Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man
My experience in Diamond's recently-finished game suggests to me that the paranoia and confusion (on both sides) may deliciously be heightened by not knowing the roles of those killed, how many Gifteds there are, how many Wolves there are etc. And it adds greatly to the opportunity (again, on both sides) to cause mischief for one's opponents, which may suit this game well. A point to consider, anyway.
|
I agree, to a degree...
In a basic kind of a game, it seems to work. And I'm just wondering, whether Lommy and I should really think of sticking into some of this stuff by Diamond in our game, which will be quite basic anyhow (let's see what we come up with?
).
But a question to
Lmp as well! As your games is built in one sense on families, should we have something like "families sticking together" -sort of stuff from our own initiative (which I would happily like to PM to my family-members before the roles are given - and the game starts!), or is there some additional & institutional things you have in your sleeve? F.ex. family-members can't vote for another in day1, 2, 3,...?, or something?
It would be nice to try to play the day1 once in a lifetime with serious discussion, but still hanging on to the roles -as this family-based idea could allow it?