The Tao of Gaming

Boardgames and lesser pursuits


According to my profile, I’ve played 10 different games in the last 30 days. ~70 games of Race, and nine other titles once each. [The other nine include sitzkriegs as R-Eco, Loco, Apples to Apples and Geschenkt!]

Larry Levy waffles about the Designer of the Year here. I look forward to his political post where he endorses Clinton, McCain, Obama and “That weird one.”

I haven’t forgotten the Master Solvers post, but I’m a) waiting for it to die down and b) wishing for a one-armed economist. As for doing more, well, send me the problems and I’ll post them. (I’ll watch for interesting draws … I could do mid-games, but that means a lot of typing to get the setup).

Another idea I’d considered is running an annotated PBEM. If you want to play, shoot me an email, but you have to write up your reasoning with your plays. I’m not convinced I want to do this yet, as my wife is already giving me strange looks.

Update: As to how the PBEM would work (as there have been questions). I’d shuffle a deck (make an excel spreadsheet of the deck, assign each card a random number and then sort the card based on those). I’d also have to create a file for the “open” position (everything except hands) and email it out seperately. Obviously commentary would only be revealed after the game (or perhaps a few turns delay would suffice). Ideally most players would send in their role selection, I’d send out the update (along with any explore cards) and then they’d send back builds/consume/produce to minimize traffic. Toward the mid-end game players are probably more likely to want to see each build before continuing.


Written by taogaming

January 16, 2008 at 9:02 pm

Posted in Misc

Tagged with

8 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Those strange looks mean “you haven’t played Race in over an hour, are you feeling ok?”


    January 17, 2008 at 1:02 pm

  2. What, only 88.6% of your games played were Race? Thats not enough :p

    A PBEM of race? How would that work?


    January 17, 2008 at 6:03 pm

  3. Please forgive me if I am committing a taboo, but is there a philosophical or commercial aversion to allowing a BSW version of the game?


    January 17, 2008 at 9:01 pm

  4. I don’t mind Brian playing Race; in fact, we’ve played a few games just the two of us. The weird looks are for the hours spent analyzing Race. Then again, he’s not the only one, judging from the comments. : – )

    Jacqueline Bankler

    January 17, 2008 at 9:14 pm

  5. Over on a website devoted to the Civilization computer game (, they explored the game by having one player run a position, stopping at critical points to let the members of the group vote on which options to take (peace vs. war, which tech(s) to get next, etc.). (I don’t know the exact details, but the idea is simple enough.) Civ is a single player game, but I think your idea might work best if you treated Race that way. Whoever runs the game could play the other positions and make some simple decisions for the position of interest, with pauses to discuss and vote as needed. There may be too many small decisions (which cards do you keep on Explore, which cards to spend for Development, etc.), but I think this would give the best chance of moving the game forward.

    Alex S.

    January 18, 2008 at 4:14 am

  6. I think a PBEM – with explanations afterwards of what your opponents were thinking – would be illuminating. I’d be interested in giving that a go, though worried I might just serve as an example of how not to play!


    January 18, 2008 at 8:51 am

  7. I’d love a BSW (or other computer moderated) version of the game, but I don’t see it happening soon.


    January 18, 2008 at 4:33 pm

  8. I agree with Alex – I must say those Civfanatics posts were more fun than the game itself. a RFTG version would be great.


    January 21, 2008 at 12:06 am

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: