Samuel Gassman (Masterstroke Games)
Mediaeval man used a matrix of human behaviour based on classical sources, separating people into four temperaments of people.The first known example of this theory being used in a fighting manual is Fiore de Liberi’s “Fior de Battaglia”.
He simplified the matrix to more general latinised terms, calling them ‘four virtues’ and matching them to animals. The famous conditiero Pietro Monte used temperaments in his book. I have summarised these in the following table:
This gave us the idea of designing a tabletop-wargame that would use this same mediaeval psychological system to put players into the shoes of a renaissance commander, which we published in 2023 called Force of Virtue.
Game Design
Players design their own 15th century mercenary company, choosing cards from different decks that dictate how many troops, how much equipment, which special combat effects or preparations a player can use, and also how many points of which virtues their troops have.
These virtues are an abstraction of the training, motivation, and other ‘soft factors’ that make them willing to fight. Troops require someone with virtue to command them, or to have innate virtue through veterancy, as otherwise they will flee, surrender, or otherwise not risk their lives just because the player wants to fight.
When a player takes an action, they choose a group, a number of virtue, and roll that many dice, taking the best result. Depending on the result and the virtue used to roll, players resolve an effect, for example a Move with Prudence might make those units harder to hit as they prudently move under cover.
‘Roll many, pick one’ is a well known game mechanic, but the idea to use it for the game came from Machiavelli’s idea of Virtù. Separate from the philosophical concept of moral excellence, for him it is the ability of a man (explicitly masculine in his eyes) to resist fate (personified as the goddess fortuna).
By using more points of virtue, players roll more dice, getting a better chance of rolling the result they want. A player can also choose to leave the result in the hands of fate and roll fewer dice, preserving their Virtue to use later for something more important.
This results in games that we find are closer to skirmishes found in the historical record. Unless one side is extremely motivated, very often a player’s forces will retreat after taking a few casualties or injuries, even if the player thinks they still have a chance of victory.
Also, when building their mercenary companies, players at first gravitate towards the most ‘flashy’ options like extra combat effects, but eventually find out that even something as simple as a hidden card that gives troops more virtue to act, to be highly effective.
For example, after a player’s troops had been suppressed by gunfire, their opponent thought they could focus on manoeuvre. However, this player had a card called “As the Lion”, which could give any troops in their force two extra Audacity to act with, allowing them to continue their charge and upset the opponent’s plans.
As we expand the system to include sieges and cavalry with a Kickstarter in June 2024, we hope that people will take the game as an entry point into a fascinating point in history and ask questions about why we decided to design it this way, what sources we drew from, and how we can continue developing it for players to enjoy!
[…] •12:30: Virtù, Humours, and the psychology of the renaissance soldier: Modelling decision-making in skirmis… […]
This looks really interesting! I was wondering about the building of your mercenary company – when you say ‘choose’ cards, is this a randomised system where they draw a card from a deck, or are they choosing their components to maximise their abilities? If it is choice, I’d be interested to see what players think is the ideal arrangement of the different aspects and whether they are influenced by their preconceived ideas about the concepts or if they just look closely at the mechanics.
Hello! Yes, in standard play players choose the cards they want to design their force. On our discord we have had some approach it from both angles: Such as attempting to replicate something like Spanish Tercio tactics, or a more ‘gamey’ option like only taking heavily armoured knights in order to try to overwhelm the opponents anti-armour capability, generally the ‘gamey’ options do end up having historical precedent though
Hello! Yes, in standard play players choose the cards they want to design their force. On our discord we have had some approach it from both angles: Such as attempting to replicate something like Spanish Tercio tactics, or a more ‘gamey’ option like only taking heavily armoured knights in order to try to overwhelm the opponents anti-armour capability, generally the ‘gamey’ options do end up having historical precedent though
The concept of Virtù is a great metaphor for the conflict we face when dealing with chance in historical games & simulations. I can see myself using your game as a meta-commentary/problematization tool for our own historical premises.
Well done! Will definitely check it out.
Thank you! Feel free to write an email or ask on our discord if you would like to discuss using the system for educational purposes!
Hi Sam! Thank you for the game presentation, I like the idea of the four virtues/humours. Pietro Monte also discusses the soldier behaviours and the advisable positioning of soldiers based on their predominant humour(s), for instance chapters 52-55 in Forgeng’s translation of the Collectanea.
Did you use Monte as one of your sources?
We look forward to the new version with cavalry!
(Edgar and Anastasija)
Hello! Looking forward to seeing you both again at Leeds! I had that exact quotation in the paper but had to cut it for space unfortunately. When we first started development back around 2014 we didn’t have access to any translation, but once we did we were glad to see that evidence from Pietro Monte supported our theory!