Myself and two friends were thinking about buying the core set since it comes with four factions, although this is described as a two player game is it possible/fun to play three or four player games?

Yes. I usually play with more than 2 people.

It's only officially supported for 2 players but if you do a bit of browsing on the forums and the net you will find multiplayer variants.

Mechanically I think it does work, I just think it's quite difficult to recover from two other players battlefield attacks if they both happen to land on you. Stuff like "No combat for X turns" can really help stabalize everyone tho.

While you can certainly game with more than 2 players, but as the poster above responded, this CCG does severely punish the player(s) that has to wait for his turn while being attacked by 2-3 players.... at least that is my experience.

We tried playing with 4 players, but the 4th player was easily removed because he was 'ganged up' on by round 2, and the odd (3rd player) pretty much ended up being the "spoiler" by the end of the game.

This is my experience with 3 games played with 4 players. Your mileage may vary.

Hi! This is my first post on these forums, but I've been lurking for months. I just wanted to say that my group plays multiplayer almost exclusively. We love it, and count Invsion as probably our favorite game in years.

A few of the house rules we play by:

1. No first turn penalties.

2. No attacking first turn (we are going to start playtesting no attacking for 2-3 turns to see how it effects the game).

3. You may play quests to units as well as units to existing quests (this subtle change *instantly* made quests a valuable, interesting, and sometimes invaluable addition to our decks)

4. First player decided by random mid-deck card reveal (highest points cost goes first).

5. In a four (or more) player game, a player cannot be attacked two consecutive turns until the number of remaining players drops to three or less.

6. In four (or more) players games, a fun victory condition is: "First player to burn a number of zones equal to 1 less than the total number of players wins." No player is ever out of the game, even if he/she has 3 burning zones. This keeps everyone playing and having fun, and no one has to sit around and wait for a long, drawn out game to finish.

And finally, we've recently realized that 56-65 card decks are sooooooo much more fun to play in multiplayer games. We try to tune our decks to about 70-80% efectiveness. We limit the total number of Warpstone/Contested/Innovation in a deck to about a combined 3 or 4 (maybe 5 in a faster style deck). Once we fattened up the decks and started bringing 10-12 of the "B-Tier" cards, we found the fun level of the games went from about an 8 (on a scale of 1-10) to about an 11 haha! You may be surprised at how effective some of those "crappy" cards can be when you never see them coming! Also, the dynamics of a multiplayer game really ramps up the power level of cards with wording that makes reference to "all opponents". As an example: Doom Divers they remove a bunch of developments and do buckets of direct-to-capital damage in a 4+ player game - even if you only keep them around for a turn or two.

Anyways, hope this helps some people out. My friends and I adore this game and we hope more people out there can find as much enjoyment from multiplayer as we have.

Tauwolf said:

1. No one is ever eliminated, regardless of how many of their zones are burning.

2. Whoever takes an action that would result in the burning of an opponents zone (normally by dealing enough damage, but also by removing enough developments from a zone to it below the burn threshold) also receives a burn token to be used as a counter (not on one of their zones). Note: It is whoever actually burns the zone regardless of the amount of damage done. If Bob does 7 damage to Joe's Quest Zone and the next player is John who deals the final point of damage to burn the zone, then John gets the token and credit for the burn.

3. The first player to accumulate three burn tokens wins the game.

We have been playing with this format for a few weeks now and it has done a great job of eliminating most of the issues I find annoying about multiplayer.

- No one ever gets eliminated and has to sit around watching while the rest have fun.

- Since you can't eliminate anyone, there is less of a resason to gang op on a player. However, once you appear to have victory within reach on your next turn, be prepared to have your Support cards destroyed, Units stolen and card pulled from your hand .

- No restrictions on the actions you can take. You can declare an attack on whoever you want or interfere with any attack.

When a zone burns you place a burn token on it and it follows the normal rules. The player who burned the zone gets an additional burn token to keep for himself for score keeping.

One point I forgot to bring up was the initial round. The first player skips the Quest Phase and Battlefield Phase. The last player in the round gets to do everything (just like the two player rules) and everyone in between skips the Battlefield phase. Seems to work well.

Try a few games with this format and I think you'll see it actually adds to the already high level of strategy present in the game. Do you attack a zone if you can't burn it since that only makes it easier for someone else to get the burn? When do you allow an opponent to burn a zone simply in order to prevent another opponent from grabbing it and winning?"

These and my custom Muster Phase rules are what my group (more like store of customers) use.