There are also some D&D campaigns that work in the same way (and unlike in the board games the heroes don't know that there might be traitors among them).
There’s a major difference between expected betrayal being part of the rules of a game, and gaslighting groups of children into competing under false pretenses. Does playing by the rules of BSG or Saboteur guarantee a loss for the team that by the rules should be winning?
The analogy would be appropriate if BSG was a competitive space fleet management game and some players decide in advance to make it a meta-game to join and sabotage each fleet without telling anyone of their intentions, leaving everyone else playing the ”fake” game while they at the end reveal the ”real” game and that whoever lost the real game actually won and vice versa.
These are camps for adults and the activity was not scored. Playing by the rules didn't guarantee a loss — there were no winners or loosers among the non-traitors.
I think the major issue that sets the game apart from the mentioned board games is that players don't know there might be traitors. OTOH it's impossible to have the board game that way, since it would only work the first time it is played. However, the D&D campaigns are the same as our game in this regard.
Anyway, the game wasn't all bad, some teams told us that they had a great time and found it an interesting and uncommon experience. But since too many people struggled with it we've decided to not run it again.
