Verdict

Leaders is a satisfying chess-like that perhaps plays things too safe. Its simplicity is approachable, but the limited strategy makes this unlikely to unseat chess from its ancient throne, even with the introduction of fresh drafting mechanics.

Pros

Approachable strategy
Moreish gameplay

Cons

Too short
Limited decision points

Leaders is a board game that asks the question: "what if chess, but with drafting?" It's not a question I've ever asked during a chess game, but publisher Studio H was itching to answer.

Leaders' (barely existent) theme describes two kingdoms that live in perpetual peace. They never go to war, but they do regularly arrange non-violent duels to help maintain their friendly relations. This seems like a strange setting for a chess-like game given the obvious implications of violence, but maybe it's not as odd as it first appears. Experts have previously claimed chess represents a just world of bloodless wars.

No pieces of your army are 'taken' in Leaders' head-to-head; instead, the victor is the team who can back their opponent's leader into a corner. Mechanically, this means you must place two of your pieces next to a leader piece to win. Alternatively, you win if the enemy leader is surrounded, with no space left to move into.

Each player starts with a leader, but they can only draft a new character at the end of each turn. They also only get four additional recruits total, so picking the right friends is crucial.

Every character offers a unique power or method of movement. If you're playing the game's base mode, you'll only have three options to draft from, so your enhancements are almost entirely down to luck.

In the (vastly superior) 'extreme' mode, you'll have the entire deck of character cards to pick from. This turns Leaders into an interesting puzzle, where your team picks combat the enemy's unique strengths or exploits their weak points.

Leaders' extreme mode has a dramatic name, but it's suitable for any child familiar with board games. The game is incredibly simple, with limited decision points to consider.

It's swift, too. Battles often come to a sudden, somewhat anticlimactic halt after just 10 minutes of play. With experience, you can stretch the play time to half an hour or so, but that's still the strategy board game equivalent of a flying visit.

Leaders actually manages to be too respectful of your time. The gameplay loop is moreish in a distinctly chess-flavored way, and I found myself wishing for longer games. There's joy in puzzling your opponents' next move and plotting your own charge forward. I was eager to experiment with different character combinations to discover optimal plays.

There's joy to be found in Leaders, but I'm not so sure about staying in power. Board games that try to innovate on chess face a simple but insurmountable problem: they're not chess. Chess is a board game that's outlived empires. Chess is older than the country of France, and is possibly more popular.

When a millennia-year-old board game is still so widely played, you start asking questions of your own. Questions like: "should I really buy this instead of a chess board?"

The answer, in my eyes, is an unsatisfying 'maybe'. I can see Leaders appealing to young or less confident strategists, who might not feel ready for the complexity of chess. It would also make a great filler game for chess superfans who want a light palette cleanser between back-to-back matches.

There's another audience, perhaps: anyone who prefers Leaders' quirky cartoon combatants over chess' cold, abstract wooden pieces. Leaders is a beautiful game, with a gilded battlefield and bright colors. Chess looks dull in comparison.

Looks, however, can be deceiving. I haven't quite worn out my review copy yet, but I can see myself one day tiring of the simplicity of Leaders. Chess, though, will still be popular when my entire bloodline is dead.

Want to talk more about the best board games? We want to hear your hot takes in the Wargamer Discord.