When Mike Demana asked me to write this article, I tried to turn it down. But the hammerlock was effective and I gave in. My plan is to simply review the changes that make up the new version of WRG's De Bellis Multitudinis, followed by some of my current disappointments with this fine effort. I am assuming that you are familiar with the DBM system.

The first really major change is in the Troop Definitions: Polish knights are no longer an archetype of Knight (S). But Knight (S) fans need not worry, the French remain. I also understand that a lot of Polish armies are suddenly being billed as Serbians.........

The definition of Bow(X) has also changed dramatically. Indeed, I would say that Bow(X) is the troop type impacted the most by the changes in this version. The change is that the Bow(X) fight as S in close combat versus Mounted or when taking a shot. This means that charging Knights are not so intimidating.

Artillery(X) now fight as Auxilia(I) in close combat. Since Artillery(X) is not a dominant troop type in the game, this won't have much impact. (Having said that, I suspect that Japanese armies will pop up faster then arquebus volleys in a Kurasawa movie.

Fortifications are different, with reclassification as temporary or permanent. They can include gates, as before, and TOWERS. All have varying effects on combat.

DBM2 does include a number of clarifications, sometimes the addition or deletion of a single word. Which is NOT enough for this "dull 8-year-old," but more than before. This includes some refinement in the information about double-based elements (DBEs).

If there are some changes that can be classed as major, it is the completely changed Set-Up Dicing and Terrain Choosing sections of Preparing for Battle. These rules are a radical departure from earlier DBM. Having used it for quite some time, I find that I like it. The random placement of terrain does NOT prevent a defender putting out a lot of terrain. But actually tailoring the terrain for your game is a thing of the past. In the Time Of Day Or Night section, it turns out that The Phil and RBS re-set their times for sunrise and sunset in the various climatic regions. Nothing too radical. I guess they forgot to wind the atomic sun-dial......

There are changes to the effects of weather. The newest addition is the Change In Wind Direction. Yes, it's another reason for players to determine the average die rolls for a turn. I suspect that, with the right combination of die rolls, the wind could go 360 degrees around the table. Now where I'm from, we call that a tornado. It certainly will affect your bow shots!

A good change is the increase in deployment areas for the attackers. Now, defenders and attackers both set up 400p (25mm) or 600p (15mm) in from their bases. This means that the distances for other game functions -- notably ambushing -- are also changed. Personally, I like this change. Now the attacker can deploy in a bit more depth. Armies will be in contact a little sooner. But the biggest impact is on heavy infantry armies, particularly in 15mm. 600p depth gives the attacker three free moves - if they deploy correctly. This might help a resurgence of heavy infantry armies as contenders in tournament play.

PIPs are one of the main items in the DBM system. It's how you represent command and control. And command and control in DBM2 just got a lot easier for some and harder for others. Those that have it easier are any Regular (I) troops. They can now wheel and march with the best of them. This is particularly good for those Regular Bow(X). It also makes the Regular (I) troops worth the AP. But now for the bad news: There's a NEW PIP in town. It reads:

"+1 If a group move, but not a halt, includes any mounted infantry, knights, cavalry or light horse, other than a general and also any unmounted foot or psiloi."

So whatzit mean? At first, I thought that the word "unmounted" meant that if you have any foot that are not affixed to bases, you can't move them. Fortunately, I started to dissect the sentence. Basically, it means that groups of foot and mounted that want to move together are going to be penalized. That's all. But it also means that we're a lot less likely to see some of the exotic formations that certain Pike-Pushers and others like to field.

You'll probably be as glad as me to see that Unreliable Allies get that way on only a ONE. That and the fact that the AP of Irregular Allied Generals command is 5 (down from 10), makes me a LOT more likely to add that little command of Huns that works so well with my Byzantine armies!

A somewhat odd addition is making a unit that is in corner or side edge contact capable of turning 90 degrees and taking the flank of an enemy unit. This is done as a single element move. My own thought is that this is a devious trap. What it leads to is the promiscuous breaking up of command and control. Personally, I don't mind (too much) if my opponent messes up my command and control. On the other hand, when I screw up my on command and control, I feel like a loser (because I usually do).

Bow (even X) can not move into contact with the Front of a mounted enemy that they can shoot at. More on this, later.

Spontaneous Advance has some interesting changes and clarifications. First, it makes quite sure that you know that certain (X) troops are not spontaneous. In addition, anyone that could contact the enemy baggage becomes spontaneous. You don't have to pay the PIPs for the ritual burning of the baggage. (And one of these days, we WILL loot before burning.......) And the biggest news is that Irregular Spears are no longer spontaneous. The days of the shield wall galloping across the game area are gone. You might also like to note that spontaneous advancing troops move DOUBLE distance until they are within 200p of known enemy. Yup, that warband(F) army could really cover some territory and use the same tactics that the Zulus used to annoy the British.

For movement distances, it was interesting to note that you can now cross a river at twice the speed. This will certainly speed up some of my operations. And, speaking of rivers, there is a new Crossing Water Obstacles section.

Distant Shooting has a couple of additions to it. First, Boats(S) are added to the list of elements that can attack something at range. There is great rejoicing among the Vikings and their ilk. Second, an element is NOT required to shoot if the recoil of the target would result in the destruction of friendly troops. To continue on the shooting theme, Blades now defend with a 2 CF against shooting. I don't think that this will result in a great massacre of Viking or Roman armies by Bow armies; it'll just take longer to come to grips.

There are some important changes to the Rear Support Factors. One is that there are new restrictions on what grades of cavalry can support each other. The one with greater potential is the Warband(S) Phalanx. Basically, you can form a column of four (or fewer) Warband(S) elements to fight a Mounted foe and watch your CF grow. For example, in a straight-up fight, 4 Warband(S) would yield a total of 3+1+1+1=5 against the 3 of a Knight or Cavalry element. Where this will hurt the warband army is in the loss of frontage, potentially giving a Mounted enemy better chances of worrying the flank.

In Tactical Factors, the removal of the "Gentleman's Factor" is a boon to Regular Knight users, despite the fact that these are now required to follow-up a successful combat. The other factor is a -2 to any element of a demoralized command, with the notable exception of the general.

The Combat Outcome section has some notable adds, particularly that of the Camelry(S) in a number of places. (And it seems The Phil is preparing a Taureg army. Is this coincidence? I think not!) Other mounted flee from fighting in DGo. Some good news for you Elephant-philes (which is illegal in a number of states): Elephants are now more efficient killers of warbands and hordes. Check it out.

The Pursuing Elements section has been heavily modified and clarified. All knights and pikes, along with all Irregular blades and spears pursue after a successful combat. And, interestingly, if they burst through the enemy and are within normal distance of the baggage, they go to the baggage. DBM2 is certainly making things harder for the Quartermaster Corps.

Finally, an important change is in the way the EE count for morale is done. Expendables and Horde(I) count as zero EE. Now if the expendable herds in Timur's army were a little lower priced.......

That's as far as a basic review should go. In general, I think that DBM2 is a definite step up from it's predecessor. But I do NOT think that we've seen the epitome of development. It seems The Phil thinks that this version will take us through to 2000, but that's what he seems to have thought about version 1.3.

First, I was upset that there was no provision made for a small or condensed scale DBM, as there has been for DBR. This, despite the fact that The Internet DBM List has extensively discussed the subject (and done most of any required development work). The only reason that I can see for this is that WRG didn't want to infringe on their DBA market. I say, "Infringe!" Although they are similar in system, DBA and DBM are emphatically not the same game. Rules can be quite different.

I have other disappointments. I hate the entire Knight(F) definition. The reason is that it violates the design philosophy. Before 1150AD, there were knights considered Superior by their contemporaries. And Inferior. The difference is that the pre-1150 knight moved faster. I would like to see greater definition of this troop type.

I wonder why there is no Cavalry(F)? The troop type is present in DBR -- as Sipahi -- and makes sense for DBM. Many of the Light Horse(S) and (O) would be better represented at Cavalry(F). A thought for the future?

When will Psiloi join the DBM philosophy? They are VERY clearly defined on their weapons and not how they were perceived by their contemporaries.

Why are expendables 10AP? Wouldn't 5-6 be a more reasonable representation?

Why can't Bow support other troops like Psiloi? This could be list-specific, just like Psiloi support.

That's it. I bought the book. I'll be playing DBM2 for the foreseeable future. It's a good game.

(Ed. Note: Jeff Bolton is an avid DBM player from Minnesota who wrote this review for the Herald. He and other DBM fans can be contacted on the internet on the "DBM List." To subscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@lists.Stanford.EDU. In the text of the message, write: subscribe dbm-list.)