Two years ago, at Origins, upon preceding to the podium to accept his award for his Wooden Block system of gameplay, Tom Dalgliesh, mentor of Columbia games, simply thanked the Origins committee for their quick recognition of his creativity. (The system had been around for almost 20 years.) With his newest creation, the ACW Card Game, Dixie, I don’t think it’s going to take that long for the awards -- and rewards -- to start falling into Tom’s lap. Dixie is the first - but certainly not the last - foray into Magic Land by wargame designers. My comment at last year’s Origin’s Awards, that “… next year’s largest category will be ‘Most Desperate Rip-Off of Magic’,” has proven more prophetic than humorous. This year’s ballot includes a new category, “Card Games”, with at least 15 entries … not including the ones GAMA forgot. And all sorts of card games are about to break loose into the consumer battlefield this year, as both Fantasy and History companies see how many of their board subjects they can convert to cards. I’m not immune to this sort of Road to Riches, and I have at least four card games in various stages of design or development. Hey, when the Big Wave comes in, seems foolish to sit on the beach and watch. Which is exactly what Tom Dalgliesh didn’t do. Several designers have talked for years about putting wargames on cards; some even had sketches for ACW stuff. But AH’s experiences with Up Front seemed to scare everyone off, except Tom. He got together with artist, Eric Holz, and together they have come up with a sure crowd-pleaser, an eye-pleasing, play-pleasing game - Dixie - that should appeal to almost anyone. Before proceeding any further, I do note that I am listed in the Dixie credits as “Contributor”. So, to assuage the incredulity of my readers, let me say that I receive(d) no money for Dixie, and my “contribution” consisted of looking the game over last summer and making some general and generic suggestions as to the game system. Dixie comes in boxed decks of 60 cards, plus an accordion-folder rules booklet. There are a total of 200 cards available for the first “set”, Bull Run 1861, but the game is “playable” with only a one-deck purchase. Dixie bills itself as a “collectable” card game, which is probably more wishful thinking than anything else, as the individual cards have been printed and distributed (albeit randomly) in equal numbers. A Buy-Trade network has sprung up on the Internet, but it appears less for collecting purposes than for filling out the “deck”. What helps Dixie a lot is that it is a very handsome product, from the attractive box to the sturdy cards. Holz’s art, while not exactly going to cause anyone at MOMA to come ‘a callin’, is evocative and colorful. Best are his large portraits of the generals; the soldiers portrayed in the individual regiment cards are all dressed ‘correctly’, even when the level of art is not up to that of their leaders. The game is delightfully simple, although it takes rather longer to play than the 30-60 minutes the box promises. What Tom seems to have done is to take the combat system from his wooden block games and tweak and twist it to fit into a card format. There are, basically, four types of cards: combat units, leaders, terrain and specials. Players establish a Battle deck of 30 cards, although there are rules for larger decks, from which they deal themselves 18 (USA) or 15 (CSA) cards to start play. Players then deploy any terrain cards they have at the time (they are useless later), with terrain affecting the various “invisible” sections of the table/board. They then place from 1-4 cards in any one of three sections, Right, Center, Left, with the rest remaining in their hand as reserves. Players add to their Reserves from their Deck during play, while also replenishing their on-field army from their Hand. The Invisible Board contains three lines of card sections, with a Battle Line in between the two lines of deployed troops. To win, you have to occupy two of the three enemy Battlelines. You do this by moving your cards and engaging the enemy in combat, which is resolved, in Wooden Block Fashion, by rolling a number of dice equal to its Combat value (from 1-4) and, checking the results of each die against the cards’ firepower (which is, interestingly, NOT on the card, but is totally dependent on type). If you roll within the range, the target gets a Hit. Cards taking more hits than their CV are gone; otherwise Hits can be removed by Morale checks. Leaders are around to add to the above dierolls, although some have little impact on anything, and the spread of capabilities is not overly great (0-2). And then there are the Special Cards, which allow you to do things like undertake a Flank move without a dieroll, cancel a Rout result with a Rally card, or Uniform Confusion, wherein you get to fire at your own units. And that’s about it. Simple, direct, accessible, and fun. And no, it is not history, nor is it intended to be. It is a game with historical flavor, and those who have carped that Dixie is “inaccurate” are probably the same folks who point out that Bart Simpson has a pointed head and is therefore “unrealistic”. (And believe me, there are plenty of both types.) While Dixie does not demand tremendous tactical insight, mostly as movement and combat is fairly limited by the three section/line arrangement (there are rules for expanding to five sections), there is enough going on so that good play can defeat bad play. And the game is a bit more subtle than one would think on just reading through the rules. And, of course, the rules, being short, do raise some questions. One that raised its head right off the bat is whether units fired at can fire back, and, if so, is it simultaneous. And it is rather easy to get your generals killed, which, when you come to think of it, is not outside the realms of reality in this war. At latest report, Dixie is selling quite briskly, especially as it is a wargame … and rightfully so. I think that many of us designers, immersed in our own systems and knowledge, have forgotten the original reason we play these things: Fun. We are starting to hear a backlash from several quarters, outcries that, while the games that are coming out are visually spectacular and loaded with history, they are without “soul”; they’re not Fun to play. It’s much the same as the questions often raised concerning “modern” classical music: are we designing for the public, or are we being incestuously creative, seeking to please and impress only our peers. Dixie is a major counter-attack against that backlash, because it is a game designed solely for Fun. And, if Fun was Dixie’s aim, Tom Dalgleisgh has hit a bullseye. CAPSULE COMMENTS Graphical presentation: A pleasing eyeful. Playability: Top-rate. Accessible and enjoyable. Replayability: One of the best-selling features of card games. Wristage: Low-to-moderate Creativity: Good work, albeit more in adapting one format to another. Historicity: Superficial and more evocative than incisive, but nicely so. Comparisons: Much less intricate and involved than the Ur-game, Magic. Then again, way ahead of Up Front in terms of ease of play and enjoyment. Overall: Spend $9 and see what it’s all about. You’ll like it. from COLUMBIA GAMES Card Game, with 60 random cards per deck, plus rules. Total of 200 cards in game. Columbia Games, POB 3457, Blaine WA 98231, c. $9 per deck. Back to Berg's Review of Games Vol. II # 16 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.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com