Contents:

• 60 Dice, 20 each in 3 colors.
• 20 double-sided Result Markers.
• 4 Publication Tokens.
• Deck of Law of the Universe cards. ^{(For this playtest, the Universe will choose from a provided list from the following link:)}

Important Terms:

• The Universe: One player plays as)the Universe, creating a secret Law only they know. Their goal is to present the other players with a challenge while silently guiding them to success.
• Law of the Universe: A statement held in the mind of the Universe against which all experiments are evaluated as either following or not following.
• Following: An experiment does not follow the Law of the Universe if any element contradicts the Law as worded, and is indicated by a red X Result Marker. Otherwise it follows the Law, indicated by a green O Result Marker.
• Experiment: Any self-contained grouping of dice created by a player. Each experiment is distinct and cannot reference other experiments or anything outside the game.

Setup:

1. Place the dice within easy reach of all players.
2. Decide which player will be the Universe and give them the Result Markers.
3. All other players take on the role of Researchers. Place the four Publication Tokens within easy reach of them.
4. The Universe shuffles the deck of Law of the Universe cards, draws two, keeps one, and places the other on the bottom of the deck.1
• The kept card must be held secret, but the Universe may refer to it at any time.
• For rules governing creating a Law of your own, consult the "Creating Laws" section in the Advanced booklet. (floating side text)
5. The Universe then builds 2 experiments, each using 4 or fewer dice. One experiment must follow their secret Law, and the other one must not. The Universe then places the appropriate Result Marker next to each: O for follows, X for does not follow.

Play:

• The active Researcher grabs any number of dice from the supply and organizes them however they like in an area on the table.
• Experiments remain in play for the duration of the game for reference.
• Dice are limited, but with the consent of all Researchers a previous experiment may be deconstructed for parts. The Result Marker from a deconstructed experiment is removed from the game.
• Once the active Researcher is satisfied with the construction of their experiment, the Universe considers whether it follows or does not follow their Law, placing the appropriate Result Marker next to the experiment: O for follows, Xfor does not follow.

• With the unanimous consent of all other Researchers, the active Researcher may spend a Publication Token to publish a Theory about the Law of the Universe.
• The active Researcher states their Theory aloud, and hands the Publication Token to the Universe. Before accepting it the Universe repeats back the Theory as they understand it, allowing the Researcher to workshop their language until everyone agrees on what exactly is meant.
• The Universe takes the Publication token and, if they can, disproves the Researcher's Theory by either:
• Building an experiment that follows the Researcher's Theory and marking that it does notfollowthe Law of the Universe.
• Building an experiment that does notfollow the Researcher's theory and marking that it follows the Law of the Universe.
• If the Universe is unable to disprove the Theory, everyone (including the Universe) wins!
• The stated Theory does not need to exactly match the Law of the Universe. If the Universe cannot disprove it, then the two are likely logically similar.
• Ex: The Law "All dice must be divisible by 2" and the Theory "There must be no odd dice" are logically the same.

Talking:

• The Universe is silent and enigmatic. They may never verbalize their Law, offer clues, or provide direction to the Researchers. The Universe may only ask or answer clarifying questions.
• Ex: Asking if one die in an experiment is meant to be touching another, or answering whether 0 is considered even. (It is!)
• Researchers are free (and encouraged!) to talk - discussing theories, advising on experiments they'd like to see, and bouncing ideas off each other.

Laws of the Universe:

• A Law may involve aspects of how dice relate to each other within an experiment.
• Number of Dice
• Color
• Fully Visible Top Faces
• Patterned / Sequenced / Consecutive
• Groupings (A group is one or more dice)
• Touching / Not Touching (Diagonal edges are touching)
• Stacked / Touching Table
• Majorities / Minorities / Parity
• Same / Different (Not sharing color/number with other dice)
• Even / Odd
• Mathematics (Products/Sums/Differences/Factors/Primes/Formulae etc.)
• Spatial Configuration (Forming a Line/Square/Triangle)
• Might run afoul directionality/orientation. Square = Diamond depending on angle.
• Also some shapes are hard to demonstrate with 4 dice.
• Neither ban nor mention. If some people go that way, let them!

• A Law may not involve aspects that are external to an experiment.
• Result Markers
• Reference to Other Experiments
• Time
• Dice Directionality / Orientation
• Proximity to a Player
• Specific Areas of the Table or Room
• Distance Between Dice
• Side Faces / Obscured Faces

Advanced Concepts:

• During play a Researcher might create an experiment with nothing in it. This is valid! Judge it as you would any experiment.
• This can be a great way to test whether a Law requires something to exist, or if the Law is a restriction on what can exist.
• Ex: The Null Experiment for "There must be at least one red die" would not follow the Law. The Null Experiment for "There must not be red dice" would follow the Law.

• Researchers should keep a watchful eye on the overall pattern of results they're getting from experiments:
• If most experiments do not follow, the Law likely includes an "and" clause.
• If most experiments follow the law, the Law likely includes an "or" clause.

• If an experiment simultaneously follows and does not follow the Law, then the experiment does not follow the Law. (Partially following is not following)
• Ex: Consider the Law "All blue dice must be 5s." An experiment with a blue 5 and a blue 3 would not follow the Law.

• If a Law imposes a restriction that is not relevant to an experiment, the experiment follows the Law.
• Ex: Consider the Law "All white dice must touch." An experiment with no white dice follows the Law.
• It is true that all Sphinxes in my game group love playing Infer. (There are no Sphinxes in my game group.)

Advice:

For the Researchers:

For the Universe:

• Ex: Consider the Law "Blue dice must be odd." It seems simple, but if a Researcher builds an experiment with no blue dice, would you mark it as following or not following?

FAQ:

• What if someone needs to leave or wants to join mid-game?
• Infer is very fluid regarding player count. It does not disturb an ongoing game if a Researcher needs to leave or a new player wishes to join. When Infer is on the table, everyone in the room is playing whether they realize it or not.
• What if an experiment gets accidentally nudged, moved, or changed?
• If someone accidentally changes an existing experiment, the Universe should pull back their Result Marker and say "This experiment has changed. Please re-create it." The Universe should then judge it as it is, even if it was put back differently.
• Do a dice's side faces matter?
• No! Only fully visible top faces matter.
• Does the color of dice stacked under other dice matter?
• Yes! Only the faces of dice with other dice stacked on top are irrelevant. Colors matter!
• Are numeric sequences considered ascending or descending?
• Lines can be read both ways. There is no directionality in Infer. All experiments must be understandable by players regardless of where they sit around the table. Thus the sequence 1, 2, 3 is considered to be both ascending and descending. Depending on your viewpoint, both are true.
• What happens if we run out of Dice?
• Dice are limited, but with the consent of all Researchers a previous experiment may be deconstructed for parts at any time. The Result Marker for a deconstructed experiment is removed from the game.
• What happens if we run out of Result Markers?
• Result Markers are limited. If the Universe must place a Result Marker and cannot, everyone (including the Universe) loses.

• What is inductive reasoning anyway?
• Inductive reasoning is the act of developing a theory from individual data points. We make many observations, recognize a pattern, and infer an explanation to describe it. In some ways it is the opposite of deductive logic which starts with an assumed theory from which we makes specific observations. In the Scientific Method, inductive logic is used to form the hypotheses and theories that are then tested and applied through deductive reasoning.
• What is a Scientific Law anyway?
• A Scientific Law is an observation about the universe based on experimentation that the Scientific community has a strong understanding of how to model, but little ability to explain the "How" or "Why" of. Our current understanding of the Law of Gravity is so detailed that we can accurately predict anything from the drop of an apple to the movements of entire galaxies... but nobody really knows why mass bends space-time. We just observe that it does.
• What is a Scientific Theory anyway?
• A Scientific Theory is an attempt to explain "How" and "Why" an element of the universe works the way it seems to. The Theory of Evolution doesn't model the exact math of genomes or allow us to make precise predictions of the future. Rather, it describes the process of genetic selection in nature, and attempts to explain the systems that have shaped the natural world throughout history.
• I prefer competitive games. Is there a game like this that's head to head?
• Yes! Check out the fabulous Zendo by Korey Heath and Andy Loony, published by Looney Labs.

//Creating Laws:

• It is tempting to make an esoteric Law to feel clever, but this frequently just leads to Researchers burning out and not having fun.
• What may seem like a simple idea to someone who already knows it will likely still prove a challenge for those attempting to understand it.
• Inductive reasoning is a difficult exercise fraught with assumptions, over-complication and confirmation bias. A Law doesn't need to be complex to be challenging.

• You must write your Law down on a piece of paper or your phone. Once the game begins, you may not edit it.
• Use specific language such as "At least / Exactly / All / No" to define your Law.
• Ex: "There must be at most 2 Even dice."
• Do not use the words "and," "or," or "If...then."
• Having an implicit "and" or "or" in the logic of your Law is fine, but if you have to explicitly say it out loud, then your Law may be too complicated.
• Technically the Law "There must be a red 2" implicitly means "There must be at least one red die and it must be a 2."
• While building your initial 2 experiments, each must use 4 or fewer dice.
• If players need to iteratively build Experiments with 5+ dice, you'll run out fast.
• This also curbs complexity and prevents players from being immediately overwhelmed.

1. There must be / There must not be
2. At least / At most / Exactly / All / No / More / Fewer
3. Color / Number (fully visible top faces) / Number of dice / Touching / Groupings / Majority / Minority / Stacked / Same / Different / Unique / Pattern / Evens / Odds / Greater than / Less than / Sequences / Mathematics

• "There must be more blue dice than black dice."
• "All stacked dice must be odd."
• "There must not be any 5s."
• "All colors of dice must be present."
• "The product of all dice must be exactly 12."
• "The difference between touching dice must be exactly 2."

• "At least one Black 5." -> Try, "There must be at least one black 5."
• "There must be two 2s." -> Try, "There must be exactly two 2s."kjm
• "Blue dice must touch unless they are even." -> Try "Odd blue dice must touch each other."
• "There must be 6 dice." -> It must be possible to demonstrate your Law using 4 or fewer dice.

////Variants:

• At the beginning of the game, give the Universe player 6 Highlight stones, 3 ea. in two colors.
• At any point, if the Researchers appear to be stuck and new ideas are no longer flowing, the Universe player may begin silently placing Highlight stones next to experiments that they feel are particularly noteworthy.
• The two colors represent two different lines of communication. Ideas? Concepts?
• For example, the universe might highlight two experiments in blue that they would like to draw particular attention to how they compare or contrast, and another group of three experiments in red that they feel are worth re-examination to learn a different lesson.
• This is a subtle and silent way for the Universe to provide hints to the Researchers, giving them direction when they've lost momentum without taking away their "Aha!" moment.

• Add a 10 minute timer to the game, extended by five minutes each time the Researchers publish a theory. Pause the timer as the Universe considers and constructs Theory Disprovals.
• If the timer runs out, everyone (including the Universe) loses.
• This represents the publish-or-perish nature of scientific endeavors, and the scramble to produce results before funding runs out and/or media interest wanes.

• For the duration of the game no player may speak except while Publishing a Theory.
• Researchers are free to communicate non-verbally: pointing at experiments that they feel are important, signaling numbers or colors they'd like the active Researcher to consider, and so on.
• Before Publishing a Theory, the active Researcher must first point at the Publication Tokens to ask for permission to Publish. If all other Researchers give a thumbs up, they may pick up the token and state their Theory as per the normal rules. Otherwise, they may not publish.
• As part of this process, they may make gestures or point at elements of existing Experiments to give an indication of the Theory they want to Publish.

• New component! A compass rose that sits in the middle of the table and is never moved after initial placement.
• Each experiment is a self-contained universe, and cardinal directionality is relative to the rest of the experiment, not its position on the table.
• "There must be a Blue die in the north." Requires other dice present in the experiment for a blue die to be north of.
• But is the blue die in the north, or are the other dice in the south?
• All directionality Laws should be phrased " X North of Y". Since each experiment is contained, direction is relative. Law must define coordinate. "There must be a blue die to the North of another die."

• Infer can be played asynchronously over time!
• Setup the game as you would normally, choosing a secret Law of the Universe and building an experiment that follows it and an experiment that does not, leaving them out on the table.
• When a Researcher gets a free moment, they can consider the table and build a few experiments in a row, leaving them out for the Universe to judge at a later time. Play continues as normal, with players updating the game state as convenient.

///Cheater:

1. Shuffle the Identity Deck and distribute one card face down to each player.
2. Each player looks at their card now, and may refer to it at any time as the game goes on.
3. The player who received the Teacher card reveals it to the table. Everyone else must keep their role a secret from all other players for the duration of the game.

1. Tell all other players to close their eyes.
2. Shuffle the Law of the Universe deck, draw one card, read it, and place it face up on the table in front of the other players.
3. Close their eyes and tell the player who received the Cheater Identity Card to wake up and read the face up Law of the Universe.
4. Count back from 10 before telling the Cheater to close their eyes again.
5. Open their eyes and take the Law of the Universe card in front of themself, flipping it face down.
6. Tell all players to open their eyes. Both the Teacher and the Cheater should now know the secret Law of the Universe.

• Start a 10 minute timer.
• All players cooperate to learn the Teacher's Lesson by Building Experiments and Publishing Theories following base Infer rules.
• Each time a Student publishes a Theory, add 5 minutes to the timer.
• If the Students spend their last Publication token without succeeding, or the Teacher has no remaining Result Markers and must place one, or the timer runs out, everyone (including the Teacher and the Cheater) loses!
• If the Teacher is unable to disprove one of the Student's Published Theories, stop the timer and move on to The Vote.

• In this phase all players (including the Teacher) have 3 minutes to openly discuss how The Class went.
• At the end of three minutes (or if people want to call it early) all players vote. On the count of three each player points at the person they think is the Cheater.
• The player with most fingers pointing at them reveals their Identity Card. Ties are broken by whomever the Teacher is pointing at.
• If that player is the Cheater, everyone except the cheater (including the Teacher) wins!
• If that player is not the Cheater, the Cheater wins alone!

• For the Student team (including the Teacher) to win, both the Teacher's Law and the Cheater's identity must be correctly guessed.
• For the Cheater to win, the Teacher's Law must be guessed, but the Cheater's identity must not.