While it is an interesting introduction to python equality and booleans, it feels like it is missing something - at least to me (solved in < 2 minutes or so). I like the idea of making the character say the answers. I just hate that the judge is not asking the questions.
Suggestions -
Change so that the judge announces the question before the character is required to answer.
How about making the live response more interactive? Would we expect that the character would have access to flags by this point in the campaign, for example? If so, for example, could we have the judge say an expression and which flag you drop is determined by whether it evaluates to True or False?
Add more questions, please. 5 is not nearly enough. See 6 below for some suggestions re alternative operators I would suggest that the player needs to know.
I liked the find-the-dud-mine concept from the find a prime level. Could we do something like that here, with each mine having an expression which evaluates to a boolean (or not) and is visible to the player? Maybe keep it simpler and only have 2 choices - left or right - and you should go towards the “True” path? If you go the wrong way, you don’t instantly lose, but you do get attacked by the [number of mistakes] ogres brawler(s) / or an escalating list of nasty ogres (starting with easier, working up to boss-type mobs depending on the number of wrong paths)? The neat thing is that an advanced/geared player coming back to the maze can use it as a testing ground for automated path finding (killing the ogres that pop along the way).
Add text/say to the referee explaining why each answer is correct after the player has selected the correct answer. (Reinforce the lesson by playing it out.)
Add a couple of different operators, especially != for python. <=, <, => and > wouldn’t be bad choices either. I also am particularly fond of the Not(False).
Add some expressions which would have to be evaluated at the run. This is not a bad place to remind folks of len(self.findEnemies()) and len(self.findFriends()). Whether it is true or false is something that could be evaluated at the time the question is asked … resulting in the player typing something like the following: self.say(len(self.findEnemies()) < len(self.findFriends()))
Maybe the level would be slightly improved if something more intimidating, such as an ogre, were placed on the middle fire-trap. The title, perhaps, could use a few commas. Aside from the nitpicking, though, I found neither bugs nor problems. The level is much easier than I first expected, but education is not lost for lack of headache. Burls Beets Booleans is quite informative–I didn’t know what Booleans were myself before playing it–and very entertaining, both in watching munchkins being blasted sky-high and in losing quickly after attempting to cheat. I have just one question: What do beets have to do with it?
Plus: change the scene to more Monty Python-esque? Change the terrain to mountain, add a bridge, replace the peasants with paladins… Oh, but then it’s not Burls Beets Booleans anymore
It is a nice, easy level, but I think it should have some tweaks, such as different symbols (eg >=, <=, <, >, and !=), posibly have the ref talk as suggested above, and other small polishes, but overall easy and easy to understand.
Oooo - I like the Holy Grail reference from @ant . It also allows for a better structure. You are trying to get your entire party past the bridge guardian. The bridge guardian will ask 3 questions which must be answered correctly in order for each soldier to get across the bridge. Failure to answer a question correctly sets off a mine under the soldier at risk, killing it / casting it into the depths of the ravine of death. That gets you up to 15 expressions to win.
Looking over my suggestions above, I thought I’d group them:
Things to do without changing the current structure of the level: 1 (have judge announce question), 3(add more questions), 5 (give questioner text explaining why the answer is correct - or incorrect), 6 (add additional operators - especially in connection with the additional questions.
7 could potentially also be addressed within the current framework, though it is fundamentally different than the other suggestions: add a question which must be evaluated at the time it is asked - the number of enemies in view is 2 i.e. ( len(self.findEnemies) == 2 ) or is the number of gold coins within range of your view is 5?
Suggestions which fundamentally change some of the current mechanics: the bridge guardian idea above, 2, 4.
Bonus points suggestion:
This would work best in the context of evaluating which mine is safe to cross in order to escape a maze. It does not work where the questions are a pre-defined and constant list.
Add an object which displays readable text showing the 2 alternatives the user has to pick from and/or the single expression the user is being required to evaluate. Which expressions appear where on the playing field needs to be random. If possible, make the value of the object the displayed text string and/or give the object a special property which contains the text string (maybe name?). Bonus points if the user selects the right answer by parsing the text in question and evaluating whether it is true or false automatically rather than by using flags. Send users back to this level once you’ve introduced text string parsing …
This level is a bit on the simple side because we’re trying to make the learning curve easier on first time coders who have trouble understanding if-statements. Previously in Thumb Biter, we introduced booleans, equality, and if-statements, so this is an attempt to split that up a bit - that’s why there aren’t extra comparison operators, flags, etc. I like the thought of having the Burl ask the questions.
Having said all that, I think a lot of these ideas would make for great practice levels to reinforce the concept of booleans, for sure! Anyone interested in building a level?
Yes, my favorite part was when I had Senick try to take out the munchkins one by one. Of course he had to kill the burl first, but that was simple enough. I really tried hard to break the level, but failed! Even tried commanding my peasants to run from the mines, but they still blew up.
I have just one question: What do beets have to do with it?
