What BOARD GAME(s) have you been playing?

We'll see. I bought R. Launius' new Cthulhu storytelling game, and I've never really played one (Dixit, like Cards Against Humanity, is not a game, it's an activity, like coloring books or Mad Libs). As I said, we'll see.

RE: Dead Man's Draw, yeah, you're totally right Dave. I never paid a dime and it's definitely a well-balanced, well-designed app. Very fun, highly addictive and strikes the balance between fun and "too damned hard". I spent a month, at least, trying to get 3-star (coin?) ratings on each challenge but I gave up. Shit is too hard.

I like Eldritch Horror a lot. No, it's not about Arkham which is kinda lame, but it's fucking tight, and just like in Arkham they create a lot of small stories with little text.

But I played a solo game recently with two investigators, and one of my dudes died quite early. Now, this is not neccesarily a problem when it comes to winning, but continuing just felt wrong so I packed up the game prematurely. And while I appreciate how the game makes it easy to stay in the game, it sort of bugs me that dying has so little impact - and can even be a benefit since you can bring in a character better suited for the end game.

My kids are with my in-laws for this week, so my wife and I spent some time at Starbucks. We brought along Lost Cities, since that's one of her favorite games.

I spent a long time actively hating Lost Cities. I assumed it was too light, and even though I like risk-taking games, I couldn't sense any good way to manage or assess that risk before I committed. That changed a little when I finally read up on some strategy just to see if I was crazy for feeling that way. I guess I hadn't played very well, because a lot of it (following the 9s and 10s mostly) never once occurred to me.

So now I've played a few games with my wife armed with this understanding, and I'm ready to admit that I actually really enjoy it. I actually think I'll have a column soon on why and how we change our minds about games, because I'm frankly a little embarrassed at how I devalued that game.

Mark one more down for Knizia. I realized last night that I have three times as many games by Knizia than I do any other designer. Guess that means he's my favorite by default.

It means you've made more bad buying decisions by default

Lost Cities is way better than the Ameritrash Handbook would have you believe.

It does fall victim to that "colored, numbered cards" thing. But it's a _really_ good colored, numbered cards game. I think it's a good one, I wouldn't list it as one of my favorite Knizias but I definitely think there's a good reason it's remained so popular and widely played.

I've never played Keltis, but it's supposedly a multiplayer Lost Cities. There is an IOS app, maybe I'll look at it.

Lost Cities is one of my top three most played games. A college buddy and I would sit around when we were living in the Chicago Burbs and play game after game of this. He wasn't a gamer but he liked Poker and he liked Gin so this was a big hit.

I think if it were to ditch it's "theme" and just be colors or suits and was marketed to associate with common card games with a standard deck of cards I think it'd do very well on mass market game shelves.

VonTush wrote: I think if it were to ditch it's "theme" and just be colors or suits and was marketed to associate with common card games with a standard deck of cards I think it'd do very well on mass market game shelves.

I completely agree with this---I think it is holding itself back by looking anything like a hobby game.

That said, I used to own it and play it with my ex. It went with her during the split and I can't say I've ever given it a second thought. Perfectly inoffensive. Which is not really at the top of the list of things I'm looking for in a game these days.

Yeah, it's one of those games that doesn't make a lot of effort to connect its mechanics and theme, even though I think they actually connect better than I thought. The idea of investing and taking risks in different expeditions totally fits with what's there, but it doesn't try to make any connection for you. We actually played two games in a row, which we just don't do any more.

It would totally sell if it were un-themed, I agree.

I tried some Keltis today. It pretty much does away with the the theme, it's just about playing colored, numbered cards to push your stones up a scoring chart. It's pretty fun and there are some notable changes to LC. Like you can get bonuses that let you forward "expeditions" (for lack of a better term) even though you don't have a playable card for them. That's kind of a nice touch, and it incentivizes certain paths.

I think it was actually released with the theme as the Lost Cities board game.

But yeah, playing it...apart from the vague Irish thing going on, I think it's more palatable for a mainstream "card playing" audience.

The theme of Lost Cities is actually really strong, like Nate suggested it's really about investing and taking measured risks (I know the 10 is out there...but is it in the other person's hand or in the deck? Oh wait, they just played it...). That's the theme. Not the archaeology angle, which is really just a system to unify the graphics.

Lost Cities is absolutely awful. If I want a game to take measured risks there are plenty out there which tell a story. Lost Cities is not one of them, it is a pure mechanics game with no link to a theme of exploration.

I do not buy that the theme is investing and taking measured risks. The theme is kitting out expeditions (otherwise, why even mention expeditions?). It fails abysmally on this front, regardless of whether it is a fun abstract card game. It does not tell a story that would be related to other gamer friends unlike say, Combat Commander or ASL where the memorable story is generated from the gameplay. Of course, games without theme (or a tacked on theme) can be very popular (chess, go, etc) but they are not games I choose to play because they don't tell a story through gameplay. For me, gaming is not about competition it is about telling a story within a social context (or even solo).

Not all of these type of games are actually good or games I would want to play because the mechanics needs to be melded into the gameplay and make sense. Careers is full of theme but the gameplay is boring. Escape from Colditz has loads of theme but you don't play this game frequently, you haul it out on Christmas Day (at least in England) and play with the family. Monopoly has a lot of theme but I, personally don't enjoy it. It drags and the end game is tedious. Lost Cities is a reasonable mechanic for a balanced game but it does not, in any way, tell a memorable story.

The design goal isn't to tell a story. A war game about a specific battle aims to tell a story. A character-based adventure game aims to tell a story. A 20 minute card game that foregrounds a mechanic and focuses on maximizing the gameplay within strict parameters shouldn't be held accountable for not telling a story.. That's the same logical fallacy that leads people tom complain that there is no strategy or compelling mechanics in Talisman..

Come to find out, it's rarely the games themselves or the mechanics that are doing the storytelling.. It's the people. It's you. You are putting a narrative overlay on top of an abstraction. The game may provide some context to hang things on. Maybe it took 10 rolls to beat a monster that yielded a +1 sword and you constructed a narrative around that. Or maybe what happened between you and three other players built a storyline. But all of that doesn't come from a rulebook or text on cards.

Some games make this easy- Magic Realm and Gunslinger, Mage Knight, DOAII and Robinson Crusoe in particular. These are great games, but they are also aiming for something different.

TL;DR- don't order the chicken at the steak place and then complain that it's not a steak. Don't go to a Merchant Ivory film and complain about the lack of boobs and bombs. Don't fault Run DMC for not doing enough country music.

That's fine then don't use a theme (or story) to sell the game. Sell it as an abstract.

Run DMC with cowboy hats on anyone??? Soy sausages advertised as a meaty taste??

I disagree with the distinctions. ASL tells a battle story because you are rolling to shoot people or miss, to climb a cliff or not, to rally some guys or not. I'm not tacking a story onto abstract mechanics. The story is part and parcel of the game.

TL;DR Bollocks

But the theme is investment and risk-taking. The faux Indiana Jones thing is the setting.

ASL is intentionally a simulation. But rolling a die is as abstract as playing a colored, numbered card is. The setting, context and theme impart meaning along with what you as the player apply to it. ASL is far, far more granular to that end.

Not liking the game is fine, that's a taste issue that is totally subjective as it should be. But judge its quality by its peers.

I think we were all pretty much saying that the game would be better off without the "theme" anyway!

So...I'm still wrapping my head around this redefining of theme counter to popular usage. Because frankly I feel it is just BS. Not to say I don't understand the argument, but I see it as just beard-stroking Bullshit.

If I say I'm having a Mardi Gras themed party, plan to serve Hurricanes, King Cakes, pass out beaded necklaces and request people bring appropriate masks, then how is that usage of theme any different than the theme being described as faux Indiana Jones?

Michael Barnes wrote: Lost Cities is way better than the Ameritrash Handbook would have you believe.

It does fall victim to that "colored, numbered cards" thing. But it's a _really_ good colored, numbered cards game. I think it's a good one, I wouldn't list it as one of my favorite Knizias but I definitely think there's a good reason it's remained so popular and widely played.

I thought it was OK. The end-game scoring really kind of killed it for me.