|
CNN Sports Ticker posted:I bought Warhammer Diskwars today and just played the introductory battle scenario with my wife. Game owns. All the satisfaction of Warhammer in a much shorter/quicker format. It only gets better when you ditch crap starting armies and introduce terrain.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
I was looking into buying Agricola (played it, was great) but I've read here that there will be a new edition coming out soon. Does anyone have more info on what that is and when that might be? I'm guessing I should wait for that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Keshik posted:This rulebook is just bonkers. Actually, it's incredibly concise and well written. Here, read a rulebook that will grow hair on your chest. Tendales posted:GMT's hardly without sin here. The rulebook to Dominant Species is way more obnoxious than it needs to be. Gonna have to help me out here. The DS rulebook is a shining example of how to write a heavy euro rulebook. Medium Style posted:I was looking into buying Agricola (played it, was great) but I've read here that there will be a new edition coming out soon. Does anyone have more info on what that is and when that might be? I'm guessing I should wait for that. 2016 at the earliest is what the BGG consensus is. If you wait for it to drop, you'll be able to get the old version for nothing as the market will be flooded. Oldstench fucked around with this message at 14:07 on Jun 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Oldstench posted:Gonna have to help me out here. The DS rulebook is a shining example of how to write a heavy euro rulebook. Gonna have to agree here. DS was the easiest "learn from the rulebook then teach right then and there" experience I've ever had.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
I still can't find a rules justification for why Bear Trap/Quagmire make you lose your turn in Twilight Struggle. They make you discard a card then roll, sure, but why can't you just take your turn as normal after that? The card text doesn't seem to cover it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:16
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:I still can't find a rules justification for why Bear Trap/Quagmire make you lose your turn in Twilight Struggle. They make you discard a card then roll, sure, but why can't you just take your turn as normal after that? The card text doesn't seem to cover it. If you run out of cards, you don't get to play a card. Simple enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Also, if you don't have OP 2 cards to discard (this card paired with a Purge is terrifying), you basically skip the rest of the turn.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
 Technically it doesn't actually say that you can't play another card after discarding one to the quagmire. There's probably a FAQ about it, it's been played that way 100% of the time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
The End posted:If you run out of cards, you don't get to play a card. Simple enough. Oh! That makes more sense than I thought it did. So you only have the no-play turns right at the end of the round instead of when Bear Trap/Quagmire is played then?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
Yeah, every Action Round until the Quagmire ends you discard a card instead of playing one. If you have no 2-ops cards in your hand, you must play scorecards. If you have no scorecards or 2 ops cards, you must pass and the Quagmire stays in effect. (This is all assuming you're not winning the die roll.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:Oh! That makes more sense than I thought it did. So you only have the no-play turns right at the end of the round instead of when Bear Trap/Quagmire is played then? No Official FAQ posted:Q. Can you explain in simple steps how to resolve a Beartrap or Quagmire?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:42
|
|
|
OK. Is this ruling covered anywhere except in the official FAQ? It doesn't seem covered at all by the rules and wording of the card.
bobvonunheil fucked around with this message at 14:45 on Jun 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:42
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:OK. Is this ruling covered anywhere except in the official FAQ? It doesn't seem covered at all by the rules and wording of the card. It is covered by the card text. Starting from the top: 1) Discard an OPS card worth 2 or more and roll 1-4 to cancel this event. 2) Keep doing (1) until successful or no appropriate cards remain. 3) If out of appropriate cards US player can only play scoring cards until next turn. The card tells you a) what you have to do while it is active, b) how to cancel it, and c) what to do if you can't cancel it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
Oldstench posted:It is covered by the card text. Starting from the top: Where on the card does it say that you can't take your turn as normal after discarding a card to try to break Quagmire? I accept that you can't; I just haven't been able to find a rules justification other than an FAQ and just having to know that that's what they meant.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:56
|
|
|
So, I played a less than average game over the weekend called Seven Card Samurai It's a retheming of Gin Rummy but with the typical spite mechanic that is prevalent in badly designed games. You have 4 different colors of Samurai, Bandits, Ronins, Ninjas, and Shoguns and you draw and play cards to form a gin like hand(in front of you so everyone can see) with the samurai and Ronins. You can only have two colors of samurais so an example winning hand would be 5 red samurai and 2 yellow ones. Ronin cards are wild. They also protect rice tokens that you have from Bandits that can be played to steal them; however, Samurai act as a shield for one piece of rice. There are ways to get past them by playing a ninja and bandit at the same time. End of round is scored by what time a gin hand the winner had plus rice tokens. Everyone else can count their rice tokens they have left at the end of the round. The rule book is written pretty badly by people who obviously speak English but at times you wish they had an editor. Thankfully the 5 rounds didn't last too long and that was it. sonatinas fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Jun 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:58
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:Where on the card does it say that you can't take your turn as normal after discarding a card to try to break Quagmire?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Unless I'm horribly mistaken, it doesn't, and you can. OK. The FAQ wording and OmegaGoo's response seemed to imply that you couldn't take your turn after attempting to cancel Quagmire.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:03
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:Where on the card does it say that you can't take your turn as normal after discarding a card to try to break Quagmire? I have never played Twilight Struggle, but as far as I can see, it has a a loop: Modified from Oldstench: 1) Discard an OPS card worth 2 or more. If you can't, skip to 4) 2) roll 1-4 to cancel this event. 3) If you roll 1-4, the card as no further effect. Else, go to 1) 4) If out of appropriate cards US player can only play scoring cards until next turn. Either you cancel it by rolling a die in step 2, or you keep going through the effect until you have no cards to discard, and you are sent to step 4, wherein you are barred from playing your turn. I can get the reading just from the card, though it is tricky.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:OK. The FAQ wording and OmegaGoo's response seemed to imply that you couldn't take your turn after attempting to cancel Quagmire. Yes, I know, it's making me paranoid and I really hope I haven't been playing wrong from the start. My reasoning is that if the card specifies that you cannot play "normal" cards if you cannot discard means that you can play them if you can, if that makes any sense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Yes, I know, it's making me paranoid and I really hope I haven't been playing wrong from the start. I guess I'm just amazed that this game has a reputation for being an excellent example of rulewriting when there have been like 3 different interpretations posited and I still don't have a definitive answer on how this card plays out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:Where on the card does it say that you can't take your turn as normal after discarding a card to try to break Quagmire? In the post you quoted, it's in step 2. You continue the quagmire until you satisfy its requirements. Step 3 reinforces this by telling you that you cannot end this loop until you satisfy the requirements.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:In the post you quoted, it's in step 2. You continue the quagmire until you satisfy its requirements. Step 3 reinforces this by telling you that you cannot end this loop until you satisfy the requirements. The card text just says you do this once per turn, not that this is the only thing you can do in a given round. Now that I've read the FAQ more closely it still doesn't answer the question of whether you can play a card as normal after attempting to break Quagmire, whether you are successful or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:18
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Yes, I know, it's making me paranoid and I really hope I haven't been playing wrong from the start. You'll just have to accept that this is a wargame with shitloads of text on the cards and not every single possible interpretation has been detailed on the card or in the rules. Hence, GMT released an official FAQ with errata. Here is the complete text of this regarding Bear Trap/Quagmire: #42 and # 44 Quagmire and Bear Trap: See also a relevant ruling under Missile Envy. Q. Can you explain in simple steps how to resolve a Beartrap or Quagmire? A. Sure. Here is a simple three step explanation: 1) Start your action round 2) If you have a 2 or greater value ops card in your hand you must discard one of them (it has NO effect); you may proceed to step three, otherwise your action round is over. 3) Roll a die. If the number is less than 5 the card’s effect is ended, you may resume normal play on your NEXT action round. If not, you must do the same on your next action round. Q. Just to make the Quagmire / Bear Trap clear - First I thought you handle it this way: discard a 2+ Ops, roll the die - if it shows a 6 your phase is over. If a player fails in rolling less than a 5 is he permitted to play a (2nd) card for acting. A. No, he has essentially lost his turn. The discard and die roll is the only thing that a player may do in that action round. If less than 5 is rolled then resume normal play in the next action round. If a player has no cards that meet the Ops requirement of the discard, he must hold his cards until the next turn. Scoring cards are the only exception, as they must be played and cannot be held. These may be played in any order once the player no longer has ops cards that meet the requirement. While this may continue into the new turn, it does not affect the Headline Phase. A player may discard his opponent’s events (without effect – see rule 5.4) as long as the Ops number is high enough. Q. Is escaping the Trap your only permissible action for a given Action Round? Or, once the Trap is broken, is another card play (Ops/Event) allowed immediately as part of the 'normal' action? A. Normal play resumes the next action round after the trap is broken. Q. Does a Beartrap or Quagmire end when the turn ends or will it continue into the next turn? A. The end of a turn will not end a Beartrap or Quagmire. Only the required die roll will do so. Remember that neither card affects headline phase.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
Oldstench posted:You'll just have to accept that this is a wargame with shitloads of text on the cards and not every single possible interpretation has been detailed on the card or in the rules. Hence, GMT released an official FAQ with errata. Here is the complete text of this regarding Bear Trap/Quagmire: Cool, thanks for this. My head can stop imploding now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
How game breaking are those cards in practice?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:How game breaking are those cards in practice? Most of the time it's basically "skip an action round or two, but you can ditch a few enemy events while you're at it." In combination with Red Scare or incredible bad luck it gets scary.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:27
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:How game breaking are those cards in practice?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:27
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:People who pick up a game for the first time, play poorly, and then condemn a game for being badly balanced are my number one GamerBane. I hate that poo poo and I hear it all the time. This is mine.  If I'd have known X I would have played differently! I explained X, apparently you weren't paying attention. You should have stressed the importance of X! It's your first game and you still came second; what is the huge issue? *Grumpy rambling about X, why the game is terrible, why everything sucks* Whatever dude...
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
Indolent Bastard posted:This is mine. I hate it when I buy a game, it gets played once and exactly one person around the table didn't really enjoy it, so it disappears into the cupboard and is never seen again
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:I hate it when I buy a game, it gets played once and exactly one person around the table didn't really enjoy it, so it disappears into the cupboard and is never seen again I have a couple like that, and it's the same person who doesn't like them both. They're both longer games that don't fit in regular pub nights, and he's always around on the nights we don't meet in pubs. What's even worse is that I do really like one of them (Archipelago) and I want to play the other one some more so I can make a firm decision on it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:38
|
|
|
Indolent Bastard posted:This is mine. Also, optional expansion rules for angry try-hard rules forgetter: - we decide on what game we're going to play weeks/months in advance - they don't read the rules but are more passionate than anyone about actually winning, more stressed than anyone about not understanding it all at once, etc fozzy fosbourne fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Jun 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
Indolent Bastard posted:This is mine. Are you secretly recording my game nights?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
Indolent Bastard posted:This is mine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
I definitely had someone get ornery about discarding to hand size in BSG this weekend (which was a special hellish clusterfuck) even though I had both explained the rule during my rundown of the turn and gave them a cheat sheet that had it in boldface.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
I think in my group of peeps, I have maybe two people like that... and me. The other two people are usually pretty good about it, though. Me, on the other hand? I think I've had one person teach a game to me that got all the rules right, even if they've played the game for years. I usually ask them to hand me the rulebook while they're teaching so I can double check. Thankfully, the people I play with tend to understand that it's not because I don't like them, but because I'm a stickler for the rules and I want us all on the same page. Tekopo posted:Personally I dislike 'rules checkers', especially when I'm making my own explanations. They also tend to be the same people that get annoyed when they miss out something I said during the rules explanation (usually because they are concentrating on reading the rules rather than actually paying attention to what I'm saying). I will always (politely) ask people to put down the rulebook when I'm saying rule explanations. Like I said, thankfully most of them understand. I try to keep it to a minimum since I know how much it tends to irritate me! OmegaGoo fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Jun 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
Personally I dislike 'rules checkers', especially when I'm making my own explanations. They also tend to be the same people that get annoyed when they miss out something I said during the rules explanation (usually because they are concentrating on reading the rules rather than actually paying attention to what I'm saying). I will always (politely) ask people to put down the rulebook when I'm saying rule explanations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Personally I dislike 'rules checkers', especially when I'm making my own explanations. They also tend to be the same people that get annoyed when they miss out something I said during the rules explanation (usually because they are concentrating on reading the rules rather than actually paying attention to what I'm saying). I will always (politely) ask people to put down the rulebook when I'm saying rule explanations. I do too, but when one of the other guys is 'explaining', I read the manual along on my phone. Because he literally just reads the manual out loud, leaving out no useless details.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
nimby posted:he literally just reads the manual out loud Even worse is when they don't even bother to do that. Since I live fairly close to a great game store my girlfriend's brother asked me to pick him up a copy of the XCOM board game. When I next visited I gave it to him, and a few weeks later we actually got the chance to sit down and play. I eagerly sit at the dinner table, really looking forward to not being the one setting up and teaching a new game. He puts the box on the table and, having seen plenty of pictures of the game, I help with setup. He then sits down and says to me "Have you got the XCOM app on your tablet? I don't really have any idea how to play. I want to be the scientist though."
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Ugggghhh I ran into this for the first time the other week. Guy's idea of teaching is to open the rulebook, put his head down, and just start reading out loud 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
Tried One Night Werewolf with a group of friends who dont play board games or havent played mafia. Everyone had a lot of fun with it and picked it up quick. God bless that little app. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 17:59
|
|
