Okay Forge! I've written a new party/ card game, and after my first test run even though the game idea is funny, the game play is simple, the actual game played out slower than I'd hoped. I could really use some creative ideas to look at this from a different angle. Without taking careful notes the game becomes a sort of slow guessing game. I don't know if it would be fun if players had to take notes to be competitive.

Pitch:
Players are British Lords trying to improve their status in the King’s Court, by dropping everyone else down a peg. The best way to do this is to slander the other nobles’ daughters. Really. They make it easy.
Unfortunately your own wild daughter seems to be doing her very best to compromise your family name herself, by performing some very unlady-like acts. Cover up the truth about your own family, while bringing everyone else's indiscretions to light in this party game for 4 or more players.

Mechanics:
Essentially a clue-like guessing game where players make up funny double entendres
all players have a 2 part indiscretion their daughter is guilty of (1 in 25 chance accurate guess w/ no clues)
every time a player takes a turn, they draw another indiscretion.

The Instigator draws a card from the Event Deck.
The action immediately read and performed. These are thematic, and usually result in free slander attempts and additional indiscretion draws.

The Instigator slanders someone.
        Instigator says "your daughter was shucking the slimy clam with the ornery school master"
              The key words are "clam" and "school master"

The noble who’s daughter had been slandered passes the instigator a burn card, revealing the number of accurate claims (either 0,1, or 2).
The Noble whose daughter was slandered reveals this card to one other Noble (not the Instigator), then passes it back to the Instigator.
Play passes next to the opponent whose daughter was slandered.

My ideas on speeding up the game:
When a noble slanders a daughter, all nobles are privy to the truth: how many of those claims were true (0,1,2)
a noble is disgraced when his daughter has been found guilty of 2 indiscretions (not 3).
indiscretions are never wiped. the more you have the bigger a target you are.
players get record sheets for taking notes in whatever format they choose.

For reference (taken from the original thread): Download Slander 1.0.

So, I'm looking this over, and here's what I have at first glance: I'm not seeing the strategy angle too clearly.

Are you familiar with the card game Guillotine? I bring it up because its mechanics are extremely, well, mechanical, but there's just the barest, most minimal necessary element of strategy that makes it possible for good play to increase one's (admittedly slim) chances of winning the game.

I am not very good at analyzing card games from the rules text alone, so if I'm missing a core element of play, then correct me, and that's cool.

Here's why I'm bringing it up, though. I think that the basic problem of "play is too slow" is not necessarily about speed - but about enjoyment. A fully mechanical, non-strategy card game is fun as a gimmick for a brief period, probably about half an hour in my experience. But a well-designed bit of relevant strategic, opportunistic content makes the game fun regardless of whether its duration is short or long.

Best, Ron

i can totally see that. I think this IS a way to improve the game.

at this point the strategy is similar to clue....
you use a score sheet to keep track of what indiscretions you know a girl has committed, and then you lay on the heat.
the strategy is very light, and the fun is supposed to come from inventing double entendres.

there are random events that introduce additional information, LOTS of indiscreations get drawn, and players gang up on each other.
That's a big element.

I want to keep is simple like guillotine..
The original draft of this game was a strategy deck building game... and then I realized as approachable as the idea was, i'd never get my wife to play!

if there were an incentive to pick one player over another, or to slander in particular, then it might slightly increase strategy.
Perhaps when you prove a daughter is guilty, you can discard two indiscretions?

that way players have a goal to work towards, and you can strategically choose which indiscretions you lose (the ones with one or more elements players are guessing at, the ones with the most in common).

BTW, play testing!

I ran the decks through the office duplex printer (shh!), and did some test games.

First, I found that the game is totally playable with 3 players. rule change is that you can slander whomever you choose (w/ 4 players rules say you can't slander the person who slandered you) thsi was a decision to make sure all players get involved. w/ a 3 player game, if 2 players go back and forth, EVERYONE gets all teh information from teh slander, AND the 2 players are drawing a ton on indiscretions, giving the noble on the sidelines an advantage. so... it's allowed, but @ your own risk.

second, making up entendres is really fun. The Accomplices can probably lose their "fill in the blank" portion, but the entendres are great!
"shucking the mouldy clam" "shaving the bumpy corn" and anything that involved "the entire Cricket team" was a hell of a lot of fun.

We played in a sandwich shop, and a gentleman at the next table leaned over, and said "that card game looks absolutely decadent"

decadent! Awesome!

How long did the playtests last?

Look, really if as a player you know what your in for with a game, then you can often fit that in. Like monopoly - I know it takes ages, so either I'm up for that, or I decline to play - it's not necessarily a problem with monopoly (though I played a kids version of it which seemed great in design, but I digress)

I mean, it sounds like you had fun and even a listener to play had fun (how many games can say that?). If it takes awhile, sometimes people are up for that - this might just be a game that you schedule "Wanna Slander this weekend?" rather than just play on whim, which is fine, and you don't need to worry so much?

I like where you're coming from. My insecurity is that I’m afraid the game’s not FUN enough to warrant play for a full hour. Plus, I have a very short attention span myself, so I like shorter games.
I’ll do some more play testing this weekend, and let y’all know how it goes.