Game: Zobmondo!!

Thread: "for 2 full player turns" challenges

Rainbow Snake — 2008-10-28T03:14:02+00:00

I don't have high expectations that anyone much reads the "Would You Rather..." (WYR) forums here ... but anyway ....

I was playing WYR again the other day and this time really noticed the challenges that tell players to do X "for two full player turns".
A common challenge accepted is "hold a spoon in your mouth for 2 full player turns".

I assume "two full player turns" means all around the table twice?
So this means you can have multiple players doing their challenges at the same time? We had the problem that one player's challenge required all the other players to write stuff down, but one of them was doing a challenge where they have to hold a pose for 2 turns. How could she write?

Also the turn after you win the second challenge, you get to draw the third and final challenge. How does it work if it's one of these "for two turns" challenges? Do they win as soon as they accept it, or only after waiting for 2 full player turns? Might someone else in that time swoop in and complete a shorter challenge and win?

Quite confusing!

Thread: Has the game changed so much?

Rainbow Snake — 2008-07-10T07:10:20+00:00

Last month I purchased and played a game of "Would You Rather" and had a mildly fun time.

Coming here to BGG I find that it's supposed to be the rebranding of a game called "Zobmondo", but the description seems to be written by someone who can't quite recall the game but knows they hated it. Either that or the game has changed quite dramatically since then. Perhaps it needs a second game page?
Since the description did not match the game I played, I've added a "variant" section to the description:

Before they can roll and move, players must pick a card and present the rest of the players with a nasty choice between two thoroughly unpleasant hypotheticals in categories such as pain, embarrassment, ethics, and ingestion. If the player guesses the majority preference, he gets to move otherwise he must pass. Some spaces allow the player to invent their own awful hypothetical choice. The other players vote secretly on their choice in this case. If the vote is not unamimous, the player can move or send someone else back. Players roll a six-sided die and there are only 10 spaces to the goal so games go very quickly. Typical choices on the cards include, "Would you rather lie naked in a bathtub full of live roaches or dive head first into a pool of tobacco spit?" The answer "neither" is NEVER allowed.

Variant:
The 2003 version of this game "Would You Rather?" appears to have quite different rules to the above described game. There is a new simpler square board with more spaces. Unlike the 20 minutes of the above game, 1-2 hours is recommended by the manufacturer. Players roll a dice, then move and depending where they land, draw cards with dilemmas to pose to the rest of the other players. The current player must try to secretly predict the result of the other players' subsequent open discussion and consensus view. No-one is penalised for an inability to reach consensus, the game encourages one option picked at random perhaps by flipping a coin, to keep the game moving. If the current player predicted correctly, they get a bonus turn.

Typical questions include "Would you rather ... On senior prom night, have to take your parent -OR- your 12 year old sibling?"

Every so often players get the opportunity to take a difficult challenge with the winner being the first person to complete their third challenge.

Thread: Review

badweasel — 2008-01-05T00:07:52+00:00

Introduction:
Like everyone on the planet, I have played been asked by or asked friends "Would you rather?" questions. In my case, these are usually choices between two equally disturbing scenarios, but still everyone has done the basic concept. There is no need to base a game on it.

Components:
There are pawns and a dice, which are of no particularly amazing quality but nothing wrong with them either. The board is broken up into three rings with various colored spaces. Some of the spaces say "Challenge" on them which causes the player to draw from the Challenge deck instead of the normal deck.

The cards in the game are of good quality and should last a long time. They are broken up into 4 different categories of Would You Rather? but there is no real major difference between the categories.

The game also comes with a few pads of paper and pencils. Interestingly enough, it doesn't come with enough for all players to have one of each at teh same time, which seems an oversight. At least have enough pencils for everyone as writing plays a big part in the game.

Rules:
The players take turns rolling dice and moving their pawn. They then draw a card from the Would You Rather? deck and read the color corresponding question to themselves. They then write down what they thick the majority of the group will select as their answer. The question is then asked to the rest of the group who has a set amount of time to determine what their consensus is. If the there is indecision, some tiebreaker is used to determine which answer was selected.

If the player guessed wrong, their turn is over otherwise they get to move again. Play continues like this until someone lands on a challenge space. Challenges consist several different types of cards that include making your own Would You Rather or completing bizarre tasks. Once a Challenge is completed a player gets to advance to the next circle. The goal is for one player to complete 3 challenges and so win the game.

Thoughts:
The game is extremely long and bloated for a party game. In the first attempt at the game, we had 5 players cycling in and out of the game because they would get bored and leave. The basic concept is okay, but there is way too much downtime for this type of game.

Plus, any game that needs to state that players need to play in the spirit of the game and not play to win, has a questionable status as a true game. Besides, most of the Would You Rathers are rather vague in their wording and many are just blah and don't invite much discussion.

Not a good game for a group.

3/10

Image

pete belli — 2007-12-29T02:51:04+00:00

Zobmondo: 1998 "As Featured In The Wall Street Journal" board

Image

pete belli — 2007-12-29T02:49:01+00:00

Zobmondo: 1998 "As Featured In The Wall Street Journal" box

Image

taragalinas — 2007-12-28T19:57:38+00:00

Zobmondo Box cover - Swedish edition called "Veckans Värsta"

Thread: User review

macls29 — 2007-09-06T01:12:47+00:00

This is a game that I had since 1998, was stolen, then found cheap at a flea market. It's a party favorite of mine... not for the "competitive juices" but more for fun and laughs.

Object - Enjoying conversation with questions serving as the starting blocks. A winner is declared when a player completes three challenges.

Teach-ability - Fast and easy. The rules have a brief summary in the margin.

Setup - shuffle up, tokens at start, and go!

Length - 15 minutes and up

Gameplay - Players attempt to predict how the group will answer an either/or question. Both choices are unsavory in some way (some categories are pain, fear, embarrassment, ethics). The player continues until they predict incorrectly, or complete a challenge. The challenge spaces have a separate deck of cards (examples are "would you do it," "invent a question," "fill in the blank"). If the player completes the challenge, they move up to the inner circle (Talisman-style). The third level is just a challenge space (Crown of Command-style). If they complete a challenge on each of the three different "circles" the game is over.

Strategy - The game explicitly forbids the use of strategy... discussion of each question should be spontaneous and sincere.

Theme - I'd call it "Just Have Fun." The rules are set up to keep the game moving quickly, with a "Notes" section on how to play within the game's spirit. Well considered and presents a clear message... enjoy!

Fun Factor - Not a game for the aggressive/introverted/competitive types. However, if these traits can be suspended for a party game, I think it could be enjoyed by most party goers. Can be played with teams, but seems most ideal for 6-8 individual players. Bottom line... a great party game!

Variants - team play, but this involves more "down time" as the first team whispers about which choice they feel the second team will go with.
At the web site www.would-you-rather.com, there is a book of further questions, and another version (the "sick and twisted" version) of the game.

Thread: Re: Would You Rahter? I'd rather not... a Review.

Paragon Games — 2007-07-01T19:39:57+00:00

Jon,

Thanks for the reply, that is an excellent idea... Use the cards for ice-breakers or a few laughts when you have a dinner party, etc. That would actually give this game some kind of a use.

Thanks,
Derek...

Thread: Re: Would You Rahter? I'd rather not... a Review.

Emsdad — 2007-07-01T07:59:51+00:00

We bought the game several Christmases ago, but I instantly dispensed with the 'game' element and simply use the cards as ice-breaker conversations after dinner for a few minutes. We flip through the cards and pick the questions that appeal. Most of them are bizarre and cause a lot of laughter but there are a few juicy 'ethical' ones in there that really get people thinking.

For us: As a game - don't bother; as a quickfire conversation generator - not bad (but I think you can buy a book of 'would you rathers' much cheaper than the game.)

Thread: Would You Rahter? I'd rather not... a Review.

Paragon Games — 2007-06-30T14:35:01+00:00

Wow! The first review on a game, I am so honored.

So last night one of my gaming group buddies and his wife came over for dinner, my wife's father has been in the hospital for about 6 weeks now, and we haven't had a nice dinner in just about that long because of how hectic it is with hospital visits, 3 kids in the house and my wife being very pregnant... So my good friend Wil decided to come over with his wife, bring some steaks and have a good time and getting my wife cheered up and lower her stress.

After dinner we decided to get out a game. Wil and I made our usual joke about getting out Axis and Allies, but after some debate we decided to try a new game that I got from Tanga a couple of weeks ago called "Would you Rather", which is apparently a remake of a game called "Zobmondo"... which was a remake of a game called "Would you prefer" or something along those lines (I am not sure which was first or last), after playing it, I am wondering if they had bad sales and kept renaming and repackaging the games to try and sell over and over again?

In any case, it was an ok game, but I don't think I'll take it out to play again. The game time for 4 people was only about 30 minutes, so it wasn't a huge time investment.

The basic idea is you have to move your little plastic counter around the board and work your way into the center where you will win. Every time you land on a color you read a question from a card that matches your color (land on orange, read an orange card question), etc. What you do is read the question to yourself and write down what you think the people will answer, then you read it aloud and the other players come up with an answer (they all talk together for 90 seconds (a cool little sand timer is included) and they come to a consensus on it as a group) and then give you their answer. If you guessed what they would answer (correctly predicted the outcome) you win that round and you get to go again, if you fail, then the next person moves and so on...

The main problem here, with 4 players, was that we never agreed on a question one time at all, never once in the entire game, and it wasn't because one person was being a jerk, it was always a different person not agreeing on the answer (you'll see what you mean in some questions below), so there is a special note about what to do if a consensus can't be reached - it basically says to kick out any trouble makers that dont go with the group and 'banish' them from the game... had we done this, the game would have lasted about 2 minutes, so since we always had an odd number of people playing (4 players is an odd number since one person is the question reader, leaving 3 to answer), then we just decided to end each one on a 'best 2 out of 3' vote.

I CAN SEE A HUGE PROBLEM with this game should you try to play with 3 or 5 players... that would leave the question answerers as an EVEN amount of people, thus making a vote impossible if there is a disagreement, and in turn, bringing the game to sudden end.

As you move your little plastic token around, every so often on the board you will find 'challenge' spaces, when you land on one of these there is a more detailed card you read from and do a more detailed and confusing challenge and if you win that challenge then you move one 'ring' closer to the center on the board.

The first person to win three challenges is the winner (and would have made it to the center of the board).

This game has a lot of potential, and I think if we all had a few drinks in us, this game might have been a lot of fun, but it really wasn't that great for us when we played it.

The standard questions were not that great to begin with, and although the challenge cards left some room to use imagination (such as 'make up a question' and 'fill in the blank' type stuff), the cards were generally long and confusing and took a few reads to understand, this really slowed down the game and made it quite a bore during those times.

Here are some sample questions off of a random card, to see what I mean:

QUESTION: Would you rather run a marathon with a blood blister on each toe or go a solid month with a horrible sunburn on your neck, head and feet?

QUESTION: Would you rather be incredibly attractive physically but exude an extremely bothersome odor or be hideously unattractive but have a scent that is irresistible?

QUESTION: Would you rather have yur name misspelled on your tombstone or have them erect the proper spelling over the wrong grave?

QUESTION: Never be able to say the word love or never be able to kiss?

So that is a good idea for what types of questions are in the game, nothing really out there, kind of boring questions that have no real consequences...

Some of the "Make your own" questions our group had come up with, which made for a lot more of a debate and fun time, were questions like this:

QUESTION: Would you rather be burned from head to toe and look like Freddie Kruegar the rest of your life or have your arms and legs cut off and only be a head and torso the rest of your life.

QUESTION: Would you rather have hand on the ends of your legs and feet on the ends of your arms or have a hand attached between your legs.

Those custom questions made the game, but there again, the problem was you could only do that on "challenge" spaces, and they were not easy to land on, and once someone does 3 challenges and wins them the game is over, so they were few and far between.

Overall, I'd give this game a 4 out of 10, it wasn't a 'horrible' experience, but I don't think this game will ever hit my gaming table again, unless it is maybe a larger crowd with no kids around and there is some drinking involved. Some house rules that would allow for some more made up questions and 'fill in the blanks' type of questions would really help this game.

A good base to work from, but not good enough to recommend someone to buy. If you have a chance to play it with a group of friends, give it a shot and hope you get some good challenge cards.

Overall Rating:

Derek...

Thread: Re: Zobmondo rules variation

nwhyman — 2007-06-20T19:58:20+00:00

Would that be death by pickling in vinegar, or death by watching soap operas?

Try Ostrakon for a more cultured version of the same game.

Image

davebo — 2006-08-24T00:35:26+00:00

Image

cdefrisco — 2006-06-30T00:46:08+00:00

"Face the Diabolical Dilemmas!" - Lagoon Games

Image

Gialmere — 2005-09-17T13:28:02+00:00

Image

xandryyte — 2005-01-20T13:40:01+00:00

Image

xandryyte — 2005-01-20T13:40:01+00:00

Image

belial1134 — 2004-09-24T13:45:06+00:00

Image

HaoleBoy — 2004-07-12T01:16:11+00:00

Eat a dead lab mouse!

Thread: Zobmondo rules variation

Talis24 — 2004-04-04T22:33:04+00:00

OK, so the whole point of the game is to make a choice. But what if both choices are just too horrendous? We added a third choice. Death. With the two groups we've played with, when after playing the game they were offered the 3rd choice, all willingly accepted it into play!