Don Sheldon writes: >> How do you make a good cooperative game? >I like competition. I find it enjoyable. The more competitive, the >more fun. Now don't get me wrong, game play should always be >gentle(wo)manly, but when people aren't trying their hardest, it >cheapens the whole experience. Agreed -- if you're playing a competitive game, you really want everyone competing, it makes the effort of those who are futile. >In a cooperative game... where's the challenge? It depends. One has to examine existing cooperative games (RPGs are a good start; one can have a competitive RPG, but it's by no means the default) and see what makes them work. "puzzles" are also a good clue--I'd say that jigsaw puzzle solving is, effectively, a cooperative game. Also, there are existing games in the whid that have cooperative elements which share the spotlight -- or overshadow -- the competitive elements. Lord of the Rings is a fundamentally cooperative game, playing against the game. Arkham Horror (both versions) features a fundamentally cooperative game, with minor elements of competition (because nobody wins if the outer gods eat the world). And the "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" board game features most players taking on one of the "scoobies", while one player takes on the "big bad" for a given game (and is individually more powerful than any of the other players, but should usually lose if they play well -- like an oppositional GM in a good role playing game). Carol, would a quasi-cooperative game (ie, one player playing "the opposition", with the bias toward "the players" beating "the opposition", but no guaruntee) suit your goals here? -- Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\ _,,,--,,_ ,) --^-- "Did you know, if you increment enough, you /,`.-'`' -, ;-;;' /\\ get an extra digit?" "I knew," weeps Six. |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\ /-\\\ "We knew. But we had forgotten." '---''(_/--' (_/-'