Prototype questions – Tianze

Our group is about to make a marine biology themed social deduction game, with reference titles including Goose Goose Duck, Feign, etc. After our group meeting yesterday, I quickly made a “mental prototype” and used AI to draw up a rule guide. I’m looking forward to having the chance to actually play it. Here are the questions I hope to explore with this prototype:a. Compared to Goose Goose Duck, what are the differences in the tabletop experience?

1. The social deduction games we referenced are all video games, which feature a giant map where each player has a different field of vision. This information asymmetry provides room for deduction. However, in a board game, it seems difficult to control the visual information players receive. Therefore, we need to figure out where a tabletop version of Goose Goose Duck should make changes.
2. I created a “one-dimensional map” and “delayed traps”. Now, players don’t have to be “in the same room” to “kill”; instead, the killer leaves a trap on the map, and players only die if they stop on that trap. Furthermore, there might be multiple cards on the map to obfuscate which specific player laid the trap.
3. I think this mechanism can provide players with a deductive experience, making them consider movement trajectories and the impact of ocean current cards, while not making the killer too obvious.

b. Will the rules of this game cause confusion?

1. In the CS377G class, the most frequent feedback I received was “confused.” This might be because the rules were too complex or the presentation format wasn’t good.
2. This time, I simplified the rules as much as possible (for example, making the map 1D instead of 2D if possible) and used AI to generate an image (because looking at a picture is easier to understand than reading text).
3. I haven’t had the chance to explain the rules to my teammates yet, but I feel that explaining them while pointing to the picture will definitely be more effective than reading a document.

c. Can this game generate the expected social dynamics?

1. I hope this is a game centered around challenge and fellowship. It has some strategic depth: players need to carefully calculate their own moves and predict other players’ actions. It also contains a lot of comedic moments: an ocean current card placed by one player might disrupt everyone else’s plans but produce hilarious results (like the killer’s trap killing themselves). Players will negotiate: for instance, the shrimp might need to cooperate with the jellyfish in the early game, but when the jellyfish is close to winning, they might even need to team up with the crab. 
2. This requires playtesting with real people. 
3. I feel that in the current version, players can only place 2 cards per turn, which is a bit too few (not enough room for strategic maneuvering). But if increased to 4 cards, I’m worried it would be too complicated. This needs to be verified through a playtest.

d. Is this game balanced? 

1. I am very worried that the pace of the game is too fast. The current rule is that a player dies if hit by a trap once. Combined with factors like ocean currents, the game might end in the first or second round. But perhaps players will be “smart enough” or “cautious enough” when placing traps, allowing the game to actually proceed smoothly. 
2. I did a pen-and-paper simulation myself, and the game ended very quickly before any strategy could unfold. I will continue to use playtests to see what kind of effects different strategy users will have. 
3. I feel the current game isn’t balanced enough; maybe it would be better if each person died only after hitting traps 2 times.