Welcome to Skeleton Code Machine, a weekly publication that explores tabletop game mechanisms. Spark your creativity as a game designer or enthusiast, and think differently about how games work. Check out Dungeon Dice and 8 Kinds of Fun to get started!
Last week was Wargames, Nostalgia, and Tactics II, where I looked back at one of the first wargames I ever played. I was happy to see that, based on the poll at the end, most people agree we can learn a lot from old games like Tactics II.
This week we are looking at a modern game that was just released this year, and many people are just receiving their Kickstarter copies: Arcs.
Arcs
Long ago, the Reach thrived. But our ancestors failed us, and I fear we’re no better. As we wrestle over the galaxy’s edge, can we break the cycle? Can we build something new?
Arcs (Wehrle, 2024) is a “fast-playing space opera” designed by Cole Wehrle (Root, Pax Pamir: Second Edition, John Company: Second Edition) and published by Leder Games. It is brought to life by the amazing art of Kyle Ferrin.
Here’s how Leder Games describes it:
Arcs is a sharp sci-fi strategy game for 2–4 players, set in a dark yet silly universe. Ready yourself for dramatic twists and turns as you launch into this galactic struggle.
It’s a fascinating game and one that I can’t wait to play again. There is a lot that we could talk about, but for now, I want to focus on the action mechanism.
It uses cards with numbers and suits and has drawn many comparisons to trick-taking games, with many reviewers calling Arcs a trick-taking game.
What is a trick-taking game?
If you recall from Pirates, Krakens, and Trick-Taking Games, trick-taking games can be a little tricky to define (pun intended). Here’s how BGG explains trick-taking mechanisms:
Players play cards from their hand to the table in a series of rounds, or “tricks” which are each evaluated separately to determine a winner and to apply other potential effects.
There are differences in how tricks are won in each game. Usually a card with a matching suit and the highest value played will win. Sometimes there is a “trump” card or suit that will win the trick regardless of the other cards played.
In that article, I gave a list of common elements and variations of trick taking games:
There is usually a “lead” suit that determines which cards can be played.
Tricks are often “taken” (i.e. won) by the highest value of the suit that was led.
Many games have a “trump” suit that wins regardless of card value.
Trump cards are randomly distributed, but sometimes acquired via bidding.
If you don’t have a matching card to “follow suit”, you must play another card from your hand.
The overall winner is based on number or value of “tricks taken” (i.e. won).
In some variations, the winner has taken the least number of tricks.
Let’s take a look at how the action selection works in Arcs and see if it has some of these elements.
Surpass, Pivot, Copy
A game of Arcs is divided into five Chapters. Each Chapter consists of multiple rounds in which players take turns. On a players turn they can take one or more actions (e.g. Move, Battle, Influence, Tax, Build, etc.) based on the card they played.
The cards each have one of four suits, a number/value, and a number of star-shaped pips indicating how many action can be taken. They are numbered 1 - 7 in a four player game of Arcs. The suits and associated actions are:
Aggression (Red): Battle or Move or Secure
Construction (Orange): Build or Repair
Administration (Gray/Yellow): Tax or Repair or Influence
Mobilization (Blue): Move or Influence
Here’s how it works:
The player with Initiative plays the leading card from their hand. This is now the lead card. They can take one action for each of the 1 - 4 pips on the card.
Each subsequent player also plays a card but has a choice:
Surpass: Play a card of the same suit as the lead card but with a higher value. Take one action for every pip on the card.
Copy: Play any card face down. Take one action given on the lead card.
Pivot: Play any action card face up that is not of the lead card’s suit. Number doesn’t matter. They can take a single action from the card they played.
If the player with Initiative “Declares an Ambition” the value of their played card becomes zero, and will easily be surpassed.
If someone surpassed the lead card, they will have Initiative for the next round and will play the lead card.
I’ll skip the explanation of Ambitions and scoring points. Also, there are other ways to seize initiative and some other complexity to this, but the above gives you the general idea.
Rounds continue until everyone is out of cards, so Chapters usually have about six rounds. This means Initiative usually will move between players a few times.
Trick-taking space wargame
BGG classifies Arcs as a “negotiation, science fiction, wargame.”
Although the definition of a wargame can be messy, Arcs definitely feels like a wargame when playing it. It also has some elements of a 4X game, although I wouldn’t put it in the same family as a game like Eclipse: Second Dawn for the Galaxy (Tahkokallio, 2020)
It’s really interesting how trick-taking elements are incorporated into this genre of game that is usually focused on thematic mechanisms and historical simulation.
The core actions of the game are familiar parts of many wargames: Move, Build, Battle, Repair, Influence. Those seem thematic and grounded in the wargame genre.
The way you access those actions, however, is done via a rather abstract mechanism that feels a lot like trick-taking. You play cards with suits and “win” the tricks by playing the highest card of a matching suit (i.e. Surpass).
Where most trick-taking games tend to be abstract rather thematic, Arcs creates a mixture that feels far more thematic than something like The Crew (Sing, 2019) or Seas of Strife (Major, 2015).
And yet, I’ve seen quite a few comments that Arcs is a highly abstract wargame.
Perhaps it sits somewhere in the hard-to-define middle of both abstract and thematic games. Those expecting a trick-taking euro-game find it to be thematic. Those expecting a wargame simulation find it to be abstract.
Where does Arcs sit on the spectrum of abstract vs. thematic games?
Thematic elements (or lack thereof)
Clearly Cole Wehrle had thematic elements in mind when designing the game as shown by the Designer Diary 3 - The Trick’s the Thing post (April 19, 2022):
I didn’t want Arcs to fall into this trap [as Root]. I wanted the game to have a much wider storytelling range than its predecessor. While there would still be plenty of fighting, I liked the idea one player might be searching for relics while another was trying to break a blockade So, I gave myself a little design challenge. I imagined one player is playing in a special, single-ship mode. Their objective is to find some critical item and activate it. Another player has to put down a rebellion led by some separatists. These two players are not friends or enemies. Could they possibly have any meaningful interaction? Does it even make sense to tell those two stories in the same game?
And yet I thought it was interesting how Arcs lacks many of Shipp’s Layers of Theme thematic elements.
Specifically Arcs lacks almost any Layer 3 - Opt-in Thematic Elements such as an introductory lore section, flavor text on cards, or explanation of faction motivations.
The most we get is four sentences on the back of the box about rebuilding an area known as the Reach.
Arcs does, however, have a considerable amount of Layer 1 - Core Gameplay Thematic Elements in the form of the core actions (Move, Battle, etc.), even if the trick-taking action selection isn’t very thematic. It also is dripping with Layer 2 - Baked-In Thematic Elements in the form of Kyle Ferrin’s art.
It’s hard to deny that the Galactic Bards card has fantastic art. But I am left wondering why having the Galactic Bards Guild support means I can declare ambitions when I surpass or pivot.
Is Arcs a trick-taking game?
I’ve seen some debate online and some podcasts as to whether or not Arcs is a trick-taking game. I’ll say again that definitions are usually boring, but if we consider the designer’s opinion authoritative, Cole Wehrle answered this question.
No, it is not a trick-taking game:
Trick taking games were critical inspirations for Arcs, but [I’d] hesitate to call the game a trick taker in the sense that the game doesn't track tricks taken over the course of the game (only the movement of the initiative records this in any way). At the same time... Those inspirations were critical. Arcs certainly uses the uncertainty and the expressive range of trick taking to generate different kinds of narrative tension. Trick takers [offer] players complex valuations and Arcs cribs much from them. — @colewehrle June 15, 2024
Arcs seems to be a blend of abstract and thematic. It takes parts of trick-taking and mixes them into wargame actions. The resulting game might be hard to define.
Conclusion
Some things to think about:
Mix and blend mechanisms: I love that people debate whether or not Arcs is a trick-taking game. I think this is an indication that it is doing something mechanically interesting. It might be similar to how some movies don’t easily fit into any common genre (horror vs. comedy vs. drama vs. romance).
Layers of theme: I continue to think Shipp’s Layers of Theme is a helpful model to use when thinking about games. It’s also starting to convince me that Layer 3 - Opt-in elements are (a) hard to do well and (b) not always necessary.
Abstract mechanisms can work in thematic games: Trick-taking is a fairly abstract mechanism, but as we’ve seen in Arcs and Sail, they can still lead to a thematic player experience.
— E.P. 💀
P.S. Want to support Skeleton Code Machine? Do it at the Exeunt Press Shop!
Skeleton Code Machine is a production of Exeunt Press. All previous posts are in the Archive on the web. If you want to see what else is happening at Exeunt Press, check out the Exeunt Omnes newsletter.