Sleuth Home - Message Boards - Message Board Game Room

Jul-1-2017 09:19

Hello everyone. I’ll be hosting another game of Resistance, and I encourage all lurkers from the previous game(s) to come out and play! We’ll keep it simple with just gameplay and no story this time. And if you’ve never played before, feel free to jump right in, because we all need more imaginary problems to worry about. :)

The game takes place over a series of 5 "missions." The Resistance is trying to complete 3 missions successfully, while the spies are attempting to sabotage 3 missions. First one to 3 wins.

I will serve as game master. Once we get enough people to play (5-10 total), I will PM everyone their allegiance (either "Resistance" or "Spy"). If you are a "Spy," I will also PM you the names of your co-conspirators.

A "leader" will be chosen at random for the first mission. The leader has 2 important functions:
1) The leader will assign various "role" abilities to players. These are one-shot special powers a player can use to learn more information about someone.
2) The leader will assign players to the "team" for that mission.

Missions will have a varying number of players who are selected; the leader picks a team, then every player will vote on whether or not they approve the team by PMing me. Once all the votes are cast, I will post the voting results. If a majority approves the team, the mission starts. If not, the mission does not start, and the next player in line becomes the new "leader" for that round. This continues until either a mission is approved, or 5 consecutive mission teams are rejected (in which case the spies win automatically.)

Once a mission team is approved, those players will PM me their choice of action during that mission. Resistance players will ALWAYS choose to have the mission succeed by sending "Success," while spies have a choice: they can either elect to have the mission succeed (to throw off suspicion), or they can "Sabotage" the mission.

Jul-9-2017 01:14

@ Tyrano

Aspen has already stated why she chose this particular team:

"Jul-8-2017 16:00

Hmm. I kinda feel like I have been seeing the same names repeated and I want to mix things up a bit. Of course I will chose myself, I know I can trust me, but who else."

-Then:

"Jul-8-2017 16:07

I guess I will go down the line from myself."

- Which is the same basic strategy that other team selectors have chosen so far.

@Bela

Your last post above states:"I'm fine with a team with Aspen, shell, and myself on it, but adding Zara out of the blue (I know it's because you need to propose a team of FOUR) is not something I can go with right now (no offence to Zara, I'd just rather pick Tyrano or Sal at this point)."

This strikes me as just plain weird. There's no particular logic to it. Aspen clearly didn't add me in "out of the blue" - I was next on the list. I'd had a fairly 50:50 outlook regarding your likelihood as a spy so far, Bela, but this (and the rest of the said post) has tipped the balance towards 'spy'.

Jul-9-2017 01:24

I think I am showing my problem here. I really don't understand the 1 thing Aspen stated. As I understand, she just wants to mix things up. That means she just picked the team which she liked without any reason. Am I correct? I am sorry because of my English. :(

Jul-9-2017 01:49

Hey Tyrano : ) When Aspen said she wanted to mix things up she meant that the first few teams proposed had pretty much the same people on them. However, it was easy for her to 'mix' things simply be going straight down the list of names - which seems to have been everyone's basic strategy so far.

Your English is really good. I think things can get confusing for everyone at times - if only because there are so many posts to read and keep up with.

Jul-9-2017 01:53

Just to clarify a little further. Although the basic *starting* strategy was to select team members by going straight down the list of names, that kind of came to a halt. Some team members were held on to for the next proposal with maybe new person added. I think that Aspen wants to introduce fresh names - which she can do so very simply by working straight down the list again.

Hope that makes sense.

Jul-9-2017 02:10

Thanks Zara :D

I am having something to do. So I will give my opinion later. Just wanna say thank you for showing your patience with me :D

Jul-9-2017 03:20

Ok! just finish things today. Get back to work here.

I have to say that I don't understand people's thought here. As I think, the 2nd team should include people from the team which proceeded a successful mission. Changing people is like taking risk and difficult to figure out what would happen. I understand that a team which proceeded a successful mission is not certainly a team with full of resistance. But at least, it is more reliable than a new team.

So I am gonna disapprove this team. And I don't exclude the possibility that AspenK is a spy.

Jul-9-2017 06:32

Did I say within the hour? Oops. Sorry, I got super-busy and had to leave.

Like I said earlier, I don't think it's a good strategy to pick a totally new team. Zara, by "out of the blue", I meant that you weren't on the first team and are hence slightly more of a wild card. The first mission passed, so it could have been all-Res or had a spy on it who was at least reluctant to sabotage the mission. That's a pretty good base, and I agree that we should work from there.
I have a team in mind for when it's my turn; help me out here, Resistance. I'll explain my team and leave it to you to vote the way you think makes sense.

*kisses first-leader powers goodbye*
Mission 2, Team 2: NO.

Jul-9-2017 06:52

You really regret that power, Zara. LOL :))

Jul-9-2017 07:02

Huh? Did you mean me, Ty? If so, yes. Yes, I really do. :(

Jul-9-2017 07:31

Ah sorry! A little confused here because I am doing multi-task.

Bela, we should make a NEVER-GET-A-POWER team, lol :))