|
Fungah! posted:You lucky motherfucker The soviets have a tendency to steamroll the US at the beginning though, and people who are intimidated by a game like that who lose during turn 4 are generally not motivated to play another game of it ever. They might learn the strategy better, but they'll feel powerless and might not have as much fun. All that's necessary for a beginner to play the USSR is to say to them during round 1 - "couping Italy or Iran looks like a good idea for you. They're only stability 2!" The best thing you can do for a beginner is to play your own first hand as an "example" hand. Make sure you place influence, do a realignment, do a battleground and non-battleground coup, space a card, and play an event, all the while explaining why you are doing those things. It's not a bad idea to play your own hand face up either, they'll see you trying to go for your scoring region and try to block you. During the second turn they'll get it enough to play the game proper.
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 05:09 |
|
|
esquilax posted:The soviets have a tendency to steamroll the US at the beginning though, and people who are intimidated by a game like that who lose during turn 4 are generally not motivated to play another game of it ever. They might learn the strategy better, but they'll feel powerless and might not have as much fun. Here's the problem, though - if the USSR gently caress up the early game badly enough, which as a new player they almost certainly will, then they're doomed to lose slowly and horribly over the course of an hour or three because the US doesn't really get the tools to catch up until the late game. I think you'd be much better off having a "learning game" with open hands in which you play the USSR, they play the US, and they know in advance they're probably going to lose relatively quickly. Then give them the USSR for the next game, and they can go in with a fighting chance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
al-azad posted:In theory it's sound but in practice trying to focus on match-3 for stars can be problematic. If you're trying to match-3 to build up points then you have a chance of inadvertently rolling a claw which puts you in Tokyo. Once it comes back to you, even if you're still not in Tokyo, you're either trying to focus on hearts or focus on stars, you can't do both. Meanwhile the players actually entering Tokyo are getting at least 1vp plus whatever cards they're buying and the off chance they get match-3 as well. If you start at 6 players and survive into the late game, the other players are probably going to have equal points to you. It's pretty hard to match 3 when you systematically reroll every numeral you roll. That "off chance" might happen like, once or twice a game. So I guess you're saying your group is known to keep 3's on purpose now and again? Why would they do that if stars have literally never come close to winning a game? The more I hear about your opponents the less I understand them. But if they are sometimes going for 3's and also going to the city, then okay of course no guarantees you can outstar them without doing the same.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
I played a single session mini-campaign of D&D with some friends who aren't generally that nerdy earlier in the year, and everyone had a great time. There's no real desire among anyone who was involved to continue having a weekly game (plus the DM fell off the face of the Earth after having a kid), but I was thinking that a fun purchase would be one of the many self-running dungeon-crawlers that have been hitting the market lately. I know about the D&D tabletop games (like Ravenloft), but I was wondering what other good options were out there. Ideally playing in under an hour, having easy to follow rules, and pricing around the D&D games. If I was looking at the D&D games, then which one is the best starting point?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
sector_corrector posted:I played a single session mini-campaign of D&D with some friends who aren't generally that nerdy earlier in the year, and everyone had a great time. There's no real desire among anyone who was involved to continue having a weekly game (plus the DM fell off the face of the Earth after having a kid), but I was thinking that a fun purchase would be one of the many self-running dungeon-crawlers that have been hitting the market lately. I know about the D&D tabletop games (like Ravenloft), but I was wondering what other good options were out there. Ideally playing in under an hour, having easy to follow rules, and pricing around the D&D games. If I was looking at the D&D games, then which one is the best starting point? Under an hour is kind of strict for the genre of game you're looking for, I think. You can get a copy of Descent 2nd Edition for about $60 these days. It's a GM vs. players type of affair where you play out dungeon crawl scenarios on maps made from modular terrain. You're looking at like 1-2 hours for a scenario, though. If you can live without a tactical map, and are looking mainly for a co-op adventure sort of game, consider Eldritch Horror. It's a little more streamlined than Arkham Horror was, and has a bit more variation between its scenarios, as well. It also takes like 2 or 3 hours.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Lawen posted:Eight is a pretty hard number to find good games for, you're mostly limited to party/social games; Resistance: Avalon, Wits & Wagers, Say Anything, One Night Ultimate Werewolf, Pitchcar, and Telestrations/Eat Poop You Cat (which is technically a "game" but is really more of a social toy where points and winners don't matter) all spring to mind. Coup + Reformation! 7 Wonders + Cities!
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
Regarding Coup Reformation for 7+: the manual recommends it only for experienced players who can play quickly and are willing to sit through a lot of downtime. I haven't tried but that sounds right to me (and when a game tries to talk you out of playing it, that's a pretty bad sign). 7 Wonders is great but teaching the game for the first time with the expansion would be rough, and unfortunately that's what you'd have to do. I'd teach the base game to almost anyone, but with Cities it's a lot for "non-gamers" to choke down at once. On the boundary between social deduction and light party games, how's 2 Rooms and a Boom for 8? Not sure what the thread consensus is on that game, nor have I played it with enough roles to evaluate properly, but I had fun the one time I played. McNerd fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
sector_corrector posted:I played a single session mini-campaign of D&D with some friends who aren't generally that nerdy earlier in the year, and everyone had a great time. There's no real desire among anyone who was involved to continue having a weekly game (plus the DM fell off the face of the Earth after having a kid), but I was thinking that a fun purchase would be one of the many self-running dungeon-crawlers that have been hitting the market lately. I know about the D&D tabletop games (like Ravenloft), but I was wondering what other good options were out there. Ideally playing in under an hour, having easy to follow rules, and pricing around the D&D games. If I was looking at the D&D games, then which one is the best starting point? What about Fiasco? It's not a dungeon crawler, but a DM-less roleplaying setup. You probably couldn't play under an hour though (you could create the characters ahead of time and same prep time I suppose).
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
ashez2ashes posted:What about Fiasco? It's not a dungeon crawler, but a DM-less roleplaying setup. You probably couldn't play under an hour though (you could create the characters ahead of time and same prep time I suppose). Not really. Character creation in Fiasco is entirely about your relationships with the other characters, and is done as a group exercise with a shared dice pool. But it only takes like 15 minutes. An entire session takes 3 hours, with a natural break at 1.5 hours if you want to have a smoke or get dinner. As for dungeon crawlers, D&D Adventures is far and above the best self-running game in print. (Otherwise you're looking at Dungeon Quest or *shudder* the original Dungeon.) Wrath of Ashardalon (#2) is probably the most polished and feels the most like good ol' D&D, with orcs and dragons and kobolds, plus the occasional gibbery awful thing with too many mouths or eyes or limbs. Ravenloft (#1) is more focused on vampires and the undead, and is a bit rougher around the edges. Both games come with a quest book, but Ashardalon also has a random quest generator, which Ravenloft lacks. However, Ashardalon is also the longest running, sometimes pushing 2 hours or more, while I've never seen a game of Ravenloft take more than an hour. This is because Ashardalon has a heavier focus on the monsters--a lot of the event cards in Ashardalon just summon more and more orcs to fight. Ravenloft's event deck has more traps and one-shot spell attacks. Ashardalon also introduces scout monsters in the random monster deck, who run away from the players, revealing more dungeon tiles and summoning more friends. This gives Ashardalon a much more intense combat slog. I can't really speak for The Legend of Drizz't (#3). Never played it, but it's far and away the one most obsessed with the D&D novels and all the attendant wank, and seems worse for it. That might be my personal bias, though. All three games are completely compatible. So you can pick up any one and, if you like it, grab the others as expansions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
ashez2ashes posted:What about Fiasco? It's not a dungeon crawler, but a DM-less roleplaying setup. You probably couldn't play under an hour though (you could create the characters ahead of time and same prep time I suppose). I've considered trying Fiasco, but I think that since it's more about creating a character and less about the mechanical aspects of dice rolling and combat, they would like it even less because it's going too far in the direction of LARPing or community theater. One of the big draws of the mini D&D campaign was group combat, and one of the major things everyone eye-rolled at was when we talked with NPCs for clues.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Huxley posted:I'm also going to grab the Agricola 2 player variant unless someone tells me it's awful. She's never really done much Euro, and it's got a nice light theme. I'd consider standard Agricola. My wife and I play standard Agric with two players all the time and it's great. As long as one player has the round phases memorized [flip card, re-up resources, famers work, farmers come home, and harvest when the board tells you (grow, eat, breed)] I think it's pretty straight forward and stream lined, even for a casual gamer. And strategies become apparent after one play. If standard is too heavy you can always play family mode. At least with the main variant you know you're getting a solid game. FingersMaloy fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
