Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
9 Posts

Caverna: The Cave Farmers» Forums » Variants

Subject: Furnishing variability using a simple d6 rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Bill Corey Jr.
United States
Elkhorn
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
designer
badge
www.thecubistpodcast.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I had an (almost absurdly) simplistic idea for reducing the number of furnishing choices in a game, and for preventing a "samey" feeling of players pursuing the same strategy every game. The Furnishings boards are divided into eight sections of six Furnishings each... so for each section, roll a d6 before the game starts and remove the appropriate tile (or stack of tiles, should you be so unfortunate as to roll a 1 in the Dwellings section and decide to live with the roll). This will remove one Dwelling type, four Green Furnishings, and three Yellow Furnishings from each game, which might create juuuuuuust enough variability to address concerns about predictable strategies.

I have not had a chance to try this yet, mind you, but I'm definitely going to tuck a d6 into my Caverna box and give it a shot next time around. I'll report back with my results and any feedback I get.

Theoretical thoughts?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Iavor Ianakiev
Bulgaria
Sofia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Try it first ...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Austin
United States
Burbank
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sounds like a cool concept for adding some variety to the game. I would strongly suggest re-rolling if you get a 1 on the dwellings board, since reducing the game to 5 dwellings total would be a disaster.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Eisen
United States
Redwood City
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Dourgrim wrote:
I had an (almost absurdly) simplistic idea for reducing the number of furnishing choices in a game, and for preventing a "samey" feeling of players pursuing the same strategy every game. The Furnishings boards are divided into eight sections of six Furnishings each... so for each section, roll a d6 before the game starts and remove the appropriate tile (or stack of tiles, should you be so unfortunate as to roll a 1 in the Dwellings section and decide to live with the roll). This will remove one Dwelling type, four Green Furnishings, and three Yellow Furnishings from each game, which might create juuuuuuust enough variability to address concerns about predictable strategies.

I have not had a chance to try this yet, mind you, but I'm definitely going to tuck a d6 into my Caverna box and give it a shot next time around. I'll report back with my results and any feedback I get.

Theoretical thoughts?



Try it first was a good answer. But:

1. I would not remove anything at all from the dwellings. No need to be doctrinaire or consistent about this. And you need the dwellings.
2. At large player counts, probably a poor idea. There already is a mad dash for furnishings as there just aren't that many of them. Also: a player generally can not be certain of getting a particular combination, as they move so fast, that it is not going to feel as "samey".

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bill Corey Jr.
United States
Elkhorn
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
designer
badge
www.thecubistpodcast.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the feedback, folks.

I will of course try it first, as I said in the OP, and report back with what I've found. I was more looking for possible pitfalls before I put anyone through what could essentially be a two+ hour playtest of an idea.

My thoughts on removing Dwellings: if there is a possibility of a game where having smaller families is necessary, might that not create an interesting dynamic in the game? So far in my ten or so plays, growing your family seems to be a no-brainer part of most strategies, so perhaps forcing players to think outside of that paradigm might be interesting. Am I way off base on that?

I agree that it's probably not a needed variant in large player count games... I'm thinking 6-7p here. However, since I haven't had much luck getting that player count around a Caverna table yet (one 6p game out of ten or so plays), I suspect I'll have more chances to do so than not.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Eisen
United States
Redwood City
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Dourgrim wrote:
Thanks for the feedback, folks.

I will of course try it first, as I said in the OP, and report back with what I've found. I was more looking for possible pitfalls before I put anyone through what could essentially be a two+ hour playtest of an idea.

My thoughts on removing Dwellings: if there is a possibility of a game where having smaller families is necessary, might that not create an interesting dynamic in the game? So far in my ten or so plays, growing your family seems to be a no-brainer part of most strategies, so perhaps forcing players to think outside of that paradigm might be interesting. Am I way off base on that?

I agree that it's probably not a needed variant in large player count games... I'm thinking 6-7p here. However, since I haven't had much luck getting that player count around a Caverna table yet (one 6p game out of ten or so plays), I suspect I'll have more chances to do so than not.


If you're looking for reduction of dwellings to drive strategies with fewer dwarves (I think the exploration mechanic already does this fairly well), then maybe replace this with:

If the dwelling d6 hits on regular dwellings, don't remove them from the game. Instead tweak the price to make them more expensive. Other option I like less is to then constrain each player to buying at most 1 regular dwelling. Removing them completely is too big a distortion.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dirk Do Wrong
msg tools
Quote:
If the dwelling d6 hits on regular dwellings, don't remove them from the game. Instead tweak the price to make them more expensive. Other option I like less is to then constrain each player to buying at most 1 regular dwelling. Removing them completely is too big a distortion.


What if in that case you made it so that you can't build dwellings off the board, you must use a level 7 expedition at full price or a level 11 for cheaper.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trevor Schadt
United States
Glenshaw
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cypherwulf wrote:
Quote:
If the dwelling d6 hits on regular dwellings, don't remove them from the game. Instead tweak the price to make them more expensive. Other option I like less is to then constrain each player to buying at most 1 regular dwelling. Removing them completely is too big a distortion.
What if in that case you made it so that you can't build dwellings off the board, you must use a level 7 expedition at full price or a level 11 for cheaper.
There needs to be an option that doesn't involve adventuring. Maybe you have to pay 1 (or even 2) Rubies, in addition to the wood and stone, to build a dwelling?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vince Lupo
United States
ALEXANDRIA
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I was looking for a way for there to be less tiles so it doesn't seem as overwhelming to a new player. I wouldn't think that a "distortion" of the strategy available from the tiles left would be too big a deal. Think of games like Dominion, where only 10 out of 25+ kingdom cards are available each game. In some cases this distorts the game to be "all about curses this game" or "all about vp generating actions" this time.
 
 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.