Like only scoring the vowels if the same number of vowels are in the guess as in the word?

I assume you don't want rules based on meaning or syllabification of words.

Could you have a multi-player version, since people could be looking both for the word and the rule?
o

(Reply) (Thread)

Like only scoring the vowels if the same number of vowels are in the guess as in the word?

Yeah, stuff like that. Basically, things like Zendo rules, only pertaining to how one scores a Jotto guess. If people were to play, I'd imagine we'd have to get used to easier classes of rules first.


I assume you don't want rules based on meaning or syllabification of words.

Yeah, I think it only makes sense to deal with the letters in the words.


Could you have a multi-player version, since people could be looking both for the word and the rule?

I'm not sure what multi-player has to do with looking for more than one thing. You can have one person looking for both, or you could have multiple people looking for just one. But, sure, could do it like a Zendo game I guess. No reason you couldn't do a normal Jotto game like a Zendo game, too.

FYI, right now, you don't have to guess the secret rule. I think, though, that you will pretty much have to know what the rule is if you're going to successfully guess the word, so I think just guessing the word is enough.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

You could pick one letter of the word to only score if it is in the correct position (or "in or adjacent to the correct position").

For example, if the word is "scout": "small" scores 1, but "malls" scores 0.

(Reply) (Thread)

Evil. Very nice.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Here's how I'd conceptualize Jotto Zendo.

Each guess is a koan, which either has or does not have the buddha nature. (The master's word, of course, must have the buddha nature.) If the guess has the buddha nature, it gets a true report of jots. If it does not have the buddha nature, it gets a false report. The student is not told whether their guess has the buddha nature or not.

False reports are (randomly) one higher or one lower than the true number of jots -- this gives the student *some* information if they know the guess is not buddha-like.

Beginning rules would be of the form "contains/does-not-contain this letter".

(Reply) (Thread)

Interesting. I'm not sure how I feel about the randomness, but it's definitely worth playing around with.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)