Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ashersky]

I would assume that survivor doesn't count like that. scum wincon is "you win when you control half the town or nothing else can prevent that from happening". "the town" is all living player, so in a situation with two scum, two town, and a survivor, scum only controls 2/5 of the town.

Right, but survivor is the 3rd scum there, so they just hammer and win with scum.

[liopoil]

I would assume that survivor doesn't count like that. scum wincon is "you win when you control half the town or nothing else can prevent that from happening". "the town" is all living player, so in a situation with two scum, two town, and a survivor, scum only controls 2/5 of the town.

Right, but survivor is the 3rd scum there, so they just hammer and win with scum.

hmmm, good point, however:

survivor has claimed, right.  So, a town player claims scum and votes, if it's for town they lose, but if it's for scum then they can lynch that player, and the survivor won't know who the real scum is.

[Archetype]

I revised the house plans and weakened town's powers.  Tell me what you think.

Yaaay! You're using my ideas!
I think the powerroles could be tweaked some more after you decide the house powers.

I have one other suggestion though. You could make one of the Death Eaters a Godfather, and then have the Gryfindor House be a Cop. Then scum could try and redirect the investigation to their Godfather for some interesting WIFOM. Just a suggestion though.

I think Slytherin should be a Roleblocker (evil role..but could it be used for good purposes?). But of course Hated works too if you still like that.

[ashersky]

I revised the house plans and weakened town's powers.  Tell me what you think.

Yaaay! You're using my ideas!
I think the powerroles could be tweaked some more after you decide the house powers.

I have one other suggestion though. You could make one of the Death Eaters a Godfather, and then have the Gryfindor House be a Cop. Then scum could try and redirect the investigation to their Godfather for some interesting WIFOM. Just a suggestion though.

I think Slytherin should be a Roleblocker (evil role..but could it be used for good purposes?). But of course Hated works too if you still like that.

I'm not convinced that the Head of Household nerf is needed--why can't they all 4 be full members of the QT?

[EFHW]

I'm not convinced that the Head of Household nerf is needed--why can't they all 4 be full members of the QT?

They could be part of the QT, but the main reason is that it's a chance to add more flavor.  It's also a challenge to the head of house to say just the right thing for their one post a day.  And will the neighbors forget they are being overheard?  Also, they won't know which player is their head of house.

What's a nerf?

[EFHW]

I revised the house plans and weakened town's powers.  Tell me what you think.

Yaaay! You're using my ideas!
I think the powerroles could be tweaked some more after you decide the house powers.

I have one other suggestion though. You could make one of the Death Eaters a Godfather, and then have the Gryfindor House be a Cop. Then scum could try and redirect the investigation to their Godfather for some interesting WIFOM. Just a suggestion though.

I think Slytherin should be a Roleblocker (evil role..but could it be used for good purposes?). But of course Hated works too if you still like that.

I like the flavor of Gryffindor sacrificing themselves to save others, and the Slytherins are such malicious gossipers, hated seemed suitable.

We have a cop already, so there could be a Godfather Death Eater.  But I don't think You-Know-Who deserves to get to play.

[Archetype]

I'm not convinced that the Head of Household nerf is needed--why can't they all 4 be full members of the QT?

They could be part of the QT, but the main reason is that it's a chance to add more flavor.  It's also a challenge to the head of house to say just the right thing for their one post a day.  And will the neighbors forget they are being overheard?  Also, they won't know which player is their head of house.

It will make the players have to decide on either of their two QT members to approve of their use of night action, instead of constantly trying to persuade the same person. If one gets killed, then you still have to do that.

[eHalcyon]

I still disagree.  If I'm the survivor, I claim D1 immediately, and broker a deal with town and scum.  Why?  ....
....  It's in the best interest of town that I NOT use my NK, since I'm most likely going to hit town (see town vigs in almost every game).  It's also in the best interest of town that I NOT vote, since anti-town voters help mislynch more often, especially since I don't have partners to bus. 

These seem like good reasons to lynch the survivor if he or she claims.  Especially since D1 is most likely going to be a mislynch otherwise.  What's in it for town to keep the survivor alive?

Lynch mafia, not scum.

If I'm town, I'm going to argue to keep the survivor around the keep mislynch numbers down.  I might try to convince him to join town, especially if we get a scum lynch.  He's the wildcard, and more useful alive than dead.

You don't lynch the survivor on d1, but it's quite possible that you do it midgame to prevent survivor joining scum for a quick quickhammer.

[EFHW]

I know there was concern about town being too strong, but I'm not so sure.  The town is now 12 people. 

I'm not convinced that the Head of Household nerf is needed--why can't they all 4 be full members of the QT?

They could be part of the QT, but the main reason is that it's a chance to add more flavor.  It's also a challenge to the head of house to say just the right thing for their one post a day.  And will the neighbors forget they are being overheard?  Also, they won't know which player is their head of house.

It will make the players have to decide on either of their two QT members to approve of their use of night action, instead of constantly trying to persuade the same person. If one gets killed, then you still have to do that.

Their powers are 1-shot, so persuasion will only happen once per house.  We could add 4 people to the game if there's enough interest to have 16 players.

[Archetype]

I know there was concern about town being too strong, but I'm not so sure.  The town is now 12 people. 

I'm not convinced that the Head of Household nerf is needed--why can't they all 4 be full members of the QT?

They could be part of the QT, but the main reason is that it's a chance to add more flavor.  It's also a challenge to the head of house to say just the right thing for their one post a day.  And will the neighbors forget they are being overheard?  Also, they won't know which player is their head of house.

It will make the players have to decide on either of their two QT members to approve of their use of night action, instead of constantly trying to persuade the same person. If one gets killed, then you still have to do that.

Their powers are 1-shot, so persuasion will only happen once per house.  We could add 4 people to the game if there's enough interest to have 16 players.

Oh that's right. They are 1-shot.

I'd make them full PRs and make the other normal PRs one shots of whatever they are. But I feel like I should just run the kind of game I would want, instead of hijacking yours.

[yuma]

I would strongly suggest keeping it at 13 or below. Well maybe strongly is too strong of a word... But for me 13 is at the max of amount of players that I will personally play. Any more is just too much for town to get moving and coordinated together, it basically turns days 1-3 into one big day1.

Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed every big game I have been in, but they can be real headaches in the beginning.

[EFHW]

Oh that's right. They are 1-shot.

I'd make them full PRs and make the other normal PRs one shots of whatever they are. But I feel like I should just run the kind of game I would want, instead of hijacking yours.

1-shot vs full seems like a balance question, which will also depend on how many players there are, so it's kind of too early to decide that yet. 

[EFHW]

I would strongly suggest keeping it at 13 or below. Well maybe strongly is too strong of a word... But for me 13 is at the max of amount of players that I will personally play. Any more is just too much for town to get moving and coordinated together, it basically turns days 1-3 into one big day1.

Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed every big game I have been in, but they can be real headaches in the beginning.

And people are probably more likely to lurk.

[ashersky]

I would strongly suggest keeping it at 13 or below. Well maybe strongly is too strong of a word... But for me 13 is at the max of amount of players that I will personally play. Any more is just too much for town to get moving and coordinated together, it basically turns days 1-3 into one big day1.

Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed every big game I have been in, but they can be real headaches in the beginning.

I think the 4 mini games combats this to an extent.

EFHW, in the end, run the game you want.  We're just making suggestions, not even all of them are for "balance" per se.

Final notes from me: I think everyone will know who their head of household is because they'll make one post only.  If they don't post, then they can act like a watched 3-person neighborhood.

I like the idea of 4 houses of 3 people each.  Confirmed Gryffindor, etc. to each other, but NOT confirmed town/scum.  You can be a Gryffindor Death Eater, for example.  Each house has a special power, not 1-shot, but requires majority vote to use AND target.  Plus you have regular PRs peppered throughout the game.

[yuma]

EFHW, in the end, run the game you want.  We're just making suggestions, not even all of them are for "balance" per se.

absolutely agree

[Eevee]

I would strongly suggest keeping it at 13 or below. Well maybe strongly is too strong of a word... But for me 13 is at the max of amount of players that I will personally play. Any more is just too much for town to get moving and coordinated together, it basically turns days 1-3 into one big day1.

Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed every big game I have been in, but they can be real headaches in the beginning.

+1

[EFHW]

This feedback is really useful.  In the end I'll mix everything up and come out with something that feels right.  I am concerned about balance, though.  Are there some rules of thumb I could follow re: pro-town vs. anti-town roles?

[Archetype]

EFHW, in the end, run the game you want.  We're just making suggestions, not even all of them are for "balance" per se.

absolutely agree

Same here. You've just got so much design space in here that I'd hate to see it go to waste.

[Archetype]

This feedback is really useful.  In the end I'll mix everything up and come out with something that feels right.  I am concerned about balance, though.  Are there some rules of thumb I could follow re: pro-town vs. anti-town roles?

Normal Roles broken down

Pro Town:
Doctor
Cop
Tracker
Watcher
Jailkeeper
Commuter

Could be considered Anti Town:
Vigilante
Roleblocker
Hated

[ashersky]

This feedback is really useful.  In the end I'll mix everything up and come out with something that feels right.  I am concerned about balance, though.  Are there some rules of thumb I could follow re: pro-town vs. anti-town roles?

What I like to do when planning a game (usually RMM), I write out the action each player is able to do.  I split them into the teams, and I think about how they interact.  I'll do a town-only analysis and a scum-only analysis and think "in a vacuum, is this over- or under-powered?"  Then I'll compare the two.

Does town have way too much investigatory power?  Does scum hide too easily?  Are there going to be too many kills?  How many mislynches can town afford?  Those sorts of questions.

I think we always worry about overpowering teams.  You can decide for yourself if you want a game driven by night powers and roles or by voting and scumhunting.

Did you read along for LotR?  That game had people that felt all three things: it was balanced, or town was too strong, or scum was too strong.  Had a grey character too, although he was scum the whole time.

[EFHW]

If I do the houses thing, which is likely, then I guess this qualifies as role-madness since there won't be any Vanilla townies.

[Jimmmmm]

ash, you are so wrong that claiming is good for a Survivor. Once the game gets down to any of 6/3/1, 5/3/1, 5/2/1, 4/2/1, 4/1/1 or 3/1/1, a half-competent Town will lynch the Survivor every day of the week. Trying to lynch Mafia here is putting Town at lylo today, while just lynching the Survivor today means lylo will be tomorrow with better odds. The only hope a claimed Survivor has is for Town to win convincingly.

[ashersky]

ash, you are so wrong that claiming is good for a Survivor. Once the game gets down to any of 6/3/1, 5/3/1, 5/2/1, 4/2/1, 4/1/1 or 3/1/1, a half-competent Town will lynch the Survivor every day of the week. Trying to lynch Mafia here is putting Town at lylo today, while just lynching the Survivor today means lylo will be tomorrow with better odds. The only hope a claimed Survivor has is for Town to win convincingly.

I disagree.  If you lynch the survivor, it's like no lynching.  6/3/1 becomes 5/3.  How is that good?  Instead, you "recruit" the survivor to your side at that point, and it's 6/3/1 to 6/3.  If you are at 3/1/1, why would you NOT lynch mafia?  Makes no sense to me.  Everything in between probably has edge cases, but it seems like keeping the survivor on your side, or at least not against you, is WAY better than wasting your only power to kill something that doesn't even matter to the game until lylo.

[Jimmmmm]

You can't "recruit" the Survivor. Imagine it's 4/3/1.

Mafia: I'm Mafia. Survivor, you will help us no-lynch, because if you don't, we WILL kill you tonight, and you lose. If you do, you're guaranteed to win with us.

Now the Survivor could try to call his bluff and risk it, but why? He has absolutely no reason to put his neck out for Town here and throw away a 100% win. So 4/3/1 is a loss for Town.

So 6/3/1 is lylo if Town tries to lynch Mafia, and has a 3/9 chance of doing so. If instead, they lynch the Survivor, then the next day they'll be at lylo, but with a 3/8 chance of lynching Mafia. Better odds, and one less Townie to mislynch. Sounds like optimal Town play to me.

[ashersky]

You can't "recruit" the Survivor. Imagine it's 4/3/1.

Mafia: I'm Mafia. Survivor, you will help us no-lynch, because if you don't, we WILL kill you tonight, and you lose. If you do, you're guaranteed to win with us.

Now the Survivor could try to call his bluff and risk it, but why? He has absolutely no reason to put his neck out for Town here and throw away a 100% win. So 4/3/1 is a loss for Town.

So 6/3/1 is lylo if Town tries to lynch Mafia, and has a 3/9 chance of doing so. If instead, they lynch the Survivor, then the next day they'll be at lylo, but with a 3/8 chance of lynching Mafia. Better odds, and one less Townie to mislynch. Sounds like optimal Town play to me.

Optimal town play is killing mafia.  There are very few edge cases where you would prefer to kill someone other than mafia.  And this isn't an SK we're talking about, who keeps killing.  It's basically a Tree Stump.