-
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.
This is how people play Mafia IRL. Even with 10 or so people they often only have one wolf total.
And man used to live in the trees and eat wild berries and dead squirrels. Paradox werewolf is us climbing down from the tree of irl mafia.
.png){kind=avatar}
This may be true, but all interested parties should blame you for this mess.
There's nothing wrong with that playstyle, but here it's not what we're used to. And to be fair to all people involved, that should be clearly stated up front, not left to be discovered in play.
Now I see what Falc was on, the part of the rules for wolves where it says something like only one pack can win has been removed.
OTOH there are traces of that left in the rules for cultist and sorcerer so I still read it like only one pack can win.
As for the one wolf vs 9 villagers that is still in line with the basic concept of werewolf/mafia games since it's still unccordinated many (9) vs the coordinated few (1).
OTOH there are traces of that left in the rules for cultist and sorcerer so I still read it like only one pack can win.
the Rules said:
As for the one wolf vs 9 villagers that is still in line with the basic concept of werewolf/mafia games since it's still unccordinated many (9) vs the coordinated few (1).
:unsure:
As a villager, I am most certainly able to coordinate with myself as well as a wolf in a one-man pack could.
As a villager, I am most certainly able to coordinate with myself as well as a wolf in a one-man pack could.
Once again, I tried innovation, it didn't work. However I feel there are some very good lessons here for people who aren't just me, and I still maintain that this community is both hostile and toxic. Anyways here we go.
Firstly the winners are: Skobelev, alexu, aedan777, randakar, esemesas, Daffius and Sedracus. Congratulations or whatever.
Next is the setup: I had 27 players, so I decided that about 30% wolf would be a nice and round arbitrary number. So I created 8 packs of 1 wolf (entirely because it seems that it has never been done before), that hunted 2 by 2 every day. The pairings were as such:
johho (who did kill Sleepy)/Kai
Sleepy/Rovsea
Euro/Falc
sohaib/AOK
Unfortunantly, Kai and sohaib were afk on the hunts (I trusted Kai's word and thought it'd be nice to play off the couple), and Sleepy and AOK/Latinkaiser were dead before their hunts. This left only the Euro/Falc double hit intact. While it sowed confusion it showed the undesirability of less useful wolves.
There was 1 innkeeper (Daffius), 4 PL (madchemist, alexu, Falc, johho), 1 Brutal (Euro), and 2 blessed (Sedracus and Gorganslayer).
Mistakes made: because they did happen and you guys are douches. 1) I forgot to write down the Pack Names. 2) I told Sedracus and GS they were blessed (didn't read the rules I copy pasted from tamius). 3) Apparently telling of a blessed save is a bad idea. 4) Apparently GMing cause you're all crotchety.
Lessons learned: This for everyone, not just me. This kind of setup can work if there are tweaks to the setup. 1) less wolves, much more cursed. 2) no innkeepers and take it out of the rules. 3) No blessed (it's a pain in the butt and not worth the space it takes up on the front page).
This could work, and honestly could've worked into the longer game if: A) sohaib wasn't such an afk wolf. B) the wolves didn't hunt themselves so vigourously in the beginning. However both occurred and that's that.
I'd GM another game in the future but you guys have made it quite clear my kind is desired round these here parts.
Now take this AAR and go.
Firstly the winners are: Skobelev, alexu, aedan777, randakar, esemesas, Daffius and Sedracus. Congratulations or whatever.
Next is the setup: I had 27 players, so I decided that about 30% wolf would be a nice and round arbitrary number. So I created 8 packs of 1 wolf (entirely because it seems that it has never been done before), that hunted 2 by 2 every day. The pairings were as such:
johho (who did kill Sleepy)/Kai
Sleepy/Rovsea
Euro/Falc
sohaib/AOK
Unfortunantly, Kai and sohaib were afk on the hunts (I trusted Kai's word and thought it'd be nice to play off the couple), and Sleepy and AOK/Latinkaiser were dead before their hunts. This left only the Euro/Falc double hit intact. While it sowed confusion it showed the undesirability of less useful wolves.
There was 1 innkeeper (Daffius), 4 PL (madchemist, alexu, Falc, johho), 1 Brutal (Euro), and 2 blessed (Sedracus and Gorganslayer).
Mistakes made: because they did happen and you guys are douches. 1) I forgot to write down the Pack Names. 2) I told Sedracus and GS they were blessed (didn't read the rules I copy pasted from tamius). 3) Apparently telling of a blessed save is a bad idea. 4) Apparently GMing cause you're all crotchety.
Lessons learned: This for everyone, not just me. This kind of setup can work if there are tweaks to the setup. 1) less wolves, much more cursed. 2) no innkeepers and take it out of the rules. 3) No blessed (it's a pain in the butt and not worth the space it takes up on the front page).
This could work, and honestly could've worked into the longer game if: A) sohaib wasn't such an afk wolf. B) the wolves didn't hunt themselves so vigourously in the beginning. However both occurred and that's that.
I'd GM another game in the future but you guys have made it quite clear my kind is desired round these here parts.
Now take this AAR and go.
Well Dadarian: first off, I don't think it's wrong to try to experiment a bit, I have no problems with that. If there hadn't been any innovation, this game would not stayed alive on this forum for almost 10 years now. Also, except for some glitches, you did a fair job on the GM'ing itself. Timely updates and such.
Also thank you for hosting, without GM's there wouldn't be a game at all, and GMing a big game does take a commitment.
That being said, I think the setup with single-wolf-packs is just something that I don't think will work, ever. You are right that having more cursed would be the first thing that needs to be changed to have a chance of working. Also you need blessed, because otherwise people will easily count how many no-hunts there are, and start deducing on it.
This game works especially well with paranoia. The need to somehow cooperate as a village versus the paranoia of not knowing who to trust (and keep trusting). Both blessed and cursed are crucial for that. Revealing a blessed hunt was your worst mistake after the setup itself, but you've already learned that lesson.
I can say something on the drawback of many small (1-person) packs, but I'll let keep it here at first.
Again, thanks for hosting.
Also thank you for hosting, without GM's there wouldn't be a game at all, and GMing a big game does take a commitment.
That being said, I think the setup with single-wolf-packs is just something that I don't think will work, ever. You are right that having more cursed would be the first thing that needs to be changed to have a chance of working. Also you need blessed, because otherwise people will easily count how many no-hunts there are, and start deducing on it.
This game works especially well with paranoia. The need to somehow cooperate as a village versus the paranoia of not knowing who to trust (and keep trusting). Both blessed and cursed are crucial for that. Revealing a blessed hunt was your worst mistake after the setup itself, but you've already learned that lesson.
I can say something on the drawback of many small (1-person) packs, but I'll let keep it here at first.
Again, thanks for hosting.
I pretty much agree with Rysz but here is some more feedback:
GMing a Big game is part administrative chores (timely updates, managing vote counts, answering rule questions), part creative work (invent new thing, organizing old stuff in an unexpected manor) and part game balancing (so all players have reasonably the same chance of winning). On top of that you need to make sure everone are having fun - and this takes priority over you yourself having fun. This can be accomplished by having good RPing setting, by creating a good tense game, by generally cheering people on and being helpful to people who are unsure how to play/what you mean.
You did the adminitrative stuff very good for a first time GM. Updates were on time, I got answers to my rule questions no vote counting errors or killing of the wrong guy. Forgetting the pack names was a minor thing but you could easily have fixed that had you just asked the wolves to send you their pack names rather than ignoring the complaints from the players.
You did some creative stuff by reorganize the setup in an unexpective way rather adding lots of new roles/traits (this is harder but if you pull it off it usually makes for real good games so kudos for trying to go that way).
Game balancing wasn't so great (and this is what happens to nearly all new GMs that try to be creative - I did it myself way back when). Revealing blessed hits, having no cursed and having too many innkeepers/liars that could prove their alignment are just minor stuff and in the right setup might be just the thing to balance out something the baddies have. One important part of game balancing is to have mechanisms that allows a side that gets off to a poor start the ability to get back into the game (witness for goodies, cursed hits for baddies, two packs etc.). I know it's dull but for the first try as a GM using a standard two pack setup is what I usually recommend or, if you go outside the box, to at least test your setup ideas with some experienced GM that isn't playing the game.
As for the fun for everyone part I think you read too much into the complaining and "feedback" we players provide. You can never please everyone so some complaining from players you have to be able to handle as a GM without getting too defensive.
So thanks for hosting and congratulations to the winners.
GMing a Big game is part administrative chores (timely updates, managing vote counts, answering rule questions), part creative work (invent new thing, organizing old stuff in an unexpected manor) and part game balancing (so all players have reasonably the same chance of winning). On top of that you need to make sure everone are having fun - and this takes priority over you yourself having fun. This can be accomplished by having good RPing setting, by creating a good tense game, by generally cheering people on and being helpful to people who are unsure how to play/what you mean.
You did the adminitrative stuff very good for a first time GM. Updates were on time, I got answers to my rule questions no vote counting errors or killing of the wrong guy. Forgetting the pack names was a minor thing but you could easily have fixed that had you just asked the wolves to send you their pack names rather than ignoring the complaints from the players.
You did some creative stuff by reorganize the setup in an unexpective way rather adding lots of new roles/traits (this is harder but if you pull it off it usually makes for real good games so kudos for trying to go that way).
Game balancing wasn't so great (and this is what happens to nearly all new GMs that try to be creative - I did it myself way back when). Revealing blessed hits, having no cursed and having too many innkeepers/liars that could prove their alignment are just minor stuff and in the right setup might be just the thing to balance out something the baddies have. One important part of game balancing is to have mechanisms that allows a side that gets off to a poor start the ability to get back into the game (witness for goodies, cursed hits for baddies, two packs etc.). I know it's dull but for the first try as a GM using a standard two pack setup is what I usually recommend or, if you go outside the box, to at least test your setup ideas with some experienced GM that isn't playing the game.
As for the fun for everyone part I think you read too much into the complaining and "feedback" we players provide. You can never please everyone so some complaining from players you have to be able to handle as a GM without getting too defensive.
So thanks for hosting and congratulations to the winners.
Of all new GMs, I expected Dadarian to have the thickest skin.
You run a good game, Dad. Just needs better setup.
You run a good game, Dad. Just needs better setup.
I have the thickest of paperskins EURO. I thank you for the vote of confidence by the way.
And given the advice I have seen (which I am most grateful for) this is the recommendation I have for a "small man pack setup"
1) No seer, no cultist, no innkeeper
2) 1 pack of 2, 1 pack of 3, rest of 1s until wolves = 25%ish baddies
3) a large amount of both blessed and cursed to add to both pack sizes and confusion
4) an excel file to properly keep all the information in check
And much to my chagrin, I agree with Arkasas that new Big GMs should allow a more experienced Big GM to have an advisory glance at the setup. I know I shall do it if my spirit animal EURO is not playing my next game.
Anyways, thank you for playing and y'all need to get thicker skins
Some of the administration was good, some wasn't. I'm told I hunt on C nights, with an A/B/C/D pattern in the game. So you'd expect the hunt goes 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / etc...
Except I somehow end up hunting on night 3 and then on night 8 (which never happened).
That and the forgotten pack names and the precarious balance of the setup leads me to a likely culprit: lack of preparation.
Like it or not, GMing is quite a chore and if you do not prepare for it, you'll mess up. You can't just come up with a totally new setup and expect it to work.
I'm sure every single wolf asked you questions once they got their role PMs. This should have been foreseen. To really make this setup work, each and every wolf needs to be told VERY CLEARLY that there are other wolves out there and that we are all supposed to work together, even though we don't know one another at the start. Make sure every wolf has Pathological Liar and the result is that they're all trying to use it in various ingenious ways to try and find the others without being too obvious about it. Sprinkle some useful bits amongst the villagers so they have something to do until they figure out the setup at which point they can analyse the game to find likely Liar claims.
Anyway, I'm saying all of this in hopes you'll learn from your mistakes and do better in your next game. Because yes, I do want you to GM again.
Except I somehow end up hunting on night 3 and then on night 8 (which never happened).
That and the forgotten pack names and the precarious balance of the setup leads me to a likely culprit: lack of preparation.
Like it or not, GMing is quite a chore and if you do not prepare for it, you'll mess up. You can't just come up with a totally new setup and expect it to work.
I'm sure every single wolf asked you questions once they got their role PMs. This should have been foreseen. To really make this setup work, each and every wolf needs to be told VERY CLEARLY that there are other wolves out there and that we are all supposed to work together, even though we don't know one another at the start. Make sure every wolf has Pathological Liar and the result is that they're all trying to use it in various ingenious ways to try and find the others without being too obvious about it. Sprinkle some useful bits amongst the villagers so they have something to do until they figure out the setup at which point they can analyse the game to find likely Liar claims.
Anyway, I'm saying all of this in hopes you'll learn from your mistakes and do better in your next game. Because yes, I do want you to GM again.
I checked, because I thought it might be interesting if I found a way to switch sides by being a PL. I could have switched by claiming cursed and being hunted, or by claiming thief and robbing a wolf.
Oh wow, Daffius was a plain innkeeper. I thought he was a PL.
1) No big deal.
2) Minor error. Gives them a way to semi-clear themselves, which may be a problem, but meh.
3) Takes away the paranoia and again semi-clears the players (though I'd be interested to see a blessed wolf hunt themselves under these rules.
)4) Meh.
Most of my comments were made in IRC, but a few last words here. The concept has promise, but it didn't quite work out the way you hoped. It happens. I'm quite willing to give your next game a shot when the time for it rolls around.
1), 2) and 3) seem like relatively minor mistakes and they happen. 4) people will always criticise you mid-game usually from a position of total ignorance about the actual set-up.
I think you should GM again Dadarian and I'd fully support. However, I still maintain you should have had more experienced before running this game as per my general rule I outlined (which has been more or less ignored by everyone) and I think from not just this game but others I've been vindicated in believing this. But that's not a personal issue and since the game's over and next time you won't be so inexperienced I will absolutely support you innovating.
However, I do believe we really should think about my idea of a certain amount of Big playing experienced, along with a few Lites GMed, as a requirement. This game, from my perspective, wasn't a disaster or close to it, but had Dadarian played a bit more first I think he could have executed his ideas maybe a bit more smoothly. Although as first-time GMed games go, this was actually among the better ones I've seen, which is more of the reason I want there to be more stringent requirements, not official of course, but informally enforced.
I don't think that you need to GM a couple Lites in order to GM a Big, however since set up is 1/3 the game, having it double checked is not the worse idea out there.
Edit: However my experiance GMing other games in the past helped alot when applied to WW.
If you've done it in other fora that's fine too. And some people are naturally organised anyway, but I'm not at least and I try to make rules somewhat universal at least in theory if not in practice. In any case you carried out orders very well from what I've seen so this one isn't as applicable here.
The more important one for me though is having played in a certain amount of games. You really need to have played for quite a while, often years in some cases, to get the beginnings of a full grasp of different game dynamics
