Reveling in this year’s 9 Card contest

I am a print-and-play file horder. I used to be a game hoarder and this obsession takes up a _lot_ less space :P And let’s face it, some files are available for a limited time so its good to make sure I have them for the uncertain future :D

Anyway, that’s a roundabout way of saying that, now that the 2019 9 Card Print and Play Design Contest is done, I’ve downloaded all the files (even the withdrawn ones that are component complete since I’m just that kind of guy :P)

(Yes, I have already made some of the games and even given feedback but I wanted to wait until the contest was over so I’d have the most finalized version of each game)

Anyway, the contest has 97 entries, all which are free to download and make. 97. In comparison, the first 9 Card contest in 2017 had 41 entries. If there is a contest next year (and there probably will be), what is that going to be like?

That’s kind of an insane number. Even if Sturgeon’s law is in play and 90% of the games are crap, that’s nine or ten good nano-games. And that’s nothing to sneeze at. And many of the others are going to be either interesting experiments or wonderful disasters, worth it for me at least to craft nine cards and look at.

I seriously doubt I will make all of them but I like having the option. And sometimes, I like to craft for the sake of crafting and a nine-card game that I will never play is better than a bigger game that I’ll never play for that :P

I am amazed at the work of the contest moderators. This was months of work and the reason I’m afraid that there won’t be a 2020 Contest is because it’s become too overwhelming. I have no idea how they did it.

And Under Falling Skies is now top of my list for games to make and quickly try out.

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2126346/2019-9-card-game-print-and-play-design-contest/page/1

My never-ending quest to understand Tintin

I recently read the Unshaved Mouse’s review of The Adventures of Tintin and that made me decide to revisit Tintin. For at least the third time.

I know that Tintin is a revolutionary comic strip/book series that is beloved in almost every corner of the globe except for my own country. But I’ve never been able to get into Tintin.

I think part of my problem is that I found out about Tintin when I also discovering comic books like Sandman or The Books of Magic. Tintin wasn’t edgy or dramatic in the same way those books were. I also found the art ‘cartoony’ and the stories strangely dense. 

(I have since realized that the comics were originally serialized so each page had to stand on its own so the density makes a lot more sense)

However, I had this ridiculously belated realization about Tintin that  seriously changed my perspective on the comic: Tintin started in 1929 and had hit its stride by the early 1930s. In comparison, Superman first appeared in 1938 and Batman in 1939.

When I look at what Tintin’s contemporaries were, Tintin is amazing. Seriously, artistically and story-telling-wise, Tintin seems decades ahead of its time. Clean, well done art. Okay, beautiful art. Surprisingly intricate storylines.

Mind you, one of Tintin’s strong points is a stumbling block at least for me. Tintin is practically a tableau rosa, both visually and personality-wise. Seriously, the guy makes cottage cheese seem spicy in comparison. Tintin will always do the right thing. He will eventually solve every problem. He will put you in the hospital if you hurt his dog. And that’s pretty much Tintin.

On paper, Tintin is practically Batman between his ability to fight and solve mysteries but he’s just so bland. And that’s kind of the point. He is a blank slate that we can project ourselves on. But he’s just not engaging to me.

(Captain Haddock, on the other hand, is great. And, if I had to make the choice, I’d rather be locked in a death trap with Tintin than Batman. I’d get out either way but Tintin would be nicer about it)

This time around, I’m starting my latest exploration of Tintin with the Cigars of the Pharaoh. (Not going anywhere near Tintin in the Congo) And while I am still not yet a fan, I can see more and more why generations of readers are. 

A Game Poem that emphasizes the Poem

Reading The Tears Devour You from the Indie Mega Mixtape, I was reminded why I read the individual games in the collections so slowly, even though I could probably read all thirty-odd of them in one sitting. It’s not just because they’d all blur together but so many of them are these tiny little emotional bullets.

So many of these tiny, short form RPGs read like exercises in group therapy. I say that a lot but I have to because it’s true. (Not that I’m recommend that you use them as a substitute for therapy. In fact, I’m adamantly against that) And The Tears Devour You is a doozy of an example of that.

It’s a game for two players and all you need is each other, some pencils and index cards. Index cards are like the duct tape for tiny indie games. You can use them for so, so much.

In this case, you use one each to write down things like hopes and dreams and wishes. Then you swap cards. The card you get, that’s your character for the game. And the rules tell you to be faithful to those ideas and to not be a jerk.

You play out four scenes: standing on a mountain, bathing on the sea, lying together, and the sky is falling. You have a secret list of the feelings: madly, truly, deeply and doomed. Secretly choose one for the scene and no repeats.

And that’s it. Four scenes and no definitive ending but you are allowed to wonder what happens next. (Some games ban that)

If nothing else, The Tears Devour You is really poetic and really rings true to the songs that inspired it.

I’m kind of glad that I that I don’t gorge these tiny games because I’d totally fail to appreciate them. The Tears Devour You is a sweet little game poem but the way you create each other’s characters is what makes me think hmmmm, this could be good.

The Tears Devour You isn’t perfect or brilliant but it has enough potential to make me really consider it.

Is there anything else like Igloo Pop?

Igloo Pop might not be the weirdest game I’ve ever played or the most unique but I don’t know of another game that’s anything like it.

Okay. Stripping all the gloss off the game, you have twelve rattles with two to thirteen beads in them. You have to figure out how many beads are in them by listening to them. Flipping them over to look at the labels is cheating :P

There’s a little more to the game than that. After all, you have to competitively listen to rattles and get points in order to figure out who wins the game. But the heart of the game is figuring out how many beads are in a rattle.   

I’m pretty sure that I’ve gotten rid of my copy. Igloo Pop is such a neat idea but it’s harder in practice to get more than a ballpark idea of the number of beads. Which wouldn’t be a game breaker for me except that I could never get anyone to play the game :P

It is supposedly a children’s game but I think our son would either get distracted by the toy factor or, more likely now that he’s getting older, frustrated with it. So I don’t really regret no longer owning it, even though we’re parents now.

All that said, I still like Igloo Pop. It’s such a fun idea and if there’s anything else like it out there, I don’t know about it.

 https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/8668/igloo-pop

Muddled impressions of Mech Capture

Mech Capture is a PnP not-quite-micro-game of trying to overwhelm enemy mechs and capture them. The game consists of two 18-Card decks and that’s it.

Here’s how I understand the game: The cards form a seven space grid that forms a hexagon with a center space. Enemy spaces are center, twelve o’clock, four o’clock, and seven o’clock. You get to use two o’clock, six and clock and ten o’clock spaces.

Short version, you play your cards to surround enemy cards. If you have the right number of  matching symbols, you capture it. If you have too many of the symbol, you destroy the card and don’t get to score it. If you manage to capture more points in enemy mech than they manage to hang onto, you win.

I’ll be honest. I’m pretty sure I’ve been playing the game right but that’s because I’ve gone through the informal Q&As on the BGG boards. The rules really need some expansion and clarification. The rules are two pages long and they could have used another page.

And I’m still not quite sure what I think about Mech Capture. When I first read the rules, I found myself hoping that I had found a solitaire Battle for Hill 218. And Mech Capture really isn’t. While board position does matter for the enemy mechs, it doesn’t for yours. By my third game, my reserve was just my hand and I just discarded cards to capture or destroy.

I’ve tried a decent number of solitaire PnP games at this point (and I’m planning on playing plenty more) and Mech Capture doesn’t quite fit into any niche for me. It’s not quite light enough for me to feel like I’m fidgeting but it doesn’t have the depth or agency to make me feel like I’m ‘gaming’.

(To put that in perspective, Elevenses for One and Palm Island do feel like gaming to me)

That said, I like how there is a real spacial element to the game, even if it is honestly limited to the enemy mech. And while the game play is really about hand management, there is a functional combat system. I don’t feel like I’m playing a war game but I do feel like I’m playing an abstract strategy game.

And I’ll be honest. The fact that the game is nothing but cards is a plus for me. It makes it much easier to sit down and play. A five-minute game that takes five minutes to set up has more to overcome than shuffling some cards.

I think further play leading me to know both decks will actually add a level of agency to the game. At the same time, luck might still overpower choices and the game feels like there should be more. Like the ideas could be recycled in a bigger and better game.

And I need to try the campaign play. I think that would really improve the game. As I’ve said, it doesn’t quite work for me as a fidget game so making it bigger might be better.

While further play might make me change my mind one way or the other, Mech Capture is a game that I’m glad that I made and is interesting to explore but not one I’d recommend.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/209826/mech-capture

The story of Henry Sugar really is wonderful

I have a theory about The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar and Six More by Roald Dahl. It was published in 1977 and, by then, Dahl’s children’s books had eclipsed his writing for adults. So the publishers collected seven of his earlier works that were still okay for kids and made a book out of them. 

The result is certainly eclectic. Two autobiographical pieces and a non-fiction piece that isn’t autobiographical, along with, you know, four short stories. They range the light comedy of The Hitchhiker to the straight up horror of The Swan to the gentle whimsey of the title story. And none of them have the phantasmagorical nature of his children’s books.

I first read the book when I was in my single digits. At the time, it was interesting but it felt strange because it was so different than everything else I’d ever read by the man. And, reading it as an adult... it’s still pretty strange because the stories are also pretty different than his standard fare for adults, which tended to be black comedy with nasty little twists. 

All that said, it’s a good read. The title story in particular is a fun ride because it is an engaging story and because it defies every expectation you have for Dahl, actually being a happy story.

The Girl on the Boat feels like a sinking ship

While reading The Girl on the Boat, one of Wodehouse’s early romances before he tackled comedy on a full time basis, I am reminded why I like his later straight-up comedies more.

(Make no mistake, there is romantic elements in his comedies as well. However, as I’m about to discuss, they are seen from the sidelines as opposed to the main stage)

Conflict in every form of Wodehouse (school stories, romances or comedies) seems to be centered around some form of trickery. In The Girl on the Boat, the protagonist Samuel Marlowe spends a lot of the book as a frankly manipulative scoundrel and yet we’re supposed to be behind him. Billie, the girl he’s in love with, has such ridiculous expectations that it’s hard to sympathize with her either. In some ways, they deserve each other but it’s hard to like them.

(Oddly, Jane and Eustace, the barely appearing beta couple, are more likeable because they are honest about themselves and each other. She’s controlling and over-the-top and he’s a shrinking violet but they don’t lie about it.)

On the other hand, Bertie Wooster in the Jeeves stories is endlessly using trickery and connivery and bad judgement in the name of love but he’s doing it for other people. In other words, while Bertie is constantly making a mess of things, he’s not doing it for his own selfish reasons but to help out his friends. He’s an idiot and nitwit but he has good intentions. 

And that makes all the difference. Bertie Wooster is a hopelessly incompetent hero but he is a hero. He may not be the hero we want or hopefully deserve but he’s the one we’re stuck with :P 

The problem with The Girl on the Boat is there are no heroes.