Hacker News Reader

Comment by SchemaLoad | Hacker News Reader

I've been trying to do this. One thing I've observed is trying to arrange people to play board games is quite difficult because you can't predict how many people will show up. People get sick, misread the times, etc. And a lot of games are very sensitive to player count, so having 2 people too few or too many has the ability to make the game somewhat unplayable or risk people sitting out watching.

Easier to just host a party or meetup where you can over invite and if some people don't show up it's no issue.

View on HN

A friend of mine has this problem with their D&D campaigns. He makes huge efforts and there’s always one or two people who flake or don’t have the same commitment level. He’s gotten quite angry and sad about it.

He is trying something different now, to make a hybrid campaign where there’s a lot of one-shots in a broader story arc. It’s structured like missions in an ongoing struggle.

Maybe if you want to do board games, we need more games that scale up and down easily. I’m not a board game person, IDK.

Our D&D group meets once to twice a month and is about seven or eight people. That's large enough that at most two of us can not show up and we're still enough to play and enjoy ourselves. The DM writes session recaps and posts them the day before the next session. The overhead here is minimized by his taking notes during the session. This has kept our group going for something like three or four years now!

The one thing about D&D is that I know almost everyone there exclusively through the campaign, and 90% of my interactions with them have been in character, which means I actually know very little about their personal lives. We're getting better with this with non-D&D hangs though.

lol I also have had this experience. I played DnD to get to know people and after two years I realized I only knew their characters. Challenging.

Tell your friend to look up the Western Reaches style of play. One of the core ideas is that you begin and end each session in a safe zone so that you can have a rotating pool of adventurers. You can tuck in some rules for having mercenaries for when you have fewer than the encounters are balanced for and you’re off to the races.

It does reduce the possibility of highly on rails campaigns and instead requires more of a sandbox plan with one page dungeons and stuff. Even so, it seems made to solve this exact problem.

5-room dungeons: https://www.roleplayingtips.com/5-room-dungeons/

I don't do tabletop, but I do write, and making these is helpful for worldbuilding.

D&D has too many rules. I invented a really light weight set of rules so that we can engage in more "role play" as opposed to RTS. It's more fun for the casual game and you don't waste so much time between turns.

Tell us more about about your custom rule set?

Try anything that's described as "Powered by the Apocalypse". It's an excellent foundation for rules-light role-playing games.

Urban Shadows was my intro into this style of play. Monster of the Week is also very good. But there a huge number of great games out there that are not D&D (which is really a bit clunky and overly complex, IMO).

You just have to make up your own - unless you want to!

> Tell your friend to look up the Western Reaches style of play.

The playstyle is called West Marches.

IMHO, the important bit of this style isn't so much the player pool flexibility (tho it does help that case), but the inversion of who's driving the story. The DM prepares the world, but it's up to the players to organize their excursions outside of the safe zone, for their own reasons. This forces more involvement of the players in the story, instead of the more passive campaign on rails you mentioned.

So in the GP's case of flaky low-effort players, West Marches style may not help because it puts more burden on the players in addition to just showing up and having everything presented to them.

That said, if the group can manage to do it, player engagement should be higher, and the DM suffers less disappointment because they're only prepping a session of content based on the players' plans for that session, not a long storyline that requires more alignment and adherence.

Oh lordy, on the fly DMing is hard. Like a 4 hour session of improv with dice.

West Marches doesn't have to be totally on the fly for the DM. The players organize and define their agenda prior to the play session, so the DM should have a little time to prepare. The excursion is planned to visit a specific area of the map, so the DM only needs flesh out a bit of the world at a time.

Could you be more flexible about what game you are playing depending on how many show up?

This is the way. You have to have some amount of flexibility in your plans.

Yes, but it's frustrating that it's on the organizer to give everyone both something fun to do and the flexibility to flake. It feels like such thankless work to work so hard and get so little commitment back.

I have a fairly reliable friend group, but sometimes stuff just happens. One game we had someone get sick, and another person's car broke down. That's just life and it happens, but the game was very disrupted. Would be easier to pick activities that are more flexible to the number of people participating.

It is possible I would assume. I just don't have that many games or enough table space to be super flexible. I'm thinking board games work easiest when the people are already in the same space and need something to do, rather than trying to arrange them to come just for the game.

Space base works well for this for up to eight people with the expansion. I have a friend with a very tiny apartment we have done that in, and while others are buying cards you can enjoy conversation. I used to host a lot when I was able to keep a dedicated hosting area at the one house, but recently not as much unless it's outdoors mainly. If you have a grill you can let people know to bring what they want to grill, and popcorn and some seasoning makes an affordable snack, and if you project a movie somewhere people can disconnect if needed. But yes, I usually use my social energy with family in the area now.

Just in case you need some recommendations:

Party games: Scale well with more people, easy to explain

- Werewolf

- Werewords

- Codenames (favorite)

Beginner Games: Accept a decent amount, somewhat easy to explain

- Camel Up

- Flip 7

- Dungeon Fighter

- Ticket to Ride

Games that have nothing to do with your problem, but I just wanna mention:

- Everdell: Cute critters prepare for winter

- Root: Cute critters prepare for war

- Azul: Place fancy tiles that look and feel delicious

- Bohnanza: The best part of Catan without the bad parts

I'd like to add a very simple one: Uno.

With the rules variant that you can play out-of-order if you add an identical card to the one that's on top of the stack, it disrupts the otherwise pretty linear play, and easily scales up to 10ish persons and still be fun.

I host a lot of board game days and...yes.

One thing I do that helps is get people to RSVP with a specific arrival time, and do my best to have a game about to start around that time.

If you show up unexpectedly, then I'm not going to feel bad about you sitting out for an hour or more.

People unexpectedly bringing a partner/friend who is not really that into board games is the absolute worst thoguh.

> One thing I've observed is trying to arrange people to play board games is quite difficult because you can't predict how many people will show up. People get sick, misread the times, etc. And a lot of games are very sensitive to player count, so having 2 people too few or too many has the ability to make the game somewhat unplayable

You're trying to arrange the wrong type of event. A board game group plays a variable number of games simultaneously to accommodate the number of players each game can support. A board game group does not try to fit everyone into the same game as a matter of principle.

Probably. Problem is I only have so much space on my table.

I have a group of people who play boardgames in a turned based fashion over at boardgamearena. This solves the flakiness issue. The lack of direct social interaction is then made slightly better by having a chat channel where we chat about ongoing games.

We've been having ongoing games (around 2 going at every one time) since about a year now I think.

Still do in person games as well, but this at least keeps that group going through in-perwon drought periods.

As someone who has tried to host events for specific board games, I completely agree. Most games I play are best with 3 to 4, and I will flat out refuse to play them with more than 5.

Now, I host meetups which typically get 8-15 people and multiple games, so an unpredictable player count is not an issue.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com