The Art of Game Creation

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

2 hours ago, Aeoryi said:

This seems like Capitalist Tyrian falls

in Capitalist Tyrian Falls you have to pay subscription fees on your vials of metal to get access to power roles and if you want you can risk paying lower rates on the black market but in that case there's a chance you get metal poisoning side effects from impure alloys also u can bribe the elendel constabulary to kill everyone

[Kasimir he/him]

12 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

in Capitalist Tyrian Falls you have to pay subscription fees on your vials of metal to get access to power roles and if you want you can risk paying lower rates on the black market but in that case there's a chance you get metal poisoning side effects from impure alloys also u can bribe the elendel constabulary to kill everyone

Sounds like crypto fevermeme sir >:P 

[The Unknown Medallion he/him]

34 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

in Capitalist Tyrian Falls you have to pay subscription fees on your vials of metal to get access to power roles and if you want you can risk paying lower rates on the black market but in that case there's a chance you get metal poisoning side effects from impure alloys also u can bribe the elendel constabulary to kill everyone

In Capitalist Tyrian Falls, roles are metal monopolies, and the player with the roles can ask whatever price they want. Whoever has the most money at the end wins. But two players can choose to join together to make a corporation. If a corporation is made, those two players immediately win and everyone else loses.

[Amanuensis he/him]

Yeah personally I’ve had enough of Capitalism in the real world, thanks but no thanks

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

we routinely have games be flavored as the bad guys infiltrating the good guys and replacing some of them, I figured why not actually let them do that

then role and distro analysis isn't an exercise of guessing what the GM would do, it's actually a part of solving and something the village can use

and the elims get to choose their own team composition basically

they basically get a heist planning montage before the game starts

the costs and stuff is just so that it's balanced and there are actual tradeoffs involved

[The Unknown Medallion he/him]

@DrakeMarshall cause who needs sleep.

The coinshot feels a little bit to cheep to remove. Should probably be equivalent to the Seeker, or one in either direction. 

Mistborn feels a little under priced. Average is 8.125, so 8 is probably a slightly better price, but it's not too far off.

The elims can currently make the game basically roleless (leaving only Smokers and Tineyes), which could be very powerful for certain team comps. Not sure if you want them to be able to do that.

[Aeoryi she/her]

41 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

we routinely have games be flavored as the bad guys infiltrating the good guys and replacing some of them, I figured why not actually let them do that

then role and distro analysis isn't an exercise of guessing what the GM would do, it's actually a part of solving and something the village can use

and the elims get to choose their own team composition basically

they basically get a heist planning montage before the game starts

the costs and stuff is just so that it's balanced and there are actual tradeoffs involved

It's a cool concept, but I feel like it'll need to be real balanced. 

Also, what's the current stance on redirects?

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

smhhh you guys these are back-of-the-napkin figures not sacred numbers (yet) !!

2 hours ago, The Known Novel said:

@DrakeMarshall cause who needs sleep.

The coinshot feels a little bit to cheep to remove. Should probably be equivalent to the Seeker, or one in either direction. 

Mistborn feels a little under priced. Average is 8.125, so 8 is probably a slightly better price, but it's not too far off.

The elims can currently make the game basically roleless (leaving only Smokers and Tineyes), which could be very powerful for certain team comps. Not sure if you want them to be able to do that.

I'd contend that Seekers are usually substantively better than Coinshots in any setup that isn't pretty mechanics heavy (in really mechanically crunchy games, I've been on both sides of situations where the village knows who the bad guys are but for whatever reason can't kill them fast enough using just the vote and badly needed a coinshot -- but in games that aren't brimming with shenanigans, you can safely assume that knowing who the bad guys are is a pretty short step away from beating the bad guys). Like sure a coinshot is clearly better if the person using it is endowed with flawless or near-flawless accuracy but when a coinshot misses it's not great for the village and when a seeker "misses" they still get a confirmed villager out of it which is still actually really really good. Seeing as there are in fact more villagers than elims the fact that a Seeker does something way more useful when it targets a villager is nothing to sneeze at. I could possibly arrive at the conclusion that removing a Coinshot should cost 5 rather than 4 points, however.

Mistborns are basically gambling on stilts.  As you've noted, you're getting a slightly better overall value by taking mistborn, but you're sacrificing the predictability of being able to do any one thing reliably.

I do want the elims to be able to make the game nearly roleless if they decide to go that route. All-vanilla games are perfectly respectable! And assuming sensible team sizes, I'm not exactly sure how an all-vanilla game would qualify as very powerful for any one side. In any case, it is not all-vanilla, since the elims won't quite be able to afford that. And when you think about it, the few remaining village power roles will be essentially confirmed village once the village realizes what the distro is (mind, being "confirmed village" isn't quite as helpful when there's no Lurcher around to keep you alive after you claim, is it but it still lets those people claim and potentially avert an ML if a need arises). There are complexities but overall yes I do want the option to be on the table if the elims feel they want it.

2 hours ago, Aeoryi said:

It's a cool concept, but I feel like it'll need to be real balanced. 

Also, what's the current stance on redirects?

As all things should be

How do you mean?

[Aeoryi she/her]

12 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

smhhh you guys these are back-of-the-napkin figures not sacred numbers (yet) !!

I'd contend that Seekers are usually substantively better than Coinshots in any setup that isn't pretty mechanics heavy (in really mechanically crunchy games, I've been on both sides of situations where the village knows who the bad guys are but for whatever reason can't kill them fast enough using just the vote and badly needed a coinshot -- but in games that aren't brimming with shenanigans, you can safely assume that knowing who the bad guys are is a pretty short step away from beating the bad guys). Like sure a coinshot is clearly better if the person using it is endowed with flawless or near-flawless accuracy but when a coinshot misses it's not great for the village and when a seeker "misses" they still get a confirmed villager out of it which is still actually really really good. Seeing as there are in fact more villagers than elims the fact that a Seeker does something way more useful when it targets a villager is nothing to sneeze at. I could possibly arrive at the conclusion that removing a Coinshot should cost 5 rather than 4 points, however.

Mistborns are basically gambling on stilts.  As you've noted, you're getting a slightly better overall value by taking mistborn, but you're sacrificing the predictability of being able to do any one thing reliably.

I do want the elims to be able to make the game nearly roleless if they decide to go that route. All-vanilla games are perfectly respectable! And assuming sensible team sizes, I'm not exactly sure how an all-vanilla game would qualify as very powerful for any one side. In any case, it is not all-vanilla, since the elims won't quite be able to afford that. And when you think about it, the few remaining village power roles will be essentially confirmed village once the village realizes what the distro is (mind, being "confirmed village" isn't quite as helpful when there's no Lurcher around to keep you alive after you claim, is it but it still lets those people claim and potentially avert an ML if a need arises). There are complexities but overall yes I do want the option to be on the table if the elims feel they want it.

As all things should be

How do you mean?

What's like, the general guideline for redirects (would mega arson + that rule set I posted earlier + redirects + scans be too much)?

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

21 minutes ago, Aeoryi said:

What's like, the general guideline for redirects (would mega arson + that rule set I posted earlier + redirects + scans be too much)?

Personally, I rather like redirects

They can pretty easily fit into a lot of setups, I'd say.

In terms of balance, redirects can be decently strong. The main thing I'd compare them to is roleblocks. Being able to turn an enemy's actions against them is just plain stronger than just being able to block them. That said, redirects can sometimes be a fair sight harder to aim than roleblocks, particularly if you aren't allowed to just redirect somebody onto themselves, or if it's something a little more complicated like a transporter type role. For instance if you want to redirect an elim kill back at the elims you've effectively got to find two elims, one to redirect from (and more specifically the one who is submitting the elim kill that night, not just any elim will do) and the other to redirect to. Potentially difficult but also rewarding.

In a game with both roleblocks and redirects, you'll probably have to decide whether you do roleblocks or redirects first in the order of actions. (Or you could RNG it or something that works too ) It's largely a matter of personal preference tbh. I've recently been sold on doing roleblocks first since it means roleblocks are still sometimes better than redirects cuz they get higher priority.

...I think that's all I can think of to say about redirects and thus concludes my TED Talk

[Aeoryi she/her]

12 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

Personally, I rather like redirects

They can pretty easily fit into a lot of setups, I'd say.

In terms of balance, redirects can be decently strong. The main thing I'd compare them to is roleblocks. Being able to turn an enemy's actions against them is just plain stronger than just being able to block them. That said, redirects can sometimes be a fair sight harder to aim than roleblocks, particularly if you aren't allowed to just redirect somebody onto themselves, or if it's something a little more complicated like a transporter type role. For instance if you want to redirect an elim kill back at the elims you've effectively got to find two elims, one to redirect from (and more specifically the one who is submitting the elim kill that night, not just any elim will do) and the other to redirect to. Potentially difficult but also rewarding.

In a game with both roleblocks and redirects, you'll probably have to decide whether you do roleblocks or redirects first in the order of actions. (Or you could RNG it or something that works too ) It's largely a matter of personal preference tbh. I've recently been sold on doing roleblocks first since it means roleblocks are still sometimes better than redirects cuz they get higher priority.

...I think that's all I can think of to say about redirects and thus concludes my TED Talk

Which would be better?

Option A:

Spoiler

Duralumin: Copy an action that targets you onto the caster. Note: You still receive the action as well. 

Nicrosil: Target two players. An action targeting one or your targets will be redirected to the other target, and as well as the other way. You may not target yourself.

Atium: Target a player. An action targeting you will be redirected into your target. This effect may also be reversed in order to receive the actions targeting your target.

Malatium: Target a player to see if they were role blocked, and If so, by whom. If your target was roleblocked instead, you receive information of where the effect landed.

Brass: Grant RB and Redirect immunity to your target. Upon doing this, you also receive the same immunity.

Option B:

Spoiler

Brass: Any action targeting your target will receive rb and redirection immunity.

Duralumin: Target a player to duplicate any action targeting you onto them as well.

Nicrosil: Redirect an action targeting your target to yourself.

Atium: Redirect an action targeting your target to your target's target

Malatium: Target a player to see if they were interfered with. If it is a role-block, you will receive the identity of the person who role-blocked them. If it is a redirect, you will see who it ended up on. You are unable to differentiate the identity scan results. (You recieve, "_____ was/was not interfered with this cycle. 《If it was interference》 <identity> was involved with the interference.")

 

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

I like option B slightly better in that the rules feel a little cleaner, but they both ought to work.

Flavor-wise, is there a particular reason why the enhancement metals function as redirects? Is fine if not I know I can be weird about making all the roles more flavorful than sensible

[The Unknown Medallion he/him]

14 hours ago, DrakeMarshall said:

I could possibly arrive at the conclusion that removing a Coinshot should cost 5 rather than 4 points, however.

That's what I was getting at. They're called Terminal Seekers for a reason. They're pretty close to even, but most would probably make a case for Coinshots being worse, so in either direction. 

14 hours ago, DrakeMarshall said:

do want the elims to be able to make the game nearly roleless if they decide to go that route. All-vanilla games are perfectly respectable! And assuming sensible team sizes, I'm not exactly sure how an all-vanilla game would qualify as very powerful for any one side. In any case, it is not all-vanilla, since the elims won't quite be able to afford that. And when you think about it, the few remaining village power roles will be essentially confirmed village once the village realizes what the distro is (mind, being "confirmed village" isn't quite as helpful when there's no Lurcher around to keep you alive after you claim, is it but it still lets those people claim and potentially avert an ML if a need arises). There are complexities but overall yes I do want the option to be on the table if the elims feel they want it.

I kinda misphrased the tone of that end comment, it was less of a suggestion and more of a genuine question. My logic on it being pretty powerful for certain teams is because a team that's good at making fakeclaims and powerwolfing can pretty easily (well, not easily, but shed a lot of confusion on it) hide the absence of roles. Most teams and most tactics it wouldn't matter too much though.

[Aeoryi she/her]

5 hours ago, DrakeMarshall said:

I like option B slightly better in that the rules feel a little cleaner, but they both ought to work.

Flavor-wise, is there a particular reason why the enhancement metals function as redirects? Is fine if not I know I can be weird about making all the roles more flavorful than sensible

The internal metals function as base

The external metals function as utility

The enhancement metals function as disruption. Pushing ones are role-blocks, pulling ones are redirects.

