Archives

Q: When playing with multiple decks, what happens if a New Rule is played which is identical to one already in play?

A: In the vast majority of cases, when a duplicate Rule is played, it simply replaces the previous one, yet causes no change. For example, if Draw 2 is in play, and someone plays another Draw 2, it would replace the old one, and the old one would go into the discard pile, and the Draw would remain at 2 cards per turn.

Functionally, this would have identical results to playing your Draw 2 directly into the discard, and leaving the old one in play. You could choose to execute it that way, but it is important to remember that it is NOT a discard: it counts as one of your Plays, it just doesn’t make any change to the game state. For this reason, we recommend going through the formality of removing the old copy to the discard pile, and playing your new version to the table – at least at first, while you’re still getting used to the concept.

EXCEPTIONS to this would be if you played a new copy of Let’s Keep Doing That or Double Agenda, since these Rules have other cards associated with them which, when you play the new copy, would give the opportunity to change the associated cards.

• Let’s Keep Doing That (LKDT)
Put the old copy and its associated Action into the discard pile, and play your new LKDT. Then look through the discard for whatever Action you’d like to associate with your new play. Yes, you may choose to attach the same Action that was there before if you want.

• Double Agenda
… (ruling TBD)

Q: When combining decks, how should I treat redundant New Rules?

A: When something which is obviously completely redundant comes up, for example, if Draw 2 is in play, and someone plays Draw 2 again, the old one is discarded, and the new one replaces it, and game conditions do not change. If Wormhole is in play, and someone plays Wormhole again, no, you don’t get a double-Wormhole, you just replace the old one with the new, and there is no functional change to the gameplay. When Double Agenda is replaced by Double Agenda, the same two Goals stay in play.

(You could just put the new one directly in the discard if you want, but don’t just stack them! Rules which have been superseded should always go in the discard pile so they can be referenced, reshuffled, etc.)

Functionally-redundant New Rule cards, which is to say, cards which have different names, but do the same (or almost the same) thing should be treated the same way. Examples would be Mystery Play, Eureka!, and Open the Door, which are all identical in function to Wormhole.

See our Fluxx Card Comparison chart to see which cards we consider functionally (or practically) redundant. Just click to highlight a whole row, and you can scroll to the right to see all of the cards that do that thing, even if they have different names.

A few non-obvious points would be:
Q: Do Double Agenda and Triple Agenda replace each other as rules? Yes. Double Agenda contradicts Triple Agenda and vice versa, since they’re both determinants of the same parameter: the number of simultaneous Goals allowed.

Bonuses generally stack, however, since they are almost always granted based on conditions which are completely independent from each other. For example the Rich and Poor Bonus do not replace each other, and neither contradicts Party Bonus. Furthermore, although we’ve put the Party Bonus and the Love Bonus on the same line in the comparison chart, we would not consider them to be mutually exclusive, since they grant their Bonuses based on the presence of completely different cards.

Of course, if someone played a duplicate Party Bonus (based on the presence of The Party specifically), it would simply replace the Party Bonus already in play, as described above.

Q: How should one handle duplicate Keepers with powers, if, for example, we want to play with a double-sized deck?

…for example, if we wanted to mix two Batman Fluxx decks and there are two BatComputers in play… or even just putting in multiples of a promo card, like the Ugly Sweater. And how should duplicate New Rules be handled?

A: Well it might seem like a basic question but I don’t think we’ve ever really answered it before. The truth is, we prefer each Fluxx as a standalone experience and don’t really encourage combining decks. We certainly don’t recommend combining multiple copies of the same deck. In almost all cases, each card in a Fluxx deck is unique.

Mixing two Batman decks together creates numerous illogical situations. Sure, there’s the question you’ve asked directly, about two BatComputers, but there will also be two Batmans, two Bruce Waynes, etc. Given that you have to discard Bruce if Batman shows up, then it would seem impossible to have two Batmans in play at once as well. And so on. The deck becomes too big to shuffle as well. We just can’t see a good reason to combine two of the same deck — if you want to play with a big crowd, you’re better off splitting into two smaller groups each playing their own game with their own deck.

That said: Nothing is forbidden. Fluxx is a very accommodating system. There’s no rule against having two copies of the same Keeper, unless you add one as a house rule. The Batman/Bruce Wayne restriction is one example of such a rule. So, unless there’s a New Rule or other fine print requiring some action, redundant Keepers can happily co-exist. As for ability stacking, again, barring a New (or Meta) Rule that provides restrictions, each redundant Keeper would have its full ability.

See also When combining decks, how should I treat redundant New Rules?
See also <

Q: We’d like to play Aquarius with more players, do you have any guidlines for doubling the deck?

A: Doubling the playing deck should not cause any issues, but for more people, you’re proposing doubling the number of Goals, which we would not generally suggest, as it raises awkward issues, some of which you have considered. It sounds like you’ve worked out some proposed ways to handle some of these yourself. (You’ve suggested that two players are going for the same Goal then the one that makes the winning play is the one that gets the win – that’s a decent solution). If you consider and work out rulings for possible complications, there’s no reason you couldn’t give it a try.

Besides potential conflicts, which could be worked out, however, we have a few more caveats. You may find that it gets to be a long time between turns if more than five are playing. Also, if there is a double of one Goal (actually in play), but not others, those two players will find themselves with what may seem like an unfair advantage. We’d also recommend that you keep the unused Goals in a specific ordered chain outside of the game (which we advise in the regular game as well), so that the Rotate Goals Action can be used to bring those in and out of play in a static order, and not just randomly. You could even insert the unused Goals in between players so that the unused chain of Goals is not so long.

To make a long story short: we don’t recommend it, for various reasons, so we don’t have a lot of guidlines for people. So just experiment with it. You may find you need to develop some other house rules… or you may find that it’s not as fun as simply breaking into two games. But give it a try!

Note that if you need to separate two decks again, we have a handy card list of sorts, to help you get them all distributed right:
http://www.looneylabs.com/lists/aquarius-card-list
if you have the first edition (square Goal images, no diagonals) here is the card list:
http://www.looneylabs.com/lists/aquarius-10-card-list

Q: Can we combine multiple decks of Fluxx?

A: Yes, but wholesale mixing of entire decks can raise some issues, for which we have some suggestions.

The main issue is the dilution of the Keeper to Goal balance. Although most of the Rules and Actions are quite flexible, the specific Goal set in any given version is designed to go with the Keeper set. So it’s harder to get Keeper sets that match the Goals which come up, since half the Goals only go with half the Keepers. Andy has noodled around to figure out what our recommendations might be to resolve this issue, and he came up with this MetaRule, which is available in our More Rules Expansion Pack.

(The card says: If the deck contains cards from multiple versions of Fluxx, a Goal from each version can be in play simultaneously. Goals only replace Goals from the same version. (Promo and expansion cards collectively count as their own version.) You win if you meet any Goal currently in play. Double Agenda creates one additional “slot” that can be filled with any type of Goal.)

Beyond that, keep in mind that, although we have deliberately designed all Fluxx versions to have the same back so you can mix and match cards, particularly promo cards, not all versions “play well together”. For example, in Martian Fluxx, most of the Creepers are Humans. What do you do when you mix a different deck where there are Keepers who are Humans? Are they Creepers now? You’ll have to decide how to handle that.

Also take a look at all of the specialized Rules and Actions to see if there are any which might interact in unplayable ways, and consider which Rules might replace each other as “contradictory.” See if there are Keepers which might “count as” Keepers in the other deck. Create whatever house rules you deem necessary, and, as you should always do with house rules, make sure everyone knows the tweaks before you begin playing.