h a l f b a k e r y
The embarrassing drunkard uncle of invention.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta:

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

 user: pass:
register,

# Infinite Tiles Scrabble

No limit on number of tiles with any given letter
 (+1, -1) [vote for, against]

This is for electronic versions of Scrabble.

In traditional board-game scrabble there is a finite set of tiles and for each letter, there is a finite number of those. For example there is one Q, one Z, one J, a couple of Ys and Hs, and a whole lot of As, Es, and Os. And so forth. The rarer letters have higher point value. Q, Z, and X have 10. However, the common letters are just worth one point.

The luck of the draw is very significant in the outcome of the games. If one player gets a Q, that player will be able to get at least 10 points from playing it and can get many more points from a clever play involving bonus squares. Thus, being lucky to get a disproportionate number of high point tiles can sway the outcome of the game.

There are 100 tiles in a standard scrabble. Thus, for any given tile, there is a 1/100 chance of it being a Q, for example. Conversely, there is a 12/100 chance of a tile being an E. Of course, once a Q is received by one player, the chance of another player drawing a Q is 0.

However, in Infinite Tile Scrabble, the probability of a tile being a given letter never changes. Thus, when someone plays a Q, the next tile drawn still has a 1/100 chance of being a Q and a 12/100 chance of being an E.

 — Goesta Berling, May 01 2020

"luck is very significant" ... If that bothers you, play chess.
 — kdf, May 01 2020

 What [kdf] said.

 Games vary from 100% luck (dice) through luck/choice (Monopoly) to 100% choice (Chess).

 Scrabble is a luck/choice mix in that the randomness of the tiles affects the outcome, but so do player choices.

You can change the random element, but then it wouldn't be Scrabble any more, and thus useless for determining the Question to the Ultimate Answer.
 — 8th of 7, May 01 2020

But Arthur's tiles were hand made and not a standard Scrabble set ... because "What do you get when you multiply six by nine" has four Y's in it. Maybe he and Ford were playing Goesta's infinite game to draw the ultimate question. Just maybe, but I wouldn't call that Scrabble either.
 — kdf, May 01 2020

 // not a standard Scrabble set //

He could have drawn a blank tile and inferred its value from context. For example "multipl_" has only two possible valid "outcomes", if you exclude horrid Italian MPV rot-boxes.
 — 8th of 7, May 01 2020

Still not a standard set, his board was only 13x13. No wonder the Golgafrincham's took over, the original inhabitants never had a chance to play real Scrabble.
 — kdf, May 01 2020

There is still luck here. It is just that drawing a hard letter doesn't disappear throughout the game. This idea would make the game harder not easier. For professionals, I suspect.
 — wjt, May 03 2020

Yes, it still has a chance factor and luck could still sway the game. And a big enough change that it really wouldn’t be Scrabble. As for “professionals,” they don’t play tournaments in “electronic” versions. At least not in the US or Canada.
 — kdf, May 03 2020

Well, I suppose it comes down to whether the main objective is scrabbling for tiles or scrabbling for words.
 — wjt, May 03 2020

This gets a croissant from me. There are many words that cannot be made without using a blank tile, and these could now zigzag their way into play. Also it might prevent "hoarding" a high scoring letter such as Q, as getting a second Q would be less than exquisite.
 — Lemon, May 03 2020

 [annotate]

back: main index