“Pick Your Poison” (2016) and its not safe for work (NSFW) edition (also 2016) was created by Tony Pellerito and has been published by Player Ten, Yas!Games, and Dyce. I’ll note that I’ve only played the NSFW edition, but they are mechanically the same, and most of my commentary is about the mechanics, so they should be universal. It’s designed to be a formalized version of “Would You Rather?”, a classic party game about choosing the lesser of two evils.
Now, this isn’t inherently a bad idea. Games like “Truth or Drink” (2019) do a lot of this successfully. I can even see some arguments in favor of regulating the topics in these games, as it makes it easier to make sure certain topics do or don’t come up. It’s definitely also capitalism trying to monetize normal fun, but I think it can be done well. If the game itself is good, I’m not opposed to the general concept of formalizing party games.
However, the reason things like “Truth or Drink” work is that, fundamentally, it’s “Truth or Dare” with cards for what your “truth” is. If “Pick Your Poison” were to work successfully, the best way for it to work would be to pull cards and choose the lesser of two evils. That’s it. That’s all there is to it. “Would You Rather?” is one of the simplest names known to mankind. And yet, “Pick Your Poison” makes it competitive. It’s really weird.
Each player is dealt six black cards. They also have an “A” card, a “B” card, and a “Double Down” card. There’s also a shared board in the center with two places for cards, one labelled “A” and one labelled “B”. Each round, the judge plays a black card onto the spot labelled “A”. Each other player then hands a face-down card to the judge, who picks one of them and places it onto the spot labelled “B”; the player who chose “B” gets one point. All other cards are discarded. All players except the judge place their “A” or “B” card face-down on the table, corresponding to the option they would prefer. If all players pick the same option, they get a point and the judge loses two. If the vote is split, all players in the majority get one point. If the game is perfectly split, the judge gets three points and no one else gets any. Before players reveal if they chose “A” or “B”, players could play their “Double Down” card. This doubles the points they receive, but if they don’t get any points, they lose the card. Judges rotate clockwise (or switch according to another agreed-upon pattern). The first player to reach 15 points (or whatever other goal is set) wins.
Okay, so already this is very weird. There’s no need to add points or “Cards Against Humanity”-style judging or voting processes to “Would You Rather?” However, the real reason it fails is that it accidentally creates a social deduction game. Think about it for a moment. Every player except the judge gets point by matching what the rest of the group chose. They want the decision between the cards to be as easy as possible, so are encouraged to offer cards that make the decision easy. The rules even say “players should choose a Poison card that will create the most difficult decision when compared to A”. But if you want to play a competitive game, players should do the exact opposite of that.
Even after the judge has picked the cards, they don’t win by admitting to what they would rather do. They win by picking what they think most of the group would also pick as what they’d rather do. The whole point of “Would You Rather?” is about making bad decisions between worse options. This completely erases that and focuses on what others would do. It’s called “Pick Your Poison”, but you’re trying to pick the poison most others will also pick – not your poison. Its competitive format fundamentally undermines the game.
The cards themselves are, admittedly, pretty good “Would You Rather?” prompts. It’s a good blend of the bizarre, the gross, and the truly disturbing. If you want to have more influence over people’s options in “Would You Rather?”, this would be good options. I could see situations where that might be appealing – you have an upcoming family event, and want something that everyone can play together, without worrying about a teenage cousin who isn’t familiar with the idea that “hey that joke isn’t appropriate around younger kids”. You are looking for a party game that can be played by a bunch of ages without huge risk of inappropriate content. If that is your goal out of this game, and you don’t intent to follow the rules of it, this might work.
Having said that, “I want the prompt cards but have no intentions of following the game rules” is the only situation under which I might say this goal is worthwhile. Even then, you could probably find better lists online for free than buying this game. I genuinely cannot think of an audience that “Pick Your Poison” would appeal to. Save your time and save your money for something that’s just better.