Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Skynet]

Kinda. I never played in a game with an arsonist, but the mafiascum wiki claims that the arsonists covertly prime their targets (so targets don't know that the Arsonist is planning on killing them later on). In my proposed fix, Cultists know they've been targeted by the Cult Leader, which theoretically gives anti-Cult forces some more info to work with (assuming the Cultists claim in thread that they've been converted).

[Jim Groovester]

If you gave the town more factional resources, i.e., stuff they could vote to use, I think a cult game with unlimited converts could be balanced. I was thinking about this some time ago and what I thought of was a public alignment inspect that the town could vote for and then the lynch.

That way the town gets double the information to balance what webadict pointed out, that the cult effectively has a double kill. The town could use the public inspect to confirm their town core, or use it offensively to find cultists, and then the lynch serves the same purpose it normally does.

Maybe the public inspect and the lynch could be used in the same phase, or maybe separate phases. Maybe the inspect first, maybe the lynch first. Doesn't need to be a public inspect, could be just another lynch, maybe a public roleblock, etc.

I've been pondering ways to make cults better. One-shots aren't too bad, but I'd like to find a way to make other types a bit less snowbally. Maybe a Mark one night and convert the next would help? It'd dramatically reduce the number of converts they get a day.

I'm assuming this would be in a Supernatural context where you would want to obscure the nature of the scumteam and wouldn't necessarily want to fiddle with too many of the normal mafia mechanics. That limits things to team and role balancing which sort of works but has historically made for pretty swingy games.

[webadict]

Actually a game where the mechanics are controlled by vote could be fairly well balanced for cult. The biggest reason for this is that the results are completely trustable.

I think it would be an interesting game where you can Inspect someone publicly, then choose to Roleblock (maybe Jailkeep would be a better flavor fit here) someone publicly, and then Eliminate someone all publicly. There are upsides on why a Cult works well in that mode:

Mafia teams rely on the removal of information to succeed, but Cults already have that factor baked in. They make information no longer trustable after a Day, so the public information can't be confirmed the Day after. Likewise, the Roleblock isn't confirmable in a Cult game because there is no immediate flip like with Mafiakills.

I actually see that as a very doable gametype, especially if everyone is a Vanilla Townie except the Cult Leader. If you want options for different player sizes, remove the Inspect and Roleblock on the first Day (or allow a Night 0 convert).

For flavor, just imagine a quarantine zone in some big laboratory with fancy equipment that you can all use.

It's definirely a viable game mode.

[TolyK]

I like the idea of a public inspect power & cult. Here's two ideas:

Spoiler: Automatic Removal (click to show/hide)

Roles:

• Cult Leader
• Townies

Starts either from the night or the day.

Night:

• The Cult Leader meets converts a person to a Cultist.
• (maybe?) The Cult Leader role transfers to the person just converted.
• (maybe?) Cultists also keep their original abilities, but can only use one per night.
• (maybe?) Cultists only know who converted them, not other cultists.

Day:

• Players vote for who to inspect.
• If the player inspects as a Cultist, they are immediately removed.
• If the player inspects as Townie, they are protected from conversion the next night.
• Inspection shows whether they were a Cultist the previous day. That is, someone converted last night is shown as town.

Potential problems:

• Need to check whether a delayed inspection is essentially useless. Cultists might push for the most-recently-converted player to be inspected.
• If the Cult Leader role moves via conversions, that sort of contradicts the inspection "lore".

Spoiler: Discussion & Trial (click to show/hide)

Roles:

• Cult Leader
• Townies
• (other roles)

Discussion phase:

• Players discuss and publicly (or should it be "privately"?) vote for who the town should investigate.
• Cult Leader can convert a player to a Cultist at any point during this phase (or in the beginning of the phase?).
• After voting, the investigation occurs: is this player a Cultist (or were they a cultist before today)? The result is public.

Trial phase:

• Players privately vote whether to remove the player.
• Perhaps roles may be active here (e.g. town vote stealer, that can become a cultist vote stealer).

Potential problems:

• Experienced players will probably be inspected first.
• There need to be reasons to not remove someone who inspected as Cultist, or reasons to remove someone who's inspected as Town.

I think there's a lot of idea space here...

[Vector]

TolyK you should run more stuff

[Toaster]

+1

[TolyK]

After I move (probably in ~2 weeks) I fully intend to run a Bay12 forum mafia game using the engine & bot Wuba and I are developing. 

[webadict]

After I move (probably in ~2 weeks) I fully intend to run a Bay12 forum mafia game using the engine & bot Wuba and I are developing. 

I've done like zero work on that bot. It's pretty much been all TolyK.

[TolyK]

Not true - I based a lot of the forum-posting code from yours, and I've bounced a lot of ideas off you. Rubber ducks are important!

Also, reading through the initial posts of Magic Mafia MM, I actually got an idea from Jim.
Most mafia games have a "cold start", with very little public information on people.
Usually this is resolved by RVS, but that's not usually very engaging.

To prevent this, it might be cool to have some public, player-specific information in the day open that can lead to lines of inquiry. This would be baked into each (custom) role, or only a subset of roles, but would probably need to have some elements of truth for it to actually start meaningful discussion.

A great example from memory was the "Mein Kampf" game, where the flavor gave a really good starting point (though iirc there was an RVS anyways). "Iron Diadem" was also flavor-heavy and started well. I think that it's easier to give "flavor hints" in flavorful games, but I'm interested in how to do it "fairly" in non-flavorful games as well.

[Vector]

mm, yes... praise...

[FallacyofUrist]

Ten things I've learned about / realized about modding BYORs:

1: People are a lot more willing to accept random bullshit in a BYOR game. Obviously if there's too much, it won't be well received anyways, but by signing up for a BYOR you're signing up to a more flexible game than most. You could even say the random bullshit is part of the appeal of the BYOR genre.
2: Checks and balances and role weights are important. There are no vanilla roles - everyone has their own powers, ideally with a strong degree of uniqueness. But you have to prepare for each single player's 'special thing' by including multiple counterbalances for that 'special thing'.
3: Every player should have something special or unique - or occasionally shared in a manner that makes the sharing feel special. (Like for example a mason group.) The specialness shouldn't be able to dominate the whole game - at least, not by itself - but it should give the player a sense of 'this is awesome' attached.
4: Aside from the checks and balances thing, positive interactions should exist as well, or at least be possible. It's entirely okay if you don't predict everything that might come from an ability, okay for you to laugh along with the players when an infinite action loop accidentally shows up... but that sort of thing being possible also helps makes BYORs feel special. The intersection of the specialness of two players is allowed to be game-breaking if it's unlikely to happen. When or if it does happen, it'll be amusing for everyone.
5: It's perfectly fine to get creative in role name interpretation, especially if it feels like the player is trying to force a specific result (like with a Shakeragian role).
6: Third parties are very disadvantaged unless they either create a team for themselves (cult for example) or attach to an already existing team (mafia-ally for example). To compensate for this, third parties should be given just a bit more power or security.
7: The more work you give to yourself, the more bloated the game gets, the more likely things are to just... go downhill. Be careful with randomness, meta-abilities (such an ability that improves other abilities arbitrarily), day powers (you can mitigate this by having a specific time of day you evaluate day abilities), and so on. If you do include any of these bloating elements, don't use them pointlessly - use them as part of a player's special element, or as 'spice' in moderation.
8: In addition to individual checks and balances, you should also consider whole groups - and sometimes even the composition of those groups. Based on what I read in the aftermath of Mostly Vanilla Mafia 1, a third mafia member instead of a mafia-ally would have been reasonable, for example, and helped stop the immense town-sided swing that occurred in that game.
9: The game should ideally be just as fun for you to run as a mod as the fun the players will have. Your own well-being as the runner of the game matters too.
10: Double or even triple-check your action resolution docs. If you own up to your mistakes you'll probably be forgiven, but better to avoid making them in the first place.

With all this laid out? Now I feel ready to run FBYOR5, once it's my turn.

[webadict]

1: There are still things people won't expect, but this should be fine. I think leaving crumbs might be a good idea.
2: Yes. Having 2 or 3 counters or checks on a role is important. If those counters die, then that's just how the dice roll.
3: Not necessarily. I think sometimes uniqueness is good, but you should consider forsaking uniqueness for fun.
4: Yes. For the most part, if something bad happens, try to fix it however you can.
5: Sometimes, yes. Sometimes, you have to know your crowd.
6: I think something like a Kill-less Assassin would make for a good third party, since they can win early. Third parties should be used sparingly, or when you need 5 SKs.
7: True. In fact, I'd say that if you use a Day action, make it a one-shot, or kill the player when they use it.
8: Yes, group balance is good, but consider that the Mafia, on average, should likely be more powerful than the average Town player, but as a group, they should be slightly less powerful.
9: There is no preparations that can make it easier to run a game.
10: I suggest using a spreadsheet. Since I use priorities, I can sort my actions after I write them out for each player.

[Toaster]

Don't try to force roles to fit a mold.  I did that with BYOP (everyone had an action, an auto, and a one-shot) and a lot of them were just me shoehorning in something "interesting".  Granted, I could probably had made more interesting role combos with 13 players, but that game had 19.

[TricMagic]

Go for it Fal! *pushy pushy*

[EuchreJack]

My biggest problem with Cults is that the player HAS TO change role.  My idea was for an optional cult, where the player can either chose to abandon their team for the Cult, or stay on Team Whatever.  Probably with some mechanic so they can't remain undecided forever. Anything where the player can make choices to optimize their personal chances of winning I think is better that forcing anything on them as the mod.  Probably easier for the community to read those players too.

Speaking on the theory of mod "fairness", I was also thinking of a player role where one player would be told all the rules and current roles in play honestly and clearly by the mod in a game where everyone else is in the dark about such things.  And updated as the mod changes those things. That role is the only role that player gets.  Not sure on the ideal name for that role. Seer? Bastard Mod's Best Friend? Cthulhu?