Mafiascum.net

There is a surprising amount of variation among mods in the way common, reoccurring actions and events are handled. I've played enough games to see a range of good through bad ways of handling each of the events I'm going to look at.

In each case, I describe what I consider to be the "ideal" method of handling the event/action. Since I've never modded, any criticism is welcomed and encouraged, if only to help me understand why some people do things less than "ideal".

In a few of these cases, I've considered asking a mod how they do things at sign-up and /in-ing or not based on the answer.

1) Vote Counts

Vote counts belong in their own post. It makes reviewing a game's voting trends as easy as selecting the mod's name in the View Posts by Player boxes.

Some mods edit them into the first post of each page. That's nice, if they also exist in a way I can find them when I want them. If I want to see if the same person is 4 voting someone, or who never left a particular wagon or whatever, I don't want to spend time looking at each page and either writing info down, Copy/Pasting vote counts or (as is usual) trying to remember the details and flipping back and forth when I can't.

2) Role/faction/name reveals

In the first post and in death scenes, give all public info together. Most mods do this, but I have seen death scenes that gave a role/name without alignment and vice versa. For clarity, I like both.

3) Confirm when a night action is recieved

This was suggested in a recent MD thread. I've been scum and woken up to no deaths and frantically PM'd the mod wondering if my partner had sent a kill (as we had agreed on). I can imagine all roles wanting to know that there action was received ok.

In the case of role-blocking a cop, or any other role that expects info, something like, "No result obtained" should be sent as well. Some roles won't know if there action worked (either because they don't know what they do, or a "passive" ability like protect or kill) until the next day, and even then it might not be clear (if SK and Mafia kill the same person, did one of the kills fail? Better left unsaid.)

4) Deadline info

A deadline should be issued via its own mod post, not edited in to another post. Editing it in to another player's post is just

mean

. When a deadline is issued, note it in the thread title, if possible. It helps me decide what games to look at if I have limited time. It is also nice to have it in the first post, at least in cases where it doesn't fit in the thread title.

For explicit clarity and prevention of any confusion at all, deadline details, including time and timezone, date and a pointer to/restatement of deadline lynch rules (typically the rules post unless they were amended or stated later), should be in the issuing post.

5) Prods

When player publicly requests a prod, acknowledge it when the prod is sent. Personally, I feel a player picking up the prod is public info and should also be stated when it occurs.

If the player is silent, says he's lurking on purpose, or says he will post- that can remain between mod and player. If he requests to be replaced, then announce that, of course.

Discuss.

gorckat wrote:

1) Vote Counts

Vote counts belong in their own post. It makes reviewing a game's voting trends as easy as selecting the mod's name in the View Posts by Player boxes.

Some mods edit them into the first post of each page. That's nice, if they also exist in a way I can find them when I want them. If I want to see if the same person is 4 voting someone, or who never left a particular wagon or whatever, I don't want to spend time looking at each page and either writing info down, Copy/Pasting vote counts or (as is usual) trying to remember the details and flipping back and forth when I can't.

Agreed 100%.

gorckat wrote:

2) Role/faction/name reveals

In the first post and in death scenes, give all public info together. Most mods do this, but I have seen death scenes that gave a role/name without alignment and vice versa. For clarity, I like both.

Agreed. Death scenes should always end with a clear, one line per death, summary of what went on.

gorckat wrote:

3) Confirm when a night action is recieved

This was suggested in a recent MD thread. I've been scum and woken up to no deaths and frantically PM'd the mod wondering if my partner had sent a kill (as we had agreed on). I can imagine all roles wanting to know that there action was received ok.

In the case of role-blocking a cop, or any other role that expects info, something like, "No result obtained" should be sent as well. Some roles won't know if there action worked (either because they don't know what they do, or a "passive" ability like protect or kill) until the next day, and even then it might not be clear (if SK and Mafia kill the same person, did one of the kills fail? Better left unsaid.)

Agreed. I don't always do this, but I agree that a Mod should acknowledge every nightchoice received.

gorckat wrote:

4) Deadline info

A deadline should be issued via its own mod post, not edited in to another post. Editing it in to another player's post is just

mean

. When a deadline is issued, note it in the thread title, if possible. It helps me decide what games to look at if I have limited time. It is also nice to have it in the first post, at least in cases where it doesn't fit in the thread title.

For explicit clarity and prevention of any confusion at all, deadline details, including time and timezone, date and a pointer to/restatement of deadline lynch rules (typically the rules post unless they were amended or stated later), should be in the issuing post.

Agreed.

gorckat wrote:

5) Prods

When player publicly requests a prod, acknowledge it when the prod is sent. Personally, I feel a player picking up the prod is public info and should also be stated when it occurs.

If the player is silent, says he's lurking on purpose, or says he will post- that can remain between mod and player. If he requests to be replaced, then announce that, of course.

Agreed.

I find myself in agreement with these two ^^

Yes.

Absolutely agree on 1, 3, and 4.

2 runs into some corner cases (for example, only revealing alignment in games with resurrection abilities) where it's justifiable not to reveal all information in a death post. I'd amend the rule to say that differences from the norm of revealing all info about a player upon death should be made clear in the front post, ideally under a "new rules for this game" type of heading so players will actually read it.

Not sure how I feel about all of 5. Agree completely that notification of prods being sent should be in thread. If a player picks up the PM and doesn't respond to it or post, though...within about 24 hours of that happening, the mod really has to make a decision if this constitutes a choice on the part of the player to lurk, or a choice not to play at all (requiring replacement). I'm not convinced that if it's the former, the mod needs to tell the players, as it would be mod confirmation that the player has chosen to lurk as a strategy. That said, I'm not sure how to get around that entirely. So while I'd agree on prods and replacement requests being public knowledge, I'm not sure about the rest of that one.

Well, I haven't modded yet, but I agree with you.

As for #3... With my previous scumbuddies, I always ask the mod whether I can send a "Just in case" NK choice. That's because sometimes discussing with scumbuddies is tough (different timezones, schedules, etc) usually they accept it.

Yaw wrote:If a player picks up the PM and doesn't respond to it or post, though...within about 24 hours of that happening, the mod really has to make a decision if this constitutes a choice on the part of the player to lurk, or a choice not to play at all (requiring replacement). I'm not convinced that if it's the former, the mod needs to tell the players, as it would be mod confirmation that the player has chosen to lurk as a strategy. That said, I'm not sure how to get around that entirely.

That revives the age old debate of whether lurking is a valid (or acceptable for the health of the metagame) strategy. If a mod will confirm that a prod was sent and when they are looking for replacement players, then it should be deducible when a player is lurking.

If they meet players that far, then let us handle the dirty work or /outing players that don't want to play

Andycyca wrote:I always ask the mod whether I can send a "Just in case" NK choice.

I've done that, but in cases where a roleblocker exists, it may matter who does the kill. I've sent "X is killing Y" when expecting to get blocked and its been accepted.

Hmm. I was editing votecounts into posts for a while, but I see your point about info gathering. Of course I haven't done that for a while, but I probably won't do it the future either.

I basically agree with everything you said.

I'll throw my name in there as someone who's modded a few games and agrees with just about everything. The one thing I'm not entirely sure about (Because it's the only one I don't do already) is the nightchoice acknowledgment, since that's

To extend a few of your points... what do people think about the mod editting player posts ever, to answer questions in the special mod formatting, or fix obviously mistaken tags?

I'd also argue that keeping the top post concise is useful, so people who use the "View first post on every page" mod can benefit from it. I do a short flavorful intro, game status, living/dead list with role reveals so far, and stick everything else in posts 1 and 2. Admittedly, I haven't been playing enough recently to know if anyone still does it any differently.

gorkcat wrote:That revives the age old debate of whether lurking is a valid (or acceptable for the health of the metagame) strategy. If a mod will confirm that a prod was sent and when they are looking for replacement players, then it should be deducible when a player is lurking.

If they meet players that far, then let us handle the dirty work or /outing players that don't want to play

Yeah; replacements suck, and doing it for someone who's still around shouldn't have to happen.

Norinel wrote:To extend a few of your points... what do people think about the mod editting player posts ever, to answer questions in the special mod formatting, or fix obviously mistaken tags?

I personally edit posts to prevent clutter. Vote Counts are always in a seperate post (though if I'm making one in the middle of a page, I'll also edit the first post of that page with the vote count and the post number where the vote count is). I'll admit I don't always announce deadlines in a seperate post, but I'll try and be better about that now that I see why that could be a problem.

As for the front post, I make a point of doing 1 and 5. 3 has never occured to me before, but 2 and 4 I generally do, but didn't realize they could be a problem.

Norinel wrote:To extend a few of your points... what do people think about the mod editting player posts ever, to answer questions in the special mod formatting, or fix obviously mistaken tags?

The one game that comes to mind with the mod editing answers to questions into posts in ABR's Mini 486 (iirc). I recall looking back to see the answer to a question or three that was asked, but couldn't remember who asked it, so I had a bitch of a time finding the answers.

Quoting the question when posting the answer would be the ideal. 1) It puts the info in the mod's "stream" when other players look back and 2) It makes it easier to see quickly who asked it (versus having to go back to the post, scrolling up nad maybe paging back to find the query).

1. Yes, absolutely. I cannot imagine how confusing it would be to review a game that was done the other way (luckily, I've avoided playing under any of those mods so far).
   
2. Yes, with the caveat that as long as it is ALL explicitly laid out in the first post/death summary post, it can be shortened a bit in the actual death scene, sometimes. I dislike the usage of colors if those colors are not going to correspond to standards (red for scum, etc); Phoebus did this in some game without alignment-reveal and it drove me batty, even though I WAS one of the scum (and yes, I realize limited-reveal games will muck with this rule, but in that case I'd rather you didn't use colors at all!).
   
3. I'll gladly take credit for this idea, so yes. Every player with a choice should receive a confirmation from the mod that their choice was received, even if they don't get full/direct information about the result of their choice.
   
4. Yes to all, especially to putting it in the thread title (even if it means you have to shorten your flavor text).
   
5. This is the only one I disagree with. I'll usually acknowledge that I've seen a request for a prod, but it's between me and the player whether or not they're lurking or have disappeared. Even pro-town roles have reasons for doing this at times, so it's not playing favorites to the scum. I don't understand your second paragraph here; if the player doesn't post and I say that they've picked up their prod, then the player is 'outed' as lurking. I generally prod on MY schedule, not the players, so I may be misunderstanding your intention here.

Norinel wrote:To extend a few of your points... what do people think about the mod editting player posts ever, to answer questions in the special mod formatting, or fix obviously mistaken tags?

I do this sometimes, most often if I can edit it into their post quickly before anyone else has responded to the thread, so I'm 99% sure the answer won't be missed. If I see it later than that, I usually just answer in the same post as my next vote count.

Flay wrote:# This is the only one I disagree with. I'll usually acknowledge that I've seen a request for a prod, but it's between me and the player whether or not they're lurking or have disappeared. Even pro-town roles have reasons for doing this at times, so it's not playing favorites to the scum. I don't understand your second paragraph here; if the player doesn't post and I say that they've picked up their prod, then the player is 'outed' as lurking. I generally prod on MY schedule, not the players, so I may be misunderstanding your intention here.

I could probably restate this point as:

Acknowledge a player has been prodded when requested. Announce when a player is being replaced. Everything in-between is for the town to deal with.

Necro'd for goodness:

Mr. Flay wrote:Mods that don't have a

Not Voting

column of their VCs make me

crazy

- I can't usually hold all the game's players in my head at once unless it's endgame, so it makes it much more likely that lurkers fall off my radar, and it's a royal pain to follow up on if I have do a Vote Count for them while backup modding.

Disagree on 3. If a player wants confirmation, they can the mod. The mod having to provide it is obnoxious clutter.

I don't count "nonvotes", because no one actually complains about it in my games. It's just as much an inconvenience for mods as it is for players, and if nobody seems to care, then I certainly don't.

Hmm. Old thread that got dragged up. But I'm glad so many people agree on 1! I definitely think that vote counts should be in their own post.

I agree on all counts except maybe 3. That does create extra work. I think the fact that the mod picked up the PM should be proof enough that the mod has read the night action.

I didn't think about acknowledging the post. I think now that it has been mentioned I will do that from now on.
1, 2 and 4 I already do.
5 is one of those things I think players need to ask. I will prod players and acknowledge that I prodded the player, but i think saying the player picked up the prod and didn't respond isn't something a mod should state unless asked.

I strongly suggest all mods have a "Not voting" line in their vote counts, because it makes compiling a vote count so . Try it! Start with everyone in "Not voting", and cut+paste to move votes from line to line. You'll never forget to remove someone's previous vote again.

Rishi wrote:Hmm. Old thread that got dragged up. But I'm glad so many people agree on 1! I definitely think that vote counts should be in their own post.

I agree on all counts except maybe 3. That does create extra work. I think the fact that the mod picked up the PM should be proof enough that the mod has read the night action.

I just did #3.

farside22 wrote:5 is one of those things I think players need to ask. I will prod players and acknowledge that I prodded the player, but i think saying the player picked up the prod and didn't respond isn't something a mod should state unless asked.

Meatworld:

A) John's in the bathroom...no way he could have responded to your point
B) John hasn't spoken up at all in like 5 minutes, stupid lurker...

Online, I enjoy/prefer:

Player: Hey, where's John?
Mod: Prodding John
Mod: (24 hours later) He was in the bathroom and said he's back now/He's not coming out so I'm gonna replace him.

over:

Player: Hey, where's John?
Mod: Prodding John
Player: (72 hours later) hey...whatver happened to John?
Mod: He was in the bathroom and said he's back now/He's not coming out so I'm gonna replace him.


Partly because I favor 2-3 week deadlines, those 48 hours make a difference. Even without rigid deadlines, those 48 hours may have been wasted debating whether lollipops are scummy than jawbreakers when some guy has been lurking in front of everyone while they assumed the mod was on it.

4 seems unneccesary to me. Yes, cops should usually recieve a "no result" if there is no result, but I don't see any real reason for a mod to respond back to the doc and say "Yes, I got your action"; the doc can certanly see that the mod read his PM, after all. If you have a question, of course (like "did you get a night choice from us"), then feel free to ask.

As for 5...it varies. If a prod is given in response to a player request, I guess the mod should post it in thread. As for the rest...eh. I don't really like people getting too much information directly from the mod, like "X picked up his prod at 7:30 PM, then he didn't post until the next evening, so he must have been having trouble inventing a fake claim...". But then again, when I prod a player, it means they need to post in the near future, or be replaced; I don't cotton to this "Psst, mod, I'm lurking, let me be" stuff anyway.

votecount as of post 233

with 12 alive, 7 will lynch before deadline

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

¬Jopoho

: 5: CoolBot, Khelvaster, jmar, Hjalti, Frostypants

izak013

Khelvaster

: 1: Numenorean7

not voting

: Sir Tornado, death_oman, Jopoho, Sir Wario, spurgistan, DGMavn
˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

deadline is November 11 at 0100 GMT

In my games I use "¬" as a flag for who will be lynched at deadline. The flag only moves to another player once that other player has more votes than the current vote-flag holder. I came up with this system after reading a game where player X had five voes and player Y had four votes. Right before deadline, someone unvoted player X, and player Y was then lynched because he had been at four votes for a longer period of time.

I think that for deadlines it is a good practice to have a rule stating something to the effect of "Votes and unvotes that accur after the deadline will not be counted." that way if can't be there to lock the thread at the specific deadline time the players will realize that while they can still post since the thread is unlocked, who will be lynched has been determined.

Xylthixlm wrote:I strongly suggest all mods have a "Not voting" line in their vote counts, because it makes compiling a vote count so

easy

. Try it! Start with everyone in "Not voting", and cut+paste to move votes from line to line. You'll never forget to remove someone's previous vote again.

I started doing this in about my third modded game after using spreadsheets and whatnot for the first two, and I can attest that it is easier. Having the not voting line also allows you to check more easily that you've got the right number of players in your votecount.

Adel wrote:

votecount as of post 233

with 12 alive, 7 will lynch before deadline

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

¬Jopoho

: 5: CoolBot, Khelvaster, jmar, Hjalti, Frostypants

izak013

Khelvaster

: 1: Numenorean7

not voting

: Sir Tornado, death_oman, Jopoho, Sir Wario, spurgistan, DGMavn
˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

deadline is November 11 at 0100 GMT

In my games I use "¬" as a flag for who will be lynched at deadline. The flag only moves to another player once that other player has more votes than the current vote-flag holder. I came up with this system after reading a game where player X had five voes and player Y had four votes. Right before deadline, someone unvoted player X, and player Y was then lynched because he had been at four votes for a longer period of time.

I used to use "If deadline hits and there is a tie for the highest number of votes, then votes will be reverted in reverse order from their placement until there is a clear leader, who will then be lynched". The italicised part is what makes the rule act in the same way as Adel's.

Now, however, I simply use "no majority = no lynch".

Adel wrote: In my games I use "¬" as a flag for who will be lynched at deadline. The flag only moves to another player once that other player has more votes than the current vote-flag holder. I came up with this system after reading a game where player X had five voes and player Y had four votes. Right before deadline, someone unvoted player X, and player Y was then lynched because he had been at four votes for a longer period of time.

Yeah...I don't like time-based deadline tiebreakers at all. I'm not sure how I'm going to deal with that issue in the next game I mod...perhaps "tie at deadline means no lynch" would be a good plan.

I think that for deadlines it is a good practice to have a rule stating something to the effect of "Votes and unvotes that accur after the deadline will not be counted." that way if can't be there to lock the thread at the specific deadline time the players will realize that while they can still post since the thread is unlocked, who will be lynched has been determined.

(nods) That's a good idea. The alternate idea is just to state in your rules that the deadline dosn't actually happen until the mod comes into the thread and announces end-of-day, like "Deadline will be at some time after 8:00 PM tommorow, whenever the mod is avalable to lock the thread". The ambiguaty should be eliminated, though; having one or the other, and having everyone know which one, is probably best.