My painting goal is now 66 out of my 100 minimum for 2026. Which is good; as I've got +12 Bloodbowl in, and am about to have +80 or so 15mm arrive (I count them as .5 each). Must keep ahead of the incomings!
There are some space skaven (from Mantic judging by the bases); I have no idea what project I originally intended them for but nevermind; space rats are cool.
My current d12 Infinity project had me dig out some 40K models and give them a quick basecoat. After thinking about how specific Zone Raiders was (to the point of having difficult-to-fulfill model requirements despite being minis agnostic) I wanted to make sure the rules encompassed popular models - or rather everything I have lying around the shed. These Eldar were only basecoated but I'll count them as I also tidied up/detailed an equivalent amount of other models (Necrons, IG, Tau etc).
In my "chuck out rules to make room" I came across these 40K rules which I looked at for reference.
I reckon Shadow War got done dirty. It was a 2nd edition(?)/Necromunda published in 2017 to allow kill teams to fight in a hive city. You could use your 40K models (Kill Team) for not-Necromunda, basically, and the one book had profiles for every faction - everything you needed. Kinda both games combined.
GW promptly squatted it, releasing Necromunda later that year and Kill Team in 2018. Guess they couldn't make enough from SW:A rulebooks (a core+house rulebook for Necromunda in Australia is north of $200; add $88 each extra faction you want...) and it was too easy just to play with the 40K models you had. They probably couldn't monetize it effectively...
I'm not a fan of SW:A's IGOUGO and I'm not claiming it is peak game design or some hidden gem (it isn't - it's rejigged 2nd ed), but I have 2018 Kill Team too (I noped out in... 2021? once they got hitpoints and special rulers) and I find them an interesting contrast. Kinda a good example of the 'boardgameification' of wargames.
Kill Team 2018 (presumably based on... 7th ed? 40K) had so much of the detail and narrative removed to make a more streamlined pick-up game/fairer competitive experience. It's smoother but blander.
There is more gimmicky 'gamey' strategems added as a layer on top; the weapons are more samey and abstract; the skills you can gain are very limited - restricted to only as few models and locked into minimalism path A or path B 'trees' for ease of balance. Kill Team finally moved away from IGOUGO into phases - but even then it was weird; each side moved all their models in the move phase, but alternated in the shoot phase. You can see the boardgame-y soullessness creeping in.
I'm not going into vast detail: I'm sure most readers have played a bucketload more than the few games of either I tried; but contrasting them side by side (published within a year of each other) was pretty interesting, as both seemed based on very different design philosophies/goals within a theoretically similar system and theme.
What is a beer and pretzels game?
I see it being bandied around a lot when I'm searching up new games to play. Wikipedia (the source of all wisdom) says:
A beer and pretzels game is any of a class of tabletop that are light on rules and strategy, feature a high amount of randomness and a light theme.
This is in direct contrast to Eurogames, which involve complex rules and emphasize strategy over randomness.
The term was originally coined to describe relatively simple wargames that did not require extraordinary focus to play. The name was then adopted by gamers to mean casual, short and easy to play games in general.
Bold bits added by me. I'd question that should complexity=strategy and simplicity=randomness as the quote seems to read. Some thoughts:
- Light on rules, easy to play (=easy to teach/learn/little reference to rulebook? Can be taught on the spot?)
- Light on strategy/more random than average (=not an insurmountable gap between veteran and newb)
- Short (obviously shorter than the average 2-3hrs)
- Casual, relaxed vibe (i.e. not super competitive Warmachine)
- Does not require deep focus to play (you can chat, drink etc and still 'keep up.')
For example, I often hear BLKOUT described as 'beer and pretzels.' Games are short (30min or so). It has simple(ish) mechanics but it's activation sequence may be unfamiliar to the average 40K-raised wargamer.
BLKOUT isn't random. Stand in the open; expect to get shot. A misplay will be lethally punished - you need focus. There's definitely strategy and difficult choices. You're unlikely to randomly roll your way to success.
I find it a bit irritating: for me, beer and pretzels is something light, casual, quick, random and requires little thought - kinda exactly in the first part of the quote. But every game I look up seems to be described as "beer and pretzels." It makes the term meaningless.
