Dragonheart / Cœur de Dragon Expert

[Faedur]

Hi,

I would suggest an expert variant for Dragonheart I use to play with:
- Each player is able to play up to three cards each turn but not necessary of the same picture and in the order of his/her choice. The effect is triggered just after each card played.
Of course, the hand is completed only at the end of the player's turn.

More rules can also be added to deal with this variant like:
- seven cards in hand instead of five
- exception for drawfs that can be played 4 in a row
- only one common deck for both players (the 2 decks are shuffled together)
- etc.

Thanks, kind regards.

[Jest Phulin]

BGA tries to keep true to the publisher's rules, and not allow "house rules" variants. If this is an official variant from the publisher, could you provide a link so it could be verified? No development work will begin before that is accomplished.
Thanks

[veme]

BGA tries to keep true to the publisher's rules, and not allow "house rules" variants. If this is an official variant from the publisher, could you provide a link so it could be verified? No development work will begin before that is accomplished.
Thanks

Except for when they don't. Here is an excerpt from a discussion about Takenoko rules, in which I was arguing to try to get them to use the official rules, emphasis mine:

You have the advanced variant partially implemented here.

Official variants:
Normal - Keep all objective cards you draw
Advanced - If you draw an objective card which you already meet the criteria for, return it to the bottom of the deck

Unofficial Variants:
BGA - If you draw an objective card which you already meet the criteria for, return it to the bottom of the deck, unless it is a Panda objective

Yes. And there is a reason for this. Some players were using it by taking 2 yellow + 2 green, then draw some panda objectives. Because of these rules, they were only drawing 5/6 points objectives. This is the exact contrary of the spirit of the "advanced variant", which is here to prevent too many random in the game. We wrote to the publisher, and had a lot of discussion about it, and finally we excluded the panda objectives.

So, if they think that there is a problem and you want the official rules, too bad. If you think that there is a problem and they want the official rules, also too bad. Seems to me more like they just don't want to discuss or deal with this type of thing than like they actually have a policy.

[Jest Phulin]

I think the important part of that message is "we had a discussion with the publisher."

I'm not saying the changes you suggest can't be implemented. I'm just saying there needs to be publisher/developer input.

[veme]

You said: "If this is an official variant from the publisher, could you provide a link so it could be verified? No development work will begin before that is accomplished." I gave an example of a game where the official rules never changed, the changes were only implemented here. Thus there is no official variant with the same rules as BGA, thus this claim is inaccurate.

If you think it is reasonable to expect five random fans to petition the makers of a game for an official variant in order to get a rule change, I think you are being naive. BGA's five playtesters or whatever actually stand a chance - but they didn't even get a rule change on Takenoko, they did a backroom deal.

[N_Faker]

Advanced variant
• When a player draws an objective card that is already fulfilled by the current game state,
it is discarded (that includes Panda objectives)

http://www.matagot.com/IMG/pdf/takenoko_faq_eng-2.pdf
-
They specifically include Panda objectives.
That does make the BGA implementation quite curious.

[turtler7]

Advanced variant
• When a player draws an objective card that is already fulfilled by the current game state,
it is discarded (that includes Panda objectives)

http://www.matagot.com/IMG/pdf/takenoko_faq_eng-2.pdf
-
They specifically include Panda objectives.
That does make the BGA implementation quite curious.

I have my copy of Takenoko in front of me (ask and I will take a picture if you require). It has a newer edition from 2014 and the rulebook for advanced variant says this "If a player picks an objective card already completed in the bamboo garden, he must discard it and picks a new objective card of the category of their choosing." The areas about panda objectives and where bamboo shoots eaten go specify on the individual board and not part of the bamboo garden. In their actual physical printings of the game since 2014, the makers of Takenoko have made this variant allow the taking of any panda objective but requires a completion check for gardening and plots objectives.

[veme]

I believe that was the wording even in the original rulebook from 2011, but it is vague - which is why Panda objectives were specifically mentioned in the FAQ to remove all doubt.

Edit: aren't there also cards in the expansion that have plot requirement in addition to a bamboo requirement? Do I throw those back if I have them completed in full? What about if I have only completed the part in the strict 'bamboo garden' sense that you are describing, but not the bamboo eating? I always thought the contents of the Panda's guts would still count as the garden I guess, never really interpreted the rule that way.

I would like to say also, as an experienced Takenoko player both IRL and on BGA, that I disagree with their analysis and I think the official advanced variant that disallows keeping panda objectives is superior. I won't get into why here, because it is irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but I want to stop any 'this is a special case because the game was broken' arguments. It is their opinion the game was broken, it is my opinion that their change broke the game, so it is not like this is a case where the game is self-evidently imbalanced and the publisher just hasn't bothered to update the rules.

And besides, BGA doesn't listen to players who want game variants even for balance reasons, but if they think a game is imba they'll go ahead and do the communications work themselves.

[N_Faker]

I have my copy of Takenoko in front of me (ask and I will take a picture if you require).

I will take your word on it. But can you post the date on the rule book, if it has one?

[turtler7]

I have my copy of Takenoko in front of me (ask and I will take a picture if you require).

I will take your word on it. But can you post the date on the rule book, if it has one?

2014