Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

Piñata» Forums » Variants

Subject: Trade 3 for 1 Variant rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
United States
Emeryville
California
flag msg tools
badge
Sometimes life is scary and dark. That is why we must find the light. -BMO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've never played Balloon Cup. Printed a custom deck once, but Pinata arrived shortly thereafter. ANYWAY...

I just became aware of the rule in Balloon cup that lets you trade 3 tokens, of a color whose victory card has already been claimed, to buy 1 of another color token when claiming that color's victory card.

This seems like it would be a good addition to Pinata. I like the idea that tokens (candies) that I won, but are now useless, can be used. It also avoids situations where already claimed colors sit unwanted by either player. For example, the green victory card has been claimed, and a green turns up on the 1 spot. Towards the end of the game, that green may stay there a long time.

I'm curious what people think of this borrowed rule from Balloon Cup.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tomello Visello
United States
Reston
Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I own both and have played both (BCup in the past; mostly Pinata since the re-issue). Your suggestion seems minor on the surface but that difference is also intertwined with other seemingly minor changes (i.e. wild cards, altered numeric values, and more). The game play is familiar for both but with slightly different decisions. I'm simply inclined to accept the changes as a package and not as mix-and-match menu.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Emeryville
California
flag msg tools
badge
Sometimes life is scary and dark. That is why we must find the light. -BMO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TVis wrote:
I own both and have played both (BCup in the past; mostly Pinata since the re-issue). Your suggestion seems minor on the surface but that difference is also intertwined with other seemingly minor changes (i.e. wild cards, altered numeric values, and more). The game play is familiar for both but with slightly different decisions. I'm simply inclined to accept the changes as a package and not as mix-and-match menu.



I would tend to agree. However, the games are surprisingly different, and are targeted at different audiences. As I can't get a copy of Balloon Cup, borrowing some elements does make sense.

I don't buy your argument. Pinata is clearly aimed at a more casual audience. I see no reason not to consider hybridizing it to make it more strategic. I don't mean to jump on your comment, but the "this is the way it was designed, so lets play it that way" argument is a weak one, imho.

It appears to me that this rule basically introduces a slight catch-up mechanic, which isn't a bad thing in a game with as much luck as Pinata. I'm assuming Balloon Cup has less luck as it doesn't have the wildcards. The rule also makes for a nice use of otherwise "wasted" candy, and an incentive to obtain "useless" candy. (BTW, runaway leader is an exaggeration, but I can't think of a better term.)

I'm more interested in arguments explaining why this is or isn't a good idea, with specific reasons. This rule certainly can't unbalance the game. It touches none of the mathematical elements. It simply adds another option available to both players.

I do have a pet-pieve against house rules, and I don't make them without much consideration. Hence this post.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tomello Visello
United States
Reston
Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Misterboy wrote:
Pinata is clearly aimed at a more casual audience.
I think the argument has been made for the opposite case in that Balloon Cup allowed immediate placement of cards on the opponent's side while Pinata requires a player to complete his own side first.

I'll grant, though, that the Wild cards might be supportive for your statement.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tomello Visello
United States
Reston
Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Misterboy wrote:
I see no reason not to consider hybridizing it to make it more strategic. ... The rule also makes for a nice use of otherwise "wasted" candy, and an incentive to obtain "useless" candy
I can't reconsctruct how it happened, but I know I had a Pinata game where my opponent had some particular candies and there were 2 tiles I could focus on to compete. He already had 2 Medals. I remember a distinction of this game was that I saw I could in fact leave him with 3 wasted candies, and thereby hope to catch up, by giving preference to winning one of the tiles even though it did not seem the best advancement of my own candy collection.

Two thoughts at that moment made a permanent impression:
a) seeing the waste in this light is unfamiliar compared to Balloon Cup
b) attempting to isolate this waste is a fresh stimulation

In short, I did feel a new excitement at the difference.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Emeryville
California
flag msg tools
badge
Sometimes life is scary and dark. That is why we must find the light. -BMO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Good points.

I would tend to think that *gaining* previously useless candies is more interesting than forcing an opponent to win useless ones. I feel this way because in my games, it's more about what you can get...meaning that the decision of what to "give" your opponent is always secondary to the main goal.

It's also worth pointing out that the Pinata rules list the variant where you can place cards on your opponents side at any time, and I believe the Balloon Cup rules officially listed the variant where you have to place everything on your side before placing on your opponents side.
 
 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.