Print

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

[LastFootnote]

First there was Dominion. People thought, "Wow, a game where you build the deck during the game itself! What a great idea! Let's make one of those." And so the genre of deckbuilding was created and we now have them coming out of our ears. To my knowledge, none of them has enjoyed nearly the success of Dominion.

There are a lot of reasons that Dominion stays on top, but I believe the single biggest thing Dominion has that many of the other deckbuilders lack has nothing to do with the deckbuilding portion of the game. For the purposes of this post, I'm calling it the Donald X. Variety Mechanic (DXVM).

The DXVM basically means that before each game starts, you randomly (or perhaps non-randomly) pick a subset of components to use in that game. In Dominion, that component is the Kingdom cards. In Kingdom Builder, it's both the boards and the Kingdom Builder cards (the Victory conditions). In Gauntlet of Fools, it's the Class and Weapon cards that comprise the Heroes. In Nefarious (though I haven't yet played it), it's the Twists.

I'm nearly certain Donald X. did not invent this mechanic. If nothing else, Cosmic Encounter has randomly-determined variable player powers, which is like the DXVM, but I'd argue different due to its asymmetry. BGG has Gauntlet of Fools listed as having "Variable Player Powers", but since drafting those powers is the first half of the game, I think that's misleading.

I want to differentiate this mechanic from other similar mechanics that randomize the starting game state, but don't actually leave out any components. For instance, Settlers of Catan and Kingdom Builder both have "Modular Boards", but Settlers always uses all of the board pieces in each game, whereas Kingdom Builder uses a subset. Likewise Gauntlet of Fools and SmallWorld both have "Variable Player Powers" (according to BGG), but SmallWorld puts all of them in a hidden, random stack each game, whereas in Gauntlet you only use one (or two) of them per player. Also, you know before a DXVM game starts exactly which components were chosen for that game. There is no face-down stack of hidden components that you discover as the game progresses (with very few exceptions). Conversely, you also know which components won't be in the game and can play accordingly.

ANYWAY, sorry for rambling on. What I hope to accomplish by starting this thread is to have people suggest an actual name for this mechanic, since I haven't been able to come up with one and Donald X. Variety Mechanic clearly isn't going to fly as a name. I want a good name because I've come to realize that this mechanic is the biggest determinant of whether or not I love a tabletop game, but BoardGameGeek does not yet recognize it as a distinct mechanic. If you believe their listings, Dominion, Kingdom Builder, and Guantlet of Fools have zero mechanics in common.

Dominion: Card Drafting, Deck/Pool Building, Hand Management
Kingdom Builder: Area Control/Area Influence, Area Enclosure, Grid Movement, Modular Board, Route/Network Building
Gauntlet of Fools: Auction/Bidding, Dice Rolling, Player Elimination, Variable Player Powers

Anybody have any good ideas for names? I'm all ears.

[eHalcyon]

That might be an interesting Settlers variant -- have some extra tiles such that it's not the same proportion of resources in every game.  I guess the randomization of chits already does that to an extent, but I really wonder how weird the game would play if, for example, there was only a single Wood hex.  Or not even a single Wheat hex?  I imagine in such cases that ports would become much more valuable.




As far as naming goes, I suggest something along the lines of "Variable Setup".  This category would be nearly a superset of "Modular Board" and "Variable Player Powers".  But not entirely.  Saying "setup" is meant to convey that the variables are set and known at the start of the game, rather than having unknown elements to discover during play.

[sudgy]

That might be an interesting Settlers variant -- have some extra tiles such that it's not the same proportion of resources in every game.  I guess the randomization of chits already does that to an extent, but I really wonder how weird the game would play if, for example, there was only a single Wood hex.  Or not even a single Wheat hex?  I imagine in such cases that ports would become much more valuable.

I've played on boards where everybody can only start where there's only wood (there's more outside other than wood, but you can only start in the wood), with a bunch of 2:1 wood trades.  It's pretty interesting.

On topic, I have no idea for a name...

[HiveMindEmulator]

variable component inclusion/exclusion?

[ftl]

That might be an interesting Settlers variant -- have some extra tiles such that it's not the same proportion of resources in every game.  I guess the randomization of chits already does that to an extent, but I really wonder how weird the game would play if, for example, there was only a single Wood hex.  Or not even a single Wheat hex?  I imagine in such cases that ports would become much more valuable.

I've definitely had boards where there's only one reasonable hex for a given resource - like, the distribution of Ore is '2, 12, something' or the wood is 2, 3, 10, 6 but the 10 is way out on the edge, on the desert, next to a 12 or something and so nobody gets it.

I don't know whether having *more* of those sorts of games would make settlers better; I don't think so.

[blueblimp]

This is one reason Boggle is my favourite word game.

Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm has a "goals" mechanic which are chosen randomly at the start and are public knowledge.

An interesting aspect of Dominion's use of this mechanic is that most components are left out of each game. In Dominion, that's true even when playing with only the base set. With the number of cards in the base set, you need to play at least 3 times or so to even see every card in the base game, never mind master them. That's pretty good value for 1 box.

[dondon151]

There's a bit of a difference between Dominion and the Settlers variant because in Dominion, the base components always exist in the form of basic Treasures.

[jonts26]

There's a bit of a difference between Dominion and the Settlers variant because in Dominion, the base components always exist in the form of basic Treasures.

And since buying only treasures is often the best strategy, it's not all that different.

[Thisisnotasmile]

I agree with something along the lines of "variable setup" as the best option, but I'd like to come at it from a different angle and suggest "expansion included". If you consider the fewest components needed to play a game as the "base" (or "core" set, then all of these DXVM games come with additional components that aren't part of that base set. They come with expansion components which can be used to mix the game up, create more variety between games, and increase replayability. Obviously, some of these games have further, non-included, expansions to create further variety and replayability and that's why these games don't get old. They're different enough every time for a very long time.

[qmech]

I agree with something along the lines of "variable setup" as the best option, but I'd like to come at it from a different angle and suggest "expansion included". If you consider the fewest components needed to play a game as the "base" (or "core" set, then all of these DXVM games come with additional components that aren't part of that base set. They come with expansion components which can be used to mix the game up, create more variety between games, and increase replayability. Obviously, some of these games have further, non-included, expansions to create further variety and replayability and that's why these games don't get old. They're different enough every time for a very long time.

Expansions aren't quite the same.  Even if a game has 3 expansions and you can choose to use each or not independently, you only get 8 different experiences.  An essential part of the DXVM is that there are a large number of genuinely different set-ups, ideally so many that the only sensible way to choose between them is to do it randomly.

[sudgy]

I agree with something along the lines of "variable setup" as the best option, but I'd like to come at it from a different angle and suggest "expansion included". If you consider the fewest components needed to play a game as the "base" (or "core" set, then all of these DXVM games come with additional components that aren't part of that base set. They come with expansion components which can be used to mix the game up, create more variety between games, and increase replayability. Obviously, some of these games have further, non-included, expansions to create further variety and replayability and that's why these games don't get old. They're different enough every time for a very long time.

Expansions aren't quite the same.  Even if a game has 3 expansions and you can choose to use each or not independently, you only get 8 different experiences.  An essential part of the DXVM is that there are a large number of genuinely different set-ups, ideally so many that the only sensible way to choose between them is to do it randomly.

You doing that tiny bit of math made me wonder what the exact number of combinations of dominion cards is.  It's 104881297907455223616000.

[qmech]

Oh, sudgy, you don't know what you've started.  Last time someone asked that question we got a whole thread out of it, and we didn't have as many sets back then.  Sample question: have you accounted for the extra games where Young Witch is in the Black Market?

How many cards in Dominion?

Enough.

Sacrilege.

[Polk5440]

That might be an interesting Settlers variant -- have some extra tiles such that it's not the same proportion of resources in every game.  I guess the randomization of chits already does that to an extent, but I really wonder how weird the game would play if, for example, there was only a single Wood hex.  Or not even a single Wheat hex?  I imagine in such cases that ports would become much more valuable.

