Be Ruthless!

This is basically an extension of the strategy of trashing all your lame cards presented here .

Don't limit yourself to only remodeling Coppers and Remodels.

Be ruthless about it: if you get a Remodel in your hand, play it, even if it means passing up other actions, and even if it means you won't get to buy anything.

This will keep your deck small and powerful.

And, as Powerlord pointed out, this applies to Expand as well, and I'd throw Upgrade into the same box.

If Workshop happens to be around, it can speed up the process.

In my experience, heavy use of Remodel works best in conjunction with another strategy; you can't usually rely on it exclusively, but it can give you a strong boost.

Get into the Remodel game early and aggressively (especially when no other trashing options exist).

Most importantly, learn to recognize when other strategies are more powerful than Remodel, and don't be afraid to only buy one and use it only moderately when that's the case.

Remodeling from Coppers and Estates all the way up to Provinces takes a long time, so find a way to buy or gain a lot of Golds through other means, and then use Remodel to bump them to Provinces.

Near the end game, you can be especially aggressive with dumping your Golds, even when it drops your coin in hand down and limits your purchase to a Duchy.

It's also beneficial to combine it with attacks to slow your opponents down enough to let your Remodel strategy come to fruition.

Remodel has 2 major uses, both of which apply games of all very strong players.

1: in the early game, if there are no other better cards to take on turns 1/2 like baron/militia/smithy, then remodel can be a great pick because it let's you trash those estates.

2: in the late game, remodel is used on gold's and nobles to get provinces.

This will very often swing the game if your opponents do not take remodel at the correct time, and you do.

Remodel is especially useful in games without +Buy, allowing you to make an end-game Victory point purchase as well as a remodel.

This can often swing close games to your favor.

I'm a big fan of incorporating Remodel into my strategy

and I buy them (and cards like it) early and often.

Great card!!

I'm not sure why you're discounting Curses here, but...

Remodel can be used to turn a Copper/Curse into any 2-cost card.

If you played a Bridge first, you can turn a Copper/Curse into any 3-cost card (because they now cost 2, and a card's cost cannot go below 0).

Remodel can also be used regain cards lost to Saboteur or Swindler.

The strategies presented here also apply to the Prosperity card Expand, but for 3 more.

Remodel is great for turning Gold (3 Treasure, Cost 6) into Provinces (6 VPs, Cost 8,) which can quickly get you tons of points and force a game end.

This works especially well with Mine (which is in the "basic" set of cards,) Adventurer , and any card(s) which give +2 actions.

Play your +2 actions card(s)

If needed, use Adventurer to get Treasure cards (hopefully Copper/Silver) into your hand Use Mine(s) to upgrade treasure cards Remodel Gold ->

Province You will also have lots of Gold in your hand following this strategy, so it may be possible to simply buy Provinces outright.

This build can also be done without Adventurer, but you will want to build a small deck focusing on treasure, +card cards, and +action cards.

Question: A basic strategy of using Remodel to upgrade Estates to Remodels, Remodels to Gold, and using Gold to buy or upgrade to Provinces is a powerful but slow strategy, so I haven't been able to win with it.    Are there circumstances in which you would use a Remodel-heavy strategy?  Assume there are no Curses.  How would it work?

What are good strategies involving Remodel?

Be ruthless. Get into the game early and aggressively. Learn to recognise when other strategies are more powerful and don't be afraid to only buy one and use it moderately.

Be ruthless about. Get into the Remodel game early and if you get a Remodel in your hand, play it, even if it means passing up other actions or not being able to buy anything. Remodel works best in conjunction with another strategy. You can't rely on it exclusively, but it can give you a strong boost. Most importantly, learn to recognize when other strategies are more powerful than Remodel. Remodel is also especially useful in games without +Buy, as it allows you to make an end-game Victory point purchase as well as a remodel.  Remodeling from Coppers and Estates all the way up to Provinces takes a long time. So buy or gain a lot of Golds and then use Remodel to bump them to Provinces.

Remodel is especially useful in games without +Buy, as it allows you to make an end-game Victory point purchase as well as a remodel.

Remodel can be used to turn a Copper/Curse into any 2-cost card or regain cards lost to Saboteur or Swindler.


Felt.

A thousand casinos can't be wrong.

Padded felt also makes it easier to pick cards/chits up off the table.

You could try some no-slip shelf liner (the kind you use for kitchen cabinets).

They're sold by the roll at various department stores, fairly cheaply.

They lay flat and can be cut into whatever shape you need.

If you can, I would splurge and err on the side of using a heavier-duty liner.

The cheap stuff is probably little better than a tablecloth.

For Carcassonne specifically, you'll want to make sure you cover as much of the table as is practical.

You probably don't want to artificially constrain the game if your no-slip surface isn't big enough.

For Settlers of Catan , there is an expansion you can get that consists of six interlocking long sections that frame the pieces in.

At worst, your entire island will shift, instead of individual hexes.

I just picked it up recently from my local game store after seeing our island moved one too many times.

For other tile-based games, I would suggest a tablecloth like Egg of P'an Ku suggested, or a large piece of fabric (or felt) that you can get at a craft store -- you don't want any fabric to be TOO slippery, though.

You can even go one step further and get those no-slip rubber mats for rugs to place between the table and the tablecloth.

The only downside to that I could see is the tablecloth may occasionally get bunched up.

You could also try a table-top gaming mat, or simply skip the tablecloth and just use a large number of the no-slip mats I mentioned above, and place your tiles directly on the rubber mats.

boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/6/LittleBobbyTables - Au Revoir

It was quite a bit of work to construct, but we made a mat to play games on that

was baize on one side and leatherette on the other.

It's really nice playing card and board games on the baize surface - it's easy to pick up cards and tokens, as if from a slightly squishy card table.

The leatherette underside is heavy enough to keep it in place, and easy to clean if you discover afterwards that the table wasn't as clean as you thought.

I made an instructable showing how we made this.

It'd be nice to know of places that sell something like this.

For Settlers of Catan, a sheet of acrylic or pane of glass over the board can work wonders!

I have used both a pane of glass and a sheet of plexiglass.

The two are roughly equivalent to play on.

Pieces slide around a little bit easier, but not so much as to become a nuisance.

I prefer glass for its superior durability, but I have been using plexiglass at home for quite a while and it works just fine.

I just took one of my old Bridge tables and is using that for most games, it works great as long as we're 4 players.

I also have a fairly cheap 8-sided poker foldable tabletop thing for bigger sessions (with the added bonus of drinkholders).

This means another table which is perhaps not an option for you but both options can be folded and take very little space when not playing at least.

In addition to Kristo's answer , if you have a wood shop you likely have a router mat which would accomplish something similar.

Question: On my polished wood table any disturbance (and I have kids, so you can imagine the disturbances...) can shift tiles around, which I then feel compelled to try to adjust to be flush with those around them. I want to get a mat to fix this, and was wondering if anyone has had experience doing this, and can offer advice. Thanks!

What's a good table-topping material for tile-based games?

Padded felt makes it easier to pick cards up off the table. You could get a no-slip rubber mat to place between the table and tablecloth. For Settlers of Catan, there is an extension you can get that would work for this. You could also get a sheet of acrylic to put over the game board.

For Settlers of Catan , there is an expansion you can get that consists of six interlocking long sections that frame the pieces in, or a sheet of acrylic or pane of glass over the board can work wonders!  For other tile-based games, I would suggest a tablecloth or a large piece of fabric or felt as long as the fabric isn't too slippery.  You could also try a table-top gaming mat or use a large number of the no-slip mats or even shelf-liner. Padded felt is useful and it also makes it easier to pick cards/chits up off the table. Or for a small number of players you can use a bridge table.


Nobles Nobles combine very well with themselves, or with action multipliers like Throne Room, King's Court or Golem.

The dominion strategy blog has a bunch of interesting combos.

My favorites are: Black Market/Tactician

: Use the black markets ability to play (not neccesarily even spend!)

your money before the buy phase, to subvert the tacticians "throw away your hand" downside.

You got to keep your money AND play the tactician!

Ambassador/

Curse : After you get your deck small, intentionally buy a curse to "upgrade" your ambassador into a sea hag!

Quarry/Talisman :

Talisman lets you gain an additional card when it costs <= 4.

Quarry reduces action costs by 2.

Play a Quarry and Talisman together and for a single buy of a six cost action for $4, you get an additional one.

I'm a fan of the Scout combos:

With any other multiple action card: 5 Victory point tokens for trashing a card that could cost you nothing if you played 4 actions: No, seriously, the possibilities are endless.

There's a reason why card randomizers are so common... so that you play with a different set of 10 cards of the 112/115 available cards each time.

I feel like posting more combinations.

Just a couple I've encountered recently:

Treasure Map +

Watchtower - being able to put new Treasure Maps on top of your deck in the early game significantly improves the odds that you'll get two in your hand.

Counting House + Cellar - discard all your Copper, draw replacements, then put the Copper back in your hand.

Herbalist + Platinum - really, this is just obscene.

Scrying Pool + City - the Scrying Pool is so weak, and so cheap, and so horribly effective if you've got a lot of Cities in your deck.

Oh, and I forgot: Counting House +

Vault - sure, you need +1 action to pull this off, but at a minimum it makes all the copper in your hand worth double.

Contraband + Gardens - especially if your opponent doesn't think to ban you from buying more Contraband with your Contraband.

It's not hard to average 3 cards a turn with this.

What happens when Golem fails to find two action card apart from other Golems?

Your entire deck (minus your hand) is discarded.

What happens when Golem finds one Counting House and nothing else?

Every single Copper in your deck comes into your hand.

Buy one Counting House, several Golems, and an extra Copper (or four, if you're going for Colonies), and you're guaranteed a Province every turn you have Golem and no Counting House in your hand.

It gets boring after a bit, but, man, is this combination fun to pull on your friends once.

When you are trying to cash in Treasure Maps, use Chancellor to reshuffle your deck if you missed the pairing.

Buy a Tactician and a few Banks.

I just discovered this one yesterday; combined with a Festival

, I was able to buy three Provinces in one turn, and still have change left over for a smaller card.

I have not personally pulled this off

but I have seen this in action - in which, you can use a Remodel card to remodel a remodel card so that you can increase your costs to gain a card of a higher value.

This is a very slow process but it can come in pretty handy when there are limited avenues of income within a very thin deck.

Question: I've only played a few games of the base set, but I already noticed some very powerful combinations:   Laboratory can be repeatedly combo'd with itself to draw a massive amount of treasure from your deck early in the game.  Remodel can be used on Gold to quickly convert it to provinces during endgame.   Share your favorite powerful combinations.

What are the most effective action combinations in Dominion?

Counting House + Cellar, Herbalist + Platinum, Scrying Pool + City, Contraband + Gardens.

You can play a Quarry and Talisman together and for a single buy of a six cost action for $4, you get an additional one. Counting House + Cellar - discard all your Copper, draw replacements, then put the Copper back in your hand.  The Herbalist + Platinum is a great combination, as is Scrying Pool + City, because Scrying Pool is so weak and so cheap, yet extremely effective if you've got a lot of Cities in your deck.  Contraband + Gardens is useful if your opponent doesn't think of banning you from buying more Contraband with your Contraband.
If you buy one Counting House, several Golems, and an extra Copper, you're guaranteed a Province every turn you have Golem and no Counting House in your hand.  When you are trying to cash in Treasure Maps, use Chancellor to reshuffle your deck if you missed the pairing. You can use a Remodel card to remodel a remodel card so you can increase your costs to gain a card of a higher value.

You can play a Quarry and Talisman together and for a single buy of a six cost action for $4, you get an additional one.  S2: Watchtower - being able to put new Treasure Maps on top of your deck in the early game significantly improves the odds that you'll get two in your hand.


Upgrade is quite strong by itself for two reasons:

You can use it to trash 0-cost cards that you no longer want in your deck (coppers and curses).

Trashing curses is obvious, but regarding copper: do not underestimate the power of having a really small deck!

You can use it to turn your Estates into Silver (always a good choice) or, even better, into a highly contested 3-cost card in a 3 or 4 player game (think Village in a pool where it is the only action-gaining card).

These reasons are enough for Upgrade to be something you want to have in your deck, and not only in one copy.

There are also, in my experience, two factors stemming from the kingdom card pool that "modify" Upgrade's usefulness: If the pool is very strongly combo-oriented (lots of cards with +actions and +cards plus cards with +gold and/or +buy), Upgrade may be too slow.

For example, in a pool with Festival/Smithy/Village/Nobles/Throne Room I don't think you 'd have the time to do enough with Upgrade before combos start exploding left and right.

If the pool has no +buy actions , Upgrade is stronger.

It's the only way you will have to gain a second card in your turn.

In this case, lots of Upgrades (3-4) can serve to turn your initial turn buys (2-4 cost) to 5-6 cost cards.

And finally, don't forget that if you have too many Upgrades you can always use one to turn another into a Gold.

You can use Upgrade to gradually improve your deck while also carrying out a larger strategy.

Because Upgrade is non-terminal (that +1 Action)

you can turn your Estates into Silver or middling 4-cost cards into more powerful 5-cost cards while still playing your other Actions.

It is tricky, I won't deny that, but it can have some value.

I don't see it as the core of your strategy, though.

In addition to the +1 Card and +1 Action, Upgrade is one of only two "gain a card costing X more"

(note: I'm ignoring Forge here) cards that has the word exactly on it (the other is Cornucopia's Remake).

Meaning that if you Upgrade a Copper or Curse, you get nothing back (assuming you didn't play a Bridge before it).

With Remodel and Expand, you must gain another card costing up to 2 or 3 more, even if the cost is lower than that of the card you trashed.

There are two key points here: Your deck starts out bad.

Many cards are much better in the early game than later.

You can use upgrade to solve both problems.

Getting rid of your starting copper (and likely estates) will improve your deck.

So will trashing that first-turn buy

that's just too weak to get you to provinces later.

It's a non-terminal action, so it gives you a way to trash these cards without wasting turns, as you tend to do with something like chapel or steward.

And do remember: it's an upgrade .

You're not just removing a weak link, you're replacing it with something to strengthen your deck.

There are some great special cases, too, like upgrading four-cost actions to duchies in the end game, and trashing curses.

You can buy many Upgrade as early as possible in the game.

This is a really good starting strategy.

By many, I mean as much as 5 or 6 cards.

It will clean your deck so quickly from all the Copper and Estate , you will be able to upgrade your Upgrade into Gold and reach the Province much faster than you can imagine.

And don't forget to upgrade your Estate to Great Hall (instead of Silver ) if both are on the table!

Upgrade allows you to thin your deck with a non terminal action.

Being able to get rid of coppers and curses is almost always helpful.

You an also trade out poorly performing or obsolete cards for better cards.

Heck, upgrade an Upgrade to a gold :)

I love being able to thin my deck and will almost always grab 1-2 of these if there are no better deck thinning options available.

The biggest advantage of Upgrade is it helps to clean the junk (coppers, estates, and curses especially) out of your deck fast.

And then, when you don't need them, turn the upgrades into gold or other 6 cost cards.

Here as an example of game of how to use them effectively: http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201106/18/game-20110618-132616-55486cf0.html

Question: In what situations is Upgrade (Intrigue) useful? I have never seen anyone buy Upgrade in the games I've played where it was available. Whenever I play with Upgrade and Swindler, I always give Upgrade to my opponents in exchange for their 5-cost cards. They never know what to do with it... What are we doing wrong? How can we make use of this card?

Proper use of Dominion card Upgrade

You can use it to gradually improve your game. Upgrade helps to clean the junk out of your deck. You can use it to trash cards you no longer want. You can then turn the Upgrades into gold cards.

The biggest advantage of Upgrade is it helps to clean out cards you no longer want, such as coppers, estates, and curses out of your deck. You can also upgrade four-cost actions to duchies at the end game. You can use Upgrade to gradually improve your deck while also carrying out a larger strategy.  You can use Upgrade to turn your Estates into Silver or Great Hall or 4-cost cards into more powerful 5-cost cards. Upgrade enables you to think your deck and trade out poorly performing or obsolete cards for better cards.
And then, when you don't need them, you can turn the upgrades into gold or other 6 cost cards.


Settlers of Catan is a classic game with trading elements.

Each player needs to build roads and buildings with various resources (wheat, clay, ore, sheep, wood), but most players will have scarcity in one or more of the resources needed; thus, they must trade resources with other players to be able to complete purchases.

The key is that you need all of the resources, at some points, to win the game.

There is no strategy where you can get by on just three or four of the five, so you must trade often to win.

Often times you will see resources traded at uneven ratios.

A few groups add more advanced sorts of trading, such as futures, but those are not allowed in the basic rules.

I always like that the rules for Civilization seemed to encourage bluffing when trading -- you had to give them the number of cards you said you were going to, but you didn't have to be 100% truthful about what you were giving the other party.

(or maybe that was just the way our group played ...

I don't have a copy, so can't verify the rules for trading)

Container One of my favourite trading type games is Container.

The idea of container is that a person has a number of elements to their island.

A group of factories A group of warehouses A Port

The interesting mechanic of this game is that a player must produce items in their factory and sell them to an opposing player.

They CANNOT sell to their own warehouses.

The opposing player then stores those goods in their warehouses.

An opposing player can then visit the port to purchase the goods from the warehouse, to then ship to "the island" in their container ship.

A player CANNOT visit their own port to purchase goods.

A player must set their own prices for goods in the factory and goods in the warehouse.

When the player ships to the island, a blind auction takes place to see who purchases the goods.

A player can choose to purchase them for themselves for the maximum bid, or choose to take the max bid in cash, plus a matched amount from the bank.

Each good is worth more at the end of the game to different players based on a random card drawn at the start, which makes the bidding process very important.

I love this game because you need to work with other players to beat them, its an odd feeling to sell cheap, so that you can buy back your own goods, but you are all competing in a real market situation with each other.

Twilight Imperium has an interesting trade mechanic: Each player has two 'trade contract' cards (varying from 1-3 in value).

When a trade phase happens (which in TI3 is a player decision) you gain goods equal to the value of other players' contract cards you're holding.

Then you can trade your contracts to other players.

(This sequence means you don't start to profit until the turn after you made the trade.)

Not all races have equal contracts - trade-oriented races might have a 2 and a 3, while warlike ones have two 1s - so bargaining power is uneven.

But as an alternative to hosting a trade phase, a player can take the 'trade phase' order and use it to cancel all existing contracts... and a player who is the only one not profiting from trade will be tempted to do so, setting all the traders back by two turns while they reestablish profitable deals.

Contracts can be broken unilaterally at pretty much any time.

Going to war automatically breaks them.

So good trade deals can discourage conquest.

It's a nice interaction.

Genoa , or as it was originally published, Traders of Genoa.

Here's a game where just about everything that anyone does involves making a deal with another player.

And everything in the game short of future promises can be part of the deal - wares, small orders, large orders, privileges, messages, extra-move tiles, everything.

It's a little daunting at first, because you don't always know how much everything's going to be worth at the end of the game

and it's hard to cut tougher deals with the person in first place when you don't know who it is.

This is by far the best negotiation game I've ever played, much better than Chinatown or Who's The Boss?

Roll Through The Ages with The Late Bronze Age "expansion".

It's a dice game that's quick to teach, quick to play, and has trading (which people often forget about, but it's really very useful!).

Also consider Bohnanza (aka: That Bean Game).

Quick to teach, plays fast, and it's all about trading.

Question: Trading is in my opinion often an overlooked aspect of rules for board games. The lack of such rules often results in players modifying or making up these rules themselves. While making up the rules can be part of the fun I was wondering if you know of any games that already have good such rules/mechanisms? Any examples of games that make trading and the interaction between multiple players when doing so an interesting part of the gameplay would be appreciated.

Examples of board games with good/interesting rules for trading?

Try Settlers of Catan. Civilization also encourages bluffing when trading. You can also try Twilight Imperium and Container.

Settlers of Catan  is a classic game with trading elements and Civilization seems to encourage bluffing when trading. Container is also a trading type game and Twilight Imperium has an interesting trade mechanic.

Settlers of Catan  is a classic game with trading elements.


Odds are that you're not going to want to get it (which is tragic, as it's a great game), since it's a long-play game.

I've found that a game typically takes 4 hours or more.

Interestingly, new player groups and experienced player groups will typically take about the same amount of time.

New players take time because they're figuring out the rules, but they're not going to be nearly as Machiavellian.

Experienced players take time because they're creating plots within plots and being devious, which leads to protracted engagements on multiple fronts.

If you really want to make a game of Diplomacy cruise along, I recommend the following: 1)

Have an experienced player resolve all orders at the end of each turn.

That helps speed things along.

2) Set a solid time limit for each turn, like five minutes.

Five minutes is very long for the first three or four turns, but by the eighth turn it's barely enough time to write your orders.

Yes, setting a time limit impairs your ability to engage in negotiations, but it'll make the game end in a reasonable amount of time.

Another option: Play in one-hour (or two-hour) sessions.

Leave the board set up between sessions.

Long ago, I made a copy of the board, mounted it on foam-core, and stuck color-coded push-pins in it to "save" the state of the board between games.

Something nice about this is that you can do all the diplomacy and negotiation you want to, and you can engage in diplomacy between games.

That's a big part of Diplomacy (go figure), and can make for a really fun experience.

I would say that its about 5 hours on average.

Its not that the game ends at that point so much as the game is agreed to be a foregone conclusion by that point, even when it might not have been, due to fatigue/disillusionment from the players :P.

As mentioned in other answers, 4-5 hours is an accurate average length.

I'd also go as far to say that 1/2 of all games are never 'officially' complete - more often a leading player and assumed winner is agreed upon.

I'd argue strongly that neither points detract from the game

, it's length and involvement is half the fun - but if you don't feel you have that sort of time to invest, it may be worth avoiding.

It's worth pointing out that Diplomacy has a lot less pieces to wrestle with than Axis & Allies and to a certain extent, an easier ruleset to learn.

Its slow point is diplomacy, which is easier to tweak, rather than the (very fiddly) physical move phases of Axis & Allies.

As the consensus opinion is: yes, it definitely will take you a whole day to get through a game of Diplomacy - why not play it as a PBM (or PBEM, or whatever kids are calling it these days) instead?

Just because something comes with a physical board doesn't mean you have to gather your friends and sit round a table.

A Diplomacy game is quite an undertaking, but you needn't complete it in one gruelling sitting.

Amortize the endless wrangling and backroom deals over a period of weeks - the thrill of finally backstabbing your "dearest allies" will stay just as sweet!

My experiences have been varied, but much like @GWLlosa, I have found it to be, at a minimum, 5 hours.

We often take a weekend day - say a Saturday or a Friday holiday off of work - to play the game.

This way we can start around 10 AM, have lunch in the middle, dinner later and then stop whenever people are done.

It is a fun, quality game, just one I never plan on finishing.

That being said, I have heard of (but never been a part of) cut throat groups where the game goes much faster, but I think you have to have a group of people who are willing to backstab at the right times, and are willing to betray alliances for a win, something that tends to be less common amongst friends in my experience.

Question: I guess this varies a lot from game to game, but I've seen everything from 120 to 360 minutes, and wondered where the average lies.  If it's closer to 360, I don't think I will bother to buy it. I know how rarely Axis & Allies is taken out of its box...

How long does it take to play Diplomacy?

An average length is 4-5 hours. Try taking a weekend to play the game.

4-5 hours is an accurate average length of the game. Many take a whole day to get through a game of Diplomacy and dedicate a weekend day to play the game with breaks in between.


We have played with a minimum 1st bid of 1/4 the price of the property (to vary with property value, but to allow for unchallenged bids to be profitable from immediately mortgaging; this puts upward pressure on the 2nd bid, pushing it towards the mortgage price).

Incremental bids are then at least the no-house rent amount (and so also varies with property value).

If you're playing for "fun", as I typically do, we set the minimum bid to be face value.

Otherwise, set a minimum increase bid of $5 or $10.

Disclaimer:

We've never played with the auctions at home.

What I'm saying comes from experience with auctions in other games.

In my experience most unregulated auctions drag on with people outbidding each other with minimal increases.

The minimum bid usually isn't much of an issue.

If people want the item then the price will quickly rise to a certain level.

I'd suggest to use the "no house" or "one house" rent (or so) as the minimum raise amount for each auction.

That also has the advantage of scaling with the value of the property.

As for a minimum opening bid I'd rather go with the mortage value than the face value.

If you want to speed up auctions, have everyone submit one sealed bid (this is known as a first-price sealed-bid auction ).

The property is sold to the highest bidder for the price he bid.

Note - I haven't actually played this rule in Monopoly, but I did buy a real property in this kind of auction as it is the way property is usually sold in Scotland.

I have played around with the bidding system in the years since I asked this question.

We now play, and I highly recommend the following simple rule:

The minimum bid increment is 10% of the current bid, round up.

So an example auction of minimum bids would be:

A: $100 B: $110 (+10 = 100*10%)

C: $121 (+11)

A: $134

(+13) C: $148 (+14)

A: $163 (+15) ...

This method is still to slow for my personal preference, but it is simple enough for a group that includes kids to actually use.

Let the auctioneer run the auction.

The Official Rules don't specify an auctioneer, but the least conflict of interest , on average, probably arises from having the player who landed on the property, and declined to buy, be the auctioneer.

Then run the auction as a proper New York auction - the type everyone is familiar with from movies and TV.

It is the auctioneer's responsibility to set a minimum price by asking if anyone will bid $X (any amount made up by the auctioneer).

If there are no takers at that price the minimum bid request is lowered until an opening bid is successfully solicited (essentially a semi-Dutch Auction).

This is commonly done by calling out "Do I hear $X" three times before adjusting the solicitation.

Then the bidding continues until no further bids can be solicited.

After each bid is recognized by the auctioneer, the auctioneer is responsible for soliciting higher bids that are any desired amount above the currently recognized bid.

Bids between the currently recognized amount and the solicited bid amount can only be made once the auctioneer calls out "Going once at $Y. ...

Going twice at $Y. ...

Going thrice at $Y and SOLD for $Y." A valid intervening bid amount is only valid between utterance of the first "Going" and the " SOLD ".

Running the auction as a proper New York Auction allows the auctioneer discretion to run the auction efficiently, so the game is not unduly slowed, without introducing any artificial constraints on the valid bid amounts.

boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/5073/Forget I was ever here

The newest standard edition (post 2008)

rules say: Auctions

If you land on an unowned Street, Railroad,or Utility and you don’t want to buy it, the Bankermust auction it.

The Banker starts the auction by offering thespace to everyone for M$10.

Anyone can increase the bid by as little as M$1(even the Banker and the player who originallylanded on the space).

The highest bidder wins the auction, pays theBank, and takes the Title Deed card.

What if no one wants

it?That

’s fine.

No one pays anything.

Question: Other questions have asserted that many people don't actually auction properties as instructed in the rules.  Monopoly doesn't specify any rules to control the auction.  I have seen auctions stretch on with many +$1 bids, making the process painfully slow.  Seems to me some combination of  eBay bid increments  and/or Poker raise rules would be appropriate.   What minimum bid increment rule(s) are recommended? Do these rule(s) lead to faster auctions?

Minimum bid rule for Monopoly auctions

If playing for fun, set the minimum bid to the face value or the mortgage value.

One suggestion is to have the minimum 1st bid of 1/4 the price of the property. One way is to set the minimum bid to be face value, alternately you can go with the mortgage value. To speed things up you can have sealed bids or you can just sell to the highest bidder. You can also set a minimum bid increment of 10% of the current bid.


The Dominion rules contain the following note:

Note:

Curse cards are present in every game, however, they are rarely used in the basic game other than with the Witch card.

I believe you can buy them just like any other card.

The question is, why anyone in their right mind would ever want to!

Just to show off, I guess :D

There are some subtle situations where you need to have curses on the table even without an explicit curse kingdom card.

For example, the Swindler from the Intrigue expansion lets you trash opponents cards and replace them with cards of equal value.

If you're trashing a zero-value copper you

can replace it with a zero-value curse .

Without curses all you could do is replace it with another copper.

When playing with "Fairgrounds" from the Cornucopia expansion I sometimes buy a curse just to have another type of card in play.

Friend of mine bought one in a Garden-based deck - he had 79 cards and copper ran out.

"Should curses be available for purchase ?" - Yes!

The most common scenario for purchasing curses (in a game where they aren't otherwise gained) is in a two-player game where buying all (at most) ten of them would end the game, resulting in a win for the player who does so .

Usually this requires some/all of the following: Watchtower in hand, so you can trash them immediately.

(Note: I was about to put Trader here also, but that doesn't trash the curses; you just don't get a curse...)

Talisman in hand, so buying a curse gets you an extra.

Multiple buys.

This ("scooping" the game) frequently happens when one or both players in a two-player game are buying-up all of a few kingdom cards (e.g. Fishing Village, Bridge, City ).

If you don't have all the expansions they're great for proxying other cards if you don't have attack cards that would use them.

I only have the base set right now, and I've used curses to represent Colonies, platinums, and even more complicated cards from the other sets if everyone understands them.

The blanks are also great for this.

You can use kingdom cards as well, but I find its easier to forget that they actually mean something else.

Question: Should  Curses  always be laid out as a supply pile even when no kingdom cards give curses? Or should the only be available when a curse kingdom card is chose?  An extension of this question could be should Curses be able to be purchased without being forced to get them by a card.

When should Curses be used?

Curse cards are barely used in the basic game. You can buy them just like any card. The most common scenario is in a two-player game.

Curse cards are present in every game, and you can buy them just like any other card, however, they are rarely used in the basic game other than with the Witch card.  When playing with "Fairgrounds" from the Cornucopia expansion you can buy a curse just to have another type of card in play.When playing with "Fairgrounds" from the Cornucopia expansion, for example, you can buy a curse just to have another type of card in play. The most common scenario for purchasing curses is in a two-player game where buying all ten of them would end the game, resulting in a win for the player who does so .

Curse cards are present in every game, however, they are rarely used in the basic game other than with the Witch card.

You can buy them just like any other card.


Here's what I did, and they don't look bad.

Used a towel to pat dry the tiles.

Used my fingers to press out the wrinkles and squish the expanding cardboard back together.

Laid them down between two towels, put a textbook on top, and pressed down to get some more water out.

Pressed out the wrinkles and squish cardboard together again.

Laid them down between two paper towels (paper towels are thinner and I wanted to make sure they stayed flat) and laid several textbooks on top.

After several hours, squished with fingers again.

Dry paper towels and textbooks again.

The next day, I pulled them out and laid them on a dry towel.

At this point they're holding together really well and are only marginally thicker than the undamaged pieces.

The damaged piece on the left is only a bit thicker than the dry one on the right.

Customer Service at Rio Grande Games will replace pieces for a fee upon request.

I ended up with a set second hand that was missing a tile, and they sent it to me.

I'm not sure how cost effective it would be if a lot of tiles are damaged though, compared to getting a new set.

Manners dictate the clumsy culprit should offer to buy you a new set.

Beyond that, you can laminate the tiles.

That said, you have to see this from a cost-to-benefit perspective.

Unless this particular set is dear to you, I would buy another one.

Especially since laminating the damaged tiles also means laminating all of them; you don't want to make damaged tiles distinct from their intact brethren.

Short of that, you can try a one-sided pseudo-lamination by sticking plastic sheets only on one side.

The sad answer is that the only real shot you have at saving wet die-cut cardboard counters is when they're still wet, as far as I know.

If you immediately put them on a tray, or in a plastic box (if in layers, separate the layers with wax paper), and put them in a very cold freezer and leave them there for a long time (i.e. weeks or months), then the water freezing will tend not to mis-shape the cardboard, and gradual sublimation will happen very slowly over time and your counters should dry out.

Taking them out of the freezer later will require care as condensation will occur on the counter surfaces: best to bring them into air that's as dry as possible and as cool as possible, and have lots of blotting material ready until the counters' temperature gets warm enough.

If all you're concerned about is functional tiles that don't have separating layers, you can try re-gluing with a decoupage solution (good decoupage glue will dry clear), but I have never tried that

and I suspect such a project would require great patience and care (and again, I suspect would meet with more success if done while the tiles were still wet/damp).

In terms of this particular game where it's important to have relatively non-distinguishable tiles, I suspect this solution isn't going to produce happy results.

In the long run, you may find that the easiest, least expensive (in terms of materials and time) solution is to simply buy another copy of the game (and ask the water-spiller to help defray the cost, if you feel comfortable doing that).

I used an iron set to Cotten.

Placed on a granite counter.

Pressed back, then front.

I pressed hard and straight down leaving the iron in contact for a good five seconds.

Could do three to four at a time.

Wiped moisture off counter with paper towel as I went along.

Took a few cycles on the wettest tiles.

Left flat on counter over night.

The iron did not burn the paper and the paper did not stick to the iron.

Turned out great.

I had a go at the straight in the freezer trick and it worked a treat.

2 weeks of being frozen, they like they had just come or of the box.

I then put paper towel under and on top of them, before setting a mountain of cookbooks on top.

They did perfectly (Smallworld lives again!)

I actually had the exact same issue - someone spilled water on my carcassonne tiles, and I blotted/placed it in between paper towels under a textbook.

When they dried, I put a bit of white glue where the cardboard was peeling.

When the glue dried, I ran the pieces through a laminator without the plastic a few times - they came out good as new!

A more DIY answer: if the top has come off of the tile but not the bottom, then you could: Wait for the remainder of the tile to dry.

Cover in paper towel and press it with heavy books until it's dry and as flat as you can get it (two blocks of wood and a vice can help with this).

Print out the image of the tile (there are lots of images on the game's entry on BoardGameGeek: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/images/thing/822/carcassonne ).

Cut it out roughly, and paste to the top of your existing tile with PVA glue (white glue).

Make sure the edges of the image slightly overhang the edges of the tile, and that you cover the back of the image in only a thin but consistent layer of glue.

Take a bit of that transparent, self-adhesive book-covering plastic, and smooth it over the top of your pasted-down image.

Turn the tile over, and using a sharp knife (wallpaper knife, scalpel, that kind of thing) trace lightly around the edge of the tile, applying only a little pressure until you've cut through all of the overhang of the image and the plastic.

For bonus points, press it in the vice again to make sure it's as thin as you can get it; home lamination will nearly always be thicker than commercial printing, and waterlogged card will often swell.

Question: Someone just spilled water on my Carcassonne tiles. The illustrations are coming apart from the cardboard (they're wrinkling).  What's the best thing to do? How can I dry them with best results?

Water damage on cardboard pieces

Lay them down between 2 paper towels and put textbooks on top. Try laminating the tiles once dry. You can also try putting them in the freezer and they will dry out over time without becoming mishapen. If all else fails, you can easily replace the tiles.

You may find that the easiest, least expensive way is to simply buy another copy of the game or Customer Service  at Rio Grande Games will replace pieces for a fee upon request. Another option is to laminate the tiles.  One trick is to bot them between two paper towels and then lay several textbooks on top or to immediately put them on a tray and put them in a very cold freezer and leave them there for a long time, over time andyour counters should dry out. You can also print out the image of the tile at  http://www.boardgamegeek.com/images/thing/822/carcassonne.

Blot them between two paper  towels and then lay several textbooks on top.

You may find that the easiest, least expensive way is to simply buy another copy of the game.

If you immediately put them on a tray and put them in a very cold freezer and leave them there for a  long time, over time, your counters should dry out If you immediately put them on a tray and put them in a very cold freezer and leave them there for a  long time, over time, your counters should dry out.

You can print out the image of the tile at  http://www.boardgamegeek.com/images/thing/822/carcassonne.


I use the Mayday games sleeves for all my Dominion cards.

The sets of 10 Kingdom cards will still fit in their slots in the box just fine.

More numerous cards (like the Treasure and VPs) either will not fit at all, or will have to be jammed in pretty tightly.

Personally, I put Dominion, Intrigue, Seaside and Alchemy into two "long boxes" that you see used for CCGs, with little labeled tabs I printed from BGG separating them.

This takes up a lot less room than the 3 large boxes and half-size Alchemy box, and makes the game portable.

Prosperity is still in its original box since I'm out of space in my long boxes.

I keep all the Kingdom cards in their original slot, but keep Colony and Platinum in some of the larger unused slots rather than the ones labeled for them, because I don't like the tight fit.

Just to offer another point of view, I also use the Mayday sleeves for my Dominion cards.

I have no problem fitting the cards in the original box in the correct slots, except for Coppers.

My solution was to just not sleeve all the Coppers, since I have yet to play a game where I came anywhere close to using all of them.

When I sleeved some of the cards from Dominion: Dark Ages with premium Mayday sleeves, they wouldn't fit back in the box.

The card slots aren't even close to being wide enough because the card sleeves make the cards a little taller.

I found that strange, because I had no problem with Dominion, the Dominion base card set, or Dominion: Seaside.

To fix this issue I ordered an Organizer for Dominion made by ElephantCraftsShop.

It claims to hold at least 1500 sleeved cards, comes with special inserts for tokens, and fits into any full-sized dominion box.

I'll let you know how that works when it comes in the mail.

Here's a link to what it looks like. https://www.etsy.com/listing/469564688/organizer-for-dominion-board-game?ref=hp_rv ...

After receiving this in the mail, assembling it, and filling it with cards from Dominion, Dominion Update Pack, Dominion: Seaside, and Dominion: Dark Ages, I realized I still had a major project in front of me.

Yes, It can hold about 1,500 sleeved cards, but I found that I couldn't easily get them out when they're packed that tightly.

So I removed my Coppers, Silvers, and Golds, and put them in the yellow base cards box.

Then I had to make my own card dividers for the rest.

I spent hours cutting out tabbed dividers from poster-board and sticking labels on them.

It was a huge project.

It's pretty awesome now that it's done, but this product is not a complete solution as of itself.

I also used the Mayday sleeves.

I've conslidated Dominion and Intrigue into one box by removing the inserts, and putting each type of card into a snak-sized ziplock.

I might be able to get one more box integrated in.... but will be tight.

I was unable to get all of it in the tray, however, due to the coppers and curses no longer fitting their slots.

Which is why I went to baggies.

I use the premium Mayday sleeves as well and own both Dominion (1st edition) and Dominion Update Pack.

I sleeved them all except the blank cards and randomizing cards with premium Mayday sleeves.

I moved all money to a separate place — I use the yellow base cards box to hold Copper, Silver, and Gold in the three compartments.

All other cards fit comfortably into the original box.

Question: I am considering getting card protectors for my dominion game. Do the cards still fit back into their slots in the box?  The ones I was thinking about were the ones advertised in the box with dominion from Mayday Games.

Can I use sleeve protectors for Dominion cards and still fit them back into the box?

They may not fit back into the box with sleeves on or they may be so tightly packed in that they are hard to get out again.

When the cards are sleeved from Dominion: Dark Ages with premium Mayday sleeves, they don't all fit back in the box. The box can hold 1,500 sleeved cards, but it is not then easy to get them out when they're packed that tightly.


I would say that resignation is perfectly acceptable as long as 1)

It was preceded by a good-faith effort to play optimally.

All parties who are affected by the resignation agree on its timeliness.

The only times I feel a resignation is discourteous is when it negatively impacts people who were depending on your continued presence; for example, if Japan were to unilaterally resign from a game of Axis & Allies despite the objection of Germany.

Many people I've played with have a "See it through to the bitter end" mentality.

Especially for some of the longer games, like Advanced Civilization, Pax Britannica, and Supremacy.

Then again, in those, the game is multi-player, and one player dropping out will drastically alter the flow of play; further, all three have victory conditions that can change the apparent leader to a loser in even the last turn.

I see nothing wrong with offering a resignation, but I also often see it as discourteous to simply walk away.

My usual experience with resignations in long games is one of two situations: Player has to leave for work.

Generally, if this was known before hand, no big deal.

Player is frustrated, losing, and a jerk; player scatters pieces and/or flips board.

On the other hand, while no one I've played with saw offering to resign as inherently discourteous, neither was it discourteous to ask the attempting to resign player to play it out in multi-player games.

It depends on the type of game: In a game between two players , I would encourage resigning.

In a game between more players , it depends on the game:

If the game has rules for resigning, or players can agree on a set of rules, resigning should be allowed.

However, if resigning would spoil the game for any of the other players, all players should be encouraged to play out the entire game.

Option 1 is easy: when you're playing chess, there is more honor (and a sign that you atleast understand the game of your opponent) in seeing when you are lost, then in playing on and hoping the other person will make a mistake.

When I see I'm lost

and I'm sure the other person knows he's won, I will usually resign.

Unless when I want to learn from the other player, in which case I'll say "I know you've won, but I want to strengthen my endgame for a bit by watching how you do it" or something like that.

Option 2:

for example in Monopoly, a resigning player could just donate his property to the bank, if the other players agree.

But there might be cases where the other players don't agree, for instance when the quitting player will probably be hitting one player's hotels the next turn -

the other player may feel his odds of winning decrease when the player goes.

One small tip: if you do insist the game is played to the bitter end, take away the bitter .

Grab something to drink and/or to munch on, make jokes, have a conversation.

Thank the player for continuing to play, apologize that he still has to play but explain that this allows the other players to end the game as it is supposed to be played.

One thing to keep in mind is resigning isn't a means to avoid losing, but a recognition that you have lost - you just haven't finished going through the motions.

In a two-player game, this should be fairly simple - you resign, opponent wins, you start another game.

In a team scenario (like Axis & Allies), the entire team should resign as a group - if a single player just packs up and leaves, the other team members should be allowed to fill in the blank spot.

(Assuming they wish to continue the game).

In a multiplayer scenario, it really depends on how the interactivity works.

Dominion can easily manage a disappearing player, but Settlers can't.

Generally, I'd err on the side of allowing someone to bow out, especially if he knows he can't win, but the ultimate winner is still unknown.

If it's fairly obvious that someone is going to win (or if it really doesn't matter who wins), I'd rather sweep and reset than force someone to suffer through the remainder of the game.

That's funny, I was going to use A&A as a perfect example of a game where I would consider it very rude not to resign, although I was thinking about the Axis or Allied players retiring together as a group

--I agree that one member of an alliance resigning unilaterally would be in very bad taste.

The criterion I use is that a player should resign when it's obvious that the victor is obvious but that achieving the stated victory conditions will take a long time.

A&A is the quintessential example because of how hard it is to captured the "island" of Japan, Great Britian, and North America.

In a two player game, the time to resign is when it is certain (or almost certain) that the weaker party will lose, given the playing abilities of both parties.

That could be a disparity of as little as two pawns in chess (at the master level), or a piece, major or minor, for weaker players.

There are some multiplayer games like Diplomacy, where a single player can "declare civil disorder" without substantially affecting the chances of other players.

On the other hand, if you are part of a pre-set "team" (Axis and Allies), it's better to resign, if at all, as a team.

In board games played online that have score values resigning may be considered rude.

For example, if you forfeit in Scrabble Online, you prevent your opponent from scoring, thus ending their opportunity for a high score value (which is tracked and viewable by opponents).

Question: Games that have developed a strong professional circuit generally consider resignation a courteous behavior. Some consider  not  resigning discourteous. This question is about the rest of board gaming: When (if ever) is resigning acceptable?

What is the broader acceptance of resignation?

It depends on the type of game. Resignation is discourteous if it negatively impacts other players. A player should resign if it's obvious to all players that they cannot win, especially in a 2-player game.

There is nothing with offering a resignation, but it can also be viewed as discourteous to simply walk away.  For example, it can be discourteous is when it negatively impacts others or would  spoil the game for any other players. It also depends on the type of game. In a game  between two players , I would encourage resigning, but in a game between  more players , it depends on the game. If the game has  rules  for resigning, or players can agree on a set of rules, resigning should be allowed.  One criterion that can be used is that a player should resign when  it's obvious that another player will win, but it will take some time. In board games played online that have score values, resigning may be considered rude.

The only times I feel a resignation is discourteous is when it negatively impacts people who were depending on your continued presence; for example, if Japan were to unilaterally resign from a game of Axis & Allies despite the objection of Germany.


Every position has both positional ("theory") aspects and tactical aspects.

Positional aspects would include the various imbalances in the position: pawn structure, space, center control, knights-vs-bishops, and pretty much anything else that would generally fall under the category "theory" .

Tactical aspects are just what they sound like: tactics.

I move here, he moves here, and in 4 moves I win his bishop.

A positional game is one that is primarily dominated by positional aspects.

Of course, every game has aspects of both, but in positional games the theory is much more pronounced.

I hear the term "positional game" especially often in conjunction with a closed center - a game in which pawns occupy the center, so attacks have to be mounted on the flanks (sides of the board), usually with pawns rather than pieces.

These games tend to be slower and less intense; it is not uncommon for a player to spend half-a-dozen moves or more moving his knight to its optimal position before pushing a pawn one square.

Because of this, many players consider positional/closed-center games boring .

"Positional game" may also refer to a game where an early endgame was reached, causing most of the game to be dominated by endgame theory.

Tactical games , on the other hand, are dominated by tactics.

For example, see the Fried Liver Attack or the Danish Gambit , which always lead to very tactical games.

boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/175/BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft

“Tactics is knowing what to do when there is something to do.

Strategy is knowing what to do when there is nothing to do.”

– GM Savielly Tartakower (1887-1956) In a tactical game, you calculate on (material) profit.

In a positional game you perform careful actions to improve your position, without expecting large profit in the beginning.

In most cases a positional game ends in a situation with interesting tactical options.

The following are some (common sense) rules-of-thumb when playing a positional game: 1.

In an open game, a (good) bishop is usually a bit stronger than a knight.

In a closed game, the action-radius of bishops is reduced and knights become stronger.

A doubled pawn is especially weak when isolated from other pawns.

Try to trade 'bad' pieces.

Try to rule the center and do not allow your opponent to rule the center.

Attack where you dominate or have more influence.

When you have a spatial advantage, do not trade pieces needlessly so that your opponent continuously needs to rearrange his pieces.

Ideally, your bishop and pawns are complementary.

For instance, your bishop on a black field (g3) and your pawns on white (f3 or f5).

This covers a maximum of fields.

First investigate on tactics, for instance by searching for possible checks or checkmates.

A positional game in chess is one where you try to control the territory on the board.

Positional players develop pieces and go for king safety early, play for good pawn structure, and pay attention to how many squares their pieces control on the board.

The opposite of a positional game is a tactical game.

A positional game is one in which you try to go for a better position, specifically control of key squares, particularly close to the center, or in the vicinity of the enemy king.

You often do this at the expense of other considerations in the game such as material.

Perhaps the best example is the queens gambit.

White offers black a queen bishop pawn (and some tactical chances).

If black accepts the pawn, white is likely to get a stronger center and the king side.

A century ago, it was considered bad for black to give white these positional advantages, but modern, particularly Russian players, have demonstrated that the material and tactical chances compensate for white's better position.

Another example is when you exchange a bishop for a knight to "double" your opponent's pawns.

Inflicting doubled pawns is a positional advantage, but some masters considered trading a bishop for a knight as "giving up the minor exchange" (on the theory that bishops were worth more than knights.)

In a positional game, the pieces remain in the game longer than tactical games and the middle-game

is the dominant part of the game.

Generally speaking, Positional players are more inclined to finish their games as a draw.

there are balanced advantages in the position: if one player controls the center, the other one might have possession of a Column with heavy pieces.

Question: What does it mean to have a positional game, or to play a positional game?What is the opposite?

