How to Play Biblios

Biblios is played out over two phases. The first phase is the gift giving phase. In that, a player takes cards off of the deck one at a time. With each card they decide to add it either to their collection, an auction collection, or face up for the other players. Once they have done that for number of players plus one, doing each action once, or once per other player, the other players take face up cards in turn order. You go through all of the cards in the deck that time. This builds up the players hands.

There are three types of cards that you might get. Firstly there is money, that is used in phase two. Next up item cards, stuff for building out your library, that is for area control or area majority in the different colors. Finally there are churches. Those influence the value on the dice. The dice are victory points, all starting at three, for each area, color, of item. And the churches increase or decrease the value.

The next phase, is the auction phase. So all the cards that go into the auction pile are auctioned off one at a time with going around to different players leading the auction. If it is an item card or a church card you use money to bid. If it is a money card in the auction pile, you bid a number of cards to get it.

Then, after all that is done, all gifts given and cards auctioned, you check for majorities. The value on the cards totaled for each color determines who wins that color. Players take the die of the color that they won, and you add up the total on all the dice. Scoring at the end is fairly simple.

What I Don’t Like

One thing that is a neutral item for me, but I think is just okay is the giving of gifts. Now, the concept is very interesting. When do you pass on something good, maybe putting it into the auction pile, in hopes something better shows up? That is cool, and I’ll talk about that more. But there are a number of cards to go through, so the giving of gifts just takes a little bit. And the interest of it wains a bit over time.

I also think that the scoring might be a little bit too simple, or more the strategy for it. Now, with more players and a few cards out of the deck every game, it does mean you can’t math it out. I think the more i play it though, I’ll find that I want to be a bit more cutthroat with the game. Buying up cards that others might want or messing with the dice more. I just want something more for scoring, like a bonus of 3 points for the player with the most item cards, something like that. Or a point for every three coins left after the auction.

What I Like

On the flip side, I do like the gift giving part with the push your luck element. What card works be the best for you. At what point in time do you maybe throw away into the auction a really good card because you don’t want it, but you also don’t want to give it to someone for free. But once you do that, now you don’t have the ability to hide an even better card. It makes an interesting choice like in Grimm Masquerade, just more of it.

I also think that the auction is good. Mainly because different cards auction different ways. I like that you can put good coins into the pool, so a 3 coin shows up, I might bid two or three cards, maybe even four, to just get rid of cards for an item I won’t win. Or to get rid of 1 coins. But there is risk with getting ride of 1 coins because if you bid a 2 coin and only have a 3, you pay with the 3 and get no change.

Finally, I like that all the cards aren’t in the deck. Even at the max player count, some are still out though not many. That means that you can’t count cards, though it’d be impossible to get everything figure out. In a two player game, if no cards were out, you could count it all I guess during the auction phase easily enough.

Who Is It For?

Who is this for, probably anyone. The game is very simple when you get down to it. I could take this to my parents and get them playing it fast. And I think that while it is light, for heavier gamers it is going to make a good filler. Even for more casual players, this is a filler weight and length game.

Now, I talked that it takes a while to get all of the gifts out. It isn’t that it takes that long, really, it is more that it loses some of the interest as you go. After going through cards and picking how to disperse them, some players might flag on that a little bit. But then the game is so fast moving that it’ll get to the auction quickly.

It is also best at three players. So a good game for that play with parents sort of situation. Two and four are solid, but three is the sweet spot for me.

Biblios Final Thoughts

Biblios is a great little filler game. For me it worked quite well, even with the bit of slowness. It helps that not on your turn, you still get a card. That means you care what the other player(s) put down. And I like it with three because now two cards are out for the players. If you pick first, I hope you leave what I want. It creates a bit of tension that the game doesn’t have a ton of.

I do worry, though, about the staying power of the game. Is it going to go like Tsuro where I played it enough times that I moved on from it? I think that it might just after enough plays. Now, I am no where near that, and it is a lower player count. That means that I won’t use it as a filler as much as Tsuro, Criss Cross, or Second Chance.

There are also elements that remind me of Arboretum where only one person scores a color. However, Arboretum has more puzzling out what to do. And I think it is meaner because you know what everyone else has, or is at least going for, on the table. Biblios scratches some of that same itch while being much more accessible. And also less mean than Arboretum because of that.

My Grade: B
Gamer Grade: C
Casual Grade: B+

Send an Email.
Message me directly on Twitter at @TheScando
Visit us on Facebook here.
Support us on Patreon here.

