Nomic

Post by tjic » Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 12:09 PM UTC

jsnell wrote: post #36

takluyver wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My friends and I used to occasionally play a card game called Mao. The winner of each round (the first to get rid of the cards in their hand) could make up a new rule governing game play for following rounds. But they didn't announce their rule, instead punishing players who broke it by giving them an extra card. By watching the punishments, you had to try to work out their rule so you could avoid breaking it. With t…

Mao belongs to a class of games called inductive reasoning games. They're mostly crap, but there are a few gems. IMO the best one of the bunch is Zendo where one player makes up a rule that determines whether a grouping of playing pieces is valid or not (usually played with Treehouse pieces, but e.g. a limited selection of lego pieces can also work). The other players then basically need to use an experimentation / i…

Post by michaelochurch » Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 12:30 PM UTC

halter73 wrote: post #69

sirclueless wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you like the win condition, and others do too, it's a pretty straightforward rule to introduce early on.

What happens then when someone introduces the rule: any player who generates a contradiction in the rules automatically loses? I imagine there could be an initial rule that states the most recent rule generated is authoritative in the event of a contradiction. But of course someone could generate the rule: the earliest rule generated is authoritative in the event of a contradiction. I've never played Nomic. Do parado…

Post by takluyver » Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 12:38 PM UTC

Evbn wrote: post #46

takluyver wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My friends and I used to occasionally play a card game called Mao. The winner of each round (the first to get rid of the cards in their hand) could make up a new rule governing game play for following rounds. But they didn't announce their rule, instead punishing players who broke it by giving them an extra card. By watching the punishments, you had to try to work out their rule so you could avoid breaking it. With t…

I thought the point of playing Mao was to torture the new player, like a hazing ritual.

Post by Someone » Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 1:54 PM UTC

anthonyb wrote: post #43

indspenceable wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to be contrarian, but flux is nothing like nomic. Rules in flux don't interact in unexpected ways (there are a few variables that change, notably, draws per turn, maximum hand size, and win conditions which are generally what cards you have out in front of you in order to win) but the player has no freedom to make up new rules on her own.

A much better game is Bartok (sometimes called Bartog) - it starts out as something approximating Uno[1]. Each time someone wins, they make a rule. Playing it with Mathematicians/CS types is brain-hurty (think mod-13 arithmetic and prime numbered cards behaving differently). --- [1] Some of the different rules: - If you ask a question, you get a 1 card penalty - If you have one card and don't say "bartok", you get yo…

Post by anthonyb » Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 2:33 PM UTC

comex wrote: post #50

BlogNomic has been mentioned, but here's a gratuitous plug for Agora Nomic, which is currently suffering from lack of interest (and could use a few more players) but is arguably the oldest still-living true nomic. The game sometimes has "actual gameplay" and sometimes doesn't really, but in practice mainly revolves around the rest of the rules - over 100 of them - including things like multiple privilege levels for r…