Design Center
Small Wars has a direct objective to be a community driven Tabletop Wargame system. It is our goal to provide players with as much resources as possible to allow players to fully customise the game and become invested as co-contributors. Through players engagement we hope to bring in new ideas and create a tabletop game system like no other.
Design Phylisophy articles
Here you will find some of the games mechanical and philosophical thinkings. Understanding how and why Small Wars was built will help you create your own rules and extentions that can further expand the game.
Player designs
When creating new abilities or unit types, a key design philosophy in Small Wars is to ask: How can I make this unit or ability feel tactically different? It's easy to fall back on simple numerical bonuses—higher attack dice, better defense—but while these can certainly be effective, they don’t always result in engaging or memorable gameplay. Instead of offering a clear statistical advantage, aim to create something that changes how a unit functions on the battlefield. A strong example of this is the implementation of Warbeasts. Representing wild, animalistic creatures, Warbeasts must move their full movement distance whenever they move. This limitation prevents them from stopping short in cover or maneuvering with subtlety, making them more difficult to control. However, they compensate for this with access to unique abilities not available to standard infantry or cavalry, and they cost slightly fewer points to build. The result is a unit that feels fundamentally different to use, encouraging a distinct approach to positioning and risk-taking. This kind of design thinking—focused on tactical variety rather than raw stat boosts—leads to a more dynamic and rewarding game. Players creating custom rules or units are encouraged to prioritize variety in playstyle over numerical superiority. In fact, it can be valuable to design a unit that doesn't appear especially strong on paper. An unusual or unconventional unit might present a unique problem or opportunity on the battlefield—one that inspires new tactics, challenges assumptions, or even gives rise to entirely new game modes.
Overwhelming Bonuses
Design Rationale: Limiting the Overwhelming Bonus Close Combat The Overwhelming Bonus in Small Wars is intended to represent the cumulative pressure and disorientation a defender experiences when engaged by multiple attackers in close quarters. By limiting this bonus to melee combat only, the rule reinforces the tactical weight of hand-to-hand fighting, where sustained physical pressure and direct engagement create true battlefield momentum. Importantly, permitting ranged attacks to grant overwhelming bonuses would introduce a risk of alpha strike abuse—where coordinated volleys from multiple ranged units could artificially inflate bonuses and allow melee units to finish enemies with overwhelming power before meaningful counterplay is possible. Ranged units, while valuable for softening targets and disrupting formations, do not pose the same immediate threat once melee has begun. Additionally, since ranged attacks cannot be made against enemies engaged in close combat, allowing them to contribute to Overwhelming would create timing inconsistencies and risk undermining the role of frontline combatants. This restriction ensures clear, intuitive gameplay and preserves the distinct tactical identities of ranged and melee units.
Defence Vs attack
So which is better? In Small Wars, combat rolls between attackers and defenders follow a core rule: ties—where both players roll the same number—are awarded to the defender. This principle is fundamental to the design of the game and has important implications for army building and tactical decisions. Because of this tie-break rule, armor is inherently more valuable than attack when it comes to rolling dice. This is reflected in the point cost system—assigning better armor to a unit is more expensive than assigning higher attack, players can therefore field more light armoured units vs heavy armoured units for the same relative cost. But even if ties were rerolled instead of awarded to the defender, armor would still remain the more strategically important stat if not carefully accomodated for in the games design. Armor Sets the Bar The attacker must exceed the defender’s roll in order to succeed. The higher the defender’s die, the higher the minimum result the attacker needs to achieve. Even if ties were neutralized by rerolling, this fundamental threshold remains. A better defense die always raises the bar, making it harder for the attacker to break through. Beating the Defender Is Statistically Tougher When both players roll the same type of die—say, a D8—the outcome is nearly balanced. The attacker wins about 44% of the time, loses 44%, and ties occur around 12%, leading to rerolls. Even in this “equal” scenario, the attacker doesn’t have the edge. As the defender’s die increases in size, the attacker's chance of success diminishes quickly. If a D6 attacker is facing a D10 defender, the attack only succeeds about 21% of the time, with 63% losses and 16% ties. The larger the defender’s die, the smaller the attacker's window of opportunity becomes. This statistical tilt is what preserves the advantage of armor, even when ties don’t automatically favor the defender. Failed Attacks Preserve Board Control Small Wars is an attritional game, where keeping units alive is often more valuable than eliminating enemies. Every failed attack means a unit survives to act in the next round—potentially securing objectives, holding positions, or supporting allies. High defense makes units more resilient and helps preserve precious action points (AP), while maintaining control of the battlefield. Though improving attack may result in more kills, it only pays off if the attack actually lands. Armor, in contrast, helps ensure that a unit remains active and effective throughout the game. So Should I Just Max Out Armor? In short, no. While armor has a significant impact on outcomes, Small Wars is balanced to prevent pure defense from dominating. Units with medium or heavy armor pay more AP for additional movement, making them less maneuverable and slower to reposition. Heavy armor also comes at a steep point cost, often higher than an equivalent boost in attack, making high-offense builds more cost-efficient in many cases. And the game includes tactical tools for overcoming tough defenders—rear attacks, overwhelming bonuses, and charge modifiers all give attackers ways to bypass or counteract the defender’s natural advantage. In the end, armor is crucial, but it’s just one piece of the puzzle. Success in Small Wars comes from smart army composition, positioning, and the ability to exploit battlefield conditions—not just stacking the best stats.