PDA

View Full Version : Mafia: The forum game


Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Merus
03-25-2010, 08:25 PM
I would be in favour of dropping protection altogether. I thought, before, that only having one angel would change the way people played, but from East we can clearly see it doesn't. Mr. J's play is the sort of thing I want to see more of - players being extremely cautious, staying off everyone's radar, and waiting until the last possible minute to have an impact instead of trying to grab the spotlight and turn it into a numbers game, Brickroad.

I have more, but it veers into giving the West citizenry hints, I will need to refrain.

PapillonReel
03-25-2010, 08:46 PM
The inspector being harder to confirm could come from no lynch results and no oracle. Plus, without angels it would be a seriously dangerous move to reveal oneself at any point. That still leaves us with "Keep quiet, hope they don't get lucky, reveal a huge game-changing block of information later on" though. It's easier to lie about being the inspector, though, but I'm less confident than I used to be that that's a useful counter to the role.

That's true, I guess - the less info the public has, the less likely they are to trust Clouseau on a lead. That said, the thing about the Inspector that bugs me most is probably the fact that he kills any and all tension in the late game after they spill their load. If an Inspector lives long enough and plays relatively well, he can completely reverse any setback the Citizenry has by sheer virtue of removing any and all doubt from the situaton, either flushing Mafia out to die without a fight or giving Citizenry a veritable carte blanche to run the game. And that's only if the role's unprotected - in a game with Angels accounted for, the days following their reveal would fall into a routine procedure of inspect -> lynch/shotgun -> win as they'd strip away any hiding place the Mafia'd have.

I'm honestly disappointed with how much of a crutch it became this game (esp. since I ended up relying on it personally) - having to rely on a single person to come and save the day turned the midgame into absolute hell. If you want to force a lot more uncertainty into the picture, I'd say the Inspector would be a good place to start.

Dunno about the vigilante either. I wouldn't mind his disappearing. Maybe if he weren't actually on the citizens' team or the mafia's - he truly has no allegiance. He could choose to help the mafia or the townsfolk. But that's only different from the current in name, and I wonder if changing that name would actually change the effect at all.

One suggestion I liked up thread was that he must NOT be the last man standing, else the Citizenry lose. I'm... none too sure how to balance that, to be honest, but it seems like a nice place to start. Aside from that, maybe keep any info from nighttime kills completely silent? I'm not really sure the Vigilante's as big a problem as the others, as his kills at night can hurt the Village as much as help it.

PapillonReel
03-25-2010, 09:00 PM
I would be in favour of dropping protection altogether. I thought, before, that only having one angel would change the way people played, but from East we can clearly see it doesn't.

I don't think it's protection that's as much a problem as it is how it's been used up to this point. The best fix I've brought it down to is to prevent the Angels from being able to protect themselves. No more shell game, no more easy confirmations, and it'd balance out their power over life and death by forcing them to stick to the shadows. And players who keep quiet are, by nature, more suspicious, no?

That said, I wouldn't say that protection didn't have a factor in East so far. In fact, I'd say quite the opposite - Alice Dizzy were used as a bit of a rallying point early on once they came out (albeit to a subtler degree than round 1) and the save for Guesty last night all but fucked over the Mafia at this point. It's a little subtler than it was round 1, but the influence is definitely still there.

Sprite
03-25-2010, 09:46 PM
I'm all for nerfing roles, but I don't think lynches should become blind. In my opinion, the game is about two things: paranoia and information. Without having any ideas who was what faction upon lynching, the game loses an enormous amount of strategy, as players have no real way to defend themselves, no real way to decide who to lynch next and far less paranoia about how a particular lynch will reflect on them later on. Remember how boring the first couple of days of both games were and how the exciting lynches have everything to do with someone's accusations. With blind lynches Mafia would become more of a numbers game, not less.

I propose a compromise: lynchings reveal faction, but not role.

That said, I probably won't be able to play next game due to finals and term papers, so y'all can do what'cha want. It'll be a blast to read, I'm sure :)

Eddie
03-25-2010, 09:51 PM
I think we should do a big mafia game, no special roles, lynch confirms role (i.e. citizen or mafioso). In addition, players that do not post at least once every 48 hours of day time are automatically ejected from the game, to keep things moving at a brisk pace.

- Eddie

Sprite
03-25-2010, 09:53 PM
Now that I think about it, knowing someone's faction would pretty much confirm their role, huh? Hm.

dwolfe
03-25-2010, 09:55 PM
Well, I'm not talking about NO roles (seriously) (anymore) (probably) (Although we could try that still! It might yet be an interesting experiment). Just different ones.

For example: Keep the inspector and vigilante, that's fine.

How about to accelerate the game, the mafia get an inspector and/or vigilante next game? (the vigilante means he can get a second kill, so make the mafia less numerous?) (the inspector means the mafia can search for power roles/confirm them before kills?).

Other power roles that keep things simple but paranoid: roles where someone gives a false inspection result, and they pick one person per night, or a third faction, or no aforementioned citizen:mafia ratio. Or two citizens are 'twins' and know each other is safe. Or a defector from mafia to citizen or vice versa after X days (you don't know you're a defector till it happens). the point is information confusion and simplicity, not learning a vocabulary of 50 roles possible. Maybe inspectors who can only inspect every X days, or only twice in the game, as they're overpowered and basically everyone else watches the inspector play instead.

This game has taken a ton of time, and I'd like to see a maximum time limit. Knowing that things are decided at a certain time is rough when people are spread across the globe, and can be metagamed. So maybe a maximum of 2 days before the 24 hour defense clock o' doom starts counting down? The week long day really killed Westside activity, I think, as it was more like 10 days with nights endcapping.

Sorry, just bored waiting for night turn to end. I'll just come back in what...9 hours, when it has to be over.

dwolfe
03-25-2010, 10:02 PM
How about angels can only save a life once, if angels are overpowered?

Or can only cast their protection a total of X times during the game?

Or they die instead of the targeted player?

Angels cannot be protected by themselves or another angel?

Same limitations on oracle/inspector/vigilante could balance things. Vig kills two citizens and suicides from guilt. Inspector can only act X times or only has a 75% chance of correct information. Oracle can only ask X times and only before the fact on investigations. I/O will die from 'being caught by the mafia' after X uses of their power, and only know that X is greater than one (and they leave a death note with their results, in public, when they die).

Basically, make the game more than the investigator and friends show, starring INVESTIGATORMANZ...because man, i was looking forward to being one when Merus first assigned roles, and got into thinking about it, and basically i win or lose the game for everyone.

McDohl
03-25-2010, 10:12 PM
I got this idea from our game thread:

Two words:

Evil Investigator.

I don't know what it means, or how it would be implemented, but it would be awesome.

Eddie
03-25-2010, 10:14 PM
How about angels can only save a life once, if angels are overpowered?

Or can only cast their protection a total of X times during the game?

Or they die instead of the targeted player?

Angels cannot be protected by themselves or another angel?

Same limitations on oracle/inspector/vigilante could balance things. Vig kills two citizens and suicides from guilt. Inspector can only act X times or only has a 75% chance of correct information. Oracle can only ask X times and only before the fact on investigations. I/O will die from 'being caught by the mafia' after X uses of their power, and only know that X is greater than one (and they leave a death note with their results, in public, when they die).

Basically, make the game more than the investigator and friends show, starring INVESTIGATORMANZ...because man, i was looking forward to being one when Merus first assigned roles, and got into thinking about it, and basically i win or lose the game for everyone.

I think that these kinds of posts (plus the numerous that came before it) point beg the question that if you need to have complicated rules dictating particular power roles...

... why even have them in the first place?

- Eddie

Garrison
03-25-2010, 10:17 PM
Another mafia power role idea - the mole. the mafia get an inspection at night and can find out someone's role, but they get it at the end of the night after their kill so they can't act on it 'til later.
Possible variation: The subject of the investigation is told they were investigated. (This is possible for the inspector as well). This has possible balance issues, however.

It's really not a bad idea at all. I think it would be really fun to use some new roles just to spice things up. One that I thought was interesting far, far up the thread was The Specter. Basically, if they get whacked, lynched or shotgunned, the specter gets the opportunity to kill one player along with them. It would be really interesting to see someone play a role that's best strategy is its own death.

Eddie
03-25-2010, 10:20 PM
I think we need to get down to basics here:

Why do we NEED power roles? I'm fine with playing with them, but before we go crazy thinking about what to add or subtract, we need to get down the basics. We need to ask the following questions about any power role:

1) Is it fun to play as?
2) Is it simple to understand?
3) Does it add or subtract to the amount of paranoia in the game? (add = good, subtract = bad)
4) If this power role was NOT used, would it change the game dramatically? (if it would... it probably shouldn't be used.)

- Eddie

Sprite
03-25-2010, 10:23 PM
The Mafia Inspector would raise the chance of the Mafia being able to imitate a power role without giving them the insane advantage that a Mafia Vigilante would. I like it.

dwolfe
03-25-2010, 10:29 PM
I think that these kinds of posts (plus the numerous that came before it) point beg the question that if you need to have complicated rules dictating particular power roles...

... why even have them in the first place?

- Eddie

That's definitely one way to go. So I'll elaborate my side of things :)

...

Because the rules can be as simple as the 'score four to win' overtime rule I like for the NFL, they shouldn't be complicated. I threw out tons of potential modifications at once, so it only sounded complex. Rules are a limitation to a power. They are intended to produce imperfect information, not complexity. They are intended so that being an ordinary, vanilla citizen doesn't mean you're just cannon fodder, and your social skills matter (yes, this means I'll get lynched day one most games!).

I can protect three times in the game, once per night. Simple.

Protecting is tiring and i can't do it consecutive nights, but I choose when to start protecting. Simple.

Inspections have only a 50% chance of successful investigation, but there are two inspectors. Simple.

Etc.

They make for interesting decisions for the role player, and imperfect information about his potential actions even if his role is revealed. The role player can lie about his prior actions, tell the truth, or choose not to tell. Man, this makes the social gaming more interesting!

The current inspector has perfect, albeit slow, information gathering, and the risk/reward of claiming to be one if you're not is way unbalanced.

etc etc. I was throwing out complicated half-dozen ideas per role just to throw out ideas for peoplemanz that are running future games (not me) and seeing what might stick in popular opinion.

Mr. J
03-25-2010, 10:32 PM
I would be in favour of dropping protection altogether. I thought, before, that only having one angel would change the way people played, but from East we can clearly see it doesn't.


Actually if we had another angel I probably would have come out on day 2. Losing an angel day 1 cost us a lot. The inspector is a powerful role and drastically changes the game once his/her information is public knowledge. One of the reasons that East is currently ~90% chance of a citizen win is that we had such a big bloc of confirmed people already by the time I spilled the beans.

What if on day 1 the citizens started with 1 vigilante and 1 inspector and then each night there would be a chance that a citizen became an oracle or an angel? I think that would be a nice twist to the game play.

Kylie
03-25-2010, 10:42 PM
The citizens would never lose the game if they could accumulate angels. There would be no advantage to protecting anyone but yourself, if every night a citizen has a 50% chance of angelhood. Accumulate 4 angels, self-protect every night, and the game is over.

Tock
03-25-2010, 10:49 PM
If we're trying to nerf the Inspector a little bit, what about a mafia role that investigates as innocent? dwolfe's "not 100% accurate" Inspector idea is one to consider too, I think.

I have some thoughts on the Miller/Vigilante experiment also, but I don't want to mess with games that are still going, since I'd be commenting on them from a Mafia perspective.

I'm also all about limits on day length, because Day Three was a slog and nearly killed both games. A hard time limit (e.g. majority votes to lynch someone within 72 hours, or night falls without a town lynch) would go a long way towards keeping the pace going and the paranoia up, I think.

Eddie
03-25-2010, 10:55 PM
That's definitely one way to go. So I'll elaborate my side of things :)

...

I can protect three times in the game, once per night. Simple.

And when the Mob decides to target someone else instead of your protection target, you feel like a big fat loser. Why not just remove the role entirely, given how unlikely it is to change the game? This also isn't as 'simple' as it seems, which I will talk about below.

Protecting is tiring and i can't do it consecutive nights, but I choose when to start protecting. Simple.

Ideas like this aren't as 'simple' as they seem. If a day runs particularly long (as they are sometimes wot to do), then the potential for error rises.

What happens if the angel and moderator accidentally miss the Angel protecting anyone two nights in a row? You can hand-wave such possibilities as 'rare' or 'fixable' but I guess my argument is that given time, it WILL happen, and deciding how to punish it or correct it will only lead to more complication.

It also opens up more avenues for cheating, rules clarification, and mistakes, none of which I think would be particularly good things to add to the game. If you want to have a role, I think it has to be 'you do X or Y', not "sometimes you do X or Y."

Inspections have only a 50% chance of successful investigation, but there are two inspectors. Simple.

Given the power of the inspector, having two of them (even with 50/50 chances) is probably still too game changing.

They make for interesting decisions for the role player, and imperfect information about his potential actions even if his role is revealed. The role player can lie about his prior actions, tell the truth, or choose not to tell. Man, this makes the social gaming more interesting!

Yeah, but you can have interesting social gaming with zero special roles. What exactly do the above roles ADD that make them worthwhile to put into a mafia game?

Nerfing Angels and Inspectors is a great idea, but it begs the question: if they're so powerful, why use them in the first place?

If you guys insist on having them, then keep it simple, and not game breaking. An angel's protection for example, might only prevent someone from dying, staving their death off until the end of the next day. An inspector might only investigate someone if the citizens successfully lynch a mafioso.

Regardless, I still think that 'no power roles' is the way to go.

- Eddie

Torgo
03-25-2010, 10:58 PM
although it's fine to have a harder-to-win-with role, for example the Serial Killer, who has nightkills like the mafia and must nbe the last man standing
Out of curiosity, have you ever seen a role like this win? I'm only asking because to me the only way that role would be fun to play as at all would be to go into it with the mindset that you're probably going to lose and be deadset on screwing with everyone's heads as much as humanly possible.

Garrison
03-25-2010, 11:31 PM
Maybe this is kind of a sticky idea, but what about some kind of rule that any role to be revealed can no longer be protected by an angel. For example, when Brickroad came out in the first game as the inspector, he signed his own death warrant. Angels could try and protect him, but it would fail.

The inspector is a really interesting role, but it'd be a shame to take it out just because it needs a little tweaking.

This isn't to say that I wouldn't play in a straight mafia/citizen game though. I'm pretty much going to keep playing as long as Talking Time does. As much as I like my idea of having a blind game, I think a straight game could be really interesting as well. I'm down for anything that changes up the game from games one and two.

Alpha Werewolf
03-25-2010, 11:34 PM
Out of curiosity, have you ever seen a role like this win? I'm only asking because to me the only way that role would be fun to play as at all would be to go into it with the mindset that you're probably going to lose and be deadset on screwing with everyone's heads as much as humanly possible.

Of course I have. Multiple times. The odds are against them, but with good play, you can win it.

Okay, guys. First of all, nerfing the angels: here's a way. First, I call them Doctors. Second, there's only one. Third, he can't self-protect. Simple, right?

Nerfing Cops (inspectors)... That's kinda hard. You could make it a "flavor cop", who gets an item that hints at the inspectee's role, or you could go another way and change it into a "Tracker", who finds out if tthe tracked player did anything at night.

Vannila mafia vs. vannila town is a game of numbers. Nothing to swing the game back (and note that these swings come from skill, not luck). If the town are screwed, they're most likely screwed forever. I wouldn't play in one.

One last thing... I think it's better to reveal role on death, any death.

Paul le Fou
03-25-2010, 11:34 PM
I like some of dwolfe's ideas. Limiting the number of inspections/vigilante kills they can do would be good - forces them to strategize and choose carefully. Maybe two plus give them a third use that will kill them as well if they feel like sacrificing (it also grants them a death post). I don't feel that's too complicated - it wouldn't make it much harder to understand.

Splitting might work too. In fact the more I think of it the more I like it. Instead of one vigilante with two kills, two vigilantes with one kill each (plus a sac kill - they get an extra lynch attempt but it costs a citizen), for example. It would give more people a special role to play, while making them less valuable and spreading around the responsibility to prevent one lucky player from being so game-breakingly important. Similarly for two-three inspectors with one investigation and no sac.

Also if the mafia had a vigilante (assassin) but it could only have one kill, that might prevent it from being too overpowered. After that they're normal mafioso.

And I do like the angel dying in place of his protected person, but not as much as I still like removing them altogether. But I can see either way working.

Come to think of it I like the oracle and corner roles all right because, again, they're information based, but reactively. The inspector is proactively information based which is way more powerful. The vigilante is a free kill PLUS reactive information which is just wow, holy shit.

Learning faction only on lynch is helpful. It doesn't say if you killed the inspector or vig or nailed their mole, but you know you killed your own teammate or managed to nail one of the other guys. You still get the same functional information - who pushed to lynch that innocent guy? Who conspicuously didn't vote? - but with fewer details. I like that idea, think it's a good compromise if we decide to nerf the lynch info after all.

I do agree with Eddie that the roles should be kept simple though. I had an idea for the mole where the person is only told they're being investigated by the mafia investigaor if the inspector is still alive, but even that seemed to complicate things too much. Too many variables turns the paranoia and mindgames and doubletriplequadruplethink into overdrive and they're pretty high already. For as overly powerful as they are, all the roles are simple and easy to understand. They should be kept that way as much as possible.

This goes back to how I think about some of the things Alpha Werewolf was saying - the complexity shouldn't be in the game and rules and roles itself. It's a game of lying and manipulation and paranoia and the roles should serve only to balance/spice that up, not to become the game itself. Like chess or any true game of skill - easy to learn, difficult to master. I think that our current role setup toes the line already. Adding inventories and hidden rules and dice rolls and variables and conjectures only hurts it more.

I don't like the idea of random chances of anything, though. Inspecting and finding out it fails because I rolled a dice is going to be a shit game to play, especially if a game only lasts say 5-6 days. This isn't an mmo.


Nich - I used to agree with no power roles at all, but if we simply make them less important and reinforce that you need paranoia no matter what your roles, we can accomplish the same thing you're talking about - make the citizens act on their own without having to or being able to rely on the roles.




Also, themewise: a while back I dreamt up a theme along the lines of 50s pulp scifi alien invasion or interplanetary war. Who among you are dastardly body snatchers?! Or if there were two games, one game was the imperialists trying to ferret out rebel infiltrators, and the other was the rebels trying to get rid of imperialist spies. They're ultimately nothing but a name/flavor swap in the end but it might spice things up.

Alpha Werewolf
03-25-2010, 11:43 PM
And I do like the angel dying in place of his protected person, but not as much as I still like removing them altogether. But I can see either way working.

Known as a Bodyguard, this usually works fine in games. A neat little twist that you can add: Whn the Bodyguard succesfully protects, the one who performed the kill is revealed in the thread.

The hell is a corner?

You can do anything with the theme. I've seen Lost mafia, Rapper mafia(that one I won as a neutral actually), Billy Goat mafia, Dictionary mafia, Hat mafia - whatever you like, it can be made into mafia.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 12:11 AM
I think Paul means "Coroner". As in, the guy who determines cause of death for murders and such.

I don't like the idea of limiting saves, to be honest. It makes the roles too "all-or-nothing" when it actually comes time for them to use their ability, and since the odds of getting it right are, to be blunt, kinda shitty, most of the time* they'll end up whiffing and spend the rest of the game twiddling their thumbs. Aside from that, I'd rather roles stay evergreen throughout the game, balanced so they'd be used throughout instead of in specific phases.

The Vigilante, I'm... actually pretty fine with, to be honest. Killing and gaining info firsthand is very powerful, but since he doesn't work with the perfect info the Mafia has, more often than not he'll end up hurting the town with imprecise shotgun blasts. It's a pretty good check knowing he can setback the town as much as help it, so I'd keep him as it is.

As for new roles: I'm still pushing for the Thief honestly, and the fact that he's pretty much the perfect counter for the Angels and Vigilante makes him all the more tempting in my eyes. Same deal as always: he chooses a target at night and any overt powers they have are deactivated for that phase. Pretty useless if the Citizenry keeps quiet, but an amazing deterrent to the self-protection and easy confirmation strategies used to death so far.

An Assassin would hit really damn hard under the right situation, so I'm not sure I'd go with it. Rogue Inspector would be pretty cool admittedly, but I'd like to rebalance the real deal first before testing those waters because giving the Mafia the most powerful role in the game is pretty fucking scary to me.

Anyway, what else... the Inspector's gotta get nerfed, but that's already been said. Oracle's fine, I'd prefer lynch info be kept out in the open, but the Coroner strikes me as a fair compromise. Another thing I was thinking of was setting up small blocks of citizenry that know who each other are, but are completely in the dark as to who everyone else is. Sort of like the Masons, except without the conversion ability.

As for dead characters, I was thinking of letting them send PMs through the Narrator to the people currently playing the game - basically haunting the village as restless Spirits. They'd be kept anonymous and double-checked for no game-breaking info, but would allow the deceased to send feedback and ideas to those still in the game. Not much, but it'd be an interesting angle to cover at least.

That's it for now. More ideas to come as I think of them.

*Yes, even if you have a few leads under your belt. It's very, very rare for the Mafia to have one tempting target or for there to be one obvious suspect for them to choose.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 12:20 AM
Excuse me, Pap, but THIEF? Really? How is a Roleblocker anything like a thief?

A Roleblocker is a standard issue mafia role, designed to stop what has been going on in every single game so far. I'm surprised there weren't any.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 12:20 AM
Excuse me, Pap, but THIEF? Really? How is a Roleblocker anything like a thief?

They're not, but Roleblocker sounds stupid so I'm co-opting the name.

Also, the idea is that it steals their ability for the night, so it fits the theme of the game in a way. Unless you want to get kinky with the Stripper, you naughty boy you.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 12:28 AM
Well, a Roleblocker I usually see as locking your door for the night, or slipping drugs into your dinner.

An interesting take is a town role, the Jailkeeper. Nobody can target theplayer that the Jailkeeper targets for the night - this means no investigations or kills. Additionally, that player can't do anything that night.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 12:31 AM
Well, a Roleblocker I usually see as locking your door for the night, or slipping drugs into your dinner.

Who better for lock picking and sleight of hand than a Thief? ;)

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 12:37 AM
Why, a Roleblocker! Fancy that. ^_^

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 12:40 AM
Why, a Roleblocker! Fancy that. ^_^

Except Roleblocker sounds dumb. Geez, Alpha, we just established thaaaat.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 12:50 AM
Except Roleblocker sounds dumb. Geez, Alpha, we just established thaaaat.

That's subjective. I like it.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 12:56 AM
You also like "town" and "scum"!

Hey-ooo

But seriously, Roleblocker's way too literal a name, esp. with how the other names play into the flavour text used. The Angel saves people because it has divine powers, the Vigilante kills people at night because he's a deranged gunman, the Oracle learns of the dead through dreams and premonitions, and so on - why shouldn't this role have something unique associated with it as well?

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 01:01 AM
You also like "town" and "scum"!

What's so bad about town and scum?

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 01:02 AM
What's so bad about town and scum?

It sounds scummy, that's why! We're an upstanding village, we don't need any of that unpleasant talk 'round here, thank you.

...Oh, that's right, you're from the bad part of town. My mistake, I'll leave you to your beggary.

Destil
03-26-2010, 01:24 AM
Wow, this thread exploded while I was playing Starcraft, huh?

The next game will be run by Paul or PR from what I hear, and from the sound of it they're coming from about the same place as me in-so-far as rules go. I'm content (though I may not play, the game thread is addictive and has been getting in the way of me getting work / D&D prep done for weeks).

The citizens could use some information, just to ramp up the paranoia a bit... but giving out the team sort of kills some of what I was interested in (i.e. you'll never know if an inspector is a fake, as if you know if they're not mafia). Perhaps reveal citizen/non-citizen, and actually leave it to that (citizen being someone with NO role).

spineshark
03-26-2010, 02:06 AM
Obviously, the Citizens get too much, and too reliable information as it stands. We can cut down on the information they receive during the game, but I think you could alternatively get a lot of mileage out of cutting down on the information they receive at the beginning of the game. You don't have to be completely obscure, just introduce an element of chance into the opening.

Like so: when you've got all the players together, come up with some (4-ish) different setups. Pick one randomly, then assign and hand out all the roles that come with that setup. Then you reveal all four of the possible configurations at the beginning of the game, without any further tips. Granted, people who get a role that isn't in all the setups get a head start on figuring out what's going on, but so would the Mafia (since stronger civilian roles would justify more of them), and I think the initial uncertainty ("is there even an Inspector in this game?") could pay off big.

Paul le Fou
03-26-2010, 04:27 AM
Roleblocker? That's your name for it? Seriously? Can we have the rolechecker and the rolelearner and the peoplekiller too? It'll be such an exciting game of Forum Badplayers where they try to kill all the goodplayers. pfffffff

Also, revealing "who made the kill" doesn't work when the kills are made by a bloc of several players. That's always been a problem with things like that or the "kill who killed you" roles. Unless it's randomly chosen, but see above re: random numbers.

Also when someone mentioned it upthread they typo'd corner and I latched onto that. It's definitely coroner. Sorry!



As for limited stuff making it too all-or-nothing - that's kind of the point. Instead of using it to play and shape the entire game, save it for one emergency when you need to make sure that someone who's weaseled into a key position is guilty or innocent. But thinking about it, that's still a pretty big move. Especially since if there's only one inspection, you have no risk of coming out since you've already blown your load. I'm actually starting to think that would be too much.

Also: If there were multiple single-shot vigilantes/inspectors, should they know who the others are?

I wasn't proposing limiting saves, just successful ones. They can protect every night until they hit. And really, in three games there have been, what, 2 successful saves? It's already really rare. But like I said, I like it less than no protection at all.


What do other people think about the Thief (I'm assuming this is mafia-allied, right?) and Jailkeeper? We've had them before but I don't remember how into them people were. I need to consider some of the ramifications, too.

Merus
03-26-2010, 07:21 AM
I think it's frustrating to have your powers limited by someone else, and I find it uninteresting that your powers become unlimited towards the end of the game when you finally lynch the Saboteur. I much prefer having the powers be limited, I think it makes the choice more interesting. It also makes mafia claims more useful than they are, because you can get the Angel to blow a protection on a mafia player.

dwolfe
03-26-2010, 07:53 AM
Come on Westside, get your act together. We can't let those filthy Easties beat us!

(back to the discussion, though: everyone obviously is going to have preferences on their ideal game, and can explain why reasonably well (except for this scum/town naming convention). I say let the game leader try what they want, but maybe have a couple days open thread rules discussion, before roles are assigned? I'm assuming no one here wants the game decided by a loophole the GM missed in the rules, and it gives people a chance to back out if it isn't to their tastes)

Aeonus
03-26-2010, 08:04 AM
Instead of mafia, maybe the next game should have slimy muck monsters that take human form. Then it's literally town vs. scum!

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 08:46 AM
Hey guys, I'm dead!

I'm disappointed, Westo scum. You're just giving the game away, as I see it.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 08:55 AM
Roleblocker? That's your name for it? Seriously? Can we have the rolechecker and the rolelearner and the peoplekiller too? It'll be such an exciting game of Forum Badplayers where they try to kill all the goodplayers. pfffffff
You got a better choice? Because Thief is not a better choice.

Also, revealing "who made the kill" doesn't work when the kills are made by a bloc of several players. That's always been a problem with things like that or the "kill who killed you" roles. Unless it's randomly chosen, but see above re: random numbers.
The mafia decide who made the kill when they send it in, then. Also, just don't say "The MAFIA killed him", say that he died (and make each player's kill method stay the same for the entire game).

Also when someone mentioned it upthread they typo'd corner and I latched onto that. It's definitely coroner. Sorry!
Corner is more entertaining though. See, if you get enough Corners, you can become an Angle! :)

As for limited stuff making it too all-or-nothing - that's kind of the point. Instead of using it to play and shape the entire game, save it for one emergency when you need to make sure that someone who's weaseled into a key position is guilty or innocent. But thinking about it, that's still a pretty big move. Especially since if there's only one inspection, you have no risk of coming out since you've already blown your load. I'm actually starting to think that would be too much.

Also: If there were multiple single-shot vigilantes/inspectors, should they know who the others are?
I don't think Cops should be single-shot. I do however think that One-shot Vigs are a good idea - it prevents a bad vig from ruining the game by shooting each day.

I wasn't proposing limiting saves, just successful ones. They can protect every night until they hit. And really, in three games there have been, what, 2 successful saves? It's already really rare. But like I said, I like it less than no protection at all.
You're not thinking like scum. When you make your kill, you have to work around the Angels at the moment - they are a factor, even though their success rate is neglible. This is exactly the reason that there are so many deriatives of the Doc - Jailkeeper, Bodyguard, every-other-night etc.

Another role up for consideration is the Jack Of All Trades, who gets multiple single-shot abilities and may only use one per night. Say he can roleblock once, protect once, shoot once, investigate once.

ThornGhost
03-26-2010, 09:01 AM
I'm not playing now, but I hope to get in on the next game.

I agree that, at the moment, it looks like the citizens are able to get too much "confirmed" information compared to some IRL games that I've played. (Of course, the longer time table and ability to re-evaluate everyone's posts probably plays into that.) The real fun of these games, I think, comes from a lack of reliable information.

In that vein, I would agree that the citizen special roles need to be changed to be less powerful and provide less information.

The Oracle and Inspector are both roles that provide solid information about players. They're both great roles, tried and tested in this sort of game, but I think it would be best to only have one of them per game.

If the Vigilante didn't find out the role of the character it killed, it would be a lot more of a firebrand. Maybe the citizens could choose to "loot" a kill of the vigilante on nights they didn't lynch to determine the role of the victim.

The limited angel seems like a good choice too. I don't think dying to protect the victim is a great way to handle it, though. The angel is a certified citizen above all, and it makes next to no sense to waste that on anyone else. Honestly, I've been trying to come up with a way this role makes more sense, but I'm having a tough time. Other roles help to fuel suspicions and move the game along - the angel seems like almost a pure numbers thing. Having one less mafia member would probably accomplish almost the same thing in terms of probability.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 09:04 AM
I stand by my point - all dead players should have their role and fation revealed, regardless of kill method, and we should do away with the Oracle.

An Doc who dies to protect, a Bodyguard, is a weapon. He buys the inpector or vigilante a turn to do their thing. His point is to die, so that his faction can win. Remember that if you are dead and your win condition was fulfilled you win anyway.

Merus
03-26-2010, 09:05 AM
You got a better choice? Because Thief is not a better choice.

Saboteur.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 09:05 AM
I think it's frustrating to have your powers limited by someone else, and I find it uninteresting that your powers become unlimited towards the end of the game when you finally lynch the Saboteur. I much prefer having the powers be limited, I think it makes the choice more interesting. It also makes mafia claims more useful than they are, because you can get the Angel to blow a protection on a mafia player.

I can't say I agree, tbh. I'd rather an Angel's power be limited by how they play than by how many moves they make, esp. once we get into the massive 30+ games later on when multiple plays might actually start happening. One thing I really like about the Thief is that it limits the Angels in all the right ways: it stops them from being able to protect themselves for eternity while encouraging them to use their powers for something else. Admittedly, it'd make their moves at the end a bit of a free-for-all, but that's always the risk when playing the game - you never know what'll happen when someone you need gets lynched (Eastside, anyone?).

As it is, the only role here that strikes me as truly broken and due an overhaul is the Inspector. The Angel isn't really overpowered due to its power alone (as it's been mentioned upthread, saving actually doesn't happen all that often), but rather because it can easily confirm itself and is nigh unkillable once they do so. Once you discourage that kind of strategy, it's not as bad anymore.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 09:08 AM
Saboteur.

I do not understand the flavor behind this.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 09:09 AM
Saboteur.

I like.

Sprite
03-26-2010, 09:22 AM
Also, themewise: a while back I dreamt up a theme along the lines of 50s pulp scifi alien invasion or interplanetary war. Who among you are dastardly body snatchers?!

I'm not suggesting we do this, but oh man, a bodysnatcher game would be awesome. A pool of players is chosen and split up between townies and bodysnatchers, and given new screennames to serve as personae. Every night one of the bodysnatchers takes over a town persona and has to try and impersonate that person for the rest of the game. The paranoia would be insane ("you're acting awful strange today"). It would be very difficult to actually impersonate someone (anonymous personae like "butcher" and "baker" would mitigate that somewhat) but with the right players it could be awesome, and a truly native forum game, as it could only work on the internet.

Merus
03-26-2010, 10:04 AM
I do not understand the flavor behind this.

It is a mafia player that sabotages other players, correct? It prevents them from using their powers.

