Standardized Rules and Role PMs (Open Games)

[mith]

In the spirit of the Open Games being "standardized", I'd like to have a standard set of rules and role PMs for Mod's to use, both to guide new mods and to avoid things like PM wording and subtle rule changes affecting game play.

Thoughts? I'll post some more on this later, I just wanted to get a thread started now since we're discussing it in scumchat.

[Kelly Chen]

I propose that the townie PM always be public knowledge.

[Drummer]

I think it would be a good idea. This way I won't accidentally give win conditions that let the mafia shut the town down Day 1.

[B Rob]

Yes, I agree with this completely.

I propose that the townie PM always be public knowledge.

Also agree.

[Mr. Flay]

I'd think in an Open Game, all role PMs could be public, like most C9 games.

[Kelly Chen]

Oh oops. Yeah, in an open game I think all role PMs should be public.

As far as what they should say... It depends a bit how much common knowledge and general rules you want to work in. Myself I don't see a big problem with

"You are a/the

Cop

. Every night you can investigate someone. You win with the town."

But I could also see working in:
1. exactly how you investigate someone (PM the mod)
2. the format of your results
3. whether you can be sure of your sanity
4. precisely how the town wins
5. the fact that you're not allowed to talk to anyone outside the game
6. rules on when choices need to be received
7. the rule that if you get NKed, you don't get to post any results you had

[Thesp]

Since no one had done this, I thought I'd put out some preliminary work on the subject. Here are some proposed standard PMs. Post your thoughts on the templating, or provide your own. There is a need for Cult PMs in here, but there are a wide variety of possibilities there.

Winning Conditions

You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated.

(I'm not wild about this wording.)

You are a member of the Mafia with XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX. You may talk with your partners at night. Have one person from the group PM me the name of the player on behalf of the mafia. The named player will be killed.

You win when at least half of the living players are mafia, or when nothing can prevent the same.

(Win condition is important on this one. Note the wording. I'm a big fan of the "...or if nothing can prevent the same" language on mafia/SK win conditions, as it builds in "endgames".)

You win if and only if you are the only player alive, or when nothing can prevent the same.

Role PMs

You are a Doctor. Each night, you may PM me the name of another player. That player will be protected from a single kill effect that night.

You are a Nurse. In the event that a Doctor is killed, you will become a Doctor on the subsequent night. Until that time, you have no nightchoice.

You are a Cop. Each night, you may PM me the name of a player. If that player is alive, I will tell you if that player is Mafia or Not-mafia.

(Could also be "Guilty or Innocent" or "Pro-Town or Anti-Town", but I like only being able to investigate mafia.)

You are a Deputy. In the event that a Cop is killed, you will become a Cop on the subsequent night. Until that time, you have no nightchoice.

You are a Vigilante. Each night, you may PM me the name of a player. You will kill that player.

You are a Mason with XXXXXXXXXX. You know XXXXXXXX to be innocent. You may communicate with your partner at night. You have no nightchoice.

You are Unlynchable. It is impossible for you to be lynched. You have no nightchoice.

You are a Bulletproof Townie. You cannot be killed at night. You have no nightchoice.

You are a Gunsmith. Each night you may PM me the name of a player. I will tell you if that player has a gun or not. Standard roles which have guns are Cops, Vigilantes, Mafia, and Serial Killers.

You are a Roleblocker. Each night, you may PM me the name of a player. That player will be treated as having not made a nightchoice that night.

(Maybe wording should be "...will be treated as having made no nightchoice that night", but this would only be significant if there are circumstances which affect whether you don't make a choice vs. deliberately making a no choice. This eliminates questions of interaction on static abilities, such as that of the Bulletproof Townie. I hate this role anyway, but people insist on putting them in games.)

You are a Miller. If you are investigated, you will show up as though you are a Mafia member. You have no nightchoice.

You are a Martyr. Each night, you may PM me the name of a player. If that player is targetted by an unprevented kill effect, that player will be protected from that kill effect and you will be killed instead.

You are a Suicide Bomber. During the day, you may PM me the name of a player. Both you and that player will be killed. You have no nightchoice.

You are a Townie. You have no nightchoice.

You are a Traitor. You know the mafia to be XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX. You have no nightchoice.

(insert mafia win condition)

(Note: this does not make this player a member of the mafia, and affects the win condition numbers as such.)

