Forums
Guides
Features
Media
Zelda Wiki
Patreon
Secret Hitler 2 Hub: Another Round Down Town
  • Hmmm, well I’ll answer this as best I can.


    A -I got tired really quickly because I didn’t like the way the game started with the “I’m only going to nominate the people from the first round and nobody new” crew taking over.The game was a lot less fun because of that, strategy or not.

    B. Flavour is not at all important to me. I wanted to play the original but this happened instead so I was doubly confused about it.

    C. It depends on how inactive we’re talking. You called me inactive when I didn’t even realise there was something to be voted for at that time - if you’d dinged me I would’ve realised and voted (Providing I happen around before the deadline once dinged, of course. No use if I’m sleeping. :P) But yeah. Just a an @Person when you've done the "this is who has/hasn't" voting when you're listing the no votes should be sufficient for those of us that thought we had but hadn't voted.

    I’m a fan of the majority vote rather than no vote being an automatic no (or conversely, it could be an automatic yay vote if it made people fear nominating hitler for chancellor) but i also think a larger player count could help too depending on the way it all worked.

    D. I was one of those confused players because I’d never played before and I really struggled to understand what I was doing. Like I said earlier about not knowing the way the game was running re: picking a chancellor and you didn’t really explain it to me when I asked :P I wasn’t exactly sure on the rules half the time.




    Overall I liked the game and I’d probably play again. I just found it hard to assert my own view in the game without feeling like I was going to get branded a fascist for disagreeing (even though I was :P)

    (throwback sig by liah btw)
    last.fm | twitter | instagram
    toot tot ride the sprite tractors
    Team S&S
  • Ok, I think Koda's post is evidence enough for me to make this point.

    The biggest problem I think with Secret Hitler is that the winning Liberal Strategies aren't much fun, or at least aren't fun in the way that people sign up for the game are expecting.

    I've said (in private, to Sol and English) that the reason that I voted for Kaylin despite my own number crunching suggesting it was a poor option is that I was exhausted. I want to be clear that I don't think the length of the game itself was the culprit here; I've played games in CC that ran for four times the length of this one without issue. What was exhausting was the emotional pushback I felt every time I took an action which increased the length (or decreased the variance) of the game over all.

    The thing is, I think that this is a fundamentally important tension. The fascists have very few tools in this game, and pushing the tempo/wearing out the liberals who advocate patience is one of the most important of those tools. If we change things *structurally* so that the libs can get away with faster, looser strategies... yeah we'll probably do a better job matching expectations and making sure everyone has the good time they were expecting, but we'll also dramatically decrease the fascist win percentage.

    So I think our solutions need to focus of properly setting up expectations for people coming in to the game and finding appropriate things for them to enjoy. You shouldn't necessarily expect to ever be in office (note that I wasn't, this game, despite having one of the highest post counts) and you shouldn't necessarily expect to contribute more than a single line post on any given two day cycle. This game is a slow boil.

    Instead, I think, players should be committed to very close and careful reading of the posts that do get made. Like Koda just said that [he] didn’t like the way the game started with the “I’m only going to nominate the people from the first round and nobody new”... but note that this wasn't actually something that happened. English was a first rounder and was never put back in office (or even strongly considered for it). Lady Sunshine was the other and was put back in office by the fascists, not the group advocating patience. There was an aweful lot of confusion, right from the start, about who was doing what and why. If the focus was put on understanding each other and really hashing things out, I hope that players might have found an experience just as rewarding as being in the hot seat and making the big calls.

    I'm planning on doing a good bit of work advertising SH3, and a big part of that is going to be doing my utmost to let players know what to expect. If that goes well, I honestly believe that we'll be in for a better experience without any need to change the game itself.
    ~~~
    Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
    ~~~


    boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens
  • The Liberal Strategies, is not much fun that is true. In the Smash Bros Melee scene, there are two players; Hungrybox and Chudat. Hungrybox is a floatie(mains jigglypuff) and he is not afraid to time out a match and camp, even though he doesnt do it all the time. People say his playstyle is not fun, but he is in the Top 5 in the world.

    Chudat plays Ice Climbers, a character that if it grabs you, can infinitely keep you and damage you until it deems you are ready to die. Not fun. And ICies have a lot of grab setups. But he still Top 10.

    Those strategies are not fun. But they win. Liberals have the chance to win, they almost won, until i deemed them to not(jk ily lol)

    SH is not for the faint of heart, but it is still a lot of fun. Sorry you got exhausted Foo, maybe next time i'll be lib and help
  • Oh nothing to apologize for: I'm 100% ok with being emotionally pushed to making a rash decision. It's the kind of thing I come to these games for and I really *want* the scum to continue to have that option. ><
    ~~~
    Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
    ~~~


    boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens
  • One thing I noticed from a minor player perspective (i.e. not Foonglish), the frustrating thing in almost having no voice:

    Your voice is your vote! I think that, Foo and English didn't *have* to control the conversation. Just, as the people most knowledgeable about the game, and the only people who ever really answered the "who tf should I nominate??" questions, they took that role.

    But it's totally possible to go against what they say lol. Vote yay when they vote no. Vote no when they vote yay. Don't allow them into office if you don't want them to. You don't *have* to follow them.


    I just think it was difficult to do this with the number of inactives relative to players, in addition to no votes counting as nays. If you need 6 votes to pass a Chancellor/President, with three players inactive, and two players disagreeing with that Chancellor, then it becomes impossible to veer from what two people are saying. It *becomes* possible for those two people to become the majority.


    An easy solution would be to get rid of the "6 votes to yay", thing, and just go with a straight majority. Another solution, which is one I would like to see in future games, is players holding each other accountable. I am verrrrry >> about GMs having to ping people to be active; I think that players should be pinging other players to vote, and pressuring them. Players should hold one another accountable.

    Again, it's easier to do in Mafia when there are immediate consequences to not being around to cast a vote for the entirety of a day. See: Kae's mafia where scum lost because 2/5 of their time were inactives and another fifth dropped out and had to be replaced end-game. I don't think we should have to be held *as* accountable as mafia, but I think players holding each other accountable, pinging for votes and opinions, pinging people when they are nominated as chancellor and asking why they should be nominated, basically forcing/reminding people that they are playing and that they should vote and talk is a good thing.


    I'm open to pinging people (I did nearer to the end of the game), but I also think it is eh when a GM has to step into games due to activity issues. I don't like that. It's fun for it play out as it was meant to.

    Which is also why I think a larger base of players is a good thing. More backups to pull from in case someone goes MIA. :P
  • I have no problem with the default vote being an "abstain" and I'd implement that in SH3 if the community seems amiable. What's really unfortunate is that, if we takes the vote down to a majority of active players rather than a straight majority, suddenly I'm left in the position of actively *wanting* players to flake so that my vote counts for more. What's my motivation to push for more activity then?>>
    ~~~
    Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
    ~~~


    boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens
  • Ok, so, something like a comprehensive rule set, to discuss going forward:


    About

    Secret Hitler is a game for ten players in which an informed minority of fascists attempt to secure positions in government and pass totalitarian policies, while an uninformed majority of liberals do their best to keep the country free.

    The game plays out as a series of elections. In each day-long phase of play the ten players are given the chance to either approve or reject a possible 2-person government. If the government is acclaimed the two players will be allowed to privately select and then publicly enforce a new policy - which may either be liberal or fascist - before the beginning of the next round.

    The game ends when a sufficient number of liberal or fascist policies have been enacted, or when the "Secret Hitler" takes power in an already semi-fascist state (ending the game immediately for the fascists) or is found and killed by the (ending the game immediately for the liberals).

    ---

    Set Up

    In the first phase of the game, each player is randomly assigned one of ten seats at the table. The player in seat one will be the game's first president, the player on seat two the second, and so on.

    Next, each player is assigned a role. There are three possible roles:

    6 of the players will be liberals, and will not know the roles of any other players.
    3 of the players will be fascists, and will know the role of every other player.
    1 of the players will be Hitler, on the side of the Fascists, but not knowing who those fascists are.

    Next, the policy deck will be shuffled. This deck initially contains:

    6 Liberal Policies
    11 Fascist Policies

    Finally, the game track will be set to its starting position. There are 7 important points on the game track:

    1st fascist policy passed - The sitting president investigates a player
    2nd fascist policy passed - The sitting president investigates a player
    3rd fascist policy passed - The sitting president chooses the next president
    4th fascist policy passed - The sitting president shoots a player
    5th fascist policy passed - The sitting president shoots a player. Governments gain veto power.
    6th fascist policy passed - Fascists win

    5th liberal policy passed - Liberals win

    ---

    Election phase ("Day")

    In the 24 hours before the election phase begins, the in-coming president will privately choose a chancellor so that when the day phase begins players can be immediately told what sort of government they will be voting for.

    Every player has an equal vote, and each player may vote (or change votes) at any time though the 24 hour cycle. Your voting options are:

    [vote]yay[/vote] - Publicaly indicating that you support the current president/chancellor pair
    [vote]nay[/vote] - Publicaly indicating that you oppose the current president/chancellor pair
    [vote]secret[/vote] - Indicating that you have sent your vote privately to the GM. It will be revealed when the day phase ends

    [spoil]yay[/spoil] - Publically destroying your "yay" card so that you are permanently locked in to a nay vote for the current election
    [spoil]nay[/spoil] - Publically destroying your "nay" card so that you are permanently locked in to a yay vote for the current election

    At the end of the phase, all votes will be revealed and totalled. If a strict majority of the voting players chose to affirm the government it will be elected. In every other case, the government will not be elected and the chaos counter will increase by one. If this causes the chaos counter to hit three, the president will be granted emergency powers.

    ---

    Governing phase ("Night")

    I. Normal Government

    If a standard president/chancellor pair has been elected then the phase proceeds as follows:

    1. Check for Hitler. If three fascist policies have been passed and Hitler is chancellor then the game immediately ends in fascist victory.
    2. Presidential action. The president draws the top three policy cards from the deck, selects one to discard, and passes the other two to the chancellor.
    3. Chancellor's action. The chancellor receives the two cards from the president, selects one to discard, and passes the remaining policy to the GM.
    4. Veto check. If five fascist policies have been passed then there will be an opportunity for veto. The president will be shown the policy which the chancellor chose and both president and chancellor will be allowed to vote. If both elect to veto the policy will not pass.
    5. Policy enacted. The GM publicly announces whether a liberal or fascist policy has been passed, increments the game track, and sets the chaos counter to zero.
    6. Policy takes effect. The president carries out whatever action is listed on the game track.
    7. New government. The next president in seating order comes into power and has the time remaining in the phase to select their chancellor.
    II. Emergency Powers

    If the chaos counter hit 3 then the phase instead proceeds as follows:
    1. Policy enacted. The GM draws the top policy card from the deck, publicly announces whether a liberal or fascist policy has been chosen, increments the game track, and sets the chaos counter to zero.
    2. Policy takes effect. The president carries out whatever action is listed on the game track
    3. New government. The next president in seating order comes into power and has the time remaining in the phase to select their chancellor.
    ---

    Special Actions

    I. Investigate

    The acting president chooses one player and learns their alignment from the GM. The president is not told whether a player is Hitler or a standard Fascist, only that they are scum. The other players at the table are told explicitly who was investigated, but it is left to the president to announce the results of their investigation.

    II. Kill

    The acting president chooses one player to be removed from the game. The players role is announced to everyone at the table. If the player was Hitler, the game immediately end in liberal victory. A "dead" player is still considered to have won the game if their side is ultimately victorious.

    ---

    • Missing anything?
    ~~~
    Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
    ~~~


    boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens
  • In most cases, 1 can be done simultaneously with 3 and 4. In the rare case of the outgoing president's action messing with the incoming I'd say discretion, yeah, although I expect it to still take less than 24 hours in general.
    ~~~
    Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
    ~~~


    boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens
  • I mean, personally I'd be more inclined to leave a bit of extra time for the president to choose a chancellor after knowing what the previous presidency passed, rather than simultaneously. That way there's a little more of an informed decision. Like, if it were me I'd go
    1. < 24 hours
    2. 72-[1] hours
    3. 24 hours or whenever all actions are submitted (GM discretion, probably depends on when GM wants various phases to start)
    4. Potentially can be done in advance with three, such that when the president passes policies to the chancellor they also say "if a fascist policy is played I want the executive order to target Y"

    Essentially, it's like Mafia if the day cycles were twice as long. The only problem being that there's so little information present in Secret Hitler, unlike in Mafia. In Mafia the day cycles are long so that all information can be properly presented and discussed to make an (hopefully) informed decision. But in this case the extra time, really, is to ensure that the right people can be present when they are needed. When no new information is being presented to the table the progress of the game will feel stagnated with such long "day" cycles.

    Ah, the woes of converting a tabletop board game to a discussion board game (pun definitely intended). Where it takes 15-30 minutes to finish a normal game, now it will take 48-72 hours to pass a single policy. And that's assuming we're moving quickly!
  • What we found in Mafia when using motivators and mailman who required 2-part night cycle was that complications were less common than people generally feared. I think it's fair to expect the president to pick a chancellor asap, as that's the standard in the base game.
    ~~~
    Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
    ~~~


    boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens
  • Are you going to move away from having voting end with a unanimous vote in favor of a more uniform night/day cycle, or will you be keeping it?

    I personally like it because if everyone is active and playing you *could* get a lot done in a relatively short amount of time.

    It does make sense that a more uniform time for starting/stoping is liked though.

    I'm fine either way


    Ask me for the clan test!

    The post was edited 1 time, last by goronmario ().

  • Maybe just the same "GM may end any phase early at their discretion" boilerplate we use for Mafia?
    ~~~
    Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
    ~~~


    boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens