Game: Clocktowers

Thread: Re: Raise the Roof!! - 1st Game with our 7-year old!!

Yokiboy — 2008-06-26T11:26:49+00:00

I quite enjoy Clocktowers and have played it with kids from 7-9 with success. However, the game hardly ever hits the table anymore. My 9-year old niece still requests to play it, but my 9-year old daughter usually sells her on another, and in truth probably a better, game.

Thread: Re: Raise the Roof!! - 1st Game with our 7-year old!!

jadzianess — 2008-06-25T18:21:04+00:00

Goodness, I had forgotten about this game. I think I bought it in 2005 and played it a few times with my then 9 year old. I thought it was a pretty nifty little game back then. My almost 8 year old is a pretty good gamer, so I might have to try with her. Ha, I just showed the deck to her and she said 'okay'. Thanks for the game reminder!!

Thread: Raise the Roof!! - 1st Game with our 7-year old!!

EgorjLileli — 2008-06-25T17:42:33+00:00

Introduction
This was the first game of Clocktowers for our 7-year old daughter who will be referred to as “D” for the remainder of the session report. Mystery Bob and I had previously played one time. After preparing the decks and explaining the rules, we were off!!!

Gameplay
D’s strategy seemed to be to avoid mice and start a lot of new towers. Mystery Bob and I tried to steer her in the right direction, but she stubbornly wanted to play in her own way. Her own way amounted to drawing cat cards and roof cards. ]]> Thanks to scottredracecar

Mystery Bob and I completed towers with single and double stories and were beginning the 3 and 4 story versions of some of the colors. D completed 2 single-story towers, but was stuck with roof cards and no story cards. Mystery Bob tried to suggest what she needed to do, but to no avail.

D ended up discarding most of her cards, but continued to draw roof cards!! ]]> Thanks to MonkeyMagic

At this point we gave up on trying to help her and concentrated on drawing the right combinations of stories, clocks, and roofs to legally complete more towers.

Endgame and Scoring
Since we quickly ran out of roof cards, the game ended because no more towers could be completed with the cards we had in our hands. D completed 2 towers. Mystery Bob and I completed 6-7 towers each with different combinations of cats only, mice only, and cats and mice.

Final Scores:
Mystery Bob: 18 points
Me: 18 points
D: 8 points (big sigh!!)

Conclusion
I’m not sure D is ready for the complexity of this game. She did not heed our hints, encouragement, or suggestions. She enjoyed the card art and seemed to enjoy the game, but definitely did NOT like losing by such a large margin. She truly prefers Aquarius. Mystery Bob and I enjoy this game and the challenges it presents. However, if we were to choose a 2-player game to play just him and I, we would probably choose something else.

Ratings out of 10
Mystery Bob: 5.5
Me: 5.5
D: 4

Thread: Re: What Is The Definition Of "A Tower Of One Color" In The Rules?

Starsunsky — 2008-05-06T15:16:20+00:00

The color of a tower is simply the color of roof only.

Thread: What Is The Definition Of "A Tower Of One Color" In The Rules?

ShreveportLAGamer — 2008-05-06T14:52:45+00:00

Is the thing that determines whether a tower is one color simply the color of roof which adorns it OR a combination of BOTH the color of the roof AND the color of the stones/bricks which comprise the stories and clock sections of that tower?

If the color of roof is all that determines what color the tower is, then I might suggest an extra +1 point to players who more uniformly build from top to bottom a tower of like-color and -composite stone/bricks at least 3 or more stories tall (and having at least two cards beneath the clock section card).

Image

chezzilla — 2008-01-13T05:45:49+00:00

Image

chezzilla — 2008-01-13T05:45:13+00:00

Image

scottredracecar — 2007-10-19T04:59:14+00:00

If you get a mouse in your tower, you will need a cat.

Image

scottredracecar — 2007-10-19T04:58:46+00:00

Just try to keep the mice out of your towers.

