Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Keep it as is

3 (12%)

Change it to a full Jester, with game-end on win

1 (4%)

Change it to a full Jester, but without game-end on win

5 (20%)

Change it to a full Jester, with game-end on win AFTER day 3

3 (12%)

Change it to a Jester with the loss of the Next Day phase

4 (16%)

Remove it entirely

9 (36%)

Other (explain)

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 25

[Leafsnail]

But -

1. He doesn't know who the alien scientist is.
2. If the alien scientist knew who he was, then he would probably just abduct the exterminator, seeing as there would only be a maximum of 3 other aliens in the game.

[Mr.Person]

The operative could kill the exterminator and win as a survivor, if he wanted to for some reason. Personally, I think they should win with the exterminator, period. No, reverting to survivor or doppleganger bs, that encourages killing the exterminator.

[Mephansteras]

Hmm...or I could keep them with the Exterminator's win condition. Everyone who isn't on their team has to die for them to win.

[Leafsnail]

Hmm...or I could keep them with the Exterminator's win condition. Everyone who isn't on their team has to die for them to win.

Yeah, that sortof makes sense.  Although they'd have to be pretty lucky to win without the exterminator  .  Can controlled operatives have additional roles?

[Mephansteras]

You mean Controlled Dopps? Right now, no, it's a Role in and of itself. Although now that you've brought it up, I'm considering making it an Ability instead of a Role.

Thoughts from other people on it?

[Mr.Person]

Well, if you do, I don't think vigilantes should be able to be controlled dopps.

[Pandarsenic]

Having a submafia within the Mafia is kind of messed up, I think. :I

[Servant Corps]

Something I wonder: What is it to stop the controlled doppelganger from revealing all the information about the doppelganger to the Exterminator, and then having the Exterminator convince the town to lynch all the doppelgangers, including the controlled Doppelganger (so as to gain trust within the Town)?

[Rysith]

Something I wonder: What is it to stop the controlled doppelganger from revealing all the information about the doppelganger to the Exterminator, and then having the Exterminator convince the town to lynch all the doppelgangers, including the controlled Doppelganger (so as to gain trust within the Town)?

And what's to stop the town from killing the exterminator off after that? Rather, how does that strategy further the exterminator's win condition? Isn't he better off with the dopps killing townies and townies lynching townies than with all the dopps dead?

[Mr.Person]

Nothing. Personally, I think the players should have win conditions and abilities that are conducive to doing whatever the players wants to do to win. Obviously, game breaking strategies and betrayal of the current win condition should be avoided, but in general, the player should be able to do pretty much anything, especially once the game is in progress.

[Leafsnail]

Something I wonder: What is it to stop the controlled doppelganger from revealing all the information about the doppelganger to the Exterminator, and then having the Exterminator convince the town to lynch all the doppelgangers, including the controlled Doppelganger (so as to gain trust within the Town)?

1. The townies may not believe him.
2. If he gets the dopp leader, it may become obvious he's the exterminator (the agent can't determine that).
3. If you correctly point the FoB at 3 people in a row, people will assume you're an agent if not the exterminator.  The agent seeker will then go and kill you.

[JoshuaFH]

Alright, rather than try to piece together whatever clearly non-intuitive logic you guys have neatly laid out for me, this is what I got:

1) Controlled Doppleganger is changed so that if the Exterminator dies, he dies as well. He will NOT win with the dopplegangers under any circumstances.

and

2) Alter the programming on the role distributor, so that one of two scenarios are chosen randomly, which are thus:



Bonus points if the introductory text is ambiguous as to whether there's one large mafia, or two small mafias, so that only the mafia actually know that there's another mafia.

What do you think?

[Pandarsenic]

As much as I like this I fail to see where MS Paint becomes necessary. o_O

[JoshuaFH]

As much as I like this I fail to see where MS Paint becomes necessary. o_O

Total boredom is where it becomes necessary!

[JanusTwoface]

Apparently Lifehacker agrees with you about MS Paint.

On a more serious note, I think we should start a semi-official discussion about conditional votes in the next round.  I'm still torn on whether I'd like to see them continue or not, but if they do, I would like to see a list of official possibilities and some sort of ordering.

My main idea would be to apply conditional votes in the reverse order that they are received.  In the case going on in the game of one person saying "tie the vote" and another (later) saying "untie the vote":
- All non-conditional votes are counted.
- "Untie the vote" applies.  If the votes are tied, untie them; otherwise, don't apply it.
- "Tie the vote" applies.  The votes are currently untied, so tie them.

Reverse the order to keep the first poster from re-posting his initial vote to change the order. (It could still happen, but would be less likely.)

(Overall, I think people should just pay attention to the game and avoid situations where it is necessary.)

Thoughts?