Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
22 Posts

Cosmic Encounter» Forums » Rules

Subject: Naming a Card (think Sniveler and Visonary) rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
J Walker
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi guys started playing Cosmic Encounter properly yesterday OMG it is sick!
Sorry about that but I do think it's a brilliant game. Some of my favourite powers are ones that allow you to name cards that the other players must play or give, such as with the Sniveler. But then I noticed some other characters that name cards like the Visonary, and wondered if it's one rule for one alien and another rule for everyone else. To be specific:

* The Sniveler, when naming cards according to his card text, can say something like 'I don't have an attack 15.' How specific can he be? Can he say 'I don't have a card with a 0 in it' or 'I don't have a card that is not a rift from the reward deck' or even 'I don't have a flare that will let me cause the other players to lose ships.' Can a number of clauses be included in these specifications such as 'I don't have an even numbered card that is higher than 5 that nobody has played in this game?'

* On the same note, the Visionary can dictate the card that is to be played, now his card has him naming a specific card like 'You will play an attack 06'. SO is he naming cards rather than describing them like the sniveler is?

*And how does this relate to the artifact that causes you to name a card then search for it?

(I'm guessing each one works differently although that's not FFG style hence the need for this post.)

Hope you guys catch my drift and can help me out here. Any general tips relating to this aspect of the gameplay would be appreciated.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Darian Tucker
United States
New Smyrna Beach
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lordocean wrote:
Hi guys started playing Cosmic Encounter properly yesterday OMG it is sick!
Sorry about that but I do think it's a brilliant game. Some of my favourite powers are ones that allow you to name cards that the other players must play or give, such as with the Sniveler. But then I noticed some other characters that name cards like the Visonary, and wondered if it's one rule for one alien and another rule for everyone else. To be specific:

* The Sniveler, when naming cards according to his card text, can say something like 'I don't have an attack 15.' How specific can he be? Can he say 'I don't have a card with a 0 in it' or 'I don't have a card that is not a rift from the reward deck' or even 'I don't have a flare that will let me cause the other players to lose ships.' Can a number of clauses be included in these specifications such as 'I don't have an even numbered card that is higher than 5 that nobody has played in this game?'

* On the same note, the Visionary can dictate the card that is to be played, now his card has him naming a specific card like 'You will play an attack 06'. SO is he naming cards rather than describing them like the sniveler is?

*And how does this relate to the artifact that causes you to name a card then search for it?

(I'm guessing each one works differently although that's not FFG style hence the need for this post.)

Hope you guys catch my drift and can help me out here. Any general tips relating to this aspect of the gameplay would be appreciated.


The Sniveler can get pretty specific, but not to the point where people would get confused about which cards he was talking about. Saying, "I don't have a card with a 0 in it," can be extremely risky because it means Sniveler might get an Attack 00, wasting his efforts.

The second case is only possible if Sniveler is the defense and used up his last Encounter card (since he would have had to use/discard all his rifts at the start of his turn if he had no Encounter cards). In this case, I think it is better to just draw a new hand, but it is technically a legal play.

The third one I would have my doubts about, and for good reason, because I'm a dipshit and didn't realize Sniveler could only whine for Encounter cards.

I am almost certain that the fourth one will not work because it places an undue burden on the players to remember information that is usually considered irrelevant. I don't believe you're supposed to search through the discard pile unless a specific card instructs you to do so, so unless someone had written down every card that was played so far, I would say this last one is illegal simply for sanity's sake.

Visionary must specify an Encounter card, not a range of cards that might be possible. I'd say this is different from Sniveler because Sniveler can whine in general about a card he doesn't have, while Visionary must specify the exact card his opponent must play. Therefore, Visionary can't say something like, "You must play an Attack card lower than a 06." He'd actually have to request Attack 00, 01, or 04. If the Visionary player is new, it's not a bad idea to print off a list of Attack cards, their values, and the number in the deck so people aren't requesting an Attack 03 (which doesn't exist) or asking for an Attack 00 after it has already been played.

Again, the Finder Artifact must name a specific card. This Artifact is extremely powerful when combined with the Clone Flare that allows you to keep artifacts rather than discarding them, as it allows you to basically pull stuff out of peoples' hands once you know they have it. Again, in this case, you are looking for a particular card which you have to name. That means you'd better know that the "Flare that prevents you from discarding artifacts" is the Clone Flare.

The general tip is I might be wrong because FFG hires horrible rules writers. Still, this seems like the cleanest way to play the game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Just a Bill
United States
Norfolk
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
No, I said "oh, brother," not "go hover."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In general, game effects that name cards must name one specific card by title: attack 12, the Miser flare, Reinforcement +5, etc. (With the advent of Cosmic Incursion, this means we need to distinguish between "regular" negotiates and Crooked Deals, as well.) This is how Finder, Visionary, Wild Visionary, and Wild Siren all work.

Sniveler, however, is a weird exception; as you point out, it's not defined very well. Like the other effects, it says you may "name a card", but then gives an example of naming a range of cards. This was probably done since having to name one specific card could make it difficult for Sniveler to get something he can use, and I have always played it as if the only multiple-card option allowed is a range of attack cards; meaning that Sniveler would have the following options:

* I don't have a regular negotiate
* I don't have a Negotiate (Crooked Deal)
* I don't have an attack ___
* I don't have an attack higher than ___
* I don't have an attack lower than ___

But I can't prove this is the correct interpretation. Your question makes me wonder if it really is more open-ended than I have played it for 30 years. Sniveler's text does say "if you ... lack an encounter card you want", so if you want a negotiate card, any negotiate card, perhaps you should be able to say that. If you want an attack card that does not contain any zeroes, perhaps you should be able to say that.

However, your rift and flare examples are invalid because Sniveler can only ask for encounter cards.

I'll be interested to hear what others have to say about Sniveler.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roberta Yang
msg tools
FFG Sniveler can only whine about encounter cards, so no whining for rifts, flares, or anything else of that sort.

My interpretation is that Sniveler can ask for any sort of category of encounter card (theoretically, I can see no problem with him saying "GUYS, I don't have an Attack 09, 12, 13, 19, 30, or -07, or a Negotiate Crooked Deal, HELP"), the Visionary needs to name a single specific encounter card, and the artifact that lets you name a card requires you to name a single specific card.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Just a Bill
United States
Norfolk
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
No, I said "oh, brother," not "go hover."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
SparkingConduit wrote:
FFG hires horrible rules writers

It doesn't seem like they actually hire writers at all. It seems like game designers write all the text and FFG doesn't think they actually need writers or editors.

Sniveler's text is a case in point. This whole confusion about "name a card" apparently meaning "specify conditions for a group of cards" was actually introduced by FFG: Eon and Mayfair had no such problem, because they both (after establishing that the effect was limited to challenge cards) say "you name what you need". FFG, as they often do, recast the text and unwittingly corrupted their own wording conventions, making it harder for new players to understand how their game actually works.

If the Eon and Mayfair editions were smart, moderately attractive women, then the FFG edition is a hottie who sounds like an airhead when she speaks.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Darian Tucker
United States
New Smyrna Beach
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bill Martinson wrote:
SparkingConduit wrote:
FFG hires horrible rules writers

It doesn't seem like they actually hire writers at all. It seems like game designers write all the text and FFG doesn't think they actually need writers or editors.

Sniveler's text is a case in point. This whole confusion about "name a card" apparently meaning "specify conditions for a group of cards" was actually introduced by FFG: Eon and Mayfair had no such problem, because they both (after establishing that the effect was limited to challenge cards) say "you name what you need". FFG, as they often do, recast the text and unwittingly corrupted their own wording conventions, making it harder for new players to understand how their game actually works.

Eon and Mayfair were smart women who were moderately attractive. FFG is a hottie who sounds like an idiot when she speaks.


Maybe she can go on a date with Azathoth and they'll both die, then.

Forgive me for not noticing that Sniveler can only ask for Encounter cards. I didn't have the sheet in front of me and must have glossed over the power description on Reda's Warp.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mi Myma
United States
Fountain Valley
California
flag msg tools
Why is there no Word Games Forum or Subdomain?
badge
There should be a Word Games Subdomain, or at least a Word Games Forum!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've always been very flexible about the range of cards Sniveler can whine about, but I'd never allow him to whine based on something that isn't inherent to the cards themselves, like "not having been played in the game so far," or "having been in player X's hand," or stuff like that. You specify the card(s) by what is actually on the card(s) and nothing else. Even in cases where it isn't abusive, it's just too much of a headache to have to deal with stuff like that.

So the Sniveler can whine thusly:
"I don't have an Attack 23."
"I don't have an Attack card higher than 20."
"I don't have an Attack card between 17 and 30."
"I don't have an Attack card that's a prime number."
"I don't have a 06 or a 14 or a 23."
etc.

And, the Sniveler could even whine about having too few of a card he wants, but that makes it more flexible on the part of the other players. For example, if the Sniveler has an Attack 18, he could whine, "I don't have more than one Attack card above 15." If none of the other players have more than one Attack card above 15, then they aren't obligated to give him one. A player with a 20 and no other cards over 15 has no obligation to give or discard his 20 - since he doesn't have "more than one over 15". If a player has both the 30 and the 40, he must give him one or discard one - not both, and in this case, he'd give or discard the 30 and keep the 40. If a player has a 16, a 17, and a 19, he could either give the 16 to the Sniveler, or discard both the 16 and the 17 - he would not have to discard the 19.

This lets the Sniveler whine even when he already has fairly good cards - at the risks of not getting anything, and giving away information about what cards he has.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Just a Bill
United States
Norfolk
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
No, I said "oh, brother," not "go hover."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Phil Fleischmann wrote:
For example, if the Sniveler has an Attack 18, he could whine, "I don't have more than one Attack card above 15." If none of the other players have more than one Attack card above 15, then they aren't obligated to give him one.

I don't see how that follows from the game text.

* The text says "if you lack an encounter card you want"; it doesn't say anything about not having as many as you would like.

* It says "you name a card you don't have"; it doesn't say you name a card that you have but not in as great a quantity as you would like. If you have an attack 20 in your hand, how can you claim that attack 20 is a card you don't have?

* It says "one player must give you such a card or all players must discard all such cards in their hands"; there is no provision whatsoever for being exempt from having to give a card just because you don't have "more of them than the Sniveler does".

Also, you said earlier that you would never allow him to whine based on something that isn't inherent to the cards themselves, like "having been in player X's hand" ... yet you are allowing him to whine about a card based on it already being in his own hand but in unsatisfactory quantity. The number of cards already in your hand is not an inherent property of the card; you're violating your own principle.

So although I can agree with the rest of what you wrote, this last bit should be considered a house rule. (And, from my perspective, a counterintuitive one.) I can't imagine trying to convince a casual player that this is what the text intends.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cameron McKenzie
United States
Atlanta
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bill Martinson wrote:
Phil Fleischmann wrote:
For example, if the Sniveler has an Attack 18, he could whine, "I don't have more than one Attack card above 15." If none of the other players have more than one Attack card above 15, then they aren't obligated to give him one.

I don't see how that follows from the game text.

* The text says "if you lack an encounter card you want"; it doesn't say anything about not having as many as you would like.

* It says "you name a card you don't have"; it doesn't say you name a card that you have but not in as great a quantity as you would like. If you have an attack 20 in your hand, how can you claim that attack 20 is a card you don't have?

* It says "one player must give you such a card or all players must discard all such cards in their hands"; there is no provision whatsoever for being exempt from having to give a card just because you don't have "more of them than the Sniveler does".

Also, you said earlier that you would never allow him to whine based on something that isn't inherent to the cards themselves, like "having been in player X's hand" ... yet you are allowing him to whine about a card based on it already being in his own hand but in unsatisfactory quantity. The number of cards already in your hand is not an inherent property of the card; you're violating your own principle.

