Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[pacovf]

Oh! Oh! Pick me! Pick me!

[silverspawn]

sure, if Watno mods another one

I think we only need the word grid and assigned roles, after that the spymasters can flip and pass turns. it's not like they can lie.

[Watno]

Game started.

[pacovf]

Thank you so much!

[ipofanes]

Forming a queue for another match ...

[ehunt]

/in if it happens again

[ipofanes]

Looks a bit odd to tell the special someone who's going to set it up how to do it, but I'd like it better as a 6p game. More table talk.

[EgorK]

 /in for next one

[faust]

Looks a bit odd to tell the special someone who's going to set it up how to do it, but I'd like it better as a 6p game. More table talk.

I think this doesn't really work though (or it does work, but it is very exploitable). If you allow table talk, then you would allow non-spymasters to post a long list of clues the spymaster should give for specific combinations of cards. So I just post a list "if it's these 8 cards, say this, if it's these, say that...." Game over.

So you have to restrict talking. But that is always trouble. I don't think anything other than "all talk is allowed" or "no talk is allowed" is loophole-free.

[ipofanes]

I'm happy to retract my request if the participants should share this concern. Playing with table talk has been done and has shown to be enjoyable, but I agree that it could easily be destroyed depending on your attitude. 

[Kuildeous]

I think this doesn't really work though (or it does work, but it is very exploitable). If you allow table talk, then you would allow non-spymasters to post a long list of clues the spymaster should give for specific combinations of cards. So I just post a list "if it's these 8 cards, say this, if it's these, say that...." Game over.

So you have to restrict talking. But that is always trouble. I don't think anything other than "all talk is allowed" or "no talk is allowed" is loophole-free.

This is something I had not considered. I think that it would violate the spirit of the game, and such things should be disallowed.

I understand table talk to be conversation between the guessers. In fact, for this to work, there should be no interaction with the spymasters. I would go so far as to say that spymasters are not allowed to post anything but their clues and the results of the guesses. Likewise, guessers cannot post anything to the spymasters. This can be done already today. There's nothing stopping a guesser from telling the spymaster in private message what clue to give for certain words except just plain, old-fashioned good decorum.

So, how about this for the table talk?
* Spymaster is not allowed to say anything aside from clues and guess results.
* Guessers cannot speak to the spymasters, including passive commands like, "If he meant for Ball to be picked, he'll surely say 'dog' next time."
* Guessers can speak to each other about the clues, but the opposite team could glean which words are not theirs, so beware.

Is this loophole-free? Not in the slightest, but it all depends on how much you trust your teammates to not spoil the fun. There are a lot of games on here that rely on trust.

[ashersky]

I think this doesn't really work though (or it does work, but it is very exploitable). If you allow table talk, then you would allow non-spymasters to post a long list of clues the spymaster should give for specific combinations of cards. So I just post a list "if it's these 8 cards, say this, if it's these, say that...." Game over.

So you have to restrict talking. But that is always trouble. I don't think anything other than "all talk is allowed" or "no talk is allowed" is loophole-free.

This is something I had not considered. I think that it would violate the spirit of the game, and such things should be disallowed.

I understand table talk to be conversation between the guessers. In fact, for this to work, there should be no interaction with the spymasters. I would go so far as to say that spymasters are not allowed to post anything but their clues and the results of the guesses. Likewise, guessers cannot post anything to the spymasters. This can be done already today. There's nothing stopping a guesser from telling the spymaster in private message what clue to give for certain words except just plain, old-fashioned good decorum.

So, how about this for the table talk?
* Spymaster is not allowed to say anything aside from clues and guess results.
* Guessers cannot speak to the spymasters, including passive commands like, "If he meant for Ball to be picked, he'll surely say 'dog' next time."
* Guessers can speak to each other about the clues, but the opposite team could glean which words are not theirs, so beware.

Is this loophole-free? Not in the slightest, but it all depends on how much you trust your teammates to not spoil the fun. There are a lot of games on here that rely on trust.

I think the answer is QuickTopics.

The main forum thread is only for clues, guesses, and results.

You open a QT for all guessers (I'd use just one, to simulate everyone being in the same room) where they can say anything they want, but the spymasters can't see or read until after the game.

So, it's more fun for the guessers, but it's the same game for the spymasters.

[EgorK]

Can someone start a 4p game already?

[ehunt]

Can someone start a 4p game already?

oh /in

[Watno]

Kuildeous made a Google spreadsheet that allows you to easily create your own game without a moderator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TXkY5snm_uhZQNYvGqwrLSHjuHARIZouOP5pBEWRMXA/edit#gid=0
One spymaster simply opens the sheet, waits for it to fully load (i.e the words don't start with BOOT, KEY,...), then copies the two messages in the bottom right and sends it to the appropriate places.

[Kuildeous]

Which reminds me that I need to clean that up, but Watno's instructions are clear enough.

[ipofanes]

So far, only ehunt, egork, Kuildeous and me are game, which'd be enough for one guesser per team. Two more?

The spreadsheet instructions look clear enough to me. I have only read access but I take that the pattern is re-randomized if I hit [F5].

That QuickTopic thing would be one more password for me to memorise; can't we just blacken the table talk and Spymaster vows not to spoiler herself?

[EDIT: Kuildeous joining]

[ashersky]

So far, only ehunt, egork and me are game, which'd be enough for one team. Three more?

The spreadsheet instructions look clear enough to me. I have only read access but I take that the pattern is re-randomized if I hit [F5].

That QuickTopic thing would be one more password for me to memorise; can't we just blacken the table talk and Spymaster vows not to spoiler herself?

That would also work.  As would a separate table talk thread.

[Kuildeous]

I'd be up for team Codenames. I've only used that spreadsheet for one game. Might as well get more use out of it.

[ashersky]

I'll try the team game.

[gkrieg13]

I would also be down for the team game

[ehunt]

ill do either way

[chairs]

I'll get involved in as many (2v2) games of this as has a spot free. It's fun and less awful when I can't "keep up" than Mafia, since all I need to know is current grid, whose turn it is, and the clue.

I'd also be interested in trying a team variant but I'm not clear on how team Codenames works, exactly.

[silverspawn]

I'd play another 2v2 too. Team variant not so much.

[ipofanes]

I'll get involved in as many (2v2) games of this as has a spot free. It's fun and less awful when I can't "keep up" than Mafia, since all I need to know is current grid, whose turn it is, and the clue.

I'd also be interested in trying a team variant but I'm not clear on how team Codenames works, exactly.

One match has just started at http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14155.0, you may want to follow it from time to time.