Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
13 Posts

War of the Ring (First Edition)» Forums » General

Subject: How well does this work with 4 players? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Blue Jackal
United States
Nowhere
Virginia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As it's very well rated, and I'd love an excellent four player game... anyhow, any help would be appreciated.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Archibald Zimonyi
Sweden
Gothenburg
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
If you ask me you should skip the four player rules and simply play two and two, with the normal two player rules.

The four player rules allow the two players on one side to split their forces (one player has some and the other the rest) and also to trade cards at certain times. Then they split the action dice and there are some restrictions on how the armies may mix.

You can't discuss your cards (both players on one side has his own set of cards) but you can trade them at certain times. So in the end you still know the other players cards, but deciding when to play them will still give the other player enough info to know what to do.

All in all this only makes the four player rules kind of a constipated two player game.

The game is still cool enough if you are two players on one side sharing the resources in a normal two player game.

But that's just me.

Archie
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Constantine von Hoffman
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I thought there was way too much downtime with 4. It's fantastic with two.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adam Smiles
United States
Dedham
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
admin
The ratio of people to cake is too big.
badge
Excuse me, I believe you have my stapler...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Downtime is a definite problem with 4. I'd only use the 4 player game if you had 2 experienced players and 2 newbies and wanted to play a teaching game.

The 3 player game is tolerable, because there's more stuff for the bad guys to do.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thomas Eager
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
DBA Junkie
badge
"A Book should serve as the Ax for the frozen sea within us."-- KAFKA
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sauron I believe WotR works better with three than four, actually. Nonetheless, as previous posters have said, it's best with just two players. A beautiful game, one of my faves. But if you're looking for a game for four, best look elsewhere. If you want a war-themed game with minis for four, try Blood Feud in New York, Conquest of the Empire or even Attack! or, 'natch, Shogun. If you want to try the Euro-games, Puerto Rico, Princes of Florence, Torres, and Taj Mahal all work great with four players. sauron
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Noel
United States
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've got two minutes so I'll chime in. The game is great with two or three players, but for some reason doesn't work as well with four. We'll still play it with four, we still love it with four, but it's not as good as with fewer players.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kurt Keckley
United States
Bakersfield
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Fields of Despair - GMT P500.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
gulpyukshake

Terrible 4-player game!!

Fantastic 2-player game so just buy 2 copies. sauron
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Blue Jackal
United States
Nowhere
Virginia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the responses... maybe a 2 (or more likely 3) player game could still be of use. Maybe not.

Would 2 players per side work? It could be good or bad... but sometimes a game is made fun just by discussing plays, in my experience, so it might work.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Antigonus Monophthalmus
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
BlueJackal wrote:
Thanks for the responses... maybe a 2 (or more likely 3) player game could still be of use. Maybe not.

Would 2 players per side work? It could be good or bad... but sometimes a game is made fun just by discussing plays, in my experience, so it might work.


I've never played it with 3 or 4 but it just seems uninteresting.

However as long as you don't mind the downtime move discussions can be fun. We did that when teaching someone the game, and it was an enjoyable experience. It did greatly increase play time though, obviously.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave J McWeasely
United States
Louisville
Kentucky
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmb
I'd say the first couple games should be with 4 players, because there are so many choices. The cards can be hard to understand, and rereading them and thinking about how they can be used takes a lot of the down time between your turns. If there are lots of players, than this process can go in || to the acting player's turn. With only two players, this can't happen, because someone from the other side needs to be watching the activity on the board to play combat card and whatnot.

So this wont' be your group's "new favorite four player game" for very long, because once you internalize the choices there won't be enough to do. However, I have no qualms to teach the game as a 4-er. The first couple games every player has blinders on, and the interactions within a team help the learning curve get flattened.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
B B
Belgium
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Number of players... An overview:

What about 3 players?
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/26073

2... 3... 4... Players
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/27285

Does it work well with 3 or 4 players
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/28100

3 player is fun, esp. with new players
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/83315

2-player vs. 3- or 4-player
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/105957

How does it play with more than 2 players?
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/112933

How well does this work with 4 players?
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/135224
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Daglish
United Kingdom
Cheadle
Cheshire
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
to answer the question for apparently the eighth time on this page, very well indeed.

There is a player-related problem: the four-player requires twice as much gaming ability & experience round the table as the two-player, and the likelihood of a deficit in this area is my explanation for the surprising reactions to it. The remarks about "downtime" are significant, as even the four-player should be engrossing. The uncertainties are increased by doubling the number of geeks playing, and player interaction more than doubles. When playing either the two- or the four-player game I found myself looking forward to playing the other.

The three-player doesn't work as well, but there's only one reason why any three would play it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rev. David Moore
United States
Avon
New York
flag msg tools
Here's three important tips that will help the 4-player work more smoothly and enjoyably:

1). Most Important: allow players in Multi-Player games to go simultaneously. It provides a bit of impetus and nothing drastic or game-changing can happen anyways. I encourages everyone to keep involved and moves it all along nicely. For all intents and purposes, the player who 'acts first' has their actions go off technically first, if it matters.

2). 'Discards' should go 'through' the other same-side players. There is nothing specifically in the rules to preclude such and it prevents same-side players from 'obviating' an important card that their fellow player may need (which has happened in some 'ruthless' multi-player formats I've been in). A 'discarded' card is simply discarded 'through' the other players hand - basically under the 'trade' auspices. Then each same-side player basically keeps it and possibly discards his own, or continues it to the discard pile.

3). 4-player has some interesting 'ruthless' politics going on. Same force players can 'sabotage' their fellow/rivals - or delay them. Also, we have used 'optional' 1/4-point rules for 'corruption' points added by bad guys or 'movement' added by good guys (first in, first out). This way, if a 'win' is tallied, the person moving the Fellowship or Destroying it gets credit! It also 'compels' teams to pay attention to this crucial game aspect, as opposed to just strongholds. thus, if a bad buy corrupts the fellowship and 'wins' it prevents his same-side rival from claiming victory just because he took a lone 'city'!

Experienced players I know actually enjoy the social/political aspects of a 4-player. Its much more involved and interesting, of course.

Remember too that only Sauron can 'muster' wraiths, but Saruman can 'move' or use them. Also, players must give permission to 'merge' units - but once that occurs, the player having, moving or mustering the majority in that army is in control (so control can 'change'). Also, cards that deploy 'other same-side' untis are usuable by either player as long as it deploys or effects at least 'some' forces you control or deploy (like mustering Easterlings in Sauron's Nurm).

Keep enjoying this Great Game!!!
 
 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.