Sidewalkia is one of the 200 Word RPG Challenge finalists for 2018. It's a game about expanding the nation of Sidewalkia, and the final line says:

The game ends if your population reaches 15 or you have expanded to three or more squares of concrete.

Ending at 15 population is straightforward enough. However I'm not sure how we ever satisfy having three or more squares of concrete.

I can see we start out with our first square. Then if I understand correctly we expand to a second square if/when we have more than 4 people as a one-time event:

If your total numbers reach more than 4, expand to another square and redistribute your population how you see fit.

But how do I, as a proud national of Sidewalkia, grow our nation to that third square? Unless I'm missing something, there doesn't seem to be anything in the game that gets us to that state.

  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ It seems to me that the [200-word-rpg] should be reserved for questions about the concept; how to write one, how to handle issues that come up while designing one, and so on. Attaching it on top of [sidewalkia] seems redundant when Sidewalkia is already a specific 200-word RPG. It’s like using [dungeons-and-dragons] alongside [dnd-5e]. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Aug 24 '18 at 15:42
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan We use fate alongside fate-core, gurps alongside gurps-4e, and l5r alongside l5r-4e. (Not universally and not as a hard requirement, just generally and not with any policy for/against.) Having a policy about not using dungeons-and-dragons alongside dnd-5e is an exception rather than the norm that's specific to D&D tagging only. The norm is do whatever feels about right or makes sense, and here I feel it makes sense to use [200-word-rpg] alongside 200 word RPGs. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Aug 24 '18 at 16:14
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I dunno, I think that’s not the operative analogy and that KRyan has a point. If we had [bacchanal] and [game-chef] tags, we wouldn’t use [game-chef] for every question about Bacchanal just for it coming from that contest. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Aug 24 '18 at 20:23
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SevenSidedDie I agree that the 200-word-rpg tag may eventually be unnecessary for famous and successful 200-word RPGs, but I think the tag may be useful for many lesser ones: It's a signal to readers that there just isn't much to the game. Absent the tag, I think it would be possible for an asker to link to a 200-word RPG and someone considering composing an answer to be confused after following the link because he couldn't find the rest of the game! \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Aug 26 '18 at 11:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ @HeyICanChan That’s a good point too. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Aug 26 '18 at 17:52

You can expand every 2 persons (you can wait if you want though)

Once you've past 4 citizens, you get to:

expand to another square and redistribute your population how you see fit.

You start with:

One player stand[ing] in a square of sidewalk

And the metric for expansion is:

your total numbers reach[ing] more than 4

I read an implicit "in a square of sidewalk" after total numbers making each square count their own population until they reach 4 (triggering expansion).

If you only send 1 person to the new square, then 2 more citizens exceeds 4 again in your original square (if you distribute them in such a way).

You are, however, forced to expand to a new square after the 9th person since you have no space in your two squares without exceeding 4. This makes the 15 population goal impossible without reaching the 3 squares goal first. Even if you read the expansion goal as 3 or more "new" squares (beyond the original), you are still forced to expand with the 13th person.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.