Round 169 Summary 1

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen (
Date: Sat Sep 29 2001 - 07:24:59 PDT

  [on behalf of the judge. --arnt]

Round 169, "Frantic Racing Chits"
The round opened at 15:17:27 GMT on 25 September 2001.
The Judge was Glenn Overby, winner of Round 168.
The Wizard was Alan Riddell, style leader of Round 168.

Current eligibility:

Factitious, 2001-10-05 @ 08:15:16; +0.65
Anton Cox, 2001-10-04 @ 14:41:36; +3.25 (style leader)
Aron Wall, 2001-10-03 @ 17:30:10; +1.35
Rich Holmes, 2001-10-03 @ 14:37:19; +1
Gallivanting Tripper, 2001-10-03 @ 01:14:18; +0.75
David Lerner, 2001-10-02 @ 17:26:23; -0.5
The Wizard, 2001-10-02 @ 15:17:27; +1.5
All other members, 2001-10-02 @ 15:17:27
Jesse Welton, 2001-10-01 @ 20:22:43; +3

Full judgements:

169:1--The Wizard
Hey everybody!  I have a new board game to play and you are all invited,
hopefully you will all have copies of the board and so you will know what is
going on.  When a FRC member posts a rule they will say what they roll,
where they land and what happens to them there.

Sadly I only roll a 2 and as such land on square 2, which is a dull square
as nothing happens to me there.
Rule Date: 2001-09-25 15:17:27 GMT

Validity:  No problems.

Style:  The board alone--wonderful creativity, with lots of room to improvise play--is
worth about +2.5.  The rule is clear, simple, complies with itself, and is in harmony
with the suggested theme.  Another +0.5.  Could this be a perfect 3?
Unfortunately, the attachment is a -1.0 for these days of viruses, an e-
mail attachment essential to a Rule is most unstylish.  Ping another -0.5 because I
had initial trouble with the Web version as well.  The net is still +1.5, as the Wizard
demonstrates why he's the Wizard.

Reflections:  I wanna play!  :)  But this board could make judging a riot.

169:2--David Lerner
I roll a 3!  The Safe House Space!

While I am on The Safe House Space I can't be affected by other events from
other spaces (e.g.: All other players lose one turn, move ahead three
spaces, etc.).
Rule Date: 2001-09-25 17:26:23 GMT

Validity:  No problems.  I will interpret the description of The Safe House Space to
apply to anyone who may occupy it, not just "I".

Style:  Ambiguous (-0.5), but helps to define a space on the board (+0.5).  No
restriction on other rulemakers (-0.5).  Total -0.5.

Reflections: I would also like to see a name for this epic journey.

[The next message was posted by the Judge in response to a query from a blind member
of the Committee, who cannot see the Wizard's board.]

Here is a quasi-official text description of the map at this stage of Round 169:

The map is roughly circular, commencing with a space in the lower left with a
direction arrow pointing to space 1.  It is possible to travel clockwise from space 1
through space 2, 3, etc. to space 70 consecutively, and then to the arrow space
again for another circuit.

There are also several branching pathways, as follows:

>From space 15, it is possible to go to space 16, or to 16a-17a-18a-19a-20a-21a-
22a-23a to 36.
From space 19a it is possible to go to space 20a as above, or to 20b-21b-22b-
23b-24b-25b-26b/c to 30.
From space 23 it is possible to go to space 24, or to 24c-25c-26b/c to 30.
From space 42 it is possible to go to space 43, or to 44a-45a-46a-47a-48a-49a-
50a-51a to 56.
From space 45a it is possible to go to space 46a as above, or to 46b-47b-48b-
49b-50b-51b-52b to 61.
From space 49a it is possible to go to space 50a as above, or to go to space 51.

(All of these presume one direction of movement, roughly clockwise, to ascending
numerical spaces.)

Additionally, many spaces have pictures in off-track spaces linked to them.

3 has a picture of a house.
11 has a picture of a ship.
17a has a stylized animal face.
21 has a volcano, or possibly a teepee, with an entry at bottom and stuff coming
through an opening on top.
21a has a picture I cannot identify.  (Wizard?)
23b and 34 both link to the same picture, showing a black cloud and lightning
over figures possibly standing on a battlement?
27 has a castle, with its drawbridge partway up or partway down.
39 has a spaceship, I think.
44a looks like four beasts in a field.
48 has a book.
48b and 58 are connected by a single ladder.
49b has a cannon.
53 has a stick figure of a person.
67 has a squiggly line ending at the bottom in a three-pointed flower head?

Pleased to be of service...
Rule Date: 2001-09-25 19:20:57 GMT

169:3--Jesse Welton
Uh, oh, since Alan and David are occupying two consecutive spaces
their pieces form a blockade which cannot be passed, so I hope I don't
waste my turn by rolling more than 3.  I roll a . . . 3!  Woo-hoo!  I
land on David's piece, which sends it back two spaces (as landing on
someone else's piece always does).  I remain (relatively) safe in the
Safe House.

I can see why this game is called Frantic Racing Chits.
Rule Date: 2001-09-25 20:22:43 GMT

Validity:  No problems.

Style:  Adds two reasonable new rules to play--the blockade and the hit-and-send-
back (+1.0).  Clever loopholing of David's immunity provision for the Safe House
(+0.5).  Responds to the calls for a Name...and an FRC name to boot (+0.5).
Doesn't limit future rulemakers much (-0.5), although perhaps the blockade will do
that soon enough.  Overall, a solid +1.5.

Reflections:  The blockade threatens to pin us all at Start!  What's a rule-changer
to do!  <evil grin>

169:4--Gallivanting Tripper
I think I?ll Gallivant in to join the game.

I?ll start by placing my piece on Start (the space with the arrow), which of
course everyone has to do when entering the board.

Before me I see an imposing barricade of David on square 1, Alan on square 2
and Jesse on the safe-house in 3.  Because of the blockade on 1 and 2, I
can?t go beyond 2.  Carefully I roll...

Fortunately I roll snake-eyes (all those years of craps practice haven?t
gone to waste), which takes me to 2 and bumps poor old Alan back to start.

Because I rolled a double, I can roll again, and now there?s no blockade in
front of me.  I roll an 8, Tripping ahead to square 10, where I can get a
bit of breathing space.

PS, in case you?re wondering why my 2 was a double and Alan?s wasn?t, as we
all know the Frantic Racing Chits are played with two dice numbered from 0
to 5.  Don?t ask me what happens when you roll a double 0, though!
Rule Date: 2001-09-26 01:14:18 GMT

Validity:  No problems.

Style:  A good solution to the blockade which was threatening to choke play
(+0.5), and a creative explanation of the double to both introduce a new rule and
maintain consistency (+1.0).  I assume the ? in place of ' is some kind of computer
glitch, so I will not deduct for it.  (If it was by design, it is dubious style.)  No
restriction on future rulemakers (-0.5), and a little windy (-0.25).  The balance is a
respectable +0.75.

Reflections:  Two consecutive rules have failed to treat the Wizard with the
proper respect, by using his name instead of just his title.  I failed to catch the first
one before judging, so I can't really penalize the second without warning the
Committee.  But now everybody knows I'm watching.  Dissing the Wizard is not
stylish.  :-)   On another front, I'm curious about the 0-0 roll now.

169:5--Rich Holmes
It's my turn!  I place my token on Start and wonder why no one's
described their token yet.  Mine's in the shape of an invisible set of
bagpipes.  Anyway, with a deft flick of the wrist, I throw the dice.

A 5 and a 2.  I move my Invisible Bagpipes to Square 7.  Now, when you
land on a square whose numerical portion is an even multiple of 7, you
must draw a Constraint card.

The card I draw says, "From now on, when the dice are thrown, the
number that comes up on each die must be equal to the number of
letters (modulo 5) in one of the first five words of the previous
valid rule.  For a throw of two dice, two distict words of the first
five must be used."
Rule Date: 2001-09-26 14:37:19 GMT

Validity: No problems.  Note that the token is placed on Start, as was first explicitly
done in 169:4.  I have no trouble with this being different from landing on a player;
thus, the Wizard's piece is not bounced.

Style:  +0.5 for the bagpipes.  +0.75 for the constraint card mechanic, which not
only defines several spaces but also encourages future rule-writers to add
constraints.  +0.25 because the rule obeys its own restrictions.  -0.5 for ambiguity;
the clear intent of the rule suggests "multiple" or the redundant "exact multiple"
rather than the actually used "even multiple" which can be interpreted differently.
Net of +1.

Reflections:  We're getting a game built around the board now.  Tokens, cards,
funky dice, and of course cool rules.

169:6--Anton Cox
Having finally found my token (a one-legged Chihuahua made of tin), I
can at last take my turn. I had better be careful not to roll a 1 or a
3, or else David will end up on 70 by the bumping rule, and be almost
sure to win! Here goes...

