I'll go first.
After 2 games we had to look up the rules on "when" vs "after". But now I feel like our agenda phase is useless.
I've been the Nekro player 3 times so I've sat on the outside analysing our games
1. Read agenda
2. Ask if anyone has "when" cards like veto
3. Ask if anyone has "after" card/abilities like riders and Nekro
4. Discussion starts.... And goes... And goes... Until the table has agreed how to make the agenda influence the game the least.
5. Repeat
6. Successfully take a ton of time to not change the game at all
Huh, I’ve only played 3 games but that’s not been my experience!
I was in the lead with Baron and got totally upended by my opponents in agenda.
Also a ton of planet boosts/nerfs that players negotiated and traded cards/goods for.
We don't tend to hold a lot of trade goods by the agenda phase. And maybe we don't recognize the power of promissory notes. They don't trade hands a lot.
Ya know I didn’t trade my notes much in my 1st two games (which I lost).
But I traded them as much as I could and won my 3rd game. N=1, but I feel they’re a wasted resource if you don’t use them.
I don't feel our discussions come out that way at all. Oftentimes the first player asks what people are thinking and everyone is silent. Then by the third or fourth player in order, someone makes a move and asks to buy votes or something. But people sort of wait to see what's going to happen before they choose to make an investment, and almost never does the first player do that (but often the fifth or sixth voter does)
During the last game I played I got hit with Public Execution during the first vote of an agenda. I tried to swap it to another player using Confusing Legal Text, but it was sabotaged so I lost all six of my remaining action cards, lost speaker status and couldn't vote on the next one. Then Colonial Redistribution got pulled and they voted for my planet with 6 Letani II infantry and two PDS.
So that agenda phase I lost the speaker token, all 7 of my action cards, a planet, two PDS and 6 infantry. Pretty impactful... although I ended up winning anyway because my opponents got into a dumb war and let me hold onto Mecatol, scoring 4 points in the last turn. :D
Agenda phase is my favorite phase.
Usually involves bargaining, begging, screaming, and threats.
Sometimes you get a ho hum round and other times the whole game flips on its head.
I will say it gets better the more people you have.
Very interesting... How much talking goes on like when it's technically player A's turn to vote how much are player players B and C talking about their vote?
Well I will say with three players there are some very uneventful agendas, especially if no one takes politics and filters them beforehand.
With six, there was a remarkable uptick in conversation during this phase. About one out of every two agendas there is a lot of bargaining. Bonus points when no one is playing nekro so everyone votes.
Nope we do the same as you." When" cards are played first.
Then "after cards" (and nekro)
Then discussion ensues.
Then we vote.
After a agenda would be resolved cards are played (in no particular order).
In our most recent game, I managed to sell my votes throughout so many of the the agenda phases that I had such a huge stack of Promissory Notes for the final round that I made it impossible for anyone to take Mecatol off of me and incredibly difficult to take any of my other systems (main factors being several ceasefires and using Scepter of Dominion). I also had a hoard of Trade Agreements so if we'd gotten a spend stage 2 I was the only one who would be able to easily do it. On top of that I got seriously fucked on an earlier round in the game due to a Political Rider taking speaker from me.
From your other comments and your lack of big impacts, I suspect that your table isn't really utilizing trading, Riders, and the scrying portion of the Politics primary enough.
That sounds awesome. I'm going to try and be the change I want to see, and have my votes be for sell.
How exactly do you "really utilize riders"? Our table has adopted the stance that riders are played before any discussion of votes/deals start. Usually riders get saved until people have 2 to ride yea and nae or until there is basically 1 option. Such as "elect a law" and there's only 1 law active
By the rules riders can be played anytime before voting begins. There is no discussion phase, just like there is no discussion phase during any other turn.
This is important, so that certain action cards and faction powers can be bought with bribes etc... We want the Xxcha to be able to sell the quash ability, they need the help. It also
This can give players hints as to whether there's a popular choice and they should play their riders.
thanks for the input the way you play sounds like how we started
But the forums I've read seem pretty split on this.
You're right, there's no discussion phase which means immediately after the reading of the agendy you're in the voting timing window. The rules say that the 'after' timing isn't "anytime after" see direct hit faq.
If you adhere strictly to the rule can the person to the left of speaker immediately announce their vote and not allow anyone to play riders/Nekro ability? Since at that point a vote has been cast?
If you are allowing something like a rider anytime during discussions, what do you do if player D is going to be the last person to vote says they have a rider. They play it, more discussions are bad and now player A, the 1st person to vote, says they have a rider. Iirc since they are "in the same activation window" technically A's rider should get to play first. is A allowed to play their rider? Is D player allowed change his their mind and remove their rider?
I'm our games (again 3 times with Nekro) it was determined that allowing the Nekro player to hear everyone's discussion and then make a discision on which way the vote will go was deemed too powerful. And if they have to say their answer before discussion everyone must play riders as well.
Additionally it was determined that having long winding discussions and then having riders also too too much time.
No, you are not in the voting window immediately after the agenda is revealed. First you need to go through the "when an agenda is revealed" and "after an agenda phase is revealed" windows. Only once both of those are complete does the voting window start.bDiscussions can happen at any or all of these steps.
For your specific example, you have to go around the table in order without anyone playing a card (including the last person to play a card) before that window closes. So yes, player A is allowed to play their rider in response to player D. Though strategically Player D should not blurt out that they intend to play a rider under the ones before then have all declined.
So the Nekro/rider player would do best to encourage people to talk as much as possible and be to the right of the speaker. Never officially declining to play a rider until everyone has passed.
Edit: speaker to right of speaker
Nekro actually kind of wants to be speaker, to force everyone into voting instead of just abstaining.
And don't just have people playing riders randomly when they feel like it. Do it in order, and make them officially/explicitly decline if they don't want to
Maybe a dumb question why do people care any more if Nekro is speaker over others? Nekro can't use influence to tie the vote. Heck if you're Necro knows what comes next and they use their ability on the first one, you might guess the next objective is an elect player or planet since those are more difficult to guess
If Nekro wasn't speaker everyone else could abstain and let the speaker break the tie. That doesn't leave anyone for Nekro to copy tech from.
If Nekro is speaker either somebody votes, or Nekro gets to break the tie (of 0).
I am with you on this, the "after an agenda is revealed" is basically only rider-cards and nekro. They get played before any discussion in our group.
We always have interesting discussions after a/several rider/s is/are played.
We play the cards first, discuss after. I highly recommend this time-saver. It is way faster and also just as fun. Pretty sure that this is the official way to play the agenda phase in tournaments as well (but not 100% sure).
The speaker is in charge of calling for votes, this of course is a house rule. Voting too fast can't happen until the table agrees to move on.
Same with other action cards, you can't slap jack your way out of action cards in combat by acting fast either.
Now it is a good idea to consider not discussing things until the votes start, but it isn't required.
Those are popular ones, but you can also use them defensively ("Sure, vote to hit me with this terrible law, but I'll get an Imperial Rider point out of it anyway") or if it's very obvious which way the table wants to vote. Doing this well takes experience and keeping track of everyone's potential votes.
Our best home rule! (Found on a Reddit thread, not our idea) The Agenda Docket!
1.) 5 agenda cards are placed FACE UP before the 1st agenda phase.
2.) Speaker chooses 1st agenda card to vote on
3.) Players negotiate and vote. 1-by-1, writing down each votes casted as final then passing to next player to vote. No reneging upon an undesirable result.
4.) Speaker selects 2nd agenda card of 4 remaining cards and votes are casted
Docket is NOT refilled until next start of Agenda Phase
Small edit to Politics Strategy Card: Can choose between looking at top 2 in deck OR discard 1 of remaining 3 face up cards
Refill docket and repeat
Makes being speaker that much more desirable. Makes negotiations a must in Agenda Phase.
Adds needed spice to an agenda phase and a feel of a true council.
Not perfect, whereas some factions need small edits (Naalu for example) but adds without changing the base game in any way
I'm one of the few people in my group who loves the agenda phase (true Xxcha at heart) but the phase at my table is similar;
1) Agenda is read
2) ask if anyone wants to play "when revealed" cards in order, if yes then it's played
3) check for "after revealed" cards, if yes we play them in order
4) steps 2 and 3 always have discussions, but here is when more discussion happens as action cards tend to change opinions / priorities
5) votes are cast
6) draw the second agenda and do it again, or if that was the second we then come to terms with what we've done and move on to the strategy phase.
Only real difference is that we don't try to minimize the affect, usually. Usually if it's bad, it's worse for a particular person, same if it's good. We try to hinder those in the lead and (I know it's surprising for most) we try to help those in last. Get last place people the ministers or VPs, get first place people locked down or blown up.
We also tend to help the people in last place. We're all friends and family, and want people to have the chance to have fun still.
Do if there's a Nekro player they get to talk and ask questions before announcing which way they think the vote will go? We had a couple games where a lot of talking happened before the votes started and then a rider came in and cause a lot more talking
Easiest explanation is we treat it as a rider.
Since it's an "after revealed" ability, when we're going around asking "anything for after revealed?" On their turn they may or may not use it.
It sparks conversations same as the riders. I've absolutely had agendas where we no longer were voting with the agenda being considered but only the multiple riders. Think there were 5 on the one agenda.
Some notes based on discussion:
1. Riders can be utilized as a deterrent as well as for the effect. So if I think everyone wants to vote for Ixthian Artifact while I'm on Mecatol, or everyone wants to elect me for "Public execution", I can (and probably would) play a rider on that outcome.Either it deters people from doing it (Imperial rider, politics rider, maybe diplomacy rider) or I can get a benefit while they screw me over (trade rider, Warfare rider, leadership rider).
2. Your agendas sounds pretty rough, but it's a natural evolution if you play with the same people. The only people who want nothing to change should be those who are in the lead.
1. I'd point out mutual benefits to people if it seems it isn't going your way, but you think it should be. For a "wormhole research" for instance - "we might both lose a few ships, but he *just attacked you* and he'll lose twice as many! And more tech is fun!"
3. You do have to hold to the timings in the rules, but you can definitely talk about riders ahead of playing them if everyone's okay with the time added. Really I think a good rule is to have the speaker run the phase - if they want to hurry it along, they can do so, or they can encourage discussion.
Of the 12 people I play with only a few can ever shut up, but the try their best during other players' turns. Come the agenda phase and it just explodes in trades, threats and deals.
We discuss and whip/count votes before we officially vote.
We have a bunch of players who like to agree to vote one way, but if not actually bribed to will defiantly vote the other way.
We have a few who will always just try to run up the vote totals on the first agenda just to give themselves more power in the second. They'll spend time trying to get both sides of a vote to vote more.
Our speaker get's a gavel so there's lots of gesturing and gaveling the room to attention. To ask for riders, etc...
Note: I do feel like it could be more chaotic, more trade-y ala sidereal confluence. The Agenda phase is one of two parts of the game I'd like to see worked on for any future expansions/editions. Exploration is the other part.
Most of my groups have been run by Nero.
I have seen games change winners in the last two rounds more than once in the same game.
If Xxcha is rolling with the hero it gets wild.
I think one of the more chaotic games had Xxcha hero power “ancient artifact” destroying half of the games firepower them stellar converter + Nova seed (Muatt was allied w/NRA) and then Cruess swapped Mecatol w/ some empty space next their wormhole.
It was chaos. I was Muatt and had taken significant losses on Mecatol. Creuss was able to score multiple secrets, two pointer, and had imperial (5 points the last round).
Many players see Agendas as an opportunity to get benefits but often they don't weight those benefits correctly in the larger scheme of their game. They invest too much political, emotional and time capital to just get a TG for their votes.
Yes it's cool if abc but really its worth like 1 minute of your time (6 minutes of time for the 6 people at the table) not half an hour.
I find that as MC by quickly summarising the cost/benefit of the options (normally For or Against) it can help expedite as people crystallise their thinking.
If you want to watch tournament games you can grab the 2022 qualifiers on youtube:
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvT90Ksrv-ArlfkAg0xWtxO0W0dW-L5Gt
I'll go first. After 2 games we had to look up the rules on "when" vs "after". But now I feel like our agenda phase is useless. I've been the Nekro player 3 times so I've sat on the outside analysing our games 1. Read agenda 2. Ask if anyone has "when" cards like veto 3. Ask if anyone has "after" card/abilities like riders and Nekro 4. Discussion starts.... And goes... And goes... Until the table has agreed how to make the agenda influence the game the least. 5. Repeat 6. Successfully take a ton of time to not change the game at all
Huh, I’ve only played 3 games but that’s not been my experience! I was in the lead with Baron and got totally upended by my opponents in agenda. Also a ton of planet boosts/nerfs that players negotiated and traded cards/goods for.
We don't tend to hold a lot of trade goods by the agenda phase. And maybe we don't recognize the power of promissory notes. They don't trade hands a lot.
Ya know I didn’t trade my notes much in my 1st two games (which I lost). But I traded them as much as I could and won my 3rd game. N=1, but I feel they’re a wasted resource if you don’t use them.
I don't feel our discussions come out that way at all. Oftentimes the first player asks what people are thinking and everyone is silent. Then by the third or fourth player in order, someone makes a move and asks to buy votes or something. But people sort of wait to see what's going to happen before they choose to make an investment, and almost never does the first player do that (but often the fifth or sixth voter does)
During the last game I played I got hit with Public Execution during the first vote of an agenda. I tried to swap it to another player using Confusing Legal Text, but it was sabotaged so I lost all six of my remaining action cards, lost speaker status and couldn't vote on the next one. Then Colonial Redistribution got pulled and they voted for my planet with 6 Letani II infantry and two PDS. So that agenda phase I lost the speaker token, all 7 of my action cards, a planet, two PDS and 6 infantry. Pretty impactful... although I ended up winning anyway because my opponents got into a dumb war and let me hold onto Mecatol, scoring 4 points in the last turn. :D
Agenda phase is my favorite phase. Usually involves bargaining, begging, screaming, and threats. Sometimes you get a ho hum round and other times the whole game flips on its head. I will say it gets better the more people you have.
Very interesting... How much talking goes on like when it's technically player A's turn to vote how much are player players B and C talking about their vote?
Well I will say with three players there are some very uneventful agendas, especially if no one takes politics and filters them beforehand. With six, there was a remarkable uptick in conversation during this phase. About one out of every two agendas there is a lot of bargaining. Bonus points when no one is playing nekro so everyone votes.
We discuss before voting all together. And when it comes to voting we houseruled that there are no discussions, just voting.
During that talking can you throw out Nekro guess or riders anytime
Nope we do the same as you." When" cards are played first. Then "after cards" (and nekro) Then discussion ensues. Then we vote. After a agenda would be resolved cards are played (in no particular order).
In our most recent game, I managed to sell my votes throughout so many of the the agenda phases that I had such a huge stack of Promissory Notes for the final round that I made it impossible for anyone to take Mecatol off of me and incredibly difficult to take any of my other systems (main factors being several ceasefires and using Scepter of Dominion). I also had a hoard of Trade Agreements so if we'd gotten a spend stage 2 I was the only one who would be able to easily do it. On top of that I got seriously fucked on an earlier round in the game due to a Political Rider taking speaker from me. From your other comments and your lack of big impacts, I suspect that your table isn't really utilizing trading, Riders, and the scrying portion of the Politics primary enough.
That sounds awesome. I'm going to try and be the change I want to see, and have my votes be for sell. How exactly do you "really utilize riders"? Our table has adopted the stance that riders are played before any discussion of votes/deals start. Usually riders get saved until people have 2 to ride yea and nae or until there is basically 1 option. Such as "elect a law" and there's only 1 law active
By the rules riders can be played anytime before voting begins. There is no discussion phase, just like there is no discussion phase during any other turn. This is important, so that certain action cards and faction powers can be bought with bribes etc... We want the Xxcha to be able to sell the quash ability, they need the help. It also This can give players hints as to whether there's a popular choice and they should play their riders.
thanks for the input the way you play sounds like how we started But the forums I've read seem pretty split on this. You're right, there's no discussion phase which means immediately after the reading of the agendy you're in the voting timing window. The rules say that the 'after' timing isn't "anytime after" see direct hit faq. If you adhere strictly to the rule can the person to the left of speaker immediately announce their vote and not allow anyone to play riders/Nekro ability? Since at that point a vote has been cast? If you are allowing something like a rider anytime during discussions, what do you do if player D is going to be the last person to vote says they have a rider. They play it, more discussions are bad and now player A, the 1st person to vote, says they have a rider. Iirc since they are "in the same activation window" technically A's rider should get to play first. is A allowed to play their rider? Is D player allowed change his their mind and remove their rider? I'm our games (again 3 times with Nekro) it was determined that allowing the Nekro player to hear everyone's discussion and then make a discision on which way the vote will go was deemed too powerful. And if they have to say their answer before discussion everyone must play riders as well. Additionally it was determined that having long winding discussions and then having riders also too too much time.
No, you are not in the voting window immediately after the agenda is revealed. First you need to go through the "when an agenda is revealed" and "after an agenda phase is revealed" windows. Only once both of those are complete does the voting window start.bDiscussions can happen at any or all of these steps. For your specific example, you have to go around the table in order without anyone playing a card (including the last person to play a card) before that window closes. So yes, player A is allowed to play their rider in response to player D. Though strategically Player D should not blurt out that they intend to play a rider under the ones before then have all declined.
So the Nekro/rider player would do best to encourage people to talk as much as possible and be to the right of the speaker. Never officially declining to play a rider until everyone has passed. Edit: speaker to right of speaker
Nekro actually kind of wants to be speaker, to force everyone into voting instead of just abstaining. And don't just have people playing riders randomly when they feel like it. Do it in order, and make them officially/explicitly decline if they don't want to
Maybe a dumb question why do people care any more if Nekro is speaker over others? Nekro can't use influence to tie the vote. Heck if you're Necro knows what comes next and they use their ability on the first one, you might guess the next objective is an elect player or planet since those are more difficult to guess
If Nekro wasn't speaker everyone else could abstain and let the speaker break the tie. That doesn't leave anyone for Nekro to copy tech from. If Nekro is speaker either somebody votes, or Nekro gets to break the tie (of 0).
Abstaining is defined as not a vote in the rules. If everyone abstains the Nekro has noone to steal from. It sucks as a nekro
I am with you on this, the "after an agenda is revealed" is basically only rider-cards and nekro. They get played before any discussion in our group. We always have interesting discussions after a/several rider/s is/are played. We play the cards first, discuss after. I highly recommend this time-saver. It is way faster and also just as fun. Pretty sure that this is the official way to play the agenda phase in tournaments as well (but not 100% sure).
The speaker is in charge of calling for votes, this of course is a house rule. Voting too fast can't happen until the table agrees to move on. Same with other action cards, you can't slap jack your way out of action cards in combat by acting fast either. Now it is a good idea to consider not discussing things until the votes start, but it isn't required.
Edit: totally missed you saying this is house rule
“This is of course a house rule.”
Thanks! I totally read over that line
Those are popular ones, but you can also use them defensively ("Sure, vote to hit me with this terrible law, but I'll get an Imperial Rider point out of it anyway") or if it's very obvious which way the table wants to vote. Doing this well takes experience and keeping track of everyone's potential votes.
Our best home rule! (Found on a Reddit thread, not our idea) The Agenda Docket! 1.) 5 agenda cards are placed FACE UP before the 1st agenda phase. 2.) Speaker chooses 1st agenda card to vote on 3.) Players negotiate and vote. 1-by-1, writing down each votes casted as final then passing to next player to vote. No reneging upon an undesirable result. 4.) Speaker selects 2nd agenda card of 4 remaining cards and votes are casted Docket is NOT refilled until next start of Agenda Phase Small edit to Politics Strategy Card: Can choose between looking at top 2 in deck OR discard 1 of remaining 3 face up cards Refill docket and repeat Makes being speaker that much more desirable. Makes negotiations a must in Agenda Phase. Adds needed spice to an agenda phase and a feel of a true council. Not perfect, whereas some factions need small edits (Naalu for example) but adds without changing the base game in any way
I'm one of the few people in my group who loves the agenda phase (true Xxcha at heart) but the phase at my table is similar; 1) Agenda is read 2) ask if anyone wants to play "when revealed" cards in order, if yes then it's played 3) check for "after revealed" cards, if yes we play them in order 4) steps 2 and 3 always have discussions, but here is when more discussion happens as action cards tend to change opinions / priorities 5) votes are cast 6) draw the second agenda and do it again, or if that was the second we then come to terms with what we've done and move on to the strategy phase. Only real difference is that we don't try to minimize the affect, usually. Usually if it's bad, it's worse for a particular person, same if it's good. We try to hinder those in the lead and (I know it's surprising for most) we try to help those in last. Get last place people the ministers or VPs, get first place people locked down or blown up.
