Ronda El 
Rule Question 1
If nobody at the end of the game fully occupies any medium settlements, does the ‘Medium Settlements Ownership’ victory card—which says ties satisfy the condition—get awarded? In other words, does a tie at zero count as meeting the card’s requirements?
Rulesplainer 1
The group discussed whether “zero” counts as an accomplishment for this card. The consensus, confirmed by the game designer via Reddit, is that simply tying at zero does not satisfy the victory card—players must have at least one medium settlement occupied to qualify. You cannot score the card for doing nothing, and a tie at zero does not count as “winning.”
Meddling Settlements Ownership victory card ruling
Rule Question 2
Should the wording of the victory card be interpreted strictly by the mathematical definition of “most,” or does usual board game convention apply—meaning you need at least one to qualify for the most?
Rulesplainer 2
Some players argued that from a mathematical perspective, a tie at zero is still a tie for “most.” However, several responses pointed out that board game conventions universally require at least some progress toward a goal—never awarding points for zero accomplishments. The general agreement is that you must have done the thing at least once to be eligible for this sort of card.
Meddling Settlements Ownership victory card ruling
Rule Question 3
Does the phrase “ties satisfy this condition” on mission or victory cards ever mean that a tie at zero is a success and would score points?
Rulesplainer 3
According to multiple answers and a direct comment from the designer, “ties satisfy this condition” means that if two or more players meet the minimum accomplishment, they can all score, but if nobody has achieved the minimum (such as zero settlements occupied), the card is not satisfied and no points are awarded. So, a tie for “most” only matters when something has been accomplished.
Meddling Settlements Ownership victory card ruling
Rule Question 4
Is there an implied rule across modern board games that you need to accomplish something at least once for a bonus, even if not written directly on a card?
Rulesplainer 4
Players agreed that there is an “implied rule” rooted in board game convention: you must meet or exceed the objective at least once to trigger scoring for goals, tracks, or mission cards. Although some games spell this out, the community consensus is that this logic holds, even if not printed in the rules or card text. This view was later backed up by the designer’s clarification.
Meddling Settlements Ownership victory card ruling
Rule Question 5
Did the game designer provide an official ruling about whether a tie at zero meets the criteria for these types of victory points?
Rulesplainer 5
Yes, based on a response received from the designer’s Reddit Q&A, the official intention is that merely matching other players isn’t enough—you must also “beat the game,” meaning you have to actually achieve the goal in the first place. Zero does not count as a valid accomplishment for “most,” so a minimum of one is required to score the card.
Meddling Settlements Ownership victory card ruling