What is a positional game in chess?

This is a game with a closed center, when pawns occupy the center. It could also be a game where the endgame is quickly reached. The pieces remain in the game longer than a a tactical game.

A  positional game  is one that is primarily dominated by positional aspects.  A positional game is one in which pawns occupy the centre, so attacks have to be mounted on the flanks, usually with pawns rather than pieces.  A Positional game may also refer to a game where an early endgame was reached. In a positional game you perform careful actions to improve your position, without expecting large profit in the beginning. A positional game in chess is one where you try to control the territory on the board or go for a better position.
In a positional game, the pieces remain in the game longer than tactical games and generally speaking, Positional players are more inclined to finish their games as a draw.


Hypothetically, there's nothing wrong with splitting the draw pile.

Splitting a randomized deck into multiple decks, won't affect the randomization.

However, you need to carefully consider how you interact with the draw pile during the course of the game.

Do cards ever get put back on top of,into, or under the draw pile?

If so,having multiple draw piles wouldaffect the game.

For example, ifplayers can put a card on top of thedraw pile, can I choose to draw fromeither pile?

What happens when thedraw pile runs out?

If the normalrule is to shuffle the discard pileto create a new draw pile, youprobably need to wait until all drawpiles run out before doing so.

If you have multiple draw piles,will you also have multiplediscard piles?

If so, you need toconsider how you interact with thediscard pile, also.

Cards are randomized through shuffling not through picking the draw pile.

Statistically you should have the exactly same chances of drawing any particular card from either pile.

We do that with some games (including tiles in Carcassonne), but you have to allow people to pull from either pile they want, and don't reshuffle until both piles have been depleted.

When the table is inconveniently large and we are playing a game with a thick pack of cards, we sometimes spread the draw pile out into a large fan.

That way, everyone can reach conveniently and anyone who suspects they may be disadvantaged can draw from any part of the pack.

Myself, I can't see it makes any difference, but those who have some doubts can pick from anywhere and therefore have no grounds for suspicion.

While splitting the deck is statistically irrelevant, as others have said, it does affect those games in which you might have such options as "check the first X cards in the deck and put them as they were" (say, to simulate precognitions), "check the first X cards and reorder them as you wish" etc.

Question: Sometimes when the table is large enough, or people don't want to reach too far, a single draw pile is split into multiple draw piles.  This has always bothered me.  Does it bother anyone else?  Are there any statistical reasons to not split the draw pile?

2 draw piles for convenience?

Splitting a randomized deck into multiple decks won't affect the randomization. You have to let people pick from whatever pile they want.

Hypothetically, there's nothing wrong with splitting the draw pile, as splitting a randomized deck into multiple decks, won't affect the randomization. If you split the deck you have to allow people to pull from either pile they want, and don't reshuffle until both piles have been depleted. While splitting the deck is statistically irrelevant, it  does  affect those games in which you might have such options as "check the first X cards in the deck and put them as they were" or  "check the first X cards and reorder them as you wish" etc.


The new way of notating - algebraic notation - has pretty much completely replaced the old way - descriptive notation .

Most people nowadays use algebraic notation, except old players who are very stuck in their ways.

However, there is still a purpose in learning descriptive notation: reading old books.

Some of my favorite old chess books are only available in descriptive notation, so you have to be able to keep track of long series of moves in descriptive notation.

boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/175/BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft

It's much easier to work the game in your head with descriptive notation, so it's good if you're reading the game.

Descriptive notation lets you know overtly which piece took which, like PxQ. Having said that, it's not used much anymore, you'll only see it in old references.

Algebraic notation was adopted by FIDE because most of the world used it, so it was international, even if the letters used were different in different countries.

It was pushed in the US in the 70s with Fisher's success, since chess was booming then, and so were book sales.

The book publishers didn't want to have to print two different versions of the book for different notation markets.

It really caught on in the US once chess-playing computers and software came out, since most of those used it.

Algebraic notation's first recorded use was in The Noble Game of Chess by Philipp Stamma in 1745:

I prefer Descriptive Notation, mainly because it's what I grew up with, and I can visualize the moves without the board (though not good enough to play blindfolded).

I have to translate (at least in my head), when reading algebraic notation (and do that easier if I have a picture of a board in front of me).

I still use descriptive notation, and I can read it, and I also have some old chess books with it.

Algebraic seems to be used about everywhere now much more often; I play on the Internet Chess Club and that is all they use there.

I put in a suggestion for them to have descriptive as an option but they haven't gone that way.

It is like some of the other answerers said here, algebraic is International.

But to answer your question: yes, I still use it

and I like it.

I am in the middle of 4 correspondence games with a friend of mine who lives about 200 miles away.

They are rated games, and we have to use algebraic, but when we talk by phone, I discuss the games in descriptive.

He understands both like I do.

I would say just go with what you feel comfortable with, but algebraic is just about forced on us now.

It is good to know both, in my humble opinion.

I could "almost" play "part of" a game, blindfolded, using Descriptive notation.

I'm lost in Algebraic, without a chessboard in front of me, with the letters on the sides, ESPECIALLY when playing black.

So, when I'm playing chess, I'm thinking the three or so moves forward, descriptively.

Thanks for asking.

I'm happy Tournament Chess lets you use either.

By the way, I recently found two oldies, at "The Bookshop" [a Chapel Hill, NC Used Book Store].

The first is "Chess Strategy", by Edward Lasker.

The other is 500 Master Games of Chess, by Tartakower and Du Mont.

I purchased them immediately (even, when short, financially), because they both use Descriptive Notation.

Did well playing chess in early '70s H.S. tourneys.

Always used Descriptive Annotation.

IMHO Algebraic format removed a portion of humanity from the game and replaces with a metric type of system.

Its one of the main reasons why my romance with the game ended.

Why does everything always get squished down to its simplest form?

Don't answer that.

Yes - I grew up with English Descriptive Notation and still use it.

I don't like algebraic notation

so I've never used it or felt inclined to do so.

Question: I have several chess books, all of which use the P-K4 type of notation rather than the e4 type.  I am still more used to the older form, since those books were my first introduction to chess literature.  I'd like to find out if anyone still uses it or can read it (1 P-K4, P-KB4; 2 N-KB3, N-QB3; etc).  As far as I've seen, it's only in books.

Does anyone use the P-K4 type of chess notation anymore?

The new way of noting has completely replaced the old way. Some people do still use it.

Yes some people still use it, but most people nowadays use algebraic notation, except old players who are very stuck in their ways.  It has pretty much completely replaced the old way of descriptive notation .  On the Internet Chess Clubs that is all they use there.

Most people nowadays use algebraic notation, except old players who are very stuck in their ways.  It has pretty much completely replaced the old way of descriptive notation .  On the Internet Chess Clubs that is all they use there.


Counters can be removed.

However, I believe there is only one card that currently removes poison counters, and that is Leeches Target player loses all poison counters.

Leeches deals 1 damage to that player for each poison counter removed in this way.

Leeches was in the Homelands set.

Another way to reduce the number of poison counters that you have is through an effect that restarts the game, like Karn Liberated 's third ability.

Doing so resets your number of poison counters to zero, as per the New Phyrexia FAQ.

Check out this column, by Magic head honcho Mark Rosewater: Something Wicked

This Way Comes .

It explains some of the thinking behind "modern" poison, most relevantly why you'll have trouble finding any other card that can reduce your poison total apart from Leeches.

Here's a taste:

My hatred of Leeches did one important thing.

It cemented in me the importance of poison not just being another life total.

(This theme will become very important in Scars of Mirrodin's design.)

As such, you will not see any card in the entire Scars of Mirrodin block that removes poison.

It cannot be done.

There are answers.

There are ways to deal with poison but healing yourself of it is not one of them.

If you want to remove poison counters you will only have one way—Leeches.

This answer is an attempt to create a canonical list: Leeches (Mark Rosewater intended this to be the only way to get rid of poison counters, but it no longer is) Karn Liberated (his -14 ability removes all poison counters, among other things) Suncleanser + a way to control their turn (such as Mindslaver )

+ a way for you to have your opponent control Suncleanser's ability (such as Bazaar Trader + Coffin Queen + Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth ).

An example of this combo is: put Suncleaner in your graveyard, take over their turn with Mindslaver, use Bazaar Trader to give them control of Coffin Queen, and then have them use Coffin Queen and mana from Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth to reanimate Suncleanser, chosing you to lose all your counters (which you can do because you control their turn).

Price of Betrayal + a way to control their turn (such as Mindslaver )

+ a way to get them to cast it (such as Hive Mind )

Honorable mention:

any of the cards that say "You can't lose" can allow to be alive (at least temporarily) with 10 or more poison counters.

And now, enter Suncleanser .

This will be released in M19.

It is a Cleric for 1W that will remove all counters from target opponent.

It can be found here, in the M19 gallery .

Now you can just get rid of all the poison counters.

Just like that.

For 1W.

On an opponent.

A wild Price of Betrayal appears!

for B you can remove 5 counters from target artifact, creature, planeswalker or opponent

so maybe another one to add to the mindslave setup.

Question: Is there some way to remove or counteract poison counters? Specifically, once you've already accumulated them, not when you are dealt them.  For example, say I already have 9 poison counters. Is there some way to reduce this number?

Can poison counters be removed?

The Leeches card can remove poison counters.

The only card that currently removes poison counters is  Leeches and the target player loses all poison counters.  Another way to reduce the number of poison counters that you have is via an effect that restarts the game, like  Karn Liberated 's third ability.

I believe there is only one card that currently removes poison counters, and that is  Leeches and the Target player loses all poison counters.

Another way to reduce the number of poison counters that you have is through an effect that restarts the game, like  Karn Liberated 's third ability.


I've never had it take more than an hour, even with 6 people.

Odds are you guys are analyzing the trades too much.

There's a variant I always play with that

I think improves the game immensely, and that's play with everyone's hand face-up in front of them .

This makes it easy to see who has what, so you won't have to ask '

does anyone have a blue bean?'

because you can just look around the table and see for yourself.

If anything, this actually adds more strategy to the game as you can use what other players have more to your advantage: "Normally this wouldn't be a good trade, but since you're going to have to plant that next turn and prematurely harvest one of your valuable fields

why don't you do it anyway?

If you still find this doesn't speed things up, you can try one of these variants to adjust when the end of the game arrives:

Have everyone draw one more card per turn, 4 instead of 3 in a 3-5 player game and 5 instead of 4 in a 6-7 player game.

This is probably the least intrusive as just gives you more trading options.

Only go through the deck 2 times instead of 3.

This will make for a shorter game, but IMHO

it's a little less interesting.

Put a timer on 45 minutes and stop at the end of the players turn when it goes off.

This should only be an absolute last resort, but it will make people play a bit faster since they know that they only have a limited amount of time.

Of course, you'll have to be careful people don't purposely waste time to deny their left-hand opponent that last turn he needs to plant his cocoa been before time runs out...

A drastic variant would be to make the last two phases of a turn simultaneous after a whole round of everyone doing the first couple.

So: Player A plants 1, turns up 2 trades Player B plants 2, turns up 2 trades Player C plants 1, turns up 2 trades Everyone trades at once until all beans have been traded or planted.

Everyone draws three cards Resume with the next 1st player (1st player rotates)

However, in general, I agree with the other advice that simply more experience should hasten the game.

(tldnr: use a timer when trading)

I will assume 6 players, so all cards are used.

There are 151 cards in the deck.

30 are dealt out at the start leaving us with 121.Each turn

5 cards are draw, meaning before the first reshuffle there will be 24 turns.

You can't use simple math to show how long the other 2 reshuffles will take, but in my experience the last 2 put together are about as long as the first.

So now all that we need to do is use a timer and give players 1 min to trade.

48 turns at most a min but often less+ some book keeping and shuffling, comes out to about a 45 min game.

One obvious route would be to run through the deck only twice instead of three times.

It's probably not ideal, but it would keep your games down to a manageable length of time while people get to grips with the trading aspect.

I do think, as I said in my comment, that 2 hours is an excessive amount of time for a game of Bohnanza to take, and I suspect that as you get a bit more comfortable with how it works, trading options/decisions will become more obvious, and you'll definitely get it down to below an hour.

(If you can't, then identify the biggest slowcoaches and just refuse to trade with them unless they speed up their play!)

People often forget the rule that non-active players may not trade amongst themselves which could slow down the game.

Question: Whenever I have a one hour window to play, I try this game, and it tends to take more like 2 hours. So far, I find the negotiating really entertaining - so I'm not sure if I want to go crazy trying to enforce time constraints on play.  The box says a game takes 45 minutes. Does that hold true for anyone? Are there things you do that speed up the game that don't feel heavy handed?

How do we speed things up in Bohnanza?

Put a timer on for 45 minutes and stop when it goes off. You can also run through the deck once rather than 3 times.

There are several ways to speed up the game. You can play with everyone's hand face-up in front of them or have everyone draw one more card per turn or even put a timer on for 45 minutes and stop at the end of the players turn when it goes off, or an obvious route would be to run through the deck only twice instead of three times.  A more drastic variant would be to make the last two phases of a turn simultaneous after a whole round of everyone doing the first couple.

`play with everyone's hand face-up in front of them .

Have everyone draw one more card per turn.

Put a timer on 45 minutes and stop at the end of the players turn when it goes off.

A drastic variant would be to make the last two phases of a turn simultaneous after a whole round of everyone doing the first couple.

One obvious route would be to run through the deck only twice instead of three times.


I think one of the best card games for three players is Skat (not to be confused with the Scat mentioned in another answer).

This is a pretty heavy game on the level of Bridge, so you can decide whether it's a good fit for your group.

I personally prefer Ninety-Nine which is like Oh Hell!

with a really funky bidding technique.

You might also find this list on pagat.com helpful.

It seems like the numbers outside square brackets are the recommended numbers of players.

When I was at university we often had exactly this problem.

The way I solved it was by extensive googling for a card game that was designed for three players.

The game I ended up finding was 3-5-8 .

It has an interesting imbalance that means you spend a lot of time deciding which of your opponents is actually in the lead, and you often get the choice to give a trick to one or the other.

I think I actually came across 8-5-3 , where the order of the hands is reversed.

Very similar games are 9-5-2 and Sergeant Major .

Rummy is the best game of the rummy family IMHO, and it works well with any number from 2-5. klabberjass is a trick taking game that works only with 3.

I'll admit upfront that I've never played, but I assume its a good 3 player game as no other amount can play.

psychological jujitsu is great with 3.

It's a game of skillful bluffing and psychological matching of wits.

Egyptian Ratscrew is really fun with anywhere from 2-6.

It's a game of speed,

so if you're group doesn't like moments where you're all racing to slap a pile of cards, then I wouldn't try it.

But try it at least once, it's a lot more fun than it sounds. :D

Since you mentioned the games you enjoyed playing, I'll point out they all can be played three-handed, with minor rules modification.

I've enjoyed playing Hearts three-handed.

Hearts with three or five players Spades for Three Players

Three Player Buck Euchre Where I live

, the canonical three-player card game is Cribbage .

Cassino A brilliant card game that just magically deals out evenly to both 2, 3 and 4 players.

The easiest way to get a three person game is to take a two person game with an extra person.

Poker is the one that immediately comes to mind. .

It's also possible to have "three handed" gin rummy, with one dealer and two players in every game.

The loser of one game becomes the dealer of the next.

It's possible, but harder, to downgrade a four person game into three.

In a pinch, I've played "three handed bridge.

" Deal out all four hands, highest bidder gets dummy, score each person separately.

On the other hand, "go fish," often a four player game, can be downgraded to three relatively easily.

Durak (Fool) is a Russian game that plays very well with 3 people.

The mechanics are also quite distinctive; it's rare to find a good card game that isn't built on trick taking in my experience.

I'd recommend: 31 (or Scat...

but I've never heard it called it that)

http://www.pagat.com/draw/scat.html 3 handed Pinochle http://www.pagat.com/marriage/pin3.html or Oh Hell!

http://www.pagat.com/exact/ohhell.html 3 is pretty fun with the right group, and all of these work great.

Briscola is a very Euchre-like trick-taking game that can scale to many different player numbers.

I prefer it with 3 so it sounds like the right fit for you folks.

If your group knows Euchre, they'll be able to learn Briscola quite easily.

Traditionally, it's played with Italian playing card deck (cups, swords, clubs, coins), but can easily be played with a modified International deck (hearts, spades, diamonds, clubs) by removing the 8, 9, and 10 of each suit.

Canasta has a three-player variant, where the players all compete against each other instead of playing in teams of two.

Question: We have a great time playing Hearts, Spades, and Euchre with 4 players.  Oftentimes though we have three people available to play but not a fourth.  How can I find card games that are interesting for 3 players?

Card Games for Three Players?

Skat, Ninety-Nine and Rummy are all good card games for 3 players.

One of the best card games for three players is  Skat. There is also Ninety- Nine or psychological Jujitsu. A brilliant card game that deals out evenly to 2, 3 or 4 players is Cassino. Hearts can also be played with three. Three handed gin rummy can be played, with one dealer and two players in every game and poker can also be played with three players.
 On the other hand, "go fish," can be downgraded to three easily. And Durak (Fool)  is a Russian game that 3 people can play. Briscola  is a very Euchre-like trick-taking game that can scale to many different player numbers, whilst Canasta  has a three-player variant, where the players all compete against each other instead of playing in teams of two.

Rummy is the best game of the rummy family IMHO, and it works well with any number from 2-5. klabberjass is a trick taking game that works only with 3. Rummy is the best game of the rummy family and it works well with any number from 2-5. klabberjass is a trick taking game that works only with 3.

One of the best card games for three players is  Skat. There is also Ninety- Nine or psychological Jujitsi/


This uses the online PDF from http://www.wizards.com/avalonhill/rules/roborally.pdf You aren't allowed to "sit" anywhere.

First: You have to play cards.

If you time-out, the player to the right plays random cards to fill out your non-locked registers.

(p. 4)

Locked registers WILL be played.

Second: All movement Cards used but not locked are discarded, as are unused.

(p. 4, 8)

New ones will be drawn.

Third: You only get one draw of an option card per turn , and only if you END the turn (and thus also Register 5's phase) on it.

Crossing it during the turn doesn't get you the card.

(p. 8) fourth: The odds are not good in 3p or more that you'll get the cards needed to return to your start space.

Camping on a repair spot is thus not as easy as it may seem.

Especially since you retain only locked cards.

If one gets consistently lucky enough to have the ability to return to start spot with cards alone, it's great.

If one is using terrain, it's skill, more than luck.

In short, I suspect the problem isn't the option cards, but a misread of the rules.

If there was no misread, one simple solution is to use a 1 per space limit; put a (custom) player token on each upgrade spot, and when you draw an option card, put that token on it.

When it's lost, put the token on an upgrade slot where you don't have one.

I've never felt it needed, and the people I've known who did usually were making one of three mistakes: 1) retaining unused programming cards, thus being able to plan multiple turns ahead 2) retaining used programming cards.

This makes it a VERY different game.

3) allowing repairs and upgrades each register phase, rather than only at the end of the turn.

This makes camping on a spot far more worthwhile.

I someone is able to somehow null out their 5 moves to collect options - kill them!

Your robot has a laser for a reason :)

Also, most hammer and wrench spaces are hard to get to - if they sit and waste many turns collecting options you should be able to beat them in the race.

The best way to discourage this behavior is to remember it's a race, and start racing.

Grabbing early options is actually a very good strategy -- it maximizes the use you'll get out of them during the game.

But once you've got a few loaded up, get your butt moving.

Every turn your opponents spend option camping is a turn you get to advance without them messing with you.

Unless the cards royally screw you (you don't get any move cards for a few turns, or somebody lucks into a devastating option combo), the head start they're spotting you can be very tough to beat.

It's a lot easier to camp a "Toy Spot" than some of the other answers are making out.

To combat this, we institute a limit of 3 options.

If you would get a 4th you must choose and discard one of your options BEFORE you draw a new one.

This reduces the camping to a good extent, but doesn't stop it either.

And of course, if someone is camping constantly, coming over and shoving them into a pit, or shooting the crap out of them can be the simplest method to solve the problem.

Or just go tag all the flags and win while they're collecting toys.

It's not in the current set of rules, but to avoid option hoarding my play group always said that you only get a new option card if you go to a different repair bay slot (you can use your archive token as an indicator of this).

So, you can go back and forth between two double wrenches to collect them.

I agree that it's all too easy to rotate and get several option cards - usually other players are not close enough to 'just blast them either'.

So I've decided on a simple house rule that says you must move off the hammer-wrench before you can go back on to get another card - i don't mind so much if someone can go 'back 1' and 'forward 1' again, as these card combo's are much less frequent than rotate left & right.

It works well, simple and effective.

While option cards can be handy, most of them aren't going to buy you a full turn, so I'd recommend the simple strategy of: If they're behind you, just keep going and build up that lead.

If they're in front of you, and it's not terribly out of your way, just line up with them and drill 'em full of laser holes as you go by - if they're grinding the wall, you might even manage to push them away and make them spend a turn or two course-correcting.

I don't really see a problem with too many option cards.

With solid planning I usually need about 2-3 complete Turns to get to the next Flag, if the other players aren't actively blocking me.

So if we both start, you take 2 turns to your Repair-Shop

I'm already at the first flag.

If you stay there for 5 more turns (and manage to just collect your option cards, without people shooting at you and without a stroke of bad cards or someone pushing you) - fine you than have 5 RANDOM option cards.

I will at this time probably be at Flag 3 - where as you have to go to Flag 1.

Sure if you are lucky, maybe you get the right cards to get amazingly fast or to kill everyone else.

But on small maps the racer will already be at Flag 3 of 4 or 5 and will win the game before you can get him.

On a Big map he is probably too far away for you to actually get him properly with your option cards.

And if you get too strong, all it takes is 3 Players ganging up on you and shooting you and your cards to hell...

Question: Robo Rally is a fun game but the option cards totally break it if a person just sits on the wrench and hammer and collects them all.  Has anyone tried a house rule to discourage this behaviour?  How did it work out?

Robo Rally - Alternative rules for option cards?

Remember that it's a race and grabbing options early on is a good strategy.

The problem might not be the option cards, but a misread of the rules.  The best way to discourage this behavior is to remember it's a race, and start racing.
Grabbing early options is actually a very good strategy -- it maximizes the use you'll get out of them during the game.
 It's not in the current set of rules, but to avoid option hoarding you can rule to only get a new option card if you go to a different repair bay slot. You can introduce a rule that says you must move off the hammer-wrench before you can go back on to get another card.


Why settle for two or three wolves when you can have seven or more of them instead?

If just having a ton of 3/3 wolves isn't enough for you - why not have them fall upon your opponent's creatures like, er, a pack of wolves?

With Howlpack Alpha, you get a free creature token every turn for zero mana.

It's crying out for a Juniper Order Ranger.

That guy's going to get large.

So now you're getting a lot of creatures with counters on them.

Maybe they're still too small…

And maybe you still don't have enough of them… EDIT: Just a note on how insane Doubling Season is… Howlpack Alpha + Doubling Season =

two effectively 3/3 wolves

every turn add J.O. ranger =

two effectively 5/5 wolves

every turn, ranger grows +2/+2 each turn add Plaguemaw Beast = Sac.

a wolf to grow all other wolves and ranger +2/+2

Here are some ways of generating more wolf tokens to play a swarming strategy.

This kicker might be more appropriate to EDH/Commander games where mana is more plentiful, likewise Master of the Hunt is expensive but if mana is plentiful, it might be an option.

For true EDH play, here's your general for this deck:

These cards have Human and Wolf or Warewolf in their creature types, and would gain +1/+1 from the Mayor regardless of which face was up.

These (formerly human wolf)

cards are (now, Sept 2011) werewolves and benefit when Howlpack Alpha is face up.

Metal wolf!

Not only does he get the boost from the Mayor/Alpha, he also boosts the Mayor/Alpha if you set his type to Werewolf.

It's a win/win partnership!

(I've noticed that Pat has requested that we amalgamate our answers into one decisive one, so my final answer is this guy plus the two other cards I've posted so far.

A pretty good start to creating a nasty pumped-up werewolf package.)

Question: In the Innistrad set, at least 1 of the double faced cards is a werewolf with the ability to upgrade other werewolves and wolves in play.  What other wolves have good potential to combine with the Mayor of Avabruck//Howlpack Alpha card?  I'm thinking primarily of Commander games, but if you think something fits a different format, please note that.

What cards have good potential for a combo with Mayor of Avabruck // Howlpack Alpha?

A Juniper Order Ranger, as well as the cards Human and Wolf.

These cards have Human and Wolf or Warewolf in their creature types, and would gain +1/+1 from the Mayor regardless of which face was up.   It's also crying out for a Juniper Order Ranger.

It's crying out for a Juniper Order Ranger.


There are different stages to testing.

You need to make sure the core idea and gameplay is workable.

You can do some of this by playing through a few games with just you playing for each other player.

Then you need to start creating the game.

This will be an iterative process.

You get the game together, and draft some instructions, and get some friends round to play it.

Take many notes!

See how they understand the instructions; make notes of any oddities during play; see if they understand the game in the way you intend.

Make changes, and do this again.

Do this a few times.

Eventually you'll get a game that's ready for beta testing with people who don't know you; maybe as a print and play download.

Make sure people know it's a beta test, and make sure they have some good method for reporting problems they have and getting help.

You'll also want to think about asking people to try to break the game; trying to use weird strategies to win or "king making" or rushing or such.

If you think you'll have to frequently change cards you could use card sleeves instead of glue/tape.

Simply print out a new version and swap.

You'll probably have to add some kind of real card to the sleeve to give it stability.

As for the actual testing, just ask people to try it out with you and tell you what they think.

You'll probably want to have a core group of testers that play more frequently so they can examine advanced strategies.

Once you're confident in your game you should have some blind playtesting:

See how people handle the game with nothing more than the cards and the rulebook.

Buy normal playing cards (maybe more than one deck if you have a lot of cards in your game), print your special cards on normal paper (or write something on pieces of paper) and simply tape/glue them on the cards you bought.

They will all look the same from the back and won't require you to make them on expensive paper.

Note: when you finally make the game, thing about cuttong the corners of the cards in rounded shape to avoid them to be destroyed too easely.

One Solution would be to start with index cards.

No need to look fancy until you are sure you are happy with what you have got.

(this could depend on the kind of card game.

Like if you are using a game that can use standard playing cards then go with the obvious, however if you are making a trading card game or something then this solution could work for you.)

Once you have your cards and whatever extra stuff such as dice and what not that you need then gather up a few people and give them a rough overview of your game.

Once you pique their interests bring them to a place where they can play, give them a set of rules.

It's important that you don't play with them while they test it.

Instead of playing, keep a notebook with you and note down different details about how the players interact with your game.

What makes them frustrated?, do they understand the rules?, are they enjoying themselves?, do they quit?

if so why?, and what not.

Also make the players feel that they can stop playing at any time so that they don't continue to play just out of respect for you, or out of the feeling of being trapped.

As you take notes also keep in mind the personalty of those you have playing.

Are they your intended audience for your game?

If so are you appealing to your audience?

Also if they are not your intended audience do they find interest in your game?

If so how can you maybe expand play to include their style and maybe broaden your market?

After you get these notes down be sure to look over your game and make revisions where necessary.

Once revisions are made try to have a play test with the same players and see if you have improved the experience at all.

Try the game with different people, and see what comes out of it.

You can purchase blank faced playing cards that are perfect for prototyping.

Just write whatever text you need on the face of the card and start playing.

It's a good idea to keep extras on hand for use as you need to add/remove/change the cards in your deck.

I could list a few sources, but your best bet is to check out Google Products to see what fits your needs the best.

Question: I've been playing around with an idea for a card game for some time, and I think I've finally got the idea fairly well in place. How can I best start testing it out to refine it?

I have an idea for a card game. How can I best start testing it?

There are different stages to testing. Try playing with people you know, or give them a print a play download. Ask people to try and break the game with different strategies. Once that is ready, then try some blind testing.

There are different stages to testing.  To make your cards you can either buy normal playing cards, print your special cards on normal pape and simply glue them on the cards you bought. Or use index cards or you can even purchase blank faced playing cards. Once you have a game ready carry out beta testing with people who don't know you. You should carry out blind testing and also ask people to try to break the game, to try to use weird strategies to win.

S0: There are different stages to testing.

You can either buy normal playing cards, print your special cards on normal pape and simply glue them on the cards you bought. Or use index cards or you can even purchase blank faced playing cards.