The real game was not chess, but Pokémon. Perhaps that answers mister_playboy's concern about the childish chess player? And as to Ceewan's concerns ... well, let me explain the real situation, and you tell me what you think. I provided a chess analogue because it would be readily familiar to most readers internationally and it would also be very simple. The true story is somewhat complex:
[hide]In Pokémon, one player has a team of six creatures and he fights against another player who also has his own team of six creatures. Whoever is left standing by the end of the battle is declared the winner. Each Pokémon is allowed one item to hold. These so-called "hold items" or "held items" affect the Pokémon in different ways. One item, called a Choice Band, increases a Pokémon's strength by a factor of 1½. Another item, called BrightPowder, increases a Pokémon's evasion stat. These items can determine the course of a battle.
One particular item, Leftovers, heals a Pokémon by one-sixteenth (1/16) its total HP per turn. This item is often used to help Pokémon survive one or more turns extra than they would have otherwise been able to do.
Leftovers is considered one of the best items in the game. You will find somebody holding onto Leftovers on almost every single team. Because this item, and other items, are so good at aiding one's team achieve victory, the fans as well as the company who makes the games established rules of etiquette back in 2000-2001 regarding the use of these items. And one of the first rules was, you can only have one copy of any item on your team. In other words, you can have one Choice Band but not two. You can have one BrightPowder but not three. You can have one Leftovers but not six.
This evening, two members of a forum I go to had their match in a tournament we are conducting. The loser of this match was Player B. (The winner was some other person C.) Shortly after their match concluded, Player B asked me, "Do you want to play?" I obliged, knowing that I would not get a chance to see his team with my own eyes since he was now knocked out of the tournament.
My team members each had different items. Some items are better than others. Indeed, several of my team members occupy roles which both would benefit best from the same item, forcing me to give one of the two of them an inferior item due to the rules of conduct we've all been following for the last decade.
My opponent, I discovered halfway through battle, had not one, not two, but three Leftovers. To make matters even worse ...
(1) One of the creatures was reduced (by me) to 5% of its health bar following earlier damage in the fight and one use of its Leftovers. 1/16, or 6.25%, is the amount Leftovers heals. In other words, I would have KO'd this creature that turn had it not been for Leftovers.
(2) Another of the creatures, the very same scenario. This creature KO'd me when I failed to KO it, despite the fact that, without Leftovers, the roles would have been reversed.
(3) And finally, the last creature with Leftovers. This would normally have taken two hits to kill, but thanks to its Leftovers it required three hits to kill. My very last Pokemon brought it from full health down to 15% health. The thing is, earlier in the battle, another of my Pokemon had brought it down to 60% health and, bit by bit, the creature returned to 100% health through the use of its Leftovers. Were it not for this item, I would have had another KO instead of being the KO victim myself.
The better analogy, then, to a game of chess would not be the palming of one pawn; but rather the introduction of one additional bishop and one additional rook to the board. Naturally, I couldn't use this analogy since there is no such thing as having three rooks or three bishops at such an early stage in the game.
Furthermore, to address Ceewan's complaint, "I would have refused to continue until he put the pawn back," Pokemon is unfortunately designed such that whichever player disconnects first is automatically declared the loser. I would have had to have either disconnected (and handed him the win) or else continued playing (as I did), since he would of course refuse to disconnect from his end. (His idea of a fair trade-off was to let me kill one of his creatures for free. Of course, he picked the one which I had reduced to 5% HP! The jerk!)
Anyway, when the match was over, he asked if I wanted to play again. I told him I never wanted to play with him again. He accused me of being a sour sport over losing to him so badly (4 Pokemon of his remaining standing to my 0, a handy loss in Pokemon). And our peers on the webforum all sided with him, accusing me of overreacting by saying I would never play with him again and of accusing him of cheating. They all claimed, "It was just a casual friendly game." When I pointed out his unfair advantage, they acted like it wasn't a big deal.
I agree that the game itself isn't a big deal. But to me, if he's that fucking petty that he'll cheat to win at Poke-fucking-mon for Christ's sake, then I never want to play him ever again.
Furthermore, he wouldn't have won 4-0 had it been fair and balanced use of items. Two of his guys, I would have killed before he could kill me. So right off the bat, that makes the score go from 4-0 to 2-2. And since we both still would have Pokemon (2-2), we'd play until someone reached 0. At worst, the final score would have been 2-0, a respectable loss. Most realistic, 1-0, a very respectable loss. Not very realistic, I admit, but still possible, would have been my victory 0-1 or 0-2. But instead, he gloats that he beat me 4-0. And says I'm just sad that I couldn't do better. Why would I want to play with him again to prove him wrong? It'd accomplish nothing. He's just an asshole who is baiting me, and I really don't want to play with an asshole. Games are supposed to be fun, and playing him would be anything but fun.[/hide]
uzzled:
