War in the Palace

[PokerFace]

I have an idea for a new AiTP Variant and I would apreciate criticism. Here is the basis

War in the Palace

1

You are

King Alpha

. You win the game if you are alive, King Beta is dead, and the Anarchist is dead. Use your vote to figure out who is on your side and weed out the rest.

1

You are

King Beta

. You win the game if you are alive, King Alpha is dead, and the Anarchist is dead. Use your vote to figure out who is on your side and weed out the rest.

1-X?

You are an

Alpha Guard

. XXXX is King Alpha. You win the game if King Alpha is alive, King Beta is dead, and the Anarchist is dead. If King Alpha Dies you will immediatly commit suicide out of shame. Use your vote to figure out who is on your side and weed out the rest.

1-X?

You are an

Beta Guard

. XXXX is King Beta. You win the game if King Beta is alive, King Alpha is dead, and the Anarchist is dead. If King Beta Dies you will immediatly commit suicide out of shame. Use your vote to figure out who is on your side and weed out the rest.

1

You are the

Anarchist

.

As long as King Alpha is alive you have an Alpha-Bomb

As long as King Beta is alive you have an Beta-Bomb

You can use each bomb only once to kill any player. No player is immune to either bomb. If you are lynched you must use both bombs immediatly with your dieing breath. You win the game if King Alpha is dead and King Beta is dead. Use your vote and your bombs to bring an end to all order.

Questions:
1. How many guards should each king have?
2. Do you see any strategies that could break this game for any side?
3. Let's say the anarchist wants to use a bomb before being lynched. Should he be forced to use both bombs at once?

If all sides claim at the start which side they are on A or B then there is chance that the side that gets more people claiming, who anarchist lies about being with, could imediatly lynch all those on the other side. Or people could go after the larger side to get rid of the anarchist but at the same time that makes the larger side smaller if they kill guards before getting anarchist. I don't think there is a breaking strategy as long as i am not overlooking the odds here.

Only problem is there can be a stalemate should they all claim sides and the anarchist gets lynched first and he kills 2 guards, one of each type. Should the Anarchist auto win in that situation since there will be no order as a result?

Or to safe guard a claim later than at the start, reveals could be King A, King B, Anarachist or Guard. Meaning guards would not be revealed as protecting a certain king at the time of their death.

[RayFrost]

I think having a lack of alignment reveal for the guards would help balancing.

As to the number of guards... maybe 3 each?

How many uses for each bomb? If only one, then you have to consider the possibility for 3p with the anarchist having one bomb left, both kings alive. Would this count as a draw, or do you intend to have a "forced lynch" rule for deadlines?

[PokerFace]

if only kings and anarachist left with both bombs. I think anarchist has a win there

I was thinking 3 each

Also another title option would be

Disorder in the Palace

instead of war

[RayFrost]

if only kings and anarachist left with both bombs. I think anarchist has a win there

I was thinking 3 each

Also another title option would be

Disorder in the Palace

instead of war

That's why I said one bomb, not both. And asked how many uses for each bomb while both kings are alive.

3 sounds like a good number.

[Battousai]

I think having a lack of alignment reveal for the guards would help balancing.

As to the number of guards... maybe 3 each?

How many uses for each bomb? If only one, then you have to consider the possibility for 3p with the anarchist having one bomb left, both kings alive. Would this count as a draw, or do you intend to have a "forced lynch" rule for deadlines?

I don't see how that is a draw, there is still a chance for the anarchist to win. All he has to do is get one king lynched then with a bomb left the next day he can kill the other (similar to having a SK and 2 vanilla townies at end game).


A side claim D1 doesn't have to play out the way outlined. If the anarchist lies about which side he/she is on, the team doesn't have to start lynching itself. Instead, with the majority numbers, can start lynching the other team until they lose. Then they can figure out who the anarchist is through scumhunting.

Only problem is there can be a stalemate should they all claim sides and the anarchist gets lynched first and he kills 2 guards, one of each type. Should the Anarchist auto win in that situation since there will be no order as a result?

His win condition isn't about there being no order, it is about there being no leadership (no kings). Unless he is told in his win condition that he can win the above way, it should not count.

Or to safe guard a claim later than at the start, reveals could be King A, King B, Anarachist or Guard. Meaning guards would not be revealed as protecting a certain king at the time of their death.

I don't see this as working. If there is a side claim, then any guard who is lynched will be confirmed to be an Alpha or Beta Guard, since there is no reason for a guard to lie about what side they are on.

And concerning how many guards, I think it depends on how likely you think it would be for a King to die early. Potentially, with a good (or bad depending on your alignment) lynch, almost half of the alive players will be killed. How balanced would it be for x+1 players versus 1 anarchist.

[RayFrost]

I think having a lack of alignment reveal for the guards would help balancing.

As to the number of guards... maybe 3 each?

How many uses for each bomb? If only one, then you have to consider the possibility for 3p with the anarchist having one bomb left, both kings alive. Would this count as a draw, or do you intend to have a "forced lynch" rule for deadlines?

I don't see how that is a draw, there is still a chance for the anarchist to win. All he has to do is get one king lynched then with a bomb left the next day he can kill the other (similar to having a SK and 2 vanilla townies at end game).

In the situation of seeing flips and having seen a death from the bomb, the two kings would know they were in a game with a king and an anarchist with one bomb, so no lynches happen, yah? Or anarchist kills one and neither can kill each other, leading to a draw, yes?

[Battousai]

But a King could decide to lynch the other King. Leading to an Anarchist win. Also, there could be a no lynch and then the Anarchist kills one of the Kings with a bomb. In both circumstances, there is at least a chance for someone to lose.

[Aranneas]

One word titles for win:

Revolution

[yabbaguy]

A side claim D1 doesn't have to play out the way outlined. If the anarchist lies about which side he/she is on, the team doesn't have to start lynching itself. Instead, with the majority numbers, can start lynching the other team until they lose. Then they can figure out who the anarchist is through scumhunting.

And that's why this setup doesn't work for me. The politics are too funky and are too akin to Survivor.

-1

[Mr. Flay]

But a King could decide to lynch the other King. Leading to an Anarchist win.

That's not rational, though. It's an inverse Prisoner's Dilemma as currently written, and I don't love it.

Let the Kings both win if they endgame the Anarchist, as a special condition to their WC. With three people left, they still have to lynch

right

, but at least now they have an incentive to.

[Aranneas]

if the anarchist goes at any time you have equal numbers doesn't this result in happily ever after?

perhaps 3 sides + anarchist would work better

[Trojan Horse]

Why give the two factions names at all? Why give the guards a chance to massclaim "Team Alpha" or "Team Beta"? How about this instead:

You are a

Guard

. XXXX is your King. You win the game if your King is alive, the enemy King is dead, and the Anarchist is dead. If your King dies you will immediately commit suicide out of shame. Use your vote to figure out who is on your side and weed out the rest.

And change the other PMs similarly.

[PokerFace]

I thought i mentioned both scenarios of big group killing little group or big group getting weeded to find assassin?

I think trojan horse just solved the problem there on stopping the mass claim. Thanx Troj. only way they could claim side now would be to say who there king is and that would be fail.

Only question now is how many guards

and should anarachist be forced to use both bombs at once. I am starting to think he should

[Aranneas]

if the anarchist goes at any time you have equal numbers doesn't this result in happily ever after?

avoiding a mass claim does not help this fact
well, it does but it still holds true

[Twomz]

if the anarchist goes at any time you have equal numbers doesn't this result in happily ever after?

No, the different sides would still have to try to eliminate their opponents.

Would there be a town included? What would their wincon be if they were included, otherwise this would be a 9 player game?

[NicolBolas]

Include some kind of role that doesnt know who anybody is, but wins when a king wins?

[PokerFace]

if the anarchist goes at any time you have equal numbers doesn't this result in happily ever after?

No, the different sides would still have to try to eliminate their opponents.

Would there be a town included? What would their wincon be if they were included, otherwise this would be a 9 player game?

This and fact guards don't know who other guards are and for which king should prevent happily ever after. All sides should still be encouraged to lynch the enemy king

No town would be included so yay with 3 guards for each king it would be only 9 players.

And yay i am thinking the anarchist must use all bombs he currently has and kill himself all at once since i think game balance would be favoring the anarachist otherwise

[Aranneas]

you don't know who anyone is... other than your king
but as soon as someone votes for your king you know they're not on your side
so what you're going to end up with is some gambits and mind games and eventually everyone who's paying attention figures out who's on his or her side

I think you may need a single shot killing role in this to which kings are immune.

[Battousai]

And yay i am thinking the anarchist must use all bombs he currently has and kill himself all at once since i think game balance would be favoring the anarachist otherwise

If the anarchist manages to kill one of the kings, then the other King and his guards auto win. I think that if you make the King immune to the opposite bomb, then that would lower the Anarchist's odds enough. If you are going to eliminate the Team Alpha/Beta this could still be achieved. Tell everyone that one King is King Alpha and the other is King Beta. Then only tell the Kings if they are Alpha or Beta.

You are

King Alpha

. You win the game if you are alive, King Beta is dead, and the Anarchist is dead. Use your vote to figure out who is on your side and weed out the rest.

You are a

Guard

. XXXX is your King. You win the game if your King is alive, the other King is dead, and the Anarchist is dead. If your King dies you will immediatly commit suicide out of shame. Use your vote to figure out who is on your side and weed out the rest.

You are the

Anarchist

.

As long as King Alpha is alive you have an Alpha-Bomb

As long as King Beta is alive you have an Beta-Bomb

You can use each bomb only once. The Alpha-bomb can only kill the Alpha King and any guard. The Beta-Bomb can only kill the Beta King and any guard. If you are lynched you must use both bombs immediatly with your dieing breath. You win the game if King Alpha is dead and King Beta is dead. Use your vote and your bombs to bring an end to all order.

[Max]

you don't know who anyone is... other than your king
but as soon as someone votes for your king you know they're not on your side
so what you're going to end up with is some gambits and mind games and eventually everyone who's paying attention figures out who's on his or her side

I think you may need a single shot killing role in this to which kings are immune.

No you don't. The idea is that you are meant to act as though you don't know who your king is.

[PokerFace]

And yay i am thinking the anarchist must use all bombs he currently has and kill himself all at once since i think game balance would be favoring the anarachist otherwise

If the anarchist manages to kill one of the kings, then the other King and his guards auto win. I think that if you make the King immune to the opposite bomb, then that would lower the Anarchist's odds enough. If you are going to eliminate the Team Alpha/Beta this could still be achieved. Tell everyone that one King is King Alpha and the other is King Beta. Then only tell the Kings if they are Alpha or Beta.

problem with that is assassin could get screwed

say he uses alpha bomb early on and king beta dies via lynch. Assassin now has no bomb and almost zero chance

Also let's say alpha bomb is used and no one dies. oops looks like everyone knows who king beta is.

I am thinking troj has best solution and yay you could tell each king if they are alpha or beta just don't tell the guards if they alpha or beta. That idea could be useful if you still wanted some form a team flavor aspect.

You could have "team edward" vs "team jacob" vs "Team Twighlight must die burn them All!"

[Mr. Flay]

I'm not sure I see why the bombs have to be 'tailored' to each King. Why not just a two-shot Assassin? Are his chances that huge of hitting both (remember, if he only hits one as he dies, he throws the game to the other King)?

Overall I don't care much for the setup, but I like that idiosyncrasy even less.

[Trojan Horse]

Question: what do you guys want to happen if the anarchist is lynched, and he misses both kings?

With the anarchist gone, everyone could then massclaim who their king is, and then the side in the majority would automatically win. I'm sure everyone would think that a massclaim would be the best move, since by definition, everyone would have better than a 50-50 chance of being in the majority at that point.

Perhaps, if the anarchist is killed, the kings should then both be given a bomb. Each can use their bomb at any time to try to kill the enemy king. That'll stop the massclaim. (Not sure if the king should be allowed to use it while he is being lynched, like the anarchist can with his bombs.)

[Mr. Flay]

Seems sensible to me, TH.

[PokerFace]

Ok then this looks like it fixes all points brought up so far

Disorder in the Palace

2

You are a

King

. You win the game if you are alive, the other King is dead, and the Anarchist is dead. Use your vote to figure out who is on your side and weed out the rest.

1-6 (3 for each king)

You are a

Guard

. XXXX is your King. You win the game if your King is alive, the enemy King is dead, and the Anarchist is dead. If your King dies you will immediately commit suicide out of shame. Use your vote to figure out who is on your side and weed out the rest.

1

You are the

Anarchist

.

Edit: Work in progress

You have 2 kills as long as both kings are alive. If you are lynched you must use both kills immediatly with your dieing breath. No player is immune to your kills. You win the game if both kings die. Use your vote and your bombs to bring an end to all order.

Any other issues and or do you think this would be fun or too easy for any one side?

Edit: me thinks assassin can be written better or perhaps taken out of the game completly. kills would be given to kings in that scenario.