I agree at this conjucture that Scum Team 2 is lot weaker than Team 1 and Team 3 (3 Being Jedah + Osmund)
I assume this is the case with Ed & Ein?It's 1 player controlling 2, or 5 in the case of League of Villains.
Yes for Ed and Ein, and yes those are the same ITAs as in Marvel.Okay, forgive me if this has been answered and I've missed it somewhere - there are references to events and ITAs - are these the same or are there ITAs as in Marvel? I'm trying to make sure I understand the game structure first.
I did consider giving winners something useful, but in the end chose not to, in the first game everyone had an upgrade and it made things a bit imbalanced, I thought that this time only a few should have one, for non upgrade stuff, I guess something small like a second vote for the winner is something that can be added. I do want to see what Bear thinks first though.Okay. Then I guess my question is - just as I get things organized in my head, because, uh, this is a lot to take in - in the events, why not add some small reward, like a 5% success or dodge modifier, so it doesn't feel useless if the reward doesn't get to the handful of people it might impact? Like the Morning Star is great for Dracula or the people in his faction, since they can pass it, but the rest of the game is like BIG SHRUG other than as a negotiating point. I think you might incite more excitement in the events if there was something for everyone, no matter how small - but I'm curious if that might impact balance. Wonder what Bear things. I do see that my predecessor also had some thoughts about these events.
So I talked to Pedro because I wanted clarification here and what's missing I think is that if you want to do an RPG-based thing, it doesn't even need to be reviewed. It's not a mafia game. It's a special event.Pedro had told me that I can make a game like this but you guys would label it as a spin off. I don't mind cutting some roles. I can drop this to around 25 probably.
The RPG aspect of the game was severely cut down, it's just an event now basically. I don't think Pedro knows how much RPG this game has.So I talked to Pedro because I wanted clarification here and what's missing I think is that if you want to do an RPG-based thing, it doesn't even need to be reviewed. It's not a mafia game. It's a special event.
Okay. Then I guess my question is - just as I get things organized in my head, because, uh, this is a lot to take in - in the events, why not add some small reward, like a 5% success or dodge modifier, so it doesn't feel useless if the reward doesn't get to the handful of people it might impact? Like the Morning Star is great for Dracula or the people in his faction, since they can pass it, but the rest of the game is like BIG SHRUG other than as a negotiating point. I think you might incite more excitement in the events if there was something for everyone, no matter how small - but I'm curious if that might impact balance. Wonder what Bear things. I do see that my predecessor also had some thoughts about these events.
Only one person has ITA's and can already benefit from an item. If they switch the same people then it's like nothing happens, essentially they get switched and then switched back.My suggestion there was just a slight advantage or even disadvantage in the ITAs. It wouldn't be something that moves the needle much, balance-wise, but gives a reward for winning or whatever. My guess is that people will be far less inclined to trade in this game than in last game (gee, I wonder why >.>) so while getting something to keep it away from someone else is a reward unto itself, something more tangible might be welcome. Just a thought.
What do you do with the simultaneous actions if they interfere with one another? If the switches target the same people, for instance?
Then targetting Brazil leads to Fandorin, targeting Sawneeks also leads to Fandorin, targeting Fandorin leads to one of the 2 at random. Unless there is a different ruling for that, I'm sure it has happened before, maybe Bear knows.Oh, I thought there were regular ITAs - that's why I asked above, but okay, then scrap that concern.
Re: switchers - I mean if there's overlap, not the same targets. Like say you and I are both switchers. I switch Brazil and Fandorin. You switch Fandorin and Sawneeks. What happens?
Yeah they will be informedIf one of the evil teams die off completely, will the game be informed? (Like "Forces of light are defeated, game continues"). Dharkon and Galeem appear if Team 1 or 2 are gone, but players might not know it's related to that, and there is nothing indicating Jeddahs demise.
Yeah I can see how it can be confusing, I will change it in the spreadsheet now.Bear, do you concur on the switcher issue above? I just want to make sure that there are structures in place to think through potential problems before they turn up in the game.
Geno, something to keep in mind before you write PMs: several of these roles say "every night, you can do this" but then it's also indicated that it's an x-shot ability. As written, this is confusing. I recommend more standardized language here - typically we do one of these structures here:
Option 1:
Twice per game, during the night, you can target another player of your choice with a roleblock.
Option 2:
You are a roleblocker; during the night phase, you may target another player and prevent their action. This is a two-shot ability.
something like that. But I recommend adjusting all the instances of every night/x-shot here as you prepare to move on to the next stage, once we've cleared this.
Then targetting Brazil leads to Fandorin, targeting Sawneeks also leads to Fandorin, targeting Fandorin leads to one of the 2 at random. Unless there is a different ruling for that, I'm sure it has happened before, maybe Bear knows.
Alright, done.I think this proposal for how to handle this is fine. It should be written down to the design sheet.