| The
wargame rules commonly known as "DBA" had its beginnings
in as a revolutionary rules set produced for a Society of Ancients
conference in 1989 by Phil Barker. Phil Barker's concept was to
produce a game that lasted only ten minutes. This rule set, known
as De Bellis Societas Antiquorum (DBSA), focussed on absolute
essentials telescoping what had been several stages of play into
simple action and result. In time the rules were developed
further. In 1990 they were published under the title of "De
Bellis Antiquitatis". In addition to the base rules the
published version also included a campaign system by Richard
Bodley Scott and army lists mostly developed by Sue
Laflin-Barker.
The resulting rules took the wargaming community by storm. Armies were affordable and games would typically last around an hour due to the simple mechanics. Ancient wargaming, especially for those not playing competitively with older rule sets, was revolutionised. For myself I finally embarked on Ancient wargaming using 15mm scale miniatures. |
 |
At the time DBA was ideal for those of us with limited time. Of particular interest was the ability to refight Ancient battles. Soon armies in my then local gaming group were being formed to refight the battles of Alexander the Great or those of the Wars of the Roses and the Norman Conquest often using local amendments to handle larger games where required.
Soon DBA was followed by it larger brother "De Bellis Multitudinis" (DBM). In time DBM was to become the standard Ancient rule set. In New Zealand support for DBA reduced as players expanded their armies to the larger more developed rule set. From my perspective however I missed the battles between historical opponents which DBA had provided. While of course DBM could be used for such battles the normal situation was for games between non-historical armies often from very different time periods.
In 2008 I travelled to Canberra Australia for a Renaissance competition. Next to the Renaissance games a 15mm Big Battle DBA competition with some 20 participants was being run. The games looked impressive with armies, comprising 36 elements aside, deployed on a table 4' wide and 2' deep. The figures were deployed in depth and looked to represent the the dense ancient battlefield I was interested in recreating in miniature. Clearly it was time to purchase a copy of the current version of DBA. So what is included in the current version of DBA?
I was struck by the development of the base rules since the version I was familiar with, namely 1.0. Yet while the rules have been expanded and clarified they retained their general simplicity. Of the changes some stand out for me.
|
Firstly is the ability of the defender to swap the location of 0-2 pairs of stands at deployment time after the invader has deployed second. This simple mechanic provides a little uncertainty while retaining a simple deployment process. In some ways this suggests to me a "stratagem" of the type found in DBMM. The introduction of march moves was clearly another. Some troop types, such as light cavalry and infantry along with barbarian tribesmen can, in certain situations, move more rapidly across the battlefield. However these additions do not copy DBM, rather they are well thought out to model the level that DBA is aimed at. |
 Above, 15mm Japanese Samurai and Ashigaru deployed during a Medieval themed DBA Competition at Tagcon. One of the advantages of DBA is the ability to more easily organise themed events restricting armies and time periods. |
The army list section has also been greatly expanded and now comprises some 310 lists many with multiple sub-lists. These lists define various troop options as well as home terrain types, historical opponents and possible allies for those intending to use Big Battle DBA.
Big Battle DBA (BBDBA) is interesting in its own right. Larger armies are be formed by combining multiple standard DBA armies with or without allies. These larger armies, typically containing 36 stands, allow larger games which can still be fought to a conclusion in around two hours. The armies are are divided into commands of varying size. An interesting mechanic included is the pre-allocation of high and low PIP dice for regular commands. A feature which is of course now in DBMM. This simple mechanic alone is in my view a wonderful addition.
There are however aspects to DBA that I do not like. The army lists require now define a dedicated general's element. I don't believe this is correct given the scale of the game and certainly some armies. For example a Polybian Roman army has the general's element defined as a cavalry stand. Given the these armies typically have cavalry on each wing the general is forced to one wing. Not ideal in my view. Further, in smaller games containing 12 elements I believe that there is too great a variance in PIP scores allowing, in some situations, too much flexibility in movement. However, in general these are minor points and can be overcome by house rules if required.
In conclusion if you are looking for a set of rules that allows simple ancient and medieval wargames between historical opponents where time is short standard DBA may well be worth a look. Likewise, if you are wanting to model larger battles, rather than simply games with lots of figures, BBDBA may well be an option you could consider. You may well be surprised, as I was, how far DBA has come in the last twenty years.