Talk:Liar's dice

Clarification of a sentence
What does "One player begins bidding, picking a number 2 through 6. He then tenders a number which he guesses to be equal to or less than the cardinality of the set of dice displaying this number on their top surface." mean? I think it means "One player bids a number of dice (1 to 5) having a particular value (2 to 6), eg 4 threes." -- SGBailey 10:38, 1 November 2005 (UTC)


 * One can bid any amount of dice with the face values of 2 through 6 and is stated as "three 4s" to claim that there are at least three dice with a face value of 4. Since a 1 is considered wild it is worth more when bidding.  Each round of bidding must increase either the face value or the amount of dice bid.  Bidding three 4s would successfully raise a bid of three 3s because the face value has increased.  Bidding four 2s would also raise a bid from three 3s because the amount being bid has increased.


 * A 1, due to it being wild, is worth twice as much as a face value between 2 through 6. This is mentioned underneath the variants section.  Examples of how it affects bidding would be that a bid of two 1s would top a bid of four 6s while a bid of five 2s would top both two 1s and four 6s.


 * My notation for labeling bids is arbitrary. I find that listing the number for face value makes it easier to visualize the bid, but that is personal preference.  I would encourage an update to clarify the confusing parts of the current edit.  If the above paragraphs satisfy the ether, they may be inserted in an edit.  MrHen

Mäxchen or Mädchen?
I'm wondering if perhaps the name of the "Mexican"-like game in question might not be "Mädchen", rather than "Mäxchen"? I mention it because a) the latter is not only extremely awkward, pronunciation-wise, in German, but is also not a word; b) the former is a very common word indeed (means "young lady" or, more literally, "maiden"--and in fact sounds very much like that English word) and c) the two letters sit close to each other on the keyboard. I changed the article, but then changed it back, since I'm really not sure. Buck 09:25, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

No, it's "Mäxchen", or "Mäx" if you ask an Austrian. "Mäxchen" is a common, if dated, diminutive of the personal name, Max(imilian). As the name of the game - and the highest possible dice result in the game - it's usually believed to derive from "maximum", though, which would sort of answer the question which came first ("Mäxchen" or "Mexican"), too. Lewis

I learned it as Mäxle, which of course means the same thing as Mäxchen--little Max. My German teacher had us play it when we were learning numbers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.89.115.247 (talk) 13:04, 14 September 2023 (UTC)


 * You're right that the name of a popular german dice game is "Mäxchen" instead of "Mädchen", but the point is that it is not this game. Mäxchen is only played with two dice for the whole group of players wich are passed from one player to another, neither is the goal to keep one's own dice - like in Liar's dice - for one doesn't have his/her own. The german game called "Mäxchen" is exactly what is described in the English wikipedia article Mia (game) while the rules described in Liar's dice coincide with those of the German game "Bluff". Compare the rules: Mia (game) = Mäxchen, Liar's dice ≈ Bluff. I will change the article accordingly. 92.224.175.103 (talk) 17:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

The "Rules (Mexican)" section is a mess
This section needs a rewrite very badly, for several reaons. I'm leaving this post as a heads-up to whoever wrote it, so that when I rewrite it (early next week) it won't look like I'm destroying their baby without fair warning. Don't worry: I'm not planning to change any rules or anything like that, but the tone and the prose in general are far from encyclopedic, and needs adjustment. Also, it seems to me that this game is sufficiently distinct from ordinary Liar's Dice that it might warrant its own page, but that can probably wait. Buck 09:41, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Spiel des Jahres?
This article is in the "Spiel des Jahres winners" category, but I can find no mention - here or elsewhere - of when it won.

Since "Spiel des Jahres" is generally awarded to new, designed games, I am sceptical that it would elegible for the award.

--Parsingphase 20:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Nonetheless, it won - in 1993, the award was won by "Bluff" which was a commercial verion of Liar's Dice . Percy Snoodle 09:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Looking at an old Hoyle, the "Liar Dice" described is a two handed game where each player describes his own five dice only, with no wild dice, thus the maximum bid is five sixes. The Spiel des Jahres winner "Bluff" has several innovations over that basic game: sixes are wild and replaced by stars; bidding predicts the total number of dice of a kind of all players (up to six); bidding goes along a board, a one star bid (not receiving any wild card benefit) being between one and two of a kind, and similarly throughout the bidding sequence; players lose a die or dice when they call incorrectly or are called and their prediction is wrong; the game continues until only one player has any dice, a rare case of elimination in a German game. This game was sold in the US as "Call my Bluff", and IIRC Milton Bradley did a similar version, perhaps licensed, called Liar's Dice, using conventional dice (no star).

Bluff really deserves its own entry as a Spiel des Jahres winner. I cannot now write that article, not having the game myself.

Note: The article lists this game as having won the Deutsche Spiel prize. It didn't! It placed 4th See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutscher_Spiele_Preis —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.235.158.166 (talk) 02:30, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Wilds
The current article has wilds listed underneath the variations section but in the listing of how to bid it assumes that only values 2 through 6 listed as valid bids. The version I learned came shipped in a box from a gaming store and had rules for the bidding with wilds variation. Are there variations where bidding on wilds is not allowed? Are these variations more common? MrHen

Article needs a rewrite
This article reads poorly, and is very disorganized. I'd suggest taking the article down for a total rewrite. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.195.12.6 (talk) 02:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC).

Pirate's Dice browser game
I've got a few friends who love Pirate's Dice as much as I do (a lot), but I don't see them in person to play very often. I had the idea for a multiplayer Pirate's Dice game which we could play over the Internet, and only recently got around to it. The game is available here --tj9991 05:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Error in Popular Culture section
The section In Popular Culture, the first bullet, relating to Pirates of the Caribbean, incorrectly states that they played under the first variant.

"(The betting is legal under the first variant rule - never allowing a decrease in quantity - but it is impossible to tell if this rule is in effect or if this is coincidence.)"

If you watch the movie, you see this is incorrect. At one point, Bootstrap Bill raises the number of dice but lowers the face, which is not allowed in the rules variant.

I added a note about the BD-Java Liar's Dice game on the Blu-ray release of Dead Man's chest. Super Saiyan Musashi 16:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite of common hand section?
I'm a bit perplexed. The only version I ever encountered uses both of the first two variations as it's currently written (raise must include at least as many dice, and players lose one die upon losing a challenge with the winner being the last one with any dice). Is this what other people have encountered, and so should it be promoted to the basic rules, with deviations in current basic rules listed as variations? If you think so, please chime in here so someone will eventually be bold enough to make the change.

A related issue: I don't understand how the game is won with the basic common-hand rules as stated, if players don't lose dice when losing a challenge. Is each round a separate game? Must there therefore be wagers on each round to keep things interesting? This could be clarified by someone who knows more about the game than I. Thanks!Jbening 21:34, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Increase the face or increase the quantity with any face.
Currently, the main section on the Common Hand version reads:

''In turn, each player must either raise the bid or challenge the previous bid. Raising the bid means either increasing the quantity of the previous face or selecting any quantity with an increased face.''

There is another variant, not mentioned in the "Variants" section, in which the player can either raise the face for the current quantity, or make a bid of any face for an increased quantity. For example, if the current bid is 5 threes, the next bid could be 5 fours, 5 fives, 5 sixes, or 6 (or more) of any face. This is the version used in Nokia games.

Ordinary Person 22:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Liar's Dice vs Perudo vs Mexican: Merge/Split/Re-index?
The articles for "Common Hand" Liar's Dice and for Dudo/Perudo should, I believe, be merged. Common Hand Liar's dice, as described, is a simpler version of Perudo, and the variants listed, particularly the variants where the loser gives up a die and is out when he/she has no more dice, and where aces are wild but can be bid by halving the previous bid quantity, are the main differences between Perudo and the game of Liar's Dice as described.

The problem is that the game described as Mexican or "individual hand", where players share one set of dice, and the game described as "common hand" or Perudo, are in the same family of dice games but are in fact fundamentally different.

I recommend that we perform a combination of splitting and re-merging. The Perudo article should contain the "common hand" games of Perudo and its simpler variants, while this article should either be renamed Mexican Liar's Dice or similar and describe the "passed dice" or "individual hand" variants. In addition, there should be a disambiguation page such that when "Liar's Dice" is searched for, the user will be able to choose between these two types of Liar's Dice. 71.158.181.131 17:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * There appears to be an incvasion of Perudo, which is just a commercial derivative of this game, Perudo should be kept to it's own article with a mention of it as a variation Leevanjackson (talk) 21:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * There really is a web of similar articles all with very subtle variations. Perudo, as has been mentioned, is just a trademarked "Dudo" (I think, from the articles. I'm no expert on this matter). I started some discussion about removing Perudo or merging some of the pages here before coming across this page. I'll look into it more later, but there's definitely no reason for the duplication of information across so many pages we have at the moment, imo. --BlueNovember (talk) 15:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I find the histories of the different names and versions notable. I'd like to see each article continued but more tightly focused on its subject. And the commonality of these games clearly noted in each article. 124.169.84.247 (talk) 03:36, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Let's also consider interlanguage links. I found 3 groups/topics of wikidata articles on this. Siriushoward (talk) 10:19, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) The [Liar's Dice group] has 3 translations. Both French and German translations describe a game with poker hand ranking. The English version is the only one that describe Liar's Dice as "a class of dice games".
 * 2) The [Dudo group] has 5 translations. All of them describe a game with the dice counting. They are titled after Dudo or Perudo.
 * 3) The [Bluff group] has 8 translations. All of them describe a game with the dice counting. Their titles varies (Bluff, Cheat, Liar dice, Domena pirates).


 * The poker hand (so called 'individual hand') variant is obviously a different game. I second that we perform splitting and re-merging.  The poker hand variant should become its own article and stay in this wikidata group to match the other translations.  Other variants/contents should be merged with Dudo. The [Dudo group] and [Bluff group] of translations should also merge.   Siriushoward (talk) 17:29, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Playing strategies WP:NOT?
I am not sure if this applies to games and strategies, but WP:NOT states that wikipedia is not a how to, so I'll leave it here for editor's to ponder Leevanjackson (talk) 21:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I grant that it can be read as a How-To and thus violates WP:NOT. However I think it is important to at least mention the rationale behind making and challenging bids, similar to a basic run-down of Poker strategy and how that would be important to someone watching the WSOP. Compromise: the section can probably be drastically shortened, possibly to as little as a few paragraphs that would tell a casual observer why a particular bid would be made/challenged.
 * That's more like it :) LeeVJ (talk) 23:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Rules for PotC
According to http://adisney.go.com/disneypictures/pirates/games/piratesDice/index.html a bid of "five fours" is allowed to follow a bid of "four fives" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.145.57 (talk) 19:11, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Some probablistic nitpicking
I removed the claim:
 * Bids higher than the expected quantity become exponentially unlikely; the chances of 60% of the dice in play having any one value are less than 1 in 10,000.

Since it is false. The said chances depend on the number of dice and can be significantly larger. I'm also not sure in what sense the change in odds is "exponential". However, I do not know where the 60% figure comes from, so I suspect something true and interesting might have been intended... Instead I wrote in some example odds for the case of 15 dice. TIARABAMUN (talk) 00:49, 10 January 2010 (UTC) Also, does the term "expected quantity" (under Elements of Common Hand Strategy) has some commonly accepted meaning in this context, or is it just defined ad-hoc for this article? The definition here, "the quantity of any face value that has the highest probability of being present", (i.e., the mode of the appropriate binomial distribution) is problematic, since it is not in general unique (it is unique when $$n \not\equiv 5 \pmod{6}$$ where n is the number of dice in play). Under Basic Dice Odds a different definition is given, coinciding with the probabilistic expectancy. TIARABAMUN (talk) 00:49, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * This point is not nitpicking (though the text is still there eight years later!)! I also expect such a term to mean the average quantity of the value in all possible (equally probable) throws. I also think that the probability of a given bid being true (or less than what was thrown) is more important; when playing with Poker Dice it would apply to a hand (or class of hands). The whole passage is a little vague and I think it needs cleaning up. PJTraill (talk) 14:11, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I believe the following rewrite to be correct:
 * The most likely number of dice showing a given number of pips may be called the mode. For six-sided dice, the mode is one-sixth the number of dice in play, rounded down (unless the number of dice is one less than a multiple of six, in which case one-sixth the number rounded up is equally likely to one-sixth the number rounded down). When wilds are used, the mode is one-third the number of dice, rounded down (unless the number of dice is one less than a multiple of three, in which case there again are two modes).
 * but I'm not sure I see the relevance of that, and I think the following cannot be similarly salvaged:
 * the "expected quantity" has a greater than 50% chance of being correct [...]. For example, when 15 dice are in play and wilds are used, the expected quantity is 5. The chances of a bid of 5 being correct are about 59.5%; in contrast, the chances of a bid of 8 being correct are only about 8.8%.
 * The probabilities given are correct (though 59.59% should be rounded to 59.6%, not 59.5%), but they are probabilities of at least n dices showing the required number of pips (or wild), and thus not directly related to the mode. Here's another correct statement (I believe - I haven't dug up a reference or verified my numerical findings by proof):
 * The probability that a given bid holds true, i.e. that there is at least the specified number of dice showing the specified number of pips, exceeds 50% for all bids up to the number of dice divided by 3 (with wilds), respectively by 6 (without wilds), rounded to nearest integer. If midway between two integers, round down.
 * Also, the next lines in the article are a bit odd. The following, at least, holds true:
 * In doing these calculations, one may count only the dice held by the other players as being in play, and then add the number of dice with the specified number of pips one holds oneself.
 * But, without a proper source, I guess none of all this should be in the article at all - i.e., several paragraphs should be deleted, rather than amended.--Nø (talk) 15:09, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


 * We could discuss it more, but I think I agree that removing it is the best choice. Gah4 (talk) 10:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

And its played in Larry 7
Since the game Red Redemption is mentioned in the article, Larry 7 should also be mentioned. Even the demo for Larry 7 only contained Liars Dice! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.229.30.11 (talk) 20:12, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

who opens the bid after a challenge?
I cannot find anywhere who opens the bid after a challenge. Is it the winner of the challenge or does it go clockwise or counter clockwise? 62.140.137.103 (talk) 06:05, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Call my bluff
Is there any evidence that this game is known to any extent as "Call my bluff"? I see no mention of this in the article. PatGallacher (talk) 12:19, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not that hard research, Pat. Browse through searches like this, or this. Find connections like this (search the text there for "call my bluff"). And this, where the text includes this (my underlining):
 * "This game has assumed many different names and variations Call My Bluff, Bluff, Perudo, Liars Dice and probably several other names I dont even know. I have even played Liars poker, which is the same concept only with cards. There is only one reason variations of this game are known worldwide and have withstood the test of time its a lot of fun! I just recently picked up a copy of Liars Dice and within 10 minutes of opening the box I had read the rules and we were playing. ..."
 * Given the "folk" nature of these games, it is not surprising that one game can have many names. Hence the need for DAB pages and redirects to sort out as much of the complexity as an encyclopedia reasonably can, and to retain adequate precision in titles, especially where this is easy to achieve without costs.
 * Readers here may be interested in the current RM at Talk:Call My Bluff (UK game show), which prompts Pat to raise this question here, I think.
 * N oetica Tea? 12:45, 27 April 2012 (UTC) ☺

Move?

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 18:06, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Liar& → Liar's Dice –
 * proper noun capitalisation (over redirect) emerson7 01:58, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose Generic game titles aren't proper nouns. That capitalization would only be appropriate for a proprietary name, like Connect Four or Guess Who?. See Chinese checkers. --BDD (talk) 18:59, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose per BDD. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:42, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Added two variants that are related to the first one

 * If played with the above variant, the player who made the last bid may count aloud from 1 to 10. If he reaches 10 with no one challenging or increasing the bid, the round ends with that player earning back a die. A player may have more than 5 dice that way, and any player who reaches 10 dice that way wins the game.
 * With the above mentioned variants, some players may stay quiet and win easily. To avoid that, the following rule may be added: Each time a player loses a challenge, he loses a die normally, but the two players sitting to his left and right lose a die as well (unless one of them was the player to win the challenge). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.166.103.180 (talk) 15:51, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Is this all just original research? -- Fyrael (talk) 16:03, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Origins
I've seen both South American and occasionally Chinese origins, generally fairly early, claimed for one or more games in the liar's dice family. Some people even use language like "historical records show" about its history. But I haven't found any citations to such records - in fact, I haven't yet turned up even a reference to any game in the family prior, nor any assertion with actual citations that any such game is known to have been played at any particular point, even as much as 50 years ago, let alone 500. (I haven't even found anybody in the 1970s claiming to have played as a kid or anything.) Admittedly, I haven't bothered to search for such outside of googling relevant terms and searching for "perudo" and "liar's dice" on Google Scholar (which results in precisely zero citations in history journals but a lot of really cool stuff about AI), so I'm quite ready to believe the evidence is out there.

Wikipedia currently follows the custom of asserting that the game was introduced to the Conquistadors by indigenous South American peoples, which would be quite the feat given that there are not to my knowledge any finds suggesting the existence of dice in the pre-Columbian New World. (This of course doesn't stop the game from being a result of contact between the cultures, which in fact seems entirely plausible - but, of course, no better sourced than any of the various claims I have seen about 18th century pirates.)

I'm deleting this sentence, but would be excited to see it come back with a citation, especially a reliable one. Does anybody have any evidence to point to suggesting the game is of anywhere near the age often claimed for it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teucer (talk • contribs) 19:32, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Variant with one set of dice
I see no mention of the form in which I know this game (in Britain): there is one set of dice, thrown in secret by the first player who then claims some hand; each subsequent player must either challenge the call or accept the dice (passed in secret), throw any number of them (possibly none) once and claim a better hand; the loser of a challenge (the hand must be at least as good as claimed) loses one of (e.g.) three lives. This is a very entertaining game with interesting tactics and opportunities for tacit collaboration, particularly when one player is ahead. A nice feature is that as long as one has a single set of dice one can play with any number of players. Does anyone else know this form, perhaps under a different name, and preferably have a citation to back it up? PJTraill (talk) 08:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)


 * What you describe matches Mia (game) (or e.g. Meyer (terningspil)) - where only two dice are used. But perhaps you have in mind a game with more dice.--Nø (talk) 14:49, 19 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I have only just noticed that the article describes a game played with normal dice, while I refer to one normally played with a set of five poker dice and by “hand” above I therefore mean a poker hand, ranked as in poker; one may also just claim some type of hand without specifying the values, ranking lower than any specific values. Not specifying the values is useful if you make five twos and are targetting the next player but one: a game might go “four 9s” (9 being the lowest face of a poker die) – (throws one) “five of a kind” – “five 9s” – (throws five or maybe none) “five 10s” – “challenge!”. (Of course one can play an isomorphic game with conventional dice, but that is less natural.) The principles of Mia seem the same apart from the dice thrown and therefore the ranking of throws/claims, except that in this game there are no special rules about the highest throw (five aces ♠ ♠ ♠ ♠ ♠): you cannot exceed it so all you can do is challenge, but you only lose one life. Anyone who enjoys Mia might like to try this game, which I always heard called Liar dice. PJTraill (talk) 14:03, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Dubious changes (2019-03-04)
The changes in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Liar%27s_dice&type=revision&diff=886154260&oldid=878587232 by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/50.76.187.19 have no useful log messages and no citations but are not immediately recognisable as wrong. Does anyone know enough to revert or justify them? PJTraill (talk) 23:38, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Common Hand rules are wrong
There is something wrong with the "common hand" rules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar%27s_dice says 'In "common hand" games, there is one set of dice which is passed from player to player.' and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar%27s_dice#Common_hand says 'Both players then roll their dice at the same time, and examine their hands.' All players can't roll at the same time if there is only one set of dice... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.171.246.44 (talk) 23:59, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Unsourced material
Article has been tagged for needing sources long-term. Feel free to reinsert the below material with appropriate references. DonIago (talk) 13:13, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Popular culture
I was searching for informations about this game for a while and this article was the first thing that popped up in search results. However, if it wasn't for one movie that this game is featured in, I wouldn't even know it existed. And I'm not talking about the Indian movie "Liar's Dice", which I haven't seen and didn't know about, I'm talking about "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest". No article seems to mention any kind of movie that features this game tho. What do you think about it? Would it be worth it to include some popular culture references to the game as well? Also, I'd like to translate this article to my native language (which is Czech), but all in all just 3 references and the article itself is pretty short. There is much lenghtier German mutation, but I don't speak German, so that's not much helpful for me. — Polda18 (talk) 12:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * EDIT: Not much leghtier actually :D — Polda18 (talk) 12:30, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Pop culture references would need to be accompanied by third-party sources, as discussed at WP:IPCV. It's not a bad idea, but I question how many sources have really taken notice of instances of this game. Hope this is helpful! DonIago (talk) 18:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC)