Groo the Game: was it a hidden gem?

I spent years looking for a copy of Groo the Game before I finally got a copy of it. Then, of course, I have barely gotten any play out of it. Despite that, I am definitely hanging onto it.

Groo the Wanderer is a comic book by Sergio Aragones (who has been drawing for Mad Magazine longer than I've been alive) about a walking catastrophe who is an amalgamation of Conan the Barbarian and the Three Stooges. I read it for years, never ceasing to amazed at how funny Sergio Aragones managed to make Groo accidentally racking up more kills than the American Civil War.

The game came out in 1997, years before not only I got interested in designer games but before other folks in the US were really starting to notice them. Settlers of Catan was out but that juggernaut had barely started rolling. I'm not even sure it was available in English.

As much as I enjoyed the comic book, my interest in the the game has been from the mechanics. Years before it was really a concept to get batted around, Groo the Game was a mashup of German Family Game resource management and infrastructure building and nasty Ameritrash take that.

The game consists of a deck of cards and a set of resource dice which is where get the resources that let you play cards. The cards include buildings which will give you special powers and victory points, soldiers that used to attack and defend buildings, and Groo cards which are horrible disasters.

What really struck me about the game at the time when I first discovered it and I still think is really neat is how the resource dice work. The active player rolls the dice and uses however many they can or want to. The unused dice get passed to the next player who has a chance to use them and so on down the line. In theory, everyone might get a chance to play a card every turn, which definitely keeps the game interesting and ticking along.

There are some elements that I don't care for. Groo cards, which are horrible but require a special Groo resource, can only be played on the player who has the wandering Groo card in front of them. Which makes perfect the thematic sense but it adds an additional level of randomness to attacking players. 

It has been more than 10 years since the last time I played Groo the Game. I really wonder, not only how well will it hold up the next time I play it, but how balanced it really is.

At the same time, I feel like so many elements of the game were well ahead of the pack. Building a tableau of cards that represent buildings with special powers? While the first card version of Catan covered those ideas, Groo was ahead of a lot of other games like Citadels or San Juan. And I still think that the dice passing mechanic still has a lot of room to be explored.

Well I would have to go back and actually replay it, I do suspect that Groo the Game has some issues. At the same time, I think that it had a lot of neat, even innovative ideas. I am going to bet that if it had a bigger print run and wider distribution, it would be considered a milestone in game design.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/194/groo-game

Going back to Shangri-La

When I was in high school, I probably read Lost Horizon by James Hilton at least once a year. Even at the time, I couldn't tell you why. There was just something very relaxing and calming about the book.

Lost Horizon didn't create the idea of the mystical monastery in Tibet. Apparently the idea had been around for literally centuries. However, Hilton definitely helped popularize and codify the idea. People who have never heard of the book know what Shangri-La is.

My memories of it as a teenager was that Hilton's Shangri-La was a more low-key, realistic mystic monastery. Basically, what made it special was that everyone got along and some people got to live to a really old age. Which, when you think about it, it's still pretty fantastical. However, thanks to comic books and movies, I was used to the idea that people got taught mystical martial arts and magical powers at these monasteries. Compared to that, Shangri-La seemed pretty realistic.

Re-reading the book after twenty years made me a little bit more critical of the book. For one thing, the high lama talks about developing telepathy, which seems pretty fantastic to me.

I also couldn't help but notice how European this perfect Tibetan Valley is. The guy in charge is European. It has all kinds of modern, western amenities. The musical focus, particularly strong in Mozart and Chopin, is western. And, it turns out that Europeans are the ones who responds best to this extended life treatment.

It wasn't enough to bother me. Despite all that, the book doesn't come across as being particular racist or imperialist. Still, I am surprised that I missed it when I was younger.

The last thing that struck me on this rereading was how Hilton managed to create a chain of unreliable narrators. The primary narrator learns Conway's story from a friend who claims to have met Conway after the world declared him dead and who claims to be telling Conway's story without any embellishment. On top of that, even with in Conway's own narrative, there is no actual proof ever given that any of this extended life or telepathy business is real.

I really like that. Hilton does it in such a smooth way that I didn't realize how unreliable the narrative was until the very end. When one of the characters points it out! What this really does is help bring back the realism that I remembered from when I was a teenager.

Earlier this year, I reread Hilton's other classic, Goodbye Mister Chips. I found that I got a lot more out of it reading it as an adult. Lost Horizon didn't have as strong an effect. But both books really impressed me with Hilton's craft as a writer. His ability to undersell themes and situations to make them more powerful is amazing.

Lost Horizon might not be as deep and meaningful as I thought it was a couple of decades ago. At the same time, I have a deeper appreciation for the craft and skill that went into writing it. It's a best seller and classic for good reason.

  

Going to almost the start of Pokémon

Over the last couple months, I have gone from a vague awareness of Pokémon to a definite interest in the franchise.

