Standardized Rules and Role PMs (Open Games)

[Glork]

For pro-town players, I usually use some form of this win condition:

You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated

I also tend to use the following win condition (or some equivalent form):

You win when you gain and cannot lose a majority of the town's population

I think this one in particular accounts for the possibility of other killing, culting, stopping, glorking, and doing-other-things-ing roles.

[Glork]

Well, it's either "Scum auto-win when they should not have" or "Scum don't auto-win, but know that they can lose."


The scum may gain an advantage by knowing they can lose, but that's still a far cry from an auto-win that they might not deserve.

[Glork]

I don't think they do. If the town has power, then the town has every right to use power. Flavor-wise, the Vigilantes won't simply stand down if they're outnumbered... and Doctors won't simply stop trying to save people.

[Glork]

I agree, well before they get endgamed.

Disagree entirely.

Though this case isn't necessarily applicable for the purposes of our "standardized role PMs for open setups," consider the case of protown players with one-shot abilities. If these players choose to keep their aces up their sleeves, even to the very last possible moment, they should be allowed to use their abilities as long as they are alive. If night chocies can turn the tide of a game, then by all means they should be used.

For example: I asked Adel/Seol in Scrubs Mafia, if my ability to turn a kill back on scum meant that they wouldn't auto-win at "endgame," and when I was told that you would in fact

not

auto-win, I played a little differently. I decided that personal survival was much more important, as my role could very easily swing the game in favor of us (which it did, albeit not at endgame itself).

[Glork]

We should probably start a new thread to discuss this, as it seems to be a topic/debate in and of itself.