[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Roa

I’m not sure what you’re talking about. A tie as in both Wizard’s pick the same person? A tie in the lynch votes? And a Wizard’s battle over what people? The people picked? How does that tie into voting for a person to kill? Please clarify.

I was thinking about a tie in a vote to lynch someone.

Now lmp entertained the idea that in a tie neither of those gaining the highest number of votes would get killed. I'm afraid that might put the villagers' most important tool into jeopardy if that would be automatic. But I'd like to try something new with the lynching procedure this time.

So my idea was to put the Wizards face to face during the Night and trying to see through each others bluff and risk-taking capabilities. One way to gain this would be that they have a chance to protect one of those reaching a tie and a chance to try to kill (or change) the other one (they could surely restrain from using both or eother of their capabilities if they so wished). I think you can imagine different possible scenarios there could be: a wolf and a seer reaching a tie, a wolf and an innocent, two gifteds, two wolves, two innocents... How would the Wizards play their cards here thinking of both the "objective" outcome of it and the bluff-factor?

So the basic idea would just be that in a case of a tie in votes the Wizards would play it off.

It might look to favour the EW but remember also that if there is a wolf there in the pair and the GW suspects her and tries to kill / change her only to learn that the EW protected her then what should the GW think about it? Or does the EW have the nerve to bluff here as she doesn't know which one the GW will pick?

It might also be worth considering that this poker-game between the Wizards could be made to consist of two rounds where initially the Wizards are asked about their choices and those would be then channelled to the other one and then their second decision would be the one that counts... (that would be easily adapted in to the narrations as the Wizards try to sense the air around the two candidates and trying to see what the other one is trying to do)

But as I said this is one of the things we should think about. It's just a suggestion and I'm not sure whether it would work in a balanced manner.

Originally Posted by Roa

I wouldn’t be opposed to two seers, maybe 3, given the sheer number of villagers, and numerous rangers. Multiple hunters I would oppose for the simple fact that they could heavily unbalance the game- either acting as landmines to severely cripple the wolves, or taking out multiple innocents and really hurting the odds of the village.

The number of the gifteds is a tough one I admit. I mean it sounds pretty inbalanced if the EW can summon as many wolves she wishes (if she plays it right) but the GW is limited to three in the original rules. But then again one conversion makes a wolf to change sides while a gifted scried by the EW only loses the gift but stays a goodie.

One way to try to balance this would surely be to make some clear but flexible limits to the number of gifteds / wolves. Like that there could at any time be three but as long as there are a lot of players the maximal amount would be something like a quarter of the village or something like that (So with 20 players left there could be at most five wolves etc. - surely any already nominated "chosen ones" would not be ripped of their status because of this rule but when the roster is full the Wizard would be banned to scry/curse more; and there probably needs to be some restrictions with the GW's scries as five Seers, or four rangers able to protect the seer(s) everyNight would be just unsporty).

Or maybe we just limit the number of wolves to the quarter of the village or something and hold the gifteds in the three-max. all through the game?

Okay that's just a thought as well. What do you people think?

I do agree with you Roa that both Wizards should be able to override their minions' decisions in the end. You made me convinced about it.

The issue with both Wizards trying to scry/curse the same villager during the Night. You are right Roa and Mac. That might be a bit too dangerous.

Right now I kind of like the idea that that person gets under so strong influence of magical powers that she crushes dead with it. That would be simple, elegant and "realistic". Also that way both Wizards will know they were after the same person without learning each others identities (which I think they should not learn if they are after the same person).

Originally Posted by Volo

I myself am worried more about timezones. There is really little time for Nightly actions and I wouldn't like to wake myself up at three in the morning just to send a PM at the right time. If I understand the stuff correctly, I vote for longer Nights.

Even if I see your concern as a legitimate one I'd be very reluctant to change the Day/Night -cycle. With 36-hour Nights the possibility of different confusions would be big indeed (just look how hard it is sometimes with even rutinely 24-hour cycles) and with 48-hour cycles the intensity of the game would suffer considerably I'm afraid. I mean we managed nicely the last time. Although I'd like to hear from Kuru and Boro (the sub-mods last time) how it went behind the curtains.