FDQ: How Many Chances Do You Give a Game?

"Three strikes and you're out!" is a common system for deciding when enough is enough. Fifty pages of a book is supposedly a good gauge of whether the whole thing is worth reading. But then there are things that are "acquired tastes," supposedly worth the effort given enough time. What's the cut-off for board games? How many chances do you give a game before passing judgment? Answer in the comments!

@FarmerLenny answers:
The board game hobby is already pretty saturated, so it seems like the answer should be low. After all, if you don't like game X, surely game Y won't disappoint. Why waste your time on what you don't like when there's a clear better option available?

I don't feel this way, though, at least not all the time. I usually give a game more than one chance (the exception is if a game really fails to grab me or anyone else the first time), since one play is rarely definitive. Puerto Rico is a great example of this. The first time I played the game, I wasn't too enamored of it and didn't see what all the fuss was about. But my brother-in-law insisted that I borrow it, and after the very next play, I was hooked. I don't know about number-one-game-of-all-time hooked, but I recognize its merits.

Of course, with other games, multiple plays only confirmed my opinion, as with Glen More. And multiple plays can even sour an experience. I liked San Juan and Cosmic Encounter the first several times I played. It was only later that I realized those games are not really for me. I had a very high opinion of Eminent Domain when I first had it, but it has since left me feeling cold. All of this weighs on me as a reviewer: how many plays is enough to give a definitive opinion? And who's to say my opinion won't change later? There comes a time when you have to put fingers to keyboard; I try to make sure it happens when my opinion is set, but we all make mistakes, I'm sure.

Because of these things, I appreciate all the more the games that are still awesome, all these plays later.

@Futurewolfie answers:
There's really no definitive answers to this one.  However there is this; I am much more likely to give a game multiple tries if either 1. the theme interests me greatly or 2. one of my friends really likes the game.

Some games (such as, you know, Bacchus' Banquet - the worst "hidden identity" game I've ever played) are immediately unpleasant.  The game is clearly flawed, I have absolutely no fun playing it, and the theme isn't exactly interesting to me.  I'm not going to try that game again - unless one of my friends (read: @Farmerlenny)  really want to (fortunately in the case of Bacchus, no one did.)

Some games immediately spark my interest - even though I'm still learning the game, I can see the potential or I really love the theme or I enjoy the mechanics and see a lot of potential for depth.

Other games I dislike which may or may not be broken, but I just don't really have fun playing them or find the experience very frustrating.  Again if the theme really interests me (something in Space) or @Farmerlenny really likes it (Ra) I will give it more tries.

And then there are games which I enjoy but are kind of "meh" but I will give them a few shots to see if they grow on me.  And many of them do.  Dominion is one such example - I enjoyed it when I first played, but it wasn't until I really began to grasp the higher concepts and intricate strategies involved that I really began to appreciate it a lot.

Of Tracts, Sheep, and Strong Drink (a review of Glen More)

[Editors note: The following is a Nemesis Review, featuring opinions from our in-house eurogamer, @Farmerlenny, and his deadly enemy the thematic space-loving @Futurewolfie.  Make sure to read both opinions to get a better overall picture of the game!]

I received Glen More for my birthday last year. Glen More seems like it should have everything that I value in a game: interesting decisions, exciting and novel mechanics, and lots and lots of meeples. It even has tiles a la Carcassonne and takes place in the British Isles. So what did I think of it? Read on, good gamer, and find out!

When Theme Matters

In gaming circles, people tend to fall into two groups (when you oversimplify things): the gamers who prefer highly thematic (and often highly complex) games, and those who prefer the often simple-but-strategically-deep eurogames, whose themes are often pasted on and rarely affect gameplay all that much.

As with all "there are two types of people..." shticks, it's really more complicated than that, but I've simplified for simplicity's sake.

FDQ: What Game Is Beautiful?

Board game design, at least within the hobby, is considered an art form. Mechanics in harmony create a well-oiled machine that is wonderful to take part in. But there are some games that go the extra mile, and beyond being beautiful mechanically are beautiful to behold. What game best falls into this category for you? Answer in the comments!

@FarmerLenny answers:
It's hard to choose just one...so I'll choose two. The first is Fresco, which is a fairly obvious choice. The components in this game are astounding, and even the insert is beautiful. The artwork throughout captures the feel of master painters fulfilling their commission. A game about master painters that wasn't beautiful would lose all street cred, so Fresco seems like an obvious choice.

Next to Fresco, the next most beautiful game I can think of is Troyes. I love the artwork style in this game. While the theme is bland, the artwork more than makes up for it, drawing the player back in time to the Middle Ages. The subdued art and color coding make it a game that's easy to stare at.

@Futurewolfie answers:
The choice for me is obvious:  Twilight Imperium. Fantasy Flight Games, with their commonly hefty rulesets and lengthy playtimes may not appeal to everyone, but one thing is certain: they consistently go the distance with art, design, and the inclusion of fancy bits.  Twilight Imperium is no exception.  All the pieces and bits are excellent quality, with lots of color.  It all feels very space-y, with art for each race that fits well within the theme, and the ships! Oh, all the tiny little plastic mini ships.  Fleets of them! Fleets of these finely detailed constructions, all in one box.  This game is a delight to unpack, and it has one of the finest looking boards (once assembled) I've ever seen.

Takenoko is a fairly recent acquisition, but it too carries the banner of beauty.  With vibrant colors, solidly crafted stackable wooden bamboo pieces, and painted minis, Takenoko is definitely easy on the eyes.

Honorable mentions:  Battlestar Galactica, and Small World.  I seem to have a lot of beautiful games because I could go on.

Dungeon-Delving Deck-building (a review of Thunderstone Advance: Towers of Ruin)

I was first introduced to deck-building when @Futurewolfie taught me how to play Dominion. As a former avid CCG player, I was hooked immediately, but I quickly vowed that I would not collect another deck-builder for fear of the CCG's downfall: monetary investment.

But then I saw Thunderstone Advance: Towers of Ruin, and I had to rethink my vow. Thunderstone is deck-building oozing with dungeon-crawling flavor. Had I vowed rashly? Is Towers of Ruin worthy of collection? Find out below!

[Ed. Note: Thunderstone Advance, while a core set and a new starting point for the franchise, is not the first Thunderstone game that has been released. We approach Towers of Ruin as Thunderstone newbies. If you've played another Thunderstone game and want to know if Advance is for you, please read on, but I also recommend that you check out this video from The Dice Tower for veteran players.]

Beyond the Board

I used to bother my roommate in college because he listened to audiobooks rather than reading them. "Oh, I've read that book," he'd say. To which I'd reply, "Whatever."

Admittedly, I said this primarily to get his goat, but having never listened to an audiobook, I saw the experiences as fundamentally different. Can you really say you've "read" something you've never set eyes on?

I've since renounced this view. While I recognize that the two experiences of eye-reading a book and ear-reading a book are different (and there are some books I wouldn't "read" with my ears), I wouldn't call one experience definitive and the other a lesser copy.

So...what does this have to do with board gaming? Read on, good reader! (Or have Siri or Microsoft Sam read it for you.)

FDQ: Have You Ever Targeted a Whiny Player?

We've all played with them. You might even be one of them sometimes. The players who whine and complain when things don't go their way, who act unreasonably vengeful against someone who offends them in the slightest (and such revenge being often without any real benefit to their own position). They get angry, they get snotty, they trash talk, and they often make the game a lot less fun for everyone else.

You no doubt try to keep your patience, try to help calm them down, and try to keep the game together for everyone else to keep having fun. But you know that temptation is there... so the question is, have you ever targeted a player like this, simply to knock them down a few pegs or blow off some steam? I'm talking about sidestepping your own strategy just to bust some knuckles. Well, have ya? Answer in the comments!

@Futurewolfie's take:
As it is one of my goals to introduce more people into the world of board gaming and show them that games are fun, this type of player is one of my biggest pet peeves.  I'm willing to give up strategies, play light, or point out my own weaknesses to help newbies understand a game and have fun playing it. When a game starts breaking down because someone has a bad attitude, not only is that detrimental to the game of the moment, but it could send other people running.


Still, I've found that fighting fire with fire doesn't usually do any good.  Antagonizing a player like that can turn into a one-on-one firefight that excludes the other players. So usually I try to talk the other player down, point out how they can get back in the game (although that's usually with an inexperienced player; I wouldn't want to offend someone who knew what to do but was just frustrated). Often these players are just frustrated with a run of bad luck and can be brought back into the game. And sometimes there's nothing you can do during the game except try to balance it out for the other players and keep it fun for them. Often a little chat after the game can result in better play sessions down the road, if the person can understand that they're ruining everyone else's fun.

I do find the temptation to be too strong occassionally. I rarely go out of my way and break down my strategy to attack that player, but if it falls within a reasonable realm of possibility, I will jump on their weakness to get a little satisfaction.

And sometimes, there's just nothing you can do except not invite that person anymore.

@FarmerLenny's take:

I'm an enabler; it's true. Usually if there's a whiner in the bunch, I let up and try to make the game better for them. I am an appeaser.

The game where I don't do this, however, is Acquire. There's not really a way to help someone out of poor buying choices early in the game. I try to help newbies decide which stocks to buy, but I can't do this too much because the whole game is buying stocks, and it's built on insider information. Strapped players can sulk in the end game, but there's really nothing to be done.

While I don't care for overly whiny players, I still try to make it fun for everyone. If a player makes a wrong move and it's not to other players' detriment, I'll let the player take it back (especially if the player is the greenest of the group). But this realization has to be immediate; I'm not willing to sacrifice several turns of play to do so.

Ultimately, whiny players are players, too, and I try to bring them into the fold...even if I am tempted to turn every ounce of ire against them. But hey, that's what @Futurewolfie is for, whether he's whining or not.

In the Distant Lands... (a review of Dominion: Hinterlands)

If you haven't heard of Dominion by now, clearly you haven't been reading this blog enough, because we talk about it all the time. But just as a quick refresher, Dominion is a card game that exploded onto the scene back in 2008 and quickly became popular and highly regarded (including a Spiel des Jahres win), for good reason. It's easy to learn, accessible, and fun for almost anyone—and yet it holds within it strategic depth and almost infinite variability. Oh, and it invented the deck-building genre of games, which is cool too.

Dominion was followed up with a number of expansions that only increased the quality and fun of the game, and now we're here with yet another expansion—the sixth of eight, Dominion: Hinterlands—which brings us cards thematically featuring elements of distant travel, exploration, discovery,  far-off lands, and valuable foreign goods.

Is this expansion worth adding to your collection? Find out below!

Quest for Riches in the Ruins (a review of Incan Gold)

Playing games with kids can be a drag. You have to put up with the tantrums. You have to spend lots of time explaining and correcting. And, worst of all, most games for kids are just not fun for adults to play. Uno? Life? Even Clue? No thanks. This was primarily my reasoning behind trying Incan Gold, a 3-8 player party game based on Diamant (and this video review was what sealed the deal—those kids are great salespeople). I wanted a game to play with my niece and nephew that the adults could play without wanting to claw their brains out afterward. I just wasn't expecting to play Incan Gold so much when only adults were present.

FDQ: What Was Your Best Trade?

Board games are expensive, and many gamers don't get a chance to play every game they have anyway, yet there is still the desire for the new, the untested experience. This, of course, makes trading an attractive option. Which brings us to today's question: what was your best board gaming trade? Answer in the comments!

@FarmerLenny answers:
It's no secret that I am a board game trading maniac. Because my wife and I use an allowance system and I don't have a lot to invest in the hobby, I try to make my dollar stretch as far as possible. The way I do this is if there is a game that either I don't love or my friends aren't excited to play, after a short grieving period in the latter case, I trade it away.

I've landed some sweet trades. There was the time I traded BoomBlox: Bash Party (the Wii game) for Puerto Rico or Citadels for At the Gates of Loyang in a math trade. (Math trades, for those not in the know, are trades by computer algorithm; a more detailed explanation is here.) These were both trade ups in terms of value. But perhaps my greatest trade in terms of usability was the Settlers of Catan 5-6 player expansion (a game I still hadn't used after three years of ownership) for For Sale (a game I play all the time). I will also occasionally "trade" a game by selling it and using the proceeds to reinvest in the hobby. In that case, perhaps my greatest "trade" was Pirate's Cove for El Grande. In any case, my collection is often fluid because of the trades.

@Futurewolfie answers:
I'm definitely the kind of person that likes to collect and keep.  I have a few board games that haven't been touched in a while, but you never know when the right mood will strike.  At the very least, if the game is something different than anything else I own, it will probably stay for a while.

That being said, there does come a time when you realize a game just isn't going to hit the table, or it's too similiar to another game.  Dragon Parade was just never going to show up with my gaming group, and Android was too long to be worth it. At least we had our fun with Android, but I traded it away for the much shorter Shadows over Camelot, which was a win.  But really, that's all I've traded so far.

Still, I'm looking forward to this year's GenCon math trade (the same place I got rid of Android and Dragon Parade), which is a great way to pass on a game relatively risk-free and without having to pay shipping.  So if anyone's interested in Frag, Cave Troll, Tobago, or Wits and Wagers... those are all on my "to trade" list.

Creative Creature Construction (a preview of Cartoona)

Kickstarter has been used quite a bit in recent memory to bring games to market that are off the beaten path. One of the more whimsical games to fall in this "other" category is Cartoona by Robert Burke, a "creature-building, tile-laying game of strategy and chance" that has almost four weeks left to go in its campaign.

It certainly looks good—how does it play? Read on and find out!

[Ed. Note: all pictures are of the print-and-play version, and the components will not match the final version. Presumably the art will, but check the Kickstarter page for the most up-to-the-minute details. As a further note, this is a PREVIEW of an unfinished product, not a REVIEW of the commercially-released game.  Our opinions reflect the state of the game at the time of our playing, not necessarily the final product.]

Feed That Panda (A Review of Takenoko)

[Editors note: The following is a Nemesis Review, featuring opinions from our in-house thematic-loving @futurewolfie and his ferocious opponent, the stodgy euro-loving @Farmerlenny.  Make sure to read both opinions to get a better overall picture of the game!]

When is the last time you played a board game about a panda?

What? Never? That's probably because there haven't really been any.  Sure some zoo or animal-themed games contain pandas, but nothing has centered around the victual-pursuing antics of a giant fat panda.

Fortunately, Takenoko is here to fill that gap.

Takenoko recently took home the French As D'Or 2012 top pick award. That's basically France's game of the year award, so good job Takenoko.  I actually haven't heard a huge amount of buzz about this game, so I wont ask if it lives up to the hype.  But is it worth a look?

One Ring to Rule Them All...

This is where it all starts.

I recently got a chance to play the recently released second edition of War of the Ring. While this is not a review—I'd hate to base my opinions of a game on a single play, especially a game as epic as this—I thought I'd share a little on what went down. If you're a Lord of the Rings fan, if you're interested in the game but not sure if it's worth your money, or if you know you will never be able to fit this into your gaming budget (whether of time or money), read on, friend! Allow me to share the wonder with you.

FDQ: Minis or Cubes

It's an age-old topic of debate. Games come with a variety of parts. Sometimes tokens are relegated to printed cardboard circles; some games resort to classic meeples and cubes to represent various elements of the game board. And then some companies, attempting to pack in as much flavor in the components themselves, fill their boxes with detailed plastic minis.

The idea of minis excites many gamers, but some just wish the parts were simpler and the games were cheaper. So, fellow gamerites, what do you think? What is your preferred style of game component?

@Futurewolfie says:
I know that @Farmerlenny will probably hate on the minis, but honestly, I love 'em. I love theme and flavor in games, and detailed plastic minis just add a whole lot to that. Starships in Twilight Imperium? Awesome!  Knights in Shadows over Camelot? Sweet! Zombies and heroes in Last Night on Earth? Dude!

I realize there are drawbacks, and I can certainly understand why someone might prefer wooden parts; the colors are more distinct and easy to check at a glance, and minis definitely add to the cost of a game. Not every game needs minis—in Carcassonne, for example, it would be pointless to have minis instead of meeples (which are sort of like wooden minis anyway; they have such personality!)  Ascending Empires, while we love starship minis, just wouldn't work—the disks are needed for flicking. Fortunately, detailed stickers fill in some of the flavor so we're not stuck with plain colorized cylinders.

But you know what? Last Night on Earth would just not be the same without the minis. The crowds of zombies help the story and enhance the flavor. Battlestar Galactica's Viper and Raider minis may not be entirely necessary, but the ship designs are visually distinct and again, it adds to that Galactica feel. Twilight Imperium just wouldn't have the same feel if you have different sizes or shapes of cubies to represent the different types of ships in your fleet.

And over time, I think the cost difference between meeples and minis will shrink. As the board game hobby overall grows, more and more games will be purchased, and games will get bigger print runs. Bigger print runs means smaller cost per game—and the costly part of detailed minis is creating the original mold. Heck, even wooden tokens are getting more detailed and unique, with animeeples, vegemeeples, fruitimeeples—all sorts of meeples coming in various shapes and sizes. Woohoo! I love this stuff!

@Farmerlenny says:
@Futurewolfie only gets it half right (which is half more than normal, by the way) when he says I will hate on minis. I don't hate on minis. Minis are kind of cool...when they aren't used as a mask for shoddy game design. That I don't like most games that include minis isn't a judgment on minis themselves but on a certain type of theme-rich gameplay that ignores the more important aspects of game design: decisions, downtime, and a preference for simplicity over convolution.

To me, cubes are serviceable, and most of the time that's enough. I opted not to upgrade my copy of Agricola, being perfectly content with discs and cubes. I don't need sheep that look like sheep. I make my living by reading: I can imagine a story overlaying drab bits if I want to. But most of the time, my games don't need the extra layer. What's the story in Ticket to Ride? I don't care. The decisions are interesting enough that I'm not thinking about it. If I want a good story, I'll read a book. I play games for different reasons. I'm so boring that I came this close to not applying the included stickers in my copy of Belfort. But then I realized that @Futurewolfie cares about such things, and since he is the person I'm most likely to play it with...

All of this being said, however, I am not immune to the draw of fancy components when they are paired with a good game. Show me a beautiful game (with beautiful mechanics to match), and I will likely be putty in your hand. I'm sure this is nine-tenths of the reason I purchased Troyes, and one-half the reason I haven't traded away Fresco. It was also what kept me on the fence about El Grande and what keeps Stone Age hitting the table again and again. I have a soft spot for beautiful games and components, whether made of wood, plastic, marble, or glass.

But I'm also plenty happy with my original Director's Cut edition of Kill Doctor Lucky, which I taped together myself.