Lucioman's Boardgaming Blog

2.24: Teaching Games - The Technical Side

2010-09-17T22:30:00.000-07:00

Quite a lot of gaming recently--I managed to get out to game with Brian and Joseph, where we played Isis & Osiris, Tomb, and Circus Flohcati. I also attended Strategicon in Los Angeles for the first time, and for a local convention, I have to say I was impressed. I went with Brian and Robert, and though I can't share many of the comments made during that weekend, it was an excellent time. We expanded Robert's horizons, met some cool people (that's "normal cool", not just "gamer cool"), and even got to play with play-doh.

This is a post I've been meaning to do for some time, but the week I planned on writing it up, several of the boardgaming podcasts I listen to covered the same topic. I figure the statute of limitations has passed, and I've got a two-parter in mind, so let's get this thing on the road.

I was going to start this with, "First..." but we should start with some important pre-teaching concerns, so...

Zero-th: know your audience, and be prepared to teach the game. If you want to play with a specific person, don't pick a game you believe a person is going to hate. If a person hates direct conflict, or Eurogames, or games with dice, don't pick those types of games. As far as being prepared, read the rules ahead of time, a couple times if possible; maybe even set up the game and play a few mock-turns. Some people complain about a teacher reading the rules to a group--I personally believe this is a bad idea and somewhat boring, plus most of the ruleset can be condensed. I'd imagine it would take 30-60 minutes to read the Agricola rules out loud, but these can be explained verbally in 10-15 minutes.

(Finally) First, I cover the theme of the game--we're bank robbers, space ship captains, ninja toilet paper rolls--something that gives the players an initial reference and hopefully draws their interest. I'll also throw in some particulars on the type of game and interactions between the players, again to create interest, but at this point a player can also decide they don't want to play this type of game, and saving us both a lot of effort. If we're playing a game about throwing frogs in blenders, and someone has a problem with that, I'd rather they leave at the beginning than suffer through a rules explanation and leave when I'm done. (Note: I don't actually have a game about...oh, nevermind.) If the players are more experienced, I'll also throw in the type of mechanics in the game--set collection, area control, roll and move--or name another game that has some similarities.

From here, I jump all the way to the end, explaining the goal of the game. "You win by collecting the most points. You get points for each full jar of pickled pigs feet you have in your fridge at the end of the game." From this the player knows what their ultimate goal is, and get a sense of the road they take to get there; in the example above, they know the rest of the rules will cover where they get the pigs feet from, and the steps needed to pickle these feet and put them in your fridge.

Next, back to the beginning. It helps to have the board set up or mostly set up, and the pieces out on the board. I explain the basics of the game while pointing out the associated pieces. If there are cards in the game, I try to remove a few of each type of card to explain their affects in the game before I shuffle the deck. It's a good idea to incorporate visual and verbal information (ever hear of "The five ways of learning"? It's the idea that people learn information differently, and often retain information better in one of these five ways: verbal, visual, tactile, kinesthetic, and aural), though depending on your group, you may want to wait on "tactile, handing pieces to players--I've seen more than one "Meeple Tower" or "Happy Meeple Circle" created while I'm trying to explain Carcassonne.

I usually go through a game turn, state any special rules, and end with "how the game ends." This is particularly important in Eurogames, where the end could be more obtuse: collecting X points, after a number of turns, or when there aren't enough animals to fill the pens. Really, that's is an endgame situation.

If there are more complex rules or special situations, I'll explain these at this point. Ideally these naturally grow out of the rules, or are what happens at points of potential conflict within the rules--if you're lucky your players will pick up on these and point them out, and you can address them naturally.

Finally, in many Eurogames there is some special way scoring is handled--if you've ever played a Knizia game, you'll understand. Scoring may be for resources you've been collecting the whole game and scored one way, but score differently at the end of the game. You may have been collecting a number of different colored cubes or points, but your final score is the one you collected the least of. You may have to collect a number of X equal to the number of Y for the points to count. Whatever it is, I try to explain how scoring works in general, then do a visual example of final scoring, placing and moving pieces around, and tallying score. After a discussion with Danny, he pointed out that it might be best to start with a "final board layout," to allow a better visual example of how scoring works (in Agricola you score for a dozen different things, and can gain or lose points depending on how well you managed your farm).

This is a general outline for teaching a game, but I will change this around depending on the game. For instance, when teaching Fluxx, I usually just deal out the cards, inform the new player that there are only four types of cards, and show them the starting rule, "Draw one, Play one." This works because the game is simple, basically teaches itself, and the learning and playing are part of the whole experience. On the other hand, when teaching Agricola, I tend to backtrack several times, and expect to reexplain during the game, as there are so many moving parts to the game.

***

That's it, a little late in the week, but it's here! Since I covered the technical side of teaching games this week, you can expect something similar but different in the coming weeks.

Take care, all.

2:23: How I got into gaming (and other things I can blame on Lucio) - By Danny B.

2010-09-09T17:01:00.000-07:00

I have to apologize for this late update--I initially started this blog with two goals: I wanted to talk about games, and I wanted to keep a regular writing schedule. The idea behind the latter was to train myself to keep writing, writing anything, so that it was a natural part of my week. When I went on vacation in August, I decided to have something pre-loaded (we all know how well that went), and it instantly took me out of my good habit. Go vacation, make me lazy.

This week--our first guest post! This post is written by my brother-in-law, a guy all-around inferior to me, Danny. I'm happy to say I'm largely responsible for Danny's introduction to gaming, though he took to it quite easily. I used to think of Danny as my gaming Padawan, but I now have to be careful when introducing him to new games--most recently I recall teaching him X-bugs, a tiddly-winks combat game, where he annihilated me in the fastest game I've yet played. Yes, he's become a Gamer Jedi.

...take it away, Danny!

I’m not a gamer.

Well, I’m not a gamer insofar as a person can be who has 33 board games in their closet (anyone up for a little Jenseits von Theben??), whose wife is the Pacific Region Ticket to Ride Champion, and who will be attending next year’s super-secret-bordering-on-clandestine board game convention code-named “The Separation of Foes.”

It’s not that I don’t enjoy gaming – actually it’s quite the opposite. It’s that I don’t think I’m entrenched deep enough into the hobby to have warranted the label. When I’m around people who are obviously gamers I see major differences between us, most notably the presence of color in my wardrobe. (Yes, I know that black and dark gray are colors. Technically.). I also see that gamers have played or are at least familiar with a seemingly-countless number of games. If I had to guess, I’d say that I’ve played about 100 different board games in my life. In comparison, the mastermind behind this blog has more than 600 games in his collection.

What bona fide gamers and I do have in common, though, is that we take great enjoyment in playing board games.

I have fond memories of playing certain games as a child, namely, Monopoly, Yahtzee and Trivial Pursuit. I mean, what wasn’t there to love about having to write down copious notes on how much money each person had, what properties they owned, and where everyone was on the board in order to complete a marathon game of Monopoly (redundant?) the following day…or days?

It wasn’t until high school, though, that I was introduced to a world of board games that didn’t all have “Parker Bros.” stamped on the box. I remember one of the first games I played was a card game (I want to say it was Poison but I know that wasn’t it…arrgh!). I remember thinking “this game is different, kind of weird, but fun.” As time passed and I spent more evenings and weekends at my then-girlfriend-now-wife’s house I was introduced to more games by her ~~cool~~ weirdo older brother, Lucio.

Now, 12 years later, I still look at a board game as something enjoyable. It’s a time to be with family and friends. It’s a time for friendly competition (unless, of course, Mychael and Jackie are in the same game, in which case, back very slowly away from the table, careful not to make any eye contact). It’s a time for good-natured ribbing (or flat-out vulgar trash-talking if David or Randy is involved). I’ve also learned to appreciate the greater nuances of games – the design of a board or card, the quality of the game pieces, the various game play mechanics, and more.

I picked most of this up over the past two years, the period when I’ve done more gaming than at any other time. It was also during this time that my wife’s and my game collection has swelled to its current size. At present, I usually squeeze in at least one board game most weekends. I’ve also introduced gaming to other people in my family including two brothers. One brother has two daughters that absolutely love Ticket to Ride. In fact, during one recent family party, a group of us took over a table to play TtR and introduced yet another non-gamer to the hobby.

I have not, however, done any of the following gamer-staples: become a member of BGG (I live vicariously through my wife’s account); attend a board game convention specifically to game (that won’t happen until The Separation of Foes); or set aside a specific area of my house for games (I’ve only used about half of the space in the largest closet in the house).

Now, if all of this makes me a gamer – or not – so be it.

At least I’m no RPG, LARP or wargamer.

Now those folks are dweebs.

***

Some words of wisdom from Danny. In case anyone has decrypted the name of the convention he has cleverly disguised, yes, he is going there next year. And, yes, I am jealous.

More regular updates planned, including some information on HomeCon! Most of you are my friends and are probably going anyway, but I thought I'd share some of our ideas and plans for our first home-convention attempt.

Take care, all.

2.22: Play in Public Campaign...join us...join us...

2010-08-09T17:06:00.000-07:00

Man, did I call it. Limited internet access while I was away, and then some things went wonky--I never thought AT&T wouldn't permit me to buy another day of access. Anyhow, this post is late, as I wanted it up the first week of August.

So, you may have guessed that I enjoy boardgaming. I enjoy the simple fun that classic games and many modern games provide. I enjoy the challenge to myself and my opponents. Most of all I enjoy the social aspect of gaming--it is a meeting place, an even playing field. Thanks to my parents I was exposed to some classic boardgames, but it's taken a far larger number of people to expose me to the boardgames I play currently--from family and friends, all the way to the numerous people in the BGG (boardgamegeek.com) community. This has become a reflexive hobby, as I now expose and share multiple facets of this hobby with my own friends and family.

But boardgaming is such a niche hobby. This past weekend GenCon was held in Indianapolis, Indiana; over 125,000 gamers were gathered into one place with the purpose of celebrating our hobby. Last month was Origins in Ohio, and several other conventions are held across the country--there can't be a lack of gamers. Unfortunately, this is the case. For a number of years I had a "convention family," the people I would visit with every year and at every convention I went to. There aren't a lot of gamers; worse, there aren't a lot of people outside the hobby that are aware of this enormous event that occurs every year.

Our hobby needs more exposure, plain and simple.

Kevin E. Schlabach of siezeyourturn.com has suggested a Play in Public campaign aimed at exposing more people to the hobby. There are a lot of reasons, and I will admit that some of them are purely economic (ie, they have to do with money), but I'll sum it up by saying that it's good for our hobby. I'll be pushing this at least through August.

If you want more information, read this excellent piece written by Kevin. If you don't read it, I'm coming for you. Whatever, Lucioman, you don't scare me! You're one of those non-athletic, overweight, downright wimpy gamers! Okay, let me advise you, read this article. Somewhere around here I have a photo of me at a Shotokan tournament, wearing my gi, kicking a good friend full force in the balls. Now, GO READ THE DAMN ARTICLE! (I really need to find that picture.)

I'll be planning some time to be in public playing a game, and I'll post that here. Further threats to follow.

***

I plan on posting again later this week in order to get back on schedule.

2.21: Review: God Dice

2010-07-29T08:58:00.000-07:00

Another game review, can it be? This week I review God Dice, a quick dice game, great for when you're short on time and don't want to play Willow.

One of the benefits of going to conventions is the opportunity to view and try games one might not otherwise have found. By walking up and down the many aisles, I've stumbled upon many a small publishers with only one or two games in their catalog. Every year there is some sleeper hit hidden among the crowd of larger publishers, such as the game I'm reviewing today.

God Dice was designed by Rick Maxey and published by Maxveld Games in 2008; it supports 2-4 players, and takes 30 minutes to an hour to play. The game comes with 12 character cards, 9 attack dice, 2 "God Dice," a set of rules, and some counters. This game is dice geared combat, so if you're not a fan of dice games or games with heavy randomness, you probably won't be interested in this one. If, however, you enjoy a quick combat game and trash-talk, pick this one up.

The game begins with the players drafting their team of warriors. There are 12 character cards, two copies of each character (for a total of 6 different characters). Each character card is double-sided, with a picture on one side and the character's abilities and health on the other; there is a little strategy to picking your team, but for the purposes of this review I'll just say that it helps to get a little variety in your team. Some of the characters combos are easier or more difficult to pull off, some affect a non-active character or more than one of your opponent's characters, some are able to heal your team, and so on.

After teams have been selected, the first player begins their turn by pushing forward one of their characters (indicating this is their active character) and rolling the God Dice--these are the two six-sided dice with letters on them. These dice are identical, each side designated to one of the characters; if the active characters' letters are rolled, an advantage can be given to the attacker or defender as follows: One letter matches the attacker, the attacker may reroll their first attack dice roll. One letter matches the defender, the defender may decide to have the attacker reroll their first attack roll. Two dice match the defender, the attacker's turn ends immediately with no attack. Two dice match the attacker, the defender is killed automatically. Lastly, if two matching letters are rolled for a character that is not involved in the battle, the direction of play is reversed (play begins clockwise, but this can change several times during the game).

Assuming no pairs of letters were thrown, the player then rolls all nine attack dice. These dice are also identical, having one Yellow, Blue and Red side, two "5" sides and one "0" side. Depending on which character you re currently using, you will need a different combination of colors to execute the different attacks (see the right side of the image above). More likely than not you will have to re-roll some of these dice to complete an attack. Re-rolls in God Dice are similar but very different from Yatzee. On a player's turn they take all five of the chits representing the sides of the attack dice; if a player chooses to make a re-roll, they must discard one of these chits, re-rolling all of the dice with the discarded symbol. The player does not need to use all the re-rolls, and may stop at any time, particularly if they have fulfilled one of the attack requirements. So long as a player can match the dice needed for an attack, damage is then dealt to the defending player equal to the number of "5's" rolled plus any modifiers based on the attack rolled. As an example, let's again look at the Hero card above; if the player rolled five Red's and two 5's, they would do 10 damage for the two 5's rolled, plus the bonus 15 damage for the Lacerate attack, for a total of 25 damage. Keep in mind it is possible that a player can fail at an attack, having used all their re-rolls and not being able to match any of the dice combinations to complete an attack.

The opposing player would move their damage chit along their character's health, removing that character from the game if the damage takes them to zero health. Play then proceeds to the next player; that player may opt to put out a new active character (since they were just attacked, they may want to move a character back if only to protect it, or to make use of another character's abilities), and they then proceed with their turn, starting by rolling the God Dice. Play continues until only one player has characters remaining.

I enjoy this game, particularly when I'm looking for something quick and light to play for 2-4 people. The character drafting has a little strategy to it and doesn't add much to the length of the game, and turns are generally quick. There's a great sense of satisfaction at pulling off special attacks. The game itself is also inexpensive: looking at online retailers, it's around $15. My main quibble is with the God Dice themselves--rolling these two dice seems extraneous to me, and rolling doubles almost always seems frustrating--if play is reversed you're attacking someone you didn't plan on attacking, if you roll double your opponent's letter you don't get a turn, and if you roll double your own number your opponent's character dies immediately, and you don't get a turn.

***

Next week I may not have internet access. This means two things: 1. I'm going to write and "schedule" a post to go up on Tuesday of next week. 2. It's not going to work, likely due to some insignificantly small yet essential error, and there will be no post up next week. Yes, that's me, 100% optimist.

Lastly, congratulations to my wife, Jackie, who is completing her last class this weekend and will officially have her Masters in Business. I love you, Jackie.

"There are better games?" Really?

2010-07-23T12:59:00.000-07:00

Apparently I missed announcing this blog's one-year birthaversary, which was the 24th of June. So, uh, Happy Birthaversary, Lucioman's Boardgaming Blog; maybe we'll get you a real name instead of this lazy nonsense.

Extra post this week because I've been slacking. I'm considering changing the schedule up, but we'll keep it the same for now, and I also realized I need to review some actual GAMES on this blog, so we'll definitely see more of those in the near future.

My cousin Randy visited on the weekend and ~~asked me~~ attempted to goad me into playing a boardgame I wasn't interested in playing. He told me it's a great game; I told him it took too long to set up (an issue, as they had limited time to visit), was one-sided, and there are better games to play. Admittedly, the last point may not have been entirely fair, but I was also watching my two toddlers, who require a certain level of attention. One of them does have the middle name "Danger," after all.

My cousin's retort: "So we'll never play this game again." I was taken aback. First, Randy was on the verge of breaking Rule #6--then again, Randy's basically always on the verge of breaking Rule #6, but I love him--he's my cousin, but may as well be a brother. Second, it isn't a bad game, but I was confused by my own statement, "There are better games." Third, if I really believed that, shouldn't I trade the game away?

Let me begin by saying that I do enjoy The Willow Game: there's exploration, a large variety in the decisions and courses of action, more than one path to victory for the good side (in this case, "more than one" meaning exactly two), there are a wide variety of items and other events that are brought about with a very large deck of cards. However, this game also has its faults. It's a roll and move game, and traversing around the map can be slow; even if you have a horse to aid your movement (1d6 spaces instead of 2 when walking), there's a chance you'll move as slow or slower. The villains start fully powered but outnumbered, while the heroes start weak but can gain power, and have a few tricks up their sleeves. A lot of this game seems like waiting, and mostly waiting for the villains to murder the heroes and steal the baby.

Understanding that I didn't want to play the game, is that statement, "There are other games out there" just BS, is it true, or true enough that perhaps I shouldn't hold onto this game? If that's the case, shouldn't it go somewhere else, either traded for something I am interested in, sold, or even donated to charity? (Note: Many of the larger thrift stores no longer carry boardgames or toys, and simply trash them upon receipt. While not 100% certain why, I've heard it's because of the recent China/high lead content issue in the last couple years.) My goal is not to be a collector, though my shelves would tell you otherwise; if the goal is to play the games on my shelf, and to try out new games before buying them, why keep this game?

I suppose one reason is nostalgia. There are games on my shelf that I know will likely never be played again, or played so infrequently that owning the game is counter-intuitive. Games from my childhood, such as Dungeon Dice, which my family played every summer vacation. Games with a special significance--my wife bought me a copy of Ceasar and Cleopatra as a wedding gift, which we didn't play until a full year later when we lost power in our house and had to play by lantern. Games that would now be difficult to re-acquire, be they out of print, small print runs, or released in another country. I don't need to own these games, but I like having them around in the event I want to play them, and simply seeing them on my shelves elicits enough emotional response to merit keeping them. To this end I made a point of tracking down a copy of Dungeon Dice, and was ecstatic to find a copy still in shrink--and this game is older than I am, having been published in 1977.

Another reason could be that the game offers something not available in another game, particularly a game I own. Certainly I don't own another Willow themed game (for reference, there is another one published by Parker Brothers), but what about a game that features this kind of exploration, character building, and potential storytelling?

We ended up playing God Dice instead (two games, I won both, TAKE THAT, Randy!), but I apparently need to replay this game.

2.20: Dominion!

2010-07-08T13:03:00.000-07:00

Hope everyone had a great 4th of July weekend. We spent time with friends and family, went to the beach, set some explosives on fire, and played 1000 boardgames. Or ten. Biggest hit of the weekend, Dominion; I personally got in three plays of the game, but it hit the table far more than that. We also played a 4+ hour game of Shogun, in which I took second; Danny, despite having no money and no income on the last turn, was able to hold onto his empire and take the win.

An interesting piece of information--last year I played a total of 105 games (not different games, total games played). As of today, I've played 86 games this year--looks like I'm on track to beat last year by 50%.

Dominion was designed by Donald X. Vaccarino and published in the US by Rio Grande Games in 2008. Since then it has won a number of awards, including the Spiel des Jahres in 2009. A number of standalone games which can be combined with the original have been released since, as well as a number of expansion cards. It is a card game with a first-of-its-kind mechanic--everyone starts with the same 10 cards, and during the course of the game you purchase cards for your deck, which provide you with additional abilities on future turns.

Turns generally go quickly, especially at the beginning of the game. On a basic turn has three parts: Play an action card, buy a new card, and clean-up.

Action cards provide a number of abilities during the game, allowing you to draw extra cards, discard cards, use extra action cards (useful, because otherwise you are only able to use one a turn), give you extra money or the ability to buy more than one card, and so on. There are also "Attack" cards, which make your opponents fall in love with you--that is, if they enjoy having to discard cards from their hand or lose money from their deck.

The buy phase of the turn is just that--you buy one card, unless you've played an action card that allows you to purchase more. Adding any treasure cards from your hand to any money provided by your action card(s), you may purchase any of the 16 or so cards on the table--Green cards provide victory points(1, 3, and 6 points), but do nothing else, so purchasing them means you'll end up with dead space in your hand, but you need these to win. Gold colored cards are Treasure cards (values 1, 2, and 3), and provide you with more money in your deck, and purchasing the larger value cards means you can afford more expensive cards more often. The action cards, as stated above, do a variety of things; there are generally 10 of these in the game, but which ones are in can be changed, altering the game drastically. Any cards purchase go directly into your discard pile--once you've gone through your deck, you shuffle your discards and these cards will become available to you.

Lastly, clean-up. This is simple--discard everything in your hand, any cards played in front of you, and draw 5 new cards.

I've played this game 10 times since I received it in June (Father's day, for reference); that doesn't include the number of times family and friends have played it. This game is highly replayable, due to the fact that the ten cards chosen for the game can be different every time; with 25 different cards provided in this game...that's a lot of possible combinations, and I don't feel like doing the math. Plus, some of those combinations would be ridiculous. The only bad thing I can say about this is that some of the card combinations don't suit my play preference: I'd usually prefer to "build an engine," gaining cards with a goal in mind, and some of the combinations urge players to race for Victory cards, ignoring all else. A minor quibble, admittedly, and I have found that some of these "races" are quite interesting. Perhaps adaptablilty is the best course of action.

I do also have to commend Rio Grande games on their storage tray--there is a specified location for each set of cards to be stored vertically on the long edge, and the larger groups of cards are also arranged around the tray such that the box remains mostly balanced. The tray is also set high enough that the cards are within short distance of the box top, and thus tilting the box doesn't result in cards splaying everywhere in the box.

I'm looking forward to trying the Dominion expansions--two of the three expansions currently out are stand-along games, but can be combined with the original, providing even more combinations for the game. My wife's interest in the game only enhances my own interest.

***

Well, we're gearing up for HomeCon! ComicCon and GenCon are around the corner, Origins just passed, and unless I hit it big in Vegas I'm not going to BGG.Con--so we're throwing our own mini-convention. It's still month's away, but we've finally set a date and are now getting things in order. Looking forward to seeing a number of friends, eating really unhealthy food, and not sleeping for four days. And since I decided on this year's theme for HomeCon, here's the tentative logo. In case you are wondering, yes, that's my house...minus the towers. The dragon really is there, he just hangs out above our house. Makes it hard to keep pets, but he keeps the sales people away.

2.19: Game Room Rules - Rule #7

2010-07-01T17:20:00.000-07:00

Jackie got me Dominion for Father's Week. A friend played this when it was in its late prototype stage, and spoke positively of it, and since its release I've heard a vast number of positive comments, though the game does seem polarizing--people either like it a lot or not at all. I really like this game, despite the fact that I can't win a game when my wife plays.

Until last night! Ha, take that, Jackie!

Rule #1: Have fun.
Rule #2: Let your opponent(s) have fun.
Rule #3: Play appropriately.
Rule #4: Remember, it's just a game.
Rule #5: Take care of my crap/other people's crap.
Rule #6: D.B.A. Don't be an Ass.

