Digital Drama - More Lessons from the Tabletop

After a bit of a hiatus, I am back with more updates and glenalysis for your reading pleasure. Today I'm once again looking at lessons from the tabletop for some insights into how to make compelling player-on-player drama.

The Multiplayer Experience
      I'm a big fan of competitive, online multiplayer games. The thrill of a competition of wits and reflexes against another human being has a great visceral appeal, and makes the experience fresh and interesting every time. Yet in the interest of diversity, I have found other multiplayer experiences just as engaging, and perhaps more so, in the realm of tabletop gaming. While lacking the twitch-based gameplay of an electronic game, they compensate in other ways by offering a deeper gameplay experience that creates not just competition, but drama, among the players, something I have rarely really seen explored in electronic game design.

      The appeal of these "drama" board games goes beyond the creature comfort of live people gathered around a table. The mechanics they employ actually force interesting conflicts and dilemmas among the players, ones that requires as much skill in diplomacy as they do in strategy, and forge stronger, more memorable connections between players.
      Consider Game of Thrones, an excellent example of compelling drama. The interplay between characters, the unexpected betrayals, the struggle for power, all of these make for a memorable and engrossing experience for the audience. Is it possible to create a multiplayer game that could create this kind of drama?

Tales of the Tabletop
      While perhaps not quite on the scale of the war for the Iron Throne, there are several board games out there with some interesting design decisions that can create compelling conflicts among the players, beyond a simple struggle for the highest score. Moreover, some of these choices seem to fly in the face of conventional electronic game design, yet nonetheless work brilliantly. Perhaps in analyzing these ideas we may yet discover a way to translate their magic into the digital realm.

• Cosmic Encounter - The Rise and Fall of Power
        Traditionally in online multiplayer games, the goal of a game designer is to make sure that every race, class, or equivalent choice is kept in balance with one another. No one should have an overwhelming advantage over the other, allowing the game to be focused on skill rather than luck. This concept goes back as far as even the rules of most sports, where everyone plays by the same rules and fairness is the main tenet of those rules.
  
  
        A game like Cosmic Encounter challenges this notion by deliberately making some races more powerful than others. When I first came across the Virus in an earlier edition of the game, I was convinced this game wasn't properly playtested and that this race was blatantly imbalanced. Yet my opinion changed in the newer Fantasy Flight edition of the game, where they started labeling races on how difficult they were to play, from green for easiest to red for hardest.
  
        Strangely, the races with the most powerful abilities end up being the hardest ones to play. This is because regardless of how strong your alien power may be, creating alliances and striking deals with other players is essential for your success. Being able to dominate in armed conflicts does you little good if every other player in the game has ganged up against you. This "imbalance" also creates interesting scenarios where players playing one of the "weaker" races can have some fulfilling underdog moments, conquering their more powerful rivals.
  
        Beyond alien powers are a variety of cards with the ability to dramatically turn the tables if used at the right time. Cards like "Card Zap" which can temporarily disable an opponent's alien power, or "Mobeus Tubes" which can make everyone get their lost ships back can quickly derail someone's plans and force them to have to rethink their strategy. It is this volatility that makes for dramatic turnarounds and can level the playing field between competitive and casual players.
  
• Battlestar Galactica - Trust and Secrets
        Cooperative games can be a great way to bring people together and to have a good time, especially if its among friends. The sense of shared triumph is a powerful drive for both electronic and tabletop games alike. But what if there was a saboteur in your midst, secretly plotting the destruction of the rest of the team?
  
        This is the conflict that Battlestar Galactica brings to the table. Among your crew of human survivors is a Cylon, a humanoid robot secretly plotting the demise of humanity. While the humans are trying to stop Crises from decimating their precious resources, Cylons are actively trying to make it happen, making a major part of the human's success hinging on figuring out who is a Cylon.
  
        This element is built upon two mechanics. The first is loyalty cards. Each player is given a secret loyalty card at the start of the game to determine if they are a human or Cylon. So long as a Cylon remains unrevealed, they are able to act and perform the same actions as any other human. If they choose to reveal, they can utilize a special action on their loyalty card (such as locking someone in the brig), and then begin to send even more dangers at the humans. That said, a hidden Cylon can do far more harm than a Cylon in the open.
  
        This mechanic works alongside the mechanic of Crisis Checks. At the end of every player's turn, a Crisis card is revealed, often requiring a crisis check to determine its success or failure. To win a crisis check, players must contribute enough cards so that the total sum of the value of those cards meets or exceeds the difficulty of the crisis. Each Crisis has a list of valid colors that count in favor of the check, with all other colors counting against.

