Game: Frank's Zoo

Image

ribosome — 2008-12-01T15:31:40+00:00

traditional Chinese and simplified Chinese rules

Image

ribosome — 2008-12-01T15:30:02+00:00

Box back (Chinese Edition)

Image

ribosome — 2008-12-01T15:28:34+00:00

Box front (Chinese Edition)

Image

EndersGame — 2008-11-20T15:44:35+00:00

"The two hedgehogs won" - a reference to Doris & Frank, the designers

Thread: iPhone Scoring module for Frank's Zoo

ryanch — 2008-10-18T21:08:12+00:00

I've created an iPhone app for scoring board games. There is a scoring module for Frank's Zoo. Here is the geek list with all of the modules supported.
http://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/34718/

Here is a screen shot of the module:
]]>

Enjoy!

Thread: Re: Rule: Could someone explain this rule about the solo player.

caesarbgg — 2008-08-26T09:06:32+00:00

A trick, in any trick-taking game, is the number of cards in the middle of the table, when the player who played the highest card(s) takes it for himself.

In Frank's Zoo, the solo player may discard two cards from his hand and count them as if they were his tricks.
E.g. he can either discard two weak animals in order to increase his chances to go out first, or discard a hedgehog in order to guarantee not losing a point at the end of the round, or discard two lions for 2 sure points at the end of the round.

Image

aladdinsdad — 2008-08-24T21:04:37+00:00

Summer holidays in Spain...and a chameleon walks right across our yard

Thread: A couple of thoughts on strategy

cdunc123 — 2008-08-24T02:33:09+00:00

My immediate family (me, wife, 6-year-old daughter and 8-year-old son) and our extended family have had a lot of fun playing this game. It seems to offer enough scope for skillful play to keep the adults interested, but the fun theme and elements of luck keep the kids involved and in the running.

I still can't convince anyone in my family (immediate and extended) to play with the lion/hedgehog scoring, which is a shame, but we do play with partners. Still, note that the tips below do not pertain to the lion/hedgehog scoring system.

The basic strategic question in the game as I see it is when to play your high ranking cards and/or your pairs, triplets, etc. -- and whether to break up your pairs, triplets, etc. (E.g. do you split your pair of elephants to play one card on top of a single alligator that has just been laid, or do you pass and save the pair for later?)

I can't claim to have any grand master strategy, but my rule of thumb is to be very reluctant to break pairs of low-ranking cards, and to be still reluctant, but less so, to break pairs of high-ranking cards. That said, as I will go on to note, an ironclad rule of "never break pairs, triplets,..." is not a good strategy, in my experience. Knowing when to play a high card or not and when to break a cluster or not is something of an art. That is what I find interesting about the game.

Basically, I look at my hand to see how many "sure losers" or "nearly sure losers" there are -- say, a single mosquito, or a single goldfish. Each of these will likely only be playable as the lead to a new trick. Identifying how many losing cards I have will tell me how many times I will likely have to grab the lead (i.e. win a trick) in order play my losers. Having made a guess at this number, I will then look at the rest of my hand to try to figure how to win at least this number of tricks.

This helps to guard against a tendency to be too reluctant to break clusters. Say for instance you are dealt two killer whales. It will be tempting to save them to play as a pair -- an extremely hard to beat combo (plus one that fills you with triumphal feelings when you play it!). However, if you have a couple or more of losing singleton cards in your hand, you are probably best off biding your time with your whales, even passing on opportunities to play your whales as a pair, until enough whales have come out already that you are fairly sure a singleton whale will be a winner. Then you should try to play your two whales to two separate tricks as singletons, to get the lead two separate times. (Of course whether you should follow this tactic depends on what other likely winning cards you have. E.g. if in addition to two whales you have two elephants, then it is safer to play your whales as a pair...)

As the previous paragraph indicates, it pays to know how many cards of which animals have come out already, in order better to estimate the odds of a play of yours being a trick-winner. Myself, I try to count elephants and killer whales, plus mice too if I have elephants in my hand (since mice beat elephants). I'm a lousy card counter, though, so I struggle. Fortunately there are only 5 of each of these kinds.

Regarding passing cards to partners: It is tempting to pass your lower singleton cards--not to get rid of them from your own hand (for hurting your partner will only hurt yourself, typically)--but rather in the hopes that your partner can create more powerful pairs with your singletons. However, passing two low-ranking singletons can really tank a partner's hand if he/she can't pair them up with cards of his/her own, and this can hurt your team score badly. So I generally find myself passing a low-ranking singleton and a middle-ranking singleton (seal, polar bear, alligator, etc.). I confess I haven't thought through the passing strategy as much as I probably should have, though. But hey, it's a light game and overthinking it can spoil the fun -- so despite the impression I have probably given here, I try not to overthink Frank's Zoo!

Thread: Re: What does it matter who deals?

cdunc123 — 2008-08-17T06:41:44+00:00

OK, thanks.

Re-reading my first post, and having played more games since then, I wonder whether being dealt 8 cards rather than 9 is much of an advantage. Yes, you have one less card to get rid of, but had you been dealt one extra card, you might have had a nice pair you wouldn't have had otherwise. What do you think? How much of an advantage, if any, is it to be dealt 8 rather than 9 cards?

Also, on a different subject: I was initially puzzled by the rule that ties are broken by giving the lead to the person who was placed lower the previous round. Why? I assume now it is because that person's current round was better: he or she made up more ground -- scored more points in the current round -- than the person he or she is tied with. Having done better more recently, he or she deserves to be ranked higher. That seems obvious to me now, but I originally found it puzzling.

Thread: Re: What does it matter who deals?

GaryP — 2008-08-12T19:50:47+00:00

As far as I know, yes, it only really matters when you have a number of players that causes the deck to deal out unevenly.

Thread: What does it matter who deals?

cdunc123 — 2008-08-03T15:08:28+00:00

The rules state that the first place player deals the cards for the start of new hand, even going so far as to state that if there is a tie for first, then the player who was in the lower place at the end of the previous round should deal the next round. BUT the player in last place starts the round by being the first to lay down cards on the table.

SO... what does it matter who deals?

The only thing I can think of is this: In a seven player game, a few players get 8 cards while other get 9. The dealer (assuming he deals by starting with the player to his left) is one of those who gets 8 cards. So getting to deal is an advantage in the seven player game. Is this the reason for the strict rules as to who deals?

Thread: First super-simple session with my 6- and 8- year old

Bjork — 2008-05-07T01:57:10+00:00

It was my daughter's eighth birthday, and I had bought her both Coloretto and Frank's Zoo. After a quick read-through of the rules for both games, we had tried Coloretto (mainly because there was no need for the kids to hold large numbers of cards in their hands), but while they enjoyed it, that game fell just a little flat, with the tactics a bit inscrutable and the scoring too involved to really capture their interest.

Then we tried Frank's Zoo, and what a difference! I decided to simplify things as much as possible, and opted to play with open face-up hands to get around the card-holding problem. Holding 20 cards in secret is a big enough ask for an adult, but almost certainly beyond my 6-year-old son. We also played with no on-going scoring, just one simple hand per game, no partners, no special scores for lions or hedgehogs, just a simple climbing game, but with an interesting looping hierarchy.

As I dealt out the cards face up, they worked hard at sorting them into neat piles, and punched the air if they received the magic Joker card. The illustrations on the cards tell you everything you need to know while playing, and the pictures themselves are fantastic for any child. I was able to give assistance when necessary, thanks to playing with face-up cards, but the kids caught on straight away, and hardly needed any help at all. They even accepted (without commenting) that a mosquito could indeed become an elephant. What could be more natural?

My daughter was very keen to consider all her options, and spent long moments examining all of her opponents' cards before making any play. My son played more by instinct - no analysis paralysis there - and was just as happy yelling "Pass!" as he was when scaring my four elephants with his four mice.

With all of us trying as hard as we could, our first game ended with all three of us emptying our hands on the same round, so I declared that we had all won.

They loved it!! We played a few more hands that night, and each time the winner was up for grabs right to the very end. I'm not sure whether playing with open hands makes it more or less likely that you'll get a runaway winner, but all of our games were very close, which is ideal when playing with small children. When my son was called away to do his homework, he cried because Lily and I got to play more games of Frank's Zoo than him, so we promised that he and Mummy would play some games on their own the next day.

"This is even better than the lizard game", my daughter said, and I had to agree.

Thread: Re: Do I HAVE to play cards, or can I pass even with the opportunity to play.

jollypirate — 2008-04-22T16:16:44+00:00

Thanks!

Thread: Re: Do I HAVE to play cards, or can I pass even with the opportunity to play.

Karlsen — 2008-04-22T03:36:09+00:00

Definitely can pass.

Thread: Re: Do I HAVE to play cards, or can I pass even with the opportunity to play.

Teriyaki Donuts — 2008-04-21T22:06:05+00:00

You are able to pass, even if you have the cards to play.

Good game!

Thread: Do I HAVE to play cards, or can I pass even with the opportunity to play.

jollypirate — 2008-04-21T17:38:05+00:00

We just played Frank's Zoo for the first time, and it was our understanding from the rules that a player MAY play or pass during his turn.

So if I could take two seals by playing my two killer whales, would I be obligated to, or could I save 'em for later.

We played we could save them.

Thanks.

Thread: Re: Partnership question

cdunc123 — 2008-03-05T02:18:11+00:00

Thanks, Gary -- good to get confirmation.

Thread: Re: Partnership question

GaryP — 2008-03-04T19:01:43+00:00

Correct. The Senior partner can withhold any help if they like. Your reasons are exactly the ones we have seen for a denial. The Senior might also deny helping if it breaks up a pair in their hand.

You are also correct that if the Junior does not receive help, they take a "normal" pass and can play again once their turn comes around again.

