Okay, maybe I'm not the David Frost of wargaming. How about Larry King? The esteemed editor has once again given me the go ahead for another interview. This time for a subject I have gone outside NHMGS, although Mr. Conliffe has visited us a couple of times.
I met Arty in 1989 at the only Historicon I have been able to attend. Mike Peterson, a Seattle gamer who moved to New York when he finished Law School, came over and said he had someone he wanted me to meet. We walked up just as Arty was prying open the first box of fresh from the printer, Tactica rulebooks.
After introductions and a short conversation (his conversations are always short and to the point) I managed to buy the first copy of Tactica ever sold. Later in the day I watched Arty and Dave Wextel put on the first demo game of Tactica (Seleucids vs. Romans - Romans won by a nose). It looked great and I was hooked. While watching I saw a man of high energy with a great sense of humor East Coast humor - in your face humor. I also saw a man who obviously cared about what he was doing and the people he was doing it with.
The next year he was asked to be the special guest at Enfilade and I was asked if I would be his host/ chauffeur. I gladly accepted. This was an opportunity to spend parts of four days with him. He was on to a new project by then, which eventually turned into Spearhead. He asked if I would play test the rules. Again I gladly accepted. Little did I know where this would lead, but that is a different story.
Arty's perspective is that of a gamer turned designer so his view is a little different than the run of the mill dice roller. His rules are geared towards historical accuracy, clarity and playability. I find his concepts to be well researched, thought provoking - often times inspiring. Hope you do to.
1. Please give some background information about yourself.
I'm 43, and live in the Bronx with a beautiful, patient woman, my wife, Donna. I graduated Columbia University with a degree in Writing and Literature though I made a first career out of advertising graphics. I've studied Martial Arts most of my life. While I continue to write (nonfiction), I also strength-train clients in a private facility in NYC. I love the Yankees, the opera, and sculpt 1/6 scale, historical miniatures.
2. How, where, when and why did you become interested in gaming?
Through my Dad's influence, I was introduced to 'things martial" from the time I could crawl and have played with soldiers since. Warrior classics like "Spartacus, 'El Cid' et al, were regular features at our huge, NYC movie houses. These films established the tone early, and set a fine example of how a man should spend his time! Also, in the 60s, the old WW II films were still popular on TV so my buddies and I were constantly exposed to celluloid combat minus the politically correct admonitions of today. I played "wargames" with the neighborhood Bronx kids in my sunporch. in our local park, we role- played our fathers' war on the makeshift battlefields of France and of the Pacific. We cared not for the current war, Vietnam-until we got a our draft cards at age 16. But as kids, we gamed in the past.
When I was 13, a man named Frank Griebel bought our home and lived upstairs. In an incredible bit of luck, Frank owned and painted Airfix 20mm soldiers and model ships and introduced me to sub-54mm gaming. Since Frank was twice my age-and still playing with toy soldiersd never thought twice about extending my gaming into my teens; Frank's wife, however thought we were insane. Through him, I got involved in more formal gaming and began writing simple rules. Through him, I joined my gaming club-NYWA. So you can blame it all on Frank, who still attends conventions.
3. What periods, scales do you use? What are the sizes of your collections in these periods? What attracts you to a period?
I sell and trade collections like a rug merchant, and have done so with thousands of figures. All have been 25mm except for micro-armor. I retain a large micro-armor collection and the original Carthaginian and Roman armies from Tactica. But that's it.
4. You have visited the Northwest a couple of times. Can you compare the gaming you have seen here to what you have seen around the country and in particular Now York? Are there East Coast and West Coast styles of gaming?
The Northwest represents a concentration of gamers, and friends, who have supported me from Tactica to present. Guys like Chris Leach, yourself and others combine intelligence, wit, and creativity in gaming. I can't hide my affection for you guys. Your cons seem to me more relaxed affairs than those of the "East" where there are larger and very competitive crowds.
5. Please tell us about the group you game with - the Now York Wargaming, Association.
Describing the 100 or so characters who have passed through the ranks of NYWA would be a book in itself. In 1973, 1 joined NYWA (as it's youngest member ever) which led me to this point. It is fair to say I grew up with these guys. Since 1973, NYWA has rented private apartments in NYC. This is a tough and fun crowd with an infamous tradition. There is a sign above the fridge at NYWA that says it best:
- Soda: $1.00
Beer: $2.00
Candy: $1.00
Abuse: Free
6. Will you give us your thoughts on any wargame campaigns you have participated in ?
There was a 15-year Napoleonic campaign. Under the leadership of John Guarnaschelli, NYWA created and sustained a Napoleonics campaign (with 30+ players and 15+ countries) for 15 years. It featured open diplomacy (some of which was conducted in the most outrageous NYC environments imaginable), and map battles were fought out in miniature using Column, Line and Square with collections totaling over 25,000 figures.
This was the most extraordinary accomplishment I have seen In gaming. But after it ended (too many guys got married), I never played in another campaign. Just like their real life counterparts, I've observed too many campaigns that begin with huzzahs and possibilities before settling into dull, apathetic grinds. For me, a successful campaign must either be swift to conclusion-so all can have at it again-or provide motivation for the losing players to remain interested. I only know of one campaign that ever did the latter and that was the one above.
