Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
48 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Fallout» Forums » Rules

Subject: Rules clarification of multiple faction-based agenda cards rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Two Bats
msg tools
badge
Avatar
I've noticed a lot of discussion about players having multiple copies of the same faction-based agenda cards, so here goes-

A heads up, for anyone wondering about the faction-based agenda cards: just spoke with the developer (Andrew Fischer) of this game, and each copy of the card is worth full points.

To quote our conversation:
If a player gains multiple copies of the same faction-based agenda cards (eg, 2 shield cards), do they gain full points for each of the cards (ie, shields are two ahead, so both cards are worth 3 influence)?

They do get full points for cards, even if they have multiples.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Graham
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Why would people think otherwise? Rules don't mention only score one of each card. It would take forever if each card only scored once. huh, didn't realize this was an issue.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Two Bats
msg tools
badge
Avatar
Yah, there's been a fair amount of discussion over it in one of the reviews posted here, and some people are of the opinion that it breaks the game (not my experience, but I do see where they are coming from). Just figured I'd get a ruling from the designer to make sure the discussion was worth perusing.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daily Grind
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As one of those folks who does think this breaks the game, I appreciate the effort to get clarification. Thanks for the post.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Graham
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I definitely appreciate the clarification for those people. Did the multiple amounts of each card not tip them off either? If there was only one or two of each card I could see some question. I did end one game rather quick (one hour) because I drew 3 star faction cards and then 2 or 3 quests in a row pushed the star faction ahead by 3. This was awesome because the next 2 games everyone was paranoid to let one faction get too far ahead. Lol
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Schenck
United States
Dayton
Ohio
flag msg tools
GO BUCKS!
badge
Stop touching me!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think most people realized they're supposed to be full point values. Most of the discussion seems to revolve around whether that's a bad idea.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig S.
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
cbs42 wrote:
I think most people realized they're supposed to be full point values. Most of the discussion seems to revolve around whether that's a bad idea.

In my experience, it would nearly impossible to beat the factions without gstting full value for duplicates. Leads me to believe those that think it's game breaking are playing incorrectly somehow...
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Howard Massey
United States
Wichita
Kansas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
JavaGammer wrote:
Why would people think otherwise? Rules don't mention only score one of each card. It would take forever if each card only scored once. huh, didn't realize this was an issue.


Silly people
Maybe we should label them Assume books. yuk
Or a comprehension test booklet.

It's like you get a board game and some 'puzzles to solve'...
thrown in for Free !! surprise
_ While your trying to learn/play a board game.

This game was designed for sale to
more than just die-hard board gamers' !

Oh well, let the Rules forum posts escalate and
the eventual addendum & FAQs' come forth...



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Graham
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
kskato wrote:
JavaGammer wrote:
Why would people think otherwise? Rules don't mention only score one of each card. It would take forever if each card only scored once. huh, didn't realize this was an issue.


Silly people
Maybe we should label them Assume books. yuk
Or a comprehension test booklet.

It's like you get a board game and some 'puzzles to solve'...
thrown in for Free !! surprise
_ While your trying to learn/play a board game.

This game was designed for sale to
more than just die-hard board gamers' !

Oh well, let the Rules forum posts escalate and
the eventual addendum & FAQs' come forth...




A game within a game. I like it.

You can tell this game was meant for casual gamers as well by how basic the rules are.

"EACH agenda provides one influence AND provides conditions for the survivor to gain influence"

Right from the rules. Not sure how you could assume that meant only one of each type.

I get asking and verifying. I guess I was just surprised by the debate on such a clear cut rule.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Graham
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I am not knocking people for asking. Sometimes people get confused or misinterpret. I get it. Been there and done that. Heck, we played the first game leveling up completely wrong. But the rule is petty clear here.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
csouth154 wrote:
cbs42 wrote:
I think most people realized they're supposed to be full point values. Most of the discussion seems to revolve around whether that's a bad idea.

In my experience, it would nearly impossible to beat the factions without gstting full value for duplicates. Leads me to believe those that think it's game breaking are playing incorrectly somehow...

You're completely missing the point. It's nothing to do with how necessary those agendas are to reach the VP threshold (the threshold could easily be adjusted). It's to do with how strong, random and swingy those agendas are compared to the others, making the game un-fun.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig S.
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
That may be your point, but it wasn't mine.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Graham
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
bleached_lizard wrote:
csouth154 wrote:
cbs42 wrote:
I think most people realized they're supposed to be full point values. Most of the discussion seems to revolve around whether that's a bad idea.

In my experience, it would nearly impossible to beat the factions without gstting full value for duplicates. Leads me to believe those that think it's game breaking are playing incorrectly somehow...



You're completely missing the point. It's nothing to do with how necessary those agendas are to reach the VP threshold (the threshold could easily be adjusted). It's to do with how strong, random and swingy those agendas are compared to the others, making the game un-fun.

Which is why you have to watch everyone like a hawk! Watch the people who are trying to advance one faction. It adds a nice level of suspicion to the game. If you lose by letting someone or two people advance the one faction far enough to win. That's on you. Also, this where a little bluffing has helped. Pledged loyalty to shields sitting with 2 stars in hand.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jean-Philippe Thériault
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The people who think the faction agenda cards are broken seem to be confused about what this game is. They want to play it like a sandbox. It's actually a VP race. You're not supposed to let people run roughshod completing faction objectives without counteracting them.

I can't see factions being ahead by more than one point very often, and only for a very short time.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig S.
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, how far one faction advances ahead of the other will have everything to do with the agenda hands of the survivors. If most survivors have more cards for faction X than faction Y, it could get ugly...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Scatliff
Canada
Victoria
British Columbia
flag msg tools
It's about time, too.
badge
I hate overtext but love irony.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
csouth154 wrote:
Well, how far one faction advances ahead of the other will have everything to do with the agenda hands of the survivors. If most survivors have more cards for faction X than faction Y, it could get ugly...

Sure, it could get ugly for the one poor sod who is drawing the faction Y agendas, but that's life. If people want a balanced game experience, they should go play a Euro.

(And even though I'm replying to you, I'm not trying to contradict you. I've agreed with the rest of your posts in this thread.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Scatliff
Canada
Victoria
British Columbia
flag msg tools
It's about time, too.
badge
I hate overtext but love irony.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bleached_lizard wrote:
You're completely missing the point. It's nothing to do with how necessary those agendas are to reach the VP threshold (the threshold could easily be adjusted). It's to do with how strong, random and swingy those agendas are compared to the others, making the game un-fun.

Are they strong? Yes.
Are they random? Only in how you draw them, not in how you advance them.
Are they swingy? Only if you ignore them.

It seems you want to play a game where you get to ignore the main story and just go do stuff. That's fine, but then it's not the game's fault that you're trying to play a different game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Howard Massey
United States
Wichita
Kansas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
JavaGammer wrote:
kskato wrote:
JavaGammer wrote:
Why would people think otherwise? Rules don't mention only score one of each card. It would take forever if each card only scored once. huh, didn't realize this was an issue.


Silly people
Maybe we should label them Assume books. yuk
Or a comprehension test booklet.

It's like you get a board game and some 'puzzles to solve'...
thrown in for Free !! surprise
_ While your trying to learn/play a board game.

This game was designed for sale to
more than just die-hard board gamers' !

Oh well, let the Rules forum posts escalate and
the eventual addendum & FAQs' come forth...




A game within a game. I like it.

You can tell this game was meant for casual gamers as well by how basic the rules are.

"EACH agenda provides one influence AND provides conditions for the survivor to gain influence"

Right from the rules. Not sure how you could assume that meant only one of each type.

I get asking and verifying. I guess I was just surprised by the debate on such a clear cut rule.


Where does "EACH agenda provides one influence AND provides conditions for the survivor to gain influence" answer the question
"do you get full points for each card, even if they have multiples ?"
All I see is 'EACH agenda provides one influence'
I assume something different from that part of the sentence that pertains to the "amount of influence" cards provide .

The question-answer from the OP is what I'm talking about.
That is the question that should not of been necessary to ask.
(glad TwoBats did)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Graham
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
kskato wrote:
JavaGammer wrote:
kskato wrote:
JavaGammer wrote:
Why would people think otherwise? Rules don't mention only score one of each card. It would take forever if each card only scored once. huh, didn't realize this was an issue.


Silly people
Maybe we should label them Assume books. yuk
Or a comprehension test booklet.

It's like you get a board game and some 'puzzles to solve'...
thrown in for Free !! surprise
_ While your trying to learn/play a board game.

This game was designed for sale to
more than just die-hard board gamers' !

Oh well, let the Rules forum posts escalate and
the eventual addendum & FAQs' come forth...




A game within a game. I like it.

You can tell this game was meant for casual gamers as well by how basic the rules are.

"EACH agenda provides one influence AND provides conditions for the survivor to gain influence"

Right from the rules. Not sure how you could assume that meant only one of each type.

I get asking and verifying. I guess I was just surprised by the debate on such a clear cut rule.


Where does "EACH agenda provides one influence AND provides conditions for the survivor to gain influence" answer the question
"do you get full points for each card, even if they have multiples ?"
All I see is 'EACH agenda provides one influence'
I assume something different from that part of the sentence that pertains to the "amount of influence" cards provide .

The question-answer from the OP is what I'm talking about.
That is the question that should not of been necessary to ask.
(glad TwoBats did)
They question and answer both Clearly say EACH. EACH means EACH. The rules answers the question. Don't look into it, just read EACH.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JavaGammer wrote:
bleached_lizard wrote:
csouth154 wrote:
cbs42 wrote:
I think most people realized they're supposed to be full point values. Most of the discussion seems to revolve around whether that's a bad idea.

In my experience, it would nearly impossible to beat the factions without gstting full value for duplicates. Leads me to believe those that think it's game breaking are playing incorrectly somehow...



You're completely missing the point. It's nothing to do with how necessary those agendas are to reach the VP threshold (the threshold could easily be adjusted). It's to do with how strong, random and swingy those agendas are compared to the others, making the game un-fun.

Which is why you have to watch everyone like a hawk! Watch the people who are trying to advance one faction. It adds a nice level of suspicion to the game. If you lose by letting someone or two people advance the one faction far enough to win. That's on you. Also, this where a little bluffing has helped. Pledged loyalty to shields sitting with 2 stars in hand.

How would that help with what happened in our first game, where I was performing pathetically, another player pushed the red faction out to +4 power, then I just happened to draw another red faction agenda, giving me the win even though I had done nothing and the other player had done all the work?

It doesn't help to say "watch the other players" because sometimes the other players don't even need to do anything except be lucky enough to draw the right agenda.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
XDarkAngelX wrote:
The people who think the faction agenda cards are broken seem to be confused about what this game is. They want to play it like a sandbox.

Thanks for letting us know what we want and think.

Quote:
It's actually a VP race. You're not supposed to let people run roughshod completing faction objectives without counteracting them.

I can't see factions being ahead by more than one point very often, and only for a very short time.

Again, this isn't the issue. It's not about some players having red agendas and some having blue agendas and a lack of motivation in acting as an opposition. It's about multiple players all having agendas of the same colour, but some being lucky enough to hold more of them than others.

If all players hold red objectives, why would anyone ever push blue forward?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Smoo wrote:
csouth154 wrote:
Well, how far one faction advances ahead of the other will have everything to do with the agenda hands of the survivors. If most survivors have more cards for faction X than faction Y, it could get ugly...

Sure, it could get ugly for the one poor sod who is drawing the faction Y agendas, but that's life. If people want a balanced game experience, they should go play a Euro.

(And even though I'm replying to you, I'm not trying to contradict you. I've agreed with the rest of your posts in this thread.)

That's slightly obtuse, and I'm sure you know it. Games have come a long way since the days of "old school Ameritrash" and some of the best game today are a hybrid of both. There's no inherent necessity for AT games to be wildly imbalanced, and I think most AT fans (like myself) would still prefer their games to have some semblance of balance or at least fairness.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Smoo wrote:
bleached_lizard wrote:
You're completely missing the point. It's nothing to do with how necessary those agendas are to reach the VP threshold (the threshold could easily be adjusted). It's to do with how strong, random and swingy those agendas are compared to the others, making the game un-fun.

Are they strong? Yes.
Are they random? Only in how you draw them, not in how you advance them.
Are they swingy? Only if you ignore them.

It seems you want to play a game where you get to ignore the main story and just go do stuff. That's fine, but then it's not the game's fault that you're trying to play a different game.

No, that's not at all what I want and I don't see how anything I've said points to that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Graham
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
bleached_lizard wrote:
JavaGammer wrote:
bleached_lizard wrote:
csouth154 wrote:
cbs42 wrote:
I think most people realized they're supposed to be full point values. Most of the discussion seems to revolve around whether that's a bad idea.

In my experience, it would nearly impossible to beat the factions without gstting full value for duplicates. Leads me to believe those that think it's game breaking are playing incorrectly somehow...



You're completely missing the point. It's nothing to do with how necessary those agendas are to reach the VP threshold (the threshold could easily be adjusted). It's to do with how strong, random and swingy those agendas are compared to the others, making the game un-fun.

Which is why you have to watch everyone like a hawk! Watch the people who are trying to advance one faction. It adds a nice level of suspicion to the game. If you lose by letting someone or two people advance the one faction far enough to win. That's on you. Also, this where a little bluffing has helped. Pledged loyalty to shields sitting with 2 stars in hand.

How would that help with what happened in our first game, where I was performing pathetically, another player pushed the red faction out to +4 power, then I just happened to draw another red faction agenda, giving me the win even though I had done nothing and the other player had done all the work?

It doesn't help to say "watch the other players" because sometimes the other players don't even need to do anything except be lucky enough to draw the right agenda.

One faction should never even have the chance to get +4. That is why you have to watch the players and power track. If one faction gets 1 ahead and it isnt in my favor I immediately make it a priority to quest and bring the other faction up. It is no secret that anyone can win easily if the power track is over 2 in favor of one faction. Dont let it happen!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Overtext pending moderation...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JavaGammer wrote:
bleached_lizard wrote:
JavaGammer wrote:
bleached_lizard wrote:
csouth154 wrote:
cbs42 wrote:
I think most people realized they're supposed to be full point values. Most of the discussion seems to revolve around whether that's a bad idea.

In my experience, it would nearly impossible to beat the factions without gstting full value for duplicates. Leads me to believe those that think it's game breaking are playing incorrectly somehow...



You're completely missing the point. It's nothing to do with how necessary those agendas are to reach the VP threshold (the threshold could easily be adjusted). It's to do with how strong, random and swingy those agendas are compared to the others, making the game un-fun.

Which is why you have to watch everyone like a hawk! Watch the people who are trying to advance one faction. It adds a nice level of suspicion to the game. If you lose by letting someone or two people advance the one faction far enough to win. That's on you. Also, this where a little bluffing has helped. Pledged loyalty to shields sitting with 2 stars in hand.

How would that help with what happened in our first game, where I was performing pathetically, another player pushed the red faction out to +4 power, then I just happened to draw another red faction agenda, giving me the win even though I had done nothing and the other player had done all the work?

It doesn't help to say "watch the other players" because sometimes the other players don't even need to do anything except be lucky enough to draw the right agenda.

One faction should never even have the chance to get +4. That is why you have to watch the players and power track. If one faction gets 1 ahead and it isnt in my favor I immediately make it a priority to quest and bring the other faction up. It is no secret that anyone can win easily if the power track is over 2 in favor of one faction. Dont let it happen!

It's like you're not even listening. What I'm saying is that it was in favour of all of us.

Yes, I agree that if half the players hold red agendas and the other half hold blue agendas (or even don't hold any faction-specific agendas) then it's the "opposition's" fault if they allow one faction to get too far ahead. But it happens too often that the majority of the players are all supporting the same side, but it just happens that one of those players has more agendas supporting that side than the other players. So the players who happen to hold fewer faction-specific agendas are punished for pursuing their own objective.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   |