Rough concept--rogue hero killing the others

[RaidCasto]

A common theme in horror movies(Aliens, for instance), is that one of the bunch is responsible for the mess, and out to kill the others to shut them up. I'm trying to cook up a scenario where one of the heroes is a traitor, and would then be out to murder the others. Obviously this wouldnt be a good scenario for less than 5 players, it wouldnt make sense for 1 player to kill their other heroes. Id like it to be a situation where the player knows at the start of the game, and has to be careful not to blow their cover. Hero vs hero fights would only fend off on ties, anything else is a would to either. Make sense at all?

[scarydk]

It's an interesting concept. I like it. Makes perfect sense to create such a scenario.

Do you see the secret villain competing against both the heroes and the ZP or is he secretly on the ZP's side. If so, does the ZP know who?

Making the ZP secretly team up with a hero could lead to a lot of suspense/mistrust but so would the fear of the lone survivor who sees everybody else as a burden.

Since everyone is going to kill zombies it's going to be hard to tell who's the villain at first but as soon as the first one falls (s)he'll have both heroes and zombies to worry about. On the other hand, who wants to share a space with a potential killer? How does (s)he get a chance to stay close to another hero? And won't that blow his/her cover on the approach when everyone else i trying their best to stay the hell away from each other?

Perhaps the heroes' objective should be to defend a building or get supplies for a building in order to keep them close together?

I really like the concept but I think it could be a bit complicated to achieve a balanced scenario. But once achieved this is going to be a killer scenario!

[RaidCasto]

I don't think even the zombie player should know. Thematically, they're just mindless zombies, the rogue hero is responsible for what happed, or trying to cover it up, etc. Maybe this should be a 5 hero scenario, so the heroes have a chance fighting zombies and the rogue. I think once revealed, zombies win if all remaining heroes are dead, heroes win if the they kill the rogue. I don't know if the rogue works with the zombie player, either? Maybe he/she has some control over them? Still a rough sketch at this point. Also, what if the rogue happens to get killed before the reveal? Could use replenish but it kinda weakens the idea. Maybe it'll be a quick reveal, only searching for counters.

[LabRat]

Your idea made me think of a Zombie card that would simulate this without changing the mechanics too much.

[kassle]

I like the idea quite a bit. Unsure how it would play out, in terms of the current Hero cards/deck and objectives.

[zxenluvszev]

Sounds cool, how about the heroes get 2 starting cards but one is the traitor. And the point would be to maybe lure them into a hazard like a wood chipper or something in the saw mill.

[StayPuft]

I love this idea! I would absolutely love to play a scenario like that. It is a bit tricky, though to think of how would it work exactly. How would the "rogue hero" be able to work towards achieving some sort of goal without making themselves known?

Maybe there would be some kind of hero goal, such as collecting certain items. So, the rogue hero can be doing the same thing, hoping that he/she will find the items first.

Then, whenever they are revealed (however that would work in the scenario) the heroes can win by killing the rogue hero, or still completing their objective. Whereas the rogue hero would maybe win by killing X number of heroes (including any killed by zombies), or preventing the heroes from completing their tasks. Basically, then, zombies would win if the rogue hero wins. Just my thoughts. Anybody else?

[kassle]

(11-27-2012 09:45 PM)StayPuft Wrote:  I love this idea! I would absolutely love to play a scenario like that. It is a bit tricky, though to think of how would it work exactly. How would the "rogue hero" be able to work towards achieving some sort of goal without making themselves known?

Maybe there would be some kind of hero goal, such as collecting certain items. So, the rogue hero can be doing the same thing, hoping that he/she will find the items first.

Then, whenever they are revealed (however that would work in the scenario) the heroes can win by killing the rogue hero, or still completing their objective. Whereas the rogue hero would maybe win by killing X number of heroes (including any killed by zombies), or preventing the heroes from completing their tasks. Basically, then, zombies would win if the rogue hero wins. Just my thoughts. Anybody else?

I think you may be onto something StayPuft. Your idea makes the most sense to me so far.

Perhaps the Rogue Hero is only playable with certain scenarios or "created" scenarios that are similar to certain scenarios) such as Stock Up, Hunt for Survivors, etc. - the scenarios that require search and rescue.

The Rogue Hero is supposed to go undercover and help the Heroes with their goals...but once the items/townsfolk are found, the Rogue Hero's job is to steal the resources or to kill the found "townsfolk" because they know his secret/have evidence.

I would assume endgame involves the Heroes still keeping all of the found items (or townsfolk alive) for the duration of the game. Killing the Rogue Hero could be optional, but they must have the items at the required location, and survive any fights on their final turn to win. The Rogue Hero would win by killing a certain number of Heroes (similar to the Zombies) or by gathering all of the items and having them at his own location by endgame. And, of course, the standard Zombie conditions apply. Although I am unclear if killing the Rogue Hero should count against the Heroes. Seems like it should, in the sense that they are all Humans, and it could present a dilemma for the Heroes - kill the Rogue Hero before the Zombies do, so they don't get a point.

Another interesting piece to throw in would be making the Free Search markers mandatory. If the Rogue Hero manages to turn over the New Hero Found marker, then they get a second Rogue Hero to work with (who would not be replaced, if killed, as per normal game rules).

[LabRat]

Has anyone played Shadows Over Camelot? It works in this manner (I only played it once, so my description may not be as accurate):

- Before the start of the game, players draw a card that identifies if they're a traitor or not. (There's only 1 traitor)
- During the game, the traitor remains unrevealed and secretly works against the Heroes' objective by botching up some plans, trying to get necessary items, etc.
- Heroes can make accusations - a wrongful accusation has negative results, a correct accusation has positive results
- The traitor can also reveal himself once he's worked his way up to a position that he's comfortable with (maybe he's obtained enough of the scenario items, etc.). Once revealed, he no longer participates in the game and instead follows a different set of actions.

There are some concepts that are already being discussed that are used in this game, so maybe we can use the others? But definitely, a Rogue hero or traitor will be scenario based and will likely have different rules/objectives.

[StayPuft]

Wow! This is actually coming along really well! Somebody should definitely put together an actual custom scenario card for this! This is becoming quite the collaborative project!

Kinding jumping off of some of LabRat's ideas....

Maybe the numbered tiles will be involved. So, X number of tiles are to be used. Maybe 6. So, say maybe you roll the determine the number that will represent the traitor. You then take four numbers, ensuring that the number rolled is one of them. Put them in a pile face down, and shuffle them up. Each of the hero players takes one. The hero player drawing the traitor numer now knows they are the traitor, but nobody else knows which person is. Then, you place all four numbers back with the remaining two, shuffle them again, and place them at random in buildings (this way, there are four numbers that could be the traitor, and two that can't, to make it a little more difficult).

If the heroes are able to reveal the number of the traitor, the traitor must then reveal themselves, and they then become enemies of the other heroes, meaning they can fight, etc. (Thematically, think of it like they found some kind of incriminating evidence to prove who it was after all.) However, if the traitor gets to a point where they have collected enough of the needed items that they think they can stop the heroes from winning, then they can choose to reveal themselves at this time.

Not sure if I am just making things complicated. But, that sounds like it could be a cool addition to the scenario, and a fun option on ways to reveal the traitor.

Obviously, just by the nature of this scenario, it could only be played in games involving 4 hero players each with one hero. Otherwise, with two hero players with two heroes each, you would know that if you aren’t the traitor, then the other player obviously is. With one hero player with all 4 heroes, it just wouldn’t make sense at all. LOL!