You are a Godfather. At night, you cannot be killed. You will show up to investigations as a townie without abilities would.

You are a Serial Killer. Each night, you may PM me the name of a player. You will kill that player.

[mith]

I haven't forgotten about this, just been busy. I'll post some thoughts before the first open game starts, at the latest.

[mith]

Or not.

I am so disorganized right now. It'll get better Tuesday, though.

[Thesp]

I would like to revive this discussion a little bit. I have some proposed language for role PMs a couple of posts up - how does it look to everyone? I'd like to wikifiy it at some point, and I'd like some input on the language of it (especially the pro-town win condition and on cults), and use this as a baseline of Open Games. Thoughts?

[Yosarian2]

Eh. The role PM's should all be public, but I see no reason why they should be standardized. If they're all public, then what harm does it do if mod A words his cop role PM slightly different then mod B?

[Thesp]

Eh. The role PM's should all be public, but I see no reason why they should be standardized. If they're all public, then what harm does it do if mod A words his cop role PM slightly different then mod B?

To some extent, I'd think it'd be trying to prevent vagueness with setups and ensure uniformity with mods, providing an easy tool for mods (especially new or inexperienced mods) to ensure consistent games. For example, in one game I played, I was told I was a cop. That was it - no further delineation of my role. With one result, I received "innocent", and on another result I received "townie" (if I recall correctly). These results can be construed in very different and significant ways, intentionally or not. Granted, the example I'm using was from a closed game, but I can conceive of a similar example arising in an open setup as well. Standard language makes it clear what's going on, and allows the mod to be taken out of it (no needing to ask the mod by

anyone

of how the role works). In this vein, it allows for "dummy mods", where the bulk of the moderator's work is already done, making it easier for them to successfully and easily mod a game without error.

It certainly wouldn't be necessary for every game by any means, but it would be a tool, and would be the most basic tool for Open Games. Thoughts?

[superstring91]

this is going into sitewide standardization. which i am NOT a fan of. the idea of an open game is that all roles are made public right? i think a base set of rules is ok. but the mod should be able to slightly modify them if he/she feels fit. but as far as rules around here go, most are very similar, as new mods take them from old mods [for the most part].

as far as standard role PMs go, i think that is a very bad thing. perhaps some suggested PMs for inexperienced mods, but forcing people to standardize is bad.

[Thesp]

this is going into sitewide standardization. which i am NOT a fan of. the idea of an open game is that all roles are made public right? i think a base set of rules is ok. but the mod should be able to slightly modify them if he/she feels fit. but as far as rules around here go, most are very similar, as new mods take them from old mods [for the most part].

as far as standard role PMs go, i think that is a very bad thing. perhaps some suggested PMs for inexperienced mods, but forcing people to standardize is bad.

I'm only conceiving of standard role PMs as being

necessary

for Open Games, which are supposed to be standard anyway, and only available as a tool for anyone else that wants to use them. They wouldn't be forced upon anyone doing Mini Normals, Large Normals, or any sort of theme game.

[superstring91]

this is going into sitewide standardization. which i am NOT a fan of. the idea of an open game is that all roles are made public right? i think a base set of rules is ok. but the mod should be able to slightly modify them if he/she feels fit. but as far as rules around here go, most are very similar, as new mods take them from old mods [for the most part].

as far as standard role PMs go, i think that is a very bad thing. perhaps some suggested PMs for inexperienced mods, but forcing people to standardize is bad.

I'm only conceiving of standard role PMs as being

necessary

for Open Games, which are supposed to be standard anyway, and only available as a tool for anyone else that wants to use them. They wouldn't be forced upon anyone doing Mini Normals, Large Normals, or any sort of theme game.

i suppose i should really check out the definition of an open game. as far as i know, it just means that all roles are published.

as for the standardization leaking into minis and normals, before the server switch, there was some policy discussion wherre standardization was a big deal. i, as you can see, want minimal standardization [if any]

[DaveMcW]

With a bit more standardization, we can have a bot do the modding.

[superstring91]

With a bit more standardization, we can have a bot do the modding. ;)

i sincerely hope this was a joke. and theres already a bot that does that. its more of a scumchat adaptaion.

if you check out the policy discussio threads, youll see that i am anti-standard.

i am in complete favor of mod creativity. also modding and creating the game is fun.

all the games would be mechanical. cold. heartless.

[Mr. Flay]

With a bit more standardization, we can have a bot do the modding.

That would put so many

humans

scummers out of work, it's not funny...

Seriously, I think in general we have a shortage of players, not mods. The Open, standard, easy setups are just designed to let people ease into the task, as well as making that type of game available for those who want it (I don't, generally). I don't see anything wrong with standardizing Opens and Newbies, but the rest should be largely freeform (though there's some concern about vetting Normals, which is a different issue).

[pablito]

Roleblocker and its interaction with a tracker/watcher...

I've always assumed that a roleblocker interacts at the moment before an action hits its target, not that the roleblocker prevents the action from ever being shown. If a tracker targets a vig (X) who was roleblocked - I thought that the tracker gets "X targetted Y" even though Y is still alive. So I guess this might be an argument to take back to the roleblocker thread, but should the roleblocker be told "That player will be treated as having not made a nightchoice that night."?

For miller, "If you are investigated, you will show up as though you are a Mafia member." Since gunsmith is also included, maybe it should say "as though you are scum" or "as though you are anti-town" or "as though you have a gun" ?

Unlynchable should be listed as Unlynchable townie, right? Most roles are nouns rather than adjectives, so I think that should be standardized.

I think martyr's language needs to be cleaned up. It's too much for some forum players (and we know who they are) to understand. I guess if English isn't a player's first language, the line is hard to understand as well.

Instead of "If that player is targetted by an unprevented kill effect, that player will be protected from that kill effect and you will be killed instead." would "If that player would die that night, you will be killed in his/her stead" or something of the like be better? It just seemed odd that the martyr role PM has more technical language than most other role PMs.

Doctor PM should include self-protect info as well, as some other forums may have self-protection as the norm, or whatnot.

Even though this is mostly for the purpose of open games, if standardize role PMs ever fall into the closed setup territory, gunsmith should include a statement that the cops, mafia, vigilantes, etc. are not necessarily included in the setup and are only a nonexhaustive list of examples.

The mafia win condition section should also include something regarding that one person will actually leave and solely kill the target - because of trackers or roleblockers, etc.

[mneme]

Mafia win condition plus extra:

You are a member of the Mafia with XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX. You may talk with your partners at night. Have one person from the group PM me the name of the player on behalf of the mafia. The named player will be killed.

You win when at least half of the living players are mafia, or when nothing can prevent the same.

(Win condition is important on this one. Note the wording. I'm a big fan of the "...or if nothing can prevent the same" language on mafia/SK win conditions, as it builds in "endgames".)

[/quote]

I see a couple of issues here. One is stylistic (I'd rather say "the named player dies" or "you will the named player"). The other is much more serious -- the VC given allows the mafia to win in non-automatic situations (vig, sk, townie, three mafia, or even the sk, mafia finale). I'd rather have:

Mafia win condition plus extra:

You are a member of the Mafia with XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX. You may talk with your partners at night. Have one person from the group PM me the name of the player on behalf of the mafia (if there's a conflict, the majority wins, ties going to the first PM received). The named player will be killed.

You win when all remaining players are mafia, or when nothing can prevent same.

Also, probably make explicit whether notification will not be given those targeted by a Doctor (who prevents a kill) or a Roleblocker (if they have a night choice) (the default is no-notification, but notification is a common variation, and such issues should also be standard in an Open game)

[mneme]

Hmm. In a Standard game, do the mafia win on a total elimination? Or is that a true Tie?

If the mafia do not win when all players (including all mafia) are eliminatied, the mafia win condition should be:

You win when all non-mafia are dead and at least one mafia member remains, or when nothing can prevent same.

[Mr. Flay]

Also, hypothetically a Doc/Vig combo could prevent Mafia from taking advantage of an "even numbers" endgame; I think "when there are more living Mafia than any other faction, or nothing can prevent that from becoming true" might work better.

[mneme]

Flay: even with more mafia than town, a Sk/vig combo could stop a win:

3 mafia, sk, vig, townie.

the mafia and the sk lynch a townie. (win for mafia! ...maybe not).

During the night, the sk and the vig each kill a mafia member.

the mafia kills the vig.

Tie!

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.

Anothing thing for "standard" rules -- what about differentiation of kills? A lot of mods do this, using different stigmatta for the SK kill vs the mafia kill. Is this kosher? Must be part of the setup? Verbotten? Mod's choice, but must mention this in the front post?

[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.

[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?