156
submitted 2 months ago by TootSweet@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world

A friend/coworker of mine and his wife hosted a weekly boardgame night that I attended. Most of the other guests were kinda flaky, and this one particular day, I was the only one who showed up. So it was just me, my friend, and his wife.

Someone suggested Dixit, which I had never played before, but it sounded fun and I was down to play. So we broke it out, shuffled, and started the game.

Now, if you don't know how Dixit works, it's basically a deck of cards with pictures on them. One of a toy abacus. Another of a child pointing a toy sword at a dragon. Another of a winding staircase with a snail at the bottom. Etc.

In one version of the game similar to Apples to Apples or Scategories, everyone gets a hand of cards which they keep hidden. The dealer announces a clue and everyone (including the dealer) contributes a card from their hands face-down to the center of the table and the dealer shuffles them together and reveals them all at once without revealing whose card is whose. Then players vote which one they think matches the clue. You get points as a player if others vote for your card or if you vote for the one the dealer picked. As a dealer, you get points if close to 50% of the players vote for yours.

I was the dealer this round. One of the cards in my hand was of a ship's anchor. That's when it came to me.

See, the friend/coworker and I both worked in web software development. His wife didn't. And I came up with the perfect play. I gave the clue "hyperlink." Hyperlinks on web pages are created using the HTML <a> tag. The "a" stands for "anchor." And any web developer would know that.

When the vote came in, I got one vote for my card from my friend and his wife failed to select the correct card and so didn't get any points. It was a slam dunk move. But I felt a little bad for excluding my friend's wife from an inside-knowledge thing.

The next round, my friend was the dealer and he picked a rule/card that was an inside-knowledge thing between the two of them. (A line from a poem they both knew well, the next line of which related to the picture of the card.) So I was glad of that.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Kanzar@sh.itjust.works 76 points 2 months ago

That is literally how you are supposed to play Dixit.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 50 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Back when I was in middle school, I had made an unbeatable Magic deck. The whole thing was built around just not letting the other player do jack shit. Everything I had other than the land cards would eliminate your creatures, your spells, or both while doing very little actual damage themselves. It would slowly kill you while you could do nothing but stand by and watch as everything you laid down, would be removed on my next turn.

I felt bad about it only after nobody would play against me anymore.

[-] Jumi@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

When I played with my much older brother when I was a lot younger I never let them him play with his black deck that was built around his ivory tower card because it was so annoying. I still almost always lost but at least I had fun.

[-] wjrii@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

I play an ongoing ladder/tournament for a Scrabble clone (Wordfeud). I'm kinda stuck at a middling level because of certain holes in my game that I refuse to fix because it would be boring (e.g. I could know what your last 7 tiles are but I do not intend to figure it out), but I'm decent. One of the ways I power through the lower tiers was by realizing that you can play defensively, specifically by shoving 'C' and 'V' in places that fuck up your opponent's access to high-scoring tiles (because they have no two-letter words to jump off from), or just leaving points on the rack because maximizing each turn would open things up on the board.

New players simply cannot handle this. I'm sure they don't have much fun, but I win and go back up to the levels where the strategy helps some but you can't rely on it. Higher level players can bust through by sheer force of pattern recognition and vocabulary, or they can build words that open up so many avenues that they can withstand my getting some points too, or them fuckers DO keep track of which tiles are left (the gall!). I'm trying to remember that I'm good enough that an open board can help me too, but my tendencies are still pretty defensive.

[-] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Back when Words With Friends was big, I developed a reputation among my friend groups for being very good. I wasn't terribly good, but I noticed there was no penalty for misspelling a word. So each turn, I'd try a bunch of high-scoring combinations that seemed like they might be words, and eventually one would work.

[-] wjrii@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

It's sort of inherent to scrabble-like apps, where there's so many ways you could mess something up. I am not above taking a flyer on things, but I try not to do it any more than I assume my opponents would. Anyway, having played a lot by now, I know most of the common and medium-weird words, so there's not a lot for me to guess at, and I'm only rarely surprised when something an opponent plays is a word.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] Skua@kbin.earth 30 points 2 months ago

I worked out the Monopoly strategy of buying houses aggressively and refusing to upgrade to hotels

In Civ VI, I let my friend conquer a city from me because that put her civ over into having a majority of its cities following my religion, which won me the game

[-] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago

The Monopoly house thing is a bit of a dick move, but I wouldn't feel bad about the Civ one--that seems legit.

[-] Skua@kbin.earth 14 points 2 months ago

It was definitely legit in the sense of it being something completely counterable by my friend had she been looking out for it, and it certanly wasn't an exploit. It did still feel dirty to make use of information that she hadn't noticed to get her to defeat herself, particularly since it only worked by me carefully not saying anything about it for as long as it took to do

[-] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Religion victories in Civ are poorly telegraphed in general. You can easily look at the minimap and see that someone is conquering everything, and poking at a player's borders will show you that they're technologically advanced, but religion and culture victories tend to sneak up on people.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

The house thing is like Monopoly 101. Never buy hotels, stop at 4 houses. If you need more houses, you can buy a hotel and have four houses to buy.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago

My family plays heavyweight games, and enjoy strategy (whether it's a "strategic" game or not). We mostly get along well (though we've had to ban a couple games that got too heated too often), but we're quite competitive and we put a lot of thought into games when we play.

My wife's family is the polar opposite. They seem to enjoy passing cards or pieces around without much reason or goal (they often play pure-luck games). The first time I sat down to a game of Rummykub with them, I won the first three games in a row, and it wasn't close. Fortunately I had the sense to pull back a bit, but then it was super boring. Finally I gave myself a new goal--each game, I mentally chose another player at the table and would subtly play to see if I could get them to win. I had about a 3/4 success rate on that, and the whole experience was more enjoyable for everyone.

[-] mysticpickle@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago

Which games did you guys ban? Diplomacy? :>

[-] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Monopoly and Settlers. Both very cutthroat at family gatherings.

[-] mysticpickle@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago

Hm I wouldn't have guessed since those are generally considered "family games". I guess the negotiation aspect of those games can get pretty heated if folks get a bit petty and play kingmaker by giving away all their resources to someone to end the game faster when they find out they're in a losing position :o

[-] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Settlers can be played pretty competitively--stuff like building a settlement in a "bad" position just to mess up someone working to build next to that spot, stuff like that.

The friction in Monopoly mainly comes down to our table rules, specifically that you can make any deal verbally you want (though there's no guarantee the other party will follow through).

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ericbomb@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

Sooo my room mate invited me to play Total War Warhammer 2 with him (RTS game based on fantasy warhammer). It was his all time favorite game, and I had played it a bit. Think 2k hours for him, 100ish for me. But I had mostly been playing the Vampire Counts, and he jumped around a lot, mostly playing the Empire as he loved their lore and how they played. Him picking the empire was kind of a dick move because they spawned very close to vampire counts, so odds were he was going to crush me mid game.

But the thing is, he had mostly played against AI, and he had never played AS the vampire counts. If you ever play as the vampire counts in that game, you quickly realize there is only one good strategy, one that the AI never uses. You can get completely free skeleton soldiers. The game normally hard caps you with negatives around 2k soldiers (2-3 full armies). They aren't great soldiers, but you can do upgrades for them to make them acceptable, and they mostly will function as meat sponges to bog down enemies while your generals do most of the killing. It's not something I looked up, it's just super obvious when you play as them that there is no purpose to any other units.

On turn 25 he thought something was wrong when he saw 5 armies attack a neighbor of his. He knew something was terribly wrong when 10 entered his territory at a point in the game when he had 2 1/2. There was shouting, there were accusations, there was mad giggling. As my room mate was thrusted full force into the zombie apocalypse. His soldiers killed thousands of skeletons, early game heavy infantry backed by mortars and arbalesters. The K/D was terrible for me. He had been focusing on building the bones of an unstoppable late gate death ball of heavy infantry and artillery, so his units were strong. But it still needed 30 turns to be invincible. But I kept winning, because his units ran out of bullets and mortar shells before I ran out of skeletons.

Then the fun thing about Vampire counts is, if you win a MASSIVE battle with tens of thousands of deaths... you can instantly recruit skeletons from that grave site! With each battle my army replenished, my generals grew more powerful, and he grew more annoyed.

After another bloody defeat of his final army, killing like 7k skeletons just to see mine raise from the dead, and his capital under siege, he resigned.

Despite his thousands of hours he said it was equally the most fun and most tilting game ever. But I just felt like I was playing lore accurate necromancers :D But when he was like "You must be cheating the game must stop this some how" and I'm just like... nah fam, game busted. I did feel a little bad. Then went back to giggling when he insisted he could win and then all his units ran out of ammo again.

[-] lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 2 months ago

When your own soldiers come back to attack you: "Stop hitting yourself"

[-] BellyPurpledGerbil@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I think I'm about to take liberties with the term "strategic play." But I'll tell this regardless.

I have a friend who is only hyper competitive when playing games, especially board games. In the moment, he wants to win so badly that he will do anything to win. He manipulates, gaslights, he's dangerously intelligent and he's good at making it seem like he's just playing casually. And then once the game is over? He doesn't care at all whether he won or lost. It's infuriating sometimes.

Thanks to also being an extremely competitive person, I saw through it pretty quickly the first few games I ever played with him. But nobody else does. It seemed like nobody ever tried to win by comparison. So when he and I are in the same game, I know I'm going to lose. And he'll use the other people at the table even if I can see it happening. Even if I made comments about it mid-game, nobody would believe me.

So I got petty. I couldn't beat him at the manipulation game. Instead, I turned him into a meme. When he ever looked like he was behind, and someone noticed, I'd say in a light-hearted conspiratorial way, "[his name] is always ahead." Repeated it whenever he would take the lead and eventually when he won the game. "You see? [His name] is always ahead."

It caught like wildfire. Our other friends started using the catchphrase, even in games where I wasn't there. People started using attack cards on him more often. They'd be less friendly with him about trading. People would snub him even when he was so far behind there was no catching up. The day I realized how much it got to him, was one day he told me how much that phrase impacted his ability to play games with friends. It ruined a lot of his fun. Sometimes new friends who didn't even play with us that often would use it. I didn't realize how much damage it caused. All I wanted was for people to be more wary of his manipulation tactics. But instead I took something fun from a good friend and made it miserable.

So I haven't said it for years since. But our other friends still remember and will say the phrase from time to time. He's always ahead.

[-] Skua@kbin.earth 11 points 2 months ago

So I got petty. I couldn't beat him at the manipulation game.

Well this clearly isn't true, you just work more slowly

[-] Cracks_InTheWalls@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago

This is an excellent example to pull if you ever want to talk about memetic warfare as a concept.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 14 points 2 months ago

One time I played exploding kittens and fucked everyone else over so hard that I felt bad and never played again because I was too good at guessing what kinds of cards people had, how and when they'd use them, and remembering who had already used their defuses. The result was that I was really good at setting people up to explode. On top of that, I was told afterward that I had a terrifyingly good poker face; that the moment the game began I turned into an expressionless robot kinda poker face.

Made me feel like an asshole even though I wasn't meaning to try-hard it.

[-] saltesc@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

When people make me play Monopoly, I always take the housing shortage strategy for the guaranteed fast win. People hate me, but rules are rules, and I hate that game.

[-] Cuberoot@lemmynsfw.com 10 points 2 months ago

I used to play a LAN game. Run around exploring a dungeon, find treasures, weapons, etc. and use them to whack on other players. One of the things you could find was a magic feather that let you walk through walls when wielded. Useful but not too powerful since it was expended with use. After about 15 minutes, if nobody had won, the game went into Armageddon mode by teleporting everyone to a small hostile room to cage match until only one survived. So I used the feather then and hopped into the wall. I could still hit and be hit by adjacent players, but was immune from all the environmental hazards that only existed inside the room.

Next game we played had a house rule to not do that anymore.

[-] Monument@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 2 months ago

I used to play 1v1 Ticket to Ride matches against my wife using the app.

As background: I’m not a very competitive gamer, but I’m decent at problem solving. When I first learned TtR, I played with fairly … great players. One of my friends was (is?) nationally ranked. They routinely beat the ever-loving crap out of me. I think of the dozens of games we’ve played, I have won maybe 10-20% of the time?

My wife isn’t bad at TtR, but she doesn’t see things the same way in terms of strategy.

We had this one game where I drew a bunch of short routes all over the map, which blocked her early in the game, and a series of lucky route draws lead me to connect them, inadvertently blocking her at least twice, including on the last play, where I was just dumping cars to end the game.

She was always a little upset when I beat her, but this time the discrepancy was so bad and she was so upset. I just stopped playing Ticket to Ride - like, at all.

[-] twinnie@feddit.uk 9 points 2 months ago

I’m probably remembering half of this wrong, it was the only time I’ve ever played Settlers of Catan in my life. So I recall you have to be the first person to so many points and I got something like a port which let me convert hay to points. I got that and then quietly traded all my items for hay.

Out of all of us there were only two guys that had played before, I’ve never met either of them before or since. They were getting really serious and competitive with each other. I still remember the look on one guy’s face when I eon the game out of nowhere. I wasn’t being smug or anything but this guy gave me a proper glare. He was a little bitch and wouldn’t talk to me for the rest of the night. A couple of people said they were glad I beat him.

[-] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

That's totally on them for ignoring you. Sounds like getting knocked down a peg might have been good for that guy.

Related, Settlers is one of the two games that are banned at my family gatherings.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

I played according to rules but still felt a little bad about the one time I won an 8-player game of Munchkin because the door wasn't a monster so I got to play one from my hand: a potted plant. They tried so hard to curse me or beef up the monster but I was way passed the level needed to beat it.

[-] Bassman1805@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Never feel bad for pulling insane shenanigans in munchkin. That's liberally what it's for.

[-] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Ending a game of Munchkin is almost impossible to do without upsetting the rest of the players. If you felt bad, that's fair, but what you described is very much in the spirit of the game.

[-] j4k3@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

I've lost friends playing Risk.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Locking people's meeples forever in Carcassone by creating unplayable holes in the map is what does it for me

[-] moonpiedumplings@programming.dev 7 points 2 months ago

Yeah. this was in high school, in my math class, and we were playing a math game.

The way it worked, was that every table was a team, and each team had a "castle" drawn up onto the whiteboard. A random spinner was used to determine a team, who would then solve a problem the teacher assigned. If you successfully solved the problem, you could draw an X on another teams castle. 3 X's mean that you are out.

My team was out. But, since this was a class, we could still solve problems, and still draw X's. Our table got selected to solve a problem, and I did successfully. I looked at the board, and realized that only two teams had a single X, every other team had either two or three. In other words, I could choose who won the game, even though I could not win.

So, I started trying to get bids. I tried to get real money, but someone tried to scam me with some "draw the X first" nonsense. But, the other team offered to pay me four of the school's fake money, and I accepted that and allowed them to win.

I may not have won the game, but I certainly felt victorious that day.

[-] irotsoma@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Yeah, the first time I played Magic the Gathering with a friend's husband was in a 4 player Commander game. I had let kept less aggressive and made it look like I wasn't too much of a threat, all the while holding a combo that could deal quite a few points of damage, but would sacrifice a lot to do it. I waited until just the right moment, the turn before I was about to be defeated by the last standing player who was doing really well. And I won. 😁

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] wjrii@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Two things come to mind (apart from just being annoyingly defensive in Scrabble).

In high school, our friend group would play Risk. We had one friend who was the youngest of the type of family that probably played Risk for fun, and probably discussed strategies afterward. He was clearly better than any of us, but he was never better than all of us. So there was an unspoken rule that everybody just ganged up on Brian until he was crushed, then with the tall poppy gone, the rest of us weeds would figure out who would win that night. For some reason he stopped wanting to play. Some people, amiright?

Then, off and on in my 30s, I played indoor soccer. I was awful. I came to the game late in life, and anyway was WAY past my already-low peak of being a useful player in pickup touch football or Ultimate Frisbee. My most useful contribution was showing up to make sure we didn't forfeit.

However, all the guys playing O30 rec-league indoor soccer had some hole in their game, so if I could figure them out I could make myself useful until I got too tired (at which point they simply ran around me, LOL). Mostly it was just simple stuff like always pushing attacking players to the corner on the idea that they would take a low-percentage shot out of selfishness (or that none of their teammates would make a trailing run), or else I'd press quickly on the idea that they would eventually make bad passes, and they often did. However, one I was pretty proud of. I noticed a pretty good player (for our level) liked to keep an eye on the build-up from his keeper and defenders and trap the ball with his chest to turn and dribble. I saw one of his teammates launch one of these long balls, and I saw him start backpedaling towards me so I just... stopped.

I was not moving at all, and this skinny little fucker had a pretty good head of steam for somebody moving backwards. He plowed right into me and crumpled before bouncing up frothing mad. He only got angrier when the ref called him for the foul. I smiled a fat little smile, and then got off the field cuz I was already getting tired.

I had a few others where I got away with shit because the refs could see I was awful as easily as anyone else, so they assumed I couldn't have intentionally directed the ball with the hand I was holding against my torso, or that I must not have been able to stop before running into some dude, but the backwards jackass (he really was unpleasant) play was uniquely satisfying.

[-] PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Any good play in a deception game - esspecially an open-ended one - feels so bad.

In particular, the example that comes to mind is when you create an alliance with a friend in TTT with you as a traitor and them an innocent: manipulating them into killing a bunch of their friendly innocents with you, before you shoot them in the back of the head to win the game.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

One time I played a Mario Party 8 minigame against my family, a rather simple game where you shoot 5 cards and you get to either add to or multiply your score.

I'd very quickly figured out that there's a maximum score and the two ways to obtain them. We practiced once and I intentionally shot whatever cards as a misdirection while the others were trying to figure out a good combination. My advantage was specifically not giving out any hints and trying to quickly going from practice to the real game with only 30 seconds to think.

I won that, there was only a little grief given to me about it, but I felt so bad. It was then that I realized I didn't like winning by intentionally withholding or giving bad advice. From then on I revealed these sorts of tricks, if only myself knowing about them would be an unfair advantage.

[-] zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

There was this game of dots I played against my 12 year old niece. The game was looking pretty even with two obvious large snakes building up - she ended up making the move that opened up the first, smaller snake for myself, hoping to force me to open the larger one for her. But I purposely didn't claim the ending squares in the first snake, which let me avoid opening up the second for her. So she was forced to then open up the second snake to me, letting me claim basically the entire board.

The second image explains it better - with the black lines as the setup she left me with, the usual strategy would be on the left, while I played as on the right, with the blue line as my last move.

[-] Forester@yiffit.net 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I was playing civ 5 with a few IRL friends over internet multiplayer. Victory types : religion scientific or political I had the largest economy by far but I was behind in tech. My military was decent. My religion was the third or fourth largest.

I had made a personal agreement through DM with one of the other human players and asked them if I could put a spy in their Capital and steal the techs they had acquired if I research agreed them. ( I was paying both halfs of the research agreement). By the time I had conquered my entire continent and extinguished the two annoying sivs that kept attacking me and neutered the other two into vassals (if you bring back an AI that another AI killed, they are very grateful to you). So as the year 1900 rolls around, I control 1/3 of the map landmass as territory under the work of my cities I cover the entirety of a large dorito shaped continent All of my cities are fully producing, have all buildings and are outputting massive amounts of GDP. However, one of the other human players has just researched nuclear theory and I've just figured out Great war infantry. I still have not caught up but I have made massive gains. I know I can't close the distance at this rate though. I am in an open alliance with this player as I am buying the tech off them still. I'm probably sitting on $50,000 with a thousand s coming in every turn. I pay off every single NPC to attack them

[-] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

So as the year 1900 rolls around, I control 1/3 of the map landmass as territory under the work of my cities I cover the entirety of a large dorito shaped continent

However, one of the other human players has just researched nuclear theory and I’ve just figured out Great war infantry. I still have not caught up but I have made massive gains.

Well, there's your problem. Civ 5 had a thing where research took more science points to complete the more cities you had. The ideal number of cities to own was five. If you had even a single city over that, even if science output was maxed out in all cities, it would take longer to research anything than for a player with only five cities.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mrspaz@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

I used to play a naval tabletop warfare game called Seekrieg with a group of friends; usually 8 to 10 people participating. It was basically a WW2 sim; the group would split into "fleets" of Axis, Allied, French Forces, whatever the scenario called for and then face off. Each player controlled a ship in a fleet.

The game was played with miniature ships on a large table (or the floor if the engagement was large enough). One fleet would move their ships, then the other fleet would do the same. Once moves were finished each player wrote down what guns were firing and what target(s) they were being fired at. It's important to note that ships had movement rules based on the type of ship. They could only turn a certain amount in degrees, and only reach certain speeds based on their maneuvers; they'd lose a certain amount of speed in turns, had max speeds, etc.

There were two official methods for playing the game: First was the "statistical" method, where each ship had certain bonuses and hindrances based on historical data, and dice rolls would determine if the ship was successful in hitting their targets. This was the option for "serious biz" players. The other method was much better suited to our group (drinking beer and bullshitting style) and was known as "range estimation." In this method, players would pick a target and visually estimate the range to that target in inches. When firing was resolved, the actual distance would be measured and hits determined. Players estimated to the 1/2 inch and could hit to the 1/4 inch (ex; if the player guessed 30" range and the ship was actually at 30.25", it would still hit).

Well, during this time I had been working on my degree and had gone most of the way through college trigonometry. The functions and identities were all fresh in my head. We came together one night for a game and as we were setting up I thought I could probably use my newfound skills to get the range estimation down pat. I was given a light cruiser with 8" guns. One of my opponents, who often made terrible mistakes in the game, was given a heavy cruiser with fewer guns, but bigger nastier 12 inchers.

We started the game and the first round closed distance. He outranged me and fired before I could, but missed. Second round I fired a huge spread at his ship, just to range him out (I should note that the actual range is called out when your estimate is checked if you're within 1/2 inch). So I fired at 30", 31", 32" etc., but in doing so learned the true range to his ship. For round three I wrote down his ship's turn angles and distances, noted mine, and then calculated the new distance. I fired all guns at his ship on this range; every single shell hit as I had dialed it in exactly. His ship took massive damage and was crippled. Repeat for round 4 and he was sunk. I repeated the performance against other players (though some of them were a bit tricksier in their maneuvers so it wasn't quite as brutal), but our fleet carried the match without a loss.

Everyone took it in stride, but it also kinda dampened the game. I decided not to do it again since it really kinda shit on the fun factor we were playing for.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] fritobugger2017@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

The first time I played Scrabble was with an old university friend and his wife. They both fancied themselves expert Scrabble players. Both bright and talented folks and lovely people. I won the game and the last word I played was DILDO.

I have never again played Scrabble again since I figured I could never top that. Also they never asked me to play with them again either.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2024
156 points (94.3% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27277 readers
1540 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS