In a morning coffee fueled fit of writer's lust, I found myself going over my collection notes and updating my thoughts on various games when I got to At the Gates of Loyang. My thoughts on it were quite outdated and they referred to a time earlier in my journey through the hobby, when I had both relatively few games and was still experiencing the wonder of discovery a new hobby can bring. I've since accumulated 20+ plays of this wonderful game and was reminded of the awe I have for Mr. Rosenberg's designs, indeed, I own more games of his design than any other one designer by a large margin. I began writing my thoughts on Gates and I decided it was becoming too long for a comment, and reasoned that it was more suited as a blog post so, here goes:
Uwe Rosenberg is my favorite designer. I think Gates is the first game that made me realize this. There is just something about his designs that gets me on a very fundamental level; and because of this I can't quite articulate it. I love economics, and growing things, I like high quality components as this greatly enhances the tactile pleasure of a good board game, and I enjoy intricate systems. Uwe tends to deliver all of these and in themes that I think a great many people would find mind-numbingly boring (Medieval European farming?, German glass making?, Production and shipping of goods in France?, Monastery economies?, Bean farming?, Goods exchange in the Hundred Years War?.) They're... erudite or niche topics, mostly. But he manages to turn them into interesting and engaging entertainment pieces, some are more challenging than others of course, but Gates stands as the pleasant middle road for me.
As I mentioned earlier there is a certain something, a power to the designs that isn't quite something I can capture easily in words. It's the way they make you feel, like a great novel. The feeling can be expressed (for me) in colors, or in wisps of personal memory which would probably be meaningless to anyone else, and they again, like a good novel or movie are not always pleasant. Agricola for instance, is brilliant. It is tight, it is tense, it evokes desperation (especially in early plays before you learn to properly manipulate the mechanics). The important thing here is, the feelings and senses it evokes jive entirely with the theme. Eking out a living from the soil, and domesticated livestock wasn't easy. Only comparatively primitive agricultural techniques were at your disposal, there was disease and blight, your lord would undoubtedly have demanded a share of your produce and you would have mouths to feed, but you needed mouths to feed in order to support the mouths you already need to feed. Even if all or most of these historical aspects aren't actually touched on in the game, the same sense of anxiety and desperation is present in the design, or at least it is for me. As is common to say around here, YMMV. I understand Caverna is a natural evolution of Agricola, perhaps replaces the design as a sort of Agricola 2.0. But the scope and depth of the design intimidates me and falls squarely on the wrong side of my self-imposed purchasing rule of "Don't buy extremely complex games, nobody will play them with you".
Do Uwe's other designs evoke similar je ne sais quoi? I think they do, but Agricola's may be the strongest; or perhaps I merely think that because it was my first experience with his designs. Merkator is dry, there is no denying that and I highlight this strongly, though sometimes tongue-in-cheek, in my review Merkator: Is This Berg' For You? but it can argued that this is part of the theme. The few depictions of the people in the art look bored, the theme strikes me as the life of a business man. A paper pusher. A merchant. This isn't exactly the glamorous life of a spy, or a soldier of a same era (something that I'm positive has been touched on in other designs). This game seems to be about war profiteering. Sure, you can say this is an excuse and maybe it is, but for me nothing is worse than a theme clashing with the mechanics and in this, they don't, which you may argue is because the theme is barely there (which isn't a lie). But the mechanics are very fine, my best friend considers this one of his favorite games and certainly his favorite Rosenberg and I think it's criminally underappreciated by the community (but I also think that about Constantinopolis and that is pretty well universally considered the poster child for milk toast designs). Merkator is very German the old adage about Germans being super-efficient, cold as ice, automatons and this design rewards you for being just that, it doesn't hurt that you appear to play as a German either. And on a personal level I think the time and following mechanics are absolutely brilliant as they help keep people interested in what others are doing.
Now, lets talk about Le Havre, and Ora et Labora. These designs are my favorite, even if they aren't my favorite games... if that makes sense (probably not). There is something about taking raw goods and turning them into finished goods that I absolutely, positively, love. Objects are fascinating to me, how they are produced, where they go, where they came from. All of these things are often explored in Rosenberg games, but none more so than in his double-sided tile designs. Amassing a stack of hides, or pottery and shipping or trading them is immensely satisfying to me and I must assume to others due to the popularity of the designs. Le Havre and Ora et Labora do not evoke strong emotions in me, besides scratching that persistent economic itch, I don't consider feeding what must be your employees in Le Havre to be an especially compelling part of the design, as is feeding your family in Agricola (this is probably due to that usually being taken care of by boats, presumably fishing). And neither game evokes anxiety the way Agricola does, it is more about optimizing your particular money/point making engines, acquiring the right buildings and fully or partially denying them to your opponents. Agricola can make you feel like you're "losing", your family is struggling, starving. This doesn't really occur in Le Havre and not at all in Ora et Labora. They are different, but they do still feel distinctly Rosenberg.
