Game: Scarab Lords

Thread: Re: Scarab Lords - Advanced

Gola — 2008-11-15T21:51:26+00:00

Great report for an underrated game.

Thread: Re: Scarab Lords - Advanced

quozl — 2008-11-15T15:57:42+00:00

Great report! How old is your boy?

Thread: Scarab Lords - Advanced

TrekkerMJ — 2008-11-15T07:20:44+00:00

So I've played Scarab Lords and enjoyed it. I'm one of those nuts who was even happy enough with how Scarab Lords played that I ended up trading away all my Blue Moon sets for better stuff and have enjoyed the younger sibling of this game design. Yeah, I'm an apostate.

That said, I've only played single match games. So as my boy Chance wants to play a game late on a Friday night, I pull out Scarab Lords determined to change my trend towards this game. "We've going to play the advanced rules, my buddy!" He's game for it so we shuffle through and I end up with the blue deck and he plays the red.

First Match
I start as first player and go with a quick phase 2 power card in upper region's religious sector and play a God card in supremacy. We bicker back and forth over the upper region while Chance resigns the lower region to me. I put up some resistance in the upper region - specifically in the religious sector but Chance is just pegging me away with curses. I've got somewhere of eight scarab tokens on two power cards on the upper region religious sector. Suddenly I play the Mass Purification card that removes all scarab tokens in one region and the tide is turned. Chance's refreshing his hand a couple times is now a weakness to his draw pile and I deck him out soon afterward.

I felt pretty good as I had probably 8 or so cards in my deck when Chance decked out. We go to the customize phase between matches and Chance likes what he sees in the deck. We both had discarded four cards so he takes a few minutes to figure out what he wants to replace. I had tossed Plague of Ash and tow of my The Seven Sphinxes in order to go after more 0 and 2 phase cards. I get a few good things and actually snag Khamal the Eternal the 0 phase leader from Chance's Red deck. I'm surprised he had dropped him but I wasn't going to complain.

Second Match
To be honest, I thought that with my pick ups that I wasn't going to have any issue with the second match. Hmmmm.... That didn't turn out to be the case. I got one God card out in my first turn and then Chance walked all over me. He preceded to replace my God and keep that center square for the rest of the game. He had Khema out that allowed him to take off a scarab token every turn as a free action. He never relinquished that power. He quickly took both military sectors and proceed to somehow surgically strike all my gods out of my deck every time he used military supremacy. When I made what I thought was going to be a good counterstrike, Chance played timely Servant of Shadows to selectively eliminate the minions that were about to give him any trouble. He had this game in hand and with a few strategic Retribution to double his military discards, Chance quickly decked me out.

So I got a lesson in humility and knowing that acknowledging the Gods had some great benefits. I discard my other two The Seven Sphinxes plus two other cards and still concentrate on getting 0 and 2 phase cards - albeit with an emphasis on balancing the favor of the Gods.

Final Match
I start with an interesting play of The Great Pyramid with two scarab tokens on it in the lower religious sector and the God Ahtu to get a second phase 1 action. Chance counters with two cards for 8 power against my The Great Pyramid and takes over the God sector with Khema again. Oh... boy.... Well, I came down with Mass Purification to get the Pyramid going again and we struggled in a hard fought battle. I pretty much had the lower region under control but Chance had resistance in place and was contesting for the upper region in all due respect. We battled it out but I finally got a few things going when my own Servant of Shadows showed to make some assassinations while Chance couldn't respond. I was soon sitting at total control of the lower region and then followed up with playing a card from each phase during one turn with one card going in each of the upper region sectors to garner me control. Chance struggled a bit and was on the verge of decking out but got beat through Supremacy check when he only had one card left in his deck.

I AM THE RULER OF HEKUMET! PEOPLE OF THE TWO REGIONS BOW TO THE CHOSEN ONE! No, I didn't really say that. Though it was a good game and Chance enjoyed the tweak builds between matches. I like this aspect of the game and its a much easier way to customize and respond to the decks than what I saw with Blue Moon. I'm liking this game and enjoy the area control emphasis over the almost pure trick taking nature of Blue Moon. This was session to re-emphasize that for me through enjoying the advanced rules finally.

Thanks for the read. Hope you enjoyed it!

Thread: Re: Handicapped game?

lebigot — 2008-11-02T00:05:09+00:00

kentreuber wrote:
How about forcing the better player to discard a few cards (say 3 or so) before the game begins? I probably wouldn't discard at random, because you might end up with a deck that's hard to play.

I think it's easier for the better player to discard rather than asking the lesser player to add cards: the lesser player may not have a good sense of the strategy or what makes one card more advantageous than another.
That's a good idea, and a good point too.

That said, in the first two games my son played, he chose cards that were worth many points, and he won both times!

In any case, I think it's great that Scarab Lords lends itself to handicapped games. My son loved playing: I'll hopefully have the opportunity to play-test the 3 options proposed so far, in which case I'll start a thread here with the results.

