Long Game Tweak:
 

Once upon a Pogglesworth, there was a night 0 kill. The night 0 kill gradually fell into disuse, because inevitably, the same 1 or 2 people would always die that night and never get an opportunity to play the game.

However, the night 0 kill meant that day 1 discussion could be at least a bit meaningful, as the village tried to figure out what the dead person meant about the thinking processes of the wolves.

I am thinking of running a game soon that turns the night 0 kill into a levelling exercise: specifically, give the wolves a night 0 kill, and give the villagers a 1 time night 0 angel protect, to be voted on by PM.

Yes? No? Good/Bad? Interesting?

Re: Long Game Tweak:
 

trying it could be cool

what about the event of a tie for angel vote? Would angel discussion be allowed in the signup thread? In the game thread prior to d1?

A few issues, but it sounds like it'd be fun. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Long Game Tweak:
 

Interesting. It's not a great idea, but it's not a bad idea. It's not a powerful mechanic, and shouldn't affect gameplay too much, but it's interesting.

Re: Long Game Tweak:
 

One protect might not be enough IMO. Slightly adjust the game's overall balance and allow 5 (randomly determined) villagers to protect one person each on n0.

That would make your pregame a nice level-fest.

Re: Long Game Tweak:
 

[ QUOTE ]
One protect might not be enough IMO. Slightly adjust the game's overall balance and allow 5 (randomly determined) villagers to protect one person each on n0.

That would make your pregame a nice level-fest.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is more interesting.

Re: Long Game Tweak:
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One protect might not be enough IMO. Slightly adjust the game's overall balance and allow 5 (randomly determined) villagers to protect one person each on n0.

That would make your pregame a nice level-fest.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is more interesting.

[/ QUOTE ]

So five people protect themselves? Or each other?

Re: Long Game Tweak:
 

They shouldn't know who protects, and protect themselves is bad..., and I just realized OH's idea is bad.

Because villagers can roleclaim based on the protection thing.

But, obviously, having the 2nd and 3rd most people voted for also be protected (using VR's idea) = hmm... good.

Re: Long Game Tweak:
 

[ QUOTE ]
Because villagers can roleclaim based on the protection thing.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't see why this is an issue. 5 people protect one player each. They don't know the role of the player they're protecting. They don't know who the other 4 players are. No one but VR would know who the 5 villagers were or who had immunity.

20 people might come out on d1 and say "I protected xxx." Extra levelling, baby!

Re: Long Game Tweak:
 

It'd be interesting to try this, giving each player (not each villager) two votes. Top three vote getters immune from n0. This gives wolves cover in case d1 there is discussion of n0 immunity.

Re: Long Game Tweak:
 

It's not that big of an issue, but like, it puts wolves in a bit of a jam early. Obviously, a wolf needs to claim.

No villager is going to claim they protected someone and keep that claim up until the end of the day. By the end of d1, you will know which villagers had a protection.

This leads to 5 cleared villagers. Bad. Obviously, wolves will roleclaim too, but it puts wolves in a bit of a jam. That part of the mechanic will overshadow it's original purpose, and I suppose that's bad.

Of course, you never know.