Heh, I put the idea to the list, so it's everybody's baby now. The ideas are intended to be quite simplified; I remember when I was first introduced to geometrical shapes in Junior High School many of them were described in this way. If you look at them from the bottom, you can see one shape, i.e. circle for the cone or cylinder, and if you look at them from the front, you can see another, triangle and square respectively. Another reason for the simplification (and why there aren't more items there) is to prevent requiring 3+ keepers for a single goal. One of the points is to limit most, if not all, of the goals to no more than 2 keepers, as well as re-using the keepers instead of having keepers that are only good for one goal which is why there aren't more shapes atm. Actually, Square could be changed to quadrilateral. This will include the square, rectangle, rhombus, trapezoid, kite, and parallelogram. However, just to cover all the angles, we would have to change circle to ellipse, a circle just being a subset thereof, and cube would have to become hexahedron, and sphere would switch to ellipsoid. While this might be fine for some students, others could become confused with the terminology, which are usually the students which need the extra reinforcement playing Fluxx would (hopefully) provide. To Fred: One of the things I didn't like about your cylinder description is that students may see the parallel lines as meaning that it were only connected at those lines instead of a continuous face, or a solid object that the square (rectangle, quadrilateral, etc) would indicate. As to game issues themselves, the more keepers required for a single goal, the easier it is for players to be unable to get a needed keeper. The more multiple copies of a keeper there are, the more likely it is for multiple players to win at the same time (which is why I went with the []^3 instead of two of each shape), ergo the limitations of two keepers per goal, one copy of each keeper (for the most part anyway, there are always the occasional exceptions). While I can understand the desire to make it more "accurate" (just how many ways are there to describe a cylinder, cone, sphere, etc), each geometric shape could end up having a subset of keepers and goals specific to it, with some of them only single use keepers and goals with quite a few (4+) specific keepers required (instead of any keeper like the 5 keepers goal). Scott Sulzer