Alessio Cavatore is a games design veteran, and has put his mark on the Games Workshop hobby. He wrote the current edition of Warhammer 40,000, as well as the 7th edition of Warhammer, not to mention The current edition of the Lord of the Rings strategy battle game and numerous army books and codexes. You’ll find his name inside almost every current Games Workshop rulebook you pick up. Since leaving Games Workshop earlier this year, Alessio has been concentrating on his own game, Shuuro (and its new expansion Turanga), published by his company River Horse, and has written a new wargames system for Kings of War, published by Mantic Games. I met up with Alessio for breakfast, shortly before he set off on a two-week trip around European toy fairs to promote his wares. We talked about his time at Games Workshop, 8th Ed Warhammer, Dark Eldar, how to win tournaments, Kings of War, Shuuro, Turanga, and more besides. In fact I’ve ended up splitting my write-up of our chat into three parts, to keep things manageable.

How did you get started in Games Development?

I started with Games Workshop as a translator, working on books from the likes of Rick Priestley and Tuomas Pirinen in the Design Studio. As you translate, you have to look at every word in such close detail that you often spot technical rules problems that have been missed. So I built up a good relationship with them, pointing out that this doesn’t work, that doesn’t work. I won the staff tournament that year too, which helped, and I wrote a few stories that got used in the Dogs of War book. And when the position of Games Designer came up they gave it to me!

Who did you learn from? Who were your mentors?

At the beginning it was mostly Tuomas – he was my boss. Also Jervis Johnson, Andy Chambers, Nigel Stillman, Gav Thorpe and Rick Priestley himself.

What is your favourite book that you’ve worked on?

Before Kings of War, I think 40k V – Warhammer 40,000 5th edition – was the best thing I’d done. It’s now the most successful wargame in the world!

In retrospect is there anything you’re not happy about with the game?

I could have been more radical. Some things are still too cumbersome and I wasn’t brave enough to cut the rules back even further. I chopped a lot – the rules are 10,000 words shorter than the previous edition – and at the time it felt very brave. But having now written a new game system for Mantic in just 12 pages, it makes you realise that there’s probably more to cut! [More on this in Part 2.]

What is your least favourite book that you worked on?

From a professional point of view it has to be the Skaven army book (the previous version to the latest edition), even though personally it is one of my favourite armies. It is the most over-powered book I’ve written – they were just far too shooty. There was simply not enough playtesting because we started working on The Two Towers, and Skaven was pushed to the side. So as it turned out, the Warp Lightning spell and the Ratling Gun were way too good.

What are your feelings about the new edition of Warhammer?

Mixed. There are bits that I like and bits I don’t. The book itself is fantastic, full of gravitas – you can feel the years of development that have gone into Warhammer. In terms of the rules, my favourite part is the alteration to the core combat mechanics – something we wanted to change for 7th edition but weren’t allowed. The way that before if you got charged, and your front rank got killed, you got no attacks back – the new version is much more satisfying to play. What I’m less keen on is the random charge – I don’t like the lack of control. Admittedly I’m a control freak. I’m quite happy to play an occasional game where you might lose control of your models because it’s funny, but I don’t want to play like that all the time. Magic may be another problem – because it’s been ‘fluffed up’ a bit, it may have ended up too powerful. Certainly from what I hear of people playing Warhammer tournaments with the new system, the Magic phase is definitely more important – there are battle-winning spells that just mean game-over if you get them off.

And what do you think of the new Dark Eldar codex?

It’s one of those armies that is very difficult to get right because they’re very fragile, but very dangerous. Dark Eldar can do all this amazing stuff – but not if they’re dead! So they’re a tough one to balance correctly. All types of elves have the same problem, and pointing them is always a pain. It’s not at all forgiving for the designer or the player. Any time you’re at the extremes of the system you risk creating a force that is either completely unbeatable or utterly useless. But Phil [Kelly] is good at that, his Eldar book is looking very solid!

How well do you think the current army books handle the conflict, or tension, between serious tournament-style play and the more ‘fluffy’, friendly approach?

There has certainly been a swing recently towards a little more ‘fluffiness’. I think the only way to resolve the two is through simplicity. Simpler rules mean fewer arguments. If the rules are simple and clear enough then arguing about them doesn’t even enter your head – nobody argues when they play chess, for example. Tournaments would become a much more pleasant and relaxed, and simple rules would certainly not hurt your friendly games.

As a keen tournament player and a former Grand Tournament winner, what advice can you give to gamers that want to lift trophies?

Oh, that’s very easy – practise. Play as many games as possible – twice a week as bare minimum, hardcore, competitive games. It literally is training, just like for any sport. The more you play, the more you know your army, how it plays, how to react in different situations. You also need to be playing various opponents and learning about different enemies. You can be the best player in the world, but if you don’t play regularly then you’ll make mistakes and you won’t be able to compete.

Our discussion moved on to the details of Alessio’s new wargame, Kings of War, published by Mantic Games. You can read our chat in Part 2, coming soon!

You’ve just finished Kings of War, a new game for Mantic Games. What brief did you write to, or set yourself?

The first step was to look at the Kings of War model range. It’s vital that the rules service the models. That’s one of the first things we say when River Horse [Alessio’s company] helps you with your game system is: do you have an existing range? It seems to surprise people when you start like that – they just expect you to write a set of rules, rather than rules that are designed for their models.

The other key aspect was the packaging, the way they sell their models – they sell them in tens, twenties and forties. A ten is called a Troop, twenty is called a Regiment and forty is a Horde. So the next question was: do you want a model-based game or a unit-based game? In other words, should the smallest element in the game be the individual models, who can be removed and killed, or should the unit as a whole have a stat line?

And what was the decision?

Because of the way the models are sold, I recommended unit-based. I’m also doing some work for Warlord Games on their coming expansions for Black Powder, which is unit-based, and it’s a method I really like. So what came out was a game that has elements of Black Powder, has elements of Warhammer, has elements of other games. In fact I had never written a new system completely from scratch, and I started thinking as I wrote: oh, this rule is a bit like that rule in that other system – maybe I shouldn’t use it. I was killing myself trying to write original mechanics that had never been used anywhere, and it got me nowhere. In the end I realised that with so many people dealing with the same problems, you’re going to end up with some similar solutions. So I decided not to worry about it, and just write rules that seemed to work well. Bizarrely, when I stopped worrying about it, I came out with quite a few original mechanics, that, mixed with some solidly established principles, that I’ve taken from other games I love, make for an interesting blend of newfangled and familiar, I think. But of course I’d say so!

So how does it differ from Warhammer? How do they compare?

When a Kings of War game starts, with the units deployed, it does inevitably look a lot like a Warhammer battle. However, once the game is underway it actually has very little to do with Warhammer. The biggest difference is: each unit has a profile – there is no removing of models as casualties – instead you put down markers to indicate damage, psychological as well as physical. And when enough damage has been done the unit breaks and is removed – there are no fleeing units. All of this means the game is much shorter than the equivalent Warhammer game.

How does the turn system work?

The system is: I move, I shoot, I attack your models in combat, then you do the same. It’s written so that I do everything in my turn, you do everything in yours, So in this game, if I do enough damage, I get to roll against your bravery or courage – I called it Nerve – and hopefully break your unit.

The interesting thing about this is that, if you want, you can decide to play the entire game with a chess clock or a timer. So in a tournament, or if you just like to experience the pressure of ‘real battle’, you can add in this time factor. Obviously you couldn’t do that in Warhammer because you do stuff in my turn. If you’re playing with a timer, you agree a time limit, say one or two hours, and when your time runs out your entire army breaks and runs – losing the game.

That’s quite novel for a full wargame.

I thought intellectually it would be an interesting thing to have, but there’s a big difference between writing a rule and playing it, and when I tried it out, it was very revealing. I’ve written a new system, it’s simple, it works, but it still feels like playing a tabletop wargame – Warhammer, Flames of War, whatever – the rules are different but it’s the same fundamental experience, one that I’m very familiar with. However, the moment we started using the chess clock, it was a different, new experience – you do different things, you feel different things. Almost like the difference between playing a turn-based computer game and a real time strategy game – there’s an element of genuine panic!

And you’ve kept the system short and sweet?

Yes. It’s very simple. The entire Kings of War rules are just 12 pages long, including all the special rules, the scenario, rules for alliances, timed games. I’ve been asked a few times when we’re bringing out the full version – people assume this is just the quick play summary sheet! But no, this is the entire game. We also made it quite humorous, particularly in the special rules with things like the Elven Sabretoothed Pussycat and the Dwarf Throwing Mastiff.

Is there anything to stop me using my Warhammer models to try Kings of War?

Not at all. Mantic’s models are considerably cheaper than GW’s, so a lot of people buy them to bulk out their Warhammer armies. If gamers go the other way and use their Warhammer models to try out Kings of War, then I’ll be very chuffed. I’m told that fans on the forum have already started creating their own army lists for races that Mantic don’t yet produce – I hear there’s one for ‘Lizard-kin’ for example.

And how is the game being sold by Mantic?

They don’t sell it. It’s a free game that will be put inside boxed sets from Regiment size upwards and later on will be posted up as a free download. Then we will publish updates every year or so, to keep the rules polished and fresh.

From here, our chat turned to Shuuro – the game Alessio has designed and published through his own company, River Horse. We talked about the new supplement, Turanga, and his plans for the future. That will all be in the third and final part of the interview – coming soon!

Two weeks ago Alessio Cavatore sat down with us, and talked game design. After the response from the BoLS readership he decided to offer a reply on two of the most contentious topics: True LoS, and Codex:CSM.


Take it away Mr. Cavatore...

"Hi, I thought I'd drop by. First of all, thanks for the positive comments, and thanks also for the less positive ones... they made me smile (and duck for cover!), and gave me a good insight of what the most competitive-minded gamers out there think.

The two biggest bones of contention seem to be true los and the simplification of Codex Chaos SM. I'll spend a few words on both (but first let me confirm that I don't work for GW anymore, since April 2010).

True LOS. I remember while developing 5th edition that I went to talk endlessly with Rick Priestley about this change. I am a tournament player at heart, and I was worried about the lack of precision of the true los approach in comparison to the 'top-down' one. I made many of the very comments you guys made on this post... however two arguments in the end convinced me.

The first was that it's true that people would end up arguing about los in a competitive environment, but they already were anyway!!! In other words, people always have arguments when trying to play a wargame too competitively... it's just too imprecise an environment.

Secondly, the act of kneeling down a lot to 'see what the models were seeing' made me see the game from a perspective that was very different from the top-down abstract feeling I experienced before. I was there, in the midst of my warriors, taking cover and firing their bolters/lasguns/missile launchers... I was in the action! In the end I judged that was worth a few arguments in tournaments.

Chaos Space Marines. Gav is innocent. I am guilty. I had just about started chanting my 'simple' 'simple' 'simple' mantra then and was most radical with the Chaos Space Marines. I probably would have been even more if it wasn't for Gav. Too much? I guess it's a matter of taste. It's true that we held back the Legion-specific stuff to leave freedom for potential future releases (that might or might not end up seeing the light of the day...), but we also provided a sprinkling of theming, just enough so that is it is still possible to field very god-specific armies. You see, the thinking was that the book should concentrate more on the Renegade Chapters than the Legions (look at the colour section...), and conversions and paint schemes don't have to be necessarily supported by rules. I understand how, once again to the most competitively minded players, those changes must have been unwelcome. And yes, I admit that the Lash was a bit too good... Bad us!

On the other hand, I absolutely love the Chaos Daemons Codex, where I think we came up with a great, simple new army, that is difficult to use and plays in a very characterful and unique way. Go us!

I hope this sheds some light into the reasons for those changes. I hope the more competitive-minded players out there will give a go to the way Kings of War plays with a chess clock. It's absolutely fantastic as a tournament system. You must try it, and then we can have another chat about it, right here on BoLS!!!"