Thinking Out Loud

Any Lucid Dreamers out There?

2006-10-12T11:47:00.000-07:00

As odd and as kooky as it sounds, I am strongly considering purchasing this "Lucid Dreaming Kit" -- for both personal interest and for research, since I am currently developing a role playing game based on lucid dreaming... Otherwise, silly as it sounds, I may pass this along as an XMas gift idea to the wife.

Back in high school and into college, I used to have incredibly violent, gory and terrifying recurring dreams -- not like night terrors, per se -- but very vivid and very disturbing dreams which I would remember and carry with me throughout the day. As the day went on, the images and scenes would quickly fade, but the underlying sense of dread, forboding and terror would linger for hours.

My best friend in college gave a speech during a communications class on lucid dreaming. I had never heard of it before, but it intrigued me and we talked about it a lot. Based on our conversations and the constant stream of horrific dreams, I did a little bit of reading on the topic and decided to give it a shot. I tried lucid dreaming for a while, but only think that once or twice did I ever really "assert myself" and start to dictate the nature and resolution of these recurring dreams. After those few episodes of being enmeshed on a more conscious and controlled level, the dreams started receding, and occured with much less frequently.

I can't help but wonder if my sudden interest in the topic as the basis for the RPG is the quasi-science of it, or the fact that I've been having a few more of those really disturbing dreams again...

Are any of you lucid dreamers? Or given it a shot? What prompted you to do so? Would you recommend a particular book or program for lucid dreaming?

A Game for All Ages...

2006-10-10T06:35:00.000-07:00

Another cool story about why kids are awesome.

I ran a very interesting session of Dungeons & Dragons at Archon over the weekend. It was a 7:30 - 11:30 PM session, my last of the convention, and I was exhausted. I really just wanted everything to be over by that point.

Then up to the table comes a 40-something year old dad and his two daughters, age 8 and 11. "We signed up for this, but none of us have ever played any sort of roleplaying game, other than Fantasy Flight on the Playstation." Great, I think to myself, just great.

Soon another father shows up with his 13 year old son, but they've both played a little. And the 6th player was an experienced gamer who didn't mind in the least.

And it turned out being the best session of any D&D I've ever run at any convention. It took some time to explain the very, very basic concepts and rules, but it all boiled down to "just tell us what you want to do and we'll help you do it."

Those three kids came up with some of the most creative, clever and original ideas to overcome various challenges. There was not a single rules argument or issue. Nobody argued that a spell should have lasted longer, or that they should be able to move an extra space. And nobody had to be reminded it was their turn.

One great example -- during a battle that ensued with these small, nasty little fey called "dobbin" at the beginning. The players were getting peppered with tiny arrows. The 11 year old said "We're in an old dead tree, right? I'll light my torch and threaten to burn their home down if they don't throw down their weapons and surrender." Then she turned to her dad and said "I'm just pretending." And then she rolled a Natural 20 on her Intimidate check. Classic.

In another section of the adventure, there's a rope ladder nailed to the wall, allowing access to the second floor - but the first one up spotted a spider swarm on the ledge, close enough that only 1 or 2 people could climb up before engaging the swarm. They didn't have any way to deal with it other than a few torches, so they tried thinking of creative ways to get past them.

They all flipped the character sheets over to look at their equipment, and a bunch of great ideas came out -- such as tying rope to the edges of a 6' x 6' tarpaulin they had to create a massive "sling" and scrape the spiders off the ledge, or using the spell mage hand to grab a tree branch and sweep the spiders off the ledge.

But the winning idea was when the 8 year old said "Why don't we use my hammer to remove the nails from the ladder and just re-attach it over on the other side?" And the 13 year old worked off that by suggesting he could use his spider climb potion to carry it up the opposite side of the wall and secure it so the rest of the group could climb up. Those parents beamed with so much pride, it was awesome.

What a great session.

Archon Recap >> The Good, The Bad & The Smelly

2006-10-09T07:21:00.000-07:00

Well, Archon 30 is come and gone. And it was pretty fun. Exhausting, but fun.

Even though it's a very, very small convention (especially when compared to the likes of GenCon or Origins) it has a faithful following, and the daily Archon newsletter that there were more event registrations over the course of Friday and Saturday than during previous years -- I'm not sure how/if that directly relates to attendance, but good for them.

Archon has a pretty heavy focus on costumes and masquerade events. There were a lot of people in costumes of some sort. A lot. At GenCon, I'd wager that fewer than 2% of the overall attendees got dressed up (in one way or another). At Archon, I'd guesstimate closer to 10% -- which is pretty significant.

Unfortunately, many of the costumed people are overweight, overage and trying to pull off looks they really shouldn't. I'm glad you have self confidence and a good self image, but I really don't want to be subjected to seeing 50 year old women weighing 200+ pounds wearing Sailor Moon or skimpy belly dancer outfits.

And please, people, bathe. The unfortunate strongest similarity between Archon and GenCon was the smell. My olfactory senses still haven't recovered.

In a quirk of coincidence, however, I ran into some folks I wasn't really expecting to see there. Sure, there were the dozen-odd people from other local gaming groups or a few folks who recognized my BGG badge, but I also ran into two people I met through my real job...

First was an intern for a local video production company, who was competing in the masquerade events (as a Starfleet officer, then Professor Snape from Harry Potter, and she had a few other home made costumes as well). She was certainly the pleasant exception to most of the costumed folks there -- cute, well groomed, in a well-made and tailored costume, and pleasant. Did I mention she was cute?

Then I also ran into someone I've met at some Business Marketing Association meetings, and had talked to enough that we thought there might be a potential business opportunity for us to work toward. So finding out he's into gaming (and for him, specifically, comic books) was a real boon. In fact, he had a booth at Archon, to promote his new comic book, Damned. I picked up a promo copy and read through it, and it's pretty neat -- I wish him all the best. And now that we know we have something in common away from the office, I'm looking forward to working with him and getting to know him better. Tres cool.

Off to Archon!

2006-10-06T06:04:00.000-07:00

I'm headed off to Archon soon, a local gaming convention here in St. Louis. Surprisingly, despite having lived in St. Louis for nearly 12 years now, this will be the first time I've attended Archon -- and I'm really looking forward to it.

As a favor to Joseph Goodman of Goodman Games (who gave me my big writing break to write D&D modules for his great Dungeon Crawl Classics line) I'm running several sessions of A Question of Morels, a scenario I wrote for DCC #29 - The Adventure Begins. It's about an herbalist in need of some rare mushrooms to brew his potions, but -- surprise, surprise -- things don't quite go as planned.

I'm also running several sessions of A Crash Course in Cthulhu, an introductory scenario for Call of Cthulhu which I've run nearly a dozen times, and always have a blast. I've written detailed backstories for all the pregenerated investigators, so they each have motivations to tie them into the clues and plot hooks that come up. And each character has one reason to like/trust one of the other characters, and a reason to dislike/distrust another. It's a great time.

I'm hoping this will help satisfy my craving for RPG gaming, or it may be just a tiny taste which turns my craving into a ravenous hunger. Either would be fine with me. Hopefully I'll also be able to get some boardgaming in over the weekend. We'll see how it goes.

I'll be wearing my custom name badge featuring my BoardGameGeek username Ynnen and my avatar. If you are attending Archon and bump into me, say hi!

Long time no blog...

2006-10-03T09:28:00.000-07:00

I haven't added a post to my blog in a while, as my gaming has been on the ebb the last few weeks. It's been a pretty dry month for gaming -- and only partially due to opportunity.

I did get to playtest some of the new options and rules I had been working on for Forbidden City and another beer n' pretzels sort of game I put together, as well as finally tried out Elasund. It was fun, but my gaming mood has been fairly mercurial lately.

I think the crux of it is that I really miss role playing games. I had played in a great Call of Cthulhu campaign that was aborted just as things heated up. Then a very interesting Eberron campaign that suddenly stopped. A few other D&D games dried up. And my attempts to get some AFMBE, Call of Cthulhu, Deadlands or Warhammer started have all fizzled. Ka Spuck.

So that's been a bit of a downer. Yet you'd think that'd make me appreciate the flexibility of boardgaming. If only 4 of the 5 can show up, you've got tons of good options available. But for me, boardgaming begins and ends there at the table. I rarely daydream about an upcoming session of boardgaming, and it lacks the creative output and opportunities to weave storylines and engage the other players.

With roleplaying games, only 50% of my enjoyment comes at the table -- there's just as much fun to be had with the session notes, planning encounters, kibitzing online with the other players about the plot, and all those sorts of supplemental exposure to the game.

So I've been a little "meh" about boardgaming. Yeah, it's fun, and I like socializing with my gaming buddies. But it's missing something. To fill the void, I've been playing City of Villains, the MMORPG. It's been a lot of fun, and quasi-fills the RPG need, but it's not perfect. Hopefully I'll be able to drum up some F2F RPG gaming soon.

Read any good games lately?

2006-09-19T09:29:00.000-07:00

Aside from gaming, one of my favorite past times is reading. I generally read fantasy and science fiction, preferring my entertainment to be detached from the everyday. But despite getting to read some fun novels lately (I just finished William King's Slayer series and am almost done re-reading Rally Cry by William R. Forstchen), I find myself reading game-related content most of all.

Not reviews, GeekLists or session reports (although I do read quite a few of each), however. Game rules and rulebooks. I often bring rulebooks to work to read over lunch, or pack an RPG core book along on a trip. I love reading about new mechanics, trying to visualize how different rules work together, trying to imagine how strategies would unfold. Some games and rulebooks lend themselves to mock set up and playing through scenarios and situations, but games with clear rules and well designed layout and images can really convey a lot.

For roleplaying games, there's the added element of daydreaming about the atmosphere, and creating a narrative of play for the proposed setting or system. I can wile away the hours just thinking about fun scenarios, character concepts or the people I'd like to sit around the table with and game. In fact, for some of the systems, it never gets past the reading and the daydreaming -- simply too many games and activities competing for the ever-shrinking available time.

So what are some of my favorite games to read? I'm so glad you asked.

InSpectres (Memento Mori Theatriks) - A wonderful Indie design RPG. A slightly tongue in cheek, slapstick game about creating your very own Ghostbusters-esque organization to battle evil spirits and monsters. Wonderful, inventive gameplay and some very clever mechanics that put the focus on action and rely on the players to drive the story as much as the referee.

Hollow Earth Expeditions (Exile Game Studios) - A great pulp-adventure game about discoveries in the unknown. With a dash of Jurassic Park, a pinch of Raiders of the Lost Ark and you've got the recipe for an enthralling setting, plus some great mechanics (their Ubiquity resolution system) which keeps the action fast and furious. I've re-read this book several times, thrilled at the potential it offers.

Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage (Avalon Hill) - While not as thrilling a read, each time I read the rules, the game makes a bit more sense. There are still some confusing sections, but for the wealth of strategy and the depth of the immersion, reading the rules is very enjoyable. I always come away with new insights, or new ideas on what to try the next time around.

Battlestations (Gorilla Games) - Walking a fine line between an RPG and a boardgame, Battlestations rulebooks, despite some proofing errors, send my mind reeling in hypothetical ecstasy... As in, I keep dreaming up new hypothetical situations, trying to design new scenarios, and finding new ways to appreciate the mechanics and the love that Jason and Jeff Siadek pour into their game.

Space Hulk (Games Workshop) - The beautiful layout and wonderful diagrams help clearly explain the rules. Space Hulk has a lot going on, but the well-written rules and fabulous formatting help demystify the game. The game is very easy to grasp from the rulebook, and allows players to focus on dreaming up plans to crush their opponent.

What are some of your favorite rulebooks - boardgame, roleplaying or otherwise? What about them is so engaging?

Interesting Game Article >> Passed Along By Fellow Gamers

2006-09-16T10:34:00.000-07:00

It's amazing the series of coincidences, referrals and chats that can eventually lead to discovering something interesting online.

Case in point, I was online checking email, when I was pinged by Simon Hunt (designer of Take Stock) to tell me about an interesting article he saw over on Boardgame News by Larry Levy. His article, titled "The Two Faces of Gaming" was spurred on by his reading of a recent Bruno Faidutti post over on Bruno's web site. The most interesting part about Larry's column was actually the response by my GeekBuddy Valerie Putman.

It was a bizarre web of ideas, concepts, notices and communication that finally got me to read the article, which is essentially about the impact of certain timed events during a game, such as when you draw a card. Does drawing a card at the beginning of your turn create more downtime or analysis paralysis than drawing at the end of your turn? Or does drawing at the beginning of your turn create more excitement and anticipation?

It's a great read, and I strongly recommend you check it out. Both Larry's column, and the article by Bruno that started it. And then Valerie's comments, which succintly mirror my own feelings about the topic. Here is part of her response, which I largely agree with:

When you draw at the end of your turn, you are much less likely to care as much about what you draw. First, you have to wait until everyone else plays before you get to use it. Second, the game might change enough between turns that you don’t know yet when you draw it if it is helpful. It is much more engaging to draw at the beginning of your turn.

What do you think? Does the timing of these game mechanics matter? How about opposed actions, like rolling dice in combat, or "after the fact" card draws after the person's turn has passed? I think it's too easy to overthink the impact and significance of design decisions like this in short, filler games, but perhaps there's more impact in longer, more tactically and strategically rich games, like Card-Driven Wargames. Dunno. You tell me.

Collection Composition >> How Has Your Collection Changed?

2006-09-15T09:35:00.000-07:00

Over at BoardGameGeek, someone recently asked me a few interesting questions -- has my collection remained relatively balanced between new and old, or is it skewed heavily in one fashion or the other? How has my collection changed over the years?

That got me thinking.

My game collection has swollen, shrunk, then swollen again over the years. I used to be able to house all my games in our tiny little apartment in college -- in fact, all of them fit into four old computer boxes (Apple IIGS) stacked in the hall closet. Back then, I had maybe 60 games, but they got played heavily. After college, my collection was purged slightly for extra cash and to make it easier to relocate from Peoria, Illinois to St. Louis.

A few years ago, I tried working eBay full time by purchasing close out/going out of business lots and hard to find games then flipping them on eBay. I purged a few titles from my collection which I regret to this day (as many of you may have noticed in several of my GeekLists, such as Requiem for a Game >> Mourning the Greatest Loss of All ). But with the move into a house instead of an apartment, and my wife and I each working full-time, the collection has gone through another boom. In fact, I'd wager that nearly 2/3 of my entire current collection (hovering near 550 games) has been acquired within the last 2 years. It now spans two rooms in the basement, on 8 shelving units.

And that doesn't take into account all my role playing games -- I easily have as many RPG books, supplements, modules as I have boardgames. In fact, as much as I love boardgames, I'm an even bigger RPG fan. But the RPG hobby doesn't have the same sort of dynamic community, or ease of entry, as boardgaming. There's nothing on part with BoardGameGeek.com for us RPG fans.

What about you and your game collection? How has it changed over the years? Aside from the size of your collection, has the focus or composition changed?

Gaming During the Game

2006-09-11T06:04:00.000-07:00

I wanted to get some gaming in this weekend, but with the opening of the NFL season, I found that I didn't want to be distracted by boardgaming while watching all the NFL games. Which is odd, because during some gaming events -- NFL as well as baseball and hockey -- I find myself flipping channels frequently. And not just during commercials.

There are lots of lulls in the action, even for a self-proclaimed sports fan like myself. These lulls seem custom made for gaming. But still, I find I get so wrapped up while gaming that I'll often miss those key bits I'd want to focus on if all my attention was on the television during the sports events.

Some sports lend themselves to radio. I think baseball is actually more engaging and spirited when broadcast on radio by a pair of experienced broadcasters. Their inflections and descriptions really add to the flair, and let me know when to focus my attention. For that, I don't mind boardgaming while listening, since I'll "look up" from the boardgame and focus on what's going on when their inflection tells me to.

What about you? Do you game while watching or listening to sports? Which sports and games lend themselves to this the best?

Mental Mistakes >> My Most Common Gaming Gaffe

2006-09-06T15:10:00.000-07:00

I tend to like games with a focus on the here-and-now and the short term, rather than elaborate, convoluted or long-term strategies and planning. Not that I can't make those sorts of plans... I just can't stick to them.

My Achille's heel as a gamer is most certainly my lack of focus and memory. Not that I don't pay attention to what's going on, or that I can't recall things like rules or how certain situations may resolve. I simply can't follow my own plans. This is sometimes attributable to distractions, but more often than not, just good ol' fashioned forgetfulness and idiocy on my part.

A good example. During my last playing of Blue Moon City, I made a concerted effort to be more mindful of churning cards and trying to manage my hand better. However, after completing my turn, I'd often look down at my hand and notice 1 or 2 cards I should have churned. But apparently forgot to consider. Ok, my bad. I'll remember next time around.

In fact, I even took the cards I wanted to churn and physically placed them in a different part of my hand, clearly separated from the others and out of sequence. But even this mnemonic (well, okay, it was a physical reminder, not a mental reminder, so whatever you call that) didn't help. After completing my turn, I look down at my hand and think to myself "Why are these two cards out of order over here?"

Gaaaah! It suddenly hits me what I've done. But rather than try to go back and see if the group would let me churn 'em, I prefer forcing myself to live with the consequences. I figure eventually I will learn from these mistakes. But let me tell you, I've been making an awful lot of them lately. You'd think I'd have learned a lot by now.

Disappointment, Thy Name Is ... Tempus!

2006-09-03T00:11:00.001-07:00

Just got back from Jorge and Eva's, where Marshall "mdp4828" from BGG stopped by to join us while visiting from Wichita for the weekend. We played Tempus, the much lauded and hyped new Martin Wallace game published by Warfrog & Cafe Games. Boy was that disappointing.

I can see why people would rate Power Grid or Age of Steam highly, even though I personally don't care for them based on the meticulous calculations and limited margin for error. Heck, I can even see why some people rave about Ticket to Ride if they desire nothing more than entry level gaming. But I'm baffled why Tempus has so many 9s and 10s over on BGG.

I know I may preaching to the choir for some of these gripes, or to some of Tempus' biggest advocates, but I just gotta' get this off my chest. What a friggin' disappointment.

My initial rating after one play is 4.5/10 ... This is a fabulous concept that feels wholly incomplete. Nice components, and I like the evolution of the civilization tiers. But other than a few neat ideas, I am actually surprised Tempus was published in its current form. Tempus as released feels like an early concept prototype.

There are several major issues with the game.

1) The mountain spaces are worth no points and cannot have cities built, yet are the most common terrain element, severely restricting space and creating a lot of game clutter.

2) Movement is so incredibly limited early on that you can accomplish very little at the point in the game where you need the most flexibility and planning.

3) Meanwhile, the board is so cluttered by the end, you find yourself with the most actions available in the game (5 or 6 actions per round) with nothing to do because you can't have babies, can't build new cities, can't move into any better positions, etc. Lots of churning Idea Cards.

4) Combat is incredibly difficult to pull off, especially against a city. The stack limits prevent all but a massive card investment to succeed in taking on any sort of city, and then only if you guess right about what terrain the defender is going to call.

5) The artificial restriction of not being able to attack someone on 3 or fewer hexes is ridiculous -- buy a bunch of cities and then consolidate your stacks to make yourself immune to counterattack. It may prevent leader bashing, but it completely eliminates any sort of catch up mechanic... the only people you can go after are the people out of contention.

Am I off my rocker, or right on mark? You tell me... If you've played Tempus, what did you think?

Frugal or Stingy >> Are There Gaming Equivalents?

2006-08-31T16:27:00.000-07:00

With Trish out of town all week on a business trip, I've been spending 2+ hours each day driving, since I have to drop Benjamin off at daycare before work (which, of course, is in the opposite direction of work). I've been churning through a lot of music, and actually listening to some talk radio -- a completely new experience for me.

Today, I was listening to "the Big 550" here in St. Louis, whatever the heck that is. But I caught their early morning show right during an interesting discussion. The panel was talking about the difference between Frugal and Stingy. Being Frugal tends to be seen as a Virtue, while being Stingy is viewed as a Vice.

When you use your coupon for buy-one-get-one-free at the local restaurant, you're just being Frugal. But when you're basing your tip on the discounted price, you're being Stingy. A lot of the discussion was pseudo-humorous, but had some interesting undercurrents which I thought were accurate. Frugal is looking out for yourself, while also taking into account others. Stingy is being an asshole about it.

And as is usually the case whenever I start thinking about, well... ANYTHING, I started thinking about game applications. If there was a game etiquette or conduct equivalent to Frugal versus Stingy.

I tried to come up with witty things like "Frugal is when you drop out of the bidding early to conserve cash in an auction. Stingy is refusing to pay the going price, while complaining about everyone else driving the price up." but as you can see. Erm, it didn't work out so well.

Perhaps a better analogy for gaming would be Conservative versus Obsessively Cautious?

What do you think? Got any good Frugal vs. Stingy comparisons to make for gaming? Or a better analogy than what I slapped together?

Get Played >> How Many Plays is "Enough"

2006-08-28T05:47:00.000-07:00

Taking a different slant on the "old vs. new" debate on gaming, I've been considering just how many games played it takes for a certain title to lose it's rookie status and become a veteran -- you know, a qualified, reliable member of your boardgaming collection.

As with nearly everything else in the hobby, the question can be answered with the ubiquitous "it all depends." For me, the depending point in this regard probably comes down to overall play time than anything else.

For a light, quick-playing filler, say in the 15-30 minute range, it's likely to get more opportunities to hit the table and work its way onto the team than a monstrously deep, complex 3-4+ hour megagame. So that certainly is a factor.

We can churn out several quick games in the same session, or get it played once on several consecutive meetings, quickly inflating its numbers. Some shorter games that have become standards on my filler list include Diamant, Coloretto and Bucket King. Going just from the games I've logged on BGG (which is probably 80% accurate), I've played the above 6, 13 and 10 times respectively.

Some longer games make the cut with barely any plays -- I just happened to enjoy my few plays so much that I know they fulfill a certain gaming need and fit a certain niche incredibly well. Twilight Imperium 3rd Edition has only seen 4 full game sessions to completion, but I'm always hankering for more. I've only actually played 1 complete game of Die Macher, but I daydream about getting another game in frequently. I've also only played 1 complete game of A House Divided, almost 3 months ago now, and would love to get another game in.

With these larger games, though, scheduling is a far greater issue -- but I still consider them viable, valuable first-string options despite their lack of repeat playings (in the right context, of course). TI3 and A House Divided I don't really consider "new" any more. I'm familiar enough with the rules that I could teach the game easily after a quick brush-up. Die Macher I still consider "new" in that regard even though it's proven its worth otherwise. I've owned it for over a year, but have only played it the once, and due to the sheer density of what's going on, would need to study the rules religiously beforehand.

So when does a game stop becoming "new" for you? How many plays before it becomes second nature and you can slip into a session like a pair of comfy slippers?

Getting it Right >> Do Rules Explanations Impact Perception?

2006-08-25T23:14:00.000-07:00

On and off today there's been an interesting discussion I've participated in with Jay Moore (MUkid) and some other St. Louis gamers. It was talking about preferences for playing new games or established and well known games, and included elements about rules explanations and the learning curve of games.

Part of the discussion was about the accountability of teaching the rules. If you have the luxury of gaming with a set plan in place and a scripted list of games to play, folks can read ahead and prepare for a game, and ideally several people can read the rules or brush up on them, and perhaps even read up on strategies or FAQ content.

That rarely ever happens, though, and often a few games hit the table that are brand new and someone is only somewhat familiar with the rules, or a game that hasn't seen action in a long time surfaces and rules recollection is a bit fuzzy. Invariably, some rules get overlooked, misexplained or outright mangled. The impact can vary greatly, from a subtle nuance to a dramatic scoring shift.

I ended up teaching Blue Moon City over the weekend to folks who had not played. I have never read the rules or looked up anything about the game online. I had only played one game the week before with Jorge (hibikir) and Eva (DeiTass) who did a great job explaining the rules. So it was completely from memory.

I missed a point here and there, and didn't know if playing with 4 instead of 3 changed anything other than the winning condition... But I think I did okay -- at least, hopefully my rules explanation was good enough to show that Blue Moon City is a very good game, and didn't dissuade anyone from wanting to try it again.

If you play a game with the rules wrong and find out part of the way through, do you retrofit the rules? Just correct it from then on? Start over? Well, all those are fine options depending on the group. I'm actually more interested in what you do next.

If you didn't like a game but realize you had some rules wrong, do you feel your opinion is still valid? Are you willing to commit 1-2 hours to a game to give it a second chance if you were less than impressed, despite knowing there were some rules mistakes? Or would you prefer investing your time in a game you know well and believe is better overall than the former game could be, even with the correct rules?

Me? Ida know. I really enjoy churning through new games and trying new things. Some games suffer from bad first impressions (Mykerinos, Ticket to Ride, Euphrates & Tigris Card Game) while others have been redeemed only through second, third or fifteenth chances (Ra, Princes of Florence, Beowulf - The Legend). But with sooo many games out there, and still 125 or so unplayed in my own collection, it's getting harder and harder -- even with rules mistakes -- to consider giving those chances.

I'm at the point where it's worth passing on the chance to uncover another Ra if that means avoiding another Siena, Marco Polo Expedition or Risk: Godstorm.

Quick Hits >> Masons, Blue Moon City, Desert Bazaar, Mykerinos

2006-08-24T05:40:00.000-07:00

Wrapping up a few loose ends from gaming last weekend, and just last night at Chez Moores... Good friends, good games, good times. Even though I lost a lot and was utterly exhausted. But it was better than mowing the lawn.

Desert Bazaar (Brian Yu/Mattel) Bottom Line 6.5/10: Fun game with a slight Attika feel of visualizing "efficiency patterns" to get reduced build rates for your tents. Since the complexion of the gameboard changes dramatically from turn to turn, it is very difficult to plan ahead or even start considering your options until it is actually your turn, whcih can slow the game down. Solid mechanics and nice components but poor graphic design decisions. The high contrast on the gameboard make seeing space outlines difficult, and the card colors do not match up well with the corresponding costs colors on the tiles -- a tent may cost 2 "red" resources, which are actually the brown camel cards, or 2 "purple" resources, which are actually the bolts of pink silk. That oversight knocks the game down from a 7.0...

Blue Moon City (Reiner Knizia/FFG) – Bottom Line 8.5/10: Great components, great strategy, nice use of the Blue Moon setting and established art/motif. I liked the number and type of decisions, and the fact that coming in second could be almost as beneficial as coming in first -- the rewards for participating in the scoring was tempting enough to warrant a lot of careful decision making, especially at the risk of letting someone resolve a region by himself and take all the credit solo. In that regard, it reminded me a bit of Marracash, where if it's gotta' score anyway, you at least want a piece of the action. Pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed it. Went up .5 in rating after the second play.

Masons (Leo Colovini/Rio Grande) - Bottom Line 7.5/10: A very nice light game with excellent components. Creates the illusion of needing to plan in advance to take advantage of scoring cards, but with so much changing from turn to turn it's hard to do anything other than optimize your current turn while making adaptable plans for the next. I like the ability for the trailing player to cycle scoring cards, as some cards are far, far less valuable than others and the values change frequently during the game. Should "feel" lighter, but does cause some Analysis Paralysis.

Mykerinos (Ystari/Rio Grande) - Bottom Line 4.5/10: What a horribly unintuitive and brutally unforgiving game. With 75-80% of your total game score being determined by your end game bonuses, there is no margin for error any step along the way. So if you invest 3-4 cubes that earn you nothing the first round, while the other players are earning supporters, there's simply no way to catch up to the rest of the power curve. Even if you horde pieces for the next round, you can't get them out fast enough to compensate for the powerful abilities of the advisors, and can find yourself forced into a losing proposition very early on, making the second half of the game meaningless. Would be simply average, but gets knocked down a full point for the horrible game design and graphic design decisions -- namely the back-loaded scoring focus, the atrocious high contrast rule booklet with 7 point type (virtually impossible to read), scoring markers larger than the scoring spaces, poorly developed icons to represent the supporter powers, and overall very disappointing component design.

Great Wall of China >> Review/Recap

2006-08-22T16:00:00.000-07:00

Better late than never, right? Last Friday I got some great gaming in with Jorge (hibikir) and Eva (DeiTass). Not only was it the first time I got to play something in nearly a month, I got to play three games I've never played before, and one game I had only played once before. A rousing success all the way around. Since each recap is longer than usual, I'll post them separately for maximum blog spatter.

Great Wall of China (Reiner Knizia/FFG) – I picked this up at GenCon for $20 at the FFG booth. It's in a new, slim design box, about half the size of the Silver Line series of games. The cards are nice, durable, well-finished cards with decent art and easily identifiable information. The scoring tokens are thick cardboard chits that need to be separated before play, but have huge "pills" from where the connect, and are subject to peeling – so be careful when you separate them. For the price, I was expecting slightly better quality bits (especially the scoring tokens).

The game play is simple. Players each have their own unique deck of cards representing their contributions to building sections of the Great Wall of China . The cards have a numeric value, and some have special abilities that influence play. Player turns are quick and fairly easy.

On your turn, you must first check to see if a section of wall has been completed. This is as easy as checking to see if you have more points worth of cards in a wall section than anyone else. If so, you can claim 1 of the 2 scoring tokens. Once the second scoring token is claimed, that wall section is cleared, cards discarded, and two new scoring tokens selected from the pile.

After checking for scoring, you have two actions. As an action, you can either play cards to a current wall section (by playing any single card to any of the eligible sections being built or by playing several identical cards at the same time) or draw a card from your deck. You can draw and then draw, play and then play, draw/play or play/draw.

There's a big element of brinksmanship – playing chicken with the other players to see if they're going to continue spending resources to go head-to-head against you in a single section or move on to a different section where they might have the opportunity to force someone else's hand rather than play catchup.

It was an odd dynamic with three players, as with three wall sections open, it was possible we could each work (more or less) on our own little section unimpeded. Ha! Like that would happen – especially since the scoring values for the different sections are randomized. Jorge and Eva ended up spending nearly ½ their decks on one of the first wall sections, with scoring tokens worth 7 & 3 points, I believe.

