-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Really, this was the norm when I started playing, I don't know why we began having day start games. Plus it makes more sense to start killing people AFTER someone has died by hand of wolves than before.
The bad thing of this nightly deadline is that the villagers have nothing to do during the first 24 hours.
That's why I'm not in favour of it.
But I have thought about something useful. Namely harass the GM with questions how he's going to interprete the rules.
I have two questions.
1) Is it allowed to delete a post with a vote ?
2) Is proper unvoting required ? Is unvoting like "Unvote whoever" accepted ?
Better to ask the GM what he's going to do in his own game, than to discuss it in the General Werewolf Thread, because we are never going to get an agreement there
Well, every GM has the right to interpret any rule as he sees it, but they way I do it is as follows:The bad thing of this nightly deadline is that the villagers have nothing to do during the first 24 hours.
That's why I'm not in favour of it.
But I have thought about something useful. Namely harass the GM with questions how he's going to interprete the rules.
I have two questions.
1) Is it allowed to delete a post with a vote ?
2) Is proper unvoting required ? Is unvoting like "Unvote whoever" accepted ?
Better to ask the GM what he's going to do in his own game, than to discuss it in the General Werewolf Thread, because we are never going to get an agreement there
1) Not at all. However, this is hard to enforce if I am not there to see the vote and then notice it has been deleted. But when I do see this, I will kill the player's role (Not use subs if there are any).
2) Yes. Unvoting whoever is seen by me as unvoting the wrong person. So the vote remains on the "whoever" person, not on the new vote.
No.
Thanks for answering so quickly and clearly
It's better to make everything clear before it becomes a problem.
Really, this was the norm when I started playing, I don't know why we began having day start games. Plus it makes more sense to start killing people AFTER someone has died by hand of wolves than before.
Just take someone who has signed up to sub and kill them. Day starts give the villagers something to do. You don't like them because you prefer the villagers to spend 24 hours with nothing but the fear of being eaten without ever getting into the game.
Well I agree with the role-playing logic of a night start, because it's only when someone gets mysteriously killed off that you start lynching people at random to find the culprit.
That's right, here I am in my little throne enjoying the villagers not having anything to do.
Witness as I laugh! Hahaha!
Really, this was the norm when I started playing, I don't know why we began having day start games. Plus it makes more sense to start killing people AFTER someone has died by hand of wolves than before.
Indeed.
What would be a good compromisem and used to be done, was to have a dummy role that got killed, rather than a player in the game.
Vote Yakman for the baddie tell
Instead of talking rubbish you should be working on digging that tunnel. Get to it soldier.
Alright...I'm reading through the rules and I have three questions:
1) Why are ties Lemeard approved?
2) What is a Crovaxian slip up?
and 3) Shouldn't the word "majority" be replaced with plurality in the below quote?
1) Why are ties Lemeard approved?
2) What is a Crovaxian slip up?
and 3) Shouldn't the word "majority" be replaced with plurality in the below quote?
1) the ones that he inserts himself in when he wants to be self-important
2) when a wolf reveals himself accidentally whilst trying his best to be a villager
3) yes.
Because Lemeard likes TIEs like a fat kid likes cake
In the long long ago, there was a player called Corvus Crovax or something. He made a post saying "Who should we eat tonight" rather than "lynch". He was a varulv and got lynched.
No.