Dragons of Glory

Graham Staplehurst reviewed Dragons of Glory for White Dwarf No. 78. He said that the game "isn't brilliant", calling the rulebook "rather unhelpful", and feeling that TSR (having purchased SPI) "could have put this together rather better".^[1] He felt that the explanation for the counters was poor, noting the absence of a key to identify which color represented which nation. He also noted that the game required multiple types of dice, making game mechanics unnecessarily messy. He considered the rules "very simple", saying that "anyone who has played a simulation game before should find them easy in the extreme to pick up, though there are unclear points, which is again unnecessary in a game this simple",^[1] citing the example rules of retreating before combat and the "moving capital" rule. He noted that with the latter rule all a player is required to do to win an offered scenario is to "disband" their capital. Staplehurst felt that although the retreating rule was a sensible option, it left the potential responses available for the attacker unclear. He said that the game "didn't appeal to me as a simulation gamer", and that compared with "excellent fantasy games" such as White Bear and Red Moon and SPI's War of the Ring, Dragons of Glory seemed "to have been rather hastily put together and the rules and charts could have been much better organized".^[1] Staplehurst also believed that while the option of using the simulation to provide a unique historical background and context for a Dragonlance campaign sounded fine, this would require a large amount of bookkeeping and a very dedicated DM to manage. He also opined that with ten modules already released in the series, most players had already started their campaigns. He concluded his review by stating: "Overall, I hesitate to recommend this game to anyone but the Dragonlance fanatic who has had some experience of simulation games. It's not a very good introduction for the novice[...] and is not a particularly enjoyable [sic] to the shelves of a simulation wargamer".^[1]

Doug Traversa reviewed the adventure in Space Gamer/Fantasy Gamer No. 80.^[3] He notes that "despite its module format, this is not another AD&D adventure, but a separate self-contained wargame".^[3] Traversa commented that "on first inspection, the game appears to be a real winner. The counters are beautiful, the maps are done in water color, which gives them an aged appearance. The rules are easy to read, and many of the mechanics are right out of TSR's old Divine Right game".^[3] After noting the lower-than-usual price, he commented that "unfortunately, the old adage, 'You get what you pay for', seems to apply here. The rules are shoddy, full of unanswered questions, and the scenario booklet if full of errors. After playing one basic scenario and two campaign games, we came up with over twenty serious rules omissions and found several errors in the set-up instructions for scenario 2".^[3] Traversa concluded his review by saying that "it would not be desirable to list all the problems with this game; but rest assured, there are enough to give players a real headache. I sent a list of our questions to TSR, and until I get a reply, Dragons of Glory will sit on my shelf. Playing it is not worth the effort. Until a comprehensive errata sheet comes out, avoid this game. If one does come out, Dragons of Glory could go from being the dog of the year to being a very enjoyable game".^[3]

• Casus Belli^[5]