Woah, big box.
Surprisingly, in the big box, you'll find a regular sized game (small, even). You see, the box also contains a board game component so big and ridiculous it makes the El Grande tower seem entirely reasonable: Behold the Dice Tower.
Welcome to Shogun, the newly re-themed Wallenstein (#15 on BGG). I haven't played the original, but from what I understand, the differences between editions are minor.
Shogun - The Idea
In Shogun, players assume the role of a military leader in feudal Japan trying to become emperor. Power is primarily gained by controlling provinces and constructing public buildings, but care must be taken not to overtax the population or forget to stockpile enough food for the winter season, as that can lead to revolt.
A Brief Overview of the Mechanics
In the basic setup, each player starts with a number of predetermined provinces, as well as a particular number of armies in each (in the advanced setup, players have more control over the initial distribution). Players receive a card for each province they own and 5 bidding cards (numbered 0-4)
Each player also has an action board, which shows 10 actions + an auction space. The action board shows 10 different, specific actions, such as "attack", "place 5 armies for 3 gold" or "build a temple".
Along the bottom of the board, cards representing each of those 10 actions are layed out randomly. This will determine the order in which the actions will occur, but in an interesting twist the last 5 are placed face down so that there is some mystery
to the order of actions.
The game is played over 8 seasons, starting in spring and working through to the end of 2 winters. Each season, players must choose a province card to place on each of the 10 possible actions, and then choose a bid for turn order (it is also possible to bluff and not take a particular action, if desired).
Actions are then played out. The first action is resolved by all players from starting with the start player. Then the second, etc. Once all 10 actions have occurred, the next season begins.
Every 4th season is winter. In winter, no actions take place other than verifying that each leader stockpiled enough rice. If not, the population might revolt. Once this has been dealt with, victory points are counted. Each region controlled gives points, each built building (theatre, temple and palace) gives points and finally each player with the majority of any one type of building in an entire region gets points.
At the end of the 2nd winter, the game ends.
My Thoughts
There is a civ light/ multiplayer wargame lurking under here... but it's quite different from what you'd expect. It's wrapped by a very "German" game system (which means it's abstracted, gamey but clever). In our first playing, I found myself thinking that there are a LOT of moving parts here compared to most euros (in fact, I made the observation that this was the "Arkham Horror" of German games, though in reality I bet that comment just reveals to everyone that I've never played Caylus, Die Macher or a Splotter game). The way the system forces you to simultaneously plan up to 10 actions and forces those actions to be in 10 different provinces feels a little intimidating at first. Over the course of the game, it becomes easier, but there is definitely potential for serious analysis paralysis! Luckily, our group managed to keep a pretty good clip most of the time. The result is a game system which effectively conveys a sense of the challenges inherent in managing a large and disparate set of regions. It certainly feels different than the majority of civ building/ multiplayer wargame hybrids which normally allow much more focused decision making. Interesting indeed, but does that make a good GAME?
I'll start off by saying this: I quite enjoyed the game, but I have no idea if it works as a strategy game.
On a single turn, you have to decide a single action for up to 10 different provinces. Therefore, if at the start of the game you decides you wanted to build up your resources in a province, build a castle there and then attack a neighboring province to achieve a majority of castles in that region, it would take 3 seasons... in other words half the game. In the meantime, you've programmed up to 3 actions for 9 other provinces. Obviously, some synergy can be worked out: You could build the castle elsewhere in the region, you could move armies from a different province instead of taking a turn to build armies, etc, but you get the idea. It can take some time to get things done.
Then, you have to consider the fact that since your province cards essentially program your actions, if you lose a province to an attacking player you also lose the action (if it hasn't already occured). This can really throw major chaos into your plans.
Speaking of chaos, I haven't yet described what is certainly the calling card of the game: the dice tower. Imagine a very large square tower with various platforms inside. Whenever a conflict arises (either between players or between a player and his revolting farmers), cubes are thrown in to represent the units in combat. As cubes are thrown in, some fall out into the large plastic tray, and others stay trapped. The winner of the battle is the side who has the most cubes which fall out. Of course, the next time cubes are thrown in, some that were trapped will likely come out! (though cubes of other players never count, they are simply thrown back into the dice tower for the next conflict). This has the unsettling effect of allowing a battle to begin 2 vs 3 and end 4 vs 1, for example. The result is very interesting, and even quite fun if you can deal with the weirdness. But again, does this type of mechanism belong in a game which is otherwise asking for so much pre-planning, so much strategy, and a 3 hour time commitment?
I'm withholding judgement. Like I said, I had actually had a great time playing the game, and I'm really looking forward to playing again (it was pretty fascinating to see the dice tower in action, and how the actions all played out turn after turn). In the long term, however, I'd like to think that the game system would allow a seasoned player to actually do well and bring the chaos under control... otherwise it's hard to justify such a heavy system. The dice tower is a randomizer unlike any other, and it IS possible to keep track of what goes in there and plan accordingly. Similarly, there is probably a way to balance a conservative strategy by choosing short term, easy goals vs long term riskier ones (similar to the trade-offs you are asked to make in most simultaneous action selection games, even though they are typically lighter games such as Citadels or Mission:Red Planet).
Or, maybe it's just an adult version of Mousetrap, and we're all just watching all the pieces work together to see what happens. That can be fun, too.
For the record, Bharmer won the game. I came in a distant last, I think.
Showing posts with label Review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Review. Show all posts
Sunday, January 14, 2007
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Wits and Wagers - A Much Delayed Review
Quite some time ago, the designer of "Wits and Wagers" contacted me after having read this blog and asked if we would like to try an evaluation copy of Wits and Wagers, on the condition that I review it here and at BGG. I responded that I would, so long as he understood that I would afford no special treatment for having sent us a copy of the game for the price of the shipping. After much unintended delay, here is that review. My apologies to Mr. Crapuchettes for failing to get a review in before the Christmas holidays.
Concept & Overview
Wits and Wagers is a party game designed for between three and twenty-one players. It combines elements of a standard trivia game with competitive betting, the gestalt resembling the price estimation element of the TV show "The Price is Right" combined with gambling. The game is played on a soft, pliable playing mat approximately 90cm (3') long by 30cm (1') wide printed on a material commonly found in mouse pads. Players answer questions asked from a wide range of categories, write down their answers with dry erase markers on small answer cards, and place their bets with plastic poker chips and wooden ownership marking cubes.
The game includes the rubber playing mat, a sand timer, seven dry erase pens, seven laminated answer cards, 14 wooden betting cubes, 120 plastic poker chips in red and blue, a rules booklet and a box of trivia questions.
Dominic Crapuchettes offers up this fun little game after his intitial (as far as I can tell from BGG) debut game of Cluzzle. The two games share very little in common, so no comparisons will be made.
As a disclaimer, I was sent this game as an evaluation copy by North Star Games. I will comment as an aside that Mr. Crapuchettes is helpful, open to suggestion and just all-around nice in the few e-mails I've exchanged with him. To be perfectly honest, it was not a game I might have purchased on my own, but after agreeing to evaluate it and playing several times with experienced boardgamers, family and casual-playing friends, this is definitely a game I would buy or recommend.
Game Mechanics
The game is very simple - and very appropriately so for a party game intended to appeal to a wide market.
Players choose a colour. In the event that there are more than seven players, players are grouped into teams so that each of the seven colours provided represents a team. Each player or team is given ten red chips representing five points, and three blue chips representing ten points for a total of 80 points.
One player is designated the "Question Reader", another is designated the "Banker" and assume the roles for the rest of the game. Some players have suggested that the "Question Reader" role rotate, but I feel that neither role gains any particular advantage.
There are seven question rounds in the game. For each question, the Question Reader reads the question (question 1 on the card for the first round, question 2 on the card for the second round, etc.), waits for any requests for clarification, then flips the 30-second sand timer. Players/teams then have until the timer runs out to write down their answer to the question. All questions have been written so that they can are answered with a number. The best answer is the one which comes closest without going over (the "Price is Right" element). This is a critical distinction and should be emphasized when explaining the game.
After all of the players have written their answers, they are revealed and then arranged on the playing mat from smallest to highest, in boxes which correspond to 5:1, 4:1, 3:1, 2:1, 1:1 (and then upwards again) payouts. Duplicate answers are stacked in the same box. If there are an odd number of different answers after stacking duplicates, they are arranged with the middle answer on the 1:1 odds box and the higher and lower answers above and below them. Even numbers of answers are arranged so that the centre 1:1 box is empty.
Players then have thirty seconds to place bets. Bets can be between 0 and 10 points. Bet chips are marked with a wooden marker cube of the player's colour. If 10 points are bet, the points can be split between two answers by placing two 5 point chips and placing marker cubes on both chips, or all ten can be bet on the same answer. It should be clarified to first time players that betting is always optional.
After the timer runs out, the correct answer is read from the back of the question card. The winning answer is the one which comes closest without going over. If all answers are higher than the actual answer, the special "The Correct Answer is smaller than all given answers" box pays out. Otherwise, the box containing the winning answer pays out at the odds for that box. The banker also gives a ten point bonus in chips to the player/team whose answer cards were in the winning payout box.
This continues for six rounds. On the seventh round, there is no limit on betting (once again, players can still bet zero), but they can only split their bet between two boxes as marked by their coloured cubes.
The player/team with the most points after the seventh round is the winner.
Artwork and Components
The production design of this game is somewhat lacklustre, though entirely functional. With apologies to the artist, the illustrations have a clip-art/cartoon appearance which seems somewhat "cheap". Combined with bright colours and an overly exaggerated "excitement factor" apparent in all the players, there is a distinct game-show feel to the artwork which, although not inappropriate, might have been done better.
The game box features three major illustrations, a character which appears to be in a game show, a group of people apparently orgasmically excited about something or other, and a "cool guy" looking like he's won a bunch of money at poker. This actually communicates quite effectively the three core ideas of the game - "game show/trivia", "party/group fun" and "betting". To be quite honest, I don't know how else I might have done the art differently, but somehow it feels like it should be better.
The playing mat is well laid out and there is plenty of room for what needs to be done in each area. Wager odds are clearly marked and it never impedes gameplay. The rubber mat idea is quite suitable for the game, and the green colour immediately brings to mind casino betting areas, as well as being gentle on the eyes.
The foldable aspect of the mat is quite nice, lending itself to easy placement and no problems with warp causing bets to slide around on the board.
The question cards are not remarkable, being pretty similar to any trivia game you might have played. There is no slipcover box provided for their storage, but this is a minor issue.
The wooden cubes are standard stock - nothing good or bad about them. They are suitably large enough to not be easily lost, while also not too large to make placement or balancing on top of stacks of chips difficult.
The plastic poker chips are pretty standard stock as well, but many players commented on how they feel "cheap". Many people are now used to the more expensive clay gambling chips used at casinos and in poker games, and the old plastic chips, once entirely serviceable, feel chintzy by comparison. While it would probably jack up the price of the set (not to mention shipping weight) to include better quality ceramic chips, thus making the idea impracticable, perhaps if a reprint or a deluxe edition is published, they should seriously consider higher quality chips.
The laminated answer cards are nicely done. It's easy to determine colour, and the dry erase marker wipes off easily. The reverse side is patterned like the back of a playing card, which, with the green rubber mat, contributes to the overall "casino" feel of the game in play.
A minor though not insignificant quibble about the dry erase markers included with the box should be mentioned. All of them worked fine, but the caps do not fit snugly on the reverse end of the pen when removed. This can easily lead to lost caps. Almost every playing group commented on how this was an annoying issue to them, and hopefully would be addressed with any future runs of this game - get markers that when you pull off the caps, you can stick them snugly on the other end. The sand timer is also unremarkable, but seems sturdy enough for repeated use.
Although the game rules indicated there should be a "napkin" available to each player, none is included in the box. A minor issue, and nothing which should detract from the game. Perhaps a deluxe edition could include cheap dry-erase marker erasers, perhaps on the pen caps.
Gameplay
This game plays quickly in about 20 to 30 minutes. In every case where I brought it out, with experienced gamers, family or casual friends alike, everyone wanted to play more than one game. In the case of my extended adult family (father, mother, uncles and aunts) we actually played for eight successive games in one evening because everyone was enjoying it so much. This was surprising because this particular group is not much of a gaming-oriented bunch. My father, who was most sceptical, ended up as one of its more enthusiastic players.
Importance should be placed on relatively firm enforcement of time limits. We have a house rule that bets or answers not placed on the board before the timer runs out are not put into play at all.
The concept sounds somewhat dry to explain it, but everyone gets into it quickly. You have to repeat certain rules with first time players - "closest without going over" and bet limits/methods seem to be the ones which cause the most confusion, but they are not inherently difficult.
Small bits of trivia and information have been included with the answers on the back of question cards, and information sources are quoted on the front. This can help make the game even more interesting if you have a good Question Reader.
The questions themselves represent a nice variety, and as has been demonstrated elsewhere in BGG, there is a method to the distribution. Many of the questions are in the "you can't possibly know that" category, and are best approached from a best estimate or "wild-assed guess" strategy. First time players should be assured that it is not so important to answer correctly as it is to bet correctly.
As a Canadian, I would comment that the questions are largely America-centric, but this is common in many trivia games. If there is an international edition or deluxe edition released, I highly recommend a set of questions with a much broader geographic and cultural basis.
The game isn't quite as successful when played in teams, but still works well. The optimal number of players is actually exactly seven, in my opinion, but 5-14 works fine. (we've played with 12). I can't see three or four players having nearly as much fun.
Most players recognize quickly the strategy of strategic betting, betting on the answer with the largest gulf between it and the next highest while still likely being in the correct range.
The designer has recommended a few variants, which I believe can be found in the game entry forums at BGG.
Summary
This game is fun, fast and easy with broad appeal and a shallow learning curve. Perfect for a party game, but having a bit more meat than the usual roll and move grind of Trivial Pursuit and Scene It. It also has a limited playing time - unless you are not doing things right, games will almost always be over within 30 minutes, and 20 minutes is more common. There's virtually no down-time (as there can be in other trivia games where a player can continue to move with several successfully answered questions) and there is a certain level of excitement (generated by the timers) to the betting and answering.
I highly recommend this game for anyone who likes party games. It is definitely in my top three of manufactured party games. It doesn't have much appeal for euro-only gamers, as the betting strategy can be largely negated by the no-limits "all-in" round at the last round.
I do feel that the international appeal of the game could be increased dramatically by selecting more international questions.
One of the most telling aspects about the game is that every time I've introduced it to a new group of players, they’ve asked where they can buy a copy. I've enthusiastically recommended local gaming stores in my area where I know the game is carried. If you need a party game that you can pull out and play anytime with almost any group of players, this is one to have.
Concept & Overview
Wits and Wagers is a party game designed for between three and twenty-one players. It combines elements of a standard trivia game with competitive betting, the gestalt resembling the price estimation element of the TV show "The Price is Right" combined with gambling. The game is played on a soft, pliable playing mat approximately 90cm (3') long by 30cm (1') wide printed on a material commonly found in mouse pads. Players answer questions asked from a wide range of categories, write down their answers with dry erase markers on small answer cards, and place their bets with plastic poker chips and wooden ownership marking cubes.
The game includes the rubber playing mat, a sand timer, seven dry erase pens, seven laminated answer cards, 14 wooden betting cubes, 120 plastic poker chips in red and blue, a rules booklet and a box of trivia questions.
Dominic Crapuchettes offers up this fun little game after his intitial (as far as I can tell from BGG) debut game of Cluzzle. The two games share very little in common, so no comparisons will be made.
As a disclaimer, I was sent this game as an evaluation copy by North Star Games. I will comment as an aside that Mr. Crapuchettes is helpful, open to suggestion and just all-around nice in the few e-mails I've exchanged with him. To be perfectly honest, it was not a game I might have purchased on my own, but after agreeing to evaluate it and playing several times with experienced boardgamers, family and casual-playing friends, this is definitely a game I would buy or recommend.
Game Mechanics
The game is very simple - and very appropriately so for a party game intended to appeal to a wide market.