I don't know of any thematic or idiomatic reason for the lion scoring. The hedgehog scoring is just due to Doris's love of hedgehogs. Also, for what it's worth, I play that capturing at least one hedgehog per round adds one point. It is functionally equivalent, but a bit more intuitive to new players. You just might want to bump up the winning score threshold by a couple points or so.

Thread: Partnership question

cdunc123 — 2008-02-29T13:48:33+00:00

I'm getting this for my birthday (tomorrow!) and plan on playing with my wife and two kids (ages 5 1/2 and 8). So I've now been looking over the rules here on the Geek, so I will already be familiar with the game when I teach it tomorrow.

I doubt we'll play the partnership rules on our first go of the game. But looking over the partnership rules, I've a question. The junior partner can lay down one or more cards and then ask his senior partner for helping in completing the play (i.e. help in constructing an outranking set). The rules state: "The senior partner may now play cards face up to complete the set so that it outranks the ranking set."

I interpret this to mean that the senior player MAY help the junior player if he/she wishes, but DOES NOT HAVE TO help if he/she does not wish to. Am I right? (Also, I'm curious how often that tends to happen in your experience that the senior partner refuses help. From reading the rules, I can imagine it happening, say, when the trick contains lions or hedgehogs and the senior partner feels confident he/she can take the trick later even if he/she refuses to help the junior partner.)

One more fiddly question: the rules state that if the senior partner can't (or won't) help the junior partner, then the junior partner's "turn is over." I take this to mean the junior partner must pass. But like any pass, if play comes back to the junior partner (i.e. someone else lays down cards), he/she can get back in by laying down cards. Is that right? (Alternatively, "turn is over" COULD mean that the junior partner must sit out the rest of the trick, i.e. cannot add any more cards to the trick, if if the play comes back around to his/her spot and he/she has playable cards.)

Also, for what it is worth, in my family I try to make learning the game as painless as possible (despite what my rule-lawyerly questions above might suggest!). Toward that end, I've made up some geeky rhymes about the hedgehog / lion scoring to help my kids remember it. (I guess it is OK for me to reveal my inner geek on a website called BoardGameGEEK, after all. ):

"Lions upright, take a bite. But if a couple sleep tight, that's alright." [Obviously, "upright" = in hand, "sleep tight" = are face down in tricks on the table.]

"Hedgehogs are so fun, you'll cry if you have none."

As I said, I probably won't introduce the partnership rules the first night. (I'm not sure how well the 5 1/2 year old will do with these, but it seems worth a try in the near future.) After the first game played without partners, though, I hope we'll play a hybrid game -- no partners, but hedgehog / lion scoring. Other commentators report this hybrid game works OK, and it seems to be a potentially good intermediate level option between the beginner's game (no partners or special scoring) and the advanced game (partners).

P.S. The hedgehog / lion scoring seems pretty arbitrary. Why the hedgehog? Why the lion? Is there some explanation in German, the way there was for the mosquito / elephant interaction (viz. that "making an elephant out of a mosquito" is German equivalent of "making a mountain out of a molehill")?

Thread: Re: How many cards to start?

Ed_the_Red — 2008-02-20T01:22:47+00:00

When playing with 3 or 4 including kids we tend to use less than the whole deck so that they can cope with a handful without being overwhelmed - usually 10-12. Doesn't reduce the fun at all!

Even if you play with adults and all the cards, it still feels light enough that no-one bothers to count cards or anything like that.

Thread: First Try With Kids

fehrmeister — 2008-01-29T19:17:45+00:00

On a lazy Sunday afternoon, during some family game time, I brought out my new copy of Frank's Zoo, which was part of the package from my Secret Santa, to play with 4 of my kids (aged 7-10). I was very curious to see how well it would go over with them, knowing their love for animals and appreciation of the food-chain. I had read some reports of this game being a little too confusing for some adults, but after reading the rules, I didn't think it would be that bad.

The children thought the artwork was great, and the idea of the game certainly was appealing. They seemed to comprehend the rules pretty well too. We started the first round, with every man playing for himself, as the rules suggest.

The biggest challenge for the kids was in managing their hands of cards, which start out fairly large in this game. Most of them resorted to putting face-down piles of each animal type in front of them in a line. This made the turns take somewhat longer, since they had to check each face-down pile to see if any cards they owned could beat the card in play.

One of the 7-year-old twins (Isaac) looked like he would easily go out first, but then stalled in his ability to get rid of the last 3 cards in his hand. Although the basic rules were clear to him, he didn't understand the overall hierarchy of the animals enough to come up with a good strategy for getting rid of his cards in the optimal order. Meanwhile, I was able to go out first with the help of the Joker card.

The first round took a lot longer than I was expecting, and although the kids thought the game was alright, it took significant coaxing to get them to try another round. I knew that playing all the way to 19 points as the rules suggest would be out of the question. We played the second round in teams, with my 9-year-old boy Samuel playing solo. My 10-year-old girl Bethany, who was my junior partner for this round, understood the concept of asking for assistance in trying to beat a card already played, but the 7-year-old twins didn't take advantage of this ability. In the end, Samuel handily won the second round, which meant 9 more points for him, including the 4 extra points he received as a solo player. I can’t say that he employed any real strategy other than to always play sets of multiple cards first whenever he could.

Final Scores:
Samuel: 15
Me: 9
Bethany: 8
Isaac: 5
Adam: 3

The kids will probably play this again with me sometime, but I first need to get some card stands for each of them so that sorting through their cards is easier. I'm a little hesitant to bring this out with adults, as the cutesy artwork could turn some people off. The strategy also seems a little limited until a player is very familiar with the cards. If players have good memories, and enjoy pitting them against each other, I can see this being a fun challenge.

Image

eklp fistronek — 2007-12-30T09:18:50+00:00

Game in max. players

Thread: Games that the Family take on Holiday (Part 3)

buffmeister — 2007-12-29T14:16:21+00:00

(Part 1)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1945845#1945845

(Part 2)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1959845#1959845

We love this game

As the subject suggests this is the third of a series of reviews of games that I can get the family to play while on holiday. As in parts 1 & 2 I am focusing on why this game is IMHO the perfect filler for family fun on holiday

]]>
courtesy of Ketty Galleguillos Moller

Components

A deck of 60 cards consisting of a main picture of an animal and also showing the other animals that can ~~eat~~ beat that particular animal.

]]>
courtesy of Ender Wiggins

as in the image above that shows an elephant card that can only be beaten by a mouse and a mouse card that can be beaten by lots of other animals.

Nothing else is needed save pen & paper if you are keeping score, (as a family we prefer to just see who won, and lost each game).

How to Play

To start the game deal out the cards until the deck is exhausted, depending on the no. of players this might leave one or more players with extra cards. If this bothers your group then just keep the excess cards out of that game - this introduces an extra element of uncertainty into the game, as the no. of animals of each type is not known. (In the full deck there are five each of eleven types of animals plus four mosquitoes and a joker.

Basically you are trying to get rid of your cards before anyone else.

How do you do this?

The starting player discards one or more animals from their hand; if you want to discard more than one card then they must be of the same animal, two hedgehogs or three seals for example.

The next player has three choices:

discard the same no. of cards but using an animal that can beat the previous animal(s) played; a mouse to beat an elephant or two foxes to beat two hedgehogs.

discard one more of the same animal; three polar bears to beat two polar bears.

pass if you cannot beat the previous players animal(s) (Although not in the rules we have sometimes allowed bluffing as a variation).

players keep discarding cards until on a players turn his discard is the best on the table (everybody else has passed). That player then starts again by discarding one or more animal cards from his hand.

There are (of course) a couple of wrinkles to this basic mechanism. The mosquito can masquerade as an elephant and the joker can be used as any animal you like (NB It can't be played on its own).

Keep going until only one player has any cards left in their hand LOSER

In the official rules players hold onto the cards that they have won for scoring purposes. They may also form teams in subsequent games. Other reviews have covered these points very well so I am not going to cover them in this review.

We prefer to play this as a straight filler game trying not to be the last one with any cards. We normally play 2 or 3 games at a time before moving onto other games, such as UNO, 6 Nimmt or Bohnanza.

A simple way of keeping score should you wish is to give the winner 5 points, second 3 points, third 1 point and no points for the player who was last (4 player game); and record the scores for the evening or over the whole holiday to produce the 'Frank's Zoo' holiday champion

Is it Fun?

Of course it is it plays quickly in around 10 - 15 minutes with great scope for family interaction as the animals hit the table, " my fox eats your puny hedgehog dad", "my elephant tramples that mangey fox of yours sister", " so what, my mouse sticks its tongue out and scares away the nellie" says my son, "I win" says my wife

The illustrations are really quite splendid and the animal food chain theme comes over very well.

]]>
courtesy of Francisco Rueda García

The tactics of holding onto your sets for maximum effect and keeping both land and marine animals so as not to get stuck, are easily learned and fairly intuitive after a couple of plays.

As I mentioned earlier we play the simple version of the game but I'm sure that the partnership version would also be great fun for other families.

So, its portable, quick to play, easy to explain & understand and takes very little space to play; simply a perfect holiday game for the family.

Greatest compliment I can lay, is that this game has successfully introduced non-gamers into the pleasure that is gaming with the family and friends. It has also induced friends to say, "any other games like that we can try".

I have a spare shrinkwrapped copy ready to give to the next group of friends who try and enjoy this game to assist them on the road to 'geekhood

Thread: Frank's Zoo.... A menagerie of fun

gordon1018 — 2007-12-19T01:13:33+00:00

First off, this is my first review of a game.

I recently received Frank's zoo on a blind trade on the Geek. I had first seen some people playiong it at my FLGS and they were having a riot. No one had a copy for sale except online, but had never picked up a copy. The person I was trading with saw it on my wish list and sent it to me

BIG THANK YOU FOR THAT!!

OKay, a simple synopsis to begin with. I'm not going to go into to details of game play, but a simple description is always beneficial

Frank's zoo is essentially a trick taking game, but I've found that it feels sort of like an auction game at the same time. The cards are very well made, in a sense of a new person needing virtually no instructions beyond the basic gameplay to know what beats what

I suppose if you want to get really serious about the game, the fact that the card doesn't show which other animals the pictured creature can beat could be useful, but I feel this game is not one that ever needs to be played in that serious of a manner; Also, if you do get that serious there are a number of wonderful player aids available here on the geek.

On we go.....

The first player has the choice of playing any number of matching animals on the table. We originally thought you could only play one animal as a lead, but were wrong, and it drastically changes the game. The next person has three choices:

1)play an equal number of any higher animal shown in the illustration
2)play one additional of the SAME animal played
3)Pass

If everyone passes, the person that laid down the last "set" collects all the cards in front of them, and starts a new set.

That's the basic gameplay

There are basically two sets of animals
-Sea Creatures
-Land Animals

There are a few crossover animals in the mix, that allow you to move from one hierarchy to another. (lion, polar bear, crocodile etc..)

You can end up being hurt pretty badly if you have all cards from one hierarchy and everyone else is playing in the other line.

There are also a few wildcard animals like mosquitos (can turn into elephants) and mice (can beat the large elephant)

The first person to get rid of all their cards is in first place, and scores an equal number of points to the number of people playing. Everyone else continues playing until there is only one person left who scores zero points and doesn't get to count the cards left in his hand towards any bonuses (listed later)

here's where the game gets a little confusing.
One of these days I'm going to make a good scoresheet that will lay everything out easier. The game's scoring works a little like a hedgehog trying to blow up balloons.

There's subtractions
-No hedgehogs in final stacks of cards taken
-I suggest playing it as a bonus for having at least one hedgehog instead, it's a lot less confusing
-Lose a point for every lion left in the ladst players hand

There's a bonus.
-One point for every lion if you contain at least two in your final taken cards.

NOTE: These point alterations should not be taken after the first round of play when doing partners play

Here's where it gets a little sticky. I think partners play is the best way to go personally. There's a really good shifting partner structure that also allows an odd number of people, with one person going solo.

I love this aspect. There's a pass across phase for partners kind of like in pinochle, and the solo person gets to discard two cards in order to be a little ahead to start

Partners can also help each other during the round if they need an additonal card to beat the active set.

The partners are set up based on score, and if there's a score, based on the rank from the previous round. It differs depending on the number of people playing and is outlined in the rules. The partners add their points from that round together and the solo person gets a bonus 4 points over whatever score they earn that round.

Figuring out the partner sets is a little confusing at times, and the bonuses require a lot of score altering, but other than a little housekeeping that usually only takes as long as reshuffling the deck, it isn't that bad.

That's pretty much the game. The first person to 19 points wins.

Okay here's my take

What I like/Love

-I love the switching partners. I think it's a way to stop people from trying to prevent a certain person from winnning. you might end up their partner and either helping them or having to sabotage yourself to hurt them.

-I like how easy it is to teach people to play. As long as you have an experienced person assigning the partners and adding bonuses & scores anyone can learn in a few minutes. My suggestion:Don't mention the bonuses and penalties in the first round. Just let them play. After the first round tell them that there will be some things added to what they just learned. It will help a lot

-Length of game. The games only average three to four rounds until someone gets the nineteen points (more on this later). you can almost always get a second game in without anyone getting bored.

-It's enough luck and random chance mixed in with some strategy. It's nice because it's really hard to take hardcore seriously, and get upset if you can't play a card. You'll have your cahnce eventually, and almost always someone gets trumped hard, or stuck with a card that can't be played.

Things I'm not too fond of:

-The scoring: A couple of things. The scores are an addition of a number of things and then subrractons and adding again before you can figure out the team partners. I know it's only basic math, but it seems to be a long list of categories before you have a final score for that round. I think if you do the hedgehog as a 1 point bonus instead. It makes it easier.
-I think nineteen might be a little low for scoring to end the game, especially in a larger number of player game. In a seven player game, you can easily be done by turn 2 if the partners score good in the second round. I suggest it be 6 X's the number of players in the game for a better average length game. This also offsets the fact that hedgehog points are positive now instead of negative using my suggested variaton.

-The fact that I can never win, but that's besides the point.

Overall: out of five

Ease of teaching:

Score System:

Fun Factor:

Randomness:

Strategy:

Replayability:

Overall rating:

This game gets better and better the more I play it. I suggest five people as the best number for playing. It's quickly moving up as one of my favorite games I've got.

Thread: Rule: Could someone explain this rule about the solo player.

aqablueturtle — 2007-09-06T13:24:28+00:00

Could someone please further explain the meaning of the following rule:

The solo player selects two cards from his hand and places them face down on the table; these count as cards taken in tricks.

One more, what is the definition of "trick" here?

Thanks

Thread: Re: Lion and Hedgehog Card Icons

aqablueturtle — 2007-09-04T02:11:44+00:00

Thanks for your help Jeff!!! ^_^

Thread: Re: Lion and Hedgehog Card Icons

Colorado_Jeff — 2007-09-03T14:16:46+00:00

When you've captured a lion, what is the value of the card? Is it one point per card or two points per card?

If you only capture one lion, it has no value. If you capture two or more lions, they are worth one point each. If at the end of the hand, you're the last player still holding cards, any lions still held are minus one point each.

There is an elephant icon on the "mosquito card". What does it represent? Are mosquito cards only played with elephant cards?

Anytime you play elephants, no matter how many of them, you may add one mosquito card to them, and it becomes an additional elephant. Mosquitos can be played on their own, like any other card, but because they're lowest on the food chain, they can be hard to get rid of.

Thread: Re: Lion and Hedgehog Card Icons

aqablueturtle — 2007-09-03T06:39:22+00:00

When you've captured a lion, what is the value of the card? Is it one point per card or two points per card?

There is an elephant icon on the "mosquito card". What does it represent? Are mosquito cards only played with elephant cards?

Urgent!! I need help ASAP!!

Thanks

Thread: Re: Individual scoring

rootbeer — 2007-07-21T16:20:21+00:00

GaryP wrote:
No, the individual scoring elements (hedgehogs and lions) are not counted in the first hand.

And the reason for this (I assume) is that turn order and partnerships are based on the ranking of the players. For example, the player with the lowest score goes first. Leaving hedgehog and lion scoring out prevents there from being any ties at this point in the game -- the scores will always be 4, 3, 2, 0, for example, and it's easy to determine the player ranking.

Later on in the game ties will be broken by what the score was on the previous hand, but that isn't possible after just one hand.

It also makes for a nice "warm-up" hand to start things off with.

---

As a side point, nearly all of my plays of Frank's Zoo have been 3-player. I've only played a partnership game (with 4 players) once.

Thread: Re: Individual scoring

Colorado_Jeff — 2007-07-17T14:36:15+00:00

That said, I know that many people prefer this without partnerships. I expect that some of them still score the lions and hedgehogs, although I don't know how that would affect the game.

We've been playing this game often since it first came out. It's become an "end of the day, time for one more game" favorite.

We've never played with the partnership rules, and we always play with the lions and hedgehog rules. It works just fine that way.

Thread: Re: Individual scoring

GaryP — 2007-07-17T13:30:31+00:00

No, the individual scoring elements (hedgehogs and lions) are not counted in the first hand. They are also not counted if you do not play with partnerships.

That said, I know that many people prefer this without partnerships. I expect that some of them still score the lions and hedgehogs, although I don't know how that would affect the game.

However, I think the dynamic partnerships are exactly what make this a clever and enjoyable game. When teaching new players, I simply wait until after the first hand to explain the partnerships. It has become a favorite with one of my groups. Also, we just add a point if you have at least one hedgehog instead of subtracting a point if you don't. It has the same effect, but is a bit easier to deal with.

Thread: Individual scoring

koby_shachar — 2007-07-17T09:36:30+00:00

Do you count points for lions & hedgehogs on the first hand, where
partnerships are not formed yet?
The question is also relevent when you choose to play the simple game with no partnerships.

Thread: Re: Lion and Hedgehog Card Icons

Liggur — 2007-06-30T09:24:09+00:00

I was reading and explaining the rules in a pub, I got as far as the inital scoring (points for first place = number of players etc.) but we just continued to play as normal. But as always happens, someone asked about the icons. So they are for scoring up from the tricks you have won and no use in the game (unlike the Mosquito)

Thanks for the help.

Thread: Re: Lion and Hedgehog Card Icons

TermiGator — 2007-06-29T14:39:15+00:00

Colorado_Jeff wrote:
I've gone through about 8 decks over the years.

Although I'm not a fan of card sleeves you should maybe consider those for this game... maybe you could lower your rate to less than 1 deck/year (game is from 1999)

Thread: Re: Lion and Hedgehog Card Icons

Colorado_Jeff — 2007-06-29T13:32:19+00:00

To clarify - if you are the last player and you have lions left, you lose a point for each.

Yes, that's an important distinction. Only the last player with cards loses those points. Thanks for pointing that out.

Thread: Re: Lion and Hedgehog Card Icons

Tatsu — 2007-06-29T13:26:23+00:00

Colorado_Jeff wrote:
Also, if you have any lions in your hand when someone else goes out, you lose a point for each.
To clarify - if you are the last player and you have lions left, you lose a point for each.

Thread: Re: Lion and Hedgehog Card Icons

Colorado_Jeff — 2007-06-29T13:14:56+00:00

I believe these are reminders that the lion and hedgehog have extra scoring capabilities. If, at the end of a round, you have no hedgehog captured, you lose a point. If you have two or more lions captured (note there are two lions in the icon) they score a point each. Also, if you have any lions in your hand when someone else goes out, you lose a point for each.

This is an excellent game that hits the table more than any other. At the end of many game sessions, when there's time for one more short game, this is often the one. I've gone through about 8 decks over the years.

Thread: Lion and Hedgehog Card Icons

Liggur — 2007-06-29T12:39:05+00:00

As the heading says, the Lion and the Hedgehog have Icons at the top, middle of the Card, I cant find any reference to what these icons mean in the rules?

Anyone help?

Image

ArtEmiSa64 — 2007-03-23T22:01:51+00:00

Box Cover (High Resolution Scan)

Image

ArtEmiSa64 — 2007-03-23T22:00:41+00:00

Box Back (High Resolution Scan)

Image

FitisGames.be — 2007-01-08T15:11:38+00:00

Image

prkl — 2006-11-06T16:27:02+00:00

Who (b)eats who? -Player aid, should be right size for the box

Thread: Re: Review of Frank’s Zoo

rootbeer — 2006-08-21T03:56:14+00:00

The lions and hedgehogs add a lot once you factor them into the scoring. Makes it a very interesting game.

Thread: Re: Review of Frank’s Zoo

custom golf clubs — 2006-08-20T23:47:18+00:00

As a family game we only played the "basic game". Our next gaming session with all adults we want to try the partners aspect as our normal group loves playing Euchre, Hearts, & Dirty Clubs, all of which play similar in the "partnership" area.

Thread: Re: Review of Frank’s Zoo

themore5@earthlink — 2006-08-20T23:09:17+00:00

Who will like this game?
I would say this is a family version of “The Great Delmuti” which has similar game play mechanic.

Have you played with all the rules, or just the basic game? Because I would say FZ is the gamer's version of the more family-friendly Great Dalmuti, with it's rotating partners, partnership card exchange, Lion/Hedgehog scoring (combined with partnership scoring), and the ability to ask the senior partner for 'help' in winning a trick.

Thread: Review of Frank’s Zoo

custom golf clubs — 2006-08-20T17:48:55+00:00

Review of Frank’s Zoo By JP LaChance

Theme of the game:
You are in control of a zoo full of animals (a hand of cards) who’s job it is to scare away the last card played to “win the trick”.

The Box Description
The two hedgehogs won! You ask, "How could that happen?" It all started with a stately lion, who was chased away by an elephant. The single elephant naturally yieded to the pair of elephants. The 2 mice came along and scared the elephants away. Finally, the two hedgehogs came and bested the mice. A pair of foxes could have won, but they stayed away and left the victory to the hedgehogs. If you are not yet a believer, play and see for yourself!

Instructions
The instructions were fairly well written and it was clear and concise about the game play.

The game play
The object of the game is not to “win the most tricks”, but to be the first to get rid of all the cards in your hand. Winning tricks does give you the right to “go first” in the next round, which is an advantage.

Use with Younger Players
I believe this game could be played with a 5-6 yr old with out a problem. There is no reading involved and the pictures on the cards make this a very kid friendly game.

Who will like this game?
I would say this is a family version of “The Great Delmuti” which has similar game play mechanic. Frank’s Zoo eliminates numbers on the cards and some advanced ideas in card trading between the higher-ups and the peon’s. If you are looking for a card game to play with the kids but don’t’ want to be stuck playing “go fish” this is your game. The game is very visually pleasing and plays great with 3 or more players.

Thread: Re: Review from Gameblog

msaari — 2006-08-14T16:21:10+00:00

Indeed; whichever way, you do need the other information as well, and if you can't remember it (which is likely, unless you play the game often), you'll need a player aid.

Thread: Re: Review from Gameblog

caesarbgg — 2006-08-14T16:18:33+00:00

msaari wrote:
It takes a while to get used to all this. Each card shows which animals it can beat, but not which animals beat it.

It seems indeed to take a while to get used to this.
Actually, each card shows by which animals it is beaten, not the other way round. E.g. the elephant is afraid of the mouse or the crocodile can be stamped on by the elephant.

Nevermind!

Thread: Review from Gameblog

msaari — 2006-07-17T08:13:12+00:00

Frank's Zoo (aka Zoff im Zoo) is a climbing game with a twist. The animal theme is obvious, considering the authors: the Frank in the title is the game designer Frank Nestel, while the game is decorated by his artist wife Doris Matthäus (who also shares a design credit), a master drawer of cutesy animals.

So, it's a climbing game. That means the goal of the game is to get rid of one's cards. The cards are played on "tricks", and to play one must play a better combination than the previous player (same animal, but more; same number of better animals). The value of the animals climbs up, thus the name.

Twisting hierarchies

However, there are twists. The hierarchy is based on animals and is far from simple. Each animal beats certain smaller animals (but not all) and is in turn beaten by other, bigger animals. There are two overlapping series, water animals and land animals (some are both). While the water animals end in unbeatable orca, in land animals the tiny mouse beats the mighty elephant and the hierarchy can loop again.

It takes a while to get used to all this. Each card shows which animals it can beat, but not which animals beat it. Fortunately there are helpful player aids in Geek, and it only takes few games to get familiar with the cards.

Good fun for large groups

The scoring is based on the order of getting rid of one's cards, plus few other things. There's a dynamic partnership system: after each round, players at certain ranks are paired together. The game ends when two players reach certain score, which doesn't usually take many rounds.

