"A token effort" Topic

Are gaming tokens the greatest advance in wargaming administration since the invention of the pencil?

Or are they colourful little reminders that our "simple fast-play rules" now require a small stationery department to run them?

Where do you draw the line between useful information and table clutter?

Looking around modern wargames, gaming tokens seem almost ubiquitous. Litko alone has hundreds of different designs and many rules companies now produce their own official token sets, not to mention those of us who make their own.

url=https://postimg.cc/Lnbfzym9]

‌

In a way, they seem to be the successors to the clipboard and pencil notes used by earlier generations of wargamers. Rather than writing "disordered", "suppressed", "out of ammo" or "activated" on a roster sheet, we place a marker beside the unit.

Tokens certainly have advantages. They make game states visible, reduce memory lapses and can speed play.

On the other hand, a table full of acrylic markers can detract from the visual appeal of painted armies and scenic terrain. Some games seem to require almost as many markers as miniatures.

So where is the ideal balance?

What information belongs on the tabletop as a token, and what is better recorded elsewhere? Have modern rules become too dependent on markers, or are they simply a practical solution to increasingly sophisticated game mechanics?

I prefer tokens that blend into the game.

Using certain figures or scenic pieces to show casualties, morale status, ammo issues, and the like is much more appealing that a pile of rubber casualty o-rings looped on beautifully painted figures, neon colored pipe cleaners wedged into units, dice stuck on stands, or plastic and paper chits piled up next to a unit.

It makes me sad to see games with incredible looking figures and terrain only to have piles of ugly data chits heaped on the table. These are usually followed by clip boards, piles of charts, drink cans, bags of snacks, and such also scattered about the table.

Kills the whole aesthetic for me but YMMV.

Dr X – I totally agree with you, but sometimes needs must.

Nothing ruins the look of a beautifully painted battlefield faster than a forest of bright acrylic markers. On the other hand, nothing ruins a game faster than spending ten minutes trying to remember which unit was suppressed, disordered, low on ammo and carrying the objective.

Ideally, tokens should disappear into the scenery. Unfortunately, some rules seem to require enough markers that you start wondering whether you're commanding an army or running a small office supplies business.

I'm OK with tokens. Prefer ones that blend in with the scenery or at least evoke their meaning, such as casualty figures for hits or disorder, some boxes on a small stand to show ammo low, maybe a section of AFV track to show broken down/immobilized.

I think the eye adjusts to some table clutter so, things that are pretty jarring in a photograph are less jarring when you play the game. I strongly dislike the index card size stat/unit cards and/or playing cards that follow units around the table. Any rules like that automatically go into my list of things that I will not buy.

As with most things, in moderation they are fine and helpful but, they should avoid clutter.

I prefer the figure type tokens as noted by pzivh43. It is more trouble to paint them than simply by a packet of pre-printed plastic or cardboard symbols, assuming you can find suitable subjects.

For my fantasy games, I bought Goat figures to mark Shaken Morale units, and Chicken figures for Routing units. They blend rather nicely, Previously, I used red and yellow tent cards with the terms written on them, placing these next to the Unit's figures on the tabletop. I also used red and yellow pipe clearer bits as markers. I really prefer my Goats and Chickens.

For my Army Men games, I use tokens in a limited fashion: tokens to differentiate between Light and Heavy Mortar Men; to mark a Sniper (only after they are Spotted); to mark Infantrymen who are Prone; and, of course, Hidden Unit Markers (some are dummies and represent nothing -- except for a Red Herring to deceive and to frighten the opponent until they are successfully Spotted…).

I came up with using colored plastic tubules on the figure bases to denote units. They are small and unobtrusive, non-distracting on the tabletop. I figured that I could use two different colors, stacked atop one another, to denote a leader figure for each Unit. Easy, inexpensive, and functional on the tabletop, without being a distraction. Cheers!

I understand the position of tabletop tokens being ugly, a distraction or what have you but I don't mind them in the slightest. To me there's something very comfy and "safe" about a tabletop with a shedload of miniatures, markers, dice and tape measures.

I have no problem with tokens or using them with paper and pencil. As long as clarity is there to play the game without guessing or maybe remembering they are useful and i like them. As for ruining the immersion, i haven't played in many games that have gone so far into the modeling that it's a distraction, usually its the opposite a sparse table. Everyone's definition of a well laid out table is different and I come at it from a longtime modeller view.

My rules on tokens are "few, flexible and inconspicuous." Otherwise, your miniatures table starts morphing into a board full of cardboard counters. Not saying they aren't helpful and sometimes necessary, but my objective is a default unit with no markers: unit type, status and formation should be apparent just by looking at the castings. Then you have to add markers for, say, poor morale, or already activated this turn.

Mind you, in 6mm this has required building a few infantry units in square rather then buying and using an "in square" marker.

Like others, I like tokens and markers to blend in. I spend a lot of time inventing markers to fit rules mechanicsms, or rules mechanisms to fit markers, so that all the toys on the table go together.

I also prefer that tokens on the tabletop not get in the way too much. Units tend to leave their status behind and suddenly upgrade or downgrade.

- Ix

I also prefer tokens that blend in. But the guys I game with want big colorful markers which I really dislike. I have trouble finding markers that actually blend in. I use prone figures to show a unit is prone. But other than that I am at a loss. Small pipe cleaners and casualty rings are just too easy not to use. They work but they add clutter.

That is part of the appeal of "Carnage and Glory." Very few markers if any. Less clutter.

If you have to use colorful cartoon markers, invest in some cocktail olive swords. They're at least militarily thematic.

(One caveat: there will always be at least one mock sword fight at the gaming table, every single game. The average age of our hobby may be high, but the average maturity level is very, very low.)