Recommend
18 
 Thumb up
 Hide
23 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Gaming Related » General Gaming

Subject: Etiquette - Announcing hidden info rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Joe Grundy
Australia
Sydney
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you possess hidden information, what circumstances of game make it acceptable to make that public? Some games encourage dealing in information, some don't. And is it ok to publish hidden info while one of the players is on a toilet trek? Or by silently exposing a card while one or two players are deep in thought over the game and won't notice? Or by offering a peek behind your screen to just one player?


To help grease the brain cogs...


There's a number of types of hidden info I can think of:
+ Trackable (eg current score in Tigris and Euphrates)
+ Odiously Calculable (eg the caballeros in the castillo in El Grande)
+ Shared Secret (eg the card that was stolen by the robber in Settlers of Catan)

There's a number of different styles of game I can think of:
+ Ponder the board, play in (game) silence (not to say there's no social banter) (Tigris and Euphrates)
+ Trading, no explicit alliances (Settlers)
+ Wheeling and dealing, no explicit alliances (Traders of Genoa)
+ Temporary explicit alliances (Cosmic Encounter)
+ Permanent explicit alliances (which usually ban partnership communication but not always I suspect. I guess a modern game of Bridge with communicative bidding sort-of falls into this category. Can someone nominate a better example of an explicit alliance game where players are free to reveal hidden info to the table?)

And there's a variety of game group cultures too.
For example, one game group culture decision is to eliminate some/most/all categories of hidden info.

btw Please don't chime in on "well we don't do 'hidden trackable/calculable information' in our games". That's a different discussion. This is (I hope) a discussion regarding the hidden info that is in your games.


So when is it appropriate to reveal hidden info? Or not so much appropriate as "acceptable"? And when is it inappropriate?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sean Ahern
United States
Spokane
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think it varies from game to game and group to group (and probably day to day) but there's a few unspoken rules I feel should always be enforced:

1) Unless the game says otherwise (Diplomacy), any information should be shared publicly. No whispering, note passing, or waiting until someone is restocking the Doritos.

2) No physically revealing hidden information. I can't show you my cards, my little colored cubes, or tiles. Most of the time I don't have a problem with someone saying, "Don't worry about me, I only have 4 farmer tiles", but I do have a problem with someone showing his tiles.

So, most of the time, I don't mind people talking about what they have. Often, it can add a bit of bluffing and metagaming that makes the night more fun. But all that is moot if you can physically reveal what you have.

EDIT: Pretty much whatever makes the game more fun/satisfying for the whole group is okay by me.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Needle
Australia
NSW
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Firstly why has this got a negative thumb.

Negative thumbs are for offensive posts that do not meet the guidelines AFAIK

Secondly, I have been brought up with giving hidden info in your game. It was common practice to show cards to fellow players, showing them either

a) How unlucky you were in cards
b) How lucky you were
c) That you had the cards they were obviously after-like a mini sledge

There was never any issue with detailing your hand and there was always a disection of the hand/round and appropriate telling partners off, helping each other and understanding tactics as well as flicking over cards to see how far you were away from winning.

This has translated into my game playing but I have begun to play with players that do not like this behaviour-to me it's all a laugh and a way to learn the game-to others it is a serious pursuit. Me, I'll follow the culture of the house.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Poulos
United States
Redmond
Washington
flag msg tools
I guess there's more to starting a game company than just having a name... :(
badge
What we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, a gaming machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this gamer does is sleep and eat and place little meeples, and that's all.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
i'd say unless information is an explicit commodity in a game it's never ok to divulge hidden information. it's against the spirit of the game the designer intended. if they wanted information to be public or partially public they would've made it so. and revealing information while one player is going to the bathroom is tantamount to cheating.
the 'meta-game' is my arch-nemesis, and i will not rest until all forms of it have been erradicated from the earth.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Grundy
Australia
Sydney
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BookandGame wrote:
... So, most of the time, I don't mind people talking about what they have. Often, it can add a bit of bluffing and metagaming that makes the night more fun. But all that is moot if you can physically reveal what you have.
Sean I agree with your (1) and (2). Your comment raises an additional question... I notice it's usually pretty obvious (around here) when someone is speaking info that might be true (in a meta-gaming / bluffing / banter sense) vs speaking info they are asserting is true. Do people get the same feeling in their group? I've even seen someone adopt the "really this is true" mode, turn out to be bluffing, and cause a gentle argument in a group where normally bluffing comments ("oh my hand's crap" ... "don't rob me I don't have any wheat") are par for the course.

Speaking of Settlers... I have a habit. I can't help myself. Whenever someone robs a sheep, I give it my best mournful "baaaaaaa". I can't help myself! So to prevent this being "revealing info", now I usually "baa" even when it wasn't a sheep.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McEvoy
Canada
Mountain
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
What about 'planned future events' - is that a variety of hidden information? Letting a limited subset of the table know "I'm going to move to 18-B on my turn" - is that sharing hidden information? What about if the events are somewhat tied to other forms of hidden information... I've seen players in RoboRally "bully" and "bluff" one another ("I've got the cards to get to that flag so I don't suggest you get in my way or into the pit with you"). Same with Modern Art ("Gitter's going to win the round, I'll see to it."). It may be a bluff. It may be a telling of hand contents.

+ Permanent explicit alliances (which usually ban partnership communication but not always I suspect. I guess a modern game of Bridge with communicative bidding sort-of falls into this category. Can someone nominate a better example of an explicit alliance game where players are free to reveal hidden info to the table?)

In Werewolf they sure are. Now, whether anyone *believes* your revealed hidden info...

Scotland Yard would be of the "planned future events" variety. 4-player Carolus Magnus, too.

The alliances in Betrayal at House on the Hill are _mostly_ permanent... I suppose the same could be said of Shadows over Camelot (though I've never played so I'm not sure what, if any, hidden information the player(s) have and might share). Lord of the Rings? Another game I'm unfamiliar with and hoping someone can support or refute.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rik Van Horn
United States
Livonia
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It really depends on the rules. If for example, the rules say, you MAY conceal your gold, showing everyone your gold, perhaps as intimidation is kosher. Showing one person secretly is not.
Pointing out who may be in the lead, if VP are openly kept is fine too.
I see nothing wrong with pointing out open information in a game if it may benefit you.
Unless the rules specify being able to make deals, either openly or covertly, that should be refrained from.

Most rules are pretty clear about what is and isn't allowed. If not, common sense and a sense of fairplay should prevail.

Of course this doesn't always stop people from ganging up on a player because they fear his skills.

I can hardly play Werewolf in my group anymore because I'm almost always one of the first to die, unless I can play with people that haven't seen me play.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Jones
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Nexus Ops has a partnership play version with explicit rules about revealing hidden information. All communication between partners must be public. Any cards shown to your partner must be shown to the whole table. My group even made me tell the other team what a card was when I passed one to my partner and then told him I had another identical card. They said that was tantamount to showing him the card. I didn't agree.

My opinion is that unless the game says you can't give information, you can. You can even show it. I'm in the habit of showing my hand if I suspect the person with the robber doesn't want to steal what I have.

Lord of the Rings says you can't show your cards, but you can talk about them all you want. In theory, there's no difference. Each time there's a decision to make, I could go around the table and have everybody read off their hand. In practice, that would make the game tedious, so we don't do it. Talking about key cards allows cooperative decision-making, but hidden hands encourages each player to play their own hand instead of letting the experienced player make all the decisions.

Shadows Over Camelot says you can't even say what cards are in your hand. We interpret that you can't strongly imply by words that you have or don't have a particular card. But, we allow things like saying, "I'm going to go to this quest over here, and I think King Arthur should pass me the right card if he wants me to complete it." That could be the Lancelot's Armor quest, and you don't say what card you need, but once King Arthur sees the pair and one of the cards in the three of a kind, he'll know what to pass.

In Diplomacy-like games, I think revealing hidden information even privately to one other player is the best way to play. More interesting strategies develop out of this. Really any multi-player wargame is a Diplomacy-like game: Mare Nostrum, Twilight Imperium, Antike, A Game of Thrones.

