These musings follow a browse through 1970 Wargamer's Newsletter and are my own thoughts on some of the issues that seem to be agitating wargamers, to judge by the correspondence. First of all, this fancy distinction between "fun" and "serious" wargaming. My first comments on this were inclined to be rather ribald, so it is just as well that I am writing this after reflection. I assume that amateurs, an we are, play wargames for pleasure, and not as some sort of mission or calling - I exclude the wargames played by Governments - although sometimes one wonders. If then, we play for pleasure, what are people getting all steamed up about? The man who tries to match up his rules to scale/time relationships and actual formations of the time must got pleasure out of it, as well as those who play "all of a heap", but please do not let us start talking about a "serious" game. This is a contradiction in terms, aid applies to all games of any sort. We play our games with toys, as all games are played; a set of golf clubs, or a pack of cards, are just as much toys as any other equipment used for play. One plays any game to win, within the rules and conventions laid down, but oae should play games for nourishment, not punishment. Having said that, we got discussions over rules and here is where some people glees to got too steamed up, First, this question of Nationally laid down rules. There is no body, or person, of sufficient stature or following to "lay down" rules for wargaming, so what is all the worry about? People will make up rules, some will publish them, and if they are good they will be bought and used - this is the only criterion, and if anyone thinks he has a good set, and they should be revealed to the multitude then for goodness sake publish, and await the reaction. Some things is the Newsletter are amusing - all the swotting up of weapon effective ranges, penetration, and nothing at all about the ability of the poor bode who have to handle them. I am very pleased to have seen in print what is known to be fact in practical that only 1% of men can hope to hit anything with a rifle at muck over 200 yards. Perhaps we should look more to this aspect of things military rather more closely than we do, and also remember that all troops are not eagerly awaiting action, or are uniformly brave and dutiful - inertia is one of the principal characteristics of the soldier and always has been, up to the point of commitment, but when there is no return, then things can be different. Now, what is a "professional" wargamer? In my book, a professional is a person who gains all, or a major part of his living, from exercising his skill in a certain direction, and really I know of no one in wargaming as such who does so. There are people making figures, writing books and so on, but they are not making money fighting wargames, and this to my mind is what would constitute a "professional". Board games of the Avalon Hill type have been much in the news, and I deplore the apparent class distinction that may be growing up between the devotees of these and those who maintain that wargaming with models is the only thing worth doing. Have a go at them all, you will find you have been missing something if you concentrate too narrowly. One point I would like to inquire about, and particular of our American board game devotees. Do you put a time limit in movement time for Avalon Hill and similar games, as is done in Chess? It seems to me that if this is not dome much of the interest will be lost, as there will be the people who will take an interminable time analysing each situation, and the things that make these games 80 interesting will be lost in boredom. By thief I mean the necessity for quick appreciation, and reaction, whereby all opponent can be "thought" off balance, if he oily has a limited time to consider, and makes his answering moves. Come to think of it, time limit moves would not be a bad thing on the wargames table with models, and for the same reasons. Back to Table of Contents -- Wargamer's Newsletter # 105 To Wargamer's Newsletter List of Issues To MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1970 by Donald Featherstone. This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com