IRL rule.

[DiscoBobbyPARANOiA]

As many of you know, both HiTheyCallMeGod and I were in the last game. I was a wolf and he was not.

What many of you don't know is that I know him in real life. (in b4 ban)

I didn't realize he was in the same game as me until it had already started, and seeing that I was a wolf and he wasn't, I wanted to see if I could be around him and not give it away. Obviously that's for him to say if I did or not, but I think I did a decent job.

I propose that the IRL rule be modified to include:

If both parties of the in real life pair don't mind to be in the same game while knowing each other in real life, they are allowed to play in the same game.

As in.. it's their decision to play with people they know (as long as both agree on it)

I think I've proven that it's possible (and I accept any punishment for not saying anything beforehand if there is any) so what do you guys think?

[MiniNeo]

Re: IRL rule.

The IRL rule is established because people are using real life interactions that is otherwise not available on text only medium to get information from other people. If people don't mind getting mindhaxxed in real life, I don't see why not.

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: IRL rule.

To me it seems that the rule is for the purpose of keeping the game within the confines of its current form. TWG isn't Mafia, nor is it meant to be played like Mafia. It's a forum game that uses a wider time frame with a more broad communication base, allowing people not physically together to communicate and plan accoringly, all behind the scenes. Introducing IRL contact negates any preparedness that one is supposed to have whilst playing TWG. You are supposed to be able to analyze evidence, confer with whom you please, and respond to a situation accordingly. If someone is a horrible liar, they can play TWG because they don't need to keep a straight face while typing up a post. Questioning people IRL weights the game against those that have something to hide, an unfair advantage in the majority of situations. I personally think that two people that see each other IRL should be able to play together, but I think 100% of the TWG should stay within digital mediums. There should be no discussion of TWG in person between two players in the same game. If there is no talk of TWG, then there is no worry of information being revealed. However, it should not be a test of "not giving anything away" while in person. TWG should merely be non-existent while in person. That's my take on it at least.

[xObserveRx]

Re: IRL rule.

I don't really see the problem with it.

However, I do think that before the game starts, both parties that can interact in person come forth and tell the rest of the game that there will, in fact, be face-to-face interaction between them during the game.

That way, at least all the other people will know about it.

[HiTheyCallMeGod]

Re: IRL rule.

What stoic says makes sence. if we want to talk about twg, we do it on aim, not in person. Would anyone have a problem with that? If so say what it is and a possible sollution.

[Afrobean]

Re: IRL rule.



The only people involved with this in real life stuff aren't limited to the two people who know each other.

Them knowing each other can have a drastic effect on the game. I believe that there was one game in which Tass led a slaughter of the wolves, partly thanks to his girlfriend being one of the wolves. Their IRL interaction added to the wolves getting owned.

Basically: IRL interactions can throw the scales of balance out of the window, even if the two players agree to it.

EDIT:

I personally think that two people that see each other IRL should be able to play together, but I think 100% of the TWG should stay within digital mediums.

Not only is that impossible, but it also wouldn't matter. It doesn't matter if you don't mention TWG, because body language can still give things away, and as I'm sure we all know, body language more than anything else gives away lies, even if, like in this instance, no lie was actually vocalized.

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: IRL rule.

I agree with afro (for once XD) RL interaction gives the two parties an advantage that the other players don't get. When you're talking to someone on AIM you can pause and think about any question to make sure to come up with just the right answer, while IRL that can't really happen.

But I also want to know how much you see each other irl. I mean lots of people know each other but are allowed to play because they may only see the other person 1 or 2 times during the game (which is fine I guess). But if you're seeing this person once a day (or going to the same school) then I don't think you should be playing together.

[xObserveRx]

Re: IRL rule.

LMAO! Stop saying "in real life"... this IS real life... it's simply not face-to-face.

[HiTheyCallMeGod]

Re: IRL rule.

It all depends on how much we hang out honestly, weather i work or not.

honestly, it doesn't bother me being around him in the same TWG as long as it isn't mentioned.

In the end it's you guy's call, if you say no, then I wont be playing anymore games here, since DBP was here first. Either way its fine with me.

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: IRL rule.

That's what we are referring to, stop being a revolutionist.

[Afrobean]

Re: IRL rule.

You guys are missing the fact that I brought up.

The two people who know each other in real life aren't the only people it affects. It affects everyone in game.

I suppose if EVERYONE WHO SIGNED UP for the current game says it's ok, then I don't see a problem with it, but simply to have an agreement between the two of you means very little.

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: IRL rule.

I don't see how body language means anything if the conversation is on anything but TWG the entire time. How would you read my body language while I'm cooking you an omelete if we're talking about the buttsex we had last night, seriously. If you can read people that well, you'd be better served spending your time with the NSA or something. If two people agree to not mention TWG a single time while face-to-face, I don't see a problem with it at all. If I'm playing cards or doing some other arbitrary thing with my brother over the break, I don't see how any hint of anything TWG related could come through if the subject is never brought up. Maybe you have some horrible wolf tell, or maybe you guys are just being difficult.

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: IRL rule.

I really don't care if people are good at noticing body language or not. If two parties are friends, thier loyality is more likely to be with each other than a TWG game. If they are both the same alignment, then they will be confirmed to each other. If they are different, then one party loses out while the other gains an advantage that no other player can get.

Now I know evidence like "He sounded weird wen I asked him if he was a wolf" is bad logic but if that person is in a key position then he can utilize his knowledge. (I mean no one took jurs seriously when she "read" wilkin's body language. But I don't want to see those types of logic and evidence in a game that is all non face to face interaction)

[FoJaR]

Re: IRL rule.

knowing the player in real life at all can influence gameplay, like the game where i spotted fish as a wolf almost immediately. it wasnt because i'm that good at reading people, it's just that i know fish well enough that i can tell, even from utah, that he's a wolf.

[Afrobean]

Re: IRL rule.

knowing the player in real life at all can influence gameplay, like the game where i spotted fish as a wolf almost immediately. it wasnt because i'm that good at reading people, it's just that i know fish well enough that i can tell, even from utah, that he's a wolf.

The same thing happened with Noah and me, except that I identified him as blue.

The thing is, we've never met face to face. Knowing each other in real life is not a requisite for that to happen.