I'm not sure if {flat, upright, weird} can work with D&D players. {up, left, right} might seem arbitrary to us, but it might be visually clearer to those unfamiliar with Zendo. IIRC, this puzzle is for non-Zendo players. Maybe if the weird-ness is consistent, it could work... Like, laying on top of the flat piece. But then, in the all-weird koan, the weird-ness would be different from the one-weird koans... Hmm... I think left, right is better for newbies.
Actually, one more idea, to try to save weird: Lean the weird's tip to the top edge of the base of the flat. Then, in the all-weird koan, you could "circle the wagons" and keep the same weird position, or very nearly the same position.
--David
----- "Timothy Hunt" <games@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Except it then becomes a protractor rule. What angle are you going
> to
> consider small enough to consider them to be "opposite"? What
> allowance are you going to have for pointing in the same direction?
>
> I can almost guarantee that you won't be able to make them so their
> pointing lines are exactly parallel, so you'd have to make a judgment
> as to the tolerance. However, you can, quite easily, make them flat,
> upright or weird.
>
> Timothy
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Nick Lamicela <nupanick@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > then just change the orientation part of the rule to "either all
> three
> > pyramids are pointing in the same direction, or else one pyramid is
> upright
> > and two are pointing flat in opposite directions." All relative.
> > ~nupanick (or other appropriate name)
> >
> > ===================
> > Guvf VF zl jvggl fvtangher.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Joshua Kronengold <mneme@xxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> David L. Willson writes:
> >> >And I think that's 209 possible white koans now, if I was right
> about
> >> >the other to begin with, which I probably wasn't, but JK will be
> along
> >> >tao loudly correct me and draw aspersions on my literacy, I
> imagine.
> >>
> >> Please don't engage in personal attacks here.
> >>
> >> And if you can't take it without rancor, don't throw it. (the last
> >> discussion was quite pleasant until certain people, you included,
> >> started proclaiming their way as "the one true way". I just got
> >> annoyed when you made a false equality in support of your
> position.)
> >>
> >>
> >> >{upright, flat, weird} or {upright, flat-left, flat-right} (as in
> >> > Treehouse). In either case, "Yes, I missed it."
> >>
> >> Personally, I'd look at "all pieces are in a line" as a fidly rule
> and
> >> not use it; when I run SET, I use a nice simple "contains (or
> consists
> >> entirely of) three pices for which the following properties are
> either all
> >> the identical or all different among those three pieces:
> orientation
> >> (upright, wierd, flat), size, color.
> >>
> >> The problem (IMO) with left/right orientations is that you need a
> >> baseline. Which means you need to specify something like "all
> pieces
> >> are on a line" or "all pieces are in parallel.
> >>
> >> Which is the kind of rule (grossly) that is of the form
> "medium-difficulty
> >> rule, precondition of other medium-difficulty rule" which, as in in
> the
> >> "three-state zendo" discussion, I find makes for a much more
> difficult
> >> rule than one expects (which is why I'm interested in
> experimenting
> >> with breaking down those rules into three different states, to
> make
> >> them much more tractable for players).
> >>
> >> IOW, I think that unless it's an illegal zendo rule (ie, absolute
> left
> >> and right, rather than defined within the koan), that an "upright,
> >> left, right" SET rule is -substantially- harder than a normal SET
> >> rule.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\
> _,,,--,,_
> >> ,)
> >> --^-- "Did you know, if you increment enough, you /,`.-'`' -,
> ;-;;'
> >> /\\ get an extra digit?" "I knew," weeps Six. |,4- ) )-,_
> ) /\
> >> /-\\\ "We knew. But we had forgotten." '---''(_/--'
> (_/-'
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Icehouse mailing list
> >> Icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Icehouse mailing list
> > Icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Icehouse mailing list
> Icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse