Back in October of last year, I attended one of Georgetown University Wargame Society's ongoing lecture series. On tap for the October lecture was Robert W. Jones' talk on The Challenges and Pitfalls of an "Authentic" Medieval Wargame. Dr. Jones, the author of the Medieval wargame rules Blood and Horse Droppings, brought up a number of interesting topics and points to ponder when creating a set of Medieval rules. While I had planned on offering up a summary of the discussion much sooner, my motivation to re-address the presentation was triggered by a challenge to bring my yet unblooded Wars of the Roses collection to the gaming table. With what I want in a Medieval wargame and rules of engagement still in the formative stage, I returned to my notes from Dr. Jones' presentation for inspiration and clarity.
Given the title of the talk, I was not surprised or disappointed in seeing Dr. Jones present a list of challenges and pitfalls to designing a Medieval wargame and how to address those challenges in game design. The central theme of the lecture should not be foreign to any wargame designer. That theme focused on the tug-of-war between playability and historical simulation. Let's briefly reconsider the salient points on what Dr. Jones had to say on the topic of Medieval wargame challenges.
Medieval wargaming, like Ancients wargaming, often encompasses large chronological periods. Medieval rules can cover nearly a millennium of military history from the fall of the Western Roman Empire to the Great Italian Wars. Universal rules, using a common game engine, tend to categorize troops according to common criteria across several periods. Players use the same mechanisms and nomenclature regardless of historical context. Standardization allows players to switch between periods more readily but at the loss historical specificity over convenience and playability.
Having such breadth in Medieval rules suggests a lack of understanding regarding the technological and tactical evolution present throughout the period. There is no equivalent descriptive label such as "Horse & Musket" or "Pike & Shot" to describe Medieval warfare's dominant military technologies.The limited and unreliable historical sources available pose problems as well. Medieval chronicles lack tactical detail, exaggerate numbers, and prioritize political or religious narratives over complete and accurate battle accounting. Administrative records focus on logistics, not battlefield behavior. Troop types often reflect national myths ("rash" French knights or "unstoppable" English archers) rather than historical nuance. Rules often impose 18th/19th-century concepts such as drilled units or hierarchical command onto Medieval armies. Medieval armies often lacked standardized training and the leadership structure was primarily flat.
Finally, the most significant challenge for medieval wargaming is that historically accurate Medieval battles make for tedious games. Medieval battles were static and chaotic by modern standards, making them less "fun" as games. The limited command and control, lack of tactical flexibility, and inability to disengage and redeploy units means Medieval battles involve minimal maneuver once lines are engaged. Commanders had few tactical decisions once battle was joined since they were often fighting in the front lines. An historically accurate simulation would essentially line up armies, advance to contact, and watch the clash unfold with little player input.
Are these foreseen challenges to designing a Medieval ruleset correct? Are there other considerations? Do answers to these challenges depend upon level of abstraction modeled or the player’s role in the game? Is designing/developing a "fun" set of Medieval rules even possible given these constraints? Many reckon it is including Dr. Jones!
With the challenges as seen through Dr. Jones' eyes laid out, next I consider solutions and rules. Something to dive into another time.
