Taur-in-Gaurhoth Scenarios you'd Like to See

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Kath

Also, if the good wizard can turn wolves back into innocents, they'll be able to tell the village who the wolves are. Or did you not actually mean that?

No, the werewolves don't know who each other are. Only the evil wizard knows who all the werewolves are.

The game has to have high numbers of villagers, the higher the better. The best chance for the innocents to win is very early, by the good wizard finding the evil wizard in the first three Nights/Days (very unlikely as far as I can tell). The werewolf number would increase drastically at first, but with each new werewolf, the good wizard's chance of scrying an actual werewolf increases out of sheer odds.

It would be interesting to see the nature of the discussions in such a game. I would, of course, be interested in modding such a game if there were enough people willing to try it out just for kicks.

I imagine that the sheer terror/excitement level would be an interesting phenomenon amongst the innocents, with such thinking as "we really, really have to do our best to try and make as sure as we can to lynch a werewolf. None of this "okay to lynch an ungifted innocent" stuff.

So the energy level would likely be pretty high. ... especially as there begins to be four, then five, then six werewolves. Which I kinda like.

[the phantom]

lmp, you said this-

Once the three primary gifted roles are filled, the remaining innocents become shirriffs, I suppose, so that they can play out the PMing and known innocent capabilities that this kind of game seems to call for, with a rather powerful evil enemy

The enemy may be powerful- but not nearly powerful enough to face a village of shirriffs. That would make for a lopsided good guy win.

Let's look at how the game would be set up after all three gifteds had been assigned (after the third night).

The village population (lets say it started at 20) would be down to 16- two wizards, three wolves, three gifteds, and eight shirriffs. The eight shirriffs would step forwards and say "I know that these seven people and myself aren't wolves". And then, the good wizard steps forward and says "I am the good wizard, and these three people are the ones I chose as gifteds", and suddenly the entire village has the candidates for evil wizard narrowed down to four people, and they know that the other three are wolves.

And so, the village will lynch them and then the game is over. I mean- there would be no way for the bad guys to win. Every time a new wolf is made, the whole village will know about it the next day because they are all shirriffs. An evil wizard and three wolves versus a seer who knows who to dream of, a ranger who knows who to protect, a hunter who knows who to target, and a good wizard who knows who to pick would be bad enough, but then when you add an entire village who knows who to lynch each day- that's too much.

For my other queries, I am going to assume that you won't be doing that shirriff thing.

1) What if the evil wizard picks the good wizard at night? You have to have a rule for it, because if the mod pms the evil wizard back and says "You'll have to choose someone else" the evil wizard will of course know who the good wizard is.

2) If the wolves don't know who the other wolves are, they might consider killing one of their own. But obviously, if the mod is passing messages back and forth, the wolf who the others are considering killing would be sending strong messages opposing that kill choice. But really, how could you strongly oppose your death without the other wolves realizing that you are probably defending yourself, and thus letting all the wolves know who another wolf is? The idea of letting the evil wizard decide which nominee to kill would solve that, unless, of course, all of the nominees happen to be wolves, in which case, what happens? Does a wolf die?

3) If you don't let the evil wizard decide who dies and instead let the wolves pass messages, the wolves might choose to kill the evil wizard. Is that a scenario that you want to see in your game, or would you have a rule against that? But how could you make a rule against that? I mean, if the wolves pick someone and then the mod says "sorry, you'll have to pick someone else" then the wolves will know who the wizard is, and when one of them is turned back by the good wizard they will tell the village who the evil wizard is.

4) Once the evil wizard degifts the seer/ranger/hunter, can the good wizard simply pick a new one, or is that role over? If a new one can be picked, then I guess there would be a seer at all times, which doesn't seem fair. I mean, eventually the seer would pick the evil wizard and out him.

5) Voting records would be useless for finding wolves because none of the wolves would know who to lynch and who not to lynch. There would be no teamwork employed in this game.

It seems to me that the game is mostly a one-versus-one duel with a bunch of pawns in the middle, and the outcome would be based primarily on which wizard had the most luck (or the least amount of bad luck) on who they pick and who gets lynched each day, because as I said there would be no way to employ teamwork to orchestrate lynchings.

Not that it wouldn't be a lot of fun.

Of course, I'm not thinking terribly hard about this. You should just try it to see what happens. Maybe there are a lot of factors that we are overlooking that will make the game the biggest hit since WW- or perhaps some unforeseen loopholes and gaps will cause it to be a disaster that will live forever in infamy, which would be fun in its own way I suppose.

[the guy who be short]

Originally Posted by tp

The enemy may be powerful- but not nearly powerful enough to face a village of shirriffs. That would make for a lopsided good guy win.

Let's look at how the game would be set up after all three gifteds had been assigned (after the third night).

LMP didn't mean that the rest of the innocents instantly become Shirriffs after the other three roles are dished out. He meant that, once those three roles are given out, every villager the Good Wizard picks on the following nights becomes a Shirriff.

[Cailín]

Wow, LMP, very thought out and interesting idea. Far more revolutionary than the idea I had in mind for my game. However, I do suppose a few problems might rise to the surface when testing this... The phantom has already pointed out most.

Essentially, your game is not really innocents against wolves anymore, but wizard against wizard. As soon as one of the wizards dies, whether this is because of the cleverness of their enemy, or the stubbornness of the innocent villagers - whom we all know enjoy to kill the gifted ones every now and then - the game is decided. The outcome of the game is entirely dependent on two people. This could be fun, I suppose, but a game is lost when one of the wizards suddenly misses a deadline or makes a minor slip up. Quite a responsibility, and I already lose my nerve when I’m a wolf or seer

Also, what happens when the evil wizard and good wizard both choose the same innocent to turn in one night? This is quite likely to happen - there are always people who catch everyone’s attention.

I suggest also that, should you wish to test this scenario, you make the night phases just a little bit longer than usual. The game looks like it is going to be even more intense and demanding than your average Tol-in-Gaurhoth game, and if one of the two wizards happens to live in a strange time zone, the game will already be decided before it has officially started. This could be prevented by making the night phase 36 or 48 hours even... If the game works out as it should, there would be too many gifted anyway to make this phase even remotely boring.

About the whole Shiriff thing, this could become especially confusing. Robbing a Shiriff of his gift is not so easily done, since there is always someone else involved.

Huhm, yeah, well, maybe you should just test this and see how it works out. ^^

Edit: I always cross post... bad habit.

[the guy who be short]

I'd like to add that the death of either Wizard would completely unbalance the game.

If the GW dies, especially early on, there's nobody to counter the continual spawning of new werewolves. The villagers are unable to win as, at best, they can lynch one wolf per day, with no consequence as the EW creates a new one each Night.

If the EW dies, the remaining werewolves have to work independently and thus their team falls apart completely.

I suggest that the lives of the Wizards be tied to one another - the death of one must result in the death of the other to keep the game balanced. This could happen in the following ways:

• Either wizard lynched.
• GW killed by wolves.

In addition, this would solve the problem of a Wizard finding out who the other Wizard is. If this were to happen, the consequence would be that one Wizard knows who the other is - and would most likely prolong his existence so as to preserve his own life. This could even develop into an interesting situation with both Wizards knowing each other's identities, but neither daring to strike. Conversely, once a Wizard knows who the other Wizard is, he could intentionally get one of them lynched if he thought the removal of both Wizards would favour his side.

If the wolves choose to kill the EW, he'd more or less have to tell them who he is, whether bluntly or not, to prevent his death. This could result in all the wolves knowing who the wizard is, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Then some of them could move over to the Good side and still know who the Evil Wizard is. We could see a situation where the identities of the two wizards are widely known, but to preserve equilibrium, nobody kills either of them.

If this were the case, I'd like to see the GW able to communicate with his side as well, in the same manner as the WWs with the EW - none of them knowing one another's identities, but able to communicate through the GW.

Anybody see any flaws?

EDIT: Ah, I see a flaw. If both wizards were to die, the gifteds on the Good Side could continue working independently. However, what of the wolves? Either the Mod takes over the EW duties, under the pretext that the wolves come together to decide who to kill, in wolf form, in the Night and are thus still oblivious concerning one another's identities; or they become a group, knowing one another's identities, under the pretext that the EW somehow did this magically...

[Firefoot]

I would say that in the event that the EW should die, the wolves would have to then know each others' identities.

It's starting to sound like a really interesting plan... I wouldn't mind giving it a shot. The worst that can happen is that it doesn't work for what ever reason - too lopsided, two players with too much power over the game, etc. That would be the biggest problem that I can see, as others have already said - two players moving around pawns. With a new wolf spawning every night, it seems fairly likely that the wolves would win though. I think the villagers would almost have to hope that after two or three nights (seer, ranger or seer, ranger, hunter) the wizards would die, leaving them with fewer wolves to deal with.

It would certainly add a whole new dimension to the question of who, individually, can say they won - the wizards died early, oops, neither of them win; at least half the villagers changed roles at least once during the game, therefore in some way helping both sides - oops, none of them really won; and most of the remaining villagers are probably already dead... Moderator wins!

[the guy who be short]

Originally Posted by Firefoot

With a new wolf spawning every night, it seems fairly likely that the wolves would win though. I think the villagers would almost have to hope that after two or three nights (seer, ranger or seer, ranger, hunter) the wizards would die, leaving them with fewer wolves to deal with.

If at any point a wolf switches sides, they'll be able to tell the villager side all about their various inputs, who the EW forbade them to kill, any identities the EW may have revealed... That could help the Good and Gifteds.

One additional wolf per night, plus one innocent death, could be overkill though. Perhaps the EW could only create a wolf every second Night?

For this to work, I think we'd need the following rules:

It is not forbidden for wizards to declare to team members who the other members of a team are, i.e. EW can tell the wolves who the rest of them are, but then if any one were to switch back to the villager side, they would be able to tell them who the rest of the wolves are. So it's unwise... but could occasionally be necessary. Additionally, Wizards can lie to team members... imagine.

I think the Good Team (so it shall be called...) should be able to commnicate amongst Evil Team lines, that is, they all know who the GW is, and the GW can communicate with all of them or convey information to all of them.

I think this will be very interesting for quite a few reasons. There'll be a lot of backstabbing a treachery, and there'll be a lot of manipulation of others by the Wizards. Additionally, we'd see two distinct teams - Good and Evil - with a sort of dull neutral in the middle, trying to help the Good Team but always remaining doubtable.

Suggestion: If EW and GW choose the same person, that person dies.

The main problem I see is that people may feel like pawns, with the two main players being the Wizards. Personally I think it'll be immense fun.

[littlemanpoet]

Ooh! Ooh! I get to triple post, just like on WW!

Originally Posted by Firefoot

Moderator wins!

But of course! Don't you know, that's the whole idea?

If at any point a wolf switches sides, they'll be able to tell the villager side all about their various inputs, who the EW forbade them to kill, any identities the EW may have revealed... That could help the Good and Gifteds.

The EW never speaks directly to the werewolves, it's always through the moderator (or an assistant moderator ). And the message to the werewolves, should they choose to kill the EW, would be something like "The EW has overruled your choice; _______ is to be killed toNight." The werewolves are none the wiser, which would be frustrating for them, but after all, the EW knows best.....

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by the guy who be short

I'd like to add that the death of either Wizard would completely unbalance the game.

Sorry I forgot to say this in the original idea post, but the wizards can only both die at the same time. Only a wizard can kill a wizard.

If the EW dies, the remaining werewolves have to work independently and thus their team falls apart completely.

Another good point I didn't see right away. If the EW dies, part of the curse is removed such that the werewolves know who each other are and can/must work amongst themselves. Darn, this is getting complex (but since when did that ever scare LMP away? )

I suggest that the lives of the Wizards be tied to one another - the death of one must result in the death of the other to keep the game balanced.

Precisely.

Either wizard lynched.

Nope. They can't be...successfully.

GW killed by wolves.

Nope again. Only a wizard can kill a wizard.

this would solve the problem of a Wizard finding out who the other Wizard is.

Actually, the way I see this working out is that the GW doesn't really mind revealing, because the EW won't want to take the GW out until EW has created enough werewolves to satisfy his/her strategy. Meanwhile, the GW will want to take out the EW as quickly as possible, so the EW will want to remain hidden for as long as possible.

If this were to happen, the consequence would be that one Wizard knows who the other is - and would most likely prolong his existence so as to preserve his own life. This could even develop into an interesting situation with both Wizards knowing each other's identities, but neither daring to strike. Conversely, once a Wizard knows who the other Wizard is, he could intentionally get one of them lynched if he thought the removal of both Wizards would favour his side.

Hmmm.... this is an interesting option, but I think it would tend to allow the game to become too unbalanced. The only way to maintain balance is for both wizards (so powerful) to be in, or out, of the game simultaneously.

If the wolves choose to kill the EW, he'd more or less have to tell them who he is, whether bluntly or not, to prevent his death. This could result in all the wolves knowing who the wizard is, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Then some of them could move over to the Good side and still know who the Evil Wizard is. We could see a situation where the identities of the two wizards are widely known, but to preserve equilibrium, nobody kills either of them.

Now, that is an interesting notion, too. But this is just as likely not to happen, rendering the equilibrium nil.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Cailín

Essentially, your game is not really innocents against wolves anymore, but wizard against wizard. As soon as one of the wizards dies, whether this is because of the cleverness of their enemy, or the stubbornness of the innocent villagers - whom we all know enjoy to kill the gifted ones every now and then - the game is decided. The outcome of the game is entirely dependent on two people. This could be fun, I suppose, but a game is lost when one of the wizards suddenly misses a deadline or makes a minor slip up.

Good points. The wizards would be hand picked from a few who volunteer for the role, and who promise that they can be available for the kind of intensity the role requires.

The wizards cannot be killed by anyone but each other. Thus, if the evil wizard or lycanthropes try to kill the good wizard, they will be told that their kill was unsuccessful, and they'll know why. A wizard can be lynched, but it won't work. (hee hee, that would be fun to write ).

Also, what happens when the evil wizard and good wizard both choose the same innocent to turn in one night? This is quite likely to happen - there are always people who catch everyone’s attention.

Wow! Excellent question. I hadn't thought of that. Inevitably, one wizard will PM the moderator before the other, and first dibs wins, I think. Unless someone can think of a better rule for that; then the wizard who came in second would have to pick over again.

I suggest also that, should you wish to test this scenario, you make the night phases just a little bit longer than usual. The game looks like it is going to be even more intense and demanding than your average Tol-in-Gaurhoth game, and if one of the two wizards happens to live in a strange time zone, the game will already be decided before it has officially started. This could be prevented by making the night phase 36 or 48 hours even... If the game works out as it should, there would be too many gifted anyway to make this phase even remotely boring.

Hee hee! I think I could work with that, although I think a lot of villagers would get really antsy, waiting for the new Day to begin.

Oh, I'm thinking also that the good wizard might not be allowed to scry until Night 3, just to make sure that there are three werewolves to start the game off.

About the whole Shiriff thing, this could become especially confusing. Robbing a Shiriff of his gift is not so easily done, since there is always someone else involved.

Yes, I don't think Shirriffs belong in a Dueling Wizards game.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by the phantom

The enemy may be powerful- but not nearly powerful enough to face a village of shirriffs. That would make for a lopsided good guy win.

I considered the option of bunches of shirriffs, and I don't like it. I could see no shirriffs and the good wizard knowing a bunch of known innocents thereafter. I could see two shirriffs. Not more than two though.

What if the evil wizard picks the good wizard at night? You have to have a rule for it, because if the mod pms the evil wizard back and says "You'll have to choose someone else" the evil wizard will of course know who the good wizard is.

The evil wizard would be told that it is the good wizard, and has the same choice the good wizard has. I still am not sure what to do with the wizard battle results. That's the one wrinkle in this thing that's not easy to iron out. I'm strongly leaning toward a wizard battle necessarily ending in the death of both wizards.

If the wolves don't know who the other wolves are, they might consider killing one of their own. But obviously, if the mod is passing messages back and forth, the wolf who the others are considering killing would be sending strong messages opposing that kill choice. But really, how could you strongly oppose your death without the other wolves realizing that you are probably defending yourself, and thus letting all the wolves know who another wolf is? The idea of letting the evil wizard decide which nominee to kill would solve that, unless, of course, all of the nominees happen to be wolves, in which case, what happens? Does a wolf die?

The evil wizard would get the final say, and the werewolves would of course be informed of that. No werewolves die. I had not thought of the werewolves figuring out who each other is, but if one werewolf happens to get identified by this means to the rest, then as a here and there thing, I don't see it as a bad thing within the game. And if a werewolf gets uncursed and identifies another as being a werewolf, that uncursed werewolf still has to somehow prove it to the other innocents. Of course, the good wizard could come out with the authoritative word, but would thus reveal him/herself, and therefore get killed.

If you don't let the evil wizard decide who dies and instead let the wolves pass messages, the wolves might choose to kill the evil wizard. Is that a scenario that you want to see in your game, or would you have a rule against that? But how could you make a rule against that? I mean, if the wolves pick someone and then the mod says "sorry, you'll have to pick someone else" then the wolves will know who the wizard is, and when one of them is turned back by the good wizard they will tell the village who the evil wizard is.

Again, the evil wizard gets final say. As for the evil wizard blocking his own death, this is a very interesting scenario, and I think that I actually like that possibility being in the game. This is especially the case since the evil wizard has the advantage early, and the sooner he is gotten rid of, the sooner the innocent villagers have a prayer.

Once the evil wizard degifts the seer/ranger/hunter, can the good wizard simply pick a new one, or is that role over? If a new one can be picked, then I guess there would be a seer at all times, which doesn't seem fair. I mean, eventually the seer would pick the evil wizard and out him.

If a gifted is de-gifted, the gift may be handed out again by the good wizard. But if the gifted is killed, the gift may no longer be handed out. So it's somewhere in between the two possibilities you noticed.

Voting records would be useless for finding wolves because none of the wolves would know who to lynch and who not to lynch. There would be no teamwork employed in this game.

True. Any every villager for himself kind of game has its own attractions, but also its own foibles. However, I think that there would end up being some teamwork anyway, simply because people would feel that they have at least a reasonable chance of being right in trusting a given set of other people each given day. Not on sheer logic, but on the nature of each other's posts .... not that they couldn't be fooled, of course!

Maybe there are a lot of factors that we are overlooking that will make the game the biggest hit since WW- or perhaps some unforeseen loopholes and gaps will cause it to be a disaster that will live forever in infamy, which would be fun in its own way I suppose.

That's why I'm bringing it up here, hoping to get help ironing out the wrinkles.