Frank's Zoo is a good game for larger groups - with five, six or seven players, it would be my choice of climbing games. With three or four Gang of Four and Tichu are hard to beat. In any case, Frank's Zoo is a somewhat lighter game than those two (but not as light and easy as the cute animals could lead one to think).

Thread: Re: How many cards to start?

GaryP — 2006-06-19T20:23:14+00:00

Ah, good catch. Yes, the rules do say to play to an agreed-upon number of points. (I also remember 19 as the suggested amount, but I don't have the game here to check.)

Either way, the game is light enough that I really don't think it effects much having one more card than others. Odds are (rigorous mathematical proof not shown here for space considerations) that the extra card will help form a pair or triplet, which can be very helpful indeed.

Thread: Re: How many cards to start?

rootbeer — 2006-06-18T16:26:54+00:00

GaryP wrote:
Play enough rounds so that each person is the dealer the same number of times.

This may work, but it's not the official rule. The rules say to play to a certain point total -- 19, I believe.

Thread: Re: How many cards to start?

GaryP — 2006-06-18T15:32:10+00:00

Simply put, no matter how many players there are, deal out the entire deck. Play enough rounds so that each person is the dealer the same number of times.

Thread: Re: How many cards to start?

rootbeer — 2006-06-17T21:03:20+00:00

Using the official 3-player rules (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/37091), each player gets 13 cards.

Thread: Re: How many cards to start?

Werbaer — 2006-06-17T19:21:37+00:00

From the rules:
When playing with 3-6 players, all players receive the same number of cards. With 7 players, four players receive 9 cards and three receive 8.

Thread: How many cards to start?

okaraburger — 2006-06-17T18:54:07+00:00

The rules say that for 7 players, 4 players receive 8 and 3 players get 7. But when we have 3-6 players, how many does each get??

Thread: Re: Ground Zero Games Board Game Night 12/28 Session

agashamirv — 2006-03-11T04:59:43+00:00

Hey Frank.

Drat! But stackelswein is so much more fun than igel.

Thread: Re: Ground Zero Games Board Game Night 12/28 Session

man of the zoo — 2006-03-10T22:36:43+00:00

Hmm, concerning German words: Stachelschwein is a porcupine, but German for hedgehog is Igel. Hedgehogs are native wild animals in continental Europe, porcupines live somewhere else on this globe. You might want to buy "Ark" to learn some more German animal names :-)

Thread: Re: Partnership Rules - Counting Tricks

caesarbgg — 2006-01-18T18:02:46+00:00

GaryP wrote:
Also, we play that you get 1 point if you have at least one hedgehog in your captured tricks. It works out the same as the written rule but was easier for some players to remember that way.

Except for the game end condition: The game ends when the second player reaches X points (I thin it is 17). Your games would end a little bit earlier.

However, we do not use this end-condition most of the times, anyway.

Thread: The Mercy Rule

Friendless — 2006-01-16T10:10:41+00:00

After a rousing game of Himalaya, Kevin pulled out one of his favourite games, Frank's Zoo. I had read about this game on the 'geek, but always got it confused with O Zoo le Mio, and consequently had no idea what it was about. I had it in my mind that it was a kids' game, but that is completely not true.

Players: Werner, Bertie Beetle, Kevin, John

On the surface, it is a funny game. Blue fish eat red fish eat mosquitoes, elephants are scared of mice, and a mosquito can pretend to be an elephant. But at its core, it's a serious climbing game in the vein of Gang of Four (and Tichu, I'm told). With the hierarchy drawn on the cards, it can be a bit confusing, and with the two ways of upping the bid and the circularities in the hierarchy, it can be very confusing. That's my justification for coming last in the first hand.

We then introduced the lions and hedgehogs rules, as if I didn't have enough to worry about. I could at least understand those (except I kept forgetting I needed two lions) and I played a couple of decent hands. I also got badly beaten when I played two orcas and someone played three orcas to beat it. I was not expecting that at all. Anyway, my struggle in last place was really quite irrelevant compared to what was happening at the front of the scoreboard.

Werner passed 19 points, and 3 hands later nobody else had passed 19 points still. Another table broke up was looking to start a new game, so in order to cross-pollinate with them, we invoked a mercy rule which game Werner the game.

Score: Werner 29, Bertie 14, Kevin 9, John 10.

To be fair to Kevin, he had been ahead of me most of the game but managed to get shafted without any hedgehogs or something and lost ground right at the end. Anyway, Werner thrashed us. It's quite a decent game, and I think my wife will like it, so it goes on the wish list.

Thread: Re: Partnership Rules - Counting Tricks

GaryP — 2006-01-06T21:34:33+00:00

Whoa. I've played this game a lot, and I never noticed the rule about losing one point per lion left in the hand of the player who doesn't go out. I'll have to remember that one for next time.

Also, we play that you get 1 point if you have at least one hedgehog in your captured tricks. It works out the same as the written rule but was easier for some players to remember that way.