Game: Star Wars: Episode 1 - Clash of the Lightsabers

Image

matthiske — 2008-08-10T22:31:27+00:00

Painted Minis

Thread: Alternate 'cinematic' setup (Same rules and play)

dreadpirate — 2008-06-29T09:04:41+00:00

I got the game recently off a trade table (Geekway to the West). I'm late to this party.

Wait... the cool pewter figures are merely score-counters? Boring. I'm a visual person. I want to see the figures fighting!
- - - -

1. Set up the final duel cards in a line (omit the 1's): 2 3 4 5 5 4 3 2
Note: the number and/or color of the final duel cards no longer matters - they simply serve as a partioned 'bridge' to fight over; you could use unnumbered tiles. The following examples omit numbers, but preserve colors to illustrate card removal.

2. Place each figure on 'their own' central (5) card: [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]Q[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]D[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR]

3. When a player wins a round, their figure moves forward one card, pushing the other figure backward one card. The winning player then removes the furthest card from behind their own figure. Note for the pedantic: if you must, put that removed card on top of a 'score pile'. The top card on your pile is the card your figure would be on, in the standard set-up. If the round was a shut-out, the aforementioned is done again. The game ends if you push the opponents figure off the cards.

4. It's simpler than it sounds.

- - -

Example of illustrated play:

Set-up:
[BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]Q[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]D[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR]

Qui-gon wins round 1. The Qui-gon figure moves forward from his own (green 5) card onto the next (red 5) card, pushing back Darth Maul (onto the red 4). The Qui-gon player then removes the first (green 2) card:
[BGCOLOR=#FFFFFF]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]Q[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]D[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR]

Qui-gon wins again:
[BGCOLOR=#FFFFFF]_ _[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]Q[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]D[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR]

Darth Maul wins the next round:
[BGCOLOR=#FFFFFF]_ _[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]Q[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]D[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR]

Darth Maul then wins a shut-out (all three battles):
[BGCOLOR=#FFFFFF]_ _[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]Q[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]D[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000][/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000]_[/BGCOLOR]

Darth Maul wins yet again:
[BGCOLOR=#FFFFFF]_[/BGCOLOR] Q [BGCOLOR=#009900]D[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#009900]_[/BGCOLOR] [BGCOLOR=#CC0000][/BGCOLOR]

...Qui-gon, sliced in half, expression of shock, bounces down the cliff-face.

Checksum: Under the normal set-up, same battle, Qui-gon is now on the 3 card {started on the 1 card + won 2 rounds}; Darth Maul wins on the 5 card {started on the 1 + won round + won shut-out round + won round}. Same result. Less flavor. IMHO.

- - - -

To play the popular extra-two points variant (where the figures start on an invisible 'zero' card, and win once they reach an invisible '6' card):

1. Add back in the 1 cards: 1 2 3 4 5 5 4 3 2 1

2. A player can now 'hang off the ledge' (their figure doesn't die if it is pushed off the cards), but they lose the game if they lose a round while 'hanging off the ledge'. Just like in the movie.

I thought it was a kewl idea. Please don't crucify me too badly for it. Props go to Knizia's Duell, and to Bruel and Pallières's Shazamm!

Thread: Re: am I playing correctly?

Verkisto — 2008-04-24T15:52:34+00:00

The only thing about playing a Draw 2 card is if your opponent also plays a special card, because they'll cancel each other out. It depends on your draw, and your opponent's draw, but it's not bad to give it a try. I and my opponent did that in our game earlier this week.

Thread: Re: am I playing correctly?

Roosterfish — 2008-04-24T02:06:05+00:00

Verkisto wrote:
This all looks correct to me. I just have one question, myself.

Roosterfish wrote:
S plays a Special card ‘Draw 2 cards’ with a value of ‘1’.

Do special cards have a value? When I taught this game last night, I taught that the special cards were worth 0.

*If both players had played all of the cards from their Hand and the Values were matched and the number of cards played for Battle were even then the Battle would be considered a Standoff and both players would discard all played cards with no winner*

Question:
If this was the first Battle then both players would play the next two Battles with only the Battle Cards on the table?

Yep. Only if one of the face-down cards was a special card that allowed you to draw cards would you have anything else to play.

I wrote this at work and was trying to remember the correct card values so you are probably right about the special card - didn't mean to confuse anyone but thank you guys for responding to me and my questions.
Any tips on strategy?
For strategy I'm thinking that playing a draw 2 cards for the first battle card, a high value attack card second battle card and a low value attack card for the for the third battle card (if I have these cards to play that is).
That way I could get more cards initially for the first two battles and the third battle would probably be fewer cards left to play on either side.

Thread: Re: am I playing correctly?

songbird — 2008-04-23T18:01:00+00:00

Thread: Re: am I playing correctly?

Verkisto — 2008-04-23T17:47:37+00:00

This all looks correct to me. I just have one question, myself.

Roosterfish wrote:
S plays a Special card ‘Draw 2 cards’ with a value of ‘1’.

Do special cards have a value? When I taught this game last night, I taught that the special cards were worth 0.

*If both players had played all of the cards from their Hand and the Values were matched and the number of cards played for Battle were even then the Battle would be considered a Standoff and both players would discard all played cards with no winner*

Question:
If this was the first Battle then both players would play the next two Battles with only the Battle Cards on the table?

Yep. Only if one of the face-down cards was a special card that allowed you to draw cards would you have anything else to play.

Thread: Re: What's your ruling?

Acoriano3 — 2008-04-23T17:43:45+00:00

I had also been playing this wrong--yikes! I bet it's a much more intense game with 1s and 2s being way more valuable.

Thread: am I playing correctly?

Roosterfish — 2008-04-23T17:23:07+00:00

This is just a basic play example so I can be sure I’m playing the game correctly; starting from the draw 7 cards from the battle deck (after the table setup is complete).
Please correct any mistakes and/or answer any question listed or make comments at any point to help me. The comments within the * * are what-if's.

I am going to teach my wife to play this weekend and she always ask rules questions I don’t have the answer to and cannot locate in the rulebook in the allotted one minute time before she loses interest.

J (Jedi) and S (Sith) place 3 Battle Cards from their Hand face down in front of them to represent three battles for the first round leaving them 4 cards in their ‘Hand’.

J and S turn their first Battle Card over at the same time.
*If two special cards were played the cards are discarded and play resumes with cards played from players Hands*

At this point whichever player has the highest value is considered winning.

Example of play:
J plays an Attack 3 card while S plays an Attack 1 card so J is winning (J=3 / S=1).

Now S has two options, either to concede or play a card from his Hand to try and gain the lead.

Example of play:
S plays a Special card ‘Draw 2 cards’ with a value of ‘1’.
S is still losing by total value (J=3 / S=2).
S now plays an Attack 1 equaling the total value (J=3 / S=3) but takes the lead because he has three cards in Battle VS J’s one card in Battle.
J now has the same options of conceding or playing a card from his Hand to try and gain the lead.

Example of play:
J concedes leaving him with four cards still in his Hand while S has four cards as well
S = 4 cards (initial hand) – 1 card (special card played) + 2 cards (special card allowed two cards drawn from the battle deck and attack value of one) – 1 card (attack 1 card played) = 4 cards (total cards in hand).
Did I figure the card totals correct?

J now discards his cards played but S leaves his down to show he is the winner of this battle.
*If both players had played all of the cards from their Hand and the Values were matched and the number of cards played for Battle were even then the Battle would be considered a Standoff and both players would discard all played cards with no winner*

Question:
If this was the first Battle then both players would play the next two Battles with only the Battle Cards on the table?

Thread: Re: What's your ruling?

franklincobb — 2008-04-23T14:59:51+00:00

GreatWolf wrote:
songbird wrote:

Also, since you don't state this plainly, did you both have the same number of cards in the battle (i.e. a bonafide standoff)? Note that if you play a single 3, but your opponent plays a 2 and a 1 (total of 3, but two cards played), it is not a standoff; your opponent would be ahead.

Wow. I had also completely missed this rule. That will make a big difference in gameplay.

Seth Ben-Ezra
Great Wolf

Absolutely it does. You should revisit the game to see, Seth. It definitely has the impact of making 1s and 2s more valuable than they were previously.

Thread: Re: What's your ruling?

GreatWolf — 2008-04-23T14:51:56+00:00

songbird wrote:

Also, since you don't state this plainly, did you both have the same number of cards in the battle (i.e. a bonafide standoff)? Note that if you play a single 3, but your opponent plays a 2 and a 1 (total of 3, but two cards played), it is not a standoff; your opponent would be ahead.

Wow. I had also completely missed this rule. That will make a big difference in gameplay.

Seth Ben-Ezra
Great Wolf

Thread: Re: What's your ruling?

franklincobb — 2008-04-23T13:33:44+00:00

songbird wrote:
I agree with the above response. The rules do state that in a standoff, both players must play a card immediately. If one player cannot play a card, that player must concede.

Also, since you don't state this plainly, did you both have the same number of cards in the battle (i.e. a bonafide standoff)? Note that if you play a single 3, but your opponent plays a 2 and a 1 (total of 3, but two cards played), it is not a standoff; your opponent would be ahead.

Good point. We played Clash of the Lightsabers wrong for quite some time before we caught that rule.

Thread: Re: What's your ruling?

Verkisto — 2008-04-23T13:33:30+00:00

songbird wrote:
Also, since you don't state this plainly, did you both have the same number of cards in the battle (i.e. a bonafide standoff)? Note that if you play a single 3, but your opponent plays a 2 and a 1 (total of 3, but two cards played), it is not a standoff; your opponent would be ahead.

Yes, we had the same number of cards. I kept missing that rule, but my opponent kept me honest.

Thanks for your replies. In the end, we replayed the entire last hand, which is what the results would have forced us to do, anyway.

Thread: Re: What's your ruling?

songbird — 2008-04-23T13:28:23+00:00

I agree with the above response. The rules do state that in a standoff, both players must play a card immediately. If one player cannot play a card, that player must concede.

Also, since you don't state this plainly, did you both have the same number of cards in the battle (i.e. a bonafide standoff)? Note that if you play a single 3, but your opponent plays a 2 and a 1 (total of 3, but two cards played), it is not a standoff; your opponent would be ahead.

Thread: Re: What's your ruling?

franklincobb — 2008-04-23T13:10:29+00:00

I think...think...that if there is a standoff, both players are required to play a card simultaneously, if possible. If only one player can, he is still forced to play his card.

Here's what the Transformers Battling Card Game (a rethemed re-release from last year) has to say:

Standoffs and draws: If the Attack Values and the number of played cards are equal, it's a Standoff. To resolve a Standoff, both players play one card from their hands at the same, then total the Attack Values. Do this as many times as needed until there is a clear winner. (If both players run out of cards it's a draw, and no one wins the battle.)

Then, on conceding a battle if you have no cards:

The player who is losing the battle may either play another card or concede the battle. If this player has no cards left to play, he or she MUST concede.

I don't think that there were any rules changes between Clash and Transformers, but I would have to dig to find my Clash rulebook. Anyway, reading the above, note that it mentions during standoffs that both players must play a card, but only calls it a draw if BOTH players are out of cards, an important distinction. Also note that the instant concession only occurs if you are out of cards and LOSING the battle.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. If there's a Standoff and it can be resolved, it MUST be. I've used this tactic to whittle down my opponent's hand in situations just as the one you're describing.

Thread: What's your ruling?

Verkisto — 2008-04-23T12:51:32+00:00

Last night, we played a quick game of Clash of the Lightsabers to end our game night, and encountered a weird situation. We were each at 4 battles on our duel track, and we were down to the second battle. I had won the first battle, and the second battle came down to a standoff. My opponent had one card left in his hand, and I had none, and we weren't clear on what we should do next (I only had my rules summary with me, not the official rules). Was it....

I was out of cards, so my opponent won the standoff immediately.

or

My opponent had to play his card to win the battle.

?

It turned out to be important, because if he had held on to his card, then the second battle would have been a draw, and he would have won the last battle, causing a draw for that round and forcing the game to another round. If, though, he had to play that last card, he would have won that battle, and I would have won the final battle based off of the initial cards, giving me the win. We couldn't decide, so we just played another final round, but we were interested in the official ruling in that situation.

Also, when the draw pile runs out, do you reshuffle, or is that it for your hand of cards? Again, this might be covered in the official rules, but all I had on hand was my rules summary.

Thread: Re: A small tweak to add a new spark to an old favorite.

franchi — 2008-03-04T22:08:18+00:00

I play this one quite a lot with my son, and we have always played that Retreat gives only Attack cards back to your hand, not Special cards.

I read this very simple variant somewhere, and the game plays very well with it. At reading the rules I realized already that a couple of Use the Force plus Retreat was a game breaker, we didn't even try it.

Thread: A small tweak to add a new spark to an old favorite.

Nick Danger — 2008-03-04T21:48:15+00:00

For your consideration:

I've been playing this game ever since its arrival on the scene and have been enjoying it as a quick little two player game. However, one recurring theme keeps playing out and it has finally caused me to try and think of some way to vary the game play a little.

What I'm referring to is the one sided whooping that takes place whenever one player can play multiple 'use the force' cards in tandem with a 'retreat' card(s). Once that player loads up with a truckload of cards only the equivalent of a lottery win can turn the tide. Unfortunately this is happening more and more often as everyone plays trying to get that winning combo into their hands. No, it's not a big problem as the game itself is such a quick little beer and pretzel type of game but that didn't stop me from tinkering.

After trying a few different variations we've settled on one that really seems to have re-ignited the fun we used to have with the game. The change is simple, yet the outcome has a nice little affect on game strategy. Here's are the changes:

*Beginning hand size changes from 7 to 8.

*Scorers start off the "board" and must travel beyond it. Effectively changing a winning score from 4 to 6.

*Introduce a starting round hand limit of 8. Such that before any round if you have less than 8 cards you may only draw to fill your hand to 8. If you have more than 8 you must discard down to 8.

These few changes seem to really emphasize your hand management skills. Shear hand size cannot win the war for you anymore. It may win a battle or two but no more. Plus, you now have to think about what cards you might want to carry over and what ones you'd like to get out from your hand before replenishing time.

The extra card, plus the extra points required for a win just about guarantee you will be going through the deck so more problems of one player hitting the "sweet spot" in the deck and the other player not having enough time to counter. Since you can count on getting to every card you can play and plan accordingly.

All our games played under these rules have been pretty tough and closely fought affairs. In fact the biggest margin of victory so far has been a 6-4 score.

If like me, you really like the game but it has started to become a bit stale for you try this variation. It might just have you bringing it to the two player table a bit more often.

Thread: Re: What if "Block" and "Draw 2 Cards" are initial cards

Rob in Richmond — 2008-01-04T01:45:33+00:00

djbcrawford wrote:
2 specials always cancel each other out.

Hurts to lose a "Draw 2" this way - I feel your pain...

And it was the battle that will give my son the victory b/c I have no more cards in my hand. I was counting on the "Draw 2" in my last battle to give me some cards to play. Oh well.

Thread: Re: What if "Block" and "Draw 2 Cards" are initial cards

reapersaurus — 2008-01-04T01:19:07+00:00

much of this game is the psychological guessing as to when your opponent will be playing a special card....

Thread: Re: What if "Block" and "Draw 2 Cards" are initial cards

djbcrawford — 2008-01-03T23:21:27+00:00

2 specials always cancel each other out.

Hurts to lose a "Draw 2" this way - I feel your pain...

Thread: What if "Block" and "Draw 2 Cards" are initial cards

Rob in Richmond — 2008-01-03T23:16:33+00:00

Hey Folks,

Santa brought my 5 year-old this game and we're loving it. Real cool one. But we have a question.

On one of our battles, my inital card was "Draw 2 Cards" and his initial card was "Block." What happens? Can I draw 2 cards before he blocks me? Or can he block me before I draw 2 cards? Or do the two cards just cancel each other out and we play 2 blind cards from our hand (like it works in a standoff)?

Thanks,
Rob

Thread: Re: Complete Card Checklist?

reapersaurus — 2007-10-28T23:49:02+00:00

ahhh!! I just found that on one page in the rulebook, it lists the card lists.

Thank you so much for the effort, and getting them in text on the Geek now for anyone else who doesn't look closer at the rulebook.

And I found the other cards I was missing - I had even bent slightly every individual card in the regular decks, because they are slightly sticky together - but I hadn't done the same to the Final Duel cards. Both cards were stuck to another card - so my copy is complete. Woo-hoo!

Thread: Re: Complete Card Checklist?

Acoriano3 — 2007-10-28T23:00:31+00:00

I too bought this off ebay, but mine was complete. When I saw your post I pulled it out of the closet, so here's a complete card checklist for you. The one's in italics are unique to that deck.

JEDI DECK

Qui-Gon's Final Duel Cards
1 - 5

Attack Cards
1 - 10
2 - 10
3 - 10
4 - 3
5 - 2

Special Cards
Block - 4
Use the force - 3
Jedi Knight - 3
X2 Obi-Wan - 3
Life Drain - 2
Retreat - 2
Burst of Energy - 1
Final Attack - 1
Qui-Gon's Fury - 1

SITH DECK

Darth Maul's Final Duel Cards
1 - 5

Attack Cards
1 - 10
2 - 10
3 - 10
4 - 3
5 - 2

Special Cards
Block - 4
Use the force - 3
Sith Lord - 3
X2 Darth Sidious - 3
Life Drain - 2
Retreat - 2
Burst of Energy - 1
Final Attack - 1
Darth Maul's Rage - 1

I hope this helps!

Steve

Thread: Complete Card Checklist?

reapersaurus — 2007-10-28T06:46:22+00:00

The webarchive one isn't available- can anyone help me find out what is missing from my sealed box?
I just won an EBay auction for this, it was shrinkwrapped in vintage wrap, but it doesn't have a complete set of matching cards.

The contents say there should be 55 normal cards and 5 Final Duel Cards for each side.

I have 54 Sith cards, and only 4 Jedi Final Duel cards (missing #5).
I'm guessing there are supposed to be 2 +5 attack cards in each deck?
If so, I'm missing the +5 for the Sith deck.

In addition, there is an odd discrepency between the decks - they are the same (each card matches) except for a x 2 Obi-Wan card vs a Sith Retreat card.

Anyone have a complete checklist?
Anyone else get an incomplete copy?

Thread: Re: Clarify "played card"

Acoriano3 — 2007-10-12T20:21:32+00:00

I also use the original box...not that it's that great, but the box art and the little window for the figs looks nice. I wouldn't mind something more portable, but I haven't really put much effort into creating a different box for it.

Thread: Re: Clarify "played card"

franchi — 2007-10-12T18:12:11+00:00

What I understood from the rules is that when two special cards are played at the same time (the two 1st face down or later during the battle), they cancel each other. So if you put a Block face down for your 3rd battle, it will block any Attack card your opponent put face down there. If he put another special card, however, they will cancel each other leading to a tie in this 3rd battle.

BTW, if you want to keep Attacks for the battles, you can put a special card face down, like Jedi Knight, but at the risk of your opponent having put another special card face down and canceling it... Many things to think about!

PS: I use the original box.

Thread: Re: Clarify "played card"

ethnosax — 2007-10-12T16:50:38+00:00

franchi wrote:
(my favorite one is a Block for the 3rd battle, if we use all cards in 1st and 2nd it's a winner!).

Does this contradict the rule posted elsewhere that a Block can't negate a card played at the same time as a Block (like, in a tie)? Up to now (only three games total played), we'd been playing that the face-down card is an Attack, but this opens more interesting possibilities.

One other non-rules question: What is everybody using to store the game? The box it comes with makes little sense to me, and I'd like something more appropriately sized and sturdier. I have no idea what to look for or where, however.

Thread: Re: Clarify "played card"

franchi — 2007-10-12T06:29:43+00:00

Yes, it is a played card. You played it, though face down. I was lucky enough to find a cheap copy and my son and I love it too. It has become a psychological fight between us to guess which card are we beginning with (my favorite one is a Block for the 3rd battle, if we use all cards in 1st and 2nd it's a winner!).

BTW, we play with the variant (posted somewhere) that Retreat puts back in your hand only Attacks, not the special cards. We found it too powerful as it is in the rules.

Thread: Clarify "played card"

ethnosax — 2007-10-11T22:44:20+00:00

After reading great reviews, I bought this game and just played a couple rounds with my son. We both love it. One question however: does the initial card that is turned up to begin each battle count as a "played card"? I.e., can it be removed with a Block, do you put it in your hand after a Retreat, etc.? I'm unsure if this card is considered a normal played card, or if it is untouchable.

Thread: Re: Reissued as Transformers Battling Card Game (Game ID: 30

franchi — 2007-08-14T15:30:37+00:00

LordBobbio wrote:
Final Battle Card (still worth 6 points)... instead of stating, "Discard your entire hand. Draw an equal number of new cards.", the Final Battle Card now reads simply, "Discard your entire hand."
This was a misprint in some copies of the game. Mine got it just in one of the decks (don't remember if it was jedi or sith), but not in the other, and I found somewhere (don't remember where, probably here) that both cards should read only "Discard your entire hand".

So I just drew a line with a thick pen on "Draw an equal number of new cards".

Image

LordBobbio — 2007-08-14T07:48:32+00:00

Do you think Milton Bradley (Hasbro) recycles game ideas?

Image

LordBobbio — 2007-08-14T07:48:00+00:00

The only difference between these two games is the final sentence on this card.

Thread: Reissued as Transformers Battling Card Game (Game ID: 30852)

LordBobbio — 2007-08-14T07:13:01+00:00

Re-released in 2007 with a Transformers theme Transformers Battling Card Game, just without pewter figurines and with the following change to the Final Battle Card (still worth 6 points)... instead of stating, "Discard your entire hand. Draw an equal number of new cards.", the Final Battle Card now reads simply, "Discard your entire hand.".... otherwise, the games are identical in game play (with the "Advanced Rules" for Transformers Battling Card Game.... there is an ages 6+ version in the rulebook without any special powers cards, just the number cards).

Thread: Re: Card Clarifications

songbird — 2007-05-29T17:30:34+00:00

1. Life Drain - Draw a random card from your opponent and discard it.

2. Retreat - Yes, powerful cards like Use the Force remain in play, so if you can convince your opponent to over-commit a battle, you can end up with a HUGE pile of cards in your hand.

3. Block - "Remove an opponent's played card" is the correct interpretation.

Thread: Re: Card Clarifications

franchi — 2007-05-29T17:29:10+00:00

jttm wrote:
1) Life Drain - Pick one card from opponent and discard it.
Do you get to see the entire hand and pick a card?
Or is it random?

2) Retreat - Return all cards played from this battle into your hand.
When cards like Use the Force are played, are they played onto a battle and left there so that a Retreat card may retrieve it?
Or are those cards discarded when played?

3) Block - Immediately cancels one of opponents played cards.
Immediately cancels?
Does that mean you cancel a card as your opponent is playing it?
1) You don't see his hand, just pick a random card.

2) The text cards are left there, as the attacks, remember that the number of cards played decides when there is a draw in attack points. However, if you return ALL cards to your hand, the text ones too, Retreat becomes too powerful. It was discussed in a thread, here or elsewhere, and the common variant used by many people (like me) is that you only return Attack cards to your hand.

3) You cancel immediately a card already played, of your choice (attack or text, like X2).

Thread: Card Clarifications

jttm — 2007-05-29T16:36:38+00:00

Just played my first game, but the game was a little unsatisfying because there were a few questions which we couldn't find the answer for.

Could anyone help clarify these cards:

1) Life Drain - Pick one card from opponent and discard it.
Do you get to see the entire hand and pick a card?
Or is it random?

The wording seems to indicate the former, but that makes the card extremely powerful.

2) Retreat - Return all cards played from this battle into your hand.
When cards like Use the Force are played, are they played onto a battle and left there so that a Retreat card may retrieve it?
Or are those cards discarded when played?

3) Block - Immediately cancels one of opponents played cards.
Immediately cancels?
Does that mean you cancel a card as your opponent is playing it?

If not, shouldn't the card say "Remove a played card"?
The wording of this card was particularly confusing.

Thanks in advance.

Image

Jormi_Boced — 2007-04-19T01:23:19+00:00

Qui Gon races ahead

Image

franchi — 2007-03-20T07:37:25+00:00

Painted minis on my Final Duel mini-board

Image

franchi — 2007-03-20T07:36:52+00:00

Painted minis on my Final Duel mini-board

Image

franchi — 2007-03-16T13:42:04+00:00

My home-made "Final Duel" board (put minis on the board and track with plastic or wooden chips).

Image

Jormi_Boced — 2007-03-16T01:03:01+00:00

Nice Box Shot

Image

arnaudel — 2007-03-08T23:07:05+00:00

French/English version - Back

Image

arnaudel — 2007-03-08T23:06:34+00:00

French/English version - Front

Thread: Re: This is a Star Wars game? Can't be.... too good.

FlyingArrow — 2006-11-01T01:47:09+00:00

Queen's Gambit is the highest rated Star Wars game, but that one is pretty expensive now since it is out of print.

Thread: Re: Help clarify a fundamental rule of this game.

songbird — 2006-07-13T11:45:57+00:00

Agree with Dave. That's exactly how the rules should be played. Each card has the potential of equaling or changing the balance. Just because you're the weaker player right now does NOT mean you can play as many cards as you want (although if you're significantly weaker, you may be able to play a slew of cards before catching up to the stronger player).

Thread: Re: Help clarify a fundamental rule of this game.

Dave — 2006-07-13T01:04:12+00:00

First, each player puts down 1 card for each of the three battles.

For each battle:

0) Both players reveal their face-down card.

1) Evaluate the total force of each player.

1a) If tied (same total AND same number of cards played), each player secretly plays another card face-down. Go to step 0.

1b) If one player has a stronger force (either a higher total, or same total but more cards played), then the other player adds one card faceup to the tableau and executes it. Go to step 1. Alternately, the owner of the weaker force can decide to retreat at this point and end the battle.

In other words, the player who owns the weaker force controls the action until he forces a tie or exceeds the other player's force. Oftentimes, this results in the action going back and forth between the players for a given battle.

- d

Thread: Help clarify a fundamental rule of this game.

darksplinky — 2006-07-13T00:10:00+00:00

OK, my girlfriend and I are playing our first round of Clash of the Lightsabers this evening... but are at odds on the basic concept of each round.

Basically, we need clarified if each round goes back and forth until standoff/conceed OR if I get to lay my cards until I decide I'm done then she plays cards until she is done and no more. We just finished the first battle of 3 rounds assuming one player went till conceed/winning score then the next player ... done. Now we are thinking that doesn't make sense as then all the defensive cards like retreat/block/etc would only be used by the person who goes second.

Can you confirm either what should be understood as common sense or confirm that we simply misread the rules about how turns progress.

Thanks!

--darksplinky

Thread: Re: Rules question.

DrNate — 2006-05-25T13:42:24+00:00

Thanks for the replies. I feel better about taking it to games night this Friday at the church. (It may be a bit much for the folks who usually play scrabble, Jenga, Spades, and Dominoes)

Thread: Re: Rules question.

songbird — 2006-05-25T02:37:57+00:00

Plus if you're stingy (or if you get several "Draw 2" or "Retreat" cards), you can save cards for the following round. The game is a lot of fun and plays quick, but sometimes it can swing pretty heavily if one player gets the aforementioned cards and the other one just draws lots of plain number cards.

Thread: Re: Rules question.

Robrob — 2006-05-25T02:11:19+00:00

Shortage of cards makes for a very tough decision - is it really worth trying to win this particular fight or should I save my cards for the next one?

Thread: Re: Rules question.

Chris Sjoholm — 2006-05-25T00:02:53+00:00

Yes, that's correct. Several of the cards will let you draw more during play.

Thread: Rules question.

DrNate — 2006-05-24T22:47:19+00:00

I'm a little confused about the rules, here.

At the beginning of the game, each player draws seven cards, then lays three out for three "Rounds" leaving each player with four cards in hand to spread amongst the three rounds?

Thanks,
Nathan

Thread: Behold the Rage

songbird — 2006-05-19T17:48:25+00:00

Because of the quick play time and the Star Wars theme, my son and I often pull out this game when we only have a few minutes before (his) bedtime. He's a fairly good player, and understands when to play a strategic Retreat card and when to discard a bunch of 1's and 2's with Burst of Energy.

So I'll skip most of the first few rounds. He (playing Qui-Gon) advanced on the first round, I (playing Maul) advanced on the 2nd and 3rd. Thus I was positioned to win by advancing 2 spaces, if only I could defeat him on all three battles this round.

We had both played Force cards at the start of the next round, allowing us to pick up some extra cards. We each played a couple of cards on the first battle, but to my surprise he conceded with a relatively low card total of 6 vs. 5. Obviously he wanted to focus on the last two battles instead, so we flipped our cards over then he played a card and pulled ahead. Then I did. Then he did. Then I did. And so on, until he played a x2 multiplier and thought he had me defeated, when I played Maul's Rage card and wiped out everything he had in play! He yelped in surprise with an increduluous look on his face, but rolled with the punches as he considered his options. I still had 7 plus a x2 multiplier of my own for a total of 14. He played his last three cards: 5, 4, and Final Battle (which is a 6), pulling him ahead by 1 point with his total of 15. I looked at my last card in my hand -- a 1! I play it on my stack and now I have pulled ahead with 16 to his 15. His jaw hits the floor again but he's grinning and loving every minute of this contest.

Now we move to the final battle of the round. We're both out of cards, so he flips over his 2. I bite my lip, and flip over my 4, and for the third time in 5 minutes my son looks at me in shock as he realizes I have won all three battles, advanced two spaces, and won the game!

The best part of this game session was that my son really had a great attitude about it all, and didn't even mind losing because the back-and-forth nature of the card battles was so much fun for both of us. I'll definitely be playing this one again sometime soon!

Thread: Re: This is a Star Wars game? Can't be.... too good.

riledguy — 2006-03-20T06:14:22+00:00

A good game is a good game. I will play a good Star Wars game just as I would play a good Care Bears game (not that you will likely see one of those.)

As far as table top star wars games I have played a few though it sounds like not nearly as many as you. The only other one that was good enough to play on a semi regular basis is the Star Wars Risk. It is pretty well done and I like the fact it is built around a two on two cooperative game but as a whole I still don't think it is a great game. But it is a good one.

If there are other very good Star Wars games out there that I should know about I would would welcome your suggestions. A number of my friends enjoy Star Wars a lot and that is how I ended up playing any of them.

Thread: Re: This is a Star Wars game? Can't be.... too good.

The Jakster — 2006-03-12T21:56:44+00:00

There are mucher better Star Wars games out there (old and new), but for haters this might be it...
just a bit dumb to play a Star Wars game as a hater in the first place

Thread: This is a Star Wars game? Can't be.... too good.

riledguy — 2006-03-10T02:54:12+00:00

I enjoy this game. I enjoy it a lot. It plays fast, it is easy to pick up, and though there is some luck, more often then not it comes down to skill. So I like it even though I hate Star Wars.

