The game of mafia has a simple concept. A large group of players known as the town plays against a smaller group of players known as the mafia. In this setup, there are nine players, with seven town and two mafia.
Before the game begins, each players is given a role and an alignment by the moderator. There are two alignments in this setup: Town and Mafia. The town outnumber the mafia, but each individual member of the town does not know the alignment of any of the other members. The mafia know the alignment of everyone on their team and they can discuss the game privately in a special mafia chat. The mafia has access to a nightkill that they may use in the Night phase, while the town occasionally has roles with abilities that are used during the night.
Once everyone has a role, the game begins in the Day phase. During the Day phase, players may discuss the game and each player has a vote that they cast publicly to lynch a player. At the end of the day after some predetermined amount of time, the player with the most votes is lynched. Lynching does two things: it reveals a player's role and alignment, and it removes a player from the game. Once lynched, a player is no longer allowed to post in the thread.
Once the day ends, the game proceeds to Night. During the Night, discussion is prohibited. The mafia team picks a target to nightkill. If available, any town power roles use their actions as well. At the end of the night, the target the mafia chose to nightkill has their role and alignment revealed, and that player is removed from the game in a similar way to being lynched. Once the night ends, the game proceeds to another Day.
Both teams win by eliminating the other. However, due to the nature of the teams, they win very differently. The town win by finding and lynching the mafia, while the mafia win by avoiding being lynched and nightkilling.
This serves as a fairly good overview of a basic mafia game, without being overly confusing in its nature. I have no complaints here.
Potential Roles:
Vanilla Townie - A member of the town with no special abilities.
Vanilla Mafioso - A member of the mafia with no special abilities.
Cop (Town) - A cop may choose to inspect a single player during the night and learn that player's alignment.
Jailkeeper (Town) - A combination of a Roleblocker and a Doctor, a Jailkeeper both protects and blocks the target from acting during the night.
Role Cop (Mafia) - Much like the Town Cop counterpart, the Role Cop investigates a single other during the night to learn their role, instead of their alignment.
The only role that receives the success of their results in this setup is the Cop and Rolecop. All other roles are not informed if they were successful or not.
One of the following setups is used:
1. 1 Mafioso, 1 Mafia Role Cop, 5 Vanilla Townies, Sane Cop, Jailkeeper.
2. 1 Mafioso, 1 Mafia Role Cop, 6 Vanilla Townies, Sane Cop.
3. 1 Mafioso, 1 Mafia Role Cop, 6 Vanilla Townies, Jailkeeper.
I'm rather ambivalent about this setup. On the one hand, most of the high-level games (with the exception of GBU and NSBM) have a large variety of power roles, so in some ways this deprives people of experience controlling a power role, which needs to be handled slightly differently than vanilla town. On the other hand, it encourages players to rely on their wits to scumhunt rather than relying on the power role they possess, and players who do roll up a town power role get to work within a setup where their power is worth a lot more than it otherwise would be, which is a teaching experience in and of itself.
The ICs are here solely to teach new players how to play, but remember, they are also players in the game. This means they have the same chance to be scum as any other player and it is entirely possible for one IC or even both ICs to be scum. Regardless of their alignment, they are obligated to provide you with genuine advice, so that even if you don't trust the IC, you can trust the advice they give. Some ICs will use a special 'IC voice' to alert players that they are delivering honest, unfiltered advice, while some don't.
The ICs have the special privilege of being able to talk while dead. This is so that they can continue to give advice even if they are killed during the course of the game.
As Jack mentioned in his analysis, in general the feared zerg rush to eliminate the IC's doesn't actually happen, so this section is probably sufficient. I usually add my own disclaimers about IC's when I IC a game, but that's up to the preference of the IC what they say.
Death - When you are dead, you are prohibited from posting in the thread. You may make a single 'bah' post after you die, however, it must not contain any game-related information.
Why is the bah post even allowed anyway? I'm kinda curious about the history of that.
PMs - PMs between players are prohibited. You may freely PM the moderator to ask game-related questions, however, what the moderator may reveal is limited.
Do not quote any direct correspondence with the moderator, including role PMs and rule-related queries.
Fair enough, I can't say having pm's adds much to a game such as a BM. And the "no quoting the mod" rule is definitely valid.
Miscellaneous - Use of cryptographic hashing is not permitted. If you want to have hidden/obfuscated messages in your posts for later use, come up with them using your own wetware.
I know I've asked this before, but what is the point behind this rule and what does it prevent?
I'm not an IC, but I once wrote a rant about nolynches on Day One that I think would be beneficial for this audience, so I quote it below. In brief, you can (i.e., it's a valid vote, and if it has majority no lynch will happen) but you shouldn't unless you have a very very good reason. Actual ICs will, of course, chime in with their own thoughts, and there are different considerations to be had in subsequent days; the below applies only for D1.
Even in a game like this, or a role-heavy game like a BYOR, paranormal, or bastard, without a D1 lynch people will lack context for the conversation during the day, which is the very point of the day game. The information lost is not just the flip of a person, but who voted them, with what arguments, and forms the very foundation of how the town power roles will choose their night actions. Information is key, and timely information moreso. People flipping at the start of D2 is not nearly as useful, and a nolynch will result in people using their powers on whoever they were voting (if block/investigate) or a crapshoot for protections and the like, due to lack of context and closure.
A D1 no-lynch pretty much wastes all of D1 content, and gives scum a chance to NK/convert/whatever while town has to shoot in the dark. The amount of information lost is not small, but most importantly, you lose the opportunity to use it. N1 will never come again. Even if you learn the information later, you'll never get that night back, which scum got for free. Not good for town at all.
Also considering the fact that the D1 lynchee is almost always town (when was the last time anyone saw a scum hang D1?),
Not that rare. The very last game I played (Cybrid Mafia 3) we lynched scum D1. A couple games before that (Politibastard) as well, though that was a... different sort of game. I'm sure there are several others.
So sure, it doesn't happen that often, but it certainly does happen. Plus the possibility of a mislynch is built into the balance of the game. If there is going to be one, it's best for town that it happens sooner rather than later, so maximum information is provided early. It's never good, but a D1 no-lynch is worse.
Please disabuse yourself of the notion that a D1 no-lynch is good for town ever. Except in very narrow types of games where constant (not just D1) no-lynch can be used to break the setup (which is not the case here), whenever you think a D1 no-lynch is good because it's cautious, it's misapplied caution, and will hurt town much more than a possible mislynch would.
I disagree with certain portions of this, but in a BM it is definitely a bad idea to D1 no-lynch because of the limited number of town power roles.
A VERY rough sketch of how a scumhunt is done (to help those who aren't sure now).
Step 1: When you have no suspicions on anyone, pick someone at random (I MEAN random.. some use Random.org for this!), take a glance as their past posts, and talk to them, usually with a vote. The goal is not to kill but to learn more about them. The vote is a "Pressure Vote", simply used to make sure they don't ignore you.
Step 2: When someone feels 'off' to you: perhaps you disliked their answer, or maybe they scare you, or confuse you with their text. Perhaps they look fine but your feelings or your gut says something is wrong. Perhaps you see them do one scumtell. Don't ignore it: make them your target. Attack them. Tell them what bothers you about them. Push them, harass them. Tell them how scummy they are. Ask them every question in the book.. and I mean EVERYTHING:
Litia: "You bother me. Vote Dakarian!"
Dak: Meh. Why?
Litia: "Because you bother me. Why are you pushing me off as if it doesn't matter?"
Dak: "What? No, you just have nothing on me."
Litia: "You're voting for Vector. why?"
Dak: "He looked scummy.."
Litia: "Vagueness is a scumtell! "Scummy.. how is he scummy!"
Dak: "He just is.. you don't have a reason to go after me either."
Litia: "OMGUSing now Mr.Scum? Being defensive? You also didn't answer my question!"
Note, this is Step 2: Litia doesn't feel like she knows Dakarian is scum.. just had a 'feeling'. She has no hard evidence, nothing real. The questions are to add pressure.. make Dakarian crack and panic. If you did it right, they WILL town or scum. WHEN they do, you will be able to see more of their true self. From there, decide if you can find them as scum for truth. If you don't: pull out and go to your next suspect: if no one else is there, go back to Step 1.
If you do believe they are scum after that, Step 3:
Step 3: When you believe someone is scum, gather evidence. Find every scum tell, every sign of their true [/list]
The example probably needs to be changed, it's kind of silly and mentions OMGUSing (which is a stupid accusation to begin with). Also, the whole thing recommends tunneling in on people, which is more detrimental to the town in the long run. Actually, this whole thing probably needs to be torn out, the pressure vote has pretty much lost all impact in the actual gameplay.
Scumtells are things that someone does or says that imply that they're scum. Usually the reasoning is that it's bad or not productive for townies to do it, so it can be hard to distinguish signs of being scum from signs of being a noob. This is one of the reasons scum almost always win beginner's mafia games.
Note that scumtells are very very subjective; there's no simple way to distinguish a scumtell from a noobtell from being justified and/or lazy. Whether a justified, non-scummy version of a scumtell should still be called by its normal name varies from person to person. (Someone might describe their voting of someone who voted them as "not an OMGUS," other would say it's "a justified OMGUS" for instance)
The disclaimer needs to be emphasized more, that scumtells are INCREDIBLY subjective. Frankly, the only way to know for sure if something is a scumtell is to know the meta of the person in question: for instance, I wouldn't lynch some people for active-lurking, but if NQT started posting a lot of useless crap it would catch my attention (for example). As another, inverted example from my own meta: normally leading the lynch on a scum player is a sign that one is not scum, but with me it's really a nulltell because I've been known to bus when I believe that the benefits outweigh the risks.
Voting for whoever has the most votes or seems most likely to be lynched, despite having poor/no reasons or not wanting them lynched previously. It implies that you don't care who gets lynched, you just want someone gone, which is generally the case for scum.
It can't be emphasized enough that voting for someone with a lot of votes on them is NOT a bandwagon: a bandwagon is doing so without good reason, particularly when you were going in another direction and suddenly change direction to hop on the wagon.
Short for Oh My God You Suck, by the way. Voting or otherwise applying pressure to whoever's voting you. It implies that you're really concerned about being pressured/lynched and want them to stop, which is more a scum thing. A townie would, in theory, be more open to the notion that their fellow townie is attempting to scumhunt at them, and less concerned about being found out.
Should be removed. Oftentimes I find it's easiest to scumhunt people who are attacking me by pointing out the flaws in their arguments and challenging where their accusations are coming from.
Defending just means what it sounds like: saying things to defend another player's actions or words. Chainsawing or chainsaw defending means attacking someone who's attacking another player in an attempt to get them to stop. The idea in both instances is that townies don't know if their fellow players are innocent or not, and hence have no real reason to defend them from legitimate persecution. Scum, on the other hand, know they're on a team and so are prone to not wanting their buddies found out or pressured.
These are almost never applied because it is so hard to determine what is defending and what is simply scumhunting someone for perceived logical flaws. In theory this is the case, but in practice scum tend to disassociate themselves during the day and coordinate their night actions.
Not posting. Especially suspicious in the case of Active Lurking, which is trying to look active while not actually doing anything (posting frequently but with no substance, for instance). The idea in either case is that townies actually care about finding scum, and so should be doing things. Scum don't care, they just want some random guy lynched so they can kill someone at night.
I have yet to see actually malign lurking occur, and I think it's faded out of the meta overall. Active lurking, however, is still something of a scumtell in some cases. This should probably be simplified to just talk about active lurking.
There's no official name for this one, but being too concerned about your image; specifically avoiding things that might be seen as scumtells. The idea is that scum are very concerned about being found out, and so want to act nonscummy. Townies know they're not scum, so they're less concerned about LOOKING nonscummy and more concerned about finding scum. Note: this is not to be confused with the Too Townie fallacy, a terrible arguement that a lack of scumminess makes a player scum. The Trying to Hard scumtell refers to someone actively trying to appear town, not a lack of scumminess.
I've never seen it used in practice. It's hard to pin down and even harder to prove, and mostly when I feel someone is trying too hard I'll get a sort of vague gut instinct that something is wrong.
This is when a person refuses, simply hasn't or seems reluctant to take a stance, such as lynches. Scum will be concerned about their image, and thus don't want to be seen supporting a town lynch or an attack on a town.
As long as passiveness is distinguished from lack of activity, I don't have much of a problem with this one. Amongst experiences players, being unusually passive does often indicate that something is up.
: When a person changes their stance on a subject after stating it, such as supporting a lynch and after doing so claiming that they didn't do it. This is very suspicious, and is often a sign of scum wanting to retreat their position so as to be able to save their face.
Very rarely seen because most scum aren't that stupid, and most backtracking I have seen is due to forgetfulness more than anything else.
: Well this should be obvious, right? It happens when someone fakeclaims (says they're a cop/doc, but is just town for example), fabricates evidence and stuff like that.
Ehhhhhh.... I disagree in some cases. While in a BM lying is a fairly good sign that something is up, this being a general scumtell is a discourager on gambits and deception tactics used by the town to mess with the mafia's heads.
: Trying to find powerroles (cop and doc in vanilla Mafia), often via questioning.
Ehhh... I guess? Within a BM maybe, but rolefishing for town power roles is a decent strategy for doctors wanting to find someone to protect as well.
Resigning yourself to being lynched.
Saying something like "there's no way for me to avoid being lynched so I won't bother trying"
Blackmailing the town, like "You can lynch me, but you'll be sorry when you see I was town all along!"
Voting yourself for any reason.
Anope. I have never, ever seen a scum do this as an AtE, and even though it might happen it's really just a tell that someone is fed up with the game and wants to be lynched, so it's a nulltell at most.
Author
Topic: Mafia Theory (Read 76158 times)