Post
Post #1 (isolation #1) » Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:24 am
Postby zoraster »
White Flag Mafia Rules
Please note three fairly unique rules:
1. This game uses instant night, so all action choices must be given before the thread is locked for night.
2. All votes and unvotes must be proceeded by ##. For example,
##vote: Zoraster
3. There is a posting restriction of 1000 words per post in this game.
Premise
This game has exactly one mafia with three members. If two out of the three mafia members are eliminated, the remaining mafia member waves a white flag and surrenders. Thus, the town wins.
Voting and Lynches
1. Vote by typing ## followed by vote in bold. For example,
##vote: Zoraster
.
2. Unvoting is discouraged before placing a new vote, but to unvote in other situations, simply put ## in front of unvote. For example,
##unvote
3. Unless altered by role, the player who receives a majority of the votes at any time will be lynched, ending the day.
4. This game will have deadlines. They will be set roughly two weeks from the start of the day, but it will be adjusted to take into account weekends, my schedule, etc.
5. If the deadline is reached with no majority, no one will be lynched.
6. To vote for no lynch, simply
##Vote: No Lynch
Instant Night
1. Instant night means that
all
actions must be turned into the mod before the night begins. These actions may be submitted during the day or during twilight (the period between the “hammer” or majority vote and when the thread is locked for the night).
2. Twilight will end when I get to the game, so you should not count on being able to submit your action at this point.
3. You may change your night action as many times as you want during the day or twilight with no penalty.
4. If you do not submit an action before night falls,
you will not perform the action
. Thus, it is in your best interest to always submit an action and then change it as the day progresses.
5. Finally, please note that the mafia team has day talk abilities.
Posting Restriction
No post may exceed 1000 words unless it is the first major post of a replacement. Posting multiple times in a row to circumvent the posting restriction will lead to the same punishment as violating it. This said, this is not intended to be a strict rule. If a post goes over the limit, it will likely only get a warning. Continual violations of the rule, especially if it is knowingly done, will be met with stiffer consequences.
Activity Requirement
I take activity very seriously. This game in particular revolves around scum hunting. Scum hunting becomes impossible with flaking and lurking. Therefore, you are expected to post regularly, and to do so with more content than simply, “prod dodge” or something to that nature.
1. Prods will be given either on request (simply type
Prod: Zoraster
) at any time or by initiative of the mod. However, a mod initiative prod will
not
be announced within the game. A player initiated prod may be confirmed by the mod in the game.
2. Everyone has obligations that require them to step away for a while. You MUST indicate that you are going
V/LA
in the thread if you are planning on doing so. You must indicate the date you intend to return.
3. Not acting on a prod swiftly or continually needing a prod is grounds for replacement. I reserve the right to replace any player who is not contributing to the game.
Other
1. No racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. language should be used during this game.
2. No copying of role PMs or other communications with the mod. You may paraphrase, but it may not be designed in any way to show a particular word choice, etc.
3. Do not try other “sneaky” tactics such as speaking in code.
4. I make mistakes. For vote count mistakes, please notify me in bold in the thread. For other mistakes, please contact me by PM.
5. I reserve the right to alter, clarify, or add to the rules.
Post
Post #2 (isolation #2) » Sun Aug 22, 2010 12:37 pm
Postby zoraster »
This thread is now unlocked. The game will only start when I have 8/11 confirmations by PM (not here). Until this time, you may talk, vote, etc. to your hearts content, but I will not COUNT votes until the confirmations are in and the day officially begins.
Last edited by zoraster on Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post
Post #362 (isolation #14) » Thu Aug 26, 2010 12:05 pm
Postby zoraster »
Thoughts:
1. What can I say? This was a stupidly fast game. While I am a fan of keeping games short and sweet as more stuff does not usually make for better lynches, I'm not sure the idea behind the quicklynches... especially when the mechanic should, theoretically, highlight connection scum hunting. If you lynch before people make a statement or stand, you don't get any of that.
2. As you may have noticed, this game, except RedCoyote's role, was essentially mountainous.
3. It was short, but I wouldn't say it was bad. I usually play with a little more selectivity in my player base, but I felt I should widen my players I have.
4. I hope you had fun!
Post
Post #368 (isolation #15) » Thu Aug 26, 2010 12:13 pm
Postby zoraster »
Yeah, unfortunately I'm not sure this game really tested the mechanic that much. That said, I think it's pretty promising. I'm not sure I'd run another theme with it, but I think it'd certainly be up for use as a constituent mechanic to a theme game (i.e. only part of the theme) or even potentially an open game.
Post
Post #377 (isolation #16) » Thu Aug 26, 2010 12:45 pm
Postby zoraster »
I think one adjustment I'm going to make to the instant-night rules is that the time from daybreak to nightfall must be at least 24 hours. In other words, if there's a quicklynch within 2 hours of day starting, I'd let twilight go on for another 22. My effort with instant night is not to allow players to try and get scum to "no action" but rather to speed things up.
Post
Post #380 (isolation #17) » Thu Aug 26, 2010 12:50 pm
Postby zoraster »
Jack wrote:
yabbaguy wrote:But the point is that you'll get someone who has no chance but to passionately defend or die.
RedCoyote claiming post 0 wouldn't be a terrible idea- but isn't exactly confirmable since such a claim could be made by scum very, very easily.
If the scum were in the ardently active players, WIFOMing the lurkers by no-killing might've disoriented the game, too. That's why quicklynching can't really narrow the pool down as verifiably as you'd like it to.
I wasn't really trying to prevent the mafia kill so much...more like, if I start a wagon on red, and scott and cloud get on, then he's probably town...
The funny thing is that they could have no killed on purpose with the same effect.
Post
Post #401 (isolation #18) » Fri Aug 27, 2010 4:19 am
Postby zoraster »
yabbaguy wrote:The worst part about Instant Night is that you can't make decisions
based on the flip
. That's really important at times.
This is certainly the major disadvantage to instant night in most games (but not this one). I actually considered going back to a normal lynch thing for this game (as I've used instant night the past two or three games), but decided this was actually an ideal game for it because it's mountainous -- in other words, it really didn't matter whether people had information on the flip.
I've considered using a hybrid instant/normal night where people can submit actions beforehand as in instant night, but there is a night that lasts 24 hours in which actions can be changed.
I just think night tends to kill the momentum of games. In some cases, maybe that's a good thing Still, i find nights to be overall pretty negative to the flow of a game, especially when they drag on and on.
Post
Post #415 (isolation #19) » Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:35 am
Postby zoraster »
Yeah. I think blaming it all on Jack is sort of absurd because he only has one vote. Anyone who went along with it is culpable as well. In fact, anyone who saw what was going on and didn't speak up was culpable.
Anyway, I don't mind the experiment. I just think it was a poorly chosen setup to do it.
Last edited by zoraster on Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post
Post #417 (isolation #20) » Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:37 am
Postby zoraster »
Jack wrote:The goal was not quicklynch per se..except on the last day where I was horribly impatient due to (I'm guessing) having had to wait around for two hours in another game to quickhammer for a scum win.
The goal was "live lynches" so that scum absolutely can't buss--it very much as to do with the mechanic of the game.
I forgot about the dead town players who would be watching though, it must have been aggravating, I apologize for that.
Why would this setup be more prone to bussing? It seems to me that you'd like to force scum to bus in this setup. The first one hurts scum a ton, and the second will have to seem really artificial and thus detectable.
Post
Post #419 (isolation #21) » Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:39 am
Postby zoraster »
Jack wrote:Ideally on the day red was lynched, I would have voted, and haschel, and it would have looked like a full speed ahead quicklynch. Then if cloud or scott had willingly hopped on it would have been pretty revealing. cloud did end up revealing himself as scum that day anyway, unfortunately with it was with his awkward hammer vote. Really should have gone with him the last day.
I'm still not sure I see it. If scott had voted for Red, what would that have shown?
Post
Post #422 (isolation #22) » Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:01 am
Postby zoraster »
Jack wrote:
zoraster wrote:
Jack wrote:Ideally on the day red was lynched, I would have voted, and haschel, and it would have looked like a full speed ahead quicklynch. Then if cloud or scott had willingly hopped on it would have been pretty revealing. cloud did end up revealing himself as scum that day anyway, unfortunately with it was with his awkward hammer vote. Really should have gone with him the last day.
I'm still not sure I see it. If scott had voted for Red, what would that have shown?
Why would scum put his buddy 1 vote from losing the game?
Well, it would have shown that Red and Scott were unlikely partners at least.
