Web of Power

From: Rio Grande Games List Price: $30 Players: 3-5 Playing Time: 45 minutes  Type of game: Family Strategy Skill level: 7 Complexity: 3  Reviewed by: Matthew Baldwin, Issue 24, September 2000

I knew immediately that getting Web of Power was a mistake. I mean, a literal mistake. I had ordered Konig & Intrigant from an online game store, and they had erroneously sent me Kardinal und Konig in it's place. When I told them of the error, they proposed that I keep the game and only pay them half price for it. Quite a bargain, that, but I was hesitant. For one thing, I was well over my game budget for the month. For another, the buzz from the Gathering of Friends was that K&K was Medieval Merchant Lite and "had the flavor of El Grande". My experience has been that new games that are described as being "like" older games are usually just watered-down imitations of same, and there's no point in owning them if you have the originals. So I logged onto the Internet, fully prepared to write the game company an email of respectful decline.

But two things changed my mind. First, while browsing game news on the Net, I discovered that earlier that morning Web of Power had been nominated for the Spiel des Jahres. I could feel my resolve crumbling. Then I happened to notice the "Number of Players" section on the (as of yet still unopened) box. While it said that Web of Power was suitable for 3-5 people, it also noted parenthetically that it was "very good for three players". A German game rated to five that worked well with three? This I had to see. So when I finally wrote my email, it was one of capitulation instead of decline. And I have no regrets. Web of Power turned out to be better than anything else in that game shipment, and has rapidly become one of my favorites and most played games.

The game is played on a map of Europe (circa the 12 century) divided into nine nations: Bayern and Burgund (both green), England and Schwaben (orange), Franken and Aragon (red), Lothringen and Italien (yellow) and Frankenreich (purple). Inside each nation are 4-8 small cloister icons and a central circle that bears the country's coat of arms. Roads connect cloisters to form a network that covers the continent. The deck of cards comes in five colors, with each suit bearing the name of the nation or nations that have the corresponding color on the board. Players start the game with three of these cards, 20 wooden house-shaped Cloisters and eight cylindrical Advisors. On a turn, a player may put one or two of his pieces into a single nation on the board. A single card can be used to put a piece into one of the nations shown on the card, or two identical cards may be used as a wild card to put a piece into any nation on the board. Cloisters go onto the cloister icons, while advisors are put into the nation's coat of arms. The player refills to three cards to end his turn.

The strategic content of Web of Power comes from the restrictions on piece placement, and an oh-so-clever scoring system. Each cloister icon can accommodate only one cloister. Once placed, a cloister is never removed.  Advisor placement has only one restriction, but it's probably the trickiest rule in the game. The total number of advisors on a nation's coat of arms cannot exceed the number of cloisters in the country that are owned by the player with the most cloisters in the country. For example, if Anna has two cloisters in Franken, Bill has one and Claire has three, the total number of advisors in Franken cannot exceed three (i.e. the number of cloisters owned by Claire, who has the most).

When the draw pile is exhausted the first time, an interim scoring round takes place. In each country, the player who owns the most cloisters receives points equal to all the cloisters in that country. The player in second place scores the number of cloisters owned by the first place player. The player in third place scores the number of cloisters owned by the second place player, and so on. So in the above example, Claire would get six points, Anna would get two and Bill would get one. In case of a tie, all the players receive the same rewards.

After the interim scoring round, the discards are shuffled to form a new draw pile and the game continues. When the draw deck is exhausted a second time, the game ends after a final scoring round. There are three components to the final scoring round. The first is cloister scoring, which is exactly as described above. The second is advisor scoring. There are 15 alliances connection shown on the board, each of which joins two countries. Most of these alliances are on the border between adjacent nations, but some connect over water (so even the island of England can get in on the action). If a player has the most advisors in both of the two nations in an alliance, he receives points equal to all the advisors in both nations. Finally, for each chain of four or more cloisters that a player owns, he receives points equal to all the cloisters in that chain.

Reading the rules, it's hard to get too excited about Web of Power— it sounds like all you do is put your pieces on the board and then score points at the end based on their location. And sure enough, your first play will confirm that this really is all there is to it. Granted, it's got some interesting gimmicks and an innovative scoring system, but is that really enough to overcome the fact that all you ever do is play cards and plunk down pieces? Surprisingly, the answer is an unequivocal "yes".

For one thing, where and what to play (cloisters vs. advisors) is rarely as obvious as it might seem. Unlike most games of this sort, players will receive points for each nation they have cloister in, not just those in which they are first or second. Having the most cloisters in a few nations is clearly a desirable position, but you might fare as well by coming in last place in all the nations. Not so with the advisors. If you have the most advisors in both nations of an alliance, you will score points; if you are second, or third, or last in either of the nations, you'll score nothing. It's crucial to remember this scoring distinction between cloisters and advisors at all times when you play. If you don't, another player will happily hammer the point home by acing you out of alliance points at the last moment.

Each time I have played Web of Power I have come away with a brand new strategy. After my first game, I was convinced that the advisors were essentially there to keep the game going after all the cloister spots were taken, but didn't contribute greatly to a person's score. After the second game I concluded that the key to winning was getting advisors into as many nations as possible. Then I decided that the trick was to concentrate advisors in a few, adjacent nations. Now I'm convinced that there is no sure win— you must adjust your strategy is response to what the other players are doing. The fact that I have come away from the table each time filled with new ideas for play—- and with a desire to try Web of Power again soon to test these theories out— is as good a sign as any that this game is a keeper.

The comparisons to El Grande and Medieval Merchant are inevitable, if not entirely accurate. The board, for example, looks quite a bit like the El Grande layout, complete with nine regions and a scoring track around the perimeter of the board. The cloisters are tiny wooden "houses" placed on key locations connected by roads— two elements you'd find in Medieval Merchant as well. Plus, all three games center around the placement of pieces on a map in an attempt to accrue victory points. But Web of Power generally plays in half the time of either, and is considerably less complex that the others. I admit that it did feel like El Grande Lite the first time I played it, but since then I've come to admire its distinctive qualities rather than its superficial resemblance to classics. And yes, it really is "very good for three players"— as well as four and five. In fact, I consider Web of Power to be the best game purchase I've made all year, accidental or otherwise.