Last week, I got to play Die Burgen von Burgund (The Castles of Burgundy), alea Big Box #14. It’s yet another game by Stefan Feld and yet another Feld game that uses dice as part of its mechanical engine.

I wrote about game designer Stefan Feld just last year (part 1, part 2). At the time I found him to be one of the brightest rising stars in the eurogame field. A year later, I still hold by that assessment. In my personal gaming pantheon, he’s replaced Wolfgang Kramer as the designer who produces somewhat abstract medium-weight gamers’ games just for me. (Thanks Stefan!)

My discussions of dice games (part 1, part 2, part 3) date back a bit further to 2008, which was the last time we had a glut of dice games on the market. As I wrote at the time, there are quite a few interesting game mechanics that tie those dice games together … and also some ways that they differentiate themselves.

Die Burgen von Burgund has encouraged me to combine those interests, and to revisit the games of Stefan Feld by looking at them through the lens of dice mechanics. As with all of his designs, there’s quite a bit that’s unique in his dice mechanics, particularly in his more recent games, but he also falls into some familiar patterns.

A Look at the Games

Roma (2005). As with all of Feld’s games, the dice of Roma are just one part of a more complex mechanical engine. In this two-player game, you place power cards in slots labeled 1-6, then you roll dice each turn to see which of these powers you get to activate. (Or you can alternatively use your dice rolls to earn money or draw cards.)

The core mechanic is simple number matching like you’d find in Craps or Kingsburg. You roll a specific number and you get a specific result. The result is what I now term action activation. A power of the card activates (or you take money or cards equal to your roll), but it’s transitory. That’s again just what Kingsburg does (and in opposition to games like To Court the King which give you permanent power collection following a die roll). Overall, I think the mechanic of number-matching action activation looks a bit quaint at this point, but that’s primarily because of its use in the better-known Kingsburg (which actually post-dated Roma by a full two years).

Though the actual mechanic might seem quaint, in Roma it still remains interesting because of its secondary purpose. Feld uses it to limit choices. This introduces some chaos into a player’s strategy, as you try to plan out things that don’t come to fruition, keeping you ever on your toes. However the limitation is even more important tactically. Though you theoretically have 8 possible actions available each turn, on any individual turn you could have as few as 3 (1 action, draw cards, or earn money). That not only makes you constantly re-evalute your plans (rather than sticking with a “best” strategy), but it also helps speed up the game by giving you fewer options.

Feld usually allows for ways to control your luck in his dice games in return for your giving up other resources. This is part of what lets him get away with introducing random factors into otherwise strongly strategic games. In Roma he does this in two ways. First, the ubiquitous money and card actions let you make use of otherwise useless action rolls. Second, the Roma systems includes a few cards that can manipulate dice. There’s one in Roma that lets you increase of decrease a die result and one in pseudo-sequel Roma II that lets you reroll. Generally, this is pretty sparse for Felt randomness-control, as we’ll see.

Mini-Review. Roma is an enjoyable game of resource-management where dice keep you on your toes. [ Rating: B+ ]

Rum & Pirates (2006). Feld’s first alea game is one that’s unfortunately disappointed me over the years despite its unique elements. One of my friends described it as a bunch of games smooshed together, and that’s not too bad of a description (which may be part of its problem).

In Rum & Pirates there are three dice games: the inn ownership game; the scorpion stinging game; and the bunk ownership game. The inn and bunk games are simple dice maxing, where someone tries to get the highest roll (though it actually occurs in several phases with bunks). The scorpion stinging game is much more unique. Players pass a die around the table, each adding their result to the previous total. When the total exceeds a certain number the player who rolled that last number gets stung(!). I suppose that’s a sort of weird cumulative dice maxing.

Generally, I find the dice of Rum & Pirates pretty uninteresting and also somewhat excessive. Bad or good results can really affect the outcome of the game, while rolling dice again and again and again can also get boring. Feld does introduce more traditional randomness control here than in Roma, with a rum barrel resource that lets you reroll a die, but it doesn’t save the game. While Feld uses dice to limit options in most of his other games, here they exist solely to randomize.

Mini-Review. Like a plank hanging precariously from a ship, Rum & Pirates is too long for its depth and too shallow for its length. Its dice also aren’t that interesting. However, the game technically works and is surely better than mass-produced family fare. [ Rating: C | Alea Analysis ]

Macao (2009). I wouldn’t have said that Feld was a dicey game designer until really recently, but the publication of Macao and Die Burgen von Burgund over the last couple of years has convinced me otherwise. Macao is at heart a resource-management game, but dice are once more introduced as a core part of a more complex mechanical engine.

Here, a communal set of six dice are rolled each turn, with each dice producing action cubes in a specific color. In itself, that’s really simple resource production. Unlike in The Settlers of Catan where the dice reveal what is produced, here everything is produced each turn, but the dice reveal how much.

But, there’s a trick: those resources also aren’t available for a number of turns equal to the die roll … and then all the resources must be used within a single turn. The result is a fairly complex supply-chain system where the dice are just a random element that keeps things chaotic. Even moreso than Feld’s other games, the dice here are just an input into the larger engine.

Feld doesn’t have any specific randomness control in this game, but a player only selects 2 of the 6 dice for his own usage, which de facto offers you tactical decisions that are not totally beholden to the dice rolling. It’s a good way to approach the issue, because it doesn’t require any explicit usage of reroll or die-adjustment tokens and thus feels that much more organic.

Mini-Review. Macao offers a fine example of integrating dice into a game’s engine so that they’re all-important, yet still disappear into the gearwork. The rest of the game’s resource management might just be average without the dice-driven supply chain, but with it, Macao becomes a great game. [Rating: A ]

The Castles of Burgundy (2011). I dearly hope that Rio Grande will come down from their Dominion-induced high soon to produce alea’s 14th big box and Feld’s newest major design. In Burgundy all the players simultaneously roll two dice each turn. Then, in player order, they use those dice to take buildings, build buildings, and sell goods. Each of those actions require use of your own dice showing certain numbers: buildings are available in numbered lots and will be built to numbered spaces on the board; similarly goods come with numbers which must be rolled to sell them.

In many ways, Burgundy comes full circle to Roma. Like its predecessor, Burgundy primarily uses its number matching dice system as an action limitation. You palette of choices will be notably limited once you’ve thrown your dice down.

It then uses that limited palette of options for action activation. However, where Roma largely limited your action, Burgundy instead limits your target for a small set of standard actions. You can always take buildings, build buildings, and take goods, but the specific ones available to you change with the dice roll.

Finally, Burgundy has its own randomness control system. Worker chits allow you to increase or decrease the value of a die by 1. I find this a marked contrast to the randomness control system in Rum & Pirates, where rum barrels let you reroll the dice. Manipulating pips supports more strategic gameplay while rerolling dice suggests seat-of-your-pants gaming.

Mini-Review. I’ve only played Burgundy once, but it immediately became one of my favorite three Feld games, alongside Notre Dame and Macao. It’s a much more game-y dice system than Feld’s other serious games, with dice pips printed all over the game board and player mats. As a result the dicing is a much more integral part of the game. The result is a lot of fun. [ Rating: A ]

Around the Corner

And that’s my thoughts on the dice mechanics in Stefan Feld’s games. They’re not exactly dice games in the way that To Court the King, or Kingsburgare. Instead they’re games that use dice as integral parts of their gameplay.

In coming weeks I’m going to be talking more about dice games. Three years ago, I claimed that 2008 was the Year of the Dice. Now, the cycle seems to have come around again, with new games like Alien Frontiers, Troyes, and even Carcassonne: The Dice Game suddenly bursting onto the scene.

For more board game writings, I’ll point you to my most recent review: Lemming Mafia (Rieneck, 2010).

Author’s Note: I never got around to writing that new article about dice, in part because I never got to play most of those new dice games. The one exception is Alien Frontiers, which felt to me like Kingsburg gone wrong, with too much complexity making slow turns even slower.

As for Castles of Burgundy: Rio Grande never ended up publishing it. I now think they’ve genuinely decided to put all their eggs in the Dominion basket. Fortunately alea produced it directly for the American market and I was (finally) able to get a copy. It’s now my favorite Feld game. —6/21/12

Liked it? Take a second to support Shannon Appelcline on Patreon!