One rule that confuses me

Comments

• jeff.wongkachi Member

  June 2020 410 karma

  It's basically just "If this is in, the other one can't be in with it in the same group" so the way I've always seen it is K-->/X, and contrapositively X->/K
• 1 Like

  Jonathan Wang Yearly Sage ⭐

  June 2020 6868 karma

  It's a single conditional. The confusion likely stems from the fact that this kind of rule takes on biconditional properties in 2-group grouping games specifically, because "X is not in group 1" is exactly equivalent to "X is in group 2" when there are exactly two groups. But in any game with 3 groups or more, this is no longer true, and so you can derive the true nature of the rule from there.

  In your example, if you have biconditional X <-> /K, that means two things: 1) when I see X, I kick out K, and 2) when I don't see K, I automatically put in an X. In two groups, this will end with one of them in each group, so that's no problem. But in three groups, that means that you'll end up with one K and two Xs (because you'll put K somewhere, and then in both of the other groups where you don't see K, you must put an X). Is that what you want?
• goforbroke Core Member

  June 2020 320 karma

  My understanding is, K --> /X = K or X or both have to be out whereas K <--> /X = one is always out and one is always in, they cannot both be out.

  Like what @"Jonathan Wang" said above, K --> /X is de facto a biconditional in a 2-group situation where you have to be in one of the two groups (being out is not an option). Hope this helps!