[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Haha, well in that case I would say it shall be when Dol Guldur is known as Amon Lanc

Originally Posted by Boromir88

My thinking is to be empowered to be a Medium, and a "voice for the dead" it would mean a majority from the dead. I considered your suggestion that dead wolves vote would count as 2 in the dead thread, but thought that might give them too much power in impacting the Day lynch. And a Medium could be chosen by essentially the dead wolf (and not the majority of the dead). After already giving the dead wolf, in the form of the NW, a power to effect the gifteds at Night, I steered away from allowing them the potential power to pick a Medium.

I mean technically they could still have that potential, but it would just be a little harder. It would also give the chance that there would be no Medium, and therefor no living players vote gets doubled.

I'm not sure if that would make it too restricting for the dead innocents. But I have read the very first WW game on the Downs, where the Barrow-wight allowed retractable votes. Once a player reached a majority the voting stopped and the player was lynched right away. I won't allow retractable votes in the Living thread, that's just too much of a headache.

But I think given how difficult it could be for the dead to agree on a Medium, I would allow the dead retractable votes. And then just go by the B-W's rule. Once the majority threshold is hit, that person is automatically chosen as Medium for that Day. I would post in the Living thread once I see that happen. In the event the threshold is not met 2 hours prior to the DL, I would post in the Living thread there was too much division amongst the dead and they chose no Medium that day.

Very well! Sound logic.

That majority part makes sense, except [see below on revealing the Medium only on DL].

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Actually, could probably include this possibility in Option 1 as well. That is the NW goes into effect once there are 2 dead wolves. They don't have to send in a haunt every night, but if they do the person, regardless of role will be notified?

I like it and these could indeed be combined. I am definitely for the 2 dead WWs quota (or something similar, but this would work well I think).

Originally Posted by Rikae

That depends on whether you want to block the possibility of the living and dead using the empowered votes to send messages rather than just empower a vote. I could see them setting something up day one like "after the seer dies, this vote means X and that means Y", and that sort of thing tends to take excitement and suspense out of the game.
If you wait to reveal the empowered vote at deadline it could help avoid that situation.

Originally Posted by Loslote

I don't think I've ever seen this idea before! I think this would serve the purpose of encouraging the Seer to leave hints; I don't know whether that's something we necessarily want to encourage, though. I think Brinn played an incredible Seer game in that new style last game, and I'd want to see a couple more tries at it before I decide whether it's unbalanced or whether Brinn was just that good.

It has been done before and exactly it has been abused that way. I'm therefore with Rikae on revealing the thing only at the DL. That way, we also eliminate the "waiting for the QT to tell us what they think before we vote"-effect.

Originally Posted by Macalaure

What if the living aren't explicitly told who the medium is and instead only the vote count is revealed? Would that be better or worse?

On first sight, to me it sounds like a terrible mess. As in, I could imagine half of the next Day spent by the villagers bickering about "I was the Medium yesterDay" "no, *I* was the Medium! The Dead trust me!" "No! You both shut up, it was me who was the Medium!!!"

...although that, too, might be fun. But let's think about it from all angles.