Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
20 Posts

Nothing Personal» Forums » Rules

Subject: Gangsters 8-4? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Therron Thomas
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I may have missed a rule somewhere in my read through but I don't understand something in the setup.

The rule book states:

"Shuffle the remaining Gangster cards. Deal a card face-up into the 8th
position (Underboss) then the 7th (Counselor) and so forth in order
down to the 4th position (Bean Counter). If at any time a dealt card is a Gangster type that is the same as any previous Gangsters dealt, (Thug,
Hitman, Conman, Gambler) remove that card and deal a new card to that
position until it is of a different type than all previously placed Gangsters."

However there are only 4 types listed and shown.

8-7-6-5-4 = 5 Positions.

How can you not have a repeat in any of the spots with 5 positions and only 4 types?

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Therron Thomas
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
trebormills wrote:
I commented on this in the rulebook preview thread

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/961710/rulebook-available

We need an erratta/faq response I guess



So it's not just my reading comprehention.

I am surpised as active as Tom is on here that he hasn't responded.

I agree this needs an FAQ soon. Moslty its a clear rule book but some fiddly errors in grammar make some things not as clear as they could be.


1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Vasel
United States
Homestead
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Love Games, Love 'Em!!!
badge
Check out DiceTower.com!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You are correct. It's a mistake.

It should say 8-5. I'm very sorry!
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Therron Thomas
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks Tom!

It shouldn't take you to much time to hand-pack an addemdum into every box before they're shipped. whistle

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dean Adam
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Tis a little stink to be planning the FAQ sheet and errata before the game is even off the press
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dann May
Australia
Victoria
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Hi! Pleased to meet you.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
moonglow wrote:
Tis a little stink to be planning the FAQ sheet and errata before the game is even off the press


I don't mean to single you out moonglow, it's more a perception that has been building up in me for a while, but I think in general the vocal wing of the board game community has slowly got more and more strident about demanding perfection in certain areas, often without consideration to all the factors, and to where it obscures a lot of the good work being done.

As you know it isn't the end of the world and it's not always easy to catch, even Tom himself who is big on rulebook proof reading, missed that one number. It happens. There will be a FAQ and it will get corrected next edition. Bottom line is designer games are more often than not huge creative endeavours produced by small teams and designers often attempting quite innovative, new and complex designs with a pressure to publish within a given time frame (if we were all creating tried and true designs like Checkers there would be a lot less problems). I know you probably have a lot of positive things to say about games, and maybe this game, but chiming in with a comment that casts a stink over what I think is a really nice game is just too much of a downer for me not to return serve. Sorry.

(Edit: spelling.... ironic )
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dean Adam
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well I guess we disagree. I don't think my comment was particularly strong, bewailing or negative. It is a shame for a game to be lumped with a faq sheet before its even printed.

I probably had much stronger things to say when I noticed a typo in my thesis when I was handing it in, and still sigh when I notice typos in documents I produced years later that had gone through multiple peer reviews. So yup I know mistakes happen.

I don't demand perfection. I also don't think the BGG community is particularly demanding. I think its a pretty sharp eyed forum that will notice and comment on pretty much anything... and much of its subjective and nothing to do with perfection. Often its in the nature of people clarifying something and wanting to compare experiences.

I think if the kind of comment I've made upsets you, and tarnishes the game, I'd worry how you'll take direct negative criticism of a game of your own.

I like to be balanced and fair with my comments. Although have my off days too. However, I'd bet that Tom himself is a little miffed that that crept though. I don't see how ignoring it changes that. But I don't see that acknowledging it detracts from the likely positive features of the game. I'm only watching the Nothing Personal threads because I have a copy of the game coming and I'm looking forward to playing it and excited about hearing people talk about it...

I do think that KS games tend to have more errors than games coming through publishing houses (if that's the correct term). And I think its disappointing and not particularly great for the hobby. Not every game published can be a Dominion or Settlers of Catan. But I think games getting published with rules that don't make sense, poorly tested mechanics and a need for a faq sheet doesn't sell the game world to people who don't subscribe to BGG. At least the vocal wing of BGG know where to get the FAQ! We're likely a tiny part of the BG community, although perhaps the trial by fire early adopters...

I was talking in another forum today and this came up a little:
Settlers - in 2011 was approaching 25 million copies sold: 50,000 owners on BGG

Dominion - end of 2010 had exceeded 1 million copies sold: 38,000 owners on BGG.

I guess on the plus side for KS, its easy to recontact game owners with amendments.

As I've said above I disagree that the BGG community, even a vocal minority is overly critical or expects perfection. To be honest, I've seen some pretty glowing reviews for some pretty mediocre games.

I appreciate that I started my games collection with many tried and true games. Games that had been around for years and had a chance to have their errors corrected through reprints and new editions. However, many of the top games are I believe still running with the same rule book they were first published with. I consider that this reflects the time and quality that has gone into them.

I don't consider rushing games to meet a timeframe should be a justifiable excuse for errors (although it is often likely to the reason/cause), no matter how minor. I get annoyed enough at work with people handing over shoddy writing because they left things to the last minute let alone want to buy in the same behavior in a hobby I enjoy!

I have a love hate thing with KS - but I do appreciate that it lets people produce game designs on a more ad hoc/part time basis, and many of these games might never have been produced. Although in many cases the world wouldn't be much worse off if that was the outcome.

Anyway, as I started, I guess we probably disagree. I like BGG most of the time for being what it is, a semi OCD crew super passionate about the same thing I am. I love their attention to detail and their commitment to their hobby. I think often they are too positive about somethings and sometimes over sweat the small stuff. But I'm glad to be part of it, and probably wouldn't change it much at all (some of the occasional misogyny or spin off personal attacks that never die might be the exceptions).

Again, repeating myself since this got a bit longer than I expected. But am looking forward to playing Nothing Personal. Will be a bit interesting seeing the responses... I mean Tom is kinda one of the BGG guru's/legends... what happens if he puts out a shite game? Even if its pretty good, will the community be a bit more scathing or critical cause its Tom? Me, I'm hoping for the next big thing! but 6-10 plays that are fun and memorable will be enough.

hmmm feels a bit of a hanging ending, but I cant think of any witty final rejoinder. Peace out?







1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Therron Thomas
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't mean to jump into this entertaining discussion again but I would like to interject two things.

First and foremost it took me literally 30 seconds to find this error. This bothers me and not just in this instance. Unlike bugs in video game that can be discovered on day one of a release simply because there are likely millions of people playing and surely someone will make the army tank drive through a mountain or whatever. This is English. A lot of people are able to read it. Many people understand it well. So if it isn't a simple error (meaning a typo like hitting the number 4 instead of 5 on a keyboard) then how does it escape proofing?

Please don't this as an attack on Tom. This rulebook is actually very well written and I think this game will do very well. I really enjoyed the demo game at Gencon and have been anxious to play again. I just see things like this in other rules and it leaves me puzzled.

Secondly I think the age of internet and kickstarter is causing an errata that accompanies the initial release to be a much more common thing. I personally think its awesome! Too often in the past a game is released and does very poorly in sales simply because of an error like this. Thankfully BGG and the internet have caused a ton of really great games to become really great game because the designer or producer are able to quickly answer questions and correct simple errors. There is no hope for some companies (I'm looking at you tasty minstrel) because they have horrible customer relations and some will fail because, lets face it, their game simply sucks.

In the case of Tom, I think we will get a streamlined FAQ / Errata that will make this game near perfect. The game itself is already top quality and entertaining.

Thanks to Al Gore all of this is possible! whistle


2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Will Baker
United States
St. Petersburg
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
A good man's steps are ordered by the Lord
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Got to play a partial game and I have to say it was fun! The components are outstanding and I have never seen thicker tiles. I wish I could of played the whole game but I was at Dice Tower con and about to go to another event. It is disappointing about rule misprints but it happens. Just check out a fantasy flight game. And they are pros!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Therron Thomas
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rvrratt wrote:
Got to play a partial game and I have to say it was fun! The components are outstanding and I have never seen thicker tiles. I wish I could of played the whole game but I was at Dice Tower con and about to go to another event. It is disappointing about rule misprints but it happens. Just check out a fantasy flight game. And they are pros!


Ha! Yeah Fantasy Flight have some doozies! I think they would be better off if they wouldn't spend half a page explaining what a D6 is.

I can't wait to play. Like I said, the Demo last year was awesome! Maybe the most fun I had playing a game at Gencon!

I wonder if I could make money as a proofreader for rule books? I think this is a service that is needed in the game world. Someone who know games really well (42 years of reading rules) and a good grasp of written instructions (30 years of reading op orders and regulations in the Army) could find these mistakes but likewise not be so familiar with the rules they are blind to them.

I am seriously not trying to nitpick because but I think most gamers could reason out most of the errors. But new gamers could be confused by things like this:

"During the Influence Phase, all players, beginning with the Capo, take
one action or pass in player order. When all players have passed, The
Commission phase ends."

Only once before this paragraph is an influence phase mentioned and then in this same paragraph it is again called the 'The Commision' phase.

The earlier mention of an influence phase is in the sentence immediately before the one above where its reads "Pass and do not play an Influence card. That player may take no more actions in the Influence phase."

'What Influence Phase?' would be the cry of inexperienced or casual gamers. Seasoned gamers would be 99.99% sure he just means the Commision Phase.

Semantics or pole vaulting over mouse droppings? Yes, but how do you read that and not ask yourself 'What is the Influence Phase?'

I mean it's 'Nothing Personal' after all.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Therron Thomas
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In a tie what happens if the tied players both throw the game off the roof at the same time? devil

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan S.
United States
Plano
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wanted or not, here's my two cents and how I read the filling of gangster positions 8-4:

Some gangsters are more than 1 type (a Gambler/Thug, for example). I read (past tense) the rule to mean that so long as positions 8-4 had no gangsters of exactly identical combinations of types, the setup requirement would be met. This made a lot of sense to me as if even a single "multi-type" gangster were dealt to one of those positions during setup, you've already made it impossible to have even 4 positions (forget about 5) with no duplications. I.e. if you've dealt a Hitman/Thug to position 8, now you have only 2 more unique single "types" left (Conmen and Gamblers) and 3 or 4 positions left to fill. Not possible.

So, either the setup instructions would need to indicate that you should also discard any "multi-type" gangsters drawn to these positions (which it doesn't) or the text "of a different type than all previously placed Gangsters" should be read to consider each combination of gangster "types" as different. Obviously, I read the latter and, based on the present available information, is the direction I would use.

Not sure if that was Tom's intention but it made immediate sense to me while reading the rulebook and thus I didn't question it until this thread came about.

Still, it would be good to know if the text was simply ambiguous or actually erroneous (which Tom's reply seems to point toward).

By the way, very much looking forward to this game. Fantastic work, Tom! By all indications, my group will love it!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Therron Thomas
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

I think his answer was clear. It was meant to be 8-5.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan S.
United States
Plano
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
twthomas wrote:

I think his answer was clear. It was meant to be 8-5.

I'm not entirely convinced that it fully addresses the issue though, mostly for the placement of "multi-type" gangsters. Even with only 4 positions to fill, they still cause a problem with the strict reading of the text. Still, I don't think it's a problem that is the slightest bit difficult to work around.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorgen Peddersen
Australia
Sydney
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Webhead123 wrote:
I read (past tense) the rule to mean that so long as positions 8-4 had no gangsters of exactly identical combinations of types, the setup requirement would be met. This made a lot of sense to me as if even a single "multi-type" gangster were dealt to one of those positions during setup, you've already made it impossible to have even 4 positions (forget about 5) with no duplications. I.e. if you've dealt a Hitman/Thug to position 8, now you have only 2 more unique single "types" left (Conmen and Gamblers) and 3 or 4 positions left to fill. Not possible.

I had exactly the same idea when I originally read the rules myself.

The new ruling that it is only 8-5 does confuse me too due to the presence of the multi-types. Either we should discard them during this stage or we should consider them as being just one of their types for the purpose of placement. It seems the rule is just there to ensure at least one of every type is present in those positions at the start of the game, so the latter would probably be the better option.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Therron Thomas
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You guys pose a good argument. Perhaps Tom will stop back by and clarify.

As for me, I figure when the designer of a game explains a rule, who am I to dispute it?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Therron Thomas
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for pointing that out. Good video and explanation.

I hope he wasn't referring to my post above when he talked about 'some guy going off about kickstarter'. If he was, he needs to read it again. LOL!

The rules are solid, mistakes are always there and thankfully, as I said above due to KS and the internet, we'll have an FAQ soon.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.