Mafiascum.net

Any love for an NFL mafia?

Other than the actual NFL Mafia?

Kind of a game I'd suggest running toward the beginning of the season rather than during the off season, but that's just me.

Mr. Flay wrote:War in Heaven III is coming this year. When should I do it, spring, summer, or fall? This will be a Large Theme game, obviously. Deadlines and such should run comparative to the last one, so it'll last somewhere between 3 days and 3 months, I'm guessing.

Size is up for grabs (possibly indefinite, if mith buys my plan).

please explain

explain what part?

So riffing off of webcam mafia... I just didn't know how much I liked just a game that had a youtube posting requirement. Thinking about it, that could lead to some very inactive people who I have to decide to replace and that's not good for the game -- especially in the 9 person game I was considering. But taking that concept and refining it what about...



1. The game will have posting as normal.
2. It will also encourage players to post two different types of posts for players to get reads: handwritten notes and youtube videos of the person talking about the game.

3. Each player gets 5 slots per game day. One slot can only be used for a handwritten message, one slot can only be used for a youtube video, and the other three slots can be used for either or an audio clip.
5. A player may only use up one slot per real time day.
6. At any point before the game day ends, a player may send a PM to the mod with the slots he's using. (e.g. "I posted a handwritten note, two video clips, and an audio clip).

7. A handwritten note is worth 1 point. An audio clip (either video without showing the person's face or just audio) is worth 3 points. A youtube video showing the person's face unobscured for at least 30 seconds is worth 5 points. To get the points, they must pertain to the game at hand in some manner.
8. Before the night begins, I will give one to three players power roles. This will be chosen using a random number generator, BUT the more points you had the previous day, the better chance you have to get it. So, if you had the maximum 21 points and other players combined had 79 points, you'd have a 21% chance of getting each power role. It may be possible to get more than one!

And that's the basics for the game. Obviously this violates the general "randomness=bad" concept, but I think it's worth it. It'll mean the setup is pretty swingy, but I think I can balance it so that each side has a reasonable chance... I may give the mafia some sort of point multiplier, and I may set up in advance the power roles that are given out in various situations (e.g. IF town < 8 AND scum > 2 THEN power role is cop; IF town > 10 AND scum < 2 THEN power role is one shot doctor) and it's possible I could make it so that town and scum get different powers (that may make more sense, but there's surely value in scum getting a town power role so that town can't use it).

The idea is to encourage players to post things that could give opponents more opportunity to scum read beyond just typed text but not force everyone to do it on a time table and allow multiple means of doing it. For example, no player would be forced to show their face, which I think some players are hesitant to do, but it'll reward those who do.

Thoughts?

I like the idea, zoraster. Might even be interested in playing, actually.

I had a similar idea for a while, where everyone would have to post audio file versions of their posts (like face-to-face without the face-showing, and transcripts for the audio), but wasn't sure if that was interesting enough. Didn't even consider something like that...

---

Would anyone be interested in a "Whose Line Is It Anyway?" Mafia? It would be a normal setup that runs on post restrictions (think Quirkytown, sorta) and each gameday would have a different restriction.

- Party Quirks/Let's Make A Date would require the posters to post in certain personalities during that gameday.
- Film, TV & Theatre Styles would have one person randomly decide a game-wide post restriction that applies to one of those categories. One person would be randomly assigned for this role and it would change every RL day.
- Questions Only is self-explanatory.

And so on. It could definitely work as a Mini Theme, although maybe I can convert enough of the games to a mafia equivalent and eventually run it as a Large Theme.

Has Tropes Mafia been suggested yet? If not, I'd like to throw in the idea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good tropes, bad tropes, and weird tropes. Every story out there has at least one.
...and now every story has one . Yeah, that's right. Someone out there destroyed a literary . How? Nobody knows. The only knowledge anyone has on the subject is that it's gone now. So all the other tropes (oddly enough) gathered together to try to solve the...murder? You get the point.

Night powers would probably based on what trope a person gets (i.e. I Just Want To Be Special would probably be a (insert role here) backup, Heroic Neutral might be a survivor). Scum? Whatever you want them to be.


Large Themed would probably be the way to go for this.

I think someone's working on/called dibs on TVTropes Mafia (similar enough, if not the same thing). Don't remember who, though.

I'd play.

zoraster wrote:So riffing off of webcam mafia... I just didn't know how much I liked just a game that had a youtube posting requirement. Thinking about it, that could lead to some very inactive people who I have to decide to replace and that's not good for the game -- especially in the 9 person game I was considering. But taking that concept and refining it what about...

Alternative Reads Mafia

the notes/audio part sounds interesting although my writing is illegible and i'm not sure i'd be understood as I tend to talk quickly(plus say words funny apparently)...sounds fun

looks like an interesting concept though.

I'm working on a Son's of Anarchy large themed game. Any love here?

How many different themes are you working on?

Not that you asked me, but I just counted, and I have 56 different Mafia themes in various stages of development.

Damned modding limits.

Ythan wrote:How many different themes are you working on?

2

wanna do a first law trilogy game (based on the joe abercrombie), anyway wanna co-mod (aka help design the set-up)

I haven't entirely thought this through, so this is definitely as the "gestation" phase, and won't be run immediately. I don't usually post ideas that aren't thought through at least to some degree, but I think this game requires input from the beginning.


1. Everyone gathers with teams of four people, picking one captain.
2. Four open games are run at the same time (perhaps identical, perhaps not)
3. The team captain must choose one player from her team to put into each of the games.
4. The roles assigned to each player are randomly generated as normal.
5. Teams are in charge of finding their own replacements. (perhaps a small penalty if the mod has to do it for them)
6. Teams can talk via a QT during their games to offer help, etc. (I'm leaning toward yes on this rule because it makes the teams more teamlike, though it comes with some negatives)
7. A point system at the end is used to determine the winning teams (perhaps just +1 for each win, but possibly also something to do with how close the victories and defeats were).
8. There may be a "solo" player sign-up where unaffiliated players get paired with each other or teams with only 2 or 3 players.

Thoughts?

My major concerns are:
1. If teams are known, it might make people in one game decide to do something that isn't what they'd normally do. For example, if it's lylo and you have a choice between a pretty scummy person who's on a team that's not really in contention for winning the whole thing and a pretty town person who's on your rival team, you might choose to lynch the town player because even if you pick wrong, at least the other person won't get a victory. The only way I really see of fixing this is to make teams unknown, but that takes some of the fun away from it and people might still guess. (e.g. If I had the choice between lynching VP Baltar and [horrible VI here] then I might choose VP because his team is more likely to hurt mine).

2. Getting enough teams. If this doesn't get at least half of its teams as preformed groups of friends, etc. then I think it's not really worth running. The alternative is to do something like have a big signup (say 52 players for 4 13 player games) and then have people rank their top choices as a sort of "team invitational" thing, but I like the idea of people picking their own team directly.

I'm sure there are some other concerns that would have to be addressed, but as I said -- this isn't a fully formed idea. Right now it's not a theme I'd consider running, but like many of my ideas it's a possible seed for growth.

I think that I know at least ONE team that would form itself(CAPS LAWKE ALLIANCE), and 1 just looks like one of those things that would naturally happen from a game like this, and would be good, if you ask me. The real problem is: what if players from the same team are parts of different factions? You might have people selling out their scumteam because there are more town from their team in the game than than scum, etc.

gandalf5166 wrote:I think that I know at least ONE team that would form itself(CAPS LAWKE ALLIANCE), and 1 just looks like one of those things that would naturally happen from a game like this, and would be good, if you ask me. The real problem is: what if players from the same team are parts of different factions? You might have people selling out their scumteam because there are more town from their team in the game than than scum, etc.

Oh no. I think you didn't read it all the way or I didn't make it clear.

There are four person teams. Four games are run. The captain picks one person from his team to put into each game.

So you never have people on the same team in your game.

OOHHHHHHHHHH
I read it as saying that there were four teams. Don't know why.

zoraster wrote:

Team Mafia

I haven't entirely thought this through, so this is definitely as the "gestation" phase, and won't be run immediately. I don't usually post ideas that aren't thought through at least to some degree, but I think this game requires input from the beginning.

The pitch

1. Everyone gathers with teams of four people, picking one captain.
2. Four open games are run at the same time (perhaps identical, perhaps not)
3. The team captain must choose one player from her team to put into each of the games.
4. The roles assigned to each player are randomly generated as normal.
5. Teams are in charge of finding their own replacements. (perhaps a small penalty if the mod has to do it for them)
6.

Not sure about this one:

Teams can talk via a QT during their games to offer help, etc. (I'm leaning toward yes on this rule because it makes the teams more teamlike, though it comes with some negatives)
7. A point system at the end is used to determine the winning teams (perhaps just +1 for each win, but possibly also something to do with how close the victories and defeats were).
8. There may be a "solo" player sign-up where unaffiliated players get paired with each other or teams with only 2 or 3 players.

Thoughts?

My major concerns are:
1. If teams are known, it might make people in one game decide to do something that isn't what they'd normally do. For example, if it's lylo and you have a choice between a pretty scummy person who's on a team that's not really in contention for winning the whole thing and a pretty town person who's on your rival team, you might choose to lynch the town player because even if you pick wrong, at least the other person won't get a victory. The only way I really see of fixing this is to make teams unknown, but that takes some of the fun away from it and people might still guess. (e.g. If I had the choice between lynching VP Baltar and [horrible VI here] then I might choose VP because his team is more likely to hurt mine).

2. Getting enough teams. If this doesn't get at least half of its teams as preformed groups of friends, etc. then I think it's not really worth running. The alternative is to do something like have a big signup (say 52 players for 4 13 player games) and then have people rank their top choices as a sort of "team invitational" thing, but I like the idea of people picking their own team directly.

I'm sure there are some other concerns that would have to be addressed, but as I said -- this isn't a fully formed idea. Right now it's not a theme I'd consider running, but like many of my ideas it's a possible seed for growth.

I'd so play this. Not sure about open games over a mini normal but. I'd play this. The QT between teams would be pretty cool too.

I'd imagine you'd get most of the players needed too, you could always drop it back to teams of 3 if you coudln't get enough anyway.

zoraster wrote:My major concerns are:
1. If teams are known, it might make people in one game decide to do something that isn't what they'd normally do. For example, if it's lylo and you have a choice between a pretty scummy person who's on a team that's not really in contention for winning the whole thing and a pretty town person who's on your rival team, you might choose to lynch the town player because even if you pick wrong, at least the other person won't get a victory.

I dunno, I kinda think that this is what would make your Team Mafia idea different and interesting. Yes, the potential for throwing games exists, but isn't that kinda the point? How people deal with the temptations of corruption? Also I'm not even sure throwing a game is a viable strategy, because if you voted for the less scummy person, you're giving yourself a loss too. The corollary of "at least the other person won't get a victory" is that if they win this game, so would you.

AurorusVox wrote:

zoraster wrote:My major concerns are:
1. If teams are known, it might make people in one game decide to do something that isn't what they'd normally do. For example, if it's lylo and you have a choice between a pretty scummy person who's on a team that's not really in contention for winning the whole thing and a pretty town person who's on your rival team, you might choose to lynch the town player because even if you pick wrong, at least the other person won't get a victory.

I dunno, I kinda think that this is what would make your Team Mafia idea different and interesting. Yes, the potential for throwing games exists, but isn't that kinda the point? How

do

people deal with the temptations of corruption? Also I'm not even sure throwing a game is a viable strategy, because if you voted for the less scummy person, you're giving yourself a loss too. The corollary of "at least the other person won't get a victory" is that if they win this game, so would you.

Well, not quite. Unless a person has been totally cleared, in a 2v1 lylo if you have two choices and one is scummier than the other, if your scumdar is good then picking the summier person is probably going to win the game, what? 70% of the time?

So let's say a win gets you 10 points. If you vote for the townier person who's on your rival team, then the expected value of your vote is 3 points for you, versus 0 for him (no way the person can win). If you vote the other way, your expected value is 7 points for you and 10 for him. So in this example, that's a six point swing for you voting your rival or not.

That said you bring up an interesting point: it's possible that that team dynamic would be part of what makes the game intriguing. Still, I don't think that having players play less toward scum hunting and more toward what team each person is on will be a great thing. Instead, simply don't list the teams. People might be able to figure out some teams, but that's probably okay.

Alternatively, I could design a system of points that discourages it (e.g. your team gets more points for hammering a win) but that has problems too.

Faraday wrote:I'd so play this. Not sure about open games over a mini normal but. I'd play this. The QT between teams would be pretty cool too.

Well I had a couple of reasons for saying open. First, if I keep the games identical, they should probably be open... although there is something cool about the communication between teams trying to figure out what the setup in one game is by the setup of another.

Second, if the games weren't identical, I liked the idea of a captain trying to place players in games they'd excel at. For example, place one person in near mountainous, place another in wild PR game according to their strength. But I could get around this by providing a summary of what to expect in the game (e.g. "This is a game with strong power roles", "This is a double day game")

Second, if the games weren't identical, I liked the idea of a captain trying to place players in games they'd excel at. For example, place one person in near mountainous, place another in wild PR game according to their strength. But I could get around this by providing a summary of what to expect in the game (e.g. "This is a game with strong power roles", "This is a double day game")

I don't even think you'd need a captain, really. Players in teams would in theory work well together and probably be able to decide what they're good at themselves. Idea has merit though, definitely. I sort of like the idea of different set-ups as to me figuring out the set-up is one of the most fun parts of mafia.

Faraday wrote:

Second, if the games weren't identical, I liked the idea of a captain trying to place players in games they'd excel at. For example, place one person in near mountainous, place another in wild PR game according to their strength. But I could get around this by providing a summary of what to expect in the game (e.g. "This is a game with strong power roles", "This is a double day game")

I don't even think you'd need a captain, really. Players in teams would in theory work well together and probably be able to decide what they're good at themselves. Idea has merit though, definitely. I sort of like the idea of different set-ups as to me figuring out the set-up is one of the most fun parts of mafia.

Yeah. I intended for there to be discussion between teams on who went where, but I liked the captain aspect because 1) as a mod it means I'm just going to one person to get their player list and 2) it makes it feel more "teamy"

Is it a problem that because of the small size one team might be assigned to scum 3 or 4 times ( 52% and 4% chance of at least one team getting that, respectively in 4 3v10 games) and the game is balanced 50/50?

Theoretically it shouldn't be. If you win a scum game, you're better off because fewer other teams will have also gotten points. If you lose it, though, more of your opponent teams will get the points.