Paradox of two houses

[Joff]

I'd agree with your interpretation—multiple pig-herds don't score more.

This follows. It would be the same as, dare I say it, having two or more 'Inn on the Lake' tiles on a stretch of road, it only scores as if one is on the road, or two cathedrals in a city, again only one is scored (or not in both cases...  ). If there is a greater majority in a city, you only score once for the city. So I would nod  in agreement, multiple pig herds don't score more in your farm, you only score them once. It just deprives another farmer of extra points, in a similar way to an 'Inn on the Lake'.

[mjharper]

It would be the same as, dare I say it, having two or more 'Inn on the Lake' tiles on a stretch of road, it only scores as if one is on the road, or two cathedrals in a city, again only one is scored (or not in both cases...  ).

Exactly the right comparison, I'd say.

[mjharper]

I've just noticed that—notwithstanding my grumbling earlier—there actually is a precedent for the building at the end of a road which looks like an inn, but isn't.

As I'm sure you know, this is from Traders and Builders. In the rules, this is described as a 'Häuschen'—a little house. Not an inn. I'm inclined to think that this settles it.

I stand by my comments about GQ11 and the pig-herd tile, though.

[Tobias]

It would be the same as, dare I say it, having two or more 'Inn on the Lake' tiles on a stretch of road, it only scores as if one is on the road, or two cathedrals in a city, again only one is scored (or not in both cases...  ).

Exactly the right comparison, I'd say.

Yepp, that's how we play as well.

[dwhitworth]

This whole controversy about the GQ "Expansion" and Matt's comments about RGG's power makes me wonder if this tile set should be accorded the status of an expansion. It seems to me that RGG have not really excecised thier power at all. They have refused to excercise that positive power that they could have used for the benefit of the game. (Hmmm, I suppose that is still a (negative) power play).

An expansion should at the very least meet the criteria that are set for a variant - which this set of tiles does not. If the expansion is issued by a game publisher it should in addition to rules require responsibility for after market support.

So I conclude that the GQ tile set is just that. A set of extra tiles that can, at your option, be included in whole or in part. If you include them you are on your own to make up rules where there are oddities like the pig tile and "inn". The HiG rules - or at least the spirit of them - can be a guide to how you interpret the oddities, but there is no official rule and they are all house rules at best.

IMHO I suggest that the CAR reflect this by lowering the status of the GQ tile set to something less than an Expansion to make its status really clear.

The only other choice is for this community to get some official rule making/influencing input (presumably just with HiG) and then when we can agree on an interpretation - as this thread has shown we generally can - then that interpretation be accepted as the rule. Not really likely to happen I guess . . . .
 

[mjharper]

I don't really think that we can 'demote' GQ11, although I see what you're saying. After all, it is an official release, even if a very poor one. And, strictly speaking, it does 'expand' the game—it add tiles, most of which are new, if unexciting.

Unfortunately, it's virtually impossible that we could achieve an official status on these issues. Even if we could work something out with HiG, the problem here is that GQ11 comes from RGG. HiG will not comment on GQ11, and RGG have the final word. Which, if you think about it, is the way it should be. As you say, it's just sad that RGG chose not to do anything positive with the opportunity.

Anyway, what would we demote GQ11 to? 'Officially released material which sucks because it could have been better'?

[O.M.S.]

I wouldn' like to establish a new science, houseology 
But you compare "building on the spring" to building from T&B (on page 44, footnote 132). OK, but building from T&B has entirely different roof on outbuilding (I hope that is correct word  :) and it probably hasn't chimney. I know, it is comparison. But mainly, the building from T&B is not alone, it is on two tiles (one according to "topology" - FRRR) from Basic and one from P&D (again FRRR) too. The whole collection below.

[mjharper]

You might be right—it doesn't look like an inn if you look closely. I'd added it to the CAR, but I'll find a more careful way to say it. Maybe if RGG had used this house, we wouldn't have the confusion.

Still, the main point is that an inn must have a lake to count.

I kind of like your idea of houseology, though.

[Scott]

I also see what dwhitworth is saying, but I agree with Matt we can't demote it. If it bothers you that much, you could start a petition. Easy enough to reach Jay through BGG once you've got a bunch of signatures.

Since we're getting into houseology, I decided to compare the pig-herd and not-pig-herd tiles. The pig-herd tile features 11 pigs, a barn with a fence, and a farmhouse. The not-pig-herd tile features 6 pigs, 2 cows, and a barn with a fence; no farmhouse. Does the lack of farmhouse make it not a pig-herd tile? Or is it the presence of the cows?

According to Wikipedia, a herd is a large group of animals. Is six not large enough to be a herd? I went looking to the Internet for an answer, but although most people wouldn't consider such a small number a herd, they all admit that technically a herd is more than one. Other definitions for herd do not specify anything regarding size.

If somebody started a petition to get the ruling changed, I'd sign it. If RGG cares about their expansion as much as some people here are saying, maybe they can be swayed?

[mjharper]

Does the lack of farmhouse make it not a pig-herd tile? Or is it the presence of the cows?

The lack of a farmhouse would be like the lack of a lake for an inn…

I'll sign any petition. I suppose there's more chance of getting them to change their mind about this than about 1st edition scoring…

[Novelty]

I'll e-sign the petition for it to be declared as a pig herd tile, and to get a ruling on the inn by the spring.

[Joff]

I'll e-sign the petition for it to be declared as a pig herd tile, and to get a ruling on the inn by the spring.

I'll sign for it to be considered a pig herd... , and to get a ruling not to score for the inn 

[dwhitworth]

OK! I still think that the GQ is not an "expansion" in any meaningful way, but I will bow to the majority on this. 

I am happy to sign a petition about the inn/spring tile - NOT being an "Inn on the Lake".

But as regards the pig herd tile I had always assumed that the "pigherd" was a person (or meeplehobbit) who cares for pigs like a shepherd cares for sheep. Therefore I had assumed that the extra power of the tile was that the pigs so carefully farmed would enhance the output of the farm and hence the extra point. This would not be important (especially to me who does not have the GQ tile-set) but if the GQ pig herd tile has no house for the pigherd to live in, then I wonder if it can have the same value to the economics of the farm . . . .  In fact maybe he does not live there at all and it is not a Pigherd's tile

As we say in Canada: Houseology Eh?

[O.M.S.]

... As we say in Canada: Houseology Eh? ...

Maybe, tileology could be more suitable 

[Novelty]

... As we say in Canada: Houseology Eh? ...

Maybe, tileology could be more suitable 

That has some "truthiness" in it?