We just had Banditry come up in Apollo 18, and that has got to be just about the most toothless minor calamity in the bunch. If you guys agree, we had probably better start discussing a replacement effect.

PS: As Apollo 18 uses the 1.3 version of the rules, I hadn't looked at the new stuff in a long time. I find the font in the new rules to be more difficult to read.

Well, the idea with the Minor calamities is that they should be minor. However, loosing a hides or another commodity from stack 1 is not a very big deal when you have access to the 9:th stack. What about having to give one of your comodities with the highest value. The problem is enforcing this, and that means showing your hand, and as minor calamities is resolved first, that means shoing whatever calamities you have, which is not good. Any ideas is wellcome.

As for the fonts, that is a a science in itself. Basicly there is two types of fonts, serif and sans-serif. Times New Roman is the typical example of the formal, and Arial of the later. Scientist (that is psychologists) has concluded that the easiest to read for the mayority of peaople is serif (ie times) and the best font-size is site 12, and that is what the new rules use. However, the psychologists has also concluded that for on-screen reading, the difference is less, and sometimes sans-serif (ie arial) is preferable. The old rules used Arial, size 10, making it hard to read on paper, and on-screan if you do not enlarge it (eg view it in c:a 120% of intended size, which is very easy on-screen, but very hard on paper). Eventhough I mostly read the rules on-screen (as I suppose you and most of the other forum regulars do as well), the rules are intended for print, and so my conclusion is to keep Times New Roman size 12 as main font. If you download the Word version, you can however easily change it to Arial if you perfer it so.

I think a simple random draw (like plunder) would be terrifying, perhaps even too much, but it'd be fun This is a 9 card...

Compare to city in Flames which requires the destruction of a city (a five card), or Minor Uprising (an which requires remove one unit point per city. So, random draw is probably way too much (especially since at this point, the cards have been concentrated into groups.) Hmm, I don't know.

As far as the rule book. I didn't mean to sound as rude as I did. I apologize. Fonts are a strange nasty subject. I guess I had been so used to the 1.3 rules that the 2.x rules came as a surprise... Sorry for any offense.

Jeff

Random draw sounds better than lowest card, but still got a problem, what if an calamity is drawn? One idea would be to give up a certain face value (amount of cities?) with no restrictions to the amount of cards used to reach that face value.



No offense taken! I just wanted to explain myself, as I did do a mayor change to the fonts involved when I updated the layout of the rulebook. I'm sory if I sounded uppset, I have an unfortunate tendence to do so even when I'm not intending to.

Unless the rules have changed in 2.x (I'll look), I'm not sure why you wouldn't just place the calamities aside when the draw is made.

In 1.3, after trade, the minors are revealed and resolved simultaneously, then the majors are revealed and resolved in sequential (then AST) order.

Why not have the player give up 3 points worth of commodity cards to the other player?

I think drawing a random card is not minor at all...

I agree, though 3 points seems a bit too litle. My opinion is either eqivalent to a mid range card (ie 5 points), or amount of cities (most likely 5-9 points). It's after all a level 9 calamity...

I agree: losing a random card is extremely expensive. Losing a single card of your choice seems pretty weak. Minors - I think - are supposed to remain annoyances.

How about this? Random choice, but you can pay N treasury (number on the card?) to negate the effect. (If a Gold is randomly chosen, pay 9 out of treasury to not lose it; or a flat amount before the draw even starts.)

I guess I should have been clear that I wasn't taking my random card suggestion seriously.

I don't know what it "should" be, but somewhere on the low end in between would be ideal.

You could take a lesson from the 8 card, and make it 1 point per city the primary has.

Good idea!

As both McBeth, Velusion and I agree on this, I have changed it in my 2.06 draft. The new wording is:



If you got a beter wording, please notify me, otherwise that's it.

"cities owned by the victim" just so it is clear.

good point

Could you clarify "total face value"? As worded, it could be interpreted a couple different ways.

If I have 3 Hides cards, is the "total face value" 3 points or is it 9 points?

Lane