It all started with Pokémon Go. No, I haven't been playing it. My wife has. And our two-year old became fascinated with Mommy's game. She played Pokémon Snap for him because it was a cinematic game that showed him lots of Pokémon. 

Then we showed him the cartoon, episodes from the first season. I have to say that neither Ash nor Pikachu come across as being very sympathetic in the first episode. However, they both proved to be not the jerks they seemed to be and grew on me. 

(What is with Shonen heroes so often being idiots? That ended up souring me Son Goku in the original Dragon Ball although Monkey D Luffy in One Piece has grown on me)

So that is when I took the big jump. I downloaded Pokémon Yellow and started to play. That's the revamp of the original games only with elements of the cartoon thrown in.

So, I'm only twenty years late to the party but I'd still shown up. And I have to say that it is an interesting world that I have found myself in.

For one thing, it seems like all of the fauna in this setting are Pokémon but only a little bit of the flora. Is everyone a vegetarian? How does meat even work? And why are humans the exception to the rule? Or can you catch someone in a ball?

Still, as someone who has played a lot of role-playing games, many of the ideas do makes sense. And the balance of each pocket monster only being able to have for moves does make for some interesting choices. I do have to admit that the game seems to be built around and grinding for levels.

I will never play every game in the series. Not even close. But I do plan on finishing Pokémon Yellow and I might very well try the new version coming out at the end of the year.

San Juan opened doors for me

San Juan was my first real experience with a card game adaptation of a board game.

It certainly wasn't the first one out there. I knew that Monopoly's Free Parking game came out back in 1988. And Settlers of Catan and Starfarers of Catan had their two-player card versions out as well.

Still, San Juan was ahead of the pack of turning board games into card or dice games.

And San Juan definitely has its own identity outside of its parent Puerto Rico. It shares a theme and the mechanic of role selection with Puerto Rico but it also helped create the genre tableu builders as well as multi-use cards. San Juan has its own legacy.

I first played it very early in my gaming experiences. I'm not sure I had even started collecting games at the time. It was after I had been introduced to Puerto Rico and was playing it with a small circle of friends at least once a week.

Since we already knew Puerto Rico so well, we were able to pick it up almost immediately. At the same time, cards being buildings, money and goods was amazing. (Truth to tell, still is)

In fact, I ended buying San Juan years before I bought Puerto Rico, because it was portable and played down to two and everyone else had a copy of Puerto Rico.

San Juan led the way for other tableu building games with multi-use cards, Race for the Galaxy and Glory to Rome being two of the highlights. I've played a lot of both of those games and I would not only describe them as deeper and more complex but actually better than San Juan.

Not because San Juan is simpler and lighter. Neither of those two traits makes a game worse, although I have friends who would tell me I'm wrong. No, it's because I've found San Juan has really one fundamental, overriding strategy. Getting big buildings out. And luck

of the draw plays a big part in who gets a chance to play them. (Both Race for the Galaxy and Glory to Rome avoid this by having multiple ways to get points)

Despite what I do think is legitimate flaw, I have gotten a lot of play out of San Juan and I have had a lot of fun with it. It is still in my collection and it is a game that still calls out to us to get played.

Frankly, that's because it is lighter and shorter. Between the different roles and the different powers of the buildings, it offers a lot of choices and different experiences in that short playing time. In addition to being a great game to help teach other games like Race for the Galaxy, San Juan gives me the experience of playing a big game in a short amount of time.

San Juan isn't a perfect game. However, the richness and fun of its play vastly exceeds the flaws. I have had over a decade of fun with it. It was one of the first games that opened my eyes to the possibility of how a boardgame could be adapted to a card game. At the same time, San Juan is not Puerto Rico the card game. It is its own fascinating beast.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/8217/san-juan

Yeah, I prefer these versions

Going on 15 years ago, Hasbro about a bunch of card games that were based on their popular board games. I think the sort of thing comes in cycles because they had done it before and they've done it since. I am pretty sure there are at least three distinct card games based on Monopoly.

Out of this particular lot, there were two that stood out to me. In fact, they stood up so much that they are still a part of my collection and I happen to like them better than the games they were based on.

Those two games were Battleship and the Game of Life.

I know that Battleship is a venerable old game that teaches deductive reasoning. It helps young minds learn how to analyze situations. However, ever since I have been young, I've always found it pretty boring.

The 2002 card version had next to nothing to do with the original board game. Instead, it resembled a mash up of Reiner Knizia's Battle Line and Stratego. The players take turns placing cards facedown on their side of five placeholder cards which represent the five oceans of the world.

Both players have identical decks and the cards include ships and special commands. Almost all of the ships, except for the title battleship, also have special abilities. After the cards get revealed and the special abilities get resolved, the highest numerical value wins that ocean. First person to three oceans is the winner.

Battleship the Card Game has bluffing, special powers and a dynamic playing field. And it plays out in about ten minutes. It may not be as educational or as analytical as the original game but I find it a lot more enjoyable.

The Game of Life is basically a spin and move game with a couple branches in the board to add choices. Let's face it, it wouldn't take much to make it more interesting game for an older gamer.

In the card version of the game, you are creating a tableau of cards that show various accomplishments of your life. Your occupation will give you two forms of denomination, time and money, that you can spend on these cards.

In other words, it uses the exact same formula as Chez Geek. And not only do I like it more then the board version of the Game of Life, I like it more than Chez Geek as well.

While I think that Chez Geek has a more interesting and, quite frankly, more realistic theme, it also has the game ending when someone achieves a certain number of slack points. And there are plenty of ways of dragging players down, which means dragging the game out. 

In the card version of the Game of Life, four letter cards which will spell out LIFE are shuffled into the last part of the deck. When LIFE is finished, so is the game. Having a built in timer like that makes the game a much more enjoyable experience for me.

Mind you, the card game still has the theme of creating the most conservative and traditional family model ever. I know plenty of happy families that don't fit that mold. Friedemann Friese's irreverent game Funny Friends was pitched to me as the Game of Life as people actually live it and I think that's a fair call.

Still, I I think that the game did a really good job with its mechanics, creating a game that is enjoyable to play and offers a lot more choices than the spin and move forward game.

I might be accused of taking aim at low hanging fruit for saying that I enjoy the card versions of these games more than the original board games. However, I do and they have themes that make it easier for me to introduce them to folks who aren't into gaming.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/7464/battleship-card-game

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/15731/game-life-card-game

When boards and pawns get replaced by dice and cards

ReAs I have grown older, card and dice adaptations of board games have become more of a focus for me. Part of this is because they've become more and more common. They are also an interesting exploration of game mechanics. How do you change and distill a game to adapt it? And, plus, they're handy when you have less gaming time and storage space :D

There are three questions I usually ask myself when I look at a card or dice adaptation.

1. Is it any good as a game?

Seriously, that's the basic question you have to ask about any game. There's plenty of criteria to apply. Is the game fun to play? Does it offer an interesting experience? Does it offer interesting decisions?

I can't tell you what makes a game good. We wouldn't have such a variety of games out there if there was a single answer. But a game has to be good for me and the folks I play with to get played more than once.

2. Does it take up less space or take less time to play?

If the card or dice version takes up less storage space, that's a plus for me. If it has a smaller footprint on the table or takes less time to set up or breakdown, that's good too. And these days, when life has me busy in a lot of other ways, a shorter playing time is also a big selling point.

Of course, as our son gets older, some of those things might not be quite so big a deal. On the other hand, having shorter, simpler versions of games to reach him will become handy.

3. Does it capture the feeling of its parent game?

Truth to tell, this isn't a deal breaker. If we enjoy playing the game and the shared name is just branding slapped over the top, I don't care. Still, it is nice when it happens. And, in some rare cases, makes me feel okay about having the card or dice version and not the board version.

A good example of a game that has stayed in my collection is Euphrates and Tigris: Clash of Kings. It is not as good a game as it's boardgame parent, Tigris and Euphrates. It also takes about as much space on the table. However, it is still a good game and it takes up a fraction of the storage space. For as often as I have ever played Tigris and Euphrates, the card version is an acceptable alternative in my collection.

Back in 2002, Hasbro put out card versions of several classic games.

These versions of Battleship and The Game of Life are still in my collection and I'd much rather play them than the originals.

In most cases, there is a tradeoff when a game or at least the theme is taken into a new medium. Sometimes, you lose more than you gain. However, at least for me, it's at least worth looking into.

Something Global: is it gaming via tweeting or just tweeting?

In Something Global, you play an ape rising up against humanity in rebellion in pretend and tweet about it in real life. Your success as an ape rebel depends on how many favorites you get.

This officially blows my mind. Mostly because I don't tweet and I don't understand that environment very well. I'm assuming that favorite works the same way as likes do in Facebook and I barely even use that.

Seriously, I've pretty much described the game it's entirety in the first paragraph.

I have looked at and played some odd games. Microscope is about building a timeline and I've played it via email. Lexicon is a writing game about building your own fictional wiki. Happy Birthday, Robot has you tell a story literally one sentence at a time.

But Something Global feels like it crosses a I line for me. After all, isn't the idea of tweeting to get people to read whatever you posted and to give you some kind of thumbs up for it? Something Global sounds like doing normal tweeting behavior and coaches it in the terms of a bunch of apes doing it.

Am I looking at a game or social commentary? Is Something Global a game or an experiment or satire? (Okay, it can easily be all three but which one was the designer's primary goal?)

Something Global is part of the Indie Mixtape Megamix, a big collection of tiny little RPGs. The vast majority of them, while minimalist, are clearly designed to be played. I have to wonder if Something Global was designed simply to be observed.