Ugh. Broke my usual "no social deduction games" rule last night because someone was really pressuring me to get a game of Ultimate One Night Werewolf in.
Right away it was a mess. 10 people on a long table where you can't possibly reach everyone else's role card, so any role that has to do that is given away by movement. Also everyone who moved a card put it back in a different spot so everyone knew if their card was tampered with and exactly which role did it.
Finally, I was the troublemaker. Since I couldn't reach any card and the host was rushing it along (despite half the group never having played), I opted to just not move any card around.
We open our eyes. I immediately announce that I'm the troublemaker and didn't switch anyone.
One of the first time players is really quiet for 4 minutes before declaring that they were the minion and trying not to smile while doing so. Really bad attempt at masking plus the classic amateur werewolf misdirection move. I immediately knew they were a werewolf. I pointed this out.
Another player, a mason (confirmed by the other mason), says that they think I'm a werewolf because "You just look suspicious, and you were quick to declare yourself not a werewolf with a cover story!"
I said yeah, of course a villager would declare it and why waste time doing so? I then pointed out that everyone could hear people reaching across and moving cards during the night, and asked if anyone heard a peep during the troublemaker phase. Everyone said no they did not.
The vote comes up. I'm the only one who voted for the smiling "minion" while the majority voted for me. Of course the "minion" turns out to be the werewolf.
So in the end, in was a bunch of solid logical points that were confirmed by the group vs. "you just look suspicious", and the latter won out.
Social deduction games all have what I call "the DotA problem", where it just takes one dumb player to tank your whole team and it's inevitable that frustration will come up.
You're supposed to make noise during the night to cover the noise of people executing their roles. You're also supposed to have everyone move their card at the end of the night while their eyes are still closed so no one can tell whether their card has been tampered with. I'm pretty sure both of those are actually in the rules.
If you can't fit people well enough to avoid jostling while reaching (a real problem with 8+ players), you should probably add a "people intentionally jostle during the night to cover" rule. Alternatively, the rule can be that everyone waits two steps back from the table until it's their turn to act (and again, have people make feet shuffling noises to cover). It kind of sucks that you have to either do that or add an unenforceable "don't use info you're not supposed to have" rule, but sometimes you have to put up with these things in order to make the game work.
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Social games like werewolf depend on you playing the room, which does not necessarily mean playing against perfect logicians. Sometimes the exact right move can look suspicious to people who haven't thought it through. If you get nailed for failing to adjust to the other players' sensibilities, that's on you.
Play "Don't Mess With Cthulhu"*! Even if you fail at bluffing, it doesn't hurt your team. You can straight up say "Hey, Investigator chums, I'm a fuckin' Cultist, come at me bro!", and it doesn't make you a pariah... it just makes the Investigators more confused! "Do we investigate his cards anyway, even though he says he has Cthulhu? What if he has Elder Signs? Oh god..."
Social deduction games often have the sort of lament that reading people (especially within the context of a game) is a valuable skill, and one that people 1) think they are good at 2) and are actually not good at. Dunning-Kruger at its finest. If you were good at reading people, you'd be playing poker and cleaning house!
* I know I evangelize this game a lot, but it solves most problems that I have with a typical social deduction game: There's no "close your fucking eyes and read a fucking script" phase, there's no player elimination, revealing your alleged identity doesn't effectively remove you from play (the "pariah effect"), there is incentive for investigators to bluff as cultists at times, and there's no voting to override your agency if you have the flashlight (the tyranny of the majority). The main disadvantage of the game (only one player has any real agency, and that's the current wielder of the flashlight) is one that's commonly shared by many social deduction games. It's not a perfect game by any means, but it's by far one of my favorite "light" social deduction games. For a heavier game that requires a LOT more rules explanation, I recommend Ultimate Werewolf: Inquisition.
Ultimate One Night Werewolf has been sitting still shrink wrapped on my shelf for I don't know how long. We haven't had a game group of more than 4 since we got it and I can't imagine it being fun without at least 6.
Cerebria - The Inside World is up on Kickstarter from the producers of Trickerion and Anachrony and it looks just as amazing - an incredible mashup of Pixar's InsideOut and of fuck something else JUST GO LOOK AT IT
Social games like werewolf depend on you playing the room, which does not necessarily mean playing against perfect logicians. Sometimes the exact right move can look suspicious to people who haven't thought it through. If you get nailed for failing to adjust to the other players' sensibilities, that's on you.
If presenting such a simple case as "I did nothing during my role phase. The fact that that role phase was the only one where nobody heard anything backs that up" is defeated by "you just look suspicious and were the first to talk", my first thought is that collective deduction games just aren't going to work out and we should play something else. Wanting to continue more rounds exploiting someone's obvious blindside like that just feels ugly. It's fine if you're playing medium stakes poker for money, not so much for a social gathering.
If someone in that group had actually told me not everyone is a perfect logic robot like me and that it was "all on you" for not adjusting to their sensibilities, I don't think I would even talk to them again.
Play "Don't Mess With Cthulhu"*! Even if you fail at bluffing, it doesn't hurt your team. You can straight up say "Hey, Investigator chums, I'm a fuckin' Cultist, come at me bro!", and it doesn't make you a pariah... it just makes the Investigators more confused! "Do we investigate his cards anyway, even though he says he has Cthulhu? What if he has Elder Signs? Oh god..."
Social deduction games often have the sort of lament that reading people (especially within the context of a game) is a valuable skill, and one that people 1) think they are good at 2) and are actually not good at. Dunning-Kruger at its finest. If you were good at reading people, you'd be playing poker and cleaning house!
* I know I evangelize this game a lot, but it solves most problems that I have with a typical social deduction game: There's no "close your fucking eyes and read a fucking script" phase, there's no player elimination, revealing your alleged identity doesn't effectively remove you from play (the "pariah effect"), there is incentive for investigators to bluff as cultists at times, and there's no voting to override your agency if you have the flashlight (the tyranny of the majority). The main disadvantage of the game (only one player has any real agency, and that's the current wielder of the flashlight) is one that's commonly shared by many social deduction games. It's not a perfect game by any means, but it's by far one of my favorite "light" social deduction games. For a heavier game that requires a LOT more rules explanation, I recommend Ultimate Werewolf: Inquisition.
I did want to try Deception: Murder in Hong Kong because there's no elimination and you have to do something else beyond flushing out the traitor.
+1
mysticjuicer[he/him] I'm a muscle wizardand I cast P U N C HRegistered Userregular
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong is pretty excellent! I'm kind of intimidated by more "pure" social deduction games: this one feels more like "a deduction game, that also has a social element" and I enjoyed that quite a bit.
I'm sitting here as patiently as possible for the FedEx man. Delivery is set for before close of business today... But it's 10 after 6 and I NEED MY MASSIVE DARKNESS!!
My issues with Deception are that it is entirely dependent on yet another "close your eyes and read a script" thing that plagues social deduction games (and all the cheating involving careful listening and peeking) and that one person essentially has to be the dungeon master. It's fine otherwise, although the clue boards vary wildly in how specific they can be (I prefer when they are vague and open to interpretation). Also, once you blow your load, you are essentially exiting the game at that point.
Social games like werewolf depend on you playing the room, which does not necessarily mean playing against perfect logicians. Sometimes the exact right move can look suspicious to people who haven't thought it through. If you get nailed for failing to adjust to the other players' sensibilities, that's on you.
If presenting such a simple case as "I did nothing during my role phase. The fact that that role phase was the only one where nobody heard anything backs that up" is defeated by "you just look suspicious and were the first to talk", my first thought is that collective deduction games just aren't going to work out and we should play something else. Wanting to continue more rounds exploiting someone's obvious blindside like that just feels ugly. It's fine if you're playing medium stakes poker for money, not so much for a social gathering.
If someone in that group had actually told me not everyone is a perfect logic robot like me and that it was "all on you" for not adjusting to their sensibilities, I don't think I would even talk to them again.
"Oh, I have a role but I chose not to do anything with it" is right up there next to "be quiet and then claim Minion" for wolfishness, and the part where you're asking people to rely on what they heard during the night is against the spirit of the game if not the explicit rules (don't own it to check).
So I'm hopefully getting a game of King of New York going at work tomorrow lunch time. I've read through the blissfully small rules and it all seems pretty simple.
Anything I should watch out for in the first game? Not looking for strategies (want to go in as a newbie too), but anything people normally miss or something?
I'm sitting here as patiently as possible for the FedEx man. Delivery is set for before close of business today... But it's 10 after 6 and I NEED MY MASSIVE DARKNESS!!
Careful. My copy came with a huge hurricane and literal darkness (still no power at my house).
I'm sitting here as patiently as possible for the FedEx man. Delivery is set for before close of business today... But it's 10 after 6 and I NEED MY MASSIVE DARKNESS!!
Careful. My copy came with a huge hurricane and literal darkness (still no power at my house).
Funny... We're getting the rain from Irma right now. A blissful rainy day.
+1
FishmanPut your goddamned hand in the goddamned Box of Pain.Registered Userregular
I'm sitting here as patiently as possible for the FedEx man. Delivery is set for before close of business today... But it's 10 after 6 and I NEED MY MASSIVE DARKNESS!!
Careful. My copy came with a huge hurricane and literal darkness (still no power at my house).
These Kickstarter stretch goals are beginning to get ridiculous.
Cerebria - The Inside World is up on Kickstarter from the producers of Trickerion and Anachrony and it looks just as amazing - an incredible mashup of Pixar's InsideOut and of fuck something else JUST GO LOOK AT IT
I remember not being interested when they first floated it out there but I don't remember exactly why.
AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
Cerebria - The Inside World is up on Kickstarter from the producers of Trickerion and Anachrony and it looks just as amazing - an incredible mashup of Pixar's InsideOut and of fuck something else JUST GO LOOK AT IT
I remember not being interested when they first floated it out there but I don't remember exactly why.
I wasn't either because it was described as "team based area control" which just sounded like a MOBA. Turns out it isn't really like that at all since there's no combat and it's farkin' booteefool.
I like how FedEx has a nice little get out of jail free card on the tracking info that basically gives them a few extra day to deliver if it's not delivered the day they say it will...
Cerebria - The Inside World is up on Kickstarter from the producers of Trickerion and Anachrony and it looks just as amazing - an incredible mashup of Pixar's InsideOut and of fuck something else JUST GO LOOK AT IT
I remember not being interested when they first floated it out there but I don't remember exactly why.
I wasn't either because it was described as "team based area control" which just sounded like a MOBA. Turns out it isn't really like that at all since there's no combat and it's farkin' booteefool.
It's definitely beautiful. I'm gonna have to dig into the rules, because a game designed for two players or two teams of two sounds pretty cool to me right now, and a lot about this is hitting the right buttons. Wish there were more reviews/previews from reputable outlets.
My issues with Deception are that it is entirely dependent on yet another "close your eyes and read a script" thing that plagues social deduction games (and all the cheating involving careful listening and peeking) and that one person essentially has to be the dungeon master. It's fine otherwise, although the clue boards vary wildly in how specific they can be (I prefer when they are vague and open to interpretation). Also, once you blow your load, you are essentially exiting the game at that point.
Generally there are apps to help with the script thing.
My issues with Deception are that it is entirely dependent on yet another "close your eyes and read a script" thing that plagues social deduction games (and all the cheating involving careful listening and peeking) and that one person essentially has to be the dungeon master. It's fine otherwise, although the clue boards vary wildly in how specific they can be (I prefer when they are vague and open to interpretation). Also, once you blow your load, you are essentially exiting the game at that point.
Generally there are apps to help with the script thing.
The script itself isn't the issue. It's the fact that you can't enforce that section (people can't HELP but to hear noises unless you have a way of making them deaf on command, and even adding scripted "shuffle around" noises doesn't stop this from happening), that inevitably someone is going to screw things up ("Wait, I thought you were a traitor, didn't you open your eyes? What?") and you have to start over, that you'll have one or two people who are peeking even when they say they aren't (we're talking mixed groups of people, not necessarily long-running board game groups entirely made of friends), that playing spaces with ambient noise often sabotages the scripted portion (although it DOES prevent people from using aural cues as much, so it's 50/50 there), etc. It's an awkward part of a lot of social deduction games, mostly ones involving collusion between two or more traitor elements.
And yeah, this is a personal preference. It's also why I really like "Don't Mess With Cthulhu".
Social games like werewolf depend on you playing the room, which does not necessarily mean playing against perfect logicians. Sometimes the exact right move can look suspicious to people who haven't thought it through. If you get nailed for failing to adjust to the other players' sensibilities, that's on you.
If presenting such a simple case as "I did nothing during my role phase. The fact that that role phase was the only one where nobody heard anything backs that up" is defeated by "you just look suspicious and were the first to talk", my first thought is that collective deduction games just aren't going to work out and we should play something else. Wanting to continue more rounds exploiting someone's obvious blindside like that just feels ugly. It's fine if you're playing medium stakes poker for money, not so much for a social gathering.
If someone in that group had actually told me not everyone is a perfect logic robot like me and that it was "all on you" for not adjusting to their sensibilities, I don't think I would even talk to them again.
Play "Don't Mess With Cthulhu"*! Even if you fail at bluffing, it doesn't hurt your team. You can straight up say "Hey, Investigator chums, I'm a fuckin' Cultist, come at me bro!", and it doesn't make you a pariah... it just makes the Investigators more confused! "Do we investigate his cards anyway, even though he says he has Cthulhu? What if he has Elder Signs? Oh god..."
Social deduction games often have the sort of lament that reading people (especially within the context of a game) is a valuable skill, and one that people 1) think they are good at 2) and are actually not good at. Dunning-Kruger at its finest. If you were good at reading people, you'd be playing poker and cleaning house!
* I know I evangelize this game a lot, but it solves most problems that I have with a typical social deduction game: There's no "close your fucking eyes and read a fucking script" phase, there's no player elimination, revealing your alleged identity doesn't effectively remove you from play (the "pariah effect"), there is incentive for investigators to bluff as cultists at times, and there's no voting to override your agency if you have the flashlight (the tyranny of the majority). The main disadvantage of the game (only one player has any real agency, and that's the current wielder of the flashlight) is one that's commonly shared by many social deduction games. It's not a perfect game by any means, but it's by far one of my favorite "light" social deduction games. For a heavier game that requires a LOT more rules explanation, I recommend Ultimate Werewolf: Inquisition.
I did want to try Deception: Murder in Hong Kong because there's no elimination and you have to do something else beyond flushing out the traitor.
The game also suggests you should play multiple rounds because then you start to notice patterns and what people do more. One Ultimate Werewolf game is always going to be somewhat ridiculous, but it gets more interesting the more you play because the more you learn about the people around you. Say, after that first game, people might trust what you say, which would change things, etc.
My perspective on the Netrunner new core thing is basically that, if you were the type of person who played Netrunner casually the old core was perfectly fine.
You don't need anything more to play a perfectly compelling game of Jinteki vs Criminal; which is enough on it's own to be satisfying, I think, to almost any board gamer.
If you felt the itch and had to go deeper, the LCG model really got oppressive, really godamn fast.
Because you couldn't actually just buy the things you thought were cool and play with them. A cycle of interactive cards wasn't found in one pack.
It was found spread one card at a time through at least a half a dozen packs.
Really, there is no way to play that game without either sticking to the core forever or buying everything ever printed.
And printing a new core does nothing to address that issue at all.
0
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Part of One Night Ultimate Werewolf's appeal, for me, is that the game is so quick that it really doesn't matter if shit goes down. People are going to make noise. It's part of the metagame. Hell, I'll make noise intentionally just to throw people off!
I picked up the companion that talks about tourney-level strategies for all the various roles. It's amazing what even the villager can do.
But blurting out your role and that you didn't do anything is horrible overall, because you are giving away not only information, but all power you have in the game.
Part of One Night Ultimate Werewolf's appeal, for me, is that the game is so quick that it really doesn't matter if shit goes down. People are going to make noise. It's part of the metagame. Hell, I'll make noise intentionally just to throw people off!
I picked up the companion that talks about tourney-level strategies for all the various roles. It's amazing what even the villager can do.
But blurting out your role and that you didn't do anything is horrible overall, because you are giving away not only information, but all power you have in the game.
This is so true because everyone should have been worried that their role had been changed because your role was possible. I've been in a situation where someone said they changed everyone which got everyone talking adn then they revealed they actually hadnt changed anyone, therefore the one who revealed they'd been a wolf was fucked because they had revealed themselves because they thought their role had been changed. There's so much that can happen in werewolf, you can't give anything away too quickly. Which again, is something I think you figure out if you play a few rounds of it rather than just one.
Edit: Of course, you had to believe the guy who said this who was usually full of shit, so chaos ensued, as it should.
Yeah, One Night Werewolf I can stand because it ends so quick. I'm not great at social deduction stuff, but sometimes the cards align for it to be a logic puzzle.
And there's enough chaos for the person who thinks he has it all locked down to stab himself in the back in the end.
Part of One Night Ultimate Werewolf's appeal, for me, is that the game is so quick that it really doesn't matter if shit goes down. People are going to make noise. It's part of the metagame. Hell, I'll make noise intentionally just to throw people off!
I picked up the companion that talks about tourney-level strategies for all the various roles. It's amazing what even the villager can do.
But blurting out your role and that you didn't do anything is horrible overall, because you are giving away not only information, but all power you have in the game.
Well standing up to lean all the way across the table would have given away that I was the trouble maker so either way the result was the same.
I have no idea about tournament level meta strategies. It was a sudden sit down game and I had 5 seconds to react when I opened my eyes and realized the logistics of reaching all the way across the table so I made a split second call. People jumping on me for revealing information I didn't know I shouldn't is part of the reason I avoid these games. "You ruined our collective experience" is an ugly fact that runs through the whole genre (another reason I call them the MOBA of board games). I may sometimes think it when a player does it and vent about it on some anonymous message board they will never read, but I would opt out of playing before I ever voiced it to a player in person and sour a social gathering.
These replies have been getting downright rude. I'm sorry I started this topic and will end it now. Thank you, Hahnsoo for your take on Deception Hong Kong.
