Browse by Series/Type
Browse Departments
Browse Designers
Online Resources

The Halls of Montezuma

DESIGNERS Michael Welker & David Fox
DEVELOPER William Cooper
COUNTER ART Rodger B. MacGowan & Mark Simonitch
MAP ART Tim Schlief
CARD ART Mike Simonitch
PRODUCERS Gene Billingsley, Tony Curtis, Andy Lewis, Rodger MacGowan, Mark Simonitch
Regular Price: $55.00
On Sale For: $35.00


  • Rules booklet
  • Deck of 110 Strategy & Action cards
  • One 22x34 mapsheet
  • Player aid cards
  • Quick Start card
  • Two 5/8-inch counter sheets


The Halls of Montezuma is a fast paced game of the Mexican War which takes you back to the era of Manifest Destiny. The Halls of Montezuma is a Card Driven Game, allowing players the opportunity to recreate the various events and actions in Mexico from 1846 to 1848. The historical cast of characters is here, from Doniphan to Arista, Scott to Santa Anna. Even Lee, Jackson, Beauregard and Grant make cameo appearances.
Strategy card play allows you to move your forces, make events happen, activate the fleet, secure control of your lines of communication, and even invade Mexico with General Scott.
The outcome is never a foregone conclusion. Victory comes from driving Mexico's political will down to zero; but each battle's outcome is in doubt - a few troops performing superbly can defeat many troops performing poorly. Mexico can achieve a quick sudden-death victory before the U.S. has declared war and can bring its force to bear.
Will Santa Anna arriver early and retake Tejas?
Can General Scott take Mexico City?
Play The Halls of Montezuma and find out!
Game Features

TIME SCALE 3 months per turn
MAP SCALE Point to point
UNIT SCALE Companies, regiments, squadrons, batteries, leaders, guerillas, and others

Customer Reviews
# of Ratings: 10
1. on 12/24/2013, said:
Poorly organized rules and too much errata made this a "get rid of" game for me. I see what the designers are trying to do and that's clever, but the trouble caused by the rules overrule their good work.
Was this comment helpful? yes no
(2 people found this comment helpful, 2 did not)
2. on 12/25/2009, said:
Lots of period feel. Very comprehensive, yet simple. One of the best card-driven games in my collection. Living rules with consolidated errata / clarifications would be welcome, though.
Was this comment helpful? yes no
(6 people found this comment helpful, 3 did not)
3. on 8/18/2009, said:
With vastly reworked rules, and additional or corrected player-aides, this could be a very compelling game. It is a shame that such an elegant design was married to a product rife with the most fundamental errors, and embraced by shabby and untested rules.
Was this comment helpful? yes no
(7 people found this comment helpful, 4 did not)
4. on 8/11/2009, said:
HoM is an interesting design that takes elements from the classics "For the People" and "Wilderness War" and adds a number of innovative - or at least original - new elements. Admittedly, the game is very chrome-heavy, with a lot of detailed event chains and sub-plots that can easily distract a player, but most of the chrome adds depth, replayability or historical context to the game. Overall, there's a lot to like here, so you won't mind having to play it several times to learn which actions and strategies are most effective. And the components are beautiful, which doesn't hurt!
Was this comment helpful? yes no
(4 people found this comment helpful, 5 did not)
5. on 5/31/2009, said:
As someone who followed the development of Halls of Montezuma on the CSW and BGG forums and looked forward to its release with much anticipation, I had high hopes for the success of one of GMT’s newest CDGs. Despite the maps “muddy and dull” appearance and the confusing color scheme of its spaces, the rest of the components (counters, play-aids and cards) are top notch and typical of what I have come to expect from GMT’s products. ******** The rules (THE HEART OF ANY GAME), however, are another story. While at first glance the rules are fairly well laid out, organized and easy to read through, when one puts them to practice in actual play holes and omissions become apparent and confusion reigns. Despite numerous play thrus since release my opponents’ and I are still confused by a number of the rules processes, if we are playing correctly, or even what the purpose of some rules are. Designers–Developers who live with a project for years can fall into the trap of seeing how to play their creation very clearly in their mind while the final rules do not convey the same clarity to someone seeing the finished product for the first time. HoM seems to suffer from this effect or perhaps just from a lack of actual playtester or especially non-tester input to the final as released rules contributing to their non-clarity and other problems. ******** Balance also seems to have suffered from lack of late testing. One example allows the US player to declare War early (turn 2) suffering little to no penalty to its victory requirements due to the maximum allowable level of Political Will (PW) points undermining a primary and vital part of the game. This may not ALWAYS lead to a US win (it sure helps though), but it defiantly takes away from the tension the US player would feel if there was a reason NOT to declare war early. The Designers–Developer repeatedly miss the point of why creating such a “No Brainer” option in a CDG takes some of the “FUN” out of playing…. ******** From the credits the Designers–Developers seem to have relied quite heavily on other Designers and Developers to play test HoM. I can’t help but wonder what the quality and amount of feedback was that they received from these individuals. Maybe they just need to rely more on just plain folks and get more of a common players opinion of their creation? ******** Another MAJOR failing of the Designers–Developer (and yes GMT too) is the total lack of any method for internet play at release through Vassal or Cyberboard leaving it to “Fans” of the game to make their own. In this day and age and given GMT’s support of internet play this omission is practically unforgiveable! The good news is that with the effort of Gene at GMT and others, the necessary game Vmods and GameBoxes are now in the works. It is hard to understand why today’s Designers–Developer would not use these vital tools for playtesting, not to mention to drive sales, and such out of date paper & pencil testing as must have been used for HoM may be one of the reasons for HoM’s problems. ******** While Some errata has been supplied and the Designers–Developer frequent the forums, their at times incomplete/off-hand answers to honestly asked and non-hostile questions from confused customers quite often lead to more confusion and more questions. To make matters worse the Designers–Developer seem to take offense to these requests for clarification of their answers and their responses at times have become insulting, included the Deletion of questions/comments and the Threat of banning from the forum those who ask questions they do not like or who do not use the “Proper Tone.” This “attitude” on the part of the Designers–Developer has very likely driven many individuals away from the forums and away from HoM! I do know that most of the members of my gaming group (29 weekly regulars) have chosen to pass on HoM. ******** I had planned to give HoM a 3 (Ok) rating on GMTs scale despite its short comings and because my opponents and I have had some fun playing later games using “House Rules.” But given the Designers–Developer post release Attitudes towards GMT’s customers I CANNOT recommend HoM to others and am giving it a 2 (Bad) rating. Even worse I have regulated my copy of HoM to the dust bin of “The Shelf.” Perhaps some day we will give it another try ….. ******** UNFORTUNATELY, in the case of HoM the Designers and the Developer have managed to shoot themselves in the foot while at the same time stabbing GMT in the back! :-(
Was this comment helpful? yes no
(34 people found this comment helpful, 7 did not)
6. on 5/4/2009, said:
This game is a very tense game that creates a fairly accurate depiction of the tension between Mexico and the United States. One of the neatest concepts is the use of "officers" to boost army capabilities. Both sides build up on the border and have to create solid supply lines. This is a great game with a lot of historical chrome. Highly recommended!
Was this comment helpful? yes no
(7 people found this comment helpful, 5 did not)
Showing comments 1-6 of 6