I was fortunate to have play-tested the original version of this game which had a great deal of interesting medieval detail. Armies came and went to the beat of a different drummer in a very medieval fashion. Seldom has the pre-industrial State been so neatly summarised. However, Columbia Games in their infinite wisdom decided it was too complex and too clunky. They have instead reduced it in size and improved the simplicity of its game play. The result is however surprisingly historical in feel if not always in producing a believable progression of events. Columbia has begun to resemble the old Avalon Hill where game play and history resided in cohabitation. Jerry Taylor (the designer) was, I think, very worried about this process but the game has emerged with much intact, and a base upon which those who prefer complexity or more detail can build but accessible to the many who do not. Hammer of the Scots is an immediately recognisable Columbia block game. The unit values are stuck on to chunky red or blue blocks and you fight against an unknown enemy. The fog of war effect can be important though I felt it was historically much less important here. I doubt the Scots were often unaware of where King Edward was, but in this game they seem unable to pick up any information about who is in the feudal levy (despite the long period it took to assemble this force). The hidden values are not however fatal to the game (though they may be for your units). The game is also recognisable as Columbia with its bright colours, clear cartography and handsome heraldry. This is a game which will attract comment if set up at a convention. Scotland's interesting geography is tamed by using areas, and the only real terrain feature is the area borders (red for mountains and black for relatively flat). The heraldry marks out which areas are owned by which nobles (with two families owning two areas). Usefully the various battles are marked on the map, with the victories colour coded by nation. The counters are bright and simple though not really in the Vae Victis league. The nobles have their coats-of-arms (with a background colour to show which were Comyn partisans and which supported the de Brus). The Scots have lots of infantry and non-noble forces (townsmen etc) plus the Wallace (portrayed as a hairy savage), and two rather dodgy counters. The first of these (French knights) is questionable, but the second (a Norse fleet) is a silly joke - we use it as a turn marker. The English have infantry (which may winter in Scotland), archers, knights, hobilars and the King. The Scots can have a King though I have never found the need for him is sufficient to overcome the disadvantages of crowning from one faction (faction warfare aids the Sassenachs). Each counter is rated for movement (mostly two) and combat type. The latter rates units A to C with A units fighting first, and also rates them by hit numbers 1-4 (being the maximum number you need to score to inflict a hit). Wallace is an A3, but King Edward is a B4. Although the knights are usually B class they are not automatically better. There are plenty of C3 units to use in battle. The game also had a pack of rather dowdy cards that give movement activations together with a few jolly events cards (five from memory). This is not We The People but it has many of its advantages. The rules are short but really need to be tidied up again (there is a version 1.1 [and greater] on the Internet) as some points (who is attacker for example) seem unanswered and the replacement mechanism is found only in an example. Some points are hidden in the right-hand column that sometimes is just notes and on others is a great deal more. As a general view you will find you miss a lot of key points from these rules so keep re-reading them. Movement occurs in rounds of card play. You play a card that (unless an event) gives you a number of groups that you can activate. These groups can break up and move all over the shop, or move together. After each side has played a card and moved you fight any combats. Who goes first is important here. It is decided by revealing a card (not I think playing it) with highest going first, ties to the English. Going first is usually a disadvantage as your opponent can run around just before the winter phase grabbing useful terrain where you are weakest. However, the first player decides the order of battles and this can be important for retreats. We usually require both sides to play their cards together though I am not sure that the game does. Red borders (the mountains) not only limit the size of forces crossing them (two blocks not six) but halt movement. The Scots can thus find it takes time to feed their infantry armies southwards. The eastern coastal lowlands are useful here. The Anglo-Scots border (the Cheviots) obviously has serious customs problems as armies cross it using their movement cards as indicating the number of blocks not groups that can move. The result is that however large the feudal levy may be getting it into Scotland is a slow task. One of the event cards permits naval transport but not into enemy territory but it can occasionally help a force northwards. The map also contains some vital information for the political game (now cunningly subsumed). There are three cathedral areas which increase recruiting (and supply) for the Scots by one. This simulates the support the Scots church gave to the independence movement. Then there are the noble home areas. At the end of each campaign the nobles units return back to base. If "base" is occupied then the noble changes sides. This is not really very historical but it is not entirely daft either, and its results are pretty good. Without this most units would simply retreat from battle (since defenders "fire" first and have the choice of combat or retreat). Now if they retreat they may find their home area occupied. Most importantly in the wintering phase the English nobles (that is, the Scots nobles currently supporting the English) return home first. This means they cannot take the home areas of Scots nobles (you need English infantry for this) but the Scots can be occupying their areas. Also marked on the map are the Castle Limits (really economic value) which show wintering limits and which allow rebuilding of forces. Often climactic battles on the last round of cards can yield surprise results if the winner exceeds Castle Limits. Battles are the usual Columbia System and probably represent a mixture of tactical and operational activity. There are three rounds per battle and the attackers and defenders are limited as to which units can be deployed in Round One. The defenders place all reinforcing units into reserves (round 2) and the attackers may only choose units that crossed one area border for Round one, the rest being in reserve. Can losses in Round One affect reserves? I did not spot the answer. Defender goes first in each letter category (see above) and losses are