Mafia Games....

[jpappy789]

I don't see the point to only one retraction. But I also don't think it changes the game in any appreciable way.

I don't get limiting the medic's role. It's hard enough without limitations like that.

To me it is not fair that the mafia doesn't get a shot at the spy without hitting the medic first. Otherwise the medic just protects the spy every night. And if we allow RCing then the spy can claim right away and start revealing investigations...that ruins the game IMO.

 

[jbradt]

Would a reasonable person do that though? That's not how I play the role, but I'm far from a reasonable person...

 

[jpappy789]

It's the smartest thing to do though. Why would you leave a known PR vulnerable to the hit???

 

[jbradt]

I guess it seems smarter to me to try and figure out who is the most likely target, not necessarily protect a PR all the time. Why wouldn't you protect a vocal townie?

 

[jpappy789]

I guess it seems smarter to me to try and figure out who is the most likely target, not necessarily protect a PR all the time. Why wouldn't you protect a vocal townie?

Because in this case the medic KNOWS that the spy is innocent. A vocal player could be a vocal mafia. Why take the chance second guessing who the mafia will hit anyways?

 

[jbradt]

It worked well for me the last time I was in that role. :grinyes: Had a couple people convinced I actually found their chat room.

If it's going to be limited like that, then why not make them find one another by investigation. That puts sort of a natural limitation on the ability to just keep protecting the spy without making it needlessly draconian.

 

[jpappy789]

That's what I personally like, but that sort of ruins the whole "underground" premise of the game.

I'm just speaking from experience here...when I've been part of a det/doc duo the doc always protects the det until the det comes out. Then it can become a matter of trying to trick the mafia into who they are going to hit.

 

[jbradt]

Yeah, I see what you mean...

 

[IceH2O]

Yeah, I don't think I will do the "save all" thing. I can see where it could be interesting, but not sure about it really. Although, if it was a one time thing and if used they can no longer save anyone...it could see it working, but I think for this game I'd leave it out. Very possible for a future game though, maybe one with "turns" or something it would work out nice.

I'm really not sure on the block vote thing, I sure wouldn't let it be every night...but not sure how I give it out? I do think the NC should be the ones with it, or each team gets ONE per game.

Ice...help me with this one please, how exactly would I do it? I do like the thought, just not sure how to add it in and be fair.

You could do the vote block daily. Its just 1 persons vote being blocked by another voter. I wouldn't just limit to NCIs, I'd have all names in the randomizer.

These are the rules from the original game. I have rule 2 and rule 3 in question in my mind. Actually, rule 3 will be eliminated and changed to a coin toss will decide. I will be adding no communication once dead.

Game Mechanics

1) The first game day will be 48 hours, all others will then be 24. Everyone in the Prison camp has to vote to lynch someone. You vote by saying (in bold)… I vote to shank so and so.

New rule: You may only retract your vote once per “day” after it is placed. (2nd vote is locked in)

2) You must vote each day, but you cannot vote for no one, or yourself. If you fail to vote, you will die an untimely death and it will be embarrassing.

2) Whoever has the most votes gets eliminated. If you have two and everyone else has one vote… you get lynched.

3) A tie results in no shanking.

4) Everything stays in the game, no PMing people and setting up deals or alliances, or discussing issues in this game on other sites. The sole exception to this is the authorization by me for special role players to do so.

5) Please do not take anything personal said in this game. It is a game. If you are having alot of trouble with another player, PM me please.

6) Do not edit your posts!

You should keep rule 3 in, its part of the reason the no retractions work so well.

-The Underground: Is composed of the Medic, the Spy, and One innocent that will be recruited on Night One. Before night one the Medic & Spy must email or PM me their top 3 choices. I will randomly choose which is selected.

Medic: You have the ability to protect someone each night, you can only protect each person once, so chose wisely, you cannot protect yourself.

Spy: You have the power to investigate once per night to find someone’s true identity.

-Snitches: You were planted by the corrupt Warden to keep an eye out and to inform him each night of who should be beaten to death
by the Guards. Before night, the snitches must email or PM me their top 2 choices for a beating. I will randomly choose which is selected.

Would this sound fair as far as roles go? I added, the Medic can only protect each person once during the game. I took out the Snitches will show innocent night 1, IMO there is no reason for a invest if that was the case. I took out the invest's for the Snitches.

Sounds good.

I don't see the point to only one retraction. But I also don't think it changes the game in any appreciable way.

I don't get limiting the medic's role. It's hard enough without limitations like that.

We've had plenty of games that had 1 protection per player,its just hasn't been implemented lately because we stopped the automatic communicating innocents.

The one retraction I thought made the game more fun coupled with the tie = no shanking rule.

 

[Lady G]

I don't see the point to only one retraction. But I also don't think it changes the game in any appreciable way.

I don't get limiting the medic's role. It's hard enough without limitations like that.

It has been done quite a few times, as Pap already said when the Doc/Det know who each other are from the get go it kinda makes it unfair if the rule is not in effect. I realize there are many who wouldn't do that, but there are many who would.

You could do the vote block daily. Its just 1 persons vote being blocked by another voter. I wouldn't just limit to NCIs, I'd have all names in the randomizer.

You should keep rule 3 in, its part of the reason the no retractions work so well.

Sounds good.

We've had plenty of games that had 1 protection per player,its just hasn't been implemented lately because we stopped the automatic communicating innocents.

The one retraction I thought made the game more fun coupled with the tie = no shanking rule.

Ok, so now I see the vote block/only one retraction thing...think I'll keep it in. The player with the block wouldn't have to use it, but in the event of a tie it would be up to them to break it. I think it will add a interesting "twist" to the game.
I would pick a person after each nightfall, and send them a PM letting them know they have the block for that night.

Ok, I am going to try to write up the game and post it. I will be adding a few things to the "rules".

Also I need someone to tell me where to go/what to do, to set up the chat rooms...that is something I have never done.