Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Anvilfolk]

I find most of those games to be low-interaction.

Rex is actually also along the lines of GoT... somehow games with a grand total of 6-8 turns don't really excite me much. There's very, very little chance to come back from any mistakes, and the FFG ones tend to take multiple hours. So a lot of investment for the chance to get royally screwed at the beginning and be essentially out of the game for the rest of it


--- edit ---

Actually, Neuroshima Hex is probably something you might wanna pick up on. Really in your face, especially with more players, some, but not a lot of luck involved, and simple gameplay. Really good, though I hope they improved the rulebook from the edition I have!

[Itnetlolor]

More of a house rule to a card game, but War with 'Hero Hand' house rule included.

•Conscription Deck: Regular cards, standard War rules. No peeking. Memorize, okay. Card counting, okay. They're your deck.
•Hero Hand: Start the game with each player dealing 5 cards from their conscription deck into their hand. These are known heroes of the force. Basically, they're random cards, but you know them now (it's as random as XCOM soldiers. Some are awesome, some are crap; others, lethal joke characters (if you permit "2's Beat Aces" rule, or 3's winning a round against a 2; especially if your opponent was expecting you to play an ace)), and can play any of them if you so choose. To reclaim a hero, survive 15 more rounds (conscriptions only) without playing another hero to add to the hero hand. Maximum cards allowed in Hero Hand: 5.

Now the game has a strategy element to it.

EDIT:
A modifier to the game: Start the game with no heroes, and build up from an empty hand (0 to start, and accumulate your 5 heroes (65 rounds of conscriptions straight; 75 if 7-Card Stud)).

EDIT EDIT:
Yet another. Integrate other games as playstyles. So 7-card stud rules. up to 4 visible (face up) soldiers, and 3 hidden ones (stealth force, face down/hand) as your Hero Hand (cards provided in same order (constant loop: D-D-U-U-U-U-D (same limits too)), and you can also play the conscription deck (again, 15 cards to replenish heroes). 7-Card Stud must be supplied by your own deck, so if you run out of cards, you're out of luck. I wonder how Texas Hold'em hands would work? Community hand as Mercenaries or Soldiers of Fortune, and 2 heroes for your main hand (would break the game, if not for the 15-round replenishment rule; replenishment exchanges between players by alternating (2-player) or rotation (3+ players/dealer chip), by the player (individual values to conscriptions))?

Reminder: If you don't recall, you have the option of the rule of 'Keeping your kills and soldiers if you win the duel'. And the other rule of 'If both players play equal value, draw 3 cards (epic duel/brawl), or alternatively, draw 3 cards, and play one more. Winner collects all played cards'.

This game can get nasty if you involve more than 2 players and card decks (generally the default is 2 players and 1 deck of cards; not 4 players and 8 decks). Jokers/Harlequins are optional.

WARNING: Those kinds of rules may need to be kept in a ziplock bag, lest it quickly becomes an amoeba that'll absorb more of your playing cards until it becomes a sentient playing card golem.

EDIT EDIT EDIT:
I'd like to see how Solitaire vs. Solitaire would play out. And yes, Game vs. Game matches of War (different nations, different rules/playstyles). So, imagine 5-Card Draw (with it's own delays involving 15-card replenishments) versus 7-Card Stud vs Solitaire? Who will win? If more than 3 players, how much ‼fun‼ is to be expected? If Egyptian Ratscrew rules are also applied, how much vulgarity can come out of a single person?

•Solitaire: You play Solitare to voluntarily reveal your (hidden) forces so you can know more about who you're sending, and who you'll be gaining (or sending out instead upon reveal). However, your leaders can get a little nervous, so they send the shrimpiest troops before themselves (assholes. basically, revealing more cards is played out exactly the same way as the game plays (54321 RBRBR)). You can also deal a new set of 3 troops (and progressively play them (top-most card first, and downward from there), or use them to reveal more of your forces to change your strategy) every 15 conscriptions. Revealed cards are not lost in play, but hidden again at the end of dealing pass. No shuffling after making a round with the conscription deck. You can play Solitaire at any pace you pick, but conscription is required to deal another reveal of playable-3(-2-1). With "Play From 0-Cards" rule applied, this game will suck.

EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT:
Considering accumulating forces comes to play, this actually still makes some sense. With amoeba decks (4+ decks mixed together), Solitaire will never play the same way even moreso, since you could have bad enough luck to get hit with 16 3s or 4s at the same time (even worse if they're all exactly the same kinds of cards).

EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT:
•Tri-Peaks: Same basic setup and rules as play. You can exchange a card played on the field with one of your visible cards (and 1 revealed random from conscription). You can also trim your forces by playing your game of Tri-Peaks, like with Solitaire, a bit to improve your strategy/game by going 1 value above or below revealed random (only that pile is permitted to accumulate from the Tri-Peak game).

Had to simplify it a bit. I started over-complicating it again.

[IronyOwl]

Splendor doesn't have a board, per se, but it's either a board game ish card game or a very card-heavy board game. There are no dice, so the draw of the cards is the only purely luck-based mechanical factor. You don't draw your own cards, though, they're arranged in rows of increasing cost on the "board" (which doesn't exist) for you to purchase with the gems you can collect each turn.

