This is a game for any plural number of players. Needed: piece of paper and a pen/pencil.
Start by writing a row of n 0's on the piece of paper. (n is a positive integer decided beforehand by the players. I suggest an n between 5 and 10 for a 2 person game. Slightly more for more players.)
After writing the row of n 0's, write the value of n to the right of this row.
Next, the players take turns. On a player's move, he/she copies the row (which will be of 0's and 1's) immediately above, but with either one 1 changed to a 0, or one 0 changed to a 1. (The player can change any one digit she/he chooses, under restrictions -- see below.)
Next, that same player writes down (to the right of the row) the lengths of the runs of both 0's and 1's in the row he just wrote down. Each "run" is made up completely of 0's or completely of 1's, and is bounded by runs of the other digit or by the edge of the row. (No two consecutive runs are of the same digit.) It doesn't matter if a run is of 0's or 1's. All that matters in this game is where each boundary is between each run of 0's and the adjacent run of 1's.
* A player, though, cannot change a digit on his move such that the multiset of run-lengths (of the row of 0's and 1's just created) has already occurred in the game. (A "multiset" is a list of numbers where the order of the numbers in the list is unimportant, but the number of occurrences of each number is indeed important. For example, {1,2,1,3) and (2,1,1,3) would be considered to be the same multiset, but (1,2,1,3) and (1,2,3,3) would not be the same.)
The last player able to move is the winner.
Sample game. Simple example: (n=5)
00000 5 00010 3,1,1 10010 1,2,1,1 10011 1,2,2 (Can't do 10111 here, for example, because the run-length multiset 3,1,1 already occurred.) 00011 3,2 00001 4,1
The player who wrote 00001 wins, because 10001 (run-lengths 1,3,1), 01001 (1,1,2,1), 00101 (2,1,1,1), 00011 (3,2), and 00000 (5) each have a multiset of run-lengths that already occurred.
FYI: The total number of moves in a game is no more than the number of (unrestricted) partitions of n. (So, there is a maximum of 7 moves in an n=5 game.)
Nick Bentley's reply has got me thinking that maybe it would be interesting, instead of just writing a row of 0's and 1's, to fill in some of the squares (those that either correspond to the 0's, or to the 1's) in a row of graph paper. Then the next player to move fills in the appropriate squares of the next row below, then the next player fills in the row below that, etc.
In this way, maybe some kind of interesting design will emerge. (Tongue in cheek) :)
Leroy Quet wrote: > This is a game for any plural number of players. > Needed: piece of paper and a pen/pencil.
> Start by writing a row of n 0's on the piece of paper. (n is a > positive integer decided beforehand by the players. I suggest an n > between 5 and 10 for a 2 person game. Slightly more for more players.)
> After writing the row of n 0's, write the value of n to the right of > this row.
> Next, the players take turns. On a player's move, he/she copies the > row (which will be of 0's and 1's) immediately above, but with either > one 1 changed to a 0, or one 0 changed to a 1. (The player can change > any one digit she/he chooses, under restrictions -- see below.)
> Next, that same player writes down (to the right of the row) the > lengths of the runs of both 0's and 1's in the row he just wrote down. > Each "run" is made up completely of 0's or completely of 1's, and is > bounded by runs of the other digit or by the edge of the row. (No two > consecutive runs are of the same digit.) > It doesn't matter if a run is of 0's or 1's. All that matters in this > game is where each boundary is between each run of 0's and the > adjacent run of 1's.
> * A player, though, cannot change a digit on his move such that the > multiset of run-lengths (of the row of 0's and 1's just created) has > already occurred in the game. > (A "multiset" is a list of numbers where the order of the numbers in > the list is unimportant, but the number of occurrences of each number > is indeed important. For example, {1,2,1,3) and (2,1,1,3) would be > considered to be the same multiset, but (1,2,1,3) and (1,2,3,3) would > not be the same.)
> The last player able to move is the winner.
> Sample game. Simple example: > (n=5)
> 00000 5 > 00010 3,1,1 > 10010 1,2,1,1 > 10011 1,2,2 > (Can't do 10111 here, for example, because the run-length multiset > 3,1,1 already occurred.) > 00011 3,2 > 00001 4,1
> The player who wrote 00001 wins, because 10001 (run-lengths 1,3,1), > 01001 (1,1,2,1), 00101 (2,1,1,1), 00011 (3,2), and 00000 (5) each have > a multiset of run-lengths that already occurred.
> FYI: The total number of moves in a game is no more than the number of > (unrestricted) partitions of n. (So, there is a maximum of 7 moves in > an n=5 game.)
I designed a perfect-information word game based on a very similar scheme, which I personally love. I never published it though, because playtesters didn't respond positively enough to it (mainly because it caused too much analysis paralysis for the normal people I recruit to playtest my games), but nonetheless some to the mechanisms are worth discussing. Here's how the game went:
1. It's played on two side-by-side grids, each 9 cells wide (although it can be played on different grids, 9-cells wide seemed ideal.) 2. You own one grid, and your opponent owns the other. 3. Players take turns. On each turn you write down a word in the upmost available horizontal row on your grid. Your score for turn is the number of letters that your word shares with your opponent's most recently played word, times the number of letters in the longest word that you formed *vertically* when you added the new word horizontally. For example, if you wrote "tan" on your first turn, and then on your second turn, you wrote "cat" such that the "t" from cat is directly below the "a" from "tan", then you would have formed the word "at" vertically. Since "at" is 2 letters long, your score for that turn is 2 times however many letters "cat" shares with your opponent's most recently played word. 4. the first letter of your word may be in any cell, as long as the word fits completely in your grid. 5. No word may be played twice, and you may not play a word that contains in its entirety a word previously played by any player. 6. There's a bonus if your word is an anagram of your opponent's most recently played word. 7. Game ends after say, 8 turns. Highest score wins. 8. If you think your opponent played a fake word, you can challenge it, and if it is a fake word, you're opponent gets zero points for his turn. If your challenge fails, you must skip your next turn. Fake words *are not* removed from the board after they've been played.
9. Since the score is undefined for the each player's first turn, the first turn of the game works differently:
-To begin, a word is picked randomly from the dictionary, and then player 1 writes that word into his topmost gridline. He also adds any number of points he wants to either player's score column. Then player 2 decides whether to play as player 1 or player 2. This acts as a pie rule, and the randomly chosen initial word ensures that each game will proceed very differently. -The score for player 2's first turn is the just the number of letters that his first word shares with the randomly chosen word that player 1 wrote down on his first turn.
I'm pretty sure that these are the complete rules, but there is some small chance that I missed something because it's been a long time since I explored this game. If any of you try it, please give me feedback. If you have suggestions for altering the game to reduce analysis paralysis I will be especially grateful.
Nick Bentley <nickobe...@gmail.com> writes: > 8. If you think your opponent played a fake word, you can challenge > it, and if it is a fake word, you're opponent gets zero points for his > turn. If your challenge fails, you must skip your next turn. Fake > words *are not* removed from the board after they've been played.
So there is an element of bluff, then? See Sauter's comments about scrabble regarding this.
Phil -- Any true emperor never needs to wear clothes. -- Devany on r.a.s.f1