Quote Originally Posted by Valmark View Post
I'm curious- those of you who have more experience with games completely devoid of power roles (meaning those that played more then one) what do you think of them? That game I was in ended up pretty one-sided (also because Town got into a pretty big argument between itself) and internet seems to confirm my idea of those kind of games being heavily stacked in favor of the wolves (the wiki even stated that the wolves' win should be almost certain) but I wanted to know how it held up in practice.
It's my favorite way to play werewolf-- that said, I do much better with the figuring people out by posting rather than by mechanics part of the game, and I know plenty of excellent mafia players who really enjoy figuring out complex setups and power roles and all of that. With regards to balance, it's all a matter of numbers. Since there aren't any power roles, there's no built-in proportional balance. This setup (typically known as "mountainous") was actually the setup of choice for the 4th Championship (12 villagers, 3 wolves), and was deemed a little wolf-sided in that particular environment-- Champs always skews in wolves' favor-- but not terribly far from even in most cases. If town is coordinated and plays together, games can be absolute rolls, and vice versa. It strips the game down to interaction and solving in terms of what people say and do publicly in thread and nothing else, which I really enjoy.