[regus]

I’ve always wanted to play this, however a few things hold me back.

Experience has thought me that it is very difficult to wrangle a lot of people to play complicated games. Simple party games are easy, but the moment you try to explain anything complicated to a large group all their eyes glaze over.

Then there is the issue of the extreme play length. The people in my play group will complain if something takes an hour to play, I doubt they could handle 8 hours.

The closet I have come to this is Sidereal Confluence which allows for up to 9 players and can takes up to 3 hours or more to play. Explaining that to such a large group was a nightmare.

And finally there is the “take that!” aspect of this game that I find worrying. People like to say “don’t get mad it’s just a game!” But this isn’t javascript we’re taking about, these are real people with real feelings. I’ve been involved in games were people explode in anger or other times were people burst into tears, this is not fun.

As the host of the game night it’s my responsibility to make sure people have a good time, not to have them fight with each other and break up their friendships.

[NikolaeVarius]

This is the kind of game you play in TableTop groups, not with some random friends at an arbitrary time.

[joe_the_user]

I've played the game with a random acquaintances and hard time limits. That worked better than formally getting all my friends together.

Also, 4-5 people is really all you need for a fun game - or a game that spirals out of hand, with the fun level then being a matter of taste.

[technofiend]

I've introduced a few classics to my family over Thanksgivings: Munchkin, Cards Against Humanity, Carcassonne. Eventually we settled on Mahjong; games are quick, the rules are well defined and if enough people want to play we just break out a second set or rotate players through the game.

People would recall and retell twenty-year-old stories how the more cutthroat relatives screwed everyone in Monopoly or Risk, so quick games without elaborate mechanics prevent a lot of hurt feelings.

[regus]

I'm curious, which variant of Mahjong are you playing? Chinese, Japanese, American? I've learned how to play Japanese Mahjong which is fun, but the rules (especially scoring rules) are so complicated that I do not look forward to having to teach this game to any one.

In regards to the Monopoly comment, to this day I still bring up the time some one screwed me in a game of Star Wars Monopoly back in 2001. So yes, these kinds of things tend to stick around in people's memories.

[technofiend]

After looking online I believe we're playing a Hong Kong / Chinese ruleset. I think my original comment implied I introduced the game to my family but I did not. One of my aunts is a Buddhist monk and she learned the game at her temple. We play with a photocopy of a photocopy of rules with American boards. The game was popular in the 40s and 50s so finding a set at an estate sale or flea market is possible, you just have to be careful that it's a full set and all tiles are included.

You're right in that there is some complexity if people are going for named hands. But it's the matter of minutes to teach someone the basics and the classic winning Mahjong hand that stops the game. You can usually get through a few games repeating the rules for scoring at the end to emphasize the basics and then let new players add complexity as they get comfortable.

I think the other reason it's popular is because although you might be the person who called out Mahjong to stop the game, someone else can easily beat your score. Plus there are no alliances to be made and broken: everyone stands on their own.

If you teach someone the game my suggestion is just hand them a copy of the scoring rules and score their hand with them a few times until they're comfortable. This is not (IMHO) a game you teach in one session.

For anyone who has played computer mahjong and is scratching their head wondering what the heck we're talking about this is not just pairs matching. The game when played with humans is very different. Same tiles, but different rules.

[tomgp]

When I've played it I've played it with my DnD group and playing it as roleplay can take the sting out of a lot of that. But yeah, it can be tough. Twilight Imperium can have a lot of the same diplomacy fun but feels less edgy -- the downside being it's quite a bit more complex.

[secabeen]

Diplomacy is fun, but I don't think the amount of time and stress is compensated for by additional fun. I'd much rather play two games of sidereal than one game of Dip.

[regus]

How was your experience teaching Sidereal to people? I've only played it once but it was really difficult to get people to pay attention and to understand all the little nuances.

I ran into the classic "if you had told me this I would have played differently!!!" complaint, even though I did mention the thing they were complaining about.

We also didn't finish the game because it got too late.

[secabeen]

Not too bad. I limit players in a first game to 5 or 7, so that we didn't have to use the two hardest races but the Eni Et and Unity are either both in, or neither. (Eni Et interest converters work best with Unity grey cubes; without them, both races are a little behind.) The game took a little while, but it wasn't terrible. I definitely recommend it when people are interested.

[jsilence]

I second this sentiment. Played it once a long time ago computer supported with longer turns. Couple of days. Could not bear the betrayals even though it is 'only' a game. There are a lot of negotiations, talking and discussing with your friends and little game mechanics.

I quit the game early. Not worth losing friends over.

[schoen]

Apparently this game is a much faster and simpler game that also makes people stressed out and mad at each other.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/So_Long_Sucker

[joe_the_user]

I've played the game in a number of contexts.

One of the things I noticed is that the longer the turn, the most intense the resulting game, to the point you can experience real life problems.

Letting the game take more than a day seems cool but it often results in things getting out of hand.

[xpe]

Many players feel this way.

You are well advised to watch your back in the game. Don't overextend yourself. However, you also cannot isolate yourself.

[snarf21]

Reach out to me, I've designed a card based version that plays 3-6 and about 15 minutes per player. It is super solid but I'd always love more feedback.

[dmurray]

Interested in knowing more about this, but you don't have contact information in your profile.

[snarf21]

My email was set but I guess not in the about. It is now.

[Someone]

“And finally there is the “take that!” aspect of this game that I find worrying”

I wonder whether introducing a small amount of luck into the game would improve that. For example, in case of a standoff, if (and only if) the attacker rolls a six and the defender rolls a one, let the attacker win, or add a rule that, if two sixes are rolled, a player’s orders in a turn are ignored.

If every player were to have a tiny bit of misfortune in a game, maybe, their mind would put the blame on that and not on the backstabbing that made them lose zillions of encounters (“if only I had won that, I could have convinced X to support me, and…”). I guess players even might put the blame of not winning the game on being too lucky (“if I hadn’t had luck three times in a row, they wouldn’t have cooperated to kick me out of the game”)

It would be difficult or impossible to find just the right amount of luck to add, though.