Re: [pbmserv-dev] Wizard Hold'em

[Lyman Hurd <lhurd@yahoo.com>]

Personally I echo the sentiment of "$^%$^ no" on
poker...

Tichu on the other hand...

Lyman

--- Richard Rognlie <rrognlie@gamerz.net> wrote:

> > Meanwhile, back at the model home, Richard Rognlie
> <rrognlie@gamerz.net> said:
> > 
> > > (what started as a side conversation in a wizard
> game has led me to...)
> > >
> > > Wizard Hold'em.    Texas Hold'em.   But with a
> Wizard Deck.
> > >
> > >
> > > wizards aren't "wild" per se.    But they are
> useful.
> > >
> > > they outrank aces.   and are "any" suit.  
> they'd help you make flushes.
> > >
> > > Jesters are lower than 2s.   and don't match any
> suit.
> > 
> > Jesters then become totally worthless cards.  If
> you get dealt one,
> > you're pretty much going to fold regardless of
> what your other card
> > is.
> > 
> > I think Jesters should be lower than 2s, but
> should match any suit
> > like the wizards.  After all, just like wizards,
> you can always play
> > jesters, regardless of what suit was led.
> 
> I'm just afraid of putting too many "wild suit"
> cards in.   Else Flushes 
> will become all TOO common.  (and therefore we'd
> have to revisit the known
> order of hand rankings)
> 
> 
> -- 
>  /  \__  | Richard Rognlie / Sendmail Ninja /
> Gamerz.NET Lackey
>  \__/  \ | http://www.gamerz.net/~rrognlie   
> <rrognlie at gamerz.net>
>  /  \__/ | Creator of pbmserv@gamerz.net
>  \__/    |                Helping reduce world
> productivity since 1994
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net
> with
> 	unsubscribe pbmserv-dev@gamerz.net
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
> 
>