Thesp wrote:
There's a difference between not including a doctor in a game and including deathmillers in a game. One keeps people on their toes, and the other actively spites the players for playing well and thinking critically, celebrating the moderator instead of allowing players to flourish and thrive.
(shrug) A good bastardmodded game keeps players on their toes, keeps them guessing, stops the obveous stratagy from always being the best, and keeps the game balanced.
For example, the first time someone put a scum mason into a game, that was good bastardmodding. The first time someone used a miller, that was good bastardmodding. The game where Dragon Phenox invented the insane doc (who actually kills people instead of protecting them; was basically a vig but didn't know it) was good bastardmodding. Now, it should be something that can be played around and beat by good play and by clever players, or can be abused by especally clever and lucky scum players; one good bastardmodding game will keep the players on their toes for the next ten games they play.
I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie