Need help with a dual hidden identity game [now co-op]

What if there are different forms of the sickness, and there are certain infections that show no symptoms? That would add an element of uncertainty to the game.

My idea may not work for your game, but I will explain and you can decide if it works or not!

So initially NOBODY is infected, everyone has 100% health. Then each player picks out of a COMMON dice bag five (5) pogs (flat circular tokens). A token can have various *infection* levels or can be simply be nothing at all.

So what happens is that all players start with *perfect* health and then they get *downgraded* by the five (5) pogs. Some players will be healthier than others. Most will probably carry some of the infectious disease but very little...

When a player comes into contact with another player, they use another *dice bag*. Where they each put into their OWN dice bag their pogs. So each player would need to have their own *dice bag*. Next players each choose a certain amount of pogs from their opponent's bag: this is like *transmitting* the disease. Each player may get more sick or healthier (which is what people believe - if they pass the cold, they might start feeling better).

Anyhow during the game, players pick out of the COMMON bag, more disease tokens. As time goes by, everyone gets more and more sick. And with contact, they spread the disease to each other! Wonderful...

Player's could "compute" their level of disease by verifying their pogs in hand... And once they achieve a certain level of *contamination*, they are uncurable... Or perhaps they are removed from the game - because they are TOO SICK.

I'm not certain about your game's end-game goal (last one standing, finding a cure, etc.) If it was finding a cure, well the more people that are too sick, the less likely a cure will be found. Since it's a co-op maybe the goal is to find a cure to the disease.

With the player's bags, they never know what they will get from another player (which pogs) and how much more sicker they will be if they interact with that person.

This is something *functional* that could help with spreading a disease in a game...

Note: Your idea of using colours to identify the various levels of disease is very intelligent. So for example you could have three (3) different colours of tokens: Green (0 healthy), Yellow (1 contamination), Red (3 contamination). All players need to do is ADD UP the points of their tokens to see how sick they really are. If you reach a certain amount like 20 points, you are too sick and therefore ejected from the game...)

What if the GM/ref is an actual player as well? The GM knows who is infected, but he/she cannot reveal this information to the other players. The backstory could go something like this. A scientist (the GM) is researching a cure for some deadly cancerous disease. He conducts clinical trials on a few of his friends. Everything seems to be going well, but all of the sudden, some research indicates that his treatment will actually accelerate the disease. Feeling ashamed, he does not tell the others but works as fast as he can to undo what he has done. As the game progresses even the GM can get infected.

Being infected could be the opposite of a victory point. Once everyone is infected (at the disease’s terminal level), the game ends and everybody loses. In contrast, if everyone is cured, everyone wins. Being infected does not eliminate a player from the game, but is an indicator that they will die at the end of the game. There can be different stages of the disease (stage 1, stage 2, terminal, etc.) . Stage 1 could be relatively easy to cure, and terminal could be incredibly difficult to cure.

I should have rephrased my sentence. I meant the infection would be "kind of like" a "reverse" victory point. If the game is a cooperative game, I don't think victory points would make sense since everybody would win or lose together. The infection would be more of an indicator of the progress of the game. It could indicate how close the players are to winning or losing.

Here is another thought. If you don't want players to be eliminated from the game, you could incorporate a timer mechanic into the game. Players can still die, but once somebody dies, the game is over. If X amount of turns passes while someone has the terminal illness, the game is over. This would add tension and urgency to the game since players would be racing against the clock.

Could you put in character cards?

for instance, ships doctor must always tell the truth, the captain may always say your well so you don't panic, the mechanic may always lie?

Perhaps?

Also - if its with cards, why not involve a 'chase the Ace' mechanic?

There could be a fixed number of 'disease' cards floating in the hand of cards - each turn the player passes a card, but you could have a system with a 'hidden' and a 'seen' hand each? So, if you end up with the 'disease' card in your 'seen' hand, the next player obviously isn't going to take it, but if they choose to take from your 'hidden' hand instead, they risk taking anything.

The 'feeling ill' idea could build up though - as cards and 'germs' swap between hands during the trip - you might gather more and more 'symptoms'? and when you have too many of one sort, you are out. So it could be less about one disease, as lots of diseases on a spaceship, with some hardly harmful at all, others being super deadly where you are out when you get the one card? Or something...

Very very very cool idea! I would love to see where you go with this!

Sam

How about a sleep/rest action? Resting could help to slow down a player's disease rate. However, the player would forfeit his or her turn to do so.

Aye, there be an edit button! Although I don't know if it allows you to use it if you've been quoted. I don't think you can edit the OP either.

Really interesting idea but there's something that isn't clicking for me with it... it's hard to put my finger on it because I feel lots of potential in the idea.

I guess I'm confused about the dual-identity cards and bluffing aspect you presented initially. If it's a co-op game, what incentive would players have to lie to each other? It seems the game is evolving to be a race against time and playing against the game. So it's less of a Mafia-esque bluffing situation. Plus if you don't know your secret identity, it's hard to bluff anything. Maybe you've dropped this part of it.

Some action ideas could be to do with upkeep of the ship like cooking food.

The more I consider it, I'd suggest dropping the dual identity cards. It seems to present a challenge in terms of linking them (i.e. can't be immune and coughing badly at the same time). Plus, if you have two cards and they're linked then 'coughing' would be a sign the person is infected...

Here's a thought, you have different "Disease" cards. Diseases that target different areas of the body. One affects the mind, so research is harder. One affects the body, so its harder to take actions. One is more contagious, another is more resistant to cures. Etc. Etc. Could be real diseases and broken into tiers of difficulty. Measles is easy and Ebola is hard.

With that, you basically need a GM to play the Disease and keep it secret from the players. Researcher can invest actions in either tending to the sick (and slowing infection) or researching a cure. As players get infected a token is placed on the Disease card, escalating its effects. The GM could also play the "ship", tracking areas where the infected people have been (kitchen, bathroom, etc.) so you don't only have to interact with the infected players to get infected, you also interact with the area.

The chit bag is a good idea and introduces controlled randomness. Players' sickness level increases when they draw a numbered chit from the bag. They start with 4 0-value and 2 1-value chits. The Disease adds valued chits to the bags, increasing the chances of infection. Players only draw chits when they interact with an infected person. The infected person increases their sickness by X amount every turn (basically meaning you can't quarantine someone indefinitely). That person needs food, water, to use the bathroom, etc.

I'm sorry if I'm going off on a complex tangent. Just shooting from the hip here...

Good luck!

Okay so how about it happens like in real-life:

1. The *doctor* must extract blood from the sick patient.
2. The blood is then given to the *researcher* (Could be named *Lab Technician*) who does basic blood analysis on the sample to determine how sick the patient really is.
3. The next part is the blood is sent to the *virologist* (Virus expert) who then attempts to create a vaccine.
4. Next the vaccine is injected back into the patient by the *doctor*.
5. The reaction to the vaccine must be computed by restarting from step #1...

So we could have four (4) steps with 3 roles. Only one (1) role interact DIRECTLY with the sick patient (the doctor). Players could take turns being the doctor (and of course worry about cross-contamination).

I don't know but if this is a FOUR (4) player game - it works: doctor, researcher, virologist, patient (sick or not).

Roles could alternate since a doctor can take on the role of a researcher or virologist (makes sense). They are also all patients since they need to eradicate the virus from all members including the sickest member of the crew...

Just some more ideas...