Tol-in-Gaurhoth (Isle of Werewolves)

[Nogrod]

I'm quite against any strict restrictions - I'm not against some people going for a super experimental game if they want to - but in general it sounds like a very bad idea.

Like some people have already noticed: situations may change drastically (reveals, sudden bandwagons, someone finds a crucial point...) which requires possibility to react freely. Also the whole feel of the game has lot to do with spontainety, including little banter here and there.

Quoting is also quite crucial to the game-mechanics. If people are forced to quote less to save their post-lengths it will immediately favor the wolves (who are, according to Kuru's latest statistics in the Grimoire, clearly having the upper hand already of late). Add to that a post-count restriction, and the wolves can co-ordinate things nicely especially late in the Day.

Or think about the last minute frenzy when everyone is holding their precious one last post to the very end, looking to see if someone is trying to use the situation to their advantage...

Also, who wants to count the characters in one's posts? So a Word or LibreOffice is required to play so that you can check the number of characters you use?


That said, I do think the walls of text in the first game this summer were quite overwhelming and we all could think twice, when it is truly important to make such huge posts (or quote all the stuff people quote) and when not.

[Inziladun]

RL is not WW-friendly for me just now, but at any rate I don't think I'd be on for a game with strict posting restrictions.

One of the fun aspects of the game for me is the way everyone's free to construct posts however they like, to fit their particular motive. Also, having to pay close attention to the structure of the post itself will just give me something else to worry about, and I find that already sometimes the stress of the game can overwhelm the entertainment.

[Huinesoron]

I actually wonder if this idea would be more fun if it was super-strictly limited. "The size of the box" just feels like it's trying to keep post sizes down, and would therefore favour players like Shasta who tend to post short posts anyway. Something ultra-strict, like "ten words" (or "one word"...), would be part of the gameplay, not a separate restriction.

I've just thought of another possible way to limit post numbers, and keep people from just breaking their posts up: you can post as often as you like, but there have to be at least five (two, ten...) posts between yours. That way everyone can contribute, and fast-paced sections stay fast-paced, but nobody can spam the thread.

(I'd say vote-posts would even more have to be separate in that game, to keep someone locking themselves out of voting because the thread went quiet all of a sudden.)

hS

[Boromir88]

I'm quite against any strict restrictions - I'm not against some people going for a super experimental game if they want to - but in general it sounds like a very bad idea. -Nog

One of the fun aspects of the game for me is the way everyone's free to construct posts however they like, to fit their particular motive. Also, having to pay close attention to the structure of the post itself will just give me something else to worry about, and I find that already sometimes the stress of the game can overwhelm the entertainment. - Inzil

Same. I'd be intrigued by Rune's twitter-inspired idea that he brought up. At least sometimes the thought is appealing when you see blocks and blocks of texts and feel like you've come back to have to read 2 pages of it. I'm not sure how this could be achieved without a character limit though. Then as Inzil mentions, that game with post limits and character limits just wouldn't appeal to me. That's not to say someone couldn't go on and create such a game.
__________________________________________________ ____
(Where the comment box cuts off on my laptop)

It just seems like it could be very easily help the wolves (who already have a slight advantage to start) than the village, which would add a wrinkle of unbalance I would not find appealing. I think it was Legate who said when he thinks of new roles or experiments the question is "is this phantom-proof" is a good general guide to follow.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I think it was Legate who said when he thinks of new roles or experiments the question is "is this phantom-proof" is a good general guide to follow.

Indeed. But actually, I like Hui's suggestion. There is a distinct chance the WWs could exploit it, but only to a degree.

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

I've just thought of another possible way to limit post numbers, and keep people from just breaking their posts up: you can post as often as you like, but there have to be at least five (two, ten...) posts between yours. That way everyone can contribute, and fast-paced sections stay fast-paced, but nobody can spam the thread.

That sounds actually pretty good to me!!! And we've had different games like this here in the past when this was used: the "Hurt and Heal" game had similar rule. And that worked pretty nicely. (And yes, posts with votes should be exempt from this rule. But the vote post should maybe have some rule like that it can't contain anything else, or perhaps at most two lines or something. Roughly. Or not. Whichever.)

The only problem could be with people who are posting at other time than others, or are in a completely different timezone. I mean, there's no problem with them to write all their thoughts down and post them all at once, if it's just about that. But imagine a situation where, say, there are ten European players and then Nilp and Lhuna. When it's "European normal time", people keep alternating, posting... then Europeans go to sleep, Nilp post once, Lhuna posts once, and that's the end for the two of them because they don't have other players present to fill the gap between their posts.

Of course, one could make some exceptional rule for some visibly disadvantaged players, but still. Again: should be tested beforehand.

[Galadriel55]

I am not sure if it's really necessary to limit post volume in that way. No one ever spams the thread singlehandedly to such degree (though I admit I have tried ). However, how about a simple rule that you can have no more than 3 (2? 4?) posts in a row? And an understanding that the post size limit is not there to break up the Wall of Text into 10 small chunks but so that what you say has to be more concise and to the point.

[Loslote]

Maybe the posts have to be separated by x number of other posts OR x length of time OR make a substantially different point than the preceding one?

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I am not sure if it's really necessary to limit post volume in that way. No one ever spams the thread singlehandedly to such degree (though I admit I have tried ). However, how about a simple rule that you can have no more than 3 (2? 4?) posts in a row? And an understanding that the post size limit is not there to break up the Wall of Text into 10 small chunks but so that what you say has to be more concise and to the point.

Going to attempt a reply from my cell phone to see where the comment box cuts off...

My reason against this is that it starts restricting strategy and like Inzil, gets me to have to think about more than I already do when I post. My personal title of “laconic” is actually making fun of my style, because I’m not a very concise person. Sometimes I use it to be intentionally confusing, but it’s just my nature when writing any post, not just playing werewolf.

(Cuts off here on my phone)

Anyway, my intention is to say I personally wouldn’t find restricting length and post construction a game idea I’d like to participate in. That’s not to say someone can’t try it for their game and that others won’t be intrigued by it.