Tag Archives: Game of the Week

GOTW: Blood on the Clocktower

This week we played a game called Blood on the Clocktower. It is a social deduction game that is very similar to a previous game we played called Ultimate Werewolf. It is a hidden roles game where individuals are given a token by the storyteller (the one controlling the game flow) at the beginning of the game. There are two sides: the townspeople and the Demon. The townspeople are trying to survive the night while also attempting to find and kill the Demon and their minions during the day. The Demon attempts to stay hidden while slowly killing off all of the townspeople. Each role has a specific ability that can either come into effect once a round, or once throughout the game. The game ends either when the Demon is killed, or when the Demon kills all of the townspeople. During the day, everyone could talk to each other either privately or in groups in an attempt to share and spread information. One part of the game that I particularly liked was the role of the storyteller. Their role is to make a good story, thus meaning they aren’t taking any sides and simply want the game to end as dramatically as possible.

           For the round we played in class, I got the role of Mayor. The mayor’s ability makes it so that if they are attacked at night, there is a chance someone else dies in their place. There is a second ability of the mayor that does not really come into effect until the latter end of the game. It states that if there are three people at the end of the day cycle, and no execution is made, then the townspeople win. In the beginning, I did not move around much since I did not have any information. I mostly just stuck with the group that sat near me. I spent most of the game this way, as the individuals around me one by one claimed their roles. Near the beginning of the game, we almost immediately were able to take out the poisoner due to the Ravenkeeper dying. The washerwoman revealed himself and corroborated the information. With a bit of assistance from the cook, we took out the demon during the second day. Unfortunately for the townspeople, there was a scarlet woman in play, so the game did not end there. Throughout this time individuals would exchange information and talk to one another, seeking to form trust. I shared my role with the washerwoman, in an attempt to create trust. I did not want to share my role too early, knowing it could result in me being targeted early on. Looking back, however, that might have been a better idea. With a little bit more digging, and a couple more deaths, the townspeople successfully took out the Baron that was in play. I ended up being executed when the fortune teller pinged that I could potentially be the demon. This was because I had the status of being a Red Herring. The game ended up coming down to the wire, with the final execution occurring when only three players remained. It was during this vote that I used my ghost vote (the single final vote someone has once they die). The townspeople won once the scarlet lady was executed.

            The hardest part of the game was knowing who to trust and defending myself with a role that was hard to prove. It was hard to know who to trust as you did not know who could be telling the truth. Not all the roles were in play, so people could bluff which role they were. However, I also found it really hard to defend my role in particular because the mayor’s ability neither provides information nor can be controlled. I felt largely like I had to rely on connections I made with individuals who were proven to be the role they claimed to be. Even then, I still ended up being executed. Despite these difficulties, I still really enjoyed the game. I really like games like Blood on the Clocktower. I used to play Town of Salem (a similar online version) all the time with my friends. I would recommend this game to anyone. It is a great game to play when you are at a party or have a lot of people over. I do not necessarily think you have to know everyone to have a good time. If anything, it is a good icebreaker. I feel like I could play this game with a good variety of people.

            I saw leadership in a couple of ways while playing Blood on the Clocktower. The first way was how people would often take the initiative to engage others in conversations. Be it to get information or to solidify their own role, they were taking action to make connections and find answers. A second way I saw leadership was during voting. Many people took strong stances and stepped forward with the evidence they had. They used this information to sway the group one way or the other for a vote. While a little bit obvious, I also believe that the role of the storyteller itself was a leadership role, as the storyteller controls the game cycle while also providing information to players based on their roles. One person I felt showed a lot of leadership skills was Alyssa. I felt like her role in the game resulted in a lot more chaos, and yet she also seemed to be the most outspoken player. I thought it was very neat how she played. All in all, I had a really good time playing, and I certainly wouldn’t mind playing it again if given the chance.

GOTW: Blood on the Clocktower

I really enjoyed playing Blood on the Clocktower, and it might be my favorite game we’ve played so far this semester. I think I enjoyed it because it was a social deduction game, which I’ve come to enjoy, but unlike Werewolf or Two Rooms and a Boom, for the most part, you can freely talk to anyone you want to. I also really enjoyed the part of the game where if you die you can still participate and don’t have to just stop playing like in Werewolf. In our playing of the game, I was the Undertaker which meant that I knew which character was executed the day before. I enjoyed this role, which is maybe why I liked the game so much, because I was on the good team (being on the evil team stresses me out) and because I gained information each night.

I think the hardest part of this game is knowing who to trust. Obviously, this is a part of all social deduction games, but it didn’t appear as much in Two Rooms and a Boom because we always showed everyone our team or in our specific playing of Werewolf both because I didn’t know many people yet and because I was on the werewolf team. But I think because I have made connections with people at this point in the semester I was more inclined to trust them. For example, I completely trusted the four people I was sitting near to be on the good team, so I was surprised when one of them turned out to be the demon. I think this problem of trusting people is also exacerbated by the fact that you can have private conversations with anyone in the game. In order for me to get people to trust me in these conversations I chose to tell them what my role was and what I learned during the night. So, because I wasn’t killed for telling someone on the evil team this information, I trusted them to be on the good team.

This relates to leadership in a similar way to the other social deduction games with the idea that people on a leadership team might have different goals with their organization. It was shown that not knowing those goals could lead to a worse outcome for either person and that the group in the majority may get what they want despite not being entirely right (if the evil team had the majority at the end the good team wouldn’t have stood a chance). I think this game also shows how much you have to trust other members of your team. Without that initial trust, the team may not get anything done and could end up destroying themselves in the process (if I had not trusted those people around me I wouldn’t have told them what I knew and some of the connections we drew that helped us win the game wouldn’t have happened).

GOTW: Ladies and Gentlemen

I enjoyed Ladies and Gentlemen, but I’m not sure how many more times I would play it because I think it is very repetitive. However, I think I also played the easier of the two sides (gentlemen) so maybe switching to the ladies’ side would allow for more plays. I don’t think anything was really difficult on my side of the game, it was just grabbing pieces you wanted and then buying my teammate the clothing with the most stars (I assumed this was the determining factor of winning the game). I guess if I had to pick a part of the game that was difficult it would be finding a number tile each round. I tended to not find one until the very end and either got stuck with #3 or #4.

While it’s a bit hard to find a leadership topic in this game I think the teamwork with your partner, despite not knowing exactly what they are doing, to reach the goal of winning is a good representation of leadership. In leadership settings, you often have a lot of people working with you to achieve one goal, but you might not know exactly what it is they’re doing behind the scenes to achieve that. For example, in student organizations the President might not completely understand the Treasurer’s role and vice versa. However, they both do know that the other is doing their best to achieve the goal of the club (of course assuming everyone has the same goal).

I think the subject matter of the game is a very interesting topic to discuss. While I completely understood that the game was satirical in manner, I can understand why other people may not see it this way. The women’s game seemed to be all about buying clothing and they were significantly limited in what they could do; they were only able to buy certain things if their husbands agreed to it and were not told why they did or didn’t purchase something. I do think, however, that this is slightly remedied in the game by the women owning shops and having control over what is placed in them. Assuming it was more accurate, although I haven’t researched this time period so this may be incorrect, it would probably be the men who were in charge of the financial decisions of the shop and therefore would determine what could and could not be placed in the shop.

GOTW #6 Reflection: Voices in My Head

In week 6 we played the game Voices in My Head. This is a strategy-based hidden roles game. In this game, you either play as the prosecutor or one of the voices in Guy (the defendant)’s head. The prosecutor is trying to convince the jury that Guy has robbed a bank, whereas the voices in Guy’s head have their own objectives. Some voices want to get a guilty verdict too, while others want Guy to get an innocent verdict. The only issue is – no one knows which is which. There are two acts, each with four rounds. Each round, the prosecutor would reveal a new piece of evidence. Each piece of evidence has two regions of the brain that can influence the card. The players must push their tokens into the different regions, attempting to have the highest score in the region so that they can be the ones to decide how to resolve the card. The game ends after the two acts are completed, and the verdict is determined based on the number of guilty and innocent tiles on the jury.

               I played this game with the same group I played Fiasco with, which was super fun. It seemed we were all a lot more comfortable playing this game, and everyone got a chance to have their own fun. I played the role of prosecutor, which was the role I had hoped to get. I really liked being able to see the evidence and to choose which pieces to throw at the other players. I often found myself picking the funniest options rather than the most optimal choices. It was different from how I find myself usually playing, but I honestly think I had more fun that way. We all had some good laughs and enjoyed the silliness of each new piece of evidence. I did end up losing, but I wasn’t even mad about it. This is definitely a game I would love to play again.

The hardest part about this game for me was trying to figure out what the other players’ goals were. Figuring out the mechanics and how the game was played was more important during the first half. Even when I got it down, my focus was mostly on having fun with the game rather than winning. I didn’t figure out people’s objectives until near the end. I feel like I would have played much differently if it wasn’t my first time playing this game. So, I feel like the hardest part of this game was born from my inexperience. Usually, I play games a bit more strategically, but this time I played it fairly loosely. I just wanted to have a good time, and I did – despite the fact that I lost.

Voices in My Head shows leadership through the role of the prosecutor as well as through who controls the different regions of Guy’s brain. To take control of the situation, and lead the game in a particular direction, players had to place their tokens in specific regions of the brain. Whoever had the most tokens in a region would be able to respond to the prompt given by the prosecutor. I believe this was a form of leadership, as it often took being persuasive and often aggressive in certain ways to take charge of the outcome. I believe the prosecutor also played a leadership role, as they had to guide the other players through each scenario. They act as game master in a way. They put forward the scenarios which the other players had to face. In particular, I also found myself being the one who was asked questions regarding rulings.

I believe my friends Katie and Xavier would like this game. I’ve been playing board games with them more often, and this seems like the goofy game they would enjoy. I think this game really should be played with a light heart and shouldn’t be taken too seriously. I think these two would fit that bill perfectly.

While I feel like I have shared my opinion on this game throughout this post, I think I could elaborate further on what I liked and didn’t like. I liked the goofiness of the cards, the art, and the game mechanics. I also liked how all the different roles interacted, and how a lot of the actions taken during my session were often a mystery until the final reveal at the end. I didn’t have much I disliked. Perhaps it was just a bit difficult to understand at the beginning. However, I feel like that could be a gripe for any game with complex rules. I liked the group I played with, and I had a good time. What more could you ask for?

GOTW: Two Rooms and a Boom

I had heard of Two Rooms and a Boom before we played it, although I’m not sure where, so I was looking forward to the game despite never playing it before. I think the first couple of rounds were confusing because I wasn’t sure what exactly to do, but once I got the hang of it I enjoyed the game. I also thought it was more fun once different roles were added to the game. Specifically, I got to be the ambassador during the last round and I found that to be a lot of fun, and fulfilling as the previous round I was “kept hostage” in one of the rooms and not allowed to go to the other.

Obviously, the main leadership concept in this game was the leaders themselves. In the early rounds, I think this leader did have more of a traditional leadership role because they mostly had to make the decision alone; however, when the leaders were able to find more people on their team they scarcely made decisions by themselves; this teamwork is a component of leadership as well, so I think this also represents leadership well.

I think being the Ambassador was also a good representation of being a leader. During the game, I was on the blue team and quickly discovered who the President and the Bomb were. This allowed me to share with the president who to watch out for, which was helpful. However, my main task was trying to get the Doctor and the President in the same room. This was really difficult because I had to find a way to communicate with both parties, while not knowing their exact plans. This led to the president and doctor being switched in the same round and the game ended in a tie. This shows that even if you have plans with certain people, you don’t always know what the other is going to do and it may lead to unexpected results.

I think the hardest part of the game was the time limit. Thinking back on it now I know what should’ve been done to win the last game, but in the moment there isn’t enough time to think your decisions through. For example, in the 1 minute round, I had to run down the hallway with 20 seconds left and hope I made it on time to inform people of what was happening and make a decision based on that. Another difficult aspect was who the leader was. During the game I mentioned previously, there was a situation where I had to stay in the room for the blue team to remain leader, because as soon as I left the room the red team took charge. This led to me being forced to stay in the room and not being able to communicate with the Doctor in the other room.

GOTW: Voices in my Head

I enjoyed Voices in my Head a lot, but this may be because it wasn’t the most complex game for me. During the game, I was able to immediately take control of the planning section, and it wasn’t taken away from me, so I was able to pick up a strategy card every round. Because of this, I knew what every influence token on the board was, and therefore knew which way the jurors were leaning. I also got fairly lucky when controlling different parts of Guy’s brain in that I almost always got to do something with the innocent/guilty tokens or the influence tokens at the end of the round.

However, I think the hardest part of this game was not knowing exactly what everyone wanted to do, even when I knew how the game was playing out. This showed specifically in the very last round of our game where a guilty token was placed on one of the jurors and instead of completely winning the game I tied with another person. I think this ties into leadership really well because even if you know everything that is going on, one person could do something that goes against your goals and completely change what is happening. Likewise, during the game, I had the selfish role and therefore was completely alone in wanting the jury to vote more innocent than guilty. This is what leadership can feel like, everyone else may want to achieve a certain goal or do something completely different than what they are meant to be doing, and you are left alone to try to achieve your goal.

In the end, I really enjoyed this game, possibly because I enjoy social deduction games, but I’m not sure if I would’ve enjoyed it as much if I didn’t know what way each juror was voting the whole time. I think that element of not knowing is a bit scary and the idea that someone else could be doing things to the game that would make you lose, without you knowing, could make you feel helpless. I think this game would be more fun with more people playing, because it would allow for all sides, those wanting a guilty decision and those wanting an innocent decision, to have more people working together to achieve their goal.

GOTW Reflection #3: Fiasco Week 2

Week four, our class continued playing the gm-less roleplay game Fiasco. For game mechanics, please refer to my previous post. This week, my group finished the first act, weaseled our way through the tilt, soared through act 2, and ended with a blast of an aftermath. The tilt is the turning point of the story, where everything starts to go awry. It is probably here that I should note that one of our players was unfortunately unable to make it to this session. Our team collectively decided that their character had been murdered by Edwardo, who proceeded to gain amnesia about his crimes and build a snowman to replace him. During the tilt, secrets were spilt, and Penny the penguin was saved from the iceberg. During act 2, the three remaining characters (Pierro, George, and Edwardo), tried to figure out what happened to the other player’s character. At the same time, it was revealed that George had stolen Pierro’s “Top Pilot” trophy on the day Pierro graduated from flight school. Not only that, but it was revealed that George had a long lost twin! Slowly making our way through Act 2, we try to put together the pieces to what happened to the absent player’s character. Making our way through several more scenes, we each collect more black and white dice that would end up deciding our fate. Going into the aftermath, I had largely accumulated white dice, having only received one black dice throughout the duration of the game. In the aftermath you roll your small pile of dice to determine what outcome your character faces. I ended up scoring pretty high on my white dice with an 11. Sounds pretty good. However, that score really only left Pierro with a neutral ending. This ended up being fairly good compared to the absent player and Edwardo however. The snowman spontaneously burst into flames, while Edwardo tragically died in a helicopter crash after successfully smuggling the penguins off Ross island. Pierro revealed himself to actually be George’s long lost brother, out to get revenge after George stole his idol’s (the real Pierro) trophy. In the end, the two brothers reconcile and live happily ever after.

I believe I struggled less during this week’s game session. I think this is because we already had gotten comfortable with the game in the last session and had a firmer understanding of the mechanics. I’d say the hardest part was wrapping it up in a way everyone found enjoyable. It was hard to predict how the other two players wanted things to pan out, and with one player absent there were some loose ends. For that reason I felt a little bad for Edwardo’s character, who was more firmly connected to the missing player’s character. As I said last week, I would play this game with my friends Roai and Korben. It just seems like a game they would enjoy. Plus, I feel like the flow would be better with people I know and have roleplayed with before.

When it came to leadership, I mostly saw it in how we wrapped up the scenes. We each started taking a firmer role in how we wanted each scene for our character to go. However, there was also an openness to negotiate which was very nice. At the end though, I feel like we all individually got to lead and determine the outcome for our characters, which was nice. I like this game. I would play it again.

GOTW Reflection #3: Fiasco Week 1

Week three, we began playing the gm-less roleplay game Fiasco. For this game, you have no game board. All you need to play the game Fiasco is the main rulebook, some note cards, some dice, and an imagination. You and your friends (or anyone you decide to play with) will start the game with four six-sided black dice and four six-sided white dice. These dice determine the outcomes of a scene that you create. The goal of the game is to create a story that usually involves some sort of crime or dastardly deeds. With little guidance, the players must establish who they are, what they want, and how each of them is associated with each other. The game is split into two main acts, the tilt events, and the aftermath. By the end of a game of Fiasco, individuals gather eight fateful dice that determine whether they are victorious or if they go out in a burst of flames. 

            Our class played the game Fiasco over the course of two weeks. The first week we played it, we were tasked with attempting to finish the first act. I played in a group of four. At first, it was a struggle to get started. Due to there being few rules for how to start, we needed a bit of guidance. After choosing our setting, The Ice, we began to create our characters. My character was Pierro. He started off as a pilot who had crashed on Ross Island after running out of gas. He was bitter enemies with another character, George. On the other hand, he was indebted to another character, Edwardo, for saving him from the crash. We only made it through four scenes, but they were all quite amusing. Pierro was convinced to help Edwardo and his partner in crime to go save a penguin who had floated off on an iceberg. They help him fix his helicopter, and plan to find the penguin once they can get some gas into it. Little did Pierro know, they only wanted to save the penguin in order to smuggle it off the island. By the end of the class session, we were starting to get the feel of how the game worked. 

            The hardest part of the game was definitely getting started. Getting used to the mechanics was not easy. I am far more used to games with a firmer structure, so this was new. Even so, once we had our characters made, we all seemed to flow easily between each other. I believe we did a pretty good job, and we all had a bit of fun with it. I think I definitely needed to watch myself though, as I did find myself trying to guide people so that the story would make sense cohesively. Considering the lack of rules, it made it hard to know exactly what might happen. That was both thrilling and scary in a way. I think it opened up for a lot of laughs for our group. So far, I definitely think I like this game. Though, I think it would be more enjoyable if I played it with people, I know a bit better. For that reason, I would recommend this game to my friends Roai and Korben. We have all played roleplay games together before and have great chemistry when it comes to those types of games. I will certainly have to try it out with them sometimes. Especially Korben, he would love the chaos this game could foster. 

            As I implied before, I like games with more structure. The lack of rules made me feel a bit more anxious. Even so it did not ruin the experience for me, as I really do love the roleplay aspect of it. I am really excited to see how the story progresses next week. 

            When it came to leadership, I could see it lightly in each scenario. One could choose to set up the scene or give that power to the other players. For those taking on the role of creating the scene, they were taking on a leadership role. They would choose who and what was going on in a scene, like a director would. However, I also saw leadership in other ways. My group would usually vote for how a scene would end. Usually, when one person proposes a certain outcome (decided by giving the directing player a black or white die) the other voting players would agree. For myself, I often found myself leading in small ways, by guiding towards a more cohesive timeline for the story. At times, I felt bad for doing so, as I did not want to limit the other players’ creativity. Though I know this simply comes from my desire to create a storyline that can be followed. I do believe that this personal value of mine had an effect on how the game progressed. I also think it had an effect on how I played my character as well. Overall, it was a good time, and I definitely would like to play it again.

GOTW Week 3: Fiasco Reflection

This week we started playing Fiasco. I really enjoyed this game, even though it was a bit confusing at first. The most confusing part for me was setting up the game. I think this was because although the video and book tried to explain it well, the general categories being their own dice and each detail within those categories being another was hard to understand. Once we were set up however, I thought starting the scenes was the hardest part. This was difficult for me mainly because it required me to both think on the spot and instruct other people what to do without knowing if they were comfortable in the scene; we did tend to just place ourselves in the scene and either ask if people wanted to join us or clarify beforehand that this scene was something that needed to happen. I also think ending the scenes is a bit difficult, just because there may have been a certain way you wanted the scene to go but upon receiving the dice decision you would have to pivot and make something completely new up.

Although, I do think the setup of the scenes is how the game relates to leadership. Not only does it require you to make on the spot decisions, but you need to direct others on what to do at the beginning of the scene. I also think the entire game is a good indication of how leadership needs to be collaborative; if only one person was telling everyone else how to play the game it would continue to go in circles and the plot wouldn’t go anywhere. We also had a lot of input during the scenes by people both in and out of the scenes. For example, we were doing a flashback scene and realized the outcome wouldn’t have matched up with what we had previously acted out, so we each shared how we would direct the scene to account for the timeline. Likewise, the decision that needed to be made after the black or white dice was chosen also could relate to leadership. Many times when you’re in leadership positions something might not go exactly as you had planned and you need to change what you’re doing quickly and make up something completely different.

As previously mentioned, I really enjoyed this game, even though I was quite nervous at first. I’ve never played any roleplaying games before, so I was anxious about what would happen. I think the first thing that eased my nerves was the paper we filled out for what we did or didn’t want to happen. It made me feel much better that no one was going to do something I wouldn’t be comfortable within the game and that we were all on the same page. I think what I liked most about the game was that our group focused much more on having fun than anything else. Our game so far has taken place in a penguin colony in Antarctica which I think helped to set a moderately unserious tone in the game, as I know the gameplay could turn very serious quickly, and heard it doing so in other groups around us. For example, I think the most serious thing that happened during our entire game was that one of our favorite penguins started floating away into the sea. I also liked that the connections you have with people were predetermined and you didn’t have to try to make something up. One of my connections is that my character is a smuggler with another character, and being in a penguin colony kind of helped to determine what was going to happen with that. Another connection I have is the soul connection with someone who has a crashed helicopter, so it was pretty simple to figure out that my character was somehow going to rescue theirs from the helicopter. Overall I’ve really enjoyed where the game has gone so far and can’t wait to continue next week!

GOTW Reflection #1: Ultimate Werewolf

During the first week, we played a game called Ultimate Werewolf. It is a social deduction-based game where every player is given a hidden role based on the card dealt to them at the beginning. In Ultimate Werewolf, you either play on the side of the werewolves or the side of the townspeople. Many roles have special abilities that can be used throughout the game to gain the upper hand for a player’s given team. The goal of the townspeople is to find and kill all the werewolves. On the other hand, the goal of the werewolves is to kill townspeople until there is an equal amount of townspeople and werewolves. The game moves in a day-and-night cycle, where werewolves as well as certain other roles kill townsfolk at night. It is also during the nighttime that townsfolk with special abilities get to choose how they would like to use those abilities. During the day, all players debate the execution of another player who may or may not be a werewolf. In a usual game of Ultimate Werewolf, there doesn’t necessarily need to be an execution every day. However, for how we played it in class, due to the time restriction this rule was in place.

            The session we played in class was one of the biggest games of Ultimate Werewolf I have ever played. There were three werewolves and a witch. The townspeople were, of course, the vast majority. The role I received for this game session was Cupid. On the first night, I woke up and chose two individuals (or rather victims), to be lovers. The Lovers know who they are, and their fate is tied together. If one of the lovers dies, so does the other as a result of heartbreak. After the first night, I basically became a normal townsperson, who has no special abilities attached. Rather unfortunately, one of the Lovers was chosen to be executed during the first day, resulting in two townsfolk deaths. Following that day, each night the werewolves would choose someone to kill. Each day, we decided who to execute based on a majority vote. Throughout the session, the townsfolk found one werewolf and the witch. Many people were silenced and many people chose to stay silent. In the end, the werewolves won.

            The hardest part of the game was determining who to execute. There wasn’t solid evidence for many of the executions that actually occurred. Until we got closer to the end, many executions were on a whim or simply because we had to choose someone. There were also some individuals who had never played Ultimate Werewolf before, likely taking more passive roles as a result. However, when it came to execution, it often only took one person taking the initiative to make a decision for an execution to occur. Considering we all didn’t really know much about each other, we similarly had very little to go off of to point to one individual over another. Which leads me to how risk was taken during the game.

            I saw risk taken in several ways. Firstly, in how we executed people in the game. Every time someone was executed, there was a risk that it was a townsperson. With that risk in mind, no one wanted to point fingers – both because it could make them look guilty, and because no one wants to vote out people they don’t know. For the werewolves, leading the charge would put them at risk of being suspicious to the townspeople, so often they left that risk to them as they had more reason to search for the werewolves. They helped just enough to keep the target off their back while staying quiet enough to not be in the spotlight. One thing that really defined this game in particular, was the domino-effect-like pattern seen in the voting. When more than one individual proposed a vote, it was rarely challenged, and often quickly accepted by the majority. The more people who agreed to a vote, the less risk there was in also choosing that decision. One moment I saw a huge risk taken was when the witch tried to vote out the apprentice seer. By doing so, the witch would complete the task they needed to win. However, they also ended up being executed the following day when the apprentice seer was forced to reveal their role after execution. Those who spoke up often could take the lead in the vote and execute someone within reason. I believe that the ones who started votes were leaders in this situation, starting the chain to lead to an execution. However, without a bit of reason to it, and without followers, the execution would not go through. That being said, it was those who were willing to make a splash that were able to form a ripple.

            I have played many games like Ultimate Werewolf before. This was the first time I played with so many people – especially those whom I didn’t know. For that reason, being on the townspeople’s side, I played pretty aggressively when it came to voicing my opinion on votes. I personally didn’t like taking risks, even if we were inevitably forced to execute every night. Though I understood that it was necessary, I knew that doing an execution everyday cycle without evidence would result in us losing far more townspeople than werewolves statistically. Unfortunately, having the role of Cupid only seemed to make this fact a lot worse for this game in particular. One risk I did take was speaking up as much as I did. From my experience, that can be a double-edged sword in games like Ultimate Werewolf. Speaking up is necessary when not a lot of people are talking. However, talking too much can make you a target for werewolves who want to shut your mouth. On the flip side, townsfolk who see you speaking up and pointing the finger a bunch might think that you are a werewolf attempting to act like a townsperson. This actually did happen near the end of the game. I couldn’t think of a good defense for myself and ended up executed. On reflection, I should have tried revealing my role to defend myself. Either way, it was still a fun game. 

When it came to this game, I took the risk of being outspoken but often played it a bit safer when it came to voting for people. I would say this is fairly on point for how I approach leadership. I don’t like being in the spotlight, but often find myself filling in the gaps when I notice it is necessary. This game didn’t have many active speakers, which resulted in me speaking out more than I normally would in a game like this. At the same time, I wasn’t too keen on voting for someone without any reason behind it and often opposed a vote if I didn’t feel it held enough ground. On that note, I do believe that my friend Arden would enjoy this game. They are a very social person, and I get the feeling they would find the hidden roles fascinating. I’ll definitely have to invite them to play a game of Ultimate Werewolf with me sometime.