Werewolf, why to play or not to play? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Rikae · 11-13-2007, 05:28 PM

Well, I don't think the problem could be worded as simply as "taking things too seriously", but I also wouldn't say that it's a problem of "not serious enough" per se.
It seems to me that, over the past year, our little band of players has lost its sense of fun. The gameplay has become too formulaic; on day one, the stock topics are trotted out and discussed in the accepted ways, day 2, the same old analysis, same arguments, and really, the same roles are reenacted again and again.
By 'roles' here, I mean something other than roleplay or hidden roles; I mean the in-game persona and strategy adopted by each player. Instead of real thought and individual analysis, players respond to each other in standardized ways, almost like filling in a form. There is always the wacky 'lightning rod' killed on day one; the myriad "quiet ones", the 'list' analyses, etc.
Even the explanations for suspicion seem chosen from a multiple-choice list. "Well, we need to get rid of the quiet ones.", "Too confusing", "Trying to appear helpful while saying nothing", "flip-flopping". However often these stereotyped methods fail to catch a wolf, they're still trotted out every time; and those who deviate too far from the average-of-all-posts are automatically lynched instead of being looked at carefully.
All this has the effect of creating overcautious, homogeneous playing styles and ever more boring games. While I'm not suggesting everyone play as oddly as I did in Lommy's game, I think that the lack of thought which causes us to vote for easy targets and make easy posts (or no posts at all), is sapping all the enjoyment and interest out of the game.

11-13-2007, 05:28 PM	#5
Rikae Mellifluous Maia Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: A glade open to the stars, deep in Nan Elmoth Posts: 3,489	Well, I don't think the problem could be worded as simply as "taking things too seriously", but I also wouldn't say that it's a problem of "not serious enough" per se. It seems to me that, over the past year, our little band of players has lost its sense of fun. The gameplay has become too formulaic; on day one, the stock topics are trotted out and discussed in the accepted ways, day 2, the same old analysis, same arguments, and really, the same roles are reenacted again and again. By 'roles' here, I mean something other than roleplay or hidden roles; I mean the in-game persona and strategy adopted by each player. Instead of real thought and individual analysis, players respond to each other in standardized ways, almost like filling in a form. There is always the wacky 'lightning rod' killed on day one; the myriad "quiet ones", the 'list' analyses, etc. Even the explanations for suspicion seem chosen from a multiple-choice list. "Well, we need to get rid of the quiet ones.", "Too confusing", "Trying to appear helpful while saying nothing", "flip-flopping". However often these stereotyped methods fail to catch a wolf, they're still trotted out every time; and those who deviate too far from the average-of-all-posts are automatically lynched instead of being looked at carefully. All this has the effect of creating overcautious, homogeneous playing styles and ever more boring games. While I'm not suggesting everyone play as oddly as I did in Lommy's game, I think that the lack of thought which causes us to vote for easy targets and make easy posts (or no posts at all), is sapping all the enjoyment and interest out of the game.