Rule #7: Take your turn, already!

"If I go here, I get 5 points. But if I go here, I get 3 wheat and 3 points. Or I could go here and get 8 points, but Danny will be able to get 9 points off of this..."

One of the greatest attributes of modern gaming can be its downfall: Choice. Many traditional games give players few if any choices--I'd guess that most have less than 2 choices on a normal turn (barring some special instances), and those with more are very simple choices. In the modern boardgame you may have dozens of choices, and repercussions of those choices may lend weight to each, and may limit or provide further choices in the future. And therein lies the problem.

Some players have the need to analyze every possibility, every nuance of every turn such that it is unbearable. There is an "average playtime" listed on the box of most games. This is usually a good representation of how long the game should take, and includes the bit of time the designers/testers think a player needs to plan and execute a turn.

"Man, Lucio, you're an ass. Why are you giving someone a hard time about taking a little extra time on their turn? It is their turn, after all." One, shut up. Two, it may be their turn, but everyone is playing, so everyone has to wait for that person. Three, I'm not talking about a couple extra minutes; I'm talking ten minutes, 15 minutes, or more. Recently some of my family were playing a game where one of my sisters took 30 minutes for one turn--and the game is supposed to be 60-90 minutes long. And before anyone gets funny, no, it's not a 2 or 3 turn game.

I'm not saying I've never taken longer than I should for a turn--sometimes in a pivotal point in the game I need to take a little longer, especially when I'm doing damage control after someone screwed me. I also give the same courtesy, recognizing that some opponents may need a little extra time; recognize also that some games may not be as intuitive to some people, and they may need some leniency with the length of all of their turns. However, there has to be a limit.

Be reasonable, people. At some point realize that you may not have used all your Calculus and Trig to get the best possible permutation for your turn, but within a reasonable time you've noticed a few bad, decent, and good choices. Just take your turn, already!

***

There won't be many more of these--I think I'll max out at 10 rules, though at present I can't think of more than one. I realize I haven't actually reviewed a game in some time, so next week I'll probably take a break from the rules and review a game.

I hope everyone is enjoying their summer.

Image borrowed from Boardgamegeek.com, taken by user Icefyst.

2.19: Game Room Rules - Rule #6

2010-06-18T16:49:00.000-07:00

This week I'm plugging Scott Sigler's soon-to-be-released book, Ancestor. In Ancestor, a biotech company is attempting to create a herd animal that has human-compatible organs for the purpose of organ donation. Their experiments go awry, and hilarity ensues. Well, hilarity in the form of an edge-of-your-seat thriller involving not-so-herbivorous creatures snuggling up to the novel's characters--with their teeth.

Scott Sigler has been giving his books away in the form of a free weekly podcast (audio file); over the past several years he has built up a significant audience, and signed with a big time publishing company. Ancestor is being released in hardcover on June 22, and Sigler is attempting to reach the top ten on the NY Times Bestseller list. Any pre-orders count toward the first week's sales, and thus aid the effort to reach the aforementioned bestseller list.

The rules so far, and a totally appropriate picture:

Rule #1: Have fun.
Rule #2: Let your opponent(s) have fun.
Rule #3: Play appropriately.
Rule #4: Remember, it's just a game.
Rule #5: Take care of my crap/other people's crap.

Rule #6: D.B.A. Don't be an Ass.

There are two aspects to this rule, the first regarding gaming. Most of this is covered in previous rules, but they are written specifically for people who wouldn't have considered these things, or might "break" a rule on accident. Rule #6 is for anyone who would break any of the rules on purpose. So, don't.

Don't do things that will intentionally upset another person, in game or out. Don't make moves to intentionally ruin one person's game; I'm not advocating against "beat the leader," "Kingmaker," or other appropriate in-game situations--I'm talking about "Brian ate the last cupcake and took my parking spot, I'm going to make sure he loses the game" situations. But Brian, stop taking the last cupcake, geeze. Along those lines (regarding DBA, not the cupcake), don't make moves that will outright ruin a game.

The second aspect of this rule regards interactions with people. Be a decent person, plain and simple. Don't act stupid, don't do anything that will put my family, friends, or house in danger. Don't do anything that will result in my neighbors getting angry--the Black Car Nazi no longer lives near us, so I can say that I like many of my neighbors, and am at least am neutral toward the rest.

Don't do anything that will result in the cops showing up. As a long-haired Hispanic guy who "obviously plays guitar and sells drugs" (that's a joke, I don't do either of those things), I see them enough when I'm driving. I don't need to be on a first-name basis.

Also, I hate filling out paperwork--one of the most unpleasant experiences I had while substitute teaching were the two instances where I knew I was going to have to fill out injury reports before I left for the day. I don't want to take anyone to the hospital, the dentist, or fill out witness or insurance reports. Keep in mind that this means taking care of yourself, as well. If you do something retarded that causes any of this nonsense to happen, I promise you two things: First, I will be pissed. Second, I will make a point to laugh at you before anything is resolved. This includes injuries, so you better hope you're not bleeding heavily.

Yes, this rule is crass, but it gets across a some of the most important information I want to get across in three words. I've probably invited you to my house, you're probably around my family and friends. Odds are that you are one of my friends, though we have had visitors come and play games. Be a normal, respectable human being, don't force me to murder you. I hate digging holes, and the backyard is getting full.

***

Don't forget, this Sunday (June 20th) is the start of Father's ~~Day~~ Week. Father's don't get enough credit, what with Mother's always stealing their thunder. Make sure you do something special for the fathers in your lives. And if you are a father, good job, high-five, and make sure to milk it for all you can.

2.18: Game Room Rules - Rule #5

2010-06-08T12:57:00.000-07:00

I'm trying not to be rude or opinionated as I present these rules, well, I'm trying to be as objective as possible. I'm normally a mellow guy (and I'll kill anyone who says otherwise!), but I think this and some of the following rules will come off a little...grumpy. Probably because the next few involve common courtesy, and I'm cultivating my "get off my lawn" voice in preparation for retirement. You know, thirty years from now.

Rule #1: Have fun.
Rule #2: Let your opponent(s) have fun.
Rule #3: Play appropriately.

Rule #4: Remember, it's just a game.

Rule #5: Take care of my crap/other people's crap.

I'm sure I've mentioned this in several previous posts. My games are to be played, not just look totally awesome on my shelves. I expect my games are going to experience wear and tear, I even expect some kind of accident to happen--speaking of which, my sister once dropped one of the games I was loaning her right in front of me, the look on her face was great; I think she expected me to explode at her. I admit that in the past I've been a little excessive in my manner toward taking care of my games, but after some soul searching and a vision quest, I realized that it's ridiculous. Okay, none of that happened, I just decided that it's wasteful to have a shelf-full of games that sit around--better they be ruined while being played than to sit around and be eaten my moths and silverfish. And ninjas--little known fact, in addition to pirates, boardgames are the ninja's nemesis.

What's not okay? Tossing the game around, bending or folding cards (or doing other unnecessary things to a deck of cards/single cards--this one's big with me), or even looking at Cheetos while you play games. I do make an effort to limit what snacks are on hand when playing at my house, and watch what I'm eating when someone else's games are involved. Drinks are something I don't worry about--unless you're drinking acetone, there's not much difference between spilling water or soda on a game. It hasn't happened yet, but inevitably it will--when it does, I'm sure I'll take it in stride.

Basically, I simply ask that the games be taken care of--don't do anything dumb. Take care of it as if it were yours. The boardgames I've purchased are an investment in entertainment, an investment for myself, my family and friends. Boardgaming is my biggest hobby, but it's just that, a hobby. If something gets ruined, I promise I won't kill you. Unless you were acting dumb, in which case I promise pain. Or a dirty look.

***

Blah blah blah, new rule coming next week. I promise it will be full of rainbow puppies and compliments.

2.17: Game Room Rules - Rule #4

2010-05-28T12:23:00.000-07:00

Ptbbbbbbbbt! Frrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrb! Plblblblblblbblblblbllbbblblb! Plt! Brrrrrrrrrpbggt. Vrrrreeeeessssst! Pblllbrct! --A message from my intestine.

Let's just say that I've had better weeks.

Rule #1: Have fun.
Rule #2: Let your opponent(s) have fun.
Rule #3: Play appropriately.

Rule #4: Remember, it's just a game.

"Oh, you M----- F---er's, this game is stupid! I can't believe you did that, you ruined the game! I'm going to beat your a--!"

One, if you are a boardgamer, chances are you can not beat my anything, what with your pasty eternal indoors-ness and all. (Okay, that's not a fair assessment of boardgamers, most actually do stuff outside the house, not like those computer gamers...)

Two, apparently you couldn't even beat me in the boardgame. So bleh (that's the sound I make when I stick out my tongue mockingly).

Three, it's just a game. I don't remember putting any money on it, and I definitely don't remember putting any personal property or lives on the game.

Four, eat some fiber and chill out.

It is just a game. I appreciate that you get involved enough, invested enough, into a game that it evokes any kind of emotion from you. On the other hand, there's no need to act like an ass. I understand that some games are set up such that it's difficult not to feel betrayed. I'll cite Diplomacy--there are a thousand references on BGG (Boardgamegeek.com) of friendships, and even marriages, being ruined by this game. But it's a game, and you should understand that when you sat down to play this game, you agreed to be a part of the shennanigans.

This is the kind of thing I would remove someone from my house for, forcefully if need be. It's never happened, I don't want it to happen. The people I play with I've known for years, long enough that I doubt anything like this will ever happen. I have had people get upset during a game, I've even had someone throw pieces at me (I love you, Jackie), and certain low-level degrees of this are, if not acceptable, at least understandable. Part of really enjoying a game is putting yourself into a game, and that involvement brings with it emotion, and a sense of victory or loss--but this should all be enjoyable (see the previous three rules). Crossing into an area where feelings or worse can be injured is unnecessary.

And if you throw my game and lose or damage pieces, I'll be pissed. Okay, not really, but I won't be happy with you.

***

Hopefully something good coming up at the end of the month. I've gotten a little gaming in this past week, but hope to have a lot more time this Sunday.

Congratulations, Jackie! Graduation ceremony completed, and only 8 more weeks until you are actually done with your degree. You're almost there, Hon!

2.16: Game Room Rules - Rule #3

2010-05-19T16:03:00.000-07:00

Elfenland. One game--that was all my gaming this week, and, WOW. I was among the many people who have heard of Elfenland, Elfengold, and Elfenroads, but had never actually played it. Needless to say (if you read the first sentence of this post), I was impressed. I'm sure a full review is in the future.

Rule #1: Have fun.
Rule #2: Let your opponent(s) have fun.

Rule #3: Play appropriately.

Play your best.
Play leisurely.
Play nice.
Play hard.
Play jovially.
Play appropriately.

I can't just say, "Play this way" when playing a game. There are times when you should go easy on a player, take, for instance, when playing with your two year-old children. There are times when you should forgo logic and even the rules, aiming just for silliness, and there are times that you should play with all the strength of a raging fire, mysterious as the dark side of the moon.

Point being, play the way the game was meant to be played. If you're playing a deep-brained Euro game, put time and effort into your moves, don't randomly slap something onto the board; if you're playing a light game, like Fluxx, for example, don't spend twenty minutes contemplating your move. I personally have a wide appreciation of boardgames, but have been increasingly interested in deeper-think Eurogames, like Stone Age and Agricola, and feel that an opponent should put out their best effort--turns should be tense, there should be a lot of thought; players should play to improve their situation, hinder or block mine. I'm disappointed if someone plays this type of game and doesn't put in the effort I feel they should. On the other hand, if I'm playing something silly, like Pictionary, I don't need someone being an a-hole about rules.

Also play the way the group expects to play--this may mean tweaking the rules to fit your group, and game selection is an important thing to consider. If your group expects to play a fast, silly game, don't bring out Agricola. If a certain person hates economic games, bidding games, dexterity games, don't bring those to the table. Of course, exposing people to new games is great, and you should be able to expose friends to new games, but there are times that you should use your better judgment. One of our friends, for instance, enjoys random games and games with short playtimes. Longer games, and games with a lot of deep mechanics, like Puerto Rico, aren't her cup of tea. She has played them, she thought they were okay, but definitely not her thing; she will still play them, but we know she gets the most enjoyment from goofy games with a lot of socializing.

All these rules could be considered my social contract for playing games, and this rule is perhaps the easiest and most important to have a discussion about, but it is unlikely to happen. To a small degree game selection plays a part in passively stating expectations (sorry for the alliteration)--"I want to play something short," or "I want to play a fighting game." How much easier would it be, though, to say, "I want to play a game where the game doesn't get in the way of me socializing," or "I want to play a game where we sit thinking for four hours, and the joy of playing comes from trying to outmaneuver my opponent's brain." Okay, those were a little wordy, but it seems overly practical to discuss beforehand what each opponent expects from a game.

***

That's it. Go home now. More posts next week.

2.15: Game Room Rules - Rule #2

2010-05-13T13:09:00.000-07:00

I played Uno yesterday. Uno. Albeit it was with my little brothers, and they're not exactly gamers yet. That's probably something I should work on. Anyway, we were waiting at a restaurant, they had a copy of Uno. We played, I lost. Can't seem to catch a break this week.

Also, with a 1:3 record I lost the first round of the 4th Annual Hive tournament on Boardspace.net. My opponent, Groo, was an excellent player and I wish him luck--and I'll feel better if he wins the whole thing. I do, however, have an empty space on my shelf now. You know, the space I cleared for that trophy...

I also ate tacos yesterday, in case anyone wanted to know. The slogan goes: Taco Tuesday, every Wednesday night. Not really, but that would be awesome.

Rule #1: Have fun.

Rule #2: Let your opponent(s) have fun.

We've all done it: You're losing a game. Badly. It seems that everything has gone bad for you this game--your action is always taken just before you grab it, your dudes keep getting killed, and kobolds keep eating your babies. Now there's no hope of you catching up, despite the end of the game being a good distance away. Whether it's a sour attitude, moves made to intentionally ruin the game for everyone else, or simple rudeness--as my daughter would say, "That's not necessary." Of course she says it with the tongue of a two year old, so feel free to fatten up your tongue when you say it.

I don't think anyone does it intentionally--okay, that's not true. I've met people that do that crap, and I refuse to play with them anymore. I've got some choice words for those people, and most of them consist of four letters. Like "dodo head" and "ugly butt." (man I'm clever).

Let's try that again: I've done it. Others I know have done it. Those that I still play with don't mean to make the experience unpleasant for anyone. It says something positive about the person that they're invested enough that the game elicits any kind of emotional response, but we've all got to make the effort to enjoy ourselves, even when the game is screwing us. The dice are always against us, the worst cards come up repeatedly on your turn, you can't get a break no matter what--it happens. Don't let it get you down, and just as important, don't let it cause you to ruin your friends' enjoyment.

Statistically speaking, you're going to have a lot of normal games, but you're going to have a few really great games, games where everything goes as planned and Lady Luck is your...uh, I'll try to keep this clean. Keep in mind, however, that you'll have just as many really, really sucky games.

Enjoy yourself; let your friends enjoy themselves.

***

Alrighty, everyone have a great week. I'm running behind on posts lately, but I'm hoping to get the next couple rules out so I have a small buffer of posts.

I'll also be crushing Danny this weekend in whatever boardgames we play, so if you see him let him know.

2.14: Game Room Rules - Rule #1

2010-05-06T00:04:00.000-07:00

As if I don't already have unfinished multi-part posts, let's just start another one, one that will probably be 10 or more parts. Awesome! Little gaming this week, despite another effort to teach my brother Agricola--instead we played the "raise an enormous aluminum garage and use all day" game. At least that's almost done; still, I'm beginning to thing that if we ever do teach David how to play Agricola, the world will come to an end.

I've been contemplating posting some "Rules of gaming" in my loft. It started a couple years back with a great gift from my wife, a long frame with a antiqued game theme (more poker/checkers, but it still looks nice), and a poem that reads:

Game Room Rules
Welcome to the place where we like to play our games...
We want you to enjoy yourself, and we'll try to do the same.
Remember:
No cheating
No fighting
No Temper Tantrums Please!
Don't be a sore loser, and...
Don't brag too much if you win.
It's only a game, so just Have Fun!

I like the idea, though some days I read this and the rhyme seems a little awkward; while this espouses most of my gaming philosophy, I thought it would be better if it were rules that I expect people to follow. Despite being thought of as a gaming tyrant by some (just read that as "most") of my family, I want people to play boardgames, and I want people to know that the games are there to be played. Still, I don't want Captain Cheeto-Fingers messing the games up--I want the games to still be around years from now, especially as my daughters reach the age where they can enjoy them as well.

Sooooooo, I'll post these up here as I think of them. I do have a vague idea of many of them in varying importance, so there will probably be some re-numbering as each one is added. Anyhow, here we go...

Rule #1: Have fun.

Alright, that's it for this week...

Not really, let's take a second to explain this. This is absolutely Rule #1 (watch this bite me in the butt); all of my gaming starts with this. Gaming is my primary hobby, and in every instance my goal is to have fun. This may mean a pleasant beer & pretzel type game (no, I don't drink, and the only pretzels I like are the ones dipped in chocolate) during which we can socialize, or it may be a horribly conflict-ridden game where my opponents and I are bent on each others' plastic-y doom (if you're wondering, that is a plastic nuclear explosion in that picture). Regardless, my goal is to enjoy the game and time with friends.

There will probably be competition, with my family there will probably be a lot of trash talk, but it's all in the spirit of fun, such that it enhances the experience.

***

Sort of a short post this week, I'm really having trouble with hay fever; currently my face feels as if someone has pulled the skin a foot away and let it snap back into place. No, it doesn't feel good. And in case you were wondering, no I didn't miss a post last week. You just didn't read it, and it made me so upset that I simply removed it entirely. Thanks a lot.

2.13: So you've decided to design a game?

2010-04-20T13:02:00.000-07:00

D had the Ticket to Ride tournament this past week at Alan Moon's Gathering of Friends. There were 16 competitors, and in the first round only the top eight would proceed into Day 2 of the tournament. D took 9th place; while I'm proud to say she even made it this far, as her older brother I am required by law to point out that this makes her the first loser. Regardless, she apparently had a great time, and met some fun people, and has continued to spend a good amount of time mocking me. On the other hand, she and Danny are now even further ensconced in the boardgaming hobby, so in reality, I win.

Neener, neener.

I mentioned in last week's post that many gamers add or alter the rules to games they play, or even go so far as to design their own games. Well, me too. On the last one.

I'm not actually sure how much information I should be sharing right now, though as I approach a final product I'll be happy to chat it up as much as possible. So, instead, I'll discuss a little of the process so far.
I've heard, and believe, the saying, "Ideas are cheap." Creativity usually isn't the hard part of doing something, but working from concept to product is where the difficulty lies. I was contemplating making a fun game with simple rules, and decided a dexterity game was the way to go (remember this?)--with only a limited number of pieces I was hoping to create something that I could produce myself from home with little capital. Within two hours I had a playable set of rules, and had contemplated a dozen ways to make the pieces I'd need.

Here's where I had difficulty. I wanted the game to look a certain way, and really loved the idea of having wooden pieces. I tried three different methods to make this work for a playable prototype, but all required a ridiculous amount of labor and materials which would ultimately be too expensive. After smacking myself in the head, I realized I needed to just make a playable prototype--it didn't need to look good. I did, however, take a recalled a suggestion from Adam (the demo team Organizer for Clout Fantasy years ago)--use artwork, any artwork. It probably won't be licensed (you can worry about "real" artwork when your game is finished), it doesn't even need to be associated with the card/tile/whatever. The idea is that it provides a visual cue for the piece, and allows you to track changes to this piece.

Next, playtesting. A lot of playtesting. In my mind the game was perfect, a finely tuned mechanic and set of rules that would produce an excellent play experience. Okay, that's not true--anyone who has designed a game will tell you that playtesting is required, as situations you never would think of occur, and often require fine-tuning or an complete overhaul of your game. After our first playtest I realized the concept was decent, but made some on-the-fly changes to the rules for the second game. And the third, and so on. This is why you want inexpensive, reproduceable game components; be prepared to repeatedly scribble new changes onto boards and cards.

Here's where having friends willing to play your game comes in handy--if you can make a few copies of the game to test, and can get reliable data from your friends, you don't have to spend all your time playtesting your game. This is also helpful in that you won't be present when your game is in other people's hands (for instance, if you plan on selling it)--you can't explain all the rules, so your game has to be able to represent itself.

We're still playtesting whenever possible, but we'll move ahead to the next possible option. Your game has been heavily playtested, it's now clean, the rules are well written, and you've decided you want to make it available to others. Your choice, self-publish, or sell the game to a publishing company. My personal plan is currently to self-publish the game, which means I have to make and assemble the games myself (requiring a little capital and a lot of time), and I'll have to do all my own hype and promotion. I'll be using Boardgamegeek.com heavily for promotion; with the large community there, and since I'm probably only making 200-300 copies of the game, I'm hoping I'll be able to sell every copy--hopefully at a small profit.

The other option is selling the game to a publishing company. This requires footwork, getting the game into the hands of the appropriate people at these companies, pitching the game to them, and providing playable copies. The advantage is the decreased amount of time necessary (I'm not assembling games), and greater promotion potential both for the game and myself, but has the disadvantage of my game potentially never being published.

Of course, it is possible to merge these two efforts, and that is probably the direction I'll be going with this.

***

No pictures of my own game on this one, but as I approach being done with the game, I'll be sure to get all that stuff up here. I even have a name for my game now, thanks to Danny. Even though "Game without a Name" had a nice ring to it.

To anyone attending The Gathering

2010-04-10T11:57:00.000-07:00

My sister, Mychael (pronounced just like the male "Michael"), is apparently enjoying herself quite a lot at The Gathering, and has been kind enough to continue taunting me (all in good fun), and has even gotten a few people to start sending me messages through Boardgamegeek.com.

So, to anyone currently attending The Gathering, please lend me a hand to return the taunting. Don't worry, none of this will hurt her feelings, and she'll instantly know that I put you up to this. First, here's a photo of her (the gal on the left, obviously). If you're having trouble finding her, she's apparently being called "The girl with the guy's name."

You can help me simply by telling her someone told you to say one of the following things:
(I'll be adding more as I think of them)

1. Mychael, Mychael, Motorcycle.

2. "What's gonna work?" (She should respond, "Team work!")

3. Ask her about Safety goggles and Rukshuk.

Hope you all are enjoying your time at The Gathering. Don't worry about me, I'm just sitting at home. Alone. With no one to game with this weekend. Excuse me, I have something in both my eyes.

Good Luck, D!

2010-04-08T13:06:00.000-07:00

My sister called today--I expected a snotty conversation full of mockery, but instead it was just moderate mockery, as she had just arrived at The Gathering of Friends. My assumption was that she would have arrived much sooner than when she called, but apparently she slept through her flight. While not yet on the plane.

This was my chance for mockery. Apparently she had a couple hours before her plane departed, so she decided to nap in the terminal right next to the boarding door. She woke and asked if her plane was boarding, and the lady at the counter told her it had left 20 minutes earlier.

No problem, D, it's just a once-in-a-lifetime invitation, oh, and you have a tournament you're supposed to attend.

Right now she's probably playing something really awesome with boardgame industry people. Curse her.

I'm not sure exactly when the tournament starts, but I wish her luck.

2.12: A convoluted and over the top closing.

