Game: Mr. Jack

Thread: Two Wrongs don't make a Right

rstruve — 2008-05-12T03:45:21+00:00

I recently sat down with my girlfriend and my brother to teach them the fine game of Mr. Jack. Girlfriend was the Detective, and brother was Jack - as I feel he is more strategy-minded, and I personally think it's harder to be Jack... at least when first getting to know the game.

So they picked up the game fairly easily, and got to work eliminating suspects. The game was going along well, and my girlfriend was down to just 2 suspects... when she made a huge mistake. Ok, I can't really call it a mistake - let's call it a 'Oh - I have to figure out who Jack is through strategy' error!

With 2 suspects left, she all of a sudden jumped on a suspect, accusing him of being Jack the Ripper. At first I thought, "Wow, she must have used Sherlock Holmes to prove the other suspect to be innocent, what a great stroke of luck - man, she is a brain!". 10 seconds later, I thought just the opposite - as the person she accused was not Jack at all, and Jack escaped in the confusion. So why the accusation, you ask? To quote her, "Well, he kept watching Ms Stealthy a lot, so I figured that must be Jack!". Oh boy...

So they played a second game, I kept her as the detective and him playing Jack. The reason for this is, you have to have a totally opposite strategy for each role... and if you just got done thinking like the detective, it is hard to switch in to 'Jack' thinking. This time, both of them did much better - really thinking out their strategies.

After making sure the detective made strategic plans that kept in mind that Mr. Jack can't slip out the alley if he is witnessed this round, my brother all of a sudden got this gleeful look upon his face as he was able to move John Smith out the alley... and to supposed freedom! I had to pause a moment, held back a little bit of a laugh... and informed him that Jack could not sneak out the alley this round. I didn't explain why, and it took him about 20 seconds to realize that Mr. Jack was being witnessed this round - and was not allowed to leave the White Chapel district! He shamefully moved Smith back to his original spot, exposing himself as Mr. Jack, and thus being captured by the detective almost immediately.

We all had a good laugh, as both of them had made a stupid mistake in both games - causing them to break even in the 'W' column! Let's hope they learned a lesson...

Image

oRMaN — 2008-05-09T07:39:48+00:00

My Own Board (Malaga-Cenachero Version)

Thread: Re: Escaping only when unseen?

Bruno des Montagnes — 2008-05-09T09:24:30+00:00

there is no exception to the rule:
Jack must be unseen at the end of the precedent tutn to escape the board..
But you're right: on a thematic point of view it would make sense to allow him to escape if he is the last suspect.
This would need to be tested !!

Thread: Re: Escaping only when unseen?

oatesatm — 2008-05-09T01:30:27+00:00

After thinking about it for a bit, I think it would be a little unfair for the detective to do all that work for Jack to be able to just walk out. Thematically it makes sense as well, if you know who he is, everybody would be looking for him and he'd have to sneak out anyway.

Thread: Re: Escaping only when unseen?

polarbear74 — 2008-05-09T12:38:25+00:00

He must still be unseen in order to leave the district. Although, your question might make for an interesting variant...

Thread: Re: Escaping only when unseen?

mgamer72 — 2008-05-09T12:37:39+00:00

From my interpretation, Jack still needs to be unseen even if Jack is the only one left unturned. Jack needs to sneak his/her way out.

Thread: Escaping only when unseen?

oatesatm — 2008-05-09T12:26:30+00:00

Since Mr. Jack can only escape when he is not witnessed, what about if he is the only token left that has not been flipped over to it's innocent side. Even though there are no more suspects, must he still try to be unseen in order to escape, or, at this point, can he just try to get away?