Dr_Mabuse wrote:

Here's some generic stuff that's worked for us:

1. Have everyone grab the PDF of the rulebook. I'll post a link if you can't find it.

2. Decide on your dispute-resolution system. Will an admin decide? Will it be a vote of the other players? Something else? Because you will have disputes.

3. Have everyone agree to a reasonable time frame to make a move or pass. We made the mistake of not doing this in our first game, and it was the first topic of discussion before we stared our second game. "Reasonable" will be different for every group, but have everyone sign off on whatever you decide.

4. Try to have one pre-game meeting, via IM. Just get as many players as possible onto an IM service and let everyone hash out any questions, concerns, etc., for maybe 30 or 45 minutes. Failing that, have someone post one central document with the rules you're using, the time limits, everyone's email address (if you're doing PBEM), the dispute-resolution process, etc.

5. Be careful with alliances. We've done everything from no-alliance games (actually kind of fun) all the way up to the by-the-letter rules of "anything goes." In my opinion, alliances in non-FTF games become unwieldy right around the three-player mark. I've personally had the most fun when we've limited alliances to two factions only (although I did take part in a memorable three-player win once). Much like bidding, alliances can be a time-sink as they grow.

As for me having the GUILD advantage of being able to move whenever I want, how about I just email after each movement by another player that I do or don't want to move at that point - probably early on in the game I will just say at the beginning that I'll move at my designated time, but I probably will want to take adantage of this later on in the game.

Southernman wrote:


That's fine - I just didn't want it slowing things down by people having to wait for your say-so every time before making their own move. I understand the most common use of this power is to go first or last as required, rather than to interject suddenly in the middle of the turn order, so most of the time you'll be able to make your decision when the movement phase starts.

Delayed notes for battle plans have the same problem as face-down battlewheels, which is:
attacker commits, logfile sent
defender commits, logfile sent
attacker reveals, logfile sent
defender reveals, logfile sent
With a 12-18 hour delay easily possible at each stage for transatlantic time zones, I agree that's too much time for too little benefit.

I think the honor-based battle protocol should be:
attacker deploys face-up on battlewheel, logfile sent.
defender decides plan, steps logfile, then deploys face-up. logfile sent.

To prevent accidental views before deciding, we should all be *sure* to use logfiles instead of save-points, at least for combat phases.

Bidding is just gonna be hard, i think. Even as a spice-poor faction, if we want to play blind-bid to speed things up, I'll live. If we want to do email turn order bids, that's cool too. Also, each bidding round is going to have to have a break as the winner generates a logfile in VASSAL to take the card, then the Atreides get a peek at the next one.
Matt can tackle that one, and I'm without strong opinions.

Yeesh, perhaps a GM would be a good idea, if there are any volunteers.

(I'll volunteer to be the next GM for any F:AT game I understand or can learn quickly, but I don't want to give up my slot here. So there. PM me, I'm totally serious, except Diplomacy.)

Duke, thanks for the tips. You know, we live in the same town. Maybe we should try to organize an actual game someday.

Not Sure wrote:

Good points.


I've no problem with it (it's only a boardgame so can't see anyone cheating), sounds OK.


Any thoughts on a communal spreadsheet to type our bids in for all to see. We could even probably find a common time when we can all do it at the same time.

Not Sure wrote:


We also haven't considered the ability to use powers and Karama cards before combat plans are revealed especially with alliances.

You tourists and your fancy powers.

Here on Arrakis we stab first and see the future when it gets here.

We also haven't considered the ability to use powers and Karama cards before combat plans are revealed especially with alliances.

If we're using the honor system, it shouldn't be too hard. The defender sends the log with the reveal to everyone, and anyone who wants to jump in with Karama or whatever has their chance to do it then. We're already opening the battles themselves up to cheating, so I don't see how the potential for a player to see the reveal, then decide to play Karama is going to make matters worse.

We're all adults here, nobody's going to cheat. Besides, if they do, it'll be a short game.

Here are my suggestions for bidding, the format doesn't really matter:

If the Atreides player is elligible to bid on the card, just let him open. It'll save time as everyone's going to want to see his bid first. After that, try to bid what you're willing to pay instead of continually going 1 higher than the last guy. It's not like we're using spice for combat, and you're probably not going to wind up paying that much more for cards than you normally would.

mjl1783 wrote:


As the player who'll be getting all the spice bid for treachery cards, I heartily endorse this suggestion :)

I thought you might, whether we do it or not, just remember who it was that suggested it.