a ToD confused...

[eclectic_boy]

Last night was SWILoween, seven hours (I admit it, I'm a wimp who leaves parties at 3AM before they even get interesting) of fun and games and overloud bleed-in music from Olde Club. It featured the biggest Telephone Oracle game I've ever seen (about twenty of us, with another fifteen plus coming in to listen to the read-out, which given that we were on the first floor of the WRC made it difficult to inhale), with at least two spectaularly accurate answers. crystalpyramid has one.

But my question is about something that happened at the end of the evening. I went to the Truth or Dare game, partly because I wanted to get the SWILpoint -- I'd never gone to one before. Whatever happened there is private among those in attendance, but I can mention the structural aspect that confused me:

Someone would choose a person and ask them "Truth or Dare?" Based on their answer, either they'd be asked a question or told to do something.
Isn't that a ridiculous way to run it? Why not say the question first, as in: "Truth or Dare: Who is your hero?". Then the person could decide whether they wanted to answer the question, knowing at least what it was! (I guess you could also list the dare up front too, but that seems secondary)

Has ToD always been run this way? Are there places that play it more like the way I'm suggesting?

Comments

[god-of-belac.livejournal.com]

ToD always has been run this way, as far as I remember. For us, since it's nearly always Truth or Truth, and anyone who says "dare" would do so regardless of the question, your idea is somewhat moot, but it's a good diea for another style of ToD.

[kid-prufrock.livejournal.com]

But I thought that was the point of the game* -- if you say Truth, you're committing yourself to answering whatever your interlocutor thinks up for you. It's a game about taking risks.

* I also thought it was really most fun when played among people who really are willing to say or do whatever crazy or embarassing things their fellow-players think up for them, which I suppose tends to happen most amongst players who are all closer to each other than SWILlies are to each other.

[sammka.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's the impression that I got, too. Especially since I remember at one point during the game, someone asked a question before saying 'truth or dare?' and the recipient contested, saying 'no, I want a dare, you never asked what I want', and then later admitted having changed their minds in light of knowing what question they'd be asked. The element of coersion in most 'truth or dare?' games can be one of the biggest parts- usually, you ask people questions that they wouldn't otherwise want to answer. So giving people non-blind choices is sort of a bad idea.

[miraling.livejournal.com]

I played the way you described it in an IRC chat with some SWIL alum, but I've always played it the way we played at SWILoween otherwise.

[rose_garden.livejournal.com]

So how does the dare part work over IRC? Do they tell you to do something, and then you say, "OK I did it"? Or is the dare generally performed over the internet?

[sammka.livejournal.com]

I remember digital photos being involved at one or two points...

[miraling.livejournal.com]

It can work like both of you said...
I would refer you to this entry, if you're on my friends list.

~Lisa

[irilyth]

Back in my day (creak creak), we played the way Jim describes: I ask a question, you then have to choose between truth (answer the question) or dare (decline to answer, take a dare instead).

I vastly prefer that way, since I don't get why anyone would take a dare without even knowing what the alternative is, and I don't know what you do when you play the other way if someone asks you a question that you aren't willing to answer... But whatever floats yer boat.

[rebeccapaul.livejournal.com]

When I was a kid, I played where you decided before you knew the question, so that the decision involved more risk.

In a book (also when I was a kid), I read a different version -- you dare someone to do something hard, and if they fail, they have to answer the question you ask. I've never done that myself, though.

[metasilk.livejournal.com]

I've also seen (played?) a variation where you specified truth/dare before the request, but you could choose to decline the first question/dare. The second one, however, you might not like as much! :)

I also played another dare-less version involing a randomizer element (we spun a pineapple), then the asker asked the pointed-at a question. The pointed-at could answer, or pay a fee of a kiss to remain silent.

[ursula]

Most versions I've played theoretically required that truth or dare be chosen first, but a sufficiently whiny person could always substitute dare for truth or vice versa, after the fact.