Game: Alchemist

Thread: Re: Rules only in German?

Yokiboy — 2008-06-14T20:33:33+00:00

And here's the official translation.

Edit: Found it.

Thread: Alchemist looks great, and so does the new set

Yokiboy — 2008-05-23T22:34:05+00:00

Great review, as always, Colin. I loved the light background behind you in contrast to the dark table. At first I wasn't sure that the contrast of the dark table to the components was a good fit, but I ended up really liking it.

The game seems like a lot of fun, and I will definitely add it to my collection.

It was however a slight let down that your cheery mug didn't pop back on screen after the credits to rant about something, but you're forgiven... this time!

At the rate your getting me to buy new games, I will have a hard time sparing cash for a donation to support the show though. Although I'm earmarking some of my - hopefully - upcoming bonus for that purpose.

Please keep 'em coming.

Thread: Obsessed Board Gamers - Episode 19 - Video Introduction and Review for Alchemist

PimpMC — 2008-05-23T15:27:44+00:00

Behold! Here is our video introduction and review for Alchemist. Hope everyone enjoys!

Download (Higher Quality): http://m.podshow.com/media/15871/episodes/113415/obsessedboa...
Streaming (Lower Quality): http://www.mevio.com/shows/?mode=detail&episode_id=113415

Let us know what you think.

Thread: Re: 2 player start turn

semperite — 2008-03-27T20:16:19+00:00

You were right - we were playing it wrong. Each time we were trying to create a potion we were filling up all 5 ingredient spaces. Now it's going to be a whole different type of game if we can use 1 to 5 ingredients. My brain is already hurting from just thinking about the possibilities and consequences. The alchemists of old had it easy trying to turn lead into to gold compared to mastering this game. I can't wait to play it again.

Thanks for the prompt clarifications

Jason

Image

olavf — 2008-03-26T14:22:01+00:00

Corrected yellow on board to match the cubes better (no confusion with orange anymore)

Thread: Re: 2 player start turn

carlo — 2008-03-25T09:34:51+00:00

Hi Jason,
a couple of clarifications:

- it is always possible to create a potion on the first turn, since a potion can be made with 1 to 5 ingredients (I've already heard that some players misunderstood this rule and always made potions of 5 ingredients, which definitely breaks the game - may be this is your case?) - so, you can even make a potion of 1 or 2 ingredients, but you are anyway forced to rate it with a 5.

- at the beginning of the game each player draws 12 cubes (not 6)

Hope this clarifies

Kind Regards,
Carlo

Thread: 2 player start turn

semperite — 2008-03-24T23:30:44+00:00

According to the rules in a 2 player game, the start player MUST create a potion of at leasat 5 value or higher. What should happen if the six random cubes drawn from the bag do not permit the first player from creating a potion?

Thread: Re: When you Copy a potion.....

olavf — 2008-02-20T08:58:24+00:00

The copier does.

Thread: When you Copy a potion.....

custom golf clubs — 2008-02-20T05:57:02+00:00

Who chooses the color of ingrediant the potion developer gets?

Thanks for the help

Jon

Image

cobalto — 2008-01-29T15:59:31+00:00

Thread: Re: The one game playing itself backward

Professor Plum — 2007-11-30T16:06:17+00:00

I like that, too.

The same night I played this I was also introduced to Origin of Falling Water, another game which plays "backwards."

All in all it was a peculiar evening.

Image

sffh — 2007-11-26T02:55:19+00:00

Alchemist as seen on Spielefest, Wien, 25.11.2007

Image

sffh — 2007-11-26T02:53:27+00:00

Alchemist as seen on Spielefest, Wien, 25.11.2007

Thread: Alchemist - 3 player

bratgamer — 2007-10-29T02:58:53+00:00

Three of us played a game of Alchemist tonight: The Witch(40 f) , the Wizard(40 m), and the Imp(10 m).

This was our first play and the Witch and Imp have little "real" boardgame experience.

After a quick what-you-can-do-each-turn, we jumped in

The first turn we felt our way, then game play went very quickly. Everyone loved the freedom in the game (such as choosing ANY point value). We each seemed to follow our own path on making, giving, and pointing through the ingredients, trying to balance point-greed with secret ingredient elimination.

The Wizard beat the Witch in the tie-breaker, with the Imp close in points to both of those alchemical prodigies.

NOTES:
On the secret ingredient front : The Wizard was sad to see that the Spider legs are yellow and NOT orange, but lucked into the win anyway!

The fact that you cannot Copy your own potion was much cooler in play than it sounds in the rules.

The rules overview and play took about 1 hr.

OVERALL OPINION :
A definite play-again game with most brain-power spent on playing the game instead of remembering the rules. Very much a game that has to be experienced to get any kind of feel for it. Fun, fun , fun.

Thread: Alchemist - It's MAGIC!

MENAREUS2000 — 2007-10-12T17:42:35+00:00

"Alchemist", designed by Carlo A. Rossi and published by Mayfair Games, is a welcome new addition to my over-flowing board game library.

I must say I've never played a board game quite like Alchemist. It's one of those rare games that seems full of contradictions. On the one hand it's a simple game, as you'll be up and running with a quick run through of the instructions, yet figuring out how to win, is quite a different story.

The theme revolves around each player representing a particular school of magic. Each player competes to create new potions and copy potions of their opponents, all while trying to promote a secret ingredient that their school thinks is best. Sounds simple enough, right? Oh, but wait!

Before going into the workings of the actual game, I must say that the publishers really went out of their way to create the right atmosphere for the game, by using such beautiful artwork on the game board. It's all very dark and mysterious and yet adds to the feeling of the theme perfectly. I hope other publishers are quick to follow suit.

WHAT'S IN THE BOX

1) Beautifully illustrated game board depicting 10 magic cauldrons.
160) Ingredient cubes that come in five colors (grey, blue, green, orange and yellow)
10) Potion Value Tiles - Valued 1 - 10.
30) Seal Stones (6 each in 5 colors)
5) School Ingredient Cards with nice artwork
5) Player Screens (nicely done)
5) Scoring Chips
1) Oracle Bag (Cloth bag for you mere mortals)

The distribution of cubes in the game will vary depending on the number of players. There's an extra rule for a 2 player game, that states that the starting player must always create a potion and assign a value of 5 or greater to it on their first turn, but all the other rules remain the same.

Each player is secretly dealt 1 School Ingredient Card. This will be the ingredient you'll be trying to get used the most during the game, in order to score bonus points at the end.

Each player receives 6 Seal Stone cubes. One of theses will be placed on the starting space of the scoring track that circles the board. The others will remain visible in front of your player screen and will be used each time you create a new potion, to indicate who created it. Once these are gone, you will no longer be able to create any new potions.

Each player starts out with 12 secret ingredient cubes behind their player screens. Lastly, every player receives a scoring chip with the number 50 on one side of it and 100 on the other. These are to indicate the additional points that should be added to your score at the end of the game, for when you may have gone completely around the scoring track.

The remaining ingredient cubes are put off to the side of the board to form the Ingredient Reserve.

On your turn, you have 1 of 3 choices you can make.

1) Create A Potion
2) Copy A Potion
3) Take Ingredient(s)

CREATE A POTION:

One must first pick an unused cauldron and decide on the number of ingredients (1-5) and the colors of them. There are three rules you must follow when creating a new potion.

1) You may not copy an existing potion or recipe as they call it.
2) You may not use the same colored ingredient more than twice in the same recipe.
3) You may not use an ingredient in a recipe that the recipe itself will produce.

Note that each cauldron will produce 2 different colored ingredients, when used to create a recipe and thus neither of these colors may be used in the recipe itself.

Once you've placed your ingredient cubes in the cauldron, you now must assign a value (1-10) by taking any one of the available Potion Value Tiles that are left and placing it above the cauldron, to indicate how much this new potion is worth. You move your Seal Stone the number of spaces indicated by the just placed Potion Value Tile. It's important to note that you only score for a created potion when it's created and never again. Your opponents however are free to copy it whenever they like, provided they have the proper ingredients and score each time they do.

COPY A POTION:

To copy a potion, you must first select a cauldron with a recipe that you DID NOT create and have the proper number and colors of ingredient cubes to duplicate it. Because you're copying another player's recipe, you must also choose any 1 of the ingredient used in the recipe and give it to the player who actually created it. They then take that cube and hide it behind their player screen, while you discard any remaining cubes from the game and score the number of point indicated by the recipe you just copied.

TAKE INGREDIENTS:

If you choose not to create or copy a recipe on your turn, you must take ingredients instead. You have the option of secretly taking 2 random cubes from the Oracle Bag or a single cube from the ingredient reserve at the side of the board.

END OF THE GAME:

The game ends on any give round when everyone has taken their turn and there are 2 or fewer types of ingredients left in the Ingredient Reserve.

SCORING THE GAME:

All the player screens are removed and each player gets to move 1 space on the scoring track for every two cubes they have remaining. Now the School Ingredient Cards are revealed and the player with the least remaining ingredient (thus used most in the game) receives bonus points depending on the number of players. The player with the most points wins.

THOUGHTS ON THE GAME:

You have to admit that "Alchemist" is definitely different. You start off with tons of choices and then the choices quickly begin to narrow as the game continues. I have to imagine you'll find yourself scratching your head, wondering what to do next during your first several games. I've only played the 2 player game and have to imagine that with 3-5 players the game might seem more random as the number of players increase. I have to believe that players will either love or hate this game depending on how much brain power they like to use during a game. Personally I love all the different and interesting choices that come up. Earlier, I had said that "Alchemist" is a game of contradictions and here are some of the reasons why. It's almost a filler game and yet it's not. It's simple to play and difficult to play well. Many of the choices you have to make seem like contradictions. The more recipes you create the more you can score. Yet the more recipes you create limits the available recipes you can make later in the game. You get to choose how much you'd like to score for every recipe you create but give your opponents the opportunity to score the same thing and possibility even more. The questions go on and on. Do you make a recipe simple or complicated. How many points should you give a recipe. Should you take a single cube from the reserve and get the color you want or take a chance and take two from the bag at random. Should I use a cauldron that produces colors I need or one that produces colors I'd like my opponent to use. Personally I love scratching my head and with "Alchemist" there's plenty opportunity to do just that. Probably the most important thing of all, is that "Alchemist" is a game you can keep going back to and seeing a little something different in it each time. Now that's Magic!

Arthur Reilly

Thread: Alchemist - Review

gschloesser — 2007-10-04T14:09:37+00:00

Design by: Carlo Rossi
Publisher: Amigo / Mayfair
3 – 5 Players, 45 minutes
Review by: Greg J. Schloesser

Note: This review first appeared in Counter magazine.

I had heard absolutely nothing about this Carlo Rossi game, and was surprised to find it on my doorstep in a parcel from Mayfair Games. The impressive cover artwork and theme intrigued me, and I was interested to see what clever concoction lie within.

The theme certainly is familiar: a group of Adepts competing in a contest of Alchemists, each hoping to concoct and replicate the most valuable potions. I’ve seen this theme in numerous other games, but I guess it is an intriguing one as it continues to resurface.

The large board depicts ten cauldrons, upon which can be placed 1 – 5 ingredients each. Each cauldron also depicts two ingredients that will be produced when the potion is made. A scoring track rings the board. A large assortment of five different ingredients, represented by, of course, wooden cubes, is sorted, and a mixture is placed into a cloth bag. Each player draws an initial supply of twelve cubes, and depending upon the number of players, a few will remain in the bag. This assortment of ingredients is hidden behind the players’ privacy screen. Each player also receives five seal stones, which they will use to mark the potions they create. In addition, each player receives a secret “school ingredient” card, which depicts one unique ingredient. Players will attempt to use this ingredient frequently, and cause their fellow competitors to use the ingredient as well. Bonus points are awarded at the end of the game to the players whose ingredients were used the most in the making and replication of potions. Finally, potion tiles with values 1 – 10 are arranged by the board, and the contest begins.

A player has three options on his turn:

1) Create a new potion. To do this, the player places one-to-five ingredients on an empty cauldron, and then chooses one of the potion value tiles to place upon it. There are a few rules that must be observed when creating a new potion:
a. The potion must be unique.
b. No ingredient may be used more than twice.
c. An ingredient may not be used if it is also produced by that recipe.

When a player creates a potion, he receives the two ingredients it produces from the general supply and earns points equal to the value of the potion. One would think that the obvious choice would be choosing the highest valued potion tile remaining so that these points can be earned. However, a player may never replicate his own potion, so those points will never again be scored by the potion’s creator. So perhaps a lower value is appropriate? Choosing a lower-value tile, however, will not be very enticing for others to make, and you want others to replicate your potion as you will receive one of the ingredients they use when making it. Plus, if you made a potion using your secret school ingredient, you want others to make that potion so that ingredient will be used and depleted. Choosing the value tile is, indeed, a tough decision.

2) Replicate an existing potion. The player must choose a potion that he did not create, and present the exact ingredients the potion contains. He must give one of these ingredients to the potion’s creator, with the remaining ingredients being removed from the game. The player earns the potion’s value in points, and takes the two ingredients that the potion produces. Again, there is an incentive to replicate potions that use your secret ingredient, as this will remove those ingredients from the game.

3) Taking Ingredients. A player may either take one ingredient of his choice from the general supply, or two ingredients at random from the bag – as long as they last. Taking ingredients should really only be done sparingly, as the opportunity to earn points that turn is lost.

The game continues in this fashion until there are only two or fewer ingredients remaining in the general supply. At this point, each player receives one victory point for every two ingredients they have remaining. All of these ingredients are returned to the general supply, and the ingredients with the fewest remaining will earn points for the players holding the matching school ingredient card. The amount earned varies from 3 – 12, depending upon the number of players. The player with the greatest accumulation of points wins the contest.

Alchemist is not a difficult game to learn, but I find it difficult to wrap my head around the strategies. Players must try to create potions using their secret ingredient so as to entice others to use those ingredients in replicating the recipe. At the same time, a player must receive a steady supply of ingredients so he can continue to replicate other potions, thereby earning points. Which ingredients are needed can be obvious, but obtaining them can be tricky. I’ve seen some folks create only one potion during the game and do well, concentrating on replicating opponents’ potions. However, I’ve also seen this tactic fail, so I’m not sure if it is the path to pursue or not. There seems to be a few strategies to pursue, but I’m suspicious that ultimate victory is really dependent upon simply getting lucky and having players use your secret ingredients. Getting a needed ingredient or two for free from players who replicate your recipes can also prove extremely beneficial.

What dooms the game for me, however, is that it simply lacks spark. I find it rather unexciting and dull. It doesn’t seem to have the breadth or variety that I seek in games. This sentiment was shared by my wife, who initially enjoyed the game, but made the comment that she enjoyed it less and less with each subsequent play. Alchemist is a game that doesn’t appear to have stamina, and is destined to suffer the same fate as the “science” of alchemy.

Thread: Re: [Review] Alchemist

bratgamer — 2007-09-13T15:19:45+00:00

The interesting part of this review is that your experience with this game is exactly the experience non-gamers have when they play one of "our" games !

Maybe we balk at anything that is outside of our normal game thought patterns. Which is no fault because we play for enjoyment.

Thanks for the excellent review. Definately on my "on sale only" list.

Thread: Re: Rules Question: Tie for least ingredient

ssmooth — 2007-08-31T07:17:02+00:00

Wow, you guys are great! We played Alchemist tonight for the second time, and sure enough there was a tie at the end for least ingredient, and the English rules didn't tell us what to do about it! (We imagined the rules translators saying to each other, "A tie? That'll never happen!")

With the winner of the game having a five-point lead, a three-point adjustment in the final scores wasn't going to change the outcome tonight, but in some games it'll make the difference between winning and losing.

Thanks so much for having the answer here before we even asked it!

Thread: Three-player game

TriTrog — 2007-08-30T17:00:04+00:00

Lynn brought the game along but had only played once before. Greg and I were brand new to the game. The instructions are very short and precisely explained all the details we needed to know.

Greg and I began the game by drawing the remaining cubes from the bag, so Lynn had the first play on the board. She built a four-ingredient complicated potion worth a lot of points and effectively ridding the game of yellow and gray (my color). I assumed this meant that her color wasn't yellow, but she saw it as a way to lock in colors on the board.

Greg countered with a one-ingredient one-point potion that Lynn and I used frequently to create two cubes out of one blue (and also gave Greg the blue automatically).

We were all pretty much neck in neck for scoring during the regular game play. I had created the most potions, but it takes a little getting used to the fact that you cannot make your own potions. I think this would be served better if the ownership markers had a name or symbol on them instead of another color to keep track of.

Near the end of the game, lots of gray was being locked on the board while blue and yellow remained in reserve.

We should've read the end game part ourselves at the beginning instead of relying on Lynn's previous play. We thought we were going to stop when we ran out of two colors in reserve, but you actually stop when it's two or fewer left in reserve. This resulted in a late scramble to get rid of yellow and blue cubes just because one of our opponents might have that color for end game bonuses.

In the end, Lynn's yellow edged out my gray by one cube, giving her the ten bonus points for a handy win. All three of us enjoyed playing the game with three players. It played quickly, and I felt as though I always had a reasonable number of options with favorable effects on my score. The scoring mechanism was also uncomplicated and easy to learn, while still rewarding good strategic moves. We all agreed that the game would likely be less controlled with more players.

Image

Terry Egan — 2007-08-18T04:59:19+00:00

Alchemist: Back of Box

Thread: Re: My thoughs on Alchemist

plutonick — 2007-07-23T22:45:15+00:00

Thanks for the nice review.
Me and my wife both enjoy a game of Poison, when friend visit us. In fact, she always win.

I suppose Alchemist is nothing like Poison, but I am sure that she kinda likes the theme (she has an alchemist profession in world of warcraft..), so I am willing to give it a try, hoping she will like it as much as poison.

Thread: My thoughs on Alchemist

pezpimp — 2007-07-23T16:45:13+00:00

Alchemist (2007)
Designer: Carlo A. Rossi
Publisher: Mayfair Games, Amigo Spiele
Players: 2-5
Time: 40 minutes

Intro

What a cool looking box, was the first thing I thought when I got this game. And it plays 2-5, how rare. After opening it, I realized it was short enough to be a filler game, but with more depth then your usual filler.

Gameplay

Being an Adept (a knowledgeable sorcerer), you must create and cast spells. However, at the beginning of the game, along with your pool of supplies, you are given a school ingredient, which identifies the ingredient that your school believes is the best. This means that you must try and promote its use and use it yourself, as much as possible.

There are five ingredients in the game and you start off with 12 behind your screen, some in the bag of supply and the rest in a visible supply (each of which vary depending on the number of players). You need to use the ingredients you have to cast spells. Each turn you have one of three choices:

• Create a spell
• Copy a spell
• Take ingredients

To create a spell you simply select one to five ingredients from behind your screen and place them on one of the spell squares on the board (of which there are ten). All the squares are the same with one exception; they indicate the byproducts of the spell you are creating (always 2). When you place the spell, you place the ingredients on the square, as well as a spell token to indicate you are the creator and you receive the byproducts for the spell. Now you can never include a casting ingredient that is also the byproduct of the spell, meaning that if one of the byproducts is a yellow cube, then the casting ingredients cannot include a yellow cube. After this, you decide how many points you will receive for creating the spell by placing a point token on it. There are ten tokens numbered 1 to 10, which can only be used once each. This will also be the amount of points given when someone else copies your spell. Now each player has 5 spell tokens to create spells, however with 10 spell creation squares, you can’t create five spells each (unless playing with only 2 players), so there may be a slight race to create spells.

When copying a spell, you must take from behind your screen all the ingredients needed to cast the spell. Of these ingredients, all but one are discarded from the game and one, of the copier’s choice, is given to the creator of the spell. You then receive the amount of points that the creator has given the spell. You can never copy a spell that you created, so when the points are chosen, the creator gets those points initially, but never again. Yet others can copy the spells as many times as they want as long as they have enough ingredients.

Finally, taking ingredients involves either taking 2 hidden ingredients from the bag or 1 from the visible supply. The bag does not have that many ingredients in it, so it will run out quickly.
The game ends when there are only two ingredients left in the visible supply. The instant this occurs, play continues to the starting player and then everyone reveals the ingredients they have left unused behind their screen. You get 1 point for each 2 ingredients you have left and then place all the ingredients in the visible supply that remain and all those unused by players together. The ingredient that has the least left unused is the ingredient that was most used and best promoted by its school. Points are awarded based on the number of players for the most used ingredients. In a game of less then five, only the ingredients belonging to a school matter, the others are not considered in this scoring.

Strategy/Comments

This game can almost be classified as a filler, except that it is has a little more depth then the average filler and slightly longer instructions. The game is not complicated in itself; it is more the effect of your moves on others that brings the game to life.

So the first thing that you question when playing this game for the first time is: Should I create spells or just use other people’s spells? And the truth is that it is not that simple. Creating a spell does help you use up your ingredient and let you chose how many points you want to assign to it and therefore receive, but you can never cast this spell again. Since others can copy it, you are also providing future points for others, so you need to find the balance between the ingredients used and the points. It also helps to create spells since when others use it, they have to use the ingredients you listed and of course, you will include the ingredient of your school. The final thing to consider is what is produced by the spell (the byproducts). Once you create the spell you receive these two ingredients, but every time someone else copies it, they get those ingredients, so it may be a good idea to produce a spell that has your schools ingredient as a byproduct, in order to reduce the supply and encourage its use. So, such a simple decision becomes quite taxing and it is the main decision in the game.

Ideally, it seems that you would want to have an easy spell producing you schools product and then have a spell using two of your ingredients and producing the ingredients in the original easy spell, so that there is a kind of loop. But there is also a down side to this, since people will have an easy time creating spells, they will get a lot of points and you will get very little.

Also to note is the cube to give to the creator when copying a spell. Since the others are removed from the game, you should almost never give your schools cube, since you want these removed to reduce the supply. You should try and keep the cubes of the person leading or that you need to catch up to, in the supply so that their bonus at the end of the game is less then yours.