Thread: Re: 2 Ur-Tet god card in play: double effect?

kentreuber — 2008-11-01T16:51:35+00:00

I would think they would both be in effect. Of course, if your opponent plays one God card all of yours go away, so I might not choose to have both of them in play at the same time.

Thread: Re: Handicapped game?

Gola — 2008-11-01T16:28:20+00:00

I think the addition of white cards to the weaker player's deck is a really good idea.

Thread: Re: Handicapped game?

kentreuber — 2008-11-01T15:58:47+00:00

How about forcing the better player to discard a few cards (say 3 or so) before the game begins? I probably wouldn't discard at random, because you might end up with a deck that's hard to play.

I think it's easier for the better player to discard rather than asking the lesser player to add cards: the lesser player may not have a good sense of the strategy or what makes one card more advantageous than another.

Thread: 2 Ur-Tet god cards in play: double effect?

lebigot — 2008-11-01T15:51:17+00:00

The Ur-Tet god cards lets you exercise an additional religious or military supremacy. If you have two such cards in your Gods column, do you apply the advantage twice? I'd guess so, as I don't see anything in the rules that would prevent this interpretation, but can you confirm it?

Thread: Handicapped game?

lebigot — 2008-11-01T12:39:08+00:00

Hello BGGs!

Do you have experience or ideas about playing Scarab Lords with a handicap? I'd like to play with my son (who's 7 and a half), and I am looking for a game that could be interesting for both of us (where we both have a decent chance of winning).

Some ideas, with which I have almost no practice:
- Let the other player choose part or all of his first hand.
- Let the other player add a few white cards to his deck.
Do you have experience with these, or other ways of playing with a handicap?

Thread: Re: Way, WAY better way to play this game.

JamesH — 2008-11-01T00:52:43+00:00

Btw, with your rules the game is almost identical to "Caesar & Cleopatra" so, if you prefer it your way, you can try this one out...
Oh and congratulations for the interesting variant!

Thread: Re: Does leader card count as minions?

beri — 2008-10-23T17:42:10+00:00

Curse Enhu, and he loses his power to protect minions.
Still, it does make your opponent more predictable: they have to go through your leader before they can go after your minions. The most obvious advantage I can see there is if your leader and your minions are in different phases; it moves your 'required' uncurse action from one phase to the other.

Thread: Re: Does leader card count as minions?

willdesigns — 2008-09-23T02:10:38+00:00

Nope, Leaders are not Minions, so they are not protected by cards that protect Minions.

Thread: Does leader card count as minions?

TRINDEL — 2008-09-23T01:51:11+00:00

I guess not, but the card The fist of Enhu, seems a bit pointless if they aren't, since he's a leader who only protect minions from being cursed, but doesn't protect himself.

Can somebody clarify. Thanks!

Thread: Re: Way, WAY better way to play this game.

photocurio — 2008-08-20T15:36:03+00:00

Mike_Evans wrote:
Anyway, you'll find that games are WAY more fun. No longer will you have to suffer through games where you just can't DO anything while your opponent wipes the floor with you.

I found this happened with a lot of my Scarab Lords games (until I gave up on it). I for one am willing to try this variant. I'm also supportive of anyone who posts a well playtested variant.

Thread: Re: When can supremacy actions be played?

lebigot — 2008-08-12T09:16:33+00:00

lebigot wrote:
Therefore, I do not think that supremacy actions can be played "anytime" during the supremacy phase.

Now I realize that the "timing" question is irrelevant. In fact, there are only two kinds of "S" cards (Ur-Tet and Retribution), and they are such that timing has no influence on their power.

Another point I'd like to make (for the record) is that it appears that the French rules contain an added paragraph about Supremacy Actions being linked to exercising a Supremacy; this paragraph is not present in the English version. I now follow the English rules (they do not tie the ability of performing a Supremacy Action to the exercise of any Supremacy), as the French rules were published after the English ones (my guess is that the French publisher tried to clarify the rules by mentioning something about when Supremacy Actions can be played).

So, to summarize, I fully concur with kentreuber and orangeblood on this: Supremacy Actions can be played whenever the player wishes during the Supremacy phase. (Given the "S" cards, the only Action available is playing a Supremacy card [no Un-cursing, no Activation].)

Image

jsper — 2008-07-28T02:10:28+00:00

Promotional sheet in spanish

Thread: Re: What am I missing?

reapersaurus — 2008-07-09T00:24:36+00:00

scds wrote:
I picked up this game because of good comments and pretty good reviews, and because I thought my husband - as a former Magic player - would dig it. But we are having serious problems enjoying this game - each game lasts about 5 minutes, with victory-by-supremacy easily won within just a few rounds. We've never even gotten a chance to see all the cards in each deck. The rules are unclear enough that I'm worried that there's something we're really messing up. And it's just un-fun enough that we're less than willing to keep playing to see if it gets better.

So, can someone please clarify:
A) Can we only draw cards when we have economic supremacy, or play a card that says we can draw more? Or, as in other types of card games, does each player get to draw during each turn?
B) Victory conditions: is it really supremacy on two fields in each region? We're finding that if one player has no cards of a certain phase in his/her initial hand, the other player can gain supremacy in 4 fields without much trouble at all - before the bereft player has a chance to draw any more cards.

Has anyone else had this problem of games lasting only about 5 minutes? I'll be convinced that we've done something wrong if no one tells me they've had this same problem. I'd have to say, my wife and my first-play of 3 games mirrors yours almost exactly.

We didn;t get THAT many rules wrong (we just didn;t play with the ability to get 6 cards for giving up your turn). The 1st 2 plays were slaughters, one for each side.
The initial draw seems to be horrendously dependant on who gains supremacy, and by that time it is too late (the weaker side gets cursed quickly).

I'm surprised more people haven;t commented on its hugely vacillating balance issues, mostly stemming from the opening draw.

I think a mulligan would be an excellent idea with this game, a la Magic.

Our 3rd game was a bit more lengthy, and actually had one swing of momentum (I was able to fight back for once), so hopefully the 1st 2 plays were an aberration.

Thread: Re: Opening strategy

Armadi — 2008-06-27T20:50:28+00:00

I usually start by going after economic supremacy as well.

Image

gutrie_es — 2008-03-31T21:19:36+00:00

Two players Spanish version

Image

jsper — 2008-02-17T14:41:01+00:00

Promotional in spanish

Image

rvinyard — 2008-02-10T22:30:56+00:00

Color corrected Scarab Lords box cover

Thread: Re: Way, WAY better way to play this game.

orangeblood — 2008-01-07T04:45:29+00:00

Mike_Evans wrote:
I played again today, btw. Drew 5 phase 1 cards and a single phase 2 as my starting hand. I would have been screwed once again if I played with vanilla rules.

Obviously I disagree here, and have played out of these situations many times.

You suggest a variant yourself, so what makes your variant better than mine?

I didn't suggest it was better, I was just trying to come up with a simpler way of dealing with your major complaint about the game without altering so many rules.

I know that I won't be able to convince you of anything...

Ditto.

But hopefully those who don't initially like Scarab Lords will try my own version of it and get a little more enjoyment out of their purchase.

Amen to that!

Cheers,

Rex

Thread: Re: Way, WAY better way to play this game.

Mike_Evans — 2008-01-07T03:46:30+00:00

what did you do with the supremacy you gained from placing the single Phase 1 card?
Well, if it's a military supremacy, my opponent discarded a card from the top of their deck. Big whoop. If I went first, a religious supremacy wouldn't have any effect. So I'd better pray I get an Economic supremacy, AND that the card I draw is helpful for next turn... assuming the one card I could play doesn't get cursed to oblivion.

Third, if you start with a hand that stinks (certainly possible, I'm not denying that), you can discard them all and draw back up to 6. That's your entire turn, but probably well worth it.
Yes, except now I'm down the number of cards I discarded, which is a pretty big setback when it comes to losing by drawing down the deck. And I've lost a turn.

I played again today, btw. Drew 5 phase 1 cards and a single phase 2 as my starting hand. I would have been screwed once again if I played with vanilla rules. It may be true that getting ALL phase 1 cards is statistically improbable, but even getting a majority of them is going to suck if your opponent gets a nice spread-out hand, and the non-1 cards you have aren't of any immediate use (extra likely with the blue deck).

You suggest a variant yourself, so what makes your variant better than mine? Besides, the rule of "2 actions" is soooo much simpler than phase 0, phase 1, phase 2, Supremacy, each with separate rules about how many actions you can take. It's so much easier to know you can just do two things on your turn.

I know that I won't be able to convince you of anything, and I have no intention of going back to the straight rules myself. So if you like the game straight, enjoy it straight, more power to ya. But hopefully those who don't initially like Scarab Lords will try my own version of it and get a little more enjoyment out of their purchase. I know I did.

Thread: Re: Way, WAY better way to play this game.

orangeblood — 2008-01-06T19:39:24+00:00

Mike_Evans wrote:
Dozens of games, and that hasn't happened huh?

Yup, that's what I said.

Mike_Evans wrote:
Here's my below example:

I have a hand of four phase1 cards and one phase 2 card which is Plague of Ash (worthless, since my opponent has no cards with 2 scarabs on them). I can play a single phase one card. My opponent then plays...

First, you should start with a hand of 6 cards. Second, what did you do with the supremacy you gained from placing the single Phase 1 card? Hopefully you gained economic supremacy and drew a card. Third, if you start with a hand that stinks (certainly possible, I'm not denying that), you can discard them all and draw back up to 6. That's your entire turn, but probably well worth it.

There are 16 Phase 1 cards in the 30-card deck, so you've got roughly a 50% chance of getting one on each card on the initial draw. If I remember correctly, the odds of getting all heads flipping a coin 6 times is 1/2^6, or about 1.6%. So these bad draws will happen only very occasionally, but as you see above you have some options.

Finally, as far as a variant, what about dividing your deck into the 1s and the 2s, and taking a couple of each before shuffling up and drawing your last two cards? Or, give a free "mulligan" draw to each player, or try the M:tG rule where you can mulligan as many times as you wish but you draw one less each time.

Any of these would ensure a more balanced starting hand.

Thread: Re: Way, WAY better way to play this game.

Mike_Evans — 2008-01-06T15:43:51+00:00

Dozens of games, and that hasn't happened huh? Well, it happened in 3 of the first 4 I played.

So, how am I getting the rules wrong? Here's my below example:

I have a hand of four phase1 cards and one phase 2 card which is Plague of Ash (worthless, since my opponent has no cards with 2 scarabs on them). I can play a single phase one card. My opponent then plays two phase 0 cards, a phase 1, and a phase 2. His phase 1 cancels out the power of the one I played, the other cards give him military supremacies plus any others he may have. The following turn, I can play a single phase 1 card. The next turn he plays Retribution and gets to choose two of my cards and kill them. Boy oh boy, I'm having fun.....

And I would like the game to actually work the first time, before I build my own deck. So I'll turn that challenge around: tell me you disagree with me after playing it MY way. But somehow I doubt you'll try it.

Thread: Re: Scarab Lords Review

photocurio — 2008-01-06T06:36:50+00:00

Well I gave you a thumbs up for reviewing this odd and nearly forgotten game. But, this review could use a copy edit. It would be a lot more coherent if all the sentences, etc, were correctly written.

Thread: Re: Way, WAY better way to play this game.

orangeblood — 2008-01-06T00:15:57+00:00

Mike_Evans wrote:
If you drew a hand of nothing but phase 1 cards, you could take a single action a turn. ...
Anyway, you'll find that games are WAY more fun. No longer will you have to suffer through games where you just can't DO anything while your opponent wipes the floor with you.

We've played dozens of games of both Scarab and Minotaur Lords, and never had such a game. As one who has blown my fair share of rules, I think you may be missing one here.

I'm not sure what is making this horrible for you and great for me, but it's something...

Thread: Scarab Lords Review

kodarr — 2008-01-05T23:19:50+00:00

Someones first impression when you look in the rule book is to think there is a lot of things going on at once. This however is not true. In fact everything in this game goes off one at a time.

The premises of the game is that you are fighting for political, religious, or military power in both the upper and lower city. You need to win at least 2 in both the lower and upper sections of the city, or to deplete the opponent of all cards from their deck.

The game overall is very well balanced even with the addition of the minotaur lords expansion. The decks are all different and each have their own theme to them. The majority of the decks are made up of minions and buildings since these are the most common things you will play each phase. Leaders are fairly common as well but remember you can never have more than one in each column. God cards and Fate cards seemed to be rarer draws, and sometimes I would even go a few games without seeing either.

The issuing scarabs or maze tokens to things nullified them allowing religious influence to become fairly powerful. The discarding a card from someones deck also gives the military sectors power. And lastly is political which allows for a draw of a card. Which sometimes you will not want to do this since you may be near the end of your deck and need to hold on a bit longer.

The ability to forgo your round one or round two actions to remove a scarab sometimes becomes all you can do in order to win a section you need. But even at these times you can be faced with the option of winning a different sector for more draw cards or to willow down an opponents cards, or to even curse one of their pieces.

Randomness does rule a lot of this game with what cards you have but you usually have a good deal of strategy to go off of for where you can place those men and where to win. I've found if you don't play aggressive usually you will just lose when they take a bunch of places with small numbers then over run one of your areas and win.

This game can turn tides on the drop of a pin so be careful.
Overall I give this game

The randomness takes a few points away from it but the variety and the extra cards to customize the decks with makes this a really great game that I'm surprised didn't become a CCG because it would work great as one. The board is more for show than needed.

Thread: Re: Way, WAY better way to play this game.

Rygel — 2008-01-05T18:48:00+00:00

I have played both of these games a bunch (Minotaur Lords), and I have to disagree with you. It is true that the decks are some what unbalanced to begin with but the true game is when each player gets to "build" their own deck. If you build a deck that is not well balanced then you deserve to get beat. I happen to think that the game is played best when you play both Scarab and Minotaur together. One player gets Scarab and the other Minotaur, then build your own decks and go at it. Play the best of three then exchange your for the other and do it again. It only takes about an hour. Try this, then tell me if you still think the game is played better your way.

Thread: Way, WAY better way to play this game.

Mike_Evans — 2008-01-05T05:50:29+00:00

Okay, I played this game a few times with a friend. I checked out the threads here too, I'm pretty sure we played everything correctly. And we absolutely hated it. I was quite disappointed that the great Knizia put his seal of approval on it.

If you drew a hand of nothing but phase 1 cards, you could take a single action a turn. If your opponent was fortunate to draw a smattering of different cards, would have 4-6 out by the time you had 2 or 3, and all the supremacy bonuses they kept getting would curse/discard your own cards into oblivion. It's totally bogus when you don't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning no matter what you do. And the Gods are always a disappointment... your opponent more often than not will have their own god card and be able to play it the moment you get one of yours out there.

I thought the game had a lot of potential but was executed very poorly. So I thought about it and came up with this: Instead of a phase 0, 1, 2, Supremacy thing, with complicated rules about which actions you get to do, and a first turn two-actions-only thing, here is the new way to play:

ONE TURN consists of:

1. Supremacy Phase (happens FIRST, before anything else)
- Determine Supremacy in each column
- Apply Supremacy Effects.

2. Action Phase - take two actions.

An action consists of any of the following:
- Playing a card (any phase, fate, god, doesn't matter)
- Removing one Scarab from any card
- Activating a God's Power

CARD CHANGES:
Plague of Ash: Your opponent must discard up to two of their cards containing Scarabs. (Note that if there are more than 2 cards with Scarabs, your OPPONENT chooses which he discards) Now this card will actually see some occasional use.

Phase 0 Cards: When you play this card, you may take an additional action for free. This simulates the fact that you can play an unlimited number of phase 0 cards and/or remove curses from them easily.

Gods: I divvied up the gods so that Red and Blue now both have 4 unique gods instead of 2 groups of 2. When you play a God card, you don't get the benefit right away... you have to spend an action to use them or, if passive, wait until the proper time to get the benefit. The upside is that once a God is in play, it stays in play no matter what. Each color has 2 passive gods and 2 "action" gods. I used photoshop to make all four gods of each side unique, but that isn't important to this variant. If people are interested I will post what each of the 4 gods do in my version.

Anyway, you'll find that games are WAY more fun. No longer will you have to suffer through games where you just can't DO anything while your opponent wipes the floor with you.

In addition, I never liked that if you were lucky, you could play a bunch of cards, rack up several new supremacy effects, and apply them instantly. Now, with the Supremacy Phase at the START of your turn, you only get bonuses for a supremacy you manage to keep through your opponent's turn. At first I worried that fewer supremacy effects in general would make the military supremacy less useful for running someone out of cards, but so far there hasn't been a problem. I have played several games since my modifications and a few of them have come down to the wire in terms of players running out of cards (usually the blue player). However, if it does become a problem, I'd recommend making a Military Supremacy Effect force your opponent to discard a card from their hand if able. This reduces the number of cards they may be able to play in their turn, and will increase the likelihood that they will have to waste a turn drawing more cards.

The final benefit is that you don't have to have a special first turn... just play normally from turn 1.

Thread: Re: When can supremacy actions be played?

lebigot — 2007-12-31T17:04:12+00:00

Quizoid wrote:
Can you exercise supremacy in any order? Meaning, can you draw your cards before cursing?

Supremacies can definitely be exercised in any order. For instance, you can exercise an Economic Supremacy before exercising a Religious one.

[1 edit: typo]

Thread: Re: When can supremacy actions be played?

Quizoid — 2007-12-31T16:33:37+00:00

Can you exercise supremacy in any order? Meaning, can you draw your cards before cursing? That would be advantageous...

Thread: Re: Only play 2 of the 4 phases?

Karmic_devil — 2007-12-21T05:16:15+00:00

Thanks

Thread: Re: Only play 2 of the 4 phases?

GSReis — 2007-12-20T16:27:58+00:00

The example of play does not relate to the first turn.

Thread: Only play 2 of the 4 phases?

Karmic_devil — 2007-12-20T15:44:55+00:00

In the rules, it says:
"On his or her very first turn, the first player may only play two of the four phases. The first player may choose which phases to play. During the first player's turn the supremacy phase may be passed."

This seems pretty clear to me. The phases are:
Phase 0
Phase 1
Phase 2
Supremacy

The first player on their first turn may only play two of them.
So two "phases" or one "phase" and supremacy. This is how I interpreted this. Yet in the example of play on the last page it give a scenario where the first player plays cards in phase 0, then passes in phase 1, the plays a card in phase 2. Then plays the supremacy phase. Isn't that 3 phases? is the example of play incorrect or did I misunderstand the original claim?

Josh

Thread: Re: Has Knizia ever played MtG? (dissecting the decks)

kentreuber — 2007-12-20T15:27:14+00:00

The gameplay is exactly the same. Minotaur Lords adds some different cards. There are some very powerful buildings that come into play with 2 scarabs on them. The Blue deck in ML has minions with a Horde keyword. Hordes are worth X strength, where X is the number of Horde cards in play in that column.

Thread: Re: Has Knizia ever played MtG? (dissecting the decks)

Taavet — 2007-12-20T07:28:00+00:00

So does Minotaur Lords add any new rules? Or is it same rules/gameplay but new decks and different theme?

