We did play 3 player game. Grane with scorpio, unicorn with Crab, phoenix with dragon.

Nice six rounds game, where every clan did have chance to win the game during the last round. Crane started the last round and did win by one str against the unicorn who did underestimate the Crane military power...

the phonenix did seem strong though. All that ring manipulation and ring effects that got fullfilled well in multiplayer game.

We did not get any deals though. Second last round was unicorn bashing because he did already have four rings before last two conflicts,, but that was without any deals.

Definitely fun and we even have enough fate to do some tricks. But the start was slow, because of board state building did take time. The Unicorn was suffering the lack of enough fate.

All players were in Luck of getting cheap characters from the imperial deck.

all in all Phoenix most likely would have won if the game would have been a Little bit longer, but who knows.

positive experience. Have to try again with different people.

20 hours ago, Hannibal_pjv said:

We did play 3 player game. Grane with scorpio, unicorn with Crab, phoenix with dragon.

.....

All players were in Luck of getting cheap characters from the imperial deck.

Thanks for posting this! ?

I would like to ask as to what you mean by “characters from the imperial deck.’ ?

Most character that were in the game were between 1 to 3 fate cost. Only one 5 cost character did enter to the fields of battle this time, so there was enough fate to pay to make the characters to stay in the game longer.

This was exactly what occurred in our 4 way multiplayer games. How funny! ?

Some more 3 players games

2. Crane with Crab, Phoenix with Dragon, Unicorn with Crab.

Phoenix did win with their spell pumps at second round! Very tight game and fast! Using the new stronghold that allows to play events from the discard pile! Very usefull for getting that last force to brake brovinces...

3. Crane with Crab, Scorpio with Crane, Unicorn with Crab

Unicorn did win (woohoo!) It managed to get all the tools. Scouts, spying classes and pumps at third round. Scorpio did have three rings and they did try to win by smashing Cranes province that did have one ring. It was short by little and Unicorn did have easy way of cleaning up the rewards. Once again very tight game. The card advantage by using spying classes multible times was the key in this game!

Both game did end by enlightenment victory with no deals...

Interesting to read that these multiplayer games are shaping up to be a totally different game compared to the standard 1v1 games. Really nice to see. ?

Yep! Somekind of limit who to attack aka role cards from Games of thrones or attack only to left could be usefull.

the multiplayer is certainly a snowball game. You normally get two, sometimes three rings with one confligh, so the game end very quicly when the rings starts accumulating. The treaties part has been vague zero in our games. The games has been so close that it has been quite pointles to make deals and game end so quicly so it is wise to not tie your hands. And when game is adding it is quite obvious what has to be done even without treaties the combined efford to try to stop the player whose turn it is and who allready have three rings, so one conflict could end the game. After that the next player try to end the game and after that the third player try to end the game... somewhere in that, players run out of cards and/or characters.

That is why card drawing during the conflict round is extremely important. The player who last run out of cards aka tricks most propably Wins.

Interesting observations Hannibal. Roughly my experience with the few games that we played in our version of multiplayer.

Three more multiplayer games

1. Phonix, Crane with Crab (duealing deck), Unicorn with Grab. Phoenix did win in second round. Unicorn was very near Also. Dueling decks just don`t work yet. No deals...

2. Grab with Unicorn, scorpio with phonix, Crane with Scorpio. Two counterspell decks... 3 round multiplayer game. Crane did win with lot of counterspells and scouts to beat military conflicts with a lot of pumps. No deals...

3. Same setting as in second game. Grab did win. Mainly because scorpio did kill buffet scout with assasin... Scorpio did end the game with 1 honor, while Grab did beat the Crane who was sufferein acute lack of manpower. Game did last 4 rounds so very long multiplayer game...

So thoughs. Phonex has a lot of cards that Are very wonky in multiplayer. Some Are good and some Are really bad.

No deals... that mechanic is just not working at this moment. Only enlighment victories. No killing opponent stornhold, no honor victories, no dishonor victories. Only getting those five rings. Main reason seams to be that all other victory types Are just too slow compared to enlighment victory. And while that makes games fast, it is Also in the long run guite boring. Other victory condition should be adjusted to make those Also more viable. Now there only seems to have one way of winning.

You can make the game longer by not making elementary conflicts or by not attaking at all and only trying to prevent other players getting those rings... but that would make games longer, while allowing room to other victory type too... but that seems counter intuitive. I would consider either... requiring the destroying of one stronhold after you get rings. (An alternative way of getting to stronhold could be having al those rings.) or redusing the starting honor and decreasing the reguired honor for honor victory.

Variant 1: win by 5 rings, starting honor reduced by amounth of players. Reguired honor victory (25-2•players). You can attack stronghold after 2 broken provinces. (This is the speed version)

variant 2: normal winning condition, but enlighmet victory requires broking one stronhold (much longer games, but less rule changes)

i would prefer option one. It would allow other victory types Also a chance in two to three round games. But have to see what other players say. Maybe our decks Are just too slow at breaking provinces or hoarding honor, or redusing honor. But in multiplayer you have to deal two opponents and that just make other victory types slover than in two player games.

On ‎6‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 3:06 PM, Hannibal_pjv said:

Yep! Somekind of limit who to attack aka role cards from Games of thrones or attack only to left could be useful.

The house-rule we've agreed upon (if we ever get it to the table, because it will otherwise be a tug-of-war between two of our players and the third will clean up otherwise) is that each player may only attack each other character once in a round. That allows for focusing on a player in the lead, and in a four-player game someone (well, 2 technically) can be attacked 3 times in a round, but that doesn't seem to be particularly overwhelming (from my armchair).

15 hours ago, Duciris said:

The house-rule we've agreed upon (if we ever get it to the table, because it will otherwise be a tug-of-war between two of our players and the third will clean up otherwise) is that each player may only attack each other character once in a round. That allows for focusing on a player in the lead, and in a four-player game someone (well, 2 technically) can be attacked 3 times in a round, but that doesn't seem to be particularly overwhelming (from my armchair).

There's an extenuating circumstance I have concocted. The new Lion stronghold allows for the potential of a third attack. This would need to be an exception to our house rule, as in a three-player game they would not be able to target anyone with their third attack.

You could rewrite your rule as "A player cannot declare a second conflict against an opponent in a single round, unless he or she has already declared a conflict against each of his or her opponent that round."