There is a story from a time now forgotten by most, when Egypt was just a fledgling community. A derelict ship, far larger than our simple ferries, became beached on Egypt's shores. Inside, the Pharaoh and his scientists found a great treasure; thousands of debens of a brilliant yet durable metal unknown to Egypt. The Priests declared the bounty a gift from the Gods, sent to help Egypt build a great society. Pharaoh asked the people to come up with uses for the metal, and when they had come to an agreement on which was the most beneficial, he would hand it over.
Egypt immediately broke into camps, squabbling over how the metal should be used. The Architects wanted to construct huge obelisks out of the material, believing they could use it to harness the power of lightning. The Politicians wanted to mint the metal into currency, arguing that a permanent and universal currency would usher in a new age of prosperity and trade. The Philosophers demanded the metal be turned over to them for research, so that they could better understand the lands across the waters. The Artists wanted the beautiful metal to mold and shape into great works of art, so that future generations would remember the Culture of the past.
The bickering went on for many months, during which alliances between the groups rose and fell, always shifting, although more often that not it was the Architects and Politicians united against the Philosophers and Artists. As for the common people of Egypt, they went about their lives unconcerned about this controversy. In fact, they made light of it, devising a game of cards which imitated the various groups all vying for the Pharaoh's attention, and the constantly-changing alliances. The game was named 'Yokir,' after the name of the beached ship.
What happened to the metal, we no longer know, other than that no group was able to lay claim to it. Some say the Stranger stole it during the uproar; others believe the Pharaoh became disgusted with the arguing and cast the ship back out to sea. However, the game played by the commoners remains today. Your challenge is to master this game, and get to know it well, so that the lessons of the past are not forgotten.
My proposal for the new Conflict test is a three-person variation of a card game called Euchre (normally a four player game with two teams of two... reading about it online will probably help understand the variation). The deck consists of 24 cards of four suits and 8 ranks; to make the game more suitable for ATITD, I suggest using four Disciplines for the suits (the red suits being Architects and Politicians, the black suits being Artists and Philosophers) and test levels for the ranks (citizen, student, prentice, journeyman, scribe, master), but if this is too confusing, we could use the names from a standard deck of cards.
To win the game, you must reach 10 points (if two players reach 10 points simultaneously, play continues until there is a single player with more points). A series of "hands" is played, with the ability to pick up zero, one, or three points per hand. (Scoring below). Here is how the hands work:
A dealer (although the computer will do the actual dealing) is randomly chosen from the three players at the start of the game, after each hand, the dealership passes to the left, clockwise. The dealer deals five cards to each player, leaving a pile of 9 cards, the top of these is flipped face-up on the table, and the rest discarded for this hand. Starting on the dealer's left, each player has a chance to accept or reject the face-up card. If the card is accepted, the player takes the card into his hand and discards one of his current ones (discarded card not shown to the other players). The "trump" suit for this hand is the same suit as whatever card was picked up. If the card is rejected by all three players, then it is discarded, and the ability to call any one of the remaining three suits goes around player-by-player again, starting on the dealer's left. If everyone passes during this second round, all cards are discarded and everyone receives 0 points for that hand.
The player who calls up trump, either by picked up the card on the first go-around, or calling one of the other suits on the second round, is on his own for the hand; the other two players are on a team. If the lone player takes 0, 1, or 2 "tricks" the other two players each get 1 point. If the lone player takes 3 or 4 tricks, he gets 1 point. If the lone player takes all 5 tricks, he gets 3 points. Letting your teammate know, in any way, what cards you do or do not have is taboo. Making it so players can only talk in a special channel created for the duration of the game (but can listen to any of them), should help with this.
There are 5 tricks per hand. One player leads a card, and the others must play a card of the same suit if they can; otherwise they can play any card they want. Whoever has the highest ranking card of the trump suit wins the trick, if no one has played a card of trump suit (and since you have to play the same suit as what was led, this is often the case) than the highest ranking card *of the suit lead*. For the first trick of the game, the player to the dealer's left leads. After this, the winner of the trick leads next.
One last (potentially confusing) detail... In each hand, two of the Citizen cards (lowest ranking) are turned into a Sage and a Oracle (the two highest ranking cards). The Oracle is the Citizen card of the same suit as the trump suit, the Sage is the Citizen card of the same color suit as the trump suit. For example, Priests are called trump; The Citizen of Priests now becomes the Oracle of Priests, and the Citizen of Philosophers now becomes the Sage of Priests (since Philosophers is the same color suit as Priests). The Citizen of Architects and the Citizen of Politicians are still the same low-ranking, crappy cards they were before.
I didn't realize until actually typing this out how hard it is to explain a card game in text... if this explanation is too confusing, I'll try to post a more detailed explanation with examples on the Wiki. If people thing it's better to abandon the Egyptian names for the ranks and suits of the cards for the more standard names, that could be done too.
The game could be played anywhere, so long as one of the three players had a deck of cards. The decks would be printed at a common paper press, needing just paper (and maybe a little ink?). Decks of cards could be donated to any UoC or SoC, where other players could pick one up for free. Once the game started, the players would be unable to move (or could move just a very limited range). There would be a 20-second time limit for a player to decide which card they want to play, after which a card is thrown randomly from the possible valid ones. Any player can call a time out, which can be revoked by any other player (so if someone disconnects, honorable opponents could time-out and wait for them to return). If two people decide to call the game a Stalemate, the third player will have a minute or two to either accept or decline. This allows two players to cancel the game if someone is playing and disconnects without returning, but prevents two players who are losing horribly from escaping a loss. Optionally, decks with better graphics(status symbols) could be made with much more expensive costs, like gold trim.
In trying to think up a new test, I wanted something that was fun, not feasibly "solvable" by a computer, and rewarded people for long-term strategy, quick wit, and old-fashioned good luck. I think this test satisifies all of these criteria. Fun: the four-person version of this card game was my favorite card games for years, until Texas Hold'em poker came along, and is widely popular in Michingan. Long-term strategy: Deciding how aggressive you want to be (calling up trump, or playing defensive with a teammate). Quick wit: 20 second timer to decide a card. Luck: Which cards you are dealt is a big factor (although how you play them is just as important).
Additionally, I wanted a game that people could play casually, meaning it had to be easily portable. As a card game played on carryable decks, this issue is resolved.
(text originally posted by Dors/Ajars to atitd.net forums)