Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
21 Posts

Twilight Imperium (Third Edition)» Forums » Rules

Subject: political cards in exchange for tgs rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
donkey d
msg tools
can a player exchange political cards to qualify for the public obj i now spend 6 trade goods?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Necessary Evil
United States
Glen Arm
Maryland
flag msg tools
Yes, I play the Bass.
badge
Sweet Holy Moses, Fruit F*cker Prime!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes. Pc can be pitched for tg at any time.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Gagner
United States
Maple Grove
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
donkcheson wrote:
can a player exchange political cards to qualify for the public obj i now spend 6 trade goods?


It is worth noting that the rulebook states the political card can be discarded instead of spending a trade good. For most purposes you can think of a political card as if it were a trade good. There are instances, such as Mentak's Mirror Computing, that a political card does not work for it.

Its also good to know that you can't discard a political card and take a trade good in return. When you need to spend a trade good, you can instead discard a political card.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
JohnnyC Waytobe
United States
flag msg tools
mbmb
I also believe that you can only spend ONE PC per transaction this way. If you were to build 5 destroyers in your HS, you could only use ONE PC as a resource.

Feel free to double-check this, but because of the language ("a" political cards, instead of "political cards") my group restricts this ability to one PC as TG per transaction.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Larouche
Canada
Longueuil
Quebec
flag msg tools
Melting souls with cuteness since 2007
badge
Lovin' N-16
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Just as a note,

After dozens of games when we spent political cards as trade goods, we removed completely this optional rules from our games.

Players would spend almost all their political cards this way.

When assembly was actually played, most players had barely any political cards to play. Some interesting cards that were of no use in the early game got spent (even if they would become real interesting later on).

By removing this extra optional rule, players keep their political cards for the entire game. It instantly made the political game many times more fun. The players accumulated the political cards and in the mid to late game, there was always a player that owned a card that could screw the other players significantly... making the game much more interesting.

For example in my last game. I had a political card that could give the player with the most VPs a free VP if it passed. If it didn't, everybody placed back their secret objectives and draw a new one. If you already completed your secret objective, you could draw a new one.

Now, i would've spent that card as a trade good in the early game. I was not in the lead, i couldn't control the outcome, and it was not a good idea to change secret objective at that time.

Later on, i completed my secret objective first. I was in the lead in VP count. I hastily took Assembly to promote that agenda specifically, giving the speaker token to another player.
If it passed, i got a free VP.
If it didn't, i got a second secret objective i could do and no other player could benefit from a second secret objective.
It was a win-win scenario... that singlehandedly gave me the game.

This would never have happened if we had played with the "can spend your political cards as trade goods". Playing with that rules, the laws being passed were not game-changers appropriate to the current situation. They were whatever the players still had in their hands and had almost no consequences to the game... making them very boring.

I have tons more examples like this... keep your political cards people! I won my last two games just because of them.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Petersen
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
I think that's just the exchange rate, Johnny.

A player may, at any time, discard a Political Card from his or her hand instead of spending a Trade Good.

The "at any time" disambiguates that interpretation.

Martin, I agree that Political Cards should be saved, but without the ability to turn them into TGs and an unfiltered deck, Bureaucracy secondary is used even less.

Receiving 1 TG each time you receive an undiscardable PC is a good compromise between the two.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JohnnyCwtb wrote:
I also believe that you can only spend ONE PC per transaction this way. If you were to build 5 destroyers in your HS, you could only use ONE PC as a resource.

There is no limit, although many house rule just as you suggest. Any time you would spend a TG, you can spend a PC instead. If you need to spend 5 TGs, you spend 1 PC for a TG. Then spend another PC for a TG, etc.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Larouche
Canada
Longueuil
Quebec
flag msg tools
Melting souls with cuteness since 2007
badge
Lovin' N-16
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TomBoombs wrote:
I think that's just the exchange rate, Johnny.

A player may, at any time, discard a Political Card from his or her hand instead of spending a Trade Good.

The "at any time" disambiguates that interpretation.

Martin, I agree that Political Cards should be saved, but without the ability to turn them into TGs and an unfiltered deck, Bureaucracy secondary is used even less.

Receiving 1 TG each time you receive an undiscardable PC is a good compromise between the two.


Not exactly true in my experience. Bureaucracy's secondary is in fact now used EVEN MORE where it was barely before.

The reason i suspect is that the political game has become much more dangerous and game-changing. You want that to your advantage, hence you want more cards.

Now, maybe getting rid of political cards for extra votes in a political agenda could be a good compromise. As trade goods? nope. People use political cards for ship building, gaining more command counters from influence and other non-political related uses. The political cards are more useful as trade goods than actual political cards... which is dumb IMO.

No really, try a few games without that political as trade goods rule. Forcing people to keep their political cards means there's bound to be at least one highly entertaining political agenda put on the table in every game that is a game changer. People get rid of their political cards WAY too easilly in the early game otherwise. Cards that could become much more powerful later on.

Another way of seeing it:
We almost never have dumb agendas like "destroy some dreadnoughs" when there are no dreadnough on the table anymore...
Instead we almost always have other ones like "cancel all wormhole movement" when the Ghosts are in play...