Cards owned then grant you victory points and reducers on specific costs, meaning if you have 3 Sapphire-Producing-Things you can buy a 5-Sapphire-Costing-Thing for 2 Sapphires. Some cards are more efficient or specific than others, and they replace as you buy them, making for an interesting game of Who Gets It First and Do I Want To Buy Crap And Then Hope It Doesn't Reveal Gold Beneath That The Guy After Me Will Buy Or Just Sit Here On My Useless Pile Of Infinite Gems.

Speaking of which, there's a limited number of gem tokens in the game, meaning hoarding them so nobody else has any can sometimes be viable, adding yet another layer of intrigue and player-driven uncertainty.

As a final added bonus, those gem tokens are really nice. They feel heavy and valuable. You wants them.

[de5me7]

I find most of those games to be low-interaction.

Rex is actually also along the lines of GoT... somehow games with a grand total of 6-8 turns don't really excite me much. There's very, very little chance to come back from any mistakes, and the FFG ones tend to take multiple hours. So a lot of investment for the chance to get royally screwed at the beginning and be essentially out of the game for the rest of it


--- edit ---

Actually, Neuroshima Hex is probably something you might wanna pick up on. Really in your face, especially with more players, some, but not a lot of luck involved, and simple gameplay. Really good, though I hope they improved the rulebook from the edition I have!

really? I'd agree with the economic and building games, but they are as a genre. Intrigue definitely is not low interaction as the game is almost completely interaction. eclipse is rather low interaction, clash can be, Imperial is high interaction as are 1830, High Society and Modern Art.

[Nao]

I'm also a person that does not like dice rolls in board games, and personally i really liked Starcraft the board game (with and without the expansion). It's a standard board game with a map, figures etc, based off pretty closely on the classic RTS from Blizzard of the same name.

It does not have any dice rolls, it has a deck building system (that is used for fighting) that is kind of random, but since there is a lot of ways to actually influence the card draws, it's pretty easy to get what you want to execute a prepared strategy (the deck mechanic acts more like a pace setter/limiter than random generator) and there is almost no way of "miracle saves" by lucky draws.

It's still the standard generic board game with units etc, but it has some interesting mechanics that make it stand out from the pack (for the good and bad ), like for example placing orders phase, (where players place order tokens on places, and then play them in reverse order) where tactics are made and ruined, and it all depends on your opponents play, counterplay or misplay. It generally encourages conflict and interaction between players.

It's not a great game or anything, but imho definitely worth exploring if you are searching for less luck reliant but still standard in layout board game.
https://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/22827/starcraft-board-game
https://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgameexpansion/38796/starcraft-board-game-brood-war-expansion
I liked it for being able to construct pretty complicated multi turn plans and then actually executing them while reading/baiting opponents actions and not having dice roll ruin everything in the end.

[i2amroy]

Gheos is a pretty fun game for up to 4 players that's pretty fun. It's like a "Build the world around you" god game type, where you can earn points by investing your power in various civilizations.

Alternatively you could try something like multiplayer Go. You'll need to find (or make your own) colored stone sets to play with, but it can get pretty intense (like a lot of multiplayer X variants of old-school board games, 4+ is generally better than 3, but there are also tons of variants out there that attempt to address the 3 player problem).

[thegoatgod_pan]

I highly recommend Illuminati and Chrononauts: both great board games masquerading as card games. Although both work off a deck, the cards are played face up on the table, like a boardgame, with only power ups and special cards kept in hand for secrecy's sake.

Illuminati lets you play a global conspiracy and compete with the other players for a pool of independents groups (e.g. a typical start might see the players competing for influence over goldfish fanciers, feminists, orbital mindcontrol lasers, and the republican party).

The strategies are asymetric: thus if the Bankers want to collect all the money and never spend it, the Discordians want to control five weird groups, and the Cult of Cthulhu wins if they permanently destroy any eight groups.

There are dice rolls, but the odds are adjusted with money, meaning that barring terrible mischance, you ought to know if you will succeed or not. However, everyone can adjust the odds, so any dice roll of significance is preceeded by a bidding war.  Really fun game!

Chrononauts is very different but also great: you lay out a timeline from the turn of the 20th century: each card has the right history on the front (e.g. Titanic sinks) and an alternative history on the back (titanic comes home safely) and each major event causes reprecussions that leave whole parts of history "paradoxed".  This is where players come in: each player has an identity and an agenda, and satisfying either will win the game. To satisfy an agenda you usually have to collect random artifact, but more relevantly, to satisfy your ID, you have to mold the timeline so that the correct events take place: e.g. the titanic cannot sink, Kennedy must get assassinated, but John Lennon must survive his assassination. Obviously, all the messing around with time by the other players will mess up your plans, even if they don't realize it: just as you likely messed up their plans. 

Nice fast game, usually if someone hasn't won in an hour, it is because they didn't notice the chance. No dice at all: just your plans and the mischief caused by other players planning.

[Anvilfolk]

really? I'd agree with the economic and building games, but they are as a genre. Intrigue definitely is not low interaction as the game is almost completely interaction. eclipse is rather low interaction, clash can be, Imperial is high interaction as are 1830, High Society and Modern Art.

I'm sorry, I should've clarified that those were mostly the ones I was talking about! I was just puzzled at the suggestions for Puerto Rico, Agricola, etc. I find most eurogames to be essentially single-player, and don't get me started on Dominion

Castles of Burgundy does feel like it has some more interaction than most, but if you like that one I'd also have a look a Troyes... where you can buy other people's dice so you screw them, whether they want to or not