I rolled 7 as well. So I land on Rich's square, he is bumped back to 5
and I have to draw a Constraint card (although Rich did not mention
it, you also have to draw one when your square's numerical part is an
odd multiple of 7 too.)

My card says, "Henceforth, only players who have taken less turns
than the player with the most advanced token (including "missed turns"
due to penalties) are allowed more than one turn in the same rule."

Having rolled the same total as the last player to go, I am guilty of
being Unoriginal, and must miss a turn. Missed turns must be taken in
the player's next valid rule.
Rule Date: 2001-09-26 15:33:14 GMT

Validity:  [Original ruling reversed by the Judge, after being schooled by several
players in the past precedents and history of the Committee.  The rule is VALID.]
On the surface, this looks good.  The problem is that the rule excludes
certain eligible players in certain circumstances from being able to post a valid rule
at all.  This conflicts with Regular Ordinance 4, which specifies how a player
becomes eligible to post a rule.  INVALID.

Style:  Unoriginal is quite original; +0.75.  Another +0.75 for bailing out the Judge
in posting a quick copy of the Wizard's map...I promised him a bonus for that.  :)
Finally, +0.25 for patching Richard's ambiguity in 169:5.  No deductions--a fine

Reflections: Rulemakers may wish to specify the count on each die rolled.  Or not.

169:7--Aron Wall
I roll a ten! I always had the greatest luck in this game.  Having
placed (not landed) my piece on the start, I move forward to space 10,
tripping the piece that is already there back to 8. Note that moving
past a blockade means moving from all the way behind it to all the way
in front of it, so blockades on Start/1 aren't all that annoying at the
beginning.  Now since I rolled doubles, I get to go again.  I stare in
disbelief at my pair of zeros and watch in horror as space 10 disappears
into ooze and fog, consuming my top hat piece.  Next moment, space 10
seems to have completely vanished, leaving a smooth connection between
space 9 and space 11.  So this is what happens on a double 0!

Is my piece destroyed?  No, it has merely entered the Void, from which
all pieces come and to which they will inevitably return.  All members
of the FRC have a piece (even the Judge, whose piece is on the board).
They come from it to start and they return to it when their piece is

Fortunately, we all are provided with an extra life, so rather then
re-entering the game as an abstract concept, I can provide my piece with
a new physical form and enter the board again normally.  The default
pieces have 3 for all their stats, but for a new piece I have to roll.
Let's see... my new plutonium horse piece has 5 strength and 2 magic.  I
can re-enter him next turn.
Rule Date: 2001-09-26 17:30:10 GMT

Validity:  [Original ruling reversed by the Judge, after 169:6 was ruled VALID and
he received some additional instruction in modular arithmetic.  The rule is VALID.]
INVALID.  The last valid fantasy rule, 169:5, has from its first five words
possible die rolls of 3,2,4,1,0.  You can't get 10 on two dice from that.  Consolation
prize...You get your top hat back, should you choose to accept it.

Style:  Sigh.  Aron picked up on most of the technical goings-on, had a really cool
idea in response to the 0-0 question (+0.5), another cool idea with the Void (+0.5),
a third cool idea with the stats concept (+0.5), and was kind enough to give me a
piece knowing that I wanted to play (+0.1).  Yes, he was also windy (-0.25).  The
balance is +1.35.

Reflections:  169:5 made it impossible to throw a 5 on either die, of course.

Judge's Reversals on 169:6 and 169:7, abridged:
Thank you for your courteous input.  (I knew I wasn't particularly well-schooled for
taking up this bench!)

I still believe that 169:6 violates the spirit of RO4.  But I am convinced that the
past precedents and practices of the Committee as presented do in fact allow this
rule to be considered VALID.

My initial ruling being at variance with this, I reverse it.

Rule 169:6 is VALID.
0 modulo 5 does in fact "equal" 5 modulo 5.  I hit Drexel University's "Ask Dr.
Math" site to research the modular arithmetic questions.  (Incidentally, the
professor answering one of the key questions used both congruent and equal as
equivalent to each other in this context.)

So a five- (or ten-, or fifteen-) letter word will allow a roll of 0 OR 5 under rule

(Regarding my reflections: "Of course" is not "of course".  Of course.)

The 10 rolled by Aron is thus quite possible, if the last VALID rule was 169:6 being
VALID, and there is no other reason to judge 169:7 INVALID.

Therefore, given the ruling on 169:6 has been reversed, I must reverse the ruling
on 169:7 which hinged only on 169:6 being INVALID.

Rule 169:7 is VALID.

169:8--Jesse Welton
Did I forget to mention that I was unoriginal for rolling a three
right after David?  Silly me.  For my missed turn, I do nothing, as
that is all one can do when taking a missed turn.  Fortunately,
Gallivanting Tripper, who is in the lead, took two turns because he
rolled doubles, (indeed, that is the only case in which a player may
ever take two consecutive non-missed turns), so he's taken more turns
than I have, which means I can still take another turn in this rule.

As I prepare to roll the dice for my next turn, they snap around in my
hand as though magnetized.  The pair of them are strangely loaded:
They never roll the same pair of numbers twice between resets, which
happen on a roll of double-zero.

I roll a double-two, landing me on 7.  That sends Anton back to 5,
which sends Rich back to 3.  I draw a Restriction card: "Each rule
must leave a legal sequence of die rolls for the next player."
Finally, I roll a 1, landing me on 8.  Nothing happens there.
Rule Date: 2001-09-27 13:03:29 GMT

Validity:  Hmmm.  I see two issues.  First off, a Restriction card is not a Constraint
card (see 169:5 and 169:6).  Second, with 169:7 now being VALID, the double-
two roll is no longer possible.  INVALID.

Style:  The relationship between the odd dice and the proposed restriction is
simply too elegant for words.  +1.5

Reflections:  Jesse's interpretation of "turn" is not the only one possible.

169:9--Anton Cox
Knowing that I have been guilty of unoriginality, and being upset that I
drew a card that also restricted his options, Jesse has just tried to
hand me the dice. (It must be my go again - I dont think I will ever
understand how turns are ordered in this game!)

Unfortunately I have to miss a turn, and the card I drew last time
prevents me from taking another turn to make up for this. So upset I
am by this adverse state of affairs that I roll myself up in a ball
and make quiet gibbering noises while rocking on my chair. A little
too vigourously perhaps, as I land up on the floor, and there add
injury to insult.

At least in my next rule I will be able to have a proper turn!
Rule Date: 2001-09-27 14:41:36 GMT

Validity:  No problems.  In particular, 169:1 has been interpreted most literally.  We
know what Anton rolled (himself), where he landed (on the floor), and what
happened to him there (injury).

Style: Short, and fiendishly creative (+2).  No significant restriction on future
rulemakers, save possibly for setting in place the interpretation of "turn" (-0.5).
Another +1.5, which seems to be a popular judgement so far.  Maybe I'm getting
lenient.  But that's the way it is...  A word to the wise--once is a cool and stylish
loophole.  More than once is repetitive, boring, and, well, you get the picture.

Reflections:  I need to get a summary up soon, I think.  (Question concerning
customary practices--what needs to be in a summary?)  Overall, a wild and crazy
two days.  I had a feeling that we were headed this way.

    This always seems to happen to me when playing this game.  Due to the
strange turn ordering (which I think has a non-deterministic element to
it), I have to begin late, when the early spaces are too crowded for
comfort.  I don't particularly want to give any of my opponents a better
chance of winning by bumping them back to space 70, but it looks probable.
Well, I have to roll, so I might as well not agonize over it.
    Let's see, I've rolled a two and a four.  By my math, that works out to
6, though addition is certainly a topic open to some debate.  This lands me
on a previously empty space, so I won't bump anyone back. Whew!
    Anyway, some of you may be a bit confused with my piece.  Rather than
use one of the default pieces, I chose to start the game with a customized
one.  It's a Klein Bottle, as I find the game's defaults a bit simplistic
from a topological point of view.  My stats are fairly low - 1 strength, 2
magic, and a mere 0 charisma.  By the way, Aron, what did you get on your
charisma roll?  Did you not mention it because you feel it's low?  I'm not
embarrassed of my low rolls, I can assure you.  It's still possible for me
to do well, even if it might have been better for me to take a default
    I could take another turn at this point, but I remember the adage
“Haste makes waste” and choose to wait for now.
Rule Date: 2001-09-28 08:15:16 GMT

Validity:  No problems.

Style:  Start with +0.4 for the Klein bottle, and another +0.25 for expanding the
stats to include charisma.  Top it off with another +0.5 for the brave choice to take
low stats instead of a default piece.  The rule doesn't restrict other players, which
gets -0.5.  The total here is +0.65.

Reflections:  Strength, Magic, Charisma.  What shall we do with these lovely
concepts?  And we are starting to clog the path again.

Rule Date: 2001-09-29 14:23:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST