[Icehouse] What is 2HOUSE?

[Carlton Noles]

Thanks, After reading this (and related threads) I wasn't certain. I thought
it was solidly two house  but  as my oldest two sons(14 & 16) are generally
my guinea pigs err avid playtesters I almost always play 3 player (4 when
the guys comedown every other weekend and my wife joins in too). In a year
or so the 7yr old will join in more (he already plays treehouse and Fluxx
and is bugging me to teach him chrononauts). But I realize that is *my*
usual gaming experience. In fact the reason I submitted Subdivision is
because early on its development my sons ASKED if we could play it again
repeatedly.

On Nov 12, 2007 1:49 PM, David Artman <david at davidartman.com> wrote:

> > From: "Carlton Noles" <carlton.noles at gmail.com>
> > Well, then I suppose I will go forward with my current idea for a game
> and
> > hope it gets in. And if not I have an appeal process. Seems
> > reasonable.Weshall see.
>
> IIRC from your last post, the game uses two matched stacks per player,
> with setups for two to four (even five?) players, ya?
>
> I'd certainly list it, in keeping with what Ryan and I discussed
> earlier: one can not assume a default number of players in a scalable
> game. Sure, one mode of play (possibly not even the "best" or "default"
> one) can be done with 1HOUSE and two colors per player; but the game is
> designed with three and four player modes, which immediately
> necessitates another set.
>
> The inverse of that, though, is a "gray space" I've elected to admit
> rather than have several list votes: games that scale in player numbers
> (2 to whatever) but which are only 2HOUSE in a two-player game:
> admissible, because that gray space is a push. Some judges (like me)
> might rank such a game higher, as it encourages sales of more sets:
> scalability as sales promotion ("Like it with two players? Add another
> set for three or four!"). Other judges might rank such a game lower, as
> it doesn't tightly adhere to the theme: the "best" or "intended"
> multiplayer mode of play isn't 2HOUSE.
>
> It is still my hope, however, that conformity to the requirement will
> not be an aspect of judging, with the list vetting borderline cases for
> me--the point is which game is "best overall" not which game best fits
> the theme. The theme has a different "functional agenda" of promoting
> sales and inspiring lateral thinking; that's the main reason I don't
> want judges to be distracted by considering it as it applies to the
> games (i.e. it should be moot at that point, it's function of bolstering
> the 2HOUSE category, and thereby encouraging gradual sales, already
> served by the creation of new games).
>
> HTH;
> David
>
> _______________________________________________
> Icehouse mailing list
> Icehouse at lists.looneylabs.com
> http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse
>



-- 
Carlton "Kermit" Noles
==================
"Joy Multiplies when it is shared among friends but grief diminishes at
every division. That is life"
-Drizzt Do'Urden
==================
Want your own GMail Account?
Ask Me for an invite.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.looneylabs.com/pipermail/icehouse/attachments/20071112/535c26a2/attachment.htm