Category Archives: The Boards
Board game reviews. Board game design info. Upcoming games. Convention information. All things board game related are here!
Board Game Review: Bruges
Bruges at Christmas time. Image via short-breaks.com
Bruges is a city located in northwest Belgium. It is also a game by famed designer Stefan Feld. And today I am reviewing it for you.
Disclaimer: I have only played Bruges twice, but I review games after one or two plays because I usually won’t give them another shot if I don’t like it after two plays.
Bruges: Is this another Feldian Point Salad?
Bored Europeans on the cover of another Euro game.
In the game Bruges players will try to win by garnering the most points. Players will attempt to earn points from buildings, people, canals, and reputation.
But the unique part of the play in Bruges is that cards serve multiple purposes. The colors of the cards matter (there are five colors). Each card can allow you to do one of the following things:
- obtain workers of that color
- obtain guilders equal to the pips on the die of that color
- discard a threat marker of that color
- build a house
- build a canal section of that color
- add a person to an existing house
The game is played until one of the two card decks runs out. Each round players will draw to a hand limit of 5 cards. Then they will play four turns each where they are choosing from the actions above.
There are many choices to make during a game of Bruges. From choosing which deck to draw your cards, to deciding whether to go for canals or houses and people. The decision space in this game is immense and yet it is limited. How can I make such a statement? The reason I make that proclamation is that with the 5 cards you have in your hand each turn, each card presents 6 options. So there are 30 things to decide from in each round. That’s a lot. But on the other hand, you will likely not actually be choosing from those 30 things. You will likely be choosing from a subset of those options based on the gameplan you have. So while there are plenty of decisions you could make, you are probably going to choose from a few of the options available to you. Also, the threats in the game can steer some of your decisions, which can be frustrating and relieving at the same time.
Here’s a look at the game (Image from BGG User henk.rollerman):
Bruges plays 2 to 4 players in about an hour. It has a bit of a learning curve, but I think it fits the Feldian mold nicely.
Here’s What I Like:
OPTIONS: I love options and a large decision space in games. I don’t love when decisions are made for me. Bruges allows me to have the liberty to play just about however I want. I can play as dumb as an ox or as brilliantly as a fox. Feld has made an open decision space where players have full control of their gameplay.
MULTIPLE-USE CARDS: I like when a designer or publishing company can provide multiple ways for components to be used. As I mentioned above, each card can be used to do any of those 6 options. That’s pretty cool.
Here’s What I Dislike:
STRUGGLE FOR SUCCESS: Though you get four turns in a round to do stuff it usually feels like only two of those turns move you forward. Often you are using turns to discard a threat or to take two workers. These don’t feel like fulfilling actions in the game. And that can be frustrating.
STRUGGLE FOR MAJORITIES: There are 12 points available if you can gain the majority in the categories of people, canals, or reputation. That’s a pretty cool thing. What’s not cool is that it can be very difficult to gain the majority from someone who already has it. That can be frustrating. While emotion in games is a good thing, negative emotions should be limited. Struggling for the majorities invokes negative emotions.
Designer Perspective – What I would change:
I think I would try to drop some of the frustration and increase the positive emotions in the game. Feld is a designer who loves resource limitation as a form of tension in games. One way that I would change Bruges is to allow for more success and turn the game into a more rewarding experience. A simple way to do that is to change the “take 2 workers of the card color” option to this:
- Take any two workers OR take 3 workers of the card color
This change alone would open the game up quite a bit, make it less frustrating, and allow players to do more while not changing the overall feel of the theme of the game. I think I’m going to try this as a house rule next time I play!
Beer Pairing:
A fine Belgian brew!
Being that the game is based on a Belgian city I have not choice but to pair it with a Belgian beer. And since I like the game quite a bit I’ll pair it with a Belgian beer that I like quite a bit. That beer is Duvel.
Duvel is a full bodied lager that is refermented in the bottle. It is hopped with Saaz-Saaz and Styrian-Golding hops. It weighs in at 8.5% abv, so don’t drink too much at a time.
The next time I play I’ll try to make sure I enjoy the game with a bottle of Duvel!
Overall Rating:
I am a fan of Feld’s games. My favorite is The Castles of Burgundy. Bruges offers some pretty interesting gameplay, but some elements seem more mechanical rather than thematic.
On the whole, this is definitely not the typical point salad that some other games can be. This game requires some work to put together a good number of points. In typical point salad games, everything you do gets you points. That’s not the case with Bruges, and I count that as one of the game’s strengths.
This is a game I can see myself playing multiple more times. I’ll rate Bruges a 7 out of 10 on the BGG scale.
Good game, usually willing to play.
Monday Brews 1-13-14
Welcome back to Boards and Barley! I’m so glad you’re here. Every Monday I write an article that let’s you know what beer and board games I enjoyed over the last week. I also give a little insight into my design ventures of the past week. It was another slow week in terms of beer and games, but the game design portion of my life picked up a bit.
Let’s start with the Barley…
The Barley:
That’s a chair I could sit in!
Gray’s Busted Knuckle Irish Ale: I enjoyed this Wisconsin brew while my brother visited. We got some amazing fried cheese curds and a beer. This was an enjoyable Irish ale that I would get again.
Fleming’s Scotch Ale: I had another of my homebrews. I think it is now stronger than the original 6.6%abv. I might have to measure that again. This one really packs a punch.
New Glarus Spotted Cow: Another Wisconsin beer was enjoyed while a friend was over. We watched some football and enjoyed a beer and some ranch pretzels. That makes for a pretty good evening.
Deschutes Red Chair Northwest Pale Ale: I am not an IPA or Pale Ale guy in general. I don’t care that much for hoppy beers. But this one was quite good. It wasn’t too hoppy overall and it had a hint of a sweet finish with a mild floral aroma. I would drink this again and I think it could be my gateway to IPAs.
Capital Winter Skal: I enjoyed this while playing Nothing Personal. This is a mighty fine brew from a local brewery.
The Boards:
Nothing Personal: My friends played this at GenCon while I was on a panel about Protospiel. They have played it several times since then. I finally got to play it last night. And it was awesome! Nothing Personal has an amazing level of back-stabbing, promise-breaking, deal-making interaction that I haven’t seen in any other game. There is a lot to keep track of in this game and it would be easy to make mistakes and get left behind. I’m glad I finally had the opportunity to play it because it was a lot of fun.
Tenzi: I got my friends to try this out last night. Each player has 10 dice. You roll them and try to get all of your dice to be the same number. The first player to get all of theirs the same is the winner. There are a bunch of variants in the rules that you can try out. But this was a thoughtful Christmas gift from my mom because she knew I wanted dice for game design purposes and she got me dice that are also a game. Thanks mom!
Designer’s Corner:
This prototype box will suffice for now.
Last week I worked a little bit on Quantum Orcas. I want to put together a version that I can purchase from The Game Crafter. It is amazing how much artwork really goes into a game. Not only do you need art for the cards, chits, tiles, etc. You also need artwork for the box and the rulebook. Then if you want to have a nice sales page on TGC you need artwork for that page. There is a lot of behinds the scenes artwork that is needed to complete a game.
So last week I put together a bunch of art and Quantum Orcas is getting closer. I still need to do more playtesting to make the game go from playable and “not bad” to something that is enjoyable that people will want to play. I’ll keep you posted.
The other progress I made last week was to come up with new mechanics for Brooklyn Bridge. I have shared the concept of the mechanics with several friends and none of them said it sounded awful. So I might have something there! I am pretty excited about the new utilization of workers. Brooklyn Bridge is a worker placement game, but it uses workers in ways I have not seen before. So I’ll plow forward with this to make it playable in the near future. My goal is to have tested it several times before Protospiel-Milwaukee in March.
***
So that’s the Boards & Barley I enjoyed and the game design progress I made last week. How was your week?
Design Me: Route Building
Ah… it’s an exciting day on Boards & Barley. Today is the first Design Me article of the year! What is a “Design Me” article? It is a design exercise. Like soccer players who run for practice to exercise their muscles, I think it is important for designers to exercise their brains. So every once in a while I choose a random theme/mechanic/victory condition and see if I can come up with a decent game design on a whim.
Today’s random stuff, via Boardgamizer.com, is this:
Route Building + Space Colonization? I can do this!
