RUtT combines Werewolf with a favorite of mine, Kutschfahrt. The great gimmick (in both cases) is that an accusation ends it. Neither game can drag on. If the accuser is correct his side wins. In RUtT's case, you win or lose that round, and each winner gets a treasure card.
But the core is the round. You get dealt one of four roles:
Once the roles are revealed, the round continues until one player points to another and yells "stop!" (or whatever).
But here's the catch, and why our game didn't go over so well. In the 4 player game, you have one of each role. But when you get more players, then you get some additional information. Every non-wizard knows who the keyholder is (the wizards close their eyes). And all the traitors know each other.
So traitors want to tell the evil wizard who the keyholder is. But if they just come out and say it, the guard will nab them and they lose. Either wizard wins if the keyholder points to them, but they can both claim to be good, but if evil figures out the keyholder, he can win.
My group didn't like it, but partially that's because you have to figure the rules out ... quickly. In fact, I 'won' one round because everyone was pausing, and I realized that another player had enough time to figure out a reasonable-odds gamble but hadn't acted, so he was probably the traitor (who can't accuse). Sadly I misremembered the rule on who I should I accuse. Still, it was like one of those math puzzles where, on the 38th night all the wives murder their husbands. (If you don't know, don't ask).
In fact, my chief concern is that each round will be too fast. The keyholder can make a 50/50 accusation at any time. Guards can usually get the same odds on someone as a traitor (since they'll know the wizards, and keyholder, if the game is large enough). Perhaps their should be a slight penalty for the false accusation (beyond not being on the winning team).
The other concern is that each member of the winning team gets a treasure, which are worth 0-5 points. 10 points wins. That's pretty random for such a clever game (and there are a few treasures that let you steal other treasures, except for those that block it). In the one hand, that's easy to remove, but it also means that you will sometimes sway between palatable accusations, because you may set things up so that if you are wrong, the leader will be on the losing side.
I've added "Play RUtT with 6 or more" to my gaming To-Do list. And I don't particularly care for Werewolf. If you like it, I imagine RUtT a must try.
Update: There may be a rule I'm forgetting, like "Good wizards also win by capturing the traitors" ... we only played 2-3 rounds and I didn't get every role down pat.
]]>I've played many more of the Meeple's Choice nominees, but I still couldn't bring myself to vote for three. (I voted for Battlestar Galactica and Cosmic Encounter .... yes, the latter is based on the Eon version. Sue me). I'm tempted to vote for Dominion (played several face to face games this weekend) ...
Update: And Rule #1 of the internet -- Snark begets Snark. (Rule #2 is that snark quality has no genetic component).
]]>All the skill gives you a bonus on your die roll. To be fair to Hanging Gardens, skill probably gives you +2.
Coupled with some cards that practically guarantee a tile versus terrible cards that can barely be played, I really should hate this game instead of being lukewarm towards it.
Now, I can understand the appeal of the luck ... people with poor spatial grasps have trouble with this game, and would get pummelled if you just scored some formulae for how big each section you built was. Still, it feels hacked on. I don't see how you can categorize a game as dice chess and like it.
]]>I do like the following comment on Cities and Knights:
Hitting upon the excellent idea of removing all the compelling simplicity of the original version, he crafted a game that was just as strategically and tactically challenging, but also ridiculously overcomplicated
I then noticed that the author lives in San Antonio, and complains that nobody here is hardcore enough to play C&K. The mind boggles.
]]>I can't recall seeing two high contracts redoubled in one session, much less back to back. (Of course, Meckwell are way behind, and taking big risks...)
(Rodwell's hand on that slam was 
AKJT98653
--
9
A94)
Played a lot of Face to Face Dominion for the first time. I've certainly played a lot on BSW, but I'm starting to enjoy the 'real' game. I'll certainly trade for a copy now. Also got in a game of Through the Ages, and managed to self destruct when I sacrificed my army to get a colony that provided enough yellow tokens that I could easily rebuy the people in one turn. I forgot I wouldn't have enough ore to rebuild the units for 2-3 turns. And two turns as whipping boy is one too many. I managed to recover somewhat and had a huge run in the end, despite only producing 4 ore a turn at game end (and one of those was via a trade agreement). Lots of mineral deposits, patriotism and military build ups (6 civil actions by mid game, 8 by mid Age III).
Also played the "Ace of Aces" book game. Exactly how many games use that exact same system? Ace of Aces, Blue Max, Richtoffen's War (which, I'm told, the Ace of Aces people used to build their book). There's a miniature version of Blue Max I've seen (the players had never heard of Blue Max, but their rules were identical, down to the damage chits).
]]>Qwirkle isn't growing on me, per se, as much as making me want to play Scrabble. But its not bad.
Caylus Magna Carta is still hitting the table; and I'm completely sold that it is superior to straight Caylus (for replayability).
Blue Moon continues to amuse.
]]>Also played a few of the "good every now and then" card games, like Castle, Gargon, and Ark. Ark is still a touch too long.
And I spent hours trying to fix my computer. For some reason Firefox crashes after 3-4 minutes -- this was a known issue in 3.0.9, but I've got 3.0.10. Fortunately the 3.5 Beta seems stable, but if anybody has any ideas (hint: mozcrt19.dll) on what to do, I'm listening.
]]>