The Princes of Florence: Chat transcript: 14 January

Herewith is a transcript of the chat we had about The Princes of Florence.
This area seemed like the best place to post it.
Please feel free to add any other comments about the design and mechanics of the game, but please try and avoid "strategy" remarks as there are plenty of other places to talk about them :)

I've cut out some of the more irrelevant digressions but I hope I've kept the core of the discussion intact.

FastLearner has entered the room
Scurra> hiya Matthew
FastLearner> Greetings, gents.
zaiga> Hello Matthew
FastLearner> Rene, David, greetings.
FastLearner> Some day we'll have to have an International Meeting of BGDF People. Maybe at Essen or something.
Joe_Huber has entered the room
Scurra> I do hope so
zaiga> That would be great
Scurra> Hello hello
FastLearner> Greetings, Joe.
Scurra> We've got "professionals" sneaking in :)
Joe_Huber> Hello...
zaiga> Hello Joe
Joe_Huber> I must admit - when I heard the topic I knew I had to peek in.
Scurra> Well, let's give it a couple more minutes
FastLearner> Then we'll tear PoF into pieces!
FastLearner> (Good pieces, I hope)
zaiga> It's number 3 on the top 100 right? Must be good pieces then
Joe_Huber> Interesting term - since the game quite literally _was_ torn into pieces between prototype & release.
zaiga> What do you mean?
Joe_Huber> As a prototype, there was a single board, rather than individual player boards.
FastLearner> Interesting, I'd wondered about that.
Scurra> It's one of the things I want to cover particularly
zaiga> I've never played PoF btw, but I did read a lot about it
Scurra> One of the nice ideas of the game is that of having to place Buildings and Landscapes on a playmat obeying certain limitations.
Scurra> But it isn’t a major limiting factor to the game. Rather it is a way to avoid including a load of extra cards whilst adding an aesthetic element.
Joe_Huber> Which gives it a nice Tetris-like feel.
zaiga> I've wondered about that. How important is that "Tetris" aspect to the game?
Scurra> Well it justifies the existence of the builders, for one thing
FastLearner> It really seems to depend on the group, in my limited experience..
Joe_Huber> When we played the prototype, the Tetris-like feel was critical to the appeal of the game, IMHO.
zaiga> So it isn't just an annoyance that sometimes gets in the way of the "larger" strategy?
FastLearner> I've only played it 3 times, each time with different groups. It seemed like in the first group a ton of buildings were built and the puzzle issue was a big deal, but in the third group there were comparitively few buildings built and space was never really an issue.
Joe_Huber> FWIW, the building layout rules remained largely the same from proto to release...
Scurra> I don't think it's an annoyance, more a way of integrating a key aspect of the game properly
Joe_Huber> ...save for the fact that in the prototype buildings could span player areas.
FastLearner> Ah, so the shared board still had individual player areas?
Scurra> Imagine if the buildings were cards Buying them would function in exactly the same way, but you would lose something because that "Estate Management" feel is a key part of the game even if it is technically less significant
Joe_Huber> Individually owned areas, with boundaries that could be spanned.
Joe_Huber> I think the buildings still provide a key draw that cards couldn't hope to duplicate.
Scurra> I could certainly see how it would have originally appeared logical to have a "shared board"
Scurra> yes, exactly - the mechanics of fitting the buildings together seems to bring something even if it is largely illusory which is one of the aspects of the design I rather like.
FastLearner> Perhaps -- and this is something I always struggle with in my games -- it's mostly just fun. I like fun in games.
zaiga> Perhaps that is why tile laying is such a popular mechanic
Joe_Huber> Agreed - the absence of buildings would increase how abstract the game feels.
zaiga> Or why SimCity is a popular game
Scurra> Yes, I admit that in my experience there is a lot of fun to be got out of misplacing things or buying the wrong building at the wrong time
zaiga> I think it is satisfying to see things grow and be able to fit that last piece of the puzzle in and it is great frustration when it doesn't
Joe_Huber> In general, I think puzzles are an element of what people enjoy in games. In PoF, this isn't an overwhelming component (such as in Ricochet Robot) but a nice addition.
Scurra> The SdJ winner this year, "Alhambra", uses that "puzzle-solving" aspect to the same sort of level of PoF, whereas in Carcassonne it is much less of an issue (except towards the end!)
zaiga> Carcassonne also has that puzzle feel plus it is nice to see the countryside grow
Scurra> Anyway, my point about the player boards is that they bring a component to the game that isn't strictly vital but adds to the feel of the game
Joe_Huber> One of the most impressive things about PoF as a design is how well integrated the game is with the theme - much as with Puerto Rico. As a result I find that it appeals more to non- and light- gamers than most heavy German games.
jwarrend has entered the room
Scurra> Whereas the Auction, on the other hand, is a vital component of what makes the game work.
Scurra> Now the auction mechanic isn't innovative or radical but the fixed increment mechanic is very interesting
Deviant has entered the room
zaiga> Can you explain in short how it works?
Scurra> Yes. The first player must bid 200 florins.then subsequent players raise by exactly 100 or pass (passing drops out of the auction)
zaiga> The player chooses what he wants to auction, right?
Scurra> Yes, there are seven things available to auction at the start of the round
Joe_Huber> Re: Auction - yes, the player chooses. But each type can be auctioned once/round.
Scurra> but once an item has been auctioned it can't be chosen again until next round (there are 7 rounds in the game)
Scurra> Now one of the neat tricks is that the choosing player doesn't necessarily win the auction. If they don't, they get to pick a new item to auction. And this is a very clever mechanic indeed as it introduces all sorts of uncertainties into the mix
Joe_Huber> Hmm... I've never thought that as one of the big innovations of PoF
zaiga> I can see how the fixed increment mechanic has advantages over a once around auction
Scurra> No, I don't think that the auction is desperately innovative but the wrinkles are clever
Joe_Huber> The fixed increment I'd agree with - the everyone-wins-one I've seen elsewhere; can't remember if I saw it before or not...
Scurra> And the last aspect of the auction that merits a mention is that the last player not to buy anything gets their choice of what is left for 200 florins (which is effectively free in this game!)
Scurra> so, as Joe says, it's an "everyone gets something" auction. The result is that players have to choose if they want to join the bidding for something they may not really want
jwarrend> I have a game where I wanted players to have to choose between "money" or "VP", with the "money" being used in a "start of the turn" auction. But, it didn't work; it just felt like the auction was added post hoc as a use for money. Does PoF have an element of this, would you say, or is it at its core a bidding game and everything else is built around that?
Joe_Huber> Actually, the 200 cost is _not_ effectively free (though it is cheap), which I think makes it even more clever.
Scurra> That's true Joe
zaiga> With a once around auction the important decision is: how much is this worth? With the fixed increment the decision is: is this worth $XX or not? Which is, I think, an easier decision.
FastLearner> Aye. I've seen this in a couple of other games, though PoF is the first place I saw it (which means nothing, as my exposure to these games is all out of chronological order).
zaiga> However, it seems that with the fixed increment auction it becomes very important to decide what to auction when
Scurra> PoF keeps being cited as a game with a lack of player interaction. Personally, I find the auction to be one of the most stressful examples of direct player interaction I've ever seen in a game
Joe_Huber> Jeff: I think PoF is at its core an action management game, with the auction the primary method for interaction.
zaiga> I think it depends on your definition of player interaction - I think Lost Cities has player interaction :)
Deviant> So why is timing important?
Scurra> Since the game only lasts for 7 rounds, you are only going to be able to buy 7 things and clever choices can ruin people's day
Deviant> So... buy everything early or hold out for something better? What sort of decision do you make?
Scurra> You only get to buy one thing - that's what matters
Deviant> Ah...
Scurra> once you've bought, you are out of the action until the second phase of the round
zaiga> In Amun-Re everyone also gets one thing during the auction and at least one player gets something for free
FastLearner> Joe, I think that's a great description: action management with the auctions as the method of interaction.
jwarrend> I don't know if we're still on the auction subject, but one thing that struck me about the game was the "Draw five cards, choose one" way that cards are drawn. It seems like this is a good luck-of-the-draw suppressant. Has anyone else successfully integrated such a system? I haven't really tried because it seems to have the potential to add a lot of downtime in games with a lot of card drawing. But PoF has only a few draws relatively, so it works ok in this context...I guess?
Scurra> I reckon the only time it's an issue is the "taking a Professional" card, and there are so few of them that stops being an issue quickly
FastLearner> Aye, people keep trying to get me to change one of the mechanics in one of my games to the "draw multiple, choose one" mechanic. In my game, at least, it won't work as well because I want the other players to have some idea of what the player might have selected.
FastLearner> How would this change PoF?
Joe_Huber> Jeff, I think a draw N choose 1 (or 2 or...) could actually work even better elsewhere with more cards, so that it could always be done simultaneously.
zaiga> Jeff: In Citadels you draw two cards and keep one. It lessens the luck of the draw effect, but I find it a bit fiddly
Scurra> One of the neat things is that you only get two actions as your turn in a round and frankly, it's rare that you can spare one of them to draw a card!
FastLearner> What if there were, say, always 3 cards face up of each (or just one type), and the player grabs all 3 and discards 2. Folks would know have an idea of what he took and might be able to deduce his most likely selection, but they'd not know for sure. (now have an idea, I mean, not "know")
jwarrend> Would it matter that much if you knew? Can you correlate your bidding to what a player's goal is? (I can't remember what the goals actually are...)
zaiga> FL: I use that mechanic in Urban Construct. Each player draws tiles from a face-up pile, but at the start of their turn they discard one of them (actually it is played facedown as a "road")
Joe_Huber> Ooh - using is as a road sounds really interesting, as it removes it entirely from the game...
jwarrend> FL: that's what I like about Web of Power from a "decision time" standpoint -- you already can see two of your choices face up, so it's "take these, or press your luck".
zaiga> Perhapd in PoF that isn't very useful, but it might be a good mechanic for other games
Scurra> OIC, the discards would be face-down? Otherwise you'd see what he discarded
FastLearner> Right, face-down discards.
jwarrend> I have a sort of cute draw pile system for the game I'll be workshopping this month that is sort of similar to that...
Scurra> Anyway, this isn't supposed to be a discussion on "how to make PoF better"!
Joe_Huber> Re: making PoF better: Aw, why not?
Scurra> ho ho ho
FastLearner> Scurra: No, sorry, I wasn't trying to make PoF better. I was just curious about how the "draw 5 keep 1" mechanic does more than reduce luck. I'm guessing that's it.
FastLearner> Ok, tis' cool.
zaiga> Weren't we discussing the auction mechanic?
FastLearner> (Wow, "tis'" is way out of the intended "it's" order I intended.)
Joe_Huber> Gonna have to get back to work - see you later...
Joe_Huber has left the room
Scurra> Anyway, one of the neat things about the auction mechanic is also that cash flow is very tight. The only way real you can get cash back is by completing works and choosing not to score from them. Which takes me on to the third aspect of PoF that I find great - that trade-off between VPs and money.
zaiga> So, you hav eto choose between taking money and VP when you complete a work?
Deviant> (tis is fine. Good old fashioned English, tis a great thing)
Scurra> (actually, you can get money later in an emergency, but it's rather expensive!)
jwarrend> Would you say there's an element of "groupthink" -- ie, the cost of buying stuff in auctions depends on how much people are collectively holding back from their works? It seems like depending on the "dominant mindset" of the group, a winning score vary a lot from game to game...
Scurra> Jeff, yes indeed.
Scurra> One of the neat things about the game (as with Puerto Rico) is that people start to get bogged down with certain assumptions, like how much cash to take when completing a work... or how much certain things are worth in the auction
jwarrend> Is that a good thing? My concern would be that it could introduce a turn order effect. (ie, I'll wait and see how much he takes for his work, then adjust accordingly). Does the start player rotate? I can't remember...
Scurra> yes, start player order rotates clockwise
Scurra> wait-and-see seems to have been built into the design
jwarrend> Gotta go, but cool chat concept! This makes me want to play PoF again. Hope you guys get some more Europeans next time! Good show!
Deviant> Hmm, interesting game. I'll have to try my hand at an auction game sometime. But for now, I gotta go.
Scurra> see you again some time
jwarrend has left the room
zaiga> I think in any good auction game the start player should rotate as there are always advantages to going first or last
Scurra> I would agree with that.
zaiga> Although people don't agree on what is the best position
Scurra> when we start discussing serious auction games, I'm sure this will come up again!
zaiga> PoF is not a serious auction game?
Scurra> It's not the be-all-and-end-all of the game though like Medici or Modern Art
Scurra> it's just a major component
zaiga> OK I see, it's just part of the game
Scurra> And, unlike a game like Modern Art, newbies don't necessarily distort the market except for Jesters
zaiga> Doesn't PoF have a runaway leader problem?
Scurra> I have to admit that I haven't experienced that myself but people do say that it happens
zaiga> But is that because of inexperience, or is it something that has to do with the design?
Scurra> It's usually inexperience in my experience :)
FastLearner> I haven't seen it, but I was always the least experienced one, so I can see inexperience causing that.
zaiga> So, if people become adept at playing PoF there isn't a real runaway leader
Scurra> The trick is the limitations on actions in the second phase of the game. There are 7 turns so there are 14 actions you get
Scurra> You need to produce a decent number of Works (7 if you can!) which is half your actions gone already
zaiga> So, the actions severely limit what a player can do
Scurra> Indeed.
FastLearner> Aye, big time. I think that's what makes Joe's description apt. ("Action management")
Scurra> Yes, "action management" is a great term for it
zaiga> "So many things you want to do, so little time to do them"
zaiga> Seems like a recurring theme in game design
FastLearner> Aye, certainly in German-style games.
zaiga> Isn't PoF a complicated game?
FastLearner> Yes, it's pretty difficult to learn, imo. And the first play is tough.
Scurra> I think it's one of the most complex games around, but not necessarily complicated
zaiga> I read the rules this afternoon, but there seemed to be a lot of small rules that are easily forgotten
Scurra> Once you understand the seven items in the auction and the five actions you can take you're pretty much set. But that doesn't mean you remember it all at the crucial moments
FastLearner> Aye. But that's a lot of items and actions.
Vexx_Paradox has entered the room
Scurra> I keep forgetting that the bonus cards are there, for instance
FastLearner> :)
FastLearner> Aye, if you don't know what the various cards do then it's hard to know whether or not that's an action you'd want to undertake.
Scurra> But they both meet that "five to eight" options rule!
zaiga> Or how much something is worth in the auction. Because it's hard to figure out how much something is worth
Vexx_Paradox> What game are you talking about?
Scurra> Princes of Florence
FastLearner> Princes of Florence (as on the front page)
Vexx_Paradox> Hmmm...never had the pleasure.
Scurra> It's especially hard with games where the money is incredibly tight. It's not incredibly tight in PoF but it's pretty tough out there
zaiga> That's a bit of a problem sometimes with auction games, the first few games are always learning games
zaiga> Maybe not a problem, rather a feature
zaiga> I always like those first games the most
Scurra> Well I won the first few games of Puerto Rico I played really handily. I don't think I've won a game since :)
zaiga> It's very tight in Amun-Re too for example, whihc seems to be a bit similar to PoF
FastLearner> I only kinda like those games... we play so many new games each month that if a game was really hard to get into the first time, it might not end up on the table again. I think if PR hadn't been so highly touted it might have struggled with that more.
Scurra> I don't find Amun-Re has quite the same tightness though
Vexx_Paradox> Well, I just stopped in to say hello. I'm using the library computer, and since I don't have much to offer this discussion...
Scurra> Vexx, keep an eye on the list of games we're going to discuss in upcoming weeks
Scurra> I'm sure you've played one or two of them!
Vexx_Paradox> Sure thing. Is this the usual time for this chat?
zaiga> We'll have a chat like this one every week
Vexx_Paradox> Well, that would be around 3:00pm my time.
FastLearner> There ya go. :)
Scurra> Vexx, everyone has something useful to say
Vexx_Paradox> True. Like, don't stick your tongue to an icy pole.
Vexx_Paradox> Would the rules to these games be available on the net?
Scurra> Head over to the boardgamegeek - you'll find loads of stuff about PoF for instance including the rules and lots of discussions
Vexx_Paradox> Okay. Good deal. Next time I'll be sure to have an idea about the game to put in my half a cent.
zaiga> You can find an entry on the boardgamegeek for almost every game in existence
Scurra> Well let me say in conclusion that PoF has influenced me probably more than any other recent design
Scurra> I've learnt that you can include mechanics that add flair to the game without distorting it
zaiga> I am interested in Scurra's remark that Amun-Re has less interaction then PoF, but that "reading" opponents is more important in AR than in PoF
zaiga> Isn't "reading" opponents and figuring our what they are up to a sort of interaction?
Scurra> yes, but that's how PR works too, and I think PR does it better
Scurra> We're doing PR next week, aren't we?
zaiga> We are
zaiga> In PR it is almost the core mechanic
FastLearner> In PR, as the game progresses your ability to read becomes much stronger. Not so much in PoF, however, as there are too many secrets. (Hidden info)
Scurra> And that was another thing I learned from PoF - hidden information can be very subtle at times
zaiga> But if you have more control in a game, doesn't that automatically mean less player interaction?
Scurra> Although you can work out what sort of professions people have, you can never be completely sure
FastLearner> It's too subtle for me.
Scurra> :)
FastLearner> It might be that I just suck at figuring out what folks are up to in PoF.
Scurra> Well that's a subject for another time (when we're discussing Citadels, I guess )
Scurra> PoF is a game that I consistently finish second in...sometimes only by a point or two, but it always hurts
zaiga> Ouch
zaiga> Second place is the first loser