Carcassonne Central
Carc Central Community => General => Topic started by: Whaleyland on November 14, 2014, 02:03:29 AM
-
ELEMENT OF THE WEEK: THE CULT
Each week, a specific element from an expansion is chosen for deeper discussion. This is an opportunity for you, Carcassonne's biggest English-language fans, to discuss strategies and problems you have encountered through the years regarding specific expansion elements. All forms of critique – from the most joyous to the most scathing – are encouraged.
This week's element is THE CULT (from Count, King & Cult [Expansion #2]; Cult, Siege & Creativity; or Spielbox Magazine). This 5-6 tile expansion (depending on your version) added the first real cloister-oriented feature to the game. The concept is somewhat simple: a Cult placed beside a Cloister (or Abbey) begins a rivalry where only one player will win. Whichever feature is completed first (surrounded on all eight sides) gets the 9 points, while the other player gets zilch. Nada. Nothing. Luckily, they do get their Monk/Heretic back at least. If a Cult is not placed near a Cloister, it is treated like a Cloister. Complicated rules about placing x number of Cloisters beside x number of Cults make this a bit more confusing of an expansion that it really needs to be, but at its core, it is a rather straightforward idea.
That being said, it can be quite easy or quite difficult to start a rivalry under the conditions imposed by this expansion. One of the features almost always has an advantage since it was placed first and the other has an uphill battle. Many times, both features seem to finish at the same time, nullifying the conflict entirely. But those victories. Oh, those victories can feel worth it even if it is only over nine points. The Cult began a trend with Hans im Glück releasing more cloister-themed elements in future expansions. But this, the first one, still has a special place. Discuss your relationship with The Cult, as well as your strategies for taking advantage of this element.
Next Week's Topic: The Wagons C:-)
-
I've played with the cult only a few times, mostly I forgot to fight against the cloisters...
I think I used the cult more like normal cloisters.
-
Most of the time when you play them to fight against other cloisters, the other cloisters are surrounded by more tiles.. so usualy just like a normal cloister.
-
I don’t really use these much, although they have been included in online games from time to time. If I do use them, it’s usually just in the same way as a cloister without setting up any challenges. Additionally, the configuration of features on these tiles make them quite useful for filling holes or joining adjacent farms.
Since it’s often very easy to trap meeples on cloisters, and since it’s also possible to lay down a challenge against yourself, I wonder if these could be used as a way of recovering trapped meeples? All you’d have to do is place the cult place adjacent to the cloister with the trapped meeple so that the challenge can be made, then complete the cult place for 9 points and get both meeples back (but no points for the incomplete cloister). I’ve never tried this but it seems like an interesting idea (provided of course that you don't end up trapping both meeples from the same missing tile)...
-
...and since it’s also possible to lay down a challenge against yourself...
I did not know this, Dan. Or at least never considered it. Is it true that you can challenge yourself? Is it in the CAR? That would be a fun accomplishment in any case - to recover a trapped meeple :D
I do use them to challenge Cloisters though...just to experience the spirit of the expansion. Win or lose it creates some tense game play.
-
...and since it’s also possible to lay down a challenge against yourself...
I did not know this, Dan. Or at least never considered it. Is it true that you can challenge yourself? Is it in the CAR? That would be a fun accomplishment in any case - to recover a trapped meeple :D
The version on the CAR I have with me at the moment is a few versions behind. But it's fairly clearly stated that this is allowed, even though it seems a little weird.
Yes indeed, regardless of the fact that you got your meeple back, I'd be very proud of myself simply for rescuing him so inventively!
I do use them to challenge Cloisters though...just to experience the spirit of the expansion. Win or lose it creates some tense game play.
Sometimes the lure to use things as they were intended and get the full experience is more effort than it's worth but I totally know where you're coming from and usually try to do the same! :)
-
megaCart or not, can't say I've had much success conquring another cloister. Then again, I only ever used this feature in TWO games.
First game I believe I tried to conquer one cloister and gave up after it failed. I hope to introduce this later on in the games because it's an easy feature to implement. There's just so much else that take precedence, like The Dragon, så the new player(s) don't get scared off due to all the rules.
