It is important to balance the cards that give you more dice against the cards that let you alter dice. You will need both, but the bottom line is that you can not win without enough dice. Luck can give you the numbers you need, it can't give you more dice.

It appears that the cards in higher rows (requiring more dice) are more helpful than those in lower rows, but that is not always true.

Row 1:
Try to avoid having to take the fool. While the fool gets you to the sharlatan, you will have spent two turns adding one card to your hand. Plenty of other cards let you add dice.

Row 2:
Don't be fooled by the farmer. The craftsman and the guard are better cards. Even though the farmer adds the die before your first roll, it is more useful to add a die with a known value.

The philosopher is more useful than the dairymaid, as he lets you alter two dice while she only lets you alter one. In almost every case, the philosopher can steal 1, 2, or 3 pips from another die, which is what the dairymaid would do. The dairymaid is only better when you have set aside all but one die. If you plan ahead, you can easily avoid this.

Row 3:
The astonomer is a very useful card; grab it if you can. In comparison to the magician in the next row, the only thing it can not do is change a die to a number that does not match one already set aside. It is rare that you would ever want to do that, and the astronomer is easier to obtain.

Avoid the merchant. Being able to re-roll does not guarantee you any help.

The hunter is a good card; he gets you an additional die.

Row 4:
The lady is a good deal here, because she is arguably more useful than the duke, and easier to obtain. If you are collecting 2's, for example, the lady can help you (when you roll a 1), but the duke can not. On the other end, if you are collecting 6's, there is no reason to think that you are more likely to roll a 4 and use the duke than a 5 and use the lady.

Avoid the magician; see discussion of astronomer above.

Pawnbroker and knights get you more dice. If you have the lady, the knight is especially good because they work well together.

Row 5:
Avoid the duke; see discussion of lady above.

The field marshall may be the single most important card to get before the king and queen. If you have six dice, you should be working to get this card on every turn. I have never seen anyone win without it.

Avoid the alchemist; he is only marginally better than the philosopher, who is much easier to obtain.

The bishop is a good card, considering its ease of attainment. When you play, four of a kind + a pair will count as three pairs, so if you are shooting for the field marshall and miss, grab the bishop.

Row 6:
Obviously the king and queen are the point of the game. Remember that getting there first is a huge advantage, as you get the queen and the privelege of only having to tie the highest roll.

Hope these notes help!

I agree on most of these, especially the choice of dice over control. Although without control you're relying on luck a lot more.

I'd add that due to limited cards, it's a race to get the best card that you can. If there is a card in the I row that is better due to giving dice, it may still make more sense to take a card that changes the dice from another row as you can come back and get the dice giving card later. While the other card may be gone, especially in a 2 player game.

Also, last night I lost with the general, maybe I just suck. I took the general getting to 9 dice, and he took the king afterwards with 8 dice, rolling only 7 5's. I rolled and ended up with 9 3's. He managed to roll 9 3's as well for the win. It was well played.

This is my most played game of the last 2 months, although I've only played with 2 & 3, looking forward to trying it with more.

Edited for clarity.

A nice article. I haven't post my strategy thoughts to the geek (they are on my blog at http://gaming.powerblogs.com/posts/1172455389.shtml), but they match closely with yours.


It's true that control matters, but you can overdo this. One less die (with an extra control card) often wins. Two less dice don't.


I'm falling out of love with the astronomer, although until my last dozen or so games that was the single control card I aimed for (It's still good, but I don't take him ahead of lots of cards now). I like the ability to deal with multiple dice. I also recommended avoiding the merchant (and we even discussed choosing to take a fool over the merchant). Tom Lehmann posted a defense of the Merchant in response, and it's worth reading.



Note that if you the lady, the duke becomes an amazing card (assuming you have enough dice to threaten). But if you are only getting one or the other, the lady is better. (Also for issues of Parity ... lady can change even dice to odd and vice versa).


I've seen wins without it, but it certainly is a focal point. I (mildly) prefer the variant at http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/141614. I have seen people win without it, but winners usually have it.


Probably my strongest disagreement. Often you can lock three dice with the alchemist, and usually two dice. You can only improve two dice with the philosopher when you are going for 2-5 and if you get a good roll. And often (in the endgame) it's ridiculously easy to get the alchemist, and hard to get the philosopher. The philosopher (and serving maid) are consolation prizes for when you miss the farmer/laborer/guard on your first turn.

Edit -- Fixed quote tags

Nice article and responses (and everyone should go and read Brian Bankler's blog on this, as noted above). The more I read and play this game, though, the less I enjoy it, and it's in part because articles like this confirm that the heuristics are actually pretty simple (though I'll grant there is some complexity if you drill down, but it too often just doesn't matter). There's a lack of tension; I think it's an interesting system, but it often fails to provide interesting choices, making it fun to watch and admire, but not to play. It's odd, considering how many cards there are, but I feel like it's too constrained. It would greatly improve (for me, of course) if all the cards were unique: it would feel more like "Yahtzee meets Magic: the Gathering," which is what I was really hoping for.

I think that there are interesting choices, particularly in the handling of odd rolls, but they don't always occur. But in a sense I agree. (I often say "The dice keep telling me what to do.") But it's such a zippy little game I don't mind. And I think that someone with a 'perfect' strategy playing against a good gamer will have an edge (obviously) but not a huge one. Certainly not as much as in, say, Backgammon.

I think that one of the issues you are mentioning is one of Tom Lehmann's hallmarks -- he builds balanced systems. Even the weaker characters exist for a reason. It's hard to balance a system and keep adding parts. As it stands now we have 18 characters and the balance is good. It would be tough to balance everything with 30 or 50 different characters with powers. That changes the number of two-power combinations you have to deal with from 153 to 435 (30 cards) or 1225 (50 cards). Tough to pull off.

No question. I'm just expressing my personal preference for a game with more rough edges and potential balance issues over a finely balanced but blander one. The former provides the potential for more interesting choices and better variety, but of course with the risk that it could degenerate along several lines (a well-known issue for CCG players).

I do want to be clear that I'm not trying to criticize the design on any objective grounds; Lehmann should be proud of it, as it's a smooth, clever game. I just like things a bit woollier, I guess.

Now that this has an english version, the names are a little different than in your article.

In my limited playing (probably two dozen games), I actually found that the duke/nobleman plays significantly different than the lady/noblewomen. The benefit of the duke is that he drastically increases the pip value of your dice, which is much more useful with the alchemist. I was tempted to keep playing the duke like I would the lady, but found that the duke can sometimes open up better combinations. The lady is better when using higher dice cards but the duke is very useful with lower dice cards and the alchemist. The trick is really about which path you followed through the characters.

I also found that early in the game the dairymaid is much better because it gives you the ability to modify one die only. It basically becomes a softer astronomer. I almost never pick the philosopher because by the time he is truly useful, the alchemist is a better pick.

Also, the merchant can be useful, but generally only after the initial roll before triggering the lady or duke. The extra roll will give you better odds because you can match two different values instead of needing only one.

Example: if your initial roll gives you 3, 3, 4, 1, 6 and you have an extra 4, 2, 1: add the 2, 1 and roll the 2, 1, 1, 6 with the merchant. You can take either 3's or 4's that come back from the roll. If you wait, then you can only use 4's. Whether this is more useful than just having an extra card is debatable. I do find that the merchant is really only useful in the first roll before setting dice.

I prefer the lady + alchemist combination, but will be keeping an eye on using the serving maid as an early card. My hunch is that the extra die in the beginning is still the way to go, but if I have to choose between a 5 and a 6 on the first roll of a game I will pick the 5.

YES! I didn't even know such a thing was possible, but I'm all for this. You've got at least one copy sold!

I played a series of five games with my father after reading some of the tips here and won four of them. We now adhere to the consensus that the dice cards are what to nab, the general is a must-get, and going first is a death knell. Of the five games we played, the player who went first lost every time. I have not been able to get more multi-player sessions in.

In two player games, I found I liked leaving the Guard behind in the first few rounds because it gave me something to fall back to when trying for the General with six dice. We have not tried the blue-dice variant, but it looks like a good idea.




This was one of the first strategies I played when learning the game. Lady/Alchemist let me do anything I wanted. I could easily target any card as long as I had dice to play. I found that getting the Lady nearly guarantees a straight, so picking up the Alchemist is fairly easy.




Ah, that is cool. During our session, my dad and I kept thinking out loud, "wouldn't it be cool if..." Glad to hear we get to see more of this mechanic teased out.




I like the sound of this. Depth, in my opinion, would really strengthen this game. It works wonders as an entry level thinker as is, so being able to have two versions would be a dream come true.




Very cool. You definitely have me sold on the idea; I cannot wait for more information.

And another!

+1

Pretty much anything can work with the alchemist, really. Except for the Merchant, and possibly the Phil...