Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
House Rules is IUEO, tweaked stuff accordingly
Changed line(s) 23,24 (click to see context) from:
As might be expected of such a mutable game, Mao is extremely prone to HouseRules; it's pretty much a guarantee that any two groups of Mao players will play a slightly different version of the game.
to:
As might be expected of such a mutable game, Mao is extremely prone to HouseRules; it's pretty much a guarantee that any two groups of Mao players will [[NoUnifiedRuleset play a slightly different version of the game.
game]].
Changed line(s) 35,36 (click to see context) from:
* HouseRules: Any two different groups of people will play Mao slightly differently.
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules: Any game that lasts long enough will inevitably build up a long list of rules. Some HouseRules state that the last person to stay sane keeping track of them wins the session.
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules: Any game that lasts long enough will inevitably build up a long list of rules. Some HouseRules state that the last person to stay sane keeping track of them wins the session.
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* NoUnifiedRuleset: Even before anyone has added their own rules, most groups have a varying set of base rules.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* MacroGame: Rules created by the winners of each round can continue to be used for multiple sessions if the players wish.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 47 (click to see context) from:
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on newbies in order to encourage them to play, since it's better to have willing players than frustrated ones. One such rule is the penalty for "ungentlemanly conduct", which penalizes people for engaging in deceptive or exploitative play. This usually stops once all the players have deduced the basic rules, at which point the gloves are off.
to:
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: VideoGameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on newbies in order to encourage them to play, since it's better to have willing players than frustrated ones. One such rule is the penalty for "ungentlemanly conduct", which penalizes people for engaging in deceptive or exploitative play. This usually stops once all the players have deduced the basic rules, at which point the gloves are off.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 36,37 (click to see context) from:
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules: If you can play long enough, and people don't go crazy from trying to keep on top of them all...
** According to some HouseRules, the winner is the last person to still have some kind of sanity remaining.
** According to some HouseRules, the winner is the last person to still have some kind of sanity remaining.
to:
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules: If you can play Any game that lasts long enough, and people don't go crazy from trying to keep on top enough will inevitably build up a long list of them all...
** According to some HouseRules, the winner isrules. Some HouseRules state that the last person to still have some kind stay sane keeping track of sanity remaining.them wins the session.
** According to some HouseRules, the winner is
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 10 (click to see context) :
* Giving cards special abilities
Deleted line(s) 14 (click to see context) :
* Amending or extending an existing rule
Changed line(s) 16 (click to see context) from:
to:
* Giving cards special abilities
* Amending or extending an existing rule
* Amending or extending an existing rule
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 19,20 (click to see context) from:
One advantage of Mao is that it is an extremely easy game to begin; all you need is some playing cards, a few willing players, and at least one person who knows the starting rules. Since the aim of the game is to figure out the rules, this means newbies can get straight into the game without needing anything explained to them.
to:
One major advantage of Mao is that it is an extremely easy game to begin; all you need is some playing cards, a few willing players, and at least one person who knows the starting rules. Since the aim of the game is to figure out the rules, this means newbies can get straight into the game without needing anything explained to them.
Changed line(s) 25,28 (click to see context) from:
Conventionally, Mao has no GameMaster: the game is run democratically, with all players granted equal power to call penalties when they see them (although they do have to be correct!). There is also a "dictatorial" variant of the game in which the power to make rules and impose penalties sits with a single player.
If you are interested in learning the rules of Mao, there is a [[UsefulNotes/{{Mao}} Useful Notes]] page for it. There is also an [[UsefulNotes/ExampleMaoGame example Mao game]] if you would like to see what a Mao game looks like.
If you are interested in learning the rules of Mao, there is a [[UsefulNotes/{{Mao}} Useful Notes]] page for it. There is also an [[UsefulNotes/ExampleMaoGame example Mao game]] if you would like to see what a Mao game looks like.
to:
Conventionally, Mao has no GameMaster: the game is run democratically, with all players granted equal power to call penalties when they see them (although they do have to be correct!).correct - calling a false penalty is itself penalizable!). There is also a "dictatorial" variant of the game in which the power to make rules and impose penalties sits with a single player.
If you are interested in learning the rules of Mao, there is a [[UsefulNotes/{{Mao}} Useful Notes]] page forit. it which explains how to run a game. There is also an [[UsefulNotes/ExampleMaoGame example Mao game]] if you would like to see what a Mao game looks like.
like in practice.
If you are interested in learning the rules of Mao, there is a [[UsefulNotes/{{Mao}} Useful Notes]] page for
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 17,18 (click to see context) from:
There is no real limit on what rules people can create, other than that they should be fair to all players and, if possible, simple to enforce. Otherwise, the sky is the limit and no aspect of the game can be taken for granted, as it can always be changed. Late-game Mao can look quite bizarre once a lot of new rules are in play.
to:
There is no real limit on what rules people can create, other than that they should be fair to all players and, if possible, simple enough to enforce. Otherwise, the sky is the limit and no aspect of the game can be taken for granted, as it can always be changed. Late-game Mao can look quite bizarre once a lot of new rules are in play.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* LoopholeAbuse: You can do it if you spot that a rule hasn't been thought through carefully enough. This is another good reason to keep rules simple - a complex rule likely has more ways it can be exploited.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 6,9 (click to see context) from:
Whenever a player succeeds in getting rid of all their cards, they win the round, and are permitted to add a new rule to the game or change an existing one - without telling anyone what the new rule is. The game therefore continually evolves as it is played and more rules are added, and the players must try to figure out and adapt to these changes as they play.
Some common rule changes are: changing something about the game state when certain cards are played, adding a condition to what cards ''can'' be played, requiring certain phrases to be said on certain actions, adding special moves to the game... people can get very creative with their rules.
