Page 4 | Board Game Argument

WhathasHappenedtotheWorld · 2022-12-26T15:48:42+00:00

DD and DS were playing a board game where you move a counter steps until the finish line, answering questions along the way. One of the question types was one where players had to cooperate and if they got it right, both players could move forwards. DD was ahead of DS and he decided to not answer that question because if both players moved ahead, then DD would have won so he reckoned that it was best that no one moved forward so he would have another chance the next go to move ahead. The rule book does not say this tactic is banned. DD says that DS is a bad sport and is really angry at him. I am inclined to agree as this was meant to be a fun game, and DS takes things way too seriously. Who is wrong? YANBU- DS is wrong. He should have not taken the game so seriously. YABU- DD is wrong as she should understand that DS was only trying to win.

Original poster

WhathasHappenedtotheWorld · 26/12/2022 17:53

@oviraptor21 Yes I think you are right. The game says it is for 2-4 players but DS says that we should only play it as a group of 3 or 4 for this reason. He said he would play cooperatively in order to be placed 2nd rather than 3rd or 4th, if more than 2 people played.

OP posts:

Getoff · 26/12/2022 17:53

UWhatNow · 26/12/2022 17:39

I agree - good on your DD for not succumbing to male arrogance. Pack up the game and fuck it off. She won ultimately.

Show quote history

The idea that she did the same thing as him is wrong. He played within the rules of the game. She broke the implied contract to play the game to completion. What he did was perfectly valid, in fact mandatory, in the sense that for games to be meaningful people must take them seriously and do what they can to win. What she did was wrong and bratty.

BadNomad · 26/12/2022 17:54

Your son sounds smart. If winning wasn't important, then your daughter wouldn't have thrown a tantrum when she didn't win. She is a bad loser.

xsquared · 26/12/2022 17:59

DomesticShortHair · 26/12/2022 17:49

And how do you think you develop that mindset, or ability for when such situations arise?

Show quote history

Quick thinking and common sense required in an emergency, doesn't mean cheating and taking advantage of others.

Okay, so there are situations where you may need to go against the rules in an emergency but not at the expense of others.

Mama1980 · 26/12/2022 18:00

Your DD is a bad loser. DS did the smart thing and as he said it wasn't against the rules.

catsrus · 26/12/2022 18:00

Wait until one of them spends christmas with the family of a new partner and discovers that they all CHEAT AT MONOPOLY and think the point of the game is just to win NO MATTER HOW. They steal from the bank and swipe each others cards..... It made me understand how the rich get richer ........🤯🤬

Merryoldgoat · 26/12/2022 18:04

WhathasHappenedtotheWorld · 26/12/2022 16:47

@NIparty maybe but tbh I am just worried that when DS goes to uni in a year or two, he won’t find many friends if he is so competitive in trying to win by finding ‘loopholes’ like this.
I want him to start thinking that sometimes he should just play for the sake of playing and become more sociable in general as it will be tough making friends otherwise.

I play board games a lot and am very competitive.

I want to win but if I don’t I want the other person to have given me a run for my money. If I lose I do so because I’ve not played a good game and it’s my fault.

Playing ‘sociably’ without having winning in mind would be shit. If I’m playing with someone who doesn’t take the game seriously it ruins it for me.

I am entirely typical of my group and your son will find people like him.

FrippEnos · 26/12/2022 18:05

DomesticShortHair · 26/12/2022 17:47

My point is on MN, I read a lot of stories of people who are struggling to put a roof over their heads and food on the table for their children. My friend (and indeed I) both grew up in a similar environment. She was determined to do what she could to make sure that her son be able to offer a provide a better life for both himself and his family. It looks like she’s succeeded, or certainly played her part. I think he’s a brilliant young man, Intelligent, focuses, driven and capable for someone still in his early twenties, but even if he is a dick, his kids are unlikely to go to school with hole in their shoes or hide behind the couch when the rent man knocks at the door, unlike his mother had to. She is over the moon about that.

Show quote history

As long as she is still "over the moon" about how he emotionally treats his wife and kids when/if he finally gets to that stage.

And on MN we also read a lot about husbands that are emotionally never there and whether they should leave them.

Life is a balancing act.

Its also worth remembering that if he is happy to break rules and step over other people in whatever his profession is, he won't last long at it before he is caught.

EwwSprouts · 26/12/2022 18:12

@EwwSprouts I think there is a subtle difference here. DS was still playing the game by answering this question type wrong. Previously you said he refused to answer in the timescale. He withdrew.

