As a grognard, my usual intake of games certainly tends towards wargaming titles. When I was presented the opportunity to acquire the retail version of DUNE: War for Arrakis (CMON, 2024) at a reasonable price I jumped on it because, with that title, it just had to be a wargame. After the game arrived, it took a while for me to get around to playing it and in that meantime I saw many stories of unbalanced play. So it was with some trepidation that I eventually dipped into learning and playing DUNE. What I discovered is a game that is different than I expected, in no small part because of the way the rules are written.
Grognard viewpoint
Of note, I never played designer Francesco Nepitello’s boardgames War of the Ring: Second Edition (Ares Games, 2011) nor The Battle of Five Armies (Ares Games, 2014). This means that, unlike what seems to be a large segment of boardgamers, I am unable to compare those games to Nepitello’s latest epic campaign title in DUNE: War for Arrakis. Yet, while I cannot compare those earlier games to the latest offering I can look at DUNE from the perspective of a long-time grognard.
Read the rules…it’s a wargame
The Introduction in the rulebook for DUNE: War for Arrakis describes winning the game with these words: “Players achieve victory by making the best strategic choices, always poised between the need to defend their own settlements and attack those of the enemy, to take control of territory and limit the resources of the adversary” (Rulebook, p. 7).
Note the key words “defend” and “attack” and the phrases “take control of territory” and “limit the resources.” In particular, the phrase “always poised” implies to me that the “need to defend their own settlements and attack those of the enemy” is the default game state. Those words and phrases very much make DUNE: War for Arrakis sound like a straight-up area control combat boardgame wargame to me.
Indeed, for the Harkonnen player, the path to victory is very Conan-like: “To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to [censored because this is a family-friendly blog]!” As the Overview in the rulebook states:
The Harkonnens start the game controlling the main populated areas of Arrakis and must launch seek and destroy missions against the shelters of the Fremen rebels (their Sietches), at the same time devoting resources to harvesting as much spice as possible. The quantity of spice they produce determines the quality of the relations with the great powers of the Imperium (the Spacing Guild, Landsraad, and CHOAM). The Emperor (House Corrino) secretly supports the Harkonnens, providing additional military options and his soldier-fanatics, the Sardaukar.
Rulebook, p. 7
Again, take note of the key phrases: “controlling the main populated areas,” “seek and destroy,” “additional military options,” and “soldier-fanatics.” Those all make the Harkonnen sound very military-focused. Those same words seemingly imply a strategy; in this case the phrase “seek and destroy” seems paramount for ensuring a Harkonnen win.
Opposing the Harkonnen is House Atreides. The Overview tells us about them too:
The Atreides fight against the harsh rule of the Harkonnens. Decimated by the initial attack, the surviving Atreides become a symbol of pride and resistance, and oppose the invaders with ruthless guerrilla warfare in a tight alliance with the local population of Fremen. By completing missions and using their knowledge of the devastating natural forces of Arrakis, the Atreides and Fremen may succeed in fulfilling ancient prophesies. At that point, there will be no enemy capable of resisting them…
Rulebook, p. 7
Yet again there are more military (dare I say “wargaming”) words and phrases in there like, “oppose the invaders,” “ruthless guerrilla warfare,” and “no enemy capable of resisting them.” As I read on in the rules for DUNE: War for Arrakis I think I am like many others who read “guerrilla warfare” and started imagining hit and run raids or other strategies weaker armies use to oppose stronger forces. Even the marketing material in the Kickstarter built on that “Desert War” theme.
Battle royale
As one would expect in a wargame there are rules for combat and DUNE: War for Arrakis delivers those rules in a section simply called “Battles.”
Legions can be composed of units (Regular, Elite, and Special Elite) and leaders. Units in DUNE are rather generic; the primary differences are the unique ability of Special Elite Units and in taking casualties.
- “The presence of Special Elite Units lowers the opponent’s defenses. Immediately before removing casualties, each Sardaukar [Harkonnen Special Elite] or Fedaykin [Atreides Special Elite] cancels 1 [SHIELD] result from the Opponent’s Combat roll” (Rulebook, p. 25).
- “REMOVE CASUALTIES: Both players, starting with the attacker, proceed to remove casualties based on the number of Hits their Legion suffered. For each Hit scored by the opponent, the player must choose one of the following possibilities:
- Remove 1 Regular Unit.
- Replace 1 Elite Unit (Special or not) with 1 Regular Unit.
- Remove 1 Leader (Generic or Named).” (Rulebook, p. 26)
All leaders DUNE, whether Generic or Named (like “Paul Atreides”), possess a Combat ability that can be used in battle (Rulebook, p. 25).
When finishing the combat rules for DUNE: War for Arrakis the player will be on page 27 of 33 for the core game—or through roughly 80% of the rules. Rules that up to this point make DUNE sound (and play) very much like a wargame. Speaking for myself, after reading most of the rulebook my mental framing of the game—as a wargame—was pretty set by this point.
The scoring condition for the Harkonnen in DUNE: War for Arrakis is very simple and reinforces the wargame feel (and my mental framing) of the game. “To win the game, the Harkonnen must accumulate 10 Supremacy Points” (Rulebook, p. 7). Supremacy Points are gained through the destruction of Freman Sietch; “When a Sietch is destroyed, the Harkonnen player immediately gains a number of Supremacy points equal to the Sietch rank” (Rulebook, p. 27). The Harkonnen race for supremacy fits well with my mental vision of how I must play DUNE: War for Arrakis—like a straight-up combat wargame.
Supremacy versus Prescience
Like the Harkonnen player, in DUNE: War for Arrakis the Atreides player has a 10-spot track on their side of the board mirroring the Harkonnen Supremacy Track. Unlike the Harkonnen player, however, the Atreides player does not accumulate points on this track in the same strict combat-oriented manner. Instead, the Atredies player uses their track for Prescience scoring.
prescience (noun)
Merriam-Webster Dictionary
pre·science ˈpre-sh(ē-)ən(t)s
: foreknowledge of events:
a: divine omniscience
b: human anticipation of the course of events : FORESIGHT
Prescience gets its own section of the DUNE: War for Arrakis rulebook (roughly 10% of the total rules) to explain the different scoring methodology for the Atredies player. The rule begins with a highly narrative telling; “The fulfillment of the prophesies about Paul Atredies, the awakening of Freman consciousness against the oppressors, and the symbiosis with the planet of Arrakis are all represented by the Prescience track” (Rulebook, p. 27).
That passage is full of theme, but how is that theme reflected in game play? In other words, what does the Atreides player in DUNE: War for Arrakis need to mechanically do in the game to win? The answer is supposed to be in the Prescience rule which specifies:
The aim of the Atredies player is to reach (or exceed) a precise score with each of the 3 Prescience markers, as indicated on their Secret Objective card drawn at the beginning of the game. If, during the End of Round phase (see page 16), the player succeeds in doing so, they win.
Rulebook, p. 27
The Prescience rule in DUNE: War for Arrakis goes on to describe—again in a highly narrative manner—the three markers colored green, orange, and red:
- “The Kwisatz Haderach marker (green), represents the progressive awareness of Paul Atredies to be the Kwisatz Haderach, the chosen one, whose powers go beyond space and time.”
- “The Sand Dwellers marker (orange), represents the mystical union between the Freman and their planet, Arrakis.”
- “The Jihad marker (red), represents the holy war of the people of Arrakis to drive off the cruel invaders.” (Rulebook, p. 27)
The rulebook then explains how, mechanically, the Prescience markers advance on the track in the rules of DUNE:
- “The Atreides player claims a Prescience card: Advance the markers indicated on the card by the number written on it.”
- “An Atreides Legion takes an Ecological Testing Station: Advance 1 step the Prescience marker whose symbol is shown on the back [of] the station’s token.”
- “A Harkonnen Settlement is destroyed: All Prescience markers advance a number of steps based on the rank of the destroyed Settlement: 3 for Arrakeen, 2 for Carthag, 1 for a Pyon Village.” (Rulebook, p. 28)
Note that only one of the three methods of moving a Prescience marker in DUNE is by combat. Granted, taking an Ecological Testing Station is a form of “take control of territory” but given that each marker only grants a single Prescience point (see Rulebook, p. 10) this is hardly a robust path to victory. No, the primary path to victory for the Atreides player is to “claim a card”:
- “To claim a card with a requirement, the Atreides player must perform what is described, regardless of whether the card is claimed during the Action Resolution phase or during the End of Round phase (for example, Families Flee to the Palmaries of the South).”
- “To claim a card specifying a number of conditions, the Atreides player must verify if they apply to the current gameplay circumstances (for example, The Desert War).” (Rulebook, p. 28).
Here again, the marketing of DUNE: War for Arrakis stands somewhat in contrast with the actual rules. Look again at the “Paths to Victory” image above. For the Atreides player the emphasis is on combat over feats: “While conquering cities and uncovering Ecological Stations gets you closer to victory, various Prescience cards boost advancement along different paths by accomplishing specific feats.” Words matter, and to simply say “boost advancement” is a rather poor way substitute for saying “accumulate victory points.”
Solo retrospective
In order to better learn the game DUNE: War for Arrakis before rolling it out on a family game night, I decided to set up the game and play through the Mahdi Solo Mode (Rulebook, pp. 37-42). I followed the Setup rules found on pages 14 and 15 of the rulebook. I paid careful attention to the modified Game Round Sequence (Draw 2 Prescience cards vice 3, use of Tactical Cards, Reinforcement Decks) the priority order for placing vehicles, Harkonnen Actions/Movement/Combat Criteria, etc. I especially focused on the Special Rules (p. 42) with particular attention to Harkonnen Deployment Tokens and “Revealing a Sietch or a Deployment Token” for the Atreides player…
…and I lost spectacularly.
In retrospect, the rulebook tried to warn me. In the End of Round rules it clearly states: “Advance the Supremacy marker by 1 step. The Harkonnen may win the game by doing nothing, so you better start collecting Prescience points [my emphasis]…” (Rulebook, p. 39).
Mechanically, the rules for DUNE: War for Arrakis clearly spelled out how to draw my Secret Objective card (see step 14 of Setup on page 14). The Solo Mode rules clearly laid out the exception in from the usual rules in drawing two Prescience cards instead of three (p. 37).
For my solo game my Secret Objective card was the following:
On turn 1, the two Prescience cards I drew are shown below:
Note that neither of the two DUNE: War for Arrakis Prescience cards shown in my solo play called for taking military actions. But DUNE is a wargame where victory in combat determines the winner, right? For the Harkonnen player the answer is a resounding “Yes!” For the Atreides player the true answer required me to undertake a careful reevaluation of theme and game mechanisms.
For my first play of DUNE: War for Arrakis I did what I usually do with cards in boardgames or wargames: I shuffled them according to the rules and placed them in face down decks. Without looking at the Prescience cards ahead of time I relied on the rules as I had framed to form a strategy built around deploying Atreides Legions to the board to defend my homes because, after all, that is what the narrative told me. When I turned up my first draw of Prescience cards, however, my mental model struggled. The “Families Flee..” card was particularly challenging to my mental game model because it called for doing exactly the opposite of what I imagined needed to be done. Why would I remove a deployment token, especially when the rules emphasize that the number of deployment tokens is limited? To wit, “Once revealed, Deployment tokens of any type are removed from the game. If the supply of Atreides Deployment tokens runs out, the Atreides player can no longer deploy tokens on the board” (Rulebook, p. 12).
Prescience challenge
My first play of DUNE: War for Arrakis brought to my attention the issue of metagaming knowledge. Specifically, does “knowing” the cards in boardgames/wargames artificially influence gameplay, potentially in a negative manner.
In the RockyMountainNavy household, for many years one of the favorite games for family game night was (is?) Enemies of Rome (Worthington Publishing, 2017). In the game, “A deck of 55 cards allows players to maneuver their forces, as well as the many enemies of Rome, while they try to become the one true Caesar” (BGG description). We played Enemies of Rome so much that RMN the Younger knew all the cards. That metagame knowledge (foresight? prescience?) in turn influenced their game play strategy as they could anticipate cards.
Half a wargame
What I quickly discovered is that while DUNE: War for Arrakis may look like—and even all but call itself—a wargame the reality is that once you brush the sand off the design you discover a game where combat is really only the path to victory for one side; the other must rely on a different, in many ways even a less-confrontation but certainly more subtle strategy. Indeed, in DUNE I see a fundamental mis-marketing of the game that leads directly to a misunderstanding of the path to victory for one player that I feel are directly responsible for the many complaints of unbalanced play. The solution to the problem is, coincidentally, a need for player foresight that pairs well with the theme of DUNE but is lacking in the rulebook.
In hindsight, the main problem I see in DUNE: War for Arrakis is that the Prescience rules—as written—are simultaneously too narrative and too mechanical. While “awareness,” “mystical union,” and “holy war” thematically capture the sweeping epic story of DUNE, the mechanically-focused rules don’t explain the less combat-oriented mindset needed to grok what it really means in terms of Atreides player actions to “claim a card.” To use DUNE terminology, the rulebook failed to provide enough Prescience for my first play as the Atreides player.
The lack of clear Prescience rules in DUNE: War for Arrakis has a straightforward solution: rewrite the rules to make it clear that, while the Atreides player will have to fight to slow down the Harkonnen player, their military strategy must coexist (thrive?) alongside a need to conduct a form of ad-hoc planning to execute non-combat actions feats in response to the draw of Prescience cards.
The lack of prescience when playing DUNE: War for Arrakis is very likely to not last past the first or second play because the players, especially those playing the Atreides side, will almost certainly build up the prescience needed to understand—and be able to favorably manipulate—the rules. A very informal review of BGG forum posts anecdotally seems to indicate that early plays heavily favor the Harkonnen player but later plays can be more balanced. I credit that change to the (eventual) understanding of the Prescience rules. Alas, that understanding seems to come from hindsight after play, not foresight from theme and rules as written.
Feature image courtesy RMN
The opinions and views expressed in this blog are those of the author alone and are presented in a personal capacity. They do not necessarily represent the views of U.S. Navy or any other U.S. government Department, Agency, Office, or employer.
RockyMountainNavy.com © 2007-2024 by Ian B is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 
Rocky Mountain Navy Gamer 