TSS wrote:>petroleumjelly (pro-limits) agreed in principle but added refinements: a king who believes that a player is the Hero should not execute him (pj added that the possible Hero has so claimed); if two people both pass majority, the town should decide on case-by-case which to lynch.
In his next paragraph, he appears to contradict his own second case by saying the town should decide early on whether to have the king kill the first to majority or the most recent, for fear that a scum king will kill the townie lynch candidate rather than the scum lynch candidate, and "preempt such a strategy before the chance arises."
Ah, you are correct that I slightly contradicted myself here, or at least left myself open to contradictory interpretations. It seemed as if I were advocating forced lynches (which I was when this game began, although I have since changed my position after listening to discussion), while allowing for two majorities and then having the town choose between them. This was not an attempt to confuse the town (in fact I would rather you point this out now than later), and as it is, I have changed my stance so that this particular rule would not apply anyways.
TSS further wrote:>>I think that a king who believes a player the Hero should not execute that player even without a claim; indeed, the case of a king who thinks he knows a player's role (and it's pro-town) is one where in my opinion the king's judgment matters and can outweigh the will of a bit over half the town. The reverse does not hold (as a mistaken king cannot unkill) and the king in question will probably (and certainly should) have attempted to sway the town to his point of view, but the king should not blindly bow to the town when they are sabotaging themselves and he knows better.
Likewise, when two people are both suspect, judgment is important. Even where the king is bowing entirely to the whim of the people, they need to exercise judgment in the individual case as to which is the more suspicious of the suspects. The first to majority need not be the beter lynch or vice versa, and a policy which sets one way or the other in stone in advance is in my opionion a mistake.
And the fact that petroleumjelly appears to have contradicted himself between one paragraph and the other is worrying. It suggests he may have been aiming at confusing the town rather than helping it.
All agreed, hence my change in position. Simply so it’s out there, I no longer advocate forced lynches, although I
do
advocate having a List of Execution, from which the King may choose which person to execute, may add/subtract players to that List, and which the town may add to the list by giving one player a majority of votes. This should give the King 2-4 people to choose from each day (in addition to whoever the King wishes to arbitrarily add), so that everybody knows where they stand and has a purpose, and votes will not be considered “meaningless”.
For the record, my new modified “rules” (which I would abide by as King, should such happen) would be (unless there are further problems with them I have yet to foresee):
1.) The King must wait for at least one person to reach a majority before any executions are ordered (so that there is sufficient discussion). When a player does reach a majority, they are placed on the List of Execution.
2.) If any player, at any time, reaches over a majority of votes, they can be placed on the List of Execution. This will give the King the "wiggle room" some people seem to want, while also leaving the options restricted enough that there shouldn't be anything crazy going on. There is no number as to how many people may be on the List of Execution at any time.
3.) Players who have direct (most likely investigative) evidence against them may be placed automatically on the List of Execution, regardless of whether or not they have received over a majority of votes.
4.) Players may be removed from the List of Execution (by the King) if they have direct (most likely investigative or Masonry) evidence to absolve them, or perhaps even a "Hero" claim and the King believes it (or the King believes said person to be the Hero even without a claim).
5.) If the King feels a particular person is scummy (but has no investigative evidence against them [or does have investigative evidence but does not wish to reveal such information], and that person is, for whatever reason, not on the List of Execution) the King may formally announce to the town that s/he is moving that person to The List of Execution, and allow the town to have further discussion (as such a move should obviously create). This allows for the King to have greater autonomy, but makes certain that King will not just randomly execute people without at least some open discussion from the town.