You can do this with Settlers if you have expansions. Because you have more tiles, you can then do a regular 3-4 player game randomized from a larger set of tiles.

Even in the base game you don't use all of the ports available (if you use the port tokens) -- but it's not really that much variety.

[Davio]

I don't think variable setup is sufficient.

As mentioned, Settlers could also be included just by rearranging the numbers and I don't think that's what's intended.
What is "setup" anyway? Does it incorporate dealing out player powers? If so, Cosmic Encounter also qualifies.

I like random component subset or something along those lines. You always play with a strict subset of everything that's in the box, even though you can choose what components to pick. I included "random" or we'd end up with Lotr TCG and the likes, heck, even Magic.

Would Small World count? I don't think so because you generally shuffle up every race and power even if you don't end up using them in the game. Games where you leave stuff in the box because you don't have enough players or have some promos also don't count.

Can we find another game? 7 Wonders is a decent candidate, not because of the wonders, but because you randomly pick some Guilds. I believe even with 7 (or 8 ) players some Guilds don't get picked. Then again if we include every game which leaves a few stuff out, it might be too broad.

Agricola then? There are a gazillion cards, only some of which get picked. I think it fits. Better than 7 Wonders at least.

[Tables]

I think a key difference between Dominion and the likes of Agricola, Small World and 7 Wonders is the known component subset. In Agricola, you know what you have, but you don't know what your opponents have - unless you limit the small improvements/occupations you're using somehow, they could have any combination of them, and you don't know which. Similar in 7 Wonders - only 5-9 guilds are used, but you don't know which ones they are.

On top of that I think the impact of the random component subset is a key feature. Of course this is very hard to quantify, but I think it's important nevertheless. Dominion and (as best I can tell) Kingdom Builder are influenced massively by the set of components you use. Two different setups often require a radically different approach, and the different setups make certain strategies vary in power hugely. By comparison, even if you knew which guilds were in a game of 7 wonders, it would likely not influence your strategy very much - you might make a few different plays knowing what is (and isn't) coming, but mostly I think you'd play the same way. Agricola's harder to say because knowing the component setup also means (I think?) perfect information on your opponent's hand in 2 player, and a good idea of it in 3+.

[Davio]

So what game, not designed by DXV and not a ripoff, has a known random component subset? 

[LastFootnote]

So what game, not designed by DXV and not a ripoff, has a known random component subset? 

I'm thinking, but I'm not coming up with anything. Which games are "ripoffs" is up for debate, but if you mean games that aren't post-Dominion deckbuilders, I've got nothing.

Then again, I haven't played a huge selection of board and card games.

[Tables]

So what game, not designed by DXV and not a ripoff, has a known random component subset? 

I think this is the reason it feels like such a unique mechanic. Off the top of my head, it's an option for the expansions in Through the Ages, but I don't even know if that's official or a fan mechanic.

Edit: And if you aren't familiar with those games, I'd say, it's nowhere near as big an impact as in Dominion, but it has much more impact than guilds would in 7 Wonders.

[Davio]

Browsing the top games on BGG the first I think is noteworthy (that I actually know) is Suburbia.

Here's a quote:

During each game, players compete for several unique goals that offer an additional population boost – and the buildings available in each game vary, so you'll never play the same game twice!

Of course this is post-Dominion, but as it's a tile layer and not a deckbuilder I don't think it's a straight ripoff.

[Kuildeous]

So what game, not designed by DXV and not a ripoff, has a known random component subset? 

Wiz War can have a random starting setup. Or you can pick your schools of magic. It's not too unlike Dominion in that regard—just on a smaller scale. You always play with Cantrips, and you play with three (I believe) additional schools of magic.

In fact, I picked up Wiz War because of Dominion. I read somewhere (I think from DXV) how Dominion's randomness is a definite nod toward Cosmic Encounter and Wiz War.

As for the name, I'd probably go with something like Modular Setup.  You remove certain bits. In Wiz War, you remove the other handful of decks of cards. In Dominion, you remove the other nearly 200 decks of cards. If you treat each deck as a module, then that kind of fits.

[Thisisnotasmile]

So what game, not designed by DXV and not a ripoff, has a known random component subset? 

Terra Mystica.

[Kirian]

Even in the base game you don't use all of the ports available (if you use the port tokens) -- but it's not really that much variety.

What version of Settlers are you playing?  There are nine ports (1 each of each resource, 4 of 3:1) and nine places for them.

[eHalcyon]

Haven't randomized goals been around for a while? I'm sure there are many that use that mechanic. Suburbia has been mentioned. There is also Palaces of Carrara. Among the Stars has objective cards too. I'm sure there are more.

[Polk5440]

Even in the base game you don't use all of the ports available (if you use the port tokens) -- but it's not really that much variety.

What version of Settlers are you playing?  There are nine ports (1 each of each resource, 4 of 3:1) and nine places for them.

In the last year I got a recent copy of the original and had a couple extra 3:1 tokens. Maybe I just got some extras?

[Tables]

Browsing the top games on BGG the first I think is noteworthy (that I actually know) is Suburbia.

Here's a quote:

During each game, players compete for several unique goals that offer an additional population boost – and the buildings available in each game vary, so you'll never play the same game twice!

Of course this is post-Dominion, but as it's a tile layer and not a deckbuilder I don't think it's a straight ripoff.

Oh, yeah, I've played Suburbia a few times. I don't really know if I'd count it as the same thing. You can get a decent number of points from goals, but you can also win quite comfortably while losing every goal. There's also variable tiles in each stack, but it's unknown what's there. The game itself is nothing like Dominion, more like Carcasonne with a personal layout each (but more fun).

So what game, not designed by DXV and not a ripoff, has a known random component subset? 

Terra Mystica.

TM I could definitely agree with. The bonus tiles and scoring tiles do often influence your strategy considerably. It also makes me think there's something else DXV variety really needs, which is quantity. Dominion (base) alone has over 3 million possible games, and including all expansions bumps that up to well over 10^16. TM has... a variable amount depending on player count, but for 4 player (what I see most recommended) it's... less than 700,000 (would be 8!/2*9C7, except the 8!/2 is an overestimate of different scoring tile layouts - not to mention a good number are extremely similar e.g. permuting the dwelling > 2VP tiles makes little difference). And when you consider than Domion base kind of feels a bit samey before not too long... yeah.

[Polk5440]

Even in the base game you don't use all of the ports available (if you use the port tokens) -- but it's not really that much variety.

What version of Settlers are you playing?  There are nine ports (1 each of each resource, 4 of 3:1) and nine places for them.

In the last year I got a recent copy of the original and had a couple extra 3:1 tokens. Maybe I just got some extras?

It could also be that I don't always set up the ports correctly. That happens from time to time, too.

[eHalcyon]

Even in the base game you don't use all of the ports available (if you use the port tokens) -- but it's not really that much variety.

What version of Settlers are you playing?  There are nine ports (1 each of each resource, 4 of 3:1) and nine places for them.

In the last year I got a recent copy of the original and had a couple extra 3:1 tokens. Maybe I just got some extras?

It could also be that I don't always set up the ports correctly. That happens from time to time, too.

IIRC, the setup rule is just that no two ports are adjacent.  You alternate port and blank water.

[shMerker]

So what game, not designed by DXV and not a ripoff, has a known random component subset? 

The Chaos Pack for We Didn't Playtest This At All has a dozen or so cards. Each is essentially an extra rule for the game. The intended use is to have one or two randomly selected and put into play for a game and then replace them afterward.

Mario Golf has a mode called Club Slots where before each hole the players use a slot machine to select what clubs they'll be allowed to use. From the usual 14 you only get 3 plus your putter.

I suspect one of the reasons that the mechanic is so uncommon is that adding components to a game increases it's cost, so adding components that won't always be used is harder to justify.

[sudgy]

Oh, sudgy, you don't know what you've started.  Last time someone asked that question we got a whole thread out of it, and we didn't have as many sets back then.  Sample question: have you accounted for the extra games where Young Witch is in the Black Market?

Crap.  Didn't think about that, just said if it was taking 10 random cards from 205.  Oh well.

[LastFootnote]

I suspect one of the reasons that the mechanic is so uncommon is that adding components to a game increases it's cost, so adding components that won't always be used is harder to justify.

I think you're right. Yet doing so has the potential to significantly increase the replayability of the game. It's counterintuitive.

[ftl]

I bet the market incentive for making someone's first play memorable is much, much higher than the incentive for making sure that a game lasts for hundreds of plays. And it's a lot easier to playtest for testing that than for longevity.

[LastFootnote]

I bet the market incentive for making someone's first play memorable is much, much higher than the incentive for making sure that a game lasts for hundreds of plays.

Sure, if you're selling a standalone game. Not if you plan to sell expansions. If after a dozen plays they're still interested in the game, I'd imagine it's easier to sell them more of said game.

[Polk5440]

Magic. Sort of. The universe of cards is large; what's in your deck and your opponents' decks are limited. Depends how you construct decks, too. Drafting from boosters for example would qualify here, probably.

[blueblimp]

So what game, not designed by DXV and not a ripoff, has a known random component subset? 

I listed two earlier in the thread: Boggle (the available letters are chosen randomly, shown to all players, and every player has equal access to them); Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm (the goals).

[popsofctown]

I'm not sure that random organization of the board is totally different from excluding part of the board.  What if you play Catan with Seafarers, and sometimes the Gold hex is so far from everything else no one is really going to build to it.  The Gold hex is essentially excluded. 

DXV is just more aggressive about modularizing his game is all. 

[popsofctown]

On that note, the newest Innovation expansion has a large stack of cards that are hard to draw from, so the ones on the bottom of the random ordering get essentially "excluded".  I think this will make it a much better expansion than the previous one, which made it very easy to draw all the cards from the first 3 ages.

[Ratsia]

I'm not sure that random organization of the board is totally different from excluding part of the board.

Related to that, Power Grid uses map exclusion to create variability. It is done only when playing with few players and only produces a few alternative versions, but still.

It's indeed interesting how few designers have followed Donald's idea. In terms of production cost it makes sense to avoid lots and lots of components that are not used in most games, but the success of Donald's games has shown that for quick enough games it works. For longer and heavier games small-scale exclusion has always been used (think about games like Arkham Horror where you randomly choose one opponent, or games with multiple scenarios), and quite likely large-scale exclusion would not be a good idea anyway -- especially for theme-rich games the box often anyway contains a lot of stuff and even if not excluding parts of them explicitly you will not see many of the components in any single game (think of Mage Knight and such).

[Tables]

Having given this a little more thought, I'd say these are the key things the DXV games have to give them their unique feel. Note I wouldn't say you necessarily need ALL of them, and occasionally some might get broken (think Black Market) but in general I think these are the things that matter.

Modular components: You only use some proper subset of the components each game

Large impact: The modular components selected are one of the most major impacts on the game. Games will play very differently depending on what components are selected. As an example, Terra Mystica has bonus tiles and scoring tiles, and they have a reasonably big impact on races and strategies. But their impact only really makes some strategies a little better or worse, it's rare for it to make specific strategies become suddenly much more powerful, and the like.

Visibility: I think this is key. While many other games might only see a small subset of components each game just by virtue of a deck being too big, or nobody activating certain mechanics or the like, the DXV games explicitly show you what's available and by deduction, what isn't. For example pops mentions Innovation - and while it's likely a lot of cards won't be drawn (heck, ~10% of the cards in base aren't available due to achievements), you don't know in advance - you can't plan for the fact that Gunpowder isn't in the game because it might be, every time.

Huge variety: A little hard to quantify, but the amount of possible options should be massive, typically in the millions or billions of possible options, just in the setup. For example, Tzolkin has its monuments, but you only ever select up to 6 from 13 - which is only about 1,700 different options.

