Search
Search results
Cody Cook (8 KP) rated Writings Of Thomas Paine Volume 4 (1794 1796); The Age Of Reason in Books
Jun 29, 2018
Thomas Paine was a political theorist who was perhaps best known for his support for the American Revolution in his pamphlet Common Sense. In what might be his second best known work, The Age of Reason, Paine argued in favor of deism and against the Christian religion and its conception of God. By deism it is meant the belief in a creator God who does not violate the laws of nature by communicating through revelation or miracles The book was very successful and widely read partly due to the fact that it was written in a style which appealed to a popular audience and often implemented a sarcastic, derisive tone to make its points.
The book seems to have had three major objectives: the support of deism, the ridicule of what Paine found loathsome in Christian theology, and the demonstration of how poor an example the Bible is as a reflection of God.
In a sense, Paine's arguments against Christian theology and scripture were meant to prop up his deistic philosophy. Paine hoped that in demonizing Christianity while giving evidences for God, he would somehow have made the case for deism. But this is not so. If Christianity is false, but God exists nonetheless, we are not left only with deism. There are an infinite number of possibilities for us to examine regarding the nature of God, and far too many left over once we have eliminated the obviously false ones. In favor of deism Paine has only one argument—his dislike of supernatural revelation, which is to say that deism appeals to his culturally derived preferences. In any case, Paine's thinking on the matter seemed to be thus: if supernatural revelation could be shown to be inadequate and the development of complex theology shown to be an error, one could still salvage a belief in God as Creator, but not as an interloper in human affairs who required mediators.
That being said, in his support of deism, Paine makes some arguments to demonstrate the reasonableness in belief in, if not the logical necessity of the existence of, God which could be equally used by Christians.
For instance, just as the apostle Paul argued in his epistle to the Romans that, "what can be known about God is plain to [even pagans], because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20, ESV), so also Paine can say that, "the Creation speaketh an universal language [which points to the existence of God], independently of human speech or human language, multiplied and various as they be."
The key point on which Paine differs from Paul on this issue is in his optimism about man's ability to reason to God without His assisting from the outside. Whereas Paul sees the plainness of God from natural revelation as an argument against the inherent goodness of a species which can read the record of nature and nevertheless rejects its Source's obvious existence, Paine thinks that nature and reason can and do lead us directly to the knowledge of God's existence apart from any gracious overtures or direct revelation.
On the witness of nature, Paine claims, and is quite correct, that, "THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man." What is not plainly clear, however, is that man is free enough from the noetic effects of sin to reach such an obvious conclusion on his own. Indeed, the attempts of mankind to create a religion which represents the truth have invariably landed them at paganism. By paganism I mean a system of belief based, as Yehezkel Kaufmann and John N. Oswalt have shown, on continuity.iv In polytheism, even the supernatural is not really supernatural, but is perhaps in some way above humans while not being altogether distinct from us. What happens to the gods is merely what happens to human beings and the natural world writ large, which is why the gods are, like us, victims of fate, and why pagan fertility rituals have attempted to influence nature by influencing the gods which represent it in accordance with the deeper magic of the eternal universe we all inhabit.
When mankind has looked at nature without the benefit of supernatural revelation, he has not been consciously aware of a Being outside of nature which is necessarily responsible for it. His reasoning to metaphysics is based entirely on his own naturalistic categories derived from his own experience. According to Moses, it took God revealing Himself to the Hebrews for anyone to understand what Paine thinks anyone can plainly see.
The goal of deism is to hold onto what the western mind, which values extreme independence of thought, views as attractive in theism while casting aside what it finds distasteful. But as C.S. Lewis remarked, Aslan is not a tame lion. If a sovereign God exists, He cannot be limited by your desires of what you'd like Him to be. For this reason, the deism of men like Paine served as a cultural stepping stone toward the atheism of later intellectuals.
For Paine, as for other deists and atheists like him, it is not that Christianity has been subjected to reason and found wanting, but that it has been subjected to his own private and culturally-determined tastes and preferences and has failed to satisfy. This is the flipside of the anti-religious claim that those who believe in a given religion only do so because of their cultural conditioning: the anti-religionist is also conditioned in a similar way. Of course, how one comes to believe a certain thing has no bearing on whether that thing is true in itself, and this is true whether Christianity, atheism, or any other view is correct. But it must be stated that the deist or atheist is not immune from the epistemic difficulties which he so condescendingly heaps on theists.
One of the befuddling ironies of Paine's work is that around the time he was writing about the revealed religions as, “no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit," the French were turning churches into “temples of reason” and murdering thousands at the guillotine (an instrument of execution now most strongly identified with France's godless reign of terror). Paine, who nearly lost his own life during the French Revolution, saw the danger of this atheism and hoped to stay its progress, despite the risk to his own life in attempting to do so.
What is odd is that Paine managed to blame this violent atheism upon the Christian faith! Obfuscated Paine:
"The Idea, always dangerous to Society as it is derogatory to the Almighty, — that priests could forgive sins, — though it seemed to exist no longer, had blunted the feelings of humanity, and callously prepared men for the commission of all crimes. The intolerant spirit of church persecution had transferred itself into politics; the tribunals, stiled Revolutionary, supplied the place of an Inquisition; and the Guillotine of the Stake. I saw many of my most intimate friends destroyed; others daily carried to prison; and I had reason to believe, and had also intimations given me, that the same danger was approaching myself."
That Robespierre's deism finally managed to supplant the revolutionary state's atheism and that peace, love, and understanding did not then spread throughout the land undermines Paine's claims. Paine felt that the revolution in politics, especially as represented in America, would necessarily lead to a revolution in religion, and that this religious revolution would result in wide acceptance of deism. The common link between these two revolutions was the idea that the individual man was sovereign and could determine for himself what was right and wrong based on his autonomous reason. What Paine was too myopic to see was that in France's violence and atheism was found the logical consequence of his individualistic philosophy. In summary, it is not Christianity which is dangerous, but the spirit of autonomy which leads inevitably into authoritarianism by way of human desire.
As should be clear by now, Paine failed to understand that human beings have a strong tendency to set impartial reason aside and to simply evaluate reality based on their desires and psychological states. This is no more obvious than in his own ideas as expressed in The Age of Reason. Like Paine's tendency to designate every book in the Old Testament which he likes as having been written originally by a gentile and translated into Hebrew, so many of his criticisms of Christian theology are far more a reflection upon himself than of revealed Christianity. One has only to look at Paine's description of Jesus Christ as a “virtuous reformer and revolutionist” to marvel that Paine was so poor at introspection so as to not understand that he was describing himself.
There is much more that could be said about this work, but in the interest of being somewhat concise, I'll end my comments here. If you found this analysis to be useful, be sure to check out my profile and look for my work discussing Paine and other anti-Christian writers coming soon.
The book seems to have had three major objectives: the support of deism, the ridicule of what Paine found loathsome in Christian theology, and the demonstration of how poor an example the Bible is as a reflection of God.
In a sense, Paine's arguments against Christian theology and scripture were meant to prop up his deistic philosophy. Paine hoped that in demonizing Christianity while giving evidences for God, he would somehow have made the case for deism. But this is not so. If Christianity is false, but God exists nonetheless, we are not left only with deism. There are an infinite number of possibilities for us to examine regarding the nature of God, and far too many left over once we have eliminated the obviously false ones. In favor of deism Paine has only one argument—his dislike of supernatural revelation, which is to say that deism appeals to his culturally derived preferences. In any case, Paine's thinking on the matter seemed to be thus: if supernatural revelation could be shown to be inadequate and the development of complex theology shown to be an error, one could still salvage a belief in God as Creator, but not as an interloper in human affairs who required mediators.
That being said, in his support of deism, Paine makes some arguments to demonstrate the reasonableness in belief in, if not the logical necessity of the existence of, God which could be equally used by Christians.
For instance, just as the apostle Paul argued in his epistle to the Romans that, "what can be known about God is plain to [even pagans], because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20, ESV), so also Paine can say that, "the Creation speaketh an universal language [which points to the existence of God], independently of human speech or human language, multiplied and various as they be."
The key point on which Paine differs from Paul on this issue is in his optimism about man's ability to reason to God without His assisting from the outside. Whereas Paul sees the plainness of God from natural revelation as an argument against the inherent goodness of a species which can read the record of nature and nevertheless rejects its Source's obvious existence, Paine thinks that nature and reason can and do lead us directly to the knowledge of God's existence apart from any gracious overtures or direct revelation.
On the witness of nature, Paine claims, and is quite correct, that, "THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man." What is not plainly clear, however, is that man is free enough from the noetic effects of sin to reach such an obvious conclusion on his own. Indeed, the attempts of mankind to create a religion which represents the truth have invariably landed them at paganism. By paganism I mean a system of belief based, as Yehezkel Kaufmann and John N. Oswalt have shown, on continuity.iv In polytheism, even the supernatural is not really supernatural, but is perhaps in some way above humans while not being altogether distinct from us. What happens to the gods is merely what happens to human beings and the natural world writ large, which is why the gods are, like us, victims of fate, and why pagan fertility rituals have attempted to influence nature by influencing the gods which represent it in accordance with the deeper magic of the eternal universe we all inhabit.
When mankind has looked at nature without the benefit of supernatural revelation, he has not been consciously aware of a Being outside of nature which is necessarily responsible for it. His reasoning to metaphysics is based entirely on his own naturalistic categories derived from his own experience. According to Moses, it took God revealing Himself to the Hebrews for anyone to understand what Paine thinks anyone can plainly see.
The goal of deism is to hold onto what the western mind, which values extreme independence of thought, views as attractive in theism while casting aside what it finds distasteful. But as C.S. Lewis remarked, Aslan is not a tame lion. If a sovereign God exists, He cannot be limited by your desires of what you'd like Him to be. For this reason, the deism of men like Paine served as a cultural stepping stone toward the atheism of later intellectuals.
For Paine, as for other deists and atheists like him, it is not that Christianity has been subjected to reason and found wanting, but that it has been subjected to his own private and culturally-determined tastes and preferences and has failed to satisfy. This is the flipside of the anti-religious claim that those who believe in a given religion only do so because of their cultural conditioning: the anti-religionist is also conditioned in a similar way. Of course, how one comes to believe a certain thing has no bearing on whether that thing is true in itself, and this is true whether Christianity, atheism, or any other view is correct. But it must be stated that the deist or atheist is not immune from the epistemic difficulties which he so condescendingly heaps on theists.
One of the befuddling ironies of Paine's work is that around the time he was writing about the revealed religions as, “no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit," the French were turning churches into “temples of reason” and murdering thousands at the guillotine (an instrument of execution now most strongly identified with France's godless reign of terror). Paine, who nearly lost his own life during the French Revolution, saw the danger of this atheism and hoped to stay its progress, despite the risk to his own life in attempting to do so.
What is odd is that Paine managed to blame this violent atheism upon the Christian faith! Obfuscated Paine:
"The Idea, always dangerous to Society as it is derogatory to the Almighty, — that priests could forgive sins, — though it seemed to exist no longer, had blunted the feelings of humanity, and callously prepared men for the commission of all crimes. The intolerant spirit of church persecution had transferred itself into politics; the tribunals, stiled Revolutionary, supplied the place of an Inquisition; and the Guillotine of the Stake. I saw many of my most intimate friends destroyed; others daily carried to prison; and I had reason to believe, and had also intimations given me, that the same danger was approaching myself."
That Robespierre's deism finally managed to supplant the revolutionary state's atheism and that peace, love, and understanding did not then spread throughout the land undermines Paine's claims. Paine felt that the revolution in politics, especially as represented in America, would necessarily lead to a revolution in religion, and that this religious revolution would result in wide acceptance of deism. The common link between these two revolutions was the idea that the individual man was sovereign and could determine for himself what was right and wrong based on his autonomous reason. What Paine was too myopic to see was that in France's violence and atheism was found the logical consequence of his individualistic philosophy. In summary, it is not Christianity which is dangerous, but the spirit of autonomy which leads inevitably into authoritarianism by way of human desire.