      Each player has their own hand of cards, and draws cards of particular colors/types each turn based on their character. Galen, for instance, draws 1 Politics, 2 Leadership, and 2 Engineering each turn. When a player contributes cards to the Crisis check, they do so in secret, and cannot reveal how much they are contributing. After each player has submitted cards or abstained, two cards are added from the destiny deck, a randomized deck containing two of each card type. All of the crisis check cards are then shuffled, and the cards counting for or against are tallied up to see if the Crisis is averted.

      The trick comes down to figuring out who is the most likely person to have thrown in the wrong cards for the check. Knowing what kind of cards each character can get gives you a hint of who it might be, but with the randomess of the destiny deck one can never be certain. Thus much of the drama of the game is in carefully scrutinizing everyone's actions and determining who might be the Cylon (or Cylons).

      Thus comes the second major element of the game - information. While most of the time you will be trying to deduce whether the other players are Cylons or not, there are a few ways players are able to gain access to information no one else have. The "Launch Scout" card, for instance, allows a player to peak at the next Crisis or Destination card and decide whether to put it on the bottom of the deck or keep it on top. Other abilities allow you to see other people's loyalty cards. When combined with the drama of trust the game evokes, it creates a compelling tension toward working with a character that has access to secret information, while still being suspicious of them.


• Twilight Imperium - Uneasy Alliances
        Twilight Imperium adds a bit more nuance to the drama of trust BSG goes for. The goal of every game is to reach 10 victory points, which are earned by completing various objectives. Players select these objectives from objective cards, with some being public for all other players to see, and others are hidden from all but the player that took them. These objectives can vary from producing a certain number of ships, controlling specific planets, obtaining a certain number of trade goods, or many others. Thus often it is less about players contending over a single, zero-sum objective, but are pursuing many various paths that may or may not be in direct conflict with one another.
  
  
        This creates an interesting dynamic where not only is the line between friend and foe blurred, but players are given only partial information to make decisions on their would-be friends or foes. Thus the game becomes about taking risks and examining many parallel victory paths in order to succeed at your own while thwarting others.

The Power of People
      At the heart of each of these game's dramatic mechanics is tension between competing elements, working like a tug-of-war against each other. For Cosmic Encounter, this is in-game power of a player versus their skill with diplomacy. For Battlestar Galactica, it is trusting your team versus being suspicious. For Twilight Imperium it is knowledge versus the unknown. Each of these elements of tension create a constant sense of suspense for players, and puts the players themselves in the spotlight, rather than the game itself.

      But to have true player-driven drama, it is not enough just to have elements of tension. Most any game has them, from RTSes where you must manage how many workers versus fighting units to build, to survival horror games where you must ration your bullets and health items. To make the players the heroes and villains of your drama, very specific elements must be considered.

The Pillars of Player-Driven Drama
      Thus if one was to make a player drama game, here is perhaps a few things to consider:

• Complex Interdependence
        In order to create a compelling drama, there must be a compelling reason for players to work together and interact with each other, beyond simple chatter or as an extra body to fight a boss. To do this, you need to give players the ability to bring something unique to the table, be that information, or some special ability, or some other like element.
  
        In terms of tension, there must also be a reason to distrust or be wary around other players as well. This encourages players to keep an eye on each other, indirectly making players work more closely together (and perhaps grow closer as friends). It also sets up for a memorable moment when you find out your once great BFF was planning to stab you in the back the whole time.
  
        The trick is making the game have the right kind of pacing to allow players to attend to their own actions while still being able to scrutinize others. Tabletop games solve this by having the game be turn-based, which gives players plenty of downtime to be able to watch what other people are doing and form strategies.
  
        For video games, this same effect can be accomplished through appropriate pacing of the game flow. Compare the non-stop action of something like Team Fortress 2 to the more punctuated action of an RTS game like Starcraft 2. In TF2, you all but need to have voice chat on and multitask to find out what's going on and what you need to do. For SC2, though, because you have many non-confrontational actions at your disposal (expanding, teching, scouting), there is plenty of time to be able to get a read on your opponent and/or your allies.
• A Different Kind of Balance
        One commonality between many drama-oriented board games is that while there is an element of competition, they are not heavily skill-based. While experienced player may have an edge over a novice one, randomness levels the playing field by giving the opportunity for that novice player to pull out ahead, or for the more experienced player to suffer a setback.
  