Thread: Re: [Review] Clocktowers

Larry Levy — 2007-05-30T03:36:45+00:00

While I agree that Capitol is the better game (and one of Alan &
Aaron's best), I think Clocktowers is quite good in its own right. To me, it's anything but an easy going game--I find it to be a very tense design that requires consistent sound judgement. It isn't complex, but I don't consider it a lightweight at all. I'm always happy to get it on the table.

Thread: Re: [Review] Clocktowers

sevorges — 2007-05-29T22:23:57+00:00

Another good review, and I totally agree with your assessment. Grabbed this as one to play with kids but it just feels too uncontrollable to hold my attention and the kids just think it is okay.

Thread: Re: [Review] Clocktowers

hughthehand — 2007-05-29T14:09:13+00:00

Nice review Tom.

Thread: Re: [Review] Clocktowers

Castef — 2007-05-29T12:52:29+00:00

TomVasel wrote:
So my recommendation is mixed. If the theme sounds interesting, and you want a small, easy to setup and play card game, this is a jolly way to pass twenty minutes. But don’t expect much strategy, the game is an easy-going thematic card game, nothing else. While I’ll play it on occasion, I’m often looking for something that has a bit more tenseness to it – one where the choices matter a bit more.

As usual, great review.

I tried it only once and I've always been tempted to buy it, but I cannot find it in Italy and shipping fees will bring the game price to over 20$, a little too much for such a "light" game.

By the way, if you liked it just try Lucca Città. Similar theme, but a waaay better game.

Thread: [Review] Clocktowers

TomVasel — 2007-05-29T10:55:01+00:00

I’m still a bit annoyed that Capitol, a game about building towers in ancient Rome, hasn’t been reprinted – and thus difficult to find. Not everyone enjoyed it, and more than a few complained about the scoring component; but I found it unique and very enjoyable. When I bemoaned the lack of availability, several people mentioned Clocktowers (Jolly Roger Games, 2004 – Alan Moon and Aaron Weissblum) as a game that was basically the card game version of Capitol. Well, I didn’t feel the need for a card game version (I’d almost always prefer a board game to a card game) but was interested, especially as I’ve noticed a noticeable jump in the quality of Jolly Roger games lately.

After playing the game, I won’t be converting over to the card version anytime soon, and many of the things I really enjoyed about the board game have been stripped from this game. At the same time, it’s very light and easy, and an enjoyable way to spend a short period of time (games take about twenty minutes). However, Clocktowers has the odd feeling that it’s much more involved than it really is, and players often are forced into choices that may make them feel as if the game is playing them. It’s certainly not a bad game, but it’s almost too light and allows players to really mess each other up during play.

The game consists of three decks of cards – a deck of roofs (four each of five different colors), a deck of clocks (nine of which have a mouse in them), and a deck of building stories (one or two floors – some with a mouse or a cat). Each player takes one story card with a cat on it, one story with a mouse, and one clock that contains a mouse. The rest of the cards are shuffled and placed face UP on the table in three separate decks – with five story cards and three roof cards secretly removed. One player is chosen to go first, and then play proceeds clockwise around the table.

On a player’s turn, they must play a card from their hand, then draw the top card of either deck. Players are playing cards face up in front of them, creating towers. Each tower must consist of at least one story, then a clock and roof. Players can continue adding stories, but once they place a clock, only a roof can go on top of that. When placing a colored roof, players must check any other completed building (if any) with the same colored roof already on the table. The first building of a color must be one or two stories tall. After that, each succeeding building must be exactly one story higher. Players cannot add a roof to any building that does not fit these requirements. A player can discard a card rather than playing one if necessary.

After all decks have been discarded, and all players have used all their cards, the game ends. Each player then scores for each completed tower, and incomplete towers are simply discarded. Scoring depends on cats and mice in towers; a tower with neither is worth five points. Cats only scores four points, and having both is worth three points. A tower with only mice is worth only two points. All the points are added, and the player with the most is the winner – with a tie going to the player with the highest mouse in one of their towers.

Some comments on the game…

1.) Components: Clocktowers is a small game with a box that can easily slide into your pocket. The cards have tremendous artwork, although they are a bit thin for my tastes. I’m also curious as to why they don’t have different backings, which would make sorting them out much easier. I suppose it’s to keep them anonymous when in a player’s hand; but since you can see someone when they take them – what’s the point? Still, everything looks nice when laid out on the table, and the cards fit together well to form nice looking towers. And it’s cheap and portable, which some may enjoy.

2.) Rules: The rules for the game are quite simple – play a card, draw a card. The rules themselves are only two sides of a page and are very easy to teach. The idea of building a tower is thematically helpful when explaining the game, and people can pick it up fairly quickly.

3.) Choices: The game really revolves around what card to place, and then which one to draw. The most coveted cards are the roof cards that I’ve seen, and they are quickly snapped up near the beginning. Cards without any animals are also yearned for, and cards with cats almost as much. Unfortunately, a player often has to take a card with a mouse on it, whether they want to or not. They can of course ignore taking the card, and then complete no towers – which would be quite unproductive. At the same time, it’s dreadfully annoying to watch the player before you constantly take the cards you want. Some aspects of this are interesting, as a player can build a taller tower in the hopes that they can cap it with a roof later on in the game; but it doesn’t really come down to forward planning as much as it does to luck. The game SEEMS likes there is a decent amount of strategy, but in reality, the player who gets the better draws often seems to win. Now, I don’t discount the entire game – I didn’t mind playing, but I was left with the nagging feeling that the game hadn’t given me as many choices as I thought.

4.) Animals: The whole point of the game is to avoid mice; and if you can’t, throw a cat in with ‘em! This is certainly thematic, but it’s not as interesting as it sounds; because if you get lucky and build a non-animal house, that’s as good as two and a half mice houses! Again, animals in the towers seem to come down to luck – and I started getting to the point where I put a lot less thought about them, since I always seemed to end up with a handful of mouse sections, anyway.

5.) Fun Factor: The game was a fairly enjoyable way to pass twenty minutes – any more and I would have been annoyed; it would have gotten fairly tedious. And with two to four people (three may be best?), it’s a nice way to pass the time. But I would NEVER pick it over Capitol – not just because the components aren’t nearly as stunning, but because I felt that Capitol offered more meaningful choices. Clocktowers is fun for people who feel as if they are putting towers together, but the choices rarely offer any angst, and the entire affair is almost decided by card draws.

So my recommendation is mixed. If the theme sounds interesting, and you want a small, easy to setup and play card game, this is a jolly way to pass twenty minutes. But don’t expect much strategy, the game is an easy-going thematic card game, nothing else. While I’ll play it on occasion, I’m often looking for something that has a bit more tenseness to it – one where the choices matter a bit more.

Tom Vasel
“Real men play board games”
www.thedicetower.com

Image

TimothyP — 2007-02-21T21:20:25+00:00

A close-up of 2 towers completed early in the game. Cool art.

Image

TimothyP — 2007-02-21T21:19:08+00:00

One player is going for 4 towers. He only ended up completing 3.

Image

TimothyP — 2007-02-21T21:17:39+00:00

A nearly completed game of Clocktowers.

Thread: Re: Color of completed tower.

steveoliverc — 2006-10-12T04:30:19+00:00

You need to look at all of the completed towers for all of the players. So if your opponent has completed a blue clocktower that is one story, you need to complete one that is exactly two stories.

Thread: Color of completed tower.

Geosmores — 2006-10-12T03:19:49+00:00

When completing a tower of a certain color that is one story higher than the previous tower of that color, do you look at all towers on the board or just yours?

Example. Player 'A' has a one story blue tower. Can player 'B' also do a one story blue tower or is she/he forced to only do a blue tower of two stories.

My wife and I would play the above example as player 'B' can only have a two story blue tower (or 1 more than the highest on the board of that color). Just wanted to make sure that was the correct interpretation.

Thanks

Thread: Re: Two Floors Cards.

Dark Son — 2006-06-05T16:24:00+00:00

They're not just prettier; they count as "two-story" cards. I believe there's a list of contents in the instructions booklet. You may play a two-story card, top it with a clock, then a roof for the first building of a colour. This can be risky as the first building if you are planning on making more of the same colour, as you have no idea how many roofs of that colour will be in the deck each time you are playing.

Have fun!

--kMs

Thread: Re: Two Floors Cards.

steveoliverc — 2006-06-05T16:23:16+00:00

It is not simply one card per story. If you play a card with 2 stories on it, that adds 2 stories to your clocktower.

Yes, the first completed clocktower in a color can be made with either a 1 or a 2 story card.

Thread: Two Floors Cards.

Ermordung — 2006-06-05T15:52:38+00:00

Cards with a drawing of two floors count as two floors for the tower, or is it just a different picture to make the game prettier? In other words, Is it “one card, one floor”, or it depends on the card?

If so, there is a rule that says that the first tower of a color must have 1 or 2 floors. May I use 2 cards to create the 2 stories tower, or the rule is only for the use of one 2 floors card?

Thanks!

Image

MonkeyMagic — 2006-05-27T17:04:12+00:00

...all the roof cards

Image

MonkeyMagic — 2006-05-27T16:38:20+00:00

...all the clock cards...

Image

MonkeyMagic — 2006-05-27T16:35:28+00:00

All the story cards...

Thread: Re: Can stories be placed above clocks?

psyche_athanatos — 2006-03-22T21:29:34+00:00

Thanks!!!

Thread: Re: Can stories be placed above clocks?

tool — 2006-03-22T16:50:36+00:00

See this thread:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/37625

In it, Alan Moon says that stories cannot be placed over clocks.

Thread: Can stories be placed above clocks?

psyche_athanatos — 2006-03-22T16:35:11+00:00

Just bought this game yesterday at the local game shop. The rules were simple and easy to understand, and I enjoyed the game, but we ran into one bit of confusion. After placing a clock, is it possible to place more story cards above it? This came up when I blocked my friend from playing a roof card on a tower he was building. He wanted to continue making the tower higher so that it could be completed. This seemed against the spirit of the game to me, but the rulebook is not explicit. It says that there can only be one clock, that a clock must go on top of a story card, and that a roof must go on a tower made up of only stories and a clock, but nowhere does it specifically outlaw placing a story on top of a clock.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Are there any authoritative voices who can give a definite ruling? As I said, it seems reasonable that a clock would be at the top of a tower (just under the roof), but I want to be sure we're playing correctly.

Thread: Re: User Review

cull — 2006-02-17T02:50:34+00:00

Thanks for this excellent review.

Thread: session report and mini-revew

jaywowzer — 2005-11-30T06:33:54+00:00

Session Report:
Next up was Clocktowers by Allen Moon and Aaron Weissblum, where players compete to build the most clock towers before the cards run out. Towers consist of three components: tower floors, a clock, and a roof, each represented by cards. The tower cards are one or two floors tall and the roofs come in five different colors. Some of the tower floors and clocks are also inhabited by mice or cats, which determine the scoring for completed towers. Card-play is simple: starting with a hand of three cards, players play a card onto an existing tower or start a new one (or discard) and then draw a new card to retain a hand of three cards. The card drawn is from a choice of three face up card stacks: a roof, a clock, or a floor card. A completed tower consists of a number of floors topped with a clock and a colored roof. The first completed tower in each color can only be a one or two floor tower and each subsequent tower built in that color by any player must be one floor higher than the previous. Tower building continues until all cards are played or discarded and the towers are scored. 5 points are awarded for animal free towers, 4 points for towers with cats, 3 points with cast and mice, and 2 points with only mice. Tower heights do not impact scores but do come into play in tie-breaker situations. In our construction efforts, Maria diversified early by starting multiple towers bases with hopes of completing them as needed. Sue and I played a similar game but only had three towers going to Maria's four. Rogan had three towers going, but overbuilt in height which left him waiting to close one tower. Tower floors ran out first and everyone had unfinished towers to try and close as the other piles ran dry. In the final turn Maria Sue and I all had one tower to cap. Mine required Maria to cap her three high tower in blue and for Sue not to follow with her four high in blue. Luckily that is how the cards fell and I completed my final tower and squeaked out the win. In the end our scores were: Jeff 11 with 3 towers (5+3+3), Maria 10 with 3 towers (4+3+3), Sue 8 with 2 towers (5+3), and Rogan 6 with 2 towers (3+3).

Mini-Review Comments:
Jeff: Clocktowers seems to play best with two or three but even then the successful draw of animal-free cards seems to be key to scoring well. The only real card management to the game is watching and anticipating the roof colors being built to successfully complete your own. Expanding bases and drawing non mouse/cat cards are also notable. As past experiences with fewer players have been more enjoyable, I think we will only pull this one out with three or fewer from now on. Even then it remains a very light game, good for a quick fix.

My Rating: 5 with 4 players, strong 6 with 2.

Thread: Re: Bad card mix?

laurion — 2005-07-08T15:43:35+00:00

When I first got the game, the copy I got was also misfilled. I think there are some production issues that really need to be worked out, and the rules could probably use a little more work, but the game is reasonably fun. I just brought the deck back to the local gamestore I got it at and had them exchange it.

Thread: Re: Bad card mix?

GI Joe — 2005-07-03T22:39:28+00:00

Thank you for the reply.

I have since noticed that the starting hand for each player is supposed to contain 1 One Story with a cat.

Since mine only contains 2 of that kind of card, the game is unplayable by 3 or 4 players. So I must have gotten a bad deck.

Thread: Re: Bad card mix?

tool — 2005-07-03T22:01:29+00:00

I don't know about the other cards without checking, but you are definitely supposed to have 4 of each color roof.

Thread: Bad card mix?

GI Joe — 2005-07-03T18:56:11+00:00

Could someone clarify for me that this is the correct number of cards that should be in the game?

66 Cards

18 Clocks (9 with mice)
20 Roofs (4 each of 5 colors-- blue, green, red, yellow, gray)
28 Story Cards
5 One Story with no cat or mice
5 One Story with cat
4 One Story with mice
5 Two Story with no cat or mice
5 Two Story with cat
4 Two Story with mice

This is what my copy's rules sheet says should be there, but my deck is not even close to this. It's so off that it seems unlikely to have been a packaging error. The deck was sealed.

Here's what mine contains:

66 Cards

15 Clocks (8 with mice, 7 of which are identical, 1 distinct)
20 Roofs (7 blue, 5 green, 5 red, 2 yellow, 1 gray)
31 Story Cards
8 One Story with no cat or mice
2 One Story with cat
5 One Story with mice
5 Two Story with no cat or mice
4 Two Story with cat
7 Two story with mice

Was the card mix changed at some point? Or did I just get a whacky deck?

Thread: Remembering the scoring (for aging minds)

Roger Yim — 2005-06-25T05:18:05+00:00

I was having trouble remembering how to score the towers (too much partying in college) until I came up with this simple method:

Towers with both cats and mice score 3 points.

If I can manage to remember that, the rest is easy:

-- mice only (worse) scores 2
-- cats only (better) scores 4
-- no animals (best) scores 5

Silly, perhaps, but it works for me.

Thread: Re: Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

LinqMAR — 2005-05-13T23:10:49+00:00

The rule should have said, "If a player plays a Story Card, he can either start a new Clocktower or add to an existing Story Card"

The rules currently don't prohibit you from placing a Story Card on top of a Clock but why would you? if you did, you wouldn't be able to complete the tower.

Thread: Re: Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

Milarky — 2005-05-12T07:50:44+00:00

does this game have a screw your opponent?

like balloon cup?

Thread: Re: Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

smithhemb — 2005-05-11T23:46:57+00:00

But you can't beat getting the definitive answer from Alan himself.

