<p>It's not out of the ordinary. For example, the <a href="https://www.alderac.com/tempest/files/2012/09/Love_Letter_Rules_Final.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">rules to Love Letter</a> have a section dealing with the topic:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Honesty<br>
  A player could cheat when chosen with the Guard, or fail to discard the Countess when that player has the King or Prince in hand. We suggest that you don’t play with knaves who cheat at fun, light games. </p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-22T01:19:32.013Z
2017-06-22T01:19:32.013Z
ConMan
<p>I believe that this is how Confusion works </p>

<p><a href="https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/2961/confusion-espionage-and-deception-cold-war" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/2961/confusion-espionage-and-deception-cold-war</a></p>

<p>Relying on player honesty isn't a sign of bad design. It's problematic if you aspire for your game to get a massive following like...say, Scrabble, or if you ever wanted people to put money on the game. But you should be able to rely on people being generally honest in a board game.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-22T05:43:59.017Z
Thats not how Confusion works.  In confusion a player is unaware of how there own pieces move.  When they attempt a move the ask if it is allowed.  The other player will answer yes or no.  The key bit here is that each player marks down what they have just been told and what they have told there opponent.  This information is all checkable at the end of the game so any 'cheating' would be spotted.  There is one piece which you have the option of lying about but that piece is a double agent and this deception is covered by the rules.  Any lying about other pieces would be picked up on.
StartPlayer
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-21T20:53:26.570Z
2017-06-21T20:53:26.570Z
Mehal Shah
<p>I'm trying to design a boardgame which seems to rely on honesty of the players. (Honesty is not the theme of the game, currently, but is the side effect of the rules)</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Basically, the players will throw a dice on a covered place (I'm thinking like the cover used in Godfather), and call the number against other player number - higher number wins.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The gameplay is not as simple as that, of course, but I'm stuck with the thought that there might be players that cheat - mainly: calling number higher than they've rolled.</p>

<p>Verifying the rolled dice by opening the cover won't work because of the design - it will reveal their skill cards, which supposed to be hidden.</p>

<hr>

<p><strong>My question is:</strong> is a game that relies (heavily) on player honesty is bad by design? Verifying means losing (like revealing your hands to other player)</p>

<p>Please note that I'm <em>not</em> asking for solution to my game (that's a bonus, if someone thought of one), but asking if the design just won't work.</p>

<p><strong>Additional note:</strong> In my close group, people is trusted and expected to play honestly - in 7 Wonders we never check if someone does not have resources needed, or has paid the coins, etc. But that's different when playing with strangers who can (and will) lie to win.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-21T09:08:30.570Z
Not really an answer but a comment that such games do exist.  eg. Roll For The Galaxy has players rolling dice and allocating them to actions behind a screen.  The game is not cheat proof as players could easily adjust a dice behind a screen.   if thats 'bad design'  I'll let others answer.  it doesn't seem ideal but the idea of playing a game with people who would cheat to win to me means just find other players.
StartPlayer
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-21T11:48:17.150Z
Simple answer is don't play with people who cheat.
Joe W
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-21T12:49:04.140Z
I'm curious as to why the dice roll itself needs to be hidden.
Becuzz
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-21T13:02:46.687Z
The goal of the game is to figure out the exact cards you chose. The cards give specific bonus to specific rolls. If you call a 7 on your `math` roll, then you must have at least 1 `math` card (only 1 dice). However, if you lie and call 6, no one can guess that you actually have `math` card, giving you advantage at least for 1 turn when you lie.
Vylix
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-29T04:45:56.767Z
This characteristic of a game necessarily means that there will be less visible feedback when the game state changes, and that is something worth avoiding (even if you're playing with perfectly honest people).
The Chaz 2.0
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-15T20:40:13.623Z
This is an outstanding idea!  You should definitely pursue this!  I don't have immediate ideas on how to fix the existing setup (hidden die rolls are highly problematic), but my advice would be not to be stuck on the current game or structure, and instead pursue the concept, whatever form it may ultimately take.  Great games are rarely developed quickly.
DukeZhou
<game-design>
Designing game that relies on honesty
Vylix
# Designing game that relies on honesty

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-06-21)

I'm trying to design a boardgame which seems to rely on honesty of the players. (Honesty is not the theme of the game, currently, but is the side effect of the rules)

> Basically, the players will throw a dice on a covered place (I'm thinking like the cover used in Godfather), and call the number against other player number - higher number wins.

The gameplay is not as simple as that, of course, but I'm stuck with the thought that there might be players that cheat - mainly: calling number higher than they've rolled.

Verifying the rolled dice by opening the cover won't work because of the design - it will reveal their skill cards, which supposed to be hidden.

---

**My question is:** is a game that relies (heavily) on player honesty is bad by design? Verifying means losing (like revealing your hands to other player)

Please note that I'm *not* asking for solution to my game (that's a bonus, if someone thought of one), but asking if the design just won't work.

**Additional note:** In my close group, people is trusted and expected to play honestly - in 7 Wonders we never check if someone does not have resources needed, or has paid the coins, etc. But that's different when playing with strangers who can (and will) lie to win.

**Tags:** game-design

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Not really an answer but a comment that such games do exist.  eg. Roll For The Galaxy has players rolling dice and allocating them to actions behind a screen.  The game is not cheat proof as players could easily adjust a dice behind a screen.   if thats 'bad design'  I'll let others answer.  it doesn't seem ideal but the idea of playing a game with people who would cheat to win to me means just find other players.  
> **username_2**: Simple answer is don't play with people who cheat.  
> **username_3**: I'm curious as to why the dice roll itself needs to be hidden.  
> **username_0**: The goal of the game is to figure out the exact cards you chose. The cards give specific bonus to specific rolls. If you call a 7 on your `math` roll, then you must have at least 1 `math` card (only 1 dice). However, if you lie and call 6, no one can guess that you actually have `math` card, giving you advantage at least for 1 turn when you lie.  
> **username_4**: This characteristic of a game necessarily means that there will be less visible feedback when the game state changes, and that is something worth avoiding (even if you're playing with perfectly honest people).  
> **username_5**: This is an outstanding idea!  You should definitely pursue this!  I don't have immediate ideas on how to fix the existing setup (hidden die rolls are highly problematic), but my advice would be not to be stuck on the current game or structure, and instead pursue the concept, whatever form it may ultimately take.  Great games are rarely developed quickly.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_6 on 2017-06-22. Score: 3 | Accepted answer

It's not out of the ordinary. For example, the [rules to Love Letter](https://www.alderac.com/tempest/files/2012/09/Love_Letter_Rules_Final.pdf) have a section dealing with the topic:

> Honesty  
> A player could cheat when chosen with the Guard, or fail to discard the Countess when that player has the King or Prince in hand. We suggest that you don’t play with knaves who cheat at fun, light games.


---

### Answer by username_7 on 2017-06-21. Score: 0

I believe that this is how Confusion works

<https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/2961/confusion-espionage-and-deception-cold-war>

Relying on player honesty isn't a sign of bad design. It's problematic if you aspire for your game to get a massive following like...say, Scrabble, or if you ever wanted people to put money on the game. But you should be able to rely on people being generally honest in a board game.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Thats not how Confusion works.  In confusion a player is unaware of how there own pieces move.  When they attempt a move the ask if it is allowed.  The other player will answer yes or no.  The key bit here is that each player marks down what they have just been told and what they have told there opponent.  This information is all checkable at the end of the game so any 'cheating' would be spotted.  There is one piece which you have the option of lying about but that piece is a double agent and this deception is covered by the rules.  Any lying about other pieces would be picked up on.  

---

