I backed the latest crowdfund and have played a little but not as much as I’d like. I agree that at the last change everyone tends to align themselves with the winning faction; haven’t tried the variants but I’ll do that next time I play.
2 Likes
I really like War of Whispers - we play it with the variant that enforces a different high-scoring faction for each player, which seems to work well.
3 Likes
I am selling it. It’s good, but not getting enough play. Will cut you a deal
4 Likes
I think I’m after the Collector’s Edition, as Zatu currently have it for £42 (instead of £99). I just need to check if it has the updated rulebook etc from 2nd edition.
Edit: From the KS page, it does - Collector’s is 2nd ed with better pieces and some expansion cards. Given that 2nd ed is going for £39 and Collector’s for £42…
Another edit: I think I like the cubes better though. Going to watch some unboxing vids to decide which components to go for.
2 Likes
I will say, if you don’t want a box full of air, you’re probably better off grabbing the fancy version.
5 Likes
I got the basic version and then 3d-printed pieces mostly taken from the TTS mod - still cubes for armies, but cities, forts and huts are my custom plastic. I think this is the best avaliable version, but then I would. 
6 Likes
I’ve only played it the one time, and it was just a 2-player game, but I really enjoyed it. What became clear as we played is that we both had the same 1st faction, so I started totally ignoring that faction and just worked on seeing what I could do for my second or third place factions, even if it involved screwing over the first place faction, as the score for that one was irrelevant. We’d both score the same amount for it, so it just stopped being a factor in my mind. My last actions taking territory from the first place faction with my second or third place ones won me the game.
And I think that’s how you need to go about this game. Each player can only do two swaps total, as once you swap and reveal a loyalty token, it’s locked in place. Anything that you have the same as your opponent no longer matters, especially if they’ve locked it in place with a swap. Start focusing on your second and third place factions, especially if they are the ones that are negative for your opponent.
Obviously my experience is very limited, but I think at least in a two-player head-to-head game, the swapping will not be too much of an issue, as it can just create new opportunities. I would really like to try a three or four player game though, to see if it feels similar.
4 Likes
I recently sold A War of Whispers. It’s a perfectly okay time. The trouble is that it promises hidden agendas, scheming, intrigue! Or as Matt would put it, Game of Thrones in an hour! The reality is that you’re silently moving tokens and cubes around and occasionally going ‘hm’ (or just discussing other things as you play). It’s very similar to ‘The King is Dead’ in that way. I’ve never had a bad game of it, but I’ve never really had a great game of it either.
I would, however, recommend playing with the variant where you get a bonus point for every unrevealed loyalty token at the end of the game (it’s not in the manual, but I think the designer admitted they always play with this as well).
5 Likes
Did Yucatan immedietely disappeared from the face of the Earth after fulfilment?? Anyone played it?
4 Likes
I really enjoyed War of Whispers as an experience, but not sure I would want to play it repeatedly. It is elegant in the best way possible - simple ruleset that strongly evokes an atmosphere - but can see it being a bit samey once everyone knows what they’re doing.
Firmly in the “100% try it out at a boardgame cafe or con, but don’t buy it” territory for me.
For me, I prefer Dogs of War for that “betting on who is going to win the war” type game. It is more abstract than WoW, but through the abstraction it does a bit more to make games feel varied.
5 Likes
I played war of whispers yesterday and didn’t rate it. An hour plus of tit for tat murder before everyone changes allegiances to the leading factions in the last round. The winner/loser is basically determined at random at the start by who is unfortunate enough to have the faction that ends up doing best in their 2nd slot. Not impressed.
5 Likes
This was on my wishlist for a long time. I did not pull the trigger for this reason, this opinion seems to be repeated over and over across every board game community. The game has a promise, and a reality, and they don’t line up.
There is a semi-official variant, mentioned by a bunch of people already, for setup. This seems to eliminate the least interesting games. Some people say it fixes the game completely so that it finally delivers on the promise. Still, it sounded inconsistent to me, a game that would have amazing and mundane sessions in an unpredictable sequence.
2 Likes
This is why I’m asking: it’s SUCH an excellent idea for a game, manipulating from the shadows, but sounds like it’s definitely not A+ to play.
1 Like
If you can find it, it’s in GAME stores for £11 atm
1 Like
I assume we’re talking about the variant where each player is guaranteed a different ‘devout’ allegiance. It reduces the risk in 3-4 player games of two players starting with very similar allegiances, which would leave the remaining player(s) at a distinct disadvantage (the odds of it happening in a 4-player game is unfortunately quite high). Similarly, the bonus-point-for-each-unrevealed-loyalty variant reduces the risk of everyone switching to the same allegiances in the final round.
Unfortunately, neither of them (or any other variant I’ve found) solve the issue of the mechanics not really delivering on the theme, which I think is a far bigger problem. It’s a real shame, because I really want to like it so much more than I do.
4 Likes
100% of the time I’d opt for Turncoats instead. It feels (to me, anyway) like War of Whispers with all the unnecessary bits lopped off.
6 Likes
Hmm, I did always plan to buy turncoats at some point…
5 Likes
Following the discussion on A War of Whispers… is the same true of Sheriff of Nottingham? Is it a game with a promise (which is fantastic) and then a reality (which is less than)?
I’ve played my copy twice. Both times were… fun. A bit. But also a little sour and people did not want to play again. In the first half, there’s really zero information to go on other than body language. In later stages, once people are discarding more, gunning toward majorities, etc, there’s a little bit to go on but the board state is still opaque. It never took off and we never found mindgames in it, just guessing games.
Additionally, I"m considering a 1:1 swap with Soda Smugglers. Knizia. Same premise. Much shorter and narrower in scope, but also the added structure may give the game more hooks and levers that form a starting point for “what you should do” which is a good backdrop for “are you playing straight or lying.”
5 Likes
I’ve played it once, maybe twice? Looks like before I was logging plays, anyway. I think what it’s trying to do is essentially multiple mini social deduction games in a row, and each player (except that round’s Sheriff) can pick their own role each time.
But you can’t win without bluffing at least sometimes, which to me reduced the game to picking which Sheriff(s) would be most easily bluffed. (As someone who is often thought to look a bit dodgy, one of my preferred tactics in this style of game is to tell the absolute truth and wait for people to suspect me.) There isn’t that element of conspiracy you get in Werewolf or The Resistance. Honestly I’d rather play Coup again.
4 Likes
It’s a fairly pure bluffing game - essentially a remake of Contraband. Like a lot of pure bluffing games, it can get old quickly. Despite what some people think, you can’t really tell when someone is lying about what card they put in a bag unless they’re really bad at it. And people who are bad at lying, generally don’t play bluffing games.
If I was to choose a pure bluffing game, I’d pick something quicker like Cockroach Poker, Skull, or Coup.
2 Likes