I've posted this before but in my family we play serious Scrabble but with house rules that improve the game.
Rule 1: On your turn, but before playing your word, any letter in your hand may be swapped with any letter on the board, as long as the swap makes a valid word (some people already do this with blanks, we do it with any letter). Swap one letter at a time, as many times as you like. No points are scored for swaps, just for playing your word.
Rule 2: Dictionary may be consulted at any time to look up a specific word - however you cannot "leaf" or browse through it. Dictionary priority goes to whoever's turn it is.
The net result of this variation is that
a) the board remains MUCH more open the whole game - there are many more places to play, and the words played are more likely to be bingos or longer words, which in turn open the baord up even more. Often under official rules you get three or four letter words that just close down the future play possibilities.
b) high-point letters which usually are "luck of the draw" like Q and Z, now become skillful, since they will be reused by many players throughout the game
c) turns can take 5-10 minutes at a time :)
Source: my grandmother, who played these rules with the inventor of Scrabble back in college, before he had sold the game for mass distribution (they changed his rules to simplify them)
I think that’s a sign of suboptimal play. The goal isn’t to score as many points as possible, it’s to score more points than your opponent. Opening up a line towards a triple-later or even triple-word square only is worth it if your word scores really high.
Also, there often are high-scoring moves that ‘weave’ new words inside the existing grid. An extreme example is adding the o’s in an existing grid of x’es:
xxxxx
ooxoox
xxxxx
x
(That’s one reason competitive players have to know the full sets of two- and three letter words)
Even if such a move scores 20-ish points less than your points-wise optimal move, it may be the better choice.
All three of your rules (swap blanks, swap single letters, and allow consulting the dictionary) are listed as official alternative rules in my Scrabble rule book[0]. We've always allowed use of the dictionary (as a new immigrant from northern Europe, it was one of the ways my grandpa learned English), but we just talked about adopting the letter-swapping rules the next time we play.
[0] I have my late grandpa's "deluxe turntable" version from the 1970s, before it was owned by Hasbro, and my folks have an almost identical one from the 1980s (Hasbro-branded). I believe both rule books have these alternative/house rules.
On your Rule 1, do I understand that you can swap any number of letters on your turn before playing your word but with every 1-letter swap, the words need to remain valid? It's not good enough if you need to swap multiple letters before getting to a different valid word?
How are Q and Z getting reused so much? There can't be that many times they can be replaced with another letter can there?
Also, after I saw how many "words" are in the Scrabble dictionary I realized that Scrabble was not a vocabulary/spelling competition like I thought when I first played. Some of those "words" are a joke, a few are mentioned in the article (eeew being one example).
> Source: my grandmother, who played these rules with the inventor of Scrabble back in college, before he had sold the game for mass distribution (they changed his rules to simplify them)
The inventor of Scrabble graduated college in 1924. He conceived of and developed the game in the late 30s while he was working full-time as an architect. He didn't start producing the games 'til after WW II, in 1948. He sold the rights in 1952.
This promises to causes a big shakeup of the Scrabble meta, two letter words are the lifeblood of high-level scrabble play and `K` is a juicy, juicy letter (points wise) to have an extra 2 letter word for.
This is huge. Two letter words are very important in Scrabble for exploiting double use of double/triple letter/word scores. K is a medium-scoring letter so being able to have a two-letter word with it in makes quite a difference.
playing a lot of scrabble -- our regular play includes a list of two-letter words on paper, in pencil, nearby to settle disputes (not visible during play). The arguments get heated ! .. (our list is smaller than the official list of two letter words, based on mutual agreement of real-world use). Personal opinion is that the official list is already too broad, and makes the play "muddy." Dictionary exploration is nerd-fun! We use a 1950s Webster's Unabridged English (which webster? have to check) and a 1980s Oxford American-English; both have their quirks ! happy SCRABBLE™
It used to be 102 two letter words that were allowed, memorising all of them was not difficult, you would just know them if you played fairly regularly. Occasional players (who you probably wouldn't be playing with if you played regularly) would not know the 102 two letter words. Slightly more to remember than the alphabet, but anything wrong on the board would be easy to spot as wrong, no risk in making a challenge.
As for dictionaries, mobile phones and apps changed everything. However, before these 'advances' the dictionary to use was the correct Scrabble one.
What I liked about the proper Scrabble dictionary was that none of the words were explained. So you could play words beyond your normal level of spoken English without knowing what they meant, but you would know they were in the proper Scrabble dictionary. So you could have 'ax' and not know what it meant or extend it on the next go to 'axon' with no idea what that meant. You did know from previous games that this was legit and that was all that mattered.
To people not in the game this dictionary seemed absurd. The language had morphed into code. A code that you had to know if you were ever to have a chance of using complete 7 letter 'laydowns' several times in a game and do those cool two letter joins to make such things possible.
> the regular players have a list of two-letter words on paper, in pencil, at hand.
No, this is against the rules. You know what we call a list of words? A dictionary. You aren't allowed to have those open until a word gets challenged. A decade ago I had all the two letter words in the Scrabble dictionary memorized, I doubt I'd still be able to spit them all out.
KO is already a valid word in international (English language) tournament play.
Personally, I am sad about this. Serious scrabble play is largely about rack management - i.e. trying to get a set of tiles that you can play all at once for a 50 point bonus (bingo). That means dumping tiles that make it harder to score a bingo (duplicates, difficult letters) while
taking into consideration the likelihood of drawing better tiles given what's been played and what letters your opponent is dumping (signalling what's in their rack). Most turns are about maximizing the points from non-bingos while putting together a good rack, and that frequently means playing words parallel to what's already on the board to double-up on a premium tile.
The 2006 OSPD addition of "ZA" and "QI" really changed the game, and not in a good way. Q-sticks (sticking your opponent with an unplayable Q) were a staple of end-game play, especially but are now basically obsolete.
OK rankles especially as an initialism. There will be (very nerdy) riots if a 2 letter 'V' word is ever added.
I like the idea of "ze" (gender-neutral pronoun), but this is the first I've come across it. Hopefully it'll catch on as IMHO it's a big improvement over alternatives like "they".
While on the topic of "missing" words, when will our language finally get something reasonable for "you (plural)"?? Extant "y'all" (southern) and "yous" (NJ) are not cutting it!
You'd think Scrabble would want to stay neutral with politically charged words like this so as not to offend any potential customers and instead ultimately gain more purchases and fewer boycotts. Especially a word like ze which would not exist if we parents had been doing our jobs correctly.
[+] [-] hammock|7 years ago|reply
Rule 1: On your turn, but before playing your word, any letter in your hand may be swapped with any letter on the board, as long as the swap makes a valid word (some people already do this with blanks, we do it with any letter). Swap one letter at a time, as many times as you like. No points are scored for swaps, just for playing your word.
Rule 2: Dictionary may be consulted at any time to look up a specific word - however you cannot "leaf" or browse through it. Dictionary priority goes to whoever's turn it is.
The net result of this variation is that
a) the board remains MUCH more open the whole game - there are many more places to play, and the words played are more likely to be bingos or longer words, which in turn open the baord up even more. Often under official rules you get three or four letter words that just close down the future play possibilities.
b) high-point letters which usually are "luck of the draw" like Q and Z, now become skillful, since they will be reused by many players throughout the game
c) turns can take 5-10 minutes at a time :)
Source: my grandmother, who played these rules with the inventor of Scrabble back in college, before he had sold the game for mass distribution (they changed his rules to simplify them)
[+] [-] Someone|7 years ago|reply
I think that’s a sign of suboptimal play. The goal isn’t to score as many points as possible, it’s to score more points than your opponent. Opening up a line towards a triple-later or even triple-word square only is worth it if your word scores really high.
Also, there often are high-scoring moves that ‘weave’ new words inside the existing grid. An extreme example is adding the o’s in an existing grid of x’es:
(That’s one reason competitive players have to know the full sets of two- and three letter words)Even if such a move scores 20-ish points less than your points-wise optimal move, it may be the better choice.
[+] [-] frosted-flakes|7 years ago|reply
[0] I have my late grandpa's "deluxe turntable" version from the 1970s, before it was owned by Hasbro, and my folks have an almost identical one from the 1980s (Hasbro-branded). I believe both rule books have these alternative/house rules.
[+] [-] jolmg|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] frogpelt|7 years ago|reply
Also, after I saw how many "words" are in the Scrabble dictionary I realized that Scrabble was not a vocabulary/spelling competition like I thought when I first played. Some of those "words" are a joke, a few are mentioned in the article (eeew being one example).
[+] [-] MagicPropmaker|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MagicPropmaker|7 years ago|reply
The inventor of Scrabble graduated college in 1924. He conceived of and developed the game in the late 30s while he was working full-time as an architect. He didn't start producing the games 'til after WW II, in 1948. He sold the rights in 1952.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Mosher_Butts
I'd love to hear more about how your Grandmother who must have been born no later than 1905 played Scrabble in college with Alfred Butts.
[+] [-] jdoliner|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] erickhill|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] codeulike|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mistrial9|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Theodores|7 years ago|reply
As for dictionaries, mobile phones and apps changed everything. However, before these 'advances' the dictionary to use was the correct Scrabble one.
What I liked about the proper Scrabble dictionary was that none of the words were explained. So you could play words beyond your normal level of spoken English without knowing what they meant, but you would know they were in the proper Scrabble dictionary. So you could have 'ax' and not know what it meant or extend it on the next go to 'axon' with no idea what that meant. You did know from previous games that this was legit and that was all that mattered.
To people not in the game this dictionary seemed absurd. The language had morphed into code. A code that you had to know if you were ever to have a chance of using complete 7 letter 'laydowns' several times in a game and do those cool two letter joins to make such things possible.
[+] [-] CamperBob2|7 years ago|reply
Most of the hardcore Scrabble people I've known would object to that. ("This isn't 'Nam, there are rules.")
[+] [-] blotter_paper|7 years ago|reply
No, this is against the rules. You know what we call a list of words? A dictionary. You aren't allowed to have those open until a word gets challenged. A decade ago I had all the two letter words in the Scrabble dictionary memorized, I doubt I'd still be able to spit them all out.
[+] [-] glitchc|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alreadyaword|7 years ago|reply
Personally, I am sad about this. Serious scrabble play is largely about rack management - i.e. trying to get a set of tiles that you can play all at once for a 50 point bonus (bingo). That means dumping tiles that make it harder to score a bingo (duplicates, difficult letters) while taking into consideration the likelihood of drawing better tiles given what's been played and what letters your opponent is dumping (signalling what's in their rack). Most turns are about maximizing the points from non-bingos while putting together a good rack, and that frequently means playing words parallel to what's already on the board to double-up on a premium tile.
The 2006 OSPD addition of "ZA" and "QI" really changed the game, and not in a good way. Q-sticks (sticking your opponent with an unplayable Q) were a staple of end-game play, especially but are now basically obsolete.
OK rankles especially as an initialism. There will be (very nerdy) riots if a 2 letter 'V' word is ever added.
[+] [-] unknown|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Pfhreak|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gridlockd|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LeoPanthera|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gerry_shaw|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chrisweekly|7 years ago|reply
I like the idea of "ze" (gender-neutral pronoun), but this is the first I've come across it. Hopefully it'll catch on as IMHO it's a big improvement over alternatives like "they".
While on the topic of "missing" words, when will our language finally get something reasonable for "you (plural)"?? Extant "y'all" (southern) and "yous" (NJ) are not cutting it!
[+] [-] sdegutis|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aldoushuxley001|7 years ago|reply