Re: Saami Tablut
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:08 am
Summary on the Saami Tablut:
https://aagenielsen.dk/tablut_summary.php
https://aagenielsen.dk/tablut_summary.php
Discussions on the Viking board game Hnefatafl
https://aagenielsen.dk/hnefataflforum/phpBB3/
https://aagenielsen.dk/hnefataflforum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=6
Nicolas Cartier kindly answered:I am very glad to have found you again!
Your article about Tablut is an important one. I would be very glad if you would inform me about some more details about it:
- Has the article also been published somewhere else other than at aagenielsen.dk? In some board game magazine fx.?
- Could you tell some details about you as the author. Fx. your background, education, perhaps membership of a chess union, perhaps employee at a university, perhaps part of a group of board game researchers?
- How did it happen that you came to be interested in the Tablut game?
Your article has hit very close to the mark, which we now in our circle (players at aagenielsen.dk) believe to be the historical Tablut.
Je suis professeur des écoles et titulaire d'une maîtrise d'histoire médiévale.
Quand j'ai rédigé cet article, je pensais juste partager mes réflexions sur les règles du tablut.
En effet, je me suis intéressé très jeune aux sagas islandaises et aux eddas. Le jeu du tafl y était souvent mentionné. Je me suis documenté sur ce jeu et sur le tablut. En jouant à ce dernier, je remarquais des défauts et des points à éclaircir dans les règles.
En cherchant sur internet, je découvrais votre site et les articles de Helmfrid, Bayless et Ashton . En lisant ce dernier, j'appris que la traduction issue du livre de Murray était incomplète. C'est ainsi je fis ma propre traduction du texte.
J'ai ensuite rédigé mon article et je vous l'ai transmis. Cet article n'a jamais été publié dans une revue, mon objectif était de partager avec des passionnés de tablut.
Depuis ces dix dernières années, j'ai observé que la recherche avait progressé sur le tablut et je suis fier d'avoir apporté ma pierre à l'édifice.
Je me tiens à votre disposition pour tout renseignement.
Je travaille près de Limoges au centre de la France.
2025-07-17 21:37:05 Dimetr:
Hagbard! Is it possible to make the throne impassable in Tablut 9*9-w (blocking the passage through), only for Black? I'm afraid that even with White's first move, Black always will be stronger with accurate play.
We've been playing Tablut 9*9-w for a long time, but now we have run out of openings (opening moves) for White. For any start from White, Black has a good defence. There are almost no tricks left.
Draganov's idea that White shouldn't immediately start expanding, but should occupy key squares and bide his time is a very good one. It gave Tablut a temporary second life. But such a game also requires openings (precise first moves), but there are almost none...
I think we should ban Black from passing through the throne. We won't violate Linnaeus' rules (he didn't say anything about it), but we will strengthen White a little.
We can't abandon Tablut, since it is the most historically accurate game. But we need to strengthen White.
2025-07-17 22:02:39 Hagbard:
Is there support in Linnaeus’s rules for being able to do that?
2025-07-17 22:20:52 Dimetr:
Linnaeus doesn't say anything about the possibility of passing through the throne (he also didn't say who makes the first move). So we won't be breaking anything.
2025-07-17 22:23:04 Hagbard:
Also, does Linneus' description support an asymmetry that only blacks are blocked for passing the throne?
2025-07-17 22:23:47 Dimetr:
Linnaeus assigned a number or letter to each square on the gameboard and demonstrates the rules with specific examples. He doesn't provide examples of passage through the throne.
It would be logical to prohibit Black from passing through the royal citadel.
I've emailed you a file; look at my translation of Linnaeus on pages 10-13. He described in detail what he saw with his own eyes, but there were clearly other rules he didn't write down (for example, the first move).
Therefore, we can add anything that doesn't contradict Linnaeus.
2025-11-07 21:27:16 gulo:
It seems that the consensus about tablut is leaning towards it favouring attackers slightly now. The briefly tested blocking of attackers by the centre square doesn’t appear to help king side.
An idea if we want to test further options: I wonder whether Linnaeus’ rule 14 might bear an interpretation that the centre only be hostile towards attacking pieces? This might ease development for king side slightly.
Possibly even blocking and hostile towards attackers, but passable by and friendly towards defenders.
This might also justify why the one exception is there when a defender can be caught with the centre square as anvil (when all other sides of the centre square are occupied by attackers).
2025-11-08 17:52:24 Hagbard:
Does Linnaeus’s journal support a variant where
– the throne blocks black but not white,
– the throne is hostile to black but friendly to white?
2025-11-08 18:14:07 gulo:
The rules for the throne/castle of the king (“arx regia”) are the least clear generally.
We know that it restricts movement in some way, as “nobody can enter”. There’s doubt whether that includes the king when he has left it, and also whether pieces can move through.
We also know that it is hostile in some way. Rule 14 doesn’t specify whether the castle acts entirely as a separate (“third”) piece, both blocking and attacking, or whether it is only hostile but can be passed through, nor whether this applies to all pieces.
We can add clarifications, but there’s no certainty. We can use logic arguments like “it makes sense that the king can return to the king’s castle”, and "it makes sense that said castle allows friendly troops to pass through, and protects their flank, while being hostile and closed off to the king’s enemies".
Others might bring just as sound arguments contrary to mine here.
2025-11-08 18:32:36 Hagbard:
It may be worth looking into after the tournament. That would probably be with a variant that goes all the way:
– the throne blocks black but not white,
– the throne is hostile to black but friendly to white,
– the king can, as usual, return to the throne.
2025-11-08 19:11:28 gulo:
Sounds good! I hope @Dimetr will join the testing. Afaik he initiated the previous test with attackers blocked by the castle.
We started testing the variant, which Hagbard decided to name after my username (though I think Dimetr deserves just as much credit).2025-11-10 07:34:42 Dimetr:
Hello!
Yes, of course I will join testing.
This year we tested the rule: -The throne blocks black but not white- but, I didn't notice the difference, black was still much stronger.
So we should also try to add rule -the throne is hostile to black but friendly to white- I hope this helps the whites
2025-12-08 20:21:46 Dimetr:
Saami Tablut-gulo-w (9x9) - seems like a good variant to me (a tournament is just finishing now), but more games are needed to verify it. The new rule "the throne is hostile only to Black" - significantly changes the game! You are no longer afraid for the white warrior near the throne. We may looking for new openings, and this will give 9x9 a second life.
It will be great if strong players could be able to play Tablut-gulo-w, when the Championship ends - It will be good for New Year!
We are continuing the test of the variant, and it looks promising!2025-12-08 21:35:41 Hagbard:
The Saami Tablut-gulo-w 9x9 is right now measured to balance +1.14.
I tried only two games yet, but in my opinion the variant feels well working and natural, and the rules details look natural and logical.
Historical Hnefatafl 9x9 (Saami Tablut-gulo-w)
All players:
+1.22 (60 / 13)
Strong players:
+1.11 (40 / 11)
Very strong players:
1.00 (24 / 7)
Ultra strong players:
- (0 / 0)
Average:
+1.14