Brain Freeze iPad app is live!
It's been in the works since December, and finally it's done... the Brain Freeze iPad app is in the App Store! It's a free download, so give it a shot and let me know what you think!
Maximum birds, minimum stones.
A game design blog by Seth Jaffee, Head of Development at TMG.
It's been in the works since December, and finally it's done... the Brain Freeze iPad app is in the App Store! It's a free download, so give it a shot and let me know what you think!
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
1:56 AM
0 nitpicks tags: BF, publishing, Xpost
At KublaCon I played some of my prototypes (Dice Works, Bluff Auction, and Eminent Domain) with some people who write for some board game blogs, and since then they have posted their convention reports, each with a section about my games! I thought I'd go ahead and link to them here:
Ian Noble (The Noble Gamer)
GeekInsight (Giant Fire Breathing Robot)
Also, Chris from DiceHateMe.com mentioned Mike and I in his podcast - you know, the one about getting kickstarted.
Enjoy the links!
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
5:46 PM
0 nitpicks tags: Blogs, Podcasts
I have played a number of games of Bluff Auction over the last few weeks, and have been making tweaks and changes left and right. I believe I'm quickly zeroing in on a finished product. What I'd like to avoid id having a game with a great central mechanism, but underdeveloped structure around it. I recently learned a game called Pergamon (which, oddly, has a similar theme to my Bluff Auction game) which I think suffers from that a little bit. The central mechanism there looks very clever, but some of the scoring incentives and mechanisms look a little tacked-on, fiddly, or underdeveloped. I want my game to shine a little bit more than that as a whole package.
In a recent post I considered 4 tweaks - here's my current thinking on those:
1. Receive 2 new dice when Exhibiting a set rather than 1.
I was never sure about this tweak to begin with as I feared it would bring to many dice into the game too quickly. I believe I've found a better way to bring dice into the game at a more appropriate rate - see below.
2. Change the Extra Bid Token to some other power: "Regrowth"
I have done this, and so far I've been happy with that change.
3. Art scoring
Currently players are allowed to score leftover tiles in their museum as if they were sets, and they get a bonus set of star icons from their Art tiles in play (which is independent, so the art tiles could be parts of different sets). I think it might be better to simplify and reduce that - I would like to try final scoring like this:
Players get 1 point for each tile in their Museum (unexhibited,including special tiles), and each Art tile that is face up is worth an additional 3 points.
I believe I've found a slightly better way to do scoring - see below. It does involve 1vp per tile left in your museum storage, and it does involve 3vp for face up Art tiles... in your exhibits.
4. Go back to disallowing 2 bids on same track. While in some ways mechanically interesting, I think allowing 2 bid tokens on the same track is anti-thematic, and I don't like the dynamic it creates enough for the rules complication it requires.
Indeed, I have decided that 2 bids on the same track is not a dynamic that I want in this game. The current rule is that you may place a bid or move a losing bid on your turn, or pass as long as you have placed all of your bid markers.
NEW STUFF
One idea that came up when consternating about losing ALL of the powers when displaying a set was that perhaps you could stack the tiles FACE UP, so that you get to keep one of the powers. This immediately turned me on the the probably more appropriate rule, which is that you don't get the powers AT ALL until you display an exhibit! This makes you decide directly between displaying a small set for powers (and dice), and waiting for a bigger set for more points. Perfect! It also reduces the number of active powers in the game at a time, which actually feels kind of disappointing, but I think that's because I'm used to using all of the powers as I get them. This is probably a better rule all around, and it also reduces the power of having won more tiles - by winning 2 tiles in a round you don't necessarily get more powers than the guy that only won 1 tile.
So I've been using that rule for the last couple of games and I thin it's gone well. You can store a certain number of tiles in your Storage, and at the end of each round you may display at most 1 Exhibit (set of any number of tiles sharing at least 1 attribute).
I have removed any bonus for sets that share multiple attributes. They have a built-in benefit because they are easier to add to. This way the triangular scoring does what it's supposed to do - rewards a larger set more than a smaller one.
If you choose to display, you stack those tiles in your Exhibit area leaving the top one visible. The tiles visible in the Exhibit portion of your player mat are active and their powers count. The only funky thing about that is that the Purple tiles (which in production might end up being a different shape let alone a different color) need to take up space in your Storage, and yet be active when in your storage. I'm hoping a different shaped tile will help keep that from being too awkward to grasp or pay attention to.
For a while I had gone to a 3-tile-minimum requirement for sets, but that was in response to not liking how the double-set-bonus was working. Removing that bonus obviates the need for a 3-tile minimum restriction on sets. Now you can turn in any number of tiles, and of course the larger the set, the more points you get for it.
When displaying an Exhibit, you also get a new die to roll. I fully expect players to display a 1 tile set in the first round to get access to some power as well as a new die to roll, but I fear that when starting with 3 dice (which seems to be the best solution so far) that might put too many dice into play too quickly, especially in 4 or 5 player games. Based on a comment from my friend Chris, the solution might be to stagger when you get dice - for example, maybe your first Exhibit does not get you a die, it just gets you the power of the top tile. The second exhibit could get you another power AND a die. Etc. I'm not sure what the best pattern is, but it probably involves no die on the first Exhibit and 1 die on the second. after that it could either alternate, or simply be 1 die for each exhibit after the first (to a max of 6 or 7). I think that would slow down the influx of dice in the early game, and would separate the 'many small sets' strategy from the 'fewer, bigger sets' strategy fairly well. With fewer total dice in the pool, an extra die means more than when there are more dice in the pool.
I have also been considering another tweak that was mentioned by a playtester - what if all players always had to be outbid by 2? With a lot of dice out, I think that rule could be good - but with few dice (early game) I don't like it. It could be easily represented by double-wide bidding tokens, and those tokens could be placed on end when bidding for Purple tiles (and therefore you don't need to be outbid by 2 for that auction) since there's no additional color counting for Purple. I don't really think this is necessary, but it might be nice. Another idea is that it could be a benefit added once you've cashed in several sets (like instead of a die for your 4th set, you get the ability that you must be outbid by 2). That way it'll come into play later in the game, when there are more dice in play. I'm not sure if I want to add powers like that (for Exhibit thresholds), they just make it more tempting to make 4 1-tile sets and then go for a bigger set. but maybe that's OK.
I'm really happy with how this game is coming along, and I hope to get some more tests of it in soon!
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
6:16 PM
0 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction
I posted a con report in GeekList form over at BGG. Check it out to see what happened over the course of the weekend. In short, I had a lot of fun, played a lot of games, hung out with a lot of people, and of course, wish it could have lasted a few days longer.
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
7:47 PM
0 nitpicks tags: KublaCon, RecentGaming
Thursday I'm heading up to San Francisco again for KublaCon. In preparation for my trip I put together a Geeklist over at BGG about games I'd like to play while I'm at the convention.
I don't know how many people actually read my blog, but I get the impression that the number has grown. Are you going to be at KublaCon? If so, leave a comment if you'd like to play a game with me this weekend, and check out my geeklist to see if we're interested in playing some of the same stuff!
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
4:10 PM
4 nitpicks tags: KublaCon
So far these are the nominees for a title of the Bluff Auction game. None of them even hint at the "highest bid without going over" mechanism, or the Liar's Dice inspiration (not that they need to). Which one sounds the best to you? What other title do you suggest?
Cura Galeria
Museum of Lost History
Treasures of the Ages
Exhibit
Exhibit: Museum of Lost History
Exhibit: Lost History
Exhibit: Treasures of the Ages
Exhibition
Exhibition: Museum of Lost History
Exhibition: Lost History
Exhibition: Treasures of the Ages
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
3:11 PM
4 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction
I thought of a potentially better scoring system for Chrono Gallery: Museum of Lost History. I am liking the sound of it more and more as I talk about it and refine it.
Rather than scoring at the end of the game for particular sets, and rather than having to put your tiles into 3 distinct exhibits, perhaps instead there could be 7 Trophies:
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
11:53 AM
1 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction
[This is an old post which I never published. I don't like having those around, so I have edited and published it.]
Rodeo Drive was at one time the title of a work in progress using the Bluff Auction mechanism I've been discussing recently. Here's one of the early posts from late 2007 describing how the game was coming together.
I think the basic structure will be to the effect of...
Some items will be "up for bid", and each person will roll some color dice (like the ones used in Wizard's Tower or Carolus Magnus). You won't know what your opponents rolled, only what you rolled. Then players will bid on the different items, which will effectively have some cost. The bid will be, in effect, how many times you think the cost is represented among all the dice people have rolled. For a simple example, suppose the item cost 1 Blue. If I thought there were 3 blues rolled among all players I might bid 3 blue on the item. If you wanted the item, and thought there were more than 3 blue, you might bid 4 blue on it. Then I could either pass, thinking you have overbid (or 'bluffed'), or I can rebid. On my turn if I'm winning the bid, I must pass. As soon as everyone passes, dice are revealed and the item is awarded to the player who bid closest to the correct number without going over.
I think the way it will work is that there will be more than 1 item up for bid, and players will probably bid on more than 1 item at a time.
So far there are 3 ways we've thought about going with this...
1. Straight scoring - as you win, say, Blue, you get better at winning blue, but each subsequent Blue is worth less and less points. So you are stronger to win future Blue things, but you'd rather win Red or Yellow because they're worth more points to you.
2. Special powers/emergent strategy a la Puerto Rico or Caylus - the item you win is like a building in Puerto Rico that gives you some ability or resource. Then you use the buildings you get to purchase things, convert resources to points, etc.
3. Area control/area placement - when winning, say, Blue, you put your house on the board in the Blue region. There would be maybe 8 spaces in each region, and the spaces would be connected by a web of roads, a la Thurn and Taxis or Web of Power/China. You'd score points per region (as mentioned, each successive house in a region is worth less points to you than the last), and you'd score points for chains of houses. The more houses in a chain, the higher the score for that chain.
That's where we're at currently, mulling over these options. We tested the Liar's Dice mechanic and it definitely seemed to work for a multiple item auction.
So comment on this post with what you think a good direction for this game would be, the simple, sort of abstract game, the divergent, multiple power building route, or the area control/placement scoring.
As to theme, we were racking our brains trying to think of something that works that way - something that is rewarded for "bidding" as much as possible without going over a certain number. So far the thing we thought of that best represents that is someone who is very rich, who will always buy the most expensive thing he can afford. So the dice represent different shoppers (each color is a different shopper), and the number of their color that comes up is their 'credit limit' - they're looking to buy the most expansive thing they can afford, and players are offering them things at a particular price (and for some gamey reason you can't offer the same price as your competitor). I'm not sure how that would fit into any of the 3 listed structures above, but it at least fits the Liar's Dice mechanic.
[edit 5/2011]
Since this post was composed, I have revamped the game and changed the theme (twice). For a while the Bluff Auction was a time travel mechanism, and players were going back in time to collect artifacts which were (until now) lost, damaged, or destroyed in history. Recently that theme has changed to one in which you're simply bidding for actual items with actual money (more recognizable), but if you bid 'too much' then your funding won't come through and you'll have to rescind your bid.
Now the items up for bid have abilities/bonuses on them, which are in effect until you Exhibit them, thereby scoring them.
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
11:44 AM
1 nitpicks tags: AreaControl, BluffAuction, Caylus, NewIdea, PR
I've been considering a few tweaks, and I wanted to get them down before I forget all about them...
1. Receive 2 new dice when Exhibiting a set rather than 1.
I fear that giving up the abilities on the tiles AND the additional points one could get by waiting may be too much, so people won't Exhibit sets until they are forced to. Maybe that's OK, but I'd rather see a viable strategy wherein a player Exhibits early and often in order to get more dice, so those dice help that player win more tiles or at least the tiles they really want more often. Perhaps getting 2 more dice will be better, though I also think this could be a perception thing...
In any case, it seems like players only Exhibit about 3 sets anyway in larger player count games, so getting 2 dice at a time might get more of the total dice in play. Lower player count games seem to see players getting 4 or 5 Exhibits...
I am unsure about this tweak.
2. Change the Extra Bid Token to some other power: "Regrowth"
The Extra Bid Token has always been a powerful tile, one of my favorites. It is like an investment - you take this tile, which will not score, and will take up space in your museum, and you get something which can absolutely translate into winning more tiles than you would have otherwise. Of course, winning just 1 extra tile means you're breaking even, but winning 2 extra is a benefit. In this game, in addition to the possibility of winning more total tiles, having an extra bid also sort of increases the probability of you winning tiles with your other bids, or forcing other players to outbid (and not win tiles) anyway.
Having the Extra Bid Token come out in rounds 7/8 means you can use it only 1 or 2 times, which really seems to neuter it. Having it come out in rounds 1-4 really makes it too powerful. So unless I want to complicate the staging of the Special tiles even further, I might have to admit that the Extra Bid Token is not a good fit for the game. Also, the Consolation rule that you get an extra bid token seems good and appropriate, and that's lessened if an opponent has an extra bid token every round already (though still kinda fair because he won that auction and is committing a slot in his museum to that tile).
An alternative could be another tile I used to have in the old version of the game, a tile which you could exchange for any unclaimed or discarded tile. I'm not sure when you would do this - any time you want, I imagine, as it doesn't affect any other players. The value of that tile might go up or down depending on how the game plays out - in a game where no tiles are discarded, the tile would be worthless (though I'm considering another tweak that makes every tile you have worth something - see next point). And even in a game where tiles are left unclaimed or discarded, it's possible they won't happen to fit into a set for you (which is somewhat within your control), and so unless they're Art it's still kinda worthless. On the other hand, if you can claim a tile that fits nicely into a set, it could be worth 5 or 6 points!
I might give this a try.
3. Art scoring
Currently players are allowed to score leftover tiles in their museum as if they were sets, and they get a bonus set of star icons from their Art tiles in play (which is independent, so the art tiles could be parts of different sets). I think it might be better to simplify and reduce that - I would like to try final scoring like this:
Players get 1 point for each tile in their Museum (unexhibited, including special tiles), and each Art tile that is face up is worth an additional 3 points.
This would be easier to calculate, I think, and easier to explain... and more importantly I think it will encourage players to Exhibit more often rather than just waiting until the end of the game. The Art scoring means that you are rewarded for holding onto Art unless you happen to have a set of 7, in which case you ought to go ahead and Exhibit it and free up the space. You might want to Exhibit a set of 6, as you don't lose out on that much bonus, and it frees up your museum. It really rewards holding onto 5 or fewer Art tiles though, which is what I want - giving up abilities in return for bonus points.
I'll note that if ALL tiles (including Special tiles) are worth 1 point at the end, then getting a Special tile that doesn't end up helping you isn't worthless.
4. Go back to disallowing 2 bids on same track. While in some ways mechanically interesting, I think allowing 2 bid tokens on the same track is anti-thematic, and I don't like the dynamic it creates enough for the rules complication it requires.
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
11:32 AM
0 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
5:54 PM
3 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction, Rules
I desperately need a catchy new name for what I have been calling Chrono Gallery. Here's the new thematic storyline:
An old, eccentric archeologist has died and his private collection, rich with a variety of artifacts of various types from various Cultures and Eras, is being auctioned off. These artifacts have not yet been assessed, but as a museum curator, you don't want to wait for that, so you do your own research and you bid based on what you think the item's value is. Once all bids are in, the artifact will be assessed, and any bid that's higher than the actual value will not be approved by your board of directors! So the highest bid that is not greater than the actual value will win the artifact.
Please let me know what you think about titles for this game! Leave a comment!
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
3:59 PM
1 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction
Marty, Jasen and I played a 3-player game of CG last night, and it went well. Marty liked it and ended up winning by just a couple of points over me - he had scored maybe 5 sets, 1 with 5 tiles, the rest were double-scoring 3-tile sets. I on the other hand had a large endgame 6-tile set (21vp) including 4 art (10vp bonus) for 31 points at final scoring, to go along with my 2 other 3-tile sets (I think one was double-scoring)
We played that "double scoring" a set was not fully doubling, but rather a double set was worth the regular 1+2+3+... as well as an additional 1vp per tile (so in total 2+3+4+...) so most of Marty's sets were worth 9 points. I think I might like to try it next time without the added complication of double scoring sets - if you have a double-set, it gives you flexibility in what to turn in when cashing a set, maybe it doesn't need to be worth more points as well.
After the game we examined the Purple tiles and re-ordered them into 4 stages:
Stage 1: Wild (Type/Era/Culture), One-Shot Double Virtual Purple, +2 Dice
Stage 2: Extra Bid Token, Outbid by 2, Hand Size +1
Stage 3: Virtual Purple, Overbid with Tie (Marty thought this one was one of the strongest)
Stage 4: 4vp
The purpose here is to ensure that certain tiles don't come out at the very beginning where they would be too powerful, and that certain tiles don't come out past the point where they'd be completely useless. I think this might be a better distribution, and if it's been done correctly then I think David's suggestion to add 1/2/3 points to the Purple auction at the last couple of rounds could be avoided. If need be I can add a VP to the Stage 3 tiles by printing it on them.
We discussed the Consolation rule, and agreed that the extra bid token (which we tried this time) is a fine and appropriate consolation for getting no tiles. On the down side, it's relatively easy to forget it, and while I verbally checked each of the first few rounds to see if everyone had gotten at least 1 tile, as soon as I stopped asking, Jasen started losing out on tiles and forgetting to take his consolation.
We played with "Overbid with Tie" meaning only 1 such overbid at a time. I got that tile and found it frustrating to only be allowed 1 such overbid, as I was frequently winning a bid with a tie, and wanting to tie on a track I cared more about. Maybe with that tile coming out for at most 2 rounds of use, maybe players could have more than 1? With 2 players I imagine that would be ridiculous though. Maybe 2 - so in a 4 or 5 player game ALL of your bids can be overbids... Another question, SHOULD this tile combo really well with the Extra Bid Token tile? Not sure, jury is still out. It may be a preference thing - I do not see the overbid with a Tie as such a powerful tile, while Marty thought it was the most powerful. On the other hand, I thought the virtual purple die tile was much better than Marty thought it was, and in essence they are kind of the same thing.
Community dice
I forgot to use any community dice, but that's kind of OK for a 3 player game. I definitely think for a 4 or 5 player game they'll be necessary though. The first thing Marty said when I described it was the exact same thing I had first considered - he said he'd rather each player roll 1 more die and then choose 1 to reveal. I think that would be more strategic perhaps, but the problem isn't that there's not enough decisions or complexity - the problem is that people don't get enough info, and I think it's simpler to just roll the community dice. It could be an "advanced rule" to role-and-reveal-1 and the standard rule just to have community dice.
Purple dice
I think the simplest rule is to just leave it swingy and have the purple dice be wild, rather than try to nerf that somehow. I'll keep an eye on it and see if people are really disappointed by it.
So - for next time:
* No bonus for double sets
* New purple tile stack order setup
* You're allowed to bid on the same track that you're on, but not directly over your own token.
* Not sure about Overbid With Tie rule
* Double Purple Virtual Dice (1-shot) worked well, will try hat again
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
3:51 PM
0 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction
Monday night at Gamesmith's we had a great turnout and a great test of Chrono Gallery. Chris and Melanie (From Stratus Games), David were there, and Simon brought his roommate Matt with him. After all the great development recently I was really looking forward to another test of the game, and I was happy to see how it went with 5 players.
The game ran longer than I would have liked - we were at about 55 minutes going into the last round, but by the time it was over we were looking at about 90 minutes. I don't know why the last round went so long, and I don't know how much of the time-sink was due to player count.
Other than that, the game went pretty well. I learned a thing or two that will be very important for scaling the game for different numbers of players, and I may have found a better theme for the game.
THEME
One thing we talked about after the game is the theme. While technically speaking, the time travel theme fits the mechanism very well, it really doesn't feel much like that's what's going on during play. It's kind of a stretch and it feels forced. I think that's kind of a shame, partly because I couldn't think of anything that really matched the "bid highest without going over" mechanism better, and partly because I really liked the idea of displaying things like Excalibur and other mythical artifacts in your museum!
We talked about a few different ways to present the time travel portion of the story, but realistically, a better theme that evolved from our discussion was that you are bidding actual money (like a normal auction), and the reason you want to bid "as high as possible without going over" is that you are not sure if you'll get funded or not.
Suppose the number of green dice represents the actual value of the green artifact, which is unknown when you're bidding (though your research has given you partial information). You bid based on that, and then when all bids are in the artifact is assessed and the true value is determined. If the highest bidder has bid too high, their financial backers refuse to go through with the purchase, so the next lowest bid is checked - the highest bid that is not greater than the true value is the one that gets the artifact.
This theme seems more easily grasp-able, which is a plus. And it means I need to find a more catchy and more appropriate title. While I liked the subtitle Museum of Lost history," perhaps that's also a plus.
5 PLAYER DYNAMIC
One thing I noticed about the 5 player game was not too surprising - the Consolation rule came into play. With 5 players each with only 2 bid tokens, and some artifacts going unclaimed due to overbids, it's fairly easy for a player to go a round without winning an auction. The rule I used was to give such a player an additional die, to give them some power in future auctions. In order to keep from having to supply a ton of dice in the game, I had limited the number of dice per player to 6 (for the 5p game), which you get as you cash in sets. I said that the consolation die came from that supply (i.e. one of your 6 for the game). That seemed to work alright, but an alternative was suggested which I'd like to try as well: any player who does not win an auction in a round gets an additional bid marker for the next round. I don't know if that will prove better, worse, or simply different, but I'd like to find out.
Also as expected, players were not acquiring as many tiles as we did in the 3 player game, or even the 4 player game. Therefore the players' displays were not filling up and they were not forced to cash in any sets. It made me think that perhaps the number of tiles you can hold should decrease a little bit, like only 5 tiles for a 5 player game. Maybe even 4 (and then 5 slots for a 4p game) - but I think that would be too few. This however was not the biggest problem I saw with the 5 player game.
The biggest problem I saw with the 5 player game was that it was very chaotic. Players do not have enough information to perform very well, they begin with a mere 20% partial information. In comparison, the 33% partial info in the 3 player game felt much better. The easiest solution I can think of to increase this percentage is to add some Community Dice - a couple dice rolled in public which people can take into account when bidding. If there are 2 community dice, then in the 5 player game you start out knowing 4 of the 12 dice... 33% like the three player game. David suggested that wouldn't be enough, and that the more info you have, the better the auction would be. I might agree with him, so I might make it 3 community dice for a 5 player game (and maybe 2 for a 4 player game and 1 for a 3 player game). That would make the percentage of partial info known about 40% in 3, 4, and 5 player games. I think this will help keep the bids from becoming too frustrating. In general I prefer the simpler setup/play of NOT having these community dice, so it's possible the 5 player game should simply be more chaotic (or in fact should not exist).
With three community dice, the total number of dice needed for the game would be 40, which may not be too many.
MECHANISMS
We talked about some more specific mechanisms as well. These comments apply to all player counts...
* Originally, I had said that you cannot move a bid you'd placed until you had placed all of your bid tokens, and I'd also said that you cannot bid on an auction you're already on. Those rules just seemed like the obvious rules to have, but I didn't have any specific reason for choosing them. In one of the recent test games somebody placed their first bid token, got outbid, and on their next turn wanted to up their bid on that same auction (before somebody else did). It seemed like a reasonable thing to want to do, so I allowed it, changing the rule to simply be that you either place or move a bid token on your turn, and you cannot PASS unless you have both bid tokens out. That seemed OK for the last couple of games, but led to players holding back their 2nd bid token until the last minute, in order to hide information from other players or something. That didn't seem as good, so it was suggested that it not be allowed. The question remained though, what if you want to bid up on the same track you'd initially bid on, but haven't placed all of your markers yet (especially in 2/3 player games where you have 4/3 markers)? Well, one idea is to allow bidding on the same track. It didn't seem like you'd want to, but in the narrow case that you do - why not allow it? Well - the problem is, suppose you pass with a marker on 3 and another on 7 for the same auction, your opponent having bid 6, and the real number turns out to be 5. Should you win that auction? Having 2 bid tokens makes it more likely you'll win an auction, but at the expense of winning any other auction. Taken to it's logical conclusion, I may bid 1 on an auction I want, and if nobody outbids me I could simply lock it in by bidding 16 as well. Now nobody can possible outbid me, and as long as there's at least 1 die of that color, I'll win that tile. Is that OK? Maybe it is. I fear that such a dynamic will really break down the mechanism in a lower player count game, but it might be worth a try. If the mechanism is OK except for that lock-in exploit, the rule could be that you cannot outbid yourself directly (someone else's bid must be in between your two markers). Another solution is to disallow passing if you have 2 bids on the same track, but that's really the exact same thing as disallowing bidding on the same track (but allowing players to move their bid before placing all of the bid tokens). I'm not sure which way I want that to go. I think I'll try the double bid on 1 auction just to see. Any opinions?
* Purple dice being wild can be really swingy. If you happen to roll 3 purple, you are kind of at a big advantage for EVERY auction. Theoretically your behavior could belie that information, but not always. Is it worth doing something like "purple counts as 1/2 wild?" So like, for every 2 purple there's +1 of other colors? Or possibly distributing the Purple dice (after resolving the Purple auction) to the other columns 1 at a time, and applying only those distributed? that could be interesting, as the Yellow auction (2nd to resolve) would more likely benefit from Purple dice than the Red auction (last to resolve). Again, the SIMPLEST rule of just counting the purples as wild might be best just because it's simplest, even if it makes the game somewhat swingy.
* The Extra Bid Token tile is very good... If it comes out early in the game, a player could gain too much of a benefit. Perhaps the Purple tiles should be staged... I could label 4 of them with a 1 on the back, indicating that they will come out first, then label 4 with a 2, indicating that they will come out next, and then have the last tile labeled 3 - which will always be simply worth victory points (because after that last round, no abilities are useful). I think I have a good idea of which power tiles should come out in the first half of the game and which should come out later, so I will try this next time.
* David suggests a bonus of a couple of points for winning the Purple auction in the last few rounds, since the benefit of the tile will be lessened. Maybe 1/2/3 points for rounds 7/8/9. In that case the 9th round tile would be more like 2vp on it's own (currently 4), plus the 3 for the round is a total of 5vp. I could do this, but it's an added complication which I don't know is really necessary.
* I definitely like the idea of the Consolation rule, and an extra die makes sense... but that removes some of the incentive to cash in a set early. Another idea that came up was to give any player who won zero auctions in one round an extra bid token (for the next round only). I'll try that and see how it goes.
* The One-Shot Double Purple Virtual Dice tile seemed really strong, but at the same time kind of weak. Melanie used it one round, and it turned out there were plenty of purple dice (more than anyone thought) and she was able to win her bids even if she hadn't used her tile. I think it would be better if the tile could apply to any 1 auction (rather than all of them), and you don't have to use it until you see the result of the auction. So procuring that tile helps you win a particular tile that you really want later in the game.
* The Overbid With Tie tile was a little too annoying when all of your bids could do it. It was suggested that you could only have 1 such overbid at a time. I'm not sure I see much difference, but I am willing to try it that way.
* A more fundamental problem I've noticed is that it's too easy to make double sets of 2 tiles for 6vp - this is better than making a 4 tile set! Solution: require minimum 3 tiles per set. that should make it harder to get double points. Also, instead of double points for a double-set, maybe better to just award +3vp? Or +1vp/tile? Any thoughts on this? I'd like the double set to be worth SOMETHING as it's harder to get than a single set - and if nothing else I'm SURE players will ask the question.
All of these things are somewhat minor tweaks as far as I'm concerned - I'm really happy with the way the game is shaping up! Please post a comment with your thoughts - including your thoughts on a new title based on the new theme!
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
4:42 PM
0 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction
I guess I set up my blog to have AdSense - I have no idea how to use that! I see that there are ads on my blog now, but I am not seeing any money. I have received like 2 different 'gift card' looking things saying "here's $100 towards advertising your blog!" Not terribly useful for me right now.
I think I will be turning that off, as I don't see any benefit. Anybody know more about this and want to tell me if there's something I should be doing differently to get some passive income from my blog?
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
2:57 PM
I had a very successful playtest day yesterday!
Bios Megafauna
First off, Mandy, Jason, and Megan played a game of Bios Megafauna with Phil Eklund. I sat in on the rules and generated comments for Phil. His request for me to play and comment on that game was the catalyst which spurred my planning the playtest day.
