First off, let me say that this was fun. A lot of fun. Figuring out the goofy interactions, seeing how good some cards were, and deciding when to attack vs. when to attack to break.

It was a three player game. Dragon(Monk)/sub-Crab (Levy), Crane(Honor)/sub-Lion, and Unicorn/sub-Lion.

• Honor is much more possible in this format (at least Crane Honor). Crane got pounced on when he hit 22 honor. Came very close to winning.
• Have Seeker Initiates? The way the rules read, the Dragon was able to attack Fire twice in one round to try to get it to activate.
• Unicorn are much better in this environment than I think anyone suspects. Unicorn player is the newest to our group. He should have been running roughshod over us....
• Small cost peeps are awesome. Bodies to defend or....
• We all had to learn that you don't have to attack to break a province.
• Dishonor is still a very real threat.
• Pay attention to the Rings your Opponents have. Dragon won by swinging in on a province the had two Rings on it he needed. If one of those had been a claimed ring, he wouldn't have won.
• Put aside 2-3 hours. Treat it like a casual game of Commander . You'll have more fun.

What we didn't do:

• Treaties. I suspect this will be a bigger feature in larger games.
• Gear the Decks to the format. Smaller people are great here while 4 costers will make you groan.

I feel like Lion are going to be Rock Stars in Enlightenment right after Unicorn.

Overall, it felt like a good game of Munchkin , where you weren't sure who was going to win until the end.

Thanks for gaming this and your feedback. ?

I definitely feel that Treaties need to have a bit more 'crunch' to them. I don't know exactly how, but I feel like they should be more integral to the format.

Kinda like titles in AGoT:LCG.

Maybe as a multi-player support FFG can release a new Treaty card type that lays out all the specifications. Maybe you can have a 10 card treaty deck, can only play one each turn with some kind of benefit if it's refused or something... just thinking

@Coyote Walks if and when possible, would you be able to game a 4-Player game?

On 5/26/2018 at 8:03 PM, LordBlunt said:

@Coyote Walks if and when possible, would you be able to game a 4-Player game?

I'll do what I can. Getting people to show up right now isn't as easy as it should be.

On 5/26/2018 at 8:03 PM, LordBlunt said:

@Coyote Walks if and when possible, would you be able to game a 4-Player game?

Played two Enlightenment games last week (before the update). A three and a four player game. Different people at different stores. Lion trounced us both times.

As to the four player version, bidding was easier. I wouldn't mind if that became the norm across the format. Everything else went smoothly. No one got dishonored out. There just wasn't enough cooperation to keep the Lion from winning.

17 hours ago, Coyote Walks said:

As to the four player version, bidding was easier. I wouldn't mind if that became the norm across the format. Everything else went smoothly. No one got dishonored out. There just wasn't enough cooperation to keep the Lion from winning.

I’ve only played 4-player MP, and I agree that bidding is very easy and quick. In one of the games, Lion also won (by honor) and in other he threatened honor victory with 23 honor.

I also saw that there was at least 1 treaty per turn. In one of the games, I made treaties with all the other players, and end up winning, very diplomatic victory.