Finally, lets examine a few of what I consider to be Mr. Rosenberg's "lesser" titles. This is not to say they are bad, I've never played a design by Uwe that I didn't like. But I guess I mean they are smaller in scope. Bohnanza is one of the oldest (by publishing date) games in my collection, but it is still obviously Rosenberg. It's the theme, it's bean farming. Bohnanza is a strong blend of trading, set collection, and hand management, mechanics not often touched on extensively in his other well-known designs. Interestingly, the two-player has an entirely different dynamic, trading is gone, but now you can "combo" off the discard pile by subtle manipulation of the order and timing of your discards as well as keeping track of the probability of any given type of bean being drawn during the draw phase. It shifts focus from a game about social interaction, to a tense duel of probability manipulation. It is also accessible, I've had more success introducing this to non-gamers than any other non-party game in my collection (Cards Against Humanity is always well received by an audience willing to accept it's brutality and crudeness in my experience and I've never encountered another tabletop game able to make people cry from hilarity). Now, Glass Road is a controversial title. I'd seen people saying Merkator was Uwe losing his touch and I thought maybe they were going too far. Then I saw comments of that variety aimed at Glass Road and I knew people had lost their damn minds. Glass Road is sheer brilliance, it is all of the wonderful parts of Uwe's designs condensed down into a shortened, concentrated form. It is Rosenberg for when you don't have time for a Rosenberg and it stand very well on it's own merits, too. Probably my second favorite designer Isaac Childres (which is remarkable since he's only published one game, Forge War and is in the process of publishing his second, the remarkable Gloomhaven) has come out with public praise for Glass Road, and the agreement of my two favorite designers on the same design (as I assume Uwe is fond of his own game) does nothing but reinforce my good feelings for it. The sheer number of possible strategies based on the combination of buildings that present themselves is the most interesting part of the design, however, the roundel mechanic (present too in Ora et Labora) makes resource management a breeze, and the forced production of finished goods like brick and glass causes you to consider carefully when you acquire certain raw materials (like sand, water, clay, etc.) my only criticism of this system is tied inextricably with it's novelness and usefulness: I'm not handling chits or veggimeeples with this system, and I like that (yes, I like some degree of fiddliness, shoot me). Overall it is innovative and fascinating how everything works tied into this deceptively simple, and fast game. And for the final game I'd like to touch on, lets look at Patchwork one of Uwe's recent designs and a 2-player only title. I acquired this recently, very recently, as in the day before I wrote this. I've only played it twice, both times with my wife and I love it, not least because she actually likes it too, it is "A Kristen game". It's very different from Uwe's other designs, I'd say it stands out the most among all the games I mentioned. I mean, it does have one of those odd themes (making a quilt), but the mechanics (fit pieces of patchwork together on a quilt to cover as much space as possible) are not typical fare. But of course, there is an aspect of economy here, marking it out as a Rosenberg. Buttons are the currency, and acquiring certain pieces of patchwork will increase your button "income". You use buttons to acquire patchwork, and they are also your points, it is an economic cycle. Obviously I have no idea how it will hold up to repeated plays, but I enjoy it and suspect I will continue to do so.
In closing this very long post, I'd like also mention that Uwe's designs often make me think and give a small measure of education, too. I didn't know what the hell a "Le Havre" was before I played Le Havre, of course I learned it is a very important French port. I didn't know a damned thing about German glass making, or why glass was/is so often green, now I do. And remember how I mentioned in Agricola a few lines ago that you need more family members to keep the food engine going? This reflects real life trends of population growth decline. We aren't an agricultural society anymore, most of us don't produce food (besides our humble gardens) we are mostly, at best, a cog in the machine of it's distribution. So one of the essentials to raising a family (food) isn't something we produce directly anymore. I think this contributes greatly to the decline in the size of families, but this a great digression from the point and has implications far outside a simple blog about games. I just love when a game teaches me things or makes me consider real life problems, systems, or scenarios and Uwe's games consistently do this for me for some reason.
But wait, you might say if you're still awake: You didn't really talk about At the Gates of Loyang, didn't that prompt this whole post? It did. However, I don't think there is much to add that I haven't already said. Gates is an economic simulation about being a vegetable merchant in a very large and important medieval Chinese city, it has excellent veggimeeples and tight, interesting mechanics. Isn't that pretty much part-and-parcel of Rosenberg designs? Good components, economic aspects, an obscure or arcane theme? Sure it has some mechanical aspects to set it apart, and I feel it's difficulty level sets it squarely in the middle of the pack of his designs and is a classic example of his touch.
Uwe Rosenberg is my favorite designer. I think Gates is the first game that made me realize this. There is just something about his designs that gets me on a very fundamental level; and because of this I can't quite articulate it. I love economics, and growing things, I like high quality components as this greatly enhances the tactile pleasure of a good board game, and I enjoy intricate systems. Uwe tends to deliver all of these and in themes that I think a great many people would find mind-numbingly boring (Medieval European farming?, German glass making?, Production and shipping of goods in France?, Monastery economies?, Bean farming?, Goods exchange in the Hundred Years War?.) They're... erudite or niche topics, mostly. But he manages to turn them into interesting and engaging entertainment pieces, some are more challenging than others of course, but Gates stands as the pleasant middle road for me.
As I mentioned earlier there is a certain something, a power to the designs that isn't quite something I can capture easily in words. It's the way they make you feel, like a great novel. The feeling can be expressed (for me) in colors, or in wisps of personal memory which would probably be meaningless to anyone else, and they again, like a good novel or movie are not always pleasant. Agricola for instance, is brilliant. It is tight, it is tense, it evokes desperation (especially in early plays before you learn to properly manipulate the mechanics). The important thing here is, the feelings and senses it evokes jive entirely with the theme. Eking out a living from the soil, and domesticated livestock wasn't easy. Only comparatively primitive agricultural techniques were at your disposal, there was disease and blight, your lord would undoubtedly have demanded a share of your produce and you would have mouths to feed, but you needed mouths to feed in order to support the mouths you already need to feed. Even if all or most of these historical aspects aren't actually touched on in the game, the same sense of anxiety and desperation is present in the design, or at least it is for me. As is common to say around here, YMMV. I understand Caverna is a natural evolution of Agricola, perhaps replaces the design as a sort of Agricola 2.0. But the scope and depth of the design intimidates me and falls squarely on the wrong side of my self-imposed purchasing rule of "Don't buy extremely complex games, nobody will play them with you".
Do Uwe's other designs evoke similar je ne sais quoi? I think they do, but Agricola's may be the strongest; or perhaps I merely think that because it was my first experience with his designs. Merkator is dry, there is no denying that and I highlight this strongly, though sometimes tongue-in-cheek, in my review Merkator: Is This Berg' For You? but it can argued that this is part of the theme. The few depictions of the people in the art look bored, the theme strikes me as the life of a business man. A paper pusher. A merchant. This isn't exactly the glamorous life of a spy, or a soldier of a same era (something that I'm positive has been touched on in other designs). This game seems to be about war profiteering. Sure, you can say this is an excuse and maybe it is, but for me nothing is worse than a theme clashing with the mechanics and in this, they don't, which you may argue is because the theme is barely there (which isn't a lie). But the mechanics are very fine, my best friend considers this one of his favorite games and certainly his favorite Rosenberg and I think it's criminally underappreciated by the community (but I also think that about Constantinopolis and that is pretty well universally considered the poster child for milk toast designs). Merkator is very German the old adage about Germans being super-efficient, cold as ice, automatons and this design rewards you for being just that, it doesn't hurt that you appear to play as a German either. And on a personal level I think the time and following mechanics are absolutely brilliant as they help keep people interested in what others are doing.
Now, lets talk about Le Havre, and Ora et Labora. These designs are my favorite, even if they aren't my favorite games... if that makes sense (probably not). There is something about taking raw goods and turning them into finished goods that I absolutely, positively, love. Objects are fascinating to me, how they are produced, where they go, where they came from. All of these things are often explored in Rosenberg games, but none more so than in his double-sided tile designs. Amassing a stack of hides, or pottery and shipping or trading them is immensely satisfying to me and I must assume to others due to the popularity of the designs. Le Havre and Ora et Labora do not evoke strong emotions in me, besides scratching that persistent economic itch, I don't consider feeding what must be your employees in Le Havre to be an especially compelling part of the design, as is feeding your family in Agricola (this is probably due to that usually being taken care of by boats, presumably fishing). And neither game evokes anxiety the way Agricola does, it is more about optimizing your particular money/point making engines, acquiring the right buildings and fully or partially denying them to your opponents. Agricola can make you feel like you're "losing", your family is struggling, starving. This doesn't really occur in Le Havre and not at all in Ora et Labora. They are different, but they do still feel distinctly Rosenberg.
Finally, lets examine a few of what I consider to be Mr. Rosenberg's "lesser" titles. This is not to say they are bad, I've never played a design by Uwe that I didn't like. But I guess I mean they are smaller in scope. Bohnanza is one of the oldest (by publishing date) games in my collection, but it is still obviously Rosenberg. It's the theme, it's bean farming. Bohnanza is a strong blend of trading, set collection, and hand management, mechanics not often touched on extensively in his other well-known designs. Interestingly, the two-player has an entirely different dynamic, trading is gone, but now you can "combo" off the discard pile by subtle manipulation of the order and timing of your discards as well as keeping track of the probability of any given type of bean being drawn during the draw phase. It shifts focus from a game about social interaction, to a tense duel of probability manipulation. It is also accessible, I've had more success introducing this to non-gamers than any other non-party game in my collection (Cards Against Humanity is always well received by an audience willing to accept it's brutality and crudeness in my experience and I've never encountered another tabletop game able to make people cry from hilarity). Now, Glass Road is a controversial title. I'd seen people saying Merkator was Uwe losing his touch and I thought maybe they were going too far. Then I saw comments of that variety aimed at Glass Road and I knew people had lost their damn minds. Glass Road is sheer brilliance, it is all of the wonderful parts of Uwe's designs condensed down into a shortened, concentrated form. It is Rosenberg for when you don't have time for a Rosenberg and it stand very well on it's own merits, too. Probably my second favorite designer Isaac Childres (which is remarkable since he's only published one game, Forge War and is in the process of publishing his second, the remarkable Gloomhaven) has come out with public praise for Glass Road, and the agreement of my two favorite designers on the same design (as I assume Uwe is fond of his own game) does nothing but reinforce my good feelings for it. The sheer number of possible strategies based on the combination of buildings that present themselves is the most interesting part of the design, however, the roundel mechanic (present too in Ora et Labora) makes resource management a breeze, and the forced production of finished goods like brick and glass causes you to consider carefully when you acquire certain raw materials (like sand, water, clay, etc.) my only criticism of this system is tied inextricably with it's novelness and usefulness: I'm not handling chits or veggimeeples with this system, and I like that (yes, I like some degree of fiddliness, shoot me). Overall it is innovative and fascinating how everything works tied into this deceptively simple, and fast game. And for the final game I'd like to touch on, lets look at Patchwork one of Uwe's recent designs and a 2-player only title. I acquired this recently, very recently, as in the day before I wrote this. I've only played it twice, both times with my wife and I love it, not least because she actually likes it too, it is "A Kristen game". It's very different from Uwe's other designs, I'd say it stands out the most among all the games I mentioned. I mean, it does have one of those odd themes (making a quilt), but the mechanics (fit pieces of patchwork together on a quilt to cover as much space as possible) are not typical fare. But of course, there is an aspect of economy here, marking it out as a Rosenberg. Buttons are the currency, and acquiring certain pieces of patchwork will increase your button "income". You use buttons to acquire patchwork, and they are also your points, it is an economic cycle. Obviously I have no idea how it will hold up to repeated plays, but I enjoy it and suspect I will continue to do so.
In closing this very long post, I'd like also mention that Uwe's designs often make me think and give a small measure of education, too. I didn't know what the hell a "Le Havre" was before I played Le Havre, of course I learned it is a very important French port. I didn't know a damned thing about German glass making, or why glass was/is so often green, now I do. And remember how I mentioned in Agricola a few lines ago that you need more family members to keep the food engine going? This reflects real life trends of population growth decline. We aren't an agricultural society anymore, most of us don't produce food (besides our humble gardens) we are mostly, at best, a cog in the machine of it's distribution. So one of the essentials to raising a family (food) isn't something we produce directly anymore. I think this contributes greatly to the decline in the size of families, but this a great digression from the point and has implications far outside a simple blog about games. I just love when a game teaches me things or makes me consider real life problems, systems, or scenarios and Uwe's games consistently do this for me for some reason.
But wait, you might say if you're still awake: You didn't really talk about At the Gates of Loyang, didn't that prompt this whole post? It did. However, I don't think there is much to add that I haven't already said. Gates is an economic simulation about being a vegetable merchant in a very large and important medieval Chinese city, it has excellent veggimeeples and tight, interesting mechanics. Isn't that pretty much part-and-parcel of Rosenberg designs? Good components, economic aspects, an obscure or arcane theme? Sure it has some mechanical aspects to set it apart, and I feel it's difficulty level sets it squarely in the middle of the pack of his designs and is a classic example of his touch.