DomesticShortHair · 26/12/2022 18:14

xsquared · 26/12/2022 17:59

Quick thinking and common sense required in an emergency, doesn't mean cheating and taking advantage of others.

Okay, so there are situations where you may need to go against the rules in an emergency but not at the expense of others.

Show quote history

Let me give you a bit of an example. Imagine you’re on an airplane going off on your holidays. As it goes down the runway, there’s a fire and the plane screeches to a halt and starts burning ferociously. Inside the cabin, there’s widespread panic and confusion. Only some people are going to make it out alive. Would you fight our way to an exit, even if you knew it was likely at the expense of others? Would you want your son or daughter to?

Or imagine if you know that there’s an emergency incident nearby to where you work, and people (including children) are injured and need your help, but your boss won’t let you go. If you do go, you know you’ll probably be disciplined at work, and may even lose your job. Also if you go, you probably won’t be covered by insurance, so if something happens to you, you and your family could be left with nothing. Would you still go and help? Would you expect your son or daughter to?

Choconut · 26/12/2022 18:18

I think the best thing to do would be to just to let him make his choice that time as it wasn't against the rules (he doesn't have ASD does he? Because mine would be just the same!) and afterwards decide between you all with a vote what the rules would be going forward.

Original poster

WhathasHappenedtotheWorld · 26/12/2022 18:19

@EwwSprouts As in he refused to answer the question correctly by giving other clearly wrong answers. So he was still playing the game whereas DD ended the game by packing up. Sorry if that was not clear

OP posts:

xsquared · 26/12/2022 18:22

DomesticShortHair · 26/12/2022 18:14

Let me give you a bit of an example. Imagine you’re on an airplane going off on your holidays. As it goes down the runway, there’s a fire and the plane screeches to a halt and starts burning ferociously. Inside the cabin, there’s widespread panic and confusion. Only some people are going to make it out alive. Would you fight our way to an exit, even if you knew it was likely at the expense of others? Would you want your son or daughter to?

Or imagine if you know that there’s an emergency incident nearby to where you work, and people (including children) are injured and need your help, but your boss won’t let you go. If you do go, you know you’ll probably be disciplined at work, and may even lose your job. Also if you go, you probably won’t be covered by insurance, so if something happens to you, you and your family could be left with nothing. Would you still go and help? Would you expect your son or daughter to?

Show quote history

I honestly don't know ow how I would behave in those extreme circumstances. In the first case, my survival instinct would probably kick in and I would be acting on adrenaline.

Of course I would want to help in the second situation, but there may be a reason why I wouldn't be able to help for example, the emergency services may have also been called at the time.

Anyway, these are hypothetical imaginary situations, but in either case, I hope I would have acted with integrity and done my best on both accounts.

Wow. We've come quite far from the OP!

howmanybicycles · 26/12/2022 18:27

Honestly it sounds like your DD is the one taking things way too seriously here, not your DS.

CottonSock · 26/12/2022 18:30

I'm possibly a bit neurodiverse but I probably would have reacted like your dd. I have such a strong sense fairness, that deviation from 'fair' makes me very stressed. My dd is the same. Unless your ds's move was in the rules I would give your dd the benefit.

Hawkins001 · 26/12/2022 18:31

WhathasHappenedtotheWorld · 26/12/2022 15:55

@NoelleSnowman
Yh I get where you are coming from, but surely this is just a lighthearted Christmas board game so DS should have just tried his best with the question even though it may have resulted him losing.

I can understand your perspectives, and I've got a friend who is similar, he doesn't know how to play a friendly game, it's always for the win

Hawkins001 · 26/12/2022 18:33

WhathasHappenedtotheWorld · 26/12/2022 18:19

@EwwSprouts As in he refused to answer the question correctly by giving other clearly wrong answers. So he was still playing the game whereas DD ended the game by packing up. Sorry if that was not clear

so basically won by default, have they made up?

Notthetoothfairy · 26/12/2022 18:36

I don’t think it’s a good lesson for DS that he shouldn’t be competitive in case this somehow stops him from making friends in future! It is more likely to damage his chances career wise if he changes his attitude.

DD needs to learn to take it on the chin (win some, lose some).

Notthetoothfairy · 26/12/2022 18:41

DomesticShortHair · 26/12/2022 18:14

Let me give you a bit of an example. Imagine you’re on an airplane going off on your holidays. As it goes down the runway, there’s a fire and the plane screeches to a halt and starts burning ferociously. Inside the cabin, there’s widespread panic and confusion. Only some people are going to make it out alive. Would you fight our way to an exit, even if you knew it was likely at the expense of others? Would you want your son or daughter to?

Or imagine if you know that there’s an emergency incident nearby to where you work, and people (including children) are injured and need your help, but your boss won’t let you go. If you do go, you know you’ll probably be disciplined at work, and may even lose your job. Also if you go, you probably won’t be covered by insurance, so if something happens to you, you and your family could be left with nothing. Would you still go and help? Would you expect your son or daughter to?

Show quote history

Scenario 1: yes I would fight my way to an exit (but would prioritise my own DC over me and push them out first). Scenario 2: no I wouldn’t help (for all the reasons you mentioned and also because I would probably get in the way of the emergency services who wouldn’t want everyone to leave their offices and intervene). I would want my DC to have the same reaction in both cases.

I would say this is completely normal, if people are being honest.

BertieBotts · 26/12/2022 18:46

People enjoy different things about games. Sounds like DS enjoys the challenge and strategy aspects (complaints about too many luck based cards).

Other people enjoy different aspects of games, like humour or story or zany surprises, and don't mind if they are totally luck based. I like these because I'm no use at strategy and find strategy based games frustrating. But somebody who enjoys strategy might find a luck based game boring because they're not getting a challenge out of it, you may as well just roll a dice and see who wins.

Most games for adults have a mix of luck, strategy, bluffing etc.

Some people don't mind what game they are playing and just enjoy the fact of a shared activity.

I do think it helps to know your game audience and pick the right game accordingly. There's no use pairing strategists and novelty gamers against each other because one of them will always be frustrated. Instead play something else where the point is completely different like charades or pictionary.

FrippEnos · 26/12/2022 18:58

DomesticShortHair · 26/12/2022 18:14

Let me give you a bit of an example. Imagine you’re on an airplane going off on your holidays. As it goes down the runway, there’s a fire and the plane screeches to a halt and starts burning ferociously. Inside the cabin, there’s widespread panic and confusion. Only some people are going to make it out alive. Would you fight our way to an exit, even if you knew it was likely at the expense of others? Would you want your son or daughter to?

Or imagine if you know that there’s an emergency incident nearby to where you work, and people (including children) are injured and need your help, but your boss won’t let you go. If you do go, you know you’ll probably be disciplined at work, and may even lose your job. Also if you go, you probably won’t be covered by insurance, so if something happens to you, you and your family could be left with nothing. Would you still go and help? Would you expect your son or daughter to?

Show quote history

When they tested the airplane scenario, they had to bribe people to make it real.
They had to offer the first X amount of people money or they were all far too nice and didn't act as they would do in real life.

As for the second scenario, part of my job is to get the kids out first. check that no-one else is in the room and lock up so that the room can't be entered by anyone else.

cakeorwine · 26/12/2022 19:01

Wow. We've come quite far from the OP

We really have.

Game theory is fascinating. Especially in certain situations.

BasiliskStare · 26/12/2022 19:02

Missing the point here - but is this "The prisoner's dilemma " A famous conundrum - I may have this wrong - someone better than me will know .

AGoodDayForSomebodyElseToDie · 26/12/2022 19:10

DomesticShortHair · 26/12/2022 18:14

Let me give you a bit of an example. Imagine you’re on an airplane going off on your holidays. As it goes down the runway, there’s a fire and the plane screeches to a halt and starts burning ferociously. Inside the cabin, there’s widespread panic and confusion. Only some people are going to make it out alive. Would you fight our way to an exit, even if you knew it was likely at the expense of others? Would you want your son or daughter to?

Or imagine if you know that there’s an emergency incident nearby to where you work, and people (including children) are injured and need your help, but your boss won’t let you go. If you do go, you know you’ll probably be disciplined at work, and may even lose your job. Also if you go, you probably won’t be covered by insurance, so if something happens to you, you and your family could be left with nothing. Would you still go and help? Would you expect your son or daughter to?

Show quote history

Scenario 2 is not comparable to cheating in order to drench your friends before they drench you. In your hypothetical scenario, your protagonist would be breaking the rules in order to help other people at their own expense - it's the absolute reverse of your fire brigade contest scenario. In these hypothetical circumstances, the biggest relevant factor is whether the individual would help or hinder the emergency services - a lay person would likely be a danger to themselves and others. An off duty paramedic, on the other hand, might reasonably skip out of their hypothetical second job to help victims of a serious incident, regardless of the consequences to themselves.

Scenario 1 - honestly, I think I'd be happier knowing a family member had died trying to do the right thing and save others than knowing that they'd trampled others under their feet to escape. But as it's a hypothetical situation, it's all a bit pointless.