Game: Warrior Knights

Image

chooche — 2008-08-23T05:51:02+00:00

Ad from Warlock Magazine

Image

bryanwinter — 2008-06-18T05:34:49+00:00

Back of the box

Image

bryanwinter — 2008-06-18T05:34:25+00:00

Components

Image

sauceybugger — 2007-11-27T02:16:09+00:00

I say Hugh, these chaps seem to be playing by different rules to us!

Thread: Re: Cruel hand of fate

RichardV — 2007-09-07T12:58:38+00:00

I think the point of the game design is to keep it in a continual state of unbalance. This prevents the game locking up: if you currently have a lead, use it before the pox takes it away; if someone is laid low by being called off to a council, then go and take over their holdings. Without the chaos the game would never end. The idea is to surf the chaos and time your grab for victory.

I think it is not a bad entry in the camp of multi-player wargames with unbridled diplomacy (aka "Descendants of Risk'). There are aspects that could be handled more cleverly to speed play a little. It is also a game that rewards familiarity (and beer).

Thread: Re: Cruel hand of fate

nnf1 — 2007-09-06T21:10:02+00:00

j b,

As Paul stated it was the oringinal version. No faith.

Thread: Re: Cruel hand of fate

unfaegne_eorl — 2007-09-06T19:12:41+00:00

One tip - try to always hold a couple of faith tokens in your pocket to cancel out bad event cards (some can't be cancelled, but I think most can)

Thread: Cruel hand of fate

Paul Mackie — 2007-09-06T15:06:46+00:00

Before the serious gaming started tonight it was noted that we were to have exactly six players. Someone observed that this was the right number for Dune, but this idea was not met with a great deal of enthusiasm, even from the proposer I think (which wasn’t Richard, by the way).

Brad had been carrying around a copy of the latest edition of Warrior Knights recently, but none present had played before, or even knew the rules. But, rather than extinguishing the idea altogether, Richard quickly called up Neil (yet to arrive), who came with game and thorough rules experience in tow.

Neil’s set was the original edition, not the latest glossy release. He forewarned that it was very “chromy” and would easily run 3-4 hours. This was fine with all present, although just outside the norm for a Sunday night game choice. We were able to get started without a complete rules explanation, and things moved along generally smoothly in the early parts of the game. The mercenary auctions worked well, but I thought the voting on the special privilege cards was an unattractive part of the game, favouring the stronger players on board and the loudest negotiators.

However, I held my ground fairly comfortably for the first four or five turns or so, as did most of the other players, although Pat kept a low profile in his corner of the board, apparently weaker than everyone else. I then decided to position myself for some tactical defence and expansion. I moved half of my troops and mercenaries, about 800 men, into the one legion with the view to using this for attacks and sieges, while the other legions were to defend captured cities with lesser forces. After the shuffle but before I could mobilise them I was struck by someone’s Fate card at the start of the next turn, and some plague or epidemic just wiped them out entirely - over half my army erased within a few seconds. Other players were also dealt severe and indiscriminate blows like this - not something I was expecting to see.

Within another turn or two, while Brad and Richard continued to joust and raze each other’s cities to everyone’s amusement, Neil marched onto my stronghold with a double attack turn and successfully sieged me into non-existence before I could do anything - took my three cities and half my cash. In retaliation I thought I could take back the city of Lenz, but with a forced march Neil returned with enough strength to kick the pus out of me before my second siege phase, and my game was as good as over. Didn’t see any of that coming!

