Messing with voting mechanics - reconfirming votes

[numberQ]

I was fiddling with some nonstandard mechanics for a setup that might never see the light of day, and I thought up something that seemed pretty smart at first, but then I wondered if it actually affects anything or if it's just an annoying extra step for everyone involved.

The basic gist is that there are two types of vote-based eliminations. Standard majority voting results in a normal kill. But there is a special kind of vote elim that is in some way more attractive for town. It doesn't matter how it's more attractive in this hypothetical scenario, just assume it does something good. This special vote is intended to be more difficult to achieve.

To trigger it, Player A must be at E-1. When Player B puts them at E-0, they can clearly and distinctly announce that this is a special vote. Maybe something like VOTE: Player A - special. Then, the majority of voting players must confirm that their votes are special too. These confirmations can ONLY happen after the E-0 vote triggers the process. Once the majority of voting players have confirmed, the special kill goes through and town is happy. If at any point Player A is brought below E-0 via unvotes, the special elim is canceled. It can of course be attempted again if another special vote E-0 happens.

If that doesn't make any sense, maybe an example will help.

• test

[numberQ]

Well shoot, I misclicked submit while trying to preview if I had list tags working -_- One sec, I'll post the example...

[numberQ]

Example:

• 12 players are alive, so 7 votes are needed for majority.
  
• numberQ receives 6 votes, putting him at E-1.
  
• The 7th vote comes in as VOTE: numberQ - special
  
• With 7 players voting, 4 of them must confirm that their vote is special. However, the 7th vote is already special, which means 3 of the remaining 6 players must confirm specialness.
  
• After 3 of the players already voting numberQ say something like "
  Confirm special vote: numberQ
  ", numberQ is eliminated special-wise and something beneficial to town happens.

That's the basic structure of it. I debated whether it made more sense for ALL voting players to confirm or just the majority, and this feels better to me since it leaves room for maneuverability. But ultimately, I suspect that without some incentive NOT to make a special elim, all this does is annoy everyone involved. Scum would have little cover to refuse confirming the special vote, unless I'm just looking at this the wrong way.

[Something_Smart]

But ultimately, I suspect that without some incentive NOT to make a special elim, all this does is annoy everyone involved. Scum would have little cover to refuse confirming the special vote, unless I'm just looking at this the wrong way.

This is what I was thinking too while reading this. If special eliminations are objectively better, then there would be no excuse for not making a special vote. If they're not objectively better and they're just a separate option, then maybe people could just specify special/non-special in their original vote? Unless the point is that a special vote can't be lolhammered. I guess right now it's kind of a rough approximation of unanimity-- if anyone on the wagon doesn't want the special elim, they unvote, so you either need a full wagon of people supporting the special elim or enough people who can vote fast enough that the others can't unvote. Which would feel bad if you wanted to unvote to block a special elim but you happened to not be around.

It does feel kinda like a time-waster to me, but I can see it being made to work. I would be interested to hear your ideas for what a special elim would do, if you have any.

[numberQ]

I'm playing around with a setup based on the Dishonored game series. One of the key features of those games is the Chaos system - kill too many people and later levels will have High Chaos. There are ways to take enemies out nonlethally that are generally more difficult, but doing so keeps the game in Low Chaos, which makes later levels easier.

So I'm trying to inject this idea of lethality and nonlethality into the game. Every player ability with an elimination will either be lethal or nonlethal, with the nonlethal ones having extra stipulations or drawbacks. And this special vote will cause the day's elimination to be nonlethal, thus not contributing to High Chaos.

Generally speaking, scum will prefer High Chaos, but there will be some town abilities that prefer High Chaos too. Other things might also hinge on this Chaos system, like maybe win cons or something. My goal is to make this balance between High and Low Chaos interesting enough that the more arduous vote is clearly desirable, but with just enough friction (both in achieving it, and in the opportunity cost) that people would argue over whether it's worth it.

[imaginality]

Maybe the first person to vote a player decides if that wagon is special or normal. Special wagons need maybe 1 or 2 more votes than normal to lim. So the risk to choosing special wagon is it will be harder to drive it to a lim, but then you get the low chaos advantage if you manage to.
It also would allow for speculation eg did scum start a special wagon on a buddy to make it harder for that player to be limmed?

[imaginality]

Flavourwise it's like the first voter on the wagon is choosing the method of eliminating the target.

You might also want a rule that once a special wagon has been declared on a player, you can't have a normal wagon start on them later. That would avoid the scenario where a wagon gets to E, doesn't get enough support for the extra votes, and then everyone unvotes just so they can vote again as a normal wagon. While still allowing normal rvs wagons to later be converted to special ones.

[numberQ]

I did consider having special wagons be declared from the start, rather than at E-0. Flavor-wise that does make a lot of sense. Mechanically, I liked the idea of converting to a special wagon at E-0 more, because in my mind it provided more opportunities for lying and fake outs. But I hadn't consider what you said about scum bussing, that is interesting.

Special wagons needing 1/2 more votes could be a problem later in the game since it's a much higher percentage of the population, but 1) I do kind of like the idea thematically that Low Chaos is harder to achieve the longer the game goes on, and 2) a situation like ELo, where majority + 1 is the entire population, is the end of the game anyway so it's unlikely anyone would even care about the special wagons anymore.

You might also want a rule that once a special wagon has been declared on a player, you can't have a normal wagon start on them later. That would avoid the scenario where a wagon gets to E, doesn't get enough support for the extra votes, and then everyone unvotes just so they can vote again as a normal wagon. While still allowing normal rvs wagons to later be converted to special ones.

Not sure I like the idea that a slot can just become permanently unkillable via normal majority voting. Even if that restriction wears off, like after a day, seems like too much potential for abuse. Imagine a single townie special voting everyone in the game in rapid succession. Now the night can't have High Chaos without some other special ability happening, which is mainly detrimental to scum and trivially easy to make happen.

Maybe the restriction only comes into play when the wagon gets to some E-# value? It would essentially be a way for town to decide to give a slot the Loved modifier, but it also negatively impacts the Chaos system. Plus there'd have to be some special rule for ELo and MeLo to prevent the player from being unkillable. Maybe special wagons just aren't allowed if the game gets that far. Like I said before, it's end game anyway, so no one will care what Chaos will be at the following phase.

I think this does solve the problem of a special vote being too annoying/boring, but it needs some tweaking. Worth thinking about, at any rate.

[imaginality]

Not sure I like the idea that a slot can just become permanently unkillable via normal majority voting. Even if that restriction wears off, like after a day, seems like too much potential for abuse.

Sorry, yes, I didn't mean it would carry over to later days. Just that it's in effect for the whole of that day.

Imagine a single townie special voting everyone in the game in rapid succession. Now the night can't have High Chaos without some other special ability happening, which is mainly detrimental to scum and trivially easy to make happen.

Detrimental to town if they fail to get an elimination because they couldn't arrive at consensus. But to avoid this you could make it that each townie can only start one special wagon per day. Or, probably better, have a maximum of three special wagons that can be declared each day. That limit adds to the tactics of how people use it.

Maybe the restriction only comes into play when the wagon gets to some E-# value? It would essentially be a way for town to decide to give a slot the Loved modifier, but it also negatively impacts the Chaos system.

This seems more of a hassle to track as a mod and town could drive all players to E-# if they wanted to game the system. Limiting the number of special wagons that can be declared seems more effective.

Plus there'd have to be some special rule for ELo and MeLo to prevent the player from being unkillable. Maybe special wagons just aren't allowed if the game gets that far.

If you disallow players creating special wagons on themselves or anyone who has a special wagon on the player, this solves itself. If you think a player making another player unelimmable in say 3-2 Elo is either scum protecting their buddy, you can vote off that player, since their buddy can't special wagon them back.

Though like you say, just allowing it until there are fewer than N players remaining also works.

[numberQ]

Oh, limiting how many special wagons can be started a day is a great idea. It adds to that feeling of special elims being more difficult to achieve, and requiring more thought.

If you disallow players creating special wagons on themselves

or anyone who has a special wagon on the player

, this solves itself. If you think a player making another player unelimmable in say 3-2 Elo is either scum protecting their buddy, you can vote off that player, since their buddy can't special wagon them back.

Though like you say, just allowing it until there are fewer than N players remaining also works.

And it does make sense to not allow players to start special wagons on themselves (or maybe just generally disallow special voting yourself). But the bolded part still has some edge cases and oddities I think. Or I'm just thinking about it too much and confusing myself. Either way, probably best to just have a rule like, "Special wagons are prohibited if at any point there are only 1 or 2 more town members than Mafia members".