Big Cam Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 With the speed of sign ups, the game may not start for a little while. I'm not going to hold the mafia thread hostage until this game gets enough sign ups, and will see the number of players at the end of the week. But it needs 25. I would actually be quite happy to start on March 17. I'm doing some work for an art show on March 16, and would be happy to have to not squeeze my time too much for this beforehand. After that, I have a 6 week vacation. I can start earlier, but it all depends on you! The later in the month the better, for me at least.
def Posted March 6, 2013 Author Posted March 6, 2013 By all means, start thinking about how things might play out. That was one of the things that didn't happen too much, at least publicly, in the last game, discussion of how the mechanics would affect things. Since people have a better idea of how it plays out, discussing it before you get assigned a role and side might be fun! (and keep the thread up) And, about the theme, it is a sequel to Eurobricks Mafia as Eurobricks Mafia was a sequel to Bloodbrick.
TrumpetKing Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Eurobricks was a sequel to Bloodbrick? Or were you just kidding? So will we get to be ourselves again?!
Chromeknight Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Please tell us: 1) Your mafia experience 2) If there is anything you would like changed about the rules before going in 3) Your opinion on pussyfooting Ragnarok, fairy tale and witchbreed. Nope. I'm more of a doggy person myself.
Nightshroud99 Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Well after deliberating with myself I decided I will make time for this game, and attempt to do better. Maybe the momentum of three games will help me. 1)I've been in a lot, I need to list them someday. Most recently the Pearl and EB mafia. 2) Seems pretty good. 3) It's an essential part of the mafia experience, and if it didn't occur games might be better; but also less interesting.
def Posted March 6, 2013 Author Posted March 6, 2013 Eurobricks was a sequel to Bloodbrick? Or were you just kidding? So will we get to be ourselves again?! You couldn't tell? I labeled it a sequel of sorts in the sign up. And the theme was almost identical: mad person locks people up and makes them kill each other. Anyway, this game is not Eurobricks Mafia II, but it will be a worthy successor I would love to tell more, but again, surprises. People should be moderately happy.
Rick Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 As for town certainty of scum, say on night one they fail to recruit, they can be sure that person is: 1) scum 2) SK 3) possibly one of two recruit blocked players or 4) a possible miller. That is likely scum, not guarenteed scum. At the same time, the odds that they're scum goes up as they recruit, since the likelihood that scum block someone already a mason, or a blocker dies/gets lynched, making it a little more sure each night. So the 'recruitment blockers' target the likely conversion targets? That sounds more like a doctor role (not a blocker role), a more powerful role to the scum, and was exactly what I was talking about in my previous post.
def Posted March 6, 2013 Author Posted March 6, 2013 Well, the last game was close. The town was on the verge of flushing the scum out, so I'm working on a fair balance. Masons are a big swing to the town. So, recruitment blockers (on the side of the person being recruited, I would call it a recruiter blocker the other way around) is my suggested balance. It's really a lucky thing, unlikely to be successful. That's my thoughts. Anyone else care to weigh in? Now is the time.
Rick Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Well, the last game was close. The town was on the verge of flushing the scum out, so I'm working on a fair balance. Masons are a big swing to the town. So, recruitment blockers (on the side of the person being recruited, I would call it a recruiter blocker the other way around) is my suggested balance. It's really a lucky thing, unlikely to be successful. That's my thoughts. Anyone else care to weigh in? Now is the time. I'd call a blocker someone who tries to block the person performing the recruitment action, i.e., one of the head masons, and a doctor someone who protects the likely target of a recruitment action (like Scouty and TinyPies for the SK/scum kills in the last game). It's not like it matters what the role title is (you could call it a seer if you like ), but it's a much more powerful scum role if they can target likely targets for recruitment by the masons.
Palathadric Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Thanks for the clarification Pandora and def. What's a "miller?" Also, wouldn't it make more sense to just have normal blockers who can block the conversions, than special recruitment blockers?
Rick Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 What's a "miller?" Mafiascum's Mafiawiki is a great resource. A miller is basically a townie who turns up scum when investigated. Also, wouldn't it make more sense to just have normal blockers who can block the conversions, than special recruitment blockers? If I read def's explanation correctly the recruitment blockers prevent a conversion by targeting the intended target for conversion and not the converter (one of the head masons), so they're not typical blockers who prevent someone from carrying out their action. They work more like doctors trying to prevent a kill.
def Posted March 6, 2013 Author Posted March 6, 2013 There's a second difference in that if a player is blocked, they know the problem is on their end (usually), but if it's in the person being recruited, then the mason wouldn't know how to read it, whether it's scum or possibly town. That's why it would replace a framer, and a godfather. Rick, I know what you mean by doctor, but scum anti-mason-doctor seems just as complicated to explain... No worries, it'll be hammered out satisfactorily by the end.
Rick Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 There's a second difference in that if a player is blocked, they know the problem is on their end (usually), but if it's in the person being recruited, then the mason wouldn't know how to read it, whether it's scum or possibly town. That's why it would replace a framer, and a godfather. That's one of the things I like about the new setup. When a scum conversion failed in the previous game, they didn't know if they tried to recruit one of the killers or an unconvertible townie. The possibility of a failed conversion makes the masons more like the recruiting scum team. It retains the uncertainty about affiliations but without many of the problems with the cop role in the previous game.
Walter Kovacs Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Rick, I know what you mean by doctor, but scum anti-mason-doctor seems just as complicated to explain... No worries, it'll be hammered out satisfactorily by the end. I doubt the scum anti-mason-doctor is going to try and describe his role to the populace at large. He only needs to tell his scummy friends. Now the townie anti-scum-recruiter-doctor-thingie might end up having to roleclaim, but since we've been discussing it here, all players should instantly know what (s)he's talking about. If they don't, I'd consider them scum, trying to confuse and mislead the town. Those evil scum.
Hinckley Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Now the townie anti-scum-recruiter-doctor-thingie might end up having to roleclaim, but since we've been discussing it here, all players should instantly know what (s)he's talking about. If they don't, I'd consider them scum, trying to confuse and mislead the town. Those evil scum. You're laying it on a little thick, there. Clearly Scum. Vote: Walter Kovacs
Walter Kovacs Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 You're laying it on a little thick, there. Clearly Scum. Vote: Walter Kovacs You're right! Clearly scum. Vote: Walter Kovacs Hey, wait a minute...
Dannylonglegs Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 You're right! Clearly scum. Vote: Walter Kovacs Hey, wait a minute... You fool! You've given us away! You're supposed to say: "OMFG You Suck! Vote: Hinckley." ~Insectoid Aristocrat
Piratedave84 Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 I'm curious to see how the first few days will play out; we all know that the influencial players are going to be recruited on both sides first and based on this, the likelyhood of a conversion "block" ealy on is very high; based on how the results would be given, it will be interesting to see how a failed recruitement will be interpreted and if it would be claimed at all. Think about it; if a recruitement fails on night one, are you going to claim (call it out) it on day 2? I don't think so seeing that at that point calling out a falied recruitement would either mean mason (who it is important for the scum to kill) or recruiter-scum (who it is important for town to kill) .... this will prove very, very intersting! What I fear may happen with this setup is that people, at least for the first day or 2, are going to try and determine who is recruitable and to "build" their teams before we see any real involvement, change or results that may garantee a lynch. I can easily foresee a day 1 without a lynch ... unless someone claims something ridiculous ... like lie detector cookies
Walter Kovacs Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 You fool! You've given us away! You're supposed to say: "OMFG You Suck! Vote: Hinckley." ~Insectoid Aristocrat Dammit!. I'm out of practice. Let me try again. OMFG You Suck! Unvote: Walter Kovacs Vote: Hinckley That looks better. And look, we have a wagon forming already. Excellent!
Dannylonglegs Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 What I fear may happen with this setup is that people, at least for the first day or 2, are going to try and determine who is recruitable and to "build" their teams before we see any real involvement, change or results that may garantee a lynch. I can easily foresee a day 1 without a lynch ... unless someone claims something ridiculous ... like lie detector cookies I was a lie detector last game... Dammit!. I'm out of practice. Let me try again. OMFG You Suck! Unvote: Walter Kovacs Vote: Hinckley That looks better. And look, we have a wagon forming already. Excellent! Perfect, no one will ever suspect that we're both members of the scum team. It'd be to risky for us to talk in public like this. ~Insectoid Aristocrat
def Posted March 6, 2013 Author Posted March 6, 2013 What I fear may happen with this setup is that people, at least for the first day or 2, are going to try and determine who is recruitable and to "build" their teams before we see any real involvement, change or results that may garantee a lynch. I can easily foresee a day 1 without a lynch ... unless someone claims something ridiculous ... like lie detector cookies Ah, but voting in my games is mandatory, and it's not a majority rule lynch. The voting is mandatory, but would people prefer a majority rule... or guaranteed lynching?
TrumpetKing Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 I'm impartial to majority voting or highest votes, especially if the day will be a guaranteed 72 hours. There is no point to have a majority lynch if there will be a 72 hour day no matter what, though. I would just stick with the voting from last time. That is, if you were sincerely asking our opinion.
Pandora Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Ah, but voting in my games is mandatory, and it's not a majority rule lynch. The voting is mandatory, but would people prefer a majority rule... or guaranteed lynching? If you think that giving us all the choices now will prevent criticism later, you're sorely mistaken!
fhomess Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 There is no point to have a majority lynch if there will be a 72 hour day no matter what, though. Nonsense. Majority lynch has a significant impact on the game regardless of how long the day is. Much better than highest vote getter. Mandatory vote is also a wonderful invention and should always be enforced when stated as a rule, unlike some recent games here on EB.
Recommended Posts