[Yellow]

D, on 30 April 2010 - 04:41 PM, said:

Yeah, the signup thread may have had something else - because when I wrote that THERE WERE FOUR FUCKING PEOPLE SIGNED UP. Use your goddamn brain and realize that "Hey, that was written when there was no way to know the size of the game and there's been far less than 21 people in most games recently. And gee golly whiz, 1 killer for 21 players is weird, I guess things must have changed and I can't really go with the sign-up thread because that's the FUCKING SIGNUP THREAD NOT THE FUCKING GAME THREAD."

Look, D'rek, your game was unbalanced. Don't take your mistakes out on me

[Yellow]

Jump Around, on 30 April 2010 - 04:58 PM, said:

I suggest that, in some of the resource thread (pointers or FAQ), we put a standard "Setup" post for a M&P game, which should be used (as in copy/pasted as is) for every game that is labeled M&P. It would describe the possible roles and the mechanics.

The same way we have a standard "Rules" post, which I am happy to see if back in our games.

Or maybe a few different choices for what is considered standard.

2 killers 1 symp, inno guard, inno finder no CF

or

2 killers 1 symp, paired lovers (no other role), no finder but with CF.

Or whatever, you get my drift. Putting the role PMs in the first post would be good as well, as you'd get no PM reveal fiascos.

[Jump Around]

True, but I don't mean setups, I mean mechanics.

A list of the possible roles, i.e. lovers, finders, vigs, guards, symp, killer, with short descriptions about their powers.
A list of required mechanics, i.e. CF that only gives info on killer/not killer, symps know the killers but not vice-versa, etc.

The balancing is a whole different story, this is still open for the mod to choose. Same with the theme of the game. I think the main issue we have with M&P is not so much the balance than the fact that they are not really M&P.

This post has been edited by Jump Around: 30 April 2010 - 05:10 PM

[Yellow]

Ah, ok. Yeah I agree.

[Peanutbutta]

I don't really like M&P games. I find they are rarely ever, truly, M&P, I think games without interesting mechanics tend to stagnate more because half of the discussion in most of our current games stems in some way from game mechanics (known and speculated).

A M&P is not really low TMDI, in my opinion. They are intended to be games about mystery... who has what role, and why are players doing what they are doing?

However, if you're going to make M&P, I think you need to probably stick to the following guidelines:

• Only a few select roles are allowed.
  • Killer (multiples can comm off-thread, should have killers 'designate' a killer for every given night, none of this 'paired' action crap that can circumvent guard actions)
  • Symp (there should be FEW of these, if any. Killers should ALWAYS outnumber symps.
  • Finder (regular, no special mechanics)
  • Vig (town-only, probably 1-usage)
  • Guard (either town or scum role, unlimited usage)
  • BP (limited usage, no lynch BPs)
  • Healer (town-only, unlimited usage)
  • Lovers (town-only, possibly roled with a power)
  • No other "role combining" should be allowed other than what's stated above.
• No scum/town CF. Just the player's name and role name (or no role name if it would 'give away' the player's identity).
  • CFs make games low TMDI, by definition, because they provide information. I think you should be relying on your instincts and trust/distrust of other player words (reveals, claims, etc), rather than some kind of moderator confirmation.
• 3.5 town : 1 scum ratio, slight alterations based upon roles.

That's a good starting point, IMO.

This post has been edited by Peanutbutta: 30 April 2010 - 05:22 PM

[Yellow]

I'm not sure how you can say that M&P games aren't low TMDI. Roles are specifically defined. People try to work out who is scum, and not what the strange mechanics are.

I like cult games as well, but I haven't played a proper M&P game in ages and I miss them. I'm not a big fan of hidden mechanics or bizarre, one-off rules.

I'm also not a fan of themed games where there are only so many roles to go around. For a quick example - the Aliens themed game from absolutely yonks ago. I know the Aliens films inside out, so I know the role names that are likely to be in the game, plus what kind of mechanics they are likely to have. These kind of games will completely rule out fake reveals, which are important symp/killer tools. If someone tries to claim as Newt in an Aliens game, they will get called out pretty quick. However in a non-themed game, they can claim finder and then it's game on.

Having said that, obscure themes like the one we've just played may as well be non-themed for all I know of Chinese history

[Morgoth]

I'd argue that a M&P game could be either cf or non cf as long as this is included in the OP. In a CF game there should however not be a finder whereas in a non-cf game a finder is pretty much a must.

As for TDMI rating; the rating does not include the need for strategy and skill, just the complexity of the game rules and mechanics. As such a M&P game is of very low rating in my opinion. 2 I guess would be the standard.

Apart from that I agree wholeheartedly with PB.

[Jump Around]

I do agree that M&P, in their true sense, don't make for the most lulz, which is why many players tend not to be into them, even after registering, which can get annoying for those who like them. But that shouldn't mean we should compromise on their nature.

I agree with PB's breakdown. I also agree with Morgoth's opinion that you shouldn't get finders AND CFs. We started with only CFs, but then since we all pretty much sucked at this game at the time, we put the finders in. But now I think we can move away from that, there have been a few without CFs since (I remember one I co-moded), they tend to be quite freaking for those who play. I adore those. The more you give a chance to team scum to bullshit, the better IMO. It comes back to actually READING what is said and evaluate yourself the solidity of what is advanced instead of lynching away to be told the answer.

A few things I would change from PB's list is that the CF should say alt, name of player, killer or not. period. I also don't agree there should be more killers than symps. It depends on the size of the game, but for eg 10 players 1 killer 2 symps work very well, or even 2k-3s like we had in this game.

Bent's idea of putting the role PMs public is good, but I'm biaised because I usually do this in my own games.

[Morgoth]

If all possible roles are listed in the standard rules, the best approach is just to copy and paste those as the role pm. Special connections to the game you can make up yourself.


Take for instance the game we did with the setting being the priest council of Capustan. Twas game 6.66 I think. There was an intro text, night scenes, day scenes, the lot. The role pm however limited itself to you are a healer (short description), guard, RI etc. So even directly copying the pm from PS would have had no effect.

Still, the rp was pretty fun and the enthusiasm for the game was by no means less than in those with very elaborate settings.