❌

Lese-Ansicht

GAMA faces fresh leadership shake-up as interim executive director, board vice president announce departures

Editor’s note: GAMA is one of the sponsors of the BoardGameWire newsletter and an advertiser on the site.

Hobby games trade organisation GAMA is facing another shake-up of its senior leadership, with interim executive director Melinda Prickett and board vice president Ross Thompson both announcing they are leaving their roles.

Prickett’s departure is a significant blow for GAMA, having emerged as a key figure in stabilising the organisation and its finances following the resignation of long-serving executive director John Stacy last year.

She joined GAMA as its first chief operating officer in September 2025, before stepping up to become interim executive director just eight months later – and was understood by BoardGameWire to be under strong consideration for the permanent position.

GAMA said its board of directors scheduled a “rapid response meeting” after being informed of Prickett’s departure on October 26, in an effort to determine its next steps – and would be taking immediate steps to appoint temporary leadership to oversee day-to-day operations.

Prickett is set to leave the organisation in less than two weeks, on November 6 – the day before GAMA’s much publicised Game Store Day, and amid the organisation’s preparations for moving its flagship GAMA Expo trade show to Baltimore for the first time.

Her departure leaves GAMA still hunting for a permanent executive director more than a year after its previous leader, John Stacy, announced his resignation.

A statement provided to BoardGameWire from GAMA board president Meredith Placko and secretary Tiffany Reid said, “Recruiting top talent for an executive position is a laborious process, and finding the right fit for our organization has taken longer than anticipated.

“As well, we have been forthright during public board meetings that the biggest reason for the delay was that we needed to get the foundations of the organization in better order, as we had been advised. To that end, Melinda Prickett did amazing work in bringing our financials from a planned deficit for the year, to a resounding success and raised more money than we anticipated for the organization.

“She also worked on creating stability amongst for the organization, the staff, and membership. Her work helped GAMA grow and succeed in the year she was with us.

“That being said, GAMA’s Board of Director’s had interviewed a strong candidate and we were in negotiations with them, but ultimately it did not work out. Because of that we will need to begin the search again.”

The pair said they could not comment on why Prickett’s notice period was so short, or whether she had been a formal candidate for the permanent executive director role.

They added that GAMA was currently working through a short list of people to bring in a new interim executive director “very soon”, adding that the goal was to “make sure GAMA Expo and Origins are a success, and the overall day to day running of the organization is met”.

The statement said, “To that end, the Board of Directors is currently seeking RFPs from firms that specialize in hiring executives in the trade association and member organization sectors. We feel it will be valuable to have the expertise of a company that knows how to recruit top talent in our search for an Executive Director.”

Placko and Reid said there was currently no estimate on when a permanent executive director would be appointed, but said an interim “to handle the most immediate needs of the organization should be decided upon very soon”.

Prickett’s exit comes after GAMA reported a significant improvement in its financial position during her tenure, with the organisation saying it had moved from a deficit budget at the beginning of 2026 to an expected surplus by the end of the year.

In a statement emailed to GAMA members, the board credited Prickett and treasurer Jamie Mathy with stabilising the organisation’s finances, as well as increasing member participation in events outside GAMA Expo and Origins Game Fair and developing new partnerships.

The statement said, “Though it is a bittersweet announcement to make, we are grateful for Melinda’s tireless work with our organization. She has been an incalculable force in leading GAMA during a transition period, setting us up for success in a way that is visibly reverberating through the organization.”

Prickett previously spent more than a decade at Girl Scouts of Ohio Heartland, including almost five years as chief operating officer, before being hired by GAMA last September to oversee its growing day-to-day operations.

Her appointment came just weeks before Stacy announced he was leaving the organisation after seven years as executive director, having just unveiled an ambitious 10-year plan aimed at expanding its international reach, membership and industry advocacy work.

GAMA appointed veteran leadership consultant Zaria Davis as interim executive director last November, initially saying it expected to find a permanent replacement for Stacy by spring 2026.

But Davis’s contract ended in March, with Prickett subsequently confirming to BoardGameWire that she had taken over as interim executive director on May 21.

The latest leadership departure follows a period of significant change for the organisation’s board.

Former president Nicole Brady lost her re-election bid in April to publisher representative Meredith Placko, who had previously served as GAMA vice president.

Ross Thompson, who was elected as vice president following Placko’s elevation to president, has now also resigned from the board after just over six months in the position.

Thompson only joined GAMA’s board in October last year, winning a special election to replace former secretary Monica Rasso, who had stepped down after five years as a director.

His resignation means the organisation will now hold its second special election for the same Media & Events board seat in little more than a year.

The latest departures also follow a turbulent period for GAMA’s board, which publicly apologised in March after some directors were accused of being rude and disrespectful towards members during a heated annual general meeting over proposed changes to the organisation’s bylaws.

GAMA did not give a reason for Thompson’s departure, but praised his work alongside Prickett in streamlining organisational processes and strengthening representation for its Media & Events members.

Thompson wrote on Facebook, “After being part of GAMA for many years, I was happy to lend my time, energy and experience to GAMA serving on the Board during the past year and a half. It was wonderful to be able to work with passionate people, identfying projects that needed support or upkeep, along with bringing new ideas to life.

“By far, GAMA is one of the best organizations to grow your business in the tabletop game industry. The connections made at events like GAMA Expo can revolutionize the way your work and that is truly special.

“There are things that need attention within GAMA, at the Board level and the Organization as a whole. I hope the membership, staff and current Board are able to continue to support GAMA’s mission and identify the obstacles it faces so the tabletop industry can continue to connect.

“I’ll still be around and am not going anywhere, but needed to end my time on the Board.”

The organisation said it would hold a special election to replace Thompson as Media & Events director, with nominations opening today and closing on November 8. Voting will take place between November 10 and 16, with the successful candidate serving until the next annual election in March 2027.

The changes come at a key time for the organisation’s professional trade show GAMA Expo, which has experienced rapid growth in recent years and is preparing to move from Louisville, Kentucky, to Baltimore, Maryland to accommodate rising demand.

This year’s event attracted a record 3,820 attendees, almost 12% above the previous year’s 3,425, continuing a run of growth that had put pressure on the show’s available exhibition and seminar space.

The first Baltimore edition is scheduled for April 25 to 29 next year. A statement provided to BoardGameWire from GAMA board president Meredith Placko and secretary Tiffany Reid said, “We are currently working to ensure there is no visible impact on the preparations for GAMA Expo.

“GAMA staff has been diligent in doing an excellent job to bring us to our new home in Baltimore. They continue with the work that needs to be done, including finalizing programming, working with vendors on booth placement, and everything that needs to happen to make GAMA Expo a success!

“Melinda has led an amazing team, and even in her absence, they will continue with the work that needs to be done.”

GAMA’s other major convention, Origins Game Fair, is set to return to Columbus in June. That show has struggled to recover its pre-pandemic attendance, with visitor numbers falling 2.5% this year to 18,700 – the show’s first annual decline since Covid-19, and still below its 2019 record of 20,642.

The event could face further pressure next year from the launch of PAX Unplugged Houston, a new tabletop gaming convention scheduled to take place just 12 days after Origins, which could potentially force publishers and exhibitors to choose between the two shows.

The post GAMA faces fresh leadership shake-up as interim executive director, board vice president announce departures first appeared on .

  •  

Exploding Kittens CEO Carly McGinnis takes charge of Asmodee’s global publishing operation, Jean-Sébastien de Barros exits

Asmodee has named Exploding Kittens CEO Carly McGinnis as head of its global publishing operation, putting an executive who helped transform a record-breaking Kickstarter game into an international brand in charge of a portfolio including Catan, Ticket to Ride, 7 Wonders and Dobble/Spot It.

McGinnis has been appointed Asmodee’s chief product officer and EVP publishing to replace Jean-Sébastien de Barros, who leaves the board game giant after almost a decade at the company. She will report directly to CEO Thomas Kœgler and join Asmodee’s executive management team.

The move puts McGinnis into a hugely influential position within the tabletop industry. Asmodee’s chief product officer has responsibility for its studios, franchise development, licensing and studio marketing, according to the organisational structure the company published ahead of its stock market listing last year.

McGinnis’ promotion – Asmodee bought a 55% majority stake in Exploding Kittens at the end of 2021, and exercised its option to purchase the remaining 45% minority stake last year – also comes at an interesting point for Asmodee’s publishing business.

The company has enjoyed huge revenue growth over the past year, but much of that has been powered by its distribution operation and the booming trading card game market rather than sales of its own board games.

Asmodee generated €1.68bn of net sales in the year to the end of March, up 23% – but more than 72% of that came from distributing games published by other companies. Sales of its own board games fell 5.8% over the same period.

That picture improved during April to June, when Asmodee’s own published board game sales returned to growth – albeit by just 1.8% year-on-year – compared with a 16% increase for board games overall.

A kitten on an exploding earth illustrating the Exploding Kittens card game

McGinnis brings to the role experience of helping build one of the board game industry’s most striking success stories of the past decade.

She joined Exploding Kittens in 2015, the year its first game raised almost $8.8m on Kickstarter, and was named COO at the start of 2019, president in January 2022 and CEO a year ago.

Last year Exploding Kittens revealed it had sold more than 60 million games as it marked a decade in business – with the company’s growth having extended well beyond the tabletop.

McGinnis helped develop Exploding Kittens’ partnership with Netflix, which expanded the property into mobile gaming and an animated series, and she was a co-executive producer on the latter.

Asmodee has been on its own push to get its best-known board games turned into films and television shows continues, with streaming giant Netflix picking up exclusive global rights for screen-based adaptations of the huge-selling Ticket to Ride series earlier this year.

That deal, which covers “scripted and unscripted projects” across film, television series, and other formats, came four months after Asmodee agreed a similar deal with Netflix for screen adaptations of its fellow bestseller Catan.

Netflix first teamed up with Asmodee in 2022, when the board game giant worked in the other direction to create a trio of titles based on Netflix shows Squid Game, Stranger Things and Ozark.

Those games have been followed by a Bridgerton-themed version of Love Letter, while Netflix brought Asmodee’s creations to screens for the first time in 2024 with French film Family Pack, which is based on the Werewolves of Miller’s Hollow card game.

McGinnis said of her new role, “I’ve spent the last decade building Exploding Kittens from one game into a global business, and I’m excited to bring what I’ve learned to the broader asmodee portfolio.

“We have incredible games, studios and people around the world, and I see a huge opportunity to build on those strengths, creating great new games while investing in the brands and franchises with the potential to grow for decades.”

Exploding Kittens has continued to stand out within Asmodee’s portfolio during a difficult period for parts of the US board game market.

Kœgler singled the company out last November as a particularly strong performer amid economic uncertainty caused by rising prices and US tariffs, adding that US consumers were favouring lower-priced games. Asmodee again highlighted strong Exploding Kittens growth while discussing a 23% year-on-year fall in its US quarterly sales earlier this year.

The promotion comes as Asmodee is making a wider push into social and party games – a category where Exploding Kittens has been one of its strongest brands.

In March the company agreed to pay up to €250m for French social and party game publisher ATM Gaming, with Kœgler saying the acquisition would combine ATM’s strength in Europe with Exploding Kittens’ strong position in the US. Asmodee has said it expects the social games category to grow at between 4% and 8% annually between 2025 and 2030, compared with about 4% for the broader board games market.

It also launched US party game studio Moodbox Games last year, a move de Barros described at the time as strengthening Asmodee’s presence in a category where Exploding Kittens and Zygomatic were already seeing strong success.

McGinnis’ promotion is the latest in a string of senior personnel changes at the top of Asmodee.

In April Asmodee co-founder Philippe Mouret stepped back from his leadership role, with Julia Marcelin taking responsibility for five studios – Days of Wonder, Repos Production, Libellud, Next Move and Space Cowboys – while veteran Catan Studio head Pete Fenlon handed control of that business to former Spin Master executive Mike Bisogno.

Last November company COO Steve Buckmaster stepped down from his role driving the board game giant’s global distribution operation after almost 24 years with the company and its predecessor business in the UK, replaced by then deputy COO Marjolein Lubberman.

Asmodee has also been moving into crowdfunding and miniatures, hiring former CMON COO David Preti last year to lead a newly-created operation focused on those areas. Its first Zombicide campaign since acquiring the IP subsequently raised more than $4m from over 11,000 backers.

De Barros joined Asmodee in 2017 and became chief product officer in 2024, with a remit covering the group’s studios as well as franchise development, licensing and studio marketing.

Asmodee said he had helped build its publishing capabilities, diversify its brand and IP portfolio and oversee the launch of what it described as its biggest trading card game to date, Star Wars: Unlimited.

Kœgler said, “I want to sincerely thank Jean-Sébastien de Barros for his instrumental leadership and contribution to asmodee over the years.

“As Chief Product Officer, he brought a strong strategic and structured approach to our product organization and built strong cross-functional teams along the way.

“With these elevated publishing capabilities of asmodee that Jean-Sébastien spearheaded, asmodee successfully launched its biggest trading card game to date and broadly diversified its brand and IP portfolios – laying an important foundation for our next phase of growth. I wish him all the best in his next chapter.”

He added, “It is with great pride that I welcome Carly to the position of chief product officer and EVP publishing, reflecting the strength of the talent within our company.

“Her product vision, international experience and collaborative leadership will be invaluable as we strengthen our global portfolio and partnerships.”

Asmodee is yet to announce McGinnis’ successor as CEO of Exploding Kittens.

The post Exploding Kittens CEO Carly McGinnis takes charge of Asmodee’s global publishing operation, Jean-Sébastien de Barros exits first appeared on .

  •  

Paul von Hindenburg (German President Ratings, #1)

Three years ago, I have inaugurated a new irregular series on my blog assessing the merits of UK prime ministers (illustrated through the lens of a single board game each). The rating system seemed robust enough to apply it to other countries/leaders (at least if they are more or less democratic). Thus, we branched out to American presidents and German chancellors. Today’s subject is the rare German president with political power – Paul von Hindenburg, the second and last president of the Weimar Republic. And which game could be more appropriate for him than Weimar (Matthias Cramer, Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx)?

The Rating System

Some caveats ahead: The presidents will be rated by the knowledge of their time. If they or their contemporaries could not have known about the effects of something, I will not use my hindsight to mark it as a mistake of theirs. The assessment is focused on their conduct as president.

Now, to the system itself: There are three policy field categories (foreign, domestic, and economic policy) and three more general ones (vision, pragmatism, integrity). A president can earn from one to five stars in each category (for a total sum of up to 30). In detail, the president is assessed as follows:

Foreign policy: Did the president increase German influence in the world and the security of Germans at home? Did the president wield German power responsibly and with positive results for the regions affected?

Domestic policy: Did the president increase the liberty of Germans to express themselves and to participate in the political process? Did the president promote domestic security and shape the framework for fair justice dealing with offenses?

Economic policy: Did the president facilitate the prosperity and economic security of Germans (including in the mid- and long-term)? Was the president’s economic policy based on mutual benefit of those involved or did it unduly burden one side?

Vision: Did the president have an idea of what Germany and Europe (the latter counting for more in times of German influence being great) should look like beyond the immediate future? Did the president’s policies steer Germany (and, if applicable, Europe) in this direction?

Pragmatism: Did the president succeed in seeing their policy through from inception to completion? How well did the president manage the support from parliament, society, the administration, the media?

Integrity: Did the president understand the office as a means to benefit themselves, special interest groups, the entire country, or another community? Did the president respect the boundaries of the office?

Note: If you have read my UK prime minister or US president ratings, you will remember that I rated them on the global impacts of their vision as well. As the rating system is only really applicable to democratic leaders and no democratic German leader ever had the chance to conduct a truly global policy, I only assess their vision on national and European grounds.

In all other ratings (UK prime ministers, US presidents, German chancellors) the subject’s life after holding the office is also assessed (for they are still seen as ex-office holders, but as a secondary consideration). This does not apply here, as – spoiler! – both Weimar Republic presidents died in office.

Hindenburg’s Life

Paul von Beneckendorff und Hindenburg was born in 1847, when Prussia was still an absolute monarchy. Like most men in his family, he opted for a military career and had his baptism of fire in Prussia’s wars of unification: He fought at Königgrätz (Sadowa) against the Austrians at age 18, at Sedan against the French three years later. The socialist Paris Commune which had been formed against both the Prussian siege of Paris and the liberal French government filled him with a horror of civil war and revolution which would influence him all his life. Back from the wars, Hindenburg enjoyed a successful career as an officer, culminating in his promotion to (full) general in 1905. In the forty years between the victory over France in 1871 and his retirement (aged 63) in 1911 he would not fight another war.

Hindenburg was recalled into active service shortly after the outbreak of World War I and placed at the head of the 8th Army, the only German force dealing with Russia’s invasion of East Prussia. At the advice of his energetic chief of staff Erich Ludendorff, Hindenburg opted for a daring counter-attack which annihilated one of the two Russian invasion armies. The actual execution of the plan was left to Ludendorff. Hindenburg’s main contribution was to remain steadfast when Ludendorff wanted to abandon the plan in the middle of the operation during one of his nervous fits – a pattern which would become characteristic for the rest of the war. Hindenburg and Ludendorff had won the most significant German victory of the early weeks of the war, and they had done so on German soil. The fundament for the myth of Hindenburg was in place.

The Battle of Tannenberg made Hindenburg a national hero – which he would later parlay into electoral success. Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

While Hindenburg, now the commander-in-chief of the German forces on the Eastern Front, had suddenly become the most admired and revered German, the ambitious Ludendorff also urged him to demand greater influence over the course of the entire war. That embroiled the duo Hindenburg-Ludendorff in a continued rivalry with the OHL (Oberste Heeresleitung, Supreme Army Command) under Erich von Falkenhayn. Hindenburg, brought up with the values of a Prussian officer, was now routinely insubordinate to his military superior Falkenhayn, until Emperor Wilhelm II sacked Falkenhayn in August 1916 and replaced him with Hindenburg. Of course, it was once more Ludendorff, who (now as First Quartermaster General) pulled the strings.

Hindenburg and Ludendorff widely sidelined the emperor and ran Germany as a quasi-military dictatorship. However, their double role of political and military decision-makers did not come with increased effectiveness:  What the politicians Hindenburg and Ludendorff demanded (a victorious peace, vast annexations, a German hegemony over Europe), the generals Hindenburg and Ludendorff could not deliver. And while the military leadership of the German armies remained strong, the political decisions lacked judgment – unlimited submarine warfare drew the United States into the conflict on the Allied side in 1917; the mishandling of relations with post-revolutionary Russia tied down German forces in the east. Hindenburg and Ludendorff gambled on a last offensive in the west in 1918 – and lost. The reserves were spent now. As the Allied armies pressed forward in a counter-offensive, making peace seemed like the best option to Germany’s military dictators.

They applied to US President Woodrow Wilson for peace – in the hope that a lenient peace based on the Fourteen Points could be obtained. Wilson, however, remained firm: On the one hand, he insisted on parliamentary government for Germany (and thus the end of the OHL dictatorship); on the other, the territorial losses and military restrictions to be applied to Germany seemed dishonorable to Hindenburg and Ludendorff. One way or the other, their desire to remain responsible for the country waned – they complained in bitter terms how they had been “stabbed in the back” by a non-supportive home front. In the end, Ludendorff resigned, but Hindenburg stayed on as the head of the OHL – but complemented with a chancellor whose power base was the German parliament. Their attempt to save the German monarchy with an orderly transition out of the war was quickly swept away by the revolting masses in the revolution of November 1918.

Now Hindenburg showed remarkable pragmatism. While the revolution was made by the Social Democrats, pariahs under the monarchy to which Hindenburg was so attached, his dislike for them was outweighed by his horror of civil war. Together with Ludendorff’s successor, general Wilhelm Groener, he placed the German army at the disposal of the new government led by Social Democrat Friedrich Ebert… with the understanding that it would be used to quell any Bolshevik unrest. The (Majority) Social Democrats thus were able to complement their political dominance over the more left-leaning Independent Social Democrats with the hard power of the army and usher in a parliamentary republic.

The pact between Ebert and Groener allowed them to put down socialist revolutionaries. Note that the game event (which is a SPD card) could also be used against a right wing uprising!

As with Ludendorff, Hindenburg let Groener fill the active role in their partnership while providing the myth surrounding his person. Groener and he made sure that the army, still spread out from France to Ukraine, returned in an orderly fashion. When the Treaty of Versailles was offered to the German government, Hindenburg personally understood that there was no alternative to it – Germany could not have renewed the war with the Allies. As he felt the Treaty was humiliating, though, he left it to Groener to advise the government to accept.

The “stab-in-the-back myth” contributed to the re-legitimation of the German right wing after World War I.

Once the Treaty was signed, Hindenburg retired to private life, but remained immensely popular, a beacon of the anti-republican Germany. When he stated at the parliamentary committee of inquiry dealing with the end of the war that the German army, “undefeated in the field” had been “stabbed in the back,” (by whom exactly, he did not specify – listeners felt free to fill in the blank with their preferred choice of enemy, usually “the Jews” or “the Socialists”) it gave the myth a quasi-official sanctioning.

Hindenburg’s cup of tea: Paramilitaries. Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

His relationship with the German right, however, was rather complicated. Hindenburg was close with some members of the DNVP (Deutschnationale Volkspartei – German National People’s Party), but never became a party member. He did join the ideologically similarly inclined Stahlhelm (Steel Helmet) association of former soldiers, though. He condemned both major right-wing coup attempts of the early Weimar Republic – reluctantly in the case of Kapp and Lüttwitz, forcefully in the case of his former partner Ludendorff with the upstart demagogue Adolf Hitler.  

Not Hindenburg’s cup of tea: Couping. Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

When president Friedrich Ebert died in 1925, lesser men had to fill his shoes. None of the various candidates running in the first round of the presidential election came close to a majority by themselves. Coalition building was the order of the day now. The pillars of the republican order (Social Democrats, (Catholic) Center, and left-leaning Liberals) would put the Center candidate Wilhelm Marx forward as a joint candidate. While the right-leaning Liberal candidate Karl Jarres had received the most votes in the first round, the parties of the right feared that he would not be able to stand against a united republican camp. The constitution, however, allowed for candidates to be entered in the second round who had not been running in the first. And which candidate would, on merit of his personality, have a better chance than the old war hero, the victor of Tannenberg?

Hindenburg electrified a certain part of the electorate. Others criticized his closeness to the old monarchy (Hindenburg had sought approval from the exiled Wilhelm II before running, but denied this), his lack of experience with parliamentary politics, and his age (he was 77 already, and would be 84 by the end of his term). Hindenburg was elected in the second round with a plurality of the votes.

Hindenburg has the best chances to be elected president in Weimar – and will give the slow-starting DNVP a great boost when in office.

The election of a Reichspräsident is one of the turning points in a game of Weimar: The winner receives the very powerful Reichspräsident card which allows the player to use one of their cards twice every turn. As you only hold five cards each turn, being president thus guarantees you to be 20% more effective! In the game, Hindenburg acts as the candidate for the DNVP (which is an amalgam of various nationalist groups extending beyond the DNVP proper). His chances to win are typically pretty good, as the DNVP has many opportunities to place more party bases early in the game… and, as the DNVP typically does not score a lot of points in the early game, other players might also be more likely to cast their votes for Hindenburg in the second round of the election.

Early in his term, Hindenburg surprised many of his critics: Despite his background, he kept within the confines of the republican constitution (and declared publicly that he did not seek a return to monarchy), despite his inexperience, he immediately found a role in the political process (for example, it was his stern intervention that brought the quarrelling parties to form a government in 1926), and despite his age, he did not seem to lack vigor.

Hindenburg even showed his trademark pragmatism: When Hans von Seeckt, the chief of the German army, invited a Prussian prince to an army exercise, Hindenburg promptly sacked him to avoid tensions with the Allies. And when the Social Democrats won the 1928 parliamentary elections and formed a “grand coalition” government with the Center and the Liberals, Hindenburg worked well with them.

Schleicher’s ability to shift political attention is neatly captured in his event card. The card only comes into play when the DNVP player selects the “Presidential Decrees” deck (P in the upper right corner) – typically after Hindenburg has been elected. Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

Yet his old networks persisted, and in the eyes of the monarchists, the military men, the aristocratic magnates of the old Prussia, it was clear that the Social Democrats, no, the whole parliamentary system needed to go. As Hindenburg grew older and relied more on his advisers (chief of them his son Oskar and Kurt von Schleicher from the Army Ministry), his attachment to the parliamentary, constitutional system lessened. When the Social Democratic Chancellor Hermann Müller opposed an agricultural aid package from which the aristocratic magnates would benefit most, Hindenburg decided it was time for a change in government. Together with Oskar and Schleicher, he sounded out the parties on the political right to form a minority government which would not act through parliament, but through presidential emergency decrees. They were intrigued.

The DNVP is not very strong in victory points in the early game. It can score a lot of points with cards from the “Presidential Decrees” deck (P in the upper right corner), though, if Hindenburg is elected president, and parliamentary majorities for the democratic parties are out of reach. Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

The last Weimar Republic government which had a parliamentary majority broke apart in 1930 – ostensibly over a rather minor disagreement regarding the budget for unemployment insurance (by then, Germany was in the throes of the Great Depression). The schemers behind the scenes quickly put up a new minority government led by Heinrich Brüning from the right wing of the Center. Brüning would spend the next two ears trying to combat the crisis with a deflationary policy exacerbating the economic woes of the country. The Social Democrats opposed Brüning and, when he couldn’t get a majority for his budget, forced new elections in September 1930. Neither they nor the government succeeded at the polls, though – instead, the Nazi Party leaped from a fringe group to the second-strongest force in parliament (behind the Social Democrats). Brüning continued his minority government based on presidential executive orders.

Hindenburg and Schleicher regarded the Brüning experiment with ever less enthusiasm, and sought to push the government to the right – but they could not find the partners for such an enterprise yet: The DNVP refused to join the government coalition, and Hindenburg dismissed the Nazi Party because of his assessment of Hitler as too vulgar (understandable) and socialist (confusing his positions with those of the “national revolutionaries” in the Nazi Party). Hindenburg even gave in to Brüning’s and Groener’s (now Army Minister) pressure to outlaw the SS and SA Nazi paramilitary forces to stop the ever-increasing political violence in the streets.

After the seven years of his first term ended, Hindenburg, now aged 84, stood for re-election 1932. His main opponent would be Hitler. The parties who had supported Marx in his failed bid of 1925 had no candidate who could match the charisma of the other two – and so the left-leaning and centrist democratic parties rallied around Hindenburg. One would suppose that this would ensure a blowout victory – yet most of Hindenburg’s old supporters on the political right, concentrated in the rural, Protestant areas of Germany, defected to Hitler. Hindenburg won 53% of the vote in the second round and remained president.

Schleicher then pushed for a new, entirely non-parliamentary government, and when Brüning proposed a plan to settle derelict agricultural land in the east with the unemployed (to the detriment of the aristocratic owners), Hindenburg agreed that it was time for change. He dismissed Brüning, and, advised by Schleicher, appointed Franz von Papen (no party affiliation) chancellor. Papen was to govern with a cabinet of aristocrats which had no parliamentary basis whatsoever – the Cabinet of Barons.

Tempting to rule without parliamentary constraints… but you will strengthen some people even more unsavory than yourself. Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

Papen and Schleicher both courted the Nazis, but disagreed on the methods: Schleicher wanted to split the Nazis by allying with its “national revolutionary” wing; Papen (supported by Hindenburg) lifted the ban on SS and SA, ostensibly to decrease political tensions. The opposite happened: Nazi paramilitaries started a riot with Communist supporters in the working-class Hamburg suburb of Altona in which several people were killed. The fear of political violence provided a pretext for forceful government action: When there was no government majority after the state elections in Prussia, Hindenburg authorized Papen by executive order to depose the acting state government of the democratic parties (an open breach of the constitution).

Papen, however, had maneuvered himself into a dead end. His attempt of governing detached from parliament ignored the political will of the German people: Some of them might prefer the Nazis, others the Social Democrats, the Communists, or the Center – but barely anyone supported Papen, as the parliamentary election of November 1932 showed. Hindenburg sounded out all parties from the Nazis to the Liberals (but not the Social Democrats or the Communists), but failed to find a workable government.

Another solution had to be found. Schleicher convinced Hindenburg to sack Papen and took over as chancellor himself. His attempt to form a cross-ideological front of the army, the trade unions, and the “national revolutionary” Nazis made the established elites uneasy. Papen took his revenge by agreeing with Hitler on a coalition government – headed by Hitler, but with only a few Nazi ministers. Papen convinced Hindenburg that this was the way to tame the Nazis: Use their popular support while demystifying them as they got bogged down in the minutiae of government. On January 30, 1933, Hindenburg swore Hitler in as chancellor.

In Weimar, Nazi parliamentary rule would end the game – with all players losing. Hindenburg, playing with people of flesh and blood, rather than with wooden meeples, also seemed defeated after the Nazi takeover. He ceased resistance to Hitler and stood by him at the old church of the Potsdam Garrison in a symbolic merger of the old and the new national movement. In the meantime, the Nazis dismantled the democratic order. Paul von Hindenburg died on August 2, 1934. No new president was elected. Instead, Hitler acted as joint head of state and government – Führer und Reichskanzler.

The Rating

Foreign Policy

Hindenburg generally supported the government position on foreign policy, which aimed at shedding the restrictions of the Versailles Treaty and re-admittance of Germany as a fully equal great power. He did misjudge at times how to achieve these goals – for example, he thought that the League of Nations would put additional shackles on Germany (unlike foreign minister Stresemann, who realized the League’s potential to adjudicate conflicts which were before handled directly between Germany and the Allies).

Once Germany had joined the League of Nations, it became obvious that the League was not just an instrument to ensure the continued humiliation of Germany… which thus de-legitimized the German right (DNVP crisis rolls at the bottom of the card). Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

Rating: 3 out of 5.

Domestic Policy

Hindenburg was not particularly interested in domestic policy and left it largely to the chancellors and their ministers. Whenever he did get involved, however, it was to detriment of the freedom of the German people: His initial refusal to outlaw SS and SA contributed to the rise of political violence, as did his speedy cancellation of the ban after only three months. The subsequent Strike on Prussia was the most obscene breach of the constitution before the Nazis dismantled it altogether – without encountering resistance from Hindenburg, whose credibility with the military, administrative, and business elites might have prevented their walkover.

