Suggestion for Mafia games - Anonymity

[Inbred Chocobo]

I support this actually. Tremendously.

Biggest reason, people going Well this guy was scum these last games, lets get him! Or things like that. I believe the accounts should have their name changed however on a regular basis so that people don't start coming up with ideas for those accounts as well, but this could work really well.

[rpgdemon]

I think if people start coming up with theories about the accounts being linked to always scum, they ought to just be GM killed.

Another strike against the accounts: What if someone's like, "I'm going to be out of town for a few days when the game starts, whether I'm scum or not."? It instantly reveals who they are, and I think that should be allowed to be discussed/noticed. Same with if someone vanishes from the rest of the forums for the exact same amount of time as one of the anonymous accounts.

[Sifright]

You will never remove all possibility of knowing who is potentially in control of an account, we don't have to solve every problem just the fact we can improve and remove other problems that already exist is a good enough reason to implement this.

[rpgdemon]

All I'm saying is, it shouldn't be against the rules to say, "X is probably Tom."

[Loyal]

All I'm saying is, it shouldn't be against the rules to say, "X is probably Tom."

I get that, but disagree. The concept is not without its flaws, but that doesn't mean we should do away with it altogether. We have one outlier of a situation where it's largely unavoidable that the identity behind a single account would be revealed - even so, the identity of everyone else remains a secret. The only thing you've learned from this scenario is that X is Tom and therefore will likely display Tom's mannerisms. What you do with that is up to your intelligence, so long as you do not attempt to use it as a basis for a vote (X is obviously Tom, and Tom would never do this if he were Town, therefore he is Scum).

But, if you're allowed to say X is Tom, or Y is Sally, you can have unpleasant situations like someone with vig powers demanding everybody reveal their real identities on pain of being targeted for a kill (and you know someone would do eventually, just to get an edge). Situations that would, again, defeat the entire point of the exercise.

We could come up with a variety of scenarios and exceptions wherein it would be acceptable to declare someone's identity, but that would likely make it too complicated to be enjoyable in a game that already demands a lot of critical thinking and memory for detail. I'd prefer the rules be kept simple and easy to remember so that the players can focus on the game, which in this case means a blanket rule of No Declaring Identities.

On a side note, another positive consequence to maintaining anonymity is that it allows players to switch up their playstyles and try something different, or more intelligent than what they used in their last game, without instantly being accused of having something to hide.

I believe the accounts should have their name changed however on a regular basis so that people don't start coming up with ideas for those accounts as well, but this could work really well.

The idea is that the accounts would be given to random people, and would be assigned to random roles, each game. Sifright might be Mr. Smith in one game and Frank Greenwood in the next, or he might get Mr. Smith again. The distinction between each is about as meaningless as the difference between different Survivors in L4D, and this method ensures that the above scenario does not become too damaging to the game's lack of continuity. Also, I should hope anybody who tries to argue along these lines would be properly ridiculed and investigated for possibly being scum, much like what happens in regular games.

[Geminex]

This is an interesting idea, but it has pros and cons.

On the one hand, if we do this, people could no longer, say, just go after Nikose by default on day 1.

On the other hand, if we do this, people could no longer just go after Nikose by default on day 1.

[Fenris]

Originally Posted by rpgdemon

I think if people start coming up with theories about the accounts being linked to always scum, they ought to just be GM killed.

Another strike against the accounts: What if someone's like, "I'm going to be out of town for a few days when the game starts, whether I'm scum or not."? It instantly reveals who they are, and I think that should be allowed to be discussed/noticed. Same with if someone vanishes from the rest of the forums for the exact same amount of time as one of the anonymous accounts.

They should send that message along to the GM, who will then be able to post for them that "Humperdinkel McAllister" is away for a while.

[IHateMakingNames]

Implement the shit out of this idea.

[synkr0nized]

I realize that I don't play these and am not really familiar with what's goin' down inside most of them, making anything I post that of an ignorant outsider.

But reading the rules -- and going from what I recall of doing Mafia games and games like this in person** -- and some of the game threads, it really seems like the "problem" comes from all the gibbering and voting before anything (i.e. an actual hit/mafia kill/lynching) even occurs. Like you all bring the previous games into the current one.

Which makes sense -- any player trying to figure out her opponents' moves does this, even in face-to-face games. So I guess from my perspective I'd like to hear more about why this is something you want to get rid of -- exactly how it's so detrimental. Maybe it's just cause you all are big meany jerks.

edit: Jesus, you all really hang on to previous games when making these initial bluffs and votes.

** and the game Bang!, as it's basically the same damned thing (Outlaws, a deputy and sheriff, and a vigilante or something; Outaws want to kill the law, Deputy wants to save the sheriff, sheriff wants to get the Outlaws, and the other person wants all dead)




This is also in part motivated by some fairly honest concerns I have with respect to the creation of mook accounts to be tossed around among players.

[Loyal]

Originally Posted by synkr0nized

But reading the rules -- and going from what I recall of doing Mafia games and games like this in person** -- and some of the game threads, it really seems like the "problem" comes from all the gibbering and voting before anything (i.e. an actual hit/mafia kill/lynching) even occurs.

The nonsense and joke phases aren't something that can really be stopped, and it's not something I intend to address. I can about guarantee one of the first things to be said in this system would be something like "##vote Mr. Smith because he's probably some secret-agent guy with a name like that, and I don't trust him." Occasionally the things said in response to stuff like this, or not said at all, can even lead to legitimate leads.

Like you all bring the previous games into the current one.

Which makes sense -- any player trying to figure out her opponents' moves does this, even in face-to-face games. So I guess from my perspective I'd like to hear more about why this is something you want to get rid of -- exactly how it's so detrimental. Maybe it's just cause you all are big meany jerks.

It's less a matter of "the old way sucks and is broken, let's toss it". It's more...

Despite the fact that roles are randomly assigned every game, certain parts of it will in fact become quite predictable because we have a rather small playerbase that actually participates in Mafia with any frequency. Less than twenty I'm pretty sure. And for the most part the players can be expected to handle the game in a particular way, regardless of their role. Fenris will generally play consistently well with whatever he's handed. Nikose is insane and should probably be offed on general principle because he pretty much plays his own game sometimes. Earl will probably find a way to unintentionally sabotage his own side with whatever power he was given.

By masking the identity of every player, we take away this player-based predictability and add a little more mystery, which is good because mysteries and the solving therein is a significant part of Mafia. You might take an educated guess as to which player is under which name, but it will never be anything more than a guess, so in order to come up with anything substantial, you need to rely instead on how their behavior may betray their role in the game, based on how they react under pressure, whether they react at all to certain events, their voting patterns, and things like that. Actions based not on who a player is, but what they do.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, the game certainly works fine among people who are largely strangers to each other, and I suppose I would like to see how that'd play out here.

This is also in part motivated by some fairly honest concerns I have with respect to the creation of mook accounts to be tossed around among players.

Fenris earlier presented the stipulation that he could ask for a list of names if it ever became unpleasant. I figure having that looming over everybody's heads is probably good enough to keep them from doing anything they wouldn't normally do?