Five Tribes Five Tribes

Forum

Suche
Forum » Shadows over Camelot - English » King Arthur
Anzeigen: Heutige Nachrichten 
  
VerfasserThema
dicefun
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 9
Registriert:
November 2004
King Arthur Sat, 18 June 2005 16:54
Can King Arthur force a player to trade with him, or does the trade have to be mutually agreed upon?
      
GreatDane
Senior Member

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 755
Registriert:
June 2004
Re:King Arthur Sat, 18 June 2005 17:04
Well, the rules say that the knight receiving a card from Arthur "must return one white card in exchange". But the rules don't say that he cannot return the card just received!

Incidentally does the rules not state either whether the knight may look upon the card received before he decides what to give King Arthur, but in either case can the same card be returned:

a) the player receives a card from Arthur. Looks at it and decides to return the same card.

b) the player immediately returns the face down card without looking at it.

Mik
      
Luke the Flaming
Senior Member

Nachrichten: 270
Registriert:
July 2003
Re:King Arthur Sat, 18 June 2005 19:59
The rules say that the cards must be exchanged "face down", so we play that you can't look at what you're received until you've given one of your card to the King.
While we never had to face the case, I suppose that you could give to the King his own card if you like...
      
GreatDane
Senior Member

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 755
Registriert:
June 2004
Re:King Arthur Sun, 19 June 2005 15:08
Luke the Flaming wrote on Sat, 18 June 2005 19:59

The rules say that the cards must be exchanged "face down", so we play that you can't look at what you're received until you've given one of your card to the King.


This is how we play as well, although I am not sure that is the reason why the rules state the card must be placed "face down". It could simply be to ensure no-one else see the card.
      
EiNSTEiN
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 6
Registriert:
October 2004
Re:King Arthur Sun, 19 June 2005 15:30
We play it different. King Arthurs gives a card to another player - "face down" so that no other player can see what it is. The other play looks at the card and gives it back - again "face down".

I see this exhchanging of cards as a help between two knights. If the player receiving the card from Arthur doesn't have any use of this card he just gives it back.

There could be moments where a knight doesn't want to give away any of his cards because he needs them all. Since he should not talk about this, King Arthur might really make trouble to this player in giving him a card. That can't be in the spirit of the game. Smile
      
Bruno des Montagnes
Game Designer

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 161
Registriert:
February 2003
Re:King Arthur Sun, 19 June 2005 23:58
We play exactly like luke and great dane

the reason of this rule is that, as far as you are not allowed to say exactly what you need (communication rule), the two knoghts exchanging cards can make listake, just because of bad undestanding !!
(and suspicion level inceases !! Wink
      
Jayboid
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 2
Registriert:
May 2005
Re:King Arthur Tue, 26 July 2005 10:38
I understand that by saying you play the same way that Luke and Great Dane do, you mean that both players pass their cards to each other without first having seen what the other is giving to him (or her). But do you also mean to say that the other player may simply reject King Arthur's card, sight unseen? I find this prospect disturbing for a number of reasons. First, it would seem to go against the rules, which call for an actual exchange of cards. Secondly, and for me more importantly, it would seem to go against role-playing and the overall spirit of the game. After all, who but an openly traitorous knight would refuse a missive (or some such) from his king? If a knight had been revealed to be a traitor (either by another or by his own hand), and was playing openly as such, then he would no longer technically be a knight, and therefore be beyond the jurisdiction of the exchange. But if he were still masquerading and functioning as a loyal knight, would he not still be bound by their codes of behavior, which refusing the king would surely violate? Lastly, there is the question of game balance. To be able to refuse the king would give the other players veto power over his special ability, effectively allowing them to cut it out of the game. True, it does open up an interesting strategic possibility for a traitor who could talk everyone into distrusting the king, but no other character has a special ability that can be taken away like that, and we ARE talking about the king here. I can understand why it would never occur to the designers to play this way, as they obviously intended the game to be played with role-playing and subtlety. But as the original question was "Can King Arthur force another player to trade with him?", I think it deserves careful consideration, as any comment from one of the game's designers will doubtless be regarded as an on-the-spot ruling.
P.S.-Congatulations to you gentlemen for producing such a wonderfully elegant game. I'm grateful to be able to add it to my collection!

[Aktualisiert am: Tue, 26 July 2005 10:46]

      
GreatDane
Senior Member

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 755
Registriert:
June 2004
Re:King Arthur Tue, 26 July 2005 11:12
Jayboid wrote on Tue, 26 July 2005 10:38

After all, who but an openly traitorous knight would refuse a missive (or some such) from his king?


Well, why would any Knight devoted to God and Country accept the bidding of a treacherous King?
      
Jayboid
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 2
Registriert:
May 2005
Re:King Arthur Tue, 26 July 2005 14:26
Because a knight would swear an oath of fealty to a lord, whom the country was considered an extension and property of, not the other way around (this latter being a more modern notion). Additionally, the code of chivalry called for deference to those higher in station. These guys were conditioned to accept and defer to the idiosyncratic behavior of their monarch (plus, give the guy a break, he's been cuckolded by his wife and best friend). As far as God goes, this was known as the monarch's divine (God-given) right. If, and only if, he had been proven to have been driven so mad with the grief of a broken heart that he had become a danger both to himself and to everything that he had worked to build (i.e.-if he had been proven to be the traitor), would it have been their duty to bring him down. Anyway, veto power over his ability would cut Arthur's power off at the knees, a situation no other character has to contend with . This would affects game balance, because while other characters may find themselves in a situation where they can't use their powers, in every other case it would only be temporary (unless you count being revealed as the traitor, but no matter which way this goes, all characters revealed to be traitors are in the same boat anyway). I am also a bit worried about non-suspicion related abuses, such as when someone is simply annoyed at the way Arthur's player is using his power, and so refuses to have anything to do with the cards he tries to give him. This would seem to fly in the face of the game's tradition of being stuck with having to work with the other knights, even if you do think one of them is the bloody traitor. I understand that Camelot was supposed to have been a bit more egalitarian than your standard feudo-chivalric setup (a round table so no one sits at the head, etc.), and that the knights also owed their loyalty to the ideals that it was supposed to have represented, but chief among those ideals were honor and chivalry. Besides, I'm not really arguing that Arthur should have any more power than any of the other characters, just a comparable measure. And this, also, is chivalry. Smile

[Aktualisiert am: Thu, 28 July 2005 00:38]

      
Bruno des Montagnes
Game Designer

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 161
Registriert:
February 2003
Re:King Arthur Thu, 28 July 2005 10:43
oh.. sorry.... i forgot to answer to your question !! (but there are so many posts to read on all the worlwide forums...)

Answer is no ! that means that a knight can't refuse an exchange with King Arthur. He's the king and he decides !!!
      
snowphx
Junior Member
Leytenant

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 1
Registriert:
July 2005
Re:King Arthur Thu, 28 July 2005 20:01
Maybe here is another way to think about it... what power does the king have that is not given to him by his loyal followers? Thus - if all his "followers" chose not to follow him - what can he do? even if he is "the king"? It is thus totally in accord (in my humble opinion) with the true roleplaying aspect of this game to be able to choose your loyalty to the king ...or not. And if by "showing your total loyalty" to the king you feel that you must accept the card given to you by him and then return a different card to him... then I am sure that you are well within your rights to do so Very Happy
On the other hand, if you feel that you are somehow "degrading" the king's power by allowing others to return the same card to him... you are forgetting the "true" purpose of the king. These loyal knights are out there trying to defend his land... he is just trying to give them what they might need to help them with this defense. If this is not what they need (or does not better their situation) - then I'm sure the king, with the best interest of his land in mind, would definitely want them to return the same card to him. Thus, I don't see it as a "veto power" over the king's special power... it is more of a "helping his power have the best possible effect".
      
GreatDane
Senior Member

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 755
Registriert:
June 2004
Re:King Arthur Fri, 29 July 2005 11:58
ShadowTemplar wrote on Thu, 28 July 2005 20:01

Maybe here is another way to think about it... what power does the king have that is not given to him by his loyal followers? Thus - if all his "followers" chose not to follow him - what can he do? even if he is "the king"?


True. We Danes have lost a lot of kings that way!
But God is above Kings - and in this game is Bruno God, and he has ruled otherwise.
King

That said, you can still go against the King if you like since he has no real power. Just give him a lousy card back and he can do nothing against it. He can't even tell his loyal Knights...

Mik
      
madvaz
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 13
Registriert:
April 2005
Re:King Arthur Fri, 29 July 2005 18:11
We have been playing that the player could either accept or reject King Arthur trade request..So I guess the knights have no choice but to trade with Arthur, correct?


      
Luke the Flaming
Senior Member

Nachrichten: 270
Registriert:
July 2003
Re:King Arthur Sat, 30 July 2005 03:12
madvaz wrote on Fri, 29 July 2005 18:11

So I guess the knights have no choice but to trade with Arthur, correct?


Correct.
As stated above (Bruno des Montagnes = Bruno Cathala = one of the two creators of the game Wink ):

Bruno des Montagnes wrote on Thu, 28 July 2005 10:43

a knight can't refuse an exchange with King Arthur. He's the king and he decides !!!
      
guest134836
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 1
Registriert:
July 2005
Re:King Arthur Sun, 31 July 2005 03:56
I agree that Bruno has indicated that Arthur can compel an exchange. He has also indicated it is done in a face down fashion and that the reciever cannot look at the card before returning a card to the King (I believe). What Bruno has not (to my mind) clarified is if the recieving player can choose to return the same card to the King.

So, the three subpoints to get clear:

1. Exchanges must be face down.
2. The King gives one to a player. He cannot look at it before deciding what to return.
3. Then the last point is may the player return the same card, without having looked at it, or must he return one of his own cards, taking the card sent him by the King?

With these three points clear, I think the operation's conduct is then clarified sufficiently for all cases.
      
GreatDane
Senior Member

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 755
Registriert:
June 2004
Re:King Arthur Sun, 31 July 2005 10:11
Bruno has explained that

a knight can't refuse an exchange with King Arthur. He's the king and he decides !!!



guest134836

What Bruno has not (to my mind) clarified is if the recieving player can choose to return the same card to the King.


But returning the same card is surely equivalent to refusing the exchange?
      
mata_dor_jp
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 14
Registriert:
May 2005
The sage of Montagnes said Sun, 31 July 2005 11:32
At Boardgamegeek's "How King Arthur trades card?" of Question of SoC, Mr. Cathala said...

"exchange is made face down, simultaneously"

Thus, nobody can return the same card.
      
    
Vorheriges Thema:What handicap do the designers use?
Nächstes Thema:Does Vivien stay in play after successful quest?
Gehen Sie zum Forum: