False Positives - Bastard or not?

[Dwlee99]

I just have a quick question about false positives in a game. Would it be considered bastard to put (for example) a godfather into a game where there is no cop or role that could make the kill target the godfather in order to make the mafia think there might be?

[Davsto]

Putting a Miller or Godfather etc in a game where there isn't a Cop is a classic setup design tactic. No, it isn't bastard.

[AlwaysInnocent]

About false positives in general (insane cop, etc). In open setups, they are not bastard. In closed setups, they are.

To make scum look for something that is not really there (can only work in closed setups) does seem semi-bastard at least.

[zMuffinMan]

it doesn't qualify as bastard under the normal definition of bastard, but it just seems like poor setup design. what are you really achieving by putting a godfather in a setup without a cop, other than perhaps any personal enjoyment you might get if the scum team gets frantic about finding a cop that doesn't exist... if you're doing it to balance something, then you're doing it wrong, and if you're not doing it for balance reasons, then you're probably not a good moderator

i'm trying to think of any red herrings that are a necessity to keep people from confirming some aspect of the game but i can't really think of any. they are just poor game design, in general. and some of them are REALLY poor game design (e.g. two scum neighbours in a two-person neighbourhood)...

miller without a cop i suppose is less bad than some other stuff but still not great

[Dwlee99]

Tfw everyone disagrees.

Another example I thought of: Flavor cop in a themed game even when flavor is not alignment indicative.

[Kagami]

Muffin once again confirms that he is my spirit animal.

[Davsto]

About false positives in general (insane cop, etc). In open setups, they are not bastard. In closed setups, they are.

That's not what they're talking about.

To make scum look for something that is not really there (can only work in closed setups) does seem semi-bastard at least.

Meh, I wouldn't agree. I don't see how putting a Miller in a non-Cop setup or a Ninja in a no-Watcher/Tracker setup is bastard. Sure, it makes the scum think something is there that isn't, but it's not the same as, say, giving a Cop results that are the opposite, having your alignment suddenly change with no prior warning or knowledge of this, or Jesters.

A game being bastard generally means that there are lies that cannot be reasonably anticipated (Cop sanities, quack Doc, being a completely different role than you are told), or a role within the game that changes the way the game should be played strategically by others, but they are unaware that it is in the game (cult, jester etc).

I don't feel like including something to slightly mislead people and act as a red herring to avoid setup spec becoming too easy fits the description of "bastard". By that nature, having one role's flavour name being an odd one out intentionally to avoid the game potentially being broken by massclaim is bastard.

Sometimes, this stuff can be really well done though. For example, look at Secret Alt Mafia 2. I was a Miller, but there were no regular Cops; however there were Vanilla Cops and the like. Thus, whilst my role was a false positive in terms of the fact that it made me think there was an alignment Cop in the setup, when there wasn't, it still had some usefulness in the setup.

[BROseidon]

miller without a cop i suppose is less bad than some other stuff but still not great

It becomes a sort of named townie. Also, a role-cop can confirm it.

[BROseidon]

Miller with a cop is also bad design, so...

[AlwaysInnocent]

Miller with a cop is also bad design, so...

Why? If it is an open setup, then it makes the Cop just a little less reliable. Assuming that the Miller flips as Miller.

[Dwlee99]

I hate open setups. Soooo much. So easy to break the game.

[AlwaysInnocent]

I hate open setups. Soooo much. So easy to break the game.

Not necessarily. These games can still be balanced. A breaking strategy implies that one team has an advantage over the other team by employing the breaking strategy. But it has already been proven that even with optimal strategies (such as Follow The Cop and others) the game can still be balanced.

[Dwlee99]

My first open setup there were a certain amount of each type of role. Mass claim led to systematic lynches. It was stupid because there was no way to stay safe from PoE because of the claims.

[AlwaysInnocent]

My first open setup there were a certain amount of each type of role. Mass claim led to systematic lynches. It was stupid because there was no way to stay safe from PoE because of the claims.

Well, if you had many PRs, then it is not the fault of open setups in general.

[BROseidon]

Miller with a cop is also bad design, so...

Why? If it is an open setup, then it makes the Cop just a little less reliable. Assuming that the Miller flips as Miller.

Miller claims day 1. Cop remains a dumb role.

[Dwlee99]

I was a neutral. Everyone claimed a type of role. I had to counterclaim someone elses claim and then just got lynched. Nothing I could do. It was one of the blitz games i cant remember which one.

Also, I completely agree about cop. In would go for a watcher or tracker over it.

[Cheery Dog]

Tfw everyone disagrees.

Another example I thought of: Flavor cop in a themed game even when flavor is not alignment indicative.

That is also perfectly fine.

[Zachrulez]

it doesn't qualify as bastard under the normal definition of bastard, but it just seems like poor setup design. what are you really achieving by putting a godfather in a setup without a cop, other than perhaps any personal enjoyment you might get if the scum team gets frantic about finding a cop that doesn't exist... if you're doing it to balance something, then you're doing it wrong, and if you're not doing it for balance reasons, then you're probably not a good moderator

i'm trying to think of any red herrings that are a necessity to keep people from confirming some aspect of the game but i can't really think of any. they are just poor game design, in general. and some of them are REALLY poor game design (e.g. two scum neighbours in a two-person neighbourhood)...

miller without a cop i suppose is less bad than some other stuff but still not great

Godfather can exist without any of the roles it's designed to be immune to existing. It's considered to be the leader of the scumteam and can be used for that purpose alone.

Miller without a cop is perfectly acceptable. The implication that a cop exists because a miller does is an implication made by players. The role gets a guilty result from a cop, but there's no requirement for there to actually be a cop to compliment the role.

[zMuffinMan]

It's considered to be the leader of the scumteam and can be used for that purpose alone.

... are you serious?

out of interest, could you find me one game where anyone has ever said, "let us listen to the godfather for he is our leader"?

or what does this even mean...?

[Zachrulez]

From a game design standpoint you can make the godfather the leader of the scumteam who directs the kill and who makes it.

[zMuffinMan]

that not only seems kind of pointless (perhaps i'm an anomaly but i've never been part of a team that's had difficulty discussing this sort of thing together!) and not really conducive to teamwork (people are less likely to contribute to decision-making if it's someone else's decision), but it's just calling something that isn't a godfather a godfather

[Zachrulez]

I've done it before.

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... er_sort=Go

Not that the specific game is a particularly great example of balance. Thought it was at the time... different times man...

I don't think I've used the godfather role since though.

[hiplop]

Zach is right, it is pretty commonly treated that way!

[zMuffinMan]

i don't see how having used it before is a counter-example to what i said in #20

[AlwaysInnocent]

I would suggest calling it something different than Godfather (if you want to use this role), to avoid any confusion. It is best not to diverge from how the Godfather role is conventionally understood. When I see a Godfather role, I immediately associate it with "when investigated by a cop, returns town". The role name then acts as a abbreviation for the description, so that it is easily understood by others without requiring the effort to explain it. Breaking this means that people end up being confused.

This is why I don't like roles that do not have a single definition, like the Vanilla Cop.