Madhujith Venkatakrishna
India
Bangalore
Karnataka
-
Hi All,
Got my copy of No Thanks delivered today and played it twice. Some questions just to confirm if we did the right thing?
- When a player takes a card, he draws the next and can keep taking as long as he wants without passing(atleast theoretically speaking)
- Is it possible to win if I keep saying pass and end up with say 1-2 tokens in hand? (0-2= -2) 
- Why would someone take cards, if you can still win the game by say just taking one card in the entire game (that is what happened today, when one of the players kept passing, though the bids were small, 3-4 coins per card and we had a huge number of continuous cards). One player just got 1 card in the entire game and still managed to win?
Request advise on the above.
Thanks,
Madhu
-
B L
United States
Apple Valley
Minnesota
-
Since you can only pass 11 times before you must take a card, one reason to willingly take a card is so you are not forced to take a worse card because you ran out of tokens.
-
Erik Henry
United States
Manvel
Texas
-
madhujith wrote: - When a player takes a card, he draws the next and can keep taking as long as he wants without passing(atleast theoretically speaking)
Yes. It is possible for one player to take several cards in a row before playing a chip and passing on to the next player.
-
Erik Henry
United States
Manvel
Texas
-
madhujith wrote: - Why would someone take cards, if you can still win the game by say just taking one card in the entire game (that is what happened today, when one of the players kept passing, though the bids were small, 3-4 coins per card and we had a huge number of continuous cards). One player just got 1 card in the entire game and still managed to win?
In our games I'd say it's quite rare for the winner to have only one card.
You mention "a huge number of continuous cards." Just to check: Did you remove nine cards from play before starting?
-
jack elfrink
United States
McKees Rocks
Pennsylvania
-
madhujith wrote:
- When a player takes a card, he draws the next and can keep taking as long as he wants without passing(atleast theoretically speaking)
Yes this can happen, but WHY this rule exists is not obvious.
Say there are three players. Alice Bob and Charlie. Its halfway through the game and Alice has run out of chips and therefore MUST take a card. Instead of getting first dibs on the next card, play passes to Bob who does not want the card and puts a chip in. Charlie is a total scumbag and just wants to watch the world burn. He takes the card and Bobs chip. Play is now back to Alice who is still out of chips and therefore must take. Bob gets first dibs on the next card and does take it, passing play to scumbag charlie again who also takes. Again we wind up with Alice being forced to take a card since she still has no chips.
With the 'if you take you keep going' rule, you never have a situation where a player out of chips can be blocked and remain out of chips. When the play comes to them the card has to have had at least one chip placed on it when they take it. This gives them at least 1 chip so that they can be 'back in the game'.
-
Rich Charters
United States
Chandler
Arizona
-
This is what was written:
"Say there are three players. Alice Bob and Charlie. Its halfway through the game and Alice has run out of chips and therefore MUST take a card. Instead of getting first dibs on the next card, play passes to Bob who does not want the card and puts a chip in. Charlie is a total scumbag and just wants to watch the world burn. He takes the card and Bobs chip. Play is now back to Alice who is still out of chips and therefore must take."
I don't believe this is accurate. If Charlie took the card and chip, then he (not Alice) needs to make a play on the next card that comes up....he either takes the card (in which case he would need to make yet another play on the following card) or he puts a chip down to pass to Alice. So every time you are 'forced' to take a card (because you're out of chips) you will get at least one chip with that card. Let me know if I am mis-understanding the rules.
Thanks.
-
Rich Charters
United States
Chandler
Arizona
-
You can sometimes win a game with a card or two and just a few chips. But the point is that if someone isn't taking cards, then they will have less chips, so when a bad card comes up everyone should pass around the table (even if they can use the "bad" card without hurting themself) forcing that person to take the bad card. That player will now have plenty of chips, but the damage has already been done.
An inexperienced player will tend to take a card to extend their straight too early. Sometimes its better to make your opponent take the card even if it extends a straight in your hand.
Make sense?
-
Andrew Walters
United States
Hercules
California
-
When a card comes to you there is always a chip on it. So Charlie must put a chip on the second card if he doesn't want to get that card in addition to the one he took at the start of his turn.
Your turn always ends with you playing a chip.
If Alice starts her turn with no chips and the card that comes to her has a single chip on it, she must take that card and its chip. Then she flips the next card. Then she can either take that, too, or put her one chip on it and her turn is over. If she takes the second card it's the same deal for the third card. She will end her turn by placing her chip on a card she doesn't want, and will again have no chips.
-
Erik Henry
United States
Manvel
Texas
-
Rich, Andrew: You're both right. But Jack wasn't describing the actual rules. He was pointing out why the person who takes a card has to be the first to act on the next card. If that wasn't the case, you could get the situation that he describes where one person would keep having to take a card without ever getting a chip.
And, likely anticipating a similar scenario, the game designer instead made the rule as you describe it.
-
|
|
