Summary
The facilitator poses a question or scenario — usually an advice question or a problem to solve. Three players stand in a line and respond in sequence: the first gives a genuinely good answer, the second gives a bad answer, and the third gives an answer that is somehow even worse than the second. The sequence can repeat with new questions. The game rewards escalating commitment to increasingly terrible ideas while keeping a straight face. Good warm-up game; also works well for audience participation.
Example
“My cat won’t stop meowing at 3am. What should I do?” Good: “Try feeding them a small snack before bed — they may be hungry.” Bad: “Move the cat to the garage.” Worse: “Move yourself to the garage. The cat was here first. Show some respect.”
Variation: Experts Panel: Good, Bad, Worse
Three players are seated as a panel of experts. The facilitator poses a question or scenario. The first expert gives a genuinely good, reasonable answer. The second gives a bad answer. The third gives an answer even worse than the second. Rotate with new questions. The game works best when all three players commit fully to their position — the “good” expert is as earnest as the “worse” expert is committed. Running several rounds lets the panel develop distinct personalities across their answers.
Example: “My neighbor won’t stop playing loud music at 2am. What should I do?” Good: “Knock politely, introduce yourself, and set clear expectations.” Bad: “Move.” Worse: “Have you considered that you might be the problem? Maybe the music is a gift. Accept the gift.”