So I work at a small company in (or at least adjacent to) the game industry, which means the lunchtime game session is a pretty sacrosanct affair for us. Lately, our boss has been out of the office taking care of his newborn, so my coworker and I have been working our way through some two player games this week. Monday was BattleCON: Devastation of Indines. BattleCON is still one of my absolute favorites, but my coworker has been getting more and more frustrated with the game. As much as I love the thing, it suffers one fatal flaw: the rules templating is godawful in places. BattleCON is a game built around making secret choices and playing very delicate guessing games. A single space of movement or point of priority (initiative) is quite often the difference between a major coup and doing absolutely nothing. And finding out that your cards don't do quite what you thought they do after you've committed to the move? It leaves an awful taste in your mouth. Also, the game needs an actual centralized FAQ, not a hodgepodge of answers scattered across the Lvl99 Games website, BGG, and loving Tumblr of all places. I really hope D. Brad Talton gets this poo poo together with the upcoming release of War of Indines/Fate of Indines. I still recommend the game, but there is an asterisk on it. Tuesday was the X-Wing Miniatures Game, out of the starter box. I'd never played, and he was teaching me. I ended up playing two of the higher level TIEs against Luke Skywalker with missiles and an R2 unit. I lost one ship in the first firing round, then limped around the battlefield for the rest of the game until he put me out of my misery. Woo. I can see where the strength of the game might lie (particularly with more robust forces, where one ship isn't half my goddamn squadron), but that was a terrible first experience. Wednesday, Star Realms. We actually had a decent game of this. It's a deckbuilder with a randomized middle row, no action/buy limits, and no VP cards to blunt an early lead (although the damage cards sort of function as VP, since they don't help your economy). So far, so Ascension. I took an early advantage, and my coworker never managed to really swing it back. That said, it was still engaging enough to keep us entertained through a lunch. For all the dumb luck, you rarely draw a hand where you feel like you can't do anything to advance your position, even though I did get a snowball on him later in the round. And I actually liked that the silver-alikes and most of the early/midgame cards in the game have some sort of in-built trashing mechanism. It meant you weren't completely reliant on the middle row to provide you with trashing, which is the death-knell for a lot of lovely Ascension clones. And Ascension. So yeah, not the deepest deckbuilder in the pool, and I get a lot of the hate for it. It sure as hell ain't no Dominion. But for $10, it felt like you could do worse. I'd play it again without coercion. And today was Cold War: CIA vs KGB. I had a great time with this. It's a pretty simple card game that uses a blackjack-style mechanism to represent Cold War-era brinksmanship. Every round, you deal out a Region card. Each Region has a point value, a target number, and a population (the max number of cards you can have in front of you before you're forced to stand). You and your opponent take turns, either taking a hit from the "Group Deck," passing, or taking a special action. When both players pass in a row, the player with Group cards closest to the target number without going over takes the Region (with tiebreakers by suit). If both players bust, no one gets the Region. First to 100 points wins. There are two wrinkles in the system, however. The Group Deck, and the Special Agents. The Group Deck is 24 cards, 1 through 6 in four suits: Military, Political, Economic, and Media. In addition to the card value, each suit has a special ability. On your turn, instead of taking a hit, you can "mobilize" (tap) one of your cards to use it's special ability. Tap a Military card to discard a group in play, yours or your opponents. Tap a Political card to steal a group from or donate a group to your opponent (but you can't force your opponent to bust). Tap a Media card to inspect the top card of the deck and either take it, leave it, or discard it. Or tap an Economy card to tap or untap another non-Economy group. This gives you a lot more room to manipulate your cards than just hitting or passing, even giving you a chance to "fix" a bust. The other factor is the Agents. Each player has an identical hand of six Agents. After seeing the Region card, but before taking hits, you send a facedown Agent to the region. When both players pass and you resolve the Region, you also flip up the Agent, which has a special effect. For example, the Director takes an extra Region card if he wins. The Master Spy steals the region if you lose (not bust), but gives it away if you win. The Assassin forfeits the region on a win, instead killing the enemy Agent. Here's the trick, though. After each round, the agent goes On Leave for one turn, then comes back to your hand...unless you bust. If you bust, the agent is killed in the chaos, and gets removed from the game entirely. This means that busting has real consequences, so you have a reason to play safe. All this comes together to create an interesting risk-taking game bigger than simple blackjack, with an added layer of bluffing and a dash of counterplay. Which is pretty good for a lunch game. Would definitely play again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Did your friend have only the starter set for X-Wing? It's definitly one of those things that improve with more pieces
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
Honestly the X-Wing starter set is completely absurd and I would never recommend anyone play with just that. Having only three ships for two people is awful. I would also understand if this makes someone pass on X-Wing entirely since it raises to initial buy in cost substantially if you want to have any fun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
I so wish I could find a copy of Witches Brew at a decent price. I only got to play it once and it still stands out for me
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
Hey, I'm looking at picking up some board games for the holidays. Space Alert is a given and is enough motivation to get the old gang together, but the rest of my board gaming these days happens at monthly nights at a pub. I'm thinking 7 Wonders will be good for that, but I'm looking for other ideas. (Dominion and BSG are covered by other folks in the group.) I kinda want to get Twilight Struggle for if two people need a game to play, but I worry it'll take so long that the place will close before anyone can finish a game. What are some other good games to get for an uncertain number of people and limited play time?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:15
|
|
|
GoatLord posted:Hey, I'm looking at picking up some board games for the holidays. Space Alert is a given and is enough motivation to get the old gang together, but the rest of my board gaming these days happens at monthly nights at a pub. I'm thinking 7 Wonders will be good for that, but I'm looking for other ideas. (Dominion and BSG are covered by other folks in the group.) I kinda want to get Twilight Struggle for if two people need a game to play, but I worry it'll take so long that the place will close before anyone can finish a game. Race for the galaxy does 2-4 (5 with expansion) and is great at any player count. Only takes about an hour too
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:34
|
|
|
GoatLord posted:Hey, I'm looking at picking up some board games for the holidays. Space Alert is a given and is enough motivation to get the old gang together, but the rest of my board gaming these days happens at monthly nights at a pub. I'm thinking 7 Wonders will be good for that, but I'm looking for other ideas. (Dominion and BSG are covered by other folks in the group.) I kinda want to get Twilight Struggle for if two people need a game to play, but I worry it'll take so long that the place will close before anyone can finish a game. Depends how many people. Anything above six and you're better splitting into smaller groups. My local group was at seven for ages so 7 Wonders was played to death because there's virtually no other good games above six. Never buy a two-player game for a club night. It will never see play unless you're deliberately being antisocial.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 09:24
|
|
|
GoatLord posted:Hey, I'm looking at picking up some board games for the holidays. Space Alert is a given and is enough motivation to get the old gang together, but the rest of my board gaming these days happens at monthly nights at a pub. I'm thinking 7 Wonders will be good for that, but I'm looking for other ideas. (Dominion and BSG are covered by other folks in the group.) I kinda want to get Twilight Struggle for if two people need a game to play, but I worry it'll take so long that the place will close before anyone can finish a game. Skull might be a good one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 09:43
|
|
|
Since one of my many hobbies is mercilessly mocking Ignacy Trzewiczek and I had a long train ride to suffer, I decided to check out the (digital version) Witcher Adventure Game. It was... Better than I've expected, actually. It's surprisingly elegant for an Ignacy game. Mind you, it's a very talismanesque game at its core, about drawing random-rear end cards and chucking dice at your problems, it just happens to have a nice action economy puzzle built over it all. At first I wasn't convinced of the claim that the characters feel different, seeing as their development cards all revolve around the same things, but just get charged with tokens differently - but they do. While the game has learned the Vlaada lesson, with separate 'good stuff' deck you need to work for and 'bad stuff' deck whose avoidance is a big part of the aforementioned action efficiency puzzle, the investigation decks (basically: burn an action to draw a random card hoping to get more clues of a particular type) feel like a regression to Talisman standards. I do, however, see the rationale behind decisions Trzewiczek made there: cards with negative effects are there so that a character can specialize in questing (sorting cards) rather than combat. There's also some set collection involved, with ability to cash out some previously drawn cards, which I guess promotes sticking to a particular deck? Yet, perhaps the mechanics are too constrained to provide enough meat to differentiate these, and therefore they feel like a homogenous, random mess. The gold (thankfully a minor part of the game) seems underdeveloped in a similar way: with exception of a particular gold-aligned character, you can attempt to semi-randomly gain gold to buff some cards you might or might not draw. After the first game I thought to myself that this was quite fun, if probably seriously lacking replayability. And still, I felt compelled to play it a few more times to try and crack the puzzle behind actions (I might have been quite bored at the time, though). Would I recommend it? I think I'd be hesitant when talking to a seasoned gamer, but if you:
PS. The game does recycle a lot of art from the Witcher games and whatnot and I shed a tear on sight of the tastefully-cropped sex cards from Witcher 1. PPS. Yes, there are a lot of ladies to bang in this game, you're able to play as Dandellion after all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 10:03
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:After the first game I thought to myself that this was quite fun, if probably seriously lacking replayability. And still, I felt compelled to play it a few more times to try and crack the puzzle behind actions (I might have been quite bored at the time, though). Would I recommend it? I think I'd be hesitant when talking to a seasoned gamer, but if you: The Witcher looks like an interesting game, same with Prophecy and Relic but I think I'm sticking with Talisman. Not that those games don't improve on the Talisman formula but to me its easy enough to just take whatever rules you like from those games and put them into Talisman (and I do). That's one of the major advantages of Talisman to me, the game has very basic default mechanics making it quite simple to house rule. The biggest advantage though is the fact that Talisman has been around since the birth of the internet and people have been making homebrew content for it just as long. My personal copy of Talisman is nothing like what a person could pick up off a shelf and buy or play on Steam. I went with 1st edition Talisman because it had more content out there to draw on (though I did use cards from all editions in the end). There are five separate 100-card adventure decks; one each for the Outer Region, Middle Region, Timescape, City, and Dungeon. I picked the cards for these decks out of the thousands of expansion/fan cards to be interesting and give each region a different flavor. I have over 100 classes and 150 different spells and 20 Alternate Ending cards ensuring no two games are alike. It brings out my Dungeon Master instincts to design all of the card pools from scratch. I couldn't do that with a game other than Talisman.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
For a pub, Coup is an easy choice (though everyone should just already own Coup by default.) Easy to teach, quick to play, flexible player count, and it doesn't take up too much space or have too many components to monkey with. If you're at an actual game meetup then probably nobody feels self-conscious about looking nerdy in public, but if anyone did, the minimalist design is good for that too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 15:53
|
|
|
Gutter Owl posted:Tuesday was the X-Wing Miniatures Game, out of the starter box. I'd never played, and he was teaching me. I ended up playing two of the higher level TIEs against Luke Skywalker with missiles and an R2 unit. I lost one ship in the first firing round, then limped around the battlefield for the rest of the game until he put me out of my misery. Woo. I can see where the strength of the game might lie (particularly with more robust forces, where one ship isn't half my goddamn squadron), but that was a terrible first experience. Tie fighters should be flown as a single unit in a (relatively) tight formation so that 2 ships then become a single ship with 6 Hull Points and 2 shots per turn. Though I will say that the game is much improved with more ships, but expanding your fleet can be costly if you just dive in and buy everything. This might help if you are interested in exploring the game further. SA X-Wing thread
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 16:00
|
|
|
I wish I'd known that the starter set for X-Wing is a little junky, I was pretty put off by my first few games. It doesn't help that I am the worst pilot in this galaxy or the next. Pressure Cooker is $17 at MM, anyone want to sell me on it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:I wish I'd known that the starter set for X-Wing is a little junky, I was pretty put off by my first few games. It doesn't help that I am the worst pilot in this galaxy or the next. Not so much junky, just a little too basic to fully enjoy the game as a mad collision of fighters and narrow escapes. It would have been better with an extra X-Wing and Tie Fighter, but I can understand wanting to keep the price point low. Though buying a second core is a good and easy way to improve the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
Yeah, X-Wing is in the crappy position that the core by itself doesn't really reflect the game, and telling people 'oh you have to buy more stuff to really enjoy it!' is kind of lovely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:The Witcher looks like an interesting game, same with Prophecy and Relic but I think I'm sticking with Talisman. Not that those games don't improve on the Talisman formula but to me its easy enough to just take whatever rules you like from those games and put them into Talisman (and I do). That's one of the major advantages of Talisman to me, the game has very basic default mechanics making it quite simple to house rule. The biggest advantage though is the fact that Talisman has been around since the birth of the internet and people have been making homebrew content for it just as long. How do you live with yourself?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
You know the saddest part of this whole hobby? How I keep willingly buying game I know absolutely no one will play with me more than once... if I'm lucky. God it's a sickness. Just ordered Suburbia and Patchwork pre-order to round out free shipping at CSI.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Texibus posted:You know the saddest part of this whole hobby? How I keep willingly buying game I know absolutely no one will play with me more than once... if I'm lucky. God it's a sickness. Just ordered Suburbia and Patchwork pre-order to round out free shipping at CSI. But one day you might find somebody to play them with! And then it will be great 
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
They all say they will but then they never do. My last hope is Children, will they adopt 8 year old children to a single 30 year old man with a mountain of board games? I don't want to play any of that kiddy poo poo. Edit: Actually I hope they wouldn't, that felt creepy even typing. Texibus fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
Texibus posted:You know the saddest part of this whole hobby? How I keep willingly buying game I know absolutely no one will play with me more than once... if I'm lucky. God it's a sickness. Just ordered Suburbia and Patchwork pre-order to round out free shipping at CSI. Good news, friend. Suburbia has not one, but TWO solitaire game modes in the manual.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
I've never played a board game alone, aside from dry runs when I plan to teach something. Are those any good?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
Texibus posted:They all say they will but then they never do. Are you friends with a lot of gamers or is there a gamer community at all where you live? If so, try setting up a board game night. We're lucky in my hometown as a local coffee shop hosts one every week on Friday, but there's nothing stopping you from going on facebook and organizing it yourself and hosting at your apartment/house. Its like throwing a party, for nerds. If you repeatedly do it people will continue to show up. You just have to have a set day for people to come on. I mean, you'll probably be stuck playing Cards against Humanity at first, but the people interested in good games will readily identify themselves.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:
My question is not so much "how can you live with yourself?" as "why haven't you just made your own game by now?", since I think the bar is pretty low for one-upping Talisman. Ditching roll-to-move and opposed rolls, and changing cards so that they interacted more with other cards on the board and less with a simple d6 would be enough to make a much better game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
Madmarker posted:Are you friends with a lot of gamers or is there a gamer community at all where you live? If so, try setting up a board game night. We're lucky in my hometown as a local coffee shop hosts one every week on Friday, but there's nothing stopping you from going on facebook and organizing it yourself and hosting at your apartment/house. Its like throwing a party, for nerds. If you repeatedly do it people will continue to show up. You just have to have a set day for people to come on. I mean, you'll probably be stuck playing Cards against Humanity at first, but the people interested in good games will readily identify themselves. Yeah, I go to a few game days every month and have picked up a few decent contacts that way. Mostly I run into a bunch of insufferable people at those meetings and can barely stand to sit through the one day with them, let alone seeing them outside of a structured event. So, I guess it's not a lack of people to play with, it's a lack of people I want to play with regularly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
Texibus posted:They all say they will but then they never do. My last hope is Children, will they adopt 8 year old children to a single 30 year old man with a mountain of board games? I don't want to play any of that kiddy poo poo. Don't feel creepy. Here in Los Angeles there are 1600 kids who need adoptive homes. They have no issues with single parents adopting. And kids love to play boardgames.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
Texibus posted:Yeah, I go to a few game days every month and have picked up a few decent contacts that way. Mostly I run into a bunch of insufferable people at those meetings and can barely stand to sit through the one day with them, let alone seeing them outside of a structured event. Well work through the decent contacts. You don't have to do a wide post, but I mean if you have all these games that you want to play, and know people who like those games, see about getting that group together to play. Of course there is going to be insufferable people, just don't message/invite them. They may still show up every now and again WITH one of the decent people, but that is the downside of socializing. Really for a good game night, you either want 4 people or 10 people, and if you have a few decent contacts 4 should be a workable number.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
Lorini posted:Don't feel creepy. Here in Los Angeles there are 1600 kids who need adoptive homes. They have no issues with single parents adopting. And kids love to play boardgames. No, definitely feel creepy as that post was about one step away from Michael Jackson and two from "Hello little girl, would you like to see some puppies?" That said, if you really want to adopt you should.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
homullus posted:My question is not so much "how can you live with yourself?" as "why haven't you just made your own game by now?", since I think the bar is pretty low for one-upping Talisman. Ditching roll-to-move and opposed rolls, and changing cards so that they interacted more with other cards on the board and less with a simple d6 would be enough to make a much better game. I have a few ideas for original games in the back of my head but its a little daunting to get started (chess with point buy armies, I'll make it work drat it!). If I can take something like Talisman that has lots of content already and tweak it into what I'm after I'll generally just do that. Vlaada Chvatil posted:How do you live with yourself? I sleep on a bed of d6.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 05:09 |
|
|
Is there a should-play list of games for the christmas season? I'm going to Toronto for the holidays, and planning to pick up a bunch of board games for cheaper than I can find them here in Ottawa. I'm thinking Space Alert, Galaxy Trucker, Sushi Go, and maybe Tash-Kalar, given the love it's been getting in this thread (though I'll watch some gameplay videos first. Any other current recommendations people would make, not just for me, but for others? (obviously with possible caveats, 'if you like this sort of game', etc)
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 17:45
|
|
