LEGO RPG system

[Chronszcz]

Hello

I've been playing a lot of board games lately and I got an idea of making a board game with LEGO bricks. After a little research of the topic online it turns out a number of people were trying to acomplish the same thing. I haven't seen any that has my design for connecting tiles. I could imagine this being a fun thing at conventions if standarized (like the GBC or Moonbase standard back in the day).

Anyway, here are some images:

 

What do you think?

Cheers!

Edited August 8, 2022 by Chronszcz

[Feuer Zug]

While it is an interesting system for connecting modules together, I know that clips do have a tendency to break. Most people use the technic pin system for its ruggedness. Looks like you have a good start on building fun dungeons to play in. Best of luck with them.

[Chronszcz]

7 minutes ago, Feuer Zug said:

While it is an interesting system for connecting modules together, I know that clips do have a tendency to break. Most people use the technic pin system for its ruggedness. Looks like you have a good start on building fun dungeons to play in. Best of luck with them.

Thanks for the reply! My early prototype was also using technic pins but I found that connecting and disconnecting the modules was very difficult. I know that clips break easily, especially those old ones. I built a couple of these modules and stress tested them and they seemed durable enough. I even used a couple as a stress relief toy. The way they connect gives a very nice feeling somewhat like popping a bubble wrap :D

[koalayummies]

46 minutes ago, Chronszcz said:

Thanks for the reply! My early prototype was also using technic pins but I found that connecting and disconnecting the modules was very difficult. I know that clips break easily, especially those old ones. I built a couple of these modules and stress tested them and they seemed durable enough. I even used a couple as a stress relief toy. The way they connect gives a very nice feeling somewhat like popping a bubble wrap :D

This is a really cool idea, always like seeing new modular standards developed. Like the collaborative Moduverse road/train terrain standard.

You have a great point about the Technic pins; they work ok for the modular buildings because of the size, spacing and mass of the structure but at this scale they'd become difficult and there's the annoying factor of the pins always pulling out on some sides and sticking to the other so you have to keep swapping the pins back and forth.

A Technic alternative to ubiquitous black pins and system clips would be to use the captive one-ended axles so they can't be pulled out and offer less resistance than the click-pins.

[Johnny1360]

It is a cool idea, I am always looking for some way to utilize LEGO with some sort of board type game, so I may be a bit biased. Likewise, I absolutely detest clips, lol, and avoid them at all costs, when making my on stuff, even though sometimes it can be the best alternative.

It will be interesting to see how this works out and I may even try my hand at making a few modules. Good luck and keep us updated.

[Chronszcz]

I fear that the friction on those technic axles is too high for such small modules. I also would like it to be fairly small so a 4x4 should be the minimum module. The workaround would be this:

But the cost of such a module is greater than of a module which uses clips.

I encourage you to build some modules with the clips. Try them out. Maybe you will love clips again :D

[MAB]

Expandable board games (or here, they are more like tile placing games) based on LEGO have been invented and reinvented many times before. There are other options, such as linking from below. For example, a 4x4 plate on top of 2x2 plate, with 2x2 plates added to the sides sticking out when played allows for expansion. If you are going to limit the play area, a 48x48 baseplate could work, although better to cover in tiles and jumper plates in an appropriate pattern to enable easy removal.  About 20 years ago I built Carcassonne based on 6x6 modules, although playing it was not as fun as using the real thing.

[koalayummies]

On 8/9/2022 at 9:34 AM, Chronszcz said:

I fear that the friction on those technic axles is too high for such small modules. I also would like it to be fairly small so a 4x4 should be the minimum module. The workaround would be this:

But the cost of such a module is greater than of a module which uses clips.

I encourage you to build some modules with the clips. Try them out. Maybe you will love clips again :D

That's another good solution. But yeah those 1x1 technic axle bricks are still pretty new and rare. I don't think I even have any of those yet whereas your original solution with the faucet/spigot-like piece and clip bricks are much more abundant.

[Mylenium]

On 8/9/2022 at 6:34 PM, Chronszcz said:

But the cost of such a module is greater than of a module which uses clips.

I don't follow. The 1 x 1 bricks with clips used in your initial design cost more than 1 x 2 Technic pin bricks and the situation would be no different here. Axles, bushings and all sorts of pins can be had on the cheap because literally everyone who has ever built a bunch of Technic models will have buckets and buckets of them. That aside it strikes me as a purely academic argument. Even on a perfectly flat table you will eventually have to reinforce your connections at some point because the game grid will come apart from the weight, friction and pressure even a handful of modules will exert. It's also one of those LEGO design rules which you can observe on their official models. They'll never use single clip connections beyond a certain level when the stress loads becomes too high. You honestly might want to rethink your strategy. The way I see it, even a basic 16 x 16 grid of your modules could already be so fragile it may not at all be fun having to fix the connections and closing the gaps over and over while playing with it... My 2 Cents.

Mylenium

[Chronszcz]

On 8/11/2022 at 12:31 PM, MAB said:

Expandable board games (or here, they are more like tile placing games) based on LEGO have been invented and reinvented many times before. There are other options, such as linking from below. For example, a 4x4 plate on top of 2x2 plate, with 2x2 plates added to the sides sticking out when played allows for expansion. If you are going to limit the play area, a 48x48 baseplate could work, although better to cover in tiles and jumper plates in an appropriate pattern to enable easy removal.  About 20 years ago I built Carcassonne based on 6x6 modules, although playing it was not as fun as using the real thing.

Yes. I know. None of which seems to be popular and in use on conventions. Maybe it's because the design or maybe making board games with LEGO is not a good idea... Anyway, I'd like to try out yet another, different design. I must try that plate solution you suggested.

21 hours ago, Mylenium said:

I don't follow. The 1 x 1 bricks with clips used in your initial design cost more than 1 x 2 Technic pin bricks and the situation would be no different here. Axles, bushings and all sorts of pins can be had on the cheap because literally everyone who has ever built a bunch of Technic models will have buckets and buckets of them. That aside it strikes me as a purely academic argument. Even on a perfectly flat table you will eventually have to reinforce your connections at some point because the game grid will come apart from the weight, friction and pressure even a handful of modules will exert. It's also one of those LEGO design rules which you can observe on their official models. They'll never use single clip connections beyond a certain level when the stress loads becomes too high. You honestly might want to rethink your strategy. The way I see it, even a basic 16 x 16 grid of your modules could already be so fragile it may not at all be fun having to fix the connections and closing the gaps over and over while playing with it... My 2 Cents.

Mylenium

The 1x2 Technic pin bricks are only an option if you want to make a 6x6 tile. I want to be able to make 4x4 tiles as I find it the most optimal in terms of size. The whole game board shouldn't be too big and a 4x4 tile fits a minifig with accessories very well.

In terms of rigidness - the idea is that you won't pick up the game board. The modules should be just attached if you expand a dungeon and detach the rooms and corridors that you already explored. They don't need to be strong enough to move the whole dungeon around. It is strong enough so the modules don't detach by mistake. You can still move all of them at once if you just don't pick them up. I can imagine that pins would give up anyway in that case. The new Lion Knights castle uses clips to hold all the parts of the castle together. Also, the design I'm proposing is actually two clips per edge on a 4x4 tile. I really do think it's enough. Try to build some modules and you will see :)

22 hours ago, koalayummies said:

That's another good solution. But yeah those 1x1 technic axle bricks are still pretty new and rare. I don't think I even have any of those yet whereas your original solution with the faucet/spigot-like piece and clip bricks are much more abundant.

Yeah, that's why I'm still holding on to the initial idea :)

[MAB]

16 hours ago, Chronszcz said:

Yes. I know. None of which seems to be popular and in use on conventions.

I doubt many people go to a LEGO convention to play boardgames. Just because something is made out of LEGO doesn't necessarily mean it will be popular at a LEGO convention. I like board games (I have over 100) and I like LEGO but I find mixing the two doesn't really work. The board game dynamic is often more clunky due to using LEGO and it is not really MOCing or building when it comes to the LEGO aspect. Finding the sweet spot between the two is difficult. 

[ScaredyCat]

Really cool! Would you use it for something similar to RPG games such as Dungeons & Dragons?

Also, couldn't you replace the tap bricks (4599) with 1x1 bricks with a handle (Brick 2921) to make it harder to break?

[Chronszcz]

On 8/13/2022 at 11:16 AM, MAB said:

I doubt many people go to a LEGO convention to play boardgames. Just because something is made out of LEGO doesn't necessarily mean it will be popular at a LEGO convention. I like board games (I have over 100) and I like LEGO but I find mixing the two doesn't really work. The board game dynamic is often more clunky due to using LEGO and it is not really MOCing or building when it comes to the LEGO aspect. Finding the sweet spot between the two is difficult. 

It doesn't mean this idea is not worth pursuing. Even if one person finds this system fun then I would be happy my idea brought someone a bit of joy. Not sure what you mean by this not being MOCing or building. You literally build these modules with LEGO's and it's your own creation...

17 hours ago, ScaredyCat said:

Really cool! Would you use it for something similar to RPG games such as Dungeons & Dragons?

Also, couldn't you replace the tap bricks (4599) with 1x1 bricks with a handle (Brick 2921) to make it harder to break?

I haven't played Dungeons and Dragons yet, but I imagined that people could build their own modules and then connect them into a big dungeon. Connecting new modules would be based on where the hero's go exploring and already discovered and "conquered" modules would be re-used for new chambers.

The brick you are mentioning can't be put on a 4x4 plate because the handle collides with the stud under it. Unless you don't use a 4x4 plate as the "base" but then it becomes too fragile. But it would be compatible with this "standard" for sure.

[MAB]

15 hours ago, Chronszcz said:

It doesn't mean this idea is not worth pursuing. Even if one person finds this system fun then I would be happy my idea brought someone a bit of joy. Not sure what you mean by this not being MOCing or building. You literally build these modules with LEGO's and it's your own creation...

When I MOC, I focus on building something I want to build for as long as I like and not part of playing a turn in a game where others are waiting and I need to follow strict rules about the format of the repetitive build. What I mean is that building slows down the game play and the game rules necessarily restricts free building. That is why it is not really MOCing to me. There have been LEGO games in the past such as Creationary. In that game you build as part of the game, but I wouldn't really call that MOCing either, even though there you are creating a small free build.

For dungeons and dragons games that take a long time to play, slowing them down further by needing to build each step of the game will make it even slower. From all the conventions I have been to, I don't think I've ever heard of anyone going and not wanting to spend the maximum time to see the displays and instead spend all the time playing a game that tangentially requires small builds with LEGO. I think you'd be lucky to get a game of D&D finished wtithin a day if you are constantly building modules, and you would have missed all the LEGO displays. Some of the games played at conventions after hours by contributors, such as teams racing to build the same set, work because they are relatively quick and fun.

But if you think it will take off, then go for it.

[Chronszcz]

The idea is that you build modules at home and then bring them to the place where you would play a game (it's kind of like a GBC module). Building during a game would prolong the game and would not be fun in the long run. But you could detach explored modules and attach them again with some minor modifications if needed. Whatever suits the players' needs.

[empiresperish]

I like this and I get what you mean about the modern clips feeling good to click together. I don't know if that translates to an easy con experience. 

I've been trying to mix Lego and DnD for decades. I never really loved tiles because I don't love repeated printed cobblestone patterns and I never loved full blown 3D plastic tiles because of how restrictive they can feel. Either they're too situational or too repetitive imo. Lego has always felt like the perfect medium since I like to let my players construct minfigs instead of using existing gamestore minis. I've tried similar methods to this and they always petered out when just copying the prefab systems in Lego. 

Have you experimented with any form of larger standard base with a grid and modules that can be placed on top? Either their own 4x4 or just a standardized grid for walls and specialized ground sections? Might be easier for low parts intensive baseplate system that's already based on multiples of four. With set entrance and exit points your convention goers could arrange their own stable baseplate mazes/corridors/rooms that could be reconfigured when all together. 

Keeping the very accessible and massable 4x4s would pair perfectly with 2x2 jumpers. A checkerboard pattern of jumpers with alternating 2x2 flat tiles would be very easy for others to copy and customize their own simple 4x4 plates to rearrange on top. You could still use the clip method or pins on edge modules too, or unique offshoots for custom perimeters that don't fit on any of the smaller baseplates of old. 

[Chronszcz]

On 9/26/2022 at 2:23 AM, empiresperish said:

Have you experimented with any form of larger standard base with a grid and modules that can be placed on top? Either their own 4x4 or just a standardized grid for walls and specialized ground sections? Might be easier for low parts intensive baseplate system that's already based on multiples of four. With set entrance and exit points your convention goers could arrange their own stable baseplate mazes/corridors/rooms that could be reconfigured when all together. 

Keeping the very accessible and massable 4x4s would pair perfectly with 2x2 jumpers. A checkerboard pattern of jumpers with alternating 2x2 flat tiles would be very easy for others to copy and customize their own simple 4x4 plates to rearrange on top. You could still use the clip method or pins on edge modules too, or unique offshoots for custom perimeters that don't fit on any of the smaller baseplates of old. 

Thanks for the post!

I haven't experimented with large baseplates yet. I might be misunderstanding what you are suggesting about the standarized grid for walls. Do you mean something like this?

Edited October 5, 2022 by Chronszcz