Quote from: Omega;743903Problem is that in a wargame you are some faceless "force" directing the armies. You dont usually have a character down there with the troops.

In my experience, that's irrelevant to the mindset that OG's talking about. Whether my 'force' is a single skirmisher or an army corps, I'm thoroughly invested in the outcome and likely immersed in the setting.

I'd call myself a wargamer. But I don't care about painting minis -- or spending that much money (geau DiscWars!) -- and I will never again play Risk as long as I live, as I hate that game unceasingly. I also don't do chess or RTS, either. Prefer video game versions, even if many AIs are weak, as they are readily available with minimal set up time.

Played quite a few of the games mentioned on this topic, as my older brother was a fan and he grew up in the golden age of Avalon Hill and cardboard chits.

I never thought of myself as a wargamer, mainly because I associated wargaming with sandtables and painstakingly painted led miniatures.  But on reflection, I used to play lots of Car Wars, lots of Star Fleet Battles, a fair amount of chess, a few sessions of Axis & Allies, a few sessions of Risk, a few sessions of Awful Green Things From Outer Space, and I think one game of Battletech.  Hell, an older boy and I used to stage battles using Army Ants and some simple resolution rules he made up.  Also greatly enjoyed Sid Meier's Gettysburg on the PC.  I guess, by the definition OG's put forward, that makes me a wargamer.

And most interestingly, looking back, I never considered such activities as especially distinct from playing role-playing games.  Particularly Car Wars and Star Fleet Battles.  Chess and Axis & Allies have the camera pulled back enough that it's abstract to the point where I don't really think "in character".  But in Car Wars "I" was the driver(s).  In Star Fleet Battles, "I" was the the captain(s) or admiral.

I must admit that I was never especially good at these games, but I played them and enjoyed them.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;743896Hmm.  I guess I get where you're coming from.  For example, I would include Risk or Axis & Allies or Stratego in the broad category of "wargames," but not everyone who likes playing Risk would consider themselves a "wargamer."

You know, once I've read a conversation (or was it an article?), probably on Boardgamegeek, about where and how wargames fit into the world of boardgames at large. The thrust of the idea was that typically, Eurogames prize elegant mechanics above all else (even at the cost of the mechanics being highly disassociated from the game's nominal theme), Amerigames promote dramatic gameplay with plenty of upsets and twists, and wargames are all about realism - i.e., regardless of the scale of the game (small unit tactics to grand strategy), they rules are set up to simulate "what would happen in real life".

Now, if we accept this division, than I can see why many people would not consider Risk or Stratego to be actual wargames (and would agree with them, personally): even though the theme of these games is war, their mechanics do not really have anything to do with what happens on an actual battlefield; hence not simulation. After all, you could have a WWII-themed Monopoly board where the locations are renamed after tanks and airplanes and Jail is called Oflag XIII-B, but it still wouldn't be a wargame. Same principle.

Quote from: Old Geezer;743660How can it not be a wargame?  Is it two or more bunches of people shooting/stabbing/swording at each other?  Sounds like a wargame to me.

"Wargame" is a game about war.  If "In the dark future of Warhammer 40K there is only war," or whatever the slogan is, how is that not a wargame?

I don't think of minis games as wargames either. Around here there are thriving communities for both historical paper wargames and miniatures. However, there is very little overlap between the players of each format. 90 per cent of the players of Worlds in Flames, Hannibal: Rome vs Carthage, and Here I Stand have no interest whatsoever in Warhammer Fantasy or Flames of War. While 90 per cent of the players of the minis games have no interest whatsoever in historical boardgames.

So in order to distinguish between the two at game store events, clubs, and conventions, gamers around here  use 'wargames' to refer to historical paper wargames, and 'tabletop miniatures' for minis.

I'll also note that while cardboard wargames are a prominent part of the Boardgamegeek database and community, there seems to be little, if any, presence there among minis gamers. And the Consimworld forum - where all the cardboard wargame designers, publishers, and grognard player-base hang out - has almost no miniatures presence. So I don't think my community is the only one where the two are regarded as distinct hobbies.

I'd like to give wargaming a try sometime--I had this friend in college who had a lot of 40K minis that I obsessed over--but I've never had the chance to play. I'm pretty crap at strategy, but it'd stil be fun to try.

I played a lot of chit and counter wargames back before I discovered roleplaying games. I wrote my own game rules and kitbashed with abandon. I still own a bunch, from Star Fleet Battles to Victory in the Pacific to Roarke's Drift. I haven't played any since 1977. Too busy with roleplaying games.

-clash

Brought up on SPI and AH at the same time I started D&D. That was fairly normal as D&D began as part of the wargaming hobby (yes I am aware that many people got into RPGs through other routes)

Today, my wargaming is largely Paradox strat games, a mini session once or twice a year and pawing through a collector friend's collection, discussing say, the large variation of maps dealing with the Russian front. They're basically touch points for discussing history and current affairs, more artifact than game. I'm not into the length of most of those old boardgames these days or the complexity level of many of them.

In my RPG game, the players are very involved in a  small regional war featuring hundreds a side. The wargame part -troops, logistics, scouting, the maneuvering- is a lot of fun.

Quote from: Haffrung;743924I'll also note that while cardboard wargames are a prominent part of the Boardgamegeek database and community, there seems to be little, if any, presence there among minis gamers. And the Consimworld forum - where all the cardboard wargame designers, publishers, and grognard player-base hang out - has almost no miniatures presence. So I don't think my community is the only one where the two are regarded as distinct hobbies.

Hmm.  I wonder when the mindset changed?  Because having just got back from GaryCon, everything from DUNGEON! to CIRCUS MAXIMUS! to DON'T GIVE UP THE SHIP was ALL considered wargames.

Quote from: Omega;743903Problem is that in a wargame you are some faceless "force" directing the armies. You dont usually have a character down there with the troops.

Whereas RPGs put you right there as the character and its YOU on the line.

Many skirmish wargames do indeed give you "a figure."

But that misses my point; in a RPG I fully intend to have MY character do well, but I'm aware it's not guaranteed.  Even playing the game risks the character.

Quote from: Old Geezer;743960Hmm.  I wonder when the mindset changed?  Because having just got back from GaryCon, everything from DUNGEON! to CIRCUS MAXIMUS! to DON'T GIVE UP THE SHIP was ALL considered wargames.

Silly Geezer, a forum can't be a wargame! :teehee:

Quote from: jeff37923;743909"I wouldn't want to be part of any club that would have me as a member."
- Groucho Marx

Exactly!

I was typing out something longer, but quickly realised that listing all the wargames of various types (hex 'n' counter, counter 'n' map, miniature 'n' tabletop, mouse 'n' keyboard) that I've played was far more trouble than it was worth. Two I will mention for their ties with RPGs are Heavy Gear (played several mixed RPG/Wargame campaigns) and the upcoming (but already available to Kickstarter backers) Domains at War for ACKS (likely replacing all my fantasy and ancients wargaming for the foreseeable future; top notch RPG campaign integration, too).

Quote from: Old Geezer;743898This is a WAY different attitude from "A high velocity shell just tore your lead Pz III open from end to end.  You have no idea where it came from."  "Fuck."

Or you line up the perfect angle for your Federation Heavy Cruiser only to roll shit on the damage allocation. Then in the next impluse your opponent's Klingon D7 rips out a new asshole in your ship.

Or god forbid play out a fleet action and watching your frigates and destroyers explode like popcorn like there is no tomorrow.

It's dangerous to play games. You might end up losing once in a while (or a lot, if you suck at it).

OH THE HUMANITY!