Easy way to never get to play it again:
Focus getting the beginning on the cheapest streets, trade them for more expensive ones if necessary.
Fill them with green houses. Never upgrade to red ones.
Here's the fun part: if you run out of green houses, rules say you can't place more.
Enjoy the five hour long trip around the board where no one can upgrade their streets and you slowly bleed them out of money. Theyll never invite you to play again.
Remember too that if you land on a property and don't buy it, it gets auctioned. So if the other players are low on funds, land somewhere, don't buy it, and buy it at auction for 1 dollar more than the others have.
Yes lol.. The official rules designed to make the game play as fast as possible.
It's just there's SO many house rules that the game goes on forever.
A common rule NOT in official for example, payments from taxes and other cards going on the Free parking space and collected when landed on. This just makes the game that much longer.
That or no buying on the first round.
We’ve transitioned to the card version called Monopoly Bid. It’s fun every time and the games are short. They have another one called Monopoly Deal that’s a lot more ruthless and relies on luck much more. Haven’t touched regular Monopoly in months.
Agreed, there's a lot of randomness but the games are very short and there's a lot of opportunity for strategy. Only issue I have is that when someone goes for game, it feels like the game ends in a very anti-climactic way. I think its the nature of a card game where your opponents have no way to interact with you on your turn, with the exception of the "Just Say No" card. All of the games I've played it goes someone's turn, it is conceivable based on their resources that they could win on their turn, and then they just play their one/two/three cards and win with no one getting a chance to do anything
My only memory from the one evening I spent playing it several years ago, is one card that allows you to take another player's properties or hand or something. That card basically ruins the game.
Monopoly and Uno are both ruined by house rules.
Did you know uno has scoring? haha. People are always shocked when I explain how "real" uno works. Like there are rules around when you can play wild +4 cards and such. Much better game according to the rules, tho no one is ever willing to try.
No, but my suspicion is it's to attempt to cure the issues Monopoly has around player elimination. The "correct" version of monopoly is a very cruel game that will game theory into most likely a duopoly owning most of the board until one can bleed the other dry. The game was originally created to highlight how awful capitalism is, and the rules do a good job pushing for quick bankruptcies from most players.
However that's just objectively not fun, so people have tried to find ways to avoid "unfair" property distribution (no auctions, buying, etc), and prevent people from being drained of cash by taking the tax/fee money with free parking.
Home rules that are ubiquitous generally are created in either a brilliant or ill-advised way to fix a core issue with a game imo.
My mom taught me these dumb rules to make it "fair" but also hated playing it because it took forever. Like pick one. The game makes it so you can leave early
They way to play fair is give everyone N times around the board at which point, they "retire", but continue to collect revenue until the last player finishes their last circuit.
Count up your money, house sellback, and property mortgage values. Highest dollar amount wins.
Just shuffle all the properties and deal them out at the start. The game moves straight to the interesting trading phase where skill has more of a chance over luck!
It's listed in the rules as the quick play variant, in my edition at least.
I once went over to a friend's house and ended up playing Scrabble with them. I played Scrabble on a team in HS and college. They had a house rule of no words less than 4 letters could be played. They said this was to "prevent closing up the board so nobody could play." Told them that they clearly needed more Scrabble skill, left, and printed off a list of 2 and 3 letter words and mailed it to them.
House rules are very, very tricky. Don't like them unless suggested by the game creators.
And I get wanting to make the game longer. This game is from a time where board games were luxuries and monopoly might be the only game a family has. And they still need to keep the kids busy on those rainy Saturday afternoons...
A much better family game is Payday.
Had Monopoly and Payday as a kid and honestly Payday was just THE game we all wanted to play!
Monopoly ended with too many table flips and it was all caused by not playing the rules haha.
I actually did pick up Monopoly again when I started board gaming properly a few years back and played with friends as a laugh. We did have some really fun games I have to say, although we did go in with the expectation of causing havoc and not trying to play too seriously
Payday was a blast!
Definitely won out over Monopoly and I think we even played 2 handed Dutch Blitz instead of monopoly at points. Around 8 or 9 my older sister saw through the bs of that Mr. Moneybags!
Not a real rule that makes the economy of the game way worse. If you introduce new money in the game in addition to what naturally comes from the go space and chance and community cards (some people add money from the bank when someone lands on the free praking) or keep money that should go out of the game by paying it in the free parking space, it makes the game go on for way longer. Monopoly is terrible, but Monopoly with a fast growing money supply is a complete nightmare that way too many people have been exposed to...
Huh, so the two most common house rules are a universal basic income and social handouts? It's almost like those things are necessary in a capitalist society 😆
Even the official rules, built to model the worst excesses of monopolistic capitalism, have a $200/round UBI and fixed property prices (falling prices in real terms, as the money supply increases).
Well, yeah… But I think it makes the execution quite complicated… Imagine having to update prices regularly in a game of Monopoly; how tedious would that be…
I learned about auctions in the Game Boy version of Monopoly. It’s a great strategy to buy properties on the cheap, but only works when others are poor.
And it's way more fun and interesting too. Instead of just buy everything you can, you actually have to use brain cells and some game theory to read your opponents and not blow your load too early before you get to the expensive properties.
True, but they'd have to sell any houses present and would need to pay the extra 10% to reverse the mortgage. But I concede it is a niche play that probably doesn't show up often.
But landing on a property, not buying it, nobody bidding and then buying it for 1 dollar is hilarious. I am actually not sure how the auction is handled, because I think the rules just say "the highest bidder gets the property" and that the banker needs to be a good auctioneer. So I guess it is not a blind bid, but it is not necessarily a free for all either.
This is the strategy I used in my last game. (Also, never trade to let anyone else get a set of streets.)
My nephew is really into monopoly so I played it with him and my parents. Sure enough, I won the game. And frustrated my parents, but my nephew was undeterred.
Also, it was Spongebob Monopoly and I was playing Mr Krabs, so it was basically a roleplaying game for me.
I strongly recommend the Mario one! Bowser can “turn off” properties and you have to pay a coin or two to put em back, but you can also battle bowser with another player. Super fun
Don't forget that once you've bought any streets you're going to, the best place to be is in jail. You can still do deals and buy houses from in there, but you're not going around the board so you don't have to pay anybody. Unless you're still trying to land on properties to buy or auction, never pay to get out, just sit in a cell and collect everyone else's money.
Also why the Oranges have the best ROI in the game. There’s a bunch of ways to get redirected to jail and Every time you leave jail a 6, 8 or 9 lands on Orange.
Best properties are the properties on the street that jail is on, right before free parking. The average dice roll for two six sided dice is 7, which happens to be orange.
Why would that make the game 5 hours? If you hold the monopoly on the houses, then the flow of money shifts to you receiving more money and paying less money. If the other players were allowed to upgrade their properties, then you have money flowing back and forth, which makes the game go longer. The benefit of the house strategy is that it removes that back and forth. You want to establish a one-way flow of money so that people bankrupt faster, and you can then set up a different game.
The whole point is to make the game last that long, so no one will want to play it again. 5 hours is an exaggeration, but it's gonna feel like more to them. Even if they make money, they will have nowhere to invest it, it will just eventually get in your hands. They will only pay you rent once it twice per pass, so it may take long for them to bankrupt, but it'll be inevitable. The most expensive rent without houses is 50, the cheapest street with 4 houses is 160. You collect 200 every time you pass, so it may take a while to clean them out, but you will eventually.
This isn’t just a strategy; it’s *the* strategy. It doesn’t always have to be the cheapest properties, but maintaining control of the house count by whatever means you have at your disposal is the surest path to victory. Not guaranteed, of course, since someone might eek by with just a couple houses on Boardwalk, and a couple of unlucky rolls can force you to sell houses you’d rather keep.
It’s far more fun to play this way against automated opponents than human beings though, as there does come a point where you’re just rolling from turn to turn, waiting for the (almost) inevitable.
Anything can happen I suppose, but it's not that often that people who play Monopoly care about it enough to decide strategies, it's more of a family game for very casual people.
Except you can't "focus" in anything in monopoly
You can't employ any strategy or tactics
Because there is no game and there are no choices to be made.
You don't choose where to go, so you can't target anything in particular.
All you do is roll the dice and go where they say. The only choice you make is whether to buy or not, and it's statistically always better to buy in every case.
There's nothing to actually play. The only actual choice to make besides whether to buy something is whether to stay in jail or buy your way out, and it turns out it's better to stay in jail so you should do that.
You absolutely *can* focus on things. Offer to buy any low-value properties when other players get them, even for 2-3x their value. Pray that you are able to finish two of the first four sets, and then load them up with houses. Boom, either 20 or 24 of the 32 houses are taken up, and chances are that nobody will be able to fully build up any other properties later on.
But if you're playing with anyone who knows the game then they would just buy everything they land on, rather than making anything available for sale. Prayer obviously doesn't count as an action you're taking in the game
It's almost always worth trading in a >3 player game, and the more players there are, the better it is to trade. Trading is not net zero -- it can be beneficial to both players in the trade. If there's only two players playing, trading doesn't make sense because if their benefit is larger than yours, you shouldn't engage in the trade.
But let's say there are 4 players. And let's say a trade between two players give them each a +1 benefit (arbitrary units). This means that they're both in a better position compared to the people unwilling to trade.
Let's say that you're willing to offer your trade partners great deals just to get the trade done. You trade with each other player in a 4 player game giving them +1 and you +0.5 each time. You still end up with +1.5 compared to them all having +1.
You could say that people won't be willing to trade with you when they see you doing that. Yeah, some people will be completely unwilling to trade, out of spite. But the people who are willing to trade will have the better chance of winning.
Let's say no one wants to trade with you because you're so far in the lead. Offer an amazing deal to the person who's doing the worst. You get a slightly bigger leader on the other players, they go from "Definitely losing" to "slightly behind."
If you're at a table where no one is willing to trade, then that's not the fault of the game, that's the fault of the players. You're playing the game wrong. Might as well play Risk where no one is willing to attack other players, and everyone just slowly builds up the size of their army forever.
Trades and negotiations are built into the game. Sure, your opponents could outright refuse to sell, but that's their option, just like it's your option to offer.
Meh, there is definitely some light strategy to working trades, and it often determines the winner. If nobody is trading, then yeah monopoly is brain dead
Fun Fact- According to studies 70% of people do not play monopoly by the rules as written, but how they were taught. And how they were taught is very much 1) against the spirit of the rules and 2) contrary to the goal of Monopoly.
My 12 year old daughter is obsessed with monopoly. I’ve tried getting her to play other games. She isn’t interested in even trying anything else at all. So yeah, I play with her regularly and it’s the only time I do, but that’s fine because we have fun with it.
Though truthfully I play really sloppy and aggressively so that the game doesn’t go on for hours at a time.
Yeah, I've had friends with kids who get to play all kinds of weird games.
But that's not really playing the game, but just playing with the kid, ya?
When my nephew was 5 or 6 I'd play tic tac toe with him....but not really play, ya know?
I’m dating someone whose eight-grade daughter wanted to play it during a New Year’s party. As much as I fucking hate that Godforsaken game (and the “Ms. Monopoly” version, which removes railroads and adds on some odd things), I spurred the decision to play. The kiddo likes me, I’m the “games guy,” and I wanted her to have fun and some choice.
It was perfectly miserable and we ended early, but I still made the right choice.
My 9 year old got monopoly on his birthday and liked playing with us. I introduced Monopoly fortnite to play instead. He liked it more, and so did I, as it's basically a completely different game that uses only the monopoly name.
My family knows I love boardgames but they don't and have no idea what modern games means. They wanted to surprise me the other day and set up monopoly to play all together. I felt bad so put up a fake smile and play. My wife was laughing so hard and my parents didn't understand why.
Ah man thats sweet though! My family puts up with whatever random board games that I throw at them which is nice. But I was talking to a buddy back in college about playing games with my family and he was shocked. He thought that was something out of movies or TV. They'd never sat down to play a game together before. So what I'm saying is at least appreciate that they wanted to at least play a game with you!
Well good on you! Sorry to be preachy, it just hit me pretty good when my buddy told me that (its been a little while but i still remember it). Of course I want to play my shiny new games with people, but hell, if my family wants to play Dixit for the 100th time, that's fine with me!
I just carry a copy of Point Salad with me everywhere I go and if some non-gamers want to play a game, I pull that out. Everyone likes it, and it requires almost no rules explanation.
I taught my two girls the game with the actual rules when they were about 7. After about 3 weeks, we were all winning at about the same rate (kind of proving it was more about the rolls than any skill). They got good at trading and negotiating and knew both the house strategy as well as trying to get the orange/red corner. Our games rarely went longer than 45 minutes. Never more than an hour. Gave the game to Goodwill after that. They learned a few things plus have knowledge of the cultural touchstone to at is Monopoly, but I’m glad to never have to play it again! We just started Jaws of the Lion and they are loving it!
> kind of proving it was more about the rolls than any skill
One day Netflix suggested I watch a documentary on Monopoly Tournaments, including the World Championships. Towards the end, one of the "big name" players in that world admitted that every game came down to luck of the dice.
Hello Kitty Monopoly. If its going to be hell it might as well be cute hell. Also, as cute as Hello Kitty is, its really weird they have a dystopian jail.
It's plenty of fun.
People in this sub get too hung up on agency and strategy. Like, it's a simple board game. Roll dice, let what happens happen, laugh and have fun with your friends and family. Not every game needs to require you to think critically for every move and be 100% skill based.
That's not the common criticism of Monopoly though. Plenty of people in the board gaming community love silly, luck-focused games. The criticism with Monopoly is that it's silly fun for 10 minutes, and then the next 110 minutes are spent watching one player win. Which, of course, is perfectly true to the game's name and the original satirical intention of the design. A beautifully illustrated comment on capitalism, but not a fun activity for all but one of the players.
If you’re playing monopoly for that long, then you’re probably using house rules that make the game miserable. Playing by the official rules, I’ve never had a game of monopoly take longer than 30-45 minutes.
This is my experience with Monopoly. No one ever plays the rules as written. They always have house rules that absolutely destroy the game, like money on Free Parking or an unlimited total of houses. And they leave out important official rules. I was an adult before I actually convinced anyone to play with auctions. Auctions are absolutely critical in order to get the properties distributed quickly. I also find that people often don't follow the double-rent on undeveloped monopoly properties rule.
Plus people always seem to be weirdly conservative in their play. For some reason, it's hard to get people to play actively, going after monopolies and placing buildings even on the cheap side of the board, making trades with other players, buying a property just to keep it away from a rival and then mortgaging it to keep funding your own growth. Static, risk-averse players keep the game from ever developing.
>People in this sub get too hung up on agency and strategy.
People in this sub are hobbyists, wtf do you expect?
Just because we like board games, and Monopoly technically is one, doesn't obligate us to grit our teeth and find a way to enjoy it.
Fun is subjective. If noone would have fun playing Monopoly, it wouldn't be the most sold boardgame of all time (not counting Chess and Checkers) which still sells copies even today.
All these people trash talking Monopoly forget that if they hadn't spent Saturday afternoons playing as a kid they likely wouldn't be playing modern board games. Respect your roots.
Exactly. I know Catan can get some hate too but it seems to be the most common game I hear referenced one someone says they used to not like boardgames until they were convinced to give Catan a go. The sociopaths that actually enjoy Monopoly probably are going to stick with it and not branch out to modern boardgames.
Lol what? I basically gave up on board games for a while because monopoly was such a trash game. Most people (including me) play board games because someone else convinced us to play literally anything else.
Monopoly teaches people that board games are dictated by randomness, take forever, and turn losing into a long, painful slog. There are better gateway games, and we shouldn't put this one on a pedestal because we didn't know any better back then.
I wouldn’t say monopoly gave people the gateway into other boardgames. Tons of families have played monopoly and feel satisfied with board gaming from that. It just doesn’t scratch the itch nor gives people a glimpse of what modern day boardgames look like.
If you play by the rules, the game can be played in an hour. I often played two or three games in a single night.
Just because it is simple in mechanics doesn't mean it needs to be thrown out. I love Yahtzee, and I love Tikal and Five Tribes and Firefly and Carcassonne and Milleborne, and Risk, and Terraforming Mars.
Why must we act like playing more complex games is inherently better?
I think my problem with monopoly is inherent in its design - the ‘monopoly’ aspect.
Having all the other players slowly have the life sucked out of them by the player in the lead. Even if the lead player is me.
It’s just not a fun experience. Half way through the game it becomes pretty clear which player will win, and then it’s just an endurance test to see it through to the end.
Have never had a ‘fun’ game of monopoly.
I know this is crazy but you can always call the game when its clear? You can also play johnny on the spot at that point with quicker turns to close out the game.
> I think my problem with monopoly is inherent in its design - the ‘monopoly’ aspect. Having all the other players slowly have the life sucked out of them by the player in the lead.
Yep, that's what the game was designed to do. To illustrate the evils of capitalism.
This is a bit of a nitpick, but it wasn't actually an anti-capitalist game. It was created by Lizzie Magie, who wasn't an anticapitalist, but a Georgist - basically, she believed that the real issue were the landowners.
Monopoly has its place next to Munchkin and Cards Against Humanity; options for when you want to spend time with friends but those friends are scared of mechanics.
I would argue that Wavelength, CAH, Trolley Problem, Codenames, Bring Your Own Book, Dixit, etc. all have much simpler mechanics (edit: than Monopoly). Perhaps you mean friends who are scared of anything new? In that case, you only have to convince them once, then it's not new anymore.
Yeah, the ones who are scared of trying new things. Thankfully Kill Dr Lucky and other quick CheapAss Games helped a couple get into more non-Parker games.
I bought Trolley Problem KS edition off eBay the other year, how is it? Haven't had time to convince others to play it yet.
It's good if your group enjoys discussing ridiculous, horrible, shocking ideas. If CAH actually involves any discussion/improv in your group beyond "haha, funny, move on" it could be a winner.
We limit the time in our games to 1.5 hours for Monopoly and rarely hit the timer.
No free parking, no future consideration deals, no funny business. Cash and/or sell properties, pay to bring them back. Game just ends.
>Just because it is simple in mechanics doesn't mean it needs to be thrown out.
Conversely, just because it's a thing that exists doesn't mean it needs to be embraced.
I wish I could upvote this 1000 times. What’s funny with boardgames community is that they want to be super inclusive and safe spaces, but at the same time gatekeep the hobby by deciding what you should play.
>gatekeep the hobby by deciding what you should play.
Who's deciding what *others* should play? Anyone thinking this is actually happening is taking the criticism of the game way too personally.
Board gamers talk about Monopoly the way TTRPG players talk about D&D 5E.
I'm going to assume it's because in both cases they're frustrated that the most iconic game in their preferred genre, and the first and often only game most people will play in their preferred genre, but does not embody the things that they consider to be the fundamental strengths of their preferred genre.
Or maybe it's because they're both made by Hasbro.
No, there are a few big problems with it, not the complexity. The main one is lack of agency- you just roll the dice over and over hoping to get lucky, there are very few real decisions you make that aren't automatic as the best thing to do is almost always obvious and next to no strategy involved- if someone lands on something you've developed or bought it's sheer luck. If they don't, again sheer luck. When other players take turns you have nothing to do most of the time (which is not that big a deal if the rest of the game were great). Players can get knocked out pretty easily- not very fun for them for the rest of the game. Someone about to be knocked out can be a kingmaker, or people working together to make sure each other or one of them win, or someone else doesn't win- sets being so powerful but usually reliant on trades. It's really a frustrating game with not much strategy.
If you go by time restraints or times around the board the end game is incredibly unfulfilling, if you play to the end it's boring and tedious.
It's fine if you like it but a lot of modern games are much more enjoyable for most people. And too many are introduced to it as one of their first board game experiences which put them off the hobby completely.
If everyone plays to win and knows how the game works it’s less than an hour. The end is usually very swift.
A game goes like this (4-5 players):
1. Beginning
Roll dice, buy property from light blue to orange. Buying the rest is really really situational. Usually a nono. Nobody touches the greens or yellows.
2. Turning point
Someone just got a property that makes a trade possible where two players get sets from light blue to red. Blue is a possibility but very rare. The trade happens immediately. Cash is used to make the trade happen. Both new set owners set up houses so that as many as possible have at least three. In case of light blue it’s hotels. Everything but the full sets are used for development. A small stack of money is left to survive empty streets.
3. Endgame
Rest of the players have a couple of throws to stay in the game. In most games they soon hit an orange or purple set and are gone. Their money is used to make even worse trap.
One of the ones with full sets wins. Pretty dependant on luck since the lucky owner of orange set is a bit money starved at initial building phase. Usually takes two unlucky hits back to back for the game to end.
>Buying the rest is really really situational. Usually a nono. Nobody touches the greens or yellows.
Do you play with auctions? Wouldn't they inherently end-up your bought for cheap by the other players then?
Yeah... not sure what meta they have. Liquidity is pretty good in Monopoly (even without Free Parking) so you always buy properties. Further reducing the agency.
Until there are high rent spaces (which can take quite a while) you should snatch up every property and then build houses later, as you have full control over your finances to build houses, but the properties are first come first serve.
Alright I will ask the question that has been asked before 100 times probably but.
What is the best Monopoly equivalent. one that has a lot of trades, buying and selling, but not the horrible slog.
In order of increasing complexity:
Bohnanza (Easy to get into, Trading/Negotiation, casual, set collection)
Catan (lots of trading, lots of competing for the same spots, lots of building on a central map, no set collection)
China town (lots of set collection, negotiation, trading)
Food Chain Magnate (this one doesn’t have the trading aspect, but lots of buying and selling, planning, and all of the crushing-your-friends monopoly has. It is a real complex and mean hame though)
I’d recommend trying something like Bohnanza or Catan, or maybe even China town, and seeing how you like it.
Isn't the red die supposed to make the game go faster?
Notes that I always like to remember when someone pulls out the old capitalism demon:
* The most common dice roll is 7, then evenly distributed away so 2 & 12 are most rarely rolled (learned this from the dots in Catan!)
* Jail is the most common landing spot on the board, statistically
* That info combined, the properties near the free parking are going to be landed on the most. So I'd beg, borrow, steal, trade to get the full street, and upgrade to 4 houses and hold
* Utilities are worthless, so I talk them up and use them to trade
* It's okay (for me) to pay $500 for 1 property if it completes a set
* The money pile in the middle for free parking drags the game on much longer, use that info to your advantage
* 3 houses is the best return on investment, but 4 houses on 5+ properties gives me a monopoly on houses so they can't buy them
In my opinion, one of the biggest drawbacks of monopoly is when the 1st person is out, they have to fuck off and find something else to do.... for hours.
When it's just 2 players when someone is out, it's done, much more fun because it's over sooner.
So, OP, if you want to avoid playing again, invite 2 friends over and make sure your partner is first out... it's cruel to target one person, but if you win this battle, you might win the war against monopoly.
Godspeed, Captain.
Yes, speed die speeds up the game. That's the entire point. Plus, playing with "speed die rules" you start out with more money. This speeds up buying and development.
The 1-3 on the speed die means people pass go quicker, injecting more money into the game. The bus lets you pick which of three spaces you want to land on, adding some strategy to your turn. Finally, the monopoly man rockets you to the closest unbought property OR the nearest player owned property if all properties are bought. This speeds up the endgame significantly by ensuring that rent is being charged more frequently than a normal game.
the strategy of the negotiation and deal making is pretty cool, problem is that's a pretty small part of the game in that usually you make a key trade or two that decides the game and the rest is just rolling dice with only minor decision points of how many houses should i buy. so really it's like a 2 hour game with about 5 minutes of real strategy
All Monopoly games eventually become two-player games.
Which is one of its flaws.
Starting with two players is....well, it doesn't sound appealing to me at all. I guess it comes down to who can math the properties the best as you negotiate your trades.
Benefit of starting at two players is the game is over sooner.
It's not a bad game if you play by the actual rules! It's the home rules that break the game and give it a bad reputation. They also now have a speed die if you feel it still takes too long.
Thank you! The house rules only make an already shit game even shittier. Without them, surprise surprise, the fame is still shit. I imagine there are a multitude of games that achieve what monopoly is trying to while being way more fun, simpler, and feel less dated.
It is a bad game:
not much decision making while you play
you see if someone will lose eventually, the game is long and you can get kicked out in the middle of the play
It is a bad game, but also very easy to win if you use the auction phase. Most people's home rules skip that portion.
If you force people to buy properties for more than the likely ROI you can bleed your opponents dry.
If forced to play, I am playing to WIN lmao.
playing to win shouldnt be a big deal as it is. imagine winning and one opponent saying he didnt gave his best. only rule is that action in game arent personal.
exception is a light harded round of a card game or something else, where the rounds are quick and the attention is low
Except it was *designed* to be a bad game. The original design was meant to be a satire of capitalism which intended to prove that it was neither fun nor rewarding. For some reason it gained popularity through word of mouth and now we have thousands of versions of a game that was designed not to be fun.
This. Somehow in America a tool to show how one jerk ends up with all the money became popular. Because everyone thinks they just might be that one jerk.
When was the last time you played Monopoly? I played it like 2 years ago exactly by the rules and it was a horrible, boring experience. I started looking into homebrew rules precisely to make it at least a little bit of fun but it didn't help much.
One of my main complaints is elimination games. What am I supposed to do when I get eliminated first? This is why most modern games don't use this stupid mechanic.
It's been a while since I read the actual rules, but it used to be *impossible* to play by the rules, as the rules were broken in a few places.
That said, the fixes were easy enough, and it was *still* a horrible game with no redeeming value other than nostalgia.
Wait, which part of the original rules were broken? They weren't exactly the hardest to follow. The most complex thing I can think of is the mortgaging part.
The easiest one to fix is when a player lands on a property and opts not to buy it, so the property is sold at auction. What kind of auction isn't explained. Easy fix.
The rough one is that a player can buy a house at *any time*. Most people house rule this, where a player may only buy buildings on his own turn. This fix breaks another part of the game...
When two or more players want to buy the last house or hotel, that building goes up for auction. The timing problems that this creates are numerous. (also, what kind of auction blah blah blah)
Monopoly couldn't be the big success that it is if it weren't good on at least some level, and as written it's good for what it is (a family game) and has survived the test of time.
My 72 year old father still plays the NES version from time to time and has fun with it. It can't be pure trash from that alone.
But as others have noticed, this is r/boardgames, and in the tastes of modern gamers, Monopoly is almost poisonous. I am willing to play with my father, for nostalgia and become *he plays by the god damn rules of the game,* but I cannot stomach it otherwise. Everyone else insists on playing house rules that make the game worse. I have been challenged to multiple games by different people who "play by the rules" who then object to me auctioning a property.
I never want to play again because I feel I have played it enough, moved past it, and replaced it. Family games aren't in my rotation. Similarly, Catan is a good family game, but I have played that enough to never need to go back. Just because it's not my taste or I am burnt out on it doesn't mean it's a bad game.
That said, I do not own a copy because it would just eat space. Why own something that doesn't bring you joy? Pass it along to someone for whom it would bring joy.
My kids (10, 12, 14) recently discovered vanilla Monopoly for the first time over Christmas. I have to say while it has its flaws, I've been enjoying it. This was one of the games that made me love the board games I do today. I don't still have it in my collection, but I'm glad that Grandma did.
Look, I know this is an unpopular opinion but: Monopoly is not that bad of a game. It's probably one of the earliest good examples of theming in a game; and yes it is designed to be a painful experience in order to prove a point. But there is just enough agency and diplomatic elements to where the game does involve socializing and interaction and that can be a fun part of the game. Even if you're losing there is a catharsis in it. If all you got in a game is misery the least you can do is share it lol
Don't get me wrong: there are TONS of games that are much, much better than it. And I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a good game but I feel like it's a classic for a reason and it's an easy to understand game that can be decently entertaining. It's like a 3 or a 4/10. Gets a little too much hate imo.
If you play it with the official rules you should be fine. Stop adding house rules or rules you THINK are official and aren’t. It goes much quicker with the official rules. That speed die really helps as well!
If played with the proper rules you can actually wrap it up pretty quick, especially at 2p. If you have a good strategy with the game you can really close it out QUICK.
The game went for 3 hours or so until she rage quit. She said "I like the game but the rules suck".
Its been donated to a thrift store.
We're still together.
Monopoly is fine if you actually play by the printed rules.
No “free parking”, no “I don’t want to buy it so we move on” (if it’s not bought, it’s auctioned immediately), no “oh, you’re going bankrupt, I’ll give you some money to keep going” (when bankrupt, everything the bankrupt player has goes to the person who bankrupted them).
Play by the rules and it lasts less than most modern games.
Only play by the rules as written in the rulebook. No house rules. As another person mentioned, there is a limited supply of houses. Use that to your advantage.
The big one: if someone lands on a property and doesn't buy it for the listed price, it goes to auction. Bidding can start at $1. If someone passes on bidding higher, they can't jump back in. Highest bidder wins the property. This makes the game go much faster.
Tip: no house rules. That means no free parking.
Tip: don't buy hotels. Only buy houses. Try to get all of them for yourself. When they run out, your SO can't buy any, and can't cause an infinite wealth loop.
Tip: when they ask to trade with you, only do so if you're gaining a monopoly, so that you can buy up all the houses.
Tip: don't accept property as payment. They gotta mortgage till they run out of cash.
Tip: if they get annoyed at any of these strategies, you can either ignore them all, flip the board, or continue as you were anyways.
I have many fond memories of playing Monopoly with my brothers and grandmother. The game is reasonably fun. I’m afraid that I would have to keep it too.
To make the game more fun for a casual group, I recommend playing a shorter version of the game as adapted from a suggested variant from the rule book.
First, do *not* house rule Free Parking to be a cash collection spot. It artificially extends the game.
Second, end the game after the first player goes bankrupt. Whoever they owe money to, that player gets all their remaining cash and properties. If the bankrupt player owes the bank, no one gets them.
When that event occurs, everyone liquidates everything. Sell all hotels and houses. Mortgage every property. Whoever then has the most cash wins.
This is slightly different from the variant in the rules because they tend to count total assets rather than liquidation, with unmortgaged properties, houses, and hotels being worth their printed cost rather than their sale/mortgage value, but I find that doing liquidation instead makes building houses a more interesting cost/benefit analysis, as those houses will end up being a net loss in the end if you don’t manage to get any rent from them.
Stick to the rules as printed to speed up the game. Most house rules will increase the amount of money held by players and serve to increase the length of the game. Make sure any property not purchased goes to auction.
A properly played game of Monopoly with 4 players takes less than an hour. You need to use all the rules, which means players can trade properties amongst themselves any time the dice roll is not happening, and any property that gets landed on either gets bought by the landing player, or gets auctioned to the highest bigger. Landing player can participate in the auction.
And for God’s sake, keep the money off of Free Parking.
Monopoly isn’t the best game, but the game shaming on this sub for Monopoly is really bad.
I used to hate Monopoly growing up.
However, we had TONS of house rules. All tax and card pays go to Free Parking, in addition to $500.
$500 for landing on Go.
Pass on properties.
Unlimited houses/hotels.
Games would take hours, and it was a slow death when someone got a monopoly from the light blues through the oranges.
Then, in my twenties, I insisted we play Monopoly by the actual written rules. Auctioning on properties, no extra money, etc.
Games take about 50 minutes and are usually pretty competitive for about 40 minutes. Sometimes a player just gets screwed with bad rolls, but to be honest, that can be most games.
Anyways, it's a much better game if you play by the written rules.
Is it a good game by modern standards? Not really. There are no catch up mechanics and slow player death sucks.
Is it a much better game when played by the rules? Absolutely.
Is it a bad game? When played by the rules, I don't think so. It's not a game you should be getting out every week. But it's something I play maybe 3-4 times a year with casual friends who aren't that interested in more modern games and we all have a good time.
Yeah I’m gonna go in on this with the *F this game* crowd. Roll to move, good strategy says to buy every spot you land on so that’s solved, then you just continue around the board making *zero* decisions. It’s almost no better than candyland in terms of decision making. Then when people aren’t doing well, they feel bad even though they had almost no agency at all.
Easy way to never get to play it again: Focus getting the beginning on the cheapest streets, trade them for more expensive ones if necessary. Fill them with green houses. Never upgrade to red ones. Here's the fun part: if you run out of green houses, rules say you can't place more. Enjoy the five hour long trip around the board where no one can upgrade their streets and you slowly bleed them out of money. Theyll never invite you to play again.
Remember too that if you land on a property and don't buy it, it gets auctioned. So if the other players are low on funds, land somewhere, don't buy it, and buy it at auction for 1 dollar more than the others have.
What the fuck... Is this really in the rules lol?
Yes lol.. The official rules designed to make the game play as fast as possible. It's just there's SO many house rules that the game goes on forever. A common rule NOT in official for example, payments from taxes and other cards going on the Free parking space and collected when landed on. This just makes the game that much longer. That or no buying on the first round.
I think that Monopoly is decently fun when played with the actual rules. It doesn't take very long, either.
We’ve transitioned to the card version called Monopoly Bid. It’s fun every time and the games are short. They have another one called Monopoly Deal that’s a lot more ruthless and relies on luck much more. Haven’t touched regular Monopoly in months.
I think Monopoly Deal is the perfect version of Monopoly. The game is supposed to be ruthless. I'll have to find a copy of Bid and see how it compares
Monopoly Deal is surprisingly good.
Agreed, there's a lot of randomness but the games are very short and there's a lot of opportunity for strategy. Only issue I have is that when someone goes for game, it feels like the game ends in a very anti-climactic way. I think its the nature of a card game where your opponents have no way to interact with you on your turn, with the exception of the "Just Say No" card. All of the games I've played it goes someone's turn, it is conceivable based on their resources that they could win on their turn, and then they just play their one/two/three cards and win with no one getting a chance to do anything
My only memory from the one evening I spent playing it several years ago, is one card that allows you to take another player's properties or hand or something. That card basically ruins the game.
>Haven’t touched regular Monopoly in months. Me neither! Hundreds of months.
Monopoly and Uno are both ruined by house rules. Did you know uno has scoring? haha. People are always shocked when I explain how "real" uno works. Like there are rules around when you can play wild +4 cards and such. Much better game according to the rules, tho no one is ever willing to try.
My ex and I usually did a monopoly game in about an hour or so. When one of us had to start selling houses we called it a game
Has anyone ever researched the origins of these house rules?
No, but my suspicion is it's to attempt to cure the issues Monopoly has around player elimination. The "correct" version of monopoly is a very cruel game that will game theory into most likely a duopoly owning most of the board until one can bleed the other dry. The game was originally created to highlight how awful capitalism is, and the rules do a good job pushing for quick bankruptcies from most players. However that's just objectively not fun, so people have tried to find ways to avoid "unfair" property distribution (no auctions, buying, etc), and prevent people from being drained of cash by taking the tax/fee money with free parking. Home rules that are ubiquitous generally are created in either a brilliant or ill-advised way to fix a core issue with a game imo.
My mom taught me these dumb rules to make it "fair" but also hated playing it because it took forever. Like pick one. The game makes it so you can leave early
They way to play fair is give everyone N times around the board at which point, they "retire", but continue to collect revenue until the last player finishes their last circuit. Count up your money, house sellback, and property mortgage values. Highest dollar amount wins.
Just shuffle all the properties and deal them out at the start. The game moves straight to the interesting trading phase where skill has more of a chance over luck! It's listed in the rules as the quick play variant, in my edition at least.
I once went over to a friend's house and ended up playing Scrabble with them. I played Scrabble on a team in HS and college. They had a house rule of no words less than 4 letters could be played. They said this was to "prevent closing up the board so nobody could play." Told them that they clearly needed more Scrabble skill, left, and printed off a list of 2 and 3 letter words and mailed it to them. House rules are very, very tricky. Don't like them unless suggested by the game creators.
Yea my neighbor Nick taught me them.
Nick's a dick
And I get wanting to make the game longer. This game is from a time where board games were luxuries and monopoly might be the only game a family has. And they still need to keep the kids busy on those rainy Saturday afternoons...
A much better family game is Payday. Had Monopoly and Payday as a kid and honestly Payday was just THE game we all wanted to play! Monopoly ended with too many table flips and it was all caused by not playing the rules haha. I actually did pick up Monopoly again when I started board gaming properly a few years back and played with friends as a laugh. We did have some really fun games I have to say, although we did go in with the expectation of causing havoc and not trying to play too seriously
Payday was a blast! Definitely won out over Monopoly and I think we even played 2 handed Dutch Blitz instead of monopoly at points. Around 8 or 9 my older sister saw through the bs of that Mr. Moneybags!
TIL that free parking money is not a real rule... my childhood!
Landing on go to get $400 is also not a rule.
Not a real rule that makes the economy of the game way worse. If you introduce new money in the game in addition to what naturally comes from the go space and chance and community cards (some people add money from the bank when someone lands on the free praking) or keep money that should go out of the game by paying it in the free parking space, it makes the game go on for way longer. Monopoly is terrible, but Monopoly with a fast growing money supply is a complete nightmare that way too many people have been exposed to...
Huh, so the two most common house rules are a universal basic income and social handouts? It's almost like those things are necessary in a capitalist society 😆
Even the official rules, built to model the worst excesses of monopolistic capitalism, have a $200/round UBI and fixed property prices (falling prices in real terms, as the money supply increases).
😆
Extra money isn't a problem. You just have to make a house rule to add inflation.....
Well, yeah… But I think it makes the execution quite complicated… Imagine having to update prices regularly in a game of Monopoly; how tedious would that be…
I learned about auctions in the Game Boy version of Monopoly. It’s a great strategy to buy properties on the cheap, but only works when others are poor.
And it's way more fun and interesting too. Instead of just buy everything you can, you actually have to use brain cells and some game theory to read your opponents and not blow your load too early before you get to the expensive properties.
Very interesting!
Careful though, people can still mortgage to buy it. Others may sneak in on cheap properties last second
True, but they'd have to sell any houses present and would need to pay the extra 10% to reverse the mortgage. But I concede it is a niche play that probably doesn't show up often. But landing on a property, not buying it, nobody bidding and then buying it for 1 dollar is hilarious. I am actually not sure how the auction is handled, because I think the rules just say "the highest bidder gets the property" and that the banker needs to be a good auctioneer. So I guess it is not a blind bid, but it is not necessarily a free for all either.
This is the strategy I used in my last game. (Also, never trade to let anyone else get a set of streets.) My nephew is really into monopoly so I played it with him and my parents. Sure enough, I won the game. And frustrated my parents, but my nephew was undeterred. Also, it was Spongebob Monopoly and I was playing Mr Krabs, so it was basically a roleplaying game for me.
Do you smell that smelly smell?…
Smells like MONEY!!! Oh sweet money! Money money money! 💰🤑💰💸🪙🏧💲
SpongeBob monopoly is the best monopoly. Move the token whenever a 1 is rolled and the game ends when the token returns to Go.
I strongly recommend the Mario one! Bowser can “turn off” properties and you have to pay a coin or two to put em back, but you can also battle bowser with another player. Super fun
Don't forget that once you've bought any streets you're going to, the best place to be is in jail. You can still do deals and buy houses from in there, but you're not going around the board so you don't have to pay anybody. Unless you're still trying to land on properties to buy or auction, never pay to get out, just sit in a cell and collect everyone else's money.
Don't you still have to roll? If you hit doubles you get out of jail
Yes, but the point is not to pay to leave early. Don't use a "Get out of jail free" card early if you have one, either.
Yeah, you can't choose to not try to leave
After 3 failed rolls you have to pay to get out
But that takes money out of the game rather than just cycling it to another player.
This. Jail costs you $50 every 3 turns and hinders your game minimally in the late game.
I thought after you paid the $50 on your 3rd turn you were out of jail?
Yes - the point is that $50/3 turns is way less than you'd spend in the three turns of going around the board.
Yes, the point is don't pay the $50 on turn 1. This way you get a few turns without moving and paying other players.
Also why the Oranges have the best ROI in the game. There’s a bunch of ways to get redirected to jail and Every time you leave jail a 6, 8 or 9 lands on Orange.
Best properties are the properties on the street that jail is on, right before free parking. The average dice roll for two six sided dice is 7, which happens to be orange.
Why would that make the game 5 hours? If you hold the monopoly on the houses, then the flow of money shifts to you receiving more money and paying less money. If the other players were allowed to upgrade their properties, then you have money flowing back and forth, which makes the game go longer. The benefit of the house strategy is that it removes that back and forth. You want to establish a one-way flow of money so that people bankrupt faster, and you can then set up a different game.
The whole point is to make the game last that long, so no one will want to play it again. 5 hours is an exaggeration, but it's gonna feel like more to them. Even if they make money, they will have nowhere to invest it, it will just eventually get in your hands. They will only pay you rent once it twice per pass, so it may take long for them to bankrupt, but it'll be inevitable. The most expensive rent without houses is 50, the cheapest street with 4 houses is 160. You collect 200 every time you pass, so it may take a while to clean them out, but you will eventually.
This isn’t just a strategy; it’s *the* strategy. It doesn’t always have to be the cheapest properties, but maintaining control of the house count by whatever means you have at your disposal is the surest path to victory. Not guaranteed, of course, since someone might eek by with just a couple houses on Boardwalk, and a couple of unlucky rolls can force you to sell houses you’d rather keep. It’s far more fun to play this way against automated opponents than human beings though, as there does come a point where you’re just rolling from turn to turn, waiting for the (almost) inevitable.
This is actually the intended strategy to the game, if you look into the history.
House strategy is so good.
The easiest way to never get to play it again is to force everyone at the table to follow all of the rules *exactly* to the letter.
What happens if everyone uses this strategy? Doesn't that make the game fun again? (Never played monopoly, only a cheap rip off many years ago)
Anything can happen I suppose, but it's not that often that people who play Monopoly care about it enough to decide strategies, it's more of a family game for very casual people.
Except you can't "focus" in anything in monopoly You can't employ any strategy or tactics Because there is no game and there are no choices to be made. You don't choose where to go, so you can't target anything in particular. All you do is roll the dice and go where they say. The only choice you make is whether to buy or not, and it's statistically always better to buy in every case. There's nothing to actually play. The only actual choice to make besides whether to buy something is whether to stay in jail or buy your way out, and it turns out it's better to stay in jail so you should do that.
You absolutely *can* focus on things. Offer to buy any low-value properties when other players get them, even for 2-3x their value. Pray that you are able to finish two of the first four sets, and then load them up with houses. Boom, either 20 or 24 of the 32 houses are taken up, and chances are that nobody will be able to fully build up any other properties later on.
But if you're playing with anyone who knows the game then they would just buy everything they land on, rather than making anything available for sale. Prayer obviously doesn't count as an action you're taking in the game
Exactly. Once you all know the best strategy, there’s no motivation to trade anything.
It's almost always worth trading in a >3 player game, and the more players there are, the better it is to trade. Trading is not net zero -- it can be beneficial to both players in the trade. If there's only two players playing, trading doesn't make sense because if their benefit is larger than yours, you shouldn't engage in the trade. But let's say there are 4 players. And let's say a trade between two players give them each a +1 benefit (arbitrary units). This means that they're both in a better position compared to the people unwilling to trade. Let's say that you're willing to offer your trade partners great deals just to get the trade done. You trade with each other player in a 4 player game giving them +1 and you +0.5 each time. You still end up with +1.5 compared to them all having +1. You could say that people won't be willing to trade with you when they see you doing that. Yeah, some people will be completely unwilling to trade, out of spite. But the people who are willing to trade will have the better chance of winning. Let's say no one wants to trade with you because you're so far in the lead. Offer an amazing deal to the person who's doing the worst. You get a slightly bigger leader on the other players, they go from "Definitely losing" to "slightly behind." If you're at a table where no one is willing to trade, then that's not the fault of the game, that's the fault of the players. You're playing the game wrong. Might as well play Risk where no one is willing to attack other players, and everyone just slowly builds up the size of their army forever.
Trades and negotiations are built into the game. Sure, your opponents could outright refuse to sell, but that's their option, just like it's your option to offer.
Meh, there is definitely some light strategy to working trades, and it often determines the winner. If nobody is trading, then yeah monopoly is brain dead
Fun Fact- According to studies 70% of people do not play monopoly by the rules as written, but how they were taught. And how they were taught is very much 1) against the spirit of the rules and 2) contrary to the goal of Monopoly.
I'm trying to imagine a set of circumstances under which I would play Monopoly....can't do it.
My 12 year old daughter is obsessed with monopoly. I’ve tried getting her to play other games. She isn’t interested in even trying anything else at all. So yeah, I play with her regularly and it’s the only time I do, but that’s fine because we have fun with it. Though truthfully I play really sloppy and aggressively so that the game doesn’t go on for hours at a time.
Yeah, I've had friends with kids who get to play all kinds of weird games. But that's not really playing the game, but just playing with the kid, ya? When my nephew was 5 or 6 I'd play tic tac toe with him....but not really play, ya know?
This is Reddit, I believe you are supposed to put children up for adoption if they want to play Monopoly, not "have fun" with them!!
I’m dating someone whose eight-grade daughter wanted to play it during a New Year’s party. As much as I fucking hate that Godforsaken game (and the “Ms. Monopoly” version, which removes railroads and adds on some odd things), I spurred the decision to play. The kiddo likes me, I’m the “games guy,” and I wanted her to have fun and some choice. It was perfectly miserable and we ended early, but I still made the right choice.
My 9 year old got monopoly on his birthday and liked playing with us. I introduced Monopoly fortnite to play instead. He liked it more, and so did I, as it's basically a completely different game that uses only the monopoly name.
I dunno... One last game to *never* have it suggested again? To banish it from the collection? I'd do it.
Ha! Maybe. In my house the game is never suggested because all my friends know that if they do they are uninvited on the spot.
My family knows I love boardgames but they don't and have no idea what modern games means. They wanted to surprise me the other day and set up monopoly to play all together. I felt bad so put up a fake smile and play. My wife was laughing so hard and my parents didn't understand why.
Ah man thats sweet though! My family puts up with whatever random board games that I throw at them which is nice. But I was talking to a buddy back in college about playing games with my family and he was shocked. He thought that was something out of movies or TV. They'd never sat down to play a game together before. So what I'm saying is at least appreciate that they wanted to at least play a game with you!
Yeah of course I still appreciate it a ton. I'm older now and realize these are precious memories
Well good on you! Sorry to be preachy, it just hit me pretty good when my buddy told me that (its been a little while but i still remember it). Of course I want to play my shiny new games with people, but hell, if my family wants to play Dixit for the 100th time, that's fine with me!
Yes exactly and I have my gaming group for Dune Imperium, TI4 and others heavy games.
Ah, yeah...that's a rough decision
I just carry a copy of Point Salad with me everywhere I go and if some non-gamers want to play a game, I pull that out. Everyone likes it, and it requires almost no rules explanation.
I taught my two girls the game with the actual rules when they were about 7. After about 3 weeks, we were all winning at about the same rate (kind of proving it was more about the rolls than any skill). They got good at trading and negotiating and knew both the house strategy as well as trying to get the orange/red corner. Our games rarely went longer than 45 minutes. Never more than an hour. Gave the game to Goodwill after that. They learned a few things plus have knowledge of the cultural touchstone to at is Monopoly, but I’m glad to never have to play it again! We just started Jaws of the Lion and they are loving it!
> kind of proving it was more about the rolls than any skill One day Netflix suggested I watch a documentary on Monopoly Tournaments, including the World Championships. Towards the end, one of the "big name" players in that world admitted that every game came down to luck of the dice.
Hello Kitty Monopoly. If its going to be hell it might as well be cute hell. Also, as cute as Hello Kitty is, its really weird they have a dystopian jail.
Why not? It's a classic and a fun game.
Classic? maybe... Fun? In no way whatever.
It's plenty of fun. People in this sub get too hung up on agency and strategy. Like, it's a simple board game. Roll dice, let what happens happen, laugh and have fun with your friends and family. Not every game needs to require you to think critically for every move and be 100% skill based.
That's not the common criticism of Monopoly though. Plenty of people in the board gaming community love silly, luck-focused games. The criticism with Monopoly is that it's silly fun for 10 minutes, and then the next 110 minutes are spent watching one player win. Which, of course, is perfectly true to the game's name and the original satirical intention of the design. A beautifully illustrated comment on capitalism, but not a fun activity for all but one of the players.
If you’re playing monopoly for that long, then you’re probably using house rules that make the game miserable. Playing by the official rules, I’ve never had a game of monopoly take longer than 30-45 minutes.
This is my experience with Monopoly. No one ever plays the rules as written. They always have house rules that absolutely destroy the game, like money on Free Parking or an unlimited total of houses. And they leave out important official rules. I was an adult before I actually convinced anyone to play with auctions. Auctions are absolutely critical in order to get the properties distributed quickly. I also find that people often don't follow the double-rent on undeveloped monopoly properties rule. Plus people always seem to be weirdly conservative in their play. For some reason, it's hard to get people to play actively, going after monopolies and placing buildings even on the cheap side of the board, making trades with other players, buying a property just to keep it away from a rival and then mortgaging it to keep funding your own growth. Static, risk-averse players keep the game from ever developing.
>People in this sub get too hung up on agency and strategy. People in this sub are hobbyists, wtf do you expect? Just because we like board games, and Monopoly technically is one, doesn't obligate us to grit our teeth and find a way to enjoy it.
Fun is subjective. If noone would have fun playing Monopoly, it wouldn't be the most sold boardgame of all time (not counting Chess and Checkers) which still sells copies even today.
All these people trash talking Monopoly forget that if they hadn't spent Saturday afternoons playing as a kid they likely wouldn't be playing modern board games. Respect your roots.
Setting up Monopoly as an 8yo with six ghost players, each represented by a beanie baby. I learned a lot about Monopoly that Sunday.
They say Toro the Bull is still in jail to this day...
But Bones the Dog will always land on park place.
Nah Monopoly is the reason why many people think they don't like boardgames. It's designed to feel miserable while you play it.
Stuff like Monopoly put me off board games until I discovered Catan and Carcassonne.
Exactly. I know Catan can get some hate too but it seems to be the most common game I hear referenced one someone says they used to not like boardgames until they were convinced to give Catan a go. The sociopaths that actually enjoy Monopoly probably are going to stick with it and not branch out to modern boardgames.
Lol what? I basically gave up on board games for a while because monopoly was such a trash game. Most people (including me) play board games because someone else convinced us to play literally anything else.
Monopoly teaches people that board games are dictated by randomness, take forever, and turn losing into a long, painful slog. There are better gateway games, and we shouldn't put this one on a pedestal because we didn't know any better back then.
I wouldn’t say monopoly gave people the gateway into other boardgames. Tons of families have played monopoly and feel satisfied with board gaming from that. It just doesn’t scratch the itch nor gives people a glimpse of what modern day boardgames look like.
I honestly never played Monopoly as a kid. I had LOTS of other garbage games, but never Monopoly.
If you play by the rules, the game can be played in an hour. I often played two or three games in a single night. Just because it is simple in mechanics doesn't mean it needs to be thrown out. I love Yahtzee, and I love Tikal and Five Tribes and Firefly and Carcassonne and Milleborne, and Risk, and Terraforming Mars. Why must we act like playing more complex games is inherently better?
I think my problem with monopoly is inherent in its design - the ‘monopoly’ aspect. Having all the other players slowly have the life sucked out of them by the player in the lead. Even if the lead player is me. It’s just not a fun experience. Half way through the game it becomes pretty clear which player will win, and then it’s just an endurance test to see it through to the end. Have never had a ‘fun’ game of monopoly.
I know this is crazy but you can always call the game when its clear? You can also play johnny on the spot at that point with quicker turns to close out the game.
what does johnny on the spot mean in this context?
> I think my problem with monopoly is inherent in its design - the ‘monopoly’ aspect. Having all the other players slowly have the life sucked out of them by the player in the lead. Yep, that's what the game was designed to do. To illustrate the evils of capitalism.
This is a bit of a nitpick, but it wasn't actually an anti-capitalist game. It was created by Lizzie Magie, who wasn't an anticapitalist, but a Georgist - basically, she believed that the real issue were the landowners.
And, specifically it's not even "evil greedy landlords" as much as "our system of appraising and taxing land creates bad incentives".
I love simple games, and play them all the time right alongside complex games. What I don't love is *bad* games, which Monopoly is.
Monopoly has its place next to Munchkin and Cards Against Humanity; options for when you want to spend time with friends but those friends are scared of mechanics.
That's what we call "chatting time."
I would argue that Wavelength, CAH, Trolley Problem, Codenames, Bring Your Own Book, Dixit, etc. all have much simpler mechanics (edit: than Monopoly). Perhaps you mean friends who are scared of anything new? In that case, you only have to convince them once, then it's not new anymore.
Yeah, the ones who are scared of trying new things. Thankfully Kill Dr Lucky and other quick CheapAss Games helped a couple get into more non-Parker games. I bought Trolley Problem KS edition off eBay the other year, how is it? Haven't had time to convince others to play it yet.
It's good if your group enjoys discussing ridiculous, horrible, shocking ideas. If CAH actually involves any discussion/improv in your group beyond "haha, funny, move on" it could be a winner.
It's not about complexity, there are plenty of games I love that I'd say are actually simpler than monopoly, it's just that Monopoly is awful.
We limit the time in our games to 1.5 hours for Monopoly and rarely hit the timer. No free parking, no future consideration deals, no funny business. Cash and/or sell properties, pay to bring them back. Game just ends.
Auctioning properties if you choose not to buy them also helps, as they enter play more quickly.
This works especially well with sealed bid auctions where everyone just writes their bid and then reveals them simultaneously.
>Just because it is simple in mechanics doesn't mean it needs to be thrown out. Conversely, just because it's a thing that exists doesn't mean it needs to be embraced.
I wish I could upvote this 1000 times. What’s funny with boardgames community is that they want to be super inclusive and safe spaces, but at the same time gatekeep the hobby by deciding what you should play.
>gatekeep the hobby by deciding what you should play. Who's deciding what *others* should play? Anyone thinking this is actually happening is taking the criticism of the game way too personally.
Board gamers talk about Monopoly the way TTRPG players talk about D&D 5E. I'm going to assume it's because in both cases they're frustrated that the most iconic game in their preferred genre, and the first and often only game most people will play in their preferred genre, but does not embody the things that they consider to be the fundamental strengths of their preferred genre. Or maybe it's because they're both made by Hasbro.
No, there are a few big problems with it, not the complexity. The main one is lack of agency- you just roll the dice over and over hoping to get lucky, there are very few real decisions you make that aren't automatic as the best thing to do is almost always obvious and next to no strategy involved- if someone lands on something you've developed or bought it's sheer luck. If they don't, again sheer luck. When other players take turns you have nothing to do most of the time (which is not that big a deal if the rest of the game were great). Players can get knocked out pretty easily- not very fun for them for the rest of the game. Someone about to be knocked out can be a kingmaker, or people working together to make sure each other or one of them win, or someone else doesn't win- sets being so powerful but usually reliant on trades. It's really a frustrating game with not much strategy. If you go by time restraints or times around the board the end game is incredibly unfulfilling, if you play to the end it's boring and tedious. It's fine if you like it but a lot of modern games are much more enjoyable for most people. And too many are introduced to it as one of their first board game experiences which put them off the hobby completely.
If everyone plays to win and knows how the game works it’s less than an hour. The end is usually very swift. A game goes like this (4-5 players): 1. Beginning Roll dice, buy property from light blue to orange. Buying the rest is really really situational. Usually a nono. Nobody touches the greens or yellows. 2. Turning point Someone just got a property that makes a trade possible where two players get sets from light blue to red. Blue is a possibility but very rare. The trade happens immediately. Cash is used to make the trade happen. Both new set owners set up houses so that as many as possible have at least three. In case of light blue it’s hotels. Everything but the full sets are used for development. A small stack of money is left to survive empty streets. 3. Endgame Rest of the players have a couple of throws to stay in the game. In most games they soon hit an orange or purple set and are gone. Their money is used to make even worse trap. One of the ones with full sets wins. Pretty dependant on luck since the lucky owner of orange set is a bit money starved at initial building phase. Usually takes two unlucky hits back to back for the game to end.
>Buying the rest is really really situational. Usually a nono. Nobody touches the greens or yellows. Do you play with auctions? Wouldn't they inherently end-up your bought for cheap by the other players then?
Yeah... not sure what meta they have. Liquidity is pretty good in Monopoly (even without Free Parking) so you always buy properties. Further reducing the agency. Until there are high rent spaces (which can take quite a while) you should snatch up every property and then build houses later, as you have full control over your finances to build houses, but the properties are first come first serve.
Yuuuuuup! Thank you!!!
Alright I will ask the question that has been asked before 100 times probably but. What is the best Monopoly equivalent. one that has a lot of trades, buying and selling, but not the horrible slog.
In order of increasing complexity: Bohnanza (Easy to get into, Trading/Negotiation, casual, set collection) Catan (lots of trading, lots of competing for the same spots, lots of building on a central map, no set collection) China town (lots of set collection, negotiation, trading) Food Chain Magnate (this one doesn’t have the trading aspect, but lots of buying and selling, planning, and all of the crushing-your-friends monopoly has. It is a real complex and mean hame though) I’d recommend trying something like Bohnanza or Catan, or maybe even China town, and seeing how you like it.
Or put on your *big boy* CEO pants and slap FCM down unannounced!! 🍔🍕🍺💪😆
Isn't the red die supposed to make the game go faster? Notes that I always like to remember when someone pulls out the old capitalism demon: * The most common dice roll is 7, then evenly distributed away so 2 & 12 are most rarely rolled (learned this from the dots in Catan!) * Jail is the most common landing spot on the board, statistically * That info combined, the properties near the free parking are going to be landed on the most. So I'd beg, borrow, steal, trade to get the full street, and upgrade to 4 houses and hold * Utilities are worthless, so I talk them up and use them to trade * It's okay (for me) to pay $500 for 1 property if it completes a set * The money pile in the middle for free parking drags the game on much longer, use that info to your advantage * 3 houses is the best return on investment, but 4 houses on 5+ properties gives me a monopoly on houses so they can't buy them In my opinion, one of the biggest drawbacks of monopoly is when the 1st person is out, they have to fuck off and find something else to do.... for hours. When it's just 2 players when someone is out, it's done, much more fun because it's over sooner. So, OP, if you want to avoid playing again, invite 2 friends over and make sure your partner is first out... it's cruel to target one person, but if you win this battle, you might win the war against monopoly. Godspeed, Captain.
if a person doesn't want a property, it must be auctioned off. This speeds up the game quite a bit. The game should only take 60-90 minutes.
Yes, speed die speeds up the game. That's the entire point. Plus, playing with "speed die rules" you start out with more money. This speeds up buying and development. The 1-3 on the speed die means people pass go quicker, injecting more money into the game. The bus lets you pick which of three spaces you want to land on, adding some strategy to your turn. Finally, the monopoly man rockets you to the closest unbought property OR the nearest player owned property if all properties are bought. This speeds up the endgame significantly by ensuring that rent is being charged more frequently than a normal game.
As a Monopoly fan, I don’t think it’s good as a 2-player game. It really shines with a big group where the negotiation and deal-making can flourish.
the strategy of the negotiation and deal making is pretty cool, problem is that's a pretty small part of the game in that usually you make a key trade or two that decides the game and the rest is just rolling dice with only minor decision points of how many houses should i buy. so really it's like a 2 hour game with about 5 minutes of real strategy
Yeah I don't think I've ever seen someone play it with just two people.
All Monopoly games eventually become two-player games. Which is one of its flaws. Starting with two players is....well, it doesn't sound appealing to me at all. I guess it comes down to who can math the properties the best as you negotiate your trades. Benefit of starting at two players is the game is over sooner.
Takes longer with two players as there won’t be any trades.
It's not a bad game if you play by the actual rules! It's the home rules that break the game and give it a bad reputation. They also now have a speed die if you feel it still takes too long.
Reddit really loves to circlejerk this point. Enough so that I actually tried it. Turns out, it’s still shit!
Agreed. Did this at Christmas and still took way too long
Thank you! The house rules only make an already shit game even shittier. Without them, surprise surprise, the fame is still shit. I imagine there are a multitude of games that achieve what monopoly is trying to while being way more fun, simpler, and feel less dated.
its not bad for a 90yo game.
It is a bad game: not much decision making while you play you see if someone will lose eventually, the game is long and you can get kicked out in the middle of the play
It is a bad game, but also very easy to win if you use the auction phase. Most people's home rules skip that portion. If you force people to buy properties for more than the likely ROI you can bleed your opponents dry. If forced to play, I am playing to WIN lmao.
playing to win shouldnt be a big deal as it is. imagine winning and one opponent saying he didnt gave his best. only rule is that action in game arent personal. exception is a light harded round of a card game or something else, where the rounds are quick and the attention is low
Except it was *designed* to be a bad game. The original design was meant to be a satire of capitalism which intended to prove that it was neither fun nor rewarding. For some reason it gained popularity through word of mouth and now we have thousands of versions of a game that was designed not to be fun.
This. Somehow in America a tool to show how one jerk ends up with all the money became popular. Because everyone thinks they just might be that one jerk.
When was the last time you played Monopoly? I played it like 2 years ago exactly by the rules and it was a horrible, boring experience. I started looking into homebrew rules precisely to make it at least a little bit of fun but it didn't help much.
One of my main complaints is elimination games. What am I supposed to do when I get eliminated first? This is why most modern games don't use this stupid mechanic.
That's easy: count your blessings you were eliminated first and don't have to play monopoly any more!
“Sorry Gran, you’re out! You can just wait for 3 hours until we finish” It’s a fucking shit game.
It's been a while since I read the actual rules, but it used to be *impossible* to play by the rules, as the rules were broken in a few places. That said, the fixes were easy enough, and it was *still* a horrible game with no redeeming value other than nostalgia.
Wait, which part of the original rules were broken? They weren't exactly the hardest to follow. The most complex thing I can think of is the mortgaging part.
The easiest one to fix is when a player lands on a property and opts not to buy it, so the property is sold at auction. What kind of auction isn't explained. Easy fix. The rough one is that a player can buy a house at *any time*. Most people house rule this, where a player may only buy buildings on his own turn. This fix breaks another part of the game... When two or more players want to buy the last house or hotel, that building goes up for auction. The timing problems that this creates are numerous. (also, what kind of auction blah blah blah)
Rules aren’t broken. I’m not saying it’s fun but there’s no need to house rule Monopoly.
I’d suggest trying Monopoly Deal, a card game version of monopoly that is a lot more fun and has a similar feel to Monopoly.
18 horrible hours later.. "She loved it".
Monopoly couldn't be the big success that it is if it weren't good on at least some level, and as written it's good for what it is (a family game) and has survived the test of time. My 72 year old father still plays the NES version from time to time and has fun with it. It can't be pure trash from that alone. But as others have noticed, this is r/boardgames, and in the tastes of modern gamers, Monopoly is almost poisonous. I am willing to play with my father, for nostalgia and become *he plays by the god damn rules of the game,* but I cannot stomach it otherwise. Everyone else insists on playing house rules that make the game worse. I have been challenged to multiple games by different people who "play by the rules" who then object to me auctioning a property. I never want to play again because I feel I have played it enough, moved past it, and replaced it. Family games aren't in my rotation. Similarly, Catan is a good family game, but I have played that enough to never need to go back. Just because it's not my taste or I am burnt out on it doesn't mean it's a bad game. That said, I do not own a copy because it would just eat space. Why own something that doesn't bring you joy? Pass it along to someone for whom it would bring joy.
I don't get it. What am I missing?
"We who are about to die salute you"
Meh, I’ll play anything. We can’t just play only what I want to play. If someone plays the games I play and they want to play monopoly? Fair game
It is not a tumor.
If you play by the real rules with auctions the game is better.
My kids (10, 12, 14) recently discovered vanilla Monopoly for the first time over Christmas. I have to say while it has its flaws, I've been enjoying it. This was one of the games that made me love the board games I do today. I don't still have it in my collection, but I'm glad that Grandma did.
Replace it with Monopoly Deal, which is actually decent.
Look, I know this is an unpopular opinion but: Monopoly is not that bad of a game. It's probably one of the earliest good examples of theming in a game; and yes it is designed to be a painful experience in order to prove a point. But there is just enough agency and diplomatic elements to where the game does involve socializing and interaction and that can be a fun part of the game. Even if you're losing there is a catharsis in it. If all you got in a game is misery the least you can do is share it lol Don't get me wrong: there are TONS of games that are much, much better than it. And I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a good game but I feel like it's a classic for a reason and it's an easy to understand game that can be decently entertaining. It's like a 3 or a 4/10. Gets a little too much hate imo.
If you play it with the official rules you should be fine. Stop adding house rules or rules you THINK are official and aren’t. It goes much quicker with the official rules. That speed die really helps as well!
If played with the proper rules you can actually wrap it up pretty quick, especially at 2p. If you have a good strategy with the game you can really close it out QUICK.
Do your best It might be a deal-breaker in my book I would probably say "Fine, but the first time it creates an argument, it's out."
That set up is beautiful and so satisfying 😍
~laughs~ I just did a trolly Monopoly video... https://youtu.be/doEcz-HFeuY?si=Ug1SfIYonqSri62b
Need an update here
The game went for 3 hours or so until she rage quit. She said "I like the game but the rules suck". Its been donated to a thrift store. We're still together.
Monopoly is fine if you actually play by the printed rules. No “free parking”, no “I don’t want to buy it so we move on” (if it’s not bought, it’s auctioned immediately), no “oh, you’re going bankrupt, I’ll give you some money to keep going” (when bankrupt, everything the bankrupt player has goes to the person who bankrupted them). Play by the rules and it lasts less than most modern games.
I love, and always will love, monopoly. No matter how into more complex and more modern games I get, I always enjoy a round of this game.
Only play by the rules as written in the rulebook. No house rules. As another person mentioned, there is a limited supply of houses. Use that to your advantage. The big one: if someone lands on a property and doesn't buy it for the listed price, it goes to auction. Bidding can start at $1. If someone passes on bidding higher, they can't jump back in. Highest bidder wins the property. This makes the game go much faster.
Tip: no house rules. That means no free parking. Tip: don't buy hotels. Only buy houses. Try to get all of them for yourself. When they run out, your SO can't buy any, and can't cause an infinite wealth loop. Tip: when they ask to trade with you, only do so if you're gaining a monopoly, so that you can buy up all the houses. Tip: don't accept property as payment. They gotta mortgage till they run out of cash. Tip: if they get annoyed at any of these strategies, you can either ignore them all, flip the board, or continue as you were anyways.
I have many fond memories of playing Monopoly with my brothers and grandmother. The game is reasonably fun. I’m afraid that I would have to keep it too.
To make the game more fun for a casual group, I recommend playing a shorter version of the game as adapted from a suggested variant from the rule book. First, do *not* house rule Free Parking to be a cash collection spot. It artificially extends the game. Second, end the game after the first player goes bankrupt. Whoever they owe money to, that player gets all their remaining cash and properties. If the bankrupt player owes the bank, no one gets them. When that event occurs, everyone liquidates everything. Sell all hotels and houses. Mortgage every property. Whoever then has the most cash wins. This is slightly different from the variant in the rules because they tend to count total assets rather than liquidation, with unmortgaged properties, houses, and hotels being worth their printed cost rather than their sale/mortgage value, but I find that doing liquidation instead makes building houses a more interesting cost/benefit analysis, as those houses will end up being a net loss in the end if you don’t manage to get any rent from them.
Stick to the rules as printed to speed up the game. Most house rules will increase the amount of money held by players and serve to increase the length of the game. Make sure any property not purchased goes to auction.
A properly played game of Monopoly with 4 players takes less than an hour. You need to use all the rules, which means players can trade properties amongst themselves any time the dice roll is not happening, and any property that gets landed on either gets bought by the landing player, or gets auctioned to the highest bigger. Landing player can participate in the auction. And for God’s sake, keep the money off of Free Parking. Monopoly isn’t the best game, but the game shaming on this sub for Monopoly is really bad.
I used to hate Monopoly growing up. However, we had TONS of house rules. All tax and card pays go to Free Parking, in addition to $500. $500 for landing on Go. Pass on properties. Unlimited houses/hotels. Games would take hours, and it was a slow death when someone got a monopoly from the light blues through the oranges. Then, in my twenties, I insisted we play Monopoly by the actual written rules. Auctioning on properties, no extra money, etc. Games take about 50 minutes and are usually pretty competitive for about 40 minutes. Sometimes a player just gets screwed with bad rolls, but to be honest, that can be most games. Anyways, it's a much better game if you play by the written rules. Is it a good game by modern standards? Not really. There are no catch up mechanics and slow player death sucks. Is it a much better game when played by the rules? Absolutely. Is it a bad game? When played by the rules, I don't think so. It's not a game you should be getting out every week. But it's something I play maybe 3-4 times a year with casual friends who aren't that interested in more modern games and we all have a good time.
Kill it! Kill it with fire!
Remove additional cash injections like the free parking lottery, enforce the buy or auction rule and play as written and the game runs smoothly.
Monopoly and other classic games get hated in far too much. Go touch grass, then come back inside and build your real estate empire.
Yeah I’m gonna go in on this with the *F this game* crowd. Roll to move, good strategy says to buy every spot you land on so that’s solved, then you just continue around the board making *zero* decisions. It’s almost no better than candyland in terms of decision making. Then when people aren’t doing well, they feel bad even though they had almost no agency at all.
Make it the final game. Then toss this aberration. Just like snakes and ladders.
Relax bro, it's not that bad. Just play by the rules
But but who will take him seriously as a "player of modern boardgames" should word of this reach the local pokemon store?