WW General rules discussion

[mormegil]

This is a thread to begin discussion for a sticky thread that will be posted on some of the universal and general rules for WW. Those who participate in this discussion ideally will be considered veteran players. I don't want to set a minimum to participate, however if you are fairly new please realize there are players who have played dozens of games and know the rules, both written and unwritten very well. I think this discussion is to collect these rules. We should bold our actual suggestions.

For example, everybody knows that you turn your status on invisible so that people do not know when you are online when playing WW. That should be included on the list.

[Rikae]

Just some thoughts, as a starting point - I'd like to hear the others' thoughts on these:

Mods should know that unless they explicitly say otherwise, players can reasonably expect the usual rules remain true, such as (correct me if I'm wrong):
- Votes are counted up to DL 'downs time. Votes posted after this time do not count.
- No PMing or other outside communication about an ongoing game unless your role specifically allows it (both living and dead players).
- PMs should not be quoted during the game (I broke this one not long ago).
- Normal cobblers are ordos in the final count.
- Name-calling, swearing, and abbreviated/implied swearing are not allowed (they aren't elsewhere on the 'downs, why would they be here?)
- Posting in game threads should stop at DL (cross-posts excepted).
- Discussion of "meta" topics such as RL reasons for absences should be kept to the admin thread.
- Mods should specify how the lynch will go in case of a tie (first to reach total, last to reach total, double-lynch, random, etc.)
- Unless otherwise specified by the mod, abilities of seer, hunter and ranger are: (to be discussed. Logical hunters? Rangers can/can't protect self? Let me know what you think.)
- Post-game discussion including the dead should not begin until after the final narration or until the mod officially allows it.
- Unless otherwise specified, votes should be on a separate line, bolded (and highlighted?) or they won't be counted.
- Mod should specify whether there are retractable votes.
- Mods should abide by their own rules and make any changes known to the whole village. If there is a possibility of secret "twists", this should be mentioned in the admin thread before the game begins.

That's all I can think of for now.

[wilwarin538]

About secret roles:
- if secret roles exist the Mod should make the players aware that they exist, and to what side they are allied too
- if it is a secret role that the possessor does not know they have then the Mod should make that clear in the rules [/B[(for example they could say "There is a secret role, the person who has it doesn't know they have it until they encounter the necessary situation")Feel free to disagree with me on that one, but I think this will prevent future mods from suddenly adding roles half way through a game on a whim, and saying that it was just a 'secret role'.

About Lovers:
- [B]It should be clearly explained in the rules exactly what type of Lover pairing is involved, or if they are secret Lovers than at least clearly explained to those who have the role. For example whether or not their fates are intertwined (one dies, so does the other) and whether or not they are just like PM buddies on the village's side, or if they are actually playing for their own side and only want to survive to the end together. I know there was Lover confussion in the past because this was not clearly explained to those who had the role.

All I have for now, but I'm sure I'll think of more...

[Inziladun]

About Lovers:
- It should be clearly explained in the rules exactly what type of Lover pairing is involved, or if they are secret Lovers than at least clearly explained to those who have the role. For example whether or not their fates are intertwined (one dies, so does the other) and whether or not they are just like PM buddies on the village's side, or if they are actually playing for their own side and only want to survive to the end together. I know there was Lover confussion in the past because this was not clearly explained to those who had the role.

That's what I was going to bring up. Hate to have that happen again, wouldn't we. ;)

[Brinniel]

I think Rikae covered a pretty good chunk of the rules. Here's a few more I thought of:

-Members who have already moderated a game cannot mod again until at least 6 months after their last game. (I would consider even pulling that up to a year)

-After signing up for a game, the player is expected to participate (vote and post) throughout the entire game or until death. If a player cannot participate for a Day, it should be stated and explained on the Admin thread. Modfire rules are up to the mod and the mod should specify these rules. (I do think there should be a penalty for players who sign up and don't/barely participate more than two or three times. I don't think it's been a problem recently, but I'm still remembering the likes of xyzzy.)

-Extending the meta-rule, no player should suspect or make accusations at another player due to meta-reasoning.

-(?) The wolf team should submit their chosen kill by one hour before deadline or there will be a no-kill. (I don't know...maybe that should be a rule the mod makes. But it is annoying for a mod when they don't receive a kill until the final moments of the Night.)

-Editing a post for reasons other than grammar or x-posting is strictly prohibited. Once a post is submitted, the content within it cannot be changed.

That's all I can think of for the time being.

If people are signing up and continue to hold or pass on their turn this creates problems. Glirdan it seems that this is happening currently but rest assured you are not targeted as I've seen it before. The problems arise because those who are behind them are not planning on modding for a few weeks at the soonest and suddenly their turn is thrust upon them. Would something like if you are unable to make your turn you are off the list be reasonable?
Since people do get busy with RL and it's hard to estimate how much time it'll take to go through the mod list, I think there should be some slight leniency. Perhaps future mods are allowed to pass off their turn only once before being taken off the list and if the next mod is a no-show, they are automatically removed from the list.

Some people have sometimes requested to mod on a particular month, which I think should be okay since that person usually very busy and may not be able to mod at all otherwise. But maybe add some limits to that, like they cannot reserve a month any sooner than 3 months from the current month. Only those who have a very tight schedule can reserve. And if they do not show or pass their turn on the month they reserved, that person is automatically taken off the list.

Just throwing out some ideas here. Opinions?

[mormegil]

I'm noticing some fairly specific guidelines or rules being mentioned for specific roles. I would advise against this. The reason is each moderator has the liberty to define the roles as she/he sees fit. I think a rule such as:

Moderators must clearly define role, unless that is part of the game, in the admin thread and those roles will be followed. Specificity is a good thing here.

[wilwarin538]

That's what I was going to bring up. Hate to have that happen again, wouldn't we. ;)

Indeed. ;)

The wolf team should submit their chosen kill by one hour before deadline or there will be a no-kill. (I don't know...maybe that should be a rule the mod makes. But it is annoying for a mod when they don't receive a kill until the final moments of the Night.)

WilwaMod says yes definitely it's annoying, but WilwaWolf says that's not fair, since villagers get a full 24 hours to choose a lynch, wolves should also get a full 24 hours. I think that's more a mod-to-mod thing.

Also: dead players should not be permitted to post on the admin thread or the game thread until the game is over.

[Macalaure]

Maybe two sets of rules would work best. 1) a list of conventions on "how we usually play here", and 2) a kind of guideline for mods on what rules etc. they have to cover in their admin/game threads.

- Among the first posts in the admin thread one post should contain all of the following (if a mod wishes to discuss some rules/roles before starting, the post should be edited according. Rule changes should not only be mentioned somewhere down the (next) page - that's so annoying if you have to look something up...)
- List of players
- List of roles (and number of each role, except maybe for ordos), each role should be defined as detailed as possible (basic roles can be described in detail very briefly - for special roles it's the more the better, I think)
- Any special rules or events have to be explained in as much detail as possible.
- Any secret twists have to be announced.
- Deadline time
- Deadline for submission of picks (if differing from general deadline)
- Rules in case of a voting tie
- Modfire rules

- The game thread should contain a list of players and dead players with time of death and role (unless the role is kept secret intentionally) at the end of every Night and Day.
(- At the end of every Night and Day the mod shall announce which roles get to do what during the coming phase.)


Some random comments:

Personally, I think bolding votes is enough. I find highlighting a bit annoying, to be honest, but maybe that's just me.

I think votes should be regarded as non-retractable unless otherwise specified.

About meta reasoning: It's sometimes really hard to avoid it. If, for example, a player has not posted one day and then there's a missed kill the next night, how do you not suspect him/her? Just being silent about it or making up other reasons for suspicion doesn't make much sense. I think the rule should be to keep meta reasons to the absolute minimum.

Can we introduce an automatic modfire rule for (repeated) inappropriate conduct (language, insulting etc.)?

Mods must not mention the identities of players to other players outside of what is covered in the rules. (this should be obvious...)

The mod should reveal the role of a lynched player within reasonable time of the deadline (30m?). If the narration takes a while (as it usually does...), the mod should either edit the deadline post or make another post before the narration that reveals the role.

The mod has to pm the roles to all his players, including ordos. It's a bit tedious to do so, I admit, but "if you didn't receive a pm, you're an ordo" makes me feel even more like an expendable extra than the ordo role does by itself. Motivated ordos are more fun. ;)
This one's just a suggestion.

[Macalaure]

Two more:

Maybe this werewolf rules thread should be merged with Saucepan's werewolf sticky. Having two werewolf-related sticky threads on top might make the mirth forum too ww-centric.

While there have been many great non-Tolkien-related games, I'm a bit sad that this has become the norm almost. This is a Tolkien-forum where werewolf is played, after all, and not a werewolf-forum that has some Tolkien discussions. How do people think about a rule to encourage Tolkien-themed games in the future, such as "if you're modding your first game, it has to have a Tolkien-related theme"?

I hope I don't look too conservative now. :rolleyes:

[Inziladun]

Two more:

Maybe this werewolf rules thread should be merged with Saucepan's werewolf sticky. Having two werewolf-related sticky threads on top might make the mirth forum too ww-centric.

While there have been many great non-Tolkien-related games, I'm a bit sad that this has become the norm almost. This is a Tolkien-forum where werewolf is played, after all, and not a werewolf-forum that has some Tolkien discussions. How do people think about a rule to encourage Tolkien-themed games in the future, such as "if you're modding your first game, it has to have a Tolkien-related theme"?

Both good points.

On the second, by "Tolkien-themed" are we meaning that the setting must be in Tolkien's Arda, or that it merely should relate to Tolkien in some fashion, however tenuously?

[mormegil]

Two more:

Maybe this werewolf rules thread should be merged with Saucepan's werewolf sticky. Having two werewolf-related sticky threads on top might make the mirth forum too ww-centric.

While there have been many great non-Tolkien-related games, I'm a bit sad that this has become the norm almost. This is a Tolkien-forum where werewolf is played, after all, and not a werewolf-forum that has some Tolkien discussions. How do people think about a rule to encourage Tolkien-themed games in the future, such as "if you're modding your first game, it has to have a Tolkien-related theme"?

I hope I don't look too conservative now. :rolleyes:

Thank you Mac, I was planning on merging with SpM's thread and having his post be the second I guess.

As far as the Tolkien theme I'm glad you brought that up. I think we should stay a bit truer than we have to that. I think we do a bit of injustice when we stray too far from it. That is a general rule of the forum that has been VERY lax here and I know some admins have frowned upon greatly in the past so I know it would help if we just keep it closer to the original core. There are of course variants that can and have been done that are still very Tolkien related.

[Rikae]

- It should be clearly explained in the rules exactly what type of Lover pairing is involved, or if they are secret Lovers than at least clearly explained to those who have the role. .
Does this rule out things like cobbler-lovers with ordo partners? That would be a shame.

Some people have sometimes requested to mod on a particular month, which I think should be okay since that person usually very busy and may not be able to mod at all otherwise. But maybe add some limits to that, like they cannot reserve a month any sooner than 3 months from the current month. Only those who have a very tight schedule can reserve. And if they do not show or pass their turn on the month they reserved, that person is automatically taken off the list.
I think a rule like this is potentially problematic. I'd rather not see the main WW thread degenerate into an argument over who is busy enough to reserve a month, for instance. Let's not make it overly complex, but say that:
Mods who miss their turn twice or miss a reserved month once are removed from the list.

Similarly, I'd say players that fail to show up for two games they've signed up for should be barred from playing for six months (or a year?)
(And maybe we should also have a similar suspension of players for repeated cheating or abusive language during games?)

I'm noticing some fairly specific guidelines or rules being mentioned for specific roles. I would advise against this.
For me at least, that's not what I was suggesting. I meant that there should be default descriptions for the really basic roles for times when a mod doesn't explain them fully enough. Mods can still define these rules differently if they wish, but they should do so explicitly in the admin thread. I've seen games where a mod didn't completely explain what a basic role did, and a player assumed something different than the mod had in mind. I'd like the players to have the peace of mind of knowing that "unless the mod says otherwise, role x works this way".

I think the rule should be to keep meta reasons to the absolute minimum.

and
Personally, I think bolding votes is enough. I find highlighting a bit annoying, to be honest, but maybe that's just me.
I agree.

The mod has to pm the roles to all his players, including ordos.I don't know. It's a nice thing for a mod to do, I agree, but should it be a requirement?

And regarding having Tolkien-related games:
I really think they all ought to be. It's possible to stretch that requirement quite a bit, and back in the days when it was upheld, I saw quite a few wonderful, imaginative game concepts that took it in unexpected directions. As far as I know, it still is the rule, it's just being ignored, and I never was really very happy about that - nothing against the mods who have done other sorts of games; some have been quite good, and the rule was essentially dropped, after all, but I would like to see it reinstituted.
So I'll propose:
All games should be in some way Tolkien-related.

EDIT: Cross posted with Morm and Inzil.(Yes, I know I don't have to do this here, but it makes things nice and clear.)

[Rikae]

I thought of one more:
Unless otherwise noted by the mod, players cannot change sides and should play for the side assigned to them throughout the game.

I've seen suggestions that werebears who could no longer win alone "join" the village, and cursed villagers play cobbler from the start; if ordos are not allowed to dub themselves cobblers or form impromptu wolf packs, this sort of thing should be out, too (unless the mod explicitly allows a role to choose sides). You can't police motivations, but at least you won't have players announcing "I decided to change sides!"

[wilwarin538]

Does this rule out things like cobbler-lovers with ordo partners? That would be a shame.


No. I meant more regarding whether they are just 2 people who are allowed to chat, or if they are the traditional Lovers who are on their own side and die together. There was a game (I forget who the Mod was) where everyone was paired up and it was called 'Lovers', so Inzil (a wolf) and I (an ordo) told each other our roles and were under the assumption we had to survive to the end together and that that was our goal above which of our teams won, as long as both of us were alive; when that actually wasn't the case at all, it was just a PM Pal type thing. The game had to be restarted. So avoiding that confusion in the future would be good.


The mod has to pm the roles to all his players, including ordos.

I think that's a good idea. Everyone deserves a PM, no matter how tedious it might be, and it just makes it clearer that way.

[Inziladun]

I thought of one more:
Unless otherwise noted by the mod, players cannot change sides and should play for the side assigned to them throughout the game.

I've seen suggestions that werebears who could no longer win alone "join" the village, and cursed villagers play cobbler from the start; if ordos are not allowed to dub themselves cobblers or form impromptu wolf packs, this sort of thing should be out, too (unless the mod explicitly allows a role to choose sides). You can't police motivations, but at least you won't have players announcing "I decided to change sides!"

The bit about the Cursed villager could easily be avoided just by not telling the Cursed of their role until the game situation demands it.
That goes back to what Wilwa said about the Secret roles in general. Perhaps players having those roles should always be kept in the dark about it until the last minute, while all players should know that the roles themselves might exist, even if their nature isn't fully explained at the start.

