While not quite as simple as Clue, Baker Street spends too much of a player's turn on uninspired game mechanics: roll to move, then read the clue for the location you find yourself in (if you're not stuck in the game's too-long spaces between locations), which is frequently a misleading word-puzzle that has no relation to the story being told. Consulting Detective, on the other hand, offers a much more intense, story-rich experience, but is extremely light on game mechanics, so much so that playing it feels more like a collective Choose Your Own Adventure than a board game.
Deadline is indeed somewhere in between the two, but in this case that didn't turn out to be nearly as interesting as I'd hoped.
The game features 12 separate cases, with clues provided via a sealed pack of cards, one for each case. Each case starts with a few clues revealed, and each clue card depicts a series of icons, 1930s gumshoe staples such as a pack of cigarettes, a glass of whiskey, a bundle of money, and so on.
Players play cooperatively, each with their own hand of cards drawn from a common deck of lead and plot twist cards. Leads, which compose the majority of the deck, feature the same icons in various combinations. Game play involves players taking turns playing down cards in an effort to match all the icons shown on the clue they're working on: once they do, the clue card is turned over, revealing information which may or may not point to the mystery's solution, and also indicating new clue cards which may be added to those available to be worked on.
The catch (and there's always a catch) is that new leads can only be played by overlapping the symbols at the bottom of the cards, and players aren't allowed to talk specifically about the cards they have in their hands, so you can't stop a player from overlapping a particular icon, even if you have a better play in your hand. Once a player can't play any more lead cards, they have to play a plot twist if they have one, which is usually a negative effect. Too many failures mean that clues start getting removed from the case. Play continues until the clues run out.
 |
| The first card played can be any card, but the second must have at least one overlapping icon. Blanks are wild and can cover or be covered by any icon. |
 |
| This next card can be played on either end of the chain, overlapping the hat on the left or the cigarette and the gun on the right, depending on what icons the players need to solve the current clue. |
 |
| This card isn't playable to the chain at all, since it isn't possible to match all three symbols, or play on either end of the chain. |
It's a weird game system that doesn't really feel connected to the story, and isn't particularly interesting or satisfying on its own. Plus, you still have to interpret the clues correctly in order to solve the mystery, which frequently comes down to the players' best guess. And the cases (at least the ones we've played so far) aren't very compelling stories either.
In short, Deadline's game mechanics don't really mesh with the storylines at all, you end up with the worst parts of Baker Street and Consulting Detective: a mystery that the players have to solve using as few clues as possible, and a largely unrelated and uninteresting symbol-matching card game.
Rating: 2 (out of 5) Not a terrible game by any means, just not a very interesting or compelling one.
1/12/2023 Note: on a much later reviewing I've noticed that in the final example above, the card in question could actually be played to the right end of the chain (the cigarette pack icon). Still a mediocre game though...