Board Game Arena

Hello, what do you think about players who, during a tournament game, write to other gamers telling them what they should do in order to stop someone from winning? Is that even allowed?

No that’s not ok. I call that cheating. Collusion with other players is specifically mentioned in the Terms of Service, Section VIII, fair play. While collusion could be understood as something that needs planning on two sides, I’d say it’s enough that someone helps a third player in the way you mentioned it.

I think it depends. If they're sharing private information, like what's in their hand, no. If it's public information, then I don't see the issue.

For example, in a game of King of Tokyo, someone else said that I had to spend 2 energy to refresh the market. or else another player would get a broken combo and win easily. I don't see that as immoral to point that out, since cards owned are public information and King of Tokyo has no private information.

I absolutely see that the wording in the TOS is not a 100% clear regarding a single hint. But where to draw the line? Imagine two players teaming up against a third, not once, but for a whole game, giving open hints to each other all the time. Do you think that’s fair just because they don’t reveal information from their hidden hands? Well even if you think that’s fair, that’s clearly a case of collusion if they agreed to do before the game started, so it’s against the rules on BGA. And I don’t think it should make a difference whether teaming up is planned or spontaneous, in spite of the etymology. As a single hint can be nearly as effective as an ongoing collusion, I think it should be treated alike. I sign up for a 3p game not for 2vs1. It’s not the same as usual game mechanism like bashing the leader, because that’s what everybody does anyway, without being told to do so.

FDHenneberg wrote: ↑17 December 2025, 08:08 It’s not the same as usual game mechanism like bashing the leader, because that’s what everybody does anyway, without being told to do so.

This is why there can't be a blanket rule. You asked this question generically without specifying a game, so we can't know whether or not it's a bash the leader type game. There are some games where is it expected that everyone not in the lead will conspire to take down (or slow down) the person in the lead. KoT was already given as an example. Munchkin is another. There are probably others on BGA that I haven't personally played that have similar dynamics. Sure, somewhere a line may be crossed, but where that happens is both murky and subjective.

Meeplelowda wrote: ↑17 December 2025, 08:18 This is why there can't be a blanket rule. You asked this question generically without specifying a game, so we can't know whether or not it's a bash the leader type game.

I didn’t ask the question so I can’t tell which game it is. To me, it doesn’t make a difference, because I thought bashing the leader is something that happens without communication. In cooperative games or games with 2v2 modes, rules mention specifically what the communication can entail and if it is secret or open. Often, it’s just that you can only talk openly and that you can’t talk about hidden information, but AFAIK, there are games where you’re not allowed to talk at all. Same goes for games like Fury of Dracula that are designed as Xv1. So when a game isn’t a game of that type, I suppose that there can’t be helping outside of learning the game at the table.

That being said, I now agree that there is no simple rule for that on BGA (though I think there could be one). So me saying they were cheating might have been a bit too thick. In the end, it seems to boil down to my conclusion for every discussion about conceding or gg etiquette: Don’t expect that others have the same values or the same interests concerning board games, as long as there are no clear violations of the BGA rules, just accept that. And that’s what I’ll do, as you convinced me that there is no clear violation.

You need to tell us the game and detail the specific scenario for us to gauge whether it's really inappropriate or not.

To judge from OP’s tournament history, I bet it’s Pax Renaissance. So it’s a game with a considerable amount of interaction which will often lead to bashing the leader. There are, however, no specific cooperative mechanisms like in Pax Pamir. The Pax Pamir rules explicitly say that you are free to discuss strategies and to cooperate. To me, that is explicitly stated in the rules
because it is an exception in a regular interactive multiplayer game.

FDHenneberg wrote: ↑17 December 2025, 10:16

Meeplelowda wrote: ↑17 December 2025, 08:18 This is why there can't be a blanket rule. You asked this question generically without specifying a game, so we can't know whether or not it's a bash the leader type game.

I didn’t ask the question so I can’t tell which game it is.

Fair point. I see I posted that at around 11:30 pm local time, so I ought to have been going to bed instead.

Yes, that was Pax Renaissance.
It wasn’t even an attempt to cooperate, the mentioned player explicitly told another player what they should do to stop me from winning. There was no mention that this would allow the person giving the advice to win on their next move

For me, this isn’t cooperation. There is rarely a clear leader in this game; there are many tactics and multiple paths to victory. It’s already difficult to win unless others make some mistakes, so when someone tells others exactly what to do, it spoils the game a bit for me.