From Paddy Griffith, England: Ned Zuparko showed me the May-June 1985 issue of MWAN which interested (& flattered) me both for Greg Novak's comments on THE NUGGET, and for your interview with Ned. I thought you might appreciate a spot of feedback here. First of all I'd better put Greg right that although I may appear to be WD's "high priest" from the outside - and definitely once was - I no longer have any official post in WD. I am just an ordinary member, although I do seem to organize more than my fair share of local meetings and write more than I ought to THE NUGGET. Nope - your real high priest is Andy Calan, and I suspect his views of wargaming are rather closer to those of your readers (and of Greg) than mine. He is the inventor of DAIS and a continuing series of original and inventive toy soldier games - whereas as you mention, I find the toy soldier gets in the way of what I am personally after in a wargame (I should add that the same applies to most boardgames, do I am not rejecting the toy soldier in favour of the boardgame, as many players do). Anyway, Andy is the president of WD and the clear leader of the WD innovations in toy soldier games. Readers of MINIATURE WARGAMES will certainly be very familiar with his work.
Second, I suspect Greg has been fooled by a (common enough) misconception about the amount of Nugget space which actually goes on the theoretical debates rather than the nitty gritty rules mechanisms. I think I'd put it rather lower than his "40-70%" (although it depends precisely what you count in each category, of course). What I suspect is happening is that people who have no taste for these theoretical debates remember them more than the nitty gritty articles, because they stick in the gullet. They therefore seem to have more physical presence in THE NUGGET than is actually the case. Changing the metaphor a bit, I'd suggest that it's like the toreador's cape: when he waves it at the bull, the bull imagines that the whole bullring is a red rag, even though in physical terms one can prove that the cape occupies only 1% of the actual space.
Anyway, I am not trying to insult anyone by my theoretical debates - I am trying to shed light on the hobby, look at it from a different angle, bring in ideas from other disciplines that wargamers may not have thought to link with wargaming before. Wargaming is such a wide activity in its potential and its scope that it seems a little narrow to stick to one rut all the time - indeed part of my dissatisfaction with toy soldiers stems less from their own defects than from the vigour with which that particular rut is defended. I guess that in the USA the situation is rather different, in that board games are the normal rut and toy soldiers are more of a radical alternative - but in the UK the boot is on the other foot.
A lot depends on your motives, anyway. A certain percentage of our theoretical debate is about motives, and I think a lot of wargamers resent having their motives examined. But it seems to me that the motives for wargaming are rather different from those of most players, insofar as I'm looking for things that might help me to write good military history, rather than simply having a relaxing time with pageantry and colorful models. That's rather a specific aim which few share (and which some military historians reject, also!) So there I am - that's why I go in for theories and inconclusive speculations.
I'm not asking anyone to read the theoretical debate about the hobby if they don't want to, although I would suggest to them that they may be missing out on something that just might be important. Also if they don't want to read it they have to wait until the debate comes full circle and ends up by delivering a finished package in the shape of an exciting new playable wargame...and that could mean a long wait!
Apart from my failure to see eye to eye with Greg on this "theory" question, however, I think his general comments on WD were very fair, and I thank him for his positive views and recruiting help. WD would certainly like everyone out there to join! But I think this also highlights an important omission from what WD wan offer the US wargamer - i.e. our conference. In a very real sense WD "is" our annual conference, which we hold every summer in a residential adult education college. We usually get about 50 gamers attending for two days. During those two days they don't do what other people do in most conventions - i.e. wander round buying models or looking at other people playing. Instead they discuss game ideas furiously, lay on games for other people playing. Instead they discuss game ideas furiously, lay on games for other people and participate fully in other people's games. By the end of the weekend we might have some forty or so different events in the can, of which each member might have played a central part in a dozen and got a good idea on most of the rest from the outside. We find it's an excellent format and provides food for though for the members who were present and also - a little diluted - for the NUGGET readers who weren't.
But of course when we come to the USA we find that none of our members can come all that way just for the conference (curses, Ned missed it by a week this year!) so there is no way we can inject that first hand experience into the US wargaming fraternity. Hence THE NUGGET cannot deliver 100% of what it has to offer. What we REALLY would like is for someone in the USA to organize a WD-style conference over there. It doesn't have to be big - we once had a successful conference in January (the worst possible month - no one could afford to turn up because of Christmas) with only 25 attending. The key thing is to get a group of like minded people under one roof for 48 hours to run varied and lively activities and discussion. I think you'll be surprised at what might emerge from that!
(Editor's Note: Thanks to Paddy for the letter and his thoughts. The idea of a USA Wargamer's Conference is an interesting one. One problem we always run into is the distance factor between parts of the country. Perhaps someone has some thoughts on the subject.)
From Frank Novak, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico: Several times you mentioned hosting hospital wargames. Why not publish them in MWAN. The suggestion is to include the scenario as proposed to the hospital players. This would include a rough map (with playing area size), order of battles, player instructions (i.e. victory conditions, certain units are delayed entering the game), rules used (including any rule changes/additions). Someone went through the effort of designing the scenario. Why shouldn't they get the benefit of seeing their name in print. At the same time, the MWAN readership receives the benefits of someone else's designed and playtested scenario. If needed, a by-line by the scenario designer after playtesting, as to what they might have changed would be beneficial. This is in no way meant to imply that I am against battle reports. In fact, I like to read well written reports providing all the background information is given (map, instructions, rules, etc). I find this can be helpful in learning new ways to conduct MWAN readership.
(Editor's Notes: Sounds good to me. I'm always willing to print this type of article, especially now since MWAN can print maps, etc.)
From Bob Beattie, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Currently involved in Colonial gaming - Boxer Rebellion, German SW African, Poncho Villa, last year renaissance, before that - ancient, before that - Napoleonics (CLS). I recently ordered some of the Frontier dismounted Natal Horse that you commissioned. They make excellent Hereros for my German SW Africa armies!!
From Bill McHarg, Aurora, Colorado: I am a long-term Hyborian-style campaign (been going since 1976). I could write about that, also I have a set of rules that have been used for some of the SOCIETY OF ANCIENTS campaign Play By Mail games. I have participated in about four of their games and have had a great time. We have had local campaigns with varying success.
From Paul Hinson, Scales Mound, Illinois: Your Isandhlwana project sounds very interesting. If you ever tire of slaughtering Zulus, you could run the clock forward about 14 years and fight the Matabeles, who were a Zulu off-shoot living in western Zimbabwe (around Bulwayo). The Matabeles, like the Zulu, were armies mostly with assegais although a few did possess rifles and served as skirmishers in the van of the impis. The British were split into two columns. One consisted of the British South Africa Company Police and settlers from Salisbury and Victoria regions. It numbered about 650-700 men and was armed with Martini's, Lee-Metfords, Henry's and Maxims. The second column, or Imperial Column, consisted of about 500 white (half Bechuandaland Border Police, half Transvaalers) and 1000-1500 warriors under the Bechuana chief Khama (about half were armed with rifles). There were two major battles involving the Salisbury-Victoria column, which defeated impi's numbered 5,000 and 7,000 respectively. Only one small skirmish was fought by the Imperial column. A fourth action at the end of hostilities resulted in the destruction of an 80-man patrol from the S-V column (it took the Matabeles all day to defeat the patrol). An article in two issues of HISTORY TODAY back in 1978, I think, about the Matabele War was accompanied by several R. Caton Woodville sketches which show the Salisbury-Victoria column dressed in khaki with wide-brimmed hats.
(Editor's Notes: Sounds interesting, Paul, would like to have an article on more of the above.)
From Wayne Kimmell, Kenosha, Wisconsin: I have just received my first issue of MWAN and was very impressed. Already you have helped me by listing information on Ahketon, USA. I have been looking for buildings and bunkers to add to my Vietnam battles and was afraid that I would have to make them myself. Having limited time is a real disadvantage for I spend more time getting ready for games that I actually do gaming. Also, thank your mother for ending my search for plastic palm trees. Pine and apple trees just don't cut it when trying to make a jungle. In the last issue someone mentioned in a letter that younger gamers are hard to find. That is very true. I'm 18 and am having a hard time finding gamers in my area.
From Howard Whitehouse, Savannah, Georgia: A friend of mine recently ordered some WWI figures from DIE KAISERZET. WWI has never really caught my fancy as anything I'd like to recreate in miniature; it seems facetious to deal with trench warfare in terms of entertainment somehow, though I don't have that problem with pre-twentieth century topics. I assume its a question partly of distance and partly that the sheer bitchery of trenches involves more in the way of unpleasantness and less in the way of strategy and tactics than those conflicts that interest me. I'd suggest that a valid simulation of the Western Front bloodbaths could take three approaches: (1) a very detached "scientific" overview of events and expectations, (2) an exercise set at section/platoon level which would, of itself, be a fairly harrowing experience and not for the faint hearted and (3) a "Chateau Generalship" game involving staff operations far divorced from the "sharp end". This would possibly require an element of "black humour". While I see a conventional figure game as fine for trench raids and other minor actions, I think that something else is needed to deal with the horrors of Somme and Pascherdade.
Speaking of "black humour", an element of that has begun to creep into the legendary Whitehouse Sudan Wars game. Of course, there has always been a certain element involved in late 20th century players - especially American players - portraying Victorian gentlemen, and I've always played up the fundamental absurdity of these often rather imbecile portions of the population. Following my reading some of the memoirs of these officers - primarily Count Gleicher's "With The Camel Corps Up The Nile" (a bestseller in 1886!) and Farwells' "Mr. Kipling's Army", I've tried to inculcate the social attitude of the time deeper into the game. Two Quotes worth mentioning are: "I adore war. It is like a big picnic." Capt. The Hon. Julian Grenfell, 1st Royal Dragoons. "An army, the officers of which are dressed for the benefit of the London tailor, and the soldiers of which are administered largely in the interests of the War Office Clerk, must of necessity afford situation replete with humour." Gen. Sir William Butler. Taking these views as a starting point, and putting them in the particular context of an expedition, sent by a Prime Minister who, in speeches, sympathizes with t enemy, to rescue an eccentric general who does not want to be rescued, and involving a log of English gentlemen who've never been without their closet for more than a day or so, one cannot but feel that there is something to smile about here. Since lots of people, primarily coloured individuals are blithely dispatched to glory in the course of events, the humour is necessarily of an ironic hue.
Back to MWAN #17 Table of Contents
Back to MWAN List of Issues
Back to Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1985 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