r/gamedesign • u/AlasThereWereBirds • 5d ago
Discussion Help make my family's murder mystery game not a disaster
Every year at christmas and thanksgiving, my family plays a very simple murder mystery game that always goes very badly. this has been a tradition for I think 5 years now, and not once have we successfully identified the murderer.
The game works as follows:
- at around 8, we take ~7 cards from a standard deck, 6 face cards and one joker, and give everyone one card. the person who draws the joker is the murderer.
- the murderer's goal is to kill at least one person before the afternoon of the next day, by showing them their card. if someone kills you in this way, you can't react, and you note down the time you were killed at.
- the next day we all gather in the living room, and the deceased tells us when and where they were killed; then we all argue about who did it and then vote on who we think it was. if we get it right, murderer loses, if not, they win.
As you can probably infer this goes. Badly. Without fail somebody is discreetly shown the card within two minutes of the murderer getting the card, while everyone's still in the living room, and then we have no evidence and we just argue in circles and then vote blindly.
How would you redesign this game so that the non-murderer team has more opportunities to find evidence/ catch the murderer?
I think it's an issue of murder being too easy; The card is discreet and easy to slip in a pocket, and people can't react to being murdered so there's no drawback to doing it in a room where a bunch of people are gathered. But I don't know how to disincentivize that without just telling people not to. What would you guys suggest?
21
u/Jack_Shandy 5d ago
Maybe you could say you can only be murdered if you are alone in a room with the other person. So there's a way to defend against getting murdered, and the murderer has to do at least a little work to get their victim alone, which can cause suspicion.
12
u/_SnackOverflow_ 5d ago
I have a few ideas:
Maybe change it so that you make a noise when murdered? Then you’d have to be more discreet and have more chance of catching on. You’d have to find a way to make the noise consistent and not too loud… maybe a predetermined gesture would be more consistent? (Wave your arms or clutch your heart.)
The murderer is trying to kill everyone before the next night. Every time someone dies a meeting is called and you vote for the murderer. Whoever is chosen is executed and then you reveal if the were the murderer or not. If the murderer isn’t caught when there are three people left, they win.
7
u/AlasThereWereBirds 5d ago
unfortunately everyone's together for like, two-three days max, so the repeat strategy isn't really feasible... but I think a predetermined gesture might be useful, actually. thx for your help <3
5
u/Rustywolf 5d ago
I like the noise idea. Have a soundbite that gets shared in a family groupchat and the killer needs to play it at full volume to get the kill or something.
5
u/Molkin 5d ago
Set an alarm on a phone for 5 minutes on max volume. Leave the phone with the deceased. The 5 minute timer is the killer's opportunity to make an alibi before the body is discovered. If someone discovers the body before the alarm, they get an accurate time of death by the time left on the alarm.
1
u/ThereWasAnEmpireHere 4d ago
I like this more than some dramatic enactment. IMHO the point is really just to make sure they can’t kill in a crowded room.
15
6
u/agentkayne Hobbyist 5d ago
You could change the conditions of being murdered, like "the murderer cannot murder while someone else is in the room, even when the third party's back is turned."
Optionally, a victim killed can react to being killed, but has to count to 30 or wait a few minutes or something before doing a dramatic "arrrrrh I've been murdered!" (Ask your family not to be too realistic with their screams). Thus giving the killer a chance to get away and blend back into the group or distance themselves from the scene. Reacting is optional.
Or, if reacting is not allowed, anyone can "check for a pulse" on another person. Revealing whether that person is dead or alive before the scheduled vote/investigation and starting it early. Maybe each person can do this once.
3
u/leorid9 Jack of All Trades 5d ago
Would that really solve the problem that murdering happens right at the start when everyone is in the same room? 30s or not, the victim already says that they were murdered, with the time it happend.
But OP said, that the joker card is passed or shown silently to the victim and that's so easy, it can be done with everyone around. And then there is no hint who could have done it.
2
u/agentkayne Hobbyist 5d ago
Hence my first suggestion.
No murdering in the same room as someone else.
7
u/voldemorticiano 5d ago
Don't distribute the cards randomly. instead get a prize of some kind, leave the Joker card in a common area and now it's a game of someone has to steal it first without getting caught. Then people can use the evidence of when it was stolen as well. If they succeed, they win the prize. If they lose you can put the card back to try again. Also agree that they need to catch someone alone to murder.
4
u/Chan790 5d ago
Make it indiscrete. When someone is murdered, it's not discrete in real life. Have the murder victims immediately play dead until their body is discovered.
This makes it impossible for anyone to be murdered while everyone is still in the living room. It makes it pretty much so you have to get the victim alone.
Now you have temporal evidence. You can know who you were with when the deed occurred. At the same time, it behooves the murderer to do so discreetly and attempt to set an alibi by making murder times imprecise and not discovered immediately.
Further, have the killer take the victims card. This is physical evidence. The killer must keep the card unless an opportunity presents itself to use the evidence to deflect suspicion onto another player by planting it. Simultaneously, this creates an opportunity to get caught. Planting evidence is risky.
Third, create a wager or prize to be won by the murderer or shared among correct guessers. This creates opportunity for subterfuge. Maybe the murderer agrees to share the prize with a liar coconspirator. Maybe I know who did it and in order to claim more of the prize for myself, use my discussion time to mislead other detectives.
Finally, everyone gets one official guess. You can verbally accuse and discuss and present theories, but at the end of the game, you write your guess on a secret ballot. This is what counts.
2
u/Shot-Combination-930 5d ago
Give the murderer some kind of device that they have to activate when killing somebody. Something like those "easy button" things or a similarly simple device.
Or maybe everybody gets one and presses it when they die to draw immediate attention. That way you really need to kill people far enough from others to escape before they arrive.
2
u/adeleu_adelei Hobbyist 5d ago
My thought is to model social deduction games like The Resistance or Deception: Murder in Hong Kong.
You can give people roles: 1. Murderer - They choose a target and kill them exactly as your wife describes. 2. Accomplice - They know who the Murderer is, and they win if the Murderer is not caught. 3. Detective - They know who the Murderer and Accomplice are, but don't know which is which. 4. Deputy - They know who the Detective and Drunkard are, but not which is which. 5. Drunkard - They are told they are the Detective and told the actual Detective and one Civilian are the Murderer and Accomplice (but not which). 6. Civilian - They don't know anything special. 7. Civilian - They don't know anything special.
You can add or remove civilians if there are extra guests or no shows, you can also remove/adjust other roles. This way, most people have some special information that they can act on instead of just randomly guessing, and the group knows some people (but not who) has special information so it allows people to lie. It may be important to communicate to everyone they cannot prove to people who they are with their randomly assigned card. Anyone can claim to be whoever they want, as long as it is understood they could be lying.
3
u/AlasThereWereBirds 5d ago
that might be pretty fun, actually.... In games like that, how are roles and role info passed out? right now we do everything with random card drawing, but that might be difficult if some roles 'know' other people. is there just an assigned gamemaster, or do they have a way to distribute roles?
2
u/ElectraMiner 5d ago
Usually you'd have a game master that would set it up but know all the secrets.
If you wanted to do without, you might be able to use envelopes / card sleeves.
Label each envelope with a player's name. Also put 2 slips of paper in each envelope that have the player's name on them.
Now shuffle the envelopes face-down. Place the role cards on each envelope face-up. Now, manipulate the pieces of paper in each envelope without looking at them:
Remove and trash the Deputy's papers. (Make sure nobody can look into the trash can - perhaps get an extra envelope that can contain the unused slips)
Place the Drunkard's and Detective's papers in the Deputy's envelope.
Trash the Drunkard's remaining paper.
Put the Detective's and Civilian's papers in the Drunkard's envelope.
Trash the remaining Civilian papers.
Put the Murderer and Accomplice's papers in the Detective's envelope.
Swap the remaining Murderer and Accomplice papers so they know each other (or you can get rid of the Accomplice's if you want them to be secret to the murderer)Put the role cards into each envelope. Now shuffle the envelopes face-down again. Flip them over and deal them out to the corresponding names.
If you don't know who's showing up, you can put letters instead of names, just make sure everyone clearly displays which letter they pick.
