Game: Great Dalmuti, The

Image

LordT — 2008-07-17T12:15:51+00:00

Back Dutch box (PS Games)

Image

Cornbread46 — 2008-06-24T21:38:42+00:00

The Great Dalmuti is A LOT more fun with silly hats!

Thread: Re: Dalmuti is not an original game

brianbloom — 2008-06-10T19:44:29+00:00

I used to play "Master and Slave", named from the game "King and Slave" online, back circa 1994-97. (At the time I was actually one of the highest ranked players in the world! ) It's nearly identical to the Great Dalmuti other than a few details about the deck (which numbers are removed, etc) but gameplay remains essentially the same.

Here's a snapshot of the link talking about them building the server:
www.ludd.luth.se/~pjotr/msbot/history.html" rel="nofollow">http://web.archive.org/web/20001215013100/www.ludd.luth.se/~...

Here were the final rankings:
www.ludd.luth.se/~pjotr/msbot/topo10.cgi" rel="nofollow">http://web.archive.org/web/20010217010231/www.ludd.luth.se/~...
(I'm moo-man)

[sorry for the URL butchering. The BBG site seems to want to parse those URLs no matter what]

Image

swuyau — 2008-05-26T11:56:19+00:00

card

Thread: The Great Dalmuti Microbadge available

LordP — 2008-05-08T10:39:54+00:00

If you like The Great Dalmuti, a microbadge is now available for purchase:

[INLINEIMG]http://files.boardgamegeek.com/images/microbadges/tgd17i.gif[/INLINEIMG] Click here to get one.

Image

acatalan — 2008-04-28T21:48:12+00:00

Spanish edition - Devir

Image

acatalan — 2008-04-28T21:33:22+00:00

Thread: Re: On the wearing of hats

slaven41 — 2008-04-03T00:05:55+00:00

Hats are great for emphasizing the changing fortunes of the game.

]]>]]>

--Dave

Thread: Re: On the wearing of hats

EvilTimmy — 2008-04-02T17:42:17+00:00

I can confirm that hats greatly enhance the experience
And I really like the idea of making the Peon sit on the floor

Thread: On the wearing of hats

EndersGame — 2008-04-02T16:39:37+00:00

My thesis is that Dalmuti is a game much enhanced by the wearing of hats.

The observation has been made by more than one person that an element of role-playing really ups the fun-factor of Dalmuti, since it is more of a social or party game than a strategy game.

Some ideas include:
- give the Greater Dalmuti the right to dictate and coordinate the flow of play
- give the Greater Dalmuti the best, most comfortable, and royal-looking chair
- make the Greater Peon stand, sit on the floor, or sit on a cardboard box
- make the Greater Peon collect the cards, shuffle them, and do similar dirty work
- and of course: hats!

It seems that I'm not alone in thinking this, as these pictures suggest:

]]> . ]]>

]]> . ]]>

(as featured in the Humorous Images of Players in Costume list)

It's the social element that really makes the game for me, because the gameplay itself is nothing astounding. Does anyone else make the wearing of ridiculous hats mandatory for this game? Any other house-rules or role-playing elements that enhances the theme of the game?

Ladies and gentlemen, bring on the hats!

Thread: Re: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

chrisjwmartin — 2008-04-02T15:50:18+00:00

Greater revolutions are merely a subset of the category revolutions. The rule says "If the player declaring a revolution is the Greater Peon, then the revolution is called a greater revolution", not "If the player declaring a revolution is the Greater Peon, then the revolution is not a revolution after all but an entirely separate thing called, coincidentally enough, a greater revolution, which turns out not to be a revolution even though it clearly says that it is a revolution".

However, as the man said, play with whatever house rules suit you.

Image

josephc4 — 2008-02-23T20:07:44+00:00

A few of our silly hats mark the Greater and Lesser Dalmutis and Peasants. Photo rights - lily_bloomers

Image

josephc4 — 2008-02-23T20:04:39+00:00

Photo rights - lily_bloomers

Image

jsper — 2008-02-14T17:06:01+00:00

Side of the box

Image

jsper — 2008-02-14T17:02:12+00:00

Cover of rulebook

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Corbeau — 2008-01-08T20:58:57+00:00

There are a number of interesting judgment calls to make depending on your hand, what has been played, and the play styles of the players still in. But that's not what Dalmuti is really about.

No, Dalmuti is all about the smack talk.

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

wwscrispin — 2008-01-08T20:07:49+00:00

I agree that a good part of the fun is the positioning activity. Without that I would not rank this game highly. There are more strategic members of this family and obviously better and more complex trick taking games.

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

dedindahed — 2008-01-08T19:44:14+00:00

wwscrispin wrote:
It is lighter than some other filler card games. I would say it is halfway between being a filler and a party game.

I think you may have hit the nail on the head there, maybe I'm really not into "halfway" games, too light (and open-ended) to be a filler game, and too much game to be a pure social activity.

I do like several light games, Apples to apples, Bang etc and I'll play stuff like pictionary, balderdash, taboo, cranium etc.
I even like stuff like chez geek, munchkin and fluxx, but to me dalmuti feels like a lame game with a lame activity tagged on, or vice versa.

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

wwscrispin — 2008-01-08T19:15:51+00:00

It is certainly not a heavy game. This is one of the lighter members of the family of ladder games but I like it. It is lighter than some other filler card games. I would say it is halfway between being a filler and a party game. It is easy for anyone to get into a game and it is usually easy to get a group to have fun with this. Like Citadels you need to have table and trash talk to make this fun.

The tension comes from the luck of your hand draw, your hand managment, your ability track played cards, and your ability convince other players you can not take the trick.

If you can only tolerate games with low luck and significant decision points at each turn then this will probably not appeal to you.

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

jjacjackson — 2008-01-08T17:07:56+00:00

I classify Dalmuti as a party game similar to games like Outburst, Guesstures, and Apples to Apples. It's played completely for the social aspect.

Nicht the Bohne, Bang!, Citadels, San Juan, and Tichu, are entirely different breeds of card games.

While never my choice, I often play the 'party' games to get the night going.

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Wrevilo — 2008-01-08T16:29:51+00:00

Anybody want a peanut?

(sorry, I just had to. if you have NO idea what I'm referring to, you need to watch more movies.. )

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

dedindahed — 2008-01-08T14:50:45+00:00

What I had intended to point out, was as far as I was concerned in a 40 minute bout of this game i estimate around 10 minutes of that will be spent making descisions, and the remaining 30 minutes will be spent Playing cards in sequence and not thinking, not that there are no descisions at all, just not many.

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Niko Ruf — 2008-01-08T13:54:39+00:00

dedindahed wrote:
NO DESCISIONS OR CHOICES WHATSOEVER

Huh? This is not a deep game, but certainly the hand management requires that you make decisions. Do you play cards now to get rid of them, or do you keep them to be able to take a trick and become the starting player later? If you are the starting player, do you open high or low? Which cards do you need to get rid off right away, and which to keep for the endgame? Counting the cards that have been played also helps. Many of these decisions may be obvious, but this is not a roll-and-move game where you literally have none to make.

Thread: never again, and this time I mean it!!

dedindahed — 2008-01-08T10:37:24+00:00

So after having played and not liked this game a year or so back, I had my arm twisted into playing this again last night by someone who had just picked it up.

As usual the sole innovative feature of the game is deciding on how well to treat the dalmutis, and how poorly to treat the peons.
In this case the lesser peon had to wear a plastic shopping bag as a hat and do the trips to the bar as well as lots of yes sir no sir type grovelling.

So we played 3 hands in about 30-40 minutes, of which I spent 30 minutes making NO DESCISIONS OR CHOICES WHATSOEVER, and firmly rooted in the Merchant category. There is no real game here, at least nothing worth investing in when there are many many regular deck card games with as much or more gaming substance to them. If the Dalmuti peon roleplay experience really works for you, try adding the concept to a game that's actually good, a dalmuti deck would be very easy to make from 3 cheap decks of playing cards, in fact you could make 2, but I'd still recommend a diferent game, or at least switching games between hands.

The other problem with Dalmuti is that groups who do play it seem to want to play it for 1-2 hours, and that's just too much for a game with so little decision making.

Rating downgraded from 3 to 2

Thread: Re: pass

Vaughn — 2007-12-14T18:31:38+00:00

Absolutely you can pass and then jump back in the same round with a play.

I call it sandbagging. You get other players to think they are going to get the lead with their 2 fours or 2 twos and then you hit them with the Dalmuti and a joker!

Brilliant.

Thread: Re: pass

kusinohki — 2007-12-14T17:16:26+00:00

I've always played that you can later come in and play cards after you pass as long as another player did not pass (similar to St. Petersburg). I learned the game as A-hole with a standard deck of cards in the late 80s early 90s and later learned Dalmuti mid to late 90s.

I have a more recent reprint of the game (3-4 years ago maybe?) From pg 7 of the rule book, under "the play": A player who chooses to pass may still play later in the hand, when it's his or her turn again.

Thread: Re: pass

Kiyote — 2007-12-14T14:58:52+00:00

Once you pass you're out of the round. At least, that's what's in my rules. My copy is quite ancient, though...perhaps it's changed to make it easier on players?

Thread: Re: pass

wwscrispin — 2007-12-14T14:58:47+00:00

We have played for years and we also have always allowed you to play in after a pass.

I do not think the game would play the same without allowing that. I will go look in the rules. I have an original copy and a newer one.

Thread: Re: pass

StyxParadox — 2007-12-14T14:28:28+00:00

I have been playing this game for many years and we allways played that after you have passed, and someone else discarded some cards, you could still discard cards in that turn. I was taught by a guy from Wizards of the Coast but he could have taught me incorrecty or the rules may have changed with the new version.

Thread: pass

GUNTHARIO — 2007-12-14T11:56:58+00:00

Hello,

a question concerning passing in the Great Dalmuti.
We had a discussion the last session of this game. I was convinced, once you passed after someone came out cards, you cannot discard any cards until the table is cleaned.
My fellow gamers were convinced that after you have passed, and someone else discarded some cards, you could still discard cards in that turn (waiting strategically for what is coming out).

The rules are not exactly clear about this.

Who holds the truth??

Thanks

Günthario

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

siempietiempie — 2007-09-28T23:34:46+00:00

Wow some heated discussion here.. not sure anyone is willing to hear a n00b's opinions on this but who cares?

I think its a good thing when people point out mistakes, and local (bgg) ettiquette.. but come on...why so harsh?? There was no need for that. you could've said the same thing in a much nicer way. Well off i go.

Thread: Peasant Revolution...

supercal5 — 2007-09-23T02:28:25+00:00

Played this with a group of 6. My brother and sister in law and their two kids (16, 14) and my wife and I. We ended up playing three separate rounds over a long weekend. Didn't expect to play more than once but the kids kept asking for it again. They were both awful at it the first time but did seem to do a little better the third time round.

The game became more interesting and fun when I got to be the Great Dalmuti I had a blanket that I was keeping over my legs and when I finally became the Great Dalmuti I put the blanket up over my head and emulated 'The Emperor' look from Star Wars. I got to stay Great Dalmuti for a few rounds and finally my bro made up to be lesser Dalmuti. Well he found a Cheetah print blanket from the living room and put it over his head. And from there the game just became a real hoot. Before long everyone had their own blankets and everyone was just trying to get to Dalmuti-dom so they could wear their blanket over their head and scoff at the other players. Of course only the Greater and Lesser Dalmuti's got to wear the blankets and somehow this made the positions of high rank all the more desirable.