Not playing with that option makes for very tense negociations and valuable promissory notes passed around. Playing with it... no one cares and the voting process feels mechanical and useless (which it is in many/most cases).
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Petersen
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
I recall playing one game like that, and I was drawing cards just so I wouldn't be stuck having to play 2 cards that hurt whether they passed or failed. In fact, I didn't feel safe discarding them because of Determine Policy.

Some of the players in my group are cautious enough to put forward "destroy some DNs" when there are no dreadnoughts instead of "for: everyone gets 2 VP against: those who voted for lose 1 VP". Others hate the latter law for ending the game earlier, because everyone votes "for" every time.

With the variant I was speaking of, Bureaucracy is more desirable than yours, as it's 1 TG plus an [b]un]discardable PC. So you get 1 TG and a PC that you'll hang onto.

Really, it's a matter of the meta-game on whether someone is willing to spend 1 CC to draw 1 in about 200 PCs. If you have no political sway, or the table hates you, you're looking at less than 1% chance of you drawing something that helps you whether it passes or fails, and another player could draw it for you anyways.

The great laws like Ancient Artifact still get saved RAW, but since the meta-game is seen as 1 CC=1AC+1TG instead of 1 AC+1PC, Bureaucracy secondary is saved for the CC/influence rich, and players stocking up TGs for the Public Objectives.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bill Norton
United States
Seymour
Tennessee
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would say not allowing PCs for TGs was the most common house-rule on ti3wiki.org

The extra 2TGs in the first round were too tempting and useful.

Then no one had PCs and the political game was usually uneventful.

Bill
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fedor Syagin
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bnorton916 wrote:
I would say not allowing PCs for TGs was the most common house-rule on ti3wiki.org

The extra 2TGs in the first round were too tempting and useful.

Then no one had PCs and the political game was usually uneventful.

Bill


I would say there are better variants out there to fix the problem of not getting interesting laws.
Because technically when you picking who will resolve card it's get messy. even if everyone have bunch of cards it doesn't mean that speaker know which one is actually interesting and if someone is screaming I have something great and then it's one of the nothing happen cards - everyone upset anyway.
Unless you use some kind of variant where everyone propose one card and speaker or whoever he picked knows what options are - then more likely interesting thing will happen.

Also if you playing with domain counters and not allowing PC for TG trade - first person to get hostage situation is indeed screwed
(yes if he got trade 2 or trade 3 was played and he managed to trade - good for him - otherwise this one is deadlier than intended...)
Personally I would prefer to use galactic senate variation and give everyone 2 tg in the beginning if playing with domain counters - to make is feels similar to what people used to.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joshua Armstrong
Canada
flag msg tools
garfielder wrote:
Also if you playing with domain counters and not allowing PC for TG trade - first person to get hostage situation is indeed screwed


That's what probing is for
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Axensmash wrote:
garfielder wrote:
Also if you playing with domain counters and not allowing PC for TG trade - first person to get hostage situation is indeed screwed


That's what probing is for

Probing wastes an entire turn (unless you have a way to remove the CC), which is almost as bad as losing the GFs to the Hostage Situation anyway (especially if you only landed 1 GF).

You can't probe and land in the same activation.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin DeOlden
United States
Chino
California
flag msg tools
badge
3D board game prints: www.3dhubs.com/service/3dgaming
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Axensmash wrote:
garfielder wrote:
Also if you playing with domain counters and not allowing PC for TG trade - first person to get hostage situation is indeed screwed


That's what probing is for


That's why when I use Distant Sun tokens all players start out with 2TG.
I also do not allow PC trade in for TG in my games.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
muthrali the relentless
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
You can trade PC's for TG's????gulp

I think we need to reread the rulesbooks sometime soon

Thanks for the tip though!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Blumentritt
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like Martin's ideas.

Quote:
"for: everyone gets 2 VP against: those who voted for lose 1 VP".


I loathe those types of cards.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Statalyzer wrote:
I like Martin's ideas.

Quote:
"for: everyone gets 2 VP against: those who voted for lose 1 VP".


I loathe those types of cards.

Why?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin DeOlden
United States
Chino
California
flag msg tools
badge
3D board game prints: www.3dhubs.com/service/3dgaming
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Statalyzer wrote:
I like Martin's ideas.

Quote:
"for: everyone gets 2 VP against: those who voted for lose 1 VP".


I loathe those types of cards.


That is one of the PC's I trimmed from my PC deck.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Petersen
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
Typically it's unanimously "let's all gain 2 VP and shorten the game" or "let's count votes. After first 3 people vote for, the next 3 can vote against."
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TomBoombs wrote:
Typically it's unanimously "let's all gain 2 VP and shorten the game" or "let's count votes. After first 3 people vote for, the next 3 can vote against."

Hmm, I guess our group has done it differently; I've seen the against voted just as often as the for, especially if it comes up in the later game, because nobody wants to get the leader closer to the win. It then becomes a tense vote of trying to eke out that two points, but risk losing one. It becomes extra fun when someone betrays the leaders and withdraws their support when it's their turn to vote (after the leaders have voted).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greycloak
United States
Fort Worth
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
That happened to us last game with this very same card. Didn't understand it until near the end game when it became clear that the player who voted down the extra VPs was going for one of the I WIN objectives.
1 
 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.