Two Rating Systems But One

So when I rate games on Nerdologists.com, I rate them with a letter grade scale. Then on Board Game Geek, I rate them numerically, since that is BGG’s scale. But I really use both of them as the same thing. I started with my own letter grades simply because that’s how I think of them more so. Lately, I think of grades or ratings on games in both.

So, while my grades might not always seem to align perfectly with the number scale, the two are meant to be the same. Or if there is a larger discrepancy Board Game Geek is more up to date of the two. I don’t go back and change a review article of a game increases or decreases for me.

What Do The Different Letters/Numbers Mean?

10

This generally equates to a game that I give an A+. Or it might be a game with an A rating but is really close to getting an A+.

But what does it mean? Generally these are the games that I love the most, not generally, but specifically. And generally, that means that I want to play them all the time. Now some, like Gloomhaven, I don’t know when or if I’ll come back to it. But that extensive experience that I had with it is that memorable and enjoyable. The same with other campaign games, I want to play them, but once I’m done, I might never come back.

9

This is going to be my A games. Again, these are games that I basically always want to play. I really enjoy them. The main difference between a 9 and a 10is just maybe, how memorable they are. Or how much each play can feel different. 9’s are going to be a bit less epic in my memory of the game.

8

This will be A- and B+’s in my letter grading. And they are a bit lower because I do see some flaw with the game. Not one that will keep me from playing the game, but something that might have me play it less. Or it is a smaller game, as well. Something like Arboretum is an amazing game, but since it’s not as epic as a game like Aeon’s End, for example, it gets a slightly lower grade. This is where a big bulk of the games are going to end up for me.

7

A 7 is going to be a game that is a B or B-. Fun games and one’s that I’d play, but now we’re getting to games that I’d be less likely to pull off the shelf myself. The example of this would be Air, Land and Sea. It is a good two player game where you fight for control in three theaters of war by playing out cards. It is similar to Hanamikoji, which I like a lot better. Hanamikoji is a 10 for me, and I would always pull it off the shelf before Air, Land, and Sea, but Air, Land, and Sea is still a game that I’d play if someone else wanted to.

6

6’s are going to be that C+ to C range when I give out a grade. Generally they are games that I can have fun with, but they aren’t ones that give me the same range of choice of other games, I feel. These are often, for me, gateway style games at this point, but not the really good ones that offer depth and strategy. Again, not a game that I’d say no to playing, but most 6’s leave the collection pretty quickly.

5

Following the scale, this is a C- of a game. Slightly below overage game or just doesn’t work for me for some reason. Often times there is a lot more luck in these games. Or the game is more about the laughs, which has limited replay value as well. The game does what it says but not enough to interest me to continue playing it.

4

With four, I think this often is where I stop wanting to play the game again. Though, there are some fours, for me, that I’ll come back to. This is a D+ game for me. And I think this is the spot, often, where a game promises something but fails to fully deliver on it. So, something like Codenames is a D+ for me, or a 4. Mainly because it promises to be a party game, but isn’t. And I don’t get any additional benefits like feeling clever from it.

3

D rated games go here. 3’s are games that I just find boring to play. Dominion, it might be a great game, but I find it boring to play, and I don’t want to anymore. And I find that there is a limited amount of strategy to the game. If you are good at Dominion, you spot the best combination and build that engine. The game doesn’t offer the variety to do well.

2

This is going to be a D- game. If I rate it a two, I really don’t like the game. It might do one thing, but that one thing isn’t that interesting. Exploding Kittens or Dr. Eureka are two 2’s for me. Exploding Kittens feels derivative and boring. Dr. Eureka is basically a puzzle with a speed element to it and dexterity thrown in. It just feels like a puzzle you give a kid, not a game.

1

These are straight up F’s for me. I don’t think a one is worth playing. Often times a game will get a one because it leans on it being a joke. For example, Exploding Kitten: NSFW Decks. It is just not an interesting thing to take a boring game and pretend that it’s now risqué. Actually adding in NSFW content takes a bad game and makes it worse. Or a game that is boring. Concept, for me, is a game that just adds in boredom. The game drags and it is just players thinking on something that masquerades as a fun social game.

Board Game Ratings Final Thoughts

Now, your ratings on a given game will differ from mine. That is why I try and give ratings for gamers and for casual players. I don’t care how great I think Gloomhaven might be, it won’t work that well for a casual gamer. Even the box, just the size of it, might immediately push them away. I think if they can learn it, it’ll be something they don’t find too complex, but there’s a massive barrier to entry.

And even my estimates for a gamer or a casual player, those are going to vary for each person individual. What I hope by giving a rating is that you can start to figure out how you align with my perspective on games. I want you to see what I like or dislike about a game, but then also have a quicker reference, than just reading a review, to know how you’d compare.

