The Art of Game Creation

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

On 11/17/2020 at 7:36 PM, Lotus said:

I have a game idea... Yes another one

Are the base chances for 0/1/2 cards and card frequency the same, such that people have a ~10 percent chance of getting a particular card each turn? That high a chance for kills and alignment scans worked out in Zillah's LG69 but maybe you wouldn't want to be able to soulcast a card into an alignment scanner.

Does the cheater submit their replacement action and pick which one of the three cards they want on the same turn? Can they play that card on the same turn they get it?

Everyone gets a card action and a role action, and the elim kill takes up someone's role action, correct?

You'll need a vote minimum/tie determination, PM rules(I'd guess closed) and an OoA, especially for the cheater and clever/one of swords actions.

[Straw he/him]

On 11/17/2020 at 7:36 PM, Lotus said:

I have a game idea... Yes another one

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bEqkC4UaTv-DnLgmt543qnXDJNNB_m0GjsS8mo6DY94/edit?usp=sharing

For the Honest, what kind of tells were you thinking?

Cards: How much is random and how much is predetermined? Is the "deck" an actual deck that has cards removed from it, or just a set of odds? Is the 0-2 thing random? Do Voidbringers have the same deck as everyone else?

Edited November 21, 2020 by Straw

[+Lotus she/her]

16 hours ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

Are the base chances for 0/1/2 cards and card frequency the same, such that people have a ~10 percent chance of getting a particular card each turn? That high a chance for kills and alignment scans worked out in Zillah's LG69 but maybe you wouldn't want to be able to soulcast a card into an alignment scanner.

Cards wouldn’t all be the same chances. I haven’t worked out what but soulcasting/Shardblades is going to be pretty hard to get.

16 hours ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

Does the cheater submit their replacement action and pick which one of the three cards they want on the same turn? Can they play that card on the same turn they get it?

They would submit the action and revive the replacement card the next turn.

 

16 hours ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

Everyone gets a card action and a role action, and the elim kill takes up someone's role action, correct

It would take up a card action. Because the role actions are like ‘out of game’ and the card actions are like ‘in the game.’

1 hour ago, Straw said:

For the Honest, what kind of tells were you thinking?

Like, ‘every time you lie you have to have a question mark somewhere in that post’ Something fairly small but if someone paying attention they might be able to tell.

1 hour ago, Straw said:

Cards: How much is random and how much is predetermined? Is the "deck" an actual deck that has cards removed from it, or just a set of odds? Is the 0-2 thing random? Do Voidbringers have the same deck as everyone else?

I’d love to have a actual deck but it will probably be RNG. The 0-2 is random, except if you have the lucky role, in that case it would be 1-2.

Voidbringers have the same deck.

[Guest Somebody from Scadrial]

I came up with this earlier would like some feedback:

There would be 3 factions, which would be,

Voidbringer: standard Elim

Listener: they win if at least one member lives to see the Voidbringers lose, they do not count towards parity bit if the number of Village is equal to the number of Elim and there is at least one Listener then the game won't end.

Knights Radiant: standard village

All factions will have these roles bit only ever one at a time.

Adhesion: roleblocks a chosen player.

Gravitation: changes a players target.

Division: kills a player, blockable by shardplate and shardblade.

Abrasion: nullify any actions targeting a specific player.

Progression: protects a player from an Elim kill or an division kill.

Illumination: swap two players surges.

Transformation: change a players surge into a chosen surge.

Transportation: (this is worded badly, I wasn't sure how to say it) swap any abilities targeting one player with a different player.

Cohesion: stop yourself from being Elim killed, only works once.

Tension: stop yourself from being division killed.

Village only roles and abilities:

Bondsmith (unique): detect either a players alignment or their non faction specific ability.

Shardblade: protect another player from the Elim kill, one time target.

Shardplate: protect yourself from the Elim kill, two time target.

Listener only roles and abilities (all are passive):

Dullform: will appear as Village to a Bondsmith alignment scan.

Workform: survive a single Elim kill.

Warform: survive a single division kill.

Nimbleform: nullify and actions targeting you, the targeter will not know.

Scholarform: know the role of a single player at the start of the game, if the player you know the role of dies you will learn the role of a random other player.

Listeners won't appear as having a role to the Bondsmith, no matter which action they choose they will appear as a Listener. Any Villagers will have both a shardplate and a shardblade. I believe this would be a long game, not sure on that though.

