Tol-in-Gaurhoth (Isle of Werewolves)

[Evisse the Blue]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

So....for now: let's hear your thoughts about the retractable votes. And Evisse, if you could specify your concerns about the times please.

No concerns anymore, as Holbytlass explained it to me, thanks Holbytlass.

As for retractable votes, I'm for.
I think that someone can very well change their minds after they've heard others' arguments, without it looking suspicious.

[Shelob]

I can understand the argument for changing votes, esp. 'cause it is rather unbelievable that people wouldn't change their votes. But as I see the point of having final votes is so that people can discuss whom to kill without worrying about seeing "++Shelob " or "--Shelob" in the middle of everyone's posts.

If you, instead of casting a vote whenever you change your mind, simply make your current opinion and the reasons for it clear then once you've had a fair chance to read/see as many different views as possible you'll be in a possition to make one well informed* vote rather than ye-many shots in the dark.


*taking into account, of course, the lying and trickery of the werewolves, the subtle attempts at guidance from the seer, and the unsurety of anything/everything.

[the guy who be short]

I'm anti-retractable votes. It is simple enough to consider different points until the final moment without voting each time you change your mind, and I think it would make people consider things more seriously if they only got the on shot at it.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Interesting link Oddwen, though I'm not too keen on introducing any of those new roles. They seem fairly 'samey' anyway, or designed for the card game.

The retractable votes issue is apparently causing a bit of a stir. You seem slightly in favour of 'sticky votes' that you cannot afterwards change. I suppose I'll decide tomorrow which to use. Either way, I don't think either decision should detract too much from the game. But keep posting your thoughts. We still have quite a bit of time.

Firefoot is in.

Saucy - a question about the Werewolf Hunter (yeah, another one ). If it comes down to the Hunter and one werewolf, who wins? I can see a case for both individuals. How would you settle this?

Another thought: how many participants would be required to demand four werewolves? Because we might still ensnare more players.

[the phantom]

how many participants would be required to demand four werewolves?

If we end up with 16 or 17 you could probably add another wolf. Or, you could add another role, such as a cobbler- one of my favorite roles.

cobbler His job sucks so bad, he wants to die. The cobbler is on the werewolves team, but is not a werewolf! He doesnt know who the werewolves are, they dont know who he is. The game does not end in a situation where #(werewolves+ cobbler) >= #villagers. The cobbler looks like a villager to the seer. The cobbler is very interesting in that he actually doesnt mind being lynched in many cases, to protect a werewolf from dying. He can also create situations late in the game where he can form a voting block with the remaining werewolf and then block any lunchings from occurring. You can even have cases where the werewolf is trying to convince the cobbler that he is in fact a wolf, or that someone might fake being a cobbler to rat out who the wolf is, so they can then say they arent really a cobbler and lynch them!
Obviously, the cobbler is a strong addition to the werewolf team. I think its a great role for situations where having one more werewolf would be too strong, but without it the werewolves are screwed.

Or you could add a wolf and a cobbler and then add masons to help the village. The people that I play Mafia with often include masons and it really adds a lot to the game.

Masons Two of the villagers are Masons (members of the secret society). Since they are together at night, they know each other are not werewolves. This adds to the game in several ways. It increases the number of people who have information, and thus makes the initial lynchings less random. It also makes two groups of people who will 'defend' each other: the werewolves and the masons.

I wouldn't mind seeing a cobbler and a couple of masons added to the mix the next game.

[mormegil]

If it comes down to the Hunter and one werewolf, who wins? I can see a case for both individuals. How would you settle this?

I know it wasn't directed to me but in this unlikely event I would say that they kill each other off and the town is left desolate.

As for the voting...I slightly favor non-retractable voting but I am fine either way.

To add the other roles such as cobbler or masons I would think that we would need more than 12. I know that's what you were saying phantom but I just wanted to add my bit about it too. It sounds okay I'm not enamoured with the idea but I guess I would need to see it played first to make up my mind.

[Holbytlass]

Whoa...seeing as I chose to be a village cobbler, I'm not saying I am a 'cobbler' (never heard of that secret-role till now) cause, well, I DON"T WANT TO DIE!!