Chess, Ludo, Carrom and the rules people argue about
The six classic boards here all had rule decisions to make, and most of those decisions are the ones your family has been arguing about for years.
By Aayush Kumar · Board games · 9 min read
Nobody learns Ludo from a rulebook. You learn it from an uncle who is certain that three sixes forfeits your turn, in a house where a token on a star square is untouchable, against a cousin who insists that two tokens on one square form a wall nobody may pass. All of those are house rules, played in some households and not others. And when you build a digital version you cannot fudge it — every one of those arguments has to be settled in code before anybody plays a turn.
Here is what was decided on each of the six classic boards here, and why.
Ludo: safe squares, blockades and the three-sixes rule
The three genuine disputes in Ludo are blockades, safe squares and what a six is worth. Blockades are the big one. In many households, two of your own tokens on the same square form a barrier no opposing token may pass. It is printed in some editions and absent from others, and it changes Ludo completely: with blockades, the strongest play is often to park a pair on a chokepoint and refuse to move. This board does not implement them. Two of your own tokens may share a square, and anybody can walk straight past. That is a choice in favour of movement — a blockade game rewards stalling, and a five-to-eight-minute match has no room for stalling.
Safe squares are kept, and they are not scattered arbitrarily. Eight are safe: each colour's entry square plus the four stars between them. Counting from your own entry they sit at steps 0, 8, 13, 21, 26, 34, 39 and 47 — a repeating rhythm of eight, then five, then eight. That pattern is the actual strategy of the game. A token on a star needs a five to reach the next haven; a token on an entry square needs an eight, meaning two rolls in the open.
Three sixes in a row forfeits the turn, which is close to universal and kept without argument. Exact finish is required. And a six or a capture buys another roll, which is the rule that makes spreading out better than sprinting: more tokens on the board means more legal moves, and better odds one of them is a capture. What was deliberately not added: bonus squares, dice weighted for drama, and any rule that lets a trailing player catch up.
Snake & Ladder: the exact-finish argument
There is only one real dispute in Snake & Ladder and it is about the last few tiles. Must you land on 100 exactly, or does any roll that reaches it win?
Exact finish is kept, and it bites hard. A token parked on 97 sits still through every roll except a three; from 96, only four of the six faces are legal moves at all. That is the rule that produces the familiar scene of somebody two tiles from the end watching three other people climb past them, and removing it would remove most of what is left of the game.
Several other house rules are deliberately absent, and their absence is felt. Rolling a six does not earn another turn. Landing on another player's tile does nothing. Nothing sends you back to the start. And the board is fixed rather than shuffled between matches, which turns the hazards into knowledge rather than furniture: ladders at 2, 4, 9, 21, 28, 36, 51, 71 and 80, snakes at 16, 47, 49, 56, 62, 64, 87, 93, 95 and 98.
The top row is where the game is actually decided. From tile 94, a six wins outright — but a one drops you onto 95 and a snake back to 75, and a four lands on 98 and sends you to 78. Two faces of the die cost you roughly twenty tiles. A commanding lead at 90 is worth far less than it looks.
None of that involves a decision on your part and the board does not pretend otherwise. What it offers is the shape of the swing, which is why best-of-three is the sensible unit.
Carrom: the queen, and who gets the points for a wrong pot
Carrom Clash inherits the two rules carrom players genuinely fight about.
The first is the queen's cover. Pocketing the red queen only counts if you follow it by pocketing one of your own pieces, and if you fail the queen returns to the centre. What people argue about is whether the cover must come on the very next shot or can be held over. This board carries the hold-over: a cover landed on the following shot still counts.
The second is the one most digital versions quietly skip. Pocketing an opponent's coin does not just remove it — the points go to them, so a wild break that clears three of their coins has done their work for them. That is why full-power breaks are a bad habit here, and it is the correct rule: carrom is about restraint and the physics should not reward flailing.
The striker foul is the biggest swing on the board: pocket the striker and you lose a point and one of your own coins returns to the centre, a two-coin turnaround in a race to clear nine. The physics makes all of this matter. Cushions return about 85 per cent of the speed they take, coins keep 92 per cent off each other, and friction is light enough that a full-power break rattles for several seconds before settling, usually with coins buried against the rails where nothing has a clean line.
Chess: the three rules that catch everyone out
Chess has no house rules to speak of, but it has three rules casual players routinely get wrong, and a digital board either implements them or it does not.
Castling. The king may not castle out of check, into check, or through an attacked square, and it may not castle if either piece has moved. Most people remember the first and third and forget the middle one. This board checks all three: that the king is not in check now, will not be in check where it lands, and does not cross an attacked square on the way.
En passant. A pawn that has just advanced two squares may be captured, on the square it skipped, by an enemy pawn beside it — but only on the immediately following move. Here it appears as a legal capture on an empty square for exactly one move and then vanishes. For a rule that has existed since the fifteenth century, it causes a remarkable number of living-room arguments.
Threefold repetition. The same position occurring three times is a draw — but "the same position" includes whose turn it is, what castling rights remain and whether an en passant capture is available. A board that hashes only the piece placement will declare draws that are not draws. This one folds castling rights and the en passant file into the position it hashes, so a board that merely looks familiar is not counted twice. The fifty-move rule is there as well.
What is absent: no clock, no move list, no undo. Those are arguments about what the game is for rather than rule decisions. A clock makes chess a different game, and undo removes the only thing a mistake teaches you.
Four in Line: who goes first
The disc-dropping game has almost no rule ambiguity, which makes its one decision stand out. Four in Line is solved: on a seven-by-six grid the first player wins with perfect play by starting in the centre column. That makes "who goes first" the only house rule that matters, and it is why competitive play alternates it.
Here red always moves first, and in single player red is you. That is a deliberate handicap on the computer rather than an oversight, and the tally at the top of the screen is designed for series play so that alternating sides between rounds is the natural thing to do.
One other detail: a full board with no line is recorded as a draw rather than quietly restarted. Forty-two slots fill faster than people expect.
Bigger Tic Tac Toe: what happens on a dead board
The nested version of noughts and crosses has exactly one contested rule, and everybody who plays it hits the argument within three games. Your move inside a small board sends your opponent to the corresponding board on the big grid. So what happens when the board they are sent to is already finished?
There are two schools: they play anywhere, or the move is lost and play passes back. Bigger Tic Tac Toe takes the first, the common competitive convention, and treats a board that filled with no line as decided rather than open. Sending somebody to a drawn board gives them the run of the grid, exactly as a won one does.
That decision is the whole strategy of the game. Handing over a free choice is usually a worse trade than whatever you gained locally, which means the question on every turn is not "what does this do for me" but "which board does this cell index point at, and what state is that board in". It also makes drawing a board a weapon: a dead board permanently removes a square from the big grid and can kill a line that took six moves to build.
A note on what these decisions have in common
Read them together and there is a pattern. Every rule kept is one that keeps a game moving or a comeback possible; every rule dropped is one that lets a player stall, or adds drama the game did not earn. Blockades out, exact finish in. No bonus squares, no weighted dice, no rubber-banding of the sort some racing games here do use openly.
They were also all arguments before they were code. If you have ever lost half an hour of a family evening to whether a six earns another turn, the honest answer is that both of you were right, in different houses. These boards just had to pick.
More from ARTHIS.space
- Short games Twelve games you can finish in the time it takes to boil a kettle Twelve games that start instantly, end cleanly and do not ask for a second session — plus four that look short and are not.
- Interface design Why touch controls fail, and what to do instead Most touch controls fail for the same handful of reasons. Here is each failure, the fix, and the games on this site that use it.
- Local multiplayer The best two-player games when you only have one phone Three genuinely different answers to the problem of fitting two players onto one handset, what each one costs, and the games on this site that get it right.