Editor’s Note: This intro was written when I was roughly a quarter of the way through the list of games in this collection. This lack of foresight and planning is largely to blame for the tonal shift the article undertakes in its latter half. Due to the somewhat humorous result of this mistake, and upon rereading the article in full several times, I’ve decided to keep the intro as is. Nintendo recently published a compilation of tabletop games for their Switch console entitled Clubhouse Games: 51 Worldwide Classics, and it is delightful. Its charming presentation, audiovisual design, and user experience are all top-notch. Even better, the amount of respect and enthusiasm the developers have for gaming history shines through every facet of the package as clear as day. Each title is introduced via a humorous dialogue scene highlighting that game’s particular brand of fun, and your first few plays of each selection are rewarded with bits of trivia you can impress your nerdy friends with later. For tabletop history enthusiasts this is an absolutely mandatory piece of software, and as an educational experience it approaches Sid Sackson’s seminal work A Gamut Of Games. That being said, this is not a review of the software itself. Clubhouse Games: 51 Worldwide Classics is undoubtedly excellent; no further analysis beyond what I’ve stated above is required. Instead, this is a review compilation of the 51 games featured in the package. That’s right, I’ve written 51 separate, albeit brief reviews detailing my thoughts on each and every title.…
Knizia, despite being an undisputed master of the modern two-player card game (amongst a multitude of other accolades), is not infallible. It’s not that Blue Moon, his take on the kind of 1v1 card combat game typically relegated to CCG territory, is bad. Far from it. In fact, when viewed solely as a work of product innovation, this is one of his most groundbreaking achievements. Remember, Fantasy Flight’s LCGs(™) did not exist at this time, so Blue Moon positioning itself as an alternative to Magic: The Gathering that didn’t require the hoop-jumping and wallet-draining of mediocre-by-design starter decks and randomized booster packs was an attractive proposal. Furthermore, the game is easy to understand, fun, and each playable deck is tactically distinct. So what holds it back from greatness? Unfortunately, Knizia’s highly European, minimal approach to game design — which serves him extremely well when designing, say, Euros — does him few favors when working in the high fantasy, direct conflict space. Of course, he’s much too talented to reduce its system to the point of meaninglessness, but Blue Moon is still lacking in the sort of flavor and dynamics you’d want from a game about appeasing powerful dragon lords by proving your worth via magical warfare. Most games of Blue Moon will be played with the prebuilt “People Decks” provided in the base game. Deck customization is allowed, of course, though is quite restrictive unless you really go wild with all the expansions. Besides, the original release only came with two decks: the “Vulca” and the “Hoax”. Thankfully, a more recent…
Android: Netrunner is an asymmetric two-player card game based on the old CCG Netrunner Richard Garfield authored alllllll the way back in 1996 (can you imagine playing a game over twenty years old?!). Over the years, the design has proved quite popular and remains a tournament favorite for many dedicated players. A CCG-turned-LCG(™) that has been played competitively in some form or another for the last twenty-five years when so many others have come and gone, it must be good right? But how good? Better than… Magic: The Gathering? Yes, much better. It’s not even close. Whether its deeper or more complex is a much harder question to answer — and one I don’t have the tournament-level experience in either to adequately tackle — but Android: Netrunner is a far, far more enjoyable way for two well-played gaming enthusiasts to spend an evening together. Its exquisite theming, immersive world, unique player interactions, tense information exchanges, and flavorful scenarios all compliment a creative, asymmetric core system that commands the utmost attention of your tactical sensibilities. I just spent the entire introductory paragraph raving about how great the game is, so lets start off the review proper by griping about something that doesn’t really matter. What is the deal with the new core sets rulebook? It actually states on the very first page that you’re going to need to consult an online reference for some of the rules questions that arise during play because they aren’t covered by the text. That is stupid annoying; why would you not provide everything needed to…
Arboretum is a really strange game that it is more interesting to think about when you’re not playing it than when you are. Then it’s just kinda annoying. It’s a confusing situation. I mean, I think this is a good game; all signs point to it being one, at least. It has simple rules, a smooth cadence, and a surprising amount of depth for a “filler” (a word best used in quotes). In a lot of ways it’s a difficult game to criticize, or at least to find the right words to do so. Nevertheless, a cursory look through some forum discussions reveals that it’s a surprisingly divisive title with many players passionately opining both for and against it — something quite atypical for lighter weight card games. So why exactly is Arboretum, a colorful game about building relaxing paths through resplendent trees, a game that some love and others revile? Well, seeing as I fall right in the middle of those two categories, perhaps I am the right man to answer that very question. As mentioned before, Arboretum‘s ruleset is quite simple. In fact, the “How To Play” section of the rulebook is a full two pages shorter than the sections on scoring. Shuffle a deck of cards with 6-10 suits of trees on them depending on player count, deal seven to each player, and put what’s left in the center of the table. Cards are ranked 1-8 indicating their value, and there is one card of each rank for every suit. On their turn…
I’d like to acknowledge right off the bat that a middling review of a 50-year old board game is a rather pointless critical venture to undertake (even for me). But seeing as Bazaar has established a reputation for itself over the years as a bit of a minor classic from master designer Sid Sackson, I thought it was worth a paragraph or three to jot down some thoughts on it. Bazaar is a basic set collection game that challenges players to efficiently use ten different equations randomly determined at the game’s outset to convert colored stones into specific combinations. On any given turn, the active player decides to either roll a multi-colored die and collect a stone matching their roll or trade stones they already have in their possession for other stones as directed by one of the aforementioned equations. After taking their action, if they have stones matching the set on an available card for purchase, they may spend those stones to do just that and score some points. Point values are determined by 2 factors: 1) the value of the card and 2) how many stones the player has leftover after making the purchase (with fewer being better, obviously). Players are highly incentivized to make efficient trades and purchases as these point values vary greatly. The same card could be worth up to five times as much for the meticulous player with zero leftover stones as the sloppy player with gosh knows how many. Whatever the methodology behind their acquisition may…
It’s Azul time. Everyone else has reviewed it, so why shouldn’t I? Azul is a light-weight abstract for 2-4 players with an appetizing presentation. Everybody says the same thing when they see its colorful resin tiles seductively radiating from the gaming table for the first time: “They look like Starburst.” This would be annoying if it wasn’t 100% true. I also really like the material used for the cloth bag you draw them from. It’s pleasantly cool to the touch and doesn’t use any of those awful synthetic fabrics found in other games (*cough* Orléans). I’ve put my hands in lots of bags for lots of games — this is one of the best. Really, everything about the game’s production is top-notch — besides an ever so slight warping issue with the player boards (as cardboard tiles of this size and thickness often have). Typically, I don’t even bother mentioning such details in my reviews, as component quality almost never influences my opinion on a game, but I do mention them here for one very simple reason: Azul is a gaming meal that looks much better to me than it tastes. Azul is a basic set collection game with rules that make it seem much more complicated than it actually is. Though some of its elements were hard for me to picture when reading through the rulebook, within two seconds of seeing them in action I understood their how and why. This is a rather unintuitive design that is hard to explain with…
Ah, the boss fight. Perhaps gaming’s greatest contribution to the artistic canon. No other narrative form has climaxes that can match the sheer moment-to-moment intensity and immersive properties of a properly designed boss fight. Of course I’m mainly talking about video games, but many a tabletop experience has tried their hand at them as well. Sadly, most of them stink; boost a standard enemy type’s stats and a throw in a shallow gimmick or two to avoid accusations of a creative laziness. And the ones that do get ambitious tend to do so by subverting all sorts of established game concepts, adding unwelcome amounts of additional admin and rules to remember. To be fair, it’s hard to fit a proper boss fight into the cadence of your average dungeon crawl, which tend to have combat systems largely predicated around mob management, area control, and equipment load outs. Squeezing satisfying showdowns into the final few minutes of an exhausting tabletop session is a difficult design challenge. Many games have tried and failed (Legends Of Andor) and many other games don’t even bother to try (Mage Knight Board Game). Then there’s Aeon’s End, in which the boss fight is the system — and it’s awesome. Aeon’s End is one of the only recent tabletop experiences that understands that board games aren’t video games but still wants you to enjoy epic boss fights. Kingdom Death: Monster did emerge from the shadows first, but it covers way too much ground to be accurately described as a boss fight simulator.…
Today on “Decent, But Massively Overrated Cooperative Campaign Games” we have The 7th Continent. Real talk, it seems like all it takes these days to garner universal praise and shoot up the BGG rankings like an express elevator is a couple clever gimmicks and an expensive Kickstarter. It’s by no means terrible, but The 7th Continent is about as mixed a bag as I’ve ever seen. Interesting one minute, groan-worthy the next; constantly building anticipation, then clumsily deflating itself. It’s loaded with creativity and promise, but bloated by repetitive mechanisms, dumb puzzles, egregious admin, and terrible pacing. So many disparate ideas are crammed into the game alongside one another that it seems like whether or not they actually worked well together was secondary to sheer volume. And, like Gloomhaven beside it, the video game wannabe vibes here are off the charts. Alas, though I do agree there is a lot about The 7th Continent to be impressed by, it’s hard for me to be super enthusiastic about a game that every one of my experiences with has been more arduous than fun. In theory, The 7th Continent is a co-operative exploration/survival game. In practice, it feels more like a filing cabinet simulator. Reason being, the players must build the board of The 7th Continent as they play using hundreds and hundreds of numbered-and-color-coordinated cards that they must keep carefully organized with trays and dividers. And not just for the board, these cards are used for practically everything in this game: skills, items, health, experience points, random encounters, puzzles, you name it…
Sheriff Of Nottingham provides a serviceable bluffing experience that sadly fails to excite beyond its initial shallow thrill, which is a real shame because a game about border smuggling has instant classic written all over it. It’s a perfectly functional design insofar as none of its flaws are catastrophic or complete deal-breakers, but most of what the game actually is fails to take advantage of its exciting premise in any meaningful way. Its overall structure and cadence are routine and uninspired and claiming victory amounts to little more than boring set collection. For these reasons, Sheriff Of Nottingham operates in a strange middle-ground between tension and vacuity, struggling to be anything more than uniquely mediocre. Its momentary action can feel quite impactful at times and yet the total package feels dull. Maybe those seeking only a few solid “Gotcha!” moments will find this a fulfilling way to spend an hour or so, but asking for anything more memorable or flavorful than that will likely be answered by disappointment. In Sheriff Of Nottingham, players take turns acting as the titular officer while the others embody merchants attempting to bring goods of all kinds through the city gates to sell at their stands. In the center of the table is a massive face-down draw deck of “Goods Cards” and two face-up discard piles. Goods cards come in two forms: legal and contraband. Legal goods may be declared truthfully at the gates, but the only way to make any money off that sweet, sweet contraband is to…
Above And Below is an inoffensive game that gets by mostly on charm. Its few unique qualities (and they are few) are at best cute and at worst irrelevant. Nevertheless, there is an endearing auteur-like quality to the game due to it being entirely the product of Mr. One-Man Band Ryan Laukat — a game designer, illustrator, publisher, many-hat-wearing ultra-talent. Its whimsical art style, young adult fantasy theme, and storytelling elements are all clear constituents of a broader artistic vision, something rare and highly welcome to see in the board game space. But even so, Above And Below is really nothing special. I can think of no compelling argument in its favor that would elucidate its qualities in a way that gives it an edge against the dozens of equal or better games in its mechanical wheelhouse. In fact, its brief popularity has already been eclipsed by a sequel that came out a mere two years after: Near And Far. However, just because this is a game that may soon be sent adrift amongst the tides of time doesn’t mean it’s not a perfectly pleasant way to spend 60-90 minutes around the dining room table with a friend or two. No one would ever accuse Ryan Laukat of not doing his homework; he is very evidently a diligent student of modern game design. The mechanical net Above And Below casts is wide and varied, encapsulating an action point system, tableau-building, storytelling, and resource collection into a straightforward game about building villages and exploring caves. Each…