Mafiascum.net

Sounds clumsy, Fickle is a better name imo

sure, Hideous was just the name for the setup I used it in but Fickle is fine too

In post 49, mastina wrote:

In post 48, hitogoroshi wrote:1. Modifier: Hideous
2.

You are a [Town/Mafia] aligned Hideous [Role]....You may only target a player you have never targeted before.

3. The modifier is mostly meant for Doctors and Bodyguards, because it's a way to avoid follow-the-cop but still allow more dynamic nightplay than non-consec (which is kind of a blunt tool.) It can also be nice to stop RBs from creating degenerate endgames.

A more common modifier along those same lines is "Non-consecutive-target", wherein you cannot target the same player two nights in a row.

hito knows, lol

"still allow more dynamic nightplay than non-consec (which is kind of a blunt tool)"

In post 52, smilefires wrote:hito knows, lol

"still allow more dynamic nightplay than non-consec (which is kind of a blunt tool)"

hitogoroshi's talking about non-consecutive , an existing modifier.
Non-consecutive is rather less of a nerf to a role, and isn't commonly used here (although is on some other Mafia sites).

Speaking of:

1. Modifier:
   Non-consecutive-target.
   

2. You are a [*alignment*] Non-consecutive-target [*role*]. [*Role description*]. You may not use this action on the same player twice in a row.

3. The modifier is, while somewhat-uncommon, known well enough and sees some usage around the site (albeit mostly in themes). The name is literally self-descriptive, telling you exactly what you need to know about the modifier and letting you know precisely what it does, which is the hallmark of many good modifiers (e.g. night-specific, non-consecutive(-night), odd-night, even-night, X-shot). Its function would be to serve as a way to force players to not keep targeting the same player, as a potential slight but not severe nerf to their role.
   
   Additionally, were such things deemed allowed, it could see good use with other modifiers. (I'm not sure how much we'd want to encourage stacking multiple modifiers on a role, but such things ARE technically allowed I believe.)

Maybe not the best argument, but I do feel it could have a place in the whitelist--it's already graylisted and has seen usage before, after all. (I'd have to hunt down what games tho.)

Also,

• MODIFIER: DISLOYAL
  :
  1. ROLE:
     (well, modifier) The inverse of Loyal, Disloyal actions only work on a target of the
     opposite
     alignment.
     
  2. SAMPLE PM:

     Code: Select all

     You are a [*alignment*] Disloyal [*role*]. [*Role description*]. This will only succeed if you do not share your target's alignment.

  3. This is an increasingly-common modifier as the logical extension of the Loyal modifier, and is a way to significantly buff or nerf the power of certain roles. (E.g. a Disloyal Vigilante can only kill scum as a buff; a Disloyal Mafia Doctor can only protect town as a nerf; a Disloyal Cop can only get guilties on scum and has no way of knowing if the 'No Result' is on town as a nerf.)
     
     It has immense utility in games and already exists on the graylist for modifiers in that it sees more and more use with the rise of Loyal as a whitelisted modifier. It forces roles to use their actions in certain ways to achieve desired results. A disloyal fruit vendor, for instance, could try to get a guilty from anyone saying they received fruit but would otherwise be useless.
     
     The modifier has a lot of ways it could be used and many possible applications. Seems like a pretty solid addition.

This seems like a good thread to resurrect now that the greylist is no more.

1. Modifier:
   [Role]

   -Immune
   . Immunity to targeted night actions by a specific role. Can be added to any other role.
   
   
2. Sample PM:

   You are a(n)

   [Alignment]

   [Role]

   -Immune

   [Your-Role]

   .
   

   • (remainder of alignment and role description)
     
     
   • If you are targeted by a
     [Role]
     at night, that action will fail.

3. This modifier is self-explanatory, fits the spirit of a normal game, and introduces no mechanics that anyone will find confusing or misleading. It would most likely function as a role-specific Ascetic in most games using it, allowing a more granular approach to balance than a full Ascetic would.
   
   The only potentially-surprising aspect of this role is that by definition a [Role]-Immune should be immune to
   any
   action by a [Role], even if the action is unrelated to that role's specific abilities; e.g. if a Voyeur-Immune Townie were shot by a Mafia Voyeur, the kill would fail. I consider this a feature, not a bug, in that it opens up space for creative designers to tinker.

This role will need a name change, but otherwise I think this needs to exist:

Role: Automatic rolestopper (Mafia aligned only)
Sample PM:

Mafia automatic rolestopper

Welcome to game X, Player, you are a Mafia 1-shot Automatic Rolestopper

Abilities:
(Standard stuff)
Once during the game, if you are performing the nightkill, you may activate your ability. Any other actions targeting that player that night will fail.

This is in the same vein as the Mafia Ninja and Strongman (which is why I used a 1-shot variant for the role PM). While Ninja takes care of motion and Strongman takes care of kill success, this role will take care of any roles targeting the NKed player, namely Doctor and Watcher. These roles tend to be more powerful than Roleblocker (for Strongman) or Tracker (for Ninja).

In post 57, BNL wrote:This role will need a name change, but otherwise I think this needs to exist:

Role: Automatic rolestopper (Mafia aligned only)
Sample PM:

Mafia automatic rolestopper

Welcome to game X, Player, you are a Mafia 1-shot Automatic Rolestopper

Abilities:
(Standard stuff)
Once during the game, if you are performing the nightkill, you may activate your ability. Any other actions targeting that player that night will fail.

This is in the same vein as the Mafia Ninja and Strongman (which is why I used a 1-shot variant for the role PM). While Ninja takes care of motion and Strongman takes care of kill success, this role will take care of any roles targeting the NKed player, namely Doctor and Watcher. These roles tend to be more powerful than Roleblocker (for Strongman) or Tracker (for Ninja).

This prevents Watcher, unlike Strongman.
But it doesn't prevent Roleblocks.
Nor Bulletproof.
And Strongmen are not affected by the Doctor.

I don't think Named Townie is currently whitelisted? Here's a templated recommendation, based on one already popular naming scheme.

1. Role:
   [FLAVORED] Townie
   , where [FLAVORED] may be any of {Chocolate, Strawberry, Cherry, Banana, Lemon, Pistachio, Bacon, Ginger}. Additional flavors may be added to this list as needed.
   
   
2. Sample PM:

   You are a

   [FLAVORED] Townie

   .
   

   • Your weapons are your voice and your vote; you have no special abilities.
     
   • You win when
     [the Town win condition occurs]
     .

3. Named townies are a simple and well-understood concept with multiple applications in a setup. They can be used to weaken informative roles or simply to create an additional role claim. They can produce some surprisingly interesting interactions when combined with e.g. Informed roles, yet by definition they involve no new mechanics that could complicate the rules or confuse players.
   
   While it is already possible to get the effect of a named townie by toying with PR modifiers ("You are a Night 1000 Bulletproof Townie"), doing so can be unintentionally misleading or confusing to less savvy players, and possibly even unintentionally informative by suggesting other information about the setup. To avoid these issues (and to alert newer normal game designers that this possibility even exists) it would be convenient to have a standard set of named townie roles that don't even appear to imply anything specific and that can be easily looked up on the wiki.
   
   It's unclear whether multiple [FLAVORED] Townies of the same flavor should normally be allowed as a possibility. This spec says they are allowed, but the creation of an additional modifier called
   Unique
   Sole (which I intend to write up as a separate proposal) could make it easier to implement guaranteed-unique names in a natural way.

1. Modifier: Sole.
   Indicates that this is the only player in the game with a given alignment+role.
   
   
2. Sample PM:
   Using a specific example for clarity; the aspects specific to the Sole modifier are underlined.
   (Note the somewhat nonstandard placement of the modifier before the alignment, reflecting that the modifier applies to alignment+role rather than role alone.)

