Game Archetypes

 Game Archetypes

When I began playing board games, I had a very limited understanding of the various board game archetypes that exist out there. And there was rarely a reason for me to think about them: it was either someone using it as a short hand for explaining a game to me, or for me to describe it to someone else. I rarely gave thought to the mechanics themselves, or why I liked one worker placement game over another. I never really felt the need to qualify my preferences or anything. Until I decided I was going to take a crack at designing my own board games. At that point, it occurred to me that maybe I needed to educate myself a little bit.

Really rocking out that quarantine hair, man!

So I started reading the posts on Cardboard Edison pretty regularly, which has been hugely helpful. But I started with learning more about the various board game archetypes. Why? Because rather than thinking I'm brilliant for inventing a mechanic that was already invented and known the world over, I thought I should learn to work within the framework of what exists, so I have a better idea of what rules I don't want to break, which ones I do, and which I am interested in bending. I've stolen the list below from Dicebreaker. Also! It's worth noting that you rarely find a game that only fits a single one of these archetypes; there is often overlap from game to game as different mechanics are combined to forge new games. Oftentimes, however, if you look closely enough, you can determine a primary archetype that drives the game's engine. And once you learn to see the archetypes, you can usually figure out which you prefer to play, thus making it more likely you'll discover games you will enjoy simply by what category they fall into.

The Archetypes

I mean, yes, but also no? Right idea, but wrong archetypes.

4X (Explore, Expand, Exploit, and Exterminate): There are plenty of these, both in board games and computer games, but the one that I always think of when I consider this archetype is Twilight Imperium. I cannot think of one that does not revolve around building an empire. The acronym is derived from the gameplay - each player will explore the board in some way, shape, or form, then expand their presence on the board. They often do this with the goal of gaining control over areas they can exploit for more resources or some other advantage. Finally, this is all done in the name of exterminating the competition, either through beating them in a race for victory points or by flat-out wiping them off the board. These are often very involved, and while I do enjoy them, they do require the right set of players, as they can often cause tilting.

Abstract: Think of chess or backgammon. These games can appear in many different skins, but usually either do not have a theme, or their theme is minimal. The majority of these games also have what is referred to as "perfect information:" the setup of each game and the abilities of each piece are forever and always the same. The only thing that changes from game to game are the players and their strategies. You're looking at games that really are all about their mechanics. I enjoy these, but rarely seek them out on my own.

Ameritrash: I haven't had a lot of experience with these, so when this archetype comes up, I inevitably think of Fortune and Glory. My friend Adam had mentioned this was a must-own, and my wonderful wife surprised me with it for my birthday after he mentioned it while we were all having dinner together one night (after my wife and I came back from our honeymoon, actually!). This, like so many of the other archetypes, does not have a definition upon which gamers definitively agree. But generally, if it is invoked, it refers to a game that is extremely luck-dependent, and features a highly-developed theme and characters. These are often really hit or miss for me, because the amount of luck involved can often make me wonder why I'm bothering to play the game if the game is going to make decisions for me.

Ameritrash pictured above. Mostly to break up the monotony of my writing and avoid that whole "wall of text" sin I'm prone to committing...

Area Control: A game in which players typically attempt to use some means to gain control of a desirable area of a board. The mechanics by which this is done vary, and the themes of these types of games are pretty much limitless. When I think of this mechanic, a couple of games that jump into my brain are Small World and Dominant Species. They are very much on different ends of the complexity spectrum, and both include elements of other archetypes. But the main overarching concern of each game is to control an area of the board to maintain an advantage over opponents. The need for area control incites player interaction and conflict; players generally cannot afford to sit back in their own space. For that reason, these games are often marketed as working with two players, but I believe that does them a disservice, as at least 3 are usually required to ensure nobody can sit in their little corner and toil away without losing any ground.

Campaign/Legacy: I don't know that I'd set this aside as its own archetype, exactly. But a lot of people do. The idea behind these games is that rather than playing the game once, then coming back to the board and starting over from scratch, each game played informs the next one. Pandemic Legacy has been a very popular choice, and helped kick off the Legacy craze. If city spaces fall to disease or players lose a game, they do not start fresh the next time they pick it up; there are lasting consequences. It's a super cool notion, but can sometimes be tough for players to get to the table as you usually need the same group of people for the narrative element of the legacy mechanic to really "work." Campaign games are similar, but not necessarily notorious for destroying components of games or permanently marking a board the way that legacy games are (That's right! Sometimes you buy a game only to rip up cards, place stickers on the board, and do other unspeakable things to your copy of the game!) Both can be a little daunting, and are usually on the heavier side of games. But there's also something really satisfying about having a group that can tackle such a feat.

There are often options beyond "place this sticker on your board permanently" or "rip up this card," but sometimes, it's just fun to commit to the game and do what it tells you to do.

Deck Builder: The main game I think of when someone says "deck builder" is Dominion because it is the first one I played. But there are a TON of these games, as well as games that feature deck building as a mechanic. Basically, part of the game is purchasing cards that then become part of your deck of cards. As the game goes on, your deck is an engine that grows and evolves to earn you VP or money or whatever it is you need to win the game. There are a lot of ways that these can be made to fit into a game, some good, some bad. But if you want to play a really fun deck builder, pick up Clank! I don't think you'll be disappointed.

Dexterity: These are games that involve actual, physical dexterity. You're often sliding or flicking components. Think Jenga. I've only played a couple because I generally don't like them too much. I often find them frustrating because, in my experience, I've felt as though it's easy to get into a hole and difficult to dig myself out. I think this is a mechanic that just generally isn't for me. But maybe it is for you!

Drafting: This is a mechanic in which players will draw cards or tiles or some such from a common pool to either gain an advantage or build something. Sometimes you just pull from a pool of cards or tiles on the table, sometimes each player is dealt a hand of them, picks one or two, then passes the remaining cards or tiles to the next player. Sometimes your best move is to grab something that benefits your gameplay, sometimes your best move is to sabotage the next player by drafting something you know they want. Some of my favorite drafting games are 7 Wonders (easily found anywhere, even at Target!) and Between Two Castles of Mad King Ludwig.

Dungeon-Crawler: Usually a game wherein the theme is centered on a fantasy setting, and each of the characters is navigating some sort of environment in which they battle monsters, solve puzzles, and evade traps. There can be different objectives from game to game, level to level. There's often a lot of variety, given the options, and there can be a strong roleplaying aspect a la Dungeons and Dragons. My favorite to this day is still Descent: Journeys in the Dark (2nd Edition). Gloomhaven is probably the most popular and successful at this point, but as Descent was one of the first games into which I bought hard, it's got a special place in my heart.

So. Much. Dungeon.

Engine-Builder: This is a game in which you gain resources or build things and reconfigure them so they create a machine of sorts that exists in the game. The machines you build help generate points more efficiently or gather resources. Though this game is not strictly an engine-builder (because it also features an element of tableau-building as well as worker placement), Everdell is an outstanding game. Easily in my top 10, possibly my top 5.

Eurogame: Whereas Ameritrash games are generally known for the conflict and moderate to high amounts of luck that are central to their gameplay, Eurogames are best known for their indirect player interaction and abstract physical components, as well as a stronger focus on minimizing the amount of luck needed to be successful in a game. They reward planning and thought. As this archetype describes games that come from an entire continent, they vary wildly in theme and complexity. My first Eurogame was Puerto Rico, and while I still really enjoy it, it's problematic. For a couple of reasons. My suggestion is to start with Power Grid. It's a great game: lots of fun, not too heavy, plenty of replayability.

Party Games: The archetype of party games sort of encompasses any games that are low complexity, require less thought and time investment than most other games, and can accommodate larger player counts. They rely on more simple mechanics so they are easy to teach, easy to learn, and move quickly. Oftentimes, they don't require a ton of thought investment and so allow for side conversations without detracting from game flow. Exploding Kittens and Love Letter (in all its various forms) are good party games and worth your time!

Pickup & Delivery: Just as the name implies, you play this game by picking stuff up and then delivering that stuff to wherever it is the stuff should go. There are a lot of examples of this, some of which are competitive, some of which are cooperative. I'm personally a fan of Flash Point, in which the players are fire fighters rescuing people from a burning building. The mechanic is fairly straightforward, and so often runs the risk of feeling repetitive or dull. For instance, I love me some Pandemic, but found myself fairly bored by Horrified.

I really can't believe how long it took for someone to introduce me to this game. Thanks, Rahul!

Push Your Luck: My favorite example of this game archetype right now is easily Quacks of Quedlinburg. It is absolutely delightful! Basically, this mechanic means you have to decide when to settle for what you've already got, and when it's worth risking what you've got to make bigger gains. In the case of Quacks, you're putting ingredients in your pot to create a brew. You pull ingredients at random from your bag, so you know what's in there and what the odds of pulling different ones are, but if you pull too many cherry bombs, your pot explodes. It's a terrifically fun game, and I just love the art and theme. This is just one example of a Push Your Luck game. I mentioned Clank! earlier, and there are elements of this in Clank! as well.

Roll-and-Move: You roll dice, you move a piece of some sort. That's the mechanic. It's not necessarily boring, but...well, how do you feel about Candyland, Monopoly, or Snakes and Ladders?

The problem with roll-and-move is often that it removes a lot of agency from the player. Choices are limited to what you can land on based on dice, and that can be a tough sell. For me, anyway.

Roll-and-Write: I need to steal from Boardgamegeek for a description of these games because I've actually never played one! "These are (usually) small and portable games that involve players rolling dice and marking the results on sheets of paper or erasable boards. They sometimes include a solitaire variant out-of-the-box." Again, I really don't know much about these because the notion hasn't interested me enough to try one out. But I'm probably due!

Social Deduction: These are games in which players attempt to figure out the roles other people in the game are playing, or the goals they have. The gameplay can range between "every person for themselves" as in Coup, or teams, such as in One Night Ultimate Werewolf (ONUW). These aren't for everyone, as they do require bluffing, deception, and the ability to either read other people or piece together information you learn based on players' actions during the game (or some combination thereof), which also means you need to implement some memory in order to play effectively. 

Storytelling: There are a variety of ideas as to what constitutes a storytelling game. I've heard games like Gloomhaven referred to as a storytelling game, but I'd disagree with that. I think it's got a strong narrative and a strong theme, for sure! But I think it's a dungeon-crawler and not a "storytelling" game, even though there's story involved. I'm pretty sure the only "game" I played that I'd consider a storytelling game (that was not a role-playing game, like Changeling the Lost or D&D) is Once Upon a Time. I enjoyed it! But I also think there are plenty of people who would find games such as Once Upon a Time frustrating because they're not necessarily comfortable with the notion of riffing some sort of story.

Worker Placement: In worker placement games (such as Viticulture or Everdell), tokens of some sort are often designated as workers of one kind or another, and players assign them to different action spaces on the board. Often times, the number of spaces on the board are limited, so turn order and action priority become more important. This is easily one of my favorite mechanics. I'm not sure if it's the mechanic itself, or because I've really enjoyed so many of the worker placement games I have played. Either way, it's a very common mechanic/archetype in the gaming world, and one of which I'm very fond!

Wargame: These are strategy games that are meant to simulate warfare. Some are much more realistic than others with regards to what they do and do not take into account. For example, while I love Star Wars Armada, the only "realistic" thing about it is that the bigger ships have more command dials than the smaller ones (and thus, players need to plan out actions further in advance for bigger ships, which are less responsive than the smaller ships). But other than that, there's not much about it that "realistically" simulates engagement and combat. There are historical war games, fantasy war games, space war games...one of the most famous wargames is certainly Warhammer 40,000. These are, in my opinion, extremely different than board games, and have much more in common with Trading Card Games (TCGs) such as Pokemon or Magic: The Gathering. You often pick a faction or a side, there's often no "one big box" you can buy that will preclude you from having to buy other boxes of miniatures...they can get expensive quickly. But I'll also say that it is worth giving them a try. You may find you like them! And if you do, there are ways of cutting costs (such as splitting a big box with a friend if they want to play as one faction and you want to play as another, that sort of thing).