Bios Megafauna was a much simpler game that I would have guessed, but in true Eklund fashion I believe it was presented as much more complicated than it needed to be. It also looked to be very well researched, and highly thematic. You have species of animals, and over the course of the game you obtain Adaptations to make them stronger and more versatile so they can spread to more places. At it's heart, the game is a majority scoring game, with Auctions as it's main mechanism - you bid for an Adaptation card each turn (which also triggers a random event when drawn, of course), which may allow you to spread to more spaces on the board. When a scoring card comes up (random event on card = scoring), whoever has the most units on the board scores 1/2 the available VP, and the rest of the players score the rest. After the auction phase, everyone gets a chance to grow or shrink 1 size level, flip from Herbivore to Carnivore or back, and reproduce and/or move on the board. After that, any space with more than 1 herbivore in it must be culled - only 1 herbivore and 1 carnivore per space is allowed. There are specific tiebreaker rules for this, and the adaptations help you win these fights. The idea is that the better adapted species eats the food, and the other one starves out. Carnivores have a similar hierarchy. Perhaps counter-intuitively, when you have a carnivore and an herbivore in the same location, the latter is not removed from the board, rather they co-exist in equilibrium (imagine a handful of lions and thousands of deer).
So the game is about getting the right adaptations and choosing to be a carnivore or herbivore based on whether you'll be able to survive and keep guys on the board. It seemed pretty solid in concept, but I did give Phil a handful of comments for some specific things that I thought would make the game better. Which he liked or whether he takes any of them I don't know, but I'd be interested to see.
Chrono Gallery: Museum of Lost History
After Bios Megafauna, Phil, Mandy, Nick, and I played my bluff auction game. I made up a variant to the scoring system I'd used on Thursday's playtest at Brian's house - pretty much on the spot. It worked out pretty well, and I got a lot of good information from the test. Later that night, David came by and I discussed the game with him, and we brainstormed several other scoring systems, and when Ted showed up we tried a 3 player game and tried the most promising sounding system... and it worked really well! And it eliminates the need for Trophy bits.
Chrono Gallery is "in the fire" at this month's Gamesmiths meeting on Monday.
Eminent Domain - Exotic Expansion
Doug, Mandy, Sam, and Nick played a game of Eminent Domain with the Exotic expansion. Sam had maybe played once a long time ago, Nick had never played, Mandy had played EmDo a couple of times before, never with the expansion, and Doug has played a couple of times even with the Exotic stuff. We decided to dive right in with the full game (not the learning game), including the expansion (which is what I wanted to test, really). It went over pretty well - they weren't making expert plays, but both Sam and Nick picked the game up with no problem.
I liked the expansion stuff well enough that I've decided to finally upload it to DropBox (as I've been threatening to do) for interested people to print and play if they like.
All in all I believe yesterday was a highly successful, and a very fun day. I hope to do that more often, at least 1x/month.
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
6:21 AM
0 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction, ED, expansion, playtest
I finally had the opportunity to play Chrono Gallery: Museum of Lost History a couple of times, and I tried the scoring scheme I figured out the other day... Not the worst idea in the world, but it didn't go over as well as I'd hoped. While players seemed to like the bluff auction mechanism, they did not seem to like the scoring trophies bouncing back and forth from player to player. I believe the crux of the complaint was that when you get a reward, you feel like that's yours, and it's disappointing to have it taken away from you.
SCORING
It's possible that trophy system could work with some tweaking of the costs and points - for example:
* When you get a trophy stolen from you, you keep most of the points - so you effectively score for getting a set and the trophy itself is a small additional bonus.
* create several trophies of each type, each worth 2vp, whose cost escalates as they are taken - i.e. the first player to get an Art trophy needs only 3 Art tiles. The next player to do it needs 4. In this case you cannot claim a trophy you already have.
* Somehow ramp up the costs of stealing the trophies so it's harder to do
* Make the trophies for larger Exhibits worth more points than the lesser ones, and then allow people to claim those too (rather than just being allowed to claim 1 trophy of each type).
There are other variations as well. I tried the second one listed above in a playtest yesterday, and it did feel like an improvement over Thursday's game where we were passing the trophies back and forth. That last version seems very promising as far as Trophy scoring goes, however I explored some other options and tried something different in yesterday's second game.
One of Brian's comments after Thursday's game (similar to what I wanted to do before I added trophies in the first place) was that you should turn in sets of tiles to score for them. His point was that you would be limited to 1 such turn-in per round, so if you keep too many tiles in play for too long, you may not be able to score them all. In general LI liked the idea, but as stated I didn't like the way that particular scoring would sound. Discussing with David last night, we figured out a better version of that. Here's what we tried (and it worked very well):
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
5:54 AM
1 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction
My Bluff Auction game, Chrono Gallery: Museum of Lost History (I do NOT love the title for that one) is "in the fire" for this month's Gamesmiths meeting, so last night I took some time to (finally) update my prototype a bit. I created tiles for the auctions, and that took some design work as well. Here's what I came up with:
There are 5 colors of artifacts (well, 6 actually - but 1 is different from the rest):
| COLOR | CULTURE |
|---|---|
| Green | Mayan |
| Red | Roman |
| Blue | Greek |
| Yellow | Egyptian |
| Black | African |
| Purple | Future |
| Artifact Type | Game Bonus |
|---|---|
| Tool | +1 die of that color |
| Weapon | Re-roll 1 die before bidding |
| Art | +1 VP |
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
1:19 PM
0 nitpicks tags: BluffAuction, Gamesmiths
Originally (well, when *I* first saw it)) Kings of Air and Steam was played over 7 rounds. Often players had a whole lot of nothing to do in the final round. demand would completely dry up such that there were cubes on the board that could not be delivered at all, all the other cubes having been delivered already.
To fix this I simply said "hey - let's cut that last round off, and only play 6 rounds!" This worked very well, as now players had things to do all the way through the game. It's still the case where you'll Pass an action or 2 near the end of the game rather than spend money, but I thought that was acceptable. So I've been happy with the 6 round game thus far.
However, taking another look, I think that actions really aren't tight enough. Players are still passing actions, even if only a couple, and they are upgrading their Airship and Train more than enough. I'd like to see Actions be in shorter supply so that players will not be able to build all their depots, upgrade both their Airship and their train all the way, and still be able to make all of their deliveries. If Actions are more valuable, then Character Abilities that amount to a free action here or there will have more value to them.
What I should really do is figure out about how many upgrades I expect or would like a player to make, and see how many actions that leaves them to do deliveries, and look at how many deliveries I think a player should be able to make in a game. I quickly looked at that just now, and I figure a 5 round game might actually work really well. 20 actions could break down something like this:
7-8 Upgrades (some Train and some Airship)
5-8 Depots
8-10 Delivery action
And a couple of Route Adjustments or partial delivery actions (moving part way to the destination).
Note that if you spend 16 actions upgrading both your Train and your Airship and buying 8 Depots, then you'll only have 4 left to make deliveries. Maximized that's probably 10 cubes at about $14, which probably won't be enough cash to win. 6 deliveries averaging 2.5 cubes/delivery and averaging $14/cube might be enough to win.
I think 5 rounds (20 actions total) may be the way to go! Time to try it...
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
5:52 PM
0 nitpicks tags: KoAaS
For those interested, here are the current character abilities and special movement cards for Kings of Air and Steam. We tested the first draft and made some adjustments. these are not final, but are probably pretty close to what the final game will have in it.
Each movement phase will go in turn order, so move-1 cards will always go before move-3 cards, but given the same movement card, Harvey and Reginald will always act before Clint and Eli. As compensation, the later turn order characters have the more powerful abilities.
Each player will be assigned 1 team, and each team has 2 characters from which the player will choose. Each character has a special ability, and each team also has a special movement card and potentially unique Airship stats as well.
1a - Harvey Golding: Start with a Level 2 Airship and $20 instead of $12 (or $15?).
Harvey Golding is the stepson of Lawrence Golding, out to salvage his father's empire.
1b - Reginald Kain: Start with a Level 2 Airship. Place additional starting depot after other players have placed.
Reginald Kain was Lawrence Golding's business partner, he helped Lawrence found Golding Enterprises and would hate to see it crumble.
1move - Move 0*, + Action
2a - Aurelia Bayley: As an Action, convert 1 cube of one color to 1 cube of another color.
Aurelia is a quirky inventor, out to prove that what the industrial revolution needs is a healthy dose of science.
2b - ISAAC (Intelligent Steam Automated Airship Captain): Discard a Cube to get 1 additional Action (1x/action)
Aurelia's clockwork assistant I.S.A.A.C. is an adept Airship pilot.
2move - Move 7** (Straight line)
3a - Eva Blane: Start with Level 2 Train. May construct a new link for $1/tile and place a Depot on it.
3b - Victor Blane: Start with Level 2 Train. $1 discount on Depots.
3move - Move 2* + Ship 1 Good (execute during 2*move round).
Son and Daughter of one of the original Rail Barons, Eva and Victor's contacts in the rail industry reach far and wide. As Rail Barons, Eva and Victor have a jump on other teams when it comes to depots and rail lines, but they're not as adept with Airships, so their Engine and Cargo upgrades top out lower than other characters. We might add storage limits to Depots, in which case Eva and Victor would be allowed to store more goods in each Depot.
4a - Flora Kingston: Upon filling a city, draw 2 New Demand tiles and choose 1.
4b - Bishop Kingston: When Delivering 2+ cubes, may place 1 in supply rather than on City (that one doesn't count toward capacity limit).
4move - Move 2, then Move 2 (execute during 4move round).
British shipping magnates Flora and Bishop Kingston are experts in the industry, very in tune with the demands of the marketplace. With Lawrence Golding gone, they have come to British Colonial America in order to claim their rightful crown as the true Kings of Air and Steam.
Flora and Bishop's Engine upgrades slower than other characters, but their Cargo upgrades faster.
5a - Clint Castle: Free Route Adjustments, and 1x/round may make an additional Route Adjustment without using an action.
5b - Eli Diamond: Play a (1-3) movement card as an action
5move - Move 6**
Clint Castle's grandfather Beaufort Castle was the first to employ the Diamond Engine in an Airship - and doing revolutionized Airship Racing at the time. That event is what inspired Lawrence Golding to adapt the Diamond Engine for his shipping industry. Clint Castle, with his Grandfather's racing Zepplin, has teamed up with Eli Diamond, who's grandfather invented the Engine itself, to bring the speed of Airship champions to the industrial revolution.
As a champion racing ship, the Sky Castle's cargo upgrades slower than other characters'. But their Engine upgrades faster. When it comes to piloting an Airship, this team cannot be beaten.
6a - Sebastian King: When delivering, may pay up to $3. For each $1 paid, draw 1 Market tile. If any match the cubes delivered, +$3/cube.
A habitual gambler, Sebastian King has tried a lot of failed ventures. Having won an Airship in a poker game from a con man, King thought it might be fun to enter the burgeoning shipping industry that he'd heard so much about. Knowing very little about Airships, he teamed up with the only Airship pilot he knew, which happened to be the man who he'd won the ship from!
6b - Corday McQuinn: 3 times per game, may spend 1 "Swindle" token to deliver 1 off color cube with a delivery.
A con man by nature, Corday McQuinn's pride took a hit when he lost his Airship to Sebastian King. He was happy to be recruited to pilot it by it's new owner. Both Sebastian and Corday have something of a dark side, but they have become friends and partners in order to make it rich as shipping magnates.
6move - Move 0-3*
7a - Thaddeus Birch: Use opponents' depots for $1/cube instead of $2/cube
When Mafia lieutenant Thaddeus Birch gives you an envelope of cash in exchange for using your depot, you don't count it in front of him.
7b - Mort Flynn: When using 1*, 2*, or 3* movement card, may Steal at the end of movement (stealing counts as picking up).
Mafia thug Mortimer Flynn finds it easier sometimes to take goods from another depot or Airship then to fly all the way to a factory.
7move - Move 0* + Steal 1 Good (stealing counts as picking up).
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
2:29 PM
0 nitpicks tags: KoAaS
I think I've made the decision to move forward with Alter Ego as a cooperative game, despite the fact that Midnight Men is in the works. It's a bit disheartening to work on a superhero themed, cooperative, deck building game when that superhero themed, cooperative, deck building game is getting so much attention, but I sincerely doubt the games are very similar at all and I do like the main design ideas in Alter Ego.
The cooperative version is nothing I haven't already discussed in this blog, I just have some more specific ideas in mind of how the game will look and play out. The purpose of this post is to document those ideas, and lay out a components list and rules set so I can move on with updating the prototype and playing it!
Alter Ego v2.2
A cooperative deck building game of heroism
You won't see Crime City on any map, but that's how people have come to know your hometown. Sadists, Anarchists, the Mafia, each carving out portions of the city they call their own. Hundreds of innocent bystanders caught up every day in their turf wars, or held under their oppressive thumbs. Precious few have the time, the money, the guts, or the wherewithal to do anything about it. You're one of those few... of course it means you'll have to give up that happy home life, or that cushy job. The paper paints vigilantism in a negative light - you'd be viewed by the community as a monster. But your city bleeds... the city bleeds and it calls your name. Will you answer?
You're a vigilante hero, one of the few in Crime City who have come together to put an end to the reign of terror the city's been trapped under. Banding together, you'll fight through a swath of henchmen in order to find and defeat several Arch Villains. But as you get stronger as a hero, you'll have to neglect some parts of your Alter Ego life - your family, your job, and the community.
Components:
XX Hero cards (5 types)
XX Alter Ego Cards
- XX Family Cards
- XX Job Cards
- XX Community Cards
XX Henchmen Cards
XX Arch Villain Cards (3 types)
XX Equipment Cards
XX Civilian (CIV) Tokens (4-5 types)
Setup:
1. Sort the Henchmen cards by level, shuffle each level separately and then sack level 2 on top of level 3 and level 1 on top of level 2 to create the henchmen deck. Place this deck in the middle of the table.
2. Sort the Arch Villains into piles by type, and randomly choose 1 Arch Villain from each pile. Those will be the Arch Villains used this game, put the rest back into the box.
3. Sort the Hero and Equipment cards by type and place them in piles in the center of the table, accessible by all players.
4. Give each player 4 of each Alter Ego card (Family, Job, and Community). Return the rest of the Alter Ego cards to the box, they will not be used this game.
5. Each player shuffles his deck of 12 Alter Ego cards and deals 4 cards face up into his "display" area, then draws a had of 4 from the remaining cards in his deck.
Turns:
Patrol phase: On your turn you must first bring a henchman into play:
* Draw 1 card from the Henchmen deck.
* If you have any face up Community cards in your display, draw 1 additional Henchman card for each Community card.
* If you have at least 1 Community card in your display, draw 1 additional Henchman card for each Community icon on henchman you have defeated (in your play area).
Choose 1 Henchman card to put into play, and return the rest to the top of the Henchmen deck in any order. Do not discuss upcoming henchmen with your fellow players!
When a henchman comes into play he takes some number of civilians hostage! Place CIV tokens on the Henchman card as indicated. If a CIV token must be taken but the supply is empty, then the game is over and the Villains win!
Support phase: After a henchman has come into play, you may gain support from your family, allowing you to draw cards from your deck:
* For each Family card in your display, draw 2 cards from your deck.
* If you have at least 1 Family card in your display, also draw 1 card from your deck for each Family icon on henchman you have defeated (in your play area).
Equip phase: You may spend money on fancy equipment to make you a stronger hero:
* For each Job card in your display, collect $1
* If you have at least 1 Job card in your display, collect $1 for each $ icon on henchmen you have defeated (in your play area).
You may spend these $s to buy or activate Equipment this turn.
Crime-fighting phase: Now that you have geared up and garnered the support of your friends and family, it's time to go fight some crime!
* Hero cards in your display may be spent to rescue CIV tokens currently being held on a Henchman card. Hero cards spent must match the icons depicted on the Henchman card. The rescued CIV token is returned to the supply.
* Other players may discard Hero cards from their own display in order to help rescue hostages.
* If the last CIV token on a henchman is rescued, that henchman is DEFEATED, and the current player may keep that henchman in his play area and gain the printed benefit (usually an icon).
* Whenever a henchman is defeated, check to see if it has any Arch Villain icons. For each Arch Villain icon, place a token on the matching Arch Villain card.
When enough tokens are placed on an Arch Villain card, that Arch Villain will come into play and terrorize the city by KILLING civilians (removing CIV tokens from the game) until he is defeated!
Recoup phase: After you're all spent from fighting crime, you get a chance to recuperate and plan your next turn.
* Discard all cards in your display.
* Play 4 cards from your hand face up into your display.
* For each Display icon on henchmen you have defeated (in your play area), you may play an additional card face up into your display.
* Choose a Hero card from the supply stacks and place it face up in your display.
* Discard the rest of your hand, and draw 4 new cards from your deck (shuffle your discard pile as needed) plus 1 card for each Hand Size icon on henchmen you have defeated (in your play area).
Play continues with the next player in clockwise order.
When the last Arch Villain is defeated, then the game is over, and the Heroes have saved Crime City from the clutches of evil!
So sayeth
Seth Jaffee
around
5:45 PM
6 nitpicks tags: AlterEgo, coop