Carcassonne Central
Carc Central Community => Community Rules (Meepledrone & Friends) => Topic started by: Meepledrone on December 07, 2021, 09:03:33 AM
-
BG01. During a game, the playing area may reach the edge of the table. Should those open road and city
edges facing the edge of the table be considered as closed? What about features like monasteries that
cannot be completely surrounded by tiles? Put in other words, should the edge of the table be considered as
the border of a Carcassonne Map?
(https://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5590.0;attach=16312)
Example: Several features at the edge of the table cannot be completed, since the playing area cannot be extended to close them. Should city 1, monastery 2 and road 3 be considered as completed features the same as if placed on the border of a Carcassonne Map?
Notes:
* This is relevant because this situation can happen in official competitions and there are cases where an extra table cannot be added to extend the playing area.
Current understanding:
* The playing area has no limit, so tile edges are not considered closed when at the edge of the table. Therefore, city 1, monastery 2 and road 3 in the example above should be considered uncompleted features.
* When reaching the edge of the table, players may make more room if required and/or possible:
* The table should be extended if possible (adding another table)
* The tiles on the board could be shifted unless otherwise agreed at the beginning of the game.
Proposals:
* No additional Community Rule is necessary
* Rewording of the "Use of a Table" on WICA could be advisable.
https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Base_game#Use_of_a_table (https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Base_game#Use_of_a_table)
EDIT: Included additional info
-
We don't consider them as closed. Just have to be aware when you are nearing the border.
We do consider it finished on a Carcassonne Map due to its explicit rules.
But these maps only came into play 10 years after we started playing carcassonne on a table ::)
-
We don't consider them as closed. Just have to be aware when you are nearing the border.
We do consider it finished on a Carcassonne Map due to its explicit rules.
But these maps only came into play 10 years after we started playing carcassonne on a table ::)
This is exactly what we do, too. :D :pink-meeple:
-
One thing is the rules of the maps and the other is playing normal without a map ... Officially there is an end of the table and if there is something unfinished the meeple is blocked so it’s something to take into consideration when you are playing an official tournament. It’s also a very interesting way to block ... I love it hahahaha
Now if your idea is to apply the rules of the maps as if there were them in a normal game that would be to ask HiG if it incorporates it ... If they answer something hahaha
If I personally add it officially to the World Tournament for example? I wouldn’t do it at all. Now if it’s an informal game and you want to use it to be able to close everything possible and take advantage of the land table by making points, it’s a good alternative if you don’t want to play in a bloody way ...
-
My answer is always: make up whatever rules will let you have the most fun. :-) For us, that means edges closed, like a map or Abbey.
Except for very small games (Carc für 2), we always use a homemade mat, sharpie on tyvek, with size depending on game, and following map rules. For the base game, the mat is 11x11.
In the rare instance where we don't have a mat, I prefer the "zero overhang" rule to the "gravity" rule, for determining when the edge of the table has been reached.
-
Using a tablecloth or table protector allows the world to shift slightly if required … especially if there’s only room for half a tile …
-
It is geometry. The space is infinite, so the edge of the table is inexistent.
-
The official answer was always option 2 - cannot continue and remains open. The fact that map edges close features is a special property of Maps as expansions - an expansion rule. Nothing more.
-
we would often try to allow for tiles to be placed, by moving all the tiles along, or slightly overlapping, but there is a limit. It doesn't go on forever, and features are left open at the edge
-
I mostly play online so table edges aren't a problem! ;)
In most of the competitions I've played in, players are almost always willing to let the game continue unhindered by moving the tiles back to the centre of the table if a lack of space prevents a tile from being placed. It might take a couple of minutes, but it's easy enough to do if you're careful (especially if there's a tablecloth) and I think this is best in keeping with the spirit of the game since the rules of Carcassonne don't specify a minimum table size. However, I have also experienced players (well, a player) who refused to allow this because they were using it to their advantage in building my features towards the edge of the table so that I couldn't complete them. Apparently this was a rule that the organisers of the tournament were enforcing, but because they hadn't announced it at the start, nobody was particularly aware of it (except my opponent who had made a point of asking them privately) and most players in similar situations were doing the reasonable thing and simply resetting the landscape.
So all things considered, my preference is to reset the landscape if possible, but whatever the decision is, to make sure everyone is aware of it at the start of the game/ competition.
-
Has the poll been changed or do I have to go and see my doctor for memory problems? :o
I don't remember having the choice of deciding at the beginning of the game when I did my vote ... :-[
-
We try to push during the game if it goes too much on one side.
The only time we say it closes everything like with maps is if we specifically play on a small table, but we agreee at the beginning of game
-
As far as I see, the regular game without Carcassonne Maps should assume the playing area has no limits. In case of reaching the table edge, the board could be shifted to make more room unless explicitly agreed otherwise at the beginning of the game. So any features that may not be closed due to lack of space should be considered as uncompleted by default.
Carcassonne Maps should not serve as a reference for the table edges, since their playing area is finite in this case and it defines certain rules for features placed on the border of the map.
-
Thought I'd remembered seeing this explicitly in the rules, but I was remembering this https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Base_game_(1st_edition)#Use_of_a_Table (https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Base_game_(1st_edition)#Use_of_a_Table): .
-
Please check initial post for additional info and comments.
-
As we play Slovak Championship this year with rules. Table is edges which disallows to enlarge features and it not possible to move tiles on table to make more space there. It was just limit to speed up game due to limit 30 min per match.
Odoslané z SM-A202F pomocou Tapatalku
-
Did anyone reach the edge of the table and have problems to complete a feature? If so, did you have any rules for open feature edges at the edge of the table?
-
Nope. We have two times expandable table which can be expanded without removing things from table.
From original size 160x90 cm to 210x90 and then again to 260x90.
Only issue is if game reach no extendable size 90cm.
There we uses another magic trick. On table we have nice tablecloth. So if game reach on of edge we usually move whole board by moving table cloth.
It happened only once that game reach both edges on 90cm size.
So this was very BIG problem without any precedent.
So we used to place tiles which continue but preca it on stack like first tile in stack was original like on deck. Second tile is first tile "levitating" next to first, etc.
Very big mess.
This create new precedent and we used it sometimes when everybody at lazy and nobody wanted to move tablecloth or expand table.
sometimes without moving
Odoslané z SM-A202F pomocou Tapatalku
-
We all know that any rule ambiguity should only ever be resolved with a fight to the death. It's the only civil way to manage situations like these.
The UK Championships that Dan described is another example of how the UK manages to do the exact opposite to the rest of the world when it comes to running tournaments.
-
I've talked about it with Georg Wild from HiG some years ago. And in the CAR you can find the table edge story. We also thought of what happens if the players like to play the game on the floor. Does the edge of the floor ends under the sofa or under the bookshelf?
-
Yes, we are aware of that:
https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Base_game#Use_of_a_table (https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Base_game#Use_of_a_table)
I sent this question to HiG after a controversial situation Dan had in a championsip. So I wanted to know if there was any update on this matter, since he was not allowed to extend the playing area because of the other player.
-
At the endgame of the World Championship they expand the playing area with a 2n or 3rd table, because the tiles are very large (around 8 or 10 cm).
-
In this case Dan was playing with a normal base game and they reached the border of the table. He can tell you the context first hand... But the resolution wasn't too amicable as far as I recall.
-
In my group, we understand it to not be completed. It is sometimes used to prevent an opponent from finishing a city, especially if it has a cathedral in it and/or high value meeples committed to it.
-
I don't think the poll quite captures the all the options here.
A city could remain open, but it may not be possible to extend the play area for example.
Given what we see at the world championships, it's quite clear that the area should be sufficiently large enough to allow for any play. If that means knocking down a wall... so be it... the game must continue!
-
I'm a little bit extremist on this, as long as you can be an extremist talking about a game ^-^ Not only I consider any open feature at the edge of the table open by default, but I also refuse to extend the game surface by adding more tables or similar and I think this should be the same for official toournaments.
This is not just blind strictness.
Carcassonne is a game of luck and strategy, and strategy calls into account ALL resources. Space is a resource. The start tile is on the table, and every player is well aware from the start what the size of the table is, so this "no more space" rule may sound harsh but it's fair and most importantly prevents unpleasant discussions (at a point in a game where adding more space blatantly helps one player against all the others).
I'll try to make a similarity here: once you start a game with 7 base meeples, you play the whole game with 7 base meeples, and you don't add one more just because you've depleted your stash: maybe you were unlucky, maybe your opponents were better than you, maybe you're a disaster at managing resources, it doesn't matter: you don't have base meeples to play anymore and you have to deal with it. Why should it be different for the table space?
-
Carcassonne is a game of luck and strategy, and strategy calls into account ALL resources. Space is a resource….so this "no more space" rule may sound harsh but it's fair and most importantly prevents unpleasant discussions.
I agree with the logic of the argument, and not just for Carcassonne, but all games. Make strict rules and discover the best way to play by those rules. If you don’t like the resulting play, change the rules.
But I don’t think the argument leads to the conclusion that features have to be open at the edge. In other words, I don’t think the game is less strategic or fair if the rule is “all features close at the edge of the table.” (In other words, it is as if the table is completely surrounded by Abbeys.)
Resource constraints introduce new strategy and tactics. For me, allowing a player to run a city to the edge to close it, or place a tile in a corner to close a 1-tile FFCC+ city for 4 points, is preferable to allowing opponents to run a city to the edge to prevent it from closing or leaving corners unoccupied. Our games are sufficiently aggressive already: we don’t need another mechanism for creating trapped meeples and incomplete features. We also have a house rule that 1-tile cities don’t score for farmers.
Also: we use a mat in a serious game. Otherwise, you always have a gray area at the edge.
-
I wouldn't conclude that just because there is a resource that that resource should be restricted. Plenty of games allow for infinite numbers of resources, like coins, even though there are limits in the box. This is because the game should be enabling fairness and most importantly ensure it remains fun.
The problem with declaring table edges, is you're going to have to start defining the size of the table, and declaring how to determine that the start tile is placed exactly in the centre, if that tile is 1mm out then maybe a player is disadvantaged simply because the tile doesn't fit. The way around this would be to use tile-sheets with spaces allocated, but again clearly the rules never said use a 15x15 grid or whatever.
I don't have enough space for all the games in my collection, but that doesn't stop me buying more ;D
-
I'm a little bit extremist on this, as long as you can be an extremist talking about a game ^-^ Not only I consider any open feature at the edge of the table open by default, but I also refuse to extend the game surface by adding more tables or similar and I think this should be the same for official toournaments.
I'd be interested to hear why you think this should be the case for tournaments too? Serious players are 100% interested in seeing the game develop over the course of the full 72 tiles and I think many/ most would be frustrated by imposing such limitations purely for the sake of it. If it isn't how Carcassonne was designed to be played (and this isn't) then it's not going to be a preference for people who love the game for what it is.
I'll try to make a similarity here: once you start a game with 7 base meeples, you play the whole game with 7 base meeples, and you don't add one more just because you've depleted your stash: maybe you were unlucky, maybe your opponents were better than you, maybe you're a disaster at managing resources, it doesn't matter: you don't have base meeples to play anymore and you have to deal with it. Why should it be different for the table space?
For the sake of answering your question, because your meeples are a resource that is pre-determined by the game, and table space isn't. They're both resources, sure, but one is strictly allocated according to the rules and the other is assumed. It would be just as valid to invite people round to play Carcassonne at your house, and then to not play your first move (because you're still "thinking" and they mustn't rush you) until all of your opponents had either resigned or starved to death because you refused to feed them anything but fed yourself. Food is a resource after all, and Carcassonne is a strategic game, so if they can't manage food resources then they deserve to lose, right? ;)
-
if that tile is 1mm out then maybe a player is disadvantaged simply because the tile doesn't fit.
Exactly. And since this is valid for all players from the start of the game, it's a fair rule. Adding a table because player X needs more space when her opponents managed to stay in the play area is fair only to player X
-
if that tile is 1mm out then maybe a player is disadvantaged simply because the tile doesn't fit.
Exactly. And since this is valid for all players from the start of the game, it's a fair rule. Adding a table because player X needs more space when her opponents managed to stay in the play area is fair only to player X
Or you could just say, before the game begins, that table space will be afforded to anyone who needs it at the time it is required. This way the game can be played as intended and it doesn't matter if one player is advantaged more than the others because it could equally have been anyone and it was agreed upon by all players at the start of the game.
-
I think we can only agree to disagree. Only thing I'm really not comfortable with is that "game played as intended" since from the very first day I started playing the "Rule 0" of Carcassonne was: "Play as you like"... so that's true, until someone tells me I *have* to play in a certain way instead, otherwise I'm playing wrong?
