Somebody help me out with this. There are 4 characters listed in post 1 under the heading of "conspirator". Does this just mean that they were conspirators on the show and not necessarily in this game? I can see where anyone in CTU or in the government could really be a conspirator, but in this game, is it possible that people listed as conspirators could really be good?

I doubt that any of the conspirators, should they be in the game, are anything other than bad.

But there is certainly a chance that our mods gave one of those conspirator characters a different route to follow than what happened on the show, we'll see. Speculating on roles based on characters is something we probably won't get to for a while, unless everyone is just going to start shooting names off, which doesn't seem prudent at this point.

And I thought they said pretty clearly in the rules that Jack is the only character we can assume any allegiance about. That seemed pretty clearly to me to mean that the rest of us are randomized.

Yes, that is true. I think that relates more to the wealth of good characters, though, that we can't assume all of them are good. It'd be weird if the 4 conspirators listed starting showing up claiming to be good guys.

I thought the same but then got confused by having the four characters listed as conspirators. So if some character has the ability to "see" that one of the players is Habib Marwan, we shouldn't assume that he is bad?

Yeah, it could be weighted toward them I suppose. Iw as thinking of the Marvel game, where it clearly was very random, but then there we all had public roles so that was much more necessary. It might not be as random here.

I'm curious to see what effect having DT cleared and public will have. Hopefully that's combined with some sort of ability to build a CoT.

I don't see where it says that. It does say that he's the only public role, and the rest are private, but it doesn't say anything about him being the only one we can assume any allegiance about.

It says he's loyal to the government which means he's the only character we know the allegiance of, or should assume the allegiance of, which I think is what the point was.

I'm pretty sure it said that too.

I would agree with this. On both counts.

I suppose. It doesn't say NOT to assume it about anyone else, though. I guess that's all I was thinking.

That section has been changed from "Foreigners/Conspirators" to "TV Show Villains" to avoid any confusion with the "Conspirators (aka wolves)" in this game.

The rules post does contain information on the relationship between "TV show persona" and "WW game persona". In nebulous language that we probably will not clarify further ;)

That's cool, now I know not to assume any absolutes. If I see a Habib Marwan come out in the game, I know I can be suspicious but shouldn't be absolutely sure he is bad. That gives me what I was looking for. Thanks.

I get the feeling people are making this too difficult.

The faction of the players, with the exception of Jack Bauer, is not predicated on the actions on the television show.

To me that reads that no matter whether a character was 'good' or 'bad' on the show, does not impact whether they are 'good' or 'bad' in this game. Kim Bauer might be the head of the Conspirators (maybe she'll be that in next season's 24 too), Habib Marwan might work for the Government for a pardon. Make up whatever backstory you want, but other than Jack, any other role is fair game for a good, neutral, or evil role.

This is what I was reading. It seems pretty clear to me that we can't assume anything. I assume the roles will mostly work out in terms of certain inter-character relationships, ways roles interact based on the TV show.

Hah, jinx.

What I don't get, then, is why the wolves are given the names of the characters that are not in the game.

I hear you, I didn't totally get that myself. I guess it gives them a bit more flexibility as to what type of role they want to fake reveal as.

So reading this, it seems my role reveal is useless, even if I list what power I have.

And by the way this game looks to be more dificult than I thought. I'm kind of confused about clock/lynch thing. I'll go back through rules again when I get a chance.

And my only confusing was characters listed as conspirators. I now know the list was of people who were conspirators on the show not necessarily in the game. I just needed clarification that "conspirator" meant "conspirator on the show". Makes much more sense now, and will hopefully prevent an even bigger fight in-game.

This is about where I'm at now, I think.

That, and in addition I think that it's probably not a good idea to put our roles out there. I imagine certain roles can affect certain other roles so for the most part it's probably best to keep the wolves (and neutrals?) in the dark.

I agree with what others are saying about mass reveals-there's going to be quite a few extra roles out there-like 7? and even if there is a mass reveal it tells us nothing about what side people are on, especially given the clarification from the mods about the roles list and only gives slight clues to whatever powers are out there. And I'm guessing there's going to be some duplicate/very similar powers out there given the number of people in the game.

Glad I decided to get back into this one.

Will check back in later. Home with a migraine and figured I would pop on to see if I missed anything. Time to close my eyes for a while longer.

Catching up, but I did not post for 8 hours just for you (and cause I was sleeping :)

Saldana should be happy to know there were only 197 posts by noon (EST).

I don't know the roles and powers people have, but using basic WW roles as an example. A seer could feed his scans to a previously scanned player through these PM's. A bodyguard could feed his identity to somehow he protected and prevent a night kill from. A duke could PM to players under lynch consideration for info. As for wolves, PM's like these could be faked.

That's certainly possible

Definitely agreed.

I agree, we should not apply absolutes to this, but hopefully this is not any real consideration to a full reveal as it is pointless if not harmful to the village.

not unless she's conspiring to throw a topless pool party at my place!! :D

I'M JACK BAUER!!!!!

You may not try and sex your daughter up

Yeah, you've got the worst role in the game DT.

LOL

Well....I have not much more to say at this point...but i enjoy the discussion. I think the players are totally random, but to me it doesnt matter as I have never watched the show.

I'll be driving now so I will catch you guys in the morning. Thanks for bearing with me.

I want some action :)

This is 24!

Looks like it's the night before the premier, we still have a few hours to go. :)

Don't worry, it will give me time to prepare my vote. Unless you want to talk about a new sig? :rant:

:D

It will be interesting starting in a half hour. I'm wondering how this voting dynamic, and realtime actions will work out. Hopefully it will give us something to work with day one.

Not that it will be much of an issue in this game but we use the Central Time Zone this game as that is what both Hoops and I reside in.

Aw, thanks, I forgot about that.

Bah! I am on the west coast and I will always refer to time in the eastern time zone since that is standard around here.

A couple of thoughts on the discussion of the day.

1. Character reveal - doesn't matter either way since it doesn't tell me anything.
2. PMs - A great concept, but as I think Alan T mentioned we really only get 2 people to talk to since we likely will need to reply. As a villager I probably wouldn't talk strategy but would like to try to get info on roles, but be very careful in the first few days if not avoid the PMs because the risk is too high.
3. My availabilty - I mentioned this when I signed up, but I have no access during the day. I have no board or e-mail access until about 8:30 PM each night. I will contribute at night, as respond at that time.

This is the longest day zero ever and wish we could get started now.

So what's the over/under on the number of times that hoops and BK have to clear their inboxes?

3

Over. Book it for as much as you'd be willing to take.

And if BK can't cover the action I'll take a part of it as well.

OK, where is everyone? The show is about to start!

Let's go!

I'm here!

Where is that damn clock to create a sense of drama?

No deaths yet? No explosions yet?

So nothing happened night zero? Or just nothing that outwardly affects us?

Nah, Night 0 is boring :) In all seriousness, we'll post what happened on Night 0 after the game.

Day 1? To be determined.

Hmm, interesting. So this Daniels may have been a bad guy? I expect there will be some detective work involved here. We should talk about a strategy for voting. We can control the pace of the game some, so I would think it would be best to draw out each day in order to get as many actions in as we can, at least until the point that we've started to get some data to go on.

This largely depends on the night kill ability of the conspirators. If they get a kill every 24 hours, it would be a mistake to draw out lynches as that gives them more kills than we have. Also, using this strategy does give the wolves more potential excuses for making certain votes.

I notice Daniels wasn't in the name of possible characters. It was too much to hope that it might give bad guys one less role to try and poach.

True, but I think it may make sense in the beginning when we don't have anything to vote on yet. We want to lynch less in the beginning and more later on.

It depends on the schedules our actions are on too though. For example if scans are based on 24 hours, or days, or what. I presume though that not all abilities are stuck to the day cycle.

We can't really drag it out too long if a lynch will happen every 23rd-24th hour or so. I guess day 1 could last until you get 40% on somebody......

But if the question is "should there be any circumstances in which a 'no lynch' policy would be beneficial", I don't see one offhand.

There's also the possibility that the conspirators get powers that can be used every say 36 hours, in which case it makes sense to try and get lynches done more quickly. I think the thing is, at this point in time, we're missing some information we'd need to make the correct call here.

Gonna head to bed for now.

Strike "should there". Replace with "are there". My opinion is the same though.

Completely irrelevant, but I had to post this in the spirit of the game (and to possibly piss off PB):

Preliminary talks on a contract extension have started between Flyers general manager Paul Holmgren and Pronger’s agent, Pat Morris. Morris said Pronger has never gone into a season with only one year left on a deal.


They’ll get a player who wants to play into his 40s and insists he doesn’t feel his age.


“Twenty-four. Call me Jack Bauer,” he said.

I definitely don't want a no lynch, I want a voting record. But since in this game it seems it would be possible to get a lynch near instantly if we wanted to, I thought I should address that issue. I think lynching fast at the beginning would help the wolves.

Jack Bauer believes in always lynching!

Y'know, I think it's a damned if you do damned if you don't thing.

If we come up with a couple possibles (no shows, etc), I don't really have a problem with getting some early information via a lynch.

What I sometimes find more destructive to the villagers chances in WW is the nitpicky small thing that blows up into a showdown that overshadows everything else until all of the people involved are outed or lynched.

that's very true Path. I think that's a very wise observation you've made there in your last couple sentences.

As this is my first game, point out to me if I'm saying something wildly off the wall and stupid (I can take it). I'd assume that we'd want some more information before we lynch someone, but of course holding off for too long wouldn't be sound. So I think a middle ground would be best. Lynching fast would probably be too rash. And dawdling too long wouldn't be too helpful either (though I'm not sure at all how long is too long in the info gathering phase).

ISiddiqui - editing posts isn't allowed in WW (you could conceivably be editing out something you said that revealed yourself or gave a clue to a teammate). No harm no foul, just saying.

ISiddiqui - one of the first lessons of Werewolf: do not edit posts in the thread. This was not posted in the rules thread but it should have been ... just one of those things that I forgot to add since it has been such a long-standing rule in these games.

haha - i'm faster than HOOPSGUY!!!!!

Oops, sorry! Was just adding the last parenthetical to my post (and fixing a typo or two!!)

The "no edit" rule ensures everyone on this forum (with the exception of the moderators, most of the time) sucks at speling over the long hual.

Not to have a disagreement between mom and dad but I feel the sort of immediate editing ISiddiqui did is alright and am sorry that has fallen out of favor in place of a rigid fundamentalism about editing.

*shrugs* it doesn't bother me one way or another. just figured i'd be a bit less of a freak about it then some others and i could be nice in pointing it out to him

If we had an editing rule I would still be alive in the Labyrinth!

I think you need to better classify the nature of the 24 ticking sound in writing, Poli. It's not a simple ticking.

It's more of a beep :D

We mostly trust each other here, but I think if you stray from rigid fundamentalism in this case you're going to run into more headaches.

Certainly. Most of the games I've run here I've just avoided re-printing some commonly known rules without considering that some might need a reminder, so leniency is always a good thing, especially early in games.

And now, to actually comment on the game.. I'm interested to see how the lynching plays out. Are we going to move towards our first lynch candidates being low-posters or have game events or character abilities interject? I feel like it won't be too far into this game before something weird/unexpected happens.

I'm assuming that we aren't going to have much to go on in the first day, so I'm going to do something to hopefully jumpstart something.

Vote EagleFan

A vote from me at this time is completely random, so I will wait for tomorrow night before voting. I think it is advantageous at this time to wait almost the full 24 hours until the next lynch.

So 40% of 24 would be 10 votes, I assume. So by 24 hours 10 votes will lynch. Presumably right now it's much higher than that. Am I thinking about this right?

I don't have a standard day one vote, so I don't have anyone to throw out for consideration at this point. Is there anyone who has not checked in?

My 100% guesstimates from page 3

26:00-26:59
25:00-25:59 = 20%
24:00-24:59 = 30%
23:00-23:59 = 40%
20:00-22:59 = 50%
15:00-19:59 = 60%
10:00-14:59 = 70%
5:00-9:59 = 80%
1:00-4:59 = 90%
0:00-1:00 = 100%

This is hoops. This game is probably rigged to really hurt us if we don't lynch.

I know there's been some talk on two points so far.

1. Whether or not the wolves get a kill every X amount of hours or if a lynch is needed.

2. Whether after 24 hours, a lower and lower percentage of votes is needed to lynch or it stays at 40%

The answer to these questions can't be the wolves get a kill after lynched and the votes needed stays at 40%.

The answer could very well be the wolves get a kill every 24 hours and 2. could be either way.

The answer could be that the wolves get a kill for every lynch and the percentage of votes needed keeps getting smaller after 24 hours.

The reason it couldn't be a kill for every lynch and votes needed stays the same is we could draw the lynches out forever.

My best guess is the wolves get a kill every 24 hours and the second question could go either way. Having the wolves get that kill makes lynching a necessity and as Tyrith pointed out, not lynching should be a negative for the villager in most cases. That would accomplish it.

Wow, I must be ready for bed. I couldnt' understand any of that Danny. I'll try again in the morning.

Though I hate sleeping in this game because I know anything could happen while I'm gone. I need the staying power of Jack Bauer.

I dont know who to PM...so im not. I dont trust any of you. I almost trust DT.

i'm pretty sure if you should be trusting anybody it's me. after all i'm jack bauer. and i have a hot daughter...if you PM me she can be yours!

I will pick her up at 7:00.

i said can be, not that she would be for sure.

you might not even be alive by 7pm bucko!

I'll try to have her back by then.