In post 23, Mizzytastic wrote:Don't use "lynch": In solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement the site is moving away from using the words "lynch" and "hang". If you are unsure of an alternative I suggest elimination, elim, E-1, ELo, MELo etc.
While I support this change and idea, I don't think it is actually a good idea to include this in your rules. The main thing I see is that it may cause the opposite effect of what it intends; namely, it reminds people about the l-word, and some people may regard it as a challenge. At the very least, I would drop the Black Lives Matter part as I think some people will feel antagonized by that. (Note: I am not commenting on whether or not they *should* feel that way, just what I think may happen in practice.)
In post 23, Mizzytastic wrote:Claiming mafia: Part of paraphrasing mod communications is claiming roles. Claiming to be part of an anti-town faction is ok. Claiming your team mates, real or faked, is not.
This is a personal opinion; it is by no means something you have to change. Anyway, personally, I am not a fan of this rule mainly because people like to do this kind of thing in jest. Some people will also unintentionally break this rule, especially since this rule is not prominently featured. (I would at least recommend moving it to the top section or at least right below the keep it civil rule.) There is also the issue of those people who just flat out don't read the rules at all; they too may unintentionally break it. I vastly prefer to keep it as a "it's allowed so long as I can tell you are not game-throwing". I guess that could be abused to try to "confirm" oneself, but in practice, I have never had any issue with my version of this rule.
---
You also have the information about submission of night actions twice: under night-time in the deadlines section and under night actions in the game actions section. It is okay to have them both, but it is not really that important, so I would advise getting rid of one instance.
While this win condition is acceptable in mini normals, this win condition does not work in a large, especially in a large that has a serial killer. The correct version is "Town: You win when all threats to the town are dead and at least one town-aligned player is still alive."
In post 24, Mizzytastic wrote:Mafia: You win when all players not aligned with you are dead, or nothing can prevent that from happening.
Likewise, this one needs to be adjusted as well to include the "and at least one mafia-aligned player is still alive" part.
In post 24, Mizzytastic wrote:Should I include a sample win con/role pm for a vanilla sk or just leave it unless someone asks? Alternatively should I just make a generic anti-town win con?
I think this is optional though maybe Flavor Leaf would think differently. I wouldn't go with a generic one because I am pretty sure the serial killer version is slightly different in that they do not have to be alive to win.
In post 25, Mizzytastic wrote:And been as you also seemed ameanable to this, the ability for the odd-nights version. Is odd-nights still ok? I still think I prefer it if it is an option to 2-shot. Maybe mix both and make it Nights 1,3,5 only?
(That's for Flavor Leaf to decide, but personally, I think odd night is okay.)
---
Also a general comment for the role pms: I prefer the approach of making it explicit that a player's action can fail. For instance, for the rolestopper, I prefer writing it like this: "Twice during the game, you may
attempt to
visit a player at night to protect them. All other actions targeting that player will be blocked." (I don't include the underline; that's for you to see the change I made compared to your wording.)
Win conditions in all the role pms need to be fixed accordingly to the above note.
---
In post 25, Mizzytastic wrote:You are a Town Lazy Roleblocker
Each day you may talk in the game thread and vote on who to eliminate.
Each night you may visit a player to block them. Any actions they take will be blocked. Your action will fail if there is only one player left alive who is not a member of the town.
I would be explicit and note that the action fails if there is only one player left alive who is not a member of the town
at the beginning of the night
.
In post 25, Mizzytastic wrote:If protectives target the bulletproof the order I am using to resolve is Rolestopper (prevents all active) -> Bulletproof (prevents 1 passive) -> Doctor (prevents 1 active)
I'm pretty sure this isn't a typical resolution; that is, it is typically Rolestopper --> Doctor --> Bulletproof, but at the same time, I think this is acceptable so long as you are consistent.