1962 saw the first publication of a hardcover war gaming book since Shambattle and it saw two of them! Since 1957, the main tool for wargamers had been War Games Digest, published jointly by Jack Scruby and Donald Featherstone. They alternated publishing issues, with one coming from California and the next from England. It provided the main tool for wargamers to talk amongst themselves and laid the basis for not only the two books of 1962, but also most of what we have seen since.

Unfortunately, I don't have a collection of War Games Digest, so I can't comment much on its specific content. Indeed, the only publications I have for the period between 1957 and 1962 are a 1958 Mechanix Illustrated article and John G. Garratt's "Model Soldiers: A Collector's Guide," which are oriented more towards collecting than wargaming, and Jack Scruby's "The StrategyTactical War Game" from 1961. The latter put together some interesting ideas which began to bridge the gap between table top wargaming and board wargaming with cardboard counters.

"The Strategy-Tactical War Game"

The Strategy-Tactical War Game was a short piece that gave gamers an opportunity to expand the scope of their gaming to a much larger scale. Previously, most wargames were composed of relatively few organized units representing a single battlefield, or even just a portion of one, covering a few hundred scale yards of battlefield. The main objective of this booklet was to provide an opportunity to play wargames on a much larger scale. Now a single stand might represent a regiment, rather than a company and the ground scale of the typical wargamer's table could cover many miles. The game would be much more strategic in nature, rather than concentrating on the tactical details of earlier games. Of course, the strategic element wasn't entirely new, remember Robert Louis Stevenson's great campaigns, for example, but this was the first organized attempt to transfer a part of the larger campaign movement and combat to the realm of the miniature soldier rather than the map. Sort of.

By enlarging the scale of the game, it was no longer necessary to scale the terrain to the figures. In fact, I thought of Shambattle and its map like gaming space when I read Scruby's description of setting up the battlefields using more chalk to define spaces than terrain pieces, though the latter were certainly acceptable. Using this larger scale provided the option of taking encounters on the Strategy-tactical table to a more tactical gaming environment to determine the results of the ensuing battles. However, this wasn't mandatory and the battles could be fought out on the large scale table top; all the rules for this are contained in the rule set. In addition to the ability to cover more ground, the Strategy-Tactical game made a real effort to add a "fog of war" element into the game. Fully a quarter of the text provides the wargamer with a chance to use concealed forces. With light cavalry providing screens to block the enemy's view of one's forces, and various infantry formations doing the same even as the opposing armies came closer together, it was a real challenge to divine the objectives of one's opponent.

The Strategy Tactical War Game must have encouraged the wargaming community's writing instincts, for it was only one year later that our main event occurred. Just as War Game Digest's publishing schedule was split by the Atlantic Ocean, so were the two books of 1962. One difference was that the American edition was written by Joseph Morschauser, while the English edition was still under Donald Featherstone's byline. Let's give Featherstone precedence in light of his ongoing work in the periodical world.

Featherstone Is "War Games"

Featherstone's "War Games: Battles and Maneuvers with Model Soldiers" is a fine introduction to wargaming. Even though the hobby has progressed a long way since 1962, many of the basic concepts we still use are presented in this volume. After a brief look at the background of wargarning and model soldiers, the book describes setting up battlefields and campaigns, then goes on to give brief rules for ancient, horse and musket, and modern wargames. More than that, Featherstone provides a sample game in each period, complete with photos of the table top action. He concludes with comments on solo wargaming and adds appendices noting the main information and supply sources of the time, a two page rule set for skirmish games and instructions for building an upside down periscope for viewing the gaming table from the perspective of your troops. A lot of ground to cover in 158 pages!

While the format is one I particularly appreciate, and reminiscent of Wells' "Little Wars" in its effective presentation, the ideas are what we're really interested in. Featherstone's first few chapters bring us up to speed on the history of the hobby and the "state of the art" regarding available supplies of wargaming soldiers and terrain materials. He also discusses the building of wargaming tables, emphasizing the appropriate size and noting that the really big table which will permit huge flanking maneuvers, and, admit it, our (not so) secret dream, can also make a game unplayable in a reasonable amount of time, or tedious while the extra movement takes place. It's important to consider realtime, as well as model soldier scale time when planning out battles.

As I read through this section, I was reminded of my question about how the hobby came together at this point in history. Featherstone's recommendation of model railroading terrain materials suggests to me that this was a period of growth for hobbies in general, notjust wargaming. Perhaps the world was finally finding itself back on its feet after rebuilding in the post-war(s) era, and a generation which hadn't fought in those wars was reaching a level of disposable income sufficient for more "frivolous" pursuits.

"When one first begins to play at war games, or, to put the matter in a more technical light, when one begins to fight battles, satisfaction is obtained at the conclusion of a single battle." (45) I quote this sentence as it tells us a lot about the hobby. "Playing at war games" or "fight[ing] battles"? Which side do you fall into, or is it a bit of both? As I get older I find the former more attractive. Of course none of this has anything to do with Featherstone's point, which is that single battles are even more satisfying in the context of a campaign, Campaigns can be based on historical events, rewriting history or completely imaginary situations based on books or the players' own creativity. Movement is generally done on maps made for the purpose, with map movement scaled to the nonnal gaming table size to make it easy to set up terrain and points of entry onto the table. Casualties are partially cumulated from game to game, another interesting feature of the campaign format. Hidden, well, scmihidden, movement could be performed by using matchboxes glued together in a grid representing the map. Players take turns moving paper slips for each of their units from box to box until they discover their opponent's slip in one box. That would signal the time for a battle. I still have my matchbox collection, though no campaigns have taken place in it for many years. A basic rule set for map movement concludes the chapter.

Once a battle is going to be joined, it's necessary to determine the format. Featherstone suggests sending a copy of the map to all players a week or so before the battle will be fought to give everyone time to consider set-ups and tactics in advance. Then the type of battle needs to be determined. Will it be a meeting engagement, a holding action, attacking a prepared position, or something else. The time of day that the battle will begin is one way to help decide that format, and he discusses the procedure for doing so, using a die to determine the time, then using that time to vary the set up. At this stage in wargaming's history there were some specific problems that remained to be solved. Fighting battles between armies of greatly different sizes, or native armies fighting regular troops are two situations where gamers were still grasping for reasonable rules in 1962, but they were actively working on the problems and Featherstone mentions ideas in progress.

The bulk of the book is taken up with rules for the three main periods of warfare. Each set is based on the same foundation, one established by Tony Bath, with input from other gamers. The Modern period is also covered by a second set of much more detailed rules created by Lionel Tarr. As mentioned above, each period also has a battle report to show how the rules work in practice and photos to illustrate the action on the table. For each period the rules cover the expected areas -- who moves first, movement rates, missile fire, handto-hand combat, and to an extent we haven't seen up to now, morale effects. Of course, there are differences from one era to the next, so we find elephants and chariots with their own rules in the Ancient period, fire becomes more important in the Horse and Musket rules, with ammunition a significant concern, and tanks and flamethrowers are among the changes in the Modem period. It's interesting that melee combat and morale rules remain much the same throughout all the periods reflecting the constancy of some things in warfare and making it that much easier to move from one era to another on the gaming table.

Initiative is determined each turn with a die roll. It's important since it not only allows one player to choose whether to move first, but adds to combat effects in melee situations where there is a bonus for the aggressor. Movement is pretty basic, but various terrain types do have effects. Fire is affected by range, and determined by dice rolls for each group of five soldiers and it's important to note that the player who moves second fires first, another consideration for the winner of the initiative die roll. Artillery has its own rules and mounted bowmen and some light infantry have a special "split move" so they can move, fire, then move again. Again, to keep things simple, bows, muskets and rifles have similar effective ranges, though in the context of their own eras. While fire ranges are unlimited in the modern period, they are not too destructive at ranges longer than we've seen for bow and musket fire.

