$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 65.53

4,615 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
29.1% of Goal | 29 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
3 Posts

Codex: Card-Time Strategy» Forums » General

Subject: 2 to 5 players instead of 2 to 6? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
William Wilting
Netherlands
Vught
flag msg tools
It doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense to make this a game for a maximum of 5 players, does it? I get the part about the downtime, but I don't think that many people would play Free For All with 5 players, if any.

6 players then? Not in Free For All, but two teams of 3 players each is more likely than 5 players.

They probably wanted this to be 5 players to give the 5th player more colour choices. However, if that would have been the reason, then I think 4 players should be the maximum.

I'm a bit surprised by this. I'd think that, by now, they would know that already a bunch of games have been "playable" with 5 or more people, but are (almost) never actually played with 5. If this kind of game is actually played by more than 5, then it always happens with an even number of players, and in two teams most of the time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doctor Fedora
Japan
Kyoto
Kyoto
flag msg tools
If memory serves, the main reason it was limited to five was because that's pretty much the breaking point for downtime and things feeling like they're kind of arbitrary. Presumably you could try playing six-player if you want (with four 1/1 Mercenary tokens for player six, I guess?) but it's not officially recommended, is all.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Austin Andersen
United States
Berrien Springs
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
You would also need 1 huge table.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.