Dueling Wizards Werewolf Suggestion Thread

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

The italicized part of your quote is incorrect. The three werewolves get ONE kill choice, thus only ONE chance to find the GW. The EW's curse plus three werewolves' singe kill = only 2 chances at the GW per Night. Once the ETeam has 4 werewolves, it's 2 kills per Night and 1 EW curse = 3 chances at the GW. Meanwhile, the GW + the Seer = 2 chances to find a werewolf, and once done, if they have the Hunter, an automatic take-down SAME NIGHT.

Well, first, I can't see what you italicized. The quote tags automatically put everything in italics, so I can't see the difference.

But, as to what you do mean. I don't think it's incorrect. For the first night, and Night 1 only, the Evil Wizard has three scries. That plus a wolf kill means 4 chances to locate the Good Wizard for Night 1. After that, providing there are four or more wolves, it goes back down to 3 per Night.

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

I think you're limiting the GW's effectiveness too much by saying that his sole purpose is to find the EW while the villagers try to pick off werewolves. The GW scries one of 3 types of players: 1) the EW; 2) a werewolf; 3) an innocent. If he finds the EW, wizard battle as soon as he likes; IF he finds a werewolf, either uncurse or send the Hunter after him. Why would the GW NOT do this?

Well, he would. Only a fool wouldn't. But think about this. The Good Wizard himself does not have to worry about the wolves at all. If he scries one, well that's an innocent villager now, not a wolf. His gifteds are there to take care of the wolves. He would also make it a point to keep his gifteds informed of what the other gifteds do and find, but he is looking for the Evil Wizard. If he discovers a wolf, well lucky him.

From my own experience (And, might I add, the only actual Good Wizard experience you have, though bad you may think I was. ) I was not worried about wolves. Ask Kuru. I directed my Seers, the few Nights they dreamed, to dream of who I thought might be the EW. When the Hunter was created, and I found out exactly what it was they did, I told spawn that she would be finding wolves while Kath and I searched for the EW.

Call it whatever you want, but I call it trying to kill the greater of two evils.

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

I still think that the Good team starts out with a disadvantage but can make up ground if it plays right. If the Good team had had Night PMs in this last game, I think at least 2 of the "critical errors" would have been avoided, and maybe 4 of them could have been.

I think much the same.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Gurthang

Well, first, I can't see what you italicized. The quote tags automatically put everything in italics, so I can't see the difference.

Ack. Oops. I forgot about that. Well you get it anyway.

Originally Posted by Gurthang

But, as to what you do mean. I don't think it's incorrect. For the first night, and Night 1 only, the Evil Wizard has three scries.

Okay, I see that I need another rule to clarify what I've always intended: the wizards are not going to find each other on Night One. I won't allow it. I just don't know how to make that work in an actual game yet, because if one wizard actually picks the other, how do you make it not happen without implying that the wizard has found the other? Oh, freepin' grrrr! Something to think about. I'll listen to any ideas on this one.

You're right that it's the seer who will inform of a dreamed werewolf and then the hunter will pick that one to kill, while the GW will always turn a werewolf into a known innocent. That makes sense. I could be wrong, but I think the balance will be there with a game played like this, INCLUDING the additional clause that wizards will not find each other on Night One. That's just plain no fun. blah.

[Roa_Aoife]

Okay, I see that I need another rule to clarify what I've always intended: the wizards are not going to find each other on Night One. I won't allow it. I just don't know how to make that work in an actual game yet, because if one wizard actually picks the other, how do you make it not happen without implying that the wizard has found the other? Oh, freepin' grrrr! Something to think about. I'll listen to any ideas on this one.

If we go with Loki's idea about sending a list to the sub mods to pick from for night one, it wouldn't be a problem. I personally think it's a very good idea.

IF he finds a werewolf, either uncurse or send the Hunter after him. Why would the GW NOT do this?

Because there's no garuntee that the hunter will be killed (and therefore able to hunt) and it leaves a werewolf running about. Now, you could have the hunter come forward as the seer and reveal the wolf, but then you lose the hunter that night, and risk losing another innocent in the process. And if the GW is already down some gifted, well that just puts them in a spot of trouble, doesn't it? But then, I think of these things.

[littlemanpoet]

So the EW would make a list of 4 to curse, and the sub-mod would pick the first 3, or if the GW is in the first three, then #4 replaces the GW. That works.

Hmmm... maybe my Hunter is still a little stronger than the classic version: I was thinking that if the hunter knows who a werewolf is and goes for him/her, that werewolf will die but kill the hunter. This gives the Good team some clout, and it's how I'm viewing the set-up.

[Boromir88]

So the EW would make a list of 4 to curse, and the sub-mod would pick the first 3, or if the GW is in the first three, then #4 replaces the GW. That works.

That would be too easy to figure out. If one of the first 3 the EW chooses was not cursed, they will know that person was the GW.

At the bare minimum I would say 5, therefor the sub-mod has more wiggling room and the EW would not so easily figure out which one was the GW (if one even was). At the most 6 should be safe. This would increase the likelihood of the EW picking the GW on Night 1, but if the GW is amongst them there are a few people that the sub-mod can put in, instead of just one where then it could be easily figured out why one of the first 3 was not cursed.

Or atleast don't make the rule "if one of the first 3 is the GW have the 4th one replace," that's too easy to figure out. Just tell the EW to send in a list of 4, if the GW is not in there then the sub-mod chooses who to leave out, if the GW is in there then the sub-mod excludes the GW.

[Roa_Aoife]

Or atleast don't make the rule "if one of the first 3 is the GW have the 4th one replace," that's too easy to figure out. Just tell the EW to send in a list of 4, if the GW is not in there then the sub-mod chooses who to leave out, if the GW is in there then the sub-mod excludes the GW.

I would opt for a larger list, since the EW can always test this theory with either a curse or a kill.

I was thinking that if the hunter knows who a werewolf is and goes for him/her, that werewolf will die but kill the hunter. This gives the Good team some clout, and it's how I'm viewing the set-up.

NO. Just no. Part of the evil team's strategy is to figure out who the hunter is, then decide on their posts if killing them is good or bad. The good team must figure out how to best utilize the hunter in any case.

This is an automatic wolf kill, and automatic anythings should NEVER be allowed. If the hunter can't get themself killed, then they're doing a bad a job. It's not right to just hand the wolves over. You can't do the good team's job for them.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

That would be too easy to figure out. If one of the first 3 the EW chooses was not cursed, they will know that person was the GW.

Hmmmmm.... maybe use codes. Maybe assign the first werewolves and the first scry? That might be the best solution.

Roa, this technique has been used before regarding the Hunter; it's not original with me. I didn't happen to play in the game, so I don't know what the reactions were. But let me clarify: (A) if the hunter fails to pick a werewolf, and picks an innocent villager, while the werewolves pick the hunter, the hunter dies without taking out a werewolf. (B) if the hunter picks a werewolf and the werewolf picks the hunter, both die. (C) if the hunter picks a werewolf and the werewolf chooses someone else to kill, the someone else dies but so do the hunter and the werewolf.

So this is NOT as powerful a hunter as the way I used it in the last game, but stronger than a classic set-up.

[Thinlómien]

I'm very sorry if this has already been mentioned, but I'm too lazy to reread through the thread:

I think the wolves' kill nomination system is a bit shady. I think all wolves should give three choices and the one who gets most votes dies. Or then the wolves could nominate primary, secondary and tertiary kill. Being a primary kill is worth 3 points, secondary 2 and tertiary 1. Then the sub-mod sums up who has the most points and that villager is killed.

Or another, more complicated system. The wolves have "kill points" which they divide between their suspects. For example, if the wolves had 5 kill points and I was a wolf, I could give Roa 3 points because I slightly feared her to be the seer and lmp and Boro both 1 point, because I thought they might be dangerous too. Or then if I was convinced Roa was the seer I could giuve her 5 points. Or if I was vaguely worried about Roa, LMP, Boro, Gurth and Valier I could give them all one point. And so on and so on... The villager who gets the most kill points dies.

Do these make sense? Or are they too complicated?