Tag Archives: Seiji Kanai

Adventure Tours (AKA Mai-Star): A four-sided game review

Posted on by
Reply

Adventure Tours boxAdventure Tours* is a ‘take-that’ and hand management card game from Seiji Kanai (Love Letter, Brave Rats/R) that is both a little larger and a little longer (40+ minutes) than his rather more illustrious micro games. It takes three to six players.

It was originally released in 2010 under the title Mai-Star in a small box format with a geisha theme, which didn’t sit well with some. While still available in this format, Adventure Tours addresses some problems with the original and has higher production values – while costing about the same (£10-15).

The original had 75 cards, six geisha cards and some score sheets to write on; while the re-released Adventure Tours boasts thick cardboard player mats with some lovely artwork, more than 100 cards (with good if unexceptional art, but good iconography), cardboard victory point chits and some useful player aids – but a much bigger box.

As you may have guessed though, the theme is wholly irrelevant in terms of the rules – this is an abstract card game with some nice, colourful art plastered on top. And this is cutesy artwork too – which very much belies the rather nasty nature of the gameplay.

Teaching

Adventure Tours player boardAs we’ve come to expect from Seiji Kanai, Adventure Tours is a simple game at its heart which relies much on player interaction to make it sing.

It is also very luck based and swingy, but enough so that things should balance out over the game.

Each player is dealt six random cards (from one big shared stack) at the start of play. In the basic game, your player board starts you with three of each of the game’s three ‘resources’ to get you going.

On your turn you will lay one card – either for its resources or as an explorer (for its action and also end-game points). If you lay a card for resources it will allow you to play more powerful explorers later, as cards cost between 1-9 resources to play.

Cards played as resources mean you have to pick up a new card from the stack to replace it, so you’re not reducing your hand – but you are giving yourself more chances to lay better explorers later. When you lay an explorer, you do not draw a new card.

Explorer actions are very much what you’d expect from a ‘take-that’ style game: make player players draw more cards (to stop them going out), or force opponents to discard/hand you explorers or resources. But some also benefit you more simply – letting you lay another card being the most common.

The advanced game sees you use the flip-side of the player boards, each of which has a special ability and different starting conditions – so that powers that seem stronger leave you starting with hardly any resources.

The real trick to Adventure Tours is to balance getting rid of your cards while also scoring enough points to make ending the round by doing so a good idea, or to just stockpile points regardless – neither of which are as easy as they sound! The nice player aid and simple icons mean everyone should be up to speed within round one.

The four sides

These are me, plus three fictitious players drawn from observing my friends and their respective quirks and play styles.

  • The writer: This is a rare time when I’m still on the fence despite multiple plays. I enjoy the mood Kanai’s games create and he has worked the same simple magic here – but this is on the cusp of being too long for the game experience it creates. I do enjoy playing, but where the luck of the draw makes me laugh in Love Letter it can have me cursing here, which suggests a slight mismatch in fun and complexity.
  • The thinker: There is really very little for the strategist in Adventure Tours. Games instead become about bashing the ‘supposed’ leader – which is more about those with good chat talking the meeker participants into thinking a particular player is winning. The only real strategy seems to be: don’t be leading after round two, then try to have a big third round very quietly. Not for me.
  • The trasher: I like this one! It’s all about table talk and hitting the right players at the right times, which is much like spinning plates. Both ways to lay cards make you a potential target, but for different reasons – going out or scoring big. You have to be a hawk, pointing out anyone who is edging an advantage – except yourself of course! And yes, I’m echoing the strategist – but from the complete other side of the table.
  • The dabbler: While aggressive games aren’t usually my thing, this one is so nice, bright and colourful that I just got swept along with it. Also the take-that cards never devastate – more hinder – so nothing you can do will put someone out of a round, for example. There is room for clever combos and lots of table talk and laughter, so for me what’s not to like once you get past the fear of being a bit snidey!

Key observations

Adventure Tours cardsIf we ignore complaints by people who were never going to like it in the first place, the most common issues with Adventure Tours are that it’s repetitive and that it drags, even for some who enjoy the game.

But simply shortening the game from three down to two rounds (or even one) will solve this – I don’t see how you really lose anything, and it brings the game much more firmly into the ‘filler’ category that the mechanisms suggest it belongs in anyway.

A bigger and related issue is that too many cards make the game last longer. Giving people more cards, for example, rarely feels ‘fun’. It feels like a necessity, while there’s no guarantee it’s even giving you an advantage – you could be handing them the perfect card. But again, this is something that wouldn’t feel like an issue if the game played shorter.

And without wishing to sound like a broken record, for a game lasting close to an hour if played ‘properly’ (ie, three rounds) there are too few options in turns of card options. Essentially they boil down to pick up cards; add extra or take away cards; defend; have an extra go, or get bonus points. You see these cards a lot – probably too much – but over a round or two instead of three I think this is mitigated.

My final concern is the advanced player powers: it’s too early to say for sure, but some of them seem really overpowered. now in the right group this isn’t a problem, as players will realise this and pick on the players with the best powers accordingly – it can actually add to the fun of the table talk. But in less boisterous groups it may be an issue.

And a quick word on the original, Mai-Star. While I haven’t played it I have seen the cards – particularly the advanced player cards – and there have definitely been adjustments made for balance. Have they worked? No idea! But they’ve certainly tried to address well publicised issues with the original and I certainly didn’t think anything in Adventure tours was ‘game breaking’. My fear is they balanced the game by making it longer.

Conclusion

Adventure Tours aidAdventure Tours isn’t a game I feel I can wholly endorse, but at the same time wit the right group I’ve had a lot of fun with it.

‘Take-that filler game’ is already a niche, so when you put it in a big box (despite nice production) and make it last more than 30 minutes you’re going to scare some people off.

But underneath is a typically simple and fun Kanai game – 12 different cards that interact with each other in interesting ways and get the table laughing and chatting. If you’ve enjoyed his previous titles this is certainly worth a look – although I’d give it the ‘try before you buy’ (where possible) caveat just in case for the reasons discussed above.

* I would like to thank Coiledspring Games for providing a copy of the game for review.

BraveRats (AKA ‘R’): A four-sided game review

Posted on by
Reply

BraveRats boxBraveRats* is another two-player ‘microgame’ from Love Letter designer Seiji Kanai, originally released under the title ‘R’ in 2011 but repackaged and re-themed by Blue Orange in 2014.

Microgames do exactly what they say on the (in this case quite literal) tin – here, for less than £10, you get a short rulebook and 17 cards, making it an incredibly portable little game.

Another common microgame trait is a quick playing time, and BraveRats is no different. Game time is listed as five minutes in the rulebook and that’s pretty accurate, but of course you can simply pick it up and play again – especially as the time to set up the game weighs in at about five seconds.

In terms of theme, well, forget it – this is two nations, each represented by eight cards, going toe-to-toe for the win. Thee is nothing ratty, or indeed bravey, here. But what you do get is a clever little battle of wits which boils down to a fun combination of luck, reading your opponent and weighing up the odds.

Teaching

BraveRats cardsBraveRats is listed as playing from ages 10 and up, but I expect you could go quite a bit lower – and also teach it to grandma (not that she might be too keen on a game supposedly about battling Scottish Highland rat clans…).

To set up, each player takes their set of eight cards (numbered 0-7) into their hand and, erm, that’s it. Both players choose a card, then flip them face up simultaneously – the highest number wins a point, and the first player to four points wins. Got all that?

While in essence this is ‘rock, paper, scissors’ with bells on, the clever bit comes from the card powers. Each player’s deck has the same eight cards, each of which has its own ability. High cards tend to be about winning through strength, lower ones by cunning – so the Prince (7) and General (6) will beat the Wizard (5) and Ambassador (4) – but the Assassin (3) flips the tables on the General, saying lowest card wins; while the Princess (1) simply beats the Prince – and wins you the game.

Each card played is either left face up or face down on the table – face up for winning cards, to show the progression of your points. Draws are also handled simply – if you draw the same number, or a card power means the round is a tie in another way, these cards are set aside and the winner of the next round will claim an extra point. so in this way, if you draw the first three rounds, it comes down to the first player to win a round wins the game (as they’ll also collect those first three drawn points too).

The four sides

These are me, plus three fictitious players drawn from observing my friends and their respective quirks and play styles.

  • The writer: While BraveRats may initially seem superficial, there’s more tactical space here than immediately meets the eye. The real game is in considering what your opponent has left to play and as your choices whither, power plays start to surface. And also, after a round or so, you may see patterns forming in your opponent’s play that you can take advantage of. Of course there’s still a massive amount of luck involved, but don’t think this isn’t a game that can have it’s, “Mwahhaha, you fell into my trap” moments.
  • The thinker: Unfortunately for me, not enough of the game falls between ‘too random’ or ‘too obvious’ to make it a keeper. The game is a very clever construct, or exercise if you will, in game design – and I would hope it will inform more complex and satisfying games in future. Personally I would much rather reach for ‘Romans Go Home’ from Eric Vogel, which adds just enough to this concept (programmed movement and locations to win) to make it sing in the same ‘light filler’ category.
  • The trasher: Love it! BraveRats is a great way to kill a few minutes if you’re waiting on another game to end, or a few late people to show up. Sure, that may be a small window of gaming opportunities to fill – but when you can buy it for just over a fiver and it will slip into any other game box, why not bring it along to games night? While the rat theme is a little odd, they’re Scottish rats – leaving plenty of room to get your best Highlander impression on too – what’s not to like?
  • The dabbler: This is a fun and sometimes tense little game, simple to pick up and teach, and with pretty nice cutesy/comical artwork. It’s also great for travelling, or going on holiday – and can create those funny moments when you play that one card that turns the game on its head. It does what a filler should do, but the limit of two players is restricting and I’d rather have a game that plays to a bigger crowd. Would I play? Sure! Would I rather play Love Letter? Absolutely.

Key observations

BraveRats contentsThe first concern you run up against here is value – which may seem strange for a sub-£10 game. Some see it as a massive bargain, while others see a very thin game you can print on two sheets of A4 paper.

The tin packaging here seems a strange choice. In a way this adds value (you’re getting a tin!), but by the same token when you open it up it just helps highlight that there’s nothing really in it. To make things worse, this is a game many will want to sleeve as the cards get a lot of use – but to sleeve it, you won’t be able to use the nice velvety insert. Personally I’ve dumped that and thrown Love Letter into the tin with it, which works for me.

But BraveRats’ biggest problem is the general consensus that it simply isn’t as good, or as appealing, as Love Letter. While some may call it ‘two-player Love Letter’, Love Letter is still as much fun as this with two players – and can take up to four, making it so much more versatile. For me though, BraveRats works as an enjoyable companion piece to its more illustrious sibling.

Conclusion

BraveRats card setWhile BraveRats will never shine as brightly as ‘that other Seiji Kanai game’ it is still a fine game design accomplishment.

Kanai’s genius is in distilling a game concept down to the barest of bones while retaining the fun element and for me he has succeeded again here.

As with Love Letter, BraveRats’ usefulness as a gateway game also shouldn’t be overlooked. From a royal court to a clan of chirpy rodents, these little card games are a great way of showing non-gamers that it’s not all about forcing yourself to play Uno with the kids, or playing bridge with your grandparents – there are light little games you can enjoy after the olds and the news have gone to bed too.

For me, every household should stretch to a £10 budget to buy a really clever little card game for the shelves – and if that’s what you have, I’d suggest going to get Love Letter. But if you can stretch that budget to £15, grab yourself a clan of BraveRats too.

* I would like to thank Coiledspring Games for providing a copy of the game for review.

Love Letter: A four-sided game review

Posted on by
1

Love Letter boxLove Letter is a light but clever little card game for two to four players from designer Seiji Kanai.

It costs well under £10 (you can usually find it closer to £5) and while it has an official playing time of 20 minutes, it is played in a series of extremely short rounds (maybe five minutes) – so it can be as long or short as you want it to be (eg, you could play best of three in 15 minutes, or first to 10 for an hour or more).

The game is also incredibly light on components. Essentially all you need to play is the 16-card deck – yup, just 16 cards.

However in the standard edition you’ll also find a rulebook, some player aid cards, wooden cubes (for keeping score) and a nice drawstring bag to put everything in.

Each card represents a character and their position in the princess’ personal hierarchy; from several lowly guards (1) and priests (2) up to the king (6), countess (7) and the princess (8) herself. Your job is to get your love letter to the princess (its current whereabouts is represented by the card you currently have in your hand) to win her favour.

This artwork style is discussed below (in Key observations), but for me the AEG version (pictured) is reasonably well presented without being spectacular. The cards are well laid out and clear, but as this is a game where very few cards get an awful lot of use the card quality isn’t the absolute best. You may want to get some plastic sleeves for them, as you really don’t want to play this game with marked cards.

Teaching

Love Letter bagIn terms of gameplay, it really couldn’t be simpler. The 16 cards are shuffled, the top card is removed from the round, then each player is dealt one card. On your turn, you draw a card (so you have two in hand) and then play one of them – carrying out the effect text on the card.

If this doesn’t end the round (because there’s only one player left), the next player in clockwise order does the same. If you get through all 16 cards and more than one player has yet to be eliminated, the player with the highest value card left in their hand wins the round.

What makes the game (if you’re a fan) is the interplay between the cards. Some actions are forced, some require a blind luck leap of faith, while others will benefit from a little deductive reasoning. After a few rounds most players are pretty much sure to have cursed their luck as they go out without playing a single card; boasted of their superior reasoning skills; then taken a few blind luck wins for good measure.

There’s really not much to teach and what there is to learn is probably best done at people’s own expense; it’s fun to laugh as someone realises their mistake in a round as they’re not going to make it again (well, until next time). And this really isn’t a game you care about winning – the fun is definitely in the taking part. If anything, that’s what you’ve got to get across when you explain the game.

The four sides

These are me, plus three fictitious amalgams drawn from observing my friends, and their respective quirks and play styles.

  • The writer: While Love Letter is an achievement in game design minimalism, and can be credited with starting the micro game trend, there’s so little too it… yet despite myself I come back for more. It certainly appeals to my inner child, raises a laugh with the right people and is a great icebreaker. Not everyone will ‘get’ it, but for such a small investment – in time and money – its always worth a shot.
  • The thinker: I can see why the design is admired, but calling this a ‘game’ is quite the stretch – most rounds you can leave your brain at the door. Sometimes this simply leaves me cold and I’d rather sit out and chat, but after a few adult beverages with the right crowd I have been known to play a few rounds with a smile on my face. Is that because of the game or the beer? That would be telling. 
  • The trasher: I was interested in Love Letter when I heard about it, but having played a few rounds – what’s the point? Sure it’s clever, sure it’s brutal, but am I in control? No. Is a win satisfying? No. It’s only saving grace is that with more than two people there can be a bit of ‘bash the leader’ fun, but even that is short lived. This one really isn’t for me.
  • The dabbler: I’m totally up for this, all the time! This is a great game for the family, for parties, the train, Christmas, whatever. It’s short and sweet (if you want it to be) while generating laughter, forehead slapping mistakes, and unbelievably rotten (or fantastic) streaks of fortune. No, I don’t want to play it all evening – but I’m happy to play it every evening on game nights.

Key observations

Love Letter cardsThe big question seems to be, is Love Letter even a game?

Apparently some 44 per cent of the two-card combinations you may end up with have been shown to include very little or no decision making potential at all; so close to half your turns will probably be purely scripted. And the rest, in honesty, are often about guesswork.

But then, is this a problem? With the right crowd (and the game has proven extremely popular) it proves to be a real winner and when it’s only costing you pennies (and there will certainly be a second-hand market) – just how wrong can the decision to buy this go? Yes, it’s a Marmite game – but in a world where the majority of the people seem to love Marmite.

Love Letter Kanai Factory Edition

AEG’s ‘Kanai Factory Edition’ has Love Letter’s original artwork

For those who do like Love Letter, artwork is a big source of debate. The original featured Japanese anime style art, but US publisher AEG decided to put their reprinted version into its ‘Tempest’ universe, which has slightly comic style art and is set in a made up European Renaissance-style city state.

It also made one small rule change, making one card a little more forgiving (not that you couldn’t play with the original rule if you wanted to).

It’s fair to say there was a bit of a negative reaction to this decision from some. Personally I’m fine with the new art, especially because it’s such a light and breezy experience. But to appease the knockers, AEG released a new version of the game in 2013, Love Letter: Kanai Edition, featuring the original artwork and rules (its just a little more expensive). So until that edition goes out of print, it’s a moot point.

Conclusion

Love Letter PrincessI’ve had a lot of fun while playing Love Letter. I rate it an eight and am always happy to have a game. And interestingly while the game is extremely basic, I can’t see myself getting bored if it – purely because of the reactions it brings to the table.

Since its 2012 release this little card game has really captured the Western gaming public’s imagination; a particularly impressive feat when you bear in mind its humble beginnings with an independent Japanese games publisher. It is now ranked in the top 100 games on Board Game Geek, putting it in the top 10 family games (January 2014) – an amazing feat for a light filler card game.

Despite the very real concerns of some, I would unreservedly recommend Love Letter to all but the most serious group of thinky gamers. The price is right, there’s a genuine level of fun here for most people – let alone gamers – and you can pop the pack of cards in the smallest of pockets. But when you lose the first few rounds without even seeing a second card, don’t come crying to me…

NOTE: I usually take (admittedly crappy) photos of my own copy of the game. I picked Love Letter up for just three euros at Essen 2012; cheap because it was just the cards, rules and player aids. For this reason, I used game images from AEG’s official website to better represent what you’ll get in a ‘proper’ retail version.