Recommend
6 
 Thumb up
 Hide
20 Posts

Stone Age: The Expansion» Forums » Rules

Subject: Trading rules again rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Frank Otte
Germany
Münster
Nordrhein-Westfalen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It is completely clear for me that you must actually use all the resources you got by a trade, to immediately buy a hut or card (with one of your meeples on it, of course). Resources, which you get by a trade, but are not used immediately to buy (in case of a 1:2 trade) are lost. You can do only ONE trade per turn, only for a SINGLE card OR hut (not both).

I have also understood, that you can "set" the price for a card or hut (with variable price) to put yourself in the "need" to trade. Or with other words, for cards and huts with variable price, you are not bound to a price, which you are able to pay without trading.

Fair enough. What I don't understand is one simple thing, namely, if you are allowed to trade, even if you have already the resources to pay. Or with other words, must the resources, you get by trade, be actually missing for your purchase?

Example: I want to build a hut, which costs one stone, one wood and one gold. In my inventory I have one wood, one stone, one gold and one tooth decoration. My token on the trader track enables me to trade 1:2. Am I allowed to trade the decoration for one stone and one gold, paying this and one wood from my inventory, to pay the hut, which leaves my original stone and gold untouched?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Thornsen
United States
Nottingham
Maryland
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hermjard wrote:
Example: I want to build a hut, which costs one stone, one wood and one gold. In my inventory I have one wood, one stone, one gold and one tooth decoration. My token on the trader track enables me to trade 1:2. Am I allowed to trade the decoration for one stone and one gold, paying this and one wood from my inventory, to pay the hut, which leaves my original stone and gold untouched?

It's my understanding that this is totally fine.

The only thing you can't do is trade, and then keep the resources you traded for on your mat for a future round.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Duff
Canada
Ottawa
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hermjard wrote:
Example: I want to build a hut, which costs one stone, one wood and one gold. In my inventory I have one wood, one stone, one gold and one tooth decoration. My token on the trader track enables me to trade 1:2. Am I allowed to trade the decoration for one stone and one gold, paying this and one wood from my inventory, to pay the hut, which leaves my original stone and gold untouched?

Not allowed. The trade was completely unrelated to your purchase, since you already had those goods. You've simply traded for goods and stuck them on your mat for the future.

This is what the whole "trade must be needed" stuff is all about. If you didn't do the trade, could you have made the exact same move you ultimately ended up doing? In this case, it's a yes answer. After the trade, you bought a hut with wood, stone, and gold. You already had that. Therefore, the trade was not needed, and illegal.

And it's probably bad strategy as well. Since you didn't need to make the trade, why do it? You've given up your ability to make a trade you might need on a future turn, and who knows what you might need down the road? It will depend on what new tiles come out, what the other players do, etc.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Günter Immeyer
Germany
Essen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, I disagree. I don't think this trade is illegal at all. I would consider this to be quite a clever move (at least if there was nothing else to trade on that turn, i. e. the player did not miss out on a better opportunity to acquire some other vital hut or civ card for which he/she really does not have the required resources).

Just like Jeff, I think that trading according to Frank's example is perfectly legit. I can spot nothing illegal at all, except for minor moral concerns maybe, hehehe... The trade seems a little "unnatural", true - but: you are giving something away (the decoration), you do get 2 resources in return and you do use exactly those 2 newly gained resources to build a hut. That's the whole point!

The rules don't actually say that "a trade must be needed" - this seems to be just a common misinterpretation... shake

What they do say is that the resources you gain from your once-per-turn-trade must immediately be spent to buy something (a hut or a civ card). And that's exactly what's happening here. No one is forcing you to use just those resources that you already have in stock. You can trade, get some fresh wood and stone and use those for constructing. So what.

And to prevent any "overpowered exploitation", there's that additional little restriction that prevents you from getting to keep any extra resource for your supply after trading 1:2 (in Frank's example, it would be illegal to take 2 stone for the decoration, only use one for the hut construction and keep the other for your supply).

So in my eyes, everything's okay. Why shouldn't a player who has spent previous actions to advance on the trading track be allowed to benefit a little from his/her 1:2-trading ability (and that only in those turns, when something new is actually acquired)? And that benefit is not even game-breaking, either: I haven't seen it happen very often in our games (so at least I agree with Steve in that on most occasions, there will probably be better strategic options for a 1:2-trade).
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
You can't handle the truth?
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Miraculix wrote:
The rules don't actually say that "a trade must be needed" - this seems to be just a common misinterpretation... shake
Except, you know, on page 5 of the rule book where it says a player may only trade if needed to acquire a card or tile.

I would agree with you if I could ignore the rules, but I just can't do that.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Günter Immeyer
Germany
Essen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
English rules wrote:
a player may only trade if needed to acquire a card or tile
Well, great. Looks like we have the good old "Lost in Translation" problem again...

No, really: In my German version, that "if needed"-phrase is simply not present! So it looks to me as if someone did not do a very precise job of transferring the original into English (without changing any meaning, that is).

The German text in my rulebook says: "Der Spieler darf nur tauschen, um 1 Zivilisationskarte oder 1 Gebäudeplättchen zu erwerben"

...which I would simply have translated to: "The player may only trade in order to acquire 1 civ card or 1 hut."

That phrase would only have emphasized the fact that a player is not allowed to just trade without immediately buying something with those resources, and would not have included any additional information/hints about "needs" that perhaps the author of this game never intended to implement...

Oh, well... Guess we'll just have to play the game with your version of the rules on that side of the Atlantic and with the German version on this side...
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Günter Immeyer
Germany
Essen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Okay, so I browsed through the FAQ entries over on the official "Hans im Glück" site and came up with something relevant:

Our trading question has been officially answered there by the "HiG Team" on February 15, 2012!:

www.hans-im-glueck.de/stone-age-mit-stil-zum-ziel/?x_comment...

In case you don't speak German, the entry basically says: No matter if you already own 1 or more of the resources required to buy a hut (or a card), you are allowed to trade one decoration for 1 (or 2) of those (same) resources, prior to buying the hut/card - as long as you actually do buy it. No one can force you to use those resources you already have in stock! As an additional detail, the HiG-Team also admits that the trading rule forcing you to use the resources in stock first had actually once been implemented during some design phase of the game, but it was eventually removed in the rules for the published version of the expansion!

So in essence, per the official HiG-rules (and as I have been saying all along... ):
it is legal to trade in both of the following situations:

1) You have 1 stone, 1 wood, 1 gold, 1 tooth decoration in your inventory => you trade 1 tooth for 1 stone and 1 gold (your marker is on the 1:2 trading track), you buy a hut costing 1 stone, 1 wood, 1 gold for 14 points => you now have 1 stone and 1 gold in your inventory.

(this was Hermjard's original example in question)

2) You have 7 gold and 1 wood in your inventory. Your marker is on the 1:2-position on the trading track. You want to buy the "1-7" hut with 7 gold. Again, you are not forced to use those 7 gold in your inventory to buy the hut now (which would leave you with 1 wood after the purchase) - instead, you would want to trade your 1 wood for 2 gold, buy the hut with 7 gold for 42 points and still have 2 gold in your inventory!
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Togu Oppusunggu
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
Thank you for your clarifications, Günter. Well that changes things a bit - funny that it's taken all this time for HiG to get this all clarified.

I'll make a note of the clarification on my post about trading rules ("okay here it is...") when I get the chance.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Günter Immeyer
Germany
Essen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
No problem, Togu. But after having thoroughly read your "okay here it is..." trading rules post (for the first time, I have to admit), I don't see how I could have helped to clarify anything new!

In your post, you already had everything completely (and correctly) covered and even pointed out the difference between the original (German) rules and the slightly alternative wording in the Rio Grande rules (especially regarding no. 4).

So basically, I just dug out some old evidence from the HiG website (dating back from February 2012) to prove that the original German rules do indeed allow trading in the example of Hermjard's new thread - retrospectively, I could just as well have redirected the OP to your post instead...

It is an unfortunate matter of fact, that the German (HiG) and English (Rio Grande) game rules for "Stone Age" (and its expansion) do differ in 2 major points: trading (with resources already present) and scoring two sets of civ cards, while at the same time both documents are of course considered "official" by their respective buyers (on two different continents)...

You can almost consider it a natural law that when game rules are translated from German into English (and vice versa, as the case of "Dominion" has shown!), some rule details will always get misinterpreted! In my opinion, this is due to the fact that the person assigned with the task of translating is either

a) a very capable/professional linguist, but a non-gamer who is not at all familiar with the given game or its rules (=> the wording is grammatically correct and makes sense when read, but does not always precisely depict the original rule on a 1 to 1 basis)

or

b) a member of the original design team (or game company at least) with a thorough knowledge of the game and its rules, but whose English is not quite good enough to guarantee the usage of expressions that reflect a 100% identical meaning in all cases (=> especially true for the more complex games out there...)

or

c) a combination of cooperating a) and b) - usually a better approach, but as this is more time-consuming (and thus more expensive) and at least 2 different characters need to agree on one final version of text, the result after several meetings and edits is also rarely perfect.

That's how I see it, anyway.

Still, I'm perfectly fine with people playing their games by those rules included with their game (that's what I'd do myself in most cases).

Nevertheless, I also believe in the general principle that a game should be played by the rules that the designer originally wanted it to be played by!

So maybe you can just point it out somehow like that in your next post's edit - as in: let's look upon the German rules as a proposed (yet official!) alternative and leave it up to each individual gaming group, if they want to play it this or that way.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
You can't handle the truth?
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Miraculix wrote:
Nevertheless, I also believe in the general principle that a game should be played by the rules that the designer originally wanted it to be played by!
While I do respect a lot of designers, and the work that they do, you may not realize that a lot of really great publishers, do a lot of great work in developing a game from a designer's original idea, to a published game.

It's because of this that I usually side with publishers. This is their life, and they have done it dozens of times, while your designer may have only done this a couple of times. Plus, sometimes, designers may be too close to their project to see what is better.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Togu Oppusunggu
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
Günter, you're right. The rule clarifications I had posted are already correct and consistent with the HiG ruling that you talked about.

I like your clarification here that a trade "doesn't have to be needed", which allows the situation that Frank Otte posted about in the first post here. I think some of us didn't realize it would be okay to do what Frank was asking about, even though we thought we understood all the HiG rulings .

I might make mention of your clarification. Thanks again.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Togu Oppusunggu
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
Curt, just a quick reply to your post. I fully agree that the development process is very important.

But in this case with Stone Age, it's not clear whether Rio Grande's two different rules are based on game development or simply a result of a translation error.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastian Zzz
Poland
Warsaw
flag msg tools
mbmb
Hermjard wrote:
You can do only ONE trade per turn, only for a SINGLE card OR hut (not both).

Just to be sure, this is correct and current rule?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Francois BOILARD
Canada
flag msg tools
I have 2 questions about the rules of trading.

The rules says i can only trade once per turn.

I have put a Meeple on hunt (1 Wood and 1 gold) and a Meeple on a second HUT (1 wood and 1 stone). I have 5 decoration , 1 stone and 1 gold .I have the trade ratio 1:1

Question #1

Can i by both HUT by trading for the first HUT a decoration for a WOOD + my gold and get the second HUT by trading a decoration for a wood + my stone ?

Question #2

I have put a Meeple on a HUT (2 wood and 1 stone). I have 4 decoration and 1 wood .I have the trade ratio 1:1

Can i Buy the HUT by trading 1 decoration for wood, trading 1 decoration for stone and give my wood so i can pay the HUT.


Made one trading (for a HUT or a CARD) consisting of and exchange of 2 decorations for 2 ressources.


