Tuesday, October 7, 2025

Clash Course in Flower of Chivalry

As an alternative to a Monday Paint & Chat session, Reject Richard gathered a collection of Postie's Rejects for a remote game.  Richard pulled out a 30-plus year-old Medieval ruleset for the session's entertainment.  Richard converted these old rules to hexes, made some amendments, and gave the rules a couple of solo playtests.
The rules that Richard dredged up from his vault are Flower of Chivalry by The Canadian Wargames Group and Bruce McFarlane.  Now, I have had this set of rules filed away on my shelves of wargame rules since about the date it was published in 1993.  Since I only recently became interested in bringing Medieval warfare to the gaming table, McFarlane's book sat on my shelf mostly unread.  Certainly, the rules, themselves, were not give much consideration.  Coming in at only four pages of the 76 page book, they were easy to overlook.  This is especially true since the rules are quite terse with ambiguities at every paragraph.  With four pages of rules and a number of interesting concepts and mechanisms, cramming everything into such a small space would be a hard task.  The game uses card draw, percentile dice, D10s, Orders, Leader Aggression and Command Ratings, Personal Challenges, Army Morale, Variable Actions, and a concept of Battle Lust.  As for brevity, for example, Morale and Melee explanations are only given one paragraph each and short paragraphs at that!  After a quick read, I envisioned sizable holes to be fill.  I explored no further.
Figure photos courtesy of Richard.
This is where Richard comes in armed with multiple pages of custom designed QRS' and the knowledge to lead us all through the basics of the game.  Since Richard will almost certainly provide a more comprehensive battle report (see My Wargaming Habit), I provide a simple, captioned overview of the action from my few screenshots.

The battle opens with a French column caught on the march by an Imperialist Army.  The battle begins!  Since I commanded the French van, my brief recap focuses on that wing almost exclusively. 
Imperialists interrupt the French march.
Imperialist Right heads for the high ground at charge rate.
Dual cameras showing the battle from each side.
The French turn to face the enemy.
All three French Battles deploy as the Imperialists approach.
On the French Left, crossbow crossfire drives off the
Imperialist MAA causing significant damage.
Having destroyed the enemy Landsknechts at the bottom
 of the hill through firepower, alone, French Center attacks.
As the French Center goes crashing in to clash with enemy pikemen, 
the French Right sees its commander cut down in a personal challenge.
  They are leaderless for a turn.
French Gendarmes continue fighting arquebusiers over the hill
on the left in a protracted melee. 
Gendarmes should have made short work of these fellows!
Against the French Left, Imperialist MAA charge to the hill.
With no remaining actions, the horsemen stop.
With Imperialist MAA hampered by the hill,
French Landsknechts move into contact.
French Center makes progress against the enemy center.
In one turn, the Imperialist Left and Center collapse.
This battle is over!
Decisive victory to the French!  A battle well executed by my French comrades Ray and Dan.  Game lasted about three-and-a-half hours.

The game provided a lot of interesting play with some uncertainty and careful decision making.  With only one game in the books, I look forward to more opportunities to give Flowers of Chivalry a bit more exercise.  On exercising, a review of these rules along with my thoughts and a compare and contrast to Basic Impetvs and my more recent work for the WotR might be interesting.  At least, to me, perhaps!
Thank you, Richard and the Rejects for a very entertaining gaming session!

42 comments:

  1. Jonathan, like you I have the rules but never used them.
    I wouldn't have thought of using them for Renaissance armies....
    Neil

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am a big fan of using percentile dice for games as it gives I always feel it gives much greater scope for results, but these rules sound like they had a lot of gaps in them. Just the sort of challenge Richard seems to enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With only four pages of gaps are expected. Yes, Richard is a thoughtful rule hole plugger.

      Delete
  3. Lovely looking game Jonathan.
    With the fixed camera position it is easy to follow the movement of the units from turn to turn.
    Great to get a win with the first play through. Serves the Imperialists right though, attacking the French when they are not ready, not very knightly!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Richard did a good job in setting this one up. I should try to take more overhead screenshots when I host if it helps track game flow. Harder to remember when hosting rather than playing. I agree that attacking out of surprise is not very sporting!

      Delete
  4. Lovely looking collection of miniatures on the table and an interesting read, good to see an old set of rules being tweaked a fair bit and given a new lease of life. Look forward to seeing more playtests to see how they work out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am sure Richard’s account will be much more comprehensive and with more close up photos of his lovely armies. This is an old set but new to me!

      Delete
  5. I am pretty sure Julian and I have played a few games with these rules....he went through a "Canadian " period where we played lots of these guys rule sets...the Habitants and Highlanders FIW being the set we played most. I liked a lot of their concepts and pinched quite a few of them for my own attempts at rule writing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which bits of these rules did you hang on to in your rules’ writing?

      Delete
    2. From H&H, it was the command cards ie you have a pack of cards per player with 1 2 or 3 actions. A great commander has a preponderance of 3 actions, average generals have equal numbers of all types and poor leaders more 1 and 2 action cards....it's a pretty good way to represent inspired v insipid leadership in my opinion!

      Delete
    3. FoC has a similar mechanism. The French in this game were much better than the Imperialists in activating. It worked well although the umpire needs to put together the card decks ahead of time.

      Delete
  6. Oh, what a fantastic game Jonathan! Pleasure to see and read!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Nice one, Jon. Good to see an old rule set doing well 🙂

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'd never realised CWG did rules outside of WW2 (!). That looked very interesting, but it sounds like the rules presentation is very similar to Great Battles of WW2, with quite a bit of 'interpretation' required.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I never tried any of their WWII rules but have both this and “Habitants and Highlanders”. Good to see that CWG was at least consistent in their development process!

      Delete
  9. Hmm. 4 page rules. Frustratingly incomplete or framework to build on? Bravo Richard for choosing the latter option.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Richard enjoys tinkering with rules and coming up with a workable system.

      Delete
  10. Pleasure to view, and the rules review added go the interest. Maybe the future has one scheduled?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I may dive into a more thorough rules' review if we get in another game or two.

      Delete
  11. I too would of passed on these rules as you describe them. 4 pages and full of holes? hard pass.
    Richard must of done a lot of heavy lifting to get these rules to the table. 😁

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stew, you can never fully discover all potential holes upon first reading. There is some vagueness to work out in playing but among reasonable gamers, anything is possible. Richard did a great job reorganizing everything so it was a cohesive package. I really did not give these rules much consideration until Richard presents his interpretation.

      Delete
  12. Enjoyed reading your report, Jonathan. I think that the French were rather more disciplined in their execution of the battle.
    I hope that you had as much fun playing the game as I did umpiring it. I look forward to you doing a review after a couple more games. They won't be everyone's cup of tea but, considering that we probably started play at c.19:15 and finished at about 21:50, made for a good entertaining evening. Hope to get my report up in due course.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Richard! I enjoyed the game very much. The French may have shown more discipline especially on the French Left where my command kept an eye on Steve’s Battle Lust (fatigue) before striking. Also, we French expected a ‘3’ action card on the turn we planned our attacks. This time, it worked!

      Delete
  13. Richard is a clever chap, that's for sure. The game plays very well and is a lit of fun to play.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I agree on both counts Ray! Certainly happy to see your crossbow take up residence in the woods!

      Delete
  14. Oh nice find, and nice amendment. I remember these from waaaay back in the day, and shelved them (clearly not the only one LOL). Now, my interest is piqued, as I always liked the turn sequence ideas. Thanks for posting Jon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Looks like a number of us bought this guidebook but never tried the rules. Perhaps give them another look?

      Delete
  15. You may or may not want to check out this blog post, as it also deals with or covers medieval material.

    https://despertaferres.com/2025/10/08/barons-war-grand-melee-at-cardiffs-firestorm-games/

    Thanks for posting your account on how this remote battle transpired.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Flower of Chivalry presses a HUGE nostalgia button for me. Thank You.

      Delete
    2. How so? Was this a ruleset that saw regular outings on your table? What are (were) your impressions of the rules?

      Delete
  16. Scary to think that a period that seems not that long ago is now 30 years in the past! Not rules I've heard of, but then I was still living overseas and not back into wargaming then, so not that surprising really. Even today it appears that rules are published with ambiguities and gaping holes in them, so little has changed over 30 years it would seem. A good playtest group makes all the difference, but even then things will crop up!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Time flies, doesn’t it? My experience and impression is that rules rarely receive enough playtesting before publication. Well, especially rigorous playtesting across various groups.

      Delete
  17. These knights are looking excellent. It reminds me of the collection in the Zinnfigurenklause Freiburg.

    ReplyDelete