3 ms·
Ugh, people bringing in outside-the-game relationships to the game itself will ruin Diplomacy. "Tom and Jim never betray each other, and if one is in a position
by yamtaddle 4y ago
Ugh, people bringing in outside-the-game relationships to the game itself will ruin Diplomacy. "Tom and Jim never betray each other, and if one is in a position to sacrifice themselves to give the other the win, they always will" is how you get a group to never ever let Diplomacy hit the table after the first couple times. Plus a bunch of other games.
Folks who play like that are game-group poison. Hell, they can even make RPGs a lot less fun with that crap.
- SamPatt 4y agoI feel the same about people who favor their romantic partners. Maybe when they're new to the game or a new relationship, go a little easy. Ok. But any longer and that's lame.
- yamtaddle 4y agoYeah, I considered putting it in my post but ultimately cut it, but it is indeed often romantic couples who have this problem. Not always, but often it's couples. I think good-natured competition is typically a part of an ordinary friendship, even a very close one (Impro's take on status-games, and friendship being largely defined as a relationship in which you can play such games safely and without "real" stakes, probably factors into this) is probably why this happens less often with friends. Though, certain friend pairs, if you get them together in a group of people they don't know, they'll do this too.
- cwillu 4y agoI was going more for the “Bob is going to blargh, he always blarghs when he gets flustered like when he blarghed at the thinger last year” sort of dynamic that people don't necessarily otherwise talk about. Nobody becomes a completely blank slate when they sit down, and some tendencies are something you might take advantage of in a game, where you would compensate and allow for it in real life. And those tendencies might be something the other party is sensitive about, but because it never came up otherwise…