Profile

Cover photo
Seth Jaffee
443 followers|28,439 views
AboutPostsPhotosVideos

Stream

Seth Jaffee

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
@Patrick: I agree, as soon as the game state changes (another player acts, a card is drawn, some information becomes available that wasn't available before), "undoing" is absolutely inappropriate. But until that happens, placing a piece and then deciding to change where you placed it is equivalent to not doing that and just thinking about where to place the piece... it just often takes less time. So Patrick, if you'd prefer, I'll do all that thinking in my head and you can just wait longer for my turn to be finished :)

If that's not clear, think about when you play a game online... anything you can do undo, or redo before you click "done" - your opponents don't even see that.

Also, the "tarantula" thing originated at my house with my friend Tyler. So amusing that it's come full circle :)
2
Add a comment...

Seth Jaffee

Shared publicly  - 
 
Alter Ego playtest at Design Retreat. Good progress, the game is back to life!
1
Add a comment...

Seth Jaffee

Shared publicly  - 
 
I got the nicest fan letter about Eminent Domain, and along with it a request to buy some EmDo playmats!
2
Add a comment...

Seth Jaffee

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
RE: Bad first play issue: Is there a way to do a sort of intro round for FJOC, to get players over the hump of that first play?
1
Michael Keller's profile photo
 
Hmm. yeah, I guess I could tell the players we're doing a practice round that won't count. Doing that then resetting the game would add about 20 minutes, but it might work.
Add a comment...

Seth Jaffee

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
I forgot to mention: you can keep up with my ramblings about game ideas on my game design blog: http://sedjtroll.blogspot.com
1
Add a comment...

Seth Jaffee

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
@mJesuile - Eminent Domain base game and Expansion are on a boat, due late November. They should be in stock pretty sooon!
2
Add a comment...
Have him in circles
443 people
Steven O'Shea's profile photo
Boyan Radakovich's profile photo
Sean McCarthy's profile photo
Tim Fowers's profile photo

Seth Jaffee

Shared publicly  - 
 
Ne blog post: Alter Ego playtest at Gamesmiths meetup.
1
Add a comment...

Seth Jaffee

Shared publicly  - 
 
EmDo playmats
7
Ian Stedman's profile photoCasey Harmon's profile photo
2 comments
 
Yes, please!
Add a comment...

Seth Jaffee

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Your 3rd game is a good example of why I don't care for this game. Dave tried really hard to convince people that he was the Troublemaker, thinking he was engineering a win for himself (a Werewolf), all the while actually hurting his own case, and engineering his own loss. Some people may enjoy that, but I'd find it super disappointing.
1
Richard Judd's profile photo
 
To be honest the switcher roles are NOT needed. As you get 3 villager cards to replace unwanted cards. As, without the 3 villager cards you could still play a 10 player game with all of the special roles. But you can just replace the role-switching roles with Villagers (the Drunk, Troublemaker, Robber). Therefore, you could play games without any switching. It would make the game lose a certain aspect of it, but if you prefer not to have them you can.
Add a comment...

Seth Jaffee

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Thanks for all the thoughtful discussion everyone! My real goal was to raise awareness in the value of game content, which maybe this discussion has done.
.
I plan to post a follow up on my blog (http://cumbersome.blogspot.com) - my latest thought after this discussion is that consumers cannot be asked to pay more upfront on the publisher or designer's word that the game is "good" for them. One way I've thought of for players to show how much they value the game content of the games they play might be unfeasible, but imagine there were a Tip Jar for each game out there. As players play games that resonate with them, games they really like, games that turned out to be a really good value for the price they had paid (which again, is mainly covering manufacturing, artwork, and shipping, with a small royalty for content creation)... as players find they're getting good value from the game content and wanted to show it, they could simply add a tip to the Tip Jar, which would go directly to the content creators. In that way, people buying games would pay up front for the material components, the box, the art, and all the usual stuff (the stuff they can see), and only when they find good value in the content would they pay extra (and then only if they wanted to).
.
In my mind this would be a good measure of whether people actually do value game content, and how much they value it - would they tip a game that their group fell in love with, vs a game that didn't go over well? But of course, it still has some issues. Getting people to pay something for nothing (and convincing people that a good experience from pieces they've already paid for isn't "nothing") could prove a herculean task. And it leads to the next can of worms... when you find game content you like, who exactly is responsible for that? Sometimes it's obvious, but when there's a developer involved it may not be. Presumably, whoever sets up the tip jar would distribute the tips equitably amongst the content creators.
.
One thing that has cropped up which sort of approximates this Tip Jar idea is the "Pay what you want" format on Kickstarter. This is not useful for games that are already in print, but for games on kickstarter which have had print and play available, or which are maybe expansions to games that are already in print. TMG is running 2 such projects right now, one for a Dungeon Roll promo pack (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/michaelmindes/dungeon-roll-winter-promo-pack-0) and one for a new game by Michael himself called Templar Intrigue (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/michaelmindes/templar-intrigue-a-werewolf-type-game-by-tastymins). The Dungeon Roll promo could possibly be used to gauge how much Dungeon Roll fans value content (just look at the average pledge per copy relative to the minimum). Templar Intrigue is not as useful, since most people haven't played it yet.
2
Watch It Played's profile photo
 
I agree Seth, I think it put the concept in peoples minds.  I know it's not something I considered seriously before this, but it will be on my mind now.
Add a comment...
People
Have him in circles
443 people
Steven O'Shea's profile photo
Boyan Radakovich's profile photo
Sean McCarthy's profile photo
Tim Fowers's profile photo
Basic Information
Gender
Male
Story
Introduction
Born on date: 3/25/1975. I'm a Structural Engineer, Board Game Designer, Ultimate Frisbee Player, and Strategy Gamer.
Links
Contributor to