[Straw he/him]

7 hours ago, Somebody from Sel said:

Voidbringer: standard Elim

Listener: they win if at least one member lives to see the Voidbringers lose, they do not count towards parity bit if the number of Village is equal to the number of Elim and there is at least one Listener then the game won't end.

Knights Radiant: standard village

For the Listeners, is the first bolded bit essentially the same as saying that the Voidbringers must kill all Listeners to win?

Can both the Listeners and the Knights Radiant win?

7 hours ago, Somebody from Sel said:

All factions will have these roles bit only ever one at a time.

What exactly do you mean?

9 hours ago, Somebody from Sel said:

Cohesion: stop yourself from being Elim killed, only works once.

Does this mean that you can only protect yourself once, or does it mean that you'll automatically survive one elim kill?

9 hours ago, Somebody from Sel said:

Division: kills a player, blockable by shardplate and shardblade.

Shardblade: protect another player from the Elim kill, one time target.

Shardplate: protect yourself from the Elim kill, two time target.

Wouldn't it be easier to say that Blade and Plate block kills in general, given how they seem to block both elim and Division kills?

9 hours ago, Somebody from Sel said:

Shardblade: protect another player from the Elim kill, one time target.

Shardplate: protect yourself from the Elim kill, two time target.

By "one time target" do you mean that you can only try to save someone once, or that you can only successfully save someone once?

9 hours ago, Somebody from Sel said:

Nimbleform: nullify and actions targeting you, the targeter will not know.

Nullifying any actions against you is a bit strong IMO, given how it'd make you immune to any kills.

[Guest Somebody from Scadrial]

1 hour ago, Straw said:

For the Listeners, is the first bolded bit essentially the same as saying that the Voidbringers must kill all Listeners to win?

Can both the Listeners and the Knights Radiant win?

What exactly do you mean?

Does this mean that you can only protect yourself once, or does it mean that you'll automatically survive one elim kill?

Wouldn't it be easier to say that Blade and Plate block kills in general, given how they seem to block both elim and Division kills?

By "one time target" do you mean that you can only try to save someone once, or that you can only successfully save someone once?

Nullifying any actions against you is a bit strong IMO, given how it'd make you immune to any kills.

Yes and no, if the Voidbringers have more players than the Radiants then they win, if it's an equal number then Listeners mess with it.

Yes.

No matter which faction a player is (except Listener) they will have a surge, Bondsmith counts as a surge.

You have to actively choose to protect yourself but you can do that as many times as you want, you can only survive once.

Yes I wrote these in a weird order.

You can only try to save someone once, if you protect them, great if you don't well too bad.

Yes probably would only actually do anything once, but would always be able to do it.

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

G'day friends.

So I had this idea for a game setup.

It's pretty different from a typical mafia / werewolf setup, but I feel like maybe it could work. It's a single page of rules, though I won't pretend they are particularly simple in practice.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g6hFwS5AShes7Nd_pCPe4G4RlOc9rSi8_uqYMzW-53o/edit?usp=sharing

I don't really know if I would be in a good place to run this by the time I hypothetically got to the end of the SE games queue, so I will also say that if anybody else is interested in using this setup, they may.

[+Lotus she/her]

13 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

G'day friends.

So I had this idea for a game setup.

It's pretty different from a typical mafia / werewolf setup, but I feel like maybe it could work. It's a single page of rules, though I won't pretend they are particularly simple in practice.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g6hFwS5AShes7Nd_pCPe4G4RlOc9rSi8_uqYMzW-53o/edit?usp=sharing

I don't really know if I would be in a good place to run this by the time I hypothetically got to the end of the SE games queue, so I will also say that if anybody else is interested in using this setup, they may.

Sounds a bit like a free-for all game. Sounds fun though.

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

30 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

G'day friends.

So I had this idea for a game setup.

It's pretty different from a typical mafia / werewolf setup, but I feel like maybe it could work. It's a single page of rules, though I won't pretend they are particularly simple in practice.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g6hFwS5AShes7Nd_pCPe4G4RlOc9rSi8_uqYMzW-53o/edit?usp=sharing

I don't really know if I would be in a good place to run this by the time I hypothetically got to the end of the SE games queue, so I will also say that if anybody else is interested in using this setup, they may.

Does actions being publicly revealed include the target(s) of those actions?

Is there any benefit to having a low cardinal? It seems like having a low number means you have to kill more people to win and also makes you a target because everyone else will want to kill you if they find out. People with low cardinal could have more clout, but then it might be necessary to adjust action thresholds up.

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

36 minutes ago, Lotus said:

Sounds a bit like a free-for all game. Sounds fun though.

This game is pretty much a free-for-all game. You only win by surviving to the end, so clearly it's every person for themselves.

This game is pretty much a faction game. There are lots of different groups of people that can win together, but some groups have exclusive win conditions.

This game is pretty much a mafia game. A few people want to kill almost everyone else, and almost everyone else wants to stop those few people.

12 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

Does actions being publicly revealed include the target(s) of those actions?

Yes, that was what I had in mind. The downsides of taking higher profile actions are substantial, I think, but then so are the benefits.

Quote

Is there any benefit to having a low cardinal? It seems like having a low number means you have to kill more people to win and also makes you a target because everyone else will want to kill you if they find out. People with low cardinal could have more clout, but then it might be necessary to adjust action thresholds up.

Mechanically: No. Having a lower cardinal is strictly more difficult.

Within limits, I'm okay with some roles being harder than others. The odds are generally stacked against a serial killer type role and they are still quite fun to play in my opinion.

I also don't believe the disadvantages are quite as severe as they initially seem. Nobody has a cardinal of zero, so you're never going at it completely alone. You can generally pick who you would like to team up with, and if you reveal yourself as low cardinal to somebody and ask them to be one of your only allies I feel there is generally less incentive for distrust. I also think it will be pretty hard for high cardinal players to work together in larger groups, for much the same reason the village doesn't always beat the elims, so I suspect that players of both lower and higher cardinals might end up as part of smallish coalitions, at least in practice.

All that said, I'm definitely not opposed to buffing low cardinal players some. I'm open to giving them a bonus to clout, if there's a sensible way to determine what that bonus should be for different cardinals (and you are right, action thresholds might also need to be revisited in that case).

[Straw he/him]

2 hours ago, DrakeMarshall said:

G'day friends.

So I had this idea for a game setup.

It's pretty different from a typical mafia / werewolf setup, but I feel like maybe it could work. It's a single page of rules, though I won't pretend they are particularly simple in practice.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g6hFwS5AShes7Nd_pCPe4G4RlOc9rSi8_uqYMzW-53o/edit?usp=sharing

I don't really know if I would be in a good place to run this by the time I hypothetically got to the end of the SE games queue, so I will also say that if anybody else is interested in using this setup, they may.

Looking at the rules, I'm confused as to why Investigate costs much more than Assail. It seems like eliminating someone would be much better than learning their Cardinal.

Also, what exactly is revealed when your action is announced?

It might be good to give the Overt method more clout, given how +1 clout is a minor advantage, since it's not at a threshold (4 clout is needed to kill, so going over wouldn't be that good). It also comes with a pretty severe disadvantage, since people know your offensive actions and can cancel them. It also requires you to put things in one cycle behind, which means you lose a ton of flexibility. I can't really see people using it.

I agree that lower Cardinal players should be given some benefit, and giving them more clout seems like a solid solution.

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

Just now, Straw said:

Looking at the rules, I'm confused as to why Investigate costs much more than Assail. It seems like eliminating someone would be much better than learning their Cardinal.

I believe this is fairly realistic. Eliminating a potential threat is generally a lot simpler than determining whether or not you can trust someone.

In a game like this, I'd say trust is more valuable than the removal of a potential enemy. Or at least it is if your cardinal is high.

Of course, some people might not see it that way, in which case killing is indeed a more efficient playstyle.

12 minutes ago, Straw said:

Also, what exactly is revealed when your action is announced?

Under the current setup, pretty much everything. It is revealed that X player took Y action targeting player(s) Z.

Actions that aren't covert have something in common with voting in a regular SE game.

14 minutes ago, Straw said:

It might be good to give the Overt method more clout, given how +1 clout is a minor advantage, since it's not at a threshold (4 clout is needed to kill, so going over wouldn't be that good). It also comes with a pretty severe disadvantage, since people know your offensive actions and can cancel them. It also requires you to put things in one cycle behind, which means you lose a ton of flexibility. I can't really see people using it.

I do think it is a reasonably substantial advantage, considering that overt actions end up having nearly twice the clout of covert actions. You can get more bang for your buck if you're willing to plan ahead and let people see you coming, but there is some element of diminishing returns. I can think of several cases where an overt approach would be pretty useful, but they aren't most cases.

It might be a good idea to increase the flexibility of overt actions, though. I feel there should still be some penalty for canceling an overt action, but maybe it could just be a -1 penalty to the clout of whatever action you decide to take in its place, instead of not being able to take an action. This introduces more IKYK because you can never know for sure if they are actually taking that action or just pretending, which I think is a feature.

Of course, I would be pretty surprised if my best guesses for what all the base "clout" numbers should be all turned out to be correct, and that's something worth watching for if this ever got run, so you may be right about needing to increase the clout of overt actions.

44 minutes ago, Straw said:

I agree that lower Cardinal players should be given some benefit, and giving them more clout seems like a solid solution.

Yeah, I might think about ways I can work that into the rules.

[Straw he/him]

5 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

I believe this is fairly realistic. Eliminating a potential threat is generally a lot simpler than determining whether or not you can trust someone.

In a game like this, I'd say trust is more valuable than the removal of a potential enemy. Or at least it is if your cardinal is high.

It might be more valuable in some cases, but I don't think it's that much more valuable.

7 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

I do think it is a reasonably substantial advantage, considering that overt actions end up having nearly twice the clout of covert actions. You can get more bang for your buck if you're willing to plan ahead and let people see you coming, but there is some element of diminishing returns. I can think of several cases where an overt approach would be pretty useful, but they aren't most cases.

It might be a good idea to increase the flexibility of overt actions, though. I feel there should still be some penalty for canceling an overt action, but maybe it could just be a -1 penalty to the clout of whatever action you decide to take in its place, instead of not being able to take an action. This introduces more IKYK because you can never know for sure if they are actually taking that action or just pretending, which I think is a feature.

Of course, I would be pretty surprised if my best guesses for what all the base "clout" numbers should be all turned out to be correct, and that's something worth watching for if this ever got run, so you may be right about needing to increase the clout of overt actions.

I think you're missing what I'm saying about thresholds. You seem to be evaluating Overt based on how much clout it gives, rather than evaluating how useful that extra clout is. Consider the following:

-A minimum of four clout is required to kill someone.
-A minimum of seven clout is required to investigate someone.

Having five clout rather than four or three does not seem to be particularly useful for either of these action. For example, if you are attacking someone on your own, you have little reason to be Overt rather than Standard, as +1 clout would not be enough to overcome any defenses they might have. Similarly, if two people are working together to investigate someone, their cheapest option is Covert + Standard. Going above that only offers an advantage if they are both Overt and there is only a single Covert player defending their target.

Essentially, Overt isn't all that good regardless of disadvantage, considering that the thresholds are composed of fours and threes, meaning that a five isn't very useful. Overt only seems to be useful in situations with large teams directly opposing each other, and it isn't very useful even then.

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

30 minutes ago, Straw said:

-A minimum of four clout is required to kill someone.
-A minimum of seven clout is required to investigate someone.

You need an excess of four clout to kill someone and an excess of seven clout to investigate, meaning you need at least five clout to kill and at least eight clout to investigate.

[Straw he/him]

2 hours ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

You need an excess of four clout to kill someone and an excess of seven clout to investigate, meaning you need at least five clout to kill and at least eight clout to investigate.

Okay, in that case Drake's completely correct.

[xinoehp512 he/him]

A little while ago I had an idea for a faction game. The main idea would be that each player would potentially be able to be a member of more than one faction, and the game would end when one faction controlled the majority. A bit bare-bones, I know, but... thoughts?

[Elandera she/her]

2 minutes ago, xinoehp512 said:

A little while ago I had an idea for a faction game. The main idea would be that each player would potentially be able to be a member of more than one faction, and the game would end when one faction controlled the majority. A bit bare-bones, I know, but... thoughts?

There would need to be some kind of balance with the people in more than one faction that keeps them from entirely selling out one faction over the other. You'd also need to make sure each one had the same number of potential traitors, so they don't feel cheated.

[Mat he/him]

Because my LG shouldn't be ran anytime near the AG, today I designed another LG to run once my slot comes up. It's set during tWoK time period. Presenting: Alethi Politics!

The main thing I'm looking for feedback on is the marketplace, particularly the pricing. Any feedback, however, is much appreciated. Thanks! 

[|TJ| he/him]

3 hours ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Because my LG shouldn't be ran anytime near the AG, today I designed another LG to run once my slot comes up. It's set during tWoK time period. Presenting: Alethi Politics!

The main thing I'm looking for feedback on is the marketplace, particularly the pricing. Any feedback, however, is much appreciated. Thanks! 

I assume the game doesn't begin with a Highstorm, since you've mentioned D3, 6 and son. Does the cycle get disturbed by the Highstorm Event triggered by the Highprinces? For example, we have normal Highstorm at the beginning of D3. Let's assume that Highprinces decide to have a Highstorm in N3, so we have a Highstorm Event in D4. Does the next regular Highstorm occur as usual on D6, or 3 cycles after this Highstorm on H7?

I'm asking because I'm trying to calculate the amount of Days it would take to buy a knife. If a player starts with 3 spheres, and there's a Highstorm event somewhere involved (makes it to 6 spheres), they still need 6 more spheres. The earliest a player can buy the knife is N7 (not sure about OoA, so if kills are before market actions, then the earliest they can use is during N8), provided the Highstorm is the event Highprinces triggers for the second time before other events (earliest possible in N6). And this is the best case scenario, because if someone with zero spheres initially decide they want it, then N9 is the earliest they can get it (again, assuming Highprinces trigger Highstorm event in N6), meaning N10 is the earliest they can use (depending on OoA), which is a tad too late. Because of this, I'd advice against breaking the knife during the Contract of Peace. I'd let them keep it, like the Assassin's Kill.

Spy seems a tad bit costly for an action scan. But I'm not going to complain much about the other items as they can be halved by Democracy. Speaking of, when the prices are halved, how do you plan on round off the prices for objects costing odd number of spheres? Round-up or round-down?

Also, do Dalinar and Elhokar know each other?

[Elandera she/her]

4 hours ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Because my LG shouldn't be ran anytime near the AG, today I designed another LG to run once my slot comes up. It's set during tWoK time period. Presenting: Alethi Politics!

The main thing I'm looking for feedback on is the marketplace, particularly the pricing. Any feedback, however, is much appreciated. Thanks! 

Just taking a quick glance for now, but here are my initial thoughts.

Quote

Twice per game, Elhokar may self-protect.

This seems low, especially considering the number of kills out there (elim, knife, assassin). Maybe once a cycle, so they have to choose between a day or night protect?

Quote

Highstorm: Fierce winds blow from the east, illumination and destruction in its wake. Every player gains 3 spheres.

...

Every third cycle (C3, C6, etc) there will be a Highstorm, which gives everyone 2 spheres.

I take it the vote to create a highstorm would be in addition to the regular storm?

Kind of along that note, would events be made public before they happen? I'm thinking in particular of the Political Vengeance one. Would players know what ties could do?

Quote

A player with possession of a legal document can use it during any Night cycle, protecting a player from the next Day’s execution.

I assume this one is basically a balance/concealment for Elhokar's ability. My only concern is the chance of it being used accurately are pretty low. It's somewhat rare that an exe vote can be predicted, while Elhokar's ability would be way more accurate. If I were an elim, I'd basically try to kill anyone who survived an exe at all just because it's statistically more likely to be Elhokar than not, unless the exe was super obvious for some reason before the day turn started.

[Mat he/him]

9 hours ago, TJ Shade said:

I assume the game doesn't begin with a Highstorm, since you've mentioned D3, 6 and son. Does the cycle get disturbed by the Highstorm Event triggered by the Highprinces? For example, we have normal Highstorm at the beginning of D3. Let's assume that Highprinces decide to have a Highstorm in N3, so we have a Highstorm Event in D4. Does the next regular Highstorm occur as usual on D6, or 3 cycles after this Highstorm on H7?

It does not get disturbed, so in the example there would be Highstorms D3, D4, and D6. The normal storms give less spheres, though.

9 hours ago, TJ Shade said:

I'm asking because I'm trying to calculate the amount of Days it would take to buy a knife. If a player starts with 3 spheres, and there's a Highstorm event somewhere involved (makes it to 6 spheres), they still need 6 more spheres. The earliest a player can buy the knife is N7 (not sure about OoA, so if kills are before market actions, then the earliest they can use is during N8), provided the Highstorm is the event Highprinces triggers for the second time before other events (earliest possible in N6). And this is the best case scenario, because if someone with zero spheres initially decide they want it, then N9 is the earliest they can get it (again, assuming Highprinces trigger Highstorm event in N6), meaning N10 is the earliest they can use (depending on OoA), which is a tad too late. Because of this, I'd advice against breaking the knife during the Contract of Peace. I'd let them keep it, like the Assassin's Kill.

Hmm, yeah. I'll change that.

9 hours ago, TJ Shade said:

Spy seems a tad bit costly for an action scan. But I'm not going to complain much about the other items as they can be halved by Democracy. Speaking of, when the prices are halved, how do you plan on round off the prices for objects costing odd number of spheres? Round-up or round-down?

Maybe I'm still influenced by losing my first elim game to a double-action scan

I think I'll keep that one the same. I legitimately did not think about how I would round the odd ones  But looking at it now, 3 would go to 2, 5 would go to 3, and 7 would go to 4... so that's up, I guess.

9 hours ago, TJ Shade said:

Also, do Dalinar and Elhokar know each other?

No. Should they?

---

9 hours ago, Elandera said:

This seems low, especially considering the number of kills out there (elim, knife, assassin). Maybe once a cycle, so they have to choose between a day or night protect?

I mean, I don't want him to be indestructible... this would make Elhokar fundamentally proof from execution, which would then make him vulnerable by night, which I guess works. I'm trying to think about how this would go (Thinking out loud here)... Elhokar is up for execution, uses this, survives. The elims know that either they're Elhokar or they had the item, and probably will kill them anyway, but there are other protects... yeah, I think that'd be fine, actually. I'll change it.

9 hours ago, Elandera said:

I take it the vote to create a highstorm would be in addition to the regular storm?

Yes, it is in addition. (See above, TJ) If the Highprinces voted for a Highstorm the same cycle there already would be one, they'd get the spheres from both storms, so 5 altogether.

9 hours ago, Elandera said:

Kind of along that note, would events be made public before they happen? I'm thinking in particular of the Political Vengeance one. Would players know what ties could do?

Yes. Whichever event is triggered is noted in the Day cycle afterward. So if the Highprinces triggered Political Vengeance N4, the D5 writeup would include a notice that Political Vengeance had been triggered.

9 hours ago, Elandera said:

I assume this one is basically a balance/concealment for Elhokar's ability. My only concern is the chance of it being used accurately are pretty low. It's somewhat rare that an exe vote can be predicted, while Elhokar's ability would be way more accurate. If I were an elim, I'd basically try to kill anyone who survived an exe at all just because it's statistically more likely to be Elhokar than not, unless the exe was super obvious for some reason before the day turn started.

While it does function like that, really I just stole it from LG70's Adjudicator role because I liked the mechanic  In that game... well, in that game the neutral had the role, so it probably wasn't used to its fullest potential, but I think it could have been used somewhat accurately had it been in village hands. But that's only one game.

---

Thanks for the feedback! 

[Archer he/him]

Howdy. Quick question, would running an I Hate Dragons game require a pass? It’s technically not published, merely available Sanderson content: link.

I would like to run an IHD game. I figure if I sign up now, by the time I get to make it happen, I’ll be experienced enough not to mess it up. The pitch is that Skip and Master Johnston got eaten by a dragon, leaving the hunting party leaderless. One player [ROLE NAME PENDING - What's this called?] will get to take up the crossbow Johnston dropped when he was being devoured. Everyone is pretty sure that a few other members of the party [the elims] had a knack for attracting dragons, but for some reason, nobody’s coming forward! The best thing to do then is to push people out one-by-one to see if the dragons eat them.

If this does need a pass, I’ll re-flavour it as a Legion game, with a similar premise to QF6 when players were aspects. Anyway, the basic, un-flavoured rules are here, I’d welcome any feedback:

I Hate Dragons Game (That Needs a Better Title)

In this 15-player Quick Fix game, there are three [elims], who have a Google doc. to collaborate in. [Elims] can secretly kill one player at the end of every cycle, except for the first. [Elims] win if they outnumber the [villagers]. [Villagers] win by killing all of the [elims].

At the end of the first cycle, one player will be elected [NAME PENDING]. Votes are cast through GM PMs. The total number of votes each player receives will be revealed in Cycle Two but the identity of each voter will remain secret. The [NAME PENDING] becomes immune to [elim night kills] and is given the ability to kill one individual [because they have the crossbow]. When they submit that action through their GM PM, the result will be revealed at the beginning of the next cycle. All kills will be announced as the type they are.

Order of Operations: [NAME PENDING kill], [Village vote], [Elim kill]

Players who are inactive for an entire cycle will be given a warning. Players who are inactive for two full cycles will be replaced. Ties will be decided randomly. PMs for this game are closed. 

[Elandera she/her]

36 minutes ago, Archer said:

If this does need a pass, I’ll re-flavour it as a Legion game, with a similar premise to QF6 when players were aspects. Anyway, the basic, un-flavoured rules are here, I’d welcome any feedback:

I Hate Dragons Game (That Needs a Better Title)

This link doesn't appear to be working. (EDIT: Or maybe it's not a link and I should keep reading...)

Also, we've had games in the past based on available content (Defending Elysium, I believe), so you should be fine without a pass. It is still Sanderson's writing.

Edited December 29, 2020 by Elandera

[Straw he/him]

54 minutes ago, Archer said:

Howdy. Quick question, would running an I Hate Dragons game require a pass? It’s technically not published, merely available Sanderson content: link.

I don't believe it would require a pass, since it is a Sanderson work.

54 minutes ago, Archer said:

I figure if I sign up now, by the time I get to make it happen, I’ll be experienced enough not to mess it up.

Are you requesting a spot on the QF list? I can't tell from this.

54 minutes ago, Archer said:

I Hate Dragons Game (That Needs a Better Title)

In this 15-player Quick Fix game, there are three [elims], who have a Google doc. to collaborate in. [Elims] can secretly kill one player at the end of every cycle, except for the first. [Elims] win if they outnumber the [villagers]. [Villagers] win by killing all of the [elims].

At the end of the first cycle, one player will be elected [NAME PENDING]. Votes are cast through GM PMs. The total number of votes each player receives will be revealed in Cycle Two but the identity of each voter will remain secret. The [NAME PENDING] becomes immune to [elim night kills] and is given the ability to kill one individual [because they have the crossbow]. When they submit that action through their GM PM, the result will be revealed at the beginning of the next cycle. All kills will be announced as the type they are.

Order of Operations: [NAME PENDING kill], [Village vote], [Elim kill]

Players who are inactive for an entire cycle will be given a warning. Players who are inactive for two full cycles will be replaced. Ties will be decided randomly. PMs for this game are closed. 

Hmm, I'd say this is a bit too strongly in favor of the village. The elected kill is going to be solidly village controlled, since it's voted on by all players and elected player still has to make a reasonable kill (an elected elim can't just kill a top village player without drawing suspicion). The fact that it provides protection as well makes it even better. This means that the village has a bit too much KP. I'm not sure what you should do to fix it, but it's definitely village-sided.

EDIT: Wait, is the election every cycle? I read it as that but I'm not sure.

EDIT2: Okay, if I'm understanding correctly now, it's one election and one kill. In that case I'd say it's fine.

Edited December 29, 2020 by Straw

[Archer he/him]

35 minutes ago, Elandera said:

This link doesn't appear to be working. (EDIT: Or maybe it's not a link and I should keep reading...)

Also, we've had games in the past based on available content (Defending Elysium, I believe), so you should be fine without a pass. It is still Sanderson's writing.

Assuming you meant that underlined text, not the IHD link, yes, that's just a title. 

And good to know, thank you. I want sure because as far as I can tell no one has run a IHD one yet. 

32 minutes ago, Straw said:

I don't believe it would require a pass, since it is a Sanderson work.

Are you requesting a spot on the QF list? I can't tell from this.

Hmm, I'd say this is a bit too strongly in favor of the village. The elected kill is going to be solidly village controlled, since it's voted on by all players and elected player still has to make a reasonable kill (an elected elim can't just kill a top village player without drawing suspicion). The fact that it provides protection as well makes it even better. This means that the village has a bit too much KP. I'm not sure what you should do to fix it, but it's definitely village-sided.

EDIT: Wait, is the election every cycle? I read it as that but I'm not sure.

EDIT2: Okay, if I'm understanding correctly now, it's one election and one kill. In that case I'd say it's fine.

I am officially requesting a place on the QF list please. 

The group votes to kill someone every round. Elims get one secret kill every round as well, except for C1. In C1, the election happens. It's largely a mechanic designed to give people something to talk about in C1, so the reward for winning can be changed if you think it's OP. I figured because voting is secret, the elims have an okay chance of getting one of themselves elected or making it look like they've done that, which could be the basis of a village mobbing of the elected person. The elected person would have to get protection from Elim kills otherwise they'd be an obvious target. Hm. 

Edit: also the crossbow kill can only be used once

Edited December 30, 2020 by Archer