A question of application

Last Saturday, we had a full day of games at our local games shop. As always, it was a good time, with a mixture of people, and the chance to try out some new games.

Amongst the games we played this week were several that were new to me, and I want to think today about two in particular: XCOM and One Night Ultimate Werewolf.

Slightly unusually (at least for me) these games both heavily featured Apps – i.e. something downloaded onto a smartphone (or presumably a tablet would work as well) that drives elements of the game.

In XCOM, players are trying to fight off an alien invasion and the app drives a real-time phase of the game, where players are informed of the arrival of alien ships on the board, forced to allocate resources to various challenges, and generally make decisions quick-sharpish.

One Night Ultimate Werewolf is a party-game, which share many similarities with well-known yet hideously ill-defined games like Mafia: essentially, the players are a group of villagers, some of whom are in fact Werewolves, intent on killing the others. By means of discussion, bluff and argument, players must decide who they believe to be the werewolf (/mafia member/traitor etc) and carry out a summary lynching. The villagers win if they successfully execute the wolves, and the werewolves win if they survive (there’s more to it than that, but that covers the key shape of the game for the purpose of this article).

These games generally involve a lot of time spent with all or most of the players having their eyes closed, and either a narrator having to sit out or, in the case of Ultimate Werewolf, a series of role-cards which have to be moved around. The App for Ultimate Werewolf solves this problem by having a recorded message instructing the various players on when to open and close their eyes and what actions they need to do.

There are certainly advantages to these apps – I remember playing a game of The Resistance: Avalon, another game of this type, shortly after we acquired it and struggling through the eyes-closed bit of the set-up, as I wanted to have my eyes shut to be part of the game, at the same time as needing to read instructions on what was meant to be happening. Having the app meant that nobody needed to remember things, simply to listen to, and to follow the instructions. It seemed fairly easy to configure which characters were in use for any particular game – and having the app cover the rules means that you can more quickly throw in bonus characters rather than feeling you need to stick with the most basic version of the game forever, until people can get the hang of things, as well as to customise the amount of time between actions. As an added bonus, the app even provided some background noise to make it harder to tell simply by listening who was moving at which point in the turn.

Whilst for Ultimate Werewolf, the app was a player-aid downloaded as an optional extra, for XCOM, it is an essential part of the game. The are certain steps (receive income, deploy troops, more UFOs appear, assign scientists to research, resolve crisis cards) which happen every round, but the order, frequency and detail is randomised – in one round we had 2 crisis cards that had little effect, whilst on another turn we got hit with 7, most of them hideous. As noted above, the invasion of earth is also happening in real-time and, with the best will in the world, no amount of player enforcement with sand-timers is going to impose that in the same way that an app – which requires the players to confirm that they have done it (and immediately flinging the next challenge at them) will.

The fact that the app also walks players through the non-timed stage of the game is (on balance) probably helpful, although the constant tension-creating background music got on my nerves – for some people this may add to the atmosphere but overall, I’d say it was at best neutral, at worst positively irritating.

For me though, the whole concept of an app-driven game was one I was slightly uncomfortable with: I’ve seen more and more adverts around for games which incorporate apps placed on the table or otherwise forming an integral part of the game, although I’d never played any, and I can’t say I’ve been falling over myself with enthusiasm to do so. For one thing, I’m old enough that whilst I own a smart-phone, I can count on my fingers the apps I actually use – the fact the multiple people had speakers with them ready to hook up to their phones and broadcast the necessary instructions was quite a surprise to me.

One of the things I like about board game is the physical simplicity – even those with loads of tokens, for the most part don’t rely on physical complexity. Something which is dependent upon technology just feels like it’s slipping into the realms of computer games.

In the interests of full disclosure, I think I should pause for a moment to outline the extent of my own hypocrisy here- I use / have used apps as randomisers for games before (for games like Dominion or Marvel Legendary, to determine which sets/mission to use), and I keep extensive spreadsheets of game-related information (scores, play-sessions etc). The difference for me is that it’s not actually within the game. Whenever I’ve played games online –whether it be Ticket to Ride via the Days of Wonder website, or experimented briefly and painfully with things like OCTGN or Vassal, it’s never felt the same – the Lord of the Rings LCG is one of my favourite games, but when you sterilise it into an electronic platform, it loses the appeal. I’ve played plenty of minesweeper and free-cell over the years, as well as spells of more fully-fledged computer games like Civilisation or The Sims, but if it’s a board game, I’ll happily leave it as a board game.

I can’t imagine myself buying either of the app-driven games I played this weekend any time soon – neither really fills any gap that I can see amongst the people I regularly game with. However, that doesn’t mean I’d avoid playing them again – at least once or twice.

That may look like a toaster on the left, but I’m fairly certain it’s an in-game app…

Perhaps I’m just stuck in my ways, perhaps I’ve just seen too much Battlestar Galactica (or the Terminator/Matrix franchises etc), but for my own purposes at least, I’m going stick with dead tree for my board games, occasionally supplemented by plastic and metal. I’d be interested to know how other people feel about the presence of apps in their board games.

How to solve a problem like Melindra?

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

There has been a revival recently in discussion around some of the class-deck characters, and the suitability (or otherwise) of the cards included in their decks.

Having played through the entire Season of the Shackles, this is difficulty we are keenly aware of- far, far too many times, we would pick up a boon during a scenario, or see another character thumb past a boon whilst rebuilding their deck, and lament that we would not be able to keep hold of such a card.

For me, perhaps the most extreme example of this difficulty can be seen by looking specifically at Melindra and at Weapons.

Melindra is a Gnome wizard, one of 5 wizards released so far in the game (the others are Ezren twice – once in Rise of the Runelords, and a second time in the class deck, Darago and Radillo). As the class-deck is designed for wizards generally, and not simply Melindra, I’m going to keep the others in mind, although my primary focus is Melindra. (There is another character who can be “unlocked” for play with this deck, but she does not use weapons, so will be ignored here).

Melindra’s Dexterity is a good D10, with her strength a rather lamentable D4. Although she is more extreme than the others, she does mirror a general trend, with all the other class-deck wizards having a dexterity dice 1 step up from their strength dice. Runelords Ezren has D6 for both stats.

In light of this, it might come as a surprise then to see that the Wizard class-deck contains only 4 dexterity-based weapons, versus 4 strength-based weapons. Add to this the fact that 3 of the 5 strength-based weapons require proficiency, a feat available only to Melindra amongst the wizards (i.e. the character with the strongest preference for dexterity over strength), and then only on one of her two role-cards, and this becomes even more baffling.

At the start of the game, Melindra has two weapons, equal with Darago, 1 more than either incarnation of Ezren, and 2 more than Radillo. For the first slot, you’ll obviously choose the Sling for a reasonable D10+D6, but for the second slot, you’ll probably be taking the Quarterstaff (D4+D6) over the rather dismal Rapier at 3D4-4, due to the penalty for those not proficient with weapons.

Levels 1 & 2 offer some slight relief for Melindra, as she is able to gain access to first of all an Allying Dart +1, for D10+D4+1 and then at level 2 a Light Crossbow +1 for D10+D8+1.

Unfortunately, this is where things grind to a halt, as the weapons at levels 3 and 4 represent great leaps backward for the wizards, being a Cutlass +1, and a Spellsword +2. Both are strength-based, and both require proficiency with weapons (or a -4 penalty), making them next to useless. The next time a dexterity-based weapon will appear will be adventure 5, where Melindra can grab a Force Sling +3, for D10+d6+3.

In a best-case scenario then, when fighting with a weapon, at level 5 or 6, Melindra will be rolling, D10+D6+6, assuming she has put the maximum 3 skill feats into dexterity, for an average of 15, or a maximum of 22 (or a minimum of 8).

Obviously, Melindra is not merely a weapons-based fighter. She is after all a wizard, and you would expect her to do the majority of her fighting with spells. It would be unreasonable if she could rival those characters who focus primarily on combat, and this has been a concern expressed by various people on the forums. However, she does start the game with multiple weapons, suggesting that she should at least be able to make some use of them. Anyway, avoiding parity with the dedicated weapon-users is already assured from the fact that her dexterity is only d10, not D12, the need to put skill feats into her intelligence, and the lack of the specific ranged bonus.

Looking at the Wizard class Deck, it seems hard to fathom why the Rapier or the Cutlass +1 in particular ever found their way in to the box in the first place – given that Melindra is clearly a rogue-like Wizard, it seems probable to me that, at some stage in play-testing, she was intended to have the power which enabled her to use dexterity, potentially even with a small bonus, on weapons with the “Finesse” trait, but that this was cut at some stage, and the offending weapon not removed.

On the theme of Melindra’s roguishness, it is worth noting that she has disable, a highly unworkable evade ability – (whereas the original Rogue could evade automatically, Melindra needs to perform a stealth check which scales with the adventure number, so that, even with maximum feats committed to it, it eventually becomes impossible without blessings [in adventure 6 you’ll need to roll a 17 on D10+5].

Obviously the game would be a lot easier if we were all simply able to have whatever cards we wanted, when we wanted, so the idea of giving people free-reign has caused some concerns, but I wanted to consider the options she would have in a different box.

Taking the Rogue class deck as the first example, the Shortbow for the Sling is essentially a straight-swap, but the availability of a dart or dagger would at least allow her to be rolling off her dexterity from the outset.

At level 2 there is the Deathbane Light Crossbow +1, a solid weapon even when not fighting the Undead, and likely to remain the weapon of choice throughout. Level 2 sees no difference to her own deck, but levels 3 and 4, instead of a pair of baffling swords, offer a venomous Dagger +2, and a Giantbane Dagger, to at least widen the options, level 5 offers the mighty Venomous Crossbow +2 (which does require proficiency, but otherwise offers her 2D10+2), and there are more options again at level 6, with the Acidic Sling +3 and the Returning Frost Spear +2.

Looking further afield, the Bard and Rogue decks both offer a Light Crossbow at level B, for Dexterity+D8, hardly a specialist or unusual piece of kit, with a Frost sling +1 appearing at level 1 for Sorcerers, and the Deathbane Light Crossbow+1 appearing again at level 2 for Ranger and the Bard.

I haven’t done a specific analysis of the weapons options which would be available to her in a standard Adventure Path- in some respects, this is too dependent on who else is around fighting for the boons. However, I think anyone who has played an AP knows that there are enough generic crossbows and the like around to know that she could certainly guarantee being able to take dexterity-based weapons without the need for proficiency, even if there wasn’t a steady stream of powerful upgrades coming her way.

Going back to the Organised Play setting, where characters build their decks exclusively from the cards contained in the relevant class-deck, the conclusion seems obvious to me. If Melindra had access to even a dagger in adventure B (she is after all pictured clutching a pair of daggers in her artwork), and some improved dexterity options later along it wouldn’t seem to be breaking the restrictions placed by the designers for the sake of game-balance, more to be correcting some otherwise inexplicable oversights. Putting a “current adventure minus 1” restriction in place for taking cards outside of the appropriate class deck would mean no access to things like the Deathbane Light Crossbow until adventure 2, to stop her outstripping the spell-less rogue in weapons-based combat, but might just give her a chance of avoiding a complete hand-wipe every time she finds herself needing to use one of the two weapons she must carry around in combat.

Share your thoughts below, or join the original discussion which prompted this article over on the Paizo forums

Hello world!

Welcome to A Fistful of Meeples!

This will be an intermittent blog about table-top board and card-games. I already run a blog focused on Lord of the Rings themed games, so you can expect to see articles from there reposted, but this will also be where I consider issues relating to other games I’m playing at that point in time.

Whenever I talk about a game for the first time, I’ll attempt to post a short summary, which I’ll create as an archive, just so you’ve got some kind of frame of reference if you’re not already familiar with the game.

I expect the games being discussed here will vary a fair bit, depending on what’s getting the most table-time at any given moment, but it’s a good bet that you’ll see posts on cooperative games, games themed around Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, and Marvel Comics, The Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, and a spattering of other things which cross my radar.