That is a wizard.

Is that one of the critters from Orb Vallis? I need to take a closer look at The Business . . .

Happy Tax Day, New York. We’re taxing the rich.

For me, part of the joy of these big strategy games is—like with roleplaying games—acting within a narrative space created by its rules and design.

A lot of players approach strategy games as a kind of optimization problem. They're trying to win. If they're not winning, they're trying to prolong the game until they can win.

That only really works for me in the most abstract games, or in games with low player interaction.

The Arcs campaign seems to be full of Fates that care about doing their own little task, sprinkled in with the ones that care about Ruling All of Space. This makes a rich environment for creating an interesting narrative, but I've seen a few players bounce off of it hard.

Turns out the Space Pope is pretty cool with Syncretism and I eventually became the feudal lord of one slice of the Reach, a vassal to the warlord.

I put the Golems back to sleep and space feudalism won. The rules say I lost, but the narrative outcome seems even better than my Pathfinder's.

The second campaign I played the Caretaker. They're trying to wake up ancient Golems. And then, to put them back to sleep. Other Fates included the Space Pope of a weird religion and a warlord trying to do Space Feudalism. I remember asking "how do you feel about the Wisdom of the Ancient Machines?"

I found the gate and got my pilgrims out. What does it mean that I accomplished that but lost the game? What would -victory in the Blighted Reach mean if my people still got away?

The game doesn't provide an answer. Perhaps the gate lays open for the Blight or the victor to follow through.

In the first game, after a disastrous first Act as the Imperial Steward, I became the Pathfinder: a Fate that's trying to find a warp gate to a new region of space and gtfo of the Blighted Reach. I remember saying out loud "nothing that happens in this part of space matters anymore."

Both times I played the Arcs campaign I wound up with a Fate (faction persona) that cared about doing a little task in the world rather than having a big strategic concern. Both times I did my little task to the best I could, but failed to be point competitive.

More often I see games where players can be in coalitions, but those tend to be about navigating or manipulating the coalition for a personal victory.

I can get personal satisfaction from another player in the coalition winning, but that is coming from myself. The game still says I lost.

Something I often wish for in these big strategy games is an alliance mechanic where two players can share victory. This is something the classic Dune board game does that I haven't seen anywhere else. But, when I've played Dune, alliances tend to just win the round after they're formed.

Sometimes the decision lives in the poetry layer. "I'm robots. You're trees. Lets team up against these meat bags!"

Sometimes it emerges from play. "We've exchanged support for the throne, and the war sun tech I traded you is a big factor in your advantage, so of course I'm still backing you."

Like, especially in Twilight Imperium, I'll sometimes be in a situation where I've fallen too far behind in points to really have a shot at winning, but maybe I can play kingmaker. How do I make a decision about which other player to throw my weight behind?

This past year I've been playing a lot of Twilight Imperium. Have a crew that plays it about once a month.

I've also lately been getting Arcs to the table a lot. And last night started what will hopefully be a consistent game of Oath.

It's got me thinking a lot about intrinsic motivation in games.

The “Calvin’s dad explains two types” meme, inspired by a Calvin and Hobbes cartoon. Clockwise from top left: 1) Calvin’s dad walks into frame to find Calvin trying to operate a record player. The dad says: “There are only two industries left in America: gambling, and fraud.” 2) The dad shows where the record goes, and how to turn on the player, while Calvin watches. Dad says “Derivatives? Gambling. AI? Fraud. Video games? Gambling. Social media? Fraud.” Calvin says “yeah”. 3) With one hand open palm up, Calvin’s dad cheerfully explains to Calvin out of frame below him, “The stock market looks like gambling, but it’s actually fraud.” 4) In bed in a dark room, Calvin clutches at his pillow, eyes wide in existential terror. There is no text in the panel.

Chronicle, Volume 1, Appendix I—The Fox King The denizens of the provinces still tell tales of the Shrouded Wood and the Crimson Path Rebels who haunted its boughs. Of their leader, the Fox King. An acerbic sorcerer who wore the face of the True Chancellor. Whose magics ruled the beasts of the wild and horse of the steppe. Who sought to win the hearts of the people with a spell. And whose power was ultimately undone by the secret word locked away in the Chancellor's impenetrable Cradle. The Crimson Path is long grown over. The Shrouded Wood felled for firewood. Yet in the provinces they say the Fox King's pups yet stalk the night, practicing on chickens what they intend for the Chancellor's get.

An exhile board in Oath. A foxy swordsman bears the Banner of the People's Favor.

The board of a game of Oath. The Red Exhile hides with a large warband in some spooky woods while the Chancellor protects their Banner of the Darkest Secret in a cliffside fortress.

Got a game of Oath in tonight. The Chancellor managed to beat the Red Exhile in a race to victory. The result coming down to a die roll at the end of turn 6.

G1 Against the Giants Sketchbook Fanzine (PRINT COPY) — Better Legends A rough and tumble 16 page B&W sketchbook created while reading Module G1 for the podcast Between Two Cairns. I like sketching while I read and this is the byproduct of that. I do plan on putting my sketches for G2 and G3 together for sketchbook zines as well,&

Do you know about my webstore? I sell zines, comics & prints there. Stuff like this- one of the stranger books I've made. It's just a bunch of jokes and sketches about G1 Against the Giants. Someday I might even make the sequel but for now just go buy this one.

Airbud Coach: There's no rule saying the Pope can't be President of the United States.

Hm. Yeah. I've seen a bunch of one-player-one-GM games and GMless duet games. But not much for a trad GM and two players.

Of course!

Pretty much every technical tell for AI writing is just a best practice for some kind of professional writing.

Are you going to Between Two Cons? I can toss my copy in my luggage.

A witchy-looking card game played in a black and white cloth mat with a box in the center.

Always a joy to get Illimat to the table. It's a lovely little trick-adjacent card game with a slightly witchy vibe. Plays excellently at 2, 3, or 4 players in about 45 to 90 minutes.

So, just the artifice being too close to the surface?

Interesting. Dark Horse published Lancer, too. Curious to see how much they continue to branch into tabletop games.

What other reasons are there for a number to be set at a certain value?