RPG-style Board Games

[damiller]

Hmmm...I've just never found much to HeroQuest. It's a pretty basic game. It's better than those miniatures-based D&D Games that basically ripped it off, for sure, but there isn't a lot to the basic system, and I kind of hate rolling the dice for your movement as a mechanic, both in a story sense and in a gameplay sense. And it's way too easy - Zargon almost never has much of a chance (your main job, if you draw the short straw and have to play him, is to place stuff on the board and roll dice for your typically overmatched minions).

To me, it's not complex enough, in strategy or story, to offer much immersion, and it feels less like an RPG than a board game simulator of a simple dungeon crawl video game. I can see it if I was introducing young kids to RPG concepts, though - it's probably super fun as a family game.

It is really simple. I'll give you that. But having only recently played it, I realized that the Zargon position, is a perfect GM teaching tool.

You have a very limited space, and very tight goal, and a way to learn to run an RPG with training wheels on. And I think that is really valuable at this time when "being a GM" is not as clear as it used to be what with all the options.

 

[payn]

To me, it's not complex enough, in strategy or story, to offer much immersion, and it feels less like an RPG than a board game simulator of a simple dungeon crawl video game. I can see it if I was introducing young kids to RPG concepts, though - it's probably super fun as a family game.

Thats really what Heroquest is. I had no friends or family that played D&D or any RPGs. My younger brother and I tried to make heads and tails of a D&D box set around age 11 and 9. We got absolutely nowhere without help. Enter Heroquest. Now this was something we could grok and it supplied hours of fun. We obviously moved on but I couldnt find a better gateway to the world of Fantasy RPG than HQ!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

We had a lot of fun with Talisman in the 80s. I've played it since, and I don't think it's wild randomness holds up for adult players as well as it does for teens.

Also from the 80s, The Awful Green Things from Outer Space was great.

 

[Andvari]

Hmmm...I've just never found much to HeroQuest. It's a pretty basic game. It's better than those miniatures-based D&D Games that basically ripped it off, for sure, but there isn't a lot to the basic system, and I kind of hate rolling the dice for your movement as a mechanic, both in a story sense and in a gameplay sense. And it's way too easy - Zargon almost never has much of a chance (your main job, if you draw the short straw and have to play him, is to place stuff on the board and roll dice for your typically overmatched minions).

To me, it's not complex enough, in strategy or story, to offer much immersion, and it feels less like an RPG than a board game simulator of a simple dungeon crawl video game. I can see it if I was introducing young kids to RPG concepts, though - it's probably super fun as a family game.

You definitely need to hack it for the best experience if the players have any tactical skill. Also the choke points at the doors can get repetitive.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

We had a lot of fun with Talisman in the 80s. I've played it since, and I don't think it's wild randomness holds up for adult players as well as it does for teens.

I only got to play Talisman as an adult, and while I can see how it might have been a hit before multiplayer computer roleplaying games, it really doesn't hold up now. It's not much of a board game and doesn't really scratch the roleplaying adventure itch, either. Fantastic miniatures, though.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I only got to play Talisman as an adult, and while I can how it might have been a hit before multiplayer computer roleplaying games, it really doesn't hold up now. It's not much of a board game and doesn't really scratch the roleplaying adventure itch, either. Fantastic miniatures, though.

The original version had card standees, but I would take “not much of a game” as meaning that the randomness and lack of balance murders any attempt to win by good tactics. Which was a strength for a bunch of kids at boarding school on a Sunday afternoon. No one was seriously trying to win, we just laughed at the random misfortunes of the other players.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The original version had card standees, but I would take “not much of a game” as meaning that the randomness and lack of balance murders any attempt to win by good tactics. Which was a strength for a bunch of kids at boarding school on a Sunday afternoon. No one was seriously trying to win, we just laughed at the random misfortunes of the other players.

Board games are today judged by how much player skill can impact things. Talisman is more strategic than Candyland, but not by a lot.

If it were being designed today, it would involve a lot more player agency than just going back and forth in rings around the end goal until they could get in.

I would play it again in a circumstance where the game wasn't the focus, but food and drink were instead. It seems perfect for that level of engagement.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Board games are today judged by how much player skill can impact things.

Which is a problem, really. Sometimes you just want to have a laugh without having to think too hard.

The board game business has become very po-faced.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Which is a problem, really. Sometimes you just want to have a laugh without having to think too hard.

The board game business has become very po-faced.

Oh, for sure. There's a big gap between Euro games, which are serious business, and modern party games. Happily, there's a ton of party games nowadays, many of them great.

 

[payn]

Board games are today judged by how much player skill can impact things. Talisman is more strategic than Candyland, but not by a lot.

If it were being designed today, it would involve a lot more player agency than just going back and forth in rings around the end goal until they could get in.

I would play it again in a circumstance where the game wasn't the focus, but food and drink were instead. It seems perfect for that level of engagement.

I think that sells Talisman a bit short. I agree with you that many board games now focus on player skill over random luck, but thats not to say Talisman requires none. It's true that random luck plays a large part, but knowing how to mitigate that luck in a risk reward analysis does take some skill. It's also more player interactive than it appears.