Print

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

[CobaltKobold]

Only madmen would want Horrible Bastard

but but

Spoiler: game spoiler (click to show/hide)

Best Ending! Should totally allow Happily Ever After in Horrible Bastard.

[Vector]

Only madmen would want Horrible Bastard

I was actually thinking about how much I was looking forward to playing Horrible Bastard >_>

[Cheeetar]

An idea I've had for a mafia is Ulterior Motive Mafia. Everyone is third party except for a small (3 out of 15?) amount of townies. The townies are a survivor group and have to protect each other, while the third parties all have win conditions that make no sense, like getting at least 3 people to roleclaim or have somebody say that they obviously have a 'insert win condition here'. Also, with jesters, and some people would have night actions as well to support their motives.

Of course, I am much too lazy to do this myself.

Edit: Have less than 7 people win at the end of the game. Have less than 7 people dead by the end of the game.

And I forgot to mention this but the game will end after day 5.

[Vector]

An idea I've had for a mafia is Ulterior Motive Mafia. Everyone is third party except for a small (3 out of 15?) amount of townies. The townies are a survivor group and have to protect each other, while the third parties all have win conditions that make no sense, like getting at least 3 people to roleclaim or have somebody say that they obviously have a 'insert win condition here'. Also, with jesters, and some people would have night actions as well to support their motives.

Of course, I am much too lazy to do this myself.

... I'd love to play this, too, provided that we got some good balancing on it.  The ridiculous win-conditions seem like they'd be particularly fun.

[CobaltKobold]

Would need some killers, or you're totally gonna get a Happily E'er After right quick.

[Vector]

I was actually thinking it might be fun to have scum vs. 3rd-party folks, no town.  Scum works like a survivor group anyway, and the NK would take care of the Happily Ever After problems.

[dakarian]

Ulterior Motive Mafia sounds like evil fun.  Balancing WILL be required though, along with a driving force for the 'town' since there's no mafia for them to kill.

[Leafsnail]

Well, if the SK/ scum/ whatever were overeager, it would prevent happily ever after endings, I suppose.

[dakarian]

Not so much a new game as it is a rule addition.

ReVote:

The game is set to deadlines, but each RL day the votes are cleared.  What's more, voting marks your attendance, NOT regular posts.  To be considered 'active' you essentually need to vote, each day.  It also means you'll need to restate your wish to vote for the person you are after.   

Of course, there will be at least 24 hours in between a 'vote wipe' and End Of Day.  It will, meanwhile, stop people from making meh posts to try to stay active and will help keep up debate as people have to now explain why they put their vote in each day.  It'll also be MUCh easier to see who's inactive by just looking at the 'Not voting' list.

[Leafsnail]

Hmm... perhaps you could keep a record of each votecount in the OP?  It would allow for some serious deep scanning/ vote analysis, so it could be interesting.

[dakarian]

Hmm.. isn't that something the town should be doing for themselves?  I know I'm not going to edit anything, so it will be clear how the votes move about as you reread the thread.

i.e. When wiping I'll do a last vote count to show what the vote count was last on before the wipe.

[Pandarsenic]

What about when they're at Lylo?

[dakarian]

It'll fade out and just go to the original system (hammer, deadline, END, begging the mod to PLEASE let them go)

[Vector]

Here to request more small (i.e., 9-person) games and bastard mods... especially small bastard mods.  Hell, I'd even play a small BYOR or mountainous--I'm fond of behavior-only games, too.  I'm just sick of trying to pull scum out of these gigantic lineups of what, 20 people?  Yeah, I think there's some game like that running around.

Advance apologies to Pandarsenic.  My stamina for that one is approaching zero.

The game is set to deadlines, but each RL day the votes are cleared.  What's more, voting marks your attendance, NOT regular posts.  To be considered 'active' you essentually need to vote, each day.  It also means you'll need to restate your wish to vote for the person you are after.  

Of course, there will be at least 24 hours in between a 'vote wipe' and End Of Day.  It will, meanwhile, stop people from making meh posts to try to stay active and will help keep up debate as people have to now explain why they put their vote in each day.  It'll also be MUCh easier to see who's inactive by just looking at the 'Not voting' list.

What you don't seem to understand is that you can make meh posts and vote, and that this is quickly going to turn into the cycle that showed up at the end of NSBMII (Vote, revote, vote, revote, rather than extension, extension, extension).  The system is cumbersome and is just going to make the active players want to stop playing, I think.

Though this focuses the town more on lurkers, lurker-focus is going to kill games as well unless we say "Okay, scum and town are dedicated to getting the first 4 kills of the game off on lurkers so that at least the endgame will be fun."  I just can't see this working.

We're all trying extremely hard to quantify lurking and convince the town to lurkerhunt and prod consistent lurkers into action.  The thing is that most lurkers don't want to come be active.  It'll work for someone like me, who gets so wrapped up in one game that he forgets about the other ones.  It's not going to work for somebody who really isn't that interested in posting.

Players are fairly good at regulating your standard semi-lurker, i.e. JanusTwoFace, Mephansteras, and Rysith.  They can't regulate the consistent lurker/noninformative poster in-game, and you can't either.  Sometimes you really can only exclude people, or set a lurker limit--one known persistent lurker/meh poster per 2 other players above the initial 3.  That means a 9-person game would have 3 lurkers max; 12-person would have 3, and so on.


It's the only thing I can think of, bar banning particular players from games in general.

[Neruz]

Might be interesting to run a 7 or 9 man bastard game, i've got a couple of interesting bastard role ideas that would work rather well in a smaller game, but fall apart rather quickly in a larger one.