Cookie Fu Review

Today's game I first heard about when Dice Hate Me interviewed it's creator Brian Kowalski. After this, one of my friends mentioned that she had seen it at GenCon, and so I investigated it further. Ladies and gentlemen.... Cookie Fu!!!!

In Cookie Fu, each player creates their young fighter and can mold them by selecting different special moves for them to perform and different dice to use throughout the duel. After the setup, players roll their dice each round to determine initiative (there is a special die for this). After initiative has been determined, players roll all of their remaining die (and I can tell you from experience, the more dice you use the more fun the game is). The result of the die rolls determine what each player can do each turn. They now alternate attacking (and defending) each turn with basic puches, kicks, and super-amazing ridiculously-powerful cookie-shattering Chi moves (this is my favorite part and the main reason the game is better with more dice). The game continues in this way until one of the players is knocked out - at which time the winner should gloat and laugh at the poor crushed victim who apparently needs to practice his Cookie Fu more (though I would encourage the trash talking to occur throughout the game and not just at the end).

So, Cookie Fu is a fun little pointless game... wait... I just called a game "fun" and "pointless" in the same sentence. I guess I should re-evaluate what I play games for; I think it actually is for fun! Therefore, Cookie Fu's first pro is that it is really fun. And, like I said earlier, the more dice you have, the more fun it can be. With 5-6 dice per person (we were splitting a single player pack), the game isn't really much fun. With 12-13 dice per person, where you are able to get enough Chi to do crazy over the top moves, the game is a huge blast!

The next pro for Cookie Fu is theme. Now, I personally don't really care anything about theme in games; if a game has a theme, great, but if it does not I'm fine with that, too (I'm just as happy playing Battlestar Galacticaas I am playing Yinsh). But, if the theme is awesomely implemented, it can be wonderful! The theme for Cookie Fu is "bad Chinese take-out spoof" (I at least hope that's the theme - otherwise, I suppose me writing that could be fairly offensive). The game comes in a Chinese takeout box, the special moves come in fortune cookies (yes, they are edible), and all of the special moves are essentially jokes about Chinese food stereotypes. There have been a lot of collectible-style fighting-ish dice games to come out, but what really sets Cookie Fu apart is the hilarity of it's theme.

Now for a quick discourse between pros and cons. How do we really determine how good a game is? Is it based on number of plays, hours of play, strategic depth, or something else entirely? I would say that one of my preferred ways of measuring this is in number of plays. Now, I realize that this will greatly favor short games, as it is much easier to find table time for them, but I accept that limitation. With that said, I can see Cookie Fu getting continued table time for several years to come since it is a very light, fast, and more importantly, fun game. I'm still not going to rank it in my top 5 games of all time or anything like that, but I can see it occasionally being in the top 5 games that I play in any given 3-month period.
Now for the cons of Cookie Fu. First, I'm not really a fan of "collectible" games. Fortunately, Cookie Fu isn't collectible in the "I need to own them all or my life is incomplete" sense (like Magic). However it is collectible in the sense that different dice are made differently and so you can customize your characters before fighting and such - but to do this, you must have enough different dice that you have these options (read "buy more dice"). Instead of customizing our characters, what we honestly found to be the most fun was to simply use all of our dice each game; maybe once we have played it more (and/or bought more dice) we will pull some of them out and focus more on the customizing aspect. The saving part of the collectible aspect of this particular game is that you can get enough to play a solid game with the 2-player with a "Battle Royal Pack". From there, if you buy a few booster packs, you should have enough dice to play a really fun game of "the 'Fu".

The other "con" (nah, we'll call this a neutral point of note) is that the game is not very deep (you know, in case you missed that earlier). Fortunately, there is at least some strategy in determining when to attack, and moreover in how to use your multi-use dice; should grabs be used on offense, or on defense? Should you use Chi dice separately or save them up for a cool move (or even use them to heal)? But if you don't have enough dice in the game, then the cool Chi moves won't be much of an option and so it can feel like just alternating punches back and forth.

Finally, this game isn't for everyone. I think that there will be tons of people that can find great joy in playing Cookie Fu. And I would enjoy playing with them as well. However, if I brought this out to try to play with some of my more strategy-focused gaming friends, they will give me the "what's wrong with you" blank stare. Oh well - to each his own.

Overall, I give Cookie Fu an 8.5/10. This is on the extreme high side of what I debated in my mind (and possibly influenced by the fact that I think I give out too many 8.0's), but ultimately, I think that Cookie Fu completely fulfilled everything that it was trying to do. It was not made to challenge Puerto Rico as one of the most strategic games of all time - it was closer to trying to challenge Fluxx as one of the most fun, quick, and lightweight games. And I think that it did an exceptional job.

Final point of note: have you not checked out Dice Hate Me yet? You really should - Chris does lots of really cool interviews; and now he even has his own podcast!

Point of note after the final point of note: Have you subscribed to my site yet?  You really should - I'm on Facebook, Twitter, and even offer a full-text RSS feed for your favorite Reader.

I would like to thank Blue Kabuto for providing me with a copy of Cookie Fu to review.

Through the Desert Review

The latest camel-based spatial reasoning game that I had the chance to play was Through the Desert.

In Through the Desert, each player leads several caravans in an effort to get their camels to oases, watering holes, and to claim sections of the desert for themselves. The game is played on a hex-based board, and starts by the players taking turns placing their caravan leaders - one in each of the five camel colors. After this, on each player's turn he is able to place two new camels. If he joins his caravan to an oasis he gains 5 points, if he builds on a watering hole he gains 1-3 points, and if he encloses an area he gains all of the previously unclaimed watering holes and oases in that region (plus a point per hex at the end of the game). Once one color of camels has run out, the game is over. At this point whoever has the largest caravan of each color gets an additional 10 points and whoever has the most points wins.

Now to try to write pros and cons for another spatial reasoning game without making it sound exactly like all of the other ones that I've played... The first thing that I like about Through the Desert is the enclosing of hexes. This is definitely the part of the game where players can make the most points, and so it forces the other players to be careful and not concede too large of an area. This mechanic seems to work very well and without it the game would not be worth playing (as it would just be a race to see who could get to certain points the fastest).

The next thing that I like about Through the Desert is that the starting placement of your leaders is not prescribed. If your caravans started from the same place every game, the gameplay would wind up being very similar from one game to the next. However, one of the key strategies of the game is related to where you place your initial leaders - should you place them where you can easily connect to an oasis and perhaps some watering holes, or should you place them where they are more likely to enclose hexes but have a higher risk of not scoring.  Also, should you place your leader where you can block another player, or should you place your leader farther away from everyone else to try to claim a section of the board for yourself.

As an aside before getting to the cons - the camels all look like candy to me. I think it might be the size of them and the fact that they are pastel. This doesn't really add to or detract from the game, but I thought it was worth noting, because every time I play, I have to quickly remind myself not to eat the pieces (ok, maybe its not quite that bad, but still - worth mentioning).

Now for another aspect that I haven't decided whether I think it is a pro or con. The game plays drastically differently depending on the number of players. I have played it with both 2 and 4 players, and the game's official range is 2-5. With two players, it is pretty easy to claim large sections of the board as each of you will be paying attention to your own areas. With four players the board is pretty crowded, and so it is very challenging to get very many points from enclosed hexes, and I would imagine that five player would be even more crowded. I like when games have a different feel and different valid strategies based on number of players (I feel like Puerto Rico does that very well), but I'm not sure with Through the Desert. As I said, I don't think this game would really work very well without the enclosure rules, so I think that the game probably functions best with 3-4 players.

The main con that I have with this game is in the confusion of colors. There are five different colors of camels, and there are (up to) five different colors of riders on top of them. It is very difficult in the game to see what is going on at a glance; you often have to trace a caravan back to the leader to see if it belongs to you or another player. I also found myself often looking around trying to determine where my riders were. This really caused the game to not feel intuitive to me when we were playing it, even though the rules are very simple.

The next con that is worth mentioning (and is based on the previous con) is that this game is atrocious for color blind players. One of the gamers in my gaming group is red-green color blind, and that has been inconvenient in a lot of games that we play, since things are often color coded. Some games, such as Tigris and Euphrates help this by providing symbols wherever possible. I have never seen a game that has caused him as many problems as this one - between all of the camels being similar pastel colors and the riders sitting on top of them not helping either, he often had difficulties telling the camels apart.

Overall, I give Through the Desert an 8.0/10. It is a solid spatial reasoning game that I will keep on my shelf and play from time to time, but it hasn't left me with the feeling that I can't wait to come back and play it more.

If you enjoy spatial reasoning games like Through the Desert, you might also want to check out Gipf, Zertz, Pentago.

Runebound (Second Edition) Review

Now I have the privilege of reviewing a classic role playing board game: Runebound (Second Edition).

