Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Board and Card Games > Illuminati Playtest

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-12-2017, 12:11 PM   #11
grimblefig
 
grimblefig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Iowa
Default Re: Rules feedback

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Goodwin View Post
It would seem to me that attributes could be useful toward future expansions, especially with things like Brainwash, NWO cards, and the like. Government might no longer be an alignment, but could that change with a NWO out? It could still be useful to know which groups are Government (or rename it State?). Likewise Bank, Church, Computer, Corporate, Person, Resource, Secret.

Plus it would let you say in the rules something like "Attributes don't do anything. Yet." :)
I agree.

With the loss of Government, there are a few fairly high-powered groups that can now be used against the Discordians (groups that were Gov't but not straight, e.g. CIA, New York, Fed. Reserve). Discordia's usual targets make it difficult to defend against these, especially if they use an attack to destroy.

Plus, it does give more hooks for group abilities or specials to work with. Without them, it is a lot more difficult to model today's climate of corporations-running-amok and church-vs-science. Even if they are not currently used, they would be there for future releases or homebrew cards (you are still going to make blank cards, right?).
__________________
--Jim Tetrick
All Opinions expressed above are mine and mine alone
...unless my plot to control the Orbital Mind Control Lasers succeeds.
grimblefig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2017, 07:21 PM   #12
Magesmiley
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Snohomish, WA
Default Re: Rules feedback

My comment on FEMA in the other thread got me thinking a bit about the bonus/penalty system used in Illuminati.

When there are two competing sides comparing strengths, I've observed over the years that in most games modifiers get computed faster if they're all positive rather than a mix of pluses and minuses. The difference being who gets the modifier. It might be worth considering making everything into a positive modifier (with negative ones becoming a bonus to the other side).

It also speeds things up a bit with both the defender and attacker dividing up the various modifiers to count up. (You could even make numbers for modifiers inside of an attacker/defender/both icon for easy visibility on the cards).

Just a thought.
__________________
Dynamax Designs, Designing quality since 2035.
Magesmiley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2017, 09:05 PM   #13
Chris Goodwin
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
Default Re: Rules feedback

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magesmiley View Post
My comment on FEMA in the other thread got me thinking a bit about the bonus/penalty system used in Illuminati.

When there are two competing sides comparing strengths, I've observed over the years that in most games modifiers get computed faster if they're all positive rather than a mix of pluses and minuses. The difference being who gets the modifier. It might be worth considering making everything into a positive modifier (with negative ones becoming a bonus to the other side).

It also speeds things up a bit with both the defender and attacker dividing up the various modifiers to count up. (You could even make numbers for modifiers inside of an attacker/defender/both icon for easy visibility on the cards).

Just a thought.
I completely second this. Sometimes there are so many modifiers that, when it's the third hour of a seven player game and we're all getting​ a bit punchy, it's easy to lose track of which ones you've counted or mis-subtract. If there's an easy way to word it so that penalties to the attacker become bonuses to the defender I'm all for that.
__________________
Chris Goodwin

I've started a subreddit for discussion of INWO and Illuminati. Check it out!
Chris Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2017, 12:42 PM   #14
ChuckEye
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Default Re: Rules feedback

The Bibliography in the copy I bought in the late 80s was a must-have reading list for me. The titles are mostly carried over to the new edition, but I'm sure many of them are going to be impossible to find now days. (I replaced my Arkon Daraul a year or two back, but the Wilgus? Good luck…)

Wondering if that section should be updated to include more contemporary books? (Da Vinci Code is the most recent title listed, and its 14 years old now…)
ChuckEye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2017, 01:39 PM   #15
Craig_Neumeier
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Default Re: Rules feedback

There's a good chance it's already the plan to include the rules tweaks from the game supplements -- but if it isn't, it should be. Those were
1) a single player can discard any two special cards to abolish privilege: once abolished, privilege cannot be restored for that attack.
2) if at the end of any turn there is only one uncontrolled group, or no uncontrolled groups, draw groups until there are two uncontrolled groups. If a special is drawn, discard it.
(I actually think drawing up to 3 wouldn't be a terrible idea.)
Craig_Neumeier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2017, 10:05 PM   #16
JCase
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Oregon
Default Re: Rules feedback

Strongly seconding the suggestion of adding a rule to draw up if there are too few uncontrolled groups. By far the biggest problem with the rules as they are now for my group and the only one we have added a house rule for. (We draw up to 4, but that may be too high.) Too few uncontrolled groups definitely means less choices and less fun though.
JCase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 07:46 PM   #17
IOWO
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Default Re: Rules feedback

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jackson View Post
a reissue of INWO, someday, is not off the table. (Also not on the schedule, to make that clear.)
Steve,

Not to veer off-topic but I am very happy to hear that a reissue of INWO is not off the table. The originally Illuminati is a really good game but INWO is the most fun I've had playing card games. Please consider this a simple request to put it on the schedule.

Thank you.

Bjørnë

Last edited by IOWO; 11-06-2017 at 05:22 PM. Reason: Fnord
IOWO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 06:03 PM   #18
Steve Jackson
President and EIC
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Default Re: Rules feedback

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig_Neumeier View Post
(I actually think drawing up to 3 wouldn't be a terrible idea.)
An easy change - any comments on this?
Steve Jackson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2017, 04:26 PM   #19
Chris Goodwin
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
Default Re: Rules feedback

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jackson View Post
An easy change - any comments on this?
I like it.
__________________
Chris Goodwin

I've started a subreddit for discussion of INWO and Illuminati. Check it out!
Chris Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2017, 09:35 PM   #20
Magesmiley
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Snohomish, WA
Default Re: Rules feedback

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jackson View Post
An easy change - any comments on this?
Yeah, I'd concur. One of the biggest drags in play seems to be when there are too few groups to choose from. One thing to watch for in play testing though is Illuminati that win with a particular number of groups of different types (Bermuda, Discordians, Assassins). Those might need to be adjusted upwards, as more groups on the table increases their chances of finding ones matching their objectives.
__________________
Dynamax Designs, Designing quality since 2035.
Magesmiley is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.