Board Thread:Fun and Games/@comment-30757827-20190820222718/@comment-30757827-20190821181053

At the end of final thoughts, it is stated that will be a different judge each time, so you’ll only be the elevated judge once, then everyone else is elevated, then back to you. However, even if you take turns, one judge essentially gets all the power for a game, it’s one person’s decision. Sure, players first have to get picked to even be considered, but generally, out of a pile, the pest would still probably pick one of the roles that would be picked by one of the judges. But I can’t bring myself to change it. If it was just the standard, like in ToTM, pick a winner out of anyone eligible, it would be too simple and short for my taste. I don’t like it. Even though this is meant to be fun, I always treat everyone as rational agents. If the contestants helped review each other’s roles, they could theoretically make bad reviews on purpose, or more likely just not review them at all. I also considered letting the contestants vote, but, again, similar to ToTM, professionals (or as professional as you get at role reviewing) need to decide. I considered, and am still kind of considering letting the judges both pick a role to work with as well as vote on a winner, without being able to vote the one you picked, but that gets messy, as, going back to the rational agent way of thinking, you could vote someone terrible on purpose so that the better candidate doesn’t get enough votes to beat you. I would really prefer having multiple (or “pestili”) but I think we need more contestants. One final thing to consider, though, is that this was posted on Fun and games, because, well, it’s just that. A fun game. I don’t think it matters too much if there’s a single judge, it will still be fun, plus, if the turns out to be a terrible role reviewer, (in which case they wouldn’t get to be pest anyways) they are still confined to the 3 or 4, maybe 5 roles that the judges pick.