Suicide rule?

[BrianMcQueso]

Once a player, scum or otherwise, has decided to give up on pleading their innocent and give in to being lynched, should the game be fast-forwarded immediately to the night scene? If a player essentailly concedes the game, should the town still be forced to wait for enough of the players to check in and cast votes before night scene, or should the inevitable just take place once a player votes for themself?

[Phoebus]

Yes. It should be a full lynch.
Voting patterns.

Voting self = easy way out.
Voting self = auto lynch = even worse.

[PeaceBringer]

I find it part of game play and an attempt to establish innocence. Sometimes it is a give up, but it is hard to sort out. I think it should be up to an individual mod as to how they treat "suicidal" votes and stated up front.

[Mr. Flay]

Yes. It should be a full lynch.
Voting patterns.

Voting self = easy way out.
Voting self = auto lynch = even worse.

Okay, now you're just messing with me. That's

three

times we've agreed!

Voting yourself is the sign of either a scum ploy, or a desperate newbie. Either way, don't reward it/sabotage the game by making it an automatic lynch. I don't think in most cases it's too diffuclt to get the remaining votes unless you've got a slew of lurkers, and then your problems are bigger than one self-voter...

[MeMe]

Ditto Phoebus.

And remember that the game's not just about the one player who wants to "give up." It affects everyone playing, to some degree, to have someone quit -- and, unless getting lynched is part of his/her win condition, it's doubtful that someone throwing in the towel figured into balancing the game.

[Phoebus]

Oh wow!
Flay, I think we're going to have to become drinking buddies or something...

[halo freak]

I think ending the day without a majority vote is wrong because the mod is there to run the game, not assume someone will vote for someone and not give them a choice.

[Dasquian]

Self-votes == auto-lynch is a horrible idea in my book, for the reasons outlined above. Self-votes I generally allow, but a few of my friends have disallowed - I can see both sides of the argument, I hate it when someone throws their rattle out of the pram and votes themselves in a tantrum, but OTOH I think there's a few interesting plays and tactical reasons why you might want to vote yourself so I generally allow it.

[mathcam]

To play devil's advocate, suppose that it

is

for some reason advantageous for the mafia to kill themselves, say for the purpose of keeping information from being posted before the day ends. If we're keeping with the thought that the day ends when someone is killed, why

shouldn't

a mafia in that situation be allowed to commit suicide and end the day?

Cam

[Mr. Flay]

I think the mafia should have to put on the actual "lynching vote" that pushes it into majority, or use a day-kill, or something similar, in that case. I don't think most people here are against self-voting, just against self-voting = auto-lynch. A player giving up usually takes care of itself (see PianoGwen in Newbie...73?).

[rajrhcpfreak]

it shouldnt be an autolynch.

checkout Animafia. i had to lynch my self for the town to win. and the town would have won if roland didnt have a one night immunity.

but i had to begg the town to vote for me.

[SpeedyKQ]

Yup, I agree it is better for the game to see how the votes play out. But...

More devil's advocate: if a player wants to die and end the day, they can always just break the rules in an effort to get themself modkilled. Quoting PM's from the mod, or worse, flagrantly disrespectful behavior would do the trick. It could be better to give players a shortcut so they don't have to resort to such things. Right?

[Dasquian]

I'd like to think that most people, however fed up with the game they are, won't break any rules to leave it - out of respect for, if not that game, "the game" as a whole. They might ask for a replacement, encourage their own lynch or place the last vote on themselves, but anyone who's going to go to the lengths of getting mod-killed shouldn't be allowed to play in the first place.

[Someone]

The problem is, there may be a strategic reason why they wanted to be killed... So is breaking the rules to get modkilled within the rules?

In other words, are the rules absolute, or a mechanic of the game?

[Mr. Flay]

Apparently it used to happen that people would get themselves modkilled in order to prevent a "wasted" lynch, because most mods would let the day continue after a modkill. Therefore, if someone was just a townie, they would get themselves bumped off administratively, allowing the town to go after someone else before the end of day. My understanding is that now, generally a modkill results in the end of the Day.

[Iammars]

I've seen both happen. It makes more sense though for a modkill to end the day. It helps disourage suicidal stuff like what we're talking about.

[Dasquian]

I just think that, despite potential tactiacl gain, you should never break the rules to win the game. It's not something the other team should have to deal with, and I would be righteously annoyed if I lost as mafia because the town kept breaking rules at opportune times.

[Norinel]

Wasn't there a Shakespeare mini where you could kill yourself as a night action?

Not entirely relevant to the main discussion, but here are two scenarios where getting lynched (Or modkilled + ending day) actually forces the lynchee's side to win:

1. 5 players in the day- one cult recruiter who has to live for the cult to recruit, one cultist, three townies. The only way the town can prevail is to lynch the recruiter, so if the cultist gets lynched, the recruiter recruits one of the townies and can get majority in two days.
2. 5 players in the day- one mafia spy who know that there are two mafia but not who they are, two mafia who don't know who the spy is, two townies. The mafia and spy could try to coordinate their efforts by claiming scum during the day to lynch a townie, but it'd be much more expedient (And easier if the townies catch on) for the spy to get lynched, giving the mafia majority the next day.

[Yosarian2]

The problem is, there may be a strategic reason why they wanted to be killed... So is breaking the rules to get modkilled within the rules?

In other words, are the rules absolute, or a mechanic of the game?

I think the actual rules, like don't quote or don't communicate outside the game when you're not allowed to, are absolute. Otherwise it might be a good play to "cheat" and message 6 people with the message "I am the cop. Person X, person Y, and person Z are the scum" even if it gets you mod-killed, and I don't think anyone wants to allow blatent cheating.

The only exception are character-specific or game-specific stuff, like getting a PM from the mod that says "You must vote for person X, if you vote for anyone else I'll mod-kill you." In that kind of situation, if for some tactical you want to get mod-killed and so you change your vote, I don't think that's cheating, as I would consider the mod-kill to be part of the mechanic of the game in that case.

[mathcam]

I think the solution here is for the mod to be careful about what punishment he doles out. For example, if the mod realizes that one mafia is modquoting to get himself intentionally modkilled, one solution would be to hand the mafia an automatic loss instead of doing the modkill.

Cam

[Mackay]

I was in a game where the setup was two teams of mafia and two groups of evil townies aligned to a certain mafia group, as well as the town. It was confessing that we were evil that won us the game. In fact, we hadn't realised that there were two mafia groups (it was a minigame), and the whole thing ended in an "I'm the mafia!" "No, I'm the mafia!" argument.

I know that's different to a "you got me, I'm evil. Lynch me now" setup, but one never knows one's luck... if you suspect that you can get enough votes on your side to win the game (as happened here) by confessing to being evil, the last thing you want is an autokill.