Episode 1 of Wil Wheaton and Felicia Day's "Tabletop," a net-show about tabletop gaming sessions

Discuss

32 Responses to “Episode 1 of Wil Wheaton and Felicia Day's "Tabletop," a net-show about tabletop gaming sessions”

  1. Timmy Corkery says:

    I. Want. That. Table.

  2. Guest says:

    “that counts, because it was awesome

    Good show. Well played.

  3. milkman says:

    Will, not sure if you read these, but nice work!  Love the show.  Also, that table is the bee’s knees.

  4. littlebone says:

    I think the rules were only slightly less complicated than those of 43-Man Squamish.

  5. Jim Saul says:

    Very nice communication of the rules, and appealing focus on the creative elements… I haven’t played complex tabletop games in years but now I’m jonesing to play.

  6. xian says:

    Jesus, for a minute there I thought Wil was hanging out with Jenna Bush.

  7. Rindan says:

    I kind of like it.  It was pretty well edited, mildly entertaining, and gave you a pretty good feel for the game.  I’ll almost certainly watch the ones for games that I don’t own as sort of a mini-preview.  Nice.

  8. ocker3 says:

    I kind of enjoyed it, but gave up 3/4ths of the way through. It needed better visual tracking of who was winning (either with a digital layover of the board or a better scoreboard).

    • Guest says:

      I think that was a narrative/dramatic device based on the way that one game was turning out. Surprise winner! The #of points each player has is their prerogative to keep secret.

      But yes, i think with  most other games that will prove a great idea you’re sharing there, in terms of watchability.

      • ocker3 says:

         Except that the number of points each player won was spoken aloud at the end of their turn. The score wasn’t a secret, it’s just that the score-keeping device wasn’t well designed.

        • Guest says:

          Sure, if you want to keep track and winning is your only goal. I generally toss back a few adult beverages while tabletop gaming and try not to win badly. You could keep track, but just go play Diplomacy if that’s your thing. :)

    • Amanda Knutson says:

      In Small World, the score is meant to be a secret.  There’s a bit of metagaming in this particular game (in the form of “I’m not winning, he’s winning,” “No, look at how good that other guy did this last turn!”), I suppose so people don’t always know who the winning player is at the moment and therefore know who to directly knock down.

  9. Petzl says:

    The personalities involved made the show entertaining for me.  The game itself was almost immaterial.

    • penguinchris says:

      Agreed. It was enjoyable to see the personalities but despite their best efforts to explain the rules as they went along (which is a great way to do this in theory) I couldn’t follow what was happening and stopped watching halfway through. 

      Not being able to closely examine the board and the pieces is what made it the most difficult. It doesn’t help that the game’s various designs seem to blend into each other – even when there were closeups I couldn’t tell anything apart (a common issue these days to be sure).

      It definitely did get me interested in playing games like this, though. I don’t think it would be as much fun without Wesley Crusher (and Grant, my favorite from Mythbusters) though ;)

  10. Paul Renault says:

    I hope they do an episode where they play Paranoia.

  11. Gtmac says:

    I couldn’t tell whether Jenna Busch was trying (and failing) to play the shrewd female gamer rope-a-dope. I hope to see more and better female representation on the show.

  12. Doug Nelson says:

    I hit Play to see Felicia Day. Where is Felicia Day?

  13. The Hamster King says:

    Argh … Jenna Busch’s opening move is killing me.   Mountains cost extra armies to conquer.  You get points based on how many territories you can conquer with your limited number of armies.  The whole point of Small World is figuring out how to grab the most with the least.  Unless you have a special ability involving mountain territories, don’t conquer them first!

  14. David Hume says:

    Awesome! I love watching the pretty people play tabletop RPGs! It takes the sting out of all the mean things they’ve joked about real gamers…

  15. Chris Gorski says:

    They play the giants wrong in the first round :(
    They only get to conquer with one less army if they already hold the adjacent mountain.

    • Gtmac says:

      There was a lot of misplay. For example, ghouls only get to conquer in decline on following rounds, not the round they go into decline.

  16. bobcorrigan says:

    I want to see 30 minutes of LCR + copious beer drinking + $100 table stakes.  Followed by a fake police raid.

  17. Syn - says:

    Tabletop games are really coming back up huh? Im building quite a collection here in argentina (my wallet is NOT happy).

    shut up and sit down is worth checking out too! They do great episodes once in a while, though its more a review show than a gameplay one. Still feeling kinda awkward about the tv exaggeration of jokes to make it look not boring, but then thats how i feel about most tv.

  18. JimEJim says:

    The only problem I’m having with this format is I don’t really understand the game yet, so I’m really just watching them have fun.  Not bad, but it’s a bit different when you’re watching something like “poker after dark” where the rules don’t change every episode and it’s easier to keep up. 

    I know they spend a little time explaining the rules, but I think they may need to give a better summary of the rules up front or maybe pick games that are easier to pickup.

    On that note, I would like to see them play something like the card game Fluxx, especially the Monty Python variant:  http://www.looneylabs.com/games/monty-python-fluxx  It was surprisingly easy to pick up and loads of fun.

Leave a Reply