So although I can agree with the rest of what you wrote, this last bit should be considered a house rule. (And, from my perspective, a counterintuitive one.) I can't imagine trying to convince a casual player that this is what the text intends.


In my opinion, the Sniveler's whining must be clear enough so that any given card clearly meets or does not meet the criteria. If the Sniveler wants to be extremely specific, he can do so, but it is often better to be vague because the other players may not have much to lose if a specific card is named.

With regard to the Sniveler's whining being clear, I don't think he should be able to whine about cards that haven't been played, as it depends on there being some memory of what has happened in the past and you can't really enforce it. However, I don't see any big problem with the Sniveler saying "I don't have any attack cards except for 04, 06, and 23" as it leaves absolutely no doubt as to what Sniveler is looking for.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mi Myma
United States
Fountain Valley
California
flag msg tools
Why is there no Word Games Forum or Subdomain?
badge
There should be a Word Games Subdomain, or at least a Word Games Forum!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bill Martinson wrote:
Phil Fleischmann wrote:
For example, if the Sniveler has an Attack 18, he could whine, "I don't have more than one Attack card above 15." If none of the other players have more than one Attack card above 15, then they aren't obligated to give him one.

I don't see how that follows from the game text.

* The text says "if you lack an encounter card you want"; it doesn't say anything about not having as many as you would like.

Why not? A second attack card over 15 may well be a card he wants.

Quote:
* It says "you name a card you don't have"; it doesn't say you name a card that you have but not in as great a quantity as you would like. If you have an attack 20 in your hand, how can you claim that attack 20 is a card you don't have?

A second card over 15 is a card he doesn't have.

Quote:
* It says "one player must give you such a card or all players must discard all such cards in their hands"; there is no provision whatsoever for being exempt from having to give a card just because you don't have "more of them than the Sniveler does".

Well the Sniveler has to tell the truth about what he whines for. If he whines about "a second card over 15", and none of the other players has "a second card over 15", then they don't have such a card in their hands, and therefore they are exempt from giving anything.

Quote:
Also, you said earlier that you would never allow him to whine based on something that isn't inherent to the cards themselves, like "having been in player X's hand" ... yet you are allowing him to whine about a card based on it already being in his own hand but in unsatisfactory quantity. The number of cards already in your hand is not an inherent property of the card; you're violating your own principle.

Well, OK. I guess I didn't phrase my principle properly. But there's nothing ambiguous about "more than one card over 15", nor does it require remembering past events or looking through the discard pile or deck, etc.

Quote:
So although I can agree with the rest of what you wrote, this last bit should be considered a house rule. (And, from my perspective, a counterintuitive one.) I can't imagine trying to convince a casual player that this is what the text intends.

The power just says, "lack an encounter card you want". There's no implied restriction on what "want" means. If he wants a second card over 15, why not let him whine about it? Because it's a second card, he's revealing information about his hand, and he's also at greater risk of not getting anything, since other players would only be obligated if they have a second card over 15.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Just a Bill
United States
Norfolk
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
No, I said "oh, brother," not "go hover."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Phil Fleischmann wrote:
The power just says, "lack an encounter card you want".

No, it doesn't just say that. It also says "name a card you don't have". That's pretty darned clear. Even the cleverest argument is not going to change the fact that if you're asking for a second copy of something you already have, it cannot possibly be a card you don't have.

Obviously we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one, but your interpretation seems like rules-lawyering to me. I wouldn't allow it at my table.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mi Myma
United States
Fountain Valley
California
flag msg tools
Why is there no Word Games Forum or Subdomain?
badge
There should be a Word Games Subdomain, or at least a Word Games Forum!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bill Martinson wrote:
Phil Fleischmann wrote:
The power just says, "lack an encounter card you want".

No, it doesn't just say that. It also says "name a card you don't have". That's pretty darned clear. Even the cleverest argument is not going to change the fact that if you're asking for a second copy of something you already have, it cannot possibly be a card you don't have.

Yes, but he's not claiming he doesn't have a card over 15. He says, "I don't have a second card over 15." A second card over 15 is a card he doesn't have.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cameron McKenzie
United States
Atlanta
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
if you rule that sniveler can make a distinction between two copies of the same card by arbitrarily naming them first and second, one could argue that you can just say "I don't have any attack 15 except the ones in my hand." Or even "I don't have any cards that aren't in my hand."

While clearly I lack the cards that aren't in my hand, I probably have an identical copy in my hand of another card that isn't. It seems clear to me that the snivelers whining indicates some group or classification of cards, not a physically distinct card.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Just a Bill
United States
Norfolk
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
No, I said "oh, brother," not "go hover."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Phil Fleischmann wrote:
A second card over 15 is a card he doesn't have.

An attack 16 in Linda's hand is a card he doesn't have.
An attack 10 that has a blue back is a card he doesn't have.
A card that is facing the east window is a card he doesn't have.
A negotiate without a ketchup stain on the front is a card he doesn't have.

There is nothing inherent to the card's identity that makes it a "second card". You can only make it a second card in relation to something other than itself; by adding a situational qualifier. Apparently you want to allow some qualifiers but not others. Fine ... but that's a house rule.

I'm done with this, so I'll give you the last word.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mi Myma
United States
Fountain Valley
California
flag msg tools
Why is there no Word Games Forum or Subdomain?
badge
There should be a Word Games Subdomain, or at least a Word Games Forum!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MasterDinadan wrote:
if you rule that sniveler can make a distinction between two copies of the same card by arbitrarily naming them first and second, one could argue that you can just say "I don't have any attack 15 except the ones in my hand." Or even "I don't have any cards that aren't in my hand."

I suppose he could, since it would be functionally equivalent to simply not using his power. If the Sniveler says, "I don't have any cards that aren't in my hand," then all the other players can say, "Neither do we," and they would have to give or discard anything.

Quote:
While clearly I lack the cards that aren't in my hand, I probably have an identical copy in my hand of another card that isn't. It seems clear to me that the snivelers whining indicates some group or classification of cards, not a physically distinct card.

Yes. "Cards over 15 beyond the first" is a group.

Bill Martinson wrote:
Phil Fleischmann wrote:
A second card over 15 is a card he doesn't have.

An attack 16 in Linda's hand is a card he doesn't have.

And an Attack 16 in the Sniveler's hand is a card Linda doesn't have.

Quote:
An attack 10 that has a blue back is a card he doesn't have.

Now there's an interesting question that isn't covered in the power description: Can the Sniveler phrase his whine in a way that specifies a Reward-deck card vs a regular-deck card? I don't know. At first blush, I'd say no.

Quote:
A card that is facing the east window is a card he doesn't have.

And all the other players can simply lay their cards face down on the table for the duration of the whine and say, "We don't have any cards facing the east window either."

Quote:
A negotiate without a ketchup stain on the front is a card he doesn't have.

No matter how you interpret it, you never "need" a ketchup stain on a card.

Apart from the blue-back, these are silly examples.

Quote:
There is nothing inherent to the card's identity that makes it a "second card".

So what? He still may very well "need" a second card of a particular value or range.

Quote:
Apparently you want to allow some qualifiers but not others.

As do you. As do the rules.

Quote:
Fine ... but that's a house rule.

No. In is a creative use of the power that is entirely consistent with the rules as written.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Darian Tucker
United States
New Smyrna Beach
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
How can you guys even play this game?

If I spent this much time arguing over something in a game, I'd probably just stop playing it for good. Munchkin got to that point. "When can I play this +2 to either side? I know you made the monster vanish, so I want to get it out of my hand. I'll add it to your side." Stupid stuff like that that just made the game not worth playing. The fact that the rulebook lets the owner of the game make up all the rules is just awful as well. Since it doesn't limit his power to only those things that are not clearly stated in the rulebook, you end up playing some very lopsided and not fun games where the owner changes everything to advantage him. It's like Fluxx where only the person who most benefits from it has to follow the rules on any given card.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cameron McKenzie
United States
Atlanta
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
you're making it complicated. If sniveler references references his own hand, you are arbitrarily allowing other players to change that to reference their own hand. If the sniveler references smothers hand, the other players reference sniveler? These exceptions are not intuitive and an annoying sniveler will make claims that are not only overpowered but suck all of the fun out of the game as people start to argue over how to handle the weird case sniveler just thought of.

What I meant by sniveler naming some class of cards is that all cards of the same type are clearly in or not in the group. A classification that includes any attack 15s must include them all. The sniveler could still make a broad unintuitive statement like "flares, cosmic zaps, non rift reward cards, and attack 00" wacky sure, but there is no doubt as to which cards sniveler is asking for, and he hadn't made an arbitrary distinction between otherwise identical cards.

Imo, its perfectly okay for sniveler to dictate reward or non reward cards since being blue backed actually does change the cards identity in a game impacting way.

I think you'll find sniveler is still plenty of fun to play and very effective too. If you are determined to make sniveler break the game though, its your prerogative. I only warn you that most people doing like playing games with people who try to twist the rules to their advantage all the time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mi Myma
United States
Fountain Valley
California
flag msg tools
Why is there no Word Games Forum or Subdomain?
badge
There should be a Word Games Subdomain, or at least a Word Games Forum!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MasterDinadan wrote:
you're making it complicated. If sniveler references references his own hand, you are arbitrarily allowing other players to change that to reference their own hand.

I? I am doing no such thing. That's the way the power works. That's the rules as they actually are. You can't give or discard cards that are in someone else's hand, right? The Sniveler says, "I don't have card X (in my hand)." The other players respond based on the cards in *their* hands. That's how the power works.

Quote:
These exceptions are not intuitive and an annoying sniveler will make claims that are not only overpowered but suck all of the fun out of the game as people start to argue over how to handle the weird case sniveler just thought of.

There's nothing overpowered about it. As I've pointed out multiple times now, it's actually a *weaker* use of the Sniveler's power because:
a) He's giving away information about his hand, and
b) He does less harm to other players' hands if they discard, and
c) It becomes less likely that other players will have a satisfying card to give him, so the Sniveler is less likely to get anything.

Quote:
What I meant by sniveler naming some class of cards is that all cards of the same type are clearly in or not in the group. A classification that includes any attack 15s must include them all.

Nothing in the rules or power description says that. The classification can be defined however the Sniveler likes, so long as he's talking about cards the he has or doesn't have in *his* hand (and conforms to the rules otherwise).

Quote:
The sniveler could still make a broad unintuitive statement like "flares, cosmic zaps, non rift reward cards, and attack 00" wacky sure, but there is no doubt as to which cards sniveler is asking for, and he hadn't made an arbitrary distinction between otherwise identical cards.

Again, the Sniveler can only whine about Encounter cards, not about flares, cosmic zaps, or rifts.

Quote:
Imo, its perfectly okay for sniveler to dictate reward or non reward cards since being blue backed actually does change the cards identity in a game impacting way.

Possibly.

Quote:
I think you'll find sniveler is still plenty of fun to play and very effective too. If you are determined to make sniveler break the game though, its your prerogative. I only warn you that most people doing like playing games with people who try to twist the rules to their advantage all the time.

I've never lacked for fun playing the Sniveler (or even against it). There's nothing broken about my interpretation. It's worked just fine for Eons. Twisting the rules to ones advantage is pretty much what this game is about. And there's nothing in what I've suggested here that *breaks* the game or breaks any rule.

The main purpose of this idea is to give the Sniveler something to do when he isn't eligible to whine about anything else. He could still use his power at the cost of revealing info about the cards in his hand and at the risk of not getting anything.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cameron McKenzie
United States
Atlanta
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sorry about the example with flares and artifacts. I had forgotten the exact wording on Sniveler.

Anyway, my point is that you are letting the Sniveler whine about all sorts of things. If he can whine about not having a second of a specific card... can we whine about not having more than a certain number of encounter cards in general? i.e. "I don't have a third encounter card"

How about other weird whining based on the counts of his cards - "I don't have duplicates of any encounter card" or "I don't have a second copy of my highest attack card" or "I don't have a fourth lowest attack card" (if he only has three attack cards and expects other aliens have a fourth lowest attack that is actually quite high).

The point is that Sniveler is already quite powerful even if his card-whining is very restricted. If you let him get too creative with it, a clever player will absolutely own the game with it.

As for twisting the rules to your advantage, I would say the game is about changing the rules to be in your favor, but such changes should be unambiguous and agreeable to most players. Pacifist breaks the rules in a powerful way, but he cannot reasonably argue that his power can do something beyond what it is intended. His "rule-breaking" is highly organized and structured. What you are proposing is that the Sniveler can basically apply his own interpretation, because you have not clearly defined what he can or can not whine about.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Darian Tucker
United States
New Smyrna Beach
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So let me ask you this, Phil. You, Bill, and I are playing a game of Cosmic Encounter. I am the Sniveler. I say, "I don't have a card that is in Bill or Phil's hand." So now you or Bill have to give me a card or discard all of your Encounter cards? That's really wacky if you ask me. I think sticking with values just makes sense.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mi Myma
United States
Fountain Valley
California
flag msg tools
Why is there no Word Games Forum or Subdomain?
badge
There should be a Word Games Subdomain, or at least a Word Games Forum!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MasterDinadan wrote:
Anyway, my point is that you are letting the Sniveler whine about all sorts of things. If he can whine about not having a second of a specific card... can we whine about not having more than a certain number of encounter cards in general? i.e. "I don't have a third encounter card"

I don't see why not. It would be a pretty stupid thing for the Sniveler to do, but I guess he could do it. He's either letting another player give him his worst card, or letting all other players discard all but their three best encounter cards. Such a whine would be helping other players.

Quote:
How about other weird whining based on the counts of his cards - "I don't have duplicates of any encounter card" or "I don't have a second copy of my highest attack card" or "I don't have a fourth lowest attack card" (if he only has three attack cards and expects other aliens have a fourth lowest attack that is actually quite high).

No. Not specific enough. The other players would have no way of knowing what card or range of cards it applies to. You pretty much always have to specify a value or range (unless you just want to whine about "any attack card", or "any negotiate card", etc.). You do have to give enough information so that the other players know what it will take to satisfy your whine. And you can't whine about the presence or absence of cards in other players' hands, only in yours. That's clear from the power description.

Quote:
The point is that Sniveler is already quite powerful even if his card-whining is very restricted. If you let him get too creative with it, a clever player will absolutely own the game with it.

I don't know what you mean by "too creative". He still has to obey the rules. As I said, I've played this way for Eons, and it doesn't let the Sniveler "absolutely own the game".

Quote:
What you are proposing is that the Sniveler can basically apply his own interpretation, because you have not clearly defined what he can or can not whine about.

No that is not what I am proposing. The rules have to be followed. I've always found that the rules as written make it quite clear what he can and cannot whine about: lack of card(s) in his hand of a specific value or group of values. Is that clear enough?

SparkingConduit wrote:
So let me ask you this, Phil. You, Bill, and I are playing a game of Cosmic Encounter. I am the Sniveler. I say, "I don't have a card that is in Bill or Phil's hand." So now you or Bill have to give me a card or discard all of your Encounter cards? That's really wacky if you ask me. I think sticking with values just makes sense.

I agree. I never advocated otherwise. To be specific, I'd say absolutely not - you can't whine that you don't have a card in someone else's hand, because there's no way that whine can be satisfied. If another player gives you one of his cards, you *still* won't have a card in his hand. And even if you could do this, it would still be a really dumb thing to do, because you're just inviting another player to dump his worst card on you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Walker
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sometimes I should be more careful when posting here as how much time does it waste if I don't even read the cards properly, of course Sniveler only names encounters it's like saying Sorcerer doesn't swap cards.

(DO NOT COMMENT IT'S A GAG!)
I hadn't actually even played the Sniveler but I think there was some great tips here thanks guys
I still haven't played him though
 
 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.