We kept score each hand scoring as many people as remained when you went out. Over the weekend we ended up with two peasant revolutions??! This is caused when the lower peon gets two jokers. (doesn't happen often) This particularly sucked when I was Great Dalmuti and immediately moved to lower Peon-dom and even worse had to remove the Dalmuti blanket. I think that was the only time during the whole game I was actually mad. Then I felt guilty for being mad when I ended up miraculously winning the round and moving right back to Higher Dalmuti-dom (blush, sorry about that outburst everyone)

Overall a fun game where nothing is fair and and you make your hay while the sun shines. Creating additional special privileges for the Dalmuti's is what really makes the game shine.

Image

cuazzel — 2007-09-20T18:03:38+00:00

German edition box back

Thread: Re: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

cbs42 — 2007-07-01T18:34:51+00:00

No taxation.

A greater revolution is a revolution. A revolution means no taxation.

Still though, this game lends itself well to all sorts of home variants, so play whatever way works best for you and your game group.

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

yankeezulu — 2007-06-15T10:39:17+00:00

I look forward to your next review. Good luck!

Cheers,

Matt

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Greendan — 2007-06-15T09:39:20+00:00

Well, I'm glad it got a reaction whether good or bad. A few differant opinions here!
This is what I've decided: For now I'm gonna leave this as it stands (at the very least it means the thread still makes sense!) As stated it is my first review, so it represents the beginning of a learning curve. I've already said I've taken on board the helpful criticism and will be applying it to my next review, which I'll be working on this weekend.

So once again I thank you all, the positive and the negative!

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

yankeezulu — 2007-06-15T09:18:47+00:00

reapersaurus wrote:
My guess is, you didn't read the discussion. Because you may see that greendan (the gentleman and apparently cool guy that he is that wants to make his reviews better and more valuable to the community) tipped my 1 GG (a not small sum) for the links I posted to him.

Yes, I did manage to read the discussion before posting my comment. That was the reason I posted it.

But for your information, what you described is not a review. I think someone should let you know that. A review is supposed to be more significant than a play walk-thru. It mentions such in the Reviewing Guidelines, IIRC.

Well that's your opinion and you're quite welcome to it, and even though Greendan's review may not have strictly adhered to the Reviewing Guidelines you mention, they are only guidelines and not requirements. I for one am extremely happy that Greendan has taken your comments as gracefully as he has and hasn't been put off making further contributions.

But as a challenge/request, read the 3 other reviews and see if this one adds anything to the reviews for this game.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1254008#1254008
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/591587#591587
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/19575#19575

The thing is that BGG is supposed to be a hobby site, not some sort of academic endeavour striving for truth or meaning. Greendan's review may not have given us any great new insight into The Great Dalmuti, or pushed back the boundaries of reviewing technique, but so what? I wasn't offended by his review - in fact I thought it succinctly and effectively explained the game and his feelings about it. Are the other reviews 'better'? Well yes, in my opinion some of them are, but that's a value judgement and does not diminish or disqualify Greendan's contribution. If his review had been "I hate The Great Dalmuti, it sucks", then I would have had a different attitude to it, but it didn't. And, as I stated in my last post, other BGG-ers may actually find the review to be just what they're looking for, written in a style that they find to be straightforward and accessible. It really all depends on the individual.

If we all sat here trying to write 'knock-out' reviews every time, then BGG would be a lot emptier than it currently is and a lot poorer for it.

And finally, I haven't written a review, so I can't really criticise someone else for having the guts to have a go.

Cheers,

Matt

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Sphere — 2007-06-15T05:37:22+00:00

I agree wholeheartedly with Kent and Art. There is ample room for diversity in approach on a board like this. The fact your review *was* approved indicates that there are different opinions as to what is proper. Be yourself, and write what you feel, Green Dan.

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

GeneSteeler — 2007-06-15T04:21:46+00:00

I agree wholeheartedly with John W. And I applaud Green Dan's response and I put my money where my mouth is.

In it's current standing, this is *not* a quick review. This is a rules summary with a one line opinion added on (which is more befitting to a personal comment one puts with their rating.)

I understand John's initial response at the breakdown of GeekMod (although it may seem a bit strong, Dan took it gently, John expounded and through tutilege BGG will become a better site due to John's willingness to speak up).

I think that John and Dan have the matter firmly under control and don't require comments from PC Nazis. If Dan doesn't take offence, why should anyone else?

Cheers Dan, I'm also a big Dalmuti fan and I look forward to you enhancing your review of your experience.

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Turo8 — 2007-06-15T02:03:48+00:00

I agree with Kent. Absolutely no reason for that tone. You could have been helpful without being a snob. Not everyone is motivated by Geek Gold!

BTW - I agree the "Quick Review" was fine.

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Kent.Landis — 2007-06-15T00:43:34+00:00

The geek is a great site, but this is the exact reason I won't post reviews. The first reply to the original poster was snooty, mean, and just plain unhelpful. I thought your review was fine.

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

reapersaurus — 2007-06-14T22:38:31+00:00

yankeezulu wrote:
reapersaurus wrote:
Oh, come on.
Not only was this "review" accepted by GeekMod (I voted to decline it, for obvious reasons), but somebody is giving it a thumbs-up??!

This is NOT A REVIEW.
It is just that simple.

What's your problem? Greendan called it like it is: "a quick review". He explained the gameplay and gave an opinion; that sounds like a review to me. My guess is, you didn't read the discussion. Because you may see that greendan (the gentleman and apparently cool guy that he is that wants to make his reviews better and more valuable to the community) tipped my 1 GG (a not small sum) for the links I posted to him.

But for your information, what you described is not a review. I think someone should let you know that. A review is supposed to be more significant than a play walk-thru. It mentions such in the Reviewing Guidelines, IIRC.

But as a challenge/request, read the 3 other reviews and see if this one adds anything to the reviews for this game.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1254008#1254008
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/591587#591587
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/19575#19575

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

yankeezulu — 2007-06-14T22:22:32+00:00

reapersaurus wrote:
Oh, come on.
Not only was this "review" accepted by GeekMod (I voted to decline it, for obvious reasons), but somebody is giving it a thumbs-up??!

This is NOT A REVIEW.
It is just that simple.

What's your problem? Greendan called it like it is: "a quick review". He explained the gameplay and gave an opinion; that sounds like a review to me. I notice that you didn't provide any constructive criticism, just criticised. Also, you should appreciate that some people look for different things in a review and just because you didn't like Greendan's review, doesn't mean others won't.

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti A quick review

Greendan — 2007-06-14T20:50:26+00:00

Taken on board. I don't have time to update it now, but I'll take another stab tommorrow.
I was kinda shocked by the Thumbs up meself!

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

reapersaurus — 2007-06-14T20:41:59+00:00

True - it is your first review. It's not like you are a longtime reviewer who deliberately put out an insufficient review, but it still should not have been accepted by the (increasingly dysfunctional) GeekMod system.

Reviews should contain more than just a run-down of the gameplay. There are many elements to a successful review, as collected by people much more helpful and informative than me. Let me look for their suggestions.

Ah... found some guidelines for ya.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1495295
secondarily... http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/987732

Read through the first one , at least, and try to add some valuable content to this Great Dalmuti review, and earn the GeekGold that you were (IMO) undeservedly awarded (no offense).
The GeekMod system may have failed here, but your attempts to become an informaed reviewer may fix the oversight, and return value to the community (especially fellow Dalmuti fans).

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti A quick review

Greendan — 2007-06-14T20:06:55+00:00

It's my first one. So, what don't you like about it?

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

reapersaurus — 2007-06-14T19:57:06+00:00

Oh, come on.
Not only was this "review" accepted by GeekMod (I voted to decline it, for obvious reasons), but somebody is giving it a thumbs-up??!

This is NOT A REVIEW.
It is just that simple.

Thread: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Greendan — 2007-06-14T18:00:29+00:00

I've played this game for years, so it's about time I review it.

The Great Dalmuti is a very simple card game for a minimum of 4 players, but it can handle up to 7. The deck consists of cards numbered 1 to 12 (the 'value') and there are as many cards as the number printed on them (so there's one 1, two 2's, three 3's, all the way up to twelve 12's.) and a couple of jokers. At the start of the game all the cards are dealt to all players. Then the player who leads lays a set of any value cards they wish (for example 4 twelves) the following player then lays an equal number of cards of a lower value (eg 4 elevens) it has to be a lower value, not equal. Players may choose to pass if they wish. The round continues until every player passes and whoever laid the last set of cards takes the lead. Jokers are have a value equal to cards they are played with, or 13 if played by themselves. As soon as one player has run out of cards the become the 'Great Dalmuti' the next player becomes the 'Lower Dalmuti'. The penultimate player to go out in the round becomes the 'Lower Peasant' and the player left with cards at the end is the 'Greater Peasant'. Anyone in between becomes a Merchant.
The cards are then dealt out again, however the Greater Peasant must hand to the Great Dalmuti the two lowest value cards from their hand, in return the Dalmuti must give the Peasant any two cards they wish. The Lowers do the same, but with one card. Merchants may swap any number of cards they wish, as long as its the same amount. Then the seating is rearranged with the lower Dalmuti sitting to the left of the Greater and the Greater peasant sitting last with the Lower peasant on his right. As you can tell, this is totally unfair, and therein lies the game.
You can play as many rounds as you like. This is normally dictated by the Greater Peasant getting fed up!

An awesomely simple and fun game, not to be taken seriously. Can be made more stupid with the introduction of silly hats and much ribbing of the Greater Peasant. I pretty much always want to play this game.

Thread: Re: Once a pawn...

EndersGame — 2007-04-28T02:41:40+00:00

Most of my plays of this game have been with children aged 5 - 10. Yes the game does strongly disadvantage the Greater Peon. But the rules clearly state that the game is intended to be unfair, just like life. Does this matter? No. As Grimwold has pointed out, the Great Dalmuti is more about the atmosphere.

So while clever gameplay is rewarded to some extent, this game is most fun when the characters do some role-playing, e.g. the Greater and Lesser Dalmuti act somewhat dictatorial and wear honorary hats, while the Peons get to sit on a cardboard box or on the floor and do the dirty work of shuffling, collecting cards etc. Lots of trash talking is essential!

In my experience, children just love the medieval hierarchy of the game ("Peon, collect the cards, or else I will send my servant to throw rotten tomotoes at you! Don't rebel, or I will chop off your head!"). If you can find ways to enhance that atmosphere, it's sure to go over well with a younger audience.

Thread: Re: Once a pawn...

Grimwold — 2007-04-26T13:11:43+00:00

We played 9 rounds of this on Tuesday night as it happens, and in one round I went from being Greater Peon to being Great Dalmuti, so it is possible.. The odds are stacked against you a bit though. Getting the lead is very important as a peon (for which you often do need lower numbered cards or a larger group of middling cards) but once in you can take advantage of having larger groups of the higher numbered cards.

The atmosphere in your group is important for the game to be fun however... this game can either sink or soar depending on the attitude of the people playing. If you're solely interested in winning overall then the game isn't as fun. It's important to get into the mood of 'Oppressing' the Peons... 'Submitting' to the Dalmiuti, making the most of small rises in power (ie moving from the ranks of peons to those of merchants).. and having a laugh.

Thread: Re: Once a pawn...

glassairports — 2007-04-26T04:24:56+00:00

Not at all, being that your two best you give up are actually your highest cards not necessarily your "best", which means your hand can still be great. You maybe left with a better hand by dumping them. However it at times makes advancement hard. But it in no way is unheard of for a pawn to rise to king in a round. I would be more afraid of what the kids would demand from one another.

Thread: Once a pawn...

fmoros — 2007-04-26T04:13:45+00:00

hi, all!
I have not played this game yet. Because I usually play games with young students or with 5 other teachers I really want to take this game out soon.

After reading the rules i have this question:
Since the pawn must give out his best 2 cards, is it not too difficult for him to come out of being pawn?

thanks
happy games!

Thread: Re: Dalmuti is not an original game

WarwickB — 2007-04-15T03:49:18+00:00

I've played the game as, "Prince and Pauper". We used Ace-high, with Jokers as wildcards only.

We also tried a Robin-Hood version where the prince has their best cards 'stolen' to give to the poor. (I also contemplated a socialist version where the prince's best cards are redistributed fairly according to the wishes of a workers' collective). This didn't seem to work out as well.

It's a good little game at any rate, and The Great Dalmuti sounds like a worthy variant.

Thread: Re: Dalmuti is not an original game

berserkr — 2007-02-11T01:12:34+00:00

There's also a traditional version in Brazil (actually a quite old one at that) called 'Fazenda' (meaning 'farm').

Thread: Re: Compared to franks'zoo

Greendan — 2007-02-06T14:54:03+00:00

I have to agree with Eric's comment, they are essentially the same game. Dalmuti is far easier to pick up because the numbers are naturally ranked, whereas you have to remember all the animals in the Zoo.

I've got both games, and I'm afraid to say Frank stay's on the shelf.

Thread: The Great Dalmuti - A Light Review

Neil Thomson — 2007-01-03T06:23:59+00:00

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

The Great Dalmuti is a card game of social classes. Each player aims to climb the social ladder by playing their cards and finishing as quickly as possible. If you are at the top then your only goal is to stay there and keep the rest of the pack below you. Designed by the man who brought us Magic the Gathering and Robo Rally, The Great Dalmuti seeks to offer a quick, fun experience with a light set of rules.

The deck consists of 80 cards and each card is given a name and value. The name reflects a social position within society but is merely added for theme. The values however are all important and they range from 1-12 and then there is the Jester, which acts as a 13. The value of each card also reflects how many of those cards are present in the deck with the exception of the Jester, of which there is 2.

The game begins by drawing cards to identify the initial seating order and order of play. The lower the card drawn the better your position. The best seat is reserved for The Great Dalmuti and the seat to their left (2nd best) is called the Lesser Dalmuti. Likewise the worst seat is for the Grand Peon and the 2nd worst seat for the Lesser Peon. All other seats in between are reserved for the Merchants.

Once seats have been taken the deck is shuffled and the entire deck is dealt to the players starting with The Great Dalmuti. Some players may get more cards than others and this is too bad. Before play begins Taxation occurs whereby The Greater Peon must give their 2 best cards (lowest value) to The Great Dalmuti and they can give the Greater Peon any 2 cards they wish from their hand. This again underlines the importance of the social classes. The Great Dalmuti begins play by playing any number of cards of a single set (value). Each player in turn can then play the same number of cards of a better value (lower values are always best) or pass if they cannot or do not wish to.

Players that pass may play a set later in the round if their cards are still better than the last played set. Once all players have passed the winner of the round leads a new set of cards. Play continues in this fashion until all players have gotten rid of all their cards. The order that each player goes out in will determine the seating placements for the next hand (eg 1st player out is the new Great Dalmuti).

This is almost the game in its entirety. At the start of any hand a player may be in possession of both Jesters. If so they can call a Revolution by playing them immediately and this results in no Taxation taking place for the hand. If the Greater Peon holds both Jesters they can call a Greater Revolution. This results in no Taxation but all players must also swap places with their direct opposite seating position!

The Final Word

The Great Dalmuti is a very light gaming experience and may not appeal to the serious gamer or competitive player. Thankfully it doesn’t pretend to. The Great Dalmuti is all about having fun and is perfect for those dinner parties or as a session between heavier games.

The game suggests that the social classes within the cards and the naming of seats can make for fun party ideas involving hats or styles of seating. This underlines the game’s light hearted nature. The cards are nicely illustrated and the rules offer several variants and some scoring options if you must have a way to keep track of how well everyone is going.

Thread: Re: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

smitty1966 — 2006-12-10T14:18:35+00:00

I believe that there should be taxation after the greater revolution. The rules do not address it specifically, because they indicate "no taxation during a revolution", this is not the same as a greater revolution. I think that the flavor of the game lends itself to playing that when the peons switch roles, they immediately enjoy the benefits... including taxation.

Thread: Re: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

EndersGame — 2006-12-04T23:28:55+00:00

Here's the rules I have:
If a player is dealt both Jesters, he or she may call a revolution. A revolution means there is no taxation, to the disappointment of the Dalmutis, and to the ill-concealed delight of the Peons. If the player declaring a revolution is the Greater Peon, then the revolution is called a greater revolution. In a greater revolution all players exchange seats with their opposites. That is, the Greater Peon becomes the Greater Dalmuti, the Lesser Peon becomes the Lesser Dalmuti, and so forth.
I guess that does imply that all revolutions have no taxation, and the only difference with a greater revolution is the changing of the seating order (and hence the player who starts).

Thread: Re: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

Gomez — 2006-12-04T21:59:25+00:00

My copy of the rules (Wizards of the Coast, 1994) state under Revolution:

A revolution means there is no taxation, ...

Thread: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

EndersGame — 2006-12-04T17:51:19+00:00

This has been touched on in another thread, but I'd appreciate some kind of definitive answer:

Does the Taxation phase happens right after a Greater Revolution? In the second ever hand of the game we played, the Greater Peon had the two Jesters, so we had an immediate Greater Revolution and role shake-up on our hands! After players have switched seats/roles, does the Taxation (card switching between Dalmuti/Peons) still happen before the new Greater Dalmuti player commences play?

The rules don't seem quite clear on this point, particularly because a Lesser Revolution means that there is no Taxation. Thematically, the idea of a Revolution could suggest that the entire society structure has been turned upside down and that the Peons should have the best chance of remaining the new Dalmuti (which would only be more likely if Taxation happened). But it could also be argued that a Greater Revolution means that everyone has a chance at becoming Greater Dalmuti - we usually play that in the first round of a game there is no Taxation to give everyone a fairly even chance of becoming Dalmuti - so a Greater Revolution could be something similar. On the other hand, then it isn't much different from a Lesser Revolution, except for the fact that the previously-Peons and now-Dalmuti get to begin the round, which gives them a slight advantage. Any thoughts on the correct way to play a Greater Revolution?

Game: Great Dalmuti, The

Image

Image

Thread: Re: Dalmuti is not an original game

Image

Thread: The Great Dalmuti Microbadge available

Image

Image

Thread: Re: On the wearing of hats

Thread: Re: On the wearing of hats

Thread: On the wearing of hats

Thread: Re: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

Image

Image

Image

Image

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Thread: Re: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Thread: never again, and this time I mean it!!

Thread: Re: pass

Thread: Re: pass

Thread: Re: pass

Thread: Re: pass

Thread: Re: pass

Thread: pass

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Peasant Revolution...

Image

Thread: Re: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti  A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti  A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: The Great Dalmuti – A quick review

Thread: Re: Once a pawn...

Thread: Re: Once a pawn...

Thread: Re: Once a pawn...

Thread: Once a pawn...

Thread: Re: Dalmuti is not an original game

Thread: Re: Dalmuti is not an original game

Thread: Re: Compared to franks'zoo

Thread: The Great Dalmuti - A Light Review

Thread: Re: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

Thread: Re: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

Thread: Re: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

Thread: Is there a Taxation after a Greater Revolution?

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti A quick review

Thread: Re: The Great Dalmuti A quick review