The Forensic Scientist should give the group a moment to discuss the new evidence before again calling on each player to present their opinions as in step 2a-II. After the sixth marker is placed and the last piece of evidence has been discussed each player will get the chance to voice their thoughts on certain clues or means. This starts with the player left of the forensic scientist and ends with the person on their right. No one may talk or defend themselves during another players presentation. These will last about 30 seconds but can no longer dependent on what is decided before the game. I’ll also mention that we threw away 3 cards from the game. Yes, there are images of dynamite, cleavers, and swords. But by themselves on a card, they’re fairly innocuous. Yet, one card we immediately removed was one showing a knife at someone’s throat. The visual on that was too direct for our taste. Deception: Murder in Hong Kong might sound like a hard-boiled detective mystery movie, because that’s exactly the mood this board game hopes to set. Although if it’s being played by the likes of our Overboard crew, Polygon’s card and board game show, the tone ends up a lot closer to Who Framed Roger Rabbit than Infernal Affairs. Either way, it’s still a whole lot of fun to slam your badge down on the table and accuse your friend ... of murder!

The players are not allowed to interrupt or disturb the player making their Presentation, EXCEPT to make an attempt to "Solve the Crime". The forensic scientist will reveal themselves immediately. Then, players will close their eyes and the murderer will reveal themselves to the forensic scientist and indicate their means of murder and key evidence using the cards in front of them. Throughout the game, the forensic scientist will use the clue tiles to try to help the investigators guess these two things. Each investigator only gets one guess (handing in their badge in the process) and the murderer wins if nobody can guess both their means of murder and key evidence. Each round, the forensic scientist can use one more clue card, and each player gets 30 seconds to put forward their arguments. The Forensic Scientist then draws one new scene tile and replaces one already in the center of the table with the new tile. Many times he will remove a scene tile that is causing the Investigators problems or is directing them toward the wrong player. And the good thing is, you are provided with nearly 300 evidence cards that can get dealt out in a myriad of different ways, so the risk of repetition is really very rare. We’ve played Deception as a family, at Guys Game Night, and over the Labor Day weekend with extended family. And because it’s been such a hit, we can’t seem to stop playing. Deception was a hit at Guys Game Night.

Roles

After everything else is set up the only remaining task is to pass out badge tokens. Everyone except the forensic scientist gets a badge token, and they must be placed within eyesight of all other players in front of you. These tokens indicate that this player has not attempted to solve the crime yet. GAMEPLAY Even though everyone we’ve played Deception with has loved it, we know it won’t be a fit for every family. The first reason is the name of the game itself. With the title including “murder”, many people may immediately be turned off. It’s not because the game is a short game. Rather it’s because everyone has enjoyed it so much that we just have to play “one more time.” Depending on the number of players, there may also be an Accomplice and a Witness. The Accomplice wins jointly with the Murderer if the Murderer goes undetected. And the Witness is on the side of the Investigators. All players other than the Forensic Scientist then receive 8 cards – 4 Means cards (blue) related to the way the murder was committed and 4 Clue cards (red) indicating key evidence left behind. Each player places the cards face up in front of them so all players can see the cards.

Even though we’ve seen many of the cards multiple times, it’s always random in what they can be paired with. Add to that the fact that there are plenty of scene tiles to keep every game unique and intriguing. Social deduction games are, generally, all about the chat, rather than the components. But, despite that, many of them often go the extra mile by adding some flair to the components that are included. After The first round of investigation, a second round will begin. The forensic scientist will draw a new brown evidence tile and will need to replace it with one of the other tiles, it may not replace the purple and green tile. Once the tile has been replaced the forensic scientist will place the marker on the evidence they wish to present to the investigators.In the game, players take on the roles of investigators attempting to solve a murder case – but there’s a twist. The killer is one of the investigators! Each player’s role and team are randomly assigned at the start of play and include the unique roles of Forensic Scientist, Witness, Investigator, Murderer, and Accomplice. While the Investigators attempt to deduce the truth, the murderer’s team must deceive and mislead. This is a battle of wits! Deception: Murder in Hong Kong combines the ‘find the bad guy’ element of other social deduction games with a clever mechanic for giving clues. It plays a lot like Mysterium, but with the added complication of someone working to actively sabotage the clues. The forensic scientist is probably the most fun to play, which might not be a good sign, given that they are excluded from the main gameplay. Closing Comments on Deception: Murder in Hong Kong The investigators probably get bumped onto traffic control. Versions & Expansions Deception: Undercover Allies They continue to participate as normal and may still present during all Presentation phases but may not make another attempt to solve the crime.

Then, secretly deal out the role cards to each player. It is vital that, other than the Forensic Scientist, who runs the game, players’ identities remain known only to the person holding them. The artwork suits the theme and the card design is simple an effective. My only criticism here is that if trying to play in low light the dark colours can be hard to distinguish between, and the palette can look a little bland. But the pieces are well made and the game has everything it needs. Forensic Scientist (1): The forensic scientist is the player that will lead the other players through the game and give out clues to catch the murder. The forensic scientist wins with the investigators but must be an unbiased character. They know who everyone else is and the means and clue for the murder, but the forensic scientist is not permitted to hint at or give away the answer to the investigator with any gesture, verbal clue, or eyes.So when a game comes out and I hear that it’s a Resistance-killer, my ears perk up a bit. I’m skeptical, for sure, but willing to give each challenger a fair shake. Spyfall was one of the early challengers, but I found it far too dependent on the players knowing all of the possible locations and everyone being very good at coming up with questions. It was frequently hilarious as an awkward-conversation creator, but far too inconsistent as a game. Secret Hitler has come the closest to matching the enjoyment of The Resistance, but that’s mostly because it’s essentially a modification of that game, though not for the best. Hybrid Social deduction games can be a little confusing for those new to the game. And, by their very nature, can be quite difficult to teach ‘as you go along’, as if anyone reveals their identity, the game is ruined.

After they have had a moment to discuss the new evidence the investigators will once again present their thoughts on the evidence and what it could mean for the means of murder and clues on the table. To start the game, the dastardly crime must first be committed. To do so, every player except the Forensic Scientist closes their eyes. Then, when everyone has DEFINITELY closed their eyes, the Murderer opens their eyes and points at one of each of their Clue and Means cards, making sure the Forensic Scientist can see them. If that seems too tough for the murderer, you can always add some extra roles: an accomplice helps out the murderer, giving them cover for their fake theories or by drawing attention to themselves so the murderer can avoid suspicion. But with that many criminals involved, there’s bound to be a witness, which is an investigator who knows which players are the murderer and accomplice, but not which is which. They also have to be extra careful with their knowledge. If the investigators solve the crime, the murderer and accomplice get a chance to guess the identity of the witness, winning the game if they get it right. The Forensic Scientist then gives the Lab Technician a thumbs up if the card selected was the Clue or Means card used in the murder and a thumbs down if it was not. The only new information you gain related to the group hypotheses are the new clue cards swapped in. I really do like this dynamic as the forensic scientist player has to use the new card, and has to eliminate one from the table. Do you remove a clue that everyone has already gained as much information out of as they will, to prevent them from overthinking it? Or do you remove that clue that didn’t give them anything at all? Do you try to angle your strategy towards bringing them closer to the cause of death, or the clue? Maybe you eliminate one of the clues they spent a lot of time over in the previous round, indicating that they were misleading themselves by overthinking it. Everything about it is touchy and subtle, and when you draw a clue that can’t possibly give them any information it’s frustrating in the best kind of way.

I love a good murder mystery almost as much as I love any game where you get to deceive people, so I was incredibly keen to get my hands on Deception: Murder in Hong Kong! The Game By the end of the 3 rd round everyone would have made their guesses. Either the Murderer is caught (someone correctly identified the two cards in front of the Murderer) or gets away. When we played Deception with our extended family last weekend, the game play itself also didn’t go over well with some players. Even after playing for a little while, some players just weren’t as engaged as others. It was clear that they weren’t as taken by the game as the rest.