The 5 Secret Rules of Wargaming

Every hobby has its unspoken codes of conduct, and tabletop wargaming is no different. Sit down at a games table almost anywhere in the world, and you’ll soon pick up on them — those unwritten rules of etiquette that keep play running smoothly. But here’s the question I want to explore in today’s video: do these rules make the hobby more fun, or do they sometimes act as hidden barriers that discourage newcomers from sticking around?

A couple of years ago, I made a video outlining my personal “top five rules of wargaming etiquette.” They were meant as a light-hearted guide to making sure everyone enjoys their time around the table. But on reflection, I realised I never asked whether those rules might also create pressure for new players who don’t yet know the invisible expectations. So in this new video, I go back to those same five rules and weigh up the pros and cons of each.

Courtesy, integrity, honesty, fairness, and conviviality are all good principles in life, but how do they work when applied to tabletop wargaming? Do they make a club more welcoming to outsiders, or can they sometimes feel like gatekeeping? I take a closer look, sharing my own experiences as a social historical wargamer while recognising that competitive players may have a very different perspective.

Most importantly, I want to open the floor to discussion. Do you recognise these rules in your own gaming group? Do you agree that they help the hobby, or have you seen them enforced in ways that drive people away? Whether you’re a veteran historical wargamer, a miniatures painter dipping your toe into gaming, or a complete beginner trying to learn the ropes, this is a conversation worth having.

We Broke our own Ruleset

Designing a new tabletop wargame ruleset sounds exciting, and it is, but the real magic happens during playtesting. In this video, I talk through my recent experiences helping develop The Battle Chronicle, a brand new historical skirmish system set during Napoleon’s Retreat from Moscow. Rather than focusing purely on the finished product, this discussion explores the messy, fascinating stage where ideas are tested, broken, repaired, and slowly shaped into something genuinely fun to play.

Playtesting is where theory meets tabletop reality. Mechanics that look perfectly reasonable on paper can behave very differently once players start experimenting. Balance issues appear, unexpected rule combinations crop up, and the flow of the game becomes much clearer. Some rules turn out to be more complicated than they need to be, while others don’t deliver the tension or decision-making they promised. This process isn’t about chasing perfection; it’s about making sure the game creates an enjoyable experience that feels right for the setting.

Because The Battle Chronicle is rooted in a very specific historical moment, narrative tone matters just as much as mechanics. The retreat from Moscow is defined by hardship, attrition, and desperation, and the rules need to support that atmosphere. Playtesting helps reveal whether those themes come through naturally in play or whether certain elements undermine the intended feel. A good historical game should tell stories that make sense for the period, not just produce balanced dice exchanges.

Another key part of the process is clarity. Designers often know what they meant when writing a rule, but new players only have the text in front of them. Watching others interpret the rules highlights unclear wording, inconsistent terminology, and assumptions that need to be explained. Fixing these issues early makes the finished ruleset far more welcoming and easier to learn. Beyond mechanics and wording, playtesting also reveals practical improvements: when tokens would help, where reference sheets are needed, and which parts of the game benefit from simplification. These small refinements can dramatically improve the overall experience.

In the video, I share why this stage of development is so important, what it has taught me about rules design, and why thorough playtesting builds confidence in a finished product. If you enjoy tabletop wargaming, historical settings, or thoughtful hobby discussion about how games are made, this behind-the-scenes look at the design process should be right up your street.

More Soviet Infantry, Tank Hunters and a T26/M1931

I narrowly missed last week’s submission to the Analogue Hobbies Painting Challenge, literally by a matter of hours, so this week turned into a bumper offering.  

First up is another twelve-man Light Machine Gun Squad, the nearly finished unit that never quite made it onto the blog last time. All that stood between them and glory was drying basing and a final layer of snow, but time ran out. One of my quietly declared New Year’s resolutions was to stop saying yes to every new project that wanders past. That resolution has already collapsed in a heap, leaving me busier than ever. Not necessarily a bad thing, but it does add another tick to the ever-growing “suspected ADHD” column.

Next on the bench is another tank for my Soviet forces. This time it’s a T-26 Model 1931, the distinctive twin-turret variant armed with machine guns. Unlike my previous T-26 from Rubicon, this one is a 3D print from Danger Close Studio. Aside from some minor clean-up around the tracks where the supports had been, it’s an excellent print and blends in seamlessly with my other vehicles. Historically, the T-26 Model 1931 was heavily influenced by the British Vickers 6-Ton and was intended as an infantry support tank. Its twin turrets, usually mounting DT machine guns, offered impressive firepower on paper, but in practice proved awkward to command. That complexity eventually saw the design abandoned in favour of more practical single-turret models.

Finally, there’s a Tank Hunter team. This unit consists of two men armed with the 7.62mm PPD 1934/38 submachine gun, a design based on the Bergmann MP18/1 and fed by either drum or box magazines. They’re supported by two riflemen, with the NCO hefting a Molotov cocktail. The Molotov was a small conversion, using a plastic piece from the Warlord Games Soviet infantry sprue that recently appeared as a giveaway on the cover of Wargames Illustrated, which couldn’t have been better timed. On the tabletop in Bolt Action, Tank Hunters are nasty little specialists, with rules that allow them to double their attacks in close combat against vehicles, making them a serious threat despite their size.

In short: a delayed update turned into a productive one, with a finished LMG squad, a characterful early-war Soviet tank, and a converted Tank Hunter team all joining the ranks. Progress may be chaotic, but it’s definitely moving forward.

Don't Throw That Away!

Most tabletop wargamers don’t realise they’re throwing away perfectly good terrain every week. In this week's podcast, I dive into one of the oldest and most satisfying traditions in historical wargaming: turning everyday household rubbish into terrain, scenery, and useful hobby tools. Cardboard packaging becomes ruined buildings and bunker walls. Plastic food containers turn into industrial tanks and silos. Bottle tops, jar lids, broken toys, and old electronics quietly transform into battlefield details, objectives, and atmospheric clutter that give a gaming table real character.

This isn’t just about saving money, although that’s certainly a bonus. It’s about creativity, confidence, and learning to see potential instead of products. Scratch-built terrain made from recycled materials often looks more believable than pristine kits because history itself is messy, improvised, and uneven. Real battlefields were full of reused materials, rushed construction, and expedient solutions. Exactly the qualities that rubbish-based terrain naturally captures.