by TwitchBot
Omahavice wrote:
When we were playing Agricola last night my buddy played an Occupation or Minor Improvement card that allowed him to get an extra family member without having an extra room. Later in the game when the Family Growth without Room action became available he played a Farmer there even though he still only had 2 rooms in his house. This gave him 4 family members with only 2 rooms. He said since the first one was the result of an Occupation/Minor Improvement card and this one was from the Action space that does not require an extra room, it was a legal play. I let him do it, because I already had 5 family members and was on the way to my highest score (50) since I started playing Agricola.
Was this a legal play?
Was this a legal play?
To expand on this question a little bit -
At least in the basic game, there are no rules about the number of family members that can be in each room. It's a common mistake to look backwards and worry about where a family member came from, and whether he "counts" as taking up a room. The game doesn't really work like that.
What there are instead are rules about when you may take a FAMILY GROWTH ACTION. In order to take a basic family growth action. You must have more rooms than people. However in order to take a family growth without room action, you simply have to have an unused person in your supply. It doesn't make any difference how many rooms you have, or where your previous family members came from. So you can always take FG w/o room if you have fewer than 5 people.
A few of the newest cards from the NL and WM decks may mess with this way of looking at it a little, but I think it's still the cleaner way to think of it.