Pages

Saturday, 14 July 2018

My next writing projects

I have been thinking about my next two writing projects. The first is a book about the Masters of the Hertfordshire Masters' Lodge No.4090 who served during the First World War. The Lodge was formed in 1920, and many of the members who became Worshipful Masters of the Lodge had distinguished war records that have yet to be recorded. It is my intention to complete the book in time for the Lodge's November meeting, which will be very close to the centenary of the Armistice that brought an end to the fighting.


Unless I have a major change of mind in the interim, the second book will be my PORTABLE NAPOLEONIC WARGAME book. I have begun jotting down a few ideas and have been looking at Paddy Griffith's NAPOLEONIC WARGAMING FOR FUN for inspiration with regard to what the book should cover.


At present I want the book to cover:
  • A simple divisional-level set of wargame rules where one base = one infantry battalion/cavalry regiment/artillery battery and that are a Napoleonic version of my original PORTABLE WARGAME RULES
  • A more complex set of divisional/corps-level rules where each unit has two rather than one base of figures, and where each infantry and cavalry unit represent a brigade/regiment and each artillery unit represents several batteries
  • A more abstract set of corps/army-level rules that might be adaptable for use in a kriegsspiel.
It is my intention that each of the above will share what is termed a common ‘game engine’ (i.e. the games mechanisms will be very similar in each game) and will used the same figures.

Paddy Griffith's NAPOLEONIC WARGAMING FOR FUN ...


... is currently published and sold by the 'History of Wargaming' Project (ISBN 978 1 4452 0299 0).

8 comments:

  1. To my regret I long ago sold off my copy of the Paddy Griffith NWFF book (at least I think I did: I no longer have it). Ironically, because they formed the basis of the very many refights of Napoleonic battles - campaigns in fact - fought at the club during the late '90s and 90s.

    I wonder if anyone would be interested in my reproducing one or two of my Southern Sortie (Club Magazine) articles on these?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Archduke Piccolo,

      I bought a copy of NWFF when it was first published ... which coincided with the foundation of Wargame Developments.

      I would be interested in you articles, and I hope that you will share them with us.

      All the best,

      Bib

      Delete
    2. To be honest I always found the title to be a bit of an oxymoron :)

      Delete
    3. Kaptain Kobold,

      Back in the 1970s I took part in quite a few Napoleonic wargames that weren't much fun ... and it put me off for the period for a very long time.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  2. Bob,
    Wish you well with both Books- being finished by November is pressure. If I'm not mistaken - Paddy Griffiths mechanism for Napoleonic BATTLES was to have each Regiment assigned a 'Status'- During the course of the action the Regiment would have it's Status altered as it took casualties and suffered from poorer morale etc...such that the Regiments were dropping from 'A', to 'B' to 'C' Status etc...with no figures from the game being removed. An interesting system which Paddy devised going back to the 1970s. Regards. KEV.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kev Robertson,

      Setting a deadline for the first book gives me something to work towards, and as the research has already been done, it should not take me too long to write.

      Paddy's rules placed more emphasis on the impact combat would have on a unit's 'will to combat' (something John Keegan wrote about in his book FACE OF BATTLE) rather than removing casualty figures. He told me that he felt that this was a better reflection of what actually happened on the battlefield.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  3. Bob, it goes without saying that I'm looking forward to your Portable Napoleonic Wargame book very much, and I like the approach of providing variants for different levels of action, from division to army level.

    I do wonder though, whether one base per battalion is the best representation for smaller 'divisional' games, such as Maida in Sicily, battles of the War of 1812, or the South American Wars of Liberation, bearing in mind that the portrayal of column, line and square on the tabletop is surely one of the reasons for the appeal of this level of wargame. If you had four bases per battalion, all four in line abreast would portray a line; two up and two behind a column, and one base on its own (the others being removed temporarily) would be a reasonable portrayal of the area of a square. Multiple bases per battalion also permits detachments to occupy farms &c.

    You could still resolve musketry and close combat by applying the SP and morale effects to the battalion, rather than the base.

    For larger engagements involving lots of battalions, limitations of space and numbers of figures would make one base per battalion more appropriate. Perhaps you could consider offering alternative styles of representation, whilst keeping the same rules?

    Could your army-level version be suitable to replace the battle resolution in Paddy's Generalship Game from NWFF for those who want something less abstract/boardgame-like for the battles?

    Best wishes, Arthur

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Arthur Harman (Arthur),

      As I expected, you’ve given me some excellent suggestions, and I will be giving them some considerable thought over the next few months.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete