Among Christians, there seems to be a trend towards taking
"secular" games and adding a Judeo-Christian flavor to it. The
obvious examples of this are such games as Bible
Scattergories and Bible Taboo
(which is funnily ironic name), but some lesser-known ones are Ark of the Covenant, which was based on
Carcassonne, and Redemption, which was the Christian
community's response to Magic: The
Gathering (it was not a copy of its gameplay, but it copied the collectability
of Magic). Yet another prime example is Settlers of Canaan, which is the spitting image of Settlers of Catan.
Settlers of Canaan is, by and large, the same game as Catan.
Much like Catan, the Settlers of Canaan board is laid out in
hexagons with each one producing one of five resources: grain, sheep, wood,
clay, and ore; and, each hex has a number from 2 to 12. You start off with
placing a settlement and a road at the vertices of three hexagons. After each
player has laid out two settlements and two roads (the two settlements may or
may not connect to each other), they gather up one card for each resource their
settlements touch. Then, gameplay begins. For those who are familiar with Catan, Canaan is very similar: a player rolls two dice, and then all players, including
the rolling player, collect resource cards for each hex that their settlements touch
that matches the number rolled. After that, the current player gets to trade
resources with other players and build settlements, cities, and roads, or
acquire development cards depending on which resources he or she possess. Canaan's Development cards are also similar to Catan's
development cards, except that there are "Priest" cards instead of
"Knight" cards and there are thematic cards that are similar in
effect to Catan cards, but named
differently. As in Catan, Canaan has bonuses for the longest road
(two points) and most priests (two points). There are also developments that
award victory points, just as in Catan. 
It would be too easy to state that Catan and Canaan are
essentially the same game, but there are four key differences. The first difference is that the
hexes in Canaan are fixed in position
on a gameboard, whereas the hexes and numbers are randomly placed at the start
of each game in Catan. This gives Catan a fresh feel every game, while Canaan's board is set (yet sufficiently
balanced in its placement of resources, in my opinion). The second difference
is that the Canaan has Jerusalem and
its wall at the lower part of the board; players can add a stone to the wall of
Jerusalem by spending the appropriate resources during their turns. Whoever has
a majority of stones in Jerusalem's wall gets a two-point bonus and a favorable
trade ratio of two of any resource chosen for the "King's
Blessing" in exchange for one of any other resource. The third key
difference is the Robber: in Catan,
if you roll a 7, you control the Robber, a nefariously black token that can be
placed on a hex, rendering that hex ineffective until the Robber is moved. In
addition, the player who places the Robber can then take a card from a player
whose settlement is touching the occupied hex. Thus, it is called the
"Robber." However, in Canaan,
the Robber is called "the Plague." It works the same way as in Catan, except that a dark stone is
placed in Jerusalem's wall. Lastly, there is a copper hex that provides one resource of a player's choice if a 10 is rolled and a player has a settlement touching that hex; this is somewhat minor, yet noteworthy because there is no "wild" tile in Settlers of Catan and this may affect early-game settlement placement.
Gameplay continues in Canaan
until a player gains twelve victory points, which is two more than Catan, thus extending the game a bit.
Points are tracked on the gameboard on a separate counter, so the need for math
during the game is reduced (unlike Catan,
in which there is no scoreboard and you have to constantly count people's
settlements and cities). As with Catan,
the accumulation of settlements and cities is important, but the most fun part
of both games is negotiation. Can I get the ore and grain I need to transform
my one-point settlement into a two-point city? Will someone trade me that clay
I need to build that settlement? Will I get that clay and stone I need to allow
me to lay that precious stone in Jerusalem so that I can take the King's
Blessing from someone? All of these questions are more often solved in trading
than with mere dice rolls; this is the beauty of Catan and Canaan.
The Settlers of Canaan,
much like Catan, is a wonderful
family game that also serves as a gateway game to more complex Euro-style
games, which are often economy-based with indirect competition. In Canaan, you don't trounce your
opponents as much as lock them out of certain hexes with key settlement
placements. In this way, I can see how Cactus Game Design saw that they could
tweak the classic Catan with a
Judeo-Christian theme and it would be palatable for Christian families. I
certainly understand that sentiment and am appreciative of it, but I admit
that, of all games, Catan was one
game that didn't need a makeover. By itself, it's a fine family game that is
non-violent and only as cutthroat as the players who play it. I have played Catan and Canaan and found that Catan would
be just as agreeable as Canaan, if
not better because Catan has a bevy
of expansions from which you can enhance the game. One thing I should mention
is that I suppose that the concept of "stealing" wasn't Christian
enough, so the "Robber" was changed to a "Plague, but is
"Plague" really better than a "Robber?" I mean, I know that it's wrong and sinful to steal, but it's a legitimate game action to take someone's card with the Robber/Plague;
if it's a legit move, is it really "robbing?" In my opinion, it is
this kind of kneejerk reaction to secondary elements in games that often drives the
Christian-theme market (and sells games to overly "religious" people).
This takes me to a point I made in a previous post about
magic: I don't have a hard and fast rule against all references to magic in
games. If magic is an integral part of a game, I make a determination about
whether it would affect me and my sons or not. However, if it's an ancillary
part of the game, such as it is in the Zelda
video games or in such board games as Dominion,
I may allow it depending on the imagery and the rules. I look at Catan in the same way when it comes to
"robbing"; I know it's not stealing in the sinful sense, and I know
that it's defined in the rules. Why can't we just call it "robbing" instead
of a "Plague," which just sounds even more awful, in my opinion?
No comments:
Post a Comment