Players: 3-4
Time: 60 minutes
Difficulty: 4 (of 10)

The Components

Who Stole Ed's Pants? comes with:

• 95 cards
• 14 glass stones
• 4 player mats
• 1 rulebook

Cards: This game comes with a slew of different cards. These include: rank cards (used to mark the ranks of the 6 types of witnesses); witness cards (who help you out by planting evidence); evidence cards (which incriminates other players); and fact cards (which show the facts of the crime). The cards are all printed full-color on half-size cards that are medium-light in weight

The cards are slightly amateur in design. They use a combination of mildly textured backgrounds and what I presume is clip art. The clip art is actually put to pretty good use, because it's all simple line art which is matched across various card types, and is pretty easy to see. However the background and some of the other graphical nuances (e.g., the scroll which are used to mark fact & evidence cards and the shields which are used to mark witness cards) aren't that attractive.

As I said, the clip art does a good job of providing good usability to the game. It's for the most part easy to match up cards that you need to match up, though a few players had some troubles when things were all the way across the table. Likewise, the color-coding of the six witness types works well, though two (brown household staff and black outlaws) were a little too similar in color.

Glass Stones: Fairly standard glass stones. Four are clear, and used to mark your score; they're easy to look through while the other 10 are an attractive purple.

Player Mats: Cardstock player mats. Because of background texturing & a multitude of colors, I found them a bit busy and hard to read. However, besides being a scorecard, they also have a lot of useful information, telling you about all the actions you can take during a turn. I wish it was organized a bit better, but the info on the cards is invaluable.

Rulebook: A small black & white rulesheet. It does a fair job of explaining the rules, had some useful diagrams, and was easy to reference during the game.

The theming of the game is worth mentioning. As with other Eight Foot Llama games, the theming seemed silly, but was funny. The idea of tracking down a pants thief is, of course, ludicrous, but the rest of the cards bring that silly theme to life. I loved having witnesses from all walks of life, and seeing which were more or less credible. For example law enforcers started out being the most trusted folks, and were the least by the end of the game. The idea of planting evidence and then changing the facts of the case to match that was delightful too.

Overall the quality of the components in Who Stole Ed's Pants? is below average and some of the graphical work isn't particularly attractive. This is all pretty understandable given that it was the first product from a small, indie designer. The utility runs from so-so (the player mats) to pretty good (the cards). And the theming is definitely a notable, fun, and successful element in the game. On the whole I give it a Style of "2" out of "5": slightly below average, but the theming (and gameplay) still make it worthwhile.

The Gameplay

The object of Who Stole Ed's Pants is to incriminate your opponents in the theft of the century.

Setup: The six rank cards are randomly laid out in the middle of the table. These determine the general credibility of the six groups of witnesses (folks on the street, law enforcers, household staff, circus performers, merchants, and outlaws).

The basic facts of the crime are laid out, with one random who fact, one random where fact, and one random when fact.

Each player is also given three witnesses, face-up: one "who witness", one "where witness", and one "when witness". These are your pigeons, who tell you how the other players might have committed the crime.

All three types of facts are then shuffled together. Likewise all three types of evidence are shuffled together. A third deck of witnesses is also shuffled. Each player gets two witnesses, two evidence cards, and one fact card.

The remaining cards in each deck form draw piles (though only 12 of the cards are used to form the evidence pile, presumably for game length reasons).

Witnesses. Each witness comes from one of the six groups, and also has a 1-6 credibility rating within that group. For example the "bearded lady" is a credibility 3 circus performer, and the "head butler" is a credibility 6 (e.g., the most credible) household staff.

Evidence. There are three types of evidence, who, where, and when. The types of labeled on the back, which means you always know what's at the top of an evidence draw pile. An example of "where evidence" says, "You were seen swimming in the river at the park", and has "river" and "park" icons. A "Who Evidence" says "You have a pet parrot on your shoulder at all times" and has "pet" and "pirate" icons. You incriminate other players with evidence cards, as discussed below, then try and match them to the facts of the case.

Facts. There are three types of facts, who, where, and when. They're labeled on the back, so you know what you're drawing. These lay out what happened--or at least what people currently say happened. An example of a "where fact" says, "Ed's car keys were recovered at the airport" and has the "airplane" icons. An example of a "who fact" says "Rumors abound the thief was accompanied by a pet" and has the "pet" icon; yes, that matches the pet parrot evidence I mentioned above.

Order of Play: Gameplay is at heart pretty simple: you play a card, then you draw a card each turn, until a round of play is over. However, there are different rules for playing each sort of card.

Playing Evidence: You play evidence on other players to make them look guilty of the crime. To play an evidence card on an opponent your related witness (who, when, or where) must have a higher overall credibility rating than their related witness. This means they belong to a more credible group, or if they're in the same group, they have a higher credibility number.

Playing Facts: Fact cards replace the current facts of the case. To play a fact your related witness (who, when, or where) must be among the four most credible groups.

Playing Witnesses: Witnesses can be played in a variety of ways.

You can replace your own witness if the new witnesses credibility number (not credibility group) is equal to or lower than your current one in the same category.

You can replace an opponent's witness if the new witnesses credibility number (not credibility group) is equal to or higher than their current one in the same category.

You can also play a witness to increase or decrease the credibility of his entire group (by moving the ranking card). You can move it up to 1, 2, or 3 spaces depending on the credibility of the witness you're using.

Drawing a Card: After you play your card you can draw a card from any of the three draw piles (witness, evidence, fact). Note that you'll be able to tell if an evidence card or a fact card is who, when, or where based on the card backing.

Ending a Round: A round of play ends after the last card is drawn from any of the three piles.

Then each player gets points based on how many pieces of evidence he's been stuck with that fit the current facts of the case. (Points are bad!) It's a geometric progression: 1/3/6/10 points, depending on if you had one, two, three, or four+ matching pieces of evidence.

By-the-by, the purple stones are used to mark any evidence you have that currently matches the "facts"; it makes it easy to see if any player does or doesn't want to go out at any time.

Ending a Game: The game ends after two rounds of play. The player with the most evidence points is arrested and the player with the least is credited with the capture.

Team Play: Four-player games are played as teams. There's some slight rule adjustments for this, but it overall works fine and gives some interesting strategic variance, as you can now help out your partner too.

Relationships to Other Games

Who Stole Ed's Pants?, contrary to the expectations of the title, isn't a deduction game. Instead, it's a classic American "beer & pretzels" game, with a lot of "take that" gameplay. The mechanics are pretty elegant and well-designed, but unlike some of the designer's later games, I wouldn't say this one has "Euro mechanics".

If anything, Who Stole Ed's Pants? reminds me most of another American game, Fluxx. Both games involve the playing of "keepers" (evidence) and "goals" (facts), with the ultimate object being to match them up in a very light, take-that game. The difference is that you want your stuff to be matched in Fluxx, while you don't in Who Stole Ed's Pants?

On the whole Fluxx is light, elegant, and just barely strategic. Who Stole Ed's Pants?, on the other hand, is a bit more complex, but also has some increased strategic depth and more serious gameplay (though some of that can become irrelevent due to the fast flipping of the Fact cards).

The Game Design

Who Stole Ed's Pants? is, on the whole, a well-designed, light game with interesting, somewhat innovative mechanics. Since the gameplay is "take that", some amount of the gameplay is fairly staid, but there's also real opportunity for strategic play down several different paths; this primarily comes out through the play of witnesses, as you change your witnesses or those of your opponents or change the rankings of the various witness groups in attempts to ultimately play evidence against your opponents.

The game does have some real complexities to it, and this can confuse players. I was astounded that half of our players had problems with the different types of evidence and fact cards, as these are players who have played a lot of European games. My current theory is that Who Stole Ed's Pants works best for more casual players who won't get confused by the complexities because they won't worry about them.

Tied into this topic is the fact that Who Stole Ed's Pants? must be played fast for it to be enjoyable. There's enough strategic & tactical possibility that you can really get bogged down if you consider all of it. Again, I think this points to the game working better for casual gamers.

Finally, the game is wild enough that despite the tactical & strategic options you're given, all your plans can easily come to nought because it's so easy to change the Fact cards. Serious game players will probably be disappointed by this since it looks like they have some many different options.

Overall I found Who Stole Ed's Pants? to be clever, humorous, and interesting. I think it'll work best for its target audience of casual gamers. More serious gamers will find some of the discontinuities between game weight and gameplay a little offputting. I give it a Substance rating of a high "3" out of "5": slightly above average. Casual gamers might like it even more.

Conclusion

Who Stole Ed's Pants? is a take-that beer & pretzels card game with some interesting, original, and humorous mechanics. It has a lot of room for strategic depth, but at the same time the gameplay is light enought that all that strategy can easily be wiped out, much as in the somewhat similar game, Fluxx. I think the game works well for the casual audience that it's obviously intended for. More serious gamers who can let go of serious playing for a bit might find some enjoyment in Eight Foot Llama's first release as well.

Help support RPGnet by purchasing this item through DriveThruRPG.