Game: Landlord

Image

DavemanUK — 2008-08-07T20:50:16+00:00

The Lunatic (1st Ed. card)

Image

DavemanUK — 2008-08-07T20:44:12+00:00

Basement (1st Ed. card)

Image

DavemanUK — 2008-08-07T20:39:43+00:00

Loft Conversion (1st Ed. card)

Image

DavemanUK — 2008-08-07T20:36:09+00:00

Bomb (1st Ed. card)

Image

DavemanUK — 2008-08-07T20:32:04+00:00

Murder (1st Ed. card)

Image

DavemanUK — 2008-08-07T20:20:43+00:00

Removal (1st Ed. card)

Image

DavemanUK — 2008-08-07T20:18:37+00:00

The Nobs (1st Ed. card)

Image

DavemanUK — 2008-08-07T20:16:56+00:00

The Single Mother (1st Ed. card)

Image

DavemanUK — 2008-08-07T20:15:04+00:00

The Celebs (1st Ed. card)

Image

DavemanUK — 2008-08-07T20:12:42+00:00

The Students (1st Ed. card)

Thread: Re: Quick rules questions

magicalsushi — 2008-06-12T13:09:21+00:00

Anarchosyn wrote:
Volstag wrote:

3) How is income calculated when you have one (and only one) building that is occupied by a squatter and you're in jail?

I'd say you get nothing since buildings with squatters give nothing at the best of times. Jail shouldn't scale your income up.

(note: when not in jail you get $1 for every empty apartment you own, but in jail that gets scaled to $1 per building. This downward scaling is what should be kept in mind since jail is an economic punishment).

The rules state elsewhere that if none of a player's buildings produce any rent during the 'collect rent' phase, the player receives $1 anyway. It does not state that being in jail has any effect on this, so I would assume that you *would* receive $1 in the situation described above. Note that this doesn't mean that being in jail has led to your income increasing; you would also have received that compensatory $1 if you had not been in jail.

I think it'd be a bit harsh if being in jail meant you couldn't even collect the $1 minimum you're entitled to every turn. As you have to pay to get out of jail if you don't already have a get out of jail free card and your opponents don't do anything that could get them into jail, you could be stuck in there forever if you're banned from receiving the minimum income. This could actually happen in a two player game, if you let your guard down. I suppose it's not like the $1 minimum is going to help you much anyway, but a $0 minimum is even harsher.

Thread: Gamer's variant - balancing Landlord

bleached_lizard — 2008-04-22T12:52:08+00:00

The rule changes below are intended to provide a more balanced gameplay experience whilst playing Landlord. All rulings listed below are intended to supersede those in the original rulebook.

Building Houses
Houses may be built over a number of turns if a player so desires, adding a number of floors each turn up to a maximum of five floors in total. Note that any player may add floors to any incomplete building, even a building belonging to another player. Once a roof is added (by any player) the building is considered complete and no further floors may be added.

Collecting Rent
Players collect rent from their tenants as usual. They also collect $1 per empty apartment in each of their completed buildings only. Empty cellars and roof conversions do not provide any income, nor do empty apartments in incomplete buildings.

Players always receive a minimum of $1, even if they do not have any apartments that provide income.

Buying Cards
Players may buy cards at a cost of $1 per card per building. This includes any incomplete buildings the player may have. So, for example, a player with three completed buildings and one incomplete building would need to pay $4 for each card he buys; buying five cards would cost $20 in total.

A player must decide how many cards he is going to buy and pay the relevant amount before drawing any cards from the deck. He may not, for example, buy some cards to see what he gets before deciding to buy additional cards.

Cards always cost a minimum of $1, even if a player has no buildings.

Players have a hand limit of seven cards. Once a player has bought as many cards as he desires, any in excess of this limit must be discarded. The player chooses which cards to discard.

Jail
As in the original rules, players in jail may only collect $1 per building each turn (except for buildings containing Squatters). However, the cost to get out of jail is increased to $5 per building (including incomplete buildings).

Bomb
The Bomb card contains errata. Replace “shuffle the cards and place them at the bottom of the draw deck” with “shuffle the cards into the draw deck”.

Optional Rule
Certain cards (i.e. Bomb, Murder, Demolition) instruct players to return cards to the draw deck. For a slightly faster game, no cards may be returned to the draw deck. If a player is instructed to do so, discard the cards instead.

Thread: Building Question

punkzter — 2008-03-11T13:27:59+00:00

Can an apartment complex have more than 5 cards in it? The rules say that you can create a building by playing 1 to 5 cards and that the building must be completed that turn. BUT, if you have a building with five cards, but no basement, can you later add a 6th card to that building by adding a basement?

Thread: Re: Quick rules questions

DoomDahDoomDoom — 2008-01-22T18:45:31+00:00

orangepeelbeef wrote:

So for example, the Manager who has a 1, but fills up 2 slots, is the only building he will live in a single floor apartment with a cellar or a roof dormer?

Exactly.

orangepeelbeef wrote:

Are the pensioners the only exception since they have a 1 also but the card states they must live only on the first floor or cellar? Or are the rules wrong and that is the maximum height they are willing to live in? If so, "portrait" cards do you count the number where the top of their card is or the bottom?

All you have to remember is that Cellars and Dormers (or renovated roofs for that matter) do not count toward the number of floors in the building. Only "floors" (the backs of the cards) are counted as floors. Makes sense when you think of it that way, eh?

Thread: Re: Playing cards out of turn (and other questions)..

DoomDahDoomDoom — 2008-01-22T18:31:01+00:00

We play that the police can be played right away to defend against the Squatters. You don't have to wait until your turn.

1) Yes, anytime *anybody* plays a move card.

1a) they pay immediately
1b) the original owner of the mover gets the money

2) Nobody is above suspicion... so yes, the owner of the bombed building can go to jail.

Thread: Re: Quick rules questions

orangepeelbeef — 2008-01-20T07:22:18+00:00

Here's what I don't understand... It says that the number in the lower left represents the maximum number of floors a tenant is willing to live in.

So for example, the Manager who has a 1, but fills up 2 slots, is the only building he will live in a single floor apartment with a cellar or a roof dormer?

Are the pensioners the only exception since they have a 1 also but the card states they must live only on the first floor or cellar? Or are the rules wrong and that is the maximum height they are willing to live in? If so, "portrait" cards do you count the number where the top of their card is or the bottom?

Thread: Re: Taught 2 gamers this fun, light card game

Pallet Ranger — 2007-04-05T14:57:25+00:00

This is one of my favourite 'light/filler' games. I've not had a bad experience with this...

Thread: Taught 2 gamers this fun, light card game

Bolga — 2007-04-05T00:59:45+00:00

It was 10pm and one of us (we were 3: Matt, Stephen and myself) had to leave in one hour. So I pulled out this card game and decided to teach them how to play.

In this game, you use cards to built appartment buildings, place tenants in them, play action cards to create a bit of chaos, and then collect rent. The idea that attracted me to the game was the one about being able to use both sides of every card. Indeed, all the cards have on one side a picture of an appartment floor. You just need a card with a picture of a roof and you have yourself a building. Place tenants in it and you have an income. The player with the highest total income at the end of the game wins.

So off it went with a 3-player game, and Matt took an early lead by attracting the highpaying general and a pensioner in his buildings. I managed to fill my 3 buildings with good tenants (families, musicians, a researcher) but Stephen to my left kept buying action cards, and I unexplicably became his target of evictions and bombs. He even escaped the police investigation and the subsequent jail. Matt couldn't provide an alibi so he ended up in the hole. While there, he withheld the rent on a high-paying tenant of mine, so here I was again losing income, while Matt kept cashing in with his 6(!) buildings, and Stephen being short on tenants.

Matt had to leave by then so we didn't finish the game, but here's what I imagined happened while I was drifting to sleep not long after:

I decided to get Stephen back for his bombing by detonating one of his buildings, even sending him in jail in the process cause I had an alibi, but leaving Matt wide open to increase his lead. No amount of evil we could muster on Matt decreased his lead and he ended up racing alone to the finish line.

At least my honour as a reputable landlord was preserved.

Thread: Re: Quick rules questions

Anarchosyn — 2007-02-06T17:53:48+00:00

Volstag wrote:
Quick questions:

1) Can you build any number of buildings on your turn (provided they're completed, of course)?

Yes.

2) Can you take actions, build buildings, and place tenants in any order you like during your turn? Or are you limited to the following specific sequence: build/renovate, place tenants, take actions?

The turn order is merely Examine - Play - Collect Rent - Buy Cards. During Play you can build, add tenants and take actions in any order with no cap on how many cards you place.

3) How is income calculated when you have one (and only one) building that is occupied by a squatter and you're in jail?

I'd say you get nothing since buildings with squatters give nothing at the best of times. Jail shouldn't scale your income up.

(note: when not in jail you get $1 for every empty apartment you own, but in jail that gets scaled to $1 per building. This downward scaling is what should be kept in mind since jail is an economic punishment).

Nanich wrote:
I have the same questions after playing my first game. The rules were not all that clear. I was also curious about adding tenants. Can you only add one tenant per turn?

- n

You can add as many as you like. The rules do not stipulate a limitation and I'm fairly sure it's not an oversight.

"The player may play as many or as few cards as he chooses...
By playing cards a player may:

[list]
[*]Build or Renovate a building
[*]Place a tenant in an apartment
[*]Take an action.[/list]"

That's a quick copy from the rules (damn the admins for playing with conventional bbcode).

Thread: Playing cards out of turn (and other questions)..

Anarchosyn — 2007-02-06T00:47:17+00:00

Can defensive cards be played at any time or only during your turn? For example, if a mate of mine plays squatters on me do I need to wait for my turn to evict them? If so, then there is no real defense to their "making your most profitable tenet move" ability, as this is resolved at the start of your turn. If not, then they loose some power.

Other issues we ran into on our first (2 player) game:

1) When a mover is played, does he give $2 to the owner when *anybody* plays a move card or only the owner?

1a) Is this money given immediately or at the end of the owners turn (per usual rent rules)?

1b) if a move card is played to move the mover then who gets the money? This hinges on the outcome of 1a.

2) When using bomb cards, is the victim exempt from needing an alibi? In our game we decided they weren't, but that could present some nasty situations for the victim if so. 3 times in our game the victim (me) was sent to jail for calling the cops on the real culprit.

That's all I can remember for now..

Thanks in advance.

Thread: Re: Quick rules questions

Nanich — 2007-01-08T19:44:20+00:00

I have the same questions after playing my first game. The rules were not all that clear. I was also curious about adding tenants. Can you only add one tenant per turn?

- n

Thread: Landlord! - A Light Review

Neil Thomson — 2007-01-02T03:33:23+00:00

All of my reviews aim to offer a brief overview that allows people to get a good feel for what the game may offer them. I feel that other reviews can be sought if detailed game mechanics is what you are after.

Ever fancied taking on the role of Landlord and having the power to invite and evict tennants at will? Well now you can in this latest offering from Rio Grande. Each player starts with 5 cards and 1 roof card. On a given turn each player can construct new buildings and place tennants into the various floors of each building. At the end of the turn each tennant will pay a certain amount of rent (depicted on their card) and the player can choose to take this income as revenue (adding it to their score) or forego the points and draw a card for each dollarpoint instead.

This is a novel feature as Landlord! does not allow the players to draw cards at any time during the game to expand their hand unless they forego their rent (which earn points needed for victory) to earn more cards. So the players are constantly having to evaulaute how much of their dollar advantage they can afford to give up to acquire more cards, which provide them with more options. Another novel feature is that every card in the game has two sides that can be used. One side will always depict a floor of a building. The other side will depict tennents, events or rooves. Whenever a player places a card on the table in front of them they must decide which of these two options will be chosen and which will be lost.

The players can build their buildings and make them as tall or short as they like. However each tennant is quite picky about where they wish to live and their card will show a symbol and value which tells the players how tall the building needs to be for them to live their, at which floor level they will reside and if they require 1 or 2 floors. If all of these conditions can be met by a building then a player can place a tennant in that building on their turn and earn rent at the end of the turn. Some tennants will refuse to live in a building with certain types of other tennants. Some tennants want a building to themselves and others will earn additional income if they can be in a building with the same type of tennants as themselves – students for example.

The game gets even more interesting with the inclusion of Squatters and Freaks which are an undesireable bunch as they pay no rent or scare other high rent payers away. The beauty here is that players can plant squatters and freaks into their opponents buildings if there is space for them – nasty! The event cards allow players to try and kill tennants, evict unwanted ones and blow up buildings. But be careful as your opponent may have a police card which means the 'fuzz' were tipped off and it’s jail for you. Jail is not a good place as you can only collect minimal rent. If you try to break the law and you have a Family as one of your tennants – then they will dob you in as well. However don’t despair as an alibi card will get you off the hook easily enough.

The Final Word

Landlord! is a surprisingly enjoyable and addictive game. The gameplay is fast paced and allows players to experience highs and lows right until the end. The only gripe is that the cards are black & white and not colour – but this doesn’t affect the play. At the asking price Landlord! is a cheap, quick and fun experience.

Thread: Quick rules questions

Volstag — 2006-11-24T23:57:14+00:00

Quick questions:

1) Can you build any number of buildings on your turn (provided they're completed, of course)?

2) Can you take actions, build buildings, and place tenants in any order you like during your turn? Or are you limited to the following specific sequence: build/renovate, place tenants, take actions?

3) How is income calculated when you have one (and only one) building that is occupied by a squatter and you're in jail?

Thanks in advance.

-V

Thread: Session Report

Zirak — 2006-08-15T00:01:44+00:00

Players – Michelle & Jason

Every now and then, when the moon is in the right position, the stars are aligned in just the right order, the temperature is at it’s optimum & my wife’s boredom is at just the right level, I can coerce her to play a game with me for the sole purpose of me test running a new game so I can get a feel of just how a game plays, how the components work together & to make sure I’ve understood the rules correctly – as well as just being able to say that I have finally been able to break a certain game out of its box for use.

Sometimes these games interest my wife so much that they become her new favourite game and some just fall flat on there face, never to be shown the light of day if she decides to join the gaming table. While we were on holiday I was able to get Michelle to play Landlord with me and it falls in-between these two scenarios, thankfully more on the positive side where she liked it and will probably play it again.

We started out our game with me explaining how to build apartments and play any cards in hand, what the restrictions were for tenant placement, how they accumulated rent for you and then how you could spend that hard-earned cash to buy more cards. I also went over the other cards as we went along and explained the jail. After a brief misinterpretation of the tenant restrictions we quickly restarted and play the game through.

I liked the different mechanisms with some of cards being discarded back underneath the draw pile, extending the life of the pile, as it first looked as though the pile would be used quite quickly as it was the same pile you use to build with, and the demolition card which destroys a players building, but then helps them by putting those building cards not on the discard or draw piles, but back into the players hand.

I generally play games in a friendly manner when it is the first time we play a game together, as I don’t want to put her of a game by decimating her – never a good strategy I find, so I did hold back on a few of the destructive cards for the first half of the game. This was until she stole my tenants, bombed my building, put in squatters & murdered a tenant of mine – not in that particular order but all in the same turn!

We found that in a two player game the jail didn’t come into effect much as we had so many of the counter cards.

Overall I narrowly won the game by ten points, and we both enjoyed the game. I do think the game will work a lot better with 3 or 4 players and I would be very interested to see how chaotic it would get with the full 5 or 6 players.

Thread: Moving on up!

greglios — 2005-10-12T16:57:56+00:00

The players:

Greg
Tracy
Jen
Phil

After a great game of Bang! we moved on to another quick card game, Landlord. We've all played it two or three times before so only a very quick recap of the rules was needed.

Tracy started but it became clear early on that there weren't many tenants around for most people. I got myself a Researcher in early to take a slight lead but he was viciously murdered by Phil after only one turn.

Despite this I moved further ahead getting a Pensioner into a single storey building and The Mover into a cellar conversion. Very lucky to get The Mover so early in the game. I also seemed to be getting a few Dormer Rooves which helped to make space for The Manager and help build my lead further.

Everyone else still seemed to be struggling for tenants and indeed both Tracy and Phil made bad placement of their Celebrity tenants by placing them in two storey buildings with no other possible tenants.

As the game progressed a few Move cards appeared, meaning the two Managers that were in the game were getting around a lot but also that I was getting money for my Mover. I also seemed to be getting plenty of Move cards myself to always move the good tenants back to my buildings.

Late in the game Phil tried to Bomb my building with the Pensioner and Mover but I'd acquired The Lunatic card and so turned it back onto one of his buildings instead. Another stroke of luck on my part. A late Move to take back a Manager from Tracy saw her play the Broker card to good effect but at the end when we counted up it wasn't enough.

Final scores:
Greg 79
Tracy 64
Phil 56
Jen 52

Not a bad game but definitely some luck on my part in getting (and keeping) The Mover and having so many Dormer Rooves, Move cards and The Lunatic at the right time.

Thread: Chaotic fun screwing your neighbour

eratos — 2005-10-03T19:08:56+00:00

Every boardgaming session needs a light game that's a bit of a laugh, capable of producing those funny moments that you talk about for the rest of the week - great for starting off the session whilst you're waiting for a couple more players, or finishing off the session perhaps with a few beers. Landlord is just one of those games. If you can keep up the pace of play, this game is great fun.

Each player is dealt a starting hand of 5 random cards ****and 1 roof card**** (This is missed by a lot of people on their first read through of the rules!) - but each card has a dual purpose. Every card can merely be used to create an apartment, and you'll need to build apartments to play tenant cards - and tenants means rent.

You choose at the end of your turn whether to take your rent in the form of money or cards - money is used for very few things other than keeping score for the end of the game, so it seems that you're always better off drawing cards. Indeed, as the game ends when the draw pile is exhausted (once for 2-4 players, twice for 5-6 players) this keeps the pace of the game nice and fast, vital for enjoying the game.

As in real life, your tenants can be a bit fussy about where they live - but the fussier they are the more rent they'll pay. Nobody will live in an apartment block higher than 5 stories, but those types of buildings will only really accommodate students and squatters. Roof and cellar conversions can add efective living space to your building without affecting the number of stories in your building.

Buildings are only considered complete once you have placed a roof on them - after the roof is placed you may only renovate the roof and cellar - not add any additional floors any other way. Empty apartments earn you $1 per turn, so there's always plenty of money to be earnt even if you don't draw those high valued tenant cards.

Finally, there are actions that can be taken - and this is where the screw your neighbour side of the game comes out. You can demolish or bomb apartments, or murder tenants, but watch out for the police! If your intended victim calls the police on you and you have no alibi, you'll end up in jail, where you earn vastly less rent each turn unless you pay the $5 release fee.

In reality I think you always pay the $5 fee, especially as you start the game with $5 and it's rare indeed to end up in jail many times in the game - but this is one of the few things money can be spent on as I mentioned above.

An an optional rule, you can play with special rules for each of the tenants, and whilst it may be somewhat daunting I certianly think it is worth it (on the other hand, I play Magic: The Gathering and have no problem with crazy card interactions!)

This means that, for instance, whilst celebrities don't pay you much rent, everyone in the same apartment block as them will pay double rent for the privelege. Musicians moving into an apartment block drive everyone away with their endless practising, but later tenants will decide they like the music after all and will stay. Students will pay cumulatively more rent the more of them you have living in the same apartment block - I think they like playing CounterStrike on their LAN

These interactions are a main source for some of the humour in the game - Your opponent may have just played the celebrities to increase his rent, so you move the squatters in and force the celebrities to leave in disgust. If your apartment happens to be the only empty one on the board, guess where they'll move. Of course, your opponent will probably attempt to murder the celebrities in response, so you call the police on them, do they have an alibi or will they end up in jail?

Overall, this is a light hearted screw your neighbour game that is good for a few laughs if you keep the pace of play up - which familiarity with the cards definitely helps with.

Thread: Re:Basic Strategy

JeffGoldsmith — 2005-01-11T22:13:51+00:00

magicmarcus (#30261),

Pretty much the main strategy is until the last turn or two, put all your rent money into cards. Pretty much any card will return at least $2. This strategy is so obvious and so effective that the game plays much better with a limit of 5 cards drawn per turn. --Jeff

Thread: Session Report

daw65 — 2004-08-09T04:25:03+00:00

Helen had arrived, but we still expected Rich, so we looked for another short game. Jim spied my copy of Landlord and remembered playing and enjoying it way back when, so we brought it out again.

The game started very differently for the different players. Jim and Sterling started well, with two buildings and many tenants after their first two turns. Helen built buildings, but could only attract one or two tenants. Dave, on the other hand, attracted no tenants at all on his first few turns. So he resorted to offensive plays, putting squatters in one of Sterling's buildings. Sterling, however, had the Police roust the squatters, so no damage was done.

Jim was playing an interesting strategy of using practically his entire earnings to buy new cards, rather than socking them away as score. This allowed him to play offensively, bombing one of Sterling's buildings. His next turn, Jim did it again, but this time Sterling called the Police. Alas, Jim had connections in court, so Sterling was the one who ended up in jail! On Sterling's next turn, he bombed one of Jim's buildings. Again the police was called, but Sterling was in jail, so he had a built-in alibi. Helen and Dave both had alibis as well, and so Jim ended up in jail.

At this point, Dave and Helen started getting tenants, but it would prove to be too little, too late. Jim bought his way out of jail on his next turn, and then used his huge handful of cards to build a number of buildings and set out a bunch of tenants, earning him 32 points on that turn. He also bought the last card that turn, starting the final round. Sterling, Helen, and Dave all did what they could to slow down Jim, but as it turned out none of the three earned enough to pass Jim's score, and Jim still had his final turn coming. That turn gave him an additional 17 points, and when he ended his turn, and the game, he finished with a whopping 57 points and a convincing win, 23 points ahead of his closest competitor.

Thread: Session Report

GC Gamer — 2004-06-13T17:35:40+00:00

It was late by now and we decided to plump for another old familiar game.

We had two drop outs and so were down to just the 5 of us.

Normally I really enjoy this game and there is loads of scheming and sabotage but this time it just didn't come together.

Really, I shouldn't complain as I got loads of roofs and great tenants and in fact wlaked away with the game in the end. However, for some reason this time it felt like a set of solitaire games going on with almost no interaction. It was only really in the last round as Chrles realised he was losing and this was his last go and so started warring with everyone. But it was too late by then and it was all over.

Odd how it played out this way as we have had 5 plenty of times before and it has always been good fun. But this time it just didn't work. Maybe it was just the way the cards fell. I think we might have all been to fortunate and able to build what we wanted. In retrospect in the past the sabotage has generally been started by someone who is struggling and so gets spiteful then revenge kicks in and it becomes all out war. So what we need for this to work is poverty and ensuing chaos. We can only hope for this next time

Thread: Session Report

jlowe — 2004-06-06T17:29:41+00:00

After King's Breakfast, Scott, Chris, and I decided to play Landlord. Chris has had this game for some time (it was still in the shrink), and he hasn't had a chance to play it. We decided now would be as good of a time as any, so we broke open the packaging and read through the rules. Chris thought he had the newer version with the cleaned up artwork, but we discovered he had the older version with the more offensive cards. I can see how these cards could turn people off to playing the game, but they didn't pose an obstacle for the three of us.

Scott had played this once before a long time back at Ernie's place. He mentioned that the game seemed to have a "rich get richer" problem to it, and I can see how that happens. You only get cards when you pay for them, and you get more money with more renters. The more renters you have, the more cards you can buy. It's very important to not let a clear leader get too far ahead, and it's also very important to establish an income base early to get those cards rolling in.

Scott jumped out to an early lead with a pensioner and a manager. I murdered his manager and moved his pensioner to one of my places. Cops were remarkably absent in this game, as murders and bombings were taking place with hardly any consequence. My early pensioner was a sign of things to come. I built more small buildings and housed more pensioners. At one point, I had the "old folks" strip, with three pensioners in three one-story buildings. Those pensioners sure are reliable renters.

The end game was a very tight race. I had the lead, but this caused Scott and Chris to whack me with action cards. Scott played a rent witheld card on one of my pensioners, and Chris moved out another pensioner. My only means of retaliation was key, as I played a broker card when my pensioner was stolen by Chris. That transfer of income helped secure my win.

Final Scores: Jason 89, Scott 85, Chris 84

A decent card game for what it is. Lots of player bashing in this one, which can be a fun thing every now and then. It's fun to make space in someone else's roof just to put a squatter there.

Thread: Basic Strategy

magicmarcus — 2004-03-11T20:59:02+00:00

I played Landlord for the first time today, and thought that it was an interesting, if chaotic, example of the "Whack Your Buddy" or "Take That" school of gaming. The first thing that I suggest is to use Poker chips as cash in the game, as you will occasionally need to pay for certain cards or actions. Using poker chips makes it easy to see who is winning at a glance. During the rent collection phase of your turn, calculate the rent due, draw the desired number of cards, then take the balance in chips.

If you can get certain combinations of cards, you can generate some serious rent. All 5 students in one 5 story building, or a three story plus roof dormer and basement, will net you $20 in rent per turn. The scientist in the same building as the celebrities will net $12 per turn (to do this you have to add a basement or roof dormer).

During my game, I was able to construct a number of buildings, and had rent in the $30 + per turn range. I concentrated on drawing mostly cards, and indeed was able to run the deck out. This guaranteed that I would get the last play, and that I would be able to win the game.

Cards are a valuable resource in Landlord. There is no way to lose cards in hand, while cards that you have built and tennants that you have housed are vulnerable. If you maximize your hand size, you have a better chance of holding key defence cards.

While playing with 5 or six players seems like it would be very chaotic, it would also be a lot of fun. If you concentrate on building up the cards in your hand, you can probably set yourself up for a very strong late game play.

Landlord is not a deep game, but it is fun.

Thread: Re:Session Report

Jimzik — 2004-02-22T03:23:05+00:00

Tyler (#18585),
You start with a roof so you can always make a 5 story house and collect $5 rent. If someone blows it up you're in trouble though.

Thread: Don't forget the roof!

Jimzik — 2004-02-14T07:11:10+00:00

I pulled this game off the shelf to play with some new people in the club that enjoy various card games. We set up and started playing not realizing you STARTED with 1 roof. Start with $5/5 cards/1 roof. The trick is to use this to your best advantage. Place as many cards as you can to construct your initial building but don't waste any other roofs you might have, save them for a later build. You can only buy as many cards equal to the rent you collected so collect as much rent as possible. I don't hold cards in the beginning of the game so as to have a superior development in the end stage. Try to always use low paying renters for the building side and keep action cards in your hand, especially for defense. Adding a dormer or a basement to an opponent then moving in squaters is an especially nasty move. I usually make my big push towards the end of the game when, hopefully, my opponents have used up all their "screw-u" cards.

Thread: Session Report

Tyler — 2003-08-25T16:56:16+00:00

This Sunday, due to overwhelming demand, I brought Landlord.

I am not crazy about the game but Steve and Chris really like this one so I went along with it. In my opinion, it is a little long for what it is. Black humor and screw your neighbor tactics can only take you so far.

I clarified the rules, in particular the ones concerning squatters. We hadn't been playing it right so we corrected it. Also we became re-introduced to a house rule we use to deal with the annoying fact that if you have no renters to start, you can't buy cards. Money spent on cards can never
exceed what you collect in rent. To deal with this, we simply insitute a one card buy for those unfortunate to be in this situation. I, of course, was the only one to find themselves in this problem.

Mary on the other hand simply just did not have enough renters early on. She was lucky enough to get the mover out so she was able to get a piece of the action on the apartment hopping that goes in this game.

Steve channeling his inner slumlord was able to build up a reasonable set of apartments to keep the money rolling on in consistently.

Chris, like Mary was abit slow on the build side of things, so he made a perfect target for me who was quietly amassing after a slow start. I swiped a pensioner of his and the feud was on.

This little feud led to a great bit that really exemplifies the mood that is Landlord. After swiping his pensioner back, I got one of my own. In a homicidal mood, he attempted to murder the pensioner. I countered with a lunatic which in turn, lead to the death of his own pensioner instead. After which he played his second murder card and wacked mine. At which point, he slid some squatters into my empty building. To counter, I moved the squatters into his empty building. Ah, the cruel irony.

Another highlight was when Steve was able to fill a five story entirely with students that he had swiped. This lead to repraisal. But everything in Landlord does.

I was able to pull out second at the very last minute by witholding rent from one Mary's renters. It was petty but it worked.

Scores:

Mary - 59
Steve - 88
Chris - 42
George - 61

Thread: Session Report

gschloesser — 2003-01-22T13:58:50+00:00

Time for one more game before closing the Bungalow. I had given Jim a copy of Landlord for Christmas, so he suggested that we play it so he could learn the mechanics. We were joined by Joey, Keith, Mark and Melissa.

It has been awhile since this Friedemann Freise game has made an appearance, so I took the time to review the rules and card powers with everyone. Melissa and I suffered from the get-go with a lack of tenants in our hand and did not possess the cards to lure other tenants to our apartments. Joey spent some time in jail and was later the victim of some nasty actions performed by Keith.

Mark enjoyed the benefit of two wealthy pensioners in his apartments for two full turns before they were lured away. Still, it was enough to give him the victory.

Finals: Mark 36, Jim 30, Melissa 26, Keith 23, Greg 22, Joey 16

Ratings: Jim 6.5, Joey 6, Greg 6

Although I enjoy Landlord, I feel the game is better when played with no more than 4 or 5 players. With six players, the cards expire too quickly and there isn’t enough time to enjoy the true flavor of the game.

Thread: Session Report

gschloesser — 2001-01-01T06:00:00+00:00

Thanks to Jay Tummelson and Rio Grande Games, I finally was able to obtain a copy of this wacky apartment building game by Friedmann Friese. The game is a hoot and lots of fun ...yet still has quite a bit of planning involved. The would-be Landlords were Jerry Maus, Jay Ouzts, Eric Syrdal and I.

This game surprised me in that most of my opponents opted for the strategy of banking lots of money each turn and opting only to select four or five cards. I went for my usual strategy of trying to get maximum cards during the first few turns while only banking a few dollars. Unfortunately, the strategy failed as I actually had a round or two wherein I did not draw any tenants!

The game saw its usual amount of chaos ... bombings, lots of murders (more than I've ever seen), evictions, movings, etc. Poor Jerry was even blamed twice for murders he did not commit, but had no alibi to defend himself! I, at one point, even resorted to murdering the homeless in order to
remove them from my building!

In the end, Jay won an impressive victory (aided by being able to play last ... more on this point under a separate post):

Jay 52, Eric 42, Jerry 38, Greg 37

Ratings: Eric 8, Greg 7, Jay 7, Jerry 6

Thread: Session Report

gschloesser — 2001-01-01T06:00:00+00:00

Lots of last minute cancellations, but we still had 8, so we split into two tables.

It's been awhile since this one hit the table. Previously, we played with Wucherer, the German language version, which really slowed the game down as players had to constantly translate the many cards. The english language version really speeds up the game and makes it a much more enjoyable experience.

The slum lords were Jerry Maus, Darren Arnold, Ashton Arnold, Eric Alleman, Lenny Leo and I. As should be expected with this group, the carnage and nastiness began immediately.

Eric began the game and I promptly moved his Researcher tenant into one of my complexes. Unfortunately, Darren immediately murdered the poor scientist, claiming he was appalled at what he was about to do to that poor mouse (you gotta see the picture!). My misfortune continued as Eric proceeded to destroy my only building with a bomb. The wily Eric had an alibi whereas I, who followed him in turn order, did not. Thus, I was sent to jail even though I was the victim!

This cycle of presenting alibis in response to crimes continued throughout the game. Several fell victim to over-ambitious police. At one point, Jerry committed a murder, but gleefully presented an alibi. He was shocked, however, as each and every player promptly produced an alibi, meaning the police again returned to Jerry and accused him of the crime. Failing to produce another alibi, Jerry as again sent to jail, a very familiar place for him during this game.

Ashton was forced to continuously fight his way out of a hole as he was constantly hit by the greedy Broker every time he moved someone. Plus, Eric had the Mover in his apartment, so was able to extort $2 for every move made. Eventually, Eric's Mover was moved to other digs.

Ashton also suffered a cruel twist of fate as his attempted bombing of Darren's apartment complex was reversed by the raving Lunatic, causing one of Ashton's buildings to explode instead. This was not Ashton's game!

The game came down to my last turn. I had everything planned to makea leap past Eric for the victory. However, on my last attempt to move a Researcher into one of my apartments, Ashton threw the nasty Broker card, forcing me to pay him $4. This was the death blow and cost me a victory.

Note: We do play with the option that (a) anyone can summon the Police, and (b) anyone can play the Broker card in response to a Move. These make for a much wilder game.

The finals: Eric 28, Greg 27, Lenny 22, Darren 17, Jerry 16, Ashton 6

The ratings: Ashton 8, Lenny 7, Eric 7, Darren 7, Greg 7, Jerry 5

Thread: Session Report

gschloesser — 2001-01-01T06:00:00+00:00

With the hour growing late, Walter Nunes, John Moore, Eric Alleman, Willard Fann and I had time for one more game. Landlord, the game of apartment building, tenant stealing and carnage, was chosen.

Eric won last week's game of this, but this week suffered a fate similar to Jerry's in that match. On the 3rd round of the game, Eric was convicted of a crime after Walter, who had murdered one of John's tenants, had an alibi, so the police moved on to Eric, who unfortunately had none. Eric spent the next three turns languishing in jail, unable to buy his way out. This really soured him on the game and is one problem I see with it. There simply isn't enough ways to get out of jail if you are forced into it early in the game.

Eric made good use of his time in jail, however, murdering two tenants. Alas, the police were not summoned, so Eric remained in his dark, dank cell.

Financially, the rest of us were all in competition for the win. I entered the final round ahead, but had made a blunder by banking $12 of my $17 on the previous round when I should have purchased an arsenal of cards in anticipation of the final round. This ultimately cost me the game as John had followed this tactic and entered the final round with 10 cards. Thus, my apartment houses were ravaged by my opponents and I did not have the cards to repopulate. This cost me a victory.

Finals: John 43, Greg 39, Willard 34, Walter 31, Eric 6

Ratings: Walter 7, Greg 7, Eric 6, Willard 6, John 6

Thread: Session Report

gschloesser — 2001-01-01T06:00:00+00:00

With a bit more time before the conclusion of the evening, we again assumed the roles of slum lords in another game of Landlord. This time, we did remember to give everyone the $5 starting money! We also used the variant rules wherein anyone could play the Broker or Police cards, which greatly adds to the 'carnage' of the game.

Eric Alleman jumped to an early lead by tossing out the Broker card when I attempted to move the Researcher from a building. This gave him an extra $5 and an early lead. Darren and Ashton floundered, each assaulting the other with bombs and moving vans. The luck of the draw also abandoned Ashton and he was never able to secure enough tenants to rebuild his apartments.

Eric and Willerd were vying for first place, while I was remaining within striking distance. Alas, Eric managed to draw the final card during the second round, insuring that he would get to play last in the game. He used this to optimum ability and managed to pull dead even with Willerd for the tie.

Finals: Willerd 60, Eric 60, Greg 40, Darren 28, Ashton 13

Ratings: All 7's.

Thread: Session Report

gschloesser — 2001-01-01T06:00:00+00:00

John departed and was replaced by the late-arriving Eric Alleman for a game of Landlord (known in Germany as Wucherer). Players construct apartments and try to attract quality tenants to inhabit them. However, if you can't populate buildings with tenants from your hand of cards, you are free to use all sorts of nasty tricks to lure them away from your opponents. And if all else fails, you can simply murder opponent's tenants or bomb their building .. just don't get caught by the police or you can rot in jail.

This is a wonderfully fun, chaotic game which I always enjoy playing. Sure, it's not perfect, but has the same feel to it as 'Groo', but without the drawbacks.

Darren took a few notes, including the fact that Eric scored a whopping 21 points on one turn in the final stages of the game to capture the victory:

Eric 42, Ashton 39, Walter 35, Darren 13

Thread: Session Report

dougadamsau — 2001-01-01T06:00:00+00:00

Present: Doug, Janet, Roger, Bernie, Alan, David C.

Doug Adams writes:

As this game was new I took everyone through two three player games of this nifty title, originally published in Germany as Wucherer. The object is to amass a fortune in rent from the tenants in your buildings, while trying to stop the other players doing the same. Cards have two functions in this game, you either play the front of the card, which may be a tenant, action or building card, or you play the reverse of the card, whcih are all appartments. You build buildings by laying the cards reverse side up (thus taking the front of the card out of play, temporarily perhaps) and then move tenants in.

Tenants in buildings generate rent, and you need rent to purchase more cards off the deck (nice, this) as well as win the game. In additon, there are is a wonderful mix of action cards, combined with the fact you can quite often play cards into other players buildings, that keeps the interaction between players high and the game in a high state of flux. Nothing stays constant for very long here.

This is a cut way above the usual "hah, take that!" type of game. There are some real, and subtle, decisions to make to maximise your income as you try to win the game. I like this game a lot.

In our first game, Bernie, Janet and myself played. I missed the vital setup rule where everyone should receive a roof card, in addition to the five cards. Of course, Janet didn't get a roof in her initial deal or in her next purchase of five cards. We played on, not realising our error, and Janet had a miserable time, spending most of the game in Jail. I took the early lead, but once Bernie caught onto the game play, he steamed past me with about two turns to go and took the game. One of my buildings was demolished on me near the end of the game, giving me back four Move cards. I used these to move Bernie's four students into my building in a vain attempt to capture the lead back. Drat!

Scores:
Bernie: $128
Doug: $90
Janet: $32

The game wasn't satisfying due to Janet's predicament. Bernie seized the rules at the end of the game and I made a joking reference to the fact that we were probably meant to get a roof each at the start. Bernie said "yes, here it is!". Oops.

Later in the evening I took Roger and Alan through the game. This was a much more cut and thrust affair, with action cards flying around the table, and it was great! Alan was sensing a problem about how to make money if he's not picking up tenant cards, but then had a superb turn where he build a swag of empty appartments then used two or three eviction cards to ensure they were filled for him, mainly at the expense of Roger. By the end of the game Roger was lamenting the fact that Mind Games, our local store where I found this, only bought in one copy of this fine game.

Scores:
Alan: $90
Doug: $88
Roger: $81

Doug's rating: 8

Thread: Session Report

davekohr — 2001-01-01T06:00:00+00:00

(EdB, *RichI*, CharlesP, John):

RichI: "Played a quick opener of this card game. Basically getting the last play can be a huge advantage in this game, if you are close, usually you can work a way to win.` John drew very few roofs and thus was left with inadequate properties to boost his score. I drew a lot of them early--especially roof dormers and renovations. I had several slots for the hard to place cards in smaller buildings: the pensioners, the mover, the Manager, etc. Of course I got the last draw and had to find $14 which I was able to do."

CharlesP: "When DaveK was asked to join us and he ran away screaming (maybe a little embellished), I got rather nervous about this game. However, this card game of building apartments, placing tenants, and thwarting your opponents' plans turned out to be pretty fun. The strategic choices are rather light (how many cards to buy each round, whether to use your cards for apartment spaces or actions/tenants, etc.), but appropriate for this quick tongue-in-cheek game."