God's Imitator

This meant that if a God’s Imitator wanted to use this rule, they would first need to be successfully selected by the Gallery in a ’Judgment’ type game, then choose a player whose behavior was relatively predictable to become the ’Super Authority Player,’ and try to keep them alive throughout the game as much as possible. Only then could they successfully activate the ’Super Authority.’

And if they wanted to send a certain player to exit, they would have to predict and manipulate the behavior of this ’Super Authority Player’ to some degree.

The additional options within the ’Super Authority’ might be able to guide this player’s behavior.

For example, a God’s Imitator could set up rules using two different approaches:

Approach One: The Super Authority Player only has the basic function of sending players to exit, with no other killing privileges.

Approach Two: The Super Authority Player must choose between ’mass killing’ and ’sending a player to exit.’

If it was a relatively kind-hearted player, then when encountering Approach Two, they would be more likely to choose to sacrifice themselves because they couldn’t bear to kill many people.

Of course, since there were too many variables in the actual design and game progression, no matter how clever the rules were, there was no way to ensure that this ’Super Authority Player’ would act 100% according to the God’s Imitator’s will.

But through specific rule design and inducement, a God’s Imitator could skillfully increase this probability.

After confirming the rules related to the ’Super Authority Player,’ Lin Sizhi closed the pop-up window.Then he opened his desk drawer and took out the planning document for this time.

In the ’Available Props List’ column, two pieces of information were worth noting:

1. Various props related to ’Tarot Cards,’ unlimited quantity.

2. Freely designable masks and costume dresses.

Lin Sizhi looked at this game invitation and fell into deep thought.

First, from the available props list, this game was almost certainly one where participants would be in costume throughout, like the ’Fool’s Game.’ How to more quickly confirm each other’s identities would become part of the game strategy.

And the game itself would be best packaged in relation to tarot cards.

Additionally, from the invitation, the biggest difference between this ’Screening’ type game and previous games was that it had been split into three different modules.

These three modules didn’t have detailed explanations of what they specifically corresponded to, they could only be judged from their literal meanings.

The designs from three God’s Imitators would definitely have overlapping or conflicting parts. According to the game invitation, the Gallery would select or modify the overlapping rules, and this was a part that God’s Imitators couldn’t control.

But overall, the division of these three modules was still quite clear.

The Basic Confrontation Rules for the Minimal Unit could be viewed as the most fundamental gameplay, and at the same time, should also have the right to define the ’minimal basic unit.’ For example, one could design ’2-player confrontation’ as the minimal unit, or design ’4-player confrontation’ as the minimal unit.

Player Matching and Game Round Rules meant specifically how players would be matched, whether in non-repeating one-on-one matches or random four-player matches, and how many rounds and how long the game would last in total.

Reward and Punishment Rules meant what specific rewards or punishments would be given after following the previous gameplay and completing the corresponding rounds. Screening games generally had a specific mortality rate, so what exactly that mortality rate would be should also be determined by this part.

Of course, some detailed rules might reasonably belong to two or even all three parts, so exactly how the Gallery would adopt them was unknown.

Each God’s Imitator could only provide a design proposal for one module, which meant the final game rules would definitely be pieced together from the rules of three God’s Imitators.

As for which proposal a God’s Imitator would specifically choose to design, there were many influencing factors.

For example, to ensure their rules were selected, a God’s Imitator could choose a module they considered themselves relatively good at designing and where competition wasn’t as fierce.

And if a God’s Imitator had some specific purpose that needed to be achieved through a certain module, they could also choose the corresponding module.

Additionally, one point was worth noting: the sequential order of the three modules.

The ’Basic Confrontation Rules for the Minimal Unit’ was designed first, which directly determined the game’s fundamental gameplay. If a God’s Imitator designed this part, they could directly master the optimal solution for this type of basic gameplay and should be invincible in most situations.

However, designing this part of the rules also meant not being able to see the subsequent rules.

The later ’Player Matching and Game Round Rules’ and ’Reward and Punishment Rules,’ although more limited in design freedom, could see what the previous part’s rules specifically were, and could adaptively make designs based on the rules of the previous parts.

Moreover, how players were matched, how many rounds the game lasted, and how the final rewards, punishments, and mortality rate were determined would also have a significant impact on the game.

The God’s Imitator designing the last module, ’Reward and Punishment Rules,’ actually held the power of life and death over all players. If they really set an extremely high mortality rate and it passed the Gallery’s review, then even the most harmless and simple basic confrontation rules would become extremely cruel.

Overall, all three choices had their advantages and disadvantages, mainly depending on which aspect the God’s Imitator valued more and was better at.

Regarding the design of these three aspects, Lin Sizhi didn’t have any particular preference, so after considering for a moment, he decided to choose the first part.

That is, to design ’Basic Confrontation Rules for the Minimal Unit’ with relatively simple rules but rich derivative strategies, which might make this screening game more interesting.

Soon, Lin Sizhi had thought through the basic framework for this game.

The basic unit for player confrontation was a two-player match, with one person as the attacker and one as the defender.

The specific gameplay was very simple:

On the confrontation table, there were 22 small boxes placed, each with a corresponding number and tarot card pattern on it.

Box No. 1 was ’The Magician,’ Box No. 2 was ’The High Priestess,’ and so on sequentially, with the final Box No. 22 being ’The Fool.’

The defender could take any amount of ’Wealth Vouchers’ and place them into these 22 different boxes.

The attacker could launch 10 attacks on the defender through certain rules and take away some of the boxes.

There were two different attack methods:

Method One: Directly choose any box to take away.

Method Two: Select a box, confirm not to take it, open it to check the specific number of Wealth Vouchers in the box, then choose another box and guess whether the second box contains more or fewer Wealth Vouchers. If the guess is correct, both boxes can be taken away together.

Additionally, the defender could establish their own rules to replace ’Method Two.’

Of course, these were only the most basic rules. More time would be needed afterwards to adjust various details, eliminate possible bugs, and make more detailed designs for the various props and scenery in the game.

Some might merely serve a decorative purpose to create atmosphere, while others would hide some traps, making it easier for different players to adopt strategies around this content.