Is it a codeword for "there's nothing to this game?" or "random dice rolling" or "takes 30min or less?" Or does it mean you need to drink a lot for it to be fun? Or is it saying how you played a game i.e. stuffing around with mates, drinking involved? A low barrier to entry? A game that allows you to chat by not requiring full mental commitment?
Is beer-and-pretzels just a state of mind? If so, stop using it to describe games!
Question for the audience: What are some examples of a beer and pretzels games for you? What leads you to class them as such?
I could really use some miniature games that are light on rules but DEEP on strategy. Preferably with a low miniature count & small table space.
ReplyDeleteWhile you are at it, I'd like a pony
Delete-eM
Still, one wonders, how come chess achieved the simple rules/deep strategy but apparently no miniature game manages. I don't think it's because it's played on a grid.
DeleteChess may have simple rules, but it's VERY heavy on rote memorization. If your memorization and pattern recognition is sufficiently greater, player decision-making intensity is near ZERO - you simply play out the memorized opening as your opponent flails into a bad position, and then leverage that advantage by grinding to away a guaranteed win. As a pure strategy game, the overwhelming majority of victories are decided by the player pairing before Black & White are decided unless very carefully matched for strength. And forget about a weaker player coming back from a bad position - a weaker player invariably fumbles the opening and their game goes downhill from there.
DeleteWhen I was younger, I played a lot and studied certain openings very intensely, and as a result, I almost never play a satisfying 'serious' game of Chess in person. Most of the time, I'm giving someone a spanking, and there's basically nothing they can do but take it. It's surprising how foreknowledge takes all the joy out of winning.
OTOH, something like Knightmare Chess is OK because the cards break up the rules and force continuous improvisation.
- GG
That is an extremely one-sided view of chess, and one which many chess masters would dispute :-) Anyway, not here to discuss chess!!! What I want to know is why there are apparently no miniature games with light rules & serious tactics.
DeletePfft. Chess masters have the side job of promoting the game, lest their hours of rote memorization and status become completely irrelevant. When they bother to play normies, it's to effortlessly curbstomp dozens simultaneously, proving my point conclusively.
Delete- GG
Chess evolved over several centuries.
DeleteMiniature wargaming is much younger.
- Eric Farrigton
I hate the term "ameritrash" and beer and pretzels. Both terms are thrown around so loosely they have no meaning and get applied everywhere. Somehow monopoly and star fleet battles are both ameritrash... What? One is an exercise in frustration and chance while the other has (an admittedly excessive amount) of detail, offers multiple avenue of risk and reward, layered tactics and strategy, but they are labeled the same.
ReplyDeleteIIRC, 'Ameritrash' is when they have a lot of physical components and are heavy on randomization, like Risk or Axis & Allies.
DeleteI don't think Monopoly or SFB actually qualify as either. As I explained under the boardgame rant, Monopoly is Socialist programming. SFB is boardgaming for accountants.
- GG
"Both terms are thrown around so loosely they have no meaning and get applied everywhere."
ReplyDeleteSo it's not just me? I thought there must be some hidden meta meaning I must be missing...
Calling SFB beer and pretzels would flat out contradicting the wiki definition:
1) slow
2) complex
3) involves strategy
4) quite involved
5) some of densest rules out there
I wonder if some are using it to describe how they play i.e. "this is our not-serious regular game I've played with my mates since 2018"
-eM
SFB dates back to the late 1980s, if not earlier...
Delete- GG
For me, "Beer & Pretzels" finishes within an hour, for any sobriety not completely intoxicated.
ReplyDeleteTo finish that quickly while not necessarily sober means it is necessarily light on rules and complexity, low on memorization and model count, with a small(er) playing area, and so forth. Resolution and gameplay mechanics are simplified. Combined, it's inherently child-friendly.
The amount of randomness vs. strategy is completely irrelevant. As is whether it's a wargame - it can be a small boardgame as well, and is the game equivalent of a pub game like darts. Naturally, it's going to be a bit more casual, and that's fine, as it's more a social activity than a purely competitive one.
- GG
Beer and pretzels, Euro, Ameritrash, etc. are all just useless marketing terms that lost meaning long ago. It is no different than saying a game is "Easy to learn but hard to master" and is just the equivalent of marketing fluff. It is like how the term skirmish game also has no real meaning anymore and is useless as a descriptor because it has no definition.
ReplyDeleteHowever, these useless terms lead to all sorts of "fun" circular arguments about what is and is not in these categories and that is their main value. Driving "discussion". This discussion is the main way people often actually engage in gaming because it can be done away from the table and online with little overhead; unlike playing the actual games.
- Eric Farrington
The ancient Chinese game Weiqi (adopted by the Japanese as "Go") is the very definition of 'easy to learn, hard to master'. It is orders of magnitude more complex than Chess, despite having only 1 unit type.
DeleteI would say that we can generally distinguish 'skirmish', Euro, and Ameritrash by comparison. Nobody mistakes a skirmish like Guildball for Warhammer 40k, nor Euro like Catan for Ameritrash like Axis & Allies. The things that blur the lines do so deliberately trying to bandwagon on to a trend, and are generally poorly-designed because they lack focus.
- GG
Dang... depressing but probably true.
DeleteYou can easily put them into categories.
ReplyDeleteThen, take that to any place of discussion on the internet to learn how wrong you were. LOL
- Eric Farrington
Soo. ... The talk about extraction shooters, beer and pretzels got me thinking about a competitve hunt, with 2 spec ops teams dropping in to grab and go amidst roving zombies.
ReplyDelete- GG
I think Silver Bayonet does something like it? I loved the idea of Frostgrave but found the gameplay completely meh.
DeleteI'm homebrewing an extraction game for weird west at the moment - but have been momentarily distracted by finding all my old 40K minis...
-eM
Thanks for the reference. I've been playing with theme beyond the obvious military one, wanting something that lends itself to a multi-mission campaign. I've been thinking James Bond / Jason Bourne Cold War stuff, East vs West Cloak & Dagger amidst civilians, security guards, and police. The nice thing about spy stuff is that you can't just go in guns blazing or your operatives get burned by modern surveillance if they aren't captured / killed by police / SWAT / security / random civilians. Plus, Ian Fleming and Robert Ludlum wrote an absolute ton of scenarios that can be adapted. The biggest problem is that it really wants to be played double-blind, where each player KNOWS enemy spies are present, but it's anybody's guess WHO they are until someone makes a move. Maybe each side just pushes figures and until an a-ha! moment when one of them does an actual spy thing and/or blows their cover.
Delete- GG
Gangs of Rome had an interesting mechanic where models could deploy or re-deploy using civilian groups that acted as living terrain/obstacles could be of interest for a Spy-fi game.
Delete- Eric Farrington
I would NOT say that beer-and-pretzels games are short. By definition, a game that lets you drink and chat is going to take LONGER.
ReplyDeleteFor example, I would say Talisman is a beer-and-pretzels game, despite its length. The key qualifications for me are low/no prep time and low mental engagement allowing for socialization.
I'd say by definition, a B&P game would HAVE to be a shorter, simpler game so it CAN be extended (via drinking and chatting) to a reasonable time. I.e. a simple, non-taxing 1hr game that you spread out over an evening.
DeleteA game that already by default is long and lasts the whole evening (I recall Twilight Imperium taking 6rhgs once) cannot be 'beer-and-pretzelified' without putting aside an entire day.
So I'd say suggest being conventionally 'short' i.e. 1-2hrs vs 4-6hrs would be a prerequisite.
-eM
A game can have depth but still be quick to play. I find that with MORTAL GODS (Classical Greece, 30ish figs) - depth in choices and decisions, but the game is usually done well under 45mins, allowing 2-3 games in a night.
ReplyDeleteFrostgrave was well themed in that it was competitive between players but not directly - ie you don't (generally) fireball the opposing wizrad but you can levitate a monster and drop him into the middle of an opposing warband. Made for some great narrative fun!
SW:A - I was recently looking at these again also (though dont have a hardcopy)n and was thinking 'how would I adjust some of the mechanisms (like turn activation) to give them a new lease on life. They certainly have lots of character!
cheers, Paul