Game #16: The 12 Disciples by jwarrend

Thanks! To put a few of my cards on the table, while I think that the recent trend of "re-theming" good games for the religious market (Ark of the Covenant, Settlers of Zarahemla) is a cool idea, I feel like original games with strong German design principles and a religious theme are sorely lacking, and so this was my attempt to that end!

Sure. And in fact, though the rules aren't clear on this, Capernaum and Jerusalem have more Deed cards (maybe 10 each) than some of the other towns (Cana may only have 3 or 4).

I think about 60; probably 40-45 Deeds and 15-20 Events. The Events will probably vary from "Advance the Pharisees by 1" to "All players with Jesus receive one Action Card" and so on. The Deeds will be mostly of the sort shown in the rulebook.

Yes, although I hope to make it work out that the game should typically end before the deck is exhausted. But, yes, it's once through -- after you perform a Deed, you keep the card (for game end scoring). If Jesus performs a Deed, or if the card is an Event, it's simply discarded.

Yeah, when I read the rules, I was like, "is this all there is to this game?" It seems so simple. Earlier versions of the game were much more "simulation" oriented, but I've tried to strip things down to a couple of simple interlocking systems. I think the "decision matrix" of "what Deed will I perform" is informed by (a) the position of the Action track counters, (b) The possible consequences of the available Deeds (c) The geographic location of the Deeds and (d) Whatever "secret goal" I may hold. So, I think there's actually a basis for decision making even in a simple package, or at least that's the hope.

Originally, each Deed card had a value and an "action card cost", but I thought the Action tracks might be a more interesting way of having action costs shift from game to game and from card to card.

Yes, this will obviously be the subject of much playtesting effort to get the balance right. The idea with the Gospel tokens, secret goals, and last turn actions, is that all of these are meant to conspire to make it impossible for the Traitor to have "perfect information" about scoring, or else the end game will break down, and even so it might. Still, this is the "core concept" around which the rest of the game was built, so in a sense, I have to make this aspect work.

This is my first iteration of the board, so yeah, it's just a "first try" at this point. Originally, I wanted to have separate boards for the map, the Action Tracks, and the "Anger Tracks", and then just a set of draw piles, but in the end, I just decided that throwing everything together on a 17" x 17" board would probably work best from a prototyping standpoint. Obviously, the thing is an artistic disaster, but I hope the game makes it out of the workshop with a favorable enough review that it seems worth going to the playtesting stage! We shall see!

Thanks again for your comments,

Jeff

I admit I haven't really thought all that much about where on the complexity scale this one will fall, but my sense is that you're right; this game is slightly more "one-dimensional" mechanics-wise that some of my other projects. But I think that's ok, and my hope is that the "meta-game" of figuring out who the Traitor is will add a layer of fun to the game. So, you're right, Tigris it ain't, but I hope that it's perhaps at the level of Settlers or Carcassonne -- a good "gateway" game with enough depth to be fun but even transparency to be accessible. We'll see how it shakes out if it gets to a playtest!

-Jeff

I can definitely understand your concern. Let me say for the record that I am a Christian, so my hope is that I can defuse the concerns at least of the religious folks by saying, "hey, I'm not trying to make light of this at all--I take it pretty seriously myself." On the flip side, folks without strong religious beliefs may not like the game solely because of its theme. That, I think, is a risk I'm taking, but I'm ok with that risk. I think the goal is to make a game that is solid enough that people will enjoy playing it. I don't necessarily want people to feel like they're being "preached at" while playing. Obviously, it won't be for all tastes.

Your interpretation of the rules is correct. There will be a couple of "Event Cards" that will move Jesus, but otherwise, yes, a player in the same town as Jesus can "bring Jesus along" with him, and there's no fight amongst players -- the active player just moves the Jesus pawn. This is by no means the last word on movement of Jesus; it's a system that I came up with, but no doubt will need to change. I welcome any thoughts on a good way to have Jesus move. The game hasn't been playtested yet, so I don't know whether the system I've chosen will be successful or not.

The idea is that during the game, when you're in the same town as Jesus when He performs an action, you get a Gospel token. Then, in the last turn of the game, you can forfeit your turn to compile a Gospel. Of those players that spent their last turn writing a Gospel, the player with the most Gospel tokens gets 4 points and the player with the 2nd most gets 2 points.

This rule is certainly subject to change, but my idea was that you can use your last turn either to pursue Deeds, presumably to complete Goals, or writing a Gospel, but not both. It's not even really historically accurate, so it's certainly open to change, with the likely change simply being "compare Gospel tokens".

I agree with this, but I don't necessarily want it to be a "deduction" system so much as a "interpretation of actions" system. Because the traitor scores points differently, his actions will likely differ from those of other players. For example, if there's one guy who keeps performing Deeds that increase the level of the Pharisees, he may be a good candidate for the Traitor. The idea is that you need to watch the other people carefully and try to determine, based on their actions, whether they are the traitor or not.

In practice, this may not work. I think it's just something to try out and see whether it's possible for someone to identify the traitor. The other question will be, can the traitor be "subtle" and yet still influence the game in his favor? Or conversely, does the traitor lose anything by completely masking his actions and going for perfectly "innocuous" deeds? If not, then some balancing needs to be done. That, I think, is partly why the Pharisees track is currently a bit steep -- there's a BIG incentive for the Traitor to get that track to be high, but doing so may expose him as the traitor.

Absolutely, yet it's sort of essential to the design -- the idea is that the Pharisees are willing to pay the Traitor (again, mildly historically inaccurate...), and their anger determines how much they're willing to pay. So, there is a direct correlation between taking actions that anger the Pharisees and giving more potential points to the Traitor. And this creates, I think, an interesting balancing act for the players. Of course, I don't want the opposite scenario where it's impossible to win as the Traitor because players can overwhelm the ability of the Pharisees track to advance. But, it will just take some testing to see!

Thanks! I really appreciate your comments and observations.

-Jeff

Correct. As a non-traitor, you are trying to get points by:
-- Performing Deeds
-- Using these to complete Goals
-- Watching Jesus perform Deeds and collecting Gospel tokens
-- Identifying the Traitor
-- Not losing points by having the most Action symbols left in your hand.

Only when they reveal a Deed card (as opposed to an Event card), and then, after they've performed a Deed.

Indeed, this will require some balancing. But, the costs, as you can (I think) see on the board, max out at 4. And at that point, having Jesus perform a Deed "resets" the track to 1 (although, interestingly, because of the turn order you can't "reset" a track and that take an action. Thus, there's some risk inherent to having Jesus perform a Deed).

But, your overall concern is well-noted; the difficulties of actions may definitely accelerate too fast in a big game. Good point!

It's funny, that's an excellent point that my friends and I hit on when I mentioned the idea to them. I think that it's essential in gaming to enforce a "wall of separation" between yourself and the game -- for example, I like Axis and Allies, but that doesn't mean pretending I'm Hitler if I draw Germany. That said, there are plenty of game themes that I'd be very uncomfortable with. So, people will have to decide for themselves where they draw the line. I'm sure this game will anger some Christians, which is ironic, but my hope is that many more will be able to see the game for what it is -- a game, first and foremost, that is set thematically in the lives and actions of the Disciples, but not an exact simulation of those events. But, your concern is definitely well-founded, and should the game get to that level, this would definitely be the subject of some market research. Perhaps a "non-traitor variant" would be needed.

I agree with your first point. Yet, the Traitor can choose to play it straight -- he must actively choose to betray Jesus, and as the Pharisees track gets higher, he'll be increasingly tempted to do so. I think the dilemma of being the Traitor may be the closest "thematic simulation" element in the game.

As for your second point, there will be Deeds that advance the Pharisees as well, but you're right, concerted play by the other players could keep the Pharisees track down. I may throw out the turn option that lets you move the Jews or the Pharisees back; at any rate, it needs to be sufficiently "expensive" that it hurts to do it; perhaps it should be 2 Cards instead of 2 symbols.

Sorry, this wasn't clear on the board. The idea is that when the Jews reach the "Temple" icon, the Pharisees advance. (So, the "Temple" icons are, effectively, positions "-3" and "+3" on the Jews track.) The Jews can't advance further than this.

In principle, yes, though I haven't worked out all the cards yet.

Currently, it's the latter. The former is an interesting possibility, but would create a slightly different way of doing the bookkeeping, so for now, it's just "whenever the Jews reach one end of the track or the other." But, the other way is interesting and potentially equally valid. I'll think about it. Thanks!

I think this is accurate. The last turn may not succeed in practice, but in concept, it's meant to accomplish two things. One, it's meant to "blind" the Traitor to perfect calculation of scores -- he doesn't know how many Deeds will be left after the real end game. Second, it's meant to be a bit thematic, with the concept of "Redemption" -- the cards that stayed in your hand and cost you negative points are then used by you to (potentially) get you more points at the end of the game.

But, the "last turn" concept isn't fully fleshed out yet, and may need some tweaking.

Of those who wrote a Gospel.

Thanks! And yes, the board is really only "playtest quality", and perhaps not even good enough for that. Certainly the "real thing" would look very different!

Thanks for your feedback, I appreciate it!

Best,

Jeff

Hey, I said any and all feedback. Criticism is most definitely welcome!

I agree with you in principle; the idea of the Traitor "ending the game", but then it doesn't really end, is weird, and may need a little better execution.

The idea is, the game ends when Jesus is crucified. This happens EITHER by (a) the actions of Jesus and the Disciples have attracted so much attention from Rome that they must kill Jesus to calm things down OR (b) Jesus has so angered the Pharisees that they are willing to kill Him, and have paid one of His disciples to betray Him. So, if the last turn was reached by method (b), then the Traitor has already betrayed Jesus. If it was reached by (a), Jesus has already been crucified, and there was no Traitor (or at least, no betrayal...)

This is a good idea, thanks!

No, this isn't the main function of the last turn. As I told Torrent (sorry to repeat myself!), it's more for the dual purpose of (a) making the game end scoring of other players uncertain to the Traitor, and (b) adding the thematic element of "redemption" -- that having unused cards in your hands is "bad", in the sense that they were unfulfilled potential -- yet, God uses them to turn them around and have something "good" happen -- more Deeds are performed.

Exactly. And, if I didn't say this, you can betray only on your turn, and you must be in the same town as Jesus. I think I said in the section on "Goal cards" that one of them says, as you say, "You're the traitor".

Currently there are 10, and each player gets 2. One is the "traitor" card, and the other will be things like "perform a Deed in 4 different towns" or "perform 4 Healings" or something similar. I don't know if they'll make things totally different in a replay sense, but they will give you different things to work toward each time, and completing them should be important scoring-wise (although of course, doing so may force you to perform Deeds that move the Anger Tracks unfavorably!). I think the replay value will come from the random order that the Deeds will appear in, as well as the way that the cost of actions will fluctuate from turn to turn. So, "Feeding the 5000" will require Compassion in every game, but just how much compassion it requires will vary from game to game, and even from turn to turn.

The goals are always secret -- there are never Common goals. I actually thought about doing just what you say, but I elected to go with secret goals because it creates a "hidden information" system that will again blind the traitor a little bit -- he can't really know whether you've completed 0, 1, or both of your goals.

I considered this very thing, but I rejected it because I think it violates the theme. I think the game captures the idea that the Traitor didn't necessarily have to be Judas because of some cosmic law of the universe, but the flip side of the mechanic you're proposing (and that I considered) is that it makes the game very opportunistic -- people are willing to turn Jesus in at the drop of a hat if it's advantageous for them to do so. I don't like the effect that would have on the theme. Jesus' disciples, with the exception of the one who betrayed Him, weren't just waiting for an opportune moment to flip on him and get the payoff. So, it is a cool idea, but I don't think it would work in this game.

You're right that the "accusation system" isn't central to the game, I think it's just meant to be a fun meta-game that rewards you for paying attention to what the others are doing, and, if you're the Traitor, to try to be a little subtle in your dealings. Pure gamers will probably hate it, but I think it's in the spirit of the game, particularly since the Traitor, even if he's been exposed, can still betray Jesus to end the game. It's just in his interest for people not to know he's the traitor, since it makes his job easier.

Thanks for your comments!

-Jeff

One thing that stood out when I looked at the board is the first aid truck icon - seemed out of place in a game set in the time of Christ. Perhaps it could be replaced with something else?

Most of the icons were taken from the "Webdings" font. I just went with something that would convey the idea of the action in question. You're quite right, and the game will need a serious visual overhaul before getting to "the next level." But, for a first order playtesting prototype, it's ok for now, although I certainly wouldn't object if someone found more thematic icons out there somewhere!

Thanks for the suggestion,

Jeff

Cool ideas, thanks! A fixed route would definitely have come up next on my "try this" list, and may yet. I like the "game state destination" idea as well; maybe Jesus goes to the area with the most Deed cards showing? (This, incidentally, could be one more "tell" with regards to the Traitor -- "why did he just move his pawn to the area with the most Deeds, and yet not perform a Deed there? Maybe he's lying in wait for Jesus?" )

Great suggestions, thanks!

-Jeff

Yeah, it does seem weird to have Jesus following the disciples rather than vice versa. I think that already, the game lends itself a bit to the (wrong) interpretation that I am saying "the disciples were really the ones who did everything", and this mechanic just would add fuel to the fire.

I think the problem I have with it is that it just gives the Traitor some more perfect information. Although, really, the Traitor knows how many tokens everyone holds (I assume it will be public), so in principle he can know roughly who might get the 4 points for the Gospel (though whether they'll take it or not he won't know).

On the other hand, I also like the "do it before it's too late, or else suffer the consequences" kind of approach. Maybe it should be, you must spend a turn writing your gospel, and then that's it.

