This week we finished our game of Fiasco! Once again the hardest part was getting the act started, but once we began the scenes flew by. Our scene pace was much faster in the second act, as we began to resolve the conflicts. This act was far more action packed and full of twists and turns. In the second act there are two twists selected ahead of gameplay. Our twists involved plans going wrong and someone going on an uncontrollable rampage. I think that we struggled a bit more with communication and pacing this week. Part of this was simply due to having less setup needed before getting into the game. As far as communication, I am not sure why we seemed less in sync this week but I’m sure it was just a natural variation in how we interacted.
As the story approached its conclusion, it seemed there were less options for how to manipulate the plot, however there were several surprise events. I loved the improvisation aspect of this game because it encouraged creativity and discouraged obvious endings. For example, there were many surprise double-agents in the second act of the game. It was fun to see how each teammate would respond to each other and the plot developments. In our specific case, it seemed everyone but my character was secretly involved in the illegal fur trade mystery that defined our narrative.
As we discussed at the conclusion of class, it can be difficult to navigate situations in which each person has a different opinion on how to proceed. This was not a huge issue for us, but there were some moments where our miscommunication was leading to a bit of frustration when we probably should have taken a step back to get back on the same page. We did manage to keep the game going, but in hindsight it may have been better to simply fully pause the game to have a conversation instead of trying to push through gameplay while explaining ideas.
Overall, I enjoyed this game experience and how every player had the opportunity to lead scenes. It allowed for every individual player to experience being an actor, director, script writer, producer, etc. This game encourages you to go out of your comfort zone and try new things. Teamwork is necessary and yet everyone gets to have a stake in the plot and major decisions being made. Fiasco highlights the importance of leading as well as being active listeners and followers. This game would be good as an acting exercise or a way to teach communication and the different roles in a team. While cooperation may not have meant agreeing on the same plot, it was important to be able to interact with one another to progress the story. I had a great time playing this game and getting to know my classmates!
Tag Archives: reflection
Sushi Go! Game of the Week
We played Sushi Go!, a card drafting game in which you collect various sushi dishes in order to gain points. Each person starts with a hand of cards from which they strategically select a meal in hopes of accruing points. These cards sometimes have set point values but many have value only when combined with other cards or when certain stipulations are fulfilled. After selecting your card you pass your deck face-down to the person on your left. When cards run out, the points are counted and the round is over. The winner is determined after three rounds.
The most difficult part of this playthrough actually had little to do with the game itself. We had to restart multiple times for various reasons which meant it was hard to get through a full game. Once we got the hang of it, the game was very fun and fast-paced. I would probably recommend having a practice round in which you can see the cards and directions to get used to each of the card’s meanings. My group got into it and ended up having some close scores. There was not necessarily a leader in this game, but we did work together to get used to the game. It was more about creating a space where we could all ask questions and have fun.
This game would be fun for a party or group of friends. I liked that there was an element of strategy and sabotage while still being a lighthearted game. For example, if you knew someone to your left had a wasabi card, you could hoard the nigiri cards so that they could not gain extra points. It was fun to be able to figure out the game as a group and see what strategies each member gravitated towards. For example, some tried to have the most puddings or maki rolls while others tried to stack dumpling cards. There are so many options to choose from when crafting your ideal hand. So if you’re wanting a fun party game, Sushi Go! is a great choice!
Fiasco Week 1 Review
We played the role playing game: Fiasco. My group chose to play the Ice edition, however there are different “playsets” or settings to choose from. This game relies heavily on character building and player decision making. As is the case with many role playing games, the hardest part was actually getting started. When reading through the directions and setting up the game, it seems a bit overwhelming. Many decisions are made before gameplay occurs and these initial choices will impact the plot, characters, and relationships of the entire game. All this to say that game setup was a daunting task and I felt a bit unsure how to initiate the improvisation scenes.
