I meant to unlock after my previous post, but I forgot.
Anyway, this setup was as follows:
Town
1 x 2-shot vig
1 x Doctor
1 x Watcher
1 x Bailiff
1 x Defence Attorney
2 x Prosecutor
2 x Judge
Scum
1 x Godmother
1 x Judge corrupter
1 x Rogue Prosecutor
Fundamentally, the game was a regular mini normal. I had a town of 9 with 3 power roles (doc, watch, vig), and a scumteam of 3 with 1 power role (Godmother).
Rather than having vanillas, I designed the game so that there would be other power roles that could influence the day process. I had much help from Norinel in this regard, who reviewed the setup (
Many thanks, Norinel
).
The defence attorney role had the power to protect from prosecution, like a doctor.
The prosecutors were indeed responsible for choosing the defendant. Each sent in a preferntial list, including malthusis, the scum prosecutor (flavour rationale: Kristoph Gavin masqueraded as Klavier Gavin. Mal had this fakeclaim, but never used it). The defendant system was an obvious disadvantage to town, since it forced lynches. The point of the prosecutors was to allow town to mitigate this disadvantage, since good prosecutors would be able to use their scumdars to place scum on the defendant's seat. Malthusis was implanted in order to play against this, however, to give the scum some influence.
The idea of the defendant system came to me because, aside from flavour, I always hate playing in games where town is indecisive leading up to deadline. I also don't like "most number of votes is lynched at deadline", because I feel it encourages indecisiveness and lack of discussion. Thus, my hope was that the defendant system would basically force people to make a judgment. It was no longer "Is X scummy enough to lynch?" but, rather, "Is X scummier than Y?" I'd be very interested to know what people think of this system, and whether you think it made the difference that I hoped it would?
The judges, as you surmised, were responsible for juror selection. Each night they sent in a role PM with a preferential list of all players alive at that point. The defendant determination took prioirity over juror determination and, thus, the top people of the combined preferential list were selected as jurors. Ties were resolved by random.org (Chief Judge did NOT gain priority, contrary to what was guessed in thread). The jury selection was also influenced by the judge corrupter and bailiff. They also got to send in lists, but their lists had reduced value (I weighted their preferences by half) and could only include three people.
The juror system was basically town's compensation for the defendant system. Given the relative control town had over the juror selection, it allowed for a situation in which, if judges were clever and gave lowest preference to suspects, the scum could be disempowered.
Thanks again for playing, and I'd appreciate hearing your thoughts
