- One frustrating aspect of the game was the lack of a specified win-state. More clarity on how the game ends would allow more strategies to form. However, we were playing on a time-limit, so that could have affected how the game was played. Another frustrating aspect of the game were the start points. Your spawn depends on the dog you choose, so some players may end up clumped together while others will be separated. One problem I saw though were the lack of specific directions. For example, a card stating “Go back 2 spaces” is confusing because there is no sense of “forward” and “back”.
- I enjoyed the art of the game. I liked the “open-world” aspect of the game, where you can choose to go anywhere. I also liked the chance aspect of the cards you drew, which added a lot of world building to the game.
- I would have liked a better way to track point. Some of the cards force players to give up, or swap, houses (and their point values). The problem began when players forgot which house came from an alley or a road. This is important because points are doubled if houses come from the alley. I would either remove the “double points” rule, color the alleyway houses differently, or create a new way for players to track their houses.
- I would clarify some of the rules in the game. We always discarded cards after we drew them. However, cards often had lasting affects that we were unaware of, or worked retroactively. A rule that clarified that we should collect the cards we draw would clear some of the confusion. I would also add a way to force a direction for players.
- I enjoyed this relaxed style of board game. There were many moments of fun conflict between players because of the competition the cards forced.
- I would play Strays again. I really liked the theme of the game, and the idea of scouring the neighborhood to collect loyal followers (households). Our group got very territorial, which was the hidden intent of the game.
The Alleyway Pharmacy – Play-test
- Two frustrating aspects of the game was the slow pace and lack of player interactions. Even though players understood the game fundamentals, the game play often revolved around players deciding which action to take (and trying to figure out what each action did). I would commit to the idea of writing action descriptions on the cards themselves, and not coloring them so that they do not stand out. Another aspect of game play was the lack of sabotage. It did not feel like my actions affected other players very much. Moreover, the game was not very punishing.
- I loved the theme and irony of drug dealers selling food and being caught for selling candy. It was a creative theme, and I enjoyed seeing the subtle jokes each card had. I also enjoyed the hand and stash mechanic. It added a complex layer the game, where players must make commitments to selling their product and cannot undo their decision, allowing other players to pass candy into their stash.
- I wish for more opportunities to affect my opponents. While Steal, Snitch, and cards of that category did spice the game up slightly, I felt as though they had little to no affect on the game.
- I would make the card count depend on the number of players in the game.
- I really liked the layers of game play in The Alleyway Pharmacy. Players have a hand that they can view, and a stash that they cannot. Players must make the choice to risk being sabotaged when they decide to stash and sell their product.
- Yes. I would play The Alleyway Pharmacy again, with some tweaks, it could become a great well-rounded competitive game.
Deadline – Play test (Version 1)
- One frustrating aspect of the game was the lack of control over what cards were taken.
- I enjoyed collecting cards from others and getting a lucky break during a round. The high-risk, high-reward style of game play made the game easy to learn but difficult to master.
- I wished for more ways to affect my play. Discarding jokers is near impossible, almost always locking you into a situation where you lose points.
- I would tweak, or at least, reevaluate the way that points are calculated. Players are almost always trying for high cards (Jacks, Queens, Kings, etc.). Though this inherently makes getting runs/sets of high cards more dangerous, it does not balance out against the low value of the lowest cards. Three 2s will almost always be the worst hand to hold on to. I would balance some of the lower cards to keep up with higher sets/runs.
- I thought that mechanics were well designed. Rounds flowed into each other and the game play sped up as we understood the game more.
- I would really like to play Deadline again. As a person who enjoys card games, I think it blends a simple concept, a nice theme, and a high skill ceiling very well.
Tale Weavers – Play test (Version 1)
- One frustrating aspect of the game was trying to work within the strict scope of the cards provided. Many of them are extremely specific, meaning one must work really hard to spin the story of the card together. There were many instances of players changing the prompt so that the story fits better.
- Two events stuck out to me during game play. Reading the card prompts is quite funny, they’re witty and employ a dark or ironic style of humor. Many of the stories people created on the fly were very funny.
- I wanted a rule, similar to a house rule in Cards Against Humanity, where players can discard their entire hand and collect new cards to better match the prompt. It felt like my cards rarely aligned with the prompt.
- As mentioned before, I would remove some of the specific wording in some of the cards, and make them more vague.
- The mechanics are well thought out. Though I often struggled to flow my story cards together with the settings and characters, when they did align it made an incredible story.
- I would play this game again. It would make a nice party game for large groups of adults.
Broken Mime – Play test (Version 1)
- The most frustrating actions in Broken Mime was the inability to repeat actions done. Though the intent of this restriction is reasonable, it makes cards that depict specific actions difficult to re-enact.
- The charade’s style game play of Broken Mime lent to many funny moments. I also enjoyed the debate that happened after the card’s prompt was revealed.
- As mentioned before, some cards were incredibly specific, so it made not repeating actions difficult.
- I would add more clarity to some of the rules. For example, are players besides the participating two supposed to watch or look away?
- The charades mechanics work with the concept of Telephone well. Rounds often ended with hilarious debates of what the original card was.
“Quads” – Version 2 Rules
Introduction
Quads is a fast-paced card game that blends the style of Poker with the mechanics of Spoons. Players pass cards between themselves, aiming to collect a winning hand to bet on. After a timed card-passing phase, players bet on their hands for the chance to win the pot.
What you will need:
- 3-6 players
- 1 deck of cards that includes Jokers
- A 30 second timer
- Betting chips with least two different colors
Game Setup
- Shuffle the deck of cards. Remember to include the jokers.
- Pass 1 card to each player. The player with the highest card becomes the “Passer”, who will cards from the deck during the Passing Phase. If two players tie, repeat this process between the players who tied until a tiebreaker is reached. If a joker is drawn, discard it and draw another card.
- The winner chooses the direction for passing cards: clockwise or counterclockwise. All players must pass cards in that chosen direction. (If you’d like, you can alter the direction of play after every round)
- Deal a number of chips depending on the difficulty you choose to play the game:
- Easy: Deal 5 green chips and 6 red chips to each player (21 points to start)
- Normal: Deal 4 green chips and 3 red chips to each player (15 points to start)
- Hard: Deal 2 green chips and 6 red chips to each player (12 points to start)
Green chips will be counted as 3 points, and red chips will be counted as 1. Extra chips should be made accessible if players run out of certain chips, and wish to exchange for chips of an equivalent value. If new to the game, play the game with a Normal level of chips.
Hand Rankings
This game borrows the hand ranking system from Poker, but removes some of the winning hands. Familiarize yourself with the ranking of hands below. Players with the highest ranking hand will claim the pot, or all chips in play. In the event of a tie, players must split the pot evenly, regardless of any extra cards (unless you are playing the Advanced Edition). When ready, start the passing phase.
Here are some examples of the hands you should be looking for.
- Four-of-a-Kind (Quads) – 4 cards of the same number (all suits): (4♠,4♥,4♦,4♣)
- Straight Flush – 4 sequential cards of the same suit: (2♠,3♠,4♠,5♠)
- Three-of-a-Kind – 3 cards of the same number (regardless of suit): (3♣,3♥,3♠,1♥)
- Two Pair – 2 pairs of cards with the same number (regardless of suit: (6♥,6♦,8♣,8♠)
- Pair – A pair of cards that share the same number (regardless of suit): (7♦,7♠,2♦,6♦)
Passing phase
- Shuffle the deck and deal 4 cards to each player. Place the remaining cards in an accessible place, this will become the draw pile. If a player receives a joker, reshuffle the joker back into the draw pile.
- When ready, the Passer will begin by drawing a card and discarding a card in their chosen direction. The player who received the card from the passer must collect the card and discard a card in the direction of the passer.
- When the last player in the cycle receives a card, they must discard a card in a pile adjacent to the draw pile. You should maintain a hand of 4 cards at all times.
- At any point during this process, players can “lock-in” their hand by placing their cards face-down and announcing it to the table. Locked-in players can no longer receive or discard cards. Players must pass around the locked-in player, and can draw if the previous passer locks-in.
- Continue this process until the first player locks in, or a Joker is drawn. If a Joker is drawn, the passing phase ends immediately.