Depending on number of players, which ingredients you use at first varies in importance. If there are 5 players, it does not matter which ones are used at first, just later in the game you want to make sure you have the least. If there are less then 5 players, you want to use up yours and then any color not used, so you need to pay attention right from the start and try and guess peoples color. Also, if there are 5 players, after a few turns, you need to make sure no one is way ahead of you. This may be hard to tell since so many ingredients will be behind other’s screen. So although it is of less importance at first, you should always keep an eye on it.

One method of keeping ingredients present at the end of the game is to hoard them behind your screen. Now you get 1 point for each 2 behind the screen at the end, but more importantly is that they remain for the final count of whose ingredient was most used. By hording them, you prevent all of an opponents color from being used, when they might think that there are less then there are if they are not paying close attention to who took and used what so far. Which is a very hard thing to keep track of, but this should be watched especially for your schools ingredient.

Now the two player version is not as good. Since you can each cast five spells and have five spell tokens, there is no race to use spaces. It becomes a decision of what you want your opponent to use and you have much more control over the supply and consumption of ingredients. I find that there are fewer decisions to make, since it is one on one and only two ingredients really matter. Trying to figure out the opponent’s ingredient is the most important issue. But the chaos and confusion is not really present.

One nice little trick that you may want to use, that a friend of mine did, is that on your last turn, simply create a spell and give it a large point value. This is of course if there are spaces left, which will be unlikely if there are 4 or 5 players. This is good since there is little chance that anyone will copy your spell, so you will be the only one who ever gets those points. This is best done when someone triggers the last round and you know the game is ending.

At the end, there isn’t a huge gap between the points given to the players for the most used ingredient. The difference between each position is only 3 points in a five player game, yet the difference between first and last in a five player game is 12. So make sure not to be last and to ensure that the person with the most visible points before the ingredient count does not also have the most used ingredient. The scoring is relative. If someone is more then 12 points behind, they should not be a focus, yet the game is designed to keep people close and have the ingredient count be the deciding factor.

Also, the bonus for most used ingredient often does not decide the game, so don’t only concentrate on that, since you may end up behind too far behind to catch up. Always stay within 12 points of the leader or you have no chance.

Conclusion

A nice game that is easy to teach and fun to play. The problem is that at the start you have so many options, yet not sure what to do with them. As the game progresses, you realize what you should have done, but it is a little late to do anything about it. About half way through, you need to stop and really look at the board to see what your best bet is. You must think several turns ahead. Definitely worth a try, yet may turn some people off due to the slight backwards play. However, I do enjoy it and will be playing it regularly since it plays in only 30 to 40 minutes.

Rating: 6.5 / 10

Thread: Re: Rules Question: Tie for least ingredient

Fledermaushaus — 2007-07-15T19:06:10+00:00

Just confirming the answer from 'olavf'.
The relevant part of the german rules translates as follows:
'The success of each school is now examined. Firstly, the adepts return their remaining ingredients to the supply. Now see which of the ingredients has the least number of cubes left in the supply. First rank goes to the school which has this ingredient as its favourite. Second rank goes to the school whose favourite ingredient has the second least cubes left in the supply, etc. If two ingredients have an equal number of cubes left, then the two schools get the same rank. The next ingredient will still get the next rank; thus a tie for one rank does not eliminate the next...Schools which are not represented in the contest are not given a rank i.e. these ingredients are not counted.

Thread: Re: Rules Question: Tie for least ingredient

olavf — 2007-07-15T09:44:52+00:00

The german rules have a clear answer:
If there is a tie for least ingredients they both (or all) score for that rank. No rank is skipped.

Have fun! Nice game.

Thread: Rules Question: Tie for least ingredient

copeN — 2007-07-15T06:13:07+00:00

The rules do not address how the points are awarded if two or more schools tie for the least ingredient at the end of the game. Or am I missing something?

Thread: Re: The one game playing itself backward

Peter The Rat — 2007-05-31T06:33:00+00:00

Thanks for your kind words
These two examples will be usefull, when players ask some strategic advice in our next few games.
I am curious to see if someone will find a good combination of a formula, its value and its output.

Thread: Re: The one game playing itself backward

AlexYeager — 2007-05-30T19:00:07+00:00

"Playing backwards" is a clever phrase. Consider it appropriated.

Because it's such a blank slate going into the game, I usually pass along one strategy point to new players, to give them a bit of confidence in creating their first formula. Consider the following:

Example 1 - a 5-ingredient formula, worth 10 points. You also get two output ingredients (worth 1 point in the end game). So (11 points) / (5 ingredients) = 2.2 pts/ingredient

Example 2 - a 1-ingredient formula, worth 1 point. With the output point included, 2 pts/ingredient

So my suggestion is that if you are creating a formula that strays from that point ratio (and there are very good reasons to do so, in both directions), do so for a deliberate reason.

Thanks for the interesting review!
Alex Yeager
Mayfair Games

Thread: Re: The one game playing itself backward

drbsgold — 2007-05-30T14:25:43+00:00

Great way of looking at it!
Well said. It still wasn't my cup of tea though.

Too many people in my gaming group have super calculator brains, and they just go into super analysis mode on a game like this.

If anyone would like to try Alchemist, I have my copy of it, up for trade as an Ultimate trade list...

Thread: Re: The one game playing itself backward

ropearoni4 — 2007-05-30T12:52:21+00:00

Looking back at it, you're right. This backwards feeling is very present. After a few potions are made you suddenly form a strategy, but till then its anyone's guess what "strategy" will work.
Personally, I find the game fun, not laugh-out-loud fun, but "clever" fun; coming up with a perfect combo that nets you cubes and points. When you get your machine running nicely, you know what to do. Till then, it is up in the air on what can win it for you. Also, it should be repeated: the 2-player game differs a lot from the 3 or more player games. Different tactics are needed depending on the players' strategies.
Thanks for the great review of a hidden gem amongst my collection. Not everyone likes this type of game, so it is good to read some positives.

Thread: The one game playing itself backward

Peter The Rat — 2007-05-30T09:25:55+00:00

Hi there,
Alchemist is a "different" game than any other I have played before. It isn't innovative, but it got a very different feeling when playing it. Here is my own little review, of this game.
Components:
The game comes with a board that shows some creepy (or atmospheric if you prefer) looking art. It is a matter of taste, if you like it or not. I personally like this dark gothic tone in it. Than there are many wooden cubes in 5 colors which serve as ingredients for cauldrons. Pretty standard thing, but they serve its purpose well enough.
The colours for the player are rather unusal (White, Red, Violet, Grey and Brown) I like the standard colours better, but it would conflict with the dark tone the artwork tries to provoke.
Rules:
They are quite short and easy to grasp, after playing the game once, it is fairly easy to explain. One thing, that must be pointed out clearly, when explaining this game and it isn't highlighted enough in the rulebook is the point that once you have created a new recipe, you can't copy it again by yourself, BUT ALL OTHERS CAN. This is the main point in this game. Overall the rules are clear enough.
Gameplay:
So this game feels different. So what exactly is the gameplay? The aim of the game is to earn honor (or victorypoints if you prefer).
On a players turn you can either invent a new recipe, copy another recipe, choose an ingredient from the reserve or draw randomly two ingredients from the bag (if there are some ingredients left).
Points are earned by either inventing new (up to 5) recipes or by copying others recipes. You even can decide by yourself how valuable a certain recipe is. But the higher its value, the more the others will try to copy it and run away with all the points. By inventing new recipes you get the two ingredients depicted under the cauldron.
By copying a recipe you give the inventor one f the ingredients used in the recipe, earn the points given to the recipe and take the two ingredients under the cauldron.
The other two actions (drawing two random ingredients and taking an ingredient from the reserve) serve just to enable a player to do one of the other two action´on a later turn.
So the main game consists in either creating a new recipe ot copying another recipe. The point is creating another recipe enables others to earn points but gives you the poissibility to get new ingredients.
When the game starts NO ONE has an idea which recipe may be copied much and whether this is a good or bad thing for its inventor.
Later in the game it becomes clear, but then the possible reactions to it are very limited.
Overall the players try to figure out ways to get ingredients for copying the most valuable recipes and producing cheap recipes that get copied often.
Overall:
I like the idea of balancing actions that can be used against the player who committed them. But I understand very well that this is not a common thing. I think, the gamedesigner Carlo A. Rossi thought of an all new way in using this mechanic. But this sure doesn't help, if players try to earn some advantages during a game. It just isn't possible to do.

This game goes the reverse order by giving the players all options at the beginning of the game but no idea what to do. Then slowly it rips the players of the possibility to react as soon as things become clear.

Therefore some people will find it very unfullfilling.
But if the players keep an open mind and forget about all the standard rules on how a game "should" work and grasp the idea of figuring out as quickly as possible the right way to earn points in each of the matches played, the can have much fun with this game.
I am sure this game will find it difficult in earning a large following because of this strangeness-factor (or the expectations of the players if you prefer).
It may not be the perfect game with this new feeling and overall it should get some things more elaborated (for example the hidden goals).
Still I like this game and I am more than happy to play it again.
Will you like it?
Answer youself the question: Would I like playing a game backward?
I can now answer for myself: I surely do!

Thread: In depth User Review : Alchemist 5 player Game

ptsuk — 2007-05-16T22:25:08+00:00

Alchemist: 2-5 player
45-50 min play time

Components: Overall the artwork through out is top notch and very nice, it enhances the theme greatly.

There are 5 Schools Thick Card stock Chits (one for each ingredient).

1-10 Potion Point value Thick Card Stock Chits.

5 Thick card stock 50/100 point chits when/if you go over 50 pts in a game.

A large number of colored wooded cubes (Grey, Green, Blue, Orange, Yellow) representing the ingredients used to create potions.

6 colored wooden discs in 5 colors (White, Black, Brown, Purple, Red) representing player ownership these are called "seal stones".

5 Cardstock "screens" that are sturdy and are angled to stay upright without much fuss, used to hide your school card and your ingredient supply.

1 Cloth bag, used for random ingredient choosing and cube storage.

1 4 panel board. The board itself depicts 10 cauldrons. Each cauldron has places for 5 ingredients(small squares), 1 large square for a point value chit, and a circle for placement of a players seal stone(to show who created the potion), and to the side of each cauldron are two ingredients list(color coded), which are received when the potion is created and/or copied.

Setup: Each of the ingredient cubes are sorted into piles(the reserve piles), and a certain number are retuned/removed from the game depending on the number of players playing, the rest are put into the cloth bag. Then, each player chooses a set of discs, these are your seal stones(like a wax impression on a documents of ole done with the kings pinky ring), 1 Screen of your color, 1 School of magic card (randomly chosen and depicts a ingredient), and 12 random cubes from the cloth bag and place them behind your screen.

Rules: The rule books if very short, a mere 4 pages long. The rules themselves are very straight forward. Each player on their turn can do one of the following:

1) Create a new potion (if there is a cauldron available) You do this by selecting a cauldron, then by selecting One to five ingredient cubes from your stash and place them on that cauldron. When placing those one to five ingredients there are some restrictions:

A) you can't create a potion that has already been created. (e.g. if one cauldron has only two green cubes, you can't create another that has only two green cubes.)
B) you can't use an ingredient that will be produced from the creation of that potion.(e.g. if the cauldron has a orange and blue ingredient at its side you can't use a blue or orange cube to create that potion.)
C) you can't use more than two of the same color cube in a creation of a potion.(e.g. you can't use three green cubes, but can use two green cubes in potion)

Once you create a potion you select a point value for that potion 1 thru 10, and then receive those number of points, and then receive two the two ingredients' produced that are listed at the side of the cauldron.

2) Copy a potion already made by another player. You CANNOT copy your OWN potions. You select the configuration of cubes from your stash, point out who's potion you are copying, move your point marker that number for the value of the potion, and then out of the ingredients you used to create the potion you select one(your choice) to give to the owner of that potion. The remaining cubes used to create a potion are then discarded and are out of the game.

3) Take 1 ingredient from the "reserve pile" or 2 random ingredients from the "cloth bag".

End Game condition: When there are only two or fewer reserve piles left. When this occurs play continues around until the starting player is reached, then the game ends. (So basically everyone gets an equal number of turns).

Win Condition, besides the points earned, all the cubes remaining behind players screens are worth points. Players adds 1 point to their score for every two cubes (regardless of color), and then returns those cubes (along with any remaining in the cloth bag) to the remaining reserve piles. Those piles are then counted. The ingredient with the least amount of cubes receives points according to a chart in the rule book, and then the next least receives an amount, etc. So for example:

Blue has 3 cubes in the reserve and in a 5 player game receives 12 pts.
Yellow has 6 cubes in the reserve and in a 5 player game received 9 pts.

This continues but unfortunately 5th place doesn't receive any points.(see rules book for exact distribution).

Gameplay: The game is pretty easy to teach and fast and fun, that is until the cauldrons fill up. At this point the game becomes a bit more of a thinking game. At this point there is tension in the air because its a matter of choosing which combination of cubes you have in your stash to copy a potion, obtain points, and then the ingredients produced, which hopefully will set up your next high value potion copy. Of course you want to have your school of magic ingredient (depicted on your school card) be used and removed from the game so you can pick up those extra points, but you can certainly win without those points.

Strategy: About medium. I think the game has two phases really, the first is a fairly light, Strategy, where your just making potions, then the second half when all of those cauldrons are filled you are planning ahead maybe 2 turns on what your going to copy, receive ingredients, and then copy once more.

I think initially the only Strategy is that you want to include your schools ingredient in as many potions as you can create and select a somewhat decent (5-7) point value. Since you can't copy your own potions using the high value numbers for your potions will only net you the initial value once, while if others choose those, and as long as you have cubes to create what they made, you will gain the maximum points. However the opposite side of the coin for that is that they will be collecting cubes from other peoples successful copies, and thus will earn a nice point increase in the end where as 2 cubes for 1 point. I would suggest that you create a potion at every opportunity if you can, not only will this garner you the initial points it may push your use of your school ingredient(try not to make it obvious), as well as garner you cubes to use for other potions or for shear points in the end.

Conclusion: A great game and would recommend "a buy"! It's Fun, makes you think a bit and plan ahead, and is fast enough to play during a lunch period.

I've read a few of the other negative reviews and miss the subtle aspects to truely enjoy this game. Especially the ones that say they feel that multiple plays would become draining and boring. I find that to be absurdly inaccurate, unless each player playes the exact say way each and everytime. (but i guess then you would hate chess each time you played and some one put out the exact same pawn two squares ahead). It may be the group you play with I suppose.

One of the games I played in was a 5 player where the end points were very close, and infact the point leads were at 75 each for 1st and second place. Which according to the rules the tie go to the player with the least amount of cubes in their school. The player who won was helped by other players creating potions with his cubes in them and assigning them high point values. In addition everyone then were copying his potions over and over thus removing even more of his cubes, so he got the 12 pts increase in the end. The 2nd player didn't create one potion the whole game, and just copied everyone else's, so she managed her stash very well and the ingredients she received, and only drew from the reserve pile once toward the end. I believe the point difference was a 5pt difference between 1/2 and 3/4 while 5th was around 7 points out.

Image

carlo — 2007-05-12T14:40:41+00:00

The board, painted by Volkan Baga

Thread: Re: Alchemist

Bobby4th — 2007-04-30T18:24:55+00:00

diamondspider wrote:
Uh... to me, kingmaking means making a move that causes another to win other than the kingmaker and possibly costing me the game after I have played well.
I've always heard kingmaking referred to a deliberate act where a player makes a conscious choice to help/make a specific other player to win.

In this case, it is not a specific other, but it will be someone other than the kingmaker and likely not the better player.

Example:

I put out a potion worth 6 that requires: orange, orange, black, because my secret ingredient is orange. Makes sense.

Now Mr. kingmaker puts out a potion worth 10 requiring only one black: who the heck is going to ever use my potion: answer, nobody.

Yeah, but you'll score the 10 points as often as the other players and the player didn't just make a kingmaking move, they played stupidly. If they didn't learn their lesson at that point, then you probably shouldn't be playing games that require thought with them.

On the other hand, I wouldn't have made the potion you created if orange was my color because I would expect the other players to keep feeding it to me instead of putting it out of the game. This would cause me to have to focus on using the orange up instead of trying to maximize my points. Ideally, you want to have a relative even usage of the ingredients by all players and be able to subtlety influence the usage so one more of your color gets used than the rest.

Maybe you put too much focus on the end-game scoring? While I’ve been successful at getting rid of my color, my goal has always been to be in the top half of the bonus points (first to third in a five-player game, first or second in a four-player game) while scoring as many points as possible without wasting turns collecting ingredients.

Since they cannot themselves make their own potion, they just lost the game almost certainly, but in making this play, they just ruined my potion for the rest of the game with a 100% guarantee: there was absolutely nothing I could do about this.

This is a more extreme case, but even when it is more subtle (e.g. a 5 potion needing orange and black) the same think happens.
In my experience, the result of the potion can be as important to the players as what it takes to make the potion. I spend the time between my turns trying to come up with a chain of turns which will net me the most points using what ingredients I have be

So, if my point was too subtle for you, then I don't know what to say. Any game that requires other players to play well also for me to win is... not one that interests me. Many games have a kingmaking potential, and I don't mind some of it, but in this game, it can happen extremely easily through fairly normal weak play: not good at all in my book.
Your point wasn't subtle, it was the misuse of the word kingmaking which was confusing.

One of the weaknesses of the game is that requires players to be on a fairly equal footing in skill because one player making a boneheaded potion for the other players can throw off the game. In that way it is a lot like an auction game where one player's skewed bidding can throw the game off and might ruin the experience for others.

After my first playing of the game, which we didn't have the issue you describe because the other players were all on the ball and I just followed their lead, I offer advice and guidelines of how to set point values for their potions. It's seemed to work.
Any game that requires other players to play well also for me to win is... not one that interests me.
I bet you hate Puerto Rico. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Thread: Re: Alchemist

diamondspider — 2007-04-30T17:15:43+00:00

Uh... to me, kingmaking means making a move that causes another to win other than the kingmaker and possibly costing me the game after I have played well.

In this case, it is not a specific other, but it will be someone other than the kingmaker and likely not the better player.

Example:

I put out a potion worth 6 that requires: orange, orange, black, because my secret ingredient is orange. Makes sense.

Now Mr. kingmaker puts out a potion worth 10 requiring only one black: who the heck is going to ever use my potion: answer, nobody.

Since they cannot themselves make their own potion, they just lost the game almost certainly, but in making this play, they just ruined my potion for the rest of the game with a 100% guarantee: there was absolutely nothing I could do about this.

This is a more extreme case, but even when it is more subtle (e.g. a 5 potion needing orange and black) the same think happens.

So, if my point was too subtle for you, then I don't know what to say. Any game that requires other players to play well also for me to win is... not one that interests me. Many games have a kingmaking potential, and I don't mind some of it, but in this game, it can happen extremely easily through fairly normal weak play: not good at all in my book.

Thread: Re: Alchemist

Bobby4th — 2007-04-30T16:38:54+00:00

diamondspider wrote:
Great art, cool theme, but I don't like it at all.

After several games, it is just too chaotic who wins. The problem is that you cannot control what potions others put out there which might draw attention from yours, unless you put one out there that is too good of a deal, so then you lose from that since you cannot make your own potions.

This game is just begging everyone to kingmake another player and, in that kingmaking, ruin the appeal of your own potion.

If you get lucky enough to avoid the scylla of kingmaking and the charybdis of getting your potion trumped, you might win: you'll have no idea how or why though (although this will, no doubt, no stop the winner from claiming it was all according to their plan )

That is my take on it.

How the heck is there kingmaking in this game? Are you playing the same game?

The game is all about creating a potion which the other players will want to make while not making it too profitable for them. It's a simple balance that most of the people I've played it with can see as it is being explained, or discover sometime during their first game.

Kingmaking? To quote Inigo Montoya, "I do not think it means what you think it means."

Thread: Re: Alchemist

diamondspider — 2007-04-30T16:15:34+00:00

Great art, cool theme, but I don't like it at all.

After several games, it is just too chaotic who wins. The problem is that you cannot control what potions others put out there which might draw attention from yours, unless you put one out there that is too good of a deal, so then you lose from that since you cannot make your own potions.

This game is just begging everyone to kingmake another player and, in that kingmaking, ruin the appeal of your own potion.

If you get lucky enough to avoid the scylla of kingmaking and the charybdis of getting your potion trumped, you might win: you'll have no idea how or why though (although this will, no doubt, no stop the winner from claiming it was all according to their plan )

That is my take on it.

Thread: Re: Alchemist

Bobby4th — 2007-04-30T16:03:48+00:00

dogberry wrote:
What I'm unsure of is if the unused ingredient scoring is too random, and therefore the endgame is too random. This game is definitely worth playing at least once to see if it grabs you.
Nathan,

I've played it five times now, and every time I was able to manipulate the ingredients used so I scored first or second place (3 & 2 times, IIRC), so it's not completely random, though there is still some chance because you never know exactly what the other players have behind their screen.

Thread: Re: Alchemist

dogberry — 2007-04-30T06:09:37+00:00

I've played two games of this now and I can't decide yet how I feel about it. I think I like it, but I would want at least one more play to be certain. What I do know is that I enjoy parts of it - creating the formulas for the potions and trying to make sure your engine can go down the road - a great deal. I also really love the theme, and it would definitely come out at my halloween party. What I'm unsure of is if the unused ingredient scoring is too random, and therefore the endgame is too random. This game is definitely worth playing at least once to see if it grabs you.

Thread: Re: Alchemist

lastalchemist — 2007-04-30T05:16:23+00:00

Hey Steven,

Welcome to BGG!

Alchemist is rather unique in it's mechanics. I personally don't know of any game off the top of my head that plays similar. Don't necessarily toss out a game just because of someone else's review. I happen to like the game the one time I played it. It has a very unique system of play, and the end is not at all "downhill." When I played it seemed the endgame became more and more intense as the closer to the end we got.

I hope this helps.
Good Luck!
LA

Thread: Alchemist

artfuldodgr42 — 2007-04-30T04:15:00+00:00

I thought this game looked intersting. Is it worth the purchase? I read a couple of reviews that said it was kind of downhill in the end. Is there a similar, better option to this game?

Thread: Re: [Review] Alchemist

diamondspider — 2007-04-22T22:44:13+00:00

I love the theme, the art, and the concept... however, I agree with Tom that the game seems too wacky and impossible to control such that there would or could be much linkage between what I do and success.

I can try to avoid making mistakes, as Tom said, but that doesn't seem to be enough to win. Winning seems to require an odd kind of luck that is not based on randomness, but on a severe lack of information about key issues: specifically, what potions will be created after yours is... there is no way to control this, and how that unfolds will determine the game--seemingly--*much* more than anything that I myself do.

That is my impression so far. I might try it several more times to be sure, but for the moment, I agree that this game seems frustrating and empty of real effective purpose.

Thread: Re: [Review] Alchemist

sumo — 2007-04-22T06:09:42+00:00

Lack of theme? Well, it seemed pretty solidly themed to me.

"Somewhat unique"?

Thread: Re: [Review] Alchemist

ropearoni4 — 2007-04-20T17:15:28+00:00

I've had no problems with tension in this game. I've only played 2player and 3player games, so that might be part of it. With less players you have more potions that you can create which will give you more options of getting cubes. One thing that really helped me in one game was making a simple potions of only 2 cubes that would use my hidden color, but I put on it a 3 points. So with it, I got 1 cube, used up one of my cubes, and only 3 points gained, whereas they might get a few more points on something else, but they might need the cubes that came about from that particular potion. Either way,I feel that this game has been given the thumbs down by so many, that no one is willing to try it who might give it a thumbs up. I feel it does take a few plays to get an idea of a strategy, but also depending on what you get in cubes this could change your strategy. All of the games I have played have been pretty close, within a couple of points between second and first (and yes, sometimes the winner did not win the hidden color).
For a light, quick-paced game, that completes in under an hour (usually within 30-40 minutes), I have enjoyed the uniqueness as well as the gameplay. I find the fun-factor in it that others do not. So, though it might be one of those "medium" games that you fear getting "another one of those games", I found it worth keeping. A filler while waiting for some players or a simple 2-player affair with my wife.

Thread: Re: [Review] Alchemist

verandi — 2007-04-20T16:32:42+00:00

I actually played this game at a convention when it was still a prototype, and I thought it was, clever, theoretically interesting but ultimately hum-drum, so yea I pretty much agree with your assessment here.

A pitfall of game design is that a game concept can have some very clever ideas that will elicit the admiration of first time players as they are explained the rules, but if the game play doesn't manage to have tension and excitement in it then it's all to no end...

Thread: [Review] Alchemist

TomVasel — 2007-04-20T13:37:14+00:00

When I opened the box of Alchemist (Mayfair Games, 2007 – Carlo A. Rossi), I was greeted with the site of 160 wooden cubes, amongst other components. The instructions listed the names of these cubes as ingredient parts (gray bird legs, blue mushrooms, green dragon blood, orange troll eyes, and yellow spiders), and some creepy looking hands are printed on the game board; but I still had a sneaking suspicion that this would be another “mechanics first – theme somewhere else” style. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, especially when I had heard that the game was somewhat unique in style.

After playing it, I can certainly attest to the fact that the game feels like few others that I have played, and it’s unique and rather simple. I simply didn’t like it, however, as I felt that the mechanics sounded incredibly more interesting on paper than they did in practice. The game starts out with a decent number of options; but after a few turns, they seem to stagnate, giving a player fewer choices and occasionally putting someone in the annoying position of helping another player to get a few scraps for themselves. Alchemist has an interesting beginning and middle, while the end tends to go much slower. The game was unanimously panned in my group, as we found it fairly boring.

Each player is an “Adept”, fighting to be the “Supreme Adept” (woohoo!) in the world of Alchemy. Each player receives a player shield, a school ingredient card (matching one of the five colors), five “seal” stones in their color, and twelve random ingredient cubes drawn from a bag. Each player places a marker on a scoring track, and piles of “50” and “100” chips are placed near the board, along with ten potion value tiles (numbered “1” through “10”) and piles of ingredients sorted by color. The number of ingredients in the bag and in “reserve” (next to the board) is determined by the number of players (2 through 5). One player is chosen to go first (the person who most recently used a recipe, etc.)

On a players turn, they may take one of three actions. First, they may either take one ingredient of their choice from the reserve or two random ingredients from the bag, if any remain. Otherwise, they may either create or copy a potion. On the board are ten cauldrons, showing the ten different combinations of the five colors. A player picks an empty one, when creating, and plays one to five ingredients to create a new recipe. They may not use one of the two colors shown on the cauldron, may not use more than two cubes of the same color, and may not create an identical recipe to one already on another cauldron. The player then picks one of the remaining values on the side and places it on the recipe as well as one of their seal discs. They receive the amount of points equal to the value, as well as one ingredient of each of the two colors on the potion. Players may only create a maximum of five potions during the game. A player may copy a potion that another player created (not one that they have created), by playing the correct ingredients - discarding them from the game, with the exception of one - which goes to the potion designer. They also score the points for the potion and take the two ingredients it creates.

After taking an action, play passes to the next player, and so on. This continues until there are two or fewer types of ingredients left in the reserve. The round finishes, and then players reveal their stashes. They receive one point for every two cubes, then place all ingredients from behind their shields into the reserves. The player with the least ingredients in their school remaining scores bonus points (depending on the number of players), then the second least, etc. The player with the most points is declared the winner!

Some comments on the game...

1.) Components: First of all, the box is sharp looking - if a little dark, and combined with the board, brings a gloomy atmosphere to the game (that hand just creeps me out!) The components are fine, with wooden cubes (shocking!) and wooden discs. Everything is easy to maneuver around, and the game includes some "50" and "100" markers for when you pass the scoring track (you will!) As for the atmosphere and theme - well, it's a nice attempt, and I can't say it adds anything to game play.

2.) Rules: The game is only four pages of rules, which are clearly explained with color illustrations. I missed a small reference to a major rule in our first game, because the examples weren’t as clear as they might have been; but later games were easier to understand. Really, the game is quite simple to explain, although new people will have a bit of trouble understanding how the game ties together.

3.) Tactics: “I have no idea what to do” is a comment I often hear from players, and it certainly is warranted. It’s confusing to know exactly what kind of recipe to create, which potion to make, and which value to give it. These kinds of things come from practice, and playing the game more than once. After several playings, I still am not sure what the best strategy is. Is it okay to make an easy potion with a high value? What ingredients should you use? These aren’t awfully hard decisions, but it is possible that a player will feel like they are in deep water – not knowing which way to swing.

4.) Mistakes: The rules note that a player cannot use potion recipes that they create, as creating many potions limits the number of potions a player may score with later. This is a huge deal and probably should be highlighted and bolded. Many new players see an easy way to make points here, but you can really stifle your progress if there aren’t enough other potions to create from other players (this is especially dangerous in a two-player game.) Players can also set up a nice production loop for other players if they aren’t careful – where the potions produce the ingredients necessary to make other lucrative potions, etc. This can be devastating, and a player can only sit there and watch helplessly. Players must be careful not to doom themselves – about two-thirds into the game they’ll notice, but it will be too late.

5.) Game play: At the beginning of the game, players have a neat amount of choices – dive into the bag for random resources (this doesn’t last very long, and I’m surprised at how few cubes are actually in the bag), start new potions or set themselves up for a nice “factory” action. However, there comes a point, when about eight or nine of the potions are created, where the game suddenly reaches a downhill feel. Most games get more exciting as they go along, this one kind of dies down towards the end, something I’m really not fond of.

6.) Secret School: You know, for as much of a deal as this is – it often dictates how people create their potions, etc. – it just doesn’t really pay out in the end. Some points are scored, but even the top amount of points (“12” in a four or five player game) isn’t really that much (especially when second place gets “8” or “9”). I’ve yet to see it affect a game – in fact I’ve yet to see a game in which there was any doubt after the game was over about who had won.

7.) Fun Factor: I’ve written a lot of negative problems I’ve had with the game, and these really overpower the interesting and unique mechanics. I want a game that has at least a little tension about it, and this one seems fairly settled much before the game is over. It’s absolutely no fun when you know you are losing and can’t do anything about it. After multiple plays, a gamer can learn to do the game well; but I don’t think most people will be interested enough to care at that point.

The game is short, around forty-five minutes, so it’s not excruciating to play; and I think there are a few who will find enjoyment from the interesting, abstract mechanics. But the harshness on mistakes by newcomers, the lack of options near the end, and the lack of theme just push me towards not being overly enthusiastic about playing it again. I’m going to have to pass on a recommendation for Alchemist. No gold here!

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

Image

liga — 2007-04-17T14:35:58+00:00

Caterina won her first game at Alchemist!

Image

pyr-shep — 2007-03-28T19:01:50+00:00

5 schools of magic

Image

pyr-shep — 2007-03-28T18:50:23+00:00

Components

Image

pyr-shep — 2007-03-28T18:47:33+00:00

Board

Thread: 5 player game: the quick and dirty low down

Rabbits — 2007-03-27T14:28:03+00:00

Our group tried Alchemist yesterday at the club. I won't go over the rules here as Greg did a good job summarizing them in his session report.

This is an intriguing game at first. It teases you, like an itch that you can't quite get to. Much of the game is decided at the beginning when players are all creating potions. Its hard at first to determine how many ingredients to use in your potions and which one's. Then you also have to decide how many points of value to assign to your concoction. If you make it to easy to make with a high point value other players will replicate it often for large points, while you fall behind. If you make it too difficult to make others won't replicate it and you won't get many ingredients. With 5 players each player has a shot at only two recipes. You're also limited by your initial start up cubes, which are drawn at random from a bag. I started with only 3 different colours of cubes from a selection of 12! That put automatic limits on me as to what kind of initial potions to create. Every player tries to hide his or her secret ingredient but that's not easy to do.

This makes the game difficult to play correctly without a few tries. Because the starting recipes are so important to winning and generating resources, it would take a few plays to master this part. If you start incorrectly, you won't be scoring many points and will fall behind.

Overall, the game went quickly, which was a bonus. It took about 50 minutes for a 5-player game, which included explaining the rules. In the end the leader ran away with about a 15-point lead, however, he would have been hard pressed to repeat or even explain why he won. We got the feeling that with repeated plays this game would fade fast. While I would definitely try it again, I doubt I will be buying it.

Thread: Alchemist -- Session Report

gschloesser — 2007-03-24T20:49:43+00:00

Editor’s Note: My full review of Alchemist will be published in Counter magazine. What follows is an abbreviated version.

I had heard absolutely nothing about this Carlo Rossi game, and was surprised to find it on my doorstep in a parcel from Mayfair Games. The impressive cover artwork and theme intrigued me, and I was interested to see what clever concoction lie within.

The theme certainly is familiar: a group of Adepts competing in a contest of Alchemists, each hoping to concoct and replicate the most valuable potions. I’ve seen this theme in numerous other games, but I guess it is an intriguing one as it continues to resurface.

The large board depicts ten cauldrons, upon which can be placed 1 – 5 ingredients each. Each cauldron also depicts two ingredients that will be produced when the potion is made. In addition to a starting supply of twelve ingredients, each player receives a secret “school ingredient” card, which depicts one unique ingredient. Players will attempt to use this ingredient frequently, and cause their fellow competitors to use the ingredient as well. Bonus points are awarded at the end of the game to the players whose ingredients were used the most in the making and replication of potions.

A player has three options on his turn:

1) Create a new potion. To do this, the player places one-to-five ingredients on an empty cauldron, and then chooses one of the potion value tiles – from 1 – 10 – to place upon it. There are a few rules that must be observed when creating a new potion:
a. The potion must be unique.
b. No ingredient may be used more than twice.
c. An ingredient may not be used if it is also produced by that recipe.

When a player creates a potion, he receives the two ingredients it produces from the general supply and earns points equal to the value of the potion.

2) Replicate an existing potion. The player must choose a potion that he did not create, and present the exact ingredients the potion contains. He must give one of these ingredients to the potion’s creator, with the remaining ingredients being removed from the game. The player earns the potion’s value in points, and takes the two ingredients that the potion produces.

3) Taking Ingredients. A player may either take one ingredient of his choice from the general supply, or two ingredients at random from the bag – as long as they last. Taking ingredients should really only be done sparingly, as the opportunity to earn points that turn is lost.

The game continues in this fashion until there are only two or fewer ingredients remaining in the general supply. Victory points are received for remaining ingredients, and bonus points are earned for players holding the proper school ingredient cards. The player with the greatest accumulation of points wins the contest.

Alchemist is not a difficult game to learn, but I find it difficult to wrap my head around the strategies. Players must try to create potions using their secret ingredient so as to entice others to use those ingredients in replicating the recipe. At the same time, a player must receive a steady supply of ingredients so he can continue to replicate other potions, thereby earning points. Valuing a potion can also be a difficult decision. Which ingredients are needed can be obvious, but obtaining them can be tricky. There seems to be a few strategies to pursue, but I’m suspicious that ultimate victory is really dependent upon simply getting lucky and having players use your secret ingredients.

What dooms the game for me, however, is that it simply lacks spark. I find it rather unexciting and dull. It doesn’t seem to have the breadth or variety that I seek in games. This sentiment was shared by my wife, who initially enjoyed the game, but made the comment that she enjoyed it less and less with each subsequent play. Alchemist is a game that doesn’t appear to have stamina, and is destined to suffer the same fate as the “science” of alchemy.

I struck out to an early lead, and held it for about half of the game. However, much to my horror, my secret ingredient had only been used in two potions, one of which I created. This meant that it was going to be used very infrequently, and I would have no chance at the end game victory points. Sheila was able to consistently replicate potions, and also managed to create three of her own. She held off Bo at the end to claim the victory.

Finals: Sheila 67, Bo 63, Jim 59, Gail 58, Greg 54

Ratings: Bo 6, Greg 5.5, Gail 5.5, Jim 5

Other comments:

Gail: “I like it less and less each time I play.”
Sheila: “It is difficult to spot a strategy. Mainly, you are just hoping others use your secret ingredient.”
Bo: “I wouldn’t buy it.”

Thread: Re: Rules only in German?

Henry Rhombus — 2007-03-18T19:21:07+00:00

jiays wrote:
Is there some rules for this game in another language?

Mayfair Games is publishing Alchemist, so the rules will be in English. The game is schdeduled to ship from Mayfair the week of March 26.

Eric
Editor, BoardgameNews.com

Thread: Re: Rules only in German?

Fledermaushaus — 2007-03-18T18:40:20+00:00

My unofficial translation is now on the files. Carlo Rossi, the game's designer, has kindly read it and says that there are no mistakes in it.

Thread: Re: Rules only in German?

jiays — 2007-03-12T21:42:05+00:00

Thank you for every one

Thread: Re: Rules only in German?

Fledermaushaus — 2007-03-12T18:53:44+00:00

There will probably be an official English translation at some point in the future on the publisher's website. In the meantime I've done an unofficial translation which I will post.

Thread: Rules only in German?

jiays — 2007-03-12T17:01:25+00:00

Is there some rules for this game in another language?