How would you handle the combination of "Hand Limit h" and "Everybody Gets One"? Suppose player B (whose turn it isn't) has h cards in hand with "Hand Limit h" in effect. Active player A plays "Everybody Gets One". What I'd do: Give B a card. B now has more than h cards, and must discard down to h, but B can choose from among any of the cards including the one just received. Your reasoning seems to require that the card drawn and designated for B is simply discarded. Similarly for any other situation where a non-active player (who must observe the Hand Limit) can end up with more cards than the hand limit allows. Trade Hands, for instance. I'm having trouble thinking of a way to implement that action without B having more than h cards in hand, albeit briefly. I'd agree, though, that Drawing, Playing some, applying Hand Limit, then Playing more -- while it _might_ be legal -- is decidedly UnCool. On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Jody Chandler <windblownhermit@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I've always had a problem with Andy's YouTube situational explanation, > because it "feels" unfair. So, while I can't argue with the wording of the > card that it says "may," there's a serious flaw in the way he chooses to > exploit that wording that gives it that "unfair" aftertaste. > > The way I see it, Andy exploits the wording so that instead of ignoring or > observing the rule, he does both! That's what's unfair about it. I think > there is a principle at work here, very common in games, that when you are > given a choice, you can't ride the fence, you have to choose and the choice > is binding, and the choice must generally be clear to other players so they > can be sure you aren't cheating. Andy ignores the rule, finds out that > ignoring the rule doesn't work out for him, and then changes his mind. I > think I disagree with James here because I interpret the "rule" as simply > not having any cards in your hand, and the only exception to this rule is if > it is your turn you "may" ignore it. So anyways, Andy draws his cards, > takes them into his hand, organizes them, looks at them and decides which > two cards he likes. How is this observing the hand limit rule? It isn't! > He has cards in his hand, and he even says "I draw three cards, add them to > my hand..."! He has a hand of 5, not 2, so he should be considered > officially ignoring the rule. At that point he has made his choice to > ignore the rule clear to other players. To my sensibilities, he can't > change his mind and decide, after ignoring the rule by taking 3 extra cards > into his hand, to observe it just because he doesn't like the cards he now > holds. I think the only way to choose to observe the rule when it is your > turn in that situation while also observing the draw rule is to simply draw > and immediately (as the rule says) discard the 3 cards one by one without > taking them into your hand. But why would you do this? Barring prescience > of what 3 cards are on the top of the draw pile, there would be no reason to > do this, so basically what I'm saying is Andy should have lost that game. > :D > <snip> -- Frank F. Smith