Why have unconfirmed Mason partners?

[destructor]

I guess my issue is, why would you want to night talk with an unconfirmed mason? Sure you

might

be able to get some information from them if they're scum, but I'd be uber-paranoid and they'd be on their guard. It would so unproductive that I'd be tempted to just not bother being a 'mason' and play like a vanilla townie.

[Sarcastro]

Did nobody notice that Yos already won the thread?

Masons should be unconfirmed. The vast majority of the time, they're still going to be two pro-town players, but it's important that the possibility of one being scum is maintained, both to avoid 100% confirmation (which should not be instantly attainable simply by claiming) and to allow for the occassional scum-mason to be slipped into games.

[Kelly Chen]

Outside of flavorful games, I don't like that answer. If you don't confirm the masons then the effect on the balance of having the masons is really unclear (and is kind of dependent on masons' innocence rate in other games). And I don't like "you can talk outside the thread" as the basis of a role. I want scumhunting to happen within the thread.

[Primate]

And I don't like "you can talk outside the thread" as the basis of a role. I want scumhunting to happen within the thread

Yeah, but it's during night. It's not a 'in thread' vs 'out of thread', it's 'out of thread' vs 'not at all'.

I do get your point with confirmation and masons, though. I like using unconfirmed masons simply because townies seem to view them as cleared for some reason, but it's not obscure enough that they'll be scum for them to get a complete pass. It's a real case of a scum role that you can either make as little or as much of it as you want. Play it right and you'll be near confirmed, play it wrong you'll be lynched like a townie.

[Kelly Chen]

And I don't like "you can talk outside the thread" as the basis of a role. I want scumhunting to happen within the thread

Yeah, but it's during night. It's not a 'in thread' vs 'out of thread', it's 'out of thread' vs 'not at all'.

My desire here is not to have as much scumhunting as possible, but that as much of the game as possible occur in the thread.

[Yosarian2]

Outside of flavorful games, I don't like that answer. If you don't confirm the masons then the effect on the balance of having the masons is really unclear (and is kind of dependent on masons' innocence rate in other games).

Well, it might make balancing games slightly harder, but in general, I think that the fact that the value of masons is slightly unclear is a good thing. Gives the town something else to talk about and think about, at least.

And I don't like "you can talk outside the thread" as the basis of a role. I want scumhunting to happen within the thread.

IMHO, talking outside the thread is only a bad thing if it means there's less discussion going on inside the thread, and that generaly dosn't seem to be the case with masons.

[Kelly Chen]

It seems to me that's because masons are usually both protown. But if you're talking to your partner to try to figure out whether they're scum, in my mind that would be better in the thread.

[Yosarian2]

It seems to me that's because masons are usually both protown. But if you're talking to your partner to try to figure out whether they're scum, in my mind that would be better in the thread.

(shrug) I donno, it can be fun to have that kind of thing going on as well, so long as it's not so widespread as to stifle activity in the main game. I had fun with being able to talk to people in 24 mafia who didn't know my alignment (I was scum, managed to convince several people I was town in private conversations.) It was a very different kind of challange. And there have been other roles that have abilites like that as well; for example, roles that can pass an annonomyous note on to someone else and such.