In this two-person game by Samuel W. Bailey and Mike Gnade (Giant Roc), the prosecution and defense sit face to face (likely in the truest sense of the word) and listen to witnesses in order to convince the jury of the truth in question. It has the side to pull.
Each party has a deck of cards of influence, the so-called trial pile, which is played during cross-examination. It represents the influence lawyers gain (or lose) through questioning. Mile symbols with different numbers and symbols are located on the cards.
Each side has a certain number of witnesses available, which is determined by the rules of the game. Prosecution witnesses give them a head start in sway, just as defense witnesses on their side give them the bonus of sway. The current effect is always shown for both ends on the turntable.
How does interception work? A duel of lawyers?
One witness is placed in the middle and then the two parties take turns placing the cards from their hands on the witness’s side. In addition to the value that increases the effect as much as possible, the decisive factors are the slope symbols at the top of the card, which must match each other in order for the cards to be placed. Some cards (“Ways”) can also be placed for activation at a later time. To do this, you usually have the right to speak, that is, the judge is more focused on you than on the other party at the moment. These method cards offer various advantages such as: b. That you can retrieve cards from your trash pile, which is a nice feature depending on the state of the game, since the cards being played are already out of the game.
Since each side only has five cards at the beginning of the turn, the turn may end after each player’s fifth card is played. This ends with a witness being questioned, and whoever is able to exert more influence on him (sum of values on cards + possibly special effects through adjustments) wins the witness for himself and allows him to judge the difference between them. Special effect value and discount effect value.
The game ends after all witnesses have been questioned. Not who can influence the most witnesses, but who can win the most jurors for himself wins the game.
The topic is curious
objection! The duel of lawyers draws attention to itself first through its subject matter. Without knowing what the game mechanics had to offer, the title aroused my curiosity, as it stands out from the usual monotony. I was a bit sober to find that the mechanism is indeed present in abundance. Games like classic Caesar and Cleopatra (Cosmos), or the latest version Thalara (Wredespiele) and Rest in peace (Blue Cocker) and in the basics revolution in rome Cosmos offers neither more nor less. Certainly, the graphics are beautiful, the cards are of good quality, and the rules of the game are complete and understandable. Two cards initially contained errors, but they have since been redeemed – without order – by the publisher, as far as customers have been reached. It is doubtful whether the theme is enough to distinguish itself from other games in this genre.
What an attractive objection! A duel of lawyers?
objection! The duel of lawyers is a bit unequal. Some kind of crafting at the beginning of the game ensures that you collect part of your process (and at the same time part of the opposing process). The attraction should lie in the fact that players do not fight with the same weapons due to the different distribution of cards, but have the same chance of winning as a result. The variability of the course of the game is only slightly affected by this. There is another very dominant mechanism for this: the slope symbols on the top edge of the card determine whether two cards can be placed directly next to each other. If there is at least one match (out of six possible matches), you can create it. As a result, both the selection itself and the order in which the five cards are placed mainly depend on whether and how they fit together. If you only have three cards that fit together somehow and no card allows you to ignore the slope symbols, the “selection” is already done.
Code of Criminal Procedure
Each player has a strong trump (or three of them) on the veto – which then leaves the German CPL. Once the witness has been cross-examined, one may, so to speak, crush the debit card using an objection mark. As long as the opponent still has at least one of his three marks, you always run the risk of missing out on a strong argument. Here you can (must) move forward strategically and try to deceive to get rid of the opponent’s weapons.
The basic version contains an objection! Lawyers duel are “two cases” in which the jurists employ each other. Specific witnesses are selected and the goal of the game is chosen. Two more cases are now available. While the cases themselves do not imply a change in the course of the game, different strategies regarding the goal of the game are still a factor that can cause a change in the course of the game. Therefore, you can play these states over and over again. Other judges, who are more open to one or the other, change the course of the game. However, tilt symbols such as alpha and omega in the argument remain an obstacle.
Get me off the chair! So no. The stages in which you try to improve the order of your cards at hand have the potential for reflection, which comes at the expense of playing time. However, true optimization rarely succeeds. You might be hoping for additional effects that some cards make possible. If you are lucky and are allowed to draw more cards, which in turn have additional effects, a kind of chain lever will appear. If you can expect it, that would be great. But you can’t. So it remains a coincidence. Other games of this type have solved this better.
“Travel maven. Beer expert. Subtly charming alcohol fan. Internet junkie. Avid bacon scholar.”