Taur-in-Gaurhoth Scenarios you'd Like to See

[littlemanpoet]

Let's start this off with these:

1. Name a Dead (BD'er that is) you want to see as a werewolf; and why?

2. Name a Dead you want to see as the Ranger; and why?

3. Name a Dead you want to see as the Seer; and why?

4. Name a Dead you want to see as the Hunter; and why?

5. What two Downers would you like to have as fellow werewolves; and why?

6. (suggested by Kath)Name a Dead you would never like to see as a Werewolf; and why?

***************************
Off the top of my head:
1. Anguirel. :D After WW13, it should be obvious.
2. Eomer. I've seen his excellent use of the Hunter, I'd be interested to see what creative thing he might do with Ranger.
3. Well, me, doggone it! I've always wanted to be the Seer. :p
4. Mormegil. It'd be fun to see how he would blend his "list of suspects" technique with being the Hunter.
5. Oh, what fun this would be. Let's see..... Feanor & Firefoot. Feanor because she'd be such a whale of a werewolf to plot strategy with, and Firefoot because everybody would just about expect her to be innocent for a long, long time.

Waiting to hear from others.......

[Mithalwen]

1. Name a Dead (BD'er that is) you want to see as a werewolf;

SaucepanMan of course ...don't we all want to see that.....?

2. Name a Dead you want to see as the Ranger; Boromir88 - because of the avatar - setting a wolf to protect the henhouse.

3. Name a Dead you want to see as the Seer; Gil-Galad. Can't you imagine it? Every game he plays everyone is banjaxed deciding what constitutes acting suspiciously in the context of Gil-Galad being Gil-Galad..

4. Name a Dead you want to see as the Hunter; and why?
If I were to play again. Me. My instincts for wolves were quite good in game one and as a wolf I picked the bear .... If not, Mormegil. He has been excellent in all the games I have followed (which is not alas all the games) and I don't think he has been one yet.

5. Lastly (for now), what two Downers would you like to have as fellow werewolves; and why?

Kuruharan and Fea. Lycanthropy was not my forte :rolleyes: so I need people who are really good....... Fea was spellbinding in the game I modded .... and Kuru managed to be sufficiently far down the list of suspects for long enough to turn a near disaster into a very impressive victory in game 1

[Glirdan]

1. Name a Dead (BD'er that is) you want to see as a werewolf; and why?

Oooo!! Me!! Pick me!!! I've alway wanted to be the Wolf, just because i haven't been it yet.

2. Name a Dead you want to see as the Ranger; and why?

Wilwa, just because I think she'd make a good one.

3. Name a Dead you want to see as the Seer; and why?

I'll put Lmp. That way, when he's playing in a game with me, he can dream about me and get his suspicions over with.

4. Name a Dead you want to see as the Hunter; and why?

Hiriel. He did so good in this role that I think he should do it again.

5. Lastly (for now), what two Downers would you like to have as fellow werewolves; and why?

Well. I'll say my dear friends Folwren and Morsul. I've become fairly good friends with both of them so I think we'd be able to come up with a good strategy and win the game.

[Lhunardawen]

1. Name a Dead (BD'er that is) you want to see as a werewolf; and why?
Not minding the egocentricism, that would be me, Lhuna. Then, I'll finally have an answer to my perennial question: Why are you suspecting me???

(It hurts not to find a valid reason behind that, y'know.)

2. Name a Dead you want to see as the Ranger; and why?
Firefoot - she usually manages to stay alive for a long time, and I think she can sniff out the innocents (and gifteds) from the cold-blooded villains.

3. Name a Dead you want to see as the Seer; and why?
dancing spawn of ungoliant - she's helpful enough not to be suspected, yet silent enough not to be killed right away.

4. Name a Dead you want to see as the Hunter; and why?
Fordim Hedgethistle. The werewolves in any village will surely be intimidated by his presence and kill him as soon as they can. But before that time comes, he's already aware of at least one of them. :D

5. Lastly (for now), what two Downers would you like to have as fellow werewolves; and why?
Formendacil, for revenge. (;)) And The Only Real Estel. Maybe then I'll finally stop picking on him for being such a traitor. (:p)

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

4. Name a Dead you want to see as the Hunter; and why?
Fordim Hedgethistle. The werewolves in any village will surely be intimidated by his presence and kill him as soon as they can. But before that time comes, he's already aware of at least one of them.

Much as I appreciate the vote of confidence Lhuna in the two games I've played so far, I was lynched on the first day (for being a loudmouth), and allowed by the wolves to live until the last day (because I was a loudmouth) -- so it would not appear as though I have been terribly intimidating to date!

Perhaps if I adopt a more quiet, solemn, even -- dare I attempt -- contemplative approach...?

[Kath]

1. Name a Dead (BD'er that is) you want to see as a werewolf; and why?
Nilp. One day he has to be suspected for a reason. But I suspect when that day comes no one will lynch him as they'll think it's just him being odd.

2. Name a Dead you want to see as the Ranger; and why?
Me! I want to see if I can make it past the first Day/Night as one.

3. Name a Dead you want to see as the Seer; and why?
Firefoot. She'd know how to make best use of the role I think, and would likely catch a couple of werewolves too.

4. Name a Dead you want to see as the Hunter; and why?
Hmm, difficult. I'll go for Cailin I think. Maybe she can get revenge on Eomer!

5. Lastly (for now), what two Downers would you like to have as fellow werewolves; and why?
Fea is great fun to be a wolf with, mostly because she does all the work and you just stay quiet in the background! As to the other, I think Shelob. Many people often find her suspicious but can't say why, so she might get by on benefit of the doubt!

I'd like to make an additional question though lmp if I may?
Name a Dead you would never like to see as a Werewolf; and why?
Under that I'll put Firefoot. In the last game I had a fear of a triad involving her, and the skill it would take to uncover a lie from her, that's just scary!

[Lhunardawen]

Perhaps if I adopt a more quiet, solemn, even -- dare I attempt -- contemplative approach...? You have Werewolf XIV to try that out... ;)

[littlemanpoet]

Perhaps if I adopt a more quiet, solemn, even -- dare I attempt -- contemplative approach...?
You know, I tried that in WW13 but it didn't even last for a day. Bloody things called "ideas" and "plans" keep asserting themselves in my mind, and I can't stifle 'em, so out they come and I turn into a loudmouth again! :eek:

Name a Dead you would never like to see as a Werewolf; and why?the phantom. At least not in a game I'm an innocent villager in. I tend to respect his analytical ability too much, and therefore I'd tend to assume he's innocent. Bad bad bad. :eek:

And now for: Part B of Scenarious You'd Like to See....

Let this be the place where you share ideas for wrinkles on the werewolf game you'd like to see tried.

Here's one: see, the players are generally getting so good at finding werewolves (despite some villagers' retort to the contrary) that I think we could stand to have fewer gifteds per game.

I got this idea to replace the Ranger and Hunter with one gifted called Elven Warrior. This person is incognito.

Let's say Lhuna is our elven warrior. She uses her elven arts to appear no different than humans. She combines the roles of both Hunter and Ranger. Being far-seeing, she can look for the werewolf as the Hunter, while guarding the person of her choice. So she'd get two picks per night: one to guard, one to hunt. It would be oxymoronic to pick the same person with both picks, so I guess she can't do that. So anyway.

Any thoughts? How would it play out? What are the pros? cons? Let's have it.

[Holbytlass]

A couple of minor 'cons' for the elven-warrior

1) On a selfish note, I like as many special roles as fair as possible to the size of the village in the hopes that I get one. :D

2)because the villagers are getting so good at finding wolves, if the hunter/ranger were one person, there is less likely that the warrior chooses an innocent to kill and a wolf to protect, and we'd never see the scenario where the hunter takes out the ranger.

I'm willing to try anything once might be very interesting.

[tar-ancalime]

I'm not sure if this has been tried before (as I didn't really get involved with ww till recently), but I'd like to see this voting scenario:

Nonretractable votes, but multiple votes per player. You can vote as many times as you like, but each vote has to be for a different person--i.e. no flooding the game with 50 votes for your favorite candidate to force a lynching.

This could work with single or multiple lynchings. I see it as being especially useful in the case of multiple lynchings--if you want a double lynch, you go ahead and vote for both suspects. If you want to prevent a double lynch, you vote for only one.

As for roles, how about this wrinkle for the Cursed? When attacked, the Cursed becomes a wolf....AND one of the wolves loses his/her powers and becomes an innocent villager. Everyone would know that it happened, just like we now know when the Cursed has been attacked, but no one (except the wolves) would know who changed roles.

[littlemanpoet]

The multiple votes idea looks pretty scarey. It also looks like it might work . . . and create all kinds of wild posting toward the end of the day, which could be really wild. But I think it could get out of hand, with six different players getting ten votes each, or something.

The trade idea kind of takes the sting out of the Cursed role. That's the only con I can see, but it looks sort of like a big one. It would stop being a potential game changer, which is what I like most about it.

[Firefoot]

The trade idea also has one big problem... you'd have one villager who knew who all the old wolves were (as many as two!), which would be a huge blow to the wolves. You may as well not even have the Cursed.

The multiple votes per person is a cool idea - the only problem I see in it is that of timezones. In a close vote, it could give the end voters a lot of power. But it still might be fun to try.

[tar-ancalime]

The trade idea also has one big problem... you'd have one villager who knew who all the old wolves were (as many as two!), which would be a huge blow to the wolves. You may as well not even have the Cursed.

Oh yeah. Shoot.

I'm going to keep thinking on that, because the thing I like about the Cursed is the concept of people "switching teams" mid-game. There's got to be a way to get more of that into the game.... :D

[Glirdan]

I'm going to keep thinking on that, because the thing I like about the Cursed is the concept of people "switching teams" mid-game. There's got to be a way to get more of that into the game....

Well, once Gil figure's out the rest of the kinks in his game (go to Tol-in-Gaurhoth Junior to see more information), that migt actually become possible. I have talked to him in awhile so I don't know how far he is into working those kinks out.

As for your mulitiple voting idea, I'm all for trying everything once. I think that would add a different twist to the game. A really interesting different twist. I just can't pinpoint anything else other than what's already been said.

Lmp, your Elven-Warrior idea sounds interesting, but I think it would take out some of the fun of the game. But I think it would be cool to try it out at least once to see how it works out. That would be a good idea for small games though.

[Anguirel]

Mith floated the idea of a Ranger/Hunter some time ago; we dubbed it a (think cringe-making Disney narration) "Hero"!

I believe the opium griller also toyed with the thought of a Ranger/Hunter/Seer at one point...

[Kuruharan]

I'm afraid the multiple votes for multiple people thing is a bad idea.

Want to know why it won't work? Well, I'll tell you.

Everybody would end up voting for everybody else. Really it is the only way it could work out. You would have to vote for all the other players in the game because you (being an innocent) don't know who the wolves are and if you spare anybody (for some strange reason given the fact you know nothing) then that is just going to cast suspicion on you that you are trying to protect your fellow wolves. Even the seer won't be able to spare a player they know to be innocent because that would just be exposing them and the known innocent to the wrath of the wolves and the wrath of the villagers at the same time.

[Glirdan]

Yes, I see that flaw to, but I have a way around that. You only vote for the ones you truly suspect. I'll take the last game as an example and use exactly who I suspected at a point in time.

I was really suspicious of Lalaith and Lmp at one point, so, if we had this multiple voting, I would only vote for those two people thus avoiding the problem that you brought up Kuru.

[Kuruharan]

But that is merely a personal choice and does not correct the inherent problem in the system.

My goal is to close exploitable holes that I assure you ruthless people like the phantom and (with all modesty) myself will use and abuse to the uttermost.

Would you be able to resist voting for everybody else at once when you saw a bunch of people starting to do it? (Especially if you did not know for sure the people you were protecting were innocent and it might come back to bite you good and hard.)

[Glirdan]

Your right in that. I was just poiting out that there was a way around the problem, yet I did realize while I was typing my previous post that there are people out there, myself included, who would abuse that kind of power. There always is a downside to everything.

[littlemanpoet]

Oh yeah. Shoot.

I'm going to keep thinking on that, because the thing I like about the Cursed is the concept of people "switching teams" mid-game. There's got to be a way to get more of that into the game.... :D

Perhaps it's time to bring out my idea for "Dueling Wizards", which does include "switching teams" in such a way that the werewolves who turn back into innocents can't be sure who the real werewolves are that are left....

*LMP waits for the curious crowd to get impatient enough to scream for him to come out with it....*

[mormegil]

*impatiently taps fingers*

How would they not know?

[littlemanpoet]

Well now, (:D) there would be two wizards, and no other gifted at the beginning of the game, which would have to be a minimum of 16 players, and could go as high as 30; less than 16 and I don't think it would work.

The two wizards don't know who each other are. One is evil, one is good.

On Night One, the evil wizard picks a villager curse as a werewolf, and the werewolf is immediately informed of the fact, and the mod requests a kill choice, which is provided by the end of the 24 hours.

Also on Night One, the good wizard picks a villager to scry. If s/he

1. finds the evil wizard, the good wizard is informed of that, and can at any time thereafter, call out the evil wizard to battle, which instance results in one of two possibilities, I've not settled on which works best:

a) the death of both wizards;
b) the death of the evil wizard only.

A third option of the death of the good wizard is unworkable on account of the way the game works, because until the evil wizard's death, said entity curses a new werewolf per Night. The werewolves don't know each other's identity because they are werewolves at Night, and cannot detect the identities underlying their own curses.

2. If the good wizard finds a werewolf, the werewolf is turned back into an innocent by the good wizard's power.

3. If the good wizard finds an innocent, the good wizard has the option of turning that innocent into a gifted, the choices being seer, ranger, and hunter. Once the three primary gifted roles are filled, the remaining innocents become shirriffs, I suppose, so that they can play out the PMing and known innocent capabilities that this kind of game seems to call for, with a rather powerful evil enemy.

The question arises, how does the mod handle kill choices by multiple werewolves who don't get to PM and know who each other is? The mod takes the kill choices, and gives them to the evil wizard, who makes the final choice. Another way this could be handled is that the werewolves individually PM the mod their kill choices, and the mod refers back to each werewolf about the others' choices, and serves as a go-between until the werewolves have come to an agreement. I think I like that option better (if I were mod).

Oh, there is a lynching every Day.

But the way this seems to work out is that there can be three, four, even more werewolves, so the good wizard has to figure out the best way to be effective with his/her choices of gifting, and so forth.

When is the game over? The evil wizard and werewolves win when the werewolves equal or exceed the number of innocents. The villagers and good wizard win when there is no evil wizard left, and no werewolves left.

I suppose that the evil wizard could even create a werebear and cobbler. Can the evil wizard curse a gifted into a werewolf? No. I'm not sure what the best option would be in this case, for a most interesting game. Perhaps it would be that the evil wizard could curse a gifted back into normalcy, of which the good wizard would necessarily be aware (informed by mod). In this case, the evil wizard would obviously be aware that this particular individual is gifted in some way, and would choose that person to be killed by the werewolves.

So, do you see any wrinkles?

[mormegil]

So, do you see any wrinkles?

I haven't done the math but it seems that this game would heavily favor the baddies but I'm not sure. With one new wolf and one kill a night plus with lynching of innocents it seems that the innocents would dwindle too quickly. The evil wizard is somewhat a lynch pin to the whole game.

[Kath]

Also, if the good wizard can turn wolves back into innocents, they'll be able to tell the village who the wolves are. Or did you not actually mean that?

[littlemanpoet]

Also, if the good wizard can turn wolves back into innocents, they'll be able to tell the village who the wolves are. Or did you not actually mean that?
No, the werewolves don't know who each other are. Only the evil wizard knows who all the werewolves are.

The game has to have high numbers of villagers, the higher the better. The best chance for the innocents to win is very early, by the good wizard finding the evil wizard in the first three Nights/Days (very unlikely as far as I can tell). The werewolf number would increase drastically at first, but with each new werewolf, the good wizard's chance of scrying an actual werewolf increases out of sheer odds.

It would be interesting to see the nature of the discussions in such a game. I would, of course, be interested in modding such a game if there were enough people willing to try it out just for kicks.

I imagine that the sheer terror/excitement level would be an interesting phenomenon amongst the innocents, with such thinking as "we really, really have to do our best to try and make as sure as we can to lynch a werewolf. None of this "okay to lynch an ungifted innocent" stuff.

So the energy level would likely be pretty high. ... especially as there begins to be four, then five, then six werewolves. :eek: Which I kinda like. ;)

[the phantom]

lmp, you said this-
Once the three primary gifted roles are filled, the remaining innocents become shirriffs, I suppose, so that they can play out the PMing and known innocent capabilities that this kind of game seems to call for, with a rather powerful evil enemy
The enemy may be powerful- but not nearly powerful enough to face a village of shirriffs. That would make for a lopsided good guy win.

Let's look at how the game would be set up after all three gifteds had been assigned (after the third night).

The village population (lets say it started at 20) would be down to 16- two wizards, three wolves, three gifteds, and eight shirriffs. The eight shirriffs would step forwards and say "I know that these seven people and myself aren't wolves". And then, the good wizard steps forward and says "I am the good wizard, and these three people are the ones I chose as gifteds", and suddenly the entire village has the candidates for evil wizard narrowed down to four people, and they know that the other three are wolves.

And so, the village will lynch them and then the game is over. I mean- there would be no way for the bad guys to win. Every time a new wolf is made, the whole village will know about it the next day because they are all shirriffs. An evil wizard and three wolves versus a seer who knows who to dream of, a ranger who knows who to protect, a hunter who knows who to target, and a good wizard who knows who to pick would be bad enough, but then when you add an entire village who knows who to lynch each day- that's too much.

For my other queries, I am going to assume that you won't be doing that shirriff thing.

1) What if the evil wizard picks the good wizard at night? You have to have a rule for it, because if the mod pms the evil wizard back and says "You'll have to choose someone else" the evil wizard will of course know who the good wizard is.

2) If the wolves don't know who the other wolves are, they might consider killing one of their own. But obviously, if the mod is passing messages back and forth, the wolf who the others are considering killing would be sending strong messages opposing that kill choice. But really, how could you strongly oppose your death without the other wolves realizing that you are probably defending yourself, and thus letting all the wolves know who another wolf is? The idea of letting the evil wizard decide which nominee to kill would solve that, unless, of course, all of the nominees happen to be wolves, in which case, what happens? Does a wolf die?

3) If you don't let the evil wizard decide who dies and instead let the wolves pass messages, the wolves might choose to kill the evil wizard. Is that a scenario that you want to see in your game, or would you have a rule against that? But how could you make a rule against that? I mean, if the wolves pick someone and then the mod says "sorry, you'll have to pick someone else" then the wolves will know who the wizard is, and when one of them is turned back by the good wizard they will tell the village who the evil wizard is.

4) Once the evil wizard degifts the seer/ranger/hunter, can the good wizard simply pick a new one, or is that role over? If a new one can be picked, then I guess there would be a seer at all times, which doesn't seem fair. I mean, eventually the seer would pick the evil wizard and out him.

5) Voting records would be useless for finding wolves because none of the wolves would know who to lynch and who not to lynch. There would be no teamwork employed in this game.

It seems to me that the game is mostly a one-versus-one duel with a bunch of pawns in the middle, and the outcome would be based primarily on which wizard had the most luck (or the least amount of bad luck) on who they pick and who gets lynched each day, because as I said there would be no way to employ teamwork to orchestrate lynchings.

Not that it wouldn't be a lot of fun.

Of course, I'm not thinking terribly hard about this. You should just try it to see what happens. Maybe there are a lot of factors that we are overlooking that will make the game the biggest hit since WW- or perhaps some unforeseen loopholes and gaps will cause it to be a disaster that will live forever in infamy, which would be fun in its own way I suppose.

[the guy who be short]

The enemy may be powerful- but not nearly powerful enough to face a village of shirriffs. That would make for a lopsided good guy win.

Let's look at how the game would be set up after all three gifteds had been assigned (after the third night).LMP didn't mean that the rest of the innocents instantly become Shirriffs after the other three roles are dished out. He meant that, once those three roles are given out, every villager the Good Wizard picks on the following nights becomes a Shirriff.

[littlemanpoet]

The enemy may be powerful- but not nearly powerful enough to face a village of shirriffs. That would make for a lopsided good guy win.

I considered the option of bunches of shirriffs, and I don't like it. I could see no shirriffs and the good wizard knowing a bunch of known innocents thereafter. I could see two shirriffs. Not more than two though.

What if the evil wizard picks the good wizard at night? You have to have a rule for it, because if the mod pms the evil wizard back and says "You'll have to choose someone else" the evil wizard will of course know who the good wizard is. The evil wizard would be told that it is the good wizard, and has the same choice the good wizard has. I still am not sure what to do with the wizard battle results. That's the one wrinkle in this thing that's not easy to iron out. I'm strongly leaning toward a wizard battle necessarily ending in the death of both wizards.

If the wolves don't know who the other wolves are, they might consider killing one of their own. But obviously, if the mod is passing messages back and forth, the wolf who the others are considering killing would be sending strong messages opposing that kill choice. But really, how could you strongly oppose your death without the other wolves realizing that you are probably defending yourself, and thus letting all the wolves know who another wolf is? The idea of letting the evil wizard decide which nominee to kill would solve that, unless, of course, all of the nominees happen to be wolves, in which case, what happens? Does a wolf die? The evil wizard would get the final say, and the werewolves would of course be informed of that. No werewolves die. I had not thought of the werewolves figuring out who each other is, but if one werewolf happens to get identified by this means to the rest, then as a here and there thing, I don't see it as a bad thing within the game. And if a werewolf gets uncursed and identifies another as being a werewolf, that uncursed werewolf still has to somehow prove it to the other innocents. Of course, the good wizard could come out with the authoritative word, but would thus reveal him/herself, and therefore get killed.

If you don't let the evil wizard decide who dies and instead let the wolves pass messages, the wolves might choose to kill the evil wizard. Is that a scenario that you want to see in your game, or would you have a rule against that? But how could you make a rule against that? I mean, if the wolves pick someone and then the mod says "sorry, you'll have to pick someone else" then the wolves will know who the wizard is, and when one of them is turned back by the good wizard they will tell the village who the evil wizard is.Again, the evil wizard gets final say. As for the evil wizard blocking his own death, this is a very interesting scenario, and I think that I actually like that possibility being in the game. This is especially the case since the evil wizard has the advantage early, and the sooner he is gotten rid of, the sooner the innocent villagers have a prayer.

Once the evil wizard degifts the seer/ranger/hunter, can the good wizard simply pick a new one, or is that role over? If a new one can be picked, then I guess there would be a seer at all times, which doesn't seem fair. I mean, eventually the seer would pick the evil wizard and out him.If a gifted is de-gifted, the gift may be handed out again by the good wizard. But if the gifted is killed, the gift may no longer be handed out. So it's somewhere in between the two possibilities you noticed.

Voting records would be useless for finding wolves because none of the wolves would know who to lynch and who not to lynch. There would be no teamwork employed in this game.True. Any every villager for himself kind of game has its own attractions, but also its own foibles. However, I think that there would end up being some teamwork anyway, simply because people would feel that they have at least a reasonable chance of being right in trusting a given set of other people each given day. Not on sheer logic, but on the nature of each other's posts .... not that they couldn't be fooled, of course!

Maybe there are a lot of factors that we are overlooking that will make the game the biggest hit since WW- or perhaps some unforeseen loopholes and gaps will cause it to be a disaster that will live forever in infamy, which would be fun in its own way I suppose.
That's why I'm bringing it up here, hoping to get help ironing out the wrinkles.

[Cailín]

Wow, LMP, very thought out and interesting idea. Far more revolutionary than the idea I had in mind for my game. However, I do suppose a few problems might rise to the surface when testing this... The phantom has already pointed out most.

Essentially, your game is not really innocents against wolves anymore, but wizard against wizard. As soon as one of the wizards dies, whether this is because of the cleverness of their enemy, or the stubbornness of the innocent villagers - whom we all know enjoy to kill the gifted ones every now and then - the game is decided. The outcome of the game is entirely dependent on two people. This could be fun, I suppose, but a game is lost when one of the wizards suddenly misses a deadline or makes a minor slip up. Quite a responsibility, and I already lose my nerve when I’m a wolf or seer ;)

Also, what happens when the evil wizard and good wizard both choose the same innocent to turn in one night? This is quite likely to happen - there are always people who catch everyone’s attention.

I suggest also that, should you wish to test this scenario, you make the night phases just a little bit longer than usual. The game looks like it is going to be even more intense and demanding than your average Tol-in-Gaurhoth game, and if one of the two wizards happens to live in a strange time zone, the game will already be decided before it has officially started. This could be prevented by making the night phase 36 or 48 hours even... If the game works out as it should, there would be too many gifted anyway to make this phase even remotely boring.

About the whole Shiriff thing, this could become especially confusing. Robbing a Shiriff of his gift is not so easily done, since there is always someone else involved.

Huhm, yeah, well, maybe you should just test this and see how it works out. ^^

Edit: I always cross post... bad habit.

[the guy who be short]

I'd like to add that the death of either Wizard would completely unbalance the game.

If the GW dies, especially early on, there's nobody to counter the continual spawning of new werewolves. The villagers are unable to win as, at best, they can lynch one wolf per day, with no consequence as the EW creates a new one each Night.

If the EW dies, the remaining werewolves have to work independently and thus their team falls apart completely.

I suggest that the lives of the Wizards be tied to one another - the death of one must result in the death of the other to keep the game balanced. This could happen in the following ways:

Either wizard lynched.
GW killed by wolves.
In addition, this would solve the problem of a Wizard finding out who the other Wizard is. If this were to happen, the consequence would be that one Wizard knows who the other is - and would most likely prolong his existence so as to preserve his own life. This could even develop into an interesting situation with both Wizards knowing each other's identities, but neither daring to strike. Conversely, once a Wizard knows who the other Wizard is, he could intentionally get one of them lynched if he thought the removal of both Wizards would favour his side.

If the wolves choose to kill the EW, he'd more or less have to tell them who he is, whether bluntly or not, to prevent his death. This could result in all the wolves knowing who the wizard is, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Then some of them could move over to the Good side and still know who the Evil Wizard is. We could see a situation where the identities of the two wizards are widely known, but to preserve equilibrium, nobody kills either of them.

If this were the case, I'd like to see the GW able to communicate with his side as well, in the same manner as the WWs with the EW - none of them knowing one another's identities, but able to communicate through the GW.

Anybody see any flaws?

EDIT: Ah, I see a flaw. If both wizards were to die, the gifteds on the Good Side could continue working independently. However, what of the wolves? Either the Mod takes over the EW duties, under the pretext that the wolves come together to decide who to kill, in wolf form, in the Night and are thus still oblivious concerning one another's identities; or they become a group, knowing one another's identities, under the pretext that the EW somehow did this magically... :rolleyes:

[Firefoot]

I would say that in the event that the EW should die, the wolves would have to then know each others' identities.

It's starting to sound like a really interesting plan... I wouldn't mind giving it a shot. The worst that can happen is that it doesn't work for what ever reason - too lopsided, two players with too much power over the game, etc. That would be the biggest problem that I can see, as others have already said - two players moving around pawns. With a new wolf spawning every night, it seems fairly likely that the wolves would win though. I think the villagers would almost have to hope that after two or three nights (seer, ranger or seer, ranger, hunter) the wizards would die, leaving them with fewer wolves to deal with.

It would certainly add a whole new dimension to the question of who, individually, can say they won - the wizards died early, oops, neither of them win; at least half the villagers changed roles at least once during the game, therefore in some way helping both sides - oops, none of them really won; and most of the remaining villagers are probably already dead... Moderator wins! ;) :p

[the guy who be short]

With a new wolf spawning every night, it seems fairly likely that the wolves would win though. I think the villagers would almost have to hope that after two or three nights (seer, ranger or seer, ranger, hunter) the wizards would die, leaving them with fewer wolves to deal with.If at any point a wolf switches sides, they'll be able to tell the villager side all about their various inputs, who the EW forbade them to kill, any identities the EW may have revealed... That could help the Good and Gifteds.

One additional wolf per night, plus one innocent death, could be overkill though. Perhaps the EW could only create a wolf every second Night?

For this to work, I think we'd need the following rules:

It is not forbidden for wizards to declare to team members who the other members of a team are, i.e. EW can tell the wolves who the rest of them are, but then if any one were to switch back to the villager side, they would be able to tell them who the rest of the wolves are. So it's unwise... but could occasionally be necessary. Additionally, Wizards can lie to team members... imagine. :D

I think the Good Team (so it shall be called...) should be able to commnicate amongst Evil Team lines, that is, they all know who the GW is, and the GW can communicate with all of them or convey information to all of them.

I think this will be very interesting for quite a few reasons. There'll be a lot of backstabbing a treachery, and there'll be a lot of manipulation of others by the Wizards. Additionally, we'd see two distinct teams - Good and Evil - with a sort of dull neutral in the middle, trying to help the Good Team but always remaining doubtable.

Suggestion: If EW and GW choose the same person, that person dies.

The main problem I see is that people may feel like pawns, with the two main players being the Wizards. Personally I think it'll be immense fun.

[littlemanpoet]

Essentially, your game is not really innocents against wolves anymore, but wizard against wizard. As soon as one of the wizards dies, whether this is because of the cleverness of their enemy, or the stubbornness of the innocent villagers - whom we all know enjoy to kill the gifted ones every now and then - the game is decided. The outcome of the game is entirely dependent on two people. This could be fun, I suppose, but a game is lost when one of the wizards suddenly misses a deadline or makes a minor slip up.Good points. The wizards would be hand picked from a few who volunteer for the role, and who promise that they can be available for the kind of intensity the role requires.

The wizards cannot be killed by anyone but each other. Thus, if the evil wizard or lycanthropes try to kill the good wizard, they will be told that their kill was unsuccessful, and they'll know why. A wizard can be lynched, but it won't work. (hee hee, that would be fun to write :D).

Also, what happens when the evil wizard and good wizard both choose the same innocent to turn in one night? This is quite likely to happen - there are always people who catch everyone’s attention.Wow! Excellent question. I hadn't thought of that. Inevitably, one wizard will PM the moderator before the other, and first dibs wins, I think. Unless someone can think of a better rule for that; then the wizard who came in second would have to pick over again.

I suggest also that, should you wish to test this scenario, you make the night phases just a little bit longer than usual. The game looks like it is going to be even more intense and demanding than your average Tol-in-Gaurhoth game, and if one of the two wizards happens to live in a strange time zone, the game will already be decided before it has officially started. This could be prevented by making the night phase 36 or 48 hours even... If the game works out as it should, there would be too many gifted anyway to make this phase even remotely boring.Hee hee! I think I could work with that, although I think a lot of villagers would get really antsy, waiting for the new Day to begin.

Oh, I'm thinking also that the good wizard might not be allowed to scry until Night 3, just to make sure that there are three werewolves to start the game off.

About the whole Shiriff thing, this could become especially confusing. Robbing a Shiriff of his gift is not so easily done, since there is always someone else involved. Yes, I don't think Shirriffs belong in a Dueling Wizards game.

[littlemanpoet]

I'd like to add that the death of either Wizard would completely unbalance the game. Sorry I forgot to say this in the original idea post, but the wizards can only both die at the same time. Only a wizard can kill a wizard.

If the EW dies, the remaining werewolves have to work independently and thus their team falls apart completely. Another good point I didn't see right away. If the EW dies, part of the curse is removed such that the werewolves know who each other are and can/must work amongst themselves. Darn, this is getting complex (but since when did that ever scare LMP away? :p)

I suggest that the lives of the Wizards be tied to one another - the death of one must result in the death of the other to keep the game balanced.Precisely.

Either wizard lynched. Nope. They can't be...successfully.
GW killed by wolves.Nope again. Only a wizard can kill a wizard.
this would solve the problem of a Wizard finding out who the other Wizard is.Actually, the way I see this working out is that the GW doesn't really mind revealing, because the EW won't want to take the GW out until EW has created enough werewolves to satisfy his/her strategy. Meanwhile, the GW will want to take out the EW as quickly as possible, so the EW will want to remain hidden for as long as possible.

If this were to happen, the consequence would be that one Wizard knows who the other is - and would most likely prolong his existence so as to preserve his own life. This could even develop into an interesting situation with both Wizards knowing each other's identities, but neither daring to strike. Conversely, once a Wizard knows who the other Wizard is, he could intentionally get one of them lynched if he thought the removal of both Wizards would favour his side.Hmmm.... this is an interesting option, but I think it would tend to allow the game to become too unbalanced. The only way to maintain balance is for both wizards (so powerful) to be in, or out, of the game simultaneously.

If the wolves choose to kill the EW, he'd more or less have to tell them who he is, whether bluntly or not, to prevent his death. This could result in all the wolves knowing who the wizard is, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Then some of them could move over to the Good side and still know who the Evil Wizard is. We could see a situation where the identities of the two wizards are widely known, but to preserve equilibrium, nobody kills either of them.Now, that is an interesting notion, too. But this is just as likely not to happen, rendering the equilibrium nil.

[littlemanpoet]

Ooh! Ooh! I get to triple post, just like on WW! :rolleyes:

Moderator wins! But of course! Don't you know, that's the whole idea? ;)

If at any point a wolf switches sides, they'll be able to tell the villager side all about their various inputs, who the EW forbade them to kill, any identities the EW may have revealed... That could help the Good and Gifteds.The EW never speaks directly to the werewolves, it's always through the moderator (or an assistant moderator ). And the message to the werewolves, should they choose to kill the EW, would be something like "The EW has overruled your choice; _______ is to be killed toNight." The werewolves are none the wiser, which would be frustrating for them, but after all, the EW knows best..... ;)

[AbercrombieOfRohan]

Good points. The wizards would be hand picked from a few who volunteer for the role, and who promise that they can be available for the kind of intensity the role requires.

Wouldn't this seriously limit the people who could be the wizards and therefore make the game way easier? Say five people signed up, two of them would have to be wizards, limiting the choices down to 2/5 and making it easier for the GW to choose. After the first couple of days there would be no doubt who the EW was.

[littlemanpoet]

Wouldn't this seriously limit the people who could be the wizards and therefore make the game way easier? Say five people signed up, two of them would have to be wizards, limiting the choices down to 2/5 and making it easier for the GW to choose. After the first couple of days there would be no doubt who the EW was.
Good question! First you get your list of 16 to 30 players. Then you ask for those interested in the wizard roles to PM you. Then you PM them back telling them whether they're the wizards.

[Kuruharan]

The EW never speaks directly to the werewolves, it's always through the moderator (or an assistant moderator ). And the message to the werewolves, should they choose to kill the EW, would be something like "The EW has overruled your choice; _______ is to be killed toNight." The werewolves are none the wiser, which would be frustrating for them, but after all, the EW knows best

If the EW only does this once, well...I'm sure you can follow me here.

If the EW does this repeatedly, it utterly defeats the purpose of being werewolf.

[littlemanpoet]

If the EW only does this once, well...I'm sure you can follow me here.

If the EW does this repeatedly, it utterly defeats the purpose of being werewolf.
Good point. It should only be allowed to happen in the case of the werewolves choosing to kill the EW. Of course, the EW is impervious to a lycanthropic attack, but the EW would not want the werewolves to waste a Night unsuccessfully attacking the EW.

[Cailín]

Since I have nothing better to do – oh jolly holidays - and am quite done decorating Christmas trees, I thought I might as well start further developing my own Werewolf Scenario. I got an idea some time ago, when I was still relatively new to the game, and have not yet been able to let it go.

I always found the role of the Shiriffs – as a team - rather interesting, though in the game I don’t believe they have really worked so far. When the Shiriffs were allowed to reveal themselves they were too strong, when they were not, they seemed rather useless. So after toying with these two soul mates for a while, adding a little Cobbler and a bit of Black Beorning, plus a little Shakespearean romance, I came up with something else:

The Lovers.

The game would be close to an ordinary game of Werewolves. The village should consist of about sixteen players, three wolves, a Hunter, a Seer and a Ranger. However, one of the wolves and one of the Ordinary Villagers are more than they appear. It is tragic, surely, but some twisted fate decided these two sworn enemies should fall in love. They shall form a separate, third team and can only win if they survive together. This might be rather interesting, for where in all previous games the wolves could blindly trust each other, they now have a traitor in their midst who not only wishes to feast on the villagers, but also his fellow wolves – blinded by love, naturally. The devoted ordinary villager in the meantime will have to betray all his or her ordinary friends to be able to live happily ever after with his/her furry lover.

At night, the werewolf in love would have to do anything to prevent his beloved from being eaten – without raising suspicion with the other wolves. During the day, there shall be two people who will really have to defend each other with their lives – because they cannot survive without the other – and still, without drawing attention too themselves. It might really damage the position of the wolves, but on the other hand, the lover-werewolf would have to keep his fellows alive to get rid of the other Villagers as quickly as possible.

I was thinking along the following lines:

- If one of the lovers gets lynched, eaten or shot by the Hunter, the other shall automatically die of grief.
- If the Seer dreams of one of the lovers, he or she shall only see their normal role, not the lover part.
- The Lovers win if they survive together or if the composition of the village is Lover – Lover – Wolf or Lover – Lover – Villager.

So – what do you all think? Did I overlook something? Could it work? Most importantly – would it add anything to the game or am I just seriously deluded? :cool:

(LMP, I hope you don't mind I'm using your thread for this.)

[mormegil]

Interesting idea. Would the two lovers be able to communicate? At first I thought if one dies the other should live but on second thought it might not be a good idea. The reason being the innocent lover would know who the wolves are and could give them up upon her loves death. It would be a fun yet difficult role to play especially for the wolf lover.

[Kath]

But why should the lover know who the other wolves are? They would only know of the one they communicated with, and that one would be dead. Could they not then live?

[Meneltarmacil]

I think the idea would be interesting to try. Of course, it should be in a village that has a roughly equal number of male and female players so that the identity of one of the Lovers is not too obvious. The alternative, of course, is to ignore gender in that scenario, but I am really not in favor of doing so.

[mormegil]

But why should the lover know who the other wolves are? They would only know of the one they communicated with, and that one would be dead. Could they not then live?

But if the lovers communicate and the way they win is by being the only two left then it would make sense for the wolf to tell his lover who the other wolves are in an attempt to help lynch them off.

[Kath]

Ah cheers morm, hadn't thought of that!

[tar-ancalime]

But if the lovers communicate and the way they win is by being the only two left then it would make sense for the wolf to tell his lover who the other wolves are in an attempt to help lynch them off.

No, this wouldn't be a problem, not till the very end of the game--the lovers have to kill not only the other wolves, but ALL of the other villagers (and a grim pair they must be--was it Titus Andronicus you were thinking of, Cailin?) to win the game. Lynching the other wolves before the precise correct moment would be a win for the villagers and a loss for the lovers. I think it would be all right for the "innocent" (if we can use that word for someone who wants EVERYONE dead) lover to know the identity of the other wolves, because s/he couldn't really do anything directly with that information without losing the game. The trick for the lovers, in addition to keeping their own identities secret, would be timing.

I like this idea a lot! If you get to implement it, Cailin, I'd love to play in that game.

Cailin--could the non-wolf lover also be Gifted? (Not the Seer, since the lover would already be aware of the wolves' identity, but the idea of a Hunter or Ranger who's treacherous is intriguing.)

[Oddwen]

Ah, the Lovers - I've heard of this, and think it sounds cool.

I've seen slightly different versions though - one, there is a "Cupid" role, and after day one, he/she picks two players to be lovers, or two, two people are picked randomly to be lovers, it could be a Wolf and the Seer, perhaps.

But yeah, I think it's a cool idea.

[Cailín]

Would the two lovers be able to communicate? At first I thought if one dies the other should live but on second thought it might not be a good idea. The reason being the innocent lover would know who the wolves are and could give them up upon her loves death. It would be a fun yet difficult role to play especially for the wolf lover.

Yes they would be. It will be hard enough to come up with a strategy as it is, so I suppose they should - like the Shiriffs - be able to communicate during Day phases. So Morm has it right - if the non wolf lover would survive after the wolf lover's death, the game would be instantly over.

I think the idea would be interesting to try. Of course, it should be in a village that has a roughly equal number of male and female players so that the identity of one of the Lovers is not too obvious. The alternative, of course, is to ignore gender in that scenario, but I am really not in favor of doing so.

Well, I'm not making any promises. But I guess I agree.

Cailin--could the non-wolf lover also be Gifted? (Not the Seer, since the lover would already be aware of the wolves' identity, but the idea of a Hunter or Ranger who's treacherous is intriguing.)

I thought it would be better for the non-wolf to be an ordinary, otherwise I think it could seriously unbalance the game. A Ranger Lover would be far too powerful and a Hunter Lover quite useless - the Lovers are one team and when they die, they should not really care who eventually wins.

Good to see some people like the idea! :D

[Cailín]

At first I thought if one dies the other should live but on second thought it might not be a good idea. The reason being the innocent lover would know who the wolves are and could give them up upon her loves death.

Not only that is the reason I wanted the Lovers to die together. Though the wolves are supposed to be a team, we have seen that in the past, they have thoughtlessly sacrificed each other for their own benefit. Also, villagers are quick to kill people they believe innocent just for clarity. It would be interesting to see two people really forced to work together. Also, if you’d allow them to live on after their lover’s death, you give them a choice to which team they’d want to belong – and I wish to avoid that. It would make the Lovers role too easy.

Lynching the other wolves before the precise correct moment would be a win for the villagers and a loss for the lovers.

Or, of course, the Lover wolf could choose to eat all other villagers by himself without attracting suspicion, but I personally believe that would be the harder way of winning the game.

I've seen slightly different versions though - one, there is a "Cupid" role, and after day one, he/she picks two players to be lovers, or two, two people are picked randomly to be lovers, it could be a Wolf and the Seer, perhaps.

I looked up the ‘Cupid’ role and I see what you mean. However, in that scenario, the two Lovers could easily be two innocents, and we’d be left with plain Shiriffs again.

[littlemanpoet]

LMP, I hope you don't mind I'm using your thread for this.
By all means! That's what it's for. I'm glad you've resurrected it.

could the non-wolf lover also be Gifted? (Not the Seer, since the lover would already be aware of the wolves' identity, but the idea of a Hunter or Ranger who's treacherous is intriguing.) Not the Ranger. The Ranger is supposed to be good, even if seeming evil, not the other way around. But the seer? :eek: That would be a deadly combination, but not altogether unwonted. And yes, it would unbalance the game to have the non-wolf lover be gifted.

I also think that it would be needful to have an extra werewolf in this scenario, which wouldn't be a problem if everybody expects there to be a Lovers combination in the game, anyway. Just to give the werewolves an even chance.

- The Lovers win if they survive together or if the composition of the village is Lover – Lover – Wolf or Lover – Lover – Villager.Um, this is confusing me. Could you explain this so my eyes can deal with it? :p Is the "or" in this list the splitter between two possibilities?

[Cailín]

I also think that it would be needful to have an extra werewolf in this scenario, which wouldn't be a problem if everybody expects there to be a Lovers combination in the game, anyway. Just to give the werewolves an even chance.

Hmm yes, perhaps you are right, but would that not seriously damage the chances of the villagers? That would mean - in a village consisting of 18 players - five people are a potential danger to the village. Within a day, probably a third is evil. And 18 players is already quite a large town.

Um, this is confusing me. Could you explain this so my eyes can deal with it? :p Is the "or" in this list the splitter between two possibilities?

And I thought I was being quite clear. Just for your eyes then, I indeed meant there are two possibilities for a Lovers' win other than them being the sole survivors. They also win when they are still alive and there's only one other villager, whether it be a wolf, an ordinary or a Gifted, still walking and talking.

Now I come to think of it, when the last one standing together with the Lovers is the Hunter, I'd say we have the extremely rare scenario of a Moderator Win. Anyway, I hope I have not just further confused you.

[mormegil]

Now a question that developed in my mind last night is what do you think would happen if there were only 3 wolves and one was killed early. That would leave the lover and a wolf. Obviously the wolf would know he's not the lover. Could this cause problems? Would it simply result in the wolf pushing for the lovers death and the lover pushing for the wolves death?

[Cailín]

Now a question that developed in my mind last night is what do you think would happen if there were only 3 wolves and one was killed early. That would leave the lover and a wolf. Obviously the wolf would know he's not the lover. Could this cause problems? Would it simply result in the wolf pushing for the lovers death and the lover pushing for the wolves death?

Good question, I had not even thought of that! I suppose it would not matter though - it would just add some extra tension to the game, because the non Lover wolf could of course not reveal himself without losing the game. Only it might be rather difficult for the two wolves to decide on a victim together then, but I can't see why it would not work.

[littlemanpoet]

Hmm yes, perhaps you are right, but would that not seriously damage the chances of the villagers? That would mean - in a village consisting of 18 players - five people are a potential danger to the village. Within a day, probably a third is evil. And 18 players is already quite a large town.

My reasoning is the same as for the werebear scenario: the forces of evil are split; therefore, the non-lover werewolves are in just as much of a predicament as the innocent non-lover villagers. There are THREE sides, not TWO. Even though five people would be a potential danger to the village, there is one werewolf plus all the "innocent" villagers who are against the non-lover werewolves. So it's fractured. Therefore, the need for an extra werewolf to balance things out in a three-way game.

[littlemanpoet]

The Oracle knows all the roles of all the characters in the village.

The Oracle may not use the name of any other villager, and may not name the role of any other villager, not even an Ordinary Innocent, and may not vote. All the Oracle can do is speak in riddles. If s/he flat out names roles and other players, the moderator's wrath comes down upon the oracle, and the oracle is summarily executed, and Night falls immediately; all roles are redistributed and Day begins 24 hours later (The threat has to be there to break the incentive; more's the pity if the Oracle could not resist the temptation).

This doesn't have to take the place of any other role.

At first I was going to say that the Oracle cannot be killed by the werewolves until (1) s/he is the last innocent villager; or (2) s/he slips from riddling. But the Oracle maybe should be just as assailable as any other gifted.

[Gurthang]

The thing is, once the Oracle speaks, everyone will be discussing the riddles instead of who they think is guilty. I'm not sure that still works with the nature of the game. Still, it's an interesting concept. I do wonder if the oracle is automatically on the villagers team, or could they pick to be on the werewolves, just have to 'riddle' only during day.

I've thought of something that might be interesting. What if we had a Healer? The idea behind it would be that they could choose one dead innocent player to revive.

Now, whether they could choose to do this at any time, or if they could only do it when they died is up to whatever the moderator decides. But whenever, they just tell the moderator who they want revived, and that player comes back. The moderator might also make a rule concerning bringing back gifteds, but that could all be worked out for each individual game.

[Aiwendil]

Littlemanpoet wrote:
The Oracle may not use the name of any other villager, and may not name the role of any other villager, not even an Ordinary Innocent, and may not vote.

If the Oracle can't use the name of any other villager, he or she will be unable to act like an ordinary innocent and take part in the usual discussions.

I suppose one could make the prohibition one merely against stating the role of any other villager. But then you'd get into a lot of grey area in terms of moderation.

[the guy who be short]

Everybody could know who the Oracle was, but s/he could be immune to wolves. Each Day, their riddling could swap from hinting at the wolves' identities to hinting at those of the villagers'.

Hm?

[littlemanpoet]

Everybody could know who the Oracle was, but s/he could be immune to wolves. Each Day, their riddling could swap from hinting at the wolves' identities to hinting at those of the villagers'.

Hm?
You're taking this in the direction I had been thinking for it. The only thing is, if the Oracle is immune to wolves, there has to be an end to that invincibility so that the werewolves could win. So maybe if there's only one werewolf left and the Oracle, then the werewolf wins.

[Garin]

Sorry I am still reading the oracle idea...I was just wondering if the lovers would be male and female or possibly homosexual? This might make things a little tricky. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Posted by Gurthang:
I've thought of something that might be interesting. What if we had a Healer? The idea behind it would be that they could choose one dead innocent player to revive.
Not that I'm currently biased but how about a healer that can bring wolves back. How about a healer that is assigned, by the mod, whether he is evil or good for that day.
Not that I'm biased.

[Cailín]

Because it would be too easy to figure out the wolves / lovers if they have to be male and female, I think homosexual couples would be allowed in my scenario. ;)

The Oracle idea sounds interesting but very complicated in practice, I should think.

[Anguirel]

I like Gurthang's Healer idea, though it needs a wee bit of thinking...

It would interesting to have an intrepid spy within the wolves-though that idea would probably necessitate four wolves. They could communicate secretly with the Seer, and reveal anything except the identity of the other wolves. IE, plans the wolves are considering employing, who the wolves attacked if the Ranger intervened, who the wolves think is Gifted, that kind of thing...

Oh, and if they were the lynched, the Seer could either choose to reveal them as the Spy, and himself as the Seer, or cold-bloodedly let them swing! A revealed Spy would be killed extremely quickly by his erstwhile comrades, of course, but that's the price of espionage. If the Seer let them hang, they would only be revealed as a spy if the Seer subsequently explained or at the end of the game.

Further complication-if the wolves especially suspected one of their number, they could execute him instead of an innocent in the night. Of course, they might be wrong!

[Oddwen]

These Oracle and Healer roles sound as if they might work better if all the roles were secret.

That's how WW is played in real life mostly, the roles aren't revealed when the player dies, and the outcome isn't known until one team is dead.

I wonder what a game of WW would be like on the Downs, with no excellent death scenes? :eek:

[littlemanpoet]

There are two wizards, and no other gifted at the beginning of the game, which must have a minimum of 20 players, and an arbitrary maximum (first time) of 30. The two wizard roles are assigned from a list of volunteers who are willing to play the roles.

The two wizards don't know who each other are. One is evil, one is good.

Evil Wizard: each Night the evil wizard picks a villager to curse as a werewolf, or werebear (only one), or cobbler (only one). The new werewolf is immediately informed and the mod requests a kill choice, which the werewolf provides by the end of the 24 hours.

The werewolves do not know each other's identity because while they are werewolves at Night, they cannot detect the identities underlying the curses. When there are multiple werewolves, and they make differing kill choices, the person with the most werewolf "votes" is killed. If there is a tie, the sub-mod for the evil wizard (smfew) PMs back to each werewolf about the others' choices, and serves as a go-between until the werewolves have come to a majority choice.

Note: Werewolves do not PM each other and therefore cannot debate with each other; thus, they are not going to find out each others' identities. If in some odd circumstance, a werewolf gets the most votes for the werewolf kill, the evil wizard has the right to overrule the choice. If in some even odder circumstance, the werewolves choose the evil wizard as their kill, the evil wizard of course has the right to overrule their choice.

If the evil wizard chooses a gifted villager to curse, the gifted villager loses the gift but does not turn into a werewolf ... this time. The good wizard is informed of the loss of the gifting.

If the evil wizard picks the good wizard at Night, he is informed that he has discovered the good wizard, and has the option from then on to call out the good wizard to battle.

The evil wizard may choose to inform one or more werewolves who one or more other werewolves are; but this is a risky option and should be used with great care, considering the possible consequences.

The evil wizard is allowed to lie to his were-creatures.

Good Wizard: each Night the good wizard picks a villager to scry.

1. If the good wizard scries the evil wizard, the good wizard is informed of that, and can at any time thereafter, call out the evil wizard to battle, which results in the death of both wizards.

2. If the good wizard scries a werewolf, the werewolf is turned back into an innocent by the good wizard's power.

3. If the good wizard finds an innocent, the good wizard has the option of turning that innocent into a gifted, the choices being seer, ranger, and hunter. If a gifted is de-gifted by the evil wizard's curse, the good wizard may assign that gift to another. If a gifted is killed, the gift may no longer be assigned.

The good wizard may choose to inform one or more gifteds who one or more of the gifteds are.

The gifteds know who the good wizard is; the good wizard may PM the gifteds during the Day, and the gifteds may PM the good wizard during the Day. They do not know who each other is unless the good wizard tells them. (why wouldn't the good wizard tell the gifteds who each other is?)

The good wizard is allowed to mis-inform and/or withhold information from his gifteds.

The evil wizard and werewolves win when the werewolves equal or exceed the number of innocents. The villagers and good wizard win when there is no evil wizard left, and no werewolves left.

There are no shirriffs.

If the good wizard and the evil wizard choose the same previously innocent villager on the same Night, that person dies from the struggle; the result being that neither wizard added a player to her/his side.

Just to be perfectly clear: a wizard battle always results in the death of both wizards.

There is a vote for lynching every Day. If a wizard is voted to be lynched, he will be lynched but cannot die that way, and is thus forced to declare himself, and the opposing wizard can call him/her out for a wizard battle. The wizard cannot be killed by lynching; instead, nobody dies that Day.

If the evil wizard dies, the werewolves are informed of each other's identity, and revert from there on to traditional werewolf group dynamics.

Each Day and Night will be 48 hours long instead of 24 hours; if such a time frame proves somehow unworkable, it may be changed (with notice of course!) during the game.

There. I think that's all the rules I can think of. Are there any holes? Problems? Difficulties? Please let me know. I hope to spring this upon the Dead relatively soon.

[Gil-Galad]

1. Name a Dead (BD'er that is) you want to see as a werewolf; and why?
Saucepanman - hes too helpful so noboyd suspects him


2. Name a Dead you want to see as the Ranger; and why?
hmmm... Firefoot, she'll be good with it


3. Name a Dead you want to see as the Seer; and why?
Glirdan - he always has weird ways of drawing suspicon to himself, so if he turns out to be the seer it'll change the whole way of voting, way to take one for the team Glirdy!


4. Name a Dead you want to see as the Hunter; and why?
the hunter... hmmm... i would have to go with Rune, Rune to me as been a pretty great WW player and he'll be a good hunter




5. What two Downers would you like to have as fellow werewolves; and why?
fellow werewolves... Boromir88 and LMP


6. (suggested by Kath)Name a Dead you would never like to see as a Werewolf; and why? me, i would die so quickly

[Lhunardawen]

Wow. That's a complicated game you have there, Elempi. But it's very much interesting...

Note: Werewolves do not PM each other and therefore cannot debate with each other; thus, they are not going to find out each others' identities. If in some odd circumstance, a werewolf gets the most votes for the werewolf kill, the evil wizard has the right to overrule the choice. If in some even odder circumstance, the werewolves choose the evil wizard as their kill, the evil wizard of course has the right to overrule their choice.Overrule, meaning he gets to decide who dies instead, or the wolves have to change their victim?


The evil wizard may choose to inform one or more werewolves who one or more other werewolves are; but this is a risky option and should be used with great care, considering the possible consequences.

The evil wizard is allowed to lie to his were-creatures.What is the evil wizard supposed to accomplish in doing this? Or can he just play around with his were-creatures as he wills?

What if for some odd reason both wizards refuse to engage in battle?

That's all I can think of for now. All I can say is that, my, these wizards have in their hands a LOT of power. (My Captain Obvious statement for the day.)

And I guess the poor players inflicted with timezones will have a hard time coping up at some point. Yes, even with 48-hour phases. Especially when they are wolves, and they have to decide on a(nother) death.

[Cailín]

LMP, I think I was the one who proposed the wizards to be volunteers in the first place, but I might get back on that now… At least, not in the way it is currently proposed. I think you might be better off telling people to PM if they definitely do not wish to be a wizard. Otherwise, it might be too easy to guess which players may have volunteered and besides, some people just cannot be bothered volunteering at all while they would have done a decent job as a wizard.