-------------------

thanks

AmiralFB







 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Francois BOILARD
Canada
flag msg tools
Maybe my question was not clear enough

I want to buy a HUT (1 stone / 1 wood / 1 gold). I have 3 decoration and my ratio for the trading is 1:1. Can i buy the HUT by trading
1 decoration for 1 stone
1 decoration for 1 wood
1 decoration for 1 gold

YES or NO

if the respond is NO that means that we can only trade 1 objet per turn if our ratio is 1:1 or 1:2


thanks

AmiralFB
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Francois BOILARD
Canada
flag msg tools
I have a question about trade

I want to buy a HUT (1 stone / 1 wood / 1 gold). I have 3 decoration and my ratio for the trading is 1:1. Can i buy the HUT by trading
1 decoration for 1 stone
1 decoration for 1 wood
1 decoration for 1 gold

YES or NO

if the respond is NO that means that we can only trade 1 objet per turn if our ratio is 1:1 or 1:2

Thanks for taking the time

AmiralFB
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
You can't handle the truth?
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AmiralFB wrote:
I have a question about trade

I want to buy a HUT (1 stone / 1 wood / 1 gold). I have 3 decoration and my ratio for the trading is 1:1. Can i buy the HUT by trading
1 decoration for 1 stone
1 decoration for 1 wood
1 decoration for 1 gold

YES or NO

if the respond is NO that means that we can only trade 1 objet per turn if our ratio is 1:1 or 1:2

Thanks for taking the time

AmiralFB
No.

You can make 1 trade per turn. You are trying to make 3.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tina McDuffie
United States
Goose Creek
South Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
Visit TheGlassMeeple.com for game reviews and run-throughs by me.
badge
She who laughs... lasts!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Miraculix wrote:
...Our trading question has been officially answered there by the "HiG Team" on February 15, 2012!:

www.hans-im-glueck.de/stone-age-mit-stil-zum-ziel/?x_comment...
...

So in essence, per the official HiG-rules (and as I have been saying all along... ):
it is legal to trade in both of the following situations:

...

2) You have 7 gold and 1 wood in your inventory. Your marker is on the 1:2-position on the trading track. You want to buy the "1-7" hut with 7 gold. Again, you are not forced to use those 7 gold in your inventory to buy the hut now (which would leave you with 1 wood after the purchase) - instead, you would want to trade your 1 wood for 2 gold, buy the hut with 7 gold for 42 points and still have 2 gold in your inventory!

So you *can* trade wood for gold? Or in general any resource for another? I thought you could only trade decorations 2:1, 1:1, or 1:2. I understand you can only trade for resources you're using to build a hut or acquire a boat (card). I missed something about being able to trade one resource for another. I thought you could only trade a decoration for a resource.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Amick
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
tgmcduff wrote:
Miraculix wrote:
...Our trading question has been officially answered there by the "HiG Team" on February 15, 2012!:

www.hans-im-glueck.de/stone-age-mit-stil-zum-ziel/?x_comment...
...

So in essence, per the official HiG-rules (and as I have been saying all along... ):
it is legal to trade in both of the following situations:

...

2) You have 7 gold and 1 wood in your inventory. Your marker is on the 1:2-position on the trading track. You want to buy the "1-7" hut with 7 gold. Again, you are not forced to use those 7 gold in your inventory to buy the hut now (which would leave you with 1 wood after the purchase) - instead, you would want to trade your 1 wood for 2 gold, buy the hut with 7 gold for 42 points and still have 2 gold in your inventory!

So you *can* trade wood for gold? Or in general any resource for another? I thought you could only trade decorations 2:1, 1:1, or 1:2. I understand you can only trade for resources you're using to build a hut or acquire a boat (card). I missed something about being able to trade one resource for another. I thought you could only trade a decoration for a resource.

Yes, you can trade any resource as well; you can even trade or receive a mix of resources and decorations if your trade ratio is not 1:1.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls