Sets [CNS] Conspiracy Spoilers

[Eric Chan]

Wait.. people hadn't heard of attack left / attack right? Oh man, I only refrained from suggesting that because I assumed everyone had already tried it, and still hated it.

If you ever end up with exactly five people, and are jonesing for some multiplayer Magic, I highly recommend star format. It's similar in spirit to attack left / attack right, except everyone's aiming to kill the two players opposite them. It present similar politics, and gives games a lot more direction than the usual free-for-all nobody-attacks-anyone durdling.

 

[CML]

That post was more in response to VibeBox who argued the fundamental rules and structure of Magic aren't suited for multiplayer, which is a load of poppycock if you ask me. I can totally respect that you and VibeBox are not into multiplayer, and I would certainly not want to convince you it's fun. That is, really, a matter of personal preference.

haha simmer down dude. nobody would dispute magic has some multiplayer support, and can obviously be played that way, but it's also hard to dismiss the notion that magic is fundamentally designed to be a 1-on-1 game. it is equally hard to dispute that some multiplayer support is a good idea, as well as the idea that ken nagle should be shitcanned at once

 

[Onderzeeboot]

haha simmer down dude. nobody would dispute magic has some multiplayer support, and can obviously be played that way, but it's also hard to dismiss the notion that magic is fundamentally designed to be a 1-on-1 game. it is equally hard to dispute that some multiplayer support is a good idea, as well as the idea that ken nagle should be shitcanned at once

But but, someone is wrong on the internet!

Kidding aside, I agree that Magic was originally designed as a 1 on 1 game. I don't agree that Magic is therefore fundamentally and inherently unsuitable for multiplayer. I don't think VibeBox and I are ever going to agree on this point though, but I enjoy the academic discussion

@Eric: We do play "attack left" all the time, but with different rules. It's like free for all but you can only attack the person to your left. Last man standing wins. Your variant sounds more interesting as it involves a bit more planning and because nobody has to sit there twiddling his thumbs while the remaining players battle it out.

Another variant we play a lot is the "protective bubble" variant. As soon as someone dies he can select a new deck. Once shuffled and ready to join the game again he gets 3 turns in succession to develop his board, then gets a whole round in a protective bubble where nothing (including sweepers) can touch him. If you eliminate three players you also have to change your deck and start anew this way. This makes for really dynamic games of Magic, plus you get to see a lot of decks

Also, it's a holiday today in the US? Really? So they tweet the full spoiler would be online Friday, mess up, then take a day off after the weekend so that we have to wait another day? I am sad now! (Not really, but it's still annoying)

 

[ahadabans]

Your variant sounds more interesting as it involves a bit more planning and because nobody has to sit there twiddling his thumbs while the remaining players battle it out.

That's the best part about it. Nothing worse than playing traditional multi-player with 5 guys and being the first to die. Then having to sit there for an hour while you wait for the remaining four to grind out the rest of the game (and they tend to linger because no one wants to make a move and then get alpha-striked by the rest of the board).

 

[anotak]

http://web.archive.org/web/20131013111851/http://magiclampoon.com/blog/throne-magic/

i really enjoy this variant for 5-8 people, but it falls apart if anyone is playing fast combo

 

[Diakonov]

I have to admit, I rarely enjoy multiplayer. I think this set will be an exception since it is completely designed around it.