Curious to see the Paradox of Modern Wargaming post return to the Top 10 posts widget after having fallen off the leaderboard, I returned to the post for a refresher.
As a corollary to the tortoise and hare fable, I argue that modern miniature wargaming is caught in a paradox. That is, wargamers invest huge amounts of time in painting, research, and terrain building, yet increasingly favor fast-play rules and shorter games that can play to conclusion in an hour or two. The contrast between the long “journey” of preparation with the brief “destination” of modern game duration prompts a question. That is, does an emphasis on speed and efficiency at the gaming table undermine the depth, narrative, and sense of accomplishment that typically justified all that effort? Of course, this is a simplification, and both have a place in the hobby.
With more than two score of readers weighing in on the topic, I try to distill this collective wisdom, experience, and insight into a handful of common themes from the many, generous responses. Taking up a tally sheet, I scored the responses. A synopsis follows:
Painting v. Gaming
I’ve noticed a bifurcation in how wargamers approach the hobby. Some clearly see painting as a means to an end. These gamers paint so they can play. They describe themselves as warGAMERS, not painters. Others admit that painting figures and building terrain are satisfying in their own right. Even if an army never hits the table, there is still get plenty of joy from this facet of the hobby. I reckon blogging feeds into that too. Being able to share progress, swap tips, and show off completed projects gives painting its own reward separate from gaming.
Game Length and Complexity
The comments about game length are interesting. Many of us remember those day‑long (or even multi‑day) games of the old days. I have had many. Now, most gamers seem to prefer games that wrap up in two to four hours. Long enough to tell a story but not so long that they feel like slogging through mud. The sweet spot seems to be rules that flow naturally and don’t bury players under numerous tables and exhausting detail. A few people pointed out how older “proper” rule sets rarely reached a satisfying finish, while modern abstract systems often feel just as plausible and more fun. I tend to agree.
Skirmish, Scale, and “Realism”
The boom in skirmish and “big skirmish” games has been fascinating to watch develop. These results are backed by results from the Great Wargaming Survey. Some historical periods (Western gunfights, pulp, sci‑fi, modern small‑unit actions) fit this format perfectly. Others, like pike‑and‑shot, maybe not so much. On this topic, there is debate. Personally, I like the idea that “realism” doesn’t have to mean a simulation. I do enjoy simulations, though. If the outcomes are believable and the game captures the right flavor of a period, that’s good enough for me.
Time, Focus, and the Modern Hobby
The whole “declining attention span” theory gets thrown around a lot, but some (like Stew, Norm, and JWH) don’t buy it. As several commenters pointed out, it’s more about life and time than attention. Most of us, having gamed for decades, simply don’t have the same long afternoons we once did. Well, until retirement, that is! Shorter games fit better with real life. I suspect those players craving detailed simulations may now find that level of detail in computer wargames. On the tabletop, people seem more interested in enjoying each other’s company and finishing games with a sense of closure.
Variety, Choice, and the Future
If the hobby suffers from anything these days, it’s too much choice. Every month brings new rules, new scales, and new shiny projects to distract us. Yet, no one seems particularly worried about the future. A few long‑time gamers said it flat‑out. If we are enjoying ourselves now, that is what matters. Whether historical miniature wargaming thrives beyond our generation isn’t the main concern. Playing with the right people and finding pleasure and satisfaction in the process, whatever form that takes, is key.
Perhaps there is no paradox in this context at all but a nuanced and individual approach to wargaming.
Thanks to all for contributing your insights to my little study.
