Thanks for the quick reply. I'll give it another go.
Recent Forum Posts
You can subscribe to an RSS feed for this page
Sounds like you're getting it. You're asking the right questions. Let me make some rule clarifications based on your comments.
First, I'm going to call the 3 piles to be deciphered Deck 3, Deck 2, Deck 1, to correspond with the number of deciphered cards required for the "phrase."
I like it. I'll change it to read this way, too.
As I understand it, we slide the top card (I'll call it the "slider") down letter-by-letter until the hidden card's title is completely revealed. That revealed ("deciphered) title card is then placed beside that deck until the required number of cards for a "phrase" (3, 2, or 1)
The "slider" card is placed aside. This makes the next card that you just 'revealed' to be the new slider, and so on. This makes the motion of slide/revealing always a discovery/mystery, and very fluid if you're working on a long phrase.
When the phrase is fully deciphered, the player who completed it takes the slider card from that deck into his discard pile (to be shuffled and drawn as needed for our 3-card hand to begin each turn.)
When the phrase is fully deciphered, the play takes all previous slider cards that have been set aside. In the case of the three-card phrase it would be all three slider cards. In the case of "Deck 1" (pawn, court, and The Excuse Deck) you would just collect the slider card each time you successfully decipher a one-card phrase.
If a phrase is partly deciphered, say only 2 of the 3 required cards are beside Deck 3, it is possible that the opponent may be able to claim the cards by finishing the reveal of the 3rd. Is this correct? So player A might have revealed 3 of the four letters of the card's title, for example, but he has no cards left in his hand and his turn is over. Now Player B, on his turn, could reveal the final letter, and thus claim the phrase card(s) next to the deck. Is this correct?
That is all correct.
I don't quite understand that "overshoot the phrase" business. If we play a 3, for example, but there are only 2 unrevealed letters on a card we're working on, what card(s) does the opponent get? Just the card that was overshot, or that card plus any other phrase cards which are next to that deck?
If you 'overshoot the phrase' by any amount, all the cards that were set aside for that phrase go to your opponent's discard. For the case of Deck 1, it would just be the current slider card. For the case of Deck 3 it would be all three slider cards.
Over on the BGG forum you suggested examples of play. I'll add them here.
Thanks again.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm a little confused.
First, I'm going to call the 3 piles to be deciphered Deck 3, Deck 2, Deck 1, to correspond with the number of deciphered cards required for the "phrase."
As I understand it, we slide the top card (I'll call it the "slider") down letter-by-letter until the hidden card's title is completely revealed. That revealed ("deciphered) title card is then placed beside that deck until the required number of cards for a "phrase" (3, 2, or 1), When the phrase is fully deciphered, the player who completed it takes the slider card from that deck into his discard pile (to be shuffled and drawn as needed for our 3-card hand to begin each turn.)
If a phrase is partly deciphered, say only 2 of the 3 required cards are beside Deck 3, it is possible that the opponent may be able to claim the cards by finishing the reveal of the 3rd. Is this correct?
So player A might have revealed 3 of the four letters of the card's title, for example, but he has no cards left in his hand and his turn is over. Now Player B, on his turn, could reveal the final letter, and thus claim the phrase card(s) next to the deck. Is this correct?
I don't quite understand that "overshoot the phrase" business. If we play a 3, for example, but there are only 2 unrevealed letters on a card we're working on, what card(s) does the opponent get? Just the card that was overshot, or that card plus any other phrase cards which are next to that deck?
Sorry if I'm a little thick. I blame it on my age.
When I first read the rule for primary scoring, I was unclear whether it compared the quantity of cards or the ranks of cards. But it's just the quantity of cards, right?
So it seems like card ranks only matter for the tiebreaker, which (as you note) doesn't really extend the strategic space of the game. Are ties common enough that there even needs to be a tiebreaker? If there does, you could just say that if there is a tie on points then the winner is the player who won the top-most Ace. If there was a tie on that Ace, then the player who won the second-highest Ace. And so on.
Sorry, but I don’t know what the designer had in mind.
You might take a look at Colour Bazaar, which is a similar game.
We noticed a few things while playing this that were unclear in the rules:
1. What happens if a player ends with suit chips for suits that only have an Ace, no other cards?
2. We often ended play with players having uneven amounts of suit chips. If you have players A, B, C, and D, and player B ends the round by placing the last card and taking a chip, players A and B have one more chip each than players C and D. Is this by design?
in discussion General Discussion / About the site » Suit symbol missing from wiki
That was easy. The problem resolved itself before I noticed your post!
in discussion General Discussion / About the site » Suit symbol missing from wiki
It seems to have been fixed now!
in discussion General Discussion / About the site » Suit symbol missing from wiki
The knots symbol graphics can't be found?
I double checked with the how-to-edit-pages page on decktet.wikidot.com and the image for knots can't be found. It just shows as a "broken image icon", but the other suit images can to found!?
Does anyone know how to fix this?
in discussion The Decktet / Game Design » Having an idea about an area-control game
Here is a diagram of the map, but it'll likely be changed later.
ftp.bmp.ovh/imgs/2021/03/5481293049a53316.jpg
in discussion The Decktet / Game Design » Having an idea about an area-control game
I'm now working on an idea about designing an 2-players area-control game, which is mostly inspired by the famous Twilight Struggle.
All the location cards and Aces will be used to form the map. Other cards will be used to control these locations. For example, play a card from you hand, and then add a token to a location whcih shares a same suit with it.
All the locations sharing the same suit make up an area, while the Excuse performs as a special area——then there will be 7 areas in total——and the goal of the game is to control more areas than your opponent.
In addition, there might be some special locations, such as the three double-type cards and the three triple-suit cards. But I don't want to add any extra texts one cards (or it'll be difficult to play the game by original Decktet cards), so there won't be something like the Events in TS.
It's still an idea, and I haven't began writing the rules yet. Any suggestion will be appreciated.
That's all, apologize for my poor English, and I hope I have made myself clear.
The rules were updated on February 23, 2021 to reflect further play testing and improvements. Specifically, Friends of the Chief are scored by both players, but only in the hand, not the bhargage; bhargs can be scored during play of the cards; 23 is not scored in hand or bhargage; and the points for more than one suit of shortage are increased.
I didn't make the game, but the person who did used links to images hosted elsewhere. With a little poking around, I found the images and added them here.
There seems to be some problems with the images, and the link in the links section doesn't seem to exist any more, just ending up on some random unconnected site.
I played it tonight (playing solo, right-hand vs. left-hand) and enjoyed it very much. It incorporates so much of the Decktet: the suits, values, and type. If you pay attention to the names of the cards, you can bring in some fun storytelling.
The set-up is the same as the two-player game, except that the automa opponent doesn't use any tokens. You take all the turns. When you roll a 10 you collect tokens on your three crowns as usual but the automa opponent doesn't.
When you sell a card to gain more tokens, instead of discarding it, you play it as a developed property on your opponent's side. You can choose which district to play it on, but it must match suit as in the regular game. You'll want to put most of the cards in one district and write that one off as a loss, but sometimes the suits won't let you.
If you want to sell a card that can't be placed with either suit you may discard it.
You only run through the deck once since there are no (or very few) discards. Scoring is the same as usual.
To make the game harder:
If one of the suits on your discard is one of your automa opponent's crown suits, you must place it using that suit if possible. If not, you can place it using the other suit. This mimics the two-player game where your opponent is more likely to be able play cards with suits from their crown cards. It makes the game more difficult because it limits where you can play the opponent's cards.
It is easier to pick up new games when you have experience with other games, as game mechanics tend to show patterns between different games. This game has similarities to Settlers of Catan, but also Machi Koro, in that dice decide which cards create wealth in this round. The goal of the game is something which can be described as "majority rule", as not the total value of your cards is counted but the majority at each plot. Think best-of-five match. A game classic using this condition is El Grande.
These are the core elements of the game. You may be able to work out the rules with these elements in mind. It is hard to start on rules if you have no idea what the game is about.
Taxation is used to deter players from hoarding goods (otherwise playing deeds were inefficient).
There are two listed at BoardGameGeek; unfortunately the wiki won’t let me link them.
Sorry, I am new card gaming and board game scene. I just found out this game, but it's hard to understand the rule. Is there any video out there showing how to play Magnate? Really appreciate any help.
It's a wiki, but this page in particular says it's protected against plebes like us.