It ended up being a fairly quick game. Eva vs. Jorge on Wall #1, Jorge vs. Jay on Wall #2, Jay vs. Eva on Wall #3 – essentially working in pairs, as the third person in, unless they had a very strong hand or play, was essentially far enough behind the curve where they were better off expending resources elsewhere. We kept rotating through head-to-head matchups through only 5 wall sections before the game ended, using just 10 of the scoring markers available.

The end game, though, was frustrating. I played the last card in my deck, forcing the last round of card play (to be followed by one last round of score-checking). Jorge positioned cards to compete with Eva on one section and me on another section. On Eva's turn, based on her cards in hand, she had no good decisions.

• If she played any cards on Wall #1, Eva would claim the small scoring token there while Jorge and I would tie for the remaining scoring marker on Wall #2. This would let me claim the scoring marker on Wall #3 and win the game.
• If she played any cards on Wall #2, Jorge would win the smaller scoring marker on Wall #1, nobody would claim the marker from Wall #2 and I would claim the scoring marker on Wall #3 and would win the game.
• If Eva played any cards on Wall #3, nobody would win the scoring marker on Wall #3, Jorge would claim the smaller scoring token on Walls #1, Jorge and I would tie for Wall #2 and Jorge would win the game.
• If Eva played no cards, Jorge would claim the marker on Wall #1, Jorge and I would tie on Wall #2, and I would claim the scoring marker on Wall #3 and win the game.
What a rotten, rotten position to be in.

Overall, it was a bit underwhelming, but I think playing with only 3 players has to be part of the problem, as there were these natural tendencies to break up into separate one-on-one conflicts on the wall sections. I'd imagine with more players (especially 5 players, where you're playing with 1 fewer active wall section than players in the game) you'd have more conflict and more decision making about where to go. It's definitely worth trying again with 4 or 5, but I'll pass on playing it again with 3.

Bottom Line -- 6/10: At first blush, feels like a combination of Samurai (individual player decks, a few pieces with special abilities, played to locations for effect) and Condottierre (vying for control of VPs instead of regions, but knowing when to say when and dropping out). Some interesting concepts, but the brinksmanship can reach levels of absurdity. In our first game, only 5 wall sections scored, so only 10 of the scoring tiles were even in play as no one wanted to yield a section. Biggest disappointment, however, was the strong kingmaking endgame. When the last player took her last turn, her card play could not win the game for her, but since she had to play somewhere to perform her actions, she was forced to decide who would win -- tie a section of a wall and allow no scoring, letting Player A win, or win the lower VP chip on another section of wall and allow Player B to claim the higher value token and win. Very disappointing, as I can see this happening often enough with fewer people to spoil the experience. That said, I think the game has potential as a slightly longer "filler" for 4 or 5 players.

XCrawl >> First Impressions

2006-08-17T06:09:00.000-07:00

Wow, I read a good chunk of the core XCrawl RPG book (from Pandahead Games, now picked up and distributed by Goodman Games) and skimmed the 5 supplements I got for it at GenCon. And I must say, I am very impressed. It's a d20-based game set in a dystopian future where technology and magic mesh, but not quite in the classic Shadowrun sort of way.

It's such a neat setup, basically putting the characters in the role of up and coming sports celebrity in front of a ravenous television audience. The players are athletes competing in live dungeon crawl events for the amusement of the general public. It's the big sport of the future, complete with team sponsorships, fan clubs, trading cards -- the whole shtick. The "Gladiator Games" setup works incredibly well, and allows for a lot of creativity and imagination for putting together dungeon crawls, as well as creative in-game applications.

Some of my favorite elements include:

- Team Mojo: Mini rewards for good roleplaying, clever ideas and the like. You have a pool of Mojo Points that anyone from the team can borrow from to add a bonus to any d20 die roll. If you roll a natural one, you lose extra Mojo. If you roll a natural 20, you only spend part of the Mojo. But it works out kinda' like action dice letting you add emphasis to really important rolls.

- Quasi Dark-futuristic: There is the television spectacle of it all, and the dungeons are built with television monitors and video cameras everywhere, so the audience can see the action -- but sometimes clues and warnings can be flashed onto the screen, adding an interesting DM "Deus Ex Machina" to work with that's already built into the game.

- Scoring: Kind of like the Dungeon Crawl Classic tournaments, the XCrawl modules are "scored" based on accomplishing certain goals. Your rewards and pay can be influenced by your score. Your score and success/failure also determines how quickly you advance through the ranks to larger, national tournaments and XCrawls to compete for better prizes and renown. There are standings and other teams to compete with in an odd sports like way.

- Fame: Lots of games have a Fame mechanic, but I like how it's represented in XCrawl, as you can "spend' your Fame points to purchase special perks in the down-time between XCrawls, like better accomodations, access to certain gear, making celebrity appearances at special events and so on.

- Signature Moves: Players can earn Fame and Mojo in game by creating Signature Moves, which are special 3 Round Actions that follow a certain sequence -- Opening Move, Action 1, Action 2. They are long and drawn out sequences, but when you pull one off, you can earn some major bonuses to other rolls and quickly become a crowd favorite. For example, you could create a Signature Move called the "Big Bad Blitz" which starts with Opening Move (flourish that let's the crowd know what you're about to do), Charge Attack (Action 1 in the second round) and finish it off with a Bull Rush (Action 2, completed in the third round).

In this case, if you pull off the Charge Attack, you'd get a bonus to the Bull Rush. And if the Bull Rush succeeds, you'd get a bonus to your Crowd Reaction check. And even bigger bonuses and rewards can be gained by having teams pull off multiple-person combos (like my Signature Move ends by pushing the guy right into the start of your Signature Move).

- TV Time Outs: Since this is all televised, there are some interesting elements the DM and players can take advantage off to gloss over boring bits. Just win a big battle and earn a chest full of 10,000 gold? Don't worry, during the next commercial break, the grounds crew will cart that off stage and have it waiting in your dressing room after the event. Or did someone pull off a restricted action or spell? A referee may blow the whistle and warn or disqualify a player or monster based on the infraction.

- Quirky: That's probably the term that sums it up best.Very quirky. And very cool. And it's episodice, sports-like nature would scale incredibly well for a group that has players who come and go and may miss a session here and there. I really, really think my main group would enjoy it. I'm hoping there's a dead spot in the schedule some time later this summer or in the fall. I'd love to give it a shot and see what everyone thinks.

GenCon Quick Hits >> The Great Big List of Loot

2006-08-16T12:45:00.000-07:00

Well, this is pretty self explanatory. This is a quick look at all the stuff I grabbed. Stuff highlighted green is stuff I'm pretty excited about and am glad I snagged. Stuff highlighted in red is a bit disappointing, and perhaps I should have snagged something else. But overall, decent haul!

New Boardgames Acquired

- Hunting Party (Seaborn Games)
- Order of the Stick (APE Games)
- Clout Fantasy (Even free I paid too much)
- Gopher It (Playroom)
- Right Turn, Left Turn (Playroom)
- Monkey Memory (Playroom)
- Desert Bazaar (Brian Yu)
- Conquest of Pangaea
- Battlegrounds: Fantasy Warfare (Your Move Games)
- - Dwarf Army & Reinforcements
- - Elf Army & Reinforcements
- - Orc Reinforcements
- - Undead Reinforcements
- - Human Reinforcements
- Top Dogs (Playroom)
- Great Wall of China (FFG)
- Dungeonville (Z-Man)
- Street Illegal (Z-Man)
- Take Stock (Z-Man)
- Tempus (Cafe Games)
- BattleStations: Pax Galactica (Gorilla Games)
- Scavenger Hunt (Goodman Games)
- World Championship Dodgeball (Goodman Games)
- Geekwars (Goodman Games)

New RPGs Acquired

- Serenity RPG, GM Screen, Module (based on Firefly series)
- Hollow Earth Expeditions (1930s pulp adventure)
- Meddling Kids ("Scooby Doo" Mystery)
- XCrawl RPG, Core Rulebook (Televised dungeon crawls, dystopian future)
- - Necroamerica supplement
- - Sellout supplement
- - Guild & Group supplement
- - 3 Rivers Tourney Crawl adventure
- - Emperor's Cup adventure
- - Pro/Am Celebrity Tournament adventure

New Misc. Acquired

- Order of the Stick Collections 1, 2 & 3
- Call of Cthulhu: The Movie
- Shoggoth on the Roof Soundtrack
- A Very Scary Solstice Soundtrack
- Serenity - The Story Behind the Movie (Book & DVD Set)
- A bunch of new minis I'll probably never assemble or paint

GenCon Quick Hits >> Highlights & Lowlights

2006-08-15T08:40:00.000-07:00

I'll post more as I collect my thoughts and find time to unpack everything... And eventually I'll post my full list of swag and haul from the 'Con (25 or so new games, all said and done). But here is a smattering of highlights -- and sadly, lowlights.

GenCon 2006 Highlights:

- Got to spend some time with Valerie Putnam, Scott Tepper, Steve Zamborsky, Brian Yu, Simon Hunt, Chad Ellis (Your Move Games), Mike Zebrowski (FFG), Greg Benage (FFG), Jeff Siadek (Gorilla Games), Zev Shlasinger (Z-Man), Rick Thornquist, Ray Peterson, Mike & Christy Pennisi and Jay Tummelson (RGG) over the course of the weekend, as well as a dozen or so St. Louis gamers that made the trip

- I got to talk with Ron Edwards (Sorcerer RPG) and Jared Sorenson (InSpectres, High Octane) and some other members of the Forge community to talk about indie RPG design. A great bunch of guys, and I'm very interested in pursuing publishing my two own indie RPGs. Sadly, I missed the Indie RPG design forum they were moderating, as I had a scheduled tournament slot at the same time.

- I had submitted a boardgame prototype to Z-Man Games a few months ago. We met at the con, and the president of the company told me that with a few tweaks, Forbidden City (the name of my prototype) is a game he'd definitely be interested in publishing -- he was very, very impressed with the end game and the novelty of many of the mechanics and scoring

- I picked up a great new RPG called Hollow Earth Exploration, a pulp adventure / "lands of the lost" sort of thing set in the 1920-30s. Excellent production quality, a premise that I've always enjoyed, and some great, great mechanics. I was very impressed with the product, and am looking forward to more by the company. I especially like their "Ubiquity Dice Pool" approach.

- Thursday night I went out for dinner with Eric (forgot his last name!), the designer of Pizza Box Football -- his booth was back-to-back with the Goodman Games booth, so we talked quite a bit over the course of the Con. Very nice guy, we talked about game design and sports games all weekend long. They virtually sold out of their entire stock they brought with 'em, which was great to hear.

- 10-12 people recognized me by the large "karate chop" Ynnen avatar name badge I made. Most of them invariably were "Oh, you're the guy who writes those Geeklists" but one was "You're the guy who dissed Ticket to Ride" or somesuch.

GenCon 2006 Lowlights:

- I slept through the movie premier for the Gamers 2: Dorkness Rising movie I wrote the module-adaptation of. It was scheduled for 8 PM, so I set my alarm clock for 7:30 so I'd wake up in time. But I set it for 7:30 AM!! Missed the whole damn thing.

- One of Goodman Games' judges had to cancel his trip to GenCon on Tuesday, so we had to juggle time slots to accomodate -- meaning I ran 1 extra slot and had more booth time than expected.

- I did not get to play a single full game over the entire weekend. I did play 1/4 of one game (essentially one round) of Take Stock, which Simon Hunt (the designer) was demoing.

- I did not get one of the swag bags. As an exhibitor, you usually get one of these bags filled with all the freebies, catalogs and cool promo items. I completely forgot about it until Saturday, by which time they were completely out.

- I met Dom Crapuchettes, who is rail-thin, curly haired and looks a bit like a librarian. We had planned on getting together for lunch and to talk about Wits & Wagers, as he disagrees with several of my observations and opinions about the game. Sadly, our schedules didn't sync up to go out and grab a bite, but we did talk for a bit at the booth he was sharing with a vendor.

- This will sadly be the last year that the Tiger Lady makes an appearance at GenCon -- for the last 5 years, she's dressed up in a black leather bikini and otherwise full body tiger paint, ears and tail. She will be missed.

Prepping For GenCon >> Crazy Week Straight Ahead

2006-08-07T07:54:00.000-07:00

Well, it's the homestretch... Or whatever you want to call the pre-GenCon prep phase. Aside from prepping the D&D tournament module I'm running for Goodman Games again this year, I'm also trying to organize the prototypes I'll be taking along, and trying to develop some last minute tweaks to Forbidden City. I'm also looking forward to getting a lot of gaming in this year with my fellow BGGers.

Highlights to include:

- Look for me at the Goodman Games booth (#439 - right next to WOTC) on Thursday. I'll be working the booth a good part of the day, and have two signing sessions for two new D&D products debuting at GenCon this year

- I'm attending a pre-screening of Gamers 2: Dorkness Rising by Dead Gentlemen Productions, a movie based on a bunch of guys playing D&D. I wrote the official module adaptation for the movie, which was pretty damn fun

- I left my early morning slots open this year, so I'm hoping to stop by and pester Zev at Z-Man and Jay Tummelson at Rio Grande before standard exhibitor hours

- Dom Crapuchettes (from Northstar Games, maker of Wits & Wagers) are going to grab a beer and talk about games and gaming

- I have more time in the evening, where I hope to run into all my BGG friends at GameBase 7 or the 500 Ballroom where the majority of open boardgaming is.

I've printed a nice laminated name badge with my BGG username ynnen clearly marked, as well as the BGG logo and my "karate chop" avatar, to make it easy for other BGG members to recognize me. If you see me there, please stop by and introduce yourself. I love hobnobbing with my fellow gamers.

So, as this crazy week gears up, I'm heading out Wednesday bright and early. This might be my last post until after the 'Con, where I'll spill all the gory details about the fun I had and all that jazz.

The Collector's Curse!

2006-08-04T08:10:00.000-07:00

So today I stopped by Target on the way to work. For no particular reason. I just had a need to delay getting to the office.

As I wandered through the store, I found myself (as I often do) in the toy section, checking to see if there were any new Heroscape boosters. After the last few series, there's usually been a nice large gap in that part of the shelf, where all the Heroscape stuff would be.

But today, as I drew closer, I realized there was no gap. No gap?! That means there's STUFF THERE! And sure enough, there are two large box expansion cases -- the frozen wasteland/Yeti set and another series of large-size figures featuring a griffon, a white dragon, a black dragon, a huge sword-wielding giant and another techno-borg thingie.

I don't know the names of the expansions. Because I never even bother looking. I just grab them, race to the checkout and drool over the anticipation of... Of...

Of nothing.

These expansions, much like the last two series of expansions (and the Hot Lava Death expansion) are destined to sit on a shelf, unopened, in the basement. I haven't even played Heroscape in the last 18 months. I've got 3 copies of the base set and 1 or 2 copies of each expansion since. Some are even open!

But the vast majority of Heroscape items will never get played, much less opened. So why do I still buy them? Why do I go out of my way to look for them? Because I'm a collector, cursed to pursue complete sets and new-in-shrink versions of games I know will never see the game table. To grab the 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition printings of games I scarcely like. To own multiple copies of a classic game "just in case" one gets damaged.

Of my current game collection, hovering somewhere around 575 games, I believe there were 150-175 that had yet been unplayed at last count, and of those, a good 25-35 of which were still NIS. There simply isn't enough time to get to play everything I'd like to play, but it's oddly comforting to know it's right there, should the time be right.

Yeah, like that'll happen.

So what about you? Are you cursed to collect, as well? What do you unerringly purchase knowing full well it will never get played?

Gaming Goals vs. Gaming Roles

2006-08-01T08:33:00.000-07:00

A blog posting by my GeekBuddy Ekted over at Gamer's Mind got me thinking. His post, If It Doesn't Hurt, You're Not Doing It Right, is about competitive play among gamers. It had me thinking about taking a closer look at how you define the competitive environment while playing a game. It’s not really examining what your goal is, but what you believe your role is.

It’s not as simple as looking at whether or not you’re trying to win – that’s a goal. Rather, a look at what you do while you play, how you relate to the other players, and how you present your strategies and those goals – that, in my mind, is your role in the game.

For me, that role is defined on a case-by-case basis. It is heavily influenced by the group I’m gaming with, as well as the games we’re playing. And it’s not necessarily restricted to one specific, overriding role. As I started noodling over this, I quickly spat out a few different roles I assume during gameplay.

Host: I have a very strong host mentality. I like to have people over at our place, make sure everyone is having fun and staying involved, and so on. This plays a big part of my role in many games. With in-game and meta-game conversation, I try to keep people involved and interested, and encourage their level of interaction with the game events. I often tell people I measure my own level of enjoyment by how much fun the people around me are having.

Mediator: This is very group dependant, but sometimes my role is to position myself between other players to smooth things over. Not that meta-game theatrics get out of hand, but more of a subtle, nuanced diplomat in a game sense – trying to make sure one person doesn’t get too great a lead, trying to maintain a certain sense of equilibrium. Hard to explain…

Mentor: This is quite a bit different from teaching, but as a mentor, I take pride in assuming a role as a role model, if you will. This is certainly the case when playing with my family and Benjamin in particular. I want to be able to pass along a love and appreciation for the hobby, but more importantly good sportsmanship. In this role I am quick to reward clever moves, applaud another’s victory and try to reinforce that playing and sharing time together is far more important than winning.

Nemesis: This role is often tied to the over-arching goal of playing smart and playing to win. As the nemesis, I look to make life hard for other players. Not necessarily picking on any specific player, but trying to open up my gameplan and strategy to encompass how to be as tough an opponent as possible. I often find myself playing rather myopically – so focused on my own goals and own plans that I fail to see opportunities to advance myself by being a thorn in someone else’s side.

Teacher: I often am the person who teaches the game to the other players. This goes beyond explaining rules before we get started, but also pointing out opportunities and rules as we go, clarifying points that may not make sense until a certain situation comes up, and making sure people are aware of critical points during the game – such as when certain endgame conditions might be coming up, etc.

Whipping Boy: Ultimately, a lot of games end up with me in this role. As fellow gamer and GeekBuddy Jay Moore (MUKid) can attest, we often hear the chorus of “It doesn’t matter who wins or loses as long as Jay loses.” Sometimes this reaches comical proportions. But when all else fails and it comes down to picking on a Jay or Non-Jay option, I believe many of my gaming buddies opt for the Jay route. The upside of this role is I really get to playfully snivel and bemoan my fate a lot.

What do you think?
- Do you agree with my distinction between goals and roles in gaming?
- What other roles do you assume during games?

Games for Kids >> Praise for Playroom & Reinhard Staupe

2006-07-30T16:54:00.000-07:00

For those of you with small children, nieces, nephews or grandchildren in the 3-7 year range, I wholeheartedly endorse the line of children's game by Reinhard Staupe published by Playroom (yes, the same company that does Killer Bunnies -- but I forgive them).

Each of these games features very thick, sturdy cards and most have optional rules to match the gameplay to the child's learning and interest levels. Benjamin, now 3-1/2, really enjoys several of the games. After our success with Papa Bear and Sherlock, I quickly went out and bought all the other games in the series I could find. They are now a staple of our gaming, alongside Gulo Gulo -- and have thankfully replaced Monkey Madness for good.

Here's a quick look at some of the games I've enjoyed playing with Ben from the line:

Papa Bear: There are 12 outfits cards, showing hat, jacket and boots in 1 of 3 colors. Then 36 "change" cards indicate which 2 items need to change colors so baby bear is ready for the day (for example, change the color of his hat with the color of his jacket). Helps with visualization and problem solving. This is Ben's favorite of the series.

Hear & Seek: A twist on the classic Memory game. You don't get to look at the cards you flip over. Only your opponents do, and they have to make the noise of the item on the card. So it's visualization and mental mapping based on sound. Pretty challenging, even for adults.

Catch the Match: Each of 15 over-sized cards has 15 two-color pictures on it (like a blue ball with yellow stripes or a green car with blue wheels). Between any two of the cards, there is exactly one match of items that are exactly the same. There are some "false positives" (like a yellow ball with blue stripes instead of blue/yellow) to keep you on your toes. The first person to find the match wins the card, and the first person with X cards wins.

Sherlock: The english version of Plumpsack, I believe. A memory game where item cards are placed face down in a circle, and each card has a clockwise or counterclockwise direction and number by it. When you flip over a card, you move clockwise/counterclockwise around the circle according to the info on the card, and have to identify the face-down card in the newly arrived space. If you make your way around the circle far enough to reach a previously revealed card, you claim the card and put a new one down in its place. He whips Trish and I at this all the time.

Number Chase: Cards numbered 1-50 are laid on the table. One player secretly chooses a number and writes it down on a slip of paper. The other players guess a number by pointing to a card. If it is not the secret number, the card is flipped over to reveal a question they get to ask to narrow their search -- such as "Is it greater than 15?" or "Is it an Even number?" so some early deduction skill work. A bit complicated for Ben, but I can see him liking it pretty soon.

I'm still waiting for 3 more games in that line to arrive at our FLGS -- at about $8/game, and given the amount of time we've played each of these already, they're among the best values I've come across, and are well suited to the children's audience.

Other than the games listed here, what are some of your favorite games for kids ages 3-7?

(Catch the Match image from the Playroom web site)

Gaming By Proxy >> Using Stand-Ins and Substitutes

2006-07-28T10:22:00.000-07:00

I caught the tail end of an interesting email chain among some local gamers here that touched briefly on the idea of gaming proxies -- things you use to "stand in" for other game elements. It had me thinking of why some people use proxy components and materials, and why some proxies are considered acceptable, while other proxies are discouraged.

There are two main reasons why I can see people use proxies:

Convenience: The number one reason people use proxies surely must be convenience. In fact, that's the number one reason for me. It's simply easier to use a proxy than the real deal in some situations -- especially if the original components in question are of poor quality or are awkward/fiddly to use.

The best example for this I can think of would be the nondescript plastic coins in the original Caylus. The denominatons were hard to distinguish and they were pretty fiddly to work with. We always use poker chips instead of coins in Caylus. Actually, we use poker chips as proxy currency (or scoring, for games like Tichu) in a variety of situations. The standard denominations and easily identifiable amounts make them very interchangeable.

Accessibility: Another big reason to go with proxies would be that the real deal may not be accessible, but people still want the benefit of playing the game with said difficult-to-obtain item. This is really a phenomena of collectable and expandable gaming. And I have to admit I'm fickle and view this differently case by case.

I abhor people using proxies in Magic: The Gathering, for example. Taking a forest and writing Mox Ruby or Black Lotus across the card with your Sharpie does not cut it for me. I refused to play with people who kept including this proxy cards in their decks, even if it was just casual play. Part of the game to me was getting those cards. If you couldn't get 'em, don't play 'em.

On the flip side, though, I use (and encourage the use of) proxy figures for Blood Bowl. Tracking down the "official" GW miniatures, then prepping and painting them can be an arduous and expensive task. I have made several proxy teams by purchasing incredibly cheap Mage Knight figures for $.25 or less per figure, popping them off their old bases and gluing them to standard 35mm bases so they'll fit on the Blood Bowl board.

I still take some time to number them, highlight them and make them presentable (as well as the initial research to find figures that look fairly close to what team I'm building in the first place) and they serve the same role perfectly as the standard GW figures would.

Defining Right and Wrong? So I can't help but wonder why I'm so dead-set against the use of proxies for M:tG, but such an advocate for other games like Blood Bowl. On one level, they seem the same thing, but on another, it feels quite different. Perhaps it's utility. The Mage Knight figure representing my Orc Lineman fulfills all the same game requirements and functions as any other figure of the same size, regardless of manufacture. The rules impact come from the rulebook, not the figure.

With Magic, though, the cards are the rules - they spell out the costs, the game impact, the implications, etc. The rules and cards are enmeshed in such a way that you can't remove one from the other, or you change a fundamental aspect of the game and gameplay.

At least, that's what I think my mind is telling me right now. Who knows. What do you think? How do you feel about using proxies in games? Which are good, which are bad?

(image of Orc Blitzer from the official Games Workshop site)

It's baaaaaack! Hopefully for good.

2006-07-27T13:05:00.000-07:00

Yeah!

Our power is finally back on. Actually, it came back Tuesday night, but we were reluctant to celebrate until we knew it was back for good. In fact, we have yet to do any grocery shopping.

To commemorate the presence of electricity Tuesday night, we let Ben watch his new Little Einstein's DVD, then I fell asleep in bed with the Cardinals-Rockies game playing in the background. It was bliss.

Wednesday night we really shook things up by listening to some Johnny Cash albums, I finally caught up with my shaving (I was getting a little burly) and then we played a game of Gulo Gulo before calling it a night and going to bed around 8:30 PM.

We've just been completely wiped out. Between the stress, the crazy hours, the stress, the sleepless nights, the travel, the stress and all the craziness, we're simply too pooped to do much of anything else. If we get ambitious, maybe tonight we'll do a load of laundry.

Or perhaps we should play it safe and put that off 'til tomorrow. I'm already feeling a little drowsy.

Electricity >> The Big Tease

2006-07-25T12:07:00.000-07:00

We actually got our power back at 4:30 PM on Monday!!

For just over 14 hours. The we lost power again at 7:10 AM on Tuesday, and no updates on whether we've been shuffled to the bottom of the priority list or what. But at least we had one cool night of comfort!

That’s pretty damn frustrating, though.

On the bright side, at least we didn’t go grocery shopping to restock everything, and we did get to bath, shower, do some laundry and enjoy the electricity for a few hours. Granted, we were asleep for the majority of the time we had power, but at least we slept comfortably.

I can't help but wonder if we’re now back to the bottom of the storm-related queue of residents needing service, since I’m assuming our losing power this morning was completely unrelated to the storms last Wednesday and Friday. I haven’t called Ameren to find out, though…

Speaking of Ameren. When we came home and found the power back on, there was a message waiting on our answering machine, from Ameren. "Sorry we missed you. We just wanted to call to confirm that your power is back on. If it is not back on, please let us know."

Isn't that a bit like asking a blind person if he likes the color of your shirt? If you don't have power, how is your answering machine picking up and recording the message? The real punchline -- since we lost power again, we can't re-listen to the damn message to get the special number we're supposed to call. Auuuuugh!

118 Hours and Counting... Still no power

2006-07-24T12:44:00.000-07:00

This is just getting ridiculous. Even St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay is getting fed up with Ameren's (the utility company) inability to provide information on when power might be restored.

Then today they release information stating that they're finally "down to" only 230,000 people without power. At one point they reported that 1.1 million of Ameren's 2.3 million customers lost power at some point from the storms Wednesday and again on Friday. So from that regard, down to 230,000 customers w/o power seems like an improvement. But frighteningly enough, that's still more than the previous high for customers w/o power at a time, set last year.

The latest estimate is that we'll have power "by the end of the day Wednesday" which would mark a full week without power. Crud.

At least we had a brief respite over the weekend, traveling up to Iowa to visit Trish's folks. And I got a little bit of gaming in. So despite the depressing site of our entire neighborhood still sans power when we rolled back into St. Louis Sunday night at 9: 30 PM, at least the weekend wasn't a total waste.

It was nice and cool in Iowa, and we got to see our niece and nephew, which is always a treat. I played 3 games of Hey! That's My Fish!, I won a close 5-player game of Wizard, and Trish and I got mightily thumped at Rook by the inlaws. Benjamin also got to play Catch the Match and Sherlock with Grandma and Grandpa, so he was happy, if a bit cranky during the 6+ hour drive back home.

I so can't wait for power. To celebrate when our power finally does come back on, I'm going to make some Jell-O, and fall asleep in front of the TV watching old re-runs of Law & Order. That sounds absolutely divine right about now.

60 hours and counting... Still no power

2006-07-22T12:25:00.000-07:00

I have a brief moment as I log in from our in-laws' house in Iowa, almost 6 hours from home in St. Louis. Our power is still out, and it may not be restored until Monday, or even Tuesday. Very grim. Very disappointing.

And feeling very powerless to do anything about it.

As I mentioned before, at least our family is safe and our property is undamaged. Many folks in St. Louis can't say the same. But there is an oppressive feeling of powerlessness and uselessness. No matter how badly we want our power, and how badly we want things to go back to normal, we simply can't do anything about it. It's very unsettling.

Being cut off from the Internet and all our amenities is a real eye opener. Not just that it's easy to take things for granted, but it's startling to see just how much we've come to rely on technology and electricity for even the most mundane tasks. I don't even own a regular razor -- and without my electric razor, I've gotten pretty shaggy and scraggly. No washing or ironing clothes. No checking the internet for a recipe. No cooking. No quick email to keep in touch with family or friends.

It feels so. Primitive. It offers the briefest of glimpses of how the devastation around Louisiana must have made residents feel after hurricane Katrina. Or how beleaguered troops feel separated from their world as they fight in the Middle East. Or the victims of bombing and raids, reduced to scraping together what they can to survive. A startling realization.

Hopefully we'll have our power back soon, and our slice of life can return to normal. Or whatever passes for normal nowadays. But hopefully we won't slip back into our routines too comfortably and forget about those who have to live in those conditions every day of their lives.

Mother Nature Kicks (My) Ass...

2006-07-21T05:51:00.000-07:00

Well, whenever humanity starts to get cocky about how superior we are, masters of all we survey and all that jazz, it's interesting how Mother Earth likes to tap us on the shoulder and say "Excuse me..."

Or something like that.

I know several parts of the Midwest were scoured by powerful storms Wednesday and Thursday. St. Louis got hit fairly hard as well. I was out taking a walk in our neighborhood around 6:30 PM on Wednesday. We live in a circular neighborhood, and at about the 1/2 way point around the circumference, I noticed a huge black wall cloud tearing across the sky. By the time I passed the 3/4 mark and could see our house down the road, the wind had started to gust. 3 houses away, several garbage cans and a lawn chair went tumbling by as the wind picked up speed and lightning started flashing.

As I was walking up our driveway, the wind whipped leaves, stones and debris all over the place. I was hit in the head with a broken tree limb that flew off the tree from our neighbor's house. Then there was a mighty *crack* and our neighbor's tree nearly split in two as the largest limb came crashing down in their drive way. Their car was parked on the left side of the driveway, or else it would have been damaged.

