The moment you allow teams in senior assassin, the math flips. Two players watching each other's back means your targeting, proof, and elimination rules all need adjustment. Teams also raise questions your original rulebook never had to answer: Can a solo player eliminate an entire team. Does one person's death kill the whole squad. Who counts as the target's successor in a chain. Get these rules written before game day, or you will spend March arguing about them.

Why teams change everything

Solo senior assassin is asymmetrical by design. You hunt someone who does not know who you are; meanwhile, someone hunts you. You're outnumbered one-to-five-hundred, and that's the point. Every senior becomes paranoid.

Teams break that paranoia in one direction. Your teammate knows who hunts you both, because they are probably hunting them too. You can plan a route together, watch each other's perimeter, and share intelligence. The game becomes semi-cooperative and semi-competitive at once.

That shift is not inherently broken. Many regions play team senior assassin successfully. But your original rules, written for solo play, no longer say what happens in contested situations, and you need to write them before March 1st.

Targeting and assignment rules

The first decision: how is a team assigned a target. Three options exist. Option one: the team is assigned one player, and either team member can eliminate them. Option two: each team member gets a separate solo target outside the team. Option three: the team gets assigned another team, and you must eliminate all members of that team to inherit their target.

Option one is simplest and keeps gameplay similar to solo mode. Option two is fairest if you have an uneven split of solo and team players. Option three is the most complicated but the most interesting: it creates mini-alliances within teams and makes team formation strategic, not random.

Once you pick your targeting model, state it in plain words. Write: 'A team inherits a target when both members have been eliminated' or 'Each team member has an independent target.' Ambiguity here explodes into disputes the moment someone's target is unclear.

• Team gets one shared target; either member can eliminate them
• Each team member gets their own independent solo target
• Team is assigned another team; all members must be eliminated to inherit

Elimination rules for pairs and squads

The next decision: do all team members have to be eliminated for the team to be out, or does one elimination kill the whole squad.

If one elimination eliminates the team, the game moves faster and smaller teams have parity with larger ones. A solo player can theoretically take out a squad alone by landing one shot. That changes the strategy calculus: solo players are not automatically at a disadvantage.

If every member must be eliminated individually, teams become fortresses. Three members together are nearly unbeatable because at least two are watching the third at all times. Squads slow the game down significantly.

Most organizers pick one elimination kills the team, because it keeps solo and team play balanced and prevents one squad from camping the final round. Write this rule explicitly: 'When any member of a team is eliminated, the entire team is eliminated.'

Chain succession and target handoff

Senior assassin works because of the one-way chain: you eliminate your target, your target's target becomes your new target, and the chain collapses one player at a time until one survivor is left. Teams mess with this mechanic.

If a solo player is assigned to a team, and the solo player is eliminated, does the team inherit the solo player's target. Yes. If a team member is eliminated and the team dies, does a solo target chain replace them. Yes. Write it this way: 'When a team is eliminated, all members are out of the game. Their target is inherited by whoever would have been next in the original chain.'

The complicated case: one team member eliminates a solo target, but that team member is then eliminated by a third player. Do they still inherit. Yes: they inherit the moment their shot lands, even if they are shot two minutes later. This is important because it prevents timing-based disputes.

Proof of elimination with witnesses

Proof gets harder with teams because teammates are built-in witnesses. If your proof standard requires a neutral third party, you need to decide whether a team member can serve as a witness for their teammate's shot.

Most rules say: a teammate cannot be a witness for their own team's elimination. An outside player must confirm it. This keeps things honest and prevents the 'he said, she said' situations teams naturally create.

If you allow video or photo proof, teams have an advantage because one member can record while the other shoots. That is not inherently unfair, but it is worth acknowledging when you write the rule. Senior assassin proof of kill explains the three proof models in detail.

Mixing solo and team players

Decide upfront if solo players can opt in once the game starts, or if team signup closes before round one. If you allow late solo entry, you create an unfair handicap: solos joining mid-game do not inherit any targets because teams will have already collapsed several chain links.

Most organizers close team signup at game start. Everyone who wants to be in a team commits before the target chain generator runs. Everyone else plays solo. This keeps things simple and fair.

One advanced option: allow solo players to hunt teams, but teams cannot hunt solo players, only other teams. This creates an interesting dynamic where teams are big targets and solo players are specialists. It works, but it is complex to explain and enforce.

Team formation and size limits

Decide how many members a team can have. Pairs are easiest to manage. Three-person squads get exponentially harder to eliminate. Four-person teams often run the board because three people watching one entrance is nearly impenetrable.

Most schools that allow teams cap them at two members. A few allow three. No organized senior assassin game allows five-person squads, because the math becomes absurd: one person would have to eliminate five simultaneous targets.

Set your limit and make it a rule: 'Teams consist of exactly two members' or 'Teams may have 2-3 members.' State whether teams must commit their membership before the game or can add/remove members mid-season. Most organizers fix membership at signup and do not allow mid-game roster changes.

Disputes and disagreement

Team-based disputes are different from solo disputes. A solo player arguing they were not hit has one position to defend. A team arguing they were not both hit when only one was shot has two positions and can be split on the answer.

Write a rule for split verdicts: if one team member was clearly hit and the other is disputed, is the team out. Most say yes: the team is eliminated and both members are out. This prevents teams from gaming the dispute system by having one member confess and one deny.

Create a dispute process before the game starts. A ten-minute process that ends in a coin flip is better than a three-hour argument that splits the class. Put it in writing.