Settlers of Catan: running out of resources
Joe Schlimgen
Great fun - I believe I like it better than Settlers (although that
could just be because it's new).
Another first was running out of resource cards. (One player received
6 grain and another received 2 whenever a nine was rolled - three
nines were rolled in succession.)
According to the archives, if every player can't get paid, none of
them do. However, I could find no explicit mention of this fact in the
rule books or almanacs. The closest I got was in the Settlers almanac
under "Resource Cards" where it says "If a type of resource card
should run out, players cannot acquire that resource (except ...".
Is this what the archives are referring to? I guess when I first read
the rule many, many moons ago, I didn't really consider the resources
running out until they actually *ran out* - not that running out meant
"not enough to deliver".
Anyhow, if there *is* a specific mention of this in the multiple
rules/almanacs, can someone point me to it - I couldn't find one.
Thanks.
Bob Dobbs
>them do. However, I could find no explicit mention of this fact in the
>rule books or almanacs. The closest I got was in the Settlers almanac
>under "Resource Cards" where it says "If a type of resource card
>should run out, players cannot acquire that resource (except ...".
>
The way we've played it is that you just start dealing out the cards, and
if you don't get your full allotment, too bad. Of course, when the deck
runs out is the PERFECT time for a monopoly card (I've won the game this
way).
Joe Schlimgen
wrote:
I assume you mean starting with the active player. I'm guessing that
would work. In any event, at least from my experience, this is a very
rare occurrence and it probably wouldn't make much difference either
way. It's just good to know what to do BEFORE it happens.
BTW, in Cities and Knights, Monopoly gives you only two of each
resource (or one commodity, depending on the type of monopoly) from
each player, not all of them. So it's certainly not as powerful of a
card (but it's easier to determine when it can be used to full
effect).
Pat Brennan
suggested two house rules:
1. No one gets any
2. Deal what's left to the active player and then to each clockwise player
until they run out.
Obviously, play which ever you prefer.
Cheers
Patrick
Rick Jones
>
> I played Cities & Knights for the first time last night (finally).
> Great fun - I believe I like it better than Settlers (although that
> could just be because it's new).
IMO, C&K is finally what's made the game interesting. I found the
basic game to be to bland. C&K added enough complexity and chaos to make
the game worth playing. That's why I finally broke down and bought the
basic game and C&K last weekend using the Dealer Dollars I won at
OrcCon.
--
Rick Jones
Remove the Extra Dot to e-mail me
"It's the new, improved Tang. Chocked full of vitamins and ministers."
-Christina Applegate, "Married With Children"
Don Woods
> It's not covered in the rule book or the almanac, so people have generally
> suggested two house rules:
>
> 1. No one gets any
> 2. Deal what's left to the active player and then to each clockwise player
> until they run out.
There have been many versions of the rules, in both German and English.
It's possible that some versions don't address this question, but my
copy definitely does. (I have an early Mayfair edition, either first
or second edition.) The first paragraph under "How to play" includes:
"If there aren't enough cards of one resource to give every player
all that they deserve, no players receive any of that resource
this turn."
-- Don.
Joe Schlimgen
Interesting. That would be the reference I'm looking for, but there is
not even a "How to Play" section in my book (copyright 1997, according
to the Almanac).
One would have to wonder, if that's an earlier rule, why it was
removed.
Don Woods
> Interesting. That would be the reference I'm looking for, but there is
> not even a "How to Play" section in my book (copyright 1997, according
> to the Almanac).
>
> One would have to wonder, if that's an earlier rule, why it was
> removed.
My version is copyright 1996, and doesn't even have an Almanac,
whatever that is. The rules are very poorly organised, so I'm
not surprised they were rewritten in later editions, and I guess
I'm not surprised if some rules got dropped on the floor in the
course of rewriting.
-- Don.
Nathan Sanders
> Interesting. That would be the reference I'm looking for, but there is
> not even a "How to Play" section in my book (copyright 1997, according
> to the Almanac).
Are you perhaps missing the rule book? My copy came with both a rule
book and an almanac, and it's been noted on here recently that some
copies have been shipped without one of the two books...
Nathan
======================================================================
san...@ling.ucsc.edu ***** Department of Linguistics
san...@alum.mit.edu *** University of California
http://ling.ucsc.edu/~sanders * Santa Cruz, California 95064
======================================================================
Joe Schlimgen
<san...@ling.ucsc.edu> wrote:
>On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, Joe Schlimgen wrote:
>
>> Interesting. That would be the reference I'm looking for, but there is
>> not even a "How to Play" section in my book (copyright 1997, according
>> to the Almanac).
>
>Are you perhaps missing the rule book? My copy came with both a rule
>book and an almanac, and it's been noted on here recently that some
>copies have been shipped without one of the two books...
Nope. I've got both (plus the other six manuals from the remainder of
the series). Mayfair must have changed the books in separated
printings for some reason.
Mayfairgames
The change in format between the "first" and "second" Mayfair versions of the
game, and the later edition produced by Mayfair were done at the request of the
game designer (Klaus Teuber). Similarly, changes to the rules were also made to
make our version of the game more consistent with the way Mr. Teuber intended
the game to be played.
In all Mayfair tournaments, the official ruling on running out of resources is
this:
If there are not enough resources for all players to receive the resources they
produce, then resources are produced, in turn order, beginning with the active
player, until the stock is exhausted.
Hope that helps clear things up!
Peter Kruijt
Just bought 'Siedler, das Buch'. There's a FAQ section that indeed
states that if not all players can receive all their resource cards, no
player gets them. The book is copyright 2000, so I figure it's up to
date enough.
Have fun,
Peter
Huw Morris
> In all Mayfair tournaments, the official ruling on running out of resources is
> this:
> If there are not enough resources for all players to receive the resources they
> produce, then resources are produced, in turn order, beginning with the active
> player, until the stock is exhausted.
> Hope that helps clear things up!
Thankyou! I thought I was going mad in saying that I always played it
like this, but everyone else said that nobody got any resources.
Huw
Ian Noble
<mac...@xmission.com> wrote:
>In the dozens of games of Settlers I've played, running out of resources
>has only happened ONCE.
Courtesy of this group, it's NEVER happened to me. I stumbled upon
Settlers a year or so ago, but couldn't quickly get hold of the
expansion set that I felt my group would almost certainly want.
Queries here produced the suggestion that I just buy a second set
instead, which I did. Another query to this group came up with
details of the expansion set components. l marked everything else up
so that I can separate out the right components for a four- or
six-player game, but I've never bothered with the resource cards - I
just use the lot (I'm convinced that running out of resources wasn't
designed as a game feature by Klaus, or cards would be more scarce and
it would happen more often). It works fine, as you'd expect, and I'd
recommend the approach to anyone with a medium-sized group who like
the game.
Cheers - Ian