Here's a recent cartoon I stumbled across - from The Spectator magazine
Will 'woke wargaming' be a contradiction in terms?
In fact you can even buy this cartoon from the magazine - if you have £95 to spare
https://shop.spectator.co.uk/grizelda---toy-soldiers-are-not-what-they-were
( If I've infringed copyright here, I will of course happily remove this.)
My toy soldiers tend toward segregationists along figure material and scale lines. They are not polarized. Well, perhaps the ones mounted upon magnetic bases are...
ReplyDelete😂
Deleteor, have you got any modern forces where polaroid sunglasses might be worn?
DeleteIf they are polarised are they depicting winter warfare perchance?
ReplyDeletethe Great Northern War is popular, I hear. And then there's Nundanket's Finns too..
DeleteIs segregationist ACW?
ReplyDeleteI'm staying away from that area..
DeleteI liked Jon's "segregationists along figure material and scale lines" - will his downtrodden plastics rise up and topple their metal overlords?
I've recently been reading the "Twilight of the Sun King" rules - bombardment still takes place as a named activity, but all other fighting has been replaced by a big series of morale tests. That must get on the Woke Scale, surely? The key question stops being "How many of them did I kill?" and becomes "How upset are my boys by all the things which are currently threatening them?". I recall that Oozlum Games' "Huzzah!" rules worked like this some years ago, though in that case (in my humble wassname) the testing was bewilderingly complicated - this seems to be a more pragmatic version of the same idea - again, I find the +/- table rather long and less than clearly worded in places, but it is a fresh approach. I rather like the concept, though I shall miss the opportunity to roll a handful of dice and shout BANG. Now the dice are accompanied by supportive calls of, "come on now, my brave lads, don't let them get to you..."
ReplyDeleteI am quite interested to learn about those rules, thinking of getting the 30YW version. Can't help thinking that given the actual effective range of musketry in those times, then 'ranged' fire owes more to fiction than reality. And given that fire might be opened at, say, 80 yards or less, I think morale might play quite a big part - can you imagine how it felt to stand there as the other lot fired?
DeleteEqually I know what you mean - shouting 'bang!' is essential! And rolling a dice to test for your units failing is not half as good as rolling to inflict hits on the other chap.
In true woke wargaming, I assume that upon failing the morale test, your units are deemed to be 'cancelled'..
I never thought of TOTSK rules that way before Tony. Probably why I like them, as I’d put myself more on the ‘Woke’ side than on the ‘Gammon’ side of the ‘Culture Wars’ if forced to take sides. 😁
DeleteThis is particularly funny to me given the views of the person that recommended them to me in the first place 😂😂😂
That second line you get a bonus for in morale tests, I see now must be there to affirm the lived experience of the first line. “No, if you want to self-identify as a cuirassier that is your prerogative, just because you weren’t born with a breastplate, no one should stop you.”
Hi Dave, this opens up a can of worms about six miles deep I think. There are endless debates on the BoardGameGeek website about the ethics of wargaming, about whether it's ok to game certain conflicts or fight as certain combatants, and, this being the internet, they have a tendency to get quite inappropriately heated very quickly. I am interested to read such debates but I tend not to comment on them; I enjoy what I enjoy and have little interest in defending it against those who might object.
ReplyDeleteThere was one debate I remember particularly, and for largely positive reasons, that centred around a game called King Philips War by a designer called John Poniske back in 2010. The war in question was a conflict between the indigenous inhabitants of New England, under a chief called Metacom who styled himself Philip, and the New England colonists in the 1670's. The game aroused a certain controvery upon its release because it was felt to be trivialising what was arguably a genocidal conflict on the part of the colonists. I remember that, contrary to the norm in online discussions, this debate was carried out with an admirable degree of restraint and sensitivity, not least on the part of the game designer himself. I think part of the issue was with the differing concepts of the word game; to many (most?) people it just represents a casual way of spending one's recreational time, like in a game of Monopoly or Cluedo. Kind of, I roll a 6, ha ha I get to destroy your indigenous village and enslave your people. Whereas what most of us in the wargamng community regard as a game is something quite a bit more serious, a model and a simulation to be understood and studied as opposed to just a beer-and-pretzel rolling of dice. Certainly all the wargamers I have ever known are decent people who would be horrified to think about events in colonial history in those terms.
I am reminded also of that Waterloo film I reference endlessly. This being 1970, when all war films of whatever period had to have that 'war is hell' message somewhere, we had to have the idealistic young British redcoat running out of the square to protest the futility of war - 'Why? Why?' - only for Wellington to reflect upon the boy's corpse after the battle has ended. Whether 'woke' wargaming is ever a thing (I hate that damned word, were we all supposed to be sleeping up to this point?) the debates around it are always interesting and relevant.
Blimey, did I really post all that? The moral of that story is never blog or comment on blogs when you've had the best part of a bottle of wine!
Deletepretty coherent I have to say, I wouldn't have managed that !
DeleteDave, sorry a belated reply from me, thanks for your thoughtful ( if alcoholically-driven ) comments. I think many serious posts could be devoted to these subjects. There was a post recently by The Mad Padre which I thought was interesting and well put: http://madpadrewargames.blogspot.com/2021/02/living-with-paradox-thoughts-on.html
DeleteI have not yet listened to the podcast he refers to, but I hope to soonn. See also RossMac's comment, which touches on the French and Indian Wars, and comes to a wise conclusion, I think.
Cheers Dave, at least you know that my alcoholically-driven comments will be attempts at something profound as opposed to random swearing!
DeleteI will check out the link you mention. The whole thing about what people find acceptable or otherwise in (war)gaming is a subject of some interest to me...in fact I think I feel a very prolix blog post of my own taking shape...