Private Topics Discussion (Now with Mish Mash)

[zoraster]

That's why in the past I've used RGAM, which involves posting the time of the draw, then in the recording showing the time and date website. Then doing the draw. Sure, I could edit it together, but it increases the cost of manipulation a lot and might result in being caught.

I don't trust you. I don't trust any mod. I don't think all mods who don't show their system manipulate at all, but I wouldn't be surprised if something like a third to half do so.

I doubt there are many mods who manipulate games hugely. I think it's likely that they randomly generate and then look at it and either (a) think this is a crappy draw and redo the randomness or (b) swap a couple of players around to make for what they think is a more fun experience. I think mods do this in the hopes of providing players with a better game, so it's not like I think mods are doing this maliciously. But I think it goes on.

[Zachrulez]

That hurts man.

If mods are unhappy with their draws, the easiest way to solve that problem if you're using the random generator shell is to just reroll it. You can do that after you get the draw with a simple press of the button. If there's any manipulation going on, I suspect that would be what's happening. I doubt the prevalence of that is as high as you believe though.

I've personally been tempted at times, but have never done so myself.

[zoraster]

Rerolling is absolutely manipulation of results.

My general thought is that if I've been tempted to manipulate results (I have), and if there's a ZERO percent chance of being caught, at least some fairly sizable portion of the population will choose to manipulate. My desire to provide a completely unbiased game will not be shared by all those who share my temptation to manipulate.

Truth be told, the systems I put in place are there to help remove that temptation so that I don't have to wrangle with it every time I do a new game.

[Zachrulez]

Rerolling is absolutely manipulation of results.

My general thought is that if I've been tempted to manipulate results (I have), and if there's a ZERO percent chance of being caught, at least some fairly sizable portion of the population will choose to manipulate. My desire to provide a completely unbiased game will not be shared by all those who share my temptation to manipulate.

Truth be told, the systems I put in place are there to help remove that temptation so that I don't have to wrangle with it every time I do a new game.

Mostly I've just trained myself not to be invested in the outcome of the game. (I'm talking in terms of how it unfolds. I am invested in a smooth well run game.) It removes a lot of the temptation to manipulate.

[RedCoyote]

Rerolling is absolutely manipulation of results.

My general thought is that if I've been tempted to manipulate results (I have), and if there's a ZERO percent chance of being caught, at least some fairly sizable portion of the population will choose to manipulate. My desire to provide a completely unbiased game will not be shared by all those who share my temptation to manipulate.

Truth be told, the systems I put in place are there to help remove that temptation so that I don't have to wrangle with it every time I do a new game.

I'm not as pessimistic as zora here, but I know he's right.

I... I close my eyes and hit refresh an arbitrary and frivolous amount of times. Then I stop, open my eyes, and that's it; that's the draw. Then I say, "Locked in. No fear. No regrets. The first day of the rest of your life. #YOLO Game on. God bless America. We built this city on rock and roll." Then I drop the mic and everyone applauds as I exit the stage.

[Zachrulez]

I'm sure in my earlier modding days, I might have found it worthwhile to create a system to remove temptation to manipulate the draw. I've gained enough experience and separated myself from the investment of wanting a draw that "results in an interesting game" to the point where I'm much less tempted to manipulate the draw now.

[zoraster]

like a bad answer answer to an even worse interview question, it's just that I care too much; work too hard.

[Mr. Flay]

I doubt there are many mods who manipulate games hugely. I think it's likely that they randomly generate and then look at it and either (a) think this is a crappy draw and redo the randomness or (b) swap a couple of players around to make for what they think is a more fun experience. I think mods do this in the hopes of providing players with a better game, so it's not like I think mods are doing this maliciously. But I think it goes on.

Counterpoint: It's not interesting when the New York Yankees play the Cedar Rapids Kernels. That's not a game.

Will I manipulate the draw to give a favorite player a favorite role? No. But there have been situations where the game benefits from a different randomization seed. As a Dungeon Master for RPGs, I can tell you that the dice hate you, and the players both.

[RichardGHP]

I do the randomization way before sign ups even take place. Removes pretty much all temptation to tinker with the assignment. If you get a list which is not strictly desirable (e.g. the entire scum team taking up one single section), you will obviously want to reroll that. On that basis, I am not entirely opposed to zoraster's example a). But I think that altering the distribution any more specifically than that is just not good modding practice. Having said that, it absolutely should not be incumbent on the mod to prove that the distribution is random.

[penguin_alien]

In terms of using the dice tags, it seems to come with a decent chance of having to perform supplementary rolls some significant part of the time. Just looking at a Micro or Newbie set-up with nine slots, rolling a d100 for each player (it would seem that that's as high as it goes) only gives nine distinct numbers 69% of the time (back of the envelope number). One could roll for the player slot to get each role individually while readjusting the list after each roll, but that generates a whole lot of posts, never mind doing that for some of the larger games. The advantage of that would be the ability to see how time stamps elapse between mod topic posts, but it's still not proof against someone aborting and deleting partway through.

In terms of randomizing for any given game, it seems to me in my limited experience that one never knows how people are going to work in the actual situation, either as a scum team or as a complete player group. Trying to outguess the competence players will bring to the table in a specific situation seems like a good way to miss out on some surprising synergies.

[Siveure DtTrikyp]

If I were modding (which I don't, lol), I'd do dice tags for each individual role other than the biggest group of roles (usually VTs). When someone gets a role, just take their name out. So, for a 2/7 setup with no PRs, do 1d9 for the first mafia then 1d8 for the second.

The amount of times I mixed up roll and role typing this in. Yuck.

[zoraster]

I do the randomization way before sign ups even take place. Removes pretty much all temptation to tinker with the assignment. If you get a list which is not strictly desirable (e.g. the entire scum team taking up one single section), you will obviously want to reroll that. On that basis, I am not entirely opposed to zoraster's example a). But I think that altering the distribution any more specifically than that is just not good modding practice. Having said that, it absolutely should not be incumbent on the mod to prove that the distribution is random.

what do you mean a single section?

[zoraster]

In terms of using the dice tags, it seems to come with a decent chance of having to perform supplementary rolls some significant part of the time. Just looking at a Micro or Newbie set-up with nine slots, rolling a d100 for each player (it would seem that that's as high as it goes) only gives nine distinct numbers 69% of the time (back of the envelope number). One could roll for the player slot to get each role individually while readjusting the list after each roll, but that generates a whole lot of posts, never mind doing that for some of the larger games. The advantage of that would be the ability to see how time stamps elapse between mod topic posts, but it's still not proof against someone aborting and deleting partway through.

In terms of randomizing for any given game, it seems to me in my limited experience that one never knows how people are going to work in the actual situation, either as a scum team or as a complete player group. Trying to outguess the competence players will bring to the table in a specific situation seems like a good way to miss out on some surprising synergies.

You're reversing it. What you do is you make a list:

1. Cop
2. Doc
3. Tracker
4. Mafia Goon
5. Mafia Roleblocker
6. Mafia Godfather
7. Mafia Goon
8-17. VT

Then you roll for each player. Higher number is 1, lowest number is 17.

When I've done this in the past for various things I'll do two rolls at once: 1d100 and 1d50 or something. The second roll is only used to break ties.

[zoraster]

I doubt there are many mods who manipulate games hugely. I think it's likely that they randomly generate and then look at it and either (a) think this is a crappy draw and redo the randomness or (b) swap a couple of players around to make for what they think is a more fun experience. I think mods do this in the hopes of providing players with a better game, so it's not like I think mods are doing this maliciously. But I think it goes on.

Counterpoint: It's not interesting when the New York Yankees play the Cedar Rapids Kernels. That's not a game.

Will I manipulate the draw to give a favorite player a favorite role? No. But there have been situations where the game benefits from a different randomization seed. As a Dungeon Master for RPGs, I can tell you that the dice hate you, and the players both.

As if we can really guess the outcome that well, but I'd rather have mods let the Cedar Rapids Kernels play the Yankees than have mods manipulate results to give what they think is a more even game. If I know you feel this way, I will 100% think to try to guess what you'd do as a mod, particularly if two poor scum players have flipped scum already.

[Kdub]

I do the randomization way before sign ups even take place.

This is pretty much the only way to do it. Generate a random sequence, reorder all the roles in your game by that sequence, then post it in a place where your backup mod sees it. Then as players sign up, place them in sequential order down the list. There is no way to manipulate that unless the backup mod is in on it as well.

[Haylen]

I really like the green. <.< Well this answers my question as to whether there was a point of that forum. I like it.

(Disclaimer: I have only read the OP and skimmed half of the first page).

Just to clarify:
We can only see topics we create.
We can add other people to topics we create.
If we add somebody to a topic we have created, they will see it in their forum.
Nobody else can see the thread unless we have added them to the topic.
People added to the thread do not have the power to add other people.

How will this work at the end of games when people ask for QT links? Do we just add everybody to the thread?
Could this put a strain on the server, hosting private topics here? I seem to remember there being server space issues in the past.
What happens to the thread? Does it eventually get deleted? (I ask because I have kept every private topic I've personally every seen in my played games and my modded games.)

[RichardGHP]

I do the randomization way before sign ups even take place. Removes pretty much all temptation to tinker with the assignment. If you get a list which is not strictly desirable (e.g. the entire scum team taking up one single section), you will obviously want to reroll that. On that basis, I am not entirely opposed to zoraster's example a). But I think that altering the distribution any more specifically than that is just not good modding practice. Having said that, it absolutely should not be incumbent on the mod to prove that the distribution is random.

what do you mean a single section?

I mean, if the scum team is taking up three spots on the list right next to each other, for example. Or any such situations where the distribution isn't considered to "look" particularly random.

[Cabd]

I do the randomization way before sign ups even take place. Removes pretty much all temptation to tinker with the assignment. If you get a list which is not strictly desirable (e.g. the entire scum team taking up one single section), you will obviously want to reroll that. On that basis, I am not entirely opposed to zoraster's example a). But I think that altering the distribution any more specifically than that is just not good modding practice. Having said that, it absolutely should not be incumbent on the mod to prove that the distribution is random.

what do you mean a single section?

I mean, if the scum team is taking up three spots on the list right next to each other, for example. Or any such situations where the distribution isn't considered to "look" particularly random.

Of course now that you've posted this, if I were one of your players I'd totally use this to clear somebody if two scum flipped on either side of them.

[RichardGHP]

I do the randomization way before sign ups even take place. Removes pretty much all temptation to tinker with the assignment. If you get a list which is not strictly desirable (e.g. the entire scum team taking up one single section), you will obviously want to reroll that. On that basis, I am not entirely opposed to zoraster's example a). But I think that altering the distribution any more specifically than that is just not good modding practice. Having said that, it absolutely should not be incumbent on the mod to prove that the distribution is random.

what do you mean a single section?

I mean, if the scum team is taking up three spots on the list right next to each other, for example. Or any such situations where the distribution isn't considered to "look" particularly random.

Of course now that you've posted this, if I were one of your players I'd totally use this to clear somebody if two scum flipped on either side of them.

Do so at your peril. It's not like I can't make exceptions to my own rules.

[JacobSavage]

How will this work at the end of games when people ask for QT links? Do we just add everybody to the thread?

You can set the privacy settings to "public" so everyone can view it.

[chamber]

We can only see topics we create.

For you, hopefully. at the moment all admins can see all PTs, and when I'm not in games I'll likely also periodically be in that group to make sure everything's working right and not being abused.

We can add other people to topics we create.

Yes.

If we add somebody to a topic we have created, they will see it in their forum.

Yes.

Nobody else can see the thread unless we have added them to the topic.

With the few previously stated exceptions.

People added to the thread do not have the power to add other people.

Unless they have editing powers in the forum. (me, admins).

[Cabd]

Chamber, how hard would it be to modify this to allow setting up main game threads with an approved poster list?

[chamber]

Chamber, how hard would it be to modify this to allow setting up main game threads with an approved poster list?

Not hard but I also have no plans to do so atm.

[Cheery Dog]

How will this work at the end of games when people ask for QT links? Do we just add everybody to the thread?

There's a make public option in the threads.

[RedCoyote]

Chamber, how hard would it be to modify this to allow setting up main game threads with an approved poster list?

This actually may be good so that mods can exercise more control over hydras. Often times hydra players inadvertently post in incorrect accounts, especially players that juggle several different accounts.

So if only the hydra account can post in the thread, it eliminates the issue of wrong accounts posting.

Also, the obvious, it could prevent any trolling from players coming into game and trying to spoil it or something. I've actually never seen this happen before, but I'm sure it's not unprecedented. I could see it being especially useful in newbie games when someone is lynched in a controversial way and they show the potential to out their partners in some emotional outburst.