Showing posts with label BGG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BGG. Show all posts

Thursday, August 21, 2014

Aquasphere rules posted to BGG! Also, BGG is awesome!

Aquasphere rules posted

Just a quick note to let you know that you can find the web version (low res) of the final rules for Aquasphere (English TMG edition) on BoardGameGeek!

Public Service Announcement

BGG is an invaluable resource for me personally, for TMG, and for the rest of you gamers out there. They host a website CHOCK FULL of content on every game imaginable, they hold an AWESOME convention in Dallas every year (which I haven't missed yet!), and they work tirelessly at (and before) GenCon and Essen to bring LIVE, up to the minute coverage of the events to those sitting at home unable to attend.

BGG is terrific, and it's run by terrific people. You probably already know this, but if you don't, then go check it out. And if you're not already a supporter, consider pitching in - if you care about games enough to follow this blog, then you'll get your money's worth. If not for BGG, I might not be the published designer I am today!

Wednesday, October 03, 2012

TMG is rocking and rolling this year

I got word that inside the latest issue of Buyer's Guide/GAMES 100, Belfort, Village, and Martian Dice have been listed among their picks for the best games of the year!

In addition, Tasty Minstrel Games has some games nominated for Golden Geek awards over at BGG:
* For The Win is up for Abstract Game
* Belfort is up for Art/Presentation and Strategy game
* Eminent Domain is up for Card Game
* Martian Dice is up for Children's Game and Party Game
* Village is up for Family Game, Strategy Game, and Innovative Game
* Train of Thought is up for Party Game

Way to go TMG! Take a look and cast your votes!

Thursday, June 14, 2012

Game Auction on BGG

I have posted a Game Auction on BGG, selling off pretty much every game I own (save a few that I actually expect to play soon or often).

Some of my favorite games are on that list, but I figure if it hasn't hit the table in over a year, it's hard to argue that I need to keep it!

So take a look, and if there's something you like, feel free to bid!

Somebody asked me about donations. I hate the thought of asking for handouts, which is why I thought it was better to sell off these games, but if you are so inclined I suppose I wouldn't turn it down. Maybe the best way to handle that is with the donation link at the Board Game Designer's Forum. I pay for that every month, so any donations there will help me directly and would be much appreciated!

Thanks everyone for your support. I feel kinda like a jerk complaining about my robbery when other people have real problems (like when their house got destroyed by a natural disaster, or their child died). But I appreciate the help all the same!

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Games on BGG - follow up

Last time I mentioned that I'd submitted Dice Works, Alter Ego, and Exhibit to the BGG database. All three have been approved and now have BGG entries, so if you have played, do play, or are interested in information about those games, feel free to use the power of the internet! Now that the entries exist, I still intend to post Print and Play files for each of these games (eventually) for people to play until the games are published.

Dice Works
My last post contained a crappy rules draft for Dice Works, and I'm still interested in help writing a succinct but complete set of rules down before I upload the files. I should probably be able to upload that one soon. I think Dice Works will make a good Print and Play game because all you need are a couple of player boards, a couple of markers per player, and a grip of standard 6-sided dice.

Exhibit
I got a chance to play a few games of Exhibit lately, and I have implemented a couple of tweaks which I think have had a positive effect on the game:

* Leave un-taken tiles for next round: if everyone overbids on an auction (so nobody gets the tile), that tile used to be discarded. Now I have been leaving it in play so that there are *2* tiles for that particular auction. When there is more than 1 tile for an auction, the winner of the auction gets their choice of tile, and then the next highest bid gets the remaining tile and so on. On the down side, when there are auctions with multiple tiles, it cuts down on the tension of the bidding a little bit (if you're happy to get 2nd place then you don't fight). However I think on the whole this is a positive change and I like it.

* Grants: My friend Andrew, who has played Exhibit several times at various conventions over the last few years, suggested that players be allowed Grants, which are effectively 1-shot weapons. The game used to have 1-shot weapons in it's very early incarnations, but they didn't do exactly this, and the game has changed a bit since then. The current plan is that each player starts the game with 1 Grant for each Culture (i.e. 1 per color but no purple). They can be discarded when resolving an auction to add 1 virtual die of that color that only you can see (like the Weapon ability). I suspect the net effect of this will be two-fold...
    - It gives a player some small recourse from being bullied by players with weapons. The ability for a player with weapons to simply outbid you by 1, making it impossible for you to win the auction, occasionally left a bad taste in people's mouths. On one hand, that's kind of what weapons are for, but on the other hand I don't want the game to be disappointing. This may be a good compromise.
    -It softens the blow of overbidding when a crazy distribution of colors is rolled. Like with 20 dice, you bid 3 Yellow, and this time it so happens there's only 1 Purple and only 1 Yellow (for a total of 2). The Grant allows you to win that bid as long as you've only overbid by 1, and only once per color. This could be especially important in the early game where there aren't a lot of dice out there and it's easier to get shafted that way.

I have only played with Grants once so far, and I thought it was OK... I'd like to try it some more. I wonder if 5 Grants is too many, and if it would be better to limit it to 3, they could be generic rather than color specific, and you could be allowed to use only 1 per auction on any auction except purple. Another possibility could be to discard 2 Grants to get +1 Purple as well (graphically, the grants could show 1/2 a Purple die on the back for example).

* Consolation = Extra bid Token: I've been using this rule for a while now, and I am very happy with the result.

* Tweaked Purple tile abilities: I have tweaked a couple of the purple tiles, and I think I like the results. I will need to re-examine them and figure out how I want to stage that stack.

Perhaps I'll get print and play files for this one together as well and post them on BGG. I think the game is very close to done, and hopefully this means it'll be on Kickstarter some time soon, perhaps later this year!

Alter Ego
I'm less far along with Alter Ego, but I'm happy with how it's progressing, and I eagerly await having more time to work on it. I have a pretty strong vision of where I want to go with the game, and I just need to get some time to work on it. When I get that done, I'll probably post it as well - as a card game (with just cards and some tokens) it could make a good Print and Play game as well.

Friday, February 10, 2012

Games on BGG, also Dice Works Rules

Two things to report...

1. I have submitted 3 of my games to the BoardGameGeek database. I did this for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that a game I know of was NOT in the database (even though it's almost done and is under consideration by a publisher), and recently another game with the very same title was announced by another publisher. It's too bad, too, because that game had an awesome title, and it' been around for years in the designer's blog.

So that spurred me to add some games I've been meaning to add, although I'm not too worried about my titles being used - they're not as good as that example was:

Dice Works
Alter Ego (not accepted yet)
Exhibit (not accepted yet)

2. I decided I would make Dice Works available for print and play though the BGG entry, so I was putting together a PDF of the player boards and the rules. It occurred to me that I had not written down (or could not find anyway) the latest version of the rules - the only set I could find was very out of date. I am astonished by how much space this is taking for how few rules it seems like the game has. I think I'm just being thick and that this could be much more succinct. So I'm going to ask you, faithful readers, to take a look and tell me how to rewrite this so it'll fit on 1 page! Is that possible? Here they are:

DICE WORKS
A fast and furious dice game of invention for 2-4 tinkerers.

Components
80 Standard six-sided dice (best if they have squared corners, not rounded)
- 20 each in 4 colors (Red, Green, Blue, Yellow)
4 Player boards
4 Worker markers per player

Each player board shows several Invention Tracks. Each track space is labeled with some combination of die faces. Sometimes only the color of the die will matter (solid colored square), and sometimes both the color and the value will matter. There is one track for each color of die in the game. One side of the player board only has 3 columns - if using that side, only use Red, Green, and Blue dice. If using the side with 4 columns, all dice are used.

Dice Works is played over a series of rounds. Each round players will contribute some number of dice to the pool, the pool of dice will be rolled, players will draft dice out of the pool in real time to place on their player boards, and once all of the dice have been drafted, players will update their Worker markers to show their progress. The game is over when a player’s marker reaches the top space in 1 or 2 of their Invention columns, depending on which side of the player board you are using. That player is the winner! If more than 1 person accomplishes this in the same round, the tie is broken by the level of advancement of the next highest marker.

Round Structure
1. Contribute and Roll Dice
Each player notes the number of dice of each color that they contribute, based on the location of their Workers on their Invention tracks, and takes that number from the supply. All of these dice are rolled together.

2. Draft Dice
Players grab dice in real time (no turns) to complete sets on their player board. The following rules apply:
2a. Only 1 hand can be used to grab dice
2b. Only 1 die can be taken at a time
2c. Once a die is touched, it must be taken and placed on your board before another die can be taken
2d. Dice may only be placed in the lowest possible space in each column (the space ABOVE your Worker) - until that is full. Once a space is full, a player may begin placing dice into the next space up.
2e. Once placed, a die on your board may never be moved.
2f. Legal placements include:
* The die color matches the space it is placed on, and if the space indicates a particular number, that must match as well.
* For spaces where number is not specified but there exists an equal sign (=) between the spaces, the value of the first die placed does not matter, but the value of other dice must match it.
* No die can be placed in a box unless
a. It is the box directly above the player’s Worker in that column, or
b. It is a box directly above a series of boxes which are full oif dice.

3. Resolve Round
After all dice have been drafted and placed, players first check for illegal plays, and then advance their Workers on their player board for each column that qualifies.
3a. Any die that is not placed legally is moved to the Scrapyard of that die’s color.
3b. After checking for legal plays (and moving illegal plays to Scrap), any worker directly below a box that is full of dice moves up - discard those dice to the supply. Repeat this until all Workers have advanced as much as possible.
3c. Next, players may use dice in their scrapyard. The least advanced worker on your player board defines your scrap rate (on the left). You may discard that number of dice from any 1 Scrapyard in order to turn it onto a die of that color with the value you choose and place it in any legal space. You may repeat this as much as you like, and any time you complete a box, advance the worker below it.

Friday, December 09, 2011

Rating one's own game

Every once in a while a thread erupts on BGG in which somebody complains that the designers/developers/publishers of a game have rated it a "10" - sometimes they call it "shilling," other times they just say it turns them off. Some go as far as to suggest that a high rating from the publisher of a game negates any interest they had in the game, even if that were considerable based on what they'd read or seen before examining the ratings.

Obviously everyone's entitled to their opinion, and one could argue that if ANYBODY is turned off by the practice of a designer rating their own game then I ought not rate my own games. No need to turn anybody off unnecessarily. However, I find that sentiment repugnant...

I am a gamer. I've been playing, tracking and rating games on BGG for years, and that pre-dates any of my game design or publication efforts. All the while my ratings have been biased toward games I enjoy. Of course when it came time to rate my own games I would be biased toward them as well. The very idea that I should have to censor myself and not rate the game is abhorrent!

Giving a high rating to a game you design, or a game you publish, is not shilling. Shilling is opening fake accounts in order to give additional ratings and other non-genuine props to a game, posing as somebody else. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but only one of them. The problem with shilling is that it's duplicitous - it's an attempt to fool somebody into thinking that more people like the game than really do. Rating a game that you designed is not duplicitous, provided you really do like that game.

Having to hold back your rating is like negative shilling and it's equally duplicitous - representing that FEWER people like the game than really do. I am not interested in artificially anti-shilling my own game for any reason.

I understand the arguments against rating one's own game, but frankly they just don't hold water. If other designers want to refrain from rating their own games, then that's fine for them - I don't care. It's the principle of the thing. I absolutely refuse to change my behavior in this case just because other people are unreasonable. If that means some guy I've never met decides he's going to predispose himself against my game, then so be it!

Tuesday, December 06, 2011

EmDo popularity at BGGcon

I was happy to wander the ballroom at BGG.con and see groups of people in the middle of a game of Eminent Domain. It made me feel good when people would say how much they liked the game:)

I just saw a post at BGG listing how many times each game was checked out of the library at the convention, and Eminent Domain was 5th on the list!

I continue to really enjoy how well the game has gone over so far. It's rating at BGG is 7.35, which is a really good average rating! It's ranked 290 overall, and 157 in the Strategy game category!

Awesome! :)

Monday, September 26, 2011

The long wait is finally over... for some people anyway

Last week I got news that the boat had landed, and all of Tasty Minstrel's games had arrived in the warehouse (ahead of schedule for once)! I was sworn to secrecy, but today it was announced that the Kickstarter copies started shipping out last Friday! That means people in the eastern US will probably be getting their copies any second now, while people like me on the west coast will be receiving their copies in the next couple of days.

I know the international orders will still take a while to arrive - I wish there were a better system for that. Hopefully there will come a time when TMG has a distribution partner, or a warehouse, in Europe and some of each print run can be sent directly there rather than sending it back and forth across the globe.

I have heard that our exclusive surprise for Kickstarters DID make it into the shipments, so Kickstarter supporters should be receiving those along with their copy of the game.

I look forward to seeing reviews, session reports, and strategy posts at BGG and Boardgaming.com starting to pop up this week!


In other news... My friend David (designer of Ground Floor, coming soon from TMG) helped me put together this official rules sheet for the Bonus planets:


This will be available in the files section of BGG as well as on PlayTMG.com in the near future. I think it looks great, and I love that it matches the rulebook.

Friday, May 30, 2008

KublaCon 2008

I went to KublaCon again this year. I had a really good time hanging out with Chris Hillary, Andrew Schoonmaker, Rick Holzgrafe, Derk and Aldie from BGG, Doug Garrett, JC Lawrence, and others. I also played a lot of games, some of which were very good, very interesting, or both!

Reading Railroad didn't do so hot in the design contest, but I expected that. I was a little disappointed in just how poorly it went over though, talking to the playtesters. One commented "I know what you're trying to do, you're trying to hit 2 markets." For some reason that comment hits me like an insult... I hate marketing, and I am not trying to weasel some shenanigans by trying to appeal to 2 types of gamers, trying to trick both groups into buying my game, which is the connotation I get out of that comment. Rather I am trying to make a fun, cool game - and in this case I think Reading Railroad could have "cross-market appeal." I expect some word game players would like it, and some eurogame players would like it. Sure, in either market by itself it might not be a smash hit, but that's not the point of the game. I did glean some good information which I hope to use to improve the game, some of which ties into things I already wanted to try. I think the game is good enough to continue to work on.

Rick Holzgrafe's entry Spatial Delivery did win the contest, and boy did it! Asmodee asked for a copy to review - they might want to publish it! Congrats to Rick on that! I remember when Rick first conceived that game for one of the Board Game Designers Forum Game Design Showdowns.

As for general gaming, I'm looking into a game purchase. There are some problems with this idea - some of the stuff I want isn't in stock at the moment. Also, I'm not sure I want to buy some of the games for one reason or other - I may have a blog post about that soon. I've been playing Container a lot, and I've grown to really like it.

Design-wise I've got some changes to make to Reading Railroad, and I've got some new ideas for that Airline game I'd mentioned. besides that, just more of the same. No movement on Winds of Fate, Dynasty, or Hot and Fresh :(

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

No news is good news?

Jay Tummelson of Rio Grande Games took a copy of Homesteaders to The Gathering of Friends with him to test out. That's pretty exciting news, and as you can imagine I'm anxious to hear back about how it went. I emailed Jay once since the Gathering ended, but have received no reply, so I really have no idea what his thoughts are on the subject.

However, I've managed to deduce that at least 3 sessions of Homesteaders have occurred, 2 at the Gathering, and 1 last Saturday (in Maryland it would seem, though I'm not sure about that). I've talked to a couple of the people who have played in these sessions, and it seems the players have enjoyed the game from what I can tell. 2 players rated the game on BGG - a 6 in one case and an 8.5 in another.

I have not been able to glean Jay's reaction as yet... so the wait continues!

Monday, December 31, 2007

New "games played" record?

On BGG you can record games played, and I've been faithfully doing so since June 2005. I play a lot of games. By way of example, in the last 2.5 years I played an average of 49 games per month, with some months as low as 14 games played, and some as high as 89. My current record month is Feb. 2007, when I played 89 games. I went to a game convention in Los Angeles which helped, and in that month I played more games than a friend who went to *2* conventions! It's also amusing to me that my record plays occurred in the shortest month of the year.

As of right now (3:48 pm December 31, 2007) I have 89 recorded plays for the month. Some friends are coming over for New Years Eve, so it's likely I'll break the record this month. I'm actually surprised I haven't, considering all the games I've been playing this month!

89+ games in one month - that's about 3 games a day on the average. And I actually spent 6 days this month not playing games! I wonder if I'll ever break 100 plays in one month (without doing something cheesy like playing 30 games of Brain Freeze in a row and counting them all).

Edit: In the end I recorded 95 games played for December 2007!

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Welcome!

I've noticed a lot more people reading my blog lately, some due to searches for Magic: the Gathering stuff, and some linking in from BoardGamegeek.com - several people check regularly from across the world - Vienna, Netherlands, even as foreign a place as Texas!

I just wanted to say "Hi" to whoever it is that's reading my blog, and encourage you to post a comment telling me at least who you are, if not how you came across my blog or whether you enjoy it.

It's good to know I have an audience :)