All the channels were showing the weather report, about this freak storm that no one had predicted, and how it was traveling from south to north -- never a good sign for a big storm in this area. And then the sky turned a sickly greenish-yellow. Another definite not-good-sign during a storm.

We lost power just after 7 PM, as we were gathering our flashlights and whatever else we could to park down in the basement for a while. By 7:30 the storm was over. I don't think there was more than 1 or 2 minutes of rain during the whole thing, but plenty of wind. Looking out at our yard and neighborhood, it looked like a small bomb had hit -- tree limbs cracked and tossed about, garbage cans rolling down the streets, everything in disarray.

Then the damage reports started coming in on the radio. There had been two tornados in the area -- one farther to the north, and one much farther to the south. Some windows blew out of the high rise buildings in downtown St. Louis, and several press boxes at the new Busch Stadium had their windows shatter. 2-3 foot diamter trees had been uprooted and sent smashing through houses or crushing cars.

When all was said and done, nearly 1 million people in St. Louis had lost power -- right before the two hottest days to hit St. Louis this summer. Thursday had an average high of 97, with a heat index rating of 112. There were reports on the news of people who died because they lost air conditioning and either didn't or couldn't get to a cooler environment.

It also, oddly enough, triggers feelings of claustrophobia (being in confined spaces) and autophobia (being alone). Being without power is being isolated. No access to news to know what's going on. No internet. No email. No charging the cell phone after it died. Virtually no communication with friends and family to see how they're doing. It really feels like being cut off from the rest of the world, just hoping that when you finally drive by the house, this time the power will be on.

Thankfully the business offices are open and powered up today. They lost power yesterday like nearly everything else in St. Louis, but they're up and running now -- I can finally check some email, check some news, and feel connected to the world again.

So while it's been horribly inconvenient -- we've been without power for 36 hours and counting, and it's estimated to be out another 36-48 hours -- at least our family is safe. And getting to log on, even for just a little bit, helps curb the feelings of autophobia.

Game Component Manufacturing – Educate Me!

2006-07-18T08:03:00.000-07:00

Why isn’t there a US-based manufacturer that can compete with overseas component manufacturers? I’ll confess I’m completely ignorant of global economics, but it’s hard to see how repeatedly shipping large, heavy, bulky things overseas is cost-effective over a domestic option.

Sure, right now there just may not be any domestic option, forcing a publisher’s hand. But with more and more games being produced every year, is there finally a substantial enough need for this sort of service to be fulfilled here in the states?

Even if board printing and mounting and card printing/cutting/collating aren’t realistic to expect locally, what about all the other components? Custom molds for injection-molded plastic figures and bits, the omnipresent painted wooden cubes and discs, and custom-cut cardboard counters and pieces… There are bound to be businesses already set up and able to perform these functions. Is it simply a matter of scale? That the gaming industry needs pale in comparison to other businesses who need custom tooling or dies?

I wish a company would take the initiative and offer components – it’s sorely needed. Not only from the publishers themselves, but I’d suspect there would be some interest and demand (albeit rather small compared to publishers) for the casual gamer. It seems that everyone is a designer in their heart of hearts, and would love to have access to nice quality bits to develop their prototypes. Or as avid gamers who tinker with rules and customize games to suit their tastes, having a lot of extra bits on hand is always handy.

I know I’d buy hundreds of cubes myself, in a variety of different colors, to make each and every prototype I develop as professional-looking as possible. And I’d fill up my Bits Box – a large tackle box – with extra bits and pieces to serve as emergency stand-ins whenever something goes missing or we want to try out some house rules.

The Doom That Came From Sweden

2006-07-17T08:49:00.000-07:00

Ok, that’s not quite as catchy a title as I first thought, trying to play off Lovecraft’s The Doom that Came to Sarnath. Oh well.

But some serious Doom has indeed come from Sweden. Again. I finally got my hands on the new Candlemass album – eponymously dubbed Candlemass, despite being their 11th album.

I hesitate to say their 11th album together, since Candlemass underwent some serious changes through its day. While I enjoyed vocalist Johan Lanquist in Epicus Doomicus Metallicus, I have to admit that adding Messiah Marcolin for Nightfall was the start of something heavy. Marcolin’s awesome, opera-inspired vocals were the perfect counterpoint to the plodding, driven rhythms and dark sound.

It was a real shame that Messiah Marcolin left after Tales of Creation. Marcolin’s next project, Memento Mori, was pretty good, and their album Rhymes of Lunacy filled a void after Tales of Creation. Candlemass was not so lucky, though. Tomas Vikström tried to fill Marcolin’s sizable role in Chapter VI and failed miserably. It was a disappointing end to one of my all-time favorite bands.

When I stumbled across information that Candlemass had gotten back together last year, I was really stoked. And when I realized Messiah Marcolin was back in the fold, I was numb with anticipation. Could it be? Could Candlemass be back and bring their doom once more?

Well, the release of the new Candlemass album reaffirms that Candlemass was, is and will forever be the fathers of true Doom metal. Pounding, thunderous riffs. Melancholic, contemplative lyrics. Oozing theme, atmosphere and oppressive heaviness.

I’d go so far as to say that the new Candlemass album is their second best offering – only Nightfall, for its originality and phenomenal production (despite being nearly 20 years old, produced back in 1987) inches ahead.

But the new doom is amazing. I hope Candlemass sends more doom our way in the coming years.

Submitting Web/Unpublished/Prototype Games to BoardGameGeek >> Your Opinions?

2006-07-15T16:25:00.000-07:00

I've been thinking about this topic quite a bit over the last few weeks. Within the last few months, I've had several prototypes have been reviewed by prospective publishers. While these games exist in a state of limbo between concept and the FLGS, they are still "real" games by several standards.

I know several folks have added their unpublished or web-published games to BoardGameGeek.com. And I've been entertaining the idea of adding several of my own prototypes (such as Forbidden City) to the database.

But something about it tugs at the back of my mind that I'd be doing it purely for ego gratification and it doesn't serve the BGG community. And it's hard for me to be objective about this since I have a vested interest.

The ongoing mental argument usually goes as follows:

I think it would be handy to add a prototype to BGG as a way to centralize information. The game designer could add some nice photos of the prototype and include some good information about the game w/o giving away too much.

It would help create an opportunity for all the Geeks and friends who have playtested such a prototype to leave comments (not necessarily ratings) and add some context to the game concept. A link to the game page could be passed along to a prospective publisher along with the prototype and other materials.

On the one hand, I like the idea of being able to include a link to a prototype page having a publisher see 10-15 comments from fellow Geeks (especially if they are well-known or avatar clad users).

On the other hand, perhaps publishers would be unimpressed, feel it's purely shill content, or be concerned about "shopping the idea" out in a format outside the publisher's control -- perhaps lessening their interest in a game if commentary and content are being supplied which bypasses the publisher's interests. And it seems awfully self-serving and not "be fair" to BGG.

I know there have been some very dynamic arguments and strong opinions expressed recently about the type of content that goes into BGG, and I'd love to hear what you think about it.

What do you think?

What sort of criteria should be the "baseline" for a game being entered into the BGG database?

How do you think entering prototype, web-published or unpublished works affects the utility of BGG?

If these sorts of games are added, what information or classifications would be helpful to make the entries as valuable as possible?

Addicted and Loving It.

2006-07-14T08:55:00.000-07:00

I recently just picked up Kramer/Kiesling's Australia. I also picked up Britannia over lunch the other day, thinking it would be a good long conflict game in the vein of History of the World or Twilight Imperium. And I picked up 3 new Playroom games for Benjamin, two with color/pattern matching and one with counting. And 4 War of the Dragon Queen D&D Miniatures boosters. And some Navia Dratp Insurgence Boosters.

All this was on the heels of recently getting Alexander the Great, Hear n' Seek and 36 brand new RPG products (some new, stand along hardcover books, some supplements, etc) during the FLGS clearance sale -- all those books set me back a whopping $45. And then I picked up a few other indie design RPGs like Horror Rules , IMP and Never Look Behind.

Then I picked up some old school Dungens & Dragons modules and books from a co-worker... Tomb of Horrors, Quest to the Unknown, Castle Amber, Isle of Dread and lots of other goodies. About 30 old-school modules and a bunch of 2nd edition AD&D hardcover books.

Oh, and then I went ahead and ordered Antike, Fairy Tale, Hey! That's My Fish!, Masons, Parthenon (Rise of the Aegean), Ra, Santiago, StreetSoccer, Tempus and Turn the Tide because I'm a game whore.

This weekend, I'm picking up some new shelving for the basement, as my collection is already causing the current storage situation to burst at the seams. It's good to have a job again to feed the addiction.

So what makes a good review?

2006-07-13T13:00:00.000-07:00

With the advent of the GeekMod system for accepting Reviews, Session Reports and other non-photo content, there has been a lot of vitriol on the boards at BoardGameGeek. My GeekBuddy ekted wrote a very compelling blog entry on the topic, and two of his comments really resonate with me:

"Personally, if I'm not willing to spend a thoughtful hour on a review, I would
be too embarrassed to submit it."

"I suppose to some degree I am trying to assert my own levels of quality on others. I feel embarrassed on their behalf because they seem to have no shame."

While I might not use “shame” in the latter comment, these two quotes from his post do closely mirror my own feelings. I tend to spend a lot of time on my submissions – be they session reports, reviews or GeekLists. It’s unfair to assume others will devote as much time (or even have the time to devote) that I do.

But I don’t feel it’s unfair to expect quality submissions.

Unfortunately, quality is subjective to the Nth degree. If content is valuable to even a single person, does that equal quality? If content is entertaining to read, but doesn’t affect the reader in some way (change opinion, pique interest or inform), does that equal quality?

It's almost reached the point where I can't afford to spend time checking out a review from an unknown source, and have started to rely almost solely on my GeekBuddies to guarantee I'm going to read quality content. So my GeekBuddy list has exploded -- nearly doubling in the last 2-3 months as I believe the quality of rewarded content has steadily declined.

I don’t profess to be an authority, but I am willing to share my opinions. I would expect these opinions are shared by many of my fellow Geeks.

While my focus is specifically on reviews here, many of these ideas apply to all types of content. Additional thoughts are shared in my GeekList titled The Complete Idiot's Guide to GeekLists >> Tips from the Complete Idiot Himself.

Due Diligence

In a business setting, due diligence often refers to investing time on research and analysis before committing resources. It applies here, as well. Take some time to read other reviews or submissions. Find out what information is already available on the topic.

If you’re writing a review, make sure you have the rules right. If in the process of writing, you can’t recall a detail – look it up! Make sure you’re comparing apples to apples and making accurate references. And if you make a mistake, go back and correct it or follow up in your post to let readers know.

Preparation

Write a draft of your content. Look it over. Make changes. Add notes. Re-write it. And for goodness sake, use the Preview feature to see what it’s going to look like when you submit it.

I’m probably in the minority, but I invest a lot of time in my submissions. It’s not uncommon for me to spend several hours working on a review or GeekList. Much of it in research and early drafts, then reviews, edits and formatting.

Provide Context

It’s important to include some details in your review to help put your submission into context. If you are basing your opinion on a single play, or with special house rules, or based on a pre-release playtest – please let us know.

Adding context helps make the most out of your submission by putting it in the right frame of reference for each individual reader. Without context, everyone is left having to guess as to the relative value of a submission with regard to how it relates to them. The more context you provide, the better equipped the reader is to evaluate the content’s value.

For example, if you strongly disliked a certain wargame and write a negative review, adding some context that you usually don’t play wargames, and gave up playing after several hours of frustration – that helps paint a clearer picture of both the experience, and each reader can determine the impact of the submission based on these qualifying conditions.

Ask Questions – Then Answer Them

Pretend you’re the reader for a second. What questions does your review answer? You don’t need to answer every possible question, but you do need to justify the reason behind your submission. Here are some typical questions readers may want answered from a review:

- What’s included with the game?
- What are the rules like?
- How does a turn flow?
- Does it play well with X number of players?
- What are the components like?
- Is there a lot of strategy or luck involved?
- How long does the game take – and would that change with more experience?
- How difficult is the game to learn or teach?
- Did you enjoy the game, and would you play it again?
- What did the other people you played it with think about the game?
- What is your BGG rating of the game?
- How is this different (better or worse) than Game X?

The ABCs of Good Writing

Of everything I learned in college, the one thing I carry with me every day are the ABCs of good writing, drilled into me during journalism, english and creative writing classes. Again and again.

A = Accuracy. Be as accurate and detailed as possible. Don't guess, find out and be sure. Make sure you list the proper designer or publisher, include accurate comments about components, gameplay or structure, etc.

B = Brevity. Be brief. Say only what you need to say to express your point. Edit your own posts to make sure your message isn't getting lost in clutter. Minimum effort, maximum gain.

C = Clarity. Use clear language to ensure you are sending the right message. Define terms that may be ambiguous. Never make the reader guess where you really stand or what you really mean.

Formatting is Your Friend

Clarity is important visually as well as verbally. If folks have a hard time physically reading your material, they'll gloss over it, misinterpret it, or ignore it. No matter how interesting it might be otherwise.

Put in enough paragraph breaks and new lines to break up content and make sure the information flows well. Reading 3 or 4 smaller paragraphs is easier on the eyes than reading the same amount of content in one massive block.

Take advantage of the editing tools to emphasize important elements. You don't need to go Grognards on us, but using bold, italics or a little color here and there can help make important information stand out, provide a sense of style and consistency, and make your content much easier to digest.

Take Pride In Your Work

Is it something where you can honestly say to yourself, “I think this is worth adding to BGG and I think my fellow gamers will appreciate the time and effort I put into it.”

‘Nuff said.

Quick Hits >> Masons, Blokus Trigon, Thurn & Taxis

2006-07-12T07:56:00.000-07:00

I got out for a little impromptu gaming last night with Jay Moore and his wife, Sarah, who graciously invited me over for dinner and a little gaming. In between talking about kids and games and component manufacturing, we actually got a few games in -- three, to be precise.

Masons: I'm a fan of Leo Colovini games, and after mentioning that I liked Alexandros' quirk of having to open up scoring opportunities on your turn which the other players can take advantage of, several folks recommended I check out Masons. I'm glad I did. I ended up with a fairly strong win, by virtue of some 10-14 point scoring cards early in the game, then two 7+ city scoring cards at 9 pts a pop on the 2nd to last turn. I believe the final spread was 134 - 122 - 101 or something like that.

Bottom Line: 7.5/10. A very nice light game with excellent components. Creates the illusion of needing to plan in advance to take advantage of scoring cards, but with so much changing from turn to turn it's hard to do anything other than optimize your current turn while making adaptable plans for the next. I like the ability for the trailing player to cycle scoring cards, as some cards are far, far less valuable than others and the values change frequently during the game. Should "feel" lighter, but does cause some Analysis Paralysis.

--

Blokus Trigon: I was excited to get to play this. It has all the interesting gameplay of original Blokus, but visualing the triangular-based pieces was more challenging for me. I ended up winning by playing out all my pieces, with my smallest piece last for the maximum 20 point bonus.

Bottom Line: 9/10. Trigon is an excellent 3-player variant for Blokus, with stellar production and the same challenging gameplay. Is certainly worth acquiring if you're a fan of Travel Blokus or the original Blokus.

--

Thurn und Taxis: We wrapped up the evening with TuT. I liked some of the elements, but overall was disappointed. Perhaps my opinion would improve with additional plays, but I felt that once falling behind, it was nearly impossible to come back. Jay ended up securing a lvl 6 carriage before I had my lvl 5 carriage, so I knew that if he continued at this pace, he'd be able to end the game and it was highly likely that the route I had in play at the time he snagged the lvl 6 carriage would be the last one I could work on in the game -- leading to a bit of frustration knowing that this was it, 3 or 4 turns before the game ended.

It was very close, Jay ended up winning 18-17-14. I had the 17, and could have snuck out the win if any of the 6 face up cards or the top card from the draw matched one of 6 possible path points for my current route, since it would have been 6 long and let me sneak the 2 VP chip for route length. In that regard, a bit disappointing that the planning and execution felt it came down to a lottery. Either the card would be there or it wouldn't. At that point, strategy didn't matter any more.

Bottom Line: 6/10. Sure, it's much better than Ticket to Ride, but that's really not saying much in my opinion. Using Germany as the map kept spatial relations difficult to determine, especially once the board started filling up with houses. Luck still plays a large part -- perhaps determining the outcome. If I need to purge the draw cards to get 1 card I need while the player to my left happens to get 2 cards he needs at a time, until he can play 2 cards at a time, I'm going to suffer. Especially since there is no way to "catch up" in the game. The game discourages falling behind by having everyone coming in late to a region scoring progressively fewer points. One small spell of bad luck early in the game feels like it would result in an unrecoverable position.

The Deuce >> Coming This February to a Gamer Near You (Well, Near Me Anyway)

2006-07-11T08:51:00.000-07:00

Well, we can't keep it a secret much longer. I suck at secrets. And Trish's morning sickness and growing belly are starting to give it away, anyway -- we're having another baby!

Currently dubbed "The Deuce", baby #2 is due the first week of February, 2007. We're excited about having a second child, and trying to prepare Benjamin for his role as a big brother. When asked what he could do to help out with the baby, and what he could help teach the baby, Benjamin commented "I can push the baby in the stroller very, very carefully -- and teach her* how to watch TV!"

Woo-hoo!

*actual gender not yet determined... tho' we are eager to find out -- if the baby cooperates during upcoming ultrasounds later on.

Papa Bear Sesion Report >> Or, "Why Kids Are Amazing"

2006-07-10T07:52:00.000-07:00

Background: I recently purchased Papa Bear by Reinhard Staupe, published by Playroom Games. It's part of a line of children's games, mostly geared toward kids ages 5-8, which come in a similar small box and generally feature thick, sturdy cards. Other games in the line include Hear 'N Seek, Monkey Memory and Sherlock. It had sat around unplayed for a while, but then Saturday, as we were looking for a creative activity for Benjamin, our three-and-a-half year old, I finally opened Papa Bear up.

I am so glad I did.

Game Overview: Papa Bear is essentially a pattern recognition game with a slight twist. There are 12 thick, sturdy cards depicting Baby Bear dressed in various outfits. In each outfit, Baby Bear has a hat, jacket and boots, which are either red, yellow or green. Each outfit is a unique color combination, and clearly labled 1-12 for easy reference.

A second set of sturdy cards shows a number on the back corresponding to one of the 12 outfits, and when flipped over, reveals two items which Papa Bear wants Baby Bear to switch. For example, the back of the card might indicate Outfit 2, which might have a Green Hat, Red Jacket and Red Boots. When you flip the card over, it reveals that Papa Bear wants to switch the colors of the Hat and the Jacket -- so the player would then have to find the outfit card depicting the Red Hat, Green Jacket and Red Boots.

Trying it Out: It sounds simple, and it really is. For an adult.

When trying to explain the game and the concept to him from the rules, I could see Benjamin was confused and growing disinterested. So I put the rules away and quickly created a narrative to help put things into context.

Here was the story: Every day for a week, Baby Bear would get up and get dressed all by himself, just like a Big Bear (and just like Benjamin had started doing). Papa Bear was very proud (as I am with Benjamin) but asked Baby Bear to swap the color of two of his pieces of clothing. If Benjamin could help Baby Bear get dressed for an entire week, we would win the game!

Rather than being a competitive game of pattern-recognition and trying to identify the correct card as quickly as possible, we played it together as a brain-building exercise.

So the game started out on Monday, and I made up the story of Baby Bear coming down for breakfast, wearing his Red Hat, Yellow Jacket and Green Boots. And flipping over the card, told Benjamin that Papa Bear was very proud of Baby Bear, but wanted Baby Bear to change his Hat and Boots. And I asked Benjamin what color that would be if they swapped.

"I don't know," he said, with his big brown eyes looking puzzledly at the cards. "Can we play Snorta instead, please?"

I wasn't about to give up that easily. So for the first card, I showed him the proper outfit, and explained how it worked, then set the swapping card aside and said "Baby Bear got dressed on Monday -- now it's time for him to get dressed for ..."

"-- Tuesday!" Benjamin interjected, suddenly showing a bit more interest.

He identified the next outfit immediately, and said "It's outfit number 5! Baby Bear is wearing a Red Hat and Red Jacket and Yellow Boots!"

When I flipped the card over, I was nearly blinded by the proverbial lightbulb going off.

"Papa Bear wants a Yellow Hat and Red Boots! Right, daddy?" After scanning the table briefly, he squeals in delight as he points to Outfit #11, the correct answer.

"Now he needs to get dressed for Wednesday!!"

And with that, the rest of the week zipped past, with me flipping over the outfit-swapping cards, and Benjamin gleefully matching the right outfits and color swaps. I was amazed. I thought it was a pretty challenging concept, and wasn't sure if he'd be able to grasp it or not.

The Kicker: Benjamin loved the game, and we played it a few more times. Then on Sunday, when we reached a slow point in the afternoon, he asked to play it again. Trish was out running errands when we played on Saturday, so she missed the moment the day before.

As I opened the box and started shuffling the cards, he taught Trish how to play. We both just sat there, mouths agape, as Benjamin explained how Baby Bear needed help getting dressed and Papa Bear wanted to swap the colors, and how to look for the right colors on the cards... It was priceless.

And that, dear reader, is why kids are amazing.

Forbidden City @ Origins 2006

2006-07-03T09:24:00.000-07:00

Aside from loving to play boardgames, I also love designing games. I was beginning to get a little distraught after such a "dry spell" after designing MLB SportsClix for WizKids back in 2002-2003, having had several games reviewed and subsequently passed on by quite a few game companies. But I think I may have turned the corner with Forbidden City, my most ambitious design to date, which coalesced last fall and was prototyped and playtested Winter 2005 and Spring 2006.

After revisiting and refining the rules and game balance after the Geekway to the West, I got in touch with a good GeekBuddy of mine who looks over incoming designs for Z-Man games. After some chatting, he agreed to take a look at Forbidden City. I was pleased to hear that their initial playtest was a positive experience, and that he would be taking the Forbidden City prototype to Origins to playtest at the Z-Man Games booth. What a great opportunity!

So I was a bit anxious over the weekend, unable to attend Origins myself, living vicariously through the Geekposts and emails from some of my buddies. But lo' and behold, I received some very good news from some of my fellow BGGeeks regarding Forbidden City.

This was from Jay Moore (MUKid) a good gaming buddy of mine here in St. Louis --

Oh yeah, one last exciting thing - guess what was being playtested by the Z-Man guys? That's right, Forbidden City, creation of local gaming hero Jay Little. They had several games out on a table in the board game room and were testing them all. Forbidden City got very positive reviews from everyone. Apparently everybody really enjoysit, and thinks the endgame scoring is one of the coolest things they've seen in a while. I think we might have a winner, Mr. Ynnen...... congrats.

And another BGGeek geekmailed me this morning with these kind comments from Origins --

My wife and my two fellow game designers gave Forbidden City the once over. They all really, really enjoyed it. John, who has a tough time keeping Settlers and Puerto Rico straight, won by one point using the card collection strategy. (He was in last for most of the game). It was a great game that was enjoyed by all of them. I may have them give me more comments to pass to you, but I think you've got a winner. Best of luck to you!

I'm completely biased, so it's impossible to remain objective, but I really do think Forbidden City is an excellent game that fits in a gameplay experience/style niche that's currently sitting empty. Of all my designs, it's easily the most ambitious and creative concept I've developed, and I'm crossing my fingers that Z-Man (or some other publisher) will fill the same and pick it up.

Big thanks to all the many, many Geeks who helped playtest and brainstorm for Forbidden City. I picked a lot of gamers' brains to get some great feedback and fine tune the rules -- and if Forbidden City does get picked up, I'll be sure to include a shout out to all of 'em in the rules.

88,000 Words and 18 Months Later...

2006-06-30T07:06:00.000-07:00

(88,000 words and 18 months ago) ... Cool, you want me to work on a big Dungeons & Dragons module for GenCon 2005? Sure -- I can do that! This'll be neat!

(80,000 words and 10 months later) ... Whew. That was tough. Now to incorporate all that post-GenCon feedback. Will this thing ever get done? Who is doing interior art? Will we have room for this other stuff? Eegads this thing is enormous.

(June 29, 2006, 4:30 PM CST) I see a brown box on the doorstep when I pull in. My mind reels. Did I order a game? Am I expecting a trade from BoardGameGeek? Looking at the return label, it's from some printer in Minnesota. Still puzzled.

(June 29, 2006, 4:35 PM CST) They're here! They're here! A utility knife and a few shredded bits of tape later, I'm clutching 5 brand new, gorgeous copies of Vault of the Dragon Kings, more than 18 months in the making. I spent all night oggling them, clutching them protectively, and drooling. They look AWESOME, and I'm thrilled with the interior art. Oh, let me tell you though, despite all the hard work, the crazy weekends, the surly playtesters, the hectic tournament and the ever-present edits and updates -- it is ALL WORTH IT!!! The module is eye-achingly beautiful, featuring a great cover painting by Erol Otus, and back panel by Jeff Dee, big names in the classic D&D art world. The interior illustrations are superb, and the book weighs in at a whopping 128 pages.

Introspection >> I've Gotten More Out of Wargaming Than I Thought

2006-06-28T05:30:00.000-07:00

I just played my first game of the 3rd edition version of A House Divided with my good friend and Civil War buff Phil. Time flew by and we had a blast. The game features some wonderful components, a neat promotion system and offers tough choices and several different approaches to take. I can't wait to try again with some of the advanced rules to introduce supply attrition and leaders. I can see this getting a lot of play, and going more quickly, with familiarity.

Overall, I really enjoy playing American Civil War games -- it is easily my favorite theater for war-based boardgaming. And playing with Phil is always entertaining and educational. As proud as I am to be an American, I know embarrassingly little about American history, geography and politics. But with American Civil War gaming, this pivotal part of our country's story comes to life, and throughout games, Phil and I have some very interesting conversations.

Knowing next to nothing about the Civil War, it's interesting to see when my moves mirror what historically took place, and when they're completely the opposite of what really happened. And Phil can put things into a historical perspective -- this army marched here because they needed to sever supply lines, or this battle was a decided Confederate victory since a small force was able to hold of a larger Union force, etc. I have to admit, after playing American Civil War games, I'm more likely to go read more about a certain battle (like reading up on the Peninsula Campaign after playing Worthington Games' excellent Forged in Fire a few weeks ago).

Wargames with armor and aircraft -- WWI, WWII and more modern warfare from Desert Storm to the present -- don't interest me at all. There's something less personal, less visceral (and as such, a bit more horrifying) about war being waged by people who are so far removed from the consequences of warfare. But in an ever-shrinking world, with 24-hour news channels and non stop coverage of war efforts, I suppose nobody is removed from the consequences.

So even that puts things into perspective for me. I have a profound respect for the men and women of the armed forces who risk their own life and liberty for the life and liberty of others. So if I've learned nothing else from my recent forays into wargaming, it's brought me a greater appreciation for my own freedoms, and a great sense of pride for the bravery of men and women willing to fight for that freedom.

Quick Hits >> Dos Rios, Medina, Palazzo

2006-06-26T06:08:00.000-07:00

I got some more gaming in last Friday, finally getting together with Jorge and Eva for the first time since the Geekway to the West. Alfred Wallace graced us with his estimable presence, stopping by St. Louis during his whirlwind trip throughout the Midwest. We only got four games in, but also got quite a bit of kibitzing in as well -- a most enjoyable evening.

Dos Rios (by Franz-Benno Delonge of Manila fame) -- Love the production quality, and love the planning and visualization to reroute the river, but there is little you can do before your turn to prepare yourself, as the board changes dramatically from turn to turn -- which means a lot of AP and downtime. Even with that, the game would be about an 8.5 for me if it weren't for the absolutely atrocious endgame -- reaching the point of foregone conclusion where the only turn option you have is to do nothing and let Player A win, or do something and let Player B win. That is not a fun position to be in. Initial Impressions: 7/10

Dos Rios ran into an odd kingmaking quirk at the end of the game. After my turn, I had enough money to play my last casa to win the game on my next turn. But the Jorge, the player to my right, had enough money that if he earned $400 on the other two players' turns, he'd have enough money to place his Hacienda and win. That put Alfred and Eva in an odd situation -- either do nothing, and guarantee that I win, or do something and virtually guarantee that Jorge won. Since there is no other score or means to track success other than casas/haciendas placed, there's really nothing to "aim for" to try and come in second, so to speak.

Medina (by Steffan Dorra) -- Very nice bits, nice illusion of 3D and pretty fun for what it is. Feels a bit like a "flat" Torres or even a bit like Marracash (sometimes forced to help other players, so pick and choose your spots). I really enjoyed the game, and glad I finally tried it out. Despite its simple rules, there are some tough decisions and great gameplay in here. This and Marracash have changed my opinion of Dorra as a "filler only" designer. Initial Impressions: 7/10

Palazzo (by Reiner Knizia) -- Seems awfully clunky and mathematically uneven for an RK design. Odd situations occured throughout the game where your best move was to do nothing, lest you set up the next player for a strong turn -- but unfortunately, you're forced into these spots. Also gameplay easily bogs down in money drafting early on... there's no reason *not* to draft money over and over and over until you're through the entire deck. Sometimes it felt that whoever "blinks" first and takes a build/auction turn gets less out of their action than others who can benefit from the tiles remaining on the board after that move. And I was disappointed how incredibly derivative the scoring and structure were to Clocktowers and Alhambra. One of the least original RK games I've seen so far. Rating After 5 Plays: 5.5/10

Fairy Tale (Z-Man games edition) -- I really like the drafting mechanic, but found the art (in the Z-Man version) squeezed into a cluttered, ugly frame with the large icons. The strategy eludes me. Despite feeling that I make good personal and defensive drafting positions, I tend to come in last. There's something about the game that I just don't get. I'm not good at games requiring memory elements, and I can never remember what's missing from a hand being passed to me to deduce who has drafted what cards, etc. [UPDATE] The more I play, the more I do like it, and can appreciate the larger, blocky icons to easily see what other players have. Very fun with 3 or 4. Rating After 6 Plays: 8/10

Over the weekend, one of my special orders also came in from Clicks. Sadly, they couldn't track down a copy of Crusader Rex (none of their distributors carried it), but I did get A House Divided (3rd Edition) and Gulo Gulo. While I was there, I also snagged Alexander the Great, a few Navia Dratp expansions and Papa Bear, hoping the latter is something Ben might be able to play soon.

Publishing Daydream >> What Would You Do?

2006-06-21T07:45:00.000-07:00

I found myself lying awake last night, as I often do, thinking about games. But instead of existing games, I kept thinking about stuff that isn't even real... yet.

As a dabbler in game design (with aspirations of some of my designs getting a closer look and consideration by publishers), I often wax philosophic about games. What makes a good game? What games am I missing from my collection? How would I tweak game X to make it better?

But last night, for whatever reason, I had greater delusions of grandeur. If I won the lottery, quit my day job, what would I do? Without reservation, I can tell you I would form my own publishing company and publish boardgames.

But what would I publish? Sure, I'd get some of my current designs out there, but there's always that Next Great Thing lurking on the gaming horizon. I'd surround myself with equally energetic, creative and enthusiastic people and work with them to develop that very game.

I think there are a lot of great opportunities to develop games rich in theme, nuanced in strategy and rewarding in gameplay experience. With captivating art, incredible components and limitless replay value. The trick is finding that opportunity.

What theme would you choose? What game design dream would you pursue? What would be your ultimate contribution to the gaming hobby?

The Kid's All Right >> The Fun of Children's Games

2006-06-20T07:36:00.000-07:00

I haven't had much time for gaming lately, but I did finally get to try Gulo Gulo, and was quite impressed. I can't think of another game off the top of my head which has such an intrinsic balancing mechanism to put adults and kids on a level playing field. I've ordered it and can't wait to show Ben -- I think he'll have a blast. I know I will.

Speaking of gaming with Ben, he's still at the stage where most of the things I've introduced him to are more "toy" than "game" but I know that will come with time (he is three and a half, after all). He still likes playing Monkey Madness on a regular basis. And just when Trish and I have started getting tired of seeing that bright yellow box, he goes and does one of those incredibly cute things that kids do. He got his three favorite stuffed animals -- Blue Bear, Baa-Baa Sheep and Duffy the Raccoon -- put them all in a circle, game them each a board, and started playing with his friends. He taught them the rules, told them to take turns, clapped and applauded when Duffy filled up his card first, and then cleaned everything up and put it back. My eyes brimmed with tears of joy. It was simply beautiful.

I also recently picked up Snorta, which has some great components -- some small plastic barns and 12 plastic animal sculpts. While the regular game is a bit too complex for Ben right now, we've made up several different variants. They're all largely memory games -- hide an animal in one of the barns, then try to remember which animal is where when the corresponding card gets flipped up. Or make the animal sounds when you see the card, and try to find the barn with that animal before mommy or daddy does. Even though we've never played it the same way twice, Ben absolutely loves the game and requests it nearly every day.

Another game with cool animal bits is Cosmic Cows from Playroom. It's a Yahtzee variant, with two players basically "sharing" the opportunity to score a certain category ... So both players vie for the right to score a full house by moving a plastic cow along a line on the board for the full house scoring line. The first player to get 3 cows all the way to their side of the board wins, so there's a bit of tug-of-war going on. Again, the concept is a bit tough for Ben, but luckily the game is easily kiddified by removing the wonky scoring combos and breaking it down to just rolling dice and moving the cows on the numbered columns. With Cosmic Cows, though, Ben's interest wanes pretty quickly and it invariably comes down to all the cows leaving the board and running around the table.

I love gaming with Ben, even if it is more child's play than gaming play. We're spending quality time together, and I get to share my favorite hobby with an enthusiastic member of the family. Hopefully I'll have a bonafide opponent on hand in just a few more years of grooming!

What about you? What are some of your favorite games to play with children? Do you have anecdotes to share about kids and gaming?

Expense Account >> Viewing Expenses in Games Paid

2006-06-12T07:20:00.000-07:00

I've often evaluated my spending habits to see if I might need to curb my rampant game purchasing. Then I've just as often discarded the ridiculous notion. I don't need to change my game buying habits -- but rather adjust the other parts of my life to better support my spending sprees. I tend to view nearly every non-gaming purchase I make as money spent on something less important than games. And not necessarily in abstract ways. I find myself waxing over games that could have been, if certain other expenses hadn't gotten in the way.

It is a slippery slope. For me.

Case in point -- My wife and I went out to dinner and then to see X-Men 3 for our anniversary. Dinner was $36, the movie was $18. Grand total: $54... Of course, in my mind, that came down to passing on my very own copy of Crusader Rex from Time Well Spent @ $44 + $7.16 ... $52.11 -- with enough left over to get a Snickers bar or two.

Funny thing, though... When I told my wife I treasured our special night out together as much as getting a new-in-shrink copy of Crusader Rex, she didn't seem overly impressed.

Our son Ben ran out of diapers the other day, and I needed to pick some up for both his daycare and at home. We usually go with Huggies or the store brand, as they work and are far, far less expensive than Pampers. Unfortunately, they were completely out of stock of his size in everything but Pampers -- and only had the super mega size -- which cost $19, or $7 more than the store brand for the same size.

So as I'm in the checkout lane, I'm gritting my teeth, thinking "Dammit, I could have gotten a copy of Mu & Mehr from the BGG marketplace for that!"

... And it just keeps going from there. You can read more about my financial fixation on games on my latest GeekList over on BGG.

Mutant Chronicles: Siege of the Citadel >> An All-Time Favorite

2006-06-07T07:47:00.000-07:00

You can read my full review at BoardGameGeek.

Introduction: Discounting card games, where you can quickly rack up a lot of games played in a single evening, I'd wager that there are a handful of games I've played more than any others. These games have been a significant part of my gaming experience since first getting into the hobby. This core group of highly played games includes quite a few you've seen me tout on BGG -- Minion Hunter, Blood Bowl, Road to the White House, Cosmic Encounter and Mutant Chronicles: Siege of the Citadel.

Mutant Chronicles: Siege of the Citadel (MC:SotC) saw a lot of play in college with a wide range of different players. MC:SotC still holds up incredibly well today, even when compared to the invasion of Eurogames into the American marketplace. And it outshines clear competitors like Doom by FFG, offering a cleaner, more compelling gameplay experience. With its blend of incredible components, edgy sci-fi theme, tactical gameplay and well developed campaign rules, it's easy to see why Mutant Chronicles: Siege of the Citadel is -- and always will be -- one of my favorite games of all-time.

So Why Is It Awesome?

- The learning curve is ultra-short. I can fully explain the entire game in the time it takes to setup the board for the first mission. If a player still has questions, we'll just have him go last in the turn order during turn one.

- The gameplay is fast and there is very little downtime between turns. Even during the bad guy turn, during which he might have a dozen or so figures to move, things go quickly.

- Despite the simplicity of the rules, there are still some important tactical decisions to make -- split up your team or stick together, pick off weaker creatures or focus on bigger threats, when to spend your precious few extra actions or special action cards, move directly to the mission completion or soak up XP to help level for the long run, etc.

- The game encourages cooperation on the part of the mercenaries to ensure survival of the group overall, but yet each individual team has their own goals and interests (either via secret mission cards or simply self-interest in earning more XP or a bigger mission bonus).

- There is a wide variety of events, secret mission cards and special action cards, ensuring that even the same mission could play out very, very differently over repeated playings.

- Character advancement and development over the course of the campaign is really cool, and you start to feel an attachment to your mercs.

- The missions vary enough to make each mission in the scenario a new experience. Plus since the role of the bad guy rotates each mission, you can enjoy each mission as both a merc or as the bad guy.

- The components rock. The game is both tactilely engaging and visually engrossing.

- It's a helluva lot of fun to play. 'Nuff said.

The Bottom Line: 10/10 -- For its time and its competition (in terms of game style and genre), Siege of the Citadel has few peers. It is an excellent value, even by today's standards. Siege of the Citadel features incredible production quality, simple rules, fast gameplay and furious action. It's a great blend of RPG and tactical elements to appeal to a wide range of people. Mutant Chronicles: Siege of the Citadel is an amazing game design and production feat. It is and will always be one of my All-Time Favorites. I still love playing Siege of the Citadel. I love it so much I've tracked down 4 copies just to have more boards and bits.

Forged in Fire >> First Look, Initial Thoughts

2006-06-05T07:48:00.000-07:00

A little while ago I mentioned that for some unknown reason, I've found myself interested in wargaming more than any virtually any point in my gaming life (with the exception of college, during which I played quite a bit of ASL with one of my roommates). I recently special-ordered a series of wargames from my FLGS, including A House Divided, and Crusader Rex.

Sadly, they're having a hard time tracking these games down, since they fall outside their normal purview. I could just order them online, but I'm really trying to "train" the hobby shop so I have a reliable brick n' mortar place to go.

Oddly enough, though, despite the spartan collection of wargames they carry, they had a copy of Worthington Games' Forged in Fire, an American Civil War game based on the peninsula campaigns in Virginia in 1862. There's very little information on the game on BGG, since it's so new, but that didn't deter me. Essentially, it's a "block game" using the same sort of block system like Wizard Kings or Hammer of the Scots, but with a small battle map for zoomed in conflict during combat resolution.

I've read the rules, downloaded a great player aids from BoardGameGeek, and am really psyched for this. I really enjoy the American Civil War setting for wargames, before aircraft, armored units and massive (reliable) guns. I find it a more visceral and personal timeframe.

For a full "first look" synopsis, read my initial reaction review over on BGG.

Forged in Fire has a much more interesting supply chain mechanic than Gettysburg 1863 or Sam Grant had, two other American Civil War games I played which just fizzled horribly. The Confederates have a strong supply chain stemming from Richmond, while the Union has to maneuver a supply depot and supply train to help provide a mobile source from which to trace their supply chain.

While the Union juggles its supply chain, the Confederacy has its ironclad, the Virginia, parked off-shore, ready to disrupt any Union amphibious landings or assaults they may be planning. It's the only ship physically represented in the game by a unit, and it creates an interesting game of "chicken" between the Union forces and the Virginia... The Virginia slowly repairs damage from turn to turn, but is removed permanently if destroyed. But the Union may end up wasting precious actions trying to activate amphibious movement, only to be thwarted by the Virginia showing up and making the way impassable.

My favorite element so far is probably the "confidence track" for McClellan. It's a long track denoting McClellan's confidence in himself, as well as the Union's confidence in the success of his campaign. Different game elements will make his confidence rise or fall (such as winning a battle, losing the supply train, sinking the Virginia, etc.) Different confidence levels may trigger the availability of certain reinforcements, or endgame conditions. For example, in one scenario, the Confederacy can win if they can drive McClellan's confidence to -4 or less on the chart.

I'm eager to try Forged in Fire out with a live opponent. The rules are interesting and lightweight enough to keep from being intimidating, while still detailed enough to provide what appears to be a nice, tactical experience. I really like the Confidence track dynamic, and the Union's need to keep its supply chain mobile. Forged in Fire looks like it might offer just the right balance of complexity and accessibility I'm looking for in a wargame.

Gut Reaction Rating: 7/10 -- hopefully moving up after a few plays.

One Was The Loneliest Number

2006-06-02T05:47:00.000-07:00

May was a sad, sad month for gaming. The last week of May I desperately tried to get some more gaming in, but my schedule just didn't mesh well with anyone else's. I ended up getting one game in for the entire month -- one game, that's it! A single session of Hammer of the Scots, played the first weekend in May.

But looking back over May, while it was indeed a dry spell for gaming, I wasn't completely bereft of fun. I did put in some time playtesting the official Dungeons & Dragons GenCon Tournament Module for Goodman Games, which has been fun and let me re-connect with some of my RPG buddies whom I hadn't seen in several months.

My wife and I got to spend some quality time together killing things. One of our favorite past-times together is console RPG gaming. I had done some research for a good game, and had been holding out for one that had the right mix of elements to really grab (and hold) our attention. We're notorious for getting close to the end of a game, getting sick of it, and never finishing. Well, DragonQuest VIII for the PS2 is awesome, and just the sort of game we need. I think we logged about 24 hours of play into DQ in May, which has been a lot of fun.

We also discovered Firefly, the short-lived sci-fi/western show from the producer of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel. Firefly is simply, in a word, amazing. I can't believe it took us so long to come across it. The dialogue is wonderful, the characters are rich, the storylines are compelling and everything about the show is completely immersive. We got the first disc in the mail from Netflix, and watched all 4 hours in one sitting -- we couldn't tear ourselves away from the TV. And then we immediately purchased the entire series on DVD, cuz it's that good. And we've been enjoying it immensely.

And, hey, it's only June 2nd and I've already doubled my gaming output from May... Yesterday my wife and I played a game of Cosmic Cows, a Yahtzee variant from Playroom Games. It's nice Yahcht-style fun with nice bits (which Ben loves playing with). And I also logged a game of Condottiere online with Ekted, using the Vassal module he put together -- I was surprised how well it captures a face-to-face feel online (granted, that was clearly aided by the fact we were talking to each other via Skype at the time).

So two games down, and an entire month to go. June's looking pretty good! :)

I'm sorry, Ra -- I didn't mean it...

2006-05-26T09:15:00.000-07:00

When it comes to games, I tend to rely heavily on initial reactions, gut instinct and snap judgements. With so many games to choose from when playing (either from my own collection or the extended pool of available games from all my various gaming buddies) and so very little time to play, I can be pretty harsh with games that don't blow me away after the first play.

There are some games, however, that I have ended up playing more often than my initial reaction would normally warrant. This was sometimes due to easy accessibility of play/opponents via PBEM or BSW, or perhaps convincing by my gaming peers that I ought to give the game another chance. Regardless, after giving the game a few more plays, I began to reverse my position.

So in an effort to set a good example for my son, I'm going to own up here and apologize. I made a mistake.

Far and away, Ra is the poster boy of this phenomena for me. When I first played Ra, everyone I played it with hated it. It was one of the first Euro/designer games I had played, and it was so different from anything we had tried before that the strategy completely eluded us. I despised the game for a long, long time. But eventually, as I met more people who enjoy Euro/designer games, Ra was often mentioned as a game that needed another chance.

It took me a long time to come around. But the wonderful player aids from the Geek and the great online implementation over at BSW helped convince me. Once I could better see the tiles, better understand who had what, then I was able to better evaluate the different lots. I found myself playing more and more frequently. And I even found myself requesting Ra a few times with 3 or 4 players. Ra probably has the highest rating boom for any game I've played. It started out around a 3/10 when I first owned and played Ra... but now, it's a solid 8/10, and a game I enjoy with 3 or 4.

Ra, if you're out there listening - I'm sorry. I should have been more patient, and let you develop at your own pace. I'm sorry for pushing you and trying to make you fit my expectations of what sort of game you were.

Old Rating: 3/10
New Rating: 8/10

Do you tend to qualify gameplay after just one play? How many chances do you give a game before giving up on it?

FrEaKiNg OuT!

2006-05-25T06:37:00.000-07:00

As in, that's what I'm doing right now.

Since the Geekway to the West nearly a month ago now, I have played one single game -- that's it. I've been oppressively pressed for time. With the new job, suddenly that concept of "free time" seems purely fictitious. What little time exists between getting home from work and going to bed is consumed by household tasks and spending time with the family.

I didn't realize just how much I took my previous flexibility and freedom for granted. Now if I need to go grocery shopping, that has to be planned around the window between 5:45 PM and 7:30 PM. Shipping something off to a fellow Geek now means skipping lunch to hit the post office instead.

Reading? What's that? I had been reading at a fairly good clip, but now, I'm too exhausted to read, and haven't picked up either book I started in more than a month. Check that, now the only thing I read is technical/programming books (currently immersed in the spine-tingling thriller that is DotNetNuke ASP.NET Portal Solutions for DNN 3.0).

I can barely even keep up with the email threads from the various usergroups and gaming groups I belong to. Several of my gaming buddies have been able to get together and game, and for the first time in what feels like forever, I'm "that guy" -- you know, the guy who can never make it, the guy who says he's too tired to game tonight, the guy who has to cancel at the last moment. I never, ever thought I'd be that guy. Especially since I used to game 3-4 times per week.

So now I'm paranoid about when oh when I'll be able to get some serious gaming in again. With greater flexibility and freedom, I'd often play anything at any time, and generally didn't pick nits about game preferences. Now, I don't want to risk what precious little time I might have to game on something less than stellar. That'd be pretty disappointing.

How do folks cope with being, well, "adults" and having to contend with responsibilities and duties without ever having the time to work on them? AAAAUGH!!! I am totally freaking out about this. I don't know how long I can last w/o gaming being an omnipresent outlet for stress release, creativity or social interaction.

How do you manage?
How do you get yourself through the day?

FrEaK oUt!

BoardGameGeek >> The Game!

2006-05-20T13:39:00.000-07:00

Ok, you heard it here first (or over on BGG a while ago as I was first flirting with the idea). Among my midnight musings and insomnia-inspired idlings, I have been noodling around with a new game concept -- BoardGameGeek: The Game. Players all start as new users. The goal is to be the first one to earn 50 GG to purchase their Avatar.

Actions include posting photos, reviews, player aids & session reports for direct GG, or writing to the forums, creating geeklists, logging games played, entering your game collection and adding comments to other posts to earn Reputation. The higher a player's reputation, the more likely their content will earn bonus GG via tips, or get special action cards/favors to reflect the GeekBuddy analysis/interest/community angle.

The different options take up different amounts of time (ie, Action Points) and some are synergistic. If you spend APs to write a review of Tigris & Euphrates, it costs less to also write a session report for the same game in the same turn. But different game categories are "hot" at different times -- so you may be spending actions on a genre that won't get as many visitors/page views/exposure as others.

Random events would crop up to incorporate BGG-isms and personalities -- Server Down (fewer AP to spend), Sisteray Poo-Poos a Popular Game (driving that game genre's interest up), Tom Vasel Posts a New Review (lowering exposure to any reviews written for the same game by other players), Greg Schloesser Posts A New Session Report (ie, Tom Vasel effect, but for SRs), New Titles Announced for Essen (increasing popularity of those genres).

I've got about 4 or 5 pages of notes typed out already... I just don't know if I'll take the time to refine it and make a playable version just for personal/goof-off use (or possibly for the next Geekway to the West?)...

Does that make me pathetic? Or just cement my position as a Geek forever and ever and ever?

Wargames on the brain >> An odd feeling

2006-05-17T06:56:00.000-07:00

I haven't had a lot of time to play games, let alone daydream about them. So I find it quite odd that I've been thinking about wargames a lot lately. Not just thinking abstractly or distantly about them, but thinking how it might be fun to track down a few and add them to my collection.

Wargames are easily the most under-represented area of my game collection. I've got a lot of designer/Eurogames, lots of traditional card and boardgames, "old school" GW and Avalon Hill games, party games, dice games and the like. But very few wargames.

And even among the wargames in my collection, they tend to be on the lighter side. Memoir '44, Battlecry, Axis & Allies: D-Day come to mind. I've also got Wizard Kings and Hammer of the Scots from Columbia. I have the solo-play Thunderbolt/Apache Leader from GMT (sadly having purged Hornet Leader years ago). And finally, I have Hannibal: Rome vs Carthage and The Napoleonic Wars -- which are probably the heaviest and perhaps the only truly "grognardian" wargames in my collection. Other than a few minor conflict games I'd hesitate to call wargames (SJG's Coup, Necromancer and Ogre, for example), that's just about it.

I think one reason I've generally steered clear of wargames is that I tend to game with larger groups of people, 3-6 gamers at a time, and most wargames don't lend themselves to groups of that size. But with my sudden shift in schedule and available gaming time (with the new job) I think I'll find that my availability doesn't match up as well with larger groups any more, and I may find myself in the position if both planning ahead (eegads!) for my game time, and possibly playing more 2 or 3 player games.

So I find myself interested in acquiring a few new wargames. The problem -- there are several kajillion games out there, of varying complexity and with varying time requirements. I'd really like to ease myself in, I'm just not sure how. I don't think I want to push beyond a 3 hour timeframe to be able to play a complete game, which helps narrow the field... My favorite time periods for war would probably be Ancient Greek or Roman, Medieval (not necessarily fantasy) and American Civil War. But basically anything before mechanized units or airplanes would appeal more.

Any ideas?

1 New Job = 15+ New Games!!

2006-05-14T15:49:00.000-07:00

The last two weeks have been crazy. I've only gotten one single game in since the Geekway, because other than that slim opening, my schedule has been swamped. (That game was Hammer of the Scots, which I won for the first time in 6 playings). I started my new job on Tuesday, so the week leading up to that was pretty hectic.

The new job is in a fairly professional setting. After spending the last 3+ years as a freelancer working from home, I had literally 1 dress shirt and 1 pair of slacks "just in case" for emergencies. So I had to splurge and do some serious clothes shopping. I can't stand business attire, so thankfully this is just below true "business dress" -- slacks, a shirt with buttons or a polo, and dress shoes. I can live with that.

The downside of the new job has been the dramatic shift to my schedule. No more getting to bed somewhere between midnight and 3 AM. No more snoozing until 9 or 10 AM. No more kibitzing all day long via email or chat with my friends. And a serious damper on my previously wide open gaming schedule.

But that makes it sound bad. It ain't. The job is with a great company, a great group of people, and will offer more security and stability than freelancing in the wobbly game market did. Once I get into my routine, it should also afford the flexibility and resources to travel a bit more and get to some Cons a bit further away from the Midwest, and possibly fly out to meet with prospective publishers if any of my game ideas generate interest. Plus, I just had to splurge on games (for the first time in a long time) as a present to myself for finding a good job.

So, over the last two weeks, I've gone a bit crazy.

I finally picked up my own copy of Manila, which was long overdue. I think it's a very accessible game with a lot of pull, and great bits. A very nice blend of push your luck and betting. And then I picked up Martin Wallace's La Strada as an Age of Steam "lite" game focused almost strictly on the path development (with AoS then adding the money management and goods shipping).

I also snagged Dos Rios, another game by Franz-Benno Delonge... I really enjoy Manila, and Fjords and Goldbrau look interesting (though I have not played either). Granted, he's the same person that designed Big City... But after reading up on Dos Rios at BGG, and now reading the rules, I'm really excited about the gameplay possibilities. Though it may end up being a bit more analytical than the otherwise light rules would seem to intend.

I was *this* close to grabbing Tower of Babel at the time -- I've only played 4 or 5 times, but keep wanting to play again. It's one of the games I wish I would have jumped in at the Geekway. While nearly element feels "borrowed" from another Knizia game, they mesh together surprisingly well, and I love the dynamic that offers which are passed over earn VPs. So I waited a whole 3 days before returning to the same game store and picking it up then.

I also grabbed Cosmic Cows and Snorta Snorta, mostly on the strength of the animal bits. They may be able to double as toys for Benjamin, while possibly introducing a few game concepts or ideas -- like die rolling, number matching and moving the cows along in Cosmic Cows, or one of every toddler's favorite past-times -- making animal noises -- in Snorta Snorta.

But why stop there? I also grabbed a few Frenzy decks, the ill-fated FFG real-time game. I dig FightBall and other similar games, and it was $4 for two decks, so what's the harm, right? The one shop was selling out their stock of Rocketman, the red-headed stepchild to WizKids runaway smash success Pirates of the Spanish Main... so I bought 6 boosters (each containing 2 ships, 1 terrain card, 1 resource card and 1 special card) for a total of $10. The bits look neat enough, and it might be a nice diversion some time.

Other knee-jerk reaction purchases were Yahtzee Deluxe Poker and Head-to-Head Poker (buy 1 get 1 free at Kay-B, meaning both games for a total of $5), Asmodee's Wooly Bully (in an attempt to find a simpler Carcassonne/tile-laying game the wife will try) and Maureen Hiron's Zippy dice game (a recognition/calculation game of rolling dice and spotting combos - like mathematical Set).

Wait, that's not all. Yeah, I'm a sick, sick man. I also grabbed the 30th Anniversary collector's edition of Tunnels & Trolls, an old-school RPG by Flying Buffalo (makers of Nuclear War). It's neat to see all the stuff they packed in the collector tin, and even though I'll probably never play it, it's got value via nostalgia.

Oh, and I ordered Crusader Rex, Ra and Gulo Gulo from the FLGS, hoping to have them in by the end of May. Toss in DragonQuest VIII for the PS2 -- one of the few game-related activities my wife enjoys sharing with me is console RPG gaming -- and it's been a pretty massive haul of gaming.

Unfortunately, with the radical shifts to my sleeping/waking schedule and the new demands of my job, I've got a feeling these games won't be seeing much table time for a while!

Session Report >> Hammer of the Scots

2006-05-08T08:33:00.000-07:00

I at least got some a little bit of weekend gaming in -- Dave Stephens and I ended up getting together to play Hammer of the Scots. He had been interested in trying out a Columbia game, and this session of HotS is the first block game he's played.

I was the English and Dave took the Scots. In a change of pace, I decided to play by the rules as written (defender firing first each phase rather than simultaneously).

I was hammered early and often. At one point I rolled 16 or so dice in one battle without scoring a single hit on B2s or B3s. With the Scottish troops entrenched as they were, I could never mount an effective assault without getting picked away mercilessly by their first fire each phase.

After the 7th round, the Scots actually had 11 of the nobles -- I was left with only Bruce, Argus and Mentieth. Then my luck turned around. He tried to seize Mentieth from me with several units, but with 8 B2 attacks, I scored 6 hits for a massive blow to his overall army.

He also strayed too far out with Wallace, harassing my supply lines as I funneled troops into Bruce's territory from England. I ended up getting another very lucky throw of the dice and eliminated Wallace with some weak C2 infantry after he failed to score any hits during the first round of combat. After wintering with Edward that year, I evened things up and we each had 7 nobles at that point.

The last turn of the game I was handed 3 events, and stole Galloway on a lucky die roll with the Herald event, who was the only noble behind my lines of maneuvering and causing me all sorts of grief. He had a pretty good offensive turn, which I negated with Victuals to heal 3 steps. Then I slapped peace down so he couldn't attack. That left me with a 3 Movement card for the last round, in which I was able to tie up enough of his guys and stave off combat to squeak out an 8-6 win (all due to stealing Galloway with that Herald card).

We had fun, but it felt a little cheap that the game came down to that one die roll at the very end. If I had rolled 5-6, Dave would have won, but I rolled 1-4, so I won. Granted, a lot of positioning and posturing led to that point, but it was a bit deflating to all end on that.

Review >> Wits & Wagers

2006-05-05T15:05:00.000-07:00

NorthStar games was generous enough to donate a copy of Wits & Wagers to the Geekway to the West gaming event. I was pleased to write a review of the game for their generosity. This is an overview of the game review. The full review can be read over at BoardGameGeek.con.

Clever, Quick Fun ... But Watch Out for Groupthink

OVERVIEW: Wits & Wagers is a trivia game with light bluffing and bidding elements, published by Nortstar Games and Eagle Games. Wits & Wagers has received a lot of press and acclaim recently (Boing Boing, Mensa Select and others) and rightly so -- Wits & Wagers is one of the more accessible, easily played trivia games I've encountered, and is well-suited to nearly any group.

THE PRICE IS RIGHT SYNDROME: Despite its apparent simplicity and accessible nature, there's a strong tendency for the game to devolve into a meta-game -- a groupthink dynamic of trying to undercut what people think a reasonable answer is, rather than what might be a reasonable guess at the question. This is tied to the (necessary) guideline that the closest guess w/o going over is the "correct" guess for the question.

To make up a random example, if the question asks how many miles long the Mississippi River is, very few people could hazard a legitimate guesstimate. The rest are arbitrary and wildy variable guesses. Knowing that my guess can't possibly be in the ballpark, I'd be inclined to make a very low guess, say 100, which I know isn't right. But that's not the point. I just want to be the highest of all the low guesses, or the best lowball guess "below" the reasonable threshold of answers.

It could very well be on the low end of the bidding extreme, meaning it could have fairly good odds for a payout. If the next highest response is too high by even 1 mile, then my absurdly low bid of 100 is "right" and pays out.

Once a group sees this dynamic in action, the next time a comparably unguessable question comes up (especially where the answer could potentially be very, very large), and they've seen the potential "power" of a lowball guess, you might see a variety of guesses like: 50, 50, 70, 100 for an answer that's really going to be 800-1000...

This sort of groupthink is contagious, especially after seeing its success. You simply can't afford to be the only person making a "true" guess if everyone else is playing the lowball game, as the odds are stacked against you that one of the lowball responses (not a true guess, but a response to the groupthink) will end up being the winning answer regardless of its accuracy.

THE BOTTOM LINE: 8/10 -- Very clever, engaging and fairly novel party game. Nice light trivia and interesting wagering process involved. One problem is that some folks will invariably play "The Price is Right" and make obscenely low bids just to undercut what they think other people will do -- putting emphasis on that sort of mind game over legitimate attempts to provide reasonable answers. Despite some poor production decisions and the bidding issues with some players or groups, Wits & Wagers does far more right than wrong, and is an enjoyable way to spend the evening with friends.

Review >> Succession: Intrigue in the Royal Court

2006-05-03T11:40:00.000-07:00

Chad Ellis at Your Move Games was gracious enough to donate a copy of Succession for the Geekway to the West. I played the game several times, and am glad to write up a full review -- the least I can do for Chad's generosity. Here's a snapshot of the review. The full Succession review (detailing the components, gameplay and negotiations) can be read at BoardGameGeek.com.

--

OVERVIEW: Succession: Intrigue in the Royal Court, is a no-holds barred game of bluffing, negotiation, bribery and bidding by Chad Ellis and Robert Dougherty of Your Move Games. It's designed for 3-5 and is listed at 90 minutes game time.

Your Move Games really crammed a lot into the box, providing a very good value for the price point (about $25 US online). Overall, I love the game from a conceptual standpoint, and while the mechanics support the concept quite well, Succession ends up being a bit long for what it is, and is highly group dependent -- you simply can't afford to play this with folks who refuse to "leave it at the table" after a game of duplicity, backstabbing and deal-breaking. That said, if your group enjoys power brokering and diplomacy, Succession offers a top notch free-wheeling and clever gaming experience.

THEME: The aging king must choose the successor for the throne. In a humorous twist, that ain't you. Nope. You're not important enough to be king. But you are important enough to influence who will become king. Ah, and that's where the game lodges the players.

You are not one of the candidates looking to become the king. Instead, you are a sycophant or stod trying to ride the coattails of whoever ends up being crowned the king. Through spreading rumors, manipulating opinion and taking credit for other people's efforts, you are trying to convince the candidate who eventually is crowned the king that you're responsible for their rise to glory. Or at the very least, that the other players were trying to sink them and never liked them anyway.

YOU MIGHT LIKE SUCCESSION IF YOU LIKE: Basari, Cash & Guns, Cosmic Encounter, Dragon's Gold, Fantasy Business, Mall of Horror

THE BOTTOM LINE: 7/10 -- I really dig the concept and implementation of the game. Great production qualilty (except the peeling cardboard coins). Clever interplay of mechanics and concepts. Everything is for sale -- how you play or apply a card, how you cast your votes, who you assign blame to... everything can be manipulated for a price or the right favor. You need to carefully balance your position so you don't peak too soon and appear that you're doing too well, or you'll get crushed. A lot more nuance and subtlety than I think most people will give it credit for.

Arbitrary and ruthless player targeting is a big part of the game -- so be warned. Grumpy players who hold grudges shouldn't play. Has some of the wheeling/dealing and evokes a slight Cosmic Encounter vibe with me (a good thing). It's certainly not for everyone due to the negotiations and backstabbing, but with the right crowd, Succession should be a smash hit.

Geekway to the West >> A Smashing Success

2006-04-30T08:25:00.000-07:00

Just wanted to drop a quick line to tell everyone how smoothly the Geekway went. Despite my anxieties, it can be considered nothing short of a complete, total, sweeping and utterly enjoyable sucess. I'd like to thank all the volunteers and attendees for making the Geekway to the West such a great event -- I'm already eager for next year, despite sheer exhaustion.

A few quick hits as I muddle through my records. I'm still trying to tally everything up, but I think we had 55-60 registered attendess stop by to play games, with another 8-10 guests tagging along to get some Geek in.

More than 100+ games went out via the Swap Table or as attendance prizes, and dozens (if not hundreds) of games were logged. The Swap Table (where people got to "draft" games in exchange for games they donated) had a lot of great titles -- including Command & Colors: Ancients, Deflexion, Liberte, Primordial Soup, Fresh Fish, Attika, Epic Duels, Maharaja, Candamir: The First Settlers, Siena, Battleline, Settlers of the Stone Age, Inka, For Sale, Street Soccer... most new in shrink! Wow.

Nine Geeks who couldn't attend were "Adopted" by our St. Louis gamers. Each adopted Geek received a free attendance prize ticket, so he could participate vicariously in the Geekway. Six of the nine won prizes! By the end of the day, I'd guesstimate that 3/4 of the people who attended walked away with something.

Folks who left early, missed out on a massive 22 player game of Werewolf -- won by the nefarious Chester "I'm not a real sleestak" Ogborn on behalf of his slain werewolf brethren.

The night was capped off with a rousing 32 player Monkey Madness tournament, the signature game of Geekway to the West. Crag Zipse (flying in from Atlanta for the Geekway) cut through the first two rounds and won a thrilling final round, with Aaron Michelson coming in a close second.

I hope everyone had as much fun as I did. I only wish I could have gotten a few more games in with a few more people. Oh well, there's always Geekway to the West 2007!!

I'm also thrilled with how close to my true goal we got -- I wanted to break even. We came within $15 of breaking even in terms of recuping costs for the facility, food, prizes and other administration/preparation costs. Not bad!

I'll post the complete prize list, games played lists, highlights and more details as I recover my wits and organize my thoughts...

Geekway to the West >> The Panic

2006-04-27T08:04:00.000-07:00

The Geekway to the West 2006 starts tomorrow, at 9 AM. At our house. And I'm a wreck. I've barely slept in three days, and have a long list of things to do before tomorrow.

Did I clean everything? Did I print out enough trivia answer sheets? Do I have all the name badges? Are all the prizes cataloged? Do I have enough seating? Did I get enough food?

While I strive in this role -- as host and "face man" for an event -- I have to admit I'm a bit of a mother hen. I worry about every little detail. I desperately want everyone to have a good time, and unfortunately, if 59 people have a GREAT time, and 1 person is miserable, a part of me will consider the Geekway a failure. Absurd, I know, but I'm crazy like that.

That said, I think I've prepared just about as well as I can. But even so, there's always a nagging doubt. I guess we'll find out tomorrow if I'm as prepared as I think I am.

Here's a small Geekway Tracker that I had inserted into the Yahoo! group so members could see the progress as we went along. The "registered attendees" is a bit misleading -- since there are folks who have signed up via the local Boardgame Meetup whom I don't know, as well as quite a few people who have said they'd show up for a bit, but probably not for the whole event, or friends/significant others that some of the attendees are hoping to entice.

I'm realistically expecting anywhere from 60-70 attendees over the course of the event. And I'm pre-giddy with anticipation. It's going to be a great weekend.

-- Geekway Tracker --

Donations Received: $125

Operating Expenses: $385

Games Donated: 48

Registered Attendees: 51

Geeks Adopted: 9

(updated 4/27/06)

Geekway to the West >> The Final Countdown

2006-04-22T16:28:00.000-07:00

The Geekway is now only a week away (less, considering the "Old School" gaming being held Friday for last year's attendees, this year's volunteers and the out-of-towners). I'm pleased as punch by the expected turnout -- somewhere between 50-60 pre-registered gamers should be showing up Saturday, over the course of our 15 hour game-a-thon.

I'm also pleased by the number of volunteers who have stepped forward to run a slot or two of some introductory games. Since there's such a wide cross-section of gamers coming (in terms of experience, preferred types of games, etc) I really wanted to provide the opportunity for folks to take some games for a "test drive" -- especially games they may not otherwise get a chance to play. So folks stepped up to run sessions of Wallenstein, Reef Encounter, Caylus, Age of Steam and lots of other games. Some folks are also going to be running some large-scale events and game prototypes, which should be exciting.

And while we're no Gathering of Friends, we're no slouches, either. Some of my game industry contacts have been very good to us. Between their generosity, a modest budget based on registration fees and attendee donations, we'll have more than 50 games to use as Attendance Prizes and to seed the Swap Table. Great, great stuff.

Here's a photo of just some of the donated games -- I've still got more to sift through, catalog, etc. Some great stuff in there.

We'll be taking plenty of photos of games in progress and chronicling our games played, hopefully via session reports, reviews and the like. We're strongly encouraging attendees to actively participate in BoardGameGeek after the event to detail their experiences and thoughts on all the games -- the more information we get out there about the Geekway, the better the event will get every year (in terms of attracting new attendees and generating donations/interest from publishers).

My personal goal is to grow the Geekway to the West where it becomes a "must attend" event every year for those who are passionate about the hobby, while keeping it casual, friendly and affordable. And if you're not able to join us this spring for Geekway to the West, hopefully you'll be one of the folks we'll get to game with at a future Geekway.

Keep gaming!

Gaming Bits & Settlers of Candamir

2006-04-20T10:55:00.000-07:00

Got some good three player gaming in last night with Chris and Justin. Three is such an awkward number to game with. Some games simply don't work well with three players, as it either invariably comes down to two-on-one, or is lopsided enough that a moderate lead can be insurmountable. So we tried a few different games out with three, and overall, I was very pleased.

I showed up a bit earlier than Justin, so Chris and I played a game of Harry's Grand Slam Baseball. I'm simply amazed at how incredibly fun this quick card game is. It's lighter than light, but there's just enough hand management and some built in tension, not to mention the great treatment of the original 60s game -- well, Harry's Grand Slam Baseball is far more than the sum of its parts. Kudos to Out of the Box for keeping the original design and artwork but adding a few modern wrinkles that mesh well (the storage tin, diamond and scoreboard).

Next up was Candamir: The First Settlers, which was largely disappointing (see below). That was followed by Can't Stop (Sid Sackson), San Marco (Alan Moon/Aaron Weissblum) and Oasis (also Alan Moon/Aaron Weissblum). My opinion of Can't Stop went up a notch, and I was amazed how incredibly different the feel is face to face after 20+ playings on BrettSpieleWelt.

San Marco and Oasis are both odd ducks. I really, really like them conceptually. I really, really like the production quality and decisions generated. But both games can be incredibly frustrating -- it feels you can be done in by luck of the draw (yours or your opponents') with little room to maneuver or fight back. But thankfully both games are quick enough (45 minutes with 3 players) that it doesn't irk me as much as it would in a longer game.

Oddly, Justin won San Marco running away, but seemed to feel (from what I can tell) that his decisions had less to do with him winning than luck of the draw and selection position. Chris won Oasis running away and I think he felt pretty much the same about that -- getting to pick first when another player's offer was the maximum possible score at that time, etc. I rate both games considerably higher than either of them (both solid 8s for me, in the 5-6 range for them).

Despite these odd sessions, I still think they are both excellent games. I'd still only recommend playing San Marco with three, but I really want to try Oasis with four to see if it opens up the gameplay experience a bit more. I'll have to mull them over a bit more before commenting further.

Candamir: The First Settlers (Mayfair Games/Klaus Teuber)

I picked up Candamir for 50% off at a local hobby shop, which seemed like a real steal considering the nice production quality, and the comments that sounded like Candamir shared some of the adventure nuance and flavor of Starfarers of Catan (which is by far my favorite Catan game). After skimming the rules, I felt I had a pretty good handle on the game, but went to http://www.profeasy.com/ to run through the online tutorial. Let me say that (despite a few interface quirks) the profeasy.com tutorials are incredibly well conceived -- after running through the 10-15 minute tutorial, you know everything you need to know about the game.

Unfortunately, while the tutorial only took 10-15 minutes and captured everything there was to know about the game, the actual game took just over an hour and a half, but featured very little beyond what the tutorial showed. There are some interesting mechanics and features (such as using a deck of cards to show how your character can move along the board and what he might encounter in the wilderness), but overall it drags on and on.

It felt about 30-40 minutes too long for the experience it provided, which is too bad. It was vaguely reminiscent of Starfarers, but lacked the cleaner production and integration of the adventure elements. It also felt like there was very, very little interaction between players, as aside from the nominal trade phase, you don't really compete. And with three players, there's very little incentive to trade.

Bottom Line: 5.5/10 -- I think Candamir's failure is in trying to accomplish too much. The game is easy to get into and seems to offer a lot of potential, but quickly becomes repetitive and drags on at the end, as players need to move farther and farther, taking longer and longer, to accomplish their goals. That said, I do like the adventure concept, as characters develop, earn experience, provide for the needs of the villagers, explore and do other adventure-y things. It's just too darn long. I think I'd play it once or twice with my nephew, but can't see ever playing this again with more sophisticated gamers.

Push Your Luck Profile >> Yahtzee Progeny

2006-04-17T12:03:00.000-07:00

I'm a big fan of easy to learn, quick playing games with push-your-luck elements, and the large family tree of Yahtzee games/clones/variants certainly fits here. The thing is, I'm not a real big fan of Yahtzee itself, but appreciate some of those elements.

But I enjoy the concept, and I enjoy the breezy nature of the games. So here's a look at the grand daddy itself, as well as my favorite and least favorite Yahtzee clones on the market.

---

Yahtzee is a classic dice game (nee Yacht) played with 5 dice. Each player's turn consists of rolling the dice up to 3 times in hope of getting die results which match 1 of 13 different scoring categories (earning several 1s or 2s, getting 3 of a kind, 4 of a kind, straight, full house, etc). Each player tries to fill in a score for each category, but this is not always possible -- especially later in the game as more categories are already filled in and your target categories may be harder to achieve. When all players have entered a score or a zero for all 13 categories, the game ends and total scores are compared.

Yahtzee is simple and straightforward, and does have some very light push-your-luck decisions over the course of the game, but even at 10-15 minutes, it takes too long for what it provides. It's one of the few games my wife will play, though, so that's something. As a basis of comparison, I give Yahtzee a true average 5/10 rating.

---

Red Hot Yott is a simplified version of Yahtzee, which I'm guessing is aimed toward younger players. It's hard to think of getting simpler than Yahtzee, but it dumbs the game down a step. You can find Red Hot Yott at Wal-Mart or Target for $5 or so -- so at least it's cheap.

The game play is almost identical to Yahtzee (roll dice, reserve or re-roll until you pass or hit a scoring combination), and the categories are similar (though renamed), but the difference between Yahtzee and Red Hot Yott is that Red Hot Yott changes the 1s on the dice to Red Hot Dots, which are wild. And that is the game's downfall. They come up far too often, removing decision making, creating wonky results and eliminating any sort of suspense or interest in the gameplay.

Bottom Line: 2/10 -- Red Hot Yott is an absolutely horrible Yahtzee variant. While it does come in a nice tin, with decent bits, there's nothing else good to say. Having "wild cards" (the red pips) that can be used as any number is crazy -- with so many dice and so many rolls (and re-rolls) you're going to get lots and lots of Yotts/Yahtzees, for crazy high scoring games that never end. Completely strips away strategy or decision making. Blech.

---

On the flip side of my Enjoy-O-Meter is Reiner Knizia's Easy Come, Easy Go, with a great edition published by Out of the Box which you can snag for $12-15. It's a slightly more confrontational Yahtzee, forcing players to vie for the same limited pool of scoring options, rather than each player scoring for each category individually.

There are nine "Prizes" -- the scoring combos -- which players earn by rolling the requirement printed on the card (Less Than 3, Exactly 13, Four of a Kind, etc). Players roll four dice and try to earn a Prize by hitting the card requirements. The first player to get and have three cards at the beginning of their turn wins. Ah-ha, but winning a Prize doesn't prevent other players from trying to seize it... If I snagged the "Exactly 7" card on my turn and you roll 7, you can snatch it from me!

This wrinkle is great, especially when added to the "no going back" aspect of dice rolling. Once you set a die aside to count toward your hand, you can't later re-roll it if a subsequent die roll makes you think another Prize might be easier to go after. While there's obviously a ton of luck, there's some probability manipulation, too -- most of the time, you can set aside dice in such a way that you'll usually have a 50% chance (or at worst 33% chance) of hitting what you need to grab a score (though considerably lower at the end of the game should you need a specific combo to snag a card from another player with three Prizes already).

The Bottom Line: 7.5/10 -- A very nice, light, breezy filler game of Yahtzee-esque push your luck. This is kinda' what Pickomino should have been. Plays quickly and offers enough push-or-pass to keep it interesting for a few rounds in a row. As an added plus, it's one of the few games the wife will play!! That's worth +.5 in the rating right there!!

Quick Hits >> Ostia (again), Oasis, Fairy Tale and Ra...

2006-04-14T14:56:00.000-07:00

Got another good night of gaming in last night with Eva and Jorge. I was happy to get to try Ostia again and see if it was still as pedestrian as before, as well as try out Oasis, which I've been eager to play ever since landing it via trade on Boardgame Geek.

Ostia, the Second Chance

The game is very easy to explain, and the individual player boards are very well done. A second playing confirmed my feelings, though, about the largely lifeless gameplay. Average all around, which is a shame, as with some minor tweaks (posted over on BGG) I feel this could be a very engaging, interesting game -- you just need to add more important decisions.

Jorge won by a landslide, 18-13-12. Considering there's a maximum 22 points to earn if you win every single Senate and all the bonuses, that was a clobbering. There were some close guesses and wrong reads, as several times Jorge beat my donation to the Senate by 2 or 3 points. Jorge also expertly bid and sold in the Forum so he was always flush with money to dominate the cards for donation. Eva and I should have been more aggressive with the auctions. But even then, the auctions felt pretty dry and repetitive.

My rating stands at 5.5/10.

---

Oasis (Moon/Weissblum)

This was the clear winner of the evening for me. I had been keen to get a hold of Oasis based on some Geekbuddy analysis, and I was not disappointed. The game was insanely close. Jorge had the opportunity, through the bonus tile action at the end of the game, to end the game immediately by drawing a stone tile. So we had to stop the game and calculate the scores to see if it was close. At that moment, it was Jorge 142, Eva 141 and Jay 139. You can't get much closer than that, so Jorge snagged the last stone tile, and even w/o triggering any scoring with that, won the game.

We spent quite a bit of time talking about the game, drawing some comparisons (most superficial) to Hacienda, Through the Desert and San Marco. It was amazing to note how close the game was, that any one turn with a different action selection could have changed the winner. Jorge and Eva agreed that they each had the bonus action (by having the 1st player select your offer) 2-3 more times during the game than I did, which even if that's only worth 1-2 more points each time you get the bonus, was very influential in our game.

Bottom Line: 8/10 -- So glad this hit the table. Very, very enjoyable. Has a slightly San Marco vibe -- not surprising considering it's another Weissblum/Moon game. Some interesting decisions to make offers to lure people into selecting your offer so you can receive greater priority or bonus actions. Specialize in just a few scoring areas, or try to cover all the bases? Keep to yourself, or get into someone else' region? Lots of nice decisions. Biggest downside is I can how a player would regularly be in a position to end the game with his "bonus action" requiring a complete score count *before* the end of the game to see if ending the game will win the game.

---

Fairy Tale (Z-Man edition)

I hadn't played Fairy Tale in a while, so was eager to try it again. We played w/o the bonus/advanced cards, which seem tailor made for 5 players -- with fewer players, the card distribution is so crazy that you'll get some very odd game results which detracts from the drafting strategies, in my opinion. We played twice, and it was easy to get back into the game after a long hiatus.

Bottom Line: 7/10 -- I really like the drafting mechanic, but found the art (in the Z-Man version) squeezed into a cluttered, ugly frame with the large icons. The strategy eludes me. Despite feeling that I make good personal and defensive drafting positions, I tend to come in last. There's something about the game that I just don't get. I'm not good at games requiring memory elements, and I can never remember what's missing from a hand being passed to me to deduce who has drafted what cards, etc.

---

Ra (Reiner Knizia)

I continue to be both fascinated and incredibly frustrated by Ra. I like certain elements a lot, but for what is largely a push your luck game, it feels awfully long when a string of bad luck does you in. It's one thing to get bad luck in Diamant, Cloud 9 or Can't Stop. But it's another thing to get karma screwed in the last 10 minutes of a 45 minute game.

In the last epoch of Ra, I was left with 3 unused bid tiles while Eva and Jorge each had 2. No gods, floods or civ tiles were drawn the entire third epoch, and the Ra tiles came fast and furious at the end of the game, leaving very little room to maneuver or react. I had groomed my hand carefully during the 2nd epoch, and held (I believe) the 10, 12 and 13 bid suns for the last round.
Was it poor decision making? I don't think so. There was literally no value in all but one of the earlier lots that epoch for me. My only option would have been to deny Jorge 5 points by using my 6 bid sun to snag the 4th building of a type for him that he ended up getting with his 4 bid sun -- no points for me, though. But after that, the epoch ended before anyone could do much of anything else.

It left me feeling incredibly frustrated. For the length of the game, it has so much push your luck that it can really kick you in the balls, even when you make a good strategic and probability-based decision. Even with clever play, it can be very, very difficult to overcome bad luck. The game still hovers in the 6ish range for me, as I see what I like about the game, but when playing, the role of luck smacks me in the face.

To Game, Or Not To Game ... That Is The Question.

2006-04-11T08:24:00.000-07:00

Over the course of my life as an avid boardgamer, I have often said "It's better to play a bad game than no game at all." But the longer I've been in the hobby, the more I'm starting to reconsider this position.

Why? Well, simply put, there are some real stinkers out there.

The more games there are, the greater the chances for a fairly standard bell curve of results based on the quality of a game. There are far more games crowding the first standard deviation, that generic 68% which occupies the common ground and creates the average. Necessarily, there are now more games occupying the further extremes... And once you get to the third standard deviation (on the right of the bell curve), you're dealing with the elite, cream of the crop games -- or if it's that third standard deviation to the left, the worst of the worst.

With more than 500 games in my collection, and access/exposure to a good 200 or more games via my friends' collections, that's a large sample size to draw from. Granted, it's not purely random sampling, as the nature of the collections introduces a bias -- hopefully screening out some clunkers before they make it that far.

But that's not always the case with my collection. I'm prone to grab games that simply sound neat, are new and shiny, are from a publisher/designer I like, or just happen to fit my budget at that time. So while my collection may be skewed ever-so-slightly toward the right and become more of a camel-hump curve than a true bell curve, it's good enough.

In a true bell curve, the first standard deviation block (one SD left, one SD right) accounts for 68% of the results. So from my 520 game collection about 354 games are one SD from the true average, making up the bulk of my games. In BoardGameGeek rating terms, these are probably the 5s and 6s (and probably 7s) in my collection -- games I'd play, usually never turn down, and tend to enjoy when played occassionally.

The second SD, when added to the first, encompasses 96% of the total sample in its range. That means a total of 28% of my collection sits here, 14% to the left and 14% to the right. That's about 73 games that are below average (games rated 3s and 4s), and another 73 games above average (games rated 8s and 9s). The high end are games I'd almost always play, will often suggest, and enjoy a great deal.

The third SD (and for all intents and purposes the final deviation) encompasses 99% of the results, accouting for 3% of the overall sample, 1.5% on the far left, 1.5% on the far right. That means only 7 or 8 games that are absolute trash (rated 1s and 2s) or are the Holy Grail of gaming (rated 10s). Those elite games are paragons of design, entertainment and boardgaming goodness.

So why this long drawn out example? Why these skewed, biased and overall meaningless stats and breakdowns? Well, first it was kind of fun to do. But more importantly, it shows the sorry state of affairs of my collection and the dilemma I face.

With a good 80-90 games that are far below average, and with more new games being added to the sample size all the time, it's getting harder and harder for each individual game to make a good impression. I'm loathe to stick to just a handful of the top tier games and play them repeatedly, as I think I'd get burned out fairly quickly. But if that's the case, are they truly exceptional games?

And for those games scraping the bottom of the barrel, would it really be better to play those stinkers than to relax and read a book? Is the social context rewarding enough to warrant trudging through the mire? Adding to the complexity of this is the fact that each of my gaming friends' bell curves are slightly different, and the ratings don't always overlap in some neat, tidy Venn Diagram. So a game in my 1st standard deviation to the right may be a game in someone else's 2nd SD left, or 3rd SD right.

I have no idea where I'm going with this, to be honest. But it kept me up all night long. In that regard, perhaps it would have been better to play, say Time Control, than lose sleep.

Gaming Snapshot >> Ostia, Mississippi Queen, Succession and More

2006-04-09T22:17:00.000-07:00

Finally got some "real" gaming in for the first time in nearly a month. A wide assortment of games, which I generally enjoyed. I was a bit surprised to find out the other gamers were less than thrilled with the selection, though. A well, they can't all be winners.

Ostia (Mayfair Games/Pro Ludo)

First time any of us had played. Ostia is described as economic game of trading goods for cash or donating them to the senate for Victory Points. Sounds like an interesting decision of where to apply your resources, or bluff to secure favor when you really want to earn money now or bide time for a future turn. Not so. The decisions are largely meaningless and bland. Justin and I disagreed as to how significant an advantage a player with superior memory would have, but we both agreed the game was pretty lifeless.

Bottom Line: 5.5/10 -- I was hoping I'd like the mechanics of secretly dividing your hand into trade/keep, and then secret assignment of cards to sell or influence. But in practice, it doesn't matter. The neatest element -- the ship/store card which is placed in your hand to designate which cards are going to be auctioned and which stored in your warehouse -- is completely unnecessary. And the bluff cards are almost unnecessary, as well. I like the concept, I like the components, but the execution does feel quite dry and listless. Even with strong memory of what cards are in whose hands, there's little application for that knowledge.

---

Bucket King (Rio Grande)

This was the first time Justin played. Michael and Chris had both played before, though Chris wasn't too thrilled to play again. As this is a favorite of mine, he sucked it up to let me play. Fast becoming one of my favorite card games. I won through a combination of good play and growing disinterest by my opponents.

Bottom Line: 8.5/10 -- Wow, what a great little game. Far more planning, hand management and strategy than it first appeared. A wonderful card game that's easy to teach, plays quickly and is wholly satisfying for its type of gameplay experience. The more I play Bucket King, the more I love it. More than meets the eye, as you have to manage your hand, your bucket pyramid and your opponents to succeed.

---

Mississippi Queen (Rio Grande)

I hadn't played in years, despite having acquired the Black Rose expansion. Justin was interested, so we pulled it out. The rules are super-simple, so we played with passenger pick up the first game. Justin and Michael got stuck in an endless pushing loop which forced them into last place. Chris screamed ahead, leaving me trolling for 2nd. By the time Justin and Michael realized the hopelessness of their situation (due to the timing of the mechanics), we called the game since positions seemed fixed. Disappointed it didn't go better, as there's a lot to like here.

Bottom Line: 7.5/10 -- Great production quality, nicely applied theme, simple mechanics. I like the laid back, easy going feel and pace of the game. It plays quickly, while offering some positioning and planning challenges when playing with passengers. Not much of a game using the strictest basic rules -- but with the simplest rule set, it's playable by gamers as young as 6 or 7.

--

Succession: Intrigue in the Royal Court (Your Move Games)

My favorite game of the evening just happened to be the least favorite of everyone else. Well, it would have been of Ostia hadn't gone over so poorly. Succession features a lot of free-form, anything goes sort of diplomacy and negotiation, around some very clever ideas: candidates for the throne gain/lose standing with the king, and reward players they feel are helping their cause, while blaming players they think are causing them problems. Each candidate and each player has unique abilities, and the wild range of cards creates a lot of chaos. Despite that level of chaos, though, I love how much manipulation exists in the game... But it certainly demands a lot from the players.

Justin and Chris clearly didn't like the game, and moved to quickly end the game. I have to admit I was a bit miffed that Justin created a vote he knew he both could not win and which he knew gave the game to Chris, to secure second place (but more importantly to end the game). I think Justin had a good chance to win of he would have continued. Arbitrary and ruthless player targeting is a big part of the game -- so be warned. Grumpy players who hold grudges shouldn't play.

Bottom Line: 8/10 -- I really dig the concept and implementation of the game. Great production qualilty (except the peeling cardboard coins). Clever interplay of mechanics and concepts. Everything is for sale -- how you play or apply a card, how you cast your votes, who you assign blame to... everything can be manipulated for a price or the right favor. You need to carefully balance your position so you don't peak too soon and appear that you're doing too well, or you'll get crushed. A lot more nuance and subtlety than I think most people will give it credit for. Has some of the wheeling/dealing and evokes a slight Cosmic Encounter vibe with me (a good thing).

--

We also played a few hands of Pit. I won 2 and Justin won 2. It brought back some good memories. It was refreshing to see how dynamic and still engaging a classic game like Pit can be. I also tried Harry's Grand Slam Baseball for the first time, a classic, quick-playing baseball card game republished now by Out of the Box (originally published in 1962). It's a light, breezy way to pass the time with enough of a baseball theme to scratch the itch, and a good back-and-forth pace -- a great game value for about $10.

Burning Bridges... Even Jerks Design Games

2006-04-06T09:37:00.000-07:00

I've had a lot of great experiences within my boardgaming hobby. I've made a lot of good friends, gotten to develop and design games for WizKids and Goodman Games, and have met a lot of great publishers, designers and hobbyists like myself.

Thankfully, there are lots of great people in the boardgaming hobby. Jay Tummelson (Rio Grande Games), Zev Shlasinger (Z-Man Games), Greg Benage (Fantasy Flight), Bruno Faidutti (Designer) and Mark Osterhaus (Out of the Box) just to name a few off the top of my head. Prominent publishers, designers and gaming enthusiasts. And really nice people who I've had the opportunity to chat with at conventions, demo games to, interview with or otherwise interact with enough to know how bad by comparison some people in the industry are.

While it may not be as severe as one bad apple spoiling the whole barrel, sometimes it's not that far off. Since the industry is so small and so clique-y, I really am loathe to name names or point fingers (heck, I'm no saint myself -- but at least I try to be civil). But recently on BoardGameGeek, one designer in particular has gone off the deep end and has done nothing but come across as arrogant, superior and downright rude.

I certainly don't mind if someone questions a comment I post in a review or session report, but when a game designer sends me private messages just to insult me, tell me I'm a poor player or that I clearly don't understand strategy -- or even better, enjoys lording his design credits or superior experience within the industry -- well, let's just say it doesn't sit well.

I'm not the only person from my gaming group he's done this with, either. Our group played one of his games, and I believe several of us posted comments and reactions to the game. And at least one other player got similarly rude, confrontational and idiotic responses. I tried to extend the olive branch and engage in meaningful discussion on his game design to convey what I felt were weaknesses and potential issues based on the game group, and was met with vitriol and vanity. He's left similar comments on a recent positive review posted by a BGGers -- rather than being thankful and kind for the positive review, he snapped at a few descriptive comments made by the reviewer.

It's a real shame, as I had enjoyed the first of his games I played, but now, not only will I avoid any games by this designer, I'm also avoiding other games published by the same publisher.

An eye-opening experience...

2006-04-03T06:20:00.000-07:00

I haven't gotten much gaming in lately, as things have been pretty hectic when I've been home, and I just wrapped up one of the medical studies I participate in. In fact, for the last few weeks, the only gaming I've gotten in has been qhile sequestered at one of these medical studies.

It's an odd, odd environment. Lots of the participants are retirees, college students or folks just looking for a little extra cash to get by. I'm in a fairly unique situation. Over the course of ten studies, it's become fairly apparent that I'm atypical from the average participant -- specifically my work experience, education and general breadth of what I had always considered common knowledge.

Common knowledge and common sense aren't that common, it appears. At first, I found it amusing, and it was a bit ego gratifying. Now I find it humbling, and more than a little frightening.

During the most recent study, I played in several games of Cranium, the popular party game. There are all sorts of different categories, ranging from general trivia, vocabulary and artistic skills. I tend to do quite well at Cranium, as I feel I'm fairly well rounded, if not especially "deep" within any of these categories.

Over the course of the games, I was shocked and appalled at some of the discoveries made:

- I was the only person at the table (of 6 players) who knew that all squares were rectangles, but not all rectangles had to be squares. When I explained the necessary requirements for a square, and the distinctions for a rectangle, I was met with baffled looks, and one of the ladies finally said "Ah well, I never was good at math."

- I was the only person playing who had ever even heard of Appomattox Court House. It was a "fill in the blanks" clue, where you only get to see 3 of the letters, and then need to solve the puzzle based on the clue. The clue was "Surrender Site" and the puzzle was displayed as A---M----X. I knew it before the card hit the table, feeling the clue was so obvious, but I bit my tongue, hoping someone else would jump in. I explained that this was where General Lee was asked to surrender by Ulysses S. Grant, ending the American Civil War. To which several people asked "who?"

- I was the only person at the table who knew that Leonardo DaVinci painted the Mona Lisa.

- I was the only person at the table capable of spelling what I had considered fairly common words: bachelor, banshee, cellular and (believe it or not) diaper.

- No one else at the table knew who Lucille Ball was. That's not so much common knowledge as just showing how old I felt. I'm only 33 -- it's not like I grew up watching I Love Lucy when it was first running. But how could anyone 26 or younger (as they were) not know who Lucille Ball was?

Things were further fragmented when we played Scrabble. I had politely warned them that I was fairly good, and had played for a long time. I offered assistance to anyone who wanted some help during the game. But over the course of the game, I was questioned over the spelling (or very existence) of the following words: smelt (the metalworking process -- no one had ever heard of it), fated, illicit, pare (that's not how you spell the fruit), jape, fiat, akin.

The following words were also spelled wrong by other players: deus (I accepted it as latin, but he had thought he was spelling "deuce"), doush (a woman thought she was spelling "douche"), fale (fail), ferrit (ferret) and several other similar spellings. I couldn't help but think that the rest of the players had litereally only ever learned how to spell phonetically, and not traditionally -- and had probably read very, very little.

It did nothing to boost my ego. There was no sense of pride or fun in winning. I felt something akin to pity. Not necessarily for these people (they're all very nice and otherwise bright, clever people), but for the "state of the world." It made me a bit frightened to think that this is the next generation assuming responsibilities for the world.

As soon as I got home, I read a bunch of books with my three-year-old son, Ben, and we spent hours building words with his blocks and spelling things out on his Magna Doodle. I have a greater sense of resolve now to do what I can to instill a passion for learning, reading and education in my son. The same sort of passion I felt growing up.

V for Vendetta is D for Disappointing

2006-03-25T17:12:00.000-08:00

If any of you had been considering seeing V for Vendetta -- don’t bother, it's C for Crap. It's the first time Trish and I have been able to go out together and see a movie in 4 months or so, and it was A for Awful.

The plot was M for Mediocre, and Hugo Weaving as Vendetta was P for Passable, as he's very good at the cultured, metered monologues. But there were far too many of these P for Pedantic monologues, delivered in a D for Dry manner. The action scenes were A for Adequate but were few and far between.

Natalie Portman was U for Uninspired, but this was her best work in quite some time. The whole unveiling of the plot was P for Predictable, while still offering enough conflicting and confusing twists to turn a C for Clever concept into a J for Joke.

Save your M for Money and steer clear of V for Vendetta. The best thing about the movie was the trailer for X-Men III.

Oblivion... A nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there

2006-03-25T08:12:00.000-08:00

(finally looks up from playing the new Oblivion CRPG from Bethesda to log onto his blog)

Hmm? Huh? If I didn't need to eat or go to the bathroom, I probably would be playing Oblivion 24/7... It's pretty addictive.

As is my usual CRPG modus operandi, though, I've created at least 4 different race/class combos, run them through the tutorial and a bit of exploration, then deleted them. I'm overwhelmed by the number of options and types of possible gameplay -- I can't decide what sort of character I'd enjoy playing the most. It's certainly going to be a different sort than my tabletop RPG tastes, given the limitations of the interface, etc.

The graphics are gorgeous, but I had to turn textures and detail down considerably (just up from the lowest end possible). I've got a 2.5 GHz PIV processor, 1 GB of RAM and a Radeon 9700 256 MB video card and the game is still sluggish -- especially when facing multiple opponents, or for some of the high end special effects (when these certain bad guys die, they explode out in this rippling warp effect, which drops me to literally 5 fps or so).

Also, the controls are horrible... I'm so used to World of Warcraft and other first person shooters that I was hoping I could configure the controls to mimic what I was comfortable with -- but no such luck. Even though you can remap some of the controls, not all of them are mappable, and there are horrible few available. For example, there is no "rotate view" option. You can sidestep left or right, but not pivot/rotate -- that can only be done via Mouselook. Grrrr.

And instead of having 6 trays of 12 mappable buttons/hotkeys like in World of Warcraft for commonly accessed spells or items, you get 8 -- that's it. By the time you're done with the tutorial, you'll already have 12 or more items you'll want quick access to (torch/shield to swap out, several potions, a few spells) which you just can't do. Very frustrating.

But despite these quirks, I'm still enamored, and see myself being sucked in for quite some time. These things keep it from initially blowing me away like World of Warcraft did, or even Sacred or Neverwinter Nights, but the promise of what lies beyond these issues is far too tempting to let that stand in my way.

Sarcasm, Thy Name Is... Me?

2006-03-23T13:53:00.000-08:00

I'm just in one of those brooding moods today. I'm usually a pretty chipper guy (all things considered) but some recent postings and comments by my fellow geeks got my inner jerk all riled up. Society is so hypersensitive that things are easily taken out of context -- people read between the lines and try to be offended.

It's a personal version of the litigious nature of life: if someone does something you would normally be indifferent toward, make a big stink about it and turn the tables so it's suddenly all about you. Crikey. It really gets under my skin.

I don't go out of my way to offend people. I'm not that sort of jerk. But I do get frustrated at how ridiculous some people are... Seeing gender bias, racism or other prejudices were there simply aren't any. Recently, I've seen this trend in boardgaming, where people get all up in arms about perceived problems (sometimes having to really stretch to get that sleight in there).

I've sounded off on this in my recent GeekList, titled The Darker Side of Gaming >> Insensitive, Controversial and Morally Reprehensible Games. It is my most ambitious and purely selfish posting in a while. It was a heckuva lot of fun to write, and more than a little cathartic.

Here's the lead-in blurbage:

I like to think that I'm a fairly cultured, well-educated and contemporary person. That I'm socially conscious, spiritually grounded and make efforts to empathize with my fellow. As such, I am shocked (and slightly embarrassed) by the huge number of incredulously insensitive, politically incorrect and downright reprehensible games that eat away at the moral fabric of the boardgaming community. I can't possibly be the only person who feels this way.

Please, share my outrage.

I am baffled. How publishers can sleep at night while developing and distributing these social diseases and value-crippling pathogens. What ever happened to pride, dignity and compassion? What do you think?

Geekway on the Brain

2006-03-23T06:18:00.000-08:00

With the Geekway to the West boardgaming "mini-con" I'm coordinating coming up quickly (April 28-29th), I'm starting to get a bit frazzled. Aside from juggling all my other responsibilities, I'm feverishly working to pump up attendance, trying to solicit donations and schedule different events.

But it's certainly a labor of love. I'm really excited about the Geekway this year, and can't wait for the end of April to roll around.

The one event I'm most interested and excited about would have to be the life-size, "live action" Mall of Horror game we're setting up. I'm a big fan of Mall of Horror, and we're going to take it to the next level.

Instead of just one player per "color" we'll have three people, one for each of the character's present on the team. One player will be nominated the team captain, and will be responsible for consulting with the other members of the team and finalize their voting. If the weather is nice, this is going to be set up outside so folks will move around to the different locations.

We've got team sandwich boards planned out, fake badges for the Security Officer, chairs at different locations to represent maximum occupancy, and other tweaks to make it a more immersive experience and make the most out of having so many people. To ensure things will run smoothly and stay on track, we're going to have a moderator timing negotiations.

I've been in touch with Asmodee, the developers of Mall of Horror, to let them know what we're doing and see if they have any tips or suggestions on running a large scale game. They seem interested in our plans, so hopefully I can encourage them to donate a copy of the game for the winning team. Regardless, this'll be a great event for lots of photos and hopefully some video.

We're also going to run a large Werewolf game or two (18 players + moderator) over the course of the day, and I'm trying to figure out some Boardgame Trivia to include for prizes -- something low key but interesting that folks can play in the background... Right now I'm thinking about taking super-duper closeups of different gameboards & bits and having players identify the game. We'll have to see how things pan out.

I've still got more donations to sift through/solicit, as well as nail down what we're going to do foodwise (cater, just do food runs, etc) and then try to schedule some volunteers to help demo and teach games to new players. One of the exciting prospects for the Geekway will be introducing this great hobby to new players who aren't familiar with Eurogames or (gasp) don't know about BoardGameGeek.com!

So if you're going to be in St. Louis in April, drop me a line... We'd love to have you at the Geekway! Until then, I'm off to do some more planning and prep.

New Horizons >> Recent Game Innovations OTHER Than Mechanics/Gameplay

2006-03-20T06:33:00.000-08:00

I know, I know, I've been ignoring my blog. Shame on me. I wish I could say that it's because I've been so busy gaming, or have gotten a new job, or won the lottery and didn't have time for all this nonsense. Nope, I've just been busy with lots of boring things, and hadn't felt the spark of inspiration for a while.

But I'm back in the saddle today, and just finished writing a new GeekList over on BoardGameGeek titled New Horizons >> Recent Game Innovations OTHER Than Mechanics/Gameplay. Here's the lead-in blurbage and first entry. Boy I love thinking about games. Why couldn't someone pay me for that?

...

As I look at my growing collection, I am constantly amazed at the variety found in games today. Especially when looking at the creativity and ingenuity shown in the gaming industry that goes beyond the gameplay or mechanics. Over the last 15-odd years, there have been countless innovations that have dramatically changed (though I hesitate to say "improved" in all cases) the landscape of modern gaming. Some of these innovations are physical in nature -- a new way to develop components, for example. Others are intangible, such as an innovation of marketing or accessibility.

This is by no means an exhaustive list. Also, please note that I'm not necessarily listing games that were the "first" of its kind to bear a particular innovation -- merely a game that comes to mind as a strong example. If you can share some information about the first game to adopt a certain innovation, please share it with us. Oddly enough, many of the things I thought of as innovations can trace their roots back, one way or another, to collectable/customizable gaming, or more specifically to Magic The Gathering.

What do you think?
What other non-gameplay related innovations have come into the scene in the last 10-15 years? What games were heavily influenced by these innovations? Are these innovations here to stay, or simply a fad that will fade?

...

Innovation: Collectible/Customizable Format

I can't think of a single other game that changed the landscape of modern gaming over the last 15 or so years as greatly as MTG. It introduced many brand new concepts and innovations, but I'll focus on the collectable/customization innovation. Developing a game that offers several tiers of immersion and interaction. There's the collection fix, where you acquire new pieces and expand your game base. There's the construction fix, when you wile away the hours tinkering with combinations. There's the actual game itself.

MTG created a new genre of gaming, but also ushered in a new mode of thinking about games -- a game can become much more than a single box purchased once. It can become an ever expanding, ever evolving experience that grows as the user grows.

Games That Followed Suit: A countless stream of CCGs following MTG's lead (Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, AGOT, you name it), and numerous other formats. WizKids click games, ChiZo Rising, Blue Moon, Battlegrounds, Navia Dratp the list goes on.

...

You can read the rest of this GeekList over at BGG.

Now that's a lot of games! Sadly, unplayed.

2006-03-07T07:40:00.000-08:00

Wow. I have a ton of games. My collection right now hovers around 500 or so boardgames and card games. If I threw in unique role playing game settings (not just supplements), that would probably add another 75 or so titles to the mix.

Sadly, I have a large number of unplayed games in my collection.

Every time I sift through my games, I stumble across games I ought to get to the table, games I know will never see the light of day again, and every once in a while, a game I totally forgot I even owned.

With so many games to choose from, a game really has to impress me to see the table more than once, but I'd like to make a greater effort to set aside some table time for some of these unplayed games in my collection. Some will be easier to get to the table than others, but I really need to lobby for some of these.

I started listing all my unplayed games over on BoardGameGeek. Being the thing I do, I put them together in a GeekList. But I have so damn many of them, I'm going to have to break it inot several lists... I started listing them alphabetically, and cut off the first GeekList after just getting through A-D in my collection -- with a staggering 38 games unplayed in that range alone!

I've got the feeling that by the time I'm done, I may discover that a full 20-25% of my collection is unplayed. Yikes.

In case you're interested, here's a link to my GeekList of games unplayed in my collection (A-D).

Gone Gaming Guest Spot >> Games that Tamper with the Space-Time Continuum

2006-03-01T06:36:00.000-08:00

Last week I was struggling to find something to occupy my mind. Thankfully (sodaklady), one of my GeekBuddies from BoardGameGeek, came to the rescue! She's a regular contributor to the Gone Gaming blog, a great gaming blog featuring a host of savvy, well-written and interesting game nerds just like me. Well, not just like me. After all, DWTripp is a regular there... :)

Anyhoo, due to some scheduling quirks, sodaklady was looking for someone to fill her next contribution. I was pleased as punch when she asked if I'd be interested in writing something for the Gone Gaming blog. So I happily went about trying to settle on a good topic.

I had it narrowed down to two possibilities:

1) Games that Tamper with the Space-Time Continuum. Those games that bend the fabric of reality and let time slip past, turning hours into seconds... or those dreadful games where time stands still and you feel you're trapped in some bizarrio Twilight Zone episode.

2) Confessions of a Collectaholic. I like to say I'm an avid game collector, but that's not quite accurate. I'm an obsessive collector. Some of what I collect happens to be good games, but there's a lot of crap in my collection, as well. It was to be a humorous look through my horrible habits.

I ended up setting on Option 1, the Space-Time Continuum thingie. The latter is still pretty interesting, but will take some more thought to pull off properly. And it's a bit disheartening to see just how pathetic I am with my game purchasing trends... Why oh why did I pick up a copy of Clout Fantasy? Paranoia the Card Game? Sigh...

Anyway, please feel free to hop on over to Gone Gaming to read by guest entry: Games that Tamper with the Space-Time Continuum. Enjoy!

I want to like Princes of the Renaissance... But it won't let me!

2006-02-28T15:01:00.000-08:00

Got in a six-player game of Martin Wallace's Princes of the Renaissance last night. I'm the only one who had played before, so I was tasked with teaching the game. All I can say is thank goodness for the great BGG player aids available. I had played 4 times before, but it was still murky and difficult to explain... Granted, it had been a while, but I was disappointed with myself for how cloodgy the explanation was for the relative simplicity of the rules (only 4 pages).

But there's a heck of a lot going on in PotR. I call it a game of omniscience. You need to know at the very outset the value of virtually every game piece that's going to come into play -- because a big part of the game is auctioning off a variety of tiles. But instead of only a small set of tiles being available, nearly everything is available at the very beginning. Talk about a steep learning curve!

One of the problems I keep running into with PotR is the intimidation factor. There are so many options from the get go that it's hard to know where to begin. All the city, event and troop tiles are available -- so where do you start? Even with 4 previous plays under my belt, I felt I had no better advantage than anyone else going into my 5th game, as the game is so opaque that it's difficult to apply experience from one game to another if too much time passes.

In several games I've played, especially the most recent game, there's a distinct arms race as folks snatch up all the high value troop tiles (especially the ones that also generate influence income). In fact, this often goes on for several rounds in a row... The city tiles start out pretty darn expensive, and locking yourself into one of your three cities doesn't seem all that valuable, except for perhaps a few of the tiles (veto a war, gain +2 influence per turn, etc). So it's hard to decide when to auction them off, and which ones to start with. The event tiles have middling initial power, since the VPs awarded are fairly low... But I suppose you could snatch them for pretty cheap. But are you giving up too much by ignoring something else?

It's incredibly hard to have any basis for your decisions. It gets much easier in the 2nd and 3rd decades, where some game context has developed and you can better evaluate the players' positions and the relative value of auctions based on their more immediate returns... But that first decade is agony -- and invariably takes much longer to play out.

The Bottom Line: 6.5/10 (Was 7.5, with an 8.5/10 rating for "Potential") Despite the deceptively short rules (basically 4 pages), the game demands a lot from first time players. As with any auction game, players need to be able to gauge the relative value and importance of items being offered so they can bid intelligently. When you only have a few items available at a time, or work within a discrete set of items, that can be easily managed.

In Princes of the Renaissance, however, every tile is available from the outset. That means knowing and understanding the relative values of 8 different army tiles and 30 provincial tiles from 5 different regions. You need to know their relative value to yourself, if you want to bid/purchase them, as well as their relative value to each other player, in case you want to auction it off. And the relative value over purchasing/auctioning the tile compared to the value of instigating a war or taking one of the other actions available. This need for omniscience has turned several prospective players from the game. I've only gotten to play five times now, with three aborted attempts once the game was set up, as folks had no idea how to filter all that information.

Despite the frustration, though, I really want to play again to see if we can unlock some deeper sense of strategy and gameplay bred from greater familiarity with the auction elements and the mechanics.

The Highlander Collection >> There Can Be Only One!!

2006-02-24T14:25:00.000-08:00

(This is a notification of a new GeekList posted over on BGG)

I love seeing hot lists, favorite games and collections over on BoardGameGeek, or the fanciful daydreaming of questions such as "If you were stranded on a desert island with only 10 games...." etc.

So here's my twist on the classic conundrum. For whatever contrivance floats your boat (messy divorce, hot lava death, termites), you need to assemble a gaming collection from scratch -- with one iNsAnE caveat: There Can Be Only One Game Per Designer!!

That's it -- just one Reiner Knizia game... One Sid Sackson game. And so on. The real trick here is that you may not necessarily pick your absolute favorite game from a designer, because you also need a nice, well-rounded collection. If your favorite game from several designers are all auction/bidding games, the collection will become too lopsided.

So please join in and help me decide what the Ultimate Highlander Game Collection would include. One game per designer, as diverse a selection of formats, mechanics, playing times and interests as possible. And just to make it more interesting, only 10 games total can be included in the collection, and only from designers with at least 4 games to their credit.

It's a lot tougher than it sounds, as there are so many great arguments to include certain games, and much tougher arguments for keeping them off the list. So wander on over to BoardGameGeek and read my picks -- and then tell me what you think.

The Great Escape >> Why I Game...

2006-02-22T09:29:00.000-08:00

There are as many different reasons to get together to game as their are games and players to play them... but there are certainly some common threads -- socialization , creativity outlet, exercise for the brain and the nebulous notion of "fun" seem to top the list.

While these are all well and good, and indeed, I share many of these reasons to game in various intensities, when it comes right down to it, there is one overwhelming reason why I game: escapism.

I game to get away from the real world, get away from my life, and crawl into an alternate dimension where I feel I have far more control over my fate than otherwise. I know it sounds a bit dark and brooding.

Well, it is.

Don't get me wrong, I've got a great life. A wonderful, loving and understanding wife. A bright, energetic and healthy toddler. A roof over my head, clothes on my back and food to eat. When I view my life honestly, I realize that I have an embarrassment of riches. I am grateful for all the wonderful blessings in our life and how much we have to be thankful for.

Unfortunately, for some people, like me, that's just not enough. This stems from the fact that I'm a manic depressive with bipolar disorder. During the upswings, nothing could be finer and the world is bright, shiny and wonderful. During the downswings, no amount of cheer or good fortune can pull me out of the trenches. Except for gaming.

It's the escapist appeal of gaming that helps me deal with my depression more than anything else I've encountered. While it's true that ignoring problems won't make them go away, being able to free yourself of their burden for a while can certainly alter your perspective, or renew your determination and energy to attack them.

When the world has me down, games offer me a means to leave the world for a while, and get a fresh start. Each game is a second chance. Each game is a "do over." Each game is a cathartic expulsion of all that is dreary, listless and depressing.

If I fail miserably in a game, it only lasts as long as the game -- a refreshing change of pace to the compounded problems day to day life can snowball into. On the other hand, if I do well during a game, it offers a much-needed boost of confidence. After all, if I can succeed in this fictitious, artificial setting, what's to say that can't carry over into my normal life?

And further, knowing there's a definite end point is surprisingly reassuring. Knowing that, win or lose, the game is moving ever onward toward its resolution helps instill a sense of planning, encourage efforts to succeed and help deal with the eventual setbacks. It's a microcosm of an idyllic lifestyle, where you can step back and view things from greater perspective, and better accept how this little slice of surreal life unfolds.

The social aspect of gaming is certainly important to me, but this tends to stem from its association to the detachment and escapism from the real world. I don't like bringing real world issues to the game table -- such as talks of religion, politics, terrorism, war... things that can bring out the differences in my friends in stark contrast. I far prefer keeping conversation light, casual, and when possible, game-oriented -- focusing more on our shared passions and interests. That helps embellish the surreal quality of the escapist retreat that gaming provides.

So I game to get away from a dreary, unfulfilling and sometimes painful life. Thankfully, when I return from the table, I can see just how truly fortunate I am to have so many friends and the countless blessings our family enjoys.

"The Source" = The Bomb

2006-02-20T10:33:00.000-08:00

I flew up to Minnesota last week for a job interview, and before my trip looked up nearby BoardGameGeek members in the area. Aside from wanting to find some gaming while I was in the frosty north, I also wanted to participate in my favorite travel pastime -- visiting new game stores!

After no less than four people replied that I had to visit this game store called The Source in Minneapolis/St. Paul (in Falcon Heights), my curiousity had been piqued. I was dazzled with comments about it being the best game shop in the world, featuring hundreds of games, tons of space and items for every enthusiast -- comics, anime, RPGs, boardgames, miniatures games, historical wargames. I was excited to visit, but balanced my enthusiasm with a bit of skepticism. I mean, after all, how great can one game store be?

The answer, surprisingly, is AMAZING.

I can now say without reservation that The Source is the best all around game/hobby shop I've ever set foot in. I actually had the taxi take me there straight from the airport, and spent 2 hours just browsing through everything they had.

I'd guesstimate The Source had easily 3-4,000 RPG items in stock -- from the popular D&D, Warhammer, Werewolf and d20 products to tons of small print run, indie published and out of print games. I looked through every rack of RPG games they had, and was amazed to find supplements of obscure games I own which I never realized had spawned any additional material!

They had 5 large tiered shelves bristling with Eurogames and designer games -- Fantasy Flight, Rio Grande, Ravensburger, Mayfair, Queen Games, Days of Wonder, you name it... There were nearly as many racks of grognardian wargames, and an entire back room filled with historical miniatures. Then you get all the Warhammer and fantasy miniatures. Not to mention the comic book and anime section as big as our entire basement.

The staff was incredibly helpful, and I was able to track down some small indie press run RPGs from the Forge.net forums, as well as a variety of obscure Call of Cthulhu/Lovecraftian bits -- the Call of Cthulhu soundtrack (from the indie Lovecraft Society production) and Cool Air, an amazing Lovecraft Society DVD featuring several short films inspired by HPL.

I was overwhelmed, and could have easily spent 2-3 more hours there shuffling through the different games, books and bits they had. The Source is amazing, and I'm looking forward to another trip to Minnesota just to visit that store again!!

So what's the most amazing game store you've ever been to?

Battlestations >> Fielding Questions

2006-02-20T08:25:00.000-08:00

Since I'm such a big fan of the boardgame Battlestations (Gorilla Games) and have been a vocal advocate for the game in forums and GeekLists over on BoardGameGeek.com, I've had quite a few of my fellow geeks drop me a line asking for more information about the game. How difficult is it to learn? How long does it take to teach new players? Is there a lot of replay value?

I've written so many responses, that I had started to save snippets and repost them to various users. It's a long enough series of responses, though, that I thought it would make good sense to post it here, as well... Enjoy/ignore at your leisure.

Is Battlestations hard? Is it a "light" game? Heavy game?

I'd say Battlestations is light-to-medium mechanically for the players, but medium-to-heavy for the gamemaster running the missions. While the players only need to be familiar with a fairly small ruleset (such as the skills of their character and a rough idea of the skills of their comrades), ideally the gamemaster will have a better understanding of the overall system so he can answer questions as well as handle the bad guys.

How hard is it to learn? Can we get started with a game in 15 minutes? I'm concerned my gaming buddies might be intimidated.

I think it's realistic to get a group of new players up and running in 15 minutes or so, but the gamemaster will need to invest far more time for the first mission. I'd strongly recommend playing with pre-generated characters the first time, so you save time answering questions about character generation or asking players to make decisions without knowing the system...
There's a great introductory mission named "Boot Camp" in the core rules that helps players run through most of the mechanics during the course of a mission. It's a great way to introduce a lot of the elements in an organized, structured setting rather than trying to cover everything at the outset. All players really need to know to start is what the different ship modules do and how to resolve skill checks.

Then, once you get underway for the first mission, you can offer suggestions to the players for the first round or two to encourage participation. Soon, most groups will pick up on this and start taking the initiative, planning together and otherwise getting into the flow of the game.

How much replay value is there? Do all the sessions/missions start to feel the same after a while? How repetitive is the gameply?

The game has incredible replay value. The core boxed set alone has 36 different missions, with a wide variety of puzzles, conflicts and encounters to keep players on their toes. And as players improve their skills, expand their ship or possibly gain/lose new crew members, it doesn't take much to shake things up so each session feels fresh and new.

I'd say the majority of the missions don't "replay" well based on the fact that the core mission might revolve around a puzzle or mystery (which, once revealed, isn't always easy to mask). But that doesn't mean there's little replay value.

Many of the missions are fairly simple to modify -- change the number of enemy ships, face a different type of alien race, clutter the board with more asteroids, introduce a small hiccup or wrinkle to spice things up... And suddenly, some of these missions feel very, very different despite a relatively minor change.

And who's to say you can't revisit one of the puzzle missions several sessions later -- after going up in rank and flying a larger ship, the mission might play out differently when you're facing a massive Silicoid warship armed with veterans than that teeny Xeloxian ship manned by some space cadet wannabes.

Is the Galactic Civil War expansion necessary? Is it worth adding?

Oh yeah. The Galactic Civil War expansion introduces 36 more missions, again, many of which can be replayed numerous times with minor tweaks. GCW also adds tons of new options to customize missions to your liking -- recurring villains and personalities, a very neat campaign system to link larger story arcs together, new skills, items and even some new modules to kit out your space ship with. It's an incredible value and can dramatically extend the life of the game.

Yeah, but... is Battlestations worth it?

I can't recommend the game strongly enough. It fills such a novel niche that no other game comes close to filling for me. A quasi Star Trek: Next Generation/Paranoia sci-fi setting, incredibly neat "dual action" system with the onboard ship actions on the one hand and the space map with ship-to-ship conflict on the other, it's got character advancement/development, lots of neat customization options and most important of all -- it's a heckuva lot of fun to play!

Geekway to the West 2006 >> It's Official

2006-02-17T08:25:00.000-08:00

Geekway to the West 2006 is now OFFICIAL! We have a date, a venue and are planning a variety of events. Thanks to my Geekbuddies here in St. Louis for all their help in coordinating this year's event. This year's Geekway will be bigger and better than ever (even though we only have one previous year for comparison). We're really excited about doubling or tripling our attendance.

>> BEST OF BOTH WORLDS
This year's Geekway will indeed be the best of both worlds. Based on feedback from last year's event by the 2005 Geekway Attendees, and some new ideas for the 2006 Geekway, this year will actually feature two different events:

KICKING IT OLD SCHOOL: First, there will be a small, informal "Old School" get together on FRIDAY APRIL 28th at my house (where last year's entire event was held). Due to the limited space available, Friday's event will be reserved for this year's Geekway Volunteers and last year's attendees -- or long distance out of towners.

THE NEW WORLD ORDER: This year's main event will be held on SATURDAY APRIL 29th at a nearby community center in St. Charles (about 15 minutes from Ynnen's house). Doors will open at 10 AM sharp, and we'll need to wrap up our festivities and be out of there by 11 PM. Several local gamers have expressed willingness to have folks over after the center closes for even more gaming goodness.

>> STRUCTURED EVENTS
This year we'll be featuring a few organized events, too -- such as a huge game of Werewolf, a life-size/live action Mall of Horror game, some Boardgame Trivia and a few other tricks we've got up our sleeves. Once we have the details nailed down and volunteers in place to help manage some of these events, we'll ask folks to SIGN UP online or by email.

If you'd like to suggest a certain event, please let me know and I'll discuss it with our other volunteers.

>> PRE-REGISTRATION
In order to ensure we have enough room available to accomodate everyone, we're asking folks to PLEASE PRE-REGISTER if they plan on attending the Geekway to the West 2006 Main Event on Saturday, April 29th. Last year, with barely a month of planning, we were able to get 22 people together to game.

This year, by spreading the word earlier and opening up the event to our local boardgame meetup community, we think it's realistic to draw anywhere from 50-70 people for Saturday, April 29th -- possibly even more! The more gamers, the merrier, but we need to keep close tabs on attendee registration to manage costs and coordinate events.

>> COVERING COSTS
To cover the costs involved with the Geekway (building reservation, refreshments, supplies and incidental costs for managing the event) we're asking attendees to please consider donating to the cause. If everyone attending were able to donate $10-15, we'll have more than enough to cover our core costs, as well as supplement the event with bonus goodies. 100% of all donations will be applied toward the convention. Any donations in excess of the facility and supply costs will be used to purchase snacks, beverages and PRIZES for the attendees. Huzzah!

>> COME AND GET YER GEEK ON!
Here's to some great gaming in 2006! Hopefully you'll be able to join us in St. Louis this April for the Geekway -- but if not, all the best to you and yours!

If you have any questions or are interested in attending, feel free to contact me via GeekMail (from my BoardGameGeek profile) or email.

High on Life >> The Prototype Buzz...

2006-02-13T09:35:00.000-08:00

Ahh, nothing fill me with more pride, energy or zest for life than watching our three-year-old son blossom and grow before our eyes -- but having a successful session playtesting one of my prototypes is the closest thing to come in second.

After all, in a way these are my little babies, too. I feed them ideas, nurture them with creative input and try to pass along what I've learned about game design. But sooner or later, if I ever want them to succeed in life, I have to send them off into the world and just hope that I've prepared them well for what may come.

It can be a nervewracking experience to ask folks to playtest a prototype. Like sending a child off to school on his first day -- Will the other kids like me? What if they all think I look funny? What if nobody wants to play with me?

I invest a lot of time and energy into game designs. Many of them I know will never see the light of day, but that doesn't make me love them any less. There are several designs in my growing portfolio of prototypes, though, that I sincerely believe are "good enough" right now to make it in the big, bustling world of the gaming hobby.

I have a great group of gaming buddies here in the St. Louis area and abroad (via BGG and online communications) who have been very supportive and helpful in my quest to see my fledgling designs grow up big and strong.

While I appreciate the positive feedback (as any proud parent does), I'm equally grateful for the constructive criticisms and disagreements. I know everyone has different parenting skills, but I try to keep an open mind. Even though these are my babies, other people have experience in a broad range of skills and disciplines far wider than my own. By embracing this feedback and helping provide a better environment and framework for my children, they can only benefit in the long run.

But sometimes the short run can be harrowing. Like having your child sent home from school with a note from the teacher, I can't help but cringe and prepare for the worst when someone starts saying "It was okay, but..."

I just need to remain confident that I've shown my children the love, dedication, support and positive reinforcement necessary to become strong, responsible and solid citizens. And if my game designs never reach that stage, that's ok. I know one day our three-year old will!

[Review] Minion Hunter >> One of My All-Time Favorites

2006-02-11T08:03:00.000-08:00

I finally was prodded (guilted?) into writing a full blown review for Minion Hunter, one of my all-time favorite boardgames. The full review details the components, gameplay, core mechanics as well as highlights the main pros and cons of the game. You can read the full review over at BoardGameGeek, but here's the main op-ed piece to whet the appetite.

OVERVIEW: Minion Hunter is a cooperative board game for 1-6 players, published in 1992 by Games Designer Workshop. The game is set in GDW's "Dark Conspiracy" setting, a dark, gritty futuristic setting of the world gone to hell. Into this cheerful setting step the players, working together to fend off the forces of evil from destroying the world -- or at the least messing it up worse than it already is. The players will succeed or fail based on their teamwork, risk management and (admittedly) more than a few die rolls.

Minion Hunter is far more than the sum of its parts, and remains one of my favorite games. It is a "classic" game with novel gameplay and fun cooperative elements. Despite showing its age in terms of production quality, Minion Hunter still delivers an overall gameplay experience that other cooperative games fail to live up to.

I first played Minion Hunter back in college, and keep pulling it out. Its blend of luck, odds stacked against you and the component quality (compared to snazzier modern games) may not be for everyone -- but it offers a rich, rewarding experience for the right group, and is at least worth a shot for anyone at least moderately interested... I've played 20+ times, and still enjoy playing Minion Hunter.

There is an excellent expansion, titled Minion Nation, which offers new twists to add even more replay value (so you can't just memorize the Plot deck to know which events occur in which regions) as well as nicely summarizes all the charts and tables (with a few new options) that are occassionally referenced during the game. I'd rate this expansion as "must have" for anyone who enjoys Minion Hunter, or wants to get the most out of what this system can provide.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Minion Hunter is still one of my All-Time favorites, and I don't see that changing any time soon. It is one of the best cooperative games out there. Yes, there is a lot of luck involved, but clever groups with good teamwork can overcome luck and will be rewarded with a wonderful gaming experience. One of the most often played games I own. A social, outgoing and talkative group will get the most out of this game.

A recent replay confirmed just how much I love this game. It is indeed an "experience" game moreso than a "strategy" game, but for what it does, and the niche it fills, there is none finer. If the current version of Minion Hunter mechanically stayed intact but benefited from the excellent production quality and marketing that someone like Fantasy Flight Games is able to apply to a game, it would easily be among their top rated games, quickly outdistancing Lord of the Rings, Fury of Dracula and Arkham Horror as the best cooperative game in their library.

RATING MODIFIERS:
9.0 Base rating
+ .5 Nostalgia bias (still have warm fuzzies recalling previous plays)
+ .5 Best In Show bias (best cooperative game I've played)
- .5 For Components (especially the money)

FINAL RATING: 9.5/10

The Hype About Skype >> As Good As It Sounds

2006-02-08T07:14:00.000-08:00

I recently read a post on BoardGameGeek discussing something called "Skype." I had never heard of it before, and had no idea what it was, but I am so glad I asked! Skype is a free download software package that allows for voice conversation over your standard internet connection -- think if it as internet phone service, but instead of dialing a phone number, you're "dialing" another user via their online connection.

I was skeptical at first, after having shaky results from voice chat over AIM, MSN Messenger and Yahoo! Messenger. But after trying it out, I have to say, the sound quality on Skype is incredible. It's better than our cell phones, better than our land line -- the best online voice chat I've used.

And Skype is incredibly easy to use. It took less than five minutes to download, and installed quickly -- you don't need to fill out any technical information about your computer settings to set it up. Once installed, just plug in a microphone or headset/microphone combo and you're ready to go. There's a quick "test" call you can use to make sure everything is set up properly -- then you're ready to roll!

It sounds so simple, but given the fact that Skype works so well and is completely free (both to download and to use) it offers some delicious gaming applications.

I've already used Skype to chat with several of my GeekBuddies -- literally from coast-to-coast -- while playing games at BrettSpielWelt, and have to say, it is a phenomenal resource. Especially for two player games. The ability to chat freely over Skype offers an unmatched means to teach a new player how to play a game online, answer quick questions about the user interface and discuss the game events -- things that may be too clumsy or time-consuming to adequately do by typing mid-game.

I have not yet tried a larger "chat" with 3 or more people on Skype, but I would certainly give it a try. More voices may be a bit distracting, especially without the visual cues you use during normal conversation to pick up on nonverbal context (even for things as basic as "who is talking? whose voice is that?"). But with the right group of people and the right game, I think Skype can richly enhance a variety of online gaming experiences!

You can check out Skype here. If you decide to download Skype and want to give it a try some time and play something online at BSW, drop me a line -- or give me a quick e-call!

Chester "Iron Cornjob" Ogborn >> The Gaming Equivalent of the '85 Bears... At least for one night...

2006-02-05T10:47:00.000-08:00

Well, I'm (sometimes) man enough to know when I've been whupped. And last night was one of those times. I haven't seen such a dominating performance since the 1985 Chicago Bears. Chester "Iron Cornjob" Ogborn schooled four of us repeatedly all night long...

Sure, it started out with a simple three player game of Ra, in which my third period score was actually higher than either other player's Final Score... Chester placed second as the scores rolled in 49, 32, 2... But that was just the pre-season, and as we all know, the pre-season don't mean Ditka.

Once our fourth player, Phil, showed up, the regular season kicked into gear, and Chester put his game plan into overdrive.

Keythedral came up first, and despite some rules ambiguities about some of the Law Cards, upon further review, there was insufficient contextual evidence to overturn the call we made on the field. The on-spot rulings benefited Chester in the long run, but even without those interpretations, he played a dazzling game with stellar defense and a coordinated offensive assault on adjacent resources. Chester reeled in 63 pts, with Chris and Jay tying for 2nd with 52... Poor Phil, the latecomer, wobbled in with 45 pts.

A brief but bloody game of Mall of Horror ensued. Rather than mix it up, Chester let everyone else duke it out for victim votes and goods from the truck out in the parking lot, and he "evaded" his way to a solid victory, scoring 8 points, while Chris and Phil -- rather than kill one of Chester's pieces and create a closer game *and* a 3-way tie for 2nd -- opted to kill Jay's last character on the final game, figuring a 2-way tie for second felt a lot better than a 3-way tie for Not First.

Next up, we decided to put Chester's steel like nerves and coordination to the test with some competitive Hamsterolle, which went over surprisingly well. With surgical precision, Chester carried Phil into a joint team victory. Chris and Jay quickly called for a rematch and won the second game, which was the only thing that kept Chester undefeated (hence the comparison to the Bears and not the Dolphins).

Switching gears to see how well Chester would adapt to relentless assaults from all sides, we moved on to El Grande. Despite an early scoring drive, Jay quickly fell by the wayside as Chester and Phil crushed everyone in their way. Chris and I thought the team/coop game was over once we finished Hamsterolle, but apparently they didn't get the message. The final scores were an amazing Chester/Phil tied for 1st with 117, Chris in 3rd with 86 and me dragging ass with 85. And up until the 7th round, I actually thought I was doing well!

Hoping to exact a bit of revenge, I called for a game fix, pulling out the real ringer in my collection -- X-Bugs. Phil tried to warn the others I was pretty good, but considering his usual blowhard comments, they figured it was all a setup to highlight even more of my ineptitude. Chester and I were teamed up together, and a few well-placed shots by my Flyborgs quickly drove Phil out of the game... Then Chester and I double-teamed Chris until we finally cracked his tough defense and destroyed the final base needed for victory. I can't help but wonder -- did Chester win this final game because he was on my team, or did I only win because I was paired up with Chester? Analysts unanimously felt it was the latter.

Regardless, it was an amazing display of gamesmanship, strategy, derring-do and other superlatives. Look for the "Cornjob Shuffle" coming soon to an ESPN near you.

Caught Off Guard >> Humor from a Fellow Geek

2006-02-03T07:36:00.000-08:00

I was just reading a GeekList from fellow BGGer Eric Mowrer (ejmowrer) about Tired Old Themes for boardgames. Most are pretty much what you'd expect... Too many games about the Renaissance and princes vying for influence. Too many wargames focused on WWII instead of other conflicts. A zillion-and-one Catan's and -opoly games.

But I was a bit surprised to see Lord of the Rings/Middle Earth as an overdone theme. Mostly because I'm surprised someone else agrees with me that LotR is getting long in the tooth. It wouldn't be so bad if there were more great LotR games -- but with so many mediocre games bearing that license (LotR: The Search, I'm talking to you), it cheapens the overall theme.

But Eric Mowrer's comment about it cracked me up. In fact, I'm still chuckling about it now as I re-read this:

Ok, Frodo took the One Ring to Mt. Doom and destroyed it. It was very very hard. There were elves. I get it.

Thanks Eric, for the best out-loud laugh I've had in a loooong time. I needed that. :)

A Ton of New Games >> Mall of Horror, T&E Card Game, Vegas Showdown & More!

2006-01-30T08:12:00.000-08:00

Last night was a great night for gaming, despite running longer than expected. Got to play 2 games I had played before, but a whopping 4 games I hadn't played before -- one we enjoyed so much we played twice! Two of the games went on my "want" list right away... A third I had already purchased, based on reviews, and this affirmed the purchase.

Game 1: Carcassonne - Hunters and Gatherers

Justin: 172
Jay: 185

I arrived at Justin's place a bit earlier than the others, so we cracked open C:H&G... Neither of us had played in a while, but it reminded me of how solid a game -- especially for 2 players -- this tile laying masterpiece is. The bonus tiles are such a great addition. Once rule I hadn't realized before, but which adds a whole new decision point to the game, is that the person who caps off a forest with a gold nugget earns the bonus tile, even if that person doesn't score any points -- letting folks seal off an opponent's scoring option while snagging those precious tiles.

Bottom Line: 9.5/10 ... Nice variations provide enough differences to make it a unique experience from the traditional Carcassonne -- and a much more balanced, strategic game, in my opinion. The bonus tiles add quite a bit. A strong game, which helps streamline and fulfill the potential Carcassonne tempted us with.

Game 2: Mall of Horror first play!

Julia: 8 pts
Michael: 5 pts
Justin: 3 pts
Jay: 0 pts (dead after turn 9)
Chris: 0 pts (dead after turn 7)

I was eager to try this one out. I had just purchased it the day before, and had put together a nice player aid which I submitted to BGG. I think folks were a bit skeptical, and it took a fair bit to explain, but once it got underway, the game moved at a nice pace and there was lots of tension. Chris and I got chowed early, from a combination of poor planning on our part and clever powerbrokering by the others. In the first game, we sorely underestimated the value of the Security Chief, and the Security Office was overrun and closed after turn 3 -- so no Security Chief, no additional information to help us plan out our moves. And it wasn't until toward the end of the game that we realized how critical control of the parking lot is for distribution of those cards -- the cards and their division are one of the key features to establishing cliques and cementing assistance in the game. Wonderful, wonderful gameplay experience.

Bottom Line: 8/10 ... [ORIGINAL POST] I picked up Mall of Horror based on several recommendations and Tom Vasel's excellent review. Sounds like a nice, bloody game of backstabbing, betrayal, deception and getting other people in trouble -- basically an entire game of Diplomacy that can be wrapped up in an hour or less. After a quick read through the rules, I can't wait to try it out!

[UPDATE] 2 Plays, and it's as exciting and engaging as I had hoped. The tension and flow fits the zombie theme wonderfully. Players can find themselves eliminated very quickly, though, and reduced to the role of spectator early in the game. I was a bit surprised that the game seemed to slow down as players were eliminated, rather than speed up, and the last half of the game takes much longer to resolve than the first half -- opposite of my expectations for the theme and how these mechanics would work. Could be based on our play group, however... Still, a solid game with lots of deliciously evil powerbrokering decisions. And it's just so darn fun!!

Game 3: Razzia!

Chris: 33
Justin: 17
Jay: 12
Michael: 7

This is only the fourth time I've played Razzia... Which coupled with Ra's four plays, is all I need to know that I will probably never like this game format. It's utterly chaotic, with an illusion over control over your decisions. I also have not been able to use experience to help establish a better means to evaluate auction lots for competitive bidding -- or on those instances where I do evaluate them and want them, I'm consistently outbid by players with the higher values. Not a fan.

Bottom Line: 4/10 ... It's a lot like Ra... And that's not necessarily a good thing. The cards take up a heckuva lot of space, since they need to be clearly spread out so everyone can see what everyone else has at any given time. Feels like a lot of decisions are beyond your control, and a great deal of the game passes with very few interesting decisions. Far, far more luck than I was expecting. I'd play it again, but only if everyone absolutely had to play it and I got to pick the next game.

[UPDATE] Dropped yet another point. More plays just reveals more of what I don't like -- too many times you don't have a decision, instead the game decides for you. Turn 1 -- I'll take a hit instead of call an auction. Oh, Razzia was drawn... looks like there will be an auction anyway. So glad I made that decision. Turn 2 -- Oh look, another Razzia card. Turn 3 -- Oh look, another Razzia card. Turn 4 -- Oh look, another Razzia card. Where is my decision making again? Oh, and if you're behind in scoring after round 2, how on earth do you make up ground on someone?

Game 4: Euphrates & Tigris Card Game first play!

Michael: 4/5/6/11
Justin: 4/4/4/5
Chris: 3/4/5/5/
Jay: 3/3/3/5

This game was frustration, personified. I started with 1 Green, 1 Blue, 6 Red and no Grey. In fact, I didn't draw any Grey until turn 4, and then just a single card. I didn't even have an opportunity to score Grey points until turn 6... And by then my King was in a completed kingdom, so I had to spend 1 action to move him first. I really dislike having to spend a card from your hand to score in a color -- that not only lessens the value of Ships/Monuments, but exaggerates the luck factor of the poor draw. Needing 2 of any color to score for that color can seriously hamper your plans, and place further emphasis on the value of Traders... But don't have any Green in your hand? Well, then too bad -- enjoy getting beat up by the other players' traders, so they can grab the treasure and cement a huge lead. Standard hidden scoring would be fine, but I'm befuddled why you can't even look at your own score!! What? Adding an arbitrary memory element to this game feels ridiculous... Why add another reason to be frustrated?

Bottom Line: 4/10 ... What a disappointing game! I was hoping for a more streamlined, engaging game that still felt like T&E, but was simpler to grasp and quicker to play. It does play more quickly, but the game feels so herky jerky, and it plays so incredibly differently than the boardgame that it's a shame it uses the same name -- aside from lowest common denominator scoring in four colors and what triggers internal/external conflicts, the game feels awkward and remarkably unlike T&E.

Sure, you get a larger hand size (8 instead of 6) but the fact that you need a card of whatever color you want to score in your hand when scoring is triggered means you have fewer actual options. Also exaggerating the problem of being short-suited as in T&E because, for some reason, there is NO option to exchange cards!! Have bad cards? Can you only play cards to trigger battles you can't win or score points for other players? Too bad!!

Also a strange vibe that the only way you can get two kingdoms close to external conflict is to play enough cards to let the player on your left trigger the conflict -- it's nigh impossible to set up external conflict w/o receing an "alley oop" from the player to your right (intentionally or not).

Game 5: Vegas Showdown first play!

Chris: 46
Jay: 41
Justin: 41
Michael: 40

I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed Vegas Showdown. Despite being a lot of stuff going on, and much of it feeling eerily similar (the Knizia-esque scoring at the end, the Alhambra/PoF casino building, etc) it offers enough novelty and a fun theme to make it a very nice bidding alternative. Justin ran through the rules quickly, but after I heard the setup and first few rules, the rest felt intuitive based on seeing the scoring aid and seeing the bidding map. I wish I could have redone 1 or 2 actions over the course of the game, but overall, I'm pleased with how quickly I felt I picked up on it, and that I tied for second in a very close game.

Bottom Line: 8/10 ... Surprisingly impressed with the variety of options, interesting integration of the event cards, bidding and planning in this game. Timely theme based on the growing popularity of poker and gambling. Decent design, but poor component quality. The player mats are very flimsy, the larger cardboard tiles seem to warp horribly and the ultra-cheap poker chips for cash were disappointing. Still, lots of scoring methods, and it looks like it pays to be flexible while still offering a variety of approaches to take. Thoroughly enjoyed the game, and I could see playing this with a wide range of people... If the production quality were better, it'd go up to about 8.5 or so... Good "entry level" bidding game, with lots of variety and replay value due to the event cards. I felt my decisions mattered more than in something like Ra.

Game 6: King Me! first play!

Julia: 67
Chris: 66
Justin: 50
Jay: 48
Michael: 42

Cute, clever little game. The seeding at the beginning was fun, with a very light bluffing tone. Oddly enough, in our very first round, the very first noble ascending to the throne was crowned -- everyone assumed someone else would behead him. I believe Julia and Chris both had that noble on their score card, giving them pretty big leads early on... Since many of the other nobles hadn't even moved from their starting positions, the rest of the scoring was very low. It was also then that I realized that you get two veto/behead cards per round and not for the entire game. Oops -- My bad!

Bottom Line: 7/10 ... Cute, quick filler with neat voting dynamics, push your luck and pseudo bluffing elements. Only real downside is there are sooo many characters, and the color scheme/font are hard to distinguish, so you need to constantly adjust the markers or get a closer look to evaluate what's going on. Still, novel enough to stand on its own and provide a different experience than other fillers of the same length.

Game 7: Mall of Horror second play!

Justin: 7
Michael: 5
Chris: 5
Julia: 2 characters chomped on Round 15 (last round of game)
Jay: Last character chomped on Round 7...

I'm glad we played this one again, after learning the ropes earlier in the evening. A coalition of evil was formed on the first turn between Michael and Justin when all three of us found ourselves in the parking lot with our Gunmen and another character for 3 votes each and 2 zombies. Without any discussion, they opted to let the zombies eat both of my characters, forcing me to use an Axe after the first vote (killing my Pin Up) to at least keep 2 characters in the game.

Justin managed to maintain dominance of the parking lot for the entire game, earning a card 8 turns in a row. Since he had such a dominant card advantage, he was at little risk of zombie attacks in the parking lot and didn't lose his first character until Round 8. I was unsuccessful in convincing the other players to surge into the Parking Lot and seize control of the truck from him. Justin spread the bonus cards equally between Michael and Julia, to keep them on his side -- and Chris and I couldn't mount an effective counter assault on our own.

Julia had an early monopoly on the Security Chief role, wielding that power for 8 of the first 9 turns. Eventually Chris wrested it away from her for a few rounds, but by then I was already dead and couldn't do much to affect the game. My Tough Guy was killed in the Restaurant on turn 3, where Chris forced me at gunpoint to go make a nice zombie snack. A miscalculation on openings in a location forced my Gunman into the parking lot on Round 7, where Justin -- still sitting there with all three characters -- quickly dispatched me, and then used his plethora of cards to kill off the remaining zombies.

So I was out of the game on Round 7, before Julia, Justin and Chris had even lost their first character. I was a bit frustrated that instead of trying to target the other players with three characters (and in my mind, the biggest scoring threats to any of the others) they all seemed to prefer to remove me completely from the game first... I can see that making sense to be one step closer to the Security Chief for movement, but watching them play for the next hour wasn't as much fun... Only 2 group votes ever came up after that, and my single vote was meaningless in the outcome since the players still in the game had already decided how to resolve the vote.

The second half of the game took about 50% longer than the first half, as there was far more deal brokering -- or at least discussion -- for mutual survival, and there were far fewer zombies manifesting on the board. Two locations shut down, so while it limited the destination options, there were fewer people left, so far fewer conflicts for the open spots in locations... And no zombies showed up when the two closed locations were rolled, so on a few turns, only 1 or 2 zombies appeared, resulting in 5 turns in a row when nobody died right before the end.

Then on the fateful Round 15, with no Security Officer, Julia tried moving into a booked room, leaving one character to fend for himself in the SuperMarket, and forcing the other into the Parking Lot. Enough zombies showed up at both locations to munch both of her characters, leaving only three characters in the game, triggering the end.

A special tip of the hat to Michael, who lost his first character on Round 2, and his second character on Round 4... Despite being 4th to act in the movement phase, he was rarely shunted to the Parking Lot, and was able to move his single remaining character around and survive 11 rounds to the end of the game, and amazing streak!

Quick Hits >> Attika, Basari and Cloud 9

2006-01-24T21:42:00.000-08:00

Got some good three player gaming in tonight with Jorge and Eva. I gave Hacienda another go, which I'll admit is better with three than with five. I won a close game (beating Eva by 1 point... One point!!) but things still feel a bit empy. The final score was 125-134-100...

The best part of the night was getting to try three new games. I recently acquired Attika and Basari via trade, and Jorge & Eva offered up Cloud 9 as a nice, light filler that works well at the local boardgame meetups. Here's how things went.

Basari
Jorge: 104
Eva: 90
Jay: 83

I tried picking roles I felt the others were also picking, to get in on as many trades as possible, rather than trying to pick actions I thought would benefit me the most -- as such, when I guessed wrong, I was left with marginally useful results. On the last two turns, they were able to make some mutually beneficial bribes that catapulted Eva from last place to contention, blowing past me in the process.

Bottom Line: 6.5/10 Nice, light game of guesswork, a bit of bluffing, and trying to figure out what your opponents want. I like the bartering system of escalating bids to bribe another player for the right to use an action. The board, however, is clumsy -- I can now see the attraction to the card decks used in Ein, Stein & Reich, the revisioning of Basari.

--

Cloud 9
Jorge: 36
Eva: 58
Jay: 52

Not really much to report on strategy. I made some poor guesses, and threw some dice combinations I didn't have the cards to back up. It's pretty light, even for a filler, but the fun is in the interaction and chit-chat more than the decision making.

Bottom Line: 6.5/10 Harmless, light and fluffy filler fun. A bit of card counting and risk management is all the decision making there is to find in this breezy push your luck game. Quick pace, ultra-easy rules and a light theme work well. Nice, sturdy cards, but the long game board is one of the most horribly warped monstrosities I've ever seen -- with so many pronounced folds and backfolds, it never lays flat, so the scoring markers slide all over the place. The board drops it down half a point from a 7.

--

Attika
Jorge: 29
Eva: 26
Jay: 30 (all tiles placed)

Jorge and Eva had played 2 player games online, and quickly grew disenchanted by the overwhelming role of luck in the early game, but were up for giving the three player game a try. I struggled trying to figure out the best placement of tiles to maximize efficiency, but I do think I made some good decisions to go along with my above average luck of the draw. Eva was seriously hampered by having her starting city, Corinth, on the bottom of her "black" pile of chits, while Jorge and I had our starting cities at the top. A very close game, as only the use of two amphorae at the very end gave me the extra actions I needed to win -- with exactly the right number/mix of cards in my hand to build my last building, the silver mine!

Bottom Line: 6/10 I really like the components and feel of the gameplay pacing, but I was taken aback at the huge role of luck. If one player gets their core city as the first draw from their stack of black tiles, they have a huge advantage over someone with that starting city further down the stack. If that can be addressed, I do like the efficiency decisions facing players, and the cascade effect of building structures for free or reduced costs if timed properly. As is, the outcome is determined by the setup of the player's tile stacks more than their decisions. Once you balance the starting tile draws, the rest of the game is quite enjoyable, and would probably hover right around a 7.

Hacienda >> Initial Reaction

2006-01-22T09:00:00.000-08:00

Got my first playing of Hacienda in last night. It wasn't my copy, and I was taught the rules -- I can't help but think (hope?) that we must have had some rules wrong, because I was surprised at how much I felt was lacking from the game.

Comparisons to Ticket to Ride and Through the Desert are obvious, but the game does offer some interesting twists on both games. Unfortunately, it includes some of my least favorite aspects of TTR -- the face up draw piles, where having matching cards available on your turn saves you precious actions, while invariably some players have to churn actions to get into playable positions. Otherwise, I think the similarities to TTR are mostly superficial, while TtD provides a roughly comparable gameplay experience.

I also was shocked that there was no balancing system to soften the player order advantage to going early (or rather, the huge disadvantages to going later) especially in a five player game. I'd play it again, but I think Through the Desert offers an overall superior experience in roughly half the time.

Gut feeling rating: 5/10. Probably would peak at a 6 if we found some rules inconsistencies or mistakes. I just don't see how the decision making or interaction would carry this much higher than a 6. I'd love to be wrong, though, since the production quality is superb.

More on what I felt was a significant player disadvantage for going last.

In the asymmetric map, the first 4 players all have the opportunity to make a 2 action move that places land and then an animal to connect a market, while being adjacent to water. And then they still have a third action to draw a card or commit another animal.

Meanwhile, the last player must use all three actions to connect to a market in this way, including the use of a pampas terrain card or a non-money making animal card in order to do so.
So they lose out on the water terrain scoring and actually have to invest more actions unless they deliberately make an aggressive opening move to place tiles at an already occupied market/watering hole, a decision that forces them into confrontation with another player for purely arbitrary reasons.

I also realized that the last player is disadvantaged by several other factors:

1) The last player has fewer overall turn options to purchase water or hacienda. As limited resources with a discrete counter mix, these two scoring items are harder to acquire for the last player in turn order. Each water source has to "get past" 4 other players in order for the last player to purchase one. Getting one for free doesn't disincentive other players from purchasing additional ones -- so they're all contested. It's just that the last player has the worst position to purchase and benefit from these.

2) The last player has far fewer potential turns/actions than the other players due to the half and end game conditions. When the animal draw pile is exhausted, a scoring round is triggered. If this happens early in the turn, the last player has fewer options -- it's quite likely that few, if any, animal cards will be left face up to select from, so the common draw and play an animal in the same turn option is not available, leaving them with fewer opportunities to take scoring/earning turns at the end of a round.

3) Since they don't have access to water immediately, they have 1 fewer total action available to them over the course of the entire game if they want to even the playing field -- they have to invest an action to purchase water which other players get for free. If the others get just 1 or 2 VPs from their initial water placement, it's worth it, since they didn't have to invest anything in that.

4) Simply to balance out starting positions, that person also has to spend 12 gold to normalize the situation. This means investing cash (and 1.2 VP) to get water they need a maximum return on -- they can't afford to spend the action AND the gold if they're only to score 2 or 3 total VPs for the water/hacienda placement, unlike someone who starts with this option for free.

I just don't get it.

Scoring Results (1st half/interim scoring in parenthesis)
listed in turn order -- I was 4th of 5 players
Justin: 70 (20)
Trey: 73 (21)
Julia: 36 (12)
Jay: 96 (37)
Chris: 25 (74)

I seriously won purely by opportunity. It's not necessarily that I played better, but we were all learning the game and didn't fully appreciate all the scoring nuances until the interim scoring. Had we cleared the board and started over right then and there, I think things would have been far different. I had one goal and one goal only in mind from the outset -- build a big land mass. That's it.

As it was, I was the only player to score a land chain in the first half -- 8 land tiles with a hacienda for 31 of my 37 points right there. Rather than try to cut me off and restrict that territory from growing further, folks basically conceded and started playing for 2nd place, allowing me to add 4 more tiles to that in the second half. By the end of the game, I only had 3 markets linked -- virtually all my points came from that enormous land chain, and purchasing 2 water spaces I could completely enclose with my tiles.

So it was definitely an aberration, and a game which would be very unlikely to occur again. But it was a learning experience. Ultimately, I learned that unless I was missing something fairly significant about the gameplay, decisions or scoring, that Hacienda probably won't have much to offer me, and doesn't really provide anything unique or compelling.

Best Case Scenario >> Surgery Was a Success!!

2006-01-13T14:54:00.000-08:00

As some of you may know, I have chronic back problems, which had been getting worse and worse over the last year or so. After a battery of tests and exams late in '05, I had back surgery scheduled for Thursday, January 12th -- 9 years and 10 days after my last back surgery (which took place on my 24th birthday).

Amazingly, I'm already back home. In fact, I was released at 7:30 PM on Thursday, literally 12 hours after the surgery was completed that morning.

The surgery and so far recovery have gone incredibly well. The percoset (SP?) I'm on for pain makes me groggy and a little disoriented, but that's better than the flaring pain from the surgery area.

The surgery, a hemi-discectomy/decompression of the L3/L4 and L4/L5 vertebrae, helped relieve pressure on my spinal cord caused by vertebral stenosis -- more or less small bone spurs in the vertebrae that constricted the spinal cord and would cause severe pain and numbness in my hips and legs. The incision was about 3 inches long, and looks pretty nasty, but is much cleaner and more efficient than the last time I had this surgery.

In 1997, the surgery site was closed with eight metal staples -- not very pretty, and it left a really nasty scar. This time, the incision was closed with dissolvable sutures, which will eventually go away on their own. Since the surgery was in the same location, the incision this time around sits almost directly on top of the scar from last time, making for a pretty yucky looking lower back. It's a good thing I gave up my aspirations as a lower back model ages ago.

I'm hoping to be back to a regular (albeit light and restricted) schedule starting the middle of next week...

The real trick is to find a way to use the computer from a reclined position -- most comfortable on my back, but least functional for a computer. Sitting is the worst possible position, since it puts so much strain and pressure on the base of the spine, right at the site of my surgery. Good thing I've got a decent laptop...

Thanks to all the well-wishers out there who sent me words of encouragement or prayed for a successful surgery! I really appreciate the support and thoughtfulness. Things have progressed very well so far and I'm confident I'll have a full and healthy recovery.

Mesopotamia >> Initial Thoughts

2006-01-10T21:04:00.000-08:00

I got one last night of gaming in to tide me over for the rest of the month, and was able to try Mesopotamia, Klaus-Jürgen "Carcassonne" Wrede's new game from Phalanx/Mayfair. I'm curious if any of you blog readers have had a chance to play it yet...

Here's my initial reaction of the game after that one play:

Interesting game with superficial similarities to Tikal. Another game of having to maximize turn efficiency, as you get very few actions per turn to accomplish a lot of things.

The action cards seem a bit unwieldy and out of balance with the value of other actions, but that could just be based on how our game panned out. My action cards were always useful to my current plans, while others got cards that were more or less wasted (such as some of the exploration cards later in the game).

I wanted to like the game more, but it seemed that there was far more indirect conflict and interaction than direct (at least, efficient and direct) means to really interfere with the plans of other players.

It felt like it was missing something -- a mechanic, a scoring element,a turn option -- to jack up the level of immersion. I think there's a definite potential for players to have turns that benefit other players more than themselves (such as in Hansa, by virtue of the final position of the boat), but it may be so subtle that it's hard to spot or evaluate. Sometimes this may be through poor play, but with the random nature of the action cards and exploration, it could very well be through good planning stymied by bad luck.

I rarely spent actions exploring, never built a temple (or whatever you call the piece where your workers can gain mana) and basically used the same approach I use with Torres -- get as many guys onto the board as possible as early as you can, grab action cards, and remain flexible.

I ended up winning our first game, with 2 other novices and 1 experienced player. I was only targeted once by others' action cards (such as stealing my mana, which is required to pay for your sacrifices), which could have hamstrung me more if I had been heavily targeted. But I still ended up winning.

However, I don't think I necessarily made better or more efficient decisions... Though perhaps, for a learning game, I did make better decisions based on early comprehension and sticking with my initial Torres-style plan -- plans and decisiont that simply wouldn't hold up against more experienced players. From that regard, it's really hard to judge the game based on just this one play.

The Bottom Line: I'd play itagain, but unless something reveals itself after another game or two, I don't think Mesopotamia would go much higher than a 6/10 rating in my book.

Happy 33rd to Me >> The Worst Birthday Ever

2006-01-03T09:39:00.000-08:00

Monday, January 2nd, was my 33rd birthday. I've had some real stinkers before, but this one really took the proverbial cake (no cake was actually taken or consumed on this birthday, however). My parents literally forgot about (or chose not to celebrate) my 18th birthday, so I wandered aimlessly out into the cold Wisconsin night for several hours. I had my first major back surgery on my 24th birthday, and woke up from surgery alone in a hallway, unable to feel anything from the waist down.

But this one was even better. At 5:15 AM, the tornado warning sirens went off as the electricity went out. Our family scrambled to grab flashlights and blankets and make our way down into the basement. My back is aching terribly, and is much worse in the morning before I've had a chance to take any medicine or stretch out -- fumbling around in the dark for flashlights and going back and forth up the stairs was agonizing.

Ben, almost three now, was pretty good, but was starting to get scared. He really had no idea what was going on. We eventually made our way back upstairs around 7 AM, and called the utility company, Ameren UE, to find out when the electricity would be back on. It was scheduled to be back online around 7:30 AM, so we decided to go out for breakfast to Denny's for my birthday.

After a grease-filled breakfast, we were all feeling pretty ill, but drudged back home to find the electricity was still off. Another call to Ameren UE told us it'd be up by 8:30 AM for sure. This time we took a shopping trip to Target and Best Buy to kill time. Upon our return, the electricity was still off. And by now I was really feeling lousy -- a headache and mild fever accompanied the sour stomach from breakfast. And the house had gotten pretty darn cold.

We drudged off to the mall, and returned to find the electricity still off. Ben started to get more and more concerned that our house was broken and started to get really fussy and ornery. Couldn't blame him -- I was getting really fussy and ornery, too. I was starting to become a wreck, and we were wondering if we had to find somewhere else to spend the night.

The electricity didn't come back on until almost 9:45 PM that night. Just long enough that some frozen goods had to be thrown out, as well as several things from the fridge (nothing like room temperature milk). And the leftover ice cream cake from Xmas -- earmarked for birthday consumption -- had completely disintegrated into a morass of goo.

When I broke down just after dinner and growled to Trish it was the worst birthday ever, Ben piped up and said "It's your birthday? Happy Birthday daddy!" ... Suddenly it wasn't so bad after all. Then he gave me a great big hug and said "It's ok to be scared of the dark, daddy. I love you."

Then Ben ate a snack and took a bath, in the dark, without so much as a fuss. Then scurried off to bed and gave me a big hug before drifting off to sleep. And he didn't make a peep until morning.

After Ben was in bed, Trish and I sat around in the dark, listening to some of the CDs we used to listen to while we were still dating, and talking about how it could have been much, much worse. We only lost our power -- no one was hurt, nothing was destroyed. We had clean drinking water. We had all our clothes. Our house was still standing.

Did I say worst birthday ever? It ended up being pretty special after all. In fact, I'm sure I'll remember this birthday far longer than many others.

He's Not Heavy, He's My Brother >> Classifying Heavy Games

2005-12-29T23:36:00.000-08:00

Just posted my first GeekList in a while over at BGG, taking a closer look at the classifcation of some games as "heavy" or "heavier" than other games -- what's the basis for the comparison? Here's the lede-in text and the first entry. You can read the list in its entirety over at BoardGameGeek.com.

----

Over the course of my gaming toward the end of 2005, I've been involved in some thought-provoking and interesting discussions with several of my GeekBuddies about "heavy" games -- an adjective that gets bandied about quite a bit for a variety of games. But what does "heavy" really mean? Perhaps we can find out together.

This GeekList attempts to define characteristics that games considered "heavy" seem to feature. Not all characteristics are shared by all games, but I think there are a few common elements that -- for most people -- help determine whether or not a game is "heavy" for them.

First and foremost, I think heaviness, like beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder. It's a personal metric combining gameplay preferences, experience comparisons and complexity thresholds. I also add some "false positive" listings... Terms that seem to be used interchangeably with heavy, which I don't think are quite the same (again, based on my admittedly biased and personal metric).

What do you think?
Do some of these characteristics seem more applicable than others to the "heaviness" of a game?
Have I overlooked some important attributes?
Have some games shifted in your perception, from heavy to non-heavy (or back) with repeated playings?
What is the single heaviest game, in your opinion -- and why?

Significant Impact of Decisions

I think this is one of the most important (if not *the* most important) factor in classifying a heavy game. Decisions can be important in all sorts of games -- even light filler games... But for heavy games, the impact is much more pronounced (it may be subtle, but have significant ramifications).

A game that adds significance and impact to each and every decision often has a "heavier" feel to it than a game where you may be able to recover from suboptimal or "whimsical" moves. For me, this means that you can't take a single decision lightly, or possibly that one poor decision can mean the difference between winning and losing.

Age of Steam exemplifies this with regard to issuing stocks and the tight money management necessary to keep from going bankrupt -- each move, each decision carries the risk of possibly putting yourself out of the game.

(click here to read the complete list)

Additional Holiday Swag

2005-12-27T22:18:00.000-08:00

Aside from things brought by Santa himself (cleverly disguised as my wife) or acquired immediately before Xmas, I also scored some additional Xmas/Birthday swag (my birthday is Jan 2nd, so we usually split the difference for gift giving). Clix, a local hobby shop in St. Louis (the only one that actually stocks euro/designer games first and foremost instead of comics or CCGs) had a huge sale -- nearly everything was 25% off, with an added 10% off for my frequent buyer card.

I'm sooo glad I took the time to drive out there"just in case" (it's about a 35 minute drive). As you can see, it was WELL worth it. Today I snagged:

- San Juan
- Coloretto
- Buyword
- Pass the Pigs
- RK's Poison
- Siena

All at 35% off retail. I only stopped my shopping and cut the list short because my son (not quite 3 yet) was VERY insistent that we leave the store immediately. Otherwise, I may have snagged even more!

So far, Poison is a nice, fun card diversion, and I'm really glad to finally get a copy of Buyword and Coloretto. Siena is a beautiful looking game with some real promise, but has some of the most horribly written rules I have ever read (and I muddled through Time Control). Extremely confusing, and the board, though beautiful, is confounding, as the board is merely a large painting, with no visual boundaries for the various regions where gameplay actions take place. Hopefully the gameplay is worth the annoyance, as there's a glitter of promise underneath.

Whaddya' Get? Whaddya' Get?

2005-12-26T12:48:00.000-08:00

So what gaming hauls did y'all rake in this holiday season?

Trish got me Red Hot Yott, a Yahtzee variant... While it's hardly a strategic or deep game, Yahtzee and Cribbage both have a special place in our relationship, as the two main games we played while dating, and subsequently in the earliest years of our marriage before being exposed (converted?) to Euro/designer games.

If you count trades and purchases monitored and approved by my wife (just as good as getting one all wrapped up, if you ask me), I also acquired Attika and Caylus. Caylus was a real find and I can't wait to get it to the table!

The belle of the ball, though, has to be the massive 500 page Game of Thrones RPG book. While it's a role playing game and not a boardgame, we're both huuuuuge fanes of the George R.R. Martin fantasy series, and the book has approved background and historical content for the GRRM novel settings -- making it a great read as well as a very interesting RPG game setting.

That's pretty much it. But my birthday is next week (Jan 2) and I've been told I have to wait "all the way 'til next year" to get more games. I'm hoping Santiago, Schotten-Totten, Tower of Babel or Traumfabrik might be in the mix...

Caylus >> First Impressions & Observations

2005-12-18T09:22:00.000-08:00

Played my first game and a half of Caylus last night (2nd game stopped due to player illness). I deliberately kept from reading ANY of the hype -- no articles, reviews, session reports or even GeekList comments about the game. I didn't want the fervent hype to completely overwhelm me and create a situation where a game couldn't possibly live up to my expectations (such as War of the Ring, which I feel is, at best, a mediocre game, made worse by my unbridled enthusiasm to try it, only to be sorely crushed at how mundane the game itself was).

I ended up really enjoying my first game, and we talked about it quite a bit afterward, spurring us to start up a second game. But oddly enough, I failed to use any of the knowledge gained from our first game in the second, and made serious strategic blunders in each of the first four turns, firmly cementing myself a good 20 points behind the leaders once the Tower was scored. Thankfully the game was called, as it was wholly embarrassing to make such terribly (and obviously) poor moves.

One thing that came up in discussion after our game is that we felt the game may eventually start to feel like Goa... The first few games of Goa were amazing, then each one after that slightly less so, as a sort of "been there, done that" feeling emerged. Eventually, the experience began to follow roughly the same course from game to game.

Since everything is essentially available from the get-go in Caylus, I can't help but wonder (and it's purely speculation at this point) if this game will eventually have Puerto Rico/Goa-esque opening moves and strategies, to the point that a good portion of the opening sequences feel scripted, and the only reason to stray from a pre-ordained plan is the unforeseen moves by your opponents.

Certainly some actions and buildings are better than others, and the value of actions varies based on player goals and strategies, but there's something I can't quite put my finger on that makes me think Caylus may end up following suit and eventually stop feeling like I'm playing the game, but rather the game is playing itself, with me as the observer. Fortunately, I think that will be a good, long time down the road.

Oh, my biggest beef with the game is currently the length. Our first game, a three player game, took 3.5 hours, which is incredibly long given the "game experience yield" that we took away from it. It was a rewarding game the first time, but if we can't shave at least an hour off the game with familiarity, I don't know how often I'd be up for playing it... For the take away experience, it "feels" like it should wrap up in about 2 hours.

So after pondering it a bit, and finally breaking down and looking at some comments and reviews, I've formed my own rating so far... My BGG Comment:

--

I can see why this game is so well received, and while I've enjoyed the games so far, I'm not completely sold on the game. I love the build-as-you-go path of actions, and there are a lot of options available to the players. The value of the actions also seems to vary quite a bit depending on how far into the game you are.

The biggest downside is that the turns get excessively long the further into the game you are -- more tiles and options open up, dragging the game to a slow grind as more and more calculations are required. The brisk pace at the beginning is soon replaced by a plodding finale.

Also, the game can get especially nasty, as players get targeted and hurt by actions meant to target the leader. The bridge/vizier/whatever-his-name-is movement (any actions after that counter are not taken) can be especially vicious... If someone wants to target the leader and the current last place person happens to be in the way, that last place person suffers even more. In fact, someone who feels "out" of the game early can heavily influence the game simply by jockeying that token around and threatening to play the kingmaker -- an element so easily abusable that it must certainly be intentional, which seems odd.

The game features many excellent strategic options and sports some very interesting and game elements. With more play, and better skills to evaluate the worth of buildings and actions, I could see this becoming an 8 or so... Still, Puerto Rico and Aladdin's Dragons provide some of the same experience, but in half the time or less.

Current Rating: 7/10

Beowulf >> Nuts n' Bolts Review

2005-12-07T10:57:00.000-08:00

Overview: I picked up Beowulf at GenCon 2005 based on a GeekBuddy recommendation. This Reiner Knizia offering promised a mix of familiar card play blended with some risk/reward elements, and for my gaming tastes, does not disappoint, despite a few quirks.

Components: I love the artwork on the board and box, the Howe illustrations really evoke a mood and feel. The cards are sturdy and stand up to repeated shuffling well, but are visually unremarkable. The board and cards share a strong resemblence to the components from RK's Lord of the Rings coop game. Functional, but not fancy.

My biggest problem is the layout of the gameboard. With its odd 3/4 board, the actual game track still takes up only a small percentage of the board's real estate -- the spaces and text on the board are far, far too small, making it very difficult to glance at the board from around the table and see what's coming up. It's hard to plan ahead without constantly asking someone to read off spaces on the board.

The Beowulf tracking figure (moved along the gameboard to indicate the current location) is nice, and the wooden disks are functional. Overall, the production is fair. It works, it's sturdy, but it's not going to knock your socks off.

Gameplay: Without getting into too much detail, I'll say that the gameplay is predominantly hand management by way of using your cards to bid and leverage yourself to win rewards at different stops along the game track. The game is played in a series of hands, where different rewards (or penalties) are available based on how well players use the cards in their hands. When all cardplay at one location is complete, players "draft" the rewards for the current space based on how they fared, then move on to the next space on the board.

The "episode" spaces on the board, where players compete for rewards, come in two varieties -- face down secret wagers and clockwise bidding from your hand. In both cases, players use cards from their hand (with suits based on the space you're on) as bidding power. The player with the most icons of the matching suits (face down bids), or the last player to stay "in" a hand by matching the previous bids (clockwise bids) drafts the reward for that space first.

The board is linear, and the rewards are static, but the game is not nearly as repetitive as I would have thought. Some spaces have several good rewards, or a few devastating penalties. This presents players with interesting hand management decisions -- is it really important enough to spend X number of cards to select my reward first, or can I get away with playing fewer cards, and still get a decent reward, saving my hand strength for later.

The Rub: The biggest issue for me is the Risk option. On many of the episode spaces, the player has the option to take a Risk and draw cards from the top of the deck instead of playing cards from his hand. Any cards drawn that match the required suit count toward your play. If you fail to draw a matching card, you get a scratch (which can turn into wounds, which count against your score at game end).

While this sounds harmless, it's a very luck-driven aspect to a Knizia game, and seems a bit out of place here since the penalty for failing to risk (a scratch) is not a strong enough disincentive. It's almost always worth the risk to tempt fate, since odds are you'll succeed. At any time, 3 of the 6 suits will help you in the episode -- the two main suits required by that episode, and the Beowulf wild cards. Over the course of the game someone who succeeds more often than not has a very distinct and clear card advantage that is incredibly difficult to overcome.

Given a standard probability curve, someone's going to fare well and someone will get shafted. This would really stink in a long game, but if it's played at a social pace, and wraps up in what I think should be 30-45 minutes, it's not so bad.

Impressions: I am actually quite fond of Beowulf, despite its odd risk element. The only downside in my previous playings of Beowulf was playing it with some professional poker players -- they wanted to know how many cards everyone had at all times, and tracked the discards so they could calculate perfect odds on each card draw. That took some of the suspense out of the game. Still, played briskly and with the right crowd of laid back players, I thoroughly enjoy Beowulf with 4 and 5... Though with a smaller spread of rewards and less anxiety in the bidding, Beowulf is not nearly as engaging with only 3.

Bottom Line: 7/10 Fun game with interesting, light decisions. I can see this holding fairly significant replay value for 4-5 players as it plays quickly and the decisions are important, but not taxing or paralyzing. Beowulf shines when played at a brisk pace, as friendly competition and interesting risk/reward dynamics make this a refreshing game despite many familiar mechanics.

BoardGameGeek >> Taking Stock of the Site

2005-12-02T06:18:00.000-08:00

A recent announcement by Tom Vasel over on BoardGameGeek.com, stating that he was moving his excellent Musings On... commentary and other select content exclusively to the www.boardgamenews.com site. This has sparked quite a bit of debate at BGG, with feelings ranging from betrayal to encouragement. I've had the pleasure of participating in several of Tom's Musings On... discussions, which recently focused on BGG itself as the main topic.

Here are my thoughts on the place of BGG in the gaming community.

----

It's hard for me to have anything but glowing remarks for BGG, as it has dramatically changed the way I game -- and all for the better.

First and foremost, it is the ultimate game information tool, from the database entries to reviews, user comments, session reports and user submitted player aids. I would go so far as to say that a good quarterof my 500+ game collection is directly attributable to the information and access BGG provides. In fact, I would never even have heard of, let alone gotten the opportunity to play/purchase gems like die Macher, El Grande, Um Reifenbreite, Hansa, Santiago or Wallenstein were it not for the information *and* insights available on BGG.

Secondly, the BGG community (warts and all) has become my "workplace" of sorts. As a guy who works from home, I don't have a convenient office water cooler to stand around and chit chat with co-workers. For the last three or four years, BGG has been my main social outlet during the long work days. It's great to be able to hop online and check out a review of a new game, read over a GeekList, or get involved in an interesting forum topic.

Just like a real job, sometimes you're stuck working with people you don't like. In this case, irritating, rude or inflammatory posts and users. So I do my best to ignore them and focus on those I like being around. A ridiculously small price to pay for what I get out of it.

Even more importantly, BGG has led to finding gaming friends. Over the last year alone, I've met a dozen people via BGG whom I never would have had the opportunity to meet otherwise. Some are casual gaming acquaintances, some I see regularly, others I can get some PBEM gaming in with...

* Is BGG trying to do too much? Perhaps, but if what they do garners more interest and attention for my favorite hobby, it's hard to see itas a bad thing... Even bad press, as they say, is good press. There will always be content, comments and contributors I disagree with or that come across as elitist and caustic. Thankfully that sort of content is fairly easy to avoid or bypass.

* Should BGG really come out with their own award? I don't see how it can be a bad thing. If it's embraced, great! BGG's clout is recognized and more people come to use and interact with this community. If it fails miserably, there's no tangible negative impact that I can imagine. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

* Has BGG become too commercial? Perhaps, but who am I to complain? BGG is a phenomenal free resource... Many other sites charge subscription fees yet offer only a fraction of the content available on BGG. I can't blame Derk & Aldie for trying to make money on their creation.

All that said, I do think there has been a dramatic shift in the general attitude on BGG within the last 12-18 months. There's no longer the sense of the small, diehard group of enthusiasts, glad to stumble into the site that there once was. Topics and comments are more vitriolic. There seems to be less adherence to the "unwritten rules" of online conduct as wave after wave of anonymous users surge into BGG and look to apply the same attitudes and behavior that they've used elsewhere.

Stuff n' Junk n' Things >> A Look at the Last Week

2005-11-18T07:59:00.000-08:00

This past week has been pretty hectic. Just wrapped up the most recent medical study I was participating in, finished revising all the game materials for the prototype based on last week's playtests and fended off the flu. An exhausting, and only moderately productive, week.

I haven't gotten much gaming in over the last few weeks -- a short night of Tichu last week, a few games of Monkey Madness with my toddler, and some time grinding away on World of Warcraft. This week, there was also a brief appearance at Wednesday night's Boardgame Meetup Group. A fellow BGG Geek, Joel Glidden from Arkansas, was in St. Louis for business, and I was happy to help set up some gaming for him at the meetup while he was here. We played a few games of Tsuro (which I'm actually quite fond of for the 10 minute time killer that it is -- and it plays well with 3, 4 and 6!) an overly-long game of Cartagena then quick games of For Sale and Metro.

But my gaming fortunes look pretty good for the coming weeks. Friday night and Saturday night I'm going to get some more playtesting in for my prototype, and hope to get a bit of additional gaming in, as well... Perhaps Age of Steam or Ra (both of which I've promised I would give another chance to), Amun-Re, El Grande, Alexandros... Heck, at this point I really don't care, I just wanna' game!

Then next week marks the return of the D&D Campaign that MUKid from BGG has been running. It's a great campaign set in Eberron with some interesting military and political wrinkles -- and I'm really looking forward to getting to roleplay again after nearly 2 months without any RPG gaming!! I'm dying to run some games myself, especially Call of Cthulhu, Deadlands, Little Fears or the new edition of Warhammer FRPG, but it's been tough to find the time and players.

The real bright spot over the last week has been getting to read! While locked away in the medical study over the weekend, I churned through the first 400 pages of George R.R. Martin's Feast for Crows, the 4th book in the Song of Ice and Fire series (re: A Game of Thrones). I finished the rest of the book in the following two days, which for me is a Herculean feat -- it took me 2 years to finish Lord of Chaos (Robert Jordan, Wheel of Time book 5? 6?). I'm a notoriously slow reader, and often am only a quarter of the way through a book by the time my wife's finished reading it and moved on to the next. It's crazy to be all done, dying to talk about what happened in Feast of Crows, while she's still reading the first chapter!

Playtest Reactions >> So Far, So Good!

2005-11-11T09:45:00.000-08:00

I ran 5 playtests of the initial prototype Wednesday, from 10 am to about 10 pm... With teaching the rules, brainstorming after games and documenting discussion, it was a long, exhausting day. The game is a science fiction "adventure" card game... You portray heroes vying for control of the galaxy for their factions. There's map building, exploration, mission resolution, combat and all sorts of things that make this more a boardgame that is played with cards than a traditional card game.

Initial feedback was very positive. Everyone's favorite elements were the combat selection/resolution system and mission resolution. The biggest area for improvement is the way the combat threats are implemented -- trying to find a balance between being worth the investment in actionsand cards while not being overpowering and railroading the game one way or the other.

I typed out about 10 pages of notes, session reports and errata of how we played, what we tweaked each game, and overall feedback and commentsfrom the testers. It recaps the games, discusses card concepts and abilities, how to balance certain features, etc. After the games, we went through the prototype decks one card at a time (all 110 cards) and discussed each card's utility, value and function.

The good news is that the underlying mechanics work very well. The math for combat values can be juggled as needed. The role and impact of combat can be modified. Card effects can be altered to fit more thematic "faction" flavor and play style. But regardless of what changes lie ahead, I'm confident that the underlying chassis is sturdy and flexible, ensuring that this is the right direction to make this a robust, entertaining game.

Consider the firt playtest a huge success!

Playtesting Approaches >> Wish Me Luck!

2005-11-09T05:59:00.000-08:00

As some of you may know (but likely more of you do not) I've been hired to develop a card game for release next spring/summer by an established publisher. I can't reveal many of the details yet, but sufficed to say this is a non-collectable card game featuring expandable "decks" to customize game play...

It's been a fairly herculean undertaking so far. I've spent countless hours already setting up big Excel spreadsheets to track all the different card types, card attributes, deck composition, etc.
The good news is that I've wrapped up almost all the data for the initial cardset. Bottom line -- I finally have everything in place for a rough playtest prototype. One of the biggest hurdles has been taking that raw data from the spreadsheets and formatting it into cards I can print out. But now that's almost done, and I'll be ready to give the system a try.

I expect the first playtest to be VERY rough... I have the core mechanics designed, and literally several hundred cards in the entire set (of which the prototype will use roughly a quarter -- selected arbitrarily to set a starting point). At these early stages, I'm most interested to see if the underlying concepts and mechanics work well enough to fulfill the project goals.

I've already been in touch with a dozen or so prospective playtesters, many of them my gaming regulars and buddies from BoardGameGeek... Once I get the first round of playtesting completed and apply some feedback, it will be passed along to the publisher for more thorough playtesting by folks who won't have the game designer sitting around to answer questions or walk them through it.

I gotta' admit, I'm pretty nervous. I think the concepts and mechanics are sound. Time to put that to the test. Wish me luck!

Tsuro >> Quick Follow-up

2005-11-02T09:17:00.000-08:00

I did get to play Tsuro, the new non-collectable, abstract boardgame from WizKids. For the price point (around $18) I definitely got my money's worth. I really like the game and its quick pace, even with the player elimination aspect -- but it didn't impress anyone else I've played it with. I love the art, style and elegance of the game. The layout and design is incredibly well conceived and implemented.

Gameplay is very quick, and the rules very simple. Each player has a small hand of tiles with paths on them, connecting opposite ends of each tile (so as more tiles get placed, these paths connect into longer, more convoluted paths). Each player also gets 1 pawn, which starts out placed along the outer edge of the board. The rules and goal couldn't be simpler: Place a tile next to your current piece, then move your piece along the new path created as far as it will travel... And try to be the last one standing on the board.

Sure, there's an initial rush to reach the center of the board, so a path won't take you to the edge right away -- but as soon as more people get toward the center, the more tiles there are that can connect to a newly placed tile, creating some very long circuits sending pawns all over the place. It's a neat, lightly strategic exercise in visualization, with wonderful looking components. That said, Tsuro feels a lot like Dirk Henn's Metro, but with only one "train" to worry about per player...

The Bottom Line: I'd like to get in more plays and see if it changes the opinion of anyone in my group. It plays quickly enough that I'd wager no one would necessarily turn it down -- but I don't think anyone (but myself) will be calling for it to hit the table. Tsuro's stellar production oozes elegance, and the gameplay is very quick. This is a solid, if not spectacular, "filler" abstract. Rating: 7/10.

Citadels >> Mixed Emotions... My Quasi-Love/Hate Relationship...

2005-11-01T08:47:00.000-08:00

I won't go into the game rules or game flow, as it's adequately detailed in other reviews over at BoardGameGeek. Instead, I'll focus on a few of the main game quirks that spring to mind whenever anyone suggests playing a game of Citadels -- hopefully the sort of things a prospective purchaser can use to determine whether or not Citadels will be the right sort of game for their particular gaming group.

Overall, I've got very mixed feelings about Citadels. I'm usually a big fan of Bruno Faidutti games, which can offer some incredibly interesting game decisions based on playing off the other people rather than playing off the game mechanic, or have a nice rat-a-tat-tat game pace based on quick turns and decisive actions.

For the most part, I really like the concept and implementation of Citadels. The quasi-hidden role selection (though the earlier selectors have more information) is quite a bit of fun, and adds to the mind-game aspect (If I pick 3rd, and have the Architect available, do I dare take him if I think the Assassin was selected earlier, etc). However, I think the game suffers from two things that keep it from being a true favorite or recurring guest at the table:

1) Player/System Issue: Downtime.

For some reason, the game has small pockets of downtime, and lurches along at an uneven pace. Even with very short, discrete turn options, I've had some 5-6 player games of Citadels last nearly 2 hours -- which is inexcusable in my mind for the types of decisions and sort of gameplay experience I feel Citadels strives for. Perhaps I'm merely impatient, but for a backstabbing game with lots of shifts and changes in position (reminiscent of Cosmic Encounter) It *feels* like the pace should be frantic and frenetic.

2) System Issue: Gang Up On The Leader/Game Extension.

While I like games having some means to target the leader, there's something about Citadels which makes me feel that it's almost too easy to gang up on the leader, further lengthening the game. The Warlord's destructive power clearly delays the endgame. The assassin and thief indirectly lengthen the game by reducing player options. Sometimes, the game drags to a point where it feels like a game of Zombies -- "my God, won't somebody just *win* already?!?!?" ... As soon as someone establishes a good lead, they're a target for anyone with a "zapping" power -- Assassin, Thief, Warlord or one of several variant powers.

That said, with the right group (which enjoys the ride as a friendly game of backstabbing rather than a deep strategic endeavor) I thoroughly enjoy Citadels. In my mind, the game should play in about 30-45 minutes for the type of experience it provides. Once it starts to stretch out much longer than an hour, I quickly lose interest -- and the risk of ending up in one of those marathon games alone keeps Citadels from hitting the table more often, which is a real shame.

The Bottom Line: 6.5/10 -- Citadels is (or can be) a surprisingly solid game for 6 or 7 players, despite its faults. Don't enjoy it as much with only 3-4, as there's even less interaction between players. Gameplay should ideally be quick, dastardly and exciting to the very end. Or at least, should be -- but with the wrong group, it tends to drag on. I dislike a few character abilities (assassin, warlord) which lengthen the game considerably without adding anything to compensate.