- The first player to lock-in starts a 30-second timer, in which all other players must lock-in their hands. When all but one player lock-in their hand, the passing phase ends immediately.
- Players who are holding more than 4 cards by the end of the Passing Phase are disqualified from the betting phase.
Betting Phase
Once the Passing Phase ends, all players (that are not disqualified) enter the betting phase. Given their current hand, players can choose to:
- Bet High – Place one green chip worth 3 points.
- Bet Low – Place one red chip worth 1 point
- Fold – Place your hand face down and disqualify yourself, making no bet.
The player who is locked-in first must start the betting phase, and the order of betting will follow the order of passing. After all decisions have been made, players enter the Reveal Phase.
Reveal Phase
Once the Betting Phase ends, all betting players must reveal their hand to the table. The player with the highest ranking hand will take the entire pot, or chips in play. If two players tie, and no other hand outranks them, they must split the pot as evenly as possible. Exchange chips if needed. If all players but one fold, the winner can take the pot uncontested and do not need to reveal their cards (It would make the game funnier if they did though). Players who run out of chips are eliminated from the game.
Collect the cards, shuffle the deck, then restart the Passing Phase. Continue until a Win Condition is reached.
Win conditions
Players can decide a winner using points, number of rounds, disqualification, or some mixture of the 3. Here’s some standard examples to provide a framework, but feel free to create your own:
- After 5/10/15 rounds, count the value of the chips. The player with the highest number of points wins.
- Given the number of points each player starts with, set a winning number of points players must reach to win.
- The last player to be disqualified wins the game.
Advanced Edition (Optional Rules): Read if you’ve played Quads enough
If you’ve played enough Quads to understand the game, and want more of a challenge, feel free to add some bonus rules:
- No betting limit: Players can bet as many or little points as desired (be sure to adjust the points/starting chips to account for this)
- Add more winning hands to the game
- Straight – Any hand of cards that progress in numerical order, regardless of suit
- High Card – If two players tie with the same hand rank, the player with the highest unmatched card wins the pot.
- Add 1-2 more decks to the original to increase variety
- Expand the hand limit from 4 to 5
- Play with more players (alter time and decks for extra players)
5 Games that involve collecting – Bryce Mathews
[Game name] is a [category of] game in which [the players or their avatars] [do or compete or collaborate for some goal] by [using tools the game provides them].
“Scrapworld” is a board game in which players act as robots that compete to be the only settlement standing using the scrap they collect in the wasteland.
“Ghostly Gather” is a board game in which a paranormal investigator must collect as many haunted items possible, and escape, before being haunted, using the tools in their arsenal and the items they collect.
“Shuffled” is a memory-based card game in which players compete to build the largest deck of cards by memorizing and matching cards.
“Sheltered” is a card game in which survivors in a zombie apocalypse must collaborate to fortify their base and survive the waves of zombie attacks by using the items they collect.
“Quads” is a card game where players compete to have the highest poker hand by collecting cards and bluffing other players.
Game Review – King of Tokyo – Bryce Mathews
I found King of Tokyo pretty fun to play. The art was flashy and creative, and the game play was very unique.
Players had to trade damage and play “King of the Hill” for Tokyo City to gain points and win either by score or attrition.
King of Tokyo was simple to learn. The dice rolling, health, score, and battle mechanics made sense.
I believe that the energy system was nearly useless. There were not enough opportunities to gain enough energy to buy the cards necessary for a leg-up. You are mostly focusing on healing, fighting, collecting score, or a mixture of the three. Energy felt like an unpolished mechanic beside the other systems.
What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played?
I enjoyed the dice-rolling aspect of the game. Determining your next action based on how lucky you are is always slightly annoying, but the re-rolling allowed players to recover from bad luck.
I wanted more energy to buy items. However, I felt too preoccupied with keeping enough health and damaging my opponents enough to force them out of the center.
I would make the energy economy less demanding, allowing players to come across energy more often. Less than 5 cards were bought during our game.
No. Even though I enjoyed the art and concept of the game. I did not believe that the mechanics were fully used or tuned to make the game enjoyable to play.
