Chris Wood
United States
Darien
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So in the rules it specifically says that you "turn in treasure clues that match the terrain type of all of the surrounding land TYPES at an intersection".

So for example, using the rules quote, if we had an intersection where we were at 1 river, 2 tundras, and 1 forest, we only had to turn in 1 river, 1 tundra, and 1 forest treasure clues to get the treasure (mountain gold equal number of clues -1.

The major point is, using the above example, if we were supposed to turn in treasure clues matching every tile at the intersection, it would say this:

"a player turns in treasure clues that match the terrain type of all the surrounding land "TILES" at an intersection.

So which is the right way? The wording in the rules was a major bone of contention, with the two words: types and tiles, being a major game changer with the ease of using treasure clues.

We house ruled it at the end going with the "types" version, seeming that it balanced out players being stranded far away from a trading post/tools and mines.

If Roland can make a clarification on this, it would be much appreciated!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Geller
United States
Sacramento
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In the example on the page right opposite the rule (page 6, upper right), the requirement is 2 forest clues for the 2 forest tiles.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roland Goslar
Germany
Miltenberg
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
www.kronberger-spiele.de
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes, it should read "matching all of the sorrounding diamond-shaped land tiles".
Otherwise you could find a 5 token treasure with just 1 clue in extreme - easyly killing the game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Wood
United States
Darien
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
RoGo wrote:
Yes, it should read "matching all of the sorrounding diamond-shaped land tiles".
Otherwise you could find a 5 token treasure with just 1 clue in extreme - easyly killing the game.


No with the first (and wrong) way we were doing it, we would still need to discard enough clues to get the mountain gold. For instance if there was a intersection with five tundra tiles, we could discard up to five tundra clues and get mountain gold equal to the amount of clues we discarded -1. To get any mountain gold, we would have to have at least 2 tundra clue tokens.

I don't think that would kill the game playing like that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roland Goslar
Germany
Miltenberg
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
www.kronberger-spiele.de
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes, you're right that wont kill the game, just finding treasures should be a lot easier.
As we liked the clues to be a long term investment, which is independent from works, I'm quite happy with our way, but I'll try your way as I haven't even thought about it till now.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Wood
United States
Darien
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for clearing that up. We will play it the right way in future games, but let me know how playtesting that variant goes!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian Amey
United States
Eastern Shore
Maryland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Myoman wrote:
RoGo wrote:
Yes, it should read "matching all of the sorrounding diamond-shaped land tiles".
Otherwise you could find a 5 token treasure with just 1 clue in extreme - easyly killing the game.


No with the first (and wrong) way we were doing it, we would still need to discard enough clues to get the mountain gold. For instance if there was a intersection with five tundra tiles, we could discard up to five tundra clues and get mountain gold equal to the amount of clues we discarded -1. To get any mountain gold, we would have to have at least 2 tundra clue tokens.

I don't think that would kill the game playing like that.


That is the way my gaming group initially interpreted playing with the treasure maps. As long as a player had some of the matching treasure maps for an intersection, they would be awarded mountain gold equal to the number of treasure map tokens minus 1.

Using the original example, if the player had 1 river and 2 tundra treasure maps, they would receive 3-1=2 mountain gold tokens. This gives players the opportunity to decide how much effort they want to invest to achieve a reward.

We have since played as Roland described; needing all the treasure maps corresponding to the total number of diamond land (and river) tiles at an intersection. I am curious to learn how Roland feels about the modified use of the treasure maps after playing a few games.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Wood
United States
Darien
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Roland have you tested the alternate way of playing treasures? Has it worked for you?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Johnny Goslar
Germany
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We did not spent much time on Lost Valley the last month as we were working on our new game Nord.
But from our one play it was too easy to get the treasures and pay off was too big/too safe/too solitary. Treasures should have a bit of a risk associated with them. And really "finding" a treasure feels better than getting one at every edge.
 
 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.