Now, I noticed you pulled out an awfully big haul. I'm going to tell you straight away that I loaded the "BANG BANG BANG" card which gives me the first shot on you. Damien, you cover Kristoff because we know he's probably the cop. Pierre, take down Eric. There's $130k on the table and we can have a really nice three way split. So you can either hit the deck, or I can put you in the grave. Your choice. Count to three.

At the last meeting of my regular game group, I got to play Asmodee's US release of the 2005 French release CA$H AND GUN$, a hilarious six player game wherein players represent cartoonishly stereotypical gangsters tasked with splitting up loot. In each round of the game, a pile of money is laid out and then the players, equipped with foam pistols vaguely reminiscent of a Beretta 9mm, load either a "Bang" card or a "Click Click Click" card under their stand up character. On a three count, everybody points their gun at someone else (in classic John Woo-standoff fashion) and then proceeds to threaten, cajole, terrify, and otherwise intimidate their target into backing down from the split. Anyone left standing either gets shot or was the target of a bluffing player and the survivors get to split the loot evenly. What's more, one player is secretly selected to be an undercover cop so after each split a card is passed around under the table. The cop has the opportunity to flip the card to indicate that he's called backup. Three times and the cop wins, otherwise the player with the most money wins.

(The box art)

CA$H AND GUN$ is a very simple game that anyone interested in the gangsters or even remotely familiar with crime films such as RESERVOIR DOGS will grasp and enjoy immediately. At 20 minutes per play, it's easy to get a few rounds in and if you've got spectators you can be sure they'll want to try it. Some gamers have argued that it is really more of an activity than a game but I think that description really undercuts what I think makes board and card games like CA$H AND GUN$ really special—an innate and subtle degree of human psychology that underpins every decision and discussion during play. It's something I think is really unique to face-to-face gaming and it's one of the trump cards that board gaming has over its electronic competition. You can send messages over the Internet to another player all you want, but you will never experience the immediacy and social interplay that occurs when you're holding a ridiculous orange foam gun in your buddy's face and bringing up real-life transgressions as a reason for you to have loaded your gun with one of those "Bang" cards.

CA$H AND GUN$, I think, makes for a good case study to point out one of the key advantages that board games have over electronic ones because it is a game that is almost completely structured around player interaction and more than that, player psychology. The human element, if you will. It's hard not to feel the tension, even with the totally fake guns and silly artwork, that comes from six people swearing torrentially and pressing foam gun barrels to foreheads in a greedy desire to get the biggest split. I believe that board games offer a much different type of experience than video games offer because of the inherent interplay between egos, minds, intellects, and wits that are engaged in the actual crafting of a game environment reconstructed based on a designer's guidelines. Video games, on the other hand, are much more of a playground sort of construct where the parameters are more clearly defined.

Sure, with the advent of social gaming networks and online play there is a decidedly different paradigm in video gaming these days then when I was growing up. Back in the days of the Atari 2600, the original NES system, and Turbografx 16, video gaming was largely relegated to the same "lonely nerd" ghetto that DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS could often be found trolling for new players. With social gaming and the impetus on interacting and connecting with players around the world, that has really changed because it has introduced this human element into an electronic format. It's really a recent phenomenon, if you discount all the bad language and trash talk you likely engaged in playing STREET FIGHTER II on the SNES, but diplomacy, negotiation, threats, and other types of psychological interplay were always a part of board gaming even when most video games were mostly player-versus-AI affairs. Still, no amount of online interaction can ever compete with the qualities of face-to-face, human-to-human gaming that still make it a unique experience. Even with online editions of board games like the Xbox Live versions of SETTLERS OF CATAN and CARCASSONNE there is still something missing in terms of direct interaction.

(Carcassonne on Xbox Live)

For example, one of my favorite pieces of body language in CA$H AND GUN$ is what I like to call the "Blue Sweat". This is when players suspect someone of being the undercover cop. Comments are made, players start to question why the card was flipped while he or she was in on a split, and the suspected player starts to do various things that pretty much signal his affiliation with the local precinct. They'll look down slightly. They'll shuffle their money around. They'll suddenly get quiet. Verbally, all of the classic tactics show up including accusing another player, professing fealty to some kind of fanciful "Gangster's Code" or even pointing out that the player who just pulled out a small haul must have stopped for donuts on the way to the hideout. These are all very human, very discrete actions and reactions that simply can't be matched, at least not yet, in video games. With wider availability of webcams and other communications technology it may very well be that these elements become more available to video gamers. But for now, nothing beats one-on-one interaction. Nothing.

The subtleties of human interaction you encounter when playing board games can be immense, and it is for that reason that you'll often hear many gamers present a value judgment on a game along the lines of "it depends on who you play it with". Again, CA$H AND GUN$ is a great example because I've played with incredibly raucous, rowdy groups that stopped just short of pulling a "Hungry Like The Wolf" on the table but I've also played with players who were too timid and shy to point the gun at another player with any suggestion of authority or force. It really goes back to how we create the psychological environment and playfield of a board game rather than having it presented to us in an electronic format.

(Ca$h and Gun$ contents)