Coup is a game all about bluffing. Created by Rikki Tahta and originally published by La Mame Games, it only gained popularity upon a later kickstarter campaign by Indie Boards and Cards for a new edition of Coup. The major bluffing element lends the game to be best suited for a somewhat mature audience(14+), as without a certain level of social maturity, the deception inherent to the game is difficult for and/or uninteresting to the players. The game has both physical and digital versions, the former of which I played a number of years back with acquaintances at a summer camp, and the latter of which I played more recently(over the weekend) with some friends over discord.
One of the great things about Coup is its simplicity, each player has 2 influence cards that act as both their lives, and determine what special abilities they have in the game. The goal is to eliminate all other players by getting rid of both their influence cards. The primary means of doing this is via a coup, which costs 7 coins. The card roles grant you actions such as the ability to do reduced cost coup(an assassination), the ability to gain more money, the ability to steal money, the ability to draw new cards and more. The deception comes with the fact that players can bluff having any card at any time, theoretically allowing them to use any ability they want, assuming their bluff isn’t called. If their bluff is called successfully, the bluffing player loses an Influence, but if the accused wasn’t bluffing, the accuser loses an influence. This creates an inherent risk-reward to both bluffing and calling a bluff. This social element adds a level of complexity that ensures the game doesn’t get too boring, and ensures replayability.
Coup leans heavily on the aesthetic of challenge, but it does so effectively by creating constant dilemmas for the players to consider. Not only those of what actions to take in the game, but also those of whether or not to call another player’s bluff, or perhaps to bluff yourself. The tension created by these kinds of dynamics suits the theming and premise of the game as a sort of sci-fi political drama, reminiscent of something like Dune. As with almost any social game however, there are more moments that inspire fellowship, such as an absurd bluff being universally questioned, or the moments before a climactic reveal where everyone anticipates it together.
Aside from inspiring fellowship however, social games also tend to reveal a lot about the characteristics and tendencies of the players who play them. For example with Coup, I found myself willing to bluff, but when questioned, I would often get overly-defensive and draw more attention to myself, eventually leading to my downfall. For example, once someone attempted to assassinate me, and instead of letting it go through and working with the remains, I claimed to have a card that blocked the assassination, but my bluff was called which led to the assassination going through and me loosing my other influence card, taking me out of the game in one fell swoop. As I played the game more, I observed that it was best not to make plays that drew attention, as even if you played well, the other players could easily eliminate you should they decide to work together. These dynamics work perfectly for a game about political strategy, as you have to be both strategic in terms of the rules of the game, but also how you navigate the social dynamics and power relations(in other words politics) present at the table.
Ethics Question:
I believe that lying in a game does not constitute a wrong action. Lying is wrong because it violates someone’s trust in you that you wouldn’t lie to them, but when playing a bluffing game like Coup, players agree that lying is not only ok but expected. While not explicitly stated, it’s implied that within the confines of the game, within the magic circle, lying is not an immoral act. It’s interesting to consider however, that this allowance for lying only goes so far, for example most would agree you shouldn’t lie about how many points or coins you have in a game, unless that is specifically allowed. This is the case because the magic circle is defined by the rules of the game and a sense of perceived fairness, and thus if you violate the rules of fair play, you step outside the magic circle and back into the realm of regular morality.
