It is curious to have the word game in the title, so that the actual description would be The game 'A Game of Thrones'. That's just one aspect of the appeal of the game, based on some fantasy books I'm not too familiar with.
I've played this twice, at the generosity of another gamer at my local game night, and I have won it both times, although I'm not sure why. I suspect because the "teaching" gamer didn't want to play too vicious, and I was one of the first newbies to catch on with how someone won.
There are two ways to win, and so far I don't even know what the "normal" winning condition is. Both my wins have been won by reaching a game stopping action, which is inserted into the rules but never (or rarely) expected to be reached.
A good game, with some good game mechaincs. Turn order is pretty varied depending on circumstances, and rarely would a player be sitting out for a while while other players took their turns.
For the completeness of my records, I also played a game called 'War on Terror' 2nd Edition on Saturday. It has a number of potential striking disadvantages, but I don't know that they can't be overcome. The game's "replayability value" is an unknown for me, although I have to wonder. It is bound to become dated, but maybe that's a virtue. Best of all of all, no players are left uninvolved after they are out of the game, but rather take on the mantle of the forces opposing the players, the terrorists, endowing the terrorists with wetware's unpredictability and craftiness. Through the terrorist activities against the players' empire building, the theme and story are done pretty well.
I have been given to understand that thse are some of a games vital factors: replayability, fun, story/theme, unpredictability, all-player-involvement, Endgame-conditions.
The Sultana Disaster
21 hours ago