History TabletopGame / Mao

4th Feb '15 5:52:59 AM hawthorn
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first time the call is repeated. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}), though you still will be penalized correctly for the bad call. And new rules can have penalty calls that tend to incite laughter or swearing, both usually against the rules.

to:

* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first time the call is repeated.error. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}), though you still will be penalized correctly for the bad call. And new rules can have penalty calls that tend to incite laughter or swearing, both usually against the rules.
4th Feb '15 5:51:29 AM hawthorn
Is there an issue? Send a Message





* RulesLawyer: The whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.


Added DiffLines:

* RulesLawyer: The whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.
4th Feb '15 5:48:09 AM hawthorn
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Unfortunately, this means that some people never get to the good part of the game, where the fun actually begins. Because when someone 'wins' at Mao by getting rid of all their cards, they are entitled to make a new rule and introduce it into the game, without telling anyone what it is. The rule could be a simple modification, or it could fundamentally change the way the game is played. And as more people win, the rules stack up and the game becomes more and more complex, and even the veteran players may be stumped by rules they haven't worked out yet.

to:

Unfortunately, this means that some people never get to the good part of the game, where the fun actually begins. Because when someone 'wins' at Mao by getting rid of all their cards, they are entitled to make a new rule and introduce it into the game, without telling anyone what it is. The rule could be a simple modification, modification (for example, "you can't play a King on top of a Queen"), or it could fundamentally change the way the game is played. And as more people win, the rules stack up and the game becomes more and more complex, and even the veteran players may be stumped by rules they haven't worked out yet.
4th Feb '15 5:42:18 AM hawthorn
Is there an issue? Send a Message


The difficulty, as mentioned above, is that, barring a short introduction to at least clarify the turn order, you are not told, and are not ALLOWED to be told, any of the rules. [[TrialAndErrorGameplay You must work them out by watching people play, trying things out, and being penalised with extra cards when you do something wrong.]]

For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair to newbies.

to:

The difficulty, as mentioned above, is that, barring a short introduction to at least clarify the turn order, you are not told, and are not ALLOWED ''allowed'' to be told, any of the rules. [[TrialAndErrorGameplay You must work them out by watching people play, trying things out, and being penalised with extra cards when you do something wrong.]]

For this reason, Mao is often hated by people who have never got beyond the newbie stage, since it is obviously quite unfair to newbies.
newbies who have no idea how to play the game.
25th Nov '14 10:37:27 PM zaphod77
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first few times. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}).
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalise players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.

to:

* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first few times. time the call is repeated. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}).
{{Angrish}}), though you still will be penalized correctly for the bad call. And new rules can have penalty calls that tend to incite laughter or swearing, both usually against the rules.
* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: Some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalise penalize players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.conduct'. This usually stops once all the players have deduced the basic rules. Then the gloves are off.
17th May '14 2:30:46 AM 99Hedgehog
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

->''"The only rule I can tell you is this one."''
-->--''The Dealer''

30th Oct '13 7:58:41 PM FordPrefect
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first few times.Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}).

to:

* VideoGameCrueltyPotential: Oh, so much. It is perfectly within the spirit of the game to repeat a penalty call when the player fails to correct their error, and (if your variant has the rather cruel 'stupidity' call) tack on additional cards for "stupidity", and even "extreme stupidity" if they fail to get the hint the first few times. Making bogus calls with a straight face that cause the other player to laugh and break the "no laughing" rule is not against the rules either (and an additional card for talking and for swearing when the person expresses their {{Angrish}}).
7th Aug '12 8:57:39 PM KingClark
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* RulesLawyer: the whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.

to:

* RulesLawyer: the The whole point of the game, really. Some people even play it so that a person can be penalised for FAILING to enforce their own rule.
7th Aug '12 8:49:34 PM KingClark
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* BeatThemAtTheirOwnGame: if you've worked out a player's rule, you can enforce it on THEM if they break it.

to:

* BeatThemAtTheirOwnGame: if If you've worked out a player's rule, you can enforce it on THEM if they break it.



* HouseRules: any two different groups of people will play Mao slightly differently.
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules: if you can play long enough, and people don't go crazy from trying to keep on top of them all...

to:

* HouseRules: any Any two different groups of people will play Mao slightly differently.
* LoadsAndLoadsOfRules: if If you can play long enough, and people don't go crazy from trying to keep on top of them all...



* LogicBomb: the result of two or more people's rules contradicting each other. It's made even more difficult by the fact that the people whose rules are conflicting may not KNOW the other person's rule, and therefore be unable to decide whether theirs can override it or not. When this happens, a point of order is called so that people can discuss what to do.

to:

* LogicBomb: the The result of two or more people's rules contradicting each other. It's made even more difficult by the fact that the people whose rules are conflicting may not KNOW the other person's rule, and therefore be unable to decide whether theirs can override it or not. When this happens, a point of order is called so that people can discuss what to do.



* ThatOneRule: some players have tremendous difficulty with the 'the joker is the 9 of diamonds' rule, which is one of the basic rules in many variants. It is exactly what it says: any joker is considered equivalent to the 9 of diamonds when played.

to:

* ThatOneRule: some Some players have tremendous difficulty with the 'the joker is the 9 of diamonds' rule, which is one of the basic rules in many variants. It is exactly what it says: any joker is considered equivalent to the 9 of diamonds when played.



** If someone says the word to the tune of the "Miaow Mix" advert, you might as well just penalise them the entire deck.

to:

** If someone says the word to the tune of the "Miaow "Meow Mix" advert, you might as well just penalise them the entire deck.



* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalise players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.

to:

* VideogameCrueltyPunishment: some Some variants try to be easier on newbies, noting that it would be very easy for people to become frustrated, so they penalise players for 'ungentlemanly conduct'.
7th Aug '12 8:46:09 PM KingClark
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Mao is often compared to MorningtonCrescent, or {{Calvinball}}, but in reality it is neither of those. MorningtonCrescent is a mock game with deliberately nonsensical rules that are invented on the spot to make it appear complex, while Calvinball is a game where the rules appear to change at the will of any player. While it often looks like people are making up rules in Mao as they go along, in fact it is a mostly deterministic game, and any rules that are introduced have to be followed by all players equally.

to:

Mao is often compared to MorningtonCrescent, Mornington Crescent, or {{Calvinball}}, but in reality it is neither of those. MorningtonCrescent Mornington Crescent is a mock game with deliberately nonsensical rules that are invented on the spot to make it appear complex, while Calvinball is a game where the rules appear to change at the will of any player. While it often looks like people are making up rules in Mao as they go along, in fact it is a mostly deterministic game, and any rules that are introduced have to be followed by all players equally.



* GameBreaker: As a guideline, any rule favoring a specific player is against the spirit of the game. It is, however, quite possible with a bit of ingenuity to rig the game with a well chosen and timed sequence of new rules that do not favor any one player. Introduce "players may play any number of cards, with the top card counting as the played card", but do not reveal it yet. Next time you win, introduce "players may play any card on any other card", and use both rules to win on your next turn, silencing all complaints with "New rule, and previously introduced new rule" (and watch the other players go "wtf?"), then introduce "dealer plays first" when you win that game, causing you to win all other rounds with ease. Don't expect anyone ever to play with you again, however.
* GameBreakingBug: it's quite easy to make a rule which can break the game and prevent anyone from playing anything at all. When this happens, the players generally take a vote on whether to keep the rule or not.



* Most have rules against 'lying' or 'cheating'.
** The cheating rule deserves special mention. In games that have that one, there are certain plays that are legal unless you get caught. The proper call for said plays is "cheating", and CORRECTLY stating how they cheated. Normally, a rule against cheating goes without being said, but in this case, it makes sense.

to:

* ** Most have rules against 'lying' or 'cheating'.
**
'cheating'. The cheating rule deserves special mention. In games that have that one, there are certain plays that are legal unless you get caught. The proper call for said plays is "cheating", and CORRECTLY stating how they cheated. Normally, a rule against cheating goes without being said, but in this case, it makes sense.
This list shows the last 10 events of 12. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=TabletopGame.Mao