More Leeway for Normal Flavor

[zoraster]

I've mentioned it before, but dropped it because I had sort of a "if it ain't broke" feeling: The breakdown between Normals and Themes is misleading and does not represent the actual division of games that I think most would agree is ideal.

The reason for not having flavor in normal games is because we don't want people to feel like they need to pay attention to it for game purposes. If you're just including a good, interesting story that can have no affect on the actual game-play, I'd actually encourage that impulse.

The problem mostly comes when people write flavor that has an affect on game play. Either they give some hints in the flip text, they give players roles with information that might later clear or implicate someone else, etc.

It's my opinion that most who like mafia games being flavorless don't do it because they like the flavor of mafia or werewolf (both of which, as we noted in that flavor problem thread, are pretty shallow and unrewarding) but because they don't particularly want to have to read whatever banal flavor text the mod is including for guidance on the game.

[zoraster]

I think if you have to give scum fake claims, you've put in flavor in a way that should not be done in a normal.

[zoraster]

I think if you have to give scum fake claims, you've put in flavor in a way that should not be done

in a normal.

Depends on your game really.

I made a Wacky Races based game on another site. Obviously Mafia had to be Dastardly and Muttley, there's no two ways about it. Thus the only fair way to make the game unbreakable through mass claim was to hold back 3 characters and give them as fake claims to the mafia.

Obviously we're discussing normal flavour here, so I guess unthemed games I would agree that there's no need to give scum fake claims. However if you meant across the board then it would be false.

I bolded my quote to help you out

Obviously fake claims are a good option in theme games.

[zoraster]

http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Normal_Game

The setting of a Normal game should be Mafia related. Even flavor text should be minimal and not be based on any book, movie, song, time period, etc.

[zoraster]

I think you guys are confusing my proposed normal draft changes with the official rules. In that it does say mafia, werewolf or face to face. It's technically an expansion of the current rule, but I'd be more than happy to have it expand further.

For "basic" games it's:

The setting of a normal game should be Mafia, Werewolf or face-to-face related. Even flavor text should not be based on any book, movie, song, time period, etc.

For "advanced" games it's:

Flavor should have no effect on the game. Flavor should not indicate who killed a player. Roles should all be known as their common role names and not some flavor name.

Just so no one is confused, the official rules currently are:

The setting of a Normal game should be Mafia related. Even flavor text should be minimal and not be based on any book, movie, song, time period, etc.

[zoraster]

Quoting the Wiki about site policy is not the best way to support an argument about changes to site policy.

Excuse me? Except those

are

the official normal rules. They're linked to in the normal queue threads. It also happens to have the text of "This page has official status; unlike most wiki pages, it cannot be edited by normal users. If you believe edits need to be made, please bring them up on the talk page." at the top.

What exactly did you mean here? because I don't think you were very clear, so I may be missing your point.

I think you guys are confusing my proposed normal draft changes

Never looked at that before. But I have seen the first rule mentioned there before. Is that rule mentioned somewhere else maybe?

We had a long thread discussing things in the draft rules, and that was one element of it. If you read that thread, you may have seen it.

[zoraster]

This thread is a discussion of change to policy. Quoting the current policy as authoritative on whether it should itself be changed doesn't make sense.

Quoting the current policy is necessary when discussing changing it. Whether something needs changing or not depends largely on what the status quo is. It also gives structure to the discussion at hand because we know where we're starting from.

Regardless, there's really no point in trying to criticize this, Ythan. I don't think you gain anything from it other than a pointless digression on whether the post was needed or not.

[zoraster]

Not if the list contains every allowable mini-normal role, plus a few dummy slots for mod inventions and fakeclaims of them. My example was abbreiviated.

I'm fairly sure mith didn't want a definite whitelist for Normal roles.

I'm not sure that he didn't. I just think that getting one was fairly low on his priority list because he's undecided. Although, for example, in those proposed rules I kept the "you may have one nonnormal role" and that keeps it from ever being truly semi-open.

[zoraster]

I don't like the trend* of people who seem to consider bastard modding some sort of accomplishment. It is decidedly not. That's not to say a bastard game can't be good, but it is to say that it is not the mark of a "good" or super mod. The reason tar's games got so much press is largely because the games are highly creative -- the bastard element is just one that allows that creativity to flow.

But bastard modding itself is no accomplishment. In fact, I tend to think less of a mod who goes with a bastard modded game for the heck of it or because he just thinks it'll be more fun. If it serves a purpose, fine. Otherwise, it's not some sort of method to "prove yourself" as a mod. I don't think

any

mod should start out at the design phase by thinking that he wants to design a bastard game.

*I say trend because I've noticed it over the course of the past year to year and a half, but it may well not be a trend but rather something that has unfortunately always been the case.

[zoraster]

This is veering off-topic without achieving or explicitly failing to achieve its stated goals. I'm sure there are threads about bastard modding...

Both Flay and I took a stab at creating the policy Mith asked for. Comments on those? Other attempts?

It seems like a fair number of experienced mods think that non-standard rolenames should be reserved for the theme queue. What about shaft's idea of non-flavored names?

Can you state them both concisely again, Ythill? It's not (just) that I'm lazy, but I think that'll help get us back on track.