Rules

[Someone]

Well today I was thinking about how I was going to get my starting post done and I came upon the writing of the rules. Now, I was originallly going to copy it off another game, like most of the other games. I browsed around and realised that a good part of the rules, especially by new mods, are edited . Now, wouldn't it be a good idea to have a post with updated "modernised rules" for people to come to when they are making a game and wanted to make a rule list. If someone realises there is a flaw in the rules they just have to come here and tell us, so everyone doesn't make the same mistake.

What do you think? Worthwhile? Or not?

[mlaker]

I think this would be a great idea! These are the rules I'm using for mini 64.
[1] Have fun and don't be a jerk.
[2] No communication outside the thread unless your role allows you to do so.
[3] Get your choices in before the deadlines. If you don't, I process a "no choice".
[4] No quoting my or others' emails/PM's.
[5] If you're dead YOU'RE DEAD. No more posting relevant information after that.
[6] Lynching will be done by regular majority.
[7] During the day, I may set a deadline. Once the minute of the deadline hits, the game goes into twilight and nothing relevant may be posted. If there was no majority in the votes, a lynch will occur if a player has at least half the votes cast so far. Otherwise, there will be a no lynch.
[8] Only votes in BOLD will be counted. Please clearly unvote if you want to change your vote.
[9] Do NOT edit or delete your posts! If you made a coding error, just post again.
I think those are the basic rules.

[mathcam]

Well, for one, there's a lot of variation in how mods want their games run. One example already discussed on this site was the use of unvoting and whether it's necessary. Other things like no lynches and deadlines vary as well. I'd also like to see things like "If two killing groups kill the same person and a doc also protects him, then that person dies", or doesn't die, depending on how the mod wants to run the game. But I think most mods make it up on the spot. Looking at mlaker's, what happens if no choice is submitted is another property that varies between different rule sets.

My point is that having a centralized rule book will essentially amount to the same thing as browsing the games and looking for a set of rules that you happen to like. What we

could

do is compile a list of things that a mod should at least address in their rules (and for that matter, decisions they should make sure to make before the game even starts in the case those situations come up).

Cam

[Someone]

Ok...what cam said .


Anyways, I was

inspired

to do this by the mistake that came up in another game about the way players could exploit mod kills if they didn't end the day. And, of course they'll always be variations in the rules. I think making a list of what a moderator has to decide to do would be better then my original idea. However it would be a good idea to also have a set of standard rules that the mod can change to fit his desires. If would be a whole lot easier to get it off here then to get it off someone else, especially when you add on the fact that there might be other rules that they missed.

[cuban smoker]

There is a standardized rule book right nya.

Anything beyond this should be addressed in the opening post.

[Someone]

wow..never saw that. Shows how well I read the rules of a game before I play .