Thread: Re: Has Knizia ever played MtG? (dissecting the decks)

orangeblood — 2007-12-20T04:59:04+00:00

qrux wrote:
The "Lords" games (Scarab Lords and Minotaur Lords) are much closer to a CCG than Blue Moon and the learning curve for the Lords games is significantly greater than Blue Moon. The decks in Blue Moon are almost self-playing as the choices are usually obvious;

I love both games, but disagree with your comments on Blue Moon. The various people decks are different and some really take some experience to learn how to play well. Blue Moon is a much deeper game, and even more so as you move into the Emissaries and Inquisitors decks and even more so if you decide to get into the deck-building part of it.

Thread: Re: Has Knizia ever played MtG? (dissecting the decks)

qrux — 2007-12-20T01:11:04+00:00

Early on we found the red deck to be weaker than the blue. As we got a few more games played we slowly discovered that the red deck requires a more subtle strategy. Once discovered we felt the two decks were fairly well balanced.

The "Lords" games (Scarab Lords and Minotaur Lords) are much closer to a CCG than Blue Moon and the learning curve for the Lords games is significantly greater than Blue Moon. The decks in Blue Moon are almost self-playing as the choices are usually obvious; not so of the Lords games. I would suggest that Blue Moon is intended for a general gaming public while the Lords games were targeted at gamers. Where Blue Moon offers a variety of decks; the Lords games offer greater depth.It is unfortunate that there have been no additional decks released .

Thread: Re: Has Knizia ever played MtG? (dissecting the decks)

kentreuber — 2007-12-20T01:10:15+00:00

With the Red deck, I often try to gain military superiority in both regions. This forces the Blue player to discard one or two cards per turn.

Thread: Re: Has Knizia ever played MtG? (dissecting the decks)

Taavet — 2007-12-19T21:06:55+00:00

So I take it the Thumbs mean people have read and like the Review, but does everyone agree that the Red is harder to use?
I thought there might be a little more discussion on the matter.

Oh, well, glad it is being enjoyed.

Thread: Has Knizia ever played MtG? (dissecting the decks)

Taavet — 2007-12-19T18:52:03+00:00

My wife and I recently got this game and have really enjoyed it. This review is meant more for those who have the game and want to get a little more out of it by better understanding the decks. The advanced rules really help (which will be addressed toward the bottom).

In this review I wanted to address the balance of the two various decks (Red and Blue). Of the 12 or so games I have played so far both my wife and I agree that Blue is stronger and more fluid. The Red deck does have some good cards but it seems hard to get in your hand what you need to for that final Supremacy to secure victory. Anyone who has played Magic the Gathering or any CCG knows there is a lot to take into account when creating a deck (and probably more so trying to create two opposing decks which should be evenly matched).

Firstly, the Decks, listed with Columns and only unique cards. Cards will be listed by Amount,(Type)Name(Phase)-Power. Type will be M(minion), L(leader), B(building), Fates and Gods listed separately as all are unique:

Red ------------------------------------ Blue
Economic ------------------------------- Economic
None ------------------------------------ 2 (M)River Merchant(0)-1
Blue has an advantage in Economics with 2 phase 0 Minions although they are only 1 Power (Justicar, a Leader, compounds this).

Religious ------------------------------ Religious
2 (B)Necropolis(1)-6 ----------------- None
Red seemingly has an advantage in Religion but not really.

Military --------------------------------- Military
2 (M)Blacksand Mercs(0)-1 ---------- None
2 (B)Fortress of Ta(1)-6
Red does have the upper hand with Military, which is needed for Retribution, but not by much.

All Columns ---------------------------- All Columns
2 (L)Khamal the Eternal(0)-2 ------ 2 (L)Justicar of Kal-Anan(2)-3
2 (L)The Fist of Enhu(2)-2 ---------- 2 (L)Shon-Ra the Radiant(2)-6
------------------------------------------- 4 (B)The Seven Sphinxes(1)-4
Red has 4 cards which can be played to Any Column but only one per Column and they are only Power 2 (many minions are stronger). Khamal I have found useful because of his ability to withstand curses (phase 0 you can remove as many as are on him!) but because he is only Power 2 its hard to get Supremacy with him when they are cursing you. I have found the Fist to be fairly useless as they just curse him and then your Minions, again only 2 Power.
Blue has 8 cards which can be played to Any Column. Justicar adds +2 Power to all his Minions in the same Column with him. This ability effectly makes all the Minions which both decks share in common much stronger on the Blue side, and remember any Column! Shon-Ra is probably the biggest hitter able to add his 6 Power to any column without any downside. All buildings come into play with at least 1 curse on them so even though Red has Necropolis and the Fortress, both 6 Power, they come into play cursed, and often don't get a chance to uncurse. Also if both Necropolis (or Fortress) are used in the same Column to secure Supremacy Red lacks the strength to obtain 2 Columns in the opposite Region for victory. Aside from Shon-Ra Blue also has 4 Power-4 buildings which can be played anywhere. I feel these cards greatly favor the Blue deck.

Fates ---------------------------------- Fates
2 Retribution ------------------------- 2 Plague of Ash
2 Bounty of the Flood -------------- 2 Mass Purification
With Bounty Red gains the ability to rapidly draw more cards, which unfortunately has caused the Red player to run out of deck more then once. Retribution is very handy IF Military Supremacy can be obtained. I almost always use them to take out the Blue Leaders.
Plague of Ash is one of Blues weaker cards (IMO the weakest Fate). If the Reds have already been cursed with at least 2 curses they lack the ability to properly recover from that anyway so it is fairly pointless to destroy them. Blue however does have the ability to recover from any amount of Cursing with Mass Purification. Several games, I as Red, have been close to winning, only to have my wife uncurse everything in a whole Region (3 Columns) and steal at least 1 if not several Supremacy away from me.

Gods ---------------------------------- Gods
2 Khema ------------------------------ 2 Ur-Tet
2 Enhu -------------------------------- 2 Kal-Anan
The Red Gods are decent. Khema is handy to have around although if as Red you don't get some Religious Supremacy you're pretty much done for. If you do then your guys aren't getting cursed as much and her ability doesn't help that much. She will help you play your buildings and remove the Curse same turn. Enhu is I feel the more powerful Red God. Even though the opponent gets to choose which 2 to discard it is usually always worth it to make them do so instead of taking a regular phase 2 action.
The Blue God Kal-Anan allows the Blue player to draw up to two cards a turn. This God almost negates Bounty of the Flood and the cards lost from Enhu. Ur-Tet is IMO, the most powerful God. He has the flexibility of using his Ability (without spending an action) in 4 of 6 Columns of which Blue only has to have Supremacy in 1. So as long as he is out (which always seems too long) Red ends up discarding more and getting cursed more. You lose by running out of deck, and Red lacks ability to remove curses quickly so I feel again these cards favor Blue.

Additional dissection reveals, out of 30 card decks:
Red has 4 Phase 0 cards, 16 Phase 1 cards (making it hard to play them when you need to uncurse one), 8 Phase 2 cards (2 Leaders, 4 Gods, 2 Fates, because the only cursable phase 2 cards are the Leaders who protect their Minions this does help you remove curses from them because you don't have a phase 2 to play anyway. However the leader is only Power-2 and Phase 2 should be used for Ehna as much as possible), and 2 Supremacy (Fates).
Blue has 2 Phase 0 Cards, 16 Phase 1 cards (again making it hard to play them when you need to uncurse one, but less burdensome to Blue because of Mass Purification), 10 Phase 2 cards (All Leaders, Fates, and half of the Gods), 2 Supremacy (Ur-Tet).

Summary- So in my opinion I feel the Blue deck is easier to play and has more useful cards. I chose to play the Red deck for the challenge it presents (and my wife usually doesn't win our other games anyway, although fairly consistently with the Blue deck). The decks are close to being balanced, the Red deck just takes a little more skill, knowledge of cards in both decks, and some luck getting the right cards in hand at the right time.

The Advanced White Deck- This feature lets Players customise their decks. There are several cards in there which really help! The Gods will help either deck, Kashdoru the Pure (a leader) is almost a MUST for the Red deck to counter the Blue leaders, the Power-5 Phase 2 Minions are very effective (at the same time susceptible to Servant of Shadows), and several other White cards have nice specific uses.

All in all we really enjoy this game, but understanding the decks sure does help if you are playing the Red deck!!

Feel free to contradict my above stated Opinions and present any useful arguments!

Image

avyssaleos — 2007-12-18T22:24:10+00:00

The manual

Image

avyssaleos — 2007-12-18T22:21:18+00:00

The 3 decks included in the game - still wrapped - along with the pyramid tokens

Image

avyssaleos — 2007-12-18T22:19:33+00:00

Unpunched Scarab tokens

Image

avyssaleos — 2007-12-18T22:18:26+00:00

You know you are a BGG addict when the first thing you do after opening a new game is taking a picture of the box's contents...

Thread: Re: When can supremacy actions be played?

lebigot — 2007-12-14T10:04:40+00:00

clandaith wrote:
The rules seem unclear on this point. They mention checking supremacy and exercising supremacy, but I can't find mention of when cards are played. In absence of any clear rule, I'd say that you can play a Supremacy phase card anytime in the phase.

The (French) rules read In addition to exercising your supremacy, you may also choose to play any number of supremacy actions during this phase (emphasis is mine). I take this to imply that you cannot play supremacy actions if you do not have any supremacy, or if you choose not to exercise any of your supremacies. Therefore, I do not think that supremacy actions can be played "anytime" during the supremacy phase.

Now, a simple interpretation of the quoted rule is that you exercise a supremacy, and this allows you to then play supremacy actions. The other interpretation would be that you're allowed to play supremacy actions whenever you will exercise or have exercised at least one supremacy. I personally subscribe to the first interpretation, as it provides a more obvious game flow (explaining to your opponent that you are entitled to play a supremacy action because you are going to exercise a supremacy is more complicated than first exercising the supremacy and then being automatically allowed to play a supremacy action).

What do you make of this? Anybody out there with a direct connection to the good Doctor Knizia?

[1 edit: precision added)

Thread: Re: When can supremacy actions be played?

orangeblood — 2007-12-14T02:22:33+00:00

lebigot wrote:
When can Supremacy Actions be played? From reading this forum and a player aid from BGG, I get the impression that some players only play supremacy actions when exercising their economic supremacy.

I agree with Kent: You're generally able to take any phase's actions in any order, and so it should be the same in the Supremacy Phase.

Thread: Re: When can supremacy actions be played?

kentreuber — 2007-12-14T00:56:51+00:00

The rules seem unclear on this point. They mention checking supremacy and exercising supremacy, but I can't find mention of when cards are played. In absence of any clear rule, I'd say that you can play a Supremacy phase card anytime in the phase. And I don't see any reason to link that to having Economic Supremacy.

Thread: Re: When can supremacy actions be played?

clandaith — 2007-12-13T23:06:41+00:00

I've always played that you determine who has supremacy and then get to do the action that it gives you. There are no tokens to play or save up.

Thread: Re: Economic Supremacy, page 6

lebigot — 2007-12-13T22:20:56+00:00

lebigot wrote:
Does everybody find this interpretation of the rules correct? Any input would be most welcome.

I moved this discussion to a separate thread: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1931964#1931964.

Thread: When can supremacy actions be played?

lebigot — 2007-12-13T22:20:01+00:00

When can Supremacy Actions be played? From reading this forum and a player aid from BGG, I get the impression that some players only play supremacy actions when exercising their economic supremacy.

However, after investing the question with Ubik, the French publisher of Scarab Lords (http://www.editions-ubik.com/forum/index.php?topic=103.0), I understand that the supremacy phase goes like this:

1) Determine supremacies.
2) After you exercise any supremacy, you're allowed to play any number of supremacy actions.

Does everybody find this interpretation of the rules correct? Any input would be most welcome.

Thread: Re: Economic Supremacy, page 6

lebigot — 2007-12-12T13:16:24+00:00

After investing the question further with Ubik (http://www.editions-ubik.com/forum/index.php?topic=103.0), they say that the rules with regard to the supremacy phase and supremacy actions is as follows:

1) Determine supremacies.
2) After you exercise any supremacy, you're allowed to play any number of supremacy actions.

Does everybody find this interpretation of the rules correct? Any input would be most welcome.

Thread: Re: Economic Supremacy, page 6

lebigot — 2007-12-11T22:12:41+00:00

Ubik, who publishes Scarab Lords in France, says that playing supremacy actions (like playing an "S" card) is not linked to having any supremacy (http://www.editions-ubik.com/forum/index.php?topic=103.0).

So, my current understanding is that the supremacy phase goes like this:
1) Determine the supremacies.
2) Exercise your supremacies, possibly interspersed with supremacy actions (playing "S" cards, etc.)--whether or not you have an economic supremacy.

What's your take on this?

Thread: Re: Economic Supremacy, page 6

lebigot — 2007-12-10T21:55:58+00:00

Lovecraft wrote:
We don't understand the last sentence in the first paragraph that states:
"In addition to exercising your supremacy, you may also choose to play any number of supremacy actions during this phase"

Is it clear that you can only play "S" cards if you have an economic supremacy? The French rules are ambiguous about this: "exercising your supremacy" can very well refer to any supremacy (in the French rules, it is not clear whether the above sentence applies to any supremacy or only to the economic supremacy). (To complicate things further, I did not find anything about playing "S" cards in the rules at http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/pdf/scarablordsrules.pdf )

And I have additional questions about the rule you quote: do you have to exercise "your supremacy" if you want to play "S" cards? and when do you play "S" cards? before or after exercising the economic supremacy (or anytime in your supremacy phase)? or after exercising any supremacy? or all supremacies?

I'm utterly confused help!!

Thread: Re: Blue Moon is Better

lebigot — 2007-12-10T21:08:31+00:00

deltarn wrote:

If you haven't at least one Economic supremacy your cards hand will quickly diminish leaving you only 'forced moves'.

You can always choose to skip your turn and refresh your hand to 6 cards, if this bothers you...

Plus, leaving the economic supremacy to your opponent helps you by enticing him to draw from his deck, which can make you win by deck exhaustion. This strategy works particularly well if you have a military supremacy.

Thread: Re: Question about

lebigot — 2007-12-10T20:57:19+00:00

orangeblood wrote:
Randall Shaw (#74209),

Yes, the removal of the scarab does not cost an action, and thus you're able to perform another action.

Great game, eh?

Rex

I'd like to add that if you just played Khema, you cannot play another Phase 2 action, since you already used your Phase 2 action (to play Khema). Reference: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1727421#1727421.

Thread: Re: Economic Supremacy, page 6

Snooze_uk — 2007-12-07T23:25:19+00:00

I believe this refers to the cards marked for play in phase "S". You may play any number of these cards during the supremacy phase.

Image

jsper — 2007-09-21T21:26:36+00:00

spanish edition back of the box

Image

jsper — 2007-09-21T21:19:18+00:00

spanish edition cover