Steffan O'Sullivan
United States
Plymouth
NH
A black cat crossing your path signifies that the animal is going somewhere. -- Groucho Marx
-
We had played this five-player for the first time the week before. This week there were only two of us, and Mike asked if it had rules for two-players, as we liked it with five but thought it a bit long. Sure enough, there are some interesting two-player tweaks, so we had a go of it.
Very good game two-player! Certainly much shorter - we played in less than two hours, and this was only our second play, so we weren't really masters of the game.
We used the recommended Wizards' Guild, and randomly drew two "R" guilds (Masons and Bankers) and two "B" guilds (Architects and Librarians). The two non-player (NP) dwarves started on the two "R" guilds and moved around each turn per the rules.
Mike went early for extra elves, while I concentrated on building an Inn to be able to get extra workers more cheaply, especially since there's only one public spot to hire workers in the two-player game. He led in Elves all game, and I eventually led in Dwarves all game, though not in time for the first scoring.
Nobody bought a guild this game, and only one Wall was built. We focused on the buildings in our hands. I managed a Tower fairly early and got the lead in Gnomes the whole game.
After the first scoring, we were tied in a fairly low tax bracket - no stress. After the second scoring, I was ahead by three points, which put me in the 6 gold tax bracket and he was in the 5. Unfortunately, my building income at that point was only 4, so it was looking painful. I could have sent workers to collect money when I passed, but I took a chance and simply slid back the two VPs, which dropped me down to the 5 tax bracket, one point ahead of him.
The NP house placement is extremely interesting in the two-player game! We played Blue and Red, and so used Yellow and White as the NP colors. The first player placed the white buildings in our game, and the second the yellow. Obviously, this means we switched placing NP colors occasionally, which is an excellent mechanic. I watched him debate about where to place a Gnome one turn, hovering over his Gatehouse but finally opting for his Bank. So in the NP house placement phase, I chose the open Gatehouse card, taking the open spot his Gnome would have claimed! He was miffed over that, and kicked himself for it the rest of the game.
We only used the Wizards' Guild once the whole game, on the final turn. The problem is that it has to be used *before* NP house placement, so we knew it could be undone by the opponent's play. Still, I'm glad I took it on that final turn, as it ended up hurting him by two points, which is exactly the amount I won the game by! And yet, if he'd placed that extra Gatehouse marker, he wouldn't have lost those points ...
It's hard to say if that Wizards' Guild move really won me the game, though - there are so many factors going into scoring that it felt like a tie the whole game. Ultimately, I feel it was more my Gnome lead that won it for me: 9 points to his 3, over the course of the game.
We enjoyed it very much and are eager for a rematch. Two-player may be the best way to enjoy this fine game!
-
Sen-Foong Lim
Canada
London
Ontario
-
Thanks for the report! I enjoyed your analysis of the game and I hope you continue to enjoy Belfort.
-
Jay Cormier
Canada
New Westminster
British Columbia
-
Yes indeed - very nice to read! One note - once someone builds the first half of a Gatehouse - no one else can build that other half. Just a small clarification!
-
Steffan O'Sullivan
United States
Plymouth
NH
A black cat crossing your path signifies that the animal is going somewhere. -- Groucho Marx
-
jcormier wrote: Yes indeed - very nice to read! One note - once someone builds the first half of a Gatehouse - no one else can build that other half. Just a small clarification!
Ah, really? He actually thought that was the case. I looked it up under the Gatehouse card and didn't see the rule, so we allowed it. Where is the rule printed?
Oh, he'll be claiming an asterisk for my victory now!
Edit: Indeed, looking at the pdf of the rules here on BGG, I don't see the rule you mention anywhere. Is there an errata file somewhere I'm not aware of?
-
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
sos1 wrote: jcormier wrote: Yes indeed - very nice to read! One note - once someone builds the first half of a Gatehouse - no one else can build that other half. Just a small clarification! Ah, really? He actually thought that was the case. I looked it up under the Gatehouse card and didn't see the rule, so we allowed it. Where is the rule printed? Oh, he'll be claiming an asterisk for my victory now! Edit: Indeed, looking at the pdf of the rules here on BGG, I don't see the rule you mention anywhere. Is there an errata file somewhere I'm not aware of?
The Gatehouse is already owned by the other player. The NP needs to choose an UNOWNED Gatehouse to occupy.
Gatehouses have 2 spaces for property markers, but they are still just 1 building, and therefore can only have 1 owner.
-
Steffan O'Sullivan
United States
Plymouth
NH
A black cat crossing your path signifies that the animal is going somewhere. -- Groucho Marx
-
sedjtroll wrote: The Gatehouse is already owned by the other player. The NP needs to choose an UNOWNED Gatehouse to occupy.
Gatehouses have 2 spaces for property markers, but they are still just 1 building, and therefore can only have 1 owner.
I believe you that that is the intent of the rules, but nowhere in the rules that I can find does it actually say that. Please quote the relevant rule!
At this point, I think this needs to be an official erratum.
-
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
sos1 wrote: sedjtroll wrote: The Gatehouse is already owned by the other player. The NP needs to choose an UNOWNED Gatehouse to occupy.
Gatehouses have 2 spaces for property markers, but they are still just 1 building, and therefore can only have 1 owner. I believe you that that is the intent of the rules, but nowhere in the rules that I can find does it actually say that. Please quote the relevant rule! At this point, I think this needs to be an official erratum.
The 2p rules appendix says...
Quote: He then puts one of NP3’s Property markers onto any available symbol of the card’s type on the board (emphasis mine)
You are correct, the rulebook is not explicit in saying that a property marker symbol in a building owned by a player is not an "available symbol."
This only comes up in conjunction with the Gatehouse, as all other buildings do not have a property marker symbol that is not filled upon building the property.
-
Steffan O'Sullivan
United States
Plymouth
NH
A black cat crossing your path signifies that the animal is going somewhere. -- Groucho Marx
-
Thanks, Seth. Of course, it could also come up in a multi-player game. We actually joked about it in our five-player game that two of the players couldn't possibly make that move because it was a bad move for them, limiting their own options. But the rest of us would happily cut off our own noses to spite another player! No one tried it, though ...
But, without an official erratum, it *is* an appealing NP move in a two-player game!
-
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
sos1 wrote: Thanks, Seth. Of course, it could also come up in a multi-player game. We actually joked about it in our five-player game that two of the players couldn't possibly make that move because it was a bad move for them, limiting their own options. But the rest of us would happily cut off our own noses to spite another player! No one tried it, though ...
But, without an official erratum, it *is* an appealing NP move in a two-player game!
Appealing as it may be, it is not a legal move 
You can consider this thread as official errata if you like, or official clarification, or whatever you want to call it
-
Peter Brahan
United States
North Sutton
New Hampshire
-
Thanks for the report. This is now officially on the list for me!
-
Josh Cappel
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
-
sos1 wrote: Thanks, Seth. Of course, it could also come up in a multi-player game. We actually joked about it in our five-player game that two of the players couldn't possibly make that move because it was a bad move for them, limiting their own options. But the rest of us would happily cut off our own noses to spite another player! No one tried it, though ...
But, without an official erratum, it *is* an appealing NP move in a two-player game!
The 2nd edition of Belfort (which is at the printers right now) addresses this question in the Gatehouse section of the Buildings Appendix in the rules.
-
Daryl Andrews
Canada
Kitchener
Ontario
-
I tried the 2 player version of Belfort recently. Loved it! The double dummy players were a great twist. And the roaming dummy dwarves were great too. I felt like it was a more strategic game because, I felt like I was even more in control of my own fate. Plus I wanted an excuse to write double dummy.
-
V L
United States
Virginia
-
I have played it twice now in two player. Great game!
My wife beat me in the first game. I beat her in the second.
I have also played it 3 player once.
-
V L
United States
Virginia
-
sedjtroll wrote: sos1 wrote: sedjtroll wrote: The Gatehouse is already owned by the other player. The NP needs to choose an UNOWNED Gatehouse to occupy.
Gatehouses have 2 spaces for property markers, but they are still just 1 building, and therefore can only have 1 owner. I believe you that that is the intent of the rules, but nowhere in the rules that I can find does it actually say that. Please quote the relevant rule! At this point, I think this needs to be an official erratum. The 2p rules appendix says... Quote: He then puts one of NP3’s Property markers onto any available symbol of the card’s type on the board (emphasis mine) You are correct, the rulebook is not explicit in saying that a property marker symbol in a building owned by a player is not an "available symbol." This only comes up in conjunction with the Gatehouse, as all other buildings do not have a property marker symbol that is not filled upon building the property.
Seth, so when a dummy chooses a Keep or Gatehouse, the dummy builds two houses in a keep and 1 in a gatehouse?
edit: and in any player count, when someone builds a gatehouse, noone else can build the other side of the gatehouse, right?
-
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
Neo42 wrote: Seth, so when a dummy chooses a Keep or Gatehouse, the dummy builds two houses in a keep and 1 in a gatehouse?
Yes. The 2nd edition rulebook was updated to address this.
Quote: edit: and in any player count, when someone builds a gatehouse, noone else can build the other side of the gatehouse, right?
That is correct - the gatehouse is already built - you never build the 2nd half of the gatehouse, you only man it with a Gnome (or, "Gnome it").
-
|
|
A black cat crossing your path signifies that the animal is going somewhere. -- Groucho Marx
