I‘ve been told that several people are planning to host games, so to avoid any problems like people cutting into each other‘s game signups and other things we may need a schedule of games.
For anyone who plans to host a game, you can either write in this thread for what month/day you‘re planning a game or edit it in the schedule yourself if you can.
Note that there‘s no limit to how many games can be had per month, but try not to have 2 games running at the same time.
Sign-ups!
To everyone who usually plays MG or those that don‘t want to miss signups, we‘re testing a new way to alert everyone to a new game instead of mass tags before each game.
All you have to do is go to>>this thread<<and press Watch on the top corner of the thread. I or a host will post there and notify everyone like this whenever a new game starts.
While hosting overall isn't necessarily hard, it's very easy to mess things up as we have seen plenty of times already. This naturally happens more often with newer hosts.
In order to get these new hosts familiar with how the game works behind the scenes and make it a smoother experience for everyone (no one wants a cancelled game!), we are establishing these sets of rules that follow the methods that have been used in the last 50 games:
-If it's your first time hosting, it's MANDATORY to have the help of someone that has hosted before. As long as they aren't banned, it doesn't matter if this person hosted twenty times or just once. This experienced host will be the "Main Host", while the new one assumes the role of "co-host".
-Tasks will be split in a rather equal manner so that the Main Host can keep things in check while the Co-host gets hands-on experience to learn properly.
-The Main Host has the final say when it comes to decisions (ideally, this won't need to be enforced heavily, it's mostly to avoid possible issues).
Once the game is over, the co-host can host on their own and even take the role of "experienced host" for a new host in need!
I understand that fully....but usually its not the merriest of unions.
Very seldom do you see the lovers working together...it always ends in betrayal.
But i get it....i just dont like it.
Maybe, but that doesn't apply to all roles. 10 games down the road, what happens if someone is upset about being Mafia way too often? Or Prostitute? Then what? I don't think an exception should be made for any role.
Gry you know roles can be adjusted.....
For instance...what ifyou have a team that is consisting of all new players.
Would you let that be or adjust it so that a veteran or two are on that team?
You dont necessarily have to reroll...am i wrong?
Gry you know roles can be adjusted.....
For instance...what ifyou have a team that is consisting of all new players.
Would you let that be or adjust it so that a veteran or two are on that team?
You dont necessarily have to reroll...am i wrong?
I get what you mean, but it's a controversial topic After the Lovers thing I even talked with some other hosts about all that but opinions are quit split on the matter. Some would consider a fair randomizer better than a fully random randomizer, others don't, while some others go some middle-ways.
Yeah but it's called a fallacy because people usually mention things that are totally unrelated to the precedent Lovers is the only role where doing something like that could work without affecting the game at all, all other roles come with a lot of gamebreaking stuff if similarly regulated so that can't be compared. It's not important to do it, but it feels like a bit of a shame to pass up on it given how perfectly the role would allow an exception like that without bad consequences. At least in theory.
Wait, does the randomizing process really work that way?
I was assuming that the hosts first chose which roles will be in the game, and then randomly give these roles to the players.
Like, if things were randomized to the point of having random roles in the game, having an investigator with no janitor would suck hard; or having a bomb defuser with no bomber. I don't think it works like that.