suffered as you dice. Losses come from the largest counters first. You can fight or retreat each round (if retreat is possible). The result is an extremely unpredictable combat system that conveys much of the concern of the real thing. It will not however give you a real battle very often. Nobles being eliminated return next round at 1-strength for the other side. There are some silly "Celtic Unity" rules that result in Irish and Welsh having to test before battle. Since the lowland Scots were predominantly Angles I suspect this is one for the emigré Scots audience. I believe it is based on an actual event but is far too regular. We do not use the rule. Leaders do suffer from a key difficulty. They usually are lost if eliminated. This makes one cautious with de Moray and Wallace, though Edward I is replaced immediately by Edward II whose death ends the game. The Scots may crown a king (lots of jolly rules about the Stone of Scone) BUT his election as Ard Righ is going to mightily piss off the opposition. Apart from Toom Tabard he must be a Comyn or a Bruce, and the other faction immediately goes English. Losing the Comyns to the English (they live in the far north) projects power into a region usually free of the Tailed Ones so I doubt the Bruce's chances (especially as he will more likely be an English noble anyway as Annan and Carrick are within the English sphere). A Scots king's death will end the game, and all you get is an extra block (albeit an A3). On the whole I prefer an aristocratic commonweal. You can redeploy Balliol in certain cases, but that also annoys the Bruce faction. Without a King in Scotland the rules appear to say that the only way the English can win a decisive victory is by controlling all the nobles, but I do not see a republic as a real Scots choice. Marginal victory goes to the player controlling the majority of nobles. The event cards (which are played instead of a movement card) are as follows: Herald: used to snaffle enemy nobles (useful in rounding out conquests - the earl of Ross for example, or starting new fronts). Sea Move: like it says but only to friendly coastline units. Victuals: add three steps to your forces Pillage: take 2 steps from an adjacent opponent and add them to your own forces. Truce: No combat this turn. Once the five cards are played (or two event cards are played together) the year ends. One then enters a key part of the game - the Winter Phase. Firstly the English nobles (then the Scots) go home to be captured if their home area is held. De Moray is never required to do this, nor is the Scots King. Wallace may use Selkirk. Having done this the Scots player removes all blocks above the Castle limit (but never the local noble). He then adds strength points (brings on new units) equal to the Castle Value to his blocks. The new units are drawn randomly from a Replacement pool, usually infantry with different values. The placement of new units is itself subject to Castle Limits. The English now winter. Normally only infantry and Scots nobles can winter (the rest withdraw to England). Edward I may over-winter in Scotland but at the cost of no feudal levy next year. If you consult the FAQs you will discover that this over-wintering does not need to meet the Castle Limits so that (due to RAF Hercules) enormous forces can suddenly supply themselves where before a ragged-arsed lord alone could supply himself. This will give Edward a good chance of reaching the north of Scotland. Replacement factors are now added to units up to Castle Levels, but no new units can be deployed. The feudal levy is now drawn and placed in England, being a random draw of half (rounded up) of all English counters. The English can therefore only move north to (say) Inverness with a lot of movement cards. Because the initial movement across the border is expensive one is likely to find no more than one or two English units pushing north unless from an over-wintering. The effect of these rules is that the English find it hard to capture nobles. Essentially, English units must do the occupying of home areas (since the "English" nobles will move home for winter first). Although the feudal levy can provide the punch in the south (and quite a ferocious punch) in the north one must grind down the nobles using the few English infantry blocks. Although the difficulties of getting the English army into Scotland are obvious the Scots have their own problems. Firstly, the major part of their army (the nobles) disperse at the end of every turn. Secondly, it can take time to build up the non-noble forces which will keep the field over Winter. I believe the English approach must be steadier, but the Scots need to reorganise themselves frequently as each area is cleared and can find their effort spread wide. There some odd effects here. I cannot easily see how the Bruces can become and remain pro-Scots. It will be an unfortunate English player that cannot capture Annan and Carrick regularly. Any Scots expedition south of the highland line is looking at a considerable response. Furthermore the English care little for losses except to "their" nobles and the infantry (unless doing an over-wintering). Other units will simply be rebuilt during the Winter Phase. Within limits the Scots are happy to see losses to their nobles (who must return to home) compared to losses to the infantry which can be rebuilt but often some distance away (taking vital movement cards to reform). Broadly, the trend is towards entropy and one must think ahead a number of years. Did the English put a full Feudal Levy into operation every year (or every other year plus an army over-wintering)? I don't think do, but as I mentioned the successful importation of the elements of medieval warfare may not generate a correct story line as campaigns tended to wax and wane due to other issues. Edward certainly did not over-winter (that is have a long campaign) as many times as he may in the game. This would I think be beyond the range of the simpler Columbia approach. Perhaps it is for this reason that one needs the Celtic Unity rule. It is not that the Welsh have run away - it is more that very few turned up in the first place. So there we have Hammer of the Scots. It is not a deeply historical study, but it is certainly not an ahistorical Euro game. You do identify the changeable nature of political groupings, you get a feeling for the inefficiencies of campaigning, and battles are risky, so it far from foolish. Yet it is both fast to play and attractive physically. It also has a lot of play value, and woe betide you if you do not think through your moves carefully. More and more this is the sort of game that will be taking up room on our tables. Hammer of The Scots: Jerry Taylor responds Back to Perfidious Albion #103 Table of Contents Back to Perfidious Albion List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 2004 by Charles and Teresa Vasey. This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com