Today, I am going to take a close look at a board game that is well-designed in order to review some of the principles and elements of design and to show a real example of how those principles can be implemented. The game I'm looking at is Roam by Ryan Laukat. Follow the link to see photos of the game if you aren't familiar with it.
Ryan Laukat has been mentioned in this blog a couple of times as the exception to the rule as a designer who does just about everything short of manufacturing the final components. Most designers are going to get better results by not trying to do everything. However, because Laukat's games have such a singular artistic vision, they are perfect specimens to examine for design principles.
Not going to lie, I chose Roam because I own it. But it also works well as a practical example because it is simple and short and thus fairly easy to dissect. Let's break down what's good about it.
Unity (A+)
Laukat's art is always gorgeous. My favorite part is that the art on the game box is used on the cards. More importantly, all the art feels like it belongs in the same world. I find gorgeous boxes with ugly boards deeply upsetting. The art also supports the light-hearted, friendly feel of the theme. The characters are heroes, but there is no real danger of death and the art reflects that. The mechanics also support the mood of the game. I don't usually think of area majority as a friendly mechanic. The way pieces rotate out of play in Roam gives players regular chances to catch up and claim new territory in a way that keeps less strategic players from feeling defeated. Hidden scoring also helps. [I don't have the Kickstarter exclusive expansion, but from what I've seen, it feels less unified with the rest of the game.]
Emphasis (A)
I guess the focal points in this game are the art and smooth mechanics. Not much gets in the way of that. The narrative elements are brief and to the point; they add charm, but this game is not a story-telling game. Roam has the elegance of an abstract game, but I would argue the theme is not pasted-on. It merely takes a back seat to art and mechanics.
Scale/Proportion (B)
I love how one side of the cards is a zoomed out map, but when you claim a card and flip it over you see a zoomed in bust of a character you have found. That playing with scale is delightful and feels intentional, as though the characters are looking at a map together, then at one another. We can also see Hierarchic Scaling in how much bigger the cards are than the artifact tiles. On the human scale, Roam was designed for a fairly narrow context of play. The ideal way to play, if you are playing with four players, is at a smallish square or round table, such as a card table. The issue being that players need to be able to properly align their character cards with their orientation of play relative to the map, be able to reach the map, and read the symbols on their cards.
Balance (A)
This is a very balanced game. The mechanics are beautifully balanced. The map arrangement is a stellar example of both bilateral symmetry (one half mirrors the other) and crystallographic balance (each card is in balance with the others, visually).
Rhythm (A-)
In terms of time, gameplay is very smooth. There just isn't enough complexity for analysis paralysis to occur. Turns do get longer late in the game, when players have more characters to choose from, but the gradual ramp up of choices keeps the decisions from being overwhelming. The cycling of cards keeps options on the map from dwindling and resources (well, money) from running out. There is very little ramp up though, keeping Roam squarely in the alternating rhythm category (a sequence that doesn't change as it progresses). The rhythm of the visuals matches well with the rhythm of gameplay.
Mood (A+)
The atmospheres of the gameplay and the art sync up nicely. The playfulness of the oranges and blues help keep the competitiveness of gameplay on the light-hearted side. None of the characters appear fierce so much as they appear determined. The tactical nature of the gameplay is also rather forgiving if you make some sub-optimal plays, which reinforces the friendliness of the theme.
Character, Narrative, and Theme (B+)
The characters are all charming, which comes through in the art style and one sentence descriptions on the cards. The narrative presented on the first page of the rulebook, explaining how all the characters got lost, is thin and doesn't really come through in gameplay. A brief rewrite of the lore could fix this issue or art. Basically, the lore says the characters all wandered off due to a 'sleeping sickness' which is why they are scattered all over the map. Perhaps this makes more sense in the context of Laukat's other games, which I have not played. Gameplay, however, clearly reinforces the search for lost or wandering characters, but the why isn't there. When you find the characters, they were all engaged in charming and harmless activities, not waking up from some sort of sickness. The theme of finding lost characters, however, is very strong. The board is a map made up of cards and when you complete a card someone discovers a character, presumably from that area of the map. The artifacts don't really add much to the theme although they add some depth to the world and a lot of depth to gameplay. The title is the theme of the game, which is great in my book.
Genre, Style, and Conventions (A+)
I would probably say the genre of Roam is 'unconventional-fantasy themed games that are accessible to a wide range of players.' Catacombs is in the same genre. Laukat has created his own signature style, both in his art by itself and in his game experiences. Because of his shared world-building across his games, I'm positive all of his design choices are motivated by the larger lore, rather than just included for purely aesthetic reasons. Conventions are tricky to look at from a theme perspective, as they would be conventions built across Laukat's other games, which I have not played. Mechanically, the game introduces enough new ideas to feel fresh while still feeling like a fairly conventional area majority game. I guess I'll lump graphics and the rule book in conventions; both are very good.
Overall, my only two complaints with Roam are the oddness of the lore and the table-shape problem you can run into with four players. I gave this game a 9 on BGG and an A- average here, which lines up pretty well.
Ryan Laukat has been mentioned in this blog a couple of times as the exception to the rule as a designer who does just about everything short of manufacturing the final components. Most designers are going to get better results by not trying to do everything. However, because Laukat's games have such a singular artistic vision, they are perfect specimens to examine for design principles.
Not going to lie, I chose Roam because I own it. But it also works well as a practical example because it is simple and short and thus fairly easy to dissect. Let's break down what's good about it.
Unity (A+)
Laukat's art is always gorgeous. My favorite part is that the art on the game box is used on the cards. More importantly, all the art feels like it belongs in the same world. I find gorgeous boxes with ugly boards deeply upsetting. The art also supports the light-hearted, friendly feel of the theme. The characters are heroes, but there is no real danger of death and the art reflects that. The mechanics also support the mood of the game. I don't usually think of area majority as a friendly mechanic. The way pieces rotate out of play in Roam gives players regular chances to catch up and claim new territory in a way that keeps less strategic players from feeling defeated. Hidden scoring also helps. [I don't have the Kickstarter exclusive expansion, but from what I've seen, it feels less unified with the rest of the game.]
Emphasis (A)
I guess the focal points in this game are the art and smooth mechanics. Not much gets in the way of that. The narrative elements are brief and to the point; they add charm, but this game is not a story-telling game. Roam has the elegance of an abstract game, but I would argue the theme is not pasted-on. It merely takes a back seat to art and mechanics.
Scale/Proportion (B)
I love how one side of the cards is a zoomed out map, but when you claim a card and flip it over you see a zoomed in bust of a character you have found. That playing with scale is delightful and feels intentional, as though the characters are looking at a map together, then at one another. We can also see Hierarchic Scaling in how much bigger the cards are than the artifact tiles. On the human scale, Roam was designed for a fairly narrow context of play. The ideal way to play, if you are playing with four players, is at a smallish square or round table, such as a card table. The issue being that players need to be able to properly align their character cards with their orientation of play relative to the map, be able to reach the map, and read the symbols on their cards.
Balance (A)
This is a very balanced game. The mechanics are beautifully balanced. The map arrangement is a stellar example of both bilateral symmetry (one half mirrors the other) and crystallographic balance (each card is in balance with the others, visually).
Rhythm (A-)
In terms of time, gameplay is very smooth. There just isn't enough complexity for analysis paralysis to occur. Turns do get longer late in the game, when players have more characters to choose from, but the gradual ramp up of choices keeps the decisions from being overwhelming. The cycling of cards keeps options on the map from dwindling and resources (well, money) from running out. There is very little ramp up though, keeping Roam squarely in the alternating rhythm category (a sequence that doesn't change as it progresses). The rhythm of the visuals matches well with the rhythm of gameplay.
Mood (A+)
The atmospheres of the gameplay and the art sync up nicely. The playfulness of the oranges and blues help keep the competitiveness of gameplay on the light-hearted side. None of the characters appear fierce so much as they appear determined. The tactical nature of the gameplay is also rather forgiving if you make some sub-optimal plays, which reinforces the friendliness of the theme.
Character, Narrative, and Theme (B+)
The characters are all charming, which comes through in the art style and one sentence descriptions on the cards. The narrative presented on the first page of the rulebook, explaining how all the characters got lost, is thin and doesn't really come through in gameplay. A brief rewrite of the lore could fix this issue or art. Basically, the lore says the characters all wandered off due to a 'sleeping sickness' which is why they are scattered all over the map. Perhaps this makes more sense in the context of Laukat's other games, which I have not played. Gameplay, however, clearly reinforces the search for lost or wandering characters, but the why isn't there. When you find the characters, they were all engaged in charming and harmless activities, not waking up from some sort of sickness. The theme of finding lost characters, however, is very strong. The board is a map made up of cards and when you complete a card someone discovers a character, presumably from that area of the map. The artifacts don't really add much to the theme although they add some depth to the world and a lot of depth to gameplay. The title is the theme of the game, which is great in my book.
Genre, Style, and Conventions (A+)
I would probably say the genre of Roam is 'unconventional-fantasy themed games that are accessible to a wide range of players.' Catacombs is in the same genre. Laukat has created his own signature style, both in his art by itself and in his game experiences. Because of his shared world-building across his games, I'm positive all of his design choices are motivated by the larger lore, rather than just included for purely aesthetic reasons. Conventions are tricky to look at from a theme perspective, as they would be conventions built across Laukat's other games, which I have not played. Mechanically, the game introduces enough new ideas to feel fresh while still feeling like a fairly conventional area majority game. I guess I'll lump graphics and the rule book in conventions; both are very good.
Overall, my only two complaints with Roam are the oddness of the lore and the table-shape problem you can run into with four players. I gave this game a 9 on BGG and an A- average here, which lines up pretty well.
No comments:
Post a Comment