Five Talking Points From Five Tribes

Five Tribes (2014)

Designed by: Bruno Cathala

Published by: Days of Wonder

Players: 2 - 4 (Best with 2)

Conflict: Low

Strategy: High

Immersion: Mid

Socialness: Low

Tom and I recently played the highly rated Bruno Cathala game Five Tribes for the first time.

It’s a good game; an interesting puzzle realised with exceptional design and production values. If you haven’t played it, I would recommend giving it a look.

As a quick aside, Bruno Cathala has quickly become one of my favourite designers this year. Whilst I don’t necessarily think all of his games are great, in my experience he doesn’t ever make a bad game. For this reason, when I see Cathala’s name on the box, there’s a certain level of comfort in knowing the game will - at the very least - be good and likely it will be great.

Case in point, Tom and I enjoyed our experience with this game. From one play; it’s a good game. I’m sure if I get to play it a few more times I’ll probably conclude it’s a great game.

Afterwards we discussed a few things that caught our attention and I thought were worth sharing. So here are five key talking points about Five Tribes:

Bidding for Turn Order in Games; Cost vs. Reward

One of the neatest and most intriguing mechanics in Five Tribes is the turn order bidding track. Players may spend coins (worth victory points at the end of game) to ensure they take their turn(s) earlier in the round. And, because each player has two turns each round it is possible for a player to take two consecutive turns (or as many as four consecutive turns, split across two rounds).

Bidding for turn order is not unique to Five Tribes, although it’s execution here is very elegant - as each player takes their turn they move their turn marker from the turn track to the bidding track. So a player taking the first turn in this round will also have the first action in the bidding for the next round.

So, there’s no doubting it’s a fun mechanic ...but is it worth it?

Tom and I are both experienced gamers and found that on several occasions we got our turn / action order muddled up.

This is because the idea of single turns, progressing in clockwise order is so ubiquitous in the game scene. Unless you are specifically reminded about the turn order it is far too easy to want to take your turn after your opponent has finished their turn.

Standard turn order in games is ingrained in many of us, built over many years of play. There is an inherent and ingrained natural flow of games. Singular progressive turn order is as close as there is to a law in board gaming.

Custom turn order fights against this natural flow of the board gaming universe. Given this seismic interruption, it must be considered; how much is gained with a mechanic like this and how much is lost?

This Game is All Carrots and I Love That About It.

One thing that struck me as we played through is that on your turn, all of the actions you are taking are good. There’s no hateful or spiteful actions. On your turn you are not choosing between “good for me” or “bad for my opponent” like in so many games; you are choosing between varying degrees of good.

This is a delicious and underused feature in games. It’s like choosing which slice of pizza you’ll eat next - you can’t get it wrong, but you still want to optimise your choice. The Capricciosa is not a bad choice... but the Mexicana is better (especially if it has pineapple on it).

And the best part is that when you take an action, it creates a new board of opportunities for the next player. When it’s not your turn it doesn’t feel like your opponent is stealing the best moves and closing off the board. It feels as though new opportunities are about to open up, which is exciting!

You don’t dread your opponent’s turn, you look forward to it and what it will allow you to do in response. One of my all time favourite games, Concordia, has a very similar feel and I wish more games explored this avenue of design.

This Game is Very Player Dependent

Whilst it’s no doubt true that all games are largely player dependent (it’s both the joy and the curse of the hobby), I think for games like Five Tribes this is particularly apparent.

To be honest, I found the opening set up for this game - with 30 face up tiles and 90 coloured meeples arranged randomly - pretty overwhelming. Where do you even start? Where are you supposed to look?

Tom and I share a lot in common when it comes to playing games; primarily we play games at a good pace, because we value the experience of play above winning.

However, I know many players for whom winning is the primary motivator for why they play games. To be clear; there’s nothing wrong with playing to win, but in a game like this I think it could be problematic.

There are so many opportunities for analysis paralysis here. If you were to try to analyse all of your available options to choose the best one, then for me this experience would turn from fun to frustrating.

At two players, I think this works really well with a 40-60 minute play time. If you were to over analyse every move I could see this game easily pushing 90 minutes or more and to my mind that would be overstaying its welcome. So, if and when I play again I will need to choose my opponent(s) wisely.

How Cool Are Djinns?!

Seriously.

Firstly, the artwork for the Djinns in this game is stunning, intricate and mystical.

Secondly, the Djinns provide modularity and replayability. By appearing in a random order, every game will play out differently.

Thirdly, the Djinns offer players multiple pathways to victory, a classic Cathala trademark (and a design style that I want to learn from myself). The Djinns also provide a chance for more advanced players to show off their skill. Once you’ve played a few times, using the Djinns to change up the rules is a rewarding way to challenge yourself. And yet, for new players to the game they don’t need to focus on the Djinns in order to have a good time or even to win the game. In a way, they let the players choose their own level of complexity allowing the game to scale to players of different skill levels.

Lastly, using magical / mythical elements in games opens up a fantastic wealth of design space. It’s feasible that a powerful Djinn could do just about anything. And so there’s no game effect or mechanic that would feel out of place or out of theme on a Djinn. That’s really neat.

This is a Surprising Game for Days of Wonder

Heading into this game I was already aware that Five Tribes was an atypical release for Days of Wonder, who have built their brand on the back of light gateway games with family appeal.

Days of Wonder has perhaps the strongest brand in the board game scene, which is continuously bolstered by the astronomical success of the Ticket to Ride franchise of games. They are “safe.” They make games that are fun and accessible. The type of games you can buy at the games shop without knowing anything about them.

Five Tribes is a good game, but it’s not a light gateway game, nor do I feel it has a large family appeal (due to its aforesaid complexity). Which is why I am surprised they published it. This is not to say that they shouldn’t publish games like this. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Has Days of Wonder moved beyond gateway games? Or as the market matures are complex games becoming more accessible to the casual gamer audience?

Have you played Five Tribes?

What did you think? Let us know in the comments below.