In the meantime, more cities were razed, lowering the victory threshold. After slowly building his forces, Pat poked his head out from his hole in the corner and successfully took Neil’s stronghold, placing him a mere one city from outright victory.
The last turn was declared by time-limit consensus at about 11:30pm, running until 12:00. Pat lost one of his cities to Alex before being able to make a winning die roll. However, on the basis of total cities won, Pat was certainly able to claim a marginal or tactical victory.
As an overall assessment, Warrior Knights is not going to be near the top of my favourite games list. Obviously I’m biased by my particular game experience, but there are too many ‘features’ of this game that don’t feel balanced. Perhaps some of these are addressed in the more recent release, but I’m not in a hurry to explore them.
27 mins rules upfront; 245 mins game time.
Results: Pat: 5 cities. Alex: 2.5 (1 overseas city counts as 0.5). Richard: 1.5. Brad: 2. Neil: 1. Paul: 0.

(Originally posted in The Mine Shaft Gap. Pic by Mijjy.)

Thread: Re: New versus Old

Boogers — 2007-07-19T07:32:18+00:00

I can understand the quandry if cash is an issue. Don't fix what works! However, if you can, I cannot recommend you get the new version enough. With the new, you usually get better quality components, clearer rules and better support.

This statement answers your question all on it's own!!!

Thread: Bringing in NEW Assembly Motions

Carver — 2007-06-18T09:36:34+00:00

During the long period that the prototype ‘Warrior Knights’ was played in our own group additional Assembly Motions were added as and when I thought up new ideas. For this reason, when Games Workshop decided to publish the game a number of blank Assembly Motion cards were included so that players could add them for themselves.

What is more, when I originally devised the game my idea was to allow players to bring in their own ideas for Assembly Motions under the “Private Motion” rule for the individual Barons. However, this didn’t work at all well; it introduced at times a sort of chaos as players proposed ill thought-out motions. So I had to make the rule that a Private Motion could be used only to try to overturn a previous Assembly decision. This was fine up to a point, but it made these Private Motions pretty useless if they turned up very early in the game.

However, there is a way to turn this problem to an advantage. Most groups, once they are familiar with the game, will continuously come up with good ideas for new Assembly Motions. (And new Assembly Motion ideas were introduced by Fantasy Flight in their current version of the game.) Assuming that the group accepts proposed new Motions as adding to the game’s enjoyment they could be written on an ‘Approved’ list. Then, when a Baron is given the opportunity to introduce a Private Motion he is given the additional option of proposing one from this ever-expanding list.

But do remember that all such motions must be phrased in ‘general’ terms and not worded in such a way as to target a specific individual (even though that is often the ultimate intention when they are proposed!). Also they must be logical. As an example of the latter, I remember somebody suggesting a Motion banning the use of roads. That is illogical. But if players like the idea a similar effect could be achieved if the Motion was that a Tax be imposed on the use of roads. That is logical. See what I mean?

Just one word of caution. It is already a long game so try to avoid introducing Motions that would slow the game down. (It is for this reason that I advised removing certain cards in order to make the game shorter. These were cards that removed a lot of money from the game and consequently slowed it down – unless, of course, time hangs heavily on your hands and you want a longer game!)

Thread: Re: Need Help Please!

Kervaine — 2007-06-12T17:45:24+00:00

Thanks for your time Derek. I have been away from the site for several months so only just read your reply to my question. I will try and find it as you suggested and perhaps play it as is rather than reworking the rules between the two. Thanks for your reply.

Thread: Re: New versus Old

LimboLance — 2007-06-12T03:25:37+00:00

Then all I need is some opponents (and a little brew)!

Thread: Re: New versus Old

Great Dane — 2007-05-31T16:53:21+00:00

Stay with the old if you have it - and buy the new one if you don't.

Thread: New versus Old

LimboLance — 2007-05-31T16:31:07+00:00

I, like many wargamers, often find myself in a quandry. Old version versus New. With the Old - you get flavor, nostalgia and history (eg memories). With the new, you usually get better quality components, clearer rules and better support. So - which version do you prefer? Should I crack open the vault and buy the new?

Image

LimboLance — 2007-05-27T14:44:36+00:00

Coins/Money

Thread: Re: HELP!

