|
Bubble-T posted:The funniest thing about DoW is unless you're playing the co-op variant it's not actually a co-op. It's not a team game or a 1vX game either, it's a straight up free-for-all due to the secret objectives. I've only played once, and with a stupidly easy secret objective at that, so I don't really know how I feel about the game, but that doesn't sound wrong. In the game I played, in the last round, we exiled someone just to make sure we could pass the crisis, and complete the main objective. By the way, my secret objective was to exile a betrayer if there was one. So, it's pretty much a coin flip whether I'd have to do anything at all for it.
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:34 |
|
|
Betrayal and DoW are both complete bullshit, but at least Betrayal is honest about it. DoW insists on pretending to be a legitimate game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:Dead of Winter is probably this generation's Betrayal in that the objectives are meaningless and someone is going to win at the end just because, but it's "thematic." Whether this is your equation for fun is up to you and your group. I would probably rather use The Resistance as a stepping stone to BSG, or just go straight to The Resistance since it takes the distills my favorite part of BSG. I feel like the less abstract a game gets the murkier the victory goal seems to be. Something like chess has a clear goal in mind so every little decision can be categorized as good or bad strategically. Likewise something relying on victory points like worker placements or deck-builders gives every player a feel for the tempo of the game. Someone can be ahead and consistently gaining VP each turn but maybe someone is investing his turns on a strategy that will give him loads of VP later. Thematic games, especially those with traitor mechanics like Dead of Winter, don't work as well because no one has any motivation for their goals from turn 1. Sure it might simulate having non-evil but still selfish people in your group, but with death being so frequent and not having that much of a consequence (just draw another character), there's zero motivation to go for your personal goal. How does completing your personal goal let you win more than any other member of your group, if there are multiple people who completed their personal goals and those who haven't, who wins? Regardless of what the rulebooks say I feel like any victory in Dead of Winter feels hollow, except maybe when you're a really good traitor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
jmzero posted:Magic Talk If that's what you're after then don't buy Duel of the Planeswalkers at all. Play with Magic: Forge (now with Android support!). It has more features than I could list; it supports every card and format in Magic imaginable with all sorts of AIs. The only thing it doesn't do is online Multiplayer (because the program is seriously better than Magic Online and would destroy it immediately so they fear WotC wrath): http://www.slightlymagic.net/wiki/Forge
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:The funniest thing about DoW is unless you're playing the co-op variant it's not actually a co-op. It's not a team game or a 1vX game either, it's a straight up free-for-all due to the secret objectives. When I played Dead of Winter, I didn't contribute to the Main Objective even though I was "good" since I wanted to wait until my Secret was fulfilled so I could win and all. Naturally, everyone assumed I was the traitor because of this and exiled me. Then I turned into the traitor, lucked into a new secret objective that I was completing by a large margin, and just shut the game out at that point. There's a few issues with that game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
A Jupiter posted:Thematic games, especially those with traitor mechanics like Dead of Winter, don't work as well because no one has any motivation for their goals from turn 1. Sure it might simulate having non-evil but still selfish people in your group, but with death being so frequent and not having that much of a consequence (just draw another character), there's zero motivation to go for your personal goal. How does completing your personal goal let you win more than any other member of your group, if there are multiple people who completed their personal goals and those who haven't, who wins? Regardless of what the rulebooks say I feel like any victory in Dead of Winter feels hollow, except maybe when you're a really good traitor. Yeah, this is basically how I ended up feeling about Dead of Winter. Feeling like a really good traitor rarely comes up though because torpedoing a game at the last second as a traitor is both extremely easy, virtually unstoppable and almost certainly better than the alternative of bluffing like mad. those win conditions are hosed and need substantial rehauling for the game to even make sense to me, much less be good. As it stands the game really just fails to compute with me, victory is meaningless why even play game boop no cannot deal SuccinctAndPunchy fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Jan 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
For every problem Dead of Winter gets shat on for here, Archipelago has sidestepped wonderfully. Except Archipelago hamfistedly stereotypes and fantasizes colonialism--or at least is really, really crass about it. Basically Archipelago needs to be reskinned with zombies (each player is managing a survivor camp and trying to keep the contagion level down while exploring new areas to find survivor camps blah blah blah) and all the nerds would be happy. Either that or the Worst Game would be created.... Seriously though if you can acknowledge the rather ludicrous colonialism in Archipelago it's everything a semi-cooperative game should be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
Trynant posted:Seriously though if you can acknowledge the rather ludicrous colonialism in Archipelago it's everything a semi-cooperative game should be. I just let that kind of stuff slide because it makes me tired and sad to think about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
We need a term like "Uncanny Valley" for that point Archipelago sits on where you can't tell if it's brave for dealing with the racism behind its theme overtly, or awful for being so racist about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
In arcapelago when people stop being unemployed they stop being native become white people. A friend of mine suggested to make stickers that replaced the employed person with a native person in a European hat and a rioting person with an angry white guy. I mean presumably unemployed, employed and separatists would be a mix of all the races in the area. There is no reason to have made white people the best, natives middling and separatists the darkest skinned natives.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
Congo Free State Simulator 2013
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
Is there a game that does what Diplomacy does but without all the bullshit? I've heard a lot about diplomacy, I've never played it myself but it just seems kind of dated and bloated with mechanics that are sort of periphery to the part of it that is actually fun. Also with a long play time and high player count it seems difficult to even get people to play it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:17
|
|
|
MildManeredManikin posted:Is there a game that does what Diplomacy does but without all the bullshit? I've heard a lot about diplomacy, I've never played it myself but it just seems kind of dated and bloated with mechanics that are sort of periphery to the part of it that is actually fun. Also with a long play time and high player count it seems difficult to even get people to play it. I've never played it, but Game of Thrones maybe, which I think is best with...5? Also maybe is Fief, but I think Fief is optimized for 6. Edit: Now that I think about it your best bet is to just sever with your friends now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
MildManeredManikin posted:Is there a game that does what Diplomacy does but without all the bullshit? I've heard a lot about diplomacy, I've never played it myself but it just seems kind of dated and bloated with mechanics that are sort of periphery to the part of it that is actually fun. Also with a long play time and high player count it seems difficult to even get people to play it. Given that Diplomacy is a pretty stripped down game to begin with, I'm having trouble picturing what you're after...
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:I've never played it, but Game of Thrones maybe, which I think is best with...5? Also maybe is Fief, but I think Fief is optimized for 6. GoT is Diplomacy with extra stuff!
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
MildManeredManikin posted:Is there a game that does what Diplomacy does but without all the bullshit? I've heard a lot about diplomacy, I've never played it myself but it just seems kind of dated and bloated with mechanics that are sort of periphery to the part of it that is actually fun. Also with a long play time and high player count it seems difficult to even get people to play it. Uh, what? Diplomacy barely has any mechanics at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
Trynant posted:Seriously though if you can acknowledge the rather ludicrous colonialism in Archipelago it's everything a semi-cooperative game should be. Republic of Rome is still better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
MildManeredManikin posted:Is there a game that does what Diplomacy does but without all the bullshit? I've heard a lot about diplomacy, I've never played it myself but it just seems kind of dated and bloated with mechanics that are sort of periphery to the part of it that is actually fun. Also with a long play time and high player count it seems difficult to even get people to play it. Diplomacy has very few mechanics, and those it does have (simultaneous orders and no doomstacks) are critical to the "part of it that is actually fun". Game of Thrones is similar and takes fewer players and has a shorter playtime, but in true FFG style it's bloated with the periphery mechanics you're trying to avoid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
This weeks Humble Bundle is a bunch of card games: https://www.humblebundle.com Includes Scrolls, Star Realms, Dominion, and Magic 2015
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Played Stone Age for the first time in forver, and it's still a really good game. I'm glad it was on TableTop as I always thought it was one the better games to use as an intro to modern board gaming. It's experiences segue into Castles of Burgundy or Agricola really well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
HOOLY BOOLY posted:That was put out by Fantasy Flight right? How in the hell can they have the perfect rulebook with what is basically Talisman but have issues explaining poo poo correctly in what is basically Descent (Imperial Assault)? Talisman is a Games Workshop game that Fantasy Flight licensed and updated. Imperial Assault is a Fantasy Flight game. Or at least, I suspect that's the difference. But even if the Talisman rulebook isn't just an updated version of the one from previous editions (I don't think I've ever read them, actually.), it'd be the exception, not the rule. Fantasy Flight is terrible at rulebooks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
malkav11 posted:Fantasy Flight is terrible at rulebooks. Was. I haven't heard anyone complain about Eldritch Horror's rulebooks or any of the LCGs (the LCGs have issues with FAQs and specific card rulings that make it incredibly difficult to take the competitive scene seriously, but I digress). The LCGs may have issues with timing windows, but they have helpful diagrams at least. Was there an FFG game that had a bad rulebook and wasn't a Kevin Wilson game?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:Was. I haven't heard anyone complain about Eldritch Horror's rulebooks or any of the LCGs (the LCGs have issues with FAQs and specific card rulings that make it incredibly difficult to take the competitive scene seriously, but I digress). The LCGs may have issues with timing windows, but they have helpful diagrams at least. Eldritch Horror's rulebook is a better reference than some, but wasn't great for learning the game. It's not a trainwreck like Arkham, granted. And Mansions of Madness' rulebook is awful and that's by Corey Konieczka. Descent 2e, also. I dunno, they may not all be awful. But most of the ones I have direct experience with have been.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 04:14
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Diplomacy has very few mechanics, and those it does have (simultaneous orders and no doomstacks) are critical to the "part of it that is actually fun". Ah, my mistake. I didn't look at it very extensively. The play time is still less than ideal but I otherwise stand corrected.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
MildManeredManikin posted:Ah, my mistake. I didn't look at it very extensively. The play time is still less than ideal but I otherwise stand corrected. Use playdiplomacy.com and get your friends online if play time bothers you. Diplomacy is a legit good game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 04:25
|
|
|
So, funny story. I was clicking around looking at solo games on BGG (because that is what I do with my free time), and I stumbled upon Tower of the Dread Mage, a pen-and-paper micro-RPG, played with a pencil on graph paper. Its rather luck-based, as you might expect from a game that small, and doesn't have much tactical depth at all. Still. the retro design charmed me, and I gave it a couple plays. Out of curiosity, I decided to take a look at when it was first made, suspecting it'd be late-70s, early 80s. 2007. And my first thought was "I could do this better than that". Knowing that I wouldn't be able to do much with one page, either, I instead opted to double my design space. Two pages of rules, two pages of tables. Still played with a pencil, graph paper, and two six-sided dice. And twenty-four hours later, I have a first draft of this horrible, horrible game that's probably barely any better at all than the inspiration, and is in desperate need of playtesting, and getting torn to shreds by people with better game design sensibilities than I. Without further do, The Labyrinth of S'xsyde. Edit Version 1.02 is live! Major tweaks to chest and treasure tables, a small buff to armor rules, S'xsyde herself got a major nerf, and I fixed some formatting. Legacy Versions v1.01 v1.00 girl dick energy fucked around with this message at 05:43 on Apr 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
How is Dungeon Bazar? My primary gaming group consists of myself, who tends to enjoy "multiplayer solitaire" games with limited competition, a friend of mine who gets pretty AP prone, his wife who enjoys relatively light and short games (~1 hour or so, maybe 90 minutes at most, and yes, this gets problematic when combined with her husband's long turns) and really likes mechanics that let her attack other players, and a variety of other players of varying interests. Probably our favorite game thus far has been 7 Wonders - we've played that game at least forty times and always had fun with it. We've also had success with games like Bang Dice and King of Tokyo, since they're really quick and can be a lot of fun with the right company. Games like Galaxy Truckers were received very poorly, and Dungeon Lords was something we played once. Caverna, sadly, hasn't ever hit the table with them (played it with other people though). Quarriors was received somewhat well, and their favorite game outside of Seven wonders is, sadly, DC Deckbuilder. I'm also planning on getting Roll for the Galaxy because I adore Race for the Galaxy and I feel like it'd be easier to get to the table.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
If anyone was in to Ascension, but sperged out about THE ART, there was a 3rd edition reprint of the base set with the new art and frames (old card for reference):     They've stuck with the Sabee "sketched" style in the newest set, just like the Apprentice Edition, I guess every set is going to get the treatment it seems. There are a few cards (Wolf Shaman, Spike Vixen) which have been reprinted in Realms Unravelled, so it seems they're doing the MTG thing where they'll reprint and change the art. It's nice though because it makes the newer sets work way better as a standalone set--Realms Unravelled is probably "the" set to buy now if you're looking to break into the game. Note the card backs logo is lighter (same as the Apprentice Edition and Realms Unravelled--looks like they're doing it with all the new sets now), so you'll have to sleeve them if you want to mix-and-match.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
Poison Mushroom posted:So, funny story. I was clicking around looking at solo games on BGG (because that is what I do with my free time), and I stumbled upon Tower of the Dread Mage, a pen-and-paper micro-RPG, played with a pencil on graph paper. Its rather luck-based, as you might expect from a game that small, and doesn't have much tactical depth at all. Still. the retro design charmed me, and I gave it a couple plays. Out of curiosity, I decided to take a look at when it was first made, suspecting it'd be late-70s, early 80s.  I love poo poo like this! I have like 50 of these micro-game one sheet games that I have culled from BGG and print out when I'm particularly bored. One suggestion; you should make this into a Pocket Mod. All the best micro games are hip Pocket Mods these days: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:Was. I haven't heard anyone complain about Eldritch Horror's rulebooks Last weekend, we tried out Eldritch Horror for the first time. Unlike Arkham Horror, weapons don't have hand icons on them anymore, so at one point we wanted to know if we could use multiple weapons in the same combat, since nothing on the card text indicated that you couldn't fire five guns at once. The rulebook was completely silent on the subject - we combed through the whole thing and couldn't find even one mention of the word "weapon". The Reference Guide seemed to provide an answer: quote:> Traits can be identified by their formatting: bold, italic, and small That seems fairly conclusive. Weapon is a trait; traits have no inherent effects of their own; therefore you can use five weapons at once, just like you can use a weapon and another equipment at the same time. It's not until you dig through the FAQ section at the back of the reference guide that you find the true answer: quote:Q. Can I use multiple weapons during combat? This question is guaranteed to come up in your first game, yet they decided to not answer it in the rulebook and to answer it incorrectly in the reference guide. Maybe the question wouldn't be asked so frequently if you had bothered to answer it properly in the actual rules in the first place? Also the game was bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:This question is guaranteed to come up in your first game, yet they decided to not answer it in the rulebook and to answer it incorrectly in the reference guide. Maybe the question wouldn't be asked so frequently if you had bothered to answer it properly in the actual rules in the first place? It's on pg. 12 of the Rulebook, under the section "Tests." Exact same rule, too. quote:An investigator can use only one card effect that provides a skill bonus during each test (for example, an Asset that reads “Gain +1 [Lore]”). If he has multiple card effects that provide a bonus, he uses the highest bonus. If bad rulebook means shaming people for their illiteracy and lack of reading comprehension, then yeah Eldritch Horror has a terrible rulebook.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 05:25
|
|
|
I'm looking for a recommendation for a board game that's relatively easy to pick-up and play, along the lines of Talisman - I know that Talisman isn't a good game per se, but it's easy to play which is a big win for my wife / friends who like the whole idea they're going on and adventure without it being overly serious, and having enough randomness (in other words 'lack of skill') that make it so really anyone can win despite not necessarily making the correct decisions. Basically, other than Scrabble or Cribbage, Talisman is the only game I've been able to convince my wife and friends to play, so I'm looking for something similar but new/different as I'm at the stage where I've memorised every card from Talisman. Happy for it to either be a competitive or cooperative game, but it needs to be something that we can leave and come back to as we don't normally have long stretches to play. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:It's on pg. 12 of the Rulebook, under the section "Tests." Exact same rule, too. Dammit, we were looking for something specific to weapons. Stacking bonuses never came up anywhere else. Most of the time we were stacking penalties instead. Congratulations, you are cursed and detained! Again! Want to take out a loan? You can't because you're too busy being dead, someone else's card just instantly devoured you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Dammit, we were looking for something specific to weapons. Stacking bonuses never came up anywhere else. Interestingly, I can't think of an instance where you can get a -X penalty to a skill in Eldritch Horror. And Dark Pacts aren't TOO bad... But the fact that it does the "just use the highest bonus" thing instead of Arkham Horror's clunky "two hands!" approach is one of those quality of life things that I appreciate in the game. If it does nothing for you then it does nothing for you, but I think it's one of the better adventure type games out there that isn't named Mage Knight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:Interestingly, I can't think of an instance where you can get a -X penalty to a skill in Eldritch Horror. And Dark Pacts aren't TOO bad... It's mostly spells where you roll at Lore-1 or -2, from my limited experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
PotatoManJack posted:I'm looking for a recommendation for a board game that's relatively easy to pick-up and play, along the lines of Talisman - I know that Talisman isn't a good game per se, but it's easy to play which is a big win for my wife / friends who like the whole idea they're going on and adventure without it being overly serious, and having enough randomness (in other words 'lack of skill') that make it so really anyone can win despite not necessarily making the correct decisions. I'm going to direct you to Tales of the Arabian Nights. It's more of a story generator than a "real" game and trying to win is a fool's endeavor. I don't know how much of a "real" game you're looking for as it seems like your group is looking more for a casual chill-out session. If you're looking for something meatier, check the OP. Do note that this thread has more of a strategic/Euro bent in general.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:And Dark Pacts aren't TOO bad... Maybe not for the person who has them. For the player across the table who gets chosen to be eaten because they've been too busy getting cursed to collect any items, it's not very fun. GrandpaPants posted:But the fact that it does the "just use the highest bonus" thing instead of Arkham Horror's clunky "two hands!" approach is one of those quality of life things that I appreciate in the game. If it does nothing for you then it does nothing for you, but I think it's one of the better adventure type games out there that isn't named Mage Knight. In our case after the first hour or two the game reached a state where we definitely would not win, but the game wouldn't actually make us lose for another six hours. We had a mythos card say that we couldn't Rest until another reckoning happened, which wasn't until five game rounds later. Because apparently for the next several weeks we were too nervous to rest because someone was standing outside our hotel window at all times. Even though we were in seven different places. Including Antarctica. At any given time at least two people were delayed, at least two were cursed, and at least two were detained. Our spend-sanity-to-cast caster might have been able to do something about the curses, except they couldn't regain sanity ever, and the lack of reckonings also meant the curses never went away on their own. The game seems to expect you to spiral up by getting improvements that make you better at things to get even more stuff, but we mostly spiraled down by getting negative conditions to make us worse at things so we failed even more the next turn. But even though we obviously weren't going to win, the game wouldn't actually end. It was definitely a better game, or more of a game, than the mess that is Arkham, but that's about as faint as praise gets. Lottery of Babylon fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Jan 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:I'm going to direct you to Tales of the Arabian Nights. It's more of a story generator than a "real" game and trying to win is a fool's endeavor. I don't know how much of a "real" game you're looking for as it seems like your group is looking more for a casual chill-out session. Thanks, just checked out Tales of the Arabian Nights on boardgamegeek and it looks exactly like what I'm looking for.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 06:04
|
|
|
I already own and enjoy Caverna. Is there any reason to get Tzolkin, and if so, is the expansion mandatory?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:34 |
|
|
Just updated S'xsyde to version 1.01... because I did something really stupid.  Specifically, I forgot to factor bell curves into how I laid out the treasure tables. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 06:15
|
|