Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
39 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Skull» Forums » Strategy

Subject: Deliberate ignorance/random play as a strategy rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Nate Dorward
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Susan
United States
Mesa
Arizona
flag msg tools
www.Meetup.com/ArizonaGames
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
I always wonder about these guys who claim to do this.

I got burned playing poker when a guy swore he never looked at his hand and shoved all in. I now *always* assume they well and truly know exactly what they are doing/playing.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
I like the game considerably better when random decisions are explicited disallowed. But I think it is fine to allow them as well.

I wouldn't say it is good strategy, per se. If you are really easy to read, it might be good strategy, but it won't actually make your play good as you really need to make decisions based on the table.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Franklin
United States
Milton
Washington
flag msg tools
He sees you when you're sleeping; he knows when you're awake ...
badge
He knows if you've been bad or good.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kirk Monsen
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
Gamethyme wrote:
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.

So you only like playing with people who bluff in the manner that you can handle?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Franklin
United States
Milton
Washington
flag msg tools
He sees you when you're sleeping; he knows when you're awake ...
badge
He knows if you've been bad or good.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.

So you only like playing with people who bluff in the manner that you can handle?

There is no bluff in random play. There is a little bluff in the "randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge" method, but not much.

There is a couple who we game with occasionally who follow that "Totally blind play" option. I don't play this game with them, because they're not bluffing.

I'm not rude about it. I just play other games with other people when they decide to play Skull. Because playing the game randomly is not fun for me. They enjoy it - and they are welcome to do so. With other people.

Ca$h 'n Gun$ is the same way for me.
5 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kirk Monsen
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.

So you only like playing with people who bluff in the manner that you can handle?

There is no bluff in random play. There is a little bluff in the "randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge" method, but not much.

There is a couple who we game with occasionally who follow that "Totally blind play" option. I don't play this game with them, because they're not bluffing.

I'm not rude about it. I just play other games with other people when they decide to play Skull. Because playing the game randomly is not fun for me. They enjoy it - and they are welcome to do so. With other people.

Ca$h 'n Gun$ is the same way for me.

But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.

So you only like playing with people who bluff in the manner that you can handle?

There is no bluff in random play. There is a little bluff in the "randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge" method, but not much.

There is a couple who we game with occasionally who follow that "Totally blind play" option. I don't play this game with them, because they're not bluffing.

I'm not rude about it. I just play other games with other people when they decide to play Skull. Because playing the game randomly is not fun for me. They enjoy it - and they are welcome to do so. With other people.

Ca$h 'n Gun$ is the same way for me.

But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.


If it became an issue, I'd say that playing randomly is cheating. And I would let you enforce whether or not you are cheating. I agree that randomizing might be a good short term strategy for bad players. But I prefer no randomness being allowed.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Franklin
United States
Milton
Washington
flag msg tools
He sees you when you're sleeping; he knows when you're awake ...
badge
He knows if you've been bad or good.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.

So you only like playing with people who bluff in the manner that you can handle?

There is no bluff in random play. There is a little bluff in the "randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge" method, but not much.

There is a couple who we game with occasionally who follow that "Totally blind play" option. I don't play this game with them, because they're not bluffing.

I'm not rude about it. I just play other games with other people when they decide to play Skull. Because playing the game randomly is not fun for me. They enjoy it - and they are welcome to do so. With other people.

Ca$h 'n Gun$ is the same way for me.

But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.

I don't know. It's entirely possible that their strategy amounts to making me think they are deliberately making the game unfun for folks like me.

If your bluff amounts to, "I'm deliberately making this game unfun," then I'd argue it's not a bluff. It's making the game unfun. And I would bow out at the earliest polite opportunity.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kirk Monsen
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.

So you only like playing with people who bluff in the manner that you can handle?

There is no bluff in random play. There is a little bluff in the "randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge" method, but not much.

There is a couple who we game with occasionally who follow that "Totally blind play" option. I don't play this game with them, because they're not bluffing.

I'm not rude about it. I just play other games with other people when they decide to play Skull. Because playing the game randomly is not fun for me. They enjoy it - and they are welcome to do so. With other people.

Ca$h 'n Gun$ is the same way for me.

But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.

I don't know. It's entirely possible that their strategy amounts to making me think they are deliberately making the game unfun for folks like me.

If your bluff amounts to, "I'm deliberately making this game unfun," then I'd argue it's not a bluff. It's making the game unfun. And I would bow out at the earliest polite opportunity.

It is still a bluff. That you feel the game is unfun is your perception, independent of my activity.

In a nutshell, you choose not to play with people who bluff in a manner you are uncomfortable with, which means you only play with people who's bluffs you are comfortable with, ie, that you can understand .. which defeats the purpose of bluffing.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.

So you only like playing with people who bluff in the manner that you can handle?

There is no bluff in random play. There is a little bluff in the "randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge" method, but not much.

There is a couple who we game with occasionally who follow that "Totally blind play" option. I don't play this game with them, because they're not bluffing.

I'm not rude about it. I just play other games with other people when they decide to play Skull. Because playing the game randomly is not fun for me. They enjoy it - and they are welcome to do so. With other people.

Ca$h 'n Gun$ is the same way for me.

But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.

I don't know. It's entirely possible that their strategy amounts to making me think they are deliberately making the game unfun for folks like me.

If your bluff amounts to, "I'm deliberately making this game unfun," then I'd argue it's not a bluff. It's making the game unfun. And I would bow out at the earliest polite opportunity.

It is still a bluff. That you feel the game is unfun is your perception, independent of my activity.

In a nutshell, you choose not to play with people who bluff in a manner you are uncomfortable with, which means you only play with people who's bluffs you are comfortable with, ie, that you can understand .. which defeats the purpose of bluffing.


Playing random isn't actually bluffing.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kirk Monsen
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
mfl134 wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.

So you only like playing with people who bluff in the manner that you can handle?

There is no bluff in random play. There is a little bluff in the "randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge" method, but not much.

There is a couple who we game with occasionally who follow that "Totally blind play" option. I don't play this game with them, because they're not bluffing.

I'm not rude about it. I just play other games with other people when they decide to play Skull. Because playing the game randomly is not fun for me. They enjoy it - and they are welcome to do so. With other people.

Ca$h 'n Gun$ is the same way for me.

But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.

I don't know. It's entirely possible that their strategy amounts to making me think they are deliberately making the game unfun for folks like me.

If your bluff amounts to, "I'm deliberately making this game unfun," then I'd argue it's not a bluff. It's making the game unfun. And I would bow out at the earliest polite opportunity.

It is still a bluff. That you feel the game is unfun is your perception, independent of my activity.

In a nutshell, you choose not to play with people who bluff in a manner you are uncomfortable with, which means you only play with people who's bluffs you are comfortable with, ie, that you can understand .. which defeats the purpose of bluffing.


Playing random isn't actually bluffing.

please read previously

Quote:
But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
MunchWolf wrote:
mfl134 wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
Gamethyme wrote:
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.

So you only like playing with people who bluff in the manner that you can handle?

There is no bluff in random play. There is a little bluff in the "randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge" method, but not much.

There is a couple who we game with occasionally who follow that "Totally blind play" option. I don't play this game with them, because they're not bluffing.

I'm not rude about it. I just play other games with other people when they decide to play Skull. Because playing the game randomly is not fun for me. They enjoy it - and they are welcome to do so. With other people.

Ca$h 'n Gun$ is the same way for me.

But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.

I don't know. It's entirely possible that their strategy amounts to making me think they are deliberately making the game unfun for folks like me.

If your bluff amounts to, "I'm deliberately making this game unfun," then I'd argue it's not a bluff. It's making the game unfun. And I would bow out at the earliest polite opportunity.

It is still a bluff. That you feel the game is unfun is your perception, independent of my activity.

In a nutshell, you choose not to play with people who bluff in a manner you are uncomfortable with, which means you only play with people who's bluffs you are comfortable with, ie, that you can understand .. which defeats the purpose of bluffing.


Playing random isn't actually bluffing.

please read previously

Quote:
But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.

I will know you aren't playing randomly because i would have said that the game is bluffing and truly random play isn't allowed. At this point if you are telling me that you are cheating, it won't be worth the trouble if I decided I can't actually trust you, and if I decided that you would never cheat, the words would be meaningless.


And I do agree that the rules allow for random play. You can choose however you want. It is just my personal preference in bluffing games to enjoy reading other players.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kirk Monsen
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
mfl134 wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
mfl134 wrote:


Playing random isn't actually bluffing.

please read previously

Quote:
But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.

I will know you aren't playing randomly because i would have said that the game is bluffing and truly random play isn't allowed. At this point if you are telling me that you are cheating, it won't be worth the trouble if I decided I can't actually trust you, and if I decided that you would never cheat, the words would be meaningless.


And I do agree that the rules allow for random play. You can choose however you want. It is just my personal preference in bluffing games to enjoy reading other players.

What does it matter if you say "that the game is bluffing and truly random play isn't allowed", as that is not in the rules, and it is the rules that matter. So therefor if I say I am playing random, whether I am playing random or not, it is not cheating.

As for my playstyle, whether I say I am playing random, or say that I am not, you cannot actually prove either way, unless you have a mind reading device, and that would be cheating.

You say you enjoy reading other people, but you also say you do not enjoy reading other people to determine if they are playing randomly or bluffing playing randomly. Which is it? It seems you only enjoy reading other people who play in a style that you can read, which in my opinion makes the game futile. If you already know if your opponents are bluffing or not, or only play with opponents who bluff in a manner that you are comfortable with, then won't the games be predictable with you as the winner? What is the point of playing then?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
D.M. Jones
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
...before I forget.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
Here is what I will say...

If someone plays blind all of the time (or worse yet, if all players do) the game is striped of most of its strategic depth.

If someone played blind only infrequently, but also sometimes bluffed about doing so, the strategic depth of the game in the long term not only remains, but is actually improved since the blind bluff is a real possibility. In other words, the range of 'possible' plays is increased.

Honestly, I dislike playing with the 'all-the-time' blind players, but it is mainly because the quality of the play is reduced (is less skill based). To determine if the person claiming to play blind is making some 'sophisticated/meta/bluff' play or is simply playing 'randomly' (devoid of a greater strategy) you would really need to observe them for for a bit.

If I think they are playing without self-interest I will finish the game and move on to something else. But that isn't exclusive to this game. Nothing turns me off from playing with someone more than if they do not play with self-interest. It is rarely fun and it often give an advantage to other players. If I discover that they are playing with strategy and self-interest, I will gladly continue to play with them.

TL;DR
All-the-time random play by a player/players makes the game boring or potentially unfair.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.
13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wim van Gruisen
Netherlands
Den Bosch
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
mfl134 wrote:
I like the game considerably better when random decisions are explicited disallowed.
Bear in mind that I only played this game once. But with similar games, making a random play occasionally would work well in a social game like this - it influences your play, your behaviour. In social, bluffing games, it pays to get the other players out of balance, and if the occasional random play does this, then good. Since you don't like players playing random, I'd do this when you're at the table. With this kind of game, you're not playing the cards, after all, but you're playing the players.

Playing randomly all the time, though, is not 'playing the players', it's just bad play. There's no shock value anymore, no surprise, if you're consistently doing the same thing - whether it's opening with a skull each time, never playing a skull and asking for a count each time when you've played two cards, or playing randomly each time. People are not reading you anymore, they are taking you into account as a known factor.

Playing like this you're not playing to win. It's the same as making random plays in other kinds of games - you're following the rules, but not in it for the win. And you're not taking the game seriously. With Skull and Roses it's as with every other game - if you're not playing it seriously, if you're not putting an effort in to win the game, you're taking the challenge, the fun away from the other people at the table.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clive Jones

Cambridgeshire, UK
msg tools
mb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
So far, Paranoia is the only game I've ever played where the rules stipulated that fun was mandatory. And Paranoia is a... special case.

If someone plays in a way that's clearly within both the letter and the spirit of the rules, but which you don't enjoy, they're not cheating. They're just somebody you don't enjoy playing with. And that's not necessarily their fault any more than it's yours.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
MunchWolf wrote:
mfl134 wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
mfl134 wrote:


Playing random isn't actually bluffing.

please read previously

Quote:
But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.

I will know you aren't playing randomly because i would have said that the game is bluffing and truly random play isn't allowed. At this point if you are telling me that you are cheating, it won't be worth the trouble if I decided I can't actually trust you, and if I decided that you would never cheat, the words would be meaningless.


And I do agree that the rules allow for random play. You can choose however you want. It is just my personal preference in bluffing games to enjoy reading other players.

What does it matter if you say "that the game is bluffing and truly random play isn't allowed", as that is not in the rules, and it is the rules that matter. So therefor if I say I am playing random, whether I am playing random or not, it is not cheating.

As for my playstyle, whether I say I am playing random, or say that I am not, you cannot actually prove either way, unless you have a mind reading device, and that would be cheating.

You say you enjoy reading other people, but you also say you do not enjoy reading other people to determine if they are playing randomly or bluffing playing randomly. Which is it? It seems you only enjoy reading other people who play in a style that you can read, which in my opinion makes the game futile. If you already know if your opponents are bluffing or not, or only play with opponents who bluff in a manner that you are comfortable with, then won't the games be predictable with you as the winner? What is the point of playing then?

No, I like bluffing games to be about bluffing and don't like random decisions made in games. I'm saying if it became an issue I'd house rule it. The rest of your post sounds like just an attempt to insult me. How in the world do you get it as me only wanting to play against people that "I" can read? I want it to be possible to get a read. If I read that you are playing cards randomly, there is no way for me to further make a read. At that point I'm just playing the odds. This is not that "I" can't read, it is that there is nothing to read.

Perhaps you don't know the difference?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
D.M. Jones
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
...before I forget.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
mfl134 wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
mfl134 wrote:
MunchWolf wrote:
mfl134 wrote:


Playing random isn't actually bluffing.

please read previously

Quote:
But how do you know if they are playing randomly, or bluffing that they are playing randomly?

FYI: Since I won't ever play with you, my style is to appear to play randomly, and state I am playing randomly, but I know what cards I played. I will deny I said this if I ever met you.

I will know you aren't playing randomly because i would have said that the game is bluffing and truly random play isn't allowed. At this point if you are telling me that you are cheating, it won't be worth the trouble if I decided I can't actually trust you, and if I decided that you would never cheat, the words would be meaningless.


And I do agree that the rules allow for random play. You can choose however you want. It is just my personal preference in bluffing games to enjoy reading other players.

What does it matter if you say "that the game is bluffing and truly random play isn't allowed", as that is not in the rules, and it is the rules that matter. So therefor if I say I am playing random, whether I am playing random or not, it is not cheating.

As for my playstyle, whether I say I am playing random, or say that I am not, you cannot actually prove either way, unless you have a mind reading device, and that would be cheating.

You say you enjoy reading other people, but you also say you do not enjoy reading other people to determine if they are playing randomly or bluffing playing randomly. Which is it? It seems you only enjoy reading other people who play in a style that you can read, which in my opinion makes the game futile. If you already know if your opponents are bluffing or not, or only play with opponents who bluff in a manner that you are comfortable with, then won't the games be predictable with you as the winner? What is the point of playing then?

No, I like bluffing games to be about bluffing and don't like random decisions made in games. I'm saying if it became an issue I'd house rule it. The rest of your post sounds like just an attempt to insult me. How in the world do you get it as me only wanting to play against people that "I" can read? I want it to be possible to get a read. If I read that you are playing cards randomly, there is no way for me to further make a read. At that point I'm just playing the odds. This is not that "I" can't read, it is that there is nothing to read.

Perhaps you don't know the difference?

Honestly, I think you both have a similar view on the main spirit of the game. The game is more fun and interesting when people play strategically and with self-interest. If excessive random play results in a significant diminishing of strategy or balancing, a lot of us probably won't want to continue playing. Is all-the-time random play allowed according to the rules? Yes. Is it interesting and/or fun? No, not for me. The 'reasonableness' of the strategy needs to be evaluated in context.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wim van Gruisen
Netherlands
Den Bosch
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
Guys, could you please stop quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are ..... ?
4 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
D.M. Jones
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
...before I forget.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
getdafunkout wrote:
Whymme wrote:
Guys, could you please stop quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are ..... ?

No.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
Full Dark House - Christopher Fowler
badge
The Watchers - Jon Steele
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
Gamethyme wrote:
Nate Dorward wrote:
I've twice played this game where one player played blind--i.e., put down his discs without looking at them first. Any opinions on this as a strategy? I haven't yet had a chance to try this out myself.

There are two ways you can do this--

1) totally blind play: don't look at your own hand after you've randomly placed a disc.

2) randomized choice, but retrospective knowledge: play a random disc but consult your hand afterward to see what it was.

The obvious effect here is that (in the starting rounds, anyway) everyone playing will know that the disc in front of you has a consistent 1/4 chance of being a skull. Which is not bad odds, really--I'd take them in most circumstances.

If I know you're a random player before the game starts, I'll not play.

If I find out after the game starts, I'll bow out of the game at the earliest polite opportunity.

There are people who enjoy random play in this game, but I am absolutely not one of them. This is a game of bluffing and reading people, and random play totally destroys that.
If the person who intends to play randomly for the entire game had any class, they'd be the one to bow out. They're not even playing really; they're just screwing up the game for the others and (I presume) thinking it's clever or funny.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wim van Gruisen
Netherlands
Den Bosch
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
getdafunkout wrote:
getdafunkout wrote:
Whymme wrote:
Guys, could you please stop quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are ..... ?

No.
Spoilsport!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug Buel
United States
Hollywood
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
Whymme wrote:
Guys, could you please stop quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are quoting people who are ..... ?
Building your ziggurat is 3 points in the first age and 7 points in the third age
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug Buel
United States
Hollywood
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Deliberately ignorance/random play as a strategy
OK, so

1. Playing randomly doesn't rise to the level of a "strategy" so much as it is a "gambit."

2. Playing randomly makes the game less fun for other people, because now they have to do math and determine probabilities rather than do reading and determine who is a liar.

3. Many people do not want to sit down to play Math: The Averaging, and would rather play a game about bluffing and lying and reading.

4. That being said, even if you're not playing randomly, it would be nice for everyone else to think you're playing randomly, so that they don't even try to get a read.

5. So then appearing to play randomly does rise to the level of a strategy.

6. We appear to have a conundrum.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   |