4 ms·
My new obsession: A horse-racing board game of pure luck
- blightful 5mo agoReminds me of the horse racing game in needful things.
- mallory854 5mo agoIs there a link to a really nice one to put on display somewhere?
- jader201 5mo agoThis sounds similar (but not quite) to Ready Set Bet [1], which is probably a lot easier to find than this. This game, as the title suggests, is pure luck, based on the cards you were dealt. In RSB, it’s real-time, and as dice are rolled to move horses forward, you can place bets on a number of spots, based on how the dice are being rolled (always by a designated player that is either part of the betting or not — recommended that they don’t bet if you have enough players). Obviously still a lot of luck, as with most dice rolling games. But a decent amount of strategy in timing your bets, especially since bets freeze once horses get to a certain line in the game. [1] https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/351040/ready-set-bet https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/351040/ready-set-bet
- jvanderbot 5mo agoBeing allowed to place bets makes it actually not a pure luck game. That game can be optimally solved given knowledge of the world because there are choices involved. TFA's base game, however, is pure luck - you place no bets, you discard no cards, you make no decisions. Perhaps you influence things by how you roll, but probably not consciously. If the same die roll sequence and same card shuffle sequence is replayed, the game is the exact same.
- neogodless 5mo agoCame to the comment(s) looking for this game. I've played this! Fun! It's interesting to explore the spectrum of what people find fun. In large groups, it seems like games that tilt heavily towards luck can be a great deal of fun for everyone, while "board gamers" (like me) enjoy games where you can learn and leverage strategies to gain advantage, and the role of luck is diminished (to varying degrees). As a board game host, you have to get that spectrum, gauge group size and preference, and pick a game that will work for them. Strategic games, in particular, take learning the rules, learning the strategies, practicing them, learning your opponents... it can take a dozen games before you're competitive. And for a lot of people, almost none of those games will be any fun. A few games kind of nail this with an unexpectedly even playing field, where strategy helps, but luck offsets it. If luck really offsets it, very strategic players will also find that it's no fun. Some luck-based games I really like include Lords of Vegas (not to mention... just Vegas), Bunny Kingdom, and Flip 7. A lot of card-based strategy games like Terraforming Mars and Wingspan certainly have some amount of luck in them, but it can be dwarfed by good synergy / strategy.
- aleksiy123 5mo agoI think for big groups it’s not so much luck/randomness that is the key but complexity. Low complexity games are going to play better. They can be pure skill games. Many drinking games are (beer pong etc). Luck/randomness is directly against determinism. A way of making feel less mechanical and opening up the combinatorial state space? Essentially increasing the fun/interest without introducing high complexity necessarily? As well as narrow the skill range as you say, but not necessarily over longer time horizons. Like you can do a 2d matrix of luck and complexity. Tic tac toe - low randomness, low complexity Chess - low randomness, high complexity Poker - med randomness, high complexity Roulette - high randomness, low complexity
- irq-1 5mo agoReminded me of Win, Place & Show (1966) from 3M. https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/782/win-place-and-show https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/782/win-place-and-show
- nogha 5mo agoMy favourite horse racing game is Knizia Winner’s Circle. Long Shot: The dice game is also another decent option. Ready set bet didn’t really work for me. But for a group that likes the more social side and yelling it seems good.
- quuxplusone 5mo agoIf we're listing modern games vaguely similar to this, we can't let the thread go without mentioning the fantastically entertaining (yet _mostly_ random) "Hot Streak" (2025)! https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/446497/hot-streak https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/446497/hot-streak
- hiccuphippo 5mo agoAnother similar game is Camel Up https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/260605/camel-up-second-edition https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/260605/camel-up-second-e...
- amenghra 5mo ago+1 to Camel Up. If you haven’t played the 2nd edition, they added two crazy camels going the wrong way. Lots of fun and playable from age ~6-7 onwards.
- iqp 5mo agoLove RSB but then again I'm a filthy degenerate :D
- orkasi 5mo agoLong Shot: The Dice Game is my favourite among horse-racing board games. It is so much fun!
- jauntywundrkind 5mo agoA great uncle of mine had made a similar but simpler game like this we used to play, decades & decades & decades ago. He didn't take credit for it, but he'd gotten it printed on a huge nice sheet of paper, and had horses that advanced down it. You just place bets and turn over cards for each horse, and the highest card horse advances. On rainy days we'd sit in the living room, my sibling & I, basically on top of the giant horse race game, making bets & turning over cards to see who the winner would be. Our game was shorter, and only had uhh 6 tracks I think. The odds rose quite a lot for the un-favored horses, like, a lot a lot. The horses/tracks all had names, but I can't remember their names.
- pessimizer 5mo agoI love what they're calling here "zero-player" games. They're automatons that you can build other games on top of (often in combination with other automatons) or, like this, they are games where players can simply identify themselves with one of the game's components. The latter are excellent for groups of drunk people. Spectator sports are basically zero-player games. Another classic is "LCR" (Left Center Right), and one that was popular a few years back is "Yahtzee Turbo."
- munchler 5mo agoThe classic I remember from childhood is the card game "War". Assuming neither player cheats or makes a mistake, the outcome is totally predetermined.
- datadrivenangel 5mo agoCandyland with extra steps.
- wewtyflakes 5mo agoExtra trots, you mean.
- ammanley 5mo agounderrated comment
- tqi 5mo agokalshi has a feature in beta right now that lets the public bet on the outcomes of this game
- MyHonestOpinon 5mo agoA bit Off topic. I am looking for a Board Game for my step dad. He is a retired 80+ years old rancher. He doesn't know any english at all, so he is very limited on choices. Something that can be played by himself or with other person.
- Our_Benefactors 5mo agoAzul and Set are both good. Can’t Stop is another classic “push your luck” game.
- InsideOutSanta 5mo agoAzul comes to mind.
- mkayokay 5mo agoI'd recommend that you try and ask this in a more specialized forum (e.g. BGG [1]). Also, if solo playable board games is a must - this drastically reduces the amount of games. Maybe also consider card games (like Solitaire)? [1] https://boardgamegeek.com/ https://boardgamegeek.com/
- regus 5mo agoI also considered recommending Solitaire. I personally enjoy playing Free Cell with a deck of actual cards (although a video game version is just as fun).
- wingmanjd 5mo agoIf you're not opposed to card games, Five Crowns [1] is a house staple in both sides of my family. It will require multiple people. Sagrada [2] is a fun game as well. Can be played solo, but I find it more fun with others. [1] https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1472/five-crowns https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1472/five-crowns [2] https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/199561/sagrada https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/199561/sagrada
- mswphd 5mo agohard to give recommendations without more information. For example 1. what languages does he know? there are boardgames that are localized into other languages. Probably the easiest route tbh. 2. what kinds of games does he like? for example, many boardgames have very little english on the game pieces. think any game that uses a standard poker deck, e.g. solitaire, or many others. Mahjong is another example though, as is dominos). There are some modern boardgames that might also be fine, namely ones that discourage communication in the first place. It's common in co-op boardgames. For example, the Lord of the Rings trick taking game is 1-4 players, and during gameplay there is no discussion allowed. Game pieces can be separated into two categories 1. scenario-specific ones, which have text on them/must be read to be understood/played. You could maybe translate them? or it may have been localized for a language he's literate in. I don't know. 2. secnario-independent ones, which are (functionally) poker cards. For this game you only need to share language when understanding the scenario-specific cards, and when planning strategy before each scenario starts. I would be comfortable playing the game with someone I don't share a language with if 1. we both know the game (this would be the hard part), and 2. we have two copies of the game, so we each can read our scenario-specific cards in our own language, and 3. we struggled through with a translation app before each scenario starts, if we want to discuss strategy.
- NooneAtAll3 5mo agoI thought this was going to be about physical horse racing game, where "horses" are moved by random ball interactions see f.e. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/nDQEI3s_2aI https://www.youtube.com/shorts/nDQEI3s_2aI
- alexpotato 5mo agoThere is also an even easier variant (best for young kids) where each person gets 1 or more horses. You then have people roll the dice and move the horse one spot forward if the number on the dice match the horse number. It's total luck but a great way to explain probability to the younger kids and probability distributions to the older kids.
- maplant 5mo agoNot to distract from what is undeniably a pretty cool thing, it's hard to even call these "games" as there's absolutely no decision making going on. I absolutely loathe games like these because you're not actually doing anything.
- interviewitis 5mo ago[dead]
- dimes 5mo agoAgreed. You might as well play candy land.
- psvv 5mo agoThe highly random and somewhat convoluted mechanisms remind me of something like character creation in the rpg classic traveller. You do have a little choice there (unlike here), but I think the same appeal is present even without the choice. The experience is a bit like reading fortunes from tea leaves. The fun comes from assigning meaning to the outcomes. This happens, generally, automatically as a human instinct. In traveller, the process of character creation generates a kind of narrative in your head of who the character is. I've been thinking about these kind of experiences a lot lately. Is it a game? I don't think a discussion of definitions is very interesting, but I would call it a game by any casual meaning of the word. Certainty, in traveller's case, a roleplaying game. But I recognize the same appeal in these zero-player games. You're playing something, just in your own mind. The primary game isn't what's on the table, but what's in your mind. You're not committing to choices in physical (or digital) space, you have no agency there -- but there's still a rich experience happening between your ears -- full of hopes, predictions, disappointments, elation, creativity. It's like reading but you're also part author. You're not reading from a book, but from pattern matching inside randomness. I'm still trying to wrap my head around it myself. I have little more than the recognition of something interesting in this direction, but beyond that I can't articulate it.
- michaelcampbell 5mo ago> character creation in the rpg classic traveller. This is half the game. I fondly remember a few "game days" in the early 80's with some friends spending hours "rolling" Traveller characters. Partly because it was quite possible for your character to due DURING GENERATION, before the "rpg" part of the game actually started.
- tempestn 5mo agoI'd hoped this would be a post about Giro Galoppo, which is a fantastic little board game if you have kids (and can find a copy). It's easy enough for small children to learn, but the mix of strategy and luck is such that an adult can put real effort into winning, but will still probably only win 2/3 to 3/4 of games, not every time. And it's quick to play. Great game.
- andrewstuart 5mo agoI’m pretty sure this was featured in a Stephen King horror story.
- redeyedtreefrog 5mo agoSimilar but a bit different https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWm0Yasp9qA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWm0Yasp9qA
- andrewstuart 5mo agoThat’s it!
- mattbettinson 5mo agoWe played this in university with a deck of cards. Great fun
- vyrotek 5mo agoSounds fun. But I'd probably consider a physical and automated version instead. https://www.amazon.com/WM-Desktop-Derby-6-Horse-Racing/dp/B002U1O2N8 https://www.amazon.com/WM-Desktop-Derby-6-Horse-Racing/dp/B0... There are some really old versions too that you crank and it knocks a ball around to move your horse.
- culopatin 5mo agoReminds me of an arcade mechanical game where you tossed balls into a panel with holes and depending on where it landed it would push your designated horse faster. It was a massive thing with room for an announcer in the middle like 20 seats at least around him in a horseshoe shape.
- bena 5mo agoWe have an even simpler version of this called "Derby Dash". It's basically just the race portion of the board with dice. It gets used a fair bit, but mostly because it is zero-player. Not to get too much into it, but since neither of us can influence the outcome, it's a good way to imitate a fictional competition fairly.
- haunter 5mo agoAnd peope wonder why auto battlers and generally gacha with auto gameplay loops are popular.
- ccppurcell 5mo agoI find pure luck games really boring. Why not just flip a coin and be done with it. I also find pure skill games boring. I mean like running races. You might as well play "who's tallest?" But I seem to be in a minority
- gampleman 5mo ago> But I seem to be in a minority Given the design of nearly all popular modern board games, that seems very unlikely.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- wewewedxfgdf 5mo agoI got lost in the double negatives and inversions of this interaction. But then again, I’m not unconvinced that I didn’t fail to misunderstand it correctly.
- gampleman 5mo agoAs in: most popular modern board games combine both luck and skill. That would imply that like the parent, most people enjoy games that combine both rather than being purely skill xor luck based.
- Calazon 5mo agoHow do you feel about chess?
- youngprogrammer 5mo agoYou might as well play "who can memorize the most openings and lines"
- jgalt212 5mo ago
- redeyedtreefrog 5mo agoRepeatedly following a fixed algorithm by hand can be relaxing - simple Sudoku problems, Solitaire, simple Rubiks cube solutions, simple crosswords and math problems, word searches, etc. Meanwhile social games are fun even if they are extremely simple - rules-lite RPGs, Guess Who, Pictionary, etc. This seems to exist at an intersection of the two. It's interesting that following a mindless algorithm with a group of people sounds so ridiculous and pointless in principle, but it's actually fun. Our brains are somehow wired to find it rewarding. Extreme luck has the benefit of bringing everyone to the same level regardless of age or background, whereas e.g. chess, Counter-Strike or boxing is much less fun if one person is 10x better than the other. The more skill a game requires, the more it needs separate leagues for differing levels of ability. Maybe there's also ironic enjoyment in playing a horse-race gambling game when most people playing have likely never watched a real horse race, let alone bet on one.
- PapstJL4U 5mo agoThe horse racing game was the first program I programmed in school. randint(1..6) per horse and watching them race was the "drug", that made me follow programming as a career.