Strip Poker (old interest thread - general)

Started by Xillen, June 23, 2008, 09:56:21 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Sherona

To all those questions I answer, I don't particularly care. However Liardice, I have never even heard of this game.

TanaSilver

Setting: Private casino room. I like the idea of this being a highly competitive game between rich people.

Partners: Defenitely no

Game: Drawpoker or Blackjack. My thought process is this: If someone volunteers to be a dedicated dealer, then I'd say go with straight poker. However, if we have no dealer, blackjack would allow everyone to play, since the dealer could be an NPC given that blackjack dealing is basically automated and the cards are public. The only card that isn't public is the dealers face down card, and that could be solved by simply not drawing it until it is revealed.

Dealer: One devoted player if someone volunteers, or see blackjack idea above. Otherwise, take turns.
O/O

GrinningHound

Setting:  Private casino room, complete with Vegas mobsters.  No backing out.  Large amounts of money. ;D

Partners:  Hmmm....no partners means that some people may get dares they are uncomfortable with, which is a GOOD thing, as discussed earlier.  No partners!

Game:  Draw poker.  Holdem would take much much too long in PBP.

Dealer:  Take turns could possibly mean that someone is 'saved' by being the dealer if they are low.  Everyone has an equal chance at that, though, so it's still fair.  Take turns!

Xillen

Forgot to ask: What amount of players are people welcome with. Though the more the merrier sounds nice, eventually too many players will make it simply last too long.

I'd prefer 4 to 6, and would really discourage more than 8. After that, it would be easier to form two different tables until only 6 people remain in total, and have them merge together.

GrinningHound


Sherona

Quote from: Xillen on June 25, 2008, 01:05:49 PM
Forgot to ask: What amount of players are people welcome with. Though the more the merrier sounds nice, eventually too many players will make it simply last too long.

I'd prefer 4 to 6, and would really discourage more than 8. After that, it would be easier to form two different tables until only 6 people remain in total, and have them merge together.

I am kind of biased as I really do dislike group games, so I would definitely enjoy a smaller number.

I also don't see how Partners would make the dares less risque..given that partners give multiple ons and offs to the fray, and would emphasis teamwork...I.E. If my partner has anal as an off, and that is our dare, my partner and I would have to come up with a solution given I have no problems with that particular kink...I would be more for doing the dare, while he would be more for giving up clothing.

Xillen

Quote from: Sherona on June 25, 2008, 01:40:09 PMI also don't see how Partners would make the dares less risque..given that partners give multiple ons and offs to the fray, and would emphasis teamwork...I.E. If my partner has anal as an off, and that is our dare, my partner and I would have to come up with a solution given I have no problems with that particular kink...I would be more for doing the dare, while he would be more for giving up clothing.

That kind of depends what the dare is about. If say, the team that just won is interested in some anal, they could order the losing team to be on the receiving end. I think what we assumed so far was that the losing team would be allowed to pick among themselves who would take the dare. If you'd consider that both take up the dare, then it's an entirely different story.

Of course the winners could order the couple to have anal together, which would then include both of them, but on different ends. Though I think to be fair, if the female ain't to keen on anal, the couple should be allowed to have her wearing a strapon and switch positions.

GrinningHound

That's why partners is less 'risky'.  The team can just choose the one who doesn't mind to perform the dare.

If someone doesn't like anal, and the hand winner wants it, well, then giving up clothes is more desirable.  If their partner can do it, then they don't give up clothes, making the game 'easier'.

I have a question, how do you determine the 'loser' of a hand?  It would just be the person with the worst hand, right?

Haibane

#33
Quote
A casual game would make this a totally different story. An intend to actually see the poker game as a contest is very much what I'm aiming at.
That's fine, you are the GM, I'm cool with that, but an intense poker game would see me drop out, it's not my thing. I can get intense competitiveness at work 7 hours a day 5 days a week, in the evenings I want fun. I just thought I'd drop that in there to give an idea of how I'm approaching this, if you want different I'm fine with that and will leave you to it.

QuoteI was hoping the people that originally responded to this thread would have a say in what game they want to see
I'm getting a vibe from you that you want the game you want, you seem to have some good clear and nicely organised ideas already about the shape it'll take, which is good because things like this need solid planning, I'm just not sure how having us all saying a half-dozen different things about what we want will help?

QuoteSo basically, can those with interest give a reply and answer the following questions:
Of course, I'd love to ^_^

Setting: Someone's home - I think when it gets to the orgy at the end a home is just a better place for lots of rude things to happen, I feel 'safer' in such an environment.
Partners: I rather would - yeah, that's a nice touch.
Game: Blackjack or Other - the simpler, less intense and less competitve the better. Heck, snap would do for me! I'll be focussing on the social interaction side anyway. I'm reasonably confident at Blackjack, clueless at Poker.
Dealer: Don't mind, whichever is the easiest from a technical game management POV. I would not want to be dealer though.

I'm tending to think my character might be one of those dumb moll types who's gorgeous but thick and hangs on some loaded dude's arm chewing gum and getting sloshed - so he'll be the brains and I'll be the bust. ^_^ Hm, yeah, actually I've never played a dumb-blonde. I think I'll go for that, should be quite liberating not having to think :)

Haibane

Sorry for the DP*

I will play a dumb blonde hanging on my dude's arm, so I've decided I *will* play in this, no matter what card game it is, and he can do all the clever card-work and I'll just be used to soak up some of the nastier dares... yeah, that works well for me. Dares + me = fun!

So who wants a dopey huge breasted willing blonde as their partner?





* That's 'double post' to you and not what your mucky little mind might have thought.

Xillen

Quote from: GrinningHound on June 25, 2008, 02:21:28 PMThat's why partners is less 'risky'.  The team can just choose the one who doesn't mind to perform the dare.

If someone doesn't like anal, and the hand winner wants it, well, then giving up clothes is more desirable.  If their partner can do it, then they don't give up clothes, making the game 'easier'.

True, if only one of the partners has to perform it, then it'll occur less often. We'll see less stripping and more action.

A side effect of partners would be that the partners would have to decide among themselves who would perform the dare or strip. This might be considered interesting, but might also lead to problems.

Quote from: GrinningHound on June 25, 2008, 02:21:28 PMI have a question, how do you determine the 'loser' of a hand?  It would just be the person with the worst hand, right?

No. That would remove all point of betting. The winner of the hand is obvious, it's the player that receives the pot (doesn't have to be the highest hand, as the highest hand could have folded).

The 'loser' would be anyone ending up with negative chips. If you're short on chips, you can borrow some from the bank to afford your ante, bet, call or raise. If you win the pot, you can simply return what you borrowed.

Some rounds won't have "losers". Other rounds would have more than one "loser". If there's more than one "loser", the winner can order them all to do the same thing or order them different things. The winner could even order two "losers" to do something together, but if one "loser" bails out, then the winner is still allowed to pick something for the other "loser" to do.

Quote from: Haibane on June 25, 2008, 02:28:26 PMThat's fine, you are the GM, I'm cool with that, but an intense poker game would see me drop out, it's not my thing. I can get intense competitiveness at work 7 hours a day 5 days a week, in the evenings I want fun. I just thought I'd drop that in there to give an idea of how I'm approaching this, if you want different I'm fine with that and will leave you to it.

It puts quite a difference in how the game is handled. Some like it, some don't. I think the majority is currently aiming at a competitive game, so I think we'll have that as a game.

If there however are more people that think about it like you, then there's nothing stopping us from putting up a seperate game that's more casual. Could also be a student party or something. The dumb-blonde that's just waiting for the orgy at the end would fit in nicely in how you see it, but not so well in the competitive game.

Quote from: Haibane on June 25, 2008, 02:28:26 PMI'm getting a vibe from you that you want the game you want, you seem to have some good clear and nicely organised ideas already about the shape it'll take, which is good because things like this need solid planning, I'm just not sure how having us all saying a half-dozen different things about what we want will help?

That's not true. I've got a very logical thought pattern, and I trust myself on that, so how the exact bidding and stuff works I'll just work out for myself instead of letting a ton of people turn that into a very clumsy discussion.

However, for the questions that I did ask, I am going to follow the majority, even if that disagrees with my own opinion. I thought the partnership was a nice twist, but most seem to be disapproving of it, so it's most likely not going to happen. I'm not seeing it as "It's my game, so it's going my way!"

Likewise, I put the competitive vs casual up for debate after it appeared that not everyone was assuming the contesting part. It still seems to be a winner, though.

Quote from: Haibane on June 25, 2008, 02:28:26 PMSetting: Someone's home - I think when it gets to the orgy at the end a home is just a better place for lots of rude things to happen, I feel 'safer' in such an environment.
Partners: I rather would - yeah, that's a nice touch.
Game: Blackjack or Other - the simpler, less intense and less competitve the better. Heck, snap would do for me! I'll be focussing on the social interaction side anyway. I'm reasonably confident at Blackjack, clueless at Poker.
Dealer: Don't mind, whichever is the easiest from a technical game management POV. I would not want to be dealer though.

I'm tending to think my character might be one of those dumb moll types who's gorgeous but thick and hangs on some loaded dude's arm chewing gum and getting sloshed - so he'll be the brains and I'll be the bust. ^_^ Hm, yeah, actually I've never played a dumb-blonde. I think I'll go for that, should be quite liberating not having to think :)

I will play a dumb blonde hanging on my dude's arm, so I've decided I *will* play in this, no matter what card game it is, and he can do all the clever card-work and I'll just be used to soak up some of the nastier dares... yeah, that works well for me. Dares + me = fun!

So who wants a dopey huge breasted willing blonde as their partner?

I think that if partners would be picked, that that idea could work very well. I'd sure be interested in a partner like that ;)

Jeramiahh

Let's see...

I'd prefer a more casual game, personally, but a serious one could work as well; a different mindset and tone to the game. I think if we had a casual game, I'd be more inclined towards the sexiness aspect of it, while in a serious game, I'd be more focused on the game. It all depends on what we want the focus to be... I'd prefer sexiness. =P

Partners sounds interesting, and would be fun, giving more options to a team and more chance for bickering. "Why don't you take off your shirt? You're the one who didn't want to do the dare!" "Because I didn't wear a bra today, asshole."

Game: I'm familiar with all the games listed, well enough to play at a semi-serious level.

For note, for those of you not familiar with Liar's Dice, it's an interesting game. Every player is given a set number of dice (usually 5), they roll them and keep them hidden, so only they can see the results. You go around the table, bidding on how many dice of a certain number you think are in the game. For instance, if there were 5 players with 5 dice, there might be 3 1's, 5 2's, 7 3's 2 4's, 3 5's and 5 6's in the game. You would only know the 5 dice you had. Bidding might start with something like "There are... three fives." The next person would have to increase either the die number (to 3 sixes) or the quantity of dice (to 4 ones, twos, threes, fours, fives, or sixes). If you make a bid that someone doesn't think exists, you call them a liar, at which point, all dice are revealed. If the bid was correct, the person who called 'liar' loses. Otherwise, the person who was called a liar loses.

Example: "There are seven threes." "Liar!" *reveal that there are seven threes* In that case, the person calling 'liar' loses.
Example: "There are eight fours." "Liar!" *two fours are revealed* In this case, the person bidding would lose.

For the dealer, I couldn't care.
I'm not shy. I'm silently stalking my prey.
There are two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not quite sure about the first one.

Haibane

#37
QuoteI think that if partners would be picked, that that idea could work very well. I'd sure be interested in a partner like that ;)
Trouble is my "dumb blonde hanging on the cool dude's arm" only works if we go with partners...  :'( If we go back to single players I'm a bit out on a limb as dumb blondes will lose every poker hand... lots of fun for me >_< but rather dull for the rest of you ^_^

LiarsDice sounds fun, gets my vote!

Xillen

#38
Making a short list to see how we're doing.

Casual vs Competitive:
Casual: Haibane, Jeramiahh, Kathadon
Competivite: Xillen, Coglio, Hollin, Grinninghound

Solo vs Partner:
Solo: Coglio (def), Hollin (more players), GrinningHound (harder game)
Partner: Xillen, Haibane, Jeramiahh, Great Triangle, Kathadon

Game:
Drawpoker: Xillen, Coglio, Ketilrior, GrinningHound, Kathadon
Texas Holdem: Xillen, Kathadon, Ketilrior, Hollin
Black Jack: Coglio, Hollin, Kathadon
Liars Dice: Great Triangle, Haibane

Dealer:
Devoted: Ketilrior, Haibane (assuming since she doesn't want one herself)
Take turns: Xillen, Hollin, Great Triangle, Passion

GrinningHound

So, in a round where there are no negatively chipped 'losers', there will be no daring and stripping, correct?

A player can stay in the game by borrowing from the bank if they are out of chips, but if they lose all their clothes, they are out, right?

Sorry, I am actually a bit shaky on the betting aspect of poker.  I know the hands, I know a little about bluffing, folding wisely, etc.  I'm just not as sure on how the rotation of betting and raising works, as I haven't really played much 'betting' poker aside from some casual hands with family.

Xillen, do you know of any online poker clients I could use to practice a little bit?

Xillen

Bettingwise:

Everyone starts with, say, 20 chips.

At the start of every round, all players pay the ante (Or in the case of Texas Holdem, the small and big blind do).

Everyone get the chance to bet, raise and fold. To stay in the game, you need to cough up the same amount of chips that the others are putting in. If you fold, you no longer need to cough up the chips, but you cannot win the pot anymore.

If you want to call or raise or whatever, but you do not have the chips, you can borrow 20 more from the bank, for the remainer of that single round only!

At the end of the round, the winner gets the pot. If the winner did borrow chips from the bank, he places those back in the bank.

All the other players that borrowed chips need to perform one dare or pay one article or clothing for every 20 chips they borrowed.

After a while (maybe after every time one person has been the dealer?), both the ante and the amount of chips you get from dares would double. this would prevent one or two players with large stacks from eventually pushing others into 3 or 4 dares for a single hand.

Note, that assumes no LiarDice. For LiarDice it would be a lot easier. There will be one winner and one loser, and the loser has to perform something for the winner. No chips would be involved. Also, BlackJack could be different as well.

I'm sorry, I don't play Poker on online sites.

Haibane

#41
The LiarDice option sounds more attractive but we lose that poker edge that some players are seeking. I have to confess being utterly clueless and confused by those rules!

QuoteAll the other players that borrowed chips need to perform one dare or pay one article or clothing for every 20 chips they borrowed.
Surely it should be "for every 20 chips or part thereof they borrowed and cannot pay back?"


My assumption was that nude players stay in but get obligatorily dared if they lose again. Otherwise once we had 2 nude losers sitting out, they'd quickly start up a 'game' of their own.

Can I suggest we don't wear many clothes - no more than say 6 items?

shoe/shoe/bra/knickers/skirt/top (or equivalent) for girls and shoe/shoe/boxers/pants/shirt erm, erm... something else for guys. Lets say socks and stockings come off with the relevant shoe.

Xillen

Quote from: Haibane on June 25, 2008, 04:13:23 PMMy assumption was that nude players stay in but get obligatorily dared if they lose again. Otherwise once we had 2 nude losers sitting out, they'd quickly start up a 'game' of their own.

Players that are naked are still in the game. If you're naked, and then deny another dare, you're out of the game.

In no way would I want to force dares on players. Most likely, the players that are naked first have the most problems dealing with those dares.

We could assign something for the lost players, though I think it would work better in the casual than the competitive environment. Something along the lines of: Players that lost have to stay naked. They have to take any pose any remaining player asks of them. In addition, they become free grope material for one gender of their choice (or both, if you want).

For the more competitive style, it's kinda out is out, in my opinion.

Quote from: Haibane on June 25, 2008, 04:13:23 PMCan I suggest we don't wear many clothes - no more than say 6 items?

I find 6 a lot. The clothes would simply be in the way of most dares, and the game won't go that fast. I was thinking more along 4 if we play solo, or 6 total per couple if we play couple.

Quote from: Haibane on June 25, 2008, 04:13:23 PMshoe/shoe/bra/knickers/skirt/top (or equivalent) for girls and shoe/shoe/boxers/pants/shirt erm, erm... something else for guys. Lets say socks and stockings come off with the relevant shoe.

I'd let people decide it for themselves, as long as they obey the amount. For clarity's sake, I'd count every individual item, including accesoires, as an article of clothing.

Hollin

Quote from: Haibane on June 25, 2008, 04:13:23 PM
The LiarDice option sounds more attractive but we lose that poker edge that some players are seeking. I have to confess being utterly clueless and confused by those rules!
Surely it should be "for every 20 chips or part thereof they borrowed and cannot pay back?"


My assumption was that nude players stay in but get obligatorily dared if they lose again. Otherwise once we had 2 nude losers sitting out, they'd quickly start up a 'game' of their own.

Can I suggest we don't wear many clothes - no more than say 6 items?

shoe/shoe/bra/knickers/skirt/top (or equivalent) for girls and shoe/shoe/boxers/pants/shirt erm, erm... something else for guys. Lets say socks and stockings come off with the relevant shoe.

I would probably have to sit as well if LiarDice is chosen as well.  I'm not sure I understand the game well enough to play competently....and I'm pretty sure you don't want that.

Pretty sure the way it works is.....that if I need to bet 15 chips, but I only have 10.   I bet 15 and promise my blouse.   If I loose, I give the bank my blouse, the bank gives me 20 chips back, and I give the winner the 15 I owe them.    Every article of clothing is worth X amount of chips.

Hollin

Quote from: Xillen on June 25, 2008, 04:25:48 PM

In no way would I want to force dares on players. Most likely, the players that are naked first have the most problems dealing with those dares.

Could we have a choice to continue playing though?  Either continue playing, knowing you face dares if you loose, or 'assume the position' if you will.

Xillen

Quote from: Hollin on June 25, 2008, 04:26:58 PMI would probably have to sit as well if LiarDice is chosen as well.  I'm not sure I understand the game well enough to play competently....and I'm pretty sure you don't want that.

I'm more and more considering splitting this idea up in two different ideas, and would do so instantly, if I was sure both games would have enough player support. It would work out quite well, I think. There would be the competitive game, with solo players, using either drawpoker or texas holdem, with the dealer taking turns, and there would be the casual game, with partners, using liarsdice, where one couple would have one player and one dealer.

Quote from: Hollin on June 25, 2008, 04:26:58 PMPretty sure the way it works is.....that if I need to bet 15 chips, but I only have 10.   I bet 15 and promise my blouse.   If I loose, I give the bank my blouse, the bank gives me 20 chips back, and I give the winner the 15 I owe them.    Every article of clothing is worth X amount of chips.

Yes, only you don't promise your blouse perse, but deal with how you pay after the round, since you might take the dare instead.

Quote from: Hollin on June 25, 2008, 04:29:38 PM
Could we have a choice to continue playing though?  Either continue playing, knowing you face dares if you loose, or 'assume the position' if you will.

You mean once you're naked? Yes. If you're naked, you can continue playing as normal. However, to stay in the game, you need to face all the dares that are tossed at you. If you are already naked, and someone tosses a dare at you that you're not willing to perform, you're out of the game.

Or if you mean, continue playing after that? I don't think that's a good idea. After all, they just faced a dare that they weren't willing to take. How would they have to face similar dares?

Hollin

No.  That's what I meant.   If you stay in the game naked, you know going in that you are required to take the dares.    If you are already naked, and not willing to take them, you are obviously out.

Xillen

Quote from: Hollin on June 25, 2008, 04:45:26 PM
No.  That's what I meant.   If you stay in the game naked, you know going in that you are required to take the dares.    If you are already naked, and not willing to take them, you are obviously out.

Yeah. It's not an optional choice. Everyone that loses his or her last article of clothing remains in the game, until they receive another dare they're not willing to take.

GrinningHound

Ok, I'm pretty sure I have it down enough to play and not be in the way.  Winning is a different matter, but I will try my best!

I want to be in the solo competitive group, if we split, or else I'll just go with whatever you decide, Xillen.  I'll be happy either way. ;D

I think I want my character to be largely unsuspecting of what's going on.  He had a really odd uncle who died and left him his fortune, but he tied it all up in the chips for this game.

So, he decides to give it a shot and try to win, but he doesn't know that it's a sexy strip poker game. ;D

I may think of another idea, though I do like the innocent young man who becomes caught up in something seedy and wild like this.

Haibane

#49
This looks like so much fun that I really want there to be just 1 game being played. Can we make it competitive (for the poker junkies) but we have paired partners. We should have the right number of bodies and competitive vs fun players to make each pair 1 competitive player and 1 fun player, so the hardcore poker people get their buzz and the lighter fun types get theirs too?

The idea of those 'out' either by refusing to do a dare or choosing not to play on once naked, having to become objects and being posed or fondled by those still playing, (or serve drinks or whatever and still get fondled) really appeals to me! >_<

The whole "treat me like an object" scenario makes me go all... melty. Yum.  :o