• 4-5 Players
• Collaborative
• 40-45 minutes
• 175 cards (estimate, could be lower – can be determined based on sheet size when printing)
  • 10 Character Cards
  • 5 “ASPECT” Indicator
  • 40 Dilemma Cards (4-6 grade level)
  • 40 Dilemma Cards (1-2 medio grade level)
  • 80 Well-Being Cards
• 2x 6-sided Dice
• 20 Self-Care Tokens
• 1 Rulebook

• As a group, the players are trying to help a randomly selected character (e.g. “Anita”) achieve their personal development goals.
  • Each character has 5 Aspects corresponding to different learning objectives. Eg.:
    • Autoestima Academic
    • Motivacion Escolar
    • Clima de Convivencia
    • Participation y Formacion Ciudadana
    • Habitos de Vida Saludable
• Each player is responsible for the Well-Being of one ASPECT and must make sure “Anita” has achieved her goal in that ASPECT by the end of the game.
• If Anita doesn’t meet ALL her goals, then the players lose.
• If Anita meets ALL her goals, then the players win.
• Set the game up (includes randomly choosing X dilemma cards from the dilemma deck)
• Each turn players draw one dilemma card and read it out loud.
• The dilemma card has a choice for the group to decide on.
• The group must discuss what they feel they should do.
• The group votes.

• The dilemma card is then flipped over – revealing the consequences of their choice.
• The consequences are applied for the choice the group made.
  
  • Consequences are (some or all) of the following:
    • Draw Well-Being Cards.
    • Discard Well-Being Cards.
    • Play Well-Being Cards for their resource
    • Roll Dice for additional effects
• Play continues until there are no more dilemmas
• Players each add up the value of the Well-Being cards in their hands to see if Anita’s development goals for each ASPECT are met.
• If all goals are met, they win the game.

• The different dilemma cards pose situations that are relevant to the players and the group discussion (what to do?) will encourage reflection and sharing of opinions on the issues described in the dilemma.
• Collaborative games are good for learning (academic studies support this) and this style of game can benefit real-world classroom social climate (get students to work together rather than compete with each other).
• There are more dilemma cards than are used in a single play session leading to greater replayability and encouraging in-classroom discussions where each group can talk about their unique/different experience (because when they played they faced different dilemmas).
• It is easy to replace/update the dilemma deck with new/revised/hyper-localized/timely cards.
• Different dilemma decks are used for different levels of player maturity/age.
• Since players are controlling 1 single character from different aspects of that character they will reflect on how they might see those different aspects in themselves and also understand how they all come together in a single person (integrative).
• Different characters (with different/higher goals) can be used to scale increase/decrease in difficulty, challenge.
• The game has light role-playing elements (not explained in this slide deck) – role-playing is good for learning and empathy (academic studies support this).

• The dilemma cards can change to address educational goals that are content-specific (e.g. students need to know X facts)
  • Their name would change, but they could still function in the same way
• The ASPECTS are currently placeholder – the subject matter experts would provide input on how to “split” the learning goals into different aspects.

There could be more ASPECTS and players only play with a subset each time.