Mafia theory discussion

[esme]

[Jedo the Jedi]

[Zag]

I hadn't really thought about it that way before, but I think you have a good point. My next game I mod will have only hard deadlines.

[Sentran]

It's something I had considered as well. In fact, I was considering a "speed" Mafia game, where each day was 48 hours and each night was 24 hours. That was after my brief and psychotic consideration of a "real-time" Mafia game, broken up into 16 hour days and 8 hour nights. I felt that would be too insane even for this group.
_________________
Sentran
"Speaking of double negatives, I haven't read greylab yet today." - Lifeinmomland

[itisally]

I think the problem with haveing deadlines from the begining is that people will take them forgranted and they will no longer be a motivating factor. Perhaps a more difinitive cause of a dead line like a minimum number of posts, or something like that. I do think that rushing only helpd the mafia because they know how long they need to "hide" for.

If you are just going to set the dead line for what seems to be the natural flow of games then what is the point of the dead line at all?
_________________
I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong.

[itisally]

Forgot to mention... I love the concept of speed games that may run in the background of a larger or longer game so that the non-participating players have something to do.
_________________
I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong.

[Jedo the Jedi]

[Jedo the Jedi]

All of this really does stem from my desire to avoid marathon games and let the non-players and dead people get back into a game more quickly. If I die Day 1 of a three-month game, I'm not going to be happy. This is why I offered an alternative to regulating the time of games: have multiple at once. In that setting, maybe it would be appropriate to give priority to those not in the "primary" game. Hell, I think both changes (hard deadlines and multiple games) would be good as long as they are handled thoughtfully and intentionally.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[itisally]

Jedo, I agree. I think players would have to be careful about signing up for back to back games. It seems like we found 20 people was too large a game for this forum. It should then be possible to fun games the have stagered starts if players are careful to not sign up to games that will run back to back, just in case they live.
_________________
I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong.

[MNOWAX]

It is always nice to have a large game every once in a while, but a 15+ game doesn't work well when it is concurrently run by two smaller games.
_________________
The Man The Myth The Legend
MNOWAX

[itisally]

SO I had this idea. We all hate the day 1 RVS BS and knowing that we don't know anything. What if everyone recieved one clue in thier role PM. How would that effect balance? What if Mafia didn't know who each other were until after night one.

I have a couple ideas for a game, but i too want to reduce day 1 in a reasonable way with out players feeling helpless. I understand not claiming... but it is a helpless feeling and encurages day one lurking.
_________________
I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong.

[Sentran]

In campfire Mafia I've played where the Mafia did not know each other on Day 1, but found out when night fell. Made for a much more interesting day 1.
_________________
Sentran
"Speaking of double negatives, I haven't read greylab yet today." - Lifeinmomland

[Zag]

While I agree in principle, I'm still stinging from the Death Eaters game that raekuul ran. Knowing that Chaz and I were ticked off at each other (within Mafia, anyway -- not really), he intentionally selected us two as the scum. Not only did we not know about each other, he then threw in a townie who was a cop and was permanently night-kill immune. (Can you say, "unbalanced"?) The closest he came to balancing that was that he told us that the character (we still didn't know which player) had the immunity, while the player himself didn't know.

Oh yeah, there was also a doc and back-up doc in the game. It was as close to unwinnable as I've played.

[Jedo the Jedi]

I mean, I already try to play with no knowledge of my mates on Day 1, so I think it is worthy. I've even considered having a game where the mafia didn't know each other ever. It would be more work for me, but they could send me a message at night and I would forward it to their mates. It's an interesting consideration.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[Zag]

I proposed a game a while ago where the mafia night-time discussion included one townie spy. The mafia, knowing this, would use QuickTopic discussion, using an alias. Only the senior-most mafia member would actually know who all the other mafia are, and he would select the night-kill (after getting input). Or maybe all the mafia would know each other, but would know to be circumspect in the night-time discussions because they know there's a spy. I hadn't decided, exactly, but the latter choice makes it a LOT harder for the spy to stay undercover -- he has to be very sure not to suggest anyone new.

[Undercover Monk]

what would stop the GF mafia from just night killing the spy night 1. I like the idea but just dont let the GF know who is the spy.
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning

[Zag]

Right. He wouldn't know who the spy is. And everyone in the night discussion would be using an alias, because otherwise they let the spy know who they are. The Godfather would not know which alias is the spy, and he certainly wouldn't know who is playing him.

[itisally]

As we are a group that plays together often, how important would writting style become in that situation. The more we talk about it the more I like it.
_________________
I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong.

[3iff]

Question:

In the recent H&V mafia game, there was an opportunity for a townie to rolecop a player. Now, how would you report a town rolecop investigating a mafia godfather where no-one is likely to be vanilla.

Fortunately for me this didn't happen but...

[Sentran]

I think I'd just let them know that they didn't receive any information. The first thought on the part of the player would likely be that they were role-blocked.
_________________
Sentran
"Speaking of double negatives, I haven't read greylab yet today." - Lifeinmomland

[Zag]

I think that it depends a lot on what you intended for the role, and that you should have that question answered well before it happens.

When I ran my Secret Theme game, I intentionally gave role names that didn't necessarily give away the alignment of the target, but might catch someone up if they tried to lie about it. It seems to me, though, that I did have one mafia role that was a pretty clear give-away, and that was intentional.

If your intent for the godfather is that he was immune from Jedo's and my investigation, vulnerable only to UMonk's, then you should have given him a role name that is not obvious -- of course, this might be a little tricky, since the character was Michael Corleone.

I don't really like giving the impression that the person was role-blocked, because that could be devastatingly misleading, in a way that seems, to me, to be unfair. I'd rather get a wrong answer, like maybe "Fund raiser" than give the impression that a different skill was used. You might even tell the player that his official role name is that, but he is really a godfather.

[Jedo the Jedi]

I think it's fine to give the impression of something. I think the mod should walk the line of not being deceptive but being obscure. The less the mod confirms and lets the player's mind create options, the better.

When I asked 3iff why I hadn't received a result on Monk, he confirmed that my lack of a result was not because of the death. From there, I had to draw my own conclusions. I think "no result" in this situation would be perfectly acceptable and force the player to decide why that is.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[3iff]

I like the idea of a fake role name for appearance. I would be reluctant to wilfully mislead a player by giving "no result" where there's no reason for a no result.

The "No result" Jedo got was because he was roleblocked and he worked out why he got no result...exactly my intentions. I suspect he thought I may have made a mistake (a perfect valid thought) and he double-checked my response...so I replied that his no result was NOT due to Umonk dying.

A few unseen implications came up during the game and I had to decide 'on the fly' what the effects would be. In the future I should be prepared for the unexpected...