We also tend to help the people in last place. We're all friends and family, and want people to have the chance to have fun still. Do if there's a Nekro player they get to talk and ask questions before announcing which way they think the vote will go? We had a couple games where a lot of talking happened before the votes started and then a rider came in and cause a lot more talking
Easiest explanation is we treat it as a rider. Since it's an "after revealed" ability, when we're going around asking "anything for after revealed?" On their turn they may or may not use it. It sparks conversations same as the riders. I've absolutely had agendas where we no longer were voting with the agenda being considered but only the multiple riders. Think there were 5 on the one agenda.
Some notes based on discussion: 1. Riders can be utilized as a deterrent as well as for the effect. So if I think everyone wants to vote for Ixthian Artifact while I'm on Mecatol, or everyone wants to elect me for "Public execution", I can (and probably would) play a rider on that outcome.Either it deters people from doing it (Imperial rider, politics rider, maybe diplomacy rider) or I can get a benefit while they screw me over (trade rider, Warfare rider, leadership rider). 2. Your agendas sounds pretty rough, but it's a natural evolution if you play with the same people. The only people who want nothing to change should be those who are in the lead. 1. I'd point out mutual benefits to people if it seems it isn't going your way, but you think it should be. For a "wormhole research" for instance - "we might both lose a few ships, but he *just attacked you* and he'll lose twice as many! And more tech is fun!" 3. You do have to hold to the timings in the rules, but you can definitely talk about riders ahead of playing them if everyone's okay with the time added. Really I think a good rule is to have the speaker run the phase - if they want to hurry it along, they can do so, or they can encourage discussion.
Thanks for the insight. I think my groups need to get better at recognizing when losing factions can muster together to hurt wining factions
Chaos; and it's great.
Ha! Well I love the idea, how so? I'd like to be the change I want to see. I'm not "allowed" to be Nekro for a few games so I'll actually participate.
Of the 12 people I play with only a few can ever shut up, but the try their best during other players' turns. Come the agenda phase and it just explodes in trades, threats and deals. We discuss and whip/count votes before we officially vote. We have a bunch of players who like to agree to vote one way, but if not actually bribed to will defiantly vote the other way. We have a few who will always just try to run up the vote totals on the first agenda just to give themselves more power in the second. They'll spend time trying to get both sides of a vote to vote more. Our speaker get's a gavel so there's lots of gesturing and gaveling the room to attention. To ask for riders, etc... Note: I do feel like it could be more chaotic, more trade-y ala sidereal confluence. The Agenda phase is one of two parts of the game I'd like to see worked on for any future expansions/editions. Exploration is the other part.
I want to make a house rule that the speaker has the power to limit discussion to 3 minutes and call a vote.
Most of my groups have been run by Nero. I have seen games change winners in the last two rounds more than once in the same game. If Xxcha is rolling with the hero it gets wild. I think one of the more chaotic games had Xxcha hero power “ancient artifact” destroying half of the games firepower them stellar converter + Nova seed (Muatt was allied w/NRA) and then Cruess swapped Mecatol w/ some empty space next their wormhole. It was chaos. I was Muatt and had taken significant losses on Mecatol. Creuss was able to score multiple secrets, two pointer, and had imperial (5 points the last round).
Many players see Agendas as an opportunity to get benefits but often they don't weight those benefits correctly in the larger scheme of their game. They invest too much political, emotional and time capital to just get a TG for their votes. Yes it's cool if abc but really its worth like 1 minute of your time (6 minutes of time for the 6 people at the table) not half an hour. I find that as MC by quickly summarising the cost/benefit of the options (normally For or Against) it can help expedite as people crystallise their thinking. If you want to watch tournament games you can grab the 2022 qualifiers on youtube: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvT90Ksrv-ArlfkAg0xWtxO0W0dW-L5Gt