Both games are remarkable for two reasons. First, they both engage all players during everyone's turn, rather than forcing players to roll, move their piece, have something happen, and then idle painfully for 20 minutes while others make their moves. Second, their entertainment is derived primarily from the tenets of politics and game theory: namely, that you not only do you care greatly about what your fellow players are doing, but winning or losing the game is strongly dependent on your capacity and/or willingnesss to cooperate with each other. Each game is built upon the need to acqure and use resources to earn the points needed for victory; however different resources have different values and gain additional value when used in combination, and the ways in which such resources are distributed among players, particularly early on, is strongly based on luck--in a manner not at all unlike how real life operates. However, how you use what you've been given is really what ultimately decides your fate.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d9a61/d9a615667e8af539b1ddc792d0bc6440c5040282" alt=""
In Bohnanza, each player has a bean "farm" on which he/she can plant a couple of several different types of beans, which are represented by cards; the more cards you lay down, the more you are planting, and if you reach a given threshold number of cards you can sell the harvest for gold coins (whoever has the most in the end wins). However, some beans are scarcer than others (i.e. fewer cards in the deck), and thus require fewer cards to achieve the same number of gold coins. For example, one type of bean may have 24 cards in circulation, and thus requres 4 cards planted to equal 1 gold coin, 7 cards for 2 gold coins etc., while another type of bean may only have 4 cards available, and so planting just 2 may get you 2 gold coins. Of course, the glory is in the ability for players to trade with one another, to screw each other over, or to build the ultimate socialist utopia, as my two friends and I have done in the first game I had ever played, where we all took a highly cooperative approach and magically and unknowningly finished the game in a 19-19-19 tie.
Meanwhile, Settlers of Catan tells the story of settlers (you) arriving on a far-away island where each player seeks to build the largest settlement using the resources of lumber, grain, ore, clay, and wool; however, the board is broken up into an array of hexagons, each of which contain only
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e160d/e160dd1eae1e086d842d061c8188d188b2594415" alt=""
Ah, and not to mention that Settlers has expansion packs, of which I have yet to try but will no doubt very soon. In some sense, Bohnanza represents the bare bones of what makes board games with other humans fun--namely, meaningful human interaction--while Settlers takes this framework as the basis for something surprisingly rich and yet still very simple and easy to learn. I'm not saying that I'd give up my Stratego in a heartbeat, but certainly it's sad to think that I didn't have access when I was little to the games the German kids have. Luckily, it's never too late to start.
No comments:
Post a Comment