7. Tactica made its debut in 1989 and changed how wargame rules are written and presented. Please give some background on how you came to write and publish it?
Tactica was created to satisfy my personal need for an historical ancients simulation that focused on army systems rather than rules woogies, and that conveyed what seemed to me to be essential: an appropriate sense of "linear mass". My intention was to play Tactica at NYWA (if I could convince these Napoleonic die-hards to do so). I never considered publishing it. Dave Waxtel liked it so much he volunteered to print and publish it at no cost to me. I never would have done it without Dave Waxtel. NYWA still plays Tactica every week.
8. You have worked with Dave Waxtel (also a member of NYWA) and Johnson Hood of Wargames to publish many sets of rules. / have heard from people who were gamers first and then became involved in the business of wargaming that it has become more work than play. How has participation in the more public, 'business' side of wargaming changed your approach/particloation in the hobby?
As I continued publishing, I discovered that my involvement as a .player" suffered. This seemed to me a necessary trade-off since I had to remove myself from the competitive end to retain objectivity. But instead of playing, I now only "play-tested". And my involvement at shows became mandatory, not optional, which sapped some of the joy of the convention experience. But I take full responsibility for these choices.
Some game designers have related similar experiences to mine, though other designers have done a better job of retaining their personal gaming side, even while developing popular products which require continual marketing and editorial attention.
As you mention, I benefited from a fortuitous alliance of skills and resources. Dave Waxtel and Johnson Hood are first rate businessmen who turned their established, "real world" talents to wargaming. I handled the concepts, writing and graphics.
9. Armati is a change in design from Tactica. Tactica is a large unit, many dice throws, classic style of game. Armati has smaller units and a less emotional combat system. Both have been very successful for very different reasons. What made you decide to change your approach to ancient gaming? How do you explain their mutual success?
Tactica was made to please only me. Based on years of feedback from Tactica advocates, they seem excited by its "epic" quality, it's clean lines, historical bent, and the tremendous anxiety it produces, which emotion seems appropriate for a closecombat model. A player in NYWA once said: "if a wargame does not make you want to vomit at some point in the battle it's not doing its job." I agree - Tactica tests your character.
Armati/Advanced Armati was made in response to the criticisms of gamers: more lists; more affordable armies; greater sophistication; cross-period play, etc. Because it satisfied these design objectives, it is more "popular" at shows than Tactica and tournaments are played often. But I'm also a restless designer - I'm never fully satisfied with gaming "solutions" (especially my own), so I always welcome the challenges of a new design. Armati taught me to solve similar problems by other means. And through Armati, I made some new friends.
Few agree with me, but I believe that Tactica, however imperfect as a first efforts, is a far superior concept than Armati both in a simulation and in a pure gaming sense. I have an unpublished version of Tactica (never seen outside NYWA), which fixed the woogies, created new lists, and remains true to the original design intent. While this is what Armati should have been, it required my development - through Armati - to realize that. So I learned that it is better to remain true to my own gut conceptually than to be popular. And this is the single best piece of advice I can give a new author: please yourself.
10. Napoleonic rules seem to be the most popular, yet have the most difficulty gaining acceptance. Do you have an opinion on these phenomena? Why did you decide to jump into the arena with Shako?
Shako was my attempt to solve a specific problem: create a tactical game (using battalions and regiments) that could handle large battles in an evening. I hoped that such a game would also permit campaigns to be fought at that level more efficiently. Regarding Napoleonic "acceptance", I have two quotes that address that well. A gamer (probably Waxtel) once told me (and this is a paraphrase): "...historical gaming is a perpetual search for the Holy Grail. Each ancients player thinks he has it; the Napoleonic gamers are always looking for it." And Dick Bryant once said that "... if God came down and handed us the "definitive" set of Napoleonic rules we'd still argue with him." Suffice it to say that the Grail search continues and so do the arguments!
11. Although each of your games can be considered an individual accomplishment, do you have a set procedure that you use to design a rules set? How do you choose a subject for your game designs?
First, I must love the period and be immersed in the sense of epic that it contains. I'd never write a ruleset for a period that did not excite me in these ways. So, in that sense, the period chooses me. With Tactica there was this sense of mythology, epic, and grandeur that only ancients can give me. Once I've created the general concept, I begin writing anywhere within its sections and move around - sort of like sculpting - until it is finished. I never write, or design in a set, linear path. If another author is excited about a period that I do not personally wish to write on, I'll consider publishing his work, as with Chris Leach's Battles for Empire.
12. As one of the most successful writers and publishers of wargamer rules, do you have any advice for would-be rules authors?
Write to please yourself and let the rest fall where it may. If you do this much you succeed. While his game had problems with stand-alone play, I believe that George Jeffery's "Variable Length Bound" was the most exciting concept ever attempted in Napoleonics (if not wargaming), and his mechanics for tactical resolution was brilliant. His was the finest expression of writing to please oneself. That his rules are not popular today, to me, is irrelevant. Also, men like Don Featherstone typify this style of writing for oneself. And by doing so he has pleased thousands of others.
Once satisfied with your product after play-testing, be clear as to your publishing goals. If you have a great game and wish to share it with a community of gamers, this can be accomplished via private publishing. With all the conventions, and the internet, it is easy to find gamers who may be interested in play-testing, editing or even doing layout work for reasonable cost or trade. There are sophisticated copy machines that can "book-up" good quality manuscripts. You can pre-sell these at cost, or profit, and never be in the red. Costs can be minimized. Also, there is something to be said about a small "band of brothers" all playing the same game and not bothering with the opinion of the multitude.
After many would-be authors have told me their goals, I found that, for them, there was no need to publish in the formal sense. If your goal is to publish games professionally and make money, that is a different matter entailing greater risks, and it requires more space than I have here to explain well. If you mix your goals you reduce the likelihood of doing any one of them well.
Finally, a good design is one that entertains. For me, part of this entertainment comes in producing a design whose mechanics do not come between the player and the tabletop drama. The more I can keep a player's head on the game, and out of the rulebook, the better. Also, as I realize how far I am from achieving .,reality" in my designs, I've grown more tolerant of the approaches of other designers trying to accomplish the same. Which is not to say that one should abandon the impossible questl I try to isolate very specific realities (not every battle detail), as I understand them, and seek to simulate those well.
13. CrossFire was a departure from the traditional sequence of play - move, fire, rally - used in most wargames. Although Donald Featherstone in the 1960's (Continuous Combat), Larry Brom, in the 1970's (rhe Sword And The Flame) and George Jeffery in the 1980's (Variable Length Bound) tried to use unorthodox turn sequences, CrossFire is one of the few commercially successful rule sets to radically alter the sequence of play. Do you see this change in traditional approach as a trend in wargame design? In what other ways do you see future games differing from what we are used to seeing?
CrossFire was the product of a dare based upon specific objectives. This dare occurred at a Historicon while drinking "Kamikazes' in the bar with some buddies. First, I had to create a miniatures paradigm that had no fixed game turns and did not require the author's presence to make it work. Additionally, the second, and more difficult problem, was to abolish the ruler while retaining 360 movement unrestrained by any formal .'grid". CrossFire accomplished these objectives to my satisfaction.
The latest problem, which I have not yet solved to my satisfaction, was to transfer the same conditions to a venue that lacked numerous terrain details, such as ancients. CrossFire was fun to design and I rank it, with Tactica, among my works that please me best. Arid I'll never design another game that uses a ruler or fixed.
Designers have always tinkered with the sequence of play, usually by introducing varying degrees of manufactured randomness to represent "fog of war" and such. I think that if many Great Captains experienced as much fog as some models suggest existed, they would long since have been forgotten! But I admire the effort to develop in this area. I think designers will continue to work on improvements here as there seems to be a lot of motivation for doing so. But for designers to build future games around the ruler-less model they must see it as a desirable end, as I do. Some do' but many do not share this requirement and, instead, find comfort in the ruler. But I would love to see how far the ruler-less envelope can be pushed.
14. What are your thoughts as to the direction that the hobby is taking2 Do you see a potential for growth in the number of gamers?
I could give a better response if I could once again experience the hobby as a gamer, not a designer. While bigscreen film classics influenced me and many others, young gamers today have to come to historical gaming by different means, probably older mentors like us. Even though the genre seems to be well served at present, I'm concerned about the future of historical gaming as our generation "grays".
As I mentioned above, my generation had the sense of "historical epic" because of the movies. Perhaps due to this, we therefore read more of that genre and generated our own, shared, love for it. Today's youth has other alternatives and there is much competition for their attention.
I must confess that I'm also a nostalgic slob and miss those times when one had to convert WWI Airfix into late 19th century British regulars using banana oil (whatever that was) to harden the soft clay pith helmets and backpacks. Though I do appreciate the accessibility with which a new player can get started, I miss the times when a gamer always knew every new figure or new rulebook introduced at a convention. As with so many fields today, much gets lost, for me, in the mass of product - some of which, ironically, I've created. But partly because there are many new authors and products, the hobby thrives even as it fragments.
15. Finally, is there any subject relating to the hobby that you would like to comment on?
The best reasons for being involved in this hobby are the relationships it provides. People like John Bicknell, Chris Leach, Jim Ellis, Bill Hawkes (the King of Kings), Rob Robertson, Howie Swanson, Rob Wolsky, yourself and, especially, the NYWA members across 25 years, have affected my life for the better. I think if those reading this reflect solely upon the relationships forged through their involvement in this hobby, they would share my opinion.
Reprinted from THE CITADEL - The Newsletter of the Northwest Historical Miniatures Gaming Society - Winter, 2000, with the kind permission of Editor, Mark Serafin. For further information on THE CITADEL, contact Mark at 6090 Pioneer Park PI., Langley, WA 98260 or visit their web site: http://nhmgs.simplenet.com
Back to MWAN #104 Table of Contents
Back to MWAN List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Magazine List
© Copyright 2000 Hal Thinglum
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com