Author Archives: hubbarj5

Community Standards Board: The Game

Requirements: Number of Players (5+ Players); Playing Time (1-2 Hours); Age (17+)

Miami University’s Office of Community Standards works to encourage students growth and development of integrity and personal responsibility. As such, the Office of Community Standards has created a hearing process to serve as the medium. One portion of the hearing process is the Community Standards Board, a board of individuals of the Miami community. You are a member of this Board and your role is to serve as an adjudicator in regard to violations of the Student Code of Conduct.

Objective: As a serving member of the Board, your objective is to work with the other sitting members, discuss the evidence surrounding a potential violation of the Code of Conduct as well as the alleged violator’s response, and come to a decision on whether or not the alleged violator is responsible, or not responsible, for the violation. If found responsible, the Board must then come to a decision on the appropriate sanctions that should be placed on the violator. 


  • Three (3) Board Members
    • One (1) Student Member, and two (2) Faculty Members
    • These are the Board Members who will be voting whether the Alleged Violator is responsible or not responsible for the violation of the Code of Conduct
  • One (1) Community Standards Representative
    • This is a representative of the Office of the Community Standards. Their role is to assist the Board Members with any questions they have about school policies, as well as, provide information to the Board Members about past violations committed by the Alleged Violator. Additionally, if the Alleged Violator is found “Responsible,” then this individual will provide the Office of Community Standards recommendations for sanctioning. 
      • The purpose of sanctions is to assist students in reflection and undergoing responsibility of their behavior. Sanctions can include probation, failed class, monetary payment, suspension, etc. Finally, the Community Standards Representative ensures that all rules of the game are being observed and followed.
  • At least one (1+) Alleged Violator of the Code of Conduct
    • This is the individual who came to the Board under the accusation of violating Miami University’s Student Code of Conduct. Their role is to explain the situation at hand. In layman’s terms, the Violator is roughly similar to the defendant in a criminal trial. 
  • (Optional) Complainant
    • The Complainant is the individual who has brought the alleged violation to the Community Standards Board and will speak against the Alleged Violator. In layman’s terms, the Complainant is roughly similar to the plaintiff in a criminal trial. 
  • (Optional) Witnesses
    • Both the Community Standards Board and the Alleged Violator have the option to bring with them witnesses who have directly witnessed alleged violation. 
  • Miami University’s Student Code of Conduct
    • The Code of Student Conduct outlines the rights and responsibilities of students, behaviors prohibited on and off campus, possible sanctions, and the procedural rights of students and student organizations.
  • One (1) Voice Recorder
  • Three (3) Legal Notepads 
  • Three (3) Pens


  1. Board Members arrive and set up the room for the Hearing.
    • The Three Board Members were given case materials which included police/residence life/academic reports regarding the potential violation the day prior to the Hearing.
      • The information given can only be related to the alleged violation, and nothing more. 
    • The Board Members then choose one member to act as the “Leading Member”
      • The Leading Member will act as the voice of the Board and will give the Opening/Closing instructions and will be in charge of recording the Hearing as dictated by the Student Code of Conduct. 
        • The Student Member of the Board cannot be the Leading Member.
    • Once the Board Members are ready to begin, the Community Standards Representative will bring in the Alleged Violator and the Complaintant. 
    • The Leading Member will then read the instructions of how the Hearing Process will play out. Additionally, the Leading Member will ask the Alleged Violator and Complainant if the makeup of the Board is acceptable. 
      • Unacceptable conditions include: 
        • A Board Member has a clear and negative bias towards the Alleged Violator/Complainant.
        • A Board Member has a clear and positive bias towards the Alleged Violator/Complainant.
        • A Board Member holds an outside position of authority over the Alleged Violator/Complainant. (i.e. Resident Assistant, Employer, Professor etc.)
        • The Board Member feels that they cannot adjudicate neutrally.
      • The Alleged Violator/Complainant can only say the Board is unacceptable if and only if it meets the above unacceptable conditions.
    • Once the Board Members have been decided, and all questions have been adequately answered, the Hearing Process begins.

Hearing Process (How to Play)

The Hearing Process consists of a series of rounds. These include Opening Statements for the Alleged Violator/Complainant, Questioning of the Alleged Violator/Complainant’s witnesses, Questioning of the Alleged Violator/Complainant, the Closing Statements of the Alleged Violator/Complainant, and Finally the Board’s Finding of “Responsible/Not Responsible” and Sanctioning. 

Hearing Process

  • The Hearing Process consists of a series of rounds. 
    • (1) The Opening Statement of the Alleged Violator.
    • (2) If the Alleged Violator has brought witnesses, then the Board will hear from the first Witness. If not, then the Board will begin the questioning phase of the Alleged Violator. 
      • (2a) If the Alleged Violator has brought a witness, the witness will then have the chance to speak their perspective regarding the alleged violation. 
      • (2b) The Alleged Violator has the option to question the witness. 
      • (2c) If there is a Complainant, the complainant has the chance to question the witness. If there is no Complainant, or else after the Complainant has asked their questions, then the Board has the option to question the witness. 
      • (2d) This process repeats until all of the Alleged Violator’s witnesses have been questioned.
    • (3) If there is a Complainant, the complainant has the chance to question the Alleged Violator. If there is no Complainant, or else after the Complainant has asked their questions, then the Board has the option to question the Alleged Violator. 
    • (4) The Opening Statement of the Complainant (If there is a Complainant). 
    • (5) If the Complainant has brought witnesses, then the Board will hear from the first Witness. If not, then the Board will begin the questioning phase of the Complainant. 
      • (5a) If the Complainant has brought a witness, the witness will then have the chance to speak their perspective regarding the alleged violation. 
      • (5b) The Complainant has the option to question the witness. 
      • (5c) Once finished the Alleged Violator has had the chance to question the witness. After the Alleged Violator has asked their questions, then the Board has the option to question the witness. 
      • (5d) This process repeats until all of the Complainant’s witnesses have been questioned. 
    • (6) The Alleged Violator then has the chance to question the Complainant. If there is no Complainant.
      • If there is no Complainant, then the Board transitions to the Closing Statement of the Alleged Violator.
    • (7) The Closing Statement of the Alleged Violator. 
    • (8) The Closing Statement of the Complainant. (If there is one)
    • (9) The Alleged Violator and the Complainant leave the game. 
    • (10) The Board privately discusses the evidence of the case and comes to a unanimous decision. 
    • (11) If the Board finds “Not Responsible,” then the Hearing Process is Finished
    • (12) If the Board finds “Responsible,” then the Board enters the Sanctions phase. (13) The Sanction Phase begins with the Community Standards Representative providing information on past violations committed by the Violator, and offers the Community Standards recommendations on sanctions. 
    • (14) Utilizing the information given, and the severity of the violation, the Board will come to a unanimous decision on the sanction that should be given. 
    • (15) Once the sanction has been voted on the Hearing Process is Finished

Description of Player Actions

  • Community Standards Board
    • The Board controls the flow of the Hearing Process and decides when to transition to the next series of events.
    • The Board has the ability to ask questions to all those involved in the Hearing Process
    • The Board is charged with the duty to come to a unanimous decision on whether or not the Alleged Violator is responsible for the alleged violation.
      • If held responsible, then the Board must come to a unanimous decision on the sanctions that will be placed on the student.
  • Leading Board Member
    • The Leading Board Member is in charge of moderating the Hearing.
    • The Leading Board Member has all the powers of a regular Board Member, but cannot vote.
  • Alleged Violator
    • The Alleged Violator may bring Witnesses on his behalf and question them
    • If there are witnesses against the Alleged Violator, then the Alleged Violator may question that witness.
    • The Alleged Violator has the ability to make an Opening/Closing Statement
  • Complainant
    • The Complainant may bring Witnesses on his behalf and question them
    • If there are witnesses against the Complainant, then the Complainant may question that witness.
    • The Complainant has the ability to make an Opening/Closing Statement
  • Witnesses
    • Witnesses must answer the questions presented to them
    • Witnesses cannot ask questions
  • Office of Community Standards Representative
    • Ensures rules are being followed.
    • Answers any procedural questions raised
    • Provides information the the Board Members
    • Does not Vote on the Hearing

End of the Hearing/Game

The Hearing is over when the Board has made their final decisions regarding the responsibility and Sanctions of the Alleged Violator. 

Winning the Game

As a Board Member, you “win” the game so long as you, and the other Board Members come to an appropriate decision. As the Alleged Violator/Complainant, you “win” the game if the decision the Board comes too is in favor of your position.

Things to Keep in Mind/Hidden Rules

  1. While it is not clearly stated, this is an official hearing with significant impacts on student wellness. Thus, it should be treated in a professional decorum
    1. For example, rudeness, inappropriate, and child-like behavior will result in you being ejected from the game.
      1. This can include not following the rules of the game, deliberately delaying the Hearing, behaving in a violent or menacing manner, falsifying information etc.
      2. All players are subject to this rule.
    2. Additionally, as this is a professional space, the Board Members must dress in business-casual/professional attire. 
      1. It should be noted that, as time has progressed the dress code has become more lenient. 
    3. As a Student Board Member one must attend outside events that target professional development. 

D20 Activity: Lego Counting


           This activity is designed as an educational tool to assist young children from the ages of 3-7 years old. The objectives are to target sight-reading, math, and spelling. There are three levels to the game, each challenging the child further. The child will be challenged to read a number and its corresponding symbol and then place that many Legos on the play mat. For example, if the child sees the number “4,” and the word “four,” the child should place four Legos on the mat. Once the child is comfortably answering correctly, then he is ready for the next level.



  • Take a piece of fabric and draw a grid as shown below using a marker.
  • In the first row, write down the number of your choice (i.e. “4”).
  • In the second row, write down the corresponding word of that number in the first row (i.e “four”).
  • Leave a pile of Legos on the side of the fabric


  • Begin by speaking aloud the number in the first row and second rows to your child.
  • Next place Legos in the appropriate column of the third row in the amount of the number that was chosen in the first and second row (i.e. four Legos).
  • After practicing with the child, allow the child to try for himself/herself.
    • Have the child read aloud the symbol and the word of the chosen number, and then ask them to place that many Legos in the appropriate box.
  • Once the child is comfortable with this exercise, challenge them by drawing a new grid without the symbol of the chosen number (i.e. “4”) in the first row and have then do the exercise again.
    • This time, have the child re-write the missing symbol in the corresponding row.
  • Once the child is comfortable with this exercise, repeat the exercise without the word of the corresponding number.   
  • Finally, when the child is comfortable, challenge them by giving them a blank grid and let them write the symbol, the word and place Legos in the corresponding box on the grid.

Learning Outcome: 

             This activity focuses on acting as a supplemental tool to assist in strengthening a child’s ability to sight read, count, write, and number recognition. Thus, this activity is meant to be implemented for children aged 3-7.  This activity can also be evolved to match the level of the child as they further progress. The overall goal for this activity is to be an engaging method of learning basic skills while challenging and thus increasing a child’s level of confidence and work ethic.  

Additional Materials:

  • At Least 4 Pieces of Fabric
  • A Marker
  • A bag of Legos


Example of the grid and play mat. The numbers chosen are up to the individual.

Playing Card Tower Activity


            This activity would split the class into equal groups with the objective of building three card towers However, only half of the group can talk. Without any time to strategize, they must be able to work together while racing against other groups to reach the ceiling first. Once finished the class would have a debrief where they talk about how they believe the activity related to leadership and what aspects they specifically contributed too.  


  • As students come into the room have them sit on two separate tables.
    • On both tables there will 3 packs of playing cards.
    • When ready, tell the students that their goal is to use the materials on the table to build three playing card towers that are each 4 layers tall.
      • However, before they begin, pick half of the students on each side.
        • These students are not allowed to speak during the activity.
      • Each side will have 10 minutes to reach their goal.
    • Once the time limit has expired, bring the class back together to have a discussion on leadership and have them reflect on the aspects of leadership that was exhibited during this activity.
      • This should take 10-15 min.

Learning Outcomes:

            This activity focuses on three areas of leadership that are closely tied in Heiftez’ Leading with Open Hearts paper. The first is common purpose, in the sense that members of each group have to come together, despite not knowing each other, in order to build the three card towers. Furthermore, this activity focuses on collaboration by having only half the group to be able to talk. Similar to the adaptive challenges Heiftez talks about, students will be challenged by a limitation with which they will have to find a way to be able to work together and handle any issues to complete the task. Finally, this activity will focus on the individual’s congruence. By suddenly having to work with random people, and being placed with communication restrictions, individuals will find their instincts and beliefs tested and it is up to them on how they respond when dealing with others. 

Additional Materials:  

  • 6 boxes of Playing Cards

BuzzFeed Assessment: What is your Cooperative Gaming Role?

What is leadership and how is it displayed? It is said that leadership can take on many forms and while I agree with that statement, it begs the question: How does one quantify it? If asked whether or not one has what it takes to be a great leader, how would one respond? And what evidence would one use to exemplify it? As society’s next generation of leaders, we are called upon to answer these questions. My experiences as a Resident Assistant, and leader of a student organization, have led me to my own answer to these questions. While it is true that there are many ways to display leadership, leadership is not solely quantified by how it has impacted you, but by how it has impacted the community. Leadership is not about a title, but rather the impact and influence one has in the community. Thus, one of the best examples of leadership within a community can be found in team based role-playing games. Games such as Dungeons and Dragons, League of Legends, and Smite, all require their players to form a team with unique roles in pursuit of a common objective. Just as leadership is defined by one’s impact on the community, so too is a player’s leadership in their impact on the team. In an effort to assist thirteen individuals with discovering their own form of leadership in games, I have created a BuzzFeed Quiz which pairs the players with their ideal role in team-based games.

While there are various roles a player can take on a team, the quiz focuses on the four core roles. The Tank, the strong-hearted defender of the team. The Support, the tactical backbone of the team. The Aggressor, the strong-willed sword of the team. And the Ranged Fighter, the sharp-eyed spear of the team. Each of these roles are significantly important. The Aggressor and Tank are the team’s sword and shield. Their duty as the vanguard is to lead the team down the path that advances their goal. The Support and Ranged Fighter, on the other hand, act as the team’s eyes and ears. Observant and strategic, their duty as the rearguard is to support and lead the team towards the correct path.

Of the thirteen individuals that were surveyed, almost half of them were given the Support role, and all participants agreed with their designation. As leaders, this could suggest that these six individuals utilize a leadership style that focuses on supporting others. Moreover, it suggests that these individuals may be empathetic and possess the ability to accurately understand what others need. Interestingly, five of these six individuals have career aspirations that involve a service for others such as, psychologist, doctor and attorney. The second most popular role was the Ranged Fighter. A role whose leadership style suggests a more tactful and indirect approach to achieving an objective. One individual who was given the Aggressor role said, “I do not know why I got aggressor…probably because I believe Dishonored isn’t a stealth game.” Being given the Aggressor role, suggest that these individuals utilize a leadership style that focuses on pushing towards greater heights. For example, those individuals who were given this designation have career aspirations such as a paper engineer and an entrepreneur. A surprising result of this quiz, however, was that not a single person received the Tank designation.

How do our leadership skills set us apart from our peers? If asked whether or not one has what it takes to be a great leader, how would one respond? And what evidence would one use to exemplify it? Leadership goes beyond a title or an authority figure. Leadership is determined by the impact an individual creates. Accordingly, a community is filled with various styles of leaders. Likewise, each of the four roles have a specific strength that they provide, and if a single one was missing, it would lead to the failure of the team. Fittingly, the BuzzFeed quiz is relevant beyond gaming, as it can assist in determining one’s leadership style in society.

Representation in Games

We are fortunate to live in an incredibly diverse world with opportunities for people of various faiths, creeds, and orientations to interact and learn from each other. As technology has progressed, so too has our ability to flourish and interact with society’s treasure trove. Nevertheless, considering the wide-spread appreciation of games, it is shocking to see the lack of representation, or even the advancement of stereotypes in them. While it is true that in recent years we have witnessed progress in efforts of inclusion, there is still an overwhelming proportion of games whose protagonist fit the basic mold of the white, cis-gendered, heterosexual male. Moreover, when we find characters who do not fit this mold, they fall into the trap of tokenism, and leave a meaningless experience with them. If not, reinforce the stereotype altogether. For example, it is no coincidence that Muslims, particularly Arabs, are routinely depicted as the enemy, members of the LGBTQ+ are routinely depicted sexual deviants, and African Americans are routinely depicted as either athletes or gangsters. Games act as an extension of society’s understanding of one another. Hence, representation has an importance beyond simple cosmetics, as it delves into the psyche and mindset of the player. To obtain a better understanding of the concept of representation, I interviewed 10 people from various and differing social identities.

In choosing a character for a given game, some had said it was as simple as choosing a color, while for others, they envisioned themselves in these protagonists. Rachel, a black cis-gender female, says that she chooses the character that most aligns with her. Whether that be physical appearance or qualities that she aspires to be. Rachel continued stating, “If my character was thin or attractive, then these are qualities that I want to see in myself.” Britney and Elizabeth, two white, gender fluid females, echoed a similar sentiment. Britney expressed a goal of choosing a character that represents who she aspires to be seen as: “I might gravitate towards some more androgynous characters, or if there is a gay/lesbian character I would pick them so I can feel like I am being seen and validated. While Elizabeth desired a character that represents who she aspires to become: “Sometimes a guy character when I’m feeling more masculine so I can muster more confidence in myself for not conforming to the hyper sexualized female characters that I have no resemblance with.” For both Rachel, Britney and Elizabeth, their reasonings were clear. They chose characters based around their identity and qualities that they aspire to emulate. In doing so, that character has become more than just about playing a game, but rather a symbol of the possibilities they see in themselves.

For others, however, choosing a character mattered less about what the character looked like, and more about the character’s background and psyche. Bram and Harry, two white, cis-gendered males both agreed that they didn’t pay much attention to the cosmetics, but they wanted a game that humanizes the protagonists with both positive and negative representations. They wanted them to be relatable and not the tired ploy of hero versus villain. Bram continued by stating that one particular quality that he gravitates towards in a protagonist are those who are shy and friendly but are willing to overcome challenges for the sake of a greater purpose as these are qualities that he sees in himself. While physical appearance is not as important to them, Bram and Harry find their connection by relating to the protagonist’s beliefs and actions.

When asked about the impact of positive representation of social identities in games, those that I interviewed had mixed responses. Dion, a black cis-gender male, believes that positive representation in the media is important because games are something we do as an outlet. For many people such as Dion and Britney, games represent a space where they can tap into their future aspirations and visually see the person who they want to be. For Bryan, a white cis-gender male, representation in games acts as a mirror to our own world: “I think there is a story to tell when the only games most people can think of with a person of color on the front label are sports games or Grand Theft Auto. If we are to believe that games mirror society’s ideals, then what does that say about us?” Bryan brought up an interesting point. Why do we see certain communities pigeonholed into certain roles?

Bill, an Asian cis-gendered male, believes that representation is important, but believes that there should be a focus on mixing both positive and negative representation. Humans are not perfect. They make mistakes and unethical choices, nevertheless, humans also learn and grow. Explaining his response for negative representation, Bill say, “Compliments tend to make me uncomfortable, and if you show negatives there’s more room for self-reflection. If a game is supposed to reflect society’s vision, then it should not hide the negatives and force the player to reflect on them through an engaging story.”   

Games act as an extension of society’s understanding of one another. Their purpose serves beyond enjoyment, but as a tool for social engineering. Specifically, to influence the social standings of those who do not fit the mold and to mend any unjust, bigoted, or racially biased understandings. Accurate and positive representation in games affords the opportunity to act as a symbol of representation for minority youths, which in turn, allows those youths the encouragement to aspire, and achieve, greater successes. Moreover, positive representation in the hands of a historically underrepresented, or marginalized, community can create the ideal that one’s identity should not subtract from one’s capabilities.

Campus Gaming Event: RECON Comedy Show

While we are all taking steps to maintain our health, as a graduating senior, I want to reflect on my time at Miami and the wealth of opportunities to explore that I was afforded while there. One of those opportunities was an event called RECON, which was hosted by the League of Geeks and took place on the weekend from Friday, Feb. 21st to Sunday Feb. 23rd. It was a weekend-long event filled with games, prizes, shows, and cosplay. Despite RECON being a yearly event, this semester was my first time attending. I had always wanted to go to these events, but due to not having anyone who was interested this type of event, I always put the wish aside. However, this year, I am happy that I went. While I was there for only a short time, I participated in various video games, board games, arts and crafts, and watch the numerous cosplayers dressed as characters from my favorite shows. It was truly a sight to see. Everywhere I looked I saw people of all shapes and sizes laughing, taking pictures, and playing games as I waited for the main event. A comedy show involving three “geeky” comedians, Larry XL, Mikey Mason, Violet Gray. As I entered Wilks Theatre, I was unsure of how interested I would be in the show. While I do have interest in the realm of “geek”, I can be considered uncultured in that respect. I am happy to report however, these three comedians were excellent.

It was clear after listening to the MC of the night, Larry XL, that he is clever yet wacky. With the audience’s non-stop laughter, Larry XL told the story of his hilarious adventures at home, while traveling, and even during RECON itself. Nevertheless, he also stood on that stage with a message. A message that hit close to home as an African American male myself. Larry spoke of his youth, and his experience as a “black geek” and how it shaped him to be who he is today. More importantly, however, he spoke of his journey of discovery to find his own happiness and self-confidence in an atmosphere that can drain it. In and outside the black community, it is not uncommon to be expected to be an athlete, to focus on sports, and to avoid things that make you seem “soft.” Societal pressure to be who everyone expects you to be is harsh, and Larry spoke about the pressures he faced as a black youth who liked Dungeons and Dragons and cosplay. For someone such as me, who does not fit the mainstream views of expectation, Larry’s message was encouraging. To be happy in one’s self.

Larry, however, was not the only one who came with a message. Violet Gray brought her unique comedy chops to the table with her own style. Violet’s demeanor was a vast contrast from the other comedians as she came to the stage dressed in all black and a mood that can only be described as deadpan. I must admit I was interested in this quirky approach, and Violet did not disappoint. While her demeanor was stoic, her words were wild and took the audience by storm. From calling out members of the audience to sexual innuendos, Violet Gray left no stone unturned but did so for a reason.  As a member of the LGBTQ+ community, Violet had her own message to share. Still in a stoic deadpan state, Violet shared her journey navigating through her life of self-consciousness and self-awareness.

Our third comedian, Mikey Mason, quickened the temp of the room through song and dance. Utilizing another peculiar style, Mikey Mason had the room laughing in thunderous roars with his upbeat songs about his girlfriend, Battle-Star Galactica, and his own interpretation of the identity of “white trash.” As a self-described “progressive redneck oddity,” Just as Larry and Violet, Mikey had his own message to share. Mikey’s songs were more than just self-deprecating jokes, they told his journey in a manner that empowers himself and others. In just that one song the atmosphere of the audience had changed. He had them captivated, and soon they were all singing his catchy tune.

For my first comedy show, these comedians, along with RECON, have definitely made it an interesting and fun experience. More importantly, however, it brought a much needed informative clarity to our student body. While each of these comedians’ styles of comedy were vastly different. Their message was the same. Self-confidence and happiness come from accepting who you are and accepting others for who they are.

GOTW: Mysterium

The 4th game we played in EDL 290, was called Mysterium. In this game, one player acts as a silent ghost whose role is to lead the other players to the murderer by giving out ambiguous “dream” cards which are images made to aid in discovering the murder, murder weapon, and murder location. In this game there are 6 turns and during each of them the ghost gives each player a “dream” card and the player has to make a guess. The first turn a player has to guess who their person is, and if they guess correctly, the player will guess on the location on the next turn. But if they guess incorrectly, then they must wait to the next turn to guess again.

While the games itself is straightforward, the most difficult part is the interpretation of the dream cards. As they are ambiguous pictures, it is the ghost’s job to pick the right card that will lead to the player to make the right selection. The difficulty comes into play as the player does not know the reasoning as to why the ghost put that card down. The ghost could be trying to get the player to associate the colors with a certain subject, or a background/foreground image, or maybe the ghost did not have a good card so he just threw down a random one.

This is also where the leadership aspect plays in. Neither parties, the ghost nor the player, have a truly accurate understanding of what the other is thinking. As such this game places the burden on both players to think about and account for how the other is thinking and feeling. As a leader, one must do the same. One cannot be an effective leader without taking into account the feelings of others, nor can they reach their goal if they refuse to think outside of their own perspective.

I think that this would be a great game for professors to play. As a professor, one has the role to teach a certain subject to an entire class. The class, however, is not homogenous and consists of various students with various learning styles. To be an effective professor, one must be able to take into account that one strategy will not be universal and thus they must be prepared to take the time to try various strategies to fit the need of the student to reach their common objective.

GOTW: Betrayal at the House on the Hill

The third game we played during EDL 290 was called Betrayal at House on the Hill. Betrayal is a game where players begin by cooperating with one another in order to explore a haunted house. Each turn a player will move to explore new rooms and collect items or omens. When a player tiggers an omen, it has the potential to start the second phase of the game. The phase where one player betrays the rest of the players and works to kill them. Fortunately, I was the traitor in this game and it was interesting to see the dynamics of the other players change as they worked to beat me.

The hardest part of this game was the strategy. While it is true that it is a cooperative game in the beginning, and thus it helps to help the other players, it is also true that no one knows when the traitor will be revealed, or if you are prepared to stop them. As such, one must also keep in mind that one has to make sure that they themselves are properly equipped and make choices that are beneficial to them, but also be aware that true leadership comes is formed when your teammates can trust you. One does not want to burn bridges, or disadvantage a potential teammate either, otherwise, one’s self interest can lead to the downfall of the team.

I think this is a game my friend Angus would enjoy. He is a kind of person who enjoys the intricacies and complexities of games and figuring out the appropriate steps to take. He would really enjoy playing through all the different scenarios and experiencing each haunt.

GOTW: Hanabi

The second game we played in EDL 290 was called Hanabi. A cooperative card game with a simple objective– players must create the perfect fireworks show by placing the cards on the table in the right order. The trick, however, is that each player can only see the cards of the other players hands, and not their own Moreover, the other players can only give him ambiguous hints as to what card to play that will assist in completing the teams objective. Players must act as a team in order to win the game, and if they cannot, then they will lose after 4 mistakes.

The hardest part about this game is that one must be able to listen carefully and trust/cooperate with the other players in the game whom you may have never met until sitting down to play. With the handicap of not being able to see ones own cards, players must learn how to cooperate with each other to reach a shared goal.

Cooperation and teamwork are an essential part to leadership. Leadership is more than just the ability to take control, or to organize others. Rather, leadership encompass the ideals of listening to your teammates and trusting their own judgement to complete your shared objectives. Hanbai is a game where one has to trust the others around them and listen carefully to one’s teammates.

This game would be a perfect game to play as an icebreaker to incoming first-years. It is a simple to learn game that will allow players who may not know each other, get to talk and learn from one another and they can take that with them as they continue on in the residence halls.

GOTW: Ultimate Werewolf Reflection

The first game that we played in our EDL 290 Class was called Ultimate Werewolf. A game similar to “Mafia” which involves making deductions using social clues, given by the other players, in an effort to win the game. As this was my first time playing such a game, it was confusing at first, but also interesting in watching how social dynamic took root quickly in the game. In my opinion, in terms of winning the game, this was the hardest aspect. As this was the first game that we played this semester, we were not familiar with the other players. As such, we were unaware of the personalities, behaviors, or “tells.” In a game of social deductions, this handicap contributed to mob mentality atmosphere very early in the game. As we had no idea who the enemy was, and no idea who each other were, the players’ paranoia was quickly heightened, and the decisions that were being made among the group become less and less rational as the game continued. It was this paranoia, and the uncertainty of who one can trust, that led to individuals choosing one of two actions. Either to take initiative and place distrust on another individual, or rather, contribute minimally and follow the mob. In our game, I took the latter approach and chose to bury my “enemy” status within the crowd. In doing so, it allowed me to survive till the end. Though at the cost, of being unable to support my team against the other players.

Ultimate Werewolf conveys many aspects of leadership. For example, as stated before, there were two roles a player could have taken: either to take initiative or follow the mob. Leadership is not about a title, but about one’s impact on a community. In this regard, either roles can have a significant impact on the community as proven by the second and third follower from the “Leadership from a Dancing Guy” video. Another aspect of leadership that can be found by playing Ultimate Werewolf comes from the notion of individuals speaking in order to persuade the minds of other players. In order to successfully place distrust on another player, or displace the distrust on you, one must be able to speak to other hearts and convey their reasoning so that others follow behind.

This is a game that I would take back to my residence hall and use as a corridor event for my residents.