Dueling Wizards Werewolf Suggestion Thread

[Macalaure]

Alright, alright...

I'm not sure I really understand how this works exactly. I hope someone can help me.


The rules for the werewolves to pick a kill appear a bit too complicated for my little brain...
1. Each werewolf sends a candidate to the evil sub-mod.
2. If a majority is already achieved, then that is the night's kill, if not, then the ESM sends each werewolf the list of candidates back.
3. The werewolves may change their pick, but only from one of the candidates.
4. If still no majority is achieved, then the Evil Wizard is handed the list of candidates and may choose.
5. If the werewolves happen to like to kill one of their own, or their wizard, then the EW may overrule their choice by a free choice of his own.

Did I understand that correctly? And did that really work in the past game, even with all the different time zones (of sub mod, wizard, and many wolves)?


From the outside, this game appears to be somewhat unbalanced in favour of the Evil Team. The EW can create a new werewolf every night (unless a gifted is picked), but can only lose more than one, and therefore have his team decrease in number, if both a wolf is lynched and the GW saves one from lycanthropy. At the same time, it takes the Good Wizard three nights to have his whole set of gifteds arranged, and he can never have more than that.

[Roa_Aoife]

You're sort of right. The EW, as well as the GW, can override the decisions of the wolves or gifted at any time. This is actually necessary, because you don't wanter a hunter hunting a seer, etc, or wolves killing another wolf. And sometimes the Wizards just know more.

The wolves can provide any ammount of reasoning they like to the EW, or none at all, with only a name. Depends on the wolf. Likewise the seer can reason who to dream, and the hunter whom to hunt, and the protector whom to protect. It's all ultimately the Wizard's decision how much autonomy they give their team. This allows for varying strategies and creative plays.

As for the unbalance- keep in mind that if the EW picks someone who is gifted to turn, the gifted merely becomes innocent, and the EW gains almost nothing, not even information. If the GW tries to turn a wolf, the wolf becomes innocent and thus switches teams, and if the wolf knows anything, s/he can tell the entire village. There's also the logical hunter- only makes a kill if they target a wolf.

I do agree that the good team should start with three gifted, rather than one, though.

Also, multiple kills for four (perhaps five?) or more wolves just helps keep the game from dragging on too long.

[Nogrod]

Just to refresh the memory and to introduce people who did not play the first DW-game here are the complete rules from the actual game-thread reprinted...

Originally Posted by lmp

Dueling Wizards Werewolf Rules

There are two wizards, and no other gifted at the beginning of the game, which must have a minimum of 20 players, and an arbitrary maximum (first time) of 30. The two wizard roles are assigned from a list of volunteers who are willing to play the roles.

The two wizards don't know who each other are. One is evil, one is good. Neither wizard can be killed, except by each other.

The game begins with a Night phase.

Evil Wizard: each Night the evil wizard picks a villager to curse as a werewolf. The new werewolf is immediately informed and the mod requests a kill choice, which the werewolf provides by the end of the 24 hours. On the first Night of the game, the Evil Wizard chooses three werewolves; thereafter s/he chooses one per Night.

The werewolves do not know each other's identity because while they are werewolves at Night, they cannot detect the identities underlying the curses. When there are multiple werewolves, and they make differing kill choices, the person with the most werewolf "votes" is killed.{**} If there is a tie, the sub-mod for the evil wizard PMs back to each werewolf about the others' choices, and serves as a go-between until the werewolves have come to a majority choice.

{**First, the werewolves place their individual nominees before the Evil team sub-mod. The sub-mod informs the EW & werewolves of all nominees. The werewolves then pick from amongst the nominees until there is a consensus for the Night as to whom to kill. If there is not unanimity, the kill will be based on majority votes. If no majority has been established by the end of the Night, the EW will choose from among the nominees. The EW may overrule all of the nominees (but should be cautious about doing so), and informs the Evil team sub-mod when s/he does so; the sob-mod then informs the werewolves and gives a summary of the EW's reason(s) for the overrule, if the EW wants to give one.}

If the werewolves happen to pick the EW or a werewolf, ALL will be told to pick another kill.

Note: Werewolves do not PM each other and therefore cannot debate with each other; thus, they are not going to find out each others' identities. If in some odd circumstance, a werewolf gets the most votes for the werewolf kill, the evil wizard has the right to overrule the choice, and the werewolves are told to make a different pick. If in some even odder circumstance, the werewolves choose the evil wizard as their kill, the evil wizard of course has the right to overrule their choice. In a 20 or more player game, if there are 4 to 6 werewolves, there are 2 kills per Night; if there are 7 or more werewolves, there are 3 kills per Night.

If the evil wizard chooses a gifted villager to curse, the gifted villager loses the gift but does not turn into a werewolf ... this time. The good wizard is informed of the loss of the gifting.

If the evil wizard picks the good wizard at Night, he is informed that he has discovered the good wizard, and has the option from then on to call out the good wizard to battle during any Day.

The evil wizard may choose to inform one or more werewolves who one or more other werewolves are; but this is a risky option and should be used with great care, considering the possible consequences.

The evil wizard is allowed to lie to his were-creatures.

Good Wizard: each Night the good wizard picks a villager to scry.

1. If the good wizard scries the evil wizard, the good wizard is informed of that, and can call out the evil wizard to battle during any Day, which results in the death of both wizards.

2. If the good wizard scries a werewolf, the werewolf is turned back into an innocent by the good wizard's power.

3. If the good wizard finds an innocent, the good wizard has the option of turning that innocent into a gifted, the choices being seer, ranger, and hunter. If a gifted is de-gifted by the evil wizard's curse, the good wizard may assign that gift to another. A newly assigned gifted may immediately function in the gift the same Night. If a gifted is killed, the gift may be assigned to another innocent. The new assignment is made via the nightly scry.

NOTE: There may only be one seer at a time, one ranger at a time, and one hunter at a time.

The good wizard may choose to inform one or more gifteds who one or more of the gifteds are.

The good wizard and gifteds may PM during the Day. The good wizard may withhold from, or divulge information to, the gifteds as the good wizard sees fit. All PMs between gifteds and good wizard must pass through the good team sub-moderator. The gifteds do not know who each other is unless the good wizard tells them.

The evil wizard and werewolves win when the werewolves equal or exceed the number of innocents. The villagers and good wizard win when there is no evil wizard left, and no werewolves left.

There are no shirriffs, no werebears, and no cobblers.

If the good wizard and the evil wizard choose the same previously innocent villager on the same Night, the two wizards discover each other's identity by means of the contest. Since the evil wizard still wants a werewolf, the good wizard must choose whether to let the villager die as a casualty of the wrenching experience of the contest, or let the villager survive and become a werewolf.

Just to be perfectly clear: a wizard battle always results in the death of both wizards, and may only happen during the Day. Once both wizards are dead, the werewolf game reverts to classic rules: no PMing between gifteds during the Day.

There is a vote for lynching every Day. If there is a tie vote, then the first player to have received that many votes, is lynched. If a wizard is voted to be lynched, he will be lynched but cannot die that way, and is thus forced to declare himself, and the opposing wizard can call him/her out for a wizard battle the following Day. A wizard cannot be killed by lynching; instead, nobody dies that Day.

If the evil wizard dies, the werewolves are informed of each other's identity, and revert from there on to traditional werewolf group dynamics.

Each Day and Night will be 24 hours; if such a time frame proves somehow unworkable, it may be changed (with notice of course!) during the game.

Order of Night Activities:
1. Evil wizard picks whom to curse.
2. Good wizard pickes whom to scry.
3. Affected players are informed of results of #1 & #2 (if both wizards pick same villager, this phase gets longer but is completed before the next phase begins).
4. Ranger picks whom to save.
5. Seer picks whom to dream.
6. Hunter picks whom to hunt.
7. Werewolves pick whom to kill.
Note: Steps 4 - 7 can happen simultaneously, but will be recorded by the moderator in the order as listed so as to keep the game straight.

Miscellaneous Rulings:
*There are no multiple lynchings.
*A killed or lynched persons previous roles will not be revealed until the game is over.
*Regarding player etiquette: Accusations and suspicions are what the game of werewolf is all about, and that's why we play. This sometimes includes insults which must be considered as 'all in fun' (using appropriate 'smilies' helps to show that it's all in fun); however, there are limits that must not be crossed: if your gameplaying insults are beyond the pale (you're going to have to accept the moderator's judgment on this), you will be considered to have gone overboard. Therefore, anyone going overboard will get a PM from the moderator with a warning to use better etiquette. Any player that "goes overboard" a second time, will be summarily removed from the game with no death narrative. As one of the Wise once said: "It's only a game - don't be offended, but it's only a game - don't be offensive."
*The seer may dream of the same person more than once. The Ranger may NOT defend the same person two Nights in a row; but may defend the same person every OTHER Night.
*The Hunter may kill (and be killed) either by being killed by a 'picked' werewolf, or when lynched.
*No retractable votes.
*When a player dies, the identity and last role of the player will be named, but previous roles will not.
*References to past werewolf games may be made as follows: "My werewolf lorebook(s) say(s) ....."

Originally Posted by lmp

The Game begins at 6 p.m. today with Night One.

At that time the following things may happen simultaneously:

1. The evil wizard may officialy pick the first three werewolves.
2. The good wizard may scry one player, resulting in the discovered evil wizard, a discovered and uncursed werwolf, or gift an innocent player.

Immediately following that, the next things may happen simultaneously:

3. The three werewolves may nominate one victim to kill, by sending a PM to Boromir88, the evil team sub-mod.
4. If the good wizard has bestowed a gift, the gifted player may, if a seer, pick a player to dream; if a ranger, pick a player to guard; if a hunter, pick a player to hunt.

The victim nomination process will continue until (1) a consensus is reached regarding the werwolf kill, or (2) a majority is reached, or (3) the evil wizard overrules the werewolf choice, which ever happens first.

There will be another narrative post roughly around 6 pm EDT today. Following that will be the first Day post, which will go up at roughly 6pm Friday. Once that post is up, posting may commence.

CRITICAL EDIT: The first Night's kill is Elempi, widowed father of Diamond of the Battledores. Therefore, the werewolves do NOT need to nominate a kill for Night one. Sorry for the confusion.

Originally Posted by lmp

A Note on Rules

The first loophole has been discovered. The good wizard chose to scry one of the players that the evil wizard had cursed. On any other Night, I would have allowed the rules to function as I have written them. This Night, however, is a special Night, and I decided that the play of the game would be compromised if the good wizard found out the identity of the evil wizard before there was even a Day One. So I made a decision that the evil wizard's choices would be made early on this Night, and the good wizard's scrying performed late. If this game is ever played a second time, I would strongly recommend that: The Good Wizard does not scry on Night One. The plot does function more cleanly that way, as Loki has suggested. But the gameplay was the deciding factor. There you have it. We shall see how many more of these snap decisions will be needed during this game. Not too many, I hope. Bear with me, it's going to be an interesting ride!

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Wow, I must say it looks really very interesting (now that I finally read the rules as whole). Only let me raise some questions. First, what bothers me, is what Macalaure already said, yet it did not seem to be answered:

Originally Posted by Macalaure

And did that really work in the past game, even with all the different time zones (of sub mod, wizard, and many wolves)?

Because I imagine it the way that every Night the sub-mod simply cannot sleep but stay awake 24 hours, and the wolves anyway need to send their kills a long time before the DL so that there can be eventually some re-sending if they pick a wolf etc. And still the Wizard needs to be informed and everything... so did it really work, or was it that every night only half of the wolves voted or something?

Originally Posted by Roa_Aoife

I do agree that the good team should start with three gifted, rather than one, though.

Well, that's another thing that bothers me after I read elempi's last note that Nogrod posted. After thinking about it, I realise it can be really bad for the GW to scry on Night One, on the other hand, if he cannot pick a Gifted, he already has significant deficite. I disagree with what Roa said here, however, because you have to count with the possibility that both the Wizards pick the same people, or worse, the GW picks two wolves and the EW: this is almost total victory for the good team even before the game itself started.
Concerning the possibility of GW picking the EW on Night 1, let's not forget that the EW can likewise pick the GW on Night One and we have the same problem. No, I think the possibility that one Wizard reveals another on Night One is not such a problem: after all, they can now decide whether to try to tacticise and wait or whether to bet on the village (resp. wolves) and choose to duel the other Wizard right on Day 1. But I think, after all, that the GW should be allowed to pick his one Gifted on Night 1. In the worst case, he saves a wolf and so the village will start with two wolves on Day 1. But I don't see this as a big problem and anyway, how often this happens?

[Nogrod]

I have lots of work to do so I decided to avoid them by reading this thread through. And you bet I have some ideas and suggestions now...

It's clear we need a big village in this kind of game. I'd say at least 20, hopefully a bit more (there were 30 in the original version but I'm afraid we'll not be able to get that many this time - but who knows?).

