A cultist only receives this protection once per game
seems to be pretty unambiguous. An unattached cultist gets hunted, becomes attached, if he ever gets hunted again, he dies.
-
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.
A cultist only receives this protection once per game
seems to be pretty unambiguous. An unattached cultist gets hunted, becomes attached, if he ever gets hunted again, he dies.
...what? An attached cultist dies when he is hunted. You only have to hunt an attached cultist once for him to die.
Also, IN
EDIT: Apparently odd rules are odd. happycats, that makes cultist way too OP man.
The rules seem to imply:
If a cultist starts unattached, and gets hunted, he becomes an attached cultist. No more inherent hunt protection from then on.
If a cultist starts attached, and gets hunted, he doesn't die because he is blessed. No more inherent hunt protection from then on.
Both types of cultists get one inherent hunt protection. That's how I read the rules.
.png){kind=avatar}
Hm. Well, if attached cultists get protection, I don't see why wolves shouldn't. With this ruleset it would be far more beneficial to be a cultist than a wolf.
So some general responses to the rule changes:
-Tornadoli is actually interpreting the rules differently from how I intended, but I actually prefer his way. The first time a cultist is hunted he either attaches to a pack (if unattached) or is treated as blessed (if attached) and then loses all protection from there on out.
-So the rules came about from some issues marty brought up after the last big, with baddie hunts making the game too variable. I wanted to attempt to control them but I'm not a huge fan of making all baddies unhuntable so I decided to give them protection without it being overboard. And as for why wolves aren't afforded protection from hunts, I don't think it makes sense to hand them hunt protection. Cultists and the sorc are at least partially neutral and are a resource to both packs. But the wolves in each pack do have to kill each other and I think hunts should be a legitimate way to do that. Of course the game will be balanced around this.
-Don't really agree that we'll see lots of no hunt nights unless the wolves are homing in on cultists and sorcs. Packs won't be hunting their own cultists so they'll only be a small amount of the larger group.
-Tornadoli is actually interpreting the rules differently from how I intended, but I actually prefer his way. The first time a cultist is hunted he either attaches to a pack (if unattached) or is treated as blessed (if attached) and then loses all protection from there on out.
-So the rules came about from some issues marty brought up after the last big, with baddie hunts making the game too variable. I wanted to attempt to control them but I'm not a huge fan of making all baddies unhuntable so I decided to give them protection without it being overboard. And as for why wolves aren't afforded protection from hunts, I don't think it makes sense to hand them hunt protection. Cultists and the sorc are at least partially neutral and are a resource to both packs. But the wolves in each pack do have to kill each other and I think hunts should be a legitimate way to do that. Of course the game will be balanced around this.
-Don't really agree that we'll see lots of no hunt nights unless the wolves are homing in on cultists and sorcs. Packs won't be hunting their own cultists so they'll only be a small amount of the larger group.
I see a lot of people throw this around as a big advantage cultists have but I can count the number of times on one hand I saw a cultist lose their pack, join the other one, and win the game.
Ni*!
* - Means "what," but in a solely demonstrative sort of way, and not at all interrogative, also means I'm in.
* - Means "what," but in a solely demonstrative sort of way, and not at all interrogative, also means I'm in.
To add to this, there have been a number of games where cultists lose despite being alive, because all the wolves have died. So cultists being harder to kill isn't much of a potential game breaker.
Cultists ae historically the most disadvantaged role in the game by far. Especially unattached ones but it applies to both kinds. Making them a bit more fun/powerful is surely a good thing.First of all thanks for getting up a game on such a short notice
However I don't like the following rule proposals at all.
Cultists have already the big advantage that they can win with any pack (once their original pack is dead). Giving them an automatic bless only increases that advantage. I really don't see the need for that.
Automatic blesses for cultists and sorcerer will result in lots of no hunt nights. This will slow down the game, which IMO is not good, especially not when this game will have more than 25 players, which I hope it will have.
Of course a lot of the real effects of these changes depends on the set-up. If you don't have cultists and/or a sorc in your game the effect of these rule changes is zero. But because I can't assume that they are not in the game I think it's better to address my concerns.
And no I don't think there will be many no-hunt nights. 1 sorcerer, a few cultists...on average 1-2 no hunts would be expected to arise from this, and and any more than 3 would be highly unlikely.
Anyway, there are other ways to keep the pace of a game. Brutals, hunters, OEOs, etc. Saying a game will be slow when you don't know the setup is premature. Personally I would try and slightly compensate for it, by having a few more potential killing traits, if I were the GM.
I would just to say happycats that with these changes in, in an otherwise normal setup, the goodie side will need to be slightly compensated. Put in a couple less wolves, give the goodies a few more big roles, something like that.
Not sure if I'll play yet. Didn't intend to but this is partly my idea.