[LastFootnote]

Having given this a little more thought, I'd say these are the key things the DXV games have to give them their unique feel. Note I wouldn't say you necessarily need ALL of them, and occasionally some might get broken (think Black Market) but in general I think these are the things that matter.

Modular components: You only use some proper subset of the components each game

Large impact: The modular components selected are one of the most major impacts on the game. Games will play very differently depending on what components are selected. As an example, Terra Mystica has bonus tiles and scoring tiles, and they have a reasonably big impact on races and strategies. But their impact only really makes some strategies a little better or worse, it's rare for it to make specific strategies become suddenly much more powerful, and the like.

Visibility: I think this is key. While many other games might only see a small subset of components each game just by virtue of a deck being too big, or nobody activating certain mechanics or the like, the DXV games explicitly show you what's available and by deduction, what isn't. For example pops mentions Innovation - and while it's likely a lot of cards won't be drawn (heck, ~10% of the cards in base aren't available due to achievements), you don't know in advance - you can't plan for the fact that Gunpowder isn't in the game because it might be, every time.

Huge variety: A little hard to quantify, but the amount of possible options should be massive, typically in the millions or billions of possible options, just in the setup. For example, Tzolkin has its monuments, but you only ever select up to 6 from 13 - which is only about 1,700 different options.

I think this is a good list, but I would define the fourth tenant slightly differently. I would say that the raw number of combinations of options is less important than how many of the total options you use in each game. Donald X. games seem to use less than half (sometimes far less) of the modular components in each game. I think this is a big part of what makes each game feel so different. Having 25 cards and using 20 of them each game is going to start feeling samey way before using just 10 of them. Or having 12 and using 10 for that matter; that gets old fast.

[Tables]

Having given this a little more thought, I'd say these are the key things the DXV games have to give them their unique feel. Note I wouldn't say you necessarily need ALL of them, and occasionally some might get broken (think Black Market) but in general I think these are the things that matter.

Modular components: You only use some proper subset of the components each game

Large impact: The modular components selected are one of the most major impacts on the game. Games will play very differently depending on what components are selected. As an example, Terra Mystica has bonus tiles and scoring tiles, and they have a reasonably big impact on races and strategies. But their impact only really makes some strategies a little better or worse, it's rare for it to make specific strategies become suddenly much more powerful, and the like.

Visibility: I think this is key. While many other games might only see a small subset of components each game just by virtue of a deck being too big, or nobody activating certain mechanics or the like, the DXV games explicitly show you what's available and by deduction, what isn't. For example pops mentions Innovation - and while it's likely a lot of cards won't be drawn (heck, ~10% of the cards in base aren't available due to achievements), you don't know in advance - you can't plan for the fact that Gunpowder isn't in the game because it might be, every time.

Huge variety: A little hard to quantify, but the amount of possible options should be massive, typically in the millions or billions of possible options, just in the setup. For example, Tzolkin has its monuments, but you only ever select up to 6 from 13 - which is only about 1,700 different options.

I think this is a good list, but I would define the fourth tenant slightly differently. I would say that the raw number of combinations of options is less important than how many of the total options you use in each game. Donald X. games seem to use less than half (sometimes far less) of the modular components in each game. I think this is a big part of what makes each game feel so different. Having 25 cards and using 20 of them each game is going to start feeling samey way before using just 10 of them. Or having 12 and using 10 for that matter; that gets old fast.

Very good point. Yeah, I think you've hit the nail on the head. I was trying to think to myself, why don't the bonus cards in TM feel quite the same, and the reason is you typically use about 7 of 9. Using a much smaller fraction as well as having a huge number of possible combinations combines to give great replayability I think.

[popsofctown]

You raise a good point about forward knowledge of how things have changed.  That's pretty key to opening up new strategies.  Unfortunately even if Gunpowder is removed and in the achievements, the best way to play is to assume it isn't.

Games like Smallworld give you a limited forecast of what's coming up.  But it's impossible to strike a perfect balance between information overload and imperfect knowledge about what components are included