GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 106.14
41.7% of Goal | left
After a dozen of plays, Greenland still continues to intrigue me. Besides providing a very interesting assymetry between the factions, the applications of certain rules make you think deeply. One of such crucial rules is the IRON RULE.
The importance of having the iron in Greenland is beyond the dispute. The game provides two extreme applications for the iron to cancel losses: In the standard game, spenditure of an iron piece cancel "all loses", whereas in the survival game it cancels "none".
Ramification of the two applications is clear to many but I will give an example that will make it clear to everyone: In one of our recent games, Tunit was well armed militarily (all their rolls of 1,2 and 3 were kills) and the Thule was trying to hunt a whale with 12 cubes (and they had zero iron piece in their caché). Tunit attacked them with 10 (including an alpha and Warchief). Their 10 dice provided 9 (nine) kills!!! At this stage, the Thule player exchanged one of his cards to receive an Iron and cancel "all loses"! Now you understand clearly the "security" provided by Iron. The same applies to hunting and hostile New World conditions.
WITHOUT IRON RULE, Greenland can easily become a place/game where players may fall into "Von Neumann's clarity (!) to nuke Moscow before the Soviets build their own nukes" and wipe out other Factions to win (!). This gives a whole new meaning to COLD WAR of course.
WITH IRON RULE, Greenland is somewhat "(TOO ?)SECURE PLACE" where you can take high risks of hunting dangerous animals, spend your time in hostile new World, behave naively against potential agressor Factions because you can cancel all your losses with one Iron.
Two different games in one small package!
THE IRON RULE is one helluwa intriguing design p(i)(e)(a)ce isn't it?
- Last edited Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:00 pm (Total Number of Edits: 4)
- Posted Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:06 am