I've been working on creating a rules document for Of Feast & Famine. I don't think the rules have completely settled down, but I do think they're at the point where having them written down is a good thing. The recent changes to the Specialties is an improvement, but I'm not sure I'm happy with them yet. They "work" but they're not terribly exciting. There doesn't seem to be enough of a reason to assign a particular event to one player or another.
*change of subject*
I've started wondering if I'm using the right strategy with trying to sell Of Power & Glory to publishers. So far, I've submitted it to 1 publisher and no one else. That's because I had heard that publishers don't want to look at games being considered by other publishers. But recently I've heard some things (almost said in passing) that made me wonder if that's really true. Or maybe it comes down to what "Considering" really means. I wish I had someone that I could ask about it. Perhaps I'm just getting impatient. I think I just want an answer from the publisher I submitted it to... even if it's a "no". But if it is a "no", I hope I get some feedback that I can use when I try the next publisher (or the next game to the same publisher!).
*change of subject*
I started thinking about a game I played a long time ago that I liked called Scotland Yard. The cool thing about that game is that is was "asymmetrical" meaning that it was one player vs. the rest of the players. The one player by himself was a criminal trying to escape the police (the other players) in London. The board was basically a map of London with tons of distinct locations on it with paths to near by locations. There were different types of transportation that the criminal could use: walking, bus, taxi, subway, ferry (I think.... it's been a long time). But the big advantage that the criminal has is that he doesn't have a pawn on the board (or at least, not always). So the police have to figure out where he is using information about what types of transportation he has used.
Anyway, I started to think about a twist on this concept. I loved the idea of an asymmetric game, but I thought I could change the advantage of the single player to become some other game..... I'm not at all tied to the police chasing a criminal theme, but that's where I'm starting. If it ends up being a game about duck hunting on Mars so be it! Nonetheless, I don't have another theme yet, so I'll stick with criminal theme for this post.
What if instead of being hidden, the one player was allowed to move and take actions at will, but the other players had to plan in advance. In other words, what if the other players had decide a turn in advance (or 2 or 3 turns in advance) what they were going to do. Could be be kind of cool! I can imagine some wonderful frustration of being right next the bad guy and knowing you're about to move the wrong way. And this kind of restriction might make some thematic sense. Big groups (represented by the many players) often are slower to move and must plan further in advance. While a single person can just do what they want.
That's it for today!