Hi. I'm designing a game where one of the things a player can do is gamble. Gambling is only a really minor part of the game so it has to be fast and simple.
What I have now is the player puts and equal amount of money into three pools. Then the house puts the same amount of money into each pool. Both now roll 2d6 for each pool, highest wins. Draw the house wins.
Now, it works. But I woul dbe interested if some of you had some ideas for a slightly more interesting mechanic.
Here's a simple change that makes the player feel like he has more choices, but keeps the house advantage almost exactly the seem. The player bets 3X coins in 3 piles against an equal amount from the house. They roll 2d6 for the first pile, house winning ties. The player has the option of increasing his bet on the second pile by X for the privilege of keeping one of the dice he rolled (i.e. a 6). They roll, and again the player can increase the bet on the third pile by X to keep one die.
Now instead of the result being
-3: 17%
-1: 41%
+1: 33%
+3: 9%
it's instead (approximately)
-5: 1%
-4: 1%
-3: 15%
-2: 8%
-1: 24%
0: 12%
+1: 23%
+3: 14%
A little more complex, significantly more perceived player control, and no significant change in odds. Who knows whether it's more fun, though.
Well if a player does not find it fun, he dosen't have to gamble. A group could ommit it entirely if they wanted. But it adds nice flavor and options :)
But, if a player doesn't have to gamble, why would he do so, when the house has the advantage?
Then again, legions of people play Black Jack and Roulette in the casinos, so what do I know?
Well in the end I may change that rule. But so far people have gamled in every game. I guess they have faith :D
...
But generaly people see it as a fast way to maybe earn a few bucks, and buy something they otherwise could not afford.
Humans are strange beings. They will happily spend $5 to participate in a lottery with a 1 in million of winning $1,000,000 which, mathematically speaking, is a bad bet, but when confronted with the option between winning $100,000 for sure, or taking an all-or-nothing gamble to win $500,000 with a chance of 1 in 3 of succeeding - which is a mathematically good bet - they'd rather take the certainty of the $100,000. It just shows that cold logic doesn't always prevail.
I find it hard to implement good gambling mechanics into my games, because once you figure out the odds you know exactly whether to take the gamble or not. Dice are especially notorious, because their unpredictability is so... predictable. More interesting, I think, are mechanics where you have to decide how much to gamble, on what thing, with the odds changing depending on what other players will do. The most interesting randomizer is still another human being.
OK, well what about this:
Every round three cards are revealed, with differing point values. Players secretly "bet" an amount of money on one of these cards in some way (I'll skip the details of how to bid secretly on different cards exactly). Then, simultaneously, all bets are revealed. The player who bids the highest on a card wins the card. All the bets go to the bank, even if a player didn't win a card.
So, what does this achieve? You could go for the highest card, but there's a risk that you are overbid and end up with nothing at all. You could go for a lower valued card, where the risk of competition is smaller. Then again, another player might think the same, and bid on that card as well. If you think all players think like that then you could bid a smaller amount of money on the higher valued card and perhaps try and get that for a bargain. You can never be sure, because you don't know what other players are thinking. Finally, the supply of money shouldn't be endless, so you have to try and save some money for the future rounds as well putting an extra variable into the equation. This is much more interesting than trying to "predict" how the dice are going to fall, in my opinion.
Every round three cards are revealed, with differing point values. Players secretly "bet" an amount of money on one of these cards in some way (I'll skip the details of how to bid secretly on different cards exactly). Then, simultaneously, all bets are revealed. The player who bids the highest on a card wins the card. All the bets go to the bank, even if a player didn't win a card.
So, what does this achieve? You could go for the highest card, but there's a risk that you are overbid and end up with nothing at all. You could go for a lower valued card, where the risk of competition is smaller. Then again, another player might think the same, and bid on that card as well. If you think all players think like that then you could bid a smaller amount of money on the higher valued card and perhaps try and get that for a bargain. You can never be sure, because you don't know what other players are thinking. Finally, the supply of money shouldn't be endless, so you have to try and save some money for the future rounds as well putting an extra variable into the equation. This is much more interesting than trying to "predict" how the dice are going to fall, in my opinion.
This exactly (although abstractly) describes the racing element of my April GDS winner Rattlesnake Rally!. Players bid varying amounts of Parts cards in order to "win" one of three routes at a time, where each route has different value to the player. I can tell you that in practice, players do face the choices that you outline here, the decisions are fun and the results often comical.
~Josh
The idea of Gambling Mini game made an old game pop up in My mind : Pari-Manie. The game is in french, but by looking at the screen shots on board game geek you will easily understand.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/20444
The idea is that you move on the board and at various location on the board you have a gabling minigame. Some mini games are played with real cards like Poker and black jack. Other games like horse racing are played with cards. The slot machine is played with dices.
Since the game did not have a dealer ( for example, poker and BJ ), each player are playing against themselves. To determine if you win and how much, you look at a table on a card that indicate how much money you get ( In proportion to what you bet ) according the hand you have.
Patriarch wrote:...and buy something they otherwise could not afford.
Humans are strange beings. They will happily spend $5 to participate in a lottery with a 1 in million of winning $1,000,000 which, mathematically speaking, is a bad bet, but when confronted with the option between winning $100,000 for sure, or taking an all-or-nothing gamble to win $500,000 with a chance of 1 in 3 of succeeding - which is a mathematically good bet - they'd rather take the certainty of the $100,000. It just shows that cold logic doesn't always prevail.
This is a very common mistake, and Patriarch has the right of it. zaiga, you are making the argument that in every gambling situation, the choice which has the highest expected value in dollars (or whatever currency) is the correct choice.
Consider Patriarch's point. Suppose it is your turn in a game and you have 3 dubloons. You have a manned quarry and there is a dubloon on the Builder role. You already produce corn, indigo, sugar, and coffee. Would you take Patriarch's gamble? If you took it a million times, you'd lose about a third of a dubloon every try. But we're talking about taking it exactly once. You would have a 42% chance of buying the factory *right now*. Suppose that this is a 4 player game, everyone's got a 25% chance to win right now, getting +1 dubloons gives you a 35% chance to win, getting +3 dubloons gives you a 40% chance (factory +2 dubloons), getting -1 dubloon gives you a 20% chance, and getting -3 dubloons gives you a 15% chance. Of course, these numbers are impossible to calculate explicitly ingame (or maybe even out), but... that means that without taking the gamble, you have a 25% chance to win, but by taking it, you have a 26% chance, even though you expect to lose dubloons.
Utility is the key here. A more transparent example: next turn your opponent will win no matter what. You have 4 ore, 1 wheat, and a 3:1 port. You make wheat significantly more often than ore. In most circumstances you would save for a city... the expected value in VPs of saving is higher than trading the ore for a sheep and buying a dev card. *But* you have 9 points. No matter how unlikely, buying the dev card now is the correct choice.
Now, suppose you have 80k in crippling credit card debt and were offered the above choice (ignore taxes). Which would you rather: someone pays off all of your debt and hands you a brand new car, or someone rolls a d3 (don't ask) and on a 1 pays off your debt, hands you a brand new car, and puts $400,000 in your bank account?
If you take the roll, your spouse should slap you silly.
Utility is the key here.
Epigone, I don't disagree with what you say. If losing a little money won't hurt you while gaining some while help you tremedously, then this changes the odds and a bad bet might become a good one. Context certainly matters.
A more transparent example: next turn your opponent will win no matter what. You have 4 ore, 1 wheat, and a 3:1 port. You make wheat significantly more often than ore. In most circumstances you would save for a city... the expected value in VPs of saving is higher than trading the ore for a sheep and buying a dev card. *But* you have 9 points. No matter how unlikely, buying the dev card now is the correct choice.
Well... obviously :)
Now, suppose you have 80k in crippling credit card debt and were offered the above choice (ignore taxes). Which would you rather: someone pays off all of your debt and hands you a brand new car, or someone rolls a d3 (don't ask) and on a 1 pays off your debt, hands you a brand new car, and puts $400,000 in your bank account?
If you take the roll, your spouse should slap you silly.
In a real life situation, I'd definitely take the safe bet. This is because life isn't a game, and life is not about making the most money. I'd rather have a 100% shot at happiness than a 33% shot at a little bit more happiness. As I tied to say, cold mathematical logic doesn't always apply to real life situations.
In a game situation, this might be different and I might take the long shot, depending on how that would improve my chances at winning. If it's early in the game, and there'll be more similar opportunities, then I'd take my chances.
I still don't get why people throw money into slot machines, or buy lottery tickets. I mean I understand why they do. I just don't get it. :)
I still don't get why people throw money into slot machines, or buy lottery tickets. I mean I understand why they do. I just don't get it. :)
Back on topic, what if you were allowed to play the same game but with other players? Instead of offering to play the house, offer to play another player. When you really need that extra $2 to purchase the uberl33t horse this turn, you have to gamble... usually with whoever's losing, giving them a bit of an edge.
 | Power Creep, a Dungeon Pages adventure (0) by jasongreeno |
| Build your own [insert game genre here] (8) by questccg |
| Board Game Blueprint - New Episode Every Wednesday (21) by The Game Crafter |
| Premium Bullet & Premium Toxic Waste Board Game Pieces at The Game Crafter (0) by The Game Crafter |
 | PoA — Major shift back closer to FCE (2) by questccg |
| What “Should” Be in an RPG Design Book (11) by lewpuls |
| Blank Poker Card Sale - 3 Cents Each! (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Blank Playing Cards - Bridge 57mm x 89mm UK (1) by questccg |
| Finally returned after all these years (1) by DyminoMonsters2004 |
| State of the let-off Union - November 2024 (0) by let-off studios |
| Shoppe: The Simulation of Guilds (1) by questccg |
| The fine line between a game and a simulation (22) by X3M |
| Only 24 hours left to bid on games for the Extra Life Charity Auction (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Songs of Conquest is now 60% off plus an additional discount for... (5) by questccg |
| Returned the reMarkable 2 and purchased the BOOX Go 10.3 (3) by questccg |
| Happy Halloween 2024 (0) by questccg |
| Epic Metal Monster Coins - Now on Kickstarter - Created by The Game Crafter (0) by The Game Crafter |
| DuelBotz: Sample New Card (12) by questccg |
| 2 levels for an unit (wargames) (6) by X3M |
| Dragon Spark Playthrough (0) by The Game Crafter |
| New Board Game Pieces - Premium Water Droplet & Premium Blood Droplet (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Designer with an 'almost' ready product (18) by questccg |
| Protospiel Madison - Only 17 Days Away! (0) by The Game Crafter |
| New Board Game Pieces - Premium Milk Bottle & Premium Beer Mug (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Testing chat GPT for mechanics searching (6) by larienna |
Sweet... I like the concept!
Well if a player does not find it fun, he dosen't have to gamble. A group could ommit it entirely if they wanted. But it adds nice flavor and options :)