User Avatar Image

POKER NIGHT: Poker rules issues in game

posted by poingpoing on - last edited - Viewed by 2.2K users

the blinds are being done incorrectly when it gets to heads up play.

during heads up play in texas hold'em the small blind is supposed to be the button and the big blind is the other player. the button/small blind acts first pre-flop and acts last post-flop. currently in the game, the button is big blind during heads up play, and this leads to the button having last action pre-flop AND post-flop.


I hope someone from telltale games can see this and patch the mistake.

113 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @emtwo said: I would have a problem with that simply because a flush is numerically less likely than a straight, but this is all hyperbole anyways.


    It is not hyperbole. To me, allowing (non-all-in) raises less than the size of the previous bet is a flagrant violation of the rules of poker, and almost anybody who understands why the rule exists would agree with me.

  • @furrykef said: It is not hyperbole. To me, allowing (non-all-in) raises less than the size of the previous bet is a flagrant violation of the rules of poker, and almost anybody who understands why the rule exists would agree with me.

    Please explain why this rule exists and why it's so important to the function of a $5 video game.

  • Can we keep this thread for issues directly relating to Poker Night, please?

    We're getting sidetracked, and if you two wish to keep discussing this, there's the PM function.

  • @emtwo said: Please explain why this rule exists and why it's so important to the function of a $5 video game.


    It's important to the function of a $5 video game because it's poker. It's called Poker Night at the Inventory, so it's not too much to expect it to follow the rules of poker.

    The reason why the rule exists is because to prevents nuisance raises. Two players could keep reraising tiny amounts while a player is caught in the middle calling all these little bets. Also, these raises re-open the betting to players who have already acted. A player who is first to bet should not be allowed to put in a giant raise (after seeing how weak everyone else is) just because somebody added a raise that was 10% of the original bet.

    @emtwo said: Can we keep this thread for issues directly relating to Poker Night, please?

    We're getting sidetracked, and if you two wish to keep discussing this, there's the PM function.


    This is related to Poker Night, because Poker Night is in violation of the rules of poker. I'm explaining how and why in the hopes that Telltale will fix it. Conducting this discussion in PM would defeat the purpose!

  • @emtwo said: I would have a problem with that simply because a flush is numerically less likely than a straight, but this is all hyperbole anyways.

    There are no official rules of Hearts, and yet you still get one point per heart card you collect. By your flawed logic, you could choose ANY color as giving one point per card, or make ANY card the 13-point card that the Queen of Spades now is.

    As these are the rules practiced by the leading agencies that are allowed to have people play these card games, they are as official as they can become. These are the rules in any casino, and they are the rules in any tournament.

    EDIT: also, don't suddenly deflect the validity of an argument because it's irrelevant. It's still a valid argument, regardless of whether this rule needs to be in a game.

    EDIT3: words can not describe the awe I'm struck by, seeing you do what you just did, emtwo. I'd tip my hat, if I had one. Oh, right, I tip my Poker Visor. ;)

  • I'll solve all of this by doing something never before seen on the internet.

    You, kind sirs, are technically correct, which is the best kind of correct. I concede.

  • Thanks guys. the issue is in the open for the Telltale guys to consider, and further public discussion on it isn't going to add anything more to that.

  • Here, I will illustrate why Poker Night's rule is bad more vividly with a hypothetical example:

    The player bets $2000.
    Max calls.
    Strong Bad calls.
    Heavy calls.
    Tycho raises $200, making it $2200. The pot is now $10,200, which should put how tiny the $200 is into perspective.
    The player re-raises all-in. Now all the other characters are forced to make a decision to either forfeit the $2000 they invested or put in all their chips, just because Tycho put in that tiny raise. If he hadn't put in the raise, the player couldn't re-raise and the others wouldn't be caught in the middle. Thus, Tycho ends up screwing the whole table over (except for you). If Tycho were forced to raise the proper minimum, which would be $2000, then your opportunity to reraise all-in would be more legitimate, because Tycho would be making a greater commitment rather than reopening the betting for no good reason.

    [quote=jp-30]Thanks guys. the issue is in the open for the Telltale guys to consider, and further public discussion on it isn't going to add anything more to that.[/quote]
    I respect your position as a moderator, but I have to say I have two issues with this.
    1) How do we know they are properly evaluating the merits and demerits of implementing the rule in a patch if we don't discuss them openly? I mean no offense to the designers' intelligence here, but that this issue occurred in the first place tells me that it should be explained.

    2) This thread is called "Poker rules issues in game" -- i.e., how PNatI fails to implement the rules of poker properly. Since we're discussing a rule that it fails to implement properly, I think this discussion is very on-topic. If we don't discuss stuff like this here, then what's this thread for? :confused:

  • I got an A-10 straight while the heavy had two pair but somehow he won the pot.

    I am confused about this. Has it happened to anyone else?

  • Hey all,

    I had a slight issue with a rule that doesn't seem to be covered here (although it could potentially be related to some of the unexpected wins described)

    In Hold 'em, the winner is the player who can make the best 5 card hand out of the 7 available. However on one particular hand the game awarded a winner when it should have been a split pot.

    I can't remember the exact cards but it was something like this:

    Table: 6, 6, 10, Q, K
    Me: 10, 4
    Heavy: 10, 9

    So, we both have two pair. The game awarded Heavy the win, presumably due to his 9 kicker - but the 9 and my 4 weren't in the final hands. We both had the same best 5 cards: 10, 10, 6, 6, K. If there are better cards on the table then the kickers aren't used.

    From what the moderators are saying it doesn't sound hugely likely these rules issues will get fixed but has anyone else seen this?

Add Comment