Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

bahahaha about time I got some new sig material

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

I would like to challenge this

the only reason I was able to win as serial killer once was to claim my role and side with humans (even though I was planning on backstabbing them in the penultimate phase) and force the game into a final four

in any game with multiple (more than two) factions, siding with another faction (including town) can be a strategic move and should not automatically constitute modkilling imo

at worst, the game setup's balance should be considered on a game-to-game basis --- one of the last games, the serial killer wasn't allowed to claim because it would screw up the game balance, but games like C9++ often are balanced in cases where SK claims happen

tl;dr I think it should be up to the host's discretion based on the game setup

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

god I love you dbp

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

@spongebob script

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

I want to say typically claiming SK as SK (unless it's the only thing that will save you from getting lynched, or maybe a few other rare-ish scenarios where you're forced to play your hand) will decrease your chances of winning the game, significantly. killing the SK is part of town's win condition. and part of wolves' win condition. who have a factional nightkill.

that's a good point though, and I think it should be less about modkilling and more about potential after-game repercussions if malicious intent was obvious.

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

I agree that most of the time it will work against you, but in the other scenarios it's also a gambit, sort of like fakeclaiming cop. You have a remarkably high chance of getting killed by town when you execute it (and mess up), but gambits in and of themselves are parts of a larger strategy and should be treated as such. (e.g. thinking ahead and realizing that it's impossible to survive if you last until the Final Three, and claiming allows you to end the game during a night phase, claiming at least makes it possible to survive; or, fakeclaiming cop will 100% get you killed later on, but if you are a sinking ship you can claim cop in order to expose the real cop and help your teammates before you die.)

I agree with the malicious intent part --- but there's a difference between making a risky gambit and having it fail vs conceding the game.

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

I think plays like that make the game hell-a refreshing

That's just me though, hahaha

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

it's very possible (especially early game) for it to not be a play whatsoever though and just be a turning the role into something it was never intended to be and shifting the balance of the game and making it far less interesting because deep SK runs are interesting as shit

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

dbp got them good points though.

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

this is totally possible

I guess my point is that it shouldn't be a blanket statement and should be taken case by case? idk

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

I would say this is completely different. wolves win as a team and dying earlier doesn't impede your ability to meet wincon, especially if it means helping your teammates live longer.

claiming a role that is anti-town and needs to not die in order to win is far less often a reasonable play.

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

but yeah blanket statement not work here

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

this rule feels a lot clunkier than it needs to be and is honestly quite confusing. it feels like the only reason this rule is here is because the old rule thread stated that you needed to play a jTWG. i think just stating that jTWGs exist and are good to beginners to play, but not required might be good enough.

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

I want to see a rule added where all game hosts must place the day / night lengths in all game OP's, especially when being voted on.

It's gotten a lot better recently, but I am of the "just in case" mentality.

On that note.

Should elaborate somewhere about "constructive posting" constraints and how they're to be handled in case some host actually thinks it's a good idea to use this.

Would like also a note in the rule set about language and fellow player treatment. I think the current stance is fine, but I don't think you touched on it anywhere.

I dig that all ban reasons should be public. 100% love that rule.

I've done this twice actually Yoshl used it in a game to fake claim it and get me killed.

I'm still mad about it.

I haven't forgotten Yoshl.

You little shit.

There should be zero rules pertaining to how SK claims / if they do, because it CAN 100% be used to obtain victory when played correctly by a skilled player.

Possibly consider adding a rule about how votes are done for the hosts who use the auto vote counter.

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

Interested in other people's thoughts, but I think just saying "jTTWGs are a thing" doesn't really have a place in a rules thread.

The part about hosts putting day/night lengths is not really a rule thing, I think, it more relates to how games are modded. This will be discussed in a future thread along with a few other points.

By constructive posts I think you mean contentful? I think that this also falls under mod discretion.

A rule about language and fellow player treatment is probably necessary, that's a good point.

The reasoning for bans being public is because its the way its always been and its a good tradition. Trying to keep everything public rather than behind the scenes is the way to go, I think.

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

I agree that I think this should be done as a case by case basis. There are 100% situations where claiming SK is strategic and beneficial, I think that what you did was fine. I think most of the time SKs claim, its fine. But when someone does what choof did, or what nijatwo did a very long time ago, where you just claim a promise to townside, its pretty awful for the game and 100% constitutes playing against your win condition.

Case-by-case basis should make it so that it allows for strategically claiming your role, but not saying "Fuck my win condition"

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

I think the cult really showcased that, because I wasn't sure what to do when hosting the bastard++ and people were openly threatening "If the cultist targets me i'm fucking outing them because fuck i have a good role" etc. etc.

case by case should be fine for this i think?

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

I did mean contentful, but I guess more what I'm after is that the rules never get added after the voting stage, and maybe the rules of game voting might need to be included so the rulebook is a bit more complete and encompasses everything?

I mean sure, I'm all for hosts choosing the rules for their games. However, I do think once the game has been voted for you should be shit out of luck on changing / adding rules.

Sorry if I seem a bit clingy to this.

Anyways on the ban thing: I agree aside from the tradition standpoint.

It's great. It really is. You don't have to wait till the time's up to know the reason, you can defend yourself if you feel you should, and if others have a disagreement they can voice it. It just makes more sense.

Also damn dbp on sk claims and stuff.

Re: New TWG Rules Proposal & Discussion
 

I mean this completely unsarcastically, the problem here is the fact that you're hosting a bastard game. Technically, they would be playing against their win condition, though. In signing up for a game such as Bastard++, you agree to put up with all possible bullshit, and that includes being converted to the cult.