"Never Seven" - Playtest Rules - Suspended While the Game is Undergoing Modification

One of the simple observations is to learn that any Token in play opposite side is either one of two OTHER values. So if you understand this fact, you can probably elongate the game in terms of time. You say the game can be played in about 10 minutes.

While I have not TRIED this... My postulation to you is that a game can go on indefinitely if you understand some of the composition of the game. Like knowing that a token will have one of two OTHER values is a critical assertion.

So to avoid any trouble... You would move a piece say a "3" knowing that the opposite side is either a "1" or "2" (the only possible values). By KNOWING and OBSERVING this, you would move a piece that has no ramifications for scoring a "7". Meaning a situation where a "1" or "2" doesn't imply a "7".

Same goes on the start of a turn where you PLACE the topmost token into play. This is much easier to solve for since you KNOW the value and can compute the values when deciding where to PLACE that token.

So there are a total of 18 Turns (9 for each player before the piles exhaust).

Q: Is it your opinion that the game will END BEFORE all 18 Tokens are placed on the Board?

This would be good to know TBH. And if this is a END OF GAME signal (out of tokens to place), well then it could signify that if the end of the tokens are reached the game ends in a STALEMATE (maybe... It's just a thought).

It's not the end of the world if an ABSTRACT game such as yours doesn't end in a victory for either side. STALEMATES are more accepted in abstract games and since it is quick it is easy to play a re-match to see if you can beat the game again.

My second points is just that...

Is a STALEMATE or a game going on forever the sign that the game is BROKEN???

I would argue that the STALEMATE is a valid condition for cutting off the game prematurely. But that going of forever would signal some kind of "brokeness".

Last point about VALUES...

It's a bit too bad that the game relies on Numbers ONLY. It has a Rock-Paper-Scissors QUALITY to the game in that there are only "3" VALUES. Maybe the only way for this game to work is by NUMBERS... You could make the game look much more PRETTY if it was about FLOWERS.

Like Roses = "3", Tulips = "2" and Daisies = "1". You would STILL have the VALUE on the Token ... Just the GAME would look much MORE PRETTIER with the FLOWER BED instead of just numbers.

Roses could be "RED", Tulips could be "RED and YELLOW" and Daisies could be "WHITE and YELLOW". The numbers would still be on the TOKEN but the resulting FLOWER BED would be much more VIBRANT than just the numbers.

It doesn't AFFECT GAME PLAY... ONLY AESTHETICS in that the board will look much more colorful.

***

I haven't PLAYED per se... Just reading the rules and understanding the strategy and where to TAKE OUT (or REMOVE) Randomness with PREDICTABLE and DETERMINISTIC results.

The idea of the FLOWERS was to make the game feel more presentable even though it does NOTHING to "alter" the game (which could be a good fact too!)

For now that's the best that I have. Let me know if you have questions of your own and please reply and do the best to address my questions.

Sincerely.

You don't know if the "2" is either a "1" or "3". It's the opponent's Tile. The first time you FLIP it you take a chance and can lose the game by being too "reckless". But yeah I agree there could be a situation where the risk is 0% that the operation of moving and flipping does NOT result in a "7" 100% of the time.

I also think that the game should END if a player CANNOT place a Tile into play WITHOUT causing a "7". Should be the rule: You can't play, you lose. You were outsmarted by your opponent. Also the END should be when the tiles you have are expended. That's more than 2/3rd of the board and it should be a STALEMATE giving both players a chance to RESET and TRY AGAIN.

I'm still curious as what you mean by BROKEN?! By your rules or the game itself, etc. etc. What exactly do you mean by "Break my game"???

Note #1: I think there is a MISTAKE in your RULEBOOK. It says 3 1/3 and again repeats 3 1/3. I think the first one should be 3 1/"2" instead. Like in your Original Post (OP). Should be 3x 1/2, 3x 1/3 and 3x 2/3 tokens. That sounds more logical and fixes the BUG in the rulebook.

@Steve ... I was thinking about the whole "Pass-Your-Turn" idea and although I don't think the idea is GOOD, there is a GOOD ANGLE to something better. My ideas go as follows:

#1> If a player feels he cannot place a TOKEN, he signals saying "BLOCKED" and then his opponent may check the board to see if this is TRUE.

#2> If it is FALSE, the opponent says "NOT BLOCKED" and the player must try to find the position in which he will NOT lose the game. If he cannot find it, he forfeits the game to his opponent.

#3> If he finds the position and one did exist, the game continues on NORMALLY.

#4> If there is no "NOT BLOCKED" position, the player may FLIP his token and try with the OTHER VALUE (on the opposite side).

#5> Play resumes as normally with this new VALUE and allows the player to go through the process of finding a location that is good for his TOKEN.

***

Why do I like this better than "Passing your turn, etc." and all that rigmarole is that it's simpler and more intuitive (just try with the other side). It's a simpler rule exception which means NORMALLY you CANNOT flip your TOKEN and put it into play... But when you are BLOCKED, you signal that fact and ask for your opponent's assessment. If you are indeed BLOCKED, all you need to do is to flip the token and continue play as normally with the opposite side.

***

Like I said about STALEMATES... In ABSTRACT GAMES it is much more acceptable. Because games are quick and simple, a rematch isn't going to take 60+ more minutes ... Maybe another 10 to 15 minutes. Which is good because it means in 30 minutes your can maybe play 2 to 3 matches and do best out of three or even have a TIE (stalemate) and be forced to replay.

But again that's on YOU. You are the game designer. It's your choice to see if this is a plausible and acceptable option.

***

With regards to the NUMBERS ... I really don't like the ROMAN NUMERALS. They are HARDER to READ. Dressing it up with FLOWERS as I mentioned was one of many options... I had another idea related to this:

Just a bit of a rhyme ... And it went with the "skin" of the Flowers. And you could have "Roses = Red", "Violets = Blue", "Daisies = White" and maybe use the numbers "1", "2" and "3" in the UPPER CORNER of the Game Tiles making it easier to comprehend which tiles are YOURS and which are your OPPONENTS (up-side-down).

The ROMAN NUMERALS are not good because you cannot tell which belongs to which player unless they are COLOR CODED. And that prevents the "Flower Skin" from going over the tiles (since the flowers have their own colors).

Anyhow that's something else for you to consider... These are just embryonic ideas which you can TRY and see if they WORK.

***

Lastly I'm glad you explained that a ROW, COLUMN or DIAGONAL must IN TOTAL add up to 7. Not just 3, 3, 2, 3, 3 becoming a 3, 3, 1, 3, 3 = 3, 3, 1 = 7 or 1, 3 , 3 = 7... Since it is 13 instead and NOT "7". Good to know that clarification has since changed the optics of the game as I thought any 3-tile sequence = "7" is a LOSS. But THANK YOU for clarifying.

One last note, thank you for sharing and visiting BGDF.com with your idea.

Cheers!

Note #1: Also with regards to the FLOWERS SKIN... You could easily put "1 Daisy" = 1 Point, "2 Tulips" = 2 Points and "3 Roses" = 3 Points as the AMOUNT of flowers and making the necessity of NUMBERS GONE!

So the TILES would have the corresponding AMOUNT of flowers and you would eventually (quickly) become familiar with the point system given the amount of flowers.

Granted this SKIN is a bit more COMPLEX than just plain NUMBERS. I think it would be so much NICER to the eye if you used FLOWER and their corresponding quantity to SKIN the game.

But this is YOUR GAME. I just liked this idea. Cheers Mate!