Brief (and probably incomplete) enumeration of

differences between Brit 1 and Brit 2:

I've run this by the Eurobrit denizens, but I've probably missed something. Of course, there are differences between the original editions (two by Gibsons, then one by Avalon Hill, and I'm not counting the WDS German-language edition). So this is a list of clear differences between the two versions.

Raiders and Settlers: There is no distinction between armies; raiding is an attribute of certain turns, not of certain armies. Hence raiders cannot hang out at sea for centuries. This was the designer's original intent.

Sides: there are changes in 3 and 5 player games, not in 4. Purple has become Yellow.

Board: in northern England the "four corners" has been eliminated. Cumbria connects with Lothian.

Pieces: there are different maximums for some nations

Points: there have been many tweaks in the point values (and all have been doubled to eliminate halves); most notable may be Romano-British interaction with English invaders, in points

General course of play: Boudicca's rebellion makes the Roman invasion and Belgae response very different.

Roman Roads make the Roman offense and defense quite different--the Romans are very maneuverable.

Changes in submission rules (points and Increase of Population) mean the Welsh are quite likely to submit.

Saxons can sometimes build Burhs (form of forts) to help them against later invaders.

Danish Svein Estrithson has been added to the endgame to make "Four Kings" instead of three

Generally: strategy is somewhat different, as Red, who were probably strongest in Brit 1, are much weaker in Brit 2. The Blue, who were probably weakest in Brit 1, may be strongest in Brit 2. This will evolve with time, of course.

"The idea for a game is not protected by copyright. The same is true of the name or title given to the game and of the method or methods for playing it.

Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form. Copyright protection does not extend to any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in the development, merchandising, or playing of a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles.

Some material prepared in connection with a game may be subject to copyright if it contains a sufficient amount of literary or pictorial expression. For example, the text matter describing the rules of the game, or the pictorial matter appearing on the gameboard or container, may be registrable."

[Emphasis added by L. Pulsipher]

Lew Pulsipher, designer, Britannia

I have included the Avalon Hill and Gibsons rules (DOC files) for Brit here.  Sorry for the lack of formatting.

I am not an arbiter/interpreter of the rules of either the Gibsons or Avalon Hill editions of Britannia. As you may know, publishers usually change games before they are published. The uncredited developer at Gibsons (Roger Heyworth) spent two years with the game, playtesting, changing the board slightly, changing the four player combinations slightly, and changing (or misunderstanding) the rules. By the time he was finished, I had "left" the gaming hobby, though I still corresponded with him occasionally.

By the time Avalon Hill picked up the game--I had offered it to them before Gibsons, but they told me games of that era didn't sell--I had no idea about Brit, never having read the published rules let alone play it. So though I received a letter from the AH editor asking some questions, I don't believe I replied, simply because I had no clue--it was not quite the game I'd done, though close, and not something I'd thought much about for three or four years.

I much prefer the Gibsons version, as it seems as though every time AH changed something, they guessed wrong. (I don't know that anyone can be blamed for this: the rules were not perfectly clear, something we can say about most games.) Perhaps it's a testament to the robustness of the system that it survived the alterations.

The one thing I really did not like about changes in the published versions was the differentiation between Settler armies and Raider armies, and this is likely to have been a misunderstanding of the original rules. As an historian I understood raiding to be a condition of the time, of the turn (hence I included no "Raider" markers).  Gibsons understood it to be a difference between types of armies. When I first watched a published game of Brit played, in late February 2004, someone left a Jute army at sea FOREVER, and when the players told me the rules allowed this I exclaimed "No Way!". Historically it makes no sense at all, of course, for raiders to hang out at sea long after their home country has disappeared. Brit Second Edition puts this back to the way it was intended, the way that makes sense historically--and just might be better for the gameplay, as well.

I have never actually played any of the originally-published editions of Britannia, though I've watched many games. You can see why I say I cannot be an arbiter of rules. If you want to play the old version of the game, I recommend the rules set put together for the World E-Mail Brit Championships (available in the Eurobrit Yahoo Group).  I prefer Brit Second.

Britannia was also published in a German-language edition by Welt Der Spiele.  I recently bought a copy (for over $70!), as I had never seen it, and I  have posted photos under "Published Games".  (I had to buy  the AH version as well, as I never received a free copy.  Sigh.)

I am glad to say that I have encountered only one person who prefers the old version to the new one, though I'm sure there must be more people in that category.