As should be clear by now, Paine failed to understand that human beings have a strong tendency to set impartial reason aside and to simply evaluate reality based on their desires and psychological states. This is no more obvious than in his own ideas as expressed in The Age of Reason. Like Paine's tendency to designate every book in the Old Testament which he likes as having been written originally by a gentile and translated into Hebrew, so many of his criticisms of Christian theology are far more a reflection upon himself than of revealed Christianity. One has only to look at Paine's description of Jesus Christ as a “virtuous reformer and revolutionist” to marvel that Paine was so poor at introspection so as to not understand that he was describing himself.
There is much more that could be said about this work, but in the interest of being somewhat concise, I'll end my comments here. If you found this analysis to be useful, be sure to check out my profile and look for my work discussing Paine and other anti-Christian writers coming soon.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated TEN in Tabletop Games
Nov 28, 2021
When it comes to game mechanics, set collection is my JAM. Auction/bidding and push your luck, not so much….. So when Alderac Entertainment Group brought TEN into my life, I was a bit wary at first. A game of collecting sequences/sets of numbers? Awesome!! Add in bidding for Wildcards or pushing your luck to not Bust each turn? A bit too risky, at least for my gaming tastes. After having had the opportunity to play TEN, were my initial feelings misplaced? Spoiler: Yes. For me, TEN was a prime example of “Don’t judge a game by its mechanics.” Keep reading to find out why.
Disclaimer: We were provided with a copy of TEN for the purposes of this review. This is a final production copy, so what you see pictured is what you would receive in a retail copy of the game. -L
TEN is a push-your-luck game of set collection and auction/bidding in which players are trying to amass the most points by the end of the game. Points are earned by collecting sets of numeric sequences in the 4 colors of the game: Blue, Green, Pink, and Orange. Played over a series of turns, players will be drawing/collecting cards from the tableau, buying cards from the Market, or Busting if they push their luck a bit too far. To setup for a game, assemble the deck of cards as dictated by the player count and set it in the play area. Each player gets 5 Currency tokens with which to start the game, and are all dealt a random reference card. The player who was dealt the reference card with the Starting Player symbol will begin the game. Before getting into the actual gameplay, I want to mention the different card types, as to provide a better understanding when reading this review. In each of the 4 colors, there are card values numbered 1-9, with more copies of the lower numbers and fewer of the higher numbers. There are also Wildcards that can be used to represent any #/color, depending on the card. Some cards in the deck are Currency cards and show a value of 1-5 Currency. Should you choose to take these from the tableau, you collect that amount of Currency to be used for auctions or buying cards in later turns.
On your turn, you will perform a series of actions, the first of which is Draw a Card. You will draw a card from the top of the deck and place it in the tableau. If the card is a # card or a Currency card, you will then decide if you wish to continue drawing cards. If you do, draw the next card, and so on, until either you decide to stop or you Bust (more on this in a bit). As long as you do not Bust, you can decide when to stop drawing cards to the tableau. You may then take one of the following rewards: take all the # cards to your play area, or take Currency tokens (equal to the amount shown on the Currency cards in the tableau). When you take the # cards, they go into your play area and all other players will collect Currency tokens. You then have the opportunity to Buy a card from the Market (by paying the numeric value of the card) and add it to your play area. If you instead choose to collect Currency, you will take Currency equal to the total value of Currency in the tableau, and all other players receive nothing from your turn. All # cards are moved to the Market, and your turn ends. In the picture below, if I choose to take the # cards, I would take the Orange 2 and Blue 6 to my play area, and all other players would collect 7 Currency. Conversely, I could choose to take 7 Currency, and the # cards are added to the Market (on the right-hand side of the picture).
So how does Busting work? The tableau may never have a value of more than 10. Every # card you draw adds to your total value, and any Currency card drawn subtracts from the total. If you were to draw a # card that would give you a total value of more than 10, you Bust! OR if you ever have Currency cards that total more than 10, you Bust as well. So there’s a bit of math involved, with addition and subtraction, but you have to make sure you never get more than 10! For example, in the picture below, the net total value of the tableau is 1. (8 from # cards, -7 from Currency cards) If I were to draw a Currency card of 4-5, I would Bust, because that totals more than 10. In this pictured instance, any # card I draw would not make me Bust, as the highest total would only be a 10, given the current cards in play. If you ever push your luck too far and end up Busting, all # cards in the tableau are moved to the Market, and you gain a Bust token (worth 3 Currency). If you Busted with # cards, then all other players will collect Currency tokens, but if you Bust with Currency cards, nobody receives anything. After resolving a Bust, your turn ends and the game continues to the next player.
If, on your turn, you ever draw a Wildcard, your turn pauses and the Wildcard is auctioned. Each player will have one chance to either bid (increasing the bid from the previous) or pass. Whomever wins the auction must pay their bid, and they collect the Wildcard to their play area. Once the auction has been resolved, your turn continues as normal. It is possible to have multiple auctions on your turn – it all depends on the cards. The game continues in this fashion, players taking turns drawing cards, collecting cards/Currency, buying from the Market, bidding in auctions, etc., until the draw deck has been depleted. The active player finishes their turn as normal, but may not draw any more cards. Points are then tallied. All players will arrange their cards to create consecutive sequences of numbers in the 4 different colors. You receive 1 point per card in your longest sequence of each color. If you have a complete set of numbers 1-9 in a color, you get a bonus point. Players count up all their points, and the player with the highest value is the winner!
That kind of seems like a lot, but I promise it’s actually pretty intuitive when you get playing. Also, huge shoutout to AEG for providing such a well-done reference card – it includes a little flowchart to help you with how the turns flow. The gameplay itself is essentially pretty straightforward. You draw a card, and then react based on what it is. Bust? Collect a Bust token and your turn ends. No Bust? Decide if you want to keep drawing. Done pushing your luck? Collect either the # cards or Currency. Try to make sequential runs of numbers in the different colors – the more cards you get in sequence, the more points you’ll get at the end of the game. The thing that elevates TEN beyond a simple push-your-luck game to me is that it requires more strategy than just luck. You can see what cards are available in the Market – is there something you need to buy? You can see everyone else’s playing area – do they need any of the numbers you just revealed? You know how much Currency every player has – do you bid high on this Wildcard because your neighbor can’t outbid you? There is so much more than just luck in this game, and that is what takes it to the next level for me. I know that Travis has reviewed No, Thanks! in the past, and I would say that this gives me similar vibes, but way better in my opinion.
When it comes to playing games, I am generally not a huge risk-taker. I like making logical choices based on known information and end-game strategy. But something about this game just gets me. I think one element that makes me love this game is the different types of cards – # cards and Currency cards. When you’re pushing your luck and drawing cards, there’s an added element of excitement, because the two different types of cards affect the net total differently. It doesn’t all positively add to the net total, which makes me more likely to keep drawing in hopes that things will cancel out and I can maximize the turn. If everything all added together, and you just couldn’t get more than 10, I would probably only ever draw 2 cards per turn, max., just to make sure I didn’t Bust. But the fact that Currency cards subtract from the net total encourages players to keep pushing their luck, and either earning a big payoff or a big Bust. This game is exciting, engaging, and entertaining to play, and that makes it fun!
To touch on components, AEG always hits it out of the park – and TEN is no exception. The game is mostly just a bunch of cards, and some white/black Currency tokens. The tokens themselves are nice plastic, and are smooth and chunky in hand. The cards are thick and sturdy, and hold up to shuffling pretty well. The colors of the game are bright and vibrant, and they are very clear to differentiate between. It’s a nice pop of color on the table, and that adds to the overall enjoyment of the game. Each of the 4 colors, and the Wildcards for that matter, have a unique background design – which can help our colorblind friends who may not necessarily be able to differentiate between the colors. Just an added plus to help the gamers tell what cards belong to what colors! The game box is equally as colorful, and is eye-catching on the shelf. All in all, I’d say AEG gets a 10 for their production quality here. (Get it?)
I spoke earlier about judging a game by its mechanics, and how TEN really challenged me on that. I was expecting a game that I would like, but would be kind of just ok overall for me. What I got is a game that is highly strategic, yet also unpredictable at times. I am definitely a planner when it comes to strategy, but the unpredictability of this game is light, fun, and engaging for all players at all times. It just is fun to play. This is a game that I see staying in my collection for a long time, and hopefully getting to the table quite often when I need a quick filler that isn’t so light that it’s mindless, but not heavy enough that it’s a brain-burner. If you’re in the market for a fun little game that challenges all players, I would definitely recommend checking out TEN. Purple Phoenix Games rates our games on a scale of 1-6 (not 10 unfortunately in this case), and we give this one a solid 5 / 6.
Disclaimer: We were provided with a copy of TEN for the purposes of this review. This is a final production copy, so what you see pictured is what you would receive in a retail copy of the game. -L
TEN is a push-your-luck game of set collection and auction/bidding in which players are trying to amass the most points by the end of the game. Points are earned by collecting sets of numeric sequences in the 4 colors of the game: Blue, Green, Pink, and Orange. Played over a series of turns, players will be drawing/collecting cards from the tableau, buying cards from the Market, or Busting if they push their luck a bit too far. To setup for a game, assemble the deck of cards as dictated by the player count and set it in the play area. Each player gets 5 Currency tokens with which to start the game, and are all dealt a random reference card. The player who was dealt the reference card with the Starting Player symbol will begin the game. Before getting into the actual gameplay, I want to mention the different card types, as to provide a better understanding when reading this review. In each of the 4 colors, there are card values numbered 1-9, with more copies of the lower numbers and fewer of the higher numbers. There are also Wildcards that can be used to represent any #/color, depending on the card. Some cards in the deck are Currency cards and show a value of 1-5 Currency. Should you choose to take these from the tableau, you collect that amount of Currency to be used for auctions or buying cards in later turns.
On your turn, you will perform a series of actions, the first of which is Draw a Card. You will draw a card from the top of the deck and place it in the tableau. If the card is a # card or a Currency card, you will then decide if you wish to continue drawing cards. If you do, draw the next card, and so on, until either you decide to stop or you Bust (more on this in a bit). As long as you do not Bust, you can decide when to stop drawing cards to the tableau. You may then take one of the following rewards: take all the # cards to your play area, or take Currency tokens (equal to the amount shown on the Currency cards in the tableau). When you take the # cards, they go into your play area and all other players will collect Currency tokens. You then have the opportunity to Buy a card from the Market (by paying the numeric value of the card) and add it to your play area. If you instead choose to collect Currency, you will take Currency equal to the total value of Currency in the tableau, and all other players receive nothing from your turn. All # cards are moved to the Market, and your turn ends. In the picture below, if I choose to take the # cards, I would take the Orange 2 and Blue 6 to my play area, and all other players would collect 7 Currency. Conversely, I could choose to take 7 Currency, and the # cards are added to the Market (on the right-hand side of the picture).
So how does Busting work? The tableau may never have a value of more than 10. Every # card you draw adds to your total value, and any Currency card drawn subtracts from the total. If you were to draw a # card that would give you a total value of more than 10, you Bust! OR if you ever have Currency cards that total more than 10, you Bust as well. So there’s a bit of math involved, with addition and subtraction, but you have to make sure you never get more than 10! For example, in the picture below, the net total value of the tableau is 1. (8 from # cards, -7 from Currency cards) If I were to draw a Currency card of 4-5, I would Bust, because that totals more than 10. In this pictured instance, any # card I draw would not make me Bust, as the highest total would only be a 10, given the current cards in play. If you ever push your luck too far and end up Busting, all # cards in the tableau are moved to the Market, and you gain a Bust token (worth 3 Currency). If you Busted with # cards, then all other players will collect Currency tokens, but if you Bust with Currency cards, nobody receives anything. After resolving a Bust, your turn ends and the game continues to the next player.
If, on your turn, you ever draw a Wildcard, your turn pauses and the Wildcard is auctioned. Each player will have one chance to either bid (increasing the bid from the previous) or pass. Whomever wins the auction must pay their bid, and they collect the Wildcard to their play area. Once the auction has been resolved, your turn continues as normal. It is possible to have multiple auctions on your turn – it all depends on the cards. The game continues in this fashion, players taking turns drawing cards, collecting cards/Currency, buying from the Market, bidding in auctions, etc., until the draw deck has been depleted. The active player finishes their turn as normal, but may not draw any more cards. Points are then tallied. All players will arrange their cards to create consecutive sequences of numbers in the 4 different colors. You receive 1 point per card in your longest sequence of each color. If you have a complete set of numbers 1-9 in a color, you get a bonus point. Players count up all their points, and the player with the highest value is the winner!
That kind of seems like a lot, but I promise it’s actually pretty intuitive when you get playing. Also, huge shoutout to AEG for providing such a well-done reference card – it includes a little flowchart to help you with how the turns flow. The gameplay itself is essentially pretty straightforward. You draw a card, and then react based on what it is. Bust? Collect a Bust token and your turn ends. No Bust? Decide if you want to keep drawing. Done pushing your luck? Collect either the # cards or Currency. Try to make sequential runs of numbers in the different colors – the more cards you get in sequence, the more points you’ll get at the end of the game. The thing that elevates TEN beyond a simple push-your-luck game to me is that it requires more strategy than just luck. You can see what cards are available in the Market – is there something you need to buy? You can see everyone else’s playing area – do they need any of the numbers you just revealed? You know how much Currency every player has – do you bid high on this Wildcard because your neighbor can’t outbid you? There is so much more than just luck in this game, and that is what takes it to the next level for me. I know that Travis has reviewed No, Thanks! in the past, and I would say that this gives me similar vibes, but way better in my opinion.
When it comes to playing games, I am generally not a huge risk-taker. I like making logical choices based on known information and end-game strategy. But something about this game just gets me. I think one element that makes me love this game is the different types of cards – # cards and Currency cards. When you’re pushing your luck and drawing cards, there’s an added element of excitement, because the two different types of cards affect the net total differently. It doesn’t all positively add to the net total, which makes me more likely to keep drawing in hopes that things will cancel out and I can maximize the turn. If everything all added together, and you just couldn’t get more than 10, I would probably only ever draw 2 cards per turn, max., just to make sure I didn’t Bust. But the fact that Currency cards subtract from the net total encourages players to keep pushing their luck, and either earning a big payoff or a big Bust. This game is exciting, engaging, and entertaining to play, and that makes it fun!
To touch on components, AEG always hits it out of the park – and TEN is no exception. The game is mostly just a bunch of cards, and some white/black Currency tokens. The tokens themselves are nice plastic, and are smooth and chunky in hand. The cards are thick and sturdy, and hold up to shuffling pretty well. The colors of the game are bright and vibrant, and they are very clear to differentiate between. It’s a nice pop of color on the table, and that adds to the overall enjoyment of the game. Each of the 4 colors, and the Wildcards for that matter, have a unique background design – which can help our colorblind friends who may not necessarily be able to differentiate between the colors. Just an added plus to help the gamers tell what cards belong to what colors! The game box is equally as colorful, and is eye-catching on the shelf. All in all, I’d say AEG gets a 10 for their production quality here. (Get it?)
I spoke earlier about judging a game by its mechanics, and how TEN really challenged me on that. I was expecting a game that I would like, but would be kind of just ok overall for me. What I got is a game that is highly strategic, yet also unpredictable at times. I am definitely a planner when it comes to strategy, but the unpredictability of this game is light, fun, and engaging for all players at all times. It just is fun to play. This is a game that I see staying in my collection for a long time, and hopefully getting to the table quite often when I need a quick filler that isn’t so light that it’s mindless, but not heavy enough that it’s a brain-burner. If you’re in the market for a fun little game that challenges all players, I would definitely recommend checking out TEN. Purple Phoenix Games rates our games on a scale of 1-6 (not 10 unfortunately in this case), and we give this one a solid 5 / 6.