   You are the

   Sole

   Town Doctor

   .
   

   • Each night, you may target one player to protect them from a single attempted kill.
     
   • There are no other Town Doctors or Sole Town Doctors in the game.
     
     
   • You win when the Town is the sole surviving faction, or when nothing can prevent the same.

3. This modifier creates a controlled element of openness during the course of the game, via confirming partial information about the setup. For town it can also prevent or provide counterplay against specific fakeclaims, and provide some cushioning after particularly unfortunate deaths: even a Sole Town Cop who's lynched on day 1 will at least prevent another Cop claim. While probably not likely to be used often for mafia, it would in principle act as a negative-utility modifier by revealing a small bit of extra information about the scumteam on death. If adopted together with my previous proposal, it affords the possibility of uniquely-named townies within the confines of the current Normal guidelines in which there is no greylist.
   
   The inclusion of a Sole PR is enjoyable even for players who don't receive it themselves: part of the fun of playing as town is the gradual unraveling of the mystery and narrowing down of possibilities, and a well-placed Sole modifier can help ensure that this happens. Furthermore, the dream of catching scum with a hard CC will likely make Sole PRs more reluctant to claim early, encouraging a game flow where setup information is revealed gradually rather than all at once on day 1 or 2. I also think its existence would have beneficial effects on the meta even in games where it isn't actually used, by adding depth to decisions (by both factions) about whether, when, what, and how much to claim.
   
   It's natural, self-explanatory, integrates cleanly into the Normal rules, and introduces no new mechanics during play. The only barrier I see to whitelisting it is that it's untested and I'm not sure how it balances; if we want to try it out, my impulse would be to take as a rough starting point "like replacing one VT with an Informed" for Town, and "practically zero" for Mafia.

this discussion would probably be more fruitful in the current thread instead of the old one (and if you want to help decide what is and isn't Normal, consider joining the NRG!)

Normals already ban duplicates (except in obvious cases like Neighbour).

Your use of "Automatic" is different from mine (when I use the modifier, it automatically triggers on the first target you kill, no choice involved), but it's a modifier that has some utility in Opens, and thus probably Normals too. I think it should be written as a general-purpose modifier, though, rather than being specific to Rolestoppers.

In post 62, callforjudgement wrote:Normals already ban duplicates (except in obvious cases like Neighbour).

Your use of "Automatic" is different from mine (when I use the modifier, it automatically triggers on the first target you kill, no choice involved), but it's a modifier that has some utility in Opens, and thus probably Normals too. I think it should be written as a general-purpose modifier, though, rather than being specific to Rolestoppers.

So I can’t put 4 millers in a normal?

In post 62, callforjudgement wrote:Normals already ban duplicates (except in obvious cases like Neighbour).

I can't find this rule anywhere.

In post 64, Umlaut wrote:

In post 62, callforjudgement wrote:Normals already ban duplicates (except in obvious cases like Neighbour).

I can't find this rule anywhere.

I would imagine it is an implicit rule (rather than explicit) due to site meta and expectations. (Granted, I will say that I wasn’t aware this was a thing til now.)

Also, I do believe that sole already exists in the form of Informed.

In post 64, Umlaut wrote:

In post 62, callforjudgement wrote:Normals already ban duplicates (except in obvious cases like Neighbour).

I can't find this rule anywhere.

I'm not sure if this rule was implemented or not, actually. It was discussed backstage, but I don't remember if it went through or not.

In post 56, Umlaut wrote:This seems like a good thread to resurrect now that the greylist is no more.

1. Modifier:
   [Role]

   -Immune
   . Immunity to targeted night actions by a specific role. Can be added to any other role.
   
   
2. Sample PM:

   You are a(n)

   [Alignment]

   [Role]

   -Immune

   [Your-Role]

   .
   

   • (remainder of alignment and role description)
     
     
   • If you are targeted by a
     [Role]
     at night, that action will fail.

3. This modifier is self-explanatory, fits the spirit of a normal game, and introduces no mechanics that anyone will find confusing or misleading. It would most likely function as a role-specific Ascetic in most games using it, allowing a more granular approach to balance than a full Ascetic would.
   
   The only potentially-surprising aspect of this role is that by definition a [Role]-Immune should be immune to
   any
   action by a [Role], even if the action is unrelated to that role's specific abilities; e.g. if a Voyeur-Immune Townie were shot by a Mafia Voyeur, the kill would fail. I consider this a feature, not a bug, in that it opens up space for creative designers to tinker.

Easily fixed with a tweaking of the wording:
"If you are targeted by a action at night, that action will fail."
Problem solved!

In post 57, BNL wrote:This role will need a name change, but otherwise I think this needs to exist:

Role: Automatic rolestopper (Mafia aligned only)
Sample PM:

Mafia automatic rolestopper

Welcome to game X, Player, you are a Mafia 1-shot Automatic Rolestopper

Abilities:
(Standard stuff)
Once during the game, if you are performing the nightkill, you may activate your ability. Any other actions targeting that player that night will fail.

This is in the same vein as the Mafia Ninja and Strongman (which is why I used a 1-shot variant for the role PM). While Ninja takes care of motion and Strongman takes care of kill success, this role will take care of any roles targeting the NKed player, namely Doctor and Watcher. These roles tend to be more powerful than Roleblocker (for Strongman) or Tracker (for Ninja).

You're quite correct; the name and description for it are a little clunky (albeit clinically, they are technically accurate), but I feel this is a good role to have.

How's this?

Mafia Sniper

Welcome,

Playername

.
You are a

Mafia Sniper

.
(Standard Stuff)

During the night, if you perform the nightkill, all other actions targeting your target will fail.

I chose the name "Sniper" because it felt like it fit; you can tie it to the idea of both the term (stealing something at the last second) and to how a sniper remains unseen, striking from a distance, suddenly killing their target without warning.

In post 59, Umlaut wrote:I don't think Named Townie is currently whitelisted?

I thought it was?

If not, then absolutely it needs to be, yes.

In post 66, mastina wrote:

Mafia Sniper

Welcome,

Playername

.
You are a

Mafia Sniper

.
(Standard Stuff)

During the night, if you perform the nightkill, all other actions targeting your target will fail.

I chose the name "Sniper" because it felt like it fit; you can tie it to the idea of both the term

sniping

(stealing something at the last second) and to how a sniper remains unseen, striking from a distance, suddenly killing their target without warning.

hitman? assassin?

i think the idea of someone that is good at killing is on the right track

In post 66, mastina wrote:I'm not sure if this rule was implemented or not, actually. It was discussed backstage, but I don't remember if it went through or not.

Banning duplicates means that every counterclaim is real(one of the two is scum).
Not a good thing.

People will assume that anyway, though.

This all boils down to how much you want outguessing the mod to be a relevant factor in games.

In post 68, Not Known 15 wrote:

In post 66, mastina wrote:I'm not sure if this rule was implemented or not, actually. It was discussed backstage, but I don't remember if it went through or not.

Banning duplicates means that every counterclaim is real(one of the two is scum).
Not a good thing.

Actually duplicates are very much not banned (for modifiers at least)

In post 61, SleepyKrew wrote:this discussion would probably be more fruitful in the current thread instead of the old one (and if you want to help decide what is and isn't Normal, consider joining the NRG!)

I would love to help decide what is and isn't Normal, but I don't feel qualified to review games for balance. Is there a place for someone like me in the NRG? If so I'd be happy to join.

At present I don't think there's anything like that; the NRG as is is big enough that I can get enough of the sort of experienced players' opinions on what constitutes normal that I need to make decisions on what should be normal. Apart from that I think the public discussion on normalcy is good as well.

I like having the people who are doing reviewing also being the sort of think tank about normal games, since I can get immediate opinions on for example how a new role might fit into a setup or be balanced/imbalanced in a typical kind of setup.