Season Bon Voyage

[Satori]

Hey guys. Decided to throw in on my season ideas here though I'm still unsure if ill host it or not but anyway, I present to you all Season Bon Voyage. ^_^

Season Name
Season Bon Voyage

Plot
The game will take place on a cruise ship called the S.S Hope of the Seas, the most technologically advanced cruise ship in the world. A group of selected students from Hope's Peak Academy were invited on a cruise for its maiden voyage. However. What was supposed to be the cruise of a lifetime will soon become a nightmare at sea.

Gameplay
Game will follow the base rules but with one slight change.

During trials. If an innocent player is convicted as the murderer, they can choose a player among those who voted for them and they will also be executed along with them. 

Why did I make this change? Well the main reason for this change is that I always felt there is a lack of any real penalty for the innocents for voting the wrong culprit which encourages sheeping since they have nothing to lose besides the loss of an innocent player if they vote wrong so giving the convicted innocent the option to take someone to their grave would encourage everyone to actually put more effort into the trial and not simply jump the bandwagon on someone. 

I already spoke to Eclipse about this and he approves this rule but I first want to know what you guys think about it before I implement it into the game. Again. I'm unsure if ill really host this or not but who knows. ^_^

[Pokedude12]

As mentioned in chat, the first and foremost abuse is whether or not the culprit can vote. Information is a big thing; and if it's determined that a culprit didn't vote (for the "Jester") after being so persuasive during trial, his identity can get blown real fast. Alternatively, allowing the culprit to get lynched would be an extra hurdle after hours upon hours of scheming, killing, and persuading. It depends on how we look at the culprit's involvement here. However, I've not fully thought on this, so my thoughts can probably be fixed easily enough, if enough foresight is put into it.

1) Mind games is innate in trials, so I won't argue the culprits' misleading the voters. Limiting in-game arguments would be unhealthy for the game state. In actuality, having more of these situations would force people to think about who to listen to, especially if there's a literally life-threatening penalty on the line. This is a plus.

2)Knowing who voted for the "Jester" and who didn't is BIG info; and that info can be leaked to the public. Granted, I'm sure the "Jester" won't be foolish enough to risk a ban; but still... This is borderline in terms of good or bad. It probably can be averted though.

This post has been made with only the first thoughts and discussions in chat. As such, the thoughts presented here may be premature and probably easily averted. And there is always time to look over any potential abuses too. However, this is a nifty idea that doesn't end the game prematurely (See: DR-style "kill-em-all" punishments for failure). If the potential abuses can be worked out, go for it.

[Ryohei Sasagawa[Hero]]

Also said in chat I believe that trust is a beautiful thing and all human beings will use systems to perform unexpected abuses, but I say yes to this rule because even now I think, haven't done this myself, that people share to the living who they think killed them.

This being said tells me that this rule will not create an uprising and may actually prevent people from sheeping as this is clearly a foul sin that no player should commit (roll-eyes) but in all seriousness this will help control the sheeping but may kill people who are utterly fooled by the culprit. This will create a whole new dynamic to the game instead of being sort of sure, you need to feel it with your gut, you need to put your life on the line for this vote.

The anti-sheep spray may be upon us all I ask is you give this a chance sure mind games will happen but mind games already facilitate most of the fun of this game and as I said before I believe info leakage is a part of this game, should it be not really, but its a known evil.

This will not stop these dark things from happening but will create a new area for which deep thought must be put...culprits who have blurred the line between sure and definite may go free based on people deciding not to risk their neck for this maybe. I once again throw my vote into the ring and ask everyone to come with me as we welcome this idea into our forum with open arms...thank you and good night...

[The City [EclipseZwolf]]

For Posterity I will post the things I mentioned when we discussed this in private as well as some of my other thoughts.

A. You will have to handle voting personally on skype so that you can track who voted for who. This is an extra bit of work and it can be awkward at times.

B. The mechanic is a big buff to two groups of people. The first is the innocents and the second is the trolls of the game. The innocents are buffed because they can use this "Take someone with me" is not required, it is optional. This means that the person who is executed can kill the culprit, possibly through sheer luck or if they have the actual culprit in mind. This means the culprit CANNOT vote for the current target of the main votes. This is because if they vote ANYONE and that person ends up with the max then they can be killed. The culprit is much weaker and cannot influence the trial safely but even if they succeed they are not guaranteed the benefit of a second innocent getting killed. The voted party could choose NOT to kill anybody which if they are innocent and know the culprit would probably NEVER vote for them or risk death why kill anybody? This leads into the buff for trolls. So who WOULD take someone with them when they die? First would be someone who has a solid theory and knows who they believe did the crime, assuming that person voted for them. Second is the person who is angry about being voted and executed, and they would most likely be angriest at the player that led the discussion against them, so the main detective. Lastly is the troll who doesn't care and just picks somebody to bring with them cause they can. The problem is the second and third possibilities can result in the death of major detectives who might have really tried hard but been mislead by the murderer. And if the major detective dies for trying you can bet that nobody will ever vote again.

C. The way this fights sheeping is making people be afraid of voting. Problem, as mentioned in point B the person likely to killed by an angry player(and trust me, most innocents who are executed are just pissed and not thinking about the success of the majority) is the major detective. It scares of sheep, but can KILL the people who aren't and most probably will. This fear also depends on the suspected party, say if its Sova NOBODY is gonna vote cause all of us would bet our bottom dollar Sova would kill one of us just cause that is how their characters usually are. This means Sova gets a HUGE buff in murders because now everybody is terrified of voting them to begin with.

D. The possibility to be killed by randomness exists and NOTHING will piss off someone who is trying to play and enjoy themselves more than getting told "Sorry you cant play anymore cause the dice said so." Its Punishing as you want it to be but its punishing in a bad way. Fear of punishment scares off the sheep, then the punishment itself kills your active players. Luck should NEVER be the major factor in someone's death and I would bet my bottom dollar that most of the sheep innocents who get executed unjustly will just pick somebody at random to bring with them.

E. You have to know who voted who AND you need to tell the executed party WHO voted for them. This point has been brought up and that knowledge should technically never leave the executed parties mind. Problem, if we assume the worst case scenario is that the executed is angry and intentionally screwing over players you can bet they will share that info. The beans will be spilled in some private chat I never see as they rage to their friend about how they didn't deserve it. Then the vote is colored next time and I have no proof that it was shared. UNLESS the person shares the info in the main chat or someone gets me a quote of them sharing it, I have no proof of the crime. ALSO, if you edit the rules so the culprit can't be killed in this manner, if you aren't careful you could end up revealing the culprit that way with the victim choosing to execute them and getting told no you cant. Then you may find your culprit screwed over and a culprit being revealed by a victim has ENDED seasons before. 

So as I said, I will allow this slight rule edit, but I do not like it. The mechanic may discourage sheeping, but I feel it also discourages activity and will serve to piss off players who actually try. Maybe it can work, which is why I am allowing it, but I cannot see this mechanic causing anything but rage.

[Daiwa Scarlet]

Hmm... random thoughts? Anyhow... maybe have a requirement for them taking another along? Something like a theory about who the culprit may be and an actual plan for taking down the "culprit" in case they had been voted. You have to have a weapon to do something to another after all... Maybe just have it be a last action instead. If you dont tell who the ones that voted for the innocent are then that would obscure the cases where the culprit is discovered/ineligible for the revenge kill as they could fail to kill any other target. Perhaps have something to appease the innocents killed in this fashion.