ESPIONAGE: A brand new simple forum game! (Central Rules & Information Topic)

[dumytru]

I actually tried to play it with my mates, so you can say I have some kind of experience.
So I could do it as well.

[Edogawa4869]

I wouldn't mind making a triumelephant return to the forums to try my hand at a new game... Be it playing or GMing.

[Jd-]

EDDDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~~~~!

I've had a couple of things to do the past few days due to some new hype, but I am now back. May the hype begin shortly! More info on the way.

[Jd-]

I sent out an offer to Stopwatch to GM since she was the first to offer. If not, I think dumytru would also be a fine choice. I wanna give Jecka the chance to actually play this time, and having Edo back in the fold would also be quite hype. Let us see!

The rules that will go into this round are:
- The Informant, an assistant for the Spy and corrupt civilian, is included.
- 3 of the 7 names on a civilian's list will be revealed upon death (NOT arrest, only when killed by the Spy).

[Jd-]

ESPIONAGE: Round 2 is now open! Stopwatch is the GM, starts on Sunday! Sign-up now and ready for hype!

[Kleene Onigiri]

Could you maybe still add a change to the list revealing thing?
Because over time, people will have their own list narrowed down anyway the more people die. And the list revealing will add into that.
So I thought maybe revealing 3 people out of the 7 from the list at the beginning, then (when a certain amount of people died or if half the people are left) it reveals only 2 out of 7 and then 1 out of the 7?
I think it could end up too strong at the end otherwise :V

[Jd-]

Main post has been updated with the role assignment templates, in case you wanna dig a little deeper into the game.

[Conan-chandesune]

Could you maybe still add a change to the list revealing thing?
Because over time, people will have their own list narrowed down anyway the more people die. And the list revealing will add into that.
So I thought maybe revealing 3 people out of the 7 from the list at the beginning, then (when a certain amount of people died or if half the people are left) it reveals only 2 out of 7 and then 1 out of the 7?
I think it could end up too strong at the end otherwise :V

I think 2 will be more ideal for the first week at least, as, if the names are random, then we may also get names of arrested and other dead people.
If 7-8 or less people are left, then it could be a problem, i do agree.

[Jd-]

Could you maybe still add a change to the list revealing thing?
Because over time, people will have their own list narrowed down anyway the more people die. And the list revealing will add into that.
So I thought maybe revealing 3 people out of the 7 from the list at the beginning, then (when a certain amount of people died or if half the people are left) it reveals only 2 out of 7 and then 1 out of the 7?
I think it could end up too strong at the end otherwise :V

I think 2 will be more ideal for the first week at least, as, if the names are random, then we may also get names of arrested and other dead people.
If 7-8 or less people are left, then it could be a problem, i do agree.

Round Two is using a variation of this rule for safeguarding purposes (to ensure the game doesn't end too quickly purely based on this). First dead will reveal 3 random names (not just first three anymore), all subsequent deaths will be 2 random names. Let's see how that goes...

[Jd-]

Rule proposal for all future rounds to fix the issue with inactivity in this sort of game:

If you do not send in a vote, you automatically vote for yourself.

This makes it much more likely that inactive players will just be arrested, since they automatically have a +1 on their own total. I think this is a nice medium between everything that could come up. This also makes it so that lists won't be inadvertently revealed and the voting tallies won't be skewed due to too many inactive players.

[dumytru]

Rule proposal for all future rounds to fix the issue with inactivity in this sort of game:

If you do not send in a vote, you automatically vote for yourself.

This makes it much more likely that inactive players will just be arrested, since they automatically have a +1 on their own total. I think this is a nice medium between everything that could come up. This also makes it so that lists won't be inadvertently revealed and the voting tallies won't be skewed due to too many inactive players.

And this way the deductions would be more accurate, since there would be no random votes.
I agree!

[Kleene Onigiri]

But you should mark this change in big, red letters XD Because some people are still like: "eh, even if I don't manage to send a vote, I'll still vote someone randomly anyway" :x

[Jecka]

It'll make it easier for the GM too

[Fujiwara]

Rule proposal for all future rounds to fix the issue with inactivity in this sort of game:

If you do not send in a vote, you automatically vote for yourself.

This makes it much more likely that inactive players will just be arrested, since they automatically have a +1 on their own total. I think this is a nice medium between everything that could come up. This also makes it so that lists won't be inadvertently revealed and the voting tallies won't be skewed due to too many inactive players.

That sounds like a really, really good idea.

[shinichi'sapprentice]

i object!

reason to be posted after round 2.

i wanted to post this after the game ends but it might be too late by then for it may have been decided already that this proposal should be implemented on all future rounds.