Tabletop Miniature Hobby Podcast

White Dwarf readers of a certain vintage will undoubtedly remember Fred Reed’s iconic Howling Griffons space marine army. Then-Games Workshop store worker Fred showcased the stunning force in issue 179 (November 94), and it had a runout in the mag’s battle report a month later.Fred’s army was a source of inspiration to many young hobbyists in the mid-90s and is still talked about more than 30 years later. One man who’s gone above and beyond in his nostalgia, however, is Jonny Watson of the Jonny Watson Gaming YouTube channel. Jonny did the ultimate homage to Fred’s Howling Griffons by assembling and painting his own tribute act.I had the pleasure of chatting to Jonny about this project and the opportunities it brought him, from interviewing Fred Reed himself to being featured on the hallowed pages of White Dwarf. We covered his origin story, returning after the inevitable deep freeze, and how running a YouTube channel can supplement and enhance your hobby when you’re not playing the algorithm game.

The monthly hobby update of the Bedroom Battlefields community. Submit a clip for next month's episodeJoin the DiscordPhotos from our game of HobgoblinLatest YouTube vids

Narrative wargaming is often framed as a niche revival or a reaction against competitive play. Rick Priestley rejects that outright. Narrative play is not a rebellion. It is the foundation modern wargames were built on.Before points values and mirrored tables, games were shaped by scenario and judgment. Sieges were unfair. Last stands were desperate. Balance was not calculated. It was agreed.Early British designers such as Featherstone, Grant, and Young did not rely on points systems. They assumed good faith, shared imagination, and players who wanted the game to be interesting rather than optimal.So what changed?When Balance Became an IdeologyPoints values began as a convenience. They helped players build collections and find games quickly. Over time, that convenience hardened into expectation.Modern balance culture assumes that a properly designed game should resolve to a near-perfect 50/50 outcome between equally skilled players. The result is list optimisation, meta-chasing, and games whose outcome is often decided before the first dice roll.Priestley does not condemn this approach. He simply questions what it produces. Efficiency, perhaps. Predictability, certainly. But not always joy.The Games Master We LostOne of the clearest casualties of this shift is the Games Master.In the episode, Jason describes running vast multiplayer games overseen by a GM who introduces events, resolves disputes, and keeps the story moving. Priestley immediately recognises the model. This was early Warhammer. Early roleplaying games. Early wargaming.The GM was never a workaround. They were the engine.Attempts to replace that role with campaign books and flowcharts were understandable, but limited. You cannot automate trust or improvisation. A referee works because everyone agrees they are there to make the game better.As Priestley puts it, the only rule is that the Games Master is always right. Not because they wield authority, but because the group has given them responsibility.Rules as ToolsAnother striking thread in the conversation is how casually the group ignores rules.Forgotten mechanics are handwaved. Unclear outcomes are resolved with a roll and a decision. Priestley admits that even with systems he helped write, momentum matters more than correctness.This is not carelessness. It is confidence.Narrative players are not anti-rules. They simply refuse to let rules dominate the experience. Systems are scaffolding. If something blocks the flow of the game, it is removed.In a hobby obsessed with precision and FAQs, this mindset feels quietly subversive.Not a Rejection, a ReminderPriestley is not calling for the end of competitive play. He is arguing for memory.Narrative gaming never died. It was crowded out of the conversation. What groups like Jason’s are doing is not inventing something new. They are remembering how the hobby once worked and choosing to make space for it again.The most radical idea in modern wargaming is not breaking the rules.It is remembering they were never the point.

We've seen some large-scale narrative games take place within the Bedroom Battlefields community these past couple of years. But is this approach often overlooked in favour of "balanced" points-based pitched battles? Jason and Mark from the Bedroom Battlefields community sit down with legendary game designer Rick Priestley to talk about the roots and future of narrative wargaming.They explore how tabletop wargames were played before points lists and tournament balance took over, and why story-led, games master driven play still matters today. The conversation ranges from early Warhammer and historical wargaming to massive multiplayer battles, campaign play, and the creative freedom that comes from trusting the people around the table.This is part one of a longer discussion, focusing on the shift from narrative play to competitive formats, and what was gained and lost along the way.Topics include:How wargames were played in the 1970s and early Warhammer eraWhy Rick Priestley avoids points-based systems in his own gamesThe role of the games master in creating memorable experiencesThe shared DNA between early wargaming and role-playing gamesHow commercial pressures reshaped WarhammerWhy narrative campaigns struggled to survive despite strong ideasThe result is a thoughtful, funny, and occasionally provocative conversation about play, creativity, and why wargames do not need to be hyper-competitive to be meaningful.Part two continues in the next episode of the Tabletop Miniature Hobby Podcast.Join the conversation: If narrative gaming, story-led battles, or games with a games master resonate with you, you are welcome to join the Bedroom Battlefields Discord at bedroombattlefields.com/discord

The monthly hobby update of the Bedroom Battlefields community. Submit your own clip for December right here. Oh, and here's a few pics of my 15mm Hobgoblin setup.