I won this game with a stack of 7 (4 colours + 3 grey):

https://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=1893661

Is this allowed by the rules?

the rulebook doesnt mention it specifically, but I think the intent of the designer is clear: the stack has to consist of exacly 6 pieces.

Wait, that’s clear intent? I would interpret it as 6 or more – not that I’m good at the game by any means, though.

Related to this issue, is a rule that seems to imply that we can move a grey piece on top of a coloured piece:

> If it happens that a player completes a stack of 6 pieces with a neutral piece on top, it does not count as a win. ...

But this is not implemented in golem. I can’t move a grey piece on top of another piece.

@ypercube: “neutral piece” != the gray joker/wild piece.

Neutral pieces are any stacks topped with a color not yet claimed by a player. The jokers are never claimed.

Regarding the original question:

https://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/27117604#27117604

I hope the programmers can fix this before any more games are affected.

1. It is not possible (More than 6 stones in stack). I receive email from author of game (Kris Burm) after implementation of Lyngk (and Google mark this mail as spam). I return last move in this game.

2. Grey piece is not neutral piece according to rules. It is Joker piece. Rules: https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/142605/lyngk-rules

Here is the relevant section in the rules:

“White” is distinguished from Ivory. White is actually Gray here at LG (understandably confusing):

"D.  J O K E R P I E C E S , N E U T R A L PIECES AND CLAIMED PIECES

1/  The 3 white pieces must be considered as jokers, i.e. they have the potential to represent any of the 5 active colors. These joker pieces are passive. They cannot be used to play with; they may only be moved as part of a stack"

@Zugzwand and @Richard, thnx for the clarifications. I had “joker” confused with “neutral”.

Richard, when you undid the last move, it seems I lost (perhaps on time?) although the game never appeared in my game list.

It should be my turn to play but I just got the message that I had lost the game.

https://littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=1916604

Still not fixed. I was of course relying on him not being able to make that move.

Does anyone know if this has been fixed?

It is not.

https://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=1916687

Bump.  I thought this had been fixed (I don’t begrudge the game, as I did not feel like I was ahead, but I didn’t think that move was going to end it).

https://littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=2052233

Oh, I thought it is legal, if Richard can undone the move, please go ahead :)

this is still not fixed, and I consider it a major bug that should be fixed right away.  It can affect strategy.  Sometimes I have calculated lines where the opponent can’t get a six stack but can get a seven stack, and I tend to avoid those lines because I don’t want the opponent to play the seven stack for an automatic illegal win that would then need to be appealed to the webmaster to revert to the last legal position.  Just make it illegal to make a stack of seven (or eight!)  OR change the rules of the game to allow larger stacks.

I just won this game by making a stack of seven (illegal win!)  but I did have a legal win on the same move (same stack captures the red/white duo on bottom of board).  Just wanted to point out that the bug is still not fixed

https://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=2071961

And again, a stack of seven (I could have also played stack of six)

https://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=2077896

Has anyone ever made a stack of eight?

All 3 jokers in one stack?  Without winning earlier? That sounds difficult to manage, except by agreement.

I think it is not as difficult as you imagine, but hopefully the bug will be fixed before we find out!  If you look at the two examples I give above, I have all three jokers in the final stack in both cases.

A stack of seven (I had a legal win also)