Clauswitz.com
This isn’t meant to be so much of a
factual piece, but a piece about, well, another
bar to entry in the hobby… from the rules writing
side. Certain bars are there for a damn good reason. Among them are:
- Is your game playable?
- Can it give a reasonably historical result?
- Is this a game worth someone investing their time, money, and energy in?
And the final bar to beat all bars - Will the game sell?
These are all necessary bars. I’ll be the first to argue they are. I’d rather have some quality in this hobby rather than the shlock that sometimes comes out in a slickly packaged but poorly proofed and playtested PDF that’s then released for a ridiculously low price on Wargames Vault. Note: This is not me knocking Wargames Vault and the quality stuff that does get released there. There is a lot of it. I’ve even released a scenario book myself.
That said, having written two scenario books and done some minor work here and there in the hobby, I can tell you sometimes, I think we make the bar to entry for first-time developers a bit too high. Look, not everyone’s going to be Jim Dunnigan, who sold Jutland to Avalon Hill when he was 11. I get it, the printing margins these days are risky, and PDF is a much cheaper way to take a chance on an untried writer. But my problem is, sometimes, with some publishers? PDF has come to mean a lesser product in some circles. To me, this is an unfair comparison. Technology is improving, and design philosophy must improve with it. Graphic design has, and there’s been more than a few innovative designs out there, but many games still have roots in their earlier forbearers.
There have been books written on rules writing, but to be honest, most of those efforts have been “meh” in this author’s estimation. Look, we’re a hobby that’s not getting any younger, and we need a new generation of rules writers to cater to a new generation of gamers, not just trot out “Fill in Set of Rules Version XXII” like we can be wont to do in this hobby. I am not immune to this; I, too, have my love of endless rules revisions and nostalgia-based buying decisions (name a wargamer who doesn’t).
But we need to figure out something as a hobby to mentor and guide these new rules designers out there to ways they can get their rules, books, and games to market. Designing a game gives one a measure of agency in this hobby. It’s a sense of “buy-in,” and knowing someone somewhere is playing something you wrote will make you want to write more and design more. Trust me. It’s a heady feeling. I’m still chasing my first Origins Award!
But that’s the point. We need to mentor new rules designers in their teens and twenties. I’ve seen workshops at PAX Unplugged and several other board gaming conventions I’ve been at. Come on HMGS? Let’s do something similar. Why can they make events of “Design a board game in two hours? Surely, we can come up with “design bare-bones rules set in two hours?” I mean, think of the ideas that will come out of that?
I am not saying we need to rescind the quality bars to the writing and design side of the hobby or compromise on quality. Or that people shouldn’t pay their dues. Everyone should pay their dues. I just think some mentoring from the vast wealth of experience in the hobby to the younger folks who are wanting to put their names out there to write for this hobby. We are an aging hobby, and if we can get some younger blood to be the ambassadors for the hobby in writing new rules and scenario packs, then we may be able to reach that youth that has not been seeing wargaming as a viable leisure option. I am not saying we need to compromise what we are, but what I am saying is that we need to get more designers out there designing more games, and we need our older, experienced designers out there teaching these “kids” the ropes.
I guess what we need is a way to make that “entrepreneurial” Euro Game spirit translate to the Historical Wargame side of the hobby. Games like Undaunted prove it’s possible. But and I say this to the grognards, we need to show newer gamers that “crunch” isn’t to be feared but embraced in moderation. Games like 1985: Under an Iron Sky prove monster games are viable, even from a small press company. Grognards and the old school and a new school of designers can co-exist, and the older designers should be willing to pass on what they’ve learned. It’s imperative they do because the institutional knowledge we have in the game designers of the 1970s and 1980s is something we need to preserve in a new generation of game design. One we need to open up as much as possible to get more people gaming.
So, I’m done on my soapbox. As always, good gaming, everyone!
–
At Epoch Xperience, we specialize in creating compelling narratives and provide research to give your game the kind of details that engage your players and create a resonant world they want to spend time in. If you are interested in learning more about our gaming research services, you can browse Epoch Xperience’s service on our parent site, SJR Research.
–
(This article is credited to Jason Weiser. Jason is a long-time wargamer with published works in the Journal of the Society of Twentieth Century Wargamers; Miniature Wargames Magazine; and Wargames, Strategy, and Soldier.)