Looney Labs Fluxx Mailing list Archive

[Fluxx] Re: Fluxx Digest, Vol 26, Issue 1

  • FromBart Janssens <bartjanssens@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • DateSat, 01 Sep 2007 14:16:59 -0400
fluxx-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

There are two corner conditions to worry about, not one:

A: You play a goal that you fulfil, causing the potato to rotate to you.
(Do you win before the potato lands?)

B: There is a goal in play which you fulfil, but you also have the potato. You play a new goal, causing the potato to rotate *away* from you.
(Do you win right after the potato leaves, before the goal changes?)

And there are three possible answers:

1: The potato moves right after the goal changes. (A: yes. B: no.)

2: The potato moves right *before* the goal changes. (A: no. B: yes.)

3: It's simultaneous. (A: no. B: no.)

The one game I've played with potato in the deck, we ruled "simultaneous". Mostly because it's easier -- you don't have to reason about momentary states.


Actually, there is another corner condition:

C: A goal is played which two adjacent players both fulfill, and the potato is passed from one to the other.

Examples: Both players have five Keepers.
Both have the same number of cards, and more than 10.
One player has the Brain and the other has Andy Looney.  (Brain: No TV goal)
There are also some possibilities with Double Agenda.

I think I like the 'simultaneous' argument, in which case the player who ends up without the potato wins.

--Bart Janssens

Current Thread