You could always 'dream-team' the wizards if you doubt people are up to it. No one will be able to tell anyways.

I didn't find any other loopholes, though. It sounds like an exciting game! Oops, I'm late for class now.

[The Saucepan Man]

My first thought is that, with 20+ players, 48 hours for both night and day and no (or few) deaths overnight, it would be a very, very long game ...

Not necessarily a bad thing, of course.

[littlemanpoet]

Overrule, meaning he gets to decide who dies instead, or the wolves have to change their victim?Overrule only if the werewolves' majority vote is to kill a werewolf or the evil wizard. Gotta let them have a little fun...

What is the evil wizard supposed to accomplish in [misleading his underlings]? Or can he just play around with his were-creatures as he wills?First, s/he IS evil. But the good wizard can do it too. So.... Second, there may be situations in which the best (and perhaps only) way for the wizards to get what they want from their underlings is to tell them other than the truth. Thus, it becomes interesting to see just how Sarumanish (or not) the good wizard gets by the end of the game.

What if for some odd reason both wizards refuse to engage in battle?The only way for the innocent villagers to win is for the good wizard to eventually sacrifice him/herself for the greater good, because the only way for the evil wizard to die is in battle with the good wizard (and it gives the mod an extra kill narrative to write :D).

And I guess the poor players inflicted with timezones will have a hard time coping up at some point. Yes, even with 48-hour phases. Especially when they are wolves, and they have to decide on a(nother) death.Which is one of the primary reasons why I'm allowing for 48 hours instead of just 24.

I think you might be better off telling people to PM if they definitely do not wish to be a wizard.I see the sense of this; but it cuts both ways. It's a PM, after all, so no matter what, the rest of the villagers don't know who has volunteered. I might just recruit my wizards in any case, but there are a lot of BDers who would be great wizards, so I don't think I'll have a hard time finding them. Besides, they ARE the juiciest roles in the game.

And to SPM, 48 hours may seem long, and yes, it probably won't be a bad thing.... but with the potential for more than one kill per Night, as well as more than one lynching per Day, I'm not worried about length of game.

One final point in that regard: I'm thinking that for every three additional werewolves there will be one additional kill per Night. Still thinking about that one, so please feel free to comment.

[Anguirel]

I had an ingenious idea this afternoon in the bath for a Werewolf role...

The Thief

Every night, the Thief prowls the streets looking for suitable houses to burgle or villagers to rob.

Each Night, the Thief selects a player.

If he selects an Ordinary Villager, he steals some trinket and nothing further happens, except the Thief has a bit more swagger in his step the next day.

If he selects a Ranger, Hunter or Seer (or other Gifted), the Gifted player's choice for that night is ignored and the ability-for that night only-devolves to the Thief instead.

If he selects a Werewolf or Werebear (or other nasty thing), he is mangled by their bloody revenge at the attempted robbery. His body will be found in the morning.

One rule to stop him getting too powerful: the Thief is vowed to keep the secrets of the underworld. He may not reveal his identity as the Thief, even if he risks hanging (it wouldn't save him anyway!) and he may not overtly reveal the roles he has discovered-though he can hint as usual.

The Thief is a pretty powerful asset to the village in some ways, but can also screw things up for them.

What do you think?

Possibly he could be balanced further by making him cancel Gifted abilities for a night, not use them himself.

[littlemanpoet]

Sounds like two roles in one.

1. Swiping things, which would be basically harmless and extraneous to the game.

2. Stealing abilities, which is the real difference maker. I think it ought to be called Trickster instead, considering certain Book discussions we've had. Sort of a Cobbler in reverse, isn't it?

[Anguirel]

You know, you read my mind. I considered calling him the Trickster.

And in my long experience of werewolf experimentation, I have discovered that almost any role can be labelled as a Cobbler in reverse...

I'd like to try him (or her actually-Trickster's Consort anyone?) out in the next game I mod. She could represent Thuringwethil rather well...

Though of course if anyone wants to give this rogue a trial run before then I'll be happy to watch his progress...

[Thinlómien]

I actually got an idea yesterday. I don't know if it makes sense, but I try to explain it. It includes two new roles:

The One Who Knows
The One Who Knows is an ordo, who knows all gifteds.
If you know a better name for the role, it would be great.

Then we have Wolf Agent/ Traitor (whichever you want to call him )
The Wolf Agent is a kind of cobbler or wolf seer. He is an ordo that wants the wolves to win. That's how he plays at days. At nights, he tries to catch The One Who Knows. So every night he chooses one to find out if he's The One Who Knows or not. If he catches him, he informs the wolves. After The One Who Knows is found, he is every night blackmailed to reveal one gifted to the wolves.
I just wonder should he know who the wolves are or not.

A good idea? A bad idea? Any thoughts?

[Anguirel]

Well...I'm not that keen on that idea, partly because it's part of the job of a skilled wolf to spot the Gifteds anyway, and they often succeed in doing so without help...

[Thinlómien]

Well...I'm not that keen on that idea, partly because it's part of the job of a skilled wolf to spot the Gifteds anyway, and they often succeed in doing so without help...That's true, but it isn't that easy to the wolf agent to spot the one who knows. And those roles would create quite interesting situations...

[Anguirel]

Oh, and in terms of names...

How about the Sophist and the Cynic?

The essential problem with this plan is it sort of distracts both sides from the focus of the game to the Gifteds-who should ideally be adornments, not ends in themselves.

But it could be fun.

I would suggest that the Cynic should not know the identity of the wolves (it's dark and they're transformed during their dealings). This means he'll have to work through the mod-a tad exhausting-but otherwise he'll just have too much power concentrated in his devious hands.

[Thinlómien]

Oh, and in terms of names...

How about the Sophist and the Cynic?

The essential problem with this plan is it sort of distracts both sides from the focus of the game to the Gifteds-who should ideally be adornments, not ends in themselves.

But it could be fun.

I would suggest that the Cynic should not know the identity of the wolves (it's dark and they're transformed during their dealings). This means he'll have to work through the mod-a tad exhausting-but otherwise he'll just have too much power concentrated in his devious hands. Nice names, Ang. :)
I agree with the identity thing; a cobbler doesn't know the wolves either.

I got a new idea, which is a role called whore in the RL version, but we could maybe call it poisoner instead. I don't know if there's been any games with a similar role.

The poisoner is a bit like werebear, a lone killer. But he kills with delay. The poison doesn't affect very fast; it kills the victim next night after poisoning, not immediatly. Ranger can protect people from poisoner, though ranger should probably be called "healer" or "doctor" in this game, since I think he should be able to cure the poisoned both on the night of the poisoning and on the night he or she would die.

[littlemanpoet]

I actually got an idea yesterday. I don't know if it makes sense, but I try to explain it. It includes two new roles:

The One Who Knows
The One Who Knows is an ordo, who knows all gifteds.This is not at all unlike my Oracle idea. Oracle post (http://www.forums.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=438248&postcount=55)

[Thinlómien]

I did see that post, but I think there are also big differences between the roles.

[Oddwen]

If you're talking about more killings, there's a character called the Witch. He/she has two potions - one to kill, and one to heal. They could be on either side really, depending on the player. Though I don't see if they could be on the winning side unless the Werewolves are dead. I suppose it's not a winning role, merely a surviving role.

[littlemanpoet]

If you're talking about more killings, there's a character called the Witch. He/she has two potions - one to kill, and one to heal. They could be on either side really, depending on the player. Though I don't see if they could be on the winning side unless the Werewolves are dead. I suppose it's not a winning role, merely a surviving role.
Could be interesting. Try it in the next game you mod, eh?

[Glirdan]

You know what, I think we should have a complete seperate thread devoted to the different Gifteds/Cursed we could come up with for a game. What do you think?? But I guess that this thread kind of does it...even though we've wandered very far off track of what the thread originally started out as. :p

[littlemanpoet]

...we've wandered very far off track of what the thread originally started out as.Actually, the current track is where I want it, if you can kindly suffer a certain sense of proprietorship in me... :p

[Glirdan]

Oh I can and I also kind of figured that's what you were doing. But wouldn't it be a good idea to have a thread devoted solely to what different roles we can??

[littlemanpoet]

Oh I can and I also kind of figured that's what you were doing. But wouldn't it be a good idea to have a thread devoted solely to what different roles we can??
If you like, although it seems like a redundancy to me.

[Oddwen]

What you guys need is for Fordim to create a poll. :p

[Garin]

All of the ideas seem intriguing, some better than others. The dueling wizards would certainly tax a moderator. The theif role could be tweaked. I'm not sure what my favorite is (including the many I didn't mention) but I'll think about it.

So far the different roles I've seen in games are the Apprentice (Takes the place of the first gifted that dies) and the Fool (Someone who falsely believes he/she is the Seer).

The Apprentice worked out well, I liked that one. The False Seer failed mainly because the crafty wolves took out the True Seer on the first day.

I was thinking of a sort of Were Bear that is randomly assigned an innocent or evil role for the day based on, perhaps, the coin flip of the moderator. One day he/she kills while the other days he/she is an innocent.
I tend to appreciate evil roles the most.

As for a new thread, I think this one suffices.

The main thing that most Downers would appreciate are roles that don't cancel out the standard roles, some people tire of being an ordo all of the time. I like the roles that are subtle and don't eliminate other gifteds/villlians.

[littlemanpoet]

All of the ideas seem intriguing, some better than others. The dueling wizards would certainly tax a moderator.I'm going to have 2 sub-moderators when I moderate my dueling wizards game. They're already lined up.

I was thinking of a sort of Were Bear that is randomly assigned an innocent or evil role for the day based on, perhaps, the coin flip of the moderator. One day he/she kills while the other days he/she is an innocent.I'm interested. What about the werebear killing werewolves instead of innocents? Of course, only if s/he picks one, not knowing what the role is...

[Garin]

I'm interested. What about the werebear killing werewolves instead of innocents? Of course, only if s/he picks one, not knowing what the role is......

That would be fine, we would need an equalizer such as a cursed. Perhaps the cursed could turn werebear, also, if attacked. We must not make things too tough for the poor wolves.

I'm going to have 2 sub-moderators when I moderate my dueling wizards game. They're already lined up.

Count me in, I love being lynched in new and exciting scenarios.

[Valier]

uuumm I'm not sure if this is the thread, but I am modding a game soon and I have made some changes to the roles. I need some feed back from others so I can tweek any problems.Should I put my ideas here?:D

[littlemanpoet]

Might as well. It's what this thread's for.

[Valier]

Thanks! Ok so umm roles right...

Cobbler- Pretty standard except they are privy to who ONE "wolf" is (Mod's choice)No pming with wolves at all!! Wolves do not know who cobbler is.Uses the info as they see fit.

Hunter- Standard but regardless of how they get killed lynched or killed by wolves, they take their last pick down with them

Hunter and Ranger pm during day

Seer- Standard?

uummm.... On the fourth night a random Ordo will have a seer's dream for their birthday. Only this night, no others. Uses info as they see fit.

I would also like to add one more new gifted......any ideas that would work for this game......Oh the bad guys are not wolves either!....(Surprise)...Squee!!

[littlemanpoet]

Everything looks cool to me, except maybe the standard ordo getting a seer's dream. I guess it wouldn't hurt, but it wouldn't help much either because it's only one dream and without the built-up collection over so many Nights, its usefulness just doesn't amount to much. On the other hand, it'd be interesting (especially from a mod's point of view) how differently the seery ordo might play the game....

If you want one more gifted, do a "find" on any of these:

oracle
thief
lovers
traitor
healer
the one who knows
mythomaniac


Multiple votes :eek:

[Valier]

except maybe the standard ordo getting a seer's dream. I guess it wouldn't hurt, but it wouldn't help much either because it's only one dream and without the built-up collection over so many Nights, its usefulness just doesn't amount to much. On the other hand, it'd be interesting (especially from a mod's point of view) how differently the seery ordo might play the game....



I thought it could be interesting expecially if the Seer was already dead.

I kind of like the idea of the one about a person who when they die they can choose to resurrect another dead player......They could perhaps be gifted or maybe just Ordo's.....but would that really help the game?

[Garin]

Valier, I think the Apprentice role is right up your alley. They replace the first dead gifted, a very good fit for you since you have this adoration of innocents.

[Diamond18]

It will probably be a while before I Mod again, seeing as I just did a game, but as I had an idea I sort of wanted to call dibs on it, for lack of a better phrase. :)

The idea revolves around the Lovers -- in fact I already have a title for the game, which would be "Tol-in-Gaurhoth ###: All Star-Crossed With Nowhere To Go"

My idea -- have a large village (20+) with 4 independant werecreatures -- a werewolf, a werebear, and two other kinds. They wouldn't know who each other were and wouldn't be able to PM, but in a sense killing each other early in the game wouldn't be a good idea since they need each other to fight against the villagers. Each werecreature would have a Lover from amongst the 'innocent' villagers -- and they would know the identity of their Lover and get to PM with them. So the four villager Lovers would be like each werecreature's own personal Cobbler. And, like with the Lovers from Nilp's game, once one Lover died, werecreature or villager, the other one would die with them.

The problem I see with this, already, is that with four independant werecreatures, dealing with nightly kills would be... interesting. The game would careen towards an end pretty fast if I allowed four kills every night, I think, especially since if any number of Lovers is killed, that makes more than four people dying. I could take a cue from LMP's game and have the werecreatures have to chose nominees and vote till a majority is reached (going through me the Mod) so that they all came up with a single more or less agreed upon kill without getting to know who each other are or really being able to work together. Or, I could allow four kills a night, then three, then two, then one, as each duo dies off.

And then there's the possibility of the werecreatures killing each other at night, which I don't think I would disallow. (IE, I wouldn't overrule it and tell them to pick again, after all, werecreatures killing each other would make for a rad narration. :D)

If I can hit on a nightly killing scheme that works, I think it would be an interesting game. The aim, of course, for each werecreature/lover duo would be to be the last duo standing. The other villagers would have the same aim as ever -- rid the village of werecreatures.

Anyway, I haven't heard anyone talking about doing another Lovers game -- but I though I'd raise my hand anyway. I thought about doing the one-set-of-Lovers-thing for my other game, but figured I already had enough going on in that one.

[littlemanpoet]

It sounds nuts. And hard for a Lover duo to win. Not that such an obstacle would necessarily discourage players from signing up. What mix of gifteds do you envision?

[Diamond18]

I haven't gotten that in depth yet, but I am toying with the idea of no seer, simply because it will already be such a challenging game for the lover duos. What do you think of not having a seer? Has it ever been done here?

[Formendacil]

I haven't gotten that in depth yet, but I am toying with the idea of no seer, simply because it will already be such a challenging game for the lover duos. What do you think of not having a seer? Has it ever been done here?

Not yet... so definitely something to aim for.

I almost wonder if having no Gifteds might not be a good idea... Or maybe just a Hunter. The Ranger is mostly complementary to the Seer, as a means of extending his/her life. Other than that...

[Diamond18]

Since the Villager Lovers will be like Cobblers, that rules out a regular Cobbler. I can see having a Hunter, though that depends on how much dying I end up having happen at night. If each duo is allowed a kill (the werecreature has authority in this but I'm sure would be taking input from their lover) then the game starts with a whopping four kills a night, and the werecreatures run a great risk of killing each other. Adding a Hunter into that already volatile mix would be... volatile.

A Ranger might work to assuage this... whether they protect a werecreature or a villager, they would be useful for stopping the crazy death rate.

If I go with making the werecreatures nominate and vote through me, then having a Hunter would be a possibility, and without a Seer a Ranger would be less necessary.

So it depends, I guess, on how the nightly killing works.

[littlemanpoet]

Think about two seers and no hunter. And the seers can PM during the day and night. This offers a counterbalance - in the villagers' favor - to the sheer madness of four separate teams of self-seeking evil. Granted, the four teams counterbalance each other, but the villagers need something to go on or they're doomed.

[Oddwen]

A few things I've been mulling over lately:

New character, the Sphinx (perhaps rename to Gollum?)

Every other Night, the Sphinx (through the Mod) sends a riddle to a player of their choice. If the player can answer the riddle, nothing happens, but if the player cannot answer, he/she is turned to stone. Could be used in a larger village if another Wolf would be too much.

Different kind of gameplay, "Will the real Werewolf please stand up?"

Ten people, one of which is a Wolf. Two hunters. No nightly killings. (Yeah, I thought of it while watching Twilight Zone.) I would recommend strong players for this game.

Idea for a Village/roles:

At Beorn's house, Orcs in disguise instead of Wolves (WereOrcs again?), thirteen Dwarves, one Wizard, one Hobbit. A sneak (seer, instead of dreaming spies invisibly) and a hunter. I just might claim this.

[littlemanpoet]

Oddwen, that's so wild I don't even know how to respond. I guess I'll have to see it in play.

Here's another possible wrinkle for a dueling wizards werewolf game:

If the lynch vote is tied, no lynchings for that day. Just imagine the implications! :D

[Gurthang]

Okay, new idea. I'd like to call it Speed Werewolf (or Quick Werewolf, or 1-hour Werewolf, etc.)

Normal game: 12 players, 2 wolves, 1 seer. 1 lynchee by Day, 1 kill by Night. Wolves PM Day and Night.

Set-up: Moderator comes forth, starts game thread. Says "24 hours from the time listed for this post, SWW1 will begin. I need 12 players." Within 24 hours, 12 players sign up. These players will have to guarantee that they can be at their computer (or within a reasonable distance) from the scheduled starting time until the game ends. ( Don't :eek: yet, it's not so bad. ) Roles are sent out as soon as 12 players are listed.

Gameplay: Days last for 10 minutes only. Nights are as short as possible, as soon as the seer dreams and the wolves kill. Narrations would have to be minimal, but each morning the moderator would include a list of yesterday's voting for the players to use. A single Day/Night cylce should be completed within 15 minutes. The entire game will last less than an hour and a half. Hence the name: Quick Werewolf.

An example, and also the longest the game ever should be, is this:

0:00 - Night 1 ends/Day 1 starts, 12 players
0:15 - Night 2 ends/Day 2 starts, 10 players
0:30 - Night 3 ends/Day 3 starts, 8 players
0:45 - Night 4 ends/Day 4 starts, 6 players
1:00 - Night 5 ends/Day 5 starts, 4 players
1:10 - Day 5 ends. Game over*.

*Only 3 left. If one is a wolf, he'll kill one at Night, and be left with a 1-on-1 the next Day. Otherwise the villagers have won.


Bascially, this would be an insanely fast, little-analysis, mostly-gut game. Each player might have time for 2 posts each Day, if they're short. Hopefully everyone would vote. Needless to say, most of the decisions will be based on how people would vote. I know a lot of us have spent hours pouring over WW threads doing analysis, so spending a single hour one day would not be hard at all. And it would be a whole lot of crazy fun.

I was debating on whether there should be 10 or 12 initial villagers. If there are only 10, then they have to get 2 wolves in 4 lynches. If there are 12, they have to get 2 wolves in 5 lynches, which seemed more reasonable to me.

[Boromir88]

Gurthang interesting idea, kind of like Turbo Texas Hold'em :p . But can you imagine how crazy it will get with the mass cross-postings and cross-votings and I'm sure the mod will be going crazy by the end of the hour. I'm bound to think there's someone on the downs crazy enough...so, anyone up to try it? :D

[Oddwen]

Use the chatroom, or even MSN or AIM - you can use PMs for "nightly" discussions.

[Gurthang]

Use the chatroom, or even MSN or AIM - you can use PMs for "nightly" discussions.

The chatroom almost sounds like a good idea, except it would be difficult as a moderator to keep track of votes and such. I'm sure there'd be some way to pull it off, but I'm also wondering what the chat mods would have to say about it. Just guessing, we'd probably get a big Stop Sign in response.

As far as MSN or AIM. Well, I (for some reason, sometimes I'm not even sure why) refuse to use the things or even put them on my computer, so that'd be out if I ever was to play. :rolleyes:

I think it would work decently as a thread, as long as players kept their posting short, maybe down to a paragraph per post. Although, I can think of certain players who might have trouble with that. ;)


But can you imagine how crazy it will get with the mass cross-postings and cross-votings and I'm sure the mod will be going crazy by the end of the hour. I'm bound to think there's someone on the downs crazy enough...so, anyone up to try it?
*Ahem* I did suggest the idea. Naturally that means I'm crazy enough. :D I don't know if I want to mod the first one if we ever did this, though, since I want to do a regular game later this summer. We'll have to see.

[Farael]

I'd suggest using a mIRC chat or something like that... I know there are some websites that allow you to log in to mIRC servers and open windows for private conversations. On the general chatroom you can have the "daily" discussions and the players can send their votes to the mod on a private message... and the wolves can PM the same way. It'd be up to the mod or the villagers to announce the votes on the general chatroom... and of course, it'd be up to the players to play fair and not have private conversations with others when they are not allowed.

It'd be an interesting game to play! Although I'd say days should last AT LEAST twenty minutes.... ten would be far too little, it'd be hard to keep up with everyone writting like crazy.

[Kath]

Why can't it be on here? I don't understand that.

The idea itself sounds really interesting Oddwen!

[littlemanpoet]

Simple solution: Make a rule that states: One sentence per post. It'd be just like chatroom, only here, and it would be mad! :D

[Farael]

Why can't it be on here? I don't understand that.


Massive cross-posting and the screen not refreshing as often are my "concerns"... but it can be done in here as well

[Gurthang]

It'd be an interesting game to play! Although I'd say days should last AT LEAST twenty minutes.... ten would be far too little, it'd be hard to keep up with everyone writting like crazy.
Well, the whole idea is that it would be crazy... and short. Hence the 10 minute Days. I also think that keeping the Day short will make people less likely to post long posts, because if everyone did that, it would be impossible to ever read them all. Especially since you can't really 'catch up' at Night, since it will be shorter than the Days.

The whole mentality about the game would be different. Basically, there could almost be no analysis, since there are so few posts and so little time. Most of everything would be based on voting.

The idea itself sounds really interesting Oddwen!
Actually, that was my idea, unless you're talking about the chatroom idea... but thanks anyway. :D

Simple solution: Make a rule that states: One sentence per post. It'd be just like chatroom, only here, and it would be mad!
That might help, and, a little know fact, there is a 30 second time limit between posts. So people would have to take a tad bit to read some stuff before they posted agan.

Massive cross-posting and the screen not refreshing as often are my "concerns"... but it can be done in here as well
Yes, valid concerns, but that's part of the madness. :D

I would like to have the game last for under 2 hours. Beyond that, I think it would be too long for people to want to or be able to commit for. I thought about raising the time to 20 minutes, but I knew people would argue that even that would be too short. So I purposely started low so that any raise would still be within my initial time range. :D Still, I think 10 minutes creates more mayhem, which is a lot of what Speed Werewolf would be about.

[Diamond18]

Sounds like a really interesting idea, Gurthang. I wouldn't be able to participate, having an extremely slow and glitchy dial up modem, but I'd be curious to read over a game others were playing. Being able to play really depends on a fast and reliable connection.

[Cailín]

I have seen werewolves played on other forums, where Days would actually last for days and still people would only post one line in which they stated their vote (mostly random) and not much else.

For me, that is one of the greatest crimes in the world. The long posts and banter is part of the fun! Still, I think your idea has some merit -it would be insane- because it's so fast. I would be willing to try it but it seems almost impossible to find many people who can be online for an extended period of time, simultaneously, and actually commit to the game. Timezones, different schedules...

I did once think about a 24-hours long werewolves marathon, on a holiday or something, with each phase lasting up to an hour. Now that would be intense. ;) Not sure anyone would want to waste a day doing that, though. Maybe if the weather is really horrible.

[Gurthang]

I did once think about a 24-hours long werewolves marathon, on a holiday or something, with each phase lasting up to an hour. Now that would be intense. ;) Not sure anyone would want to waste a day doing that, though. Maybe if the weather is really horrible.
I remembered someone had that idea, but I couldn't remember who.

Sounds like a really interesting idea, Gurthang. I wouldn't be able to participate, having an extremely slow and glitchy dial up modem, but I'd be curious to read over a game others were playing. Being able to play really depends on a fast and reliable connection.
Is there a library or school near you that you could 'borrow' a computer at for an hour or so? Maybe a friend with a speedier connection? I'm sure you can find a way around it if you want to participate.


I do agree that it might be hard to get 12 people... perhaps we would do an even smaller game. Maybe 6 innocent villagers, a wolf, and no gifteds. The longest that would be is 3 Days. :eek: We could easily bump up that time to 20 minutes and still be close to an hour for the whole game. Although, I think that would get a little too far away from the whole nature of the game.

[Diamond18]

Is there a library or school near you that you could 'borrow' a computer at for an hour or so? Maybe a friend with a speedier connection? I'm sure you can find a way around it if you want to participate.

I think I'll just watch. I think you'll get enough players for it, so you won't need me to get it off the ground. But if you do need an extra player, let me know. There's no other computer I can use, but if I have troubles I'll just have to be killed. *shrug*

[Nogrod]

This sounds just so crazy that it should be tried!

I think most of the students (if not in summerjobs) and older people have vacations during the summer, July might be the best one to try? And somewhere around 8PM-12AM GMT seems to work at least for most people in North-America and Europe (Sorry Far-East again) for the very-fast game.

But still I find this 24-hour marathon a worthwhile idea too. C'mon, it's just one day! People could take their naps - if needs to - during the game on night-phases if not gifteds or wolves or according to their timezones, but the others wouldn't be forced to not to vote for them during the time. That would be intense and mad. And still the DAY's might be 1-2 hours long, nights a little less I suppose?

[Kath]

Sorry Gurthang! Can't remember why I thought Oddwen now, but just transfer the compliment from her to you :)

[Oddwen]

just transfer the compliment from her to you :)
Well, fine. :p Someday when you have a good idea I'll just credit it to myself. ;)

[Kath]

Oh! Don't go making threats Oddwen I remember why I got confused now. You had made a suggestion just before Gurthang, and I combined the two.

I liked the Sphinx idea, that was what I meant to compliment you on :D I even had a question. Can the Sphinx ask wolves riddles too? So if a wolf was asked and couldn't answer the village would be one werewolf (or whatever you plan to call them) down?

[Oddwen]

Oh! Don't go making threats Oddwen I remember why I got confused now. You had made a suggestion just before Gurthang, and I combined the two.
No offence meant, mah dear. :D

Can the Sphinx ask wolves riddles too? So if a wolf was asked and couldn't answer the village would be one werewolf (or whatever you plan to call them) down?
I'd think so - the Sphinx is another WereBear-type role, it's not on the Wolves' team and it wins if it survives to the end. The Hunter can kill it, the Ranger can't protect from it.

I don't know if riddles are the best way to go though - it depends on the riddle-knowledge of the asker, and on if the askee would Google the answer. :rolleyes: Though anyone who would cheat at the most ancient game of Riddles is a sneak and is probably under some sort of evil influence.

[Diamond18]

I had an idea for a new bad guy role:

The Basilisk

The name basilisk comes from the Greek basileus, which means king. The basilisk was the King of the snakes and the most poisonous creature on earth. His appearance has always been a matter of dispute since there is no way to see a basilisk and survive. Looking at it, according to legend, brings death.

When the Seer dreams of the Basilisk, the Seer automatically dies. The Basilisk I think would work best as a member of the wolf team, rather than as an independent, because s/he can't really kill any other player at night. It could be implemented as a wild card in a more traditional game setup. What do you think?

--

I also have been thinking more about my Lovers game, and I was thinking of doing it this way:

Allow each team one kill per night. The number of kills therefore dwindles as teams are killed.

For Gifteds, use two independent Rangers. (That is, they don't know who each other are and cannot PM). One Ranger should have the dual ability of dreaming as a Seer, but the other will be merely a Ranger. I don't have ideas for names, but I'd like to call the Seer/Ranger something a little more imaginative. :)

Basically, I want the two Rangers to balance out the high death rate at the beginning, and I like the Seer/Ranger idea, but I want one traditional Ranger who can possibly protect one of the Weres or Lovers inadvertently.

[littlemanpoet]

SeeRanger?
Half-Elven?
Istari?
Wizard?

*LMP shrugs*

[Gurthang]

So the Basilisk would be sort of a cobbler, only reversed as far as the Seer is concerned. I mean instead of coming up as an innocent, he comes up as YOU ARE DEAD.

I'm not sure about all these new bad guy types. From the stats, the good guys have enough trouble as it is... and all we can think of are new ways to kill them.
:rolleyes: ;)

Hmm... maybe I'll be able to think of something new for the good team. :D

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Wizard Werewolf scenario that I dream of with a certain amount of wistfulness:

Kuru and Boromir submodding LMP's game again with Fea and the phantom as good and evil wizard, respectively. I can't help but think that that situation would either be very short-lived or extremely fun.

;)

[Diamond18]

SeeRanger?

Heh, this makes me think "Sea Ranger."


Half-Elven?

I'll probably be going with the mixed-races village again, since I like the goofiness, so that kind of makes the elveness less special.


Istari?
Wizard?

Well I can't use Istari or Wizard because you have forever defined werewolvian Wizardry on this board. ;)

The Skittles in me wants to name it Mighty Morphin' Power Ranger but technially I think it would have to be a Ranger/Hunter combo for that to really make sense. ;)


So the Basilisk would be sort of a cobbler, only reversed as far as the Seer is concerned. I mean instead of coming up as an innocent, he comes up as YOU ARE DEAD.

Yeah, that's a good way to describe it. Mainly, while at work the random thought popped into my head, "Basilisks are cool, I should figure out a werewolf role that fits that name." :rolleyes:


I'm not sure about all these new bad guy types. From the stats, the good guys have enough trouble as it is... and all we can think of are new ways to kill them.

Yes, disturbing, isn't it? Though don't I get points for my Suped Up Ranger idea? Hmmm... ah ha! Pimped Out Ranger.

Nah.

[the phantom]

Kuru and Boromir submodding LMP's game again with Fea and the phantom as good and evil wizard, respectively. I can't help but think that that situation would either be very short-lived or extremely fun.
Heh heh. The outcome would depend on when you decided to scry me. Early- you win. Late- I win. Cause you know I wouldn't be suspected enough during the day to attract a lynch mob, no matter what happened. Finding me as the EW would be completely on the GW's shoulders.

You, I wouldn't have to find. You'd reveal sooner or later, and then I'd have all kinds of fun getting inside your head and figuring out who you made into a gifted.

Fea, if you're ever the GW in one of these games, and right after you reveal yourself your gifteds suddenly drop dead, you'd better scry me m'dear, cause it's probably my doing. ;)

[Boromir88]

I've thought about having something sort of like a Healer. And the Healer could resurrect dead players.

Of course to have the healer do this on a daily basis would be extremely long and prolonged, so perhaps the amount of "energy" and power needed it takes the healer an extreme amount and can only resurrect a deceased player every 3 days? Any dead player, whether be lynched wolf or innocent, or killed by wolves...etc. Any dead player of their choosing to resurrect and that player will enter back into the game as an ordinary.

This was slightly inspired by my recent dream where after I was lynched I came back posting that I was a ghost. Just kind of something I recently thought of and might sound a bit whacky. :p

[Formendacil]

I've thought about having something sort of like a Healer. And the Healer could resurrect dead players.

Of course to have the healer do this on a daily basis would be extremely long and prolonged, so perhaps the amount of "energy" and power needed it takes the healer an extreme amount and can only resurrect a deceased player every 3 days? Any dead player, whether be lynched wolf or innocent, or killed by wolves...etc. Any dead player of their choosing to resurrect and that player will enter back into the game as an ordinary.

This was slightly inspired by my recent dream where after I was lynched I came back posting that I was a ghost. Just kind of something I recently thought of and might sound a bit whacky. :p

Or you could up the Wolf kills per night...

I think a game with a Healer, though, would be best advised to NOT reveal the roles upon death- thus making the choices of the Healer more peril-fraught and interesting. Will you cure a Gifted? Cure an Innocent? Resurrect a Wolf even?

[Diamond18]

I think I have a name for my super Ranger. It's quite simple, really.... Watcher. This is what the Hobbits called the Rangers, so it's just another term for Ranger, but kind of implies the "sight" of a Seer through "watching."

[Gurthang]

I think I have a name for my super Ranger. It's quite simple, really.... Watcher. This is what the Hobbits called the Rangers, so it's just another term for Ranger, but kind of implies the "sight" of a Seer through "watching."
Oooh... I like that. :D Will that be resereved just for your Quadruple Lover's game, or could somebody else use that sometime. ;)


I've thought about having something sort of like a Healer. And the Healer could resurrect dead players.

Of course to have the healer do this on a daily basis would be extremely long and prolonged, so perhaps the amount of "energy" and power needed it takes the healer an extreme amount and can only resurrect a deceased player every 3 days? Any dead player, whether be lynched wolf or innocent, or killed by wolves...etc. Any dead player of their choosing to resurrect and that player will enter back into the game as an ordinary.

This was slightly inspired by my recent dream where after I was lynched I came back posting that I was a ghost. Just kind of something I recently thought of and might sound a bit whacky.

Well that sounds like fun to me, although I can see a loop-hole already. If you bring back anyone as an ordinary, it might make for a short-lived game. You see, whenever the first wolf dies, the Healer revives them as an ordinary, and they know who the other wolves were and are.

Although, that could make an interesting addition to a Dueling Wizards Game as a fourth gifted. And that would automatically iron out the problem with the game's length, since the wolves can get multiple kills per night as Formendacil mentioned. And any wolf brought back by the Healer wouldn't know any wolves unless the Evil Wizard had named names. That would be really interesting. :D

[Diamond18]

Oooh... I like that. :D Will that be resereved just for your Quadruple Lover's game, or could somebody else use that sometime. ;)

It's not reserved. I will be using it, but anyone else is free to break it in before that time. :)

Same goes for the Basilisk, especially since it won't actually be in my Lovers game. There are enough ways to die in that one already, methinks!

[littlemanpoet]

I like the Seer/Ranger idea, but I want one traditional Ranger who can possibly protect one of the Weres or Lovers inadvertently.How about Clairvoyant Ranger or something like that? PalantiRanger? ah phooey
:rolleyes:

[Thinlómien]

I think I have a name for my super Ranger. It's quite simple, really.... Watcher. This is what the Hobbits called the Rangers, so it's just another term for Ranger, but kind of implies the "sight" of a Seer through "watching." Or maybe Jedi? :D

[Anguirel]

I've just thought of a simple yet ingenious role (I think).

The Barrator (that means a politician who gives and takes bribes)

The influential Barrator's vote secretly counts as two votes. This means he must vote with care...

EDIT: This role could also be called The Lawyer...

[Thinlómien]

I've just thought of a simple yet ingenious role (I think).

The Barrator (that means a politician who gives and takes bribes)

The influential Barrator's vote secretly counts as two votes. This means he must vote with care...

EDIT: This role could also be called The Lawyer...That could be very interesting... And that'd surely make the villagers paranoid!

[Anguirel]

I present

Tol-in-Canterbury-Werewolf as Chaucer might have modded it

The Knight-combines roles of Ranger and Hunter

The Squire-Werewolf

The Yeoman-Another Hunter

The Prioress-False Seer

A Second Nun-Ordinary Pilgrim

The Nun's Priest-Ordinary Pilgrim

The Monk-Yet Another Hunter

The Friar-Werewolf

The Merchant-Ordinary Pilgrim

The Clerk-Ordinary Pilgrim

The Sergeant of Law-Lawyer

The Franklin-Seer

The Haberdasher-Ordinary Pilgrim

The Carpenter-Cobbler, naturally (see Plato)

The Weaver, the Dyer, the Tapestry Weaver-Ordinary Pilgrims

The Cook-Poisoner

The Shipman-Ordinary Pilgrim

The Doctor of Physic-Healer

The Wife of Bath-Goose

The Parson-Werewolf

The Plowman-Ordinary Pilgrim

The Miller and Reeve-Shiriffs

The Manciple-Eeeeevil Wizard

The Summoner-Basilisk

The Pardoner-Thief

The Host-Good Wizard

Canon and Yeoman-Ordinary Pilgrims

Chaucer-mod

[littlemanpoet]

Anguirel, are you just having serendipitous fun, or are you serious? If so, care to explain how some of these might work? Nah. can't be for real. not with dueling wizards. Sheer chaos!

[Anguirel]

Aye, but Chaucer is sheer chaos. That's his charm...

[Durelin]

Okey, here's my idea. A back to the basics game, with a new twist.

Tol-in-Barrow, Werewolves on the 'Downs.

As picking roles go, everyone must pick a Barrow-Downer of his or her choice, and can play as the Downer they pick would, if they're up to it. Perhaps they should even be known in the game as that Downer, to add to the confusion. I just know I could have all sorts of fun with this... Ah, identity crises.

And we go back to some of the earlier gifteds, and each will have their Downs mod equivalent:

Seer = The Barrow-Wight (Omnipotence and omniscience himself.)
Ranger = Legolas (Well, he has to have a bow...)
Hunter = Mister Underhill (It's the Eastwood look.)
Cobbler = Rimbaud (He seems like the shady type.)

Sorry to all the mods I left out. And egads, it seems like I'm being sexist, doesn't it? :rolleyes: ;)

If anyone likes this idea, I claim it. I've had the urge to sign up to run a game ever since I got back into Werewolfing with the current game... :p

[littlemanpoet]

So you'd post as yourself under your own moniker, and put in the title Rimbaud or something? Not clear on what you mean....

[Kath]

I think she means we have to try and post in the style of our chosen Downer. If so, it certainly sounds intriguing!

[Durelin]

The Gifted roles would just be known by the Downer name rather than their traditional one. In other words, when someone accuses someone of being the Cobbler, they accuse them of being 'Rimbaud.'

And yes, you would choose another Barrow-Downer in place of what is sometimes known as your 'occupation,' and try to play and post as he/she would. And you would be known as that Barrow-Downer throughout the game.

So if I picked lmp, then I would try and post as he would and play the game as he would. Also, everyone would refer to me as lmp. At least, as long as they thought I was really who I said I was, and innocent.

Perhaps when someome suspects you of being a wolf, they should say that you are not 'insert chosen Barrow-Downer occupation here,' you're 'insert your Barrow-Downs screenname here.' Because you are obviously not who you say you are.

In other words, if I chose lmp as my role and someone accused me of being a wolf, they would say I was acting rather 'Durelinish.'

Okay, so basically my ideas serve only one purpose: trying to make things more confusing. :rolleyes: :p

[Mithalwen]

Aye, but Chaucer is sheer chaos. That's his charm...


I think the wife of Bath should be a werewolf.. she is rather carnivorous....

[Nogrod]

I like Durelin's idea.

The Barrow-Wight didn't give us a go for a game where we all would have used unknown identities, but this could be fun. The mod should perhaps supervise the "roles" so that we wouldn't have 10 Lhunas' or Diamonds' in the game at the same time.

Sounds very good - and I'm applying to that game immediately (I'd love to play Valier! :cool: ).

[Valier]

Sounds very good - and I'm applying to that game immediately (I'd love to play Valier! :cool: ).

Oh you would now....You bugger! If this game ever happens I absolutely must play You dear Nogrod. A sample of you perhaps...


I'm Nogrod...Blah, blah, blah....Ra, ra, ra, .....(insert good point here) I'm innocent I swear....Blah, blah, blah...Ra, ra, ra, ...Trust me...Blah, blah, blah

Sound familiar? LOL :p :D

All in good fun!!

[Nogrod]

I'm Nogrod...Blah, blah, blah....Ra, ra, ra, .....(insert good point here) I'm innocent I swear....Blah, blah, blah...Ra, ra, ra, ...Trust me...Blah, blah, blah
Sound familiar? LOL :p :D

All in good fun!!
Surely!

But methinks all so puzzzzling theese Days. Must think firrst. Back later...
:D

[Diamond18]

You guys crack me up. :D

Lommy -- maybe Yoga? :p

[littlemanpoet]

'Ey! Wassup! Wha' happened to DAffy?

[Diamond18]

Sure you're in the right thread, LMP? (Don't want to anger the OT Skerwlz, you know.)

[Durelin]

The Barrow-Wight didn't give us a go for a game where we all would have used unknown identities, but this could be fun. The mod should perhaps supervise the "roles" so that we wouldn't have 10 Lhunas' or Diamonds' in the game at the same time.

Well, I imagine the mod could just have everyone PM their chosen roles to him/her (hopefully me, heh), and then any difficulties could be worked out through PM, everyone's final role only known at the start of the game (though of course each person would know they're role - they chose it).

And yes, permission must be granted. :D

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

I'd be highly amused to play either Nilp or the phantom... Most especially Nilp. Though I could have great fun with a legendary LMP rant. ;)

[Gurthang]

I'd be highly amused to play either Nilp or the phantom... Most especially Nilp. Though I could have great fun with a legendary LMP rant.

Hey! I remember that. That was my first game, too. And then somebody decided to make up the tags. Fun stuff. :D

Fea would be fun to play, but really hard. ;) I'd personally try being Naria, because it'd be a challenge for me to keep my mouth shut. :rolleyes:

[Valier]

I thought of a new gifted last night and I wanted to know what others thought of it and if there is any problems with it. ok I think I may call it the Weaver, but that also is up for review. Ok there would be no Hunter in this game, only a Seer and a Ranger. The Weaver sees connections between people. The weaver will pm two peoples names to the mod, then they will be able to see the connection they have to each other. EX: if they are on the same team ie: wolves, Ordos, or gifted they will be told there is a connection between them, but they will not be told how and if the two people the Weaver picks are odd ie: wolf/Ordo, wolf/gifted Ordo/Gifted or any other combo they will be told there is no connection. Will this tip it too much towards the gifted side or do you think it will be fine? Oh I also call first dibs for this role, but if others like it they can use it after me. What do you guys think?:)

[Durelin]

That's very interesting... Probably would want that to replace one of the other Gifted roles, possibly the Seer's just to make things more interesting. Having both a Seer and a Weaver might be a bit much... Though I guess a way to fix that is to just throw in another wolf... :rolleyes: ;)

[Firefoot]

The other way I could see doing it would be just giving them the knowledge of "same side" or "different side", depending on how powerful you want them to be... but this isn't quite as much fun.

