All Roads Lead to Amber

So has anyone read Roger Zelazny's Amber novels? For those that haven't, or need a refresher, here is the gist:

The Chronicles of Amber is a 10 book sequence split into 2 parts. Part 1 was written between '70 and '78. And Part 2 was written between '85 and '91. These are fantasy novels set in an alternate reality, of which Earth as we know it exists as one of many different worlds/realms. The basic universe exists as a sort of continuum between chaos and order, with the Courts of Chaos and the Logrus on one end and Amber and the Pattern on the other. All of reality is spread between these two poles.

The stories are quite engrossing and all 10 books are about as long as one book from the Games of Thrones (for reference). The major plots revolve around various Lords and Ladies of Amber (or Chaos) going about their power grabs in all sorts of subtle and not-so-subtle ways. The books mostly focus on the political intrigues and dynamics between the characters, and not the usual fantasy trappings - its almost the progenitor for something like the Game of Thrones in that regard. But better and more concise in my opinion.

Other than a rather odd (diceless apparently!) RPG set in the Amber universe, there haven't been many games using the Amber setting (although I've heard rumors of it being difficult to license). This is about to change!

Fall-time Spectacular: The State of the Blog!

It's been too long right? I know, I know, you are wondering, where has he been!? The answer my friends is that I've been here, just not writing as much as I've been intending to. In fact, I'm starring at a virtual stack of half-finished term papers ... err blog posts ... that I'd love get finished and submitted to the interwebz professors; but life has been hectic lately. I'm sure you've all been there.

Part of me is also a little torn about what direction in which to take the blog. One thing I'd like to do is have more frequent blog posts, which of course requires me to actually write blog posts more frequently. This conundrum is somewhat at odds with the fact that I haven't had a lot of extra time lately in which to write said blog posts (hence the lack of posts over the past few months). Sigh, it is a circular and terrible circumstance. What to do?

Defined by Committee: Games and the Language Thereof

The Challenge of Talking About "Talking About" Games

It's futile. That is what a lot of people say when I, or many others, start to get all big-wordy when the subject of game analysis or critical review, or other forms of game-related theorizing and pontificating take root. The argument is that (1) we're never going to agree on terms, or (2) this topic has been endlessly debated before, or (3) why do you think you are right, or (4) even if we all agree on terms not everyone is going to use them correctly, or (5) what a waste of time.

My opinion is that without talking about the language we use to discuss games, we are going to be challenged to actually talk about games in a way that opens the door for critical analysis or discovery If we don't advance the language we are in a holding pattern. And even if any particular conversation doesn't yield something tangible and applicable, the discussion nevertheless helps with knowledge building and working towards a common understandings - or at least framing our disagreements and differing perspectives.

Towards a Grand Unified Theory of Boardgamery

 

There has been an interesting series of articles on the League of Game Makers about the whole mechanics-first or theme-first approach to designing games (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3); and in turn how important theme is or isn't in terms of shaping a game's overall experience and long-term success or failure. That debate is always interesting and illuminating, and arguments for or against one approach over the other simply underscores the diversity of approaches and methods for working on a design.

Part 3 of the series, Theme vs. Mechanics: The False Dichotomy, presented an interesting Venn diagram showing how "theme" manifests in relation to a game's rules, its components, and what we imagine about the game at hard. The blog post I'm writing today started off as a desire to refine the concept Mark Major proposed; but consequently has cascaded into a watershed moment for me. This moment has coalesced a number of threads of game design and theory I've been wrestling with since starting this blog. For my thinking at least, this moves me a few steps closer towards a Grand Unified Theory of Game-Stuff. No way! you say? Yes way!

Emissary's Thematic Conundrums

Emissary was originally designed for the PnP Express/In-a-Tin Design contest using the Decktet. It was envisioned as a card game "express" version of Hegemonic transplanted into the fantastic and odd world of the Decktet universe. If you are curious about the gameplay of Emissary, check out this prior post on the topic: Emissary: A Study in Brain-burn and Emergence

As much as I love the Decktet, using the Decktet cards posed some playability challenges. Players had to mentally map the card's ranks into a Tier structure used in Emissary, each of which had certain implications for the cost of using those cards. It was hard for players to keep it all straight in their mind (and required a reference card at a minimum) and as a consequence the flow of the game bottlenecked a little bit.

If the game was to mature beyond its roots I felt it had to deviate away from the Decktet. Custom cards could facilitate learning the game and streamline the play considerably by using clear iconography to identify the various ways of interacting with the cards (costs, build allowances, etc.). But this opened up a whole separate question, what to "theme" it around. I was torn whether to embrace the games forefather (Hegemonic) and go with a spacey theme, or do something more subdued and landscap-y. I couldn't decide so I did both!

Onward to the eye-candy!

Designer Diary: Hegemonic, or Reimagining the 4X/Sci-Fi Empire Genre from Sketchbook to Publication

This Designer Diary was originally published at BoardGameGeek News on January 14, 2013.

---

The Short Version

I've always enjoyed tinkering with and designing games. In the summer of 2010 I started designing a space empire game called Hegemonic, inspired in part by the many sci-fi authors I enjoy. I endeavored to break the mold and create a space empire game with a big open decision space, lots of room for creative and dynamic gameplay, and mechanisms appropriately abstracted to match the theme of galactic domination.

The first prototypes were tested in early 2011 after spending months in a sketchbook working out the concepts. With the help of space artist Alex Skinner, I had an attractive prototype to use and share with willing test subjects. I then spent the next fifteen months, until mid-2012, developing the game, testing with external (blind) playtest groups, and polishing the gameplay.

Towards the end of the summer of 2012, with the help of some BGG friends, I began pitching the game to interested publishers. Minion Games was quick to pick up Hegemonic, and we've been working feverishly this fall and winter getting the game ready for production!

Hegemonic is a space empire game wrapped around an area-control style game. It is has a high level of direct conflict and interaction in the game, yet also feels more "Euro" than many of other space empire games. It is distinct because players' industrial, political, and martial systems all contribute toward their economy and area control, and all of them can be used to initiate conflicts.

If you like big, deep, conflict-driven Eurogames, please continue reading!

Schools of Design and Their Core Priorities

One of the regular topics on this blog has to do with the classification of games and the pursuit of a theory or framework that describes the operation and resulting experience of playing board games.

This interest is not driven by the assumption that we'll ever find a perfect system for actually classifying games. Rather, I feel the pursuit of such classification efforts and building a framework for understanding generates interesting discussion, builds knowledge, and creates insights that can be of value on their own.

I've discussed, in an earlier blog post, the idea of trying to define broader categories of games (e.g. What makes a euro a euro?). I want to return to this topic but bring in some other insights and references that I've come across, which will hopefully provide a more tangible and comprehensive picture.

This is a monstrous post ... you have been warned!

Dynamic Balancing Acts - A Perspective on Ginkgopolis

This review was originally posted on BoardGameGeek.Com April 8, 2013.  As of this reposting, I've played Ginkgopolis over a dozen more times.  The below review still applies.

---

  

Ginkgopolis is Xavier Georges’ fifth (I believe) game, following Royal Palace (2008), Carson City (2009), Troyes (2010), and Tournay (2011), along with a smattering of expansions for some of the above. This is the first of Xavier’s game I have played, and is currently ranked 325 in BGG (April 8th, 2013). Both Troyes and Carson city rank higher (39th and 167th respectively).

I admit that I have not played Ginkgopolis exhaustively – as I only have 3 plays under my belt at the time of writing (one each at 5 players, 3 players, and 2 players). Despite this, I found myself enamored with the game, both its flaws and its successes, and spent considerable time thinking about it.

Reactions to Ginkgopolis seem a bit of a mixed bag. The primary criticisms of the game being lack of theme integration with the mechanics and the high level of apparent randomness and uncertainty in the game. I decided to write this review to explore these two criticisms and examine the overall gameplay dynamics at work. I will conclude with my thoughts on how Ginkgopolis “fits” into the overall gaming scene and why I think it will be a compelling but underappreciated game.

Big Game Theory! Expands into a New Universe

The Big Game Theory! blog has a new, dedicated home in an alternate reality where BGG, impossibly, doesn't exist! What you say!?

The Big Game Theory blog launched at BoardGameGeek (BGG) to discuss boardgame design and design theory. The blog has been running at BGG since September 2011 and has generated a ton of great discussion and dedicated followers. So worry not, it will continue to be updated at the original location in full.

So why the dedicated site?

The Wondrous Ages I Have Known

It’s been a while since the last post, and I feel an update is in order so you all don’t think I’ve succumbed to a game avalanche tumbling down out of my closest or that I've been dragged into Real-Life by some demon spawn. No – it’s been far more ordinary than that: family, work, deck (re)construction, traveling, and general chin scratching. All this, plus Age of Wonders 3 and some trepid steps towards a possible expansion for Hegemonic (more on that in the next blog post). As for this post - it's all about my reflections of Age of Wonders 3, a PC 4X game I am enjoying more and more by leaps and bounds.

Orc Sorcerer owns you!