|
Anyone have any opinions of Paper Tales at 2 and 3 players? I'm looking for a card drafting game that's a step up from Sushi Go to play with my mom and also can still be played with my wife. I think Paper Tales has interesting art that my mom would like.
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 13:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 12:01 |
|
|
I think the "you didn't tell me I could do that" is the most egregious of board game social sins, maybe second only to the teacher who says "I forgot to tell you about this critical rule that will now win me the game."
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:03
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I had a guy at a public meetup blow up on me because I hadn't explicitly told him that you could do the same move twice in T&E (having given him no indication that this was not allowed before). He asked me to ask someone else to adjudicate the rule for me. Including "place a tile"? Like, everyone's first few turns were place a tile and place a person? How long could that possibly have gone on?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:12
|
|
|
I had someone get very grumpy because I supposedly didn't tell them you could remove sympathy in a game of Root. In the next few turns people removed sympathy but somehow knew to give a card. There's one person in my regular group who does it a lot, it used to stress me out because I genuinely would think I had forgotten something. Now I just ask the rest of the group and so far without exception it turns out I had explained the rule and it was just forgotten.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:18
|
|
|
When I said the same move, I meant the exact same move. There's a trick in T&E where, if you do an internal fight and the piece you are placing has more red on the board than the piece you are trying to remove, you can place it there as a first action, draw out the reds from your opponent's hand, then if you lose, do the exact same fight and win since he doesn't have any more reds to defend himself. My crime was that I hadn't explicitly told him about this interaction (which I now do after that encounter).
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:19
|
|
|
Oh. Oh, sure. Why on earth would they think it's disallowed?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:22
|
|
|
I really like how the first thing you read in Root are the "golden rules" which basically amount to "if there's ever a rules question then follow the steps as literally as possible." Don't assume you can't do something unless expressly forbidden.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:23
|
|
|
The Root story brings up another etiquette question. I ended up teaching Root because the guy who owned the game barely knew the rules. They regularly referred/read from the rule book during the teach and couldn't answer questions when the game started. I could answer them and sometimes would and gradually questions became addressed to me not the owner. I felt like an absolute tool for doing it though even though they had made a handful of mistakes up to that point already and people were losing interest due to constant references to the rules. Is there a correct way to go about this sort of thing? Do you just leave people to flounder? Ask if they'd like you to take over?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
Redundant posted:I played a 5 player game of Blood Rage this evening. .... It turns out there wasn't really a balance issue, who could've guessed? So, I've STILL only heard of the Loki strategy (kill your stuff for profit) winning, and now also from a pretty far behind position, so, in not sure if I agree?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
Redundant posted:The Root story brings up another etiquette question. I ended up teaching Root because they guy who owned the game barely knew the rules. They regularly referred/read from the rule book during the teach and couldn't answer questions when the game started. I could answer them and sometimes would and gradually questions became addressed to me not the owner. I felt like an absolute tool for doing it though even though they had made a handful of mistakes up to that point already and people were losing interest due to constant references to the rules. Is there a correct way to go about this sort of thing? Do you just leave people to flounder? Ask if they'd like you to take over? I own a few games that rarely make it to the table. If someone is over who knows the rules better than I do, I would be more than happy for them to take over the explanation. I feel like it's my job when I host, but I'm happy to give that job up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:38
|
|
|
Redundant posted:The Root story brings up another etiquette question. I ended up teaching Root because the guy who owned the game barely knew the rules. They regularly referred/read from the rule book during the teach and couldn't answer questions when the game started. I could answer them and sometimes would and gradually questions became addressed to me not the owner. I felt like an absolute tool for doing it though even though they had made a handful of mistakes up to that point already and people were losing interest due to constant references to the rules. Is there a correct way to go about this sort of thing? Do you just leave people to flounder? Ask if they'd like you to take over?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:39
|
|
|
al-azad posted:I really like how the first thing you read in Root are the "golden rules" which basically amount to "if there's ever a rules question then follow the steps as literally as possible." Don't assume you can't do something unless expressly forbidden. Arkham Horror and its successor have an explicit recognition that if there are two ways to interpret a rule, you always pick the one that is worst for the players. I can't recall if it was ever put into the rulebook, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:57
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Arkham Horror and its successor have an explicit recognition that if there are two ways to interpret a rule, you always pick the one that is worst for the players. I can't recall if it was ever put into the rulebook, though. I've seen this is a couple places. It's known as The Grim Rule in Marvel Champions rulebook.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 15:03
|
|
|
Redundant posted:The Root story brings up another etiquette question. I ended up teaching Root because the guy who owned the game barely knew the rules. They regularly referred/read from the rule book during the teach and couldn't answer questions when the game started. I could answer them and sometimes would and gradually questions became addressed to me not the owner. I felt like an absolute tool for doing it though even though they had made a handful of mistakes up to that point already and people were losing interest due to constant references to the rules. Is there a correct way to go about this sort of thing? Do you just leave people to flounder? Ask if they'd like you to take over? I've had that happen a few times at meetups with A Feast for Odin. For some reason lots of people can't wrap their heads around the rules for laying tiles and the silver track. The couple that owned the game (nice folks, I might add) thought that you always had to fill any board from the bottom left to top right, and as a consequence couldn't figure out why or how anyone would ever get an island. The last time it happened thankfully I wasn't playing that game so when questions came up they'd tap me on the shoulder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 15:13
|
|
|
SettingSun posted:I've seen this is a couple places. It's known as The Grim Rule in Marvel Champions rulebook. And the rule of carnage(?) in Gaslands. If there's any ambiguity do what causes the most destruction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 15:15
|
|
|
SettingSun posted:playing a game was playing Puerto Rico We got an itch to play Puerto Rico before our 4th got there and got it set up. When the 4th arrived he asked if we were sure because the game was solved. To which we asked if he had solved it? We then played a pleasant game of Puerto Rico.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 15:22
|
|
|
!Klams posted:So, I've STILL only heard of the Loki strategy (kill your stuff for profit) winning, and now also from a pretty far behind position, so, in not sure if I agree? I've won all the games, albeit not many, of Blood Rage I've played using Loki.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 16:02
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:I'm still convinced such extreme assholes don't exist and those posts are made up for attention. The shop closest to my home lets customers organise games (usually a couple of tables, most of them are reserved for Magic). We're 25-ish people rotating there, all of them friendly and welcoming. Last Saturday a new guy organised a 4-player game of Root and appeared with 3 extra people and asked whether we would like to play with 7 factions, one of them a homebrew one (I think? Trick or Treat? Maybe that was a specific scenario? No idea, we walked away.).
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 16:38
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:I'm still convinced such extreme assholes don't exist and those posts are made up for attention. Outstanding experiences have a way of sticking in your mind. And it's probably some combination of slight exaggeration and picking like, the most egregious example of something. Like if I tell you about a gentleman at our gaming club who was such a sore loser, he actually got up from a game he wasn't going to win a turn early to go find a new game. Now that's a bit of an exaggeration ( it was Gaia Project and he technically "finished his turn" cause he passed as first action) and also he wasn't in the habit of doing this. But this is something that happened. (In fact it's verifiable because another goon was playing the same game)
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 16:57
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:The shop closest to my home lets customers organise games (usually a couple of tables, most of them are reserved for Magic). We're 25-ish people rotating there, all of them friendly and welcoming. Last Saturday a new guy organised a 4-player game of Root and appeared with 3 extra people and asked whether we would like to play with 7 factions, one of them a homebrew one (I think? Trick or Treat? Maybe that was a specific scenario? No idea, we walked away.). I think that was a promo vagabond. His ability is to blow up a single clearing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 17:08
|
|
|
Redundant posted:The Root story brings up another etiquette question. I ended up teaching Root because the guy who owned the game barely knew the rules. They regularly referred/read from the rule book during the teach and couldn't answer questions when the game started. I could answer them and sometimes would and gradually questions became addressed to me not the owner. I felt like an absolute tool for doing it though even though they had made a handful of mistakes up to that point already and people were losing interest due to constant references to the rules. Is there a correct way to go about this sort of thing? Do you just leave people to flounder? Ask if they'd like you to take over? This is kind of a non-answer because I'm the teacher/collector in our group :/
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 17:15
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:This is what I do in a lot of games. I like games that have a turn structure, since I will often go through it verbally as we play, even if I know it by heart. Arkham Horror LCG comes to mind. "Okay hunters move, no hunters, enemies attack <process attacks>. Okay, ready things, get one resource and card, check hand limit, end of round" (been a while since I've played, I'm probably forgetting something)
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 17:57
|
|
|
When I'm playing a new game and it's not one I brought and I haven't had time to read the rulebook I get extremely anxious. The owner tries to go through the rules and I just stare at the rulebook looking for a good time ask for it without looking rude. On the other end of the spectrum, I know Spirit Island's rules backwards and forwards and recently I got really offended when someone I played with asked to read an event card because he didn't believe I was resolving it right.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
I played Pax Pam w/ someone who's an enthusiastic if undisciplined rules teacher, and he was ping ponging between actions, on-play effects, and win conditions. I knew the game and was getting confused. I don't have the natural charisma to start teaching his game out from under him though, but I have asked if I could teach when it was mooted to play again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 18:06
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:I like games that have a turn structure, since I will often go through it verbally as we play, even if I know it by heart. Arkham Horror LCG comes to mind. Yeah.  I like to call myself a facilitator. Games run more smoothly when I know the structure inside and out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 18:23
|
|
|
Redundant posted:The Root story brings up another etiquette question. I ended up teaching Root because the guy who owned the game barely knew the rules. They regularly referred/read from the rule book during the teach and couldn't answer questions when the game started. I could answer them and sometimes would and gradually questions became addressed to me not the owner. I felt like an absolute tool for doing it though even though they had made a handful of mistakes up to that point already and people were losing interest due to constant references to the rules. Is there a correct way to go about this sort of thing? Do you just leave people to flounder? Ask if they'd like you to take over? I'm pretty sure I'm the one with the most games in my current gaming group and 90% of my library would never get played if I wasn't okay with sitting down and shutting up while someone else in the group taught us the rules, explicitly including Root.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 18:33
|
|
|
In regards to the metagaming stuff: my wife and I mostly play against each other only, but we host game nights where we get other players. I think we have these implicit rules after doing this for awhile: 1. Metagaming is discouraged unless there are things in the rules about things like trades and stuff like that. Check the rules carefully. IIRC Sheriff of Nottingham allowed players to do a lot of stuff. 1b. This bends in party games. 2. Giving other players--including amongst ourselves--some advice is perfectly fine and even encouraged given most of our group aren't as familiar with the games... 3. ...so long as we're not using that to try to get at anybody except ourselves. 4. When playing 3+ players, don't play specifically to make either of us lose rather than to win. In 2-players, playing to make the other lose is fine since it implicitly means we are still aspiring win as a consequence. 5. Any game where #4 is easy to do is probably getting sold out of our library. One of our friends really wanted to roll out Scythe on us but it has a bit of what we call "chicken blood" to it. We never did actually play it so I'm sorry if I'm distorting the game a little bit here. My understanding is that combat is regarded as "friendly" in that the loser still gets something. However, if people catch wind of somebody that's losing combats, the game can turn into who can beat them constantly the best instead of who themselves is playing the overall mechanics better. It serves to exclude that player. It's good sportsmanship to try to do what you can and laugh it up if you can't, but that becomes a chore--not a game--if it goes on over an hour. We previously had Black Fleet but everything would go out of whack if my wife was gunning for me even if I wasn't winning. So out it went. It was a shame since I like my pick-up-and-deliver/ ...speaking of pick-up-and-deliver, Cardhaus would only off a $25 refund for Roads and Boats so we wound up just returning it. I was under the impression that everybody had just about sold out of it, but Cardhaus immediately got new stuff, and CoolStuffInc had some for $50 less. So we ordered from there, and got enough stuff that we were basically at Cardhaus' price. I've heard Splotter game boxes are pretty weak so finding one crushed shouldn't have been too surprising, but I'm not paying that kind of money to get something wrecked from the get-go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 18:50
|
|
|
My board game group friends have a story of a meet-up where a newer person got upset at a game, stood up, and one by one threw his hand of cards into one the other player's face. I have a hard time imaging a stranger doing that to a person they just met, but I believe them it happened. I'm not sure how I would respond to that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
SettingSun posted:I've seen this is a couple places. It's known as The Grim Rule in Marvel Champions rulebook. It's also called this in the Arkham Horror LCG rulebook. It's towards the front as an explicit up-front idea to keep the game going and prevent rules-lawyering. Which is ironic because the game has so much errata and card interactions that often there is a right way that is beneficial to the players, but understanding it can be complex or obtuse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 19:21
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:My board game group friends have a story of a meet-up where a newer person got upset at a game, stood up, and one by one threw his hand of cards into one the other player's face. I have a hard time imaging a stranger doing that to a person they just met, but I believe them it happened. I'm not sure how I would respond to that.  It makes me wonder what the worst thing people in the thread have done at a table. For me it's either: 1) Getting salty that someone attacked me, not the person clearly in the lead, in a game of Small World because they couldn't be bothered to reach across the table. 2) Being a bit passive aggressive when pointing out that another player was triple parked in a drafting game when somebody asked me why they hadn't received their next hand yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
My wife got annoyed at that sort of thing in small world since no one was attacking me, and she was pointing that out, got ignored, and then I won, and I'll never play that poo poo pile of a game again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 19:33
|
|
|
Redundant posted:It makes me wonder what the worst thing people in the thread have done at a table. For me it's either: I got way to drunk for the weight of game I was playing and basically ruined the game.  . I still feel a little bad about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:I played Pax Pam w/ someone who's an enthusiastic if undisciplined rules teacher, and he was ping ponging between actions, on-play effects, and win conditions. I knew the game and was getting confused. I don't have the natural charisma to start teaching his game out from under him though, but I have asked if I could teach when it was mooted to play again. We have a guy like this in our group who is a math teacher, and he has a bad habit of not teaching along the natural flow of the game. He also tries to teach new players ever loving strategy at once, which means explaining odds and poo poo like that, and that means it takes him 15 - 20 minutes just to explain Secret Hitler, of all things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 20:22
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:I played Pax Pam w/ someone who's an enthusiastic if undisciplined rules teacher, and he was ping ponging between actions, on-play effects, and win conditions. I knew the game and was getting confused. I don't have the natural charisma to start teaching his game out from under him though, but I have asked if I could teach when it was mooted to play again. Pax Pamir is a nightmare to teach let alone learn. Lots of patience and forgiveness required. I think the last time I taught it I was still explaining the turn structure and what symbols indicated what and how allegiances worked up to the last bloody turn. More than willing to accept I did a poor job teaching it but God help me, I swear the one guy was being deliberately obtuse in some dramatic display of confusion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 20:28
|
|
|
no, Pax Pam is a very hard game to teach and learn. Even with its fairly clear rulebook its hard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
Just want to interject that the most important thing to teach about a game is the objective, which is generally to win, and you should always lead off with this. The gimmick pays off when you play a game where the objective is not to win. This is true, off the top of my head, in Falling where the objective is to lose last, because everyone hits the ground eventually. E: also true in galaxy trucker because winning has an atypical definition (which i also advocate to new 18xx players as a goal) Fellis fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Jan 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 20:43
|
|
|
The saltiest I ever got at a game was playing ticket to ride with some friends when a couple players decided to deliberately do nothing but draw cards until the entire deck was gone and then start just taking tickets and still refusing to play cards. I eventually just put my hand down and left the game. They gave me a little poo poo about it until I reminded them that inviting me out to game night, having me drive out there, then wasting my time by not even pretending to play the game is kind of a lovely thing to do, so I think I was justified in that one. Also I guess I only just kinda tossed my hand down at the table and said "gently caress this" so not really that over the top of a reaction. Certainly not throwing cards in someone's face.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 20:49
|
|
|
The worst for me was a game of Briefcase where I couldn't do anything but accelerate the end. That's a deck builder where you start out--to use Dominion as a common analogy here--with something more like six estates and four coppers, and the cheapest card costs 3. Guess who kept drawing twos? After five turns, all I could really do was start removing resources, which ends the game when depleted. After nine turns, that's all I did. I eventually did get out of the start jam and bought, like, one thing before the game ended. We thought the expansions took care of this, but they instead just gave you more worthless things to do when you were jammed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 21:19
|
|
|
Fellis posted:Just want to interject that the most important thing to teach about a game is the objective, which is generally to win, and you should always lead off with this. "Okay here's the new game to play. The objective is...to win. Anyway let's continue." But yeah I know what you mean. It gives a good frame of reference for the other actions that you're about to describe, something that (presumably) they're all working towards. John Dyne posted:We have a guy like this in our group who is a math teacher, and he has a bad habit of not teaching along the natural flow of the game. He also tries to teach new players ever loving strategy at once, which means explaining odds and poo poo like that, and that means it takes him 15 - 20 minutes just to explain Secret Hitler, of all things. lol strategy, in Secret Hitler? Here's the strategy: If you're hitler, don't do anything until someone elects you because you're quiet and didn't vote badly. If you're not hitler, well, good luck doing nothing the whole game. Glagha posted:The saltiest I ever got at a game was playing ticket to ride with some friends when a couple players decided to deliberately do nothing but draw cards until the entire deck was gone and then start just taking tickets and still refusing to play cards. I eventually just put my hand down and left the game. They gave me a little poo poo about it until I reminded them that inviting me out to game night, having me drive out there, then wasting my time by not even pretending to play the game is kind of a lovely thing to do, so I think I was justified in that one. Also I guess I only just kinda tossed my hand down at the table and said "gently caress this" so not really that over the top of a reaction. Certainly not throwing cards in someone's face. Yeah that's pretty justified, especially since what they were doing would've made it impossible to win, I'm pretty sure - unless they fulfill all those tickets, all one player would need to do would be to run out of trains, and the game ends with their hands full of negative points. Morpheus fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Jan 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 21:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 12:01 |
|
|
Glagha posted:The saltiest I ever got at a game was playing ticket to ride with some friends when a couple players decided to deliberately do nothing but draw cards until the entire deck was gone and then start just taking tickets and still refusing to play cards. I eventually just put my hand down and left the game. They gave me a little poo poo about it until I reminded them that inviting me out to game night, having me drive out there, then wasting my time by not even pretending to play the game is kind of a lovely thing to do, so I think I was justified in that one. Also I guess I only just kinda tossed my hand down at the table and said "gently caress this" so not really that over the top of a reaction. Certainly not throwing cards in someone's face. They'd never see me again, I'm sorry but that's just over the top rude. I've become (as you can probably tell) pretty picky about who I hang out with and people who find it 'fun' to ruin a game wouldn't be people who I thought were worth my time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 21:49
|
|
