#Worms (Rare)
60 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
"X1 mult. Mult increases by 0.5 per poker hand contained in played hand."
Ehh
My issue is it needs a clear reset
Since it's presumably intended to only be for the current hand
Isnt it obvious?
But it isn't said- and I don't trust people's ability to read
X1 Mult
X0.5 additional Mult for each poker hand held in hand when hand played
(Currently X_ Mult)
Thats good
This is my issue
I like the effect and my only real concern is if it deserves 0.25 instead
@icy stone what u think?
If it doesn't say "gains" I think it's clear enough
That is debatable given the questions or comments here
Yes
I can draw the natural conclusion from it- that doesn't change the fear others won't
Maybe it could also say "gives"
As for the actual effects, isn't this at minimum 1.5X because High Card exists?
Yes
Contained in played/scored hand or held hand?
Scored
Played might be too op
So a flush five contains a flush, HC, pair, 3oaK, 4oaK, 5oaK, and itself so this joker would give x4 mult?
This joker is more versatile than, but also significantly weaker than, duo, trio, family, etc.
Well, it is a straight upgrade of duo
Yes
If it’s a straight upgrade from duo it’s not a good idea, since duo is rare
High card doesn’t count as no hand technically contains a high card
Don't you mean every hand. Like high card is one card, every hand has 1 card. Except for the none hand in cryptid
No, High Card's description IIRC is that it occurs when no other hand types are valid
High Card isn't 1oak
That said, the Pluto planet card depicts it as 1oak
But technically speaking only High Card is allowed to contain High Card
What about high cards
None only exists because High Card doesn't make any sense if no Card is High
since there is no Card
to be High
I think you're high
You good at spelling or grammar
Point is: hands other than High Card can't contain High Card, because High Card occurs by definition when there is no other hand type contained in the hand
I got that back in the 1500's. But my question is "are you good at spelling or grammar* because I think that people that like math are all bad or lesser in language
I don't see how that relates but I would say I am
I knew it. My theory lives on
no i would say this does not support your theory
Why not
because you're saying that i should not be good at those things, but i would say i am
this is getting off topic though and i dont really care to continue this conversation
This is far from the craziest theory. Plus one case is the rotten potato in the carrot tree, not the rule
Wow you are yapping your ass off