New Role: Drunk JoaT

[Thesp]

Yes, but I suppose I'm looking for something different when I play Mafia than when I'm playing poker. I want a psychological chess game, in some very real sense, rather than a psychological poker game. Maybe some people are looking for that, and that's what they want. Yet to me, Mafia may be the purest of all games in "playing against other people" in that you are trying to read and figure out what a player wants to keep hidden from you based on how they act. I liken Mafia more to Diplomacy than to Axis and Allies.

Of course, there are times when I'd rather play Axis and Allies over Diplomacy, yet I never find myself wishing there were random factors in

any

game of Mafia I play. It just seems to interfere with what is already a compelling game for me.

(I also still haven't seen anyone vouch for preferring roles with randomness when they are a player, only moderators vouching for it. I suspect moderators enjoy roles with randomness far, far more than townies do, and my philosophy for modding is always very player-driven.)

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) I don't mind getting a role with random factors in it. I'd rather have a role that said "You can target someone at night; there's a 50% chance you'll kill them and a 50% chance you'll doc protect them" then a vanillia townie role. Yes, much of the time I wouldn't use it at all, but I'd have fun trying to figure out when I could use it to the town's advantage, and during the day, I'd just consider myself a vanillia townie with a slight bonus.

[Primate]

(shrug) I don't mind getting a role with random factors in it. I'd rather have a role that said "You can target someone at night; there's a 50% chance you'll kill them and a 50% chance you'll doc protect them" then a vanillia townie role. Yes, much of the time I wouldn't use it at all, but I'd have fun trying to figure out when I could use it to the town's advantage, and during the day, I'd just consider myself a vanillia townie with a slight bonus.

Yeah, but wouldn't you be slightly pissed off if you were the person being targetted, and you died on a coinflip? Introduce random factors into a role, and you're just asking for the game to a degrade to a situation in which the game hinges on a single die roll, which just seems jarring for a game like mafia. I have won a game on the back of a random choice before, and even for the winner, it just seems empty.

Something like a random cop seems ok though, oddly. Guess it's because it doesn't influence other people in any way.

[ShadowLurker]

Well, the Protect/Kill should be used as Vig anyway.

[Zindaras]

I think this role could definitely lead to some interesting choices. Also, I don't really see this as something completely random. There are only two possible variants (not 20 or something, a role which I once had), and it's not a fail/success flip either (those suck).

I like it.

[ShadowLurker]

So this was tried out during a 7 player ILLEGAL MAFI open setup themed game.

The roles were

2 Scum
3 Townies
1 Drunk JoaT
1 Lawmaker

The lawmaker had to pick a president each night and a back up one. Then at the start of the day, the president could remove a law and add a law. If you broke a law, you weren't allowed to vote or speak for the rest of the day. You could not pick yourself as president and could not pick the same person twice in a row. If you died, lawmaker became another vanilla.

Started with lawmaker head start.

Players were chamber, alkohaulec, Pie_is_good, thesheamuffin, lordy, Save the Dragons, and Jathan84.

D1: alkohaulec president makes the rule "No unvoting." muffin, lordy, alko, and Pie all claim townie. lordy, townie, is lynched.

N1: Piescum and Drunk JoaT STD both die

D2: blarg president makes the rule "No voting for blarg" and lets "No unvoting" stand. Town votes no lynch.

N2: Alko dies

D3: Town lynches blargscum to win.

[Save The Dragons]

I drunk JoaT'd the scum good.

Pie claimed townie. I wasn't sure if he was town or scum. If he was scum, he's probably not going to get killed anyway. If he's either town or scum, that's one less to deal with.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, but wouldn't you be slightly pissed off if you were the person being targetted, and you died on a coinflip?

(shrug) I'm always pissed when I get vigged. Don't see how I'd be any more or less pissed if someone attempted to vig me and succeeded.

I actually have died from a semi-random vigging before; someone had a role where they could pick a certain list of people, and one of them would randomally die. And yeah, I was annoyed that he put me on his list of people to be vigged, especally as I thought I was pretty much a confirmed good guy at that point. (Yeah, still bitter ). Nonetheless, I'm not annoyed at the role, only at the way it was used.

If you get targeted by a 50/50 vig, and lose the coinflip, you die. If you get targeted by a normal vig, you die. I don't really see why one would be more annoying then the other.

[al_kohaulec]

To eliminate the random factor, couldn't you plan it out so that, for example, if he chose #1 on an even-numbered night, it would kill, and on an odd-numbered night, it would protect (but don't tell them that, of course). That way they still wouldn't know which it would do, and you would have it fairly mapped out rather than flipping a coin?

It would either have the same effect as pure randomness, or it could be gamed, thus breaking the role.

Haha, if you really want something that makes it not random, then have somebody else have a role that sends in odd or even, and if it's odd, the first of those abilites is used, if he chooses even, then the latter is used.

[Adele]

I like the idea of random roles... it adds a dimension to the game theory aspect.

On the flipside, there are many cases in a zero-sum game (such as mafia) when it is best for a player to make a decision randomly; such as a town agreeing that whoever the doc is, they should flip a coin between protecting the claimed cop and the mod-confirmed vanilla; in this scenario, it may be the mafia's best play to steer away from both enhanced roles; whichever route they take, the town's chances being improved upon both the case that thedoc protects the cop, or the case that he protects the vanilla. Ergo, randomness clearly does have its place in the game.

I'd certainly have a power role weakened by a random factor than a vanilla role. I think I'd even prefer to have certainty of a somehow (eg through a random factor) weakened role than the usual odds of 10% (or whatever) cop, 10% doc, 20% other power, 60% vanilla.

[Fiasco]

Random roles can add to the game by creating new kinds of strategic choices.

Random roles can detract from the game by making good play less closely related to winning. This is more true for small numbers of important random events than for large numbers of unimportant random events.

Pre-game randomness (as in C9) and in-game randomness aren't fundamentally different.

There's already an element of luck in mafia: does the town happen to hit the scum with their lynches? Do the power roles happen to choose the right targets? Alko's suggestion would be another example of luck without explicit randomness.

I'd never actually flip a coin to make a decision. Instead, I'll base the choice on some consideration that the enemy can't predict. Maybe I think claimed cops are overrated, and the enemy doesn't know I do; in that case I won't protect the claimed cop. Maybe I think claimed cops are overrated, but I know the enemy thinks I think claimed cops are more overrated than I actually think they are; in that case I will protect the claimed cop. But the role of luck here is still as large as it would be if I did flip a coin.

[Fiasco]

I'd certainly have a power role weakened by a random factor than a vanilla role. I think I'd even prefer to have certainty of a somehow (eg through a random factor) weakened role than the usual odds of 10% (or whatever) cop, 10% doc, 20% other power, 60% vanilla.

This could make for a great theme game. Make a table of role powers, each with a probability of working, then let all players pick a power and target each night. Instead of giving the mafia nightkills, let them all use their vig power. The doc power would have a high probability; it's not that useful otherwise. Obscure powers could have a low probability to make their use rare. Games with only one role are always fun. Though maybe the serial killer should get to use two powers each night.

[Twomz]

My only real experience w/ random roles were when i was Mr. Game and Watch in Mafiascum Mafia Mafia and MUDs in the IRC room.

GaW got a random role out of 9 choices, depending on a die roll at the end of the day. I believe I got vig once (hit scum), double vote once, nothing twice... and something else that wasn't very useful. 2 of the 9 choices involved me dieing (i believe).

MUDs have a random chance of copping, docing, vigging, or doing nothign (25% all). They come up a lot in Momir, and people just spam it til they get the vigkill. (*shrug*)

[Thesp]

I'd certainly have a power role weakened by a random factor than a vanilla role. I think I'd even prefer to have certainty of a somehow (eg through a random factor) weakened role than the usual odds of 10% (or whatever) cop, 10% doc, 20% other power, 60% vanilla.

This could make for a great theme game. Make a table of role powers, each with a probability of working, then let all players pick a power and target each night. Instead of giving the mafia nightkills, let them all use their vig power. The doc power would have a high probability; it's not that useful otherwise. Obscure powers could have a low probability to make their use rare. Games with only one role are always fun. Though maybe the serial killer should get to use two powers each night.

See Civilization Mafia (Large Theme) for a similar approach.

