A law school professor offered sage advice to the inventor and his classmates upon our first day of law school. He noted that we should take a good look out our car windows as we drove home from class that day, because upon our graduations from law school, each of us would see the world as a different place. All attorneys know how true this is. There is a need for the layperson to understand general principles of law that are set out in an efficient, entertaining format.
Every country and every organized group of people throughout the ages have governed themselves with rules of law. Ancient tribes and civilizations painted their civil codes on the insides of their important public buildings, or carved their rules onto stone steles and displayed them in public locations. To give an example of how far our legal traditions have evolved, the ancient Saxon doctrine of cornsned involved a ritual performed by a priest to determine the guilt or innocence of an accused by determining how an accused swallowed a piece of bread. Law is a changing, seamless web. It is an art not chipped in stone by masons, but molded by the practitioners of the day. This game is intended to demystify the law for the layperson and to bring out one's competitive spirit. This game is also intended to entertain attorneys and to reaffirm many of the principles of law that attorneys may have “misplaced” since passing the bar examination.
Attorneys have an understanding of the world that non-attorneys have not been exposed to. Attorneys are trained to understand just how fraught our world is with liability, just how expansive are our rights and duties in relation to others. The field of law is a knowable entity if one puts forth the effort to learn. The field of law, the rules that we live by, affects nearly every aspect of our daily lives whether we recognize our rights and duties or not. In purely material terms, what we don't know really can hurt us in our daily transactions. It is no small endeavor to gain a general understanding of the law, but it is well worth the effort.
This game seeks to offer an understanding of American federal and state law in a fun, safe format. Almost all of the questions in this game address well-established principles of American law. This game does not attempt to provide an all-encompassing survey of American law. It is not an attempt to be all things to all people. The game kit offers an extensive examination of a limited number of different legal categories.
Various changes can be made regarding the legal topics that are represented in the game kit that would not change the scope of the invention. The fields of law that are examined in the invention are done so by way of question cards. The game also has a separate, broader category of legal questions, one question of which must be answered correctly to win the game. The questions are written in plain English for the layperson. However, the distinctions between the answers in each multiple choice question are straight forward on one hand, and deceptively complex on the other. The questions are designed to challenge both attorneys and non-attorneys without being too difficult or too easy.
The question cards in the invention are crafted to teach fundamental principles of law. Many of the question cards typically have a correct answer that represents the majority rule among the states, or the majority opinion of the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal or the U.S. Supreme Court. Questions typically include dissenting opinions as well as answers that play on the potential biases of players for what “should be” the correct answer. The game is intended to challenge non-attorneys to demonstrate their common sense and critical thinking skills while learning to think like attorneys.
There are board games that predate this invention that ask players to answer questions as one of the main tasks of the game, and in that respect this invention is not unique. “Trivial Pursuit” set the standard for the question-based board game. “Trivial Pursuit,” however, offers a series of short questions and asks players to search their memories for certain facts. Those who do well with rote memorization and who have a good memory for trivia tend to do well playing “Trivial Pursuit.” However, rote memorization and one-word or one-phrase answers offer little in the way of substantive learning. “Trivial Pursuit” could not adequately teach fundamental principles of law using its format.
This invention provides a more efficient, more focused educational format. True/false and yes/no questions give one a 50/50 chance of guessing the correct answer. Fill in the blank questions and name the missing element questions ask players to guess at answers if they are not schooled in the topic. Multiple choice questions on the other hand offer a definite advantage as a learning tool. This invention provides players with four answers to choose from. Rather than pulling facts from air, players are given fact scenarios and are required to apply critical thinking skills and logical thinking to deduce the correct legal response. The answers to the multiple choice questions do not involve one-word answers and are written in a truly challenging format that is fostered to emphasize learning. An additional teaching element is added by offering not only answers to each question, but detailed explanations that further the learning process with citations to actual case law, statutes or rules.
