Hm, I do remember that Monopoly's actual rules are better than most people's house rules. Maybe the Uno people have a point?
post
If we can't keep adding +X cards to the rotation until one poor fool is left drawing 183 cards then what even is the point of playing Uno?
You realise the first thing that came to mind is there are +2 cards and +4 cards so why would anyone end up drawing an odd number of cards?
Because after being forced to draw 182, you still don't have anything to play.
I fucking hate house rules
"I pulled this rule of my ass and now it's the law"
Most people don't hate actual Monopoly, they hate the house rules version of it. Rent Utilities go in the bank, Free Parking is just an empty space. If you don't buy the property it goes to auction.
Monopoly was literally designed to be terrible, it's a sardonic statement against capitalism expressed as a game that's meant to tire you out. The house rules definitely make it worse, but Monopoly isn't a good game without them, or even intended to be.
I still hate actual Monopoly because it's all about fucking over everyone else. I don't mind competitive over cooperative in a board game, but Monopoly pretty much always rewards asshole behavior.
Variety is the spice of life, homie.
I'm not against custom rules that everyone has previously agreed upon.
However, bringing up on the go random made up rules...
Next you're going to tell me I can't sandbag on purpose in Spades to trick the other team into reneging.
Do you mind a quick elif on this? I don't know spades and immediately got overwhelmed trying to look up these terms and research enough to know their context x.x
You know what I've been playing spades since I was 9 and I'm as confused as you. Reneging means playing a card from the wrong suit, i.e. playing a spade even though hearts was led and you have hearts. This happens very rarely and it's almost always a player error, and it's almost never done in relation to the bid. There's no strategy that involves reneging, it's just a penalty when someone sees it happen. (Someone always sees it happen. It's hard to renege without someone at the table knowing what cards should be left.)
It's possible OP was talking about "setting" the other team, which means tricking the other team into bidding overconfidently so they fail to take enough tricks. (This results in a big score penalty for the team going set.) Sandbagging (deliberately underbidding) can definitely be used, and legally, to make the other team go set.
Doesn't the official uno online app allow for +2 stacking?
I hate Uno.
First you stack +2. Then you stack +4 and +2. Next, whenever there's a +n, everyone can throw a +n in. Logically this now goes for reverse too. And so on... it ends in a card fight.
This is one of the best things about it. There's no feeling like passing on a +8 to someone.
it ends in a card fight.
That's the point.
Don't forget it's just a game. Better than having an actual fight.
Uno is just a shit version of the dutch game Pesten, which in turn is more fun if you shuffle 4 packs of cards together for larger groups.
Yeah I was going to say, I remember someone I know buying an Uno set and it turned out to basically be a game we already played with normal cards that cost £1 a pack.
No one has ever played Mouse Trap or Operation and followed the rules.
What are these even for?

Wait, operation has money and cards? Since fucking when?
The fun of mousetrap is spending an hour setting it up, finding out you're missing one crucial piece of tiny plastic and trying (and failing) to set it off anyway. The game board is just there for stability.
+4 can also go in a +2 but now only +4s can be player—you can’t go back to +2.
You can skip a skip, but then it skips two people. If the person who it lands on skips again, it skips three people, and so on. Fun to figure out when you’re all wasted.
We calls it Meanuno.
Don't forget Reverse on a +2 or +4 so the person who played it has to pull it.
Have you ever played Mornington Crescent?
remember: wild draw four should only be played on your mortal enemy
I'm not even sure where the official rules end and where the house rules begin and a quick Google search didn't find anything for me either, but I think that's stupid (no +2 on a +2) and it runs counter to how the rest of the game is played (unless I'm also going off of other house rules, I'm not clear on what the "official" rules are).
So the main mechanic of the UNO is matching cards, whether it's by text/symbol, or by color. I can play a green 2 on a red 2, because the text/number/symbol matches. I can also play a blue 'Skip' on a yellow 'Skip' or a green 'Reverse' on a yellow 'Reverse' or I can match them up by color, the whole point is that you're matching things up because that's how the color cards work. The black cards Wild and Draw 4 work a little differently, that's understood (for the most part), those you can't play unless you have no other option.
Why then is it that the 'Draw 2' cards are given a special place, why even have color versions of those cards in the first place unless you're trying to confuse players? If they had wanted them to behave differently, they should've made them black-bordered and/or multi-colored like the Wild and Draw 4 cards, that would let people know, "Oh hey, these have different rules." Instead, they're made to look like all the other color cards and then the UNO Industrial Complex says, "No, you can't actually use these the same ways as every other card, you're an idiot for thinking that." The reason so many people "screw up" this rule is because they're playing the game consistently and they're applying the main mechanic as it should be applied.
This is generally referring to the practice of allowing a player to play a +2 to avoid the penalty and stack it for the next player to draw 4 cards. That has never been part of the rules.
It is legal for player A to plays a +2, player B draws two (their turn getsskipped), player C plays a +2.
You cannot play a +2 on a +2
Sounds like the Pauli Exclusion Principle applied to cards.
If you make your own rules you may end up in:
i played a game where we had a rule that skip cards could stack.
while being skipped, if you have a skip card, you could play it instead of being skipped. skipping your skip. the next person would be skipped instead, continuing the cycle.
top 50 comments