Thursday, 30 July 2026

Bosworth - scenario building




I have put together a Battle of Bosworth 1485 scenario. It zooms in to the main part of the action and assumes that some fighting and manoeuvre has already occurred. It makes the decision to leave some formations out of the game and as a consequence is a tad kinder on smaller collections. 


The following is a discussion of why it looks like this, followed by an AAR of a first run out with it.


There are a few resources at the bottom of this post that link back to some posts that have already tackled the Bosworth subject and since they exist, I will not be covering some of that old ground here.


We are taking into account information that is post 2009, when the true location of the battlefield was identified. The scenario has been written within the terms and mechanisms of the 'Test of Resolve' rules, which I am presently favouring.


I should say that much of what I have put together accords with the Bosworth scenario that the Test of Resolve team have put in their own scenario.


In the main, I have been referencing three books; Osprey’s Bosworth 1485 - The Downfall of Richard III by Christopher Gravett (not his earlier Osprey book on the same subject), Helion’s Richard III and The Battle of Bosworth by Mike Ingram and Pen & Sword’s Bosworth - the Archaeology of the Battlefield by Richard Mackinder.


We are starting the scenario part way through the battle and so some assumptions are being made. The key aspects of the design choices are as follows;


Oxford (Lancastrian main body) and Norfolk (Yorkist main body) are already in mid clash. Their archers have done their arrow thing and have now run back to the rear of their melee troops to support the clash of the melee troops!


Effect - the start positions show the melee retinues already in contact. A die roll is made for every Oxford and Norfolk unit to assess their losses up to this point. There is an uplift on the Yorkist die roll of +1 because they had historically been getting the harder time of it. 


Northumberland (Yorkist rearward) has already started moving away from the battlefield without making any intervention on Richards behalf. He will not appear in the game.


Artillery (both sides) The guns are positioned outside of the zoomed in area that we have chosen to represent. They have already been in action as the armies approached each other, raking into the flanks of Oxford and Norfolk. They are in the main not mobile enough to reposition themselves within our time frame to find new targets that are not blocked by friends (Richard had an advantage in artillery, he could have sorely done with them being in a different position to counter the French threat). They will not become involved in the game.


Lord Stanley is assumed to stay out of it. He is generally judged as being a commander who hedged his bets on which side to join, but evidence suggests he has already given the nod to supporting Henry. Either way, he did not intervene, so he is not represented.


Sir. William Stanley was positioned closer to Henry. He mostly stayed out of the action, but in the last moments of battle, when Richard moved against Henry directly, he did send his men forward to assist Henry and it was likely his men that cut Richard down.


Effect - Sir William is off board, but once the Yorkist event card goes into the draw deck allowing Richard to directly charge Henry, then at the same moment, the Lancastrian event card will also be put into the deck that will allow up to two of Sir William’s melee retinues to attach themselves to Henry. The consequences are then hostage to the card sequence of play as to whether Richard can reach Henry and kill him before Henry becomes reinforced and it gets harder to do that.


It appears that the French contingent (includes Scots) that Henry brought with him when he landed in Wales, has not been given the recognition in Tudor accounts that they deserve, feeding into a narrative that they were simply part of Oxfords line. Ingram elevates their involvement as being a fully independent battle that skilfully appeared on the Lancastrian left flank, surprising Richard and threatening to roll up Norfolks battle. Ingram goes on to give the French mercenaries the status of being the Lancastrian vanguard (not Oxford).


This is likely based around the source of Jean Molinet, who wrote about the battle five years later in 1490. He was a continental and a professional historian. He was not present at the battle, but took eye witness accounts from the soldiers returning to the continent. As a source, he might be valued as offering a counter to the Tudor propaganda machine and so I have chosen to give some weight to his account, accordingly the French and Scottish contingents have a significant role.





Effect - the French threat is very real and Richard will likely become compelled to use his own battle to deal with the French attack, rather than perhaps being free to choose to move forward and support Norfolk to stand against Oxford. Again we have a race, can Richard re-orientate and engage the French before they advance on Norfolk, tipping him over the edge.