The multi-state portion of most state's bar examinations are written in a multiple choice format. Multi-state questions are designed to do one thing, to test competency in certain legal topics. Such questions fail to teach however, because they fail to provide any answers or explanations. This invention is clearly distinguishable because it offers not only answers to questions but detailed explanations that seek to teach specific legal principles. The invention teaches not just legal principles, but the “why” that underlies certain principles of law. It offers an opportunity to understand how the legal principles within each legal topic inter-relate, and an opportunity to see how the broader legal fields inter-relate and fit into the seamless web that is American law. Another distinction from the multi-state format is that to even have access to multi-state questions, one must be a law school graduate and must be eligible to take a bar examination.
The multiple choice legal topic question cards contained in this embodiment are designed to stimulate a player's critical thinking skills by requiring players to distinguish among the sometimes very subtle discrepancies contained in each of the four multiple choice answers.
The number of legal fields that are examined in the question card decks are limited to maximize the teaching impact. Rather than painting with a wide brush, the invention seeks to offer a narrower scope to more clearly demonstrate the relationships among principles within a field of law. Similarly, players gain a better understanding of the relationships among the fields of law by developing a more detailed understanding of each of the legal fields addressed in the invention. Other than the game winning legal topic question card deck, the legal topic question card decks contain a broad range of questions that focus only on that particular field of law.
The invention contains action cards that simulate real world examples in the practice of law. Most of the action cards are based on actual experiences of the inventor, actual contempt proceedings [not involving the inventor!], or actual disciplinary actions, [also not involving the inventor]. The action cards add elements of learning with the aid of real world examples of what attorneys may actually experience in the practice of law.
The action cards in this embodiment add elements of strategy and luck by permitting players or teams to roll again, to gain a free “juror,” to take a “juror” from an opponent, to go to the central portal to win the game, or to go to certain locations on the game board to obtain a needed “juror.” The game rules level the playing field by handicapping attorneys, by permitting players to determine how fast they want to play, permitting players to take “jurors” from an opponent by answering their “lightning round” questions, and to win the game by answering an opponent's game-ending “lightning round” question.
The novelty of this invention lies not just in the format used to teach or to reaffirm legal theory, but in the combination of elements used for playing and winning the game. The invention adds chance, strategy, luck and competition in several different ways through the use of the question cards and the action cards, lightning round questions and the game rules. The invention is novel in its approach because of its teaching format, the question card format is designed to entertain and to teach, the triangular game board design is unique, the introduction of learning by way of the action cards, the introduction of chance and luck by way of the action cards, the competitive elements of the “lightning round” questions, and the strategic elements introduced by the game rules level the playing field and let players determine how fast they want to play.
Game play for this particular embodiment begins and ends at the central portal, also called the DISORDERLY CONDUCT™ Courthouse. Players must answer multiple choice questions correctly in order to advance toward completion of the game. The game kit includes an ornamentally unique game board marked with a plurality of indicia The kit includes several different question card decks that are housed in a single card holder. Each of the question card decks represent specific fields of law.
A plurality of action cards add additional elements of learning. “Lightning round” questions, the action cards and the game rules add strategy and luck to the game and attempt to level the playing field. There are different types of action cards that correspond to different indicia on the game board.
The aforementioned aspects and advantages of the invention will become more apparent and better understood when viewed in light of the following drawings and detailed description wherein:
The game board [1] of the preferred embodiment of the game is illustrated in
The game of this preferred embodiment is comprised of the game board [1], a plurality of game pieces, [
Game play for this particular embodiment begins and ends at the central portal [2], also called the DISORDERLY CONDUCT™ Courthouse. Players determine in lawyerly fashion who should begin the game. The first player or team begins by rolling the game die [27] and moving their game piece [26a-26c] from the central portal [2] to a corresponding number of spaces along the outer playing path [3-23]. The game rules of this embodiment require that players move only in a clockwise manner, but alternate embodiments may include moving clockwise during one move and counter-clockwise during a subsequent move.
The game board [1] allows for three alternate routes when leaving the central portal [2] to begin play. Players proceed from the central portal [2] through one of three indicia [6, 13, and 20], corresponding to one of three action card decks, [
Throughout the course of the game players can use the central portal [2] as a shortcut to other areas along the outer playing path [3-23], but only by moving their game pieces [26a-26c] in a clockwise direction. There are images of small hands near the central portal [2] on the game board [1] that point players in the right direction when traveling through the central portal [2].
The central portal [2] has the effect of creating a game board [1] with a larger outer playing path [3-23] and three smaller sub-pathways to speed up game play. This is designed to stimulate additional elements of strategy. The central portal [2] serves to increase the chances of landing on a certain indicia that players may need to become eligible to win the game. By way of example, a player whose turn begins on indicia [12], corresponding to a “torts” question card, [
A player or team reads the legal topic question cards [24a-24g] out loud to themselves and are allowed to hold the question card in order to read it before providing an answer. Players are allowed one roll of the game die [27] per turn, after which they cannot roll again until all the other players or teams have taken their respective turn. Each type of indicia on the game board [1] contains either a graphic representing a certain kind of action card, [
Game play for the preferred embodiment begins and ends at the central portal [2], also called the DISORDERLY CONDUCT™ Courthouse. The theme of the game is to win the race to the DISORDERLY CONDUCT™ Courthouse [2] while demonstrating one's legal skills and one's learning skills in the process. The game kit allows for two to three players or teams. As players land on the game board indicia, [2-23], they must answer legal topic questions that correspond to the legal topic question cards [24a-24g]. Players must answer a legal topic question card [24a-24g] correctly to gain that topic, and in doing so they gain that “juror.” Players must obtain a requisite minimum number of different legal topic cards [24a-24f] along the outer playing path [3-23] in order to become eligible to win the game. If a player lands on an indicia but have already obtained the corresponding legal topic, they must simply wait for their next turn.
When players have correctly answered or obtained the requisite minimum number of legal topic question cards [24a-24f], they become eligible to answer the game-winning category of legal question cards [24g]. The game winning question cards [24g] are reserved for use when a player lands on the DISORDERLY CONDUCT™ Courthouse [2] and have obtained the requisite number of “jurors” or legal topic question cards [24a-24f]. Some action cards [represented by
Any appropriate scoring means may be used to keep track of the number of different legal topic question cards [24a-24g] that are required to become eligible to win the game. The game rules in this particular embodiment ask players to collect the question cards [24a-24g] they have answered correctly to demonstrate which topics they have correctly answered. Other means for scoring include using pencil and paper, scoring chips, or a digital scoreboard for computer game play.
Some legal topic question cards [24a-24g] contain a “lightning round” question [
The legal topic question cards [24a-24g] in this particular embodiment include seven main legal categories. The six legal topic question card decks [24a-24f] correspond to the indicia on the outer playing path [3-23]. The seventh legal topic deck [24g] corresponds to the DISORDERLY CONDUCT™ Courthouse [2] once players become eligible to win the game, and covers a much broader category of legal topics that are not covered in the other decks [24a-24f].
The number and type of indicia on the game board [1] may vary from that illustrated. The number and type of legal topic question card decks [24a-24g], and the number and type of action card decks [represented by
Each of the questions in the question card decks [24a-24g] ask players to determine which elements or facts give rise to a certain legal principle or legal claim, or challenge players to determine which of four multiple choice answers most accurately applies to a certain set of facts or circumstances, or legal principles.
The multiple choice legal topic questions contained in this embodiment are designed to stimulate a player's critical thinking skills by requiring players to distinguish among the sometimes very subtle discrepancies contained in each of the four multiple choice answers.
Each of the multiple choice legal topic question cards [24a-24g] are intended to do several things:
1) to measure a player's competencies in specific legal topics;
2) to teach certain aspects or principles of a certain legal topic, with each legal topic teaching broader principles of law by demonstrating how each legal principle within a certain legal field intertwines with other legal principles within the field, and how each field of law intertwines with other fields of law;
3) to stimulate a player's critical thinking skills by requiring players to distinguish between the discrepancies contained in each of the four multiple choice answers;
4) to teach certain principles of law by offering detailed explanations for each question unless the answer is self-explanatory, with many explanations including fairly detailed examinations of case law, statutes, rules of evidence, court rules or administrative rules;
5) to foster leaning by requiring players to apply the facts of real-life or hypothetical case scenarios to established principles of law;
6) to foster learning by requiring players to distinguish among competing legal theories;
7) to entertain and/or to fascinate by presenting questions based on real world examples that have been the subject of actual prosecution or litigation;
8) to add elements of strategy to the game by allowing players to answer an opponent's “lightning round” question [28] by offering the chance of obtaining an opponent's legal topic question card [24a-24g] by answering the question correctly, at the cost of incurring a penalty of losing one's turn for answering the question incorrectly;
9) to add elements of strategy to the game by allowing players to win the game by answering correctly an opponent's game-winning “lightning round” [28] question, at the risk of losing their next turn by answering the question incorrectly;
10) to stimulate a player's powers of reasoning by offering sets of fact scenarios and legal principles that challenge players to deduce the correct legal theory or the correct response from the offered multiple choice answers;
11) to teach or to reaffirm certain legal principles or theories as well as to offer an introduction to non-attorney players of the processes by which attorneys apply facts and circumstances to existing legal theory;
12) to stimulate a player's powers of critical thinking by requiring players to apply a set of facts to a correct legal response among four very similar answers, many sets of answers containing not only the majority opinion of a published legal opinion, but dissenting opinions and closely analogous responses that could be a correct response but for certain facts contained in the question;
13) to challenge both attorneys and non-attorneys without being too difficult or too easy.
A plurality of action cards, [
Action cards, [
The action cards [
Each of the action cards, [
1) to introduce elements of chance and luck into the game by allowing players to roll again, or to lose a turn;
2) to introduce elements of chance and luck by allowing players to take a legal topic card from an opposing player to reduce an opponent's number of required legal topic cards in which to become eligible to win the game, thereby increasing the player's own chances of winning;
3) to introduce elements of chance and luck to the game by permitting players to acquire the legal topic question card of their choice without having to answer a corresponding legal topic question, which can benefit a player by obtaining a certain legal topic question card that might present more difficulty than other legal topics;
4) to introduce elements of chance and luck to the game by granting the right to go directly to the central portal [2] if and when they become eligible to win the game, allowing players to save these cards for later use to answer a game-winning legal question card [24g];
5) to introduce elements of learning with the aid of real world examples.
The game rules in this embodiment also level the playing field by handicapping players who are an attorney or teams with an attorney by requiring them to obtain more legal topic question cards [24a-24f] than non-attorneys before becoming eligible to win the game by answering a game-winning legal question card [24g].
The question cards [24a-24g] in the preferred embodiment are crafted to teach fundamental principles of American law. Many of the question cards typically have a correct answer that represent the majority rule among the states, or the majority opinion of the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal or the U.S. Supreme Court. Questions typically include dissenting opinions as well as answers that play on the potential biases of players for what “should be” the correct answer. The game is intended to challenge non-attorneys to demonstrate their common sense and critical thinking skills while learning to think like attorneys.
Other anticipated embodiments or derivative works of the invention include games designed in this format that focus on other topics or professions such as the Civil War, medicine and psychology.
The invention should not be considered as limited by the specific embodiments shown and described herein. Since certain changes may be made in the foregoing disclosure without departing from the scope of the invention herein, it is intended that all matter contained in the accompanying drawings be construed in an illustrative and not in a limiting sense. Various modifications and structural changes may be made without departing from the spirit of the present invention.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60605421 | Aug 2004 | US |