Carcassonne Central

Hello,

I just got the Traders & Builders expansion, and according the (danish / swedish / norwegian) rules following this set, farm scoring with a pig says 5 points per city, instead of 4 points  ???

..and when I checked out RGG on Traders and Builders rules PDF (http://www.riograndegames.com/uploads/Game/Game_59_gameRules.pdf), same numbers  :o

We have always played with 3 points scoring for a farm, per city.

..is it a new 4th edition scoring rule?

Cheers,
Harry

No, this is the old 1st edition scoring.

The presence of the pig in a field gives a total of 4 points per completed city. The pig does not count towards the majority of the farm.

The RGG site is up to date on some rule editions, but still out of date on others. It makes things quite confusing.

Thank you  :)

We're back in business..

Cheers,
Harry

However, if you have the pig (meeple) on the same farm with a pig farm (tile), then cities are worth 5 points.  Castles are then worth 6 and besieged cities worth 10 (double).  A very nice way to end the game!  ;D

Stick a Barn on the tile and you are set for life!

I like to play the barn on my own farm when at all possible and as late in the game as I dare.

Doesn't change the fact that you are set for life. If you barn your farm that has all the features above (and a large number of cities adjacent) then you not only score a nice bonus but you score a double nice bonus.

Just bear in mind that you are not able to have a Pig 'attached' to a Barn. Also, I don't believe that the 'pig herd' tile scores extra when 'attached' to a players Barn. Pigs and the 'pig herd' tile only score extra when used with Farmers.

Bah! Technicalities.

...a happy medium for me.  I don't count the pig, but I do count the pig herd tile simply because it's fixed on the tile and the pig meeple is not fixed.

I never have counted the pig herd tile when scoring at all. We just ignore it.

The pig tile does add a bonus according to the rules you only can have the pig meeple if there is a farmer on the field the pig herd counts as an extra bonus point for each ciy on the farm

Which rule set is that from, the pig tile?  I guess I totally missed that. 

I think they were with the River II rules since that is the only tile where a legal Pig Herd exists. No rules were printed with Games Quarterly 11 anyway.

Actually it was through one of the CARs or rule link i found on CarcCent that said the GQ11 is not a pig herd it is just a four way farm tile similar to a four way city.

Indeed. I never said it was a pig herd. In fact, it is a pig and cow herd, which oddly scores nothing. Just remember, there is no OFFICIAL rulings at all concerning the Games Quarterly Expansion since it was not released in Germany or by Rio Grande and Games Quarterly Magazine closed up without issuing any of their own rulings. Thus, it is just a random extra tiles expansion.

A tile with a pig herd on it is a pig herd tile. I do not know why some people have a hard time realising that. Granted, there are fewer pigs in the GQ11 tile than in River II, but the shed (pig house, whatever it is called in English) is exactly the same graphics. On the GQ11 tile there are also two animals (cows?), and on the River II tile there is an extra house.

Point is: it is a pig herd, with a pig house. And since the tile has a pig herd it is a pig herd tile.

Maybe I should collect this question in its own thread ...

You just stated how the GQ11 tile is different from the River II, the River II tile has been explicitly defined as a Pig Heard but as you stated the GQ11 tile is different in several critical ways from the defined River II tile that they are clearly two different functions. the River II functions as a pig heard while the GQ11 tile functions as a field tile and nothing more. Cows aren't pigs.

No. I did not. There is no "critical" difference between the tiles. They both have a pig herd. They both have sheds (pig houses). I would wager a guess that you do not dismiss all other tiles with adornments on them. Just because there are several elements on a tile does not mean that all other elements become void. Many other tile functions has different graphics and different "misc stuff" on them. Is a road not a road because there is a little house on the same tile? Ridiculous!

A tile with a pig herd on it is obviously a pig herd tile. What else would it be?

The difference is that the differences concerning the GQ11 tile are not "misc stuff" because it is the only stuff. If you are saying that these are "misc stuff" then it must be concluded that the GQ11 tile is just a Field tile with "misc stuff" on it. Therefore ther is no bonus farm scoring that the pig farm gets because the pig farm is not "misc stuff"

One thing I love about the game is that you can add or subtract rules as you like.  If I want to play with a builder, but not the rest of the t&b expansion you can.  If you want to play the catapult tiles but use the fan made jester and minstrel rules you can.  If you want the GQ11 FFFF tile to be a pig herd it is.  If you don't want to you don't.

I love the variety this game offers that lets everyone tailor it to their own preferences. 

I salute the fan mades and house rules :sa :sa :sa

According to the GQ11 expansion text in the Carc:

"It should be noted that, officially, the ffff tile is not a pig-herd tile (see The River II for more details). I
have been informed by John Sweeney that this has been confirmed by Jay Tummelson of Rio
Grande Games, the producer of this expansion. It may be possible to use the tile as if it were a
pig-herd tile, but this would be a house rule, rather than an official rule."

Note: we use the tile as a pig heard tile.

That was my understanding as well. However, just because it isn't officially a pig herd tile there's no reason not to have a house rule that says that it is one.

Whichever way you want to play it, it's definitely not worth getting into arguments over. After all, it is only one tile...

No, it is not the only "stuff". There is also a pig herd. Just as there are roads, and roads with a little house. Noöne would consider the road not a road just becuase there is also a house on the same tile as the road. But you consider the pig herd not a pig herd becuase there are also cows.


Added afterwards, without thought. This is Jay's house rule. Rio Grande Games did not publish this, so why should Jay be the official judge about something he did not create? We can as well ask Martin Wallace what he thinks.


It is apparantly worth arguing that a pig herd tile is not a pig herd tile because someone who did not create it said so. The reason I argue is because I think it is a grand example of rule lawyers gone wrong. It is totally obvious to every sensible person that it is a pig herd, and that makes the tile a pig herd tile. It is a great example of when authorities are wrong, and yet people defend them. If you look at the tile, you will see a pig herd. Just as if you look at any other tile you will see its feature. Arguing that it is not a pig herd because there are also cows (for example) is not only reaching, it also borders on the obstinate.

If Jay Tummelson of Rio Grande Games is the producer of this expansion, why coudn't he be the offical source for the rules?

As I wrote, we play that it's a pig heard tile regardless of what anybody says.

No rules were included with the GQ11-expansion. The rule saying that the pig herd tile is not a pig herd tile was added afterwards. The reason someone even had to ask the question is the kind of "rule lawyerism" I can neither understand nor bear.

What else would a tile with a pig herd be but a pig herd tile?

You mention disliking "rule lawyerism" yet seem intent on doing the same thing yourself. I really don't understand why it's such a big issue - after all it's such an easy thing to agree before the start of a game whether it counts as a pig tile or not, regardless of whether there's an official ruling or not (and regardless of what that ruling is). We do it all the time when we mix & match expansions or parts of expansions.

Isn't that a bit like saying a pig flies because pigs fly?  ;)

No, no no no! I dislike this level of rule lawyerism, where you let logic just fly out the window! A game needs its rules, no question about that. And I agree: it is easy to agree upon beforehand.

The thing I take issue with is that this defies everything logical end sensible. We have a tile with a pig herd that does not count as a pig herd, becuase ... well, um ... there are also cows! And ... well, it is not exactly the same tile as the other pig herd tiles! If I were to argue that a road tile is not a road tile because it is also carrying a little house as adornement everyone would just shake their head (I hope). Do you remember the question about the river and if they ended farms or not? This is the same thing. In that case it was even more absurd thoguh – a rather fun excersise, but if you actually are serious in that regard, well, then you have taken it way too far.


I do not understand this analogy. There is some proverbial useage of "flying pigs" in English. Is that what you mean?

You mean there are multiple pig heard tiles? I am pretty sure that the only pig heard tile was in the River II. Therefore the River II tile is the precedent on pig heard tile. Plus as to counter your road example, the base set rules of Carcassonne explicitly state that the road tiles may contain decorative accents, such as your afore mentioned houses, and have no effect on the tile.

There are two identical tiles in River II, unless my memory has gone toally bonkers (which it might have!).

You say that the rules state that a road tile is a road tile even if there are additional adornments on it, and you also state that a pig herd tile is not a pig herd tile for very the same reason. A cloister is still a cloister even if it shares a tile with a little house, or a road or a city. In fact, every single feature is legal, no matter what else is on the tile.

But not the pig herd tile from GQ11, because it also has cows on it.   :bh

There is no, and I stress no, official rules regarding the GQ11 tiles. I reject Jay's afterthought as a ruling. It is his house rules, nothing else. I reject his ruling because it is stupid.

Jay is the producer of this expansion... not Hans Im Gluck. If Hans Im Gluck were to give an official ruling, would you agree with it regardless of the logic you see?

Granted Jay does not seem to take interest in having appropriate rules for Carcassonne (it did take him many years to change his mind on the farmers rule). But in the end, he is still the producer of this expansion whether we like it or not.

I'll mention it again, we use it as a pig heard tile. But as it goes for having the closest thing to an "official ruling", it's not a pig heard tile. This last statement is only valid if Jay did actually mention that the tile is not a pig heard tile, as referenced by Matt in the Carc.

It was merely an attempt at humour - I couldn't resist the link between the pig tile & "when pigs fly", but my point there was that you were using a self-referential definition, effectively "it's a pig tile because it's a pig tile".
To be honest I can't see what the issue is; officially pig tile or no, you can play it any way you like. That's one of the things I love about Carcassonne. I also don't understand your refection of Jay's ruling - since he produced it isn't he the one who should say what it is? Would you reject rulings made by the producers of fan-made expansions simply because they aren't HiG?

Regardless, you seem to be very worked up about this. I might bow out of the debate now before it gets heated.

I am not worked up :) I guess that sometimes the language barrier will rear its ugly head and make me look more agitated than I am.

Another analogy is: "let's call a spade a spade" (http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/call+a+spade+a+spade). In the link it says it might be offensive, which I have never heard of before. Why would it be that?


Yes, I would. Not that I use any fan expansions. C suffers from too many expansions.

By produce, do you mean design or make the tiles? The expansion was published by a now dead game magazine, and there were, as earlier mentioned, no rules included.

I can play it the way I want to, but when teaching the rules to someone and saying: "you will get extra points for a farm with a pig herd on it, unless it is a pig herd with cows, which will not yield any points, since ... well, I do not know why, but I guess cows are evil", and then someone will point to another tile with cows and ask if those cows also are evil, and I will have to say that, "no, they are not; cows are only evil if mixed with pigs, but I still do not know why that is so", and so on. I would feel really stupid.

How do people who do not play it as a pig herd tile rationalise it?


I would still think it was a stupid ruling, but yes, I would accept it as official. I would still not play it that way though.


Yes. Sometimes Jay's word is disregarded, and sometimes they are the rule. Granted he did it right with the insult that was Graf, König und Konsorten, and instead published something else. Apart from that though he pretends that he does not even know there are differnet editions of the rules. In the CAR Jay's rules has always been second rate compared to HiG's.

Again: The GQ11 did not come with any rules, because no rules were necessary.


I have no reason to distrust Matt – far from it. That is not the intent of these ravings.  :)

Tobias, I noticed by your frequent repetition of this sentiment, that you seem to feel very strongly about this issue.  You are not required to purchase any new expansions, or are you a completionist and find this to be a moral dilema?  ;) 

Perhaps this is a new topic.

Oh, yes!  :'2

Not only that though. Since expansions (almost) never are designed with other expansions in mind, there is bound to be collisions. In Carcassonne the CAR is the result of that, and speaks for itself. In other games, such as for example Arkham Horror, the game gets either too diluted or completely bogged down.

But, yeah, this should maybe be split to its own topic. I will give it some thougt.

It could be offensive because, historically, the term "spade" was a derogatory term for an African American, it is still offensive if used to refer to a person, but is not offensive when referring to the farming tool or card suit. So don't call a person a "spade" and there should be no issue of offending then, at least in terms of the word "spade".