Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
14 Posts

The Rivals for Catan» Forums » Rules

Subject: Same number of Trade Points? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Anthony Reynolds
United States
Greenwood
South Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
After reading the rules and having played Settlers for years we have been playing this game so that once one person gains the Trade or Strength Advantage that they can not lose it until it is taken by the other player. I have read online however that if the 2 players have an equal number of Trade or Strength points that the Advantage Token goes back to the table with no owner.

Which is correct?

Thanks

On a side note, whenever someone plays the card that lets them choose the production dice before the dice are rolled how is the brigand event dice handled? I assume that you choose the production dice number, then roll the event dice, then resolve the event dice, then resolve the production dice. Just seems a lil goofy.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rick Teverbaugh
United States
Anderson
Indiana (IN)
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It is possible for the trade advantage to be unclaimed as it is when the game starts.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bill Kunes
United States
Cincinnati
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You only maintain the advantage if you meet the minimum number and have the most strength/commerce points. In the event of a tie you return the advantage token until a player gains the advantage again.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastian Rapp
Germany
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
KnagrocK wrote:
After reading the rules and having played Settlers for years we have been playing this game so that once one person gains the Trade or Strength Advantage that they can not lose it until it is taken by the other player. I have read online however that if the 2 players have an equal number of Trade or Strength points that the Advantage Token goes back to the table with no owner.

Which is correct?


The allready given answers are correct, in case of tie, later in the game, nobody has the Advantage in either Trade or Strength. It is seldom a wise idea to take the rules of another (even if very close) game as given for a new game. In this case, Rivals and Settlers are very close to a certain point, but differ in several specific rules. This starts with the cost of the roads and ...

KnagrocK wrote:

On a side note, whenever someone plays the card that lets them choose the production dice before the dice are rolled how is the brigand event dice handled? I assume that you choose the production dice number, then roll the event dice, then resolve the event dice, then resolve the production dice. Just seems a lil goofy.


This is (almost) correct, play the card, set the production die, roll the event die, resolve the production die unless the brigand attack is rolled, then the event die.
If you consider the cardplay and setting of the die as a replacement for rolling the die, you will see that it really does not make a difference if you set the die or roll the die.
(The expansion will also give the possibility to manipulate the event die.)

Sebastian Rapp / Kosmos




2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anthony Reynolds
United States
Greenwood
South Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sebastian Rapp wrote:
KnagrocK wrote:
After reading the rules and having played Settlers for years we have been playing this game so that once one person gains the Trade or Strength Advantage that they can not lose it until it is taken by the other player. I have read online however that if the 2 players have an equal number of Trade or Strength points that the Advantage Token goes back to the table with no owner.

Which is correct?


The allready given answers are correct, in case of tie, later in the game, nobody has the Advantage in either Trade or Strength. It is seldom a wise idea to take the rules of another (even if very close) game as given for a new game. In this case, Rivals and Settlers are very close to a certain point, but differ in several specific rules. This starts with the cost of the roads and ...

Sebastian Rapp / Kosmos


It was less comparing the 2 games and more just furthering the point. If you take the rules as written they are completely in line with the rules for settlers. My rule book for Rivals says exactly this:

"If you have the hero/trade token and your strength/commerce points fall below 3 or below your opponent's strength/commerce points, remove the trade token from your principality."

This tells me you can only lose the tokens if your point total falls below your opponent's point total or 3. Below and equal to are not the same thing. If they were you would lose the token for falling below "equal to" 3.

I will certainly concede that the rules are incorrect, but I was not making assumptions based on other games.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Reiner Dr. Düren
Germany
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
KnagrocK wrote:
... My rule book for Rivals says exactly this:

"If you have the hero/trade token and your strength/commerce points fall below 3 or below your opponent's strength/commerce points, remove the trade token from your principality."

This tells me you can only lose the tokens if your point total falls below your opponent's point total or 3. Below and equal to are not the same thing. If they were you would lose the token for falling below "equal to" 3.

I will certainly concede that the rules are incorrect, but I was not making assumptions based on other games.


The important sentences stand before this:

"You have the strength advantage if your principality has 3 or more strength points and you have more strength points than your opponent."

and

"Trade Advantage You have the trade advantage if your principality has 3 or more commerce points and you have more commerce points than your opponent."

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anthony Reynolds
United States
Greenwood
South Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
RedPiranha wrote:
KnagrocK wrote:
... My rule book for Rivals says exactly this:

"If you have the hero/trade token and your strength/commerce points fall below 3 or below your opponent's strength/commerce points, remove the trade token from your principality."

This tells me you can only lose the tokens if your point total falls below your opponent's point total or 3. Below and equal to are not the same thing. If they were you would lose the token for falling below "equal to" 3.

I will certainly concede that the rules are incorrect, but I was not making assumptions based on other games.


The important sentences stand before this:

"You have the strength advantage if your principality has 3 or more strength points and you have more strength points than your opponent."

and

"Trade Advantage You have the trade advantage if your principality has 3 or more commerce points and you have more commerce points than your opponent."



The important sentences that stand before the ones I quoted are about gaining the advantage. They both read "in these situations you gain the advantage." the ones I quoted are about how you lose the advantage.

If you want to apply logic to the rules then you could say that if the part you quoted no longer applies to me then I would no longer have the advantage, but thankfully it is unnecessary to read into it because the rules spell out what causes you to lose the advantage in the part I quoted. Even if it is incorrect...

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastian Rapp
Germany
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Looking at the English rules, I guess you are right.

Although it may not really help you, I will translate the respective phrase about losing the advantage from the German rules (which is the base for all translations):

"As soon as a player does not have the majority of trade- or strength-points any longer, he loses the respective token or gives it to the opponent if he has the majority now."

I guess, the translator wanted to improve the German phrase (which is precise) with adding the specific cases, but in fact made it worse while not covering the case of a tie.

I take this on my list of inconsistencies, thanks for pointing it out.

The intention of the rule is:

If you want to take or keep one of these tokens, you must have/maintain:
- 3 or more strength/trade points
- more strength/trade points than your opponent

Sebastian Rapp / Kosmos
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anthony Reynolds
United States
Greenwood
South Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sebastian Rapp wrote:
Looking at the English rules, I guess you are right.

Although it may not really help you, I will translate the respective phrase about losing the advantage from the German rules (which is the base for all translations):

"As soon as a player does not have the majority of trade- or strength-points any longer, he loses the respective token or gives it to the opponent if he has the majority now."

I guess, the translator wanted to improve the German phrase (which is precise) with adding the specific cases, but in fact made it worse while not covering the case of a tie.

I take this on my list of inconsistencies, thanks for pointing it out.

The intention of the rule is:

If you want to take or keep one of these tokens, you must have/maintain:
- 3 or more strength/trade points
- more strength/trade points than your opponent

Sebastian Rapp / Kosmos


Thank you for the information. We want to play the game as the designer intended, so this is indeed helpful to me.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shane
Canada
Calgary
Alberta
flag msg tools
Train gamer, Euro gamer and War gamer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sebastian Rapp wrote:
The intention of the rule is:

If you want to take or keep one of these tokens, you must have/maintain:
- 3 or more strength/trade points
- more strength/trade points than your opponent

Sebastian Rapp / Kosmos

I've been playing this wrong as well. I took the lack of addressing ties in Trade and Strength advantage as an explicit change from the old game; not so.

This topic was also previously covered here: Strength or trade advantage - what about ties?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Yee Keat Phuah
Malaysia
flag msg tools
Sebastian Rapp wrote:

"As soon as a player does not have the majority of trade- or strength-points any longer, he loses the respective token or gives it to the opponent if he has the majority now."


Its interesting to see how the same German phrase is translated into two different English phrases.

And this German phrase does not cover the condition of "less than 3"??
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sebastian Rapp
Germany
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
ykphuah wrote:
Sebastian Rapp wrote:

"As soon as a player does not have the majority of trade- or strength-points any longer, he loses the respective token or gives it to the opponent if he has the majority now."


Its interesting to see how the same German phrase is translated into two different English phrases.

And this German phrase does not cover the condition of "less than 3"??


The translated phrase does only explain the general rule: "A player has the trade- or strength-advantage if he has 3 or more respective points and more points than his opponent." In fact, the explanation may not say again that you do not have the respective advantage if your total points fall lower than 3, but the explanation is already redundant, because the above translated general rule is everything you need: It defines when you have the advantage - if you don't fulfill both requirements, you don't have the advantage.

Sebastian Rapp / Kosmos
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
K Neumann
msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I was reading this post thinking, what kind of question is this? As the discussion went on I'm thinking, what is the problem here? Why keep asking obvious questions! Then after processing . . . Oh, that was a pretty good question.

OK, next time I will play it correctly as well. So much for pride in knowing everything.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anthony Reynolds
United States
Greenwood
South Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
zooney wrote:
I was reading this post thinking, what kind of question is this? As the discussion went on I'm thinking, what is the problem here? Why keep asking obvious questions! Then after processing . . . Oh, that was a pretty good question.

OK, next time I will play it correctly as well. So much for pride in knowing everything.


I will take that as a compliment. Thanks!

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.