How NOT to design a MODERN board game

you don't make calls on a rotary telephone you don't take road trips in a Ford Cortina and you don't spend your weekends besting your mates at pong times have moved on phones are powerful mini computers in your pocket cars look like shiny silver bullets and video game Graphics are almost indistinguishable from movies in the 1960s the board game Risk was all the rage Innovative exciting and very desirable the perfect family entertainment for a Sunday afternoon just as retro video games offer up a dose of nostalgic fun vintage board games still have something to offer nonetheless like cars telephones and video games tabletop games have matured they've leveled up there are a number of features once common place which just wouldn't fly in the modern gaming market and in this video I'm going to list 10 Untouchable mechanisms and features designers do not put this out dated stuff in your games you want your players to have a good time right I'm Adam Porter I'm a game designer from Wales and I share my thoughts about game design and the industry on this channel with the intent of helping designers to focus their thoughts avoid pitfalls and develop their own vocabulary of mechanisms and design philosophies but these videos are for gamers too they're packed with examples of games which you might want to try out or in the case of this particular video maybe a void if you like what I do please subscribe and comment on the video I love to read your comments and hear your opinions about tabletop design the rules to the earliest board games found buried in ancient tombs are lost in The Mists of time but while ancient Gamers created some of the deepest most deterministic abstract games in history they also created a lot of dross start as you mean to go on Adam tell it as it is but no this isn't that sort of video I'm not here to criticize and condemn older games these were the building blocks from which our wonderful extraordinary Rich ecosystem of games evolved designers throughout history were not blessed with thousands of new releases each year to learn from they built games from scratch in 2008 we hailed Donald X vakaro as a Pioneer when he invented deck building someone somewhere invented playing cards marbles dice someone invented chess do you know who invented the score track circling the board of many modern games it was Wolf Gang kmer the renowned designer of El Grande tial and six NY designers of the past deserve our respect but that's not to say they didn't make mistakes before we delve deep into game mechanisms which belong in the past I have a message I'd like to share with any game designer watching I'm Adam Porter and over the last decade I've shared hundreds of videos about games and game design offering up honest practical advice about how to develop your own games but also how to develop yourself as a designer my latest project is a tabletop game designer Journal which helps you to do exactly that with structured prompts reflective logs tools to assist you in prioritizing and developing your ideas and much more the content is designed to give you a clear direction of travel towards success however you choose to Define it this is not a play testing Journal that is to say the journal is not focused on one specific game or project it's focused on you you are the project the Adam and Wales board game designer Journal is available right now exclusively from Amazon so check out the link in the description for this video and if you do purchase a copy and find the content valuable it would really really help me out if you could leave a review early Amazon reviews are essential in getting the journal seen and making more designers aware which doesn't just help me but hopefully helps the whole designer Community now back to the topic at hand Snakes and Ladders or Shoots and Ladders for my American viewers is based on an ancient Indian game created around 2,000 years ago MOA patam was a morality game the designer appears to have presented the game as a story of ups and downs progress and setbacks an allegory for Life their primary focus was to educate and Inspire engaging gameplay play seems to have been less of a priority Snakes and Ladders is a game entirely without decisions it plays itself on your turn you roll a die and you move where it says you might land on a ladder and leap far ahead on the grid or you might land on a snake and move back but whatever happens you had no choice in the matter no agency designers of the past seem to struggle striking a balance between luck and strategy many older games feature a high degree of chance so in Game of life you spin the spinner and you move forward just as in Snakes and Ladders now you might occasionally make a choice to go down One path or another but the game is dominated by Randomness and generally the winner will not be the most strategic player but the luckiest it is acceptable to feature minimal or even no decisions in a game for very young children I love game right's card game too many monkeys is great for teaching turn taking and chaining actions to four or five year olds and harbers let's cook is a Charming little product for ages two and up with absolutely no decisions involved but a total lack of agency becomes tiresome in a longer drawn out Affair like snakes and ladders or game of life now unfortunately I still see many new designers struggling to create engaging meaningful decisions in their games Gopher Broke is a box full of missed opportunities you win the game by getting rid of all your money before the other players now that's a fun con Concept in each turn you roll and move as far as the dice tell you and then you do whatever the space you landed on dictated a double six costs you money if you pass the lottery space you deposit money there and if another player is sent there they take the money the game does offer up a tiny little glimmer of strategy in the push your luck game of snake eyes when you land here you roll both dice as many times as you like totaling the results and returning that much money multiplied by $5,000 to the bank but if you ever roll a one you instead gain $100,000 or $300,000 for a pair of ones and remember in this game the goal is to lose money not win it this decision offers up a tiny drop of tension in an ocean of tedious Randomness some other games offer up decisions but the correct choice is obvious if you spent any time in the UK you'd be aware of the extremely popular children's card game top trumps players split a deck of cards evenly between them each card has a series of numerical values strength speed weight age wingspan cuteness and on your turn you look at the top card from your own deck and you call out a category and the corresponding number from your card height 72 and all other players reveal the number for that category from their own card and whoever has the highest adds all the cards to the bottom of their deck the last player with cards wins now the game pretends that you have a choice but the only viable strategy is to call out the strongest number you have so you don't really have any agency at all now I'm not knocking the product as a kid it was tremendous fun to collect the different sets whether you were into trains or ponies or He-Man or Care Bears or planets or insects there was a set for you and the game has the strong selling point that it can be played anywhere doesn't need a table since the cards are always held in hand so it's ideal for playing on an airplane in a restaurant at the beach or in the back of a car it's perfect for traveling it's a shame that the actual gameplay is really tedious modern designers please do not pretend to offer choices where really there are none the 1990 game wrestling from Avalon hill was a favorite of mine when I was 12 and I've referenced it in many of my videos because it was such an important game in my childhood and I retain a lot of fondness for it but the game is plagued by hands of CS that you just can't use on your turn you generally play a card representing a wrestling move to attack the other wrestler but each move has specific requirements strength skill or agility and these are reduced as you take damage so the more beaten up you are the fewer cards you're able to play now if you're Babyface Harpo or Jimbo The Elephant Man your Baseline skill is insufficient to climb the ropes even without damage and if you're flying Phil with a strength of one there is no way that you could ever body slam baby face Harpo with a weight of seven the results can be hand after hand where you simply cannot play anything especially when you're already losing now the game does allow you to discard a card and draw a new one each turn and this might bring up a recovery card where you can start to regain your stats and get back into the game but it's not uncommon at all to hit a bad run of unusable hands and suffer more and more damage at the hands of your opponent while they hope to draw a pin card so they can finish you off now if your game has sustained periods where one or more players are essentially unable to take part you probably want to revisit the mechanisms which are driving this a game should be fun and engaging for all players at all times whether they're winning or losing now finally while we're still on the subject of player agency I want to highlight games which present you with a choice voice but offer no context at all to enable you to make an informed decision so the classic example is battleships you certainly have choices on your turn you could call out any coordinate from the grid and there are many to pick from but you have very little information on which you can base your decision it's a guess it's the illusion of player agency tank battle is an evolution of this basic mechanism on your turn you move your tanks forwards or sideways on the grid and each player guesses where their opponent might move during their turn and plots six shots which will be fired if their opponent does indeed move into these spaces now in addition the player chooses two spaces to place minefields at the start of the game the five anti-tank guns provide bonus shots and can be used each once per game and if tanks move adjacent to other tanks their secret values are compared and the higher numbered tank destroys the weaker tank if a tank moves a to an anti-tank gun the gun is destroyed 5 sixths of the time so a die is rolled and if the Red Dot shows then the gun instead destroys the tank each player has three installations on the board and tanks can destroy these by moving onto them destroying the ammunition dump reduces how many shots your opponent has per turn destroying the fuel dump reduces your opponent's available moves and destroying the headquarters removes any Mine Fields controlled by your opponent so there's more stuff more options but still very little agency honestly I think tank battle could probably be fixed if a modern game designer took a look at it it has the core of something really fun and thematic but in its current form it wouldn't pass muster in the modern gaming climate designers if you allow players to make decisions they should be informed decisions a shot in the dark is tense and exciting once or twice especially especially when a player is presented with an occasional highrisk High reward wager but when every turn is a straightup guess the excitement soon wanes now some of you are probably watching and thinking but he's only showing us ancient games why not show us some modern examples and that's precisely my point modern published games don't make these mistakes or if they do they're completely overlooked by the online community and they quickly sink Into Obscurity so why am making this video at all well I'm pressing this point because I still see these mechanisms in board game prototypes at designer meetups on a regular basis especially from newer designers and I want the message to sink in the games you played as a kid are not a suitable blueprint for a modern product things are different now if you want to get your game published you need to keep up Monopoly it had to crop up somewhere in this video didn't it you might be surprised that it took this long so in Monopoly if I land on this space I draw a chance card let's take a look you have been elected chairman of the board