Wow - a month has gone by since my last blog post....where does time go?
Stuff going on in the last month:
Played another pair of Field of Battle:Ancients test games. I think the rules are getting pretty tight, and provide a unique ancient game. I'm at the point that I have to start the rule writing process, which is always ridiculously hard to start, but pretty engrossing when I'm into it. With a 5 month old puppy, its hard to find blocks of time to devote to writing.
I've been pondering another campaign method to generate battles, set up terrain, and provide "campaignish" feeling decision points for the players. I'm looking for something that is relatively paperwork free, fast and easy, and sustainable over the course of the campaign, while providing interesting and unique game situations. Oh - is that all??? We'll see how well that works out...
I'll be trying out a test run of "Grand FoB" next Saturday - a scaled up FoB with some minor tweaks to fit the grand tactical scale.
I read Steven Pressfield's novel "Killing Rommel" on the way home from a business trip Tuesday night (its funny how much reading you can get in when you're stuck on a plane for almost 3 hours waiting for your gate to open up as you sit parked off the main runway in a howling snowstorm). GREAT book. I hated to see it end - highly recommended!
I've been doing some thinking about what I want to game, and what "periods" of wars interest me. I am fascinated by WWI, but primarily 1914 and 1918. I am similarly deeply consumed by WW2, but I always seem to be reading about the Normandy campaign. Somehow, I feel guilty that I don't want to do ALL of the wars - surely there are gameable situations in 1916-17, and in Germany in 1945, or in Italy in 1944?
But - for some reason, those situations just depress me. The dreariness of the situation just beats me down at times. On the other hand, the intriguing tactical problems in 1914, and the hard fighting in the Normandy campaign (before the German army was shattered) continue to fascinate me.
I think I've reached a "eureka" moment - why do I feel an obligation to "have" to game the other periods in those, or any other wars? I don't "have" to do the whole war - I can just do what I want! While that may seem painfully obvious, for me, the collectors mentality of having to "have it all" has always meant that I had to do the whole war, if I did the war. But - if I'm just doing a part of it - I can concentrate on the part that I personally find the most interesting. Maybe my personal obligation to do "all" the war periods stems from writing rules....I write the rules, research the periods...and then feel obligated to do it "all". Well...no more! I'm going to do the stuff I want! So that means: 1914, WW2 Normandy, and avoiding the dreariness of pure trench warfare (which is a fascinating study, but I don't necessarily want to game it) and the inevitability of winter 1944/1945 WW2 gaming.
Anyway - its my hobby, with my toys, in my basement. I'll do it and have fun!!