Some common rule changes are: changing something about the game state when certain cards are played, adding a condition to what cards ''can'' be played, requiring certain phrases to be said on certain actions, adding special moves to the game... people can get very creative with their rules.
to:
Whenever a player succeeds in getting rid of all their cards, they win the round, and are permitted to invent and add a new rule to the game or change an existing one - without telling anyone what the new rule is. The game therefore continually evolves as it is played and more rules are added, and the players must try to figure out and adapt to these changes as they play.
Some common rule changesare: changing something about the game state are:
* Giving cards special abilities
* Making things happen when certain combinations of cards areplayed, adding played
* Changing what constitutes a valid play
* Requiring players to say something when a conditionto is met
* Amending or extending an existing rule
* Changing the identity of a card or suit
There is no real limit on whatcards ''can'' be played, requiring certain phrases to be said on certain actions, adding special moves to the game... rules people can get very creative with their rules.
create, other than that they should be fair to all players and, if possible, simple to enforce. Otherwise, the sky is the limit and no aspect of the game can be taken for granted, as it can always be changed. Late-game Mao can look quite bizarre once a lot of new rules are in play.
Some common rule changes
* Giving cards special abilities
* Making things happen when certain combinations of cards are
* Changing what constitutes a valid play
* Requiring players to say something when a condition
* Amending or extending an existing rule
* Changing the identity of a card or suit
There is no real limit on what
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 24,25 (click to see context) from:
* DropInDropOutMultiplayer: Mao is perfect for this, since it doesn't really matter who's in the game as long as you have enough players. In Cambridge-based versions, this is practically a design feature since play never stops; a person who gets rid of all their cards actually has to opt themselves back into the game.
* EndlessGame: Mao isn't really designed to end; it usually finishes when everyone has had enough. The "winner" can be considered the person who introduced the most rules, but really the game is about having fun.
* EndlessGame: Mao isn't really designed to end; it usually finishes when everyone has had enough. The "winner" can be considered the person who introduced the most rules, but really the game is about having fun.
to:
* DropInDropOutMultiplayer: Mao is perfect for this, since it doesn't really matter who's in nobody needs to know the game as long as you have enough players. rules to be brought into the game. In Cambridge-based versions, this is practically even a design feature since play never stops; a person who gets rid of all their cards actually has to opt themselves back into the game.
* EndlessGame: Mao isn't really designed toend; have an ending; it usually finishes when everyone has had enough. The "winner" can be considered the person who introduced the most rules, but really the game is about having fun.
* EndlessGame: Mao isn't really designed to
Changed line(s) 31 (click to see context) from:
* RulesLawyer: The whole point of the game, really. In some versions of Mao, you can actually be penalized for ''failing'' to enforce your own rule.
to:
* RulesLawyer: The Kind of the whole point of the game, really. The only way to succeed is to understand the rules so well that you can't be penalized, whilst inflicting penalties on other players to disadvantage them. In some versions of Mao, you can actually even be penalized for ''failing'' if you ''fail'' to enforce your own rule.
Changed line(s) 34 (click to see context) from:
* TrialAndErrorGameplay: The only way to learn the rules for this game is to be penalized for breaking them. (Or watching other people break them.)
to:
* TrialAndErrorGameplay: The only way to learn the rules for this game is to be penalized for breaking them. (Or watching other people break them.)them).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 4,5 (click to see context) from:
Mao is a "shedding-type" card game similar to TabletopGame/{{UNO}} or [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crazy_Eights Crazy Eights]], in which the goal is to get rid of all your cards. However, there is a twist: you are not told, and are not ''allowed'' to be told, any of the rules of the game. You must instead work them out by inductive reasoning - [[TrialAndErrorGameplay watching people play, trying different moves, and being penalized with extra cards when you do something wrong]].
to:
Mao is a "shedding-type" card game similar to TabletopGame/{{UNO}} or [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crazy_Eights Crazy Eights]], in which the goal is to get rid of all your cards. However, there is a twist: you are not told, and are not ''allowed'' to be told, any of the rules of the game. You must instead work them out by inductive reasoning deduction - [[TrialAndErrorGameplay watching people play, trying different moves, and being penalized with extra cards when you do something wrong]].
Changed line(s) 12,13 (click to see context) from:
The flipside, however, is that the start of the game is rather asymmetric for new players, since they start off at a clear disadvantage against people who do know the rules.
to:
The flipside, however, is that the start of the game is rather very asymmetric for new players, since they start off at a clear disadvantage against people who do know the rules.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 4,5 (click to see context) from:
Mao is a "shedding-type" card game similar to TabletopGame/{{UNO}} or [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crazy_Eights Crazy Eights]], in which the goal is to get rid of all your cards. However, the twist is this: you are not told, and are not ''allowed'' to be told, any of the rules. You must instead work them out by inductive reasoning - [[TrialAndErrorGameplay watching people play, trying different moves, and being penalized with extra cards when you do something wrong]].
to:
Mao is a "shedding-type" card game similar to TabletopGame/{{UNO}} or [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crazy_Eights Crazy Eights]], in which the goal is to get rid of all your cards. However, the twist there is this: a twist: you are not told, and are not ''allowed'' to be told, any of the rules.rules of the game. You must instead work them out by inductive reasoning - [[TrialAndErrorGameplay watching people play, trying different moves, and being penalized with extra cards when you do something wrong]].
Changed line(s) 8,9 (click to see context) from:
Some common rule changes are: changing something about the game state when certain cards is played, adding a condition to what cards ''can'' be played, requiring certain phrases to be said on certain actions, adding special moves to the game... people can get very creative with their rules.
to:
Some common rule changes are: changing something about the game state when certain cards is are played, adding a condition to what cards ''can'' be played, requiring certain phrases to be said on certain actions, adding special moves to the game... people can get very creative with their rules.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 4,15 (click to see context) from:
One of the rules of Mao is that we can't tell you the rules. But here goes.
Mao is a card game played with regular playing cards. In its basic form, it is a simple game of laying down cards according to the rules of the game, and winning when you have laid down all your cards.
The difficulty, as mentioned above, is that, barring a short introduction to at least clarify the turn order, you are not told, and are not ''allowed'' to be told, any of the rules. [[TrialAndErrorGameplay You must work them out by watching people play, trying things out, and being penalised with extra cards when you do something wrong.]]
For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair to newbies who have no idea how to play the game.
Unfortunately, this means that some people never get to the good part of the game, where the fun actually begins. Because when someone 'wins' at Mao by getting rid of all their cards, they are entitled to make a new rule and introduce it into the game, without telling anyone what it is. The rule could be a simple modification (for example, "you can't play a King on top of a Queen"), or it could fundamentally change the way the game is played. And as more people win, the rules stack up and the game becomes more and more complex, and even veteran players may be stumped by rules they haven't worked out yet.
Mao is often compared to Mornington Crescent, or {{Calvinball}}, but in reality it is neither of those. Mornington Crescent is a mock game with deliberately nonsensical rules that are invented on the spot to make it appear complex, while Calvinball is a game where the rules appear to change at the will of any player. While it often looks like people are making up rules in Mao as they go along, in fact it is a mostly deterministic game, and any rules that are introduced have to be followed by all players equally.
Mao is a card game played with regular playing cards. In its basic form, it is a simple game of laying down cards according to the rules of the game, and winning when you have laid down all your cards.
The difficulty, as mentioned above, is that, barring a short introduction to at least clarify the turn order, you are not told, and are not ''allowed'' to be told, any of the rules. [[TrialAndErrorGameplay You must work them out by watching people play, trying things out, and being penalised with extra cards when you do something wrong.]]
For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair to newbies who have no idea how to play the game.
Unfortunately, this means that some people never get to the good part of the game, where the fun actually begins. Because when someone 'wins' at Mao by getting rid of all their cards, they are entitled to make a new rule and introduce it into the game, without telling anyone what it is. The rule could be a simple modification (for example, "you can't play a King on top of a Queen"), or it could fundamentally change the way the game is played. And as more people win, the rules stack up and the game becomes more and more complex, and even veteran players may be stumped by rules they haven't worked out yet.
Mao is often compared to Mornington Crescent, or {{Calvinball}}, but in reality it is neither of those. Mornington Crescent is a mock game with deliberately nonsensical rules that are invented on the spot to make it appear complex, while Calvinball is a game where the rules appear to change at the will of any player. While it often looks like people are making up rules in Mao as they go along, in fact it is a mostly deterministic game, and any rules that are introduced have to be followed by all players equally.
to:
The difficulty, as mentioned above, is that, barring a short introduction to at least clarify
For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair to newbies who have no idea how to play the game.
Unfortunately, this means that some people never get to the good part of the game, where the fun actually begins. Because when someone 'wins' at Mao by
Whenever a player succeeds in getting rid of all their cards, they win the round, and are
Some common rule
One advantage of Mao is that it is an extremely easy game to begin; all you need is some playing cards, a few willing players, and at least one person who knows the starting rules. Since the aim of the game is
The flipside, however, is that the start of the game is rather asymmetric for new players, since they start off at a clear disadvantage against people who do know the rules.
As might be expected of such a mutable game, Mao is extremely prone to HouseRules; it's pretty much a guarantee that any two groups of Mao players
Conventionally, Mao
Changed line(s) 21,22 (click to see context) from:
* BeatThemAtTheirOwnGame: If you've worked out a player's rule, you can enforce it on THEM if they break it.
* EndlessGame: There isn't really an end to the game; it normally ends when everyone has had enough. The 'winner' can be considered the person who introduced the most rules, but it's really about having fun.
* EndlessGame: There isn't really an end to the game; it normally ends when everyone has had enough. The 'winner' can be considered the person who introduced the most rules, but it's really about having fun.
to:
* BeatThemAtTheirOwnGame: If you've worked out a player's rule, you can enforce it on THEM ''them'' if they break it.
* DropInDropOutMultiplayer: Mao is perfect for this, since it doesn't really matter who's in the game as long as you have enough players. In Cambridge-based versions, this is practically a design feature since play never stops; a person who gets rid of all their cards actually has to opt themselves back into the game.
* EndlessGame:There Mao isn't really an end designed to the game; end; it normally ends usually finishes when everyone has had enough. The 'winner' "winner" can be considered the person who introduced the most rules, but it's really the game is about having fun.
* DropInDropOutMultiplayer: Mao is perfect for this, since it doesn't really matter who's in the game as long as you have enough players. In Cambridge-based versions, this is practically a design feature since play never stops; a person who gets rid of all their cards actually has to opt themselves back into the game.
* EndlessGame:
Changed line(s) 25,36 (click to see context) from:
** According to some HouseRules, the winner is the last person to still have some kind of sanity. Although arguably, the true winners are those who begin the game already insane.
* LogicBomb: The result of two or more people's rules contradicting each other. It's made even more difficult by the fact that the people whose rules are conflicting may not KNOW the other person's rule, and therefore be unable to decide whether theirs can override it or not. When this happens, a point of order is called so that people can discuss what to do.
* RulesLawyer: The whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.
* TheScottishTrope: there is a word that, if said during the game when not required, results in one of the harshest penalties.
** If someone says the word to the tune of the "Meow Mix" advert, you might as well just penalise them the entire deck.
* TrialAndErrorGameplay: The way to learn the rules for this game is to be penalised for breaking them.
* UnstableEquilibrium: Downplayed. The more of the hidden rules you've figured out, the more likely you are to win a game. And when you win a game, you get to add your own hidden rule and penalize your opponents for breaking ''that'' in addition to the other rules they're still trying to figure out. However, it's unlikely that someone will gain an insurmountable advantage because good luck can compensate for incomplete knowledge of the rules.
* UrbanLegends: Some claim that the game was invented in China, as an illustration of what life is like living under Communist rule (IE, you don't know what the rules are until you've already broken them). In reality it's simply a TakeThat to such concepts.
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}), though you still will be penalized correctly for the bad call. And new rules can have penalty calls that tend to incite laughter or swearing, both usually against the rules.
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalize players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'. This usually stops once all the players have deduced the basic rules. Then the gloves are off.
** Most have rules against 'lying' or 'cheating'. The cheating rule deserves special mention. In games that have that one, there are certain plays that are legal unless you get caught. The proper call for said plays is "cheating", and CORRECTLY stating how they cheated. Normally, a rule against cheating goes without being said, but in this case, it makes sense.
----
* LogicBomb: The result of two or more people's rules contradicting each other. It's made even more difficult by the fact that the people whose rules are conflicting may not KNOW the other person's rule, and therefore be unable to decide whether theirs can override it or not. When this happens, a point of order is called so that people can discuss what to do.
* RulesLawyer: The whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.
* TheScottishTrope: there is a word that, if said during the game when not required, results in one of the harshest penalties.
** If someone says the word to the tune of the "Meow Mix" advert, you might as well just penalise them the entire deck.
* TrialAndErrorGameplay: The way to learn the rules for this game is to be penalised for breaking them.
* UnstableEquilibrium: Downplayed. The more of the hidden rules you've figured out, the more likely you are to win a game. And when you win a game, you get to add your own hidden rule and penalize your opponents for breaking ''that'' in addition to the other rules they're still trying to figure out. However, it's unlikely that someone will gain an insurmountable advantage because good luck can compensate for incomplete knowledge of the rules.
* UrbanLegends: Some claim that the game was invented in China, as an illustration of what life is like living under Communist rule (IE, you don't know what the rules are until you've already broken them). In reality it's simply a TakeThat to such concepts.
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}), though you still will be penalized correctly for the bad call. And new rules can have penalty calls that tend to incite laughter or swearing, both usually against the rules.
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalize players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'. This usually stops once all the players have deduced the basic rules. Then the gloves are off.
** Most have rules against 'lying' or 'cheating'. The cheating rule deserves special mention. In games that have that one, there are certain plays that are legal unless you get caught. The proper call for said plays is "cheating", and CORRECTLY stating how they cheated. Normally, a rule against cheating goes without being said, but in this case, it makes sense.
----
to:
** According to some HouseRules, the winner is the last person to still have some kind of sanity. Although arguably, the true winners are those who begin the game already insane.
sanity remaining.
* LogicBomb:The result of Because anyone can introduce a rule and all rules are unexplained, it is possible for two or more people's rules contradicting to contradict each other. It's made even more difficult by the fact that the people whose rules are conflicting may not KNOW the other person's rule, and therefore be unable to decide whether theirs can override it or not.other. When this happens, a point of order is called so that people can discuss what to do.
* MetaGame: This is basically unavoidable; at least one of the players must have played the game before in order to enforce the rules.
* RulesLawyer: The whole point of the game, really.Some people even play it so that a person In some versions of Mao, you can actually be penalised penalized for FAILING ''failing'' to enforce their your own rule.
* RuleZero: It is possible to break the game with a poorly-considered rule. As a last resort, Mao players can settle such problems democratically by having everyone agree on whether to amend or drop the rule.
* TheScottishTrope:there is a word that, if said If you say "Mao" during the game when you are not required, supposed to, this results in one of a three-card penalty, the harshest penalties.
** If someone saysin the word to the tune of the "Meow Mix" advert, you might as well just penalise them the entire deck.
game.
* TrialAndErrorGameplay: The only way to learn the rules for this game is to bepenalised penalized for breaking them.
them. (Or watching other people break them.)
* UnstableEquilibrium:Downplayed. The more of the hidden rules you've figured out, the more likely you are to win a game. And when you win a game, you Experienced players do get to add your own hidden rule and penalize your opponents for breaking ''that'' in addition to the other rules they're still trying to figure out. However, it's unlikely that someone will gain an insurmountable advantage because against newbies to start with, since they are less likely to be penalized and thus have a better chance of getting rid of their cards. This is partly intentional - it generally makes more sense to allow experienced players to control the game until newbies have had a chance to learn the rules. However, good card luck can compensate for incomplete knowledge of knowledge, which helps to prevent people from gaining an runaway advantage. And the rules.
game isn't really about winning anyway.
* UrbanLegends: Some claim that the game was invented in China, as an illustration of what life is like living under Communist rule(IE, (ie. you don't know what the rules are until you've already broken them). In reality it's simply a TakeThat to such concepts.
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential:Oh, so much. It Since newbies don't know the rules, there is perfectly potential to engage in trickery, such as pretending it's your turn when you know it's someone else's (this tricks people into running afoul of the "failure to play within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}), though you still will be penalized correctly for the bad call. And new rules can have penalty calls that tend to incite laughter or swearing, both usually against the rules.
X seconds" rule).
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier onnewbies, noting that it would be very easy for people newbies in order to become frustrated, so they penalize encourage them to play, since it's better to have willing players than frustrated ones. One such rule is the penalty for 'ungentlemanly conduct'. "ungentlemanly conduct", which penalizes people for engaging in deceptive or exploitative play. This usually stops once all the players have deduced the basic rules. Then rules, at which point the gloves are off.
** Most have rules against 'lying' or 'cheating'. The cheating rule deserves special mention. In games that have that one, there are certain plays that are legal unless you get caught. The proper call for said plays is "cheating", and CORRECTLY stating how they cheated. Normally, a rule against cheating goes without being said, but in this case, it makes sense.
----off.
* LogicBomb:
* MetaGame: This is basically unavoidable; at least one of the players must have played the game before in order to enforce the rules.
