Category Archives: Games

Playing Fiasco on Tabletop Simulator

Fiasco
Fiasco was, as promised, a fiasco. As expected, the Tabletop Simulator was difficult to navigate, especially since I’m currently stuck using a trackpad. Otherwise the game went as many do, with a lot of confusion and chaos. It was hard to work off of the energy of the other players like you can in person. We compensated by talking as much as possible about our characters and the story itself. One of our group had a lot of trouble with connecting his voice to zoom, so for the last session we had the zoom chat pulled up and he communicated with us that way. Despite these struggles I believe that we were able to play

I’ve played Fiasco before in person and, despite the challenges that came with playing these past two weeks virtually, still really enjoy the game. There’s a lot of freedom in creating the characters, while still having enough of a structure and general direction that you’re not truly put on the spot for having to suddenly come up with a creative character backstory and motivation. I did struggle with immersing myself in the role of a mink farming grandmother. That had more to do with getting the components working than the game itself.

I feel that it ties into leadership by forcing each player to take an active role in making decisions concerning the story. Fiasco is, in my personal opinion, a fairly cooperative game. This means that there needs to be a balance of taking responsibility for the direction the story takes and then stepping back and listening to the others. There is also a lot of on the fly adapting that all the players need to be open to. A rigid mindset of how the game with play out can make it feel more like a script than a cooperative game. Being willing to hand over the reins can be difficult, but also makes the story better most of the time.

Fiasco – Part 2

This week we continued playing Fiasco from where we left off last week. Overall the game went well. I have to thank my group as I had wisdom teeth surgery the day before this class and so wasn’t feeling great and they supported me in that. They let me take a smaller role in Act 1, the Tilt and Act 2 and I mostly utilized the chat function while I iced my face.

The hardest part about this week was once again getting started. While we had our background from the prior week, actually starting Act 1 was challenging. I think we were all nervous to actually dive into the acting portion of the game. This ties to leadership because we needed someone to be brave enough to lead the game in discussion in order for the game to really get started.

I personally didn’t love the game Fiasco. I had a really hard time being creative and making my story lines interesting. However, I would suggest this game to my sister as she is extremely creative and I can imagine her succeeding in this role.

Fiasco – Part 1

This week we played the first session of Fiasco. This was a game I was very timid to play as I have never played a role playing game and the idea of it really intimidated me. I am not a very creative person, so I was nervous about having to make different scenes. The hardest part about the game was getting started. My group personally struggled with using the Steam platform itself and moving things around in the simulator. Getting started was difficult because we all were pretty quiet and this game revolves around speaking. Once we got into it the game flowed pretty smoothly. 

I think this game ties to leadership because you have to be a leader of discussion. In order for the game to be successful you have to be a strong speaker and really play the role you have chosen for yourself. I like this game because I really don’t believe you need materials to play. It would be easy to just play this game anywhere as long as you had dice and pictures of the playing cards. However, I didn’t enjoy this game because it is a little too open ended for my taste. I am someone who enjoys strict rules and guidelines for games and this game did not have a lot of that. 

Throughout the game I played a drinking buddy to two different people. This doesn’t fully align with my personal values as I do not drink very often. I also made some decisions I typically would not make in real life. This was easy for me to act in this role, even though it didn’t personally align with what I believe in. 

I think my mom would really enjoy this game and I would love to teach her how to play. She has always been the creative one in the family and I think could make a really strong story line. She has a great sense of humor, so I would enjoy hearing what she would be able to come up with.

Roll Player

Last week we played Roll Player online through Tabletopia. The hardest part for me was definitely adjusting to the board game simulator and understanding whose turn it was. The confusion over turns was solved by constantly mentioning whose turn it was and keeping track of who went when after replacing the order cards. Our Zoom connection was fairly good so we were able to talk over how to play and get to know each other a bit while playing.

When playing Roll Player I enjoy the art and the overall unique character creation. I don’t particularly enjoy keeping track of the specific abilities of the trait and skill cards. It does take some time to understand how to keep track of the dice placement goals and I do think that anyone interested in learning to play Dungeons & Dragons or anyone who wants inspiration for a new character would appreciate playing a round or two, alone or with friends. I like that it can be taken as seriously as I want and still be fun.

It ties into leadership through the slow building of unique, and possibly unusual, backstories and strengths of each player’s character that can help the players gain a better understanding of strangers. Even more, it makes you have to be willing to adapt your strategies as some goals become unattainable. Throughout the game we had to have patience with each other, ourselves, and the simulator, something I see becoming relevant for every game.

Week 1 (Roll Player)

To begin this class we started with the game Roll Player. As someone who has never played a character creation game, I quickly realized how it tied to leadership. In order for someone to be a successful leader, one must know what traits a successful leader has and then embody them. Creating a character gives the opportunity to create someone who embodies the traits we aspire to have.

My particular session of playing with my classmates was very enjoyable. We kept our Zoom call on so that we could participate in discussion while we played and anyone could ask any questions throughout. It was nice to get a chance to talk to people outside of my typical classes, as I am an accounting major and don’t know a single person in the class. My only complaints are while Tabletopia is very user friendly software, the speed of the game was definitely slower than it would be as an in-person class. I also had more trouble visualizing my next moves as I am very much a physical learner.

Overall, I really enjoyed playing this game. It was unlike any game I have ever played before. I think the hardest part about it was definitely thinking ahead and planning what strategy to take in order to have the most points in the end. There are many different directions one can take in order to score the most points. I want to introduce this game to my boyfriend, Daniel, as I think he would really enjoy it. He is also an accountant and has a very numbers based mind and typically enjoys playing games that involve strategy. Definitely a great first week of class!

BuzzFeed Quiz: Don’t Starve and Leadership

           I decided to create a BuzzFeed quiz based off of characters from the game Don’t Starve. I decided to choose this because each character from Don’t Starve has a unique personality with quirks, perks and drawbacks. I started with the original 9 characters and gave an overview of each character in the results as well as what that might say about the quiz taker’s own personality. Each character’s backstory and personality are over the top stereotypes so giving basic traits to the quiz taker based on the character is more likely to be resonated with. After that I imagined what each character from don’t starve would be like if they were a leader, how would they treat their followers and what would people go to them for and added that to each result as well.

            I asked my friends to take this quiz and tell me their result. Then I asked them if they believed it accurately depicted them or not and why. Most of my friends believed it to be mostly accurate to them but some were just a little too off.

            The first one to take the test was Nick. He got the result Wendy. Wendy is a sweet girl whose sister haunts her. I had her answers be mostly related to family, love, and care. Nick told me that he does like to be alone in his head or outside somewhere. He believes he is a caring leader and loves to listen to other’s stories and problems. The only inaccurate thing was that he didn’t have that strong of a connection with his mom.

            The second one to take the test was Jeremy. He got the result WX-78. WX-78 is a self-sustaining robot who constantly improves himself and hates humans. I geared his answers towards logical thinking and being alone without any desires or emotions. Jeremy believed this is really close to accurate for him in the sense that he doesn’t like rainy days, generally doesn’t like people, loves his pets, and is a logical thinker. The only inaccurate thing was that he is an emotional person, not a heartless robot.

            The third person to take the test was Connor. He got the result Wes. Wes is a silent French mime who expresses his emotions through physical motions and painting. I made his answers fall towards indecision, quietness, and wanting to have only close friends. Connor believed this result was accurate to him because he can lead a group of friends and express with art. He had no complaints with his result.

            The fourth person to take the test was Daniel. He got the result Maxwell. Maxwell is the antagonist of the game and is entertained by watching the other players struggle to survive. However, he crawled his way to the top after being at an all time low and decided to focus his answers on competition, winning, and himself. Daniel thought this was kind of accurate in the sense that he is competitive, but he loves people, doesn’t see them as subjects, and tends to have good relationships.

            The fifth person to take the test was Riley. He got the result Wolfgang. Wolfgang is a strong character who can take on the toughest foes and has a high self-esteem. I aimed his answers at strength, confidence, and attention. Riley thought this result was accurate for him except he hoped he didn’t come across as boastful.

            The sixth person to take the test was Zach. He got the result Wilson. Wilson is a witty, creative scientist who isn’t that good at being a scientist. I geared his answers toward creativity, ideas, and not being good enough. Zach did not think this result was accurate at all. He is extroverted, hates the winter, is afraid of the unknown, and says that no one goes to him for creative input. The only thing that this result kind of got right was that he means well even if nothing goes to plan. Zach then decided to take the quiz a second time and he got the result Wes, like Connor. He once again did not think the result accurately portrayed him because he is not silent and doesn’t communicate with art.

            The seventh person to take the test was Maggie. She got Maxwell as her result, like Daniel. She was sad that the result said she would rather be feared than loved.

            The eighth person to take the test was Rebecca. She also got Maxwell. She said that it was accurate because she liked control and to be respected but that it was inaccurate because she appreciates input from others and doesn’t make gut decisions.

            The ninth person to take the test was Julia. She got Wendy like Nick. She said she’d like to think it fits but she said that she does need to work on her active listening skills more for it to fit perfectly.

            The tenth person to take the test was Mackenzie. The got Wolfgang like Riley. She said it was accurate because she is confident, opinionated and likes to command a room. She also says she prioritized health, but she doesn’t center her life around it. She only thinks its inaccurate because she doesn’t see herself as a leader and people don’t look to her for instruction.

           The eleventh person to take the test was Ethan. He got Woodie. Woodie is a polite Canadian lumberjack stereotype who also turns into a werebeaver. I centered his answers around hard work, the outdoors, and being polite to people. Ethan believed this was fitting because he is down to Earth, people respect him and his values, and he also definitely turns into a werebeaver.

            So overall, I think my test was accurate with some exceptions. Tests that categorize people can’t all be winners because humans are too complex to begin with to be put into 1 of 9 characters from a video game.

Take the test for yourself here:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jackowcl/what-dont-starve-character-are-you-and-what-does-8yay0v5dcx

Game Review: Azul

            I decided to review the board game Azul by Michael Kiesling. This game is for 2-4 players with around a 30-45 minute play time. There are two different versions you can play, and you simply flip your board for the other one. Side A, you have specified places for the color tiles to go while Side B, you have more freedom with where you place the tiles as long as you follow the same pattern of no repeats in columns and no repeats in rows.  The game involves players collecting all of one color of tile from a plate or from the center and placing them into one of five rows on their boards. If the player has too many of one color to the row, the tile “falls” to the bottom of the board where it will have negative points. Once the tiles for the round are gone, all the players see which rows they filled up completely with the colors and move one of the tiles over to their main board in that same row. They add up their points for that round and then continue to play until someone fills up an entire main row or the tile bag becomes empty. Then the players add end of game goal points to their scores which could be filling an entire column or row, or they collected all 5 of one color. The one with the most points wins.

            If I were to rate this game, it would be 5/5 for visuals and 4/5 for game mechanics. To a new eye, this game seems to be very difficult and they may be turned away by it. That is what almost happened when I showed this to a couple of my friends. But once you play through a few rounds and they get the idea of how to add up their points, it becomes easy to understand. The gameplay requires you to have a plan, but then also 5 back up plans after that if someone takes the color from the plate you were eyeing. You also need to keep track of the center of the plates because if no one is choosing a certain color, it may become overpopulated and the poor soul who has the last turn of a round ends up with so many lost points. These may seem like a negative, but I like how much you need to strategize and think ahead. You don’t have to wait around on your turn already knowing what you will do because you tend to constantly have to change your plan of attack. You have the ability to look around at other people’s boards and determine which plate they may be after and you could wreck their plan. It’s not my play style, but I like that the players can choose that strategy if they wish. There are so many different ways to fill the same board and it gives you options. It’s clever and fun. You don’t really know who is going to win until the very end. Even if someone was ahead the entire game, the end of game points could create an upset. You are always on a constant equal playing field with people fighting over tiles and creating bargains with each other. Besides the cool game mechanics, I just love the art for this game. Each tile has a different pattern and the board it just so pleasing to the eye. Everything is very cohesive; nothing looks out of place. For such a simple concept, it is very ornate with many different looking textures in the art on the board. Even the bag for the tiles is decorated. The only thing not decorated in this game is the small black cube used to keep track of your points. I think that is just amazing and deserves credit.

            Pertaining to our class, Tabletop Games and Leadership. I think this game takes a lot of strategic thinking and planning but being able to be flexible. Your plan could disappear within a single second as soon as someone chooses the exact play you were going to make on your next turn. Then you must adapt and find a new plan. I think this could really help teach leadership. Sometimes things don’t go the way you wanted or planned. As a leader, you must reflect on the past and change things to be better in the future based on what you learned. You can have as many plans as you want, but even then, none of them could work. If this happens, you must go in a completely different direction you never thought of before. This changing and adapting can teach so many lessons and open the world to more possibilities. This may be just a game about building up tiles, but on a deeper level, it’s a game about flexible planning.

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. 

Components

  • 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

Setup

  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. 


Game of the Week: Survive! Escape from Atlantis

Yesterday in Tabletop games and Leadership, we played Survive! Escape from Atlantis. We had the complete expansion set, but opted out of using the Octopus expansion. This game was interesting. It was a game different than anything I played before. This game is in the combat game genre and the only other specifically combat game I played before was King of Tokyo, but it had extremely different game mechanics.

For Survivie! Escape from Atlantis, you were given several meeple with several different values from 1-6. They are placed on the mixed tiles in the middle of the board representing Atlantis and you must board a boat and sail safely to the corners of the board to land. There are sea monsters that can move and destroy your boat and kill your meeple. Other players have the opportunity to control these monsters and target you. The end of the game is decided by a volcano tile and you count the values of the meeple you saved.

The hard part about this game is the helplessness I felt while playing. There were so many opportunities for players to kill your people before it was your turn again and sometimes they weren’t even the cause. I lost both games while playing in class and I lost by a giant margin compared to everyone else. I was told this game doesn’t cause much anger when meeple are killed, but when I lost all my meeple except 1 in the second game, I couldn’t help but feel a bit upset. It was so hard to avoid death for me or even get my meeple off the island. At the end though, I feel like I have to narrow it down to the luck of the tiles I chose to put my meeple on and the tiles I chose to sink.

Leadership in the game I believe is in the cooperation you must do in this game despite it being a combat game where it is player versus player. When a player boards your boat you must make a pact to work together to get out alive. When a player has the opportunity to kill your meeple, you must convince them why they should not. Leadership cannot work without cooperation and teamwork even when you don’t want to work with the others on your team. I’ve learned from a different class about the difference between teams and groups. Groups split up the work and never discuss together and at the end, the project is a thrown together Frankenstein of several different approaches to the problem. Teams constantly meet and there is a leader who brings people together to work on the problem and create a seamless product. Teams are the better option and this game shows that you cannot win without a little bit of teamwork with others you are competing with.

Even though I already know he loves this game, I would have definitely recommended this game to my friend Jeremy. He was the one who showed me the game King of Tokyo and always wants to compete in games. He has expressed how much he hates cooperation in games and wants to do everything himself. I also saw this when playing Bohnanza with him. He barely traded at all and ended up losing. He did not want to help others even when it was hurting him. He would love to kill meeple in Survive and quickly escape by himself.

I would love to try this game again and hope for better luck.

Game of the Week: Mysterium

Last week I got the chance to play the game Mysterium in Tabletop Games and Leadership. Several times since coming to college I heard of this game and how I should play it because of my obsession with Betrayal at the House on the Hill and Clue. As much as Clue holds a dear place in my heart from my childhood, this game blew it out of the water. Mysterium contains intrigue, cooperation, and creative thinking.

Mysterium is a game with a team of detectives and a ghost who are all working together to solve the ghost’s murder. The ghost may not speak and will give the detectives dreams to hint towards the person, place and weapon. The detectives discuss their dreams with the other detectives and they try to uncover what it means. Once everyone finds their own stories, the ghost will give a final hint to the players on what is the true story of their demise.

I have not played Mysterium before this class and it was easy to pick up and figure out. However, there is some difficulty in deciding what each dream means. There are usually several unique aspects to each card and it is hard to distinguish which aspect the ghost was aiming for. The advantage a returning team of players have is memories associated with certain cards. Friends who play this game can develop a very specific meaning to a card which any one of them could understand immediately when given this card. As difficult as it is to be a new player to the game, the randomness of the cards and the fact you are working together compensates for this.

The Tabletop games and Leadership course gives you a new perspective on games every week because you start to decide what about the game could tie back to leadership. There are many things in this game that could teach leadership, but one of these is the ghost’s position. The ghost of the game has no say in what the dream they gave meant. They chose based on their own ideas and associations with the card. However, they are able to listen to and view the thought process of the detectives. The ghost must reach an understanding of where everyone’s ideas are at and what they focus on. Through this observation, they can change the entire game’s direction toward everyone’s success. This relates a lot back to leadership because you cannot lead without your followers. Leaders must understand their followers’ needs in order to successfully lead and keep their followers from wandering. I did not play the role of the ghost, but I would love the opportunity to lead the detectives in their mystery.

I love the game Mysterium, but I know of someone else who would also love to play this. My sister-in-law Claire. Claire and my brother, Shane, are major board game nerds and would always invite their friends over to play during college. Claire is intelligent and precise, but her personality is very easy going. She is cooperative because she would always trade with me during our games of Catan and listen to my ideas on how to overthrow my brother from his board game throne. Shane is very competitive and will do whatever it takes to win. I know from growing up with him I would try to avoid being on a team against him. I’m sure Claire would love a game where it is fun and cooperative to avoid my brother’s boasting or sulking at the game’s end.

Overall, this was a fantastic game for week 4 of this course. I can’t wait for week 5!