Question about handling priorities

[Karo]

Okay, what happens when two actions happen at the same time? How is this usually handled? Example:

Scum A nightkills Player A. Player A happens to be a Vig and targets Scum A as well with his shot.

So both of them die? Mafia has priority and kills the Vig before the other player can kill him? This might sound stupid, but I am curious if there is a consensus about how to answer this question. Thanks.

[ChannelDelibird]

I would rule that they both die. As far as I know that's the most common scenario on 'scum.

However, what I don't know about the general consensus for is the following:

Scum A NKs Doc B. Doc B protects Townie C. Vig D kills townie C.

I would rule that Townie C survives and Doc B dies ('heroic death' kind of thing), but I'm sure some people would kill Townie C as well.

[Thestatusquo]

As a mod, I've toyed around with the idea of using first come first serve type system, in order to better entice the players to get night choices in fast. In such a system, the first person targeted would be dead, and hence not get to use his night choice.

The main reason such a system doesn't work is that players a) either don't read about it in the rules, or b) Just don't care, or b) Can't check the site that often, so I usually go with the standard idea that all night choices go through.

[mith]

First come first served is a terrible idea. It's been used before on occasion. It's just not a fair way to resolve things given the nature of the forum game, and time zone differences, and all that.

[Zindaras]

I rule as following:

First, protective roles trigger, including roleblockers and such. Once those are handled, the rest triggers, all at the same time. If two players attempt to kill each other, both succeed.

[Kelly Chen]

Additionally, mafia (or other parties that collectively control a move) tend to need longer to decide on their move. You wouldn't want to penalize them for that.

[Zindaras]

I think we had a first come, first served rule in Mini 372, hosted by Kain. I don't think it's a good idea, ever, because of the reasons pointed out by Kelly and mith.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

1. Roleblockers
2. Doctors
3. Everyone else

That's how I handle it, although there are, of course, exceptions.

[Seol]

Generally agree with CES, which means Reservoir Dogs situations (A shoots B shoots C) are possible.

[KaleiÐoscøpe]

I have bad flashbacks about "first come, first serve"... I always use the stack rules like CES posted.

[Mr. Flay]

Mmmmm, Mexican Standoff. I was disappointed in the distinct lack of A shoots B shoots C situations in the Reservoir Dogs mini.

First in first out sounds like a good idea on paper, but realistically it can penalize certain groups. I'm not sure it harms mafia much though, since kills are generally blocked by docs under most circumstances anyway. Who else needs to discuss and then choose, mason cops? It's not standard practice at MafiaScum though so you'd need to inform your players that was the case, if it was.

Generally speaking, I resolve night actions in the following order: roleblockers, protectors, investigators, recruiters, then killers.

[Seol]

When I first saw this thread, I thought it would be along the lines of "Who here ends up finding themselves playing Mafia instead of eating?"

[Kelly Chen]

Yeah, I thought it was going to be something like, "If I'm in too many games, how can I decide which ones I should quit?"

[mikehart]

i used the first come first serve way in "The Hobbit" and it was disastrous as was the whole game. i shall never use it again. i think flay's method is what i will use in the future

[Mr. Flay]

Note: the order I listed above can be tweaked depending on whether your investigators should take precedence over recruiters in a specific game. Most of my investigative roles work based on evidence already in existence, which is why they generally won't know about a conversion that same evening. A psychic investigator or something of that kind might have different rules...

[Coron]

the order I resolve things in in general is similar to Mr. Flay's.

However to avoid ties in endgames I resolve kills this way only in endgame:

SK
Mafia
Vig.
unless otherwise stated.

[Twito]

When I first saw this thread, I thought it would be along the lines of "Who here ends up finding themselves playing Mafia instead of eating?"

Me sometimes.

Yeah, I thought it was going to be something like, "If I'm in too many games, how can I decide which ones I should quit?"

Kinda.

[Mgm]

the order I resolve things in in general is similar to Mr. Flay's.

However to avoid ties in endgames I resolve kills this way only in endgame:

SK
Mafia
Vig.
unless otherwise stated.

Why bother avoiding a tie. If it happens, it happens.

[Cubsfan4ever]

As a mod, I've toyed around with the idea of using first come first serve type system, in order to better entice the players to get night choices in fast. In such a system, the first person targeted would be dead, and hence not get to use his night choice.

The main reason such a system doesn't work is that players a) either don't read about it in the rules, or b) Just don't care, or b) Can't check the site that often, so I usually go with the standard idea that all night choices go through.

and that'd be unfair to scum groups that usually have to talk night decisions out as opposed to vigs, sks, or roleblockers who can make their decision right away

[spectrumvoid]

I am strongly against first-come-first-serve. Poor people like me in GMT +8 will lose out.

This is a good thread to read for new mods...

[Courk]

This is slightly OT, but about encouraging players to get choices in fast: I don't like to do anything that encourages that. If all the choices are in, do you go to day before the deadline is up? If you do that, what do you do about people who are known to be gone for part of the night, like if they are away for a few days? There are situations where other players could get a pretty good idea that the delay is caused by someone not getting a choice in, and so-and-so hasn't been online, so maybe he's holding it up, so he must have an ability. A townie thinking this wouldn't be as bad as the mafia realizing this.

By just setting a deadline and keeping to it, no matter when the choices are received, no one knows if anyone was holding up the game or not. The mod could have been sitting there for a few days just waiting to start day, or half of the people could have missed the deadline.

[mole]

As a mod, I've toyed around with the idea of using first come first serve type system, in order to better entice the players to get night choices in fast. In such a system, the first person targeted would be dead, and hence not get to use his night choice.

The main reason such a system doesn't work is that players a) either don't read about it in the rules, or b) Just don't care, or b) Can't check the site that often, so I usually go with the standard idea that all night choices go through.

and that'd be unfair to scum groups that usually have to talk night decisions out as opposed to vigs, sks, or roleblockers who can make their decision right away

Also, I think it allows for too much (unintentional) mod interference in the game. If you're a couple of hours late in declaring the lynch and locking the thread, you could have a major impact on the outcome of the game, depending on which players are online at the time.

Which isn't to say that it should never be done, but we all want the game to be decided as much as possible on the actions of the players, and not on who got a lucky break, right?

[Skruffs]

You think there could be a way to 'rate' players based on what happens in the game? This might be aprtially based on some of GL's roles in his last PR3 game, which got benefits from posting a certain thing certain times... and you wouldn't want a system to be biased, but I would think that people who are more involved in the game (People who initiate busses, who cast hammering votes, or whatnot) could be 'rewarded' appropriately. Or even just give each person a private 'number' before the gae starts and base it off that, like initiative.

My question on this is, what about 'bus drivers' or target switchers and compllicated stuff like that.

[Turbovolver]

Giving players scores based on game actions seems like largely unexplored design space and awesome, though I wouldn't be using it to determine killing priorities. And randomising priorities sounds like it would just frustrate players, though I agree from the mod perspective it's kinda cool.

[Fircoal]

I agree with CES's way of doing it but I would add Fircoal as #1. I should always get top priority.