[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Absolutely great, in coherence of theme and originality!
Wow!! Who said theme doesn't count in abstract games? I want to play this, but I think I'm going to be disapointed when the pieces remain silent. I want to see a ZRF, but not too soon. Whoever does it needs to do a good job on the graphics, not to mention audio, to do the game justice. 'What eldritch noise did I hear?' Perhaps the screech of the El.
It recently occurred to me that I might have named the Zombie an Iron Golem so that its dissolution by ichor would be a nethack reference. But perhaps that would have been inappropriate after all. Lovecraft never played a game of Nethack in his life.
Question: can a wounded friend move over (but obviously not stop on) a square occupied by a mummy? i am not sure. if anybody wants to try this game with me by email, send to good7972@hotmail.com
A Wounded Fiend (not 'friend' unless you are a truly scary creature) is impeded by mummies, as indeed a Rook would be. Notice also that it cannot retrace its steps because of its own ichor, and therefore, as Azgoroth once said, 'carries within it the seeds of its own destruction'. (The endgame where each side has one Wounded Fiend and nothing else can be quite interesting.) This game is tough to get used to. For a while I thought I had made a major rules error, but in fact when a Leaf Pile engulfs, the mummy does not appear until it moves on, and so the Leaf Pile is vulnerable to being engulfed by an enemy Leaf Pile. If it were not so, the first player would attack with Leaf Pile (engulfing his own Human for greater speed) and win by force.
Oops. It seeme I misremembered what the Spirit told me in my dream, for when I tried to play the game it was too easy to end up in an impasse with no good way to break it; and the reason was clearly that the Go Aways were not performing their intended role. Then I tried a few games in which the Go Away moved by leaping two squares Rookwise or by moving one square diagonally, and things seemed to work much better -- in fact, just about exactly right, in conformance to the original vision of the game. It is funny how the Wounded Fiend seems to be such an unimportant piece, when it was the original inspiration for the game. Under 'Interactions', it should be added that 'Leaping pieces can cross unharmed a square seen by a Basilisk, for their talons never touch the ground and therefore the Basilisk does not see them.' The interactions are so complicated! I need to make a chart to see if I left anything else out.
Addition to Interactions made as requested. Did you also mean to add a
diagonal step move to the Go Away?
<p>
<br>
<i>(Fnord)</i>
Under 'compelled Moves', there should be a final notice that 'Sometimes it is possible to make a saving move with some other piece than the compelled one. For example, suppose that your Basilisk has been pushed onto an occupied square, and so is compelled to move off, but has no legal move; if you can engulf your own Basilisk with a leaf pile, you have removed the condition causing the compulsion, and therefore you have saved the game.' And, under 'Interactions', 'If a Go Away which is compelled to flee an enemy Ghast is next to the Ghast, it can scream GO AWAY! instead of moving. It ends its turn one move further away than it started and so it has met the compulsion to flee. A Leaf Pile which is next to a Ghast can engulf the Ghast; as it then no longer needs to flee, its compulsion has been satisfied.'
Thy bidding done once more, Oh Gnohmon.
I have rarely seen so much chatter as for this game. (N.B. there is significant commentary on Nemoroth in the Yellow Journalism thread.) A couple of points: Is Nemoroth a chess variant? If gnohmon says it is, who am I to gainsay him? I am an 'inclusionist' when it comes to chess variants, anyway. It actually seems more like an Amazons variant, and there are other more chess-like games that make use of the 'shrinking board' mechanism, but what the heck. (Bob Abbott, who invented Ultima, did not think it was chess, because it did not use replacement captures. He was an 'exclusionist'.) When Nemoroth is refined, and the rules settle down, may we expect pages on 'The Value of the Nemoroth Pieces' and 'Nemoroth with Different Armies'? Should we reserve the name www.nemorothvariants.com? If interest remains high, how about the CVP sponsor a contest in Nemoroth problem composition?
'rarely seen as much chatter' -- it's a combination of two things, I think; first the story is pretty good. You must understand that after I wrote it, I also read it, and even I was affected by it. The idea of the ancient Lovecraftian city that existed before the world was finished being built kinda grabs me. And the details that make it real (by the way, the reason that Nemoroth was destroyed when Luna was floated up into the sky after being built in its harbor was that the project was given to the lowest bidder) -- well,when I wrote it, in the heat of the moment I thought it was merely corroborative detail intended to add artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative, but when I read it, it sounded so suspension-of-disbeliefable and I could picture the city and the harbor and the Moon and the little boats carrying pieces of craters to the work site, and golly gee gosh how amazing. The second thing is that the game itself is pretty interesting. Although I was so caught up in the story that I really did a bad job of describing the game, it's non-trivial and it's very different (in terms of how it feels to play it) than most chesslike or ultimalike games. This *will* cause chatter, even in the most silent of times. Since The Game of Nemoroth came out shortly after I had said strongly that there wasn't enough chatter, well, what would you expect. :-) 'values of Nemoroth pieces' -- quite impossible. Likewise Nemoroth with Different Armies. The various non-capture effects have values that are imho impossible to estimate numerically. The useful Go Away has a value that depends entirely on what it can push, just for one example. In practice, I think the Zombie is most valuable, and the second tier contains the Go Away, the Basilisk, and the Leaf Pile. The Leaf Pile is so easy to use; an advanced Basilisk, even if it gets petrified (but you gotta calculate if the foe can push a Leaf Pile onto it!) can be crippling, and the Go Away transforms positions completely. But even the humble Human is strong. Leaving one's Basilisk at home invites the Humand to advance and petrify themselves in blocking positions. The Ghast is so powerful that it is outside the range of values. However, I have not yet played a game against myself where I captured a Ghast, so in effect the Ghast is always neutralized by the enemy Ghast. Pushing a statue to d4 or d5 neutralizes the enemy Ghast and allows you to reposition from b6 to f6; this happened once and was very strong. All in all, I like the way the game works.
''values of Nemoroth pieces' -- quite impossible.' --- I was just joking here. I actually can't imagine how one could assign values, considering all the interactions. In regular chess, the only interaction is capture. 'Likewise Nemoroth with Different Armies. The various non-capture effects have values that are imho impossible to estimate numerically.' --- True, but it is possible to imagine other interactions that might be interesting. Several spring to mind (nature abhors a vacuum) but they could be as simple as ichor with different effects. One could even handicap by allowing the ichor of each player to dissipate at different rates. 'The useful Go Away has a value that depends entirely on what it can push, just for one example.' --- A trivially true statement. Ceteris paribus, a Knight that can capture a Queen is worth more than one that can capture a Bishop. I consider values to be a statistical guide, not a received truth, fun as they may be to study and play with. (Of course, I stink as a chess player, so what's my opinion worth?) It is likely that I may soon be playing Nemoroth against another human via email. We will be sure to post our observations. As a sidebar, there is really no assurance that any entity with which one communicates via email alone is actually human. We could all be alien anthropologists, who, thinking we are studying humans, are studying each other. The resulting theses would be feces.
I am reviewing the document http://www.panix.com/~gnohmon/nemofull.html and I need to know if I have interpreted it correctly. Statements: [A Leaf Pile] can move onto a non-ichorous non-Ghast square which contains a Mummy and at least one other piece. When a Leaf Pile makes its first voluntary move after engulfing something, it leaves behind a single Mummy; notice that this means no Mummy is left behind when a Leaf Pile that is digesting something is pushed. Conclusion: If a Leaf Pile engulfs a multiple occupancy square including a Mummy, and then is pushed, there is no Mummy remaining on that square. Statement: If the ichor will evaporate after you make your move but before your opponent moves, you can ignore it. Conclusion: That ichor actually lasts nine plies, not five moves. There will be more questions.
1. Yes, the mummy has been engulfed. 2. 'ichor actually lasts nine plies' ---- hmmm. This relates to the specific case where a piece is compelled to move off. The ichor certainly lasts ten plies, so in this situation the ichor must have been created during your opponent's move. My thought was that since it will finish its evaporation at the end of your move, you can effectively satisfy the compulsion to move off by simply staying where you are; and at the end of your move the result is that you are no longer standing on icky ichor.
Wait, there's more. Statements: A Leaf Pile is subject to the effects of a Basilisk, and a petrified Leaf Pile cannot engulf anything. A petrified Leaf Pile can still engulf things that are pushed onto it, and it can still engulf things it is pushed onto. Conclusion: Second statement is true, and more fun. Corollary: A Go Away pushing a petrified Leaf Pile around can vacuum up all sorts of impedimenta. Statement: Any mobile piece except a Zombie within two squares of a Ghast must flee the Ghast, and no mobile piece except a Zombie may move of its own accord to a Ghast Square; the squares within the Ghast's range are called Ghast Squares. Clarification requested: If several pieces are under compulsion to flee a Ghast, but the Ghast moves off before the compulsions can all be satisfied, the compulsions no longer exist if the compelled pieces are no longer on Ghast squares. Additional statements: When you are under compulsion, you may make any move which removes the compulsion, but if you cannot satisfy the compulsion of at least one piece, you lose. The Human moves one square sideways, or one square straight forward, or one square diagonally forward, but only to an empty non-ichorous square. Hypothetical situation: Alabaster Human on f5, Obsidian Ghast moves to f6, creating compulsion for human to flee. Assume there is no other Alabaster piece under compulsion this move, and no saving move is possible. The Human can only move to e5, e6, g5, or g6. These squares are still adjacent to the Obsidian Ghast. Is this a win for Obsidian due to stalemate by compulsion?
Lovecraftian/Chess related story: http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Hangar/5176/misc/pirc01.htm
OK, now I'm going to try to clarify ichor: Alabaster Obsidian Wounded Fiend moves Move 1 Ichor deposited Ichor ply 2 Ichor ply 1 Move 2 Ichor ply 3 Ichor ply 4 Move 3 Ichor ply 5 Ichor ply 6 Move 4 Ichor ply 7 Ichor ply 8 Move 5 Ichor ply 9 Ichor ply 10 Obsidian pieces need not move off ichorated square OR Alabaster Obsidian Wounded Fiend moves Move 1 Ichor deposited Ichor ply 1 Move 2 Ichor ply 2 Ichor ply 3 Move 3 Ichor ply 4 Ichor ply 5 Move 4 Ichor ply 6 Ichor ply 7 Move 5 Ichor ply 8 Ichor ply 9 Move 6 Ichor ply 10 Alabaster pieces need not move off ichorated square Does this look right?
Note that the moving Wounded Fiend in the prior comment could belong to either player if it was forced to flee by a Go Away.
Quoth the Betza: 'The Leaf Pile cannot move of its own accord onto an ichorous square, nor onto a square containing a statue, nor onto a square containing a single mummy but no other pieces. It can move onto a non-ichorous non-Ghast square which contains a mummy and at least one other piece.' Does that mean that a Leaf Pile can move of its own accord onto a square containing TWO mummies? That's my interpretation. (NOTE: Two mummies can be on the same square by pushing one onto another)
More comments may be found in the
<a href='http://www.chessvariants.com/index/listcomments.php?subjectid=YellowJournalism'>YellowJournalism</a> discussion.
What's a bit surprising is that compelled moves are also 'of its own accord'
To flee means that the piece must end its move geometrically further away from the Ghast than it was when it started its move; for example, if your Ghast is on b3, you can move your Human from b2 to c2 because the geometrical distance between the two pieces has increased. Clarification has been made.
'compelled move of its own accord' -- yes, because the owner chooses which compelled piece is to be moved, and if the piece has more than one legal move the owner gets to choose its destination.
Does that mean that a Leaf Pile can move of its own accord onto a square containing TWO mummies? That's my interpretation. (NOTE: Two mummies can be on the same square by pushing one onto another) Yes, it means that. I'm not sure if it was right. As I think of it, it seems to me that this rule was generated in a momentary panic when I myself misread the rules and pearef that a leaf pile could not recapture (it can recapture because when a Leaf Pile engulfs things, there is nothing on the square but the Leaf Pile itself; the Mummy is not generated until the Leaf Pile moves on. Now that I think of it, it seems to me that this adds too many rules and clarifications for too little benefit. If the presence of a Mummy or a statue makes a crowded square safe from voluntary engulfment, doesn't this actually add to the interest of the game? Pending your responses, I believe I will change this back to the original, where, as you may recall, it was stated that the only way to mummify a petrified Basilisk was tu push a Leaf Pile onto it.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.