|
silvergoose posted:I guess it's just weird to think that everyone must be playing. It is undeniably weird for me and others. Even though my group are all close friends who will come over just for a beer and to recline on the couch, "game night" is a scheduled thing and it feels off to have our backs turned to someone even if they insist on sitting out. I can't explain the psychology behind it, that's just the way it is.
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 04:17 |
|
|
I think the issue is that people are talking about 3 different scenarios. 1. The Casuale Difference of Opinion In this scenario a regular group suggests that they might play game A or B, when player X says that they're not interested in playing game A. The group decides to go with game B. 2. A Pox on All your Boardgames In this scenario a group has a problem player, X, that selectively withdraws from all games unless they meet player X's standards. 3. Social Game Nighte In this scenario your college friends have just found out about Cards Against Humanity and want to replace their nightly drinking session with a nightly drinking-and-meme-joke session. You need to decide whether or not to play the game or kill yourself and make it look like they did it, instead. Scenario 1 can be a part of scenario 2, but usually it's just an isolated incident. And I think these kinds of social interactions are inevitable when you Plan to do Things with People. If you have someone whose tastes diverge that much from your game group, you are probably both better off without the other. If your good friend is problem player X in scenario 2, you may need to tell them to stop being a dickhead. If you're in scenario 3, buy dixit, codenames, coup and "accidentally" spill your drink on your cards. Or don't. CAD is a bad game, but your friends are racist beause they do nothing to stop systemic persecution of PoCs, not because they think race jokes from the 50's are cutting edge humor. Impermanent fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Sep 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
the panacea posted:Your group didn't have a real choice. You forced your preference on the group. At least acknowledge that. I don't entirely disagree, which is why I said I felt a little bad with how it seemed to go down. I definitely felt strongly about playing one over the other, not only for personal tastes but for some professional reasons as well, which surely contributed to my approach. But in my example, had the other 3 players really wanted to play Mansions, they absolutely could have, and should have felt able to do so without feeling bad about it, but that didn't seem to be the case. I gladly could have sat out and joined the next open group for something that interested me. I stand by the point being made that no one should feel like they are obliged to play anything they don't like or want just on the premise of not making others feel bad (even if they haven't played it before). Now, if someone approached FCM in the same way I had approached Mansions, I'd have been fine to concede to not create an awkward impasse. All said, it's not as though these were random people either; it was a very regular group of friends that I play with weekly, so I feel like there should have been less feeling of mandatory inclusion here. They know I'd have been good playing something else later instead.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
There's a lot of variance between different settings. If I was with friends and beers I wouldn't turn my nose up at any game, movie, whatever. If I'm at a board gaming meetup and the tables split into Games I Hate #1 and #2, I'm cool with doing my own thing like learning a new game on my own while they play or calling it a night & they should be, too. The exception I suppose is when there are new players because you kinda want to make a group and not let them hang.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Even better (and more polite as a host) is planning ahead and telling people what you are expecting to play. "Hey guys, I'm trying to get a game of Dominion or Valley of the Kings together this week." Then those people with bad taste in games who don't like deckbuilders will either find something else to do that time or say "I don't really feel like playing, but I'll come hang out anyway." Weirdness avoided! Otherwise you get stuck playing your "compromise game" every time (looking at you, 7 Wonders) I've had people say before that they were so mentally drained from work or something that they didn't want to learn a new game, so they're fine just sitting out. No problem!
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Merauder posted:I don't entirely disagree, which is why I said I felt a little bad with how it seemed to go down. I definitely felt strongly about playing one over the other, not only for personal tastes but for some professional reasons as well, which surely contributed to my approach. But in my example, had the other 3 players really wanted to play Mansions, they absolutely could have, and should have felt able to do so without feeling bad about it, but that didn't seem to be the case. I gladly could have sat out and joined the next open group for something that interested me. I stand by the point being made that no one should feel like they are obliged to play anything they don't like or want just on the premise of not making others feel bad (even if they haven't played it before). Now, if someone approached FCM in the same way I had approached Mansions, I'd have been fine to concede to not create an awkward impasse. Ah sorry I thought it was just you and your friends playing at home on a dedicated board game evening. If there are other groups to play with at the place then it doesn't matter and you shouldn't feel bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
