Hubris (#20)
1) CREATIVE AND EFFECTIVE INCORPORATION OF RULES (1-10): 5
Feedback: The break-up of the game into distinct segments helps to justify the use of Time. However, some of the time is left unaccounted for. Three rounds of four nine-minute turns equates to 108 minutes. This leaves twelve minutes for set-up, character creation, and endgame. This works, but what if set-up and character creation take too long? Is it taken out of the last player’s narration?
Committee is weak. Edit! Considerably stronger after I have looked up the archaic meaning. Given the new spin, however, a new wrinkle is introduced. Why are the players being punished for their hubris when it is being used to further the goals of the gods? The use of hubris in game terms serves to lend flavor to a scene/set the stakes. It doesn't necessarily relate to overbearing pride, does it?
I like Ancient. The game is about ancient times, after all. Emotion also brings a lot to the table.
2) CLARITY (1-10): 5
Feedback: The sections flow in a suitable fashion. Each one logically follows the next. Within each section, however, the language often grows confusing. Also, I humbly suggest a spell check.
In the example of the Princess narrating the King’s encounter with a concubine, how would the Princess be involved? Would it be enough to summarize the Princess’s feelings about her father as the concubine was murdering him?
The results of “I cannot accept this” are unclear. What happens if the narrator loses? He must take a different course of action? How similar can it be to his original plan?
3) COMPLETENESS (1-10): 5
Feedback: The appendix containing a more complete version of the core story that is promised in the game’s summary is not present.
The players do not hold on to their hidden agenda, correct? Otherwise their secrets would be revealed when everyone changes places and changes their god card to accommodate their character. Given this case, is there a way for the players to record what their hidden goal is?
The endgame mentioned in the game’s summary doesn’t have a corresponding section in the rules beyond counting up petra tokens to see who has won. Is the final narrator supposed to pursue his own goals while bringing the story to a successive conclusion, eliminating the need for a final narration to tie everything together and explain the ways of gods to men?
4) ESTIMATED EFFECTIVENESS IN PLAY (1-10): 7
Feedback: The free petra rule doesn’t seem necessary. If a player talks for nine minutes without doing anything overtly suspicious, players are going to grow suspicious and put a stop to the showboating. The lure of tokens is too great.
If a player’s hidden agenda suit is the same as their divine agenda suit, they’re in a heap of trouble come endgame. Their winner points will only come from one pool, whereas a player with a hidden agenda different from their divine agenda has access to two suits worth of tokens.
5) SWING VOTE (1-10): 8
Final Feedback: This game looks like a lot of fun. Given the time limit and mechanics, it has a fast-paced feel to it. Given this environment, the rules complexities should be spelled out as fine as possible. No one wants to cut into anyone else’s turn in order to argue little points. I can definitely see myself playing this on Friday Night Game Night, given a healthy revision.
TOTAL: 30