Android was an Xmas gift from my Brother this year. After reading the rules, he and I both wanted to give it a quick run to gain better understanding of how the game system worked. We played a game with just the two of us and had a third character that we played as a "blind hand". We kept the "non"player's hunch cards face down so we didn't know who he was after, and then we played him jointly. Whenever he was able to place evidence, we didn't look at the value, we just took turns placing them.

This started me thinking about how you could make Android a two player game without the 3rd character at all. You could have a rule that basically has someone placing random evidence after both players take their turn. Has anyone else attempted this?

P.S. The Non-Player won the game by about 20 VP!!

I haven't attempted it yet but I am working on some theories. One of which is to play with four characters but sort of with a team of investigators. You can still do everything you could normally but you're trying to work together with your other character instead of against. Basically, how I would do the scoring at the end is the winner would be the team with the highest average. Like I said, I still need to work alot kinks out but I'm hoping to start playtesting it that way tomorrow actually.

My girlfriend and I played two player without any rule changes. I thought it played just fine. It was her first game so it was nice that we could just take it slowly and really take in the theme.

All two-player needs is 4 suspects instead of 3. It works like a charm.

3 suspects makes it a little more difficult to bluff. 4 lets you set up diversions, which are critical with only 2 players.

I actually really enjoy this variant - have played several rounds.

Try to play with my friend our first game with no rule change.

Well, it seems that the game is not created for two players, as you can easily guess what suspect your opponent has(too few testimony tokens, not hard to track what belkong to you), as well as playing twilight cards was a little weird. You always draw a black card from the same deck, so you have lot of them to play on your oponent in almost every situation.

All this isnt that bad, we agreed that is not the problem, but following the lead is. As you normally give the lead to the player on your right, he is not usually the one who gets it next turn. But, in two player game, lead goes to the player who plays next... so he put it one or two spaces far to get there easily when its his turn(and still fulfil the rules to place the lead). When he does, you do the same, and again and again ...

We play in 4 after that, although the game took a very very long time it was not that stereotype...

I'll be checking this topic out often, as I may be in a position to play this 2-player more often than 3 or 4...

I really would like the full compliment, but I don't see it as realistic with my current group...

Rasiel said:

But you can get into the exact same thing with a 3-player game. It's just that there's a slight gap between the lead being moved and it being claimed again. After all, when I place one, I'm going to place it as close to me as I can. And then the person to my right goes (allowing the person to my left to place a lead that they can get to quickly), then I examine that lead (and the person to the right places it as close to him as he can), then the person to my left goes again, gets another lead, and passes it to me...

So it's the same as in the two player, it's just that with a 2-player you're immediately getting the one that was just taken, while with a 5-player there are 3 people in between you placing the lead and you taking the lead (so the leads can potentially just circle the table, rather than appearing to go back and forth).

Not that it's usually that repetitive/monotonous, that's just one way it can go (and the reason there are limitations on where leads can be moved).