Tol-in-Gaurhoth (Isle of Werewolves)

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Originally Posted by Lhunardawen

I'm quite sure this won't work for the werewolves who live about ten time zones away. Just remember that there will be players who are all the way in Asia. *cough* *cough*

Would 24 hours and 24 hours work better? That had been my initial idea, but I thought that it would slow the game down quite a lot. Other mods dealt with that by allowing the extra time, but if it was finished early, they would begin the next set of times. I can't guarantee that I'll be sitting near a computer when the voting finishes, unpredictable as it is, or when all of the PMs stream in, which is why I had aimed for set times so that I would know when to continue each day.

To clarify my view on multiple lynchings (this is mostly so the phantom stops whining):

They are a fantastic idea. It is a great way of securing a victory when you've got the right circumstances. My previous statement was a generality (*glares at tp*). I know that you could not have a conclusive and finalizing vote on day one. However I would hate to see what The Barrow-Wight referred to initially as

a game of accusation, deduction, lying, reverse psychology and bandwagoning

turn into a game of numerical logic. Quite frankly, instead of a game where we search out werewolves using our instincts and their screwups, I can see the game morphing into one where every player tries their best to confuse the phantom. As hilarious as that would be, it takes away from the point of the game.

Where I can understand the strategy involved in mass lynchings, I do not desire to see them employed as a given occurence in every game. Therefore, as the [potential] mod of Werewolf VI (subtitle yet unknown), my formal statement is this:

Originally Posted by THE ALL-POWERFUL MOD

Multiple lynchings are allowed. You can use them as often as you want. But as a means of discouraging their use, any deaths thereby produced will be intentionally boring, inapplicable to the situation, and/or lame.

EDIT:

Clarification: You can die in a mass death, but if you do, your death will suck. If you want to go in an interesting way that is not along the lines of

And then, looking around boredly, The Barrow-Wight, Estelyn, and Bethberry all dropped dead seemingly of their own accord. "Oh shucks" muttered one of the villagers... "Looks like they were all innocent."

then you want to bandwagon, back-stab, and follow intuition a little more.

By the way, Fea, in the event that you do get to moderate Werewolf VI, will you be having shiriffs as tgwbs had, or will you adopt Mith's rule of allowing the Hunter and the Ranger to know each other's identities?

There will be shirriffs as tgwbs had them.

Gil- Mith's game, last I knew, begins this afternoon.

[Gil-Galad]

It starts today does it not?

[the guy who be short]

Originally Posted by Fea

I can see the game morphing into one where every player tries their best to confuse the phantom.

Yeah, I know it was a joke but... I see that as a very interesting idea, and I'd be willing to try it. I mean, we'd need to bend a lot of rules and such, but a game where every other player is trying to confuse the phantom would just be too good.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

If you like TGWBS, I can add a chaser rule where, instead of becoming a wolf upon slaying, the cursed villager becomes the anti-phantom of the village, having his/her entire existence based upon keeping him confused about everyone. Each night, the cursed villager PMs the mod with a cryptic comment, to be forwarded to the phantom. If the phantom accurately guesses the identity of the cursed villager, his side automatically wins. The downside is that once the cursed villager is revealed, the phantom dies. So if he's the only one left on his team, ironically, he'll lose.

Or... you know... not. What a complicated addition to the game.

[The Saucepan Man]

Seems to me that the games in which the phantom plays are phantom-centric enough without introducing special rules to make them more so ...

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

phantom, there isn't anything wrong with strategy as such. For example, your plan in Werewolf IV was headscratching and highly interesting. But (and this is just a rehash of what Sauce said) the lying, cheating, bullying, deceiving, manipulating and detective work that goes on in the game is what makes it such fun. Just because we're scrambling in the dark for clues doesn't mean that intelligence goes out the window.

You could organize a mass lynching of four villagers in the probability that one of the four is a wolf........but that's the opposite of fun. For a start, it robs some villagers of his/her moment in the sunshine (or shadow of death, might be more appropriate).

Who wants to be killed and chucked into a large grave with other people? Who doesn't want to be the focus of the game for one morning or one night?

[the phantom]

the lying, cheating, bullying, deceiving, manipulating and detective work that goes on in the game is what makes it such fun

And all that would continue. The last game is a perfect example. It was a very fun game, and on the last day, to make sure they bagged the final wolf, the villagers did a multiple lynching.

No, but if all the players understand it, the multiple lynching strategy is likely to be used in every game where the conditions are right, which would be rather dull.

In other words, it would be dull if everyone got very good at the game.

I, personally, think it would make the game better, seeing as the wolves would know that they either had to kill the seer early or at least kill people that the seer is identifying as innocent. It would make for some tricky strategy. If there are two people that the wolves think might be the seer, and one of them seems to be saying that the other one is innocent, it would be a good bet to kill the one being declared innocent by the other one. That way, if they are the seer of the two then the wolves have killed the seer, but if the other person is the seer then the wolves have at least killed someone the seer declared innocent. And if the wolves are able to kill off proven innocents, it will keep the villagers from using the multi-lynch technique because there need to be proven innocents to make it work.

The more everyone knows about the game and strategies, the touchier the game becomes, meaning that everything the wolves and seer do must be done with more consideration, planning, and subtlety.

That sounds like a very fun game to me.

I can see the game morphing into one where every player tries their best to confuse the phantom.

As hilarious as that would be, it takes away from the point of the game

No no, it would just create a new point of the game.

I see that as a very interesting idea, and I'd be willing to try it. I mean, we'd need to bend a lot of rules and such, but a game where every other player is trying to confuse the phantom would just be too good.

I'd be inclined not to play considering every player is against me and my defeat certain from the outset, but.... how could I disapprove of a game revolving around me?

Well, just go ahead and map the game out and pm me when you're ready to start (I probably won't be around much until late August, so that'll give you some time).

I can add a chaser rule where, instead of becoming a wolf upon slaying, the cursed villager becomes the anti-phantom of the village

Well, there always seems to be plenty of anti-phantoms in each game without assigning someone such a role, though I'd love to have a role named after me.

Seems to me that the games in which the phantom plays are phantom-centric enough without introducing special rules to make them more so ...

Ha ha!

I'd like to point out that there were definitely times in the last game that were not terribly phantom-centric.

Of course, those times were after I was dead- but they still count.

And speaking of things that are phantom-centric, is it safe to say that this thread has toppled into phantom-land?

[Mithalwen]

I thought the mass lynchings were rather like when Somerset declared in a Limited overs game against Worcestershire in 1979 .........

So that is why we ain't having them I do like the role of Mythomaniac to mix things up.