Board Game Arena

Hi all,

so there seems to be a discussion about whether two players can discuss/strategise in the chat against another. Let's say player A has 8 points and players B and C have 4 points.

Player B says in the chat - hey player C, exchange resources with me (so i can f.e. make a longer road), if not then A will win soon.

I was interpreting the rules on this page as this not being allowed and may be teamplaying. Of course people strategise against the strongest player, but I thought you can do it by your own thinking and actions, not by actively chatting against another. Of course then player C won. What are the official rules here (not by playing board games in your home).

It can feel harsh when you're winning and the other players set out to stop you, but this is exactly what happens at a table in real life.
Especially if it's happening to prevent you from winning in the next turn and it's happening in open chat, this seems legit.

I've never seen it myself, turn based games don't get much chat at all. But it doesn't seem like team-making, it is just playing Catan.

Thanks for the reply, I guess it's also context-specific to a certain amount - few strategy chats vs. teaming up for the play.

I believe the printed rules state that "table talk" is not allowed...

Darksidebox wrote: ↑05 January 2026, 17:03 I believe the printed rules state that "table talk" is not allowed...

Not that I can see in the latest rule set.
Catan

Darksidebox wrote: ↑05 January 2026, 17:03 I believe the printed rules state that "table talk" is not allowed...

Statements like this should be backed up by a quote from the rules citing which edition the quote comes from. It may have always been true. It may have been true in the past but changed. It may have been added but wasn't originally true. Or it may have never been true. A clear reference to the rules based on more than belief helps resolve this.

Jontia has this correct, I believe. So-called table talk is necessary playing the board game in person, because how else would you negotiate a trade? It is absolutely permitted to discuss the current game with your opponents, including how best to thwart another player at the table.

I agree with Jontia, "it's just playing catan."

in reference to your example:

player B gets road and 3 more points, player C gets 3 points, and you lose road and are kept at practically 0 cards (possibly through co-ordinated knight steals)

now A is at 6, B is at 9, and C is at 7

C would now likely help A build road. Generally the help will stop when the score gets close, i believe this is an intended mechanism in the design of the game. A "catch up" mechanic.

I also think this is similar to porting for another player, where you use your 2:1 port to convert others cards for them, in exchange for a card or a 1:1 trade.

If road is given to the player in the lead to give them the last 2 points to win, i think that might be cheating. If a player on 9 points discussed and got a favorable trade from last place to win that might be cheating. Then again is this legitimate "revenge" for that early game steal and settle plow that left a player in an unwinnable game? Is managing your opponents emotion intended gameplay? The emergent trend of not stealing on 7 rolls early in the game suggests that managing opponent emotion is part of gameplay.


If the chat occurred in another chat or in person and not in the table chat for everyone to read i think that would be cheating.

The thing is written Catan rules don't have it, but I was referring to this webpage rules. There is nothing in the Catan rules about swearing, kingmaking, trolling etc. bc it is specific to a webpage rules. I have however not found an interpretation on what f.e. "teamplaying" means. So if you can report players for it, I guess there should be a better referral what it means.

There is a rule against kingmaker but your scenario wouldn't fit under it. Kingmaking is:
"enabling another player to win on purpose while there is a better move to make for yourself"

The scenario you are referring to seems to be a case of not making another player win. I see that just as part of a strategy since another playing not winning of course benefits myself. Though it's a pain when higher ranked players purposely target lower ranked players. If they know they aren't going to win, it is in their best interests to lose to a higher ranked player vs a lower ranked player anotherwise their ELO takes a bigger hit.