Review Glory to Rome

Review

Glory to Rome

Cambridge Game Factory

Designed by Carl Chudyk

The Spin:  “The seriously strategic strategy card game”

The Story:  Players of Glory to Rome take on the roll of Patricians who are hoping to play a large role in the rebuilding of Rome after it has been burned down in the great fire of 64 A.D.  Through the course of the game, players recruit patrons, gather material, build infrastructure and increase their wealth and influence in order to come out on top. 

The Play:  The rules to Glory to Rome are not particularly complex.  There are a small number of options available each turn which are further limited by the cards the player has in hand.  Those cards, however, are complex in that each card can serve multiple functions according to what the player wants to do.  Assuming the player doesn’t simply pass in order to draw more cards, he or she can choose to play a card that represents one of the game’s six roles (patron, laborer, architect, craftsman, legionary, or merchant).  The other players, in turn, decide whether to follow the action (assuming they also have the matching role card) or pass and draw cards.  Then, starting with the lead player, each player takes the action associated with the role.  The starting player card is then passed to the left and the next round begins. 

My Take:  Glory to Rome can be a hard game to wrap your mind around.  There are forty different buildings, many of which can interact in complex ways.  Once a player has a couple of buildings and a few clients in play, turns can be complex and confusing, especially for new players.  On top of the combinations, Glory to Rome features a number of different paths to victory.  It can be a lot to wrap your head around.  That said, the game is filled with interesting, meaningful choices.  Each game feels different.  In other games of this type, one broken (read: too powerful) card can ruin the game.  Glory to Rome has dozens of cards that can be broken when combined with another card.  Really, every card could likely be part of a three-card combo that would seem abusive.  Given this, the game isn’t for everyone.  For me, trying to find combos for the buildings is a blast.  I love winning by fielding some ridiculous combo, and, more importantly, I enjoy the game even when it is my opponent that puts the powerful combo into play.  If you like tactical games and don’t mind a bit of chaos, Glory to Rome is a must-own.  If, instead, you like your card games to be perfectly balanced, I’d play GtR before buying it.

Similar Games:  Glory to Rome will remind players of San Juan and Race for the Galaxy.  It has many more combinations that San Juan and is far more chaotic than Race.  Huge fans of either of those games should definitely check out Glory to Rome.

Score: 9/10

Nerdblogger Dan

Ebert Backs Off a bit on the Video Games as art issue

Unlike other blogs, we didn't get all that upset at Roger Ebert and his "video games will never be considered art" post a while back.  Still, as we said at the time, history will likely prove Ebert wrong as it does nearly everyone who claims to have some sure vision of the future.  Because Ebert is a smart and thoughtful critic, he has published a bit of a mea culpa, basically saying that he doesn't know enough about the genre to be taking shots at it.  You can read the whole article here:

Ebert's Mea Culpa

Here is the Game of Thrones trailer for those that missed it:

Winter Is Coming

The Language of the Dothraki

In my constant search for news about HBO's upcoming Game of Thrones series, I came across this article in Scientific American about the creation of the Dorthraki (a race of horse-riding, war-prone nomads in the novels) language.  This may be more interesting to me because I'm an English professor and a word nerd, but check it out and let us know what you think.

The Dothraki response to a call for science in a created language

Guillermo del Toro leaves The Hobbit

The Associated Press is reporting the Guillermo del Toro has quit the production of The Hobbit over what it calls production delays.  The bigger news in the article is the reason behind these delays, which is that MGM is holding up the production with the haggling over their portion of the rights to the property.  It is no secret that MGM is struggling financially, and it seems they are trying to milk The Hobbit rights for all they are worth.  That is understandable, but I doubt it is in their financial interests to run a talented, passionate director off the project with their delays.  Clearly MGM and all involved make more money if the films are blockbusters, and having a director like del Toro at the helm seems the best way to guarentee that they are done right and live up to Producer Peter Jackson's legacy.  The good news is that the AP article does state that del Toro will continue to work with Jackson and Walsh on the screenplays to the proposed two films.  I hope this is a sign that he might be ready to jump back on board when the project eventually gets the green light.

Here is the AP article in its entirety at The Boston Herald.

So, what do you think?  Is del Toro's departure the nail in the coffin for a troubled project or is this just a bump in the road?