For each word we need the word itself in the new language (which can be whatever you like, though face to face you might consider that you may be saying it out loud repeatedly) and its meaning in the old language (i.e. English). I assume we can all make up new words, though various aids are available if wanted.
Some way of saying “I know” is compulsory. I have rolled “no” into “not” with some success.
I don’t think we have turns, though I may be misunderstanding either you or the rules.
Once we have our starting vocabulary, a round is:
a new player becomes the Mentor
Mentor gets a word card and chooses a word to convey. They fill in the New Language side of a vocabulary entry. (They may also choose a Support Word, which is similarly shown as New Language only for now.)
Players try to work out what the word is, They can communicate with Mentor only in New Language, though they can discuss among themselves in English.
There are five guess tokens. Up to three of them can be used to get extra clues. In the four level 1 rounds there’s no benefit to not using all of them.
The round ends with success (the word is guessed, players gain tokens) or failure (no tokens). Either way the new word goes into the vocabulary. Overall success is determined by whether the level 3 word is guessed correctly.
So maybe the best option is we all post some suggestions for the first 18 words? Perhaps we all suggest an essential word and some ideas we think we’ll need.
We can pick any 18 (English) words we like as long as they can express the concept “I know” (which is how someone makes a guess). The photo gives some examples of 18-word sets that you might use.
Each of those words gets a New Language word, which are how Mentor communicates with the other players, and can be anything you like. I’m trying to put some structure into it with my vebrank related to Lordof1’s brank but that is not compulsory and it doesn’t make any difference to gameplay.
Oh no, it’s Roger’s game, I’ve only ever heard the rules second-hand. I’m just trying to get a feel for how it is played, or more specifically how Roger is interpreting the rules.
OK, I did feel the need to explain after all
EDIT: The examples are all one-to-one word correspondence, so I assumed that creatively interpreting/widening that one-to-one correspondence was up to us to do while playing, rather than while making the original definitions. (So by my interpretation, it wouldn’t originally be tot = fire/heat/hot, but rather tot = fire, or any one of the three, and we’d probably end up having to use “tot” to mean all kinds of other related things to get anywhere, given a vocabulary of 18 words.)
In short, yes, do it the way it makes sense to you. I’m using multiple words in my definitions because I want to make it clear that tot isn’t just fire, but I agree it’s probably not actually necessary.
I agree, we probs should let it happen organically, I think that is my fault initially with ‘eat/consume’. Let’s try to keep it to single basic meanings and see if we can imply/infer other meanings in context?