* RulesLawyer: The whole point of the game, really.
* RuleZero: It is possible to break the game with a poorly-considered rule. As a last resort, Mao players can settle such problems democratically by having everyone agree on whether to amend or drop the rule.
* TheScottishTrope:
** If someone says
* TrialAndErrorGameplay: The only way to learn the rules for this game is to be
* UnstableEquilibrium:
* UrbanLegends: Some claim that the game was invented in China, as an illustration of what life is like living under Communist rule
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential:
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on
** Most have rules against 'lying' or 'cheating'. The cheating rule deserves special mention. In games that have that one, there are certain plays that are legal unless you get caught. The proper call for said plays is "cheating", and CORRECTLY stating how they cheated. Normally, a rule against cheating goes without being said, but in this case, it makes sense.
----
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* UnstableEquilibrium: Downplayed. The more of the hidden rules you've figured out, the more likely you are to win a game. And when you win a game, you get to add your own hidden rule and penalize your opponents for breaking ''that'' in addition to the other rules they're still trying to figure out. However, it's unlikely that someone will gain an insurmountable advantage because good luck can compensate for incomplete knowledge of the rules.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 27,30 (click to see context) :
* ThatOneRule: Some players have tremendous difficulty with the '[[spoiler:the joker is the 9 of diamonds]]' rule, which is one of the basic rules in many variants. It is exactly what it says: [[spoiler:any joker is considered equivalent to the 9 of diamonds when played]].
** That rule is simple when compared to some others. Here are some fun ones to add: All clubs are called spades. All Diamonds are clubs. Can a Diamond be played on a spade? Can a diamond be played on a club? and what must be spoken, if the played card is the 7 of Diamonds? And what is the proper penalty to call for failing to speak what is required? [[spoiler:no, yes, and "Seven of spades, have a nice day.", and "Failure to call a club a spade, failure to say "have a nice day", of course.]] And that barely scratches the surface.
** This trope also occurs when there's a rule that's been introduced that a player just can't figure out, and they always end up getting penalised for breaking it without knowing why.
*** "Failure to be a Thwiggle-Thwoggle," anyone? [[spoiler:not hooking your thumbs after playing your card.]]
** That rule is simple when compared to some others. Here are some fun ones to add: All clubs are called spades. All Diamonds are clubs. Can a Diamond be played on a spade? Can a diamond be played on a club? and what must be spoken, if the played card is the 7 of Diamonds? And what is the proper penalty to call for failing to speak what is required? [[spoiler:no, yes, and "Seven of spades, have a nice day.", and "Failure to call a club a spade, failure to say "have a nice day", of course.]] And that barely scratches the surface.
** This trope also occurs when there's a rule that's been introduced that a player just can't figure out, and they always end up getting penalised for breaking it without knowing why.
*** "Failure to be a Thwiggle-Thwoggle," anyone? [[spoiler:not hooking your thumbs after playing your card.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 27,28 (click to see context) from:
* ThatOneRule: Some players have tremendous difficulty with the 'the joker is the 9 of diamonds' rule, which is one of the basic rules in many variants. It is exactly what it says: any joker is considered equivalent to the 9 of diamonds when played.
** Bah, that rule is simple. Here are some fun ones to add. All clubs are called spades. All Diamonds are clubs. Can a Diamond be played on a spade? Can a diamond be played on a club? and what must be spoken, if the played card is the 7 of Diamonds? And what is the proper penalty to call for failing to speak what is required? [[spoiler:no, yes, and "Seven of spades, have a nice day.", and "Failure to call a club a spade, failure to say "have a nice day", of course.]] And that barely scratches the surface.
** Bah, that rule is simple. Here are some fun ones to add. All clubs are called spades. All Diamonds are clubs. Can a Diamond be played on a spade? Can a diamond be played on a club? and what must be spoken, if the played card is the 7 of Diamonds? And what is the proper penalty to call for failing to speak what is required? [[spoiler:no, yes, and "Seven of spades, have a nice day.", and "Failure to call a club a spade, failure to say "have a nice day", of course.]] And that barely scratches the surface.
to:
* ThatOneRule: Some players have tremendous difficulty with the 'the '[[spoiler:the joker is the 9 of diamonds' diamonds]]' rule, which is one of the basic rules in many variants. It is exactly what it says: any [[spoiler:any joker is considered equivalent to the 9 of diamonds when played.
played]].
**Bah, that That rule is simple. simple when compared to some others. Here are some fun ones to add. add: All clubs are called spades. All Diamonds are clubs. Can a Diamond be played on a spade? Can a diamond be played on a club? and what must be spoken, if the played card is the 7 of Diamonds? And what is the proper penalty to call for failing to speak what is required? [[spoiler:no, yes, and "Seven of spades, have a nice day.", and "Failure to call a club a spade, failure to say "have a nice day", of course.]] And that barely scratches the surface.
**
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 36 (click to see context) from:
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first time the call is repeated. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}), though you still will be penalized correctly for the bad call. And new rules can have penalty calls that tend to incite laughter or swearing, both usually against the rules.
to:
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first time the call is repeated.error. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}), though you still will be penalized correctly for the bad call. And new rules can have penalty calls that tend to incite laughter or swearing, both usually against the rules.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 4 (click to see context) :
Deleted line(s) 28 (click to see context) :
* RulesLawyer: The whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.