Players choose a colour. In the event that there are more than seven players, players are grouped into teams so that each of the seven colours provided represents a team. Each player or team is given ten red chips representing five points, and three blue chips representing ten points for a total of 80 points.
One player is designated the "Question Reader", another is designated the "Banker" and assume the roles for the rest of the game. Some players have suggested that the "Question Reader" role rotate, but I feel that neither role gains any particular advantage.
There are seven question rounds in the game. For each question, the Question Reader reads the question (question 1 on the card for the first round, question 2 on the card for the second round, etc.), waits for any requests for clarification, then flips the 30-second sand timer. Players/teams then have until the timer runs out to write down their answer to the question. All questions have been written so that they can are answered with a number. The best answer is the one which comes closest without going over (the "Price is Right" element). This is a critical distinction and should be emphasized when explaining the game.
After all of the players have written their answers, they are revealed and then arranged on the playing mat from smallest to highest, in boxes which correspond to 5:1, 4:1, 3:1, 2:1, 1:1 (and then upwards again) payouts. Duplicate answers are stacked in the same box. If there are an odd number of different answers after stacking duplicates, they are arranged with the middle answer on the 1:1 odds box and the higher and lower answers above and below them. Even numbers of answers are arranged so that the centre 1:1 box is empty.
Players then have thirty seconds to place bets. Bets can be between 0 and 10 points. Bet chips are marked with a wooden marker cube of the player's colour. If 10 points are bet, the points can be split between two answers by placing two 5 point chips and placing marker cubes on both chips, or all ten can be bet on the same answer. It should be clarified to first time players that betting is always optional.
After the timer runs out, the correct answer is read from the back of the question card. The winning answer is the one which comes closest without going over. If all answers are higher than the actual answer, the special "The Correct Answer is smaller than all given answers" box pays out. Otherwise, the box containing the winning answer pays out at the odds for that box. The banker also gives a ten point bonus in chips to the player/team whose answer cards were in the winning payout box.
This continues for six rounds. On the seventh round, there is no limit on betting (once again, players can still bet zero), but they can only split their bet between two boxes as marked by their coloured cubes.
The player/team with the most points after the seventh round is the winner.
Artwork and Components
The production design of this game is somewhat lacklustre, though entirely functional. With apologies to the artist, the illustrations have a clip-art/cartoon appearance which seems somewhat "cheap". Combined with bright colours and an overly exaggerated "excitement factor" apparent in all the players, there is a distinct game-show feel to the artwork which, although not inappropriate, might have been done better.
The game box features three major illustrations, a character which appears to be in a game show, a group of people apparently orgasmically excited about something or other, and a "cool guy" looking like he's won a bunch of money at poker. This actually communicates quite effectively the three core ideas of the game - "game show/trivia", "party/group fun" and "betting". To be quite honest, I don't know how else I might have done the art differently, but somehow it feels like it should be better.
The playing mat is well laid out and there is plenty of room for what needs to be done in each area. Wager odds are clearly marked and it never impedes gameplay. The rubber mat idea is quite suitable for the game, and the green colour immediately brings to mind casino betting areas, as well as being gentle on the eyes.
The foldable aspect of the mat is quite nice, lending itself to easy placement and no problems with warp causing bets to slide around on the board.
The question cards are not remarkable, being pretty similar to any trivia game you might have played. There is no slipcover box provided for their storage, but this is a minor issue.
The wooden cubes are standard stock - nothing good or bad about them. They are suitably large enough to not be easily lost, while also not too large to make placement or balancing on top of stacks of chips difficult.
The plastic poker chips are pretty standard stock as well, but many players commented on how they feel "cheap". Many people are now used to the more expensive clay gambling chips used at casinos and in poker games, and the old plastic chips, once entirely serviceable, feel chintzy by comparison. While it would probably jack up the price of the set (not to mention shipping weight) to include better quality ceramic chips, thus making the idea impracticable, perhaps if a reprint or a deluxe edition is published, they should seriously consider higher quality chips.
The laminated answer cards are nicely done. It's easy to determine colour, and the dry erase marker wipes off easily. The reverse side is patterned like the back of a playing card, which, with the green rubber mat, contributes to the overall "casino" feel of the game in play.
A minor though not insignificant quibble about the dry erase markers included with the box should be mentioned. All of them worked fine, but the caps do not fit snugly on the reverse end of the pen when removed. This can easily lead to lost caps. Almost every playing group commented on how this was an annoying issue to them, and hopefully would be addressed with any future runs of this game - get markers that when you pull off the caps, you can stick them snugly on the other end. The sand timer is also unremarkable, but seems sturdy enough for repeated use.
Although the game rules indicated there should be a "napkin" available to each player, none is included in the box. A minor issue, and nothing which should detract from the game. Perhaps a deluxe edition could include cheap dry-erase marker erasers, perhaps on the pen caps.
Gameplay
This game plays quickly in about 20 to 30 minutes. In every case where I brought it out, with experienced gamers, family or casual friends alike, everyone wanted to play more than one game. In the case of my extended adult family (father, mother, uncles and aunts) we actually played for eight successive games in one evening because everyone was enjoying it so much. This was surprising because this particular group is not much of a gaming-oriented bunch. My father, who was most sceptical, ended up as one of its more enthusiastic players.
Importance should be placed on relatively firm enforcement of time limits. We have a house rule that bets or answers not placed on the board before the timer runs out are not put into play at all.
The concept sounds somewhat dry to explain it, but everyone gets into it quickly. You have to repeat certain rules with first time players - "closest without going over" and bet limits/methods seem to be the ones which cause the most confusion, but they are not inherently difficult.
Small bits of trivia and information have been included with the answers on the back of question cards, and information sources are quoted on the front. This can help make the game even more interesting if you have a good Question Reader.
The questions themselves represent a nice variety, and as has been demonstrated elsewhere in BGG, there is a method to the distribution. Many of the questions are in the "you can't possibly know that" category, and are best approached from a best estimate or "wild-assed guess" strategy. First time players should be assured that it is not so important to answer correctly as it is to bet correctly.
As a Canadian, I would comment that the questions are largely America-centric, but this is common in many trivia games. If there is an international edition or deluxe edition released, I highly recommend a set of questions with a much broader geographic and cultural basis.
The game isn't quite as successful when played in teams, but still works well. The optimal number of players is actually exactly seven, in my opinion, but 5-14 works fine. (we've played with 12). I can't see three or four players having nearly as much fun.
Most players recognize quickly the strategy of strategic betting, betting on the answer with the largest gulf between it and the next highest while still likely being in the correct range.
The designer has recommended a few variants, which I believe can be found in the game entry forums at BGG.
Summary
This game is fun, fast and easy with broad appeal and a shallow learning curve. Perfect for a party game, but having a bit more meat than the usual roll and move grind of Trivial Pursuit and Scene It. It also has a limited playing time - unless you are not doing things right, games will almost always be over within 30 minutes, and 20 minutes is more common. There's virtually no down-time (as there can be in other trivia games where a player can continue to move with several successfully answered questions) and there is a certain level of excitement (generated by the timers) to the betting and answering.
I highly recommend this game for anyone who likes party games. It is definitely in my top three of manufactured party games. It doesn't have much appeal for euro-only gamers, as the betting strategy can be largely negated by the no-limits "all-in" round at the last round.
I do feel that the international appeal of the game could be increased dramatically by selecting more international questions.
One of the most telling aspects about the game is that every time I've introduced it to a new group of players, they’ve asked where they can buy a copy. I've enthusiastically recommended local gaming stores in my area where I know the game is carried. If you need a party game that you can pull out and play anytime with almost any group of players, this is one to have.
Thursday, August 12, 2004
Role Playing Game Systems - A Look Back
I had originally put these comments in another forum, but I thought you gents might be interested as well.
RPG systems.
I'll be the first to admit I'm pretty finicky when it comes to RPG systems. I've designed three (well, the first two got rolled into the third) and I'm pretty happy with the final result. It's still amateursville compared to most complete systems, but I like it better than most.
I'll just run through the systems I've tried and run through the pros and cons of each. For fun, I'll list them in the order that I played them.