[wilwarin538]

Oh, and about the Tolkien relatedness. I have modded a few games completely non-Tolkien related, that I really enjoyed doing, and I've played in many games like that as well that I thought were fantastic. But this is a Tolkien forum, and more Tolkien related games would probably be a good idea. I do know of some people who are currently planning a non-Tolkien game, and I would hate to tell them they have to start their plans over completely, that seems unfair to me since people have been able to do practically any theme they want up to this point. But I think strongly encouraging Tolkien games would be a good idea, and maybe anyone who is starting their plans can aim for a Tolkien theme for the future.

[Rikae]

We could just say the Tolkien rule comes into effect after those on the list have gone - or did you mean people who aren't on the list, but are planning already? Perhaps we should extend the list to include those people, but let them be the last to do non-Tolkien related games?

Or those mods could just work a Tolkien-element into the game - we could be lenient about how integral to the theme it needed to be. I don't know what everyone else thinks, but my opinion was that the games didn't actually have to take place in Tolkien's Arda, but just have some connection to Tolkien. I designed the first game I modded in this way (it was set in California in 2020 or something, but the theme was a remake of the LoTR films).

[Eönwë]

I think it might be easier if when a someone signs up to mod they should also say when they are (or more importantly, aren't) able to do it, which might make organising the list easier.


But I think strongly encouraging Tolkien games would be a good idea, and maybe anyone who is starting their plans can aim for a Tolkien theme for the future.
It might be interesting if the Tolkien theme will be more encouraged in experimental games, with it being more lenient on traditional games, as they already have werewolves and rangers and such which are already Tolkien-related (and so can have a bit more lenience with theme), while more more experimental games are often so different anyway, giving them a Tolkien theme might be a good idea.
Also, on this note, I think that because this is a Tolkien forum, it might be a good idea that any new role should be introduced in a Tolkien setting/theme before being allowed to be used in a less Tolkien-themed game, just so it has a some sort of Tolkien connection.


It might be useful to have an ongoing thread where any new role invented can be added and explained by the mod whenever a game is completed, which will make it easier for people who haven't played with such a role before if it is used again by another mod. Of course the mod should always specify if there will be any changes made to any of the roles in their game.

[mormegil]

Would somebody be so kind as to compile all the suggestions to this point in a nice list so we can better see them and possibly condense them? I'm in an online class so I'm not really available.

[Isabellkya]

How about a clarification on meta?
Are we talking similar to the example, missed kill and x player was not around.

Or meta in terms of 'this person is usually like this when innocent and like such when evil.'

[Brinniel]

When I mentioned meta-reasoning, I was thinking along the lines of a player suspecting another player because he/she believes the mod would've chosen that player to be a wolf. It's happened before...and it irritated a lot of people too.

[Rikae]

Ok, here's my preliminary attempt at putting everything together. I've divided it into sections for clarity, and if there's something anyone wants corrected, just let me know.

General Rules:

1. Turn your status on invisible so that people do not know when you are online when playing WW.
2. No PMing or other outside communication about an ongoing game unless your role specifically allows it (both living and dead players).
3. PMs should not be quoted during the game.
4. Name-calling, swearing, and abbreviated/implied swearing are not allowed
5. Discussion of "meta" topics such as RL reasons for absences should be kept to the admin thread.
6. Post-game discussion including the dead should not begin until after the final narration or until the mod officially allows it.
7. After signing up for a game, the player is expected to participate (vote and post) throughout the entire game or until death. If a player cannot participate for a Day, it should be stated and explained on the Admin thread. Modfire rules are up to the mod and the mod should specify these rules.
8. Editing a post for reasons other than grammar or x-posting is strictly prohibited. Once a post is submitted, the content within it cannot be changed.
9. Dead players should not be permitted to post on the admin thread or the game thread until the game is over.
10. Keep meta reasoning to the absolute minimum. (Need a definition of "meta")
11. Can we introduce an automatic modfire rule for (repeated) inappropriate conduct (language, insulting etc.)?
12. Players that fail to show up for two games they've signed up for should be barred from playing for six months.
13. Players cannot choose their own conditions for victory; these remain as the mod defines them for the given role.

Votes and Deadlines:

1. Unless otherwise specified by the mod, votes should be on a separate line, bolded or they don't count.
2. Votes are counted up to DL 'downs time. Votes posted after this time do not count.
3. Posting in game threads should stop at DL.
4. The wolf team should submit their chosen kill by one hour before deadline or there will be a no-kill. (?)
5. votes should be regarded as non-retractable unless otherwise specified.


Guidelines for Mods:

1. Would-be mods must have participated in at least 5 games of Barrowdowns werewolf before modding.
2. Mods who miss their turn twice or miss a reserved month once are removed from the list.
3. Members who have already moderated a game cannot mod again until at least 6 months after their last game.
4. Beginning when the currently planned games are done, games should be in some way Tolkien-related - or alternatively -
4. Experimental games should be Tolkien-related, traditional games don't have to.
-or-
4. Every mod has to let people know what type of game s/he plans (Tolkien-related or not / experimantal or not) and at least half of the scheduled games have to be non-experimental and half Tolkien-related.
5. When a someone signs up to mod they should also say when they are (or more importantly, aren't) able to do it.

6. Among the first posts in the admin thread one post should contain all of the following (if a mod wishes to discuss some rules/roles before starting, the post should be edited according. Rule changes should not only be mentioned somewhere down the (next) page - that's so annoying if you have to look something up...)
- List of players
- List of roles (and number of each role, except maybe for ordos), each role should be defined as detailed as possible. If there are lovers, the type should be specified (whether they die together, etc.), if there are secret roles, Mod should make the players aware that they exist, and to what side they are allied.
- Any special rules or events have to be explained in as much detail as possible.
- Any secret twists have to be announced.
- Deadline time
- Deadline for submission of picks (if differing from general deadline)
- Rules in case of a voting tie
- Modfire rules

7. The game thread should contain a list of players and dead players with time of death and role (unless the role is kept secret intentionally) at the end of every Night and Day.
(- At the end of every Night and Day the mod shall announce which roles get to do what during the coming phase.)
8. Mods should abide by their own rules and make any changes known to the whole village. If there is a possibility of secret "twists", this should be mentioned in the admin thread before the game begins.
9. Mods must not mention the identities of players to other players outside of what is covered in the rules.
10. The mod should reveal the role of a lynched player within 30 minutes of the deadline.
11. The mod has to pm the roles to all players, including ordos


Default Role Descriptions:
1, Unless the mod specifies otherwise, cobblers are ordos in the final count
2. Unless otherwise specified, rangers can protect themselves but cannot protect the same player twice in a row (?)
3. Unless otherwise specified, Hunters are logical (kill only baddies by night, but whoever they picked by day) (?)
4. Unless otherwise specified, a seer does get a dream on Night 1, and can not see cobblers.

[Nerwen]

I'm noticing some fairly specific guidelines or rules being mentioned for specific roles. I would advise against this. The reason is each moderator has the liberty to define the roles as she/he sees fit. I think a rule such as:

Moderators must clearly define role, unless that is part of the game, in the admin thread and those roles will be followed. Specificity is a good thing here.

My understanding of the purpose of this thread is that the role descriptions we give here don't have to be followed– rather, we're attempting to define the standard roles, mainly for the benefit of newcomers. I think that will need to be emphasised in the final version.


4. Beginning when the currently planned games are done, games should be in some way Tolkien-related - or alternatively -
4. Experimental games should be Tolkien-related, traditional games don't have to.
Either way, I'd prefer to see this as a recommendation only, rather than a "hard" rule, or else make a token connection acceptable. *cough* Starship Lothlorien *cough*;)

Default Role Descriptions (?):
1, Unless the mod specifies otherwise, cobblers are ordos in the final count
2. Unless otherwise specified, rangers can protect themselves but cannot protect the same player twice in a row (?)
3. Unless otherwise specified, Hunters are logical (kill only baddies by night, but whoever they picked by day) (?)
4. Unless otherwise specified, a seer (does? does not?) get a dream on Night 1, and can not see cobblers.
Agreed on 1.) and 2.) As for 4.), it's normal for the Seer to get a Night 1 dream.

The Hunter's role is a bit more problematic, as it never really has been standardised. Perhaps we should define Logical and non-Logical Hunters and leave it at that? I recall being quite confused on that issue as a n00b.

Shouldn't we also mention Cursed and Werebear? They're non-standard, true, but newbies often don't know what they are at all.

Finally, it might be an idea to have a Barrowdowns WW Glossary.

[Macalaure]

4. Beginning when the currently planned games are done, games should be in some way Tolkien-related - or alternatively -
4. Experimental games should be Tolkien-related, traditional games don't have to.

Why don't we handle the Tolkien-relation like we're going to handle the experimentalism? Every mod has to let people know what type of game s/he plans (Tolkien-related or not / experimantal or not) and at least half of the scheduled games have to be non-experimental and half Tolkien-related.

Finally, it might be an idea to have a Barrowdowns WW Glossary.

Interesting idea, but I'm not sure how it would fit in with the idea behind the sticky. Then again, I don't see any other feasible way to do it either. Maybe a third post on the thread could contain it?

[Macalaure]

morm, how long do you plan to keep the discussion going until you want a "final draft"? So far only a few people gave input, most of who were playing in the last game. A lot of experienced active players don't seem to have noticed the thread yet.

[Nogrod]

I have only managed to get a sort of a grip on what's cookin' here and it will take like two weeks for me to get really involved as cruising through the US takes the energy and time from me right now.

But I do like the idea of making something like the general-rules of BD werewolf, the deviations of which the mods should clearly announce - and be cognizant of themselves.

I would also be happy to join "the committee" ironing them out as I think I have quite a lot of experience on the matter as both a player and a mod. I could actually volunteer to make a draft, but that would be in two weeks' time as we'll be home only on July 21st.


On the discussion concerning the limits for modding...

I came to BD werewolf via the junior-games we had at that time. I'm not sure any separation of that kind should be re-introduced (like in RPG's as someone noted). Nevertheless while I think everyone should be able to play, I also think that the role of the mod requires some basic understanding of and commitment to the game - the latter which also some veterans have occasionally lacked. :(

So a five played games -requirement? That would sound reasonable. Other requirements surely are too complicated and tricky to come up with in any "objective" way. Although a person who has played five games but has disappeared in every game, or something like that ie. showing a total lack of interest and / or consideration for other players, could be refused to mod until shown some more solid understranding & commitment. But who would draw the line and where? Tricky.

[the phantom]

Other requirements surely are too complicated and tricky to come up with in any "objective" way. Although a person who has played five games but has disappeared in every game, or something like that ie. showing a total lack of interest and / or consideration for other players, could be refused to mod until shown some more solid understranding & commitment. But who would draw the line and where? Tricky.
Not if you just all agree to hand over all authority to me. ;)

At the start of each game the mod can submit his or her rules to me and I judge whether or not they are satisfactory. "You need to clear this up" and "This won't work" and "This is silly, so no"... Long story short I send back an edited version of their rules and only then can the game commence.

And as far as player behavior, I will read games as they are played and on my official "Phantom's Werewolf Judging Thread" I will declare certain behaviors that I witness as being good examples or bad examples. For instance, I could list at the end of each day which members had an amount of participation that was less than desirable. Also, I could point out any behavior that was annoying, and chide noobs for various noob mistakes (public ridicule can be a very effective teaching tool, or at the least can prove highly entertaining to others). In addition, I will hand out yellow cards and red cards via PM. Just like in soccer, a red card would kick a player out of that game and keep him from participating in the following game, where as a yellow card would just be a strong warning.

Example- Lommy comes under suspicion and lashes out at her attackers with an insulting profanity-laced post (you know how she is sometimes). So I send a PM reading "YELLOW CARD- without altering the meaning edit post number XX so that it is appropriate by the end of the day or you will receive a red card and be modfired and banned from the next game as well."

My role on the Downs would be differentiated clearly from that of current game mods by referring to them as "Mod" or "ModGod" and me as "Supreme ModGod", "Eternal Werewolf Ruler ModGod", or "Grand Emperor of Wolvery" (or some other simple little title befitting my humble role).

I am 100% certain that the masses will not adopt this wonderful plan of mine, and I am just as certain that it would function beautifully if given the chance.

You think I'm attempting to goad you into handing me the power just to prove me wrong? Ridiculous. But of course if you don't hand me the power you will be proving Phantom right. Again.

[Boromir88]

Are you Para, phantom? This was your plan from the very beginning, no doubt? :p

But honestly, we should consider slashing some of these regulations, too many hoops to jump through and even I won't want to sign up anymore. Just because be personally annoyed with something, doesn't mean there needs to be a rule on it.

For example, I get peeved when I can tell someone didn't read the Admin thread, but how do you watch something like that? I could have a mod-fire rule "don't read the Admin thread, bye bye." But that doesn't mean it should be made into a universal rule. Stuff like mod-fire rules should be left up to the game mods, and shouldn't be all that rigid anyway.

Banning members from games seems way too over-the top. You don't get banned from the forum for 6 months if you don't post in the Books thread, so like Rikae asked about inappropriate language...why here? And who's going to police that? The Admins won't, and when morm gets busy I doubt that's something he wants to pay attention too (and I'm not letting phantom have that kind of power! :rolleyes: ). Yes, we may all get annoyed if someone keeps signing up and then keeps getting mod-fired for not participating, but that's something the Mods have to watch. We don't need any universal banning rules.

I'm running short on time, gotta get to work for another 11 hour day *sigh*. But for organization purposes, maybe we can break this down to...

For all WW-participants: (this will include no inappropriate language, insulting, rules regarding meta-gaming...etc)

For Game Mods: I think having a type of format like the RPG forum would be helpful.

-Something like, ALL 1st posts of the admin threads must include...theme, DL rules, roles (and full explanation of them), list of players, voting rules. Anything else?

For the mod-list:

--------

Getting into banning players for reasons beyond the obvious (like actually breaking forum rules) is a bridge too far.

[Nerwen]

But honestly, we should consider slashing some of these regulations, too many hoops to jump through and even I won't want to sign up anymore. Just because be personally annoyed with something, doesn't mean there needs to be a rule on it.

For example, I get peeved when I can tell someone didn't read the Admin thread, but how do you watch something like that? I could have a mod-fire rule "don't read the Admin thread, bye bye." But that doesn't mean it should be made into a universal rule. Stuff like mod-fire rules should be left up to the game mods, and shouldn't be all that rigid anyway.

Yes, I think it's better to err on the side of having too few rules than too many. I believe what we should be aiming for is more in the nature of a set of guidelines and role-descriptions rather than laws.

The exception for me would be the points about mods needing to be clear from the start about how their particular games work, and not revealing living players' roles for no good reason (or otherwise giving one team an unfair advantage).

[Mithalwen]

I suppose this isn't really any of my business since I don't play werewolf anymore but I do think if you have got to the point of needing a rule book it really has got out of hand.

It started out as a fun thing and now you need lists of rules and committees? What next a signed contract before playing?

I know from experience that you can think you have all bases covered and things will happen that will necessitate invoking the divine right of moderators. I am sure I did things that would have contravened many of the proposed rules but I tried to do nothing that altered the mechanics of the game even if some things altered the dynamics... However my greatest problem arose because either half my players didn't read the rules or for some reason decided that they didn't apply to them. So I don't think a great list of regulations helps. Noone reads them.

I modded game 5 and hadn't played all the previous ones.... however I realise that there are a large number of werewolf players who don't otherwise participate on the board and that is a different dynamic to the original games where Downers played ww as a sideline....

[Nerwen]

Oh, here's a thing I didn't notice before:

Unless otherwise noted by the mod, players cannot change sides and should play for the side assigned to them throughout the game.

I've seen suggestions that werebears who could no longer win alone "join" the village, and cursed villagers play cobbler from the start; if ordos are not allowed to dub themselves cobblers or form impromptu wolf packs, this sort of thing should be out, too (unless the mod explicitly allows a role to choose sides). You can't police motivations, but at least you won't have players announcing "I decided to change sides!"

No, I don't think we need a rule about how people should play. That's up to them, isn't it?

Werebears, for instance, can help either side, or neither, as they please, and I think we should leave it at that. They can't, however, actually join the village, or the pack– that is, win when they win.

As for the rare cases where a player is aware of being the Cursed from the start, I again think it's much better to leave it up to him or her how to act– in fact, that's the only reason for having such a role. (It's an interesting dilemma: whether to play one's current alignment, or bet on the chance of becoming a wolf eventually.)

With all that, it's still true that players can't change sides, in the sense that they cannot choose their own conditions for victory. If you're a bear, you can only win as a bear, not as a villager. That's what needs to be made clear.

EDIT:X'd with Mith.

[Nerwen]

I suppose this isn't really any of my business since I don't play werewolf anymore but I do think if you have got to the point of needing a rule book it really has got out of hand.

It started out as a fun thing and now you need lists of rules and committees? What next a signed contract before playing?

Well, my idea, as I keep saying, is for this to be a set of guidelines and role-definitions, mainly to help new players out and avoid confusion.

[Rikae]

Boro -
I think you misunderstood what I meant. First of all, profanity etc. is not allowed on the 'downs in general, and WW players shouldn't get a free pass. That's what I was saying; somehow you seem to have read the opposite into it. I wasn't, however, saying players should actually be banned from the 'downs or from the forum for not playing games they sign up for - but if a player repeatedly signs up and doesn't play, why should the next mod have to sign them up on their request, knowing they'll most likely be a no-show? It hasn't been a problem lately, but a while back there were quite a few players doing this, and it disrupts the game mechanics needlessly. I'm not talking about people who are busy and have to drop out or announce they'll be absent for a few days, but people who simply don't show up, with no explanation;, repeatedly. Remember xyzzy?

Mith -
I hope these rules are going to be common sense for all the veteran players; the point is to ensure that new players coming in, and especially new players wishing to mod, know what is the "norm" around here and what other players expect the rules to be. Most of them are either simple game mechanics ("don't PM people you're not allowed to PM") or default definitions of terms that the mods can change, as long as they do so explicitly in the admin thread.
I had an active role in all this, and I'm not doing it to change Barrowdowns werewolf, but to protect it. After seeing days spent trying to convince a player that PMing other players randomly was not allowed, seeing a mod invoke new rules he had never mentioned to the village and PM the roles of gifteds to wolves for no reason, and another player persist in PMing non-packmates with questions, I think we need a way to be sure players and mods are starting on the same page. We've had an influx of new players who are coming to the 'downs (as far as I know) just to play Werewolf, and who come in with a background in similar, but different, games and different assumptions about how the game works. It's not fair to the older players or to these newbies to fill the game threads with debates over how Werewolf should be played. Usually it's been possible to teach new players the ropes over the course of their first couple games, but when there are too many at once, when newbies want to mod, or when newbies don't seem willing to learn how the game is played here, it becomes a problem.

Nerwen -
Ok, fair enough. I'll take it out. I did mean, though, that a player can't change their winning conditions - I wanted to prevent a situation like in a previous game where there was a lot of confusion over how the Werebear role worked. I guess, though, that such requirements for winning should be in the admin thread and referring to it should be sufficient. Still, part of the idea here is to state the obvious so we don't need to explain it again and again (like the PMing and deadline rules).

[Rikae]

Another thing -
Boro, I don't think there is a suggested rule about reading the Admin thread at this point anyway, unless I missed it. Or do you mean the rule about reading the general rules? Yes, you can't enforce such a thing, but at least if someone is breaking one, such as a mod who doesn't turn up when they should or a player who PMs people they shouldn't, you can refer them to the rules and move on.. (Also, a player who is confused about something that wasn't satisfactorily clarified by the mod will have a place to go for answers.)

[Rikae]

Why don't we handle the Tolkien-relation like we're going to handle the experimentalism? Every mod has to let people know what type of game s/he plans (Tolkien-related or not / experimantal or not) and at least half of the scheduled games have to be non-experimental and half Tolkien-related.


I'm not sure I like this system for experimental/traditional games already. It sets up a situation where most people want to mod one type of game, and modding the other becomes a sort of drudgery that someone has to do (I don't understand why so many people seem to want to play traditional games while few seem to want to mod them, but that's how it tends to go).
I would hate to see modding Tolkien-related games become a similar sort of drudgery. I'd say it's better to either always have the same requirement (at least a token Tolkien connection?) or none at all (game mechanics are up to the mod). Really, I'd say "anything goes" with regard to the themes as well, except that this is a Tolkien forum and that was, if I recall correctly, one of the original conditions. Did the BW ever even approve dropping this requirement?
At any rate, there seem to be opinions on both sides, so I'll put in all three possibilities and wait for some agreement to be reached.

In addition, I will hand out yellow cards and red cards via PM. Just like in soccer, a red card would kick a player out of that game and keep him from participating in the following game, where as a yellow card would just be a strong warning.
:D
I like this. One small change, though: I'll be the Supreme ModGod.

[Morsul the Dark]

While I like the idea of making offenders miss the next game etc...

I think if possible the offender should be reported under "Poor Sportsmanship"(Or something to that effect. And the final decision belong to a forum Mod. It's too much power to belong to any one of us.

Also if a Mod Has to be absent Please spell out how the game will continue: For example
"I might be gone day 3 So and So will be substitute mod." It's very confusing and frustrating to out of the blue have someone take over the game.

That's pretty much all I have at the moment... Oh, As for 6 month waiting period for ReModding. I think We should base that on demand to mod.

[Morsul the Dark]

Ok, here's my preliminary attempt at putting everything together. I've divided it into sections for clarity, and if there's something anyone wants corrected, just let me know.

General Rules:

1. Turn your status on invisible so that people do not know when you are online when playing WW.
2. No PMing or other outside communication about an ongoing game unless your role specifically allows it (both living and dead players).
3. PMs should not be quoted during the game.
4. Name-calling, swearing, and abbreviated/implied swearing are not allowed
5. Discussion of "meta" topics such as RL reasons for absences should be kept to the admin thread.
6. Post-game discussion including the dead should not begin until after the final narration or until the mod officially allows it.
7. After signing up for a game, the player is expected to participate (vote and post) throughout the entire game or until death. If a player cannot participate for a Day, it should be stated and explained on the Admin thread. Modfire rules are up to the mod and the mod should specify these rules.
8. Editing a post for reasons other than grammar or x-posting is strictly prohibited. Once a post is submitted, the content within it cannot be changed.
9. Dead players should not be permitted to post on the admin thread or the game thread until the game is over.
10. Keep meta reasoning to the absolute minimum. (Need a definition of "meta")
11. Can we introduce an automatic modfire rule for (repeated) inappropriate conduct (language, insulting etc.)?
12. Players that fail to show up for two games they've signed up for should be barred from playing for six months.
13. Players cannot choose their own conditions for victory; these remain as the mod defines them for the given role.

Votes and Deadlines:

1. Unless otherwise specified by the mod, votes should be on a separate line, bolded or they don't count.
2. Votes are counted up to DL 'downs time. Votes posted after this time do not count.
3. Posting in game threads should stop at DL.
4. The wolf team should submit their chosen kill by one hour before deadline or there will be a no-kill. (?)
5. votes should be regarded as non-retractable unless otherwise specified.


Guidelines for Mods:

1. Would-be mods must have participated in at least 5 games of Barrowdowns werewolf before modding.
2. Mods who miss their turn twice or miss a reserved month once are removed from the list.
3. Members who have already moderated a game cannot mod again until at least 6 months after their last game.
4. Beginning when the currently planned games are done, games should be in some way Tolkien-related - or alternatively -
4. Experimental games should be Tolkien-related, traditional games don't have to.
-or-
4. Every mod has to let people know what type of game s/he plans (Tolkien-related or not / experimantal or not) and at least half of the scheduled games have to be non-experimental and half Tolkien-related.
5. When a someone signs up to mod they should also say when they are (or more importantly, aren't) able to do it.

6. Among the first posts in the admin thread one post should contain all of the following (if a mod wishes to discuss some rules/roles before starting, the post should be edited according. Rule changes should not only be mentioned somewhere down the (next) page - that's so annoying if you have to look something up...)
- List of players
- List of roles (and number of each role, except maybe for ordos), each role should be defined as detailed as possible. If there are lovers, the type should be specified (whether they die together, etc.), if there are secret roles, Mod should make the players aware that they exist, and to what side they are allied.
- Any special rules or events have to be explained in as much detail as possible.
- Any secret twists have to be announced.
- Deadline time
- Deadline for submission of picks (if differing from general deadline)
- Rules in case of a voting tie
- Modfire rules

7. The game thread should contain a list of players and dead players with time of death and role (unless the role is kept secret intentionally) at the end of every Night and Day.
(- At the end of every Night and Day the mod shall announce which roles get to do what during the coming phase.)
8. Mods should abide by their own rules and make any changes known to the whole village. If there is a possibility of secret "twists", this should be mentioned in the admin thread before the game begins.
9. Mods must not mention the identities of players to other players outside of what is covered in the rules.
10. The mod should reveal the role of a lynched player within 30 minutes of the deadline.
11. The mod has to pm the roles to all players, including ordos


Default Role Descriptions:
1, Unless the mod specifies otherwise, cobblers are ordos in the final count
2. Unless otherwise specified, rangers can protect themselves but cannot protect the same player twice in a row (?)
3. Unless otherwise specified, Hunters are logical (kill only baddies by night, but whoever they picked by day) (?)
4. Unless otherwise specified, a seer does get a dream on Night 1, and can not see cobblers.

I'm wondering if everyone agrees with this list if it'd be possible to edit it into the first post of the thread... just so we don't repeat rules suggestions and such... I think I might have. It's a strong list by the way good work guys!

[Macalaure]

I don't think banning people from playing for a stretch of time will work. Who would enforce it anyway? A mod can always refuse to let a player with a recent history of offenses join. That should be enough.

I can understand how this batch of rules can be a bit overwhelming, but remember that most of it is really obvious stuff. In fact, it makes life easier for mods and players, since mods don't have to go through all those rules in their admin threads over and over again. We've been gathering rules so far and probably should now head into the phase of simplifying, generalizing, combining rules and dropping undesired ones.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

As a veteran player as far back as the first BD WW game, I'd like to think I'm important.

Oh who am I kidding... we all know I am. :p

To put it frankly, the more hoops one has to jump through, the less fun it's going to be for everyone.

I think that rather than compiling a list of rules, we should write up a glossary of terms and traditions. "Ordo: aligned in the final count with the villagers; no special powers." "Wolf: aligned in the final count with the wolves; interacts with the wolves during the Night phase." Not rules, but a general paradigm. The things, basically, that we take for granted, but that new players might not. Not rules of how it should be in a game, but descriptions of how it usually has been.

Therein still lies a risk of somebody saying something in a game (I have most definitely 'played stupid' to gauge reactions) and having an instant, "Fea, please look at page 4 of X Thread where Barrowdowner says "_"." I feel that a great deal of the dynamism and spontaneity of games will be lost if we try too hard to limit understanding of how they *should* work.

However I believe that it is significant to have a couple major standbys.

But I think they can be summarized.

1) Special roles and special rules do not need to be explained (otherwise there goes the secret) but they *should* be announced in a reasonable way. Like, "By the way, there's a secret role." As long as it's understood by the village that there are one or more variables to contend with, it's okay to have unannounced variables.

When performing experiments, scientists require dependent and independent variables because if you have nothing concrete to compare your findings to, then there's no objective way to look at your findings.

Same goes for werewolf: the nature of the roles provides us with dependent variables and we can judge behaviors and evidence accordingly. As long as we know how many bad guys there are, for example, (or as long as we know that we don't know), we are able to measure and surmise.

If we're just told to play and that we'll find out later?

I once modded a game that became a wee bit legendary and I still haven't quite lived that reputation down. It was announced before the game started that I wasn't going to reveal roles upon deaths and that I'd let the village know when the game ended, and that until that point they should do their level best to kill the bad guys.

As the mod, the intention was always to have a last person standing. I'd intended to show that you can find suspicious behavior anywhere, and you can 'prove' without doubt that somebody is evil whether or not they are. I was basically just subverting assumptions that you can objectively do anything. It was a distinctly cerebral game, very philosophical in its approach and its playing out. There were only two wolves because teams didn't matter so much. But when both wolves died within two days? I kept the game going. But there were never any illusions that I wasn't messing with everybody. It was an invitational game and there was full disclosure with each golden ticket that I was tampering with assumptions. I didn't say how, but it was announced that the game was abnormal and that it existed to amuse me.

Basically, I gave the village warning that I knew more than they did about what was going to happen, and I stuck with the one concrete fact that the winner was going to be the last person alive regardless of their role.

But the point was that I announced that something was going to be weird.

I don't think mods should have to give full disclosure on what they plan to surprise the players with, but I do believe they should disclose that a surprise exists.

2) Assume your players have never played before, and describe your roles and rules accordingly.

3) The reason we have mods is to make split second decisions when the unexpected arises. As long as the mod is clearly making a valiant effort toward a fun and fair game, we should fully accept their decision making.

4) Co-mods are okay, as are substitutes, as long as privileged information remains privileged. For instance, if FeaMod can't make deadline, and I call up NiennaOrdo to post that Mira is dead and she was a wolf, I'm not filling in Ni with any information she wouldn't immediately have upon reading that same post I'd write. "Let the village know that-" is one thing. But "Hey NiennaOrdo (who's still alive), would you let SeerLari know that MiraWolf is a wolf, and then RangerRikae needs to choose her protection!"

That? Not so okay. Basically it should probably be assumed that in a pinch, passing on PUBLIC information is okay, whereas any living players should not be made aware of secret information regardless of what the mod is up to. (unless, as mentioned in rule 1, it's already a given that the mod might do this).

