Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Solan

Shards of the Throne Final Frontiers: Precursor Space Station Question

Recommended Posts

For the Final Frontier's Precursor Space Station chit the rulebook says that the player who controls that space needs one less victory point to win.  Now, my question is, does that apply as soon as the player takes control of the space?  If he only needs one more victory point to win and grabs the Space Station, does he instantly win?  Our group decided that it did indeed, treating it as similar to the Action card which awards you a victory point immediately after you blow up an enemy War Sun or Flagship.  What does everyone else think?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is effectively a VP, but just sneakier, it lets you look like you have less VP's so you might not be targeted as much, as people might forget you have it when looking at the VP Track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nehkrimah said:

it is effectively a VP, but just sneakier, it lets you look like you have less VP's so you might not be targeted as much, as people might forget you have it when looking at the VP Track.

Pardon my sardonic tone, but...

This is obviously good game-design in a game whose rulebook at times merit an Enigma decrypting machine, whose Errata-list is towering with even more questions begging answers and which is already plagued by glaring inconsistensies.

Oh wait.

 

My group opted for playing without them. We felt that randomly inducing such game-breaking random aspects didn't provide us with additional fun, and the inconsistency it represents were more annoying than enriching for the game. Besides, with Artifacts, certain Political Laws, certain Action Cards and Preliminary Objectives entering the mix, the game becomes far too truncated, resulting in an endless bubble-victory fest in which either end-game or mid-game are all but eliminated before they really get off. To us that wasn't enjoyable, as the Public Objectives deck seemed utterly pointless, especially if someone managed to fulfill their SO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 On a technical point, needing one less VP to win is very slightly better than gaining a VP. 

VPs can be lost through occasional political agendas, whereas this cannot. However, it's almost completely identical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's also not forget that it makes a great deal of difference when it comes to the Imperium Rex card popping up out of the Objective Deck.  In that case you'd MUCH rather have the 1 VP rather than needing 1 less to win.  This has come up in several games with our group.

Also note that the Shards of the Throne promissory notes use this same language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...