Star Wars Card Games and others
- Thread starter Raptor98
- Start date
KalElKenobi1138
New Member
@TB-7027 I made a more print friendly version https://docs.google.com/document/d/11GIc2XA-bB8dimTjBX_vN2oeZ8ZXFCZv8ihIj9K2Bgk/edit?usp=sharing
I also have been working on my own version of more EU accurate rules. However, The ordering of the panels is wrong on the 2nd page and I'm currently at work so I can't fix it right now.
I might move the game credits to make room for a bigger Winning Hands section
I also have been working on my own version of more EU accurate rules. However, The ordering of the panels is wrong on the 2nd page and I'm currently at work so I can't fix it right now.
I might move the game credits to make room for a bigger Winning Hands section
Last edited:
LordGalaxian
New Member
It was a screen capture of what I made, its meant to be more of a model of what an instruction book might look like, there have been others below who have made more official versions of it.
LordGalaxian
New Member
The rules you made are almost great, but the rules have a lot of classic Sabacc in it, for example, in the book you put 23 or -23 as the winning hand, but in this version a winning hand is 0.
- - - Updated - - -
Here's an update on the rules!
This French YouTube channel asked the story group about the card values and they answered
View attachment 830840
Here is my version of the rules:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k4KbfVqM7OTXEqv1DlP6VXBgL7-laHLSWqIoJsWr1ek/edit?usp=sharing
And here is a document everyone can edit so whe can improve the rules.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IhfjjY2htHlR-wshdWWET-S6SNcHnrR6tUkapG05Oy0/edit?usp=sharing
I'm a big fan of the rules posted on the open doc, I'll give them a test run. But if we can all agree on them, we can make an official printable instruction sheet for everyone to have.
EDIT:
After giving the rules posted by TB-7027 a test run, I'm fully on board with making those rules final.
So after playing the game myself I had a few questions/ideas for the game.
I don't think we have agreed on how the Sabacc Pot is won, and I think it's probably a little late to bring up, but I don't think there is even a Sabacc pot in Corellian Spike at all, in the movie there is only ever one pot on the table, not 2. Maybe we should consider taking that out unless we can find an official source saying that there is indeed a Sabacc Pot. Anyhow, if we do include it I like the idea of it being won if a player wins with a 0 hand including a Sylop.
After reading up on the rules again, I'm just a little confused about how the betting phase is supposed to work, as I understand it, players can make bets at anytime.
To be clear, when do players make bets exactly?
Last edited:
Byroson89
New Member
The visual guide to solo says there are 2 pots. Also in regards to people saying this is the "new canon version of sabacc" and not the real version......sabacc is still sabacc. The old version is still canon. It talks about them playing in the books. This is just Coreillian Spike variant of Sabacc. Therefore, I want to try and figure out a deck of cards that work for both games...and quite possibly for pazaak as well.
disneyjedi87
New Member
Here's an update on the rules!
This French YouTube channel asked the story group about the card values and they answered
View attachment 830840
Here is my version of the rules:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k4KbfVqM7OTXEqv1DlP6VXBgL7-laHLSWqIoJsWr1ek/edit?usp=sharing
And here is a document everyone can edit so whe can improve the rules.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IhfjjY2htHlR-wshdWWET-S6SNcHnrR6tUkapG05Oy0/edit?usp=sharing
Haha. I was just about to post about this. I’ve been checking Leland Chee’s Twitter sporadically to see if the question came up. Yay Story Group.
KalElKenobi1138
New Member
Thank you. the EU version has Pure Sabacc set at +/-23 and in those versions the Sabacc Pot is won only with an Idiots Array or Pure Sabacc. I think TB-7027's rules should have the Sabacc Pot being won by the Sylop Spike, Full Sabacc, and Straight Staves hands.
disneyjedi87
New Member
I know the visual guide says the Sabacc pot was won with a score of zero, but I feel that comes up much easier then the 23 of traditional. I imagine the placement of special hands would best out any tie.
Scratch
New Member
I added page numbers (useful for those who wish to print these out). Also, I'm not sure if I agree with adding the rule about discarding a card without first taking a card from the draw pile or the discard pile (Draw Phase 2.d.). That seems too easy to get yourself closer to a zero and contradicts the rules in the Han Solo Card Game (which seems to be the basis for this version of Sabacc).
LordGalaxian
New Member
Well you can’t discard until you already drew a card, you have to have 3 cards before you can discard one.
Scratch
New Member
Yes, but the "Han Solo Card Game" rules don't allow you to discard at all unless you first pick up a card from the discard or draw pile. The shared Google Doc indicates that you can discard a card without drawing one so long as you have 3+ cards in your hand. I prefer the official HSCG game rules, which provides a more risk/reward scenario every time you pick a card. If you can just discard cards without taking one, it's much easier to get a zero (albeit with lesser cards).
TB-7021's version of the rules seem to favor the HSCG approach as well.
TB-7021
Sr Member
My intention is to keep that rule in. You can't discard a card without first drawing one. I might have to rephrase that in the doc.
Hi! While the rules look really good so far regarding the gameplay, I still got some problems with the ranking.
I don't know if a Sylop should be mandatory for any hand (except the "Sylop Spike", of course)
Thus I would call a total of zero with four cards of the same value a "Full Sabacc".
In case of a draw, a hand with an additional Sylop will always beat an identical hand without one. This would still be canon with the movie (as it explains, why in either game the player with the Sylop wins), yet would be a more consistent way of ranking the hands (imo).
Would really like to hear your opinions on that one!
As for the pots: The movie as well as the HSCG don't seem to mention any different types of pots. So I'd be fine with a single pot like traditional Poker.
This would also relieve us from the problem of defining the special hands for the Sabacc-Pot.
(P. S. I haven't done any edits in the doc yet! Wanted to discuss the issue with you guys first!)
I don't know if a Sylop should be mandatory for any hand (except the "Sylop Spike", of course)
Thus I would call a total of zero with four cards of the same value a "Full Sabacc".
In case of a draw, a hand with an additional Sylop will always beat an identical hand without one. This would still be canon with the movie (as it explains, why in either game the player with the Sylop wins), yet would be a more consistent way of ranking the hands (imo).
Would really like to hear your opinions on that one!
As for the pots: The movie as well as the HSCG don't seem to mention any different types of pots. So I'd be fine with a single pot like traditional Poker.
This would also relieve us from the problem of defining the special hands for the Sabacc-Pot.
(P. S. I haven't done any edits in the doc yet! Wanted to discuss the issue with you guys first!)
Last edited:
Byroson89
New Member
The two pots wouldn't be a problem with full sabacc being the defined absolute zero. Or sylop spike being defined as absolute zero. That would allow the big pot to be won once or twice a game. That could turn the tide for a player down on their luck because the pot could be so big that they could be the dominant player by time they won it.
TB-7021
Sr Member
@Muddler, I agree on the ranking, there are still some problems there. Not sure if we should take the Sylop out of the Full Sabacc.
Maybe a Sabacc is the same as a Full Sabacc, but without the Sylop? Where do we position the Straits in the ranking?
After some playtesting I do believe the Sabacc pot works. The Visual Dictonary says that when you win a round with a value of zero, you get the Sabacc pot. This worked yesterday while play testing.
I've added these comments to the doc as well:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IhfjjY2htHlR-wshdWWET-S6SNcHnrR6tUkapG05Oy0/edit
Maybe a Sabacc is the same as a Full Sabacc, but without the Sylop? Where do we position the Straits in the ranking?
After some playtesting I do believe the Sabacc pot works. The Visual Dictonary says that when you win a round with a value of zero, you get the Sabacc pot. This worked yesterday while play testing.
I've added these comments to the doc as well:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IhfjjY2htHlR-wshdWWET-S6SNcHnrR6tUkapG05Oy0/edit
Ah! You're right! The Dictionary clearly mentions the Sabacc-Pot!
OK, so if playtesting shows that a total of zero is also practically a good condition for winning the Sabacc pot - that's cool!
But shouldn't we then also call any total of zero a "Sabacc"? This would be consistent with the "Original Sabacc Rules"...
I know we still got the problem with ranking the hands.
I guess the Straight should be ranked higher than any "unordered Sabacc". Therefore "Straight Staves" can simply be seen as the highest form of a Straight. (In case of multiple Straights you simply rank them by their highest card). Now that we know, that the "10" is the face card with the lance-like patterns this might be the reason for this being called "Staves". (instead of being confused with the suit of classic Sabacc)
The mentioned "Full Sabacc" is a little harder, though. I don't know if they were trying to reference the hand to the "Full House" in Poker. Maybe that's why they were trying to combine five cards for this hand (which would actually give support to your version of including the Sylop as a mandatory part of this hand).
It's really hard to decide...
Other people's thoughts on that issue?
Just an odd thought. What about the suits (triangles, squares, circles)? Would an on-suit hand beat an equal off-suit hand?
I suspect the only reason we haven't seen mention of it is because the Hasbro game only has triangles, but it could help to reduce the possibility of a draw.
I suspect the only reason we haven't seen mention of it is because the Hasbro game only has triangles, but it could help to reduce the possibility of a draw.
TB-7021
Sr Member
It is hard indeed, would love to hear more ideas on this.
Could be, story group said there are a lot more hands we haven't seen.
