Lewis & Clark has some nifty mechanics interwoven into a fine racing game; one such mechanic is resource conversion for movement. Basically, in order to advance up river or mountain spaces, you need one or more characters that convert resources to movement, and you need characters or Native Americans to gather the resources you need. The key is to find the characters that most optimally convert resources to movement. At the start, everyone gets a mission commander, who can convert two food into two river spaces, one canoe into four river spaces, or one horse into two (?) mountain spaces. This is the bare minimal conversion rate, so you have to keep your eye out for characters who convert fewer resources into more spaces. For example, one character converts three wood into four river spaces, which cuts out the "conversion to canoe" intermediary step. Ultimately, Lewis & Clark boils down to setting up an efficient resource conversion engine.
Resource conversion is prevalent in European games. Two examples I can recall are Uwe Rosenberg games: in Le Havre, you process simple resources into things like smoked fish, steel, and coke; and in Agricola, you can convert wood, clay, or reed into food with the right occupation or major improvement. I'm not counting using resources to build final products, such as in Stone Age, in which you convert resources to huts or civilization items, or in Puerto Rico, in which you convert cargo into victory points (though it is a kind of conversion), but changing one resource into another is common to Euro games and a welcome, time-honored mechanic.
Do you have any examples of resource conversion to share?
Thursday, February 11, 2016
Rules Discussion: Deck-Building
Many of my favorite games are considered deck-builders, which means that you build your decks as an integral part of the actual gameplay and then you compete with the deck that you built. Now, games that require players to compile their own cards to construct decks aren't new to gaming; Magic: The Gathering, Legend of the Five Rings, Netrunner (circa 1996), and the old Star Wars and Star Trek collectible card games were the forerunners of deck-builders. However, as time has passed, deck-builders can be differentiated into three basic types: the collectible card game (CCG), which requires a large investment to buy randomly packed decks and booster packs to acquire cards so that you can build your deck BEFORE actual gameplay; the living card game (LCG), which requires a relatively smaller investment in prepackaged decks and booster packs to acquire cards for deck construction BEFORE gameplay; and what I will simply call deck-builders, which involve playing with a shared inventory of cards and building your deck DURING (or as an integral part of) gameplay. Today, games like Dominion, Core Worlds, Eminent Domain, Thunderstone, Ascension, Star Realms, Trains, and even A Few Acres of Snow utilize the deck-builder mechanic in their gameplay, often employing an in-game card drafting method to distribute cards and more mechanics for accelerating draw, trashing/scrapping/removing cards from decks, denying opponents' their card draws, and forcing opponents' to discard cards.
In contrast to LCGs and CCGs, which requires some investment in decks, packs, or singles, deck-builders are much less expensive to play and need just one shared set of cards (and maybe some optional expansions). More importantly, deck-builders present a more level playing field because, unlike CCGs in which the most expensive cards often tip the odds in their owners' favor or LCGs which may require a complete collection to be competitive, all deck-builders require is one person to bring one set of cards and game elements. Wanna play Dominion? All you need is one friend with the game. This doesn't mean that you will win in your first or even tenth game (after all, the more experienced player of any game has greater odds of winning), but you are less likely to get blindsided by an unexpected card or hosed by an overpowered card that costs $200 on eBay to buy a playset of four. In this way, the "modern" deck-builder is more egalitarian than CCGs and LCGs, and are more welcoming to the new and inexperienced player (though you do miss out on the thrill of opening a booster pack, hoping for a prized rare card).
Any thoughts about deck-builders, CCGs, or LCGs? Feel free to offer your opinions and insights.
In contrast to LCGs and CCGs, which requires some investment in decks, packs, or singles, deck-builders are much less expensive to play and need just one shared set of cards (and maybe some optional expansions). More importantly, deck-builders present a more level playing field because, unlike CCGs in which the most expensive cards often tip the odds in their owners' favor or LCGs which may require a complete collection to be competitive, all deck-builders require is one person to bring one set of cards and game elements. Wanna play Dominion? All you need is one friend with the game. This doesn't mean that you will win in your first or even tenth game (after all, the more experienced player of any game has greater odds of winning), but you are less likely to get blindsided by an unexpected card or hosed by an overpowered card that costs $200 on eBay to buy a playset of four. In this way, the "modern" deck-builder is more egalitarian than CCGs and LCGs, and are more welcoming to the new and inexperienced player (though you do miss out on the thrill of opening a booster pack, hoping for a prized rare card).
Any thoughts about deck-builders, CCGs, or LCGs? Feel free to offer your opinions and insights.
Rules Discussion: The Flop
A nice little mechanic in any game is the ability to draw from the discard pile. Gin Rummy is a classic example of using the discard pile as a resource, but there are numerous games that actively draw from the discard pile. A few that come to mind are 7 Wonders (which allows you to pull from the discard pile by activating the ability on certain Wonder boards), Magic (which, like it or not, set a lot of standards for modern gaming), and even Twilight Struggle (which allows it with a couple of key cards).
Now, I should differentiate the discard pile from the "flop" because the flop is there for people to draw face-up cards, but the discard pile is intended to be the landing place for played cards or cards that were discarded because of a game effect. Ticket to Ride, Core Worlds, Star Realms, many of the Cryptozoic deck-builders, and Poker are exemplars of games that employ flops for drawing.
Anyway, do you have a favorite game that involves discard pile drawing?
Now, I should differentiate the discard pile from the "flop" because the flop is there for people to draw face-up cards, but the discard pile is intended to be the landing place for played cards or cards that were discarded because of a game effect. Ticket to Ride, Core Worlds, Star Realms, many of the Cryptozoic deck-builders, and Poker are exemplars of games that employ flops for drawing.
Anyway, do you have a favorite game that involves discard pile drawing?
Rules Discussion: Player Asymmetry
Player asymmetry is the concept of having each player assume a role and/or in-game abilities that differ from other players. A prime example of player asymmetry is in Pandemic, when each player assumes a role AND has abilities or enhancement that are unique vis-a-vis other players. Twilight Struggle is another great example: one side is the USA (who is always second in each action round and has its own specific cards) and the other side is the USSR (who is always first in each action round and has its own specific cards). A third example is Memoir '44, in which both players play two sides with different game abilities (particularly in the expansions) and starting positions. Eclipse also comes to mind, as you start out as a human or an alien race with a couple of special bonuses.
Player asymmetry is broader than a rule or mechanics discussion not only because it's pervasive in gaming, but also because each player works essentially under different rules from each other. The benefit of this asymmetry is variety: you can play one of two or many different roles; you have different abilities each game; you can explore different in-game strategies and tactics each game; and, even the material differs between players, whether it's pawns of various colors or other meeples. The downside, though, is that the playing field is not necessarily level and it's difficult to compare player performances when they are fundamentally dissimilar.
Do you have any thoughts on player asymmetry?
Player asymmetry is broader than a rule or mechanics discussion not only because it's pervasive in gaming, but also because each player works essentially under different rules from each other. The benefit of this asymmetry is variety: you can play one of two or many different roles; you have different abilities each game; you can explore different in-game strategies and tactics each game; and, even the material differs between players, whether it's pawns of various colors or other meeples. The downside, though, is that the playing field is not necessarily level and it's difficult to compare player performances when they are fundamentally dissimilar.
Do you have any thoughts on player asymmetry?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
