Category: Notes

An arithmetically paired fishing game with the Decktet.

In the Eastern Deserts, the jackrabbits are regarded as a pest and a delicacy. Lesser known is that between eating (and being eaten) they while away their time with a simple fishing game.

As a fishing game, the goal of the game is to capture cards. Each player will play two cards every turn, capturing cards using either the sum or difference of the played cards. The players that captures the most cards scores points for the round. The first player to reach twenty-two points wins the game and is granted the privilege to be the first bunny out for dinner.

The game is a reinvention of the classic Moroccan fishing game Ronda. Aside from using the Decktet instead of the Latin Deck, the game is also played with two cards at a time and bonuses are given for suit combinations played.

Setup

Shuffle the basic deck and deal four cards to each player and four face up to the table. After the initial deal, no further cards will be dealt to the table, but there will be three additional deals during the round (emptying the deck). The same player will be the dealer during the entire round, and the dealer switches each round.

Only the two player version has been playtested, so the two player game is the basis of these rules.

Gameplay

A player will play two cards on each turn.

If the sum OR the difference between the played cards equal the rank of a card on the table, the player captures the card on the table along the pair just played. If there are several cards of that rank on the table, then all cards are captured, a player may not leave any on the table. A player is restricted to capturing only ONE rank per turn, even if a play could capture two ranks. (7 and 3 captures 4 OR Crown but not both).

If the cards played are a pair (of the same rank) they will capture all the cards of the rank just played. (7 and 7 would capture a 7).

If a player cannot make a capturing play, then he or she must place two cards on the table.

When both players are out of cards (after two plays each) the dealer then deals out four more cards to each player. At the end of the game, the last player to capture cards takes the remaining cards on the table.

Bonuses

There are two possible bonuses during gameplay.

Flush – each of the cards (played and captured) share a same suit. The capturing player scores 2 points. (eg 7 wave/wyrm – 3 moon/wave = 4 wave / leaf).

Sextet – the group of cards (played and captured) show one of each suit between them without duplication. A sextet must have exactly one instance of each suit. The capturing player scores 4 points. (eg 4 wave / leaf + 5 wyrm / knot = 9 moon / sun, or any triplet of the 2 through 9 rank cards)

Some warrens will exchange captured cards to keep track of bonus points (ie if you score a flush, the opponent will place two of her captured cards in your capture pile), thus the bonus points are not “scored” until the end of a round. Some warrens do not exchange cards but keep a running tally, thus scoring bonus points immediately and ending the game as soon as a player reaches 22 points.

Scoring the Round / Winning

At the end of a round, each player will count their captured cards. The player with more than 18 cards (half the deck) will score a point for each card in excess (20 cards would score 2 points).

As noted in the introduction, the first player to reach 22 points is the winner. If both players reach 22 points, then whoever has more points is the winner. If both players are tied, play additional rounds until the tie is broken.

Variants

There are several variants that were tested. The most promising one is to deal out six cards to each player per deal (none to the table). It may actually be a better game, but after designing and playing it with the four cards, it felt a little strange to me. It may be in part because I have a numerological a fondness for the current game with 2 pairs dealt, 2 plays per round, 4 deals per round, 22 points per game. However, one could easily construct a cohesive numerical system with 3 pairs, 3 plays per round, 3 deals per round, 18 card goal, and 18 or 36 point games. As such, I would not hesitate to switch numerological allegiances, if this variant is clearly the better game after further playtesting.

A streamlined version (my original idea for the game) is to calculate only the difference between the cards. I think it works but is a little too constricted.

A more complex version would be to allow a pair of cards to capture BOTH the sum and the difference of the two cards. However, I think it adds a little unneeded complexity to the calculations and detracts from the suit bonuses.

Extended Deck (untested)

There is no place for the excuse, but there could be uses for the Pawns and Courts. Both the Pawns and Courts are worth 0 points in summing cards. In all cases, scoring at the end of the round is based off of the deck size divided by the number of players.

A 3 player game could add either the Pawns or Courts making a 40 card deck. Deal four cards to each player and four to the table. There will be three deals in a round. One could just use a standard deck and start with no cards dealt to the table.

A 4 player game could also be played using the standard deck with two deals per round (four cards to the table during the initial deal) but I suspect each round would be a little short and unsatisfying. Maybe this will work better with a double deck.

In a 2 player game, add both Pawns and Courts to the deck for a deck of 44 cards. Deal and play as in the main rules, but there will be an additional round.

Many domesticated warrens are rumored to play a variant called Brulu, using a 40 card deck including pawns. There are no cards dealt to the table during the initial deal and they play to 41 points. Many aficionados consider this the purest way to play.

Thanks

The Blulu variant is a direct nod to the Moroccan card game Ronda which this game is based on. Let me start with my friend Margaret who gave me a Moroccan deck, inspiring me to look into the game and eventually develop a rough draft of the rules (Ronda is surprisingly hard to find on the English speaking internet). I sent these rules to John Pagat who then did an amazing job doing real research and completely rewriting the rules; thus publishing the only comprehensive Ronda rule set in English.

Of course, many, many thanks to my girlfriend who helped me playtest the game – not only Blulu but also Ronda when I was trying to figure out how that darn game worked using fragmented descriptions found on different websites. And to my old bunnies Buster and Lulu, wherever they’re hopping now…

Links

BGG database entry
Initial announcement of Blulu on BGG
Rules of Ronda

Boardgamegeek.com database entry

An asymmetric climbing race game for two.

The tortoise and the hare are staging a series of races!

To be the champion keep shedding your cards first.

Setup

The player who most recently held a bunny shuffles the basic deck, discards two cards (to introduce uncertainty) and deals one face up to each player to be their starting positions for their race tracks.

Take the remaining cards and deal them face down equally to each player (sixteen each). The hare then draws the top eight cards off his deck, while the tortoise draws none (zero). The hare starts first.

Game play

As a “climbing game” the card play will consist of a player leading with a set of cards to his race course (the allowable plays are described in the following section). The second player may then play an equal or higher ranked set of the same type to her own race course. The second player must pass if she does not have a playable set. If the second player passes then the first player may then lead with a set of any type. If the second player follows with a set then the first player may then either play an equal or higher set or pass, giving the lead the the second player. Note: unlike most traditional climbing games, players are not restricted to playing the same number of cards as the previously played set to continue the series.

Racin’
There are three types of sets: Singles, Multiples (groups of cards with the same ranks), and Straights (ascending consecutive ranks of two or more cards). The hare may play as many cards as he desires, but the tortoise may play at most two cards at a time.Note: straights are not required to share a common suit

A set must always be connected to the player’s race course. The first card played must either share a suit, or share the rank, or be of one higher rank than of the top card of his or her race course. Each player’s race course will always remain their own, they will never play cards on their opponent’s course.
At the end of the race, each player’s course should be completely connected from beginning to end. It is suggested that the players announce their plays and mention how it is connected (such as “I play a 6,7,8 straight, the 6 is connected by the sun to the orange crown”)

After the lead, the second player may either pass or play the same type of set and the final card must be of equal or higher rank than the first player’s final card (and yes, it must be connected the second player’s course). Only the final card matters in determining the rank of the set. When a player passes, the series ends and the other player may then lead with any type of set on their race course. The newly lead series does not have any relationship to the previously played sets, but it must still connect to the player’s race track. A player that captures the lead may pass his or her turn, and will still draw the appropriate number of cards from doing so.

Because the hare and the tortoise may play different numbers of cards in a play, the amount of cards (aside from minimum of two(!)) in a multiple or a straight is irrelevant. Even though the hare must follow type, he may always play as many cards as he wishes to the play (ie 3-4-5-6 in response to a 5-6 straight played by the tortoise). Similarly, no matter how many cards the hare plays, the tortoise must merely follow type (ie she may follow four Aces with a pair of Aces or higher)

Drawing cards
As mentioned previously, the tortoise starts with an empty hand. However, she will draw two cards at the beginning of each turn until her deck runs out.

The hare does not replenish his hand regularly, he will draw cards only in three situations:

1. If he passes and has cards remaining in his hand, he will draw a single card.

2. If he passes and has no cards remaining in his hand then he will draw the remainder of his deck.

3. Finally, he will draw the remainder of his deck after the end of the series during which the tortoise draws her last card.
The hare will never draw a card without following a pass. In the second situation, even if the hare won the series where he shed his last hand card, he will still have to pass the lead to the tortoise as he cannot play until he draws his cards. In the third situation, he will not draw the remainder of his deck until someone passes.

Winning
The first player to play all of his or her cards is immediately the winner of the race. If both players are unable to play their final cards, the winner will be whoever has the fewest cards remaining. If they are tied in remaining cards, then the race is declared a draw. The winner of the race scores 1 point for every card remaining in their opponents hand. In the case where neither player was able to empty their hand they score the difference in number of cards between the two remaining hands.

A full tournament of races would involve four rounds with the players alternating as the hare and the tortoise, and see who has the best record. If after four races, the series is a draw, then continue racing and the next winner is the champion badger.

Example 1: Jen plays her last card to her race track and is declared the winner. Brad has 3 cards left in hand so Jen scores 3 points.

Example 2: Angelina and Brad both pass because they have no legal plays remaining. Angelina has 2 cards left while Brad has 4. Angelina is declared the winner of the race and scores 2 points. (4 minus 2).

The extended deck

The pawns and courts could be inserted in the deck, they would rank between the nine’s and crowns. As such the setup would still involve discarding two cards and starting with two cards, but instead of starting with eight cards, the hare would start with ten cards.

If the Excuse has no rank and no suit and is considered lower than an ace. As such it can only be played as the very first card of a series (the one who plays it must have the lead) but it can be played onto any card and any card may be played to follow it. It counts as leading a series of Singles. If you use the Excuse you should discard 3 cards at the beginning of the game.

Credits

Playtested with Jing Gu.

Thanks also to Kenny VenOsdel who reviewed the rules and suggested clarifications.

Links

BGG database entry
Initial announcement thread on BGG

I am a big fan of the designer Sean Ross because of his awesome “Recommended/Best for Two” Geeklists and his active participation on BGG, so I will readily admit that if I did not enjoy Haggis I would have just kept my mouth shut.

And I had planned on really disliking this game. As a fan of climbing games, particularly Tien Len, I am a little protective of this mechanic, so I get skeptical when the designer adds an extra suit, faceup wild cards, funky bombs, and awkward scoring. Furthermore I tried playing it 2 player with my girlfriend who was half asleep and we both came away with a very lackluster impression.

But yesterday, I got a chance to play Haggis with a couple every experienced gamers and I was very impressed. It is not a perfect game (I don’t believe Tichu is either), but it is definitely a fun game, especially for gamers.

I won’t go too deep into gameplay, but here’s a quick intro. The game is played with a custom five-suited deck of good looking, well designed cards printed on fairly nice stock, (a step below casino quality but fine for heavy use). As a climbing game, the primary goal is to shed all your cards.  However you have a secondary goal of picking up point cards during the play. A 3 player game will involve all five suits of cards (each ranked 2 through 10) with each player is given a JQK which are wild cards kept face up on the table (2P games involve only four suits). There are a variety of bombs, and each player actually starts with at least one available (using the JQK). For scoring, the 3,5,7 and 9 are worth 1pt each while Jack is worth 2pts, Queen worth 3pts, and King worth 5pts. When you shed of your last card you immediately score 5X points for every card in your opponent’s hand (in a 3P game whoever has more cards) and the last place player also gives his cards in hand to player who went out first. Each player keeps and scores the cards they captured during play. There is also bonus scoring if someone declares a bet that they’ll go out first. The game ends once someone suprasses 350 points.

So what did I think of the game? Well let’s start with the criticisms. I still haven’t got over my initial lackluster 2 player experience and even though I like the 3 player game, I am very disappointed that the 2 player game involves taking out one of the suits – which diminishes one of the more distinctive aspects of the game, the ease of mixed 3579 bombs and the mind twister of having to keep track of that fifth suit. Furthermore, I still find the scoring more awkward than it should be. I’m not sure how to I’d fix it but  that there must be a better way because we just kept finding ourselves digging around for missing point cards.

However, the primary reason I don’t plan on buying the game is because I feel that Haggis, like Tichu, are great gamers’ games but I don’t think either game is particularly suited for casual play. Just as I still prefer Tien Len to Tichu, I prefer Dou Dizhu as a lighter 3 player climbing card game on a standard deck that doesn’t involve nearly as much explanation. I fear that non-gamers will not get past the rough initial plays of Haggis to get to the zone where this design starts to shine.

So why do I think it’s a great gamers’ game? First, there is a huge tension between getting rid of cards as quickly as possible while keeping the big boppers in hand so you can go out smoothly. Having cut my teeth on Tien Len, I have very strong instincts to hold back during play, letting the other players deplete their hands and then slamming them right before they can go out. Unfortunately with this strategy, if you misjudge your opponents in this game, they can pick up a ton of points when they go out.  Even if you win, you won’t capture many bonus points with such a strategy.  So this game makes me play more dangerously than I prefer, which makes it an exciting brain tickler – I almost never end my hand with a weak set in normal climbing games, but I found myself regularly stuck with a crap in Haggis.  Also, the plethora of wild cards and bombs in the game adds a nicely balanced wildness to the gameplay – you can’t just chart a path and roll the opponents when you get a great hand. Because the game does not have the partnership and passing of Tichu, Haggis produces its gamery complexity by giving each player three wild cards and the ability to make bombs with those cards.  In a 3 player game with 5 suits, the mixed 3579 combo is fairly common, but it’s not nearly as strong as one would wish since it’s weaker than the face card bombs. I really enjoy how the fifth suit forces you to think differently in keeping track of cards. And finally, because two players can try to sit on a player and keep him from that magic 350 threshold, there are some interesting temporary partnership dynamics that come and go in a course of a 3 player game.

I really enjoy the multiple dilemmas that Sean has embedded in the game.

The dilemma that if you use your wilds you’ll break up your bombs, and if you use bombs you’re burning crucial wildcards for the sets you just earned the right to play.

The dilemma that you can see what wild cards/bombs your opponents have…and they can see yours too.

The dilemma that the awesome hidden bomb in your hand often breaks up some sweet sets you’d otherwise be able to play.

The dilemma that keeping your cards can let you unleash some awesome combos, but because everyone starts with wilds and bombs, an opponent can often suddenly dump their last few cards before you’ve made your move.

The dilemma that you’re buddies with one guy now, and those points you let him take might just let him sneak past both of you.

With all these dilemmas, Haggis becomes a dynamic game. While I really think that the game could use a little polishing at the edges, its 99% of the way there.  If you’re a fan of traditional card games, especially if you like them a little meatier, you won’t regret trying it out.

Bonus: I came up with a scoring variant that I think could be pretty elegant. It’s very simple. Instead of scoring 5X points for cards, you score 1 point for each card in the (largest) remaining opponent’s hand. Also you score 1 point for each face card you capture. When you win a set with a 3579 bomb, the player you give the captures to sets it aside and scores 2 points for a mixed set and 3 points for a suited set. And instead of playing to 350, play to 70 points. That’s it….now lets see if I get a chance to playtest it!