Re: piecepackplus (long)

["davidlhsl" <DavidLHsl@...>]

>From the "Nobody asked me, but here it comes" Department for the 
Criminally Insane, my own feedback concerning pp+ and this debate:

* Let's begin with one area where everyone should agree: the 
original piecepack specification is an extremely inspirational and 
ingenious design.

* Inspirational ideas naturally produce... other inspirational 
ideas! If one is inspired by something, one naturally tends to 
develop ones own ideas for modification. The pp+ idea is one of many 
such ideas to be proposed.

* While I'm on a roll, let's try another area where I feel we can 
agree: the piecepack works very well with other gaming components.

* Consider piecepack (or any gaming, for that matter) to be like 
sex -- anything goes between mutually consenting partners. Just 
don't try to shove a piecepack pawn up... uh, never mind. Only 
downside to this analogy: people tend to consider anyone who tries 
it any other way than their own to be degenerate perverts.

* I need a shower after that last point. I feel so dirty.

* From my own observation, other proposals to enhancing the original 
piecepack specification have, for a very large part, not resulted in 
much controversy. I feel it is disingenuous to criticize the 
piecepack community as being closed-minded. You'll find pdf files in 
the Files section containing a wonderful 8-suit piecepack called the 
JCD piecepack (I've even converted my own set to this) and piecepack 
pyramids. Additions have also included piecepack money, suit dice 
and star tokens. Matter of fact, there isn't even a consensus on 
whether the crown suit should be green or yellow. Perhaps the pp+ 
proponents are being a tad defensive towards honest feedback.

I believe the criticism of the pp+ proposal originates from the fact 
that the proposal offers to substitute the established suits rather 
than expanding them. Again, please consult the JCD piecepack and 
piecepack expanded specs (piecepack expanded may not be at this 
group). You'll find that these specs already include the suits of 
club, spades, hearts and diamonds in addition to the original group 
of four. Therefore, this entire debate is likely more moot than one 
may care to admit, because the expanded specs already can be used to 
form the five proposed pp+ suits (use suns as stars).

* Expanding on my point about pp+ replacing rather than expanding 
the suits: the original piecepack suits of crown / arms / sun / moon 
are icons that uniquely identify the piecepack. Check out the neat 
logo at www.piecepack.org. Isn't that pretty? Now, imagine that logo 
with only hearts / spades / diamonds / clubs. Would you 
automatically associate this with a specific game system? With the 
hearts / spades / diamonds / clubs added to the 4 piecepack suits to 
make eight, you maintain synergy with the Stardeck (use suns for the 
star suit, or even add a 9th suit if that doesn't float your boat) 
and the Empire deck (a 6-suit deck, IIRC).

This point may seem trivial, but if you really want to promote this 
system to a wider audience, it becomes important.

* The pp+ proposal of using four suits around the tile is pretty 
clever and does suggest ideas for tile placement designs. There are, 
however, two very real concerns: (1) how can you add one or more 
additional suits to this spec without breaking the system, (2) if 
you do decide on this idea, it is imperative that to specify which 
combination of suits go with which specific tiles. For example, you 
might state that hearts / spades / diamonds / star (in that order) 
goes around a 2 of clubs. If you do not expicitly state this and 
leave it up to the individual and/or vendor to determine, I can see 
some real conflicts with game rules down the line. One third lesser 
critique, but one which must be addressed, is that the proposed spec 
requires an indication of tile facing to be compatible with existing 
rulesets. This is currently not indicated.

* As for the discussion about the evolution of game systems and 
change being a part of the evolution process, I'd like to point out 
my own humble opinion that changes to any game system will 
always follow games being designed for the change. While evolution 
in a game system can be a healthy thing, a Tower of Babel scenario 
where each game designer goes off the piecepack spec in a separate 
direction will most assuredly lead to the collapse of the system. I 
don't think that anyone wants this, and that is the reason a 
thorough debate of any proposed change is necessary.

My own opinion, for what it's worth.

David