MrBody on
0
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
My perspective on the Netrunner new core thing is basically that, if you were the type of person who played Netrunner casually the old core was perfectly fine.
You don't need anything more to play a perfectly compelling game of Jinteki vs Criminal; which is enough on it's own to be satisfying, I think, to almost any board gamer.
If you felt the itch and had to go deeper, the LCG model really got oppressive, really godamn fast.
Because you couldn't actually just buy the things you thought were cool and play with them. A cycle of interactive cards wasn't found in one pack.
It was found spread one card at a time through at least a half a dozen packs.
Really, there is no way to play that game without either sticking to the core forever or buying everything ever printed.
And printing a new core does nothing to address that issue at all.
Continuous release card games aren't for people who don't like continuous release card games, it's true.
For people who are bored by static games (like me) an evolving metagame is necessary, so the continuous releases are valuable in and of themselves, and the LCG model is a far less exploitative and frustrating way to engage with that then traditional CCG.
The problem is that even with continuous releases and rotation the unchanging core set had too many cards that were not just staples, but meta-defining. So it was guaranteed to continually warp the format; removing the ever-changing nature we are looking for.
Today my group finally, finally, blessedly won a game of Eldritch Horror. It involved three out of four investigators being Blessed, multiple rerolls, pulling clues and spells out of midair, mysteries that spawned clues almost exactly where we already were to solve, and a benign Rumor that effectively just closed off a space that nobody needed to visit anyway.
Even with all that, we ended with 2 left on the Doom Track on a turn that involved all of us earning a clue token to be put toward the final mystery.
GNU Terry Pratchett
PSN: Wstfgl | GamerTag: An Evil Plan | Battle.net: FallenIdle#1970
Hit me up on BoardGameArena! User: Loaded D1
To return to my plans for my family gathering down the line (as a reminder: three generations, youngest nieces at 8 and 10), a little bit of advice:
I mentioned in passing that I'd picked up a couple of escape room-y games for the group. One's Unlock, and to prep I've played through the tutorial and a couple of the print-and-plays, but haven't touched the main decks. Another (that I don't have in my hands - I've had it sent directly to my parents') is Thinkfun's Escape The Room: Mystery at the Stargazer's Manor.
There's two things I'm wondering that it'd be useful to know in advance, and I'd be interested to hear in the event that anyone's tried that one specifically:
* I know that Stargazer's Manor takes as the jumping-off point (I guess I'll spoiler this, but I'm aware it's covered in the initial blurb):
the death of said astronomer's wife.
I don't think *that* conceit will bother my nieces too much, but does it get any scarier than that? It's been a couple of years since I last saw them, but they were a bit timid back then, so I'm wary. Put it this way: I have Incan Gold in the mix, and I'm pondering whether I ought to remove the 'monster' or 'spiders' cards.
* A more general question around quarterbacking: Since Stargazer's Manor is resettable with instructions found on the internet, I'm wondering if I ought to play through it quietly myself first; partially so I could act as a hint system and give them something to call on if they get stuck, and partially because I'm quite good at puzzles and I'm nervous I'd spoil the family's fun by being too quick off the mark! I'm nervy about quarterbacking, and a puzzley environment is one I'd fear I'd be particularly obnoxious in.
Play "Don't Mess With Cthulhu"*! Even if you fail at bluffing, it doesn't hurt your team. You can straight up say "Hey, Investigator chums, I'm a fuckin' Cultist, come at me bro!", and it doesn't make you a pariah... it just makes the Investigators more confused! "Do we investigate his cards anyway, even though he says he has Cthulhu? What if he has Elder Signs? Oh god..."
Social deduction games often have the sort of lament that reading people (especially within the context of a game) is a valuable skill, and one that people 1) think they are good at 2) and are actually not good at. Dunning-Kruger at its finest. If you were good at reading people, you'd be playing poker and cleaning house!
* I know I evangelize this game a lot, but it solves most problems that I have with a typical social deduction game: There's no "close your fucking eyes and read a fucking script" phase, there's no player elimination, revealing your alleged identity doesn't effectively remove you from play (the "pariah effect"), there is incentive for investigators to bluff as cultists at times, and there's no voting to override your agency if you have the flashlight (the tyranny of the majority). The main disadvantage of the game (only one player has any real agency, and that's the current wielder of the flashlight) is one that's commonly shared by many social deduction games. It's not a perfect game by any means, but it's by far one of my favorite "light" social deduction games. For a heavier game that requires a LOT more rules explanation, I recommend Ultimate Werewolf: Inquisition.
Definitely got curious about the game after this post. Then I saw that it was running out of stock on CSI and already $50 on Amazon, so I ordered it. I've played Secret Hitler and Avalon a few times with a few people, enough to know it isn't always fun. So then I picked up Spyfall but haven't tried it yet, and picked up Secrets on a whim because it was in a LGS and it surprised me. I don't know how Secrets will hold up because of the randomness - but I also haven't figured out what I enjoy from these games, the bluffing (which I'm not good at) or the deduction (which I'm also not good at). So I'll have to play Spyfall, Secrets, Don't Mess With Cthulhu, and I still haven't opened Deception: Murder in Hong Kong.
Basically, I'm on the quest to find the board game apex predator. If I like Deception more than Mysterium, I'll find a new home for Mysterium or repurpose those beautiful cards for god knows what.
0
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Part of One Night Ultimate Werewolf's appeal, for me, is that the game is so quick that it really doesn't matter if shit goes down. People are going to make noise. It's part of the metagame. Hell, I'll make noise intentionally just to throw people off!
I picked up the companion that talks about tourney-level strategies for all the various roles. It's amazing what even the villager can do.
But blurting out your role and that you didn't do anything is horrible overall, because you are giving away not only information, but all power you have in the game.
Well standing up to lean all the way across the table would have given away that I was the trouble maker so either way the result was the same.
I have no idea about tournament level meta strategies. It was a sudden sit down game and I had 5 seconds to react when I opened my eyes and realized the logistics of reaching all the way across the table so I made a split second call. People jumping on me for revealing information I didn't know I shouldn't is part of the reason I avoid these games. "You ruined our collective experience" is an ugly fact that runs through the whole genre (another reason I call them the MOBA of board games). I may sometimes think it when a player does it and vent about it on some anonymous message board they will never read, but I would opt out of playing before I ever voiced it to a player in person and sour a social gathering.
These replies have been getting downright rude. I'm sorry I started this topic and will end it now. Thank you, Hahnsoo for your take on Deception Hong Kong.
For the record, it was never my intention to insult you or second guess your choices. I wasn't there, so I couldn't read the room. Having fun is the most important part of board gaming, and I have friends who don't enjoy social deduction games. Therefore, I don't suggest them.
I picked up the companion that talks about tourney-level strategies for all the various roles.
This exists? Where can I find it?
It is called the One Night Companion. It was a higher tier bonus for the One Night Alien kickstarter, but I hot mine at GenCon. I do not know if Bezier is selling it direct on their website.
Queen Games is back on Kickstarter with two games and a LENGTHY apology for constantly fucking people over. I'm tempted because one of them is a Feld game but buying it from them will get me some extra tiles at double the fucking price I have it pre-ordered for.
They really are insane.
0
FairchildRabbit used short words that were easy to understand, like "Hello Pooh, how about Lunch ?"Registered Userregular
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong is pretty excellent! I'm kind of intimidated by more "pure" social deduction games: this one feels more like "a deduction game, that also has a social element" and I enjoyed that quite a bit.
I've only played it a few times, but it might be my favorite social deduction game for my gaming group. With other games, my group has a tendency to not deliberate very much before making a decision, which cuts out 90% of the opportunities for doing any of the deducing. Murder in Hong Kong was totally different, and just about everyone was standing up out of their seats looking around at the cards, offering opinions, and defending/attacking different theories. It was much more engaging and made the social deduction gameplay emerge a lot better.
Posts
I'm probably going to end up buying one for the new art.
Right away it was a mess. 10 people on a long table where you can't possibly reach everyone else's role card, so any role that has to do that is given away by movement. Also everyone who moved a card put it back in a different spot so everyone knew if their card was tampered with and exactly which role did it.
Finally, I was the troublemaker. Since I couldn't reach any card and the host was rushing it along (despite half the group never having played), I opted to just not move any card around.
We open our eyes. I immediately announce that I'm the troublemaker and didn't switch anyone.
One of the first time players is really quiet for 4 minutes before declaring that they were the minion and trying not to smile while doing so. Really bad attempt at masking plus the classic amateur werewolf misdirection move. I immediately knew they were a werewolf. I pointed this out.
Another player, a mason (confirmed by the other mason), says that they think I'm a werewolf because "You just look suspicious, and you were quick to declare yourself not a werewolf with a cover story!"
I said yeah, of course a villager would declare it and why waste time doing so? I then pointed out that everyone could hear people reaching across and moving cards during the night, and asked if anyone heard a peep during the troublemaker phase. Everyone said no they did not.
The vote comes up. I'm the only one who voted for the smiling "minion" while the majority voted for me. Of course the "minion" turns out to be the werewolf.
So in the end, in was a bunch of solid logical points that were confirmed by the group vs. "you just look suspicious", and the latter won out.
Social deduction games all have what I call "the DotA problem", where it just takes one dumb player to tank your whole team and it's inevitable that frustration will come up.
If you can't fit people well enough to avoid jostling while reaching (a real problem with 8+ players), you should probably add a "people intentionally jostle during the night to cover" rule. Alternatively, the rule can be that everyone waits two steps back from the table until it's their turn to act (and again, have people make feet shuffling noises to cover). It kind of sucks that you have to either do that or add an unenforceable "don't use info you're not supposed to have" rule, but sometimes you have to put up with these things in order to make the game work.
Social deduction games often have the sort of lament that reading people (especially within the context of a game) is a valuable skill, and one that people 1) think they are good at 2) and are actually not good at. Dunning-Kruger at its finest. If you were good at reading people, you'd be playing poker and cleaning house!
* I know I evangelize this game a lot, but it solves most problems that I have with a typical social deduction game: There's no "close your fucking eyes and read a fucking script" phase, there's no player elimination, revealing your alleged identity doesn't effectively remove you from play (the "pariah effect"), there is incentive for investigators to bluff as cultists at times, and there's no voting to override your agency if you have the flashlight (the tyranny of the majority). The main disadvantage of the game (only one player has any real agency, and that's the current wielder of the flashlight) is one that's commonly shared by many social deduction games. It's not a perfect game by any means, but it's by far one of my favorite "light" social deduction games. For a heavier game that requires a LOT more rules explanation, I recommend Ultimate Werewolf: Inquisition.
If presenting such a simple case as "I did nothing during my role phase. The fact that that role phase was the only one where nobody heard anything backs that up" is defeated by "you just look suspicious and were the first to talk", my first thought is that collective deduction games just aren't going to work out and we should play something else. Wanting to continue more rounds exploiting someone's obvious blindside like that just feels ugly. It's fine if you're playing medium stakes poker for money, not so much for a social gathering.
If someone in that group had actually told me not everyone is a perfect logic robot like me and that it was "all on you" for not adjusting to their sensibilities, I don't think I would even talk to them again.
I did want to try Deception: Murder in Hong Kong because there's no elimination and you have to do something else beyond flushing out the traitor.
"Oh, I have a role but I chose not to do anything with it" is right up there next to "be quiet and then claim Minion" for wolfishness, and the part where you're asking people to rely on what they heard during the night is against the spirit of the game if not the explicit rules (don't own it to check).
Anything I should watch out for in the first game? Not looking for strategies (want to go in as a newbie too), but anything people normally miss or something?
http://steamcommunity.com/id/pablocampy
Careful. My copy came with a huge hurricane and literal darkness (still no power at my house).
Comics, Games, Booze
Funny... We're getting the rain from Irma right now. A blissful rainy day.
These Kickstarter stretch goals are beginning to get ridiculous.
I remember not being interested when they first floated it out there but I don't remember exactly why.
I wasn't either because it was described as "team based area control" which just sounded like a MOBA. Turns out it isn't really like that at all since there's no combat and it's farkin' booteefool.
Jenks...
It's definitely beautiful. I'm gonna have to dig into the rules, because a game designed for two players or two teams of two sounds pretty cool to me right now, and a lot about this is hitting the right buttons. Wish there were more reviews/previews from reputable outlets.
Generally there are apps to help with the script thing.
And yeah, this is a personal preference. It's also why I really like "Don't Mess With Cthulhu".
The game also suggests you should play multiple rounds because then you start to notice patterns and what people do more. One Ultimate Werewolf game is always going to be somewhat ridiculous, but it gets more interesting the more you play because the more you learn about the people around you. Say, after that first game, people might trust what you say, which would change things, etc.
My perspective on the Netrunner new core thing is basically that, if you were the type of person who played Netrunner casually the old core was perfectly fine.
You don't need anything more to play a perfectly compelling game of Jinteki vs Criminal; which is enough on it's own to be satisfying, I think, to almost any board gamer.
If you felt the itch and had to go deeper, the LCG model really got oppressive, really godamn fast.
Because you couldn't actually just buy the things you thought were cool and play with them. A cycle of interactive cards wasn't found in one pack.
It was found spread one card at a time through at least a half a dozen packs.
Really, there is no way to play that game without either sticking to the core forever or buying everything ever printed.
And printing a new core does nothing to address that issue at all.
I picked up the companion that talks about tourney-level strategies for all the various roles. It's amazing what even the villager can do.
But blurting out your role and that you didn't do anything is horrible overall, because you are giving away not only information, but all power you have in the game.
This is so true because everyone should have been worried that their role had been changed because your role was possible. I've been in a situation where someone said they changed everyone which got everyone talking adn then they revealed they actually hadnt changed anyone, therefore the one who revealed they'd been a wolf was fucked because they had revealed themselves because they thought their role had been changed. There's so much that can happen in werewolf, you can't give anything away too quickly. Which again, is something I think you figure out if you play a few rounds of it rather than just one.
Edit: Of course, you had to believe the guy who said this who was usually full of shit, so chaos ensued, as it should.
And there's enough chaos for the person who thinks he has it all locked down to stab himself in the back in the end.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Well standing up to lean all the way across the table would have given away that I was the trouble maker so either way the result was the same.
I have no idea about tournament level meta strategies. It was a sudden sit down game and I had 5 seconds to react when I opened my eyes and realized the logistics of reaching all the way across the table so I made a split second call. People jumping on me for revealing information I didn't know I shouldn't is part of the reason I avoid these games. "You ruined our collective experience" is an ugly fact that runs through the whole genre (another reason I call them the MOBA of board games). I may sometimes think it when a player does it and vent about it on some anonymous message board they will never read, but I would opt out of playing before I ever voiced it to a player in person and sour a social gathering.
These replies have been getting downright rude. I'm sorry I started this topic and will end it now. Thank you, Hahnsoo for your take on Deception Hong Kong.
Continuous release card games aren't for people who don't like continuous release card games, it's true.
For people who are bored by static games (like me) an evolving metagame is necessary, so the continuous releases are valuable in and of themselves, and the LCG model is a far less exploitative and frustrating way to engage with that then traditional CCG.
The problem is that even with continuous releases and rotation the unchanging core set had too many cards that were not just staples, but meta-defining. So it was guaranteed to continually warp the format; removing the ever-changing nature we are looking for.
So, it's the perfect release.
Even with all that, we ended with 2 left on the Doom Track on a turn that involved all of us earning a clue token to be put toward the final mystery.
PSN: Wstfgl | GamerTag: An Evil Plan | Battle.net: FallenIdle#1970
Hit me up on BoardGameArena! User: Loaded D1
I mentioned in passing that I'd picked up a couple of escape room-y games for the group. One's Unlock, and to prep I've played through the tutorial and a couple of the print-and-plays, but haven't touched the main decks. Another (that I don't have in my hands - I've had it sent directly to my parents') is Thinkfun's Escape The Room: Mystery at the Stargazer's Manor.
There's two things I'm wondering that it'd be useful to know in advance, and I'd be interested to hear in the event that anyone's tried that one specifically:
* I know that Stargazer's Manor takes as the jumping-off point (I guess I'll spoiler this, but I'm aware it's covered in the initial blurb):
* A more general question around quarterbacking: Since Stargazer's Manor is resettable with instructions found on the internet, I'm wondering if I ought to play through it quietly myself first; partially so I could act as a hint system and give them something to call on if they get stuck, and partially because I'm quite good at puzzles and I'm nervous I'd spoil the family's fun by being too quick off the mark! I'm nervy about quarterbacking, and a puzzley environment is one I'd fear I'd be particularly obnoxious in.
Definitely got curious about the game after this post. Then I saw that it was running out of stock on CSI and already $50 on Amazon, so I ordered it. I've played Secret Hitler and Avalon a few times with a few people, enough to know it isn't always fun. So then I picked up Spyfall but haven't tried it yet, and picked up Secrets on a whim because it was in a LGS and it surprised me. I don't know how Secrets will hold up because of the randomness - but I also haven't figured out what I enjoy from these games, the bluffing (which I'm not good at) or the deduction (which I'm also not good at). So I'll have to play Spyfall, Secrets, Don't Mess With Cthulhu, and I still haven't opened Deception: Murder in Hong Kong.
Basically, I'm on the quest to find the board game apex predator. If I like Deception more than Mysterium, I'll find a new home for Mysterium or repurpose those beautiful cards for god knows what.
For the record, it was never my intention to insult you or second guess your choices. I wasn't there, so I couldn't read the room. Having fun is the most important part of board gaming, and I have friends who don't enjoy social deduction games. Therefore, I don't suggest them.
It is called the One Night Companion. It was a higher tier bonus for the One Night Alien kickstarter, but I hot mine at GenCon. I do not know if Bezier is selling it direct on their website.
They really are insane.
We're not back to that alien sex thing on Kickstarter again, are we ?
I've only played it a few times, but it might be my favorite social deduction game for my gaming group. With other games, my group has a tendency to not deliberate very much before making a decision, which cuts out 90% of the opportunities for doing any of the deducing. Murder in Hong Kong was totally different, and just about everyone was standing up out of their seats looking around at the cards, offering opinions, and defending/attacking different theories. It was much more engaging and made the social deduction gameplay emerge a lot better.