The 'Boardgame Golden Age' keeps going ... and a couple of thoughts why that may be...
- Thread starter Addendum_Forthcoming
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Phoenixmgs said:
I will say this, at least it tried? I played it once but I feel like it doesn't really do anything as good as Mage Knight. Fallout tBG feels like one of those games that you could probably like in one or atbest two playersituations, butI feel like the Chvatil classic just kind of outclasses it in everyway. Which is a shame. I wanted to like it, but after basically stumbling over the same four hexes for a hour and just utterly failing because dice and a combination of not knowing what I'm actually really supposed to do in the cluster of mess. There's just so many good quality adventure rpg board games out there. And even the price tag isn't that appealing, even though admittedly youget a good amount of content in there. Like 60USD ...
Like compare it to Grimslingers. Yeah, completely different game ... but if all you're doing is predominantly buying it for the theme of an adventure with rpg mechanics... there's better options out there. Grimslingers is half the price and it's pretty good solo and with a small group of players.
Terra Mystica is pretty simple, but there is a calm and methodical appeal to it I find but yeah, I can see that happening. Agricola provides a little more stress and stimulation... the only problem I find with games like Agricula is that you're effectively playing two board games. But I'll reserve that commentary for why I just felt lost with Trajan... Not tosay I think Agricola isbad, I liked Agricola ... it's nice to just build a thing ...
Haven't played Caverna, so would you suggest it if you already have people who know Agricola andare already comfortable with Agricola?
As for the internet, that is certainly a valid critique. Then again on the flipside it took us forever to get into the online 'backing scene'. Where people and artists with a good concept of a game could just say; "Hey look, we don't want to get a bank loan with interest. Instead we'd rather get a 0% interest loan in exchange for future copies ... you interested in these mechanics? With x money you will get y stuff."
Which works perfectly for what is fundamental a physical property. Something that you'll actually get in your hands and quite literally drop on a table.
Ahhh, nvm ... uness you really, really dig bluffing, a little randomization, and player coflict, and various other mechanics in tandem with the stock standard Dominion style game... you won't like Arctic Scavengers.
I ... yeah? Okay, coming into this a bit hard I just found myself a little bit lost to be honest. Effectively the person that tried to teach me Trajan treated it as if I was playing two different board games. And I get why he was doing it. I think it's a game youneed to treat as a job to be good at. Like corresponding Trajan tiles with your 'cala movement, to score VP if you perform that action, so you're calculating how to do that and ... well and it might take you you two or three turns for that scoring plan to come to fruition and you get.... 6 more VP you otherwise wouldn't get.
And that's just one thing with a corresponding board plan with a complex little future planning, ontop of that watching how someone else used their 'cala tokens, to the5 different minigames going on above.
And the thing is it's one of those situations where if you're new or not 100% with it, you're merely reactive ... and if you're merely reactive you'll get gutted. And it's one of those games you just know someone will have likely won by the second quarter.
And you combine this with effectively the means of someone who islearning the game moving at a reduced tracker speed, whereas someone familiar with it blitzing ahead and then speeding up the tracker progress on top to quantify and magnify the impossibility of you even pretending to be able to make a comeback, it's like a licence to destroy people.
You end up in a situation where you're haemorrhaging VP just because you need that one extra turn but, nope ... they knew that as well, so you don't get it.
It reminds me of Seasons if you've played it. I like that game because at least the time passage is democratic, and you can hate draft that dice.
And that's ... look, if you're familiar with a board game you'll probably win. But at least the other person feels like if they were merely more familiar with the game they could have won ... with Trajan, you get destroyed if you don't know what you're really doing ... and you're not sure if it's because you're stupid or simply still trying to get to grips with the game.
If you have a new player in your 4 player group ... they're just going to sit there being destroyed. And always getting less VP than other players. Always never making the most of the Trajan tiles, they will be the last people to send ships out... at best the only bit of the gamethey will feel like they have power over is the 'cala bits and the round tracker. Even then, both the former and the later, they still won'tfeel like they did anything good enough. They never once felt capable of a brilliant play even in the midst of so many failures to eke out every VP.
And that's an awful feeling. At least with games like Archipelago there's bickering, and alliances they can make, and because of the hidden roles/win conditions they might have definite win conditions they feel they could have made if only they had just a little bit more leeway. It's a legitimate tactic in Archipelago to simply build stuff so you're not the last person with the least of that thing everyone else seems to have built. That's a legitimate tactic. You still won't likely win, but you may still challenge someone to up their game, or concentrate on things they didn't want to have to.
This is one of the things I actually like about a bit of conflict. As the aforementioned Seasons, there are opportunities for a new player to get in your way. To earn a bucket load of crystals... or by truly denying you yours... which is similarly victorious in its own way.
That's when a player feels some form of control.
And Season's 'randomness' of the dice isn't actually as bad as Trajan's commodities deck. So I feel like in a way it's a better type of Trajan than Trajan will ever allow players of mixed experience to actually get to grips with. And the artwork is glorious, everything is colourful and fun, and you have more direct control over all of your stuff to build your very blatant engine. And you can easily explain it to another player.
So they always feel involved, and feel like they're a part of the game, and that no one can just ignore them, and that they actually contribute by their own power to the gamestate. And that's surely what every new gamer should get to feel, right? They'll still lose, but they'll know exactly why and they might even win next time, which means you can never truly discount them. And they'll always be a thorn and they'll always be directly involved.
Trajan ... the first time you play it, it merely calls you a fucking idiot. And you're never sure when as a new player where exactly you could have been more efficient. Sure, you can say; "I'll be the first person to put a legionnaire up here...." But that would never have earnt you enough VP to win, anyways.
And there's like, 4 or 5 other minigames you have to play, plus your board on top of it, and everybody else is looking at everybody's other boards, and it feels like you're a sacrificial lamb at the table and the best you can do is merely get in way somehow ... or just singularly fixate at your own gamestate and still lose because you haven't actually been watching how other people manage their boards and learning how they playtheir game from them and guesstimating what they're going to do next.
I feel like Trajan is a game you play with everybody who just loves Trajan ... putting it simply.
As I was saying before; "I want to be better at Trajan. I feel like I should. But I know I won't be."
That's basically as best as I know how to sum it up as. Trajan is calling me stupid, and I feel like I should prove it wrong, but I don't know where to start to competitively play it at a level where I can legitimately challenge people who are good at it. And you know, that's fair. I've met chess players who have removed their queen and still beaten me. But then again, Fischer-timed chess doesn't take 2 hours to play. And I feel like I know I can get better if I keep playing. I will force that player to play with their queen, and I did.
And that's a victory even if I lost. I forced them to up their game. I didn't get that playing Trajan. Which is problematic to me... and I get that sort of hard euro style game does tickle someone's fancies (like your friend) ... but for me, I kind of want the licence to just attempt to stop someone if I think they're getting too far ahead.
--------------
Waterdeep + PvE fights sounds like fun. And if there is a level of randomness in fights, that expansion sounds like a good way of mitigating the pain of a bad roll, I suppose? Yeah, colour me interested. This Saturday I'll ask if anybody has a copy.
Its just people playing games together at a table and then going 'What other games can we play together at a table'Addendum_Forthcoming said:
Last sunday when I went to play with my group, we ended up stopping for reasons and instead went and played some co-op video games, not because those games where like DnD, but because those games we could play together in the same room.
Though plenty of boardgames are more alike DnD too in some form, Red Dragon Inn definately appeals to DnD players, for example.
Perhaps? I know some players in our group like tabletop rpgs. ButI'm going to be honest, the only campaign I'm currentlyinvolved in is a Roleplaying is Magic 3E campaign. Which is fun, but thegrand majority of board gamers I know aren't into tabletop rpgs predominantly because they have a higher buy in limit.Saelune said:
Like, Gloomhaven is popular in our group in terms ofdungeon crawlers precisely because it's amazing ...but secondly because players can drop in and out if their schedule is a bit tight. The game totally takes that into account. It doesn't really matter. There's a story behind the scenarios, as well as global world changes to shop prices through prosperity, to what you can do like unlocking the means to modify your ability cards. But it doesn't really matter so much.
You don't need a GM, and the difficulty rating of the scenario is customized by number ofplayers, and a table that is basically sum of character levels / no. of players / 2 rounded up. The number of enemies and their type is portrayed in the scenario with a colour andbar system as well as their position on theboard corresponding to the number of players.
The problem is with tabletop rpgs, you have to have a really regular group. Particularly at the 4 PC mark. One of our current players in our RiM 3E game is spotty, but we have a 5 PC group so it's not such big a deal. But I have to admit it's kind of annoying when they as a contractor with basically not knowing they have work often until the last minute writing to our skype group; "Soz, can't make it"... when the GM was likely planning something around their character for that session or basically they're tossing an item at us clearly designed to be related to that PC, whether in abilities or its background lore, and they're not there to take of advantage of it in terms of it over the sesh.
One of the reasons why I really, really love playing a bard in 3.5 (favourite class) is I often make social+ characters, buff heavy.
My favourite and stupidly OP stuff was entirely roleplaying basically being a pop princess superstar with amagical light mace thatI enchanted to allow me to use 'Amplify' whenever I want. Effectively inventing a magical microphone I could still beat people to death with.
So basically every town I went to I pulled out every charisma and Perform boosting shenanigans I could, with magical light shows, and 2,000 gp+ hyper expensive outfits I wore both adventuring and in towns. Armour is for wusses, hyperstylized magical clothing with perma Prestidigitation so you never get dirty and always smell like roses is where it's at. With promotional music video-style illusion spells that I could change of the fly and cast seamlessly with my musical performances with the Melodic Casting feat. I was the party's social monkey galore, whose goal in their life was basically to became the most famous 'celebrity adventurer' to ever live.
Shiniest outfits to stick out (on town, road, or dungeon), get Leadership feat to have stage building crew, some orchestral movements, make up artists, stylists, and to help me move my wardrobe.
Bringing love, happiness, and good vibes wherever I went.
And the reason why I played those characters originally was precisely because my schedule was a bit spotty... I can't expect the GM to roleplay on my behalf, and if the party was in combat--if I couldn't go I made my combat actions as simple as possible.
Badge of Valor + Vest of Legends + Inspirational Boost + Inspire Courage + move out of harm's way = my first turn. Every other turn = counterspelling prep.
Not only that, all my character goals were was;
A: Become famous.
B: Be a heroine.
C: Become even more famous.
Hell, I still remember my build. Fun as all hell. We were a Warblade, Rogue blend, Druid/warshaper, Cleric, and me ... I went with a Bard/Human Paragon/Virtuoso/Sublime Chord build.
Great build. Always played some variation of it.
Still less than ideal despite making such a character that could so easily 'fall in' and 'fall out' of participation.
Board gaming is easier than that and requires a lower dedication time. They like that idea they can play a game of Netrunner over their lunchbreak. Or that a board game is self-contained, and completable without too much to worry about.
It's been so long since I played Agricola that I remember very little about it other than I played some other farming game like 2 weeks after (which I have no clue the name of) that was better. Caverna is kinda like 2 board games in one where you have mining and farming half where you basically focus on one but still have to do just a bit of the other to fill-in your board. There's really only 2 playstyles in Caverna. Then it has this whole slew of costly buildings to build that all do something slightly different so every player has to read though what each one does. There's a lot of breadth but not much depth IMO. I far prefer A Feast for Odin over Caverna as it sorta does the same thing but much better. You have an objective but you're given full freedom to accomplish it instead of just winning because less players choose your path to victory like in Caverna (which is how I won both times I played because I went farming and no one else did).Addendum_Forthcoming said:
---
I won Trajan the first time playing but I don't think anyone in the group is like a "pro" Trajan player. You sorta just do the same thing every game where you try to pick 2 of 4 main scoring actions and you min/max on those while doing a different action here or there to fix up your movement cubes while getting something you need anyway like a new trajan or one of the demands you're short. I remember I won my 1st game just maxing out the pickaxe thing collecting 4 of the same tile and also 3 of a different tile for big endgame points. Last game I played, I won going heavy on cards. I'm actually known in the group for winning the 1st time I play a game because I look to min/max and focus on 1 or 2 things as I obviously don't know the game well and many games lend themselves to that strategy.
I just played Seasons for the 1st time a few weeks back. I didn't do so well because how you have to sorta make a deck before you start playing the game and I didn't quite get how it was all going to work out obviously when making the deck. I got dealt this card that allowed me to discard 3 cards for 15 points so with my min/max mentality and I kinda just did that all game and ended up with like 3 cards in play at the end of the game. I was winning at the end but I had like no endgame points and everyone ended up passing me. I'm thinking Seasons is more a "fun" game vs something you'd want to master just because there's a lot of chaotic-ness to it where there's so many sorta broken combinations of cards, which seems like the point of the game. I'd definitely look to play it again for sure.
Monopoly is kind of intentionally terrible though. It's meant to be an illustration of the flaws of capitalism,[footnote]This isn't a joke. The woman who invented it was a Georgist, and made it as an educational/propaganda tool to illustrate the detrimental effects of private land ownership.[/footnote] But unfortunately people seem to have got the wrong idea that it's actually a real game rather than an intentionally unfair luck based game in which the winner is usually decided early and the game just drags on into a boring and meticulous exercise in one player ruining everyone else's fun.CaitSeith said:
But compare it to Scrabble, created at around the same time. Scrabble is still perfectly playable, and would probably do fine if it were released today. Chinese checkers is even older, and is perfectly servicable. Stratego still sees tournament level play too. Then there are games like Fief (originally released in 1981, and still being re-released today). Much as I intensely dislike Risk as a game, it was also the basis for the first legacy game (Risk Legacy).
The reason new board games can be more complex and yet still accessible, I think, is in large part because they tend to be less abstract. Abstract games have an inherent problem in that the rules are essentially arbitrary. This makes it difficult for new players to grasp more complex rules, so abstract games tend to be simple. Thematic games can use the theme to provide a mnemonic aid to the rules, because it makes sense that things work a certain way. If your pieces represent people rather than abstract shapes or colours, then it makes sense that they can do some things people can do. If a game has money, then it makes sense that it works like real money.
In this sense, I think things like roleplaying, collectible/expandable card games, and tabletop wargaming really benefited the development of board games, by showing how complex rules could be explained easily through a thematic lens.
The downside is that thematic games have to be carefully designed so that mechanics and theme support each other, otherwise you end up with The Cones of Dunshire.
I'll ask our group tonight. Check out Feast for Odin. I've heard it's good but haven't had the honour.Phoenixmgs said:
I got about 130... but the closest I got to another player was 35 points. The problem is I don't know whether that was good or not. I tested a bit with shipping and trying to race down the senate track.
Seasons is kind of like that, yeah. But I love it. A pseudo deaft is great and the engines you can build are just wonderful and take strategic thought. I prefer because there is a level of long term strategy. That and there is actual conflict and you have to be mindful of the engine the other players are creating.
Plus I feel the dice-time mechanics allow... see I feel like Trajan tries to create that similarly effect of people having some control over time... but with Seasons, it's democratic. Do you or do you not hate-draft that dice to buy time? Will someone else take that dice? Do you need to cling to this season a little longer to transmute energy into the most crystals?
