The Short Answer
A genuinely useful starter collection is smaller than most new hobbyists assume — three or four games covering different situations (a large-group party game, a solid two-player option, and one slightly deeper strategy game) covers most of what a new group actually needs before it’s worth expanding further.
Why More Games Isn’t Automatically Better Early On
It’s tempting to buy broadly once you discover modern board gaming, but a collection of ten games nobody’s learned well is often less useful than three games the whole group actually knows and enjoys. Early on, depth of familiarity with a few well-chosen titles matters more than breadth of options, since a new group benefits more from repeat plays of a good game than from constantly starting over with something unfamiliar.
The Three Gaps Worth Filling First
- A large-group party game. Something that scales to a full room, teaches in minutes, and works for a mixed group including people who’ve never played a modern board game — this is the most broadly useful single game to own for spontaneous, casual gatherings.
- A solid two-player option. Many game nights end up being just two people, and a dedicated two-player game (rather than a multiplayer game technically playable at two) tends to feel more satisfying for exactly that situation.
- One game with real strategic depth. Something that rewards repeated plays and takes an evening rather than fifteen minutes, for when the group wants a more substantial session than a party game provides.
What to Hold Off On Buying Early
Expansions for a game you’ve only played once or twice are usually premature — it’s worth knowing whether the base game has staying power with your group before adding more content to it. Similarly, niche games built for a very specific group size or a specific kind of player (a highly deceptive social game, a very long campaign game) are worth waiting on until you have a clearer sense of what your regular group actually enjoys, rather than guessing early.
How to Decide What to Add Next
Once the three core gaps are filled, the next additions should be driven by what your specific group has actually asked for or gravitated toward — more of whatever category got the most table time, rather than filling out every possible category evenly. If your group ends up playing the party game constantly but rarely touches the strategy title, that’s a real signal about what to prioritize next, even if it means owning more than one game in the same category rather than one of each type.
FAQ
Should I buy games based on personal interest or what my group will actually play?
What your specific group will actually play matters more early on — a critically acclaimed game that doesn’t fit your group’s size, patience, or interests will get less table time than a simpler game that genuinely matches how your group plays.
Is it worth buying a game just because it’s a classic, even if it’s not exactly what my group wants?
Not necessarily — classic status doesn’t guarantee it fits your specific group’s preferences. It’s more useful as a reference point for what “broadly appealing” tends to look like than as an automatic must-buy.
How do I know when it’s time to expand beyond a starter collection?
Once your group has played its core few games repeatedly and specifically wants something different — a longer session, a different mechanic, more players — that’s a clearer signal than a fixed timeline or number of plays.
Leave a Reply