One of my favorite combinations to come out in a game (played by my mate/life partner/whatever you want to call her):
The black card: “What gives me uncontrollable gas?”
Her play: The Nazis
Politically incorrect? Sure. But clever. And not poking fun at any minority, disability, etc. Just a reflection of a real event presented in an unexpected way, and probably not a combination most people would have thought ever coming up.
It’s a game. It’s what you make of it. There are far better games out there, sure. But it’s an easy to play, low maintenance way to kill a few hours hanging out.
Yeah, I’m not sure why the article is trying to tie in CAH with the “tabletop community” or “modern day board gaming.” The group who loves CAH the most are my parents, who will typically think of Monopoly or Sorry! if you ask them to name a board game. I agree that sometimes I wish the humor was a bit smarter but it can still be fun. Irreverence is irreverence.
The main thrust of the article is pretty much given away as soon as the phrase “trigger warning” gets thrown around. It’s the same debate you see all over the place these days, just with a different subject du jour.
Up at the cabin on a rainy day with your 78 year old father and your five kids, 20~11. We had a blast, and it gave the kids insight that their grandpa was a person, not just a grandpa. He had confirmation that we’re all insane.
Cards Against Humanity is just a vulgar version of Apples to Apples. I’ve played CAH three times and had fun each time but I acknowledge that it isn’t a very good game and the concept wears thin very quickly. During a regular game night I wouldn’t ever suggest CAH but it’s a fun party game when you have a lot of people and don’t want to split into multiple groups.
Classifying CAH (or, as Odesio points out, Apples to Apples, the family friendly version) as being in the same category as hard core board games and criticizing it accordingly is kind of like criticizing beer pong for not having quite the same developmental system as professional hockey, or like saying your sister isn’t good at charades because she’s not as good an actress as Jessica Lange.
The term “Board game” is simply too broad a term, really. The fact that “Cards Against Humanity” and “Aegean Strike” are both games that are sold in a cardboard box doesn’t make them anything at all alike, just as “Sorry!” and “Axis and Allies” are totally different experiences.
I think the article is entirely wrong-headed, but to each their own. The cards that refer to minorities could certainly be used to make a racist construct, but I find in my circle of friends, they’re used to set up a punchline satirizing the white status quo far more frequently.
Cards Against Humanity is poor in the same way Fluxx is a pathetic game. It’s manufactured jokes are stale to the point the only comedy involved is in being ‘ironic’ with them.
1000 Blank Cards blows the doors off of both games and all their knock offs. It’ll require a little effort and creativity but it’s essentially free (but for the cost of some index cards) and it can be tailored to whatever your group likes.
I’ve grown weary of CAH. I admit, when I first played… I thought it was great laughs. After playing through all the cards a few times… I just groan now whenever its suggested. I know that I’ll have to play it because some people still love it.
In my group, its not actually even the “racist” cards that seem to draw the automatic wins as much as it is the “gross” ones. (Pacman uncontrollably guzzling cum will invariably win, for example). What annoys me now, too… is that now that the “shock” of the cards has worn off… people will often pick the cards that are just the grossest even if they make no sense versus the cards that are more clever or genuinely funny. I guess thats part of the game- playing to your caller, but it drives me crazy.
(In one of the more recent Tabletop episodes- somebody says of Wil Wheaton… “Wil’s the type of guy who never learned a game isn’t about playing the rules, but playing the people” I’m totally like that, too… so maybe I’m a bit of a stick in the mud.)
I disliked the article a great deal. It’s fine to not like a game, but calling it objectively unfunny is obviously untrue, given that it has tens of thousands of fans who like it. I am a power gamer, with thousands of dollars worth of Magic cards and dozens of board games filling my house. And yet I think CAH is a great game, especially towards the end of game night when everyone is tired and punchy. It’s certainly not for everyone, and that’s ok! It doesn’t have to be. But my game group has people with a diverse background of ethnicities, religions, and sexual orientations, and everyone there gives as good as they get.
Calling it spoon fed is missing the point. It’s not as simple as playing the grossest card in your hand, or at least, that’s not how my group plays it. We tend to like the Pick Two or Pick Three cards the best, because that allows you to craft more of a joke. A lot of jokes fall flat, which is fine, because it demonstrates that skill is involved. If there was no skill involved in crafting a joke, then it would always get a laugh, right?