|
Post by sachertorte on Nov 18, 2011 16:24:20 GMT -5
With all Red-Blue pairings, though, the game is still balanced, but in a more dynamic and fun way. In such a case, certain mislynches are mitigated by half-a-mislynch worth of dead Scum. Thinking about this more I've realized that storyteller is more correct than I thought originally. While true that we need to kill all Red-Blue to win, we have a priority issue. It is possible to reach a point where a Red-Blue lynch followed by a Blue-Blue nightkill loses the game for Town*. That is, it is entirely possible to lynch a RED member and subsequently lose the game. In order to win in such a situation we would need to lynch all Red-Red pairs FIRST before lynching the Red-Blue. This implicit and hidden ordering (priority) is troublesome. I have a problem with this, especially since I see little reason that we would be able to or be expected to be able to distinguish a player as Red-Red or Red-Blue. *Assuming standard scum win condition
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Nov 18, 2011 16:46:00 GMT -5
I disagree with your interpretation. The "they both go" statement meaning every kill kills someone else is a reasonable interpretation. Characterizing it as "a huge assumption" is off the mark. Quite frankly, if two people don't die at the end of Day I'll be extremely irate. Okay, let's take a look at this another way. 24 people, assuming a standard lynch and Nightkill every Day and Night, by the end of Day 4 only 6 people will be alive. Now assuming there are 5 scum, and let's assume each day the town correctly lynched a Red-Blue pairing, and each Night the scum eliminates a Blue-Blue pairing. On Day 5, we're left with two Blue-Blue pairings and one Red-Blue pairing, effectively leaving the game at Lynch-Or-Lose for the town, DESPITE having correctly lynched four scum the first four Days. Does this sound fair and balanced to you? It doesn't to me. If we, as town, correctly lynch four scum in a row, we should be kicking ass and have a nice buffer. No game that isn't a complete bastard game should reward the town with correctly lynching four scum in a row with a lynch-or-lose situation. I'm aware Cat mentioned minor gastardity. I'm also aware somebody will probably bring up Roosh's Arkham game, where town lynched non-town every round except one and still ended up at Lynch or Lose, and that game had minor gastardity in it. But I'm not talking non-town here, I'm talking scum. No serial killers or Riddlers or whatever. Just straight up town lynching four scum in a row. I will be honestly, really, truly surprised if every lynch/Nightkill results in two deaths.
|
|
|
Post by sachertorte on Nov 18, 2011 16:57:58 GMT -5
Now assuming there are 5 scum, and let's assume each day the town correctly lynched a Red-Blue pairing, and each Night the scum eliminates a Blue-Blue pairing. On Day 5, we're left with two Blue-Blue pairings and one Red-Blue pairing, effectively leaving the game at Lynch-Or-Lose for the town, DESPITE having correctly lynched four scum the first four Days. Does this sound fair and balanced to you? It doesn't to me. If we, as town, correctly lynch four scum in a row, we should be kicking ass and have a nice buffer. No game that isn't a complete bastard game should reward the town with correctly lynching four scum in a row with a lynch-or-lose situation. There is no reason to assume 5 Red-Blue pairs. It is entirely possible that some scum are in Red-Red pairs. In fact, your scenario convinces me of it.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 18, 2011 17:04:13 GMT -5
Now assuming there are 5 scum, and let's assume each day the town correctly lynched a Red-Blue pairing, and each Night the scum eliminates a Blue-Blue pairing. On Day 5, we're left with two Blue-Blue pairings and one Red-Blue pairing, effectively leaving the game at Lynch-Or-Lose for the town, DESPITE having correctly lynched four scum the first four Days. Does this sound fair and balanced to you? It doesn't to me. If we, as town, correctly lynch four scum in a row, we should be kicking ass and have a nice buffer. No game that isn't a complete bastard game should reward the town with correctly lynching four scum in a row with a lynch-or-lose situation. There is no reason to assume 5 Red-Blue pairs. It is entirely possible that some scum are in Red-Red pairs. In fact, your scenario convinces me of it. Meh. The scenario is easily mitigated using fewer than five total Scum. ---- I don't expect Cat to comment on Night kills, but I do think that it is only fair to ask regarding the lynch: Is the lynch mechanism one that will, under ordinary circumstances and if no power(s) are employed, cause the player linked to the lynch target to die as well?
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Nov 18, 2011 17:04:50 GMT -5
At the end of cycle 4, assuming a double lynch of red-blue and a double NK of blue-blue, there'd be 4 pairs left at Dawn of D5, 3 blue-blue, 1 red-blue, 7 Town to 1 scum, right?
The mod has yet to respond but I suspect any death will potentially result in the death of both the target and the linked player however, as Sach initially speculated, there may be mechanisms which can break the link to prevent two deaths.
|
|
|
Post by sachertorte on Nov 18, 2011 17:09:16 GMT -5
Meh. The scenario is easily mitigated using fewer than five total Scum. That too, but reducing the number of scum and only having Red-Blue pairings for scum puts them in a bad position should they accidentally blow up one of their own. I'm pretty convinced of at least one Red-Red pairing at this point.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Nov 18, 2011 17:30:26 GMT -5
Do the various types of pairing help or hinder the hunt for scum? I can see how it could make things difficult for the scum team but what does it mean for Town?
|
|
|
Post by scáthach on Nov 18, 2011 17:39:12 GMT -5
Do the various types of pairing help or hinder the hunt for scum? I can see how it could make things difficult for the scum team but what does it mean for Town? Is best case blue-red? That way even a mislynch has a chance of getting scum too. And scum aren't going to night kill themselves so the paired townie isn't at much risk. Red-red confuses me, sure we get a twofer for a good lynch, but would it not mean that there'd have to be twice as much scum as normal?
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on Nov 18, 2011 17:46:36 GMT -5
It'd probably mean six scum for red-red.
Also the thread is getting choked in theory nattering so uhhhh...
Vote: Sister Coyote
Because why not.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Nov 18, 2011 17:47:58 GMT -5
I think it is for us, unless scum know which player they are linked to, every mislynch and NK puts one of their own at risk. That way even a mislynch has a chance of gettigonng scum too. And scum aren't going to night kill themselves so the paired townie isn't at much risk. Only if they know who the pair is. Red-red confuses me, sure we get a twofer for a good lynch, but would it not mean that there'd have to be twice as much scum as normal? I think Sach's point was that both sides would appear to have double its true numbers, 24 players paired by alignment would be equivalent to a 12 player game.
|
|
|
Post by scáthach on Nov 18, 2011 17:56:28 GMT -5
Only if they know who the pair is. Well the paired townie would still be at risk of being night killed, but they wouldn't be at risk due to the collar itself since scum wouldn't kill one of their own. And if they were nightkilled, bang, 1 scum down. Net win right?
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Nov 18, 2011 18:15:21 GMT -5
It'd probably mean six scum for red-red. Also the thread is getting choked in theory nattering so uhhhh... Vote: Sister CoyoteBecause why not. All righty, then.
|
|
|
Post by Caerie on Nov 18, 2011 18:17:26 GMT -5
Other than being a potentially devastating random factor, with potential Red-Blue pairings really have much impact on how we play, though? If you don't know the pairings, you can't plan around them. It'll just be another way to die, with no real way to avoid it.
|
|
|
Post by scáthach on Nov 18, 2011 18:45:01 GMT -5
It'd probably mean six scum for red-red. Also the thread is getting choked in theory nattering so uhhhh... Vote: Sister Coyote Because why not. Any reason why? Like is it a random vote or a gut feeling or what?
|
|
|
Post by special on Nov 18, 2011 19:09:05 GMT -5
Huh??? Sorry. vote SachtorteCome on this is page 1 WTF Bah!
|
|
|
Post by special on Nov 18, 2011 19:10:42 GMT -5
Let's lynch someone and see what happens, and then see what happens at Night and then we'll be able to have more than supposition and semantics to discuss, eh?
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Nov 18, 2011 19:49:17 GMT -5
Without more info on the mechanics of the collars, all I can do is guess. If a lynched or NKed player's collar explodes then I imagine we have at least one method of separating collars. If collars are not set off so easily, I bet rather than separation, the power is to swap connections.
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on Nov 18, 2011 20:02:35 GMT -5
Any reason why? Like is it a random vote or a gut feeling or what? <font style="font-size: 12px;">Let's lynch someone and see what happens, and then see what happens at Night and then we'll be able to have more than supposition and semantics to discuss, eh? Basically what Ed said. Theory and supposition regarding the collars is pointless until we have a concrete idea as to how they function in gameplay. Plus giant text walls of theory n' bullshit are unsightly and a pain to dig through when trying to get a handle on who scum are.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Nov 18, 2011 20:10:33 GMT -5
At the end of cycle 4, assuming a double lynch of red-blue and a double NK of blue-blue, there'd be 4 pairs left at Dawn of D5, 3 blue-blue, 1 red-blue, 7 Town to 1 scum, right? Dang, you're right, my math was off. So not quite lynch or lose, but still a hazardous situation to be in after lynching four scum. Now I'm wondering how 4 people left would work. If it's a Red-Blue and Blue-Blue pairing, there's a 50/50 shot of both sides winning at that point. Right now we're postulating we're playing a game where every person is a Lover. I can't quite tell if a game like that is balanced in favor of scum or town. Without more info on the mechanics of the collars, all I can do is guess. If a lynched or NKed player's collar explodes then I imagine we have at least one method of separating collars. If collars are not set off so easily, I bet rather than separation, the power is to swap connections. Actually, I think swapping connections is one of the least likely scenarios for a special power. I can see somebody having a power to sever connections without activating the collars, maybe. But swapping them would screw up the balance of the game, I would think.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Nov 18, 2011 20:27:57 GMT -5
But severing wouldn't?
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Nov 18, 2011 20:40:56 GMT -5
Any reason why? Like is it a random vote or a gut feeling or what? <font style="font-size: 12px;">Let's lynch someone and see what happens, and then see what happens at Night and then we'll be able to have more than supposition and semantics to discuss, eh? Basically what Ed said. Theory and supposition regarding the collars is pointless until we have a concrete idea as to how they function in gameplay. Plus giant text walls of theory n' bullshit are unsightly and a pain to dig through when trying to get a handle on who scum are. But, how else are we going to get Obvious PIS ? Or the marvy 'slips' that get people lynched? [/sarcasm]
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 18, 2011 20:51:23 GMT -5
Basically what Ed said. Theory and supposition regarding the collars is pointless until we have a concrete idea as to how they function in gameplay. Plus giant text walls of theory n' bullshit are unsightly and a pain to dig through when trying to get a handle on who scum are. But, how else are we going to get Obvious PIS ? Or the marvy 'slips' that get people lynched? [/sarcasm] No, you're right. By all means, let's talk about nothing. That'll make for both an exciting and effective strategy.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Nov 18, 2011 20:51:34 GMT -5
I can see where the ability to sever a connection could work .......somehow we have a confirmed Town, the severer severs and that player would no longer die with their counterpart? I can see where that mechanic could be in game...... But I tend to agree that these speculations are all moot until we have our first day/night cycle............................on the other foot some of the statements this Day may be revealing in the next? Of course if some one is spot on they will be lynched most likely.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Nov 18, 2011 20:53:24 GMT -5
The "shushing" could be interpreted as someone trying to prevent PIS leaking?
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Nov 18, 2011 20:55:43 GMT -5
Ahh storyteller it would seem my chicken legs and yours followed the same path there
(avatar reference)
|
|
|
Post by Drain Bead on Nov 18, 2011 21:49:21 GMT -5
Along the same lines as the potential severing power, it would be interesting if there happened to be a power out there who could investigate someone and find out who they are linked to.
|
|
|
Post by special on Nov 19, 2011 0:00:57 GMT -5
But, how else are we going to get Obvious PIS ? Or the marvy 'slips' that get people lynched? [/sarcasm] No, you're right. By all means, let's talk about nothing. That'll make for both an exciting and effective strategy. I don't mind some discussion about what this mechanic might bring to the game. I'm just opposed to actually reaching any conclusions with no information whatsoever. I'm also opposed to deciding on a course of action at this point. And, I don't want this to dominate the discussion for the Day. That's quite different from wanting no discussion about anything at all. Why would you even pretend to come to that conclusion?
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Nov 19, 2011 2:25:25 GMT -5
UnvoteI was messing about ( 3 glasses of white I find it interesting that if 2 players are killed because of the linked collars, it could be a very short game?
|
|
|
Post by deon on Nov 19, 2011 6:27:21 GMT -5
I've seen nothing in the rules that strongly suggests a third party, and frankly, I think it would be a bitch to balance something like a Serial Killer in a game structured like this. If the links are predominantly Red-Red and Blue-Blue, then a Serial Killer is the ultimate force of swingyness, dramatically increasing the impact of chance on the game. To be fair, that is always the case. In a standard game, SK and Vig are always a source of swing. This I agree with. As for where the idea of a third party psychopath came from, It came from the blurry line between color and rules. CatInASuit said something about man,woman, and psychopath, so that implied something about psychopaths as a game entity. At first, I thought it was town divided up into Red and Blue Teams with psychopaths as scum, but the Night 0 clarification made it clear that Red is scum. That pushed psychopath into 3rd party territory for me. I'll also note that the rules say nothing about the associated pair blowing up when the linked dies... that's also from the color. From Cat's post in Night0 I snip the following: As always the main point of the show, two teams red and blue fighting for victory and around each man, woman and psychopath's neck, that special wedlock collar. Each collar containing just enough explosive to remove a head with at least a 5' scatter radius. And of course, each collar randomly linked to someone else in the camp. So if one goes, they both go.
|
|
|
Post by deon on Nov 19, 2011 6:32:19 GMT -5
Must learn to read more before starting to post....
|
|