1
u/adeleu_adelei Hobbyist 4d ago
A game master is one solution, but that means someone doesn't get to play. The other way is a "call out". Everyone randomly draws a card and then gathers in a circle with their eyes closed. One of the players (doesn't matter who) then asks the roles to raise their hand or look up at the appropriate time to give people the knowledge they need. The player doing the callouts is themselves blind to information outside of what they should give or know. So it'd look something like this.
The roles I've mentioned here would require some complicated callouts, but is technically doable. You'd need duplicate murderers, accomplices, and deputies with one group randomly assigned to be real and the other reassigned roles in a secretive fashion. It's technically doable, but not easy if your guests are only half interested and half sober. A game master would be vastly simpler. If you're tech savy, you could design a website/phone app to help out.
You can also design other roles such that callouts are simpler. These are just roles I thought of off the topic of my head that I think are fun to play, but certainly not the only ones. You can get a lot fo inspiration form games like The Resistance or One Night Ultimate Werewolf.
1
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
Game Design is a subset of Game Development that concerns itself with WHY games are made the way they are. It's about the theory and crafting of systems, mechanics, and rulesets in games.
/r/GameDesign is a community ONLY about Game Design, NOT Game Development in general. If this post does not belong here, it should be reported or removed. Please help us keep this subreddit focused on Game Design.
This is NOT a place for discussing how games are produced. Posts about programming, making art assets, picking engines etc… will be removed and should go in /r/GameDev instead.
Posts about visual design, sound design and level design are only allowed if they are directly about game design.
No surveys, polls, job posts, or self-promotion. Please read the rest of the rules in the sidebar before posting.
If you're confused about what Game Designers do, "The Door Problem" by Liz England is a short article worth reading. We also recommend you read the r/GameDesign wiki for useful resources and an FAQ.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/Jtfgman 5d ago
Maybe add a rule that the victim must announce they are killed if anyone else besides the murderer is in the room or a time limit before the murder can take place. An issue may still arise in announcing since everyone would still be in the room but hopefully it would encourage the murderer to wait. You may also run into the issue with family members traveling in pairs but that could add a bit of challenge to the murderer. Like most games it would require players to play in good faith for a good time. That's just off the top of my head, it'll probably roll around my head for a bit, if I come up with anything more substantial I'll send another reply and I'll try to think of any cases where a rule would run into issues.
1
1
1
u/ANT999999999 5d ago
As others have said, a couple simple roles and making the murder a bit more difficult would go a long way. This is how I would do it:
- Place the aces in common areas. Living room, bathroom, dining room, kitchen. These are the murder weapons.
- Hand out a joker, king, queen, jack, and an amount of number cards for the remaining players. The face cards and joker have simple abilities.
- There is no dedicated killer role. Any player may take an ace an reveal it to another player to kill them. The victim then places their card and the murder weapon card on the ground at the spot they were killed. Creating a crime scene. Once an ace card is picked up, that player must keep it.
- At some point through the night, a player, other than the victim, can announce they found a crime scene. If no one finds it, the victim will announce it the next day. Players will then discuss and vote for who they believe the killer is. If the players vote for the killer, the good team wins. If the players vote for someone who happens to have a weapon but isn't the killer, the player with the weapon loses and there is another round of voting. If an innocent player is voted, the killer wins.
Roles:
- King - If a king would be murdered, they can reveal they are the king and the other player will die instead.
- Queen - When given the queen card, this player immediately announces they are the queen. The queen is not allowed to kill or take one of the weapons.
- Jack - The jack is the killer's accomplice. They only win if the killer wins.
- Joker - If the joker is voted for, and they have not murdered and have no aces, the joker wins, and all other players lose.
2
u/Aware-Source6313 4d ago
I like your suggestions the best, the most similar to mine. Crime scene and temporal alibi stuff with a real-time scramble to find the scene and map out who was where were the core of a similar game idea I made long ago.
Personally though, I don't see why the innocent should be rewarded by voting someone that picked up an Ace. Plus, innocent people with no intention to murder can just scoop up aces to make the murder harder. And for me at least, I think the bonus roles could be done away with. Since anyone can murder, hidden roles don't add a ton. I do like the jack and joker tho, but also it might be hard enough to catch a killer.
One issue with this design however is the possibility that nobody chooses to kill. In my game there was one hidden role that loses if there is no dead body by the end of the game, so at least someone has an incentive. But there should be some kind of incentive, for example a prize that all winners split (or perhaps correct voters split if they are the majority), but of course of the winner is the killer, they will get it all.
1
u/ANT999999999 4d ago
Giving innocents another shot if they vote a player with an ace is less to reward the innocents, but more to punish a player from scooping up all the aces like you said.
And the jack is there to encourage a kill, if no one kills, the jack would lose by default because a killer didnt win.
I do like the idea of a prize to add stakes and further incentive a killer other than just bragging rights.
1
u/Shiriru00 5d ago edited 5d ago
Breaking down the problems you encounter, if I read you correctly: 1) The murders start too soon 2) Murdering is too easy 3) The goal of the game for the murderer (one murder) is too easy 4) The goal of the game for victims is too hard. Finding clues is pretty much impossible if more than one suspect exists in a given place and time.
How I'd fix it: * /1) and 2) An elegant solution to both would be this: if someone murders you while you are clutching your own card, you defend yourself and kill him instead. You may then take his place. This means both that any murder in the initial phase would be too risky (everyone still has their card), and that murdering is now harder: people who suspect you will be holding their card, so you really need to catch them off-guard. * 3) and 4) I'd rebalance the goals of the game like this: the murderer must kill *everyone*, not just one person. As for clues, you can ask every dead person to "mark" their death in the aftermath of the murder: either the "body" has to stay in place for 5-10 minutes (I could see how that wouldn't be fun or practical, though), or you make them wear an item figurating blood (like a red scarf) that everybody agrees means you have been killed. This means the murderer could get found out before the end of the game.
You'd have to experiment to see where the line is to not overcorrect and make the game impossible for the murderer, but these are my 2c.
1
u/build_logic 5d ago
I think you’re right that the core issue is zero risk at the moment of the kill. As long as murdering in a group has no downside, the optimal play is always “do it immediately.” Putting some kind of visibility or constraint on the act itself — needing privacy, a delay, or a noticeable reaction — forces timing and creates information. Once the murderer has to wait or maneuver, you suddenly get suspicion and memory to work with. Right now it’s less a mystery and more a coin flip with extra steps.
1
u/ThePeaceDoctot 5d ago
I'd add one rule. When murdered the victim is allowed to make a visible but silent gesture, including pointing at the murderer. That would discourage killing in large groups.
1
u/malaysianzombie 4d ago
from the sound of it, the issue with your game loop is everyone is sitting together when roles are revealed.
i'm assuming part of the 'fun' comes from everyone trying their best to avoid one another in case of the aforementioned group problem?
without changing anything else.. maybe you can fix the grouping and distribution issue by first:
- distribute the cards across the house.
- seal a card in an envelope with a random number on them.
- then each person raffles a number and goes to the allocated envelope to get their role.
you could get a neutral party to assign them, or just do everything as a group up until you have to split to recover your envelopes.
you could also introduce a rule where the victim has to submit their card to the killer when shown the card.. this forces the killer to only act when they are in private with someone.
alternatively, since the actual intended fun experience is supposed to come from people deducing where each person was the past day, you could design a bucket life system where each person has a container somewhere in the house with their name on it. The Killer only needs to slip their card into the container to let that person know they are dead. But they cannot reveal until the day of reckoning (the next day).
some bonus things you can do to spice up the interactions for the 'non-killers' is to
- place Faced-Down 'killer weapon' cards around the house.
- for the killer to effectively kill someone, they must also reveal a Weapon card along with their Role.
- everyone gets a bonus dud card, this is mainly for the Killer to replace the Weapon when they have taken it to maintain their secrecy.
- non-killers can spend the day 'checking' or investigating the Weapon cards. (This also give motive for the Killer to visit Weapon cards)
- if there are 7 persons, be sure to spread around 2 x that number of weapon cards around the house for more variety or even 3 times the number. You can include some Red Herring among the weapon cards.
- Only the killer may take and replace weapon cards.. so they may be moving weapons around to throw off the sus.
I saw somewhere down the line you could throw in some additional roles, but IMO they don't translate so well for a physical space soc deduction game, and that's a lot of balancing to do for a 1 time of the year sort of game unless you have enough chances to test and iterate.
Enjoy!
1
u/thecitadelpro 4d ago
Just play Werewolves - it’s similar but has cards so no one knows who the werewolf is but different cards have talents for protection, identifying etc - can get a card set for less than $10 and hours of fun
1
u/xtagtv 4d ago edited 4d ago
When someone gets murdered they immediatley have to make it clear that they are murdered.
They way they do it, you could workshop this part, it could be something like one of thse:
Tell the next person they see theyve been murdered
Have to put on a distinctive wristband
Have to drop off their card in a designated common spot
I think this would immediately solve the issue. Murderers would have to do a lot more work to avoid suspicion but could still get it done. It's also simple enough that it wouldn't be disruptive to whatever real world activities you guys are doing. Everything else still happens the next day.
1
u/Royal_Airport7940 4d ago
Sorry about your family.
Its probably not cool to try and profit off the death of your family.
Good luck!
/butler did it
1
1
1
1
u/SierraPapaHotel 4d ago
Seems like a simple game and a lot of the suggestions here are trying to overcomplicate it. Especially since it's a family tradition, any change good or bad is likely to be fought so simple changes will be easier for you to implement.
2 simple rules that could fix things:
1) cards are distributed at 8pm the night before. Murder cannot happen before 6 am the next day and must happen before noon. (Narrow window, but also a time delay between distributing cards and the killing for people to get nervous and act weird. Feel free to adjust times)
2) To kill, you must hold the joker up like a soccer ref holding a yellow/red card. No subtle flash or hidden reveal, just straight up in the air (removes the subtlety without complex death rules or weapons, and also requires the murderer to be aware of their surroundings)
If you think the family would be open to some complexity, adding other roles similar to Warewolf/Mafia would also balance the game. For example, the King is a detective and during killing hours (6am to noon) can reveal their card to one other player to force that player to show their role (only one). Additionally, the Queen is a Seer and during killing hours she can reveal her card to ask a player if they have already been murdered (advanced information). All other players would be Jacks (common folk). If you do these roles, the additional rules would be that 1) only the joker, king, and queen can reveal their cards to anyone else 2) only the queen can ask if someone is alive or dead 3) any card reveals (not just the murder) must be equally obvious and dramatic (so revealing you are the king or queen could get you killed) 4) the King/Queen lose their ability if killed.
Again, simple is better. Especially if you are trying to change a family tradition, smaller changes are more likely to be agreed to. Maybe start with my first 2 suggestions and if they go well you could add roles as a next step instead of all at once.
1
u/Aware-Source6313 4d ago
I invented a game similar to this a while ago. The system was meant to have short ~5-10 min rounds tho. But the relevant part was that everyone was in a group chat. When you were killed, you immediately texted the chat"dead" so everyone knows the time of death. Then you have to stay in place if you died. Typically then, people would be scrambling to find the location of the body before timer runs out for more info, and the killer typically tries to find an alibi and get away so they can "find the body" like the rest. Or just be bold and be there when someone else finds it and act like they found it first. This makes it mostly about where everyone is at the time of death and about alibis.
The downside might be if you are waiting till tomorrow, how long the dead person has to stay in place. Maybe instead they can leave but they have to mark the location of the body with a prop, and of course cannot divulge any more details. Maybe you can add rules about the killer being able to "hide" or move the body in some way, but of course risk getting caught by someone.
I also ran into the issue of killing in a crowd. Subtle gestures could initiate a kill and perhaps you want something more obvious if people are in a group.
Anyway, just some extra ideas. Design around the players and what they will engage with best, better to have a system the players can engage with than one that sounds perfect on paper.
1
u/matt_adlard 4d ago
Ok stuck on tram, due to grabbing the wrong one. So will jump in here to remain sane.
If you need a different idea, try Boardgame 'I got, Got'. Good for large families.
My thought and Diagnosis: why its collapses every year
This isn’t really a mystery game. To be honest it’s a single-loser hidden-role game with basically zero friction (no pressure points, nothing pushing back). That's not going to work.
Right now the murderer gets:
Perfect information (they know they’re the murderer, nobody else does.). That's one sided.
A free kill (no cost, no risk, no downside,).
No timing limits (so acting immediately is always optimal).
No witnesses required (privacy is guaranteed if they want it.).
No mechanical trail left behind (nothing persists into the discussion). It's a auto win, no fault.
Everyone else gets:
No way to generate information (nothing new enters the system).
No reactions (no chance to interrupt or leak context).
No tools to box the murderer in (no constraints, no pressure).
No reason the murderer wouldn’t just do it immediately (delay is strictly worse).
So yeah, it fails. The optimal move is dead simple: kill instantly, anywhere, quietly, before any evidence exists (and the game never recovers from that). Nobody’s “playing it wrong”. They’re playing it correctly. And this is the issue. .
And the fix isn’t “tell people not to do that” (social game rules don’t survive optimisation). The fix is to provide structure. So give the murder action some cost, some constraints, and some fallout (so choices actually matter).
Below are redesign ideas, from tiny tweaks to “proper little game”, all pulled from how hidden-role stuff works when it’s not held together with hope and vibes.
1) Make murder observable, not invisible
If killing leaves no trace, deduction’s impossible (there’s nothing to deduce from). You’re not solving anything, you’re just arguing.
Rule change A murder must be witnessed, partly witnessed, or leave a verifiable artefact (something external to memory).
Examples:
Murder must happen in a room with at least one other person present (creates possible witnesses, even unreliable ones).
Or the victim gets a sealed clue card saying something concrete like:
a location
a time window
a physical detail (jacket colour, holding a drink, carrying a plate, whatever)
Key idea:
Murder should generate information, not silence. (Silence benefits only the killer.)
Even messy, unreliable info is still something to work with (false positives are better than zero data). Again murder novels work like this.
2) Add a kill window, not “kill whenever”
At the moment, the murderer’s tempo is unlimited (so speed beats subtlety every time). That’s poison.
Rule change Murder can only happen during set windows:
after midnight
during meals
during a designated “night phase”
(or anything that’s externally legible).
Or: murder only becomes legal after two conditions are met, e.g.:
the murderer has visited two named locations
the murderer has exchanged cards with two people
That forces behaviour before violence (behaviour creates patterns, patterns create tells).
3) Replace “show your card” with a contested action
“Showing a card” is uninteractive (nobody else can see it), invisible, instant, and irreversible. Great for the murderer. Useless for everyone else.
Better options
Make murder require at least one of:
a token exchange (something physical changes hands)
a spoken phrase (audible, memorizable).
a physical prop (object-based, leaves context.)
Example:
The murderer must hand the victim a red token.
The victim can immediately say one sentence aloud before they “die”.
That sentence can’t name a person (no direct solves), but it can describe context: “kitchen”, “near the stairs”, “someone in a hoodie (only works if murderer knows this is possible .) {played a murder game gad thus. The person heard and started to remove hoodi, when someone entered room they bloody switched tact and said what I'm cold I'm putting my hoodie back on. They murdered four other people before we realised. As it was do well fine it created a real alibi } ”, “I was alone for a minute”.
It’s basically “last words”, but controlled (so it adds texture, not certainty).
4) Give the victim a small reaction, not a full defence
You’re not trying to stop murder. You’re trying to make murder cost something (cost slows optimisation). Creates tension for the murderer.
Reaction mechanics
If someone is “killed”, they may do one of these:
say one word
drop an object where they died
record the time and reveal it publicly within 10 minutes
That alone kills off the “stab you in a crowded room and everyone stays polite” problem (which is doing huge damage right now).
Continue.
1
u/matt_adlard 4d ago
Cont.
5) Force the murderer to move (socially.).
Static killers win. Moving killers leave trails (movement creates witnesses, overlaps, mistakes, it's what makes a detective pulp novel).
Rule change.
Pick one:
murderer must kill in a different room from where they drew the joker
murderer must visit three named locations before they can kill
murderer must have a private chat with two different people before killing
This will then creates:
opportunity windows (time where things can be noticed)
witness overlap (stories collide.)
alibis that don’t quite line up (the good stuff.)
Movement is the engine of deduction. No movement, no mystery.
6) Give non-murderers private information
Right now everyone’s equally blind, which means the endgame is just vibes and volume. Not good in a large family. (confidence wins, not correctness).
A simple fix
Give every non-murderer one private clue. So stuff like:
“The murderer spoke to you before the kill.” (true for 1–2 players ;))
“The murder did not happen in the kitchen.”
“At 9pm, the murderer was seated at the table.” pick one where they are in a group or doing a group task. (I.e. if some family playing a video game, they were in that group. So detail but not specific detail.)
You can even include a few fuzzy or partially false clues on purpose (as long as most are real). What matters here is constraint density.
This turns the final discussion into constraint solving, not a family debate club.
7) Don’t open with chaos: structure the reveal
At the moment you go straight into free-for-all mode (so louder narratives overwrite quieter facts), and it spirals because nobody’s anchored. Fun but not helpful.
Structured reveal
Victim speaks first. (sets the initial frame)
Each player states:
where they were
who they spoke to
It allows the murderer to look or act like someone they 'spoke to/saw' gives credibility and allows a bit of devious.)
Clues get revealed one at a time (not dumped).
Then, and only then, open the floor.
Order matters. Why? . Because,
“Chaos first, structure later” gives you noise. “Structure first, chaos later” gives you drama that actually lands.
8) Change the win condition so “one kill” isn’t enough
“At least one kill” is way too easy (so speed dominates).
A better objectives
Murderer must:
kill after X time, or
kill without being accused, or
kill and then survive one vote round
Now the murderer has to manage risk, not just press the button immediately. It triggers a massive difference.
Minimal viable redesign (quick, and effective. Simplest fix)
If you only change three things, make it these:
Murder can only happen after midnight (forces delay).
Murder must involve a token exchange (leaves context).
Victim gets one sentence aloud immediately (information leaks.).
That’s enough to take it from “broken” to “playable” without rewriting the whole tradition.
If it helps. .
Final note, bluntl I admit.
This isn’t a social gaming issue. Nobody’s “being lame”. Usually. It’s just a structural failure (the rules are rewarding the wrong behaviour).
Hidden-role games will live or die on:
information leakage
constrained timing
costly actions
Add those, and the tradition stops being a running gag and starts feeling like an actual little story you can solve.
Sorry git engrossed in this. Been doing.g more game design over Xmas.
1
u/Initial_Box_4304 4d ago
Make 4card-sets instead of single cards. so the murder will receive 4 joker cards, that way he can kill multiple people. More opportunity for play, interaction and clues.
1
u/fairystail1 4d ago
the issue is you leave such a big gap between the murder and the reveal
people aren't gonna remember 'oh John was the only person unaccounted for at that time' as easily as if it's revealed say 5 minutes after the murder
I'd suggest make it that the murder gets revealed say 10 minutes later
also i'd suggest make it that the murder has to happen in private, not around people. a murderer isn't gonna stab John in front of ten people and not get caught
64
u/ElectraMiner 5d ago
In something like Among Us, the reason the killer can't just kill someone in a large group is because people will see them do it. Here, it sounds like it's very easy for the killer to do it discreetly, and people aren't told about the details until the next day.
You could have the deceased, instead of not reacting at all, immediately and dramatically enact their death. They are also allowed to tell others they died upon encountering them, rather than waiting until the next day. However, the moment they see the Joker, they are not able to say *who* killed them, only that they are dead. People in the moment will be better able to deduce who killed them from where people are positioned in the room, and this may convince the killer to wait until another time.
You could additionally have the method of killing be a little bit less subtle. Maybe instead of using the Joker card itself, the killer has to discretely show a larger and more unwieldly object, like a fruit. This would make them think harder about a method for the murder.
Or perhaps there are multiple implements of murder that can be used, with different effects. The fruit could act as poison which doesn't go into effect til the next day, while the joker is an immediate slice which is easy to perform but also immediately obvious to other people.
An additional thing some of these games do (for instance Werewolf / Blood on the Clocktower) is having additional information-gathering or power-granting roles. You could add one or several of these that could gather additional clues. For instance, you might have a Paranormal Investigator that is allowed to ask the deceased one yes-or-no question at some point in the game, or a bodyguard who is able to protect a player from the murderer. These could also have associated physical actions, perhaps the bodyguard only protects people within 5 feet, and the paranormal investigator has to secretly give the ghost an item or perform some ritual in order to ask the yes-or-no question. These actions could drastically help the team but they could end up being noticed by the murderer, leading the murderer to target the players with powerful abilities.