Wibblenut — 2007-02-23T10:17:54+00:00

Well I tend to fall somewhere between the 2 categories, where possible I'll have a mint unused copy to sit and admire (whilst rocking backwards and forwards whispering 'ahhh my precious' to), and a second copy for playing. However, I'm not the kinda person to blow huge wads of cash on an unused title (I only paid $10 for my totally unused 1982 Judge Dredd board game, ahhhh cards still in wrap, so temptingly close, yet soo far away...) So I would certainly be interested, but wouldn' be able to offer a 'life changing' amount of money...

Hopefully this weekend I'll find time* to sit down and familiarise myself with Warrior Knights (because joy of joys my second set of game cards have arrived and are complete as per rule book list).

Will probably also add a complete contents listing for this game, and any others I find time* to finish, and add them to the BBG forums for other suffering collectors!

*Time, that oh so rare commodity, assume that I have any left after sculpting minis, feeding the Sea Monkeys, washing the bike, scouring eBay, and staring longingly out of the window waiting for more treasure from eBay to arrive...

Thread: Re: HELP!

Carver — 2007-02-23T10:03:14+00:00

Wibblenut wrote:
Hopefully the posty will be delivering my next batch of treasure in a week or so (so I'll be able to compare the two sets and then be even more confused as I become riddled with doubt as to whether either batch is correct!)
I suppose a simple solution would be to just go out and buy a sealed copy of the re-issue and play that instead, but it wouldn't match my collection of 80's classic GW boxed games that I have been hoarding and polishing, coveting and collecting, listing and collating, alphabetising and zip-lock-bagging...

Well, you do derive one distinct advantage by buying the (cheap) used games. The GW 1985 production values left a great deal to be desired when it came to thickness of their card counters. Right from the outset I cannibalised a second copy and stuck two sets of counters together and even then they could hardly be called 'thick'! But they were certainly an improvement. So this could be something to amuse yourself with in the long dark evenings.

And another writer is correct - the 1985 game and the 2006 game are totally different.

(But should you be a really keen collector of those early GW titles I know somebody (who is NOT a collector) who has a totally unused copy of WK. All members of my games group received a copy but as they always play at my house, their's remain unused. But if you simply need the game 'to play' - as opposed 'to collect' - you are probably better off (financially!) sticking with your several eBay bargains -'sticking' also being an operative word in this instance!)

Thread: Re: HELP!

Wibblenut — 2007-02-23T09:38:14+00:00

'ere Derek, am afraid that the erratta sheet isn't very exciting at all, it's just making a note that the epidemic fate card should only work on a roll of a 1, not a 1 or a 2.

Mind you, it does say explicitly at the bottom of the errata sheet 'ta very much to Meester Carver the designer, for pointing this printing error out'

Image

Social Work Dad — 2007-02-22T14:57:10+00:00

the board

Image

Social Work Dad — 2007-02-22T13:38:35+00:00

character cards

Thread: warrior knights rule query

padsbar — 2007-02-13T23:02:35+00:00

when a plague area is generated on one of your nobles castle does his line still wipe out even if your noble is not in his home castle.
if it does,i cant see why the noble who is still alive cant generate some heirs elsewhere

cheers

peter

Thread: Re: HELP!

fellonmyhead — 2007-02-12T14:00:10+00:00

Wibblenut wrote:
I suppose a simple solution would be to just go out and buy a sealed copy of the re-issue and play that instead

No solution at all, as they are played very differently. You won't get the same kind of atmosphere from the new version (though indisputably they are both great games).

Thread: Re: HELP!

Wibblenut — 2007-02-12T13:41:44+00:00

Cheers chap, am a few leagues East over in Kentshire...
Hopefully the posty will be delivering my next batch of treasure in a week or so (so I'll be able to compare the two sets and then be even more confused as I become riddled with doubt as to whether either batch is correct!)
I suppose a simple solution would be to just go out and buy a sealed copy of the re-issue and play that instead, but it wouldn't match my collection of 80's classic GW boxed games that I have been hoarding and polishing, coveting and collecting, listing and collating, alphabetising and zip-lock-bagging...

Thread: Re: HELP!

MartinStever — 2007-02-11T13:49:42+00:00

carver wrote:
Frankly there are so many cards in this game that listing them all is quite an undertaking. So as a first attempt at sorting out your problem let us know where you live. Maybe somebody visiting this site lives close enough for you to compare your sets with theirs. Me - I'm in Surrey just off the M25 (Junctions 9 and 10) if it helps.

- Derek

Holy Cow! Talk about great customer service. A Geeker buys a used game off eBay, and the designer offers to meet to check up on his new old copy. That's amazing! Well done, Derek!

Thread: Re: HELP!

Carver — 2007-02-11T13:33:24+00:00

Wibblenut wrote:

Would anyone be interested in swapping a card list (ie a list of what cards I should have in my set and how many) for a lovely lovely scan of the errata sheet?

You almost make it too tempting to resist - but I think I'll manage to.

Frankly there are so many cards in this game that listing them all is quite an undertaking. So as a first attempt at sorting out your problem let us know where you live. Maybe somebody visiting this site lives close enough for you to compare your sets with theirs. Me - I'm in Surrey just off the M25 (Junctions 9 and 10) if it helps.

- Derek

Thread: Re: HELP!

Wibblenut — 2007-02-11T13:21:37+00:00

Have just won a second incomplete set on eBay (and this one does have the errata sheet included).

Hopefully I'll be able to cobble together the best of each to create one super-complete-set for the collection...

So...

Would anyone be interested in swapping a card list (ie a list of what cards I should have in my set and how many) for a lovely lovely scan of the errata sheet?

Thread: Re: HELP!

Great Dane — 2007-02-09T18:05:47+00:00

caradoc wrote:
Yep - sorry, I didn't realise that it was for the GW edition - not the newer FFG edition! - disregard my comments above!!!

Good luck!

Giles.

(edited for spelling)

It happends to us all, Giles.
But insetad of asking us to disregard your posts, you can simply delete them again - that's what I always do when (or if) my posts are no longer relevant.

Thread: Re: HELP!

Carver — 2007-02-09T17:59:41+00:00

Wibblenut wrote:

Here's a picture of a different eBay auction with the 'Mystery Errata Sheet' that got me wondering...

Gosh. Thanks for that. It's all news to me. It might be something GW sent out with the magazine 'White Dwarf' after they learned of the errors. I certainly have never before seen a copy or even knew one existed!

- Derek

Thread: Re: HELP!

Wibblenut — 2007-02-09T17:49:22+00:00

Cheers Meester Carver! Was after a card listing so that I could cobble together a set out of cheapy incomplete sets (afterall this copy was cheap as chips n the box is minty, even if the contents seem a tad mixed up).
Here's a picture of a different eBay auction with the 'Mystery Errata Sheet' that got me wondering...

Thread: Re: HELP!

caradoc — 2007-02-09T13:08:16+00:00

Yep - sorry, I didn't realise that it was for the GW edition - not the newer FFG edition! - disregard my comments above!!!

Good luck!

Giles.

(edited for spelling)

Thread: Re: HELP!

Carver — 2007-02-09T11:29:36+00:00

Great Dane wrote:
Wibblenut wrote:
Yup, Mik is right, this is for the 1985 original Games Workshop edition.
Whilst am waiting for a card list here's another question:
"How do I know whether I should have got a copy of the Warrior Kings errata sheet?"
I notice some copies for sale have an errata sheet in the picture, but mine didn't have one, but there is no mention of a revision in the rule book?

Maybe the designer, Derek Carver, at derekcvr@aol.com can help you. Just say that I sent you.

Here I come Mik - riding in on my white charger!

As for the card shortage, there isn't much I can do to help there. I can only hope that it was accurately described on Ebay and not too much was paid for it! (If it helps, there are usually copies available on UK Ebay but that's maybe a bit drastic given that you've already taken the plunge) Otherwise I fear you'll need to improvise via a photocopier.

BUT where I can help is about the errata sheet. There was no Games Workshop published errata sheet (or if there was nobody told me about it) but I published my own Q&A sheet, which you will find under 'Files' here on the Geek. Also available under 'Files' are instructions for shortening (and speeding up) the game, which I greatly recommend. All you need do is to download these files.

I hope that's of some help at least.

Thread: Re: HELP!

Wibblenut — 2007-02-08T15:13:39+00:00

Yup, Mik is right, this is for the 1985 original Games Workshop edition.
Whilst am waiting for a card list here's another question:
"How do I know whether I should have got a copy of the Warrior Kings errata sheet?"
I notice some copies for sale have an errata sheet in the picture, but mine didn't have one, but there is no mention of a revision in the rule book?
MORE HELP! ta!

Thread: Re: HELP!

Great Dane — 2007-02-08T13:54:19+00:00

FFG can't help him - since he is asking about the contents of the original GW version.

Thread: Re: HELP!

Sagrilarus — 2007-02-08T13:45:14+00:00

Yikes! Make a phonecall to FFG, tell them you want a fresh pack of cards. Offer to send back the strange assortment you found in the box. Everyone (including FFG) will be happier if people aren't spending hours figuring what's in and what's out.

Sag.

Thread: Re: HELP!

Wibblenut — 2007-02-08T11:52:02+00:00

In the manual it lists 59 Fate cards (plus one blank spare) whereas I only seem to have:
1. Corruption x1 - 3. Revenge x1 - 5. Forest Fires x1 - 6. Traitor x1. - 7. Uprising x3. - 8. Bumper Harvest x2. - 10. Dramatic Increase in Foreign Trade x1. - 11. Disaster at Sea x4. - 12. Cholera x2. - 14. Foreign Wars x1. - 15. Royal Pretender x2. - 17 Council Meet x1. - 18. Council Meet x1. - 19. Assassin x2. - 20. Penance x1. - 21. Widespread Famine and Unrest x1. - 22. Forced March x5. - 23. Crisis for Green x1. - 24. Crisis for Black x2. - 25. Crisis for Brown x3. - 26. Crisis for Red x4. - 27. Crisis for Orange x4. - 28. Crisis for Light Green x4. - 29. Crisis for a Noble in your Faction x4. (plus two blanks).

So I am assuming I am missing card number 23 x3, number 24 x2, and 25 x1, as this makes for a total of 59?

Apparently I should have 54 Assembly cards (plus 6 blanks)but I appear to have:
1. Governor of the Holy Lands x1. - (2?) Governor of North Africa x1. - 3. Rauol D'Emerande x1. - 4. Thomas Edmund Madder x1. - 5. Heinrich Otto Zobel x1. - 6. Caesare Di Reseda x1. - 7. Umberto Da Sienna x1. - 8. Guillaume De Tenne x1. - 9. Ambassador to the Holy See x1. - 10. Ambassador to the Orient x1. - 11. Wool Concession x2. - 12. Wine Concession x2. - 13. Spice Concession x2. - 14. Salt Concession x2. - 14(should be 15?) Increased Concession by 50% x1. - 16. 50% Tax on all Concession x1. - 17. Hardship Fund x1. - 18. Paid Assembly Chairman x1. - 19. Compensatory Monies x1. - 20. Hereditary Offices x1. - 21. Emergency Fund x2. - 22. Appointment of Noble to... x26. - 23. Appointment of Noble to... x3. - 24. Appointment of Noble to Office of Lord Chancellor x1. - 24(again?). Recruit Regular Troops x1. - 25. Compensate for loss of Concessions x1. - 26. Encourage Overseas Expansion x1. - 27. Invalid Assemblies x1. - 28. Expel Certain Mercenaries x2. For a total of 62 (plus 10 blank cards - 6 with yellow dots on).

Mercenary Armies: The contents list says I should have 1x 300, 2x 200, 3x 100, 4 x 50 of English, Lombards, Poles, Rumanians, Swiss and Tuscan Mercenaries.
English - All correct. Lombards - All correct. Poles - missing 1x 50, 1x 100, 1x 300. Rumanians - I appear to have 2 incomplete sets, one yellow set and one white. Swiss - All correct. Tuscan - missing 1x 100. Plus 2 blanks.

Out of the 114 vote counters I appear to have: 121.
Town Levies: 18 + 1 blank (all present and correct - but have an extra Lenz, Froli, & Olbi levies card).
Regular Troops: 24 + 1 blank (all present and correct).

All other components as per rule book.

Could someone confirm or deny whether the listing is correct?

Thread: Re: HELP!

caradoc — 2007-02-08T11:40:36+00:00

Fair point Mik - sorry for being crabby!

Which cards types seem to have more or less Wibblenut?

Giles.

Thread: Re: HELP!

caradoc — 2007-02-08T11:27:47+00:00

Sorry Mik - was that constructive???

It seems like "a quick card count or a list" to me.

If you can offer something useful to the thread by all means do so.

Giles.

Thread: Re: Need Help Please!

Carver — 2007-02-08T10:58:55+00:00

Hi Chris. I'm the inventor of the original and have just spotted your posting. The new version is a totally different one - although based on the original - and whereas the original typified UK gaming of the 1980s the new one typifies American gaming of the present time. And they are totally different in their approach, even though the basic theme is the same.

As you say, getting hold of a copy of the original is probably your best approach. This isn't so difficult if you go to UK e-bay (eBay.co.uk). It is very rare for there not to be a copy for sale and the prices are not alarming (especially as you only want it for information - the Fantasy Flight components being far superior - so you could accept a 'worn' copy).

Good luck

- Derek

Thread: Re: Warrior Knights Question

Carver — 2007-02-08T10:46:22+00:00

I can't remember the precise details of the Fantasy Flight version, Craig, but in the Games Workshop version, should you fail to remove the event cards for Barons not in the game simply chuck 'em back in the box when they appear and turn another card. I assume it is the same in the new version.
And speaking of removing cards, different groups respond favourably or unfavourably to different aspects of the game. This particularly applies to the Assembly motions. Some are weaker than others (something that is more apparent in the new version where far less motions are presented to the Assembly during the course of the game than in the original). So sort through them prior to starting play and put back in the box the 'limp' ones (or the ones that your group regards as being limp). You'll still have enough and you'll have a better game that way.

Thread: Re: HELP!

caradoc — 2007-02-08T10:31:07+00:00

Cards:

6 Stronghold Cards
24 Noble Cards (4 for each of the six possible players)
24 Fate Cards
36 Event cards
45 Agenda Cards
66 Mercenary Cards
24 Regular Troop cards (again - 4 for each player)
80 Action Cards (12 per player + 8 Neutral action cards)

Cheers!

Have fun with this great game!

Giles.

Thread: HELP!

Wibblenut — 2007-02-08T10:12:07+00:00

Another parcel from eBay-land has arrived containing a copy of Warrior Knights, but whilst the counters and other small oddments that usually get lost are complete, I seem to have more of some cards and less of others than listed in the contents section?!
Coud someone either provide a quick card count or a list so I can figure out what manner of weirdness has taken place?! Cheers

Thread: Re: Warrior Knights Question

darkarden — 2007-01-11T04:15:03+00:00

ah, ok, thanks, i have the fantasy flight one. I thought you might have to remove them prior to playing but i just wanted to check, thanks a bunch

darkarden

Thread: Re: Warrior Knights Question

Sagrilarus — 2007-01-07T21:37:23+00:00

    . . . Hmmm, hey darkarden, which version of the game do you have? You posted to the old Games Workshop version, but you may have the new Fantasy Flight Games version. The rule set is different for the new version and you may need to post there. I browsed the new version's rules (not very thoroughly though) and don't see an explicit answer to your question.

    Fantasy Flight Games' version is here: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/22038

    Games Workshop's version is here: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/1143

    The cover shown at the top of the page should match your box on either version.

             Sag.

Thread: Re: Warrior Knights Question

Sagrilarus — 2007-01-07T19:21:43+00:00

What Brad meant to say was, if you look in section 4 of the preparation section of the rules, it states that you need to remove those baron cards prior to starting the game. A simple enough oversight that anyone could have made, and easy enough to fix the next time you play.

Welcome to the geek -- I see it's your first day. It never hurts to ask a question if you're confused about something, and there's always someone here to help you out.

Sag.

Thread: Re: Warrior Knights Question

Windopaene — 2007-01-07T19:09:25+00:00

First off, the game is not by Avalon Hill, but rather Fantasy Flight games. Second, there will never be an action card in the deck that belongs to a player who isn't playing. Why would you be putting in those cards? Who is choosing which cards to go in each pile for the players who are not playing? You are playing something seriously wrong.

Thread: Warrior Knights Question

darkarden — 2007-01-07T18:53:43+00:00

I recently bought warrior knights by avalon hill and i have a question about the rules.

In the action phase what do you do if you draw an action that belongs to a baron who is not playing, i.e. if there are three people playing as bvue, black, and red and a card is drawn that belongs to green. what happens?

thanks

darkarden

Thread: Re: Player Review

thebadgerboy — 2006-12-30T22:16:05+00:00

thanks for the review, I may go on the hunt for this game now

Thread: Re: Player Review

Danny from Tower — 2006-12-12T08:04:18+00:00

Great review Karl, but I would like to add a note about the fate cards:

kglepp wrote:

The Fate cards comprise much of the nastiness of the game, and are bad news most of the time. If you don't know what Fate can bring and don't defensively plan for it, it can wipe your entire army out. But these cards are the single best theme device here, as they constantly remind you about the troubles of the age.

Indeed I found the fate cards to be a flaw in the game and after a year of playing my friends and I hit on what the problem was and how to fix it.

The Problem

There are two rounds of movement and in each round each player draws a fate card. In a four player game that is just way too much random nastiness with plagues and famine racing across the land, adding a certain aount of tedium, making most strategies irrelevant and making the game take a lot longer to play.

The Solution

In a 3 player game only the veto holder and the 3rd player draw fate cards during the 1st move round, and only the 2nd player draws a fate card in the 2nd move round.

In a 4 player game, play the same as described above except that the 2nd AND 4th player draw fate cards in the 2nd move round.

In a 5 player game the 5th player draws fate only in the 1st move round and finally,

In a 6 player game (my favourite) the 6th player only draws fate in the 2nd move round.

This keeps the level of fate down to something reasonable while keeping the fate effects in play and ensuring that every player gets a chance to draw a fate card that they can keep each turn.

Even so, with the 5 and 6 player games we would like to dilute the fate effects a bit more but could not come up with anything simple yet effective

Thread: Need Help Please!

Kervaine — 2006-11-10T04:16:55+00:00

I know this isn't the proper place to post this but I know this is the most easily seen so I'm taking a chance.
First, let me say that my friends and I have just finished a 2 day stint of playing Warrior Knights and enjoyed the game quite a bit. We are always critical of new games however and decided that while the game was good it could be better.
I went on-line to find alternate rules and discovered that this is the game's 2nd incarnation of which I was unaware.After finding this site I looked at the rules from the original and found that there were several things about it that sounded intriguing and perhaps better than the existing rules for the recent.
This is where I need HELP! Although the rules for the 1985 version were available none of the card explainations were to be found. My group would like to mesh the two games into one Ubergame but really need access to the info on what each of the cards in the original did/do to do so. I cannot find this anywhere. Have even looked on Ebay willing to buy the game to get the info but have had no luck. Anyone that can post the cards by type and function would be doing me a large favor. Hope there are some kindly souls out there that might do this or at least inform me of where I can find this info. ThanX in advance!!

Image

m0ns00n — 2006-05-07T03:58:13+00:00

Dark green attacks brown to win the game

Image

m0ns00n — 2006-05-07T02:53:09+00:00

Image

m0ns00n — 2006-05-07T00:56:41+00:00

Red faction gangs up on black

Thread: Re: Better Combat System?

David_Rauscher — 2006-03-10T18:54:38+00:00

And, speaking of the new version coming out, if you want to look at its combat system, you can go to FFG and download the rules.

Thread: Re: Better Combat System?

fellonmyhead — 2006-03-10T18:22:32+00:00

Hawk wrote:
Does anyone know of a better combat system for this game? The 1d6 table cross reference is a tad to simplistic.

Thanks.

I feel the combat system does exactly what it needs to in a game focussing on strategy and politics; but even if you don't buy the new version it shouldn't be too difficult to come up with an alternative.

Thread: Private Motions

Carver — 2006-02-16T13:03:26+00:00

When I invented the game (purely for play within our own group)I brought in the idea of 'Private Motions' at the Assembly so that players could contribute their own interesting ideas into the game. However, there is a problem in this. All Assembly Motions have to be applicable to any and all players (and should not be worded in such a way that intentionally directs them towards one player in particular). Also they should not in any way 'change' the game rules. It is a very fine line we found.

In our own group we had the advantage of the inventor being there so I could quickly rule a suggested Private Motion acceptable or not in gaming terms, like it or not!

But we realised that once the game was published such freedom when wording these Private Motions could result in endless discussion and arguments that would slow down the game. So we felt we had to make the rule that Private Motions could only be used to reverse a previous Assembly decision (e.g. Removal of an Office or Concession, recalling an Ambassador, or readmitting a Baron previously barred from attending the Assembly, etc.) However, this should not inhibit folk from making up a list of what the group have agreed are acceptable Assembly Motions - in effect, extending those that come with the game. But, as mentioned, such discussion can interrupt the game flow so it's best to restrict them to over a beer after the game is over!

Thread: Re: Setting for Warrior Knights

Carver — 2006-02-16T12:49:40+00:00

No. I set the game in nowhere in particular - even though the names of the towns are all actual names (from a variety of middle European countries!)as you noticed. It was intended to embrace the 'flavour' of the times rather than be set in some particular kingdom, which would inevitably come with its own historical baggage that would impinge on the rules.

Thread: Setting for Warrior Knights

evm111 — 2006-02-09T15:52:07+00:00

Hi! I recently purchased this game specifically for the cardboard coins; I saw that the game-board has many cities (some of them are actual names of European cities), but I wonder if in general, Warrior Knights takes place in a Kingdom that has a fictitious name of some sort? Maybe Warrior Knights ties in with one or more other games from the same company, that are set in an imaginary Kingdom or nation?
Thanks!

Thread: Re: Better Combat System?

Mendosa — 2006-01-31T16:12:50+00:00

The new FFG Warrior Knights features a diceless combat system that involves some decision making. Unfortunately, you will have to wait a couple of months before the game is released...

Thread: Better Combat System?

Hawk — 2006-01-31T05:57:11+00:00

Does anyone know of a better combat system for this game? The 1d6 table cross reference is a tad to simplistic.

Thanks.

Thread: Re: FFG Remake

Mendosa — 2006-01-26T20:41:04+00:00

The FFG edition now has it's own page on the geek!

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/22038

Feel free to ask questions about the new game there as I will be checking the board frequently.