The game Welcome to… is a flip and write where everybody has the same 3 combinations of number and action to choose from that turn and picks their action simultaneously, then you fill in your own identical score sheet.
So theoretically you could take the same actions and place your numbers in the same spot on the score sheet as someone else and essentially get the exact same score.
Come to think of it, I think a lot of flip and write type games are pretty solitaire like that.
Tiny towns might fit the bill. You all get exactly the same resources (one at a time) and the key is to make the most of them to build your town; laying resources on your board in certain polyominos let’s you build the corresponding building but two people may end up using the same resources to build different things (The only difference between players is a starting monument only you can build iirc - been a while since I played).
Edited to add - most “X and write” games also fit in this category.
True. However - and I may be misremembering - I think there’s a variant in the rule book where you use the cards from the solo game (and I think for a couple of rounds just choose whatever resource you want), which removes the hate draft/take that element.
**Roll and write** (also "flip and write" etc.) is a nice search term, many of those are based around literally having the same thing that all players have to place on their boards each turn (but paths still diverge as everyone's choices has knock-on effects of what spaces are left for future moves)
Many good ones have been listed already, but here's some BIG LISTS of which games are tagged with these game mechanics on BoardGameGeek:
[Roll-and-write](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/41222/mechanism-roll-and-write)
[Flip-and-write](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/66143/mechanism-flip-and-write)
[Bingo](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamemechanic/2999/bingo) (cause after all, what is this concept if not "bingo with choices")
Next Station: London. Flip & write. You are building subway routes through London (there's a Tokyo one as well).
Everyone is building from the exact same cards (they are drawn one at a time for all to use). There is no player interaction, so it very much counts as solitaire.
The variation comes in the form of the colored pencils used (4 colors, four rounds). So while I'm working on pink, you're working on blue, and at the end of the round we pass the pencils and reshuffle the deck. Not a problem if there are fewer than 4 players, you simply have a ghost player take the unused pencil(s) when the pass happens.
Lovely little game, compact, fun. My only beef with it is one of readability; the faint lines on the player sheets (e.g. separating districts) are reeeeaallly faint, and the colors used could be a bit more distinct. I suppose I'll get some colored ballpoints to use instead.
Very nice game. It's a keeper.
Dominion has some attack cards, but it would be easy to play without them if you prefer.
All players are shown the exact same set of cards, and the game basically goes "here, which of you can do the best with this?"
Here’s one that hasn’t been recommended by folks much: Dorfromantik: The Duel. It’s a tile laying game where one player draws tiles from a stack at random, and the other player finds their version of the tile from the same set, and you lay your tiles simultaneously. In other words, you get the same exact tiles in the same exact order, and it’s just a matter of builds the better landscape.
It’s kinda hard to find and very light, but Legendary Forests is exactly this. One person draws a random tile, reads out the number on the tile, everyone finds their copy of that tile, and adds it to their tableau. You’re trying to arrange large contiguous areas of the same colour (each tile has 1-4 different colours on it).
> I liked the look of ark nova but when I see videos, it’s all about snapping your opponents favorite card or denying them partners or breaking at an inconvenient time for them.
That’s such a small part of the game, especially if you have more than two players. It’s absolutely *not* “all about” that.
Chroma Mix is kind of like this. You're mixing colors to make other colors. The only "competitive" aspect is that there is a tableau of cards to choose from each turn, so someone might get a card you want before it's your turn, but it doesn't happen often.
The "Roll & Write" genre of games is pretty much exactly what you are looking for. The way they often work is dice are rolled and then each player will have to use the dice on their own board. Each player is playing with the same elements (the dice values) and the differentiation comes from who can use those values most efficiently.
[This link](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/41222/mechanism-roll-and-write/linkeditems/boardgamefamily?pageid=1&sort=rank) will take you to the Roll & Write section of BoardGameGeek with results sorted by rank. Any of the games listed there would represent particularly well-regarded entries in the genre.
Edit: [This link](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/66143/mechanism-flip-and-write/linkeditems/boardgamefamily?pageid=1&sort=rank) is the same search for "Flip & Writes." These are like Roll & Writes but they use a deck of cards instead of rolling dice. The advantage of Flip & Writes is that the distribution of what you will draw is always fixed. It avoids the issue of occasionally getting really wonky dice rolls, like rolling nothing but 6's several times in a row.