In the first act, players develop their initial strategy. A few players rushed to the center and tried to hold on to it as much as possible. Other players held back and were able to out heal the damage and collect energy. In the second act, exchanges of control over the center happened more often, and players may start using items to get ahead. In the final act, players gather enough points, either by fighting or using cards, to win.
There was little collaboration in the game. Due to the fighting mechanics, players cannot choose who they strike and the damage is divided into “In Tokyo” and “Outside of Tokyo”. The game is a free-for-all with very little ways or reasons to work together.
I believe that the overall metaphor is “King of the Hill”. Players must work against each other to hold a piece of territory for the longest time, all while preventing others from reaching it. This “there can only be one” style of game is unlike other games played in this class.
Game Review: Citadels – Bryce Mathews
I found Citadels to be a uniquely fun game that relies on player interaction in a way unlike any other cardboard game I have played so far. The game play loop encourages hiding your strategy while constantly changing it to remain elusive from other player’s.
After players understood the game. IT became clear that, to win, offensive attacks were required to prevent others from gaining a lead. Before, players would seek the character cards that allowed them to build more, or gain more wealth. Later on in the game, players picked cards that harmed others more often.
Citadels was one of the harder games to technically understand. Learning its flow, and the intricate set of steps needed was slightly frustrating, especially because the game often failed to justify why we needed to perform these actions initially.
To me, the most frustrating aspect of the game was learning it. I believe that the game did not fully explain its mechanics well to new players. We spent a significant amount of time trying to understand what cards meant, and how the round was supposed to start. We also complained, as mentioned before, that the game did not explain the reason as to why things happened the way they did. The sense of discovery finding out what the game’s intentions were was satisfying, but it took us a while to get there.
My favorite aspect about playing the game was trying to fool other players into assassinating cards they believed I had. I drew a different character card, because I knew that I would be targeted if I picked a king. I was able to fool the assassin into targeting the wrong person, allowing me to stay ahead.
I wanted a purple character card in the original deck of characters. Since there are no purple cards in the standard character deck, and the cost of purple cards are high, it did not feel worth the effort sometimes. I would also add more cards that benefit players regardless of their character.
I would add more fun characteristics to many of the character cards. It did feel as though players only picked 4 of the 8 cards we had.
Yes. Citadels offers a unique pseudo-role based experience unlike many other games that I have played. The strategies that people develop in the endgame pit them against each other nicely.
The first act is centered around the initial setup and the first round. Players understand the basics and pick whichever card they think is best, usually a Merchant, Bishop, or King. In the mid game, players have around half the cards needed to win, so players must choose to play defensively or offensively (depending on the character cards they get). In the end game, players attack and sabotage more often in the race to the end.
There was little collaboration in our game. We did not feel as though players could successfully collaborate much beyond choosing to attack one player over another. There were many competitive aspects, however. The role-based system allows players to use their own means to succeed, and players are called in a specific order to prioritize players who take offensive actions first.
In my opinion, the highlight of this game is the dynamic turn order. Players do not proceed in any set fashion, but are called to act by the “king” of the round. The character you chose determines your sequence. This means that players can study the cards drawn and deduce who they think their opponents are, and act accordingly. I used this method to discover a hidden Warlord and steal their resources. The game rewards players who take risks and play offensively. The game’s metaphor describes the unique roles everyone plays to build an empire.
5 Themed Game Ideas (Ghosts)
I decided that my theme will be Ghosts.
- “The Haunt” is a board game in which players must compete to posses a human and escape a house of trapped souls using strategies to learn their victim’s identity.
- “Ghost hunters” is a card game where players must evade capture by world renowned ghost hunters using the tools they come across to win.
- “Spirit’s Revenge” is a collaborative board game where players collaborate to hunt down a mysterious and elusive spirit using the clues found around the location.
- “Battle of the Boos” is a strategy game where players compete to be the head of the house using the clues of this opponents identities.
- “Ghost Stories” is a card game where players must compete by building the best ghost story using the cards they draw and pass to others.
Game Review: Dominion – Bryce Mathews
From the little that I played, Dominion looked to be a promising game with lots of ramp-up time and skill expression. There were so many ways to play the game and therefore many options different strategies to come out on top.
