I think vanilla Risk will do you fine, we played Godstorm a bunch back in the day and it was amusing, but I don’t think worth the effort to seek it out over Risk.
Or use DigitalDeckard’s suggestion (it has been several years since I’ve Risked, after all).
With this, I’m not really sure what to expect. My weird wallstreet cousin is setting it up, and he says he’s gonna dress up like Napoleon and just be really extra for the whole thing. So given that this isn’t really about the board game and is mostly just him wanting… whatever it is he want’s out of all this. I’m probably just gonna wait and see.
If people end up actually playing the game rather than what I expect which is a bunch of people just like having fun under the pretext of playing the game (likely fudging rolls and sneaking pieces on the board and other stuff that really makes it no longer a game of risk) Then I may go the extra mile and suggest another risk like Risk Legacy.
Otherwise I think I’ll wait and see.
If it does become a recurring game of risk, Risk Legacy is what I would whole heatedly recommend once everyone gets comfortable with basic risk mechanics. Everything in Risk legacy is introduced piecemeal and the rules are modified and added to as the game progresses and certain conditions are met. Players have a lot of agency, factions, the board, the rules etc. all get changed overtime and so every 15 game play-through will create a unique board, even with the same players.
If you do not like Risk, do not expect to like Risk Legacy.
I do not like risk. I’ve played it once at an adult and all the players in the game ultimately got bored of the war of attrition that seems to just be what the mid to late game of risk IS.
Like regular ass TV was on in the background and everyone playing just ultimately ended up leaving the game on the table to watch stupid detergent commercials so boring was the game.
This is why I asked “Are the not vanilla risks better enough to justify buying one?”
The set collection is the only thing breaking the war of attrition - ultimately, someone will roll in with a 25-army steamroller.
Yeah we all saw that coming, and ultimately stopped a few turns before it would.
I liked risk a lot as a kid up to college before discovering real boardgames and finding much better strategic alternatives. Risk Legacy still has the core 3 v 2 dice mechanic but the faction powers, map modifying stickers, and other rules effects essentially give you enough strategic determinism to remediate the inherent goblin dice swingy-ness of base risk. There are strategic choices and decisions to be made beyond turtle in australia and don’t fight a land war in asia that actually decide who wins or no.
Quartermaster General gives the feel of a big WWII conflict in a fraction of the time it takes to play Risk, and it’s way more fun.
I disagree with this statement.
If you don’t like Risk, you may still not enjoy Risk Legacy, but like @DigitalDeckard wrote, there’s enough going on in Legacy that you can still enjoy the game.
I don’t like Risk, but I enjoyed Risk Legacy for all the crazy stuff that happens and how the board changes from game to game. Unlocking the secret stuff was cool. I played more to find out what would happen next than to actually try and “win.”
Likewise, I don’t particularly enjoy Pandemic and would never choose to play that game. That being said, playing through Pandemic Legacy Season One was the best boardgame experience I have ever had, without a doubt. I don’t think Risk Legacy is as good as Pandemic Legacy, but both games are different enough, and continue to change throughout the “campaign,” that merely dismissing them because you don’t like the games they’re based on is not 100% right.
At the end of the day though, your mileage may vary…
Thanks, that basically is what I was getting at. Risk Legacy was the originator for the Legacy games and is still the 2nd best one (I agree that Pandemic Legacy thrilled me a bit more because its base game and co-op nature was more to my liking). Also I’ve played Risk Legacy 3 times now and still enjoyed it each time because you get just complete different map states in a way that no game yet has truly matched.
I haven’t played quartermaster general but from Rym talking about it it does look like a better strategic game (I thought of it as less annoying axis and allies rather than the Napoleonic war thing I feel like risk has going on). That said the entry point here was “family risk game” ie everyone is already familiar with core risk gameplay and risk is the brand on order, not a strategy game, but specifically risk and if you gonna specifically play risk, risk legacy is the best one.
Yeah, as much as I love all the QMG games, they’re not quite Risk.
History of the World actually is a little bit Risk. But ultimately, it sounds like the game of the evening is Risk.
All I’m sayin’ is QMG is worth the risk. 
Fine wordplay.
QMG isn’t Risk, mechanically, not even close. However, it is similar in that they are both games of WOR with little miniatures on a world map. The fact is that most people who go to play Risk just want a war on a world map with miniatures. I think a lot of people, if they even know Risk, just know it as that WOR game, and don’t know a single rule. You could probably put QMG in a box and write Risk on it, and fool a LOT of people into thinking that’s what Risk was. They’ll also probably enjoy it way more than actual Risk.
If you had a random person play both games, not knowing which was Risk and which was QMG, and then asked them which they liked more and would like to play again, we all know which game I’m betting will come out on top.
Heh, when we were all standing around in my dad’s kitchen a few months ago, when this idea was first proposed. I basically immediately complained that risk was a bad game. They were open to alternatives but they were wary and their objection was something along the lines of
“We don’t want you to pick anything too complicated, where we’re all just sitting around trying to figure out how to play while you sit around and crush us”
They don’t understand that their goal and my goal are the exact same. We both want a game everyone can enjoy, but they suspect I just want to dominate less skilled players. And the fact that I’m skilled means no amount of me telling them that I just want to enjoy games will dissuade them of what they think are my goals.
I also believe QMG WW2 (the most approachable one) is currently out of print.
Not that there’s anything wrong with 1914 and Cold War, but most Americans are familiar with the WW2 narrative and it has the fewest rules overall. Hell, I really want to play 1914 again, since I have a much stronger feel for the entire WW1 narrative after recent wargaming.
You could offer to simply arbitrate the first game if you do go a non-risk route. That way they can all focus on playing and you could help them learn and it side-steps their “the boardgamer will crush us” concern.
You’ll lick Jerry and be home by christmas!
They’re not interested in that, the stated goal is a game for bragging rights among this little clique of the family who don’t play poker. I’m in that clique therefore if I’m not in it, it’s not bragging rights as I wasn’t there.
They’re blowing the whole thing out of proportion, in my opinion, which is why I’ve largely not been involved since that first day standing around in the kitchen, I just said I’ll show up and see what happens.’
They’ve named it First Annual Risk World Domination Night, and the text that formally invites us to participate ends: “I look forward to getting this group underway, but a word of warning for the future. If you step foot in my territory, you are going down!!”