Swato's New Game of Cards

[Swatopluk]

I came up with a game of cards and now at last found the time to write it down.
I would be interested in your opinion.

Matchit?

A strictly tactical game of cards for 4 players

Material: A set of numbered cards 4 times 1 to X (X between 10 and 20)

One player is designated SETTER (S), the other 3 are FOLLOWERS (ABC).
A game is played over 4 rounds (of X tricks), so each player fills the position of SETTER once.

Each player at the beginning of each round receives a subset of cards 1 to X, i.e. all players start with the same hand.

The person designated as SETTER selects one of his cards and puts it on the table face-up.
All 3 FOLLOWERs then select one of theirs and put it on the table face-down.
Now the cards on the table are turned face-up.
One or more FOLLOWER cards can MATCH the SETTER card (=have the same number) or not.

If a single FOLLOWER matches the SETTER, he takes the trick.

SABC
5953
=> B takes and gets 22 points

If two FOLLOWERS match the SETTER, the one FOLLOWER not matching takes the trick.

SABC
7377
=> A takes and gets 24 points

IF all three FOLLOWERS match the SETTER, the SETTER takes the trick.

SABC
8888
=> S takes and gets 32 points

If no FOLLOWER matches the SETTER, their cards are compared.

If one FOLLOWER has played a card with a higher number than the other FOLLOWERS, he takes the trick.
It does not matter what card the SETTER has played.

SABC
2596
=> B takes and gets 22 points

Should there be a match between two FOLLOwERS playing the highest card, their cards are discarded.

Variant 1: SETTER and non-matching FOLLOWER each retain their card

SABC
7355
=> S gets 7, A gets 3, B&C get nothing

Variant 2: Non-matching FOLLOWER takes his and the SETTER's card.

SABC
6884
=> C gets 10 points, the others get nothing


If all three FOLLOWERS match each other, the SETTER retains his card, the cards of the FOLLOWERS get discarded.

SABC
3222
=> S gets 3 points, ABC get nothing


-------

Assuming that all players can keep in mind which cards have already been played, they are always fully informed about the current situation since each started with the same subset of cards. So, unlike traditional card games, this should be pure tactics and psychology and not deduction/guessing of the opponent's hand. With only 3 players (SAB) it would not work since there is only one possible strategy: always match. Each round would end with all cards in the hand of the SETTER => draw. If one player would not follow that strategy even for a single trick, he would hand victory to the player always matching. In the 4 player version this is avoided because a trick can be taken by non-matching against 2 matchers or by matching against two non-matchers.
The SETTER can influence the game by e.g. playing a card he knows only one of the FOLLOWERs still possesses, so that player can get a guaranteed single match and take the trick. This would be naturally used to steer points away from a FOLLOWER too successful. More complicated would be a strategy to lure certain cards out, increasing the probability of matches between FOLLOWERS because that (esp. in Variant 1) can lead to the SETTER retaining his card while denying points to the FOLLOWERS.
As I see it, the game is (distantly) related to the Prisoner's Dilemma. The way to win is to be the single dissenter.

[Griffin NoName]

In my present frame of mind I would struggle to learn the rules. But take me back a few years and I'd be up for it!

[pieces o nine]

It sounds quite intriguing, Swato; I like the emphasis on strategy over luck.