• Posts
  • RSS
  • ◂◂RSS
  • Contact

  • Careers Bankruptcy

    October 31st, 2015
    games
    One of the rules in the game "Careers":

    14. Bankruptcy -- Any player may declare 'Bankruptcy' at any
          time by turning in all of their cards and cash and starting
          over again from the Payday square with a $1000-bill, a $1000
          starting Salary, and a clear score pad.  They may not change
          their Success Formula, but in all other respects they start
          over again.

    This rule breaks the game. Two players make an agreement: one player will repeatedly give all their money to the other and then declare bankruptcy. After repeating this cycle as many times as they like, they divide the money.

    Potential objections:

    • "Careers is a silly American board game, why are you still playing that?" It's not as good as modern games, but it's one of the more fun games from the era and has an aesthetic that's entertaining with the right group in the right mood.

    • "Can you make this sort of agreement?" The game has a market, in the sense that you're allowed to buy and sell things. Typically in these games you can trade money for some future promise unless the rules forbid it, though there's nothing to compel the other person to follow through. You could decide not to allow this, though in most games this is a dynamic that's a lot of fun.

    • "Won't the person accumulating the money just keep it all?" Not the people I typically play with. People care about maintaining a reputation as someone who keeps their word in games more than they want to win a single game.

    • "This isn't fun." I agree. Next time I play I want some sort of house rule that makes this not work. Not sure what rule yet though. Suggestions?

    Comment via: google plus, facebook

    Recent posts on blogs I like:

    Interview with Kat Woods: decision-making about having kids

    Realizing what you don't want The post Interview with Kat Woods: decision-making about having kids appeared first on Otherwise.

    via Otherwise July 5, 2022

    Decision theory and dynamic inconsistency

    Here is my current take on decision theory: When making a decision after observing X, we should condition (or causally intervene) on statements like “My decision algorithm outputs Y after observing X.” Updating seems like a description of something you do…

    via The sideways view July 3, 2022

    10x (engineer, context) pairs

    Your actual output depends on a lot more than just how quickly you finish a given programming task. Everything besides the literal coding depends deeply on the way you interact with the organization around you.

    via benkuhn.net June 9, 2022

    more     (via openring)


  • Posts
  • RSS
  • ◂◂RSS
  • Contact