The "ewww Munchkin" problem

[Spaceknight]

Munchkin Quest is not Munchkin.

Now, I realize plain Munchkin isn't for everyone. Some say it's too random, too social with the alliances, and so on.

The problem here is: because some people hate plain Munchkin, they won't even give Munchkin Quest a try.


Now, I think MQ is far superior. Some of the "fixes" it provides include
- range on helping in combat, so it's not a table-wide free-for-all of bribery. (which also speeds things up.)
- more reliable opportunity for XP with the Monster deck. (it's bad to have too many turns of "I draw, not a monster, I draw again, not a monster, guess I'm done, when do I get to actually play something?")
- room text makes sure you never have a "useless" turn.
- boss fights make sure the game doesn't end on a lucky unstoppable draw.
- dice and hitpoints make combat a bit more interesting.

The problem is making that case to people who have already turned away from the Munchkin card game.
I can see where they're coming from - if I didn't like the card game I don't think I'd have ever given Quest a try.


Have other people run into this problem?
Are there other things I can point out that would overcome anti-Munchkin bias?

[crimhead]

I also prefer Quest. I haven't played the card game since I got the board game.

I like how Quest makes the game less abstract - Monsters that don't die stay in play, and there is an element of spacial geometry. Then again I've always preferred board games to card games as a general rule. Gamers with a background in CCGs might feel more at home with the card version. If your dealing with players who tend to prefer board games, use that angle to try to persuade them - at least to try it.

I've never had trouble with players not liking this game because they don't like Munchkin - who wouldn't like Munchkin? But I have had trouble with players who feel they've played too much Munchkin and want something different. Not much I can do about that, but given the size of my board game collection we usually just play something else. True though, I don't nearly enough games of MQ in. I'd like to play it more. :(

[capnq]

Originally Posted by crimhead

I've never had trouble with players not liking this game because they don't like Munchkin - who wouldn't like Munchkin?

People who don't like cutthroat, competitive games, and people who hate puns.

[Spaceknight]

Originally Posted by crimhead

I like how Quest makes the game less abstract - Monsters that don't die stay in play, and there is an element of spacial geometry.

I think the monsters staying in play WITH their modifiers is a huge plus over normal Munchkin. It makes the modifier cards worth more, instead of them just being one-shots. Again, a little less randomness in Quest. Which means more strategy.

Originally Posted by crimhead

who wouldn't like Munchkin?

I got a copy of Burn In Hell, and the box says "from the creator of Munchkin" and on THAT some people didn't even want to hear what kind of game it was.
Yeah, some people are just that silly.

It's funny, there's one guy who LOVES Betrayal At The House On The Hill. MQ is a bit similar with the explore mechanic. And this guy is so anti-Munchkin that even a comparison to his favorite game won't get his interest. I have, however, had some success presenting MQ as a better alternative to Prophecy.

[crimhead]

Originally Posted by capnq

People who don't like cutthroat, competitive games, and people who hate puns.

I suppose. I'd like a cooperative game if there was a rule prohibiting the sharing of information - like partners bidding together in bridge. Cooperative games with complete shared information are kind of like two people working together to solve a puzzle - the cooperative element isn't intrinsic to the puzzle itself. Different strokes for different folks, though.

Originally Posted by Spaceknight

It's funny, there's one guy who LOVES Betrayal At The House On The Hill. MQ is a bit similar with the explore mechanic. And this guy is so anti-Munchkin that even a comparison to his favorite game won't get his interest.

I think Capnq nailed this one - Betrayal is not such a cutthroat competetive game as Munchkin, and it's light on the puns.

If you'd made an honest effort to persuade your friend and they're that turned off by the Munchkin theme, there's little more you can do. If comparison's to other games with similar mechanics won't work, maybe it's not the mechanic your friend doesn't like about Munchkin, but rather the cutthroat nature and abundance of puns?

Have you tried bribing your friend with food? ;)

[PK]

Originally Posted by capnq

People who don't like cutthroat, competitive games, and people who hate puns.

Sure. There are plenty of people who don't like Munchkin. Just head on over to BoardGameGeek and get some opinions -- you'll hear an earful, from, "The gameplay lacks tactics -- it's just chaos and luck," to, "The attempts at humor almost invariably fail, and detract from the game," and, "The premise of 'screw your neighbor' leads to arguments and resentment, practically ruining any game night." It doesn't help that some people are munchkins and will introduce the game to a new person by half-explaining the rules, then taking advantage of them (or even outright cheating) to win. And yes, I've seen this once or twice and heard many stories about it.

Anyway, it boils down to some people having a really bad taste in their mouth when they hear "Munchkin". And you're either going to overcome that or you're not. I'll give it a good ol' college try: "I understand you didn't like the card game. But this is a completely different approach to the game. You're still killing monsters to level up, but the gameplay is more Descent-like, with a physical dungeon that grows as you explore, and the position of the pawns matter -- if someone wants to throw a potion into your combat, they have to be next to you. You have more tactical options, because all of the known rooms and monsters remain there, allowing you to choose to head over and deal with them. While the Munchkin humor is still part of the game, the actual mechanics are far more serious."

And if that doesn't work, I'll happily give up. No point in forcing someone to play what they don't want. Instead I'll pull out Frag or Revolution.

[capnq]

Originally Posted by crimhead

I'd like a cooperative game if there was a rule prohibiting the sharing of information - like partners bidding together in bridge.

You might enjoy Pandemic from Z-Man Games. Players are not allowed to show each other their hand of cards at Normal difficulty or higher.

[Andrew Hackard]

Originally Posted by capnq

Players are not allowed to show each other their hand of cards at Normal difficulty or higher.

Bah, I say, and bah again to THAT rule. It's a cooperative game; why shouldn't we cooperate? If I'm going to say "Who has reds? Does anyone have Taipei?" it's just as easy to face all the cards.

[Rudkin]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard

Bah, I say, and bah again to THAT rule. It's a cooperative game; why shouldn't we cooperate? If I'm going to say "Who has reds? Does anyone have Taipei?" it's just as easy to face all the cards.

Yes and no. The first time we played Pandemic we ran into some problems when we had all of the hands face-up. Essentially one or two of the players just took total control over everyone's actions. "Suggestions" turned into "orders" and at least one of the players left the table rather upset. We stopped the game shortly after that.

By forcing the hands to be concealed the players CAN reveal what they have ("I can meet you in Taipei and give you a red." / "I can transport you somewhere if you want.") but they still maintain autonomy over their actions. Nobody can tell them "Go over here and do this so that I can do that and she can then do this blah blah blah I'm in charge". Nor can three or four people have a loud discussion about what so-and-so should do on her turn while the player in question tries to make a suggestion but is ignored. By concealing the hands the player whose turn it is MUST be listened to, since he or she is the only one with all the information.

After that first game we have played with concealed hands and things have gone MUCH smoother for us.

Maybe people were just having a bad day. Maybe we just have some bossy people at our table. All I know is that playing some cooperative games like Pandemic with all hands face up can run the high risk of having some people get left by the wayside.

~~~~~~~~~

Regarding "The ewww Munchkin" problem, I haven't encounted that much negative feedback. There is one person I can think of (part of my D&D group, actually) who doesn't really like playing it all that much (especially when her boyfriend stabs her in the back...), but she is willing to play a game every now and again. The silliness of it helps to balance out the cutthroat nature of the game, and so long as everyone doesn't gang up on her she seems to have a good time.

It didn't help that one game she consistently drew Race after Race after Race card to the exclusion of anything else. Her full hand for a couple of turns was 5 Races (possibly 6; I don't remember if she was a Dwarf or not). No curses, no Monsters, just Races. Very weird.

But people refusing to have anything to do with Munchkin? No, I haven't really seen that. The closest might be one of my oldest friends who has an aversion to D&D and D&D related games (this may be partially because her boyfriend and brothers are all a big gamers, but I'm not sure). Even still, there was a time when she would enjoy playing Munchkin regularly. The pirate theme of Booty helped keep her interested, I think. Then one day she must have overdosed or something. Alas!

I guess I'm lucky to know so many open-minded people willing to at least give the game a try. The people who aren't too keen on Munchkin share the same opinions regarding Quest even if they haven't played it, however it would appear that their reasons for not liking the card game would carry over to the boardgame (they aren't a fan of the Fantasy RPG style/they don't like the cutthroat nature of the game/etc), so I haven't really pressed the issue to get them to try Quest.