Hmm, this is actually pretty good. You get a partial benefit of the Ambassador by getting to peek the deck, but you also don’t miss out on getting coins in the meantime.
Yeah, this seems basically a weak Ambassador if you have to pay a coin to get the 2nd card. Unless you can keep paying coins to keep drawing cards, which would then be somewhat cool.
Are the Tax tokens a new thing then? What’s the purpose of the one they keep? Also, how does this work with multiple Customs Officers? Once the 1st does this, then there aren’t Tax tokens available? Do they take the existing Tax tokens and just move the one to a different role?
I do think the idea of taxing a role could be fun, but I’d like to understand more about what happens with multiples first.
Oh, now that I think about it more, I suppose that makes sense. They have the 2nd Tax token to indicate they get the taxes. So that means if there are multiple Customs Officers, then they probably end up taking away the only 2 Tax tokens and moving to a different role, so the other Customs Officer no longer gets the taxes. That could definitely be interesting.
I’m not sure that I understand how this works. When it says that all other players can claim Capitalist, does it mean those other players also get 4 coins upon claiming? Or do they take a share of those 4 coins? Probably makes more sense that they get a share of it, otherwise that’s way too many coins getting taken. But then I could see the Capitalist claim being worthless towards the beginning because you’ll probably get most of those 4 coins taken away, and you still have to pay 1 coin back afterwards.
It’s probably: Someone claim Capitalist and take 4 coins, any other player may claim Capitalist. The original Capitalist claim pays 1 coin to all other Capitalist claims
1 Like
Ahhh, okay. That makes sense. So at worst, if there are 2 other Capitalists out there, you still get 2 coins.
I’m going to vote to add Farmer and Customs Officer. Then vote to veto Socialist. I don’t like how it has the potential to severely stifle bluffing, which is a huge part of this game.
(+) Farmer
(+) Customs Officer
(-) Socialist
I just saw this
I considered signing up
I saw that you’re adding a fuck ton of custom cards
I am no longer considering signing up
You can sign me out if this game reaches more than 14 players. It’s turn based and waiting potentially 14+ x 24 hours with only being able to challenge is boring to me. With more players and everyone’s consent necessary to have to pass, it is almost a given that the full 24 hours will be used every time. Especially, since last person standing means it’s better to go after the one(s) in the lead, meaning mostly everyone will survive until midgame.
Ahh yes, the consent to pass for each claim is one of the most difficult parts to translate from IRL to forum. I’d suggest we go with something like 3-5 passes (maybe percentage based on player count). Even though that has the risk of a few impatient players always passing without thinking, that should still prevent the most crazy claims.
So like if 5 other players besides the next player give their consent and pass, then that’s enough for the next player to go.
Though of course for situations where a specific player is targeted, like stealing, we need to wait for that player.
That gives more power to alliances abusing this system and working together. Five ordered players could work in tandem to quickly rush through their actions foregoing any counterplay from any players that do not happen to be present. Lack of private chats do migitate this.
I’m just of the opinion that some things do not scale well and the solution can be to just host another one later.
An alternative solution is to make two groups (or however more) of 8 and just run the games in parallel.
While it’s fine to worry about such abuse when planning something like this for a grander release worldwide, I don’t think this is something we should be too concerned about on this site. I mean, if you really think we have 5 players around who would intentionally abuse the system like this, then I think we have bigger issues to discuss. We can even agree to allow the host to make adjustments midgame if such a situation should come up.
That being said, the parallel games idea is actually pretty good. Keeping the games smaller would help move things along and prevent it from getting boring waiting for your turn.
3 Likes
/out
I joined on impulse, but if it’s going to be a larger game, I can’t be bothered :wowee: