Looney Labs Fluxx Mailing list Archive

Re: [Fluxx] Monty Python Fluxx: first reactions and questions

  • From"Bryan Stout" <bryan.stout@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • DateMon, 20 Oct 2008 15:05:39 -0400
Mike accidentally sent this just to me rather than everyone, so I'm forwarding it:
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Fluxx] Monty Python Fluxx: first reactions and questions

I agree with you on 1 and 4.

Regarding Question 2: I would think you would not be able to win in any case until you've rid yourself of one of the creepers. This is because the text on the creeper stats you can't win with that particular creeper in play unless the goal states you can. By having a second creeper that prevents you from winning because the goal does not say you can win with that second creeper in play. In the case of a double agenda fulfilling requirements for both creepers I'd think you'd need to rid yourself of one creeper before winning for the same reason stated above. The text on creepers says you can not win unless the goal says other wise. "The goal" is singular therefore creeper A prevents goal X and creeper B prevents goal Y.

Regarding Question 3: Yes you'd get to draw 3 more. You've only drawn 2 that round. The other two cards that allowed you to draw were bonus draws and they don't count towards your draw according to the draw rule. At least that's how I see it and would argue it.

On Oct 20, 2008 11:19am, Bryan Stout <bryan.stout@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> <snip>
> I think the rules for MPF are probably the best Fluxx rules
> descriptions yet, in part because of the very helpful FAQ list on the back
> side.  Still, I do have other questions -- it's almost as unavoidable as
> Taxes or the Grim Reaper:
> 1. The Animator Keeper says it "Counts as the
> Finger of God if the real Finger of God is not on the table".  I'm certain
> this refers to the Goal cards that require the Finger of God ('Course it' a Good
> Idea!, Gone to Meet His Maker, Squashed From Above).  But since the Finger
> of God gives its owner the ability to "smite (i.e. discard) any Creeper", does
> this mean the owner of the Animator may also smite Creepers if the FoG is
> absent?  My guess is not, because that would require referring to the text
> of the FoG card when it isn't around.  But, I'm not sure. 
> 2.  Let's say I have these cards on the table:
>    Keepers                 Creepers
>     Robin's Minstrels       3-Headed Giant
>     Trojan Rabbit           Killer Rabbit
> If the current Goal were "He
> Bravely Ran Away", I would satisfy the Goal conditions (the top cards above),
> but couldn't win because I'd have the Creeper Killer Rabbit.  And if
> the current Goal were "Rabbits of DOOM!", I would satisfy its conditions
> (the bottom cards above), but couldn't win because I'd have the Creeper
> 3-Headed Giant.  But, what if there were a Double Agenda, and the two Goals
> were "He Bravely Ran Away" *and* "Rabbits of DOOM!"?  Would I win now or
> not?  I think yes, because both my Creepers are part of winning conditions,
> but I can see how someone could argue the other way. 
> 3.  Suppose the current New Rules include
> Draw 2, Play 2 and I Just Want To Sing!  I draw 2, sing a Python song to
> draw 2 more, play Jackpot to draw 3 more, and finally play Draw 5.  Do I
> get to draw 3 more because my Draw step only gave me 2, or do I get nothing
> extra because I've already drawn 7 this turn?  I could see it going either
> way on this question. 
> 4.  Unfortunately, there was one card I found
> ambiguous.  Fortunately, I only found one.  Unfortunately, it will
> take a while to explain this.  For those who haven't seen it yet, the text
> of the Action card Nudge, Nudge, Wink, Wink... is:
>     "Know what I mean?  Know
> what I mean?  Say no more!  Say no more!"
>     All players who know what is
> meant may immediately draw 1 card.
> When I first read this, a swarm of possible
> reactions a player may have buzzed through my head:
> A)  What does "what is meant" refer
> to?  Not only do I not know the answer, I don't understand the
> question!
> B)  I guess I'm supposed to act something out,
> and everyone who knows what I mean gets a card.  I of course know what I
> mean so I get one.
> C)  I know!  The quote is from the
> "Nudge nudge" sketch on the TV show, so I get a card. 
> D)  I know!  The guy in the sketch
> is referring to his ultimate question (You've ... er ... slept ... with a lady
> ... what's it like?), i.e. s*x, so I get a card. 
> In addition to understanding the question, there's
> demonstrating one's knowledge:
> i)  To draw a card, you must demonstrate you
> know what is meant.  Rather than blurting it out loud so others find out,
> you can write it down or whisper in the ear of the one who played the
> card. 
> ii)  You don't have to demonstrate your
> knowledge, unless someone challenges you. 
> iii)  You don't have to demonstrate your
> knowledge at all.  You can bluff and pretend, getting a card even if you
> are clueless. 
> I'm pretty sure D) and iii) are the intentions,
> which means that Nudge, Nudge, Wink, Wink... is a Pythonesque version of the
> card Everybody Gets 1.  Am I right?  But I suspect this card will
> lead to a good number of discussions or arguments at gaming tables. 
> 5.  There is one piece of artwork on the
> website that doesn't appear on any card, namely the Taunting Frenchman. 
> Was this for a card that ultimately ended up on the cutting room floor? 
> (He'd make a great Creeper.)  What cards from the Origins prototype deck
> were dropped for the final version? 
> Thanks!
> Bryan

Current Thread