This interview feels like one of my stranger non-sequitur dream sequences. I am sitting with Uwe Rosenberg in a cafeteria, eating currywurst. We are discussing the “Feed Your People” mechanism, and whether he house-rules his own games. Sounds like a dream, doesn’t it? If a giraffe had walked by, it would have seemed weird, but oddly appropriate.

Uwe: That’s a general issue with board games, because of… You do have a game with 4 players and one has an opinion towards that game. “No, you always have to do this here, that’s this and that…” The stupid thing is that person has a strong status in that group. Whatever he says, it’s always correct. That means afterwards everyone at the table thinks that it is correct, what he is saying, and plays exactly that way, and the game gets broken. That’s an issue with board games, that games, that are 100% working, get broken due to such an opinion. And… yes...

Uwe: Das Problem hat man generell bei Spielen, das heißt wegen… Man hat ein Spiel mit 4 Personen und einer hat eine Meinung zu dem Spiel.”Nein, man muss hier immer das machen, das ist ja hier das und das…” Das blöde ist, dieser Mensch, der hat nen starken Stand in der Gruppe. Wenn der was sagt, dann stimmt das einfach. Das heißt, danach glaubt jeder am Tisch, dass stimmt, was er da sagt, spielt darauf und das Spiel geht kaputt. Das ist ein Problem bei Brettspielen, dass absolut funktionierende Spiele durch so eine Meinung kaputt gehen. und… ja…

DTD: One person drives the game.

Uwe: And so the game is boring. It’s not really boring, but in this group it is boring, and this is the problem.

DTD: Because of the players. Yeah, I agree.

Uwe: Because of the players.

Uwe: If we realize that then we give hints in the rulebook that it is not that way, and maybe even justify that it does not happen at all. Well we don’t write it that straight forward, but we give examples where we prove the opposite.

Wenn wir das erkennen, dann geben wir Hinweise in den Spielregeln, dass es nicht so ist und begründen es vielleicht sogar, dass es erst gar nicht passiert. Wobei wir das nicht so deutlich schreiben, sondern wir geben ein Beispiel, in dem wir das Gegenteil beweisen.

DTD: Spoken like a Mathematician. [laughs] That’s good! That’s a good thing. So, a lot of people talk about the “feed your people” mechanic. And some say it in horror, and some say it in love. And I was wondering what your thoughts were on “feed your people” as a mechanic; the more workers you have, the more you need to give up. Is it something you are embracing and using more, or is it something you are moving away from?

Uwe: Yes, I think i got it. My intention is not to feed the workers. For me, it’s that every few rounds something happens that starts some kind of a wave motion. Only because you have to feed in Agricola after 4 rounds, you play in a way that you do long term moves in round 1 and 2. And in rounds 3 and 4 you collect, short term, the nutritional values. Due to the existence of that feeding phase, I have some kind of evolution in the [game]. These action spots are good now, and other spots are more valuable later. That’s important in general. It’s important for worker placement games that action spots do have a different value during different rounds. The feeding mechanism is one possibility. Another one is the accumulation history: 3 wood, 6 wood, 9 wood… Both in combination offers plenty of variability. Round after round the action spots in Agricola have a different value. That is the functionality.

Uwe: Ja, ich denke, ich hab’s verstanden. Mir geht’s eigentlich weniger darum, die Arbeiter zu füttern,. Mir geht’s mehr darum, dass alle paar Runden etwas passiert, was eine Wellenbewegung auslöst. Nur dadurch, dass in Agricola nach Runde 4 gefüttert werden muss, spielst Du das Spiel so, dass Du in Runde 1 und 2 langfristige Züge machst. In Runde 3 und 4 kurzfristig Dir die Nährwerte holst. Und ne… es ist nicht so sinnvoll in Runde 1 gleich die Nährwerte zu holen, weil die musst Du lange rumliegen lassen. [Die] kannst Du besser in Runde 4 holen. Dadurch, dass es diese Ernährungsphase gibt, habe ich eine Entwicklung im [Spiel]. Hier sind diese Aktionsfelder gut  und etwas später sind andere Aktionsfelder gut. Das ist generell wichtig. Es ist wichtig bei Worker Placement Spielen, in verschiedenen Runden, die Felder unterschiedlich wertvoll zu machen. Da gibt’s verschiedene Möglichkeiten zu. Die eine Möglichkeit ist die Ernährung. Die andere Möglichkeit ist die Anhäufungs-Geschichte. 3 Holz – 6 Holz – 9 Holz… Beides zusammen ergibt genug Variabilität. Runde zu Runde sind die Agricula Felder unterschiedlich viel wert. Das ist die Funktion.

DTD: It’s a balance. If you want more workers, more people for more actions, you have to pay.

Uwe: That’s not important.

DTD: That’s not important?

Uwe: Also put these the same, what fits better in the game. But its not a philosophy for me…

Uwe: I don’t have a philosophy behind that, that it has to be like this. I will try it out and decide in either direction.

Es ist keine Philosophie von mir dahinter, dass das so sein muss. Das probier ich aus und irgendwie entscheide ich mich.

Uwe: Perhaps you have to pay it all around the same, or you have to… I will see how it works in the game.

DTD: I understand. I am going back, you have said a couple times that you have been trying very hard to design games that people like, and I have seen a lot of designers that make the game they want to play. Do you think that you are doing both of these, or do you think that you would make a game that Uwe would not want to play, but the people would [want to play]? Does this happen to you?

Uwe: Yes, actually that really is not possible. Because, in the meanwhile it’s that way that there are games I cannot play, because I absolutely don’t like them. And there are games I love. I’m totally distinct in that regards.

Uwe: Ja, das ist tatsächlich sogar eigentlich gar nicht möglich. Denn inzwischen ist es so, dass es Spiele gibt, die kann ich nicht spielen, weil ich sie überhaupt nicht mag. Und es gibt halt Spiele, die ich liebe. Das ist bei mir total ausgeprägt.

Uli: Even of your own [games]?

Uli: Auch von Deinen eigenen?

Uwe: Games in general, that exist on the market. There are some things i really do not like at all, I can’t play them. And such kind of games I won’t be able to design.

Uwe: Generell von Spielen, die es auf dem Markt gibt. Es gibt Sachen, die ich einfach überhaupt nicht mag, die kann ich nicht  mitspielen. Und solche Spiele würde ich dann auch nicht erfinden können.

Uwe: [I] cannot develop it because I really do not like it. In the former time, when I made family games, and try to make the games that people love, there are only some mechanisms, and I played everything. But now, those mechanisms are so special that there are really games I don’t like. And [in] the former times, I like everything perhaps.

DTD: I guess what I am also saying is, making board games is a passion industry. I think people cannot make a really good game unless it’s a game that they love, that they have a passion behind. Whereas in other industries you can make, I don’t know… lights. You can make lights if you don’t love lights. You can make a living at it. But in board games, I think you cannot make a good board game, if you do not really love the board game. Do you agree with this?

Uwe: Patchwork for me is a counterexample. I will never say… “let’s go and play Take it Easy, lay some tiles”. Would be totally boring for me. Why did I invent Patchwork? It happened nevertheless. Yes, and all of a sudden I do like Patchwork. Why do I like it? If I would have tried to design a puzzle game like Patchwork in the first place, I would have… I cannot imagine, that it would have worked. There is always some coincidence involved.

Uwe: Patchwork ist für mich ein Gegenbeispiel. Ich würd nie so… “komm lass uns mal Take it Easy spielen, ein bisschen Plättchen hinlegen”. [das] würde ich total langweilig finden. Warum hab ich Patchwork erfunden? Es ist trotzdem passiert. Ja, Patchwork mag ich dann auf einmal. Warum mag ich’s? Hätte ich es direkt versucht, so ein Puzzle-Spiel wie Patchwork zu erfinden, das hätte ich… das kann ich mir nicht vorstellen, dass das funktioniert hätte. Es ist immer ein bisschen Zufall dabei.

Uli had that moment we all have experienced, where a single word hides in the dark corners of your mind, playing a frustrating game of hide and seek. Spoiler: the word was “coincidence”. Uwe tried to help.

Uwe: A question of … probability.

Uli: [thinking] It is a very easy word, sorry.

DTD: [laughs] You broke Uli.

Uli: I’m not a professional translator by the way.

Uli: Ich bin kein professioneller Übersetzer übrigens.

Uwe: It’s all fine, I enjoy sitting here with you. It’s wonderful.

Uwe: Alles schön, es macht Spaß, mit Dir hier zusammen zu sitzen. Es ist wunderbar.

Uli: Thanks!

Uli: Danke!

And now the hidden word jumped out from behind Uli’s frontal lobe and said “Boo!”

Uli: “Coincidence”! It is the same thing in Germany. So sometimes there are special coincidences! and this is how Patchwork was.

Uwe: The kind of Patchwork, I like. But Take it Easy is not one…

Uwe: Well there are puzzle games I like and ones I don’t like and this I didn’t know prior. Yes, here is a new game for example, called Cartographers from Pegasus. You are puzzling, and you do have real board game rules. This I don’t like. Why not? it’s “over complicated” for me. It’s not relaxed enough for me.

Es gibt halt Puzzle-Spiele, die ich mag und die ich nicht mag und das wusste ich vorher  gar nicht. Ja, zum Beispiel hier ist ein neues Spiel, das heißt Cartographers von Pegasus. Da puzzelst Du und hast richtige Brettspiel-Regeln dazu. Das mag ich nicht. Warum nicht? Es ist mir zu “verkopft”. Es ist mir nicht entspannt genug.

Uwe: Too much board game. But that’s really only my opinion. It is nice that this game is on the market, and many people like it. Yes, its good.

DTD: No, I understand that. Do you play your own games when you have free time?

Uwe: When the people want to do it, yes.

DTD: Not your choice, but you will play. Do you enjoy playing your own games?

Uwe: I always have new games to test, and will enjoy [those] more.

Fast die ganze Zeit spiele ich immer nur neue Prototypen, also… ich spiele ganz… ja, ich spiel fast nie veröffentlichte Spiele. Wenn ich auf einer Veranstaltung bin, dann wollen die Leute… “Zeig Dein Spiel und so, spiel mit!”… dann spiel ich das. Aber privat, also wenn ich mit meinem Sohn spiele, dann hab ich immer einen Prototyp. Dann spiele ich einen Prototyp.

DTD: Oh, with [your] son, even.

Uwe: 8 years old, and he is more a fanatic gamer than I. [laughs]

DTD: That’s nice. I had that, and then he moved away.

My son recently moved to attend college. But when he is home visiting, we play games like mad men. There was an unfortunate mix up translating the English phrase “passed away” instead of “moved away” – very different meaning and intention, as you can no doubt guess. I guess my face looked somewhat horrified as I listened to the German discussion, so it was clarified pretty quickly. Just to reiterate, my son is just fine.

Uli: So, he “moved away”, exactly.

Uli: also, er ist weg gezogen… genau…

Uwe: ...that’s different from “passed away”.

Uwe: …das ist der Unterschied zu “passed away”.

DTD: [shocked] No, no, no, no, no! They are in their twenties.

’Uli:

Seems like I interpreted your facial expression the right way.‘]Uli: Dann hatte ich Deinen Gesichtsausdruck gerade richtig gedeutet…

’Uwe:

Excuse me?‘]Uwe: Wie bitte?

Uwe: First I had to… oh wait, no… that was “passed away”...

Uwe: Ich musste das erst… ach so nee, das war ja “passed away”…

[Nervous laughter and relief all around]

DTD: So, this is a funny story. When I first came to Essen, Dice Tower had a badge for me, but it was inside. So I had to explain to the guard, who spoke no English, that the badge is already purchased, and it is inside, and I need to get it. And I used the wrong word. I said over and over, I mixed up “kaufen” and “verkaufen”. So apparently, I told the guard over and over that I was selling tickets.

kaufen = to buy
verkaufen = to sell

Uwe: [hysterical] And then the police came?

DTD: And I was very adamant. I said it over and over, because I really wanted to get inside!

[Uwe is rolling with laughter]

DTD: I tell everybody, I know just enough German to get in trouble. [laughs]

Uwe: yes. [still laughing]

DTD: So, were there any games or things you were looking forward to seeing at this show? You probably know a lot of the things that are happening already, but were there things that you really wanted to see when you were here, or no time?

Uwe: What drives me, is to play the third Ghana game. That’s what I will do. After that there most probably will be a new one. I know that I won’t worry too much about this right now. There will be game nights again in my life one day, and then I know that I will play other games as well. Because it won’t happen, that I [play] other games [right now], I’m not putting too much thoughts into this and raising expectations that won’t be met anyway.

Uwe: Was mich bewegt, ist das dritte Ghana Spiel zu spielen. Das werde ich machen. Danach gibt’s wahrscheinlich wieder ein neues. Ich weiß, dass ich mich da nicht groß drum kümmern werde. Irgendwann wird’s wieder viele Spieleabende in meinem Leben geben und dann weiß ich, dass ich auch wieder andere Spiele spiele. Da das eh nicht passieren wird, dass ich Spiele [spiele], denk ich da gar nicht drüber nach und bau Erwartungen auf, die sich dann nicht erfüllen.

Uwe: And here, there is another “in-between phase” as well. Every once in a while, I had my scouts… again the scouts… searching for games that are “Uwe-like”. “Uwe, you like… It doesn’t matter… this kind of games… but it contains a mechanism, that is… that could almost be yours. Have a look at that game.” And then I checked specific games. That’s how it… how I have… how Viticulture drew my attention, because a scout told me “you have to look at it, the game”. And… That time is very important and that’s where I definitely want to get back again. That I find some time for these games. And that I once again activate my scouts… searching for contacts.

Uwe: Und es gibt auch da dann so eine Zwischen-Phase. Also ich hab das zeitweilig gehabt, dass meine… wieder Scouts… dass die nach Spielen gekuckt haben, die “Uwe mäßig” sind. “Uwe du magst… egal… diese Art von Spielen… aber da ist ein Mechanismus drin, der ist… der könnte fast von Dir sein. Kuck Dir das Spiel mal an.” Und dann hab ich gezielt Spiele angekuckt. So ist auch, so hab ich auch Viticulture… bin ich drauf aufmerksam geworden, weil ein Scout gesagt hat “das musst Du Dir ankucken, das Spiel”. Und… diese Zeit ist sehr wichtig und da will ich auch unbedingt wieder zurück. Dass ich für diese Spiele dann Zeit bekomme. und ich meine Scouts wieder aktiviere… Kontakte suchen…

DTD: Sure. Yeah.

Uwe: But now I have no scouts. And so, no idea which games I like. But I think in the future I will have scouts again.

DTD: Let me know if you need a scout who speaks no German.

Uwe: [laughing] I only need the title of the games.

DTD: I can do that!

Uwe: OK! [laughs]

Looks like I may be back in the scout game! You can still call me for advice however, Mr. Feld.

DTD: There is a trend right now, to take some of the older games that maybe didn’t have the most wonderful production value, and redo them, and make them prettier and bigger, and use the new things we have. Double boards and plastic pieces. Have you thought about doing that with any of the older classics: Le Havre, things like that. Or is it out of your hands?

Uwe: Yes, that is a question for the publisher. Indeed I always had a say with the publishers about what to do and so on. But especially with Lookout Games, that is Asmodee, that is...

Uwe: Ja, das ist ‘ne Frage des Verlages. In der Tat hab ich bei den Verlagen immer mitgeredet, was man so machen kann und so. Aber gerade bei Lookout Games, das ist Asmodee, das ist…

The ownership of publishers is long and complicated, and Lookout Games, historically a bastion of heavy euro goodness, is in the middle of it. Lookout has published games under Z-Man Games since 2005. Lookout and Z-Man are both owned by Asmodee. Asmodee is in turn owned by PAI Partners.

DTD: It is the publisher.

Uwe: Yes… yes… there are smaller publishers; there we talk about how to do the work, in cooperation. But… but it doesn’t apply there. So, it is not in my thoughts to grab any old game and reprint it. Yes, back then we designed a 4 player version of Babel. That’s in my head, to re-activate that. Babel was published in 2001.

Uwe: Ja… ja… es gibt kleinere Verlage, da denken wir gemeinsam darüber nach, wie wir arbeiten. Aber… aber da liegt das ja nicht an. Also irgendwelche alten Spiele neu raus zu holen und die zu veröffentlichen, hab ich nicht im Kopf. Ja, wir haben damals eine 4-Personen Version zu Babel erfunden. Das hab ich im Kopf, dass man das nochmal wieder aktiviert. Babel ist von 2001.

Uwe: [Small publishers like Wyrmgold are] too new. We don’t have old board games yet.

Wyrmgold is the publishing house responsible for Uwe’s new game Robin of Locksley

DTD: There’s not an old [game]!

Uwe: [Babel was] years ago.

DTD: I know it, but I have not played it.

Uwe: I am thinking about publishing it [the new Babel rules].

Uwe: I also have to finish the design. Only the idea is in my head.

Uwe: Ich muss es auch noch zu Ende erfinden. Es ist nur die Idee in meinem Kopf.

DTD: Nice. Similarly, if you do play one of your older games, do you have house rules, do you have little changes that you think make the game work better? Does “house rules” translate?

Uwe: I understand the question. It is again Babel. In Babel we make the rule to start the game with 5 cards. I start it, you start with 5 cards. After publishing the game, I know it is better than the starting player has 3 cards, and the other player has 5 cards. Mehr ausgewogen [more balanced].

DTD: But not in general?

Uwe: Each game… The starting player has 3, the other one 5 [cards].

Uwe: Jede Partie… Startspieler hat 3, der andere 5.

DTD: But there’s not in general house rules for the games? I feel like a lot of artists constantly change their works.

Uwe: No, I don’t.

DTD: You are satisfied with where they are?

Uwe: I do not play the games, so I do not change the games. [laughs]

DTD: Glad to leave it where it is!

Don’t weep, but there’s only one more Germany installment before returning to sunny California. Next time Uwe and I talk about Bohnanza and White Elephants, before ending our interview time together over the intangibles of Chess.