I've been talking and thinking about it for ages, but I finally got there: two days ago I ran a tabletop wargame at work.
Not that I haven't before, but that was years before I started this blog. Hopefully this will be the first of many.
I was lucky to have, on the one hand, a captive audience of interns who needed something to do that could be argued to be relevant to library programming, and on the other, a couple adult staff with particular expertise in teen programming - mostly the technical sort, but non-electronic activities fall under their purview too, so this was a useful experiment.
I had a choice between running a simple role-playing game (which I mentioned during a recent teen advisory board as a summer-program possibility) and a wargame. I ran the wargame after one of the interns expressed interest in the plastic soldiers I'd brought - a handful of the Black Powder frames I've been assembling.
| Here we see one advantage of painting - if I'd done it the sides would be easier to tell apart despite the bad photo. |
Infantry move 6" in line, 12" in column. Guns may move 12", but may not fire in the same turn. Commanders move 12". Guns have a max range of 24", musketry 12". Above, the Union open their advance on the open brown plain of Tabletop.
Another issue was that there were two players a side (and a fifth turned up midway thru the game - he appointed himself strategic overseer of the Union). With an odd number of units each side, play had to be cooperative, and when rolling dice in particular the players each rolled half (this was their own idea). Two regiments, one to each player, would have been preferable. Fewer units also would have helped us get thru the game faster, as we only had an hour to work with.
Anyway, above you see turn one, in which we simply spread the units around 24 inches apart. The Union are moving forward.
| Here the Union column has charged a Confederate line. The Union artillery are classically deployed in the center. |
| After a charge, before end of the combat. The paper casualty markers indicate half-a-base worth of casualties. The rebel general has also been eliminated. |
| A wider view; the Union column lost the action and retreated. Union guns fire thru the gap to hit the right-hand rebels. |
| From the rebel side of the table this time. I think the rebels are trying to flank a Union unit here. A casualty box is visible. |
This is great progress, Jennifer! Congratulations on bringing wargaming to the library.
ReplyDeleteGood luck in next week's game.
I learned a lot and was surprised at the interest shown! Will definitely try it again.
DeleteGood game if everyone had fun.
ReplyDeleteFair enough. I'd call it "short but sweet."
DeleteLooks fun. Good luck for next week.
ReplyDeleteI have been involved with a couple of short and sweet games for non wargamers over the years.
At a local Roman Day (I live near the Antonine Wall) we ran Roman v Picts games with a much simplified version of Lion Rampant. Also used that for the Jacobite Rebellion.
On several ocassions we have taken part in what was mainly a reenactor event at the Scottish National Museum of Flight using Wings of War. The only change there was to take out most of the cards showing zero damage and have the 'boom' card strategically placed on the bottom of the deck where it could be produced if the game needed to finish quickly. That was also interesting because the organisers gave us a spot under the wing of Concorde.
Thinking about it there was another such game we put onat the National Museum of Scotland. They had the opportunity to have an exhibition showing the eagles captured at Waterloo. The club put on a big game in 15mm of one part of the battle. However, as a public participation game, we ran a skirmish game of the capture of one of the eagles. Unfortunately I could not attend on the day but the reports were very good.
Perhaps some inspiration for you?
Definitely some good ideas there! I've always liked the 40K jungle-fighting rules which might work for a Seminole game here in South Florida.
DeleteGreat idea
DeleteGreat start! My experience has been that for newcomers, the simpler and less fiddly the rules, the better but looks like you have it covered and bright students seem to learn more easily than slightly older folk.
ReplyDeleteWell, could have been less fiddly - most likely by using five bases rather than 3-counting-as-six, and dropping the morale rules (which in this set basically determine whether melee happens at all - if charger fails he doesn't close, if chargee fails they break, otherwise they fight).
Delete