Category Archives: Criticism

Winter Book Shelf – The Earl of Brass

Leave a reply

Book cover for the Earl of Brass; image from the internet.

Title: The Earl of Brass

Author: Kara Jorgensen

Tags: Clockwork, Adult, Fantasy

Reflections:

I suppose my first impressions were that the book was fine. There was nothing overtly offensive about the story or the writing. But that was a lazy anwer and the more I reflected, the more dissatisfied I became.

Our lead male, Eilian Sorrell is an exceedingly flat character. A moral snob when it suits him and selfish, moody brat the rest of the time. When we are first introduced to the next earl, he is standing on the deck of an airship bemoaning his wealthy status. How fate be so cruel as to saddle him with wealth and status? Oh, the tragedy of it all…

Only the unthinkable happens and the airship goes down in flames and destruction. Our melancholy hero is anything but heroic in these moments as he pushes his way past screaming mothers and dying passengers. Eilian failed to garner my sympathy when he is one of very few individuals to survive this terrible incident then spends the rest of the book feeling sorry for himself. For you see, Eilian lost his arm – though not his life. And this makes him somewhat of an outsider in his old social circles. Mostly he whines about his sad state of existence while completely ignoring how lucky he is to be alive.

Our lady heroine, Hadley Fenice, has all the disadvantages of dead parents and brother, low income and female gender paired with sharp wit and mechanical genius. While I am attracted to the cross-dressing aspects of Hadley’s adventure, the fact is she plays such a backseat role. Partly because her marvelous mechanicals serve very little purpose in the overall plot.

This brings me to the two biggest complaints I have for the story: the choice of setting and the obviousness of the message.

The author chose to set her story in an a clockwork Victorian England. But then spends the rest of the book pointing out how terrible this time was for … practically everybody. It was a time of rampant racism, sexism and classism. (and probably even more -isms) So, why bother when you are going to just complain about how it is not fair for women, or any person belonging to another culture? And why is this message delivered in such a ham-fisted manner?

The mystical people of utopian society found in the desert, where an odd inclusion and seemed to be placed only to prove how backwards Victorian England was. But really, don’t we already know that Victorian ideals are anything but ideal?

Also, why build the world’s most complex mechanical prosthetic when really the story veres off to some random treasure hunting tangent? It seemed that the clockwork window-dressings were forced upon the world. While mostly selfish main characters tried to feel better about themselves by professing the ideas of equality.

I cannot complete fault the message. Equality is important, but there are far better ways of expressing the idea – such as creating a functioning world where equality exists. This book was nearly preachy in its message, bland in its characters, and confusing in its world design. So, now that I have finally written my book review, I will give it a conservative 2.5 / 5. Hopefully the author will mature in her writing and create more impactful writing for I think they have potential.

Raiders of the Lost Acropolis

Leave a reply

So for Christmas, I was generously gifted a lovely two player game called Akrotiri. I’m a little hard pressed for two player board games and given that Kait’s really the only one willing to play with me, it’s been a boon to get some new games in my collection to vary our options. Course this has come with the uncomfortable realization that my sister tends to beat me at head-to-head games. She was dominating in the two player Agricola version called All Creatures Big and Small. Then she got Caverna Cave vs Cave which she’s been sneaking out last minute successes each time we open it. Now we’ve got Akrotiri though at least I’ve managed to secure a few victories so far.

However, since those other board games aren’t mine, I haven’t done a review on them. Akrotiri is, so I got to share my thoughts today on what it’s like.

First off, I kind of like it. The game is quite different from the others that I’ve played. It’s not a worker placement, which is the primary source of competition in the 2 player Agricola and Caverna. Those games are primarily about trying to optimise your farm or cave build while potentially taking important actions from your opponent so they’re less optimal. While Akrotiri isn’t particularly aggressive in its mechanics, I do feel there’s a bit more back and forth play with it than the others which lean pretty heavily on being hands off of your opponents actions.

Accessed from https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HkH0yS-ttmk/V02KZOl92II/AAAAAAAANF0/D_KU7AhE1uYV90p8bbMyMJQ6SF3Q3BC8ACLcB/s1600/pic1917399_md.png

Akrotiri is designed by Jay Cormier and Sen-Foong Lim. It is published by Z-man Games and rights belong somewhere amongst them all.

For one, Akrotiri is played in a single space. Players don’t have their own little cave to putter away on. You’re slowly building the map of Akrotiri with each turn, creating an expanding island infested Aegean with strict trade routes that your boats can sail. As such, there’s two ways you can interfere with your opponents movement. One, you can block docks by parking on them in your own turn, denying your enemy access unless they happen to be holding a tile that they can use to open up a new space. Second, you can redirect incomplete trade routes to other islands with your tile placements. You always get to place a tile before you take your little trade vessel around the sea, however, so you’re not going to get locked away unless you really outplay yourself.

But what exactly are we trying to do in Akrotiri. This game does rely on accumulating more points than your opponent and you accomplish this by funding expeditions to unearth lost temples on the tiny islands dotting your tile build sea. But before your little venture in tomb raiding can commence, you need to first find where your temples are buried. This involves drawing map cards which will give you requirements to fulfil for you to place your temple. Each map simply lists the number of element tiles needed in each cardinal direction that must be satisfied with your temple placement. Since each tile has a single element on it, this puts pressure on your tile placement to not just block your opponent but to fulfil your map conditions so you can progress through your expeditions. The game ends once one player has successfully unearthed six temples but depending on the type of map, your temples are worth different amount of points.

It sounds confusing but once you start playing, you find the rules themselves are pretty straightforward. For example, I might have an easy map that requires I have two fire tiles to the right of my temple, one tree south of it and a water tile to the north. I can build my temple on any non-excavated island so long as one of the quadrants of that tile meets these criteria. You can even use that tile’s own element assuming it falls in the right direction. Course, just because the rules are easy doesn’t mean that the game is.

As you place your temples, you are rewarded with extra abilities. Most of these are giving you additional actions during your turn but you also get to draw more goal cards as you progress. These cards are hidden from your opponent and let you score additional points for fulfilling additional requirements for your temple placements. They’re things like building a temple on an island with a tree element or gain a point for each tile used to build that island. If you’re lucky or sly you can really accumulate a lot of points with these bonus goals.

And this is where one of my major complaints with Akrotiri arises. Our games have been entirely determined by these goal cards however its entirely random how you get them. You draw two cards from the deck and pick one to keep and one to discard. So it’s possible your opponent can just draw into a winning card as their final goal and you couldn’t do anything about it. Alternatively, you might just draw nothing but dead goals that means you’re playing at a severe disadvantage in the game. So far we’ve found that the goals of building temples a certain number of portages away from the central island to be really bad because their point value is pretty minor considering that your opponent can fairly easily disrupt these requirements by laying tiles to make them directly connected.

Thus, a lot of the strategy my sister and I have discovered is trying to determine which goals they have and attempting to block them. By the end of the game you will know what they have but this element requires memorizing twelve different scoring goals. Which mostly means we spend a lot of the game looking at the back of the rulebook. I like this element of deducing what your opponent is doing, I’m just less of a fan of so much chance determining who will win.

There is an additional layer of strategy in that you need money to fund these expeditions for the lost temples. Money is accrued through the collection of resources from freshly placed tiles. These resources correspond with the element of the tile. So placing a fire tile requires that you put one fire resource on its quadrant. You also have your choice of another resource to place anywhere else on that tile. And the value of resources increases with each cube removed from the market and scattered across the map. In this way, it’s advantageous to double up on the resource shared with the tile, assuming you can gathered both of them and don’t leave the extra lying around for your opponent to grab.

As you can see, the different tactical considerations increase as the map expands. If you’re placing tiles to stop certain islands from meeting your opponent’s hidden goals, you may be leaving them easy to collect resources to fund their expeditions. If you’re trying to lay tiles to meet the requirements of your maps then you may be leaving your opponent to fully gather in another direction or fulfil their hidden agendas.

Then there’s the question of what kind of temples you pursue. The maps for finding their locations come in three different difficulties: easy, medium and hard. The points increase for each type of map but so does the cost of purchasing them. Hard maps cost nine gold to purchase, cost gold to fund the expedition and have harder requirements to place them. However, they’re also worth seven points in the end. If you manage to place that temple to meet one or more of your agendas, you can get a temple that’s worth more than ten points alone. Unfortunately, the longer it takes for you to place your temples, the more time your opponent has to find theirs. If you’re not fast enough, your opponent can unearth a bunch of smaller temples but close the game out while you have lost points for not excavating your last ones.

It’s a delicate balance of pushing for the higher valued maps while also placing pressure on your opponent to make less ideal decisions to keep up. And, of course, if you can figure out where an opponent is trying to build you can swoop in and claim that island for your own excavation if you happen to have a map that fulfils that requirement. It’s not simply of getting the biggest, most expensive maps.

However, since so much of the game is reliant on map chicanery, my other big complaint with the game is that there’s not a lot to do in the first couple of turns. You don’t even get to place a helpful tile if you’re second player. The game setup requires both players place one tile before the first player takes their turn. So, as second player, you don’t want to place yours so the enemy can gather your resources. Neither Kait nor I have really discovered a good use of that first turn and it’s very easy to basically just pass it without doing anything. So while I like the dynamics of creating the map and the strategy involved, I would have like something more interesting to do at the beginning.

Akrotiri does have an interesting pace, however. The start of the game is a bit slow as you’re low on funds, tiles to meet temple requirements and resources to collect. You’re left looking for any action to take rather than good actions. However, things ramp up very quickly as you start unearthing temples and start getting more and more actions per turn. By the final two temples, you have six actions to take and between portages, resource gathering and excavations, it’s very easy to lose track of how many actions you’ve done or what you were trying to accomplish. It’s not uncommon for your opponent to suddenly excavate two surprise temples in one round and end the game while you’re still plotting how to orient the tile you’ve just picked up!

Overall, I really enjoy Akrotiri. It’s really different from the other two player games that I’ve played. It’s a little on the long side, however. Cave vs Cave feels like a faster experience especially since a lot of our time is spend mentally rotating map tiles and trying to figure out how many actions it takes to navigate a trade route. But outside of the goal cards, it’s a pretty strategy heavy game. The randomization of tile and map draws aren’t too bad since you have some control over them, whether that be through purchasing more maps or spending an action to call for a specific element tile.

Now it’s just a matter of scrapping a few more victories from my sister’s slumming strategy of only unearthing cheap but easy temples to finish the game before I can found my glorious places of worship!

A Tale of Madness and Mythos

Leave a reply

Well something magical happened over the holidays. My family and I were able to find enough time to sit down and work through a new little game called Mythos Tales.

Course, this game isn’t really new. I believe in released in 2016. What’s more, it was released in the same genre as another game I’ve discussed at length on this blog: Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective. In fact, the game is essentially Consulting Detective but instead of investigating the twisted streets of London you are hunting down the insane footsteps of cultists on the fictional streets of Arkham. All the familiar trappings of Consulting Detective have returned but this isn’t simply a reskinning in Lovecraftian lore. Mythos Tales takes several bold strides to separate itself from the genre’s founder. Some of these changes work. Some of them don’t.

The game is shorter than Consulting Detective. Only eight mysteries await in the tentacle covered box. Nine if you have the bonus kickstarter mystery called The Faceless Expedition. It does, however, contain a map of Arkham, a directory, a collection of newspapers and the casebook. There are, however, a few additional elements.

Accessed from https://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic2820384.jpg

Mythos Tales belongs to Hal Eccles, 8th Summit and some other people while taking heavy inspiration from Lovecraft and the Cthulhu Mythos.

Prime among them is the time tracker. Mythos Tales takes a curious approach to try and address the major shortcoming of Consulting Detective. Cases have a time limit and each location you seek will draw you towards an inevitable conclusion to your investigations. These vary depending on the case presented but you generally have between four and six days to get to the root of whatever evil is currently besieging the little Massachusetts town known for its plague of eldritch horrors and despicable witches. Each day is further broken down into morning, afternoon and evening.

There is also a small deck of cards called Requirements. Both the time tracker and requirement cards feature in all the cases and represent the biggest shift in gameplay. My feelings on these two important elements kind of tie into my overall feelings of the whole experience. Sometimes they work. Often times they don’t. I like the experimentation even if I’m not tickled with the overall results.

Let’s start with the good. Requirement cards are my jam. I had some issue with Consulting Detective, especially in the West End Case Files, where the mysteries were getting a bit convoluted due to the nature of the game’s setup. Since the scenario writer is unable to know the exact sequence players will investigate locations, they often write each location on a nebulous expectation that it’s the first place you’ve visited in the case. This means if you happen to, say, find some mysterious white powder at the crime scene, going to the forensic pathologist may or may not actually work out depending on the mood of the writer. The pathologist may be preemptively analyzing the white powder which, if you happen to visit him before the crime scene can be baffling when he’s discussing details of the case you haven’t uncovered yet but treating you as if you have. On the other hand, the scenario writer may just have the pathologist never say a word about any white powder and you’re meant to use Sherlock Holmes’ alien space brain to predict that you’re supposed to visit the taxidermist about it because obviously that’s where you take strange white dirt.

Mythos Tales sidesteps this issue. During the course of the investigation, you’ll come across people who will give you a generic greeting and information for your first visit but the end of their section might contain further instruction for the reader. Generally this reads as, “If you possess Requirement Card 1, proceed to supplementary encounters on page 42 and read encounter 3.” This effectively allows you to follow-up on clues and discoveries without having to worry about the order players travel to locations. The only downside, and it’s pretty minor, is that if you visit the pathologist and don’t have the request requirement card, you know there exists something out there that he can shed further light on. However, this bit of meta knowledge isn’t necessarily helpful. Oftentimes these supplementary encounters aren’t always fruitful and this can be a gameplay trap due to nibbling away at your time tracker.

Which brings me directly to that new mechanic.

I’m less enthused about the time tracker. I understand why it exists. It gives a general idea of the complexity of the case Armitage, your Sherlock Holmes replacement with significantly less character, will inform you of the approximate number of steps you’ll need to solve the case before setting out on it. There is a hard limit, so you can’t somehow get wrapped up in sideplots so much that you end up running the additional step penalty to the point of not even wanting to finish the adventure. It’s a way to ensure that players don’t try and read every entry in the game. They literally cannot since the case’s conclusion comes at the time tracker’s conclusion regardless of their progress.

Unfortunately, I don’t feel the time tracker is as smoothly integrated as the requirement cards. Both will shape player actions in ‘unnatural’ ways but the time tracker is more intrusive. The requirement cards simply make players want to find whatever card they’re missing in order to come back to the location it was needed at to learn what they couldn’t access. It can sometimes feel like you’re playing “Where is card 6?” instead of trying to logically follow the case (and trying to guess what the card would even represent based on where it was needed). The time tracker, however, puts unnecessary pressure on the player. Oh, you haven’t solved the case yet and you have three more steps to go? You’ll probably start lashing out erratically trying to find some magical location that will allow you to stumble into the solution instead of properly following up your leads. Even worse, the game tries to incorporate the time into several of the cases. Some locations can’t be accessed except at certain times of the day or on certain dates. If you arrive early then you’ll feel the siren song of curiosity drawing you back on the date you should have visited even if you had no good reason to do so outside of the directions given in the location’s entry.

Even worse, however, is the fact that the time tracker double punishes missteps in the adventure. Not only are you evaluated on the amount of time that you spend on the case (and receive point penalties at the end for going longer than Armitage much in the same way you are with Sherlock) but each false lead also eats into your allotted time for the case and could simply run you off the clock before you can properly solve it. So, you lose a point for going to the wrong location for the point tally and you lose the time that would be needed to follow the proper path to the conclusion. And woe betide you if you need to visit a location at night but the case concludes in the afternoon and you only learned of this requirement after your final nighttime step!

I liked that the game tries to make a day/night cycle more important to gameplay and an additional consideration of when you want to visit certain locations. But trying to wiggle your investigation around these time restrictions especially given the free form nature you learn about them is far too fussy and punitive to the player. For me, the few cases we failed often hinged on the fact we skipped a location we learned about early on and never went back to it because we felt we wouldn’t have enough time to track down any leads it would dovetail into as our time tracker was nearly filled.

Perhaps the best use of the time tracker was as a way to adjust the difficulty of consecutive missions. If you scored poorly on a mission, then next case you investigated often had a small handicap afforded to you to make it a little easier. This would be either reducing the number of locations you were penalized for visiting by one, allowing you an extra time slot for visiting locations or giving you a free requirement card for the case. On the flip side, if you were proving to be far more competent than even Armitage, you would be handicapped by having less time on the next case by starting with your time tracker advanced one space.

There were also several tokens that came with the time tracker that were never used which I thought was a bit weird.

These were the biggest changes to the game. However, there were several smaller ones that I thought were a bit interesting. A lot of the cases had unique game elements strictly for that case – explained before you started out on them, of course. In one you had to deal with poison. Another you could give chase to a suspect after certain encounters. Perhaps the most interesting one was a mystery that focused on passing into the dreams of the town’s inhabitants and exploring their dream version of Arkham. All the relevant locations in that mystery had a corresponding dream version that you could visit and had drastically different encounters associated with them. It’s almost a shame these elements didn’t come up in later cases though I can understand that the additional complexity would simply be too much to handle from a scenario creation standpoint.

Finally, and this isn’t a new mechanic or anything, Mythos Tales does a far better job of outlining what exactly you’re expected to do with each mystery. One of my long standing complaints with Sherlock is you have no idea what you’re going to be asked at the end and, since Sherlock sets the questions, you’re playing from a massively disadvantaged position. Mythos Tales makes this far more fair. First, Armitage does a very good job of making explicit what you’re supposed to do. At the end of each case introduction, he’ll tell you exactly what he expects for you to solve. If a painting were missing, his closing remarks would likely be directing you to identify who the thief was, where the painting went and why they stole it. That way you know you don’t need to waste any time worrying about how the theft was performed since it isn’t a primary concern for Armitage.

Second, Armitage is explicitly incapable of answering all the questions at they end. They’re not based on his investigation but based on the overall mystery itself. My estimation is that Armitage can answer about seventy percent of the questions but there are a fair number of points to accumulate for going off his beaten track and learning elements that he won’t know. Course, the danger in trying to strategize around this hole in Armitage’s method is that you don’t know what these questions are until the end and the primary questions always award the most points. So it’s important to listen to wise, grumbling Armitage and focus on his directions.

Now that we’ve covered the good and interesting aspects, let’s dig into the bad.

The biggest problem with Mythos Tales is actually the biggest problem facing Consulting Detective: bad writing. Mythos Tales has about four cases that are solid from my experience. Unfortunately it has three that are pretty bad with one of them literally unplayable because of bad writing. And the problems in Mythos Tales are possibly more egregious than Consulting Detective. Forewarning, you can’t solve the sixth case. Straight up, there is no path through the mystery that lets you answer the questions posed. Armitage’s path makes no sense in that he literally can’t follow the locations provided at the end because he doesn’t gain the requirement cards needed for them by where he goes. Furthermore, one requirement card that’s necessary for the solution isn’t even available anywhere in the entire case! It’s a shocking case of everything going horribly wrong on a production side that I’m surprised at least some of its errors weren’t discovered before print. Ignoring case six, however, there are others with missing locations in the directory, spelling errors on names so you can’t find them, locations on the map with the same number or no number so you don’t know where some places are and other minor errors that can have a pretty big impact on the case depending on their importance or perceived importance.

These careless errors stand out in starker contrast since the rest of the game is so careful otherwise. At least you come to expect bullshit from Sherlock that when it comes up again, you aren’t taken unaware. But Mythos Tales has a solid first couple of cases before the quality of the writing takes a noticeable drop. So if you do decide to play Mythos Tales, it’s unfortunate but you need to search through the internet for errata to make some cases playable.

And I’m just going to say it: the newspapers were dead useless in this game. They felt like they were tacked on because Consulting Detective had them. I think, once again, the time tracker is partly at fault since you can’t have obtuse clues hidden in papers since players are so pressed for time they’ll never investigate longshot possibilities in the print. So it simply isn’t feasible to build cases around using them.

As for the difficulty, I found that overall Mythos Tales was a lot easier than Consulting Detective. Our results support my impressions too. I think we only failed two cases and one of them was the aforementioned impossible to solve case. Two or three we scored within Armitage’s expected window (even including the hilarious bonus mission where we got ‘Cthulhu devoured’). The rest we crushed Armitage in. Granted, it sometimes felt like we cheated in those and this is due to a unique issue with Mythos Tales. I, personally, am a fan of Lovecraft’s work having read a lot of it over the years. As such, I was able to pick up on the Lovecraftian elements and references pretty quickly. Other players wouldn’t. So they may need to hit up more locations trying to understand the relevance of Dagon references whereas I knew immediately what the writers were implying and the implications it had on the case. Oftentimes this meant I would be able to get us some free points in the end by answering some minor questions without needing to resort steps or time in researching them.

But despite this unique weakness of the game, I felt that the cases were pretty straightforward anyway. I’m not sure if this is a necessity due to the constraints enforced by the time tracker (you can’t have surprise twists if people are trying to manage their incredibly limited time) or by the fact that all the mysteries rely on some supernatural element (you can’t use deduction on things that are, inherently, illogical). Overall, most cases didn’t really use the supernatural element all that well, either. For most it was window dressing, though the several cases that executed their mystical elements well were certainly highlight cases of the box.

I’d say I liked Mythos Tales more than Consulting Detective and I know my family greatly appreciated the fairer cases even if they could have done without all the tentacle dressings. Mythos Tales isn’t really a refinement of the genre but it does add its own twists and elements that make it a worthwhile foray to explore. I’m not certain I’d jump at a sequel partly due to the quality of the later cases. If one were realized, I’d certainly wait on others impressions before looking into it. However, more than anything, I think Mythos Tales demonstrates that the game systems of Consulting Detective are flexible enough that they can be applied more broadly and that the systems themselves are still pretty fun even without major changes to them.

Until next time, happy hunting detectives.

Winter Book Shelf – Coiled

Leave a reply

I know it is has been a long time since I posted a book review. The end of last year (October – December) was a little chaotic for and I simply had no time for reading. However, the New Year has brought a few days of binge reading. Now it is a matter of recording my thoughts about what I have read to share with you. Don’t worry, these will be very short as work is starting to pick up again.

The first book from my Winter Book Shelf Reading List up for review is Coiled.

Book cover for Coiled by H.L. Burke, taken from the internet.

Title: Coiled

Author: H.L. Burke

Tags: Young Adult, Fairy Tale / Myth

Reflections: Coiled was a cute, young adult fairy tale/romantic myth. Set in a world feeling like ancient Rome/Greece, Princess Laidra is cursed. While her sister dominates her Kingdom’s court and parents affection, Laidra is relegated to the shadows. Until the day she is taken as sacrifice for a monstrous serpent. Escaping her captors, Laidra washes ashore of the island guarding another cursed child. Prince Calen is isolated from the world even more than Laidra. But alone in the dark, they can become friends. At least until those tormenting Calen come to finish off the prince.

The book is cute, predictable and decently written. The target audience is younger and while I enjoyed having the time to read, it was not the most gripping of tales. The world is different from traditional medieval fairy tales, so that was a nice change. However, I would have prefered more focus on the character development. Instead the plot focuses on the convoluted relations of one rather dysfunctional family, how parents ruin the lives of their children and demigods are mostly selfish, vindictive jerks.

In the end, my biggest complaint was the seemingly random fetch-quest the main characters are set to solve their problems. And it does solve everything. All their personal problems are dealt with by collecting magic water from the well of life (or something like that). How this action changes the long standing opinions of others is a bit of mystery to me, but the story had to end somehow and in reality interpersonal relations are difficult to resolve.

Overall, this is a competent story that gets points for its less common setting but failed to inspire more than “it was fine” rating from me. I would give it 3.5 stars out of 5.

All Aboard the Hype Train

Leave a reply

Accessed from http://media.socastsrm.com/wordpress/wp-content/blogs.dir/106/files/2017/09/MOTOE-Trailer-release-website.jpg

Murder on the Orient Express, its images and all other legal stuff belongs to Agatha Christie, 20th Century Fox, Kinberg Genre, Scott Free Productions and whoever else that I failed to mention.

So over a month ago Murder on the Orient Express released. I went to see it. I had always wanted to see it. The story is a little famous. Written by Agatha Christie if you didn’t know. Though it’s arguably her most famous story so I’d be surprised if you didn’t know. When I had expressed to my family that I wished to see it, most of them already said they had. Or knew the ending. I was a little surprised because some of them don’t even read mystery novels.

Now, my interest wasn’t based on the star power of the movie (though it does have the always entertaining Kenneth Branagh and a host of other really fantastic actors). It wasn’t even the buzz surrounding the picture. Largely because I was keeping myself divorced from the film having decided to watch it when I heard the title. I wanted to know as little about it as possible. That it was the seminal work of Agatha Christie was enough for me.

And I’m glad that I had.

If you’re like me and know nothing about Murder on the Orient Express, and you have an interest in watching it, then I’d suggest you stop reading now and go take a look. What I can tell you is that the performances are top notch and the filming of it is expertly crafted. As a cinematic piece, it is wholly worth the price of an evening ticket. So close this window now and go check it out! Scoot!

For the rest of us, either those not interest, those that have seen it or both, then I have many thoughts on the film. I suppose the first place to begin is the obvious question: did I like it?

Unfortunately, that question is possibly the hardest. So let’s talk about something else first.

I legitimately thought the acting was outstanding. There isn’t really a poor performance amongst the lot, though if I had to pick the weakest actor from the ensemble then it would go to Tom Bateman as the son of the Orient Express owner. He basically serves as Hercule Poirot’s (Kenneth Branagh) bumbling sidekick with little characterisation beyond degenerate womaniser and zero investment in the turmoil that overtakes his train. Outside of being a busy set of hands at the legendary detective’s side, he just doesn’t do anything interesting with his character or time on screen. Which is a stark contradiction to the rest of the cast who work overdrive in their brief moments before the audience to bring the colourful cast alive.

But Murder on the Orient Express is largely a Branagh affair. Bringing Hercule Poirot alive is a tall task especially since he’s been so defined by David Suchet’s portrayal. You can’t truly mimic other performer’s takes but Branagh never truly revitalises the detective or redefines him. I’m reminded of Heath Ledger’s Joker in Nolan’s movies. That was a transformational performance that changed the public’s perception of the comic book character for years to come. Branagh… isn’t doing the same. He does a fine job but it mostly left me wanting David Suchet to return.

Though I do have to give credit to Branagh for that fantastic moustache.

Of the standout performances, I’d have to give it to Johnny Depp to be honest. Depp has been pretty lacklustre in his years since doing Pirates of the Caribbean and it felt like he was pretty much going to ride out his career coasting on that character. However, though brief, he certainly adds punch and life to Samuel Ratchett. Otherwise, I really liked Olivia Colman as Hildegarde Schmidt – the assistant to regal Judi Dench’s Princess Dragomiroff.

Part of the issue, however, is that there’s such a large cast and so little time to spend with them. And each character has seemingly a lot to say towards the plot that, by the end, it feels like you’re just blasting through most of their connections and issues to come screeching to the end. Having not read the novel, I can see where much time would be spent weaving their various backgrounds and interactions together. In a film that can only cover an agonising portion, however, their time is too brief and the story focuses more on the plot. It feels like the movie would benefit from having a smaller cast just so you could focus on those characters more but one of the problems with Murder on the Orient Express is its devotion to sticking with its source material.

I’m not film buff, however I could really appreciate the technical work done. Trying to keep action high on the cramped quarters of a train can’t be easy, and there were some very clever uses of perspective and angle to both add variety and communicate emotion. I think the moment when I really noticed this technical work was with the discovery of Ratchett’s body. The camera follows Poirot from a top down perspective, curiously removing the audience from the initial facial reaction of the discovers of the grisly scene while also cutting out the grisly scene itself! You only see Branagh’s head as the initial panic over the dead body is addressed and the doctor is brought in to do a very brief examination of the body. It was an intriguing and unexpected use of camera work that brought my attention to an otherwise ignored aspect of film making. Whether that is a good thing or not, I suppose, is more up for debate.

But all this is perhaps extraneous. Given its authenticity, the real question about Murder on the Orient Express’s quality isn’t on its production or execution. Both of those are outstanding. Instead, the movie lives and dies by its story itself. And that’s where I feel things get a lot murkier.

As I mentioned earlier, my whole impetus for watching the movie was its pedigree. Agatha Christie is really the founder of the murder mystery genre. Murder on the Orient Express is one of her famous, if not most famous, stories. And I just simply can’t see why.

It does represent the distillation of her style, however. This is the point in my movie review wherein I recommend a wholly different movie. Have you heard of Murder by Death? Yes? Good. Go watch it. No? Too bad. Go watch it.

Murder by Death is a comedy that lampoons the mystery genre. It specifically targets some very famous but very old authors and works. I really enjoyed the movie on its comedy merits alone. Seeing Murder on the Orient Express has made me appreciate Murder by Death far, far more. Now I know exactly what it’s criticising. And I absolutely agree with the writers and Capone. What they did was bullshit.

But let’s be more concrete. Agatha Christie wrote her mysteries specifically in a manner meant for the reader to be impressed by the detective. The techniques used were not opaque. The detective often had additional information never presented to the reader. Say, like in the Murder on the Orient Express, the knowledge of an earlier incident involving the kidnapping and death of a little girl. Detectives will also often go into a scene and make note of objects or evidence never elucidated to the readership. That way, when the big reveal occurs, the audience is in awe of the deductive prowess and fantastic reasoning of the principle character.

It’s certainly a style that’s run its course. And, for me, it’s definitely a style that I don’t lament fading. There’s a certain dishonesty to it. Like the author doesn’t actually feel confident the detective will come across as observant or intellectual if they don’t purposefully keep their audience in the dark. It’s the idea that if, when presented with the same information, the audience will groan and decry “it’s obviously the butler!” But unlike the audience, the detective is enslaved to literary pacing and story development.

Which is a fair concern. Literary detectives don’t work under the same restraints as real life detectives. And genre savvy readership is plenty apt to be able to parse their favourite writer’s style and method to figure out the perpetrator before the climax of the story. And the last thing you want is your audience groaning over the obvious struggle of your detective to piece together obvious clues and finger the culprit.

Murder on the Orient Express is clearly written to subvert it. It’s hard to not see it less as a story about the characters but more a game between the author and readership. There’s far too many fake-outs and misdirections than I personally like. The story is secondary to the situation as you fight with Agatha Christie, trying to beat her at her own game. And, of course, she’s leaning into the old bag of tricks because her readership would know them by now.

In the end, I don’t like the story because it’s reliant on a history of Agatha Christie’s style and characters in order to achieve it’s amusement. If you’re not really familiar with her, like I am, it’s very easy for the piece to piece moments to make absolutely no sense. And, frankly, they don’t. The characters’ motivations and methods are insanely over-the-top. It’s a mess of over complicated nonsense with no rhyme or reason to occur. At best I can imagine that the whole thing was set up because the culprit was aware that Poirot was onboard and was worried about being discovered. Unfortunately for that hypothesis, Poirot only made it on the train at the very last minute so either the culprit is capable of making insanely detailed plans involving the movements of multiple actors or that this was originally planned in order to baffle… no one?

I mean, seriously, the culprit had the ability to murder the victim in some discreet alleyway in Istanbul then ride a luxury train to Europe where they would never be caught. The whole mystery is intentionally made convoluted solely so Poirot can dazzle and amaze when he reveals who was ultimately behind it. But it’s such a blatant example of showmanship that it lays bare the ugly reality that you’re not watching anything real. This whole exercise is just a mindless excuse to amuse and entertain with nothing else to stimulate your interest.

Sure, in a reductive way this could describe any entertainment but that’s where character arcs and themes step in to give you greater pause to consider the work and its larger relevance. There is no relevance to Murder on the Orient Express save for its fame. In a sense, it’s the Kim Kardashian of murder mysteries. Its meant to be ogled for an hour and a bit but ultimately discarded and forgotten.

Contrast that with Murder by Death which examines the actual underpinnings of a genre and the relationship between author and audience and it’s hard not to think one has more value than the other despite being a shameless spoof.

So did I enjoy Murder on the Orient Express? I enjoyed its production. I enjoyed the contextualization of other work that stemmed from it. But of the mystery itself I can’t honestly say that I did. I’m glad I saw it for its role in history but, more than anything, it makes me question why it played a role in the first place.

Schooled in Magic – Book Review

Leave a reply

Image of the book cover, Schooled in Magic by Christopher Nuttall. Image from the internet.

Good news – I have gained more employment. Bad news – I will have even less time for reading and writing reviews. Thus I anticipate this is going to be my last post for a while.

Schooled in Magic is the first in a fantasy series by Christopher Nuttall. Our female protagonist, Emily, has a tragic sort of life when she is pulled into another world rife with necromancers, danger and magic. When it is discovered she also has sorceress potential, Emily is sent off to the prestigious Whitehall School.

The story is fine, the writing is sufficient and the characters are okay. This I realize is hardly a stellar review. Well, the book lacked that hook to engage my attention and perhaps I was not in the right mood for that style of book.

The plot was not the most interesting and is far from original. When we are introduced to Emily, we learn she leads the most sad of sad lives. She is a tragic high school student with nearly no friends. Teased and bullied by other students and verbally abused by her stepfather, Emily retreats into books. While I too love literature and libraries, I did not need my mother to fail as a parent for me to enjoy them. Emily’s mother not only married an abusive second husband (after the first one vanishes – I bet I can guess where he went!), but she remains in this abusive relationship. And while I recognize people do behave in this manner – it is becoming a bit of trope in the world of fantasy. At least it feels that way to me.

Image of the book cover, Schooled in Magic by Christopher Nuttall. Image from the internet.

Then suddenly, Emily is whisked away to another world where a necromancer plans on sacrificing her life because she is the Child of Destiny (her mother’s name is Destiny). While the book does try to play with this idea – even Emily recognizes she cannot be the person prophesized – the story also falls back to Emily being super special. You’re a Wizard Harry Emily! I suppose I should have known from the title of the book that much of it would revolve around Emily learning magic in a world reminiscent of Harry Potter – if more students died and the magic was a bit meaner. Harry Potter at high school I suppose. Even the teachers are meaner.

I appreciated the rather pragmatic view of the main character who is willing to sell the ideas of our world to this new land (with its more medieval structure). However, it was difficult for the American heroine to sell me on how there is no classism in the US. Yeah, for pointing out how the social structure of the past was bad. Sadly the presentation of such information was not interesting, and it was presented by a character whose home world is far from perfect.

Anyway, for a younger audience, I think this book would be more interesting. And perhaps the series picks up over time. For me it was mediocre, which was a bit sad as I actually paid for this book. But as I mentioned earlier, I may just not have been in the mood for the story. At this point I would give it 3 out of 5 stars. Nothing offensive but nothing noteworthy.

