Breadknife
1500+
One confusion tends to be its direct inspiration.
Posts: 1,888
|
Post by Breadknife on May 19, 2014 2:40:04 GMT
Post count and gender missing in first. Not really the biggest thing about that. There was some minor editing, but they were 'there', just needing scrolling to have been visible. If they'd have shown on the (original) original screenshot, prior to finessing the final image in Paint/GIMP/whatever-I-used, they'd have appeared in the fake one too. {Spoiler} So, not really the actual anomaly. (Far more interesting was why I truncated the footer. Or it would have been, if I hadn't just hastily dragged a rectangular selection around to copy and paste for some reason... I think I was ensuring there'd be no damning meta-information in the image file or something...) Arguably, the fact that the footer was higher at all might be interesting, forensically, but I've got a multi-monitor display and I think that discrepancy might have been something to do with the differing aspect-ratios, for the respective monitors I screenshotted off of.
|
|
|
Post by whereyouthinkyoupoliying on May 19, 2014 16:58:51 GMT
Now I'm home again, I thought you might like to see the (fake) roleclaim screenshot I created for myself. As a remote contingency (nobody asked me for one directly, and I was also prepping myself to be self-sacrificing in the name of the Brotherhood), and I never had to compromise (albeit with deceit) with my views on modquoting. Yes, there's two minor but potentially obvious mistakes that I know of (that I'd have corrected before posting), and I had to use a little guesswork based upon the 'leaked' screenshots, but I was still quite happy with it. (And there's the hint of either being a latent townie-role or perhaps even a Jester, either way maybe a reason not to lynch me.) Yikes, that looks perfect. I wouldn't even know how to do that. I actually think this supports the use of screenshots quite well. Wait, how so? Really? But why? Does that mean the townies shouldn't even try to find each other? But then all you'd be doing as a townie (role or no role) is sit and wait to be killed while guessing at mafia. And the existence of a detective would completely lose its point, if all he can do is investigate for himself because he can't tell anyone.
|
|
TSM
5000+
Ableist Kinkshamer
Posts: 5,195
|
Post by TSM on May 19, 2014 17:26:47 GMT
Oh no, sorry. I think that townies should totes be able to talk privately, but what I dislike is the big group conversations the likes we had with Edlichbury this time around. I feel as though it makes trust too easy to come by, whereas if as a townie you can only message one person at a time you're always wondering if everyone's telling the truth.
|
|
Breadknife
1500+
One confusion tends to be its direct inspiration.
Posts: 1,888
|
Post by Breadknife on May 19, 2014 20:22:25 GMT
Mason and Neighbour groups are already a possible game-thing that can be initiated through assignment by mod (and/or by a player role as granted by them). The difference between the one and the other being a matter of whether on not there's implicit trust outside the conceipt of that particular grouping.
I find that the art and fun of playing the game is in saying things in public that (whether or not you sincerely believe what you say) is there for the entire township (whether they're wearing white hats, black hats, grey hats or psychadelic hats with bells and whistles) to read and process and judge and respond to in kind.
Private play (especially one-to-one) can devolve the game to canary-traps by the clever player whilst people are tracing out their web-of-trust. And there's minimal risk for (say) a mafia-member to message a non-mafia player and say "I'm the cop, and I investigated you last night so I know I can trust you", compared with any kind of public role-claiming, so it's not even a Townie-biased behaviour.
Perhaps I'm most upset because I feel excluded. Whether live or dead, and whatever side of the membership divide I am, I seem to have become more likely (in TBC games, so far) to end up without any practical public conversation to 'work with', in untangling the lay of the land (to mix metaphors). I'm not looking for blatant stating of "I'm a cop, the doctor should protect me tonight", exactly, but it's nice to see something other than random (or random-looking) accusations.
But that's just how I feel. Don't mind me, it's just that now I'm concocting game scenarios (for me to mod with) that are deliberately designed to counteract everyone's expectations and make things very interesting. Hopefully you'll get a more vanilla one, instead, but right now I'm not sure what'll happen when I finally step up to the mark...
|
|
SCIENCE
5000+
Baaaad to the bone!
Heaven is other people.
Posts: 5,744
|
Post by SCIENCE on May 19, 2014 20:39:59 GMT
You've got to explain all those terms like Mason and neighbour, I'm at a total loss about what you just said.
|
|
Breadknife
1500+
One confusion tends to be its direct inspiration.
Posts: 1,888
|
Post by Breadknife on May 19, 2014 22:06:09 GMT
It might well differ from game to game, mod to mod and from place to place (e.g. local interpretations), but Masons are generally linked players who are set up to 'know each other' well enough that they know that they (at least) are all townies. (Although a mafia-aligned mason can be in the mix, for fun and profit, in which case that player can pick and choose whether to 'win' by supporting the mafia against the town or by supporting the mason group against everyone-else.) In larger games there can be multiple mason groups which (assuming they are are all town-aligned, to keep things simple) have a specific mason-only win-condition of having survivors until the end, possibly regardless of the fate of the other townies and/or members of other mason groups. It's often used to balance a mafia advantage, like the townies did it (or tried to) in this game, e.g. a shared night-time role (perhaps a choice to investigate or protect one target, per night) that is a group action and so can survive (un)lucky nightkill/daylynch actions of individuals within the group. But it's a mod decision how it works out. (Imagine a dozen players, four each in two mason groups and four in mafia to balance off a more-than-normal smattering of power-roles, including duplications... e.g. JOAT ability for each section and smatterings of other flavourings, and each group has full-on 'strategy meetings' outside of the usual public discussion. But that's organised, sanctioned and encouraged by the mod.) "Neigbours" is often the term used where there's intrinsically no exception of alignment match (rather than the mod messing with the idea of "we're all town, here, right?"). Again, a neighbourhood (group of neighbours) can win by still existing at the end-game. Players may have a choice as to whether to play to further the interests of their alignment-group or neighbourhood-group, assuming they can't do both. Or they might be given a personal goal that makes one win condition supercedes the other. Depends on how the game is designed. As well as being set up from scratch by the mod, there may be "neighbourisers" (or "mason recruiter", whose attempt to recruit will generally fail and/or backfire and kill recruiter if targetted on mafia) as individual roles, with zero or more others having been pre-recruited by the RNG (or at the whim of the mod) at the start of the game and an aim to recruite all survivors, perhaps against a competing group. (It differs from the plain Cupid role by the recruiter themselves being in the 'relationship' that is created. And "paired-monogamy" not being the default limit to each group-size.) If the person with the recruiter role dies (either for any reason at all, or perhaps a defined subset of lynch/assasination/bad-targetting/etc death causes), there might be a fall-back person. Either a specifically named "backup recruiter" (who the main recruiter might or might not be able to replace, if the original dies before themselves), the next person by strict order of recruitment, decided by the group or just randomly granted from amongst the remaining group. Although it tends to devolve into a "group role" in the latter case, essentially proof from assasination, unless there's a limit (e.g. just one nominated backup, ever, or just one transfer-to-backup but the backup-nominee can be reassigned indefinitely before that point). And for complex games with horribly divided loyalties the (current) recruiter might be unknown even to the group itself. Any nominal backup might find themselves given the title without warning. TL;DR;, however... if a Mod wants to use such tricks then he/she will probably tell those involved as much (or as little) about the role as they want to. i.e. exactly how they want their version of the system to work. Or at least as much as they want to let on. (There's always room for surprises!) Also googling for "mafia <term>" will probably help out somewhat for any more words (like "Tracker" or "Watcher") I might far-too-casually drop into this or similar conversations, in the future. (Unless you're paranoid about the FBI/etc it's probably not going to put you on a watchlist. And unless you're actually searching the darkweb you're probably not going to find yourself encountering actual Scicilian-originating people, anyway. )
|
|
|
Post by Serrland on May 19, 2014 22:23:26 GMT
This whole thing is so much more complicated than I'd assumed. When I've played it's usually just been mafia, innocents, detective, doctor, and sometimes vigilante.
|
|
TSM
5000+
Ableist Kinkshamer
Posts: 5,195
|
Post by TSM on May 19, 2014 23:30:50 GMT
Mason and Neighbour groups are already a possible game-thing that can be initiated through assignment by mod (and/or by a player role as granted by them). The difference between the one and the other being a matter of whether on not there's implicit trust outside the conceipt of that particular grouping. I find that the art and fun of playing the game is in saying things in public that (whether or not you sincerely believe what you say) is there for the entire township (whether they're wearing white hats, black hats, grey hats or psychadelic hats with bells and whistles) to read and process and judge and respond to in kind. Private play (especially one-to-one) can devolve the game to canary-traps by the clever player whilst people are tracing out their web-of-trust. And there's minimal risk for (say) a mafia-member to message a non-mafia player and say "I'm the cop, and I investigated you last night so I know I can trust you", compared with any kind of public role-claiming, so it's not even a Townie-biased behaviour. Perhaps I'm most upset because I feel excluded. Whether live or dead, and whatever side of the membership divide I am, I seem to have become more likely (in TBC games, so far) to end up without any practical public conversation to 'work with', in untangling the lay of the land (to mix metaphors). I'm not looking for blatant stating of "I'm a cop, the doctor should protect me tonight", exactly, but it's nice to see something other than random (or random-looking) accusations. But that's just how I feel. Don't mind me, it's just that now I'm concocting game scenarios (for me to mod with) that are deliberately designed to counteract everyone's expectations and make things very interesting. Hopefully you'll get a more vanilla one, instead, but right now I'm not sure what'll happen when I finally step up to the mark... Didn't I literally say "I'm a cop, the doctor should protect me tonight" this game
|
|