[Thesp]

Random roles can detract from the game by making good play less closely related to winning. This is more true for small numbers of important random events than for large numbers of unimportant random events.

Pre-game randomness (as in C9) and in-game randomness aren't fundamentally different.

There's already an element of luck in mafia: does the town happen to hit the scum with their lynches? Do the power roles happen to choose the right targets? Alko's suggestion would be another example of luck without explicit randomness.

Sorry for double postage, but this is worth commenting on. I would like good play in Mafia to trump a coin-flip. (I know it's not always that way in other games, but in Mafia this is what I prefer.) Also, lynches and nightchoices are

never

random (though some idiot who uses random.org to make a nightchoice may do differently, but even still...), even if they appear to be random. People lynch

based on

how others play. Nightchoices are made

based on

what's said in the game. If you're flipping a coin in the dark as doc and I'm scum, I'm going to kill the cop, and you won't successfully protect. Good scum can pick out and kill a poorly played doc by day.

Skill is the pre-eminent deciding factor of who wins a good game.

Take a look at the 5-year invitational. I can assure you luck wasn't part of any role there.

And I have no idea where "Pre-game randomness (as in C9) and in-game randomness aren't fundamentally different" comes from.

[Fiasco]

The last post was more of a collection of loose points; I should probably have made it a bulleted list.

I would like good play in Mafia to trump a coin-flip.

Me too, everything else being equal. Randomness for the sake of randomness is bad. But a well-thought-out random role can add something to the game.

Also, lynches and nightchoices are

never

random (though some idiot who uses random.org to make a nightchoice may do differently, but even still...), even if they appear to be random.

Towns don't always lynch the worst-playing player. Sometimes they'll lynch someone for bad/imperfect reasons, and just get lucky.

If you're flipping a coin in the dark as doc and I'm scum, I'm going to kill the cop, and you won't successfully protect.

If always killing the stronger role is your strategy, then you can be defeated by a doctor who always protects the stronger role. So you

will

have to base your decision on something your opponent can't predict (such as a biased coin flip), and if you target the right person, it

is

luck.

There's luck in Diplomacy, too:

http://www.diplom.org/Zine/S1995M/Dreier/NoTheory.html

scroll down to "now for the second reason".

And I have no idea where "Pre-game randomness (as in C9) and in-game randomness aren't fundamentally different" comes from.

Do you think they are fundamentally different? If I'm a random cop, for example, does it matter if my results are rolled before or during the game?

[Kelly Chen]

I would say randomness in one's decisions is quite different from randomness in the mechanics of the setup. You

can

make

all

decisions randomly, but your doing this doesn't undermine the setup's reliance on skill (other than in that particular game).

Towns don't always lynch the worst-playing player. Sometimes they'll lynch someone for bad/imperfect reasons, and just get lucky.

Again here. I could take my car out driving blindfolded and I

might

get lucky and not hit anything. That doesn't mean my car uses a random mechanism or doesn't rely on skill.

And I have no idea where "Pre-game randomness (as in C9) and in-game randomness aren't fundamentally different" comes from.

Do you think they are fundamentally different? If I'm a random cop, for example, does it matter if my results are rolled before or during the game?

This is an interesting point, since the town in a C9 can lose more easily if they don't roll up any power roles.

The role of a player killed N0 might fit here as well. Presumably no role allocation (other than an unnk one) would've stopped that player from dying.


I don't like random mechanics, though. I don't want anyone blaming the dice at the end of the game.

I don't mind alko's suggestion, since the town could in theory learn how the roles interact.

If the town can't learn how a role works, it's no better than random. I don't want players blaming their failures on unguessable mechanics, either.

[Fiasco]

Of course Mafia relies on skill. All I'm saying is that there's

also

an element of luck. If two players seem about equally scummy to me, and I lynch one of them, and it's a scum, don't you think I've been lucky?

(Note that Mafia has a built-in handicap; if you have a reputation as a good player, people will hold you to a higher standard and lynch you on less evidence, at least if they're rational. In fact, I think that from now on I'll always vote good players until someone else looks particularly scummy.)

[Kelly Chen]

Of course Mafia relies on skill. All I'm saying is that there's

also

an element of luck. If two players seem about equally scummy to me, and I lynch one of them, and it's a scum, don't you think I've been lucky?

Sure. But if you lynch wrong you're not going to be able to complain when the game is over that you

would

have made the right decision if it weren't for your bad luck.

I doubt anyone has a problem with this kind of luck in Mafia.

[Yosarian2]

Well, any game of mafia that starts at night has a large inherent random factor, as who the scum/sk/cop/doc/roleblocker/ect target on night 1 can easily swing the game. And even when games start in day, while there is a skill factor involved, there is still a lot of luck when it comes to questions like "does the mafia kill a power role?" Sometimes scum can notice some cop tells or something, but more often they're firing basically blind, especally early in the game.

In general, I'm more in favor of a random role in a large game, where the random factor is less likely to determine the course of the game. If you've got an ability that works 50% of the time in a large game, then first of all odds are it'll work at least a few times as you have more nights, and second of all one single sucess or failure is less likely to change the course of the game.

One random role I was thinking about was a "novice tracker". You target someone, and you always find out if they have a night choice or not (you can always tell if they leave their house or not). If they do leave their house, then you have a 50/50 chance of finding out where they're going.

I think it's a neat idea for a role; it always gives some information, although it's information that's somtimes not very useful, and if someone leaves their house and you don't manage to track them, you've got an interesting choice; do you try again, and take another 50/50 chance at seeing where they're going, or do you look at someone else and get more information?

[Thesp]

Well, any game of mafia that starts at night has a large inherent random factor, as who the scum/sk/cop/doc/roleblocker/ect target on night 1 can easily swing the game.

This is why day starts (or some variants) are better for figuring out balance.

Also, lynching rarely if ever relies on chance, even in cases where it might appear to, IMHAAO.

[Thesp]

Of course Mafia relies on skill. All I'm saying is that there's

also

an element of luck. If two players seem about equally scummy to me, and I lynch one of them, and it's a scum, don't you think I've been lucky?

No, I think likely you've weighted one of the others more subconsciously somehow. If you actually flipped a coin, you deserve to lose.

[mith]

There's luck in Diplomacy, too:

http://www.diplom.org/Zine/S1995M/Dreier/NoTheory.html

scroll down to "now for the second reason".

I agree that there are situations that come up in Diplomacy that are game theoretically "coin flips". I disagree that their outcomes are based on "luck", though - I have always made a distinction between true randomness (actually making the coin flip) and an actual real live person making a choice between two (seemingly) equal options. In practice, very few Diplomacy players would ever make a choice like that with a truly random method; the bad/mediocre ones will make the choice based on some subconscious factor (what Thesp said for the lynching), the good ones will make the choice based on what they think their opponent might consider a factor.

You may as well say there is luck in Chess, in choosing an opening that your opponent hasn't seen before, or in choosing between two moves that look pretty much the same now but over the analysis horizon one wins and the other loses. The human factor in games is in some sense "random", but it doesn't constitute "luck", at least to me. If someone *did* play by coin flips, then yeah, that would be luck; but it just doesn't happen that often in practice.

[mith]

(I'll also add that one reason I tend to discourage random roles is that it leaves a temptation for the Mod to give more or less favorable flips depending on how well that side is doing.)

[Fiasco]

In practice, very few Diplomacy players would ever make a choice like that with a truly random method; the bad/mediocre ones will make the choice based on some subconscious factor (what Thesp said for the lynching), the good ones will make the choice based on what they think their opponent might consider a factor.

"Truly random" or not, in a game between decent players, no amount of skill will help you make the right choice in situations like this, because as you said it's game-theoretically a coin flip (usually weighted). What's the difference if I "flip a coin in my mind" by basing my decision on thoughts of mine that I know my opponent can't predict?

Question: do you think there's any luck involved in Rock-Paper-Scissors?

I guess the important point would be that just because there's already luck in Mafia doesn't mean it's a good idea to add more luck.

You may as well say there is luck in Chess

Yes, I've considered bringing that up. I do think there's luck in chess, though not as obviously as in Diplomacy. If I play enough games against a grandmaster, eventually I'll play a series of moves that later turns out to have been brilliant, and win. I suppose you could also choose to call that "good play", though...