$30.00
Andy Szymas
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
This came up in our game group last night, so I'm curious what others think/would do. I'm not upset or anything (to clarify) but just thought it was an interesting situation.

In a game of Kemet, Player A was set to win at the end of the turn and was out of actions. Player B (me) and Player C still had actions left. I could attempt to deny Player A, but most likely I would have been weakening both of us, which then would have allowed Player C to finish either of our troops off, which would have extended the game one more turn.

Instead of attacking player A, I secured a spot that would give me two points - allowing me to tie Player A for the victory (we figured out later I would win on tie-break).

As I did it, I smiled and clapped Player C on the shoulder "Have fun kingmaking!" - because he now had to choose who to attack and knock out of first place. Whoever he attacked would drop to 3rd and he would rise to 2nd.

So what would you do in that position as Player C? Is Player B (me) a jerk for making that happen? (probably )
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marina SC
Canada
Vaughan
flag msg tools
Hmm, I'd probably do the move that ends with me getting the most points. I think that's fair, and shouldn't even really be considered "kingmaking" as I'd still be playing to optimize my score If it would be exactly the same, I'd attack the player who screwed me over more during the course of the game (but in good humour, it's all for fun after all).
25 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pete
United States
Northbrook
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I would begin the bidding process.

Pete (has no reasonable in-game move anyway)
15 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
AndySzy wrote:
This came up in our game group last night, so I'm curious what others think/would do. I'm not upset or anything (to clarify) but just thought it was an interesting situation.

In a game of Kemet, Player A was set to win at the end of the turn and was out of actions. Player B (me) and Player C still had actions left. I could attempt to deny Player A, but most likely I would have been weakening both of us, which then would have allowed Player C to finish either of our troops off, which would have extended the game one more turn.

Instead of attacking player A, I secured a spot that would give me two points - allowing me to tie Player A for the victory (we figured out later I would win on tie-break).

As I did it, I smiled and clapped Player C on the shoulder "Have fun kingmaking!" - because he now had to choose who to attack and knock out of first place. Whoever he attacked would drop to 3rd and he would rise to 2nd.

So what would you do in that position as Player C? Is Player B (me) a jerk for making that happen? (probably ;) )
Yes., but over the comment.
20 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf Cordero
United States
Bolingbrook
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I think this illustrates why I don't really have a problem with kingmaking. The focus is on that last move, that one move that "picks" the winner, but in reality there is an entire game that just occurred that culminates in that moment. Tons of actions, reactions, and tabletalk have occurred up to that point.

It's also why I am always working and negotiating alliances in almost any game. That way, if my bud is one of the Kingmakers then there is a good reason for them to pick me. If it's an enemy, then the decision doesn't feel like they arbitrarily kingmade against me...it's because I probably worked against them throughout the game. Similarly, if I'm in the position to kingmake, it doesn't feel cheap or bad if there is someone I've been working with.
20 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Istanbul
Colorado
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Seems like an OK move... best for you. Since you don't know how C is going to play it, best give yourself the best odds that you can force.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
C M
msg tools
mbmb
I wouldn't even consider this kingmaking. I usually save that distinction for someone who is actually making an effort to get a specific other player to win, usually over multiple rounds. What you're describing is just how the game state ended up
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Russell InNC
United States
Roswell
Georgia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sometimes there are no good answers for determining how someone should "kingmake"

If someone IN THIS GAME had screwed them, it is appropriate to gain revenge.

Otherwise, it's possible that you just have to say that the game has ended in a quantum state. (Both people winning is equally likely therefore both players are half-dead and half-winner!)

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roger Reisinger
msg tools
mbmb
I agree that this situation isnt really kingmaking, but since we are on the subject:

#1 - do the moves that scores you the most points and increases your position in the game regardless of who it affects.

#2 - if a move benefits you equally, and also can kingmake between multiple opponents, then benefit the player who has played the best during the game and deserved the win.

#3 - if a move doesnt not improve your position in the game, and hurts any players chance to win, pass on your final turn and allow the leaders to determine the rightful winner of the game.


That is my personal code of conduct regarding kingmaking.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jack Swan
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
If I was in no position to win myself I'd leave the two alone and choose the next best move that would get me the most points.

(Preferably AFTER I'd bribed them both, of course.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chapel
United States
Round Rock
Texas
flag msg tools
"32 inches of Plexi....for your pleasure"
mbmbmbmbmb
I usually tell players put into a kingmaker decision to play the action that improves his score the most.

And if all things were made equal no matter what he did, then I say, hey, play against who you want to fuck with the most.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Reid
United States
Brooklyn
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I'd probably flip a coin, at least partially to demonstrate my belief that it doesn't matter. I'm going to lose either way...who I choose to lose to ought not be a consideration as far as I'm concerned. And whoever wins ought not feel all that superior to whoever loses.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derek H
South Africa
Pretoria
Gauteng
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
MWChapel wrote:
I usually tell players put into a kingmaker decision to play the action that improves his score the most.

And if all things were made equal no matter what he did, then I say, hey, play against who you want to fuck with the most.

Or the opposite - support the player who you spend most time with outside of the game... also knowing they will likely support you in return should you be a similar situation next time.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J C Lawrence
United States
Campbell
California
flag msg tools
designer
The game is over: it doesn't matter what they do as there are no game-relevant decisions left to make. Just pack up and restart or play something else.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pauly Paul
Canada
Calgary
Alberta
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Mashpotassium wrote:
Hmm, I'd probably do the move that ends with me getting the most points. I think that's fair, and shouldn't even really be considered "kingmaking" as I'd still be playing to optimize my score


I agree with this. I don't really consider this an example of what the spirit of kingmaking actually is.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Harv Veerman
Netherlands
Zoetermeer
Zuid-Holland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Not sure how much could be deducted at that given moment, but...

if I were player C and I could at that point deduct that B was better than A, so B already beat A fair and square, I would obliterate A if I could. B was already the winner, I'ld go for 2nd place.

EDIT: if this could NOT be deducted at that time, I would obliterate you, just for making that remark.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin C.
United States
Bethlehem
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
The game is over: it doesn't matter what they do as there are no game-relevant decisions left to make. Just pack up and restart or play something else.


How do you just end a game without a winner?

I get calling a game when one person has an insurmountable lead, but in this case, nobody had won yet...there is still game to play and the most important decision yet to be made: who wins.

I say make the play that gives you the most points, crown the winner, then pack up and restart.

I don't think games should be called just because there is a difficult social decision to make, though. The gamestate here is still unresolved (two potential winners), so the group should resolve it, then move on to a new game.

Kevin

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J C Lawrence
United States
Campbell
California
flag msg tools
designer
natsean wrote:
Quote:
The game is over: it doesn't matter what they do as there are no game-relevant decisions left to make. Just pack up and restart or play something else.


How do you just end a game without a winner?


You just stop playing.

Quote:
I get calling a game when one person has an insurmountable lead, but in this case, nobody had won yet...there is still game to play and the most important decision yet to be made: who wins.


There's no decision as the acting player cannot win (the winner has been determined as not them). Sure there's a choice, but the choice is functionally irrelevant/identical and has no game value. Meantime the other two players are in an ambiguous/tied situation without any ability to affect their own positions either. So as there's no decision and any choice made is irrelevant, you already have as much winner definition as the game will ever provide. The game is done, those two (functionally) tied, next!

Quote:
I don't think games should be called just because there is a difficult social decision to make, though. The gamestate here is still unresolved (two potential winners), so the group should resolve it, then move on to a new game.


If someone want to go through the motions, fine, I'll wait, but there's nothing more of interest in this game. I see no substantive way this is different from the forgone winner case: the game is over.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pete
United States
Northbrook
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
natsean wrote:
Quote:
The game is over: it doesn't matter what they do as there are no game-relevant decisions left to make. Just pack up and restart or play something else.


How do you just end a game without a winner?

What's the point of generating a winner that is completely arbitrary?

I would feel no better or worse (or even differently) in that circumstance if I "won" or "lost."

Pete (thinks that's just timewasting)
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J C Lawrence
United States
Campbell
California
flag msg tools
designer
Let's imagine a hypothetical game in which players play and make substantial decisions and build positions and so forth up until some point...and then they roll dice in a long faintly complicated and entirely decision-free process based on the positions they've achieved in order to see who won. The key is that there are no decisions left in the game at all and all the player's have complete transparency into the probability space that will do the winner determination.

Would you play out the end? I sure wouldn't bother. The player with the marginally higher probability (which is calculable) nominally won. Pack it up, put it away, let's play something else. Oh, you want to grind it out? Sure, go for it, roll my dice for me too. I'll be over there doing something else and don't care if you tell me your final result or not.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Brown
United States
Okemos
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
AndySzy wrote:
"Have fun kingmaking!"


B. For that statement alone.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Wilczewski
United States
Folsom
California
flag msg tools
Someone on the internet is wrong!
mbmbmbmbmb
clearclaw wrote:
Let's imagine a hypothetical game in which players play and make substantial decisions and build positions and so forth up until some point...and then they roll dice in a long faintly complicated and entirely decision-free process based on the positions they've achieved in order to see who won. The key is that there are no decisions left in the game at all and all the player's have complete transparency into the probability space that will do the winner determination.

Would you play out the end? I sure wouldn't bother. The player with the marginally higher probability (which is calculable) nominally won. Pack it up, put it away, let's play something else. Oh, you want to grind it out? Sure, go for it, roll my dice for me too. I'll be over there doing something else and don't care if you tell me your final result or not.


I think your hypothetical game is called "Killer Bunnies". People are constantly complaining that the game is all of this gameplay, and the ending and winner are determined randomly by essentially rolling a die and assigning probabilities based upon how many carrots were collected by each player.

I played it once, and you're right - the ending is pointless. I wonder how many people would say the game is better by just assigning the winner based on who has the most carrots.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pete
United States
Northbrook
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
alenen wrote:
clearclaw wrote:
Let's imagine a hypothetical game in which players play and make substantial decisions and build positions and so forth up until some point...and then they roll dice in a long faintly complicated and entirely decision-free process based on the positions they've achieved in order to see who won. The key is that there are no decisions left in the game at all and all the player's have complete transparency into the probability space that will do the winner determination.

Would you play out the end? I sure wouldn't bother. The player with the marginally higher probability (which is calculable) nominally won. Pack it up, put it away, let's play something else. Oh, you want to grind it out? Sure, go for it, roll my dice for me too. I'll be over there doing something else and don't care if you tell me your final result or not.


I think your hypothetical game is called "Killer Bunnies". People are constantly complaining that the game is all of this gameplay, and the ending and winner are determined randomly by essentially rolling a die and assigning probabilities based upon how many carrots were collected by each player.

I played it once, and you're right - the ending is pointless. I wonder how many people would say the game is better by just assigning the winner based on who has the most carrots.

Anyone over the age of about 12. The beauty of that game is I can play it with my 7 year old for example, and even though I have a pile of carrots to her diddly-squat, she can still sometimes win.

Pete (thinks the illusion of success is all that is really required to engage young people, or not-so-smart older people)
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
DJ Wilde
United States
Monroe
LA
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
How would I respond? Hmm. Is there a nuke card? Hand grenade? Flip the table?

On a serious note, it really doesn't matter to me. I would find the comment humorous and just go for the points unless I was in a "mood" and felt like messing with you just for creating that situation.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin C.
United States
Bethlehem
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
There's no decision as the acting player cannot win (the winner has been determined as not them)


This is no different than the 1,001 "What should I do when I can't win?" threads.

You continue to approximate the win condition by reducing delta from the leader and be done with it. You concede there is a bit of the arbitrary when you can no longer win, but you've accepted this as valid.

Why should it matter that this is the ultimate turn of the game?

Quote:
If someone want to go through the motions, fine, I'll wait, but there's nothing more of interest in this game. I see no substantive way this is different from the forgone winner case: the game is over.


There is no winner here. The games isn't "tied," at all. You have potentials and the player on the move has decisions to make that affect the gamestate.

By agreement, of course, you can end the game. But I don't think it valid to do so based on a "the game is over" conclusion. It isn't. You have potential winners and definite losers, which is a pretty common case in non-player elimination games.

Quote:
What's the point of generating a winner that is completely arbitrary?


People can be rendered moot in many types of games. I don't think their decisions then become "arbitrary."

I think this is function of our misunderstanding or anxiety about kingmaking. If on turn 8 of a 12 turn game, I can't win but two other people can, do you just end the game or do you let me take my turn? I think most people let me play it out.

It seems more dire on turn 12, when my decision carries more weight, but as was said above, it really doesn't. My turn 8 move as a definite loser impacted the gamestate as well. Why is that OK?

(Maybe you will say it isn't and once you have a definite loser, you stop the game. I've seen that notion before, I just don't think it is as widely accepted as stopping when you have a definite winner.)

We normally say that people should play to better their own scores. This isn't arbitrary on turn 3 so why should it be on the last turn of the game?

I don't think this is any different than what players can/should do when they can't win. The specter of "kingmaking" is here and that is like garlic to a vampire around here, even though, to my mind, it doesn't really exist the way we posit it does.

Let the person play their turn and complete their game, declare a winner and move on. I feel better with completed games rather than games left in limbo.

Declaring a tie here would be completely unsatisfying.

Kevin
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [8] | 
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.