Here's a question you didn't ask. Is it okay to "reveal" information that isn't hidden at all? Player A might notice an opportunity that player B has, and that player C has an opportunity to thwart. Can player A tell player C about it? I think it depends on the game and the players. In Attika, I encourage this. If someone just overlooks an easily-blocked opportunity to connect the shrines, the win might just go to the player who happened to be near to the unobservant player. The game is more satisfying if a hard-earned win goes to the best player. In other games, it depends on the group. Some players feel like they're being picked on if other players keep discussing their weak points. Other players don't feel like they've earned the win as much anyway if they left open clear weaknesses and only won because no one noticed. I am the latter type of player.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McEvoy
Canada
Mountain
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
jgrundy wrote:
+ Permanent explicit alliances (which usually ban partnership communication but not always I suspect. I guess a modern game of Bridge with communicative bidding sort-of falls into this category. Can someone nominate a better example of an explicit alliance game where players are free to reveal hidden info to the table?)


Re-replying because I thought of a better one, along the lines of Bridge. Dia de los Muertos (and its retheming, Four Dragons). In this game there's an "Ask" card; when played, you can ask any player in the game a question (answerable by yes, no, or an integer from 0 to 10) about his/her hand contents; that player must answer truthfully.

Not only can you use this to get hidden information from your partner which is announced to the entire table ("What is the value of your highest-valued Blue card, partner?"); you can use this to ask YOURSELF a question for the purposes of conveying hidden information to your partner (and the entire table). For instance, I could ask myself "How many tens do you have, Mark?", to which I'd reply "3!" and reveal to the table that I have three tens in hand. Which my partner might like to know and my opponents might not be able to do anything about.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Grundy
Australia
Sydney
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
morningstar wrote:
... They said that was tantamount to showing him the card. I didn't agree.
The way you've painted it (a) makes me want this game more than I already did and (b) makes it pretty clear that you aren't supposed to be able to make any secret communication. It's pretty easy to see their interpretation. Alas in this context you've also revealed what card you've just given. (How does that work... you can donate a card without communication about it?) I would agree with them except perhaps it would depend on the justification for the rule. If it's because you're (say) on open channel radio, and yet you have some way of secretly smuggling stuff between team members, then having smuggled something through and then announcing "and we have another the same" would seem quite reasonable. Hmmm. One for a house rule probably. (Doncha hate it when house rules have to be formed on the spot, and they go against you! Rematch! Rematch!)

morningstar wrote:
My opinion is that unless the game says you can't give information, you can. You can even show it. I'm in the habit of showing my hand if I suspect the person with the robber doesn't want to steal what I have.
Do you show everyone when you do this? So in the case of Settlers specifically, and many games have a similar rule, I think there's a line in the rulebook "players keep their resources hidden" (or something like that... the rules are at the office at the moment and I'm not.) Do you feel this is not a "rule" but an option/guideline?

morningstar wrote:
Lord of the Rings says you can't show your cards, but you can talk about them all you want.
I confess we never figured out how that dynamic was supposed to work.

morningstar wrote:
Here's a question you didn't ask. Is it okay to "reveal" information that isn't hidden at all?
Indeed that's an interesting but (I feel) quite different question. (Cooperative play in non-cooperative games. Defending your interests. Kibutzing.) I left it out because I feel it's a point for a different discussion entirely. But if we feel general it does belong here then so be it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Douglas Bushong
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AbeLincoln wrote:
i'd say unless information is an explicit commodity in a game it's never ok to divulge hidden information. it's against the spirit of the game the designer intended. if they wanted information to be public or partially public they would've made it so. and revealing information while one player is going to the bathroom is tantamount to cheating.
the 'meta-game' is my arch-nemesis, and i will not rest until all forms of it have been erradicated from the earth.


I have to disagree with this one to an extent. Sometimes, even in a two player game, it is (1) to your advantage and (2) perfectly within the rules to divulge what is supposed to be hidden information, even to your opponent.

EXAMPLE: Let's say the game is Magic: The Gathering. My opponent is playing a red/black deck and I am playing a blue deck (you don't need to know what these colors mean to get this point. Let me just say that blue is know for countermagic, i.e. cards that tell the opponent "no, you can't play that.")

My opponent plays a card, and before he continues I say "wait," look over my cards, think about it for a few seconds, and then say "OK, go ahead." I've just revealed to my opponent that I have something in my hand that can stop him from playing certain cards. If he knows that, it is going to affect how he plays. This is true regardless of whether I actually have countermagic or not.

Now, have I shown him anything? No. Have I broken any of the rules to the game? No. Have I still conveyed information (possibly false information) that is hidden? Absolutely. This isn't outside of what the designers of the game intended; if the game involves hidden hands of cards, then it must inherently involve bluffing.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
ɹǝsɐɹɟ
Australia
Melbourne
flag msg tools
admin
designer
Back in the days when there were less maps we played every map back to back
badge
Ooh a little higher, now a bit to the left, a little more, a little more, just a bit more. Oooh yes, that's the spot!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The most immediate examples in Euros that spring to mind of hidden, but trackable, infomation are Victory Points in Tigris & Euphrate and Puerto Rico and money in Power Grid. I think the benefit of the hidden information in these games is that it reduces analysis paralysis that may occur if people did know that information and were using it to determine their optimum move, particularly if a player was already prone to analysis paralysis. Admittedly it is trackable and thus they may already be using it, but in the long run I think it improves the gameplay experience.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Jones
United States
Gainesville
Florida
flag msg tools
Yeah it's here! Really it's right here.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It seems to me in your OP there were two distinct types of announcing hidden info.

One, telling people what you've got for what ever means you feel you need want to share. Many games have hidden info to make it harder for your opponent to know what you are planning or might do. If you want to tip your hand sooo be it.

Two, 'secretly' showing what you have to only one or two people in the game. A lot of games have an element of negociation. This may be stated or implied. If it's the type of game where this happens, then some 'table talk' in expected. It's probably also the type of game that you are going to end up double dealing against to one you showed it to anyway. Such as Game of Thrones or to a lesser extent El Grande/Wallenstien. BUT, if it's not a game of deal making. Like say Aquire or Power Grid, I'd say it's an individual game, don't be playing two against one, that's just not right.

Just my 2 cents
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Figgins
United States
Woodland
California
flag msg tools
badge
http://lyrislaser.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
For most games, I think it's unacceptable to reveal hidden information to another player. You can announce it if you want, but everyone else gets to hear - no waiting until someone goes to the bathroom, or such. I hate kingmaking and player alliances in general (unless the game endorses them, of course) so any practices conducive to those activities are right out.

There are a few exceptions, such as when you're on the same side. For example, in Marvel Heroes, whenever a player tries to score VP, everyone else plays cards to stop them, but only so many cards can be played. In this situation, I think it's okay for the villains to discuss among themselves what strategy they'll pursue.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Poulos
United States
Redmond
Washington
flag msg tools
I guess there's more to starting a game company than just having a name... :(
badge
What we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, a gaming machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this gamer does is sleep and eat and place little meeples, and that's all.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
douglasbushong wrote:

I have to disagree with this one to an extent. Sometimes, even in a two player game, it is (1) to your advantage and (2) perfectly within the rules to divulge what is supposed to be hidden information, even to your opponent.

EXAMPLE: Let's say the game is Magic: The Gathering. My opponent is playing a red/black deck and I am playing a blue deck (you don't need to know what these colors mean to get this point. Let me just say that blue is know for countermagic, i.e. cards that tell the opponent "no, you can't play that.")

My opponent plays a card, and before he continues I say "wait," look over my cards, think about it for a few seconds, and then say "OK, go ahead." I've just revealed to my opponent that I have something in my hand that can stop him from playing certain cards. If he knows that, it is going to affect how he plays. This is true regardless of whether I actually have countermagic or not.

Now, have I shown him anything? No. Have I broken any of the rules to the game? No. Have I still conveyed information (possibly false information) that is hidden? Absolutely. This isn't outside of what the designers of the game intended; if the game involves hidden hands of cards, then it must inherently involve bluffing.


but since an instant can be played after any spell is cast it should technically go "i cast X, any response?" "no" "ok, then i...". that would just slow things down too much though so until that first "wait...umm, ok go ahead" happens things move at a good clip. After that first "wait" then there's usually a pregnant pause to see if the opponent will interject. but if playing against a blue deck it's pretty standard to ask permission after every spell by at least giving the opponent a quizical raising of the eyebrows.

hidden hands don't inherently involve bluffing. in many games you can bluff with your actions but that's much different than saying "if you attack with your Force of Nature I'm going to Terror it" wether you have a Terror in your hand or not.
bluffing with actions in the game is fine, few things are as satisfying as pulling off a good feint. but when you bluff with words, then you're playing head games, and i don't want to play head games, i want to play boardgames. even games like poker, bluffing is done with moves on the table (commiting chips to the pot). announcing "i have two aces" whether you do or not is just kind of annoying and a good reason to wear headphones when playing (but that's not much fun).
now, games like liar's dice, werewolf, have the verbal bluffing mechanic built into the gameplay, so in those cases it's fine of course, otherwise things just get messy and unpleasant.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Douglas Bushong
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AbeLincoln wrote:
bluffing with actions in the game is fine, few things are as satisfying as pulling off a good feint. but when you bluff with words, then you're playing head games, and i don't want to play head games, i want to play boardgames.


It's still communicating information about the hidden hand, regardless of whether it is with words, a carefully timed thoughtful "hmmmm", or even a sigh. It might not be what the makers intended, but it's all part of the strategy. It's no different than a military leader, knowing that one of his followers is a spy for the enemy, giving that spy false information to lead the enemy in the wrong direction. If the avenue is there, then it could and should be exploited.

Incidentally, this reminds me of something from my Magic days. There's a cards called "Arcane Denial" which counters a spell, lets you draw a card, and then lets the caster of the countered spell draw two cards.

Anyway, I had one in my hand, and I needed to draw cards. So at the end of my opponent's turn I played an instant (I think it was a Twiddle), and then I countered my own spell so that I could draw 3 cards. The guy got angry and said "that's not the way that card is supposed to be used!"shake I explained to him that it was allowed, but he didn't care. "Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should." He later refused play with me any more that evening (the refusal was actually because the deck had an infinite combo, which he also thought was not what the game makers intended).

In any case, if you don't like head games, then I strongly suggest that you stick to games where each player has perfect information with nothing hidden (or develop psychic powers). If there's a hand involved, there's going to be a head game. Rejecting that premise is just setting yourself up to get angry when people play those head-games with you, and life's really too short to waste time doing that to yourself.



1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Jones
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
jgrundy wrote:
How does that work... you can donate a card without communication about it?


Yes. At the end of each of your turns your partner can pass you one of their Energize or Secret Objective cards. You could communicate about it, I guess, but your communication would be public. We never did. You can pretty much tell from the situation on the board what cards your partner would find useful. It might be useful to know what other Secret Objectives your partner has, so you could give them another Secret Objective that could be completed at the same time, with only one battle. But telling the other team what Secret Objectives you have would be a bad idea.

I think Nexus Ops just requires public communication because it's supposed to be a fast-paced game. Going off to the war room to privately discuss plans would delay the game.

jgrundy wrote:
Hmmm. One for a house rule probably. (Doncha hate it when house rules have to be formed on the spot, and they go against you! Rematch! Rematch!)


Well even my partner agreed with their logic. We won handily anyway.

jgrundy wrote:
morningstar wrote:
My opinion is that unless the game says you can't give information, you can. You can even show it. I'm in the habit of showing my hand if I suspect the person with the robber doesn't want to steal what I have.
Do you show everyone when you do this?


Yeah, but not because I think I have to. It would just be inconvenient to try to show them secretly.

jgrundy wrote:
So in the case of Settlers specifically, and many games have a similar rule, I think there's a line in the rulebook "players keep their resources hidden" (or something like that... the rules are at the office at the moment and I'm not.) Do you feel this is not a "rule" but an option/guideline?


It seems a little ambiguous. Does it mean players may keep their resources hidden, or must keep their resources hidden? Maybe it's because when I first played Settlers, we didn't know about keeping resources hidden. We thought we were required to keep them public. Anyway, after playing more, I do think mandatory hiding is better for the game. Otherwise, everybody who doesn't have the resource the person with the robber needs can show their hand. That makes the robber more selective than I think it's intended to be.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Dearlove
United Kingdom
Chelmsford
Essex
flag msg tools
SoRCon 11 23-25 Feb 2018 Basildon UK http://www.sorcon.co.uk
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
thatmarkguy wrote:
I suppose the same could be said of Shadows over Camelot (though I've never played so I'm not sure what, if any, hidden information the player(s) have and might share).


Lots. But there are rules on what you can and can't share. Rules that aren't rigorous, so there are always borderline cases. But with good will (present in all the games I've played) they work - and that includes now I've finally been the traitor and wanted minimal sharing, I was happy with what the good guys (boo, hiss) did.

(I got very close to winning - I was fishing for a win, just one Pict wanted, for a few turns. Got a Saxon ...)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Grundy
Australia
Sydney
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
douglasbushong wrote:
My opponent plays a card, and before he continues I say "wait," look over my cards, think about it for a few seconds, and then say "OK, go ahead." I've just revealed to my opponent that I have something in my hand that can stop him from playing certain cards. If he knows that, it is going to affect how he plays. This is true regardless of whether I actually have countermagic or not.
Hi Douglas. I would call this "bluffing" and again that's directly related to "announcing" hidden info but isn't actually doing it. I mention somewhere... I think it's usually apparent (somehow) whether players are saying something that may or may not be true (bluffing) or whether they're just making a factual assertion. Your example is a nice edge-rider of those two ... metagaming that some players would never do and others you would expect it.

Then there's the banter that occurs when someone, eg back to Settlers, has rolled a seven. In some groups people say nothing, in others it's "rob him he's winning" "no I've got nothing you want", in others they may even point out recent acquisitions. At the extreme, it's been noted by someone here they may show their whole hand to the table.

With my usual players, now usually out of reach, "I've got no wheat" would be taken tongue in cheek and not considered actually revealing anything. But if someone started going over the recent plays (beyond "I just built a settlement") to demonstrate their cause, or if they exposed their hand, there would have been a raising of eyebrows.

It would also be possible to move from this-is-a-game-and-I'm-probably-bluffing tone to here-is-some-true-info tone while saying "I've got no wheat" and raise similar surprise. Suddenly that banter becomes revealing info, which we didn't usually do at our table.

One example where most of us don't bat an eye is in a learning game. If the teaching includes some strategy tips, the explainer may reiterate recent plays to suggest what hidden info might motivate a player, or to indicate where a piece of trackable info might change the next play.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Campo
United Kingdom
Manchester
lancashire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
to me the whole some one goes to the bath room, can we look at some thign while there away smells like cheating.,

the whole question relies totaly on the game your playing at the time.,

Carcassone, doesnt really matter if all the player have picked up a tile before there turn...

Monopoly Do you want to look at the next chance card really while player one is out of the room..

Settlers (PL1)you got any ore (LiE)ive got no ore... save a lot of hassle barginging. with Persistant people or that erm market rule card oppertnists

allmost all games are about baiting or bluff your opponet to play something you want..


So the topic could get a thumbs down for being useless not offensive or abstaine from the thumb thing as every answer to each specifuc game will be diffrent.

I think Res publica is the only game that says no speeking about your own cards that i know of i dont know that many games yet...

and even then depends on your game group too, personaly i like chit chat, i like bluffing games, i like settlers because you can lie.


and As for the settlers comment thief, only the player that takes the card and the player the card took need know, what card was taken, If either player wishes to tell the rest of the player they can.. the other player can not complain.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mendon Dornbrook
United States
Phoenix
AZ
flag msg tools
"Go with the grace and protection of the Lord." It's the usual mantra for the big hero.
badge
The ticket to the future is always open.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
While I thoroughly approve of your approach to playing, deck construction, and bluffing tactics (as I have been guilty of all of them), I am beginning to take issue with something that you wrote.
Quote:
"Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should." He later refused play with me any more that evening (the refusal was actually because the deck had an infinite combo, which he also thought was not what the game makers intended).


I don't think that any of us (with the exception of the designer of a game) has the authority to approach a game as a strict constructionist. (If you're the game designer and your rules don't explicitly display the spirit of the game, REWRITE your rules!) However, there is a sort of Spielgeist that is worth taking into account when approaching the game. When everyone understands the tacit Spielgeist, no feelings are hurt. In Diplomacy, your best friend can look you in the face and say with all sincerity, "I will never lie to you," and then do nothing but and you won't be upset because you understand that that's the whole purpose of the game.

It strikes me that your opponent was upset because the two of you didn't agree on the Spielgeist of MTG or make any effort to establish it. If the mood is, engage in a challenging competition for victory and the satisfaction of having done one's best, I think that an infinite loop suggests that you are lazy (however efficient) and indeed violates the Spielgeist. If the mood is, win at all costs, then go ahead and throw in whatever tactics you want so long as you are willing to bear the social consequnces of being virulently frustrating to your opponents. If, in fact, "win at all costs" is the precedent, no one will begrudge you.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Poulos
United States
Redmond
Washington
flag msg tools
I guess there's more to starting a game company than just having a name... :(
badge
What we are dealing with here is a perfect engine, a gaming machine. It's really a miracle of evolution. All this gamer does is sleep and eat and place little meeples, and that's all.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
douglasbushong wrote:

...It's no different than a military leader, knowing that one of his followers is a spy for the enemy, giving that spy false information to lead the enemy in the wrong direction. If the avenue is there, then it could and should be exploited.

using a real life example like this to justify game behavior doesn't really work for me. real life doesn't have rules, but games do.

Quote:
...There's a cards called "Arcane Denial" which counters a spell, lets you draw a card, and then lets the caster of the countered spell draw two cards...So at the end of my opponent's turn I played an instant (I think it was a Twiddle), and then I countered my own spell so that I could draw 3 cards. The guy got angry and said "that's not the way that card is supposed to be used!"shake I explained to him that it was allowed, but he didn't care. "Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should." He later refused play with me any more that evening (the refusal was actually because the deck had an infinite combo, which he also thought was not what the game makers intended).

sounds like a clever use of a card. unique combos and such are what Magic such a great game. i'm fine with rules lawyering (to an extent. "but the rules don't say i can't kick my opponent then takes his victory cubes!?!") and would never begrudge someone a nice maneuver within the bounds of the rules.

Quote:
In any case, if you don't like head games, then I strongly suggest that you stick to games where each player has perfect information with nothing hidden (or develop psychic powers). If there's a hand involved, there's going to be a head game. Rejecting that premise is just setting yourself up to get angry when people play those head-games with you, and life's really too short to waste time doing that to yourself.

i think i'll go ahead and continue to play games that have cards in them, been enjoying them for years thanks . but what i'll also do is continue to fight the meta-game by not playing any more games with someone that tries to head-game in Ticket To Ride, those people just aren't enjoyable to play games with and there's enough other people around that fun to play. I'll also use all the resources at my disposal to strike down with great vengence and furious anger any player that tells me what my next move *should* be, even if that was what i was gonna do and even if going after them costs me the game.

let's just play the game on the table and leave the shennanigans at home says i.

Abe.



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Douglas Bushong
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AbeLincoln wrote:

using a real life example like this to justify game behavior doesn't really work for me. real life doesn't have rules, but games do.


I don't want to get too deep into this philosophical discussion, but real life does have rules. They are called "physics." They don't change, ever; only our perception of them changes.

AbeLincoln wrote:

...but what i'll also do is continue to fight the meta-game by not playing any more games with someone that tries to head-game in Ticket To Ride, those people just aren't enjoyable to play games with and there's enough other people around that fun to play.


You don't get any pleasure out of saying "you got me" after losing because of such tactics? Maybe it's just me, but I love that kind of surprise. It makes the game interesting by...

You know what's funny? I was about to say, in the same sentence, "it adds depth by creating a game on top of the game." Shouldn't it either be "it adds height" or "by creating a game beneath the game?" Interesting.

...Anyway, such a surprise is nicely followed up by a stern thrashing in the following game using similar tactics. Or as you would say, "Strike down upon them with great vengence and furious anger." It keeps the game fresh.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.