As for Cluing Safe Discards and Double Discarding - let's agree to disagree In my experience ambiguity you mentioned is usually contradicted by the flow of the game - who clues and how, when they clue and when they don't, what do they play. In most games it is easy to distinguish between a save or play - and anyway it shouldn't be a problem if a clue giver is aware that a chop clue will be considered as a save. "Each player is incrementally disempowered to perform finesses themselves" - that's what I felt about your way. (Like I said, your system is coherent. I just disagree that the benefits are higher in your case than in my way of playing. )
...Or clue red, then 4. It works exactly the same, within the rest of your framework, and - if instead of B5 there was some 4 we want to save - you can save it as well with it.Double Cluing the Same Cards
(...) R4, R1, R2, R3, B5 (...) 2 clues to get 4 cards played
I'm not saying that this convention is totally useless, just... I still need to see an example of situation that could be covered only by this convention. The example you gave failed at this. And I really would like to see the person (not knowing the convention) figuring this during the game. Most (all?) of conventions I know/use, given enough time even when first time encountered, are possible to figure out.
ad. The Trash Finesse
OK, I see your point and I agree. (I play 5p games so rarely that the difference didn't occur to me And I admit I didn't use it in 4p - for double play of one person - either, it would be very situational.)
ad. Play Time
I am somehow curious and somehow afraid of playing with your group - I disagree with many things you mention (including 3 bluffs ), though it would be definately interesting experience. Maybe some day (I don't quite get that chat). Or maybe you will invite your group here?
@Hyphen-ated via Zamiel
While I agree that these chains of reasoning make really cool feeling, I am not so sure if is it unique (though I am convinced Hanabi WAS a milestone in game design). As for newer games in a second I can think of "Overseers", "Abracada...what?" (here you can't see your own, um, "cards" too) or (2p though similar) "Hanamikoji", generally - all games that rely on information exchange and why someone did what he did. (Though, I admit the main difference between those and Hanabi - all mentioned games aren't cooperative.)Doing complicated chains of reasoning that relies on stuff like "he knows that she knows that I know that he knows this" is something almost completely unique to Hanabi in boardgames, as far as I know. It's like those logic puzzles with the 100 blue-eyed islanders, or the people in a line with colored hats. That's the stuff I really love about the game.