Note - since playing the scenario, I have reduced Richard’s foot melee retinues from 3 to 2 as he actually had limited numbers of foot with him. This will add a bit more tension for the Yorkists, so that if things start getting tight, they will increasingly hope to be able to charge Henry directly, elevating the importance of that event.


Ingram and Gravett disagree on the orientation of the two armies, however they both agree that the marsh was on Oxford’s right and so the effect is that Oxford’s frontage is restricted in length, but so is the Yorkist army where it contacts the Lancastrians and the effect of that is that Richard will not be able to bring his overwhelming numbers to bear early in the fighting. Gravett has Northumberland on Richard's far left. Ingram has him located behind Richard, so that the Yorkist are deployed in depth. Neither matters as we have discounted Northumberland from the battle. The road doesn’t matter and it is being left out, so in effect, orientation is not a thing for us to worry about today.


The cavalry Swan Song - Richard charges Henry with a couple of hundred mounted household (classed knights or superior in the rules). This was due to some desperation on Richard’s part, a sort of do or die moment. I have called the scenario ‘This day I will die as a king or win’, these words uttered to the foreign leader Salazar, who urged Richard to escape. So we have this important element that Richard is determined to see this through, yet we must also acknowledge that the charge may not have been possible if the gap had not existed. However, I wanted to help the possibility of this important moment occurring (like the official Test of Resolve scenario does).


Effect - Once Richard's army loses two retinues, the Yorkist charge event card is placed in the card discard pile, at the same time, the Lancastrians place their Sir. William event card in the discard pile. Next turn onwards, the order that the shuffled cards are drawn may bring about the  famous charge and the reinforcing of Henry by Sir. William’s men running to his aid, in either order, or perhaps not at all. [note to those not familiar with the system, there are two End of Turn cards, when the second is drawn, all the cards are re-shuffled into a new draw deck …. So anything can happen and in any order. Can Richard deal with Henry before Sir. William’s men intervene!


Winning - obviously if there is only one survivor in the Richard / Henry exchange, then the survivor wins, the crown will be upon their head. Regardless of that, a game also ends immediately that a side loses six units. 


This supposes that if the Yorkists lose that many units, it will mean a collapse of their army (Northumberland has already gone), the Lancastrians will be too numerous and organised well enough so as to ensure that Henry’s physical position is safe, plus both Lord Stanley and Sir. William Stanley will likely have shown their hand in favour of Henry, further putting the remnants of the Yorkist army at risk. Richard will have been out-manoeuvred, but will still be king …. So who knows what would  happen then!


All of this has been taken into account in version 1.2 of the scenario. I have made this available in my Google Drive, link below in the Resource section.


Our refight - (using V1.1 before the latest update) 

 

At start, casualties at set-up are assessed. Oxford suffers 4, Norfolk suffer 5.





Above - Oxford and Norfolk engage, with archers supporting. The French and Scots are off photo, to the left (flank).


In response to the danger posed by the French, Richard begins to send his infantry melee retinues across to deal with them. The French crossbow are already hitting the Yorkist archers in the rear of Norfolks line.





Above - Richard's Billmen advance towards the French and Scots, having already driven their hand gunners in.


In the Oxford / Norfolk engagement, fighting is intense and two out of Oxford’s four melee retinues rout!


The first of Richard’s melee companies reach the French handgunners who flee to the rear of their billmen for safety.


Two of Richard’s Billmen companies reach the French Billmen. Richard’s third company is following, it should surely move against the French crossbow …. but, I have one of those delightful moments in a game, as to being vexed about what to do for the best, since Norfolk is also desperate for support. 


After pondering, Norfolk gets the vote! Fortunately for Richard, the fight against the French billmen is going very well and they are routed. For now, the French must forget about their flank attack against Norfolk, they are fighting to fend off Richard’s melee retinues.


The Oxford / Norfolk engagement is now getting to a critical point, both sides are very brittle, but it is Norfolk who has the fewest Battle Morale Points remaining - he cannot afford further loss!





Above - Richard from his commanding position is looking for Henry's banner!


There is tension in the battle as Richard sends out light cavalry to pinpoint Henry’s position ( this is a notional sending out of scouts, he is just desperately hoping his event card is drawn :-) )





In the French position, their pikemen get to drop on Richard’s billmen by striking them in the flank …. but (in the most unlucky of die rolls) the pikemen are repulsed! It is a moment that may come to define the battle.


And then it happens …. Norfolk takes a loss that crashes his Battle Morale, he goes on to fail his Test of Resolve and his battle disperses … all those units go to the ‘dead pile’ and the Yorkists have now lost at least ‘six units’, so the Yorkists immediately lose the game.


Sadly, we didn’t get to see a Richard on Henry fight, I checked the card draw deck and both of those event cards just happened to be  at the very bottom part of the draw pile, they could so easily have been near the top (or split, one at the top and one at the bottom) and Richard may have slain Henry and got rid of his rival, winning the game, or Richard himself may well have died, but such is the way of these things, we play for the fascination that uncertainty brings.





Above - this is what the Richard / Henry fight might have looked like.


So what does that mean now? We can assume that the Yorkist army is in rout, but the Yorkist king is still alive and has reluctantly escaped.


We will certainly need to fight another battle somewhere in the country. A sort of Bosworth II, perhaps the Random Battle Generator from the ToR rules could help with that. 


In this subsequent fight, more Lords may come to Henry’s cause, certainly the Stanleys will be at his side in the next fight. What of Northumberland? Historically, Henry imprisoned Northumberland for a short time, suggesting that Lord Percy had not made any agreement prior to battle to help Henry, so perhaps he will still fight for Richard and perhaps he might even have his own event card that could have him switch sides (or not) at the next battle, who knows! 


Richard’s authority is now deeply harmed, it is in the interest of all the Lords to now declare their ‘loyalty’ to someone, because whoever wins the next battle is going to remember who was loyal to whom …. will it be York or Lancaster!


I enjoy all of my gaming, but this has been a particularly enjoyable couple of hours of fun. The rules worked well and the situation seems to have enough nuance in it, that both sides have a fair chance, with good narrative falling from play.


It will get another playing and the scenario might get a bit more tweaking. The first version has nine items of red pen marked upon it already, so hopefully V1.2 will get us closer to 22nd August 1485. We shall see.


Resources;


A download of the scenario PDF V1.2  LINK


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uBnpCDD_yfYNhXfW-TSafVsLweypv04W/view?usp=share_link



A previous post that discusses two different position proposals of the two armies. LINK


https://battlefieldswarriors.blogspot.com/2021/05/bosworth-1485-percy-attacks.html


A recent post that looks at the Christopher Gravell’s take on the new evidence. LINK


https://battlefieldswarriors.blogspot.com/2026/07/bosworth-reading-and-scenario-design.html


My other bit of webspace ‘COMMANDERS’ that is more snippet based than here and gets updated more regularly. LINK  


https://commanders.simdif.com/dear_diary.html


35 comments:

  1. Very interesting, Norm. Do you think that picking up the battle at this particular moment removes some interesting decision making from players as they jockey for position before closing upon the enemy? Some of the most interesting decisions here are who will commit, to whom, and at what point in battle. Here, Richard lives to fight another day. Good stuff!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Jon, In some ways, the short answer is yes. In terms of which way could this go, this is perhaps the most dynamic of the Wars of the Roses battle and certainly one that you can give the players all that treachery fun stuff ..... but, this scenario cuts to the chase!

    I have had one previous proper attempt at doing Bosworth, years ago, and on the events table, there was a slim chance of Northumberland going over to Tudor. I now believe this to be a highly unlikely outcome and his simple withdrawal from battle the most likely event, with Henry being the benefactor of that act.

    If one allowed fate to have both Stanleys and Northumberland join Henry, you don't have a game, the Yorkists will be overwhelmed.

    What to do with the Stanleys? I have seen scenarios where they have separately set up on opposite sides of the table and / or where both can attack Richard. But the Stanley story is that they appear reluctant in the important opening moves and the accounts seem to suggest that only Sir William commits and then only in the closing moments of battle - so a big, loads of treachery fun early in the game actually seems quite unhistorical.

    Rather, this scenario tells the story of the French / Scots and injects the emotional stress of a desperate Richard seeking out Henry as 'a decider' and a desperate Henry, frustrated at the Stanleys not physically / meaningfully showing their support.

    The centre, Oxford Vs Norfolk is just a big messy bash-up, with Oxford getting the upper hand.

    I haven't even needed to show the marsh because the setting up of Oxford / Norfolk has been restricted by its effect and Richard cannot access Henry except via an Event Card (Gap) or if Oxford loses the centre and by implication access is easier.

    In fact, when I played, I was on a 6' table and used 4', with Henry's position being sort of notional / virtual, together with my dice trays, rules etc being placed in that same area. So I was not envisioning that part of the table being used and perhaps my schematic plan should reflect that.

    The opportunities of a losing, but surviving Richard deserves further exploration and I think I will do that, I've not seen it done before.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent, Norm. Your starting point follows your well-known method of looking at a slice of the action and produced an engaging game. I have refought Bosworth only a single time and the entire battle was considered. While treachery was a possibility, it maintained a low probability. I agree that Northumberland’s “treachery” would most likely be to simply remain on the sidelines or slow play his engagement for Richard. Good stuff, Norm, and a compelling reason why refighting historical battles offers much interest to see what might have been. Looking forward to your next iteration.

      As an aside, you mention that the French fielded both hand gunners and crossbow. Were both troop types present on the field?

      Delete
    2. Scenarios seem to go for hand gunners only, but (I can't remember where I saw it), but crossbows are indicated and it still was a weapon of French and continental troops ..... plus I have just painted some :-)

      I think anyone putting a scenario together could go with whatever their collection offers up. Interestingly, the official Test of resolve scenario for the French offers up Pike, Retinue and Handgun, but they offer an alternative of Retinue, Retinue and archer, with archer presumably meaning X-Bow.

      Delete
  3. Starting the battle halfway through is a very interesting approach and rather clever. As you say, if going for a more big picture view, the outcome is almost entirely dependent on which way the various factions jump. Decades ago I was fortunate enough to go on a school trip to Bosworth, it is a bit disappointing to realise the battle was actually somewhere completely different!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Martin, I can't help but agree about the disappointment of the battlefield being somewhere else. I was a frequent visitor of the Battlefield Centre in late 80's and early 90's and happily trod the battlefield trail and went to two of the re-enactments.

      A small part of me typically holds back on re-imagining battles and certainly on researching this, I actually fancy going back and doing a nostalgia scenario for the Ambion Hill battlefield.

      Delete
  4. Hi Norm,

    Cracking write-up! I really like how you've handled the card deck sequence to build tension for Richard’s charge versus Sir William’s intervention—it captures that high-stakes race against time brilliantly. Thanks for sharing version 1.2 in your drive, too!

    Cheers, Andy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Andy, the cards are a ready fit for this sort of thing at is something that the official Test of Resolve Bosworth scenario does - they have a 'gap' rule which is the perfect fit (and probably inspired by) for Richard finding a gap to get to Henry.

      I'm hoping that V1.2 is stable enough that it can be printed off with some confidence.

      Delete
  5. That seemed to give you plenty of friction and unexpected turns Norm, so mission accomplished I would say - looking forward to seeing the refight!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Keith, I really enjoyed the game, but then I am in a honeymoon period with the ToR rules. I got so hooked up on developing the Henry / Richard probability that having both leaders alive at the end of the game took me a bit by surprise as the scenario had not really been directing itself at that - so now that it has happened and the light has turned on! I will be looking for a suitable narrative for the second battle - who knows, even Piggy Longton might get a mention after a long absence.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Cracking stuff Norm, the rules appear to be just right for the period.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi Phil, yes, I am very much enjoying the rules ..... have just ordered some Kerns that will open the way to Stoke Field and Mortimers Cross.

    ReplyDelete
  9. A very interesting read Norm, I must admit I like the idea of the scenario you have created and the way you gamed that specific period of the battle, good stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hi Donnie, taking some time out to dig into the history has brought its own pleasures.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Nice work Norm you out a lot of thought into this and it shows you can always cut a battle down to the collection available 👍

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi Matt, I find that a slice of a bigger action quickly develops its own character.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thanks Michal, time for a return visit to the Battlefield Centre I think.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I get Access Denied when I try and download the scenario

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Mike, that's odd, I can reach your blog, so I am assuming that you are signed into Google. I will check my file / drive settings.

      Delete
    2. Mike I have changed a setting on the Google Drive, which may help.

      Delete
    3. Hmm. Access Denied for me too.

      Delete
    4. Thanks Jonathan - this was almost a two coffee job :-) but anyway all should be good now, please let me know if the link is still a fail.

      Delete
    5. That worked. You should put your name on the document so that you get credit for this work if it is widely distributed.

      Delete
  15. Excellent looking game and scenario Norm. A very interesting and clever way to start as well. While there could of been more treachery I think sticking to what you have done is a great way of focusing on the parts of the battle that count, rather than having widely swinging impacts from various treachery dice rolls that may make the scenario very one sided.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hi Ben, the Wars of the Roses is known for its treachery, but it is easy to over cook it in game systems and have it happening too often. Bosworth though, clearly does have treachery.

    I should really make notes when doing research, but 'somewhere' I came across a line of text in which Richard states something like it is the French who have caused the ruin, another thing to push the focus there and it may be that it was the French manoeuvre that was the last straw for Northumberland, who saw the situation as lost.

    I am going to play the systems official scenario as it looks a ton of fun and has a some goodly uncertainty.

    My take has given me two sides of the same coin :-)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Love your way of looking at things Norm.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hi Aaron, I am having a lot of fun with this ……. And I think what is coming next will please you😀

    ReplyDelete
  19. A bit late to the party re: commenting due to real life stuff, but I've read this several times and there is a lot to enjoy here Norm:)! The tweaks to make it work for the ToR rules look good and once the holiday season is out of the way, I might even get to give this a go using my wooden blocks. BTW I see that at Colours in September they are doing a 28mm WotR battle. No idea on the rules though but look forward to seeing it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Hi Steve, I am really enjoying the ToR system and have just ordered the third scenario book, which of course has the advantage of smaller battles. I would love to do colours one year.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Excellent scenario and write up, I agree the degree of treachery is always difficult to guage in the wotrs, looking forward to Bosworth II, this time its personal,again?
    Best Iain

    ReplyDelete
  22. Hi Iain, Bosworth II is ‘evolving’, wonder where it end up …. Perhaps the Tower for someone!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hi,
    Seem I have to use my blogger I.D. to be able to post.
    Hugely enjoyable read which I did over breakfast yesterday. Fascinating number if possibilities and I particularly liked the logical weighing of evidence and details(along with the little touch of influence from your stock of figures). The update on your Commanders site adds to the enticing prospects of what might be contained in the developing “alternative” history thread. Look forward to more probing and the possibilty of another outing to Piggy Longton!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hi Mike, I have had to change blog settings so that visitors are not anonymous due to an anonymous spammer.

    The Commander post should also be up on the Battlefields & Warrior blog, but ongoing issues with blogger posting in a timely fashion leaves all blog posts subject to delay, I recently waited 28 hours for a published post to appear.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for visiting.