pay each player $50 construction loan approved collect $150 yeah these are quite significant outcomes and they're very different so what did the player do to deserve that reward or punishment nothing they rolled a die and they did what it said is why wildly unfair so maybe landing on the community chest space will offer up a more balanced enjoyable experience Bank error in your favor collect $200 pay school tax of $150 well look at that it's just Chan by another name two event decks in a single game random events have the potential to completely undermine players strategic choices in a game why bother to strategize at all if a random card draw could hand the victory to my opponent when I see random events featured in Prototype games it's usually because the designer naively thinks it will add a little more theme or narrative you know my game set in prehistoric times so let's feature a random earthquake or volcano from time to time it's a space game so maybe players could get sucked into a black hole or decimated by a supernova you don't increase a player's immersion in a narrative with random events you do it by allowing players to make engaging impactful decisions which evoke the feel of the real life activity that they're simulating event decks are a little more acceptable though still a little jarring if they affect all players equally so this is easier to achieve if every event is positive an example would be the single card that's drawn at the start of each round in the quacks of quedlinburg which alter the rules a little or gift every player with a small reward going into a new round if these were all negative effects even if they treated all players equally the player in first place would most likely find the impact far less punishing than the players who are trailing so your job as a designer is to make sure that every player is having fun now that doesn't appear to have been a major consideration for the designers of trouble or frustration as it's known in the UK this game is a modern implementation of the ancient Indian game par cheesy with the main Innovation being the popomatic dice flipping device pesy has been around for thousands of years and in many versions you need to roll a certain result before you can even start playing the game inexplicably this rule has survived the centuries and made it into Hasbro's implementation until you've rolled a six you can't play Meanwhile your mates are off halfway around the track it's a bizarre Rule and entirely unfun rule number one of board game design and does it even really need to be stated if some of your players don't actually get to play well then there's a problem with your design now I'm sure there are hordes of par cheesy Fanatics who flood this comment section with messages pointing out that there's little more to this rule than initially meets the eye you see in this family of games you do control multiple playing pieces so when you roll a six you do have a decision to make do I bring on a new piece or do I move one of my existing pieces six spaces it's one of of the few decisions in the game but it still doesn't explain why your very first piece can't start on the track it's baffling and trouble isn't done with the exact roles it finishes as it began you need a roll of precisely six to start the game and you need to land on your base by exact count to end it so once again as you approach your unearned Victory you'll be repeatedly popping that popamatic turn after turn as the other players gain ground on you the same mechanism is used in Trivial Pursuit with players who have filled all spaces of their little tray with pieces of pie forced to roll exactly the number that they need to land in the center of the board it's essentially a catch-up mechanism making life difficult for the player in the lead to give everyone else a fighting chance but it's the most irritating boring frustrating catch-up mechanism I could imagine far from making the game more pleasurable for the losing players all it really does is elongate the game and drag out their misery in Escape From Frankenstein players are attempting to collect keys of their own color and then deliver them to the laboratory to shut down the power and of course landing on the key space requires you to draw a movement card of exactly the required total and likewise an exact move is required to land on the laboratory space and win the game designers there are very few situations where requiring players to land by exact count is a good idea idea game design is often about greasing the wheels making everything flow more smoothly keeping things moving not adding in arbitrary hurdles for the players you're playing Snakes and Ladders you have a run of good luck you're landing on ladders at every opportunity steaming towards an inevitable Victory but then your luck Runs Out you land on a snake and you shift into reverse you're sent back four spaces no worries not a major setback on your next turn you roll a two slow progress but at least you're moving forwards or so it seems you've landed on another snake and this time you're back 43 spaces you're almost at the start of the track all of your earlier progress is undone that is not a fun experience especially because you had absolutely no control over what happened in most pesy variants when one of your pieces lands on another player's piece your opponent's piece is sent home the game does at least give you a choice about which of your playing pieces to move so you could choose not to inflict this punishment on your opponent and instead progress one of your other pieces but in the majority of cases sending your opponent's packing is the stronger move a game should move steadily towards a conclusion actions which elongate the game or undo other players actions generally provide a negative experience and should be avoided in modern designs in Escape From Frankenstein on your turn you draw a card and you do what it says often this will be moving individual spaces sometimes you'll be transported to a specific room and sometimes you will activate Frankenstein sending him after your opponents but there's one other card which really shakes things up the wish you weren't here card forces you to swap positions with another player of your choice and this has the effect of undoing the progress of one player while advancing the position of another or even worse undoing the progress of both players a common house rule in the card game Uno allows players to swap their hand of cards with an opponent whenever they play a seven and playing a zero forces players to pass the hand of cards to the player on their left some recent additions of Uno feature a swap hands card officially incorporating the house rule into the game published in 1997 flux is a slightly more modern Game featuring this same mechanism flux gets away with it because of the chaotic fluid nature of the game playay is the entire selling point of the game rules change on every turn and players constantly have to adapt to the changing objectives now this doesn't feel out of place in a game as chaotic as this one in a game with even a hint of strategy this would be a ridiculous design choice now in woodington's rally burner BMX game players play movement cards to race around a track full of ramps and jumps most cards give you a degree of control over your movement but some allow you to to roll dice to determine your movement and that could result in you landing on unstable spaces causing you to fall off the track and miss your next turn and if that wasn't enough other players could play Crash cards to push you off the track regardless of your position in the race again you sit out the next round before getting back into Motion in Monopoly if you're sent to jail which of course is entirely random not dependent on any in-game misdemeanors you may end up sitting out several turns while you attempt to roll what you need to free yourself now ironically it's actually beneficial to sit in jail for several turns rather than taking normal turns so that you can collect rent from other players without risking landing on any of their properties and paying rent yourself the basic principle is this if your players don't get to play the game they'll soon lose interest it is tedious watching other players take actions while you get to do nothing especially if the situation was entirely out of your control skipp a turn has become a staple of children's G games and family games and the benefit of this mechanism is that it is very familiar and it's easy to understand for all ages and I think that's why it's stuck around particularly in games for very young children I've previously mentioned game writes too many monkeys as a fantastic first card game for a four to six-year-old and this game has a skip card and deciding which opponent to Target is one of the few decisions in the game the ever popular stacking game Rhino hero from Harbor has a take a breather of effect which causes the next player to miss their turn now I wanted to incorporate a little take that into my own card game for six-year-old zing aam and skip a turn seemed the most intuitive option for kids especially if they're familiar with Uno which also features a skip card but in Zing aam turns move fast maybe 10 seconds per player so even in a five player game you're going to be sitting out for 40 to 50 seconds Max my plea to designers here is to take great care with this mechanism it doesn't belong in a strategy game or a game with long turns and significant downtime you need to keep all your players engaged in your game at all times the next entry in my list of outdated features in board games is not a mechanism but an issue which can arise if game mechanisms are not handled carefully Now The Runaway leader problem occurs when one player gains a significant advantage over others making it difficult for other players to catch up or compete effectively risk is a game with a heavy Reliance on luck specifically in the use of card draws for reinforcements and dice rolls for battles a player who happens to draw more favorable cards or consistently rolls higher on dice can quickly gain an advantage making it harder for others to compete and this tends to snowball as players conquer territories and gain more armies their power increases and they can then conquer more territories with ease which in turn allows them to acquire even more armies leading to a self-reinforcing cycle the other players have limited ways to recover from a setback or regain lost ground once a player falls behind it can be challenging to catch up in Monopoly as players accumulate wealth and properties the gap between the leaders and the other players tends to widen this is because the players with the most money can afford to build houses and hotels charging higher rents to the other players and that income allows them to buy more properties and continue the cycle there are limited opportunities for comebacks while there are some mechanisms which can provide a trailing player with income such as chance and Community chess cards they're random and they're not impactful enough to overturn a strong lead and the result can be a very variable experience with the players in the lead having a great time amassing resources money hotels territories and sensing their inevitable Victory many turns ahead meanwhile the trailing players are having a frustrating experience aware that they have no hope of catching up and wishing for the game to put them out of their misery many designers these days tend to build catchup mechanisms into their games to ensure that all players have a positive experience and a comeback always feels like a possibility and these catchup mechanisms can take many forms taxing resources so the more you have the more you pay gifting the trailing players so they have more resources entering each new round hiding information so it isn't immediately obvious who's in the lead at any given time or altering turn order in each new round so that the trailing players are given advantageous positions 1962's Formula 1 is unusual among its contemporaries in that you don't roll to move you choose how far you wish to proceed the random element comes when you speed round a corner if you choose to stay in low speed you're safe but if you choose to exceed the speed limit you have to roll to see whether you take any damage and whatever result you roll you have to consult a table to determine the outcome similarly if you break too suddenly a different table is consulted to assess the impact on your tires now Consulting tables was a standard feature of board games for several decades especially as they became more complex and it was common practice to include results tables in war games the violent fantasy football game blood bowl and its sister game dungeon Bowl were favorites of mine as a teenager in the early '90s the game was and still is rammed with reference tables when any given action is taken throwing the ball beating up a player determining injuries dice are rolled and a table is consulted to determine the outcome later editions of the game did streamline things a little introducing custom dice for attacking other players these block dice have different icons on each face for each potential outcome saving the need to refer to a table swords and Wizardry is a reimplementation of the Stratego mechanism but it significantly increases the number of different unit types and the ways they interact in battle so it's Stratego when a battle occurs you simply compare the numbered ranks of the two combatants to determine the Victor there are one or two special effects but the effects of these are easy to remember in swords and Wizardry there are so many possible combinations of playing pieces that are pretty complicated table is needed to determine the victor of each battle including reference tables in your product will make your game feel dated modern game designers streamline their games as much as possible stripping out long winded complex and tedious mechanisms Consulting tables interrupts the flow of a game and lifts players out of the narrative breaking their immersion imagine a Formula 1 racing game where players shifted gears then rolled two six-sided Dice and consulted a table to see how far their car moved compare this to formula D's Innovative system where players roll a differ Siz die with a different number distribution depending on the gear that they're currently in so if you're in first gear you roll a four four-sided dice in second gear it's a six-sided dice third gear you roll an eight-sided die and so on it achieves the same goal as my hypothetical speed table but it's much more intuitive it's much more tactile and it's fun Scrabble is one of the most wellknown games across the world you can play it with two players three players or four players any more than that and you're out of luck this was pretty much standard in games of the past a range of two to four players with was the default now that's not to say there weren't games with bigger counts risk works with up to six players as does cludo a monopoly can handle up to eight but a significant number of games could only manage two to four and this was no barrier to publication and that has changed over recent years with over a thousand new games hitting the market annually Publishers are doing whatever they can to broaden the appeal of their games restrictive player counts will stand in the way of your game getting made and Publishers aren't just expanding to higher player counts increasingly they're expecting solo modes too the default is now more like two to five players with a solo mode and a six player option being very desirable if your game does not play well with two that's a problem unless it's a party game in which case a range of 3 to8 or higher might be acceptable there are exceptions of course there's a nice little niche for Pure solitaire games and a similar Niche for two player only titles but if you want Publishers to pay attention to your game you're generally going to want to keep the range wide now in days gone by you could get away with some pretty shoddy components and this was presumably due to a mixture of manufacturing processes at the time and keeping costs low but you wouldn't get away with cards like these in a modern game there'd be 350 GSM thick layered card lavishly Illustrated these plastic card stands in Stratego variant Sharps attack are extremely flimsy and liable to break I'm quite certain any publisher today would be looking for a much more robust alternative of course not all game components from earlier decades were of poor quality I have a begrudging fondness for the Hefty spinner in Game of Life and the engineering behind games like guess who Connect 4 Buckaroo Etc it's impressive but the days of plastic monstrosities L this might soon be over modern Publishers are generally moving away from Plastics and instead using card stock and recyclable materials wherever possible the squeaky monster in Escape From Frankenstein was a particularly impressive bit of unnecessary tat as it clumps around the castle it can clamp its hands onto the head of any of the playing pieces which cross its path if you want to incorporate a three-dimensional board or complex plastic structures in your game in 2024 you're really going to have to justify its inclusion crowdfunding sites like Kickstarter they're a bit of a wild west in this regard and for some Publishers bigger is definitely better but for the majority environmental impact box size and Retail costs are a significant concern so you want to keep your project manageable and that concludes my 10 Untouchable mechanisms and features which could leave your game feeling outdated but there are a few notable absences from this list which you will all probably expecting me to include so let's briefly cover them here and I'll explain why I left them off the list it's fashionable these days to dismiss the most dominant mechanism in Gaming's history roll and move has been a staple in tabletop games for over 5,000 years it was the central mechanism in the earliest known board game the royal game of UR roll and move is familiar to most of us because it was the driving force of most of the games we played as kids cludo Monopoly trouble you rolled and you moved I've highlighted the issues with games which lack player agency earlier in this video and that's the problem with these games the lack of player agency not the rolling and moving I'd go further and say that rolling to move is an intuitive exciting and accessible design choice and that's the reason it didn't make my list roller move has to be handled carefully to prevent luck dominating ver flick otherwise known as that's life is the perfect example of a roll and move game which is packed with interesting decisions it's one of my favorite games formula D nilon deep sea Adventure Monza and camel up all use roll and move in engaging ways now this will be a controversial statement for many in the hobby but I'd like to see more roll and move games released it's time to reclaim this mechanism and bring it up to date I've made a whole video about roll and move with loads of good examples of the mechanism I'll add a link at the end of the video the second feature you may have been anticipating is take that by which I mean mechanisms which allow players to make d direct attacks on other players many old games provided loads of opportunities to damage your opponent's positions to limit their progress and create gloriously mean moments where you can gloat over your opponent and their Misfortune which of course wasn't Misfortune at all because the attack was entirely deliberate now I don't love this stuff it's not to my taste but I can't condemn this aspect of gaming to history I've met far too many gamers who can't get enough of it the truth is it's polarizing you love it or you hate it take that is still very frequently utilized in children's games and mean-spirited card games for casual players so my advice is that if you're incorporating take that elements into your own game ensure that the attacks can't set the players back too far they shouldn't undo a player's entire strategy and they should never prevent anyone from playing the game the third feature which I haven't listed here as Untouchable is memory now forcing players to memorize components is is a frequently maligned mechanism in games yet it remains a staple of the children's genre it's a great leveler children just seem better at this stuff than adults like take that memory games are not to everyone's taste but neither is stacking pieces or flicking pieces or rolling dice or playing eight hour economic train games we all have our own preferences now I can't deny that a significant portion of hobby Gamers do seem to dislike memory mechanisms especially when they're overt Gamers don't seem to complain too much about card counting and trick-taking games or trackable information hidden behind player screens in Euro games but if you're aiming at a market of seasoned strategy Gamers you probably want to keep the memory elements to a minimum but I'm not ready to completely dismiss memory mechanisms in the same way that I am event decks or result tables or winning by exact count and the final feature which you are probably anticipating but I've declined to include lude is player elimination neither Monopoly or risk are known for their short durations and as I've stressed earlier it's no fun playing these games when you know that you're so far behind you couldn't possibly catch the leader in both of these games there's also the possibility of getting kicked out of the game altogether made bankrupt by landing on an opponent's property or wiped off the board by a more powerful Army and maybe this is a blessing in disguise at least you don't have to endure the rest of the game watching your opponent amass more and more wealth or territories while you suffer the brunt of their repeated attacks but it's not much fun sitting out the remainder of a lengthy game in which all your friends are still fully engaged player elimination is a real problem in some games but when handled well it can still be the right choice for certain games for both thematic and mechanical reasons King of Tokyo is a game of King of the Hill in which players representing giant monsters compete to hold the center ground while soaking up attacks from their opponents it's a violent aggressive theme and player elimination just feels right in that setting Yogi is a game where players pick up cards and position them on their body according to the instructions on the card if they ever drop a card they're eliminated from the game this is a logical mechanism for the game and the right choice by the designer the key to player elimination is that when one player is eliminated the game needs to end pretty soon thereafter the eliminated player is probably willing to sit back and watch a round or two as the game reaches its climax but keeping them waiting for longer than that is going to create a negative experience and put pressure on those still playing to bring the game to a close to stop their friend feeling left out I was impressed recently with the system used in the Thunder Road remake Thunder Road Vendetta each player controls a group of vehicles and as they progress on the track new sections are added to make the road seem never ending now in the original 1986 Edition players were eliminated as soon as their last vehicle was destroyed but the game continued without them Thunder Road Vendetta revisits this rule with a modern design approach in the new edition when the first player is eliminated a Finish Line is placed at the end of the road and no more sections will be added meaning the game will draw to a natural close pretty soon with one player winning either by eliminating all opponents or being the first to cross the finish line the best way to avoid any of the outdated stuff in this video of course is to immerse yourself fully in the world of modern board games the vast majority of Games published after the year 2000 just don't feature this stuff the mainstream market is still catching up significantly influenced by the legacy of Monopoly and its counterparts from Parker Brothers and Milton Bradley if your Prototype game plays like a game from the 1970s I'm afraid you're going to have a hard time getting it to Market if you want to take up my Challenge and reclaim roll move in one of your designs this video would be a great place to start

Channel: Adam in Wales

Views: 62,529

Keywords:

Id: 8GZLqnOr6zM

Length: 38min 2sec (2282 seconds)

Published: Sun Apr 28 2024