Microteach: Tigris & Euphrates

What follows assumes

• you know Tigris & Euphrates,
• what a microteach is,
• the game is set up on the table normally except that
• the catastrophe tiles, monuments and player shields are set aside (simplify, enhance), and
• 2 kingdoms (one with red, black and green leaders, the other green and blue) are situated 2 tiles apart for an external conflict (enhance).

Microteach

The overview follows the original edition rules where cubes (not tokens) represented points and before the wonder and idol variants were added. It calls revolts and wars, respectively, internal and external conflicts, as they were once known.

The object is to get the most points. Points are scored in cubes. (Grab a few and place them in front of yourself.) I’ll show you several ways to get them. First, let’s see what you can do on a turn.

You get two actions, your choice. You can place a leader to the board (do so). Leaders may only ever be placed beside red tiles (point out the red tile). You can move your leader. (Pick up one and relocate it to a legitimate spot.) You can remove a leader (do so). Thus, there are 3 ways of “positioning” (air quotes) a leader. Or you can add tiles to the board (place a couple, legally, sensibly). You’ll usually only add tiles to a kingdom—this is a kingdom (point), and this (point)—where you have a leader present who matches the color of the tile just played. The reason for that is this is how you get cubes. The player who owns the leader gets the cube, regardless of who placed the tile. (Take a cube for each tile, tapping each on the played tile, then the leader of the matching color, before placing it into that leader’s tableau.) At the end of your turn, regardless of what 2 actions you chose, you refill your hand to 6 tiles.

Cubes are also earned in conflicts. There are two kinds: internal and external. A kingdom cannot, under any circumstance, support more than one leader in any given color (show the uniqueness of leaders in a kingdom). When it happens a conflict results. This is much of the game. Say someone wants to seize control of a kingdom (add a second leader of the same color to that kingdom). This problem must be resolved. Both leaders play red tiles from their hands to decide the outcome. The winner remains and earns red cubes (take a couple and place them in front of the winning player), while the loser is ejected from the board (remove his leader).

There are also external conflicts. These happen when kingdoms collide. (Point out two kingdoms on the verge and the couple spaces between them. Fill in those spaces with tiles taking care to place a unification tile on the last tile played.) This problem, too, must be resolved. Unlike the internal conflict, the players play tiles that match the color of the leaders involved in the conflict and to it add the tiles of that color already existing in their kingdoms (count out the strengths after laying some tiles from each involved leader in front of them). The difference, here, is not only does the loser get ejected—this leader lost (point to and remove him)—every tile that matched his color is destroyed (remove them). The winner gets a cube for each such destruction (take and show the appropriate cubes before placing them in front of the winning player). So you can see, the name of the game is cubes, but the twist is this. Your score is the number of cubes you have in your weakest color—and that can be zero!

Last thing: see these treasures (point them out). They’re wild. These go to the player who has the green leader in any kingdom with 2 or more treasures. And that can only happen when kingdoms merge. The game ends where there are only 2 treasures left on the board or when the bag of tiles is depeted. Whoever has the best score in his worst color wins! Ties are broken by second worst color and so on.

In accordance with Rule #1, it connects

• the means (positioning leaders, placing tiles, and winning conflicts) and
• the ends (cubes earned from growing kingdoms and winning conflicts).

Glaring omissions

• That there is a precise definition for what a kingdom is.
• That monuments and catastrophes exist.
• That an external conflict could result in multiple leader conflicts.
• That players can discard tiles.
• That conflicts favor the defender.
• That black leaders are a catch all for points.
• That cubes earned are shielded behind player screens.
• That all players, at the end of any one player’s turn, fill their hands back to 6 tiles.
• That blue tiles can only be placed on the rivers.
• That internal conflict strength is bolstered by red tile adjacencies.
• That colored tiles have names: temple (red), farms (blue), settlements (black), markets (green).

Commentary

The external conflict which was set up deliberately avoided having conflicts in more than a single color. The one conflict situated to happen is green (simplify, enhance).

It was important to avoid setting up a red external conflict (enhance) as that would’ve resulted in yet more red cubes being doled out as a reward. It seemed better to allow another color to be doled out to illustrate the difference.

Eliding momuments from the overview helped (simplify, enhance). What remained showcased a few vehicles by which a player earns points, even if monuments are an otherwise significant source. Monuments are not the main story.

Setting a game at the ready to explain something (e.g. setting up for an external conflict, keeping monuments in the box) takes only a minute and a bit of forethought, not a lot (enhance). Start by thinking of the distance needing covered. These overviews are neither planned nor rehearsed. They’re just technique and improvisation.

At the first mention of “kingdom” the concept wasn’t fleshed out. It didn’t need to be because it will eventually be, in the fuller explanation. Most looking at the board will understand that a blob of tiles one points at is a kingdom. He doesn’t need a definition (simplify) in the initial fly by.

In the overview, when the kingdoms unify, the unification tiles is used correctly. During an explanation, even when it’s grossly simplified, try to keep to doing things mostly correctly. It’s meant to paint a picture, even if some of the details of what’s happening exactly aren’t fleshed out. Remember, elision is master class what simplifying is about. Don’t give in to interruptions, especially here.

Two minutes to done is an important target to hit. The elucidater who has a solid handle on what he’s doing and why will be well on his way to hitting all the important notes. He can, therefore, politely and confidently set aside an interruption knowing the concern will be addressed. Preserve continuity and form the complete thought. It’ll hold together in a mind better, as a unit, if it’s completed without delay.

Tigris & Euphrates rates medium heavy. Regardless of game weight, any game’s critical core can be exposed in 2 minutes or less.

“Positioning (air quotes)” was used in the explanation to simplify the idea of manipulating a leader. To help the listener see the 3 similar options as one thing.

The terminology—priest, farmer, trader, king, temples, farms, settlements, markets, amulets, crops, bricks, goods—for leaders, tiles and cubes of different colors helps solidify theme and makes the game sound richer in the rulebook, but using these in an explanation is counterproductive. Call them red tiles, red cubes and so on. Share the flavor text after nailing the explanation, if at all.