# In "Super Cluedo Challenge", how should the removal rule be applied properly?

In "Super Cluedo Challenge", the instruction booklet I have in my possession explains, in an ambiguous way (in my opinion), the important rule of the "removal".

To better clarify which game I am talking about, it is good to say that it is the version of Cluedo that includes nine different characters (which is also the maximum number of players who can take part in the investigations), and in which there are three containers (black, green, ivory) in which to put the cards of the final solution.

Here we talk about the rule activated when a player ends up in a square adjacent to that of another player.

The booklet in my possession reads verbatim:

1. If a player ends his move by arriving in a room on a square adjacent to that of another player, he has two possibilities, namely:
1. leave the statuettes as they are; or,

2. move the statuette of the opposing player to any other space on the board ...".

And then, a little further on, the booklet goes on to say:

"If the player who enters the room ends up on a square adjacent to more than one (two) statuettes, he moves only one of his choice".

(emphasis mine)

And then the question is:

Is this rule activated only inside the rooms, and, in particular, is it activated only if a player enters a room on that turn, or is it activated every time you end up close to an opponent, but inside rooms only? (this means this rule isn't activated in the garden, for example).

Everything takes on a particular value when you find yourself (and obviously the other players too) having to find clues in the garden (in the flowerbed, in the fountain, etc ...). In fact, since you are not inside a room, the removal rule should not apply. But in those cases it often happens that a player gets "wedged" between two others, since there is a narrow corridor, and you cannot pass. So, it would seem that the solution is precisely to "remove" a player even outside the rooms.

But this is precisely the question I ask:

In your opinion and experience,is the removal rule applied in rooms only, or is the wording wrong, and this rule also applies in the gardens (for example)?

Thank you all for the attention.

• What I tend to say with this question is that, in my opinion, it would be appropriate to introduce the rule of the "removal" also outside the rooms, especially in the gardens. Or, a way should be proposed to solve the problem of the "entanglement" that occurs in gardens. One way to solve the problem could be to make an exception - to the rule that a player cannot "jump" an opponent's statuette - when it is impossible to do otherwise, ie when a player cannot legally move his statuette. Aug 29, 2021 at 10:11
• Can you provide pictures of the instruction booklet where it says these rules? Aug 30, 2021 at 17:11
• I have got an Italian instruction booklet only, which literally says what I reported in the OP. It is currently impossible to scan it in a sufficiently visible form, since it dates back to 1988. Why expect irrefutable evidence? You are great , DenisS. Anyway, sometimes you are also a person who trusts others too little... You always like too much to play at being a modern St. Thomas, who "wants to verify for himself" everything that happens ... it is not necessarily a good attitude. Sometimes you should trust your neighbor more, it would do you good. Anyway, thanks for your concern! Sep 1, 2021 at 8:54
• I attempted to scan and send an image of the booklet. But it comes larger than 2 MiB (the limit allowed by Stack exchange). I also tried to turn it into pdf, but it doesn't take it anyway. Could anyone tell me Is there an alternative way to send this image file? Should I use the "Browse" option correctly? Sep 1, 2021 at 9:41
• And actually there's the problem, this question is not about "Clue Master Detective" or "Super Cluedo" but about "Super Cluedo Challenge" cluedofan.com/sccrule.htm They're two seperate games Sep 1, 2021 at 16:29

I can't comment so here is my answer: I have the english version of this game, the rule in question is written as folows verbatim:

1. If a player finishes a move in a room on a space ADJACENT to one occupied by another player, the player entering the room can EITHER:- i) Leave the Charachter pieces as they are OR - ii) Remove the other charachter[sic] piece and place it ANYWHERE else on the board, EXCEPT on the spaces occupied by :- another Charachter piece, a Weapon, a Garden Ornament or a Clue Counter. If there is more than one player adjacent then the player entering the room has the choice of moving EITHER Charachter pieces as above, but NOT both.

Which I think has the same ambiguity. I wonder if 'finishes a move in a room' and 'entering the room' is included in an attept to clear uncertainty around the meaning of an adjacent space. I think we are safe to assume spaces on either side of a wall would not be considered adjacent. But, is a space that is the other side of a french window an adjacent space? The space the other side of a door? The other end of a stair/secret passage? It could be thought that adjacent space here is not just one that a player could move into, as 'in a room' is an attempt to bound the definition of adjacent space to the immediate area. For example, your move finishes in the corridor next to a door, there is a player inside the door blocking the entrance to the room, you would not be able to move the player as you are not in the same room.

With this in mind I believe a strict interpretation of this rule as follows:

• 'the player entering the room' - indeed, the player must enter the room on that turn for the rule to become effective.

• An 'adjacent space' is any space any player could legally move into from their current location ie. not through walls, or diagonal spaces.

• 'In a room', means the rule would not apply for an opponent's charachter piece on an adjacent space in another room. For example, to players either side of doorways, french windows or either end of stairs/secrect passages.

• the garden is not a room, taking a dictionary meaning of 'room'.

However, I have also found the issue of 'blocking', particularly when racing to garden ornaments, which is amplified with more players. For example, playing with 8 or 9 people, if the first or second player blocks the most convenient route, or ends up very close to or in the space adjacent to the target garden ornament there is little chance remaining players will win the race, this significantly holds up game play as they must all take a hopeless turn until the inevitable blocking player's turn which wins them the race.

As an idea to fix this possible flaw in the gameplay and make things as simple as possible, I would suggest the following alterations for this rule:

• You do not need to have entered the room.
• The rule applies everywhere, including the garden and corridors.
• The rule applies to any 'adjacent space' (as above) including other sides of a door, french window and either end of stairs/secret passages.

With these changes, it will be possible to remove the blocking player in any situation if your move finishes next to them or both players are on a stair/secret passage. This will open up the race to all players and somewhat fix the slight flaw in the gameplay as 'blockers' could potentially be removed (you still need soemone to throw the right number to finish adjacent to them). A replacement rule could be worded:

1. If a player finishes a move on a space ADJACENT to one occupied by another player, including spaces on either sides of doors, french windows and if both players are occupying stairs/secret passages, they can EITHER:- i) Leave the Charachter pieces as they are OR - ii) Remove the other Charachter piece and place it ANYWHERE else on the board, EXCEPT on the spaces occupied by :- another Charachter piece, a Weapon, a Garden Ornament or a Clue Counter. If there is more than one adjacent Charachter piece then the player can move only one Charachter piece, of their choice.

I have yet to try this adjustment to the rules but I will be suggesting it to my family for next time we play.

• Thank you for your excellent response. I took some time to respond due to various personal problems, but after careful reading, I must say that I agree 100% with the proposed change of the indicated rule. Again a big thank you and a greeting Aug 2, 2023 at 8:45