Board 8 > Alcohol Mafia Topic 4: I don't think I tol;d you guys yet but im' crunk

(+) Yeah! (+)

A scum daykill is fine, especially if it has stipulations. The problem is that Executioner stops Town getting a chance to lynch, which is kinda miserable to play for them. As a general rule, punishing Town by preventing them from lynching is not very fun and a pain to balance - in the same vein as having roles that punish Town for killing anti-Town roles like Jester or Scum Bomb.

We talk about things that are banned on b8 every now and then and if anyone actually has that as a list or something, do show, because if it only exists as something that was "oh yeah we all verbally agreed on this 5 years ago in a post game discussion" then I don't blame anyone for not knowing it at all.

I am taking this as a challenge to make banned role mafia

I think it's cool of you just simply give the disclaimer. When Chris did a role madness game I thought it would be more crazy things like that.

I'm not sure scum executioner was even the worst role in the game. Gambler was just as bad. Two day ends from an ability was the problem.

I think instead of a banned role list it's better to know why they're banned in the first place.

Scum gets to control a lynch, well, that sucks, but if the setup is super town stacked that's doable. I think people would whine if I could only use my ability with mayor timing, but if it did that I wouldn't think it was bad in that setup.

I take flak to this day for suggesting Death Miller when the setup I suggested for it was better than the one we had. No one actually brings up the insane psychic which is more deserving of a ban than Scum executioner or death Miller.

So what makes a role bad? If it actively makes the game less fun and can't be solved, basically. Insane psychic does both of those. Death Miller does both (MOST of the time-- the setup I suggested for it was actually clever). Scum executioner actually can be solved and must just be balanced for accordingly. It does make the game less fun though. But so does a Gambler that ends day.

Yeah this is why I kind of want to make banned role mafia, because it isnt that the roles themselves are broken. Its not like any of these roles are infinite shot day vigs or something that just fundamentally break the game, its that they arent fun and punish players for playing mafia well

Many of these roles could be used in a way that doesnt do that, but understanding the concept is more important than a list of banned roles

I agree with basically all of that and I don't necessarily want a banned role list either, it's just odd to tell something they shouldn't have used a banned role when they had absolutely no chance to know that it was.

ctesjbuvf posted...

I agree with basically all of that and I don't necessarily want a banned role list either, it's just odd to tell something they shouldn't have used a banned role when they had absolutely no chance to know that it was.

There has always been a banned role list.

Corrik7 posted...

There has always been a banned role list.

Where

ctesjbuvf posted...

We talk about things that are banned on b8 every now and then and if anyone actually has that as a list or something, do show, because if it only exists as something that was "oh yeah we all verbally agreed on this 5 years ago in a post game discussion" then I don't blame anyone for not knowing it at all.

Didn't realize you asked this.

1. Jester
2. Death Miller
3. Roles the punish town for lynching correctly (scum bomb etc)
4. Roles that let non-town take control of the lynch without opportunity to lynch correctly. (scum gladiator that can choose two town etc)

These have always been banned on board 8. If you want to host a game outside of these rules, you simply label it experimental and announce it will not follow normal rules.

Another rule is
The host cannot lie to the player or the game. This is why Death Miller is banned. Because the host tells the game the alignment is something it is not.

You can be uninformed Miller, but the host cannot say you will scan town if you are uninformed Miller, for example.

We used to have a rule list. What happened to it.

Corrik7 posted...

You can be uninformed Miller, but the host cannot say you will scan town if you are uninformed Miller, for example

Basically not lying to the player purely on technicality-- anyone arguing uninformed Miller is a role that should be allowed doesn't understand why roles should and shouldn't be banned

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Everyone wants the benefits of a bureaucracy but no one wants to be a bureaucrat!

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]



I did admit I completely fucked this one up

Requiring unvotes is functionally useless.

If people don't keep track of if they have a vote down or not, it becomes standard for people to just always unvote when placing a vote down. Even if they don't have a vote down. But if people are always unvoting, you might as well not require it.

Unvoting serves the purpose of removing a player's vote. That's what it does. The reason hosts like unvotes is because it clues them in when updating votals (but this is unnecessary if the host has eyes).

Besides, with how long days are, I don't think it's fair to the players to require them to sift back through pages and pages of topics to try to find votals, to keep track of who has a vote down or not, for themselves AND other players, if host is not providing votals very frequently.

As it's been said, the actual effect of not requiring unvotes is usually just that somebody wants to put a vote down, gets told they forgot to unvote, then puts a vote down.

I'm pretty sure what started this trend of hosts requiring unvotes was like, somebody mistakenly requiring them at some point and then everyone going along with it (may have been a Sultan game, even??)

HanOfTheNekos posted...

I'm pretty sure what started this trend of hosts requiring unvotes was like, somebody mistakenly requiring them at some point and then everyone going along with it (may have been a Sultan game, even??)

This has been a thing long before Sultan began hosting. I just checked FFVII mafia from 2011 on the old Mafia board

Votes not made in this format will not be counted. You must unvote if you intend on changing your vote. New votes won't count if you don't unvote

I checked Fettbox yesterday and I wasn't finding that rule.

Unvote necessities are definitely not a recent trend

I didn't play in game during that time much, so maybe this is a thing where it did spring up and I never thought of it. Regardless of history, I stand by it. I don't think the rule has enough of a point.

I did another quick skim. It seems like requiring unvotes happened post-Fettbox, but pre-mafia board. It didn't look to be a result of Dels bringing mafia to CE.

Now I'm just curious to see how this started. But I think logging faqs goes back to the beginning of using that Mafia board anyway, so idk.

I scammed a town win with it the rule has peaked now and should retire

New banned role and mechanic lists - everything that lopen has ever clinched a win with

I'm OK with this as long as we include stuff I caused a loss with too so we can get Insane Psychic on there.

I think there's an acceptable niche for some "lying" rules.

Like, a Mafia framer serves a similar purpose as a godfather.

But if you included one of those, you'd probably want to adjust balance a little more towards Town side to allow for Town taking big hits on account of it being an unfamiliar role.

Lopen posted...

I'm OK with this as long as we include stuff I caused a loss with too so we can get Insane Psychic on there.

The problem with your role was it was RNG I believe. Wasn't it?

Here's the "central" Discord server link, again:
https://discord.gg/f6f2naes

Let's compose a ruleset that can be referenced here at any given time.

HanOfTheNekos posted...

I did another quick skim. It seems like requiring unvotes happened post-Fettbox, but pre-mafia board. It didn't look to be a result of Dels bringing mafia to CE.

Now I'm just curious to see how this started. But I think logging faqs goes back to the beginning of using that Mafia board anyway, so idk.

I didn't join CE Mafia til a while after it started, but we always required unvotes there. We also always had them on the Pokmon boards which spun off from the Smash boards (and both melded into CE) iirc? Idk how or if those latter two link into here, but it's pretty safe to say from that info that unvotes were around by 2013 at the latest.

Dels was the pioneer of bringing mafia to CE and he never required unvotes in his rules.

It happened sometime June of 2010 - June of 2011.

I mean, near as I can tell, Plum was the first host to require it.

HanOfTheNekos posted...

I did another quick skim. It seems like requiring unvotes happened post-Fettbox, but pre-mafia board. It didn't look to be a result of Dels bringing mafia to CE.

Now I'm just curious to see how this started. But I think logging faqs goes back to the beginning of using that Mafia board anyway, so idk.

honestly it feels like something cokes would have done, let's blame him

e: taking a look I think Dark Tower was the first one that used it, I recall cokes/FFD discussing it in the discussion topics at the time.

I think we typically did the unvote first, I think we technically couldn't vote for someone if we hadn't unvoted yet. it didn't need to be a rule. but I think we ran into some issues, maybe in the newbie mafia topics. I'd have to look over stargate to see if it was annoying for FFD.

It's been so long so I have no memory of if we did unvotes or not on TPSB. I found a logged page from October 2010 under Regaro's site (?) And I don't see unvotes there.

I forgot about so many of these names. Wow. Blast from the past.

I've just been kinda lurking watching these games, but on the topic of lying rules & such, I kind of remember something like in the Star Wars + Pokemon game, there was a point where the host had the lynched player post their own role flip & stuff, and they turned out to be Ditto as scum... I thought there was a chance that the "Ditto" part was really that they could write whatever they wanted for their own flip, with certain restrictions like keeping the Ditto / scum parts and having to post it themselves, maybe having the real role revealed after a certain amount of time...

GameBopAdv posted...

I've just been kinda lurking watching these games, but on the topic of lying rules & such, I kind of remember something like in the Star Wars + Pokemon game, there was a point where the host had the lynched player post their own role flip & stuff, and they turned out to be Ditto as scum... I thought there was a chance that the "Ditto" part was really that they could write whatever they wanted for their own flip, with certain restrictions like keeping the Ditto / scum parts and having to post it themselves, maybe having the real role revealed after a certain amount of time...

That could be a neat idea, but in that instance, the player could just give the host what they wanted to be posted.

I mean, there's a "Janitor" role which prevents a dead body from flipping. You could just variation on it - the flipped body has to be the right alignment, but everything else is player provided.

Again, it's a "lying" role. But usually Hosts post in the rules if "All flips are 100% truth".

HanOfTheNekos posted...

That could be a neat idea, but in that instance, the player could just give the host what they wanted to be posted.

I mean, there's a "Janitor" role which prevents a dead body from flipping. You could just variation on it - the flipped body has to be the right alignment, but everything else is player provided.

Again, it's a "lying" role. But usually Hosts post in the rules if "All flips are 100% truth".

mafia coroner

Corrik7 posted...

The problem with your role was it was RNG I believe. Wasn't it?

Yep. It is my major regret from the game.