Waiting List- Paging sectoid

[Kraegor]

who then forces another random player to become a lover

is lover the correct role name then?

If one lover dies then the other dies. They get constant private communication. If they happen to be on opposite sides then they only win if they are the last two standing.

I'm just wondering if master/slave is a more appropriate reference...

[Kraegor]

I think you guys are starting to jump the shark again. LM's outline should work as long as the powers can not prove themselves beyond doubt (i.e. the hunter shooting during the day or the Medium being proclaimed as the Seance director).

in avoid work over-drive....

Is a fully revelatory role that big a deal? what if the revelatory "skill" does not prove yer side? i.e. if a wolf could be hunter? too much power?

[Remus West]

I think you guys are starting to jump the shark again. LM's outline should work as long as the powers can not prove themselves beyond doubt (i.e. the hunter shooting during the day or the Medium being proclaimed as the Seance director).

in avoid work over-drive....

Is a fully revelatory role that big a deal?

Yes it is. That is one of the most powerful aspects of those specials. If you can prove yourself then you are essentially immune to lynching on top of anything else you have going.

what if the revelatory "skill" does not prove yer side? i.e. if a wolf could be hunter? too much power?

Hmmm, hadn't thought of that but a wolf hunter would just intentionally miss while a wolf medium would only contact a dead wolf. Neither could be forced to use their ability as no one would know they were in the game. I do not think I like that.

[Kraegor]

Hmmm, hadn't thought of that but a wolf hunter would just intentionally miss while a wolf medium would only contact a dead wolf. Neither could be forced to use their ability as no one would know they were in the game. I do not think I like that.

too much focus. Wolf medium can contact any dead player.

just like a wolf hunter could shoot anyone. course powered wolves are hella nasty in that respect. perhaps stick with the monty rule. a timmy (hunter) leaves the game after taking out someone else.

[Chaosraven]

People underestimate the powers of a Normal Wolf.

Ability to PM (Masons) Check.
Knowledge of who IS A WOLF (Seer) Check, and complete at the start)
Ability to kill without Village Majority Vote (Hunter) Check, and in SECRET, no less.

Most of the complaints about these games are:
Balance
Too Many Powered NonWolves destroys the ability for the Wolves to hide.
Without some ability, a few players get bored with the game (or get frustrated as they have no actual insight to work from, it's all guesses)
100% proof is a Bad Thing

[Remus West]

Hmmm, hadn't thought of that but a wolf hunter would just intentionally miss while a wolf medium would only contact a dead wolf. Neither could be forced to use their ability as no one would know they were in the game. I do not think I like that.

too much focus. Wolf medium can contact any dead player.

just like a wolf hunter could shoot anyone. course powered wolves are hella nasty in that respect. perhaps stick with the monty rule. a timmy (hunter) leaves the game after taking out someone else.

My point is that without knowing the medium is there a wolf medium would only come forward to contact a dead wolf (which we wouldn't know was a wolf) so the dead guy could spew lies. A wolf hunter would only shoot a non-wolf then go "oops my bad" or worse, edge 3-2 village wolf shoots non-wolf 2-2 game over wolf wins.

[Chaosraven]

BTW:

consider me IN for whatever gets rolling

[Kraegor]

Hmmm, hadn't thought of that but a wolf hunter would just intentionally miss while a wolf medium would only contact a dead wolf. Neither could be forced to use their ability as no one would know they were in the game. I do not think I like that.

too much focus. Wolf medium can contact any dead player.

just like a wolf hunter could shoot anyone. course powered wolves are hella nasty in that respect. perhaps stick with the monty rule. a timmy (hunter) leaves the game after taking out someone else.

My point is that without knowing the medium is there a wolf medium would only come forward to contact a dead wolf (which we wouldn't know was a wolf) so the dead guy could spew lies. A wolf hunter would only shoot a non-wolf then go "oops my bad" or worse, edge 3-2 village wolf shoots non-wolf 2-2 game over wolf wins.

correct.

cept no need for the "oops my bad". death reveals nothing.

-------------------
I spose it does give a major edge to the wolves. could cut down on their number...but it's random classing....<head explodes>

[Chaosraven]

WW Variant Idea:

Superheroes
Heroes
Scavenger - gains abilities of Dead Heroes
Psychic - ability to ID (Villain/Hero/Normal) one player at night, that player is notified they have been scanned, but not by who. When killed at Night, allowed one MINDBURST - Single PM Maximum Five Words to a Single Living Player passed through Moderator.
Bolt - Allowed to Kill one player during the day, one time.


Villains
Mastermind - Allowed to ID one player (told actual Role), that player is notified they have been scanned, but not by who.
Brick - immune to the Bolt

Night:
Mastermind scans
Psychic scans
Villains kill a Player

Morning:
Scanned Players notified
Psychic/Mastermind notified of results.
Scavenger notified of abilities received (Psychic or Bolt)

Daytime:
Majority vote (actual Majority 1/2 +1) irreversible.
Bolt allowed to Blast On e Player prior to Majority.
If Brick targeted, Bolt fizzles and Brick is revealed.
Scavenger is allowed to Blast as the Bolt even if Bolt used his ability.
Scavenger is NOT given Results of Dead Psychic Scans
Scavenger IS allowed MINDBURST PM if he has received Psychic Abilities and killed at Night.

Mindburst will not happen if the Player is Lynched or Blasted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WEREWOLVES
Masons (2 allowed to PM)
Seer ( ID Wolf/NonWolf)
Hunter - Protect One Player (other than self), not same player twice in a row. If attacked at Night, kills a Random Wolf.

3 Wolves:
Skinstalker - This wolf is chosen AFTER the Masons are chosen, allowed to be Normal or Mason. If Mason, other Mason will NOT be informed.
Tracker - when Seer scans a Player, 50% chance Tracker is informed which player was scanned.
Infected - this Wolf will not come into Play until Morning after 2 Nights have passed. Will not be chosen from Mason, Seer, Hunter, or other 2 Wolves. Will be chosen at Start but not notified until 2rd Morning. Scans as WOLF to the Seer. If killed before 2nd Morning, no replacement is chosen. If Killed before Change shows as HUMAN to Public.

THOUGHTS?

[Austin]

Re the Tracker, I don't like % based skills personally. Sorry I don't have a better idea off the top of my head but the 50% stuff doesn't do it for me in these games. (Not saying I wouldn't play)

[Chaosraven]

Re the Tracker, I don't like % based skills personally. Sorry I don't have a better idea off the top of my head but the 50% stuff doesn't do it for me in these games. (Not saying I wouldn't play)

Perhaps the Tracker could give 2 Names, and if either is the Scanned, he is told One of Those Players was Scanned

Little more strategy, little less information.

[Austin]

Re the Tracker, I don't like % based skills personally. Sorry I don't have a better idea off the top of my head but the 50% stuff doesn't do it for me in these games. (Not saying I wouldn't play)

Perhaps the Tracker could give 2 Names, and if either is the Scanned, he is told One of Those Players was Scanned

Little more strategy, little less information.

Cool. I'd give the wolf names to see if we were scanned were I a wolf. But might be handy to see who's trusted also.

[Chaosraven]

So a few people had ideas or suggestions or showed willingness to run another game.

Where do the following people stand:

Grundbegriff
Austin
LordMortis

as Lassr seems ready to run a new BSG

[LordMortis]

So a few people had ideas or suggestions or showed willingness to run another game.

Where do the following people stand:

Grundbegriff
Austin
LordMortis

as Lassr seems ready to run a new BSG

I'll still run a game but if you've got a line of hosts waiting, then I don't need to.

[Remus West]

If we get a moderator that doesn't want to play I would rather do that then chose one who does want to play. That is, if LM wants to run a game but not play if someone else runs it I would rather we have him run it IF Lassr would play in it. If neither or both one actually want to play then I do not care which we do. I just want to keep the player field as large as possible.

[Grundbegriff]

If one of the moderator-volunteers doesn't really want to play, he should moderate so any of the other volunteers who do want to play can have that opportunity.

[Grundbegriff]

BTW: I'd be willing to run one if all the other moderator-volunteers were also hoping to play.

[Lassr]

starting a BSG game thread now.

[Austin]

I still plan to but when I was motivated we went into a slump. I'll dig up my plans but it's not there yet. When it's ready I'll post a sign up. Sign up and you'll get an invitation to the banquet at the old McAllister place. (Don't eat the cranberry sauce)

[LordMortis]

I'm not into playing at the moment but I don't want to take the pleasure of running a game from someone else. Running a game feels like civic duty here. I'd also not be huge on setting the flavor that most people who run games here are adept at. I'd be here so that people could play. Like you are being dealt cards and I am here to give the illusion that you are sitting here face to face. I'd be simply serving my time and monitoring the game for you.

[Scoop20906]

Once I have a few more games under my belt I will step up and host a game but I'm still too wet behind the ears to do it properly.

[Chaosraven]

Wondering if we might put together a List of Prior Players, and those people could then be notified a game is underway with signup.

For example:

Thread: Player List
Post by Chaosraven - Consider me *IN* any game that comes up
Post by SomePlayer - please PM me if a Game begins and I'll see if I'm interested
Post by AnotherGuy - please PM me if there is a Game where there is a need for one more player
Post by ThatDude - email me if a Game comes where the Bad Guys don't get abilities

etc

[triggercut]

Can I go next (after Lars Lynching Liasons)?

I have a cool 13-player game lined up, called Controlled Kaos.

Roles for the Good Guys (Control):
Maxwell Smart
99
The Chief
Larabee
Hymie
Agent 13
Carlson

Roles for the Bad Guys (Kaos):
Siegfried
Shtarker
The Craw

[Remus West]

Floks need to remember that the bad guys hide in the unpowered normals. Giving everyone powers always seems fun but when the ratio of powers to unpowered rises it unbalances the game in favor of the village.

[Austin]

I'm getting close to getting mine done. I've included some surprises to help speed along certain days and situations too.

[Chaosraven]

I am always willing to Play in any Game.

I am willing to Mod Games in the event there are none running.
But I would always rather play.

[Grundbegriff]

The Craw

Not 'Craw'. 'Craw'!

[triggercut]

Floks need to remember that the bad guys hide in the unpowered normals. Giving everyone powers always seems fun but when the ratio of powers to unpowered rises it unbalances the game in favor of the village.

Wrong again.

It's actually based on Wiggum's game from a few months ago. That game came down to 3 of us. 1 bad guy vs. 2 good guys. Bad guys won, despite lucky breaks for either side that could've turned the tide.

What I liked about all the roles is that it kept everyone playing in the game. There was no "I'll hide with the innocents" since 10 of the 13 players had some role or another. It was an awesomely fun game.

[Remus West]

Floks need to remember that the bad guys hide in the unpowered normals. Giving everyone powers always seems fun but when the ratio of powers to unpowered rises it unbalances the game in favor of the village.

Wrong again.

It's actually based on Wiggum's game from a few months ago. That game came down to 3 of us. 1 bad guy vs. 2 good guys. Bad guys won, despite lucky breaks for either side that could've turned the tide.

What I liked about all the roles is that it kept everyone playing in the game. There was no "I'll hide with the innocents" since 10 of the 13 players had some role or another. It was an awesomely fun game.

And if on the first day all the powered folks announce themselves then the bad guys must choose to hide in the limited supply of unpowereds or contest a good guy role. Thereby outing themselves. There needs to be some pool of unpowereds for them to hide in. I will play almost any game but they do unbalance. And if you want to reference a game/rule set at least link to it so I can look at what you are talking about because I have no idea right now.

[Lars]

Floks need to remember that the bad guys hide in the unpowered normals. Giving everyone powers always seems fun but when the ratio of powers to unpowered rises it unbalances the game in favor of the village.

Wrong again.

It's actually based on Wiggum's game from a few months ago. That game came down to 3 of us. 1 bad guy vs. 2 good guys. Bad guys won, despite lucky breaks for either side that could've turned the tide.

What I liked about all the roles is that it kept everyone playing in the game. There was no "I'll hide with the innocents" since 10 of the 13 players had some role or another. It was an awesomely fun game.

And if on the first day all the powered folks announce themselves then the bad guys must choose to hide in the limited supply of unpowereds or contest a good guy role. Thereby outing themselves. There needs to be some pool of unpowereds for them to hide in. I will play almost any game but they do unbalance. And if you want to reference a game/rule set at least link to it so I can look at what you are talking about because I have no idea right now.

I got to agree with Remus West on this one. Whenever I organize my games, I always make sure that there are more unpowered innocent players then powered innocent players because I don't want to make the safest route to victory be "let's all announce our roles and see who is lying". Unless you have some way to combat it, it seems that would be the smart play in your game. Assuming your rules are still werewolfish as far as lynching goes, here is how your game could end:

The village:
Maxwell Smart
99
The Chief
Larabee
Hymie
Agent 13
Carlson
Innocent 1
Innocent 2
Innocent 3

The bad guys:
Siegfried
Shtarker
The Craw

If you are going with 13 people, I'm assuming that an NPC dies the first night. So, on the first day, if I'm a villager, I tell everyone to out themselves to their role. Assuming all of the bad guys say they are innocent, and everyone else tells the truth (which would be the smart play), the village now has their pool of suspects down to 6 people. Here is the worse case scenario:

Day 1: Kill an innocent - 12 left
Night 1: Villager dies - 11 left
Day 2: Kill an innocent - 10 left
Night 2: Villager dies - 9 left
Day 3: Kill an innocent - 8 left
Night 3: Villager dies - 7 left

On Day 4, the 3 bad guys are identified, and with 4 good guys left, the game is over, as a bad guy will die each day until it's over. That is the worse case scenario.

I'm sure you could add a rule stating that no one can announce their role in the game, and if they do they can be killed immediately or some other kind of punishment, but then you'll just have people hinting at their role instead, and trying to judge on what is too much of a hint would be a pain. I would recommend dropping a couple roles in your game, to take away that avenue of victory.

By the way, why aren't you participating in my game? I thought we were friends............

[triggercut]

I'm glad you two already know not only the rules for the game I'm proposing, but also who'll win. Yeah, sure, I'm stupidly basing this on a ruleset that brought the game down to the last 3 players standing last time, but that probably means little. This ruleset obviously favors the Good Guys. For instance, the last time we played with this ruleset, Remus West himself noted how much it favors the good guys:

I think any rule set that includes a scanner Vamp must have some sort of off-set for the Village. Maybe something that tells a special they have been scanned but not by whom, or which side? When we played and I was the scanner we uncovered the Hunter and killed him right away. My calls for the Hunter to shoot Newcastle who had been ID'd as the Beserker probably contributed to folks letting me slide in that game. Problem was I knew the Hunter was dead so I had no worries. Same thing with the Seer this game. Knowing exactly who they have and/or need to kill gives the Vamps a huge advantage.

...or not.

Wiggum, who ran the game, notes how much the rules favor the good guys:

I do think, however, that this game favored the vamps. In fact, if they hadn't tried the whole fake seer stuff I think they would've won in a walk. Part of that had to do with luck (i.e. scanning Remus the first night). But I think that the game would be more balanced if there were an additional 2 villagers or so. I think the original plan (that called for 4 vamps and 16 villagers) would have also worked a bit better.

As for the scanner vampire, what do you guys think about him having the exact same powers as the seer? That is, instead of learning the exact role of a player, he only learns special vs. non-special.

or not again.

Now then, as it is, I'm tweaking his rules a bit. I was thinking 13, but then in looking at my notes, I actually want 15 players.

#2, I'm thinking about definitely changing the scanner vampire in the way Wiggum suggests.

#3, I'm looking at other rule changes (combining the hunter with the protector roles, but then limiting the role by making a protection of a badguy fatal)

I appreciate the input, but...

1. I was born at night, but not last night.
2. I've been working on balancing and counterbalancing this ruleset since the original game ended back in July.

Finally:

By the way, why aren't you participating in my game? I thought we were friends

You can almost certainly probably count me in, but with me being in holiday crunch time at work, I didn't want to commit to anything until the game was actually ready to roll. I'd hate to sign up and disappear.

[Unagi]

I'm getting close to getting mine done. I've included some surprises to help speed along certain days and situations too.

THANK YOU

[Chaosraven]

I'm getting close to getting mine done. I've included some surprises to help speed along certain days and situations too.

THANK YOU

Time limits for Voting is the Whip I used to use. You could withdraw from a Majority, but come Zero Hour the guy with the most votes dies.

[Austin]

I'm getting close to getting mine done. I've included some surprises to help speed along certain days and situations too.

THANK YOU

Time limits for Voting is the Whip I used to use. You could withdraw from a Majority, but come Zero Hour the guy with the most votes dies.

I have some other mechanisms in mind.

[Chaosraven]

I'm getting close to getting mine done. I've included some surprises to help speed along certain days and situations too.

THANK YOU

Time limits for Voting is the Whip I used to use. You could withdraw from a Majority, but come Zero Hour the guy with the most votes dies.

I have some other mechanisms in mind.

How about Tarentino Style... every player has the Hunter Shoot ability, even the Bad Guys?

Welcome to Last Man Standing

Night One - Kelric dies
Day One:
I think it's obvious that-
BANG!BANG!BANG!BANG!BANG!BANG!BANG!BANG!BANG!BANG!BANG!BANG!

[Chaosraven]

Here's a Scary idea...

A Player is only allowed (x) words per Page and DIES if he goes over?

A Player is only allowed ONE VOTE per Day, and within a Time Limit... all Players with the Highest Vote Count are killed.

[Remus West]

Here's a Scary idea...

A Player is only allowed (x) words per Page and DIES if he goes over?

A Player is only allowed ONE VOTE per Day, and within a Time Limit... all Players with the Highest Vote Count are killed.

Why not just have pr0ner sign up for all the slots in your next game and you can find out how it goes.

[Chaosraven]

Here's a Scary idea...

A Player is only allowed (x) words per Page and DIES if he goes over?

A Player is only allowed ONE VOTE per Day, and within a Time Limit... all Players with the Highest Vote Count are killed.

Why not just have pr0ner sign up for all the slots in your next game and you can find out how it goes.

Which reminds me, we need to start the recruiting drive for Lars.

[Lars]

Here's a Scary idea...

A Player is only allowed (x) words per Page and DIES if he goes over?

A Player is only allowed ONE VOTE per Day, and within a Time Limit... all Players with the Highest Vote Count are killed.

Why not just have pr0ner sign up for all the slots in your next game and you can find out how it goes.

Which reminds me, we need to start the recruiting drive for Lars.

I just sent IMs to everyone who previously participated in one of my werewolf games, including LordMortis, but I'm sure you and Remus can apply some pressure to him a lot better then I can.

[Lars]

I'm glad you two already know not only the rules for the game I'm proposing, but also who'll win. Yeah, sure, I'm stupidly basing this on a ruleset that brought the game down to the last 3 players standing last time, but that probably means little. This ruleset obviously favors the Good Guys. For instance, the last time we played with this ruleset, Remus West himself noted how much it favors the good guys:

I think any rule set that includes a scanner Vamp must have some sort of off-set for the Village. Maybe something that tells a special they have been scanned but not by whom, or which side? When we played and I was the scanner we uncovered the Hunter and killed him right away. My calls for the Hunter to shoot Newcastle who had been ID'd as the Beserker probably contributed to folks letting me slide in that game. Problem was I knew the Hunter was dead so I had no worries. Same thing with the Seer this game. Knowing exactly who they have and/or need to kill gives the Vamps a huge advantage.

...or not.

Wiggum, who ran the game, notes how much the rules favor the good guys:

I do think, however, that this game favored the vamps. In fact, if they hadn't tried the whole fake seer stuff I think they would've won in a walk. Part of that had to do with luck (i.e. scanning Remus the first night). But I think that the game would be more balanced if there were an additional 2 villagers or so. I think the original plan (that called for 4 vamps and 16 villagers) would have also worked a bit better.

As for the scanner vampire, what do you guys think about him having the exact same powers as the seer? That is, instead of learning the exact role of a player, he only learns special vs. non-special.

or not again.

Now then, as it is, I'm tweaking his rules a bit. I was thinking 13, but then in looking at my notes, I actually want 15 players.

#2, I'm thinking about definitely changing the scanner vampire in the way Wiggum suggests.

#3, I'm looking at other rule changes (combining the hunter with the protector roles, but then limiting the role by making a protection of a badguy fatal)

I appreciate the input, but...

1. I was born at night, but not last night.
2. I've been working on balancing and counterbalancing this ruleset since the original game ended back in July.

Finally:

By the way, why aren't you participating in my game? I thought we were friends

You can almost certainly probably count me in, but with me being in holiday crunch time at work, I didn't want to commit to anything until the game was actually ready to roll. I'd hate to sign up and disappear.

Sorry triggercut, it wasn't my intention to insult you. You seem like a pretty sharp guy, I wasn't in any way trying to say otherwise. But seriously, you are using Ralph to help back up your arguments? I mean, COME ON.