Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 4996353" data-attributes="member: 18280">pawsplay,Why must it have some kind of rules?&nbsp; Aren't the purpose of those rules to moderate how a goal is met?&nbsp; Is there not a goal inherent in &quot;Let's think of words starting with M&quot;, such as &quot;Think of as many words starting with M as you can&quot; or &quot;Think of three words starting with M&quot;?Having &quot;victory conditions&quot; means nothing more determining how well the goal of a game is met.&quot;I couldn't think of any words starting with M&quot; is a kind of loss.&nbsp; &quot;I could only think of 265 words starting with M, whereas pawsplay thought of 3,758&quot; is a kind of conditional victory.&nbsp; I succeeded in the overt goal, but failed to compete effectively with pawsplay.In the cooperative game, Bus Depot Diner, the overarching goal is to feed everyone before the bus leaves.&nbsp; This is almost impossible, but allows for a type of complete victory.&nbsp; Otherwise, you win on a sliding scale based on how many people you can feed.&nbsp; The secondary victory condition is to do better than you did on your previous attempts.The framework (the bus will eventually leave) is known, but the outcome (how many people you will feed before the bus leaves) is unknown.In some cases, the victory conditions of a game are not overt.&nbsp; This is the case with Truth or Dare, where the goal of the game requires pretending that you do not know what the goal is in order to succeed.&nbsp; It is a good rule of thumb, when examining any game, that you can uncover the goal by determining first (1) what outcomes are unknown?, and (2) what can the players influence?&nbsp; Answer those two questions, and not only does the nature of the game become far clearer, but that clarity usually brings with it a better understanding of the game itself (and hence better/more satisfying play).EDIT:&nbsp; Example:&nbsp; In Scrabble, one of the unknown outcomes is &quot;What spaces will be open on my turn?&quot; and this is one of the things players can influence (esp. by blocking access to high-point spots that they cannot themselves use).&nbsp; Failure to understand this not only limits your own score, but causes you to set up your opponent so that he can get a higher score than he otherwise could.&nbsp; Therefore, &quot;keep your opponent's score as low as you can&quot; is a hidden victory condition that feeds into the main victory condition of Scrabble (have the highest score when all the tiles are used).RCRC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 4996353, member: 18280"] pawsplay, Why must it have some kind of rules? Aren't the purpose of those rules to moderate how a goal is met? Is there not a goal inherent in "Let's think of words starting with M", such as "Think of as many words starting with M as you can" or "Think of three words starting with M"? Having "victory conditions" means nothing more determining how well the goal of a game is met. "I couldn't think of any words starting with M" is a kind of loss. "I could only think of 265 words starting with M, whereas pawsplay thought of 3,758" is a kind of conditional victory. I succeeded in the overt goal, but failed to compete effectively with pawsplay. In the cooperative game, Bus Depot Diner, the overarching goal is to feed everyone before the bus leaves. This is almost impossible, but allows for a type of complete victory. Otherwise, you win on a sliding scale based on how many people you can feed. The secondary victory condition is to do better than you did on your previous attempts. The framework (the bus will eventually leave) is known, but the outcome (how many people you will feed before the bus leaves) is unknown. In some cases, the victory conditions of a game are not overt. This is the case with Truth or Dare, where the goal of the game requires pretending that you do not know what the goal is in order to succeed. It is a good rule of thumb, when examining any game, that you can uncover the goal by determining first (1) what outcomes are unknown?, and (2) what can the players influence? Answer those two questions, and not only does the nature of the game become far clearer, but that clarity usually brings with it a better understanding of the game itself (and hence better/more satisfying play). EDIT: Example: In Scrabble, one of the unknown outcomes is "What spaces will be open on my turn?" and this is one of the things players can influence (esp. by blocking access to high-point spots that they cannot themselves use). Failure to understand this not only limits your own score, but causes you to set up your opponent so that he can get a higher score than he otherwise could. Therefore, "keep your opponent's score as low as you can" is a hidden victory condition that feeds into the main victory condition of Scrabble (have the highest score when all the tiles are used). RC RC [/QUOTE]

Verification