Blocks! Richard III

Blocks! Richard III is a turn-based strategic wargame that simulates the historical conflict known as the Wars of the Roses in 15th century England. Two players take command of the rival houses of Lancaster and York, led by figures such as Henry VI, Edward IV, and Richard III, with the objective of eliminating enemy heirs or controlling powerful nobles to secure the throne.

Blocks! Richard III: Review

Introduction: The Digital Blockade

In the vast and often tumultuous landscape of digital wargaming, few titles arrive with such a specific, almost academic, pedigree as Blocks! Richard III. It is not merely another strategy game set in the Wars of the Roses; it is the digital embodiment of a beloved and meticulously designed board game system—Columbia Games’ Richard III—translated pixel-by-pixel, block-by-block, into the interactive medium. Released in October 2019 by the French indie studio Avalon Digital, this title represents a deliberate, niche-focused effort to preserve and propagate a unique design philosophy: the “Blocks” system, where unit strength is represented by numbered wooden blocks standing on their edges, hidden from the opponent. As both a historian and a journalist, my thesis is clear: Blocks! Richard III is a profoundly faithful and mechanically interesting adaptation that succeeds as a piece of digital preservation but is simultaneously hamstrung by the technical and presentational limitations of its small-scale development, resulting in a game that is a fascinating curio for enthusiasts but a tough sell for a broader audience. It is a game where the elegance of its historical simulation is perpetually at war with the roughness of its digital execution.

---

Development History & Context: From Tabletop to Desktop

The story of Blocks! Richard III is intrinsically linked to two entities: the venerable board game publisher Columbia Games, and the ambitious but modestly resourced Avalon Digital.

The “Blocks” Legacy: Columbia Games, founded in 1970, has built its reputation on a signature mechanic: the use of wooden blocks with strength numbers (typically 1-4) printed on the end. When stood on their side, only the block’s face is visible, hiding its true strength until combat. This system, introduced in classics like Hammer of the Scots (2002), creates a constant fog of war and a bluffing element absent from traditional hex-and-counter wargames. Their 2010 board game Richard III was a critical darling, winning the 2010 Charles S. Roberts Award for Pre-20th Century Era Board Wargame. It was praised for distilling the complex dynastic struggle of the Wars of the Roses (1455-1487) into an accessible yet deeply strategic card-driven system where armies, nobles, and heirs are all represented by these iconic blocks.

Avalon Digital’s Mission: Avalon Digital SAS, led by lead developer Damien Le Guen, appears to be a small studio with a passion for adapting Columbia’s “Blocks” system. Their prior work includes the Blocks! series title Blocks! Julius Caesar (released the same year, October 2019). The Steam page lists a core team of just three credited individuals for Richard III (Le Guen, Kelly Recco, Grant Dalgliesh) alongside Philippe Thibaut, a name that resonates in wargame circles—he is a veteran designer for Columbia Games and the co-designer of the original Richard III board game. This collaboration was crucial for ensuring authenticity. The game was developed in Unity, a common engine for indies, with a target of Windows and macOS.

The 2019 Landscape & Crowdfunding: The release occurred during a modest renaissance for digital board game adaptations. Titles like Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization (2017) and Root: The Leder Games Digital Adaptation (2018) were proving that complex, physical games could find new life on PC with care. Blocks! Richard III was part of a successful crowdfunding campaign (as noted on MobyGames), indicating a pre-existing audience of board game fans hungry for a digital version. However, the studio’s communication was noted as a weakness. Steam discussions reveal that even fans who followed Columbia Games’ announcements were often caught off guard by Avalon Digital’s release schedule, which ambitiously planned multiple titles (Julius Caesar, Crusader Rex, Hammer of the Scots) in quick succession. This “coming out of nowhere” sentiment, expressed by a Steam user, highlights a marketing challenge for a tiny studio trying to satisfy a dedicated but niche fanbase.

Technological Constraints: The game’s modest system requirements (2.5 GHz Dual Core, 2GB RAM) speak to a no-frills approach. There are no 3D battle animations, no orchestral scores—just a clean, functional representation of the board game. The constraints necessitated a focus on accurate rules implementation over graphical spectacle, a decision that would define its reception.

---

Narrative & Thematic Deep Dive: The Dance of Heirs and Crowns

Blocks! Richard III is not a narrative-driven game in the traditional sense. There is no scripted campaign with character portraits and voiced dialogue. Instead, its narrative is emergent, born entirely from the systems and mechanics that faithfully recreate the historical drama of the Wars of the Roses. The theme is not just a skin; it is the engine.

The Core Conflict: The game simulates the 30-year struggle between the House of Lancaster (red rose, holding the throne) and the House of York (white rose, in exile). The stated objective—eliminate the enemy’s five Royal Heirs (e.g., Henry VI, Edward of Westminster for Lancaster; Richard, Duke of York, George, Duke of Clarence for York) and/or control a majority of the powerful Noble families—mirrors the historical reality that legitimacy was tied to the survival of the direct bloodline and the allegiance of the great families of England.

Key Historical Personages as Game Pieces: The game’s genius lies in how it abstracts historical figures into game elements:
* Heirs: These are your primary victory condition and ultimate vulnerability. Losing an heir (by elimination in battle or through political events) is a catastrophic blow, mirroring the real historical toll (e.g., the deaths of Edward of Westminster and Henry VI).
* The “Kingmaker”: Warwick, Earl of Salisbury (the “Kingmaker”) is a Noble block. His high strength and the fact he starts Yorkist but can defect via a random event card perfectly captures his historical role as the most powerful magnate who switched sides, making kings and breaking them. His potential betrayal is a narrative event players must plan for.
* The Usurper and the Usurped: Richard III himself is a Yorkist Heir/Commander. His late-game potential is high, but he can be killed, directly simulating his death at Bosworth Field. Henry VI, the “mad-king,” is a Lancastrian Heir with low combat strength, reflecting his ineffective rule and need for protection.
* Nobles & Allies: Blocks represent significant families (e.g., Stafford, Stanley) and foreign allies (Scottish, French, Breton contingents). Controlling these gives you strategic options and victory points. The Stanley family’s often-indecisive role in history is modeled by their block having the ability to switch sides, a brilliant mechanical translation of historical ambivalence.

Thematic Depth in Mechanics: The card-driven system creates a fragmented, chaotic narrative of shifting fortunes. A player might hold the Crown (represented by a token) for several turns, only to lose a major battle and see it change hands. This “Kingship can be won or lost several times during the game” is the core thematic experience. It forces players to think not just about annihilation, but about political survival, protecting heirs at all costs, and striking when the enemy’s leadership is exposed. The game doesn’t tell the story of the Wars of the Roses; it makes you live its tense, dynastic calculus.

---

Gameplay Mechanics & Systems: The Block System Decoded

The heart of Blocks! Richard III is its adaptation of the Columbia Games’ system. Understanding this is key to evaluating the game.

Core Gameplay Loop:
1. Setup: Players choose sides (Lancastrian or Yorkist) and set up their blocks on the map of England (divided into regions). Heirs start in safe strongholds; nobles and troops are deployed.
2. Turn Sequence: Each turn consists of an Event Card Phase and a Command Phase.
* Event Cards: A deck of historical events (e.g., “Death of a King,” “Queen Margaret’s Rally,” “French Intervention”) is drawn each turn. These create historical pressures and random twists, breaking up any player’s perfect plan.
* Command Points (CP): Players receive CP based on controlled regions and nobles. CP is used to move blocks (1 CP per region) and to initiate battles.
3. Combat: This is the crucial, distinctive phase.
* Bluff & Reveal: The attacker selects a target region. Both players secretly choose a block from their units in that region to be their “commander” for the battle, rotating it to show its hidden strength number.
* Strength Calculation: The attacker’s total strength = their chosen block’s strength + any reinforcements (adjacent blocks) + any applicable Event Card modifiers. The defender’s total is calculated similarly.
* Resolution: A simple difference is calculated. If the attacker’s total is higher, the defender’s chosen block is eliminated (put to the “Reserve” for potential future reinforcement). If the defender wins, the attacker’s chosen block is eliminated.
* The “Rout” Rule: If the difference is 3 or more, the losing side’s entire force in the region is wiped out. This creates massive, war-altering battles where concentration of force and the right commander choice are paramount.
* Heir & Noble Capture: Heirs and Noble blocks can be captured (removed to the captor’s “Prisoner” area) if their block is eliminated in combat. Captured heirs can be executed (removed from the game) or ransomed (for CP). This is how you win by elimination.
4. Victory Conditions: The game ends when one side’s five Royal Heirs are eliminated, or at the end of a set number of turns (the historical timeframe), with the player controlling the most Noble blocks declared the winner.

Analysis of Systems:
* Innovations & Strengths: The digital translation of the block-fog-of-war is flawless. Clicking to rotate a block to reveal its strength is a simple, tactile pleasure. The streamlining of the command point system is clean. The core combat mechanic is brilliantly tense. The random Event Card draw injects perfect historical chaos. For someone who knows the board game, the digital version is 100% faithful.
* Flaws & Limitations:
* AI Criticisms: This is the game’s single biggest flaw, repeatedly cited in Steam reviews (“the AI leaves units exposed all too often,” “I have yet to lose a game“). The AI appears to be rudimentary, failing to protect high-value heirs, mismanaging its blocks in battle, and not prioritizing Noble control effectively. It turns a deep, psychological duel into a one-sided rout against a competent player.
* Lack of Asynchronous/Online Multiplayer: The game only offers “Local 2-player (hot seat)” and single-player vs. AI. In 2019, with services like Steam Remote Play Together, the omission of true online multiplayer (or even a play-by-email system) is a glaring oversight that cripples its potential audience. Community discussions repeatedly ask “why no multiplayer?” to no avail.
* User Interface (UI): While functional, the UI is spartan. Moving blocks requires multiple clicks. There is no “undo” button for misclicks. The map, while clear, lacks some of the aesthetic flourish of the physical board. The lack of detailed logs or a history tracker makes it hard to follow the strategic narrative after several turns.
* Presentation: There are no animated battle sequences, no voice-acting for events, minimal sound design beyond basic clicks and a looped medieval-esque track. This is a conscious, budget-driven choice, but it fails to create an “epic” atmosphere as the Steam tag suggests, leaning instead into a “dry simulation” feel.

---

World-Building, Art & Sound: A Functional Facade

The game’s world-building is almost entirely a product of its map and component design.

Visual Direction & Art: The game uses a clean, top-down, diagonal-down perspective of a map of England and Wales, circa 1450. Regions are color-coded for control. The blocks themselves are simple 3D models with a wood texture, bearing the numbered strength on one end and a faction symbol (red/white rose) on the side. When selected, they rotate smoothly to reveal their strength. Noble and Heir blocks have unique icons. The art is utilitarian and clear, prioritizing readability over beauty. It successfully replicates the board game’s visual language but does nothing to elevate it. It feels like a 3D viewer for a physical game, not a bespoke digital experience. There is no sense of place—no depiction of London, York, or the castles that defined the conflict. The atmosphere is generated solely by the player’s knowledge of the history.

Sound Design: The audio is minimal to the point of being barebones. A single, looping, synth-based track with a medieval guise plays in the background—drum-heavy and appropriately solemn but generic and repetitive. Sound effects are limited to block rotations, card draws, and the clashing of steel during combat resolution (a brief, stock sound). There is no dynamic audio that reacts to winning a key battle or losing an heir. The sound serves an alert function only, contributing almost nothing to immersion.

Contribution to Experience: The art and sound do not hinder the gameplay—they are clear and non-intrusive. But they actively prevent the game from feeling epic. The “epic” tag on Steam feels aspirational rather than descriptive. The experience is one of cerebral, abstract strategy. The historical feel comes entirely from the player’s mental model—connecting the abstract block labeled “Earl of Warwick” with the historical “Kingmaker.” The digital format has, in this regard, failed to leverage its potential for sensory immersion.

