Game: Magier von Pangea, die

Image

Toynan — 2008-03-23T12:33:58+00:00

Side of the box

Image

ArtEmiSa64 — 2008-01-30T16:46:02+00:00

german back of box

Image

ArtEmiSa64 — 2008-01-30T16:44:41+00:00

unpunched components

Thread: First time play

sevorges — 2007-08-16T02:10:45+00:00

It is rare to have just 4 of us at the weekly gaming gathering but as that was the case last night I finally got to get this to the table. Firstly, I have to point out how easy it was to get into the game. I don't think we made any mistakes and there was little rules referral which is not typical for us the first time.

Everyone placed their towers and the first turns were spent getting more minions onto the board and moving them into productive areas. We soon got the gist of overpopulating tiles to stifle goods production whilst seeking available manufacturers of artefacts.

The turning point of the game was when I had loaded 4 artefacts onto minions getting one to the tower immediately. This round Matt and Shaun had one artefact but were setting theselves well and Boyd made 2 with one more on its way. Matt placed his spell marker in the worst place for me (god bless him!) forcing me to move 2 artefact carrying minions onto the same tile next to my tower while I got another home to make 2. Both Matt and Shaun got their 2nd home this round and Shaun loaded up with artefacts, set for a finishing run. Boyd got his 3rd home but did not have many goods and had no other artefact carrying minions. But he made the mistake of placing his spell marker to prevent a critical tile of his from moving. In concentrating on his and not my position he allowed me to move the tile my mimions were on next to my tower so I could hop home and win a 4 artefact-11 goods victory.

So, the endgame was a cheap victory for me (mind, I'm not complaining) that I'll only get away with in a first playing. I can see the point where I won the game is where the game should really start as players have more magic at their disposal and everyone is on the verge of achieving the victory conditions. So, this session was not the most exciting but I can see the potential in future games and will be willing to whip it out again.

Thread: Re: Nice Try, Fellas, But You Ain't Stopping This Runaway Leader

sevorges — 2007-08-16T01:45:13+00:00

I find the potential to spoil in this game is rather high and is what all of your opposition should have been doing to prevent you from winning. Once you see a person trying to deliver their 3rd artifact you should be moving tiles and placing magic to prevent this from happening. It doesn't matter if you have all your workers and are collecting heaps of goods if you can't get the artefacts to your tower.

Image

ZiggyZambo — 2007-05-19T21:39:01+00:00

Image

ZiggyZambo — 2007-05-19T21:38:34+00:00

Characters from player mats

Image

myadestes — 2007-04-25T03:18:07+00:00

closeup of board and bits

Thread: Re: Always 5 in play?

GaryP — 2007-04-04T13:21:03+00:00

Yes, always five colors. Any color not used by a player is still placed on the board as a neutral team.

Thus, even when no one is playing, you should still leave the game set up. =)

Thread: Re: Always 5 in play?

Bernd — 2007-04-04T11:37:40+00:00

And so it is.

Thread: Re: Always 5 in play?

Great Dane — 2007-04-04T09:02:09+00:00

From the rules:The remaining people (colour) are considered neutral.
Looks like it, yes.

Thread: Always 5 in play?

Langy — 2007-04-04T08:23:17+00:00

Im pretty sure I know the answer but Id like to double check before play - If its a 2 player game all five colours are used yes - 3 will be neutral?

Image

petersjs — 2007-03-14T03:52:05+00:00

Sample of land tiles

Image

petersjs — 2007-03-14T03:50:33+00:00

Back of box

Image

petersjs — 2007-03-14T03:48:46+00:00

Front of box

Thread: Nice Try, Fellas, But You Ain't Stopping This Runaway Leader

ed95005 — 2006-07-27T05:48:06+00:00

Only 23 session reports, or about 3.5 reports per year, have been written for Die Magier von Pangea since it was published in 2001. The last one was written in December 2004, so I guess it's overdue for another one. Why do you suppose that is? Maybe Pangea isn't a game that lends itself well to session reporting. Or maybe it's one of those games that quickly wore out its welcome and is rarely played these days. Anyway, here goes session report 24.

After a four-player game of Primordial Soup on Monday, Larry wanted to play Pangea. We drew our initial set of workers, selected our tower positions, and got started. I drew three mountain workers and one desert worker, selected a desert adjacent to a mountain for my tower, drew another desert worker from the bag, and sent my workers off to work their respective tiles.

Having five workers in the first turn who could immediately be put to work on their corresponding tiles was an advantage as it gave me an early lead in points, which are the currency for purchasing artifacts, which in turn enable a player to perform additional actions each turn. Pangea has an obvious runaway leader problem, but hey, who am I to complain -- I was the leader and I ran away.

Pangea gives players a choice of actions to take during their turns, but based on my one play, it seems obvious the first several turns need to be spent getting workers out of the bag and onto the board. The player with the most points and artifacts wins the game, workers are required to get points and to buy and transport artifacts, so it was curious to me to see other players using their initial actions to do anything other than deploy workers.

Maybe therein lies the answer to my original question. Why have there been so few session reports? The game just isn't that interesting. The strategy seems obvious, and once a player gets an advantage, it's almost impossible to stop that player from winning. Toward the end, the others made a concerted effort to try to deny me points by overloading my areas with workers and thereby take them out of production, but it was too late. With all of my workers on the board, I had too many scoring options to be stopped.

So that's Pangea. If you enjoyed reading about this game, stick around, the next session report should be out sometime in 2008.

Thread: Re: Novice rules query

GaryP — 2006-07-01T21:47:57+00:00

I am not the most experienced player for this one, but I am quite certain I can answer all of these.

(i) Are you obliged to sell an amulet to another player? Can you refuse?

You may not refuse the sale. If your minion is producing (manufacturing), then other players may buy from you whether you want them to or not. Note that a minion carrying an amulet is not producing even if on their home terrain.

(ii) We found that where there were two 'other' minions on a space, a neutral and another player, one would always buy from the neutral so as not to give a 'good' to an opponent. It could be that you might have two other player 'sellers' available - is it your choice who you buy from?

Yes, the active player chooses which minion they purchase from. (And, yes, that means you'll choose a neutral minion when you can.)

Some of us moved a neutral minion onto our home space and bagged the amulet instantly - is that allowed?

The short answer is no. Here's why. In order to purchase an amulet, you need to have one of your own minions present. This is true even at your tower space. (The tower may not make the purchase.) The Amulet Purchasing phase takes place after the Movement phase. Amulets may only be delivered to the tower at the end of the Movement phase. Thus, the purchasing minion must wait a turn to make the delivery.

Does the tower take the place of a minion on a space, thus a tower and 3 minions on a 3-minion space is over-crowded?

Absolutely not. The population limits refer only to the number of minions.

Congratulations. Now you've got me itching again to find a copy of this little wonder. =)

Thread: Re: Novice rules query

Great Dane — 2006-07-01T21:38:50+00:00

neiloduncan wrote:
(i) Are you obliged to sell an amulet to another player? Can you refuse?
No you cannot refuse. No-one would ever sell one if they could prevent it!

(ii) We found that where there were two 'other' minions on a space, a neutral and another player, one would always buy from the neutral so as not to give a 'good' to an opponent. It could be that you might have two other player 'sellers' available - is it your choice who you buy from.
Yes, you may choose - and it makes sense to buy from the neutral.

Some of us moved a neutral minion onto our home space and bagged the amulet instantly - is that allowed?
No, that is not allowed. See note on page 6:
"Note: Minions that are currently carrying amulets may not be bought from since they are not currently manufacturing."

Does the tower take the place of a minion on a space, thus a tower and 3 minions on a 3-minion space is over-crowded?
No, the tower is not a minion an doesn't count as such.

Thread: Novice rules query

neiloduncan — 2006-07-01T20:00:14+00:00

Dear All - recently got this second and and played it once. Enjoyed it, but have a couple of queries;

(i) Are you obliged to sell an amulet to another player? Can you refuse?

(ii) We found that where there were two 'other' minions on a space, a neutral and another player, one would always buy from the neutral so as not to give a 'good' to an opponent. It could be that you might have two other player 'sellers' available - is it your choice who you buy from.

And a couple of other queries;

Some of us moved a neutral minion onto our home space and bagged the amulet instantly - is that allowed?

Does the tower take the place of a minion on a space, thus a tower and 3 minions on a 3-minion space is over-crowded?

Thanks for any tips there.

We did enjoy the game and will certainly give it another outing. We will probably add some of our own little tweeks just to make it more interesting.

Cheers

Neil

Image

helyanamanso — 2006-01-31T22:10:00+00:00

Thread: Re: What happens if you "win" out of turn?

GaryP — 2005-11-02T16:52:44+00:00

I was hoping someone more experienced would answer this, as I'd like to know myself. My gut feeling is that, yes, this would trigger the final round. Since the blue player's assets are open to see, it is not as though this would come as a surprise. The purple player needs to buy the amulet from someone else, as inconvenient as that might be.

Thread: What happens if you "win" out of turn?

StormKnight — 2005-10-06T13:31:31+00:00

Let's say that Blue has 3 amulets and 19 goods. On Purple's turn, purple buys an amulet from Blue, giving Blue 20 goods, meeting the 20 goods and 3 amulets victory condition. Would this trigger the last round immediately (possibly ending the game right away if Purple was the last player in the round), or would the last round of the game not start until Blue's next turn?

Thread: Re:Movement question

everlong205 — 2005-04-24T18:24:17+00:00

everlong205 (#479736),
I'm thinking, due to a poorly worded translation, some confusion is generated, and the rule is probably very straightforward.

We'll play that multiple amulets can be delivered on one turn. This does sound right, and the German rule quoted above makes more sense. I'll blame the translator of the rules for the confusion.

Thread: Re:Movement question

everlong205 — 2005-04-24T18:15:54+00:00

Sack (#479180),

It does suggest that, and others have said as much so that's the way we'll play it.

I'm just a little confused by the wording "Minions carrying amulets move the same as other minions, but if they enter the tile with your castle the amulet is moved into your tower and your movement phase is ended".

What is confusing is "the movement phase is ended". Why would it be necessary to state that, as once your minions moved, whether they brought your amulets to your tower or whether they simply moved to a landspace, your movement phase would have ended regardless.

The phrase seems to suggest that by moving a minion to your tower (or minions) it would end the movement phase immediately, whereas if you didn't do that you would still be allowed to move (provided you still had minions to move).

Thus, it sounds like something like this:

If I had 3 minions who were able to move, they could all move to a landspace, one at a time, BUT if I had a minion bringing an amulet to my tower, then I might be limited in my movements. i.e. if on my first move (or the movement of my first minion) I moved my minion into the tower, then movement phase would be over and I couldn't move my other 2 minions. Or if I had 2 minions bringing an amulet to a tower and a 3rd simply moving to a landspace, my movement would be dependent on how I moved my minions.

Perhaps the correct wording should be "after all movement is completed and the movement phase is ended , the amulets are placed in your castle."

Thread: Re:Movement question

Sack — 2005-04-23T04:43:19+00:00

The German rules are very clear on this!

The sequence of the movement phase is a) all minions may move one space, then (and only then) b) ("at the end") all amulets which reached the the tower are moved to the player map.

There's no two way about it, you CAN collect multiple amulets in one turn.

Sven.

Thread: Movement question

everlong205 — 2005-04-23T00:06:41+00:00

This was actually asked in a slightly different way earlier but I'm still a little unclear as to movement.

According to the rules, each minion can move 1 space. Minions carrying amulets move the same, but if they enter tile wih your castl the amulet is moved to your tower and movement phase is ended.

Now does this mean that multiple minions can move (sounding like a Friedman Friesse game description here)to the tower and can score multiple amulets. Or can only one enter per turn.

