthly turns, but who knows. Combat is also simple, with gunfire and boarding results determined from modified dierolls (d20) applied to a chart. Results are in crew lost or ship damage. With movement and combat so system, the economic game should have some teeth in it. Unfortunately, even the economic model is simple and colorless. Cargo must be important. Well, it is in a way. It is also very generic (my favorite is "Trade Goods"). Each ship can carry a specific number of cargo 'units'. When the ship gets to port it can unload cargo to sell, or buy cargo to load. The amount and type of cargo available in a port is determined by a chart which lists the amount of cargo, the selling price, and the buying price. The problem is, all of these are immutable fixed. There is no accounting for weather, climate, season, or even supply and demand. Every player in the game can arrive at a port with several ships, all demanding the same cargo, and the price remains the same! Add to this the confusion arising from the fact that you can move in either phase of your player turn and that only one ship per round can land and unload in a port. Since the authors assume it is better to arrive in the first phase (that way you stand the best chance of being first) the rules were written as if movement would occur only in the first phase. It is very common in all of these games to find important information spread out over several paragraphs or pages. In a paragraph explaining a ship's maximum cargo capacity there is the following sentence: "How much you can buy per rurn [sic] of a given commodity is strictly limited to a set number of cargo units." This paragraph does not explain where that limit is determined. (The answer to this riddle is found two paragraphs later.) Even examples do not help. The following is their rendition of how to conduct trade. Sale 10 units of Tobacco at 10,000 = 100,000 Buy 10 units of Trade Goods at 9,000 = 90,000 Cash on hand = 10,000 Sale 10 units of Trade Goods at 11,000 = 110,000 Profit of = 20,000 Cash on hand = 30,000 There's 90,000 missing in there somewhere. The only complex parts of the game are the rules for nationalities, allegiance, and war. I still haven't decided if these rules are really complex, or only seem that way because they are so poorly written. For example, each ship has a nationality, and countries at war with that nation are liable to attack that ship and not trade with it. What is confusing is that a ship also has a home port, which is not necessarily allied with the ship's nationality. Am I missing something here? Worst of all, these games are bland. There is no color in the movement or combat rules. The economic model is too simple and too deterministic. The only important part of the model that is under the gamers' control is being first to a port, and that is mostly determined by the fixed rotation of play. While becoming a shipping magnate sounds like it would be fun to experience, you can't even get that out of these games. There is no history, so historical gamers are out. The system is tedious, dull, and boring, so the "playability over realism" crowd is out. The games could conceivably be used as scenario generators for RPGs, but the lack of color probably also precludes this use. These games are a poorly designed and poorly produced execution of a good idea. I cannot recommend them to anyone. CAPSULE COMMENTS: Graphics Presentation: Horrible. Playability: Considering the confusion rampant in the rules, what you make up might be better. Solitaire is too awful to contemplate. Replayability: Ground Zero. Historicity: Minimal and often non-applicable. Creativity: Zippo. Comparisons: You want merchant marines? Try Distant Seas or Blackbeard, both far better games. Overall: A good idea, poorly executed. One 22" x 17" map (22" x 34" in PacPass); one rule book; set of cards; pile of play money … but no dice and no plastic stands (even though listed in components); ziplock bag. Ragnarok, address above. $12 each. Back to Berg's Review of Games Vol. II # 12 Table of Contents Back to Berg's Review of Games List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1993 by Richard Berg This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com