I recently discussed that I prefer to keep in-game admin on the table, rather than use off-table paperwork. Most games have some form of 'admin' whether this is recording hits or keeping track of conditions and effects. There is probably no one correct answer but today I ask, how do you feel about the use of tokens or other on-table devices for tracking these items?
Interesting topic Lee. Like you, I prefer on table tokens. Without having a’chief of staff’ on hand, tokens help to see what is happening at a glance.
ReplyDeleteI also like games which don’t require you to record lots of different pieces of information. And I like tokens to be little representative models, rather than chips or chits. For example, casualty figures to represent stages of attrition. Or for command points or similar resources, or orders, I like to use mounted officers. They can then be distributed from the commander to units as ‘orders’ - their position relative to the unit or direction can indicate the type of order.
You raise an interesting point. Do games with umpires need tokens because the admin can be off table and handled by them rather than the players? Something to think about!
DeleteGood topic to raise Lee. I don't think that it's "old school" vs "new school". I consider that it is more about what is appropriate for the game, system and scenario. With French Revolution I have the "stat board" but depending on the game, the casualties are recorded on table with dice or on a roster sheet. I use the latter when I feel that the game would have extra tension through the fog of war of the commanders lacking certainty about their units. After all, the commanders can't be with every unit at the same time. It also means that players can't deliberately target a unit because it is "one casualty away from a morale test". But I will also ditch the roster and use dice. The games flow either way. But with FPW I use on table admin exclusively because there is too much to keep track of and allows the game to flow better than using a roster. All in all, it depends on the type of experience and dilemmas the umpire is trying to create for the players, and what works best for the game system and umpire.
ReplyDeleteNice and thought provoking piece Lee.
I like the fact that we don't know how close a unit is to breaking in your rules. Keeping that particular bit of admin off the table works really well in your French Revolution games.
DeleteInteresting talking point Lee. Being of a certain age I must have tried every form of wargaming admin and didnt like many of them. I did like the way I recorded causalities for Volley and Bayonet and Blucher rules using a chino-graph pencil on the actual plastic coated bases, but then moved on. Now I have various plastic chits for specific units and causality tokens.They work, are very clear to me and also dont allow any possible cheating etc. I must admit Im not a lover of playing cards on a table although I understand their need. Im more concerned with the look of the game and how it moves along.
ReplyDeleteChits and tokens are very clear and do leave little room for those players that have problems 'mis-remembering' unit effects (!). Everyone can be clear what is in play and what isn't. It also reduces the need for an Umpire to keep tabs on stuff which means everyone can just concentrate on the game and having a good time.
DeleteTokens!
ReplyDeleteShort and clear! And if it works for you then that's the best option.
Delete