Game: Pepper

Image

whoami — 2008-06-14T12:12:42+00:00

Image

swuyau — 2008-05-26T01:04:31+00:00

Game

Thread: Re: [Review] Pepper

ixnay66 — 2007-07-12T21:16:12+00:00

Maybe I just need to play it but it sounds like a total luckfest similar to Uno except you can dump cards on anyone.

Thread: Re: Does the dealer have an advantage?

sparr0 — 2007-06-04T21:12:03+00:00

I disagree. The only advantage that the dealer has is one free/easy play at the beginning. After that any time they are at a card deficit there is actually a disadvantage, since it is harder to respond to a play without picking up cards. I want 5 cards in my hand or 1, nothing in between

Thread: Re: Pepper -- Session Report

sparr0 — 2007-06-04T21:08:47+00:00

I agree. I got my $1 worth out of it (bargain table at a convention) in components, I look forward to trading it away or making up a trick taking game that uses this distribution of colors and ranks.

Thread: Re: Kicball comes to cards

steveoliverc — 2006-11-03T15:39:53+00:00

Nice review. I agree with you to just play until there are no more cards, especially with younger kids. The rule about winning if you play your last card after someone tried to play their last card on you is only there to prevent a win by the first player (if they have the right cards). With 3 or more players anyway, I wouldn't think this would be too much of a problem. Only less casual gamers are going to notice that and they've got a lot of other filler games to choose from.

Thread: Pepper and Multiple Intelligences

sdonohue — 2006-11-03T06:33:04+00:00

Pepper is a game meant to model the game kickball and it does so pretty well.

Components
52 cards in a nice metal tin

Game Play
The play is fairly simple. The cards are divided into 5 colors with ten cards from 1-5 twice. Blue and Orange each have an additional card with a 6 on it.
The dealer starts and after that play continues with the last person to receive a card.
On each turn a player may either pick up all the cards in front of him and play 1 card in front of any other player or play a card from his or her hand in front of any other player. The new card must have either a higher value or be the same color as the card just played in front of him. If he can’t play a card from his hand, he must pick up the stack.
The game ends when a player plays his last card and the person he plays it to cannot respond without picking up a card.

Intelligences
This review is part of a series of reviews I’m doing as I evaluate games my wife may use in her classroom or that I’m using with my Boy Scouts. Apart from the normal review, I try to identify the kinds of intelligence that the game will use. For an explanation of multiple intelligences, see: my blog post at: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/786097

Linguistic
The game is completely language free, which means linguistic skills are unimportant.

Logical-Mathematical
The game does rely on number recognition, but mathematics is not really involved.

Bodily Kinesthetic
Although not critical, the idea that this game is modeled on kickball may make it more appealing to those with a keen bodily-kinesthetic sense.

Interpersonal
The game can take on a very “take that” feel, so having the skills to encourage players to play cards on others can prove important.

Naturalist
The game requires grouping of similar items and may appeal to the naturalist.

Age Appropriateness
There is nothing inappropriate in the game. It can be easily handicapped by allowing younger player to play equal or greater cards or by having more experienced players start with more cards (this can backfire if the younger player can’t play).

Overall
The game is a great deal of fun although it is probably best to just play to “no cards left” with younger children to avoid confusion about the victory condition. It does an excellent job of focusing on color and number recognition.

Thread: Pepper -- Session Report

gschloesser — 2006-10-12T18:03:44+00:00

We were waiting for a few others to arrive, so a filler was in order. I wanted to give Pepper – the new Out of the Box release – another try. Our first few playings didn’t impress anyone, but I felt I needed to give it one more chance. Sadly, it fell just as flat as our first few times.

The game just doesn’t have much going for it. There really aren’t any strategies worth noting, and the game is simply not fun to play. It won’t be making another appearance.

Rhonda, Kevin, Robert, Elena, Gail and I tossed the “ball” around the table a few times before Rhonda depleted her hand to win the game.

Ratings: Kevin 5, Gail 3.5, Rhonda 3.5, Robert 3, Greg 3

Thread: Re: Does the dealer have an advantage?

steveoliverc — 2006-09-27T16:22:13+00:00

I can think of one scenario where it would be a disadvantage to be the dealer. Let's say the dealer starts off by playing a card to the person on his or her right. Let's also assume that with the luck of the deal that the receiving player is able to play back to the dealer, and they can each play back and forth to each other. Pretty unlikely, but remotely possible. The dealer and the receiving player are ignoring the other players. Eventually, the dealer is down to their last card and plays it on the receiving player, who then plays their last card onto the dealer and wins. The dealer loses because a card was played to them and they couldn't play a card back without taking cards.

This would explain why the game isn't recommended for 2 players.

Granted, this makes it a disadvantage to be the dealer only if the dealer pursues a strategy of playing against a single opponent. But I think it shows that there is enough going on in the game that the dealer isn't at an advantage. Also, you can always play one round per player and rotate the dealer.

Image

Boomer — 2006-09-22T19:11:07+00:00

Image

Boomer — 2006-09-22T18:48:10+00:00

Image

Boomer — 2006-09-22T18:42:49+00:00

Thread: Re: Pepper - Session Report

TheGameCzar — 2006-09-18T16:21:25+00:00

gschloesser wrote:
Pepper is one of the most recent releases from Out of the Box and designer / proprietor Mark Osterhaus. Sadly, the name of the game is identical to that of the 1998 Wolfgang Kramer / Michael Kiesling design released by FX Schmid, which is a source of confusion amongst gamers. Why that name was selected is quite puzzling, especially considering that the name has absolutely no relation to the game itself. Strange.

I believe the name come from a baseball term. The term "pepper" means to put some extra power into a throw.

Show me your stuff. Put some pepper on it, boy.

Since the game is a "ball game" and since you play higher numbers (putting on some pepper), I think that is how it got it's name.

Image

fenwic — 2006-09-14T17:36:17+00:00

That face down card is about to win the game.

Image

crazyyog — 2006-09-12T17:09:13+00:00

rule book from the Tin Box Edition

Image

crazyyog — 2006-09-12T16:33:41+00:00

Tin Box Edition

Thread: Re: [Review] Pepper

sdonohue — 2006-09-08T20:46:50+00:00

I played a demo of this at Origins. It was definitely described to me as being based on 4 square as that's what made me buy it. I've already bought a couple more as my wife thinks it will be great for her first-graders (color and number identification).

Thread: Pepper - Session Report

gschloesser — 2006-09-07T16:08:31+00:00

Pepper is one of the most recent releases from Out of the Box and designer / proprietor Mark Osterhaus. Sadly, the name of the game is identical to that of the 1998 Wolfgang Kramer / Michael Kiesling design released by FX Schmid, which is a source of confusion amongst gamers. Why that name was selected is quite puzzling, especially considering that the name has absolutely no relation to the game itself. Strange.

Like the Kramer / Kiesling game, this new version of Pepper is an easy-to-learn card game. The components consist solely of one deck of cards consists of five suits (colors), with each suit containing two each of values 1 – 5. The blue and orange suit also contain one “6” value. The deck fits snuggly inside a small, attractive tin, which fits comfortably inside one’s pocket, making it easily transportable.

Game play is exceedingly simple, and is loosely themed to a challenge of tossing a ball around the table. Each player is dealt five cards, with the remainder set aside. One player begins by playing any card in front of an opponent, with the value of the card representing the speed of the ball. The recipient must respond to the “tossed ball” by either playing a card from his hand with a higher value, or any card of the same color. The responder has the option of playing the card in front of any opponent, including the player who played the card upon him.

If the player cannot respond, or if he opts not to do so, he may take any cards in front of him into his hand and then play any card to an opponent. This is occasionally a wise choice, as it may be the only way in which to divest oneself of a low-valued card.

The ultimate objective is to be the first player to deplete your hand of cards. However, a critical condition must first be met. When a player plays his last card, the player upon whom it was played must fail to respond. In this case, victory is achieved. If the opponent does respond, however, play continues until someone is able to achieve this condition.

Pepper is fast, playing to completion in 5 – 10 minutes. The main tactic is to keep an eye on the cards players may be collecting, and try to toss your last card to an opponent who is likely to be unable to respond. The other major choice is whether to respond to a tossed ball, or to pickup the cards instead. There really isn’t much else to ponder. That’s really OK, though, as the game is meant to be a light, fast filler, and it certainly meets its objective. Whether it is fun or not is a matter of taste and debate.

Other than playing that last card, the game lacks tension or suspense. It has a sort of mindless feel to it, akin to many mass market games. It failed to excite me, or most of the folks with whom I played. I certainly don’t mind a quick filler, but I generally desire one that generates excitement and fun. Sadly, Pepper failed to deliver.

Three games were played during the course of the evening. Match one was exceedingly quick, as I managed to play my last card without response on my very first effort. The second game lasted a bit longer, with Robert depleting his hand of cards. I’m not sure who won the third match. Sadly, no one seemed terribly impressed by the game.

Ratings: Jennifer 6.5, Kevin 5, Robert 5, Robert 5, Gail 5

Thread: Re: [Review] Pepper

fenwic — 2006-09-07T14:40:49+00:00

It is a fun little game, indeed, and definitely like Four Square (we used to call it "Boxball" when I was in elementary school -- I later found out it's the same game).

But what I am really commenting on is something somewhat silly: the mention of the tin box. I thought I was the only one who was thrilled with that packaging! We need to let the game companies know how nice that is. I bought Cranuim's Zigity JUST BECAUSE it came in a nice tin container. All of my cardboard boxed card games have worn boxes and even some card edges are bent and worn. I usually go buy the plastic containers which are usually used for collectible card games, just to give them some kind of protection.

But the nicely fitting metal containers that are made for that specific game are so much nicer.

Keep writing those reviews, Tom... They are always concise, complete, helpful and enjoyable.

Thread: Does the dealer have an advantage?

kimbo — 2006-08-29T20:54:01+00:00

All players start with five cards. The dealer than throws a card, leaving the dealer with four cards and the target player with six cards. The dealer can never have more than five cards whereas the other players have either five or six cards. The player who received the sixth card can "even" things up by throwing back to the dealer, but again the dealer will throw on his turn and again have 1 - 2 fewer cards than the other players.

I'm talking total cards here; cards in hand as well as cards on the table.

It would seem, on the face of it, that having fewer cards is an advantage. But does the dealer have a significant advantage?

Thread: Re: [Review] Pepper

Psauberer — 2006-07-13T16:19:00+00:00

In looking more closely, it seems like the game does more closely resemble Four Square. If it were really Pepper, the ball would keep going back to the original player. Maybe Mark thought that Pepper was a catchier name than Four Square.

Thread: Re: [Review] Pepper

TomVasel — 2006-07-13T15:14:40+00:00

Hmm, you may be right. When Mark explained the game to me, he talked about playing Four Square as kids. So I assumed that was the theme.

Thread: Re: [Review] Pepper

Psauberer — 2006-07-13T15:11:52+00:00

Is there a reference that says that the inspiration for this game was Four Square?

That seems odd since Pepper is a game played with a baseball and looking at the rules on the Out of the Box site, it certainly seems like this card game makes a decent attempt at replicating it.

Both Four Square and Pepper could be considered cousins of a sort, but it would be strange for the game to be based on Four Square, but named for Pepper.

Thread: [Review] Pepper

TomVasel — 2006-07-13T14:49:48+00:00

In elementary school, I played Four Square all the time; it was something I was fairly good at, and it was simply rather addicting. We would play in front of my house, at school, anywhere where we could simply get four squares and any kind of ball that had a semblance of a bounce. Pepper (Out of the Box Publishing, 2005 - Mark Alan Osterhaus) is a small card game that uses Four Square as an inspiration to come up with a game in which players are simply trying to get rid of the ball.

The game does feel slightly like Four Square, but it's also a very unique card game with mechanics unlike none other that I've seen before. Memory is the key element, along with skillful card play. Games are quick and fast, with one mistake causing the fifteen minute game to end. Clever choices make this more than a simple "take that" game; it may take a bit to understand how to play well, but a good play can be very satisfying. I quite enjoy it.

A deck of cards, with five suits (purple, green, yellow, blue, and orange) - each made up of numbers "1" through "5" (twice), and a blue and orange "6", is shuffled together. Five cards are dealt face down to each player with the remainder removed from the game. The dealer then takes the first turn.

On their turn, a player is "throwing" the ball at another player - with the number on the card depicting the speed of the ball. To represent this, the player may place any card from their hand in front of another player. That player then has two choices.
- They can respond to the throw by placing another card in front of any other player (including the person who threw the ball to them). This is done by either playing a card of the same color, or a "faster" (higher numbered) ball. If a player cannot do this, they must take the second option.
- They can pick up all the cards in front of them and place them in their hand, then throw any card from their hand at any other player. (By "throw", I mean place in front of them, you literalists!)

Play continues with players attempting to get down to only one card in their hand. When a player is able to throw the last card in their hand, AND the player they throw it to cannot respond, then they win the game. Otherwise, they must simply wait until the ball is thrown to them again to get another chance.

Some comments on the game…

1.) Components: Pepper is being produced in a small tin can with a lid (as many of the OOTB games are this year), which I've really fallen in love with - I hope more companies follow this route. The cards themselves are of decent quality, showing balls moving at various speeds to match the number on the card. Other than that, I can only slightly criticize the fact that there's no real way to distinguish between the colors for color blind folk. Still, it's a nice little package for the very inexpensive price.

2.) Rules: The rules are rather handy - formatted nicely, because while they are extremely short, they make mention of the different basic strategies and tips for new players. The rules are some of the easiest I've come across, but the implementation of them isn't the easiest thing I've ever explained, and more than one person has looked at me with a "huh?" plastered across their face as I've explained the game.

3.) Speed and Memory: Still, once the game is understood, players start throwing cards on the table, and the simulation of the ball bouncing around begins. Playing quickly is more thematic, but players will suddenly stop and wonder just what cards everyone has. After a few minutes of play, you MIGHT be able to know where all the cards are; but since players don't know exactly what cards from the deck are in play, and a person can hold a card as long as they want, there is no perfect information. Still, it's rather obvious that having a good memory counts for a good bit when playing the game. When throwing your last card, it's important to know who can't block it.

4.) Tactics: Knowing when to throw a card is critical, and sometimes it's good just to voluntarily pick up the cards in front of you, to avoid having to throw away a good card. Obviously, it's a good idea to keep your highest card until the end, then get rid of it - but should you ever throw it early, just to avoid having to pick up all the cards? One problem that I often have with games that allow players to choose their targets is that one person tends to get picked on in many groups. In Pepper, however, that's a good thing, because a player who has balls thrown at him has the chance to win more quickly. Conversely, if everyone avoids throwing a ball to one person, they will find themselves helping everyone else.

5.) Fun Factor: The game is very interesting, as you constantly throw balls, pick up cards, and try to get rid of them all. Players are watching the cards as they cycle throughout the player's hands; because if you throw the wrong card at the wrong time, you can easily set up the opponent to win. This keeps the game interesting, as players are playing cards quickly; but there's a tense atmosphere (not too tense, mind you). The game might contain a bit too much memory element for some; but I found it quite fun, and its speed was certainly a point in its favor.

Pepper is an unusual, fun game in a small package. It looks really good in its small tin case; and while gameplay is a bit more involved than most OOTB games, it's still simple and easy and rewards good memory and clever card-play. I'm not sure I'll ever play Four Square again, unless I teach it to my own children. But I'll be playing Pepper for many years to come.

Tom Vasel
"Real men play board games"
www.tomvasel.com

Image

markmist — 2006-01-20T18:18:04+00:00

from Rick Thornquist / Gamefest

Thread: A quick first play at GenCon

happycamper — 2005-08-24T21:47:18+00:00

I was able to scope this out at GenCon and it seems to be a nice, fast-moving light card game. *Note, I believe the game was in a very late prototype stage, but it looked to be in its final form.

The deck has cards numbered 1 to 5 in various colors. Play your cards at another player to try to get rid of your hand. When played at, you then respond with a card of a higher number or the same color. If someone plays their last card to another player and that player responds with a card, the player going out has to pick up all the cards that are sitting in front of them - often really rotten cards. If a player goes out and the opponent cannot respond by playing a correct card, the player going out wins.

Like I mentioned, it seems to be a simple game but there is a little bit of strategy to be had. Not a deep game but it plays so fast and is so much more active and participatory, I would pick it over something like Uno any day of the week.