---

Reception & Legacy: A Niche Success, a Broader Enigma

Critical & Commercial Reception at Launch:
* Critical: There are no traditional critic reviews aggregating on Metacritic (score listed as “tbd”). MobyGames itself shows no critic reviews. This is a stark indicator of the game’s obscurity outside its niche. However, its nomination for the 2019 Charles S. Roberts Award for Best Pre-20th Century Era Computer Wargame (as listed on VideoGameGeek) is a significant badge of honor within the hardcore wargame community. It acknowledges the game’s success in translating a complex historical simulation.
* Commercial/User: The Steam user reviews sit at “Mostly Positive” (72% of 47 reviews as of the latest data pull). This is a solid but not spectacular score for a niche title. The positive reviews consistently praise its faithfulness to the board game (“If you liked the board game, you will like this“), its elegant mechanics (“Easy to pickup but hard to master“), and its value for fans. The negative reviews (28%) overwhelmingly cite the poor AI as the primary flaw, followed by bugs (“multiplayer battles crashing,” “last turn of campaign broken“) and the lack of online multiplayer. The price point ($24.99) is seen as fair for the content by supporters, but high for a game with such limited features by detractors.

Evolving Reputation & Industry Influence:
* Reputation: Its reputation has solidified around a specific identity: the definitive digital version of the Columbia Games’ Richard III board game. For that audience, it is a must-have. For anyone else, it remains a curiosity. It has not broken into the mainstream strategy consciousness. Its profile is similar to other faithful digital adaptations like Tools of War or Command Ops—deeply respected in a subculture but invisible outside it.
* Influence: Its direct influence on the broader game industry is negligible. It did not pioneer new mechanics or set graphical trends. Its influence is preservational and legitimizing. It demonstrates that even small studios can successfully digitize complex, physical wargame systems with fidelity. It exists in a lineage with other Columbia Games adaptations (like Hammer of the Scots by another developer) and contributes to the slow digitization of the board wargame library. The fact that Avalon Digital attempted a series (Blocks! Julius Caesar immediately following) shows a belief in this niche market.
* Legacy as a Case Study: Blocks! Richard III will likely be remembered not as a classic, but as a case study in niche digital adaptation. It highlights the trade-offs: absolute rules fidelity vs. feature completeness (AI, online MP), historical simulation vs. sensory presentation. It proves the demand exists for such adaptations but also that the economic model for polishing them to a Triple-A level is absent. The ongoing “why no multiplayer?” questions in 2022 (years after release) speak to a studio unable or unwilling to revisit and expand the product, cementing it as a static museum piece of its design.

---

Conclusion: A Flawed Relic for the Faithful

In the grand canon of video games, Blocks! Richard III is a footnote—a meticulously crafted, deeply knowledgeable footnote, but a footnote nonetheless. Its place in history is not as a genre-defining masterpiece but as a perfectly preserved digital artifact of a specific board game design philosophy.

Its strengths are undeniable and profound for its target audience: the translation of the “Blocks” system is impeccable, capturing the bluff, the fog of war, and the catastrophic potential of a single battle with digital precision. The historical theme is not an abstraction; it is baked into every rule, from the defection of the Kingmaker to the fragility of the royal heirs. For students of the Wars of the Roses or fans of Columbia Games, this is invaluable.

Yet, these strengths are encapsulated in a package that feels technically dated and incomplete even at launch. The AI is a deal-breaking liability for solo players. The absence of online multiplayer in an era of digital board games is a baffling omission that limits its social utility. The presentation is functional to a fault, missing every opportunity to use the digital medium to enhance the theme—no dynamic maps, no procedural battle reports, no historical vignettes triggered by key events.

The verdict, therefore, is one of qualified recommendation. Blocks! Richard III is an excellent simulation but a * mediocre video game*. It is essential for the board game completist or the historian who wants to explore this conflict through its most acclaimed modern mechanical interpretation. For the general strategy fan seeking an “epic” or accessible experience, it is a hard pass. Its legacy is that of a respectful, competent, but ultimately limited translation—a monument to the designs it adapts, yet one that remains trapped behind the screen of its own narrow ambition and constrained resources. It asks to be judged as a board game first, and a video game second, and in that light, it is a fascinating, if frustrating, success.