First | Prev || Next | Last
¿Question #2469?
Myszka: Let's say you are a group of five, or six. But you're in the mood that you want so much to play that game for four... would you suggest to play teams?

PolarDad: No, we modify and house rule. (family of six)
bobcatt: Have tried two teams of two for a two-player skirmish game. Won't do it again for the same title, but it could probably work in others.
MartinWin: No.
BOBBYCAN: Are all Italians nuts?
jaredkass: Not unless it is a trivia game.
licotto: no, find a new game
jokerjesterknave: I don't want to be a group of any number. I enjoy being only one person.
kmbx13: If 5 i would send the drunk home, if 6 i would have 2 play something else or send 2 drunks home
PsyJam: If this ever happens, usually a couple will 'pair up' to take control of one player, while the rest just play for themselves.
TiwazTyrsfist: Yes.
XendoBreckett: I would suggest to kick out the others. But I'm a jerk like that. : ) No, I usually would play teams. This because, some of my friends have a slower learning curve.
MisterCranky: This answer brought to you by Turkey Basters Anonymous.
Der Ubermolch: No, teams are lame
Mathew753: It would depend on the game, but if I felt like it would be fun still with teams, I would definately suggest doing that. For example, I would never suggest teams for a game like Dominion (base set), but I would consider it for Settlers of Catan.
Spirit of 70: Yes.
Woelf: Yes. Some players can be humans and others will be Cylons.
Crazy_Dave: Nope, will wait until there are four of us.
seminole: never
paulidale: Nope, find a game where everyone can pick on each other properly...
moiraineasedai: yes
magalvao: Yes.
Elf__Man: no
Hector Vortac: Eagerly push for a game Josh hates; he'll leave.
DHEK: Yeah, why not. If that game's really good or not tried before, I'd be willing to go teams than to play another game everyone has tried before and maybe not quite like as much.
ZiggyZambo: no
wrkeech: with six i'd offer the other two another game, with five... i'd send him on a beer run.
rootbeer: No.
bigbadsteve: i send the extra people out for pizza
jeffwolfe: I was actually in this situation not too long ago. It was a 4 player game that I wanted to try that I hadn't played yet. I still haven't played it, because we played 5 player games instead.
smitty1966: no. ask to 2 losers to leave.
Daribuck1: Yes
jlavigne: no
greglios: I'd suggest splitting into two threes or a four and a two if the game requires specifically four.
tdabomb: Yep
zappothedude: Yes
janiera: No
MaksimSmelchak: Sometimes, yes. It depends upon the group.
Melantha: no.
brainrob: No
Dorque: Nope.
FrozenHoHos: I'd kick out two people and let them play something else.
Avatar_69: No. we'd play a game for the number we had
davidme: Depends on the game.
joebelanger: no, I would throw someone out of my house
ronster0: I've only been one person.
Helenoftroy: I would probably let one group play a four player and than another play a two player game. We have plenty of great two player games. Than they can switch or something.
Chris Page: In rare circumstances.
ben_ethus: Probably. Or ask two people to get the hell out.
Csteb: No. We can play the 4-p next time. We have plenty of games to play so I wouldn't be "stuck" on needing to play one specific game.
Loquutus: No, we vote someone off the island.
Linguist: no.
J Davison: Suggest that the extras go take a nap.
SatanicEssence: No
Fawkes: No.
GrandpaDave: Sure
vetinari7878: It depends on the game.
ZombyDawg: no
Dr. No: yes
GI Joe: Sure
ssmooth: No
motoyugota: Nope, find a game that everyone can play, or split into a couple of games
Longbow: sure, why not?
skrutsch: no
Legend Dan: No, we'd just break up into two games.
POvidiusNaso: Yes, but I'd get shot down like Daffy Duck.
yoacusna: No. I'd suggest splitting into a 2 and a 4, perhaps. Teams never works, except is casual family-type games, and often not even then.
Great Dane: certainly
rdmasters: Sometimes. Other times, we'll play it twice!
steef: can we kill 2?
CapAp: No way.
Lord_Prussian: No
puffinge: I wouldn't.
chrisesko: Not usually
davedanger: player # 5 plays 1/2 the time , player #6 plays 1/3 of player #4, then ..uhhh. player #6 sleeps 10 minutes...then ... i'm not sure
leece: No, not with our group. Most likely a couple will sit out that round and watch.
dakarp: no
AWildEep: No
Ludocrazy: yes
Windopaene: No
Karlsen: No
jens_hoppe: Sure, have done that on a few occasions.
Sceadeau: No, teams suck.
2amp: yes
4wire: no
heli: have done
snoozefest: no
gnomehome: No
jttm: Depends whether there are couples.
djlg: No. There's too many great games for 3 or 6 that forcing a group of 4 is unnecessary in any circumstance.
AlorielLelyn: Not really
skelebone: No, teamwork is for suckers.
CortexBomb: Um, no, never
CDRodeffer: No. I'd suggest the game for four and the others can play something two-player for a while.
chaddyboy_2000: No.
Spielfreak: No! Either split the group into two 3-player groups, or play a 6p game.