One thing we got wrong our first couple times is we'd pay spice to revive up to 3 extra troops *in addition* to whatever free revivals the faction has, instead of just paying spice to get up to 3 troop revivals total.

Great video Jack! Please when you release part 2 to this, Explain why it's important that Treachery cards don't in a battle and can be used multiple times in the same battle phase. I've had friends argue with me that it's okay to houserule them to lock, when in reality it completely changes the mechanic of the game and makes Harkonnen at the very least twice as strong!

Thanks a lot for the video! My suggestion for a part 2 would be a discussion on how various factions interact with each other (say Harconnen's card drawing Atreide's card knowledge vs Ixian's 'have seen the cards' or Fremen's free revival and Tleilaxu income)

Great video! For part 2, I'd suggest mentioning that the Fremen cannot ship normally, they can only ship using their special free shipment. I see this one misplayed often because people think the Fremen's forces being on the planet already is just flavor text and the fact that forces can only be shipped from off-planet is easily missed.

Great series, thanks Jack!

We always let fremens ship outside their free range normally, paying to the guild but I recently learned they can't do that.

Love the video ideia! really helpful

Great… I asked the official support about HMS spice collecting, and they confirmed “sector”… It was strange to me, a bit op, but they said. So, they were wrong. 🙃

Thanks a lot for starting this series! This will improve our plays quite a bit. However, I am still a little confused about the HMS collection. So when you move the HMS, you always point at a specific sector in the destination territory. You are free to point to a non-spice sector of a spice territory and still collect the spice. You can end your HMS movement in any sector, your choice is not limited to the spice sector. But now that you explicitly point out being in a "territory" is sufficient for collection rather than "sector", I have this question: Imagine the storm is splitting Cielago North in half. There is still some spice in the right (spice) sector of Cielago North. The HMS is positioned in the left (non-spice) sector of Cielago North. Can it collect the spice in Cielago North (through the storm)? Technically I am in this "territory" now and by your explanation I need not be in the correct "sector". Is Cielago North in this case considered to be two separate "territories" for all purposes as long as its cut by the storm? And if so, what if a sandworm were to appear in Cielago North while being split in the same way as before, would forces on the other side of the storm (in the left (non-spice) sector of Cielago North) be eaten? Or could fremen ride a worm from the other side of the storm?

Question on bribes: We played a game where Choam and Empire were in play and we had a round where Choam activated it’s token for no Choam charity. The rules state that no bribes can be made during this round of play. A faction allied with the empire was relying on the Empire’s spice to buy treachery cards, but I made the argument that the empire should not be able to gift his teammate spice during this round for a card and the spice end up basically back with the emperor. So during this round would the ally have to only use spice already in his/her bank for a card?

Easy to overlook is: somebody lost 4 leaders, the 5th one is abducted by Harkonnen and yes, in that case you can start reviving the other remaining leaders.

I have a question about the karama card buy rule. If you buy a karama card (or useless card as BG) and that brings your hand to 4 cards you still are not allowed to buy the card with the karama card? I perceived the rule as players who are have a full hand are not part of the bidding round and can not use karama card to buy because they are not part of the bidding round. But if your fill your hand during the round to 4 you would be allowed to buy cards with the karama card

What would happen if the BG bid above their held amount of spice for a bid, and then use a worthless card as a karama card to get it for free, but then another player uses a karama card to stop the BG from using that faction ability?

This was helpful, but I have another question. Are there certain factions that should always be in the game? Especially with the expansions? It seems like the Atreides, Spacing Guild, Fremen, and maybe Harkonnen should always be in the game. I am talking about 5-6 player games (cuz why would you play with any fewer). We played our last game without Atreides and Harkonnen, and having Carthaag and Arakeen open at the beginning didn't seem right, CHOAM/Spacing Guild won easily in round 2.

Questions around your bonus with the karama card allowing you to bid up without revealing it. Are you allowed to bid past the amount of spice you have because in the case you win you have the karama to cover you? And that's what you mean when you say you can bid up without revealing it, in the case that you lose the bid. What is the last possible point to interject in an auction with a karama card? If all but one player has passed and the winner is clear can you still steal it, or does the auction need to be ongoing with at least 2 bidders still in.

Thanks!! Buying info on the current card in the market from the Atreides, is it a payment or bribe?

Hey Jack, Just confirming. Im in a battle with an opponent, I play a 5 point leader, they play a 3 point leader. I beat them, but we both kill each others leader. I would receive 8 spice as the winner?

good video ) Suggesting for next topic to discuss it's a 'voice' / ww not a shield / BG advising/BG advising with ally / choam charity with BG/without / karama deprecation worthless card playing like karama by BG

Aggressor order...I understand how it works. What I don't understand is why this rule exists. Does defining Aggressor by storm-order effect play in some meaningful way? Other than an arbitrary means of determining who the aggressor is? And if it is just a mechanism to define who is the aggressor, then why not actually define aggressor and defender by who attacked and whose defending? That would make far more sense to me and gives a slight advantage to the more aggressive player. Unless I'm missing some underlying effect to the storm-order definition?