Print

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

[faust]

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.

You actually also need to know prior clues you didn't fully solve

[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.

You actually also need to know prior clues you didn't fully solve

First I have to quit fully solving them

[Kuildeous]

It can also help to pay attention to what the other spymaster said. If the other person didn't get all the clues, then that might help you rule out certain words.

Though that can be dangerous. In game IV, the spymaster said Hitler, so I figured Brazil would be one of them. Turned out he wasn't going that route, and Brazil was actually my color. Fortunately, my spymaster gave me a stronger clue for Brazil so I went against my initial thought.

Of course, winging it can be fun too.

[chairs]

It can also help to pay attention to what the other spymaster said. If the other person didn't get all the clues, then that might help you rule out certain words.

Though that can be dangerous. In game IV, the spymaster said Hitler, so I figured Brazil would be one of them. Turned out he wasn't going that route, and Brazil was actually my color. Fortunately, my spymaster gave me a stronger clue for Brazil so I went against my initial thought.

Of course, winging it can be fun too.

I don't actually know the Brazil connection.

[silverspawn]

I don't actually know the Brazil connection.

I didn't either 

[WalrusMcFishSr]

Or Argentina.

Source: that one episode of The Simpsons

[Kuildeous]

I don't actually know the Brazil connection.

Probably a generational thing. As he would be 126 years old now, I guess the likelihood of him still hiding out in South America is even slimmer than before.

Also, the Boys from Brazil was a movie about duplicating Hitler.

So yeah, I'm going to chalk that up to a niche cultural thing and not assume people know those references. 

In any case, it probably helps to know what the other team clues were in case they don't get everything.

[chairs]

Still, that's a much simpler process than keeping up with mafia.

[ipofanes]

I am just noticing that in boardgamegeek some matches are set up which explicitly rule out search engines. How do you feel about it? I think usage of Google can be exploited to a degree that would change the game, but this game should not encourage stretching the limits of the rules anyway.

[gkrieg13]

I think google should be allowed. Lots of times there is a reference that you don't understand because you have a different background

[silverspawn]

I don't like it... I think it's fine if you can make up for your lack of knowledge by putting in some extra effort.

[chairs]

To some extent, I think not allowing Google is interesting in that it forces your spymaster to "play to your partner", meaning post-game we can all discuss why we didn't understand X or Y clue and learn more about each other.

[EgorK]

I wouldn't mind joining 4 player game in addition to team game I'm participating in

[GendoIkari]

So now that I've played this in real life, I have a question... I noticed that in the Team Codenames game thread, the rules say that discussion between guessers should be in spoiler tags and that the clue-givers shouldn't look at them. Well this sort of rule doesn't exist in regular codenames... when the clue is given, the guessers discuss it, while the clue-giver can hear all that discussion. And it can be important strategically; he can use the stuff he learns from their discussion to help guide his next clue. Similar to how in Mysterium, listening to the teammates discuss what they think the clue means can help the ghost give his next clue.

Is there a reason that this rule was introduced for the forum version?

[gkrieg13]

Faust said somewhere that you could post something that would ruin the game so we decided we would do spoiler tags

[GendoIkari]

Faust said somewhere that you could post something that would ruin the game so we decided we would do spoiler tags

What sort of thing could the guessers, who don't have any information that's not completely public, say that would cause a problem?

[ipofanes]

'Well, if TANK and WEAR are on our team, I believe he would give "rhubarb 2" as a clue whereas if we'd be looking for DENT and AUSTRALIA we would expect a clue like "hamstring 2".'

   

[GendoIkari]

'Well, if TANK and WEAR are on our team, I believe he would give "rhubarb 2" as a clue whereas if we'd be looking for DENT and AUSTRALIA we would expect a clue like "hamstring 2".'

 

Fair enough, but the rules for regular play would allow this sort of thing. Or, one might protest on the grounds that the clue given is supposed to actually "point to" one or more words on the table, and in this case the clue given would be purely a meta-gaming type thing and not a "real clue". But either way, I don't see why the rules for the forum version would be different from the rules for real-life play.

[faust]

'Well, if TANK and WEAR are on our team, I believe he would give "rhubarb 2" as a clue whereas if we'd be looking for DENT and AUSTRALIA we would expect a clue like "hamstring 2".'

 

Fair enough, but the rules for regular play would allow this sort of thing. Or, one might protest on the grounds that the clue given is supposed to actually "point to" one or more words on the table, and in this case the clue given would be purely a meta-gaming type thing and not a "real clue". But either way, I don't see why the rules for the forum version would be different from the rules for real-life play.

Well, forum games allow for more extensive abuse. You could post a long list assigning a clue to every set of 9/8 words in the grid, and then the spymaster just needs to say the word and it's game over.

[gkrieg13]

'Well, if TANK and WEAR are on our team, I believe he would give "rhubarb 2" as a clue whereas if we'd be looking for DENT and AUSTRALIA we would expect a clue like "hamstring 2".'

 

Fair enough, but the rules for regular play would allow this sort of thing. Or, one might protest on the grounds that the clue given is supposed to actually "point to" one or more words on the table, and in this case the clue given would be purely a meta-gaming type thing and not a "real clue". But either way, I don't see why the rules for the forum version would be different from the rules for real-life play.

Well, forum games allow for more extensive abuse. You could post a long list assigning a clue to every set of 9/8 words in the grid, and then the spymaster just needs to say the word and it's game over.

It's even easier than that.  Assign each of the words a letter of the alphabet and then just post your first clue as heiuochsw: 9 and you have won the game.

[ipofanes]

'Well, if TANK and WEAR are on our team, I believe he would give "rhubarb 2" as a clue whereas if we'd be looking for DENT and AUSTRALIA we would expect a clue like "hamstring 2".'

 

Fair enough, but the rules for regular play would allow this sort of thing. Or, one might protest on the grounds that the clue given is supposed to actually "point to" one or more words on the table, and in this case the clue given would be purely a meta-gaming type thing and not a "real clue". But either way, I don't see why the rules for the forum version would be different from the rules for real-life play.

Well, forum games allow for more extensive abuse. You could post a long list assigning a clue to every set of 9/8 words in the grid, and then the spymaster just needs to say the word and it's game over.

It's even easier than that.  Assign each of the words a letter of the alphabet and then just post your first clue as heiuochsw: 9 and you have won the game.

Of course, all these approaches would be thwarted by the rule that clues may only be associated by meaning (so it's illegal to go "bravo 4" if four of your words start with b), but a less obvious stunt than the one I suggested (with more related words) would be a first step on a slippery slope.

It's a game where rules have room for interpretation and this is important to have people know beforehand.
 

[Jack Rudd]

Well, forum games allow for more extensive abuse. You could post a long list assigning a clue to every set of 9/8 words in the grid, and then the spymaster just needs to say the word and it's game over.

If you can post a list 2042975 words long, you deserve to win the game.

[Kuildeous]

Considering some of the conversation I had in spoilers on that team game, I could see inadvertently feeding clues to the spymaster. I'd be less worried about it happening IRL.

[ipofanes]

We just finished rounds with guessing teams of two using both open and concealed talk. I think in the end everyone was ok with open talk. It is clear that this game needs more "fair play" or rather "playing to the spirit of the laws" anyway.

I'd be interested to join another round of six. 

[Eevee]

I'd be interested to play as well.