In post 548, 3dicerolling wrote:I'm kind of salty nobody cared you changed your claim so many times.
I felt like that should have been obvious.
In post 550, Alexcellent wrote:Oh man. Whoops. Yeah I 100% believed Podo was actually the Troublemaker, I didn't expect the Minion to say he swapped me since I didn't think I was likely to be lynched. Also, he played town super well from my perspective so I just totally believed it. When Podo started pushing for the GL/Lane double lynch I started to think that maybe I was wrong, I probably shouldn't have jumped in to claim when I did.
In post 548, 3dicerolling wrote:I'm kind of salty nobody cared you changed your claim so many times.
I felt like that should have been obvious.
Maybe I had a bit of confbias, whenever I play Troublemaker in One Night, I usually bluff a claim a few times to trip the Werewolves up so in my mind that made Podo check out more as the Troublemaker
Well played though town, fun game!
In post 551, podoboq wrote:In post 550, Alexcellent wrote:Oh man. Whoops. Yeah I 100% believed Podo was actually the Troublemaker, I didn't expect the Minion to say he swapped me since I didn't think I was likely to be lynched. Also, he played town super well from my perspective so I just totally believed it. When Podo started pushing for the GL/Lane double lynch I started to think that maybe I was wrong, I probably shouldn't have jumped in to claim when I did.
In post 548, 3dicerolling wrote:I'm kind of salty nobody cared you changed your claim so many times.
I felt like that should have been obvious.
Maybe I had a bit of confbias, whenever I play Troublemaker in One Night, I usually bluff a claim a few times to trip the Werewolves up so in my mind that made Podo check out more as the Troublemaker
Well played though town, fun game!
I'm totally taking responsibility for this one. I shouldn't have claimed switching you. I gave you at minimum 50/50 odds on being town after that claim, and since you believed me, you had to do what's best for you and play to the odds that your wincon has changed. I just didn't think through how my claim would actually effect you. I was so focused on seeing every angle through town's eyes that I didn't look at the game through scum's.
In post 556, podoboq wrote:When this is run again, I'd nix the ability to double lynch. I think it makes it too easy for town. As I said earlier, the party game is so much shorter that it's not plausible to build a fool proof split. The nature of forums makes this version inherently different, and I think you need to change the rules for a tie to disallow a double lynch.
Or, implement the Tanner. The Tanner is a neutral party, and only wins if he dies. If the Tanner dies, all other players lose. This could help to discourage a split vote.
In post 565, vettrock wrote:What about the if no werewolves, re-roll? I got that from shos, but I think taking out the possibility that there are no werewolves helps town. I do like the Minion becomes werewolf if he is all alone option. Otherwise town must circle vote to win, and minion just has to mess it up. It is like a guarenteed victory for the minion.
![:]](./images/smilies/icon_smiling.png "Cheerful Smile"){kind=icon}
In post 567, GuiltyLion wrote:First off, thanks for modding vettrock! It was a very smooth game and I had a lot of fun, and I'd totally be in for another.
Second, podo, you played great in a tough position. I do think the double lynch was really town-sided here, if we had to choose only one lynch you would have easily won. I apologize for saying to "shut up" at one point, I felt bad about that one afterwards but at the time I felt like it was my only option to try to get townies to see what I was saying, because it felt like they all were agreeing with you. The last few days you made this game both more challenging and more enjoyable than it should have been
In post 556, podoboq wrote:When this is run again, I'd nix the ability to double lynch. I think it makes it too easy for town. As I said earlier, the party game is so much shorter that it's not plausible to build a fool proof split. The nature of forums makes this version inherently different, and I think you need to change the rules for a tie to disallow a double lynch.
Or, implement the Tanner. The Tanner is a neutral party, and only wins if he dies. If the Tanner dies, all other players lose. This could help to discourage a split vote.
PokerFace wrote:At first I did not like the "no werewolves re-roll" idea. Trying to convince players there are no werewolves when you are the only one is a legit strategy. But consideringhow OP a solo minion can be andhow un fun an actual no werewolf game really is, I am fine with the re-roll in hindsight
In post 573, PokerFace wrote:Thinking more on it, I don't think having the paranormal investigator is a good idea!
While its true seer + apprentice is OP since it gets to see 2-3 center cards. You get knowledge of whats in the game through whats not in the game. Paranormal with dopple, apprentice, insomniac also looks very powerful because you get knowledge of whats directly in the setup based on actually see it. Considering that and fact we have to overlook some mechanics of the PI to avoid 5 scum (2 weres, minion, dopple?, PI) rarity, i am starting to think PI is a step too far
So I would lean towards next running containing:
Werewolf
Werewolf
Minion
Apprentice Seer
Troublemaker
Robber
Villager
Villager
Villager
Villager
Insomniac
Doppleganger
5prs possible 4 villagers posible 4 scum possible, this feels better. Subbing in a hunter for one of the villagers would not be a bad idea either. Most powerful role in game is likely still the robber though