In Runebound, each of the players takes on the role of a sissy little hero. Unfortunately, there are giant evil dragons (or other things depending on if you use expansions) threatening the entire known world. Therefore, you, Mr. Pansy, must bulk up, equip yourself and find friends in order to take these wretched monsters down. To do this, obviously, you will want to practice on wimpy monsters. Fortunately, you know where these guys are hiding, because the map has nice green gems to mark their locations. Ok, ok. Here's how it works: each turn you will get 5 movement dice (4 if someone is fatigued or injured). You roll these dice, and they determine where you are able to move based on what symbols are on the face of each die. Once you have moved, if there is a colored gem at the place where you stopped your movement, then you have an encounter (fight a monster... or have other stuff happen and then fight a monster. There's always monster fighting, though). Once you see this monster, you can either try to flee as fast as you can (I forget the rules of this because I never bother), or you can fight it. When fighting it, each round you choose one trait to attack with: melee, range, or magic, and you must defend in the other two. You continue fighting in this manner until someone is knocked out - if you, then you lose lots of stuff and return to a city; if the monster, then you gain money (for buying more stuff) and experience points. Once you have enough experience points, you can level your hero, thus giving him a stat boost in some area. If you were not wanting to fight a monster on your turn, the other option is going to a city. If you go to a city (end on a city space instead of a space with a gem on it), you can go to that city's market. In the market you can heal your character (and allies), and you can also buy sweet new stuff (like allies and giant weapons and such). Anyway, the game continues like this until someone has bulked themselves up enough that their hero (who is hopefully not a sissy anymore) takes on the High Dragon. And defeats it (if you lose to it, then the game hasn't ended, but you have embarrassed yourself a little bit).

Now that I have completed my length intro, its time for pros and cons. Here's the first pro: replayability. I cannot express how much I appreciate the fact that Runebound has a lot of heroes (12 to be exact). It also has enough item cards that you won't see them all in a single game. This is what sets Runebound apart from a lot of other role playing games like World of Warcraft: The Adventure Game. Whereas in the WoW Adventure Game you only have enough heroes for the number of players (4), in Runebound you have a ton. I realize why WoW is set up this way - to sell the expansions, but Runebound has even more expansions and yet gives you more in the base game.  I like being able to play through a game and still feel like there is more for me to discover; that my next adventure will be different.

Now for the next thing that I like about Runebound: allies. I like the fact that your hero is only able to attack in one trait each given round. This adds to the importance of your allies because each ally can also attack in a trait each round. This means that if you have two allies, then you are able to attack the monster in every trait each round. Without this, you are only able to damage him in one out of every three rolls of the dice, but with allies you can hurt him every time.  Obviously this means that a player that is able to hire two allies will have a distinct advantage over a player that is unable to hire any, but I still like the fact that you can essentially "build your party."

A third positive for Runebound is how the movement works. Whereas I'm yet to play Talisman (its on my "to do" list), I have played some other role playing games like Prophecy and the aforementioned World of Warcraft, and when comparing them, I significantly prefer the movement system of Runebound. I feel like it is fairly intuitive to use, but gives you the freedom to explore the map. A lot of the benefit here comes from the map itself. Whereas so many other games use a simple Monopoly-esque map where you roll a die and can move that many, Runebound is a hex based map where each hex is a different type of terrain. You still have the possibility of not being able to move very fast in Runebound, but most turns you will be able to go at least 2 or 3 hexes based on the dice you rolled - no more getting frustrated about rolling repeated one's on the dice.  Instead Runebound actually represents the difficulty in moving through things like mountains by having the mountain symbol be on less faces of the die than, say, roads.

Another aspect that I liked about Runebound is the leveling system. I have played RPG's where I felt like I was spinning my wheels the whole game, and I've played ones where I felt like I was actually making progress.  Fortunately, Runebound falls into the second category. Since you actually improve your stats each time you level up, you do not feel like you are a wimpy character after a while. In addition, after you level up your hitpoints, you are no longer able to pick on the lowest level of monsters - this helps prevent the stronger heroes from preventing the weaker heroes from getting any kills. The fact that Runebound has a different amount of experience based on the level of each hero is also a nice feature of the game.

With all that said (in case you can't tell yet, I really like this game), there is at least one con in the game: it can get somewhat lengthy. This is especially true if you play with a larger number of players, and so I normally try to keep my games around 1-3 (2 being my ideal). Really, this trait more than any other has kept Runebound from hitting my gaming table more often, though I realize that this won't be something that bothers many gamers.

One final point of note before the score: Runebound has rules for player versus player combat. I did not mention them previously because I have never actually used them. All of the games that I've played have worked out quite nicely without them. I have heard that they can add more length to the game, and I have also heard rumors of it degrading into the person in the lead picking on the other players, which would obviously detract from the game. My solution for that is to simply not play with that person, but that may just be me.

Overall, I give Runebound a 9.0/10. This is the best role playing game that I have played to date, and I enjoy busting it out. I have recently come to own several of the "big box" expansions, too, so I am looking forward to playing them (and more reviews are to come on this system).  If you are looking for a role playing game to add to your collection, I would definitely recommend this one.

If Runebound sounds interesting, you might also want to check out Legend of Drizzt, Star Wars: The Card Game, and Heroscape.

Summoner Wars Review

After hearing lots of hype about Summoner Wars (which has two base sets: Elves v. Orcs and Dwarves v. Goblins), I finally had the opportunity to play the game (special thanks to Danny in Tulsa for teaching me this game).

In Summoner Wars, each player takes on the role of a race that is led by a Summoner (hence the name), and the object of the game is to kill your opponent's Summoner. On any given turn, you will draw cards, summon new cards, play events, move, attack (killing your opponents gains you extra magic), and (optionally) discard cards to turn them into magic. This continues back and forth until one player kills his opponent's Summoner. And then the person who has a Summoner left gets to do a happy dance... or whatever version of celebration he deems appropriate for winning a card game.

The first thing that I really enjoy about Summoner Wars is how the magic works. Whereas in almost every game I have ever played, you normally gain whatever currency you needed to play characters every round, in Summoner Wars you do not gain magic just because a new round has started. Instead, you are able to gain magic in one of two ways: first, you can kill your opponents, thus putting their dead unit into your magic pile (which I think is awesome); second, you can discard cards from your hand at the end of your turn to put them into your magic pile. Therefore, each round you must decide if the cards in your hand are important enough to keep, or whether they would serve you better as magic (you will never get them back - you only go through the deck once). In case you missed it earlier in the paragraph, you gain magic for killing your opponents. And that is awesome.

The next thing that I like about Summoner Wars (and every other game that does this well) is that each race has its own unique, well formed identity. Something that often annoys me about a game is when each player uses a different "race" (or "character" or whatever) and the only difference is that the pictures are different. I realize that it takes a lot more effort to balance a game where different factions work in completely unique ways, but Summoner Wars has done this. I haven't had the opportunity to play all of the races as much as I would like, but from what I have seen they all play out quite differently with varying strengths, weaknesses, and strategies. I really compliment the designer for doing a great job in bringing life to the playable races.

The third thing that I like about Summoner Wars is the speed and pace of the game. The game seems to take between 20-40 minutes, but there aren't really slow times in the game. Whereas many games (such as Magic, Race for the Galaxy, etc) have times where the game is fast paced and other times in players are building up to get ready for the action, Summoner Wars is constant action. You start the game with several units on the board, and you will have very few (if any) turns in which you don't fight each other. Units will die - often. But that's why you have more of them.

One thing to mention that is neither a pro nor a con about Summoner Wars is the expandability of the game. Either base set provides a player with all that they need to play the game. However, like with Heroscape, Warhammer: Invasion, and many other games recently, it appears that the marketing strategy for Summoner Wars is that they will provide you with everything you need to play the game in the hopes that you will continue buying more of their products and expanding your gaming experience. Honestly, I am of the mindset where I really like to buy the whole game in a box and then I have everything I need for that game. That I will ever need for that game. Realistically, most game companies seem to have gone away from this model due to the cost and risk of developing a new brand, and so I much prefer this marketing to the CCG random pack opening.

Another thing to note (this one I haven't decided if I like it or not) is the small deck size - approximately 30-35 cards.  This keeps the game going very quickly since you are unable to gain new units once you run out of cards.  However, it seems like the game may be a bit too short and may have been better with more turns.  At the same time, having more cards means you would probably just spend more time going back and forth killing trivial minions instead of focusing on your opponent's Summoner.  I don't really know my thoughts on this - like I said, I don't know how I feel about this part of the game, but I did think it was worth noting.  I'm sure a lot of playtesting went into this, and I would guess that they considered making the deck bigger, and they must have decided for whatever reason that the smaller deck worked better... so I'll go with it.

Overall, I give Summoner Wars a 9.0/10. I was quite pleased with my time with the game, and I truly look forward to playing the game quite a bit more and seeing what options are available among all the different races, expansions, etc.  I would highly recommend this game to most any gamer.

If you want to check out some more opinions on Summoner Wars, I'd recommend reading this Summoner Wars Review from Play Board Games, or another Summoner Wars Review by Games With Two. Or, if you want to check out more of my reviews, you should consider The Summoner Wars Master Set (obviously), but you might also try The Resistance, Yomi, and BattleCON.