Once we actually dove into the gameplay the experience was much less intimidating and seemed to flow naturally. I enjoyed the player interaction and the way that we bounced ideas off of each other to create a scene. It reminded me of the improv game “yes and” in which players do not reject each other’s ideas but rather add to and twist their interpretations. Some of my classmates expressed their preferences for games in which there is more randomness and less player decision. Personally, I felt like this game had randomness because you never knew how your teammates would react or interpret a scene.
Fiasco requires communication and cooperation between characters, while leaving room for individuals to create unexpected plot twists. One thing that makes this game unique, is the need for different players to take a leadership role depending on the scenario. This ensured that all players were able to take charge of certain parts of the overarching storyline. I believe that our gameplay went pretty well as we were able to trust each other and have fun with our situations. I believe this game would help with confidence in acting classes while making sure that all players got to design, participate, and lead certain scenes.
Once we actually dove into the gameplay the experience was much less intimidating and seemed to flow naturally. I enjoyed the player interaction and the way that we bounced ideas off of each other to create a scene. It reminded me of the improv game “yes and” in which players do not reject each other’s ideas but rather add to and twist their interpretations. Some of my classmates expressed their preferences for games in which there is more randomness and less player decision. Personally, I felt like this game had randomness because you never knew how your teammates would react or interpret a scene.
Fiasco requires communication and cooperation between characters, while leaving room for individuals to create unexpected plot twists. One thing that makes this game unique, is the need for different players to take a leadership role depending on the scenario. This ensured that all players were able to take charge of certain parts of the overarching storyline. I believe that our gameplay went pretty well as we were able to trust each other and have fun with our situations. I believe this game would help with confidence in acting classes while making sure that all players got to design, participate, and lead certain scenes.
The Crew Reflection (Mechanics Week)
This week, we were given an overview of various types of board game mechanics and then given free reign to choose one of the many different games scattered about the room to play. Initially I gravitated towards Vagrant Song for its very unique art, but a glance at the rules revealed that it would take quite a while to learn. Instead, I ended up playing The Crew with 2 other students.
The Crew is a co-operative trick-taking game which has some campaign elements to it. I was very interested to see how it was possible to make a co-op trick taking game as the concept initially did not seem feasible! I mean, how is it possible to have a game mechanic built on beating all of your opponents mesh nicely into a co-op experience? Well, after playing The Crew, I have to say that they did a pretty phenomenal job.
The Crew solves the issue by giving the players various goals that they either must complete or avoid completing, such as winning a trick using a specific card or not winning any cards of a specific suit. From here, it is up to the players to work together to play their cards in such a specific sequence as to complete all of the goals assigned to them. Winning each individual trick has little purpose; it’s all about those GOALS!
One player is assigned the role of Captain and gets to choose the first goal as well as play the first hand of the game. The Captain typically ends up setting the pace for the round by nature of choosing that first goal, as every other player must then work around that choice. The game prevents most forms of communication so a lot of the time you are working off gut feelings and card counting. In my opinion, a smart captain will choose a goal that will be difficult for the other members of the team to complete rather than a goal that is easiest for them to complete.
Overall I would say that the game isn’t for many people. While I enjoyed the mechanics presented, it felt like a novelty after a few rounds. The limited communication aspects really soured the experience for me, as I wanted to coordinate more with my team than I actually could. Without being able to talk, sometimes it felt like some goals were completely unachievable.
T.I.M.E. Stories Week 1 Reflection
This past week we played T.I.M.E Stories in class. It was quite a fun game. The story is very intriguing, but I’m unsure of how it will eventually resolve, as I don’t think we’ve gotten very far before the end of class. The gameplay aspect I liked the most was resetting the time. It reminds me of some of my favorite roguelike video games, Risk of Rain 2 and Hades, in that while you lose some of your progress, the most valuable thing carrying over is your learned knowledge of the game. I can’t wait to run it back next week.
The most difficult aspect of playing the game was certainly learning the basics of how to play. There’s many moving parts and when playing it for the first time, it’s very overwhelming. Now having gotten through a full cycle of the game, I’m quite sure that I understand how to play the game properly. An aspect of the game I’m still learning is combat. In that first cycle, I never had to enter into combat, but even at opportunities where I could, from my understanding, I would’ve lost very badly and been killed/knocked out. One aspect I do not like is the skill checks. Every so often a location would have a challenge to beat, but out of the 4 or so challenges that I’ve encountered, my character has not had any skill points in that area being checked. That led to my group and I having to spend even more time at a location that might not even have been worth it.
It’s very easy to see and understand how this game ties into leadership. To start, the game requires someone to be the “Time Captain”, an in-game leader that helps facilitate the game to run smoothly. Next, someone has to keep track of all of the information that’s discovered to make sure that no little detail is left unremembered. A potential outlet for leadership for this game could be role-playing. It’s not required by any means and would have little effect on the overall flow of the game, but someone could lead a group into that.
The most difficult aspect of playing the game was certainly learning the basics of how to play. There’s many moving parts and when playing it for the first time, it’s very overwhelming. Now having gotten through a full cycle of the game, I’m quite sure that I understand how to play the game properly. An aspect of the game I’m still learning is combat. In that first cycle, I never had to enter into combat, but even at opportunities where I could, from my understanding, I would’ve lost very badly and been killed/knocked out. One aspect I do not like is the skill checks. Every so often a location would have a challenge to beat, but out of the 4 or so challenges that I’ve encountered, my character has not had any skill points in that area being checked. That led to my group and I having to spend even more time at a location that might not even have been worth it.
It’s very easy to see and understand how this game ties into leadership. To start, the game requires someone to be the “Time Captain”, an in-game leader that helps facilitate the game to run smoothly. Next, someone has to keep track of all of the information that’s discovered to make sure that no little detail is left unremembered. A potential outlet for leadership for this game could be role-playing. It’s not required by any means and would have little effect on the overall flow of the game, but someone could lead a group into that.
Compare and Contrast: Ultimate Werewolf and Blood on the Clocktower
Ultimate Werewolf and Blood on the Clocktower (BOTC) are two social deduction games that we have played over the last semester that share quite a bit in common mechanically. However, both have distinct differences that set them apart in many ways. Both games utilize a day and night cycle in which two teams attempt to meet the necessary criteria to bring their team to victory. For Ultimate Werewolf, the townsfolk try to catch and kill the werewolves before they can kill the whole town. Similarly, BOTC has the town attempting to catch a demon and its minions before they can murder the whole town. During the day, the town votes to execute one person in an attempt to kill a member of the evil team. During the night cycle of both games, the werewolf/demon faction chooses one townsperson to kill. Each game utilizes unique hidden roles to give players an edge for their team.
While these two games are both similar, each presents itself differently and provides unique experiences for its players. For example, while both Ultimate Werewolf and BOTC use hidden roles, BOTC makes sure that each role is unique and has an ability of its own. In Ultimate Werewolf, many of the players are simply townspeople with no addition abilites. I see this as both a positive and a negative. For one, I believe the lack of an ability could make the game less exciting for players. However, I also think this requires players to then utilize other skills in the game to make up for that. On the flip side, everyone having an ability makes things very interesting in BOTC. This is especially the case because of how BOTC works. What roles are in play is unknown, unlike in Werewolf. It is harder to tell if someone is lying about their role. Not even to mention that the demon gets to see what roles are not in use. Another difference between Ultimate Werewolf and Blood on the Clocktower is that BOTC relies on private conversations before each day’s execution. This feature I really enjoyed. It allowed you to secretly communicate and construct alliances way better than you could in Ultimate Werewolf. For Werewolf, you are largely limited to communicating with those near you, if not to the entire group at large. Another difference that I was particularly fond of in BOTC was how death was handled in the game. Unlike in Ultimate Werewolf, you don’t just sit around once you die. You can still communicate and participate just as you had when you were alive. The only caveat was that you could no longer use your ability. Additionally, you were allowed to vote one more time during the course of the game. A vote beyond the grave. One thing that I also felt made a distinct difference between these two games was the hidden special mechanics that BOTC had (the red herring and the drunk). Both added some nuance and intrigue to roles, making it harder for the townsfolk to win. Ultimate Werewolf does not have special conditions like this. Finally, the biggest difference I noticed in the games was the role of the Gamemaster. While Ultimate Werewolf largely only had the gamemaster playing a passive role, the gamemaster of BOTC was an active participant in the story of the game. They’re role is to make the game as interesting as possible and to try to get it to come down to the wire in the last few rounds. I really liked this, as it made the game feel more alive.
Overall, I really like both games. The social deduction genre has been a favorite of mine for years, and while my experience with these specific iterations has been limited, I found myself enjoying them both while playing with the class. I like the differing roles, especially those of BOTC. Each time you play will result in a vastly different experience from the last. I feel like this game is good for large groups of people. I did find Werewolf easier to pick up, but that is largely because there are some more complex mechanics in BOTC. From what I have seen, the the game is evenly balanced from round to round, with one side never really being too far above the opposing team just by default. Additionally, I really enjoy games where I can act both cooperatively and competitively. Working as a team in a game is just so satisfying.
I didn’t find many negatives in either game, though I did feel that BOTC had more replayability compared to Ultimate Werewolf. It expanded on and filled in any of the gaps that I felt Werewolf had. Not only did every player get a unique ability with their role, but the game felt a lot more secretive and strategic. Every person had a role to play. I also really liked the role of the GM and dead players. The GM felt more like an active participant who had an effect on the outcome of the game as opposed to just a neutral party who facilitated it. Additionally, players were still important throughout the game, even after dying. This meant that unlike Ultimate Werewolf, there was still an incentive to remain tuned in to the game. While this didn’t have much of an effect on our gameplay, I also thought I should add that BOTC has additional role sheets to spice things up if it began to feel stale. Overall, both games were a lot of fun – but for me BOTC simply did it better.
GOTW: T.I.M.E. Stories
This week, we played a narrative mystery game called T.I.M.E. Stories. In the game you play the part of a team of time travelers sent by an organization to stop a temporal fault from occurring. Our team consisted of four players, each of which took over a receptacle (a host body) in order to explore a specific moment in time and space to stop the fault from forming. The hosts you can play as all have different strengths and weaknesses as well as abilities that can come in handy throughout a run. As a team you explore several locations across a map, fighting off enemies and solving puzzles. However, time is limited, as the organization that sent you there can only hold the link for so long before you are forced back into reality. 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 game is to successfully complete the mission in as few runs as possible, by solving the many puzzles found throughout the map.
Our story started right before we were to be connected to our hosts, and we were briefed on what we needed to do. Our team is sent back to a mental health asylum in 1921. My character was Marie Bertholet. The other characters we had were Felix Bonnunfant, Edith Jolibois, and Mademoiselle Doume. So, we set out to explore the asylum, finding keys, breaking into lockers, and trying (failing) to steal the key off a doctor in the kitchen. Playing as Marie gave me some advantages, especially when it came to the speech skill. I was able to turn any speech roll I made into a minor success. Using her to speak proved very useful in many situations throughout the asylum. However, there was one scenario with a particular orderly that was not so successful. Overall, our team seemed to move quite well, cooperating with each other, and noting down anything we found important as we went. None of us lost any health during the first part of the game, more so having issues with time as we often rolled high on the time lost dice. Our team actually worked quite well together, collectively coming to decisions, and helping each other out as much as possible. We found the secret passageway after murdering Dr. Hyacinth. By the end of the session, we had gathered two pages of a book. Unfortunately, we are near the end of our time loop, and likely will lose everything next week. However, with the knowledge we gained this week, our team should be able to proceed quite easily. I am excited to see what happens.
The hardest part of the game was deciding which options were important with the time we had remaining. While our group was very good at gathering and using information and items, we often ran into issues that cost us precious time points. Our team actually did really well with working together and sharing authority. Our abilities were actually spread pretty evenly, allowing us to prioritize where each of us should go ahead of time so that we worked as efficiently in a new location as we could. I actually believe that that is a way each of us showed leadership. While each of us took on the Time Captain role at least once, we each collaborated and based our decisions on where our strengths lie. The only time other than that that I saw leadership come into effect was deciding where to travel next. Typically, one person would propose moving locations, and then we would all agree on a location.
I loved this game so far. I love games that dig deep into lore, and this one definitely dug deep. I also thought that the mechanics really complimented it well. I loved the exploration aspect as well as the collaborative play. We all had the same goal, which I have not seen much in games I have played recently. I liked the risks we all took, as we all were curious to discover every little secret in the game. This both lead us to learn a lot in our first run, while also being something that cost us a lot of time (I am looking at you moon step man). This being said, this game definitely feels like a game you can only play once. I know there are other decks out there as well, so that makes me a bit tempted to purchase it for myself and play it with my friends. I think my friends Xavier, Katie, Korben, and Roai would love this type of game. They love narrative based games just as much as I do.
GOTW: Ladies and Gentlemen
This week, our class played a game called Ladies and Gentlemen. It is a team-based game where players are divided into pairs – a lady and a gentleman. Both players play on opposite sides, with different gameplay depending on which role you were. Players on the Gentlemen’s side had to gather money in the form of stocks and make money for their wives. This side was dexterity based and involved very little strategy. On the Ladies side, players had to set up shops and strategically visit other shops to be the best dressed by the end of the game. Each team had seven rounds to collect money and purchase clothes for the ball. It is through the money the Gentlemen earned that the Ladies would be able to purchase their outfits. The Ladies and Gentlemen could not communicate on how their situation on their side of the board was going, so they largely could not strategize between collectively. One just had to trust the other.
For this game I was playing on the Ladies’ side. My partner actually ended up being a friend of mine despite teams being randomized. There were three other pairs that we were up against. The first round took the longest, as we all were getting set up and gaining an understanding of how each turn was. Being on the ladies’ side, my primary goal was to get the best clothes I could by trying to deduct what other Ladies had in their shops. Unfortunately for me, my shop was usually stuck with servants being sold. I tried my best to strategize where I went for each round, but I definitely found it took me a while to get comfortable with what was the best way to play. I think this game is definitely one you have to play once to understand on the Ladies’ side. Me and my partner did a pretty good job, but I believe we ended up in third place. Each item of clothing had a star rating, and the more stars you had at the end of the game the better you did. One pair absolutely blew the rest of us out of the water. What I really liked about the game was the lack of seriousness we all had around it. We all definitely appeared to have a good time, and many laughs were shared.
The hardest part of the game was strategizing. I do not play a lot of games that usually require me to strategize, so this took some time for me to pick up. Just getting used to the mechanics took some time as well. However, once everyone understood everything, they needed to do it became a lot easier to play and went a lot smoother. I definitely would like to play it again if given the chance. Besides these difficulties, none of them made me overly frustrated. It just took time to learn.
Personally, I liked Ladies and Gentlemen. I thought it was a neat concept, especially for a satirical play on the old-timey roles of the European upper class. While playing on the ladies side of the board requires more strategy, something I usually try to avoid, I still had a lot of fun. I did not take the game too seriously and was not necessarily playing to win. I just enjoyed the banter and getting the chance to step into a rather silly role. I particularly liked how the group I played with also seemed to enjoy their roles as well. If I had to name something I disliked, it would be the fact that I was unable to strategize with my partner. This made it harder for me to communicate what I needed. Even though I disliked that aspect, I understood it was an important addition to the game to add another level of challenge.
With that being said, I did not see many forms of leadership beyond those who chose to lead the night and day cycle. They made sure the game was running smoothly while also taking care of what was needed for their roles on each end of the board. I think my parents would like this game quite a bit. They like silly games like this, and I feel it is a game they would enjoy when they have friends over for a game night. Considering they know other couples; I think it would be interesting to see whether those relationships would have an effect on how people played the game. Overall, it was a great experience, and I would love to play it again.
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 #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?