- What rules need to be explicitly stated in a social deduction game? What rules can be left up to the players for maximum fun?
This is an important question because our premise of the game is relatively new (although inspired by other games). Thus, we want to know how much context to give the players, versus letting the player explore the game in their interpretation of the rules. For this, we can make an implementation prototype, to test out an iteration of the game with actual players. I think our current rules are enough, but perhaps some clarification will be needed.
- How do we make the game interesting enough for players to play multiple rounds?
We want our game to be fun, which can be measured in the number of rounds that players want to play. We will most likely test this through an implementation prototype to get feedback about what mechanics interest players the most. I think by providing different themed archetypes each round, players will have fun switching up which role they are.
- What design of game pieces (do we need game pieces) will be most appealing to players?
We want the game to look nice, but also because it is a social deduction game, the focus is less on the design of the game itself and more so on the fellowship that comes as a result. For this, a look and feel prototype feels most appropriate, to see which design players gravitate towards (and how much players pay attention to the graphics in the first place!). I think that having nice cards is never a disadvantage, so we can play around with different stylistic elements.
