Mini 870: Melee mafia. (Mod Abandoned)

[Thestatusquo]

Farside, at the beginning of each melee phase I will roll for initiative for each player, and that roll will determine the order of actions in the melee phase.

[Yosarian2]

Which would be fine if you were the only one who could do it. The problem arises when everyone starts doing it - its like having a mess of vigs and the issues it causes.

Then, of course, the other side is a bunch of people that are wounded are just asking to get picked off in the great harvest.

I haven't gotten around to reading the game nuwen keeps referencing, doing so may change my mind. Until then I think every town player being a vig and vigging every night sounds like a great idea.

Basically, the problem in a hit point type of game is this: you're not a vig, you can just bring someone a little closer to death. If everyone goes off on their own and attacks someone, then what that means is that most people will end up semi-wounded. If a lot of players end up injured, then we have a problem, because that means that towards endgame, a well orginized scum team can kill off several people in a day either themselves or with the help of one confused townie, kill one more person that night, and win.

Or, alternatly, if several town people are injured (and if the scum kills off the people that everyone trusts and aren't injured, that's likely to happen), then that can allow a scum team to "race" the town at a certain point, to kill all of us off before we can kill them off even if we have figured out who they are and even if they're still a minority, so long as they have more hit points then the remaining town (and there's a random factor too in this version, with the "1d6 damage" stuff.)

Having a lot of people injured can basically push the "lynch or lose" point back several days. That's kind of what happened in that War in Heaven game Nuwen is talking about. So, basically, it's better for the town if we all pick one person and beat on them until they're dead, rather then spreading the damage around and injuring a lot of different people. In order to do that, we have to work together.

[Kast]

@Snowbunny-
-Would you prefer single longer posts?
-Does the use of color make the post difficult to read?
-Are you objecting to content, format, style, something else?

I don't follow your fear from Post 85.
-I agree that if the town decides to follow a voting strategy, then it is likely that mafia will also place votes and have some effect on the lynch decision. How does this differ from a standard game in which mafia can place votes? How does that difference make it overall bad?

I think the possibility of mafia influencing the lynch reinforces the need for all townies to contribute and prevent the mafia from having disproportionate representation.

-You said you can see the merits of the town agreeing to not spread damage. How do you reconcile this with your position that anyone should be free to attack whoever they feel like attacking?

@Kirbyoshi-
-Using player names instead of pronouns can save time and prevent confusion. This especially helpful when I anticipate future quotations or when I try to resolve misunderstandings and/or differing interpretations of specific events.
-I encourage you and anyone else to take a more active role in this game if you are able.

@Yosarian2-
Agreed with your analysis except for one point.

a well orginized scum team can kill off several people in a day

After a player dies, the day ends. Scum should not be able to kill several people in a day. However, your general point still stands; a well organized scum team will control the lynch and is even better off with rogue townies helping them.

[Yosarian2]

After a player dies, the day ends.

Ummm...really? Where does it say that in the rules?

3) Each day will be divided into alternating sets of phases. The first phase will be a discussion phase. This is like your traditional mafia day in every way except that it does not contain voting. Feel free to vote if you wish, but I will not be keeping track of them. After this, we will enter the melee phase, which will consist of each player rolling for initiative, and then taking/or not taking an action in turn. Discussion phases will last 3 days each, and melee phases will last for 2 complete turns for every player. Discussion is still allowed during melee phases.

It sounds to me like the day only ends after each player has gotten 2 complete melee turns; I don't think it matters how many or how few people die during that phase. Unless I misread a rule somewhere?

[Kast]

@Yosarian2-

3.) Days will continue until a player is killed, or a majority of players vote no lynch during the discussion phase.

[Kast]

If nobody is killed, in the first Melee Phase, we will enter a second Discussion Phase. Then second Melee Phase. Then third Discussion Phase. Then third Melee Phase. etc.

[Kast]

@Yosarian2-
Btw-this makes things worse, since mafia can calculate when to "go rogue" and kill a player so that it prevents the most townies from getting actions.

[Yosarian2]

Ok, you're right, Kast, I just double checked with the mod. Each day goes back and fourth between discussion phase and the melee phases, until someone dies.

Also, it sounds like when a person rolls initive and gets to attack first, there's no specific time frame in which they have to do that, so whoever gets to attack first, don't be afraid to continue to discuss stuff with the town for a little while, so hopefully we can achieve some kind of consensus and decide who to kill as a town.

[Grover]

Could we not vote during the talking phase and then, if we are looking at attacking as a group, attack the person with the most votes during the melee phase? I am fine with attacking as a group.

I'd like us to come to a consensus as to who to attack but, if someone does see something that the rest of us don't, I'm not sure if punishment is a good thing.

I think it's up to the players with actions as to wheter they submit them in thread or via PM. Seeing everythig in thread is good because it might out the Scum but, it will also give away Town powers.

[Kast]

@Grover-

Seeing everythig in thread is good because

it might out the Scum

but, it will also give away Town powers.

Please elaborate.

Forcing players to post in-thread obviously makes townies with Melee Phase powers choose between revealing themselves or not using (wasting) their powers.

How can we out scum by forcing actions to be submitted in-thread? Mafia were selected randomly, any feats/abilities revealed will not be indicative of affiliation.

[Grover]

To me it's the same as a mass claim type situation. We get to see everyone's powers. I'm not used to this dynamic and am trying to wrap my head around phases and attacks and stuff and I misspoke. What I should have said was that it would give away our powers.

[Kast]

@Grover-
Thanks, that is a lot more clear.

I think most people have chimed in one way or another. Going to dig through and see where town as a whole stands...

[Yosarian2]

Could we not vote during the talking phase and then, if we are looking at attacking as a group, attack the person with the most votes during the melee phase? I am fine with attacking as a group.

(shrug) Voting dosn't really matter, as far as game mechanics go, unless we vote for a no-lynch apparenlty. Still, it's a useful way to keep track of what people are thinking, and of getting a town consensus.

I think it's up to the players with actions as to wheter they submit them in thread or via PM. Seeing everythig in thread is good because it might out the Scum but, it will also give away Town powers.

I think that all "normal" attacks should be done in thread. Everyone can attack, we all know that, and since attacking is basically this games equivilent of voting, I think it's very important to know and keep track of who's attacking who, in order to figure out who the scum are. No one should attack in secret. Granted, if we see everyone's attack, it'll make it possible to figure out people's strength and so on, but that can't be helped.

Now, if you have a special feat and don't want to reveal that you have it just yet, and want to use that by PMing the mod secretly so as to avoid having to claim,that might be more understandable, depening on what the feat does.

[Kast]

Let me know if any of this is inaccurate or if you've changed your position on anything:

Positions

chamber- We should vote/All players should be free to attack anyone (rogues)/We should not punish rogues/?/?
Col.Cathart- We should vote/The majority should attack their candidate/We should punish rogues if they are also dicks/Action PMs should not be allowed/Action PMs should not be punished
farside22- We should vote/The majority should attack their candidate/?/?/?
Grover- We should vote/The majority should attack their candidate/We should not punish rogues/?/?
Kast- We should vote/The majority should attack their candidate/We should punish rogues/Action PMs should be allowed/Action PMs should not be punished
Kirbyoshi- We should vote/The majority should attack their candidate/We should punish rogues/Action PMs should be allowed/Action PMs should not be punished
Nuwen- We should vote/All players should be free to not attack/We should punish rogues/Ambivalent about Action PMs/Action PMs should not be punished
populartajo- We should vote/All players should be free to not attack/?/Action PMs should not be allowed/?
Snow_Bunny- We should vote/All players should be free to attack anyone (rogues)/We should not punish rogues/?/?
SpyreX- We should vote/All players should be free to not attack/We should punish rogue players/Ambivalent about Action PMs/Action PMs should not be punished
TonyMontana- We should not have a voting system/All players should be free to attack anyone (rogues)/We should not punish rogues/Action PMs should not be allowed/?
Yosarian2- We should vote/The majority should attack their candidate/We should punish rogues/?/?

Thoughts

-With 4 players opposed to punishment for rogue behavior, I don't think it is fair to implement that.
-The vast majority is in favor of a voting system.
-It's a toss up as far as whether players should be allowed to submit actions by PM, however, nobody thinks players who do so should be punished so this is moot.

Conclusion

We should vote. People who voted for the majority candidate should attack that candidate during Melee Phase. Players are requested to not attack anyone other than the majority candidate; those who do will probably not face punishment. Players are requested to post actions in thread. Those who do not will probably not face punishment.

Despite the lack of systemic punishment, it is probable that players who violate these general rules will draw attention from the town as a whole. Hopefully townies don't do this and distract the town.

[Yosarian2]

Well, I think we should operate from a consensuss. We probably won't have time during a 3 day discussion period to really get a true majority from voting, though, but we should try to get some kind of general agreement.

I'm not sure about "automatic punishment", per se; however, if someone starts swinging away wildly, I'll probably view it as a huge scum tell unless they've got a really good reason for it.

Anyway, we don't have much time here before discussion period ends. I'd like to hear people start talking about who they suspect, and who they would want to attack if they had to decide right now.

[Kast]

@TonyMontoya-
Your original answer is extremely sparse on content. I would like to hear more elaboration on it. I want to hear your answers to my follow up questions.

Also, please explain the apparent inconsistency between your belief that an unenforced voting system is beneficial and your blanket statement that any voting system is so infeasible to the point that it is not worthwhile to answer questions about voting systems.

Vote: TonyMontoya

@Yosarian2-
-Please elaborate on reasons to require standard attacks be submitted by PM.

If a player would see an action being made, then the mod will dictate to the players what they see, just as a DM mitigates the action in a game of DnD.

-A standard attack is a public action that all players see. The results will be visible to the town regardless of the method of submission (PM or in thread). If a player uses a feat to make a hidden/stealthy/covert attack, then we won't be able to tell that apart from no action anyway.
-I don't see any need to allow players to submit standard attacks by PM, nor do I see any reason to prohibit this. There are many easily conceivable feats that would be harmed by public revelation, but I have yet to see an actual reason to place a no PM constraint on the town.

[Kast]

@Yosarian2-
Submitted without seeing your Post 114.

Agree in general.

We probably won't have time during a 3 day discussion period to really get a true majority from voting, though, but we should try to get some kind of general agreement.

This is easily remedied:

When we reach the first melee phase, the first player in initiative order will hold off on taking actions until the town reaches a lynch consensus.

[Yosarian2]

@Yosarian2-
-Please elaborate on reasons to require standard attacks be submitted by PM.

What? I said the opposite of that; I spefically said that standard attacks should be submitted in public, not by PM. You want me to elaborate on that?

Anyway, I was reading the thread and triyng to get a suspicion on someone, and frankly it's hard to read most people now, especally since everyone's just been talking game mechanics and no one's really started scumhunting yet. For now, I'm going to

Vote: Kirbyoshi

. It's not a very strong vote, but some of the things he's done so far feel a little strange to me. Specifically his voting Tony for "not answering one out of 7 questions" when a lot of other people haven't answered them at all, and his comment that he would "follow Kast's lead until Kast makes a scumslip", apparently saying he would follow Kast just because he's posting a lot, seems really odd.

To be clear, I'm not sure that either of those points are huge scumtells, but it's the closest thing I could find at the moment.

[Kast]

@Yosarian2-

What? I said the opposite of that; I spefically said that standard attacks should be submitted in public, not by PM. You want me to elaborate on that?

Yes, my mistake. Please elaborate on reasons to prohibit standard actions from being submitted by PM.

[Yosarian2]

@Yosarian2-

What? I said the opposite of that; I spefically said that standard attacks should be submitted in public, not by PM. You want me to elaborate on that?

Yes, my mistake. Please elaborate on reasons to prohibit standard actions from being submitted by PM.

Well, in a normal game, the biggest source of info the town has is who voted for who, when, and why; because votes really matter, that's the main tool town has at figuring out the difference between scum and town in a normal game, is who votes for who, when, and why; voting is the point when ideal town and ideal scum play diverge significantly.

In this game, votes might be useful, but they're much less important, and therefore it's much easier for scum to cast their votes in ways that look pro-town, since they're not really threatening their own interests. However, attacks are vitally important.

Scum are unlikely to actually damage each other that much, since hitpoints are a vital resource for them; they may a LITTLE to distance each other, especally in the early game, but I'd expect that to be very limited. Plus, scum are likely to take any chance they get to hurt a townie, especlaly one that's already injured or one they don't intend to kill. So, it is very much in the interests of the town that we know exactally who is attacking who, when, why, and how; analyzing that infromation is going to be our biggest scumhunting tool this game, so we can't afford to let anyone attack in secret.

[Kast]

@Yosarian2-
I follow what you posted until here:

So, it is very much in the interests of the town that we know exactally who is attacking who, when, why, and how; analyzing that infromation is going to be our biggest scumhunting tool this game,

so we can't afford to let anyone attack in secret.

Regardless of whether an attack is submitted by PM or in-thread, we know "exactally who is attacking who, when, why".

As for "how":
If scum, or anyone, submits a standard attack by PM, we will see the same results for a standard attack and can reasonably determine the "how". The exception to this is abilities that mimic a standard attack's public results but actually do something else. If such a feat/ability exists, then a player making that action secretly but in-thread false claiming to do a standard attack is indistinguishable from an in-thread standard attack.

If a player does something anything that has different results from a standard attack, then we will still know that.

[Kirbyoshi]

@Yosarian: I voted Tony for ONLY answering one out of 7 (although technically he answered 2, but one of them was a "Why?"). I gave my reasons for why I would follow Kast. He seems to be trying to take the lead anyway, almost to the point of acting as a narrator, or an advice mod. He seems to know alot about this kind of setup, which puts him in sharp contrast to me.

@Kast: I'm new at this DnD-style Mafia thing, so I'm pretty much just learning at this point, which is why I haven't been posting much. Well, part learning and part waiting for the actual "Mafia" part of the game to start (i.e. the part where we determine our target). Clarification: I don't know what exactly you mean by a "rogue," but my opinion is that we only punish people who don't attack the target if they have a good reason to. If the "rogue" has no good reason, then they are both scum and should both die.

Agreed that the first person in the melee phase should wait until we are absolutely sure of who our target is.

[Yosarian2]

[quote="Kirbyoshi"I gave my reasons for why I would follow Kast. He seems to be trying to take the lead anyway, almost to the point of acting as a narrator, or an advice mod. [/quote]

Well, you didn't really explain your reasons, IMHO.

Do you think Kast is likely pro-town here? More to the point, do you think it's helpful to just follow someone else when you don't know their alignment?

[Snow_Bunny]

@Snowbunny-
-Would you prefer single longer posts?
-Does the use of color make the post difficult to read?
-Are you objecting to content, format, style, something else?

Well, your tl;dr version in blue can be confusing at times. I don't care if you make long posts or multiple short posts, but could you keep that blue thing off? Or at least post it in normal black colour. Just a small request.

[/quote]I don't follow your fear from Post 85.
-I agree that if the town decides to follow a voting strategy, then it is likely that mafia will also place votes and have some effect on the lynch decision. How does this differ from a standard game in which mafia can place votes? How does that difference make it overall bad?

I think the possibility of mafia influencing the lynch reinforces the need for all townies to contribute and prevent the mafia from having disproportionate representation.

-You said you can see the merits of the town agreeing to not spread damage. How do you reconcile this with your position that anyone should be free to attack whoever they feel like attacking?[/quote]

My fear is that players will be pushed to do something they don't want to do. I agree with the voting system, and I agree that we should focus on a single target, but I don't agree enforcing other players to do this. Their actions will speak for themselves. Also, when you enforce, you create more excuses for mafia to mislynch. "But I hammered because it was forced to" and things like that. Just don't enforce. A town player should know what's best for town. If chamber wants to spread damage like if there's no tomorrow, then that speaks for himself. I know that mafia will likely follow town's plan, but, isn't that what always happen in every game?

My point, in short, enforcing gives more advantage to mafia than to town. We can get more information with a mutual agreement rule than an enforced one. Also, btw, it can take out the fun in playing for some. And, as all games, this is for fun.

[chamber]

Well, your tl;dr version in blue can be confusing at times. I don't care if you make long posts or multiple short posts, but could you keep that blue thing off? Or at least post it in normal black colour. Just a small request.

The blue writing is all that keeps me sane.