Valerie Putman:  Which rules?

House rules, tournament rules, advanced rules, alternative rules, variants, errata, designer’s original rules, 1st edition rules, 2nd edition rules, German version rules, English translation rules, you learned it wrong and you prefer those rules….  How do you decide?

Let’s face it, not every gamer is a part of the internet gaming world.  In fact, many people mistakenly think I’m new to gaming just because I’ve only been posting online in gaming forums for about 1 1/2 years.  In reality, I’m just new to the internet.  Board games have been my primary hobby since the mid-90’s (and I’ve played games with my Mom since I can remember).  So I clearly remember the days when the rules that came in the box were the only rules I had to consider.  We rarely made house rules (though most gamers I know say this and almost all of us have a list of exceptions).  In fact, I remember my hesitancy when a member of the game club brought in a print out of alternative rules to Elfenland as recommended by the designer (a complete stranger to me, at the time, named Alan Moon).

In contrast, I have twice recently found myself having to have a 2 minute conversation with fellow experienced players before starting a rules instruction to a new player.  Before teaching Maharaja we had to agree which variants we would play with.  I think the Yogi chit breaks the backbone of the game, which is the necessity to plan ahead when things could change between the dialing of your actions, the playing of your turn, and the scoring.  But I think that auctioning the characters balances first player advantage and that using the characters as points to score in the cities adds a nice alternative for a city that’s hard to travel to.  Before starting Union Pacific last weekend we had to agree on the placement of the scoring cards in the deck.  I prefer the Puffing Billy tournament rules (which are the same as those written in the rulebook), but I was playing with last year’s WBC Union Pacific champion (and they use more evenly distributed scoring).

Over time we all develop our preferences, I guess.  Some prefer the purity of the rules as they are written.  Some like to try out different rules options until they find a set that feels right.  Here are some experiences I’ve had with different rules in recently released games.

Aquadukt This is a very fast and lightweight game.  I don’t mind the randomness of the dice roll because I lump this game into the light, filler category.  But there is an alternative rule using the values on the back of the mountain tiles that is just too random for me to play with.  The mountain tiles are marked on the back with modifies like +2 and 0 which alter the value of the scoring tiles after game play is over.  No thanks, I will be sticking with the basic rules on this one.

Masons I love Leo Colovini games, with a twist.  When I play Cartagena, it is with the hands and the draw cards face up.  When I play Carolus Magnus, we play with one automatic crown (wild) to reduce the effects of unlucky dice rolls.  For Masons I’d like to see some house rules for drawing scoring cards.  There is just too much potential for major swings in scoring based on what cards you draw.  Perhaps there could be face up cards to choose from.  Or maybe there could be two draw decks--one with field scoring cards and one with city scoring cards.  I think that without some sort of luck mitigation, I’m not likely to play this one often.

Conquest of Pangea It’s been a while since I’ve played a game where we needed so many rules questions answered.  Luckily, my second play of the game was at Origins and it was easy to run to the Immortal Eyes booth for help.  This game will certainly need an FAQ.  For starters, the card that says “this continent” that doesn’t have a continent shown on the card should read “any continent” according to the helpful folk at the convention.

I’d rather be gaming!
Valerie Putman

Comments:

< Back Home