Plea to parents: Introducing children to the abstract concept of games

I have a niece and nephew, 2 1/2 yr old twins, whose mom is starting to think about introducing them to games -- Candyland, Chutes and Ladders, etc.. But she's afraid that the concepts of competition and losing in an abstract environment might be hard for them to accept. ("Why did mine go down the chute, if his gets to go up the ladder?!") Especially since even in real life everything is shared equally between them.

It seemed to me that the cooperative play model of most RPGs would allow the kids to learn the abstract concepts associated with games while putting off sibling competition to a little later age.

Does anybody with kids or experience with games for little kids have any recommendations for cooperative play kind of boardgames for three-year-olds? Or ANY other good games for introducing that age kid to the core concepts of games?

Thanks

Carl

Maybe something along the lines of Rel's Samantha the Red Story Hour? I would think that could be done with two kids, though it would be more difficult. With the right co-op "puzzles" I would think it would work, and be a blast for everyone.

Yeah, I love what Rel's done for his daughter, but these kids' folks are NOT gamers, or Scifi/fantasy fans at all. They're Manhattan attorneys who will be definitely be looking for some thing more.....packaged.

[Cartman] They sound like hippie tree-huggers to me. [/Cartman]

Seriously -- kids have being playing competitive games -- with winners and losers -- for all of recorded history. And guess what? Life is about winning and losing, so you may as well learn that lesson early.

But since you asked about co-operative games...

* Blockhead -- stack up various shapes of blocks until they fall over. Technically, the person to knock it over "loses", but you can just play to see how high you can get the tower.

* LotR board game -- you would have to drastically scale down the complexity, but it's all about cooperating to keep Suaron from winning.

Can't think of too many more off the top of my head.

I recommend Hi! Ho! Cherry-O! for kids that age.

I also recommend the parents relax a bit about the competition.

Kids want to play what they want to play.

Usually up to the age of 3-4 (depending on the child) the concept of Rules are harder for the child to grasp, and they'll want to just play with the pieces on the board. Even a game like Memory or something, they'll just try flip card after card after card. They'll still have fun as long as you don't hound and repremand to stay with the rules.

Around age 5 the child will have more of a "try follow the rules" concept...at least until he/she finds the game interesting or not.

Family Fluxx By Looney Labs

It isn't officially out yet, but I hear good things.

Family Pastimes has co-operative board games, kind of on the level of Candyland or Chutes & Ladders but not competitive. Caves & Claws is fun but I think it's a little beyond 3 year olds. They have a couple of games rated for 3 years but most of them are meant for 4 or 6 year olds.

My comments about parents who have a burr about competition really aren't grandma-friendly.

That said, I'd recommend Cranium Hullabaloo. It's, essentially, a game of musical "chairs" where no one is eliminated and multiple people can "win". Plus, you get to do silly dances with your kids. Actually, most of the Cranium kid games are low-competition. All have a "winner", but they are definitely focused more on play, and the play is more cooperative.

I'd have to say that RPGs are probably have just as much, if not more, of a risk element when it comes to dealing with infants and extremely young children. If by cooperative RPG you mean "Make-believe in which they work together to overcome riddles and puzzles" then that'd be fine, but if there's any sort of conflict with imaginary characters or monsters, then there's a risk involved. Imagination can be both a child's sanctuary and realm of danger- whether it's retreating into their fancies as they often do, wandering the house making it far more interesting that it actually may be, or it's dealing with nightmares or concepts they can't quite understand and interpret negatively. Children invent their own antagonists- no need to inject more into their lives.

Introducing any kind of hostile or antagonistic, make-believe character, comes with dangers. First of all, it's a character that has the parental stamp of approval. Sauron and Santa will be on the same page- and one is, for better or worse, a bad guy. Secondly, no matter how much you play it down, you can't go inside a child's mind and stop them from building it up to mean more than you intended... that's what maturing minds do- they give unique and personal texture to general concepts over time. If the family has to actually come together, mom, dad, siblings, to try to overcome that nemesis repeatedly- that has meaning as well: 1) it's important, because everyone's there, 2) it's really bad, as it takes us to do it, and 3) even though my sibling and I can work together to win, since we play the game more than once, it means we can't actually beat him.

Additionally, the concepts of fairness and equality, are about as far away from a 2.5 year old's mental capacity as morality is. At that age, at least according to the texts I've read (anyone with info beyond 2001ish please correct), it's really about being sated or not being sated by whatever experiences they're having- be it food, ownership of a toy, or being with someone they find comfort/happiness with.

That said... to address the actual question as briefly as possible, after spending too many paragraphs on the wee bit in the middle about RPGs, no I have no recommendations for non-competitive games. Just haven't seen any.