That said it looks pretty straightforward to me that in the beginning of the game both the EW and the GW send the mod (and the sub-mods?) a list of 6 or something (depending on the number of gifteds we will give the GW in the beginning: I personally would be ready to give the GW more than one but more of that later) whom they wish to make wolves / gifteds. After that the mod checks the overlaps, makes a lottery if needed and deals the picks. After that he sends the names of the wolves to the EW and notifies the wolves about their status. To the GW the mod would send the names of those selected so that the GW could assign them their roles herself. After the allocation the GW then notifies the sub-mod (or the mod) of her choices and those would then be passed on to the players via the sub-mod (or the mod).

If the Wizard wishes to give any instructions to her minions she would be free to do it before Day1 starts via the sub-mod (who'd actually need to rephrase them).

On the other Nights than the initial Night1 we should have something like a clear system. Not too complicated but still one that would make playing a role other than a Wizard interesting enough. The Wizards should be the ones to make the final decisions though. That's the idea in "Dueling Wizards Werewolf" in the first place. But I'd like to see the people with roles being able to voice their minds as well and be able to make a difference.

So how about something like the wolves and gifteds being able to make PMs where they argue their choice to their respective sub-mods in say 10-14 hours (or something) after the Day has ended and the sub-mod being required to pass that on to the Wizard immediately? Other discussion than that of the choices should be allowed to all people with a role at any time during the Night. It's only this choosing stuff where we'd need to have some deadlines during the Night.

The wizard should also be able to pass information to her minions as much as she wishes. That's something the Wizard and the sub-mod should then work out together (as to when the sub-mod can be online) as the authentic PMs should not be quoted but the sub-mod should alway paraphrase it so that the minions would not quess the identity of their Wizard if she doesn't want them to know it. And in any case if I'm the one modding this one I'd be ready to help in this PM traffic as well if fex. a sub-mod lives in a timezone which limits the possibilities of channeling the posts in time. This all can be fixed when the game starts and we know the particular people involved.

After the wolves and gifteds have given their points (within the 10-14 hour framework or whatever it will be) the wizard could then add her own suggestions and preferences. That would then be passed back to the "chosen" and they could have again a time limit to make further suggestions (like 4 hours before the deadline or something - all these exact hours should be decided when we have the actual people in). Then on the basis of that discussion the Wizard would announce the choices to the sub-mods & the mod - preferably one hour before the deadline so that everything could be counted and a narration could come in time.

That's what I'd call the minimum requirements. Naturally people would be able to PM more and make comments when and as many times they wish. There should just be some clear timelines when certain decisions are made. And it's up to the Wizard whether she wishes to reveal herself to someone in her team which would then allow them to PM without going via the sub-mod.

All this would require the mod and the sub-mods to be able to be online at certain times - the more often the better - but in the end they are all there voluntarily...

The important thing in the "conversation" between the minions and the Wizard is that the minions' PMs can be just passed forwards as they are but the Wizard's PM's should be rephrased by the sub-mods (or the mod if needs be).

I'll take a break now but will come back soon as I still have a few suggestions to make...

[Nogrod]

A few more thoughts on the rules...

I kind of liked lmp's idea that in a case of a tie no one gets killed but at the same time I can see the arguments against that ruling.

So how about we tried something along the lines of "Wizard's battle" over those people? One idea would be that both Wizards could nominate one they would like to keep around and one they would like to get rid of and submitting their choices to the mod. If they agreed the person dies if they don't the person lives. The downside in this would be that only innocents would be killed but it might also save people. Another chance is that the end-result would not be death but "conversion" (so from gifted or a wolf to ordinary or from ordinary to either one according to the result between the Wizards). This one needs to be thought of.

The GW should probably be restricted to one seer at the time but otherwise I might be tempted to allow more than the three gifteds... the EW may appoint an unlimited number of wolves anyhow. But this also depends on the exact capabilities of the gifteds.

I'm not wishing to turn the hunter into a 100% killing-pawn of the GW who could "assasinate" a wolf paying it with her life. Instead I would be persuaded to make it in the way that the hunter in the end - like other gifteds - are responsible of their actions themselves but that the GW could give them instructions on the basis of anything they have discussed or what she seems fit. It would then be the GW's task to make her minions to see why her plans are better than an individual gifted's feeling (and she'd need to decide how much to reveal her knowledge to gain her ends) although in a case of fex. the seer trying to dream of someone already known to the GW she should have a right to override the decision of the seer.

We'd need to think about this one too as I'd like to make the gifteds / wolves to feel they are involved in what happens but still retaining the Wizard as the one who pulls the strings...

About the hunter still. If the hunter gains the information from the GW she should be of the "classical" style eg. bringing down whoever she has targeted, a wolf or an innocent. It might also be possible to think that the GW first would like to keep her in shade about the other gifteds but if the hunter wishes to take another gifted down with her the GW could then override it (when it would be known to the hunter as well). That would indeed sound "realistic"

If both Wizards choose the same people during the Night that one would be turned a werewolf but be known to EW. That sounds good to me.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Nog, it looks good but terribly exhausting to read and decipher. I thought I'm going to die before I finish reading that Nevertheless, I'm sure you'll make a good mod after seeing the effort you put to it.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

That said it looks pretty straightforward to me that in the beginning of the game both the EW and the GW send the mod (and the sub-mods?) a list of 6 or something (depending on the number of gifteds we will give the GW in the beginning: I personally would be ready to give the GW more than one but more of that later) whom they wish to make wolves / gifteds. After that the mod checks the overlaps, makes a lottery if needed and deals the picks

This is the best idea of all of that.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

The wizard should also be able to pass information to her minions as much as she wishes. That's something the Wizard and the sub-mod should then work out together (as to when the sub-mod can be online) as the authentic PMs should not be quoted but the sub-mod should alway paraphrase it so that the minions would not quess the identity of their Wizard if she doesn't want them to know it.

Not sure about this one. Now putting aside the effort of passing the information (imagine a sub-mod getting flow of information from a person like me), what if the sub-mod misinterpretates what the Wizard told him? And there may be importance in every word and the formulation of the Wizard, and this will be lost by the sub-mod's interpretation. I mean, what if the sub-mod ignores, or interpretates as less important something that the Wizard intended to be more important. We don't want it to become a Paper Telephone.

To the rest: good, good, only don't overcombinate the rules. I think the game looked good enough as it was, don't overstretch it (I'm referring to introducing more gifteds etc...).

I am sure there was another thing I wanted to mention, but I forgot it.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Legate

I thought I'm going to die before I finish reading that

Well, if you of all the people feel like that I guess there's not a lot of people reading and / or thinking about this...

Happily being able to play does not require one to know all the niceties of the game. In the end only the Wizards and the sub-mods need to have a clear conception of what to do and what is possible / allowed. And they should be volunteers as they were the last time.

No one should just state their wish to be a Wizard here or anywhere else in the 'downs but they should PM the mod eventually declaring their willingness.

Originally Posted by Legate

what if the sub-mod misinterpretates what the Wizard told him? And there may be importance in every word and the formulation of the Wizard, and this will be lost by the sub-mod's interpretation.

In this one I could see it as a natural possibility like the idea that in a really big village everyone does not have a chance of hearing everything all others are saying (not time to read all the posts that is)... So maybe the minions just didn't get the full picture of their Wizard's intentions if they were so finetuned? Narrationwise we could come up with an idea that makes that kind of scene possible... no problem with that. I think it more important for a Wizard to be able to decide herself whether she wishes to reveal her identity to her chosen ones.

Originally Posted by Legate

To the rest: good, good, only don't overcombinate the rules. I think the game looked good enough as it was, don't overstretch it (I'm referring to introducing more gifteds etc...).

I hope I'm not doing it. On the contrary I'd wish to see a few balancing acts to bring the GW and the village to a bit more competitive position and to make certain things a bit more fluent. So not overstraching but making it straighter and more even.

I can see that all the talk I made above may look like nitpicking and too thorough... but in the end when the game is played one needs clear rules to every situation and deciding those rules requires every thing and chance to be thought patiently beforehand (so that we don't make a same kind of blunder the first game suffered from just because the mod had to make a decision about an un-thought-of situation in a hurry).

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Well, if you of all the people feel like that I guess there's not a lot of people reading and / or thinking about this...

I hope I'm not doing it. On the contrary I'd wish to see a few balancing acts to bring the GW and the village to a bit more competitive position and to make certain things a bit more fluent. So not overstraching but making it straighter and more even.

Well, the point is that I am not that much a kind of person who should read and reply to this - the most input should be made by the ones who played and experienced the first game for themselves and know what seemed balanced or unbalanced. My view is only theoretical and I'm saying only what I think; but lack the practical insight and personal experience.

In this one I could see it as a natural possibility like the idea that in a really big village everyone does not have a chance of hearing everything all others are saying (not time to read all the posts that is)... So maybe the minions just didn't get the full picture of their Wizard's intentions if they were so finetuned? Narrationwise we could come up with an idea that makes that kind of scene possible... no problem with that. I think it more important for a Wizard to be able to decide herself whether she wishes to reveal her identity to her chosen ones.

Yup, that's plausible. I like that.

I can see that all the talk I made above may look like nitpicking and too thorough... but in the end when the game is played one needs clear rules to every situation and deciding those rules requires every thing and chance to be thought patiently beforehand (so that we don't make a same kind of blunder the first game suffered from just because the mod had to make a decision about an un-thought-of situation in a hurry).

No way looking too nitpicky - you are doing a good job, as I said before - it's the best for the mod to have everything checked, if only for his own feeling of safety...

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I kind of liked lmp's idea that in a case of a tie no one gets killed but at the same time I can see the arguments against that ruling.

So how about we tried something along the lines of "Wizard's battle" over those people? One idea would be that both Wizards could nominate one they would like to keep around and one they would like to get rid of and submitting their choices to the mod. If they agreed the person dies if they don't the person lives. The downside in this would be that only innocents would be killed but it might also save people. Another chance is that the end-result would not be death but "conversion" (so from gifted or a wolf to ordinary or from ordinary to either one according to the result between the Wizards). This one needs to be thought of.

I’m not sure what you’re talking about. A tie as in both Wizard’s pick the same person? A tie in the lynch votes? And a Wizard’s battle over what people? The people picked? How does that tie into voting for a person to kill? Please clarify.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

The GW should probably be restricted to one seer at the time but otherwise I might be tempted to allow more than the three gifteds... the EW may appoint an unlimited number of wolves anyhow. But this also depends on the exact capabilities of the gifteds.

I wouldn’t be opposed to two seers, maybe 3, given the sheer number of villagers, and numerous rangers. Multiple hunters I would oppose for the simple fact that they could heavily unbalance the game- either acting as landmines to severely cripple the wolves, or taking out multiple innocents and really hurting the odds of the village.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I'm not wishing to turn the hunter into a 100% killing-pawn of the GW who could "assasinate" a wolf paying it with her life. Instead I would be persuaded to make it in the way that the hunter in the end - like other gifteds - are responsible of their actions themselves but that the GW could give them instructions on the basis of anything they have discussed or what she seems fit. It would then be the GW's task to make her minions to see why her plans are better than an individual gifted's feeling (and she'd need to decide how much to reveal her knowledge to gain her ends) although in a case of fex. the seer trying to dream of someone already known to the GW she should have a right to override the decision of the seer.

While I agree that the GW, being Good and all, shouldn’t act like a dictator, it’s a bit unfair to give the EW final say over what the wolves do, and not afford the same option to the GW. In any case, what gifted wouldn’t listen to the GW in this instance. I think it should be left up to the Wizards if they want to override their team, or give them autonomy.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

We'd need to think about this one too as I'd like to make the gifteds / wolves to feel they are involved in what happens but still retaining the Wizard as the one who pulls the strings...

This was discussed ad nauseum in this very thread. It’s up to the wolves and gifted how involved they get. They have the option to send a name, or to send reasoning and points. Morm for example, immediately jumped in with long messages and detailed reasoning for his choices, and had multiple choices that he offered to me as the EW. Other wolves chose to send only a name.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

About the hunter still. If the hunter gains the information from the GW she should be of the "classical" style eg. bringing down whoever she has targeted, a wolf or an innocent. It might also be possible to think that the GW first would like to keep her in shade about the other gifteds but if the hunter wishes to take another gifted down with her the GW could then override it (when it would be known to the hunter as well). That would indeed sound "realistic"

I partially agree. The GW should be able to override the hunter at anytime. For example, the seer dreams of a wolf. The seer passes that info to the GW. The hunter wants to hunt someone the GW knows is innocent from a previous Night, but has already left for the Night due to RL, and can’t get the GW’s response. The GW should be able to change who is hunted regardless of the hunter’s choice. That’s the power the EW has, the GW should have the same.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

If both Wizards choose the same people during the Night that one would be turned a werewolf but be known to EW. That sounds good to me.

This is dangerous. Say the EW curses a gifted, turning them into an ordo. The turned person had some knowledge of who their other gifteds were. The next night, both wizards try to turn this person, but if they become a werewolf, then all the knowledge they had is now in the hands of the Evil team. Granted this is only a possibility, but it’s there, and should be considered.

Originally Posted by Legate

Because I imagine it the way that every Night the sub-mod simply cannot sleep but stay awake 24 hours, and the wolves anyway need to send their kills a long time before the DL so that there can be eventually some re-sending if they pick a wolf etc. And still the Wizard needs to be informed and everything... so did it really work, or was it that every night only half of the wolves voted or something?

Boromir was the sub mod for the evil team last time, so you’ll have to ask him how it went, but in my opinion it worked well. If I was going to be gone by the voting deadline, I sent him a provision, such as, “The first kill is X. The wolves can decide the second kill. If they choose one of their fellows, then kill Y instead,” or something similar depending on what was going on at the time.

I suggest that no one who doesn’t think they have the time for it attempt being a wizard. I agreed to be a sub mod because by the time the game starts I’ll have plenty of time to waste on it. I wouldn’t have volunteered if I didn’t think I could put in the work.

[Volo]

Originally Posted by Roa

I wouldn’t be opposed to two seers, maybe 3, given the sheer number of villagers, and numerous rangers. Multiple hunters I would oppose for the simple fact that they could heavily unbalance the game- either acting as landmines to severely cripple the wolves, or taking out multiple innocents and really hurting the odds of the village.

It's risky to have more Seers around than daily kills. It's rather boring when you have "known Wolves" around but can't lynch them. However in this specific game it might work somehow.
Are the Seers told the EW's role if the dream of her? In that case there shouldn't be 3 Seers.

Rangers. They're easier to add, if you make sure that the same person can't be protected two Nights in a row.

It might actually be fun to have a game with loads of Hunters some time, but not now.

Originally Posted by Noggie

After the wolves and gifteds have given their points (within the 10-14 hour framework or whatever it will be) the wizard could then add her own suggestions and preferences. That would then be passed back to the "chosen" and they could have again a time limit to make further suggestions (like 4 hours before the deadline or something - all these exact hours should be decided when we have the actual people in). Then on the basis of that discussion the Wizard would announce the choices to the sub-mods & the mod - preferably one hour before the deadline so that everything could be counted and a narration could come in time.

I myself am worried more about timezones. There is really little time for Nightly actions and I wouldn't like to wake myself up at three in the morning just to send a PM at the right time. If I understand the stuff correctly, I vote for longer Nights.

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Legate

No, I think the possibility that one Wizard reveals another on Night One is not such a problem:

We could always make a rule that they can only challenge each other from day three (or so) on.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

That said it looks pretty straightforward to me that in the beginning of the game both the EW and the GW send the mod (and the sub-mods?) a list of 6 or something (depending on the number of gifteds we will give the GW in the beginning: I personally would be ready to give the GW more than one but more of that later) whom they wish to make wolves / gifteds. After that the mod checks the overlaps, makes a lottery if needed and deals the picks. After that he sends the names of the wolves to the EW and notifies the wolves about their status. To the GW the mod would send the names of those selected so that the GW could assign them their roles herself. After the allocation the GW then notifies the sub-mod (or the mod) of her choices and those would then be passed on to the players via the sub-mod (or the mod).

Sounds good to me.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I hope I'm not doing it. On the contrary I'd wish to see a few balancing acts to bring the GW and the village to a bit more competitive position and to make certain things a bit more fluent. So not overstraching but making it straighter and more even.

I think I'll trust you that you'll find a good way to define the rules. Just keep them as simple and accessible as possible in this kind of game.

About the messages via the sub-mod: They definitely need to be reformulated. You could narrow down the Wizard's identity by their style/amount of writing. The information flow should be encouraged to be very concise, I think, for the sake of the sub-mod.

About more than three gifteds: I think the situation is already a bit balanced by the fact that the three can always be replaced, and the knowledge of the old ones is passed over to the new ones by the Wizard. Two seers I could agree to (esp. considering the size of the village and the inconstancy of the roles). Two rangers, as long as even together they can't protect one villagers twice in a row, don't have much more power than one alone. The hunter already has an advantage due to the information s/he obtains from the Wizard and the seer (if the seer is successful only once, the hunter cannot go wrong anymore). Furthermore, s/he can be replaced after death, so no more than one at any rate.

Originally Posted by Roa

This is dangerous. Say the EW curses a gifted, turning them into an ordo. The turned person had some knowledge of who their other gifteds were. The next night, both wizards try to turn this person, but if they become a werewolf, then all the knowledge they had is now in the hands of the Evil team. Granted this is only a possibility, but it’s there, and should be considered.

Absolute agreement. If both choose the same villager, s/he should simply be killed by the excessive amount of sorcery applied to the poor individual. I'm not sure whether it's really necessary to have the Wizards learn each other's identity because of it, though.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Roa

I’m not sure what you’re talking about. A tie as in both Wizard’s pick the same person? A tie in the lynch votes? And a Wizard’s battle over what people? The people picked? How does that tie into voting for a person to kill? Please clarify.

I was thinking about a tie in a vote to lynch someone.

Now lmp entertained the idea that in a tie neither of those gaining the highest number of votes would get killed. I'm afraid that might put the villagers' most important tool into jeopardy if that would be automatic. But I'd like to try something new with the lynching procedure this time.

So my idea was to put the Wizards face to face during the Night and trying to see through each others bluff and risk-taking capabilities. One way to gain this would be that they have a chance to protect one of those reaching a tie and a chance to try to kill (or change) the other one (they could surely restrain from using both or eother of their capabilities if they so wished). I think you can imagine different possible scenarios there could be: a wolf and a seer reaching a tie, a wolf and an innocent, two gifteds, two wolves, two innocents... How would the Wizards play their cards here thinking of both the "objective" outcome of it and the bluff-factor?

So the basic idea would just be that in a case of a tie in votes the Wizards would play it off.

It might look to favour the EW but remember also that if there is a wolf there in the pair and the GW suspects her and tries to kill / change her only to learn that the EW protected her then what should the GW think about it? Or does the EW have the nerve to bluff here as she doesn't know which one the GW will pick?

It might also be worth considering that this poker-game between the Wizards could be made to consist of two rounds where initially the Wizards are asked about their choices and those would be then channelled to the other one and then their second decision would be the one that counts... (that would be easily adapted in to the narrations as the Wizards try to sense the air around the two candidates and trying to see what the other one is trying to do)

But as I said this is one of the things we should think about. It's just a suggestion and I'm not sure whether it would work in a balanced manner.

Originally Posted by Roa

I wouldn’t be opposed to two seers, maybe 3, given the sheer number of villagers, and numerous rangers. Multiple hunters I would oppose for the simple fact that they could heavily unbalance the game- either acting as landmines to severely cripple the wolves, or taking out multiple innocents and really hurting the odds of the village.

The number of the gifteds is a tough one I admit. I mean it sounds pretty inbalanced if the EW can summon as many wolves she wishes (if she plays it right) but the GW is limited to three in the original rules. But then again one conversion makes a wolf to change sides while a gifted scried by the EW only loses the gift but stays a goodie.

One way to try to balance this would surely be to make some clear but flexible limits to the number of gifteds / wolves. Like that there could at any time be three but as long as there are a lot of players the maximal amount would be something like a quarter of the village or something like that (So with 20 players left there could be at most five wolves etc. - surely any already nominated "chosen ones" would not be ripped of their status because of this rule but when the roster is full the Wizard would be banned to scry/curse more; and there probably needs to be some restrictions with the GW's scries as five Seers, or four rangers able to protect the seer(s) everyNight would be just unsporty).

Or maybe we just limit the number of wolves to the quarter of the village or something and hold the gifteds in the three-max. all through the game?

Okay that's just a thought as well. What do you people think?

I do agree with you Roa that both Wizards should be able to override their minions' decisions in the end. You made me convinced about it.

The issue with both Wizards trying to scry/curse the same villager during the Night. You are right Roa and Mac. That might be a bit too dangerous.

Right now I kind of like the idea that that person gets under so strong influence of magical powers that she crushes dead with it. That would be simple, elegant and "realistic". Also that way both Wizards will know they were after the same person without learning each others identities (which I think they should not learn if they are after the same person).

Originally Posted by Volo

I myself am worried more about timezones. There is really little time for Nightly actions and I wouldn't like to wake myself up at three in the morning just to send a PM at the right time. If I understand the stuff correctly, I vote for longer Nights.

Even if I see your concern as a legitimate one I'd be very reluctant to change the Day/Night -cycle. With 36-hour Nights the possibility of different confusions would be big indeed (just look how hard it is sometimes with even rutinely 24-hour cycles) and with 48-hour cycles the intensity of the game would suffer considerably I'm afraid. I mean we managed nicely the last time. Although I'd like to hear from Kuru and Boro (the sub-mods last time) how it went behind the curtains.

[Roa_Aoife]

I understand now. I agree that no lynch on a tie isn't very good for the village. It would be too easy for the evil team to manipulate that. I'm intrigued by this Wizard's Battle idea, however, with everything that has to happen at Night, it may be overstretching the capabilities of the mods and wizards alike.

I like the idea that the number of wolves/gifted rely on the number of villagers, but I wouldn't like to limit the kind too much. After all, the GW needs to be able to strategize. If we have wolves= 1/4 village, then the number of gifted should also rely on the size of the village, though maybe not in equal numbers. (As you pointed out, when the gifted are cursed they don't change sides, but when the wolves are scryed, they do.) Perhaps 1/5? So 20 villagers would mean five wolves and four gifted, whereas 30 villagers means seven wolves (or eight depending on if you want to round up or down) and six gifted. This is total of course, and assuming that either team can manage to keep all their members alive (quite a feat, I assure you.) Then for the gifted, as long they stay withing the limits of each type (such as no more than two seers, etc.) they can be arranged however the GW wishes.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Nog, to that wizard battle over lynched people - if this rule was used, what will happen if a tie is reached and the Wizards are already dead?

Anyway, I must say I don't particularly like this rule, it seems still too much more of an advantage for the EW. Or: I can't see an advantage for the GW in it. And by the way, why can't we simply have a double-lynch or the lynch when the first person who reaches... etc?

As to the Gifteds/Wolves: was the last game really that badly unbalanced or what? Remember that with the rising number of wolves, the possibility that the GW turns a WW into an innocent rises every night, so that maintains balance, sort of. And with three Gifted...

As to the 36-or more hour days/nights: definitely not. Whatever transmission problems it may take, I'm strongly against changing the times.

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

As to the Gifteds/Wolves: was the last game really that badly unbalanced or what? Remember that with the rising number of wolves, the possibility that the GW turns a WW into an innocent rises every night, so that maintains balance, sort of. And with three Gifted...

If you read through this entire thread, you'll see that some people believed it unbalanced in favor of the Evil team. I can understand it as well. Personally, I don't have a problem with it staying the way it was before, but we're trying to satisfy all ends here, so bear with us as we work it out.

Perhaps 3 gifted total, but they can all start on night 1?

As to the 36-or more hour days/nights: definitely not. Whatever transmission problems it may take, I'm strongly against changing the times.

I believe the 36 hour day was how we managed last time, and I don't recall a problem occuring.

[Volo]

Originally Posted by Legate

Nog, to that wizard battle over lynched people - if this rule was used, what will happen if a tie is reached and the Wizards are already dead?

I vote for normal "first to reach tie is lynched".

This looks like an unnecessary rule at first sight. However my argument for it working is that the more days we are into the game, the better the chances to spot a Wolf. I say that it would be interesting to see this work in practice.

Originally Posted by Roa_Aoife

I believe the 36 hour day was how we managed last time, and I don't recall a problem occuring.

Oh, ok. Sounds fine. Or if the game did work well with 24 hour Days/Nights, that's fine too.

Putting a limit to the ammount of Wolves and Gifteds sounds good for the balance, but to me it diminishes both the Wizards quite a lot. What would happen if the when the border is reached? Will the Wizards still be able to curse/scry?

What about the GW giving her targets "protection" from being cursed after the Gifted limit is reached? Being a Gifted is basically having a protecting from becoming a Wolf. So if there would be limit to Gifteds, but the Wizard could still protect?

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by Volo

Putting a limit to the ammount of Wolves and Gifteds sounds good for the balance, but to me it diminishes both the Wizards quite a lot. What would happen if the when the border is reached? Will the Wizards still be able to curse/scry?

What about the GW giving her targets "protection" from being cursed after the Gifted limit is reached? Being a Gifted is basically having a protecting from becoming a Wolf. So if there would be limit to Gifteds, but the Wizard could still protect?

The GW shouldn't be able to protect more than one a night. Otherwise you take away some of the power that the EW has. Remember, gifteds don't become wolves if cursed. The just lose their giftedness. And for that matter, the EW should also be able to protect at least one wolf from being scryed. Afterall, it's no guarantee that either team will have their roster filled at any time. It's possible that the GW may still need to scry gifted while the wolves have as many as is allowed.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Wait, wait. I am kinda confused. I thought that the GW can scry on people still, all the time, and if he already has three Gifteds, he still can scry, only he does not turn the innocents he scries into Gifteds, but if he scries upon a Wolf, he turns him back. So I don't see why Volo is suggesting what he is suggesting, as the GW is already doing this thing by which he can save people who already are wolves (and if he scries upon a person who becomes a wolf the very same night, he un-curses him, so in fact, it's the same as if he Protected him, technically). And I don't see why Roa is opposing it, as the GW already does this thing, as I just wrote. Or am I totally confused and misunderstood the rules, the posts, or everything?

[Volo]

Ok, if Legate is correct, then I was talking nonsense and everything was just as it should be.

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Wait, wait. I am kinda confused. I thought that the GW can scry on people still, all the time, and if he already has three Gifteds, he still can scry, only he does not turn the innocents he scries into Gifteds, but if he scries upon a Wolf, he turns him back.

That is partially correct. We were discussing (or at least I was) how to handle scrying/cursing after both teams have filled their limits, should we choose to apply limits. If the GW continues to scry with out making gifteds, they act as another seer, but able to change wolves. Volo's suggestion was that instead of being yet another seer, the GW have the option to protect the gifted from cursing.

So I don't see why Volo is suggesting what he is suggesting, as the GW is already doing this thing by which he can save people who already are wolves (and if he scries upon a person who becomes a wolf the very same night, he un-curses him, so in fact, it's the same as if he Protected him, technically).

If the GW and the EW choose the same person to scry/curse on the same night, that person dies, so they really aren't protected. If the GW scries a wolf, then the wolf becomes an Innocent. If the EW curses a gifted, that person becomes an Innocent. Volo, as I was understanding it, was suggesting the GW be able to protect people who are already gifted from being cursed by the EW, and thus losing their gifted status.

And I don't see why Roa is opposing it, as the GW already does this thing, as I just wrote. Or am I totally confused and misunderstood the rules, the posts, or everything?

I think you misunderstand what we were talking about. As I said above, this isn't the scrying ability- it's something else entirely. If the GW could protect all the gifted from being cursed, it stops the EW from being able to remove gifteds in the same way the GW could remove wolves. I was saying that if you give such a power to the GW then it should also be given to the EW, but they should only be able to protect one of their team members a night.

However, either way, the protected person is a goner. If the EW chooses to curse someone, only to find out that s/he can't, then it'd be obvious that that person is gifted. If the GW tries to scry someone and can't, then it becomes obvious that that that person is a wolf. So really all it would do is maybe give either a gifted or a wolf one more day on that team.

[Volo]

Stupid as it may sounds, I think I was a bit confused when I answered Legate.

Ok, this is what I meant in the very beginning:

If the Wizards can't create more Minions (Wolves/Gifteds) because the limits are reached.
If a Wizard targets a Minion, the Minion will be turned to an Ordo.
If a Wizard targets an Ordo - What happens? My suggestin is that the Ordo is now protected from the other Wizard's powers for the next Night/the rest of the game as if it was the Wizard's own Minion.

How my suggestin would work:

Originally Posted by Example

The limits are 5 Wolves and 4 Gifteds.
There are 5 Wolves and 4 Gifteds at the moment.


Night5 begins.

The EW targets Ordo #1.
The GW targets Ordo #2.
Neither of the Ordos turns into anything, but the EW marks Ordo #1 as her property while the GW marks Ordo #2.
Both Ordos survive the Night.


Day5 begins.

A Wolf is lynched.


Night6 begins.

Now it makes sense for the EW to target an Ordo to turn it into a Wolf.
She decides to target Ordo #2.
In a normal case Ordo #2 would now become a Wolf, but since it was protected by the GW on Night5 is stays an Ordo.

Does that make sense?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Yes, it makes sense and that's (except for the limits, about which I was not thinking back then) the same way as I believed the game works. I would vote for this.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Roa_Aoife

I believe the 36 hour day was how we managed last time, and I don't recall a problem occuring.

I just checked the actual game thread back there. The Days and Nights were 24 hours.

Originally Posted by Roa

If the GW could protect all the gifted from being cursed, it stops the EW from being able to remove gifteds in the same way the GW could remove wolves. I was saying that if you give such a power to the GW then it should also be given to the EW, but they should only be able to protect one of their team members a night.

Originally Posted by Volo

My suggestin is that the Ordo is now protected from the other Wizard's powers for the next Night/the rest of the game as if it was the Wizard's own Minion.

This (the bolded parts together) sounds good with first read at least. But I would be very reluctant to give that "protection" to the rest of the game. It might be pretty strong weapon especially in GW's hands if she gets two or three gifteds already in the beginning...

[Volo]

I don't think they should be able to protect their own Minions, but it should come as a part of scrying/cursing Ordos if their Minion limit is already reached. The protection lasting one Night is probably too little, but the whole game too much. Maybe the next two or three Nights?

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Volo

I don't think they should be able to protect their own Minions, but it should come as a part of scrying/cursing Ordos if their Minion limit is already reached. The protection lasting one Night is probably too little, but the whole game too much. Maybe the next two or three Nights?

I'd say bringing forwards rules like "this enchantment expires on Day three from the casting" just make the game too complicated (and who could trail on all those different expiry-dates!). So I'd say that one Night or then to the end. Which would leave me to one Night indeed.

But I do like the idea that the Wizards could not "protect" their minions from a scry but only others. That might also bring forwards a possibility that the GW protects a wolf on one Night... but also that she could try to foresee EW's actions and try to override them with her anticipation. When there is no one to scry (roster full) it would give a Wizard some nice things to think about trying to figure whom the other one would like to target and to bar that conversion.

Though the possibly academic question remains what if both Wizards have their rosters full? Maybe just one Night with one less problem to solve to both of them?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

But I do like the idea that the Wizards could not "protect" their minions from a scry but only others. That might also bring forwards a possibility that the GW protects a wolf on one Night...

Surely not? Because under such circumstances the Wolf would be turned into an Innocent. Or should I shut up and wait till the rules are issued in some nice, summarized, easily-readable version? (which is an important and even necessary task which is in front of you, Nog )

[Boromir88]

Alright, so just some observations from the first Dueling Wizards game that I remember.

I will first tell Legate, that yes the sub-mods had to be around a lot, but I knew that when I told lmp I'd do it. I assure you I got enough sleep, and I hope to all my evil companions I did an efficient job of sending the information to all the necessary people. As soon as I saw a message I forwarded it right back out. So, yes, the sub-mod needs to be someone who has a lot of available time, and is on often, but I didn't have any issues with getting the information to the right people in a reasonable time. (Well at least I didn't hear Roa complaining about me )

But, the sub-mod definitely has to be someone with the time and comittment to do the job...something I can't do this time around but I am hoping to be able to get into a DW game if one is started.

As far as the game balance, lmp, had many many dry runs before starting his game and it had turned out pretty even. I think the Good team was disadvantaged with only being able to PM during the day, because on top of trying to do the ordinary day business of analyzing and voting, the GW had to try to communicate with his gifteds as far as what action should be done. And it didn't seem like Gurthang could plan as effectively as Roa, simply because of only being able to PM during the day. So, definitely letting both teams only PM at night should alleviate some of the "work load" the GW has to do, and they could plan more effectively.

Also, before we do start, clear rules for everything definitely has to be established for a game as complex as this one. I remember an issue right off the bat, it was a while ago and don't remember the exact details (maybe someone else does?). I just remember lmp, Kuru, and myself awarding Roa an extra kill at one point because of something we all felt was unfair. At that time that was the decision we thought was appropriate, and I believe as Gurthang pointed out before the extra kill hurt the good team.

However, that wasn't the only reason the evil team was able to win and win pretty decisively. I thought the biggest reason was Roa's play as the evil wizard. She definitely had a great plan, did a great job of executing her plan, and overall just being in control. I think the GW could have done a better job of planning had he been able to communicate at night, because only being able to communicate during the day was, when you also have to worry about posting and finding wolves, was just too much. You had that situation when tp was awaiting for directions from the GW and so on, so allowing both teams to only communicate at night I think would solve that.

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Alright, so just some observations from the first Dueling Wizards game that I remember.

I will first tell Legate, that yes the sub-mods had to be around a lot, but I knew that when I told lmp I'd do it. I assure you I got enough sleep, and I hope to all my evil companions I did an efficient job of sending the information to all the necessary people. As soon as I saw a message I forwarded it right back out. So, yes, the sub-mod needs to be someone who has a lot of available time, and is on often, but I didn't have any issues with getting the information to the right people in a reasonable time. (Well at least I didn't hear Roa complaining about me )

I thought you did a great job. You were very helpful.

As far as the game balance, lmp, had many many dry runs before starting his game and it had turned out pretty even. I think the Good team was disadvantaged with only being able to PM during the day, because on top of trying to do the ordinary day business of analyzing and voting, the GW had to try to communicate with his gifteds as far as what action should be done. And it didn't seem like Gurthang could plan as effectively as Roa, simply because of only being able to PM during the day. So, definitely letting both teams only PM at night should alleviate some of the "work load" the GW has to do, and they could plan more effectively.

I'd forgotten that LMP did a bunch of dry runs. Perhaps the ability to talk at Night is the only thing we need to change to even things out.

Also, before we do start, clear rules for everything definitely has to be established for a game as complex as this one. I remember an issue right off the bat, it was a while ago and don't remember the exact details (maybe someone else does?). I just remember lmp, Kuru, and myself awarding Roa an extra kill at one point because of something we all felt was unfair. At that time that was the decision we thought was appropriate, and I believe as Gurthang pointed out before the extra kill hurt the good team.

Are you refering to the extra kill my wolves got each Night once they reached a certain number? I thought that was to move things along more quickly (30 people is a lot to kill, after all). The only extra thing besides that I got was an extra turn one Night to replace a wolf that was unfairly taken from me. If you recall, TP, the new hunter, refused to pick a person to hunt with out talking to the GW (as you mentioned) so when my wolves killed him, LMP decided to give him an automatic wolf kill. I protested, Gurthang protested, and I was given an extra cursing the next Night.

However, that wasn't the only reason the evil team was able to win and win pretty decisively. I thought the biggest reason was Roa's play as the evil wizard. She definitely had a great plan, did a great job of executing her plan, and overall just being in control. I think the GW could have done a better job of planning had he been able to communicate at night, because only being able to communicate during the day was, when you also have to worry about posting and finding wolves, was just too much.

Aww, thank you. I agree, the good team should be allowed to communicate during Nights, rather than Days. That could significantly balance things, if the GW has the opportunity to plan like the EW.

I like the idea of Wizardly protections, but not whole game. That would just get silly. The next Night should be good enough. I don't think it would be easy to keep track of who was protected and who wasn't, and when the protections were up if we did it for multiple Nights. Trust me, by the time each wizard has their roster full, IF they ever get their roster full, there won't be that many people left in the village. People drop like flies in this game.

[Kuruharan]

I would love to grace everyone with the sparkling brilliance of my input at being the good submod...alas, I don't really remember anything about it.

The only thing I really remember is having to step in when lmp couldn't be there to post about the wizards duel and everyone was just twiddling their thumbs.

I'll try to re-read and see if I can remember anything.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

So, yes, the sub-mod needs to be someone who has a lot of available time, and is on often, but I didn't have any issues with getting the information to the right people in a reasonable time.

I do agree with this. If the mod and the sub-mods are up to their task there should be no problem there. And if Roa actually is the other one of the sub-mods I have not a slightest doubt about her commitment. And in the end the Wizard decides so it's only the problem of the "Chosen ones" if they miss their chance of making their stands.

Originally Posted by Boro

As far as the game balance, lmp, had many many dry runs before starting his game and it had turned out pretty even. I think the Good team was disadvantaged with only being able to PM during the day, because on top of trying to do the ordinary day business of analyzing and voting, the GW had to try to communicate with his gifteds as far as what action should be done. And it didn't seem like Gurthang could plan as effectively as Roa, simply because of only being able to PM during the day. So, definitely letting both teams only PM at night should alleviate some of the "work load" the GW has to do, and they could plan more effectively.

I think it is obvious we'll let the GW PM with her team during the Nights this time. The only problem is whether that is enough to balance the game.

And even if I myself think one should run a host of dry-runs before trying a new concept I'd also remind of the fact that dry-runs are only random results. If Lommy and A little Green will take the bait we might try the dry runs some weekend we'll be together and we could see how it works with some more specified gaming as well. *

Originally Posted by Boro

Also, before we do start, clear rules for everything definitely has to be established for a game as complex as this one.

Absolutely! I think no one wishes to relive the situation where lmp needed to make a hasty decision. And that's the reason why I have wished to have this discussion going on. I mean not everyone needs to know all the rules by heart when the game begins but there should be a place where anyone could check them if they just became interested or if their role-change made it important

Originally Posted by Boro

but I am hoping to be able to get into a DW game if one is started.

I'd surely like to see in our game!

* I thought of trying this one out with Lommy & Greenie in a way that would also take notice of the different personalities of people possibly playing. I mean the any one seer looks differently to Legate and Shasta (or Spm and Valier) as they have very different profiles... The Wizards surely take these different profiles into account but I would just be intersted to try it out not purely random but with a few different scenarios where the Wizards would have different tactics (scrying the silent ones vs. scrying the opinion-shifters etc.). But we'll see about that...