Salem 1692 - Is this Social Deduction Game Offensive?

How do you feel about games with the theme of historic witch trials, especially if they depict the witches as murderers?

A few years ago I was gifted a copy of a social deduction game called Salem 1692. I wavered over that question so much I didn’t play it until last weekend at a games convention. Now  I have, I thought I’d both review the game, and blog about my feelings on the subject. First, the review.

How it Works as a Game

As social deduction games go, the mechanics work well. In case you don’t know the term, think of party games like Murder in the Dark and Are You a Werewolf? or the TV show The Traitors. Everyone is assigned a role only they know. Most people are innocents and potential victims, while one or more are murderers of some kind. In one phase the killers attempt to bump someone off without being detected, while in another phase everyone discusses what happened, examines evidence, and votes to eliminate a player accused of being a villain. 

Salem 1692 is more complicated than that. First there’s also a constable role, with the power to save one player from murder. Players also have cards giving them the identity of someone who featured in the historic witch trials. Each has a special ability such as needing more accusations than normal to be tried, or being able to discard accusations played. Another deck of cards are events that affect what happens, such as robbery, which means a player discards all their cards. 

The extra complexity makes the game interesting and varied, and the events and powers are well-balanced. I’d thoroughly recommend it purely as a game, if you aren’t put off by the theme. Let’s get on to that now.

Is the Theme Offensive?

I fully expect there will be many different personal opinions about this. I can only give my own thoughts. 

I like that Salem 1692 includes some historical facts. It explains that after a few girls had fits blamed on “the devil”, the town of Salem became engulfed in witch trials that led to more than 150 people being accused, 19 hangings, 1 person being pressed, and several other deaths in prison. There’s also a biographical paragraph on each of the characters. 

However, although this background information implies how unfair the trials were, and how dodgy the evidence, it doesn’t specifically state that the convictions were eventually annullled and that few  nowadays believe any of the accused were really witches. Also, those tried for witchcraft in Salem weren’t even accused of killiing anyone.

These points mean I still feel a little uncomfortable about the way witchcraft is presented in this game. That doesn’t mean I’ll never play it again. I enjoyed it and will happily give it another go. I’m capable of accepting the fantasy horror trope of witches as evil while knowing that isn’t the case in real life, and that the game isn’t totally historically accurate. The people I play games with are all pagan-friendly and astute enough to do this too.

What do you think?

Whether you’ ve played Salem 1692 or not, I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on the topic. Is this game offensive in your opinion? Would you play it or not? If you have given it a go, did you enjoy it?

Please leave a comment.

Previous related posts
https://www.badwitch.co.uk/2015/05/review-storm-of-witchcraft-salem-trials.html
https://www.badwitch.co.uk/2014/01/review-terry-pratchett-witches-boardgame.html
https://www.badwitch.co.uk/2019/10/witch-games-witching-hour-reviewed.html
https://www.badwitch.co.uk/2024/10/witch-games-septima-build-coven-avoid.html
https://www.badwitch.co.uk/2014/10/review-penguin-book-of-witches.html

To read more posts like this visit A Bad Witch’s Blog at www.badwitch.co.uk

Source: http://www.badwitch.co.uk/2026/02/salem-1692-is-this-social-deduction.html