Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
5 Posts

...and then, we held hands.» Forums » Rules

Subject: Objectives rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Matt Williams
United Kingdom
Penkridge
Staffordshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Is there a mechanical reason why the objectives are placed in 2 separate stacks (one per player) and then you draw from alternate stacks? It would seem easier (although less thematic) to simply draw the objectives from one stack.

When I first started to read the rules and it says that at the start of your turn if there is no current objective you draw from your deck, I assumed that one of the mechanics in play would be a conscious management of who actually completed the objectives and that if one stack ran out quicker than the other then the game would end. If this is the case then the rest of the rulebook does not mention it and the game would be a lot harder.

The game looks really interesting and I can't wait to give it a try
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Chircop
Malta
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Putting the objective stack into one big pile would achieve the same mechanical effect. Although there is no thematic sense to doing that. That is the reason they are on two different stacks. Each mechanic in the game is derived from a thematic conception.

It it both more intuitive as well as more thematic, for the reason of storytelling and theme to each have his own emotional objective. The game should always be played with the theme in account, because the theme is what it was born from and not vice versa.


I didn't quite understand what you meant with the second paragraph, but the rulebook is currently being re-written. We are planning of releasing an update of the P&P files soon, with an updated ruleset, board, and a special card to allow you to cover the top card of the hand.

Dave
4 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Heiko Günther
Germany
Saarbrücken
Saarland
flag msg tools
designer
Coming soon: Peak Oil Spillover!
badge
I spent 100 GG so you can read this.
Avatar
I can't think of any great thematic reasons to have two objective stacks in a relationship, while I could find quite a few to justify drawing them from the same stack.

Sure, you could argue that people in a relationship still are single entities with their own goals in life, but in this case, being able to fulfill the other players objective makes no sense at all. ("Hey, you always wanted to visit Paris, let me do that for you...")

Also, I don't get how most of this game should result from thematic musings; In case the thematic foundation is supposed to be relationships in the real world and our times that is. In case you are trying to model a mashup of romantic love in eighteenth century boudoir literature and existential philosophy, it seems to work pretty well.

For example, thematically, supposing the real world is the model, using your partners cards could mean to, for example, anger him or her by doing something you see important to do to reach a certain objective in your relationship. Perhaps that love vacation in Paris is only possible during his or her mother's birthday or whatever. However, this would alter my partner's, not my, emotional balance. So this can't be the thematic reason. (Unless the theme is actually 'unfulfilled emotion vampire relationships' or something along those lines. But even those creatures have learned that spoken communication is one of the basic principles of a working relationship...)

BTW, how you actually fulfill objectives is not mentioned in the current rules.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Glen Graham
United States
Carmichael
CA
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Heiko,

Of all the years I've been reading BGG, I don't think I've ever seen a new game come out that claims to be thematic where someone didn't do a post like yours, showing how it wasn't thematic. What this game tries to do is very courageous: simulate the patching up of a relationship with a 30 minute abstract game, with no pictures, and NO TALKING about what's going on!

Obviously, to make this to work will require some imagination, no matter how well-designed the game is. You came up with a scenario which didn't fit the theme in your mind, but Rahdo gave us an hour and a half of video showing how every part of the game was thematic in his mind, with lots of examples.

With a game so abstract and open-ended, you will always be able to imagine a way that a certain set of cards wouldn't make sense in the real world, but with just a little more imagination (as Rahdo showed), you could also come with ways that it does make sense.

You argued that fulfilling your partner's needs would balance your partner emotionally, and not yourself. I beg to differ, because I believe that everything we do is ultimately selfish, and is to make ourselves feel 'better' in one way or another.

But this is all subjective, and there have been countless books written on the subject. The beauty of the game is that it puts your that mindset, so that you consider the different aspects of relationships, and what makes them work, or not work.

I have never played the game, but I hope my wife is up to playing it - it sounds fascinating.

[edit]
After rereading your post, it sounds like you may think the game is thematic, but are just arguing to change one rule. That's what I love about boardgames - you can do what you want. If putting the cards in one stack works better for you, more power to you!
3 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Heiko Günther
Germany
Saarbrücken
Saarland
flag msg tools
designer
Coming soon: Peak Oil Spillover!
badge
I spent 100 GG so you can read this.
Avatar
Hey Glen,

Sorry, I have not seen Rahdo's video, so I can't possibly comment on that.

I was posting in direct reaction to Dave's post above and reading through the rules, trying to figure out how on earth those mechanics might be thematic or, as Dave puts it, derived from a thematic conception. Maybe that is what I got wrong: The game in its present form is not meant to be thematic but instead all mechanics or rules sprang originally from some thematic reason. If so, it would be interesting to know from which. The rulebook is kind of quiet on that topic.

If, on the other hand, it is indeed assumed that the game and its mechanics are thematic, they model a world I would not like to live in.

Quote:
You argued that fulfilling your partner's needs would balance your partner emotionally, and not yourself.
I was probably not very clear on that: What I wanted to say is that using my partner's cards, not fulfilling his objectives, should affect my partner's emotional balance, not mine.

Quote:
I have never played the game, but I hope my wife is up to playing it - it sounds fascinating.
I have also not played the game and will most likely not try to - it does not sound fascinating to me at all. Don't get me wrong here, it's not because of the theme, which I find highly interesting, but because it is far too abstract for my taste. I feel it lacks in 'thematicness'.
 
 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.