It seems to suggest both. It says minions, plural, which sounds like more than one can enter the tower. However, what would be the purpose of saying the movement phase is ended then? Because if it were plural, then the movement phase would end as soon as all minions were moved anyway.

The rules state that each minion can move one space. Is this done consecutively, or one at a time. If one at a time that would suggest that as soon as one minion entered the tower he would get the amulet and the movement round would end. If consecutive, then multiple minions could enter the tower and give player multiple amulets on one turn. And then movement would be over.

However, even if players didn't enter the tower at all, once all minions were moved then movement is over (as all minions have moved).

I'm assuming, and the way I'll play it is that a person is limited to only one amulet per turn, but would love to know if this is the correct interpretation.

Thread: Re:Movement/Amulet question

Octavian — 2005-03-15T10:22:42+00:00

Sack (#453811),

I suppose where my interpretation differs is in what is considered delivering an amulet to the tower. I always considered it to mean moving a minion with an amulet into the tower space (which ends that phase, so should be the last move made) - NOT taking the amulet off the minion and putting it onto your board.

-MMM

Thread: Re:Movement/Amulet question

Sack — 2005-03-15T09:00:16+00:00

bonxie wrote:
We play that any amulets on your tower are delivered at the end of your turn, so you do not benefit from their magic effect until the next turn

This is exactly what the original German rules specify:
"amulets (plural) can only be returned at the end of the movement phase".

Sven.

Thread: Re:Movement/Amulet question

Octavian — 2005-03-11T16:18:52+00:00

bonxie wrote:
Octavian (#82572),
I don't think that's right, if you applied the rules like that then it would be impossible to achieve the four and five amulet victory conditions.

Why would it be impossible? Winning with three amulets requires that you have 20 goods in your stock, 4 amulets requires 10 goods, and 5 amulets wins outright. Further, there is incentive to strive for a winning condition consisting of more amulets, as they take precedence in the case of multiple players meeting winning conditions in the same turn.

-MMM

Thread: Re:Movement/Amulet question

bonxie — 2005-03-11T09:22:41+00:00

Octavian (#82572),
I don't think that's right, if you applied the rules like that then it would be impossible to achieve the four and five amulet victory conditions.

We play that any amulets on your tower are delivered at the end of your turn, so you do not benefit from their magic effect until the next turn

Thread: Re:Movement/Amulet question

Octavian — 2005-02-03T20:17:51+00:00

ekted (#82567),

That's right. You can only gain one amulet per turn to your player board.

-MMM

Thread: Movement/Amulet question

ekted — 2005-02-03T20:13:38+00:00

The rules state: Only at the end of the movement phase may an amulet be delivered to the player’s tower.

Does this mean that if I have 2 minions each carrying an amulet that I can't move both of them home on the same turn?

Thread: Session Report

Peter The Rat — 2004-12-10T14:49:22+00:00

Our last game was finally a game with some "normal" theme:
"Die Magier von Pangea"
Andy explained the rules and soon we where of to play this game.
Andy was quite lucky to get 3 Amulets in the first two rounds of the game, right before we other two realized how important the are. So we didn't hinder him to get them back to his tower. This advantage prooved to bee to much until the end of the game.
I started to bring almost every own token on the board and managed to earn a whole lot of money (throughout the game I was the one with the most money)!
Still I had a much harder time to get my tokens somewhere where I could get some Amulets.
As soon a Andy started casting more than once in his round, we realized how much more powerful he had become we worked together and tried to stop him. But we didn't manage it, because we had only one Amulet brought home until the last round. Only the last round we had two tokens at home. It is strange how much faster the game becomes as soon as someone has two Amulets at home.
Andy won with 5 Amulets, Peter came in second with 2 Amulets and 23 Money, Rich came in last with 2 Amulets and 18 Money!
I fear this game might be a prime example for a runawayleader problem. I need to play it again!

Thread: Re:Question

Hubajube — 2004-10-23T22:07:55+00:00

Oops. Amulets cost 1 more than your current level. Heh, I guess that makes more sense.

Thread: Question

Hubajube — 2004-10-23T22:02:39+00:00

If I buy an amulet from a neutral player, does it always cost 1 since neutrals never buy amulets themselves?

Thread: User Review

familygaming — 2004-08-30T03:23:11+00:00

A while back, when this game first came out, I heard a bit about it and it intrigued me. True, the 'wizards and spells' theme is nearly done to death, but I heard that the 'earth' (the board) was made up of land tiles that were arranged differently every play (like Settlers of Catan), and that, during the course of the game, players could actually slide the land masses around! Now I didn't know too much more about it than that, but it certainly piqued my curiousity. So I waited to hear the great response to the game... and it never came. There were one or two rather indifferent comments and that was about it. I was surprised, but perhaps the execution of the game wasn't that good.

Well, flash forward several months. I'd asked around to see if it was going to be released in English by Rio Grande, but apprently Jay decided to pass on it. I kept my eye on the game hoping to hear some good press, and the more I read about it, the more I was sure I'd like it. But the game was published by Queen--a smaller publisher in Germany--and seemed doomed never to be purchased by anyone in our group. But at last one member picked it up. When I walked into his house and saw it, I couldn't take my eyes off it. We played several games that night, but Pangea was the one I was waiting for. One guy left early leaving me and my friend, and I asked him if he would mind if we played it with two players. He agreed.

We pulled out the components and admired the very pretty bits--one of the best looking games I have played, right up there with Tikal and Elfenland. The instructions took a couple of careful readings, but actually were less complicated than they sounded. We got going on the game and what unfolded was very sweet indeed! Basically, on your turn you get one special action for every amulet you possess (minimum 1 action, even if you have no amulets). There are several actions to choose from, all very basic--produce a new minion, move a land mass, etc. You proceed thru six phases, each person particpating in each phase, then you repeat until the game ends. The phases are very simple to do and take very little time--indeed, the game flies by--but one great part of the game is the winning conditions. There are three different ways to win: get 5 amulets, get 4 amulets and 10 goods, or get 3 amulets and 20 goods. Getting 5 amulets seems more glorious, but it is very difficult to accomplish.

Goods are pretty easy to get. Each minion is 'home' on a different type of terrain. If they are on the type of land they like, they produce one good per turn; if not, they don't. Amulets are harder to come by. You see, you have to send out your minions all over the 'earth' to go purchase the amulets from other players' productive minions. And on your way back, you may find that the earth has split in two, or that your minion is suddenly on an island (due to the rather importune intervention of your opponents! =) On top of that, each land tile has a population limit, and if it is exceeded, all the creatures become unproductive, which means they can produce no goods and they can not sell amulets. Wait, I'm not done yet! No matter how many humans play, 5 'teams' are always on the board. In the action phase, one option is to move the neutral players' minions which can help you acquire amulets much more easily. But when you are trying to shift the earth, produce your own minions, and move neutral pawns, you find your action points drying up very quickly.

I've had a chance to play this game more lately and find it great with 2, 3, or 4 players. There is less interaction with two, but also less luck. Playing with more makes for more malice. The 3 different winning conditions mean that you must pay a lot of attention to what the other players are doing. Sometimes getting 3 amulets and 20 goods is a very viable strategy, which means piling minions onto tiles to render the other players' minions unproductive is often necessary. And to crown off the whole game, it plays with very little downtime in about 45 minutes! This game is tense, tricky, and a pleasure to play. I waited a long time to try it out, and the wait was worth it. This is one of the best games I have played, in fact, the best game I've played since Princes of Florence, and I highly recommend it for those who want an uncomplicated but tense game. It sure will keep you on your toes.

Thread: Re:

Octavian — 2004-08-21T04:36:05+00:00

JimPAX (#50256),

Yes, meaning it stays locked until the every token is removed, effectively lengthening the amount of time that it is locked down.

-MMM

Thread:

JimPAX — 2004-08-21T02:49:55+00:00

I'm surprised no one has asked this yet, but can a player play a spell on a region that already has a spell?

Thread: Session Report

daw65 — 2004-08-13T15:14:47+00:00

With plenty of time remaining, we went with the game that had ranked second in our initial voting, Die Magier von Pangea.

The game started with Sterling and Fritz quickly jumping out and getting an amulet back to their tower. Jeff and Dave both went out and got two, but Dave got slowed by moving terrain, while Jeff was able to deposit his two quickly. Eventually Dave got his two in. Sterling was quick to pick up a third, but he was having a hard time getting it back to his tower. Jeff was able to get a third and fourth amulet in hand, and got his third back to the tower before people realized how close the game was to ending, and started playing defensively. That allowed both Dave and Fritz to pick up and deposit their third amulets.

As the game drew to a close, land was moving fast and furious. For the most part it hindered Jeff, to try to keep his tower away from the amulets, or Sterling, though I still can't quite figure out why. Jeff eventually bought a fifth amulet, but only really needed to get a fourth to his tower. But by having two, he made it much harder for the rest of us to defend, and he eventually got his fourth one in, with 14 goods, to meet one of the game ending conditions. Dave was the only player left in turn order, and he was also able to deliver his fourth amulet, but he ended with only 10 goods. The others had only three (Fritz), or two (Sterling, who never was able to get his third one delivered) amulets, so Jeff came away the winner by virtue of the # of goods tiebreaker.

Thread: Re:Paste-ups broken?

alkaiser — 2004-08-11T16:09:56+00:00

alkaiser (#47920),

As a follow-up, I emailed the paste-up files and they worked just fine. If anyone else has any problems feel free to drop me a line and I'll be happy to email you the files.

Thread: Re:Paste-ups broken?

alkaiser — 2004-08-03T17:43:50+00:00

ccomeaux (#47840),

Hmmm, not sure if you can add attachments to BGG mail. Drop me a line on my BGG mailbox with an email where you would like me to send the zip archive and I'll send it off.

Thread: Re:Paste-ups broken?

alkaiser — 2004-08-03T17:39:19+00:00

ccomeaux (#47840),

I think I posted those paste-ups, I'll try zipping the files and emailing them to you and see if that works. It's odd that it doesn't work for you but works fine for others.

Thread: Re:Paste-ups broken?

ccomeaux — 2004-08-03T15:28:18+00:00

Strange. I've tried this at work using WinZip 8 and WinRar 3.3. At least with WinRar, I can see the contents, but all I get is a single extension-less file. At home, I get an invalid archive on XP. I've tried downloading it several times on both machines.

Thread: Re:Paste-ups broken?

gamesbook — 2004-08-03T08:12:42+00:00

ccomeaux (#47840),
Nope, no problems for me (Winzip 8 on WinXP).

Thread: Re:Paste-ups broken?

stayman — 2004-08-03T06:22:33+00:00

ccomeaux (#47840),

Now I get this one as corrupt?

Thread: Re:Paste-ups broken?

sodaklady — 2004-08-03T03:39:33+00:00

ccomeaux (#47840),
I just downloaded them and had no problem. Try dl them again maybe.

Thread: Paste-ups broken?

ccomeaux — 2004-08-03T03:15:34+00:00

I have not been able to open the paste-ups zip file (MagierPangeaPasteup.zip). Has anyone else experienced this and found a way around it? Thanks for the help.

Thread: Reoes a person's goods max out at 23?

Octavian — 2004-07-11T04:34:52+00:00

Neal Herperger (#44575),

I believe the numbers on the player boards are not meant to be a limit. Simply find some way to mark your extra goods.

-MMM

Thread: Does a person's goods max out at 23?

Neal Herperger — 2004-07-10T16:10:13+00:00

We had a game last night where someone had the potential to get more than 23 goods. We thought that because the provision for accounting for goods ends a 23, so must a person's ability to acquire them (i.e. if you could have more goods, the numbers would have been higher). There doesn't seem to be anything in the rules either way about this. What have other people played regarding this?

