New Voting Concept: Campaign Voting[This concept is up for potential inclusion in a future round. Click here to discuss it in the central topic if you like.]
Until now, all rounds have used the typical "most votes gets arrested" idea that's pretty common in games with voting electorates at their core. I had two ideas that I think could change things up in a fun way. Foremost, everyone would now--in both of these concepts--receive something like 5
votes to allocate to fellow living players during any given phase.
This concept is tentatively known as Campaign Voting
. Each player would assign their 5
votes to any living, non-arrested players that are not themselves. Additionally, we could make it so that your 5 votes could all be allocated to one person, or would have to be spread out. There would be a penalty for not voting, in some form (either as a natural result of not forming any alliances to protect yourself and thus having no support, or a penalty similar to the current one).
Of course, there are two ways to really do this: Either we make it so the player that receives the most votes is arrested like before, OR
we change it so that the players that receive the least votes
are up for an arrest. In other words, we would eliminate ties, and the GM would randomly arrest one player from the lowest amount should any ties occur.The New Method:
Whoever receives the least votes is immediately up for arrest (ties result in a random arrest from the players that receive the same lowest amount of votes), meaning you are responsible for campaigning for votes for yourself in order to survive for the game. Now, we have to consider that this makes it easier for the Informant/Spy to hijack votes as they could always protect each other and would be able to always vote each other in support. However: This would also be shown to the civilians in the voting tally, as the Informants would have a lot less ability to hide themselves without publicly supporting their Spy. Naturally, this means the Spy and Informants have to both get involved in the discussions if they want to survive.The Classic Method:
Whoever receives the most votes is arrested like before (ties result in no arrest), meaning you would be campaigning to have yourself left out of anyone's votes. It would probably be best if you had to spread out your five votes instead of dumping them all on one player. I'm not actually interested in this method, but am including it for the sake of covering all bases.
Of course, this new, alternative method to voting is a real danger and threat to
inactive players. While they are being inactive, they would not be able to forge any voting alliances to secure enough votes for themselves to continue in the game. At first glance, it may seem like it's harder for civilians to do a targeted arrest, but it does
ensure that inactive players have minimal impact on active civilians being arrested just for being active. Once someone is found suspicious, players could campaign for others to drop their vote support for that player.
There are pros and cons, but I think there's a lot of fun to be had here. What does everyone think? There are some additional things we could try to throw in, like making it a real "Election" in which the person who does get the most votes is given a special ability (maybe similar but less powerful than Investigate) or something. Just some ideas to float out there.