Saturday, January 25, 2025

What's In A Name?

After seeing the above book mentioned on Peter's blog (see A New Book...) and listening to the authors' podcasts, I placed an order.  Book arrived quickly and was read just as quickly.  I won't repeat the contents of the book since Peter did that and Table of Contents can be seen on Amazon.

What I do want to discuss is the authors' wrestling with the renaming of the gaming aspect of the hobby that we enjoy.  Many of us likely refer to this hobby as miniatures wargaming or playing a miniatures game.  Really, I lump all facets of the hobby simply into the catch-all, wargaming

The authors' take a different tack, however.  They state their rationale for first dismissing the use of tabletop games, then dismissing miniatures games, then dismissing miniatures wargames, before settling onto the term of non-discrete miniatures games

The name, non-discrete miniatures game is chosen since the authors argue that,
  • Games are not necessarily about war.
  • Spatial relationships between miniatures and terrain are crucial.
  • Any physical object can be introduced into the game and have meaning in game terms (non-discrete components).
  • Movement and positioning are not limited to fixed increments or grid spaces (non-discrete positioning).
Non-discrete is an interesting term to choose and returns me to the days of studying mathematics.  Typically, one sees a bifurcation between discrete and continuous but not between discrete and non-discrete.  I suppose if the term, continuous was utilized as in continuous miniatures game, readers might conclude that we game non-stop!      

Moving on, the authors define these games by their unique spatial characteristics in that,
  • Precise physical positioning matters.  That is, movement and placement are analog (and continuous) and not grid-based.
  • Players can bring any object to the game table and game systems must accommodate an infinite variability of components.
One example given of discrete movement and figure (marker) placement is the game of Monopoly.  A playing piece can only be in one of the grid spaces on the playing board at any one time and not between two spaces.  In a non-discrete game, movement is governed by a measuring device with a miniature able to move anywhere along that vector and stop anywhere short of the maximum move distance allowed.  This non-discrete movement criterion seems to not only explicitly exclude grid-based games from inclusion into non-discrete miniatures game by definition but implicitly as well with the continuous nature of measured movement along a vector. 

In later chapters, the authors relax the condition for non-griddedness.  Games having gridded movement or zoned movement may fit into the structure of building a non-discrete miniatures game as long as the focus on the design remains on the spatial relationships within the game and the infinite variety of components.  Given that discrete positioning and movement criteria are later relaxed, the grid vs non-grid distinction should be dropped from the definition altogether.

With the argument for excluding gridded games jettisoned, what remains the focus of non-discrete miniatures gaming?  What remains constant is the reliance upon the external components brought into the game system.

What distinguishes many boxed miniatures games from the non-discrete miniatures games that the authors describe?  The difference is that the former is self-contained with the rules and all of the components necessary for play while the latter is similar to a toolkit with a programmed game engine requiring any number of external inputs provided by the player(s).  These external inputs could include figures, terrain, army lists, dice, measuring devices, etc.
       
Is the classification still between discrete vs non-discrete miniatures games or is a better fitting distinction between endogenous vs exogenous miniatures games?  I suggest that the latter terminology may be a better fit if one agrees with the authors that the deciding attribute is bringing external inputs into the system.  Still, it is all wargaming to me.

There is much more to be pulled from this book of interest to wargamers and wargame designers whether focusing on non-discrete miniatures gaming or not.  I have only brought up the main thesis of Chapter 1!  With so much to consider, I may non-discretely dip back into this text on occasion.

32 comments:

  1. Must confess I've never really thought about the name of our varied hobby. I just kind of lump it altogether as wargaming

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Neil, I have not given this topic or naming convention much thought before either.

      Delete
  2. I'm not sure this definition scheme of whether you have integral playing pieces or can bring in external components entirely works. Take for example C&C. As I understand it, it can be played with game blocks or you can substitute the blocks for figures. Has it changed it's fundamental nature by the substitution?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like Schrödinger's cat, can a tabletop miniatures game be both discrete and non-discrete simultaneously? I play C&C both with blocks and miniatures. Has the game changed fundamentally? I say, no, but is a block game a miniatures game?

      Delete
  3. I’ve always referred to it as “playing with toy soldiers” which satisfies the none enquiring minds of those that know me. Just “playing with toys” would probably do if covering all the potential none soldier variables. The potential quantum state of my models has yet to concern me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nancy calls what we do, "Playing with Army Men." If you are not spending time pondering the possibilities of the potential quantum state of your games, well, you need more idle time.

      Delete
  4. Must admit I wargame and that does for me, I don;t think too deeply into it that's for sure!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Wargaming" does it for me too although I give these topics some thought.

      Delete
  5. Non-discrete is one that would have caught my eye too, Jonathan.

    The thing that makes me chuckle the most about University degrees is that there is usually a basic statistics course involved, and yet after two or three of them nobody can completely and confidently remember the terms involved.

    That said, it's all sweetness and light, until someone uses the term 'non-discrete".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With the study and use of statistics, there is a point in either study or career where it all falls into place and one becomes "statistically mature".

      Delete
  6. Normally I just use wargaming or historical wargaming if I want further definition.

    Christopher

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Reasonable path. I use the term, "historical" wargaming when I want to emphasize that I am not simply playing with toy soldiers!

      Delete
  7. Sorry to appear rude but it sounds like an exercise in semantics by people with too much time on their hands.
    I don't think many people refer to a perambulator but will happily know and called it a pram. Whether it's a automobile or a car, we still understand the reference.
    For me, wargaming will do nicely. I can then clarify if required if this means a board game and/or using model figures; historical or fantasy etc.
    I have said enough!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Richard, no appearances of rudeness at all. Here, you are (mostly) free to say whatever you wish. Since the book is catering to an academic setting (I think!), perhaps having the power to redefine offers some "street cred" in that world.

      Delete
  8. An interesting exercise. At any point does the author ask the fundamental question, is it fun and entertaining? For myself I refer to it all as gaming.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is it fun and how to make it fun are topics for other book chapters and, perhaps, other blog posts.

      Delete
  9. It's interesting to pick up on your introductory comment about many referring to what I do as MINIATURE Wargaming, Jon. I would suggest that this is another example of the difference between N American (I don't know for about Canada?) gamers and the rest of the English speaking community....I have never heard anyone I know call the hobby MINIATURE(S) Wargaming....only Wargaming. If we look at some of the "founding documents " from the 60's and 70's, we can see some of the original pioneers referred to it as Battlegaming.
    I suspect that once again, this reflects the difference between America and the rest of us....you had a lot of boardgames in your early "wargaming experience, most of us did not. I for one consider the term wargaming to refer to tabletop games with model soldiers and vehicles etc...SPI etc are boardgames that simulate large scale military operations.
    As for " non-discrete miniatures game" .....like the "Gulf of America", I don't think it will catch on for general usage!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your feedback, Keith!

      The authors of this book are both English and the terminology of "miniatures gaming" is one of their constructs to distinguish between other gaming mediums. Like you, I stick to a more generic "wargaming" term since most of my gaming centers upon warfare whether in miniature or hex-and-counter. As for "Miniatures Wargaming" being more of North American origination rather then UK/European, the first time I recall seeing the term was in Miniatures Wargames magazine, a distinctively UK publication.

      "Non-Discrete Miniatures Game" may not catch on but it may be too early to discount "Gulf of America."

      Delete
    2. Yes - ironically enough, I visited the Gripping Beast site shortly after making my comment, and noted it describes itself as a supplier of figures for Miniature Wargaming - so perhaps my impression that this is a more US term is mistaken!
      In terms of using the phrase to distinguish games involving figures from those that do not, its reasonably logical.

      Delete
    3. When you start looking, you often find!

      Delete
  10. I have to say the discussion seems like a waste of print space in the book to me.
    I certainly will not be referring to what I do as "non discrete". Well maybe there are those near nekkid Ancient Libyans; they aren't particularly discrete! :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, this chapter in the book is a short one at only three pages. The term, "non-discrete" does not work for me either. As for the Libyans, I agree! They are not discrete in their battle attire. Reminds me that I ought to add Libyans to my Biblical armies. Something for 2025 perhaps?

      Delete
    2. Well, you clearly need Libyans, Jon! :-)
      One thing I haven't found for them is chariots, which they used later in their long tenure, although I suppose you could just evict the occupants of some other contemporaneous cultures vehicles. For now, I just use some old Canaanite chariots for the job!

      Delete
    3. I might just take you up on your suggestion!

      Delete
  11. All I can add is that I wonder how monopoly would play if you moved your marker each turn up to your roll in inches 😁 Would that then make monopoly a non-discrete wargame - as long as someone is using the battleship? 😂

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, if moving in inches up to a max move, that would be non-discrete only if you also bring external pieces into the game.

      Delete
  12. I’m with some of the others above; that whole discussion sounds like someone writing a book who is getting paid by the word. I do not think I would even finish that chapter. Maybe the rest is better? 😀

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The authors made the claim that the book is 100,000 words. My recap here is only of the first three pages. There is interesting content in the book. More topics for additional posts.

      Delete
  13. My brain hurts...I think I discretely need to get out my H.G.Wells, Featherstone and Grant books and move some toys around on the kitchen table...😄😂🤣

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Apologies for the brain hurt. Getting the toys out on the table may ease the pain.

      Delete
  14. When someone says “like Warhammer” I will say ‘no, Historical’ but normally it is Wargaming for me, always has been, George plays with wee sojers for my family. I am not keen on using ‘miniatures’ or the awful ‘mini’s’.

    ReplyDelete