Tol-in-Gaurhoth (Isle of Werewolves) - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Kuruharan · 06-14-2005, 05:33 PM

Still can't play. I won't have regular internet access again until Tuesday.

**The Saucepan Man** · 06-14-2005, 07:54 PM

Although I can't play in the next game, I would like to participate in the future, so here are some thoughts on the ideas raised on rule changes etc.

I agree that, given the trend of our first three games, any rule changes should favour the Villagers. I am not sold on the Scribe idea, as he or she would be in no different position than any other normal Villager during the game, and so the death letter is just as likely to be wrong as it is right (if not more so), which might simply end up confusing the daytime discussions (which the innocent Villagers are perfectly capable of doing themselves, thank you

).

I like the Mason idea, since having two Villagers who trust each other and can bounce ideas off each other will go some way towards mitigating the Villagers' lack of knowledge (and therefore the random accusations). I agree that these players should only be able to PM each other during the day, whereas the Werewolves should only PM each other at night. I still think that the Werewolves are powerful enough wothout letting them coordinate efforts during the day too.

Does the name of the role have to be specifically Tolkien-orientated, given that the others are not? Something in keeping with the medaeval/folklore atmosphere of the game that suggests a connection between the two should suffice. Although all I can come up with at the moment is the "Twins". Or how about Tweedledum and Tweedledee?

I am edgy about killing people off for non-participation. At most, players should only be summarily killed if they don't post at all during a day without good excuse, rather than forcing them to make a positive assertion or to vote. Otherwise, this compromises the "quiet" strategy that worked so well in the last game. And there might be perfectly good game-related reasons (for both innocents and Wolves) for not voting on a day.

I agree that players should not post on this thread while playing the game, even to raise questions about the rules (which can be done by PM to the moderator). The reason that I posted a warning about this earlier in the thread was that I felt some posts were getting dangerously close to possibly influencing the game. I don't have a problem with people making a short post following their death (there is quite an urge to do so

), provided that they avoid giving any indication of their thoughts on who might be guilty or innocent. I think that people can be trusted to stick to this proviso.

Finally, someone mentioned the possibility of starting a thread to set out all the rules. I suggest that this is best addressed by the moderator including all the applicable rules in the first post for a game. This is probably best done by cutting and pasting rather than by giving links (as I did), since earlier rules can be superseded in subsequent games (such as the tied voting rule).

Oddwen · 06-14-2005, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morm

I would gladly yield my position and become something more appropriate like the village idiot

Bah! Now ye've taken my idea!

I really like the idea of the Masons/Elf-friends, and I'd be willing to play with the scribe/letters - although would we introduce both these roles/things in the same game?

One role that sounds really interesting is the Werehamster.

Quote:

Werehamster - This character is on its own side, fighting both the Werewolves and the humans. During the night phase, he has his own phase and can kill someone just like the Werewolves do, causing two deaths in one night. If the werewolves try to kill him, he’s safe; but if the Seer points to him, he dies. The Werehamster wins only if he is the sole remaining person in a game.

This would work best in a larger game...though we'd have to call it the "Sméagol" or something. Perhaps it could only kill on every other night. Though, most likely in another game.

And a question: say the Guardian protects person A. The Werewolves choose to kill person B, who happens to be the Hunter. If the Hunter has chosen person A as their intended target, is the Guardian able to protect person A from the Hunter? Or is the Guardian only effective against Werewolves?

Anyway - I'd like to sign up for the next game. And I'd like to be...the village idiot!

littlemanpoet · 06-14-2005, 08:16 PM

Seems to me that if we're going to call the game "Tol-in-Gaurhoth", then we can call the two allies 'Elves', and they can do osanwe-kenta using PMs. After all, this is a Tolkien dedicated site, and the Legendarium is rife with names to pick from. .... that is, if there's a majority in favor of it.

I'd be interested to see if these characters seem "groupy" enough to get lynched by the innocent villagers, so maybe we don't want them to be Elves after all ... um ... unless we let whoever wants to be, be Elves? Maybe they could just be Dunedain? Rangers? Ah, heck, I dunno.

Kuruharan · 06-14-2005, 10:39 PM

Quote:

I don't have a problem with people making a short post following their death (there is quite an urge to do so

Yeah, but what is the point of this? Just to announce, "I'm dead." Anybody who cares already knows that. I think that sooner or later if this keeps up it is just bound to lead to trouble.

I think a goal for naming the masons/mirdain/whatchamacallits should be to have it as non-specific as possible. I mean honestly, do you think a character like mine is going to make a good elf or elf-friend. Just imagine the lynching...

The Hangman pulled the leaver. Kuruharan's body dropped down with a snap. Suddenly, Kuruharan grew two feet, lost his beard, his ears got all pointy, and he got nauseatingly pretty!! "Oh-no!! We've killed our Elf...Dwarf...thing," wailed the villagers.

That just doesn't sound good.

