Thanks for a great review. I still wonder about the language. What language skills do you need to play this game?
I understand German and our group plays many games, that do not have many language dependent components. (Cities&Knights is OK, with a translation of all the cards)

So, could we play this game?

/Strömer

Patrick,

You’re most welcome!  The rulebook is in both German and English.  The cards are printed in both languages as well, although the English text is printed in a smaller font.

Ultimately, this game would not be too difficult to play if your group didn’t speak either of these 2 languages.  You would have to make a cheat sheet to explain the 10 Profession cards, the 2 different Brotherhood cards, The Drink of Power card, and 14 of the Object cards.(Only 14 because 6 of them are Keys and Goblets)

Scott, I guess the real question is if the rules are written in English or that dreaded alternate tongue, Adlungese?  As you no doubt know, many of Adlung’s earlier games had translations that featured a fractured form of English that would have been funny were it not for the fact that it made playing the game so difficult.  Hopefully, that’s not the case here.

Thanks for the review of DKzT.  A few other reviews have appeared recently which criticized the game for its sluggish start.  I was wondering if you could address this.  For example, my choices at the beginning are to trade my one object card with a player or to attack an opponent.  But the latter case is a shot in the dark, which my trading partner might well reject (why am I so anxious to get rid of my card and why should he let me gain the benefit of trading it?).  And attacking sounds incredibly risky early on, when no one at the table has any idea who is on which team.  It would be great if my opponents arranged for a tie, so I could draw a new Object card, but why should they be so nice to me?

Your glowing review indicates that the game clearly worked for your group (as opposed to some others that have reported).  It was also highly rated during the Messe, so it obviously isn’t broken.  I’m just trying to figure out how players get started in this game.  Thanks!

Scott, you and I have definitely different opinions of this game.  I was completely bored with it, and frustrated by the lack of real options players had on most turns.  The game requires players to play counter-intuitively in order for it to work properly.  I found that distasteful, as it forces players to take actions that aren’t logical. 

The game is primarily one of bluff, a mechanism of which I am not fond.  This is one carriage ride I prefer not to take again.

Here is my report from our 2/1/07 gaming session:

This Adlung Spiele card game has been getting a fairly positive buzz in gaming circles, so I was most eager to try it when Kevin arrived toting a copy.  I must admit to being somewhat confused by the rules, and after a few rounds was convinced that we must be doing something incorrectly.  Kevin consulted the rules several times, however, and confirmed that we did seem to be playing correctly.

Each player is dealt a public identity card, and two secret pieces of information:  an occupation and alliance.  They also receive one treasure card.  One-half of the players will be aligned with the Brotherhood of True Lies, while the remaining half will be aligned with the Order of Open Secrets.  The task is to discover your teammates, and together collect three artifacts – goblets or keys – and claim the victory.  Since one’s alignment is secret, much of the game is devoted to discerning the identity of your teammates and then attempting to track and force the movement of the needed artifacts as they make their way amongst the players.

I don’t own the game – nor will I – so I won’t delve into great detail regarding the mechanisms.  Basically, players have few options on their turn:

1) Request a trade with an opponent.  The active player offers one of his treasures to an opponent, who, after looking at the treasure, can accept or decline the trade.  If accepted, the player gives one of his treasures in exchange.  If the offer is declined, nothing occurs and the player’s turn is over.

In our game, this became quite problematic as several of us had treasures that were not highly desirable, and no one wanted to trade for them.  Thus, this option wasn’t generally successful, so became used less-and-less as the game progressed.

2) Attack an opponent.  The purpose here was to either discern the alignment of an opponent, or steal one of their treasures.  The active player declares the target of his assault, and each player then declares whether they were supporting the attacker or defender, or remaining aloof.  Some occupations and treasures would add strength to the attack or defense, but those items must be revealed in order to use them. 

If the attacker wins, he can either look at the alignment of the defender, or steal one of his treasures.  However, if the defender only has one treasure, he then must give him one of his treasures in exchange.  Early in the game players only have one treasure each, so if one’s alignment is already known, then this will only result in an exchange of treasures.  If the defender wins, he may choose between the same options.

If a tie results, the active player may take a new treasure from the deck.  This is the desired result of many attacks, so a player will often try to manipulate the outcome of the battle in order to achieve a tie.  Until players’ alignments are known, however, one really doesn’t know who to support in a conflict, so this is really just a guessing game.  I tend not to like guessing games. 

The purpose of these two actions are to learn the alignment of the other players, and to get more treasures into the game and, preferably, into your hand.  Learning the alignment of your teammates is important as you now know who to support in struggles, and who to possible exchange cards with in order to help in future encounters.  It is also important to see as many of the treasures that are in the game as possible, so you can attempt to track the location of the needed goblets or keys.  The idea is to then maneuver these artifacts into the hands of your teammates.  A player can attempt to claim victory for his team by announcing the identity of his teammates, and revealing they collectively possess all three required artifacts.  If this is revealed to be correct, victory is achieved.  Otherwise, the opposition team is victorious.

There is a considerable amount of guesswork and bluffing present in the game, features that I generally dislike.  Compounding my predilection to dislike the game is that I found the possible actions extremely limiting.  Often, no one wanted to trade for the item I had available, and choosing to attack was little more than a boring guessing game.  Further, many of my fellow players felt the same way.  Turn-after-turn was more of the same – and quite boring.  The game fell completely flat with our group, and I honestly don’t see any bright spots that would entice me to play again.

Larry, The first time we played, it did seem to get off to a sluggish start.  At the time, I attributed it to us not knowing what we were doing, because when we played it subsequently when all the players knew the game, it moved along briskly and felt like the amount of time of play was just right (about an hour).

One of the players in our group has made the point that at the beginning of the game, if you start with a Key or Goblet, no matter which team you’re on, you are limited in your actions(you don’t want to trade) because you don’t want to lose the item.  As a result, that player might feel slowed down somewhat because they don’t have an item that can help during an attack.

When this happens, it behooves this players teammates to help this player by either actively trading with them, or helping them in an attack. 

If players are just attacking and attacking just to learn other players’ affiliations at the beginning of the game, the game will definitely feel like it is moving slowly (although it is moving along because people are learning information).

After the first game we played, we learned that it moves the game along if players, at the beginning of the game, play their support cards so that attacks result in ties.  This adds Items to the hands of players and this helps move the game along.

You can feel powerless if you repeatedly attack people and you consistently lose.  This happened to me in the first game, and I learned that trading really is a viable action.

What is hard to tell from reading my review, without actually playing the game, is the little nuances of information that can passed back and forth within the game.

In one of the games I played, I was at first sure that one of the players who attacked me and won(and chose that win to learn which Sect I belonged to) was not on my team because he did not support me when I subsequently attacked another player.

He later, though, initiated a trade with me and passed me a Key (which my team needed to win) as a clue that we were on the same team.  He had not supported me in the earlier attack to throw off the other team.  It was very clever of him. 

It’s little things like that that make this an interesting and fun game in the vein of Werewolf.

>>>Scott, I guess the real question is if the rules are written in English or that dreaded alternate tongue, Adlungese? 

Hi!
Sometimes I’ve had some problems with the learning of Adlungese rules, and most of the time I have to read a bit of English, a bit of Italian and a bit of French to get the whole picture.
This time, though, it looks like the English rules are clear enough (for me, at last), even if they could have been a bit shorter…

Scott -

Thanks for the review.  DKzT is one of the few Essen games I haven’t played yet - my gaming is usually with small groups and it sounds like the game is fun with more people.

I was at a gaming get-together in Germany after Essen and the game was in constant play there.  It seems that practically everyone who played it really liked it.

I’m looking forward to giving it a try, perhaps you could teach it to me at some upcoming game convention? :)

- Rick

Greg,

Wow! You and I certainly did play different games.  Given that you don’t like games of bluff, I can see why this wouldn’t appeal to you. 

But I do want to address your comment, “In our game, this became quite problematic as several of us had treasures that were not highly desirable, and no one wanted to trade for them.”

I found this odd, since we found that all the items are desirable.  It was pretty rare in our games that people would refuse a trade.  In our first game, I don’t think there were any refusals.  In the second game, there were maybe two.

I question if your group followed the setup correctly where it requires you to include the 2 Secret Bags amongst the initial distributed cards.  This pretty much insures that trading will be going on (and accepted) at the beginning of the game because it will result in more Items being acquired.

Although it makes it more challenging to narrow down where your items are at the end of the game when there are more players playing (9-10), I disagree that this game requires a “considerable” amount of guesswork.

I will submit, though, that everyone has different tastes in games.  For example, I know I’m in the minority that I’m not all that fond of Settlers of Catan.

Yes, we did include the 2 secret bags in the initial distribution of cards. 

As mentioned, my main complaint is that the game relies heavily on guesswork and bluffing, mechanisms which I tend not to enjoy.  So, I’m just not going to enjoy this game, and neither will folks who share my distaste for guesswork and bluffing.  Folks who enjoy such mechanisms may well enjoy it.

But, I have further problems with the game.  As I mentioned in my original post, it requires players to do things that aren’t necessarily in their best interest.  For instance, early in the game, why should I support folks who attack when the alignment of the attacker and defender are unknown?  My only possible incentive is to try to force a tie in order to get cards into the game.  Of course, I really can’t control forcing a tie unless I’m the last in turn order.  Further, why do I want to trade with a player for an item of dubious value?  Again, logic tells me know, but for the game to flow smoothly and work properly, I need to do it.  I don’t like being forced into such action just because it will make the game work better.

Again, different tastes.  But, I do I have enough problems with the game to feel it isn’t deserving of the hoopla.

Larry & Silvano,

Regarding the Adlunese...There were a few phrases that could have been written in clearer English, but for the most part, it was all understandable.

The difficulty I have with the rulebook is that, by necessity, its size is 2"x2.5", so the print type is pretty tiny.

The biggest omission in the rules was that it was unclear that if you want to declare victory for your action, you do not have to name ALL the people on your team, only enough members so that you can show at least 3 of your target Items.

So for example, if you had 2 items, you only need to name one other player.

(And Rick...It would be my pleasure!  I know it would have helped if this was another game by Reiner Knizia, but maybe you can find other trivia questions to answer once you know this game!)

Adlungese, Eggertese, Bewitchtese--all German publishers who are reading this, PLEASE send your rules to a native English speaker to proofread.  Your conversational English is very good, really, but writing rules is another animal, and there are many gamers in the USA (and Germany, by the way) who would love the chance to work on the English rule set of a cool German game.
After all, I wouldn’t try to write my game rules in German without a native German friend proofreading it for me!

I first heard about DKzT last October from Kulkmann’s Gamebox when he was reporting about Essen last year. The game’s excellent art grabbed my attention, and the description of the gameplay held my interest. Finally, I thought, if the game could handle up to ten players it would make a great opener or closer for our game nights at the ETG. Since everyone has read Greg’s comments already you can probably see where this is going… :)

My quest to find DKzT began then. I searched high and low but there were none to be found here in the states. Greg took a trip to Germany and I asked him to see if he could find me a copy. No luck. The game was soon available from online German game dealers, but shipping was certainly going to be expensive.

Then, just a few weeks ago, this small elusive cardgame began appearing at online retailers stateside. I snapped up a copy and brought it to our game night eager to teach this new game to our group. (Hoping it might even displace Bang! at the table occasionally...)

I explained the rules, dealt out the cards, and away we went down the twisting, treacherous road toward Teufelsburg.

And everyone hated it.

Except me.

This isn’t the first time a game has polarized our group (Parthenon, TI3) but it surprised me how much displeasure this short simple diversion created among our group.

I’m not going to use the tired phrase ‘it would be good with the right group of people’, but I do think if the players know what to expect going into the game and they are predisposed to like that type of interaction then this game could be a very enjoyable romp (That has obviously been Scott’s experience).

So, hopefully, we will try it again on some future game night and the experience will be much better.

Or, Kevin, you can just come to Chicago and play it with us!