Dominion has a somewhat complex learning curve, due to the way that cards are drawn and played. It took our group about 10 minutes to learn, but that was because we had an experienced player teaching us the rules.
The most frustrating aspect of the game was learning the draw, reshuffle, and discard procedure. On paper it seems simple, but it is complex to an inexperienced player. I have not played a card game where your discarded cards become the cause of your actions next turn.
My favorite moment, from the little I played, was looking over the possible actions I can take. Dominion leaves a lot in the players hand, and gives them so many tools to work with. I enjoy games with lots of expression in them.
I found myself able to do anything. I am unable to describe anything I couldn’t do.
I did not play enough of the game to find flaws. I will say that the game is very overwhelming initially, making it hard to come up with a strategy. I would add more pacing to the game, either by gating certain cards or encouraging simpler strategies to build off of.
I would like to play Dominion again. I’d like to experience the game in full to see how complex the game gets at the end.
The first act would probably be the longest. The start of the game and subsequent ramp up has players understanding the game and developing their initial strategy, up until players feel confident enough to buy land or attack others. The second act would stat when players focus more laterally than vertically, either by attacking, defending, or working towards buying the most estates or amassing the most wealth. The second act flows smoothly until the final act, where new cards begin to run thin.
There are many ways to compete with opponents in Dominion, but there’s one single factor that determines victory. Many players will adopt different strategies like collecting wealth, attacking others, or playing multiple actions to maximize turns. In the end, the player with the most land cards will win the game.
I believe that the general metaphor of Dominion is empire building. You act as a king who must do whatever necessary to build their dominion. I believe that the vastness of avenues to build your kingdom is what makes Dominion stand out. Like in real life, kingdoms needed to build wealth, gain territory, and secure themselves against adversaries.
Game Review: Splendor – Bryce Mathews
I had a lot of fun playing Splendor. It was an extremely unique game play experience that I had not previously experienced.
Players formulated strategies, multiple turns in advance, lining up a series of purchases. It was common to hear another player’s sigh as you buy the card they hoped for.
The game did not take long to learn, only about 10 minutes.
One of the most frustrating aspects of the game was the coin and card limit. I understand the limitation to encourage players to make more purchases, but I saw players hoarding a lot.
I had fun winning by a landslide through the automatic noble acquisition (if you have the cards, you automatically receive a noble).
Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t?
We made the mistake of thinking that the number representing “prestige” on the card meant that you received 2 or three gems for the price of one card. After reading the rules, we realized that it was impossible.
I would add more money to the overall “economy”. I understand that the money limit is to force players to make purchases and not hoard, having more money to play around with would make games more technically complex.
Yes, I would play Splendor again. It offered a unique competitive experience in which players are always wondering if they’re the only person vying for the card they need.
The first act starts slow, as players are amassing wealth and trying to understand the game. Usually, an initial strategy forms, buy cheap cards in order to have enough to cover a more expensive one.
The game had many competitive aspects. We all shared the same coins, so we were forced to contribute to the economy while shutting others out. I often bought cards that my opponent were looking for to force them to revise their strategy.
The metaphor is similar to monopoly, which is capitalism. Strategic investments allows you to win in the long run.
5 Game Ideas involving Collaboration – Bryce Mathews
- “Summit” is a board game in which players work collaborate to reach the summit of a mountain by using climbing equipment and overcoming challenges.
- “Antivirus” is a computer-themed board game where players must work together to identify, and remove a rogue virus using clues, roles, and strategy.
- “Frostbite” is an apocalyptic board game where the Earth has frozen over. Players must adapt, befriend, or betray their way to the oasis, the only remaining location on earth fitting for humanity by using their skills, resources, and friends.
- “The House” is a horror themed board game where players must work together escape a decrepit house filled with unseen horrors by using their surroundings, pickups along the way, and their survival instincts.
- “Anarchy” is a political board game in which factions must compete for political power in what’s left of the city of “Petora”, using movements, information control, and, sometimes, whatever means are necessary to win.
Game Review: Forbidden Island – Bryce Mathews
Was it fun?
After playing Pandemic, I was able to understand the vision of Forbidden Island more, and found it fun to play.
What were the player interactions?
Our group adapted pretty quickly and were able to focus on using each other’s abilities to move around the board and collect the treasures.
How long did it take to learn?
The learning curve was not long at all. That was because we had played Pandemic, which has a similar turn cycle.
What was the most frustrating moment or aspect of what you just played?
I am not sure if it was because we set the game too easy, or luck, but we had pretty much collected all the necessary treasures before the flood cards were drawn.
What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played?
I did like the stakes of the game. The idea that the island is flooding and sinking below us as we move made the game immersive and the stakes higher.
Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t?
I wanted to move diagonally, but we found out that only certain roles can move.
If you had a magic wand to wave, and you could change, add, or remove anything
from the experience, what would it be?
I would add more spaces, and maybe more treasures. It could be my bias coming straight from Pandemic, but the play-space felt small. It did not take many moves to reach each others or the treasures’ locations.
Is this a game you would play again? Yes _____ No ______ Why
I would like to play this game. I not only to finish it, but see how difficult the game can be.
Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.
The first act would be first setting on the island and familiarizing ourselves with our roles and capabilities. Since the spawns are random, we plan ahead and make moves to each other to swap cards. The middle act involves us moving to the treasure locations, shoring up flooded areas as we went. The final act would be attempting to reach the helicopter before the island flooded and sank (we did not get to that part yet).
What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?
Much like Pandemic, Forbidden Island has a large win and lose state. The goal is to collect all treasures and make it off the island safely. If we do not escape before the island floods and sinks, we lose. We were forced to collaborate to combine our roles’ skillets. Like pandemic, we did not compete with each other much.
What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout?
I believe that Forbidden Island had a similar mechanic to Pandemic: that working together often gets things done quicker. It would be difficult to collect the cards needed for each treasure individually, so the game incentivizes you to work together.
Game Review: Pandemic – Bryce Mathews
Was it fun?
After understanding the flow of the game and its primary objective, the game was incredibly fun to play.
What were the player interactions?
Instead of working against each other, players had to strategize and plan their next moves carefully. Our group found ourselves planning, then splitting up to handle different infected regions of the world.
How long did it take to learn?
It took a good 15-20 minutes to understand the multiple actions, card interactions, and how each piece of the board affects the game.
What was the most frustrating moment or aspect of what you just played?
Even though we accidentally set ourselves on a n easier difficulty, it felt as though there was little stakes after a certain point. I never felt as though a loss was right around the corner (unless people made unwise decisions).
What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played?
My favorite aspect of the game play was collaborating with team members to divide and contour the board efficiently and handle the new outbreaks efficiently.
Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t?
No. The game felt balanced and intuitive after understanding the game’s mechanics and objectives. I enjoyed the experience overall.
If you had a magic wand to wave, and you could change, add, or remove anything
from the experience, what would it be?
I would add more randomness to the game, something that different versions of Pandemic already did.
Is this a game you would play again? Yes _____ No ______ Why
Yes. I found the need for collaboration to be a breath of fresh air. I have played few table-top games where players actually benefited from working together. I also found the setting, the art, and the overall stakes of the game very fun.
Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.
The first act is the initial start and outbreak. Players find out what needs to be done and usually go to the most infected cities to curb the spread. In the second act, at least one epidemic card has been drawn, and players quickly change course to deal with the new outbreaks that have occurred, all while dividing tasks between themselves. In the final act, players either collaborate successfully and cure all diseases, or fail to stop them in time.
What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?
The most collaborative aspect was the role system. Differences in roles and their bonuses made players rely on each other for certain tasks. Some players could cure diseases more effectively, while others made it easy to travel to infected areas for quicker cures. Learning how we all could help each other out and executing the plan was a satisfying moment. We felt little need to compete, and it was stated in the rules that we were better of working together.
What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout?
I believe that the game’s metaphor is one of people coming together to stop threats bigger than themselves. There was no way that players could win the game alone, or by working against each other. Each player had to use each other’s locations (city cards drawn), and specialist roles (which gave bonuses) to make an effective plan before the diseases spread too much.