[Doctor Xaos] Final tweaks it seems

[Ron Edwards]

Doctor Xaos playtesting at GenCon! With five people who had never heard of it and had no idea who I was. Optimal, really.

Well, the game's primary conceit is still full blast successful, just as it always had been. When a person plays Doctor Xaos, he or she goes bull goose loony, and when playing a hero, is very motivated to defeat the Plan. I never have to explain or encourage it. Realizing the strength of this, I also revised some text that went in long ago that was very iffy about whether you play to win or not. Now, I say, "Always play to win for whomever you're playing." The game is about whether Doctor Xaos wins, not you, but it will be very satisfying for you to go for it hard at all times, whatever the it might be at the moment.

Before the game, I stripped the rules a bit, de-chroming them, so that anyone working together uses the same rules - specifically, that if the lesser villain is uncontrolled, not working toward his or her Plan, and therefore opposing Doctor Xaos, then he or she is effectively a Developed hero. I'd discovered a few too many "but if it's ... and then if ..." going on.

In the Forge Midwest games, the heroes tended to do very well against Doctor Xaos, but this game saw two stomps in two rounds (not Gin though) similar to the recent Finnish game. I've done a little dummy drawing and probability thinking, and it breaks down like this:

1. Doctor Xaos will probably hit a meld in the first round, the second at the latest, and is likely to get four cards in melds in the second round. This is a pretty consistent result, barring a major lucky draw. The question is whether the player chases more.

2. The heroes are at a considerable statistical disadvantage and their individual results also vary more widely. A lucky draw can make a big difference, but without, it they'll take three or four rounds for one or more of them to be able to knock. So Doctor Xaos has a while to round out his or her hand a bit, and even if a hero knocks first, may well be able to match it. This has been a bit too consistent.

So I'm considering that every hero player can consult with the player to his or her left about what to discard. I think that will help to optimize their play a little bit, especially if it's only "show and pick," not a discussion. The lesser villain is included in this only when he or she is in full "hero mode" as described above.

This rule would also permit players with bad draws to stay engaged with what's going on, and to contribute to hero success anyway. The statistics suggest that even if they lose, they can get almost there and feel like they're scrapping, not sitting there glumly drawing and discarding crap in a non-strategic way. I'm also amused at the role that the changing seating will play in that effect, as Doctor Xaos moves around. A hero trapped between the two villains is potentially cut off, for example.

However, that is a whole new dynamic at the table which is not playtested, so I'm not going to drop it in without more thought and play.

It's really important to keep Doctor Xaos from getting Gin in that first round, so without a good draw, the hero players need to knock immediately at four cards, even if it's  to lose. Better to come back developed right away, as many as possible. The GenCon group did this and I expected a bit of retribution in round two, but I think there was some misplaying in it - someone discarded a Joker, for instance, not knowing it was wild for them now, and I didn't catch it in time.

I haven't seen the lesser villain stay free in the first round yet. A bit of a pity because there's no sensible way to oppose his or her Plan, in action - a hero is always better off opposing Doctor Xaos. But who wants the little creep to get his or her way either?

3. Developed heroes have a fighting chance to defeat the Plan, especially since their melds add for potential sums far higher than Doctor Xaos can do alone - Doctor Xaos is best off knocking fast when faced with three or four developed heroes, and keeping the damn lesser villain under control. I don't see a problem with this part, mechanically, especially since it keeps the rounds short.

I've noticed some role-playing turning the tide one way or another - if the lesser villain player decides he or she can live with Doctor Xaos' plan instead, or is especially ticked off at the way Doctor Xaos treats him or her. This also seems in keeping with the point of the game.
I like the tension between helping the lesser villain rebel and opposing Doctor Xaos in the mid-game. I cut it back to permitting heroes only to do one or the other. I also made the lesser villain's successful rebellion not oppose the Plan in that round - unless he or she gets Gin, in case it does. This is because the heroes really weren't too badly off in the Forge Midwest games, and the rebelling villain was effectively an instant defeat for the Plan.