I realized this about myself when I went on BGG@SEA a couple of weeks ago. I really like to play games that I like and don't like to play games that I don't like and don't like to be 'that guy' when this discussion comes up. So I doubt I'll be going on things like this anymore. I am going to Sasquatch up in Seattle this year but 1) my son is there and I haven't seen him since March and 2) there are new games there that everyone including me will want to try. But going to gaming groups where it's just 'whatever' is not appealing to me anymore. And yes, it's dickish to make everyone play something you can at least stand playing, so I'll be avoiding those situations in the future.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Thanks all for the feedback on the Cube Libre player sheets yesterday. My goal for making these was as much to teach myself the game as anything, and I tried to build them around resolving some of the issues that came up the first couple of times I played, basically trying to more-easily answer "what should I be doing?" and "how should I be doing it?" Except more at a glance and more plain language. Something you could hand a first-timer that wasn't as daunting as a folded 11x17 card with 32 identical boxes on it. I also tried to limit information that was applicable to everyone (like Propaganda process), as those inserts weren't quite as "omgwut" as the Ops/Specs insert is. For draft 2, I cleaned up some language, added some iconography and all victory conditions onto each card. Thanks, all! The first two pages are meant as a "back/front" quick reference for a solo-player, and that information is expanded on the individual player cards. Here go: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2_bRLJTm_OKcFFkQlg2Q3NTWk0
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
al-azad posted:I really don't know what to add to the argument because all my groups have thankfully been likeminded in taste but sacrifices have to be made sometimes. I will suffer a game of Munchkin among strangers if they promise to suffer through my Mediterranean spice trading game. If it reaches the point where all we do is play Munchkin and they don't want my abstract cube worker placement then "bye." Yea, I completely agree with this. I'll put up with a game of Munchkin once in a while even though I find it incredibly tedious, because everyone else I play with loves it. Likewise, some of them will play incredibly dry euros with me even though it's not their cup of tea. I guess it's also because my board game group is also just my general friend group, so we see board games as just an avenue for hanging out, so which specific game we're playing is secondary to finding an activity we can all do together. If you have no overlap in tastes at all, then they're probably not the right group for you to be playing board games with. Which in my case would mean that we'd just find another activity to meet up regularly to do, but if it was a group that met specifically for board games, I'd just find a different group. minute fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Sep 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:Even better (and more polite as a host) is planning ahead and telling people what you are expecting to play. "Hey guys, I'm trying to get a game of Dominion or Valley of the Kings together this week." I feel like this is the correct answer. I feel that people need to stop treating board/card games like they're a single genre or hobby at this point. If I was going to invite a group of friends over to watch a movie, I wouldn't just say 'we're going to watch a movie.' Instead, I'd probably specify 'horror film' or 'rom-com' or 'cheesy B sci-fi'. Unless you're really selective about who you invite, I don't think simply inviting people over for 'boardgaming' cuts it anymore.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Yeah that's a good point. The types of experience different games generate are so different as to be almost different hobbies at a certain point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Lorini posted:I realized this about myself when I went on BGG@SEA a couple of weeks ago. I really like to play games that I like and don't like to play games that I don't like and don't like to be 'that guy' when this discussion comes up. So I doubt I'll be going on things like this anymore. I am going to Sasquatch up in Seattle this year but 1) my son is there and I haven't seen him since March and 2) there are new games there that everyone including me will want to try. But going to gaming groups where it's just 'whatever' is not appealing to me anymore. And yes, it's dickish to make everyone play something you can at least stand playing, so I'll be avoiding those situations in the future. I'll be up at Sasquatch this year! Let's play a game together if you get a chance! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
We're having a Play Like A Pirate Day game night on Saturday, and I wanted to go full-stupid with Dominion. I wanted a comical attack kingdom and then one that had a better narrative and gameplay setup. Both would need to make the Pirate Ship at least possibly useful, because yaaaaar! I have: Original Dominion Intrigue Seaside Prosperity Adventures Empires I was thinking of including the travelers (peasant+) from Adventures for a certain amount of character and give something that wasn't just constant offense. Any ideas other than me combing through them and analyzing all the attack cards? I was hoping it wouldn't end with the curse deck getting depleted in 4 turns and a slog to deal with them. Edit: This would be supplemented with cards that boost hand size and trashers to help them claw out of the mess. It looks like a good time to have Bishop in there. I will also probably layout whatever landmark/alternate scoring in Empires that gives extra points for otherwise being screwed. Rocko Bonaparte fucked around with this message at 22:21 on Sep 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
Well the last few pages were garbage. Anyways, I can say after 5 plays now that the newest Valley of the Kings (Last Rites) is definitely the best, but only when playing with experienced players. It has a lot of intricate combos with deep interactions of the various card zones. Really good, maybe my favorite deck builder overall, edging out even Dominion with it's tightness of card pool. Dominion's only real weakness is the massive amount of cards means you can have some bad kingdom setups, and it can be overwhelming trying to put together a fun and balanced one. This game is just as tightly designed, but the three sets are all self contained while being vastly different, and you can also mix them and it works really well either way. Just a great game all around, especially for the ~$15. Go buy all three. It's also easily the best small box game (you can fit the entire trilogy in a standard MTG deck box I think).
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:This game is just as tightly designed, but the three sets are all self contained while being vastly different, and you can also mix them and it works really well either way. I haven't experimented with mixing the base game with Afterlife yet. Do you have a preferred variant, or any specific setups?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
What's an example of the mechanical theme of some of the card sets in last rites?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
 gently caress Munchkin
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:
I'm not sure if truer words have ever been spoken.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
Rocko Bonaparte posted:We're having a Play Like A Pirate Day game night on Saturday, and I wanted to go full-stupid with Dominion. I wanted a comical attack kingdom and then one that had a better narrative and gameplay setup. Both would need to make the Pirate Ship at least possibly useful, because yaaaaar! Including Watchtower in your attack heavy layout might be cool. It effectively deals with pretty much every attack in the game, aside from forced trashing and spies. Putting subtle not-quite attacks in there would be neat too - like Embargo, and Masquerade. I think that Pirate Ship is probably most useful in boards without other ways to generate money (aside from PS and the base treasures). You could experiment with that. Pirate Ship might also suddenly be more meaningful with one of the events that give you VP based on treasure counts. Missing VP from a Fountain while your opponents were able to clinch it could be the difference between a win and loss.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:What's an example of the mechanical theme of some of the card sets in last rites? If you're familiar with the other two games just lots more interaction with the other players and more manipulation of the pyramid. Card like pick three cards and have someone deal them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
In case anyone is still anxious about it, CSI has 2 copies Warhammer Diskwars and the Legions of Darkness expansion right now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:37
|
|
|
That feel when your opponent is facing Lum for the first time and you poker flourish to activate blackjack and draw a joker as your first card.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 13:29
|
|
|
Was looking at prices of FFG stuff and found this kind of funny: Learn about shapes, spelling, and basic numbers! Ages 3 and up!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
How many skulls can you count on Khorne's throne?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
Is it worth owning Codnames: Pictures and the original?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:How many skulls can you count on Khorne's throne? A lot more after my first game last night. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Pvt. Parts posted:Is it worth owning Codnames: Pictures and the original? I think so. They both appeal to different people. I find Pictures more enjoyable but some of my friends think it's more difficult than words.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
Pvt. Parts posted:Is it worth owning Codnames: Pictures and the original? If you don't own either, probably not. But if you own the original and you want Pictures, just buy it and own both. Second hand Codenames sells for like :tenbux:, not worth the effort.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
Pictures is butt compared to Vanilla. It just doesn't have the amazing AHA! moments in my opinion. Also, clues are lower numbered in my experience which makes the guessers game less fun. Also hitting an assassin is super easy because you didn't see that one little thing that your guessers saw.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
Pvt. Parts posted:Is it worth owning Codnames: Pictures and the original? If you own (Dixit or Mysterium) and Codenames, you have Codenames: Pictures! But yes, buy both. Give Vlaada your precious monies. MoM2e solo players - two characters a must-have, or does the game scale down to just using the one character?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
I know that Imperial Assault is basically Descent 2E: Yavin Edition, but as someone who kind of lucked into a copy of Descent (and some weird booklet expansion that allows solo/Overlord-less play) for crazy insane cheap are there any major differences to note?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
Ryoshi posted:I know that Imperial Assault is basically Descent 2E: Yavin Edition, but as someone who kind of lucked into a copy of Descent (and some weird booklet expansion that allows solo/Overlord-less play) for crazy insane cheap are there any major differences to note? I think the line of sight rules are different. If I remember correctly, in descent you have to be able to trace an unobstructed line to any corner of the destination space from any point of the origin space. I think in IA you have to be able to draw to two corners on the destination.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
There are some refinements and fundamental design changes in the dice mechanics but they're 90% the same. IA does have the skirmish mode, which is really fun.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
sector_corrector posted:Including Watchtower in your attack heavy layout might be cool. It effectively deals with pretty much every attack in the game, aside from forced trashing and spies. Putting subtle not-quite attacks in there would be neat too - like Embargo, and Masquerade. I think I'm putting in treasure map for theme, but otherwise, I think I took your advice in blocking off +treasure cards: ambassador (seaside) haven (seaside) native village (seaside) pirate ship (seaside) sea hag (seaside) tactician (seaside) treasure map (seaside) peasant+ (adventures) [for the crew, yarr] rabble (prosperity) watchtower (prosperity) Edit event: bonfire (adventures) I don't think I'd put out platinums and colonies. I don't think I have anything that can trash (Edit: curses) in there though; the ambassador is about as close as it gets, which just turns into a giant curse exchange. Eh... maybe. Rocko Bonaparte fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Sep 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Purely by accident, I found out there's an Obsidian-developed (!) Pathfinder card game app. On a whim I tried it, since some games I dislike are tolerable in tablet form. Plus, it's free to try, so why not? After half an hour I remembered how much I hate this awful game. The app itself is really drat good though. Easily the best board game to digital adaptation I've ever seen. If only they'd done this but with a good game instead.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
Quick Falling Skies question am I reading it right that if Vercingetorix rallies in a arverni controlled region he can place two allies then warbands ?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
Pvt. Parts posted:Is it worth owning Codnames: Pictures and the original? Yes. They can be played together as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
Rumda posted:Quick Falling Skies question am I reading it right that if Vercingetorix rallies in a arverni controlled region he can place two allies then warbands ? quote:Arverni Rally in a Region The first sentence is an explanation that you can ignore the Control requirement. The second sentence says that you can both place an ally and warbands. So only 1 ally + warbands.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
If I was to buy into Diskwars, would I want 1 or 2 copies of the core set? What would the specific reason be for getting two copies rather than 1?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 04:17 |
|
|
Well, it looks like Forbidden Stars and Fury of Dracula are back in stock at Cardhaus.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 23:25
|
|