How do you rate board games? Do you do a letter grade, 1-10, 1-5? Do you use decimals, or do you not really have a grading system? Let me know in the comments below.

Send an Email.
Message me directly on Twitter at @TheScando
Visit us on Facebook here.
Support us on Patreon here.

What’s The Answer?

Super simple answer is no. There is no minimum number of times. I know the first time I played Gloomhaven and Tainted Grail that I liked them a lot. Now I didn’t play them only once before giving them a review, but I could have basically done it at that point. The same with Concept, I knew I didn’t like that game after one slightly too long play of it.

Why, because those games show you how they work right away. You sit down and you play Gloomhaven, you know how the card play is going to work. Tainted Grail, you get an idea of the exploration and combat immediately. Concept, you get the concept of the game right away as well.

Other games, it will take longer. That’s why I’ve started doing the Beyond the Box Cover articles as well. Something like Isle of Cats, there is a lot to explore in the game and mess around with. I want to make sure that there isn’t just a better strategy than others. I also want to figure out how much the drafting will swing things. Or Railroad Ink. I can tell you how much I like the base game, but I need to play with the expansions that come in the box.

But Story Games Need the Whole Story

This is another thought that is thrown around as to why you need to play more. I’ve read a ton of books, I’ve played a number of story games. I can tell when sitting down if I will like a story. Now, the story might underwhelm or surprise me, but I have a general idea. And no, I don’t need to know how the story ends. The end of a story can dampen how much I like that story, but unlikely to flat out ruin it.

For example, not in board games, I think that the story in the Witcher TV show is alright at best. However, I want to see that second season because there are elements that I like and I really like the world. In board games, the story in Gloomhaven is solid, nothing amazing, but the rest of the world and the game play itself mean that I absolutely love that game. And with a game, so much of how well a story works is the tone it sets with the mechanics. And I don’t need to critique a whole story to know if I like the mechanics.

But You Need to Play All the Content

Again, I’ll disagree with this premise. I think that playing a lot of the content is probably smart. Again, that’s why I do the Beyond the Box Cover. However, some games, Merchant’s Cove for example, I can give a review on without playing the whole thing. Why, because I can see other people playing characters with me, and I get the general idea of the game as a whole. I still want to play those other characters, but I don’t need to, to know about the game.

In fact, Merchant’s Cove is a great example, I really liked playing the Innkeeper. I want to try the other characters, but I know I can go back and play the Innkeeper again and still enjoy the game. So who knows, maybe I’ll hate the Blacksmith, that’s fine because if I don’t want to play one out of 8 characters, I still have a lot to play.

And again, I know that I like the mechanics of the game, and in particular the ones that go across all characters. I like the loading meeples onto ships. I like the townsfolk that you can recruit. The scoring of with making and selling goods, I like. I like the corruption. All of those things in Merchants Cove work across the board.

Why Do People Push Back?

I think in the end, we have to talk about why people push back. It’s because people forget that a lot of this is opinion. Tom Vassel talks about this a lot when he doesn’t like something. Just because he doesn’t like a game doesn’t mean that someone won’t have it as their favorite game. A board game review is an opinion of the reviewer.

So why do people make a big deal about it? This tends to happen when people have a low opinion or a really high opinion. Though, there is a third category of people who push back, and that is if a game is too popular. I can find myself falling into the trap of that where I won’t play a game because it is too popular. Now, I will play it, but I won’t buy it. And I tend to be more hesitant.

Basically if we have a strong emotion towards a game, whether love or hate or annoyance of it being everywhere, we will have higher standards for reviews. We are going to want people to agree with us. So we push back on it because we think if they play it more or they must have played it wrong, and that’s why they do or don’t like the game.

So What’s the Point of Reviews?

The point is that you can find people who review whom your tastes match up with. And a good reviewer talks not only about their feelings around a game, but also the mechanics and what does and doesn’t work for them. That means you get not only an idea of the flavor of the game but how the game works.

For example, I know that when he was on the Dice Tower, Sam Healey and my taste matched up pretty well. So I could generally know if he liked a game, then I’d like the game as well. He’s no longer on the Dice Tower, had to move away, so now I don’t know who I would put in that realm. But now I also know my tastes better, so I tend to go more with thoughts off of playthroughs.

Who is that reviewer for you whom you like their reviews? Is there any channel or reviewer who is the best for you or maybe you know is the opposite of your tastes?

Email us at nerdologists@gmail.com
Message me directly on Twitter at @TheScando
Visit us on Facebook here.
Support us on Patreon here.