Re: Piecepack: Plain Jane?

["Matt Worden" <Brykovian@...>]

Ed Thorn <prophesor@y...> wrote:
> Way back when I joined this list, I had thought how
> some of the games could stand alone, that they might
> have flashy custom tiles and coins made, with imagery
> on them that matched the individual game.
> 
> Now, if that imagery didn't _break_ the piecepack
> spec, what you'd have is a sexy piecepack-based game
> to bait the eye-candy crowd with, and then once
> they're at the table (and have played the game, gotta
> be fair...) explain how the same pieces can be used to
> play dozens of other games.

The solution from one angle happens to be the problem from another.  
The idea of generic components *makes* the piecepack what it is -- 
versatile.  But I can understand that people might get scared off by 
having to "paint a theme" onto those components in their own mind in 
order for a game to work for them.

Now, the problem with what the prophesor is suggesting is how to make 
the piecepack more sexy -- specifically for a single game -- but 
still allow it to be generic enough to play?  For example, if you 
were to make a "Froggy Bottom"-focused piecepack set (replacing the 
generic pawns with colored frogs, giving the coins a definited 
lilypad look, etc.), wouldn't it make using that piecepack for other 
games more difficult?  The players would have to "ignore" the 
purposeful theme of the "sexed-up" piecepack in order to apply the 
new game's theme in their head.

-Bryk