Welcome to Ludology, an analytical discussion of the hows and whys of the world of board games. Rather than news and reviews, Ludology explores a variety of topics about games from a wider lens, as well as discuss game history, game design and game players.
We post a new Ludology episode every other week. In these episodes, hosts Erica Bouyouris and Sen-Foong Lim deep-dive into a single topic within game design, often with a well-regarded guest from the game industry. We generally focus on tabletop game design (mainly board games and RPGs), but we often pull in experts from all forms of games, from video games to escape rooms to slot machines.
On weeks where there is no flagship Ludology episode, we will alternate between two smaller mini-sodes. Erica and Sen are happy to announce that Sarah Shipp of Shippboard Games and Stephanie Campbell of TTRPGKids will be joining us for the next year, providing additional content between our longer episodes.
Sarah’s segment, Thinking Beyond Mechanisms, is a monthly feature that dives deeper into the other aspects of games beyond the dice and cards we’re all familiar with.
Stephanie’s segment, TTRPGKids, explores how parents and teachers can use role playing games with children in the home and in the classroom.
We hope you enjoy the additional content!
Our History
We aim for most Ludology episodes to be timeless, so you are welcome to explore our entire catalog. Most of it should age quite well. The podcast was started in 2011 by Geoff Engelstein and Ryan Sturm, with Mike Fitzgerald taking over for Ryan in 2015. Gil and Scott joined the show in 2017 when Mike stepped aside, and Emma joined in 2019 when Geoff ended his tenure as host. Emma left in 2021, and Erica and Sen joined us. Since then, Scott stepped down in 2022 and Gil will be hanging up his mic in 2023, leaving Erica and Sen to carry on this amazing legacy.
Erica and Sen are working to bring new voices to Ludology and have some great things to announce as gaming expands to include even more people!
Contact Us
Have your own thoughts about our topics? We encourage you to visit us at our guild on Boardgamegeek to get involved in a continuing discussion.
If you have questions that you’d like answered on Ludology, let us know by filling out this Google Form; you can also leave an audio question that we can use on the show, if you wish!
You can also make a one-time or monthly donation here. The link will take you to Erica’s account. People who donate in this way will not have access to the Patreon page – sorry!
I’ve been a big proponent of print-and-play games, and over the past year or two, dozens and dozens of these titles have hit Kickstarter, PNP Arcade, DicePen, and several other sites. It’s no wonder why – many of these games offer a short, fun game experience for less than half the price of a standard title. Yes, there’s a little extra effort that might go into it, and yes you may have to supply some of your own components. But for those who prioritize the gameplay experience and don’t need all the little fancy bits and pieces, print-and-play is the way to go.
Now, there are several different kinds of print and play, but my favorites are games that take place on entire sheets of paper. I prefer not to have to do much cutting, and I certainly don’t want to spend hours trying to properly align card backs and fronts. So these are usually my game of choice. There are plenty of options out there that scratch this itch, but most fall into the category of “roll dice, do thing”. There’s certainly not a problem with that, but I will say that it’s gotten a bit stale for me lately. Lots of them also involve going out and exploring different terrain types, marking the spaces that you visit. You’re usually looking at some form of area control, a bit of set collection, maybe a few other little things thrown in here and there.
Starfront Scouting Academy is the first title from Shiny Pigeon Printables, and it contains many of these elements. Plus, it’s in space, which I’m pretty tired of as a theme. So my fear was… is this game going to be like all others, or will it have some extra fun parts that will make it ready for launch? (Don’t worry, I groaned at that sentence, too.) Let’s find out!
I Need You to Be Clever, Bean
Starfront Scouting Academy, designed by Chris Backe, puts 1-6 players in the role of cadets facing their final exams. Their challenge: explore a toxic planet remotely using a variety of equipment. Your goal is to utilize your tools and your smarts to chart the planet in the most successful way and head to the top of your class!
Play works very simply – four dice of the same color are placed on the top, bottom, and sides of a shared Equipment Selection sheet. There’s also an extra die in the middle that represents SCOUT – a robo-dog that’s here to help you out. On a turn, you’ll select one or two of these dice to explore a particular terrain area, each of which uses the dice in different ways. For the dunes, you’ll take two dice and use the difference in their values. For the mountains, you’ll add 5 to one of the die values. You can only use dice that border that terrain type on the Equipment Selection sheet, so your options are somewhat limited.
Once you’ve made your choice, you’ll go over to the shared planet map sheet (there are 4 to choose from) and mark one of the spaces based on the value from your dice. You’ll then go to your individualized player sheet to mark the value and terrain type that you visited. You reroll the dice you use, place them on the Equipment Selection sheet, and then it’s the next player’s turn.
Play continues just like that until either a row, column, or full diagonal is completed, at which point scores are tallied. Players earn points in a variety of ways. The location values are split into three groups, and the two players with the most visits in a particular group will get some points. There are also points if you manage to visit a terrain type 4 or 5 times. Other little bonuses are also present, like having connected scout boxes or having your boxes in the line that finished the game.
There are also points available for completing six different patterns with your scout boxes on the planet map. Manage to be the first one to get the pattern completed and you’ll get even more points. Once everyone’s added up all their points, whoever has the most is the big winner!
She Just Wins… Thoroughly
Now as I said, I’m a bit tired of space games, and so I was hoping that the theme wouldn’t bring this down for me. For most games like this, the theme and everything rarely impact the way the game is played, and that’s pretty much the case for SSA. That said, I do like the flavor text and the presentation, and I feel like it goes really well with the artwork we have from Parker Simpson. It’s certainly space-themed, but it has a nice little “younger” twist to where it does feel like it’s intended for students. The full-color version looks really good, though I prefer a black and white printout as it’s easier to see what the players have marked on the sheets.
I played this game with my wife, and at two players, it made for a fun time that increased in competitiveness as it went along. We both started off doing our own thing. My wife went immediately after the patterns, while I tried to connect a bunch of my squares together. There’s so much space on the board for two players that you can easily stay out of each other’s way…. but what’s the fun in that? As the game went along, my wife was quickly racking up pattern bonuses, and I was getting a whole lot of nothing. So I started trying to take boxes away from her to keep her from getting more patterns. While this was successful for a bit, it only ended up making it so that I wasn’t getting many points for myself either. In the end, I did better than her in a few areas, but her focus on patterns and those big points for being the first one to finish them led to her having a clear victory.
If You Try and Lose, It Isn’t Your Fault
I will say that this game can be a bit more challenging for people that struggle with spatial reasoning in games. This is true for my wife, and there were times when she was taking several minutes on each turn. We quickly blew through the recommended time and got to a little over an hour, and we likely could’ve gone for 30 more minutes if my wife didn’t begin to focus on ending the game quickly before I could get more points. I’m sure as we play the game more, we’ll both go a bit quicker, but I could still see our games being closer to an hour than to 30 minutes.
In some cases, that would be a problem, as this game’s mechanics are pretty much the same from your first turn to your last. There are some bonuses you can unlock at certain levels when you visit the terrain types, and they do make for more interesting turns, but it’s still pretty much the same. That being said, I don’t think we ever got bored. As we started trying to get in each other’s way, that bit of competitiveness in us came out just the right amount, and it made for a good time.
I Will Not Be a Pawn in Your Game
I also played the game solo a few times, and I must say that I was incredibly impressed with how the rules have been manipulated to allow for this experience. When it’s just one player, they will take a turn as normal, but any dice that they do not use on a turn are utilized by a “storm simulator” to mark off spaces and make them unavailable. The use of direction and the values of the unused die is quite clever and not something I would’ve been able to envision myself.
That said, the solo mode is also REALLY hard. After playing with my wife, I thought that patterns would have to be the way to go, but that got blown up quickly. The way the simulator works, it’s always going to mark off spaces that are orthogonally adjacent to the one that you just selected. Therefore, patterns that involved having boxes in the same vertical or horizontal line led to lines that quickly filled up. My first game ended after less than 10 turns, and I had a miserable score. In my second game, I adjusted my strategy a bit, and I was certainly more successful but still fell far short of the top goal given in the manual. I do feel like there’s likely a strategy that could work, and I’m interested to keep trying it out.
Overall, I’m not sure that there’s anything about Starfront Scouting Academy that is completely unique or sets the standard for all print-and-play games going forward. However, it does what it does very well, and it’s a solid gameplay experience. This would be a very good family game for those with kids in the higher levels of elementary school, and I think it could also be good fun at the beginning of a gaming night before you get to your main gaming course. If you’ve been on the fence about backing a print-and-play campaign on Kickstarter, I would say that this is a very solid way to begin your journey into that realm.
A prototype of the game was provided for this coverage. Components and rules covered in this preview are not finalized. Read more about our preview policies at One Board Family.
Highs
Nice artwork that fits well with the theme
Fun interactivity that increases as the game progresses
Disease killed significantly more soldiers in the Civil War than bullets did. The Union lost 110, 000 killed in action and 225,000 from disease. The South lost 94,000 killed in action and 169,000 from disease. In addition, each side had about 30,000 men die in captivity, and almost all of those would have been die to disease, although in some cases aggravated by exposure and malnutrition. Four major killers were dysentery, typhoid fever, pneumonia, and malaria. The estimated totals from several diseases were:
These estimates are probably low, because a great man men died of unspecified causes, or “a fever.”
Most disease losses were spread evenly over time and so represented a steady attrition made up for with continuous recruiting. But I thought that some representation of epidemics which could suddenly impact a field army’s fighting strength was in order.
A House Divided now includes event cards, one of which is drawn each turn, and there are unique decks for each of the years of the war after 1861. Every card is drawn and played once, and so every one of the historic events portrayed by the card occur, but players are unsure in what order within the year they will happen. One of the effects of a number of the cards is to cause an immediate loss of one unit by one or both players at the start of a turn, the sort of disruptive casualties that sometimes occurred with particularly virulent outbreaks of a disease. Over the course of the game five Union units are removed and four Confederate.
Work in Progress Event Card Samples (not final artwork)
Some other non-disease losses occur due to events outside the player’s control. Those cards read as follows:
Trouble on the Frontier
*Union player removes any one active Union infantry to the Recruiting or Promotion Pool.
The Dakotah uprising in Minnesota, August 1862, force diversion of Federal troops north.
Southern Bread Riots
*Confederate player removes one Confederate infantry in play and place it six months later on the turn track. On that turn place it in the Recruiting or Promotion Pool.
The Southern Bread Riots were a response to dwindling food supplies in the Confederacy, and took place across the south in March and April of 1863. Militias were called out to restore order, diverting troops from the front.
New York Draft Riots
*Union player removes any one New York militia infantry in play and place it six months later on the turn track. On that turn place it in the Recruiting Pool.
Historic draft riots in New York, July 1863 caused diversion of troops to restore order.
Midwest Draft Riots
*Union player removes any 1 Illinois militia infantry in play and place it six months later on the turn track. On that turn place it in the Recruiting Pool.
In Charleston, Illinois the last pro-Confederate draft riots of the war took place in March 1864
Three Year Enlistments Expire (Union)
*Union player removes any two active Union Veteran infantry units to the Promotion Pool.
The enlistment terms of large numbers of the Union regiments enrolled for three years’ service in the summer of 1861 expired during the summer of 1864, just at the height of the Overland Campaign, which weakened the Army of the Potomac in particular.
Blockade Tightens
*Confederate player removes any one active Confederate infantry to the Recruiting or Promotion Pool. (If the Confederacy has been recognized by Europe, this card has no effect.)
Starvation in the South
*Confederate player removes any one active Confederate infantry in play and place it in the Recruiting or Promotion Pool.
As transportation broke down across the South in mid-1865, food often rotted in warehouses and starvation became widespread. Confederate soldiers increasingly left the ranks to look after their families.
In addition, weather can cause casualties as well as affect movement and game length, but that is the subject of a different article.
Welcome to Ludology, an analytical discussion of the hows and whys of the world of board games. Rather than news and reviews, Ludology explores a variety of topics about games from a wider lens, as well as discuss game history, game design and game players.
We post a new Ludology episode every other week. In these episodes, hosts Erica Bouyouris and Sen-Foong Lim deep-dive into a single topic within game design, often with a well-regarded guest from the game industry. We generally focus on tabletop game design (mainly board games and RPGs), but we often pull in experts from all forms of games, from video games to escape rooms to slot machines.
On weeks where there is no flagship Ludology episode, we will alternate between two smaller mini-sodes. Erica and Sen are happy to announce that Sarah Shipp of Shippboard Games and Stephanie Campbell of TTRPGKids will be joining us for the next year, providing additional content between our longer episodes.
Sarah’s segment, Thinking Beyond Mechanisms, is a monthly feature that dives deeper into the other aspects of games beyond the dice and cards we’re all familiar with.
Stephanie’s segment, TTRPGKids, explores how parents and teachers can use role playing games with children in the home and in the classroom.
We hope you enjoy the additional content!
Our History
We aim for most Ludology episodes to be timeless, so you are welcome to explore our entire catalog. Most of it should age quite well. The podcast was started in 2011 by Geoff Engelstein and Ryan Sturm, with Mike Fitzgerald taking over for Ryan in 2015. Gil and Scott joined the show in 2017 when Mike stepped aside, and Emma joined in 2019 when Geoff ended his tenure as host. Emma left in 2021, and Erica and Sen joined us. Since then, Scott stepped down in 2022 and Gil will be hanging up his mic in 2023, leaving Erica and Sen to carry on this amazing legacy.
Erica and Sen are working to bring new voices to Ludology and have some great things to announce as gaming expands to include even more people!
Contact Us
Have your own thoughts about our topics? We encourage you to visit us at our guild on Boardgamegeek to get involved in a continuing discussion.
If you have questions that you’d like answered on Ludology, let us know by filling out this Google Form; you can also leave an audio question that we can use on the show, if you wish!
You can also make a one-time or monthly donation here. The link will take you to Erica’s account. People who donate in this way will not have access to the Patreon page – sorry!
Welcome to Ludology, an analytical discussion of the hows and whys of the world of board games. Rather than news and reviews, Ludology explores a variety of topics about games from a wider lens, as well as discuss game history, game design and game players.
We post a new Ludology episode every other week. In these episodes, hosts Erica Bouyouris and Sen-Foong Lim deep-dive into a single topic within game design, often with a well-regarded guest from the game industry. We generally focus on tabletop game design (mainly board games and RPGs), but we often pull in experts from all forms of games, from video games to escape rooms to slot machines.
On weeks where there is no flagship Ludology episode, we will alternate between two smaller mini-sodes. Erica and Sen are happy to announce that Sarah Shipp of Shippboard Games and Stephanie Campbell of TTRPGKids will be joining us for the next year, providing additional content between our longer episodes.
Sarah’s segment, Thinking Beyond Mechanisms, is a monthly feature that dives deeper into the other aspects of games beyond the dice and cards we’re all familiar with.
Stephanie’s segment, TTRPGKids, explores how parents and teachers can use role playing games with children in the home and in the classroom.
We hope you enjoy the additional content!
Our History
We aim for most Ludology episodes to be timeless, so you are welcome to explore our entire catalog. Most of it should age quite well. The podcast was started in 2011 by Geoff Engelstein and Ryan Sturm, with Mike Fitzgerald taking over for Ryan in 2015. Gil and Scott joined the show in 2017 when Mike stepped aside, and Emma joined in 2019 when Geoff ended his tenure as host. Emma left in 2021, and Erica and Sen joined us. Since then, Scott stepped down in 2022 and Gil will be hanging up his mic in 2023, leaving Erica and Sen to carry on this amazing legacy.
Erica and Sen are working to bring new voices to Ludology and have some great things to announce as gaming expands to include even more people!
Contact Us
Have your own thoughts about our topics? We encourage you to visit us at our guild on Boardgamegeek to get involved in a continuing discussion.
If you have questions that you’d like answered on Ludology, let us know by filling out this Google Form; you can also leave an audio question that we can use on the show, if you wish!
You can also make a one-time or monthly donation here. The link will take you to Erica’s account. People who donate in this way will not have access to the Patreon page – sorry!
This week, we have musician and artist Mike Phirman in the guest judge seat. His years of making comedy music is just what our slightly funny podcast needs. Ric and Ryan have been tasked with creating a “thrilling” board game for Mike. Will Ric’s adrenaline filled game get our judge excited? Will Ryan’s pitch leave Mike on the edge of his seat?
Mike Phirman has been making comedy music since 2010 and can be heard on “Kids Place Live” on SiriusXM. You can check out Mike’s music at his website https://mikephirman.com today.
Like the content that is filing your ears? Consider giving to our Patreon and connect with One Board Family even more. https://www.patreon.com/oneboardfamily
In 2024, my upcoming game Men of Iron Volume VII: Ermine was put onto the GMT P500 list, and reached its number relatively quickly. For those who don’t know, Men of Iron, created by Richard Berg is a hex and counter series of games focussed on medieval battles at the grand tactical scale.
Ermine covers a handful of smaller battles from the early stages of the Hundred Years’ War. You’ve probably never heard of most of them – they’re all rather obscure and tend to be overshadowed by the likes of Poitiers, Crécy, and Agincourt. But they’re surprisingly varied and interesting in their own right.
These battles span the full range of classic Hundred Years’ War encounters: from Morlaix, where a small English force of longbowmen in a defensive position managed to hold off -and arguably defeat – a much larger cavalry army; to a daring night attack at La Roche-Derrien, where a small, plucky group of mounted men-at-arms broke a siege, captured the enemy commander, and snatched victory; to the full-on pitched battle of Auray, which was a close-run thing and could have gone either way.
It’s been a really interesting process to design these battles as their own, independent scenarios, and I want to write a post detailing each of them individually. In the meantime though, here’s a bit of a historical summary of the period, to give the subsequent posts a bit of context:
The War of the Breton Succession (1341–1364) was a dynastic conflict rooted in competing claims to the Duchy of Brittany following the death of Duke John III without issue. His half-brother, John de Montfort, asserted his right to the duchy against Joan of Penthièvre, supported by her husband Charles of Blois and the French crown. Hostilities opened with Montfort’s seizure of Champtoceaux in September 1341, but he was soon captured following a siege by royal forces. His wife, Joanna of Flanders, continued the resistance, rallying support from England. The arrival of English reinforcements led to the Battle of Morlaix (30 September 1342), where Anglo-Breton forces successfully repelled a larger Franco-Breton army through the use of field entrenchments and longbow fire, marking the conflict’s transformation into a broader Anglo-French proxy war.
Throughout the 1340s and 1350s, the war was punctuated by sieges and intermittent field engagements, with no side able to secure a decisive advantage. A turning point came at the Battle of La Roche-Derrien in 1347, where Charles of Blois was captured by English and Montfortist forces during a failed assault on the town, severely weakening his faction until his ransom in 1356. Meanwhile, the Battle of Mauron (14 August 1352) reinforced Montfortist momentum: English-led forces annihilated a larger Franco-Breton army, inflicting heavy casualties on the French nobility. Yet the conflict dragged on, and in 1364 French momentum revived after Bertrand du Guesclin’s victory at the Battle of Cocherel (16 May), where he defeated Navarrese-English forces in Normandy, allowing the French crown to refocus efforts on Brittany and emboldening Charles of Blois for a final push.
The war culminated in the decisive Battle of Auray on 29 September 1364. John de Montfort, now returned from English exile, laid siege to Auray, prompting Charles of Blois and Du Guesclin to attempt a relief. The Montfortist forces, well-positioned on high ground along the River L’och and reinforced by English contingents under John Chandos, repulsed the Franco-Breton attack. Charles of Blois was killed, and Du Guesclin taken prisoner. The defeat ended the Blois claim to the duchy, and the Treaty of Guérande (April 1365) recognised Montfort’s son as Duke John IV. Though the war resolved the immediate succession, it left Brittany politically fractured and firmly enmeshed in the wider struggles of the Hundred Years War.
The Battle of Champtoceux
Champtoceux is also the least well documented battle in the box. We don’t really know where it happened, and we don’t really know the makeup of the forces (outside of the leaders and that 2,000 Genoese crossbowmen were involved; those fellas crop up in quite a few of these battles). Here’s the historical background:
Charles de Blois
By September 1341, Charles de Blois had amassed 5,000 French soldiers, 2,000 Genoese mercenaries, and a substantial number of Breton troops in his military ranks. He stationed his forces at Angers in the Loire Valley, on the southern border of Brittany.
Jean de Monfort
As October 1341 dawned, Charles de Blois prepared to advance, only to find that Jean de Montfort had already seized control of and fortified most of the castles and towns along Eastern and Central Brittany. Among Montfort’s stronghold possessions were the key towns of Rennes, Dinan, and the heavily fortified castle at Champtoceux, guarding the Loire Valley. Charles chose this stronghold as the first target for the French army’s march toward their ultimate destination, Nantes. Jean de Valois – France’s future King Jean II – joined Charles on this campaign, as did the Genoese mercenary leader Ottone Doria, who was famously scapegoated for the failure of the French army at Crécy 5 years later.
Prince Jean of France
Charles, alongside Prince Jean of France, initiated a siege of Champtoceux, a key stronghold held by Montfortist forces. However, the besieging army faced severe logistical challenges due to Jean de Montfort’s strategic network of defensive outposts in the surrounding countryside, which disrupted supply lines and made sustaining the siege increasingly difficult.
In response to these disruptions, Charles de Blois took decisive action by leading a detachment of approximately 1,000 men to clear the countryside of Montfortist forces, hoping to reestablish secure supply routes. This maneuver, however, exposed him to counterattack. Jean de Montfort, seizing the opportunity, moved swiftly with his army to intercept Charles. The confrontation forced Charles and his men to retreat to a fortified farmstead, where they prepared to defend themselves under pressure from Montfort’s numerically superior force.
The situation became critical for Charles de Blois until reinforcements arrived under Prince Jean of France. These fresh troops bolstered the French position and launched a counteroffensive that nearly routed Montfort’s army. Despite the setback, Jean de Montfort managed to execute a disciplined withdrawal, preserving his forces.
I identified two main challenges in designing this scenario: the map, and how to reflect the flow of the battle. The only concrete detail in the sources is that the fight took place at a farmstead, so I took some creative license and added a few wooded areas to help break up the reinforcement line and create more tactical interest.
Capturing the flow of the engagement was equally tricky – it unfolds in two phases: an initial Montfortist attack on the scouting Blois forces, followed by the arrival of Blois reinforcements that turn the tide and force a Montfortist retreat off the map. There are a few ways of doing this in the Men of Iron system. The simplest way would be to simply reflect this through the Flight Point system; for those not familiar – the more units you lose, the more FPs you accrue, and once you hit your side’s FP limit, you lose, with your troops effectively scattering and running away. I didn’t like that though – as I thought that the most interesting part of this battle was the decision of Jean de Montfort to run away. Timing the retreat is key – as Jean has a real chance to kill or capture Charles de Blois and nip this whole succession crisis in the bud pretty early on. Before the reinforcements come to overwhelm him.
