|Maggot Brain - 2016-05-31 |
So it's just "Mafia" with a more complicated win state?
Sort of. One difference is there's no moderator, and the laws give plausible deniability for what side people are on. As I said below, I think the most intriguing part is that the liberal side could use the fascist laws to win the game, but by using them it brings them closer to losing. Seems like a decent group game, so I backed it.
Yep, this one works where all players close their eyes - fascists open their eyes, and Hitler keeps eyes closed but gives a thumbs-up; so fascists know who everyone is, hitler doesn't know who his allies are and the liberals start totally in the dark. The laws are random and only the chancellor/president see what was really given so they can affect what laws are voted for to give plausible deniability. It's a really well-designed variant of mafia.
|badideasinaction - 2016-05-31 |
I backed this one - it looked like an interesting twist on mafia/werewolf style games. I think the most intriguing part is that the liberal faction is battling not only the fascist members, but also the temptation to use the fascist laws to win the game. Seems like a solid enough concept at least and a good game when you've got more than 6 people and most board games can't handle the crowd.
If it's anything like reality, they'd never be able to sort through all of the people they call Hitler.
Liberal laws do nothing other than advance the Liberal side to victory. Fascist laws let you do things like eliminate players, see what side they're on, pick who's the president next etc. So a liberal chancellor can use a fascist law to out a suspected fascist (or if they target Hitler, win the game) meaning there's always a temptation to use it, and also always a plausible reason to be voting for said laws. I have no idea how well it plays in practice, but in theory it's a pretty thoughtful commentary on what happens when bad laws are used with good intentions.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|