Experimental Games

[Dalinar]

I thought it might be fun to start a group of people interested in games where the players follow different sets of rules agreed to before starting the game. Masterjskye has done some interesting games where everyone has to agree they'll self-destruct (eliminate the non-winners and allow yourself to be eliminated), and I found the 1v1 games I played where the first player skipped attacking to be both more fair and more interesting.

So, hopefully there might be wider group for trying this with multiplayer

Two example thoughts:

A simple one might be a 2v2v2v2 where the first team to eliminate any other player wins (probably not that great, but simple and different).

A more complicated one might be a 4, 6, or 12 player escalate, 3-border match on Twelve Domains where the first player to hold the dragon for a turn wins. And in case of stalemates, the surviving player with the fewest troops at the end of round 40 (or 30?) wins.

More or less, whatever you want to make up and find interesting. I guess we could start threads for each game type to keep track of them for those interested, but I'm imagining this being pretty informal - those who don't follow the rules just wouldn't be invited back, etc.

Thoughts?

 

[Tyro]

Count me in, it sounds interesting. I particularly like the idea of winning by having the fewest troops at R30. I love attacking and cursing good dice because it is against what is required, e.g. playing minus 1.
Another option could be: losing at least as many troops as the round, if possible. 1 troop R1, 5 troops R5 &c. That might not work because of problems attacking but someone might find a way of twisting the idea into something interesting.

 

[Dalinar]

Losing as many as the round has potential, but that's harder to tell because troop losses (and overall troops) are one of the things the records don't track.

And I thought about winning by having the fewest troops because the opposite works so spectacularly badly - games where I've had agreements that the person with most troops wins after X rounds just allow the last person going to decide the game. Having the fewest troops would be a much more difficult balance since getting into a better position to win makes you more likely to get eliminated. I'm sure there would be issues with it, but it'd at least be better than going for the most troops.

 

[once]

yes. i am very interested. if you are starting this week - i cant. in fact not until mid october i guess, too busy finishing uni right now. but i do want to throw my name in the hat for future fun! very much so. please. ?. i havent thought this through, but first idea that comes to mind could be an assassin variation, where the given targets rotate. so f.ex. on even rounds (2,4,6, etc.) your target will be the player going before you, on odd rounds, the player after you. or sth else entirely. anyway. have fun with this, and keep me in the loop guys, sounds like a great idea to freshen things up.

 

[Bluebonnet]

I would be interested. Just all depends on when you gear up. But a most likely work?

 

[Tyro]

An assassin game that relies on rotation of targets could work if 3 players. It would not be set up as assassin but if a player eliminates their target then the other player would allow the victor to finish the game. I might have better luck in such assassin games ;-)
I guess 5 rounds might be about the right length to target one player.
Perhaps it would give rise to stalemates?

 

[once]

yes, a stalemate seems likely with this, and a whole lot of back & forth too. like i said, didnt think this through much. but what i would find intriguing, is a scenario in which right timing would be (more) essential to win. so maybe this would be more intersting w/ more than 3 players, say 4 or 5 maybe, & the target wouldnt swap back & forth between two players, but cycle evenly through all of them. so round 1 everyone targets the one going after you, round 2 the one after that, etc. but maybe this too complicated & possibly a pain to keep track of. will think this through proper & make an actual suggestion once the time comes..

 

[ndrm31]

Im in for a domains game, the 1st one to hold the tower for 1 turn wins, so as the team game 2 v 2 v 2 could be great

 

[haWD96lz]

I'm always open to trying new things.