Ever Feel Odd About It?

[Dhalsim-on]

I love fantasy battle games and sci-fi... BUT... the idea of playing historical wargaming really perturbs me.

When you're busy re-enacting battles that really did kill hundreds of thousands of people don't you ever feel a bit weirded out by it all? Is there an element of militarism in the historical wargaming community? An undercurrent of death, or more precisely, state regimented murder worship?

Don't get me wrong, I've competed in thai boxing, western boxing and grappling... I think violence can actually be a creative force for the individual. However mass organised murder is a whole different ballgame.

I guess my question really is, is historical wargaming a little disrespectful to all those who lost their lives?

I'm not wanting to start an argument I'm just trying to identify if anyone ever thinks about these themes. Thanks.

[Easy E]

No. The greatest disrespect is to forget.

[sigur]

Good question. If you want to listen to two seasoned (mostly historical) wargamers talk about this specific issue you really should download this. It's a very interesting and good ...listen and they raise some very good points.

It's probably the touchiest topic when it comes to Wargaming and I think that the lines are drawn very subjectively. Ultimately, we're all here to have fun, push around our little puppets and roll some dice. We're not playing any ideologies or something like that and usually it's the historical wargamers who are the best versed in history and thus are especially self-reflective and sensitive about such things.

As for myself, I'm interested in the 30 years war. I guess it's the big pants and hats, the mix of modern tactics and equipment but still without lacking cavalry and shining armour. It is this weird (and of course horrible. Really horrible.) age between medieval times and napoleonics if we think in terms of popular wargaming topics. Also, there was a wide variety of nations, outfits, very different military personalities and politics going on. Historically it was one of the big catatrophes of European history but for some reason I think that it would look really good on the table.

With World War 2 I actually have a problem gaming. I'm not even 100% sure why, I think it's a mix of just being oversaturated with WW2 stuff along with a general discomfort with gaming WW2 in general. I'm not even talking about the really shady aspects like Totenkopf divisions, Einsatzgruppen or something like that.

I think it really is something everybody will have his own opinions on but in general wargamers seem to be good eggs and if someone is either too uneducated or stupid and crosses clear lines (someone in another thread just made the example of the difference between playing a Waffen-SS army in FoW and doing so whilst wearing a jacket with SS runes on it) it's probably best not playing with this person. But you also got this very small percentage amongst players of fantasy or sci-fi games.

[Spectrar Ghost]

Occasionally it feels like trivializing death, yes. Not often. I think Easy E has the right of it though.

Historical Wargaming is about understanding historic battles and even entire conflicts. Why did a general do something? What could have happened differently? For instance, if Hitler had allowed the assault on Dunkirk, how would that have affected the British morale and ability to prosecute the remainder of the war? There are real questions to be asked and answered by wargaming, and while it does have an element of cognitave dissonance to be having fun while recreating these battles, it teaches us a great deal about what happened, and even interests us in the personal stories about the soldiers involved, who they were and what their motives were.

That many people never think about the millions who have died in armed conflicts at all is the bigger tragedy, IMO. The greater public is out of touch as to the real price of war. If there were greater awareness of it we as a species might be more hesitant to go to war.

[Wishing]

I regularly ponder about what is appropriate and justifiable and what isn't when it comes to the overlap of death, violence and entertainment that we find ourselves in as wargamers. However, I can never really come up with a good answer. It's clear that we find the drama of violent battle to be fascinating and interesting, if we didn't, then there would be no action or war movie industry. Almost everyone participates in some level of seeing violence as entertainment on a regular basis. Actually enacting violence in a game is a step further than just watching it on a game, but historically based action videogames are very common too, so this isn't restricted to miniature wargaming.

Partially, I think that violence in general is a bad thing, and enacting it and using it as entertainment is somewhat degenerate. On the other hand, the attraction of excitement and drama is undeniable and understandable, and violence is simply something that can evoke the most extreme levels of excitement and drama. We can get a thrill from playing a violent computer game without actually wanting to go out and commit violence ourselves. But on the other hand, using violence as entertainment also desensitises us to some extent, which I guess is the point of this thread. Is it respectful to those who really died in WW2 when we play a game and pretend to be WW2 soldiers shooting each other?

There is the argument that by engaging with the historical situation, we make ourselves remember that these events happened. However, we could do that by reading a book, we don't have to actually pretend to kill each other for fun to know and learn about history. Also, this argument doesn't apply to fantasy wargaming. In fantasy and sci-fi, the warfare is entirely fictional, and thus is entirely for entertainment's sake.

I can understand why many people find wargaming and other forms of violence-based entertainment to be tasteless and uncivilised. I also agree with it to an extent, just not enough that it would make me give up a hobby I enjoy out of principle. So yes, I do feel odd about it, but I consider that to be a good thing because it shows that I'm not so desensitised that I revel in fictional violence without at least reflecting about why I do so.

(I also don't consider martial arts to be violence, at least not in the way we are talking about here - since neither sports nor self-defence generally aim to intentionally hurt and kill people, I consider them to be athletics.)

[Whitwort Stormbringer]

I don't really see it as any more problematic than playing historical video games or watchin movies based on historical conflicts. I think you could extrapolate similar themes from some fantasy and sci-fi anyways, since most good fantasy and sci-fi involves themes, issues, and ideologies from historical conflicts.

That said, I'm mostly interested in gaming medieval and earlier. If it's early enough then there's a certain detachment from the actual people involved, and you are often creating fictional or hypothetical encounters rather than documented battles anyways. I do like skirmish-level WWII games, but that's based on my love of old WWII flicks like Where Eagles Dare moreso than actually wanting to recreate the period.

[Lars Porsenna]

I don't think I've ever been "weirded out" about it. I have a pretty clear and narrow distinction between what is real and what is fantasy. Ultimately all historical wargaming is an element of fantasy, and while at one time the men that fought in these periods and battles were living, breathing people, the little metal and/or plastic figures are not. If the objection with it is the violence and the simulated killing, the same onus lays on fantasy or SF wargames as well. It does not matter that an orc does not exist, and probably never has or will, but the simple act of "simulated killing" should hold the same gravity whether it is fantasy or not IMHO.

Damon.

[redben]

Do you feel that watching something like Saving Private Ryan is disrespectful or "murder worship"?

[Karak Norn Clansman]

No, why should one be ashamed about it? It is a great way to make history live a bit for some people of the present, and is also a way to remember the past. Being ashamed of historical wargaming would be like being ashamed when learning about military history - there is no connection whatsoever to wanting organised killing.

Speaking of "oddness about it", just to play the devil and reverse the cards: Are not people ashamed when they play wargames set in imaginary universes? As if real-world killing is not enough, now some weirdos even make up killing in imaginary places. It is disrespectful of the real men, women and children who died in real wars, exterminations, genocides, massacres, GULAG etc.

See the flawed reasoning above? Well, it is pretty flawed in my eyes to imply shame on such things as historical wargaming.

[sigur]

Nobody ever said anything about shame, no need to get defensive. Indeed, I'd understand if some people are deeply concerned about certain fantasy backgrounds like 40k for example. I don't find it grounded in much reason but I can understand why it may concern people and make them rather not play that game.

[Karak Norn Clansman]

Well, I guess I am ridiculing the modern trend (?) of for some reason being ashamed of one's past. Yes, there are actually people like that. But moving away from shame, I for one am unable to see a good reason about feeling odd about historical wargaming whatever the period. It's pretty educating, and it's also a way to remember the people of gone ages. Also, war is perhaps the most dramatic human enterprise of them all, and war is as such very interesting to learn about. One cannot be anywhere close to understanding human nature and history without studying war. Being able to act out some warfare in a game with friends without anyone being injured is something positive.

In a potential deep era of prosperous peace in the future, I can easily see the necessity to remember the warfaring aspect of human nature and history. This remembrance could take place through museum visits, trips, books, videos, comics and games of every kind. A necessity to remember, perhaps to learn from the mistakes of the past in order to not repeat them, or maybe to give people a more thorough view of what it means to be human, in all its wide spectrum ranging from wondrous to horrible - which would for one thing prevent naïve people having too-high expectations of humanity (and thus be more prone to depression when these expectations are ground asunder by experienced reality).

[Gwyddyon]

I think the OP overstates matters quite a bit. I've never seen a historical wargamer fetishizing death as seems to be the suggestion. But there are certain historical games I don't play. While I find it very interesting, I don't wargame the Spanish Civil War because it still hits too close to home having many living family members who were in Madrid while it was besieged. But I have no issue with my English Civil War, Viking, and Catalonian Civil War armies not only because those battles took place many hundreds of years ago, but also because I don't know anybody involved. I suppose if relatives of mine had fought in WWII I wouldn't game that, either. It's a personal knee-jerk reaction rather than a moral concern, for me - I just don't think I could not take anyone (friend or not) lining up Fascist troops on the other side of the table personally, so I don't put myself in that position.

[6mmhero]

For the most part a lot of people who.play historical wargames research the period they are playing and for the most part play either actual battles or hyperthetical scenarios. Yes warfare involves death and destruction and yes it still occurs but wargamers are not war minded perhaps even have a greater empathy for the consequences of decisions by politicians to go to war, than many of the general public do.

That being said I am disturbed by the amount of tshirts that display divisional emblems from Waffen SS units tat are worn at game shows. Perhaps some people don't realise what the emblem stands for and the fact that while the Waffen SS may not have been responsible for the camps etc they did commit some very savage atrocities.

[PsychosisPC]

Simple answer for me is a big fat NO.

Those of that play historicals, I believe have a much better understanding of history than the majority of the people out there. I feel no shame, definitely not ashamed of anything my ancestors did or might have done. I don't believe its disrespectful at all.

That being said I am disturbed by the amount of tshirts that display divisional emblems from Waffen SS units tat are worn at game shows. Perhaps some people don't realise what the emblem stands for and the fact that while the Waffen SS may not have been responsible for the camps etc they did commit some very savage atrocities.

I've not seen that happen before, don't know how I would react to that if I saw it....

[Evilgenius]

Just have fun with whatever games you want to play.

Its not like the soldiers from real life conflicts are going to get any less dead, and the outcome of the conflicts will stay the same , so angsty handwringing is just self indulgent nonsense.

[the_corvus]

I have thought about the ideas that the OP raises, but Historical wargaming isn't any different to fantasy wargaming in that respect. I mean Warhammer is mostly a copy of historical forces with the occasional veneer of fantasy slapped on it (pre-Spanish conquest South American armies, just with lizard men instead of men, fighting Renaissance Germans for example).

I have seen war and murder fetishistism more in 40k then I have ever seen it in historical wargaming.

EDIT: And I find it interesting how people get upset about gamers displaying Waffen SS symbols for example while average teenagers walk around in Che Guevera t-shirts. Che inspired revolutions that caused more death and misery then the Waffen SS could have ever hoped to achieve. Even in wargaming the Soviets are treated much more positively than the Nazis.

[Eurytus]

And I find it interesting how people get upset about gamers displaying Waffen SS symbols for example while average teenagers walk around in Che Guevera t-shirts. Che inspired revolutions that caused more death and misery then the Waffen SS could have ever hoped to achieve. Even in wargaming the Soviets are treated much more positively than the Nazis.

Good point.

I dont think its a case of murder worship more the tactical elements that are involved in wargaming.

People in general have a rather ignorant way of forgetting how abhorrent certian groups have been in their past, seen as its Easter any one reckon there will be a documentary on BBC4 on whichhunts, heresy crushing or pagan killing?

Nope, there will be a thing about a magician most likely.

If you are safe in the knoweldge that killing is bad, you should be ok, at least you know people die in war.

[6mmhero]

EDIT: And I find it interesting how people get upset about gamers displaying Waffen SS symbols for example while average teenagers walk around in Che Guevera t-shirts. Che inspired revolutions that caused more death and misery then the Waffen SS could have ever hoped to achieve. Even in wargaming the Soviets are treated much more positively than the Nazis.

I am with on this point, Che and various other Communist personalities are treated in a manner that does illustrate some of the bloodletting that they are responsible for. However this is just the world that we live in and how Che has been marketed. I had one person think that Che was from Rage Against the Machine based on the Tshirt they had seen.
However when it comes to the SS tshirts they are worn by people that should know a little better than the average teen. I have also heard people talk in glowing terms of the Waffen SS based on the perceived martial prowess and they overlook the other nastier points that the divisions were involved in.
Yes the Soviets do get viewed in a much more favorable light then they should be. Lets face it they went on quite a rampage through what was Prussia, East Germany and Eastern Europe. But then the Soviets were our allies at that point so this is hardly surprising.

[colhodg]

With ref to the OP, not the first time someone has asked that kind of question, the common collective response seems to be, have fun, be respectful and if it encourages you to know a little more about history then it's fulfilled more than just a fun game and certainly more than a session on Call of Duty. And yes i suppose it did weird me out a bit at first but on reflection it makes more sense recreating a real battle or imagined historical scenario with the implied real consequence than a purely fantasy one with no moral consequence.

To throw it back at you a bit - should giving your gaming a sci fi setting mean you get to skirt around the fact your also playing at killing people? I'm not sure there is any real connection between wargaming and militarism, if i did i think i'd just stick to painting nice looking figs.

@the_corvus there are aren't many flags that haven't been soaked in blood, i still think wearing of waffen ss paraphanelia would be demonstrating a pretty unambiguous (and tasteless) point.

[adamwelton]

I'm a Modern 6mm player myself, since 1985-even worse as it's not "historical wargaming" as such. However you lot want to worry less about us "geeks" playing with "toy soldiers" in a manner similar to that of most learned military men in history and think about the utter freaks who dress up as Nazi Stormtroopers and "re-enact" the days of the Third Reich, whilst actually enjoying the experience and acting as if the regime was a good one to fight for. I knew a guy from Essex who was a Wehrmacht expert and admired him for it until I saw him spit at the 8" guns outside the Imperial War Museum in London "for killing so many good German boys". This from a British passport holder.

That my friends is disturbing, not trying to exercise our minds by trying to see how a historic event could be changed in some way by our own limited actions. There are even some nutjobs in the U.S. who take their Civil War events too seriously, in spite of the very real basis for the whole event and its consequences.

"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you".

Apologies for the seriousness but it seemed that this thread was going that way and I thought I would head it off by moving towards a more controversial way of "re-enactment", thus putting our quaint hobby into perspective.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". We should congratulate ourselves for learning from our efforts and not repeating the same mistakes, even on the game table. This is existentialism, not semantics. Good luck to you all.