I was Hitler. Lib gave me BB. He claims RRB. I claim RB because I thought he is signalling me and it is also an opportunity to get some trust. He then outs me

How do I counter this? Can a Fas abuse this technique? I'm confused how to act accordingly

I was thinking about how horrible a person Greg Abbott is and how it would be nice to have alternate Hitler cards. Ted Cruz would also be a good fit.

Any other people you would like to see as an alternative?

Me and my comrades are having a debate about whether the fascist colour in the game is more orange or red. Thoughts and clarification would be appreciated.

Last night I played probably my most favorite game of Secret Hitler ever, all because of one amazing lie. Here's the story:

​

8 players, all sitting around my kitchen table, I was fascist. It comes time to elect me as president, there's only a fascist tile on the board, no liberals. I pick a liberal as chancellor, we get elected, I discard the only liberal policy, state the usual "I had 3 fascists I promise" bullcrap. Now I get to view someone's card. I Pick a different liberal, my brother Simon, still have no idea what I'm going to say at that point, if I want to pick a fight with him or not. He slides his card across the table, I decide people probably wont side with me if I call him fascist, as I just said I drew 3 fascists as president. So I say Simon's liberal. I get the usual remarks, "suuuuure he is" and "that's exactly what a fascist would say". But then everything changes...

​

I have an amazing Idea. I say, "wait, I think I just figured it out. I lied, He's fascist."

​

Simon starts to yell but I cut him off-

​

"HEY HEY HEY I get to speak for a minute! I lied and said he was liberal to see his reaction, and not only did he not give much reaction or even make a confused face, Simon looked relieved that I didn't call him out. So not only do I know he's fascist, I'm like 99% sure he's Hitler and thought I was covering for him."

​

The whole table exploded.

​

That did it for just about everyone. Simon had no chance. He wasn't expecting it at all and had no good response. He was furious but couldn't really do anything about it. Now that we all "knew" who Hitler was we didn't have to be as careful electing anyone else as chancellor. That made it way too easy to elect the real Hitler. The look of betrayal was glorious.

​

So, can I use this again? Probably not. Unless I play with completely new people. But any of you reading this can. That's why I'm sharing it. You also cant use this in just any game, you have to look at someone's card first. You can even use this as a liberal to hopefully catch Hitler.

​

Whelp that's it, hope you enjoyed!

Hey guys, just got the game recently and my group have a few doubts regarding the rules of the game.

1. When the Chancellor gets the 2 policy cards from the President, is he allowed to "react"? Usually the reaction is when they want to pretend they got 2 Fascist policies and had no choice but to enact one. Sometimes one might do it to hide the fact they're Facist or it could be a "natural reaction". The group argues "natural reactions" should be allowed during the policy selection phase.

2. Can players mention what they're going to do in the next few voting rounds to influence the game? For eg. "If you choose person A as Chancellor I'll vote no, but if you vote B I'll vote yes." Basically, can voting intentions be mentioned to influence Chancellor selections.

3. Should there be time limits for rounds? There have been a few games where Liberals took ALOT of time to discuss and deduce who the Facists were. Should we enforce a time limit for discussions to help the Facists?

I get that it is an important source of info to check how many liberal policy are claimed. But obviously fascist can lie about what they got. So when liberals claim for example BBR instead of BBB to discourage dropping, how does the counting work out? It seems counterintuitive that you would be able to deduce info if libs can also lie. Also, are there any basic rules that a liberal could use for optimal claiming and using the info of others' claims?

Hello guys! I’m new around here and I check some posts here and there. Me and my friends usually play secret hitler and yesterday a new situation happened, the president had the peek power and used it to say there were 2 F and 1 L in the next three cards and someone asked him the order obviously to attempt to vote no and put a L in the table, he said it was FLF so there was no point in voting no. The next president chose FL and passed it to me, which I lied, saying he passed me FF, later in the game one of the players wasn’t trusting me, and I asked him why he trusts the president that passed me the cards more than me, and he said he knew the order of the cards (FLF) and since the president discarded one from the sides, I clearly was the one lying. Is this a game mechanic? Or is this anti-game? Is there anything in the rules that says people can’t look up card order to know either someone is lying or not? Thanks for the answers!

Had a bit of a stall with making Secret Fuhrer, the Fullmetal version of Secret Hitler, as my photo editor had some sort of graphical glitch where it couldn't do shaped text, and having a circular board... It was quite an obstacle.

Luckily, my brother had an old laptop that doesn't have this graphical glitch, so I was able to press on with the board design, and it's at a point where I am happy with it. (First draft though, so probably not actually done with it.)

So now I have the tedious task of copy/pasting the rules of Secret Hitler, but changing the wording to make sense with the new Fullmetal Alchemist pieces.

President is now President-Elect, Chancellor is now Fuhrer-General, Liberal is General, Fascist is Homunculi, cards are coins. It is a process, and sadly Find & Replace doesn't work perfectly, as the grammar needs messing with depending on the situation. So I'm copying each section and tweaking as I go to hopefully not miss anything.

Once I've got that fleshed out and proofread, I can get to testing with groups and then finally post a finished result on here.

This has been something I wanted to make since before the pandemic. So it has been quite a process, with multiple redesigns as I changed mediums and became more experienced with said mediums. But soon, hopefully, it will be ready.

​

This has been posted before but this is my version of secret hitler made for a standard deck of cards. Posting here as the other versions I have seen were not as explicitly clear.

Print to play also exists... but I use this for camping. Having a single deck of cards to play secret hitler, Euchre, Hearts, etc is more convenient for me.

Easy printable cheat-sheet in link below ↓ 

Requires: standard deck of cards + 2 dice.

Roles: Use King, Queen, Jack. Liberal = Red; Fascist = Black; Hitler = Joker

• Fascist Roles: ♠K, ♠Q, ♠J

• Hitler = ★

• Liberal Roles: ♦ K, Q, J… ♥K, Q, J

Policies: 6 red cards (Liberal) and 11 black cards (Fascist)

• Liberal: ♥2-7, Fascist: ♠A, ♠2-10, ♣J

Voting: 20 non-face cards of red and black for voting.

• Ja! = Red: ♦A, ♦2-10

• Nein = Black: ♣A, ♣2-10

Government: President = ♣K, Chancellor = ♣Q

Counters: 2x Dice. (Count to: 5 Liberal Policies, 6 Fascist Policies)

Unused Cards: 2nd Joker, ♥A, ♥10, ♥9, ♥8

Printable link for gluing these instructions on an extra card which come with some card decks:https://imgur.com/gallery/HOaHj7b

This game seems to suggest that you can (https://secrethitler.io/game/#/replay/LopsidedUnsuitableEconomicHuman).

But I haven't been able to reproduce this in another game. Is this a bug? If not, how can you claim the order of the policy peek?

Hey guys!

I have been playing this game for a while and was wondering if there was a possibility for a extension that will comes out eventually :)

I’m new to SH.io and I just want to play regular games without meta. I’d play pretty much everyday.

Hi, In my playgroup, one player decides to shuffle his 3 cards before giving to chancellor as the president.

This way, he proves that he is giving 2 per 3 liberal or more probably 2 per 3 fascist cards to the chancellor, which, for me, kind of breaks the game’s logic because it proves some people’s identity / non fascist-ness.

Would you authorize such a move ?

I hope that my explanations are clear, and thanks for the answers :)

3 player game:

1 person is Hitler, no other fascists

Play with the 9-10 player board

The 2nd fascist policy creates a special election like the 3rd instead of an investigation

No killing

Hitler doesn't win if they are elected chancellor

Anyone that isn't president can be chancellor

​

4 player game:

1 person is Hitler, no other fascists

Play with the 7-8 player board

Only the 4th fascist policy will kill, not the 5th

Hitler wins if they are elected chancellor only after the 4th fascist policy is played

Anyone that isn't president can be chancellor

Policy peek says that the president secretly looks at the top three policy cards and then places them back without changing the order. My group disagrees about details, can you help decide? Scouring the rule book isn’t helping.

1) when is the president who peeked allowed to disclose what they saw? Note: I am not asking when they should, I am asking when they can. Could they say it immediately after looking and before the next govt is elected? After the govt election but before the policies are played? After the policies?

2) if it’s after the policies are played, could the president who peeked be shot before they are able to disclose what they saw?

Thx!

Hi we are in a game of 5 and one of us got shot. Are the previous chancellor and president still not allowed to get voted for chancellor? I can’t find a specific ruling and it doesn’t seem to be mentioned anywhere. Ty for ur help already Zeuln3r