I don't think Kyouraku from Bleach is a genuine example of this trope, so I've removed it from the page. Justification as follows.
Looking at the trope description, this is about games that are fluid, without rules or with rules that will change at a moment's notice and the purpose is fun, not winning. Kyouraku's power weaponises children's games. Going by the four points listed in the trope description, his power compares as follows:
1. The games rules change whenever the players want, the players know this and aren't playing to win, but just to have fun. Kyouraku's shikai produces weaponised children's games. It's very much about winning the "game" (which is really a fight tactic) because if you lose, you die.
2. The protagonists are playing a non-existent game, making up the rules as they go in an attempt to hide an ulterior motive. They're weaponised children's games. As a result, they're not non-existent games. If the opponent can work out which game is being played, they can work out the rules because it's a fight-modified version of the game it's based on. There's also no ulterior motive: both participants know they're in a fight and one person will win (live) and the other person will lose (die).
3. Really, any attempt to explain the full rules would just take away from the joke, so why bother? Kyouraku's zanpakutou requires him to explain the rules to allow his opponent to play the game. As a result, all Kyouraku can do is try to limit how many of the rules he reveals to retain as much of a tactical advantage as possible. It's not about having fun or spoiling jokes, it's about winning a fight and making sure that it's the other guy who ends up dead.
4. Those are the only rules they follow whatsoever, no using the same rule twice, can't be organized, and don't explain it entirely The rules are fixed for the game being played. Kyouraku can switch the game being played but he can't change the rules of the game. If he switches from Game A to Game B and then goes back to Game A, the second time he plays Game A will have the same rules as the first time he played Game A.
Kyouraku's zanpakutou can withhold games leaving Kyouraku limited to specific set of games he can play in battle, but again, that's not what this trope's really about. The games are more like battle strategies, the person who masters it best, wins. The loser dies. As much as he's called Captain Calvinball by the fanbase, I really don't think he's a genuine example of this trope. Not based on the trope's current description, anyway.
Edited by Wyldchyld If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.
Should Fizzbin be on this list? I mean, it was not meant to be a real game, even in-universe. It was a distraction.
I think Fizzbin should be its own page. Fizzbin should be defined as 'a faux game with convoluted and confusing rules designed to distract, defraud, or harm another character.' On this page under Live Action TV, I see: Jigglyball, Spat, Klebob, and an anti-Fizzbin game of Cups.
Basically, a Calvinball is a 'real' game (however outlandish, unrealistic, or unplayable) that is enjoyed and understood by all the players. Though, part of the enjoyment may come from how confused and frustrated spectators become. A Fizzbin is just a scam. Two very different things.
A number of the examples given on this page should be filed under Fizzbin.
In the intro: "Also, the trope does not include games to which every single rule has not been given."
Shouldn't the second "not" not be there?
I think it's meant to say, "Also, the trope does not include games to which every single rule has been given."
Hide / Show Replies
It says what it means to say, it is just poorly worded. It it's trying to say, effectively, "games with set rules that simply haven't been explained don't count". Someone should fix that.
Inquisitor
Remoced the following:
* Mancala. Invented in Africa in prehistoric times, this game makes this trope Older Than Dirt. Many ancient half-complete games have been found, and some African tribes still play the game today, but no one set of rules has been found. Several methods of playing even contradict each other, to the point that all we know is that it has to do with two rows of cups with long cups on each end, and stones that were moved around.
Mancala is an entire family of board games played with the same board, and there are many
rules for those games, not to mention that the earliest Mancala boards were discovered in 7th Century Ethiopia (which was already in written history), and the earliest mentioning of Mancala in a written work occured during the 14th Century.
Is it just me or are a *hell* of a lot of these in the card/board games section actually Loads and Loads of Rules? Talisman, for example, has Loads and Loads of Rules, but the players' whims have nothing to do with what they are. Even Fluxx is a pretty dubious example. I'd like to give the example list a thorough spring cleaning, but I want to make sure first that I'm not just missing the point.