Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nomic

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 88 posts

Re: Nomic

#41

Post by sirclueless »

michaelochurch wrote: post #27
chrisacky wrote: post #11

If there is one thing that the "internet" has lost, it's games like this. I used to love playing #wolfgame on IRC. Even Ultima Online (although hardly a typical heritage game) definitely shaped the way MMORPGs evolved. Anyway, back onto Nomic. After reading the Wiki and seeing the "Initial Rule Set" [1] then reading through a lot of the archives it became clear that "chaos" and administration was the downfall of this…

The way I remember Nomic there was another rule, which defines an alternate objective function. 117. Any player who generates a contradiction in the rules automatically wins.

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

Re: Nomic

#42

Post by sirclueless »

bobobo1628 wrote: post #40
chrisacky wrote: post #11

If there is one thing that the "internet" has lost, it's games like this. I used to love playing #wolfgame on IRC. Even Ultima Online (although hardly a typical heritage game) definitely shaped the way MMORPGs evolved. Anyway, back onto Nomic. After reading the Wiki and seeing the "Initial Rule Set" [1] then reading through a lot of the archives it became clear that "chaos" and administration was the downfall of this…

If by '#wolfgame' you mean what we call Werewolf, where there are a bunch of 'villagers' and one or more randomly selected 'werewolves' where the werewolves get to kill a villager in the night and the villagers get to lynch someone during the day, we have a group who frequently plays this (or the Mafia variant) at uni through IRC or their forums.

Also, epicmafia.com is a great online implementation. There's a nice little community there, it's a great time sink.

Re: Nomic

#43

Post by anthonyb »

indspenceable wrote: post #17
drewcrawford wrote: post #12

There's a commercial game similar to this called Flux. It's not as free-form (there are cards with rule changes pre-printed on them), but it is easier to play with a group of new users. One of the primary results--obvious to programmers but perhaps not obvious to the general public--is how easy it is for rules to interact in unexpected ways, often producing ambiguous gameplay which may go unnoticed by players for sig…

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 your hand made back up to 7.

- We played with a bunch of broken decks all smushed together, so you couldn't count cards.

Re: Nomic

#44

Post by derleth »

dsr_ wrote: post #8

Mornington Crescent.

> Mornington Crescent.

... can be made into a Nomic, but the way it's usually 'played' it is simply a parody of over-complicated games with no actual rules of its own beyond, perhaps, 'be funny' and 'confuse the new guy'.

Re: Nomic

#45

Post by zem »

michaelochurch wrote: post #27
chrisacky wrote: post #11

If there is one thing that the "internet" has lost, it's games like this. I used to love playing #wolfgame on IRC. Even Ultima Online (although hardly a typical heritage game) definitely shaped the way MMORPGs evolved. Anyway, back onto Nomic. After reading the Wiki and seeing the "Initial Rule Set" [1] then reading through a lot of the archives it became clear that "chaos" and administration was the downfall of this…

The way I remember Nomic there was another rule, which defines an alternate objective function. 117. Any player who generates a contradiction in the rules automatically wins.

yeah, i thought that was the entire point of nomic

Re: Nomic

#46

Post by Evbn »

takluyver wrote: post #21
mjn wrote: post #14

I've been interested in this idea of games with modifiable rules on and off, but something about the voting aspect doesn't appeal to me that much. Not entirely sure why. I like the self-referentiality of the rules being modifiable, but it just being a vote, "what rule change do you want?", feels unsatisfying. I'm not sure what to replace it by, admittedly. I did one experiment where instead of saying what the rules w…

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.

Re: Nomic

#47

Post by Evbn »

michaelochurch wrote: post #26
mjn wrote: post #14

I've been interested in this idea of games with modifiable rules on and off, but something about the voting aspect doesn't appeal to me that much. Not entirely sure why. I like the self-referentiality of the rules being modifiable, but it just being a vote, "what rule change do you want?", feels unsatisfying. I'm not sure what to replace it by, admittedly. I did one experiment where instead of saying what the rules w…

Voting games can be painful. I remember Mafia, which is very crowd-dependent. People who slow-play/minimax games make Mafia intolerable. At 3:00 in the morning with 3 players left, the 30-minute discussions are painful. Just kill someone and lose or win already. The variant I built (to give something useful to start the discussion, rather than blind suspicion) had a combat mechanic. You actually had to "buy" arms in…

You should turn these rules into a G+ Hangouts game.

Re: Nomic

#48

Post by Evbn »

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…

That is the same as Mao.

Re: Nomic

#49

Post by Tyrant505 »

chrisacky wrote: post #11

If there is one thing that the "internet" has lost, it's games like this. I used to love playing #wolfgame on IRC. Even Ultima Online (although hardly a typical heritage game) definitely shaped the way MMORPGs evolved. Anyway, back onto Nomic. After reading the Wiki and seeing the "Initial Rule Set" [1] then reading through a lot of the archives it became clear that "chaos" and administration was the downfall of this…

I've stated a few times.. why can't we make UO in browser by now? Old rules of course.

Re: Nomic

#50

Post by comex »

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 rules, a court to decide questions and punish rulebreaking, assets that you can give someone to let them act on behalf of you, a bill of rights, offices, and, of course, proposals, all of which is written in a rather formal and pedantic style that's nevertheless the subject of much debate over interpretation. The whole thing somehow feels like maintaining a computer program written in English, and perhaps for that reason, many players are programmers; as a particular example, one valid way to play is to find bugs in the rules and try to exploit them to force through a proposal granting you a (temporary) dictatorship, which is like nothing so much as computer hacking. It's bizarrely fun.

http://agoranomic.org

The ruleset: http://agora.qoid.us/current_flr.html

An example call for judgement: http://cfj.qoid.us//1892

Post reply on HN