Sunday, January 17, 2010

Proposal: Weapons

18-2, cannot be enacted without CoV -Darth

Adminned at 17 Jan 2010 09:59:16 UTC

Add a new rule to the rule set called “Weapons” that reads:

There are 5 different weapons, a knife, a pistol, a club, a vial (of poison), and a rope. Weapons can be tracked in the GNDT under the “Weapon” column; however, weapons can also be hidden, in which case the weapon does not appear there. Weapons are either possessed by a guest or are in a room. All guests (including the executor) will initially start with “-” in the weapons column, which means that the guest either has no weapon or has a hidden weapon. The murderer starts with the knife, which is hidden. The detective starts with the pistol, which is also hidden. The remaining weapons will be hidden in undisclosed locations in the manor by the executor. If a guest is alone in a room, he may search the room for a weapon by sending the executor a private message. If there is a weapon in that room, that guest becomes the possessor of that weapon and keeps it hidden initially. A guest may only posses one weapon at a time. If a guest which has a weapon searches a room with a weapon, their weapon is switched with the one in that room, and their previous weapon is placed in that room; additionally, the new weapon becomes hidden.

If the Proposal titled “How Are You Feeling?” passes, then add the following subsection titled “Attacking” to the rule titled “Weapons” that reads:

As a daily action, a non dead guest may apply a weapon to another non dead guest in the same room. This is done by sending a private message to the executor explaining what weapon you wish to use on which guest.  If the other guest is unarmed (i.e. possesses no weapons, hidden or otherwise) this has the following effect:
*If the weapon is the knife, the other guest is wounded.
*If the weapon is the pistol, the other guest is wounded.
*If the weapon is the vial, the other guest is poisoned.
*If the weapon is the club, the other guest is stunned.
*If the weapon is the rope, the other guest is restrained.
If the other guest is armed, the attack becomes a duel, unless the attacker used the vial in which case the other guest is poisoned. If a certain weapon “beats” another weapon, a duel with those weapons will result in the guest with the losing weapon receiving the same effect as if they were attacked with the winning weapon while unarmed. Here is a table of which weapons will “beat” each other:
*Knife beats vial and rope.
*Pistol beats knife, vial, club and rope.
*Club beats knife and vial.
*Rope beats club.

(These follow the rules given in the proposal “How are you Feeling”, i.e. an already wounded guest that gets wounded becomes dead.)

If the lights are on and there is another guest in the room besides the guest getting attacked and the guest attacking, then the weapon becomes unhidden, if this is a duel, then both weapons are unhidden.

Additionally, the following effects occur for certain weapons:
If the weapon is the pistol, the weapon becomes unhidden.
If the weapon is the vial, the vial is destroyed and is no longer available for play.
If the weapon is the rope, the guest getting attacked becomes the possessor of the rope, which is unhidden.

If the attacking guest is not the murderer, the gangster, the colonel or the detective, that guest becomes a lunatic (i.e. the role of that guest is changed to “Lunatic”). In no case is the attacking guest explicitly identified (although in some cases it will be obvious).

If more than half of the EVCs contain the text “cyanide pill”, change the text

The detective starts with the pistol, which is also hidden.

to

The detective starts with the vial, which is also hidden.

 

I know the other weapons proposal got shot down, so I’m not really expecting this one to pass either. However, I tried to address the concerns there with this one. Particularly, innocent guests will become lunatics most of the time. By making the lunatic role very unsavory, we can prevent this from happening most of the time. Also, secret murders are possible, especially in a crowded room with the lights off…

Comments

Thrawn:

17-01-2010 03:35:27 UTC

for
Cyanide Pill

Roujo: he/him

17-01-2010 04:08:23 UTC

for At first reading, this proposal looks nice. =)
I might change my vote after more experienced Guests express their opinion, however. =P

Dustin:

17-01-2010 04:12:35 UTC

I don’t think the detective should start with a weapon which beats the murderer’s knife, so if I do decide to vote, it will be with the Cyanide Pill clause.

“Additionally, the following effects occur for certain weapons:”—is this only in a “attacker vs unarmed” scenario, or for any combat scenario?

For that reason I will reserve my vote for the moment.

Darknight: he/him

17-01-2010 05:05:01 UTC

imperial I’m not sure atm. And my thoughts on the add on is simple. Why would the detective be carrying poison? So either way I won’t be voting for the add on. Its the main part that I’m not sure about yet.

digibomber:

17-01-2010 05:25:52 UTC

against I like the weapon’s proposal in general, but I don’t like this part:

“If the attacking guest is not the murderer, the gangster, the colonel or the detective, that guest becomes a lunatic (i.e. the role of that guest is changed to “Lunatic”). In no case is the attacking guest explicitly identified.”

It makes it far too easy to identify the murderer or the detective if they attack, and thus precludes them from attacking.

I would prefer something else like
“If there is a detective on the same floor as the attack then the attacker’s status is changed to restrained and their location is changed to basement”.
i.e. the detective will catch the attacker and tie them up in the basement.

alethiophile:

17-01-2010 05:33:51 UTC

imperial

Excalabur:

17-01-2010 06:05:44 UTC

against  wall of text.  my first read is.. uninspired.  could be convinced.

Ornithopter:

17-01-2010 06:20:38 UTC

against
I like this better, but if the detective starts shooting us at random, he’s going to get into a duel with the murderer sooner or later, and the pistol will win.

alethiophile:

17-01-2010 06:46:14 UTC

Either this is a werewolf-type dynasty, in which case the victims should not be able to defend themselves at the event, or it’s a murder mystery, in which case the same probably applies, or it’s more combat-themed, in which case we need a combat system more interesting than broken rock-paper-scissors. CoV. against

Nausved:

17-01-2010 07:07:46 UTC

against

There:

17-01-2010 07:43:11 UTC

@dustin: I meant that for all combat scenarios.
@digibomber: Yeah, I think you’re right, that should probably be fixed somehow.
@Ornithopter: Yeah, the pistol is too strong currently. Maybe if it was a revolver and only had 6 shots that would be better. Actually, I think it would still be too strong, maybe no gun at all is best.
@althiophile: There are 32 guests and only 5 weapons. Most victims will be defenseless. I think that with the pistol dropped, it would be even better in this sense. I figured that the murderer has to kill people somehow, and the health system should be fully utilized by available weapons so… Also notice that if we drop the gun and start the vial with the detective, nobody but the murderer and the detective will be able to kill anybody.

Anyway, I would appreciate more feedback if you would vote for something similar since I am already planning on proposing it in a better form.

Rodlen:

17-01-2010 08:02:49 UTC

against Super-guns just aren’t that fun.

TrumanCapote:

17-01-2010 08:55:50 UTC

against

Josh: he/they

17-01-2010 09:22:39 UTC

I’m a bit confused by “If the other guest is armed, the attack becomes a duel, unless the attacker used the vial in which case the other guest is poisoned” - does that mean that the vial always wins? And if so, what is the table of relative weapon strengths saying?

Hmmm…  against

NoOneImportant:

17-01-2010 09:23:04 UTC

against

But I’d vote For on an improved version.

Uvthenfuv:

17-01-2010 10:56:29 UTC

against

Kevan: he/him

17-01-2010 12:00:16 UTC

against Seems good apart from the poison-always-wins confusion and the Lunatic flagging. It could also use some clarification on the timing; as worded, sending a private message to the Executor “has the following effect”. This isn’t how it would actually work - it would mean it was possible for Guest A to send a message murdering Guest B, and for Guest B to wander around and fix the fusebox and do some other things before the Executor actually processed the murder. Maybe we need to cut things back so that only the Murderer can wander around and attack people in the dark?

Nitpicking: “These follow the rules given in the proposal” is an odd wording, and should reference the rule (although it’d be safer not to include the redundancy, so that we don’t change one rule but forget the other). Also, “non dead guest” should be “non-Dormant”. And should Guests be able to tell which weapon they were wounded by?

Anonyman:

17-01-2010 12:14:28 UTC

against , but I would be likely to support a revised version.

spikebrennan:

17-01-2010 12:25:11 UTC

imperialagainst

There:

17-01-2010 13:21:43 UTC

@Josh: What I meant was that if someone uses the vial to attack someone, the other person doesn’t get to fight back i.e. duel. On the other hand, if someone attacks a guest who possesses the vial, the person with the vial loses.
@Kevan: I’ll fix the nitpicky things you mentioned :) I’m not really sure about how attacks should work. Ideally, they should be immediate, secret and valid. Going through the executor ensures it will be secret and valid, but there will be a delay. Even if we cut back to making only the murderer able to attack, there still needs to be a way to let the identity of the murderer remain hidden while making the attack. Seems like one of those pick any two situations. Maybe someone more clever than I will come up with a solution to this problem.

Kevan: he/him

17-01-2010 13:58:09 UTC

Secret and valid seem like the big two. I’d favour every single lights-off action going through the Executor, to be processed in the order they arrive. If Guest A asks to kill Guest B, followed by Guest B asking to fix the fusebox, Guest B is killed and the fuses don’t get fixed. (It gets a bit hazier if Guest A only wounds Guest B, who could still limp onwards to fix the fusebox, but we could say that being wounded or otherwise affected causes any of your pending instructions to be ignored, and you’d have to resubmit them.)

Given that nothing much should happen in the darkness anyway (the murderer will kill someone and try to move back to their previous position; maybe someone will fix the fusebox if we have a mechanic for that; everyone else will stand still so that they don’t look suspicious), I think it’ll be okay to treat it more like the simple, minimal-activty nighttime phase of Werewolf, and process it all via the Executor.

Roujo: he/him

17-01-2010 15:53:10 UTC

against Per alethiophile and Kevan.

Klisz:

17-01-2010 16:27:16 UTC

imperial  I’m just not going to read through all that right now.

Qwazukee:

17-01-2010 17:04:33 UTC

against