Always important to focus the pedantry lens when a victory condition is up for voting, and “a blog post that describes a Possibility for each of the four Qualities of the Murder” looks a little vague. Would “the Murderer’s name contains a vowel” or “the Method is either Candlestick or Rope” be accepted as a correct description of a possibility?

on those grounds. Would also clarify that the final paragraph doesn’t apply to detectives who idle and unidle within the dynasty.

More broadly, should accusations be public? Is it fun or frustrating if a player (who knows nothing except that Colonel Mustard is 100% the murderer) can piggyback off of another’s failed accusation by swapping out one fact?

[Kevan] I agree that the first two are problems that should be ironed out before this goes anywhere. However, I do feel the need to explain making them public. It’s supposed to serve the purpose of raising the stakes so that people would have to be absolutely certain they knew everything before admitting they knew anything. If you jump the gun a little bit, you might just give someone the little bit of extra information they need to beat you.

This also gives alliances another advantage: they have multiple guesses as a collective. So they are allowed to have minor errors. To could just have someone submit one thing and have another person submit another thing.

for reasons of pedantry.

[Trigon] “Absolutely certain” is harder to get to now that 10% of clues are red herrings, and there’s currently no easy way to double-check a Method or Motive. I can see an endgame where someone is 95% certain due to red herrings, and can’t risk a guess as it would give so much information away.

But there’s plenty of Nomic left.

[Kevan] Hmmm, that is a very good point that I hadn’t thought of before.

Gonna s/k this. I was planning on doing it already since this is broken and I need to think how to fix it.