Grayson Page@BoardgamingParent @shimokitajer especially with the evolution of them. It's one of the complaints I have with the book Engelstein/Shalev wrote on boardgame mechanisms, there seems to be an almost arbitrary cut off for lumping some together vs breaking them out as a sub-type or something else. Decent reference, not a great conceptual organization of them (purely IMHO).
Jeremy Robinson@gpage @BoardgamingParent I don't have an issue with it but I also don't find their categorization system particularly useful. I think if there's a gradual decline in originality it's a natural effect of having so many previous examples to look to, but the pigeonholing might also has something to do with it. I've heard many have trouble describing a new design without comparing it to existing designs and mechanics.