I think there's more going on with Seasons than Trajan, tbh... and because it's easier to teach, and people automatically can tell how another player is winning, and even intuitively getting a chance to throw a wrench into that .... that was immediately satisfying to me.
Plus the off chances of being able to directly interfere with another's gamestate means you don't get destroyed even if you're new to it. After playing it I just wanted to buy it and the expansions and show it to another person.
And some of the card art is fucking adorable. It helps when a game is vibrant, colourful and bursting with visual energy if you're just going to stare at it and plot out your turn.
That's true. And there are games almost as old as Fief that are arguably more successful and even smarter that have influenced modern gaming with group favourites like Resistance. And that is Ultimate Werewolf.evilthecat said:
However abstract games are doing kind of well, though. Tash-Kalar which is a delicious puzzle-conflict game that is selling well.
There are pseudo abstract head to heads if we're taking the loosest definition of abstract to mean purely asymmetrical gameplay. Like Android: Netrunner. Being any good at Netrunner means learning how to play two very differeng games. So even in the head to head genre, with heavy thematic games, there's a new energy to the board gaming scene over the last decade that wouldn't have ever survived against something like Magic in the past.
Which is sad because Magic is stupid, and Netrunner, 1st or 2nd, was/is infinitely superior.
Abstract games are even doing well. Just, you know... I wouldn't begin with them if wanting to introduce someone to the hobby.
Last game of Trajan I played, I scored 132 [https://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/245363/nwibga-game-night-monday-august-20-2018].Addendum_Forthcoming said:
There's definitely more going on in Seasons. Trajan isn't very complex, it's just one of those games you'll get more efficient playing and that's about it.
Yeah... I guess. I'll give it another shot I suppose? I still think it wouldn't be the Euro to introduce players to Eurogames.Phoenixmgs said:
Probably not, it's pretty bland. Probably a rather basic worker placement game like Waterdeep, Champions of Midgard. Probably something with a theme that's interesting mainly, who actually gets excited over something like Stone Age? Whereas making bombs with Manhattan Project would probably get people sorta into it on theme alone.Addendum_Forthcoming said:
Someone offered to introduce me to Champions of Midgard Friday night, but what they were telling me about it at the pub yesterday I'm kind of excited. Apparently it will be him, his roommate and me ... and he has the expansions of it and said it's newbie friendly as a first game inclusion. So that's already a positive for me. So that should be fun. I looked up videos of it in play and I think I have the basics down.Phoenixmgs said:
I got one person into board games with Karmaka. Or a light Euro like Splendor. I find card games with good art is a great step and Karmaka is gorgeous and easy, and Splendor is at least colourful with some tactility to it with the chips. Either that or inviting them to a Resistance: Avalon game (which I class as Euro-lite if only because it's all skill and utterly abstracted from its theme, and is less luck based compared to its Wolf sibling given the smaller maximum playgroup and no player elimination). All they really have to understand is their role, given so often people are explaining (lying) about their justifications why someone may or may not be who they accuse/assume them to be ... and by dint of that they just learn the nuances through that emerging dialogue and gamestate.
Plus the after game chatter is amazing and you see everything click behind their eyes.
It can also be incredibly empowering to them if they're new to it when they don't actually select themselves to participate on a quest.
Like in the back of your head (if you're not Merlin/etc or a Minion, etc) is already screaming; "Suss! SUSS!" But because they're new to the game you're also thinking like; "Hrmmmmm ... it might be that they're just new to the game and being diplomatic about those aspersions cast against them before..."
And honestly, if they pick up on why you almost never, ever not select yourself to go on a quest ... they can just use that to their advantage if everyone else thinks they're just new to the game and made a rookie error to muddy the waters of their near definite guilt or perhaps suspicions they are in fact Merlin (if it's not the last quest). Like if they've been a bit too chatty and flung some shit a little too early ...
And that's the great thing about the Resistance games as an introduction to the hobby. Because even if they make mistakes no veteran player would make, a part of your brain is like; "Well, they're new." And if it turns out that they picked up on these dynamics as the rest of you have been flinging shit and accusing eachother ... then they can even use those assumptions of others to their benefit. Turns out they were a Minion all along and just wanted some of us to think they were Merlin or Percival.
And the great thing about that is the real Merlin then has to suddenly accuse a newbie to the game that they're actually playing the rest of their team for fools. Which is problematic for them ... because even if you have a 'trusted' knight at the table that people more or less vouch for, they may misuse their LotL.
And it's great... A newbie that can pull off that level of chicanery, they'll instantly love it. And they often can. Never had the words; "So Merlin is the guy we have to protect?..." from a supposedly absentminded newbie, delivering it with a perfect faux confusion at the start, sow such visceral mistrust and infighting mid-game.
All the worst elements of human nature come screaming out of everyone's mouth-barrel. Distrust, cynicism, raw competitiveness, manipulation---argh. Your friends are utter bastards and you are, too. It's therapeutic, and you'll all laugh at the end.
It's a great 'equalizer' game, I reckon. Guaranteed that newbie player will have a bucket of fun by the end. It's like injecting some epic level confusion and chaos if it's just been your group playing it every month or two.
There's a reason I advertized Resistance: Avalon in my OP, as I still think it's one of the best, proper, hard introductions to board games once someone wants to play something bigger and more chaotic than a 3 or 4 player game.
Social games or easy 'pocket' games you can pull out and explain in 5 minute are usually my go-to, however ... I still carry around a copy of Karmaka in my trolley bag if someone wants a quick pub game during lunch break. I just love it. Not the greatest game, but so simple and easy. And the card art.... it's just lovely, I find it. Not a true Euro ... but I feel like it has the same level of 'buy in' as Splendor, with less table space and throw up/tear down time necessary.
For totally new players, something simpler like a Splendor or hidden agenda/social deduction or party game would be better than probably any type of Eurogame. Any of the better games that a Target has (which actually has a decent selection for a department store) like Betrayal at House on the Hill Board Game as well would probably be good. Then slowly ramp of the weightiness.Addendum_Forthcoming said:
If you haven't yet - try Pandemic. Really quite fun - the base game to start with (the expansions are good but without an understanding of the base game they are just a bit of confusion too soon, unless it's just the first expansion (can't remember their names) that allows for 6 players instead of 4). Team vs. the board 3-4 ways to lose and one way to win with different roles and random-ish scenarios (different starts based on set up draw really).Elijin said:
Castle Panic is pretty good too, but harder (if you ask me) to really get the strategy of until you've played quite enough to know what all to expect from the enemies and configurations.
Oh, and while it's not co-op - maybe try Gloom (Fairy tale edition would probably be the most accessible to true new comers to geek/table top type things, but the original is pretty easy to imagine too) - which is a card game really but in the spirit of a board game so sort of a hybrid. The stories and imagination used to joke and express your card plays are the most rewarding aspect of the play if you have some fun with them. Plus side is virtually no set up (so quick to start up) or major clean up.
My main conflicts with the boardgame are space, both in terms of storage and a playable area (Bachelor apartment, so at best there's a small coffe table worth of space for it), time-investment (which combines with the space issue, I tend to need my counter/kitchen island over the course of a day for food preparation). And then most of my friends being various amount of significant time away. Lugging a board game on a bike to a bus/train depot to another bus then to someone's house isn't exactly an appetizing proposition.
Do some boardgames offer more in-depth or unrestricted mechanics since they can focus on that over all the myriad technical framework of a videogame. Sure. Do they offer the amount of use for their hefty space and time occupancy? A little more dubious.
Do some boardgames offer more in-depth or unrestricted mechanics since they can focus on that over all the myriad technical framework of a videogame. Sure. Do they offer the amount of use for their hefty space and time occupancy? A little more dubious.
Yeah, I live in a studio apartment in Sydney. It's pretty decently sized in comparison to most Sydney apartments (about 66m2) but still a studio apartment. I bought a trolley bag specific for my board gaming needs. The economy of space alone feels kind of fucked up. Like the example I used in my OP was Gloomhaven which is 10 kilograms of board game (and its expansion is coming out soon) and it's a jam packed box roughly a 17 x 12 x 8 inches of box space.Seth Carter said:
But consider if you will such a game has monumental amounts of playability, a ridiculous boatload of gameplay in it. Stuff that you probably won't unlock ever.
That being said, it's a 'table-eater' with 4 players. It's certainly a bourgeois hobby in some respects as to its space as I have a rental storage unit and three crates in it are board games that I'll liable only play a few more times. That being said ... 'not all boardgames'. Risistance: Avalon is a game that comes in a box about as big as old PC games did and you can definitely get 100s of hours of gameplay out of it.
See, one of the reasons why I spent so much time going on about economy of space but then directly challenge that own assessment is because there's boardgames you can playthat as longas you have physical space to fit people the game size itself is inconsequential. Lugging around Gloomhaven is an unappealing concept without a trolley bag and immediate access to a bus and train terminal (I live a stone's throw away from Railway Square so it's not a huge dealbreaker, but still annoying) ... but a game like Resistance: Avalon fits inside my inner pocket of my Dririder moto jacket. And that you can play for ... I think my running clock time is at least 70 hours at this point.
Plus given its social nature it's not just you bringing games someplace. It's your friends. Like tohave a really good game ofResistance: Avalon you need 6+ friends. And those 6+ friends have their own places and often bringing their own games.
I certainly found it easier than GMing some TTRPGs of anything given that often I would have to be the one lugging the books. If not people coming to my apartment whereby I had to keep people's sheets, and carry extra dice, and have wads of paper with NPC, town and region notes, and a physical printout of the adventure and a note book to write secret messages to hand to individual players.
While I haven't been able to master it quite yet, you can just get rid of old games that you know you're going to struglgle to ever get to a table again.
Most of my friends have smaller places then me. I'm one of the ones that lives outside of Toronto, where costs have basically skyrocketed over the last decade or so.Addendum_Forthcoming said:
Most tabletop RPG games you go do pretty simply online. There's hosts of free tools that make it easier, and the lack of a defined board. The big footprint for those was always the library of books, and I think you can legally even get those in PDF or similar forms now (of course you could always get them questionably)
I... yeah? Maptools is okay, but as I wrote in the OP I'm an extrovert (most of the time...) and part of the allure of tabletop gaming is being in a group. My current TTRPG group is going through a Roleplaying is Magic 3E chronicle, and part and parcel of the fun is the theatrics.Seth Carter said:
Plus I always play the social monkey bard in things like D&D and roleplay with a lot of body language and facial expressions. And it just doesn't feel the same online if after a particularly cutting barb you can't fistbump another player and have that roleplayed out as both improvised theatre ooc ... yet with IC dimensions.
It helps if you have some prior ttrpg friends from another group to bounce off like that that just knows your roleplaying style and can buddy in at key points to just *sell* a scene... and that's harder to do in a Discord chat where the medium of computer speakers instead of the direct-to-Mk I human eardrum is a poor substitute.
Tabletop gaming is my first and truest love. Video gaming will always have my affections, but board and dice RPG's are what I'd pick if I was forced at gunpoint to abandon all but one form of gaming.
I'm not too big into the current crop of boardgames, really. My wheelhouse generally stays in the 80's and early 90's games. About as recent a boardgame as I've played is Dreadfleet, really. This trend makes me happy though. I'm glad to see it's not died out and is still attractive to new and old gamers.
I'm not too big into the current crop of boardgames, really. My wheelhouse generally stays in the 80's and early 90's games. About as recent a boardgame as I've played is Dreadfleet, really. This trend makes me happy though. I'm glad to see it's not died out and is still attractive to new and old gamers.