August 28, 2004 |
Sam wanted to have folks over to play some games, and once I showed up, Dan and Annie made an appearance, though Annie and Jill ended up watching the movie Thirteen.
| Zèrtz |
| Edel, Stein & Reich |
| Results | |||
| Player | Score | Place | First Time? |
| Mike | $88 Million | 1 | * |
| Dan | $85 Million | 2 | * |
| Sam | $84 Million | 3 | * |
Notes: I was eager to try this brand new game (for me!) and give it a go, as I figured I'd like it a lot. I did. In Edel, Stein & Reich, each player is a gem trader and tries to procure contracts and get majorities in gems, along with trying to acquire money from time to time. Whoever has the most money by the end is the winner.
There are 8 rounds per "phase", and three phases. In each round, the players secretly pick an action card - gems, money, or event cards. If a player is the only one to pick the action, the player gets to perform the action. If 3 or more players choose an action, all who chose it lose the action. When 2 players pick the action, they must haggle to determine who gets to use the action. Gems help a player get more gems, money gets a player money, and event cards either aid a player in scoring or give the player an opportunity to add/subtract gems from different people.
There are three rounds of scoring. The person with most rubies gets $14 million, most topaz gets $12 million, most emeralds gets $10 million, most sapphires $8 million. Also, the player with the most contracts (a type of event card) gets $10 million, and the player with the second most contracts gets $4 million.
So, with that we started to play. The first round was very balanced, as I managed the most gems, everyone went for a free round of money, and Dan and Sam got contract money. After the first phase we were all tied at $28 million.
In the second phase, Sam was stuck with only one gem majority, and was only able to get $18 million. Dan was really upset with Sam's paltry offers for a while, but Sam insisted on starting every deal with "One blue gem." Once, Sam said, "Give me two yellows and I'll let you have the card." Dan did so and they made the deal. Dan wondered if it was okay to haggle out loud over gems, and I said that I thought it was okay. (I had to change my mind later.) Dan and I alternated between getting money and gems, and (I think) no one managed to get any contracts. Dan and I were tied at $57 million and Sam had $46 million. At some point during this round Dan complained that the gems I handed him were greasy - probably from all those disgusting cheesy cracker things I was eating.
In the third round Sam made a nice comeback, as he still had a lot of red gems, and he parlayed them into some more money. He also held an early contract lead that he defended throughout the last phase. Dan was short on gems, though he managed to get the lead in emeralds and tie me in sapphires. I managed, though, to get some money from contracts and hold onto a slim lead in topaz. I also collected a lot of money in the last phase in an effort to let Dan and Sam haggle with each other. In the end, we tallied up the scores, and Sam was in the lead $91 million to $88 million (over me). Then Sam confessed that on his "half-score" card that he played, I gave him $14 million, instead of $7 million (which would have been half). With that, I managed to hold onto the victory.
I must note that when I had a half-score card in the second phase, I paid myself half correctly, but I didn't return half my gems to the pot (which would have cost me two yellow gems and would have changed my strategy completely). So, with two errors being listed, I shan't count this game as a victory for me in the ol' record book.
| Citadels |
| Results | |||
| Player | Score | Place | First Time? |
| Dan | 39 | 1 | |
| Mike | 29 | 2 | |
| Sam | 23 | 3 | |
Notes: Recently, I had an epiphany in this game when I read about the tax collector. The tax collector role replaces the thief, and instead of stealing all of someone's loot, he gets a gold for each building built in a player's district at the end of the player's turn. I thought the thief would just perform the biggest hosings every game, and I've seen people (like me, for instance) get really upset when their plans were thwarted by a robbery. Needless to say, I enjoy the tax collector much more.
Still, when I pulled it out of the box, Dan groaned. I tried to assuage his fears by saying "I've heard that this game is more fun with 2 or 3 players," but he wasn't buying. Sam's strong "FOR" vote carried the day, though, and Dan grumpily sat down to play it. The game started well enough, with Dan taking the merchant and pretty much marking him as the assassination victim for the early part of the game, as the extra $$ he netted was ridiculous. Sam built a lot of cards early on by taking some early architects, but most of his cards were only for low points. Dan and I went for bigger buildings, and I built the fortress and the Great Wall, which both helped keep the Warlord from being aimed at me.
As in most games of this we play, though, the Warlord was rarely chosen, except once Dan had built a couple red buildings. Without the thief, the game wasn't too cutthroat, though the Assassin's victim was usually a well-chosen one. With two role-selections per turn, though, being assassinated wasn't as turn-destroying as it tends to be.
Around mid-game, I saw that Dan had a ton of cards, so I took the magician and took his huge hand for my paltry one. There were a nice group of cards in there and I laid out my plans for the rest of the game and was sure I would win. First, I built my missing color (yellow), then I selected the architect (with 2 areas yet to build) and waited eagerly. Sam had just lost a district to the Warlord (the 1 gold tavern card), and found himself with only 6 buildings, too. Dan had 7 districts. (Dan, it must be said, had a lot of money all game, and refused to build when other people had the tax collector, until the last round). Sam had chosen the assassin and he murdered my Architect, so I was only going to build one building all of a sudden. Though I maybe could have built two buildings with 2 other characters, I really needed more money and a lucky card, and that was why I needed the Architect. In the end, Sam and I managed only 7 buildings while Dan got the +4 bonus with 8.
Dan's buildings were excellent - highlighted by the Dragon's Cave - and he destroyed us in the final scoring. Had I been able to build my final building (a 2 or 3), I would have finished with 35 and Dan would have had 37, so the order would have been the same anyway. All of us managed to get a building of every color.
The game was a lot of fun this way and gives me hope for it in the future. Even Dan confessed to enjoy it.