Okay, you can deal me in. Very intriguing idea. I hope I don’t blow it.
Yes, I’m in
@fiddlehead, glad to have you as part of the game.
Ok, so far, we have 7 confirmed players:
Maybe we will have eight if @Brianvy confirms, or if others still want to join.
I have updated the Rules to reflect the discussed change of adding a lunatic. I also added the restriction that the protector cannot protect the same person on consecutive nights.
The game starts at 2020-02-13T17:15:00Z
I will start a game thread and send out affiliations via private message around that point.
Will need to drop out sadly I’m not active on the forums unless its the school week and i have next week off, also i just fell ill today x.x sorry!
Is disappointed that @yebellz “liked this”
I’m glad that they got back to me to let me know. Also, sometimes, I just use the “like” feature to acknowledge that I saw something.
I have a couple of clarifying questions regarding the rules:
- Upon execution, will the executed player’s role be revealed?
- Does the seer get to know exact roles (Lunatic, Protector, Werewolf, Villager) or do they simply get a confirmation of innocent/guilty?
Yes, I will reveal both the affiliation (village/werewolf/lunatic) and role (seer/protector), if any.
The seer will only be informed of whether the player is a villager, werewolf, or lunatic.
This is the win condition for the werewolves:
should this really be “half of the remaining players”? Then, if only a single villager dies and no werewolf, the werewolves would win.
Half of players, not half of villagers.
There’s 2 werewolves, 1 lunatic and 4 villagers I think.
I think you have a point.
Ah, so, half of players including werewolves.
I got tripped up by the ambiguity of “remaining”, which could mean, the players that are still in the game, or the players that are not werewolves.
Yeah, the idea of this win condition is that when number of werewolves is greater or equal to number of non-werewolves there’s no point in continuing. During the day it would be impossible to execute a wolf because they with the rest of the wolves are going to always vote against.
The werewolves win if among the non-eliminated players, they are equal or greater in number than the non-werewolves AND the lunatic has not been eliminated.
With our specific rules and roles, the game would end at “equal to” and the “greater than” condition is unreachable. However, I left that in just to be clear in case, since with other variants and roles, it could be possible to have double eliminations that jump to greater than.
Question: what is the purpose of the rule that werewolves know who the lunatic is?
The werewolves have it hard enough with surviving. Them accidentally killing the lunatic kind of ruins it: the lunatic has to try to appear like a werewolf, so the villagers will try to kill him.
Note that the lunatic is not supposed to know who the werewolves are, so the lunatic can still assist with killing the werewolves during voting (not sure if that would be a good strategy, though ).
Yes, but, since the antique shop wolves (TM pending) know who they are, so their only function is to kill villagers one by one each night.
And maybe the seer or the protector could pretend to be lunatics, so they are somewhat protected from the grocery wolves (TM pending). The only deception that the villagers could be allowed to do, since e-shop wolves (TM pending) have all the available information.
In a IRL situation (or how close to it ) the werewolves wouldn’t be privy to that information, would they? They couldn’t read the mind of the lunatic, to know that their plan is to get killed; that would be the vampires .
(I’m fine with our game, just thinking about the rules as it unfolds).
If the werewolves do not know who the lunatic is, then the lunatic does not have to try anything: they just wait to be killed by either team.
Also, the villagers are not supposed to be able to pretend not to be villagers, they are there to be slaughtered by the werewolves.
oooh that’s cold.