-
the same for me... I played few times with Cult... Is difficoult to make a good and equilibrate challenge and there are too many tiles with cloister rules in play!
but... in this days I made a fan expansion that can involve also the Cult! I create this expansion thinking at the too many "church thinks" and... well, is a "church think" also this expansion but is really evil! I tested it this afternoon and the play was an hecatomb! ihih >:D
I hope to translate it in english and put in the download section in this days...
-
I think there also should be an expansion with the moslem invasion - they destroy all cloisters then.
-
I can not be arsed to check the rules right now, but is there not a limit to how many cult places/cloisters that can border eachother? If so, you could use them as fairly powerful blockers.
-
I can not be arsed to check the rules right now, but is there not a limit to how many cult places/cloisters that can border eachother? If so, you could use them as fairly powerful blockers.
I am pretty sure there is a limit, but I could be wrong. I can't check right now, though.
-
I heard there was a rule on not placing cloisters besides each others in the original rules before HiG made the 1st edition. Since then it is allowed to place as many cloisters together as you want.
-
However, a shrine may not be placed in such a way that it adjoins several
cloisters.261 Similarly, a cloister may not be placed so that it neighbors several shrines.262, 263
––––
261 In other words, a shrine cannot adjoin more than one cloister, and vice versa.
262 Question: Can I place a shrine in such a way that it forces a cloister to neighbor several shrines? What effect does that have? Answer: It leads to enormous problems when multiple cloisters and shrines neighbor each other. [In other words, no, you can’t place a shrine in that way—ed.]
263 The rules that restrict the placement of cloisters next to already placed shrines also restrict the placement of abbeys.
-
I'm also going to say that I disagree with obervet and mjharper's choice to call this expansion element "Shrines and Heretics". I think the intention is very clearly to portray these as heretical, pagan, and/or heathen cult centers. "Places of worship" to be sure, but much more in the vein of a pagan temple than a simple heretical sect. That's what we have the Cathars for, they were a quasi-heretical sect of Christianity. I see no Christian overtones with the Cult. I don't think the tiles need to be called anything but Cults or Cult tiles and the whole argument against that, begun by Rio Grande when they released their own version, is ridiculous. I'm not sure what Z-Man calls it, but I am arguing for simply "Cults". Certainly not "shrines".
-
I'm also going to say that I disagree with obervet and mjharper's choice to call this expansion element "Shrines and Heretics". I think the intention is very clearly to portray these as heretical, pagan, and/or heathen cult centers. "Places of worship" to be sure, but much more in the vein of a pagan temple than a simple heretical sect. That's what we have the Cathars for, they were a quasi-heretical sect of Christianity. I see no Christian overtones with the Cult. I don't think the tiles need to be called anything but Cults or Cult tiles and the whole argument against that, begun by Rio Grande when they released their own version, is ridiculous. I'm not sure what Z-Man calls it, but I am arguing for simply "Cults". Certainly not "shrines".
I'm not sure if Matt Harper had a specific reason for naming/translating the expansion as he did -- I don't have immediate access to the CAR materials right now. However, a shrine is not specific to Christianity; any religion can have shrines to its deity/deities, so a pagan shrine would still work. And I think of a cult more as a group of people, not a building, so to me calling the building a shrine makes more sense than calling it a "cult" and is less cumbersome than "cult place."
-
I'm also going to say that I disagree with obervet and mjharper's choice to call this expansion element "Shrines and Heretics". I think the intention is very clearly to portray these as heretical, pagan, and/or heathen cult centers. "Places of worship" to be sure, but much more in the vein of a pagan temple than a simple heretical sect. That's what we have the Cathars for, they were a quasi-heretical sect of Christianity. I see no Christian overtones with the Cult. I don't think the tiles need to be called anything but Cults or Cult tiles and the whole argument against that, begun by Rio Grande when they released their own version, is ridiculous. I'm not sure what Z-Man calls it, but I am arguing for simply "Cults". Certainly not "shrines".
I'm not sure if Matt Harper had a specific reason for naming/translating the expansion as he did -- I don't have immediate access to the CAR materials right now. However, a shrine is not specific to Christianity; any religion can have shrines to its deity/deities, so a pagan shrine would still work. And I think of a cult more as a group of people, not a building, so to me calling the building a shrine makes more sense than calling it a "cult" and is less cumbersome than "cult place."