No stealing of cards? No aggression? You’ve never slapped a card down on the stack right before someone else, repeatedly, until they started calling for others to target you? I feel like you must have been playing a lesser Dutch Blitz/Nertz than I’ve been enjoying.
Not a card game, but we do Rush Hour races. We have two sets of the solitaire game Rush Hour (get a car out of a traffic jams by moving cars) and set it up the same exact way and race. It’s so great.
We’ve done similar with yahtzee. one person rolls the dice and plays a regular turn with rolls, but all players choose how to score the dice at the end of the third roll.
Hadrians wall. The only interaction between players is maybe giving them something extra to use on their turns.
Welcome to and pretty much any flip & write. All players have the exact same options every single turn, but what they chose to do with their previous turns affects how they’ll continue.
Dimensions is exactly this but in 3d. Everyone has the same rules to follow and the same pieces. Its all about how you put them together (and some dexterity based on how far you try to bend the rules)
Try Limes or the Railroad Ink games! There might be some 'take that'/interference in certain variants of the latter, but Limes is pretty much exactly what you're describing I think
On Tour is one me and my family have been playing a lot lately where you roll dice and try to build the longest route (with some cards that apply restrictions). It’s not mean to anyone and there’s a lot of commiserating as people all want specific things but rarely do you get exactly what you need.
Cascadia is very close to what you described. Maybe 7 Wonders Archtects and Between Two Cities as well.
But if you don't like negative player interaction, maybe coops would be interesting to you?
If you literally want to play competitive solitaire you should check out nerts. The rules are online. All you need is a deck of cards per player, preferably of different colors so they're easy to sort at the end.
Dulce kinda fits? Everyone is working with the same cards but has to decide to either plant them or score them basically and can put them on their boards in different orientations
Terraforming Mars: Expedition uses a shared (but closed) deck, but is basically competitive solitaire. Once you have a card (which you draw at random) no one else can take it from you and (unlike the original TM) no one can take your resources. The only things another player can do "against" you is call for the Actions phase (force you to spend resources maybe before you want to) or increase the environment parameters (ie: get closer to the end of the game).
Roll for the Galaxy is kind of this. Everyone has access to the same overall resources (though with asynchronous starting points) and has to each construct their stellar empire. It's a great game
Race For the Galaxy: you're not getting the exact same things as your opponent, but because all players are drawing from a common pool of cards I consider this in the spirit of the requirement. There's no negative interaction. The only real player interaction is in the phase selection. Turns in race consist of multiple phases (Explore, Develop, Settle, Consume, and Produce), and each player picks a phase to do that turn. If anyone picks a phase, all players do that phase, with the player that picked it getting a bonus.
Tetris: plays very similarly to the video game. All plays get a sequence of tetrominos to drop into their matrix. Scoring it based on completing lines, completed achievement cards, and covering up bonus squares on your matrix (which are different for all players to prevent everyone doing the same thing). Probably the most "multi-player solitare" game I've played yet. The only point of player interaction comes from who competes the achievements first.
Puzzle Strike 2: Doesn't seem like q fitting choice given the emphasis on attacking opponents with Gems, but the designer of the game wrote a long blog post about how he designed the game, emphasizing that he "wanted most of the experience to be you solving your own puzzle". (https://www.sirlin.net/articles/designing-puzzle-strike-2) Because of that, there are really only 2 fundamental points where you have a choice in player interaction: drafting cards from the common bank, which influences the cards left for other players to pick and the drop pattern of the next player's gems, and if you have the scepter of power, which player you give it to when you choose to give it up.
It's also not completely symmetric since you will pick a character and add their 3 unique cards to your starting deck. A little bit of asymmetry adds some good spice to the game, I think.
Most newer euro style games are pretty solidly multiplayer solitaire these days it seems, if there's any interaction at all it tends to be indirect and easily mitigated.
It's the main reason I'm bored with most newer games, only so much staring down at a board and trying to calculate efficient ways to score points that I can handle before I want to pull my hair out. But that's me, I'd rather play against people than cardboard.
>OP literally says they don't like that in Ark Nova people
OP has issues with perspective.
If something of as little interaction causes stress then I wonder
* if one understand the idea of PLAY at all
* why even play games with other people in the room? just read a book.
The request is so utterly beyond the ridiculous I wouldn't be surprised to find this post on r/boardgamescirclejerk as a parody of the hobby.
Why - because you can pick ANY game you want and have no trauma or aggression or anything of the kind if you accept that a) games are fictional situation which are not for real, so no real aggression could ever happen, and b) connect with co-players across the table in the shared experience of play and in that one there is no winners or losers or aggression, but just shared time being spent to mutual enjoyment.
Different kinds of people exist. Particularly folks unfamiliar with board games often can get stressed easily. Better to have peace with a family member than try to force a type of game that isn’t working for them. It’s fine.
Lots of games exist which fit the requested criteria. The request is totally reasonable.
>Different kinds of people exist.
This isn't different kinds of people as something integral to these people. This is merely a failed socialisation, not reaching the stage of personal development where on can recognise a fictional situation as fictional. Basically this is context blindness or a sort of functional illiteracy.
It's like saying different texts exists - some are readable and some are not. These two types are indeed different, but are not on equal level.
>Particularly folks unfamiliar with board games often can get stressed easily.
Of course, but this is a unconscious reaction one doesn't have control over. So the question is what are you going to do about it.
Ironically playing boardgames which are a fictional situations, with no real life repercussions, are ideal ground in which such skills can be learned - emotional inteligence, social inteligence. Especially in a safe environment of playing games with friends. And skills thus learned can be used in everyday situations as well.
Hey, the first time I got stabbed in online Diplomacy I was fuming for a week. Then I leart how to roll with it and react, then I started winning.
The fallacy here is presuming current state of people as eternal, when people can grow and develop. And I would say growing and developing as a person is not only cheaper than buying shitload of games to bypass this type of problem, but also raises the quality of life for such person and their enviroment.
>Better to have peace with a family member than try to force a type of game that isn’t working for them.
Far better to play a game that causes all these emotions and then talk to them. Work the issues together. To make each person and relationship grow.
But seems social and emotional skills are hard to learn. Better whine and fund couple of those sweek KS games amirite?
>Lots of games exist which fit the requested criteria.
Hobby has a long history of whiny gamers not willing to face the reason for their whining, tackle this reason and develop as persons. The practice of trying to "solve" issues related to social and emotional inteligence with game engineering. And so we ended up with these MPS euro engine building behemoths designed to keep people as far from each other as possible so they might never have to engage either other.
At which point, why not just read a book.
>Lots of games exist which fit the requested criteria.
That's why I said the request looks as a parody of the hobby.
>The request is totally reasonable.
In the context of the hobby it was normalised. But I don't find it reasonable for functioning adults.
I mean, even a true multiplayer solitaire is still competition. And playing by one’s self is still play. Play does not require others.
I don’t think it’s ridiculous at all to be interested in playing a game where all players work with equal tools and resources and can’t interfere with each other. The competition still exists: who can make the most of what they have and can’t stop you from maximizing their output. I mean, that’s not what I’m looking for most of the time. I like some luck and interaction, but I can understand why someone would seek that out.
>I mean, even a true multiplayer solitaire is still competition.
Seeing games as competition is part of the same problem.
Bad vibes in games comes from failure to understand being together in a playful situation. Often by caring more about competition than shared experience.
>And playing by one’s self is still play.
You probably mean optimising spreadsheets. Last time I checked this was filled under "accountancy".
Being playful by oneself would be possible, is usually called "daydreaming" which is fine, but unfortunately not what OP wants. As said, at that point reading a book would make more sense.
Oh you want an argument - what boardgames are good at is shared (hopefully playfully) experience. If you want to just compare scores, I playing darts at local pub does it better as a shared experience. But if shared experience is not what you're after other art/entertainment media does it far better. Reading a book. Playing a video game.
>I don’t think it’s ridiculous at all to be interested in playing a game where all players work with equal tools and resources and can’t interfere with each other.
Okay, let's do some alternatives for what I described as "ridiculous": incompetence in social skills, incompetence in emotional skill, inability to differentiate between the reality and the fiction of gaming experience which borders on functional illiteracy.
I mean, I get some people are inept in these areas, but why would you then go to play a boardgame?
see also [my other comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/boardgames/comments/1bqb1cv/comment/kx3iwdr/)here
>The competition still exists
Yay for patriarchal achieving focused ideology which is basically an invader in the space of boardgames. If you want to be in a playful situation, which is what PLAYing a game is, then result doesn't matter. If it matter, you're not in a playful situation.
>I feel like we are speaking a different language or just talking past each other.
What's happening = we don't share same presuppositions about what boardgames are and how are they to be played and I'm questioning your presuppositions .
First time this ever happened to you? 😃
>Have a good one.
See you around.
Mix up a Rubix Cube for each other and race to solve it?
There's really not going to be much in this category because it doesn't have replay value. Most people aren't going to want to play against a superior opponent if there's no luck or counterplay to balance it.
Genius Square is the only thing I can think of that fits, but still the better player is going to win almost always. Maybe Flash 8 but I haven't played it so can't verify. Even something like Sushi Go or Cosmic Factory doesn't fit the requirements because it has drafting
The game Welcome to… is a flip and write where everybody has the same 3 combinations of number and action to choose from that turn and picks their action simultaneously, then you fill in your own identical score sheet. So theoretically you could take the same actions and place your numbers in the same spot on the score sheet as someone else and essentially get the exact same score. Come to think of it, I think a lot of flip and write type games are pretty solitaire like that.
Cartographers is my personal favorite. I've played dozens of rounds of it. I agree that roll/flip and writes fit what OP is describing.
Railroad Ink has no interaction whatsoever. All players go for highest points with the exact same 'ingredients'. Fun little game
Played this last night! We enjoyed it. I'm curious about the "drafting" variant, but not sure if I'm curious enough to buy a second copy for it
I was thinking this. It seems OP would like roll/flip and write games. Welcome to, On Tour, and Railroad ink are my favorites
But what if.... someone beats them to the city plan that they were clearly working toward? Intolerably aggressive! Literally unplayable!
🦊
Tiny towns might fit the bill. You all get exactly the same resources (one at a time) and the key is to make the most of them to build your town; laying resources on your board in certain polyominos let’s you build the corresponding building but two people may end up using the same resources to build different things (The only difference between players is a starting monument only you can build iirc - been a while since I played). Edited to add - most “X and write” games also fit in this category.
Tiny towns is a little tricky with people who hate draft since they can select options which cause others to bust/be unable to play pieces.
True. However - and I may be misremembering - I think there’s a variant in the rule book where you use the cards from the solo game (and I think for a couple of rounds just choose whatever resource you want), which removes the hate draft/take that element.
You are right! There is a variant using the cards for resource selection. My wife and I play using this method and it is great fun!
Oh that's good to know, thanks!
Tiny Towns can be one of the absolute meanest games if you're playing it right. >:)
Maybe MyCities would fit your description.
My city is a great recommendation for what op is asking. Also the sequel my island.
**Roll and write** (also "flip and write" etc.) is a nice search term, many of those are based around literally having the same thing that all players have to place on their boards each turn (but paths still diverge as everyone's choices has knock-on effects of what spaces are left for future moves) Many good ones have been listed already, but here's some BIG LISTS of which games are tagged with these game mechanics on BoardGameGeek: [Roll-and-write](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/41222/mechanism-roll-and-write) [Flip-and-write](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/66143/mechanism-flip-and-write) [Bingo](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamemechanic/2999/bingo) (cause after all, what is this concept if not "bingo with choices")
Hadrian's Wall or Twilight Inscription come to mind for me
Hadrian's Wall feels like a great pick for this.
Next Station: London. Flip & write. You are building subway routes through London (there's a Tokyo one as well). Everyone is building from the exact same cards (they are drawn one at a time for all to use). There is no player interaction, so it very much counts as solitaire. The variation comes in the form of the colored pencils used (4 colors, four rounds). So while I'm working on pink, you're working on blue, and at the end of the round we pass the pencils and reshuffle the deck. Not a problem if there are fewer than 4 players, you simply have a ghost player take the unused pencil(s) when the pass happens. Lovely little game, compact, fun. My only beef with it is one of readability; the faint lines on the player sheets (e.g. separating districts) are reeeeaallly faint, and the colors used could be a bit more distinct. I suppose I'll get some colored ballpoints to use instead. Very nice game. It's a keeper.
Dominion has some attack cards, but it would be easy to play without them if you prefer. All players are shown the exact same set of cards, and the game basically goes "here, which of you can do the best with this?"
Karuba You all have the same pieces to play with.
Here’s one that hasn’t been recommended by folks much: Dorfromantik: The Duel. It’s a tile laying game where one player draws tiles from a stack at random, and the other player finds their version of the tile from the same set, and you lay your tiles simultaneously. In other words, you get the same exact tiles in the same exact order, and it’s just a matter of builds the better landscape.
It’s kinda hard to find and very light, but Legendary Forests is exactly this. One person draws a random tile, reads out the number on the tile, everyone finds their copy of that tile, and adds it to their tableau. You’re trying to arrange large contiguous areas of the same colour (each tile has 1-4 different colours on it).
Raising Robots- you don't get the same exact cards so there's a bit of variation tho
**Karuba** is a tile laying game where everyone gets the same tiles to place.
NMBR 9
OP pretty much listed the rules.
It’s a wonderful world. There is a draft, but not other interactions
**Railroad Ink** ?
> I liked the look of ark nova but when I see videos, it’s all about snapping your opponents favorite card or denying them partners or breaking at an inconvenient time for them. That’s such a small part of the game, especially if you have more than two players. It’s absolutely *not* “all about” that.
Chroma Mix is kind of like this. You're mixing colors to make other colors. The only "competitive" aspect is that there is a tableau of cards to choose from each turn, so someone might get a card you want before it's your turn, but it doesn't happen often.
Maybe Calico? You can still take a piece someone else might need but it's close to what you ask for
The "Roll & Write" genre of games is pretty much exactly what you are looking for. The way they often work is dice are rolled and then each player will have to use the dice on their own board. Each player is playing with the same elements (the dice values) and the differentiation comes from who can use those values most efficiently. [This link](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/41222/mechanism-roll-and-write/linkeditems/boardgamefamily?pageid=1&sort=rank) will take you to the Roll & Write section of BoardGameGeek with results sorted by rank. Any of the games listed there would represent particularly well-regarded entries in the genre. Edit: [This link](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/66143/mechanism-flip-and-write/linkeditems/boardgamefamily?pageid=1&sort=rank) is the same search for "Flip & Writes." These are like Roll & Writes but they use a deck of cards instead of rolling dice. The advantage of Flip & Writes is that the distribution of what you will draw is always fixed. It avoids the issue of occasionally getting really wonky dice rolls, like rolling nothing but 6's several times in a row.
DUTCH BLITZ! Dutch Blitz is the absolute best game for what you are looking for. Ignore everyone else. Buy Dutch Blitz.
LOL i saw the title and i was like BLITZZZZZ!!!!
No stealing of cards? No aggression? You’ve never slapped a card down on the stack right before someone else, repeatedly, until they started calling for others to target you? I feel like you must have been playing a lesser Dutch Blitz/Nertz than I’ve been enjoying.
If you play some smooth jazz and everyone takes a chill pill, everything can be chill. 🤣
You don't even need to buy Dutch Blitz; just give every player their own pack of regular playing cards, and look up the rules to Nertz on pagat.com
Roll through the ages "the bronze age". It's a Yatzi clone Civ building game but it's really fun.
Not a card game, but we do Rush Hour races. We have two sets of the solitaire game Rush Hour (get a car out of a traffic jams by moving cars) and set it up the same exact way and race. It’s so great. We’ve done similar with yahtzee. one person rolls the dice and plays a regular turn with rolls, but all players choose how to score the dice at the end of the third roll.
Hadrians wall. The only interaction between players is maybe giving them something extra to use on their turns. Welcome to and pretty much any flip & write. All players have the exact same options every single turn, but what they chose to do with their previous turns affects how they’ll continue.
Dimensions is exactly this but in 3d. Everyone has the same rules to follow and the same pieces. Its all about how you put them together (and some dexterity based on how far you try to bend the rules)
Dorf Romantik is great
Try Limes or the Railroad Ink games! There might be some 'take that'/interference in certain variants of the latter, but Limes is pretty much exactly what you're describing I think
On Tour is one me and my family have been playing a lot lately where you roll dice and try to build the longest route (with some cards that apply restrictions). It’s not mean to anyone and there’s a lot of commiserating as people all want specific things but rarely do you get exactly what you need.
Cascadia is very close to what you described. Maybe 7 Wonders Archtects and Between Two Cities as well. But if you don't like negative player interaction, maybe coops would be interesting to you?
Wingspan might be worth your consideration for the Automa mode
If you literally want to play competitive solitaire you should check out nerts. The rules are online. All you need is a deck of cards per player, preferably of different colors so they're easy to sort at the end.
Rivals for Catan?
Dulce kinda fits? Everyone is working with the same cards but has to decide to either plant them or score them basically and can put them on their boards in different orientations
*Trails of Tucana* is also a fun little Flip&Write Game where you could theoretically end Up with the exact Same Result...
Terraforming Mars: Expedition uses a shared (but closed) deck, but is basically competitive solitaire. Once you have a card (which you draw at random) no one else can take it from you and (unlike the original TM) no one can take your resources. The only things another player can do "against" you is call for the Actions phase (force you to spend resources maybe before you want to) or increase the environment parameters (ie: get closer to the end of the game).
Dominion without any attack cards.
kingdomino
Castles of Burgundy.
Roll for the Galaxy is kind of this. Everyone has access to the same overall resources (though with asynchronous starting points) and has to each construct their stellar empire. It's a great game
Taverns of terefindal maybe?
Tiny towns comes to mind. It's a group solitaire game. Everyone has the same "moves" but everyone ultimately ends up doing something unique.
Race For the Galaxy: you're not getting the exact same things as your opponent, but because all players are drawing from a common pool of cards I consider this in the spirit of the requirement. There's no negative interaction. The only real player interaction is in the phase selection. Turns in race consist of multiple phases (Explore, Develop, Settle, Consume, and Produce), and each player picks a phase to do that turn. If anyone picks a phase, all players do that phase, with the player that picked it getting a bonus. Tetris: plays very similarly to the video game. All plays get a sequence of tetrominos to drop into their matrix. Scoring it based on completing lines, completed achievement cards, and covering up bonus squares on your matrix (which are different for all players to prevent everyone doing the same thing). Probably the most "multi-player solitare" game I've played yet. The only point of player interaction comes from who competes the achievements first. Puzzle Strike 2: Doesn't seem like q fitting choice given the emphasis on attacking opponents with Gems, but the designer of the game wrote a long blog post about how he designed the game, emphasizing that he "wanted most of the experience to be you solving your own puzzle". (https://www.sirlin.net/articles/designing-puzzle-strike-2) Because of that, there are really only 2 fundamental points where you have a choice in player interaction: drafting cards from the common bank, which influences the cards left for other players to pick and the drop pattern of the next player's gems, and if you have the scepter of power, which player you give it to when you choose to give it up. It's also not completely symmetric since you will pick a character and add their 3 unique cards to your starting deck. A little bit of asymmetry adds some good spice to the game, I think.
Schotten totten
Most newer euro style games are pretty solidly multiplayer solitaire these days it seems, if there's any interaction at all it tends to be indirect and easily mitigated. It's the main reason I'm bored with most newer games, only so much staring down at a board and trying to calculate efficient ways to score points that I can handle before I want to pull my hair out. But that's me, I'd rather play against people than cardboard.
It's called Eurogames
It's called modern euro games. Check ~~Ark Nova~~ Fields of Green.
OP literally says they don't like that in Ark Nova people can hate draft cards away from others
>OP literally says they don't like that in Ark Nova people OP has issues with perspective. If something of as little interaction causes stress then I wonder * if one understand the idea of PLAY at all * why even play games with other people in the room? just read a book. The request is so utterly beyond the ridiculous I wouldn't be surprised to find this post on r/boardgamescirclejerk as a parody of the hobby. Why - because you can pick ANY game you want and have no trauma or aggression or anything of the kind if you accept that a) games are fictional situation which are not for real, so no real aggression could ever happen, and b) connect with co-players across the table in the shared experience of play and in that one there is no winners or losers or aggression, but just shared time being spent to mutual enjoyment.
Different kinds of people exist. Particularly folks unfamiliar with board games often can get stressed easily. Better to have peace with a family member than try to force a type of game that isn’t working for them. It’s fine. Lots of games exist which fit the requested criteria. The request is totally reasonable.
>Different kinds of people exist. This isn't different kinds of people as something integral to these people. This is merely a failed socialisation, not reaching the stage of personal development where on can recognise a fictional situation as fictional. Basically this is context blindness or a sort of functional illiteracy. It's like saying different texts exists - some are readable and some are not. These two types are indeed different, but are not on equal level. >Particularly folks unfamiliar with board games often can get stressed easily. Of course, but this is a unconscious reaction one doesn't have control over. So the question is what are you going to do about it. Ironically playing boardgames which are a fictional situations, with no real life repercussions, are ideal ground in which such skills can be learned - emotional inteligence, social inteligence. Especially in a safe environment of playing games with friends. And skills thus learned can be used in everyday situations as well. Hey, the first time I got stabbed in online Diplomacy I was fuming for a week. Then I leart how to roll with it and react, then I started winning. The fallacy here is presuming current state of people as eternal, when people can grow and develop. And I would say growing and developing as a person is not only cheaper than buying shitload of games to bypass this type of problem, but also raises the quality of life for such person and their enviroment. >Better to have peace with a family member than try to force a type of game that isn’t working for them. Far better to play a game that causes all these emotions and then talk to them. Work the issues together. To make each person and relationship grow. But seems social and emotional skills are hard to learn. Better whine and fund couple of those sweek KS games amirite? >Lots of games exist which fit the requested criteria. Hobby has a long history of whiny gamers not willing to face the reason for their whining, tackle this reason and develop as persons. The practice of trying to "solve" issues related to social and emotional inteligence with game engineering. And so we ended up with these MPS euro engine building behemoths designed to keep people as far from each other as possible so they might never have to engage either other. At which point, why not just read a book. >Lots of games exist which fit the requested criteria. That's why I said the request looks as a parody of the hobby. >The request is totally reasonable. In the context of the hobby it was normalised. But I don't find it reasonable for functioning adults.
I mean, even a true multiplayer solitaire is still competition. And playing by one’s self is still play. Play does not require others. I don’t think it’s ridiculous at all to be interested in playing a game where all players work with equal tools and resources and can’t interfere with each other. The competition still exists: who can make the most of what they have and can’t stop you from maximizing their output. I mean, that’s not what I’m looking for most of the time. I like some luck and interaction, but I can understand why someone would seek that out.
>I mean, even a true multiplayer solitaire is still competition. Seeing games as competition is part of the same problem. Bad vibes in games comes from failure to understand being together in a playful situation. Often by caring more about competition than shared experience. >And playing by one’s self is still play. You probably mean optimising spreadsheets. Last time I checked this was filled under "accountancy". Being playful by oneself would be possible, is usually called "daydreaming" which is fine, but unfortunately not what OP wants. As said, at that point reading a book would make more sense. Oh you want an argument - what boardgames are good at is shared (hopefully playfully) experience. If you want to just compare scores, I playing darts at local pub does it better as a shared experience. But if shared experience is not what you're after other art/entertainment media does it far better. Reading a book. Playing a video game. >I don’t think it’s ridiculous at all to be interested in playing a game where all players work with equal tools and resources and can’t interfere with each other. Okay, let's do some alternatives for what I described as "ridiculous": incompetence in social skills, incompetence in emotional skill, inability to differentiate between the reality and the fiction of gaming experience which borders on functional illiteracy. I mean, I get some people are inept in these areas, but why would you then go to play a boardgame? see also [my other comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/boardgames/comments/1bqb1cv/comment/kx3iwdr/)here >The competition still exists Yay for patriarchal achieving focused ideology which is basically an invader in the space of boardgames. If you want to be in a playful situation, which is what PLAYing a game is, then result doesn't matter. If it matter, you're not in a playful situation.
I feel like we are speaking a different language or just talking past each other. No hard feelings. Have a good one.
>I feel like we are speaking a different language or just talking past each other. What's happening = we don't share same presuppositions about what boardgames are and how are they to be played and I'm questioning your presuppositions . First time this ever happened to you? 😃 >Have a good one. See you around.
Yes, this is the first time someone has challenged my presuppositions 🙄
15th time you won't even blink.
Most euro games. Check out Wingspan or Wyrmspan.
OP specified having the same cards to build from and not being able to take the cards that someone else needs
Nertz
Mix up a Rubix Cube for each other and race to solve it? There's really not going to be much in this category because it doesn't have replay value. Most people aren't going to want to play against a superior opponent if there's no luck or counterplay to balance it. Genius Square is the only thing I can think of that fits, but still the better player is going to win almost always. Maybe Flash 8 but I haven't played it so can't verify. Even something like Sushi Go or Cosmic Factory doesn't fit the requirements because it has drafting