On 11/5/07, David Artman <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: "Jorge Arroyo" <trozo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> I think it makes sense, although relaxing the requirement to 1 or 2 sets
> wouldn't change things that much and would stop designers artificially
> modifying their rules for the 2HOUSE requirement...
I'd say "art*fully* modifying," because I like to think that rules
additions that begin as artificial (i.e. "forced") additions often lead
to interesting complexities of gameplay.
While that may be true in some cases, in other cases it may lead to games that are "almost 1HOUSE" and that may even work better removing those artificial elements... but you're right: now it's not the time to change the rules... Let's hope that people do games that really need 2 sets, else newcomers to the system that bought a second set to play more games may feel a bit cheated :)