Archives

Q: Does Double Agenda include the playing of a second Goal as part of it’s effect?

…Double Agenda says “A second Goal can now be played…” The person I was playing with thought this meant they automatically got to put a second Goal down as part of the Double Agenda play.

A: Double Agenda allows there to be two Goals at the same time, but playing a second Goal (or even first if you’re really early in the game!) still uses up one of your plays for your turn.

Q: What happens in Batman Fluxx if Double Agenda causes a Goal with a Villain AND a Goal without a Villain to be in play at the same time?

…One player put out the Double Agenda rule and set out 2 Goals. One of which required Batman and The Batsignal, the other Bane and Poison Ivy. A certain player ended up with both Batman and The Batsignal for the win, but the were other Creepers in play. Two of us were under the assumption that you couldn’t win with that particular Goal since it did not require a Creeper/Villain, and another person thought that because the Double Agenda card said “You win if you meet either Goal,” that a player could achieve the Batman/Batsignal Goal even though there were Creepers on the table.

A: Double Agenda does not remove the Creeper problem, it just means there are two Goals at once. All requirements for either Goal must be properly met. So if the Goal you are trying to meet also requires that you have no Creepers (as the Batman/BatSignal goal does) then you can’t win unless you can get rid of those Creepers before the Goal changes again.

So yes, you do win if you meet either Goal… but to win with the Batman/Batsignal Goal, part of the winning condition that must be met is that there be no Villains anywhere else on the table (unless Elsewhere In Gotham City is in play, of course).

Q: When using a card that moves when the Goal is changed, what happens when you add a second Goal for Double Agenda? What about when it goes away?

A: For cards like the Radioactive Potato or Larry the Zombie, we would rule that the Goal, as a set, has been changed if you:

• Go from zero Goals to one
• Change one Goal out for another
• Go from one Goal to two
• Change one of the two Goals
• Go from two Goals to one
• Go from one goal to zero

All of these things would be considered a change in the Goal. The cards that could make that last situation happen may not be in Zombie Fluxx or Fluxx 4.0, but there is at least one card out there that can make that happen.

Q: What happens if a Goal and UnGoal are met at the same time?

… We were playing Cthulhu Fluxx, and what complicates things is that my wife had the Secret Cultist, so she would win if the UnGoal overrides the Goal, but my son would have won with the Goal if that overrides the UnGoal. [Note from Looney Labs, in Cthulhu Fluxx, a simultaneous Goal and UnGoal could arise from either Double Agenda or The Stars Are Right. Zombie Fluxx and Martian Fluxx could also generate this condition since they both have Double Agenda and an UnGoal. Zombie Fluxx also has the Zombie Boss Rule which can make a player win in the case of the UnGoal being met.]

A: Well, this IS a doozy. Andy and I had to think this through carefully.

But in the end, the answer seems obvious: on the rule sheet itself, at end of the first page in “Notes” is the ruling for ties:

“The game doesn’t end until there is a clear winner. If for some reason two of more players meet the winning conditions simultaneously, the game continues until a single winner emerges.”

So, for your situation, the answer is actually fairly simple: there were two players meeting winning conditions simultaneously, so keep playing until a clear winner emerges. Note that the “clear winner” need not be one of the two originally tied. It could happen that someone else manages to break the tie and win instead of either one of them.

What got a little tricky for us, is that we also wanted to rule in cases where the Cultist/Secret Cultist/Zombie Boss wasn’t invoked, which is to say when there is one player winning, but the conditions for “all players losing” is also met. How could that be? Would we rule that there is only one player winning? Or would we rule that there is “no clear winner”, since that player should simultaneously be both winning and losing?

We went with the latter: If a Goal and UnGoal are met simultaneously, then, even if there is not an actual player that can claim victory in the case of the UnGoal conditions, having the UnGoal met is like having the “forces of evil” be the winner. So if a player meets the winning condition, they are actually tied with “the forces of evil” , thus play would continue until a clear winner emerges.

In a way, all that the Cultist/Secret Cultist/Zombie Boss does is make an actual player represent those forces of evil, thereby claiming that victory.

Q: Can I mix two decks of Fluxx to play with twice as many people?

A: Well, you could… But (except for mixing the two Star Trek Fluxx decks*) we don’t recommend it, actually. No matter how many versions we publish, we really don’t encourage people to play Fluxx with more than 6 players. The problem is not the number of cards. When you have that many people playing, it can take a really long time waiting for your turn to come around again, and this significantly reduces the fun of the game. If you have more than 6 people who want to play, we always simply suggest that you split the group and play two separate games. All that said, some people do choose to mix decks, or stretch the game to include more people.

Also, wholesale mixing of entire decks can raise some issues. Though we have deliberately designed all Fluxx versions to have the same back so you can mix and match cards, particularly promo cards, not all versions “play well together”. For example, in Martian Fluxx, most of the Creepers are Humans. What do you do when you mix a different deck where there are Keepers who are Humans? Are they Creepers now?

Another issue is the dilution of the Keeper to Goal balance. Although most of the Rules and Actions are quite flexible, the specific Goal set in any given version is designed to go with the Keeper set. So it’s harder to get Keeper sets that match the Goals which come up, since half the Goals only go with half the Keepers. One solution we’ve thought of, but not tried, is to use Double Agenda like a Meta-Rule, which is to say, a Rule which is permanently in play throughout the entire game. That way there is more of a chance that the Goal you need will come up to match your Keepers.

* The difference with the Star Trek decks is that they have so many analagous cards (both have a Captain, Engineer, Transporter, phasers, Enterprise, etc…) that it was just a no-brainer to make them combinable, and we even made an expansion to assist in that, called the Bridge Pack. HOWEVER, we still advise against playing with more than the six people recommended, for that simple reason first stated: it gets to be boring waiting for your turn to come around.

Q: What do we do with the Goal and UnGoal when The Stars Are Right is taken out of play?

How do we decide which one to keep?

A: The situation is just like resolving the two Goals that result from Double Agenda: whoever got rid of the Rule allowing the double Goal/Ungoal situation gets to decide which to keep, and which to toss.

UNLESS Cosmic Agenda is also in play (which forces you to play UnGoals). In that case, you should be forced to keep the UnGoal in play, and trash the Goal, because this is analagous to having to play the UnGoal.

Q: If Double Agenda is on the table, and each Goal requires a different Creeper can you win by fulfilling both Goals?

For example, if the Goals were He Bravely Ran Away (requires the 3-Headed Giant) and Rabbits of DOOM (requires the Killer Rabbit).

A: No, not if they are two different Creepers like this. The 3-Headed Giant you need to win with He Bravely Ran Away prevents you from winning with Rabbits of DOOM, while the Killer Rabbit you need for that prevents you from winning with He Bravely Ran Away.

Q: What if two people simultaneously meet the win condition/s?

This could happen with Double Agenda in effect. For example, in a 2-player game, if the goals are Star Gazing and Time is Money. Player A has The Eye and Time in play while Player B has The Cosmos and Money. Player A plays Exchange Keepers and exchanges The Eye for Money. Is the game over, with two winners, or must it continue until one and only one player has a winning condition?

This could also happen with 10 Cards In Hand

A: You would keep playing until only one player currently meets the win condition.