If you like Fluxx, check out Chrononauts. It's a card game. You have a timeline of some 20 events. Some are "linchpins," and can be altered by cards that reverse fate; these are the actions of the time traveler you represent. Others are thereby paradoxed; you can patch these by applying other cards.
For example, if you save Lincoln and Kennedy, Watergate (1974) can be patched with ("President M. L. King sworn in"). The most interesting thing is if you sabotage the Manhattan Project (1940?) and Sputnik (1957) you've paradoxed the Cuban Missile Crisis. The patch is "World War III: Human Civilization destroyed." This "uberparadox" renders all cards after 1962 inaccessible, until someone restores the Cuban Missile Crisis.
There are also relics, such as "Videotape of the Creation of the Universe" (Betamax, of course) and "Cure for Cancer" (in easy-to-swallow tablet form).
You win if you collect the 3 artifacts your identity says you're looking for, or restore the timeline you came from, or collect enough payments from your bosses for applying patches.
Special action cards: "Your parents never met" (force someone to change identity cards), "It never existed" (discard someone else's artifact), "Memo from future self" (stop someone from making a play).
Posted by Orson Scott Card (Member # 209) on :
This sounds fun ... but is it a "play once" game, a "play till you've seen all the cards" game, or a game you can replay again and again?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I played it once at a Hatrack gathering and had a lot of fun. I was assured (but since I haven't bought it yet, cannot testify) that it is a game that remains fun and enjoyable.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Chrononauts" is kind of a "play 'til you've seen all the cards" game, IMO, but then I believe the same thing of "Fluxx." The gameplay is very enjoyable, but it doesn't support really elaborate strategies; experienced players will eventually figure out who has which goal and shape their own play accordingly, but that's about as deep as its gets due to the high random factor. It's a good party game for that reason, but since it takes longer to explain and set up than "Apples to Apples," "Munchkin," or "Fluxx" (or "Once Upon A Time"), I usually wind up taking one of those other ones.
One I never see recommended, but which has a surprising amount of depth mixed in with the humor, is "Guillotine."
(And for board games, I strongly recommend that people check out "Tsuro." It's a fantastic and quick-playing game that never feels "unfair.")
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
"Guillotine" is a wonderful game. The gameplay is simple, but it is fun and entertaining.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: "Chrononauts" is kind of a "play 'til you've seen all the cards" game
PFFFFT! While I do like to alternate with Chrononauts: Early American Edition, I can play either for hours. And have.
Same with Fluxx (which comes in a freeware Palm edition, which will make little sense if you've never played the card game).
Aquarius and Nanofictionary get a bit much after the third round or so. But I'll be happy to pay them again a week or two later.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
The problem I have with playing either Fluxx or Chrononauts for hours is that, in the end, the gameplay of either just isn't all that deep. The card draws are too random -- and some of the random cards too powerful -- to make serious strategy a real possibility. (This is particularly true of Fluxx.) That's not really meant as a criticism of them; they're intended to be light, pick-up party games, and they do this excellently. But if you have hours to play a game, there are other games out there which fill that time in (IMO) a more satisfying way.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
You assume that everyone plays games the way you do. Not all of us LIKE games that require much in the way of strategy.
I don't enjoy chess. I don't like RPGs at all. I'm not a fan of Monopoly or Risk.
I prefer my games to be fluffy. Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
Tom -- where did you get Tsuro from?
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
I'm undecided on whether to call it a play-a-few-times or play-forever; I haven't gotten sick of it yet. One problem is that you get to know the identities, so you think, ah: this player wants World War III -- he must be Squa Tront, the giant radioactive cockroach from the future! But I bluff sometimes: try to do that when I'm NOT Squa Tront, so people will be confused and when I prevent the Vietnam War and legalize pot (as "Rainbow," the flower child), they won't know what hit them.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I bluff sometimes. But I also just have particular cards/years that I like to mess with (unless doing so is bad for my chances of winning).
So, unless contraindicated, I am likely to: kill Hitler (both for obvious reasons, and because it is the one card that affects more years than any other, and likely to mess up other people); stop the Manhattan Project (my grandfather worked on it, so I got a kick out of telling him I had done that; I still do it even though I cannot tell him about it any more); and I will paradox the birth year (or closest year available) of any fellow player whose birth year I know (like my sister ).
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
plaid, I picked Tsuro up at my local game shop.
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
OSC, you've been quoted on the Web page of the Fluxx company (scroll down to "Testimonial of the Week"):
(And I don't think there's anything objectionable in original Fluxx; Famly Fluxx is just simpler.)
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
However, unless you want your kids to look at you really, really strange, you might decide against the Stoner Fluxx deck.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote: I don't like RPGs at all.
Oh no, Rivka.
You see, I'd recently begun rethinking destroying California because you, specifically, live there.
But this is just unforgiveable.
I'm sorry. When the Implaccable Engine of Ultimate Destruction is completed, California will still be the first target.
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
Yes, OSC probably won't be able to stand the Looneys' views on a lot of societal issues.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
*curious* Surely you already knew this failing of mine, Scott? If it helps, sometimes I like to watch. Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
If I did, I forgot about it.
But if that's your only failing, you're not doing so badly...
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
Tom -- I found a copy of Tsuro, and it does look pretty neat... so the game says it's for 2-8 players; do you have an opinion about what the optimal number of players is?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I'm not sure "optimal" really applies, here, since the very nature of the game changes. With two players, it can be a longish strategic game; with six players -- the most I've ever done -- it's downright chaotic.
Posted by BandoCommando (Member # 7746) on :
See, the conspiracy theorist in me thinks that Card is just touting the GAME Flux as a way of getting us to buy his collection of short stories with the title "Flux."
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
).
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)