In post 72, Isis wrote:Those two are fine. "Your action failed* messages are only given to players who were roleblocked while performing some type of investigation. They should not be sent when a kill fails
yup noted
i've modded games on ms before, just never with my own setup. i kinda sorta know what to do
"I would also like to reiterate my claim that Osuka is sort of obviously town" - rc about scumsuka
"don't tell anyone, but there's a reason why you're one of my favourite people to mod for" - datisi
rules look good, except you'll need to include a sample VT pm somewhere.
i would also personally suggest that you also allow bold votes in addition to vote tags to avoid angleshoot-y situations. say, in lylo, i have the hammer vote and i decide to bold "vote: isis", who then says that wow nsg you suck i was town, and then implosion says wow nsg you suck i was scum and i fooled you. according to the rules, i haven't actually voted anyone and so i can now vote implosion to win the game, but the impression was there that i did vote. this is an unlikely situation but i've seen it before, so personally i always allow bold votes, even if they're harder to see. you don't have to do this or anything, just my suggestion.
another personal suggestion is to have votes for "no elimination" be at 50% rather than a majority, because 50% of players wanting one is technically all that it takes for them to force no elimination, so it being set at 50% just cuts out the part where they would have to wait until deadline. (example: 4 people are alive, 2 want to no-eliminate. they can force this to happen by simply not voting until deadline runs out, so it makes sense to just have it be hammered at 50% instead of requiring 3 people to hammer it.)
so apart from the sample VT thing which i trust you to include in your rules when you actually start the game, think it's a pass from me.
I agree with those recommendations and also don't view them as binding recommendations (except VT PM in the OP which I think is an implo rule and regardless is such a good recommendation it should be binding)
"Let us say that you are right and there are two worlds. How much, then, is this 'other world' worth to you? What do you have there that you do not have here? Money? Power? Something worth causing the prince so much pain for?'"
"Well, I..."
"What? Nothing? You would make the prince suffer over... nothing?"
VT pm is going in there - i just didn't include it because i didn't think it was part of the rules. sorry i took that too literally
thanks for the suggestion about no exec - i'll change the rules to reflect that
"I would also like to reiterate my claim that Osuka is sort of obviously town" - rc about scumsuka
"don't tell anyone, but there's a reason why you're one of my favourite people to mod for" - datisi
about the vote tags vs bolded votes: i'll bold that bit of the rules (ha) and if i catch a bolded vote i'll point out in-thread that it's not being counted. call me a hardass, but vote tags exist for a reason and people should use them - it's _way_ too easy to miss a bolded vote (compared to a vote tag), and it breaks my vote counter (which is, admittedly, not even finished and pretty broken already). really my rationale is that there's no real reason for someone to opt for a bolded vote as opposed to vote tags - it's even shorter to type VOTE: user[{/}v] than to do
vote: user[{/}b]
"I would also like to reiterate my claim that Osuka is sort of obviously town" - rc about scumsuka
"don't tell anyone, but there's a reason why you're one of my favourite people to mod for" - datisi
you got it. i feel like agreeing speaks for itself, but a dissenting opinion needs to at least be explained to some degree
on a side note, thanks to you all for being fucking awesome and walking me through my first setup. you guys are great <3 <3 <3
"I would also like to reiterate my claim that Osuka is sort of obviously town" - rc about scumsuka
"don't tell anyone, but there's a reason why you're one of my favourite people to mod for" - datisi
Just so implo doesn't have to scroll up and interpret and etc:
This setup is passed.
"Let us say that you are right and there are two worlds. How much, then, is this 'other world' worth to you? What do you have there that you do not have here? Money? Power? Something worth causing the prince so much pain for?'"
"Well, I..."
"What? Nothing? You would make the prince suffer over... nothing?"
