Worst non-PnP traditional games ever.

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Worst non-PnP traditional games ever.

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Since Monopoly seems to be causing a lot of discontent in the Design Principles thread, I'm going to spin off a new thread here.

By the way, all of those people saying that you hate Monotony? I agree with you. It's an awful, miserable game that only gets by on its own inertia. It's one of the few games where you're glad to get knocked out of the game early because that's the only vaguely exciting party.

Despite all that, I'm going to have to say that Risk is a worse game. Yeah, Monotony has worse rules, but the upside to Monopoly is that you can at least play with your aunt and your cousin and your grandma at the same time--so if you're not able to watch TV you can prevent yourselves from killing each other. But Risk has no family bonding excuse. Anyone who plays Risk has to admit to being at least slightly nerdy. And if the seeds of nerddom have already been planted, why don't you fuckers play a better game? Like Axis and Allies or Scrabble or Settlers of Catan?

Risk wouldn't be so bad if people engaged in some elementary diplomacy (the only thing that makes the game remotely fun), but everytime I played it people want to be lone wolves, which turns it into a mindless grind fest. Then again, playing with diplomacy might turn the game into a Monotony-style lockdown. So who knows.
Last edited by Lago PARANOIA on Fri May 14, 2010 6:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Surgo
Duke
Posts: 1924
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Surgo »

What strange universe do you live in where Axis & Allies is a better game than Risk?

I can finish a game of Risk in half an hour. I can't finish a game of Axis & Allies in a day.

Also, I think your first principle (that Risk is an inherently nerdy game) is incorrect.
Last edited by Surgo on Fri May 14, 2010 4:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Archmage
Knight-Baron
Posts: 757
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:05 pm

Post by Archmage »

Playing Risk with heavily diplomatic people just makes the game take longer. It's a game that generally favors aggressive players, but alliances tend to result in people sitting on their hands for a while, trading a country a round to collect cards and calling it a day until they have a whole board full of armies. At which point some grand final battle is supposed to happen, which really means rolling dice about a hundred times when the results are basically pre-determined.

At least Risk and Monopoly both have some basic decision-making involved. You could be stuck playing Parcheesi.

If we're including non-board games, I'm going to have to throw out Go Fish.
Last edited by Archmage on Fri May 14, 2010 4:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
P.C. Hodgell wrote:That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
shadzar wrote:i think the apostrophe is an outdated idea such as is hyphenation.
User avatar
mean_liar
Duke
Posts: 2187
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Boston

Post by mean_liar »

The new Risk is decent. Certainly an improvement. Risk 2210 remains awesome. Godstorm is a very good variant but requires a few houserules to work correctly.

My list:

KINGMAKER. What a piece of shit this thing is. The game encourages brinksmanship and headhunting of the vilest kind, followed by epic ass-beatings with a shitty battle minigame. Takes way too fucking long.

BATTLE ROYALE. Create complicated lineages, play medieval lawyer with your friends for hours and then get stomped because some asshole came up with a few +X Strength Princes who make a mockery of your military and the game's unit stacking limit.

ILLUMINATI. Complicated and fiddly for a game that should be fun and lighthearted and quick.

POWER GRID. Yes, Power Grid. This game ought to be called, "Resource Management: the Game". It's a flavorless exercise in bidding. Runner Ups in the flavorless category are: Through the Desert and Blue Moon City.

TWILIGHT IMPERIUM (without the expansion). It's not a sci-fi empire game, it's a Cold War simulator. You get a ton of ships you will never use because the base game rewards bullshittery and turtling, with actual blast-you-from-space strategies resulting in basically no Victory Points... unless the "you win if you attacked everyone" card randomly comes up. Utter turd. Much much much better with the expansion.

TSURO. Fun if you don't know how to play, but once you realize the strategy is "avoid the edges, go to the center" you might as well be playing multiplayer War.
User avatar
RobbyPants
King
Posts: 5202
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm

Post by RobbyPants »

I love A&A, and I love the boardgame (mostly from a nostalgia point of veiw; I haven't played it in nearly a decade), but I think the computer version is much more playable.

First of all, the setup time is instantaneous. Secondly, it neatly tracks your movements as you ponder where to move your forces. Thirdly, it automatically remembers and applies all the obscure rules of the game, like Amphibious Assaults. Fourthly, the resolution is much faster.

Another nice plus is the settings page incorporates quite a few house-rule and revision options.


Edit:
Good call in Illuminati, M_L. That's another game that I like the thought of, but it always takes longer than what I want to devote to the game. I think I've played Illuminati once or twice since I've bought Munchkin.
Last edited by RobbyPants on Fri May 14, 2010 4:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
hogarth
Prince
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 1:00 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by hogarth »

mean_liar wrote:ILLUMINATI. Complicated and fiddly for a game that should be fun and lighthearted and quick.
Not to mention that the different societies are poorly balanced at best.

You might find this thread at Board Game Geek interesting (bad games people love). Some have been mentioned already (Monopoly, Risk, Kingmaker):
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/1 ... e-t/page/1
User avatar
RobbyPants
King
Posts: 5202
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm

Post by RobbyPants »

hogarth wrote:Not to mention that the different societies are poorly balanced at best.
Yeah. If you don't ban Bavaria, someone ends up running the table with it.
User avatar
hogarth
Prince
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 1:00 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by hogarth »

RobbyPants wrote:
hogarth wrote:Not to mention that the different societies are poorly balanced at best.
Yeah. If you don't ban Bavaria, someone ends up running the table with it.
And after that, I consider the Gnomes of Zurich the second-best.
User avatar
RobbyPants
King
Posts: 5202
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm

Post by RobbyPants »

They're also very good, particularly with those free transfers.

I think part of what makes Bavaria and the Gnomes so good is that their secondary victory conditions (either gaining power or gaining money) are directly in line with what you'd do anyway. It's when you play something like Cthulhu where you have to go against your instincts and destroy groups, or collect Weird groups for Discordia that you have a harder time achieving victory.

Of course, free privileged attacks for Bavaria is fucking insane!

Edit: I'm not sure the privileged attacks are "free", but you can do it every turn, which is what's scary.
Last edited by RobbyPants on Fri May 14, 2010 6:43 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Kithkanan
NPC
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 12:31 am

Post by Kithkanan »

I got over Candyland quick once I realized there was no strategy involved.
User avatar
RobbyPants
King
Posts: 5202
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm

Post by RobbyPants »

How about Chutes and Ladders?
User avatar
Lokathor
Duke
Posts: 2185
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 2:10 am
Location: ID
Contact:

Post by Lokathor »

Lately I have played online monopoly (pogo.com) with my friends over skype. We have played a fair number of games (20+) and the player count on a game is usually 4 (the max; though sometimes there are only 3). Because it's computerized it's able to run much much faster than normal monopoly, no counting out bills and so on. My assessment compared to normal monopoly is that when the players aren't forced to count out all the cash they're handing over to other players each time it can maintain a much lighter and more humorous atmosphere.

We've also played a lot of Risk (tabletop). Usually we have a large player count and we stick two boards together to attain a proper country to player ratio. Two-Board Risk is a pretty slow slogfest just like normal Risk is. The one major rule change we use is a 15 army limit per territory (with +1 per card set that's been turned in so far as a more recent rule update).

I've played Illuminati only twice, and it was kinda alright. Only one player really knew how to play and the rest of us were just beginners so it never got very heavy. It did seem like it could turn bad eventually.

The non-RPG game my group plays the most (other than Magic) is probably Munchkin, which I think is pretty awesome. I've personally got the fantasy set with several add-on packs, and my friends have the kung fu, western, and cthulhu sets. I've also played with the space and supers set. Some sets are better balanced than others (space is really shitty on balance), but overall it's a pretty fun game I'd say.
[*]The Ends Of The Matrix: Github and Rendered
[*]After Sundown: Github and Rendered
Koumei
Serious Badass
Posts: 13898
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: South Ausfailia

Post by Koumei »

RobbyPants wrote:How about Chutes and Ladders?
It's Snakes and Ladders over here, and I wish to issue a warning: in real life you can climb ladders (both ways, even!), but do not try to slide down a snake. You will be bitten and die.
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
Calibron
Knight-Baron
Posts: 617
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 1:38 am

Post by Calibron »

Snakes and Ladders over here too, I think the Chutes bullshit was added in recent decades to make the game more kid friendly or something.

Anyway, am I the only one who actually enjoys monopoly? Course the game rarely reaches a conclusion when other people start rage-quitting so maybe I just haven't experienced enough of its torturous ministrations to have built up a sufficient hatred for it; or maybe I'm just an unusually laid back dude.
User avatar
Count Arioch the 28th
King
Posts: 6172
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Count Arioch the 28th »

Koumei wrote:
RobbyPants wrote:How about Chutes and Ladders?
It's Snakes and Ladders over here, and I wish to issue a warning: in real life you can climb ladders (both ways, even!), but do not try to slide down a snake. You will be bitten and die.
Oh, right, Australia. Here, the most venomous snake is practically a joke and will make an obnoxious noise long before you even see them. My ex used to pick up snakes and play with them (something they were very displeased with).
Kithkanan
NPC
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 12:31 am

Post by Kithkanan »

Calibron wrote:Snakes and Ladders over here too, I think the Chutes bullshit was added in recent decades to make the game more kid friendly or something.
Or distance it from that bad movie.
User avatar
Crissa
King
Posts: 6720
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Santa Cruz

Post by Crissa »

I didn't know was using a realm game in it. It was in On Demand a month or so ago.

-Crissa
User avatar
Psychic Robot
Prince
Posts: 4607
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm

Post by Psychic Robot »

Every Risk game I've ever played in has the controller of Australia or South America win by a landslide. Not fun when you play random placement and you don't have any territories in there.
Count Arioch wrote:I'm not sure how discussions on whether PR is a terrible person or not is on-topic.
Ant wrote:
Chamomile wrote:Ant, what do we do about Psychic Robot?
You do not seem to do anything.
User avatar
Maj
Prince
Posts: 4705
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Shelton, Washington, USA

Post by Maj »

Kithkanan wrote:I got over Candyland quick once I realized there was no strategy involved.
Did you know they actually nerfed it? The game I taught to my siblings is not the same game I get to teach my son.
TarkisFlux
Duke
Posts: 1147
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:44 pm
Location: Magic Mountain, CA
Contact:

Post by TarkisFlux »

Maj wrote:
Kithkanan wrote:I got over Candyland quick once I realized there was no strategy involved.
Did you know they actually nerfed it? The game I taught to my siblings is not the same game I get to teach my son.
:ugone2far: Wait, what? How? How can you nerf "draw a card, move to next same colored space"?
The wiki you should be linking to when you need a wiki link - http://www.dnd-wiki.org

Fectin: "Ant, what is best in life?"
Ant: "Ethically, a task well-completed for the good of the colony. Experientially, endorphins."
Zinegata
Prince
Posts: 4071
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:33 am

Post by Zinegata »

Calibron wrote:Snakes and Ladders over here too, I think the Chutes bullshit was added in recent decades to make the game more kid friendly or something.

Anyway, am I the only one who actually enjoys monopoly? Course the game rarely reaches a conclusion when other people start rage-quitting so maybe I just haven't experienced enough of its torturous ministrations to have built up a sufficient hatred for it; or maybe I'm just an unusually laid back dude.
Snake and Ladders here too.

Monopoly isn't terrible. But if you've played more advanced stuff it is woefully primitive compared to lots of other games mechanics-wise.

The original Risk is a primitive dice-fest made bearable by metagaming. You may as well play Diplomacy. The new Risks allow for much more tactical flexibility. 2210 is fantastic. Godstorm is ok. Star Wars has the Order 66 thing, and LoTR is fine except for stupid Fellowship pathing.

Axis & Allies... never played it before but honestly I kinda dislike it. It's not bad, but you regularly end up with anachronistic stuff like Japanese tanks going into Siberia.

Also, I don't really hate a lot of board or card games. I do have one game that makes me go into a rage though:

Fits.

It's fucking Tetris in a boardgame format. Why? WHY?
Last edited by Zinegata on Sat May 15, 2010 1:41 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Crissa
King
Posts: 6720
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Santa Cruz

Post by Crissa »

They shortened the board, removed the shortcuts, replaced cards with a spinner. The newest one doesn't have a static board, which is the first good idea they've added in years, and is a bit longer than the re-release in 2002. There's a pretty good demo on the hasbro site.

(Strangely, we have these 'new looks' because of the work of such as Meg Whitman, although I think of her marketing ability more as an ability to surf popular trends. I don't think she'd make a good Governor, as she's pretty deep in Republican winger-land and greased-palms.)

-Crissa
Zinegata
Prince
Posts: 4071
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:33 am

Post by Zinegata »

mean_liar wrote:POWER GRID. Yes, Power Grid. This game ought to be called, "Resource Management: the Game". It's a flavorless exercise in bidding. Runner Ups in the flavorless category are: Through the Desert and Blue Moon City.
Power Grid isn't that terrible. I'm a wargame sort of guy and I enjoyed my first playthrough.

Mainly because I justified to myself that I was helping to electrify the German war machine for its eventual attempt to overtturn the injustices of Versailles.

Okay, yes, admittedly if I play it again I might start strangling people.
TheFlatline
Prince
Posts: 2606
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:43 pm

Post by TheFlatline »

Zinegata wrote: Axis & Allies... never played it before but honestly I kinda dislike it. It's not bad, but you regularly end up with anachronistic stuff like Japanese tanks going into Siberia.
I'm not a fan of Axis & Allies but I'll play it.

And you're absolutely right about Japanese tanks in Siberia. In fact, the last game I played, I split my fleet in the Pacific, avoided tanking in pearl harbor, and had my "Battle of Midway" within range of my bombers and fighters with the US. I stomped all who opposed me,, the stomping was swift, the stomping was painful, and in all my stomping I showed no mercy (Amen). The pacific fleet parked off the coast of the US to mop up any real opposition that the US could afford, and essentially took the US out of the majority of the game.

In the meantime I created an armored column that would be the envy of the Soviet Bloc and sent it straight through Siberia, gutting Russia, crashing through Europe to provide reinforcements, and shoving the UK and Allied Europe back across the channel.

I admit, lucky rolls helped me smash the US player who was the strongest, but the rest of my tactics were nuts.

I also hate that the allies not only outnumber the Axis powers, but generally outproduce them too every turn. If the Allies are competent, I can't see how they *can* lose, save by the hatred of the Dice Gods.

That being said, I'll admit to being completely and totally burned out on Munchkin even if everyone around me seems to love it. I don't find it entertaining any more. 90% of the time one player gets a lucky combination of cards and is unstoppable for the rest of the game.
User avatar
Prak
Serious Badass
Posts: 17354
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Prak »

TheFlatline wrote:That being said, I'll admit to being completely and totally burned out on Munchkin even if everyone around me seems to love it. I don't find it entertaining any more. 90% of the time one player gets a lucky combination of cards and is unstoppable for the rest of the game.
I have a couple problems with munchkin now: first: the last like twenty god damned times I've played, it's been with the same friend and just that friend, so there's never much new about another game, unless I just bought a new set. second, I love mixing and including lots of expansions, and all that, but it gets hard to decently shuffle that many damned cards.
Post Reply