Werewolf discussion thread

Ectoplasm

Thanks for PM. Probably too late but I could play

quickbeam

Ectoplasm wrote: »

Thanks for PM. Probably too late but I could play

Still 8 minutes. Might happen

Necro

Never too late. I'm only thinking of finish times starting it at 8

I can run a quick one with 5.

Solitary wolf, 4 villagers if folks want.

quickbeam

Necro wrote: »

Too much wine :pac:

Don't even have that excuse tonight

deconduo

Running a D&D game at the moment, but might be around later.

quickbeam

Necro wrote: »

Never too late. I'm only thinking of finish times starting it at 8

I can run a quick one with 5.

Solitary wolf, 4 villagers if folks want.

Up for that?

Necro

quickbeam wrote: »

Up for that?

Game Thread:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=108982250#post108982250

Necro

deconduo wrote: »

Running a D&D game at the moment, but might be around later.

Can run a quickfire game a bit later too if there's interest.

sKeith

If WW forum is to continue with this awards stuff, then nominations for awards should be accepted and compiled after every game while it is still fresh in peoples minds.

Games closer to the ceremony should not have an unfair advantage.
They will always get an advantage because they are closer, but the nominations in the Feedback Threads of new monthly schedule games should be accepted.
That way, Janurary games get their fair shot at nominations.
Anybody should be able to nominate, but maybe .... maybe... they need to be seconded to be a realistic nomination.

I am also putting forward that feedback threads should be a thing that we continue doing into and beyond 2019 but they should not be limited to only what makes the mods of the game just played feel warm and cosy about themselves. Of course, thanks and well dones should go there too but...


It should allow for any and all feedback, which the community as a group can answer to.
The feedback should not exist just for the mods of that game, but for our whole community.
The mods of the game just finished can distance themselves from the thread if necessary, the feedback is not for their egos, its so we can all make future games even better and discover our mistakes.

It is only in reviewing our mistakes that we can better ourselves.
Ignorance of our mistakes and quelling peoples opinions of these mistakes does nothing for our community as a whole but only makes a few gain by the detrimint of the group.

Happy New Wolfing Year....

Necro

sKeith wrote:

Games closer to the ceremony should not have an unfair advantage. They will always get an advantage because they are closer, but the nominations in the Feedback Threads of new monthly schedule games should be accepted. That way, Janurary games get their fair shot at nominations. Anybody should be able to nominate, but maybe .... maybe... they need to be seconded to be a realistic nomination.

On this, I think certainly a rolling Awards Nominees Thread, posted after the first game of the year and left open until a few days after the last would make a lot of sense. I think the early games suffer from people having short memories in terms of plays, mechanics etc. With a yearly thread people can read back and see everything from Jan to December.

sKeith wrote:

I am also putting forward that feedback threads should be a thing that we continue doing into and beyond 2019 but they should not be limited to only what makes the mods of the game just played feel warm and cosy about themselves. Of course, thanks and well dones should go there too but...

Now to the feedback thing. While I agree in part with your post sKeith, my concern is that the workload might simply start to become too off putting for mods.
Basically it's:
1. Plan game for a month or two (or more depending on complexity)
2. Recruitment and advertising for sign ups
3. Run the game for a week
4. After game finishes, field questions in a feedback thread.

So in all minimally about 2 months if not 3 worth of work.
It's taxing and tiring on game mods from my own perspective.

I certainly see where you're coming from in learning from mistakes etc. But perhaps a general WW Game Feedback Thread, opened again after the first game of this year and left running until it hits the fabled 10k Mark (so ages) is a better idea.

That way, players can put up their thoughts on what they liked and what they didn't about the latest instalment without it coming across massively personal with a thread in big capital letters named after your own game.
Game mods are free to respond or ignore the General Feedback Thread and the deserved kudos after each game does at the end of the game threads.

Of course it's only a suggestion, but I think it might be fairer to all (players, game mods, forum mods) than running a seperate feedback thread for each game which inevitably will get lost in the mire of the forum here as it progresses throughout the year.

Baggly

Mod

Lads this is the place for this discussion. As per the op in the awards thread, they are a bit of fun. You are welcome to discuss it as a serious topic but do it in our discussion thread.

sKeith

Necro wrote: »

On this, I think certainly a rolling Awards Nominees Thread, posted after the first game of the year and left open until a few days after the last would make a lot of sense. I think the early games suffer from people having short memories in terms of plays, mechanics etc. With a yearly thread people can read back and see everything from Jan to December.

Yeah, that would do, someplace everybody can make a nominations from start of the year until close.

Now to the feedback thing. While I agree in part with your post sKeith, my concern is that the workload might simply start to become too off putting for mods.

I think you missed my point, the feedback thread is for everybody, not for the mods of the just played game, they can stay out of the thread altogether if they so wish. I do not agree with closing the game thread and sending everybody to a feedback thread which has OP that say it does not want peoples opinions because they are too tired. If you are too tired, go to bed. Leave the game thread open to recieve kudos while you sleep, and let people write their opinions of what was good and what they think is not good about mechanics of the previous game, things worth keeping, things that should probably never be tried again. A feedback thread is for future mods, to discuss the past, not for the previous mods to have to field questions.

Basically it's:
1. Plan game for a month or two (or more depending on complexity)
2. Recruitment and advertising for sign ups
3. Run the game for a week
4. After game finishes, field questions in a feedback thread.

1,2 & 3 don't change, 4 just answered.

So in all minimally about 2 months if not 3 worth of work.
It's taxing and tiring on game mods from my own perspective.


I certainly see where you're coming from in learning from mistakes etc. But perhaps a general WW Game Feedback Thread, opened again after the first game of this year and left running until it hits the fabled 10k Mark (so ages) is a better idea.

Yeah, this works but definetly not the 10k thing, reasoning to follow.

That way, players can put up their thoughts on what they liked and what they didn't about the latest instalment without it coming across massively personal with a thread in big capital letters named after your own game.
Game mods are free to respond or ignore the General Feedback Thread and the deserved kudos after each game does at the end of the game threads.

Yes, game kudos should go at end of game thread, locking game threads straight after a game ends is not something i'd like to see being repeated.

Of course it's only a suggestion, but I think it might be fairer to all (players, game mods, forum mods) than running a seperate feedback thread for each game which inevitably will get lost in the mire of the forum here as it progresses throughout the year.

Keeping it annual, inline with the nominations thread seems like a decent oppurtunity to split the threads.
There is disavantage to having a very large thread, people will not go back to read over it if it becomes too big. Monthly was a good size for rereading purposes, but as you say, some mods were taking the feedback threads to personally. Maybe trialing an annual feedback thread would be best.

Baggly

Game mods are free to run their games however they like before during and after the game.

I won't force a feedback process on game mods. If they want to open a thread straight after, they can. If they don't, they don't have to.

I don't really care if you disagreed with the most recent feedback thread op to be honest. That op was written like that for a reason and the fact mods take their games and how other comment on them to heart isn't something I discourage nor is it something you can just stop.

The quality of the games directly correlates to how invested game mods are in their games.

A reminder to play nice and be considerate of game mods feelings after an extended period of effort doesn't stop anyone from providing their feedback and stops threads in this forum from being against the charter.

sKeith

Pter wrote: »

stops threads in this forum from being against the charter.

As you bring up the charter, the charter needs fixing. I have wrote a post explaining this and reported my own post so that the fmods could see it.

Necro

Pter wrote: »

Game mods are free to run their games however they like before during and after the game.

I won't force a feedback process on game mods. If they want to open a thread straight after, they can. If they don't, they don't have to.

Well actually, Pter - the initial suggestion wasn't made by me re: feedback - but by others a while back. My initial gripe tbh was that in the SK game we kind of had a feedback thread foisted on our game without prior discussion, which was then continued for the Sherlock game.

I don't really have a problem with feedback threads, I think it's no harm for people to say what they thought of the game in a fair space - just see the quotes below who tend to agree with me:

fixxxer wrote: »

I suppose I never considered the way the WW game has to exist within the Boards.ie framework. It's hamstrung in how it can deal with disruptive influences. It's also pretty unique in that it's a space that posters are encouraged to go at each other. I'm new it all this having never played WW before I came across it here, but I have to say the community has been very welcoming and patient with me.

If I'm going to suggest things, I think the feedback thread should continue. I mentioned before that having an old head go through the game with a new player is something that should be encouraged. A few players have been kind enough to point out to me what got me killed early on in a couple of games and it's been invaluable. As a new player I have all these ideas of how I should play roles, forgetting of course that there are players here that see right through that sort of thing as its all been done before. Like a new player Q&A mod available before the games starts but after the thread has opened.

A bit of a personal one but D0 not being D0 puts extra pressure on players. The instinct is hide rather than take part, so having D0 just being time to familiarize with the game and ask the silly/obvious questions might help?

Deleted User wrote: »

Just seeing this now, you absolute politician! :pac:

The return of the feedback threads might be something to consider for next year. Sure, we have this place to discuss WW, but maybe game specific feedback threads could take some of the heat which can often be brewing in the immediate aftermath of a game.

I see that some posters are worried that disputes in here isn't a good look to any new players who are thinking about signing up. Well this thread could be for the more general game queries and discussion, and we could have our little 'venting' sessions in the game specific feedback threads. I reckon that lurkers and new players would be more inclined to read a 'Werewolf Discussion' thread, than a feedback thread for a game they didn't play in.

I think a specific feedback on games thread is beneficial, and Stu puts it more succinctly above than I ever could tbh.
Basically I think the baby was thrown out with the bathwater in creating the initial feedback thread and it's only fair that it's continued on each game via a general game feedback thread or a game per game specific one.

Baggly

Necro wrote:

Well actually, Pter - the initial suggestion wasn't made by me re: feedback - but by others a while back. My initial gripe tbh was that in the SK game we kind of had a feedback thread foisted on our game without prior discussion, which was then continued for the Sherlock game.

Foisted? Who did the foisting? To my memory I asked if you would try it and you said yes.

Necro

Pter wrote: »

Foisted? Who did the foisting? To my memory I asked if you would try it and you said yes.

Look it's not an issue - it's in the past and redundant. My point was there are a number of people in the community in favour of feedback threads. I believe it's something we should consider exploring, or at least polling people on.

I think they're beneficial for all parties tbh.

Baggly

sKeith wrote:

As you bring up the charter, the charter needs fixing. I have wrote a post explaining this and reported my own post so that the fmods could see it.

Which refers to d&d which is outside of the purpose of this thread and this specific discussion.

Baggly

Necro wrote:

Look it's not an issue - it's in the past and redundant. My point was there are a number of people in the community in favour of feedback threads. I believe it's something we should consider exploring, or at least polling people on.

I'm going off your choice of words necro. To foist is to impose an unwelcome or unnecessary person or thing on. So either we asked you and you agreed or that's not what happened. Don't throw out the word foist like it's nothing. If it was so redundant why bring it up?

Necro

Pter wrote: »

I'm going off your choice of words necro. To foist is to impose an unwelcome or unnecessary person or thing on. So either we asked you and you agreed or that's not what happened. Don't throw out the word foist like it's nothing. If it was so redundant why bring it up?

Because it's part of a larger point I was making, about the feedback threads. I don't want to discuss the origins of it though, I want to discuss whether people are in favour of having them as a regular feature or not.

Fwiw, foisted is probably too strong. Strongly suggested would be a better description.

Baggly

Well my 2c as game mod and player is it's up to each game mod team.

I disagree with even 'strongely suggested' but I'll leave it at that for the sake of the discussion.

sKeith

Pter wrote: »

Which refers to d&d which is outside of the purpose of this thread and this specific discussion.

Its the Forum Games Charter.

Its relates to all games played in Forum Games.
The Charter may not be broken for WW, but it is broken. And the charter governs WW too. More than one topic can be ongoing on a discussions thread.

d&d is only one of the games being played in Forum Games that most if not all of its players are breaking the current charters no edit rule. The no edit rule was something that used to be part of the ww game rules, but putting it in the FG charter meant that any game which did not ban editing, all its players are breaking the charter and risk being carded or banned for such blatent disregard for the charter.


In case people forget the wording of the charter, this is the number one rule for ALL games being played in Forum Games.

1) There is to be absolutely no editing of posts. There will be a zero tolerance approach.


Note the wording, alsolutely no editing, zero tolerance.


Please fix the charter to either remove this rule and its horrible language or express which games have a zero tolerance to editing, cause its definetly not all games.

Baggly

Mod

sKeith if I wanted to continue the discussion here I would have done so. You have made your feelings known to the forum mods 3 times now so leave it with us.

Necro

Pter wrote: »

Well my 2c as game mod and player is it's up to each game mod team.

I disagree with even 'strongely suggested' but I'll leave it at that for the sake of the discussion.

And that's fine too, completely acceptable view point but I would like others to weigh in.

Just realised where I got the mega thread idea from too - knew it wasn't my idea originally:

Kolido wrote: »

Could we not have a mega feedback thread to cover all games and perhaps create a new one each year.

sullivlo

sKeith wrote: »

Its the Forum Games Charter.

Its relates to all games played in Forum Games.
The Charter may not be broken for WW, but it is broken. And the charter governs WW too. More than one topic can be ongoing on a discussions thread.

d&d is only one of the games being played in Forum Games that most if not all of its players are breaking the current charters no edit rule. The no edit rule was something that used to be part of the ww game rules, but putting it in the FG charter meant that any game which did not ban editing, all its players are breaking the charter and risk being carded or banned for such blatent disregard for the charter.


In case people forget the wording of the charter, this is the number one rule for ALL games being played in Forum Games.

1) There is to be absolutely no editing of posts. There will be a zero tolerance approach.


Note the wording, alsolutely no editing, zero tolerance.


Please fix the charter to either remove this rule and its horrible language or express which games have a zero tolerance to editing, cause its definetly not all games.

*checks thread title* werewolf discussion...
*reads post* d&d discussion
*scratches head*

I have no clue about d&d Keith. Set up a feedback thread with your suggestions, feedback and comments and I’ll take a look.

Banjo

If - and it seems like a big if, given the response from some quarters - you're doing a yearly feedback thread, it may be beneficial to have the mods as part of their signing off post a summary of the game including links to some of the big moments, who was who, who won, lynches and munches etc. It'd be low overhead since you'd be adding to the summary as the game progresses live, it'd give people an opportunity to review your game around awards season and remind themselves of what they might have forgotten. Would also be a handy resource then for the wiki, functioning as your "For your Consideration" when the Wolfies roll around.

That said, it does seem like there's a reluctance to let people criticise a game and that's not really a healthy way to move forward with future games. You don't learn from mistakes, you don't learn from successes and you don't find ways to turn interesting ideas that just didn't work into new mechanics that kick ass. The game might be your baby, but once you unleash it on the world it's not a baby any more, it's a grown-ass man with it's own life and values and it will not turn out to be everything you expected it would be - and that can be both bad and utterly fantastic.

Criticism doesn't mean you've failed and doesn't mean you're a bad mod/team. (People not signing up to your next game might, but that has never happened, so it stands to reason that no one is going to get slated!) . It might mean you made a mistake though, or a bad decision, or missed a trick that could have turned meh into mehoooooOOOOO! (that's a positive noise, especially if you're a dairy farmer who was worried their bull had lost his libido) but then don't you want make sure you don't make that mistake again? Just set sensible boundaries, make it opt in and put limits on how often someone can state the same point before it's considered badgering.

And to answer your question, yes I am in here 'cause there's no D&D feedback thread and I've nothing else to do. Since I'm here - the rental place are ringing about the Tux I haven't returned - when do I get my Codenames crown? Hopefully the "Codenames So White" jokes I wrote for the speech are still relevant all these months later...

Necro

You could always sign up for Lord of the Rings Banjo if you're at a terrible loose end... :pac:

Banjo

Can't! Have to stay ready. Icons is going reignite with a flurry of posting any second now, I can feel it - I have to be ready.






any second now.





any second.


(P.S. This is just a **** excuse. Please don't actually post in Icons, even for ironic giggles. Let dead dogs lie!)

sKeith

Banjo wrote: »

Can't! Have to stay ready. Icons is going reignite with a flurry of posting any second now, I can feel it - I have to be ready.






any second now.





any second.


(P.S. This is just a **** excuse. Please don't actually post in Icons, even for ironic giggles. Let dead dogs lie!)

Can't wait for LOTRs. Truely HYPED.......








is my character conscious again yet in icons?

Banjo

Game Mod
It's outside the scope of this thread sKeith! (Actually, just realised that looks like I'm taking the piss. It genuinely is though.)

And also, if you read the rules, you'll see that as soon as you regain consciousness with 1 hit point you'll take 1d4 burn damage which will knock you unconscious again for another 2d6 turns. And the tragedy is that you're too strong for the burn damage to kill you so this will never end until the murder-hobos Secret Squirrels stop acting like the arsonist wing of Arkham Asylum and start behaving like superheroes. And thats never going to happen while there are other buildings to destroy or bases to build. So let's just leave things where they are