Werewolf 2 Lurker Thread: Spoilers!

[MJW (ya that one)]

Nope, but no one argued strongly for it. We were all pretty meh about it. Besides, I don't think what you are suggesting is even possible. Can you point me to the post where fire&ice supposedly gave this away?

F&I suddenly angryly warning me not to edit posts right after the Luddite kill. If you are smart you know that a mod's angry does not go unused. I voted that day and there is only more thing he can do to me.

There is not much point talking about this. In the simple WW3 (all role PMs posted and no editing posts ever) the only way to come close to cheating is reading spoilers or PM's. Both are an auto-mod kill (and being banned from ww4). This will be forgotten by WW4.

[MJW (ya that one)]

Arent't there any other slightly less powerful roles that could be used instead?

I think the town needs power roles for fourm mafia. Something needs to drive action.

[Selrahc]

Also, let me talk about the co-narrator.
On the old forum I played on, games habitually had co-narrators, to fill in if the person running the game was busy, or to bounce ideas off if something comes up. I think it could have really helped Fire&Ice, as there were a few late days and some disciplinary decisions that I got the impression he could have used some discussion over.

I'll volunteer to co-narrate if Sareln thinks he could use a little help. Otherwise I'll be signing up.

[scooter]

One comment I'd like to make for WW3 is for the lurker thread for that game, I'd like there to be less spoilers - more akin to WW1, where the lurkers didn't really know for sure who was who, and mostly were guessing just like the villagers were. I know I'll probably be unpopular for bringing it up since the community has always been based on trust, but this is quite different from the PBEM games. In the PBEM games, even if you did have some player looking at spoilers (which honestly, I've never seen any evidence of that actually happening, but still), skill would still trump that kind of cheating in the end. In this kind of game though, all it would take is one player perusing through spoilers to thoroughly ruin the game for everyone. It also can add some doubt to players actually in the game - for instance if you felt someone was being unusually stubborn about something despite little evidence to support it, then there could be a (probably inaccurate) suspicion about that given player having unfair knowledge.

For what it's worth - I didn't feel like that ever actually happened in WW2 and I don't feel like any particular players did it at all, but after reading this thread, I realized that there was far, far more specific spoilers in this one than in WW1 - where it was mostly just a discussion thread. In that thread, Selrahc and dead players kept things mostly under wraps. So I guess that's my request for WW2, the the lurker thread be more of a discussion thread rather than a full-on spoiler thread, with the understanding that players are still definitely not allowed, and due to the discussion there will possibly be some mild spoilers. The reason for this being to remove any doubt of full-on spoiler knowledge for any player. I'd like it to never even cross my mind that someone has that kind of knowledge, even though I generally trust everyone here to not pull any shenanigans like that.

Is this reasonable?

[scooter]

Also, let me talk about the co-narrator.
On the old forum I played on, games habitually had co-narrators, to fill in if the person running the game was busy, or to bounce ideas off if something comes up. I think it could have really helped Fire&Ice, as there were a few late days and some disciplinary decisions that I got the impression he could have used some discussion over.

I'll volunteer to co-narrate if Sareln thinks he could use a little help. Otherwise I'll be signing up.

I think this is a good idea, but in the interest of not losing a potential player, perhaps someone like T-Hawk would be good for this? I say this because I get the impression he follows these games but isn't interested in playing (there are several who fit this description probably). I'd be totally fine with Selrahc as co-narrator, but I'm just nudging those who didn't want to play, as it'd be nice to not lose a player over a role that could be filled by someone who wants to stay on the sidelines for this one.

[Sareln]

Also, let me talk about the co-narrator.
On the old forum I played on, games habitually had co-narrators, to fill in if the person running the game was busy, or to bounce ideas off if something comes up. I think it could have really helped Fire&Ice, as there were a few late days and some disciplinary decisions that I got the impression he could have used some discussion over.

I'll volunteer to co-narrate if Sareln thinks he could use a little help. Otherwise I'll be signing up.

I think I'll be alright Selrahc, but thanks for the generous offer. I guess time will tell if this is just going to be .

With only FfHPBEM V & WW3 though, I think I'll be able to keep a handle on it. I need to figure out when a good time is that I'll always be able to hit though... I'll need to look at my class schedule for next quarter before placing that.

[zakalwe]

I agree with Selrahc about having the mayor select his successor, I agree with Scooter about the spoiler thread being as spoiler-free as possible, and I agree with Novice that I'd like to see some more discussion on less powerful power roles.

The argument for having a baner is that he can protect villagers who have established trust; unfortunately there is a feedback effect in that he can also help establish trust by protecting someone who is targeted by wolves.

If I understand correctly, if we drop the baner then we don't really need a fool either, since nobody can protect the seer when he claims. That said, if we do end up with a lot of signups then it might be a bit boring if we have just a few power roles. Either way it's pretty hard to predict how the game will play out.

How about roleplay btw?

[Sareln]

I agree with Selrahc about having the mayor select his successor, I agree with Scooter about the spoiler thread being as spoiler-free as possible, and I agree with Novice that I'd like to see some more discussion on less powerful power roles.

The argument for having a baner is that he can protect villagers who have established trust; unfortunately there is a feedback effect in that he can also help establish trust by protecting someone who is targeted by wolves.

If I understand correctly, if we drop the baner then we don't really need a fool either, since nobody can protect the seer when he claims. That said, if we do end up with a lot of signups then it might be a bit boring if we have just a few power roles. Either way it's pretty hard to predict how the game will play out.

How about roleplay btw?

Each player gets a roleplay-role in the village to go with their game-role. For example: Zakwale is the town tailor, and is secretly a wolf. Krill is the blacksmith, but also the Mason. Bob is the town drunk, but also the seer. And so on. Gives players something to latch onto if they want, and gives me a handle by which to write the updates For safety's sake (avoiding unconcious linkage) I'll be randomly assigning the role-play roles before doing the game-role assignments.

[zakalwe]

For safety's sake (avoiding unconcious linkage) I'll be randomly assigning the role-play roles before doing the game-role assignments.

Hmmm yeah. Otherwise I'd be prone to suspect the village butler.

Seriously though, isn't it fine for people to request specific role-play roles too, as long as you randomly generate the game-role assignments?

[Sareln]

Hmmm yeah. Otherwise I'd be prone to suspect the village butler.

Seriously though, isn't it fine for people to request specific role-play roles too, as long as you randomly generate the game-role assignments?

Yes, could also do it that way too. State a role you want when you sign up in the thread or I give you one at random to fill out the village. I'm not picky.