Game: Limits

Thread: [Review] Limits

TomVasel — 2008-08-04T07:41:21+00:00

It does seem as if memory shows up in quite a few games these days - perhaps it's always been so, but I'm just now beginning to really notice it. Limits (Playroom Entertainment - 2007 - Uwe Rosenberg) is another game from one of the great card game designers (Bohnanza, anyone?) that sounded so simplistic from the rules that I was convinced I wouldn't enjoy it. Instead, I was impressed that Limits has become a very entertaining, battle of the minds card game that is quickly played. I'm pleased that this older game (first published in 2001 by Amigo Spiele) has been republished in an excellent format.

Folks who don't like Limits will complain about the memory aspect; and indeed, those who aren't fond of memorization will likely wish to steer clear. At the same time, the game may use memory, but it's all about a psychological battle between players. A player with perfect memory might do better than others, but they still must attempt to outguess other players to win. On paper, the game really sounds boring; but it plays well even with two players - an enjoyable, fast card game.

Limits is essentially a deck of cards that is broken up into three parts - point cards (in "1" and "5" denominations); Limit cards, and sixty Color cards (simply a card with one of five colors - red, blue, purple, yellow, or green). The amount of players determines the number of Limit cards used in the game, which are placed face down on the table. Five Color cards are dealt to each player, and the rest form a draw pile.

At the beginning of each round, the top Limit card is turned over. Each card shows the limit number for the five colors, which ranges from "0" to "9", but can also show an "x", which means that that color has no limit. Players then choose a card from their hand and place it face down in front of them. This card they've played increases the limit of that color by one. The youngest player takes the first turn in round one.

On a player's turn, they have two choices. The more likely decision is that they will discard a card from their hand face up on the discard pile and draw the top card from the deck. The other possibility they have, if they have four cards of the same color in their hand, is to reveal them, taking a value "1" point card. They then draw four new cards, discarding two of the four card set into the discard pile and the other two on top of the draw pile. The next player then takes their turn.

BUT, at the end of a player's turn, if anyone thinks that the limit on a color has been broken, they slam their hand on the table, shouting, "Call!". This ends the round, and everyone reveals the Color cards they had placed face-down in front of themselves. The player then counts the number of cards in the discard pile - specifically the color that was played when they were "called". If the number of cards of that color is greater than the limit (including the previously facedown cards) of that color, then the accused player loses the round, taking the limit card (worth "-2" points). The accuser receives a "+1" value point card. If the number is equal to or less then the limit, then the results are reversed.

At this point, all players add the color card that they had facedown back into their hands, and a new round begins with the player who took the Limit card going first. Play continues until all of the Limit cards have been taken, at which point the game ends. Players add up their points (subtracting two for each Limit card they have), and the player with the highest score is the winner!

Some comments on the game...

1.) Components: The cards are of a very high quality - linen finish and a nice white border allow them to be handled fairly heavily with no discernable damage. The Color cards are a bit bland - just a color, mind you - and they have an imprint of a hand. There are a few discernable differences in the background for those who are colorblind. The cards all fit easily into a cardboard insert inside a small box. The whole game really has a "colorful" vibe to it, which isn't really overwhelming (although the box is perhaps a tad ugly), but it gives the game a fairly abstract feel.

2.) Rules: The rulebook is only three pages, which makes sense, since the game rules are actually quite simple. I did appreciate the extended examples and figure anyone could learn the game from the rulebook easily. The game can be played easily with most age groups.

3.) Time and Players: The game takes about twenty minutes to play, which is a good thing; as it would likely begin to drag if it went on any longer. I enjoy this game in small doses; but because it is a game in which the same thing is repeated over and over, keeping it short is for the best. The game handles up to six players, and having the maximum amount makes for a fairly interesting game, because players have absolutely no idea about the limits. A three player game is a more controlled game; and while it lacks in the chaos of the larger game (especially as four people race to hit the table first), it may be my favorite way to play. At the same time, in a two player game, players place two cards face down in front of themselves, rather than one. This gives them a bit more wiggle room to maneuver with the limits. It's not one of the best two-player games I've ever played, but it is a good one, although it still is best with multiple players.

4.) Memory and Bluffing: Limits certainly panders to those who remember every card that has been played. At the same time, one is never quite sure what cards the other players have played at any particular time. I especially enjoy when the limit number for a color is "0". When a player discards that color for the first time, you can see everyone thinking, "Is he bluffing? Did he play that color as his face-down card? Did anyone else?" Watching what people play usually is no help; it's simply a matter of watching their faces. Perhaps they are bluffing.

5.) Fun Factor: And the bluffing, short and simple as it is, is what adds the "fun" to this game. Collecting four of a set is a nice goal, and it helps focus gamers as they discard cards; but the game is mostly about trying to guess when one player goes over the limit. Guessing wrong by one card, or catching someone trying to pull a fast one are moments of levity in this game; and they keep it fun and entertaining.

My verdict is that while Limits isn't really anything ground-breaking and won't likely be played twice in one setting, it still is entertaining enough for an "ice-breaker" of sorts on a gaming night and fun enough that it will see play on occasional game nights. I like the low-end bluffing; and although scores are often quite low (it's not uncommon to end up with a negative score), the game is short enough to be an enjoyable appetizer. And since it tastes good, it's a nice start to a gaming night.

Tom Vasel
"Real men play board games"
www.thedicetower.com

Thread: Re: House rules to make "limits" fun

Psauberer — 2007-12-31T05:00:31+00:00

The rules I have say that "suspecting" can only be done on a player's own turn and not out of turn.

I actually think this is cleaner and adds a little more (very little) strategy.

You don't have any arguments about who objected first and if you are trying to sneak one by, you know who has the first chance to catch you, so if they are leading you can decide whether or not it is worth it.

I can't imagine it being appreciably less time to allow anyone to go ahead and object at any time. It's simple enough to figure out what card that the suspected player played.

Thread: Re: House rules to make "limits" fun

Fad23 — 2007-12-31T03:23:14+00:00

Maybe my edition is different, because it says that players can object on any players turn and offers the other version as a variant. Also, players can discard four cards of the same color from their hand for a victory point. But again, maybe I'm misreading...

Thread: Re: House rules to make "limits" fun

alkis21 — 2007-12-30T11:27:03+00:00

Actually the rules say that you can only object on your turn and that you can do so for any of the previously played cards. That means that if player 1 has put a card that player 4 wants to object, the latter has to wait for his turn and then he can set aside the last cards played and object for the card played by player 1. This makes the game quite messy and not so fun.

Thread: Re: House rules to make "limits" fun

Fad23 — 2007-12-28T21:10:31+00:00

I read the rules last night and I think that this is the normal play. The way you described it is only a variant. But maybe I should reread.

Image

dan4th — 2007-12-07T02:29:12+00:00

Colorful cards

Image

samoan_jo — 2007-03-24T10:53:28+00:00

Limits - Amigo - German box back

Thread: House rules to make "limits" fun

alkis21 — 2007-02-21T18:58:51+00:00

Here is a rule we use to make Limits actually a lot of fun.

Objecting someone's cardplay is not done as in the rules on your turn. It is rather done at any time.

As soon as a player has put down a card that is raising doubts, anyone can object, out of their turn. Whoever objects first is the person to get the -2 or the +1 point. That's it.

This variant makes the game much faster, more fun, creates an element of pressure not to miss your chance and generates much laughter. It is also a lot easier to keep track of the card in question because it can only be the last card in play. If no one objects to it, gameplay moves on. Playing it this way will certainly notch up your rating of this game to a brilliant evening closer.

Have fun with Limits!

Image

samoan_jo — 2007-02-06T12:55:36+00:00

Limits ---high quality box art--- Amigo

Image

Ceryon — 2006-12-30T08:51:56+00:00

Box front

Thread: A ticky little number...

flyinghogfish — 2006-11-13T18:46:00+00:00

I had some friends over to play games at the weekend. After a long session of Roads & Boats, something a bit lighter was needed. My friend Camo brought out his copy of limits, a game I'd never played before.

The bits

It's cards. There are a deck of colour cards (gold, blue, red, yellow and green), a deck of limits that are split into five, giving a limit for each of the five single colours, and some scoring cards (+1 for a correct challenge or being incorrectly challenged, -2 for a wrong challenge or being correctly challenged).

Each player is dealt five cards. The first limit card is revealed which will say something like: Red 2, Purple 4, Gold 2, Blue X and Green 8. Each player plays one card face down from their hand, which raises the limit on that colour. You don't know what the other players have placed down, so you're not quite sure what the limits are.

In turn, each player can either play a card, or challenge one of the other players that their last card went over one of the limits. A good memory comes in handy here, to keep track of what's gone down, but you still have to figure in the face-down cards into the equation.

Eventually, someone calls one of the other players. Someone checks to see whether the limit has been broken or not, if it has then the challenger gets the +1, the challengee the -2. If the limit has not been broken, then the cards are reversed.

A new round starts, with the face-down cards taken back, and a new one chosen by each player. At the end, the player with the highest score wins (in our game, it was a round 0).

Conclusion:

The game sounds really simple, and it is, but it's the interplay between the players and the face-down cards that make it fun. More than once, someone would have broken a limit if not for the card placed by the challenger. I would recommend that after the face down card is placed, it can't be chaecked; adds to the confusion.

Image

Toynan — 2006-07-23T15:57:09+00:00

Image

Toynan — 2006-07-23T15:10:46+00:00

Thread: User Review

Michael Becker — 2005-03-04T17:19:06+00:00

Yesterday was an extremely long day. I usually work mornings and instead I needed to work a bit later. I find the change in hours makes my whole day feel “off”. I brought two relatively heavy games to the club – Tikal and El Caballero but my mind wouldn’t have been able to handle that. So instead we played two games of Limits.

Neal had played a few times but this was the first play for Mark and me. After a quick rules explanation we started.

DISCLAIMER: This summary pertains to a three player game and this was not my copy of the game. Therefore, if things are incorrect we will blame Neal. You can send him nasty notes as he is listed as one of my “geekbuddies”.

The game is pretty simple. There are five colors of cards (no face value). Each player is dealt a hand of five cards.

Each round a “limit” card is played face up. The limit card will have various values for all five colors. For example: the card might be 2 green, 2 yellow, 4 blue, 0 red, x purple. An “X” in this game refers to an unlimited number. In essence, the limit card sets the parameters for the current round.

After the limit card is played each player selects one card from their hand and plays it face down in their play area. This card will add one to the face up limit card. For example, if I play a red card the limit will no longer be 0 – it will be 1 instead. So, in effect, this rule adds a hidden element to the game play.

On your turn you have two choices: 1) you can add a card to the face up discard stack and draw a replacement or 2) you can call someone’s last play as being wrong/impossible/a bluff/over the limit – whatever you choose...

Most turns you will just add a card to the discard pile. Then the player to your left continues. Each discarded card goes directly on top of the previous discard. Therefore the values underneath are kept hidden.

At some point if you have been counting cards correctly you will know that someone has made a mistake. At this point, during your turn, you can call someone on their most recent misplay. So I might say I call Mark’s last red card as wrong, wrong, wrong. If I do, everyone flips over their hidden cards. Any face down red cards will now get added to the limit card. In this example, if I was the only player to play a face down red at the start of the round the red limit would be 1 instead of 0. If there are two or more reds in the discard stack (i.e. Mark played over limit) I will gain a +1 vp card. Mark would take the limit card which is always worth -2 pts.

Let’s say instead there was only 1 red card in the stack. In this scenario Mark would receive the +1 bonus and I would get the -2 penalty. So whoever is wrong takes the penalty and whoever is right gains a +1 bonus.

There is only one other rule. If you have four of a kind in hand you can make a special play. Let’s say I have four blue cards. I can discard my cards as follows: First of all, the four blue cards are set aside and I draw a replacement hand of four cards. Next, two of the blue cards get played face up onto the discard stack and these will count towards the current limit for the round. Finally the other two blue cards get added to the top of the draw stack.

This special rule doesn’t happen very often. When it does, however, the player making the play gets a +1 vp card as a reward for doing so. In the two games I played I kept trying to get this bonus, but the lack of variety in your hand (3 of one color and a different single) really “limits” your options when it is your turn. Having a flexible hand is pretty critical for doing well in this game especially when the limits are really low values.

I always thought I was an alright card counter. Well this game certainly proved me wrong. Yikes. I would say 30% of my guesses were completely incorrect. The other 30% were correct except for the face down cards - which always seemed to work out in my opponents favor. It is probably a good thing I haven’t joined the local poker games at the casino…

I did manage to get things right a few times however, but my -2 cards definitely exceeded my +1’s.

In both games I managed last place finishes… darn. I will blame it to my off day. Despite this fact, I really like this game. It is easy to teach, the rules are very concise and the length of the game can be adjusted by adding or subtracting limit cards. Also, the hidden element adds just the right amount of luck and depth to the game.

In my readings, I often come across reviews which are extremely negative if a game is light or chaotic. I think all games should be taken at face value. Some games are light, some heavy, some have no unknown elements and others have many… We should take a game for what it is and try to have fun and enjoy ourselves. Gaming in my view is all about the social experience.

Once again, Uwe Rosenberg continues to impress me. The way he takes memory elements and transforms them into a wonderful experience is very cool. I like Mamma Mia and as expected, I will also enjoy many more plays of this game.

Image

puppi — 2004-12-07T12:54:13+00:00

Thread: Session Report

bengkohn — 2003-10-21T13:02:49+00:00

Limits: EYAL (8), Art (-9), Brad (-9), Mike (-3)

We used to play this often, and it was nice to see it again. This reminds me of nothing so much as a card based version of Liar's Dice.

Eyal seemed golden this time, I don't think he scored a single -2 card. Art and I are demanding to play the ABS() version next time.

Thread: Session Report

PBrennan — 2003-06-29T12:54:19+00:00

A good game for eyebrow lifting, muffled coughs, smirks and 'yeah, rights' as each player attempts to push the limits of credibility. Good fun when it comes out, but it needs a break between plays to keep it fresh. A 6 after 6 plays.

Thread: User Review

bengkohn — 2002-08-19T16:48:06+00:00

Each person that I have introduced Limits to has had the same comment after playing: “It is like the card version of Call My Bluff/Liar’s Dice.” And I believe that is true. However, the subtle (and not so subtle) differences make for a different game, one that we play when we want a closer to the evening, much like we would the dice-based Bluff.

Limits has two decks of cards. The draw deck consists of cards showing one of five colors, an equal amount of each color. The limit deck is much smaller, and shows what will be the allowed number of each color that can be played for that round.

Each round starts with five cards from the draw deck for each player. A limit card is turned over, and each player places one of their five cards face down in front of them. All of these cards will add to the limits shown on the limit card. For example, if the limit shown on the card for blue this turn is 6 cards, and two of the players put down a blue card face down, then the limit is really 8, although none of the players know that (although both players playing blue know that it is at least 7).

Play goes around the table, with each player placing a card down on the stack and drawing another to replace it. At some point the limits shown on the card will be exceeded in one or more colors. After that point a player may, instead of playing a card, challenge any of the cards that have been placed since that player’s last play.
This is one of the differences between Limits and Bluff. In Limits you may challenge anyone’s last card as opposed to just the last person to play.

When a challenge occurs, all players reveal their down card, and it is checked if the person playing the card was over the limit or not. Whoever wins the challenge gains a +1 point card, and whoever looses takes the limit card, which has a -2 on the back. The cards on the table go, in order, on the bottom of the draw pile. This oddity has our gaming group mystified. Theoretically anyone with a perfect memory could know the exact sequence of cards after the deck has been gone through once. None in my gaming group has such a memory, but we all wonder at the inclusion of such a rule.
Everyone takes their face down card back into their hand, and a new limit card is drawn, starting the process anew.

When the limit card deck runs out, the game is over; points are totaled and a winner declared.

The big difference between Limits and Bluff is in the face down cards. In Bluff it is the standard deviation that the dice rolling creates that makes for the uncertainty, while in Limits it is the thought processes of your fellow gamers, and unstable lot at best. Whether you think this is better or worse is a matter of taste, we have both sorts in our group.

The only real problem is with the point system. If someone runs away with the points early in the game, it can be hard to catch up to them, and you end up playing the last half of the game almost certain that a particular person has won. The large penalty (-2) associated with loosing a challenge helps alleviate this. Also, the system can set up a kingmaker situation, where one particular player has to challenge another particular player (and win) to win, but any of the other players between the two of them can challenge and loose the game for the person who needs to challenge.

Limits is a good game, light and quick. If you like Call My Bluff then you owe it to yourself to at least give it a try.

Image

bengkohn — 2002-08-11T02:43:54+00:00

Image

bengkohn — 2002-08-11T02:43:48+00:00

Thread: Session Report

PBrennan — 2002-04-13T21:19:29+00:00

The first game of this provoked just an ok response, but a second playing improved on it. It’s a memory game - a limit card gets turned over which shows how many cards can be played to a central pile (Mamma Mia style) in each colour. It’s play 1 draw 1. If you think one of the other players exceeded a limit, accuse them. Whoever’s right gets points, the loser loses points.

With concentration, it’s not hard for a table of gamers to keep track of what’s in the pile. What turns the game from the mundane to something better is that each player plays a colour card secretly to the middle at the start of the round that ups the limit secretly. After each accusation, those cards are returned to the players hands and potentially played again. Together with what they avoided playing last turn, you get a feel for what’s likely to have been played secretly - and then the game turns into rounds of sniggers, smirks, guesses, laughs, double guesses and “yeah, right”s until someone finally calls a dodgy play. Not great, but better than expected.

Scores:
Kevin -1, Pat -2, Nick -9
Kevin +5, Rick -3, Pat and Rob -5

A rating of 6 after 2 games; ok game for the occasional late night closer.

Thread: Session Report

cwmassey — 2001-01-01T06:00:00+00:00

Limits - Pitt, Alan, Andrew, David, myself and Pat: Well we were all waiting for Pitt when the phone rang. It seems he was at the wrong house. After dragging Pitt away from hassling the neighbors who I'm sure were ready to call the cops for their second visit to game nite in Wakefield, we broke out some of the new Nurenburg games that he had translated. We had 6 so decided to try limits, a new card game from Uwe Rosenberg. The game has cards in 5 suits which are really just colors with no numbers. There is also a deck of limit cards. Each limit card has a number for each color. This number is the maximum amount of cards of a particular color that can be played that round. So a limit card might be Blue 2, Red 3, Purple 1, Yellow 0, and Green 7.

Each player on their turn plays a card to the stack face up and draws a new one. Or if they think that Alan (or any other player, but usually Alan) is trying to get away with something, they can challenge any players last card. If the stack contains too many of that color than the challengee takes the limit card which is worth -2 and the challenger takes a +1 point card. If the challengee is right than he gets the +1 and so on. One other twist - at the start of the round each player plays one card face down. All of these cards serve to increase the limits of the various colors adding the element of the unknown and generally irritating someone highly when their card is challenged. Not a lot of positive scores in this game. Mine was particularly negative. I think Pat and maybe David were the only ones to finish in the black with Pat winning on the last round. Pretty decent filler that should work well with the non gaming crowd as well as kids too.

That was the only new Nurenberg game I tried - bug the others to provide a sneak peak of Big Shot and Isis & Osiris.