The other method, then, is to emulate the rules found in other Men of Iron entries. The Battle of Fornovo, found in Arquebus – Volume IV in the series – has a nice rule that encourages you to move your units off the map, effectively counting themas having retreated, but not counting towards your FP total. It doesn’t make it easier for de Montfort to win, but it does make it harder for de Blois to.
I and my developer and playtesters will be testing that for now – to see if it works well mechanically in this context, but also whether it fits narratively in the scenario. Next up, Morlaix.
Welcome to Ludology, an analytical discussion of the hows and whys of the world of board games. Rather than news and reviews, Ludology explores a variety of topics about games from a wider lens, as well as discuss game history, game design and game players.
We post a new Ludology episode every other week. In these episodes, hosts Erica Bouyouris and Sen-Foong Lim deep-dive into a single topic within game design, often with a well-regarded guest from the game industry. We generally focus on tabletop game design (mainly board games and RPGs), but we often pull in experts from all forms of games, from video games to escape rooms to slot machines.
On weeks where there is no flagship Ludology episode, we will alternate between two smaller mini-sodes. Erica and Sen are happy to announce that Sarah Shipp of Shippboard Games and Stephanie Campbell of TTRPGKids will be joining us for the next year, providing additional content between our longer episodes.
Sarah’s segment, Thinking Beyond Mechanisms, is a monthly feature that dives deeper into the other aspects of games beyond the dice and cards we’re all familiar with.
Stephanie’s segment, TTRPGKids, explores how parents and teachers can use role playing games with children in the home and in the classroom.
We hope you enjoy the additional content!
Our History
We aim for most Ludology episodes to be timeless, so you are welcome to explore our entire catalog. Most of it should age quite well. The podcast was started in 2011 by Geoff Engelstein and Ryan Sturm, with Mike Fitzgerald taking over for Ryan in 2015. Gil and Scott joined the show in 2017 when Mike stepped aside, and Emma joined in 2019 when Geoff ended his tenure as host. Emma left in 2021, and Erica and Sen joined us. Since then, Scott stepped down in 2022 and Gil will be hanging up his mic in 2023, leaving Erica and Sen to carry on this amazing legacy.
Erica and Sen are working to bring new voices to Ludology and have some great things to announce as gaming expands to include even more people!
Contact Us
Have your own thoughts about our topics? We encourage you to visit us at our guild on Boardgamegeek to get involved in a continuing discussion.
If you have questions that you’d like answered on Ludology, let us know by filling out this Google Form; you can also leave an audio question that we can use on the show, if you wish!
You can also make a one-time or monthly donation here. The link will take you to Erica’s account. People who donate in this way will not have access to the Patreon page – sorry!
Welcome to Ludology, an analytical discussion of the hows and whys of the world of board games. Rather than news and reviews, Ludology explores a variety of topics about games from a wider lens, as well as discuss game history, game design and game players.
We post a new Ludology episode every other week. In these episodes, hosts Erica Bouyouris and Sen-Foong Lim deep-dive into a single topic within game design, often with a well-regarded guest from the game industry. We generally focus on tabletop game design (mainly board games and RPGs), but we often pull in experts from all forms of games, from video games to escape rooms to slot machines.
On weeks where there is no flagship Ludology episode, we will alternate between two smaller mini-sodes. Erica and Sen are happy to announce that Sarah Shipp of Shippboard Games and Stephanie Campbell of TTRPGKids will be joining us for the next year, providing additional content between our longer episodes.
Sarah’s segment, Thinking Beyond Mechanisms, is a monthly feature that dives deeper into the other aspects of games beyond the dice and cards we’re all familiar with.
Stephanie’s segment, TTRPGKids, explores how parents and teachers can use role playing games with children in the home and in the classroom.
We hope you enjoy the additional content!
Our History
We aim for most Ludology episodes to be timeless, so you are welcome to explore our entire catalog. Most of it should age quite well. The podcast was started in 2011 by Geoff Engelstein and Ryan Sturm, with Mike Fitzgerald taking over for Ryan in 2015. Gil and Scott joined the show in 2017 when Mike stepped aside, and Emma joined in 2019 when Geoff ended his tenure as host. Emma left in 2021, and Erica and Sen joined us. Since then, Scott stepped down in 2022 and Gil will be hanging up his mic in 2023, leaving Erica and Sen to carry on this amazing legacy.
Erica and Sen are working to bring new voices to Ludology and have some great things to announce as gaming expands to include even more people!
Contact Us
Have your own thoughts about our topics? We encourage you to visit us at our guild on Boardgamegeek to get involved in a continuing discussion.
If you have questions that you’d like answered on Ludology, let us know by filling out this Google Form; you can also leave an audio question that we can use on the show, if you wish!
You can also make a one-time or monthly donation here. The link will take you to Erica’s account. People who donate in this way will not have access to the Patreon page – sorry!
Suppose Player A’s Sporogenic Infection enters enchanting Player B’s Nine-Lives Familiar, and its ETB triggered ability is put onto the stack targeting Player B. Player B responds by casting Back to Nature, destroying Sporogenic Infection. When Sporgenic Infection’s ETB triggered ability resolves, can Player B sacrifice Nine-Lives Familiar?
The best candidate for relevant rule seems to be…
608.2h If an effect requires information from the game (such as the number of creatures on the battlefield), the answer is determined only once, when the effect is applied. If the effect requires information from a specific object, including the source of the ability itself, the effect uses the current information of that object if it’s in the public zone it was expected to be in; if it’s no longer in that zone, or if the effect has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the effect uses the object’s last known information. See rule 113.7a. If an ability states that an object does something, it’s the object as it exists—or as it most recently existed—that does it, not the ability.
I am unclear on the how to apply the phrase “requires information from a specific object.” In my own attempt to arrive at an answer, two distinctions arose…
About which object(s) does the effect require information? Does it look at the creature and view “being enchanted by Sporogenic Infection” as information about that creature? Does it look at the enchantment and view “enchanting Nine-Lives familiar” as information about that enchantment? Does it look at both the creature and the enchantment?
Does the phrase “other than enchanted creature” refer to whichever object(s) the effect ultimately looks at intensionally or extensionally, for example, in the case that the effect will look at just the creature, does the effect say “hey game, give me information about Nine-Lives Familiar” (intensional) or “hey game, give me information about the creature which has the property of being enchanted by Sporogenic Infection”?
If the creature is the sole object of query, and if “other than enchanted creature” refers intensionally, then Nine-Lives Familiar is in the public zone it is expected to be in, thus its current information should be used, and as it is no longer enchanted by Sporogenic Infection, it should be legal for Player B to sacrifice Nine-Lives Familiar. If the creature is the sole object of query, but if instead “other than enchanted creature” refers extensionally, then the game will not find any creature which has the property of being enchanted by Sporogenic Infection, and will have to use last known information to find the creature which has that property, and thus it should be illegal for Player B to sacrifice Nine-Lives Familiar. By similar logic, if the enchantment is the object of focus, then regardless of the intensional VS extensional distinction, it should be illegal for Player B to sacrifice Nine-Lives Familiar. If both the creature and the enchantment are objects of query, then more explanation may be warranted.
What is the right way to interpret and apply this rule? An ideal answer would obviously describe the mechanics which address the broadest category of phrases possible, but if such consistency is not to be found, then at least how does it apply to the phrase “other than enchanted creature” as in the above case?