Also, maybe we could add the rule "the Traitor cannot write a Gospel". This would be an additional "tell" -- why isn't Joe composing a Gospel, when he has so many tokens?

Of course, this would have worked better with an older rules version, where the traitor also lost points for having performed Deeds. Thus, the Traitor didn't want deeds in his area, so having Jesus perform deeds and collecting gospel tokens instead would seem to be a good idea, except that now, hoarding gospel tokens and not composing would potentially expose you as the Traitor.

The cute thing about this is there's a real "press your luck" effect -- you want to write your Gospel late enough that no one will be able to exceed it. Yet, when the game is closing in on "ending", there are other things that you want/need to do. But, wait too long, and you're out of luck.

I like it. I need to think about it some more, but I like it.

-Jeff

Ok, I'll think more about something like this. The only thing I don't like about this is that currently, the game has a "continuous loop of turns" effect, where things just keep going and going. In the movement scheme like what you mention, there needs to be an "interrupt" phase during which Jesus moves. I suppose I could trigger this with event cards, but I'm worried that Jesus would still move too infrequently.

It's a fine line I'm walking; I believe the Bible is very clear that the disciples were capable of doing everything that Jesus did (as evidenced by Acts, for example). What I'm not saying, though, is some bizarre claim that "the disciples did all the work". Perhaps no one would ever have even interpreted things this way, but it's something I worried a little about.

I'm very glad that you guys are arguing both sides of this one so compellingly, it gives me a lot to think about (although an overwhelming consensus would have made my decision a bit easier...)

Ok, here you make an excellent point that perhaps I hadn't appreciated -- the success of the "last turn" really hangs on whether there are any good cards left to begin with. If everyone has used all of their cards, then the last turn will be somewhat dull.

How about this instead:

1.The game ends. All players do the following (except the Traitor if he betrayed Jesus...)
2. All players count the remaining symbols in their hand. The player with the fewest symbols gets that many VPs.
3. Players can take one last action -- they can either write a Gospel, or perform one Deed in the town they're in or in one adjacent to it.

Step 2, I think I like because it has the effect I wanted of "blinding" the Traitor to perfect info about scoring. And 3 is now simple enough that it won't give way to serious Analysis paralysis problems of people trying to max out their scores. (or maybe it will...)

I think the idea, instead, should be that the end of the Pharisees track should be so lucrative that it is almost a given that if it gets there, the Traitor will betray and almost certainly win the game.

Thanks again!

-Jeff

I admit, this is not a point that I had fully appreciated; it's true that from an AP standpoint, it's much easier for all players (except the Traitor) to have the position "Pharisees track going up = bad".

Moreover, I think that's the only proper way for the theme to be evoked. If you're making decisions based on a thought process like this: "Ok, I'll do this good deed because it will make the Pharisees mad, then I will betray Jesus and they'll pay me more to do it!", you've just kissed the theme goodbye -- the whole game becomes about being opportunistic and manipulating things with no regard to which side you're on. I don't think it fits, and indeed, it may be more analysis-heavy since it's a bigger matrix of options you'd need to consider.

Yes, I think there needs to be a possibility in a smaller game that no one is the Traitor. Perhaps there also needs to be a punishment for an incorrect guess -- the wrongly accused player gets 1 card, perhaps? The reason there isn't currently such a thing is that a wrong guess is currently "punished" by making a correct guess easier for the remaining players (by virtue of the number of options being reduced). On the other hand, the possibility of a bad result doesn't address the problem of the possibility of a lucky guess. Maybe "you need to be within town of the player you're accusing", to make it slightly more difficult? I agree, having random guessing be rewarded is bad, but I'm not sure of a great fix.

One idea I tossed around is to have each player, at some point, write down who they think is the traitor, and if they are right, each gets the bonus, or something like that. Maybe it would be an event card. But, I don't know if this really makes things better, either -- in fact, it even more encourages (and rewards) guessing, since it requires you to guess!

Another thing I haven't really considered is Goals that weren't equal in value -- ie, you might draw a "harder" goal that was also worth more points. In the end, it's all the same from a balancing standpoint -- each goal needs to be worth a fair number of points, whether the value is the same across all cards or not -- but in the "unequal goals" model, it would make things a little less sure for the Traitor scoring wise. And, it's somewhat thematic -- after all, not all the Disciples were called to the same level of responsibility. But, in the interest of fairness, probably all the goals should be worth the same. Otherwise, maybe you should have some choice in which goal you want. Maybe everyone is dealt one "4 point goal" (one of which is "Traitor"), and then players can choose, for their second goal, either a 5 point goal or a 3 point goal...

Maybe there's even an Event that lets you draw an additional goal card...

Ahhh, the possibilities!

-Jeff