David Artman Askes...[edit source]
an upright 1-pointer underneath an upright 2-pointer scores 1 + 4 + 1 + 4 = 10 (1 for the upright 1, 4 for the upright 2, 1 + 4 for the 1 pointing at the 2)
Wouldn't that example be "an upright 1-pointer underneath an upright 2-pointer scores 1 + 4 + 1 + 2 = 8 (1 for the upright 1, 4 for the upright 2, 1 + 2 for the 1 pointing at the 2)," per this rule: "A pyramid pointing at another scores the total of *both* pyramid's pip count."
Do you mean that rule to read something like: "A pyramid pointing at another scores the total of *both* pyramids' values based on their current orientation"?
- Yup, it's the second. Should read something like . . . well, I'm not coming up with anything better than your wording off the top of my head. That's why examples are helpful, though . . . --Nycavri 16:49, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
Note that the possessive plural of pyramids is pyramids'. (You've got it wrong in the quoted rule above.)
- Thanks, fixed. --Nycavri 16:49, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
[Note a "weird" pyramid automatically score zero for the throw.]
Even if the pyramid is weird because it, miraculously, landed on top of an upright pyramid and stayed weird? I'd be half-inclined to give that a big Luck bonus (weird pieces score the cube of their values), because it will be RARE.
Sure, a weird which is weird because it, say, is leaning on a flat piece, pointing at the sky at some odd angle, is worth nothing. But an ungrounded weird, half-hanging on an upright medium or large, should cost the player the 4 or 9 points for the upright, nor should that neigh-impossible weirdness be worth nothing in and of itself.
As the rule reads, weirdness is like "snake eyes." Maybe that's what you want, though....
- And, as you say, weird = snake eyes. Anything else is complex to spell out. But enjoy "house ruling" it . . . --Nycavri 16:49, 17 June 2008 (EDT)