Star Nomad – Book Review

Leave a reply

Despite my personal bias I find myself reading a number of science fiction books of late. Before you get excited, these are not serious, heavy, intense science fiction books exploring quantum metaphysics the existential relationship between artificial intelligence and souls. These are light, space-opera type books packed with space pirates, laser battles and a hint of romance. Oh, and occasionally an alien – but not always.

Book cover for Star Nomad, book one in the Fallen Empire series. Image from the internet.

Star Nomad is the first of the novel in Lindsay Buroker’s Fallen Empire series. It doesn’t have any aliens. It does have space pirates!

Our daring protagonist is a survivor of the recent war between Empire and rebel Alliance. She is determined to return home and reclaim her daughter and the first step in accomplishing this goal will be acquiring a ship – a freighter, not a warship. In the wake of all great space adventures our heroine does not have a huge arsenal at her disposal. Rather the odds are stacked heavily against her. She is joined however by a colourful caste of crew and passengers which include the hated cyborg, loyal engineer, security office running from the mafia, passenger with a love of narcotics and a monk with some dubious morals.

This is a book heavy in the tradition of Star Wars and Firefly – two science fiction universes I love. From Star Wars we have the existence of space magic. This comes in the form of the mystic Starseers and probably my least favourite aspect of the work so far.

While the opening of Star Nomad struck me heavily with its familiarity to Firefly. My worries that I was destined to read a pale version of the TV cult classic disappeared as the author’s own strong voice came through. This is not a space-western. The similarities in the crew are superficial at best. There is depth to these characters that makes for great reading.

Book cover for Honor’s Flight, book 2 in the Fallen Empire series. Image from the internet.

However, one of the things that I am really starting to enjoy are the different perspectives of interstellar governance. The war between the Empire and the Alliance is over at the start of the first story. The characters are now dealing with the consequences of war and the emergence of a new ruling body. With characters coming from both sides of the conflict we are able to glimpse some of the problems inherent in rebuilding afterwards.

While I might be spoiling somethings, I really found the discussion over the oppression of the Empire being compared to the current lawlessness under Alliance leadership. Is it really repressive that civilians are denied access to weapons? Or was the order and safety provided by those rules a worthwhile trade off. The presentation of this debate has been interesting to follow – especially as it is packaged in this fun, futuristic setting!

So far, I am loving this series. Star Nomad achieves the 5 out of 5 star rating. It has a solid plot, a caste of interesting characters and successful use of banter. I like this book and recommend it to fans of the lighter aspects of science fiction.

We Can Stop Digging, Watson

1 Reply

Awhile ago, I reviewed Sherlock Holmes: Consulting Detective. Well, if you hadn’t enough of my complaining about the original game, my family and I have finally gotten through the expansion Jack the Ripper and West End Adventures.

If you want a short, sweet summary of the experience: it’s worse than the first. Which is quite a feat considering how sour my family was towards the original game.

Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective: Jack the Ripper & West End Adventures is the product of Asmodee and a bunch of others that aren’t me.

But if you haven’t read my prior review and you want more than “it sucked” then buckle up because I have a lot of thoughts about the experience.

First, a quick rundown of what Sherlock Holmes: Consulting Detective is. The game is quite different from your normal tabletop games. This is an (ostensibly) detective game about solving a crime by listening to descriptions or testimonies at various places and by a revolving cast of characters. The idea is pretty neat and certainly something that would be up my mystery obsessed family’s alley. The conceit is that you’re a member of Holmes’ Baker Street Irregulars. These rapscallion street urchins are known for running tasks for Holmes but in the game you’re promoted to assistant consulting detectives and are given the same premise to the mystery as Holmes before being set loose into the streets of London to come up with your own explanation for how and why the crime took place.

And, more often than not, you’ll come to a better conclusion than Holmes. But more about that later.

The only tools you have available to solve the case is a map of London with various locations demarcated with a number, a directory, a list of Sherlock Holmes’ famous allies, the newspaper for the day and the case book which contains the meat of the adventure. After listening to the introduction of your case, you will look up locations on the map or by searching the directory for the address of potential suspects then consult the corresponding number in the case book. In this way you simulate the experience of crossing the busy streets of the Victorian Empire’s capital. And when you start running into some frustrating dead ends in your investigation, you can crack open the papers to get some additional clues to get you back on track.

Now, the game aspect of Consulting Detective is that you’re ostensibly in a competition with Holmes trying to solve the mystery before he does. And this aspect is what brings the whole experience crashing down on a fundamental level. But I’ll be addressing this portion of the game later since it’s an inherent problem in the original release that was only exacerbated with the expansion.

The expansion itself, however, is distinctly split into two experiences. The first four cases concern the infamous Jack the Ripper case and is the first instance of a crossover between Sir Conan Doyle’s fictitious character and a real world event. The latter section of the case is six additional cases set in the same style as the original game. It’s these adventures I’ll address first.

When comparing the West End Adventure to the original Consulting Detective collection, all three of us were grossly disappointed with the offerings. The writing is still the largest stumbling block but, more than anything, I found that these cases were simply far less inspiring than the original ten cases. We basically solved all of them within three locations in the book and they really didn’t feel as developed as the originals. Since I was the sole keeper of the case book, I also happened to notice that all of them were on the thinner end of the spectrum with all six approximately the same length as The Munitions Magnate and about as interesting. The Munitions Magnate I felt was a pretty good case solely because it worked as an excellent introduction to the game and its mechanics. The case itself is pretty dry and West End Adventures doesn’t really find any way to sprinkle some excitement into the mix.

In fact, outside of Dr. Goldfire and the Murder of Sherlock Holmes, I’m having a hard time remembering them despite having played them only last week. And of those two, I’d say only the Murder of Sherlock Holmes is interesting. I just remember Dr. Goldfire because it sounded like a James Bond villain.

Give me a sec as I look them up…

Jeez, even looking up their names I don’t even remember what A Simple Case of Murder was about. Oh, digging further I was confusing Savage Club with A Simple Case.

And that’s exactly the issue with this expansion. The only reason that The Murder of Sherlock Holmes stands out is because of its use of a theatre as a location for interviewing multiple witnesses/suspects. It felt like a missed opportunity since you’re given so much information concerning the theatre layout and suspect locations when all that information really isn’t relevant.

Contrasting these cases with the originals and there differences between their quality is quite stark. The Mystified Murderess (despite it being a written mess) at least had a rather unique concept. The Lionized Lions was my favourite simply for its cute setup. The Cryptic Corpse really hit a traditional Sherlock Holmes vibe and the details of The Pilfered Paintings were pretty amusing. Even with the annoyances of The Banker’s Quietus, The Mummy’s Curse and The Solicitous Solicitor, I’d say we found them at least okay. I’d say the only one we truly hated was the Thames Murders. And with those cases part of our frustration was trying to play the game “by design.”

West End Adventures, however, are all feel pretty much the same. There’s also the unfortunate issue that they’re pretty predictable too. Several start without an actual murder but you know you’re going to come across one pretty early on regardless. The lack of depth in these cases even reflects in Sherlock’s awful solutions. He resolves all of them within four or five clues because there’s really just not that much going on with them.

They’re bad and had the original release been on the level of West End Adventures, I can’t imagine the game ever being recommended.

The Jack the Ripper files, however, are a bit interesting. For one, there designers did some research into enacting some measure of authenticity so the nature of the cases is starkly different from the rest of the Consulting Detective cases. You’re going to be reading through gritty details and unreliable witnesses and testimonies. Here, the red herrings don’t feel like cheating because there’s a much stronger feeling of authenticity to its presentation. These four are certainly the strongest of the cases and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that this is due to the writers being constrained to actually following a real life case and thus don’t have some absolutely idiotic events occur.

Granted, Sherlock Holmes’ solution is completely asinine but that should be expected from anything carrying the Consulting Detective name.

But there’s some extra details that make the Ripper files stand head and shoulders above the rest. First, there’s a distinct change in the nature of playing the game. You’re provided far more visual aids in those four cases and are expected to pull out details and clues from those aids. It really helps to clear up some of the ambiguity which arose from the purely written accounts that can lead to contradictions in the rest of the cases. It also makes the newspapers a lot more interesting to read.

However, there’s a second element unique to the Ripper files that really needed to be expanded to the whole of Consulting Detective. You have the ability to follow up individuals about specific clues or questions!

Granted, due to the nature of the game, these follow up questions are pretty restricted but it’s a fantastic addition that really makes the game a better experience. Before the Ripper files, if you came across an important clue you had no ability to find further information about it. Say, after some detective work, you came across the name of a likely suspect there really wasn’t any way to ask the police about that suspect since the designers couldn’t know if you were visiting the police before or after learning of said suspect. With the Ripper files, however, there are many passages that come with some cryptic directions if you’re arriving at a location for a specific reason. Say, for example, you learn about a shady individual named Derek the Dirk who was seen in the area of one of the murdered women. When you go to speak to Inspector Lestrade, you will still get his generic chest puffing about how you ruffians shouldn’t be in his precinct. But at the bottom of the passage you might be rewarded with a little bold text reading, “If you are looking for information concerning Derek the Dirk then go to the location in this district corresponding with the number of the location you last heard about Derek the Dirk.”

Granted, if you’ve come to Lestrade before hearing about Derek, then you might be more vigilante about this missing Derek character from your investigation. However, after going through the casebook after the investigation, I found that there were some red herrings that you could investigate as well which adds that necessary element of ambiguity where you can’t know if following the lead on Derek the Dirk is a waste of time or not. And having a more responsive investigation is certainly worth the trade-off.

Course, none of this addressed Consulting Detectives true issue. It’s scoring system is a mess. The West End Adventures are even more of a mess than the originals. My mom kept saying that Sherlock cheats and it wasn’t until this set of cases that I finally came around to her point of view.

First, for Jack the Ripper and West End Adventures, we decided to play the game the way everyone recommends: ignore the scoring. But in doing so, I only came to see how incredibly arbitrary and awful the scoring really is.

Part of the problem is inconsistency. There were two cases where Sherlock admonished Wiggins for attempting to come up with a motive for the crimes. The very next case one of the primary questions asked at the end was about the culprit’s motive. Consulting Detective is constantly doing these contradictions. It sets up a sense of expectation in one case and in the very next it will break all the rules it had established. Sometimes the method a crime was committed is incredibly important. Sometimes, it doesn’t matter how an impenetrable safe is broken into with a dozen witnesses in the area and no explanation given at the end for how it was compromised by the guilty parties. Sherlock cheats in this manner by dictating what and when something will be important and, without providing the questions ahead of time, there’s simply no way for the player to know what incongruities are due to the game’s design or simply bad writing. In one case, we had followed Holmes’ steps exactly but kept hunting down clues because we erroneously assumed we had to unmask the location or true identity of the criminal because literally every other case until that point expected those answers. And this time Holmes considered it unimportant… simply because.

I’ve put a lot of thought into the game aspect of Consulting Detective because it is so bad that it detracts from the experience. And I’m not certain there’s a satisfactory answer beyond simply getting better designers and writers. What is clear is that Consulting Detective does a horrendous job of ultimately making clear what you’re supposed to actually do in the game. And this is inexcusable considering they’ve published twenty cases and have had plenty of time to figure out a good method of doing so.

But I’m going to share my idea for a better way.

First, during the introduction of a case, the writers should drop most of the extraneous fluff and spend more time actually making clear what exactly the players are tasked to do. To use an example of what not to do, the Savage Club case is too vague. You leave understanding that there’s some sort of Bohemian Scandal setup for the adventure. You’re contact by a princely individual who wants you to address some embarrassing situation before it can get out. But the Savage Club doesn’t make clear what you need to do to stop that embarrassment. Do you need to reclaim the necklace? Do you need to prove the necklace was stolen? Do you need to retrieve the letters? Do you need to prove the letters were stolen and not intended for their current owner?

Accessed from http://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/content/ve/sherlock-holmes/images/B2-Art_Spaget_1.jpg

Original Sherlock Holmes art by Sidney Paget

Since there’s no clear indication of what will solve this case, it will naturally lead to players meandering blindly all the while Sherlock knows immediately what needs to be done. Every player should finish the introduction to a case and know exactly what the first two questions in the back of the book are going to be. If this means Sherlock has to turn to the Baker Street Irregulars and literally spell out, “I’m leaving you, Wiggins, to find out who killed our victim and how” then so be it. Then players can properly go to scene and start deducing answers with this directed focus.

Second, if you’re going to have a competition with Sherlock Holmes over solving the case then Sherlock should spend a lot more time engaging with the damn case. That Sherlock solved most of his in four steps and the designers expect you to do the same is asinine. The designers are literally creating a game to not be played. There are so many locations to visit and sub plots to uncover that players are directly encouraged to ignore. It’s bad design. It’s also even worse that Sherlock will make broad proclamations about the case without actually having the evidence to make those claims. This goes contrary to the character and even contradicts a lot of his advice throughout the game. If the designers wanted a detective who made wild assumptions and didn’t bother to “eliminate the impossible” to find the truth. Holmes’ most famous quote is to basically hunt down leads and prove they’re wrong. Yet in the game he never, ever does that. He just magically finds a path that can make sense and doesn’t even examine whether there’s an “improbably but truthful” alternative.

So Sherlock should have some steps to corroborate witness testimony, to ensure his theories are sound and eliminate other possibilities. Sherlock should literally be used to demonstrate to players how to engage with the game and solve the case. No one is bedazzled when Sherlock pulls some nonsense solution especially when it’s trivially easy to go through the locations he did to come to his conclusions.

There should also be some consistency in his allies. It’s also asinine that only three allies are ever actually useful. Why are over half his allies “not in their office” for most of the cases. Why even bother putting them on a list to consult. Players shouldn’t have to guess when an ally is going to be important or not. Basically, what we learned is that Porky and Langdale Pike are the only really important allies to visit and basically you rotate between them for each case. And the fact that one in twenty cases requires you to visit the Carriage Court but there’s literally never anything to gleam from it otherwise is also stupid. Especially if there are no witnesses to at least suggest you should check out the movement of carriages by seeing a suspect climb into one.

Instead, all allies should be useful in some manner. Make most of them like Sherlock which give helpful hints pertaining to the case but aren’t necessary to visit. Make some of them consistently give direction to the sub plots that are bonus questions at the end. I like that Porky often asks you to look into elements pertaining to the case but from a wholly different direction and more of the allies should do that. That way, when you do get to the end, you aren’t completely baffled by some of those bonus questions which can seemingly come out of nowhere.

Finally, there should be far more consistency in how information is presented. It’s frustrating trying to find the right witness who will actually describe what a body looks like, especially when it’s a moment when Wiggins actually looks at the body himself! Anytime a new character is introduced, there should be some measure of important information provided so that witness testimonies for height, hair, accent and build can be easily determined. Also it’s bullshit that you can have someone interact with an individual to such an intimate degree like removing a bullet from them and they can’t even tell you their god damn hair colour!

There shouldn’t be one exact way to solve a case but many different angles that you can approach it. This does mean keeping track of all the minute details but that’s exactly what Sherlock Holmes is about.

The game ultimately should be designed in a fair, engaging and fun way that encourages people to think and analyse the information they’re given. There’s potential here that is absolutely squandered in the shoddy writing and it’s simply inexcusable for a game that requires consistency in information to have witnesses with incorrectly spelt names so you can’t even look them up in the directory until you stumble across the one individual that properly writes their name.

As it stands now, I’d hesitantly recommend the original Consulting Detective. But I would never tell anyone to play Jack the Ripper and West End Adventures. And any recommendation comes with ignoring the rules of the game which leaves me wondering why people would play it in the first place.

Truly, the best way to engage with Sherlock Holmes is to simply read the stories.

The Watchmaker’s Daughter – Book Review

Leave a reply

I read the Watchmaker’s Daughter last week and have been ruminating on a book review since then. I have been having problems as this was a book I neither loved nor hated. It is not dreadfully written nor brilliantly told. Having not sparked a strong reaction one way or the other, in the end all I can really say is that the book was Okay.

Book cover for the Watchmaker’s Daughter. Image from the internet.

The Watchmaker’s Daughter is the first book in the Glass and Steele series by C.J. Archer. It starts, unsurprisingly with the daughter of a recently deceased watchmaker struggling to survive after her fiance dumps her and takes over her father’s business. Set in Victorian England (or something like that), the all important element of magic is alluded to briefly then introduced at the end of the story.

And that, I believe is one of the key reasons I was so lukewarm towards this novel – it felt like an introduction. I understand that this is book one in a series. However, I still want the story to feel complete and the threads left dangling made the story feel far from that. While I understand that authors, particularly of series, need to leave some threads loose to work into the subsequent books, these were rather large concepts. Why does magic exist in this world? Why are so few aware of it? I suppose the staunch defenders will say the book covered these points in the two paragraphs dedicated to magic – it is scary so most magicians were killed and thus the few remaining are hiding. That is an extremely weak response to the problem. There is no feel of magic in a world that is designed to be a real representation of historical times. For this to work you need weave the idea (or fear or love for or …) of magic into the world.

The other aspect that felt completely unresolved was the extremely negative reactions of other watchmakers to our female protagonist. Even India Steele herself comments on how peculiar this behaviour is. The lack of detailed histories, the predictable nature of the plot and the lack of depth to the characters made for a somewhat bland story. The mystery of the characters never felt important. The writing was fine, but there was no spark in style to really capture the reader. Our lead female wavered uncertainly between being a strong independent female – though right no I am struggling to think of an instance when she showed true strength – and the love interest of a romance novel. There was some promise in the secondary characters who at least demonstrated a little diversity, though all were subservient to the alpha male.

To balance out the negatives, I will say I liked the blending of American and British cultures. There were some amusing moments, as half the important characters came from America.

Would I recommend this book? It is difficult to answer. I want to support new voices and writers. And I am sure there are people who would derive much enjoyment from the book. It was, for me, too flat and simplistic a read to put forth effort of recommendation. With that I would give it a 3 out of 5 (or maybe a 3.5 out of 5 – as this time I feel I might be unnecessarily harsh towards the book). It was okay, not great or stellar but not terrible either. You might like it.

Sherlock Fails to Catch Jack the Ripper – Game Review

Leave a reply

Box cover for the boardgame: Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective – Jack the Ripper & West End Adventures. Image from the internet.

Jack the Ripper may be part of the collective consciousness, but I really didn’t know anything about the case until this week.

Earlier this year I was introduced to a boardgame called Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective. It was less board and more oral story with an interesting concept and a terribly frustrating execution. The short version: you play as members of Holmes’ Baker Street Irregulars. By tracking down leads you are challenged to solve the case in as few steps as possible in order to beat the amazing Sherlock Holmes. Unfortunately, Sherlock cheats. He uses information you the player don’t have access to, magically traces only the correct – generally obscure or illogical – leads and makes up answers at the end. Anyway, with my family, we played all 10 cases, grew frustrated with the system and moved onto other things.

That is until my brother brought home the expansion/sequel. Now, I know he is going to do a much better (and more detailed analysis) of the game when we finish this next series of 10 cases. But in the meantime here is my feelings of the matter. We are, to date, only four cases in to the expansion and have just concluded the Ripper Series.

First, I would like to say that I like the general concept of the series. I like the idea of tracking down clues and solving mysteries. We have even decided to dismiss the scoring system of the game which encourages players to visit as few locations as possible and ultimately miss out on much of the story. Instead, this time around we are not counting our leads, but chasing up whatever clues catch our fancy – while trying to accumulate enough knowledge to answer the random assortment of questions at the end.

The first four cases of the expansion are all tied to Jack the Ripper. Obviously you cannot identify Jack until the end of Case Four. However, you are still given a series of questions to answer related to the earlier cases. I liked the idea of creating a great arch with smaller steps. I even liked the new mechanics which allowed you to get more information from different locations/witnesses by adding clue numbers together (under specific conditions). This meant you could learn more about a character you had already been introduced to.

What failed was the writing ultimately.

A spread of the board and game sheets for Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective – Jack the Ripper & West End Adventures. Image from the internet.

I learned that the case of Jack the Ripper actually did consist of a confusing mass of information and misinformation. The police did a terrible job and the coroner actually included wrong information in his report. An unknown and highly debated number of women are actually attributed to Jack. The newspapers actually fabricated letters apparently from the serial killer. So, this does explain some of the conflicting testimonies you are presented in the game.

Unfortunately, the writers, chose one of the weakest culprits to be Jack. Even Watson points out some of the numerous flaws to Sherlock’s weak explanation at the end of the fourth case. It was so utterly unsatisfying. Thus, I cannot say I am terribly excited to proceed with the other cases, though how they can be worse is difficult to imagine.

Yet, all was not lost. By playing this game, I did learn more about Jack the Ripper. And more interestingly, I discovered that my brother’s first novel was inspired by the case. No, it does not follow any one of the theories. But I can now see the influences of this bloody and violent case on the writing of Thyre. Something I found far more interesting that Sherlock’s impossible solution.