I'm very confused, Tom often played cards that, I think, couldn't be played. So when you play a card from your hand to your pallette, you have to be winning with that card, before you play the card that changes the rule. So Tom would not have been able to play the yellow 1. The rules also say that you have to be winning at the end of your turn, a draw is not winning, so I'm not sure how he could play a few of these. I played about 8 hands of this with my wife and we just found it frustrating. I think this is like "The emperors new clothes" of games. I simply couldn't believe how many contributors to the Dice Tower said this was their card game of the year.
Richard: There's a couple of things at work here. When you have a draw, you win by having the highest card that is applicable to that draw. So, if you and another person both have 2 cards of a color, but you have the red 7 and the red 3, then you are winning, because your red 7 beats whatever high card they have. As far as playing to your palette, you can always do that -- it's changing the rule that requires that you be winning with the new rule (so you can't just screw over other players by changing the rule despite losing the game that turn.) So, if you wanted to be technical, he would have needed to play the Yellow 1 to his palette first, *then* play the Yellow 7 as a rule (now that he would be winning by it) -- most groups don't heavily enforce the ordering, since it is all a wash in the end. It's not the best game in the world, but it's a fun and fast filler, with a few advanced rules to give it a little more to play if used -- I'd describe it as 'Uno meets Fluxx'. It also has the advantage that it is playable by non-gamers and gamers alike.
@@Dragon7398 The order of playing the cards - to your own display first, then to the middle - only becomes important when you play with the special powers of the odd-numbered cards.
@@conilletThe original comment was confused on 'how can he play a card that wouldn't let him win', so I was commenting on that -- it's the combination that matters, not each individual play. And the order also matters for one of the other optional rules, where playing a rule card can let you draw cards [based on its value vs. the # cards you've already played.]
Well, for one, it's new, so there's an element of popularity based on that. Second, it's from Carl Chudyk, who did Glory to Rome and Innovation, both well regarded games. Third, it's simple and fast, so you can fit it in between other games on game night. Fourth, it's got a hidden depth to it that you discover the more you play, which means you want to play it several times at a go. As for your comparison to Fluxx, you've never played Fluxx, have you? Aside from a changing win condition, thery're nothing alike. I'd say it's closer to Master of Rules than Fluxx, but even that's a distant comparison.
I've never played, but it seems like planning and player elimination make it different from Fluxx. Don't forget that people were gaga over Fluxx too......
Much like the "Uwe pass", it gets the benefit of the doubt because of the designer. If this exact same game was released by Hasbro or Bicycle, it wouldn't get a fraction of the attention.
It's horrible. Illogical. Really uninteresting cards to look at. Might have started as a cool idea, but how this got commissioned at all is beyond me. The designer needs to be put in prison. Okay maybe not, but Uno is borderline bearable, but UNO is "genius simple" compared to this.
This game looks like a lot of quick fun! Simple but more complex than Uno. I like it!
Red7 looks awesome! Thank you!
Sounds like what would happen if you took UNO, Fluxx and War (the card game) and threw them into a blender.
Couldn’t have described it better myself!
carl chudyk is one of the best game designers ever
Seems interesting. But does the game play go v.similar to Fluxx? or quite differently?
Not in love with it!? Shush!! ...Rodney might be watching!
Where is the red7 expansions? I am waiting...
the whistling tune is different...
might be worth getting for the chibi veggies alone.
I'm very confused, Tom often played cards that, I think, couldn't be played. So when you play a card from your hand to your pallette, you have to be winning with that card, before you play the card that changes the rule. So Tom would not have been able to play the yellow 1.
The rules also say that you have to be winning at the end of your turn, a draw is not winning, so I'm not sure how he could play a few of these.
I played about 8 hands of this with my wife and we just found it frustrating. I think this is like "The emperors new clothes" of games. I simply couldn't believe how many contributors to the Dice Tower said this was their card game of the year.
Richard: There's a couple of things at work here. When you have a draw, you win by having the highest card that is applicable to that draw. So, if you and another person both have 2 cards of a color, but you have the red 7 and the red 3, then you are winning, because your red 7 beats whatever high card they have.
As far as playing to your palette, you can always do that -- it's changing the rule that requires that you be winning with the new rule (so you can't just screw over other players by changing the rule despite losing the game that turn.) So, if you wanted to be technical, he would have needed to play the Yellow 1 to his palette first, *then* play the Yellow 7 as a rule (now that he would be winning by it) -- most groups don't heavily enforce the ordering, since it is all a wash in the end.
It's not the best game in the world, but it's a fun and fast filler, with a few advanced rules to give it a little more to play if used -- I'd describe it as 'Uno meets Fluxx'. It also has the advantage that it is playable by non-gamers and gamers alike.
@@Dragon7398 The order of playing the cards - to your own display first, then to the middle - only becomes important when you play with the special powers of the odd-numbered cards.
@@conilletThe original comment was confused on 'how can he play a card that wouldn't let him win', so I was commenting on that -- it's the combination that matters, not each individual play. And the order also matters for one of the other optional rules, where playing a rule card can let you draw cards [based on its value vs. the # cards you've already played.]
Seems like Flux what am I missing that makes this so popular?
Well, for one, it's new, so there's an element of popularity based on that. Second, it's from Carl Chudyk, who did Glory to Rome and Innovation, both well regarded games. Third, it's simple and fast, so you can fit it in between other games on game night. Fourth, it's got a hidden depth to it that you discover the more you play, which means you want to play it several times at a go.
As for your comparison to Fluxx, you've never played Fluxx, have you? Aside from a changing win condition, thery're nothing alike. I'd say it's closer to Master of Rules than Fluxx, but even that's a distant comparison.
I've never played, but it seems like planning and player elimination make it different from Fluxx. Don't forget that people were gaga over Fluxx too......
Much like the "Uwe pass", it gets the benefit of the doubt because of the designer. If this exact same game was released by Hasbro or Bicycle, it wouldn't get a fraction of the attention.
حنن ♥♡♥♥♥♥♡إحب
a game
It's horrible. Illogical. Really uninteresting cards to look at. Might have started as a cool idea, but how this got commissioned at all is beyond me. The designer needs to be put in prison. Okay maybe not, but Uno is borderline bearable, but UNO is "genius simple" compared to this.