Are boardgames fun anymore?

[Skywalker]

Getaway Driver is another inexpensive highly narrative game that plays great. It is for 2 players but has a solo mode as well.

 

[Necrozius]

My rules of thumb with big board games are:

1. Can be played solo (officially).
2. Has beautiful components (to my taste, anyway; for the record, Gloomhaven fails this test because I find the illustrations and overall graphic design to be very ugly)
3. Has bits that I can use in RPGs (miniatures, obviously, but also terrain/tiles)

So far so good! Hellboy and Zombicide Black Plague are winners. Waiting for Massive Darkness to go on sale again...

 

[The Butcher]

If your game is more work to set up and/or takes longer than a RPG session I’m probably playing a RPG instead.

Monopoly is awesome and fulfills both conditions but no one wants to play it because it “takes too long” — of course, no one actually auctions property as per RAW. This hobby could use its own OSR.

 

[Baulderstone]

If your game is more work to set up and/or takes longer than a RPG session I’m probably playing a RPG instead.

Monopoly is awesome and fulfills both conditions but no one wants to play it because it “takes too long” — of course, no one actually auctions property as per RAW. This hobby could use its own OSR.

The house rule about putting all fines under Free Parking is another problem. A game where running out of money is the lose condition is going to last a lot longer when you keep pumping money back into the system.

 

[Ghost Whistler]

After just recently picking Spirit Island up (at long last), I've concluded that yes, boardgames are (or can be) fun anymore.

Video games, on the other hand, can die a fire. Which is where the my ps4 seems to be headed as it's clearly on its last legs

 

[Necrozius]

If your game is more work to set up and/or takes longer than a RPG session I’m probably playing a RPG instead.

Fair enough. But sometimes I don't feel like being the GM. Sometimes I wanna throw dice with the gang and have a beer too, you know?

Hence why I don't mind the extra setup.

 

[E-Rocker]

Monopoly is awesome and fulfills both conditions but no one wants to play it because it “takes too long” — of course, no one actually auctions property as per RAW. This hobby could use its own OSR.

On a similar note, I recently played UNO and actually read the rules first. Turns out, when played RAW, it's a much faster and more enjoyable game than the way I learned it as a child.

 

[Ghost Whistler]

Just played Spirit Island with the expansion, Branch and Claw. Really fun. Adds a lot of cool variables. This is definitely one of my favourite games of all time I think (it's no Mystic Cave, but then what is). Lots of interesting choices to play with, but not overwhelmingly so.

Outer Rim comes out next week. I was originally going to pass over Journeys in Middle Earth as Outer Rim looked awesome: a sandbox deliveroo game about the scum and villainy of the Star Warsverse. But it kinda looks lacking from the previews. Bounting hunting seems to just be spend your turn flipping over a token and hoping it's the target. If not, pffft. The board looks shit as well.

I'd like to try Forbidden Fortress as well, a dungeon crawl with samurai? Yes please! But it's got too shit like a roll to move rule. Plus it's eighty quid!

 

[dbm]

One of the guys in our gaming group has a serious board game problem. He backs loads of stuff on Kickstarter and has an awesome collection. But now has so many games that each game doesn’t get much table time...

We have a regular RP group and if more than one person misses a session (out of 6, including the GM) we tend not to play our RP campaign. In those instances we have a board game session instead. We also sometimes have board game sessions in the evenings mid-week. You can have a good board game session with 3-4 players total and 2-3 hours of table time.

I have Mage Knight Ultimate and really enjoy it, but the set up is quite time intensive and you need to be fairly familiar with the rules for it to play at a quick pace. I also have Cthulhu Wars and the perennial classic of Chaos in the Old World. We love asymmetric games, as there is both more replay-ability and you can have a closer game when people are not all chasing the same success-criteria.

Another of the regulars in our group is a game savant, so playing anything with him that has minimal randomisation is a recipe for disappointment. It becomes a game of ‘who can come second’ rather than playing to win!

ETA: to the original question: in my opinion and experience we are in a golden age of board games. The number of high production value and diverse games being generated is off the scale.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

This hobby could use its own OSR.

Something I've been thinking for some time, funnily enough.

I'm not saying that new games are bad (although I don't subscribe to the Whigish "golden age of board gaming" theory either), but I think it's clear that there are certain play experiences old games offered that aren't catered to any more.

I'm partly basing this on my experience of playing old games with gamers in their twenties. A lot of them really enjoy my old games, simply because of the novelty factor.

I think what makes it difficult compared to the RPG OSR is the higher production and distribution costs. It isn't as simple as putting a PDF out.

 

[dbm]

I think what makes it difficult compared to the RPG OSR is the higher production and distribution costs. It isn't as simple as putting a PDF out.

You need 3D printing to go mainstream, then this will happen.

 

[Brock Savage]

The wife and I got a lot of mileage out of Eldritch Horror; it is our favorite board game. Even though we own every expansion I am happy to say FFG avoided the rules bloat of Arkham Horror.

Since decent board games are so expensive, I "try before I buy" at my FLGS or on Tabletop Simulator.

 

[Ghost Whistler]

I think the new Batman Chronicles game is peak kickstarter absurdity. It's only available through KS (or via shops if they backed it, mine did, the fools). It's £300! That's the entry point! Certainly you get a lot of stuff, but my god this seems ridiculous. How can this sustain a hobby?

 

[dbm]

It's £300! That's the entry point! Certainly you get a lot of stuff, but my god this seems ridiculous. How can this sustain a hobby?

Well, a well-run Kickstarter should be a low risk affair from an inventory perspective. If you over-produce an expensive game then you could be toast. But with Kickstarter you can, potentially, only produce exactly the number of units you have sold to backers.

SJG talk about how this has changed the market in their latest Report to the Stakeholders. The industry has morphed to one where, if a game isn’t a success at launch then it likely will never get the chance as there are too many hot new games for shops to take a chance on slow moving product.

Board games are now where pop music was 20 years ago - if you don’t debut at #1 you are a failure...

 

[Ghost Whistler]

I don't see the shop shifting this for £300. I don't htink they ordered on behalf of that one customer who's always got more money than sense (the one that never actually plays the games he buys!) since it's on regular display. Makes me wonder if that's a wise business move.

I just can't see myself ever buying a game for £300. I hear this game has some negative feedback as well

 

[Gabriel]

I think the new Batman Chronicles game is peak kickstarter absurdity. It's only available through KS (or via shops if they backed it, mine did, the fools). It's £300! That's the entry point! Certainly you get a lot of stuff, but my god this seems ridiculous. How can this sustain a hobby?

That's about $375 USD according to the currency converter. That isn't too much more than the limited edition 1st edition War of the Ring game from way over a decade ago.

I had to look up this game. I immediately found the base game package for $200 as well as multiple other listings with wildly different prices. Then I looked at the Kickstarter. I found there was a base game package for around $150 which is the entry package for the core game. That's not too much different from retail price for a GW boardgame or MSRP on a Shadows of Brimstone core.

I wasn't able to find whatever you're referencing. The only things in that price range I found which weren't obviously scalpers were packs of the base game plus multiple expansions.

 

[Ghost Whistler]

But that's a limited edition. You could still get the regular game. I did (it was about £40-50 back then, not that long ago, actually)

 

[Gabriel]

But that's a limited edition. You could still get the regular game. I did (it was about £40-50 back then, not that long ago, actually)

Likewise, as far as I'm seeing, that £300 is not just the core game, except from some game scalper shops. The base set is £130.

Assuming I'm looking at the right game. Is this it?

Batman: Gotham City Chronicles - Season 2

80th Anniversary

www.kickstarter.com

 

[Ghost Whistler]

Likewise, as far as I'm seeing, that £300 is not just the core game, except from some game scalper shops. The base set is £130.

Assuming I'm looking at the right game. Is this it?

Batman: Gotham City Chronicles - Season 2

80th Anniversary

www.kickstarter.com

I don't know about seasons. The initial product is a lot of stuff: basic game, villains box and all sorts of stuff. All of which I'm sure is well worth the money. it's just the money asked is huge. I don't see that as a sustainable business model outside of KS.

 

[Skywalker]

Batman has also been getting some middling reviews based on its bloat. It seems to stifle the core game elements from Conan that were actually very good in an effort to add in more detail and get close to emulating the source material. It may be worth it if you want all those models but even those you can get alternatives for at a better price.

 

[TristramEvans]

I think the new Batman Chronicles game is peak kickstarter absurdity. It's only available through KS (or via shops if they backed it, mine did, the fools). It's £300! That's the entry point! Certainly you get a lot of stuff, but my god this seems ridiculous. How can this sustain a hobby?

It's not meant to sustain a hobby, it's meant to give people a crapload of stuff for a decent price

 

[KrakaJak]

The initial product is a lot of stuff: basic game, villains box and all sorts of stuff. All of which I'm sure is well worth the money. it's just the money asked is huge. I don't see that as a sustainable business model outside of KS.

Just the coreboxes was $140. $10 less than the D&D 5 corebooks. $140 isn't that much for what you get (162 miniatures + everything else). Regardless, you are still correct: Batman is a Kickstarter only game. Monolith would be losing dozens of dollars on every box sold, or have to charge $400 or so for the coreboxes only if they were to make any money in normal retail. The game is only reasonably priced because of direct sales and strategic manufacturing/distribution.

I backed Batman. $320 was "All-In:" The coreboxes plus 2 huge expansions, 2 smaller ones and a VS Mode conversion that turns the game into a 1v1 miniature skirmish game. I'm going to get hundreds of hours of enjoyment out of this game. The miniatures are really well designed for painting as well, so I have been working on painting the whole set.

Batman has also been getting some middling reviews based on its bloat. It seems to stifle the core game elements from Conan that were actually very good in an effort to add in more detail and get close to emulating the source material. It may be worth it if you want all those models but even those you can get alternatives for at a better price.

I've seen mostly positive reviews for the game. The conceit is correct though, you do not just run around and beat people up like you do in Conan, there is always a mission to complete. The heroes have to manage their effort and most of the scenarios I've played have come down to the wire. I've seen some really cool, very heroic moments come out of this game organically. It really feels like Batman, not Conan with a Batman skin.

Easily the worst part of the game is the rules presentation and the player aids/usability/UX. The ruleset is written up like the Magic: The Gathering Comprehensive Rules, which makes the game seem significantly more complex than it actually is. The characters have language independent icons to represent their special powers, 7 or more for each character. You have to look up each power in the back of the rulebook, which is not organized in any kind of helpful way. With some fan created player aids, this is still a bear the first couple of games. Without the fan made aids, it's a total shitshow. Once you have played a few games, you'll remember most of the icons, so you only have to look up 1-2 a game. The boards have elevations and special movement rules that are not actually visible on the board. You have to go to the back of the scenario book to see all the elevation and special rules.

I can admit, I'm not sure I would have worked through all the crap in the last paragraph if I hadn't already purchased it as a backer. Once through it, Batman: GCC is a very, very good game in my experience. All of the scenarios are varied, very replayable and well balanced for competitive play (For an easier mode, I just add an extra turn to the scenario). The Heroes feel strong, and the decisions you make feel consequential. It's a very immersive experience, I still have a ton of the game to explore (I haven't even cracked open the Vs. game yet), and a ton of miniatures left to paint.

All that said, I can say this game is not for everybody. The game is almost all dice and dice manipulation. It's also as complex as your average hobby game, which I only mention because people in this thread have mentioned Monopoly and Uno. Less complex than your average RPG ruleset though.

(Please point me in the direction where I can get decent Batman miniatures for 86 cents a piece...)

 

[Skywalker]

Another game with a big box feel for a small price is Starship Samurai. It opened to some mild reviews and this seems to have resulted in some pretty drastic discounting by retailers. I got my copy for just USD40.

The game is actually pretty good in the lines with the trend of Dudes on a Map games that use Euro style mechanics to streamline the experience (Cyclades, Inis, Kemet, Blood Rage, Rising Sun). This one has the feel of a tight "chess" like abstract, almost like Neuroshima Hex, but is also packed with a lot of cool theme without a lot of components. Plays in 60-90 minutes.

 

[Skywalker]

I've seen mostly positive reviews for the game. The conceit is correct though, you do not just run around and beat people up like you do in Conan, there is always a mission to complete. The heroes have to manage their effort and most of the scenarios I've played have come down to the wire.

I think that was the core of one of the complaints. Combat in the system is a lot of fun, where the stuff around the Manipulate is less exciting. Though it makes sense to swing the focus in the Batman game toward the latter, this needs to be accompanied with making that part of the game more exciting (and not by just making scenarios balanced around it).

Easily the worst part of the game is the rules presentation and the player aids/usability/UX. The ruleset is written up like the Magic: The Gathering Comprehensive Rules, which makes the game seem significantly more complex than it actually is. The characters have language independent icons to represent their special powers, 7 or more for each character. You have to look up each power in the back of the rulebook, which is not organized in any kind of helpful way. With some fan created player aids, this is still a bear the first couple of games. Without the fan made aids, it's a total shitshow. Once you have played a few games, you'll remember most of the icons, so you only have to look up 1-2 a game. The boards have elevations and special movement rules that are not actually visible on the board. You have to go to the back of the scenario book to see all the elevation and special rules.

Its a shame that this is a likely a reaction to Conan's rules being so poor in their first iteration, that Batman beefed its own rules up. However, by all accounts, its now a dense barrier that you have to penetrate.

I am also concerned with setup time and the learning curve. Conan saw a lot of play on my table as it played fast and was easier to pick up. It was a refreshing change to more dense experiences like Gloomhaven or Descent, but still gave the same big box feel and even shined through its versatile mechanics. Batman should have tried to double down on this part of the game. On a few actual plays I have seen the set up and explanation time now seems to exceed the play time :/

(Please point me in the direction where I can get decent Batman miniatures for 86 cents a piece...)

If you want an all-in set then I expect that the price point per miniature is unbeatable. But if you want a selected set of the main characters, then you can probably get them cheaper than the total price for Batman: GCC via the Batman Miniatures game or the like. You know, having Batcow is a laugh but I am not sure its a miniature that I would want to see a lot of table play with

 

[Dumarest]

(Please point me in the direction where I can get decent Batman miniatures for 86 cents a piece...)

Spider-Man is also available:
​

 

[Gabriel]

Spider-Man is also available:

And Avengers, and Justice League, and Transformers, and... there are a whole slew of these "Busy Books"

 

[Ghost Whistler]

What is this glory?

 

[Baulderstone]

I guess I am going to have to order the Avengers and Spider-Man Busy Books to go along with the Marvel Super Heroes boxed set that saskganesh just sent me to supplement the fold-up figures.

 

[Skywalker]

Talking about Batman, another board game with a big box feel with a low price is Batman: the Animated Series - Gotham Under Siege. Its on Amazon for only USD35. It has a lot of theme in it too with each of the heroes feeling very different to the others.

Its also a cooperative game, and capable of solo play.

 

[Gabriel]

That Batman game looks pretty neat. I'm not into Batman at all, but it has vibrant components with presence. Those buildings may just be paper, but they're making the play area pop. The cards aren't shabby either. The only thing I might have issue with is there don't seem to be a lot of figures, but I'm guessing it's not the sort of game that needs a lot of figures.

I'll once again pimp the Ghostbusters Board Game. The first one is $32 on Amazon as I type this and the second one is $45.26. They're incredible bangs for the buck at those prices with tons of little toy minis. The game is pretty good, but probably only really cool if you're a Ghostbusters fan. It can also be played solo.

 

[Picaroon Jack]

Here's another good option for a thematic game which also scales down to solo mode. Its based on Pandemic but has been changed to model the invasion of barbarian tribes on Rome. Good value too at USD50.

I am not typically a fan of boardgames, but I really liked Pandemic. This looks AWESOME.

 

[Skywalker]

The only thing I might have issue with is there don't seem to be a lot of figures, but I'm guessing it's not the sort of game that needs a lot of figures.

Its not a dungeon crawler. The miniatures are to represent the position of the heroes. The villains and their henchmen are represented by cards and counters.

I am not typically a fan of boardgames, but I really liked Pandemic. This looks AWESOME.

It also plays very well. Better than Pandemic IMO.

 

[EmperorNorton]

Idk, some games are huge and expensive (I have all of S1 Batman, and while yes the game could have a better rulebook and some cheat sheets, I do love the game), and some games are small and cheap (In all seriousness, Cat Lady is one of my favorite drafting games ever made), and some are in between.

Tons of games are good though.

 

[Skywalker]

Tons of games are good though.

Definitely. However, the main thrust of this thread has been Ghost Whistler struggling with a desire to own and play big box board games, but feeling like he will never get to play it enough to justify the cost and shelf space. So "good" seemed to be focussed on a game that satisfied that desire with as little cost and shelf space as possible.

 

[FeralToaster]

Idk, some games are huge and expensive (I have all of S1 Batman, and while yes the game could have a better rulebook and some cheat sheets, I do love the game), and some games are small and cheap (In all seriousness, Cat Lady is one of my favorite drafting games ever made), and some are in between.

Tons of games are good though.

I'm just happy that we as gamers not only have a Tactical Batman boardgame but it is apparently becoming a popular subgenre with good games both at the high and low end of the price range. That said Batman: Gotham City Chronicles was a blast to play even with the poorly arranged rulebook (which I think is a valid criticism) but man it was fun to play.

 

[Smith]

I am not typically a fan of boardgames, but I really liked Pandemic. This looks AWESOME.

I own and have played the Fall of Rome variant of Pandemic quite a few times (and the solitaire version a couple times) and it is very interesting. The design shifts away from generic pandemic but not enough that it strays into unfamiliar territory.

The two aspects that tie this version together for me is how the 'disease' barbarians spread (along routes unless it's a 'revolt' aka outbreak) which allows you to have at least some idea of how to plan ahead with armies and forts to stop the advance. The secondary aspect which is quite the wrinkle is that curing is no longer just an action - it requires at least 1 legion, and it introduces RNG with a set of dice. Tie that together with there not being an 'eradicate' equivalent and hoo boy, this game is a doozy.

I enjoy flirting the line between enjoying ameri-trash and eurogame titles, so I am perfectly fine with a little bit of extra RNG in my games. This won't be for everyone, though.

My final note is that this version is hard. It gets tough to see the optimal outcome of managing time and your resources.

I highly recommend! Some colleagues and I are playing it on our lunch breaks at the moment.

 

[Ronnie Sanford]

Sounds like you're playing the wrong games or with the wrong people, or both. Of course boardgames can be lots of fun. I would never pay even 1/4 the prices you mention, though.

I agree with Dumarest. You don't need the new shiny to have fun. Games like Puerto RIco, Settlers of Catan, Rail Baron and Manhatten are all inexpensive, fun to play and not that difficult to setup (though Rail Baron is out of print).

 

[Smith]

I have a modest collection of games that are a lot of fun to play, every time. I do have a small collection of wargames that shamefully haven't gotten any playtime (need an IRL partner, not my wife's cuppa tea!). I specifically organise the interior of games to aid in setup and break-down (e.g. for Twilight Imperium which is a beast of a game, I have used tackle boxes, photo boxes, etc to minimise the time needed to setup as much as possible).

It does heavily depend on what your tastes are - the boardgame fandom can definitely succumb to the cult of the new and shiny, and kickstarter (and it's many failures) are a highlight of that. In my personal experience, I take quite a lot of time researching a product, and watching multiple reviews before I make any purchases. Not been burned yet! Although, I did go in on a 1/4 of Gloomhaven and that one was slightly disappointing.

 

[EmperorNorton]

As someone who has spent quite a lot on board games, I think there is this idea that unless you play every game it is a waste.

I don't buy games I buy opportunities. Each game I have is a potential game I can play. And I play with a variety of people who all have different tastes. And maybe that game that is coop, heavy euro, that is best with 5 players and has a fishing theme never has the right group together to play it (hypothetical game, don't ask what it is cause there is nothing that matches it that I know of), but I still had the opportunity to play it and that is good with me.

Like as long as someone isn't spending money on stuff they can't afford, who cares you know.

Do I like novel experiences? Yes, I do. Do I still get out older games at times (I'm the Boss is still a fantastic game, Sid Sackson was a genius designer)? Of course.

Also, if the idea of an "OSR for Board Games" is bringing back games like Monopoly, that sounds horrible. There are plenty of low setup, quick to play, easy to understand games NOW, and every single one of them that is moderately well designed is better than Monopoly. Just look at any German Family game.

 

[TristramEvans]

I think I own about a dozen board games in all, not counting various chess sets. Let's see..

HeroQuest, Risk, Axis & Allies, Fortress America, Shogun, Baker Street, Clue, Labyrinth, Battlemasters, Spider-man Monopoly, Hellboy, Rising Sun, Kingdom Death...that may be it. And some of those I just bought for the minis.