Take the 2-minute tour ×
Board & Card Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who like playing board games, designing board games or modifying the rules of existing board games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

A friend mentioned a possible easy tweak of the Saint Petersburg rules: just pay out the buildings once again at the end of the game (perhaps disallowing observatory/debtor's prison except for taking the 1 VP).

This has two possible advantages:

  1. It could enable a viable blue-heavy strategy to compete with the as-many-aristocrats-kinds-as-possible strategy.
  2. The trading card phase at the end would actually matter for blues as well as aristocrats.

Can anyone shoot holes in the idea? I'm curious for people to try this out and report how it goes.

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Lohoris, Dave DuPlantis, Gregor, Pat Ludwig Apr 8 '12 at 20:42

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

    
Could this possibly be reformatted into a question? Or is this intended to just have "Yes this works", "No it doesn't" answers? –  LittleBobbyTables May 30 '11 at 13:28
    
Reformatted a bit, but that's basically what I was going for, yes. –  Drew Hoskins May 30 '11 at 22:33
3  
Have you tried this house rule? I'm a little put-off by you asking for other folks to try it out and report back if you haven't gone through that effort yourself. –  Pat Ludwig May 31 '11 at 0:05
2  
Pat, wow. I haven't had a chance to play, but not for lack of effort or desire. There's a presumption that people who would try it out would, well, want to try it out! The implication of your statement is that I should withhold the idea until I've tried it, because I am somehow doing damage by presenting it untested. If you are someone who doesn't like testing house rules, then obviously that addendum is not for you. –  Drew Hoskins Jun 15 '11 at 20:54
1  
Voting to close because no experience with the house rule has been demonstrated per this meta question. A better version would be "A problem we've had with Saint Petersburg is X; using Y house rule seems to have helped. Is there a side effect we're missing?" –  Dave DuPlantis Feb 14 '12 at 16:43
add comment

1 Answer 1

I don't see any reason why this would fail to work, but it would change the strategy. I'll give it a go next time I play, if I can persuade the other players to try it.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.