Board Game Book Club – May 2015
|Spurring from the idea of trying to combat the pervasive Cult of the New, we’re decided to start what we’re calling the Board Game Book Club. Just like a real book club where members all read a selected book and then come together discuss it as a group, we’re doing the same thing only with a “carefully” selected board game. (Listen to podcast episode 7 to find out how we chose the first book club game).
Each month we’re going to choose a game that we intend to play multiple times for that month. At the end of the month we’ll come together to discuss our thoughts on the game, the depth, the strategy, and how our opinions have changed. But we want you to be part of the dialogue too. If you have the chosen game, we want you to play along with us with your game group, at home, or wherever you game. You don’t necessarily need play it as much we’re going to, but we encourage you to try to really dive deep into the game. Then share your thoughts and perceptions as you play right here on this page in the comments section below. And to kick off the start of the club, we’ll be giving away a copy of June’s book club game to one of you who shares your experiences with us. Not only do we want to do this for ourselves, but we really want to develop a community around this. We’ll be posting our game recaps, experiences, and perspectives throughout the month of May, and we’ll be responding in the comments to your posts as well.
The inaugural Board Game Book Club game is…
Next month’s game will be Castles of Burgundy, and you have a chance to win a copy for yourself if you participate in the club by sharing your thoughts on Pandemic. Be as creative as you like, but you have to participate in the comments below to win!
Stay tuned as we update this page all through May. We sincerely hope that you’ll join us. We’ll be trying some different things so let us know what’s working and what you’d like us to try out. Now, go save the world!
Week 1: Live Stream on Normal Difficulty
Shawn’s Thoughts:
Jonathan, Clint, and I did a live play of Pandemic on normal difficulty using only the base game and broadcasted through Periscope. During our live stream, the very first question that was asked by one of the viewers was “Would you recommend this game?” Wholeheartedly, with a resounding yes. This is a classic, approachable cooperative board game. After introducing this game to non-gamers (basically co-workers during our lunch hour game sessions), nearly everyone who has played has ended up purchasing the game for themselves. This really begs the question why? The cooperative nature of the game is what I believe attracts so many new players. It’s something different from what we have traditionally expected from board games. For many, this may actually be the first cooperative, strategic board game they have played. I know for me this was a whole new world when I first played it. Thinking back, I loved Clue: The Great Museum Caper when I was younger, but the aspect that really caught me was that we had to work together to stop another player from stealing paintings from the museum. However, there was a still a winner and a loser (or a group of such) in the game. Pandemic is completely about teamwork. We win or lose together. Yet while we’re all part of the same team, we’re not all the same. The base game comes with 5 different roles and finding the synergy among the roles used really makes or breaks whether the team is successful. It’s not enough to just move around and clear cubes from the board, although that’s certainly important. You must utilize the strengths of your role in conjunction with role of your fellow players. You have to communicate and coordinate to work through the problem because no one player can do everything.
While Jonathan has only played the game twice, Clint and I have played numerous times. Anecdotally, I’ve noticed that as a player’s experience with the game increase, so too does the tendency for alpha gamer syndrome (while perhaps not true for everyone, I have certainly noticed this within myself to a certain extent). When I’m teaching a new player how to play Pandemic, I naturally want to point out what I believe would have been a more optimal move. The intention is not to tell the player what to do but rather to teach them alternate perspectives and options. Personally I’m thinking it best to only give advice when a player asks for it, and maybe reserve sharing potentially more effective strategies until after the game’s conclusion. I am curious what others think on this topic. While a lot of people want their cooperative games hard, I worry that losing the first game might discourage new players from wanting to try again, especially if it ends in a blood bath (Pandemic, she be a cruel mistress). On the flip side, you don’t want the game to be a cakewalk where there’s no challenge. However, it’s interesting that none of us have ventured beyond the normal difficulty setting. Our next play will certainly take us into the unknown territory of having 6 (or more if we’re feeling stupid) epidemic cards. It will be interesting to see how the increased challenge will impact the way I’ve played the game. Playing on normal difficulty is never a guaranteed win for me, but perhaps my higher win to loss ratio on the normal setting warrants taking it up a notch (and I’m sure I’ll immediately regret it).
-
Mark Johnson
-
Dave Racette
-
Punched and Played
-
Dave Racette
-
-
-
Jacob Coon
-
Punched and Played
-
Jacob Coon
-
-
-
Mark Kohls
-
Punched and Played
-
-
Punched and Played
-
Dave Racette