Take the 2-minute tour ×
Board & Card Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who like playing board games, designing board games or modifying the rules of existing board games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Player A and Player B both have 5 Keepers in play.

Player B has 1 Creeper (Prevents Player B from winning)

Player A plays the goal card 5 Keepers which goes like this (goal cards, are the criteria met to win)

"If someone has 5 or more Keepers on the table, then the player with the most Keepers in play wins. In case of a tie, continue playing until a clear winner emerges."

Does Player A win or does the game continue?

share|improve this question
    
Have you sent your question to Looney Labs? thelab@looneylabs.com They should be able to give you a definitive answer. –  Polymath Mar 25 at 15:31

2 Answers 2

Does Player A win or does the game continue?

In case of a tie, continue playing until a clear winner emerges.

There's clearly a tie in the number of Keepers, so you must continue playing.

Player A is not the player with the most Keepers. He's merely a player with the most Keepers. It is explicitly stated that the game does not end in the event of a tie.

It could have been written "If someone has 5 or more Keepers on the table, and if a player has more Keepers than any other players, that player wins."

To win, one must have 5 or more Keepers [satisfied], and one must be the player with the most Keepers [not satisfied].

Player B can't win because he has insufficient Keepers and because he has a Creeper.

Player A can't win because he has insufficient Keepers.

GendoIkari's answer is self-contradictory. "Until a clear winner emerges" only applies if the players keep playing, but he suggests that Player A should win rather than keep playing. That rules out letting Player A win. The only way around that self-contradiction is to keep playing until the tie is broken (or the goal changes, etc).

share|improve this answer

I think that "until a clear winner emerges" is met due to the creeper. Player A should win, as player B cannot be a winner.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks for the answer. –  annoyingcalc Mar 23 at 1:59
    
Your answer is self contradictory. "Until a clear winner emerges" only applies if you keep playing, but you said "Player A" should win rather than keep playing. –  ikegami Mar 23 at 4:42
    
@atk, He does not satisfy the winning condition. 1) He's got 5 or more Keepers [satisfied], and 2) he's the player with the most Keepers [not satisfied]. A tie is explicitly called out as not meeting the winning condition. –  ikegami Mar 23 at 15:50
    
@atk, What part of the card allows you to ignore Player B's Keepers when you check if Player A has the most? Player A is not the player with the most Keepers. He's merely a player with the most Keepers. It is explicitly stated that ties does not end the game. –  ikegami Mar 23 at 16:31
2  
@ikegami, I agree now as well, given the wording. However, I would be surprised if that's what the intention was, I think it much more likely that this was a rules oversite (it wouldn't be the first time Fluxx has done this, see "x=x+1 and hand limit 0). It seems that the intention behind "in case of a tie" was to deal with when there would be more than 1 winner. Keep in mind that that goal card was created back when Creepers didn't exists. But, as it stands, I'd have to agree with you. –  GendoIkari Mar 23 at 23:52

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.