|
jesus WEP posted:I think Mysterium is really good fun especially if you have one family/group member who won't shut the gently caress up because you make them be the ghost and enjoy the torture of them not being able to speak for an hour Mysterium is great, I like it but I also think that Obscurio is an improved version of it really. Introduces a traitor mechanism and makes it coop.
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 20:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 17:53 |
|
|
...How have you been playing Mysterium?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
I guess you could just treat Mysterium as a race to solve “your” murder
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 21:07
|
|
|
That is how it's played. Who cares what the rulebook says, the worst dream interpreter instinctively feels the sting of defeat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 21:13
|
|
|
El Fideo posted:...How have you been playing Mysterium? I'd ask you the same question. Everyone has their own puzzle to solve and you bet on people getting it right or wrong. Then there's the weird endgame bit. Obscurio everyone is solving the same puzzle, cooperatively.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 21:30
|
|
|
jesus WEP posted:I think Mysterium is really good fun especially if you have one family/group member who won't shut the gently caress up because you make them be the ghost and enjoy the torture of them not being able to speak for an hour poo poo just saw this is being added to my list!! Looks great
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 21:42
|
|
|
What's everyone's favorite games on Tabletop Simulator? I've played and enjoyed: Arkham Horror LCG Twilight Imperium 4 Gloomhaven Spirit Island Interested to broaden my horizons though and see what other mods folks have had good experiences with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:I'd ask you the same question. Everyone has their own puzzle to solve and you bet on people getting it right or wrong. Then there's the weird endgame bit. Obscurio everyone is solving the same puzzle, cooperatively. The older versions of the game don’t have the betting mechanic, and they’re better for it IMO. You can just chop all that crap out for a better game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 23:07
|
|
|
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong also does that kinda thing very well and while I prefer the theme and art of Mysterium, I think Deception is the better interpretive game even if it's social deduction (most people don't see that as a downer though)
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 23:10
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Deception: Murder in Hong Kong also does that kinda thing very well and while I prefer the theme and art of Mysterium, I think Deception is the better interpretive game even if it's social deduction (most people don't see that as a downer though)
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 23:18
|
|
|
Oh I love social deduction games but there are so many that it’s hard to recommend another after a while. You don’t really need much beyond The Resistance or One Night Ultimate Werewolf depending on how your group leans. And A Fake Artist!
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 23:34
|
|
|
Yeah my group has Fake Artist and Resistance, also Coup if that counts
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 23:36
|
|
|
jesus WEP posted:Yeah my group has Fake Artist and Resistance, also Coup if that counts I actually really like Masquerade for this. It's a bit devisive but I love it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2020 23:51
|
|
|
Social deduction needs to keep the deduction part and not just the social part. That said, these are incredibly good  
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 00:24
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:I'd ask you the same question. Everyone has their own puzzle to solve and you bet on people getting it right or wrong. Then there's the weird endgame bit. Obscurio everyone is solving the same puzzle, cooperatively. You're supposed to play Mysterium cooperatively. You all have "your" puzzle but if all the players don't solve their puzzle you lose the game because you only get the final round if everyone gets their puzzle correct. In the final round it's really hard even if you can see all three cards so you really want as many people as possible seeing all three cards. Hence why the betting is there to help boost your score and the final round is a vote after everyone sees different cards and cannot talk to each other. You really need as many people to score high enough to see all 3 cards. However, you also gain score for every turn before turn 7 in which you completed your puzzle. So basically the best strategy for the group to succeed is always for people to help each other and try to complete the first stage as quickly as possible. I honestly can't say I've ever played Mysterium and not seen the entire group helping each other out aware of the fact everyone needs to progress
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 00:50
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:I actually really like Masquerade for this. It's a bit devisive but I love it. Masquerade is fun, but King Thief Minister is better. Because it's Iranian you'll never get a copy now, but it's a micro-game so I can give you a full breakdown. Just promise to buy it if you ever can. You will need 30 coins ($30), plus the following six cards: King, Thief, Minister, Executioner, Sheriff, Peasant. To start the game, put $5 into the Treasury for each player (the game plays 3-6). Each player then takes $3 from the Treasury. Then, deal all six cards face down into a circle regardless of player count. Seat players so they have a card in front of them; any other cards are unassigned. With three players alternate players and unassigned cards; with four, have a pair of players between unassigned cards on each side of the circle. Once all players have a card in front of them, each player may privately look at one card other than their own, including an unassigned card. Players now take turns in clockwise order to perform one of the three actions. 1) Pay $1 to the Treasury to look at your own card. 2) Make all cards rotate one to the left or right, or be passed directly across the table. 3) Claim your role. The roles are as follows: The King: Receives $3 from the Treasury and asks "Who is the Minister?" If the Minister answers, they receive $1. The Thief: Takes $1 from the players to either side of him. If a player has no coin to take, the Thief takes it from the Treasury instead. The Minister: Takes any two cards at the table (including his own) and may choose to exchange them, either above or below the table. The Executioner: Chooses a player and names their role. He looks at their card; if he is correct, he takes all their coins. The Sheriff: All players other than the Sheriff pay $1 to the Treasury. The Sheriff then names a player to pay another $1. The Peasant: Reveals his role card. If he is not the Peasant, he pays $2 to the Treasury. If he is the Peasant, he then attempts to indicate the position of the King, Thief, Minister and Executioner, flipping the cards as he goes. If he names all four correctly, he takes all coins from the Treasury. Whenever a player claims a role, including when the Minister answers the King, any other player may challenge. (If two people answer the King, they must challenge each other.) The challenger looks at the claimant's card; if the claim is false then the action is cancelled, but if it is a true claim the challenger must pay $1 to the Treasury. Challengers caught lying forfeit all their coins to the Treasury. If a player is required to pay $1 at any time but cannot, then each player - starting from his right and going anticlockwise - takes $1 from the Treasury. (Note: the Thief's ability is taking $1, the victim is not paying it. The Sheriff's ability is also exempt, the Treasury will not give everyone else their taxes back just because you're poor.) The game ends when the Treasury is empty. The player with the most coins wins. Jedit fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Mar 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 00:54
|
|
|
That sounds a bit like Coup.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 01:16
|
|
|
It sounds like Coup without player elimination and with more agency once people have your role card figured out. Definitely sounds interesting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 01:19
|
|
|
jesus WEP posted:there's a direct correlation between how terminally online someone is and how likely they are to hate social deduction I hate social deduction because people typically don’t do well with the scrutiny of their words and actions that makes up the meat of the town gameplay, nor do they have the capacity to make scum plays with counter/fakeclaims, trying to split the town, or when to sacrifice to give cover to a teammate. I think most social deduction games are just a few interested players and the rest just get dragged along so they end up very bad. If everyone’s on board they are good. Just kill the quiet people when you are town and kill the loud ones when you are scum and you’ll probably win 70%
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 02:02
|
|
|
i am terminally online and love social deduction, i do not understand the statement
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 02:15
|
|
|
I think the sentiment was based on the amount of forums games of mafia and such but I may have read it wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 02:23
|
|
|
Snooze Cruise posted:i am terminally online and love social deduction, i do not understand the statement Same
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 02:39
|
|
|
My favourite social deduction game is Kemet wherein you deduct figures from other players societies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 02:41
|
|
|
Jabor posted:It sounds like Coup without player elimination and with more agency once people have your role card figured out. It is, it's Coup meets Mascarade and the escalating level of available information is what drives it. Not knowing your own role at the start is a key point: if the start player chooses to look at the role opposite himself or to the left or right, as second player you might choose to do the same in case he elects to use his first action to put a role he knows. But he may then choose a different movement, because he doesn't want the role or so he can track it. Games where the Minister isn't shaking things up tend to end with everyone knowing where all of the cards are and fighting to start their turn with the Peasant. In those games the King often has time to suck enough cash out of the Treasury to stop the Peasant winning, but if the King's location becomes public knowledge he's at risk of being Executed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 02:47
|
|
|
A couple of clarifying rules questions: - If someone claims the Executioner, do challenges happen before or after they name their victim and role? - When does the "challengers caught lying forfeit all their coins" come into play? Is it for if they say "no that's not the card you claimed, your action is cancelled" when it actually is the right card? (Are they allowed to lie if they think they won't get caught? If not, why an in-game penalty instead of just not playing with cheaters?)
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 03:07
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:I think the sentiment was based on the amount of forums games of mafia and such but I may have read it wrong. I thought it was terminally online = logic robot that hates social game I forgot to clarify that I do like social deduction quite a bit (its basically a negotiation game where player interests are obfuscated), but i’ve found that I’m very disappointed when people don’t actually want to play (think)
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 04:14
|
|
|
Thinking about gettin Barrage... Y/N?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 08:55
|
|
|
The terminally online thing is a callback to an old argument as to whether Secret Hitler is good or not. The criticism of SH being it's just The Resistance but every concrete bit of information has some uncertainty added to it, and therefore the deduction is impossible. The counterpoint is in fact you're a nerd and people like an excuse to lie to friends and see if they can get away with it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 09:32
|
|
|
Also I liked Barrage from the one play I've had of it. Heavy-ish economic game with a euro-style market row of contracts with various bonuses. Happy to play it again but I'm not rushing out to buy it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 09:37
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:Also I liked Barrage from the one play I've had of it. Heavy-ish economic game with a euro-style market row of contracts with various bonuses. Happy to play it again but I'm not rushing out to buy it. Thanks. Was it tough to get into or is the rules overhead not that big?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 09:41
|
|
|
Jabor posted:A couple of clarifying rules questions: 1) Before. You don't execute (heh) your role until nobody challenges. The flow of play is "I am the Executioner" <pause for responses> "X is the Sheriff". 2) It's not RAW, it was what I was told they did. Iranians aren't averse to a little dishonesty, so long as you pay a price for it. But if you just want to cut cheaters dead, do it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 09:51
|
|
|
I was just imagining the inevitable hilarity of "I'm the executioner. <pause>. Steve is the executioner."
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 09:56
|
|
|
Jabor posted:I was just imagining the inevitable hilarity of "I'm the executioner. <pause>. Steve is the executioner." This is a perfectly valid play. False claiming isn't cheating.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 10:31
|
|
|
Honestly the funnest thing to do in a bluffing game is making if very clear you’re lying about something but not what part
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 10:31
|
|
|
I'm actually spending more money on boardgames at the moment, both as an activity to do with my partner at home and via boardgamearena with friends/family. Previously I'd only occasionally play with my partner but now we do it loads!
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 10:40
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:The terminally online thing is a callback to an old argument as to whether Secret Hitler is good or not. The criticism of SH being it's just The Resistance but every concrete bit of information has some uncertainty added to it, and therefore the deduction is impossible. The counterpoint is in fact you're a nerd and people like an excuse to lie to friends and see if they can get away with it. I have the Resistance and I played it with my friends a few times, and then someone suggested we played Secret Hitler and while I loved Resistance I wasn't a huge fan of Secret Hitler. I didn't give it much thought so I've only just figured out why after reading that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 10:48
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:I have the Resistance and I played it with my friends a few times, and then someone suggested we played Secret Hitler and while I loved Resistance I wasn't a huge fan of Secret Hitler. I didn't give it much thought so I've only just figured out why after reading that. Chill la Chill posted:Social deduction needs to keep the deduction part and not just the social part.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 11:53
|
|
|
jesus WEP posted:Honestly the funnest thing to do in a bluffing game is making if very clear you’re lying about something but not what part That’s one of the highlights of civ/advanced civ/mega civ/western empires. Trading is a negotiation mini game where you can bluff (some cards are calamities) and there are enough iterations of this trading that the usual bluffing problem of consequences comes into play. I do not like games where bluffing is a big deal but you don’t get to do enough iterations of it in one play. Reason being it shifts the responsibility of good design into moral suasion and carrying long term memories as to who has tendencies to lie at which points. So it becomes a meta game between plays instead of a tabula rasa at the beginning of each game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 11:59
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:a tabula rasa at the beginning of each game. These don't and can't exist with humans. It certainly makes sense why you'd want it but it's just not a thing. Any game with a bluffing component has to take that into account.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 12:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 17:53 |
|
|
Casnorf posted:These don't and can't exist with humans. It certainly makes sense why you'd want it but it's just not a thing. Any game with a bluffing component has to take that into account. I was going to type out a longer reply here, but then I remembered some players are absolutely biased because of past experiences and can't easily shake it off. For those people, I agree - I would only play anonymous online games with them to remove such biases. Clearclaw said it best: -- Tabula rasa. The only thing that should enter the game is the players and their knowledge. The only things that may leave the game are the players and the results. Every game begins and ends on a perfectly blank slate. Emotions, history, relationships, outside considerations, metagames, social contexts, cultural considerations and all the rest of that claptrap and the people who wish to carry it with them have no place in the games I play. Chill la Chill fucked around with this message at 13:22 on Mar 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2020 13:19
|
|