First Impressions Of Forbidden Stars

Well, I got this game, and I've played. Not as much as I would like, but I have.So, here are my opinions after only three games and a lot of rules mistakes(1). Buckle up.

Overview

Forbidden Stars is perhaps best compared to Fantasy Flight's highly strategic Game of Thrones boardgame, only with drastically expanded combat mechanics. Or alternatively, a simplified Eclipse where player actions are declared in secret. Victory comes by claiming the most objective tokens by turn 8, or as befits 40k, genocide. Players get a pool of order tokens which are placed on a star system faced down, resolved on a last on, first off basis. While players only get to place 4 of these tokens, each player gets a choice of which system to remove a token of theirs from. This means you can not only bluff, but stall enemy actions too. Increasing the general feeling of mistrust are the Warp Storms, which act as usually impenetrable barriers, which players move during the clean up step. Lines of battle therefore shift constantly. Moving between planets meanwhile does not necessarily demand ships, but frequent patches of open space do, and the game makes movement in allied territory impossible. Diplomacy is strictly a matter of "you go that way, I'll go that way", informal and outside rules mechanics, so the four player games I have played reminded me of Game Of Thrones in a bad way. The introductory map intermingles each players forces and objective tokens, meaning that neutral territory doesn't exist and players end up with units isolated from the rest of their forces. This caused some annoyance for myself and others and I wonder if a slightly more segmented map would solve it.

However, I've come to conclusion this is not so much bad game design as an attempt to make players more ruthless, something that doesn't come to me easily, as there are legitimate tactical reasons to have harnessing units near enemy territory. Turtling seems a really bad idea in the game overall, as people can just plonk an order token on a system, preventing you from acting until they want you to. Plus there's an 8 turn limit, and its rather easy to develop a clever plan that gets invalidated by enemy action. In the singular two player game I've played, were we ditched the introductory map, in favour of the alternating tile placement method. This resulted in a less stressful game, although how much of that could be a result of smaller playing field and fewer players is unclear. Trying the same thing with four players could just easily create a similar mess as the introductory map. While I definitely want to play this game more, I want to see how it plays with fewer players the most.

In either case, this game takes a fricking long time to play, at least one hour per player, plus another hour to explain and set up.

The Fighting
Actual combat is fairly brutal and surprisingly involved, as fits the setting. Players roll a number of dice based on the units in the combat, and then take three rounds applying a card to these results, attacker, then defender. Combat can end either by slaughter, or via Morale, which is slightly more involved. Units are only destroyed if a unit takes max damage in a single round, if they take less, they are Routed, and stop contributing to the battle, but the damage doesn't carry over. Damage is caused by the bolter symbol on dice and card, blocked one for on by shields. Morale victories happen when based on the number of unrouted, whom contribute their Morale rating, plus the value of cards and dice. Cards also have triggered abilities based on the units doing the actual fighting, which is probably the most important thing about the,

There a big element of deckbuilding to all this, each player have a combat deck which they can customise and forms the bulk of their offensive power. Improving your deck, and building the better units that trigger the card abilities, seems more important than sheer numbers and the actual dice roll. Due to the capacity of sectors merely spamming units at people doesn't work, as if a planet is full, the extra units die. The disposable and easily used Reinforcement Tokens fulfil this roll, and while they only really exist to catch bullets, they do make entry level infantry a bit obsolete. The interplay of cards between opposing players meanwhile make a vast different to combat results, as their effects are more consistent and predictable than the dice. A combat deck consists of 5 pairs of cards, which you shuffle and draw 5 from for each combat. Once you have replaced at least two of these pairs, you will have a critical advantage as you are all but guaranteed to draw one of those cards, and failing to properly maintain my deck lost me many battles(2). In using the Strategise Order to purchase these, you also get the benefit of the Event Deck, which often grants a combat related bonus, and also ties into Warp Storms.

The Different Armies

While there is some similarities between these forces to start with, the differences become much more pronounced as they upgrade their combat deck and purchase new orders. Playing pieces are rated in three ways with standardised costs, so its easy to make generalisations, but that's a mistake. Here's an overview what of they seem to do.

Ultra Marines: The generic best at everything guys, marines start out as slightly defensive, but don't stay that way. Their dominate order allows they to side step usual unit restrictions, and replace weaker Scouts with regular Marines, and those with Land Raiders. Marines also have a close relationship with Bastions, A.K.A fortresses, and be quite mobile, depending on the options chosen.

World Eaters: Much more aggressive than loyalists, the chaos units tend to be more about murder, while their Combat Deck tends to have unusual mechanics. These fellows are largely unconcerned with warp storms, as they can place cultists easily on unoccupied worlds via their Dominate order, and have a card that allows safe passage through them. The four marks of chaos are in evidence, although Morale is something this army can have issue with in comparison to the loyalists.

Craftworld Iyanden: The glass hammer force, the pointy ears have less physical models than the other forces, but tend to be extremely hard hitting and mobile. This is evidenced by their very high number of ships relative to the other armies, six basic ships to three, meaning they easily take control of void areas, whereas for other armies its more of a considered decision. Also, their Dominate order is arguably the best in the game, as it allows you to move a single ground unit from the chosen system to any friendly world.

Evil Suns: Big, green, and with the subtlety of half a brick in a sock, the Ork army is all about the brute force. Ork units vary in their strengths, and aren't usually brilliant with Morale, but can usually dish out and receive a lot of damage. The whole “more boyz than bullets” thing meanwhile is represented by Ork having various cards that tie into Reinforcement Tokens, with one free at start up, with their Dominate order allowing a ground unit to be built without a factory. Orkz however don't get a ship at start up, and are the weakest force in space.

Initial Conclusions?

Worth a go, certainly. And its more fun than I had with the Warhammer 40K Minitatures game in a while.

Images Copyright Fantasy Flight, Sourced from their website.

Foot Notes

1. There's two rulebooks, one a “learn to play” and a “reference”. This didn't always help.
2. That and having an embarrassing interaction between mine and my opponents cards.