Playing EPIC in 28mm.

Tuesday, 17 December 2013

Another 'I don't get it' on : Bell of Lost Souls: Historical Wargaming and the Average Gamer

Warhammer 40k, Fantasy, Wargames & Miniatures News: Bell of Lost Souls: Historical Wargaming and the Average Gamer: Everyone at one time or another has seen a fantastic historical wargaming table and said "what if".  But why is making the j...

Yes, it's a police crusier.  Probably an unarmed Tauros with four seats, but we'll sort it out. Possibly the first time it gets shot at. 

So there's a post where someone just doesn't get historical wargaming.  Hummm.

The parameters for (for instance) WW2 wargaming mean that there are already fliers in most games and superheavies are generally limited to Naval Bombardment; there will be no weird shit added to army lists unless you start playing Weird WW2.  Like 40K, there is a table, an army lists and a points value.  And people who are going to play these games (beit FoW or 40K) will be interested in the background.

What do I think ?  I think a tabletop wargame is a tabletop wargame.  In the same way that an RPG is an RPG.  The people I play either of these with tend not to vary.  So essentially we play the same game each time, regardless of genre or ruleset.

So I do get that someone might not get it. 'It' in this case being the games I play in. But I think it's phenomenally unlikely that I will find myself at a table with someone who doesn't get 'it' is hugely divorced from my gaming experience - the one I'm happy with.  I am also perfectly OK that the original poster would possibly be horrified with the way I/we approach 40K and may well feel that we arn't really playing 40K at all (I am imagining the look of disbelief as I pull out the WH and BT Codecies).  Whereas those I have met and ending up killing and being killed by through the really quite wonderful medium of bloggin' seem to have got something close to what they expected when they made planetfall on Devos IV.

So a whole load of talk about 'should/are superheavies be allowed in 40K ?' is a bit of a non-question as far as I am concerned.  Same with flyers; If you turn up here an want superheavies and fliers, then we'll have 'em.  If you don't then we won't.  And if I've got an idea for a specific scenario, then let me talk you into it - you'll go down in history, on Devos IV at least.

Oh well.  Each to their own, eh ?


  1. I find that BOLS, often has these sorts of clueless and oft pointless articles that can be easily answered in this way. Its unfortunate because i really enjoyed their old campaign books and the content they used to produce there, still there is some content i like there. But i agree with you about fliers/superheavies i don't really see the argument with them. But then i like you (allow me to kindly presume your demeanour) am more concerned with the spectacle and story, where I believe they are busily writing down their most vicious tourney lists, and as such the question bears stronger significance to them

  2. Opinions are like arseholes...... Etc.

    Opinion pieces should be relegated to toilet stall walls.

    And I agree with everything you and Impcommander have said.

  3. I'd struggle to enjoy a game with lots of superheavies in it to be honest - don't get me wrong, the odd Baneblade is nice thrown into the mix, but with loads of these units the game starts to get a bit silly. Why bother bringing any infantry?

    Having said that if someone really felt strongly I'd take part in a game just for the fun factor.

  4. It would be interesting to see a game with combined superheavies and infantry; not sure how it would be run on a tabletop though!