Skip to Content

Comments and Questions on the June 2009 GDS Chellenge

18 replies [Last post]
Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008

Please use this thread to post any comments, questions or requests for clarification regarding the June 2009 Game Design Showdown Challenge, entitled "Last Meeple Standing".

Zzzzz

Jpwoo
Jpwoo's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/26/2009
Interesting! >>>> End Game

Interesting!

>>>> End Game Goal = Last player to NOT complete some predefined goal.

Does this mean that the players have to be part of completing this goal, or does a rules based timer also qualify?

Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008
I just elaborated on this

I just elaborated on this requirement, since it seemed vague as I re-read it. And I would also say that all players have to be involved in completing this goal, but are obviously trying to avoid it (or be last to complete it).

So as another example, assume the predefined goal is to collect 4 sets of something. The player whom does not end up collecting all 4 sets would be considered the winner. But obviously you would want the gameplay to be such that NOT collecting the sets would prove difficult.

As for the timer, as long as the timer is somehow tied to the predefined goal, I would say it qualifies. But obviously not knowing what you have in mind, it is hard for me to clarify.

doho123
doho123's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
I take it that use of "meeple

I take it that use of "meeple components" are left up to the discretion of the judges? Because it sure does seem easy to simply add "score track meeples" to any old game. Or "replace checkers with meeples."

Rick-Holzgrafe
Rick-Holzgrafe's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/22/2008
Ninja Checkers

doho123 wrote:
I take it that use of "meeple components" are left up to the discretion of the judges? Because it sure does seem easy to simply add "score track meeples" to any old game. Or "replace checkers with meeples."

A meeple should represent a person; a checker doesn't. (But I suppose you could replace checkers with meeples and paste on a theme about two battling clans of ninjas that leap over their opponents to attack them from above. Ninja Checkers!)

Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008
As long as some form of

As long as some form of meeple component/piece is used in the game that should satisfy the requirement I set. THOUGH keep in mind that using them in unusual ways, or as more than a simple marker/score indicator might help you gain more votes!

Brykovian
Brykovian's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Animeeples?

Would the animal-shaped Meeples work as well ... or just the people Meeples?

-Bryk

Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008
I am using the term *Meeple*

I am using the term *Meeple* generically here, so yes animals, vikings and bears oh my!

metzgerism
metzgerism's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/19/2009
Hrm

Is there any way that we can get rid of the elimination concept for multi-player contests? I'm wracking my brain here and thinking that a negative scoring track might be the best way to go about it, but even then there's no guarantee against kingmaking and early elimination.

Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008
Sorry I think I caused

Sorry I think I caused additional confusion when I attempted to update the GDS information the other day.

It should really be :

End Game Goal = Being the last player to NOT accomplish some predefined goal (so not gain 20 vp, not cross the finish line, not collect 3 sets, not use the last resource, etc).
Victory Condition = Anything you desire.
Meeple Components must be used.

Sorry for the confusion.

Rick-Holzgrafe
Rick-Holzgrafe's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/22/2008
Multiple goals?

Zzzzz wrote:
Victory Condition = Anything you desire.

So could there be multiple goals? That would allow a player to remain in the game even after he has unwillingly achieved some of the goals.

simons
simons's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/28/2008
I feel kind of silly that I

I feel kind of silly that I have to ask this, but what exactly is a Meeple? Is it just the generic name for any token that represents a character or creature? Are there meeples in Chess, Candy-Land, or Settlers of Katan?

InvisibleJon
InvisibleJon's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/27/2008
Ask da Geek...

simons wrote:
I feel kind of silly that I have to ask this, but what exactly is a Meeple?
Funny thing is that someone on BGG has asked the same question:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/7848

Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008
Maybe I was bad at wording

Maybe I was bad at wording what I was attempting to define as the criteria for this GDS.

The point of this was to develop a game where the *End Game* is triggered only upon the LAST player to achieve this end game goal. The end game trigger/goal does not have anything to do with the actual victory condition. So you could develop a game where the end game trigger was the last player to *build 10 cities*. Which upon the last player to build their 10th city the game would end.

Upon this end game, you would determine the winner by your victory condition (which can be anything you want).

As such, NO player is eliminated and they should continue to play to hopefully achieve the *best* victory condition. So assume that after the last player built their 10th city, the victory was the player with the MOST VP (or whatever creative victory condition you might want to define).

Hopefully this helps clarify a little more, if not we might have to cancel our first GDS ever! Since I am not sure I can salvage this if I am still causing confusion.

Mitchell Allen
Mitchell Allen's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/09/2008
Last Scale Falling (From Eyes)

Zzzzz wrote:
Maybe I was bad at wording what I was attempting to define as the criteria for this GDS.

The point of this was to develop a game where the *End Game* is triggered only upon the LAST player to achieve this end game goal. …

Upon this end game, you would determine the winner by your victory condition (which can be anything you want).

As such, NO player is eliminated and they should continue to play to hopefully achieve the *best* victory condition. So assume that after the last player built their 10th city, the victory was the player with the MOST VP (or whatever creative victory condition you might want to define).

Ohhhh! Now I get it. I won't add to the confusion by telling you what I thought you meant!

Thanks for clearing this up :)

{Goes back to drawing board}

Cheers,

Mitch

Mitchell Allen
Mitchell Allen's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/09/2008
Umm, I'm Sorry, But I Have to Add to the Confusion ...

Zzzzz wrote:
I just elaborated on this requirement, since it seemed vague as I re-read it. And I would also say that all players have to be involved in completing this goal, but are obviously trying to avoid it (or be last to complete it).

So as another example, assume the predefined goal is to collect 4 sets of something. The player whom does not end up collecting all 4 sets would be considered the winner. But obviously you would want the gameplay to be such that NOT collecting the sets would prove difficult.

Not to nitpick, but ... does your latest clarification nullify the quoted portion?
For a game to use the quoted rules, the end game would actually be the victory condition, unlike the clarification.

{The smart-aleck in the back of the room pipes up, "As soon as you start the game, everyone wins, because NONE of the players have achieved the goal!"}

Cheers,

Mitch

Jpwoo
Jpwoo's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/26/2009
hmmm

How about,

There must be some task that the players are either rewarded or not punished for, if they are the last player to complete the task.

+Survival theme
+Meeple inclusion

Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008
You can always assume the

You can always assume the last thing I stated will clarify and override any previous statements.

As such if you look at the GDS main post, it has been altered to clarify that end game and victory condition are two distinct concepts.

Mitchell Allen
Mitchell Allen's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/09/2008
Override, Override!

Gotcha. I'll be back on the 24th :)

Cheers,

Mitch

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut