As others have pointed out, 4 players and 2 snakes means the mongoose is the only player, who doesn't know who to trust. The snakes obviously know, and the human can easily deduce it, since they know their own role and the mongoose. This problem could be easily fixed by making the number of snakes variable. If there are between 1-3 snakes each round, or 1-2, or even 0-2, then the game becomes much more interesting imo.
Yeah I was thinking about this during work after the rules were explained cause I was just like “it’s essentially 1v2 with another person just there trying to figure out who they’re supposed to help.” I think ditching the mongoose entirely makes the game much more entertaining
@@someusername1452 Oh, that's not the issue. The snakes could just as easily claim to be the human, so with the setup of this video, the mongoose can never be sure who to trust. It just seems boring that the human can figure out every role for certain. Not much of a social deduction game, if only 1 player is left in the dark. With a variable number of snakes, it becomes a lot more difficult to figure out who to trust.
@@ahlpym This game really looks like it was meant for more people. Yes you *can* still play it with 4 people but it’s a lot less interesting than if you played it with the max amount of people big potato recommended, which is 8.
theory: the reason that Sammy hosts "Some Lovely Board Games" is because when he ISN'T the host, he will stop at nothing to derail the games and Big Potato wanted a little bit less chaos
I think that's just a consequence of having only four people play the game. The box seems to say 4-8 players, so it'd probably be better with more players. Maybe you could change the number of snakes depending on how many players you have to help deal with this issue.
Hello, Just wanted to precise that the study about choccy milk and americans is flawed. They were presented the question "Where does chocolate milk comes from ?" : A. White cows B. Brown cows C. Black cows D. I don't know When presented this kind of question, it is not a surprise that some people were not answering seriously. This was mandated by a company that makes chocolate milk, to use it in an ad. This percentage however got overseas, and we were fed this crazy stat without any context. I am, indeed, not fun at parties.
As a child, I always thought that since horses and cows were always kept together, and because at preschool you either got apple juice or milk, that cows made milk and horses made apple juice.
Regarding the Egyptian question: considering that Heqet, ancient goddess of childbirth, was pictured as a frog headed woman, clearly frogs were familiar enough to the Egyptians from the yearly flooding of the Nile. Also there are a hedgehog species native to Egypt. As (like the mongoose) they hunt snakes, they were sacred to the sun god Ra, who was supposed to face the demon serpent Apep nightly.
These guys are so genuinely nice, like the coming out of mongoose was so respectful and accurate ! It would have been easy for anyone to make a joke and be stupid with this subject but you managed to be funny AND respectful... Thank you!
If someone starts the round with "I dont think it's XYZ" instead of "I think it's XYZ .." you are immediatly suspicious, and I am kinda sad it worked in the first round.
Why? If you're not sure between the other two, but you're pretty sure it's not that one, of course you're going to say that. The alternative is to say nothing. If anything I'd argue that makes someone less suspicious since it's ridiculous to think the snake would risk immediately outing themselves like that. Basically, it's a bluffing game and all bluffing is complicated, you can't make statements like yours without there being numerous problems with them.
I think what's even more confusing is that the human didn't IMMEDIATELY know who the snakes were. It seems like a difficult game to actually screw up with only 4 players. For example, with four people, two are snakes one is human and one is mongoose. If you are human, you know that you are human, therefore there can be no others. The mongoose's identity is revealed to everyone, so you know who the mongoose is. Therefore the last two must be snakes and are not to be trusted.
@@alansmithee419 The alternative is not to say nothing, it's to say that you are not sure. It's to say "I dont know". It's to at least say, that you are unsure between 2 options. Of course it's essentially the same, but the goal is not to exclude an answer, but to find the correct one. It's not about the absolute value of the statement. It's about the implications and reading of a first suggestion. Of course the goal can be to "bluff" people into picking the option you suggested is wrong on the assumption that these people already suspect you. But still that's something weird to do upfront. Just because it's a bluffing game, doesnt mean that there aren't ways to control suspicion. Bein suspicious can be good and bad, but it's something to look out for. The point still stands. I tend to distrust people more, if they try to discourage an option, especially when they dont have explicit knowledge, or can cite where you have learned that factoid. The first question perfectly makes that point. Eddie knew Wallpaper was wrong, so instead of nudging people towards answeres he knew were wrong, by saying he was considering two options over the other, he just out of the gate BOOM went "Nah it's not that one, source: trust me dude" If it's bluffing, it's bad bluffing, is my point.
@@YTNFSCC Well all I know is that if I were given three things and told one of them was true, but there was one I was sure was wrong, I too would point that out in a heartbeat. It's easy to rationalise that someone's behaviour is suspicious when you're already convinced (or in this case are fully aware) of their guilt.
Yes. Every life form is trying to evolve into crabs. And we have seen this in crustaceans almost identical to crabs that live in identical environments to crabs, causing them to become slightly more similar. Truly, conclusive evidence that all animals, every single one, are becoming crabs.
The whole '''hard mood/gonegoose'' section of the vid may be one of my new favorite ''tomska and friends'' moments, i was struggling not to choke on my food from laughter
I am being humble when I am telling you that I am the most powerful strongest coolest smartest most famous greatest funniest Y*uTub3r of all time! That's the reason I have multiple girlfriends and I show them off all the time! Bye bye sk
wait, logically, if there is 4 players, and one is guaranteed good (mongoose), and there are two snakes, then you not being the mongoose or snakes, you would know exactly who the snakes are, right?
it'd probably be better with more but also consider the Mongoose doesn't know who the human is, and its likely to make the mongoose suspicious of you if your likr "WELL I'M HUMAN AND" so its better to just play as a better convincer than really go into the social deduction aspect of it at this size, but imagine teh chaos with like 6-12 people--
@@Draig44 well that and convincing the mongoose you arent a snake. im just the asshole who plays games like this and has to make the answers a logical thing
@@flicnerdy4385 oh yeah, im sure with that many people it would be a blast. im just the asshole that looks at the logistics of something and goes "hold on a sec"
This seems like one of those games that's fun the first couple times, but once you've gone through all the cards and know all the answers you either have to buy expansion packs or never play the game ever again.
I love Tom's Big Brain play at the last question. Vehemently arguing against one option to make himself seem suspicious, then giving shit arguments, but that option was actually wrong.
You don't know how much I wanted Elliot to quote Jeremy Irons' infamous line from the opening of Dungeons and Dragons after pissing off Tom by continuing the joke. He failed all of us.
I wanted to watch this right away, but I'm in the silent part of the library and the first minute has made me laugh out loud already, so that seems like danger 😂
The whole crab thing is an ACTUAL thing like some random sea animals always turned into crabs throught their evolution because it's just the best way to gain food have armor and move at the sea floor there was also a Now famous YT vid about it
Okay but riddle me this. If you are playing with 4 people, 2 snakes, and the mongoose of truth, and get ordinary human, wouldn't you be able to see who the mongoose is, and then know who the snakes are because you're the only ordinary human?
@TheSportsGuru its a bible story that can’t be proved real, they weren’t even targeting a specific group of people with their jokes and they were literally discussing it in relation to the question.
@TheSportsGuru I disagree that this specific case is a double standard because I think the joke was meant to be sarcastic and not to be taken at face value. Even if it WAS from malicious intent to mock and belittle religion it’s a very minor jab at best and I don’t consider these small double standards something new or the downfall of humanity
@TheSportsGuru I meant that small double standards aren’t the cause of humanity’s downfall, and I rewatched it and it still feels to me like a part of the video that isn’t meant to be taken literally at face value. It may be just me but it seems like he knows that him saying the Bible is a children’s book is a hot take so he jokingly doubles down by saying “yeah I said it”
15:19 that's a harsh callout right there, glad they can joke about this kind of thing, Tom seems like someone who would maybe take that to heart. Probably more than a decade of degrading comments on the internet toughened him up for it. Good on you guys for being able to make jokes like that about eachother.
Honestly how does this make sense with four players, the human is always gonna know who the snakes are, because they know they aren't one, and they know the mongoose isn't one, unless theres a variable amount of snakes they would always know that the remaining two players are the snakes.
The fucking Sammy wheeze is so good. The pure amount of idiocy is fascinating. Also i just realized like 9 minutes into the video, the background is a green screen. Just perfect.
The word is carcinization. On multiple occasions, nature has evolved q creature into a crab-like creature, independent of other factors. Crabs truly are the most optimal lifeform. Reject humanity, reject monke, advance to crab
Gotta say, basing it off of this video. This game seems like it’s really easy to know who’s a liar. The mongoose announces themselves at the start of the round so you know they aren’t trying to lie to you. And if you get the normal human character card, you know the other two people are the snakes. So it’s like, what’s the point?
I tell ya, as someone who recently discovered they're Agender, I really appreciate that Tom still used "they/them" for the Mongoose even after that little skit.
Looks like a cool game to play between friends :) took me 10 min to realise they are actually in front of a green screen tho lol.. Idea for a longer form: 10 questions in a row without the actors being revealed until the end(except mongoose of course) in order: question > diskussion > answer repeat; points get tallied up in the end. The rest of the rules stay the same.
14:29 Actually, the story of the plagues is true. There’s some debate of their exact nature and how many there were, but it really happened. The question is whether or not it was an act of god
I don't see the point here. Like most of the time content could POSSIBLY be unscripted but in this, they know their own identity, they know there are 2 snakes, 1 human, and 1 mongoose, so they just know who is a snake. I mean, I'm a human, I can see the mongoose, so there are only 2 people and roles left...
Fun fact, in the original hebrew, frog is referred to in the singular (i.e. a plague of frog), which some have interpreted as a single frog plaguing egypt rather than many.
10:32 The fact, often flanderised, is that _specifically crustaceans_ are always trying to evolve into crabs. Also, "always" is hyperbole, it's just somewhat frequently. So carcinisation never had any relevance to the question, but it's perfectly understandable how Tom got confused.
The funny thing about this game is that somehow it related to my school life. Sometimes during some trivia games in my IT classes, one of my friends would try to mislead me into choosing the incorrect answers. It obviously did not work as I still somehow managed to get them correct.
I can only assume this game doesn’t have a set number of snake players every round, otherwise the human will go in knowing who the snakes are. Let it be said this comment is being made during the first round and more to help boost video engagement than to get the answer that I’ll likely get by the time I finish typing this.
