LogFAQs > #933744195

51. Decrypto (2018)

Category: Team vs Team
Genres: Clue-giving, hidden communication, word game
Rules complexity (0 to 7): 2
Game length: 15-45 minutes
Experience: 8+ games over 6+ sessions (2018-19) with 4-8 players
Previous ranks: NR (2016), NR (2018)

Summary - Each team has four words that only the team knows. Each round, one player on each team sees a different sequence of numbers, representing those words, and that player on each team has to give three public clues so that the other players on their team can guess the correct numbers. The catch is, while the opposing team does not know your words, they do know your clues and finds out what clues correspond to what numbers for your cards. In future rounds, they are granted the opportunity to "intercept" sequence-guesses of the opponent. Two interceptions by the opponent or two failed guesses on your own team, and you lose. Make it through eight rounds, and your tiebreaker is guessing your opponents' words straight-up.

Design - Decrypto is a true battle of the wits. You have to try really hard to outwit your opponents while not outwitting your own teammates when you give clues, and as a bonus, everyone takes turns giving clues in Decrypto. Unlike in other cluegiving games, you can't make your clues as accurate as you want them to be; they need to distinguish your cards but not necessarily identify them. For example, giving "yellow" and then "fruit" as clues for "banana" is extremely dangerous, because two rounds later, your opponent will know for sure that your word is "banana," and then any clues you give for it, when it shows up on your sequence, will be almost immediately identified. On the other hand, if you get too cute - "funny" for "banana" - your team might miss it. The danger of giving the single word that gives it away also terrifying. "Boat" is fine for banana. You can even get away with "curved." But toss in "split" in round three, and suddenly you're running up against very dangerous territory.

For some reason, Decrypto is nearly impossible to explain with words. It's one of those games that you just have to play a practice round of to get the hang of, unless you've independently read up on it. Separating the intercept phase and the open discussion phases is a little clunky, and keeping track of all the info you want to requires just a little more space than the paper gives you.

Experience - I got a lot of really good plays out of Decrypto, really fast. It has a very unique brain-burn-y, puzzle-y feeling that, in cluegiving games, can let you feel so indescribably clever. Figuring out your opponent's word is also incredibly satisfying; it's perfectly acceptable to say what you're thinking about the opponents' words because you have nothing to hide from them, and nailing their sequence also feels incredible.

That said, for a while, we had a core four thing going, and then early in 2019, the couple came back after having played a ton with their families, which made them much harder to beat. And then my erstwhile partner said, "I don't really like Decrypto." And that's the thing. As much as Decrypto can burn your brain and make you feel clever, it is one of those games where being noticeably worse than your opponent can feel really, really bad. It happened, and since then I haven't really played.

Future - With the right group I can bring it out again, but it feels like opportunities for that right group are a bit limited. The potential for negative feelings in teammate miscommunication is pretty rough; something about it is a little less laugh-filled than guessing wrong in other cluegiving games, perhaps due to the amount of thought that has to go into each clue. Additionally, the difficulty in teaching Decrypto creates another barrier to getting it to the table. I'll bide my time, though - it remains on my shelf, waiting for the stars to align again.
---

yet all sailors of all sorts are more or less capricious and unreliable - they live in the varying outer weather, and they inhale its fickleness