Thread: Re:A couple questions

Octavian — 2004-04-14T04:35:55+00:00

sodaklady (#33098),

1- yes

2- the problem with extending this to 5 players is that doing so takes away the neutral color. It is very important to have at least one neutral color. The ability to use magic points to control neutral workers is necessary to maintain the potential to buy at least three amulets, despite what other players do.

-MMM

Thread: A couple questions

sodaklady — 2004-04-14T01:04:23+00:00

I have just gotten this game and so far have only run through it by myself to get the rules down.

1-Can a player buy 2 amulets on the same move if all the criteria are met for each?

2-Has anyone tried to play this with 5 players? I know it says 2-4 but is it possible without messing up the game play?

Thanks.
Mary

Thread: User Review

Chinese Bandit — 2004-03-28T18:18:19+00:00

BRIEFLY This is an object acquisition game. Players are wizards who send their minions out from theirs towers, onto the shifting tiles of the island (continent ?) of Pangea. There, the minons produce goods and secure amulets produced by other players' minons. The more amulets you have, the more you can do, until someone gets the enough amulets and/or goods to win.

BITS AND BOARD The nifty modular (island) tiles and underlying (sea) board are very nice. The towers are good, but the flat cardboard minions leave a little to be desired. And...IT'S ALL IN GERMAN.

DIFFICULTY It takes a little while to catch on, but once you do, it is not difficult to play.

THRILLS This is a fun game. You are constantly trying to figure ways to mess up the other players and worrying about what the others plan to do to you.

BEST PART The constantly shifting tiles and moving minions create a pleasantly confusing atmosphere that builds to a utterly chaotic climax in which you can make that final consumate move to screw the other players and sweep to victory.

MAIN GRIPE The constantly shifting tiles and moving minions create a unnervingly confusing atmosphere that degenerates into an utterly chaotic climax in which another player can make a lucky move to screw all the other players and clinch an undeserved victory.

TIPS The board wraps around, so tiles can move from one side to the other. Also, it is not always a good idea to have your minion producing goods, since that means others can buy amulets from him. Obvious points, I know, but took a while to sink into to my brain.

OVERALL Very good game

Thread: Session Report

batman — 2004-03-26T05:30:22+00:00

We had to relax for a second after the exhausting soccer match, but just for a second. There were more games to play. Aaron and John joined us for a magically good time with Die Magiers von Pangaea. I've played, and described, this game before but it's been awhile. Each player plays a magician vying to be the first to gain five amulets. You can also win the game with less amulets but you have to produce a certain number of goods to make up for the deficiency. This game has an escalating factor to it. The more amulets you have the more actions you can perform. So as the game progresses it speeds up considerably and usually ends before it seems like it should.

Jeff was the first player to get two amulets and subsequent extra action. With the temporary advantage he immediately came under the close scrutinization of the rest of us so that he couldn't gain an even greater advantage. I was next to gain two amulets. It was Jeff, however, with two of his minions carrying two more amulets back to his tower, that was still in the perceived lead. His minions were close enough and he had enough goods that he was imminently close to winning the game. It was a mutual effort from the rest of us to assure that this didn't happen. Usually in a situation where one player is so close to winning that all efforts are spent to prevent him from winning that another player sneaks in to claim the win. I was hoping that player would be me. I was able to move a third amulet into my tower without much fanfare. I was close to delivering a fourth amulet but I didn't have enough goods for victory. I needed a fifth amulet which was only a couple turns away. Aaron only had two amulets and John was still working on his first so I didn't sense a threat from either of them. Boy was I wrong. Aaron saw the chance to claim a third amulet and simultaneously produce enough goods to give him the victory. Nobody but Aaron saw that one coming.

