Change, a game system whose games work just as well with regular cards

I probably still have two or three copies of Change, since it was so cheap and it is so small. One copy lived in my bag for a while, in large part because it is the size of a box of matches.

And the idea of Change was one that appealed to me and still appeals to me. Instead of one game, it's three different rule sets for a tiny, special deck of cards. You know, a game system.

Really, given the whole found art nature of James Ernst design aesthetic, you could say that game systems are his speciality. In many ways, that has so far culminated with the Pairs deck.

But Change was a very early approach to a game system in the world of Cheapass Games. And, I really hate to say it, it shows.

It's a deck of fifty cards. There are no suits. Instead, there are ten 1's, 3's, 5's, 7's, and 10's. They are decorated with cute pictures of the Fridey's zombies and done up to look like paper money. It's card stock, which might have the word card in it but doesn't make for good cards but this is Cheapass we're taking about.

The games comes with three rules sets: Make Your Own Change Night, Boneyard (which I admit I never played) and Diminishing Returns.

Here's the big problem. Make Your Own Change Night is a retread of Hey Bartender from Chief Herman's Holiday Fun Pack and Diminishing Returns is a retread of Pennywise from the same collection. In other words, they were games I was already familiar with, just tweaked for the special deck.

Now, I have had fun with Make Your Own Change Night so it's not like Change is a total waste. But a deck of cards can do the same trick and I can play a whole bunch of other games with that.

(It's telling that Boneyard has since been released as a rule set for regular cards, although you do need two decks of cards to get the right card count.. I also have to admit the rules to Boneyard confused me when I first read them years ago but they seem perfectly simple now, although I still think calling the auction sets buckets is bad jargon)

What a game system needs, more than anything else, is a great game. A killer app. For instance, if the only game you had rules to play with the Looney Pyramids was Zendo or Volcano, I'd still be happy with those games. Change it only doesn't have that killer game, its games work just has well with regular cards.

I have seen a lot of different kinds of decks over the years. Five or six suits, pyramid decks, multi-suited cards, straight up numbered decks. I haven't seen another deck like Change and maybe there's a reason for that. It would be really interesting to see what a killer game with a deck like this and I still don't know what it would be.

The disappointment of Stonehenge the Game Anthology

As I will tell anyone at the drop of a hat, I am a big fan of game systems. I think a deck of cards is one of the most essential things to have in a game library and the bare minimum of what I'll pack for a trip. (You know, after my toothbrush) The Looney Pyramids were a big part of my start in gaming. I think the Decktet is brilliant.

And then there was Stonehenge.

When it was first announced, I knew that I had to get Stonehenge. It was billed as a board game anthology. Both the original game in the expansion head top-notch designers create games with the components. 

Those components, at least for the time, were pretty decent. There was a big board, a deck of cards, druid figurines, plastic trilithons, discs and bars. That wouldn't be that impressive know but it was pretty good for 2007.

I had to get it. A game system that came with games by Richard Borg, James Ernst, Bruno Faidutti, Richard Garfield, and Mike Selinker? With more games promised from other well known designers like Andrew Looney and Bruno Cathala and Klaus-Jurgen Wrede? What could go wrong?

Well, my friends and I started trying out the different games and they just kept falling flat. It has been about 10 years so time has mercifully blocked out the details but I still remember the profound sense of disappointment. It isn't my biggest board game disappointment (Hi, Thunderstone!) but it's up there. The fact that it ultimately wasn't even that memorable doesn't help it's cause.

It is probably telling that every game only got a two-page spread in the rulebook. And some of them clearly needed more. Even for folks who were experienced reading rules and playing different board games, it was kind of vague.

And, as much as I enjoy other things that all the designers are done, it really felt like they phoned the Stonehenge games in. There wasn't a single killer app in the lot. Would I buy a standalone version of Zendo, for instance? Oh yes. Any of the Stonehenge games? Wouldn't even cross my mind.

And I don't accept the argument that the five games are just examples and the real goal is for you to come up with your own games. The examples still have to hold up on their own.

I think part of the problem is that the pieces don't really work as a toolbox. The need to tie everything back to Stonehenge made too many of the pieces too specific. That took away from the flexibility of using them as general tools for games.

As an idea, Stonehenge was great. As an execution, it was terrible. In the end, it proves how difficult intentionally designing a game system really is. I honestly believe that an important component is having an active and committed community. If Stonehenge ended up developing one, it was after we gave up on it.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/20436/stonehenge-anthology-board-game

Pairs proves to be a more interesting game system than I thought

Since I subscribe to the Cheapass Games newsletter, I have been aware of Pairs pretty much since it was ever mentioned. However, it didn't really interest me very much.

However, I did sign up for what amounted to a Pairs seminar with James Ernst at this year's Rincon. He ran through four different games that you can play with the Pairs deck as well as some variants. And by the time he was done, I had a much better opinion of the Pairs deck as a game system.

The Pairs deck is a triangular deck. It doesn't have suits, only ranks one to ten. And each rank has as many cards in it as its rank. So there is only one one card but ten ten cards.

All the Pairs games I played were light, quick games. Pub games that would be good for figuring out who pays for the next round. The games I learned included elements push-your-luck and bluffing. And I know you can use the deck to play climbing and trick taking games since Cheapass has all but admitted that they started with a Great Dalmutti deck to create the Pairs deck.

The actual Pairs game was one of the ones I learned, which is a very simple push-your-luck game. In fact, I'd say it was the weakest game I learned. So instead of being a deck of cards that you can theoretically play other games with, I would buy the deck specifically to play the other games. It really is a legit game system.

The Pairs deck isn't the first triangular deck I've played with. I'm pretty sure that was the Great Dalmutti, which goes up to twelve. I didn't realize how much losing those twenty three cards (11+12) tightened up the odds in the Pairs deck until I had a chance to play with it.

The games I got to play were on the serious casual side. They were lighter than what we play when the toddler is in bed and we are exhausted. But they'd be great at restaurants or parties or bars. And great with folks who'd never play something like Love Letter. And I wouldn't be surprised if there are deeper games that I just don't know yet.

Nothing is going to beat the standard deck of cards as a game system. It has had literally centuries of development and refinement and playtesting. And the best alternative I've found is the brilliant Decktet with its multi-suited cards. The Pairs deck is still pretty flexible and fun, though. And, since all three take up less space than some paperbacks, there's no reason not to own all three.

http://cheapass.com/pairs/

Pyramid Arcade is on Kickstarter

Looney Labs has just started a Kickstarter project called Pyramid Arcade, which is the largest tool kit they've offered for their Looney Pyramids.

I've been playing with their pyramids for so long that Looney Pyramids is the third name that they've had for the system. I first started playing with them back when they were called Icehouse Pyramids. Then, they were Treehouse Pyramids. I have a feeling Looney Pyramids will stick since they finally named them after the company.

Looney Pyramids aren't a game. Instead, they're a game system. Think of them as a tool box, a collection of pieces you can use in different ways to play a wide variety of different games. Just like a deck of cards, only more pointy.

I am a big fan of game systems. Not just because they are a lot of game packed into a small space but because they really let you look at the nuts and bolts of mechanics. When you take away the chrome, you get to see all the moving parts.

Although, having just said that, the colorful stacking pyramids are awfully pretty chrome.

There's a lot of different games you can play with the pyramids, ranging from abstracts to dexterity to deduction to area control to resource management to war games. Okay, light war games. I'm pretty sure that Homeworlds qualifies as a 4X game.

There are a number of reasons I think that the pyramids have become a really good game system.

First of all, the actual pyramids themselves are very versatile. Pyramids that are stackable, come in three sizes and come in a wide variety of colors can be used in a variety of ways. And they make nice eye candy.

Second, the pyramids are really just the jumping off point. A lot of these games use boards, dice, cards or tokens. Alien City uses a whole other game system, the Piece Pack. That does kind of spoil the whole game system standing in its own (Hey, take this handful of pyramids. It's all you'll ever need) but the end result is a lot of fun, different games.

Finally, the pyramids have been supported and nurtured by both a game company and design community. One way or another, it has been supported since 1989. The pyramids are a living system that is constantly being developed by professionals and not-quite-as-professionals. 

I've played about half of the twenty-two of the games that will come in the Pyramid Arcade and eight of them I'm pretty sure are original to this set. Just from what I've played alone, I know it's a good collection.

The one glaring omission to the set is Zendo, which is my favorite pyramid game. Unfortunately, Zendo would require a different distribution of colors. On the other hand, you can still use the set to play Zendo, just not using colors. Really, you can use a handful coins to play Zendo if you felt like it.

And one of the stretch goals is to work on a sequel project that would allow people to play Zendo and other older games that used the older color distribution. 

Looney Labs has already reached their funding goal. I think they might've done it on the first day. The pyramids have been around for decades and they have really proven themselves as a gaming system. 

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/looneylabs/pyramid-arcade

http://www.icehousegames.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page