GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 131.4
48.6% of Goal | left
Immunities have long been proposed as another variant to make the game more interesting. I think I first read about them in that book: Beyond Boardwalk or whatever it was...
Immunities are strictly illegal under the rules as written it should be pointed out. So you have to get people to agree on this variant. However immunities are useful.
Anyhow, the basic complaint is that anything like this will prolong the game and although most of our games go about 1.1/4 hrs (some take longer even much longer) any sort of prolonging is not fun because most of the late game is just rolling and not much decision making.
However, immunities are important to allow people to make trades/create monopolies and otherwise get back in the game when someone first gets a monopoly. Trading is definitely the major way to balance out the luck of the die in obtaining monopolies early. Immunities of course sweeten the deal between two playes who are behind so they dont have to pay each other and can obtain more time to catch up to the leader.
So the idea here is to only allow ONE IMMUNITY PER TRADE. So I trade you a yellow for a blue and I can allow you one free pass on Boardwalk/park place and you may allow me one free pass on the yellow group. that is all the immunities you can allow.
We are also playing that immunities transfer with the property so if I sell the blues to you, then you have to allow the person I gave immunity to his one free pass. YOu may or may not like that so you have to decide if you want to play it that way.
Most of my group feel that this is a useful change because it does really encourage trading to make monopolies and counter act any luck of the die initially. Allowing only one per trade is a reasonable compromise to avoid prolonging the game.
What do you think?