The refusal of the Prussian democratic parties to resist the Strike on Prussia benefitted Papen’s anti-parliamentarian government. Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

Rating: 1 out of 5.

Economic Policy

Once more, Hindenburg largely went along with the policies of his chancellors. In the case of Brüning’s attempt to combat the recession with the tightening of spending, that was catastrophic. Whenever Hindenburg attempted to leave his own mark, it was in favor propping up the failing system of East Elbian agriculture in a lucrative way for the old aristocratic elites.

The deflationary measures taken by the German government exacerbated the crisis – both politically (meeple to be placed on the NSDAP track) and economically (marker moving on the economy track and removal of prosperity). Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

Rating: 1 out of 5.

Vision

What did Hindenburg eventually want? – He favored monarchy over republic, but did not seek a return to it in office. He swore an oath to the constitution, but treated it ever more casually the longer he ruled. His preferences for governing with, against, or beside parliament shifted according to his chancellors and advisors. He attempted to include or exclude the Nazis at times, and eventually was swallowed by them.

While Hindenburg personally disliked Hitler, he attributed good motives to his followers (“national feeling”) and never understood the danger of the Nazi Party; in that, he was like many others in the traditional elites of Germany who thought that they could hitch the Nazi horses to their wagon. Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

Rating: 1 out of 5.

Pragmatism

Hindenburg started strong in this regard: He was instrumental in the formation of governments and got along well with parties as different as the Social Democrats and the German National People’s Party. He also got his way in the change of governments from 1930 on (even though a good deal of this was conceived rather by his son and Schleicher). Yet these tactical strokes did not lead to strategic gains, and in the end, Hindenburg outmaneuvered himself with the Nazi-led coalition government.

Parliamentary majority? Sorry, the Reichspräsident doesn’t do parliament. Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

Rating: 3 out of 5.

Integrity

Hindenburg attached great importance to be regarded as above the parties, as a representative of all Germans. Yet in practice, he played favorites, most notably in his economic policy which was shaped by his close connection with the East Elbian agricultural magnates. Hindenburg could also be petty, as when he refused to visit the Rhineland and Westphalia in 1930 because the Stahlhelm had been outlawed there for their breaches of the Versailles Treaty. On a grander scale, Hindenburg tested the limits of the constitution from 1930 on with his various non-parliamentary governments… and in the end, attacked the constitution frontally in the Strike on Prussia.

The “We Need a Strong Man!” agenda card is Hindenburg in a nutshell: Presidential decrees (new cards added to the deck), Stahlhelm paramilitaries, a testy relationship with the Nazis, influencing public opinion (the classic move for the DNVP would be to replace an issue with the “Stab in the Back” issue), and a stronger role of the (large) farmers in society. Image ©Capstone Games/Skellig Games/Spielworxx.

Rating: 1 out of 5.

Overall: Hindenburg played a complex role in the Weimar Republic. While his age and his tendency to let others plot the course of action excuse him from some of the blame, he crucially contributed to the extension of the economic woes and political violence which engulfed the republic, and directly aided the steady erosion of parliamentary rule from 1930 on. Hindenburg enters the list at the very bottom.

  1. Abraham Lincoln 28/30
  2. Franklin D. Roosevelt 25/30
  3. Friedrich Ebert 25/30
  4. Winston Churchill 25/30
  5. Robert Walpole 24/30
  6. Willy Brandt 23/30
  7. Konrad Adenauer 22/30
  8. Harry S. Truman 21/30
  9. John F. Kennedy 17/30
  10. Hermann Müller 17/30
  11. Wilhelm Marx 17/30
  12. Woodrow Wilson 15/30
  13. Ludwig Erhard 12/30
  14. Paul von Hindenburg 10/30

How would you rate Hindenburg? Let me know in the comments!

Further Reading

Hindenburg has found surprisingly little attention in recent English-language scholarship. The standard scholarly biography in German is Pyta, Wolfram: Hindenburg. Herrschaft zwischen Hohenzollern und Hitler [Hindenburg. Rule between the Hohenzollern and Hitler], Siedler, Munich 2007.

A shorter, more accessible treatment is Rauscher, Walter: Hindenburg. Feldmarschall und Reichspräsident [Hindenburg. Field Marshal and Reich President], Ueberreuter, Vienna 1997.

For the broader context, see: Herbert, Ulrich: Herbert, Ulrich: A History of Twentieth-Century Germany, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2019.

  •  
❌