Tol-in-Gaurhoth (Isle of Werewolves)

[Formendacil]

Yeah, the idea that the Ghost could only speak the line of a chapter-opening was an attempt to corral what the Ghost can say into something more cryptic. To sum up the idea of what *I* was thinking about the Ghost:

1. In a Dead Thread game, the Ghost can be the means of the Dead Thread's involvement.

2. Each Day, the Dead Thread votes for one of their own to return and haunt the village.

(3. Perhaps the Ghost has a vote? If so, does the Ghost cast their OWN vote or is it casting a vote the Dead Thread has already chosen?)

4. To keep the Ghost from being too much a straight-up data-channel between the Dead and Living, the idea was to make it that Ghost can only speak cryptically (other than voting, obviously). Some thoughts thrown around included the idea that the Ghost could only post quotes from their Living days--no bolding, no italicising, and I wanted to add "full paragraphs only" so that it wouldn't be immediately apparent why the Ghost had chosen that paragraph (i.e. if there was a nugget of emphasis buried in a paragraph, they wouldn't be able to post just the relevant clause, which would be hardly better than just being able to type what they wanted). The "first line from a Tolkien chapter" was a variant on this theme. I like that it makes things "more Tolkien" than this game sometimes devolves to... but it might be TOO limiting. Some sort of happy medium that ISN'T too much of a burden on the Mod is the idea.

(5. If the Ghost can vote, then perhaps that should be the SOLE purpose of the Ghost: the Dead Thread votes during the NIGHT and whoever the Ghost is makes a single Haunting during the DAY. In this case, maybe a single, cryptic clue would be permitted by the Mod.)

6. I think, if there is to be a Ghost, there should also be a Cobbler, and that the Cobbler's role should NOT be revealed to the Living Village upon Death--or to the Seer. Perhaps it should be revealed to the Dead? Or not?

[Blind Guardian]

The other option would be to allow the rules of the last game to stand while also allowing the Dead to select to say per night. Like Boro did on the last Night. So ++empower and ++quoteVote.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

6. I think, if there is to be a Ghost, there should also be a Cobbler, and that the Cobbler's role should NOT be revealed to the Living Village upon Death--or to the Seer. Perhaps it should be revealed to the Dead? Or not?

This is something that should absolutely hold. And I think it exactly should be that it would NOT be revealed even to the Dead, in order to allow the possibility to send back a Ghost, but lo, it was a Cobbler and made a mess of everything in its final returning grand act.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

This is something that should absolutely hold. And I think it exactly should be that it would NOT be revealed even to the Dead, in order to allow the possibility to send back a Ghost, but lo, it was a Cobbler and made a mess of everything in its final returning grand act.

That. ++Reveal the cobbler as an ordo to both Seer and Dead.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

That. ++Reveal the cobbler as an ordo to both Seer and Dead.

Not that the probability of it is very high (Cobbler needs to die, not be recognised by the innocent Dead, then needs to be selected by them to return), but already the possibility of the Cobbler being there forces the players to think about it and play around it.

But yes, the more pressing concern is to figure out all the powers of the ghost(s?) and the Dead in the first place.

[Rikae]

Regarding the problem of the living giving the dead a code to use (and yes, I was one of the worst culprits of this in the last game, but I was the cobbler ):

Could it be as simple as banning the living from giving instructions to the dead on what to post? We've had modfire-enforced bans on posting mod messages or on certain roles revealing in the past. Do folks think it would be possible to do the same with this?

[Rikae]

Patented Rikae double post ...

So here's what I'm tentatively thinking of right now.

- 3 wolves, unless it's a huge village. Perhaps NW role comes into play when two(three) wolves are dead? NW not being a specific wolf, but a collective ability of the dead pack.

- cobbler, only ever revealed as ordo, whether dead or dreamed

- seer (straightforward normal seer)

- ranger (straightforward normal ranger)

- weaver. This was a role in the first game I ever played. It's a bit like a seer, but instead of seeing one players role, they see whether two players have the same alignment (so, for the weaver, cobbler & wolf would come out as "same alignment"). I'm thinking of having this be another role that only becomes active on death, and looks like an ordo to the seer and in their death narration.

- hunter (undecided about logical vs illogical)

So there will be 3 possible unknown roles among the dead.

-------------------------------------------------
Rules

-The dead may talk day and Night

-during the Night, the dead may elect a ghost. They get 3 chances to do this, and cannot choose the same ghost twice. I'm thinking of doing it this way to force the dead to think about these choices rather than sending back the last night-kill every day. To make the choice whether to send a ghost at all democratic, those who want not to could vote ++no ghost.

- the ghost returns to the game thread the next Day. They cannot communicate with the dead while haunting. They may only make 3 posts, which can only be sentences from Tolkien, but they may make these posts at any point during the day, allowing them to respond to new developments (I'm going for maximum frustration for living, dead, and ghost here, because it amuses me ).
If the first chapter thing is just to avoid pointing to signatures, I think it might be okay to open it up to all quotes, given the last rule on this list. After all, people have always had the ability to hint by alluding to signatures, but they rarely do.

- the dead may also cast a collective vote during the Day (???)
This would also mean the ghost did not get to participate in voting while they were haunting. I kind of like this, since I'd like sending a ghost to be a costly choice the dead will only make if they feel like they have something important to convey, but alternatively, I could let them privately cast a vote to be counted in the dead's election that day, or let them vote on the living thread.

- strict ban on the living giving instructions to the ghost or the dead (aside from the general "Boro is a wolf, vote for him!" type thing directed at everyone). Violators will be yeeted into the void.

[Boromir88]

Yes to not revealing the cobbler if they die.

I think I always err on the side of trying not to restrict content in posts, because I like having as many options on the table as possible. However, I think in this case with the Ghost role, where every day 1 person comes back to the living to pass off cryptic information, Rikae's suggestion makes sense. I think it would be important in having the Ghost role be one where the living players are forbidden to direct the returning Ghost a plan to relay the information.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Love all this, Rikae! And after thinking about it, the three posts may be very well enough for the Ghost - some people post only as many (not counting maybe some one-liner vote post) even when alive!

Just for clarification, I assume the Ghost can't quote (as in, quote: <somebody's post> /end quote). That would be unfair and would allow them to skirt around the ambiguity (as in, they could quote the post of someone they want to accuse and add to it their own quote about how Wargs attacked the Fellowship, or something.

And the NW would be the first Wolf dead? Or how would it work? I assume that's the third "unknown role" you are referring to? (Aside from the weaver and cobbler.)

[Blind Guardian]

Alright kiddos. It's been over a year. We have a new series coming out and I'm going though werewolf withdrawals. Let's get this show on the road. Who is up for some WW?