I am so annoyed by this 3 points robber thing

[JacksonianEra]

100% agree. The game developers should program this "rule" into the game. It causes unnecessary debate via chat when half of the players aren't exactly sure how it works. Now there are apparently subsets of the rule making this even more confusing. For example, I thought that once anyone hits 3 points it's fair game to play the robber how you see fit. Guess not? Now it's everyone has to hit 3 points or what? I'd say people should just play the game and stop crying. Everyone will get robbed at some point, it's part of the challenge.

[Stroom]

From my experience, Catan communities on pretty much every platform eventually turn toxic. There are currently 4 major ones and on all of them you see bad behavior like this. The way how player interaction works seems to enforce it.

[DVC]

Totally agree with you. It’s completely wrong to target someone just because they want to play by the rules as written. Friendly Robber is not “etiquette” - it’s a variant rule - and if BGA allowed it to be implemented officially by the player who sets up the game, then there’s no argument. You can then join if you want to play that variant and you can’t demand it after the game has started.

Currently what I do to combat this is set up my own table and say during setup, something like “I prefer normal robber from the start. All OK with that?” That way, if someone really wants to use it, or expects it, then they can speak up before it becomes an issue.

The rule itself is flawed because it doesn’t take into account development cards, starting positions and overall potential. There are a lot of ways to exploit it to remain immune from the robber for as long as possible, even if you are clearly doing well. And this is assuming you actually implement it as written - don’t get me started on “house rules”!

Of course, the downside of having it as a setup option means that the gurus will, in their infinite wisdom, immediately add it to Arena mode, to complement the current 3-player, random board setup madness.

[Jellby]

It’s completely wrong to target someone just because they want to play by the rules as written.

The rules allow targeting anyone for whatever reason. It may not be good etiquette or sportsmanship, but it's not against the rules either. You can choose to target the first player that writes in the chat, or the last one to do so, or the first in alphabetic order, or the one playing orange...

[palf87]

I agree, I've just been accused of being a cheat because I played a monopoly card. There was nothing in the chat even stating friendly robber. I honestly feel rubbish by the accusations... I didn't even think about it, even if I'd agreed to friendly robber, I don't think the thought to not use monopoly would have even occurred to me.

[Obnoxious_Ostrich]

Yes, this is really annoying. Even when you at the start say "no friendly please", then you know that the others will likely teamplay and always rob you for the rest of the game. I really wish that this very weird rule would be added to the setup, so you can choose one or the other. So tiring when you have someone with a setup to pop cards staying at 2 pts and expect to not be robbed and even rob others at the same time.

[DVC]

It’s completely wrong to target someone just because they want to play by the rules as written.

The rules allow targeting anyone for whatever reason. It may not be good etiquette or sportsmanship, but it's not against the rules either. You can choose to target the first player that writes in the chat, or the last one to do so, or the first in alphabetic order, or the one playing orange...

Well, you can, but that doesn’t mean you should. I didn’t say it was against the rules - it’s just poor strategy and a bizarre way to choose your early target.

[DVC]

I agree, I've just been accused of being a cheat because I played a monopoly card. There was nothing in the chat even stating friendly robber. I honestly feel rubbish by the accusations... I didn't even think about it, even if I'd agreed to friendly robber, I don't think the thought to not use monopoly would have even occurred to me.

Well, that’s nothing to do with the Friendly Robber variant. Even using it, you are free to play a Monopoly whenever you like. It seems that you broke their unknown house rules, which weren’t agreed or even suggested at the start. How dare you?!

[DVC]

Yes, this is really annoying. Even when you at the start say "no friendly please", then you know that the others will likely teamplay and always rob you for the rest of the game. I really wish that this very weird rule would be added to the setup, so you can choose one or the other. So tiring when you have someone with a setup to pop cards staying at 2 pts and expect to not be robbed and even rob others at the same time.

Your last sentence is exactly why I hate using the variant. I think the name of it doesn’t help, either. If you say “no friendly”, the implication is that you don’t want to be a friendly player, ergo you become a target. Generally I prefer to call it the “3-VP variant” to emphasise that it’s simply a different choice from “normal” - which is robber active from start.

[Theana]

I think either the developer do something about it or we start naming players.

I have just finished a game where an entitle player said that I should have asked to play according to the official rules: I don't need to tell you that they were both stealing and blocking me when they had 9 points and I was at 3.

Reporting them for kingmaking, giving red thumbs do nothing and playing Catan is becoming stressfull since you never know who you are playing with