2010-04-07T23:24:00.000-07:00

Last week I proposed a fictitious but highly realistic scenario in which my house had caught fire, and I had only a short moment to grab three games and escape the house. I had mentioned that Danny, my brother in law who had proposed this predicament, offered this question in two parts. My 100% completely successful April Fool's joke took the place of the second post last week, so I'm going to cover the second half of Danny's question this week, starting where we left off.

I have a small armful of games, and now find myself trapped in the loft, a wall of flame separating me from the staircase. I turn around, already certain that I'll find the same thing keeping me from the window. Walled in, smoldering pieces of ceiling begin to fall around me--the roof won't hold much longer. I know I have one chance: I'll have to sacrifice a few games to distract the fire.

Absurd you say? Well, I tell you that...you're probably right. But that was the other half of this conversation--Danny asked what games I would toss into the fire to fan the flames as I escaped. This was actually a much more difficult choice to make, but I'm awesome, so I'm sure that this will be a clever and well thought-out post.

Well, hopefully it will at least be on time.

Okay, truthfully, the first choice for what goes into the fire was easy. There is a series of games that come in a distinctive box size with the Kosmos logo on them, all designed specifically for two players. These are often conveniently called the "Kosmos two-player" line. While I can name a number of games my wife and I enjoy in this line, we once played one called Dracula. In this game you play as Van Helsing and Dracula, and are competing to find vampires/victims; it uses hand management and memory as its mechanics, both of which were unimpressive. I'm pretty certain we played this correctly, and may be tempted to give it another shot--if I weren't already sacrificing it to the fire.

The second game I'd throw into the fire is Frog Juice by Gamewright. This is a strange and moderately vindictive choice, and I have to admit that I do own it (I bought it to read the rules), but have never played it. Now, what could I have against a children's game in which one makes magic potions? Well, many a gamer makes house-rules or minor changes to games, and some even go so far as to design their own boardgames. A number of years ago I designed a game where you ran an organic juice bar--a game I was calling "Frog Juice" (yes, it is about what you think it is, and blenders are involved) until I discovered there had been a game available with this name for several years. Gamewright's Frog Juice actually seems interesting enough, being a kid's game and whatnot, but...into the fire with it. Take that, Frog Juice!

And last of all, a game which I would love if I didn't hate it so much: Safari Jack. This is a funny and interesting tile-laying game about murdering animals on safari produced by Cheapass Games. For whatever reason, I was absolutely unable to beat my brother David at this game, despite him being a freshman in high school and I being in college. We played this a dozen or more times during summer break, and after the first ten games he taunted me by stating that we should just rename the game "Safari Dave." Even with this prodding I remained unable to beat him, and haven't won a game to this day. So, Safari Jack, you should have been a little nicer. My greatest triumph is that you are made entirely of cardstock, and will burn horribly well, without any hope of survival. Land of adventure my ass.

***

Well, that was a pleasant trip down memory lane. Hopefully everyone enjoyed this post; next week's post will be something a little different, so be sure to stop by. Same Bat Time, same Bat Channel! Or, you know, Monday/Tuesday of next week, providing I'm on time.

A Monk-like Life

2010-04-01T12:30:00.000-07:00

Well, I've made a decision. I've cluttered my life with too many things, I have a family to care for, bills to pay, a job I have to attend to every day--sometimes even during the holidays. There are things that can be trimmed, and less important things go first.

I present you with a photo from my game room:

That's right, I've decided to give my game collection away. It not only consumes part of my income, but also many hours of my week. I have donated my collection, so hopefully a number of orphaned children and stray animals will be aided by this act as well.

April Fools!

2.11: A convoluted and over the top opening

2010-03-31T07:11:00.000-07:00

"Lucio, you suck. Your update is late again, I can't believe I'm paying for this." Yeah, yeah. To make up for last week's missed post, I'll be doing two posts this week--since this was originally intended to be a two-part post, it should work out quite well.

I'll set the stage. While preparing a 47 course meal heavy in caviar and saffron, some Komodo Dragon grease spills over my saute pan and onto the stove, erupting into a six-foot gout of flame. The Picasso above the stove catches and explodes, cubist shards of flaming death hurtling across the kitchen and dining room. I roll with the explosion, and as I rise, patting out small flames on my clothing, I hear our car pull up; I had sent my family away so I could scour the house spotless and cook my wife this fantastic dinner.

Rushing out the door I wave them away, quickly informing my wife of what had just happened, and dashing back in to get our family keepsakes: Photos (both physical and digital), a carving of a boot done my my grandfather, two pocket watches, my wife's bouquet, and my daughter's umbilical cord (just kidding, that's gross). Dumping these outside, I turn back to the house; flames curl upward from the doorway and I can see by the pulsating yellow glow from the upstairs windows that the fire has spread upstairs. The second floor windows explode outward, glass shattering around me--the fire has apparently reached our second Picasso (why these were done with explosive paint is beyond me). My family and I are safe, but one last thing pulls me inside--in my mind I hear the whimpering of my boardgames. I'll have one chance, just enough time to grab a few games, so what do I take?

My brother-in-law Danny asked me this question recently; it got the brain-gravy going, so this and next week's posts are going to cover his question. To simulate my house going up in flames, I'm going to limit myself to one minute of thought for each game, then I'll see if I'd change anything afterward.

The first game I'd grab off my shelf is my favorite game, and one of my first boardgame purchases: Roborally. I believe I purchased this in 1995, and though I don't get it to the table nearly enough, I have several fond memories of this game. While this wouldn't be terribly difficult to replace, sentimentality would have me grabbing for it first.

The second game would be something I'd have difficulty replacing but something I'm fond of--this leaves me with a toss-up of Star Wars: Epic Duels or Mutant Chronicles: Siege of the Citadel. Apparently I also feel the need to save a colon. Both of these games are out of print; while Mutant Chronicles would be more difficult to replace and (if I'm remembering correctly) would cost over $120, I find Epic Duels a really enjoyable game with a clever mechanic. Though it would be significantly easier to replace and would only cost in the $50-80 range, I'd probably grab Epic Duels.

Third, and this is the one where you all go "Awwwww!" Infinitely unreplaceable, not because it's only available outside the US, out of print, a limited release. My third choice, Ceasar and Cleopatra. My wife gave me three gifts on my wedding day--a new pocket watch, a cape to wear to the wedding ceremony (no kidding), and this game; I already mentioned saving the pocket watch, I'm assuming I would have already been wearing the cape (yes kidding). I'm certain this isn't the first game she bought me, but it meant a lot that she thought enough to include my hobby in her gifts. As a side note, we were supposed to play this game while we were away on our honeymoon, which didn't happen--not what you think, we both ended up getting sick, we played it almost a full year later by lantern, when we lost power at our house.

Alrighty, I'm going upstairs to look at my shelves. I'll be back in a few minutes.

Okay, sorry to keep you waiting. Here's what I came up with--I don't think I would replace either my first or third choice, but Epic Duels could potentially be overlooked by Ticket to Ride: Nordic Countries. Nordic Countries was a limited release, and I actually acquired our copy for my wife by trading boardgames with a guy in Finland--because the game was originally published and distributed in, you guessed it, the Nordic countries. Conveniently, as soon as I had received it my copy, Days of Wonder announced it would do a second limited run in English for the US; it has not been reprinted since.

Well, I'm in a burning house with a small armful of games. Guess you'll have to tune in next time to hear how I get out.

Images borrowed from Boardgamegeek.com

2.10: Scrabble and more - Word games

2010-03-16T23:59:00.000-07:00

Alas, I have missed my first post of the year. This was due almost entirely to my family being sick—first the girls, then my wife and I, and then the girls again. Regardless, we’ve had the opportunity to play a number of games I the past couple of weeks; we also had a small get-together for my wife’s birthday, during which even more games were played. We also barbecued some carne asada, but if you want to hear about that, you have to read my other blog, “Asada Quest.”

I don’t know how it happened, looking back over the last month or two, I realized we had played a large number of word games. Most people are familiar with Scrabble—this is an excellent game, and an excellent example of many of the mechanics in a word game. You get a random assortment of letters, and must arrange them to form a word—in Scrabble you often want the longest word or the word that uses the rarer letters (those letters worth more points--), but you also have to watch board position. A common mechanic among the games covered today, words are built upon each other in a crossword type fashion, interlocked by a single shared letter.

One of the biggest drawbacks to playing word games is that they favor people with large vocabularies and people that spell well. While I'm no slouch in either of these areas, I've played people that put me to horrible shame. Did you know that Ibex is a word? Did you know it scores ten-gazillion points if placed on the correct spot on a Scrabble board.

A friend of ours, Robert, recently introduced us to Bananagrams. Bananagrams was designed by Abe and Rena Nathanson; it was published in 2006, and supports 1 to 8 players. This game consists of 144 bakelite-type tiles which are similar in size and shape to the Scrabble letter tiles, and an appropriately designed bag. In this game, players place their letters as in Scrabble, placing words horizontally and vertically--but as quickly as possible. That's right, no turns, this game is a speed game. When a player has placed all their letters, they shout "Split", and all players must draw another tile from the pile in the center. Words can be removed or rearranged; if a player finds themselves unable to use a tile, they may discard it to the center of the table, but must draw three to replace it. The game ends when when there aren't enough tiles in the draw pile for all players--at this point the first person to use up all their tiles and declare "Bananas" is the winner.

Coincidentally we recently acquired the predecessor to Bananagrams, a game called Pick Two! Pick Two! was designed by Gary Gatchel and first published in 1993. It supports 2-6 players; it contains 180 thin plastic tiles and a scorepad. This game functions almost exactly as Bananagrams, except that when someone has used all their letters, they shout "Pick Two," and all players draw two tiles instead of the one drawn in Bananagrams. There are also wild tiles, which function as the blank tiles in Scrabble do. Lastly and most significantly, the tiles all have a number on the bottom; when the round has ended, all players with unused letters add up these numbers and score that many points--the player with the lowest score after five rounds is the winner.

This post is getting long, so I'll end this shortly; there are a number of other word games to visit. To those who have difficulty in word games, I make this suggestion—memorize the two-letter word list. Yes, it's 96 words, but it’s ridiculous how much easier word games become when you know even a few. You may also notice that there are no two-letter words that contain the letters C or V.

AA  AB  AD  AE  AG  AH  AI  AL  AM  AN  AR  AS  AT  AW  AX  AY  BA  BE  BI  BO  

BY  DE  DO  ED  EF  EH  EL  EM  EN  ER  ES  ET  EX  FA  GO  HA  HE  HI  HM  HO  

ID  IF  IN  IS  IT  JO  KA  LA  LI  LO  MA  ME  MI  MM  MO  MU  MY  NA  NE  NO  

NU  OD  OE  OF  OH  OM  ON  OP  OR  OS  OW  OX  OY  PA  PE  PI  QI RE  SH  SI  

SO TA  TI  TO  UH  UM  UN  UP  US  UT  WE  WO  XI  XU  YA  YE  YO 

***

Time to publish this thing--I should get it in just under the wire. Have a good week everyone, don't forget to drink your ovaltine.

Pictures borrowed from Boardgamegeek.
Two-letter word list is available from a number of different sites.

2.9: Game Review: Ruin

2010-03-04T23:24:00.000-08:00

I haven't done a simple game review in a while, sure, why not.

Ruin is listed as being designed by "Terry Miller Associates;" it was published by Buffalo Games, Inc. in 2008. It supports 2-4 players, and takes 45 minutes to play (though I suspect it could be much, much longer). Retail price is $25, but if you recently visited Borders, you may have been able to pick this up for a whole dollar. That's right, $1. So we'll pose a question, "Was this game worth $1?"

First we'll talk about the components. Ruin comes with a board, eight pawns in 4 colors (two for each player), a deck of cards, a large d20 (that's a 20-sided die) specific to this game, and two interlocking clear plastic...things. These two plastic pieces cover all but the corners of the board, and create the most interesting part of the game's mechanic.

Gameplay is simple, and reminiscent of many games you've probably played in your youth--on your turn you roll the die and move a pawn clockwise around the board, ultimately hoping to get to the "safe area" (in this game, the center of the board) first to win the game. The clever part of this game is the modular path--along each edge of the board (under the plastic cover) there is a slot for three cards; if you roll a number with a red background, you can replace one of the cards along the board edge, replacing it with one from your hand. These cards have a 3x3 grid of brick spaces or black "hole" spaces, and some of the cards have an assortment of colored masks that match the pawn colors.

Replacing the card changes the path, possibly separating one part of the path from another, or as we discovered this weekend, could also move a pawn (like your opponent's pawns) from a brick space to a hole space, causing that pawn to fall back along the path. Here's where the colored masks come into play--when you fall in a hole (or a player ends their turn by stepping on you), you fall back to the closest mask space in your pawn color. If you've passed the halfway point, there is an Ah Kinchil mask in your color; since the corner spaces can't be changed, it becomes important to pass the halfway point. This is actually an excellent design choice, since this alone does a lot to keep this game from going on forever.

Jackie, D, Danny and I played this over the weekend on a lark--it was on the table and the rules were short. Despite it's simple roll and move mechanic, the game was hilarious. Eventually Jackie and Danny were within a few turns of victory, and spent every opportunity thwarting each other. I was horribly behind, so D and I were locked in mortal combat one card away from my start area. Ultimately it was Jackie who won, distracting us with Danny's misfortune (he'd been separated from his stair area by a card which had no path to them, and repeatedly failed to roll a red-background number).

Overall I was surprised and pleased by this game--while I'm probably not going to insist on playing it, in instances where I'd play a traditional game, such as Sorry!, this will be high on the list of candidates. My concerns about the game potentially taking forever still stand, though this was assuaged by the placement of the Ah Kinchil masks at the halfway point of each player's path. The game was only slightly longer than the stated 45 minutes. Of course my opinion of the game was largely influenced by the group I was playing with--everyone realized this game had a good bit of randomness, and took it as a simple and funny experience, not a challenge to be won.

Final verdict? "I'll buy that for a dollar!"

Sorry, I had to do it.

If anyone didn't get that joke, you need to spend less time doing important things, and more time watching crappy 80's robot cop movies.

2.8: Know your Gamer - Gamer OCD

2010-02-24T23:11:00.000-08:00

A little late on this post, as work is keeping me rather busy--at least they're feeding me well.

Got some gaming in this week, playing Puerto Rico, Ingenious, and Agricola with D and Danny. I managed to walk away with a victory in all three, largely because it was D and Danny's first games of Ingenious and Puerto Rico; still, I only won each game by a very few points. Agricola was great fun but awful; we all seemed to be doing poorly the entire game, and it was only because of a large number of bonus points I gained at the end (and a large amount of baby-making) that won me the game. In my opinion Danny did the best, especially considering he only had two family members (and thus only two actions) the entire game.

I'm still doing a little work in the loft, aka my game room, so hopefully I'll have pictures of that in the near future.

This is our hobby, so it makes sense to take care of one's games; there is also a collecting aspect to the hobby, so one may want to display their games; games are also for playing, so making that easier and more enjoyable is reconcilable. However, we gamers may sometimes take it a bit too far.

I don't know where or how this has developed into an aspect of the gaming hobby; perhaps people drawn to gaming are naturally inclined toward categorization and order, just as they must don black t-shirts. Perhaps it is a behavioral remnant of our long-ago gaming ancestors, who had to have the shiniest pebbles organized in the best woven basket. Whatever the reason, many a gamer exhibits some form of Gamer OCD.

I'm not even going to pretend that I'm not a part of this, so I'll start with the reason for this week's topic--tuckboxes. A tuckbox is simply a box with an edge that you tuck in to hold the box shut, such as the box that holds a standard deck of cards. I've mentioned that we've been playing Agricola recently; this game comes with over 200 cards in multiple decks, but not all the cards are used in a given game. There is no method to store the cards inside the box, so one has the choice of ever-so-delicately navigating the box around, or finding a way to keep the decks separated despite jostling.

Rubber bands, of course! Well, rubber bands do work for a while, but there are two problems with rubber bands--first, rubber bands eventually degrade, and cease to work; second, over time rubber bands can damage the cards, either by staining/melting to the cards, or by damaging the edges of the cards. Tuckboxes are a simple, permanent solution. Boardgamegeek.com has a great and variously talented community, and some of these members have taken it upon themselves to design appropriately sized and visually appropriate tuckboxes, all one has to do is print, cut out, and tape these boxes and, like magic, the decks of cards are henceforth and forever separated. Being able to print these out is especially useful in that the boxes are designed for the card size and deck size, as not all cards are standard Poker card size, nor are they all 52 card decks--Agricola's E-deck, for instance, is over a hundred cards.

I'm also known to bag my game components, that is, I went to WalMart and purchased a number of small zip-loc type baggies, and after I've played a game for the first time, we separate and bag all the little bits into a systematically logical number of these baggies. This sounds like a bit of work, but in reality it only adds a few minutes to the end of the game, but greatly speeds up the set-up. When I open my game boxes, I'm able to toss Jackie the red player-pieces, toss Robert the green player-pieces, have someone set up food, clay, wood and stone tokens while I shuffle cards (a shiny nickle to whoever guesses that game first), and we're ready to play. This is a vast difference from having to pick ten green tokens from the 150+ wooden bits, plus the cardboard tiles and cards that would always be mixed among each other. D and Danny recently purchased Puerto Rico, a game which comes with several hundred different cardboard chits that go a number of places on and off the board--it could take 15 minutes or more just to sort through all this, but instead we took less than five minutes to separate and bag the bits after we played last weekend.

I'm only going to mention this briefly, since it's a point of contention on the BGG forums. Game storage seems simple and straightforward enough, but there are two camps waging a constant war--okay, it's not so bad, but people have very strong opinions on the orientation games should have on one's shelves. Spining (spine-ing--see the horror to the right) involves standing a game on it's side, like you would a book on a bookshelf; stacking is exactly what you think it is--placing a series of games atop each other.

I'm not going to state my opinion on this, but the wrong people believe that games should be spined, as they look better on the shelves this way, and it's easier to store them, see them, and get access to them when they are spined. The disadvantage of storing games this way is that components can be jumbled around when a game is spined, and more importantly, the boards can warp or bow over time. The ever-brilliant, much better looking people that stack their games ideally do so by stacking similar sized boxes atop each other--this often keeps sets of games or games by similar publishers together, but prevents any board damage. The disadvantage, however, is that there are many different box-sizes, making same-size stacking difficult; mismatched stacking can lead to either the box top or bottom (or both) bowing in, and can also split the box corners if too much weight is on one box. Of course, given the choice between a damaged box and a damaged board, the game can still be played with a damaged box (well, that might not work with Niagara, but that's an infrequent case).

Perhaps the biggest thing I'm a stickler about is food; I really try to limit what is eaten around boardgames. This goes for everyone's boardgames, not just my own, though I do make a point of limiting what foods are available when we have guests over for game nights. I want my games to be played, but I also want to be able to play these same games years from now.

Greasy foods damage the paper components of games, leaving permanent stains (oh, I'm not playing this, he has that counter-card with the moon-shaped grease stain), and in severe cases destroying the integrity of the components. Drinks could be a major issue, but I do enjoy quaffing a carbonated beverage while I play, so this is a "risk" that is acceptable. Besides greasy foods, foods that leave particles everywhere are frowned upon while playing (think Cheetos), and this is because of mold. Anyone who is a boardgamer should take mold into consideration, and having smelled a moldy boardgame and seen the damage mold can do, this is the primary reason I monitor what is eaten during gaming. Mold requires three components to grow--a cool temperature, humidity, and a food source. I live in Southern California, so temperature and humidity are mostly taken care of for ten months of the year, but keeping foodstuffs out of the games is another way to prevent mold spores from finding a foothold.

Now that I've made my confessions, do I think Gamer OCD can go too far? Probably. Something that seemed a little over the top was someone who mentioned he wanted to find a way to shellac or otherwise laminate the game box so it wouldn't show wear. Someone should have pointed out that there is a "spray on glass" product coming on the market soon, but...

Okay, I'm doing a bad job of proving my point. My point was going to be, "Yes, Gamer OCD can go too far," but damn if I can't think of an example right now. Doubtless I'll edit this entry when no one's looking, and make an extremely clever example which will change gaming culture, leading it into the next decade.

***

Enjoy your week, everyone. Hard to believe it's almost the end of February, a sixth of the year gone like that.

Pictures borrowed from Boardgamegeek.com

Being bored isn't safe for me...or my family

2010-02-18T10:48:00.000-08:00

THIS...IS...AGRICOLA!

Something additional, and strange for this week--I realized this week's post was short, so I figured I'd throw this up here. No comments about sloppiness, I can do better, but did this in about ten minutes; the enlarged jaw on Danny was intentional. I almost thought about going bigger.

Jackie and I did play a game of Agricola with D and Danny (our second, their first)--the game was longer than expected, partly because we were trying to remember the rules and partly because the game was new to all of us. I won by a large margin, but don't doubt that the next game will be closer. Best moment of the game, about half-way through D looks at the board and her cards, and suddenly shouts out, "I just got the game!"

Looking at this, I'm tempted to do a "good" one, print it at Kinkos and hang it on the wall of our loft.

2.7: Congrats to my sister...

2010-02-16T23:55:00.000-08:00

Who won the Ticket to Ride Regional Championship this past weekend. She was given a gold-plated scoring marker, and will be traveling to The Gathering of Friends in beautiful Columbus, Ohio this April to participate in the National Championships.

Color me jealous.

At my excited declaration that my sister was now invited to the GoF, she initially asked "What's the Gathering of Friends?"--a question that almost resulted in her murder. I am aware of a number of people that entered the tournament simply for this opportunity.

For those of you who aren't familiar, the Gathering of Friends is a invitation-only convention, attended by less than 500 people. Many of the regular attendees are industry professionals, be they game designers, publishers, or whatnot. The event is held by Alan Moon, the designer of the Ticket to Ride series of games--hence why the championships are being held there. In addition to the general gaming that occurs over the week-plus long event, there are special events, tournaments, a flea market, the opportunity to play game prototypes and games before their official release. Invitation to this event is sought after; every year a number of people on BGG ask "How do I get invited to the GoF? PLEEEEEESE!" However, it's not something you can just ask for, as stated before it is invitation only, though regular attendees can sometimes bring a guest.

Now my sister is training and thankfully has looked into the GoF, and is now excited. She's been looking online and seen video taken by Rick Thornquist of the 2006 event, and I believe now is beginning to understand the significance of this invitation.

So, once again, congratulations to my sister. And, if she gets to take a guest, she better take me. I think Danny (her husband) has something to do that day, and he probably wouldn't enjoy himself there anyway.

2.6: You guessed it, Dexterity Games!

2010-02-10T19:14:00.000-08:00

Does anyone out there have children? I have two daughters, and this week my oldest has decided that she's going to take her naps at the end of the day, and then keep us up until midnight. The end of the day is when I usually write, so that has caused me a few difficulties--beyond the fact that I've been perpetually tired for the last week. I'm not complaining, but...okay, I am complaining. I can't wait until my daughter is a teenager, I really need to keep a log I'll call "What you did," and as she complains about whatever horrible parent-thing I do, I'll allow her to check off one comparable item. I'm certain I'll still owe her after she's moved out.

***

As I mentioned in my last post, while I do enjoy many types of games, Speed games and Dexterity games have a special draw for me. A dexterity game is a game in which play requires some kind of physical manipulation of the pieces. This can be stacking blocks, flicking pieces, etc. This can be turn-based, which is what I'd call a pure-dexterity game (such as the mass market classic, Jenga), and can include a more real-time manipulation of the pieces, which we'll call an Action-dexterity game (something along the lines of Foosball would fit in this category).

You might be surprised to hear that a dexterity game was made into an epic war game. It's a personal favorite of mine, a game of heroes, daring attacks, sabotage, and willing sacrifice for your cause. A game who's deep theme and elaborate conflict resolution system can be pared down to two sentences.

Insects. And Tiddly-winks.
X-BUGS
Yes, you heard me correctly. X-Bugs was published in 2001 by Steve Jackson Games/Nexus, and was recently republished as Micro-mutants: Evolution. While I do have both copies of the game (or multiple copies...of both versions, we'll just skip talking about that), we'll discuss the X-bugs version.

X-Bugs was designed by Francesco Nepitello and Marco Maggi and published in many countries by many publishers. In the US there were four different boxes for the game, each box containing two armies and supporting two players. The boxes could be combined; though there were only four different armies, each army came in two colors, so up to eight people could play.

The idea is simple--you want to destroy your opponent's three bases, large stationary chips which are placed at the beginning of the game. To acheive that end, you have an array of different insects at your disposal, determined by which army you are playing. On the whole, you attack by flipping a "soldier" (a la Tiddly-winks) and landing on top of your opponent's soldiers or bases, removing them from the game. You roll three dice at the beginning of each turn, and this determines which pieces you can flick, but where you move them is up to you. Or perhaps not, if you're really bad at Tiddly-winks.

That seems simple enough, except that each army has several different types of soldiers, each with different powers--some of which are determined by which side the wink is laying on (the wink being the little plastic chip--I suppose that's the source of the name Tiddly-winks, though the act of "tiddling a wink" sounds a little dirty). Some of the soldiers can be flicked twice, some can't be attacked when on their "hidden" side, some take an attacker down with them if their stinger side is up. Added to this, several little "resource" winks are dropped onto the table at the game's beginning, and these are used to upgrade bases, making them stronger, but also providing bonuses to certain pieces.

I picked this game up several years ago for a few dollars; my friends and I have teased it as "Super Tiddly-Winks," but despite this, I really enjoy this game. There is enough luck that it could be anyone's game, but there's enough skill and flicking technique to be learned that an experienced player or someone who has a natural knack for dexterity games (feel free to read that as "someone as awesome as me") could expect to fare better than inexperienced opponents.

SPINBALL
Alright, I have to talk about Spinball. Spinball was designed by Aaron Weissblum and supports two players. We played with this game a little at BGG.con this past year, and it was very, very fun. There is one problem, completely unintentional and unknown to me until I did a little research on this game--and I'm going to come out and say this right now. There were between 50 and 100 of these produced around 2001. They sold for $150 then, and there are no more in production; the creator doesn't even have one. If you want one, you have to either murder someone that owns one (or I suppose you could just buy it off of them), or make one yourself. Keep in mind that this is someone else's intellectual property, so any laws you may break by making your own board are all on you--I take no responsibility for your law-breaking ways.

Spinball is played on a rectangular board with rails on the long edges. There is a small bumper in the middle of the board parallel to the short edges, and on each side of this bumper there is a hole slightly larger than a ping-pong ball. Players stand opposite each other on the short edges, and attempt to shoot a ping-pong ball into the hole--but they are aiming for the hole on the opposite side of the bumper. To aid in this, each player has a yoke-like ball holder and a launcher that has wedge-shaped piece of rubbery silicone. By pressing down on the top of the ball, you are able to put backspin on it, and by positioning your holder and/or banking off the side walls, it is possible to get the ball to go into the hole. I assure you, it is possible, and damn does it feel good when you do.

All you have to do is score 5 points, but you can opt to forgo scoring to place a metal blocker in the hopes of messing up your opponent. Jackie and I didn't play a full game, but we did take several dozen shots, some of which skirted around the hole, and I believe both of us actually made one shot each.

CHEESE
And how could I cover dexterity games without talking about Cheese? Okay, in truth, I really, really could have, and I would hardly call this a dexterity game. While at BGG.con this past year, I glanced through the 2009 Essen release table, and found this foam rectangle that looked like Swiss cheese with a little nibble on one corner; I couldn't help but check it out of the library. We hadn't walked 100 feet before I'd finished reading the rules, and after laughing and giving our table a ten-second demo, it went straight back to the library. If you're familiar with press-your-luck dice game Pass the Pigs, this game is quite similar. The goal is to score 12 points by flicking the cheese block into the air, the side it lands on determining how many points you get--if it lands nibble-side down on the broad face, you get one point; the long edge is three points, and the short edge is 9 points. You can always choose to flick the cheese again in the hopes of scoring more points, but if it lands on the broad side with the nibble facing up, the turn ends and no points are gained. Strangely, this game was designed by Michael Sohre, the guy who has designed more than one gorgeous, even art-quality, games such as Fire (see photo on right).

***

Alright, this one is late, but only by a day. Still trying to find a normal writing schedule this year, especially for other projects I'm working on. One bit of gaming goodness this week, I completed a trade with someone from BGG, and am now the happy owner of Agricola. In case you're wondering, it's a really awesome game. About farming.

I'm also looking at Agricola and a few other games I own, and have to admit that it's the first time I've been tempted to make tuck-boxes. I already exhibit gamer-OCD in having to sort and store the game pieces in small zip-lock baggies, and this appears to be just another step down that spiral.

Photos borrowed from Boardgamegeek.com

2.5: Simultanous action speed Games

2010-02-02T19:17:00.000-08:00

Down to the wire, but it's here and on time. Not much gaming this week, but I did do a little work in the loft, aka My Game Room. See if you can guess what next week's topic is.

Also, you may have noticed that the posts include a number, for instance, this post is "2.5". This simply means this is the 5th post of the second year of this blog, and I hope this serves as a way to keep track of each post. I'll probably spend a little time in the near future numbering all the old posts as 1.whatever.

Most games require that players take turns--Player A rolls the dice and moves his pieces, Player B rolls the dice and moves her pieces, Player C, Player D... The type of games I'll talk about today are Simultaneous action speed games, sometimes simply called "Speed Games" or "Real Time" games.

These function exactly as they sound--all players act at the same time, and attempt to do so quickly. Many may be familiar with a card game using a standard deck of cards, I learned it as "Speed;" in this game the deck of cards is dealt between two players, and players attempt to get rid of their cards by playing to a common pile, playing numbers in sequence. This game is frenzied, fast and fun (sorry, that alliteration was unintended), and perhaps best of all it takes only a few minutes to set up and play--this is a general trend in these types of games.

Interestingly, both games I'm covering today are by the same company, Cheapass Games. A quick note on Cheapass Games--they have an interesting concept for their games, that is, you can get dice, pawns, money, and other stuff that makes a game expensive from your other games. As such, if you purchase one of their games, you are basically buying rules, cards and a board (printed in black and white on cardstock). The games are clever and quite humorous, and usually run $6 or less. That said, they did have a line of games that were printed in color, as are the two games presented here.

BRAWL
Brawl was designed by James Ernest, and first published in 1999. It is a two-player game, and each player needs a deck in order to play. The game is currently out-of-print, but it can be purchased from Paizo; while the decks were originally around $6, they appear to be on sale for around $2.50. There were 16 decks printed for this game, each representing a different character. It is possible to play the same character against itself--of course each player would need a copy of that character. There is also a 17th character available as a free download, so if you're interested, you can print two out and give it a try.

The theme of the game is that of a street-fight, and the gameplay is simple; each deck has a combination of bases, hits, blocks, clears, and three freezes. The game starts with two bases out, one for each player, and are the points of contest. There can never be more than three Bases out at a time, and never less than one. Hits come in three colors, Red, Blue and Green; each of these cards counts as one point (some characters have some Hit 2 cards, which is worth two points), and whoever has the most points on their side of each Base when the Freeze cards come up (or the owner of the base if there is a tie) wins that base--whoever has the most Bases wins. Playing a Hit on an opponent's side is an option, and can be a strategic play--once a Hit is played on a Base, all further Hits on that side must be in the same color. If you know that some characters have a low number of a color, you can play that color to their side.

Blocks are played on an opponent's side, and must be played on a Hit and in the Hit's color. They do exactly what they say, preventing any further cards being played on that side. Clears are also aptly named, they eliminate a base and everything on it from the game, but can only be played on the left or right Base; if there is a Base in the middle, it is essentially protected. Obviously you'd want to play these on a base your opponent is winning. Finally, the Freeze cards; these are always placed at the bottom of a deck, and once they are played nothing else can be placed on that base, and the game ends.

When the game begins, players draw the top card of their deck, and either play it or discard it; yes, it's that simple. You can probably see that there is a bit of strategy to this game, despite the 1-2 minutes it takes to play; there are even times you may want to delay the play of a card, or simply discard cards as quickly as possible if you have a solid lead.

I should note that the game started with six decks (Brawl), then had two subsequent sets (Brawl: Club Foglio and Brawl: Catfight--actual cat-girls, not girls fighting), which introduced a small number of additional card types with their own powers, such as one that cancels a Block.

LIGHT SPEED
Now, from a street-fight to spaceship combat with Light Speed. Light Speed was first printed in 2003 as part of their "Hip Pocket" line (which were games designed to, you guessed it, fit in your pocket), again designed by James Ernest. It plays 2-4 players, takes around 5 minutes to play, and costs around $5...if you can find a copy. This game is apparently out of print as well, though I know I've seen it recently on the shelf of more than one game store, and some online stores appear have copies.

In this game each player has a deck of ten ships, numbered from 1 to 10; the #1 ship is the smallest and fastest, and the #10 is the slowest and biggest--this will make sense in a moment. Two asteroid cards are placed at the center of the play area and six tokens placed on each asteroid. Each player shuffles their ten ships, and when play begins players place their ships, in whatever orientation they want, onto the playing area. When one player has placed all their ships, they call "stop," and any players that have cards left in their hand are unable to play them.

And then chaos, I mean scoring, ensues. Each ship has white, red, or green lasers (or a combination thereof) pointing from their turrets, white and red "shield" areas on the card borders, and one to four red dots that indicate the ship's health. The white laser does one point of damage, the red two, and the green three. The goal of the game is to score the most points by mining (shooting) the asteroids and by destroying opponent ships. Here's where the ship numbers come into play--remember I said the #1 ship is the fastest? The number indicates the ship's initiative, lowest numbers going first. Thus, all #1 ships activate at the same time, shooting their single white and red laser. Using some type of straight edge (the rules suggest a broken rubber band, which does work quite well), trace a path from the laser to the first object it hits. If it is an asteroid, take a token from the asteroid and place it on the ship that shot it; if it is a ship, place a token in the shooting player's color onto the now-damaged ship, unless it strikes a "shield" area, in which case nothing happens.

And that's pretty much it--ships continue firing in their initiative order until ship ship #10 shoots. Any ships that take damage that equals or exceeds the number of health they have are destroyed immediately, and the ship card given to the player that delivered the most damage to it. Keep in mind that this means it is possible to destroy a ship before it's initiative has come up; for instance, if the #6 ship (with two health) is hit by the #3 ship's red laser, it is immediately removed from the board, and never gets to shoot. Also, any ships that are carrying asteroid tokens must survive through all ten ship activations in order to score; if they are destroyed, the tokens are simply discarded. When all is said and done, players score a point for each asteroid token, each health point of opponent ships destroyed, and minus a point for each health of their own ships they destroyed.

The scoring is fairly quick, but the real meat of the game is in the initial fast-playing part of the game. Since your ships will come out in a random order, you have to decide quickly where to place it, whether you want it to mine or attack another ship, and if it will act before or survive a strike from another nearby ship--all while your opponents are doing the same. Instances of one-upmanship abound, as players repeatedly place faster and faster ships next to each other in an effort to protect their own ships, and even this can lead to problems as ships are destroyed in scoring, and you find your lasers striking your own ships.

For whatever reason I find myself drawn to Speed games and Dexterity games. Perhaps it's my fast reflexes, quick wit, steady hand, and glinting-white smile. Maybe not. Despite my own enjoyment, I do see some disadvantages to Speed games--the speed aspect somewhat limits the potential players. Players who can't act quickly, or who have difficulty making quick assessments of the table, may not enjoy or simply be unable to play this type of game. Playing with, say, your 80 year old grandmother, may not be possible--but that's your grandmother. Mine was able to outrun the orderlies when the laundry truck opened the front gate. But that's another story.

***

That's it for this week; I know the holiday season is over, but don't forget to support your Friendly Local Game Store (FLGS). If you do have an FLGS, that is a thing to cherish; don't forget that they need to pay the bills, too.

Along those lines, I recently picked up a copy of the new Tyranid Codex for Warhammer 40k. I won't talk about it, but let's just say that it involves playing with hundreds of little plastic figures--not dolls.

Images borrowed from Boardgamegeek.com.

2.4: Know your Gamer - Conventions

2010-01-25T12:16:00.000-08:00

I mentioned in this post what a convention is, and since I have some family members attending their first boardgaming convention in February, I decided to go through some suggestions for them and any other convention newbies.

1. Bring snacks and water. You'll be indoors for an unknown period of time, and if you're unfamiliar with the area or building you're in, there may be no water faucets or food-providing venues nearby. If you're attending an event at the convention, it may be scheduled for two hours and run for four. You may be heading out to eat, and find a "can't miss" even that you pass by and find you're interested in participating in. Best to be prepared, even if it's just a few granola bars to tide you over.

2. Parking. Find out as much as you can about parking, before and after arriving at your destination. Some parking lots may be closed on the weekend, or cost a stupid amount to use. You may find, as a few of my friends did too late, that the parking lot with the suns painted on the wall is closed at night, and the one with the owls painted on the walls is open late. Because there wasn't anywhere actually informing them of this, they had an ordeal finding someone who was able to open the garage and let them out.

3. Events. You're probably going with something in mind, but don't be afraid to try something besides this. Many conventions will have a schedule or program, online or on-site; glance through this, see if anything catches your interest. Likewise, if you're walking around the convention, and see something interesting, don't be afraid to stop and watch--no one is going to yell at you for watching, and they may invite you to participate. And if they do yell at you, you have my permission to kick them in the nuts. Also, keep an eye out for special guests--you never know who may have been invited to attend the convention.

4. Walk the convention. There is probably a lot to look at, participate in, there may be convention-specials on games, game demonstrations, whatever. Don't just stay in the main hall, either--there are probably a number of other events going on in nearby rooms.

5. DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING! Okay, perhaps not so serious, but some people are a little too anal-retentive about their gaming. It's generally best to engage in conversation or simply ask if it's okay to look at whatever may have caught your eye. Also, some games (particularly miniature wargames--if you see dozens of inch-tall models on a table, that's probably what you're looking at) are very measurement-sensitive, and moving a model even a quarter-inch could alter a game. This isn't meant to scare you, but to try to ease you into the convention experience. Now you know, and knowing is half the battle.

6. Socially...akward? Gamers are brilliant, sexy, well-groomed, charismatic orators. Perhaps not--not all gamers are as lucky as I am. Most are just normal people, and then this wouldn't even be worth mentioning, but...some gamers. Let's just say someone may approach you and tell you about their D&D character. This may mean nothing to you now, but if it happens you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. I do my best to take it in stride; my suggestion is to handle it as positively as possible--you're all at the convention to have a good time, you don't want to ruin anyone's day.

7. Make...friends? Years ago Brian, Joseph and I attended Origins in Columbus, Ohio. While eating lunch, we gestured at a girl sitting alone with this really pissed-off look on her face, and made comments about how friendly she appeared and such. We also mentioned that she probably had no MarioKart skills, and would suck and the Metroid video game series. Joseph was the one to introduce himself later, and now I consider her and her group of friends (whom we met the next day) my convention family, and great friends.

8. Participate in a demo. There may be individuals or even a publisher giving demonstrations of their games. Give it a shot--you may find something you like. Or, just as good, something you don't like, and perhaps save yourself a purchase you'd regret.

9. Have fun. Or don't. I really don't care.

***

That's it for this week, for those interested, my sister D is participating in the Ticket to Ride tournament in February. Wish her luck--or don't. I, personally, am somewhere in the middle, only because it frustrates the poo out her when she loses that game.

2.3: This...is...STONE AGE!

2010-01-21T17:58:00.000-08:00

Alas, the streak is broken. Now we'll see how long it takes before I miss a week's post. We've been getting a surprising amount of gaming in during the last week, despite our newly busy schedules. We even goaded Jackie into "spending time with the family," and got her to join in a game of Stone Age recently.

Stone Age has been getting a lot of play around here lately--At around two hours a play, I think it needs a review here. Also, if you take a look at the picture, you'll see the jazzy Chief's crown I'm wearing, which, unfortunately, I've recently had to surrender. You may recall that my brother David declared himself Chief after our New Year's game, but within a few days of that, I beat he and Danny in a rematch, and then followed that up with a slaughter of these two and Robert; this picture was sent in an email to both David and Danny. Unfortunately, all that mocking brought me was failure, as recently we played another game where I defeated Danny and my sister D, but was finally defeated soundly by Danny (a 40 point loss) in a 4-player game.

Stone Age was designed by Bernd Brunnhofer and Michael Tummelhofer. It was released in 2008 by several publishers; domestically the publisher is Rio Grande Games. It plays 2-4, and though it's play time is listed as 60 minutes, it's more like 90-120 minutes.

The primary mechanism of Stone Age is worker-placement--you begin the game with five meeples (wooden people), the allocation of which determines what you are able to do on your turn. Players alternate placing groups of their meeples to collect the four resources (lumber, brick, stone, gold), to collect food, hut tiles or cards, to advance agriculture, build tools, or make babies.

Really, that's one of the actions--you can place two meeples on the love shack, er, hut space; strangely, a fully grown, able-bodied person is formed by this union. I guess this is the stone age, there really weren't child labor laws, so I guess it could be a working-age child.

The resources you gather are used in specific combinations to take Hut tiles, which score points when taken, or in a less specific manner to buy Civilization cards, which provide a broad range of benefits immediately (take a resource, score a few points, receive some food, etc.), and provide scoring bonuses post-game.

On a player's turn, they place a single set of meeples, it can be just one, up to the full number of meeples you currently have (maximum of 10, but that's a lot of mouths to feed) onto one location on the board. Once they have placed, the next person plays a set of their meeples, and so on. This does mean that some players may play only one or two large groups of meeples, and they are simply skipped as the rest of the players (who played smaller groups or single meeples) place the rest of theirs. The strategy lies in when and where to place, as some places have only a single "spot" to be taken (each individual hut or Civilization card, and the agriculture, tool, and "makin' babies" location); each resource can hold a maximum of 7 meeples, so if Bob places six meeples on the lumber, there is only one spot left for someone else to take.

So everyone has placed their meeples, now everyone takes their stuff, right?

Well...mostly. The placement of the meeples on the resource locations determines how many dice you roll for that resource. In the example above, Bob would roll six dice, one for each meeple placed on lumber. He then adds the dice together, and divides the sum by 3 (the resource cost of lumber), and receives that many lumber. Each resource has a different value: food is 2, brick is 4, stone is 5, and gold is 6. As you can see, placing a single meeple on gold would yield a gold resource only on the roll of a 6, so the placement of multiple meeples is recommended. It is possible to receive no resources as the result of a poor roll. For those who are convinced that dice hate them (*ahem* Robert *ahem*)Tools can mitigate poor rolling and the randomness of dice--these provide a once-a-turn bonus to one roll; this can be as little as +1 to a total, and be as high as +12 if tool development was maxed out.

Each of these locations is assessed at the player's discretion--players do not need to pick up their resources in the order they placed their meeples, nor in a pre-determined order. This becomes important on several levels--they may need to gather a certain resource before they gather a hut, may want to delay picking something up if it will help another player (as certain civilization cards do), or may want to be sure they have enough food at the end of the turn.

And that's the last part of the turn--once everyone has assessed and picked up all their meeples, they need to pay one food per meeple--your cave people are going to be hungry after all that hard work, or all that lazing about if you rolled poorly (it's the caveperson's fault, afterall). As an aide here, every point of agriculture subtracts one from the amount of food a player needs--a person with 2 agriculture and 7 people only needs to pay 5 food. If they do not have enough, the player must then pay a resource per meeple who still needs food, or forgo this and take a -10 point penalty for starving their tribe.

The game continues until one stack of hut tiles is gone, or when there are not enough Civilization cards to refresh the 4-card draw area. At this point players would figure out their post-game scoring which results from the Civilization cards they've acquired. These will be either multipliers for their tools, agriculture, hut tiles, or people, and what we call "relic" cards (really named "culture symbols"--but that's too long to say) which score according to how many different ones you've collected. Of course, whoever has the most points at the end wins.

Apparently we've quite enjoyed this game recently, and there's a lot of banter going back and forth, even after the game has finished. Strategic placement and blocking of opponents is a must, and despite all the choices one has on their turn, this game keeps a pretty steady flow without much down-time. Indeed, keeping an eye on the board is critical even when it's not your turn, as your opponents actions can make other actions more urgent. You may need only one lumber to fulfill a hut tile you've already placed on, and even though you'd rather take agriculture, if a player plops down six meeples on the lumber spot, waiting on that spot means you don't take that tile this turn. The dice are also an interesting factor, as even placing a large group of meeples can still yield few or no resources--comments about certain meeples not pulling their own weight, or sleeping on the job abound.

***

That's it for the week; yes, it's late, but at least I posted this week. I am contemplating reducing my posts to once every two weeks so that I can free up some time for another project, but I'll keep you posted. Perhaps now would be a good time to solicit guest-bloggers, in order to fill in those non-posting weeks? I'll keep you all posted.

By the way, if you do read this thing, do me a favor and "follow" this blog so I know you're out there, and leave a comment. Comments about how awesome I am are especially appreciated.

Take care all.

2.2: What is this gaming thing? Part 5 - Where did I go wrong?

2010-01-12T18:46:00.000-08:00

That's right, two, count them, two posts on time in a row! Time for a new "What is this gaming thing?" segment, and now there's an end in sight. This is part 5 of the ongoing series, "What is this gaming thing?" Click here for parts One, Two, Three, and Four.

There used to be stores in the mall called either The Game Keeper or Wizards of the Coast--here they sold, obviously, Wizards of the Coast products, but also products from other companies. The walls were filled with wargames, modern and traditional boardgames, collectible card games, dice of many types, and other gaming related paraphernalia. I don't recall how I found this place, it's very possible my best friend Brian took me along to this place of wonder; inevitably, this became a place I'd regularly visit on any trip to the mall.

My spending was meager, I'm sure; I was in high school and college when the stores were open, and though I got my first job as soon as I graduated high school, most of the money I made went to tuition. Still, I picked up a few things--Lunch Money, a card game about fighting on the playground; Knightmare Chess, an addition to standard chess that makes things really chaotic; Plague and Pestilence, a game about, well, plague and pestillence, and which is now strangely worth $200-300; and a game that remains among my favorites, RoboRally, a race game where you program robots to navigate a dangerous factory floor. There were other purchases, including some of the "collectable" variety--we won't talk about those. Let's just say new gamers are often excited to play whatever they can get their hands on, and when your game group consists of three people, you're going to have to take some chances.

My collection was small, but even if it was at 25 games, it crushes that of the average household, where ten games would be a large collection. But one day something horrible happened. The last months of 2003, Wizards of the Coast announced they would be closing all their stores...and I had saved up a little money.

What does one have to do with the other? Well, if you've ever witnessed a store closing, you'll understand; I don't know how all the economics work, but apparently it's cheaper to try to sell everything out rather than pack it up and move the stock to another related store, even if it's right down the street. And if an entire line of stores is closing, the prices drop fast.

I was unaware of the announcement, but one day I walk in to the Wizards of the Coast stores (as the Gamekeeper stores had been renamed), and everything was 30% off, and stuff that had been hidden in the back room was "specially priced" at even less. I picked up a few things. I showed up the next week, and the 30% was replaced with a 40%. I picked up some more. This continued, and apparently there was a warehouse somewhere that also needed to be emptied, and though the staff seemed to be reduced, the stores continued to be restocked.

In the past I had to be cautious with my purchasing--I'd do what research I could, and usually make several visits picking up and putting down the same game several times before I actually bought anything. But when the games were marked down to 80% or more, and I was buying $40 large-box games for as little as $4, and other games for less than a dollar, caution all but went down the toilet. My girlfriend at the time (who I am blessed to be able to now call my wife) was also a bit of an enabler--boardgaming was firmly ensconced as a primary hobby, and her opinion was "Well, you'd probably buy it eventually, you might as well get them cheaper." She even threw in a few games she was interested in--I believe I picked up Cranium and two expansions for around $5.

Eventually, thank goodness, the stores closed for good in the first months of 2004. I'll skip mentioning an actual dollar amount (Jackie, I know you probably remember...), but I'd estimate that overall I paid less than 30% of the retail price of the games. Half of my closet was taken up by stacks of games, and I recall having to step around small piles of games to get to the closet. One of the trips, I recall, did involve Jackie and I leaving with so many large bags that, despite my chivalric intentions, there was no way I could carry them to the car myself.

I had some information on the games I had purchased, but largely my purchases were made by reading the synopsis on the back and looking at the cover. In retrospect I did leave many, many games that I would have done better to pick up--for instance, it would be years later before I purchased a copy of Lost Cities. I was also slightly puzzled by who this "Knizia" guy was, and why his name was on a dozen or more games. Ultimately this excursion lead to the discovery of a website that catered to boardgamers and provided a large amount of information on the games themselves, and provide an opportunity to trade away some of the games I didn't enjoy or simply had no interest in--Boardgamegeek.com.

Regardless, my collection had grown to several times its original size, and if I wasn't a boardgamer before, I certainly was at this point.

Which leaves the question...Where am I now in boardgaming?

***

Alright, finally got this thing posted. You may not believe me, but I usually write down segments of posts I'm planning, and flesh them out shortly after finishing the current week's post. This particular post was 75% complete several months ago, right around the time I posted Part 4 of this thing. I figure I'll wrap it up in the next installment of "What is this gaming thing?", and post a picture of my current collection.

Hope everyone is having a great Twenty-Ten!

The Gamekeeper image taken from the Wizards of the Coast website.

2.1: A most unwinning beginning of 2010

2010-01-04T00:42:00.000-08:00

or "Starting the new year in the middle of the Stone Age"

It's been a busy holiday season; I wish I could say it was 100% restful, but it seems that being away from work brings with it a whole new set of obligations.

On the plus side, time off and time with family means more time for gaming. We did a bit of gaming on the 25th, had friends and family over for a game day on the 26th, and after an exellent dinner of roast beef on the 31st, we brought in the new year with a game of Stone Age, followed by a very close 5-player game of Small World, where we had a tie for first at 66 points (Jackie and David), a tie for last at 62 points (D and myself), and Danny sitting in the middle with 64 points.

I should also point out that of the four games played during the transition from 2009 to "Twenty-ten," not only did I not lose three of the four games, but I came in last in every one of the games I lost. My lone victory was in a filler, a ten minute game called No Thanks! The biggest loss was a game of Stone Age that began in 2009 and ended in 2010--okay, it was actually two hours, but I lost to two people that had never played the game. I don't expect to win every game that I play against inexperienced players (though experience can be an advantage), but it's not even as if I can say it was a close game. Well, it was a close game, for David and Danny, who took first and second, each having around 160 points. I was around 40 points behind Danny.

Perhaps the worst part, however, was my brother David proclaiming that he was the Chief for the next few days.

***

Well, that was the end of 2009, thankfully we've already started this year's gaming pretty strong, having already had a game night on January 2nd, which also brought me the title of Chief by crushing my brother David in a 4-player rematch of Stone Age.

In 2010, my goal is to keep a normal posting update, as stated before, once a week Monday or Tuesday. Also, I may consider efforts to increase reader numbers, and plan to have some guest bloggers do a few posts this year.

Just for fun, let's look at my personal gaming stats for this past year:

Total games played: 105 (that's an average of about 2 games a week)
Number of different games played: 53
Number of games played only once: 34
Number of games played 5 or more times: 4 (Small World, Crokinole, Pack & Stack, Wits & Wagers)
Number of games played 10 or more times: 0
Most played game: Small World (played 9 times)
Most games played in a single day: 8 games, on November 19th (during BGG.Con)
Number of different games played: 53
Month with most games played: November with 28 games played (followed by June with 15, then December with 12)
Number of blog updates: 25 (I started this thing on June 28th of 2009)

1.27: Happy New Year!

2009-12-31T00:27:00.000-08:00

Hopefully everyone's holidays have been pleasant and provided more rest than mine have. As you may have noticed, I've taken a slight break in posting here; while I had planned to do so, this break has been more absolute than intended. Let's just say that Campbell's soup should show some high Chicken Noodle sales for their fourth quarter of this year.

Expect more regular updates in "Twenty-ten."

Take care all.

1.26: If everyone else jumped off a bridge...Holiday Gift Guide

2009-12-12T03:00:00.000-08:00

Well, it seems that everyone I know and all the podcasts and blogs I frequent are doing a "Holiday gift guide." Boardgamegeek.com has their annual gift guide, The Spiel did an entire podcast for theirs, and there seems to be no shortage of other gaming gift guides. There's a lot of great suggestions, a lot of great games and ideas and categories for all types of people and ages (if you have kids, click the word "other" in the previous sentence). With all this, could I have something to contribute?

Well, no. Not really.

Okay, obviously I'm kidding, despite my deepest urge to simply end this update now for S&G.

Despite my urge to send any number of "non-gamer" blindly into a game store, to be struck with awe and then lost amid the vast selection of boardgames (okay, actually that's the opposite of what I want...regardless of how funny that would be), you're probably a thousand times more comfortable doing your boardgame shopping at regular retail stores like WalMart, Target or Kmart. So let's explore some good games you can get at those stores (that should be read with disdain--not for any reason, just because).

Category 1: Retail store games
- For the Adults -

Risk: 2210 A.D. - Enjoy Risk? Does it take too long? Well, Risk 2210 lasts only 6 turns, and features a sci-fi theme and futuristic map of the world...and the moon! Add to this specialized commanders that allow you to buy cards that give you extra troops or special abilities (like the Nuclear Commander, who's cards let you bomb the crap out of the world...or the moon!), and you've got a shorter, tighter, meaner version of Risk. And if you'd prefer more of a fantasy/lore theme...

Risk: Godstorm - This time you lead the Egyptians, Norse, Babylonians, Celts or Greeks, and receive aid from their associated pantheons of gods, all in an effort to conquer Ancient Earth. Like the commanders, these gods allow you to really mess with the game, and if you save up the resources and get the right cards, you can sink one of the continents--the Moon!...I mean, Atlantis! Don't worry, though, your troops can continue to fight in the Underworld, and even return to Earth to aid your army.

- Playable with the Kids -

Don't Break the Ice - Really, if you don't know about this game, I don't even want to talk to you. Just go buy it. It's awesome, and it's for ages 4 and up. I picked this up recently for my two-year old, and despite being two years short of the recommended age, she was mostly able to play this game; I expect with a few more tries and another couple months, she'll be playing this easily. It's normally $8-10, but this time of year you can usually find it for as cheap as $2-4. Give a try at Toys R Us or Kohl's.

Sorry! Sliders - I've mentioned this one several times, and if you still don't own it, I'm going to come over to your house and stomp on your toes. Then I'm going to steal your wallet/purse, take $15 dollars, and leave you a copy of this game. Yes, an advantage of all the holiday hullabaloo, discounted games; Sorry! Sliders at $15 is an excellent price--last I checked, WalMart still had plenty available both in store and online. Children as young as 3 or 4 should be able to play this with a little coaching, and they'll definately love the tactile "flicking" aspect of the game.

Snorta - If anyone has played Slapjack, you're halfway through the rules to this game; as with Slapjack, the goal is to get rid of your cards. Players each have a small barn, inside which they have one animal, which everyone at the table has already seen. A deck of cards is dealt to all players, and one at a time players flip one card face up and place it in front of them. As soon as two players cards match, these players must make the noise of the other person's animal (the one hiding in their barn); the fastest person hands all their face-up cards to the slower.

Obviously this game is loud, and there's a lot of humor in seeing your opponents struggle with remembering exactly which animal you have, and a whole chorus of animal noises pour forth from their mouths. With a little coaching, children around age 5 should be able to play this one.

Blokus - A very simple but challenging spatial and pattern-recognition game; all players begin the game with an identical set of Tetris-like pieces, your goal being to place as many of these pieces on the board. You have two simple caveats--after your first piece is played, all other pieces must touch one of your pieces...and your own pieces can only touch at the corners. When no more pieces can be placed on the board, the number of squares each unplayed piece would take up are tallied, and the player with the lowest score wins.

This game is gorgeous, the clear plastic pieces are wonderful, and the game is an excellent challenge. It begins as a land-grab, and a few turns in becomes a struggle to fenagle the next piece between one or more opponent's pieces. Children around age 5 or 6 sholdn't have a problem with this game, and if they're math/spatially gifted, they'll crush their parents. Good for them.

Blokus 3D (aka Rumis) - This game is similar to Blokus, but your pieces are, obviously from the title, three-dimensional. Like Blokus, each piece you play after the first must touch at least one of your other pieces (though this time on a face, not the corners), but unlike Blokus, in this game you are not spreading out so much as reaching up. In this game, your goal is to either block out or climb upon your opponents, such that at the end of the game your blocks are visible when looking down from above. The player with the most squares visible from this view is the winner.

This game would be clever enough if it was just a matter of playing within a cube, but the game comes with several boards to play upon, each with different base shapes (such as a square or an L) and limits on the maximum height of the structure--some even have multiple such limitations, resulting in stepped pyramids or the like.

I very much enjoy this game. While the most obvious strategy would be to simply continue playing upon your opponents, it's often more benificial if you can simply block off a piece of the base. Keep in mind this is suggested for children 8 and up, but it's an excellent tool for 3D visualization for kids. Best of all, $10 at Barnes and Noble.

***

While this update did focus on games you could buy at large retailers, show the local small game stores some love. I would hope that there's a good shop near everyone, and though this may not be the case, if you do find a good shop, the owners will be more than helpful in guiding you along to games you'd enjoy and are appropriate to your play level. In case you're a new gamer and feeling daring, here's a list of few "stocking stuffer" games that most game stores should have in stock, just to give you a starting point. No links here, just a list of games, you have to do the research (though I will say I highly recommend the asterisked games):

No Thanks!*
Coloretto
Bull in a China Shop*
Blue Moon
Guillotine
Hex Hex
Hive
Lost Cities*

And, just because I'm awesome, I'm going to throw up a few local game stores for California and Utah readers:

California:
GMI Games and Hobby
8300 Limonite Avenue, Suite F
Riverside, CA 92509

Utah:
Game Night Games
2030 S. 900 E. • Suite E
Salt Lake City, UT 84105

1.25: Party games...hooray? Take 2.

2009-12-10T12:54:00.000-08:00

Alright, already said, I'm not a big fan of party games. The benefit of playing a party game is that they scale up, allowing a large number of people or teams to play. Think Pictionary--the minimum to play is 4 (two teams of two), and the maximum is the number of people able to see a give point (ie, the drawing tablet) before the curvature of the earth blocks view. Obviously if you have tall friends, this number is higher. The drawback, the games need to be accessible, and as such are often re-hashes of other party games. How many games have you draw, or do pantomime, or hum songs, or answer trivia questions?

And as stated before, I so, so hate pantomime. I believe my quote from the last party games post was "I'd murder everyone in the room before I played Charades."

Well, I guess it's time for me to eat a little crow.

1:30am rolled around on Saturday night (or Sunday morning, if you want to get all specific), a number of people were extremely eager to get a game of Time's Up going. Jackie and I were about to go to sleep, what with it being past midnight and all, but we'd had a great time with Stephen and Francie, and had done an event (the Spiel-A-Thon!) and gone to dinner with a number of these people. I'd heard about Time's Up, even read the rules--which clearly indicated the second and third rounds promoted pantomime, but didn't understand what all the hullabaloo was about. Perhaps it was the magic of BGG.Con, but I turned to Jackie and said, "Screw it, let's do it. Let's go play this game."

This ended up being my single most memorable event of the con. And this was a damn good con.

We played the Time's Up! Title Recall! version of the game, the game is same as the standard version except the cards were book, song, and movie titles, along with character names. The game is very simple--players are broken into even teams (we played two games, with two teams of 8 and then three teams of 3), then 40 cards plus two per player are dealt out. Each player has to discard two cards, and then all the remaining cards are dealt out and shuffled, and this entire stack passed to the first player. Team members are seated such that they are evenly distributed around the table (ie, in our 8-player game, every other person was on a team). In turn each player has 30 seconds to get their team members to guess what is written on the card, keeping the correctly guessed cards and passing the rest of the stack to the next player. When all the cards are correctly guessed, points are tallied at one point per card, and then the cards are shuffled for the next round.

"You use the same cards for the second round?" Super simple, and you'd think it would get easier, right? Well...the game goes three rounds, and in the first round you can say, sing, hum, gesticulate, whatever you want (besides outright reading the card) to get your team to guess the card--but you can't skip past cards even if they're difficult. The second round you can only say one word, but still may pantomime or hum or make noises as in the first round--though you may skip past a card if you're stuck. In the third round you may not speak, and must get your team to guess the card using only humming, sounds, and pantomime.

A little memory element, so simple and yet so critical in this game, and that's what makes it work. In our game Mark W. made a point of adding some gesture to even the simplest cards, with the hopes that his team would remember in the later rounds. The funniest in-jokes are created in this game, such as Janna's "Sexy Deer" (the card was Deer Hunter) when she gestured shooting a rifle and then swished her hair upward in an attempt to put antlers on her head. Or the phrase "Squatting in the place where I fish" (for Sitting on the dock of the Bay), which became "Squatting!" and then an actual squat in later rounds. And the phrase, "Brrrrrrrr, Nice" in round two...I'll let you guess what that clue was for.

So, yes, the game was excellent, due in large part to the group we played with. I would highly recommend this game if you have friends and family willing to act a little goofy.

***

That's it for today; I'm hoping to get a few extra posts up during the next two weeks as I'll have a little time off for the holidays, but I'm always playing it by ear.

Happy Holidays, everyone.

1.24: BGG.Con Day 1 - What we played

2009-12-05T14:12:00.000-08:00

I've already listed what we played on Day 1 of BGG.Con, but here it is again:

Fluch der Mummie
Pack and Stack (x2)
Agricola
Homesteaders (Just me, Jackie was doing homework)
Crokinole (x3)

I'll give a run-down of what each game is, and a blurb on our own play of it. Writing this, I realize this is going to be a long post, so I've titled each section with the game's name; also, the last paragraph or so a little info on our play experience, and the rest is info on the game itself.

FLUCH DER MUMMIE

Fluch der Mummie was designed by Marcel-André Casasola Merkle and released in 2008 by Ravensburger. It supports 2 to 5 players and takes around 30 minutes, though our game was shorter. The game is played on a vertical magnetic board; one player acts as the mummy and attempting to catch the players, while the players act as explorers trying to gather their treasures first.

Everyone is dealt one of each colored treasure, corresponding to the five areas on the board, and places their magnetic pawn on the starting area. The mummy player places their white pawn on their starting area (on the player side), and the moving token on their side of the board; the mummy never looks at the player side of the board, but instead must surmise where the players are by their actions or when they reveal themselves. Moving the mummy token moves the pawn on the other side, and when the mummy pawn comes into contact with a player pawn, it scoops it up onto itself. The explorers roll 5 dice, which either have a number to move, a slide, or a mummy, which gives that die to the mummy; the player tells the mummy what one action they're choosing to do, and the Mummy must guess where they are. After all players have moved, the Mummy moves according to the number of dice they've been given, plus the number rolled on the mummy-movement die. Eventually the players will run out of dice, but they are free to ask for all the dice back, but immediately gives the Mummy player the chance to move. Players are only revealed when they stop to pick up a treasure (the Mummy can see where the treasure is on their side of the board), and wins if they can capture the explorer players a total of 7 times.

In our game Jackie and one of the other players were in a solid lead, having collected four of their five treasures (I only had two), but the Mummy also had captured us 5 times. Ultimately the Mummy won, with both Jackie and the other player near their final objectives, by capturing myself (I blame poor movement dice--I couldn't get far enough away) and the other player. I believe I was actually captured around three times, never actually being able to move far enough away from the Mummy.

PACK & STACK

Next, with the same husband and wife that invited us over for Fluch der Mummie, we played Pack & Stack. Pack & Stack was designed by Bernard Eisenstein, and released in 2008 by a lot of companies--for our purposes we'll mention Kosmos and Mayfair Games; it supports 3 to 6 players and takes 20-30 minutes. This was a very fun and quick game with a simple goal--suck the least; at least that's what it felt like.

In Stack & Pack each player starts with 50 points, and will generally only lose them from then on. Each turn the players will each roll five dice, colored to correspond with the five colored "goods," and takes the number rolled on the dice. It's possible to end up with zero of one type of good, and a lot of others. Next all players receive two face-down "truck" tiles, and simultaneously flip them over; each truck has open space to be filled in with goods, and a number that represents how high this space can be stacked. Players may choose any but their own trucks, or may choose a random truck from the draw pile.

Once a truck is chosen, players stack the goods, attempting to fill as much space as possible. For each "single" space left open in the truck (ie, the space equal to the white cubes above), the player loses one point, and for any goods left over, the player loses two points per amount of space it takes (in the picture above, left to right the goods take up 5, 1, 4, 3, and 2 cubes of space). At the end of each turn players settle up, and the player who lost the least points gets a 10 point bonus--even with this it's likely the scores just keep descending. The first person to lose all their points ends the game, and the player with points left wins the game.

We played two games of this back to back, and both Jackie and I enjoyed it. In the first game, both gals did very well, while the other guy and I were nearly eliminated at the third turn of the game, though we both miraculously managed to hold on for two more turns--somehow taking a random truck did better for me than choosing one. I somehow ended up winning the first game, and the wife (I feel really bad that I can't remember her name) won the second game by a lot (she still had her 50 starting points, for Pete's sake!).

At this point we wandered a bit and broke for lunch, and by chance ran into Stephen, Dave and Francie from The Spiel, who were arriving to the hotel from the airport. They joined Jackie and I at Denny's, and we split up on arriving back at the con, knowing they would soon have to meet my challenge in a game of Clout.

AGRICOLA

Here Jackie and I got a little adventurous and decided to check out Agricola; I'd been wanting to play this since it came out in 2007, and Jackie had apparently had interest since 2008 when she amazingly did her own research when purchasing Christmas gifts for me, but neither of us could pull the trigger on the $70 price tag. We found a table, sat down to open the box, and stared dumbfounded at the 15 page rulebook...which happens to be in German. Ah, yes, Aldie had purchased that at Essen in 2007. There were English rules printed out, but an initial skim through told me we were in for some trouble. Thankfully Guy from Canada (GUY!) stopped by and showed us how to play, and another convention attendee who had played 3 times before joined us.

There is a lot to say about this game, but let's hit the highlights. Agricola was designed by Uwe Rosenberg and released in 2007 by Z-man games (in the US, it was released by a lot of other companies in other countries as well). It plays 1-5 players and takes about 2 hours to play. It has won a butt-load of awards, including the Spiel des Jahres in 2008 (Special Prize for Complex Game), and is currently the #1 ranked game on Boardgamegeek.com, unseating the multi-year holder of that position, the now #2 Puerto Rico. This is a worker placement, resource management game with a lot of choice; if you're interested in playing, I make the same recommendation I was given--have someone who knows how to play teach you.

Each player has their own board, an open are with a two square hut--part of your goal is to fill in the rest of the open area with more hut (ie, extend your hut), fenced pastures, plowed fields, and stables, but you must collect resources for each of these, and also feed your people and extend your family (ie, make babies). You score points for doing each of these things, or score negative points for each that you don't do, or for unfilled spaces on your board at the end of the game. On each turn, players take actions equal to the number of people they have (you start with two), and though new actions are added as the game progresses, each action can only be claimed by one person a turn. You may need to gather stone, but lumber is produced at only one location, family expansion is available only at one location until late in the game, and so on. You're probably thinking, wow, this game sounds really easy, can you make it harder? Yes, sure, how about you have to feed your people after every few turns, and the penalty for not feeding them...yep, you lose points.

I went into this game interested and optimistic, but the hype didn't do it justice. I did win this game, thanks to my strategy of wholesale slaughter of innocent animals (really), which provided not only enough food for my people to eat, but also allowed me to play all but one of my Occupation cards. This allowed me to upgrade my house from wood to stone (without the intermediate "Clay") using almost no resources, which meant I didn't have to spend time collecting resources as much as Jackie or the other player.

HOMESTEADERS

Tasty Minstrel games was holding teaching sessions for their two games, and afterword did what they called "Winner Cleans Up" play sessions, where the winner of the game kept the copy of the game. Jackie was still a little jet-lagged at this point, so she went up to the room and rested while I wandered around, incidentally into the teaching session. The rules were unexciting and the game actually seemed a little clunky, and I was going to walk out, but for whatever reason I figured I could burn two hours.

I'm very glad I did. This ended up being the surprise of the con for me.

Homesteaders was designed by Alex Rockwell and was published in 2009 by Tasty Minstrel games. It isa game for 3-4 players, and takes approximately 80 minutes (our game took a little over two hours, but that was with us struggling with the rules...and some coallation problems--more on that later). The goal of Homesteaders is to get the most victory points by the end of the game, gained by judicious auction wins and selling of goods. There are three auctions each turn, and each player is able to win only one per turn; in a four player game, obviously someone isn't going to win one, though they do get to advance on the railroad at the bottom of the bidding board, which provides small bonuses such as an extra worker, a trade chit, more income, or the resource of your choosing. The winners of the auctions gain the ability to build one of several types of buildings, each giving a combination of victory points, goods production, or special rules.

Two interesting aspects of the game are debt and trade chits. In order to conduct any trade with the market (selling or buying), you must expend one trade chit; while several buildings provide them, they always seem to be in short supply. Next there's debt--you can feel free to overbid whatever monetary amount you have, and can simply take "debt" tokens and get two silver each. Of course, you do have to pay this back at the end of the game, at a cost of 5 silver each; every unpaid debt token is negative points, one for the first, two for the second, three for the third, and so on. One debt token is no big deal, five, however, is negative 15 points. In our game the scores ranged from the high 40's to the mid 30's (me), so even having three or four debt tokens can take you out of the running.

Wow, did I lose this one. My main problem was that I figured out the game about a turn too late, and as a result missed a few essential auctions and the opportunity to purchase some buildings that would have been a great boon, but beyond that I made some strong and important plays that made me at least somewhat competitive. We did not purchase this game (and obviously I didn't take home the copy we played), but if Jackie had played this game we likely would have. Still, I am strongly considering puchasing this in the near future, especially since it's from a smaller publisher.

Two items of note on this game--first, the games we received were slightly damp; this could be for any number of reasons, but I suspect it's because they were not completly dry after printing. I've been told keeping the game open overnight (before punching any pieces out) gives it enough time to dry, and there is no adverse affect on the game.

Second, in our game we got started late due to a coallating problem. There are a specific number and arrangement of auction tiles for the #1 auction spot, and when we opened our copy we were missing eight of the ten tiles. This does make the game unplayable, but the guys at Tasty Minstrel hopped on the problem immediately at BGG.Con, and continue to do so. They've apparently been opening every one of their some-odd thousand games, checking the parts, throwing in a silica packet (to counter-act the moisture problem) and re-sealing them.

If you have an hesitations after hearing these problems from this or other sites, I ask you to go ahead and make the purchase. Printing issues are often not the fault of the company, and despite this Tasty Minstrel is making an excellent effort to pre-emptively take care of these two issues.

CROKINOLE

Sitting in the lobby outside the main gaming hall there were a lot of things going on--registration was at a small counter area, nearby any stuff being given away later that day was on display, GeekChic was displaying their excellent gaming tables (we are so going to buy one), CrazyBooth was taking photos, there was a running tally for hot games at BGG.con, and there were a number of dexterity games set out. We ended up trying every one of these games out, but Crokinole was one we went back to several times.

Again, I had only a vague knowledge of the rules, but some people nearby gave us the run down, though we would run across several variations over the course of the weekend--kind of like playing tetherball in elementary school: No poppies, no babysitting...

BGG has a few boards made every year, and they end up raffling off one of these boards (no, we didn't win the raffle, dammit), and they are gorgeous. In the photo you can see one of the boards; they have a circular play surface with a series of concentric circles indicating the scoring areas. In the center is a small circle just big enough for a puck to fit in, and the edge of the next circle has a series of pegs that make it all the more difficult to get into that area. The goal is simple, be the first to score 100 points by shooting your puck into the center (20 points) or keeping it on the board at the end of the game. Any pucks left on the table after both players have made their 12 shots score 15, 10, or 5 points, depending on their distance from the center--but only one person can score per area, so if both players have pucks in an area, they are eliminated in a one-for-one fashion, and then scored (in another variant, only one person can score for the board, so all the pucks are tallied, and then the person with more points subtracts the value of the other person's score, and adds this toward their total).

The only other complication, if your opponent has a puck on the board, you must make contact with one of their pucks, or your puck is removed regardless of its final position. As a result, most of the game is strategically flicking your puck so it glances an opponents puck on its way toward the center, or smacking an opponent's puck into the gutter and ricocheting yours to a benificial position.

Crokinole boards have a wide range of surfaces and overall quality, but these boards at BGG are excellent--from looking at the site of the guys that do these, they put anywhere from 7 to 20 layers of lacquer on the top surface, and it shows. The pucks glide cleanly and easily over this smooth surface.

As you can see in the photo, Jackie really started getting into this--despite complaints after my first victory of "I'm not good at dexterity games," once she started leaning down and squinting at the board, she couldn't miss a shot, and each turn one of my pucks would fly off the board and hers would scoot toward the center rings. Jackie stated several times, and I agree that "We should get a Crokinole board." However, at around $200 each, I don't think it'll be any time soon that we do so.

***

That was far longer than I expected, I'll do write ups of the rest of our BGG.Con experience, but will do my best to make thenext ones far, far shorter. Two things to wrap this up:

1. Please leave a comment if you have anything to say or ask. I write this and will keep writing this thing for several reasons, and several of you have said "Oh, I read that, you had some good stuff in there," but weeks after I posted whatever it was. If you guys respond, it'll motivate me to keep doing this on time, and keeping a normal schedule where I write *anything* is one of the main reasons I'm doing this.

2. We're in the midst of the Holiday season! Hooray! That also means I'll have some time off, and while I do intend to spend the large majority with my family, I'd also be happy to get some gaming in with anyone that's available; if you're new to gaming, all the better--I can coach you along with some new and engaging stuff that isn't scary. Or we can do a scary game if you want, I'm sure I've got some games here that take 4+ hours and come with hundreds of pieces.

Take care all.

1.23: Conventions and BGG.con Day 1

2009-11-25T23:58:00.000-08:00

It's been a busy month for many reasons, but the most pleasant by far has been BGG.con, a boardgaming convention held just outside of Dallas by Aldie and Derk, the guys that run Boardgamegeek.com.

For those who are unfamiliar with conventions, it's simply a gathering of a lot of people with like interests. Conventions are held annually for pretty much everything: TV shows, story genres, some things you'd probably not want to think about, and, obviously, boardgaming. Often there are special guests, events, and a number of other things related to the subject of interest. One of the best parts of a convention, you're surrounded by a number of like-minded people; all the jargon, all the related head-space, it's all fair game.

This is our first year attending BGG.con; Jackie and I have attended boardgame conventions in the past including Gencon, which we've enjoyed every year for the past 5 years. This, however, was a whole different monster. Gencon is busy and huge, there are a lot of events, special guests, and hundreds of gaming companies showing their wares; attendance is around 20-25 thousand. BGG.con had something like 6 vendors, less than 10 official events, and 900 attendees; obviously this is a much different convention, and just looking at the numbers you can tell it's much more intimate.

On arriving at the convention, we were met with two lines of around 100 people waiting to pick up their registration packets--this line moved quickly, and at the onset we were already in possession of four new games, thanks to Queen games and some of the other sponsors. Once out of the registration line, however, Jackie and I were a little lost--here, too, we were pleased, as one of the staff noticed our "First Time" ribbons on our badges, and directed us to the library and main gaming hall. After a quick pass through of the library, which is a portion of Aldie's collection and consisted of several thousand games, we went to the main hall, and within five minutes were invited to a game of Fluch der Mummie, followed by two games of Pack and Stack, both of which were taught to us by the couple that invited us over.

We also checked out a copy of Agricola, probably had a daunted look on our faces as we glanced over the 900+ pieces in the box, and thankfully Guy from Canada showed us how to play before he left for dinner, and another attendee (name forgotten) who had played Agricola before hopped into the game and made sure it ran smoothly.

I'll give a run-down explaining these games later, but here's a list of what we played on the first day of BGG.con:

Fluch der Mummie
Pack and Stack (x2)
Agricola
Homesteaders (Just me, Jackie was doing homework)
Crokinole (x3, and a lesson learned--don't even consider playing Jackie for money)

I'm estimating this at around 7 hours of gaming, just on the first day. Next post on BGG.con will cover days 1 and 2, including short synopses of the games.

***

Happy Thanksgiving! Remember to play something good!

1.22: Party games...hooray?

2009-11-11T00:04:00.000-08:00

It's that time of year--Halloween is over, and three days before it all the stores put out their Christmas stock. Yes, the holidays approach! A time for friends and family, large gatherings, and, of course, an excellent time for gaming. Large gatherings require a special class of game--the Party game! *sigh*

Party games--they're games you play at parties, right? Charades, Pictionary, Cranium, uh, Trivial Pursuit, Win Lose or Draw (do they still make this game?). Party games are designed to be played with large groups of people or teams of people. We're talking more than a standard boardgame which supports between 2-6, more on the order of 10-30 or more. The rules are really easy, they're generally on pop culture or common knowledge items (especially if they're trivia games), and for play time...well, ideally it'd be an hour or less, but for better or worse that may not be the case.

I'm not a big fan of Party games. Of those listed above, I'd probably play Pictionary and Cranium (though I'll never do any of the singing/acting cards), and I'd murder everyone in the room before I played Charades. That said, I should probably point out some party games that I actually enjoy, and hopefully you will too. As with Halloween, I imagine I'll post more than one of these.

First up, Scene It? Scene It? requires a DVD player; during a team's turn, they roll two dice--one is the distance moved along the track, the other determines which type of question the team answers. There is the standard "question on a card," but they also use the DVD player to great effect. There are several different types of questions on the DVD, many involve playing a movie clip and asking a question afterward, but there are also screen shots with missing items, Wheel of Fortune type title puzzles, scrambled images and more. There are also several types of Scene It?, from Friends, Marvel Comics, movies, television, Disney, blah, blah; basically, you should't have a problem finding something that interests you. This game is available at most large retailers, and can range from $10 (travel edition) to $40 (licensed content).

Wits and Wagers was released in 2005 by North Star games, a smallish company, but has had great success, and has been picked up by a large retailer (Target, I believe). In this game one player asks a question that has a numerical answer, such as "How old did Mozart live to be?" All the other players have a small dry-erase board, and write their answer. When everyone has written an answer, the dry-erase boards are arranged in numerical order and placed on a mat which depicts betting values. The middle value guess is placed on the center space (which pays out 2:1), and the remaining guesses are placed outward from the center (3:1, 4:1, 5:1). Players then may place up to two bets; whoever places chips on the answer that is the closest gets their payout, plus the player with the closest guess also gets a payout. This game is quick, fun, and best of all it's a trivia game where you don't have to know the correct answer--you can win by guessing the closest answer, or by making judicious bets--you may not know how wide a football field is, but if you place your bet on the answer of a football fan, you'll probably get a payout. As stated before, this is available at a large retailer (Target, I believe), and goes for around $30-$40.

Lastly, let's do something different. At home we've had some great success with Ca$h 'n Gun$. CnG (I'm too lazy to spell that correctly again) supports up to 6 people, though you can expand this by an additional 6 by purchasing additional copies of the game, or you can buy the expansion that adds 3 players...but we'll get back to that. In CnG you are a member of a gang that has pulled a heist, and it's time to divide up your spoils--however, you can't all decide on how to split it...and so the guns have come out. The game lasts 9 rounds, each round five of the money tiles are turned over--the goal is to have the most money and be alive at the end of the game. Each player has a deck of nine "bullet" cards, and chooses one of these cards and places it face-down in front of them. There are three different bullet cards--Click Click cards do nothing, they're basically a bluff; Bang! cards do one damage and knock a player out for the round; Bang! Bang! Bang! cards have priority over Bang! cards, do one damage, and knock a player out for the round. A card is discarded after its use, so you'rea free to use all your non-bluff cards early, but if someone is keeping track, you could be in a world of trouble.

The best part of the round, after everyone has chosen their bullet card, you pick up your foam gun, and on the count of three everyone simultaneously points and whoever they want to threaten (read as "shoot"). You know what's in your gun, but you have no idea what your opponets are doing--and the battle of wits has begun. There will be another count of three, and every player has a choice here--either stay in and risk being shot (if anyone is pointing a gun at you), or drop out (usually if you suspect someone has a non-bluff card in their gun, or if several people are pointing at you). If a player drops out, they get a "shame token" (worth -$5000 at the end of the game), but can't be hurt this round, but can't collect a share of the pot. The remaining people reveal their bullet cards, and anyone with a non-bluff card does a damage to whoever they're pointing at, and knocks that player out for the round (that player can't collect a share of the loot). Anyone left standing gets a share of the loot--if all or a portion of the pot can be divided without making change. Any money left in the pot carries to the next round.

The last thing to consider, if a player takes a total of three wounds, they are dead--they don't participate in the rest of the game, and can't win, even if they had the most money. It's commonplace for a person to collect a large pot early in the game, and the next round be faced with 4-5 gun barrels the next round, or receive a steady stream of barrels for the entire game, making survival difficult.

The base game also includes "Special Power" cards, which change how each player plays--you may be "The Kid," who is able to see where everyone else points before you decide; or you may take the gun of the first killed player, using two guns for the rest of the game; or you could just be friggin nuts and carry a grenade with you, waiting for someone to shoot you so you can pull the pin... As for the expansion, titled The Yakuza, it adds three more players, all from a Japanese gang carrying throwing stars and swords, and turns CnG into a team-based game, with groups of 2-3 players attempting to get the most loot for their gang.

***

That's it for this week, hopefully everyone will be enjoying their holidays, getting together with family and friends, and crushing them under your feet. In boardgames; I'm not advocating violence, though I may partake in the literal crushing of family members over the holidays anyway.

Staying busy here, NaNo is kicking my butt and I've had to switch my novel, meaning I had to start over; 50k is in sight, but it's way, way over there. Family obligations and all that have priority, as always, so finding time to write is difficult. Oh, there's one other thing I should probably mention...

Happy Anniversary, Jackie! Three great years and counting!

1.21: Know your Gamer - Dice

2009-11-02T23:28:00.000-08:00

I kind of aim this blog at fledgling gamers and people that might be interested in games and gaming, or could be if given a nudge. People that, for the most part, have only bought boardgames from conventional retail outlets such as WalMart, Target, or Toys R Us. The goal is to expose these people to the larger gaming world; I throw around and explain a lot of terms, and try to explain the social and ritual aspects within the gaming community. These "Know your Gamer" articles are going to aim at this last idea, explaining gaming concepts and social/ritual aspects of gaming. If you're interested in gaming, it helps to know the jargon, and like going to one of the many possible multi-cultural/religious ceremonies, you don't want to do something that would embarrass you.

With that said, let's start off at a familiar yet wholly foreign gaming accessory--dice. I'm going to make the statement right now that this may be a strange post.

"Hand me that dice on the table."

"Dice, I've seen those before, the white cubes with black dots."
"How many dice do you need?"

STOP RIGHT THERE. Firstly, let's talk grammar before someone impales you onto a pile of d4. Dice = plural; Die = singular. Read aloud, and never forget this. "I have one die." "He has two dice."

Next, a point of terminology. Well, let's first utter a phrase from the mouth of a new gamer looking down at the gaming table, "What are those?" The answer, dice. Look at the picture on the right. Beyond the standard six-sided dice, you'll see a number of non-standard dice in a plethora of colors: 4-sided, 8-sided, 10-sided, and more. As a result, there had to be an idiom, a simpler way to state how many and what type of dice to roll. You may have noticed I used the phrase "d4" in the paragraph above--the number after the "d" refers to the type of die; in this instance it refers to a 4-sided die. Putting a number before the "d" indicates a quantity of dice. Thus, the "correct" way to state "Roll ten 6-sided dice" is "Roll 10d6." Simple. Now you know what I'm saying if I say 4d8, 2d20, or 15d1. Okay, maybe not that last one is a little strange.

As for that last statement, "How many dice do you need?" Let's just say you shouldn't ask this question, as it's marginally rude. Asking how many a gamer has is perfectly acceptable. Gamers can be weird about dice, which we'll get to in a minute, but most will have a good number of dice and possibly a "dice bag;" some gamers purchase dice regularly--once a week, a new set for every new game they play, a new set once the old one has started having problems.

Which leads us to the really weird stuff.

Gamers deal with problem solving, logic, strategy and a bunch of other multi-syllable words as a hobby. However, when it comes to dice, that's all out the window. Die keeps rolling bad, it must be tired, give it a rest. Your set of dice causing problems? Simply line all the dice around one of the offenders, and smash it with a hammer--the other dice will get the hint. How to get rid of "cursed" dice? Burn them, freeze them, smash them, ritually skewer them--just don't let them touch any of your other dice. And heaven forbid you touch someone else's dice...you'll be lucky to escape with all your fingers.

Akward ending and transition! Because I'm tired! And have other things to write! See below!

***

Before anyone says anything, yes, I missed one Halloween post; it was mostly done, so it may make an appearance in the future--oh, 12 months from now? Ultimately I was busy and other things got in the way, like my daughters' boogers; we've got to have priorities. As for Arkham Horror, that will be reviewed in the future as well; it's a great co-op game, but when attempting to refresh my memory, I downloaded the 24 page rule book and looked at my metaphorical watch and decided that I wanted to do something else with the 17 hours it would probably take to read and recall the game we played. I do recall that we were facing Chuthulu and we still managed to win, so there.

And, speaking of priorities, this blog is one, but November brings with it the madness of NaNoWriMo! One 30 day month, one 50 thousand word novel, piece of cake. Yes, November is a busy month, but NaNo's opinion on that: You're already doing a million and one things, what difference does one more make?

Blog posts should be on time, but don't be surprised if they're a little shorter than normal--these posts don't count toward my daily novel word count. Also, as I finish this, it's day 2, and I'm already 3k words behind, so that need to be amended. If anyone is interested in joining, NaNoWriMo is free, it's all on the honor system, a great personal challenge, and it's fun to boot. Or glove. So you're a few days behind--so am I.

1.20: Halloween week daily update 2 - Death Angel ...and Scary stories!

2009-10-29T01:02:00.000-07:00

How on Earth I forgot about this on, I have no idea. Today's game is easily among my top five horror-themed games, and has a great cinematic feel. I've played this game dozens of times, and could tell you just as many stories--like the time we were trapped on the bus with the murderer and she marched through the seats, killing everyone...or the time I, nearly dead, hopped on the altar of the Church, crushing the killer with my rusty Civil War sabre... Best of all, this one is a Print and Play game--for those of you familiar with this term (good for you if it's because you've been following this blog--have a cookie), you're aware this means the game is either cheap or FREE.

Death Angel was designed by Anthony Gil, and released on his website for free in 1998. It plays 2-6 players (the more players the better), and takes 60-90 minutes to play. The idea behind Death Angel is that you're on a bus that has a blow out in a farming town. As the bus driver checks the tire, he is killed by Angel, a girl with blades bolted through her fingers. This is where the game begins, and your goal is simple--survive.

Primarily the game has a simple roll-and-move mechanism; on your turn you decide if you're going to Walk (roll 1d6--that is, one six sided die, no penalties), Jog (roll 2d6 and move your choice, but don't move if you roll doubles), or Run (roll 2d6 and move the total, but if the dice are the same or equal 7, the player trips, losing this and the next turn). The game ends in one of two ways--the turn timer progresses to 5am, when the sun rises and Angel leaves, or if you manage to get the keys to the bus and drive it out of town--bet you can guess who has the keys. The ultimate goal of the game is to score points, which you get increasing amounts for each turn you survive, doing damage to Angel, and doing cool stuff, like jumping through windows. You can die, and probably will--the main penalties to this are the loss of any equipment you had, and your "turns survived" counter starts over.

Much of the game is against you--you're in a town with a few buildings, a corn field, and a lot of open space. There are a number of icons on the ground which indicate places that can be searched, hiding places, and many, many places that Angel can simply appear--when this happens, she comes for you. Combat is resolved using cards--there are several stacks of cards for each different class of weapon, and then another for Angel's attacks. Since most of your weapons are crap, like flashlights and books, sure you could get lucky and find a sword or a gun--probably not, you're usually disadvantaged. The cards themselves have some interesting text describing the attack: Die die die! Pinging with energy, you ravage Angel's beautiful face with your weapon. After a few seconds, you stop to survey the damage... you appear to have broken her concentration. Angel stabs you in the arm for the inconvenience. Lose 1d6 -2 life points.

The game does have a bit of set up--beyond the initial double-sided printing (files available by following the link above), there are a number of tokens and cards that need to be cut out, but I feel it is well worth it. Of course, I say this having played the copy Brian printed and cut out all the pieces for, but still. My main complaint is the penalty for Jogging and Running--a lot of turns you have to move fast, you know, because there's a psycho is trying to kill you. Tripping while running is the worst, it's basically a "lose two turns" penalty; if Angel is anywhere near you, this may as well be a "shove your face onto Angel's claws" penalty.

***

Alrighty, that's number two, and I'm very glad this game came to mind. Here's one more suggestion.

When's the last time you heard a scary story--a good scary story. If you have an iPod...or a computer even, take a glance at Pseudopod.org, a free podcast (don't worry about the terminology), and part of the Escape Artists, Incorporated organization. Every week Pseudopod puts out a free audio file of a horror story--some classics, some new stuff, in my opinion nearly all of it good, and the readers usually do a good job as well. I'll recommend a personal favorite, Scavenger, but you have to listen if you want to know what it's about.

Be safe, everyone, and enjoy your weekend. Happy Halloween!

1.19: Halloween week daily update - Lord of the Fries

2009-10-28T13:46:00.000-07:00

Here we go, attempt-at-a-daily-update #1, what's on the menu? How about a zombie game? How about some Lord of the Fries? Lord of the Fries is a 3-8 player card game which takes 45 minutes (or more, time increases with the number of players) to complete. Originally published by Cheapass Games on cardstock in 1998, there have been two subsequent versions of the game; the latest "Third edition" (published in 2008) is in a sturdy box, has high-quality full color cards, and includes multiple menus to represent different fare. I have played both the first and third editions of this game; since gameplay is the same, we'll talk about the third edition, which includes a few extra goodies.

In Lord of the Fries, you are a worker at Frideys, the fast food restaurant of the dead. Customers make orders, you and your co-workers try to fill them, but... Well, this is Frideys (pronounced like "fried cheese", in case you were wondering), and being zombies, you kinda suck at your job. The customers get more and more impatient; eventually they're willing to accept a more and more imperfect order. "Well, sir, we know you ordered a Chickabunga Conga, but, uh, we're out of fries...and chicken. Here, have a bun and a soda."

The game begins with the entire deck of cards being delt to the players; depending on the number of players, this may give some of the players an extra card. This isn't an issue, as you play a number of hands equal to the number of players, the dealer shifting clockwise with each hand. These cards represent the ingredients used to make the menu items, including "Meat," "Fish," "Cheese," and "Bun." Someone rolls the green and the black die, and reads the corresponding item on the menu. The starting player then has the option to play cards from their hand to complete this menu item, or forgo making the menu item (either because they can't or don't want to complete the item) and pass a card to the left, and it is the next player's turn. If they do complete the menu item, they play the cards face-up in front of them, and then can either choose a new menu item, or roll a random new menu item. Either way, it becomes the next player's turn, so they have first crack at making the new menu item.

What's the difference, why roll or choose? Well, this is where a little strategy comes into this game--the hand ends when any person runs out of cards. All cards face-up in front of you count toward your score, but the cards in your hand are negative points. If you choose the menu item, the cards continue passing to the left if a person is unable to make a menu item; however, if you roll the menu item, anyone who is unable to make the menu item passes their cards to the person who rolled, increasing that person's hand size. Early in the hand it's a good idea to roll, hoping to get a few extra ingredient cards, but later in the hand this could do nothing but supply you with a fist full of negative points.

What happens if no one is able to make the menu item? Believe me, this does happen, and fairly often; just by looking at the menu you can probably tell there are some menu items that are more difficult to make--either they contain a lot of items, or a lot of the same item. If every person passes on making an item, the customer becomes impatient, and is willing to take the item with one less ingredient, player's choice. Play continues around the table in this fashion, and eventually someone will be able to make that "Magna Carta with a side of Fries" less some ingredients, even if it comes down to just a slice of cheese.At the end of the game scores are tallied across all hands, and the player with the highest score wins.

Lord of the Fries is easy and quick to play, funny, and the latest edition has great quality components in full color. As mentioned above, it also has several different menues to represent the standard Fridey's burger joint, a Mexican restaurant, and several others; each menu also has a special rule (such as the "substitute any meat for any other meat" rule in the Mexican restaurant menu). Card distribution for each menu is different (ie, the number of cheese, meat, bun, sauce cards), so each plays differently. You should be able to find this around $15-20; this is a fun game, and it's uncommon to find a game that plays so quickly and is also able to support up to 8 players.

1.18: Late...almost two weeks running. Yes!

2009-10-27T00:47:00.000-07:00

Yes, I missed last week's post; it also appears I may be late on this week's post. Arkham Horror is still coming, but it's a bit daunting--I mean, the rulebook is 24 pages long, and it's been about two years since I played it last. I'm going to need some time to refresh.

So, here's the deal. To make up for my tardiness, I'm going to post one Spoooooky themed game each day until Halloween, probably in the evenings, but we'll see. Perhaps I can even get a couple games of Der Hexer von Salem, a 2-4 player co-op game I picked up in Germany (yes, I went to Germany and brought back boardgames). It was either just released, or is soon to be released, in the US under the name "The Witch of Salem." That's right, I'll try to review a game that you may or may not be able to get in the US. Hopefully it will be awesome, you'll all run out to your local game store, and you won't be able to get it.

Neener, neener.

1.17: Son of Halloween - Halloween Post 2

2009-10-15T19:19:00.000-07:00

More scary games? Really, how many can there be?

...well, a lot!

Let's start with a 1-player "print-and-play" game. Wait, one player? Print and play?

Zombie in my Pocket was designed by Jeremiah Lee and released in 2007; to the gratitude of many, the game was originally released in a Print and Play format, meaning you can download the files (for free!), and you print and assemble the components. In this game, you are searching for weapons to fend off zombies, and ultimately hope to find the zombie totem; if you are able to bury it before midnight, you end the zombie curse and save the world. And, yes, you read correctly--this is a one player game, and as the title states, it conveniently fits into your pocket. (It's recently come to my attention that there is a retail version of this game, running less than $10, that comes in an attractive metal tin--go find your own picture, lazy).

Next, for all you Lovecraft fans out there, Unspeakable Words. Unspeakable words was published in 2007 by Playroom Entertainment; it is for 2-6 players, takes around 30 minutes to play, and runs $15-20. This is a word...making...game (the actual term eludes me, perhaps it is, itself, an unspeakable word)--think Scrabble or UpWords (no links provided--really, do you need them?). Score points for spelling words, but for each word you create you must make a sanity check; longer words score you more points, but put you at greater risk of going insane and being removed from the game. Kind of a unique self-balancing aspect for those smarty-pants word game aficionados--sure, they can spell a few big words in a row and be eliminated early, but another player's consistent small-word approach may keep them in long enough to outpace Smarty-Arty's score. Plus it comes with a bunch of small plastic Cthulhu figures to track your sanity!

Lastly...perhaps a game you should steer away from. The Haunting House has an interesting theme--you and your friends are in a haunted house and are attempting to traverse its maze-like hallways and be the first out. The problem? The hallways keep changing, and your friends aren't helping you out either. In this game you "program" your turn, selecting which cards you are going to play (move 1, move 2, turn the tile you are on 90 degrees, etc), but your opponents also add cards to this stack, messing with your plans. The game itself is okay, the components look great and the theme is interesting though shallow, but this game can take far too long--45 minutes (or more, as you fight with your opponent's "help"), in a game where you're trying to get across a 6x6 grid of floor tiles seems long, and after the first 20 minutes I felt it was already dragging. However, if you and your friends like maze-games and screwing with each other's plans, you may enjoy this one. I should mention, there are a couple expansions for this game...which make the game longer.

***

That's it for this one, I'll probably be covering an excellent co-op game in the next post. Happy Halloween everyone!

1.16: Halloween-y Gaming Goodness

2009-10-13T12:31:00.000-07:00

I love this time of the year--I'm in SoCal, so our weather is generally "More Hot" or "Less Hot." Thankfully, this is the less-hot part of the year, and we've had some wonderful, dreary, overcast weather, just how I like it. We're also approaching the holiday season, where much foody goodness will be had...but before then, we have Halloween. I'm not some wierdo (well, not any more than anyone else is), but for some reason, the creepy, scary, and strange aspects Halloween engenders interest me.

With Halloween's approach, I figured I'd discuss some Halloween-type games, either legitimately scary games, horror themed games, games for Halloween parties--things of that sort. I'm going to try to hit a few different areas of complexity and game type. If anyone has any suggestions, especially for parties, by all means, suggest away.

Game number one, and the first game I thought of when I started this list, Betrayal at House on the Hill. If you have access to this--if you own it, if a friend owns it, if a store near you happens to have it in stock, if you have a wad of dough or ebay is kind to you, it fits great with the horror theme--play it. This game was published in 2004 by Avalon Hill (owned by Hasbro, so "Avalon Hill" is a technicality), it supports 3-6 players, and takes 45 to 90 minutes. The first half of the game you are exploring a three-level house, building it room by room, discovering its secret perils and passages, and items that will hopefully help once the Haunt starts. And that would be the second half of the game--at some point, things turn sour, and you usually find out one of your teammates has done some horrible thing, like re-animate the Frankenstein Monster, is trying to wed you to a ghost-bride, or just wants to feed you to his giant pet insects. Each side (the Heroes and the Traitor) have separate victory conditions, and your goal is to fulfill your side's goal before your opponent(s). With 50 different haunt scenarios, this game has a good amount of replay value, increased by the fact that the house will be built differently each time you play.

The problem with this game--it's out of print. Just as it happens with books, only a certain number were printed, and when Hasbro decided they were going to liquidate and then destroy the remaining stock of a series of games, the price dropped (from $40 to $10 or less), and then skyrocketed. Currently you can expect to find this game on Ebay for around $100.

Next, something less expensive. Zombies!!! is a 2-6 player game published in 2001 by Twilight Creations. Like Betrayal, Zombies!!! (yes, the exclamation points are in the title) has a modular board, in this case, the tiles represent the town you are exploring. On your turn you draw and place one of these tiles, then roll dice to move your character. Each tile has numbers in the corner denoting how many zombies, life and ammo counters go onto the tile when it's played. After moving your character, you roll dice again to move zombies; of course you're moving them closer to your opponents. The goal of the game is to either kill 25 zombies or be the first to find and reach the helipad and ditch your friends. While not a deep game, and mostly dice-driven, this game is fun and can be tense; also, while it retails at $30, you can find it for $20 or less if you shop around. Another bonus, several expansions have been published for this game, each adding something new, such as a military base, zombie dogs, zombie clowns, or a shopping mall. My main problem with this game is that it can take a long time, much longer than the 60 minutes the box says it takes.

Third, a party game, and to stay with the decreasing price theme, this game is not $100, not $30, it's FREE! Or $10...I'll explain in a bit. Werewolf, Are you a Werewolf, Mafia--all the same game, but for simplicity's sake we'll just call it Werewolf, has been published in several different versions by several different companies. One of it's main advantages, this game requires a large number of people--a minimum of 9, and can support many, many more. It's origin is traced back to its development by Dimitry Davidoff in 1986 at the Psychological Department of Moscow State University, and is very well defined by his statement "Informed minority against an uninformed majority."

One person, the moderator, shuffles and gives one card to each player; this card is that person's role for the game, and is to be hidden from all other players. Most players are given a "villager" card, but 2-3 players are given "werewolf" cards; the goal of the villagers is to eliminate the werewolves, while the werewolves only need to bring the number of villagers equal to the number of werewolves to win. The game alternates between a day phase and a night phase--during the night phase all players close their eyes, and on the moderator's cue, the werewolves choose one player to "eat," removing them from the game. During the day phase everyone opens their eyes, the moderator tells them who is dead, and then players throw accusations at each other. Eventually a vote is taken, and the town kills one of the players, hoping to eliminate a werewolf. This continues until either the villagers or the werewolves meet their victory conditions. Each version of the game has "special character" villagers, allowing special abilities for a limited number of the villagers: The bodyguard can prevent a death if he chooses to protect the werewolves' victim; the Seer chooses one character each night, the moderator indicating if that person is a werewolf or villager; the Stonemasons start the game knowing each other, giving them one ally. Of course, special characters are much more delicious than regular villagers...

This game feeds on paranoia--the villagers have little or no information, but the werewolves know each other; once players are warmed up, there is a lot of discussion, a lot of yelling, and when the game is over, a lot of "I knew it was you!" or "I told you it wasn't me!", and some great discussion afterward.

Now, how much would you pay for this game? If you call right now... Like I mentioned earlier, there are several different versions and thus several different prices for this game. For the most part you can get this game for around $5-10, but you could always make your own copy--a simple production would be index cards with "werewolf" or "villager" written on them, or if you have a small amount of technological savvy, you could create cards as elaborate as you wish, including your own images.

***

"What?! Only three games, come on Lucio! What if we want to have a Halloween get-together, three games aren't enough!"

That'll have to do for now, this post is approaching that "too long" area, but I enjoyed this, and you can probably expect at least one more Halloween post before, well, Halloween.

Images taken from Boardgamegeek.com

1.15: Gateway games - the first one's free

2009-10-09T00:30:00.000-07:00

Gateway games--I'm sure I've mentioned this term multiple times on this blog. I've probably given a definition as well, but for the sake of discussion, let's define "gateway game" again. The term refers to a game that interests a person in gaming, and for our discussion, may introduce a person to modern boardgames. Many boardgamers can recall their gateway game, and many people cite the same gateway games (often Eurogames) for good reason. But what makes a good gateway game? As I see it, a gateway game should have four elements:

A Gateway game:
1. Has a simple rules set
2. Is easy to understand
3. Is easy to play
4. Is engaging.

The combination of the first three makes the game accessible, the last makes a person want to play. I'll go through each of these and give examples.

First, a gateway game should have a simple rules set. I could hand a person a thirty page, black and white rulebook complete with charts and graphs. Or I could hand them the four page, full color rulebook (with pictures and examples) for Ticket to Ride. If everyone is new to a game, this means someone has to read the rules; the shorter they are, the clearer they are, the better. Even now, though I've been gaming a long time and may power my way through the black and white rulebook, I'd rather read the second, shorter rulebook.

Second, a gateway game should be easy to understand. Let's look at two pictures, side by side, and you pick the game that looks easier to understand. Imagine I invited you over and sat you down at a table, and you see one of these two scenes before you:

Obviously the game on the left has a lot going on--boards in front of each player, another board in the middle, wooden bits, cardboard chits, little writing everywhere, cardboard cards with wooden bits sitting on them...a bit daunting. The game on the right? A single board, and a rack with six domino-like tiles sitting on it (actually, if you look at the far end of the picture, there is a scoreboard as well). If I sat you in front of the game on the right, Ingenious, you'd probably have figured that it plays similar to Dominoes; if you were sat at the game on the left, Puerto Rico, you'd probably stand right back up. Intiutiveness--being able to glance at the board and understand immediately what is going on--goes a long way with gateway games, as does being able to compare the game to another more commonly known game. Ingenious plays like Dominoes. Ticket to Ride (the example discussing the "simple rules set" element) plays like Rummy.

Third, ease of play. This is a little vague, but let me give an example. Chess, has an easy rules set (6 different pieces, each with different movement), is pretty easy to understand (capture the king), but is complex in play. People play lifetimes and continue learning new strategies, there are whole books on opening moves. Conversely, it's very easy to sit a new player down to a game of Carcassonne, and tell them that on their turn they're going to draw a tile, look at it, and place it on the edge of the board so it matches. Already they are playing; I can add the small amount of complexity there is to Carcassonne as the game continues--I can then explain on each person's turn how playing one's meeples (the little wooden men) on each component of a tile (roads, cities, fields, and cloisters) leads to scoring points, how to manage your fluctuating supply of meeples, how the game ends and endgame scoring.

Fourth, a gateway game should be engaging. This is more subjective, as what is engaging to one person may not be to another. The theme of a game can be a big part of this--many would say Agricola is an excellent game, but if someone new to gaming asks what the game is about, and you respond "farming," you might get punched in the face (What? Some people take their games seriously). I have family members that may be wary about playing a space themed game, but it would be easier to get them into a high fantasy themed game, and they'd jump on a Lord of the Rings themed game. If you're attempting to recruit new players, it behooves you to know or learn a bit about this people and their interests before attempting to introduce a new game.

There are a several other aspects that make a game a good gateway game, and may fall partly in "being engaging." For instance, a visually appealing game is more attractive than a bland appearing game, and thus more engaging. Playtime is also a factor; if you want to introduce a person to a new game, they're more likely to be accepting if the playtime is 10-20 minutes, rather than the 4+ hours that some games take. I find games that come in around an hour or less are ideal to introduce to new players; I'm sure it's no coincidence that the big three gateway games, Carcassonne, Settlers of Catan, and Ticket to Ride, come in right around one hour.

1.14: For the heck of it - game contest and deals October 3, 2009

2009-10-04T00:22:00.000-07:00

Just doing this on a whim here, I may or may not do another of these depending on its reception.

First, a contest. Days of Wonder is giving away a game every day until October 13th. In order to qualify, you have to link your DoW account (free to sign up) to your Facebook account, and then write a story about playing a DoW game (it appears you can also use the auto-update). For those of you unfamiliar with Days of Wonder, they put out excellent quality games which continuously have top-notch game art. Their Ticket to Ride series are all wonderful gateway games for those unfamiliar with the Modern boardgame, and Small World the game that's gotten the most replays this year. If you haven't played a DoW game, by signing up for the free account you can play several of the games online for free.

Second, a deal. Sorry! Sliders is currently $16 at Toys R Us, a savings of around $10, or 40% off the retail price. In Sorry! Sliders you are attempting to flick a pawn down a short ramp onto the target board, scoring the value of the highest numbered ring the pawn touches. Easy enough, except that you don't score until everyone has flicked all four of their pawns onto the same target board, in the process knocking their opponent's pawns onto different rings or off the board. This is an excellent dexterity game, playable by 2-4 players ages 6 and up--but I would argue that a 3 year old should have no problem playing this game. If you're tired of playing Candy Land, I'd definately recommend picking this one up; this game is also good for adults, who will find a great deal of fun in the positioning, finesse, and competitiveness of this game.

***

I find deals and contests fairly often; if you're interested in hearing about these, or if you're not, please let me know. I figure it's pretty easy to enter most of these contests (I'll probably only post them if the entry qualifications are relatively easy), and if someone I know wins a free game or two, all the better. If you've entered the contest, or if you win a contest I post here, let me know as well.

1.13: What is this Gaming Thing? Part 4 - The Cost of Gaming

2009-09-29T01:07:00.000-07:00

Ah-ha, I lied! You thought the topic was going to be "Where did I go wrong?" Well, after writing that up, I felt it'd probably be better nearer the end of this series. That's right, it's done, and you can't read it. Neener -neener. This also means that sometime in the future I'm actually ahead of schedule. Just not right now.

This is part 4 of the ongoing series, "What is this gaming thing?" Click here for parts One, Two, and Three.

Gaming is my primary hobby. Some people go skiing, skating, skydiving. Some people watch sports, buy tickets to games, buy their team's jerseys. Obviously a good portion of my "entertainment" budget goes into purchasing boardgames and related accessories, though there isn't anything as silly as boardgamer clothing (ahem). I also have a celebrity toenail clipping collection, but the cost of that hobby is negligible (before people start wondering, that's totally made up).

So what does this hobby cost? That, of course, is going to vary with your tastes--tthe cost of card games can be as low as $10, but the majority are probably in the $18-20 range. The average boardgame is probably in the $35-50 range, but can be higher for some of the really big games, such as Descent or Twilight Imperium. For reference, these two games come in boxes that are about 18 inches wide, three feet long, and six inches deep. Gauge that with your hands. Yeah, big.

That seems expensive, but is it really? As far as entertainment goes, gaming is actually pretty affordable. Let's take some loose averages and figure this out.

"Let's go see a movie." Sorry, I have to use something I'm familiar with--I could have gone with Bowling or competitive pie-making, but I'm not familiar with the cost of those activities. Anyway, cost of a movie, around $9 out here for a matinee. Since Jackie and I usually game with another couple, let's look at a family of four going to a movie--that comes out to $36 for four people to attend a matinee, about 90 minutes of entertainment, and that's without popcorn or drinks. I'll let you figure that out for yourself; don't try lying, I used to work at a theater, and watched as the concession prices raised a quarter, fifty-cents or more every year. One trip to the movies with no snacks, 90 minutes of entertainment, about $9 a person.

Now, gaming. An average big box game, no, instead let's use Small World or Ticket to Ride, both excellent quality games with gorgeous components, and a slightly higher than average cost. Both of these games support play for 2-5 players, take around 90 minutes to play, and cost $45 retail. When Jackie and I play, we usually have another couple playing with us, so we'll divide this cost by four. This comes out to 90 minutes of entertainment for $11.25 each. But that's more! But, when you're done playing a game, you can set it back up and play again. As often as you want. Once you've purchased the game, there is no additional cost to playing that game. Even if you threw the game on a shelf after the first play, it can always be pulled down months later, and each time you play it you reduce the cost of each hour of play per person.

Additionally, and one of the key benefits of playing boardgames, is that it's a social activity; friendly competition, problem solving for a little self-challenge, and a forum for interacting with your friends--and if you're hanging out with the guys and have the desire to beat the feces out of each other, there are games that fit that bill also.

***

Well, that's it for this segment, come back in the future when the topic will be...something else. I've also considered covering types of games; I'll probably start this off with either Dexterity games or Party games, so expect these topics to come up soon. If anyone has any questions or suggestions, especially suggestions for further topics, by all means post a comment here. I can read your mind, but my mother taught me that it's rude, so I don't do it often.

1.12: Boardgame websites you should know about - Boardgamegeek.com

2009-09-26T02:24:00.000-07:00

New or veteran gamers, if you are not familiar with this site, make a point to visit. Boardgamegeek.com was created and is run by Scott "Aldie" Alden, and serves as a database and meeting place for gamers. The database has tens of thousands of games in it, and better yet, if you somehow manage to think up a board or card game that isn't in the database, you can add it yourself. Yes, the site's content is user created, including the database.

The community on BGG (which includes a number of game designers) is generally friendly and helpful as well, and there are a number of groups within the community, assuring that most everyone can find somewhere on the site to hang out. Contributions are also rewarded with Geekgold, BGG's digital currency. While many sites allow new members to create their avatar on signing up, BGG instead encourages new members to reach out and contribute by requiring 30 Geekgold to "purchase" the ability to create an avatar. Your geekgold can also be used for a number of other purposes, including further personalization of your avatar, turning off ads, and also to bid in other members' boardgame auctions.

There are a number of useful features on BGG beyond its database. Each database entry links to reviews, play sessions, photos, rules clarifications, player aides, and much more. While a little time consuming if you have a large collection, you are able to use the database to create "Games Owned" list, which allows you to keep track of your collection and add personal info on each entry, as well as "Games wanted," and "For trade" lists, if you are interested in trading boardgames with other BGG members.

The best part of it all, Boardgamegeek.com is free. All the features listed above are free, you simply have to create an account. The site does accept donations, and that is part of what pays to keep it going; there are some incentives to donate (some geekgold and the ability to permanently turn on Ad-blocker, off the top of my head), and I'm happy to say that I've been a member and "officially" donating since 2006.

As a head's up, Aldie also recently started Geek-do, which links in with a user's BGG account, and includes Roleplaying games. Anyone interested in boardgames of any era can find useful information on BGG; I use it to keep track of my collection, as well as to keep abreast of upcoming games, and to research before I make a purchase. Anyone interested in seeing BGG in use, feel free to check out my account by clicking right here.

1.11: Let's start...at the End?

2009-09-21T13:01:00.000-07:00

Okay, not the end, but the Endgame. For this segment I'm not interested in how to win a game, but in what causes the game to end.

Many traditional boardgames end with one of two endgame scenarios--either get your pawn or pawns from A to B, and the first one to do so wins. Examples of this are Pachisi, Sorry!, and Candyland. Of course there are games that throw a few caveats into this, such as Life, where the first player to the end of the path gets a huge cash bonus, but the winning player is the one with the most cash. The second scenario is DESTROY YOUR OPPONENTS!--that is, you win when you have eliminated all other players from the game. Obvious examples here are, of course, Risk and Monopoly. (Monopoly, really, I don't hate you, you're just such a useful example.)

For the Modern boardgame, though the above endgame mechanisms may be included, there are a number of different endgame possibilities.

The most simple, score N points. This can take a couple forms, including that common in many card games, where several hands are played, points scored at the end of the hand, and a marker is moved along a score track or points are tallied; the ultimate goal being to reach some pre-determined number of points first. Cribbage (a traditional card game) and Lost Cities (a modern card game) both use this mechanism in this form. If you've played Settlers of Catan or read my review, you've encountered another form of this endgame mechanism--the point total required is usually lower (for instance, twelve points in Settlers, versus the traditional 61 or 121 for Cribbage). For simplicity's sake, we'll also classify most games where you collect a set number of "things" under this category as well--Apples to Apples requires a player to collect N "Green Apple" cards, and Battlelore requires a player to collect N "Battle Standards."

Another endgame mechanism is the need to fulfill some predetermined condition--perhaps this is getting rid of all one's cards/pawns/other fiddly bits (as in Saga, where you play and pick up the same dozen cards repeatedly, but the game ends when you finally play all of them), building a set (think any Rummy style game, as well as The Reef, a two player game where your goal is to pair up male and female fish that produce a specific type of offspring), or the like. A portion of the strategy may be in when to complete said condition, thus bringing the game to a close. In Ticket to Ride, for instance, the goal of the game is to score the most points by laying out your trains and by completing routes, but the last round of play starts when one player has two or less trains left in their pool. Being able to quickly amass a large number of points and then ending the game before other players can catch up is a valid strategy.

Lastly, we'll talk timer-mechanisms; the idea here is that a game ends either in a set number of turns, or when something runs out (or is close to running out), or even an actual amount of time that passes before a game ends. The basic idea is that everyone (or the game) starts with a set amount of something, and this is whittled away, either by the players taking certain actions, or by a set amount being removed each turn. This can be as simple as there being a deck of cards you'll play through N number of times (in Coloretto players go through the deck once, in the Ticket to Ride Card Game the deck is played through once with 2-3 players, or twice in a four player game), a set number of tokens/pieces/other random bits that can be earned or used during the game. Alternatively, a player may start with a certain number of pieces, such as in Blokus, where a player starts with 21 pieces, so the game will take no more than twenty-one rounds, though it may end sooner if the board fills.

Of course there is can be some overlap or combinations--indeed, you may have noticed some overlap in the games I've mentioned here. Some games may even supply multiple endgame possibilities, such as Puerto Rico, where the three things that end the game are running out of colonists, running out of victory point markers, or one player filling all twelve spots in their city (all three of these are condition based endgame options). Rumis, aka Blokus 3D, has two different types of endgame possibilities--players can be removed from the game if they are unable to play a piece on their turn, or the game ends when players have played their eleventh piece. Interestinly, the types and combinations of engame possibilities create different types of tension, and of course they require players to mix and adjust strategies as needed, and also to focus on different aspects and effects of their opponents' actions.

1.10: Crushing defeat in Black Sheep

2009-09-19T14:30:00.000-07:00

Yeah, it happens. A friend of me dubbed me an "Elite Gamer"--I think he was referring to my knowledge, ethic, and experience in boardgaming. I hope he wasn't referring to any sense of gaming snobbery, and doubt he was referring my ability to win all the time, since that theory would be crushed--crushed about as bad as I was this past weekend.

Robert, Wendy, Jackie and I had dinner and sat down for a game. Since I'm still working my way through my unplayed games, I pulled down Black Sheep. Black Sheep is a game by Reiner Knizia, originally published in 2008, it is a game for 2-4 players, and takes approximately 30-40 minutes to play.

If you've played Poker, you already know how to play half the game. There are three fields, and two plastic animals are randomly assigned to each field. Each player will play a total of three cards (the cards depict the seven animals in the game) to each field, and you "Poker hand" is composed of the three cards you play and the two animals in the field. The player with the highest hand when all players have played three cards to the field takes the two animals. At the end of the game players look at the underside (not the backside) of the animals, where a number from 1-3 is present; players score positive points for all animals except the Black Sheep, who is worth negative points. Bonus point cards are given to the individual with the most of each type of animal, and for each full set (one of each animal) a player has.

Despite the seeming simplicity of the game, there are a lot of tough decisions, and half the time you have to sacrifice a chance to win one field to delay your play on another field in the hopes of winning it. At least that was the game Robert and I were playing--the girls seemed to have trouble not taking animals every other turn. I was actually the last player to take any animals, and took them just as the endgame began.

Let's just say I scored very few points. Add to this that Jackie ended up taking majorities for three of the seven animals, and Wendy for another. Robert took a majority as well--for black sheep--the 6 point bonus card didn't make up for the 9 negative points he scored on the black sheep. I won't talk about exact scores; we'll just say that Jackie won, and almost tripled my score.

1.9: An actual schedule for this blog?

2009-09-15T01:52:00.000-07:00

Uhh, kind of. My goal is to get one significant post a week; either game overview, continuing part of a series, discussing a game mechanism, or something of that nature. I think I can drop these on Monday or Tuesday, so that will be the schedule for now--we'll see what my daughters have to say about that.

Mixed in among these will be other smaller things, such as quick reviews, recommendations, and play sessions. If over the weekend I get my butt kicked in a game of, uhhidunno, Black Sheep (not that this would ever happen)--I'll post about it here. I'm thinking many of these will be first-plays of a game, but I'll juggle these around and see what works.

If anyone has any comments or questions, or wants to see more of something , please feel free to make suggestions. If they're good, I'll be happy to follow up on them. If they suck, I'll feel free to ignore them, and will probably make fun of you the next time I see you.

Until then...go play some damn boardgames.

Maybe we need to work on the catch-phrase.

And, yes, I know that "uhhidunno" isn't a word.

1.8: Settlers of Catan - Overview of play

2009-09-01T23:42:00.000-07:00

During my last post I realized that I should probably do a full overview of The Settlers of Catan; I gave a summary of the game, but it really should be given more time. While, yes, this is an in-depth overview of the game, I'm not covering every piddly nuance--if you want that, why don't you just go play the darn thing a couple times...

The Settlers of Catan was designed by Klaus Teuber; originally published in 1995, it has since earned a number of awards, including the Spiel des Jahres (those familiar with boardgaming realize this is a big deal). The game supports 2-4 players, and takes about 60-90 minutes to play. There have been several expansions for this game produced, but we'll start out by explaining the base game, and will mention a few of the expansions at the end.

What' s in the box?

In addition to the board tiles, the game also comes with a deck of Development cards, a deck of resource cards representing the five resources (Grain, Wool, Lumber, Brick, and Ore), four sets of wood Settlement, City, and Road tokens in four different colors, 18 "number" tokens, four building cost "cheat sheets," one "Longest Road" and one "Largest Army" card, and a Robber pawn.
Goal and Set-up

In Settlers, the goal is to be the first to reach 12 victory points. A player does so by using resource cards to build new Settlements, upgrade settlements into Cities, and to purchase Development cards. The game uses a modular board of 19 land tiles (representing each of the five resources, plus one desert tile which produces nothing) and another 18 water tiles to represent the island of Catan and the water immediately surrounding it; the arrangement of the land and water tiles can be random (with some caveats) or preconstructed, the result being that you may never play on the same board twice. After the board is built, one circular number token is placed on each of the island tiles, and the Robber token is placed on the desert tile.

Before the first turn begins, players must place their initial two settlements (each worth 1 point). Going clockwise, each player places one settlement at the junction of three tiles, and then attaches a road along one tile edge. The three island tiles the settlement is touching are the three resources this settlemnt will produce; also, each settlement must be placed with at least one corner between it and any other settlment, meaning that you can block an opponent from taking resources by strategic positioning of your settlements. After the last person has placed their first settlement, he then places his second, taking one of each resource for the tiles this settlement is in contact with. Players continue counterclockwise, placing their second settlement and taking these resources.

"Wow, Lucioman, that seems like a whole lot of busy, it must take, like, forty years to set all this up." Not really, since the set-up is mainly shuffling the Development cards, shuffling and placing the island tiles, and then placing the number tokens. Placing the settlements is actually more of the actual playing of the game, but I'm rambling, so let's officially talk about...

Playing the game!

On a player's turn, they must first roll two six-sided dice, adding the roll. Remember those number tokens? They show a number between 2 and 12 (one 2, one 12, two of every other number except 7, which is skipped); any tile with the number rolled produces one resource for each settlement touching it, or two for each city. A corresponding resource card is given to the owners of these settlements. It is very possible that on your turn, you gain no resources for yourself, but supply your opponents with resources. For anyone who's had some basic statistics courses, you also know there is a probability curve for the numbers rolled on two six-sided dice--6 and 8 should come up with the same frequency, and will likely greatly outnumber the number of times 2 and 12 come up. This, of course, was one of the major influences in initial settlement placement.

After rolling, the player may do the following in any order: Play one Development card, trade resources with other players, trade resources with the "bank," build Roads, Settlments, or Cities, or purchase Development cards.

Play a Development card You may have purchased development cards on previous turns, but you can only play one per turn, and only one that was not purchased on the current turn.

Trade Resources
You may trade resources with the bank on a 4:1 basis (ie, you could trade those four grain resource cards you don't need for one grain, lumber, wool or ore card), on a 3:1 basis if you have a Question mark labeled harbor, or on a 2:1 basis if you control a resource specific harbor (ie, if you have a settlement on the Grain harbor, you may instead trade those four Grain cards for two resources of your choice, but if you wanted to trade your Ore, you would still have to trade on a 4:1 basis if you controlled no other harbors).

You may also trade with your opponents, and while you can probably get a better trade ratio, you can only trade away what is needed or wanted, trade for what your opponents are willing to trade away, and if you are in the lead, they may not trade with you at all.

Build...all that stuff
Building is the most important part of the game, as this is where you'll gain your Victory points for settlements (1 per) and cities (2 per, but replaces a settlement), building the longest continuous road (3 points), or from the development cards as simple Victory point cards (1 point), or by getting and playing the most Soldier cards from the Development deck (3 victory points). In order to win, you must be the first to obtain 12 victory points through a combination of the above means.

"How does one build?" What, do you think those resource cards are for decoration? In the image to the left you can see the cost of building--for instance, a road is one Lumber and one Brick. If your hand of resources has these two resources and you want to build a road, you may do so--the same goes for the Settlements, Cities, and Development cards. There is no order that these must be built in; as with the rest of their turn, the player has the flexibility to build at their whim.

"But what about that Robber pawn? And what about rolling 7's?" How grossly convenient that you asked exactly those two questions at the same time. You'll recall that I mentioned players gain resources when 2 through 12 are rolled, skipping 7. When a 7 is rolled, the active player (that is, the player who's turn it is) gets to place the Robber pawn in any island tile on the board. This does three things: First, all players count the number of resource cards in their hand--anyone that has more than seven cards must discard half, their choice. Second, the active player chooses one of the other players that has a settlement touching that island tile, and steals a random resource card. Third, the island tile where the Robber now sits will not produce resources when its number is rolled until the Robber is moved.

When a player has completed their turn, play continues clockwise around the board, and players continue in this fashion until someone has 12 Victory points.

Final Word

While I know this overview is long and may sound a little confusing (future Overviews will likely be shorter--Catan, however, is important in many aspects, so I gave it a little extra time), I assure you that The Settlers of Catan straight-forward with a simple rules set. The complexity, and the common point of confusion among those new to the "Modern Boardgame," is the openness of the game. A player is not restricted to doing A, then B, then C; they may choose to build a road, trade some resources, build something else, then trade some more. Alternatively, there may indeed be a turn where they simply roll the dice, realize they aren't getting any resources, and simply pass play to the next person.

The Settlers of Catan is an excellent gateway game--that is, the rules are simple and undaunting, but there is enough depth in the actual play that new players are able to understand and enjoy the experience of playing, and--here's the "gateway" part--are intrigued enough to start looking at what else is out there. Think of the saying, "The first one's free..." Many boardgamers cite Settlers as their first foray into boardgaming.

Images taken from Boardgamegeek.com .

1.7: What is this gaming thing? Part 3 - Modern Boardgames?

2009-08-31T17:02:00.000-07:00

This is part 3 of the series, "What is this gaming thing?" Part 1 can be found here, Part 2 can be found over here.

For this segment, rather than reminiscing, I figured it's probably a good time to explain what it is about the "Modern Boardgame" that is so interesting, and why adults and families coming together to play again.

First, let's start with the actual physical presentation of the games; one of the features of the modern boardgame is the aesthetics of the game. I have for you two photos of games--the classic game, Monopoly, and what is many a person's first foray into the modern boardgame, The Settlers of Catan (Note: click the game's name to get a larger view). The first things a person new to the modern boardgame often notices is the visual representation of the board, much bolder and more colorful than the classic boardgame, and the quality and number of bits that come with the game. In addition to the visual elements, the games often contain tactilely pleasent elements, that is, the parts of the game (wooden bits, cards, dice, thick cardboard chits, and even the board) are pleasent to the touch. Many of the "Eurogames" contain a number of wooden bits, while many "American-style" games may contain a number of intricately detailed plastic miniatures (don't worry about these terms, we'll come back to them later). Often this initial wow-factor was the initial source of intrigue for many veteran boardgamers.

I had mentioned in Part 1 of this series that classic boardgames, while having a place, can become uninteresting. This is due largely to a lack of choice, very limited strategic options, and high randomness; while any one of these may be present in the modern boardgame, the extent to which it plays a role will be moderated. I'm not trying to beat on anyone's favorite game here, but let's use Monopoly as an example that everybody knows. Without recapping how Monopoly works, I'll simply state that it is restrictive in choice and strategy (ie, the dice are a larger determining factor than the player's will or intuition), has a largely static board, but does have a decent asset trading scheme.

Now let's take Settlers as an example of a modern boardgame. First, the board; while this is not always the case with the modern boardgame, the board for Settlers is modular--that is, it is made up of a series of pieces which can be interchanged in order to alter the board. Look back at the picture above, and you'll see that the board is a series of hexagons; while the ring of water does always surround the island of Catan, the 19 tiles that make up the island can be shuffled around, greatly affecting play.

Next, player choice. During the game the player will obtain resources, which they will use to expand and develop their settlements (I'll be making a post that covers Settlers soon enough). Let's say they have one of each brick, timber, wheat, and a wool resource. They could build a road with a brick and a timber, which would extend the reach of their settlements, giving them the opportunity to expand and reach other resource tiles. However, if they did that, they wouldn't be able to build another settlement--since settlements (which sit not on, but at the junctions of tiles) are what produce resources, having more enables a player to produce more resources, different resources, and they can rely on them being produced more often. Also, a player may wish to hold on to all of these, in the hopes that they receive an ore resource, enabling them to build a development card. While which resource is produced each turn is determined by the roll of two six-sided dice, how and when each resource is used is entirely up to the player. Since the value of each resource is also determined by the game and individual players, the ability to trade resources is also an interesting part of the game--for instance, a player who needs one more piece of road to block out another player may be willing to trade extra resources for that last brick they need, or perhaps grain is overproduced in the game, and thus trading it for another resource results in a 2 or 3-to-1 trade ratio.

As you can probably see from this run-down, the depth and interaction in Settlers far exceeds that of Monopoly. Now, here's an interesting piece of information--an entire game of Settlers of Catan is 60 to 90 minutes; while a game like Sorry! may only be 30 to 45 minutes, how long was your last game of Monopoly?

Since this post is getting long, I'm going to cut it short here. The series will continue with another reminiscing segment, "What is this gaming thing? Part 4 - Where did I go wrong?"

1.6: What is this gaming thing? Part 2, Discovery

2009-08-22T02:45:00.000-07:00

This is part two of the series, What is this gaming thing? Click here to read part 1.

How many of you had a closet or shelf at your parents' house that held all the boardgames? Ours was the closet at the entry for our house (I suppose it would qualify as the "coat closet," but we live in Southern California...I don't think I even own a "coat"). We had the usual copy of Memory, Sorry!, Monopoly, Pick-Up Sticks, a few decks of cards; there were also a few more interesting games. Bazaar (a trading/set-collection game) and Dungeon Dice (a press-your-luck style game) are two that stick out in my mind--initially because we, as a family, played these often (you should see my dad's copy of Dungeon Dice, one day the box just gave up, it's atoms scattering into the ether). Secondly, though I didn't think about it in my youth, these were not the typical "roll and move" style games. To me, they were simply "more fun."

Let's hop forward a number of years, High School; little boardgaming to speak of in the interim, but hanging out at Brian's one day, he brings out a copy of Kingmaker, a game about the War of the Roses (not the movie). The board, which was actually just on glossy paper, took up almost the entirety of his floor, and there were all these cardboard counters and cards, and a 20+ page rulebook. Like fools, we glanced at the 20 page rulebook and jumped right in. Hours later my meager army was holed up in London with the next heir to the throne, watching the rest of the world's population (aka, Brian's army) march toward them. We flip an event card for my turn...and my entire army falls victim to the plague. At that point I have to resign, giving Brian victory, but I leave intrigued. I'd later learn this game, Kingmaker, is considered a Wargame, but at that point I have two thoughts on my mind: First, I'm never playing that again. Second and more significant, I've never played anything like this--what else is out there?

1.5: Games for children, starting around age 2.

2009-08-12T23:16:00.000-07:00

This is written in response to a friend's post, wherein she stated that she had just completed the world's longest game of Chutes and Ladders. This friend has two children, ages 2 and 3.

Let me start this post by saying that games are good, especially for children. They are a wholesome social activity in which they can interact with their parents on a more even playing field, and an excellent way to teach any number of skills (reading, math, memory, spatial relations, etc.) and develop their dexterity.

With that said, some games...let's use the phrase "quickly outlive their usefulness." Perhaps this isn't the most correct phrase, but if you're a parent who has just completed their 900th game of Candyland, you understand what I mean.

The goal of this post is to suggest games that serve this purpose, that is, aid the development of one's children, but don't bore a parent into a coma.

***

First, here's a link that takes you to a small list of games for children of about age two. While not linked here, with a little attention and tweaking, most children around age 3 should be able to play games listed "for ages 5 and up"--this greatly extends the number and variety of boargames available for play. Also keep in mind that development at this age is amazing--a child at 2 years, 2 months will be far more developed than they were at only 2 years.

Now, some more specific suggestions of my own, with summaries. Many of these games take 20 minutes or less to complete.

Gulo Gulo:
--Players draw wooden spheres from a small wooden bowl without knocking over the "alarm" stick; player moves to the same color on a track as the sphere they drew. The goal is to get to the end of the track first. Twenty minute play time, and kids tend to excel over adults due to smaller fingers. Note: The wooden spheres look somewhat like peanut M&Ms--if you children are familiar with this candy, either pay really close attention or pass on this game.

Tier auf Tier (Animal upon Animal):
--Each player has a set of thick wooden animals. On their turn, a player rolls two dice, and must stack the associated animals upon the crocodile (or upon the other animals already on the crocodile). First to stack all their animals without knocking over the crock wins. Good, simple dexterity game with solid, sturdy pieces.

Hula Hippos:
Another dexterity game, this game comes with a wooden ring and four sets of colored wooden hippos, six to each set. One player spins the wooden ring; everyone plays simultaneously, flicking their hippos. Players attempt to get the hippos in or under the ring once it stops spinning; these are removed from play, and the ring is spun again to start a new round. The first player to get rid of three hippos wins.

Hey! That's My Fish!:
For two to four players, I'm actually considering this one for a child slightly older than two--perhaps three or four years old. The board is composed of a number of hexagonal tiles, each depicting 1, 2, or 3 fish. Players have two or three wooden penguins, and after placing them on the board, take turns moving any of their penguins as many spaces as desired in a straight line, and remove the tile the penguin started on. Eventually the board develops holes or separates into several pieces (think of the motorcycle things in Tron--hopefully everyone has seen that movie) as the penguins jockey for board position. The player with the most fish at the end of the game wins.

Lastly, I'll make two suggestions that I think are funny and unique.

Run for your Life, Candyman!:
If your kids can play Candyland, they can play this with a little help. This is Candyland in reverse--after discovering that the King of Candyland has been selling the gingerbread people to the children of the world (for eating!), you (a gingerbread person, of course) decide you need to escape. Of course, only one can make it, so if you have to beat on the other gingerbread people, so be it. This game plays exactly like Candyland except for two things: first, you hit and damage any player that you pass--this can ultimately lead to destroying an opponents arms, legs, etc. Second, you get weapons to help you hit your opponent more and/or harder. There is a little reading, but if you are selective with the weapon cards (all of them are cute, candy themed weapons) and play with open hands, this shouldn't be a problem.

Pitchcar:
Purely a dexterity game, players flick their cars (wooden disks) around a smooth wooden track. The goal, of course, is to be the first to pass the finish line. Great fun and playable by anyone that can flick, it is, unfortunately, on the pricey side, at around $80.

BoardgameGeek.com is an excellent resource for all manner of boardgaming knowledge, has an excellent database of boardgames, and, best of all, it's free to use. All links in this post will likely lead to Boardgamegeek.com.

1.4: What is this gaming thing? Part 1

2009-07-18T02:07:00.000-07:00

Many of us grew up playing boardgames--Candyland, Chutes and Ladders, Memory--these are generally the games we were introduced to, and often enough enjoyed. But we grew up and our opinion of these games changed. Even by our early teens we had decided that these games were horrible--Candyland could take hours to end as your character, three spaces from the end, was called back to Gumdrop Lane all the way at the start of the path. The same with Chutes and Ladders--why, why did they make space #99 a slide that goes all the way back to the start? And Memory...well, really, how many times do you want to find those same two dogs or chickens or whatever?

And so we moved away from boardgames, maybe on occasion playing Sorry! (yes, the title has an exclamation point in it), Monopoly, Risk. But even these had their problems--Monopoly and Sorry! are both very simple "roll and move" type games, a random number determining how far you moved a piece along a circular track. And Risk--sure, you got to kick your friends' collective butts, but the randomness of the dice greatly outweighs any attempts at strategy.

And so most of us put boardgames behind us completely.

1.3: Defeat in Small World

2009-06-28T15:31:00.000-07:00

Played three games of Small World yesterday--fun as always, but, man, I had my butt handed to me. DB, my brother in law, beat me by nine points in the first game, for his second win. The second game I was victorious, but the third game...

A four player game with my wife Jackie, DB, and my sister D. My wife started, and from the get-go I knew we were in trouble. First, let me preface this game with this statement: I have not yet beat my wife in Small World. She has played the game one third of the times I have, yet every time I play against her, no matter how many other players are involved, she wins.

My wife chose her first race, Spirit Ghouls. D took forever taking her turn, and DB started out strong with an eight point turn. I start out with a little Ghoul butt-kicking. Jackie's second turn, you guessed it, going into decline; unfortunately my turn had opened up Merchant Trolls, and on her next turn she took these.

The game was close between Jackie, DB and myself, but Jackie had a strong lead with her multiple 13+ point turns. The one chance we had was two simultaneous attempts made by DB's Underground Amazons, who popped up from every which location on the board, conveniently almost exclusively owned by one of Jackie's three races, and my Berserk Giants, who took the mountain near Jackie's Ghouls and laid waste to Troll after Troll.

When final scoring rolled around, I knew I would be soaring into last place; DB and I both had around 60 points, but both D and Jackie counted over 80 points (apparently we overlooked D's last few turns, which were getting 15+ points). Jackie ultimately won by only one point.

1.2: Hula Hippos Review

2009-06-26T11:20:00.000-07:00

Hula Hippos, designed by Heinz Meister and published by both Gamewright (and HABA as Maus nach Haus), is a simple dexterity game four players, ages 5 and up.

The components are excellent--a polished wood ring around 4 inches in diameter, and 24 wooden hippo tokens in four colors. The ring and hippos have a nice feel and weight to them, and are smooth, so there is little risk to the playing surface (such as a wooden dining table).

The game is simple; you spin the wooden ring, and everyone attempts to flick their hippos such that they are either enclosed by or under the ring when it stops spinning. Any that meet this criteria are removed from the game, and the ring is spun again to begin a new round. Once someone has successfully flicked three of their hippos into/under the ring, that person wins.

While a simple quick game, taking only 5-10 minutes to complete a game, the experience is fast and fun, and begs to be played again immediately. The hippo tokens slide across the table and bump each other, players shouting, and as the ring falls, there are always a last few desparate shots to get under the ring or remove another player's hippo. Add the zero set-up time, and this makes for an excellent quick filler that will likely get much play.

1.1: Small World Overview and Review

2009-06-24T18:29:00.000-07:00

Small World is the latest boardgame release from Days of Wonder (daysofwonder.com), designed by Philippe Keyaerts. This game plays 2-5 players, and takes 40 to 90 minutes, the play-time increasing with more players.

The goal of Small World is to score the most gold (points) by taking and controlling territory, and removing your opponents' pieces from the territories they occupy. A player gains one point for each territory they control at the end of the turn, a simple enough idea, except the game features 14 Races, each with unique abilities; there are also 20 Special Powers which are randomly assigned. The result, hundreds of Race/Power combinations--Diplomatic Trolls, Berserk Elves, Hill Ratmen and others; each combination has different advantages.

The basic turn is simple. If you do not have an "active" race, you choose one of the six upturned Races and the randomly assigned Special Power next to it. Each of these tiles has a number value on it; the sum of these is the number of Race chits you receive, generally between 8 and 16. After this you take territory, if the territory is empty, you may take control of it by placing two of your Race chits onto this space. If there is any other cardboard on the space, be it mountains, bivouacs, or another player's Race chits, you place two of your own Race chits plus one for each piece of cardboard (ie, a Mountain space occupied by three of an opponent's Race chits would cost 2+1+3=6 of your own Race chits).

Play continues in this fashion; each turn you take up as many of your Race chits as you wish (generally you leave one on each space you conquered the previous turn), expanding the territory you control. However, your expansion is limited by the number of chits you began with, and each time an opponent attacks your territory you lose a chit, decreasing this number even further. Inevitably you will need to "go into decline."

Going into decline takes a full turn; when doing so you flip over all your chits, leaving only one on each territory you control. On your next turn you are able to purchase a new Race, and continue to score for both your "active" and "in decline" races. This is another interesting addition to the game, as it becomes essential to have both a successful active and in decline race in order to win the game.

***

Having now played several games of Small World, I believe that Days of Wonder has another hit. With the combination of Races and Powers, the variety in each game is astounding; a race may be looked over one game (Hill Humans? What am I supposed to do with those...?), only to find its combination with another power exactly what a player needs in another game (Berserk Humans! You're dead now!).

The rulebook is clearly written, and the game also scales extremely well--it actually comes with two double-sided boards, each marked with a number 2, 3, 4 or 5, to denote which board to use depending on the number of players.

As far as level of difficulty, I'd put this in the Medium difficulty range--experienced gamers will have no problem with the game, and new gamers may have only a little difficulty with game terms or mechanics.

Presentation: 8 of 10 (only marked down for lack of clarity of in-decline chits)

Difficulty: 4 of 10 (most people should be able to play this game with little or no help)

Overall rating: 9 of 10