I hate the random voting too. But at least it gets the voting started without having people fear being seen as "too bloodthirsty" and then they themselves getting lynched. I think the first couple days of voting really favor the WW, but I don't see a way around that... we're pretty much voting blind.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
[WW] Bloodlust GAME OVER - WEREWOLVES WIN
- Thread starter ravenvii
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Granted my no-vote probably doesn't help much, but I agree. Also people need to keep in mind that while "random is random" it doesn't take a genius to figure out that anybody that cares can just click random until they get the number they want.
As for the zombie/ghost type idea here are some thoughts on what it could entail. I'll just call them ghosts below.
- Only pure villagers can become ghosts.
- This can only happen the first night.
- Nobody will know if the ghost is coming back until they come back.
- They would come back on day 3 or 4.
- They would not count as a voter for lynching but could have some power. Maybe they could duplicate any alive villager special function. For instance they would send a list of things to ravenvii in their order of preference.
- Seer - Scan player x
- Hunter - Protect player x
- Undertaker - Scan dead player x
- Sorcerer - Resurrect dead player x (only once)
I dunno... something like that... works better as a ghost than a zombie. It also gives WW's more incentive to smash the special villagers first.
interesting stuff, but it could possibly make a too powerful force of goodness:s/ he can't be killed again, everyone knows s/he's with the good guys and so whatever s/he says is pure gold. there is no uncertainty and no risk in saying anything.
the best for the game would be if s/he is an unknown after the comeback.
I do really like your idea of repicate powers, so you could make it a replicant ghost/zombie, in the sense that it replicates (randomly, assigned by ravenvii) any of the living villagers, including the bad guys and then s/he plays as such, as if nothing happened.
That's why I think it would be best that the seer get sent the seer request answers that the ghost makes. Then the ghost doesn't actually have the information and might even be rescanning what the seer already knew.
The hunter protection roles don't matter since the ghost won't know if they were actually protected or just not attacked.
And so on... the ghost would help, but be kept in the dark.
Also the specials wouldn't want to out themselves since the ww's would be more likely to kill them to remove the duplicate power.
Another option would be to give the Sorcerer/Priest two (different) uses of their resurrect ability:
1) this resurrect would have to be used within the first 3 days and could be used to resurrect any Villager who has died within the first 3 days/2 nights. This would give one of the unlucky few who have died "randomly" another chance in the game. If this ability is unused, or the Priest/Sorcerer dies before it can be used, tough luck. This would also serve to show that the Priest/Sorcerer is in fact still among the Villagers.
2) original resurrect, works as is.
Another option would be to create two Priest/Sorcerer roles, with one having the time-limited resurrect and the other having the original resurrect ability.
EDIT:
OR... we could introduce Zombies formally to the game! The first Villager lynched could come back as a Zombie, and each person that is lynched (WW/Vampire victims not eligible since they were either eaten or drained of blood) would become part of the Zombie Horde. The Zombie Horde would be unable to communicate normally since they are unable to speak, and could only communicate with each other through PMs... a collective hive mind so to speak. Each round after a voting majority has been reached (3 Zombies), they would vote on a player to "bite". The victim of this Zombie bite would then have 3 rounds to live, before they succumb to death and re-animate as a Zombie.
Muahahahaha.
1) this resurrect would have to be used within the first 3 days and could be used to resurrect any Villager who has died within the first 3 days/2 nights. This would give one of the unlucky few who have died "randomly" another chance in the game. If this ability is unused, or the Priest/Sorcerer dies before it can be used, tough luck. This would also serve to show that the Priest/Sorcerer is in fact still among the Villagers.
2) original resurrect, works as is.
Another option would be to create two Priest/Sorcerer roles, with one having the time-limited resurrect and the other having the original resurrect ability.
EDIT:
OR... we could introduce Zombies formally to the game! The first Villager lynched could come back as a Zombie, and each person that is lynched (WW/Vampire victims not eligible since they were either eaten or drained of blood) would become part of the Zombie Horde. The Zombie Horde would be unable to communicate normally since they are unable to speak, and could only communicate with each other through PMs... a collective hive mind so to speak. Each round after a voting majority has been reached (3 Zombies), they would vote on a player to "bite". The victim of this Zombie bite would then have 3 rounds to live, before they succumb to death and re-animate as a Zombie.
Muahahahaha.
ok, i see now, i had misread your post. this could be quite fun. still a pretty powerful character, as s/he would influence/manouvre the lynching (through posting) with authority (s/he's def good) and impunity.
edit: stonyc's idea works too. i'd keep them in the same sorcerer character with two powers: full resurrection (to be used at any time, brings back as a fully functioning zombie); and evocation, (brings back as a ghost, but can be used only in the first two nights)
All I think it really does is give the villagers a little help near the end when they might be losing anyway and allow a player who didn't get to participate much something to do. I'm not sure if 3 or 4 or even 5 days out would be best. I don't think it gives them extra speaking power as they know *nothing* more than a normal villager would. You know they're not evil but that doesn't make them right.
Edit: ohhh it also places some risk because if the seer is turned to WW like last game, the WW's actually benefit from the ghost.
In regards to SP's post, I don't think the role should be powerful enough so as to give incentive for the villagers to hang a villager. I think it should be intended to be more of a consolation to the player than the whole group. After all, it's the villagers' fault they killed one of their own, however it's not the first villager's fault he was killed.
In part, that's why it only works if you kill a normal plain ol' villager. People also will not know if the ghost is coming until the set amount of days are up. The reason for this was I feared if people knew, they might be hesitant to lynch so as to have a higher chance of keeping specials around.
If they don't know then they can't make that choice since not lynching and then not having a ghost would be quite bad. No lynch votes for 3-4 days would be a big advantage to the wolves.
We could also give the ghost a purely hidden role. They would participate but not be able to chat in the thread. Then the only one that would really know the ghost was back would be the seer since they'd get double information back... although I don't think that necessary. Like I said, if the seer gets werewolfed then the ghost becomes and ally of the wolves. Then the wolves could start getting twice as many seer calls a night. This gives the ghost player something to strategize about since he won't know if the seer queries are going to a werewolf-seer or a normal seer.
I don't know that the role is perfect by any means (heck we can't keep any of the rules the same game to game as it is) but thought it might be a good base.
I almost feel that in future games we should not be allowed to use random.org for our votes. If you do use random.org at least come up with some half back reason why you are voting for someone.
Does anybody know the average amount of days the past games have taken? That would be a good gauge for when the ghost would come. Really it would only give them 1-3 extra bits of help providing the ghost didn't accidentally rescan somebody already scanned or protect somebody who was already being protected/not attacked. Then it lowers the amount of help the give even more.
i don't think random.org or any other 'criteria' are the problem. it is a random vote anyway and there is very little logic that can be applied to voting for or against someone on the first day, or even the second.
people will be circumspect, and try to not attract the votes to themselves, but whatever reason they give (or don't give) is equally 'suspect' to begin with.
except mine, of course.
i don't think random.org or any other 'criteria' are the problem. it is a random vote anyway and there is very little logic that can be applied to voting for or against someone on the first day, or even the second.
people will be circumspect, and try to not attract the votes to themselves, but whatever reason they give (or don't give) is equally 'suspect' to begin with.
except mine, of course.
I think it's okay to use a random number generator so long as you don't state you got it that way. Otherwise the people that don't use it may feel like they're going to be scrutinized for having an agenda. If you want to use a random pick that's fine, but make up a reason outside of that.
it doesn't matter. whatever they say it is in effect a random guess.
for most of people is 1/19, for the wolves is 1/18. the worst position is that of the vamps/goths, which might be targeting on of their rare bethren.
anyways just to summarize again, so people doesn't have to scroll back for the info:
votes: (majority is 11):
Chrmjenkins: 5 (Mexbearpig, iBookG4user, philbeeney, abijnk, iBlue)
SilentPanda: 4 (renewed, Rodimus Prime, King Mook Mook, NathanMuir)
iBookG4user: 4 (willbro, chrmjenkins, stonyc, jav6454)
-aggie-: 2 (Don't Panic, SilentPanda)
Stonyc: 1 (appleguy123)
NathanMuir: 1 (ucfgrad93)
Don’t Panic: 1 (-aggie-)
Appleguy123: 1 (Melrose)
Left to vote:
mscriv
edit1: updatet jav6454 vote (post 294)
edit2: updated SilentPanda vote (post 316)
edit3: updated iBluevote (post 320)
edit4: updated jav6454 vote again (post 325)
Yes I know that. But it removes the herd mentality of everybody doing a random guess. Saying "I used random.org and got a 36 and that's bob" makes others feel like they need to use random.org. Then enough people use it and we're at were we are now. A stalemate. Saying "I choose bob because his name is a palindrome" gets bob lynched because everybody else realizes bob is indeed a palindrome. Okay not really... but it decreases the amount of people that will use random.org because nobody feels compelled to use it. Your much more likely to get a 1st day lynching (I keep typing lunch instead of lynch because I'm totally a werewolf and y and u are next to each other... dang these large paw fingers!) with people giving stupid reasons than you are with everybody using random.org.
On day 1 there are only 2 people that honestly have incentive to "lie" about their random number and that's the werewolves. Everybody else has no incentive and therefore just using random.org will provide a no lynch almost every single day 1. By removing the visibility of random.org you'll get more coherency in the votes I believe.
Time to go make lunch!
(ps I'm actually just a plain ol villager again)
Somebody wants somebody lynched today... *cough*
We could just leave them an stalemate too... of course my accusation makes me sound like I don't want anybody lynched today...
I did the number generator to get people voting (in other words, break the ice) because everyone is obsessed over being the first one to say a peep.
However, now that we have the ball rolling and people are voting, I'd like to say I'm changing the vote to chrmjenkins.
However, now that we have the ball rolling and people are voting, I'd like to say I'm changing the vote to chrmjenkins.
Yes I know that. But it removes the herd mentality of everybody doing a random guess. Saying "I used random.org and got a 36 and that's bob" makes others feel like they need to use random.org. Then enough people use it and we're at were we are now. A stalemate. Saying "I choose bob because his name is a palindrome" gets bob lynched because everybody else realizes bob is indeed a palindrome. Okay not really... but it decreases the amount of people that will use random.org because nobody feels compelled to use it. Your much more likely to get a 1st day lynching (I keep typing lunch instead of lynch because I'm totally a werewolf and y and u are next to each other... dang these large paw fingers!) with people giving stupid reasons than you are with everybody using random.org.
On day 1 there are only 2 people that honestly have incentive to "lie" about their random number and that's the werewolves. Everybody else has no incentive and therefore just using random.org will provide a no lynch almost every single day 1. By removing the visibility of random.org you'll get more coherency in the votes I believe.
Time to go make lunch!
(ps I'm actually just a plain ol villager again)
Somebody wants somebody lynched today... *cough*
We could just leave them an stalemate too... of course my accusation makes me sound like I don't want anybody lynched today...
very reasonable my pawed friend, except everyone has the same incentive to "lie", including the wolves.
they just exclude two numbers from the random results instead of one like everyone else.
i also have one question directly for you: why don't you switch your vote to one of the other two candidates? the no-lynching vote, in the eyes of many is a pro-baddies vote (especially vamps would benefit from it), and at most one of chrmjenkins and ibookG4user could be the 'other wolf, if you are one, so why not voting for one of them?
Personally and primarily because I don't suspect anybody at all yet. Publicly because since I'm one of the top 3, it makes me look just as guilty to switch now from a no-vote to one of the other contenders. I have no reason to suspect them other than swaying votes towards them. Sure since I'm a villager then the odds are *slightly better* that they're a baddie but the odds are also slightly better that they're a super-goodie.
Basically... I don't think it would matter. Damned if you do, damned if you don't...
At this point I'm hoping it's a stalemate which I stated several times in the last thread that I thought was a better option for first day voting anyway (I know you and I have gone round and round on it so I won't get into that again). I didn't give much thoughts to vamps since they weren't in last game and I forgot they even existed.
something I have noticed from other games is when some one presents some type of logical argument against someone that person tends to be the one taken out. The random.org people start switching their vote to them.
The argument can be an unbelievable crappy one but it at least some type of reason other than random.org told me 2.
For example someone could still use random.org as their way or making a choose but say. I am voting for Don't Panic because he does not seem worried right now and I heard rumors that he is going to enjoy eating us or his lack of panic worries me. He much be a wolf.
It is a lame reason but at least it is a reason.
I am standing by my vote earlier right now. Not a very good reason for voting that way but at least it is a reason.
The argument can be an unbelievable crappy one but it at least some type of reason other than random.org told me 2.
For example someone could still use random.org as their way or making a choose but say. I am voting for Don't Panic because he does not seem worried right now and I heard rumors that he is going to enjoy eating us or his lack of panic worries me. He much be a wolf.
It is a lame reason but at least it is a reason.
I am standing by my vote earlier right now. Not a very good reason for voting that way but at least it is a reason.
I'd say anyone pushing for only three people to vote on could be a WW. No one is even half way there, except SP and he's still far off.