Standardized Rules and Role PMs (Open Games)

[somestrangeflea]

I think "total victory -- or nothing can prevent same" is the only good answer. the "50% mafia" or ">50% mafia" rules are really an attempt to encapsulate "nothing can prevent same" in numbers.

I agree. >50% mafia doesn't take into account Vigs & SKs. The Mafia win condition should be:

You win when Mafia members are the only survivors, or when nothing can prevent the same.

But do you think the mafia

should

win if it's 2 mafia against a vig and doc only going into Day?

Well, since it's 2v2, there cannot possibly be a lynch. In that situation, it would move straight into night, and the night choices would decide the game.

[mneme]

But do you think the mafia

should

win if it's 2 mafia against a vig and doc only going into Day?

No, I don't. Do you?

[somestrangeflea]

The next morning, there could be a number of situations:

1. Only scum remain - Scum win (caused by scum killing vig and vig killing doc)
2. 2 scum v doc - Scum win (caused by doc preventing vig-kill on scum, and mafia killing vig. The next day, scum control the lynch.)
3. 2 scum v vig - Scum win (caused by doc preventing vig-kill on scum, and mafia killing doc. The next day, scum control the lynch)
4. 1 scum v doc - Scum win (caused by vig-kill on scum, and mafia killing vig. Scum kills doc the following night)
5. 1 scum v vig - Draw (caused by vig-kill on scum, and mafia killing doc. No-lynch, and both kill each other the following night.)
6. 1 scum v vig + doc - ?? (caused by vig-kill on scum, and doc preventing kill on vig. Next day lynch decides the game)

It's highly likely that the scum

would

win that situation, but they shouldn't be

given

the game if that setup were to occur.

[Mr. Flay]

I agree. >50% mafia doesn't take into account Vigs & SKs. The Mafia win condition should be:

You win when Mafia members are the only survivors, or when nothing can prevent the same.

This Win Condition wins, to the degree that I think it should be the example WC (substitute "members of your faction", maybe). Everything about endgames

must

be deterministic before the mod can call the game "over". Any power role that could change that outcome

must

be allowed to act.

Well spotted, ssf.

[Glork]

For pro-town players, I usually use some form of this win condition:

You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated

I also tend to use the following win condition (or some equivalent form):

You win when you gain and cannot lose a majority of the town's population

I think this one in particular accounts for the possibility of other killing, culting, stopping, glorking, and doing-other-things-ing roles.

[Kelly Chen]

It occurs to me that with this win condition, as long as the game has not been called, the scum know the town has some way to thwart them. I'm not sure what they could do with that info, but it seems inappropriate.

[Glork]

Well, it's either "Scum auto-win when they should not have" or "Scum don't auto-win, but know that they can lose."


The scum may gain an advantage by knowing they can lose, but that's still a far cry from an auto-win that they might not deserve.

[Kelly Chen]

It seems to me a total matter of opinion whether scum deserve to win at the point where town can only win through night power...

[Glork]

I don't think they do. If the town has power, then the town has every right to use power. Flavor-wise, the Vigilantes won't simply stand down if they're outnumbered... and Doctors won't simply stop trying to save people.

[Nocmen]

I agree with what Glork and Mr. Flay said. If players have actions which COULD change the ending result of the game, they should be able to play it through to use them, regardless of the odds (Even if it is a 1 in 20 shot, they should be able to shoot for that 20th time).

[Mr. Flay]

I guess what I'm trying to say is, whether the town *actually* has power to affect the Nightgame or not, you don't tell the *scum* that in their Win Condition.

[Grek]

Well, it's either "Scum auto-win when they should not have" or "Scum don't auto-win, but know that they can lose."

What if we change it to "You win once your faction is the only one left." It would take a irl day or two longer to finsh a game, but it is perfectly fair.

[somestrangeflea]

It occurs to me that with this win condition, as long as the game has not been called, the scum know the town has some way to thwart them. I'm not sure what they could do with that info, but it seems inappropriate.

Yeah, but we're talking about Open Games, remember? Chances are the scum would know this anyway.

[Thesp]

I think "total victory -- or nothing can prevent same" is the only good answer. the "50% mafia" or ">50% mafia" rules are really an attempt to encapsulate "nothing can prevent same" in numbers.

I agree. >50% mafia doesn't take into account Vigs & SKs. The Mafia win condition should be:

You win when Mafia members are the only survivors, or when nothing can prevent the same.

But do you think the mafia

should

win if it's 2 mafia against a vig and doc only going into Day?

Well, since it's 2v2, there cannot possibly be a lynch. In that situation, it would move straight into night, and the night choices would decide the game.

There is no reason anyone should rationally expect this outcome to occur, and if I were playing in the game, I would be very surprised.

Once the day game is moot, the night game should be, too.

In fact, depending on deadline rules, the mafia should be able to simply both vote for one of the townies, and never move their vote, so that townie would be lynched at a deadline, no? (I understand that wouldn't work for all deadlines, but for most as written, they would!)

But do you think the mafia should win if it's 2 mafia against a vig and doc only going into Day?

No, I don't. Do you?

Yes. There's even some game-historical precedent to the concept that once the mafia reach half of the living players in the game, they come out and openly slaughter everyone left. All games I run feature this aspect - even if the town could theoretically do something at night, they won't make it there.

If the town has power, then the town has every right to use power.

I agree, well before they get endgamed.

[somestrangeflea]

But do you think the mafia should win if it's 2 mafia against a vig and doc only going into Day?

No, I don't. Do you?

Yes. There's even some game-historical precedent to the concept that once the mafia reach half of the living players in the game, they come out and openly slaughter everyone left. All games I run feature this aspect - even if the town could theoretically do something at night, they won't make it there.

Whether or not the game ends at =>50% Mafia could become setup dependant, with some Open Games automatically killing the game at =>50% Mafia, and others playing right to the end.

[Thesp]

But do you think the mafia should win if it's 2 mafia against a vig and doc only going into Day?

No, I don't. Do you?

Yes. There's even some game-historical precedent to the concept that once the mafia reach half of the living players in the game, they come out and openly slaughter everyone left. All games I run feature this aspect - even if the town could theoretically do something at night, they won't make it there.

Whether or not the game ends at =>50% Mafia could become setup dependant, with some Open Games automatically killing the game at =>50% Mafia, and others playing right to the end.

Which should be standard, though? It will make it easier if we determine one way to be standard, and others to be variant thereof for ease of reference.

[somestrangeflea]

But do you think the mafia should win if it's 2 mafia against a vig and doc only going into Day?

No, I don't. Do you?

Yes. There's even some game-historical precedent to the concept that once the mafia reach half of the living players in the game, they come out and openly slaughter everyone left. All games I run feature this aspect - even if the town could theoretically do something at night, they won't make it there.

Whether or not the game ends at =>50% Mafia could become setup dependant, with some Open Games automatically killing the game at =>50% Mafia, and others playing right to the end.

Which should be standard, though? It will make it easier if we determine one way to be standard, and others to be variant thereof for ease of reference.

Hmm... I think the classic method should be standard, simply because that's the way everyone's used to! The other variant can have a fancy name, like "Town Catch-Up" or something...

[Yosarian2]

There is no reason anyone should rationally expect this outcome to occur, and if I were playing in the game, I would be very surprised.

Once the day game is moot, the night game should be, too.

But the day game still isn't moot. There's no lynch, but the town vig and doc still have to figure out who the mafia are to win, and the mafia still has to figure out which townie has which role and how they will use their role in order to win, and that all comes from the discussion that happens or has happened during the day.

In fact, depending on deadline rules, the mafia should be able to simply both vote for one of the townies, and never move their vote, so that townie would be lynched at a deadline, no? (I understand that wouldn't work for all deadlines, but for most as written, they would!)

That's one reason I really, really hate time based deadline rules.

[Mr. Flay]

I think "total victory -- or nothing can prevent same" is the only good answer. the "50% mafia" or ">50% mafia" rules are really an attempt to encapsulate "nothing can prevent same" in numbers.

I agree. >50% mafia doesn't take into account Vigs & SKs. The Mafia win condition should be:

You win when Mafia members are the only survivors, or when nothing can prevent the same.

But do you think the mafia

should

win if it's 2 mafia against a vig and doc only going into Day?

Well, since it's 2v2, there cannot possibly be a lynch. In that situation, it would move straight into night, and the night choices would decide the game.

There is no reason anyone should rationally expect this outcome to occur, and if I were playing in the game, I would be very surprised.

Once the day game is moot, the night game should be, too.

In fact, depending on deadline rules, the mafia should be able to simply both vote for one of the townies, and never move their vote, so that townie would be lynched at a deadline, no? (I understand that wouldn't work for all deadlines, but for most as written, they would!)

But as already mentioned, the day game

isn't

moot yet; the Doc and Vig can change a 3-3 endgame to 3-2 in their favor very quickly. And any two mafia that out themselves by both voting for a townie when a deadline is imposed deserve to get lynched by the remaining players.

But do you think the mafia should win if it's 2 mafia against a vig and doc only going into Day?

No, I don't. Do you?

Yes. There's even some game-historical precedent to the concept that once the mafia reach half of the living players in the game, they come out and openly slaughter everyone left. All games I run feature this aspect - even if the town could theoretically do something at night, they won't make it there.

This is a BIG problem if you're running Open Games this way; it's decidedly unstandard from any game I've ever seen/played in. The town only loses when there is

no way

they can possibly overcome the odds. Any chance, however small, should get played out, unless someone forfeits (as sometimes happens in Newbie Games when a single Mafia is facing a confirmed Cop and Doc).

[Zindaras]

Winning Conditions

You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated and at least one town aligned player is standing.

(I'm not wild about this wording.)

I like this better. This is my standard win condition.

I don't really like standardizing role PMs and such. I think them being Open is more than enough. All role PMs should be public in Open games, and, with that, a lot of the problem is gone.

As far as the Mafia win condition goes, I'm really on the fence on that one. I think I'd just go to day in the proposed scenario (1 Doc, 1 Vig, 2 Mafia heading into day) and just let it run out. Even in that situation, the day game is very relevant. One of the scumbags may want to bus his buddy, the Doc, Vig and Mafia all have something to figure out, even at that point there is something interesting going on.

[Glork]

I agree, well before they get endgamed.

Disagree entirely.

Though this case isn't necessarily applicable for the purposes of our "standardized role PMs for open setups," consider the case of protown players with one-shot abilities. If these players choose to keep their aces up their sleeves, even to the very last possible moment, they should be allowed to use their abilities as long as they are alive. If night chocies can turn the tide of a game, then by all means they should be used.

For example: I asked Adel/Seol in Scrubs Mafia, if my ability to turn a kill back on scum meant that they wouldn't auto-win at "endgame," and when I was told that you would in fact

not

auto-win, I played a little differently. I decided that personal survival was much more important, as my role could very easily swing the game in favor of us (which it did, albeit not at endgame itself).

[mneme]

VM agree with Glork, Flay, Yos2, etc. The "the scum come out during the day and masacre everyone" is really chrome associated with a scum auto-win (ie, avoiding playing out a moot game). It's -not- a rule and not part of Standard Mafia -- where the real rule is total anihilation of opposing sides. There are some funky roles (lyncher, jester) that have wierd insta-win abilities, but in some ways those roles are actually too powerful -- and regardless, the mafia isn't and shouldn't be one of those.

[Kelly Chen]

As always my take on this is "live and let live." But this debate always annoys me.

For one thing it should be obvious that the "50%" camp holds that mafia have an inherent endgaming ability. That makes it pointless to point out that flavorwise it makes no sense that a vig would just stop killing.

For another thing, wth is with saying "the real rule is total annihilation of opposing sides." That's either attacking a strawman, or you guys think the 50% camp is so dumb that they don't even believe mafia win by killing off the town.

I'd also like to see a reference on what is "Standard Mafia." I was not aware that was subject to capitalization. Lacking that, how can you claim that the 50% rule is "really chrome" when the basic game doesn't have vigs or double-voters to make it possible to tell what the practice signifies?

Finally, I'm sure there are any number of points that could be made along the lines of what Glork says in post 45, making a plea for townies with one-shot abilities. Personally I like the 50% rule because I like it to be clear for scum that when they reach a certain ratio, they win. I don't expect anybody else to find that aesthetic preference of mine to be a convincing argument.

[Mr. Flay]

You're arguing uphill. Provide evidence that there are a significant number of games in which scum DO autowin when there are potentially choices left to the town that could revoke 50% dominance. This is literally the first time I've seen a variant interpretation of this win condition's meaning, so yes I think it's

S

tandard

M

afia. But if you need an Argument from Authority, Princeton's definition is, was, and continues to be "If you are a member of the mafia, your goal is to kill off all the civilians in the game. If you are a civilian, your goal is to kill off the mafia before they kill you off."

Furthermore, I'm pretty sure you'll lose to most people on "aesthetics" here, especially if they're looking at it from the perspective of not being scum.

[Kelly Chen]

Why should I have to do that or care about other people's aesthetics? I say the setup designer should be able to implement whichever they like. And confirm it to the players if they so choose.

I am only annoyed by what I see as bad arguments against the 50% rule.