We need a revision. The concept's too cool to give up on it.
I've played 3 games, all ended on a frustrating defeat against consistently big bad odds.
*Notes I took about rulebook and gameplay:
- Say the objective, win and lose conditions at the start
- Absolutely use examples and/or pictures to demonstrate how-to-plays
- What do I do when I lose a column but it was protected by the token? The column doesn't count as cleared, right? But to start a column, there needs to be a card, right? Since I'm not supposed to lose a life, I'm not using a card from my lives, right?
So does the column stiil exist and starts anew with no card? Or do I take a card from the deck to start the failed column (which is what I did)?
- What happens when you clear a column with the token? What do I do with the token?
This case doesn't get covered but I figured I transfer the token to another column of my choice?
- What does
"You can also decide to take on the cards of the column, however if the cards are below 19 or above 21 you’ll lose a life."
mean?
What do you mean by "taking on"?
I know that when you get a column's number from the die, you either add a card from the deck to it, or you reveal all the column's hidden cards.
But what is "taking on" - if it means "add a card from the deck AND reveal the column's hidden cards" wouldn't it be kinda pointless? Wouldn't players choose to reveal all the cards first before deciding to "take on the column?"
- (Mis)Usage of CAN: wording is important for a rulebook. As we all mostly know, CAN allows actions to be made at one's own discretion.
I know I'm being nitpicky about a rulebook that tells me I can be flexible in how I interpret the rules, but a minimum of precision (as opposed to vagueness) IS needed for the basic rules to exist.
Here's a snippet from the rulebook to show you:
1 to 4:
You can reveal the cards [...], or take one card from the deck [...]
You can also decide to take on the cards of the column [...]
By using solely CAN, it may seem like you can just skip all these and roll the die again until you get the number you want. That would be pointless as a game then, right?
So if you want to be clear that one of these must be done, then state the possible actions like orders (or a recipe for cooking). In some cases you may also have use for the words MUST, HAVE TO, and EITHER.
The way I would write the above snippet would be:
1 to 4:
Either:
- reveal the cards [...],
- take one card from the deck [...]
- take on the cards of the column [...]
* Notes about the "Balance":
- it gets very stupid at the last column remaining... 2 times out of 3 it'll just be piling up a card from the deck onto that last column,
Since the 3 other cleared columns now are treated like a 5 from the die, anything other than the column's number and the number 6 will just stack more and more cards on the column. As a reminder, I may uncover the column's cards only when rolling the column's number.
So for each die throw, I have only 1/6 chance to actually do something about the last column, and 1/6 chance to use a bomb, which will be just useless most of the time because by then there'll be a very big chance there are too many cards stacked for the bomb to matter.
And tokens and extra lives for the last column aren't too helpful, they're just a reroll for whether the column will be winnnable by luck or it spirals out of control by stacked 5's rolls again.
Yes, either there's too much bad luck involved , or we may need a (default) game mechanic that makes the endgame easier to win.
I play HRtP for breakfast and I can confirm it's not that hard to clear the last brick, even for average players. Like, come on. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