Crusader Kings

Brace yourself, the backstabbing and intrigue of medieval Europe is...

Read more...

www.kickstarter.com/projects/1192053011/...f=new_friend_backing

It looks neat, but it seems fairly close to Warrior Knights. Which someone in my group already has, and we play *maybe* once every 2 years.

I welcome any and all attempts to make this kind of "multiplayer wargame" or "kidn of multiplayer wargame". I'm not hopeful, though, they are very hard to make and, like hotseat says, chances are you end up with something like Warrior Knights.

Blood Royale in PC license clothing?

Warrior Knights cross with Blood Royale ... or just the boardgame version or Paradox's Crusader Kings ;-p

Interested to see how different it is from both of them, I think it will need some decent diplomacy mechanics like Blood Royale had to make it different enough to Warrior Knights that I already have and get out infrequently.

After reading through the rules it looks similar to what FFG did with Civilization recently, made a rules and time friendly version of a particular genre of game that usually is not rules or time friendly. It looks like it has reasonable mechanics and limited goals (not a euro points salad) and should work OK for a 3 hour medieval fix but I think it may be a bit lacking in depth and time allowed for some of us wanting that bit extra immersion (Note: I am quite happy playing a 4-6 hour game of FFG's Civ rather than try a 2-4 hour attempt at Civ: A New Dawn).
But it is reasonably priced, especially for the UK, so it does have that has a bit plus factor.

True to the source material, it appears there is more administrative material than there is a board.

I will also say I find their rejection of stretch goals refreshing. This is the game, take it or leave it.

Brace yourself, the backstabbing and intrigue of medieval Europe is being brought to life in the real world.

I assume they mean the modern world. Pretty sure in the real world that medieval Europe did have backstabbing and intrigue.

hotseatgames wrote: I will also say I find their rejection of stretch goals refreshing. This is the game, take it or leave it.

Yeah, and CTRL+F "exclusive" yielded no results, so no typical Kickstarter FOMO psychology bullshit either. Maybe this will make it to retail, and indeed maybe then, I'll take a look. The computer game always sounded fascinating.

Shouldn't this game just be Republic of Rome?

I’m in on this one, despite the warning signs and similarities to other games. I’m a sucker for stuff in the Warrior Knights / Blood Royale vein.

The rules seem a bit lighter mechanically than FFG Warrior Knights, which I’m counting as a strength.

What I didn't like was the 'Choose two actions for a turn' via cards. I'd rather be able to choose what I want to do from a list of actions and react to the people who went in a turn order higher than me.

The simplified map is disappointing.

the_jake_1973 wrote: What I didn't like was the 'Choose two actions for a turn' via cards. I'd rather be able to choose what I want to do from a list of actions and react to the people who went in a turn order higher than me.

The simplified map is disappointing.

Now I've had time to refresh myself with FFG's Warrior Knights rules I prefer their each player chooses two orders to put in each of three piles, along with neutral cards, and then they are shuffled - you get planning with some timing uncertainty.
Crusader Kings is obviously going for a more time friendly experience but it has thrown in the dynasty mechanic with game tests on traits so it has some differentiation for people.

I read through the CK rules and I know this will not be one on my to play/buy list. For all it's warts and crazy time investment, I would opt for BR.

I will be interested to see if anyone here gets an advance copy to review and read their impressions.