--

Basically my suggestions boil down to:

1) you must disclose that you have something to disclose, even if you don't disclose the nature of the disclosure :cool:

2) be really detailed in your explanations of rules and roles even if you think everybody already knows what you're talking about

3) don't tell living players anything they're not allowed to know

4) our list of 'rules' shouldn't be rules, but should be assumed definitions that can be ignored at will as long as the mod follows rules 1 and 2.

[Macalaure]

I took the liberty to edit the rules collected by Rikae.

General Rules:

1. Turn your status on invisible so that people do not know when you are online when playing WW.
2. No PMing or other outside communication about an ongoing game unless your role specifically allows it (both living and dead players).
3. PMs should not be quoted during the game.
4. Name-calling, swearing, and abbreviated/implied swearing are not allowed
5. Discussion of "meta" topics such as RL reasons for absences should be kept to the admin thread.
6. Post-game discussion including the dead should not begin until after the final narration or until the mod officially allows it.
7. After signing up for a game, the player is expected to participate (vote and post) throughout the entire game or until death. If a player cannot participate for a Day, it should be stated and explained on the Admin thread. Modfire rules are up to the mod and the mod should specify these rules.
8. Editing a post for reasons other than grammar or x-posting is strictly prohibited. Once a post is submitted, the content within it cannot be changed.
9. Dead players should not be permitted to post on the admin thread or the game thread until the game is over.
10. Keep meta reasoning to the absolute minimum. (Still need a definition of "meta")
13. Players cannot choose their own alignment or conditions for victory; these remain as the mod defines them for the given role and the players have to abide.

Votes and Deadlines:

1. Unless otherwise specified by the mod, votes should be on a separate line, bolded or they don't count.
2. Votes are counted up to DL 'downs time. Votes posted after this time do not count.
3. Posting in game threads should stop at DL.
5. votes should be regarded as non-retractable unless otherwise specified.

Guidelines for Mods:

1. Would-be mods must have participated in at least 5 games of Barrowdowns werewolf before modding.
2. Mods who miss their turn twice or miss a reserved month once are removed from the list.
3. Members who have already moderated a game cannot mod again until at least 6 months after their last game.
4. Rules on traditional/experimental and Tolkien-related/non-Tolkien related.
5. When a someone signs up to mod they should also say when they are (or more importantly, aren't) able to do it.
6. Among the first posts in the admin thread one post should contain all of the following (editing it before the start of the game is possible)
- List of players
- List of roles including each's number. Each role should be defined as detailed as possible.
- Any special rules or events have to be explained in as much detail as possible.
- Any secret twists have to be announced.
- Deadline time
- Deadline for submission of picks (if differing from general deadline)
- Rules in case of a voting tie
- Modfire rules for no-shows or inappropriate behavior
7. The game thread should contain a list of players and dead players with time of death and role (unless the role is kept secret intentionally) at the end of every Night and Day.
8. Mods should abide by their own rules and make any changes known to the whole village.
9. Mods must not mention the identities of players to other players outside of what is covered in the rules.
10. The mod should reveal the role of a lynched player within 30 minutes of the deadline.
11. The mod has to pm the roles to all players, including ordos



Changes (I hope I'm not going overboard with this):

General Rules
"11. Can we introduce an automatic modfire rule for (repeated) inappropriate conduct (language, insulting etc.)?"
This should be left to the individual mod.

"12. Players that fail to show up for two games they've signed up for should be barred from playing for six months."
This one seems to be particularly controversial. We indeed should rather err on the side of too few rules, and this should be taken care of by the mods. No mod is forced to let everybody join who wants to join anyway.

Votes and Deadlines
"4. The wolf team should submit their chosen kill by one hour before deadline or there will be a no-kill. (?)"
This should be left to the mod to decide. It is also already covered in the Guidelines for Mods.

Guidelines for Mods
"4. Beginning when the currently planned games are done, games should be in some way Tolkien-related - or alternatively -
4. Experimental games should be Tolkien-related, traditional games don't have to.
-or-
4. Every mod has to let people know what type of game s/he plans (Tolkien-related or not / experimantal or not) and at least half of the scheduled games have to be non-experimental and half Tolkien-related."
This has to be thought over thoroughly first, I guess. It does seem like players prefer mostly traditional and Tolkien-related games, but mods do the opposite. Middle ground to be found.

Part of 6. "If there are lovers, the type should be specified (whether they die together, etc.), if there are secret roles, Mod should make the players aware that they exist, and to what side they are allied."
I understand why lovers caught some extra attention, but it's really just a special case of the general rule to explain one's roles in detail. Secret roles are already mentioned right after this.

Part of 7. "(- At the end of every Night and Day the mod shall announce which roles get to do what during the coming phase.)"
Not really necessary, I think.

Part of 8. "If there is a possibility of secret "twists", this should be mentioned in the admin thread before the game begins."
Already mentioned.

Regarding 10: 30 minutes is rather arbitrary, I admit, but nobody brought up criticism to this one in particular.

Regarding 11: This one could possibly be dropped. Opinions?

I also took out the role descriptions / glossary, since this should be an extra post in the sticky thread. Do you want to start writing it up, Nerwen?


Pretty much all of the remaining rules have been applied explicitly or implicitly before, so I think the list is helpful to newbies and makes a mod's job easier.

-crossed with Fea

[the phantom]

I like this. One small change, though: I'll be the Supreme ModGod.
So long as you agree to act as my puppet and allow me to rule from the shadows. :p

But seriously, I think these are the two most important rules. The Great Commandments of Werewolf, if you will-

1) Mods should clearly define all roles and rules in his or her game.

2) Players should read (not skim, but R-E-A-D) the moderator's rules.

I've seen many times where doing those two things responsibly and carefully would have made play more enjoyable or prevented some sort of fiasco. If you don't have enough time in your schedule to read the rules, you should not be playing. I mean, geez, reading the rules is so basic. Sorry if I sound extreme on this, but in my opinion a player should be booted from the game and banned from the next if he acts in such a way that demonstrates he clearly did not read the rules (e.g. votes and then asks, "Do we have retractables?" or asks if there is a Cobbler in the game, or something similarly simple).

As far as enforcing rule number one, I think that would fall to Morm as the mod of this sub-forum, but I imagine he could privately contract Downers to keep an eye out for lists of rules that are incomplete, or clearly won't work for some reason, and these Downers could PM him and point out the problems they believe they have spotted and then Morm can send a PM and tell the Mod what needs to be fixed.
No, I don't think we need a rule about how people should play. That's up to them, isn't it?
I understand your point, but no. People cannot play any way they wish, and they are not free to choose any side they wish. Deciding to act in a way that is against affiliation throws off the balance of the game that the Mod crafted via role assignments, not to mention it is no more proper to strip away small wins than it is to strip away overall wins. What I mean by that- let's say in a game of dueling wizards the Evil Wizard converts a player that used to be the Good Ranger, and the former Ranger knows the identity of the Seer and Hunter. I'm sorry, but that player despite any lingering feelings of affiliation must act in such a way that is true to his new role as a Wolf, which means he must completely switch sides and spill his guts to the Evil Wizard and rat out his former team mates.

From the Evil Wizard's view- his successful and by-the-rules conversion of a former gifted is a victory. Not the overall game final victory, but a small victory that was gained fairly and justly, and no one should be allowed to rob him of this (in this specific example, the new Wolf cannot just up and decide that it wouldn't be proper and sporting to give away his former companions).

If all of the players are posting and making votes and picks in such a way that assumes certain rules and behaviors, these rules and behaviors must be preserved in order to make the game legitimate. Coming up with strategies and such becomes completely pointless when you have zero assumptions to work with. And honestly, what are we trying to create here with these games- complete and total random chaos? That is no fun whatsoever for most people. The people who do enjoy such things- sorry, but I guess this isn't your place to have fun. To quote from a recent private discussion I had-
Sorry, but I've never seen it as my duty to welcome and ensure everyone has fun playing. That goal is impossible, as the way some people wish to play ruins it for everyone else. Everyone shouldn't play.

[Rikae]

Phantom - good to see someone else sees why it doesn't work to have players switching allegiances. You explained it very well, I think.
The problem is that this is a rule which can't really be enforced and is open to interpretation (but then, so is the meta-reasoning rule). Both are sort of what I would consider matters of good form vs. bad form; I disapprove of meta reasoning and that sort of "switching sides", but I'm not sure whether or not it merits an actual rule.
Anyway, I don't want to dominate this process too much. Some veteran (more so than I) players have expressed concerns about having rules, and the last thing I want to do is participate in forcing rules on people who don't want them. I was thinking primarily of getting newbies up to speed, not cramping people's style... I think I'd better back off, since I have the uncomfortable feeling that I may have caused the problem in the first place by complaining about Paranoia's modding. If most here feel things were going fine and there is no need for rules, they shouldn't have to have them.

[Mithalwen]

I do think a Glossary is sensible. And I have to admit that among the reasons I don't play anymore is that the games have become too complex and divorced from the rest of the forum with games without a notional connection to Tolkien and played by people who do not participate elsewhere.

I don't have time to follown the games usually but given that the catalyst of this discussion only had a small number of posts exclusively in WW, I would have to concede that there should be some restriction on who may mod.

I just feel that rules and committees are a bit "heavy", we will end up having to get SpM back to adjudicate. Maybe call them guidelines/advice? I would be sorry for responsibility for a game to be devolved from the mod to some committee.

Have a glossary by all means, and maybe a check list of things to consider when planning and then let the mod take the consequences.

[Blind Guardian]

as A noobie this Is a great idea. You come on the downs see a game and start playing. Then you ask a million questions in that game thread :rolleyes:

I don't mind there being a 5/6 game restriction on modding. (Maybe also take a test to see how well you know the game and the rules?). I agree that mods should list all of the rules in the game (or admin) thread.

Okay that's all I got. Already I have learnt something that I didn't know nor ever thought about :D

[mormegil]

A few things and it echos with what a few others have said. I should have named this General Guidelines instead of rules. There are a few 'rules' that should be covered and these rules are hard and fast but in general I had hoped this would help the new players understand a little bit better what WW is all about and dip them into the culture. I think we could condense this list into more general terms as I've stated such as the Mod is responsible for the definition of roles etc... if secret twists apply that should be announced, that is that there may be some in the game...really Fea said it well enough.

I cannot believe we all missed this. To vote you need to have a ++ before the name of the candidate you are voting for.

I think a glossary of terms would be helpful and could be the third post and would eliminate some of the 'rules' here. I would rather see this as a kinder and more welcoming guideline to newcomers.

I think we need to keep it Tolkien related. The requirement was never dropped but as I said the enforcement of it has been very lax on my part and if the admins ever looked in on this again it may rankle them enough that talk of shutting down WW would occur. (It has in the past)

I think I had other things but I have a meeting I need to run to.

[Mithalwen]

I suppose it is hypocritical of me to agree that there should be a tolkien connection since my first two mod games didn't - however they were in the early days when the players were all primarily Downers rather than werewolfers.

Given that anything off topic is given short shrift elsewhere in the forum it jars rather when you see a host of unfamiliar players and a non-Tolkien themed game... I could understand it if the Admins did feel like that since they are providing a free venue to people who don't contribut to what is a Tolkien site. Of course there are keen werewolfers who do make contributions to the site as a whole and I'm not anti newcomers but it seems that werewolf has moved from being the social side of a serious site to being an end in itself and that is perhaps detrimental to the forum.

[Morsul the Dark]

I disagree... WW can draw people in who then contribute elsewhere... I notice there are other Downers who spend a great deal of time in the RPGs but not elsewhere... I think to get the clutter out of Mirth we could try settng up a seperate section...

I mean we'd be limiting creativity to a point. Now granted my game in itself was nowhere in Tolkien land... so I'm biased but why not do non-Tolkien games? I'm not saying make Books now include Glen Cook and Kafka discussions we're talking about one Small aspect of the site.

[mormegil]

I disagree... WW can draw people in who then contribute elsewhere... I notice there are other Downers who spend a great deal of time in the RPGs but not elsewhere... I think to get the clutter out of Mirth we could try settng up a seperate section...


I can tell you from the impression I've had from the admins from past conversations is that that won't happen.

[mormegil]

By the way, if there is profanity of insults etc... I would like to be apprised of the situation. The insult if they are out of hand and need me to step in. But with profanity please point it out to me and I will edit the post and speak to the member.

Thanks

[Blind Guardian]

.

I cannot believe we all missed this. To vote you need to have a ++ before the name of the candidate you are voting for.





++Mormegil

You just have to explain to the new-comers like this:
Click the # button (found next to the php and quote options)
Erase the word 'CODE' and enter 'HIGHLIGHT' in its place
Hit Submit Reply


I think it would be easer to say highlighted and bolded. It is much easer to find, thus making tallying easer.

[mormegil]

++Mormegil

You just have to explain to the new-comers like this:
Click the # button (found next to the php and quote options)
Erase the word 'CODE' and enter 'HIGHLIGHT' in its place
Hit Submit Reply


I think it would be easer to say highlighted and bolded. It is much easer to find, thus making tallying easer.

Red is not a requirement but bolding is as well as the ++

[Inziladun]

Red is not a requirement but bolding is as well as the ++

Personally I don't have a problem with the highlighting, as I can see how it would make it easier for a mod to quickly count votes. Perhaps that should just be an option reserved for the game mod to decide, with only the 2 plusses / bolding format being the general rule.

[Rikae]

One trouble with highlighting is that it makes it more difficult to vote quickly at deadline. Bolding takes one click, highlighting needs to be typed in, which can make a big difference in last-minute voting.
Definitely don't think it belongs in the general rules. We managed fine for how many years with just bolding? Highlighting is pretty new.

[Inziladun]

One trouble with highlighting is that it makes it more difficult to vote quickly at deadline.

Everyone knows only wolves hold out their votes until DL. :p

As I said though, I don't think highlighting should be mandatory, but an available option to the individual mod.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Highlighting is pretty new.

I started it!

Because it made it so much vastly easier for me to tally votes in a game where days were double the length because of multiple voting processes that I decided the convenience to me as mod countered the length of time required by the players to do it.

But I believe it should be a mod decision, not a regulation. I require it in my games, but it's not like it's really all that important, is it?

[Blind Guardian]

I started it!

Because it made it so much vastly easier for me to tally votes in a game where days were double the length because of multiple voting processes that I decided the convenience to me as mod countered the length of time required by the players to do it.

But I believe it should be a mod decision, not a regulation. I require it in my games, but it's not like it's really all that important, is it?



Maybe it should be: if the game uses highlight they have to give a few extra minutes to do so. Instead of no more votes past deadline you get up until the mod says end. Since everyone post after deadline quickly anyways. Of course, unless mentioned by the mod otherwise.

[mormegil]

Highlighting is not a requirement in general but may be required by the individual mod. As such it is not needed to be included on our list here...now let's move on shall we? :D

[Nerwen]

I understand your point, but no. People cannot play any way they wish, and they are not free to choose any side they wish. Deciding to act in a way that is against affiliation throws off the balance of the game that the Mod crafted via role assignments, not to mention it is no more proper to strip away small wins than it is to strip away overall wins. What I mean by that- let's say in a game of dueling wizards the Evil Wizard converts a player that used to be the Good Ranger, and the former Ranger knows the identity of the Seer and Hunter. I'm sorry, but that player despite any lingering feelings of affiliation must act in such a way that is true to his new role as a Wolf, which means he must completely switch sides and spill his guts to the Evil Wizard and rat out his former team mates.

Tp, playing against one's team carries an in-built penalty already: you're liable to lose. It's covered by the general "play-to-win" principle of any competitive game. I mean, if you really want, we can have a rule that says, "Don't try to lose on purpose" or something, but I think that's going into Captain Obvious territory.

[Nerwen]

Glossary (to be made a separate thread)

Bandwagon: A large number of votes for the same person.

Gifted: A player with special abilities. The term is usually only applied to good-aligned players. The standard gifted roles are Ranger, Seer and Hunter (q.v.) but others are possible.

Meta-reasoning: The practice of trying to deduce roles from factors outside the current game. This is frowned upon.

Reveal: To openly claim a special role, such as the Seer.

Throwaway: A vote which is highly unlikely to affect the outcome of the lynch.

Turning: The transformation of a Cursed Villager (q.v.) into a wolf.

Wolf-on-wolf: A tactic in which members of the wolf-pack accuse and even vote for one another, in order to make the survivor(s) look good.


Roles

Ordinary Villager ("ordo")
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: none.
Note: By default, all players are "supposed" to be ordinary villagers, though in reality some have other roles.

Werewolf
Alignment: Evil. Counts for the wolf-pack in the tally. Wins if the number of wolves becomes equal to that of innocent villagers. Special abilities: may pm other wolves at Night. May choose one player to kill each Night.

Seer
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: chooses a player to "Dream" each Night– this player's role is revealed to the Seer (with some exceptions).

Ranger
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: chooses a player to protect each Night– this player cannot be killed by the wolves. Note: typically, the Ranger may not protect the same person two Nights in a row.

Hunter
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: chooses a player to hunt each Night. If the Hunter is killed or lynched, this player will die also. Note: there are many versions of this role, however, the two standard ones are the Logical Hunter (kills target only if a wolf) and the Non-Logical Hunter (kills target regardless of role).

Cobbler
Alignment: Evil. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if number of wolves becomes equal to that of villagers. Special abilities: appears as ordo to the Seer. Note: typically, cobblers do not know the identity of the wolves.

Werebear
Alignment: Evil. Counts for neither team in the tally. Wins when everyone else is dead. Special abilities: May choose one player to kill each Night. Often has one or more extra special abilities.
Note: typically, though not always, gifted abilities work on the werebear just as on the wolves. The presence of a werebear changes the victory conditions for the other players, as they now have also to kill the bear in order to win.

Lovers
Alignment: Neutral/Good (usually). Count for the village in the tally (usually– see note). Win if both survive the game. Special abilities: may pm each other. Often the death of one will kill the other, or the survivor may be allowed a "revenge-kill". Note: there are many possible variants of Lovers; sometimes one or both has another role, which may be evil. Otherwise Lovers are generally assumed to play for the village, but this is not always the case.

Cursed Villager
Alignment: Variable. The Cursed is an ordinary villager who becomes a wolf if "turned" (attacked by Night).

Suggestions?

[Macalaure]

Just what came to mind, feel free to disagree and discard.


Glossary:

Analysis: The systematic investigation of a player, kill, or voting. Differs from a summary by being rich in observations, opinions, and conclusions.

Bolding of names: The practice of bolding all player names occurring in your post. Not a rule, but very common, since it improves a post's readability (and "skimability").

Day One: First Day of the game. Lacking the information provided by previous kills and lynches, Day One is regarded by many as random and not very useful. This is debated, however.

Known innocent/wolf/etc.: A player whose role has been revealed, usually by a known seer. Players with known roles frequently have quite a limited life expectancy.

Modfire: Ejection of a player from a game, usually due to prolonged absence.

Multiple Lynching: Happens when the mod rules that a voting tie is not broken. All players (sometimes limited to two) that received the maximum number of votes die.

Submarine: Quiet player who is overlooked by the majority.

Summary: Synopsis of information available about a certain player, kill, or voting. Differs from an analysis by missing the poster's individual opinions.

Under the radar: Player(s) that has/have largely escaped another player's attention.

Vote Count: A list of votes cast on a Day up to the point of posting.


Roles:

Assassin
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if number of wolves becomes equal to that of villagers. Special abilities: can kill another player, typically either once a Night/Day or once during the game at a time of the assassin's choosing.

[Nerwen]

Assassin
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if number of wolves becomes equal to that of villagers.
???:confused:

[Macalaure]

Oops.. copypasted without thinking. :rolleyes:

Assassin
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: can kill another player, typically either once a Night/Day or once during the game at a time of the assassin's choosing.

[Nerwen]

Under the radar: Player(s) that has/have largely escaped another player's attention.
Should we define "under the reindeer" as well, do you think?

[Mithalwen]

I disagree... WW can draw people in who then contribute elsewhere... I notice there are other Downers who spend a great deal of time in the RPGs but not elsewhere... I think to get the clutter out of Mirth we could try settng up a seperate section...

.

You are entitled to disagree, and yes it could - but it doesn't seem to. I don't think anyone is spending a great deal of time in the RPGs Scarburg excepted (of which the mainstays are also fairly serious Werewolfers) ..I have finally given up trying to resurrect the Golden Perch. :( . I don't want to name names but I didn't make that statement without some checking. Of course it could be argued that we should make more effort with encouraging newcomers to post in Books or N&N or even Movies but the fact remains that many people come only to play werewolf. It is not a small part of the site by posts. Hey ho...

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Something which has always peeved me is the ubiquity of so-called 'admin threads'. These are just a waste of forum space. There's nothing useful in an admin thread that can't be in the game thread or in the general Tol-in-Gaurhoth thread; the rest of the posts are people explaining that they can't play that afternoon because they are going to the dentist. Newsflash: no-one cares! This isn't your blog. If you'll be away and not back before deadline, just mention that in the game thread.

My suggestion is: to Mordor with admin threads!

[mormegil]

Meta-reasoning: The practice of trying to deduce roles from factors outside the current game. This is frowned upon.

[
Ranger
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: chooses a player to protect each Night– this player cannot be killed by the wolves. Note: typically, the Ranger may not protect the same person two Nights in a row.



I'm not sure we want to be so definitive on 'Meta-reasoning' and say it's universally frowned upon...I'm not sure it is.

We may want to clarify on the Ranger role that it is the 'protected player cannot die' not this player. When I first read it, it sounded like the Ranger cannot die. Just a clarification would help on that.

[Rikae]

I think the definition on meta-reasoning might be a bit too general, at least when it comes to the type that's frowned upon. Most of the time comparisons to a player's usual style in previous games is acceptable (at least, I was under the impression it was). I think it's more things that come from outside the world of werewolf game-play in general - references to real life, or to the supposed preferences of the mod, for instance - that are frowned upon. I'm not sure how to word this concisely enough for the glossary, though.

[Mithalwen]

My suggestion is: to Mordor with admin threads!

Ah well you can blame me for those. I had one because I didn't want the game thread cluttered with the trivia. However I admit that their usefulness was diminished when instead of say x, y and z signing up it turned into a chat thread about how X and y felt about z signing up and maybe a and b would if the game started before thursday whereas c and d could only play after friday and discussions of deadlines etc.

[Macalaure]

I'm not sure we want to be so definitive on 'Meta-reasoning' and say it's universally frowned upon...I'm not sure it is.
Something like that should be in there, though. Otherwise a newbie might read it and regard meta as a common and encouraged way of reasoning. "This is often frowned upon." instead?

[mormegil]

Something like that should be in there, though. Otherwise a newbie might read it and regard meta as a common and encouraged way of reasoning. "This is often frowned upon." instead?

Mac I tend to agree with what Rikae said about Meta Reasoning that there are times when it is perfectly reasonable to use. Perhaps a clarification as to not using outside events as suspicions etc...but in general when I've played with somebody a lot I will use those experiences to my benefit.

[satansaloser2005]

Quick goody two-shoes note. Morm, can I play language police? I've PM'd players (no names, of course) about their language in the past, but sometimes the request for respect can be met with....well, hostility to say the least, although most Downers are very gracious and admit their mistakes. I just feel so bad bothering you every time I see an inappropriate word, because you've got enough on your plate already.

Anyway....to Werewolf itself....

I think the Day we have to include "and don't sabotage your own side" in the tips for newbies section is the Day we've got to get rid of those newbies. It's common sense, or at least it should be. If you're going to Benedict Arnold your team that's your decision, and you'll have to live with the way those players treat you. It doesn't need to be in the rule book, however. I'm just sayin'.

Also, a lot of this should be left up to individual mods. Highlight, for instance, which I'll mention no more because Mormiekins said not to, are up to the person running each game. However, BG's suggestion of extra time for highlighted votes is rather absurd, to be honest. Put in your vote then highlight it; if your vote is IN before DL and I know you intended to highlight it and/or are in the process of doing so, I'll let it slide. Besides, allowing extra time creates too many problems.

Modding itself, then. I am strongly against anyone who has played less than a dozen games of Barrow-Downs Werewolf modding a game. Repeat, a dozen, if not more. Players may catch on to the game (dang it!) itself pretty quickly, but as someone else said, with the variety of games and rules and just plain atmosphere what with many different people playing, it's hard to get used to the feel of a game. In five or six games you'll get a basic understanding, but you're still a newbie at heart. (I say this because I've given a newbie pass to a couple of players past their fifth game just because I knew they didn't yet fit the BD WW culture and didn't want to hurt their feelings.) Thus, again, my proposition. Anyone who wishes to moderate a Werewolf game must have played in at least twelve games of Werewolf, specifically on the Barrow-Downs, and they must have a co-mod for their first game to prevent any unforeseen complications in general game play.

In fact, I think EVERYONE should have a co-mod, whether they're a newbie or a veteran. I'm not complaining, really, I'm not, because I love magic-modding games, but I've stepped in post-mortem at least twice this year to help run things because of complications or just plain understaffing. Everyone should have someone who's able to call DL in the event of their absence, be it the first Day lynch or someone who is officially designated as a co-mod. (That being said, it's a well-known fact that I don't mind being a co-mod after death and I'll be happy to do so for anyone who needs it.)

I've got to go eat supper now, but I'll be back later with more thoughts. For now, tell me what you think on what I've said so far.


P.S. I know there's a typo in here somewhere, so I'll fix it later and probably fiddle with formatting. But for now, at least I have chicken. ^_^

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

In fact, I think EVERYONE should have a co-mod, whether they're a newbie or a veteran.

Are you serious? This has almost never been necessary.

[satansaloser2005]

Are you serious? This has almost never been necessary.

I don't think it should be a requirement, no. I'm just saying it would be smart.

[mormegil]

I don't think it should be a requirement, no. I'm just saying it would be smart.

I think having an idea of a back up isn't a bad idea but there is certainly no need to make it a requirement.

[Nerwen]

I think the definition on meta-reasoning might be a bit too general, at least when it comes to the type that's frowned upon. Most of the time comparisons to a player's usual style in previous games is acceptable (at least, I was under the impression it was). I think it's more things that come from outside the world of werewolf game-play in general - references to real life, or to the supposed preferences of the mod, for instance - that are frowned upon. I'm not sure how to word this concisely enough for the glossary, though.

I was worried about that. Maybe I should give examples, and also say that it's ok to refer to a player's usual style?

[Morsul the Dark]

Really Sally "A Dozen" (If not more) minimum?

come on now. 3 or 4 would be fine.

It's absolutely insulting to think someone can't handle modding a game withou double digit games.

[satansaloser2005]

Really Sally "A Dozen" (If not more) minimum?

come on now. 3 or 4 would be fine.

It's absolutely insulting to think someone can't handle modding a game withou double digit games.

I stand by what I say. Game styles vary, so a player may not know how a "standard" game works, or they may misunderstand certain rules.

Possibly not a dozen, but certainly more than three or four. You can apply for modship whenever you like, but in order to mod a game you need to have experience. Experience to me is not the time at which people stop giving you a newbie pass. It's the point at which you properly understand the game. I don't think new people are incapable, just new. We were all new at one point, and I wouldn't have been able to mod after just a few games either.

[satansaloser2005]

I think having an idea of a back up isn't a bad idea but there is certainly no need to make it a requirement.

Certainly not. I just figured it'd be nice to put the suggestion out there, because having a co-mod makes everything that little bit easier. I'd have been lost without mine. *group hugs*

[satansaloser2005]

I stand by what I say. Game styles vary, so a player may not know how a "standard" game works, or they may misunderstand certain rules.

Possibly not a dozen, but certainly more than three or four. You can apply for modship whenever you like, but in order to mod a game you need to have experience. Experience to me is not the time at which people stop giving you a newbie pass. It's the point at which you properly understand the game. I don't think new people are incapable, just new. We were all new at one point, and I wouldn't have been able to mod after just a few games either.

To add to this, twelve games isn't really all that bad. Returning mods have to wait six months minimum between modding, so a first time mod need only wait the same amount of time as a veteran (assuming about two games a month).

[Morsul the Dark]

Actually don't first time mods get bumped up the list?

[satansaloser2005]

Actually don't first time mods get bumped up the list?

Yup. So I suppose I should amend my earlier point to suggest that you should wait twelve games to apply, since we bump new mods up. Good point, and thanks for the reminder! :)

[Morsul the Dark]

Actually why not amend it so the New mods have to wait in line I think That'd be easier than a game minimum... because you are right it does make the waiting period longer just by doing that.

[Nogrod]

I should have realised that every BD werewolf-geek would just love to be the one who makes the official rules for the game - like every teenager roleplayer wishes to make his/her own roleplaying-system... Aren't we that similar? :)

Actually I'm not so much culpable of the latter but I do recognize myself belonging to the former group. :D

Anyway, Im not able to delve into this in two weeks but what I have skimmed through (hastily) looks good and I'm assured you can make it good. If there are any unresolved issues when I come back home I'll gladly take part in the discussion, but for the time being I'm just unable to even read all that has been written.

[Boromir88]

Catching up a bit...

Another thing -
Boro, I don't think there is a suggested rule about reading the Admin thread at this point anyway, unless I missed it. Or do you mean the rule about reading the general rules? Yes, you can't enforce such a thing, but at least if someone is breaking one, such as a mod who doesn't turn up when they should or a player who PMs people they shouldn't, you can refer them to the rules and move on.. (Also, a player who is confused about something that wasn't satisfactorily clarified by the mod will have a place to go for answers.)

I was in a rush and explained myself poorly. My example with players not reading the Admin thread, wasn't a proposed rule (and I don't think it should be), it was an example of what I find personally a bit annoying. However, just because I find something annoying, doesn't mean it should be a universal rule for all the games.

That's what I was trying to say about the banning of players who repeatedly sign up for games and then just do nothing. To make myself a bit clearer, I don't think there should be any rule banning players unless they repeatedly break forum policy (vulgar language, insulting or bullying, that type of stuff). I do remember xyzzy, but how much of a problem is it? And where is xyzzy now? I really see no point in having such a rule, because the xyzzy's disappear on their own and as someone else said, the mod is in control of the player list and sign-ups. I think rules banning any players from games (aside from someone repeatedly breaking forum rules) is a bit much, as well as unnecessary to have.

Regarding meta-gaming, I don't know how to condense it in an easy form, but here's been my understanding of it. Like Rikae, I always assumed referring to peoples past games was alright, or saying something like "When Boro's been innocent, he's done such and such" or "Last 3 times Boro-wolf has killed his own cobbler first night." :rolleyes:

I was talking to Nienna awhile ago, who was angry because she thought she was a victim of meta-reasoning (I can't recall the exact situation), but I do remember telling her that it seems like people only hate meta-reasons when it's used to suspect someone. We all seem to overlook the fact that we use meta-reasons to defend ourselves, "I'd do this if I was innocent..." "I was here at this time, and couldn't post/didn't have time to read." Anyway, my point was we find meta-reason perfectly acceptable to defend ourselves, but for some reason it's a touchy thing for people when they are being suspected by it.

So, it looks like I think along the lines with Mac more, and that is if we know someone was gone, there was no night kill, it's rather silly to just ignore that. Also, it's hard enough as it is to try and come up with suspicions on Day 1, eliminate meta-reasoning completely, Day 1 will become even worse.

Any privvy communication between the Mod and active players (that isn't stated in the rules) or the Mod doesn't announce to all the players is definitely I think a no-no. In the very least, Fea's suggestion I find acceptable, if a mod wants a secret or a twist, you obviously can't let everyone know what it is before it happens. However, if you let everyone know there are twists, or just don't tell anyone the secret until after it happened, than go for it. I find twists irritatingly fun.

The other part of meta-reasoning is communication between players (living and dead) about the game, outside of the game, while the game is going on. With how much of a community this place is, and with how we can easily communicate outside the forum, it's ridiculous to forbid any type of communication if a game is going one. What I can't talk to Kath about Freud because we're both in an active game? Rubbish. :p

Any type of communication about the game should be forbidden, and no one can obviously watch that type of thing, but it's like Rikae said about having honor and respect for the game. While a game is going on, don't talk about it with any of the other players (should we include non-players?), should definitely be included under meta-reasoning.

The game I modded was one where I happened to see some "Boro's friends with Mira and I think would pick her for the bear, because it's the best role." I absolutely hated that, and it should also be a no-no under meta-gaming. It's more I just hate people assuming things that most likely just aren't true. I mean it could be a fact, I hate Mira, if I see her face in my presense again, I'm going to punch it. :p But seriously now, that type of argument is just a mess of assumptions, the main one being that I don't like anyone else enough to give them such an "awesome" role, or it assumes anyone who's an ordo, I hate...like that phantom, I can't stand that arrogance, ordo-ship for you!

So, now someone condense that, chop-chop.

Speaking of the phantom, and having rules about how people should play the game, and whether it's ok to switch allegiances...etc. What the...you really want to regulate that? Nerwen's right, the underlying personal glory to win, assures that people won't switch teams. If you want to control how people play, watch yourself play against 15 phantoms, 3 phantom-wolves, a phantom seer, phantom-ordos, and simulate how a phantom-wolf, would react to the phantom-seer making a claim or something. When you start limitting how people play, you are only capping creativity and some of the best games are created because someone did something you could never have expected.

[Thinlómien]

Seems everything interesting happens while I'm away... ;) As most of you probably now, I'm currently on vacation and can't really take part in the debate actively. But what people (especially Mac :p) have said looks good and I agree with the majority of things - Tolkien themes and co-mods recommended but not obligatory, you must play five games before modding and so on. And I'm very happy you agreed on sending ordos role PMs too because it gives everybody a nice feeling of the start of game AND prevents confusion (careless player on admin thread: "hi why haven't I got a role yet?" mod: "um..." OR uninformed player: "have the roles been sent out already?" mod: "yes" everybody else: "ok, that person's an ordo and so on...)

There's one objection to the general lines of the discussion I have, though. Why should it be the standard that the ranger can protect himself? It wasn't like that in the begininng, and it wasn't like that for the first several years of BD werewolf, and it has just suddenly become a trend, which is something I personally dislike (and Nogrod and Aganzir are against it too, so you have three veteran players opposing the idea ;)). Gotta dash now so I won't give you more grounds for my dislike but Aganzir feels very passionate about this so maybe she'll be back to write a novel on the topic...

[Rikae]

Well, those definitions are just the default for when the mod doesn't say - mods can override them in the admin thread. But if self-protecting is less traditional, I'd agree that the glossary should say "usually can't protect self".

[satansaloser2005]

Well, those definitions are just the default for when the mod doesn't say - mods can override them in the admin thread. But if self-protecting is less traditional, I'd agree that the glossary should say "usually can't protect self".

"Can't protect him/herself unless otherwise specified" is a rather nice way to put it if you ask me. Just for extra clarification. :)

[Loslote]

Really Sally "A Dozen" (If not more) minimum?

come on now. 3 or 4 would be fine.

It's absolutely insulting to think someone can't handle modding a game withou double digit games.

I disagree with this. Modding isn't something that you should do just because. Either you should want to mod because you have a brilliant idea, or because you want to see something different around, like a more traditional game. Most newbie players don't have a good enough grasp of what's going on to be able to have a brilliant idea, or to decide what Downsian Werewolf needs to be like. Case in point, I believe, is rather obvious. And I don't mean to be insulting, but I do think that while maybe most people could handle modding a game, the few who couldn't would ruin it for everyone.

Anyways, I think this thread is a really good idea. I agree with most of what's been said, especially about making the end result guidelines, not rules - but, as I think has been said, with some exceptions, like the mod list.

[Aganzir]

Just a quick post because there are two other people who want to use our laptop before going to sleep... I have only skimmed through the thread, but it's good the rules are being discussed.

I think a certain balance should be preserved between the evil and the good team. All the gifteds should have their weakness.
The seer is the strongest gifted in the sense that she can cause the greatest damage to the wolf team, thus she should also be relatively easy to eliminate. The ranger can give the seer an extra night or two, but this should be all. It is too big an advantage for the village if they can, even in theory, keep all their gifteds alive for an extended period of time. The ranger is enough of a problem for the wolves as the last defense between them and their target, and it's simply too much if they can't count on being able to kill the ranger when they want to.

Lommy might have exaggerated a bit when she said I feel very passionately about this, but I do dislike playing with a ranger who can protect herself, even if it's just once during an entire game and I'm innocent myself. Of course it's up to the mod to decide, but in my opinion a self-protecting ranger should never be the default.

Will read and post more when I have more time.

[mormegil]

Is this thread going to continue? I was under the impression that somebody would submit a draft to me and that I would post it on a sticky thread. Do you all still want this? I don't care either way but to those that play often just let me know.

Thanks

[Macalaure]

I thought the discussion was going to continue, but then it kind of died. I can post a final-ish draft by tomorrow and then get everybody's last opinions.

[mormegil]

I thought the discussion was going to continue, but then it kind of died. I can post a final-ish draft by tomorrow and then get everybody's last opinions.

Thank you

[Nerwen]

Is this thread going to continue? I was under the impression that somebody would submit a draft to me and that I would post it on a sticky thread. Do you all still want this? I don't care either way but to those that play often just let me know.

Thanks
Well, we started a new game in the middle of this, which distracted everyone, and also I think we've been waiting around to see if anyone would come up with something that's been overlooked.

[Macalaure]

A. Guidelines for Players:

I. Expectations and Responsibilities:
1. Read the rules of the game you are playing in and abide by them.
2. After signing up for a game, you are expected to participate (post at least once per day and vote) throughout the entire game or until your death.
3. If a player cannot participate for a Day, it should be stated and explained on the Admin thread (and only there). Extensive absences can lead to modfire subject to the mod.
4. Remember that the team you are playing on is counting on you. Lack of participation or deviation from your role (in particular its intended alignment) will spoil the game for the other players.

II. General Rules:
1. Name-calling, swearing, and abbreviated/implied swearing are not allowed. This is against the rules of the forum and may lead to consequences beyond the game.
2. Turn your status on invisible so that people do not know when you are online when playing.
3. Editing a post for reasons other than grammar or crossposting is prohibited. Once a post is submitted, the content within it must not be changed.

III. Deadline and Voting:
1. Posting in the game thread has to stop at the deadline.
2. Unless otherwise specified by the mod, votes should be on a separate line, preceded by a "++", and bolded. Otherwise they do not count.
3. Votes are counted up to deadline 'downs time. Votes posted after this time do not count. (F.ex., for a 1pm deadline, a vote posted at 1:00 counts, at 1:01 does not.)
4. Votes can be regarded as non-retractable unless otherwise specified by the mod.

IV. Guidelines on communication between players during a game:
1. No PMing or other outside communication about an ongoing game is allowed, unless your role specifically allows it.
2. No game-related communication between living and dead players is allowed.
3. PMs and other private discussion may not be quoted during the game.
4. Post-game discussion including the dead should not begin until after the final narration or until the mod officially allows it.
5. Admin threads are only intended for rules, signups, game management, and notifications about absences. They are not a place to chat.


B. Guidelines for Mods:

I. Before Signing up for Modding:
1. Would-be mods must have participated in at least X games of Barrowdowns werewolf before modding.
2. When you sign up to mod you should say when you are or aren't able to do it.
3. Mods who miss their turn twice or miss a reserved month once are removed from the list.
4. Members who have already moderated a game cannot mod again until at least 6 months after their last game.
5. It is very strongly recommended that your game should have a Tolkien-related theme.
6. Try to keep the number of traditional and experimental games even.

II. Before the Game:
1. If there is a foreseeable chance that you might not be available at one of the deadlines, consider appointing a co-mod.
2. Among the first posts in the admin thread one post should contain all of the following
- List of players
- List of roles including the respective number.
- Any special rules or events, in particular an announcement of any secret twists.
- Deadline time.
- Deadline for submission of picks (if differing from general deadline).
- Rules in case of a voting tie.
- Modfire rules for no-shows or inappropriate behavior.
3. If your game is experimental, make sure that you thought everything through and that the game has equal chances of victory for all sides.
4. The rules post should be as clear, complete, and detailed as possible.
5. If you change rules, edit the post and point out the change.
6. The mod has to pm the roles to all players, including ordos.

III. During the Game:
1. Mods should abide by their own rules. Should changes be necessary, they have to be made known to everybody.
2. Mods must not make any extra knowledge available to any player outside of what is covered in the rules.
3. Make sure to start/end all days and nights exactly on time.
4. The game thread should contain a list of players and dead players with time of death and role at the end of every Night and Day.
5. The mod should reveal the role of a lynched player within 30 minutes of the deadline.
6. At the end of the game, the mod has to ensure the beginning of post-game discussion within reasonable time.

Don't forget that your players are counting on you. You are responsible to provide them with a well-managed game.

[Macalaure]

I might have gone a bit overboard with the numbering. Feel free to delete them if you want.

I left an 'X' for the number of games you have to have played before you can mod, because I don't think we reached a conclusion about this.

Do you want an introduction for the post? If so, what should be in it?

[Macalaure]

I thought of an addition for the glossary:

ToDay: Since a day is usually 24 hours long and two days are separated by a 24 hour night, the terms Day, toDay, toMorrow, yesterDay are often used to refer to other WW days to avoid confusion.

[Thinlómien]

Looks good, Mac. :)

Are we still going to come up with a glossary?

And I think x = 5 sounds good, although I would be fine even with something like x = 3.

[satansaloser2005]

Looks good, Mac. :)

Are we still going to come up with a glossary?

And I think x = 5 sounds good, although I would be fine even with something like x = 3.

I think it'd be fair for a new mod to have to wait as long as a returning mod. Thus, six months should be more than enough time for someone to get a good feel for Downs Werewolf. I think most people (with of course a few exceptions) have played more than twelve games before modding (I personally waited sixteen, for what that's worth) and considering that we average two games a month, a dozen game minimum isn't really all that insane. If we continue the practice of bumping first time mods to the top of the list (which I think is a good practice, honestly, unless of course returning mods have time restrictions on when they can mod their games) a twelve game or so wait and then a bump to the top of the list would ensure that new mods are experienced enough to handle themselves and that everyone, new and returning mods alike, have to wait about the same amount of time to mod their first/next game. It seems fair.

I don't think a person could be ready to mod a Downs WW game after only five times playing. I know I wouldn't have been, or at least have been confident enough to mod very well.

So my suggestion is that if you mod with that few games under your belt, you have to have a co-mod. If you've played more than a dozen (or even ten, for that matter) you can mod on your own, but otherwise I don't feel very comfortable with newer players at the reigns. I have to be honest, it doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

I think it would be a good idea to put a higher limit on minimum games required to mod rather than a lower one, because it could also make it less awkward in the future if, say, Mary Sue comes to play Werewolf here, decides she has an idea for a game after playing three times, and signs up to mod. Mary Sue has been in three games, an early lynch/kill in three of them. We're not putting a limit on how active the person was in their initial games, just that they played; Mary Sue could be modfired in one of those games and it would still count. Granted this is a worst case scenario, but if Mary Sue has played enough games to mod by our rules, who are we to turn her away? Do we really want to be put in the position of having to say, "Listen, Mary Sue, but we don't think you'll make a good mod yet". Or do we let her mod and have a disastrous game? Why not just set a standard by which it's almost impossible to have someone not understanding the game and have that be the rule? Sure, there may be Mary Sues who are ready to mod after only a game or two, but they will not be the norm. Norm, as we know him ;), is a tricky bloke, and unpredictable. I think it's best to raise the bar a bit.

Besides, consider the recent trend of....erm, not-so-serious Werewolf players. To be frank, we've had players not understanding the DLs even after a couple times playing and we've had some fairly heated games of late, with the possibility of players not understanding their roles or doing things that may be acceptable on other sites but that are frowned upon in Downs Werewolf. A player may be able to handle themselves in running a facebook game (which doesn’t even count, but meh) or on another forum, but that doesn’t mean they understand the atmosphere of Downs wolfing. This is not other Werewolf forums, this is the Downs. You need to get used to the culture and the accepted practice as much as the game, and I don't think everyone can do that in just a handful of games. If people really want to mod, they'll wait their turn.


Note: I say this without any consideration to Paranoia's game, so don't think I'm just picking on him or anything. That's certainly not the case. I would have the same thoughts regardless of his game.

