Game Preview: Die 3 Gebote

By W. Eric Martin
September 5, 2008

Publishers: BeWitched Spiele / Rio Grande Games
Designers: Friedemann Friese, Fraser Lamont & Gordon Lamont
Players: 3-7
Ages: 10+
Playing Time: 45 minutes
Release Date: Spiel 08
Price: €24

Inductive reasoning in games dates to at least 1956 when Robert Abbott created Eleusis, in which players try to deduce a secret rule created by a dealer by playing the proper cards from their hands. A sample rule might be, “After a red card, play an even card, and after a black card, play an odd card.” Master game designer Sid Sackson released his own inductive logic game, Patterns II, in his book, A Gamut of Games.

Are there other, more recent examples? I can’t think of any at the moment, but after October 2008 I’ll be able to point to Die 3 Gebote – designed by the unexpected team of Friedemann Friese, Fraser Lamont and Gordon Lamont – as a new take on inductive reasoning.

"We were having a chat to Friedemann and talking about game design,” says Gordon Lamont. “He had been talking about one of his designs for the ‘Game of the Afternoon’ award at the Gathering of Friends which involved a very definite mechanism which showed when a turn was over.”

“In contrast,” he continues, “we had a design which we had produced at the request of a vodka company, a party game that’s played fast and loose. Part of the rules meant that one person was always in control, and we solved any rules problems with the rule that the pack leader is always right in their decision. This discussion about the contrast in the two designs set off the creative juices, and the design of Die 3 Gebote just flowed from this. However, Die 3 Gebote is not like either of the two games that inspired it!”

Trial and Error

In Die 3 Gebote – to be released as The Three Commandments by Rio Grande Games – players take turns being the High Priestess and watching over the novices (i.e. the other players) while they participate in a religious ceremony. The HP knows the rules that other cult members should follow, but the cult members are left to guessing and to careful observation of their neighbors.

Each player is High Priestess once, and for each HP, depending on the number of players, the novices have a number of rounds to make moves. A move consists of taking one artefact and placing it somewhere on the decorated gameboard; once the player is finished, the High Priestess will tell the player how much karma he’s earned, whether positive or negative, for following the rules or doing something taboo.

Where do these rules come from? At the start of her turn, the HP draws four rules and keeps three of them, designating two of them as positive and one as negative. In general, the rules relate to the moving or positioning of artefacts on an illustrated gameboard or to the behavior of the player doing the moving. (The card shown at left divides the positive and negative rules, and the card stands allow the novices to see which type of rules are where.) The trick is that you don’t know whether you’re scoring points for moving the right artefact, choosing the right location, leaving certain artefacts arranged a certain way, smiling at the High Priestess, touching another artifact, dancing in your seat, taking a drink during your turn, and so on because the HP is monitoring several rules that interact at once.

“Part of the joy of the game is watching people attempt similar moves to other players, but get awarded vastly different points,” says Fraser Lamont. “The occasional round might see similar points awarded to copycats, but the cards are such that this would be unusual rather than the norm.”

A novice’s success each round will depend on some combination of thought, observation and chance, and while players can try to puzzle their way to success, Die 3 Gebote is a performance piece as much as a game, allowing anyone to jump in and participate. Says Fraser Lamont, after the initial bandying about of ideas, “the discussion moved on to designing a game that could be taught to a new player in one sentence. That sentence became, ‘Move a pawn from one area to another.’ When we first got the prototype ready to go, we grabbed a passerby sat him down and told him only that sentence. He moved his pawn, was awarded 8 points, and it was five minutes before we all stopped laughing. It was clear then that the game worked, so we started ironing out the edges.”

First impression, by W. Eric Martin

Version played: Prototype
Times played: Twice

This game’s a hard one to judge because the playing style differs from most everything else I’ve played. You’re trying to watch other players to see what they’re doing and how those actions affect the score, and the surprise that results from the first time something crazy happens – a player inadvertently sneezes, drops a piece, sings, etc. and scores a ton of points – is memorable.

Being the High Priestess is a fun role because players look to you with eager anticipation after making their move: “Did I do well? Was that what you wanted to see?” The HP is punished if no player scores for four moves in a row; she had some say over the rule cards, after all, and setting up impossible challenges should cause you to lose standing in the cult. You’re still tempted to make the rule set difficult, though, because the HP scores the same karma as the novice who scored the most. Construct an easy rule set, and you’ll just be on par with everyone else; put together a puzzler, and you and an especially astute novice might rise above the pack.

I almost like the concept of the game more than the game itself because the high concept idea is clever and worthy of kudos on its own, no matter how the game plays out with flesh-and-blood players.



Posted by W. Eric Martin on Sep 5, 2008 at 08:30 AM in Game Previews / 2475

Want more posts like this one? to Boardgame News to keep the game goodness flowing!

Comments:

To comment, you must register with BGN.

that sounds extremely interesting and the concept seems original and fresh. I am conflicted because I am on the fence about party games in general—but look forward to trying the rio grande version whenever it drops.

Posted by tom moughan on Sep 5, 2008 at 09:11 AM | #

I played this as a prototype several times and absolutely loved it. It’s fun, intellectually stimulating and has a very unique feel to it. It’s been called “Party Zendo” but it’s very much more than that (it shares inductive reasoning with Zendo).

A must-have for Essen 08.

Posted by Ted Alspach on Sep 5, 2008 at 09:28 AM | #

Duh, Zendo – I should have remembered that one…

Eric

Posted by W. Eric Martin on Sep 5, 2008 at 09:52 AM | #

Yep, Zendo was the first thing I though of...what an unbelievably unusual team for this one.

Posted by Dave Kudzma on Sep 5, 2008 at 11:01 AM | #

That “unbelievably unusual team” is one of the many reasons to visit our biannually game weekend in Germany. Always in March Gordon, Fraser, Friedemann and the rest of us have a lot of fun in four days :-). (In November usually (and sadly) without the Fragors)

And sometimes the results of that fun will be released only 7 months later… so all of you can join part of the fun…

Henning

Posted by Henning Kröpke on Sep 5, 2008 at 11:35 AM | #

Also interesting to note a trend in Andrea Meyer’s Bewitched Spiele producing games by other designers.  Linq was the first of these.

Posted by Jeff Allers on Sep 5, 2008 at 12:08 PM | #

My first reaction is one of caution because of the boring fact that I’m a purist about some kinds of games.  For example, I love deduction games, but dislike Mystery at the Abbey, because there’s so much other stuff included that diminishes the importance of the deductions.  Similarly, I think Eleusis is a great game because all the information is there in the cards played and can be inspected at any time.  You can play like a scientist trying to figure out Nature’s laws, which is no accident, as the Scientific Method is the embodiment of inductive reasoning.  Combining these intellectual pursuits with party game elements might be an uncomfortable mix for me.  I can see myself despairing about whether my opponent’s great score (or mine, for that matter) was because of the token he moved or because he shrugged his shoulders.

On the other hand, these are all talented designers and Ted’s enthusiastic recommendation carries some weight as well.  Since it seems to be such an unusual design, I should obviously wait and see until I get to play it myself.

Posted by Larry Levy on Sep 5, 2008 at 01:37 PM | #

Well, Larry, it’s no “Deduce or Die” in terms of intellectual stimulation…

I don’t know how much it’s changed (probably not all that much, based on the preview), but there are two ways to approach this game: As a light, fun party game (the example about the 8 points for the n00b is right in line with that)...and in fact the first few plays will undoubtedly be close to that, with the winning vs. losing players attributed to good fortune moreso than skill. But after you see most or all of the rules, it’s much more about being clever in both your deductions as well as your “examples” that can earn you points (again drawing a comparison to Zendo).

I’m hoping it still retains that fun, loose feel after several plays while giving me the opportunity to do “better” each game.

Posted by Ted Alspach on Sep 5, 2008 at 01:53 PM | #



Advertisements

Follow Boardgame News on Twitter