Yep. Busted. I borrowed the concepts from gaming. I came at the event planning as "live action wargaming." It was a judged tactical, and part of the judging was on how period the activity and response was, not just whether the "mission" was accomplished. Now the site we were using was not a historical site, nor was the event tied to a single historical event (other than that the timeframe was the fall of 1863). Actually, each scenario was a "reenactment" in the sense that winning involved doing at least as well as the unit in the original scenario did, and was "living history" in that the period reactions of participants were strongly encouraged. With small groups, scenarios are short. If you want to do exactly what happened on x day at x time, at x location with 8-10 guys, you better be prepared to do it about 8 times that day, because it's going to be over quickly.
Originally Posted by ThumbStall
There's a little RP in all reenacting. Perhaps we're straying into philosophy of reenacting here, but what we do is rarely an exact recreation of the conditions and results of given circumstances. The best we can do is put ourselves under vaguely similar conditions and encourage a result which we call "historically accurate." It's not a theatrical production where each line and action are carefully rehearsed. At best, it's improvised theater. Not muchof a step to RP at that point, is it?
Pine River Boys, Co I, 7th Wisconsin
"We're... Christians, what read the Bible and foller what it says about lovin' your enemies and carin' for them what despitefully use you -- that is, after you've downed 'em good and hard."
-Si Klegg and His Pard Shorty