|
Rocko Bonaparte posted:I would kind of be interested in how CAH works in crowds where race is a factor. We play the game only every once in awhile. We got one of the expansion decks, and then did a card cull. We got rid of a lot of the "shock jock" cards that never really fit anything, but often win for just being disgusting. But then there's a lot misogynistic stuff that my wife and I culled out too. We took out some race stuff, I'm sure not all of it. Then again, we're still pretty stupid-white. I'm almost always the only non-white at any gaming group here, and a couple of times a year I get dragged into CAH. I don't think I even get an occasional glance as "brown people" or similar cards are played, and I don't feel any racism from the players. Some people are really loud and obnoxious with their "trump" cards (both insisting they are trump, and acknowledging their trump when played by others) which don't match the question cards at all, and that is the worst thing about the game. Sometimes you get interesting decisions when trying to provide an answer to match the specific questioner's tastes in humour, but not all that often - either you don't know their tastes or you only have one sensible choice anyway. I'd much rather play Dixit (or try Say Anything), but once or twice a year I can tolerate CAH.
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 06:53 |
|
|
enigmahfc posted:Maybe that's it; the first time I played this was something like 6 months ago. Until recently, I didn't even know it was that old. Oh yeah, I'd rather play practically anything else instead of CE, don't get me wrong. by modern standards it's a box of dog farts and it's got no business at the top of anyone's best game list in Tevet, 5775
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
esquilax posted:They like games where the mechanics create interesting player decisions, and where the enjoyment of the game comes from playing it instead of winning it. The second part of that sentence is misleading. It's not that there are games where winning is the only fun outcome, because no one would enjoy that. Even tough, grueling games like Mage Knight or the 'Gric are enjoyable in their play. A contest where the only fun is in winning reminds me more of a hazing process than a game. The difference between this thread's preferences and SU&SD is that they don't believe winning matters. For certain groups of friends this is a default playstyle. You are playing to interact more than to get good at a certain type of strategy or to make strong choices within a set of rules. However, there exist many, many games (like those that you mentioned at the bottom of your paragraph) that can satisfy both kinds of people. It is faintly ridiculous that CE is at the top of their list because it will inevitably turn away anyone who wants to have a fair shot at winning at the beginning of the game. If I walk into a game place to match wits with people around the table, I'll be annoyed if everyone starts breaking out into arm wrestling competitions because that's not what I signed up for. Recommending CE as a game to be played isn't really that great of a thing to do to someone because CE isn't a game with even stakes that can be won as much as it is a social experience generator to be engaged with. And I get that's what some people want! That's a useful thing. It's a kind of social lubricant. Just not something I care for. But a game can do what CE does and also do other things. That they don't place value on those other things is sad for them and for us in general because it means that they neglect an important part of the whole hobby they claim to introduce people to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Tonight's the first Night of Hanukkah. Racking my brain I can't think of any eight, judea or candle themed games. Suggestions? Would the eight sided board of Can't Stop qualify?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:The second part of that sentence is misleading. It's not that there are games where winning is the only fun outcome, because no one would enjoy that. Even tough, grueling games like Mage Knight or the 'Gric are enjoyable in their play. A contest where the only fun is in winning reminds me more of a hazing process than a game. Are you aware that in the most excellent game Twilight Struggle the USSR has a better chance of winning at the beginning of the game?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Tonight's the first Night of Hanukkah. Racking my brain I can't think of any eight, judea or candle themed games. Suggestions? Kemet's got a slave card...
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
My playgroup has a great love for Cosmic Encounter, to the point where I think the only game we try to play more regularly than it is Pathfinder Adventure Card Game (which, while not quite a board game, is something I recommend to everyone always). We get that it kind of sucks as a competitive, balanced game, but what we enjoy about it is all the alien combinations and the in-group "metagame" of what strategies we consider good; trying to collectively find answers to the problems those strategies create for the rest of the table. Nearly all of the games of it we play are completely unique and provide different forms of strategic challenges as a group, and that is why we play it. Winning doesn't matter as much in that context, though we each try to win within the confines of each round. We've played a huge list of board games, including nearly all of the ones heavily recommended in this thread, and we enjoy a lot of them but not quite as much as we enjoy Cosmic Encounter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:Game gets shamed for being out of print, but never having been in print, ever is ok. Just because it's a PnP doesn't exclude it from being a game ya know?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
I noticed that Palaces of Carrara has been one of my most played games this year, and it really reminds me of what I enjoyed about first coming into board games. The rules are simple, turns are brief but engaging, and the total playtime usually clocks in at under an hour. It reminds me of games like Samurai and Web of Power. Has there been anything in the past year or so that's cut from a similar cloth? I've played Splendor and Spyrium, and they weren't quite what I'm looking for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:The second part of that sentence is misleading. It's not that there are games where winning is the only fun outcome, because no one would enjoy that. Even tough, grueling games like Mage Knight or the 'Gric are enjoyable in their play. A contest where the only fun is in winning reminds me more of a hazing process than a game. Yeah there's certainly a big difference between this thread deems "good games" and what they like, but there's rhyme and reason to the disagreement. And a lot of people share their pro-funhaving view: Cosmic Encounter and Dead of Winter are both in the top 100 at BGG. Hell, even Arkham Horror is 116. The most extreme example on their list is Skull and Roses (which is a game that I don't like) since it seems like it would be the worst game in the world to play if you cared at all about winning. But it makes sense when you see what other stuff they enjoy. A lot of mechanics make use of the "winning doesn't matter but try anyway" view, such as Avalon. The assassin choosing Merlin makes a lovely rando-chess ending possible, but the existence of the assassin makes the actual game play a whole lot better.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
Lorini posted:I would never have fun with CAH. It's me, I'm not going to pass judgement on other people. But that would be a pretty awful experience for me. It ain't you. I am a thick skinned, insensitive white dude and I find the game offensive or more importantly stupid. But some people like it so.. Meh
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
esquilax posted:The most extreme example on their list is Skull and Roses (which is a game that I don't like) since it seems like it would be the worst game in the world to play if you cared at all about winning. But it makes sense when you see what other stuff they enjoy. Wait, why is this the worst to play if you care about winning?? I've played this with my group several times and we all definitely tried to win and still had fun. Is there some degenerate strategy I'm missing? Acolyte! posted:Are you aware that in the most excellent game Twilight Struggle the USSR has a better chance of winning at the beginning of the game? I believe actual competitive play has small tweaks to overcome this imbalance (some sort of VP auctioning I think?)
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
My group enjoys Cosmic Encounter a lot, and though I'm not as big a fan of it as the rest of them, it's nice in a "experience generator" way. There's also few games that really encourage as much discussion and negotiation as CE. My group usually adds a dollar every time we play, with anyone who wins a solo victory taking the pot. It's definitely a bad game, don't get me wrong. The cards range too wildly, and the alien powers are as unbalanced as anything you'll see in a game, but that's part of the charm for my group. It's more interesting to see how ridiculous and broken things get and to see crazy swings in what's going on that winning is secondary to enjoying the chaos. It's definitely not for everyone, and I definitely wouldn't pick it over something similar with a lot more meat in its gameplay, but it's pretty interesting for what it is, and as I said few games really offer as much potential for negotiation as CE (though Resistance and Werewolf/Mafia are also pretty big with my group). Actually, what would be some games similar to Cosmic Encounter but obviously better that you guys would recommend? Sounds like something useful to add to the next thread's OP since it's another popular game and all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
PopZeus posted:Wait, why is this the worst to play if you care about winning?? I've played this with my group several times and we all definitely tried to win and still had fun. Is there some degenerate strategy I'm missing? Everyone should be trying to win, that's how games work in general. But if you place a lot of importance on winning, Skull isn't the greatest since only one person out of a bunch can win, there's no real second place, and when someone does win it seems fairly luck based. I wouldn't feel that satisfied if I won Skull the same way I would when I win Twilight Struggle or Mage Knight, e.g.. Maybe I'm missing something about it though, I don't like it so maybe I just never "got" it. PopZeus posted:I believe actual competitive play has small tweaks to overcome this imbalance (some sort of VP auctioning I think?) Yes, the manual outlines a bidding process for it. They auction based on influence points instead of VP though. Apparently, the US typically gets one or two extra influence to put on the board, which they usually put directly into Iran. esquilax fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Dec 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
Someone tell me what criteria SUSD used for their list so I can learn how the hell something like Dungeonquest (a set of extra Descent heroes with a "game" attached) got into their honorable mentions list.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
esquilax posted:Everyone should be trying to win, that's how games work in general. But if you place a lot of importance on winning, Skull isn't the greatest since only one person out of a bunch can win, there's no real second place, and when someone does win it seems fairly luck based. I wouldn't feel that satisfied if I won Skull the same way I would when I win Twilight Struggle or Mage Knight, e.g.. Maybe I'm missing something about it though, I don't like it so maybe I just never "got" it. There's definitely an element of luck but it's really all about the mind games. When it gets down to 3 people, it can be super intense! When I get more time maybe I'll write a little more about it, but definitely give it another shot. What felt overly luck based to you? It is a bummer that there's some downtime if you're knocked out early, I'll admit. Good to have another quick game ready for the first few people that are out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:Someone tell me what criteria SUSD used for their list so I can learn how the hell something like Dungeonquest (a set of extra Descent heroes with a "game" attached) got into their honorable mentions list. Quinns tore apart a full-grown ox and wrote down the words he thought the entrails spelled out, that's the list
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:Someone tell me what criteria SUSD used for their list so I can learn how the hell something like Dungeonquest (a set of extra Descent heroes with a "game" attached) got into their honorable mentions list. Hey. Just because they removed Baldur Bågman (an affront to gaming if there ever was one) in the transition from Drakborgen and inserted their own set of generic characters doesn't mean that DungeonQuest has been degraded to a “game”. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:I think that you might not be a cis-scum shitlord for liking CaH, but you might be something even worse for getting upset that your taste in media might reflect who you are as a person: a baby. I'm not going to defend CaH as a game - I'm only responding to people who literally said that you are a bad person for laughing while playing it/playing it in the thread. For full disclosure: Personally, I only play it when I have to (which is usually during the holidays with my parents when they bring it out). I have a copy that I got over two years ago when it was all the rage and then I moved on to things like Pandemic. It's kind of a dumb game, and only loosely a game at that. If you want to call me a baby - OK, you're well within your right to do so. I just have a problem with people categorizing other people based upon playing/laughing while playing/having a single game. Of course, I fell into the same trap as well (categorizing them as the aforementioned poo poo-lords) but it was more of a call for self-awareness than anything else. For the record - no one is a poo poo-lord, baby, cis-scum poo poo-lord, or cis-scum poo poo-lord baby in the thread for opinions. We all just need to step off it, including me. We can talk about better, more interesting things in the meantime.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
Mega64 posted:There's also few games that really encourage as much discussion and negotiation as CE. Rex, Game of Thrones, Chaos in the Old World, Battlestar Galactica, Diplomacy. Those are the games I see the most discussion/negotiation with, at least off the top of my head. In CE, I see more role-playing than anything else.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
With the multifaceted personalities people possess, there is always the potential that a set of actions may not reflect the whole of a person. Someone might regularly fight with their parents and donate to the poor. You might enjoy both the Avengers and Michael Bay's Transformers movies. You could even like both Caylus and CaH. Inside of each person is two wolves, fighting: a wolf that plays caylus and a wolf that plays CaH. The one you feed is the one who will win.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
PopZeus posted:There's definitely an element of luck but it's really all about the mind games. When it gets down to 3 people, it can be super intense! When I get more time maybe I'll write a little more about it, but definitely give it another shot. What felt overly luck based to you? It seemed like there wasn't enough information to determine if other people were bluffing, so choosing which cards to flip almost felt like guessing. In the game I played there were like 12 failure hands in a row, because everyone was overbidding and there wasn't enough information out there to pick 4 roses. Other games that are known for bluffing like Coup and Poker use it to supplement straightforward mechanics, whereas in Skull it feels like bluffing is the entirety of the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
Tippis posted:Hey. Just because they removed Baldur Bågman (an affront to gaming if there ever was one) in the transition from Drakborgen and inserted their own set of generic characters doesn't mean that DungeonQuest has been degraded to a “game”. Bardhor Bågman, if you please. As if Riddar Rohan wasn't Tolkien enough for you.But good god, that game. I don't think anyone has ever won that game. I think the closest anyone's ever gotten in a game I've been in is to randomly find a crappy 100 gold item outside the dragon's lair, ignoring the dragon completely, and hightailing it towards the nearest exit. Not a bad strategy, all things considered, but that doesn't mean it's going to work out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
OmegaGoo posted:Rex, Game of Thrones, Chaos in the Old World, Battlestar Galactica, Diplomacy. Those are the games I see the most discussion/negotiation with, at least off the top of my head. In CE, I see more role-playing than anything else. I have seen this... role-playing even in Battlestar Galactica. When it happened, well... The Cylons didn't even need to try to win the game. The humans won it for them. Baltar and Zarek fought it out for the Presidency, and neither was actually a Cylon. Zarek began the game essentially by claiming they were role-playing and going for the President title, which the current President (Baltar) decided to block because it was sub-optimal/reeked of Cylon suspicion. Even after everyone knew who was who, Zarek (Human) still kept trying for the Presidency, Baltar (Human) still kept holding onto it, and the Admiral (Human) basically had to baby-sit his quarters to prevent Zarek from brigging the President, who was sitting on Administration to prevent Zarek from calling for an election. Then one of the Cylons played Bomb on Colonial One. And Baltar spiked that check hard in order to be President for Life and prevent any more fighting over the title. While entertaining, it was very dumb from a game balance perspective because it really removed the challenge of winning from the Cylons. They really didn't need to do much to get the humans to start fighting each other which then had devastating cascade effects, as seen above.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
Hyper Crab Tank posted:Bardhor Bågman, if you please.  quote:But good god, that game. I don't think anyone has ever won that game. I think the closest anyone's ever gotten in a game I've been in is to randomly find a crappy 100 gold item outside the dragon's lair, ignoring the dragon completely, and hightailing it towards the nearest exit. Not a bad strategy, all things considered, but that doesn't mean it's going to work out. It's entirely possible to have a good run — a good set of tiles with the right special abilities and you're in and out in a dozen turns. But yes, as a general strategy, searching the first few rooms and then running out once you find even the most worthless treasure tends to win the game most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
esquilax posted:It seemed like there wasn't enough information to determine if other people were bluffing, so choosing which cards to flip almost felt like guessing. In the game I played there were like 12 failure hands in a row, because everyone was overbidding and there wasn't enough information out there to pick 4 roses. Other games that are known for bluffing like Coup and Poker use it to supplement straightforward mechanics, whereas in Skull it feels like bluffing is the entirety of the game. I will say that the more cards get on the table, the tougher it gets to make accurate bids (with the exception of the knowledge of your own hand). Many times too, our group would just start the bidding immediately at like 2 when everyone just had one card down which made it easier to track what was going on. I made a lot of plays where I made bids knowing I had a Skull on top in an attempt to make other people overbid me and then assume my pile was safe to pull from. It's not always about trying to get the points to win. Sometimes it's about knocking people out too! There's definitely not a lot of information to go on initially, but as your group meta develops you can start making some cooler plays. I never feel like I'm totally grasping at straws / fumbling in the dark. Plus, you can play with any deck of cards!
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Tonight's the first Night of Hanukkah. Racking my brain I can't think of any eight, judea or candle themed games. Suggestions? http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1070/waldschattenspiel Probably impossible to find on short notice, but a cute little game about staying in the shadows cast by a literal candle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
LuiCypher posted:I have seen this... role-playing even in Battlestar Galactica. I once played a game where the President and a Cylon kept stealing titles from one another. We safely reached Kobol with Admiral President Cylon, who was just happy to have been the leader. It's the best kind of gaming there is, gently caress balance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Tevery Best posted:I once played a game where the President and a Cylon kept stealing titles from one another. We safely reached Kobol with Admiral President Cylon, who was just happy to have been the leader. It's the best kind of gaming there is, gently caress balance. I wish I was there for that game then, because it sounds positively amazing. Even though the Cylon technically lost, they personally (and in my opinion) won.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Tonight's the first Night of Hanukkah. Racking my brain I can't think of any eight, judea or candle themed games. Suggestions? Uh, doesn't that start Tuesday night, 4 days from now?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:After ~70 games I finally started playing Race for the Galaxy: Alien Artifacts with the Orb add-on and.. I actually like it a lot. The rules aren't as fiddly or constraining as I remembered, it makes several of the cards in the deck more interesting, and I'm impressed by how it translates the bluffing and trade-off aspects of the main game to what feels much more like a "real" board game. I was blocked from my goals several times and then won the game because I placed a card to block my friend from gaining a large VP reward token by one space on the last turn, so there was a neat addition of passive-aggressive interaction as well. It wasn't the slow-down in play that got me so much as the lack of the Orb interacting with anything else aside from maybe spitting some bonuses you could use. I would have preferred if they had instead made a new game in the same style as RftG that interacted much more with the orb. For example, if exploring it was a mandatory phase and your tableau was various resources and infrastructure to support the exploration team instead of a galaxy-wide collection of planets.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 23:28
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:Waldschattenspiel This looks awesome, and I'm saddened by it being apparently a childrens game. Will I ever be able to get adults to play it/is it actually good?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
We played it with a bunch of adults. It was pretty fun to huddle up in the kitchen of our friends apartment with all the lights turned off trying to rules lawyer where shadows were and weren't with each other, and every 5 minutes screaming "WE NEED AN ADULT" so the "adult" would come over and move the candle. It's light on "mechanics" and more of an interesting experience generator, but it's quirky enough that grownups can have fun with it, as long as they can enjoy a little whimsy. The game box includes little pieces of felt to make hats for your gnomes, and also recommends cotton balls (well actually pieces of wool but that may be a cultural translation issue) as beards for your gnomes. That probably increases the chance of your gnomes catching on fire, but then that's part of the fun, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
Bubble-T posted:That's a pretty funny criticism of a video in which IIRC they go "WE'RE USING A HOUSE RULE" multiple times. Tabletop's not great but I think someone can get a reasonable idea of what Say Anything will be like from it. I didn't re-watch it (because Wil Wheaton and the idiots he hangs out with are unbearable) so I guess this is the one video where they actually let you know that they're playing the game wrong. Mea culpa.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
BonHair posted:This looks awesome, and I'm saddened by it being apparently a childrens game. Will I ever be able to get adults to play it/is it actually good? All I know is that I'm making one using the laser cutter I have access to. It looks great and will be the best camping game ever! rockpapershotgun.com posted:
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Scyther posted:I didn't re-watch it (because Wil Wheaton and the idiots he hangs out with are unbearable) so I guess this is the one video where they actually let you know that they're playing the game wrong. Mea culpa. It's ok I generally can't stand Tabletop either, I just happened to watch that one recently. I don't even know why. Bruceski posted:It wasn't the slow-down in play that got me so much as the lack of the Orb interacting with anything else aside from maybe spitting some bonuses you could use. I would have preferred if they had instead made a new game in the same style as RftG that interacted much more with the orb. For example, if exploring it was a mandatory phase and your tableau was various resources and infrastructure to support the exploration team instead of a galaxy-wide collection of planets. I can see that and I'd be pretty interested in the game you describe! I admit I went in with low expectations and expected it to be completely vestigal, and thought it did a decent job of changing the tableau play.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
Bruceski posted:Uh, doesn't that start Tuesday night, 4 days from now? Huh. I set a phone alert for "Buy X a gift on first night of Chanukkah" and it...told me that was the 12th.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Huh. I set a phone alert for "Buy X a gift on first night of Chanukkah" and it...told me that was the 12th. Looks like the last time that was the case was 2009. Moving holidays can screw those things up sometimes, back in 2004 I got a calendar that consistently had every Jewish holiday occurring 2 days late, which caused some issues when a teacher scheduled a big test a couple of days early to avoid Yom Kippur.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
My boyfriend plays Munchkin. Like he actually forces people to play it with him. He also gets us to play Flux. How the gently caress do I get him to stop? It's like torture. I've tried introducing him to plenty of other fun boardgames but he retains a horrible interest in both of them. Is there another game that is at the very least less bad?
Jarvisi fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Dec 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 06:53 |
|
|
Sgt. Anime Pederast posted:My boyfriend plays Munchkin. Like he actually forces people to play it with him. He also gets us to play Flux. How the gently caress do I get him to stop? It's like torture. How exactly does he force people?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 01:01
|
|