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons
My first ever, at age 10. Was completely at sea, since our DM was 10 as well. I think this is a fair to middling system, but it's popular.
PROS: Great for fantasy play - lots of spells and magic items.
CONS: Poor combat, action and skills systems, even with recent d20 make-over, plus my personal nemesis - hit points.
Star Frontiers
I played maybe three sessions of this game. I can hardly remember anything about it, other than the name of the bad guy Sathars, and that the other alien races seemed interesting.
PROS: Nice diversity of species - humans didn't seem like the be-all and end-all.
CONS: Forgettable
Gamma World
I'm a huge sucker for post-apocalyptic settings, especially in a sort of Mad Max future. This one was different in that the apocalypse happened about 75 years in the future of our time, which made for very interesting lost technologies.
PROS: A whole system for figuring out how to work pre-war gadgetry was a nice touch. The mutation system was extensive and interesting. The game world was pretty neat - my 2nd edition rules had a great map of post-war North America
CONS: Suffered from most of the same problems as D&D, since it was based on the same system.
Middle-Earth Role Playing (MERP)
One of the most complex and detailed RPGs I've played, which sort of fits the whole Tolkein mystique.
PROS: Great diversity of skill advancement and roll modifiers. Fantastically funny critical hit tables. Interesting that critical hits are divided by type of damage.
CONS: Super-kludgy character generation and skill advancement, thought I'll probably revisit it now that I'm not 11 and know a lot more about RPGs in general.
Top Secret
I liked being a superspy, what with the gadgets and the cars and the near-death.
PROS: Nice theme. It was a lot grittier than most RPGs, which meant it was easier to get hurt or die. The luck point mechanic helped out a lot with that.
CONS: Too many tables. When you've got a table for escaping death traps and torture, there's a problem. Also, the background info provided in the basic game set didn't provide a good framework for getting campaigns off the ground, unless you know a lot about world espionage and politics, which I didn't at the age of 12.
Robotech (Palladium RPG system)
Ahhhh... megadamage. A kludgy way to deal with the fact that you've got some things which are small and puny, like humans, and big and mighty, like veritechs.
PROS: set in an interesting and pre-made universe, with lots of depth and variety of enemies, especially with the multiple expansion rule books. Plus, any game where you can fly a veritech and fire off salvoes of AP missles is supa-cool.
CONS: Palladium level-based skill/percentage plus combat systems is clunky, with the need to cross reference a lot of abilities that affect skills, and skills that affect abilities. This is a cross-the-board criticism of Palladium games, not a specific swipe at Robotech.
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
PROS: Mutating animals with BIO-E is cool.
CONS: See Robotech critique above.
Call of Cthlulu
Super creepy. Insanity sucks.
PROS: Very atmospheric. Super easy to die. You had to really ROLE-PLAY to stay alive. H.P. Lovecraft world is great to muck about in.
CONS: Sometimes TOO easy to die or go mad.
Star Trek (FASA version)
This was actually the second role-playing game I bought, but when I first got it, I had no idea of how to figure out the character generation system, so it sat on my shelf for several years until I could figure it out. When FASA lost the license, a lot of the modules and supplements went for super-cheap, so I've got a lot of books for this game.
PROS: One of the best character generation systems around - it really feels like a Star Trek character career. I cribbed this system for use in the home-made Aliens RPG mentioned above, then modified it until it wasn't quite as derivative in the Void Angels iteration. Once we got a campaign going, it felt like we had our own ship and familiar cast and crew which made for some fun evenings.
CONS: Action point movement system never really worked. Playing "goody-goody" Fed types can be very limiting, as can the resources available to a big Fed starship. I don't really comment often on manual and module artwork, but FASA had a really poor artist for a lot of the illustration and manual work.
Twilight 2000
More post-apocalyptic goodness - basically role-playing as former soldiers in the wake of WWIII Europe trying to get home to North America. Poor GDW, we barely knew ye.
PROS: Fantastically realistic post-war world. Great character creation system. Excellent volume of supporting modules and supplements. The vehicle guides and attendent colour plate explanations were excellent. Every module that I bought was well thought out and chock-full of great NPCs, settings and plotlines. Just about the grittiest game I can think of - any game where typhus and dystentry is covered as a real danger in the rules just about wins for the blackest sense of doom category (with Wraith: The Oblivion a possible contender)
CONS: Piece of crap combat and ammunition system. The only thing that seemed to make sense was the range and penetration values - damage and ammo were based on some weird burst/grouping method. A combat round took a long long time to resolve. Vehicle combat was better done, with component specific damage, but also a lot of time to figure out.
Star Wars
Everyone knows the Star Wars universe. You can role-play in it.
PROS: Great cinematic feel - very fast paced and very role-playing oriented. Star Wars universe is a fun place to beat on Stormtroopers.
CONS: Sometimes dice-rolling got a bit much. As easy as addition is, adding more than 8 dice slows down the game. Character templates ease character creation, but more options for custom design should be given.
Marvel Superheroes
Also familiar to most.
PROS: Super simple task resolution chart. I stole it, with modifications, for all three of my homemade games because I liked it so much. Super powers and character generation well thought out and fun to play. Surprisingly, this is probably the game that I have fewest beefs with - it's simple, easy to play and goes quickly. Character generation is easy.
CONS: I'm not a huge superhero fan, so this game didn't really have a lot of appeal for me. I don't recall at all the advancement system - which probably means it wasn't anything of interest.
Shadowrun - 1st Edition
This is the best RPG setting ever in my opinion, with the possible exception of Twilight 2000 and the "World of Darkness" series. Cyberpunk meets fantasy, with a lot of other influences thrown in.
PROS: Fantastic - literally and figuratively - game world. Art - layout, graphics and illustrations were fantastic, with the very rare exception of the one FASA artist from Star Trek (I guess they kept him on out of pity or something) who wasn't very good at all. Fortunately, he didn't get many pictures in. Very interesting spell system, which brings us to the cons...
CONS: In its first edition incarnation, Shadowrun had to have the most klugdy ruleset I've ever encountered. It improved in 2nd (and 3rd, I think, though I haven't looked at it) editions, but by that point the damage had been done. Combat was clunky, spells were very interesting but took a while to figure out and opposing skill checks were arcane. I had only the briefest of looks at 2nd Edition rules, but they looked much improved. I'd like to try this one again some day, if only for the game world.
Ninjas and Superspies
Another Palladium offering - Shemp cobbled together elements from this game and Beyond the Supernatural to make a very interesting game world.
PROS: Interesting concept - sorta Hellboy/Buffy idea.
CONS: Palladium system.
Traveller 2300
Picked this up cheap after GDW went under. Like almost all of the GDW games I ever looked at, this had a very "real" feeling universe, with really "alien" aliens that weren't just humans with forehead prosthetics.
I guess for my own games I grabbed elements from a number of games that I found interesting.
From Marvel, I took the task resolution chart.
From Twilight, Star Trek and MERP I grabbed the concept of developing the character from childhood through a career to present times.
I drew inspiration from Traveller 2300's take on the future, if only because it seemed the most likely of the many futures I've seen presented thus far.
From Star Wars I took the cinematic mechanic of FPs, which are very helpful in a high-fatality setting like the Void Angel universe.
The main thing I've learned from three attempts at RPGs (plus one or two others which were never really completely baked) is that the temptation is to make things over complex, when in fact, simplicity while still maintaining the flavour is what makes a game shine. If your game has too many mechanics, it collapses under its own weight - you're spending all your time looking up charts, modifiers and tables.
RPG systems.
I'll be the first to admit I'm pretty finicky when it comes to RPG systems. I've designed three (well, the first two got rolled into the third) and I'm pretty happy with the final result. It's still amateursville compared to most complete systems, but I like it better than most.
I'll just run through the systems I've tried and run through the pros and cons of each. For fun, I'll list them in the order that I played them.
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons
My first ever, at age 10. Was completely at sea, since our DM was 10 as well. I think this is a fair to middling system, but it's popular.
PROS: Great for fantasy play - lots of spells and magic items.
CONS: Poor combat, action and skills systems, even with recent d20 make-over, plus my personal nemesis - hit points.
Star Frontiers
I played maybe three sessions of this game. I can hardly remember anything about it, other than the name of the bad guy Sathars, and that the other alien races seemed interesting.
PROS: Nice diversity of species - humans didn't seem like the be-all and end-all.
CONS: Forgettable
Gamma World
I'm a huge sucker for post-apocalyptic settings, especially in a sort of Mad Max future. This one was different in that the apocalypse happened about 75 years in the future of our time, which made for very interesting lost technologies.
PROS: A whole system for figuring out how to work pre-war gadgetry was a nice touch. The mutation system was extensive and interesting. The game world was pretty neat - my 2nd edition rules had a great map of post-war North America
CONS: Suffered from most of the same problems as D&D, since it was based on the same system.
Middle-Earth Role Playing (MERP)
One of the most complex and detailed RPGs I've played, which sort of fits the whole Tolkein mystique.
PROS: Great diversity of skill advancement and roll modifiers. Fantastically funny critical hit tables. Interesting that critical hits are divided by type of damage.
CONS: Super-kludgy character generation and skill advancement, thought I'll probably revisit it now that I'm not 11 and know a lot more about RPGs in general.
Top Secret
I liked being a superspy, what with the gadgets and the cars and the near-death.
PROS: Nice theme. It was a lot grittier than most RPGs, which meant it was easier to get hurt or die. The luck point mechanic helped out a lot with that.
CONS: Too many tables. When you've got a table for escaping death traps and torture, there's a problem. Also, the background info provided in the basic game set didn't provide a good framework for getting campaigns off the ground, unless you know a lot about world espionage and politics, which I didn't at the age of 12.
Robotech (Palladium RPG system)
Ahhhh... megadamage. A kludgy way to deal with the fact that you've got some things which are small and puny, like humans, and big and mighty, like veritechs.
PROS: set in an interesting and pre-made universe, with lots of depth and variety of enemies, especially with the multiple expansion rule books. Plus, any game where you can fly a veritech and fire off salvoes of AP missles is supa-cool.
CONS: Palladium level-based skill/percentage plus combat systems is clunky, with the need to cross reference a lot of abilities that affect skills, and skills that affect abilities. This is a cross-the-board criticism of Palladium games, not a specific swipe at Robotech.
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
PROS: Mutating animals with BIO-E is cool.
CONS: See Robotech critique above.
Call of Cthlulu
Super creepy. Insanity sucks.
PROS: Very atmospheric. Super easy to die. You had to really ROLE-PLAY to stay alive. H.P. Lovecraft world is great to muck about in.
CONS: Sometimes TOO easy to die or go mad.
Star Trek (FASA version)
This was actually the second role-playing game I bought, but when I first got it, I had no idea of how to figure out the character generation system, so it sat on my shelf for several years until I could figure it out. When FASA lost the license, a lot of the modules and supplements went for super-cheap, so I've got a lot of books for this game.
PROS: One of the best character generation systems around - it really feels like a Star Trek character career. I cribbed this system for use in the home-made Aliens RPG mentioned above, then modified it until it wasn't quite as derivative in the Void Angels iteration. Once we got a campaign going, it felt like we had our own ship and familiar cast and crew which made for some fun evenings.
CONS: Action point movement system never really worked. Playing "goody-goody" Fed types can be very limiting, as can the resources available to a big Fed starship. I don't really comment often on manual and module artwork, but FASA had a really poor artist for a lot of the illustration and manual work.
Twilight 2000
More post-apocalyptic goodness - basically role-playing as former soldiers in the wake of WWIII Europe trying to get home to North America. Poor GDW, we barely knew ye.
PROS: Fantastically realistic post-war world. Great character creation system. Excellent volume of supporting modules and supplements. The vehicle guides and attendent colour plate explanations were excellent. Every module that I bought was well thought out and chock-full of great NPCs, settings and plotlines. Just about the grittiest game I can think of - any game where typhus and dystentry is covered as a real danger in the rules just about wins for the blackest sense of doom category (with Wraith: The Oblivion a possible contender)
CONS: Piece of crap combat and ammunition system. The only thing that seemed to make sense was the range and penetration values - damage and ammo were based on some weird burst/grouping method. A combat round took a long long time to resolve. Vehicle combat was better done, with component specific damage, but also a lot of time to figure out.
Star Wars
Everyone knows the Star Wars universe. You can role-play in it.
PROS: Great cinematic feel - very fast paced and very role-playing oriented. Star Wars universe is a fun place to beat on Stormtroopers.
CONS: Sometimes dice-rolling got a bit much. As easy as addition is, adding more than 8 dice slows down the game. Character templates ease character creation, but more options for custom design should be given.
Marvel Superheroes
Also familiar to most.
PROS: Super simple task resolution chart. I stole it, with modifications, for all three of my homemade games because I liked it so much. Super powers and character generation well thought out and fun to play. Surprisingly, this is probably the game that I have fewest beefs with - it's simple, easy to play and goes quickly. Character generation is easy.
CONS: I'm not a huge superhero fan, so this game didn't really have a lot of appeal for me. I don't recall at all the advancement system - which probably means it wasn't anything of interest.
Shadowrun - 1st Edition
This is the best RPG setting ever in my opinion, with the possible exception of Twilight 2000 and the "World of Darkness" series. Cyberpunk meets fantasy, with a lot of other influences thrown in.
PROS: Fantastic - literally and figuratively - game world. Art - layout, graphics and illustrations were fantastic, with the very rare exception of the one FASA artist from Star Trek (I guess they kept him on out of pity or something) who wasn't very good at all. Fortunately, he didn't get many pictures in. Very interesting spell system, which brings us to the cons...
CONS: In its first edition incarnation, Shadowrun had to have the most klugdy ruleset I've ever encountered. It improved in 2nd (and 3rd, I think, though I haven't looked at it) editions, but by that point the damage had been done. Combat was clunky, spells were very interesting but took a while to figure out and opposing skill checks were arcane. I had only the briefest of looks at 2nd Edition rules, but they looked much improved. I'd like to try this one again some day, if only for the game world.
Ninjas and Superspies
Another Palladium offering - Shemp cobbled together elements from this game and Beyond the Supernatural to make a very interesting game world.
PROS: Interesting concept - sorta Hellboy/Buffy idea.
CONS: Palladium system.
Traveller 2300
Picked this up cheap after GDW went under. Like almost all of the GDW games I ever looked at, this had a very "real" feeling universe, with really "alien" aliens that weren't just humans with forehead prosthetics.
I guess for my own games I grabbed elements from a number of games that I found interesting.
From Marvel, I took the task resolution chart.
From Twilight, Star Trek and MERP I grabbed the concept of developing the character from childhood through a career to present times.
I drew inspiration from Traveller 2300's take on the future, if only because it seemed the most likely of the many futures I've seen presented thus far.
From Star Wars I took the cinematic mechanic of FPs, which are very helpful in a high-fatality setting like the Void Angel universe.
The main thing I've learned from three attempts at RPGs (plus one or two others which were never really completely baked) is that the temptation is to make things over complex, when in fact, simplicity while still maintaining the flavour is what makes a game shine. If your game has too many mechanics, it collapses under its own weight - you're spending all your time looking up charts, modifiers and tables.
Monday, May 17, 2004
Extra-WAGSal Affairs
As the members of the group are aware, I am lucky enough to have a spouse who is quite happy to join in board games from time to time - she goes by Tigerlily Bumbleroot on this blog. The WAGS group being composed of roughly five members, with one provisional member at the moment, lends itself more to five or six player games. Unfortunately, games designed for four to six players seldom scale down to two players well (notable exceptions being Duel of Ages). Seeking games which better suited a one-on-one enviroment, I've bought a few games which I feel are worthy of note even though they're played outside the usual WAGS night.
Hera and Zeus was one of my first two-player purchases. It's a self contained, non-collectible card game which takes a mythological competition between the chief of the Greek gods, Zeus, and his wife, Hera, as its theme.
The object of the game is to conceal the mortal lover of your opponent (Argus, in the case of Hera, and Io, in the case of Zeus) from being recovered while struggling to get back your own. Along the way, players use a wide array of mythological creatures and personalities to probe for weaknesses and try to locate the hidden mortal. While the cards are differentiated between the two "sides", the game is "symmetrical" in the sense that both sides have the exact same number of indentically powered cards (with different names). This is quite different from a asymmetrical game, in which one side typically has strength in some areas but weaknesses in others. The game plays in about a half an hour to forty-five minutes, and there is a large amount of strategy to the game play. Combat exists, in a sense, but is abstracted, which is a bonus for Tigerlily, who doesn't find much interest in combat-themed games.
This game has a good amount of strategy and a fair deal of bluffing, but a few game mechanics allow for a largely random game-winning option (the infamous Pegasus strike). I don't find this such a "broken" mechanic as some people seem to think, as there are ways to avoid being caught with the mortal in your hand, and appropriate strategy can protect the mortal on the board.
I enjoy this game, and given its theme of spousal conflict, it seems ideal for a gamer to play with his or her significant other as a fun way of fighting the war of the sexes on an epic level. Released by Kosmos, Hera and Zeus has decent artwork (Tigerlily likes it more than I do) and well produced cards and rules. None of the rules have to be modified to play the game correctly, but a quick trip to the online site can assist in clearing up some minor interpretation questions.
Rating: 7
Lord of the Rings: Confrontation was my second purchase of a two-player game. Knowing Tigerlily's love for Tolkein, I thought she would enjoy a two-player board game which abstracts the War of the Ring and Frodo's quest to destroy the Ring of Power. Produced by Fantasy Flight Games and featuring artwork by the same acclaimed Tolkein artist who did production artwork for the movie adaption of Lord of the Rings, John Howe, LoTR: Controntation is a handsome looking game.
Played on a small gameboard which has an abstract representation of Middle Earth, the game uses a mechanic familiar to players of Stratego - each piece has a strength rated from one to nine, which determines its power in combat. This strength is hidden from the other player by having the pieces constructed in such a way that the characters are only viewable from one side. If this was all this game was, it would be only a LotR-themed Stratego. However the designer takes the game a few steps further by introducing special powers for each character, as well as giving each player cards which can modify the strength number or cause other effects when played as a part of combat. The "good" forces must attempt to spirit Frodo into Mordor through a combination of strategy, bluff and good luck. The "evil" forces must capture Frodo or move a number of their characters into the Shire.
This game is a classical example of an asymmetrical game, quite different from "Hera and Zeus" above. At first glance, the good forces are weak and ill-matched - the evil forces seem almost insurmountable. Careful gameplay and a liberal dose of skillful bluffing can even the odds. After several plays, I find the sides fairly evenly matched, although some players claim one side or the other has a distinct advantage. Reiner Knizia has perfectly captured the theme and mood of the conflict with very simple powers and mechanics. Playable in about twenty to forty minutes, the game is suitable for many replays and is a delight to look at. A steal at its usual MSRP of around $30 CDN, this game is a worthy addition to any two-player game collection.
Rating: 8
Lost Cities is my most recent two-player purchase. Having bought and enjoyed LotR: Confrontation and Hera and Zeus, I was intrigued by reviews of Lost Cities being as good or better. Fortunately, I was not disappointed. Lost Cities is a super simple game, themed around making voyages to fabled lost cities in Iceland (or Northern Scotland?), Central America, Atlantis, Egypt and the Himalayas. Strangely, the cities and locations are never explicitly named, so most of the time they are referred to by their colours: Red, Green, Blue, Yellow and White. Players take turns playing a card to either invest in a expedition, or advance it. You can set out without investment, but for lesser return. After embarking on a expedition, no further investment can be made in it, so the gameplay becomes a very careful balance of bluff, risk management and a healthy dollop of "screwing your opponent". Scoring comes once the entire deck has been played through, and a quick addition/subtraction plus a multiplication factor for investment (and a bonus for an eight-card expedition) scores each journey. The highest score takes the round.
Of the three games mentioned here, Tigerlily seems to like this one best. It requires no understanding of any specific language and only rudimentary math skills, but the strategy is quite deep. A round can be played in 10-15 minutes, and to balance out luck factors, a combined score total over three or more rounds is recommended. The cards are well illustrated and the quality of both the cards and the small three panel board (largely needed only as a placeholder) make this an attractive game which is also fun to play. One thing I like about this game is that, much like Eucre or Hearts, once you've gotten the rhythm, the correct play is almost reflexive - it doesn't tax your mind overmuch. It's a lovely way to help your mind relax while sparring with an opponent. This Kosmos game feels like a classic - it's one that will be around after other fads have come and gone. It's as close to perfect within the context of what it tries to be as is possible - and that's the hallmark of a fine game.
Rating: 9
Hera and Zeus was one of my first two-player purchases. It's a self contained, non-collectible card game which takes a mythological competition between the chief of the Greek gods, Zeus, and his wife, Hera, as its theme.
The object of the game is to conceal the mortal lover of your opponent (Argus, in the case of Hera, and Io, in the case of Zeus) from being recovered while struggling to get back your own. Along the way, players use a wide array of mythological creatures and personalities to probe for weaknesses and try to locate the hidden mortal. While the cards are differentiated between the two "sides", the game is "symmetrical" in the sense that both sides have the exact same number of indentically powered cards (with different names). This is quite different from a asymmetrical game, in which one side typically has strength in some areas but weaknesses in others. The game plays in about a half an hour to forty-five minutes, and there is a large amount of strategy to the game play. Combat exists, in a sense, but is abstracted, which is a bonus for Tigerlily, who doesn't find much interest in combat-themed games.
This game has a good amount of strategy and a fair deal of bluffing, but a few game mechanics allow for a largely random game-winning option (the infamous Pegasus strike). I don't find this such a "broken" mechanic as some people seem to think, as there are ways to avoid being caught with the mortal in your hand, and appropriate strategy can protect the mortal on the board.
I enjoy this game, and given its theme of spousal conflict, it seems ideal for a gamer to play with his or her significant other as a fun way of fighting the war of the sexes on an epic level. Released by Kosmos, Hera and Zeus has decent artwork (Tigerlily likes it more than I do) and well produced cards and rules. None of the rules have to be modified to play the game correctly, but a quick trip to the online site can assist in clearing up some minor interpretation questions.
Rating: 7
Lord of the Rings: Confrontation was my second purchase of a two-player game. Knowing Tigerlily's love for Tolkein, I thought she would enjoy a two-player board game which abstracts the War of the Ring and Frodo's quest to destroy the Ring of Power. Produced by Fantasy Flight Games and featuring artwork by the same acclaimed Tolkein artist who did production artwork for the movie adaption of Lord of the Rings, John Howe, LoTR: Controntation is a handsome looking game.
Played on a small gameboard which has an abstract representation of Middle Earth, the game uses a mechanic familiar to players of Stratego - each piece has a strength rated from one to nine, which determines its power in combat. This strength is hidden from the other player by having the pieces constructed in such a way that the characters are only viewable from one side. If this was all this game was, it would be only a LotR-themed Stratego. However the designer takes the game a few steps further by introducing special powers for each character, as well as giving each player cards which can modify the strength number or cause other effects when played as a part of combat. The "good" forces must attempt to spirit Frodo into Mordor through a combination of strategy, bluff and good luck. The "evil" forces must capture Frodo or move a number of their characters into the Shire.
This game is a classical example of an asymmetrical game, quite different from "Hera and Zeus" above. At first glance, the good forces are weak and ill-matched - the evil forces seem almost insurmountable. Careful gameplay and a liberal dose of skillful bluffing can even the odds. After several plays, I find the sides fairly evenly matched, although some players claim one side or the other has a distinct advantage. Reiner Knizia has perfectly captured the theme and mood of the conflict with very simple powers and mechanics. Playable in about twenty to forty minutes, the game is suitable for many replays and is a delight to look at. A steal at its usual MSRP of around $30 CDN, this game is a worthy addition to any two-player game collection.
Rating: 8
Lost Cities is my most recent two-player purchase. Having bought and enjoyed LotR: Confrontation and Hera and Zeus, I was intrigued by reviews of Lost Cities being as good or better. Fortunately, I was not disappointed. Lost Cities is a super simple game, themed around making voyages to fabled lost cities in Iceland (or Northern Scotland?), Central America, Atlantis, Egypt and the Himalayas. Strangely, the cities and locations are never explicitly named, so most of the time they are referred to by their colours: Red, Green, Blue, Yellow and White. Players take turns playing a card to either invest in a expedition, or advance it. You can set out without investment, but for lesser return. After embarking on a expedition, no further investment can be made in it, so the gameplay becomes a very careful balance of bluff, risk management and a healthy dollop of "screwing your opponent". Scoring comes once the entire deck has been played through, and a quick addition/subtraction plus a multiplication factor for investment (and a bonus for an eight-card expedition) scores each journey. The highest score takes the round.
Of the three games mentioned here, Tigerlily seems to like this one best. It requires no understanding of any specific language and only rudimentary math skills, but the strategy is quite deep. A round can be played in 10-15 minutes, and to balance out luck factors, a combined score total over three or more rounds is recommended. The cards are well illustrated and the quality of both the cards and the small three panel board (largely needed only as a placeholder) make this an attractive game which is also fun to play. One thing I like about this game is that, much like Eucre or Hearts, once you've gotten the rhythm, the correct play is almost reflexive - it doesn't tax your mind overmuch. It's a lovely way to help your mind relax while sparring with an opponent. This Kosmos game feels like a classic - it's one that will be around after other fads have come and gone. It's as close to perfect within the context of what it tries to be as is possible - and that's the hallmark of a fine game.
Rating: 9
Thursday, May 13, 2004
Clearing away the Wags Blog Backlog.
I didn't want to leave a gigantic comment on the Complied Rating post from earlier, but did want to log my thoughts on the games mentioned in it. You can check the original post here.
9's- El Grande, Traders of Genoa, Puerto Rico
I'm agreeing w/ the posts below on El Grande - a great strategy game, with the healthy dollop of screwing over the other players.
I'm seeing great potential in Traders of Genoa. Since there are many possible routes to earn money, many different strategies can be pursued simultaneously, and nothing that happens is arbitrary. A little bit of randomness, but no arbitraryness. Looking forward to playing this one over & over. Also w/ the Healthy Dollop of Screwing Over the Other Players.
Puerto Rico, most of the same comments as Traders of Genoa. Also w/ the HDoSOOP.
8's - Illuminati: New World Order, Duel of Ages, Princes of Florence
I just have a great affection for INWO. It's my personal favourite, a combination of humour, scheming and strategy. As long as you try to keep it snappy and change up your decks regularly, the game is a fun one. Especially if you are paranoid.
Duel of Ages is also enjoyable, but you need to be in the right headspace, and as mentioned, devote a LARGE chunk of time to it. And hope that none of the balancing issues crop up, or things can get out of hand and hopeless for one team pretty quickly. That's the only reason this is a little below the top.
I have a feeling that Princes of Florence would get repetitive if you played it often - it's fun, but the extent of play options seems a little limited compared to some of the other German games that I have ranked higher here.
7's - Citadels, Deadwood, Firefly: Space Traders
Citadels is a nice quick card game w/ simple mechanics. Not too involving or memorable, but a nice little game.
You want a hilarious, quick to pick up game? I think you want something from Cheapass Games. And I think you want Deadwood. That's all.
Kozure's Firefly: Space Traders game was really slick, and well-worked out. I would definitely play again, and look forward to any tweaks he might make.
6's - Settlers of Catan, Bang!, Star Munchkin, Shadowrun, Wreckage, Star Wars: Epic Duels, Kill Dr. Lucky
Catan just feels a little arbitrary to me - I can't put my finger on exactly why my crank isn't turned. This one may just "click" one day.
Bang! is quite fun, with the only downside being the aformentioned "kicking out" of players before the game is completed. Also, some roles are more difficult then others, affecting the game balance IMO.
Shadowrun, as mentioned, suffers from lag time when being played by more than two, but is a perfectly reasonable card game.
I REALLY enjoyed playing Star Munchkin once - it is good silly fun, and doesn't aspire to be anything more. I think this would be a good one to pull off of the shelf periodically, but it isn't much special as far as gameplay goes.
Wreckage, I really enjoyed the first couple of times, but the replayability just doesn't seem to be there for me. The same things happen, over and over.
SW:ED - I think that this is for the game as a whole. If it were solely a 2-player game, I would bump this up to a 7.
Kill Dr. Lucky is, again, a perfectly fine game IF all the players are on a similar wavelength. If not, it can suffer in the same way that Monopoly can when one player just isn't willing to engage in "deals".
4's - HeroClix
Unlike Easy, I AM a comic book fan, and yet.... the actual game play of this is clunky. One really need to know their pieces inside out to be effective. Also, as a colour-blind person, I find that the colour coding used on the pieces is even more impenetrable than most. I think that this would be more fun ignoring the "superpowers" of the characters, but that destoys the point balance. Eh. I would, however, instantly bump this up to a 9 if they ever issue pieces for Grant Morrison's incarnation of the Doom Patrol! 'Cuz I'm a dweeb like that.
3's - Wreck of the Pandora, Falling!
Pandora had fun elements, but all of the rolling for non-player actions became tedious, destroyed the pacing (I'm all about pacing - blame the MTV), and sucked the life out of this one. (Although, it should be noted that this was only intended as a 1 player game, so take the criticism on this page with a grain of salt.
Falling! is an OK palate cleanser between games, but is frenzied, muddled, immune to strategy, and pretty arbitrary, at least to this player. I'm liking the frenzied part. The rest, not so much.
0's - Dr. Who CCG
RNA - (Rating Not Applicable)- Firefly the Game
This was playtesting, and I'd await the next incarnation before forming an opinion.
UBUBS - (Unrated Because Unplayed By Shemp)
Carcassonne, Robo-Rally, & Zombies!. I look forward to any game with an Exclamation Mark! in the Title! because they are Exciting!
Is that the whole list of games we've played in 2004? Whew. It was a blast, but I'm glad I'll be down to commenting on just a couple weekly from now on.
9's- El Grande, Traders of Genoa, Puerto Rico
I'm agreeing w/ the posts below on El Grande - a great strategy game, with the healthy dollop of screwing over the other players.
I'm seeing great potential in Traders of Genoa. Since there are many possible routes to earn money, many different strategies can be pursued simultaneously, and nothing that happens is arbitrary. A little bit of randomness, but no arbitraryness. Looking forward to playing this one over & over. Also w/ the Healthy Dollop of Screwing Over the Other Players.
Puerto Rico, most of the same comments as Traders of Genoa. Also w/ the HDoSOOP.
8's - Illuminati: New World Order, Duel of Ages, Princes of Florence
I just have a great affection for INWO. It's my personal favourite, a combination of humour, scheming and strategy. As long as you try to keep it snappy and change up your decks regularly, the game is a fun one. Especially if you are paranoid.
Duel of Ages is also enjoyable, but you need to be in the right headspace, and as mentioned, devote a LARGE chunk of time to it. And hope that none of the balancing issues crop up, or things can get out of hand and hopeless for one team pretty quickly. That's the only reason this is a little below the top.
I have a feeling that Princes of Florence would get repetitive if you played it often - it's fun, but the extent of play options seems a little limited compared to some of the other German games that I have ranked higher here.
7's - Citadels, Deadwood, Firefly: Space Traders
Citadels is a nice quick card game w/ simple mechanics. Not too involving or memorable, but a nice little game.
You want a hilarious, quick to pick up game? I think you want something from Cheapass Games. And I think you want Deadwood. That's all.
Kozure's Firefly: Space Traders game was really slick, and well-worked out. I would definitely play again, and look forward to any tweaks he might make.
6's - Settlers of Catan, Bang!, Star Munchkin, Shadowrun, Wreckage, Star Wars: Epic Duels, Kill Dr. Lucky
Catan just feels a little arbitrary to me - I can't put my finger on exactly why my crank isn't turned. This one may just "click" one day.
Bang! is quite fun, with the only downside being the aformentioned "kicking out" of players before the game is completed. Also, some roles are more difficult then others, affecting the game balance IMO.
Shadowrun, as mentioned, suffers from lag time when being played by more than two, but is a perfectly reasonable card game.
I REALLY enjoyed playing Star Munchkin once - it is good silly fun, and doesn't aspire to be anything more. I think this would be a good one to pull off of the shelf periodically, but it isn't much special as far as gameplay goes.
Wreckage, I really enjoyed the first couple of times, but the replayability just doesn't seem to be there for me. The same things happen, over and over.
SW:ED - I think that this is for the game as a whole. If it were solely a 2-player game, I would bump this up to a 7.
Kill Dr. Lucky is, again, a perfectly fine game IF all the players are on a similar wavelength. If not, it can suffer in the same way that Monopoly can when one player just isn't willing to engage in "deals".
4's - HeroClix
Unlike Easy, I AM a comic book fan, and yet.... the actual game play of this is clunky. One really need to know their pieces inside out to be effective. Also, as a colour-blind person, I find that the colour coding used on the pieces is even more impenetrable than most. I think that this would be more fun ignoring the "superpowers" of the characters, but that destoys the point balance. Eh. I would, however, instantly bump this up to a 9 if they ever issue pieces for Grant Morrison's incarnation of the Doom Patrol! 'Cuz I'm a dweeb like that.
3's - Wreck of the Pandora, Falling!
Pandora had fun elements, but all of the rolling for non-player actions became tedious, destroyed the pacing (I'm all about pacing - blame the MTV), and sucked the life out of this one. (Although, it should be noted that this was only intended as a 1 player game, so take the criticism on this page with a grain of salt.
Falling! is an OK palate cleanser between games, but is frenzied, muddled, immune to strategy, and pretty arbitrary, at least to this player. I'm liking the frenzied part. The rest, not so much.
0's - Dr. Who CCG
RNA - (Rating Not Applicable)- Firefly the Game
This was playtesting, and I'd await the next incarnation before forming an opinion.
UBUBS - (Unrated Because Unplayed By Shemp)
Carcassonne, Robo-Rally, & Zombies!. I look forward to any game with an Exclamation Mark! in the Title! because they are Exciting!
Is that the whole list of games we've played in 2004? Whew. It was a blast, but I'm glad I'll be down to commenting on just a couple weekly from now on.
Monday, May 10, 2004
Unplayed Games and Games Forgotten in Previous List
Just a supplement to Easy's excellent previous list (I disagree with one or two of the ratings, but otherwise a very good list).
Games also Played by WAGs
Star Wars: Epic Duels
A really quick, simple to learn game with a snazzy theme: any of the various main characters from Star Wars Episodes 1, 2, 4, 5, & 6 can fight any other main character on a tiny "arena-like" map board. Up to eight players can play, using a combination of dice and cards to beat the 'Force' out of the other guy. Last man (or woman, or wookiee, or whatever the heck Yoda is) standing wins. Two-on-two, Team and Battle Royale games add to the fun, but there isn't much depth. Basically, you fight with blasters, lightsabers and the Force and enjoy the ride.
Personal rating of 9, Miguel would probably rate it a 5 or 6.
Kill Dr. Lucky
A sort of prequel to Clue - players try to kill the owner of a large Edwardian mansion without being seen by other players. Unfortunately, the intended victim, Dr. Lucky, has more lives than a cat with seven rabbit's feet and a horsehoe up his behind. Good for a few laughs, but it can drag if people aren't good sports about playing certain cards.
Rating: 6 - Miguel might rate it lower.
Unplayed with WAGs Games
These are games which I haven't played with WAGs - in many cases, I've played them with other friends. Occasionally I haven't played them at all.
Buffy the Vampire Slayer
One of the best boardgames adapted from a TV show (not high praise, but true nonetheless), Buffy is a relatively easy game for 2 to 5 players. One player controls the forces of evil; the other one to four players control Buffy and her 'scooby gang' of Willow, Xander and Oz as they battle Evil through the streets of Sunnydale. The game and components are very well done and it works pretty well even if you're not a fan (which I wasn't when I first bought the game). Gameplay meshes very well with theme, with certain game mechanics such as a rotating "daytime/nighttime/full moon" track being very well done.
Rating: 8.5
Captain Park’s Imaginary Polar Expedition
I haven't played this one yet. Inspired by Victorian sagas of exploration derring-do, and jealous of the fame and fortune of "Captain Park", players travel around the board of London collecting artifacts which will better help them tell tall tales at the Adventurer's Club. Artifacts, faked photos, bar stories and other fake memoribilia help to make the incredible journeys more plausible. The player to acquire the most fame wins the game. Looks like fun.
Rating: Unplayed
Chez Geek
A card game where players compete to get the most "slack" by goofing off, getting cool stuff and snogging with significant others. The winner must learn to carefully balance a job (various occupations ranging from part-time fry-cook to full-time professional) with the need to relax and slack off. Funny, but some of the cards are unbalanced and a lot of the strategy is determined by the luck of the card draw.
Rating: 6
Chrononauts
A card game of alternate histories, where players alter events from 1860 to 2000 to make it into the reality that their character wants to return to. Unfortunately, with everyone altering space-time, this can be a challenge. A clever strategy game with a great sci-fi theme. I've only played this solitaire and with Marianne, so I'm unsure how it would work with a larger group.
Rating: Unplayed
More later - I should get back to work.
Games also Played by WAGs
Star Wars: Epic Duels
A really quick, simple to learn game with a snazzy theme: any of the various main characters from Star Wars Episodes 1, 2, 4, 5, & 6 can fight any other main character on a tiny "arena-like" map board. Up to eight players can play, using a combination of dice and cards to beat the 'Force' out of the other guy. Last man (or woman, or wookiee, or whatever the heck Yoda is) standing wins. Two-on-two, Team and Battle Royale games add to the fun, but there isn't much depth. Basically, you fight with blasters, lightsabers and the Force and enjoy the ride.
Personal rating of 9, Miguel would probably rate it a 5 or 6.
Kill Dr. Lucky
A sort of prequel to Clue - players try to kill the owner of a large Edwardian mansion without being seen by other players. Unfortunately, the intended victim, Dr. Lucky, has more lives than a cat with seven rabbit's feet and a horsehoe up his behind. Good for a few laughs, but it can drag if people aren't good sports about playing certain cards.
Rating: 6 - Miguel might rate it lower.
Unplayed with WAGs Games
These are games which I haven't played with WAGs - in many cases, I've played them with other friends. Occasionally I haven't played them at all.
Buffy the Vampire Slayer
One of the best boardgames adapted from a TV show (not high praise, but true nonetheless), Buffy is a relatively easy game for 2 to 5 players. One player controls the forces of evil; the other one to four players control Buffy and her 'scooby gang' of Willow, Xander and Oz as they battle Evil through the streets of Sunnydale. The game and components are very well done and it works pretty well even if you're not a fan (which I wasn't when I first bought the game). Gameplay meshes very well with theme, with certain game mechanics such as a rotating "daytime/nighttime/full moon" track being very well done.
Rating: 8.5
Captain Park’s Imaginary Polar Expedition
I haven't played this one yet. Inspired by Victorian sagas of exploration derring-do, and jealous of the fame and fortune of "Captain Park", players travel around the board of London collecting artifacts which will better help them tell tall tales at the Adventurer's Club. Artifacts, faked photos, bar stories and other fake memoribilia help to make the incredible journeys more plausible. The player to acquire the most fame wins the game. Looks like fun.
Rating: Unplayed
Chez Geek
A card game where players compete to get the most "slack" by goofing off, getting cool stuff and snogging with significant others. The winner must learn to carefully balance a job (various occupations ranging from part-time fry-cook to full-time professional) with the need to relax and slack off. Funny, but some of the cards are unbalanced and a lot of the strategy is determined by the luck of the card draw.
Rating: 6
Chrononauts
A card game of alternate histories, where players alter events from 1860 to 2000 to make it into the reality that their character wants to return to. Unfortunately, with everyone altering space-time, this can be a challenge. A clever strategy game with a great sci-fi theme. I've only played this solitaire and with Marianne, so I'm unsure how it would work with a larger group.
Rating: Unplayed
More later - I should get back to work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
