Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This is probably pretty old "new" for some of you out there, but I didn't find where anyone announced this book on this forum (my apologies if someone else did). I walked into a gaming store the other day, saw it and had to buy it.

It is called "Hobby Games - The 100 Best" and is produced by a company called 'Green Ronin' and was released in September 2007.


What is really interesting about this book is that they got (close to) 100 of the premiere hobby game creators in the world and asked them to pick their favorite game and write an essay on why it is so great. They couldn't write about their own games or any game from their company.

That means the list doesn't represent the actual best 100 games in any sort of empirical way but rather the best 100 games as based on (sort of) a random poll of the industry's designers. Kind of like the Academy Awards in a way.

Since none of the designers knew what anyone else was writing about that means that in a few cases some fairly big games are left off the list (Warhammer Fantasy Battle and Warmachine jump to my mind). The foreword of the book makes it very clear that this doesn't mean these games aren't great, but rather those games just happen not to be any of these 100 designers favorite.


Some of the designers who wrote for the book from GW fame are: co-founder, Ian Livingstone (writing on Amun-Re), Alessio Cavatore (writing on Empire in Arms), Gav Thorpe (writing on Hammer of the Scots), Narc Gascoigne (writing on Once Upon a Time), co-founder Steve Jackson on Paranoia.

Some GW games that got the love are: 40K, Blood Bowl and Space Hulk (thank god).


They also have plenty of other big name game designers writing essays, such as Gary Gygax (D&D fame), Richard Garfield (creator of Magic: the Gathering), Larry Harris (Axis & Allies creator) and Warren Spector (video game Dues Ex).


This is such a great book for so many reasons. Not only is it fun to see what games the designers themselves love to play (and why) but it is also a great resource of games to try out, many of which I'm sure you've never heard of (I hadn't).


So check it out if you're so inclined.

I hate to contradict our Noble Leader. However, it was the other Steve Jackson (Steve Jackson Games: Ogre, GURPS, Munchkin etc.) that fittingly wrote on Paranoia, the single greatest game in history. The GW Steve Jackson wrote on The Warlord. I think the only other GW game in it is Fury of Dracula.

I have the book, and have been through it twice. I have to whole heartedly recommend it. Some of the reviews are little more than summaries of the games, but on the whole they do make for great read for anyone who considers himself a true gamer. The fact that some of the obvious ones didnt make the cut in favor of smaller games, really makes it feel like a gaming room discussion. They run the full range of games, with C and non-c CGs, RPGs, miniatures, board, and everything else that makes up the full hobby spectrum.

Actually, this would make for a great thread. What games in the book have you played, are your favorites, and what got left out. Someone should start that. I'm too sleepy.

Niccolo wrote:
I have the book, and have been through it twice. I have to whole heartedly recommend it. Some of the reviews are little more than summaries of the games, but on the whole they do make for great read for anyone who considers himself a true gamer. The fact that some of the obvious ones didnt make the cut in favor of smaller games, really makes it feel like a gaming room discussion. They run the full range of games, with C and non-c CGs, RPGs, miniatures, board, and everything else that makes up the full hobby spectrum.

Whoops! I had no idea there were two Steve Jacksons! Shows what I know. . .


The games I've played that are in the book (and up front I'll admit that I'm a very limited gamer in many respects):


1) Axis & Allies (own it).
2) Battletech (one time, didn't like it).
3) Blood Bowl (played it for a while then had a really bad game and sold it).
4) Carcassone (own it on Xbox 360).
5) D&D (one time when I was a teenager, didn't care for it).
6) Illuminati (played it a couple of times).
7) Legend of the Five Rings (played it a couple of times).
8) Magic: The Gathering (played it a couple of times).
9) Ogre (played it once).
10) Paranoia (played it once and have to say it's the only RPG that ever seemed interesting to me).
11) Settlers of Catan (own it on Xbox and in real-life, plus the expansions).
12) Shadowfist (loved it owned thousands of cards but couldn't find anyone to play with so sold 'em all).
13) Shadowrun (played it once).
14) Space Hulk (still own the first edition of the game and the expansions. My favorite game of all time).
15) Vampire: the Masquerade (okay, I never played it but I watched other people play it and was horrified).
16) Warhammer 40,000 (obviously).



So I've got quite a bit of games to try!!!

Review written by me last year.

Hobby Games: The 100 Best

Edited by James Lowder
Published by Green Ronin LLC, Sep. 2007 (www.greenronin.com)
Softcover, 380 pp mono
ISBN: 1-932442-96-0
£12.99 from Amazon.co.uk


The idea behind this book is that the last 50 years have been a period of unprecedented innovation and creativity in games for serious adult gamers. Before the mid-50s there were games like Monopoly, Ludo and Canasta. Since then, hundreds of new games and entire new genres have been produced, the best 100 of which are collected in this book.

Hobby games as covered here comprise hex map wargames, role-playing games, table-top miniatures games, in-depth boardgames of the German type, and some miscellaneous others such as collectable card games. Neither computer games nor traditional games (chess, bridge) are included; these areas are covered well in other literature.

Following a short introduction and foreword we come to the meat, the 100 reviews.

The publisher’s good idea was to ask the most prolific games professionals of the period each to write a review of their particular favourite. All the reviewers are therefore well-known designers or publishers, so you find familiar names – Greg Stafford, Steve Jackson (UK and US versions) and Tom Wham to name only three -- cropping up several times as reviewers and as designers or producers of the games reviewed.

Whilst this might create an impression that the book is only an exercise in mutual admiration, any keen gamer will recognize these names as key figures in the history of the industry. The method is convincingly validated by the quality of the reviews.

Game design requires an ability to express ideas well in print, so the reviews are highly readable and give a good impression of the merits of the titles. Each chapter consists of two to three pages -- about 1,200 words -- on the chosen game, followed by a mini-biography of the writer.

Each review gives an overview of the game components, the rules and the key reasons why it was selected. In many cases the writer acknowledges a title’s faults, and explains how he chose it for personal reasons such as the immense fun he had playing. Some writers value speed of play as much as an elegant mechanism, others have a regard for the clever use of dice, and others still like cooperation rather than conflict.

The book is in effect a selective gazetteer of great games. It works on various levels; as a reminder of the fun of the titles you know, as a stimulant to appreciation and argument (why was X included and why not Y?) and as an introduction to titles you didn’t know before and really ought to try.

It is also fun to work out your “nerd status” by counting the titles you have owned or at least played.

If there are to be criticisms, the book is -- probably inevitably -- male dominated, and is stronger on US originated titles than European. Given that it is from a US publisher, this is natural, and it should be recognised that the USA has made a very strong showing in board wargames and RPGs. Even so, I feel one of the two ACW games included -- Johnny Reb and Fire & Fury – should have been dropped in favour of DBA.

Nonetheless, there is a good selection of the best British and German titles (Kingmaker, Carcassone and others.) They have certainly not been ignored.

The 100 reviews are rounded off with an afterword by James F. Dunnigan, who is a giant in the field, and a short article on collecting out of print titles.

It is interesting to note that many of the games included are still available in reprints or electronic editions, even though the original publishers may have shut shop. If this book stimulates your interest in an unfamiliar title, you can probably find it if you search hard enough.

Anyone who has continued playing games after their student days is probably incurably infected with the games hobby, and will enjoy this book.

Reviewed by Richard Milner, 27 October 2007.

That;s alright Yak, I always wondered if the two Steve Jacksons were the same. Unfortuneately for GW, their Steve Jackson can never compare to the fine creator of Munchkin, GURPS, and all around general awesome-osity that is the great founder of Steve Jackson games. Cars Wars! Illuminati!

Okay, I'm done. Now I'm gonna go play all seven thousand versions of munchkin in one game.

Out of curiosity, who did the essay on Shadowfist?

Glad to hear that it got some love along with Paranoia. And good to see Space Hulk and Blood Bowl getting some props, too. Surprised the Necromunda didn't make the list.

I'm going to pick that up. I've always wanted to meet Warren Spector.

Presumably to ask him how he deals with the awesomeness of his name.

I'll have to see if there is a copy of this floating around in a bookstore nearby.

are you sure there's not actually 5 Steve Jacksons all working together to bring down the conspiracy inside GW aimed at taking over the world by destabilising global oil prices due to demand for palstic tat Fnord?

(edited to remove sensitive information)

yakface wrote:
15) Vampire: the Masquerade (okay, I never played it but I watched other people play it and was horrified).

Horrified in what way? The various V:tM groups I've seen can range between terrible lack of taste, to terrible in a "a person should not think of these things" kind of way, and then the occasional good game. Never play with someone whose favourite clan is Tzimisce.

yakface wrote:
12) Shadowfist (loved it owned thousands of cards but couldn't find anyone to play with so sold 'em all).

I still have my hundreds and hundreds of Shadowfist cards in a box in the garage somewhere. That game is too cool to get rid of. Let me know the next time you come up to Matts, I'll bring em over. Its much more fun with 4 or more people playing tho...it was never a good one-on-one battle ccg. We had a rule when new people were playing...you had to read the awesomely cheesy flavor text out loud when you played a card.

CrimsonTurkey wrote:
Horrified in what way? The various V:tM groups I've seen can range between terrible lack of taste, to terrible in a "a person should not think of these things" kind of way, and then the occasional good game. Never play with someone whose favourite clan is Tzimisce.

It was really just my shock and dismay over seeing LARPing for the first time. Watching a bunch of gamer geeks running around dressed up in gothic clothing, acting like a terrible community theatre acting troupe and yelling the names of spells and attacks at each other was just too much for me to handle.

I know Vampire isn't always played as a LARP and I fully understand that someone else watching me play with my little toy soldiers could be equally as horrified, but to me it was just a total mind-melting experience.

Fango wrote:
I still have my hundreds and hundreds of Shadowfist cards in a box in the garage somewhere. That game is too cool to get rid of. Let me know the next time you come up to Matts, I'll bring em over. Its much more fun with 4 or more people playing tho...it was never a good one-on-one battle ccg. We had a rule when new people were playing...you had to read the awesomely cheesy flavor text out loud when you played a card.

The other problem is that after the game got bought out they started releasing a ton of new cards (like all CCGs do) and soon my thousands of cards were severly underpowered compared to the stuff.

But yeah, I'll play a game anytime.

@Yakface re/Vampire: that's a shame that was your first experience. I find LARPing to be pretty comical, whether it's Vampire or NERO or Cosplay or SCA (full disclosure: I used to do the ren faire thing, both Ohio Ren. Festival and King Richard's Faire in MA)

However, Vampire was a pretty good game, especially for its time. A well-written and well thought out background, with simple mechanics and a heavy emphasis on role-playing (though the players' guide had a 2 page list of guns). It tapped into the zeitgeist (Anne Rice, Sarah Maclaughlin, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the antihero ascendant etc.), probably did more than many previous games to bring women into the gaming community and had a neat approach to the horror genre, making you (the player) the 'bad guy'. One could argue that the way they handled character creation, experience and mechanics had an effect on the move from AD&D 2nd ed. and it's complexities to 3.x.

Later accretions got silly (especially the LARPS), and like most games they started putting out supplements willy-nilly (the Book of Nod? Really?) and the game started to attract some unhealthy types--probably no more than any other game, but somehow they were more 'in your face'. Even so, Vampire, Mage and Werewolf are still some of my favorite games (though by the time I got to grad school I preferred Mage due to its lack of angst).

yakface wrote:The other problem is that after the game got bought out they started releasing a ton of new cards (like all CCGs do) and soon my thousands of cards were severly underpowered compared to the stuff.

Actually, Yak, as someone who's been involved in playtesting with Shadowfist for the last 6 years, I can say that while there are a lot of new cards that are better, there's still a bunch of the old cards are still considered to be close to broken. You still see a good amount of cards from Standard, Netherworld, and Flashpoint in tournament winning decks. As one of the designers I used to play with commonly would say, "Playtesting confirms that Shadowy Mentor still does not suck."

Death By Monkeys wrote:

yakface wrote:The other problem is that after the game got bought out they started releasing a ton of new cards (like all CCGs do) and soon my thousands of cards were severly underpowered compared to the stuff.

Actually, Yak, as someone who's been involved in playtesting with Shadowfist for the last 6 years, I can say that while there are a lot of new cards that are better, there's still a bunch of the old cards are still considered to be close to broken. You still see a good amount of cards from Standard, Netherworld, and Flashpoint in tournament winning decks. As one of the designers I used to play with commonly would say, "Playtesting confirms that Shadowy Mentor still does not suck."

Wait, this is still an "in production" system with an active following and tournaments? I thought it died out, where have I been....Last cards I got were from Flashpoint...

Fango wrote:
Wait, this is still an "in production" system with an active following and tournaments? I thought it died out, where have I been....Last cards I got were from Flashpoint...

Man, you are waaaay out of it!

Check out the wikipedia page to see a history of all the expansions since Flashpoint (the last Daedalus expansion). There have been *quite* a few.


Shadowfist is now owned an published by "Shadowfist Games" after being published by "Z-Man Games" who bought it off of Daedalus.

The Shadowfist site is still going strong too.

Death By Monkeys wrote:
Actually, Yak, as someone who's been involved in playtesting with Shadowfist for the last 6 years, I can say that while there are a lot of new cards that are better, there's still a bunch of the old cards are still considered to be close to broken. You still see a good amount of cards from Standard, Netherworld, and Flashpoint in tournament winning decks. As one of the designers I used to play with commonly would say, "Playtesting confirms that Shadowy Mentor still does not suck."

While you're right that individual old cards are still very viable in many cases, when trying to design a deck a lot of the new cards are needed to create the good combos and counters you need to play against the rest of the new cards.

The problem is finding just those new cards you need to 'update' your old decks can be a real pain, and playing with an old deck (in my experience) just left me feeling like I was trying to win a gunfight with a knife.