Re: [s-d] (if it passed)

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 11:18 PM, Tyler <wisety@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> um, what do we do again? (Maybe I should go read the rules.)
>
> On a side note, I actually played a pencil and paper version of Mathflag
> with some friends, and they liked it for the most part. One interesting
> thing is that some expressions are really hard, (if not impossible) to
> calculate for the average human. You have to be careful to make an
> expression that you could at least get a calculator to find the result for
> say, x=100. Or x=1/3. If your expression is 2^x, for example, what do you
> give as the result for x=1/3? A 10-digit rounded decimal? And what would
> you
> give for x=100? Aaah! So keep it simple, guys, and we'll all have fun.


You played this ruleset paper and pencil, or some similar game?

Also, v. good point about the complexity of the expressions. We need a
policy for irrational numbers, I guess. As it stands, there is no provision
for rounding or significant digits. Therefore I think the Gamemaster should
simply report exact answers, in the form closest to a real number that he
can.

e.g.
5/2 ---> 2.5
2^1/3 ---> 2^1/3

in other words, don't set yourself up so that the Gamemaster has no choice
but to report your answer in such a way that bits of calculations show!

Also, players should keep it simple to avoid their expressions producing
anything other than real numbers. If anything else comes up in some
calculation, game over for the player with that secret expression. (I didn't
just make that part up :p it's in the subgame rules)

BP
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss