Game: Mü & More

Thread: Re: Three Player Mü

ChelseaSquare — 2008-08-19T07:38:42+00:00

Very good variant. It melds the pedigree of bridge with the modern evolution of trick-taking games.

An excellent idea.

Thread: POLL -- Best Number of Players for this Game

Randy Cox — 2008-05-15T18:34:06+00:00

[poll=291]

Thread: Re: Bidding cards when already highest

jrachfal — 2008-04-23T21:48:15+00:00

efreeman wrote:
Situation: You already have the bid for chief sewn up.

The rules state you can only bid one card more than the current highest bid. If everyone but the current leader passes, can the current leader put down more cards? Can they do this until they decide not to bid any more?

My guess is that the answer is yes. Otherwise there is little chance the huge bids I see reported here could have happened. That would require the opponents to also have monster hands.

Wow. Really? We've never played that way. If no one pushes the current leader up, they are stuck with what's been bid.

In this way, if someone has a monster hand (e.g. lots of sevens), we can limit their bonus points by stopping the bidding war early.

Thread: Re: Token Mü

huber — 2008-03-17T02:55:59+00:00

NateStraight wrote:
Hmm. The charm of Mu, to me, is that it keeps the information-sharing-through-bidding element of Bridge while eliminating the rigidity and certainty of Bridge's bidding conventions.

To each their own; for me, the charm is that it's a partnership trick taking game that's at it's best with five.

I'm not particularly fond of the "conventions" (named "bidding") section of this variant, but I do see the appeal of the tokens. Still, the game does have built in incentives to laying down more cards to share more information, as the higher bids (required to lay down more cards for information purposes) bring you more points.

But - that's an incentive for the chief to put down more cards, not for the other players to do so. This helps the chief to find the right partner - and the vice to find the right undertrump.

Even a 1-card bid is hard to make if you don't pick the right partner, but it's almost impossible to since you've only got at most 1 card's worth of information.

Actually, a 1-card bid as chief has _0_ cards worth of information, which for me isn't interesting - it's a shot in the dark.

If the lower bids were easier to make, players would have more incentives to go for the higher "returns" attached to higher bids, which would necessarily lead to more information-sharing. I'm not sure conventions are needed.

My experience - across many groups - is that bidding never gets high enough to show much data.

FWIW, people never followed the bidding conventions very closely in my group, but the tokens did make mid-level contracts - and contracts that are just on the hairy edge of making, and therefore very interesting to play - far more common.

I mean, after a certain point of adding more and more elements of Bridge, you might as well just be playing Bridge.

But these _aren't_ elements of Bridge; the bidding and play are nothing like Bridge even with Tokens; the only way in which it becomes more similar to Bridge is that the bidding is more detailed. But the flexible partnerships, color/number options, and 2-on-3 nature of Mue keeps them from ever feeling similar.

In any event, I posted this because (1) it's a variant that we've played and enjoyed dozens of times, and (2) I thought others might be interested. I'm not recommending it as superior - simply different and interesting.

Thread: Re: Token Mü

thatmarkguy — 2008-03-05T18:33:21+00:00

NateStraight wrote:
Hmm. The charm of Mu, to me, is that it keeps the information-sharing-through-bidding element of Bridge while eliminating the rigidity and certainty of Bridge's bidding conventions.

I'm with you 100% here. I like the information sharing, I hate the rigidity, but I feel there's a flaw in the Mu system that this at least partially addresses (though its solution carries some undsirable side-effects with it - like rigidity and convention).

NateStraight wrote:
Still, the game does have built in incentives to laying down more cards to share more information, as the higher bids (required to lay down more cards for information purposes) bring you more points.

IMHO, the *problem* is that there's no incentive for the VICE to bid up. The Chief bids as much as he/she feels comfortable with, with escalated reward for escalated risk, but unless the Vice is making a real run an Chiefship him/herself, the Vice has no incentive to increase his/her bid (and, in so doing, give the other players the bidding space to show the chief who would make a good partner). IMHO, that's where the game bogs down - when the people who want to be Chief's partner can't bid because bidding would put them past the current-Vice's bid and put them opposite the chief. So the chief is stuck making an effectively-random partner choice.

Thread: Re: Token Mü

NateStraight — 2008-03-05T15:12:04+00:00

Hmm. The charm of Mu, to me, is that it keeps the information-sharing-through-bidding element of Bridge while eliminating the rigidity and certainty of Bridge's bidding conventions.

I'm not particularly fond of the "conventions" (named "bidding") section of this variant, but I do see the appeal of the tokens. Still, the game does have built in incentives to laying down more cards to share more information, as the higher bids (required to lay down more cards for information purposes) bring you more points.

My experience with Mu is that players are loathe to reveal the strength of their hand through bidding because the incentives to bidding more aren't powerful enough, given the point requirements of higher bids. If anything, I think a possible fix might be to shift the scale of points required to take a bid "to the right," making each bid easier.

Even a 1-card bid is hard to make if you don't pick the right partner, but it's almost impossible to since you've only got at most 1 card's worth of information. If the lower bids were easier to make, players would have more incentives to go for the higher "returns" attached to higher bids, which would necessarily lead to more information-sharing. I'm not sure conventions are needed.

I mean, after a certain point of adding more and more elements of Bridge, you might as well just be playing Bridge.

Thread: Token Mü

huber — 2008-03-05T14:53:48+00:00

This variant was devised by Steve Root, a former co-worker of mine. Steve is an excellent Bridge player, and was intrigued by Mü, but bothered by the fact that so little information was exchanged during the bidding, making critical elements such as choice of partners or undertrump far too luck dependent. This variant - played many times, and very successfully - was devised to deal with this issue.

The remainder of this text was written by Steve; I've cleaned it up a bit to post, and have added a few notes in italics.

=====

There can be hands (in the absence of Joe i]I am a notorious overbidder, whether in Bridge or Mü[/i) where the bidding dies are a very low level. I saw player 1, open the bidding by playing a 7. Player 2, holding four 7's, never had the bidding space to raise.

Let's fix this!

Each player gets 3 tokens, be they coins or poker chips. i]For those with a Doris & Frank copy of the game, the cubes which come with the game work very well.[/i

A card played with a token on it, doesn't count for the bidding. (Although a tokened play DOES count toward keeping the bidding open!)

So, for instance, the first bid may contain 0-3 tokened cards! And, the first bid, may contain no non-tokened cards!

A later bid can be made, by removing token(s) from card(s). Each token can be only employed once per hand.

BIDDING:

The first/second round of bidding is suits, and raises. Controls can come later. We can now also play the highest card(s) in our proposed trump suits !!

Openers:

one of a color is a four-card-suit
two of a color is a five-card-suit
three of a color is a six-card-suit

one of a (1,7) is a four-card-suit
two of a (1,7) is a five-card-suit
three of a (1,7) is a six-card-suit

one of a (0..6) is a three-card-suit
two of a (0..6) is a four-card-suit
three of a (0..6) is a five-card-suit

(Shorter 1,7's can be bid on the next round.)

Raises:

(Again, please play the highest one(s)! Chief would like to reach you at trick one, so you could either continue trump, or return a singleton.)

one of a color is a three-card-raise
two of a color is a four-card-raise
three of a color is a five-card-raise

one of a (1,7) is a three-card-raise
two of a (1,7) is a four-card-raise
three of a (1,7) is a five-card-raise

one of a (0..6) is a one-card-raise
two of a (0..6) is a two-card-raise

You'd like to get to an eight-card fit with color, a seven card fit with (1,7), and a five-card fit with (0..6). Sometimes, you have to make do with less. Shorter raises, especially with good high cards, can be shown on a subsequent round.

Ambiguity:

So, say someone opens with a black 7, does he have black or 7's? (With a five-card suit, the second card would have clarified this.)

Someone can then clarify, on the next round, by adding another card (which doesn't show additional length, as that would happen on the first round).

One can avoid ambiguity in choosing, say which 7 to open. If someone has already bit a suit; the 7 of someone's suit would be construed as a raise. So, play a different 7.

If no one has bid, doen't play the seven of a suit, with which you might be interested in raising, should someone else open it.

Also, a seven of some suit in which you might be planning to bid a control, should be avoided.

Controls:

Both on offense and defense, show your 9's and 8's!! In the long run, this info will help you.

If vice picks as undertrump a chief suit with too many 9's, 8's, 7's,(to reduce those tricks to undertrump), chief can in some number of cases, counter with no-trump.

Purpose:

Don't dilute your message with random plays, because...

Void-showing:

It's clearly in the interest of defenders, and raisers, to show voids! It's more dangerous for chiefs to show voids, as it helps vice to pick under.

If trump is expected to be a number, a stray play in a suit shows a void in the next-higher suit red => yellow => green => blue => black => red. Most of the time you will be able to find a card to do this.

If trump is expected to be a suit, the intent is the same, but, the trump suit is eliminated from the plays. So if green is trump, it goes red => yellow => blue => black => red.

It's especially valuable if raiser is to the left of chief. Chief gives partner a ruff. A trump return gives chief a free finesse. Then another ruff. (Consider how high a trump is prudent on the second ruff.) Then another trump finesse.

On defense, a void bid, may help vice pick under. Total length of under may now be less valuable than under with a quick entry.

i]As a pratical matter, we never made much use of Steve's void-showing structure, but I include it for those who might. And we never quite managed to avoid random bids...[/i

Thread: Re: Three Player Mü

MANN — 2007-12-12T09:31:05+00:00

Seems interesting.
I'll try it someday.

Thread: Re: Bidding cards when already highest

Werbaer — 2007-10-25T08:39:16+00:00

rri1 wrote:
The bid was 13 cards (in a 5 player game)
You can't get a bid of 13 in the 5 player game as you only get 12 cards.
Yes, my mistake. Faulty memory. Thought there were 15 cards, and 2 cards were still in the hand of the chief, so a bid of 13. But with only 12 cards in a 5 player game, the bid must have been 10.

Thread: Re: Bidding cards when already highest

rri1 — 2007-10-25T06:01:15+00:00

The bid was 13 cards (in a 5 player game)

You can't get a bid of 13 in the 5 player game as you only get 12 cards.

Thread: Rummü scoring question

slovo — 2007-10-16T13:35:42+00:00

when do you score? just at the end of the round? or when you play down the cards?
If it's at the end of the round, how do you know what to score? you score for the run that someone else has added up to? how much do you score if someone else has added up to a 'pure combination' an make its 'no pure'?

plz. answer, I can't understand the rules...

Thread: Re: Card Play... Must or May

hvddrift — 2007-10-15T23:58:43+00:00

Thanks, it makes sense now, i was confusing people with my being ambiguous

Hans

Thread: Re: Card Play... Must or May

snowman882 — 2007-10-15T23:53:25+00:00

I believe Clearclaw's reply was assuming your second question was about Tichu (since you mentioned Tichu in the question).

Mu: each trick is one card from each player, you cannot pass.

Tichu: each round ("trick") is played until three players pass in a row.

Thread: Re: Card Play... Must or May

hvddrift — 2007-10-15T23:46:06+00:00

Hi,

Thanks for the quick reply. It seems that the 2 replies somewhat contradict each other in terms of rounds.

Let me ask in a different way:

A 4 player game:
Bob: Leads with Blue 2
Greg: Plays a Blue 3
Frank: Plays a Blue 7
Lucy: Plays a Blue 4

Is is now Bobs turn again? Or is that Hand over and a new hand starting with Frank?

Thanks

Thread: Re: Card Play... Must or May

clearclaw — 2007-10-15T23:08:15+00:00

hvddrift wrote:
If a player does not have in their hand a card that is the lead or trump, must they play a card or may they lay a card. Another way to ask, can they not play a card?

Every player must play a card in every trick in Mu.

Also (I have played Tichu) is the playing of cards just one round? (eg. Lead playes then all other players get one chance at playing a card)or do you keep playing until players pass?

No, the "trick" goes around until all players pass.

Thread: Re: Card Play... Must or May

thatmarkguy — 2007-10-15T23:01:37+00:00

Mu is a traditional trick-taking game in the same vein as Euchre, Bridge, Hearts, Spades, Oh Hell, and many more.

As such, in every trick, every player must play one and only one card, and the trick only goes until each player has played one card.

If you do not have a card that is the lead suit, you still must play a card. You are not obligated to play a trump card (unless trump is led, of course). But you are obligated to play a card.

Thread: Card Play... Must or May

hvddrift — 2007-10-15T22:27:25+00:00

Hi,

If a player does not have in their hand a card that is the lead or trump, must they play a card or may they lay a card. Another way to ask, can they not play a card?

Also (I have played Tichu) is the playing of cards just one round? (eg. Lead playes then all other players get one chance at playing a card)or do you keep playing until players pass?

Thanks

Hans

Thread: Re: What is the purpose of the anti-tie penalty?

Gilby — 2007-10-01T04:45:59+00:00

And it's a chance to get more information before making a high bid. I can tie a bid and see what the other player does before I have to decide what to do. Is he willing to go higher? Then maybe I don't want the bid. He's not? Good, I'll add another card to take the bid.

And think of the beginning of bidding. The first bidder bids one card and you, being next, are forced to pass if you don't want to make a bid at chief this hand unless you can just throw out one of your own.

Thread: Re: What is the purpose of the anti-tie penalty?

Malachi — 2007-10-01T04:02:20+00:00

jtakagi wrote:
Why not make a rule that says that you cannot tie for the chief's position?

Without it, there would be no way to try to push the current high bidder up by one, since each bid would have to be two higher than the last bid if there could be no ties. If you are trying to edge a player to the highest bid he thinks he can make, you have to be able to push that way.

It can also serve to motivate players to bid closer to their max bid sooner, since being the last to match the high bid carries the penalty.

Thread: Re: What is the purpose of the anti-tie penalty?

St. Elvis — 2007-10-01T03:01:41+00:00

Occasionally, it makes sense for a player to voluntarily take the penalty, rather than lose big as chief.

Thread: What is the purpose of the anti-tie penalty?

jtakagi — 2007-10-01T02:50:50+00:00

I'm new to the game (Mü) and just don't understand the point behind the penalty for tying for most cards bid. Why is it there? Why not make a rule that says that you cannot tie for the chief's position? If someone could enlighten me, that would be great.

Thread: Re: Bidding cards when already highest

thatmarkguy — 2007-09-24T20:26:10+00:00

The problem arises if/when no more than one person wants to be Vice, and no more than one wants to be Chief. That's the problem I've seen in particularly conservative groups. Like Poker, a hand is only interesting when two (or more) people think they have the best hand (then they get into a bidding war, the top bidders each have a pile of cards on the table, giving everyone else ample room to show cards in support of their preferred Chief). In a hand where only one person wants Chief-ship, the Vice has no want or need to increase his bid, which thus leaves the people who want to be Chief's partner not having much room to show many (sometimes, any) cards, leaving the chief very little information for partner selection.

Thread: Re: Bidding cards when already highest

Octavian — 2007-09-16T13:27:04+00:00

atholbrose wrote:
I keep trying to encourage higher bids, but so far it's been no-go.

The best encouragement is to consistantly bid six and make it with ease.

Further, if the Chief is picking a partner more or less at random the other players are playing wrong. You WANT to be picked by the chief - particularly if the bid is low. You get the reward with none of the risk. Some of the bidding tension is in how to give the Chief enough information without putting yourself in second place and automatically being out of the running.

-MMM

Thread: Re: Bidding cards when already highest

atholbrose — 2007-09-16T11:55:49+00:00

A bid of 13? Our group is unusually scaredy-cat when playing Mu, it seems. Our highest bid ever has been 5. Usually the bids are so low that the Chief picks his partner more or less at random. I keep trying to encourage higher bids, but so far it's been no-go.

Thread: Re: Bidding cards when already highest

Werbaer — 2007-09-16T11:22:08+00:00

Yes, this is allowed. Usually if you have a very good hand, to increase the number of bonus points.

But you risk that suddenly someone else becomes vice, and chooses a vice trump that's bad for you.

The huge bids are usually the result of a bidding war between two peoples. If you think your opponent will make his bid, you bid higher and expect to be down two or so, but still gain net point through the tricks you take.

In the highest bid i experienced, two players had a long trump suit each. I as a potential partner had shown several aces and the missing high cards from both suits. The bid was 13 cards (in a 5 player game), and it was down one only because the chief made a mistake.

Thread: Bidding cards when already highest

efreeman — 2007-09-16T10:56:45+00:00

Situation: You already have the bid for chief sewn up.

The rules state you can only bid one card more than the current highest bid. If everyone but the current leader passes, can the current leader put down more cards? Can they do this until they decide not to bid any more?

My guess is that the answer is yes. Otherwise there is little chance the huge bids I see reported here could have happened. That would require the opponents to also have monster hands.

Thread: Re: Mu: legendary chief bids?

Allopes — 2007-09-16T05:18:20+00:00

12 card bid on a five player game. The chief lost by a single point.

Thread: Three Player Mü

SteveBl — 2007-07-17T22:43:02+00:00

Copied almost word for word from my blog. (I'm too lazy to retype it but I thought it was worth sharing here too.)

This game plays almost identically to the four player game. Four hands are dealt as normal. The major difference is that one hand is played by a dummy player. Let's call him Fred.

Fred's position rotates with the deal. He always sits opposite the dealer. The "real" players remain in their same positions throughout the game. So the second pile of cards dealt always belongs to Fred no matter who dealt them.

Bidding progresses exactly as in a four player game. Fred does not bid and no one gets to see Fred's cards during bidding. This means that Fred can never be chief, nor can he ever be vice.

Once bidding has concluded, the vice (if there is one) chooses under-trump as normal and the chief chooses over-trump as normal. The chief then chooses a partner as normal. That means the chief can either choose Fred or the remaining player as partner.

Once the partner has been chosen, Fred's hand is revealed to all players. Fred's hand is played exactly like any other player's and his play is controlled by whichever player is on his team. So if the chief chooses to partner with Fred then the chief will play Fred's hand, otherwise the vice will play Fred's hand.

Fred takes tricks just like any other player and his tricks are kept and scored separately, just as if Fred were a real player. All bonuses and penalties apply as normal but since Fred can never be chief or vice, he will never lose points due to a failed bid.

And that's how to play three player Mü. We found that it played very well. Having only three players participate in the bidding definitely alters the feel of the bidding a bit from the four player game but it didn't really seem to be an overwhelming change. The fact that all players get to see Fred's hand is definitely a huge advantage to whomever is leading but it doesn't ruin the game. Especially since all players have exactly the same knowledge. I'd definitely prefer to play with four flesh-and-blood players (and five is best) but as three player games go, this is definitely well worth playing.

Thread: Re: Best of Breed?

dietevil — 2007-05-19T20:03:37+00:00

Mu is my favorite card game for 5. If we have 4 players, we play Tichu, with 5, it's Mu. Both make good "finishers" for a game session that aren't too light, but if everyone already knows the rules, aren't too draining either. I haven't settled on favorites for 3 and 6 players yet.

Thread: Re: Best of Breed?

dcjackso — 2007-05-19T09:08:21+00:00

I very highly recommend, for 3P, Wimmuln and The Last Panther from this great collection of games. Some of the members of one our gaming groups have played these two games a lot, and the games never seem to get old. It's really a treat to find good trick-taking games for 3P. I haven't even played Mu yet, and I've already bought a replacement deck!

Thread: Re: Best of Breed?

SabrStryk — 2007-05-19T04:23:27+00:00

You reminded me of some of the best times I had gaming back in my old dorm. Thanks

Thread: Best of Breed?

SteveBl — 2007-05-19T01:42:30+00:00

Lately I find myself playing an awful lot of Mü, a trick taking card game for 4-6 players by Doris and Frank. The box also contains rules for four other card games that can all be played with the same special deck but none of the other games is even remotely as compelling as Mü. Of all traditional style trick taking games, Mü is easily my favorite. Let me try to explain why.

Components

Mü comes in a very nice box which is officially labeled Mü & More. (The "& More" part refers to those four other games.) The box is far better than the standard tuck box that normal playing cards are generally sold in. This is a hard cardboard box with a nesting lid, similar to boxes used by many other European card games. It's very durable and under normal use it will typically outlast the cards themselves. Inside you'll find a very nice, and complete rule booklet, and a deck of cards. The cards themselves are quite nice with a luxurious linen finish. They are sturdy and should last for many, many games.

The deck itself is composed of sixty cards divided into five colored suits. The twelve cards in each suit are ranked from 0 to 9 with two 1s and two 7s. Each card also has a number of chevrons (or pips) printed under the rank. Most cards have one pip but 1s and 9s have none and 7s and 6s have two. Each pip is worth one point so there are sixty points distributed throughout the deck.

Gameplay

Mü, like most trick taking games, is played over a number of hands, usually until one player reaches a predetermined amount of points. Our lunch group typically plays to 1000 points and our games span several lunch hours but it's more common, and still quite fun, to play to a smaller score or play a predetermined number of hands, perhaps ensuring that each player deals the same number of hands. The rules state that playing to 200 points will take about an hour and my experience would say that estimate is perhaps a little bit optimistic.

A hand begins when one player shuffles the cards and deals all sixty cards to all players. Since there are sixty cards in the deck, each player will have an even number of cards whether there be four, five or six players.

After the cards are dealt, a bidding round begins. The really clever thing about Mü is that the bidding is done silently by revealing cards from your hand and placing them face up in front of you. Cards that are bid remain part of your hand and are played just like any other card but they must remain face up in front of you until they are played. The genius of this bidding mechanism is that as you bid you are also revealing information about your hand. This is especially true since if you win the bid, you will be required to name a trump suit from the cards you revealed. If you haven't revealed a blue card then you may not name blue as the trump suit.

This bidding round is really the heart of Mü and a huge part of what makes this such a brilliant game. Unlike Bridge, where hand strength is revealed through complex bidding conventions which must be learned and practiced over dozens, perhaps hundreds, of games; there are no complex bidding conventions in Mü. They aren't needed. The bidding in Mü just naturally seems to do what it should: reveal something about the players' hands, form a contract for the hand (called a goal in the rules), and select trump.

Once all players have passed, the bidding round ends and whoever has won the bid is named the "chief" of the hand. Whoever comes in second is named the "vice". In the relatively rare case where no one comes in second, there is no vice. The vice's job is to name a lesser trump suit and thwart the chief. The chief's job is to name a greater trump suit, choose a partner from the remaining players, lead the first trick, and, as a partnership, try to capture enough points to fulfill the contract based on the number of cards in the bid. Naturally, the more cards that were bid, the more points the chief and his partner are required to take and the more difficult it will be to win the hand.

Since both the vice and chief call trump, there are (usually) two trump suits in a hand. The vice chooses a trump and the chief must either choose a different trump or choose "no trump" in which case only the suit named by the vice is trump. These two trump suits then merge to become a single trump suit. What's more, either colors or numbers can be declared trump. For instance, the vice could declare that 1s are trump and the chief could declare that blacks are trump. In this case, the two black 1s would be the highest trump cards (since they are doubly trump by virtue of both their rank and color), followed by the black 9, 8, 7s, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, and 0 (the chief's trump), with the eight other 1s (the vice's trump) tied as the lowest trump cards. Note that the 1s would be in the trump suit; and thus not considered red, blue, green or yellow cards. This can lead to some confusion (many is the time I've accidentally played a trump number card when I thought I was following suit) but it also leads to some very intriguing play possibilities.

Tricks are played as in most traditional trick taking games. A card is lead and each subsequent player must follow the lead suit if they can. The highest card in the lead suit takes the trick unless one or more players was void in that suit and chose to play a trump card, in which case the highest trump card takes the trick. If two identical cards are winning the trick (possible since there are two 7s and two 1s in each suit and also since numbers can be declared trump) the first of the tied cards wins. The winner of the trick takes the cards played in the trick and earns the right to lead the next trick.

Once all cards have been played, the hand ends. Each player counts the number of pips on the cards they've captured and earns that number of points. The chief and his partner add their pips together to determine if the chief has fulfilled his bidding contract and won the hand. If the chief has won the hand then both the chief and his partner are awarded bonus points based upon the difficulty of the contract. If they fail, the chief is docked points and each of the players on the vice's team for that hand are awarded a bonus.

Comments

The doubled 7s and 1s, the uneven distribution of pips, the ever-changing partnerships, the double trump suits, and the ability to name numbers as well as suits trump all make for a very strategic and relatively complex game. While the rules themselves are not that complex, the ramifications of those rules can be. This is probably not the best game for trick taking novices; yet it is far easier to learn than Bridge and much richer and more elegant than any other trick taking game I've played.

Probably the most common mistake newcomers make is forgetting that all trump cards (numbers or colors) become part of the same suit during play. If the trump is black over 1s (to use our earlier example) and a black card is lead, then the 1s are all in suit and may be played without breaking suit. Conversely, if someone leads a yellow card then your yellow 1 is trump and may not be played unless you have no other yellow cards. It takes some getting used to but once everyone gets the hang of it, it's brilliant.

The play of the hand makes use of skills that will be familiar to seasoned card players. Players who understand the value of roughing, draining trump, and especially card counting, will benefit. The uneven pip distribution and the fact that the length of the trump suit changes from hand to hand (depending on what was called) make the play even more exciting and challenging. For instance, 9s are powerful but they are worth no points. 1s can be thrown on hands you know you're losing to avoid giving away points. 6s can be thrown on hands you know your partner is winning.

But where the game really shines is in the bidding. The simple bidding system offers so many possibilities. As the bidding unfolds it's typical for two players with strong hands to battle back and forth for chief while the other players lay down just enough cards in an attempt to be chosen as the chief's partner. Bidding can get brutal when one player indicates he might be a good partner only to get cold feet as the chief's bid rises too high for comfort. So he lays down a high enough bid to secure the vice position, thus forcing the chief to partner with one of the weaker players instead. Bidding is always tense and good bidding is what sets a good Mü player apart from the rest.

Mü is for four to six players but I think it plays best with five and it's almost as good with four. With six players your hand is very small and the chief's team is outnumbered two to one. This makes the deal a little more fickle and it makes it more difficult to bid with confidence. But don't let that deter you from playing with six! It's still quite enjoyable. With four players you have more information but the chief's team seems to be just a little more powerful. Five is the sweet spot.

If Mü has one flaw (other than its complexity which, with practice, becomes a virtue) it is that, like most card games, it can be very susceptible to the whims of fate. Even the best Mü player in the world can lose by being dealt several bad hands in a row. As players become more comfortable with bidding this becomes less of a problem but it will never go away completely. If you want a fair game then you really need to play dozens of hands to allow the luck to even out.

So if you are looking for a rich trick taking game that will provide experienced card players with a lifetime of enjoyment then you need look no further than Mü. I really can't recommend it highly enough.

Image

ArtEmiSa64 — 2007-04-23T03:28:21+00:00

Player Aid

Thread: Re: Good for 6 players?

Barkam — 2007-04-22T04:19:25+00:00

Thank you for your input, Mark. I have enough games that are "dependent on your play group" that are still sitting on my shelf unsuccessfully played (Traders of Genoa, I'm the boss, etc). So I won't be picking this up. Thanks for saving me money and shelf space.

Thread: Re: Good for 6 players?

thatmarkguy — 2007-04-21T11:29:13+00:00

It's more of a "Dependent on your play group". If they tend to be aggressive card players, it shouldn't be a problem at all and the game should be tremendously fun even at 6. If they're cautious/conservative card players, a problem I see with this game and such groups at 5 players would surely be even worse at 6. But even then, it wouldn't make the game 'bad', it would just be like poker - the hands when only one person thinks his hand's good enough to win aren't very interesting. The hands where two or more people think their hand's good enough to win are worth the wait.

Thread: Re: Good for 6 players?

Barkam — 2007-04-21T08:17:50+00:00

So... that's a no?

Thread: Re: Good for 6 players?

thatmarkguy — 2007-04-20T20:21:28+00:00

In my opinion, it's ideal with 5. It's good with 6 or 4. For 6, it's quite a struggle, though, because the Chief's 'team' only has 1/3 of the cards in the deck. It's really rough, and IMHO it probably demands aggressive (perhaps even reckless) play for bidding to ever get 'primed' to the point that the Chief can get enough information from the non-Vice players to be able to make an educated partner decision.

Even at 5, too conservative a group can cause too little information to be conveyed that the Chief is largely helpless when it comes time to pick a partner. You really need two players who think their hand is good enough for chief, for the Vice's bid to get high enough that a player can show strength to the Chief and not become Vice. At 6, I'd worry that an only-one-Chief-bidder impasse happens often. If only one player thinks his hand is good enough for chief, the Vice's bid will be low (no need to increase it if he doesn't have designs on Chief-ship) and the ability for other players to convey "I'd make a good partner" info to the chief will be nearly nil.

Thread: Good for 6 players?

Barkam — 2007-04-20T19:54:53+00:00

Hello fellow geeks,

How is this game with 6 players? Is it any good? Is it fun with that many players?

Thank you for your time.

Thread: Re: Safarü RGG Rules Errors

Aldaron — 2007-04-20T18:48:47+00:00

andyl wrote:
I have the german rules and yes, you are right on both points.
Thanks!

I guess that just adds to the list of creative RGG rules translations!

Thread: Re: Safarü RGG Rules Errors

andyl — 2007-04-20T16:03:05+00:00

I have the german rules and yes, you are right on both points.

The rules you can download on the game page has the rules correct.

Thread: Safarü RGG Rules Errors

Aldaron — 2007-04-20T15:43:11+00:00

There appear to be errors in the RGG (English, 4th Edition) Safarü rules:

(1) The rules state that a player who does not catch anything "may" release a card into the wild. Surely, he in fact must, or the rules for beginning a new hand, which state that after each hand players will have no cards left in their hands, are in error.

(2) Shouldn't the rules for dealing new cards after each hand say "an additional four cards" are dealt in the wild.

Does anyone have a copy of the original German rules?

Thread: Re: Safaru: Many Catches

craniac — 2007-04-05T05:24:52+00:00

Oh, sweet, I get it--thanks!

Just be glad I'm not trying to figure out MU! (yet...)

Thread: Safaru: Many Catches

craniac — 2007-04-05T02:06:36+00:00

Hi,

I don't understand the "many catches" rule in Safaru. Is it possible to "catch" cards using more than one method in a single instance? Or is the point of that section that "many catches" are forbidden?

the rules read: "A player MAY use his one card played to catch 2 or 3 of the above combinations, but only one of each kind."

What would be an example of playing one card to catch wild cards using, say "adding" and "totalling" ? Thanks!

Image

ZiggyZambo — 2007-03-30T20:40:25+00:00

Image

ArtEmiSa64 — 2007-03-11T04:12:08+00:00

box back (HRS)

Image

ArtEmiSa64 — 2007-03-11T04:11:31+00:00

back of card

Thread: Re: During gameplay

EzPotato — 2006-11-17T13:02:45+00:00

Thx for the quick reply.

Thread: Re: During gameplay

thatmarkguy — 2006-11-17T12:36:57+00:00

1. Yes, everyone needs to play one and only one card to every trick.

2. No, you may not pass when it is your turn to play a card. You must play (and if you have a card of the led suit, you must play a card of that suit - again remembering that all cards that are either variety of 'trump' make up one supersuit and lose their previous suit identity.

3/4: If no trumps are played, the trick is won by the highest card of the led suit (and in the event of there being two such cards, IE 7s or 1s, the first one of them played wins). A card of a suit that is neither the led suit nor the trump suit cannot win the trick.

So, to bring it all together: suppose Reds and Fives are trump and you're playing a 5-player game. Player 1 leads Yellow 0. Player 2 plays Yellow 7, player 3 plays Yellow 3, Player 4 plays the other Yellow 7, and now it is your turn to play. Your only 'Yellow' card is Yellow 5. You *don't have a yellow card* (you have a trump card, it is no longer considered Yellow). You may play *anything in your hand that you like* (because you have no cards that are of the suit led). If you play any card that is Red, a 5 (including that yellow one), or the Red 5, you will win the trick. If you play anything else (even, say, Green 9), the trick will be won by Player 2 (who played the highest card of the led suit, and in the case of a tie, the first such card). But you must play something. You must play one card.

Also to be noted that the cards that are laying faceup on the table in front of you (from the bidding phase) are still considered to be in your hand, and you can (and eventually must) play each one of them to a trick. They're cards in your hand everyone can see, but they are cards in your hand.

Thread: During gameplay

EzPotato — 2006-11-17T08:42:55+00:00

After bidding and decided who is the chief / chief-partner / vice and which are the trumps and start the round,

1.)does everyone need to play a card?

2.)can the player choose to pass?

3.)let's say nobody play trump, the highest number collect all the cards in play?

4.)if the player does not have the color in led and play a different color (not trump), does he / she still win the trick if his/her card is the highest?

Thx.

Thread: Re: Mu and the trump suit

DaviddesJ — 2006-11-07T20:57:22+00:00

ACK ACK wrote:
Right. Only if both trumps are numbers will there be 6 suits.

Or if one trump is a number and there is no other trump.

Thread: Re: Mu and the trump suit

ACK ACK — 2006-11-07T20:45:42+00:00

DaviddesJ wrote:
ACK ACK wrote:
So, in effect, each hand is played in 6 suits (the five colors and a trump suit).

Most hands have only five suits (because one color is trump), and many hands have only four suits (because two colors are trump). It's usually not a good idea to choose a number as the lower trump.

Right. Only if both trumps are numbers will there be 6 suits.

Now that I've got the rules down, I'll have to try to end the game with a positive number of points.

Thread: Re: Mu and the trump suit

DaviddesJ — 2006-11-07T07:58:21+00:00

ACK ACK wrote:
So, in effect, each hand is played in 6 suits (the five colors and a trump suit).

Most hands have only five suits (because one color is trump), and many hands have only four suits (because two colors are trump). It's usually not a good idea to choose a number as the lower trump.

Thread: Re: Mu and the trump suit

ACK ACK — 2006-11-07T07:04:07+00:00

Thanks for the quick answer, Dave. Looks as if we played it correct then.

It took us a while to get our heads around the fact that the trumps constitute an entirely separate suit. So, in effect, each hand is played in 6 suits (the five colors and a trump suit).

Thread: Re: Mu and the trump suit

daw65 — 2006-11-07T06:59:40+00:00

You'd have to play the yellow 3 over the yellow 5. You're correct that the yellow 5 is in the trump suit, not the yellow suit, for this hand.

Image

Werbaer — 2006-11-02T12:47:49+00:00

box cover (german version by amigo)

Image

Champion Eternal — 2006-10-29T04:13:27+00:00

Image

Verkisto — 2006-10-20T16:07:28+00:00

How I modified the cards for ease of play with colorblind players.

Image

nrihtar2 — 2006-10-01T01:03:43+00:00

box art

Image

shotokanguy — 2006-07-30T03:24:33+00:00

noticeable wear on the cards after only half a dozen plays...

Image

seiji — 2006-02-26T21:10:29+00:00

back of Rio Grande box