Note: for this design me I am changing the victory condition. Instead of solving a puzzle or mystery, the player who builds the best route will win.
Armada Galactica
In Armada Galactica you are a galactic superpower trying to create a new trade route through whichever galaxy you are currently in.
As a galactic superpower it is your job to make sure you are providing enough vacation spots for your population. The way to do that is to spread your empire throughout the galaxy. You can colonize a new location if it is within a certain location of your currently existing locations. But there are a few steps you must take. These include SCOUT, TERRAFORM, and then COLONIZE.
On your turn you can also perform some research upgrades. Each planet or moon you colonize will begin with basic capabilities based on its characteristics. As you bring technology along your colonization route, those planets/moons will get better at allowing you to reach further and explore/colonize more distant locations.
So the concept is to build a route from planet to planet by utilizing the characteristics of those planets to allow you to further colonize. The winner will be the person who has built the best route by the end of the game.
Components
- Game Board
- Planet tokens
- 12 Rocket meeples (3 each in four different player colors)
- 40 Colony tokens (10 each in four different player colors)
- Research tokens
- Population cubes
How to Play
A game of Armada Galactica is played until someone has placed their tenth colony token. To place a colony token, the desired planet/moon must be able to support enough population. A planet/moon can support enough population if it has been terraformed correctly for the type of body it is.
Players will each have a home planet (not dissimlar to Ascending Empires – I’m trying hard not to simply duplicate that game here – I feel I’m failing at that). The board is composed of a grid of planets/moons. Each location will have randomly received a planet token, so the grid is never the same from game to game.
There will be four main types of celestial bodies that you can try to colonize. These are:
- Earth-like
- Mars-like
- Europa-like
- Water worlds
Earth-like
These planets are the rarest in the game. But they are the easiest to colonize. Without the need for terraforming these are the hot spots that you’ll want to go after!
Mars-like
These planets were once Earth-like, so it will take some work to get them back to that state. That means you’ll have to devote some effort to terraforming. But these are still relatively easy to colonize.
Europa-like
These are planets that possess water under layers of ice or rock. Terraforming won’t be enough on planets like these. You’ll need specialized research that can warm the planet from the inside to sustain life on it’s surface.
Water Worlds
These planets are basically covered in water. So terraforming isn’t exactly possible. Instead you’ll have to haul a serious amount of infrastructure to the planet to essentially create boats/structures large enough to sustain a large population while floating on the water. If your terraforming research isn’t very good you may want to build a network out of these bad boys.
Those are the four main types of celestial bodies you will encounter while attempting to grasp galactic supremacy. Yet the goal is not simply to build all ten of your colonies. Scoring is also based on the populations you can sustain.
On your turn you can choose either EXPLORE, RESEARCH, or POPULATE as your main action.
The EXPLORE action allows you to use your three rockets to scout the nearby planets. All of you network must be in a continuous line, so it’s important to look ahead and see what’s coming. Also during the EXPLORE action you can transport equipment to the newly selected planet. This could be infrastructure, terraforming equipment, or research scientists.
The RESEARCH action allows you to utilize scientists that you have placed on your planets to increase that planet’s capabilities. For example, if a planet has a high exploratory research level, then if the rockets are launched from that planet they can travel twice as far, which would allow you to spread your network over a wider area. If your planet has great earth-like resources, and if you increase its terraforming capabilities, then it can become a hub for your terraforming infrastructure to expand to new locations. Research will play a key role in the game and you will want to maximize the capabilities of your planets.
The POPULATE action allows you to colonize a new location. This can only be done if that location has met the colonizability standards. Players will place a colony token on the new location. This action can also be used to increase the population in your existing colonies. This is a key to victory since population is the main scoring category.
On your turn, in addition to the main action you can also perform a secondary action. These are like dumbed down versions of EXPLORE, RESEARCH, and POPULATE. But they can allow you to take advantage of certain planetary characteristics if you really wanted to accomplish something awesome on your turn.
The Endgame
Once a player has placed their tenth colony, all players will have one final turn, including that player. At the end of the game players will total their population cubes and their colony tokens. Each colony token counts as three population cubes. So players could earn a maximum of 30 points from their colonies alone. Research levels and infrastructure will also be scored on a low-level basis. The idea behind awarding points for those is because they are what set the population limit for a player.
I expect final scores to be in the 70-90 range. I had a lot of fun coming up with this design despite not creating any graphics or images for it. That’s a rare thing. I really like this idea and I think I might move forward with it. I am still on the lookout for the other game that I’d like to put on The Game Crafter this year. If this comes together nicely maybe it will be that game.
Your Opinions…
Do you have any thoughts about this design? Are there any obvious problems? Are there areas where I really fell short?
Don’t forget to exercise your brains!
Flavor Text: What’s the Verdict?
Flavor text on this card: “Ribbit”
Yesterday I solicited opinions on Twitter regarding flavor text:
I was interested in finding a consensus on whether or not it is worth the time to add flavor text to cards, or game components in general. I was pleased with the number and variety of responses the tweet received.
For those who do not know what flavor text is, here is a definition from Wikipedia:
Flavor text is the name given to text for action figure character backgrounds, playing cards, or within the pages of a role-playing game’s rulebook. While appropriate to the product’s or game’s story concept, it usually has no effect on the mechanics of the game, but instead serves to add realism or characterization to the item in question. Flavor text is often the last text on a card or on the rear of a toy card or package, and is usually printed in italics or written between quotes to distinguish it from game-affecting text.
Flavor text is used to full effect in Magic: The Gathering. Here is a page from Wizards of the Coast listing some favorite flavor text additions to cards (Thanks to Matt Loomis for the link). While the flavor text in the M:tG cards is typically used to describe the character on the card, I think there are other ways of utilizing flavor text. But before I get to that, let’s take a look at a few of the responses I received from my tweet…
All Those in Favor:
Adam Buckingham: “It’s fun, but I tend to ignore it mostly.”
Seth Jaffee: “I like flavor text, gives me something to read while waiting for others to go. But don’t bury game text in flavor text!”
Isaac Shalev: “I love it when it’s good. MTG is the best-in-show at it. Evocative, haunting, immersive.”
Thomas Eliot: “Enjoyable! I love the flavor text on Professor Pugnacious: it’s all thematically appropriate quotes”
Stephanie Straw: “Noooooo! I *love* flavor text! But if you do it, don’t just toss it on there. Make it LEGIBLE and allow it to add value.”
David Chott: “Thanks for reporting back! I like flavor text, but have been leaning against using it in Lagoon to reduce cognitive clutter.”
All Those Not in Favor:
I was surprised at how few negative responses there were. I thought more people would hate it and wish it didn’t clutter things up.
Alex Strang: “Usually distracting IMHO”
Grant Rodiek: “I’m generally against it mostly because most people are bad at writing. Being creative does not mean good at writing.”
Check out Grant’s awesome blog post about flavor text!
All Those Who Are Indifferent:
Nolan Lichti: “When it’s tiny, like in Ascension, I don’t mind, and it can be enjoyable. Just don’t sacrifice clarity of game play for it.”
Matthew Riddle: “I ignore it but it doesn’t bother me.”
Danny Devine: “I also always ignore it, but as long as its clear that its flavor text “italicized and tiny” I don’t mind it.”
Jason Smith: “rarely look at it except when I’m bored from waiting on other players to take their turn”
Chris (@copax): “I rarely look at it to be honest. I’d prefer larger iconography or more detailed “power” descriptions”
Chris Darden: “ignored”
64oz Games (Richard): “I think it depends a lot on the game. On a Euro style game I expect it to be ignored, but a more thematic one it could be read”
Rob Lundy: ignored… “Unless it’s funny…. like…. very funny”
Brian Henk: “I believe it can add some fun to the experience, but it’s not worth the complexity of more words on the cards.”
My Verdict: I Favor Flavor!
Based on the feedback I think flavor text can be used on game components, but that it should be done in subtle, non-distracting ways.
The M:tG cards include flavor text to immerse you more into the world of the game. That works really well. It is there for those who want to read it, and others can ignore it. And it occupies a portion of the card that would likely otherwise just be background art.
So I am in favor of flavor. I like it when subtle, creative, and clever information can be added to a game that further immerses you into the world of the game under the following conditions:
- It doesn’t distract.
- It doesn’t take long to read – keep it short!
- It adds to the game’s experience.
Thanks to everyone who responded to my tweet. I am planning on using flavor text for Quantum Orcas, but only on the backs of cards that do not flip during the game. Since I have the backs of those cards available I could easily slap on the logo or some artwork. But I decided that I would prefer some flavor text instead.
The bottom line for Quantum Orcas is that people can completely ignore it. And that won’t bother me at all.
Monday Brews 1-6-14
It is -16 degrees out (as of 7am) and I’m happy that I don’t work outside. I think I’d rather have a foot of snow than -16 degrees. Never the less, today is Monday, so I am reporting on the Boards & Barley that I enjoyed last week, which sadly were few.
The Barley:
Redhook Game Changer: I had the privilege of a private tour (my wife and I were the only guests on the normal tour, so I can refer to it as a private tour) at Redhook in 2010. It is a really awesome brewery in the wine country region northeast of Seattle. They also have a restaurant, which was greatly enjoyable. At the time they did not offer The Game Changer. But I am glad to have tried it. It is a “sessionable” ale according to the website, with 25 IBUs and 4.6% abv. I’d get it again if it happens to be present.
New Glarus Cabin Fever Honey Bock: For a New Year’s party we were hosting I chose to purchase an assortment of local New Glarus beer. This Honey Bock may be one of my favorite beers. It is very clean and has an excellent taste. The honey presence is very mild, but adds significantly to the beer. I wish this were offered year round, though it is probably good that it isn’t.
New Glarus Snowshoe: The other seasonal New Glarus brew I purchased is the Snowshoe Ale. It is an Irish Amber and is deeper in color than the Honey Bock. It is also a very enjoyable brew. New Glarus’ two winter seasonals are outstanding!
The Boards:
Kingdom Builder: We played this on New Year’s Eve with 8 people. And it was pretty awesome. We played with teams where you would site opposite your teammate and you would both play at the same time. We also expanded the board to have 8 sectors instead of 4. I got some cubes from my design supply for the extra players. Overall it worked pretty well with 8. Since the scoring conditions are public knowledge there isn’t a huge disadvantage to any player in the game. And, as with all games of Kingdom Builder, it does sort of come down to the terrain cards that you get.
Balderdash: With the right group Balderdash can be really fun. We had the right group on New Year’s Eve. Unfortunately I am terribly bad at being the reader. I laugh way too hard and people can tell that when I’m laughing it’s not the right answer. But overall, this game can be a lot of fun.
Designer’s Corner:
It was a pretty low key week for me overall. On the design front I came up with two new ideas, neither of which I really want to pursue. One was about a game themed around the White Pass & Yukon Route but focused on how many horses you can keep alive. The other was about the Phoenix and the game would revolve around the idea of the Phoenix dying several times in the game and being reborn, which would change what you can do in the game. So you would have to maximize what you accomplished right before the Phoenix died.
While I think those are both awesome game design concepts, you will recall my article last week about my goals for the year. I’ve already got 6 games that I want to “finish” in 2014. If I start to take on new game concepts then I’m afraid I wouldn’t end up completing any of them.
This week I plan to incorporate some bonuses to Quantum Orcas that will help incentivize players to visit the wormhole locations. If that works well enough, then it will be time for 20 playtests. After 20 playtests, if the game works and is enjoyed by players, then I’ll put together the artwork and post it to The Game Crafter. That is my path forward with Quantum Orcas.
Also this week I plan on moving ahead with a full Trading Post redesign. A while ago I tweeted an image for the redesign:
What I want to accomplish is to make the game centralized on the concept of obtaining goods and trading them. So i now have different areas of the board where your workers can go to obtain different types of goods. They then bring them back to the trading post and trade them for points/abilities/bonuses. Also, the trading portion of the game is now extended to player-to-player trading, which is something that should have been in the design from the beginning. So I’ll sit down and work on the overhaul of Trading Post and see if I can turn it into something fun and awesome!
***
So that’s what I’ve been up to. Did you enjoy any Boards or Barley last week?
Boards and Barley 