Werewolf LXI - Ocean's Eleven (GAME OVER, SEE PAGE 19 FOR RESULT.)

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

As a GM, I find the 12/12 clock (or whatever variant Lathum uses - the 9/15 clock, perhaps) incredibly onerous. As a player, I do like it quite a bit, and understand why some people like it. Without the 24 hour clock, I just would not have the energy to keep running games.

I suggest somebody try a small game using a 24/24 clock at some point. I think we have formed a sort of "werewolf culture" here with biases against certain types of play that may actually be very rewarding.

Do you have further thoughts on the idea of our culture having a bias against certain types of rewarding play? I'm very intrigued by this idea.

[st.cronin]

I don't have ideas of "rewarding play" in mind, but ... I think Passacaglia's Clue game may have run up against one of those biases. In fact, I think his BCS game may also challenge some players biases about how to play this game, and I'm intrigued to see what happens.

Different GMs have different styles. Barkeep's games, while all different, all get me thinking in a similar way. Same with Alan, in a different way - when I play Alan's games, I tend to access a certain type of thought. I think that variety is good, but I guess I am thinking we just don't quite have enough of it, or that there is more available.

Edit to add: I am in no way suggesting that BCS werewolf will be flawed.

[Abe Sargent]

I think part of that is we as GMs have certain styles.

For example, when I GM, I give every player an actual role, in addition to powers, and publish those roles. The best example of this is the small game "Seville High, Book One: The Janitor of Death" which I thought went very well.

BTW - after winning as a wolf in back to back games, I will get no trust next game at all!

[Abe Sargent]

Neither with BK after he got converted.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Neither with BK after he got converted.

I was bummed about being converted. Not my fault. You on the other hand are a sneaky SOB and deserve any attention you get

[Abe Sargent]

I'm just saying that we were both wolves in the last two games and won each time. That's all.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I don't have ideas of "rewarding play" in mind, but ... I think Passacaglia's Clue game may have run up against one of those biases. In fact, I think his BCS game may also challenge some players biases about how to play this game, and I'm intrigued to see what happens.

Different GMs have different styles. Barkeep's games, while all different, all get me thinking in a similar way. Same with Alan, in a different way - when I play Alan's games, I tend to access a certain type of thought. I think that variety is good, but I guess I am thinking we just don't quite have enough of it, or that there is more available.

Edit to add: I am in no way suggesting that BCS werewolf will be flawed.

Don't worry, I didn't take it that way. I think that if a game challenges biases, that's probably a good thing. I have a lot of worries about how things will play out, but I'm sure it won't be as bad as Clue was.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

I think part of that is we as GMs have certain styles.

For example, when I GM, I give every player an actual role, in addition to powers, and publish those roles. The best example of this is the small game "Seville High, Book One: The Janitor of Death" which I thought went very well.

BTW - after winning as a wolf in back to back games, I will get no trust next game at all!

My next game will have some abilities and everyone will have a certain power (whether they can trust it completely or not is another matter), but I don't think I'm going to list any extra roles. I like the idea of open-endedness and creativity that I think not having listed roles could bring to the game.

[jeheinz72]

Originally Posted by Lathum

JHeinze- can you explain your thought process behind trusting path based on the fact he allegedly scanned you?

Well that wasn't the main fact really, it was more that I thought there had to be a conversion and based on reveals it seemed a lot more like it was you who revealed out of the blue than Path who took the gambit as a 2nd revealer. Yeah, I whiffed pretty big on that one, but realistically I don't think we would've ever looked BK's way anyhow.