SWE1-COTL (Star Wars Episode 1 - Clash of the Lightsabers) is a card game that works a bit like the card game war. There are a few big differences thankfully. You get to see the cards you lay down and there are special cards that have abilities instead of number values. There are two decks in the game they are identical in content but one is themed "Dark Side" and represents Darth Maul (who gets more time in this game then he did in the movie) and one themed "Light side" that represents Qui Gon Jin. The base cards in the game (the lightsaber cards) have values ranging from 1 to 6. These are your battle points and the person with the highest total wins the battle.

Play:
1 You start by taking your decks and shuffling them.
2 You then deal out 7 cards. These represent your initial cards for your first 3 battles.
3 You lay lay 3 cards face down these will be your opening card for each of the three battles. The idea is to have the highest total in each battle.
4 You each turn over your first card. The person with the lower number must now ether play another card to up his total past the opponent or secede the battle. You can use the number cards and or special cards such as double your value, block opponents last played card, draw two cards, or the card that holds the most valuable card in the game.. retreat to up your points. Special note: the retreat card is the best card in the game, with that card you admit to defeat that battle and take all the cards you had in play back into your hand. Why is that so powerful? Because you get to carry over any cards you have left over after the 3 battles into your next hand. So instead of starting with 7 cards you get 7 plus what you had.
5 You play out the 3 battles and see who won the 2 out of the 3 or 3 out of the 3 battles and move your token up accordingly.
6 You deal out another 7 cards and the cycle continues. Knowing when to give up a few battles to gain the advantage to win the war is a key strategy in this game. How to win the war? There are 5 cards in each deck that represent the "duel" that the game is named for. If you win two battles in a set you move up one. If you can pull of winning all three battles in a set you move up 2. The first person to make it to the 5th card (earn a total of 5 movement points) wins. l

That is the game in a large nutshell.

Components: You two fairly well sculpted miniatures one of Maul and one of Qui-gon. This is what prompted the guy who own s the set I play to buy it and it would seem was the main reason many folk bought the game. I know one guy who bought it for these two little minis then tossed out the cards before having ever played the game. These two miniatures are nice if you like Star Wars. The cards themselves however are poor. They are full color cards printed on pretty cheap playing card stock. The kind you get when you pay a dollar for a themed deck of playing cards. The art on the cards is also pretty bad. The pictures are all pulls from the movie but even on little cards you can see compression and artifacting in the art. It is not major but it looks like someone built the deck off of art they took from a ripped VCD of the movie. I will give it the only reason it did not get a two is because of the miniatures which are pretty well done.

Game: The game is solid fast and fun. Luck can be a factor especially if you get most of your good cards in the top part of your deck and make a fast sweep. If however you get through the whole deck it is purely a matter skill as you have each had the exact same cards albeit at different times. I really like this game especially as it plays nice and quick. I wish they would use this system with a nicer theme or with some better card stock also it would be great to see them make rules that allow it to be a 4 player game.

Overall:

Thread: Re: Rules Discrepancy?

songbird — 2006-01-30T20:07:58+00:00

Wow. Thanks for bringing up the question -- I now realize I've played this game wrong every time! We always thought standoff was determined by the number of cards in hand, not in play.

Thread: Re: Rules Discrepancy?

steveoliverc — 2006-01-14T13:39:15+00:00

Yep, you should give it a try, it's a clever game.

Thread: Re: Rules Discrepancy?

Verkisto — 2006-01-13T22:25:56+00:00

ejamer wrote:
The Jedi or Sith whose played cards have the higher total Attack Value is said to be "winning the battle." If the total Attack Value is equal, then the player with more played cards is winning. If both the total Attack Value and the total number of played cards are equal, then the players are in a Standoff.

AH! Well, then, that makes better sense than the way I was interpreting it.

I wonder, though, if that makes sense for the game. If one manages higher points in FEWER cards, then he's playing more efficiently, but then again, it would be giving a double-benefit to that player, since he would also have more cards to use in later rounds. Hmmm....

If I remember correctly, it is possible to end a round in a stand-off if neither player has any cards remaining in their hands.

This is correct.

I need to make time to play this game. It sounds decent enough, to be a licensed card game.

Thread: Rules Discrepancy?

Verkisto — 2006-01-13T19:33:54+00:00

Under the "Rules of the Duels" section of the rulebook, it states in one bullet point:

The Jedi or Sith whose played cards have the higher total Attack Value is said to be "winning the battle." If the total Attack Value is equal, then the player with more cards is winning. If both the total Attack Value and the total number of cards are equal, then the players are in a Standoff.

Further down in this same section, the rules state:

If there is a Standoff and one player is out of cards, the other player must play a card.

Am I correct in saying that if there is Standoff and one player is out of cards, that there ISN'T a Standoff? Or am I missing something? I haven't played the game, but I don't understand how this situation could happen, based off of the rules.