Thread: Session Report

PBrennan — 2004-02-18T22:28:17+00:00

I had to re-learn this game on the fly, and realised that the rules are all back to front. To understand the big picture, you have to work backwards - ie you deliver stuff at the start of a turn which you've gradually worked up to acquire at the end of the previous turn. Anyway, once we got back into it, I was reminded of why I liked it - interesting options each turn, the game builds, the trickiness increases, then ends quickly. Good for 3 players. A 7 after 3 plays.

Thread: Re:Another Rules Question

benedictus — 2004-01-07T21:54:43+00:00

Hi again.

I am very sorry for my hastefull reply. It seems I was wrong. Oh mercy. Guess if we have played lots and lots of games the wrong way.
Mayby i should keep clear of games in languages i dont get...
Don't you agree?

And by the way. This was a reply to the article on M o Pange. I thoght i was replying in the post..

Still learning some of the ropes.

Hope you get the game more right then we did here. Take care! and good luck!

/Kent Karlsson

Thread: Re:Another Rules Question

benedictus — 2004-01-07T21:50:14+00:00

Nope.. according to the rules there is only one extra minion in play (ie if there is two players there is one neutral, if there is three players there are one neutral).

So there is allways one tribe more than there are players.

Thread: Re:Another Rules Question

Octavian — 2004-01-06T23:08:31+00:00

alkaiser (#25152),

All 5 colors are always in play.

-MMM

Thread: Another Rules Question

alkaiser — 2004-01-06T22:33:17+00:00

The rules on BGG say that there are always 5 colors in play but some of the reviews I have read seem to indicate that there is only 1 minion in play in any game no matter how many players. Which is correct?

Thread: Session Report

lorna — 2003-01-27T15:20:44+00:00

Eric, Barb and I sat down to try this game I recently traded for. I love the componente. There were lots of "Lucky Charms" sniggers as we collected our amulets. We had a few miscues as the game progressed (who does not in the first time thru a game?)Such as Barb missed the part about tiles being able to wrap around until I moved one of hers to the other side of the world. Barb and I ganged up to slow Eric with our spells. I went for the early amulets bt was slowed by lack of goods. Barb went for hanging around until the end then brought all her amulets back. The last turn I brought my 4th amulet back and ended with 15 good. Barb edged me out with 4 amulets and 20 goods at the end of the round. A nice game that is fairly quick if there is no analysis paralysis. Glad I traded for it.

Thread: Session Report

BoardGameGeek — 2002-09-12T14:15:47+00:00

DIE MAGIER VON PANGEA
2 players: Sean, Yahu (me)
WINNER: Sean
Avg enjoyment: 8.00

A 2 player game at a TCG Session is unusual. It was a strange circumstance. 4 players went to play Puerto Rico leaving 3 to play Web of Power, but Web of Power is short, and upon concluding, our third player left, leaving Sean and I to find something to play. Puerto Rico was nowhere near done, so we picked out Pangea.

The playing of Pangea was rather informal. Since it is so strategic, I helped Sean play. This is one of those games that if you don't help a first timer, they may well get trounced, because it can be hard to "see" how to use the wraparound map and how to use the neutral pieces. So we just whiled away the time helping each other out and discussing strategies as we played.

This is one of the best game ever made in my opinion. Even playing two players, informally, discussing tactics, taking back moves and optimizing, I still rate this thing a 9.

I took the lead in the game, but Sean got to take his last turn before the game ended. He ended up getting only 13 goods, which gave me the victory. We took the move back and bandied about his options, and realized he could draw minions, gambling he'd get two that would be productive for him. He pulled two out, both could be productive, and those two goods got him ahead of me by 1.

A close game that was marred only by realizing the luck involved in that tile draw. The luck is so mitigated that something like that would only happen maybe one game in 30, but still, it won him the game. Had he drawn one minion that could not have been productive, we would have tied. Nonetheless, the tile draw has never won the game before, and would rarely do it in the future, but it is the one (and only) flaw I have found in this game, however small that flaw may be.

Scores:
Sean 4 amulets/15 goods WINNER!
Yahu 4 amulets/14 goods

Ratings: Sean 7, Yahu 9