Posted on May 22, 2011 by admin

I've hated on Candyland before, but the more I think about it, Chutes and Ladders is worse. Not only does it offer zero choices, the board is difficult for a young kid to traverse since it changes direction on each row. It offers its own judgmental karmic rules by saying you deserved to fall down the chute (or in its more sinister version, snakes) because you broke the cookie jar, ran out in the rain, or pulled a dog's tail, none of which you actually had a choice in doing.

Random and Judgmental

In my last post about Candyland and the ensuing discussion on hacker news, we came up with some ways to fix it. What could be done to Chutes and Ladders allowing for some choices, but leave the board as is? Here are three bad ideas, but hopefully they can spark some good ones.

1. Present the child with the choice - When they reach a square that shows a kid doing something bad or good, have them identify the behavior as such and only give them the bonus if they get it right. In the case of a slide, the bonus is not sliding down the slide. Even though most kids will figure out eventually that ladders = good, slides = bad, it might take a few turns.

2. "Get out of slide" cards - Offer them three of these cards at the start and the strategy becomes to know when to appropriately play vs save them for later.

3. Play a "chase" game instead - You start at the end and play backwards, they start at the beginning. You can only move in one direction (backwards), but they can move in both and their object is to try and catch you using the slides and ladders in whichever way suits them best.

These ideas aren't that great, so please someone save Chutes and Ladders.

Posted on May 22, 2011 by admin | Posted in games | Tagged chutes and ladders, dungeon adventure, games

11 Responses to Please, someone save Chutes and Ladders

1. 

   JTagmire says:

   ---

   I think the board layout is part of the issue. Maybe instead of #100 being the win space, make a token that would mark the win space. Choose the placement of that token at the beginning of the game.

   With that in mind, there’s still too much luck involved with the movement. If going up wasn’t necessarily always good, and going down wasn’t necessarily bad, you could have the option of stopping at a slide/ladder.

   More random ideas, but these would raise the age level a bit…
   -Start with X amount of ladder/slide tokens. Earn more throughout the game.
   -If you slide down on top of someone, it sends them to start.
   -Cards instead of dice for movement. Start with 3 or so, and draw a new one each turn.
   -Roll two dice for movement, choose one.

   All of that aside, I do love the board design and style.

   May 22, 2011 at 11:25 pm

   ---
2. 

   Alex Greene says:

   ---

   The British version does not have the images of childrens’ behaviour. No morality lessons attach to the game because the numbered squares are, apart from the snakes and ladders, blank.

   Essentially it’s pure luck whether you land on the head of a snake and get swallowed / excreted or arrive at the bottom of a ladder and ascend.

   Morality has nothing to do with the British game.

   May 23, 2011 at 12:02 am

   ---
3. 

   ladders says:

   ---

   I prefer the British version. Much more fun going down a snake than a chute.

   June 6, 2011 at 1:34 pm

   ---
4. 

   steve says:

   ---

   Setup: start with all players on square #100: this is the Entrance to the dungeon. Place a marker on the opposite corner, #10: his represents the Amulet of Yendor. Place five more markers randomly around the board: these represent Monsters.

   Goal: as a team, return the Amulet to the Entrance (#100).

   Player Move: Players take turns rolling a die and moving this number of spaces. Players may move down slides and up ladders, counting as one space. If you bump into a Monstor, you stop moving and the Monstor is bumped the number of squares remaining on your count, stopping if you reach the edge.

   Monstor Move: Each round, after the last Player moves, each Monstor moves: for each one, roll a die and move the monstor that many spaces toward the nearest Player. Same bumping rule applies. Monsters may not use chutes or ladders.

   Example move: you’re on 100 and roll 4: move to 99 makes one; move to 98 makes two; slide to 78 makes three; move to 79 makes four and ends the move.

   Note 1: you can move either direction left or right unless you’re on an edge in which case you can only move inward (or use a chute or ladder).

   Note 2: Players may choose whether or not to use a chute or ladder as the come to it.

   July 12, 2011 at 9:16 pm

   ---
   • 

     steve says:

     ---

     Well, we tried it this morning, and it doesn’t quite work as described above: from the top row you can get to the third row, but there’s no way to get to the rest of the board. There may be other dead ends like this, so we need another mechanism.

     Also, there should be more interaction between the players to make it more fun, otherwise the first player to reach the Amulet gets all the glory even though it’s supposed to be a team effort. Some more work is required ….

     July 13, 2011 at 3:56 pm

     ---
     • 

       admin says:

       ---

       Maybe add keys or additional treasures that have to be collected.

       July 13, 2011 at 4:13 pm

       ---

5. Pingback: Chutes and Ladders Revisited « smjollnir rambles

6. 

   Shelby says:

   ---

   As I am certified in the field of child education, I think your stupid. This layout is not confusing to children. Children are not stupid. There are numbers on the board. They can count. Three year olds find it exciting that they never know who will win because it is not a game of skill but a game of luck. Get over yourself. Just because you were that unlucky kid that never won a game of chutes and ladders does not mean the game needs to be changed. Thanks.

   October 21, 2011 at 12:45 pm

   ---
   • 

     admin says:

     ---

     Shelby,

     Ouch! Maybe the layout is not confusing to all children, but in my experience it has been.

     I never said that choiceless games weren’t fun for kids, but I think choices make games better. A lot better.

     Choices can make competitive games unequal, so instead of taking out the antagonism we took out the choices.
     If you read the other posts on this blog, I’m trying to make the case for cooperative games. Not necessarily in a touchy-feely, everybody wins kind of way, but working toward a cooperate goal that the group completes and everyone contributes.

     October 21, 2011 at 3:46 pm

     ---
   • 

     Nobody says:

     ---

     I would think that someone certified in the field of education would know the difference between “your” and “you’re” – especially when she’s using it to insult someone else’s intelligence.

     February 7, 2012 at 9:29 pm

     ---
7. 

   Lisa says:

   ---

   Shelby-

   Do you realize that you just made the statement “I think your stupid” while spelling you’re wrong?

   If your students are old enough to understand irony, this could be what we call a “teachable moment”.

   January 31, 2012 at 4:41 am

   ---