Sure you can -- definitive answers to such basic questions should be included in the rules packaged with the game. This is a really poorly written set of rules. Hopefully, they'll be rewritten if/when the game gets reprinted.

Thread: Re:Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

Con Man — 2005-03-03T16:11:20+00:00

I had the answer to question1 up all along.

]]>

But you can't beat getting the definitive answer from Alan himself. Very cool.

Thread: Re:Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

jmglidden — 2005-03-03T15:49:29+00:00

alanrmoon wrote:
Here are the official answers.

Reason #43 why I love BGG! Thanks Alan.

Thread: Re:Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

Aldaron — 2005-03-03T15:45:30+00:00
Excellent!

Thanks Alan!

Thread: Re:Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

terranova — 2005-03-03T15:36:56+00:00
jmglidden (#92211),

Me neither, storys on top of clocks is a valid move.

Thread: Re:Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

alanrmoon — 2005-03-03T15:36:56+00:00
Aldaron wrote:

(1) Can Story Cards be played above Clocks?
The rules clearly imply that they can be, but there seems to be agreement here that this is not the case. The posted German translation explicitly states that the cannot be, and that makes sense in terms of game mechanics.

(2) Who scores/owns towers? Is it the player who places the Roof, or the player who starts the tower?
I assume the former.

(3) Can players place cards in any tower or just in their towers?
I assume that this is a meaningless question, because ownership is determined when the Roof is placed and the tower is completed, but some posts indicate indicate otherwise.

Here are the official answers.

1)A Clock can only be placed on top of a Clocktower that contains only Stories. Once a Clock is placed, the only other thing that can be placed on this Clocktower is a Roof. A complete Clocktower will always be a number of Stories, with one Clock on top of the Stories, and one Roof on top of the Clock.

2)and 3) Each player builds his own Clocktowers in front of him on the table.

Alan

Thread: Re:Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

jmglidden — 2005-03-03T15:07:44+00:00
shumyum (#92204),

There's still no Alan Moon quote on this. I'm not satisfied.

Thread: Re:Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

shumyum — 2005-03-03T15:00:44+00:00
shumyum wrote:
We read from the rules that clocks could be anywhere, but I have since heard (here on this site?) that Alan Moon says the clocks have to be at the top (just below the roof).

I found it: it was hidden in the "image comments":

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/75498

Thread: Re:Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

kvn299 — 2005-03-03T15:00:34+00:00
Aldaron (#92193),

I don't have the rules in front of me, but IIRC, the English rules in my game basically state the Clocks must be placed on towers comprised only of stories. This rule implies that a) you can't start a tower with a clock, and b) there's a limit of one clock per tower.

I can't remember how the story rules are stated, but we've always played that stories can be played on any tower without a roof. I've read the rules carefully and am pretty sure this is allowed.

We've played that each player owns the towers s/he created and can only build on those towers.

Thread: Re:Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

shumyum — 2005-03-03T14:55:22+00:00
Aldaron wrote:
A few things are unclear (or clearly wrong) in the English rules for Clocktowers:

(1) Can Story Cards be played above Clocks?
The rules clearly imply that they can be, but there seems to be agreement here that this is not the case. The posted German translation explicitly states that the cannot be, and that makes sense in terms of game mechanics.

We read from the rules that clocks could be anywhere, but I have since heard (here on this site?) that Alan Moon says the clocks have to be at the top (just below the roof).

(2) Who scores/owns towers? Is it the player who places the Roof, or the player who starts the tower?
I assume the former.

Everyone has their OWN towers! You look at other players towers to see what size a particular color can be, but you start your own towers (as many as you want) and only you can finish them.

(3) Can players place cards in any tower or just in their towers?
I assume that this is a meaningless question, because ownership is determined when the Roof is placed and the tower is completed, but some posts indicate indicate otherwise.

Maybe WE missed something (I don't have the rules in front of me), but we played that you only have your own towers. The roof is necessary for SCORING not ownership.

Thread: Re:Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

jmglidden — 2005-03-03T14:54:42+00:00
Aldaron (#92193),

I don't have the rules in front of me, but I gave them a pretty thorough read and referred to them extensively during my first two or three games. Here's how we've been playing.

(1) Can Story Cards be played above Clocks?
Yes. Also, Clocks must be placed on stories.

(2) Who scores/owns towers? Is it the player who places the Roof, or the player who starts the tower?
You only play on towers you start. It's as if each player is in a separate city.

(3) Can players place cards in any tower or just in their towers?
See #2. One plays cards only on their own towers.

Thread: Rules Questions (and an Omission)?

Aldaron — 2005-03-03T14:26:51+00:00
A few things are unclear (or clearly wrong) in the English rules for Clocktowers:

(1) Can Story Cards be played above Clocks?
The rules clearly imply that they can be, but there seems to be agreement here that this is not the case. The posted German translation explicitly states that the cannot be, and that makes sense in terms of game mechanics.

(2) Who scores/owns towers? Is it the player who places the Roof, or the player who starts the tower?
I assume the former.

(3) Can players place cards in any tower or just in their towers?
I assume that this is a meaningless question, because ownership is determined when the Roof is placed and the tower is completed, but some posts indicate indicate otherwise.

Thread: Session Report

Con Man — 2005-02-22T14:38:37+00:00
Prelude
Jodie and I took a short trip to Plano over the weekend. While she was busy with a job interview, I headed out to the Game Chest at the View Valley Mall. It was a cool little store that had lots in stock. I was hoping for an OOP game like Goa or Hannibal:RvC. No luck but I did leave the store two other games richer: Carcassonne:The Castle and Clocktowers.

Session
Clocktowers was easy to learn and explain so we were able to play right away. After one turn we both had a handle of it.

I aimed to claim the empty stories and clocks. Early on, I managed to build two five-point towers. Its good to do this early as the height has no bearing on scoring the towers and its gets a little more difficult to build taller ones without mice. I tried my best to avoid building mice only towers and got lucky with drawing cards with cats. At the end of the game I won with 28 points, having three five-point towers. Jodie had 22 points.

The next game wasn't a good one for me. Jodie had the perfect card draws. So I decided to build more towers than she did, settling for two-point towers at times. When the dust had cleared, I had eight towers. Jodie had seven. Whaaa!? I didn't build as many as I wanted, maybe it was because I discarded a couple of roofs. Maybe it was because Jodie played a good game and had some nice luck. Well, my score was 23 with four two-point towers and only one five-pointer. Jodie had eight more points than I did with one less tower.

There's a lot of luck in the game but the tight hand balances it out a bit. Regardless, we had fun and that justified the purchase.

Thread: Re:Removing 5 and three cards

Fledermaushaus — 2005-01-25T11:59:15+00:00
We play it 2 player and this also happened the first game we played. However, after rechecking the rules we just seemed to adapt our strategy accordingly and have not experienced the problem again. Compared to our first game, we now don't build so high and seem to discard some mousey clocks and unwanted roofs instead of building nearly every turn. There is never any need to discard storeys as they can always be played even if not subsequently built upon.

Thread: Removing 5 and three cards

nibuen — 2005-01-15T17:47:11+00:00
This seems like it works fine with the roofs, but does not seem like a good idea with the stories. When I play a two player game there are always extra clocks and roofs left over, is there a rule I am missing about removing a certain amount of clocks or something?

Thread: Re:User Review

terrymmoto — 2005-01-11T05:22:04+00:00
jm100 (#75293),

Has anyone considered playing this game where the clock towers belong to no one until the roof is placed? Therefore you gain possesion only on those clock towers where you actually place the roof. I admittedly have not thought this out completely. However on first blush it appears to potentially expand the scope of the game and would make for very interesting tactics, and offer direct confrontation.

Terry

Thread: Re:User Review

fbranham — 2005-01-10T17:55:39+00:00
jm100 (#75674),

Actually, you can do some very devastating things to an opponent during the endgame.

The problem is, once you place a clock, you are locked into the building's size in floors. If you know your opponent only has a red roof and an unclocked building, and you have say a building that could be finished by playing a red or yellow roof. Instead of finishing your yellow building you could basically check his red building by just holding onto the red roof, and playing it once their clock goes down.

This kind of thing does not work well in the early game, as one of the other colors can give them a way out, but when the decks are getting low, not being able to finish a tall building can be devastating.

Moo,
Frank

Thread: Re:User Review

themore5@earthlink — 2005-01-09T22:49:06+00:00
Wardo (#76005),

I wouldn't say it' unplayable with four. I just played a four-player game last week, and was able to complete four towers for 13 points. Maybe I just got lucky, but either way, it's over in 15 minutes or less.

Thread: Re:User Review

Wardo — 2005-01-09T02:30:16+00:00
I believe this works best for 2. I want to try it for 3. I don't know why they even say that 4 can play this game because there's not enough cards, and therefore game, for 4 players. Maybe removing fewer cards would help, but I really consider this playable only for 2 or 3 players.

Thread: Re:User Review

jm100 — 2005-01-07T14:55:59+00:00
Thanks for all your comments.

Frank --

Fair enough. Describing a level of interaction is a tricky endeavor because perceptions of interactivity can vary widely (see, for example, the recent geeklist where different folks labeled Lost Cities as low as 1 and as high as 6 on a 10-point "cutthroat-ness" scale).

I agree that it pays to watch what your opponents are doing. And I agree that you can usually guess what your opponents are planning. But both of those same characteristics are present in Lost Cities.

In Clocktowers, the primary interactions arise from the race to place roofs before other players, and from choices about which of the three decks to pick from. There is no doubt that both of these decisions are impacted by what other players are doing. If you think your opponent really needs a mouseless clock, and there's one on top of the deck, it might influence your decision to take that card immediately. But the card can also benefit you, and your opponent can't be sure that you didn't take it for that reason instead of just to deprive them of the card. To me, this is analogous to the interaction in Lost Cities; in both cases, the deck operates as an intermediary. Plus, in Clocktowers, you cannot guarantee that the next card under your mouseless clock is not another mouseless clock.

The same analysis takes place when considering roof-placement. It is hard for an opponent to begrudge you the placement of a roof. Placing a roof primarily benefits you, and only secondarily makes trouble for your opponents. In fact, the practical upshot of a placement is that it requires your opponent to spend one more story (or a different roof) than he or she otherwise would have. It's an impact, to be sure, but it's not devastating. And again, it's a somewhat indirect interaction.

As for monopolizing one color, that seems like an interesting strategy, but I wouldn't think that it would be a winner. Not only could a player not guarantee being able to get all four roofs of one color, but they might not even be in the deck. Plus, building four clocktowers of the same color costs, at a minimum, 10 stories. A more opportunistic strategy should be able to better that count and save resources.

I think the important factor that people should know about Clocktowers' level of interactivity is that it lacks the kind of "take that" feel that characterizes, say, certain trick-taking games. There's certainly significant interaction, but it's on the more subtle side of the fence.

Also, thanks for the information about the 3-player game. I'm looking forward to trying it with more players.

Thread: Re:User Review

rootbeer — 2005-01-07T05:36:17+00:00
jm100 (#75293),

Thanks for the review, I'd been wondering about this game!

Thread: Re:User Review

fbranham — 2005-01-06T23:35:19+00:00
jm100 (#75293),

I actually disagree with your statements about interaction. It seriously pays to watch what roofs your opponents take, and you can usually make a guess as to what they are planning.

This gets rather trickier in a 3 player game which also allows the propect of a player monopolizing one color (which avoids the increasing danger of someone beating you to a building od the appropriate color.

The 3 player game is possibly even better than the 2 player because the level of roof evil is larger.

Moo
Frank

Thread: Re:User Review

steveoliverc — 2005-01-06T18:07:00+00:00
Jeff,
thanks for the great review! Despite the low price of this game, I was wavering whether to get it or not -- but now I'll definitely get it and try it out.