The way that the Lupus in Tabula edition handles voting for the lynching phase of the game seems quite different from most other versions of Werewolf.
It's effectively a two-stage affair, as every player gets to assign their "angry mob" cards to another player, then the two players with most cards are considered nominated and make a defense speech, and then a second vote is made to decide between them.
Somehow it seems a bit clunky and fiddly, and doesn't quite fit the game. Most other voting systems seem to use a one-stage affair, often by using some kind of nomination system, or just pointing. Some of these seem to run the risk of having players vote to lynch the first person nominated, just so that they can survive themselves.
Is anyone actually a fan of the Lupus in Tabula method? Is it the best way of handling this, or are there better ways?
Let me start the ball rolling on my own question, with this follow-up. I just came across a wonderful post by Brandon Bernard, who outlines five common voting methods with their advantages and disadvantages here:
The Lupus in Tabula system of voting seems to be what he calls Method 3, although the Lupus in Tabula method makes things slightly more cumbersome than what he describes because it using cards instead of pointing. Brandon argues against this system of two nominees, describing its pros and cons as follows:
Earl of Dukes wrote:
Method 3: Choose two Nominees to put on the block.
In this method, after a set time limit and a GM count down, everybody points to one person. The two people with the most votes will be put on the chopping block. After arguments/defenses are given, a vote is done between these two, one of which must be lynched.
-Allows defenses to be given
-Can shorten the game due to time limits
-Gives a clear choice to everyone between two people
-Possible to have two villagers on the block
-Villagers can get on the block with relatively little votes
Opinion: This fixes the problem of no defenses, but brings with it a new one - what if, after defenses are given, it is obvious that both are innocent? There is no really good way of dealing with this. Sure you can use a variation and have a vote to take these two off the block, but then why use this method? When it comes down to it, this method still has many similar problems to Method 2, except for the defenses. It can be a total surprise as to who is on the block. True, it can cause for some interesting showdowns between two players, but this can happen no matter what method you are using.
Personally (disclaimer: I am part of DV Giochi, publisher of "Lupus in Tabula"), I think the two-stage voting of Lupus in Tabula has another great pro: after the defenses you have a second voting, and looking at voters you can receive more precious information.
Being "Lupus in Tabula" a game about gathering little bits of information and hints, I think this really helps the game, and makes it a different game from other Werewolf games that chose other paths, like adding more characters with a one-stage voting system.
1 Lucky Texan
I recently tried moderating my first 2 werewolf-type games. Everyone was new to the game. I used a nominate/defend-discuss/vote procedure and it seemed to work well. I'll probably keep it.
For groups that have experienced several games, It may be too involved but, i don't know.