The Royal Game of UR - Iteration Essay

The Royal Game of Ur

Introduction

In this essay it will focus on a ancient board game known as the Royal Game of Ur. The Royal Game of Ur was first discovered by Sir Leonard Woolley in the Royal Tombs of Ur in Mesopotamia in 1926-27. Though he found five different versions each one had different variations in the way it was decorated. The boards were all shaped of oblongs of 3x8 cells from which two cells have been taken away on each of the outer edges. All together there are 20 cells on a board. The boards were all decorated however differently in a mix of shells and jewels  mainly lapis lazuli. The cells on some boards depicted animal scenes though all the boards agree by having rosettes on the centre file and one on the side of the bridge. The more elaborate boards have rosettes on the 3x4 end. The boards date from around 3000bc. The board is also associated as similar or played the same as the Egyptian game sen't though has a different shaped board.The boards were hollow and inside contained seven black and seven white counters and six strange dice. The dice were of a pyramid shape and had 2 of the four corners coloured differently. There was three white and three lapis lazuli.

Appendix one

Body

According to Bell R.C he suggested that the game was played under the following rule set:

Each player would place an agreed sum into the games pool as a pot for the winner. To decide which player would go first one of the players would throw one of the dice and while it is in mid air would decide whether or not a marked corner would be pointing upward. Both players start with no counters on the board. The point at which the counters enter the board are shown on the diagram below(Bell, R.C (1979)). So the player that is going first throws his or her dice and the possible outcomes are three marked corners up would net you a score of five and another throw. Whereas three plain corners would get you a score of four and another throw. Two plain corners up would get you a score of zero and the turn finishes and one plain corner up would get you a score of one and another throw.

For a player to be able to place a counter on the board they would have to throw a five and then all throws after that would decide on how much the counter would move around the board. On the board  as shown in the diagram below you can see some marked squares. If a player lands his or her counter on this space then their opponent would have to pay a fine to them. On the board below there is a a central file which is where players are effectively at war with each other. If the current player moves a counter onto a square with another players counter on then the attacked players counter is removed from the board and can only be entered back into play with another successful score of five. A player can have as many of their counters on the board at any one time however they can only have a single piece in each of the games squares. The game is won when a player has managed to safely get all of their counters of the board. To do this a player must roll exactly the number of squares needed to land on the final square on the board.

Appendix two

Another common way of playing is for each player to decide who goes first. once whoever goes first is decided then that player rolls their dice. Depending on how many marked sides are pointing up is how many spaces a player can move his or her counter. For example if you roll a three then you can move one counter from outside of the board to the enter square which you can see in the appendix one. You would then move along the edge towards the first rosette or marked square  If you land a piece on the marked space at the end of your move then you would get a second roll and so on. Once you have reached the first marked square the next move takes you into the middle where you will do battle with your opponents pieces. If you or an opponent land their piece on a square containing yours or their counter then that counter is knocked of the board and back into the players hand. Unless however the players counter is in a marked square then it is safe. The counters in the marked squares cannot be knocked of the board and as a strategy a player can keep counters there which works not only by keeping that players counter safe but also by taking the chance of an extra roll from the other player. To win the game a player must get all their counters to the end of the board and land exactly on the last marked square. Players can also have more than one counter occupying one square and move them all as one however this can be risky as if a player lands his or her counter on that square then they would all be knocked back to the start.

Now for the purpose of this essay an iteration on the way the game is being played will be implemented and a discussion on how the new rule changes will affect the gameplay. There are allot of things to think about when making any kind of iteration to a game like positive and negative feedback loops, intention, perceivable consequence, skill, luck and also the victory condition. As the game stands there is some skill based decisions like whether or not to leave a counter on a marked square or whether to move your counters as a group. Even whether to put another counter on the board or whether to focus on moving a particular counter to the end. Though the game still focuses allot on luck as a player cannot definitively predict exactly what they will throw and so is at the mercy of the dice outcome. Also if a player happens to throw an amount which lands them exactly on a marked square which will give them a free roll. There is also a negative feedback loop in this game as it is with players having to land exactly on the last square which can take numerous turns and allow the opponent a chance to catch up.  

Now a simple iteration would be to allow for an extra dice and the splitting of the results between the player's pieces. The splitting of the dice results between the counters would allow another element of skill to be implemented and at the same time reducing the impact of luck on the game. Also it would reduce the impact of the negative feedback loop experienced towards the end of the board as if a player is 2 spaces away from the finish but rolls a four then a player could simply use two of the four rolled to get their counter safely of the board and the remaining two would allow them to move another of their counters. Though what is great about this iteration is that when a player is on their final counter then the negative feedback loop comes into play but is not as powerful as it was before as it only really affects the last piece but may be enough in a close game to allow the opponent feel that they have not lost yet and keep their tension up in the game so that the player remains emotionally invested in the game. Another great dynamic to come form this is the fact that a player can more easily strategically move their counters as to allow them to take control of the marked safe zones and stopping their counters from being removed form the board. A couple of issues arising from this iteration however was do we allow the extra roll usually awarded for landing on a marked square being that it is allot easier to land in these squares now and with having an extra dice would this make the game too quick. For the purposes of this though it was best to leave the awarded roll in play as that would be a further iteration and also it actually made the game play fast again but made players cautious at leaving these marked spaces open and made a nice strategy evolve where players would camp in the marked squares to deprive their opponent of extra rolls. As for adding one extra dice which will allow for a faster game where the tensions are high but are not drawn out so a player does not get too exhausted and will want to play the game again. This allows the game to more easily fit in a scoring system where the game result itself doesn't matter and that the amount of games won in a set more important. This is good for a player not loosing interest as that game was just one result of say a best of five game. If however the game was too long then it would usually focus down to the result of just one game as the player or players have little interest to play another game.

Conclusion

The iterations made to the Royal Game of Ur were interesting and it feels it not only balanced the game out in respect to the skill and luck but also made the game faster and added new dynamics in how the game could be played. The new strategies that emerged from the protection of the marked squares made some great play styles and bought out different emotions from players. So all in all I feel these iterations had a positive result on the game as a whole.