Print

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

[Rysith]

No, this isn't Religious Flamewar Mafia reborn.

I've been playing around with some ideas for alternate mafia win conditions (Why? Because nobody else does it!), and I've found one that I think might work.

The idea would be that in addition to winning through the usual means gaining the majority, the mafia would also be able to win by getting the thread post count to some level (dependent on the number of players, and with some rules in place to prevent blatant mafia auto-posting victories).

Roles would probably be closed, since I've found that closed roles seems to generate more discussion. The flavor, as alluded above, would be a forum attacked by trolls with bannings for lynches and hackings for NKs.

So, any interest in the game and, since it seems like something that hasn't been done before, and comments on the idea or implementation?

[Pandarsenic]

Making discussion counter to the town's goals is never good.

[CobaltKobold]

As a theme mafia, you can always look at Flame Warriors for ideas.

[Servant Corps]

Actually, Rysith, I did GM Alien Mafia some time ago. Each alien had a seperate victory condition that does not involve killing the entire town. Town must stop all aliens from acheving their victory conditions.

I guess I should resurrect that concept again soon.

[dakarian]

Hmm.. let's see: 


I believe the mafia win should be based on votes.  In normal games, the goal is to 'not be the one with the most votes'. 

Why not reverse that?

Flamewars are arguments that go out of control.  The point of an argument is to get the majority of players to go to your side.

We can represent that by votes.. by changing the consequense from negative to positive. 


Whoever gets the most votes wins the current arguement. 

The idea: the town wants al of their members to win the argument, which each one winning each day.

The mafia, however, wants all of their members to win before all of the town does.


Thus, everyone is trying to collect the majority amount of votes. 

i.e.

Servant
Cobalt
Pandar
Dakar(mafia)
Litia(mafia)
Rysith
Vector


Day 1 Vector gets majority votes.  Vector wins the argument and is removed from play

left:
Servant
Cobalt
Pandar
Dakar(mafia)
Litia(mafia)
Rysith

Day 2: Pandar wins the most votes... same thing

Servant
Cobalt
Dakar(mafia)
Litia(mafia)
Rysith

Day 3: If the town can lower their numbers to match the mafia, they win.  However, today Dakar got majority and is removed.

Servant
Cobalt
Litia(mafia)
Rysith

Day 4: final day.  If Litia wins the most votes mafia will win.. If any of the others do, they win. 

[Vector]

Hm... I prefer the postcount one, myself.  Dakarian's version just looks like an inversion of Systematically Make Others Lose... which is clearly so popular that it's not dying at all 

I also think that Servant Corps' idea looks entertaining, but I do not advocate some sort of obscene hybridization of the two.

[CobaltKobold]

I dunno. All-jester mafia MIGHT be interesting. The only rule addition I can think is no self-voting or game too-quickly deadlocks.

[Leafsnail]

It wouldn't be so much like a game full of jesters, as you'd have to tell people why you're not scum before you get them to vote you.  Actually, do the scum have any kind of NK?

[CobaltKobold]

...Mafia nightkills self, wins quickly? Good catch. 

Perhaps a lynchblock?

[Servant Corps]

Even better, give the Mafia a NK, but tell them they have to NK someone other than themselves. The result would be that they would have to NK a Confirmed Townie so as ensure that they're the ones that will be lynched.

[dakarian]

I was thinking no NK since the concept is to be removed. 

Truth is, I had a few ideas in my head but I had a hard time making them balance out.

i.e Make it so that the mafia gains points for each vote they recieve, BUT they still die if they get lynched.  The points are used to perform acts like NKing, roleblocking, and other powers.  They can store up the points, though, and, if they gain enough, they can win.

Best I can do to balance that is to make all of the power roles have a similar feature: you need points to use your power and each vote on you gives you power.

Also you wouldn't be able to self vote and mafia partners don't gain points for voting for each other.  A vote + unvote gives you the point still but same person repeat voting doesn't give more points.

Hard part is to give an incentive for the town to vote instead of lurk. 

Perhaps have mafia powers require recieved votes, but town powers require them to vote.


Another option:

If the mafia can succeed in not getting a single vote on them all day they win instantly.


note: not really sure how to balance any of those.  The idea I gave was the most balanced I could think of.

[Rysith]

Perhaps have mafia powers require recieved votes, but town powers require them to vote.

Wouldn't that cause a lot of either repeat-voting (if you could gain multiple points per day) or self-voting (to avoid potentially giving the mafia points?). It's an interesting idea, though I'm not sure of the best way to integrate it with lynches. Maybe some variant of Kingmaker?

[dakarian]

Also you wouldn't be able to self vote and mafia partners don't gain points for voting for each other.  A vote + unvote gives you the point still but same person repeat voting doesn't give more points.

Thus if I'm your mafia buddy, I can vote for you but you wouldn't gain points.  If we weren't buddies, if I voted for you, unvoted, then vote again, you wouldn't gain extra points (just 1 for the first time I voted).  You wouldn't be allowed to self vote at all.

I would give the town power roles that ONLY functioned if their vote is on another person (though you didn't have to use your power ON that person.  As a cop, I could vote for you then inspect someone else).  Some powers would require you to have voted on two+ people.  Others require you to have a vote on a person before the day ends.  Other requirements could kick in.

Bah, I could give the town access to all powers, but each one takes a different requirement.

I..e

To inspect, you must have spread you vote among three people.  One of those three you may inspect

To protect, you must not have gone without voting for more than 3 hours the entire game-day. 

To Hide, you must have voted for every person at least once.

ext.

Then give each person different requirements.  One person would have easier requirements to inspect while another will have it easier to protect.  Of course, if you fit multiple requirements, you can only do one thing at a time.

Mafia, meanwhile, would gain powers by recieving votes combined between the two of them.  Thus, the most points they could gain is NumberOfPro-Town X 2 (if there's 7 townies, 14 is the maximum that day).  They then spend that points to perform powers. 

Examples:

1 point = the mafiakill (yes, if NOONE votes for you, you can't kill)
3 points = roleblock
10 points = godfather effect
30 points = mass kill: all town are killed.  Aka, the 'instawin'

The mafia would be able to do multiple acts.  Mafiakill+Godfather, Roleblock 3 times, ext.  They can also save points for the next night.

PLEASE NOTE!:  All examples are just to demonstrate the idea.  I did not balance them .  It's just to get the idea.


Thus, the town is compelled to vote not just to make the lynch but to obtain their powers.  The mafia, meanwhile, wants those randomly flung votes and failed bandwagons to grow in strength

[Servant Corps]

Um. Why not just have points accumulate at the END OF THE DAY?

[dakarian]

Because most days end with the town focused on one person that's lynched.  Thus the mafia won't get many points. 

Besides, the concept is to get the mafia to try to bandwagon on themselves but somehow break out of it.  In order for it to work, the vote has to count even after it was removed.