Added DiffLines:
* RulesLawyer: The whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 13,14 (click to see context) from:
Unfortunately, this means that some people never get to the good part of the game, where the fun actually begins. Because when someone 'wins' at Mao by getting rid of all their cards, they are entitled to make a new rule and introduce it into the game, without telling anyone what it is. The rule could be a simple modification, or it could fundamentally change the way the game is played. And as more people win, the rules stack up and the game becomes more and more complex, and even the veteran players may be stumped by rules they haven't worked out yet.
to:
Unfortunately, this means that some people never get to the good part of the game, where the fun actually begins. Because when someone 'wins' at Mao by getting rid of all their cards, they are entitled to make a new rule and introduce it into the game, without telling anyone what it is. The rule could be a simple modification, modification (for example, "you can't play a King on top of a Queen"), or it could fundamentally change the way the game is played. And as more people win, the rules stack up and the game becomes more and more complex, and even the veteran players may be stumped by rules they haven't worked out yet.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 9,12 (click to see context) from:
The difficulty, as mentioned above, is that, barring a short introduction to at least clarify the turn order, you are not told, and are not ALLOWED to be told, any of the rules. [[TrialAndErrorGameplay You must work them out by watching people play, trying things out, and being penalised with extra cards when you do something wrong.]]
For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair to newbies.
For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair to newbies.
to:
The difficulty, as mentioned above, is that, barring a short introduction to at least clarify the turn order, you are not told, and are not ALLOWED ''allowed'' to be told, any of the rules. [[TrialAndErrorGameplay You must work them out by watching people play, trying things out, and being penalised with extra cards when you do something wrong.]]
For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair tonewbies.
newbies who have no idea how to play the game.
For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair to
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 37,38 (click to see context) from:
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first few times. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}).
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalise players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalise players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.
to:
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first few times. time the call is repeated. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}).
{{Angrish}}), though you still will be penalized correctly for the bad call. And new rules can have penalty calls that tend to incite laughter or swearing, both usually against the rules.
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so theypenalise penalize players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.conduct'. This usually stops once all the players have deduced the basic rules. Then the gloves are off.
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Added a quote.
Added DiffLines:
->''"The only rule I can tell you is this one."''
-->--''The Dealer''
-->--''The Dealer''
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 33 (click to see context) from:
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first few times.Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}).
to:
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first few times. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 24 (click to see context) from:
* RulesLawyer: the whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.
to:
* RulesLawyer: the The whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 18 (click to see context) from:
* BeatThemAtTheirOwnGame: if you've worked out a player's rule, you can enforce it on THEM if they break it.
to:
* BeatThemAtTheirOwnGame: if If you've worked out a player's rule, you can enforce it on THEM if they break it.
Changed line(s) 20,21 (click to see context) from:
* HouseRules: any two different groups of people will play Mao slightly differently.
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules: if you can play long enough, and people don't go crazy from trying to keep on top of them all...
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules: if you can play long enough, and people don't go crazy from trying to keep on top of them all...
to:
* HouseRules: any Any two different groups of people will play Mao slightly differently.
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules:if If you can play long enough, and people don't go crazy from trying to keep on top of them all...
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules:
Changed line(s) 23 (click to see context) from:
* LogicBomb: the result of two or more people's rules contradicting each other. It's made even more difficult by the fact that the people whose rules are conflicting may not KNOW the other person's rule, and therefore be unable to decide whether theirs can override it or not. When this happens, a point of order is called so that people can discuss what to do.
to:
* LogicBomb: the The result of two or more people's rules contradicting each other. It's made even more difficult by the fact that the people whose rules are conflicting may not KNOW the other person's rule, and therefore be unable to decide whether theirs can override it or not. When this happens, a point of order is called so that people can discuss what to do.
Changed line(s) 25 (click to see context) from:
* ThatOneRule: some players have tremendous difficulty with the 'the joker is the 9 of diamonds' rule, which is one of the basic rules in many variants. It is exactly what it says: any joker is considered equivalent to the 9 of diamonds when played.
to:
* ThatOneRule: some Some players have tremendous difficulty with the 'the joker is the 9 of diamonds' rule, which is one of the basic rules in many variants. It is exactly what it says: any joker is considered equivalent to the 9 of diamonds when played.
Changed line(s) 30 (click to see context) from:
** If someone says the word to the tune of the "Miaow Mix" advert, you might as well just penalise them the entire deck.
to:
** If someone says the word to the tune of the "Miaow "Meow Mix" advert, you might as well just penalise them the entire deck.
Changed line(s) 34 (click to see context) from:
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalise players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.
to:
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: some Some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalise players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 11,12 (click to see context) from:
Mao is often compared to MorningtonCrescent, or {{Calvinball}}, but in reality it is neither of those. MorningtonCrescent is a mock game with deliberately nonsensical rules that are invented on the spot to make it appear complex, while Calvinball is a game where the rules appear to change at the will of any player. While it often looks like people are making up rules in Mao as they go along, in fact it is a mostly deterministic game, and any rules that are introduced have to be followed by all players equally.
to:
Mao is often compared to MorningtonCrescent, Mornington Crescent, or {{Calvinball}}, but in reality it is neither of those. MorningtonCrescent Mornington Crescent is a mock game with deliberately nonsensical rules that are invented on the spot to make it appear complex, while Calvinball is a game where the rules appear to change at the will of any player. While it often looks like people are making up rules in Mao as they go along, in fact it is a mostly deterministic game, and any rules that are introduced have to be followed by all players equally.
Deleted line(s) 20,21 (click to see context) :
* GameBreaker: As a guideline, any rule favoring a specific player is against the spirit of the game. It is, however, quite possible with a bit of ingenuity to rig the game with a well chosen and timed sequence of new rules that do not favor any one player. Introduce "players may play any number of cards, with the top card counting as the played card", but do not reveal it yet. Next time you win, introduce "players may play any card on any other card", and use both rules to win on your next turn, silencing all complaints with "New rule, and previously introduced new rule" (and watch the other players go "wtf?"), then introduce "dealer plays first" when you win that game, causing you to win all other rounds with ease. Don't expect anyone ever to play with you again, however.
* GameBreakingBug: it's quite easy to make a rule which can break the game and prevent anyone from playing anything at all. When this happens, the players generally take a vote on whether to keep the rule or not.
* GameBreakingBug: it's quite easy to make a rule which can break the game and prevent anyone from playing anything at all. When this happens, the players generally take a vote on whether to keep the rule or not.
Changed line(s) 37,38 (click to see context) from:
* Most have rules against 'lying' or 'cheating'.
** The cheating rule deserves special mention. In games that have that one, there are certain plays that are legal unless you get caught. The proper call for said plays is "cheating", and CORRECTLY stating how they cheated. Normally, a rule against cheating goes without being said, but in this case, it makes sense.
** The cheating rule deserves special mention. In games that have that one, there are certain plays that are legal unless you get caught. The proper call for said plays is "cheating", and CORRECTLY stating how they cheated. Normally, a rule against cheating goes without being said, but in this case, it makes sense.
to:
**
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 28 (click to see context) from:
** Bah, that rule is simple. Here are some fun ones to add. All clubs are called spades. All Diamonds are clubs. Can a Diamond be played on a spade? Can a diamond be played on a club? and what must be spoken, if the played card is the 7 of Diamonds? And what is the proper penalty to call for failing to speak what is required? [[spoiler:no, yes, and "Seven of spades, have a nice day.", and "Failure to call a club a spade, failure to say "have a nice day", of course]] And that barely scratches the surface.
to:
** Bah, that rule is simple. Here are some fun ones to add. All clubs are called spades. All Diamonds are clubs. Can a Diamond be played on a spade? Can a diamond be played on a club? and what must be spoken, if the played card is the 7 of Diamonds? And what is the proper penalty to call for failing to speak what is required? [[spoiler:no, yes, and "Seven of spades, have a nice day.", and "Failure to call a club a spade, failure to say "have a nice day", of course]] course.]] And that barely scratches the surface.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
One of the rules of Mao is that we can't tell you the rules. But here goes.
Mao is a card game played with regular playing cards. In its basic form, it is a simple game of laying down cards according to the rules of the game, and winning when you have laid down all your cards.
The difficulty, as mentioned above, is that, barring a short introduction to at least clarify the turn order, you are not told, and are not ALLOWED to be told, any of the rules. [[TrialAndErrorGameplay You must work them out by watching people play, trying things out, and being penalised with extra cards when you do something wrong.]]
For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair to newbies.
Unfortunately, this means that some people never get to the good part of the game, where the fun actually begins. Because when someone 'wins' at Mao by getting rid of all their cards, they are entitled to make a new rule and introduce it into the game, without telling anyone what it is. The rule could be a simple modification, or it could fundamentally change the way the game is played. And as more people win, the rules stack up and the game becomes more and more complex, and even the veteran players may be stumped by rules they haven't worked out yet.
Mao is often compared to MorningtonCrescent, or {{Calvinball}}, but in reality it is neither of those. MorningtonCrescent is a mock game with deliberately nonsensical rules that are invented on the spot to make it appear complex, while Calvinball is a game where the rules appear to change at the will of any player. While it often looks like people are making up rules in Mao as they go along, in fact it is a mostly deterministic game, and any rules that are introduced have to be followed by all players equally.
If you are interested in learning the rules of Mao, there is a [[UsefulNotes/{{Mao}} Useful Notes]] page for it. There is also an [[UsefulNotes/ExampleMaoGame example Mao game]] if you would like to see what a Mao game looks like.
----
!!This game has examples of:
* BeatThemAtTheirOwnGame: if you've worked out a player's rule, you can enforce it on THEM if they break it.
* EndlessGame: There isn't really an end to the game; it normally ends when everyone has had enough. The 'winner' can be considered the person who introduced the most rules, but it's really about having fun.
* GameBreaker: As a guideline, any rule favoring a specific player is against the spirit of the game. It is, however, quite possible with a bit of ingenuity to rig the game with a well chosen and timed sequence of new rules that do not favor any one player. Introduce "players may play any number of cards, with the top card counting as the played card", but do not reveal it yet. Next time you win, introduce "players may play any card on any other card", and use both rules to win on your next turn, silencing all complaints with "New rule, and previously introduced new rule" (and watch the other players go "wtf?"), then introduce "dealer plays first" when you win that game, causing you to win all other rounds with ease. Don't expect anyone ever to play with you again, however.
* GameBreakingBug: it's quite easy to make a rule which can break the game and prevent anyone from playing anything at all. When this happens, the players generally take a vote on whether to keep the rule or not.
* HouseRules: any two different groups of people will play Mao slightly differently.
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules: if you can play long enough, and people don't go crazy from trying to keep on top of them all...
** According to some HouseRules, the winner is the last person to still have some kind of sanity. Although arguably, the true winners are those who begin the game already insane.
* LogicBomb: the result of two or more people's rules contradicting each other. It's made even more difficult by the fact that the people whose rules are conflicting may not KNOW the other person's rule, and therefore be unable to decide whether theirs can override it or not. When this happens, a point of order is called so that people can discuss what to do.
* RulesLawyer: the whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.
* ThatOneRule: some players have tremendous difficulty with the 'the joker is the 9 of diamonds' rule, which is one of the basic rules in many variants. It is exactly what it says: any joker is considered equivalent to the 9 of diamonds when played.
** Bah, that rule is simple. Here are some fun ones to add. All clubs are called spades. All Diamonds are clubs. Can a Diamond be played on a spade? Can a diamond be played on a club? and what must be spoken, if the played card is the 7 of Diamonds? And what is the proper penalty to call for failing to speak what is required? [[spoiler:no, yes, and "Seven of spades, have a nice day.", and "Failure to call a club a spade, failure to say "have a nice day", of course]] And that barely scratches the surface.
** This trope also occurs when there's a rule that's been introduced that a player just can't figure out, and they always end up getting penalised for breaking it without knowing why.
*** "Failure to be a Thwiggle-Thwoggle," anyone? [[spoiler:not hooking your thumbs after playing your card.]]
* TheScottishTrope: there is a word that, if said during the game when not required, results in one of the harshest penalties.
** If someone says the word to the tune of the "Miaow Mix" advert, you might as well just penalise them the entire deck.
* TrialAndErrorGameplay: The way to learn the rules for this game is to be penalised for breaking them.
* UrbanLegends: Some claim that the game was invented in China, as an illustration of what life is like living under Communist rule (IE, you don't know what the rules are until you've already broken them). In reality it's simply a TakeThat to such concepts.
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first few times.Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}).
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalise players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.
* Most have rules against 'lying' or 'cheating'.
** The cheating rule deserves special mention. In games that have that one, there are certain plays that are legal unless you get caught. The proper call for said plays is "cheating", and CORRECTLY stating how they cheated. Normally, a rule against cheating goes without being said, but in this case, it makes sense.
----
Mao is a card game played with regular playing cards. In its basic form, it is a simple game of laying down cards according to the rules of the game, and winning when you have laid down all your cards.
The difficulty, as mentioned above, is that, barring a short introduction to at least clarify the turn order, you are not told, and are not ALLOWED to be told, any of the rules. [[TrialAndErrorGameplay You must work them out by watching people play, trying things out, and being penalised with extra cards when you do something wrong.]]
For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair to newbies.
Unfortunately, this means that some people never get to the good part of the game, where the fun actually begins. Because when someone 'wins' at Mao by getting rid of all their cards, they are entitled to make a new rule and introduce it into the game, without telling anyone what it is. The rule could be a simple modification, or it could fundamentally change the way the game is played. And as more people win, the rules stack up and the game becomes more and more complex, and even the veteran players may be stumped by rules they haven't worked out yet.
Mao is often compared to MorningtonCrescent, or {{Calvinball}}, but in reality it is neither of those. MorningtonCrescent is a mock game with deliberately nonsensical rules that are invented on the spot to make it appear complex, while Calvinball is a game where the rules appear to change at the will of any player. While it often looks like people are making up rules in Mao as they go along, in fact it is a mostly deterministic game, and any rules that are introduced have to be followed by all players equally.
If you are interested in learning the rules of Mao, there is a [[UsefulNotes/{{Mao}} Useful Notes]] page for it. There is also an [[UsefulNotes/ExampleMaoGame example Mao game]] if you would like to see what a Mao game looks like.
----
!!This game has examples of:
* BeatThemAtTheirOwnGame: if you've worked out a player's rule, you can enforce it on THEM if they break it.
* EndlessGame: There isn't really an end to the game; it normally ends when everyone has had enough. The 'winner' can be considered the person who introduced the most rules, but it's really about having fun.
* GameBreaker: As a guideline, any rule favoring a specific player is against the spirit of the game. It is, however, quite possible with a bit of ingenuity to rig the game with a well chosen and timed sequence of new rules that do not favor any one player. Introduce "players may play any number of cards, with the top card counting as the played card", but do not reveal it yet. Next time you win, introduce "players may play any card on any other card", and use both rules to win on your next turn, silencing all complaints with "New rule, and previously introduced new rule" (and watch the other players go "wtf?"), then introduce "dealer plays first" when you win that game, causing you to win all other rounds with ease. Don't expect anyone ever to play with you again, however.
* GameBreakingBug: it's quite easy to make a rule which can break the game and prevent anyone from playing anything at all. When this happens, the players generally take a vote on whether to keep the rule or not.
* HouseRules: any two different groups of people will play Mao slightly differently.
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules: if you can play long enough, and people don't go crazy from trying to keep on top of them all...
** According to some HouseRules, the winner is the last person to still have some kind of sanity. Although arguably, the true winners are those who begin the game already insane.
* LogicBomb: the result of two or more people's rules contradicting each other. It's made even more difficult by the fact that the people whose rules are conflicting may not KNOW the other person's rule, and therefore be unable to decide whether theirs can override it or not. When this happens, a point of order is called so that people can discuss what to do.
* RulesLawyer: the whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.
* ThatOneRule: some players have tremendous difficulty with the 'the joker is the 9 of diamonds' rule, which is one of the basic rules in many variants. It is exactly what it says: any joker is considered equivalent to the 9 of diamonds when played.
** Bah, that rule is simple. Here are some fun ones to add. All clubs are called spades. All Diamonds are clubs. Can a Diamond be played on a spade? Can a diamond be played on a club? and what must be spoken, if the played card is the 7 of Diamonds? And what is the proper penalty to call for failing to speak what is required? [[spoiler:no, yes, and "Seven of spades, have a nice day.", and "Failure to call a club a spade, failure to say "have a nice day", of course]] And that barely scratches the surface.
** This trope also occurs when there's a rule that's been introduced that a player just can't figure out, and they always end up getting penalised for breaking it without knowing why.
*** "Failure to be a Thwiggle-Thwoggle," anyone? [[spoiler:not hooking your thumbs after playing your card.]]
* TheScottishTrope: there is a word that, if said during the game when not required, results in one of the harshest penalties.
** If someone says the word to the tune of the "Miaow Mix" advert, you might as well just penalise them the entire deck.
* TrialAndErrorGameplay: The way to learn the rules for this game is to be penalised for breaking them.
* UrbanLegends: Some claim that the game was invented in China, as an illustration of what life is like living under Communist rule (IE, you don't know what the rules are until you've already broken them). In reality it's simply a TakeThat to such concepts.
* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first few times.Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}).
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalise players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.
* Most have rules against 'lying' or 'cheating'.
** The cheating rule deserves special mention. In games that have that one, there are certain plays that are legal unless you get caught. The proper call for said plays is "cheating", and CORRECTLY stating how they cheated. Normally, a rule against cheating goes without being said, but in this case, it makes sense.
----