After my second try at a wargame with the classic "buckets-o-dice" adjudication, I'm looking for simpler ways to play - especially ones that can be easily understood by children. One such method is known as Free Kriegspiel.
I've been asked in the comments what the hell that is. It's basically loose dungeon mastering - yes, in the same style as Dungeons and Dragons. But the way the Prussians did it.
We don't usually think of the Prussians as willing to accede to the whim of a game master, but they're the ones who invented it. Standard Kriegspiel, as published first in 1824 by the von Reisswitzes (father and son), basically had pages and pages of comprehensive rules. This is Teutonic, of course, and all very realistic, but if you're not careful as you try to improve the game, you'll eventually end up with something unplayable.
We all tinker with our favorite rulesets - that's the fun of the hobby. I think all gamers have experienced the urge - and the danger - of adding complexity to their favorite rules. Classically, it came to a head with the hex-and-counter game Battle for North Africa and the Star Trek wargame Star Fleet Battles.
One takes a month for ten players to complete if they spend all their waking hours playing (God forbid a cat jumps on the table), and has an infamous rule that requires the Italians to expend more water on cooking their pasta rations.
The other has textbook-thick rules and a meme order: "Legal Officer to the Bridge!"
Kriegspiel was never quite that bad, but the rules were complex enough to get to the point where simulating a battle took longer than the actual battle. Also, games bogged down when they got to close quarters; we've all experienced a situation where three units on each side are in combat, all overlapping each other, one elite, one militia, one cavalry, all armed with different weapons, and the center of the battlefield turns into an absolute snarl. There's a reason the close-combat rules often take up more pages than the rest (and in role-playing and skirmish games, attacks of opportunity and grappling!) - there are more "edge-cases" to consider.
This was okay so long as Kriegspiel was treated as an instructional tool; by the time troops got to close quarters it was usually obvious who had won anyway, as one side would be flanked, outnumbered or otherwise clearly at a disadvantage.
So the rules worked all right, but there were dangerous signs. One was that players ended up focusing on the rules and minutiae rather than the game. Today we call this rules-lawyering, but it's also a sign that the game has lost its true purpose - education for professionals, fun for the rest of us. Professional wargames are not about winning - they are about identifying organizational issues and improving group communication. Anything that detracts from that makes the game less useful as a tool.
By the 1860s, the Prussian staff was fed up. A chap named Francois von Verdy simplified the rules. His conclusion was revolutionary: Why bother looking up tables and counting modifiers when the umpire (roleplayers would call him a game master) is experienced- and educated enough to answer the question himself?
He does have to be educated and interested; you don't want him pronouncing results on something outside his expertise, or becoming bored. This is why the GM needs to know the rules, or at least the norms and basic organizations of the period in question. The point is that the players don't.
He can just lean over the table, suck his teeth for five seconds, and announce, "Well, the fresh Second Jager are flanking the First Uhlans, and the Uhlans have charged twice already this game so their horses are probably tired. They withdraw for ... let's say two moves."
The Uhlan player, at this point, is indignant - he's certain that Uhlans could charge three times in an hour and still be fairly effective. But it's actually not that big a deal, because a) this is only one battalion out of twenty on the field and b) this is something that would likely (not absolutely, but likely) happen in a real action. We don't need to check three tables and roll percentage dice to determine that the Jagers killed exactly thirteen Uhlans and are precisely 155 yards away; we just need to know that the Uhlans withdrew.
Here's another example, from a Warhammer 40,000 RPG:
Here's how I simplify the Dark Heresy crit tables:
Roll a D10.
1-3: Minor; bleeding, bruising, stunned etc. Take penalties to appropriate rolls at GM's option.
4-6: Serious: severe bleeding, loss of extremities, etc. Take penalties or lose a turn at GM's option.
7-8: Critical: bleeding out, loss of limbs, etc. At GM's option, roll against toughness to retain consciousness or just not die.
9: Die.
10: Die messily.
For everything else, I can make up my own effects according to the situation. I know how to describe a leg getting blown off by a bolter shell; I don't need to read it from the book. (Though granted, it is hilarious.)
I'm not tied to this, either; I can "read the room" and change things up according to the mood of the players. Maybe I feel that the poor player who just rolled an eight should be able to have a second wind, grit his teeth, and keep fighting. Or that the guy who rolled a minor injury actually got briefly knocked out because the enemy are throwing bricks at him. (This can also be catered for with appropriate bonuses or penalties to the roll.) While GMs should be consistent, they should also be ready to pick the most exciting option to keep the game going and interesting.
With this method, I can get through the same amount of gaming in an hour that most GMs get through in five.
But I haven't tried it in large-scale wargaming yet.
For some good examples of Free Kriegspiel RPGs, that could work in a pinch as the basis of one-to-one skirmish wargames, please check out this previous post. A future post will discuss my thoughts on running such games at a larger scale.

What a brilliant and interesting post Jennifer.
ReplyDeleteI'm coming more and more to a game-model as an exploration of history and am considering dispensing with dice altogether (as another back to the future approach). The effect of, say fire, should not be too variable, or at least have identifiable factors to take into account. The moral effect on the troops is the key. Again, if one considers factors like losses, training, situation and command they can be assessed objectively. Richard Zimmermann in his 'The Wargamer's Handbook' of 1973 had the brilliant idea of a variable morale level. He used a die roll to set it and then had it go up and down with battlefield effects (winning/losing mêlée, being flanked and a few other things). Once a unit reaches zero it retreats. One could add commanders rallying the troops (which might have a dice-induced result read from a grid related to unit factors and commander's factors.
Someone suggested to me that I might like to consider Kriegspiel. I had not thought of it, but it could be just the thing. The narrative and deterministic aspects are appealing.
It would be ideal with kids, as you say. Provided you are consistent, reasonable and have reasons I reckon they will accept the adult umpire's decision—all part of the learning too. The automatic inclusion of a narrative of the reasoning and effects adds to the enjoyment and learning.
I'll be interested to read how you develop this further.
Regards, James
p.s. You know this site, I assume?
Deletehttps://kriegsspielorg.wordpress.com/
Yes, I've checked out that site, and considered running it, but my group prefers miniatures. I suppose in theory I could paint up some 1/300 scale blocks...
DeleteSome rules are already more deterministic, some of Charles Grant's for example where casualties are based on the number of men firing and only varied by the toss of a die - which you could leave out. One method I've seen used in DnD is just taking the average roll of the dice rounded up - ie if you are rolling a D6, the result is automatically 4; if you're rolling a D20 the result is 11. This is changed only by circumstances - skills, winning initiative, flanking, etc. You'll never roll a critical effect, though, and it's those that make gaming most exciting - the regiment that stands fast when it should have run, or runs when it should have stood fast. Or Bard hitting the dragon's one tiny weak spot in a pinch.
My first exposure to this sort of gaming was a fellow in my group who demonstrates it to newbies by drawing NATO unit symbols on cards, then running them thru a scenario. "Your infantry are here, they see cavalry here in these trees. What do you do?"
GMing is less deterministic, because the GM's actual job is to ignore the rules or make them up as necessary.
Free Kriegsspiel has become the single most liberating revelation for my roleplaying!
ReplyDeleteMine too; it began for me with Tracy Hickman's Xtreme Dungeon Mastery, which is right this minute raising money for a second edition on Kickstarter if you want to check it out: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/howardtayler/xdm-x-treme-dungeon-mastery-2nd-edition?ref=nav_search&result=project&term=x-treme%20dungeon
Delete