Mafia Game Rules

RandomGuy · Post by **RandomGuy** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 3:20 pm

Starting a new thread to discuss possible rules and twists for the next mafia game iteration.

My prior post about possibilities:

A random guy wrote: I'm open to suggestions, Scad. If people enjoy having private communication between innocents, we can do that. It makes an innocent victory MUCH more likely, and tends to become a game of waiting for the sheriff to post a pick.

Forcing people to vote SHOULD help the innocents. It gives information. If the sheriff knew some innocents, they would defend them, likewise mafia defending eachother. If nobody died during the day, it is equivalent to giving the mafia a free kill and being right back where you were.

There are lots of variations we could use too - a "deputy" who takes over for the sheriff if he is killed. A "guardian angel" who can protect like the doctor, but can't protect themself. A "vigilante" who is basically an innocent who can kill at night as well (sometimes with limited opportunities - like 3 bullets).

One possible idea is to allow the sheriff to PM innocents, but add the twist that the "Godfather" shows up as innocent if investigated...

I'll run the game in whatever way people think would be most fun. The key, in any game though, is for people to be active on the thread, vote, talk and strategize...feel free to PM me or post your ideas here or in a new thread.

So let me know - do you prefer to have innocent communication off thread? More specialty roles?

jwd · Post by **jwd** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 3:45 pm

RandomGuy wrote:Starting a new thread to discuss possible rules and twists for the next mafia game iteration.

My prior post about possibilities:
A random guy wrote: I'm open to suggestions, Scad. If people enjoy having private communication between innocents, we can do that. It makes an innocent victory MUCH more likely, and tends to become a game of waiting for the sheriff to post a pick.

Forcing people to vote SHOULD help the innocents. It gives information. If the sheriff knew some innocents, they would defend them, likewise mafia defending eachother. If nobody died during the day, it is equivalent to giving the mafia a free kill and being right back where you were.

There are lots of variations we could use too - a "deputy" who takes over for the sheriff if he is killed. A "guardian angel" who can protect like the doctor, but can't protect themself. A "vigilante" who is basically an innocent who can kill at night as well (sometimes with limited opportunities - like 3 bullets).

One possible idea is to allow the sheriff to PM innocents, but add the twist that the "Godfather" shows up as innocent if investigated...

I'll run the game in whatever way people think would be most fun. The key, in any game though, is for people to be active on the thread, vote, talk and strategize...feel free to PM me or post your ideas here or in a new thread.
So let me know - do you prefer to have innocent communication off thread? More specialty roles?

Great ideas Random.

I think The Sherif and Dr. Should be able to know who the other is somehow.. Perhaps not immediately on receiving their roles but also not by random chance either... (An option to use 2 nights investigations to find the Dr and pm them?)

I'd love to see the Deputy and Vigilante roles added..

For the vigilante, perhaps have it so that if the vigilante attempts to kill the Sherif (before the sherif goes public), the vigilante is killed?

jwd

RandomGuy · Post by **RandomGuy** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 3:56 pm

I like that - if the vigilante tries to kill either the sheriff or deputy during the night, they are killed themselves. Makes them hesitate before killing at night.

I was thinking for the deputy role, that the sheriff would send the investigation request, but both would receive the info - but maybe they wouldn't know eachother's identity to start. Or should they start out as a sort of "good team" and work together like the mafia?

n00less cluebie · Post by **n00less cluebie** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 5:42 pm

all interesting stuff, the question is to find the right balance of numbers on each side to keep the game winnable from either side

RandomGuy · Post by **RandomGuy** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 5:47 pm

yeah, depending on which rules/roles are chosen, I'll have to tweak the numbers accordingly to make the game winnable as either side.

Mike · Post by **Mike** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:02 pm

Possible collection of rules. Just ideas.

INNOCENTS -
Doctor - Angel and Sherrif

Doctor can protect anyone (including self)
Angel can only protect Doctor or Sherrif (not including self)
Sherrif can investigate anyone

Sherrif can only reveal self in thread - the sherrif can not reveal himself to innocents by pm - unless they are doctor or angel (once he investigates them).

Angel and Doctor can not reaveal themselves to anyone. Therefore, the Angel can only protect who he 'thinks' is the doctor or sherrif - once the sherrif is revealed - the Angel can protect the Sherrif. However, the Sherrif can reveal the identity of anyone he has investigated - but he must do it publically - not by pm.

MAFIA

Godfather - Godfather can lie to Sherrif if he is investigated.
Informant - Can investigate Innocents (instead of killing them) if he is alive - the mafia team can choose to investigate the innocents (only if their informant is alive) - this would come in handy for the mafia at the end of the game, (which ofsets the addition of the angel.)

RandomGuy · Post by **RandomGuy** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:22 am

I'm not sure I understand Mike - so the angel doesn't know who the sheriff or doc are, but sends a protection request - and if they are right that person is protected?

The angel could protect the sheriff and the doc protect the angel (or himself) - as long as the angel remains hidden, they are free to come forward...?

About the informant idea - the mafia could investigate the innocents at night to determine the sheriff or doctor identity - I get that. but I think it is too powerful to be allowed every turn though. You could allow it instead of a killing, but why would they? How would that work in a game?

Scad · Post by **Scad** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:23 am

I really like the idea that the Godfather shows up as innocent. That could make the "voting bloc" effect less strong; you could only trust people if they were innocent in the thread and also proved innocent to investigation. And it could introduce an unstable element in the voting bloc. Likewise the vigilante and deputy elements. I don't think the angel or informer add too much to the process, but the informer does more, so maybe that too.

Also, I didn't say I dislike the forced voting idea entirely. Perhaps, though, it could be amended to required killings the first three days. That forces enough trouble to start conversation and allows the Mafia a little head start, as well as putting the doc and sheriff at risk to the townies, at least for a while. As Drift mentioned to me in a PM, if this were mirroring a more realistic situation, the townies would probably slow down on the accusations after three or four dead innocents. Stopping the force vote after that seems to me to allow suspicions to start without forcing the innocents to exterminate themselves.

Mike · Post by **Mike** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:38 am

RandomGuy wrote:I'm not sure I understand Mike - so the angel doesn't know who the sheriff or doc are, but sends a protection request - and if they are right that person is protected?

The angel could protect the sheriff and the doc protect the angel (or himself) - as long as the angel remains hidden, they are free to come forward...?

About the informant idea - the mafia could investigate the innocents at night to determine the sheriff or doctor identity - I get that. but I think it is too powerful to be allowed every turn though. You could allow it instead of a killing, but why would they? How would that work in a game?

Angel - Doc and Sherrif don't know who each other are. you are correct - if they send the protection request, the right person in protected. The angel (if he or she survives) will play a larger role at the end of the game.

Informant - yes, the informant (as long as he is alive) would be in place of a lynching. Why have the informant? If the innocents get one more person (angel) who can protect - they may want to investigate, in lieu of killing.

But these were just an idea I had - it could be too complex.

n00less cluebie · Post by **n00less cluebie** » Mon Apr 28, 2008 3:01 pm

How about instead of only investigating a single person, the Sheriff can choose to look at a group of players and find out how many innocents/mafiosos are in the group? Is this too powerful?

RandomGuy · Post by **RandomGuy** » Mon Apr 28, 2008 3:08 pm

n00less cluebie wrote:How about instead of only investigating a single person, the Sheriff can choose to look at a group of players and find out how many innocents/mafiosos are in the group? Is this too powerful?

Very interesting. You could get more information, but it would be less exact. I'd be willing to give it a try if others like the idea...

Goten6456 · Post by **Goten6456** » Mon Apr 28, 2008 4:59 pm

I like the idea of the sheriff seeing more than one house. I'd say no more than 3, probably even 2 to make it fair.

As for the abstaining part, I disagree. I think that if this sort of thing were happening in a closed community, as it seems to be happening here, people would not be thinking rationally. With someone new dying each night, the townsfolk SHOULD think rational and wait for clues. BUT, I think that the risk of dying each night would put people into a panic, thus, someone would be accused each day.

Drifter · Post by **Drifter** » Mon Apr 28, 2008 5:14 pm

Well, after 3-4 innocents were wrongly killed, I do not think people would keep killing with no proof, or else you get what we had last game...

Goten6456 · Post by **Goten6456** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:23 am

Perhaps after a certain amount in a row, but at the beginning it would be too unexpected.

my wife hates me · Post by **my wife hates me** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:41 am

After playing both as Mob and as Innocent, I think Innocents, at least Sherif/Deputy/Doctor, should be able to talk privately.

However, as an innocent, Preach (sherrif), contacted me at the start of a game. The problem being that if I'm Doctor, Preach can come out 2nd round and create the unbreakable voting bloc. So he needs to be limited in some way. It has just shown that No talking favors mob and even though we got lucky with finding the Doc on night 1, I never felt like we were in trouble.

I also think more PM talk would help. One idea I had would be a Mafia turned informant. One of the mafia is given the role and allowed to talk through the game master and provide clues such as "the mob is gonna try and convince the innocents to kill so and so tomorrow..."

Damn, now that I think about it, you could create a million different roles and rules.

n00less cluebie · Post by **n00less cluebie** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:51 pm

One thing that I think hurt the game was the fact that people were lynched before everyone voted, and people were able to "lurk" in the voting so that they were never became accusers, and only followed the rest of the crowd. That's what probably helped the Mafia the most.

One thing that might help:

1) Have everyone PM you an initial selection for lynching, and once everyone has voted, you can post the initial lynch requests. This could be followed by a discussion period, and a chance to change their choice. This would FORCE everyone to finger someone else and not be able to lurk in the shadows. Of course, this will slow the game down, since we'd have to wait for all those who are AFK, but it might make the game more interesting without having to create all kinds of new roles like Angel, deputy etc.

A compromise might be to post the initial votes once a certain minimum # of votes came to you, so that we don't wait indefinitely if someone happened to be AFK for a week....

Thoughts?

Kef · Post by **Kef** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 6:21 pm

How about instaid of innocents and Maffia we have:

Luxers - normal players, can ban a suspected asshat
Mods - can reveil intentions by looking at their IPs or whatever
Dustin/Admin - can protect people
Teamers (2) - They always have to agree on who to ban from the Luxers, though they can't let people know they're teamers
Asshats - They make people quit by whining

pls · Post by **pls** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 7:16 pm

LMAO!

Kef - don't EVER lose your sense of humor, bud!

RandomGuy · Post by **RandomGuy** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:30 am

Funny you mention the teamers - there is a role for the mafia game, often called "siblings" or "lovers" where two people know eachother (and their identities) with the catch being if one dies, the other automatically dies.

Which adds a twist when they are on different sides (one mafia, one innocent). Or you end up with innocents fighting to protect eachother (and looking like mafia in the process)

3DA · Post by **3DA** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 11:49 am

RandomGuy wrote:Funny you mention the teamers - there is a role for the mafia game, often called "siblings" or "lovers" where two people know eachother (and their identities) with the catch being if one dies, the other automatically dies.

That's a really fun twist. Let's do that this game!

Kef · Post by **Kef** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:17 pm

RandomGuy wrote:Funny you mention the teamers - there is a role for the mafia game, often called "siblings" or "lovers" where two people know eachother (and their identities) with the catch being if one dies, the other automatically dies.

Which adds a twist when they are on different sides (one mafia, one innocent). Or you end up with innocents fighting to protect eachother (and looking like mafia in the process)

Well no, I was actually rather serious

Instaid of the "xxx was killed by a few gunshots through the head" we could get "xxx has quit the community after his mailbox got spammed with hate-mail"

RandomGuy · Post by **RandomGuy** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 3:24 pm

ok, almost time to start a new game up - how's this for a proposed set of rules.

20 players (if we can get that many again):

3 mafia
1 godfather
1 doctor
1 sheriff
1 deputy
1 vigilante
12 innocents

2 of the players will be linked as "siblings" - independent of their other roles (so they could be mafia and sheriff, for example). They won't know their sibling's role unless they reveal it to each other. If one dies, the other automatically dies.

The deputy receives the sheriff investigation results, and takes over investigations if the sheriff dies. But they don't know the sheriff's identity or make own investigations as deputy.

The Godfather will show up as "innocent" to investigations.

The Vigilante can choose to kill at night. If they target the Sheriff or Deputy, the Vigilante is killed.

Innocents are free to PM each other.

EVERYONE must vote the first 3 days. After that, innocents can choose to abstain by voting "abstain". If everyone abstains, nobody is killed during the day.

Thoughts?

The Wontrob · Post by **The Wontrob** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 3:52 pm

I like it: and I want in.

Another odd twist if the siblings are on opposite sides is having them play to win, beating out both innocent and mafia. It's next to impossible to do, but it's been known to happen.

Kef · Post by **Kef** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 4:49 pm

Just wondering, who says who the roles go to? Randomizer or you just picking a name from a hat?

RandomGuy · Post by **RandomGuy** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 4:55 pm

randomized computer sorting of the player list with spots assigned to game roles.

Kef · Post by **Kef** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 6:04 pm

Coolio

(Not that i'm accusing you of cheating with the thing or something)

n00less cluebie · Post by **n00less cluebie** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:54 pm

RandomGuy wrote:EVERYONE must vote the first 3 days. After that, innocents can choose to abstain by voting "abstain". If everyone abstains, nobody is killed during the day.

Thoughts?

What does abstaining do? It just gives the Mafia a free kill, no? Not sure that's such a good idea. In fact, we might make a rule that if someone is late voting for 2 or 3 days in row they turn up dead (how about if you are in the last 3-voters 3 days in row you die; until the total body count gets too small....)

Mike · Post by **Mike** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 11:18 pm

RandomGuy wrote:
EVERYONE must vote the first 3 days. After that, innocents can choose to abstain by voting "abstain". If everyone abstains, nobody is killed during the day.

Thoughts?

is this to imply that after 3 days - the mafia must vote, but innocents can abstain?

RandomGuy · Post by **RandomGuy** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 11:22 pm

I think it helps the mafia too - but it does give the sheriff one more chance at an investigation without sacrificing a (probable) innocent. Many of the players were vocal about wanting to abstain last game, so I figure I would let them if they choose to.

The mafia act as innocents during the day, so they could abstain too, after day 3...

Scad · Post by **Scad** » Thu May 01, 2008 12:32 am

I think the abstention option is a good one; frankly, if you have no idea as to the identity of the killers, you will ALWAYS stand a better chance of killing an innocent than of killing a mafia (we know this by virtue of the mafia voting bloc.) So abstention can help, even if it gives the mob a free ride. Also, it allows a person who's innocent and stands accused to let the heat die off them, or prevent the sheriff from exposing himself by voting for someone he knows is innocent... etc, etc.

Mafia Game Rules

Mafia Game Rules

Re: Mafia Game Rules

Who is online