I feel like the discussion over power roles misses a key point about the way the game's flowing. Ideally, players stay in a state of uncertainty and paranoia, and right up until the end they can never really be sure. Currently, it's too easy for the citizens to gain information, and too difficult for the mafia to muddy the waters again. Once the citizens learn a piece of information, it stays known, and the mafia players get into a position where they basically have to wait for death. This explains the feedback I've seen from players where they felt on day 2 that the mafia had too great an advantage, and on day 3 that the citizens had too great an advantage.

I feel that roles like the inspector are useful in that it gives the mafia a bit of uncertainty of their own, and a clear target. Without roles, I imagine that the mafia are going to have a game that goes from them being smug and happy that they're clearly in control, to increasing despair as the citizens work out leaders and start hitting mafia. In that sense, I would be uncomfortable with losing the role entirely. I feel like the Inspector + protection is the real problem - the Inspector is overpowered only as long as the Mafia can't do anything about them, and that power is why they're such an important target in the first place (as opposed to the Oracle, who's nice but a very low-value target).

For that reason, I'd be happy to get rid of protection entirely. It does increase the uncertainty for the mafia, but the increased uncertainty mostly seems to be frustrating.

One idea I did kick around, however: giving protection to the Narrator, who can publically give it out to whoever they choose. The winner would be announced as having won the protection. I decided against doing this because it smacked of Survivor immunity, but the advantage is that it gives players who have played too hard a way to divert attention, while not making the mafia decisions any more complex. Because they know for sure who's been protected, they can hit someone else - and the Inspector won't win immunity forever, much like in Survivor.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 10:08 AM
The problem with the Cop being protected is that there are two Docs. Cut it down to one Doc and it gets much, much more managable.

Merus
03-26-2010, 10:23 AM
The problem with the Cop being protected is that there are two Docs. Cut it down to one Doc and it gets much, much more managable.
I can't agree with this: having one Doctor around still seems to make the mafia skittish, and it doesn't prevent the Doctor doing a shell game. Perhaps you could prevent the Doctor from protecting themselves, but the problem I'm having is that protection seems to appeal to citizens a lot without it really making the game much more interesting. I really don't see that it adds a lot of tactical value, and in return it makes it overpoweringly profitable for town roles to step forward. I feel like it's too powerful as something you can rely on and direct.

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 10:26 AM
Watering down the current civilian roles seems like the best route to me. I like the roles we have right now but I do think they're a little overpowered. I also feel like the Citizens get too much information.

Daytime Lynches: Citizens are not told the role of the lynched party.

Mornings: Citizens are told who died, but not what they were killed by. They are not given word of angelic protection. If the mob kills someone and the Vigilante doesn't act, it will read "So-and-so turns up dead." If the mob tries to kill someone but an Angel intervenes, and the Vigilante does act, it will read "So-and-so turns up dead."

Angels: We keep two angels, but each one only gets one shot of divine protection per game. They can use their power every night, but the first time it successfully protects someone it is used up and they become a regular Citizen. No more testing for Angels with Vigilante hits; an Angel that confirms himself in this way ceases to be useful except as a confirmed citizen (which will likely only last one day).

Inspector: Stays the same, but is less of an IWIN thanks to the lack of ability to confirm and the lack of guaranteed (or even likely) repeated protection. (I am also more open to the idea of a false positive being added than I was back when I was the Inspector. =))

Oracle: In addition to current abilities, learns the role of daytime lynches each night.

Vigilante: Stays the same, but it's easier for the mob to front one both publicly ("Of course I showed up guilty under inspection -- I'm the Vigilante!") and privately ("Hey, I noticed the Citizens floated two possible shotgun targets tonight. Let's let them kill one and we kill the other, to mask our kill.")

Butt Monkey: This player is given access to Silent Noise's account. His role is to log in, post nonsense, and get lynched on day one regardless of what else happens.

Sprite
03-26-2010, 10:38 AM
Butt Monkey: This player is given access to Silent Noise's account. His role is to log in, post nonsense, and get lynched on day one regardless of what else happens.

Actually, there is a role called the Jester whose goal is to be lynched.

Tock
03-26-2010, 10:39 AM
Mornings: Citizens are told who died, but not what they were killed by. They are not given word of angelic protection. If the mob kills someone and the Vigilante doesn't act, it will read "So-and-so turns up dead." If the mob tries to kill someone but an Angel intervenes, and the Vigilante does act, it will read "So-and-so turns up dead."

Brick beat me to this one, but I totally agree. It's the easiest way to keep the Vigilante from being instantly confirmable--mask his kills from everyone but the Oracle. It also gives the Oracle more strategic options than just the canary in the coal mine role that we've seen in our games to this point. It's obviously good for Mafia paranoia as well, particularly if the Vigilante still turns up guilty under inspection.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 10:41 AM
Actually, there is a role called the Jester whose goal is to be lynched.

Said role is the best way to earn the hatred of players, incidentally.

Tock
03-26-2010, 10:42 AM
Said role is the best way to earn the hatred of players, incidentally.

Silent Noise really was as good at Mafia as he claimed!

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 10:47 AM
Silent Noise really was as good at Mafia as he claimed!

You mean, Marion was.

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 10:48 AM
Oh, I also really like the idea of flying blind.

Pre-game: Mobsters are each given the identities of other mobsters. Power roles are given their own identities and abilities. Citizens are given absolutely nothing; they are not told which roles are active and in what numbers, nor how many mafiosos there are. No more "Well we have a 43% chance of hitting one mobster, and an 18% chance of hitting two, but only if so-and-so is the inspector, and there was a 9% chance of that, so isolate the differential and carry the two..."

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 10:51 AM
Oh, I also really like the idea of flying blind.

Pre-game: Mobsters are each given the identities of other mobsters. Power roles are given their own identities and abilities. Citizens are given absolutely nothing; they are not told which roles are active and in what numbers, nor how many mafiosos there are. No more "Well we have a 43% chance of hitting one mobster, and an 18% chance of hitting two, but only if so-and-so is the inspector, and there was a 9% chance of that, so isolate the differential and carry the two..."

That's the entire point. Scum are given the other scum, town drives blind. Also: "so isolate the differential and carry the two..." = brick no know math :P

Here's a thought abut the Cop. Once your reveal your role, you cannot investigate anymore.

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 10:52 AM
I took Algebra II in high school.

Also I am relatively confident I don't ever want Alpha Werewolf running a game for us. I... just don't like your ideas very much, dude. Simple is best.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 10:53 AM
I took Algebra II in high school.

Also I am relatively confident I don't ever want Alpha Werewolf running a game for us. I... just don't like your ideas very much, dude. Simple is best.
I was joking about the math :)

About running a game. The forum isn't ready for a complex one, not by a long shot. What I have planned is simple, and pretty balanced.

ThornGhost
03-26-2010, 10:57 AM
Oh, I also really like the idea of flying blind.

Pre-game: Mobsters are each given the identities of other mobsters. Power roles are given their own identities and abilities. Citizens are given absolutely nothing; they are not told which roles are active and in what numbers, nor how many mafiosos there are. No more "Well we have a 43% chance of hitting one mobster, and an 18% chance of hitting two, but only if so-and-so is the inspector, and there was a 9% chance of that, so isolate the differential and carry the two..."

I think this is the best idea.

kaisel
03-26-2010, 10:59 AM
Watering down the current civilian roles seems like the best route to me. I like the roles we have right now but I do think they're a little overpowered. I also feel like the Citizens get too much information.

Daytime Lynches: Citizens are not told the role of the lynched party.


I like all of your suggestions, but this one I have one slight question on: would daytime lynches still give an innocent or guilty verdict? Citizens need some amount of information, and with an inspector death early on, I suspect it would become very difficult for a citizen win. Another tactic might be to increase the number of false positives, so that an inspector is still fairly valued, but isn't omniscient.

Pre-game: Mobsters are each given the identities of other mobsters. Power roles are given their own identities and abilities. Citizens are given absolutely nothing; they are not told which roles are active and in what numbers, nor how many mafiosos there are. No more "Well we have a 43% chance of hitting one mobster, and an 18% chance of hitting two, but only if so-and-so is the inspector, and there was a 9% chance of that, so isolate the differential and carry the two..."
Reply With Quote

I like the idea for the most part, though I think the citizens should know what roles are in the game, but not the number per role. I think going completely blind actually increases the randomness, though I admit that's probably just my poor strategizing than anything else.

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 11:05 AM
I like all of your suggestions, but this one I have one slight question on: would daytime lynches still give an innocent or guilty verdict? Citizens need some amount of information, and with an inspector death early on, I suspect it would become very difficult for a citizen win. Another tactic might be to increase the number of false positives, so that an inspector is still fairly valued, but isn't omniscient.

No, citizens would get nothing. Logic train: we know a citizen pretending to be the inspector is a pretty much universally bad move. So: A announces he's the inspector, along with a fabulous wealth of collected info. We then lynch A. He is "innocent". That's not functionally different from getting a return of "inspector". We therefore know his wealth of information is good, and can act on it for the rest of the game.

Essentially, if the citizens want to rally behind an inspector, they do so at their own considerable risk. It is far less likely that it is seen as the most optimal move. You might see factioning; these citizens trust the "inspector", these ones do not. Civilian infighting. Paranoia goes up. In such an environment, the mob might actually elect to leave the inspector alive to ramp the suspicion up even more.

I've come under a lot of fire in both games because I refuse to play the game of suspicion. The reason I don't isn't because I don't want to, or because I couldn't hack it, or because I'm a wuss -- it's because it's not optimal. I want to win, and the structure of the first two games make it easy to play based on perfect or near-perfect information. Maybe Mafia West has evolved differently, but I doubt it.

About running a game. The forum isn't ready for a complex one, not by a long shot. What I have planned is simple, and pretty balanced.

You also floated the idea of a "roleblocker", which was pretty cleanly shot down the first time around. It's a bad idea that adds too much randomness to the game without adding anything of actual value.

kaisel
03-26-2010, 11:14 AM
No, citizens would get nothing. Logic train: we know a citizen pretending to be the inspector is a pretty much universally bad move. So: A announces he's the inspector, along with a fabulous wealth of collected info. We then lynch A. He is "innocent". That's not functionally different from getting a return of "inspector". We therefore know his wealth of information is good, and can act on it for the rest of the game.

Essentially, if the citizens want to rally behind an inspector, they do so at their own considerable risk. It is far less likely that it is seen as the most optimal move. You might see factioning; these citizens trust the "inspector", these ones do not. Civilian infighting. Paranoia goes up. In such an environment, the mob might actually elect to leave the inspector alive to ramp the suspicion up even more.

I've come under a lot of fire in both games because I refuse to play the game of suspicion. The reason I don't isn't because I don't want to, or because I couldn't hack it, or because I'm a wuss -- it's because it's not optimal. I want to win, and the structure of the first two games make it easy to play based on perfect or near-perfect information. Maybe Mafia West has evolved differently, but I doubt it.


My main worry is that we'll get a repeat of game 1, where it was really easy for the mafia to hide, and I think weakening all the roles, as well as hiding the lynch results might be a bit too much.

On the other hand though, I think Mafia East and West have shown that it's not quite as easy for mafia to hide, so maybe I'm worrying over nothing.

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 11:20 AM
Honestly? I don't mind it's easy for the mafia to hide. You and demonkoala especially did a terrific job in Game One. If not for the citizen's ability to build a mountain of perfect information, you would have won. (I won't say you should have won. I won't. But probably only because I wasn't on your team. =))

Calorie Mate
03-26-2010, 11:27 AM
I agree with almost everything Brick has said, but I'm still unsure about how little information the Citizens would have to go on. I mean, they pretty much know nothing except in very special cases (the Oracle or Inspector say something and are then killed, confirming what they say). It feels like they'll spend too much of the game flying completely blind, which isn't much fun in the long run. Maybe.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 11:28 AM
You also floated the idea of a "roleblocker", which was pretty cleanly shot down the first time around. It's a bad idea that adds too much randomness to the game without adding anything of actual value.

Randomness? The roleblocker is the counter to all the overpowered strategies we've had! They negate a claimed Cop, make it possible to kill people even if there's still a Doc, etc. They're the mafia's way to be on even grounds with the town, who are horribly overpowered at the moment.

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 11:31 AM
Randomness? The roleblocker is the counter to all the overpowered strategies we've had! They negate a claimed Cop, make it possible to kill people even if there's still a Doc, etc. They're the mafia's way to be on even grounds with the town, who are horribly overpowered at the moment.

You're thinking backwards. If the town is overpowered (and I agree they are) the answer is not to add power to the mob until they're equal, but to remove power from the town until they're equal.

Otherwise it becomes a mafia arms race. "The mob had the Roleblocker and it was OP!" "Okay, next game the town gets the Roleblockerblocker." "But that was OP too!" "Okay, next game the mafia gets two Roleblockers and an Evil Inspector." "But now Angels are worthless!" "Okay, now Angels can protect two people per night but one of those people becomes the new Angel, who can't protect Roleblockerblockers except on Tuesdays."

No thanks.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 11:34 AM
You're thinking backwards. If the town is overpowered (and I agree they are) the answer is not to add power to the mob until they're equal, but to remove power from the town until they're equal.

Otherwise it becomes a mafia arms race. "The mob had the Roleblocker and it was OP!" "Okay, next game the town gets the Roleblockerblocker." "But that was OP too!" "Okay, next game the mafia gets two Roleblockers and an Evil Inspector." "But now Angels are worthless!" "Okay, now Angels can protect two people per night but one of those people becomes the new Angel, who can't protect Roleblockerblockers except on Tuesdays."

No thanks.

Removing power from the town would make the game too tame. The Roleblocker forces the town to be more cautious - play the game of suspicion, instead of playing the game of numbers.

No need for an arms race. I'm telling you, the setup works. I've played with it often.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 11:37 AM
You're thinking backwards. If the town is overpowered (and I agree they are) the answer is not to add power to the mob until they're equal, but to remove power from the town until they're equal.

I'm not sure we can even detract from the Angels or Vigilante without underpowering them, though. Maybe remove self-protection... but then you'd just have the situation where one Angel would protect another while they sling their powers around. Limiting them to once a game would remove most, if not all, utility they'd have, at which point why even bother having them in the game in the first place?

The Saboteur idea is mostly harmless anyway - it's only really dangerous if the two overt roles are stupid enough to reveal themselves while it's still in play. At the same time, the effect it has psychologically makes protection and shotgunning more of a secondary affair to the game, adding to the play without dominating it like it has up until this point. I see the role fitting in quite nicely, honestly.

Seriously, Brick. Where's the harm in even trying it out? If it turns out to be too much for the game, then it just means we'll have to dial the powers back again.

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 11:38 AM
Removing power from the town would make the game too tame. The Roleblocker forces the town to be more cautious - play the game of suspicion, instead of playing the game of numbers.

No need for an arms race. I'm telling you, the setup works. I've played with it often.

I don't doubt you have. You know what game I've played often? Mega Man X6. =)

How does ramping up the level of uncertainty and paranoia the town operates under make the game "too tame"? It sounds like you get your mafia kicks from crazy roles, not the core social aspect of the game. The latter is what I'd like to see emphasized.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 11:41 AM
How does ramping up the level of uncertainty and paranoia the town operates under make the game "too tame"? It sounds like you get your mafia kicks from crazy roles, not the core social aspect of the game. The latter is what I'd like to see emphasized.

By adding a Mafia counter to the overt roles, you will get that. Adding a disincentive for them to come out will keep the Angels and Vigilante in the background, leaving most of the daytime discussion on who to trust/who's suspicious and not on "which power roles will win us the game?"

I don't like Alpha's ideas as much as the next guy, but the role makes sense.

kaisel
03-26-2010, 11:42 AM
You're thinking backwards. If the town is overpowered (and I agree they are) the answer is not to add power to the mob until they're equal, but to remove power from the town until they're equal.

Otherwise it becomes a mafia arms race. "The mob had the Roleblocker and it was OP!" "Okay, next game the town gets the Roleblockerblocker." "But that was OP too!" "Okay, next game the mafia gets two Roleblockers and an Evil Inspector." "But now Angels are worthless!" "Okay, now Angels can protect two people per night but one of those people becomes the new Angel, who can't protect Roleblockerblockers except on Tuesdays."

No thanks.

Exactly, I'd much rather remove roles than add them, since I think each role added takes away from the interesting part of mafia: suspicions and paranoia, and not being able to trust anybody. I think the next game should be something scaled back (power roles not as powerful, less information in general) to see how it goes, and if we find that it's not as fun, then we can start adding things.

All the new roles and such seem a little tiresome and detracting from what's fun in the game. If there are too many power roles in general, it becomes a bit of a disappointment when you're "just" a citizen.

My problem with the roleblocker is that seems more like curing a symptom than the disease. The power roles are definitely the lynchpins in the citizen game, it makes more sense to me, to scale them back, rather than trying to null them every once in a while.

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 11:44 AM
I'm not sure we can even detract from the Angels or Vigilante without underpowering them, though. Maybe remove self-protection... but then you'd just have the situation where one Angel would protect another while they sling their powers around. Limiting them to once a game would remove most, if not all, utility they'd have, at which point why even bother having them in the game in the first place?

I'd be okay with removing Angels entirely. Worth a try.

The Saboteur idea is mostly harmless anyway - it's only really dangerous if the two overt roles are stupid enough to reveal themselves while it's still in play. At the same time, the effect it has psychologically makes protection and shotgunning more of a secondary affair to the game, adding to the play without dominating it like it has up until this point. I see the role fitting in quite nicely, honestly.

The way I see it playing out is making everyone play two shell games at once. Right now we're playing "the mob can only hit one of our power guys per night, so let's structure our strategy so we're in a good position regardless of who they hit." With a Roleblocker/Thief/Saboteur/whatever it will still be that, but with the added layer of "the mob can only stop one of our power guys per night, so let's structure our strategy so we're in a good position regardless of who they stop."

Plus it has the added effect of "Well I want to use my role tonight, except WHOOPS I can't." That's not fun.

The best roles in the game are the ones that supply and control the flow of information. The game is information - it's all talking. That's what I'd like to see us work with, not giving people super powers. A perfectly played inspector or oracle can be rendered entirely impotent if the town doesn't trust them - that's an option I'd like to give the mob.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 11:51 AM
brick, you admitted that right now it's a game of numbers, and the mafia has no way of stopping it. The town is completely reliant on power roles now - but the mafia can be given a tool to stop that, a tool that does not affect anything else in the game!

Think! What are the proven strategies right now? Have a claimed inspector build a bloc - Roleblocker stops that! Vigilante test? Roleblocker can either deny the Vigilante shot or the protect, making this very dangerous to try! The players will have to rely on analysis instead of roles.

I've advocated from the start of West that we shouldn't rely on power roles. This is the perfect solution.

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 11:53 AM
I've advocated from the start of West that we shouldn't rely on power roles.

Then you're a proven mobster and they should lynch you immediately (if they already haven't). Relying on power roles is the best path the citizenry can take, given the ruleset we're using. Town East has leaned hard on their power roles the whole game and are within eyeshot of winning.

This is the perfect solution.

It's really not.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 11:56 AM
Then you're a proven mobster and they should lynch you immediately (if they already haven't). Relying on power roles is the best path the citizenry can take, given the ruleset we're using. Town East has leaned hard on their power roles the whole game and are within eyeshot of winning.

I was nightkilled, brick, by the mafia.

Calorie Mate
03-26-2010, 11:56 AM
I do kind of find the idea of someone claiming to be the Vigilante failing to prove it because they were secretly stopped by the Roleblocker to be funny. The more important thing about that role isn't that it gives guilty people one more tool to fight with, but that it gives one more way for someone to anonymously cast suspicion on someone else. (Of course, this would mean you wouldn't inform the group when the power was used.)

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 11:57 AM
I was nightkilled, brick, by the mafia.

Well then you're just a really dumb citizen. "Hey guys let's not utilize our power roles" is a terrible strategy given this ruleset, where power roles are so intregal.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 12:00 PM
Well then you're just a really dumb citizen. "Hey guys let's not utilize our power roles" is a terrible strategy given this ruleset, where power roles are so intregal.

Not "let's not use our power roles". Let's not rely on our power roles. Let's use our brains to figure out who's scum.

I'm saddened that the game devolved into a complete reliance on a couple of power roles. I want to give the mafia the tools to counter this strategy, because right now the mafia's only shot at winning is to nightkill the inspector before he reveals.

kaisel
03-26-2010, 12:04 PM
Not "let's not use our power roles". Let's not rely on our power roles. Let's use our brains to figure out who's scum.

I'm saddened that the game devolved into a complete reliance on a couple of power roles. I want to give the mafia the tools to counter this strategy, because right now the mafia's only shot at winning is to nightkill the inspector before he reveals.

Actually I'd say it's not, it's just that to nullify the inspector, without taking them out, is incredibly, incredibly risky, and it's hard to play (and probably involves some self-sacrifice as well).

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 12:09 PM
Not "let's not use our power roles". Let's not rely on our power roles. Let's use our brains to figure out who's scum.

Yeah, but why would you, when you can just rely on the power roles instead? "Hey guys, let's take a handicap!" doesn't seem like a good strategy to me.

I'm saddened that the game devolved into a complete reliance on a couple of power roles. I want to give the mafia the tools to counter this strategy, because right now the mafia's only shot at winning is to nightkill the inspector before he reveals.

The mafia already has the tools to counter this strategy. I want to make those tools more effective by removing the amount of information the town can be certain of.

Here's a scenario. Day Four, and someone steps forward. "I am the inspector. A and B are innocent, C is guilty. We should lynch C immediately and trust A and B for the rest of the game."

Under current rules, the mob can't do much about this. They can't front an inspector. They can't stop the lynch. They can't announce their distrust of the inspector because the lynch will immediately prove them to be liars.

Remove the information, however, and:

1) The mob could front a fake inspector. There's no way to confirm either inspector, and there are many ways to play it from here.

2) The mob could discredit the inspector, if they know he's real. The inspector won't be confirmed by his own lynch or C's lynch, so the mob could keep this game going even if the town decides to trust the inspector and lynch C.

3) C could out himself as the Vigilante. Since the mob can now mask their kills, there are a few ways they could play it here, too.

That's just three options that spring immediately to mind. There are several directions it can go. This is far, far more interesting gameplay than "well time to use the Roleblocker again."

Tock
03-26-2010, 12:09 PM
I'm saddened that the game devolved into a complete reliance on a couple of power roles. I want to give the mafia the tools to counter this strategy, because right now the mafia's only shot at winning is to nightkill the inspector before he reveals.

Reliance on power roles isn't a negative because it changes the mafia gameplan--if the mafia's any good, they'll come up with ways to work around it--it's a negative because it is boring as hell to sit around and wait for someone to save the day with perfect information. Again, see Day Three of both games as evidence.

For me, the interesting parts of the game are information control and social collusion. I'm not saying axe all roles (though I'd be curious to see how that would play out), I'm saying let's emphasize intellectual strategy over power-role strategy.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 12:12 PM
I'd be okay with removing Angels entirely. Worth a try.

Fair enough, I guess. All I'm saying is that if we do decide to keep them in the game, then a Saboteur would be an excellent check to them.

(Aside: Let's stick to calling them saboteurs for now, guys. This multi-name shit is getting confusing.)

The way I see it playing out is making everyone play two shell games at once. Right now we're playing "the mob can only hit one of our power guys per night, so let's structure our strategy so we're in a good position regardless of who they hit." With a Roleblocker/Thief/Saboteur/whatever it will still be that, but with the added layer of "the mob can only stop one of our power guys per night, so let's structure our strategy so we're in a good position regardless of who they stop."

Sure, but early on that won't really mean much - a Saboteur won't have that many leads to go on until later in the game, after a player or two have slipped up on a bit of info when put under pressure. Regardless, it's the effect the role will have on the others psychologically that I'm more interested in, especially since it'll turn discussion back on daytime affairs when it's suboptimal for the Angels and Vigilante to come out.

Plus it has the added effect of "Well I want to use my role tonight, except WHOOPS I can't." That's not fun.

Already been happening since the start. "Well, I want to kill this guy tonight except WHOOPS he's protected." "Well, I think I've camouflaged myself in with the town pretty well now WHOOPS I've been inspected" "I think I've survived pretty far up until now I think I'm doing pretty WHOOPS the Mafia just killed me". No matter what, there's always going to be something that "ruins" the fun for someone playing, but that's just how the game goes.

The best roles in the game are the ones that supply and control the flow of information. The game is information - it's all talking. That's what I'd like to see us work with, not giving people super powers. A perfectly played inspector or oracle can be rendered entirely impotent if the town doesn't trust them - that's an option I'd like to give the mob.

That's all perfectly fine! Only difference is, the Saboteur would help the kind of game you want.

The big problem with the Angels and, to a lesser extent, the Vigilante is that revealing their power to the Citizenry is an optimal strategy - it gives them someone they can rely on to do the work for them because an easy nighttime test would confirm their identity beyond a shadow of a doubt. Back in round 1, I felt damn invincible once I came out and flaunted it like nobody's business, and looking back it derailed the discussion far beyond the original scope of the game. There wasn't any talking or discussion any more after the big reveal - it was just a bunch of people waiting for me to point the finger and say "kill".

By adding someone in that can depower the two roles, it'll put an end to that. Angels that come out cease to be any more than glorified Citizenry and are easy kills for the Mafia, or worse yet give them a license to kill as the other Angel is forced to give up his powers for the night to protect them. A revealed Vigilante ceases to be able to kill because he blew his load too early, forcing him to keep quiet for optimal effect - which, coupled with his negative alignment when investigated, really puts the onus on him deflecting suspicion away from himself.

I just... I dunno. Outside of removing the roles completely (which I guess you guys can do if you want, I don't really mind either way), the Saboteur would balance the game out pretty nicely. The very fact he exists would keep the overt power roles from dominating the game, as taking control would require them to sacrifice the biggest advantage they have.

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 12:14 PM
I'm willing to give the role a try, Pappy. I'm just not convinced we can't get the same results by toning down the rules we already have.

Ideally, we should have as few roles as possible. Classic, IRL Werewolf is played with only one, after all.

eta: I should clarify. I'm willing to try the role in the context Pappy is talking about, which is he believes it will make the game more interesting. But not in the context Alpha is talking about, where our "views on mafia are limited, just look at all these psycho power roles my friends are using on some other forum!"

Calorie Mate
03-26-2010, 12:17 PM
Here's a scenario. Day Four, and someone steps forward. "I am the inspector. A and B are innocent, C is guilty. We should lynch C immediately and trust A and B for the rest of the game."

Under current rules, the mob can't do much about this. They can't front an inspector. They can't stop the lynch. They can't announce their distrust of the inspector because the lynch will immediately prove them to be liars.

Remove the information, however, and:

1) The mob could front a fake inspector. There's no way to confirm either inspector, and there are many ways to play it from here.

2) The mob could discredit the inspector, if they know he's real. The inspector won't be confirmed by his own lynch or C's lynch, so the mob could keep this game going even if the town decides to trust the inspector and lynch C.

3) C could out himself as the Vigilante. Since the mob can now mask their kills, there are a few ways they could play it here, too.

That's just three options that spring immediately to mind. There are several directions it can go. This is far, far more interesting gameplay than "well time to use the Roleblocker again."

Ok, you've convinced me. I'm 100% with Brick on this one now.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 12:18 PM
I'm willing to give the role a try, Pappy. I'm just not convinced we can't get the same results by toning down the rules we already have.

I don't see why we can't go both ways - after all, one thing Alpha is right in is that the game's pretty malleable. You'd be fine with going pure vanilla, minimal roles, final destination and switching back for a test right after?

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 12:20 PM
Pappy, I will literally play any form of Mafia you guys throw at me. I'll even play Alpha Werewolf's Crazy Mobster Circus. As long as I get to yell at people and maybe also kill them, I am happy.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 12:24 PM
Pappy, I will literally play any form of Mafia you guys throw at me. I'll even play Alpha Werewolf's Crazy Mobster Circus. As long as I get to yell at people and maybe also kill them, I am happy.

Sounds good to me. Whatever makes you happy, bud. :p

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 12:36 PM
I'm willing to give the role a try, Pappy. I'm just not convinced we can't get the same results by toning down the rules we already have.

Ideally, we should have as few roles as possible. Classic, IRL Werewolf is played with only one, after all.

eta: I should clarify. I'm willing to try the role in the context Pappy is talking about, which is he believes it will make the game more interesting. But not in the context Alpha is talking about, where our "views on mafia are limited, just look at all these psycho power roles my friends are using on some other forum!"

I should've stressed this more...
Look. My crazy psycho roles are examples of how far you can stretch mafia, and still keep the core game. I am not saying that every game should have them, by ANY means. Rarely should they be used.

But the Saboteur is a standard role, which I am discussing in the context of this forum's form of mafia.

You example proves MY point, in fact. By adding the Saboteur, the town cannot rely on their power roles. By adding the Saboteur, we have purified the game into a state where the town has to learn to hunt mafia by analysis, not by getting information from the power roles.

This is exactly how you want the game, no?

Brickroad
03-26-2010, 12:39 PM
This is exactly how you want the game, no?

Yes, I do.

But we can accomplish it without adding any new roles at all. Fewer roles = better game.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 12:43 PM
Fewer roles = better game.

This is where we stand apart then. I believe that it's better to add roles, though I admit there's a certain peak after which any complexity worsens the game.

This is a matter of perception.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 12:52 PM
If I weren't so lazy and at work I'd hunt down the post where Brick lays out why Bionic Commando doesn't have a jump button. It's the same deal here. When you can achieve the same result by adding rules or simplifying them, it's better to simplify.

I'm sorry, that's completely different. In Commando, the fact that there is no jump button makes the game. Not so in mafia.

I've read that post.

Alpha Werewolf
03-26-2010, 12:56 PM
But the logic is the same. If you add a jump button to BC, then to make the swing mechanic as vital as it is without one, you start having to redesign the level layouts so that the jump mechanism is neutered. Or you could just have no jump mechanism at all and design the game around the intended mechanic. That's what Brick is saying--instead of saying "let's have a bunch of roles and then add something to neuter their value," let's just have fewer roles so that the intended mechanic shines through naturally.

If you add a jump button to BC, It becomes Megaman. End of arguement.

If you remove roles from mafia, or add roles to it, it's still mafia.

Garrison
03-26-2010, 01:13 PM
Just because an idea is interesting, doesn't mean it isn't superfluous. I think that's what the jist of the argument is. There really isn't a point to adding roles other than to spice things up. I'm pretty much with Brickroad on this. Our power roles are too powerful and there's other ways to balance these powers without throwing the mafia/citizen balance off as well.

As long as we're floating ideas into the river, here's what I'd like to see for game three: Slight warning, some of these ideas may be terrible

*Going into the game blind in regards to the mafia/citizen ratio.
*Listing only the people playing the game and the roles that could be in the game.
*When a player is lynched, only the faction is revealed.
*Mafia and vigilante kills are anonymous. Regular citizens won't know who killed who with the possible exception of the Oracle.
*Angels, if present, can't protect themselves.
*Inspector targets get a PM when they're inspected. If they get a dirty result from a mafioso, it's up to the inspector to make sure that the town lynches the right man.
*Oracles find out the roles of those who died and possibly who kills who.
*Vigilante is fine as is.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 01:33 PM
There really isn't a point to adding roles other than to spice things up.

Oh for the love of- I never said we should do that. At least not recently. The reason I'm pushing for the Saboteur is because I think it'd balance the game quite nicely, for the reason I outlined in detail above and for serious, I'm not going to reiterate it for the umpteenth time.

Anyway, one thing I don't get is the opposition to at least testing the role out. This isn't like adding the Poisoner or Poison Doctor or Werewolves or some shit - it's a role included in the basic ruleset for the game since the beginning. If it can help balance out some of the other roles, then why not give it a shot and see how it works out?

namelessentity
03-26-2010, 01:35 PM
My idea for a game would be no power roles, but each person gets a set of unique features: say style hat, color jacket, male\female. After each kill a single feature is revealed (the attacker wore a beret). With a large group of people this information barely limits the suspects and it doesn't become really helpful until later on, but it's something to go on.

I like this because I enjoy the sleuthing aspect to the game, but you guys seem to enjoy the mass paranoia and the unknown.

Alternative: For smaller groups, one person could be chosen at random each night to receive the information. The person would have to choose to reveal it or keep it to themselves, and it opens up a wide possibility of the mafia faking information with no real way to prove it. Sleuthing and paranoia, a compromise?

Sprite
03-26-2010, 01:37 PM
I don't like the idea of the Citizens receiving no information whatsoever, though I like the idea of going in without knowing how many Mafia there are or what roles there are.

Like Brick, though, I'd be up to play just about anything, pending time constraints (which will probably keep me out of the next one).

namelessentity
03-26-2010, 01:59 PM
Angels: We keep two angels, but each one only gets one shot of divine protection per game. They can use their power every night, but the first time it successfully protects someone it is used up and they become a regular Citizen. No more testing for Angels with Vigilante hits; an Angel that confirms himself in this way ceases to be useful except as a confirmed citizen (which will likely only last one day).

The way I have played mafia in the past, the angel was a sacrificial character. You died in place of your target. It makes it futile to protect yourself, but it places the game on a set time line. There is no "the mafia may wiff then we get another day." The mafia still get there kill, just not the one they wanted. It keeps the angel from being over powered

Garrison
03-26-2010, 02:02 PM
Oh for the love of- I never said we should do that. At least not recently. The reason I'm pushing for the Saboteur is because I think it'd balance the game quite nicely, for the reason I outlined in detail above and for serious, I'm not going to reiterate it for the umpteenth time.

Anyway, one thing I don't get is the opposition to at least testing the role out. This isn't like adding the Poisoner or Poison Doctor or Werewolves or some shit - it's a role included in the basic ruleset for the game since the beginning. If it can help balance out some of the other roles, then why not give it a shot and see how it works out?

I wasn't necessarily referring to your suggestions Paps. Sorry if it came off like I was belittling your idea. The saboteur seems like an interesting enough idea and I'd like to try it at least once. The point of the top part of that post is just that we shouldn't go hog wild with adding roles and I think if we do go in a blind game like I was talking about, Saboteur would be one of interesting roles that should be put on the table.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 02:15 PM
I wasn't necessarily referring to your suggestions Paps. Sorry if it came off like I was belittling your idea. The saboteur seems like an interesting enough idea and I'd like to try it at least once. The point of the top part of that post is just that we shouldn't go hog wild with adding roles and I think if we do go in a blind game like I was talking about, Saboteur would be one of interesting roles that should be put on the table.

Nah, it's okay, sorry if I was a bit harsh. Aside from the Saboteur, I agree - as it stands, I am 100% behind limiting the number of roles we introduce to Mafia. The core game itself is actually pretty great once it gets going, so we should do as much as we can to preserve it when figuring out how we'll remix it. If you have a new role that you think'll add something new to the game, then sure, why not? But at the same time, let's not take it to the crazy extent other place have taken it.

I mean, seriously, you should see some (http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Poisoner) of (http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Friendly_Neighbor) the (http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Bus_Driver) roles (http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Tree_Stump) they've come up with out there. I mean, a Tree Stump? Say whaaat?

Sprite
03-26-2010, 02:27 PM
We should do a game with five Mafia, ten tree stumps and ten vigilantes.

Tock
03-26-2010, 02:29 PM
I mean, seriously, you should see some of the roles they've come up with out there. I mean, a Tree Stump? Say whaaat?

Yeah, see, this is exactly the kind of min/maxing arms race crap I don't want to have to deal with. I skimmed through a few of the other roles pages too and I dunno, it just seems to me like people are trying to keep their interest level up in the game by giving everyone a unique role, whereas I'd rather we keep things fresh by making everyone feel like they can contribute regardless of what roles there are in the game.

That or certain Mafia players just love pages and pages of rules, but I am probably too dumb to play that kind of game.

shivam
03-26-2010, 02:35 PM
i think that for every new role we add, we must remove an existing one.

demonkoala
03-26-2010, 02:57 PM
Man. To think Alpha Werewolf had almost no posts before Mafia started.

The world was more sane then.

Merus
03-26-2010, 04:58 PM
This is where we stand apart then. I believe that it's better to add roles, though I admit there's a certain peak after which any complexity worsens the game.

This is a matter of perception.

Not... really. It's a matter of game design.

I'm with Brick in the belief that the less roles there are, the better. I think OG Mafia, just Mafia, Citizens and a single Inspector is the way to go.

dtsund
03-26-2010, 05:04 PM
Count me in the 'don't have too many roles' camp. Though if we end up playing a megagame with 60 people, I'd support having multiple competing Mafia factions...

(Another example besides not jumping in Bionic Commando: Valve, in their Team Fortress 2 commentary, said they removed grenades from the game because while they sound good on paper, the game instantly became more fun with them gone.)

kaisel
03-26-2010, 05:16 PM
Not... really. It's a matter of game design.

I'm with Brick in the belief that the less roles there are, the better. I think OG Mafia, just Mafia, Citizens and a single Inspector is the way to go.

I'm still unsure about the Inspector, since it gives perfect information, and the best strategy is to form a bloc around 'em. I'd almost prefer that instead of an inspector, there's a role who knows that x amount of people are innocent and who they are, that way there'd be a good mix of trying to figure out who this person is, enough strategy to counter it (mafia could float their own candidate). I'm sure there's flaws with that, but I think it'd be interesting at some point.

Destil
03-26-2010, 05:30 PM
The inspector is a pretty key role and I don't have a base problem with him. One reason I was in favor of hiding the role of people lynched is that the town would never be sure that they were getting information from the real inspector. This is also why I sort of think just knowing the team of the lynched won't fix it, you know a citizen claiming to be the inspector vs. a mafia member.

I agree that less is more and to keep the game fun the roles should be simple, focused and balanced. The clouseau may be a way to help with this (thinks he's the inspector but he gets randomized results). I likewise enjoy the idea of randomizing the roles a little because you end up with something like two vigilantes, where you're no longer certain that they can just step forward and not be killed to prove themselves.

shivam
03-26-2010, 05:30 PM
i think my favorite game is the creating of the game. like right now, there are blocs forming and backroom deals and all sorts of mafioso shenanigans, and we haven't even gotten started yet!

Destil
03-26-2010, 06:00 PM
What's everyone's opinion on day one lynch? It's pretty clearly optimal for the citizens not to do so given the choice. My own take is that there should be some risk/reward beyond the standard chance of lynching a mafia member to it, to both drive tension and to encourage players to change how they play on day two (since the mafia will possibly do so after talking).

Alternately, a night phase before the first day. Perhaps we could even have some special roles that are limited to only acting during this first night (ideally none that can kill someone, since that's a bit cruel. Well, no one not named Silent Noise).

dwolfe
03-26-2010, 08:24 PM
What's everyone's opinion on day one lynch? It's pretty clearly optimal for the citizens not to do so given the choice. My own take is that there should be some risk/reward beyond the standard chance of lynching a mafia member to it, to both drive tension and to encourage players to change how they play on day two (since the mafia will possibly do so after talking).

Alternately, a night phase before the first day. Perhaps we could even have some special roles that are limited to only acting during this first night (ideally none that can kill someone, since that's a bit cruel. Well, no one not named Silent Noise).

Real quick: I'm in favour of less certainty. Mafia West is down to few enough players people can compute all possible outcomes and odds. That's...kinda boring, not exciting.

I'm in favour of a initial night phase, but not a first night kill. I wouldn't mind seeing 'twins' as a new role then though (i.e. two citizens that can communicate privately ONLY with each other at night), but that does add complexity, which isn't what we're shoot...
*ouch*

ok, i gotta go. Movie time.

Paul le Fou
03-26-2010, 10:53 PM
OK so, we got a lot of stuff on the table right now. Let's break this down.

The most popular (and sensible) suggested options as I've seen so far.

Angel
~Remove entirely
~Successful protection kills Angel
~Successful protection removes Angel's powers

Inspector
~Limit inspections
~Inform inspection targets that they've been inspected.
~Clothing articles
~replace with Mathematician-style (gets results of numbers based on a list)
~replace with Tracker-style - only finds out if person acted at night


Oracle
~Remove entirely
~Don't remove.
Not a whole lot here. Some weirdo stuff:
~Let them learn deceased roles on request only and limit their seeing? Works similar to above with splitting into more weaker roles instead of fewer more powerful ones.

Vigilante
~Limit kills
~~Total cap (per game)
~~Every other night or one per X nights
~Possible feedback - if he hits a mafia he dies, after a certain # of kills he dies

Possible new roles:
Mafia inspector - I kind of like this idea. It gives them a little more agency without effecting too strongly the day-phase game flow.

Mafia vigilante - hard to balance, would likely require limited turns. Or maybe something like "can only act if the town's vigilante does not"? This would put pressure on the vig to act, which could accelerate the game and have strategic ramifications.

Saboteur - This could work with our current ruleset but if we nerf/remove citizen roles the saboteur would be overkill. Possibly overcomplicates game/role setup and strategy beyond what people actually want to play.

Miller - our old buddy back for more! I still don't like the miller but it IS a possible counter to more inspector power. On the other hand with the possibility of multiple vigilantes this may be overkill and it's still kind of a fuck-you randomization.

Godfather - a normal mafioso who inspects as innocent. Possible to roll into the Mafia Inspector above.

Mechanics tweaks:
Lynch reports
~Faction only - removes some detail from the lynches. Possibly still enough info to work with such that it doesn't result in a functional change.
~No report. Nobody knows what the lynchee's status was. The more I think about this the more I like it.
~~Possible addendum: add a Coroner role that does find out lynch results. Full info or faction only.

Morning reports
~No longer reveal who killed whom, only a list of dead bodies. (This could work but at the same time, I wouldn't get to write kill skits! Sadface)
~Keep as-is, but remove details of successful angel protections, failed targets, failure to act, etc.

I am not sure whether implementing BOTH of the above would not be overkill. I could see it going either way. That said, I'm also comfortable going too far in the less information direction this game and adjusting later.

Game setup
Keep citizens in the dark as to how many of what roles are in. We've had suggestions from randomizing between 4 explicit setups, telling them absolutely nothing, and so on.
My personal favorite is "Tell them what roles are in but not how many of each." This works best with limited-use power roles, because then there may be 1 vigilante with 3 kills or 2 vigs or 3 with one each, for example. Same for inspectors with limited inspections. That way they know that they do in fact have (a) vigilante(s), but not how many.

Paul le Fou
03-26-2010, 10:59 PM
General opinion seems to be trending strongly towards "Less information," "less emphasis on power roles," "weaker power roles," and/or "fewer power roles."

Information breaks down into:
~As much or slightly less information, little/none of it confirmable/certifiable.
~Less information, period.




Now, one thing we have to be careful with. A lot of these things come up with synergy and we have to make sure we put together a whole package that works. For just one example, the saboteur would only work if we kept our current power role setup with very minor tweaks. If we drop our roles as much as others have talked about (esp. dropping angels) the Saboteur can become too powerful.

namelessentity
03-26-2010, 11:01 PM
Inspector
~Limit inspections
Did we have any other suggestions? I think this was the big one that people wanted to see addressed - it sure is for me - but I can't find any actual suggestions beyond limiting the number, or splitting the limited number across a number which is basically the same.


I had a suggestion, though not specifically for inspector. You limit his perfect information by only giving him general descriptions of murderers (not specifically mafia). It gives him an edge over citizens, but he still has to contend with guessing games.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 11:05 PM
One way you could nerf the Inspector is make him unprotected at night, so once he's revealed that'd be it. It makes sense in context - he's snooping around town late at night, so odds are he might have a run-in with whomever he's tailing and take a shot to the heart. Aside from that, I'm guessing the Miller and Traitor were introduced in other games in order to add some unreliability to his inspections, but I don't think that's the right way to go since there'd be no way to plan for it in the long run. It'd also be potentially game-breaking in the Traitor's case, since a false positive and a confirmed Inspector would guarantee his survival right to the bitter end.

If we're doing the whole limited power thing (which I'm not exactly all that enthusiastic about for the other roles), the Inspector seems like a good place to try it out. Maybe limit him to four-five inspections before he's revealed to the Mafia?

EDIT: Paul's right on all counts for the Saboteur. It'd work best if we included it with unmodified Angels and Vigilantes, while any hard limits put around them would be enough (or, personally, too much) to reign them in. It's really an either/or situation since one excludes the need for the other for balance, though I'm more inclined to add the Saboteur since said balancing would come more naturally in the form of a deterrent than a hard stop.

As for the Mafia Inspector/Vigilante, I'm leaning towards calling them the Informant and Assassin respectively. Not sure how I feel about them though, so I'll get back to you on that.

dtsund
03-26-2010, 11:05 PM
I'm still unsure about the Inspector, since it gives perfect information, and the best strategy is to form a bloc around 'em. I'd almost prefer that instead of an inspector, there's a role who knows that x amount of people are innocent and who they are, that way there'd be a good mix of trying to figure out who this person is, enough strategy to counter it (mafia could float their own candidate). I'm sure there's flaws with that, but I think it'd be interesting at some point.

This reminds me of a role I've heard of but never seen in use: the Mathematician. Once per game, he may send the GM a list of people, and the GM responds with the number of people in that list who are Mafia.

Also, I'd like to add to the list of possible morning reports. As is currently, except the GM makes no mention of successful angel saves (just say that the Mafia failed to kill, or the Vigilante failed to kill, not who they tried for).

Paul le Fou
03-26-2010, 11:06 PM
I had a suggestion, though not specifically for inspector. You limit his perfect information by only giving him general descriptions of murderers (not specifically mafia). It gives him an edge over citizens, but he still has to contend with guessing games.

I saw that and liked it, but feel it would be a bit too much - it would almost become a whole different game at that point. Which I'd also like to try out sooner or later - I've seen like bodysnatcher ideas and this Guess Who idea and so on that might be fun. I think for now we're working on minor tweaks.

I dunno, what does everyone else think about the character descriptions?

Destil
03-26-2010, 11:10 PM
Other inspector related options:

Lynch and Learn: You only learn if a lynch victim is a plain vanilla citizen or not. Not their role. Make him impossible to verify.
Inspector Clouseau: A second fake inspector who gets random results. Reduces the certainty, but it's always possible the clouseau gets lucky the first time... "they're on a collision course to wackyness!"
False Positive: Have a miller (inspects guilty, thinks he's a citizen) in the game.
False Negative: Have a godfather in the game (inspects innocent, thinks he's a mafia).
Limited Success: After X successful inspections the inspector becomes a citizen. Bonus if it's random or if another player random citizen becomes the inspector.
Inspector Gadget: An otherwise normal citizen (Penny) learns the results of the inspectors inspections, not the inspector.

Garrison
03-26-2010, 11:13 PM
Well, I guess I'll go ahead and try again and see what people think about my inspector nerf.

Whoever the inspector investigates gets a PM telling them that they have been snooped on. For citizens, it lets them know the inspector is still in the game, for the mafia, it gives them a chance to preempt anything that the inspector may throw their way.

Paul le Fou
03-26-2010, 11:19 PM
Well, I guess I'll go ahead and try again and see what people think about my inspector nerf.

Whoever the inspector investigates gets a PM telling them that they have been snooped on. For citizens, it lets them know the inspector is still in the game, for the mafia, it gives them a chance to preempt anything that the inspector may throw their way.

Hmm. I may like this. I actually suggested it for the mafia inspector but somehow didn't make the connection as a possibility for the actual inspector.

If a mafia knows they've been investigated, they can try to come out pre-emptively and fake it. This could drive the real one out, or let the mafia manipulate the game, or more.



HEY GUYS: I'm going to continue to update the post above with possibilities (and possibly repost it for new pages). When it gets pretty full, I propose we use it as a ballot and take a vote. It won't necessarily decide the game, but it will let the new narrator decide based on the trends that people want to work with.

Tock
03-26-2010, 11:33 PM
I like the idea of depowering the Inspector a bit by either having both a Miller and a Godfather, or both a Citizen and a Mafia Inspector. Maybe I'm just stuck on that idea because of Paul's Infernal Affairs reference.

This is a little premature, but another thing to consider in this thread is game scale. I'm intrigued by an Angel-less game if we have roughly Round One levels of participation (twenty-five players or so). If we do a huge game with forty players, do we still need to remove them entirely? Does this change if we give the Mafia two night kills? Etc.

PapillonReel
03-26-2010, 11:36 PM
I like the idea of inspect players knowing they've been tailed. It adds a little bit of paranoia on the Mafia side while giving them a clue on how far along the Inspector is.

One thing I've been curious about for a while: would anyone be up for a third faction somewhere down the line? Mafia 3 would probably be too soon for it, since we're still hashing out a balanced two team game, but sometime after might be a good chance for it once we start setting up larger games. I'm thinking adding a group of Warlocks, with their win condition being to collectively predict five or so lynches correctly to offer up as sacrifices or somesuch, but that might be a bit too superstition-y for people's tastes.

Anyway, no matter what, I just want to emphasis one thing: The Narrator should have final say in the ruleset for their game. No matter how popular an option may be for something or unpopular another, they should choose the rules they're most comfortable with so they can maximize their full creative license when planning the game. The catch is that they should publicize the rules they want to use when it comes time to vote on the next game's mod, so that everyone knows what to expect going in when they pick their choice of Narrator.

Garrison
03-26-2010, 11:43 PM
Anyway, no matter what, I just want to emphasis one thing: The Narrator should have final say in the ruleset for their game. No matter how popular an option may be for something or unpopular another, they should choose the rules they're most comfortable with so they can maximize their full creative license when planning the game.

Absolutely agreed. They're the ones putting the metaphorical blood and tears into the game and as such, should get to run it to their liking. I would hope they'd get their ideas from us for the most part, but I'm fine with pretty much anything.

With that said, you will all know and fear me when it comes down to Mafia 8 when I run the show. Nothing but Tree Stumps and you will all enjoy it.

Destil
03-26-2010, 11:48 PM
One thing I've been curious about for a while: would anyone be up for a third faction somewhere down the line? Mafia 3 would probably be too soon for it, since we're still hashing out a balanced two team game, but sometime after might be a good chance for it once we start setting up larger games. I'm thinking adding a group of Warlocks, with their win condition being to collectively predict five or so lynches correctly to offer up as sacrifices or somesuch, but that might be a bit too superstition-y for people's tastes.

I'm waiting for you to run just such a game, PapillonReel. You've mentioned it before and I'll be the first in line. Especially if we keep the roles pretty basic, there's also some cross-play we can do with three factions and the basic rule set...

Alpha Werewolf
03-27-2010, 12:49 AM
Man. To think Alpha Werewolf had almost no posts before Mafia started.

The world was more sane then.

I had a couple hundred before. But mafia, man, it's my SOUL.

It seems you've all finally caught on to what I'm trying to say. I've got nothing left to add to this discussion at the moment.

Merus
03-27-2010, 09:54 AM
One of the things I've noticed is that the way things are set up, the only meaningful impact the Narrator has on the game is the way the roles are laid out at the start. If the Narrator chooses poorly, they're pretty much screwed.

dwolfe
03-27-2010, 11:04 AM
Do you want the narrator to have some role or impact in the future, merus? I've played games with a NPC that the narrator controls, that interacts with players (by predefined rules to prevent favouritism, but still). Honestly, it seems a thankless task other than reading along and watching what goes on, since you have to be around to manage it. Not sure why people do it.

Comb Stranger
03-27-2010, 11:17 AM
Not sure why people do it.

To have the cheat sheet. I'm sure it reads a lot differently when you know slappy is mafia, bingo is the oracle, etc.

dtsund
03-27-2010, 11:24 AM
To have the cheat sheet. I'm sure it reads a lot differently when you know slappy is mafia, bingo is the oracle, etc.

Exactly. The job is actually kind of fun.

Merus
03-27-2010, 07:49 PM
That is the major perk, yes.

dwolfe
03-27-2010, 10:01 PM
while the major drawback is having me in your game :)

i see how running it could be fun now, though, thx guys.

Brickroad
03-27-2010, 10:13 PM
Exactly. Making fun of Brickroad for being a shitty inspector is actually kind of fun.

Mr. J
03-27-2010, 10:17 PM
That is the major perk, yes.

Man does it make for those "don't do it he's ____" moments! When I ran a mafia game one time I wanted to slap every single townsperson at least once.

dwolfe
03-27-2010, 11:56 PM
That happens regardless of knowing people's roles, dude.

Brickroad
03-28-2010, 12:05 AM
Mafia East just went to night and seems to be winding down anyway, and I have no work to do tonight.

I'm gonna read Mafia West. I'm gonna do it, dudes.

Alpha Werewolf
03-28-2010, 08:47 AM
Mafia East just went to night and seems to be winding down anyway, and I have no work to do tonight.

I'm gonna read Mafia West. I'm gonna do it, dudes.

Yes. Yessssssss.

Brickroad
03-28-2010, 08:48 AM
Yes. Yessssssss.

SPOILER: I didn't do it.

Alpha Werewolf
03-28-2010, 09:10 AM
SPOILER: I didn't do it.

NUUUUUUUUUUUU

Dizzy
03-28-2010, 10:46 AM
I don't blame him. These games are not meant to read backwards but lived forward. [/kierkegaard]

Doing so would probably give the most disciplined reader an intense and vibrant aneurysm.

dwolfe
03-28-2010, 12:22 PM
I don't blame him. These games are not meant to read backwards but lived forward. [/kierkegaard]

Doing so would probably give the most disciplined reader an intense and vibrant aneurysm.

I'm probably going to make this my last mafia game here just to prevent aneurysms occurring in other players and future readers. The past couple pages have been craaaaazy, guys!

namelessentity
03-28-2010, 03:40 PM
I'm probably going to make this my last mafia game here just to prevent aneurysms occurring in other players and future readers. The past couple pages have been craaaaazy, guys!

sorry to lose you, you really got a raw deal. But hey, you made it a lot farther this time around

DemoWeasel
03-28-2010, 06:09 PM
Hahahah, this shit is in the bag.

dwolfe
03-28-2010, 11:33 PM
sorry to lose you, you really got a raw deal. But hey, you made it a lot farther this time around

Let's get one thing clear. I had fun playing again, and I'm not rage-quitting or anything.

It's just that I was accused for no particular reason other than I'm...well...me, afaik.

I'm going to pick at any idea anyone in the game has, and find the low-probability weak points in any plan, just to be sure people know all the possibilities; people seem to get paranoid and don't realize why I'm doing it. I have zero respect for authority. Perhaps I'm utterly inept in explaining my ideas even when I can state them in a single sentence, but I find that slightly improbable.

This is how I think, by training and by nature. Assumptions are the worst thing anyone can do. They need examined, and even if accepted, should be consciously accepted. Brickroad hammered this all the damn time in the first game, so why is it so hard to hear it from me?

I was playing along as if I were a citizen this whole time. I gave public analysis of things all game, and always explained why I did something truthfully. So if I'm going to get accused for exactly that reason every single game, regardless of my actual role, what's the point? It just hurts whichever team forced to deal with me. I felt really bad when brickroad said how much it threw him when he lynched me during game 1, because I wasn't trying to be suspicious then either. I just don't get you guys.

I just seem to derail the damn game even when I explicitly try to get it back on track this game. There's like...6/25 pages devoted to my pointing out that investigators could lie according to the rules and people freaking out over that fact.

I'd LOVE for someone to tell me that's incorrect, guys.

Westside still rules, y'all :)

But I guess I'm trying to understand why I can't seem to communicate with you guys so I can try to work on it in general. I can't logic my way out of this, so I'd honestly love some feedback.

Brickroad
03-28-2010, 11:38 PM
bawwwww

gg bro

Alpha Werewolf
03-28-2010, 11:48 PM
dwolfe, when you pointed out how Nich COULD be lying for every single post, you were practically confirmed scum to me. Just sayin'.

VorpalEdge
03-29-2010, 12:25 AM
Going on about how Nich could be the inspector, but lying about the verdict, is a bad idea, because yeah it's possible, but it's an extraordinarily bad move for him, especially for someone whose hunches (vaterite, epithet) had proven to be incorrect. If he was wrong about his hunch and Byron was innocent, that could have sabotaged the whole game by getting him killed, and etc etc. I can't take such a concept seriously because the only person I can imagine playing that badly is Silent Noise. Yeah, that's another assumption, but it's one I'll make without regrets. Once you hit a low enough probability you really shouldn't mention it, theoretically possible or not. If you must, mention it once, let everybody dismiss it, and then drop it. Just not worth talking about, since you have to make assumptions at some point.

This is how I think, by training and by nature. Assumptions are the worst thing anyone can do. They need examined, and even if accepted, should be consciously accepted.

We had consciously accepted it. Or at least I had. Seriously, that was the reason nobody talked about it until you... switched your vote in protest? good job. I'm never going to believe that that was on principle.

McDohl
03-29-2010, 12:54 AM
Is there a decent website to read mafia rules variants on gameplay/roles?

I have a theme in my head. I'm wondering if I could tailor it appropriately.

PapillonReel
03-29-2010, 01:00 AM
Here (http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page) you (http://www.epicmafia.com/instruction) go (http://www.princeton.edu/~mafia/).

McDohl
03-29-2010, 01:09 AM
Here (http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page) you (http://www.epicmafia.com/instruction) go (http://www.princeton.edu/~mafia/).

My hero!

That wiki has some hilarious articles.

shivam
03-29-2010, 01:15 AM
presenting shivam's stripped down ruleset--
bad guys-
mafia
good guys-
citizens
vigilante who shows up as guilty
inspector
oracle
angels who die in place of victim OR only one angel to prevent collusion.

Lynch is optional day 1, and only oracle knows if lynch victim was good or ill.
makes game much more paranoid inducing and tense, and stacks shit against the citizenry, as it should be.

Brickroad
03-29-2010, 01:24 AM
presenting shivam's stripped down ruleset--

Needs more Tree Stumps.

But no seriously I dig it and I would play that.

Destil
03-29-2010, 01:42 AM
Well, that was close. From day 2 my nightmare endgame was that I would be one of three people standing on the last day, along with Brickroad and PapillonReel and would loose the town the game by choosing wrong. Glad I avoided that (though it wasn't as scary after I proved it was mathematically impossible for Brick to be mafia yesterday).

Ah, well. Time to start in on West. I can actually get some work done tomorrow, too.

Brickroad
03-29-2010, 01:45 AM
You played well, Destil. I look forward to more of your shenanigans in round three. =)

Destil
03-29-2010, 01:51 AM
You played well, Destil. I look forward to more of your shenanigans in round three. =)

I'm actually really hoping I get a chance to run it, but I'm not planning on jumping line in front of Paul or Pappy...

Destil
03-29-2010, 02:00 AM
Most likely, but I'm not voting for myself when other people have been waiting in line.

Alpha Werewolf
03-29-2010, 02:13 AM
I assume game 3's GM will be decided with a poll, same as game 2's was. The GM/ruleset with the most votes will run the game. (I thought about putting my own ruleset forward for a candidate, but I'd much rather play in the game. This one's gonna be awesome.)

I suggest two games and two mods. A big game may sound good, but in practice it's too long.

PapillonReel
03-29-2010, 02:13 AM
Speaking of which, when should we start up the next poll? East is on the cusp of a Citizen victory and West isn't too far behind from being decided either way, so we're getting to the point pretty soon where we'll have to decide on where to take round 3.

So far, it looks like the people interested in GMing are:
•Alpha Werewolf
•Destil
•Garrison?
•PapillonReel (myself)
•Paul le Fou
•shivam?

I think that's everyone, though if not feel free to correct me on it. Also, one thing to consider is should we continue with splitting the games down the middle or go for a much larger game for round 3? Maybe we could compromise and set a limit on players next time just so it doesn't get too big, though I'm not sure how I feel about excluding people after an arbitrary cut-off.

Brickroad
03-29-2010, 02:16 AM
I'd like to wait until both games conclude, myself. Give us a week or so to decompress, catch up on the game we didn't play, drink in the postgame, etc.

Alpha Werewolf
03-29-2010, 02:18 AM
Actually... My game DOES have a limit on players. I designed it for exactly 20 players. There's the chance of changing the setup, but right now, that's it.

McDohl
03-29-2010, 02:42 AM
I'm on the fence about GMing. I only got the idea in my head a few hours ago, and I don't know if I'd be any good at it, but I do have an amusing theme in mind.

I need to sleep on it.

Destil
03-29-2010, 03:18 AM
I think my biggest regret is that I stopped roleplaying on day 3 due to being too caught up in getting myself lynched. I had my farewell post all planed out, but now it's too late. Ah, well.

Merus
03-29-2010, 09:21 AM
I feel like, if people are interested in a stripped-down rule set that eliminates some of the advantages the citizens have, getting rid of the vigilante entirely would be an excellent move. Right now it is essentially a free lynch for the town that the mafia can't manipulate. It's a good role if you're going to give everyone powers (and if you're going to have lots of roles, you might as well give everyone powers), though.

Sprite
03-29-2010, 09:45 AM
I don't see a need for an arbitrary cut-off (if it gets really big we can split again, though I think a big game would be fun--who cares if it takes a long time? we're not going anywhere) but I do want to dissuade people who don't intend to play from signing up. I have nothing against the guys in West who dropped out or rarely post, I'm sure they're fine people, but it does put a damper on the game when you have to wait 12 hours for someone, anyone, to vote.

QFT. Well, somewhat. I'm sitting out the next game because of time constraints. If you don't anticipate being able to make at least one meaningful post every 48 hours and weighing in on a vote within 24 hours, you probably shouldn't play.

(barring temporary stuff like vacation weekends and such, of course :) )

Garrison
03-29-2010, 11:31 AM
So far, it looks like the people interested in GMing are:
•Garrison?


Nah, I don't really want to GM this time around. I'm going to wait a couple more games before I throw my hat in the ring.

spineshark
03-29-2010, 11:33 AM
So far, it looks like the people interested in GMing are:
I would still be interested as well.

PapillonReel
03-29-2010, 11:37 AM
Okie-doke. Updated list:
•Alpha Werewolf
•Destil
•Garrison?
•McDohl?
•PapillonReel
•Paul le Fou
•spineshark
•shivam?

Anyone else?

namelessentity
03-29-2010, 12:08 PM
presenting shivam's stripped down ruleset--
bad guys-
mafia
good guys-
citizens
vigilante who shows up as guilty
inspector
oracle
angels who die in place of victim OR only one angel to prevent collusion.

Lynch is optional day 1, and only oracle knows if lynch victim was good or ill.
makes game much more paranoid inducing and tense, and stacks shit against the citizenry, as it should be.

What ratio would you be considering? Taking out the ability to know how many mafia are still in the game would create a huge advantage for the mafia with the current ratio

McDohl
03-29-2010, 12:56 PM
What about this for a role variant:

Can ask the GM once per night how many # of a certain role are remaining. The idea is you could start off a game with an unknown quantity of roles, but a player could find out how many are remaining though the course of survival. This weakens the oracle a bit while throwing in a twist, but it doesn't make them ineffective.

Garrison
03-29-2010, 01:00 PM
Would this new role be called a Preacher since they're essentially talking to god? I don't know how I feel about it as of now, but there isn't any harm in trying it.

dtsund
03-29-2010, 01:05 PM
I'd like to wait until both games conclude, myself. Give us a week or so to decompose, catch up on the game we didn't play, drink in the postgame, etc.

VorpalEdge
03-29-2010, 01:15 PM
If I ran a variant (which I won't; don't add my name to the list), it would be the following:

-Inspector has 2 or 3 shots. The Inspector Clouseau achievement indicates hard mode! Brick was playing on a beta server. This should still give the inspector a way to make an impact on the game with the terrible hit rates we seem to have, while destroying the traditional way of creating a voting bloc.
-1 miller, 1 vigilante. Both show up as mafia. Vigilante gets two kills. Just to be a jackass, the gm pms the miller with the fact that they're the miller at 2 votes away from a lynch against them.
-Angels get unlimited protection attempts until their first successful protection. After that, they are regular citizens. Number of angels stays the same. Choose carefully! Both angels can be used up on one mafia or vigilante hit.
-Lynching reveals a person's allegiance, but not role.
-No oracle.
-Exact count of # of mafia to # of citizens is not known.

I don't think a variant where lynches do not reveal allegiance is a good idea. We seem to be removing or otherwise nerfing pretty much every other source of information the citizens have. While I think the game needs to be a lot more paranoid, I'd like for it to still be possible for the citizens to win.

Dizzy
03-29-2010, 03:29 PM
I'd like to wait until both games conclude, myself. Give us a week or so to decompress, catch up on the game we didn't play, drink in the postgame, etc.

One thing I'm looking forward to is the Mafia Dialogues post-game. It would break my heart if East mafia didn't keep a record.

Merus
03-29-2010, 07:55 PM
I have access to all the mafia dialogues, and will make them available at the end of the game.

I've also got the bits of flavour text I sent at the start of the game, the flavour text I've sent for inspections and vigilante kills, and the dreams the Oracles have had.

Comb Stranger
03-29-2010, 08:59 PM
Long-winded idea: We could do a Thing game. There's only one infected to start, but instead of killing civvies, they infect them, and make more. Who gets infected isn't announced, just that someone's bloody clothes were found overnight.

Civilians may nominate people to be executed as normal. In addition, since Infected numbers grow, the Inspector's role becomes a public vote. Civilians nominate during the day to test one player during the night phase; if they're infected, they're automatically executed, if they're clean, it's announced in the morning. A player up for testing cannot be the target of infection that night, since they're under constant watch. Since innocence isn't permanent, this only works to validate someone until the night after testing; they can be infected afterward as normal, so effectively return to being unknowns. This eliminates the civilian bloc strategy, and requires a more offensive, investigative approach.

There are no Angels, only Immunes. Immunes can't be infected, and attempts to do so fail. They don't begin knowing who they are, and if lynched or killed by Vigilantes, they show up as civilians. Their role is only announced when an attempt to infect them fails. Since there are no Angels, this means the Vigilante can never safely come out; doing so is simply an invitation to be infected. Infected Vigilantes lose their ability to kill in the night phase, as the parasite only wants to create more hosts.

This variant is sort of the inverse of existing games, in that the Infected grow a bloc. The Civilians have the ability to kill two or three Infected per day, quickly winning the game, but have to operate in a state of constant, crippling paranoia.

For example, if there's three Infected and seven Civilians, the Civvies could go all-out, lynching, testing and shotgunning. If they score with all three, they win the game. If they whiff on all three counts, now theres four infected and five civilians, with the Civilians only gaining temporary trust in one of their own. They could easily lose the game that night, if they don't rethink and turn it around immediately.

Destil
03-29-2010, 09:09 PM
Comb Stranger's
The Thing

Sprite
03-29-2010, 09:16 PM
I definitely want to try a Werewolf/Thing/Vampire/Bodysnatcher/Cult variant. Maybe for Game 4.

spineshark
03-29-2010, 09:19 PM
In the Vampire version, Silent Noise sparkles if he steps outside during the day.

namelessentity
03-29-2010, 10:01 PM
Thing

It's one of those ideas that when you hear it, you think they're mad. But after a while it seems like the greatest idea ever.

Brickroad
03-30-2010, 05:49 AM
I would totally play a Comb Stranger-approved game of Infected! New Zombie.

Alpha Werewolf
03-30-2010, 09:30 AM
It sounds neat, but then I realize this: If you're infected and then the town wins the next day, that's no fun at all. In fact, it kinda kills the fun :(

Sprite
03-30-2010, 10:39 AM
It sounds neat, but then I realize this: If you're infected and then the town wins the next day, that's no fun at all. In fact, it kinda kills the fun :(

*shrug* I have fun whether I win or lose. Don't get me wrong, I want to win, but a sudden team switch at the end wouldn't bother me that much. If anything I'd find it funny. The narrative that arises out of each game is the best part for me.

Calorie Mate
03-30-2010, 12:56 PM
The Thing, uh, thing sounds fun and I think we should do it alongside one or two standard Mafia games. (Mostly because I don't want to wait all the way to Round 4 to try it!)

vaterite
03-30-2010, 01:45 PM
Great Idea

Great Idea!

Rai
03-30-2010, 03:13 PM
The growing threat.

This was an idea I was kicking around a few days back actually, and I'd love to play in it. I was also considering throwing out the suggestion of a Battlestar Galactica Boardgame-esque play through, where there would be two or three mafia members for the first few days, but then another group of civilians would turn out as mafia after a certain point. These sleeper agents would be pre-determined, so the mafia could accidentally bump off one of the sleepers, but civilians could also theoretically pull off a win before the new agents appear.

Anyway, yes, regardless of what happens, I am looking forward to next game. Hopefully school won't be as stressful as it has been this go around.

vaterite
03-30-2010, 09:29 PM
I was also considering throwing out the suggestion of a Battlestar Galactica Boardgame-esque play through, where there would be two or three mafia members for the first few days, but then another group of civilians would turn out as mafia after a certain point.


It wouldn't be very BSG-esque if the sleeper agents were known beforehand..........grumble grumble........final five........grumble grumble.

Rai
03-30-2010, 09:31 PM
It wouldn't be very BSG-esque if the sleeper agents were known beforehand..........grumble grumble........final five........grumble grumble.

No, no, they wouldn't be announced publicly, the GM would just keep the names sequestered off from the rest of the group. That way, no one knows until the turn.

Of course, the twist could be that everyone was mafia. Or that no one was mafia.

Comb Stranger
03-30-2010, 09:44 PM
Or it was all a holodeck simulation.

Alpha Werewolf
03-30-2010, 10:10 PM
Will be away for ~a week. See you mafiosi later!

Paul le Fou
03-31-2010, 09:45 AM
Hey, I'm just popping in to say I'm travelling around a lot and checking in on this thread when I can. At the end of the week I'll be back in action.

Also I think the Thing idea's been mentioned a couple times before and I still think it sounds pretty great. I don't know how playing in two similar games at the same time would go, though. It could get confusing really fast, but it might be worth a shot(?)(!)

Calorie Mate
03-31-2010, 11:11 AM
These sleeper agents would be pre-determined, so the mafia could accidentally bump off one of the sleepers, but civilians could also theoretically pull off a win before the new agents appear.

I was with you until this bit.

The cool thing about the BSG board game - besides being a Cylon from the beginning - is when you've got someone working really hard for the human side, everyone trusts them...and then they find out they're sleeper agents. I'd like to instead make a certain percentage of the remaining civilians sleeper agents when the time comes; say, when half the players have died, suddenly one or two more or sleeper agents. That would be better, because you can never fully trust someone, even after proving their loyalty earlier in the game.

Destil
03-31-2010, 11:30 PM
Garg, why did I try and be clever and go for Rube instead of just sticking to my guns and lynching Paul yesterday. Ah, well.

Merus
04-01-2010, 04:49 AM
I am sorely, sorely tempted to just call West for Nich right now. Not whatever team he's on, just Nich.

Brickroad
04-01-2010, 04:50 AM
Is he really posting lolcats? He told me he was posting lolcats.

spineshark
04-01-2010, 04:50 AM
He does seem to have a lot of free time on his hands at the moment. I hope he's okay!

Dizzy
04-01-2010, 04:57 AM
Uh-oh. What personality are we dealing with now?

I can't wait to do my cheerleader thumping post-East game.

Merus
04-01-2010, 05:15 AM
Is he really posting lolcats? He told me he was posting lolcats.

He is posting lolcat digests.

DemoWeasel
04-02-2010, 11:03 AM
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c87/OrangeFox0/1224518498gescheitert_tanzwiesel-1.jpg

Aeonus
04-02-2010, 11:25 AM
I have to say, you guys over in West are doing a fantastic job of avenging my death.

shivam
04-02-2010, 11:27 AM
these games have been going for a LONG time now. aren't we done yet?

Dizzy
04-02-2010, 11:58 AM
The one weaselly little mafiaoso in the East game is taking an inordinate amount of time making his/her decision. That and everyone seems to have suddenly lost time to play these games. What a weak, boring ending to all this. Not like the first game at all.

PapillonReel
04-02-2010, 12:02 PM
East has pretty much already won, we just need to wait for Merus to get the next day started to either a) win by shotgun, or b) lynch the last man standing.

VorpalEdge
04-02-2010, 12:03 PM
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d123/sirmaur/citizencat.png

Dizzy
04-02-2010, 12:05 PM
West is officially cooler than East thanks to their lolcat gaming.

PapillonReel
04-02-2010, 12:05 PM
http://i863.photobucket.com/albums/ab194/PapillonReel3/Screenshot2010-04-02at20449PM.png

PapillonReel
04-02-2010, 01:40 PM
Funny thing is, I already got my dreams for the night from Merus, so I know exactly how the next day is gonna turn out. I'm just not allowed to say anything yet or risk spoiling the whole thing. :(

On another note, I feel pretty bad for the hand dealt to the Mafia this time around, the guys in East especially. As of day 3, they wracked up a huge lead after nailing one of our power roles and stirring up paranoia from the resulting reveals, to the point where they could've won by a comfortable margin even after Mr. J's reveal. But then a string of bad luck (BodhiTraveller's shotgunning, Dizzy's two consecutive saves, etc.) ended up blowing their lead and now they're stuck in a no-win scenario, forced to either endure a slow, painful loss or surrender outright. I'll pour one out for them - they did good.

dwolfe
04-02-2010, 03:44 PM
Is that really better than missing power roles for five straight days? The odds of that were under 5% even on day four's miss. Plus Westside was down a man from day one due to Marion :(

Phantoon
04-02-2010, 04:19 PM
Lolcat digests are the best thing to happen to Mafia.

Dizzy
04-02-2010, 04:22 PM
(Dizzy's two consecutive saves, etc.)

First time, shame on me. Second time, shame on them.

SpoonyGundam
04-02-2010, 09:37 PM
Plus Westside was down a man from day one due to Marion :(

To be fair, eastside was in practically the same situation. Silent Noise somehow managed to be mafia in both games. They just waited until the next day to kill his replacement.

Destil
04-02-2010, 09:46 PM
To be fair, eastside was in practically the same situation. Silent Noise somehow managed to be mafia in both games. They just waited until the next day to kill his replacement.

Actually, we even got some good information from it, we just didn't act on it; (I was ready to lynch Paul for his suggesting Noise be left alive, even though I agreed at the time)... Man, I hope these wrap up soon, I want to get into the post game reports.

BodhiTraveller
04-02-2010, 09:55 PM
I decided to not say anything until the game was over, since I was not sure how the remaining players would try to spin the game. I would like to add a few cents to the conversation about East once it is done for good, but since this is also the thread of 'things to do differently in the next mafia game,' I will say that the single most interesting thing I can think of is allowing the members of the mafia to communicate secretly with each other during the day.

This would elevate the potential for dirty tricks, give the town a run for their money, and make the whole thing more interesting for spectators.

The major advantage forum mafia has over a game played at a party is the ability for the mafia to privately discuss during the night-- why should this potential for collusion end at night?

Merus
04-02-2010, 09:59 PM
I'll admit that Silent Noise was intended to be a handicap for Paul, although they were both drawn as Mafia by the computer. I did move a couple of people around, who were Mafia players in game 1 that the computer had drawn as Mafia again.

All in all, I agree that the deck is currently stacked in favour of the Citizens, and part of that is my fault. I should have gone with my instincts and not duplicated the roles from game 1; I originally intended to have two inspectors and one angel, but when we split the games two inspectors seemed overpowered. Still, I feel like East proved that even one Angel is enough to distort the game in the town's favour.

Destil
04-02-2010, 10:09 PM
I think the smaller game ultimately helped the citizens in both. There just weren't that many places left for the mafia to hide by the end, we got lucky pretty early and could afford the extra shotgunning and west has had an active inspector whittling down the unknowns one way or another all game...

Yeah, I'd love to see roles mixed up a bit and citizen's information scrambled too...

gamin
04-02-2010, 10:20 PM
Fun game, and that was a great ending Merus. Thanks for hosting!

Merus
04-02-2010, 10:23 PM
As you'll see from the Mafia speakeasies, the Mafia were extremely skittish about hitting power roles. The power roles are balanced by the ease of which they can communicate their findings; allowing them to claim and then survive for half the game inevitably distorts the game in favour of the citizens. Even in the East game, where there was only one Angel, knowing there was an Angel out there was enough to keep the Mafia away until it was too late.

I feel like the Vigilante isn't as interesting as it should be, either - at the moment, it's basically a second lynch, and the Vigilante takes orders from the town. West made it basically explicit, as they started nominating Vigilante targets along with their accusations.

My feeling is that forum Mafia basically doesn't work - a competent Mafia player (i.e. not Silent Noise) is indistinguishable from a citizen based purely on their votes. The only way I can see to smoke a Mafia player out is to watch who they align with; in both games there were deliberate decisions to align with certain people. This is sort of hard, and a good deal harder than the RL version where you watch body language. Even putting that aside, night phase is brutal on the Internet, and necessary; I had several power roles not get back to me until the end of night phase, Guesty. I think these two aspects are what causes forum mafia to rapidly spiral into Epic Mafia, where nearly everyone has a power role (thereby alleviating the boredom during the long night phase) and the game is very system-driven. On the other hand, I suspect that roles that change people's alignment are much more viable in forum mafia; I'd be very interested to try a The Thing game for that reason, as I suspect it'd work much better than Mafia.

I'm curious to hear what people thought of the voting scheme - it's hard to get a bead on how it affected the game, which perhaps means that it worked.

I feel like the biggest success in terms of the rules was the day one forced lynch - both lynches ended up being critically important, a far cry from the initial impression that it was going to end up being 'random'.

PapillonReel
04-02-2010, 10:25 PM
Hey West: We didn't have to replace any of our players because of inactivity the entire time!

Also: We won even with a handicap! Yeah.

Destil
04-02-2010, 10:26 PM
I greatly preferred the new voting, especially for potentially larger games. It's faster and the spread out votes was actually a key part of my long-term strategy...

Sprite
04-02-2010, 10:26 PM
Hey East: We won with six citizens alive to your four, and we didn't lose a single power role the entire way through.

Only because your Mafia gave up :P

At least we escaped the squid! for now...

DemoWeasel
04-02-2010, 10:28 PM
shut

shut it up, you

"shut it up, me."

Anyway, wheee.

PapillonReel
04-02-2010, 10:28 PM
Alice sure was a good angel, wasn't she!

Still 1 for 3, though, which is better than you weaselly Westies.

DemoWeasel
04-02-2010, 10:29 PM
There was only one of those ;)

Destil
04-02-2010, 10:34 PM
At least we escaped the squid! for now...

It was an illithid conspiracy all along! How did I miss it?

(I'm totally for running game three with the squid flavor text...)

Merus
04-02-2010, 10:48 PM
I didn't really intend to end the game with a town summoning a Great Old One; initially I decided that, because I'd been a bit cruel in East's flavour text, I'd just make that one the 'creepy' town to differentiate them, and then I got the idea that West should be responsible for the horror in East. This was foiled somewhat by the West town winning instead of the Mafia.

Incidentally, flavour text for the roles:

Angel

It's clear to you that God has forsaken his flock. You've followed all His commandments, you've turned the other cheek and exalted your fellow man, and yet life grows worse for you and all those around you. The thrice-cursed Cosa Nostra visit your house, and the others in your village, every fortnight, demanding tribute; and yet, God does not strike them down. There's not enough food to go around, even before the visits from the Family, and yet while the towns prays they go hungry. God will not provide. But the greatest burden is the one that took your wife and baby boy away from you; however God is testing you, He has broken you.

And so, when you saw the poster promising a new life, in a new colony on the Sicilian coast, you leapt at the chance. You have nothing left to lose, except your breath.

As it turns out, you may soon lose even that, for in the east waits the Devil himself...

Oracle

The dreams started when you were barely of age; your best friend, Florica, the girl you were to marry some day, disappeared as the caravans moved south, through the mountains. You were the one who raised the alarm, in a roundabout way; you'd dreamt of her slipping on a rock and falling, then sprouting wings and taking flight. She looked at you and smiled, blood spurting out of a wound on her right temple. You told your mother about your dream, and she laughed it off; perhaps it was a sign that you were seeing her grow into womenhood, she said. Let's find her, and we'll have breakfast together, she said.

They found her at the bottom of a ravine, that afternoon. Her head had been crushed from the impact.

You kept your dreams to yourself from then on.

You left the caravan, eventually, and moved to Florence, where you worked as a patent clerk for a time. Occasionally, you'd have another dream, someone you'd seen at the office, their head sparking with light until it snuffed itself out. You'd grown used to these dreams, eventually, and passed off your dire predictions as cynicism and an eye for naivety, when new elements started creeping in: one poor genius was clutching a paper train ticket; another had wallpapered his house with posters proclaiming "A NEW LIFE IN SICILY".

Two days ago, you dreamed of Florica. It was sunrise. She was dressed in white, standing in a newly-constructed seaside town, her wings wrapped around her body. Storm clouds brewed on the horizon, red lightning flashing between them. She was fully grown, as beautiful as she would have been had she placed her foot somewhere different that night. In her hands was a silver train ticket that blazed with the light of a thousand stars, with midnight black printing: "A NEW LIFE IN SICILY". She looked straight at you and whispered with her perfect lips: "Come to me."

Yesterday, the posters went up that you'd dreamed of. Today, you handed in your two weeks notice. In three weeks, you move to Sicily. One way or another, there you will find Florica again.

Mafia

None of you know why the Boss has called this meeting. None of you have much in common; some of you haven't even seen each other before. Eventually, you're led into an opulent office, with six beautiful wood and leather chairs arranged in front of a luxurious oak desk. It's a good life in the Family.

Although, the Boss explains when you're seated, not for long.

It seems someone in government has disrespected the Family and all it does for Sicily, and has hired Tuscan contractors to build a railway line. They're building a new settlement, to the east, to prepare to house the workers for a rail extension along the far coast of Sicily. It's a lot of money, and a lot of work, that should have gone to us. If the Family does not have a response, everyone else is going to get it into their heads that we have grown lenient, that maybe they can skip a payment or ignore our suggestions, and soon the Family will not be able to provide.

The Family has chosen you, and your compatriots, to make an example of this new town, to let the Sicilian government know just how much of a mistake it was to disrespect the Cosa Nostra.

Your train for the new colony departs tomorrow. Pack swiftly.

Vigilante

The store your great-great-grandfather is being consumed by flames, and all you can do is watch. Your helplessness feeds your anger - you didn't have the cash in the drawer to pay the heavies that came around for protection, and when you came back from the safe, they were gone. You're seething so much, you can barely hear the bystanders talk amongst themselves, although one conversation catches your attention.

"The mafia must be getting desperate these days. Did you hear about the railway?"
"The what?"
"The railway. Apparently the Rail Authority refused to use mafia contractors and hired some guys from Tuscany. Did the work in half the time, for a third of the cost. The mafia's pissed - word is, they're sending their best men to the colony the rail workers are using for a base when the rail extension starts."
"Teach 'em a lesson, right?"
"Yeah. Hate to be those guys."

You've seen the posters around - A NEW LIFE IN SICILY, somewhat strangely worded because you live in Sicily - but you didn't think anything of it until the Cosa Nostra took your old life away. You see a glint in the ashes -- the shotgun you kept behind the counter somehow survived the blaze. The fire's mostly out in the building, but it's only growing inside of you. The Rail Authority aren't the only ones that are going to learn a lesson in that colony to the west. You grip your shotgun tightly and allow yourself a smile. A New Life In Sicily, indeed.

The gun is still pretty hot, and is starting to burn your fingers. You don't care, though. Your only thought is revenge.

Inspector

"Close the door, Inspector Maragos," the Chief says.

You shut the door and take a seat. You don't know why the Chief's called you to his office, but you vaguely suspect that you're being fired.

"Right, Maragos. Let me get straight to the point; we're sending you undercover. You might have heard that the Rail Authority has been building new lines to the east and west. Turns out they've been using new contractors, and that's messed with the Cosa Nostra's key moneymaker.

The Rail Authority's set up a colony to the west to build a new line towards Marsala, and an informant's told us that the mafia are heading in to make an example of the town. Quite simply, we want you to stop them. If you root 'em out, the Cosa Nostra will be broken for good. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, for us -- and for you. You make it back, Maragos, and there'll be a promotion waiting for you, with a sizable pension.

If you can't, well, you'll probably be dead."

Shit. You would have preferred to be fired.

The intention was that, if the power roles survived, the end-game flavour text would have them receive whatever reward they were promised. Nich probably should have received his pension, but hey, is immortality okay?

BodhiTraveller
04-02-2010, 10:57 PM
Hats off to you, Merus. The care you put into the writings really made the game special.

I also think that providing waves for the mafia was an excellent idea, and is going to make them so much easier to share now.

Merus
04-02-2010, 11:03 PM
Yeah, the Google Wave Speakeasies worked a treat. dwolfe had some trouble, but everyone else seemed to really appreciate it. It's perfect for this sort of thing.

I need to head to work now, but tomorrow I'll hook up the bot that syndicates waves to a webpage so everyone can have a look.

VorpalEdge
04-02-2010, 11:22 PM
You guys may be interested in seeing who would've been East Mafia if Merus hadn't had to reroll teams.

http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q383/Merusdraconis/mafia_e.png

None of you know why the Boss has called this meeting. None of you have much in common; some of you haven't even seen each other before. Eventually, you're led into an opulent office, with six beautiful wood and leather chairs arranged in front of a luxurious oak desk. It's a good life in the Family.

Although, the Boss explains when you're seated, not for long.

It seems someone in government has disrespected the Family and all it does for Sicily, and has hired Tuscan contractors to build a railway line. They're building a new settlement, to the east, to prepare to house the workers for a rail extension towards the city of Marsala. It's a lot of money, and a lot of work, that should have gone to us. If the Family does not have a response, everyone else is going to get it into their heads that the Family has grown soft, that maybe they can skip a payment or ignore our advice, and soon the Family will not be able to provide.

The Family has chosen you, and your compatriots, to make an example of this new town, to let the Sicilian government know just how much of a mistake it was to disrespect the Cosa Nostra.

Your train for the new colony departs tomorrow. Pack swiftly.

You have been chosen as Mafia, going to the Eastern colony.

Your full team is:
Byron
gamin
Guesty
Phantoon
Torgo
VorpalEdge

Mafia collaboration will be done via Google Wave; PM me back your Google Wave identity, and I'll add you to the Speakeasy. If you don't have access to Google Wave, PM me your email address, and I'll send you an invite. The Speakeasy can only be used during the night phase; I'll be watching.

As part of your duties to the Cosa Nostra, you must nominate one townsperson to be killed each night phase. This will be done in the Speakeasy. Your nominations need not be unanimous, but it must be a majority vote, and there must not be any dissenting votes. Mafia hits may fail due to the actions of the Angels.

Mafia win if they have equal numbers to the rest of the town; when they do, they take to the streets by day and kill the remaining townspeople. Mafia lose if they are all killed.

I'm not going to lie: I was pretty disappointed that I got rerolled from a mafia into a regular old civvie, lol. It was one of the reasons I was such a whiner for the first half of the game.

"What? You guys won't take my word as gospel? well I'll just stop talking! take that!"

Thankfully, it turned out all right in the end. Only regret is that I no longer feel clever for accidentally sabotaging namelessentity's dastardly mafia plan. >_>

Umby
04-02-2010, 11:24 PM
Heh, you never gave me my Google Wave, Merus. REVENGE!

Nah, I think that the only problem is that there are too many angels. Less angels means that less power roles can come out, which means more paranoia. Other than that, the new voting mechanism is great, and I hope the next GM will make just as good flavor text. It's too bad I wasn't able to play this game out, maybe next time.

PapillonReel
04-02-2010, 11:27 PM
http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q383/Merusdraconis/citizen_w.png

The poster seemed so innocent. "A NEW LIFE IN SICILY", it proclaimed; some government office was setting up new settlements along the western coast, and they wanted people to get the town up and running.

The poster was accurate; it was a very different life to the one you left. The problem was, it also promised to be a very short one.

You are a Citizen, travelling to the Western colony. Best of luck to you!

Yep, I was slated to be a regular ol' Citizen this time around, but Merus's goof-up ended up slating me for a much better role to play. ;)

spineshark
04-02-2010, 11:33 PM
You guys may be interested in seeing who would've been East Mafia if Merus hadn't had to reroll teams.



I'm not going to lie: I was pretty disappointed that I got rerolled from a mafia into a regular old civvie, lol. It was one of the reasons I was such a whiner for the first half of the game.
West Mafia was going to be unstoppable. We had Alice, Umby, SuperRube, SpoonyGundam, myself and (best of all) Eddie. Who was going to lynch Eddie? That's right: No one.

Umby
04-02-2010, 11:35 PM
I don't want to double post, but here was what was going to be...

http://i349.photobucket.com/albums/q383/Merusdraconis/mafia_w.png

None of you know why the Boss has called this meeting. None of you have much in common; some of you haven't even seen each other before. Eventually, you're led into an opulent office, with six beautiful wood and leather chairs arranged in front of a luxurious oak desk. It's a good life in the Family.

Although, the Boss explains when you're seated, not for long.

It seems someone in government has disrespected the Family and all it does for Sicily, and has hired Tuscan contractors to build a railway line. They're building a new settlement, to the west, to prepare to house the workers for a rail extension up the coast of Sicily. It's a lot of money, and a lot of work, that should have gone to us. If the Family does not have a response, everyone else is going to get it into their heads that the Family has grown soft, that maybe they can skip a payment or ignore our advice, and soon the Family will not be able to provide.

The Family has chosen you, and your compatriots, to make an example of this new town, to let the Sicilian government know just how much of a mistake it was to disrespect the Cosa Nostra.

Your train for the new colony departs tomorrow. Pack swiftly.

You have been chosen as Mafia, going to the Western colony.

Your full team is:
Alice
Eddie
Spineshark
SpoonyGundam
SuperRube
Umby

Mafia collaboration will be done via Google Wave; PM me back your Google Wave identity, and I'll add you to the Speakeasy. If you don't have access to Google Wave, PM me your email address, and I'll send you an invite. The Speakeasy can only be used during the night phase; I'll be watching.

As part of your duties to the Cosa Nostra, you must nominate one townsperson to be killed each night phase. This will be done in the Speakeasy. Your nominations need not be unanimous, but it must be a majority vote, and there must not be any dissenting votes. Mafia hits may fail due to the actions of the Angels.

Mafia win if they have equal numbers to the rest of the town; when they do, they take to the streets by day and kill the remaining townspeople. Mafia lose if they are all killed.

It was going to be epic, you're right, Spineshark. I was so pumped. And then... I was lynched on the first day, hah.

Destil
04-02-2010, 11:36 PM
Man, I was a citizen both times.

I liked the player list for my game the 2nd time, at least.

Tock
04-02-2010, 11:37 PM
I feel like the Vigilante isn't as interesting as it should be, either - at the moment, it's basically a second lynch, and the Vigilante takes orders from the town. West made it basically explicit, as they started nominating Vigilante targets along with their accusations.

Building on this, now that the games are over: In my opinion, our current Miller/Vigilante combo is a dead end. A mafia faking a vigilante role basically buys himself one day, because either the real Vig kills them at night, or their secret's out the next day when a Vig kill isn't announced. I contemplated a Vigilante turn when Mr. J fingered me (and it would have been hilarious to make East lynch Guesty), but again, I would have gotten one more day, tops. Plus, I would have needed the vote of every remaining Mafia to even hope to pull it off, meaning that our entire team would get found out off of one move.

Obscuring night kills as we discussed upthread (i.e. citizens don't know if a murder was done by mafia or vigilante) is one way I can see to make this a more balanced role.

Torgo
04-02-2010, 11:42 PM
I think Merus is going to ask them to just give up.
Actually, McDohl and I both were ready to surrender well before the day was out. Merus didn't want to do it unless all remaining mafia wanted to, and Loki never chimed in. Going through to night and with Loki gone, he simple double-checked one more time that that was what we wanted.

Just sayin', it wasn't him asking us. Totally the other way around. ;)

PapillonReel
04-02-2010, 11:50 PM
dwolfe's right in the West thread - we really have to do something about these endless days that plagued both sides this round. Without a hard limit to end the days at, all it does is encourage stalling tactics for the Citizenry as they try in vain to turn up any information, all the while going in circles because nothing new has been added to the game. Days 2 and 3 were absolutely brutal East-side, as the numbers were frustratingly tight and everyone on the town's side was too frightened to make a move.

At the very least, I'd like to see day AND night have both the same length of time to go by - 72-96 hours with the option to end early when a decision is reached sounds about right, giving more time for Mafia to plan while forcing the village to play faster. Hopefully forcing a time limit on both sides will encourage them to take action next time.

dwolfe
04-02-2010, 11:54 PM
0.) Thanks for running the games, Merus!

0a.) Fantastic flavour texts, Merus, two thumbs up, would read again.

0b.) I propose that all future games get christened with a pre night/day lynching of dwolfe, because he is obviously evil. Just to get things started well, and because I can't play this game on this forum without going all HULK SMASH at the density of some people.

1.) Westside had THREE citizen power roles get replaced due to inactivity? Christ, no wonder we couldn't hit one. I assumed if you had a special role you might want to bother playing, argued that heavily in the Mafia Waves, and that at most one special role might go inactive. Metagaming broke us, you guys that dropped out. I most sternly and severely call shenanigans on you guys ;)

2.) Angels just break the game online. The inspector should FEAR even hinting their identities early in the game, but any sane angel will protect a potential inspector over themselves. Free, guaranteed information makes the game utterly boring.

3.) Turns took too long. 1000 monkeys at 1000 typewriters can eventually figure things out. There wasn't enough tension/sense of urgency, both of which are crucial for the Mafia to have a chance. The week-long day turn destroyed morale on both sides.

4.) As it stands, the inspector role basically runs the whole game for weeks on end (in all games to date). Just because it's that overpowered and special a role, if people trust you enough to angel protect you (Nice play, Shinji). Citizens absolutely need depowered somehow.

PS can we get a summary of what roles did each night, Merus?

5.) Activity checks, at least every 48-72 hours, should be mandatory. First, it prevents people from hiding by not posting. IF someone drops out, they commit suicide in game, and their role is revealed. none of this bullsh*t inactivity and replacement. Don't sign up if you aren't willing to put something into it, or you ruin the game for dozens of other people. And Alice, you did it twice in a row. You need to talk real pretty to get into another game, ever. That's just not cool. It's not like no one else has a life outside the forums, but you're screwing with everyone else's time investment. Yes, I want you to feel a little bad about it.

Compare this to a game of Survivor. When do they get flown off the god damn island for a week vacation at a spa? Brickroad, can you point that season out to us...oh...yeah.

Overall, I was frustrated and angry because too many people didn't put enough time or effort in to make it worthwhile. Mandatory, repeated activity checks at least mean that people aren't posting because they're trying to hide, not because they quit or have nothing to contribute other than pinging their special role once a week.

dwolfe
04-02-2010, 11:57 PM
dwolfe's right in the West thread

As this is the first time I have ever heard these words, I vote to not lynch PapsmearReal in any Mafia game, ever again.

SpoonyGundam
04-02-2010, 11:58 PM
There were only two replacements. DemoWeasel is Shinji-Fox.

spineshark
04-03-2010, 12:00 AM
IF someone drops out, they commit suicide in game, and their role is revealed.
Yeah, if I'm running next game, the rules will include divine wrath on people who don't participate.

PapillonReel
04-03-2010, 12:03 AM
Thirded. Unless you post beforehand to let everyone know you'll be inactive and specify when you'll be coming back, inactive players should be culled from the game and called out for it.

dwolfe
04-03-2010, 12:12 AM
There were only two replacements. DemoWeasel is Shinji-Fox.

Let me just say that that little forum name change threw me for over a week, as it wasn't stated in the mafia thread clearly and Shinji barely posted. So only two replacements, and one name change.

DemoWeasel
04-03-2010, 12:26 AM
Jesus Christ you guys =/

PapillonReel
04-03-2010, 12:28 AM
Jesus Christ you guys =/

dook dook dook

You'll always be the Weasel guy to me.

DemoWeasel
04-03-2010, 12:28 AM
dookdookdook

dwolfe
04-03-2010, 12:39 AM
Jesus Christ you guys =/

Note to self: don't bother praising ShinjiFox for playing well again, he doesn't notice it *pats DemoWeasel on his head*.

One last observation: we need much, much, much more mistrust in future games. Current ones are too black and white.

PapillonReel
04-03-2010, 12:47 AM
One last observation: we need much, much, much more mistrust in future games. Current ones are too black and white.

I can do that. Just vote for me in the upcoming primaries and you'll all get the anxiety you've been secretly waiting for since round 1!

Destil
04-03-2010, 12:59 AM
One last observation: we need much, much, much more mistrust in future games. Current ones are too black and white.

But as is the mafia is in a pretty good position to step it up with a fake inspector, especially if they sacrifice someone quickly... though Silent Noise really screwed both games in that regard.

dwolfe
04-03-2010, 01:09 AM
Just christen the game with my death, please. It'll get the party started right :)

Destil: inspector vs fake inspector only works so long as the fake gives absolutely true information.

So, it's doubling the true inspections as long as the fake is in play. if the fake fingers the real inspector as guilty AND manages to get him lynched right away, that's the best possible outcome from that play, and the fake suicides himself in the process.

If you manage to kill at least one angel before trying it, you have a shot, but not a good one. Otherwise, it's a low % play.

It's just a weak play, which is why no one has tried it yet. Any fake inspector can act just like a real one, but the risk is too high. At best, you're without an inspector. Then you have the vig and oracle come forward and be angel protected, lynch/shotgun daily; if you're accused of lynch as angel, ask to be shotgunned, and protect self that night. At most only one fake mafia for one day can survive by claiming to be a fake angel. Mafia loses this game unless they manage to kill both angels ASAP. that's a <5% chance for a game of the size we just played.

tl;dr fake inspector is a losing strategy for Mafia, statistically.