[Valier]

I think I would replace the Hunter for the Weaver and have at least four wolves (or WereCats ;) ) would that work to even the sides out? Also I thought by the Weaver being told that there is a connection or there isn't it would still leave it fairly vague so they would not know exactly whose team the two are on. So if they are told there is a connection they could assume that either the two are both wolves, both Ordos or both gifted. If there is no connection then it tells them that the two are not on the same "team". I would be counting the gifted as a team even though they work for the village.... hope this makes more sense?:) Also should all three gifted (Seer Weaver Ranger) be able to talk to each other during the Day? I suppose they could but then it gives them an advantage of being able to coerce plans as to who to dream and Weave? of. Would this be too much of an advantage? Should the Wolves be able to chat at night?

[Thinlómien]

I think giving the seer and the weaver the right to chat with each other is too big an advantage for them. With only one known wolf it would be disastrous for the evil team, because basically the good team would have two seers...

A question: the weaver can't dream about dead people, right?

[Valier]

I never thought of that Lommy....No I don't think they should talk with the dead. They can however Weave a person that is alive, more than once. And I will have no talk between gifted in this game, I think.

[littlemanpoet]

I never thought of that Lommy....No I don't think they should talk with the dead. They can however Weave a person that is alive, more than once. And I will have no talk between gifted in this game, I think.
Actually, Spawn and I were dual seers in a recent game and we were allowed to chat at night. It worked out pretty well because there was no ranger to protect us. That was the first game with the Lovers, so there was that extra variable. Hard to say whether the Lovers made it easier, or harder, for the werewolves versus 2 seers. Any thoughts on that?

[Thinlómien]

Actually, Spawn and I were dual seers in a recent game...But that was a different thing, for you and spawn had the same dream. With a known wolf in a weaver game the good team would have two different seer dreams a night. That'd be a bit unfair for the baddies.

[Valier]

Well I thought since the Seer and Weaver, with the added Ranger all being able to talk, it would give them too much of an advantage because they could plan their choices together and get far more info. Perhaps the Ranger and Seer could talk, but the Weaver is their own team, not knowing who anyone is. I was also thinking of giving the Weaver a choice during the Day and then another during the night. Would that be too much? I could also give the wolves some sort of a leg up by letting them have two kills the second night or something... I just think that the way the Weaver works they could make a really formidable team if allowed to chat with the Seer. Thoughts?:)

[Valier]

Well Lommy the Weaver does not quite have a Seer dream. They more or less just get to see the connection, if there is any, between two players. They do not learn their role. But the Weaver can use their powers smartly if they think about it. They can chose a player more than once, say they choose Valier (me) and Lommy, say we are both Ordos, the Weaver would be told that there is a connection and that is all. Then the next pick they could pick say..Lommy again and say Nogrod (who lets say is a wolf) then the Weaver would be told there is no connection, so if they use their gift wisely they can be very helpful. I think giving the W one weave per day and night this would allow them to make better choices. Is this making any sense?

[Thinlómien]

Valier, I mean that the weaver is a second seer if s/he the seer has told him/her the identity of a wolf. Then s/he can weave about that wolf every night and just change the other person, so s/he gets to know every night about one person if s/he's a wolf or not, so s/he's basically the same as the seer... Do you see my point?

[Valier]

Ahhh yes I see your point!:D OK so no way are the Seer and Weaver allowed to talk. Should the Seer and Ranger be able to chat? Oh and do you think it a good ideas for the Weaver to have one pick during the Day and one at night?

[Durelin]

Secret Admirers Game:

Each person has a secret admirer, and when a person is killed, their secret admirer dies with them out of heartbreak.

If a person’s secret admirer has already been killed, then they must die alone.

Everyone knows whom they admire, but they do not know who admires them.

Game would include: Three Wolves, Seer, Ranger, Hunter; possibly Cobbler.

Would be played in a very large ‘village.’

Okay, so I just like to kill people... :rolleyes: :p

[mormegil]

I'm not sure if this has ever been brought up but an idea that just came to me is that of a revolving seer.

Let's say on night 1 the mod randomly designates one innocent ordo to be seer. They dream of somebody and that dream is kept to them. Now the role of seer remains in them throughout the day and if they are killed at night or day the gift of the seer is dead and will not come back, if however they live it will be randomly assinged the next night to another ordo, it could be the same as the night before but it must be random.

This would make it difficult for the wolves to spot but also there may be some overlap in dreams which could be detrimental to the villagers.

[littlemanpoet]

Morm, I like it. Both simple and interesting, and not so difficult to be Moderator for. :rolleyes:

[Gurthang]

Secret Admirers Game:

Each person has a secret admirer, and when a person is killed, their secret admirer dies with them out of heartbreak.

If a person’s secret admirer has already been killed, then they must die alone.

Everyone knows whom they admire, but they do not know who admires them.

Game would include: Three Wolves, Seer, Ranger, Hunter; possibly Cobbler.

Would be played in a very large ‘village.’

Okay, so I just like to kill people... :rolleyes: :p

Well, considering that each person dies when the one they admire does, once one person got killed, it would start a chain reaction of admirer's dying. Could kill the whole village the first Day. :eek: Although, I assume you mean that only the lynchee/wolf victim's admirer dies, and not the admirer's admirer.

Would the wolves be admirer's, too? Truthfully, it would seem like the wolves have too great a chance of dying if they did.

[Thinlómien]

Has anyone ever planned a game where every wolf would have a lover? That could be great fun, and chaos.

[Gurthang]

Has anyone ever planned a game where every wolf would have a lover? That could be great fun, and chaos.
Actually, I think Diamond was thinking about doing something like that. Although, they weren't all going to be wolves, since they would each be on a seperate team. Just browse back a couple of pages, it shouldn't be too far back there.

[Durelin]

Good points, Gurthang. Yes, I did mean stopping the killing at just one admirer. And yes, the wolves would be admirers, too....

Perhaps only lynched victims' admirers die....though that makes no sense.

Okay, here's an idea thanks to CaptainofDespair, actually:

Beyond the Grave:

One villager, after they die, is notified of the identity of one wolf. They then get to choose one person to PM who they think is innocent, and inform them of who is a wolf. The person, if innocent, can say what they want about who the wolf is, but they cannot inform the village of how they know. No one knows who that one villager is (not even the villager themselves), and when they are killed, they still appear only as an 'ordinary villager.'

I imagine this would possibly replace at least one of the Gifteds...though really it just seems it would add a great deal of frustration onto the game for the one person the special villager chooses, if that person is an innocent.

[Thinlómien]

Thanks, Gurth. Anyway I'd like too se the all wolves have a lover -game tried. It would be tricky; the wolves would have to really think about their loyalties. I think in that case the wolves could win as wolves or as lovers, but their lovers only as lovers. That'd be a great deal of fun.

[The Saucepan Man]

Being a Board Game Geek, I often frequent the boardgamegeek website. And lookee what I found when browsing there today:

Werewolf (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/925)

It's a commercially produced version of Werewolf for "live" play. Basically, it looks like it's just a set of cards with the various roles plus the rules. Seems a bit strange to me to bother buying the game, when a simple deck of playing cards, or a custom-built set, would suffice, although it's not particularly expensive.

I had wondered how the game might work in "real life" (as it were) and the articles posted on that site give an indication. It seems that Night phases require players to close their eyes, except those carrying out the various Night-time activities, which are directed by the moderator. During the Day phase, players then have a certain amount of time (3 minutes is suggested in one of the articles, but I suppose it can depend on the time availiable) to discuss who might be the Wolves, nominate a number of players for lynching (each of whom receives an "Angry Mob" card :D ) and then vote on which nominee is to be lynched.

I was wondering whether anyone had experience of playing a "live" version of Werewolf. The mechanics would be a lot different, with body language playing a strong role and much greater capacity for slip-ups, but with no ability to go back and check the record or analyse in detail what people have said. It sound like a great idea for a party game. :D

The articles also give some ideas for new roles - the medium, for example, who is able to hold a seance and allow the village to communicate with a dead player. There is also the suggestion that "Gifts" be represented by items, rather than having Gifted players. Those items (a crystal ball, for example, for the Seer or a shield for the Guardian) may then be transferred from one player to another during the Night phase. Some ideas, therefore, for future games here.

[Nogrod]

I have played it. It is indeed quite popular game here in Finland at different youth camps or when enough people are around, as just a fun game to play with friends.

Here it's called "the Mafia" or "the Mafioso".

I'm not sure if I get the rules 100% right as it has been something like two years I've played it the last time, but someone more knowledgeable might correct me.

First of all: no cards or any other commercial things needed. It can be played just by people.

It requires some 15-20 players (as we have seen here in the BD too). A dim lighting or evening outside is preferable.

With that crowd there will be three mafiosos (werewolves), one doctor (ranger) and one police (something like a seer / hunter combination - a bit different from both).

So people set themselves to the floor / ground in a random and un-ordered constellation, near enough of others but leaving some space between them. They bow down (sitting) and close their eyes. The moderator walks around the space, making sure to pass all the players at least twice (not to be too easy to other players to guess who had been touched) and passing by makes marks on some peoples backs or shoulders to inform them of their roles. F.ex. a pat on the shoulder means you are a mafioso (a wolf), a pat on the head means you are the police, a sweep on the back means you're the doctor or whatever.

Then the Mod announces that the mafiosos will wake up - the others will have to stay bowed down and their eyes shut. The mafiosos (the wolves) rise their heads (still sitting of course) and see each other. With facial expressions and pointing fingers they must silently "negotiate" the one to be killed and then all of them to point to the same person to show the mod their kill. Then the mod announces that the mafiosos go to sleep. It's time for the doctor (ranger) to wake up (others will stay down). S/he will rise up her/ his head and point to someone s/he would like to take care of (and if that one is the just decided mafioso-kill, then no kill takes place - kill = the person must leave the game floor). Then the doctor goes to sleep too. Lastly it's time for the police to wake up (all the others are still down and eyes closed) and to point for a suspect. If the police gets it right, the pointed mafioso is taken out of the game, if he's mistaken, he will know that person to be innocent. Of course when one sort of gifted is up, the others are down, eyes closed, so the gifteds don't know each other or the wolves and vice versa.

At last the villagers wake up - meaning that all the players rise their heads and may discuss with each other. Normally there is no time limit to lynching someone. People talk and when they have a majority to lynch someone the lynching takes place. They may put up preliminary votes or anything, so here we find the "real retractables" as there might be six to ten votings takin place on the same Day - it's only when majority is reached that the lynching takes place. The Mod will have to take care of these.

So then the villagers lynch someone and they instantly hear how they fared, and the lynched has to step out from the floor / ground. Night then falls again, meaning that they will have to bow down again and the round starts a new. And so on...

The real difference between BD werewolfing and the live game is the body-language part. Mostly in RL games people with pokerfaces and charisma do well. Surely good arguments and the timing of them are valid stuff in the RL games too, but the other factors are strongly there too.

If you happen to have enough friends around, try it! It's fun! A bit different from BD WW, but enjoyable in other ways...

And surely, it's face to face - and therefore so much fun - although not so complicated and sophisticated as the best WW-games here can be.

Edit: Just wanted to add one thing. One major difference surely is, that playing live and playing it well requires a good memory! There is no written record of anything...

[Cailín]

Such a coincedence!

When I was browsing the local fantasy store a few weeks ago, I actually found the official werewolf game and could not resist buying it! I even managed to convince my friends to come over and play the game, but unfortunately, there was so much sangria and all that we never got around to it.

As I will be working as a camp counsellor for young teens this summer and be in charge of coming up with group activities, I'll have ample opportunity to experiment with playing live werewolves and I'll be sure to report back to you. ;)

I think live werewolves will be completely different in one respect: it requires you to be able to lie in real life. Not everyone can do that without blushing.

[Anguirel]

Before I ever heard of Werewolf, I did play live "Mafia" once, on an island in Scotland, but it was sort of the third after dinner game of the evening, following "The Adjective Game" and I think "Ring of Fire", as a result of which we didn't take it very seriously. I remember my Italian cousin won as a Mafioso...

[Nogrod]

Before I ever heard of Werewolf, I did play live "Mafia" once, on an island in Scotland, but it was sort of the third after dinner game of the evening, following "The Adjective Game" and I think "Ring of Fire", as a result of which we didn't take it very seriously.I see the situation... :)

But live-werewolf can be fun and quite intense too. Just try it with a good company (and with no adjective games to "warm it up") :D

[Gurthang]

My youth group has recently gotten into playing Mafia. It's a pretty fun time. They know I play WW here on the 'Downs a lot, so I either get killed during the Day very early, or die during the Night. I've only ever been the Mafia once, and died rather early.

It is a lot different, but I can see so many similarities, too. Certain people in the group remind me so much of people here it's not even funny. Actually, my youth pastor is really good at being the Mafia, wins almost every time he's the evil ones, and he reminds me so much of Eomer. Not just from winning as the evil team, but also playing style.

Anyway, it's a lot of fun. I get to be the moderator most of the time also, so that's good practice. :D



I think live werewolves will be completely different in one respect: it requires you to be able to lie in real life. Not everyone can do that without blushing.That's my sister. Everytime she's the Mafia, we just ask her if she is, and we can always tell if she's lying. She's only survived past Day 1 once when she was the Mafia. Even then she was killed off by the Assassin (Hunter), who, ironically, happened to be her best friend. Good times.