All true, but I feel that the expansion itself is called The Cult and that that terminology should just stick throughout. I'll have to check out the original German rules again to get my own perspective on what Hans im Glück originally wrote.
-
Great idea for the next element, Whaley.
I'm with the majority here: when I play using cults, I usually place them to avoid confrontation. Like others have said, the challenger in many cases starts out behind, and the rules that govern how there can only be one cloister/shrine pair can make tile placement a bit more clunky.
That said, I like any expansion that pays attention to the cloister mechanic, and for anyone interested, I recommend playing with both Cults, and with the rules from Chris Korfmann's MISSIONARY fan-expansion. In the MISSIONARY fan-expansion, Chris incorporates a form of a common 'house' rule for Cults: that when a challenge is won, the winning player scores for both his feature, and the challengers feature as well. This energizes the cloister/shrine challenge and makes it more enticing and fun, IMHO.
-
I had a JCZ game with farin a few days ago, which I lost with quite a big gap, but I had there one special use for a cult tile, which might be of interest here.
Farin placed two adjointed cloisters with monks earlier in the game, I challenged one of them with a shrine. There was a gap adjointed to all three buildings, which could have been filled only with the two cloisters with one road from the base game. At least one of them had been available at that time in the game, I think even both. So I basically blocked two of farins meeples and one of mine. Filling the gap with an other cloister was impossible afterwards, because then two cloisters would have been adjointed to my cult tile.
In the end it did not work out completely like I wanted it to be. I considered the gap important to block one of farins farmers from my big farm, and he still found another way inside, but still: what I want to point out is, that a cult tile in some occasions can be an option to trap two (or even more?) rival meeples while trapping just one of yours.
-
... but still: what I want to point out is, that a cult tile in some occasions can be an option to trap two (or even more?) rival meeples while trapping just one of yours.
That is very interesting. I had never considered to use a cult place that way. It's good to know that JCloister has got it right too. :(y)
-
Cults are great (I seem to be saying that for all expansions!) as they add a new element to cloisters which was much needed following additions to roads and cities such as inns and cathedrals. The artwork is great and the concept/thematic addition is wonderful.
The problem I have with them is that they often just end up as extra cloisters. Adding these tiles to a few expansions makes too many cloisters-scoring features if they aren't used to start a challenge. I've tried a number of ways to get around this. For a while we tried playing with a rule that you HAD to place a cult place/cloister so that it started a challenge if there was a place to do so. This was too restrictive, however, and if the previously laid cult/cloister had a head start, the challenging player almost always lost. We tried changing the score so that the winning challenger scored 18 points (9 for each feature) but most people still avoided a challenge. What did work reasonably well though was changing the range of the challenge. We played a few games where a challenge would be initiated with any cult/cloister within a two tile boundary, i.e. in the eight tiles surrounding or in the 16 surrounding those. This didn't change the completion requirement of the feature, the cult/cloister was still complete when surrounded by nine tiles. It just changed the range at which a challenge could be initiated. This was quite good, as there were more challenges and less of a chance that the other person would have a bigger head-start. The problem, however, is that it occasionally meant you couldn't start a challenge because there were multiple incomplete cloisters/cult places in that range which prevented placement.
Overall, I like the cults, and very often use them with siege tiles. Now if only we had a flooded road tile...
-
Interesting idea, extending the range. But I see your problem. Since we're already in the realm of variants, one option is that a player may designate the cloister being challenged if multiple cloisters are applicable. I'd say that any cloisters in the immediate periphery would have to be challenged, but after if there were none then any in the second ring could be challenged. It would definitely change things up a bit. You could use a Tunnel token or something similar to designate the challenged cloister. There would also (obviously) have to be a rule that a challenged cloister or cult place could not be challenged by a later placed cloister or cult place.
..ooh, question time...
-
I think you're right, designating the cloister/cult to be challenged would be the best way. Trying to reconcile multiple challenges would get messy, but prohibiting the playing of these features next to another if they all have a double range would be too restrictive.
If the cult/cloisters can be played anywhere and the player must choose a cloister/cult to challenge if there is one in range, you could have more challenges without causing problems. Good idea about the tunnel tokens. I also like the idea of the inside ring coming first and the outer ring second, although it makes this variation we're discussing slightly more complicated. And yes, a cloister/cult cannot be involved in more than one challenge.