Expansions - Need em, Skip em, and Why?

Look, I'm not looking to stir up some shit here by saying this, but here's how it is.

It's not my place of anyone else place to present their opinions something open interpretation. When I tell you how I feel about something, I'm either not going to preface it with some lame "Gee, well here's what I think" bullshit. When I say something about a game, movie, comic, whatever, I've probably done some thinking about what I'm saying and I'm going to treat those feelings as stone cold facts because I believe in what I'm saying fully. It's also the most fundamental building block of persuasive writing, and just because I don't have a weekly column here doesn't mean that I or anyone else can't phrase their thought in that manner. "I think" and "I feel" are not why I come here. You have an opinion? Fucking stand by it and don't give me this bullshit YMMV. Leave that for the Dice Tower. Don't agree with something? Tell me with details as to why and give it to me as if it were fact.

The best expansions are the ones that bring a few good ideas without over-complexifying the game. Getting a new expansion for a game you dig is like getting a new game, with all the "Look at this cool new stuff!" excitement, but it builds on a game you're already into. The "few good ideas" expansions like Spartacus' are the best of this breed.

Expansions I can't get into are members of the serial purchase model some companies have embraced. I don't want to keep up with a game. I also balk at anything that was obviously held out of the base game just to sell the expansion, especially if these expansions are 75% the cost of the base game as SebastianBludd noted.

That said, I almost always buy expansions for my favorite games, many times without doing any research. Responsible? Not likely. Fun? Yep. But it also means I get burned out on games that have constant expansion releases, because I start to feel like a sucker.

Josh Look wrote: Look, I'm not looking to stir up some shit here by saying this, but here's how it is.

It's not my place of anyone else place to present their opinions something open interpretation. When I tell you how I feel about something, I'm either not going to preface it with some lame "Gee, well here's what I think" bullshit. When I say something about a game, movie, comic, whatever, I've probably done some thinking about what I'm saying and I'm going to treat those feelings as stone cold facts because I believe in what I'm saying fully. It's also the most fundamental building block of persuasive writing, and just because I don't have a weekly column here doesn't mean that I or anyone else can't phrase their thought in that manner. "I think" and "I feel" are not why I come here. You have an opinion? Fucking stand by it and don't give me this bullshit YMMV. Leave that for the Dice Tower. Don't agree with something? Tell me with details as to why and give it to me as if it were fact.

What you believe is NOT a fact, it's a highly subjective opinion. After all if two people have highly subjective but opposite opinions then they both cannot be spewing forth fact. "I think", "I feel", "I believe" are all the same - just someone giving their opinion
And I assume you are talking about your opinion that BSG expansions are crap - the high ratings on BGG seem to indicate that many people disagree with your fact.
What I am quite happy to accept as a fact is that you and some others here don't rate the BSG expansions.

Expansions I own that (in my opinion) I like playing with their base game, and probably would not play the base game without:
- Arkham Horror
- BSG

Expansions I own that (in my opinion) I like playing with their base game:
- Cosmic Encounter
- Firefly
- Last Night on Earth
- Lord of the Rings
- Runewars
- Spartacus
- TI3
- Warrior Knights

Expansions I own that (in my opinion) I like playing to provide more content:
- Age of Steam
- Descent 2E
- Power Grid
- Tide of Iron

And I'm sure I could find expansions for games I've played that come under the skip em (or just plain bad) as per the thread title, just a bit late to get my old grey cells cranked up.

The Runewars expansion is a must... but I have the original coffin box and not the revised edition. It's not for commanders or the lost city so much as the tech tree (or whatever it's called). I love the extra troops too and feel that they make the game more interesting.

Cutthroat Caverns - the expansion that gives you rooms and items is perfect. It changes the game in a very simple way but definitely makes it feel better and more complete. Plus they add some cool monsters in there too.

Catacombs - the expansion that gives you extra heroes to choose from is pretty much necessary. The same four heroes get stale really quick otherwise.

TI:3 - I like both expansions, I don't really think either is necessary right away (even the first one) but they both help the game become more interesting. The first one probably makes more sense to get though if I had to choose.

Games like Tide of Iron where it's scenario dependent almost always appeal to me. I own all the ToI expansions and enjoy them all.

Deck Builders generally need expansions to be great. Dominion, Nightfall, Thunderstone etc... but most amazing to me is the Rune Age one which changes the game dramatically with very little. The base game plus expansion is close to the same price as any other base game deck builder and yet it feels like there is ten times more game in Rune Age than in any of the others. It is the most interesting deck builder to me and the expansion gives it some great longevity.

Mage Knight - all the expansions I have for it are great. The characters are an easy thing to add and don't fundamentally change the game but the Lost Legion one does dramatically change the game for the better. Preparing to fight General Volkare is much more interesting than preparing to attack a city. I feel like this expansion completes the game.

Survive - all of it is unnecessary but I like them none the less.

Quarriors was dramatically improved by it's second expansion (where the rules were cleaned up) and even more so by the "Qwests" expansion which gave viable options that made the game more interesting.

I'd say the same thing for King of Tokyo, the game really shines once you add that expansion that gives you power cards to draw when you roll three hearts.

Alien Frontiers is more fun with the expansions by far. It makes a simple game more interesting without adding any real complexity.

Cities and Knights is one of the most interesting to me. It makes Settlers a completely different game that is equally as good as the base game but just plays way differently.

There's lots more I could write about too. I generally love expansions.

Gary Sax wrote: Some good posts in this thread.

I have a problem because I like expansions but often by the time I get to them I've already played the shit out the game. Which means that it's a game I love, but my play of games usually decreases to a sort of normal low level once I've played 20 times. So that means I'm buying an expansion to a game that'll only hit the table, typically, a couple times a year. Which means I often don't want the extra rules material since I'm playing the base game so rarely!

This is why, while I feel I'm stupid more often than not for doing so, I wait until a game system is 'mature' (read: old news) before buying it, and then I buy the expansions with it as "popular opinion" would dictate. This affords me the chance to play the game's "final version" or really, what the game should've been to begin with. Then, I don't end up playing a game 90 times and then try to de-stalify it by adding shit.

Expansions really kind of piss me off, because I seem to get the feeling that they were designed in from jump street and then pared off to milk me for more money later.

Spartacus is a great example. I waited 2 years to play it and when I did, I did so with the Serpent expansion. It really does make the game better, I think. So, when I got back, I bought the expansion (got the game at GenCon, trade) straight away. Can't imagine playing it without. I think this also falls into the "developed and pared down for expansion dollars" category.

The thing I keep coming back to is that Kickstarter is basically a model I think has merit in that you can get the whole damned complete package in one expensive swoop versus being whittled away by the death of a thousand cuts.

With regard to the BSG bollocks, can you guys make at least a modicum of an attempt to keep things civil? When I am the voice of reason, you are fucking up.

SuperflyTNT wrote: This is why, while I feel I'm stupid more often than not for doing so, I wait until a game system is 'mature' (read: old news) before buying it, and then I buy the expansions with it as "popular opinion" would dictate. This affords me the chance to play the game's "final version" or really, what the game should've been to begin with. Then, I don't end up playing a game 90 times and then try to de-stalify it by adding shit.

I've been leaning towards the wait-and-see purchase model too, especially for games that have several expansions. Even that isn't safe though, as you have companies taking established games with mature expansion content and then rereleasing the entire shebang as slightly tweaked new editions. Pandemic + On The Brink, Stronghold + Undead, Robinson Crusoe + Voyage of the Beagle, for example. I probably shouldn't care, but I do because now I'm wasting time trying to figure out if the new edition is a gameplay upgrade, downgrade, a components reimagining, or a cash grab.

At least Portal has been quite adamant that they will take care of previous edition owners, but I'm with you wadenels. Revised/2nd editions is something that I intellectually think they should be doing, but in my heart I'm like "why didn't I wait?"

More on topic, I very rarely feel like board game expansions feel like videogame style DLC that has been taken out only to be put in later. I'm trying to think when I've felt that way and nothing comes to mind.

When I am the voice of reason, you are fucking up.

In your opinion, of course.

You're all dicks. Expansions are only good if it's ASL, otherwise it's all shit.

See how easy it is?

Expansions come out for games that don't need them. Additional pieces a la new units like Wings of Glory or ASL are an exception because the game is designed to be modular in the first place. But a legit expansion only gets made for games that are successful without them.

S.

I think that expansions for miniatures games are different than expansions for a board game. Heroscape, X-Wing, etc expansions add value to the entirety of the proposition, whereas Arkham Horror expansions don't really provide you anything but bloat.

wadenels wrote:

SuperflyTNT wrote: This is why, while I feel I'm stupid more often than not for doing so, I wait until a game system is 'mature' (read: old news) before buying it, and then I buy the expansions with it as "popular opinion" would dictate. This affords me the chance to play the game's "final version" or really, what the game should've been to begin with. Then, I don't end up playing a game 90 times and then try to de-stalify it by adding shit.

I've been leaning towards the wait-and-see purchase model too, especially for games that have several expansions. Even that isn't safe though, as you have companies taking established games with mature expansion content and then rereleasing the entire shebang as slightly tweaked new editions. Pandemic + On The Brink, Stronghold + Undead, Robinson Crusoe + Voyage of the Beagle, for example. I probably shouldn't care, but I do because now I'm wasting time trying to figure out if the new edition is a gameplay upgrade, downgrade, a components reimagining, or a cash grab.

That's why I am always 2 years behind on games...I wait until I think the totality of the game has been released, then I buy it in totality. But I agree with you...the neverending sea of stuff that is reprinted gets hard to keep track of. I really do think Kickstarter is influencing things though....more and more companies are starting to see that people will spend 120$ for a complete game rather than spend 50$, then 40$, then another 40$ later. It's cheaper to produce bigger games in total versus a bunch of expansions, too...less shipping, less handling, less setup charges, etc. I'd think it would be nice to go back to the 70's when you bought a game that was complete, and played it for 30 years before it is reprinted.

ubarose wrote:

SuperflyTNT wrote: I think that expansions for miniatures games are different than expansions for a board game. Heroscape, X-Wing, etc expansions add value to the entirety of the proposition, whereas Arkham Horror expansions don't really provide you anything but bloat.

The Arkham Horror expansions do not add bloat any more than expansions to the miniature games that you mention. If you really like Heroscape, for example, than you appreciate having different units to choose from, and the ability to build different boards with different terrain features to play on. If someone happened to have all the Heroscape stuff ever released, and tried to play with all of it all at once, I imagine the game would be bloated and unwieldy. When I look at all the Heroscape expamsions, it just looks like more and more and more of the same. However, I assume that to an experiences player all these different expansions allows them to customize the game each time they play in ways that I do not fully understand.

The same is true of Arkham and it's expansions. The expansions are modular, allowing you to customize your adventure. They give you the ability to build your board, choose from a greater variety of investigators and GOOs, and manipulate the type of adventure you will have. It does, require some experience with the game to make informed choices about what to add or subtract to create a certain type of adventure. It also requires some time and effort when setting up or breaking down to sort out cards by expansions. I appreciate that some people would not want to invest this time and effort into the game, because I feel the same way about Heroscape.

If I really love a game, and play it a great deal, I do like expansions. In many cases they give you the opportunity to customize you experience each time you play, and give you a kind of personal ownership of your game.

EXACTLY.

There was a good thread here about five years ago (well that's when my document is dated) where ideas of what to do with all the bits when combining expansions was discussed and I have good notes from Frank (La Terra), KingPut, Shellhead and a few others.