The temporal metals function as scanners and utility.

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

On 11/10/2023 at 4:14 PM, Aeoryi said:

The internal metals function as base

The external metals function as utility

The enhancement metals function as disruption. Pushing ones are role-blocks, pulling ones are redirects.

The temporal metals function as scanners and utility.

ohhh clever you I didn't notice that, cheers

On 11/10/2023 at 4:02 PM, The Known Novel said:

That's what I was getting at. They're called Terminal Seekers for a reason. They're pretty close to even, but most would probably make a case for Coinshots being worse, so in either direction. 

I kinda misphrased the tone of that end comment, it was less of a suggestion and more of a genuine question. My logic on it being pretty powerful for certain teams is because a team that's good at making fakeclaims and powerwolfing can pretty easily (well, not easily, but shed a lot of confusion on it) hide the absence of roles. Most teams and most tactics it wouldn't matter too much though.

well if they claim to have roles when there actually aren't many roles then from the village's view at face value that implies the elims must have spent some of their points on having roles of their own, so people with roles will automatically be in a suspect pool and the elims will have just placed themselves in that suspect pool by pretending to have roles and then if one of them dies and flips without a role the sham will be rather ruined

if they are good enough at powerwolfing to play the confusion and pull it off anyway, I'd say they deserve the advantage they get from doing so

[Aeoryi she/her]

6 minutes ago, DrakeMarshall said:

ohhh clever you I didn't notice that, cheers

well if they claim to have roles when there actually aren't many roles then from the village's view at face value that implies the elims must have spent some of their points on having roles of their own, so people with roles will automatically be in a suspect pool and the elims will have just placed themselves in that suspect pool by pretending to have roles and then if one of them dies and flips without a role the sham will be rather ruined

if they are good enough at powerwolfing to play the confusion and pull it off anyway, I'd say they deserve the advantage they get from doing so

I think maybe having more roles might help. Otherwise, there's clearly ones you have to prioritize. Augur, seer, or maybe even Oracle might help.

I think Striker's MR 62(?) In the shadow of ash had a cool unsnapped mechanic, that might help.

[Aeoryi she/her]

I am looking for feedback on this idea, it is very rough, but could be interesting:

Spoiler

MECHANICS:

There is an execution each cycle. 1 vote minimum. Ties do not kill anyone, but take away all of their breath and randomly distribute it amongst the voters involved in the tie. 

 

Kills are not differentiated. Survivals, however, are. Returned survivals will be, “____ was killed but Returned!” or “____ was attacked, but saved!”

 

Each player starts out with 1 breath. A player who has 0 breath gains the Drab role. You cannot go beneath 0 breath, attempting to do so will result in a failed action. If they go above 0 breath, one loses the Drab role. A player is told how many breaths they have at the start of a cycle.

 

The breath mechanic works so that way no breaths are ever lost. Upon a player dying, their breath will be given to a player who voted for them recently. If they were not voted on, then it will go to the player they voted for most recently, and if they did not vote on anyone, the breath will go to the person who killed them.

 

A player may do any of the following things with breath:

Use 2 breaths to role-block a player, returning one breath to the caster and one breath to the target,

Use 2 breaths to protect a player, returning a breath to the caster and the target. If they were attacked, the breath goes to the attacker and the target,

Give all their breath to another player,

Use 1 breath to move their vote Anonymously, returning the breath to the person they vote for,

Use 4 breaths to kill a player, distributing the breath like normal kills.

Any non-returned player has a 33% chance of returning on any given kill, and gain the Returned role, losing their breath as if they had died, and instead gaining a single use divine breath. 

ROLES:

Returned: A player obtains this role by having survived a kill. They are Unable to give breath, are Unable to be role-blocked, are Unable to use breath, will die after 2 cycles unless they receive a breath from someone. They cannot receive more than one breath at a time (they give back all the unused breath) and can sacrifice their life in order to protect a player or role-block them.

Drab: A player becomes a drab by reaching 0 breaths. They have several unique properties. They will die in a tie between a themselves and a player with breath. Drabs are unable to return. A Drab's vote also holds half the value of a normal vote, meaning that it will take 2 drabs to effectively make 1 vote.

Scholar: The five scholars (note: may not be 5 scholar roles in-game) are amongst the nalithis commonwealth. They start out with 2 breath, and are able to give out certain amounts of breath to others, instead of all of their breath.

 

It's all about the economy. This is designed for a QF, btw.

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

Well I think it could be fun

Question - if you kill someone who hasn’t voted or been voted on by the rules does that mean you get all of your 4 breath back? If the answer is yes then in a way that’s kind of an inbuilt discount on killing inactives tbhhh

it’s got a significant RNG element with the Returning 1/3 of the time that means RNG could have a pretty big impact depending on where the die fall but that can be alright just something to be aware of

And I mean anyways in many cases if you Return you’ll still die after 2 cycles unless somebody gives you a breath or you’re an elim and you get one by submitting the kill but sometimes you’ll die after 2 cycles

Note that I suppose the powerfulness of Returning is technically a function of how many players there are cuz if there’s only 5 players the game is only gonna last 2-3 cycles total so being alive for 2 extra cycles is basically the same as just never dying whereas if there’s something crazy like 34+ players the game will go on for ages and 2 cycles is a drop in the bucket :P. Those are the extremes but yeah, total player count affects things.

Anyways I like Nalthis setups

[Aeoryi she/her]

1 hour ago, DrakeMarshall said:

Well I think it could be fun

Question - if you kill someone who hasn’t voted or been voted on by the rules does that mean you get all of your 4 breath back? If the answer is yes then in a way that’s kind of an inbuilt discount on killing inactives tbhhh

it’s got a significant RNG element with the Returning 1/3 of the time that means RNG could have a pretty big impact depending on where the die fall but that can be alright just something to be aware of

And I mean anyways in many cases if you Return you’ll still die after 2 cycles unless somebody gives you a breath or you’re an elim and you get one by submitting the kill but sometimes you’ll die after 2 cycles

Note that I suppose the powerfulness of Returning is technically a function of how many players there are cuz if there’s only 5 players the game is only gonna last 2-3 cycles total so being alive for 2 extra cycles is basically the same as just never dying whereas if there’s something crazy like 34+ players the game will go on for ages and 2 cycles is a drop in the bucket :P. Those are the extremes but yeah, total player count affects things.

Anyways I like Nalthis setups

You bring up a good point about the returning- but I have a great solution; A returned can kill another returned at the cost of their life. I think this is a decent fix to this issue.

As for the inactive kill thing: yes you get all your breath back if it succeeds. Your breath will be randomly dispersed if your target returns, and your breathe will simply be given to your target if they are awakener protected. I suspect players will find a way around this (like purposefully voting on inactives to recieve their breath) and as such it will probably be solved by them. I don't think NK on inactives will be much of a problem for anyone after C1, but it'll give the elims a choice of going for a powerful kill or just a breath kill.

Also, inactivity filter is 3 cycles without voting, or 2 without speaking.

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

48 minutes ago, Aeoryi said:

inactivity filter is 3 cycles without voting, or 2 without speaking.

unfathomably based

[Aeoryi she/her]

1 minute ago, DrakeMarshall said:

unfathomably based

It's a QF so there must be a filter

... 2 isn't too quick, is it?

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

34 minutes ago, Aeoryi said:

It's a QF so there must be a filter

... 2 isn't too quick, is it?

no sorry I'm not trying to be ironic I genuinely approve of this inactivity policy

all of the games I've run in the past have had very similar policies

[The Unknown Medallion he/him]

Speaking of inactivity filters, what's everyone's thoughts on "You must post equal to or more than half the average number of posts per person." That feels like it would be pretty good to encourage a high posting game. Combine it with a roleblock if failed, make it three cycles before removal. I would also think there should be an alternative for lower active people of "You will not be penalized for failing to meet this requirement if you vote, respond to at least two separate PMs, and start at least one PM (it will count as one of your responses if you respond to the other player in the PM you started)."

[Aeoryi she/her]

30 minutes ago, The Known Novel said:

Speaking of inactivity filters, what's everyone's thoughts on "You must post equal to or more than half the average number of posts per person." That feels like it would be pretty good to encourage a high posting game. Combine it with a roleblock if failed, make it three cycles before removal. I would also think there should be an alternative for lower active people of "You will not be penalized for failing to meet this requirement if you vote, respond to at least two separate PMs, and start at least one PM (it will count as one of your responses if you respond to the other player in the PM you started)."

Ah, but then people can willingly go inactive to prove they didn't submit the kill (like AN9, where players were going inactive to prove alignment)- such play is discouraged

Actually, if you use that kind of inactivity filter, you can probably have the Elim kill not take an action slot/be able to be role-blocked by this

And vanillas won't care about being role-blocked

I had an idea similar to the QF where you had to vote (GM'd by Orlok and STINK, I think), where your vote was on yourself until you changed it, and you always end up voting yourself if you don't vote for another

Edited November 22, 2023 by Aeoryi

[Aeoryi she/her]

Alrighty people I have need for people to spot holes and stuff like that in this game (MR format) ruleset:

Spoiler

Mechanics:

1. Majority Lynch every cycle. Ties kill no one and 1 vote minimum

2. Certain roles use stormlight charges. Everyone starts out with 2 charges, then every 2 cycles every player is given another 2 charges.

3. Survivals are not differentiated. Deaths are not differentiated either. PMs are semi-open. One 1 on 1 Pm can be made a cycle per person.

4. The Elim kill is Arson. This means that every cycle, an elim can chose to mark a player, or kill all currently marked players. Elim wincon is overparity.

5. Sudden Death Mechanic: Upon the defeat of an Unmade, (Sja-anat, Yelig-nar, Re-shephir, or Cultivation) all currently marked players die alongside the unmade, and the elim kill switches to a normal NK. Yelig-nar's marking does not count as arson marking and is not triggered upon the arrival of sudden death.

6. One actions slot per cycle (unless otherwise stated). Elim kill does not count as an action.

Roles:

Surgebinder: Nearly all players can become surgebinders. Not all players will start as a Surgebinder. Players may have multiple surges that require becoming a Surgebinder multiple times to achieve. Surgebinder surges are preassigned and cost stormlight. Players may have non-consecutive surges. The surges are as follows:

1. Tension: You can target any player and see what surge they used last (2 charges)

2. Adhesion: You can target another player to redirect an action targeting you to them (2 charges)

3. Gravitation: You can target another player to learn their target (2 charges)

4. Division: You can kill a player, once per game (3 charges)

5. Abrasion: You survive an attack so long as you have 2 charges when you are attacked.

6. Progression: You can target another player to protect them. (2 charges)

7. Illumination: You can target a player to role-block them. (2 charges)

8. Transformation: You can target another player to make them immune to rd/RB (2 charges)

9. Transportation: You can create a 1 on 1 PM. This doesn't consume an action slot. (1 charge)

10. Cohesion: You can target a player to make them a Surgebinder if they are not already one, or make them lose their Surgebinder role. (2 charges)

Herald: You survive the first attack on you. You may target a player every cycle to grant 2 charges to. You may become a Surgebinder.

Sja-anat: Village-exclusive role. You can target a player every cycle to give them the Surgebinder role. You may not become a Surgebinder. You have an extra life.

Re-shephir: Elim-exclusive role. You can target a player to copy their roles for a cycle. You may copy roles on successive cycles without using an action slot. You may become a Surgebinder yourself and have an extra life.

Yelig-nar: Elim exclusive role. You can target any player to make them become a Surgebinder. After two cycles, you can use an action slot to kill a player you made into a Surgebinder. This will kill the player if they are still a Surgebinder. You have an extra life and cannot become a Surgebinder yourself.

Cultivation: (Neutral):  You are a passing shard, willing to change people's souls. You have 2 action slots, and an extra life. You win when you have changed every alive player's Surgebinder status (that can be changed) and do not get yeeted upon satisfying your wc. You have two actions you can take, and you are limited to using each one once per cycle. You can either make a player a Surgebinder, or remove their Surgebinder role. You may become a Surgebinder yourself. You do not count for parity.