|
Lord of Waterdeep is an intro game for its genre (worker placement). You take it in turns to allocate workers to various tasks (usually some form of resource gathering), with the wrinkle being that if someone chooses a specific task nobody else can do it that round. One reason it works as a intro is that it gives people a good set of short term objectives to work towards, rather than the more open-ended approach of heavier worker placement games. There are some decent app / Steam versions if you wanted to see what it's like. There are worker placement games I prefer but as an intro (especially for someone who likes D&D) it's a good game.
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 10:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Lord of Waterdeep is an intro game for its genre (worker placement). You take it in turns to allocate workers to various tasks (usually some form of resource gathering), with the wrinkle being that if someone chooses a specific task nobody else can do it that round. Ah so it's competitive rather than cooperative? That'll be something new for sure. I'll check it out. So far all our non codenames board games have been Co op so it'd be good to mix it up a bit
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 10:23
|
|
|
Yeah it's competitive. You are the titular Lords and the "resources" you collect are adventurers that you send out on quests (the short term objectives I mentioned).
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 10:28
|
|
|
I wish the little cubes were the adventurer meople that my girlfriend's dad found online.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 10:38
|
|
|
Out of interest is there a co-op worker placement game out there? I can't think of one off the top of my head.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 10:47
|
|
|
Depends on if you would call The Colonists a worker placement game. It got a co-op scenario during Spiel 2017 in which you defend your colony against invaders by building traps, mines, etc. Orleans is more of a bag builder but it has a co-op expansion as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 11:33
|
|
|
There's Kitchen Rush...
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 11:42
|
|
|
Troyes has a cooperative element I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 12:26
|
|
|
If we're looking at it that way, isn't Archipelago a WP game? Never played it, but goons mention it a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 12:36
|
|
|
Dancer posted:If we're looking at it that way, isn't Archipelago a WP game? Never played it, but goons mention it a lot. There's worker placement to Archipelago, yeah (along with a bunch of other stuff), but it's not a strict co-op, it's competitive co-op--you have to work together at times to avoid a shared loss (which gives a player who's trailing a Samson Option), accompanied by a traitor-like role who may or may not be in a given game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 12:45
|
|
|
Played Kitchen Rush on NYE. First game we lost playing on easy and without events, we weren't even close to getting the required amount of orders filled. Second game we diversified roles, had one guy on supply and dishwashing duty and three others taking orders and cooking stuff. That way it went much more smoothly. We won the scenario with 30 orders filled, overshot prestige and money reqs considerably. Game's good, but it's no Space Alert. It's a bit more multiplayer solitaire than I expected. Everyone who's cooking does his own thing (orders - ingredients - cooking - spices - serving), only competing for the worker spots and calling for missing supplies. So it's missing those "but I thought you recharged the batteries" interactions between players that make SA so good. My main problem with the game is that the component quality is crap, the player boards are flimsy as hell and the hourglasses are a catastrophe. We had two getting stuck regularly, and another one running to almost 40 seconds. The others run between 27 and 32 seconds. Quality control could have been a lot better there. Rules question for 4 players: The rulebook says nothing about a locked oven at 4 players, but the upgrade card unlocking an oven is still in the game. Should that card be removed or one oven marked as locked?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 13:52
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Lord of Waterdeep [...] works as a intro is that it gives people a good set of short term objectives to work towards, rather than the more open-ended approach of heavier worker placement games. Yeah, there's a ton of other worker placement games that I prefer now, but Lords of Waterdeep's "get quest that needs certain cubes, get cubes, turn in cubes for points" system is extremely easy to explain to newcomers. Viticulture is often held up as a Waterdeep replacement, but "get wine order, get grape card, plant grape card, harvest grape, turn grape into wine, ship wine" is a hell of a lot harder to explain to people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 14:54
|
|
|
Dancer posted:If we're looking at it that way, isn't Archipelago a WP game? Never played it, but goons mention it a lot. Where your workers are placed matters but I wouldn’t describe it as “worker placement” like AFfO or Waterdeep, where you place a worker to perform an action and lock out opponents. Your Action Disks only restrict two of the spaces on the action board and the rest comes down to who manages to exploit the island first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:I had to play some godawful meme game a couple days ago. I feel your pain. Was it What Do You Meme? I had to play this a few months ago at the behest of a friend's non-gamer wife and 5 gamers and it was loving excruciating. We have played Joking Hazard and one or two other other CAH-likes with some success, trying to extract the humor that was put into the game. This game is so righteously unfunny I decided to come up with a way to slightly alter the prompts so that they would actually be funny. It is awful even if you grade on a curve. My holiday game plays were: Don't Mess with Cthulhu: Played it three times. Already played this a bunch, and I cannot believe how good this game is. This game is pure concentrated social deduction / bluffing game. You can play it 2-3 times in a half hour and it gives you most of the same enjoyment as a more complicated one. It has a larger element of luck than a similar game like One Night Ultimate Werewolf. For instance, you could win or lose because one team by chance happened to control all the key remaining cards, which can be a bummer. Of course, this only works if it's all in the hands of people who are trusted, so even if luck shines on you, you might lose because people don't trust you. Like me. I am apparently super untrustworthy. (From a future quote in the thread: Yes, you're untrustworthy because you really like this provably terrible game.) Oceanos: Second time playing this game. It is a nice 'next step' kind of game with just enough to it to give you something to think about, particularly with upgrades. It's a decent theme, and the components have a pretty nice toy factor. The best part is the fuel, which lets you take an additional card from what you're normally entitled to, which lets you do some luck manipulation with your divers and coral. It's good, but nothing to write home about. Welcome to the Dungeon: Have already played this a bunch. We did it once while waiting for others. This game is still good. Playing it with new players can occasionally be a drag because they will not complete the arithmetic and let someone walk in when it is a fait accompli that they will survive. Still, super light filler with almost no set up. The Grizzled: First time with five. This game is still great. We won, even though we missed three supports over the course of the game. We're pretty sure it's about time to stop playing the beginner variant. The Princess Bride: A Battle Of Wits: Not really sure why my friends like this one so much. You gain so little information in this game it is basically luck with a smidge of memory. I had a bit of fun because I was Vizzini and got the switch card, but as it turned out every goblet had more wine than poison so we all lived. I feel like this game could be salvaged with a few better design choices, though I don't know how. I do wonder how it compares to Raise Your Goblets. La Granja: First time with four, second time for me overall. We had some rules hiccups because the game is complicated and I screwed up at least once. It also took quite a while. Once again I got spanked from Menorca to Formentera. In both games, I had trouble getting my hands on additional actions to gain additional fields or farm extensions. In fact, I haven't built a single farm extension in either game because I was too busy trying to do something, anything else. It makes me wonder if 2 on the revenue track is overpowered. Like, I have only been able to take a 2 once in two games, and even if I didn't want the other action, at this point I think I would have to take the 2 to keep it from someone else unless I absolutely needed a donkey or something. I still want another look at this. Concordia: Not a new game for any of us, which meant I didn't have to teach it.  Four players on Italy. It was pretty tight, with a fair number of Prefects being forced to give away very valuable amounts of goods, which hasn't happened in less crowded maps before. In some of the earlier games, we had the Saturn/Jupiter counts going to 9-10 or so, but in the more crowded games they are only going to 6-8, which makes me think the game is going faster as far as the number of turns goes. I also need to start counting the number of cards each player has at the end of a game because I am curious to what degree the number of cards you have determines if you win. Still, I loving love this game. The only sad thing is that my box got one of those Monopoly-box corner tears in transit in my duffle bag.  I need a new way to transport games, or maybe some sort of padding for that bag.Tyrants of the Underdark: Second time playing this one. I was lukewarm on it the first time, but the second time I dug it a lot more. This game really showcases Ascension and Thunderstone in a bad light. The board adds an interesting way to get points in various ways, and offers a way to affect other players without actually clogging up their decks or discarding their cards (in the cards I've seen, anyway). This one is pretty good as far as deckbuilders go. I'd rather play Dominion or probably Valley of the Kings, but this is pretty good. Blood Rage: First play for anyone for this one. My friend has owned it for a year, and I kept saying, "This game is highly regarded, we should play this." Today, we finally made it happen. I watched the Watch It Played for it to help me prep to teach, which is good because my friends nearly gave up because they thought it might be too complicated. We played 3 player. It went okay, but we still had a fair number of rules screw ups. It also sort of played out in a way that seemed odd. There were a lot of times where people pillaged and either no one was adjacent to fight or no one was willing to resist anyway. I do like that you get no glory if they just let you take the pillage reward, so you would rather actually fight and win. It makes the pillage feel like a nega-verse version of Concordia's Prefect, which I liked. I got the card that doubles the bonus for dying in Ragnarok, so I crammed all my guys in there and got them killed. That was awesome fun but it felt like my opponents should have been stopping me, or even just marching men in there to hog up villages. I thought I was going to be super sneaky in the last round where there was a huge scrum in Ragnarok by playing the card that gives you 2 glory for each figure that dies, so I just sent a single guy in, but there's that Heimdall cancel card that makes you replay. That gave me the feeling that it would need a few plays to truely shine, and probably a better memory than I have to know what's going around. I can see why this game is so popular. It's thinky and strategic but also relatively simple when you get down to it. It has a great toy factor, a great combo factor, but it still plays in 90 or so minutes. Overall, it was a great couple of days of gaming.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 15:20
|
|
|
I don't think Time Bomb is "provably terrible". Sure it's built in ways you'll have a few duff games but brevity makes up for a lot. Bad retheme though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 15:57
|
|
|
I’ve been playing games with my younger cousins over the holidays and they catch on quick. Sushi go party and Carcassonne so far. I feel like I’m doing the typical patronizing them of their inability to learn more difficult games when they said those were too easy but I also didn’t want to scare them off when they said they wanted to try good board games (that weren’t Monopoly/risk, in their words). One of the girls didn’t like the meanness of some of the sushi go setups so I think I’ll take the Rahdo approach. Troyes and Trajan shouldn’t be too bad, right? I think I can work up to Caverna and Gaia Project afterwards and that could be our games for a while. I’ve realized I don’t actually have much in “friendly” multiplayer solitaire engine racing competitive games but I think those should do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 16:21
|
|
|
I love La Granja, but drat if it isn't a bit frustrating if you don't get a good hand on the first turn.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 17:06
|
|
|
The TSA guy at the airport was inordinately interested in my copy of Las Vegas - he opened up the box and everything. I guess that does sound like the name for a fake game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
Magnetic North posted:Welcome to the Dungeon: Have already played this a bunch. We did it once while waiting for others. This game is still good. Playing it with new players can occasionally be a drag because they will not complete the arithmetic and let someone walk in when it is a fait accompli that they will survive. Still, super light filler with almost no set up. If it wasn't hard enough yet, why wouldn't you still be in the round? The only problem I've noticed with new players is the opposite: they want to "do the dungeon", so they'll add cards long after they have any hope of succeeding. quote:One of the girls didn’t like the meanness of some of the sushi go setups so I think I’ll take the Rahdo approach. If you want a bit softer game (and one with a super crowd pleasing theme), try Cat Lady.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:I don't think Time Bomb is "provably terrible". Sure it's built in ways you'll have a few duff games but brevity makes up for a lot. Bad retheme though. Yeah, Timebomb Evolution is fine and only ever fails when you get the odd case that the two terrorists know each other and end up with the clippers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 18:34
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Troyes and Trajan shouldn’t be too bad, right? I think I can work up to Caverna and Gaia Project afterwards and that could be our games for a while. These seem rather heavy coming directly after carcassonne. i think you should take an extra step inbetween and play a "post-gateway" game next. Something like Dominion, Istanbul or Concordia. a game with relatively simple rules but complex decisions, see how they do. if they dig it, go heavier.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 19:16
|
|
|
discount cathouse posted:These seem rather heavy coming directly after carcassonne. i think you should take an extra step inbetween and play a "post-gateway" game next. i usually suggest Dungeon Petz due to the attractive theme and approachability, which is also pretty good on making complex decisions owing to the whole points/selling mechanics
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 19:35
|
|
|
Good Lord, why doesn't Hansa Teutonica get more attention in this thread? Concordia is a great game and deserves all the attention it garners but I think it's criminal that a game like HT that plays like a mix between it and... Scythe(!) isn't given nearly enough love. You take on the role of German traders running around the country setting up trading routes between cities and establishing offices in them. You've got a few options of what to do every turn, but you've got this player board with cubes on it covering different levels of abilities that as you go through the game, can be removed (ayyyyy) and added to your general supply, upgrading your player board actions in whatever direction you see fit. There are a bunch of ways to score points but doesn't feel salad-y at all, instead giving you the slightly overwhelming sense that 'holy poo poo, I can (try to) win in a number of ways here and they all feel viable.' I'll admit the theme is slightly dry but come on, Concordia isn't exactly pulse-pounding either. And there are some light 'take that' actions that can be aggravating if you hate the idea of anyone messing with you at all, but they're typically costly and should only be used under certain circumstances otherwise you're just wasting precious workers and actions. Anyone who likes Concordia/Navegador should at least read some reviews or watch some videos about HT because I think this is a game that does some interesting, strategic things very well and is very easily and quickly learned, taught, and played.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
I had the pleasure of playing Escape from 100 Million BC. Despite the name it's not in any way related to Escape: Curse of the Temple, but it was on sale and my buddy couldn't resist the allure of saving JFK from dinosaurs. Unfortunately, JFK didn't show up in our game, but we got to rescue a civil war soldier, a space man with a ray gun, and Lucy. The highlight of the game was absolutely the hotshot reporter getting two pistols as his starting items and going in guns blazing against a woolly mammoth. After getting slapped around he fled into a stegosaurus who dealt the final blow, triggering the emergency teleport to the hospital. On his next turn the woolly mammoth had moved onto the hospital space, hotshot reporter spent the rest of his ammo trying and failing to kill it before being hospitalized again (later we found the FAQ which clarified that enemies can't move onto the hospital space, but this isn't present anywhere in the rulebook). The long and short of it is: the game is bad, and nowhere is this more apparent than in action resolution. To do anything you roll a bunch of dice and 4+ is a success, with 6's counting and then being rerolled for another potential success. Already we're getting a little fiddly, but it then, rather than just giving you a target number, the roll is always opposed by another set of dice under the same rules. This makes tests extremely volatile, even when doing something your character is specialized in and has equipment for you still have sizable chance of failure on every task you attempt. You have a small pool of will tokens that let you reroll one die when you fail, but this often isn't enough to make the difference and you want to conserve them as there are a number of other special actions that require spending one. Most of gameplay is in exploring tiles, you move onto a space and flip its tile over, potentially revealing items, enemies, or random events, but usually revealing nothing. To win you have to find the pieces of your time machine and bring them back without creating too much time paradox. Time paradox is created by using the emergency teleport, killing enemies, and by any items that are left in the item deck at the end of the game. In addition, time castaways spawn randomly, these have to be retrieved and returned to their portals to avoid creating more paradox. Essentially you spend every turn running out into unexplored territory hoping to find the things you need to win. When you inevitably run into an enemy you can try to run away, kill it, or scare it off, which is mechanically identical to killing it except that it costs a will token and doesn't add paradox. Whatever you try to do, you have to roll and that's far from guaranteed. Worse still, there's even further variance in what enemy you pull, with each deck featuring enemies that are hard to fight, enemies that are hard to run away from, enemies that are both, and enemies that are neither. And then we have the Pack special ability which has to be one of the most ill conceived mechanics I've ever seen. When you pull an enemy with "Pack 3" you flip the top 3 cards of the deck, if there are any copies of that enemy they join in attacking you and then their pack abilities also trigger, potentially cascading through the whole deck and creating a giant stack of dinosaurs. Or maybe you get lucky and are accosted by a single pterodactyl that you can punch out. The paradox mechanic was a sliver of a good idea, but the whole rest of the game is just surface level theme-driven mechanics with very little thought put into how they actually affect the gameplay. As a narrative experience there just isn't enough meat to carry things, what little flavor text the game has is actually pretty well written, but its spread pretty thin. I totally agree that rescuing JFK from dinosaurs is rad and it's pretty cool that the Snack Cakes card does nothing but generates the most paradox if you leave them behind, but those little morsels of flavor are all the game has going for it. And, I mean, you can play a whole game without having JFK or Lincoln OR Teddy show up. That's a hell of a design flaw. Those shoulda just been your player characters right there. Presidents V Dinosaurs, I'd be on that poo poo day loving one. Fenn the Fool! fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Jan 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 20:12
|
|
|
I love Hansa Teutonica. Doesn’t get to the table enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
I've just started getting into board games a bit, played some lords of waterdeep and Dead of Winter. It seems like people are quite down on Dead of Winter, but I had a lot of fun playing it for the first time. Group of 4, 3 of us managed to complete our objectives (which does seem a bit high considering none of us had played before). What are the main things you guys don't like about the game? Also I ordered a game called Unfair for my partner as a late Christmas present, it sounds fun but does anyone have any experience with it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Re: Unfair - the theme is nice. Has a bunch of targeted attack cards, which are a bit incongruous when most of the game is just building up your own park - but might be a bit less objectionable if you're playing with just two. I haven't played it a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 22:08
|
|
|
Anyone actually played Aeon's End? I'd never heard of it before Rhado put an upcoming Legacy version on his "most want" end-of-year list thing. Always on the hunt for 2p coop legacy stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
HampHamp posted:I've just started getting into board games a bit, played some lords of waterdeep and Dead of Winter. It seems like people are quite down on Dead of Winter, but I had a lot of fun playing it for the first time. Group of 4, 3 of us managed to complete our objectives (which does seem a bit high considering none of us had played before). What are the main things you guys don't like about the game? Unfair is something I grabbed over Christmas that my girlfriend and I currently quite like it. It's a neat little (tableau builder?) with several different sets of themed cards broken into a couple different things but mainly a park deck that allows you to build yourself a little theme park using cards from both of the worlds. The meat of the game comes from generating a tiny engine to generate enough money/combos to fulfill blueprints for big victory points, as well as stacking fat upgrade stacks on your various attractions. Combine this with an events deck that players are dipping into that contain top half actions that are good for you, and bottom halves that are meant to gently caress over your opponents and you've got an interesting little package. The first four rounds are nice and happy and will probably have only minimal aggression depending on who you play with. The last four rounds have mean and bad world events every round, and people will start to get vicious with their take that attack cards. We have played it only a couple of times but the theme is adorable and the rules simple and clean. The components are great and the game lends itself to some interesting strategies. My only complaint is that the cards drawn at every round are totally random and even though you can dig into the deck a bit, it sucks up precious actions to do so and doesn't guarantee anything either so you may have to occasionally suck it up and build stuff that isn't the most optimal. It's also very
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 22:11
|
|
|
Jabor posted:Re: Unfair - the theme is nice. Has a bunch of targeted attack cards, which are a bit incongruous when most of the game is just building up your own park - but might be a bit less objectionable if you're playing with just two. With regards to Unfair, the fact that the attack cards have a side that helps a player and a side that hurts another player is a pretty decent way to balance them. It's almost never worth it to use the attack side unless you have a real runaway leader to catch, the side that helps you is stronger in basically all situations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 22:13
|
|
|
HampHamp posted:I've just started getting into board games a bit, played some lords of waterdeep and Dead of Winter. It seems like people are quite down on Dead of Winter, but I had a lot of fun playing it for the first time. Group of 4, 3 of us managed to complete our objectives (which does seem a bit high considering none of us had played before). What are the main things you guys don't like about the game? 1) Higher die rolls are always better, making completing actions a bit too luck dependent. 2) Any time you move, there's a chance you will instantly lose your character regardless of anything else. 3) The hidden objectives do a poor job of providing cover for the traitor beyond "I'm doing this bad thing to help myself win." 4) The best strategy for the traitor is to play completely normally until they go last and then create as much mayhem as possible because they get two turns in a row. 5) If the traitor does get found out and exiled before the end of the game, they can be completely and utterly screwed by getting a new objective that's impossible for them to complete.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
HampHamp posted:I've just started getting into board games a bit, played some lords of waterdeep and Dead of Winter. It seems like people are quite down on Dead of Winter, but I had a lot of fun playing it for the first time. Group of 4, 3 of us managed to complete our objectives (which does seem a bit high considering none of us had played before). What are the main things you guys don't like about the game? A giant deck of cards, from which you constantly draw, but could hypothetically never use during a whole game, is par for the course in how well-designed it is. See also: being a traitor means making a lot of noise and generating trash(?!) on one turn. See also: some combinations of win conditions and characters being wayyy easier than others.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:Good Lord, why doesn't Hansa Teutonica get more attention in this thread? i really want to play it at some point because it seems cool. the blocking/teleporting mechanic sounds awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
Between Terraforming Mars, Lewis & Clark, and Robinson Crusoe: Adventures on the Cursed Island, which has the most favorable consensus here? They're about the same weight, all with solo options, and about the same price. I'm not really looking to fill a particular niche in my collection, just something new.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
FulsomFrank posted:Good Lord, why doesn't Hansa Teutonica get more attention in this thread? The problem is to me - I struggle to play concordia (random example, insert agricola here as well or whatever other game) 10 times. Getting another game that is a twist on a previous one makes little sense. It's particularly a problem with heavy euros like Agricola. I've played that 5-6 times and still don't have a handle on it really. It probably needs another 10 players to explore, but getting another worker placement game cuts into the time available for that. It's even worse if they have the same player count. So when I buy games I'm looking for the category killer and then should not buy anything else. (Don't always listen to my own advice, as I own Agricola, a feast for Odin and Argent)
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
Thanks for the answers guys. Regarding dead of winter, i didn't feel moving was too random (using fuel, requesting fuel if needed), and I kinda like the idea of the crossroads cards. It's true that it's possible for not many to get used during a game, but when very specific ones come out and get triggered I always found it quite exciting. The point about some objectives being way easier than others is one I can't really comment on as I haven't played it enough, but I can see that being a thing even with my limited playtime. Looking forward to digging into unfair, sounds right up our street!
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
Huxley posted:Anyone actually played Aeon's End? I'd never heard of it before Rhado put an upcoming Legacy version on his "most want" end-of-year list thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 23:15
|
|
God I fucking love Diablo 3 gold, it even paid for this shitty title
|
Jejoma posted:Between Terraforming Mars, Lewis & Clark, and Robinson Crusoe: Adventures on the Cursed Island, which has the most favorable consensus here? Lewis and Clark is the only one of the three that this thread does not (correctly) believe to be absolute poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Lewis and Clark is the only one of the three that this thread does not (correctly) believe to be absolute poo poo. Ok, excellent. I certainly do not want lovely games in my collection, no sir.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 23:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Cocks Cable posted:Fog of Love I kickstarted this one because of the novelty. The components are absolutely gorgeous. But I'm not really sold on the game after 2 plays. It's trying to do a hybrid game + RPG experience generator thing and it hasn't been working out all that well. There's too much luck of the draw and guessing with no real info and not enough mechanical strategy options to really make the game side of it work to a satisfying degree. And then the RPG side gets a bit random and repetitive and doesn't necessarily form as coherent a story line as one would like. It relies heavily (too heavily?) on your own creativity and role-playing skills to fill in the blanks which makes choice of player partner crucial. I applaud the design for trying to do something different. And I think designer is on the right track but missed the mark a bit. Who knows, maybe the mechanics can be tweaked and a new game genre will be born of it eventually? I bought this game as a Christmas present for a friend I'm on the verge of dating (she's been out of town, so she knows she has a present waiting, but hasn't opened it yet), and I'm kind of second guessing the choice. Do you think this leans more toward something that would be cute and fun in an early dating situation, or more toward being awkward? The thing is that it's hard to think of anyone it would be appropriate to play it with if it's not appropriate in that situation, so if it's not, I'm kind of wondering who the audience for this is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 23:46
|
|
