Multiplayer suggestion (another one)

By Kzar Otto, in Warhammer: Invasion The Card Game

Well, here's my take on the multiplayer variant.

You're gonna need several sets of markers (or cheap beads). 1 set for each race in the game (or 1 for each player).

I've seen wytefang's variant on bgg and was thinking about the problem of getting a burn token stolen and holding of attacks until you are sure to make a burn.

If instead of the original dmg markers you use custom markers for each player/race you could track down each dmg point done to each capital zone. The rules go like this:

Original rules apply all the same. But each dmg you apply gets marked with your own custom markers.

You try to burn other players' zones as usual and mark the dmg you apply with your markers. Once the zone burns, and only when it burns, the dmg markers on that zone become victory points and are given back to the players that applied them. So... each player gets their respective dmg markers back as points once the zone burns.

Give 2 extra poins to the players that actually applies the burning dmg, as a bonus for "realeasing" the points.

A zone with developments gets more hit points, so more dmg can be applyed, but if the development is destroyed and the zone burns because of this... the points get returned to theis owners without any bonus.

If a player burns his own zone he also does not get extra points.

Moving dmg from zones works the same as the original rules, but the moving player gets to choose which marker gets moved, if there are markers from different players. Once a zone burns only the dmg on it gets returned as points. The same applies for healing dmg... the healer chooses which marker to remove.

Burned zones cant get more dmg as usual.

Player that gets 25 (3 players) victory points wins. Add 10 more points for each additional player (10 points is the amount you'll get for completely burning a zone + the bonus for burning it). I choose 25 because its the points for 2 complete zones + some extra hit points players might add with developments.

Ganging up on weak player might happend, but he wont be able to provide a full win for either player, even if he gets his 3 zones burned (30 points split to the stronger players), so the stronger players will have to burn each other zones to recieve their points back and win the game.

Edit: If when a zone burns, 2 or more players end up with more than the winning number of points at the same time, the one with more points wins. If 2 or more players end up with the same nunber of points, you can call it a tie or decide based on who has more power on the table at that point, or more units...

Thats my best shot so far... The game remains completely the same, the only diference is that after a zone burns the dmg markers become points.
The number of points might need tweeking and i need to playtest it more, but i think this is ok. What do you guys think?

I'm intrigued by this idea and think it has potential.

Some question. Let's say a player with damage on his capital decks out? What happens to the "Victory Points" that are on his capital. This seems important for mill decks. Does anyone get those points? Also what if the player who decked out has "Victory Points" on other player's capital boards. Does he still collect victory point when those zones burn and if so can he still win even after decking out (assume not). In theory is it possible that enough people decking out could mean those remaining cannot get enough victory points to score the win?

When you have two burned zones are you out of the game?

If you still get knocked out, then last man standing is also a victory condition in addition to scoring victory points?

Would like to see this in play. Will be keeping an eye on this.


I really like this idea. Needs a little more polish but so far the best multiplayer put forth. I also will be keeping an eye on this and doing some playtesting with some three player games.

Yeah this sounds like its going in a good direction. Kinda like Power in AGOT.


The idea of the variant was to have no elimination, so you dont get "killed" if you have 2 burning zones.

But on the decking issue... you got me there. It didnt happened so i never thought of it. Well I guess i'll have to add 1 more rule...

Lets try and think of something clean and simple...

If a player's deck runs out he will be given a -10 point penaly, so to win he needs 35 points (instead of 25) in a 3 player game. He will play his turn as normal but in the end of it he will shuffle his discard pile and his remaining hand to make it his draw deck.

My reasons for the rule are: In a 2 player game, beeing decked = losing, so the penalty for doing so should be high enough to punish someone but not enough to eliminate any possibilities of winning. My guess is 10 points should do the trick... Moving on... The player that was decked probably has a huge hand = lots of possibilities, which in many games can become more valuable than anything else. That's why his new draw deck will have not only his discard pile, but also his remaining (and probably huge amount of) hand cards.

Well thats what I came up with but i really need to test it...

If you have any suggestions or better ideias share it plz.

When i first thouth of this multiplayer i had AGOT in mind, to make all turns "simultaneous". i.e.: all players get resources (active player first), then all players draw cards, then all players play cards, then all players declare attacks (active player first) and turn ends, active player moves clockwise and repeat. Also thought about being able to declare more than 1 attack: if you have 3 units on battlefield you could attack one zone with 2 units and another zone from a different player with 1 unit at the same time. But those ideas needed WAY more testing and would change the game dinamics, so I might try them at a later moment, or if someone else wants to give it a shot... go ahead and share the experience.