Census Game Suggestions Thread - looking for new ideas

OK, a picture of the board will be a part of every turn. How about # of pawns per player?

 

2 or 3. 4 sounds too many

 

Would anyone be opposed to starting the game out with two for a trial run, with a possible change to 3 pawns each for the next game if 2 is deemed to few?

 

That's a great compromise

 

Sounds good.

 

I think that would be a good way to do it.

 

You'd be able to manipulate the images to show where teh pawns are after every move?

 

I'd just take a picture of the board after every turn and post it along with each update.

 

Ah, okay, cool. Bassil and I are talking

 

No problem.

 

Hoping all the details for Sorry are being sketched out

*

I PMed Nat with my Match Game rules draft. Hope you got it all right.

 

Has anyone ever tried a Civilization game?

-The_Chiss_Ascendancy

 

Oh stop it!



Sounds a blast!

 

I take that as a no?

I think I have a good idea on how the game can be run, strategy wise. And confrontations can be settled with dice. The goal of the game would be to destroy all the other civilizations or, in tradition, to reach the highest level of technology.

The game would need a map, but how could that be designed?

 

Sound stellar. I took courses in ancient civilizations in college and read a lot about them as well.

*

Would love to play Clue and/or Scrabble if anyone is interested in hosting.





Yes, I love the C&G!

 

Clue
Looks like it was having some trouble.

Scrabble

Hm, designing a board...does it look like a board from any other game?

 

The Scrabble board is pretty unique, because it has all of the multiplier squares.

 

Hi:

After some discussion(s)/messages exchanged with Nat, here's my final Match Game set of rules:

1. This game can have 6 players. After sign-ups, the host (that?s me!) will PM the players their randomly-chosen partners.

2. There will be 3 rounds of 4 fill-in-the-blank statements each. The host will post each statement in the thread, signalling the beginning of the 24-hour time period for each player to send in both their answers and what they think their partner will say via PM to the host. Statements will be things like ?Favorite color? and ?Favorite sports team.? Each correct guess earns that person a point.

3. Each player will post in the thread that their answers have been PMd to the host in order to keep track of players who submitted on time and the host can track which teams have lost a player.

4. Since there are four rounds, if a player disappears for two (whether in a row or not) they?re ejected from the game. A player who has lost their partner posts this in the thread so that the host can extend the deadline another 24 hours. If two teams have lost a player each, the remaining players will form a new team. They will not lose any team or individual points through this change. If only one of the teams is a player short, the host will fill in for the missing player as the one to guess about but will not receive an individual point; the player will receive an individual point and the team point as if she/he had not lost their original partner.

5. There are two prizes: individual and team. The person who gets the highest score gets 24 hours of colors. The team that gets the highest score (which I get by combining individual scores) will also get 24 hours for each person.

*

Example of a statement:

?Favorite Star Wars,? my answer is Mara Jade. My partner has to correctly guess that for an individual point.

 

I apparently forgot earlier Sorry! was approved for a trial run, but it's currently on hold as there are some technical difficulties.

Civilization seems to be a lot like Risk, which we already had running.

We've tried several incarnations of CLUE - it doesn't seem popular, so I'd like to keep that on hold for now in favor of other games. Scrabble, as FG linked to, was actually played here once. It didn't last long though IIRC it's because the host got busy.

 

Clue ran through about three different threads. It takes a certain person to want to play it, though, as the version we ran had some role-playing to it. I definitely agree with you, Nat, in keeping it on indefinite hold.

Might need to clarify this, Jade

I see nothing wrong with giving the game a shot, otherwise. Sounds like it has similar roots to Hypothetical or Two Truths and a Lie or some of those games, but that's okay. Go for it, Jade

It sounds like almost a: "Match Game -- the getting to know you game!" and you could play it in WNU, too.

 

Oops, you're right. Thanks. It's three rounds of 4 questions. And I can't wait to play Hypothetico. Two Truths and a Lie was a blast.

 

Update on Sorry! I've been having some time issues as of late with college and assorted other things, and have been trying to figure out how I can get a picture of the board up every turn so that I don't have to keep the board on the floor all day where it can be a tripping hazard. I'll be experimenting with those things, but don't worry, Sorry! is still in the processing stage.

 

How about using a paint program to put a mark of the correct colour on a picture of the board? Maybe something that you could easily white out when the piece is moved. I'm not sure how well this would work, but it seems like it would be better than having to deal with a real board.

 

Any other comments on the Match Game?

 

The Match Game would need far more specific categories, I think. As it stands, it seems far too easy to end the game with nobody having gained any points at all, simply because of how broad the categories look, and since the partners are randomly assigned, there's not much of a basis to form a guess on. Even with something like colors, you'd have to determine how to handle shades: would viridian be green, blue-green, or even blue, or would the partner have to precisely guess viridian as well? If so, that's far too many shades available for someone to realistically have much of a chance of getting the right one.