$10.00
Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
11 Posts

7 Wonders: Leaders» Forums » Variants

Subject: No more initial draft. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
David Spira
United States
New york city
New York
flag msg tools
What about this: instead of making the initial leaders draft, each player receveis 4 leaders card at the beginning, picks one then passes the remaining 3 to the right. Then he buys the leader he picked (or discard it for 3 gold).

At the beggining of the 2nd era, he picks a leader from the 3 he got from the player to his left, then passes the remaining 2 to the right.

At the beggining of the 3rd era, he picks one of the two he has, and discard the last one.

A good thing about this variant is that there is no longer a unidirectional logic "4 leaders you picked at the beggining of the game determining the way you play the entire game". instead, it's more like a dialogue. the 1st leader you pick determines how you play the 1st era. The way you played the 1st era determines which leader you will pick next, and so on.

Rome, however, could be a problem, since if you draw more leaders on the first era, you won't feel like passing them away on the 2nd era. This could be solved like this: the leaders the rome player drew are set aside. He doesn't pass them on, but he can pick any of them everytime he is to choose a leader.

Any thoughts on this?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Todd Warnken
United States
Harrison
Ohio
flag msg tools
I'm not crazy. My mother had me tested.
badge
Happy grandfather!!!
mbmbmbmbmb
Sounds like an interesting variant.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M. B. Downey
United States
Alexandria
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
mb
I think it removes the strategy that you can plan for and does not substantially change the base game to be worth being an expansion.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Miller
United States
Stigler
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The last thing Leaders needs is more variance.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Spira
United States
New york city
New York
flag msg tools
the thing is: something i've been hearing people complaining about is that your whole strategy is determined by the leaders you get to choose by the beggining.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew
United States
San Francisco
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I believe the pre-Leaders complaint was that the game was too tactical, with not enough long-term planning.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M. B. Downey
United States
Alexandria
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
mb
yodavid1 wrote:
the thing is: something i've been hearing people complaining about is that your whole strategy is determined by the leaders you get to choose by the beggining.


Whereas with your suggestion one's whole strategy is to be reactive and hope one gets good cards down the line. I do not see this as an improvement.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Miller
United States
Stigler
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
downeymb wrote:
yodavid1 wrote:
the thing is: something i've been hearing people complaining about is that your whole strategy is determined by the leaders you get to choose by the beggining.


Whereas with your suggestion one's whole strategy is to be reactive and hope one gets good cards down the line. I do not see this as an improvement.


This is exactly what I meant by my "more variance" crack. It puts even more emphasis on getting lucky because you don't even know what you have to work with, greatly skewing leader effectiveness towards the ones that slot into the same strategies that were already good in the base game, unless you're extra lucky and open one of the few leaders that can constitute a strategy on its own. It's just the base game with extra luck.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
M. B. Downey
United States
Alexandria
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
mb
Again, I do not see this as an improvement.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Miller
United States
Stigler
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
To be clear I was agreeing with you.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul King
United Kingdom
Cambridge
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I think that this will add to the luck factor, without improving the game in any other respect. For instance, you don't have the option of choosing a leader from your initial draw to play in era III (due to price, or usefulness). You play it in Era I or pass it on.

I know that the approach you suggest is the same one used with the Era cards, but the fact that the number of leaders dealt is much lower than the total number of Era cards gives much less chance for averaging effects - and the fact that they aren't sorted by Era makes it even worse...

So, I see your change as adding more luck at the cost of strategy, and I don't think that Seven Wonders needs more of that.
 
 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.