[Fluxx] Fluxx Hand Limit question on YouTube

[Melissa Parish]

I'm also trying to figure this out.

Say you have 3 keepers, Bob has 4 keepers, and Jane has 2 keepers.  Under
the old rules, you would still get the rich bonus because you have more
keepers than her.  But, under that logic, wouldn't you also get the poor
bonus because you have fewer keepers than Bob?

In any case, it's all straightened out now in 3.1...

~ Melissa

On 1/19/07, Lynda <giddens at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "I also remember the 3.0 days when Rich and Poor Bonus meant to us that if
> you had more/fewer keepers than any other player (at all) you got the bonus.
> Glad they cleared that up in 3.1."
>
> Could you please clarify this?  I'm pretty sure I have the 3.0 version and
> I thought the rich/poor bonus was determined by how many/few keepers you had
> within the group playing.  (IE - If you have 3 keepers and everyone else has
> 2 or less, you qualify for Rich Bonus; if you have 0 keepers and everyone
> else has 1 or more, you qualify for the poor bonus.)   Is this thinking not
> correct?  If not, what specifically was cleared up in 3.1?  I looked on
> the website, but couldn't find where this sort of change information might
> be located.
>
> Thanks!
>
> On 1/18/07, James Hazelton <jameshazelton at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I have the opposite problem. Instead of applying it too much, my group
> > routinely forgets about First Play Random/Final Card Random entirely, and
> > many turns pass before someone says, "Say, wasn't that card supposed to be
> > random?" I also remember the 3.0 days when Rich and Poor Bonus meant to
> > us that if you had more/fewer keepers than any other player (at all) you got
> > the bonus. Glad they cleared that up in 3.1.
> >
> > On 1/18/07, TheLoneGoldfish <thelonegoldfish at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Speaking of rules nobody ever reads... First play random's cevat that
> > > it has no effect in a play 1 situation was not known for the longest time to
> > > the people I played with.
> > >
> > > Although you could just smash the play all with the trash a new rule
> > > 2nd from last.
> > >
> > > -Evan
> > >
> > > On 1/18/07, S Mattison < s.mattison at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Amazing move, and completely sneaky! My jaw dropped when I saw that.
> > > > I can't believe you can observe those rules *during* your turn! Goes to show
> > > > you just gotta read them cards!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Looking forward to more. =)
> > > > -Steve
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Fluxx mailing list
> > > > Fluxx at lists.looneylabs.com
> > > > http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/fluxx
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Fluxx mailing list
> > > Fluxx at lists.looneylabs.com
> > > http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/fluxx
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Fluxx mailing list
> > Fluxx at lists.looneylabs.com
> > http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/fluxx
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fluxx mailing list
> Fluxx at lists.looneylabs.com
> http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/fluxx
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.looneylabs.com/pipermail/fluxx/attachments/20070119/dffd09cd/attachment.htm