The "saving throw" begins to make an appearance in the Ancient period, with various levels of armor providing the defender with an opportunity to avoid destruction. This was introduced to encourage more aggressive play by cutting down the number of casualties, leaving some soldiers and/or their horses only wounded and still capable of fighting. In later periods the process is simplified since personal armor isn't a consideration. Knowing whether officers are killed or not is important, so one die of a different color is used for each group of five saving throws.

Hand-to-hand combat is performed similarly to saving throws with one die for each group of figures in the combat. I noted the benefit of initiative in melee combat earlier. There are also bonuses for cavalry versus infantry, defensive structures, spears against cavalry and flank and rear attacks. "Overwhelming" and superior odds, officer casualties, and fire combat all have their place in melee as well.

Morale tests are to be made whenever one of a number of situations arises. Loss of officers, or fifty per cent of its troops, "overwhelming" odds, or units breaking nearby can all force a unit to test its morale. The results of these tests can see a unit stand in place, retire in good order, or rout. Being attacked from flank or rear can also affect a unit's ability to stand and fight.

Nearly two thirds of the volume is taken up by the rules for the three periods and the sample games used to describe them in context. Featherstone finishes up the main section with a description of solo gaming. The interesting thing here, is the use of a correspondent to assist in the preparation. This person can define the set up and the general plan for one of the armies and then it will be played out on the table top by the other party to the communication. This gives the gamers some outside input to avoid that all too familiar problem solo gamers have of "taking sides."

"How to Play War Games in Miniature"

Joseph Morschauser, when he wasn't playing wargames, or writing about them, was a distinguished journalist. But our main concern is his wargaming output. I immediately recognized the name as I'd been using the Morschauser Roster System for some of my gaming activity since the late sixties. What I didn't know, before I found this book a few years ago, was who Morschauser was and where the system had come from.

"How to Play War Games in Miniature" follows a format similar to Featherstone's book. We have a review of the hobby and model soldiers, ideas for setting up battlefields and basic rules for the Shock Period (ancient/medieval), Musket Period and Modem Period. Morschauser also adds appendices on sources of reading and soldiers. Not surprisingly, he introduces his roster system then discusses writing one's own rules, using boats, and fleets and naval war.

Morschauser's approach is quite different from Featherstone's. While we've seen movement trays before, for the first time combat is now decided by tray, rather than the individual troops temporarily mounted on the stand for convenience that we'd seen before. In the basic game, these trays act much as individual soldiers in other rules, as the whole stand comes off if it loses a combat. While the normal move, fire and melee segments of a turn remain in place, they are now less rigid, since a player can choose to fire/melee, then move, or move then fire/melee each unit. Unlike most other rules I'm familiar with, there is a melee range. Troops within three inches, two in the Modem period, are considered in melee, while in most other games troops or their stands need to be in physical contact for hand-to-hand fighting to occur.

Actually, for simplicity, it would be hard to beat Morschauser's rules. They are among the most basic set we've seen, approaching Shambattle's low level of complexity, but with a more "adult" flavor. As with Featherstone's collection, the rules here move from one period to the next with only relatively minor adjustments. Troop types come and go, ranges change and melee factors meet the various circumstances of the different time frames, but the basic rules are consistent throughout. The most dramatic changes come in the Modem era, not unexpectedly. Here he introduces a point system for choosing troops for the battle. Because of the greater variety of possible types of forces, he suggests building an army group of a number of units, from which opponents may choose their soldiers and equipment for a given battle based on the situation "on the ground."

Of course, it is the Morschauser Roster System which kept his name in my mind all these years and it added a whole new group of possibilities to the wargaming tabletop. With movement stands at least semi-permanently mounted with figures, it became apparent that another way to keep track of casualties was possible and desirable. The convenience of tray mounting for movement was popular, and the desire to fight with large numbers of troops continued to be attractive. Trays not only allowed the wargamer to move substantial numbers of figures more readily, but, with the roster system allowed those stands to represent many more than the number of figures physically present on the table. By doing a bit of record keeping the player could have each stand represent a varying number of soldiers. In Morschauser's rules this usually varied from two to four, but, with a few modifications to the system, my Zulu stands represent hundreds of warriors. These two additions to the wargaming rule panoply allowed re-creation of much large battles and added to the "fog of war" as it could be difficult for opponents to remember the strength of a large number of enemy stands. Of course, rosters, and other paperwork aren't very attractive to many wargamers, so we find casualty caps, casualty figures and other markers on the tabletop battlefield to avoid the need for record keeping. I think I prefer the paperwork to the markers and caps. Though casualty figures look OK on the gaming table, I find that my limited painting time rarely gets around to them. Guess it's just a matter of personal preference in the end.

Morschauser's book goes on to discuss morale, Chance Cards, night movement, using maps for campaigns, and using boats in games. In the latter case, he suggests defining the wargame table as between two rivers or as an island. His boats are mounted on stands which reach up from the floor and carry passengers quickly from one point of the battlefield edge to another. Just as boats can play an important role around the tabletop, so can fleets in campaigns. Ports are important objectives for opposing armies to aim for as their loss can lead to the loss of the fleets they support, just as the loss of a city can lead to the loss of an army.

Before leaving Morschauser's book let me relay one more item he considered important enough to repeat in each period's rules:

If at any point in a war game in this Period, a basic disagreement between you and your opponent arises which cannot be settled by the rules alone, you must LET THE DICE DECIDE. Instead of arguing and holding up the game, settle the matter with dice. Rollfor high number, and the winner then is allowed to decide what is to be done. This will settle arguments quickly and let you get on with your game. (58) Not an original concept, perhaps, but one we'd all do well to keep in mind.

Both of these authors emphasized the breadth of possibility available to the wargamer as described here in Featherstone's Preface.

The pleasure does not begin and end with the actual playing of the war game. There are many pleasant hours to be spent in making model soldiers, painting them, constructing terrain, carrying out research into battles, tactics and uniforms by means of browsing in museums and bookshops, correspondence with fellow-collectors in many parts of the world and, finally, collating descriptions of your battles with drawings and photographs. (12)

I suspect that most of our homes would bear testimony to the truth of this statement, to a great extent as a result of the significant role these two small books played in bringing an awareness of the wargame to a much larger audience.

With the publication of these two volumes the wargaming world was primed for a continuing stream of rule books and magazines. From this point forward there were a few more books which tried to cover the whole universe of the hobby. On the other hand, as we'll see, the stage had been carefully set for specialization and the wargaming community took full advantage of the situation.

Bibliography:

Featherstone, Donald F. War Games: Battles and Maneuvers with Model Soldiers. London: Stanley
Paul, 1962. Garratt, John G. Model Soldiers: A Collector's Guide. London: Seeley, Service,
1959?. Morris, Ed. "Little Soldiers - Big Hobby." Mechanix Illustrated. Sept. 1958: 76+.
Morschauser, Joseph, III. How to Play War Games in Miniature. New York: Walker, 1962.
Scruby, Jack. The Strategy Tactical War Game. [1961]. Reprinted in MWAN 92, downloaded from MagWeb.

Author's Note: The latest issue of The Courier (No. 81) has a short bibliographic essay by Steve Haller describing the publishing history of wargaming over much the same period as this series. He notes some items I was unaware of and puts everything into context. If you've enjoyed this series, Haller's article is worth looking up.

More Roots of Wargaming

Robert Louis Stevenson
H.G. Wells
Shambattle
Children and Toy Soldiers
Links Between Military Miniature Collecting and Gaming
Jack Scruby
1962
Table Top Talk Magazine
Naval Wargames Part 1
Naval Wargames Part 2
Air Wargames
Horse and Musket I
Napoleon Rides Again
Featherstone Again