More on this.
On my paper instruction it is written that the table is the limit.
On the wiki (https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Base_game#Use_of_a_table) the official instructions are quite inconsistent. First is said that
The edge of the table is the limit for the game if, as stated in the rules, a table is used.
but then it is added that
Addition of a second table is possible if one of an appropriate height is added to the first table
So the second sentence seems to nullify the first one, but if so, what is the point of the first one?
So, everyone play as they like so different people use different rules. Mine are more strict, and I think that's better because they add a solid layer of strategy, that's all.
I just think telling people the game must be played "as intended", and then having a rule that is not even fixed by the creator of the game is a little silly.
-
The whole “addition of a second table” paragraph doesn’t nullify the earlier paragraph about the table being the limit. If you add a second table of equal height, the limit is extended to the second table, but the edges of the table remain a limit.
Nobody is trying to prevent anyone from having fun. At the end of the day, you can play with whatever house rules you want. KJW has house rules for all of the games in his personal collection and he is a big proponent of making house rules. That being said, there needs to be some sort of defined standard from which to deviate. That’s what has been captured on Wikicarpedia.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
The whole “addition of a second table” paragraph doesn’t nullify the earlier paragraph about the table being the limit. If you add a second table of equal height, the limit is extended to the second table, but the edges of the table remain a limit.
;D I really does not understand this: If you can extend the game area whatever you want, then there is never a limit ;D It's like saying: you can only buy 5 essen tiles but hey, if you ask you can buy 10 ;D
-
The game play area is limited. It's limited to 72 tiles (or more if you use expansions).
-
I think we can only agree to disagree. Only thing I'm really not comfortable with is that "game played as intended" since from the very first day I started playing the "Rule 0" of Carcassonne was: "Play as you like"... so that's true, until someone tells me I *have* to play in a certain way instead, otherwise I'm playing wrong?
I certainly can't disagree with this. KJW has always been very clear that the purpose of his games is to help people find fun and provide entertainment for themselves and the people they play with. If adapting the rules, or creating your own, heightens the pleasure of your gaming experience then you can be sure that he would approve! :(y)
So the second sentence seems to nullify the first one, but if so, what is the point of the first one?
I don't follow your logic behind this. To me, it seems that one is an extension of the other in the same way as Scott explained previously. You can continue to misunderstand this, deliberately or otherwise, but that's your decision and isn't a problem with the rules or the wiki.
So, everyone play as they like so different people use different rules. Mine are more strict, and I think that's better because they add a solid layer of strategy, that's all.
This isn't all. This is a big thing. I'm very happy for people to play whatever rules they like; it's a personal thing for you and your group. You do you. But don't expect everyone else to do you too just because you think your rule is better. For me, and for everyone I play with, at every level, it isn't better and it doesn't add anything that's in keeping with the spirit of the game.
I just think telling people the game must be played "as intended", and then having a rule that is not even fixed by the creator of the game is a little silly.
There's nothing to fix.
-
You can continue to misunderstand this, deliberately or otherwise, but that's your decision and isn't a problem with the rules or the wiki.
Well it's not a decision if it's not deliberate, isn't it. ;) As incredible as it is, I'm still lost. One rule determines what's a limit is, telling me the edge of the table I'm playing on is the "limit". Limit for what? I read that as "the boundaries of the game space are the table edges". But then another rules says I can extend this limit/boundaries by just adding more tables if I want. So what's exactly the "limit" defined in the first rule? For me, a "limit" is not extendable since... you know, it's a limit:
limit (ˈlɪmɪt/)
1. a point or level beyond which something does not or may not extend or pass.
2. a restriction on the size or amount of something permissible or possible.
Finally,
There's nothing to fix.
Wrong word. "Clarified" is maybe the word I wanted to use. Resolved? Settled down? "I just think telling people the game must be played "as intended", and then having a rule that is not even made certain by the creator of the game is a little silly".
-
As much as I'd love to continue our chat here, it doesn't feel like we're ever going to agree and I don't think this is going anywhere helpful or productive. No hard feelings though; you're always welcome to a game of Carcassonne at my table: :(y)
(http://www.dan.tehill.net/CarcaTable.jpg)
Oh look, I've won!
-
+1 from me Dan - glad to see common sense prevails
-
(http://www.dan.tehill.net/CarcaTable.jpg)
Oh look, I've won!
Have you? You haven't claimed anything, so it's a tie with us both scoring 0 points >:D
-
Have you? You haven't claimed anything, so it's a tie with us both scoring 0 points >:D
Yes, but I always play with the houserule that the starting player wins if nobody else can place any tiles. It's better this way because of the extra strategy. I recommend everyone else should do the same, especially the world championships.
-
Uhmmmmm! It seems this saves you a lot of time... Well done!
-
So, as a recap.
I honestly don't understand a rule (you may feel it's a waste of time to keep discussing with me, but the result is that in the end I'm still at total loss about the whole "extendable limits" thing, still an oxymoron to me) and trying to understand it is labeled as "having no common sense"... and then the conversation is shut down with a Lego joke.
Fantastic.
-
So, as a recap.
I honestly don't understand a rule
but I also refuse to extend the game surface by adding more tables or similar and I think this should be the same for official toournaments.
Fantastic.
-
I'm still at total loss about the whole "extendable limits" thing, still an oxymoron to me.
I agree that the idea of “extendable limits” is confusing. But perhaps the confusion arises because the WICA clarifications (https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Base_game#Use_of_a_table) on use of a table, as provided by HiG, are not necessarily intended to be applied simultaneously—they are four distinct options, some of which may be combined, as the last bullet in this list makes clear (I converted the inner list to numbered items for easy reference below):
- It is important generally, that all the players in the round agree how to play:
- Table - Standard
- Table - with "total shifting" of tiles
- Table - with extension
- Floor
It seems that in this community, there is a strong preference for avoiding table limits whenever it is reasonable to do so, by some combination of options 2 and 3, creating an effectively infinite play area. I infer that this is also the most common approach in tournaments, although maybe option 2 is less desirable because of the potential for confusion or errors when moving the tiles? In any case, your preference, option 1, is certainly a clear and not uncommon way to play—it is “Standard” after all. :)
Hope this helps.
P.S. Perhaps option 5 should be ‘Floor - with “total shifting” of tiles?’ >:D
-
P.S. Perhaps option 5 should be ‘Floor - with “total shifting” of tiles?’ >:D
And if it's a tile floor ...
-
... and why not floor - with extension? (But that might take a while ... >:D)
-
… you just can’t get builders these days …
-
… you just can’t get builders these days …
Hahahahaha! Variant: Your builder is used to allow you to add tiles to a road or city beyond the nominal limit of play! You may add meeples to features on these tiles, and then add the builder once the first feature is finished! Start with a very small playing area? Each player gets two builders?
-
Hahahahaha! Variant: Your builder is used to allow you to add tiles to a road or city beyond the nominal limit of play!
Haha, Genius! ;D A Builder Variant out of a discussion on table edges.. +1 merit
I love it!! :D
I would suggest to completely redefine the Builder rules:
In order to be allowed to place a tile outside the agreed playarea (referred to as „playarea“), the builder has to be placed first on a tile inside the playarea on the specific feature that will be extended later into the new area (referred to as „new space“).
A builder can be placed during the move wood phase on any tile on any feature (road,city, monastery- on the monastery tile) in the playarea.
The feature may already be occupied, this means the builder can be placed on a tile on a feature together with an already existing meeple.
But a builder cannot be placed on a feature that is already occupied by another builder.
This also means when playing with the phantom, that the builder and the phantom can be placed on the same feature on the same tile!
Only the player with the colour of the builder is allowed to extend the feature into new space.
All tiles placed like this with the help of the builder into the new space become immediately part of the playarea. Therefore, a builder can be placed on these tiles on other features, too, in order to further extend the playarea.
Special tile placement rule: a space in the new area where there are already tiles on 3 adjacent sides can be filled with a tile without the help of a builder.
When a feature with builder is finished, the builder is returned to the player.
At the beginning of the game, the playarea is agreed on by the players. My suggestion would be: 2 tiles next to the start tile in each direction ( = 5x5 tiles).
Each player gets 6 builders (I think one or two is not enough)
Hahaha! :pink-meeple:
-
Sorry for hijacking the table edge thread! ::)
I started a new thread for a variant that incorporates some sort of game mechanics into the expansion of a limited playing area:
https://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=6250
Thanks.