        Having unexpected things occur is one of the major hallmarks of dramatic storytelling, and thus adds a sense of excitement when they come up. The challenge for a designer comes in making a game that, while random, gives players just the right amount of control what happens, provide equal opportunity for success and failure for everyone, and ensure that regardless of your luck, the game is still interesting.
  
        It's important for players to feel like they are in control, and that they can put their well-earned power in the game to good use. This is something Cosmic Encounter does very well, as players can look at their cards and plan ahead what their next few turns might look like. While there are unexpected events in the game, the player has enough control so they know when they are making a risky move vs playing safe.
  
        Contrast this to a game like Talisman, which does not handle randomness nearly as well. The player has almost no control over the outcome of the game, with luck being more based on the roll of the dice than a player's cunning. Worse still is that it is very easy for advantages or disadvantages to snowball and cause massive disparities among players. While perhaps good for lighthearted entertainment, it is not the best approach when creating a dramatic game.
• The Blank Slate
        Alongside randomization, having the games be session-based, rather than persistent, opens up a lot of doors in the dramatic realm. For one, even if a player has a terrible time one game, there is always the incentive to come back in the hopes that they're luck would turn around next time. It also allows players to reach much greater heights of power and success in the game without causing a major imbalance.
  
        Competitive multiplayer games have done this for years, but it is much less common for larger social and MMO games, which instead opt for persistence. While people certainly enjoy creating their own customized cities and worlds in social games, or gradually accumulating in power by gaining loot in an MMO, I feel like this undermines the dramatic element of the game.
  
        Games with a lot of ups and downs, where players can achieve great feats within the span of a couple hours, tend to have much more emotional richness when compared to the much slower pace of persistent games. It is the difference between having a great, memorable time and forging new friendships vs forming a pick-up group to do a routine quest with people you will likely never speak to again.
  
        You could make the argument that those games are designed that way to keep people hooked as long as possible, and to keep them coming back. I would argue that just as many people come back again and again in multiplayer games too, even over a decade after the game's release (like Starcraft). Perhaps it is time to re-examine the idea of persistence in these genres, if only for a little more variety.

Livening Things Up
      Some people play games to escape their stressful and busy lives. Others come to games because their lives are boring and would like to liven things up. For those in the second camp, who wouldn't want a tumultuous drama of fueding families, deception, and hidden plots? I think we are sorely lacking dramatic games in the digital world, and I think we should seek to change that.

Mage Knight - Lessons from the Tabletop

What? A Board Game in a Video Game Design Blog?
      As much as I have devoted the last several years to the study of video games and how they are made, I have come across certain board games that have also caught my attention. Not the Monopoly or Scrabble games everyone knows about, but the kind found only in specialty shops, alongside Warhammer figurines and D&D manuals. They are the kind of games that I feel don't get enough love these days.

     Consider this: video games have been steadily evolving over the past several decades, but this evolution has been held back by technological constraints. Alongside those technological constrains are the rising costs of utilizing these new technologies, driving the cost of developing video games up higher every year. What this means is that as games get more expensive to make, you start to see less variety and experimentation in the medium, as an ill-fated risk can mean a death sentence to a development studio, or a major loss the stockholders of a major publishing company.

     By contrast, the board game industry has been steadily growing. While remaining very much a niche market, they are able to thrive and grow without the constraints put on video games. The costs of development are very low, and a game prototype can be whipped up by a single designer working with a team of dedicated testers. And since the technology never really changes (aside from making pieces look fancier, etc), board games are able to enjoy a steady and constant forward momentum toward innovation and new creative frontiers.

     Mage Knight the Board Game* is an example of some truly excellent game design to come out of the board game world. It's one I felt like highlighting here to show just how much video game designers can learn from our board game designer friends.

     *Not to be confused with the earlier miniatures game set in the same universe.
Overview
     Mage Knight is a fantasy conquest game where you take on the role of one of four Mage Knights and battle your way across the map, acquiring Fame, loot, and conquering various holdings across the map. All of your actions are dictated by a deck of cards, and gameplay is all about careful management of your cards and how to maximize the effectiveness of each turn.

     The game is far too complicated to go over every rule in detail, so I highly suggest watching this video demo of the first round of play to get an idea of how the game is played. If you want to learn more and/or put your reading comprehension skills to the ultimate challenge, both the Rulebook and Walkthrough book are available through Fantasy Flight Game's official website (be warned, though, the books are not very well written and can be very confusing). Hopefully this will make enough sense as to not be too confusing should you not choose to look into those things, but just thought I'd give you a heads up.

     So without further adieu, lets take a look at the game's various mechanics.

Put on your robe and wizard hat!

      Mage Knight has a lot of interesting mechanics that interact together in fascinating ways. It strikes a strong balance between randomness and predictability that allows for deep strategies to emerge and for fun surprises to happen over the course of the game. Below are a few highlights of the system I found particularly compelling:

• The Deck
       Each player starts with a deck of 16 cards, with one card unique to each character that is a stronger version of one of the standard cards. Considering that you draw up to five cards each turn (or more as you level up), this seems like a small number, especially for those used to games like Dominion or even Magic the Gathering with large decks. Unlike in MtG, you are most likely to be able to use every card in your deck each round, which affords you some strategy to complement your turn-by-turn tactics, rather than crossing your fingers and hoping you draw that one kickass card you stashed in your giant deck.
  
  
  
       Tied to the deck is the idea of rounds in the game. Each player takes their turns during a round until one player is unable to draw cards at the end of their turn to put into their hand. Note that decks are only shuffled in between rounds, never in the middle of one. Now, if you compare this to traditional deck building games like Dominion, where reshuffling your deck isn't a particularly huge deal, this creates a very different dynamic. In Mage Knight, how fast or slow you draw new cards has a strong impact on how long the round will go and what you will be able to accomplish, and even what you and your opponents will be able to do.
  
       Consider this: Suppose you used the Regenerate Card to draw 2 cards. Now, this means that not only do you get 2 cards, but that also means you deck is going to run out faster, which can potentially mean that other players will not get to play all of their cards.
  
       At the same time, given how wounds effectively shrink your hand size, it is no coincidence that the regenerate card, your main way of healing, has the choice of Heal 2 (trash two wound cards from your hand) or draw 2 more cards. It makes even a single wound a potentially major liability, and one to be dealt with as soon as possible.
  
       This creates an interesting system where even though you may not be able to predict what you will have from one deck to the next, you have a good idea of what you will be able to do over the course of a whole round, so there is the right balance between randomness and deterministic strategy.
  
  
  
       One could draw parallels to this in RTSes like Starcraft 2, where there is also a mix of determinism and randomness at play during a multiplayer matchup. A player is in full control of what they make, and can make predictions of what their opponent is going based on how quickly they get up certain buildings or what kind of army compositions they go for. Aside from the choices of the players themselves, and arguably the AI of the units, Starcraft is far more on the deterministic side when compared to Mage Knight, given that it is played on a computer that can handle all the number crunching behind the scenes. Board games, by contrast, rely on randomness as a shorthand simulation of complex deterministic algorithms behind these games, so generally the outcome is comparable on some level.
  
       There is a downside, of course, to having the computer do a bunch of heavy lifting so the player doesn't have to pull out a calculator. It can mean that the underlying systems of the game are more complex than the player could ever wrap their head around. You have to carefully balance the need for hiding info from the player with having just the right amount of mechanics to be interesting. I much prefer the route the Diablo III beta is going in, where by default descriptions of abilities are short and general, with the option to expand them. Dawn of War II, on the other hand, went about it the wrong way by hiding virtually every stat of every unit, to the point where you have only a vague idea of how much damage you are doing against particular types of enemies. Rather than being able to look at a number and say that its damage is good/bad, you have to just eyeball it or look over esoteric charts and stats created by fans on external websites.
• Cards
       Each card in your deck can be played in three different ways. First, you may put the card into play normally for its basic effect. Alternately, you can spend mana of the appropriate type to use its more powerful ability detailed in the lower text field. Finally, any card can be played sideways to act as a Move 1, Attack 1, Block 1, or Influence 1.
  
  
  
       This system makes it so every card use has to be carefully considered, and there are tradeoffs for every choice. Do you spend a card for its basic effect to save your mana for later? Use its more powerful effect to pull off a killer turn? Or go all in and play a few cards sideways to pull off a turn you only barely have the cards for?
  
       The most compelling aspect of this system is that it gives players ample ability to make clever moves and pull off killer combos. Not only does it make the player that pulled them off have more fun, but other players can also vicariously feel the rush of a well-executed turn.
  
  
  
       The closest equivalent that comes to mind are the Tactical Marines squad of Dawn of War 2. They are the single most versatile unit in the game. They start out quite capable enough, but at tier 2 you can upgrade them (the squad, not all tactical marines) to be anti-vehicle, anti-infantry, or anti-heavy infantry depending on your weapon choice. This allows them to be adaptable to any situation you want, though there is always the sacrifice of resources and time should you need them to switch to a different weapon.
• The Day/Night Cycle
       Each round alternates between day and night. During the day, it is easier to cross through forests (pretty common), harder to cross deserts (pretty rare), and you can use Gold mana, which is essentially a wild that can be spent as any basic mana type. You are also able to see what enemies are guarding fortifications from far away, making it easier to plan your assaults.
  
  
  
       During the night, however, it becomes harder to cross through forests, easier to cross deserts, and instead of Gold Mana you can use Black Mana, which allows you to use the enhanced versions of your spells. It also makes it so for most fortifications you can't know who is guarding it until you are directly next to the building.
  
       This works to create an interesting element of timing to how one should explore the map. Should you cross a forest and explore a new map tile, risking being stuck in a forest at night? Is it worth it to assault a Mage Tower in the middle of the desert when you are only a couple turns away from daytime?
  
  
  
       This is not unlike the Day/Night system of Warcraft III, though it has a bit more of an impact on gameplay. In Warcraft III the main advantage of night vs day is that at night neutral creeps would be asleep, allowing you to ambush them to gain experience for your hero easier, and the line of sight of your units was lower. If you were a Night Elf, you could also shadowmeld (turn invisible but take no other action), and moon wells (which provided supply and restored nearby units' health and mana) would replenish their mana.
  
       It worked well to create a compelling mechanic that encouraged timing of your attacks and creeping (killing neutral "creeps" to level up your hero between battles with your opponent). The one complaint I'd have about their implementation was that it wasn't a strong enough factor to make a huge difference at low-level play, and could be easily ignored after early game.
• Location Cards
        Mage Knight features many different locations you can visit, from villages, to Mage Towers, Monastaries, and even Monster Dens or Ancient Ruins. Each location has slightly different rules about what players encounter at each place, what type of enemies they have to fight, and Influence costs for their various services. All of this could very quickly get confusing for a new player, but MK has a rather ingenious way to make this easier to grasp.
  
  
  
        Each location card has the full text description of what the location does, plus an iconographic representation of the rules on the left. This I think is an excellent design choice, as it makes it easy for a player looking to remind themselves of the rules of a card to just glance at these icons and grasp its at times complex rules in a fraction of the time.
  
        The most similar analog to this in the video game world would probably be the iconography used in such games as RTSes or MMOs, which rely heavily on complex user interfaces filled with different icons players have to be able to identify and understand at a glance. However, there is still a major emphasis on having to read or be told lengthy explanations of how to use the interface, with no quick and easy way to be reminded of what they do without cracking open a book worth of help text. The closest to actually iconographically explaining mechanics would probably be fighting games, which these days has training modes that let you see each character's full moveset.
• Combat
        MK has an interesting combat system that simplifies and streamlines combat considerably, but without dumbing down the overall experience. When you attack a monster, there are three phases. First is the Range Attack Phase, where you may play any Ranged or Siege** attack cards or abilities. If you have enough points to equal or exceed the monster's defense, they are dead and you can claim your reward. If not, you enter the Blocking and Damage Allocation phase, where the monster gets to hit you, and you must either play a number of block points equal to the strength of the attack, or take wounds, allocating them to your hand or to one of your units. Finally, you enter your normal Attack phase, where you can play any type of attack to kill the monster (if you can).
  
        **Identical to Ranged, except it can be used against Fortified opponents, which Ranged cannot.
  
        This system is interesting for a couple reasons. First, it is deterministic, rather than being based on any kind of dice roll. If you have the right cards, you will be able to kill a monster. No critical hits or percent chances of getting a wedgie. This makes combat feel much more like a chess move than a bet placed on a roulette table. I mention in my previous post how I feel the best way to create the thrill of skill-based play is to make in-game actions be based on the player's choices and actions, not the random calculations of the computer, and I think this accomplishes that quite nicely. Second, it is fast and easy to get through without sacrificing it's depth or strategic potential.
  
  
  
        The streamlined nature of combat makes a lot of sense for a board game, as unlike in a video game the players are responsible for all the number crunching. It also makes sense from a game pacing perspective. Video games with complex combat systems generally have either a turn-based combat system, or feature encounters with only a few opponents. This makes it so the player can easily see when their dismembering, or stun attacks, or parrying, etc are making a difference, and the added realism makes for a compelling fight. Perhaps the best old-school example of this is the combat system of Prince of Persia 3D, which featured vertical attacks, left and right horizontal attacks, as well as the ability to feint, parry, or block as you saw fit.
  
        Cool mechanics and such may be cool in a game with a few opponents, but if you are mowing down waves of dozens or even hundreds of enemies in a game like Dynasty Warriors, it can quickly become chaotic. Not only does it pose a risk of confusing the player, but it could also very well just be completely ignored, given the pacing of the combat.
  
• Character Advancement
       Each time a player gains enough Fame to level up, they will either gain a new command token or gain an Advanced Action card (and new skill), alternating between the two each level. Gaining a command token raises your unit allowance by one and will increase your defense, hand size, or both. It is a nice, incremental bonus that gives you just a little more power.
  
       Gaining new Advanced Action card is a bit more dramatic. Most advanced action cards give you great benefits, and are sometimes powerful enough to really change the course of a whole turn. Yet for all their power, in the grand scheme of things they actually don't affect the game as dramatically as you may think. Rather than giving players a power to call upon at any moment, players are given a new ability that must be carefully and wisely used during the game round. This creates more punctuated moments of power, making the player feel stronger without dramatically effecting the balance of the game. It is more like improving your critical hit chance than your base damage.
  
        The new cards are further balanced, paradoxically, by how powerful they actually are. Because they can have such a dramatic effect on your turn, they have to be used very carefully. Many can be made even more potent if played at the right moment, making its use a very careful consideration for the player. They are powerful enough to be consistently useful, but not so useful that they become a "no brainer" ability.
  
       One could compare this system to the ability system of Battlehearts, where you gain new abilities every couple levels, but those abilities tend to have significant cooldowns. There is a decent variety between abilities that are "no brainers" that you want to use at every possible opportunity, and situational abilities that can be dramatically more powerful at the right moment. This is to be expected, of course, given the large market the game is targeting.
  
  
  
       Skyrim, on the other hand, went about this wrong, and it is one of the big reasons why I lost interest in the game after a while. There are really no situational spells or abilities in the game to speak of. All of them are useful and with the right specializations can be freely and arbitrarily chosen on a whim. The elemental system of ice being effective against warriors, lightning against mages, and fire against everybody goes a little way toward alleviating this, but not far enough.
  
       The result is that battles have very little in the way of true strategy or tactics, and your choice of what kind of spells to hurl at your opponent or weapons to use are pretty much purely arbitrary, with no clear reason to favor one over the other outside of personal preference. Again, this make sense if you are appealing to the casual crowd who perhaps isn't a Rhodes Scholar in the Art of War, but it needlessly sacrifices some satisfaction to your more hardcore players.
• Variant Rules
       Finally, I would say one of the best features of the game is the fact that there are so many different ways to play. Contained in the rulebook are numerous variant rules and scenarios which let you tailor your experience to the preference of your players. Do you want to play a tooth-and-nail competitive brawlfest for the conquest of the continent? Or are you in a more touchy-feely mood and would rather play a cooperative game? Hate everyone and want to just play by yourself? Or are you and your buddies a bunch of stoned druids that think that wandering around the forest and summoning dragons to fight is a great way to pass the time? (see the "Druid Nights" scenario on page 17 of the Rulebook). All of these options are welcome and embraced.
  
       In all honesty, I can only speculate on this chicken-or-the-egg conundrum of whether video games or board games started offering different modes for different players first. I am inclined to say board games, since we have had complex tabletop games like Dungeons and Dragons and Warhammer 40k stretching back to the 70s and 80s respectively. But who knows?
  
       Regardless, the benefits of offering many modes and variants makes the game much for appealing to a bigger audience of gamers, both in terms of their tastes, the amount of friends they have available, how much time they have, or how much of a challenge they want to take on. Video games have only started to scratch the surface of the potential of offering such diverse choices.

Banding together with our Board Game Brethren!
     Sure, great board games like this one may not pull in the money or have the name recognition of video games, but ignoring them would be a big mistake in my opinion. There remains a vast treasure trove of great design decisions and discoveries and concepts borne out of board games that most video games today have not even considered.

     To me, good game design is good game design, whether it is on a table, TV, or computer screen. I hope that in some small way I can help bring more attention to great board games out there and foster a greater bond of mutual collaboration between the board game and video game industries. There is much we can learn from eachother, and even more to gain from it.