Multiple protections vs multiple kills

[numberQ]

Say you're in a game with at least two sources of nightkills and at least two sources of protection from nightkills. What happens if a single player is protected once but killed twice? Does one protection keep them protected all night, or is it a game of sums at that point - there need to be more kills than protections for the player to die?

I think letting one protection work for all kills that night favors town more, though I'm not sure if the opposite is true, i.e., matching protections to deaths doesn't necessarily favor scum more. But maybe I'm thinking about it wrong. Thoughts? Is there already a consensus on this I wasn't aware of?

[sheepsaysmeep]

usually the mod's choice and goes in the protective role pm i think

[numberQ]

So is there any effect on game balance, one way or the other?

[implosion]

In normal games on mafiascum, a single doctor protection prevents a single nightkill, so it's a game of sums.

In other games, it's up to the moderator to decide how the interaction plays out.

In practice there is a very nominal effect on balance, because the only way it can ever come into play is if a single player is targeted by both a protection and multiple nightkills, which will likely only ever happen in multiball as a player who is townish enough to draw a scumkill and a doctor protection is unlikely to draw a vig shot. And even then it will be rare just because of the odds of all of those roles targeting the same player and nothing else interfering.

[numberQ]

Yeah that makes sense. Thanks for the insight.

[yessiree]

check out reasonable action resolution, which is made to address cases that are insufficiently handled by NAR

[numberQ]

Huh, never saw that article before. Looks pretty handy. Seems like it's advocating for matching up protections with kills.

[Espeonage]

General rule with NAR is that Doc protects happen post kill and BG vests work pre kill.

So generally the ones that work pre kill only block 1 shot. And Docs can either completely save or save from one shot up to the mod.

[Zachrulez]

Yeah I don't think that a standard has ever really been set for how this works. The best practice as a mod though is to have hopefully considered it beforehand and know which way you want to go with it.

[Gamma Emerald]

Doc can only save for one in normals, so does bg, jk is up to the mod

[Zachrulez]

I don't see it in the normal guidelines... unless I missed it.

If it's buried in a discussion thread somewhere it should definitely be more explicitly listed in the wiki.

Edit: oh... it's in the wiki for the doc role itself. Does that actively restrict the mod to that standard though? #whatever multiball in normals and even in general sucks anyway.

[mastina]

This is my thread!

The thing about it is that wording of your role PMs is important. A one-phrase difference CAN in fact make the difference between how a role functions. Roleblockers causing an action to fail should (in my personal view) cause X-shot roles to be expended (it is attempted, but FAILS), and maybe for trackers to still see the blocked player visiting (YMMV on that aspect); roleblockers causing an action to be PREVENTED should (in my personal view) cause X-shot roles to be refunded (because they are prevented from ever having used the shot), and also cause trackers not to see the blocked player visiting.

A bodyguard specifying they will die if their target is attacked will supersede a doctor protecting the same target (thus, BG dies); a bodyguard specifying they will die if their target were to die will have the doctor protection applied first.

A doctor specifying that they will prevent their target from being killed is capable of saving a bodyguard who protects the nightkill; a doctor specifying that they stop a nightkill from going through on their target cannot save a bodyguard who protects the nightkill because the cause of the bodyguard's death is not a nightkill and thus cannot be stopped. (This is a neat little trick I picked up which allows you to write both a Doctor and a Bodyguard into a setup WITHOUT allowing a protection loop to form and WITHOUT the macho modifier.)

An X-shot bulletproof specifying that their vest is used up preventing the nightkill will lose a vest even if protected by a protective PR because they burn the vest before the protection (NOTE: in this case, just in case, best to word the protective PR as specifying they prevent death; see above for why); An X-shot bulletproof specifying that their vest is used up when they would die will keep their vest if protected (NOTE: again, in this case, best to word the protective PR as specifying they prevent the nightkill).

I can think of more examples than that.

In other words.

Wording is not mere semantics. It makes a difference in the fundamental nature of how the role functions. Sometimes, you can run into situations where the wording of roles conflicts. For instance, above I recommended that if you have an X-shot bulletproof, for it to use the opposite wording of the protective (if protective says nightkill, bulletproof says death; if protective says death, bulletproof says nightkill), because if both say the same thing, you run into a conflict: if a doctor says they prevent the nightkill, and the bulletproof also says it activates to prevent a nightkill, which prevention applies?; if a doctor says they prevent death yet the bulletproof says it activates to prevent death, which prevention applies?

In this case, I personally resolve things going into the NAR list.

That being, "what resolves first?" and "what resolves last?". Passives you can make an argument for resolving either absolutely first or absolutely last but must be one of the two. (I lean the latter.) But mostly, you just follow along.

[kuribo]

Depends on how you worded the doc role pm:

"Will attempt to prevent one attempt on the person's life"

Vs

"Will attempt to prevent any attempt on the person's life."

[numberQ]

I'm aware it all comes down to the wording of the role PM. Maybe I wasn't clear enough in the first post, but I was mainly wondering if there was a standard on the site (doesn't seem there is) and what potential balancing issues there may be one way or the other.

[yessiree]

Say you want to put multiple killing powers and doctors in a setup. It really seems like an oversight to not have considered the extend of the doctor's capabilities.

I mean it kinda has to depend on the setup and the overall balance right? i.e. for the doctor, is one attempt too weak for town given the setup? If so, is any attempt too strong? is one attempt + rb/jk more balanced, etc...

[NuclearBurrito]

In my opinion if a setup has multiple scum kills then having a heal block all of the in one night being townsided is outweighed by the fact that there is twice the total KPN on town

[Mathdino]

Having this thread ongoing while a bodyguard protected someone from both the mafia and the vig kill in my recently completed game was pretty funny

[LlamaFluff]

To me you see all kills resolving simultaneously (unless otherwise noted) and any single entity being able to protect against all of those kills (unless otherwise noted).

For people who think of it different ways... lets say you have two killing factions and a bodyguard. Both factions target town X who is also targeted by the bodyguard.

What tracks/watches to who? If a BG only protects against one kill, then one kill should still go through on the town. But how does that resolve?

[kuribo]

Just use my night action system

The best method is the Kuribo Resolved Action Protocol:



Very few mods use it though

[Espeonage]

To me you see all kills resolving simultaneously (unless otherwise noted) and any single entity being able to protect against all of those kills (unless otherwise noted).

For people who think of it different ways... lets say you have two killing factions and a bodyguard. Both factions target town X who is also targeted by the bodyguard.

What tracks/watches to who? If a BG only protects against one kill, then one kill should still go through on the town. But how does that resolve?

Bodyguard doesn't count as a redirect. I would say that a PR would see nothing hitting BG, and everything hitting the target regardless of how many kills get stopped.

[Gamma Emerald]

BG only redirects the effect, not the action, so it takes the kill but watcher won't see the attacker if visiting the BG