Jump to content
Dolorous Gabe

AcroPHILIA #19: EXTREME Edition - R3

Recommended Posts

ACROPHILIA #19: EXTREME EDITION

 

Welcome to this extreme edition of Acrophilia. It was mad before, in this version it's even madder! This time, clues in each round will be split up into mini-themes, with a further puzzle to work out after the mini-themes. Hopefully, this will become clearer as the rounds come.

 

This is how Round One will look, to use it as an example:

 

1a) Character 1 clue

1b) Character 2 clue

1c) Character 3 clue

 

2a) Character 4 clue

2b) Character 5 clue

2c) Character 6 clue

 

3a) Character 7 clue

3b) Character 8 clue

3c) Character 9 clue

 

Each number has a mini-theme, so there are three mini-themes here. These mini-themes together will be a clue to something else, an overall theme.

The game will proceed as a normal game of Acrophilia does. You will receive a character and an acronym to work on and submit a clue. You will get the usual prelims plus a preliminary guess at each mini-theme in rounds one and three. Round two will be a little different. You may also ask one yes/no question about whatever you like.

 

Points Scoring:

Clues: 2 points per correct answer to the clues

Mini-themes: 3 points per correct answer to the mini-themes

Overall theme: 5 points

Favourite clues: 1 point per favourite clue vote.

 

If you would like to sign up, please send your host – Dolorous Gabe – a PM with the subject reading “Acrophilia Extreme: [your board name here]”

I have decided to make it optional to play in pairs. Let me know in your PM entry if you would like to do so. We are playing in pairs

 

Players:

 

1. Julia H.

2. Jez Bell

3. Castellan

4. a free shadow

5. Raisin' Bran

6. She Who Must Be Obeyed

7. Fragile Bird

8. Ser Not Appearing

 

Pairs:

 

1. a free shadow and Jez Bell

2. Julia H. and Raisin' Bran

3. Castellan and Ser Not Appearing

4. Fragile Bird and She Who Must Be Obeyed

Edited by Dolorous Gabe
"I'm a drinker with writing problems" - Brendan Behan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, a free shadow said:

:pirate::pirate::pirate:

Who would choose to play in pairs if it is optional? 

Someone who doesn't fancy taking on the extreme version on his/her own?

You brought up the idea of playing in pairs. Why do that if you think nobody might want to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dolorous Gabe said:

You brought up the idea of playing in pairs. Why do that if you think nobody might want to?

It would be interesting, people playing in pairs! But if the starting point is not equal (pairs would have an advantage, wouldn't they), nobody would choose to play in pairs against somebody who is playing alone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, a free shadow said:

It would be interesting, people playing in pairs! But if the starting point is not equal (pairs would have an advantage, wouldn't they), nobody would choose to play in pairs against somebody who is playing alone. 

It could even things out, no? Let's be honest, you and Julia are the likely frontrunners with Castellan and perhaps She Who Must Be Obeyed, if she plays, the next favourites. For the rest to compete they would be best teaming up. But it should be a choice I think. It could lessen the enjoyment for some or it could enhance the enjoyment for others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dolorous Gabe said:

For the rest to compete they would be best teaming up

This is insults and drivel and tosh. 

I personally would choose pairs randomly, because that is what is interesting, but if you only prefer to act on prejudice, then you can make pairs using the last game: first with last, second with second-last and such. I did not check who I would be with in this case and I apologize to them. I am certain that I would only be a fair match to Ser Not Appearing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, a free shadow said:

This is insults and drivel and tosh. 

Cold hard facts. You (and Julia) can say the contrary out of false modesty yet anyone else would have to be in denial to say such. Myself included. 1 every 3 rounds is a bad round for me. At least.

Must we bicker at the start of every game I host? :P

20 minutes ago, a free shadow said:

I am certain that I would only be a fair match to Ser Not Appearing.

Is this a proposal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Dolorous Gabe said:

out of false modesty

I have never bothered to steal any modesty, so I do not have it :pirate: 

Pairs are not to make it easier, even if it would happen. It is about having everyone see new perspectives and maybe enjoy the game more*. It seemed sometimes previously that people felt like they were toiling in a stupid mine during a game, and this might make it different for one game. 

*If that is not true then it does not matter anywhere

:ninja:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dolorous Gabe said:

 

Must we bicker at the start of every game I host? :P

I think so and I must say I find it highly amusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, a free shadow said:

I have never bothered to steal any modesty, so I do not have it :pirate: 

You only need a bit of false modesty to place here and there like a garnish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2018 at 7:41 PM, a free shadow said:

:pirate::pirate::pirate:

Who would choose to play in pairs if it is optional? 

As my family and friends have made it clear that they do not want to be asked what "Man unto egg fry" means ever again, it would be fun to have someone to share the pain with.

But I think it would be less fun if some are in pairs and others are struggling alone.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jez Bell said:

As my family and friends have made it clear that they do not want to be asked what "Man unto egg fry" means ever again, it would be fun to have someone to share the pain with.

:lol:

14 hours ago, Castellan said:

I think so and I must say I find it highly amusing.

I'm delighted that someone gets something out of it.

 

@a free shadow at the moment it is moot because players signed up are so few. Can I assume you are playing? I didn't want to put you on the list until I had an official entry PM.

Is my insane concept putting people off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Dolorous Gabe said:

 

Is my insane concept putting people off?

rocksniffer is away, Raisin' Bran is playing pictionary and acrophobia and might be exhausted from the last game, SNA is just conforming to his name...

I have an insane hope the sets of three clues will make it easier to solve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Castellan said:

You only need a bit of false modesty to place here and there like a garnish.

:frown5:

1 hour ago, Dolorous Gabe said:

at the moment it is moot because players signed up are so few. Can I assume you are playing? I didn't want to put you on the list until I had an official entry PM.

It would be five, with me? Even three pairs is enough, I think :ninja: I am fine to start alone if someone arrives later (Bran or Ser or a plague).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, a free shadow said:

It would be five, with me? Even three pairs is enough, I think :ninja: I am fine to start alone if someone arrives later (Bran or Ser or a plague).

Four with you currently. I don't think two pairs is enough.

Let's see if we can get two more players. Or we could wait for Sniffer to return with all his fish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or we could just start playing solo and try the pair game some other time. 

Since each round needs nine character clues, what if everyone got two characters, except the host, who would have to supply only one clue then, instead of five? Would that be too much help for us, players? How would it work if six of us played in pairs? Would each pair get one clue or two? If there are three pairs and each pair gets one clue, then six characters will be left for the host. 

Of course, we can also wait, if you think that's better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was expecting 6 players at least. Each player would have got a clue to make but if playing in pairs they could confer and swap if they felt it necessary. Two clues each is a reasonable idea if we do only have four players, except that in round one I was thinking two of the characters would be better clued by me for reasons that will be alluded to, although that's not absolutely necessary.

I will give a little longer for anyone who hasn't seen this yet to see it. I'm sure Ser would play, although he might not be a great teammate due to the lack of time he has to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×