Why do you play games?
The obvious answer is, "To have fun." Ok, fine. So what's fun? And what obligations, if any, does our unwritten social contract place upon you with respect to the other players in the game? You may never have thought about it, but if you were to pose these questions to the people in your favorite gaming group, they'd probably offer answers similar to your own. Part of what makes a gaming group work is that everyone in it shares the same expectations when sitting down to a game. When the values of the players aren't in sync, it's only a matter of time before problems arise. Such a case arose recently in a group I played with.
The game was Rette Sich Wer Kann. The nature of that game is such that there can come a point where a player is hopelessly out of the running. In this case, it was impossible for White to score more points than either Red or Blue had already scored. As it happens, Red and Blue were tied for the lead. Since White couldn't win himself, he instead decided to have an influence on the game. At the end of the game, when it was clear that Red's last bid to get more points and win the game would fail, White supported Red and caused him to win. Not to stop Blue from winning jointly, or even to cause Red to win alone. Just because he could.
In this game, I was Blue. And I was quite annoyed with White. Not because I didn't win the game but because, in my mind, White broke our gaming contract. When I play a game, I assume that all other players will do their best to win. I assume there will be no collusion between husbands and wives, housemates, or fraternity brothers (at the gaming table, all players should be on equal footing). I assume players will put forth their best effort, will strive to win and prevent other players from doing the same. And I hope that one player's fun will not come at the expense of another's. That last assumption includes things like throwing the game or making silly, arbitrary decisions which benefit some players and harm others.
Problem is, these are my assumptions, not necessarily those of everyone else at the table. White did what he did in order to have an influence on the game. For White, that was fun. For me, it violated two of the assumptions I listed above.
And it started me thinking about the different goals people have when they play games, and how they can be incompatible. The way I see it, there are two main schools of thought. The first says that when I play a game, I play to win. Period. I'll do everything I possibly can within the bounds of the rules to secure my victory while simultaneously trying to prevent my opponents from doing the same. Even if I can't possibly win, I'll still strive to achive the best possible position at the finish. Games where all players are of this mindset tend to be ordered, exciting, and "predictable." I put that in quotes because I don't mean to say that the outcome of the game is easily determined at the outset. Rather, I mean that opponents can count on each other to make the best play the can. This, in turn, enables players to form their own strategies more easily because random variables are reduced from the equation.
The second school of thought says that when I play a game, I'm out to have fun. If I happen to win, great. If not, that's ok, as long as I have a good time. That may mean hosing other players whenever I can, setting my own goals which don't necessarily coincide with the victory conditions, or just having an affect on the outcome of the game. Games where the players have this attitude are often chaotic, non-competitive and totally unpredictable. It's difficult to formulate a strategy when you're unsure of the goals of your opponents. But if they're not sure of your goals either, it hardly matters.
Both schools of thought are perfectly fine. Alone. But start mixing the two together and you've got trouble. People out to win sometimes pay little attention to whether or not other players are having fun, while players trying to just have fun often frustrate the players playing more seriously. Have other people run into a similar problem, or am I nuts?
Do you have trouble getting people together to play games? Do you just want to meet new people who share an interest in your hobby? Do what I did-- teach a class.
During the summer I taught an eight-week class called "Board and Party Games" at the University of Washington Experimental College (UWEC). The UWEC is a student-run, non-profit organization offering courses to the general public. You know the type-- everything from Beginning Guitar and Thai Cooking to Explore Your Inner Self and Rituals of Winter. I managed to get my course listed in the summer catalog. About twenty people signed up (with an average of fourteen attending each class), and we had a great time.
Each class session I brought in about a half dozen games from my collection. The first thirty minutes or so were spent describing the games. I provided a broad overview of the rules and a sense of how each game played, displaying and explaining the components. Then we took a 2-3 minute break during which students were able to ask me questions and decide what they wanted to play. Students sat down at their chosen game and spent the next ninety minutes playing. Often people were able to play more than one game per night. I tried to bring games which are still on the market and readily available (although German game night went very well, and Liar's Dice was so popular I brought it no less than four times and sold two copies I'd found at thrift stores), and I provided students with information about where to find the games in the Seattle area.
The class was a smash success. I plan to teach it every quarter until people stop signing up, and many students plan to repeat the class next quarter! The class succeeded on the social level as well-- my students have gotten together independently during the break between UWEC quarters. For the curious, the average age in the class was in the high thirties, and (surprisingly, to me) there were more women than men. Most were casual, Pictionary-and-Pente types of people, with few (if any) hard-core gamers. I think this class may have been my most brilliant idea ever-- I've actually got people paying me to play games. And instead of looking for people to play games with, they come looking for me. What a country!