[satansaloser2005]

Also, the glossary sounds like an excellent idea to continue. I'll poke around while I'm in Lincoln today waiting for Master Phantom and will see if there's anything else that needs to be defined. :)

[mormegil]

Overall it looks good. I will post it in a few days when the is a general consensus. I say 5 games is sufficient before you mod. Also I am VERY tempted to say that Tolkien theme is mandatory. I guess if it is not taken seriously and mods continue to deviate too far too often I will make it such.

Thanks Mac.

[satansaloser2005]

Overall it looks good. I will post it in a few days when the is a general consensus. I say 5 games is sufficient before you mod. Also I am VERY tempted to say that Tolkien theme is mandatory. I guess if it is not taken seriously and mods continue to deviate too far too often I will make it such.

Quite honestly I don't think that would be fair to the game mods. Sure, you could easily mandate that a game can't be themed on another book series, movies, fandom, etc., but to say that each game has to be Tolkien-themed could cut out some fabulous game ideas.

That's just my two cents, which probably aren't worth much, but there you go. :)

[Nerwen]

Note: I say this without any consideration to Paranoia's game, so don't think I'm just picking on him or anything. That's certainly not the case. I would have the same thoughts regardless of his game.

Except that Paranoia's game was the first I can remember where a mod's newness actually sunk the ship. Which isn't surprising, because it's not like there are hordes of new players clamouring to be mods. (Last, I believe, was Morsul back in March.) And such newbie mods as there have been have usually acquitted themselves pretty well.

No, I'm not trying to pick on the absent Paranoia either, just pointing out that his was a very unusual case. I feel the upper limit may be overkill.

[mormegil]

Quite honestly I don't think that would be fair to the game mods. Sure, you could easily mandate that a game can't be themed on another book series, movies, fandom, etc., but to say that each game has to be Tolkien-themed could cut out some fabulous game ideas.


I've been fairly open on this topic and I have mentioned once but I will do so again. The admins have discussed in the past of banning WW altogether for its lack of Tolkien theme. The rules on this forum are very clear. I have been exceptionally lax in the WW department but it may be worth taking this opportunity to tighten it down. That way if the admins ever look in on this again they will see that there is some Tolkien theme to it and will perhaps smile on us instead of smite us.

[satansaloser2005]

I've been fairly open on this topic and I have mentioned once but I will do so again. The admins have discussed in the past of banning WW altogether for its lack of Tolkien theme. The rules on this forum are very clear. I have been exceptionally lax in the WW department but it may be worth taking this opportunity to tighten it down. That way if the admins ever look in on this again they will see that there is some Tolkien theme to it and will perhaps smile on us instead of smite us.

I should have been much more clear, for which I apologize. I don't think mandating that there should be a Tolkien element to every game is a bad idea, but sometimes it's hard to make a theme expressly Tolkien. I do, however, see your point, considering the nature of the forum and all. And to be fair there have been a lot of other fandom games (though of course they were fun!) so I'm certainly not against saying that either X% have to be Tolkien-related or saying that there can't be other fandom games on the board. I just was concerned about how strictly you would enforce the "Tolkien only" rule and how it might affect the game mods' ability to come up with unique ideas.

[Macalaure]

Is somebody preparing a final draft for the glossary right now, by the way?

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

It's a Tolkien website. We should be playing Tolkien games.

That said, it's really not difficult to come up with creative ideas within constraints.

The very first game, introduced and modded by His Wightness Himself, was 'Tolkien'-ish just by having werewolves be the bad guys.

If you want a pirate game, just call them corsairs from Umbar. Evil horsemen? Nazgul. Talking animals? Set it in the Shire, where there's Hobbitish precedence for talking foxes. Or in Dale, where the birds chat with folk, if you know the language.

It does not constrain the types of roles a mod may choose to include, it merely constrains the types of story lines of the narratives. And really, it doesn't do that much either.

As a sign of respect to our admins and to the website that we're on, a literary discussion forum that's dedicated to J.R.R. Tolkien, I quite firmly think that games, whether traditional or experimental, should be Tolkien-oriented.

I mean, you could stretch it to calling the ordos 'linguists' and calling the werewolves 'publishers' and it would still relate to Tolkien and the spirit of the website.

We should at least be making a cursory attempt to pretend like we care about the TOLKIEN website whose resources we are utilizing.

[Folwren]

I have a question that doesn't really pertain to the immediate conversation (whether or not games should be Tolkien-based):

Do the badguys have to turn to werewolves in the night, or can they just be bad? Like supposing there was a game based around dwarves, and in the night instead of some of the dwarves turning into some creature, the badguys are just a group of evil dwarves who mean everyone else harm and meet together?

-- Foley

[satansaloser2005]

I mean, you could stretch it to calling the ordos 'linguists' and calling the werewolves 'publishers' and it would still relate to Tolkien and the spirit of the website.

You just gave me a horridly brilliant idea. :rolleyes:


Anyway, to the rest....

I'm not saying we shouldn't have Tolkien based games. I was just making sure that we wouldn't be disallowing elements that weren't tied to Tolkien. Repeat, elements, not necessarily themes. I personally think we can bring in elements or references to other things and still have Tolkien-related games, and vice versa. I'm not saying you disagree with this, of course, because it's totally possible to pull it off. I'm just expressing this here so that new players or mods who read this don't think they have to be tied to werewolves devouring hobbits or elves coming in to save the village from baby-stealing Gollums. (Although....) I think each game should have explicitly Tolkien themes inherent in its construction, but we also can reference other things as well. I'm not saying you're trying to shove out anything that's not expressly Tolkien related, because I know you and I have both modded games that didn't have explicit Tolkien themes, but I want to make sure that we can be as unpredictable and wide-based in our game ideas as possible.


In short, I agree. Let's make sure we at least try to have something of a Tolkien nature. Whether it's Phantom's pub game, my Denethor seer, or Brinn's Downs itself related game, there should be at least an attempt to include a Tolkien theme. Even if you have a non-Tolkien theme there should be at least Tolkien-tied roles or characters. It is a Tolkien board. Even the craziest theme can involve a Rings role or make references to Tolkien's life or works. We don't have to be tied to wolves or rangers or palantirs, but we can at least try to involve Tolkien somewhere. As you said, we owe it to the board we're on.


Then again, the day we start having Tolkien characters in Mario world, we know we're in trouble. But as long as everyone is creative but sane we should be fine.

Now here's hoping this post doesn't give anyone any ideas. :rolleyes:


EDIT: x'd with Foley

[satansaloser2005]

Also, I need to find the discussion about this, but I suggest that the official DL times are :00. By this I mean that votes AT :00 count, but :01 do not. I think that's the more common practice, and making it a Werewolf-wide rule will cut down on confusion.

Sorry if I'm repeating what's already been decided, but I didn't want to forget to mention it.


ETA: Good, it was on Mac's list earlier on the page. :D

[satansaloser2005]

If it is a secret role that the possessor does not know they have then the Mod should make that clear in the rules [/B[(for example they could say "There is a secret role, the person who has it doesn't know they have it until they encounter the necessary situation")Feel free to disagree with me on that one, but I think this will prevent future mods from suddenly adding roles half way through a game on a whim, and saying that it was just a 'secret role'.

No one's actually done that, have they? :confused:

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Sally, I concur with your comments. They make me think of the Thursday Next series, or The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. I frankly think it would be funny to combine a game of hobbits and Mario characters, where all the special powers stemmed from eating wonky mushrooms. ;)

And Foley, no, bad guys don't have to be werewolves. They just often are.

[satansaloser2005]

Sally, I concur with your comments. They make me think of the Thursday Next series, or The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. I frankly think it would be funny to combine a game of hobbits and Mario characters, where all the special powers stemmed from eating wonky mushrooms. ;)

I am in awe.



Oh, and Foley, ditto what Fea said. I've had were-ducks and Fea's had politicians, which are clearly always evil, even in the daylight. ;)

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

I've had were-ducks and Fea's had politicians, which are clearly always evil, even in the daylight. ;)

But they were politicians in a village in Middle Earth. I loved that game...

[Nerwen]

Sally and I have had a further discussion of the newbie-mod rule via pm. As a result of this:

How about eight games as the minimum? Or else, how about we don't count a game towards the total unless the player survived to Day 2? Or both?

Is somebody preparing a final draft for the glossary right now, by the way?
I'll do it. I've got a bit a spare time toDay, which is a nice change.

[mormegil]

Sally and I have had a further discussion of the newbie-mod rule via pm. As a result of this:

How about eight games as the minimum? Or else, how about we don't count a game towards the total unless the player survived to Day 2? Or both?


I'll do it. I've got a bit a spare time toDay, which is a nice change.

Up to 8 sounds reasonable enough. More than that is too much for my taste. And thank you for doing the glossary too.

[Nerwen]

Here we go, then. So far this is all Mac and me– if anyone else has suggestions you're welcome to contribute, but you'd better be quick because morm wants to get the thread up.

Glossary

General Terminology

Analysis: The systematic investigation of a player, kill, or voting. Differs from a summary by being rich in observations, opinions, and conclusions.

Bandwagon: A large number of votes for the same person.

Bolding of names: The practice of bolding player names occurring in your post. Usually required when casting a vote.

Bus: (Of a wolf) to betray your packmates or allies. (From "throw under the bus".) See also: Wolf-on-wolf.

Day: The phase during which players can post on the game thread, and at the end of which a lynch (q.v.) takes place. Usually lasts 24 hours.

Day One: First Day of the game. Lacking the information provided by previous kills and lynches, Day One is regarded by many as random and not very useful. This is debated, however.

Drive-by Fenris: A wolf who is Fenrissed (q.v.) seemingly by accident.

Endgame: The last stage of the game, in which most players have been eliminated and the outcome will soon be decided.

Fenris: A wolf who is lynched on Day One; (as a verb) the act of lynching such a wolf.

Gifted: A player with special abilities. The term is usually only applied to good-aligned players. The standard gifted roles are Ranger, Seer and Hunter (q.v.) but others are possible.

Kill: (also a noun) To eliminate a player directly through the use of a special ability. Roles with this ability include the Wolves, Hunter, Werebear, Assassin and (sometimes) the Lovers (q.v.)

Known innocent/wolf/etc.: A player whose role has been revealed, usually by a known seer. Players with known roles frequently have quite a limited life expectancy.

Legate-180: A sudden reversal of opinion about another player. (From Legate of Amon Lanc, d. 11-15-2006.)

Lynch: (also a noun) To eliminate a player from the game by general vote.

Meta-reasoning: The practice of trying to deduce roles from factors outside the current game. This tends to be frowned upon.

Modfire: Ejection of a player from a game, usually due to prolonged absence.

Multiple Lynching: Happens when the mod rules that a voting tie is not broken. All players (sometimes limited to two) that received the maximum number of votes die.

Night: The phase in which no one may post on the thread, but in which designated players (wolves and certain gifteds) can pm, and during which the wolves pick a player to kill. Usually lasts 24 hours.

Night One: The first Night phase of the game. Occurs before Day One. Generally, players with pm-ing abilities may use them on Night One, but no kill may take place.

Pack: The wolves.

Packmate: One's fellow-wolf.

Reveal: To openly claim a special role, such as the Seer.

Submarine: Quiet player who is overlooked by the majority.

Summary: Synopsis of information available about a certain player, kill, or voting. Differs from an analysis by missing the poster's individual opinions.

Tally: A list of votes cast on a Day up to the point of posting.

Throwaway: A vote which is highly unlikely to affect the outcome of the lynch.

ToDay/toNight: The current phase of the game. "YesterDay", "last Night" "toNight" and "toMorrow" are used to refer to past and future, to avoid confusion with day and night in the real world.

Turning: The transformation of a Cursed Villager (q.v.) into a wolf.

Under the radar: A player who has largely escaped another player's attention.

Under the reindeer: See "Under the radar".

Village: 1. The good-aligned players ("a village victory"). 2. The entire group of players ("there are three wolves in this village"). Comes from the fact that early games were always set in an actual village.

Villager: A player who counts for the village (in sense 1.) in the tally. 2. Any player. 3. An "Ordinary Villager" (q.v.).

Vote Count: See "Tally".

Wolf-on-wolf: A tactic in which members of the wolf-pack accuse and even vote for one another, in order to make the survivor(s) look good.


Roles

Basic Roles

Cobbler
Alignment: Evil. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if number of wolves becomes equal to that of villagers. Special abilities: appears as ordo to the Seer. Note: typically, cobblers do not know the identity of the wolves.

Hunter
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: chooses a player to hunt each Night. If the Hunter is killed or lynched, this player will die also. Note: there are many versions of this role, however, the two standard ones are the Logical Hunter (kills target only if a wolf) and the Non-Logical Hunter (kills target regardless of role).

Ordinary Villager ("ordo")
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: none.
Note: By default, all players are "supposed" to be ordinary villagers, though in reality some have other roles.

Ranger
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: chooses a player to protect each Night– this player cannot be killed by the wolves. Note: typically, the Ranger may not protect the same person two Nights in a row.

Seer
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: chooses a player to "Dream" each Night– this player's role is revealed to the Seer (with some exceptions).

Werewolf
Alignment: Evil. Counts for the wolf-pack in the tally. Wins if the number of wolves becomes equal to that of innocent villagers. Special abilities: may pm other wolves at Night. May choose one player to kill each Night.


Typical Special Roles
In theory, special roles can be almost anything, but in practice most fall broadly into one of the following categories.

Assassin
Alignment: Good. Counts for the village in the tally. Wins if wolves are eliminated. Special abilities: can kill another player, typically either once a Night/Day or once during the game at a time of the assassin's choosing.

Cursed Villager
Alignment: Variable. The Cursed is an ordinary villager who becomes a wolf if "turned" (attacked by Night). Note: The Cursed may or may not be aware of his or her status from the start.

Lovers
Alignment: Neutral/Good (usually). Count for the village in the tally (usually– see note). Win if both survive the game. Special abilities: may pm each other. Often the death of one will kill the other, or the survivor may be allowed a "revenge-kill". Note: there are many possible variants of Lovers; sometimes one or both has another role, which may be evil. Otherwise Lovers are generally assumed to play for the village, but this is not always the case.

Werebear
Alignment: Evil. Counts for neither team in the tally. Wins when everyone else is dead. Special abilities: May choose one player to kill each Night. Often has one or more extra special abilities.
Note: typically, though not always, gifted abilities work on the werebear just as on the wolves. The presence of a werebear changes the victory conditions for the other players, as they now have to kill the bear as well as the wolves in order to win.

[Nerwen]

Also–

Guide to Players' Nicknames

Agan– Aganzir
Alona– Alonariel
BeiGe, BeiGei– Blind Guardian
BG– Blind Guardian
Boro– Boromir88
Brinn– Brinniel
Cabbie– McCaber
Cel, Celly– Celuin
CoD– Captain of Despair
Cupcake, the– satansaloser2005
Di– Diamond18
Dun– Inziladun
Dure, Dury– Durelin
EW– The Elf Warrior
Fea– Feanor of the Peredhil
Foley– Folwren
Form– Formendacil
Glirdy– Glirdan
Glirdypie– Glirdan
Greenie– A Little Green
Gwath– Gwathagor
Kit– Kitanna
Kuru– Kuruharan
Inzil, Inzy– Inziladun
Izzy– Isabellkya
Lal– Lalaith; Lalwendë
Lari– Lariren Shadow
Leggy– Legate of Amon Lanc
Lhuna– Lhunardhwen
Lommie, Lommy– Thinlómien
Lottie– Loslote
Lottiepop– Loslote
Mac– Macalaure
McCobbler– McCaber
Menel– Meneltelmacil
Miggy– The Might
Mira– Mirandir
Mith– Mithalwen
Mnemo– Mnemosyne
Morm– mormegil
Mr Agreeable– Pitchwife
Mr 88– Boromir88
Muffin, the– wilwarin538
Ni– Nienna
Nilp– Nilpaurion Felagund
Nog, Noggins– Nogrod
Pitch– Pitchwife
Sally– satansaloser2005
Sallycakes– satansaloser2005
Sauce– The Saucepan Man
Shasta– Shastanis Althreduin
Steve– Eönwë
Stick– Mirandir
SPAM– The Saucepan Man
SpM– The Saucepan Man
tgwbs– The Guy Who Be Short
tp– the phantom
TORE– The Only Real Estel
tum– autume98
tummy– the phantom (mormegil only)
Vanilwa Muffin, Vanilwuffin etc.– wilwarin538
Wilwa– wilwarin538
Xed– Celuin
Zil– Inziladun

I've left out names like Rune, Legate and Eomer, which I think are self-explanatory.

[satansaloser2005]

I demand that Stan be removed from that list. :mad:


:p


Really though, it's likely best, 'cause no one actually calls me that. I don't personally care, because it is rather funny, but I don't particularly want all the newbies thinking I'm a guy. o_O


Also, do we need to clarify which Downers are which desserts? ^_^

[Nerwen]

I demand that Stan be removed from that list. :mad:
Sure, Stan, I just did that to annoy you.:p

Also, do we need to clarify which Downers are which desserts? ^_^

Yes, I suppose so.

btw, no wonder n00bs get confused. Some of these nicknames aren't exactly obvious, are they?

[Boromir88]

In short, I agree. Let's make sure we at least try to have something of a Tolkien nature.~Cupcake, the

No trying, just do. I realize I am completely hypocritical when saying this, seeing as my game was made up of d-list superheroes, and completely unrelated to Tolkien in anyway. But I shall do better next time, and we should respect the admins and purpose of the 'Downs existance to keep games Tolkien related.

I don't think it has to be as rigid as an RPG, but still Tolkien elements have to be involved. I'm in favor (inspired by Nerwen) of a futuristic WW game, with the SS Lothlorien going where no Elves have gone before to seek out werewolves, wherever they may be... :p

[Macalaure]

Great work, Nerwen! :)

In the player aliases, you forgot Mirandir=Keeper of Dol Guldur.

[Inziladun]

Great work, Nerwen! :)

In the player aliases, you forgot Mirandir=Keeper of Dol Guldur.

I thought our old Mira was back!

[Nerwen]

Great work, Nerwen! :)

In the player aliases, you forgot Mirandir=Keeper of Dol Guldur.

No I didn't– Mira is once again using her old account, and as the Keeper account actually belongs to somebody else, I thought it was an unnecessary complication.

[Macalaure]

I'm not up to date, I see. :o

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

btw, no wonder n00bs get confused. Some of these nicknames aren't exactly obvious, are they?

I take full responsibility for Steve.

[mormegil]

I think I will post the general guidelines in one post, glossary in another and nicknames in the third.

By the way Saucepan Man's general abbreviation is SpM. And you can add Tummy to the phantom though I think I'm the only one who calls him that :rolleyes::p

It is looking good and thanks for all the work. Nerwen I don't plan on posting until it is ready but I want the ball to be rolling which it is.

[satansaloser2005]

I think I will post the general guidelines in one post, glossary in another and nicknames in the third.

By the way Saucepan Man's general abbreviation is SpM. And you can add Tummy to the phantom though I think I'm the only one who calls him that.

It is looking good and thanks for all the work. Nerwen I don't plan on posting until it is ready but I want the ball to be rolling which it is.

Hehe. I think if we added Tummy to the glossary for Phantom people could get confused between him and Tum. Although I still think that ranks on top ten funniest nicknames. ;)

Also, Steve....oh, Steve. Even now that I know his proper RL name, I still call him Steve. o_O

[satansaloser2005]

Sure, Stan, I just did that to annoy you.:p

Heh, heh, heh. Somehow I'd guessed that. :p

No trying, just do. I realize I am completely hypocritical when saying this, seeing as my game was made up of d-list superheroes, and completely unrelated to Tolkien in anyway. But I shall do better next time, and we should respect the admins and purpose of the 'Downs existance to keep games Tolkien related.

I don't think it has to be as rigid as an RPG, but still Tolkien elements have to be involved. I'm in favor (inspired by Nerwen) of a futuristic WW game, with the SS Lothlorien going where no Elves have gone before to seek out werewolves, wherever they may be... :p

Exactly. What I meant by try was that if you have a game that doesn't have a Tolkien theme, try to fiddle with it so you can at least have some Tolkien elements.

And oh no. Nerwen, you've created a monster. o_O

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

I tend to spell it Espiem, but I blame that on Elempi, whom I miss greatly.

[satansaloser2005]

I thought you called him sweetcakes. ;)


Also, we need to add this to the glossary.

"Fea is evil. Always. Even when she has no alignment, she's evil."


:Merisu:




Real additions to the glossary (although I do hate taking the fun out of our pet names....)

Wilwa=Muffin, Vanilwa Muffin, etc.
Sally=Cupcake, Sallycakes, etc.
Glirdan=Glirdanpie, Glirdypie, etc.
Phantom=The Puddingtom. *snerk*
Lottie=Lottiepop. (Yes, I know, I just thought of it. But it's staying.)

Did I miss anyone? I keep thinking I have, but I can't recall who else is sweet. :)


Also, the guidelines should note that muffins are really just ugly cupcakes. It's an important fact that newbies need to know before they play Werewolf. Actually, it's an important fact that everyone needs to know, but I digress.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

I thought you called him sweetcakes.

Snookums, Love of My Life, Darlingest, Sauciekins... There were never lovers more notorious than we were...

[Loslote]

I spell it SPAM, but it's similar enough that newbies should be able to understand. Really nicely done, Mac and Nerwen! Also, Sallycake is win. :p

[wilwarin538]

Also, the guidelines should note that muffins are really just ugly cupcakes. It's an important fact that newbies need to know before they play Werewolf. Actually, it's an important fact that everyone needs to know, but I digress.

It's what's on the inside that counts. I have a t-shirt to prove it. :p


Great glossary, and the list of nicknames was a brilliant idea!

'Lottiepop' is so perfect! :D

[Macalaure]

I added something to the rules that I thought was important. In Guidelines for Mods, Part III, I added as new rule:3. Make sure to start/end all days and nights exactly on time.

Sure, no harm comes from starting a day a little late, but a mod should make an effort to really be on time every night/day.

[Nerwen]

By the way Saucepan Man's general abbreviation is SpM. And you can add Tummy to the phantom though I think I'm the only one who calls him that
I'd better, because that's exactly the sort of thing that bewilders newbies– "tum" (autume98) and "tummy" (the phantom).

I'll put in "SPAM" as well for the Saucepan Man.

Wilwa=Muffin, Vanilwa Muffin, etc.
Sally=Cupcake, Sallycakes, etc.
Glirdan=Glirdanpie, Glirdypie, etc.
Phantom=The Puddingtom. *snerk*
Lottie=Lottiepop. (Yes, I know, I just thought of it. But it's staying.)

I forgot "Sallycakes"– but where has tp been called "The Puddingtom"?

[Loslote]

I forgot "Sallycakes"– but where has tp been called "The Puddingtom"?

He's not really, except for occasionally on Facebook...but he *should* be. :p

[Nerwen]

Hehe. I think if we added Tummy to the glossary for Phantom people could get confused between him and Tum.
No, that's exactly why it needs to go in.

[satansaloser2005]

He's not really, except for occasionally on Facebook...but he *should* be. :p

Ha, that's where it was! I was trying to find a post to quote and didn't see one. Duh, Sally, that's because it started on facebook. And yes, he should. ;)

No, that's exactly why it needs to go in.

Good point, actually. I suppose I'd rather have people wonder what the heck is up in Morm's head (:p) than get players confused. *nods sagely*

[mormegil]

I will keep looking in as best I can but when a final draft is agreed upon send me a PM and I will begin posting it.

[Eönwë]

Guide to Players' Nicknames

Doesn't that kind of spoil the fun a little bit?

[satansaloser2005]

Doesn't that kind of spoil the fun a little bit?

Really, I think so too, but since we're being thorough....*shrugs* Heck if I know.

[Loslote]

Also, Celly = Celuin = Xed. :p

[Nerwen]

Also, Celly = Celuin = Xed. :p

Oh, I forgot her– and Mr Agreeable!

*goes off to fix it*

[Inziladun]

I'd forgotten about "xed" for Celuin. That's a favourite. ;)

[mormegil]

Is everybody more or less okay with this? I made it 7 games prior to modding.

A. Guidelines for Players:

I. Expectations and Responsibilities:
1. Read the rules of the game you are playing in and abide by them.
2. After signing up for a game, you are expected to participate (post at least once per day and vote) throughout the entire game or until your death.
3. If a player cannot participate for a Day, it should be stated and explained on the Admin thread (and only there). Extensive absences can lead to modfire subject to the mod.
4. Remember that the team you are playing on is counting on you. Lack of participation or deviation from your role (in particular its intended alignment) will spoil the game for the other players.

II. General Rules:
1. Name-calling, swearing, and abbreviated/implied swearing are not allowed. This is against the rules of the forum and may lead to consequences beyond the game.
2. Turn your status on invisible so that people do not know when you are online when playing.
3. Editing a post for reasons other than grammar or crossposting is prohibited. Once a post is submitted, the content within it must not be changed.

III. Deadline and Voting:
1. Posting in the game thread has to stop at the deadline.
2. Unless otherwise specified by the mod, votes should be on a separate line, preceded by a "++", and bolded. Otherwise they do not count.
3. Votes are counted up to deadline 'downs time. Votes posted after this time do not count. (F.ex., for a 1pm deadline, a vote posted at 1:00 counts, at 1:01 does not.)
4. Votes can be regarded as non-retractable unless otherwise specified by the mod.

IV. Guidelines on communication between players during a game:
1. No PMing or other outside communication about an ongoing game is allowed, unless your role specifically allows it.
2. No game-related communication between living and dead players is allowed.
3. PMs and other private discussion may not be quoted during the game.
4. Post-game discussion including the dead should not begin until after the final narration or until the mod officially allows it.
5. Admin threads are only intended for rules, signups, game management, and notifications about absences. They are not a place to chat.


B. Guidelines for Mods:

I. Before Signing up for Modding:
1. Would-be mods must have participated in at least 7 games of Barrowdowns werewolf before modding.
2. When you sign up to mod you should say when you are or aren't able to do it.
3. Mods who miss their turn twice or miss a reserved month once are removed from the list.
4. Members who have already moderated a game cannot mod again until at least 6 months after their last game.
5. It is very strongly recommended that your game should have a Tolkien-related theme.
6. Try to keep the number of traditional and experimental games even.

II. Before the Game:
1. If there is a foreseeable chance that you might not be available at one of the deadlines, consider appointing a co-mod.
2. Among the first posts in the admin thread one post should contain all of the following
- List of players
- List of roles including the respective number.
- Any special rules or events, in particular an announcement of any secret twists.
- Deadline time.
- Deadline for submission of picks (if differing from general deadline).
- Rules in case of a voting tie.
- Modfire rules for no-shows or inappropriate behavior.
3. If your game is experimental, make sure that you thought everything through and that the game has equal chances of victory for all sides.
4. The rules post should be as clear, complete, and detailed as possible.
5. If you change rules, edit the post and point out the change.
6. The mod has to pm the roles to all players, including ordos.

III. During the Game:
1. Mods should abide by their own rules. Should changes be necessary, they have to be made known to everybody.
2. Mods must not make any extra knowledge available to any player outside of what is covered in the rules.
3. Make sure to start/end all days and nights exactly on time.
4. The game thread should contain a list of players and dead players with time of death and role at the end of every Night and Day.
5. The mod should reveal the role of a lynched player within 30 minutes of the deadline.
6. At the end of the game, the mod has to ensure the beginning of post-game discussion within reasonable time.

Don't forget that your players are counting on you. You are responsible to provide them with a well-managed game.

[Inziladun]

I don't see anything missing from that. Looks like a good, general guide to me.

[satansaloser2005]

Also, Celly = Celuin = Xed. :p

Oh, I forgot her– and Mr Agreeable!

*goes off to fix it*

Oh snerk yes, to both of these. :p

[mormegil]

I have posted the first sticky thread. Let me know when the other posts are done and I will add them. I made another change and I apologize for forgetting to incorporate that into this draft. It is the part about Tolkien themed. It is required to have it themed or at least a tie into Tolkien.

I also merged SpM's sticky post with mine.

Thank you for all your work on this and helping to make this game better.

[mormegil]

Let me know when the other two posts are done and I will post them too.

thanks

[Nerwen]

Request: can people look over the glossary and names list and see if I've left anything (or anyone) out?

[mormegil]

Nerwen, what do you think, one more day and then just post it if there is no feedback?

[Inziladun]

Request: can people look over the glossary and names list and see if I've left anything (or anyone) out?

I didn't see anything obviously missing from either. It looks good to me. I was glad you added this bit:

Note: there are many possible variants of Lovers; sometimes one or both has another role, which may be evil. Otherwise Lovers are generally assumed to play for the village, but this is not always the case.

There's a reason why I never trust Lovers. ;)

[Nerwen]

Nerwen, what do you think, one more day and then just post it if there is no feedback?

Yes, I think so.

[Nerwen]

Note: there are many possible variants of Lovers; sometimes one or both has another role, which may be evil. Otherwise Lovers are generally assumed to play for the village, but this is not always the case.
There's a reason why I never trust Lovers.

I don't think either of us ever will.;)

[mormegil]

Posted.

Thanks for all the help.

[satansaloser2005]

Crap. Stupidly, NOW I realize that Dun wasn't listed as....well, as Dun. o_O


ETA: Yes he is. I'm just illiterate. Then again, it explains why I hadn't brought it up before. *shrugs*

[mormegil]

Yes, and this list won't be updated often at all...sorry.

[satansaloser2005]

Yes, and this list won't be updated often at all...sorry.

Hey, totally fine. That's why I mentioned it right away, and then I realized I'd derped pretty bad. From what I see the list is fine, so updates hopefully won't be needed too often anyway.