(Mutter, mutter...dumb pointy-ears...who needs 'em anyway?)

Maybe we should just call them "Lorekeepers" or something simple (and non-specific) like that.

the phantom · 06-14-2005, 10:47 PM

I want masons. Call them whatever you want.

I definitely want the seer to dream the first night.

As far as my role in the next game.... hmm... maybe I'll be an arrogant healer.

mormegil · 06-14-2005, 11:56 PM

I haven't heard from anyone else but I thought that the mason's wouldn't be named at death similar to the cursed villager. But just a thought.

Feanor of the Peredhil · 06-15-2005, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the phantom

As far as my role in the next game.... hmm... maybe I'll be an arrogant healer.

Hey, that role sounds familiar. I think I remember playing that part in game two.

Anywho, I want in. Now that I'm back (for those who didn't know, I was away), I'm done with work, and I'm looking at quite a lot more free time... Yeah.

My part shall be that of the mysterious artist who prefers silently sketching in corners to hanging out with the rest of the village.

06-14-2005, 05:33 PM	#1
Kuruharan Regal Dwarven Shade Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: A Remote Dwarven Hold Posts: 3,593	Still can't play. I won't have regular internet access again until Tuesday. __________________ ...finding a path that cannot be found, walking a road that cannot be seen, climbing a ladder that was never placed, or reading a paragraph that has no...

06-14-2005, 07:54 PM	#2
The Saucepan Man Corpus Cacophonous Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: A green and pleasant land Posts: 8,390	Some thoughts ... Although I can't play in the next game, I would like to participate in the future, so here are some thoughts on the ideas raised on rule changes etc. I agree that, given the trend of our first three games, any rule changes should favour the Villagers. I am not sold on the Scribe idea, as he or she would be in no different position than any other normal Villager during the game, and so the death letter is just as likely to be wrong as it is right (if not more so), which might simply end up confusing the daytime discussions (which the innocent Villagers are perfectly capable of doing themselves, thank you ). I like the Mason idea, since having two Villagers who trust each other and can bounce ideas off each other will go some way towards mitigating the Villagers' lack of knowledge (and therefore the random accusations). I agree that these players should only be able to PM each other during the day, whereas the Werewolves should only PM each other at night. I still think that the Werewolves are powerful enough wothout letting them coordinate efforts during the day too. Does the name of the role have to be specifically Tolkien-orientated, given that the others are not? Something in keeping with the medaeval/folklore atmosphere of the game that suggests a connection between the two should suffice. Although all I can come up with at the moment is the "Twins". Or how about Tweedledum and Tweedledee? I am edgy about killing people off for non-participation. At most, players should only be summarily killed if they don't post at all during a day without good excuse, rather than forcing them to make a positive assertion or to vote. Otherwise, this compromises the "quiet" strategy that worked so well in the last game. And there might be perfectly good game-related reasons (for both innocents and Wolves) for not voting on a day. I agree that players should not post on this thread while playing the game, even to raise questions about the rules (which can be done by PM to the moderator). The reason that I posted a warning about this earlier in the thread was that I felt some posts were getting dangerously close to possibly influencing the game. I don't have a problem with people making a short post following their death (there is quite an urge to do so ), provided that they avoid giving any indication of their thoughts on who might be guilty or innocent. I think that people can be trusted to stick to this proviso. Finally, someone mentioned the possibility of starting a thread to set out all the rules. I suggest that this is best addressed by the moderator including all the applicable rules in the first post for a game. This is probably best done by cutting and pasting rather than by giving links (as I did), since earlier rules can be superseded in subsequent games (such as the tied voting rule). __________________ Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind!

06-14-2005, 08:16 PM	#4
littlemanpoet Itinerant Songster Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The Edge of Faerie Posts: 7,066	Seems to me that if we're going to call the game "Tol-in-Gaurhoth", then we can call the two allies 'Elves', and they can do osanwe-kenta using PMs. After all, this is a Tolkien dedicated site, and the Legendarium is rife with names to pick from. .... that is, if there's a majority in favor of it. I'd be interested to see if these characters seem "groupy" enough to get lynched by the innocent villagers, so maybe we don't want them to be Elves after all ... um ... unless we let whoever wants to be, be Elves? Maybe they could just be Dunedain? Rangers? Ah, heck, I dunno. Last edited by littlemanpoet; 06-14-2005 at 08:21 PM.

06-14-2005, 10:47 PM	#6
the phantom Beloved Shadow Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: The Stadium Posts: 5,971	I want masons. Call them whatever you want. I definitely want the seer to dream the first night. As far as my role in the next game.... hmm... maybe I'll be an arrogant healer. __________________ the phantom has posted. This thread is now important.

06-14-2005, 11:56 PM	#7
mormegil Maundering Mage Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 4,651	I haven't heard from anyone else but I thought that the mason's wouldn't be named at death similar to the cursed villager. But just a thought. __________________ “I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo. "So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”