Some of you may have noticed that last issue was quite late. I take the blame for that. All I can offer as an excuse is that the changeover in editors resulted in some confusion and delay in putting together the magazine. It turned out that the editorial duties were more difficult and time consuming than I had anticipated. This has resulted in The Grenadier missing a "beat". This issue (8) is appearing when issue 9 should have, and this will hold true for future issues. However, from now on, I foresee no problem with staying on schedule with the future issues.

On the same subject, Pearl Harbor was temporarily delayed in its final production stages. We had slotted the Pearl Harbor maps to be printed last for the wave, but our printer ran out of map stock. This had been anticipated, but the complicating factor arose when the restock failed to arrive. This caused a delay of several weeks, but the new stock finally arrived, and Pearl Harbor returned to production on 7 December.

Adventure Gaming

Changing topics once again, I now come to the real subject of this issue's editorial. In recent months, a new term has arrived to described our hobby - adventure gaming. Its suitability to role- playing games is obvious and need not be discussed. More disturbing, however, is its application to describe the entire hobby.

First of all, does it mean that the hobby can be characterized by roleplaying games alone? Are historical simulations (wargames) only an unimportant and ignorable aspect of the hobby? I think not, and the continuing releases of the companies supports this. While science fiction/fantasy/roleplaying games form a vital segment of the hobby, historical games are also appearing in great numbers. Indeed, the bastion of fantasy games, The Chaosium, has entered the historical game market with its release of Reich at Origins '79.

Secondly, does it mean that all games of the hobby are adventure games? This implies an association with role playing. Thus, anyone who plays a Russian Front game secretly (or otherwise) desires to be a Hitler or Stalin. Rubbish. On the other hand, it could mean that those who play wargames do so for adventure. What adventure is there in war except violence? This would mean that Russian Front game players derive vicarious pleasure by conceptually causing millions of deaths and countless sufferings. This is also rubbish. Wargames are played for the same reasons chess and bridge are played - for enjoyment, not adventure.

No, the real reason for the appearance of the term adventure gaming is far more insidious. It derives from a neo-Victorian guilt impulse. 'War" is not a pleasant word, hence "wargaming" must also be a tainted subject. "Conflict simulation" is also suspect, for conflict is directly associated with violence. "Adventure gaming", on the other hand, avoids these problems, having only an indirect association with violence. Further, it goes hand-in-hand with a recent slogan from a certain US armed forces branch, "Not just a job - it's an adventure!" Let us hope that world politics will not give those who enlist under the slogan more adventure than they bargained for!

In closing, let me say that I find this word white-washing by the Madison Avenue types in the hobby both saddening and amusing. For my part, I will continue to call a rose a rose.