Knizia, despite being an undisputed master of the modern two-player card game (amongst a multitude of other accolades), is not infallible. It’s not that Blue Moon, his take on the kind of 1v1 card combat game typically relegated to CCG territory, is bad. Far from it. In fact, when viewed solely as a work of product innovation, this is one of his most groundbreaking achievements. Remember, Fantasy Flight’s LCGs(™) did not exist at this time, so Blue Moon positioning itself as an alternative to Magic: The Gathering that didn’t require the hoop-jumping and wallet-draining of mediocre-by-design starter decks and randomized booster packs was an attractive proposal. Furthermore, the game is easy to understand, fun, and each playable deck is tactically distinct. So what holds it back from greatness? Unfortunately, Knizia’s highly European, minimal approach to game design — which serves him extremely well when designing, say, Euros — does him few favors when working in the high fantasy, direct conflict space. Of course, he’s much too talented to reduce its system to the point of meaninglessness, but Blue Moon is still lacking in the sort of flavor and dynamics you’d want from a game about appeasing powerful dragon lords by proving your worth via magical warfare.
Most games of Blue Moon will be played with the prebuilt “People Decks” provided in the base game. Deck customization is allowed, of course, though is quite restrictive unless you really go wild with all the expansions. Besides, the original release only came with two decks: the “Vulca” and the “Hoax”. Thankfully, a more recent big box release entitled Blue Moon Legends contains all eight playable peoples and expansion cards in one convenient package (which, as an aside, is the version of the game I have in my collection). One thing Knizia succeeded at is making each of these basic decks feel distinct from one another. Some encourage aggressive play, others are more suited to espionage and subterfuge, and a couple rely on tricky hand management to ensure their most powerful card combinations are utilized. The only people I would recommend staying away from are the “Pillar”. Not because they’re mechanically dull or anything — I actually find them to be quite fun — but because of the awful attempts at humor by whoever came up with their downright embarrassing names. “Smartia Pantia”, “Halitosis Terriblus”, “Bigus Musselus”, “Bodius Maloderus”, and, miserably, so on. How did these make it to printing? Would I have been the lone play-tester cringing away while everyone else in the room laughed their heads off? Perish the thought!
Anyway, after selecting their decks and giving them a shuffle, players draw their starting hands of six cards. Every turn follows the same structure: 1) the player resolves any abilities that trigger at the beginning of their turn, 2) they decide whether or not to player a “Leadership” card, which grant same-turn bonuses and effects, then 3) they decide whether or not to start a fight, or if there is already a fight ongoing they decide whether or not to retreat. If a player declines to start a fight, they are permitted to discard up to half of their hand and draw replacements as a sort of mid-game mulligan that will hopefully put them in a better position for the inevitable altercation to come. If they do decide to initiate a fight, they must play a “Character” card which they are allowed to supplement with a single “Support” or “Booster” if they wish. Characters are cards that establish the player’s fighting power and always provide two possible values: Fire and Earth. Played Support cards persist for the entirety of the fight and typically bolster the player’s fighting power, enhance their abilities, or limit their opponents’ in some way. Boosters are similar to Supports, but they are attached directly to Characters and become inactive after a round of combat. After playing their chosen cards, the player announces their power in either Fire or Earth, thus starting a fight in the chosen element. Continuing a fight works exactly the same way as starting one with the exception that the player must meet or exceed their opponent’s power value in the chosen element using a card combination of their own. Characters and Boosters from previous rounds of combat are usually rendered inactive after a single use, so other than their Support cards they essentially must start from zero every turn. If they are unable to meet or exceed their opponent’s power value — or if they no longer want to participate in the current fight — they must retreat, earning their opponent the favor of one of the three god-like dragons overseeing the bout. Whatever happens, the player draws back up to a full hand of six cards at the end of their turn.
There are two ways to win a game of Blue Moon: winning a fight after already possessing the favor of all three dragons, or having the favor of at least one dragon when either player runs out of cards and can no longer continue the game. Keep in mind, however, that the dragons are fickle creatures, and their allegiance is far from permanent. Even after a glorious victory in battle, your opponent’s subsequent combat success will cause your dragon pals to lose interest in backing your campaign and return to neutrality once more. Because dragons can only be attracted to a player’s side when all three of them are currently neutral, their favor will only ever be with one player. This high fantasy tug-of-war is a crucial component in Blue Moon‘s tactical puzzle as some decks are more likely to perform well in the game’s beginning due to their raw combat power and others toward the end when their opponent’s resources are starting to drain. This is very much a game of timing; sometimes the best response to an opponent coming out swinging with an explosive combo is to immediately retreat and counterattack with a series of fights that are more in your favor. By far, the most interesting decisions the game offers involve deducing the best times to instigate, regroup, retreat, or press on, and the stark duality of these choices create a remarkably clean internal dialogue of “this” versus “that” that is very, very, Knizia.
That being said, the structural elements surrounding the game’s fights are more interesting than the fights themselves, which ain’t great because those comprise the bulk of what you actually do in the game by a pretty wide margin. The goal of every single round of combat beyond its initial provocation is exactly the same: get your Fire or Earth value to hit a certain number. That’s it. 95% of the time a cursory look at your hand makes it immediately obvious whether or not this possible, so it’s not an incredibly exciting objective to be challenged with time and again. Another area the game lacks excitement in is player interaction. Though I’m not going to go over what any of the specific card effects are in a game with hundreds of them, suffice to say they don’t offer many interesting or unique ways to contend with your opponent. Blocking them from playing a certain type of card or forcing them to place their hand face up on the table is about as creative things get in Blue Moon. This would be fine if the information exchange between players was as subtly impactful here as it is in Lost Cities or Battle Line, where every card has a small but meaningful effect on the entire game’s possibility space. No, things are much more linear in Blue Moon. “Can my hand make a number that my opponent’s hand can’t right now?” Which all comes back to timing being the key factor of success in this game. There’s not much space for clever card utilization, only the skillful consideration of when best to play your hand. Granted, that’s better than nothing, but its still disappointingly shallow and single-layered.
Blue Moon is still a fun game — and the push and pull of risk and reward is alive and well within the walls of its design — but ultimately it strikes me as a bit of a missed opportunity. A quick, clean fighting game from the designer of some of the best two-player card games of all-time should have been fantastic, but Blue Moon doesn’t bring to the table the lateral nuance or psychological turmoil Knizia’s best titles are known for. Even so, its a solid enough design that could function as a steppingstone for newer players toward more intense and complex card games. For more experienced gamers it still occasionally satisfies, but if the intent here was to make a lifestyle game à la Magic: The Gathering (which I suspect it was considering tournament stipulations are included in the rulebook) it doesn’t even come close. Yet, it is a testament to Reiner Knizia’s brilliance that this weird, highly European take on the thoroughly American CCG would break enough ground that Fantasy Flight would brand and trademark the concept of its release structure and assume it as their own. Knizia’s impact on the industry is indeed so vast that even some of his middling releases have left indelible marks on the modern board game landscape. If for no other reason than that it’s worth giving Blue Moon a try, especially if you’re interested in a trimmed down card combat experience with a lower barrier of entry than just about anything else in the genre.
Blue Moon gets a rating of THREE out of FIVE, indicating it is WORTHWHILE.