Conventions pervert minds
A few days ago, I had an interesting conversation with a player used, like 99% "good players or more" on BGA, to the "play left discard right" technique. I invited him and another such player on a table where I wanted to play with no conventions and no finesses, only logic and basics (see Definitions).
During the game, there was a situation where I (player A) had no clue tokens left and player B's chop card was critical. I had just been clued a card to play. I discarded to let B know that he should save his chop.
In the end game conversation, that player told me "ok you want to play with no conventions, but discarding to tip the next player not to discard his chop is a convention".
I found this very interesting, since it shows that playing with coded conventions (which are derived from an initial logical trick and then go astray) distorts how one perceives logic.
Playing newest card of several clued with one clue (leftism) is logical only in some situations and most players on BGA play so in situations where it is not. And they get so used to it, so blinded by how easy this convention is, that they forget it is not always logical.
And they end up seeing convention in purely logical moves. To make myself clearer, here is why intentional discarding is logical.
Player D > player A, this is yellow, play it (there are no clue tokens left).
Player A > I discard.
Player B > What the--?? He knows he has to play it and he chooses to discard instead, man, what was that?!. Why is he doing this? Is he stoopid? Oh, wait a minute, there were no clues left. If he played, I would have to discard. Eureka, perhaps he didn't want me to discard. Ok, I have to save my chop.
This is a logical reflexion that even a smart newbie could have.
I will be happy to teach anyone a logical game with no conventions on BGA. Just send me a PM on Boardgamearena.
For more basics, also see "Over-assuming -- do you have what it takes for finesse?".
CommentairesSuivre le flux RSS des commentaires
Ajouter un commentaire