Updates to Bastard Tags

[Jingle]

This has been a popular topic for the last few days in the discord, so I thought I might as well make a forum post for it.

Currently, these are the proposals (Feel free to poke me if you'd like your proposal included/edited):

Jingle

Ideally I'd actually like 3 toggles. 1 would be Mafia Mutations (Vote for town, Double Day, Nonstandard phases). 1 would be a revision of what is now [bastard roles] (cult, jester, redirector, etc) Basically, the toolbox shea wants available to him. the third would be bastard modding (everything is a lie or mod is mafia: things where the might telling you you're a doc and you're a vig is a legitimate concern or games with hidden reliability statuses)
And that the third toggle be the only one with the label of bastard, because that's the thing most people think of when they think bastard

Cook

split it into Lies, Mech, and Rules
"does your game feature any directly untrue moderator statements?"
for instance, false role pm's or false flips.
"does your game feature alignment-changing or non-standard mechanics?"
for instance, cults or strange mechanics
"does your game mess with the expectations of how a game is run?"
for instance, non-random role generation, allowing discussion of the game outside of threads, unwarranted (e.g: force-replacing or modkilling someone because of rule violations is not "unwarranted" according to this.) moderator influence

TLich

mine would be a sliding scale:

1 (strategically bastard) - Is it possible your game has roles or mechanics that drastically alter how the game should be played (e.g. Jester), important information knowingly withheld (e.g. Janitor), random elements (e.g. Percentage), divulged non-random role assignment (e.g. uPicks), or individual post restrictions?
2 (mechanically bastard) - Is it possible your game has mid-game alignment changes (e.g. Cult), roles that cause the moderator to lie (e.g. Death Miller), lies in role PMs (e.g. non-reliable Cop), or secret win conditions?
3 (fundamentally bastard) - Is it possible your game has un-divulged non-random role assignment, direct moderator influence during the game, ways to discuss the game outside its threads, adding players midgame, or non-players directly influencing the game?

*Note, any lies by omission would still be considered lies.

If I had to take a crack at it, I would say maybe:
- Curveballs (I would call jester and janitor this. Not an explicit lie, but these break unspoken rules such as "nobody wants to be executed" or "alignments of dead players will always be known". Unsure if redirector belongs in here, but framer definitely would)
- Alignment changes
- Mod lies (I would group these two together, but it seems like there's some support to keep them separate. This is like unreliable cops, any sort of false/hidden roles or mechanics, incorrect flips, or mod-provided information that's wrong outside of reasonable expectations like ninja)
- Outside influence (Nonrandom role assignment, direct mod interference in the game, etc) - If this box is ticked then the mod should disclose exactly what's going on; I really struggle to imagine a game that would benefit from having this but not having the players know what exactly

Current System

Is it possible your game has any mechanically bastard roles or mechanics? cults and other mid-game alignment changes, roles that cause moderator dishonesty that cannot be reasonably anticipated (for example, Godfather, Tailor, Miller, Ninja, and mechanics like that are generally fine. Telling someone they are a reflexive doctor when they're actually a PGO is not), post restrictions, secret win conditions.
Is it possible your game has any procedurally bastard dynamics? nonrandom role assignment, direct moderator influence during the game, allowing your game to be discussed outside the game thread and its own PTs, adding players midgame

Please note that any actual changes to this would be at the discretion of the Listmods responsible for the Micro, Mini Theme, and Large Theme queues.

Edit to include recent relevant rules changes:

Game moderators may not unduly influence the game - this includes, but is not limited to:
Giving game advice to players in private threads
Excessively bantering with players
Providing information about the setup that players should not have, or refusing to provide information about the setup that players should have
Providing setup information only to some players and not others when this is not directly necessitated by the game setup/mechanics/roles (more information about this specific clause is included here)
Addressing misunderstandings of the setup without being directly asked
In general, it is recommended that game moderators refrain from posting in their game threads unless it is directly related to a game moderator task (votecounts, flips, replacement posts, and other game-related announcements) or unless directly asked about the game by a player. In particular, responding to posts unprompted can influence the game if players speculate on why some posts were responded to but not others.

The exception to this rule is if a game is declared bastard when queueing the game. The setup reviewer must be aware of and approve of any ways in which the game moderator will influence the game.
Game moderators may not use nonrandom methods of role and alignment assignment at the start of the game. The use of nonrandom methods must be indicated by declaring a game as bastard when queueing the game and must be included in the setup review.
Game moderators may not lie to players unless it can be reasonably anticipated or is necessitated by the game setup, mechanics, or roles. The presence of lies that cannot be reasonably anticipated must be indicated by declaring a game as bastard when queueing the game and must be included in the setup review.

[Something_Smart]

raw takes reading this post:

• mafia mutations can be a toggle, but it probably doesn't have to be. this stuff is already generally announced ahead of time.
  
• I don't know about anyone else, but cult falls squarely into what I think of when I hear bastard, if only because it's way more common than other types of lies. Redirector and cult also do not belong in the same class of roles.
  
• "does your game feature alignment-changing or non-standard mechanics?" seems like a terrible question because it's a very specific thing paired with a very general thing.
  
• I think TLich most cleanly separates what I see as bastard vs. non-bastard; their 2 & 3 (but not 1) together constitute a pretty good definition of bastard.

Were there any concrete examples given of games where people expected more or less bastardry than was present in the game?

[Jingle]

Outdated game, but this is what that question brings to mind:

Subject: Micro 756: Extra Communication Mafia GAME OVER!

I FUCKED UP NOT JOINING SOME OF THOSE ROLES HAD SO MUCH MEME-TENTIAL

Recently: Shea's Neighborhood viewtopic.php?f=23&t=87738

Anecdotally without hunting down the conversations: I've had a lot of discussions over the years about what is/isn't bastard and in bastard games there seems to be this expectation that the game itself isn't balanced. Which is why I think divorcing the concept of cults or janitors with the concept of "The mod might actually just maliciously be lying to you" in nomenclature is a valuable thing.

[Something_Smart]

I feel like most people don't answer the bastard question with "yes" unless it's something like EIAL. But it seems fine to codify the different things that mods should disclose.

If I had to take a crack at it, I would say maybe:
- Curveballs (I would call jester and janitor this. Not an explicit lie, but these break unspoken rules such as "nobody wants to be executed" or "alignments of dead players will always be known". Unsure if redirector belongs in here, but framer definitely would)
- Alignment changes
- Mod lies (I would group these two together, but it seems like there's some support to keep them separate. This is like unreliable cops, any sort of false/hidden roles or mechanics, incorrect flips, or mod-provided information that's wrong outside of reasonable expectations like ninja)
- Outside influence (Nonrandom role assignment, direct mod interference in the game, etc) - If this box is ticked then the mod should disclose exactly what's going on; I really struggle to imagine a game that would benefit from having this but not having the players know what exactly

[Cook]

I feel there's something to be said as well about fully-open setups containing something of the above, for instance, 3d20, where there

are

suits, cults, and jesters possible, but everyone knows those are all possibilities and know the chance of something of the above happening.

[RadiantCowbells]

This is a strong idea

I don't think I'm exactly keen on any of the suggested divisions but it's definitely on the right track

[TemporalLich]

addendum to my scale: If you don't know that information is missing (e.g. Hidden Role, or a Janitor that can't be distinguished from mod error), it counts as a lie. Super-injunctions are equivalent to lies.

[Jingle]

I feel like most people don't answer the bastard question with "yes" unless it's something like EIAL. But it seems fine to codify the different things that mods should disclose.

If I had to take a crack at it, I would say maybe:
- Curveballs (I would call jester and janitor this. Not an explicit lie, but these break unspoken rules such as "nobody wants to be executed" or "alignments of dead players will always be known". Unsure if redirector belongs in here, but framer definitely would)
- Alignment changes
- Mod lies (I would group these two together, but it seems like there's some support to keep them separate. This is like unreliable cops, any sort of false/hidden roles or mechanics, incorrect flips, or mod-provided information that's wrong outside of reasonable expectations like ninja)
- Outside influence (Nonrandom role assignment, direct mod interference in the game, etc) - If this box is ticked then the mod should disclose exactly what's going on; I really struggle to imagine a game that would benefit from having this but not having the players know what exactly

I kind of lumped Curveballs and Alignment changes into flag two in mine although I'm not particularly against separating them if there's value to that. Mod lies would be split between 2 and 3, in that known-to-be unreliable cops would be 2 and cops who don't know their reliability is suspect would be both flag 2 and 3. Outside influence would fall under flags one or three depending on case. A game where non players could post would be a mutation, for example, while a game where the mod could edit player's posts would check flag 3.

[Something_Smart]

I don't think I'm exactly keen on any of the suggested divisions but it's definitely on the right track

This is the big glaring problem with doing this.

Everyone has slightly different ideas of what exactly counts as bastard.

[Ircher]

I liked the change that was made to the micro and I think mini theme queue not too long ago and would support further steps in that direction. I haven't looked over any of these suggestions really in detail.

[RadiantCowbells]

I don't think I'm exactly keen on any of the suggested divisions but it's definitely on the right track

This is the big glaring problem with doing this.

Everyone has slightly different ideas of what exactly counts as bastard.

I think we can come up with. Betterthan what we have right now though?

[TemporalLich]

imo, arbitrary investigation interference (not stuff like Miller, Godfather, Gravedigger, or Ninja, but more like Framer, Lawyer, Jammer, and Fogger) really toes the line.

Is it mechanically bastard or not? If it isn't, is it strategically bastard?

[Jingle]

I liked the change that was made to the micro and I think mini theme queue not too long ago and would support further steps in that direction. I haven't looked over any of these suggestions really in detail.

That's basically what all of the suggestions are. A refinement of that system.

[Jingle]

Everyone has slightly different ideas of what exactly counts as bastard.

Fixing the ambiguity is kind of important though

[RH9]

Maybe you can make the mod disclose what they consider bastard as well as whether such things will occur in the game, when signing up to mod. Then, the players can know whether what the mod finds bastard is similar to they themselves find bastard. This can help the players better decide whether they want to play or not.

[TemporalLich]

strategically bastard is not what most people (including me) would consider bastard, but I am including it in my proposal anyway because a strategically bastard game might have you do strategies that would normally be considered obviously bad (such as voting for Town, or claiming scum with partners)

Maybe you can make the mod disclose what they consider bastard as well as whether such things will occur in the game, when signing up to mod. Then, the players can know whether what the mod finds bastard is similar to they themselves find bastard. This can help the players better decide whether they want to play or not.

This can be abused to state that nothing is bastard, the queue needs to be objective when having a bastard tag so it is something everyone can agree on

[RH9]

strategically bastard is not what most people (including me) would consider bastard, but I am including it in my proposal anyway because a strategically bastard game might have you do strategies that would normally be considered obviously bad (such as voting for Town, or claiming scum with partners)

Maybe you can make the mod disclose what they consider bastard as well as whether such things will occur in the game, when signing up to mod. Then, the players can know whether what the mod finds bastard is similar to they themselves find bastard. This can help the players better decide whether they want to play or not.

This can be abused to state that nothing is bastard, the queue needs to be objective when having a bastard tag so it is something everyone can agree on

To be fair, I would consider Hammerer Bastard because Hammerer makes Town unable to put anybody at E-1 without the risk of unintentionally eliminating them, especially in a Closed game.

Edit: And I do agree with what you say about it being Strategically Bastard and potentially Mechanically Bastard.

[TemporalLich]

To be fair, I would consider Hammerer Bastard because Hammerer makes Town unable to put anybody at E-1 without the risk of unintentionally eliminating them, especially in a Closed game.

This is a good example of a strategically bastard role.

If you're particularly generous with what is considered bastard, it might even be mechanically bastard but you'd have to justify it with something like "Hammerer makes vote thresholds a lie".

But in that case you'd have to explain why Hated is mechanically bastard, because Hammerer and Hated are bastard in the same exact way (it's just more prevalent with Hammerer).

[Jingle]

Maybe you can make the mod disclose what they consider bastard as well as whether such things will occur in the game, when signing up to mod. Then, the players can know whether what the mod finds bastard is similar to they themselves find bastard. This can help the players better decide whether they want to play or not.

It’s really not about litigating what individuals want to consider bastard, imo. Bastard is just a poorly defined class of mechanics.

It’s about determining what mechanics/roles should come with forewarning when they are used. Do we as a site think there should be some level of forewarning if there are cults in a game? Yes. Janitors? Maybe. Tailors? Maybe. Death Millers? Yes.

The flag system is to give that warning without a questionnaire or writing an essay every time you in to mod a game.

[Jingle]

Hammerer is like the least bastard role imo, btw. It says that the player will always hammer when someone is put to E-1. They know that. They can tell the town that. Even if they don’t, someone hammering when you put someone to E-1 should be something you expect is possible.

[Thestatusquo]

Basically there is a big difference in game design that attempts to be a Bastard Game and game design that attempts to be a well designed balanced mafia game that just happens to use roles that some people don't like, especially in terms of expectations and mindset of the players. I'm fine with any division that makes it so players will stop joining my games expecting the mod to be a member of the mafia or lie to them about their alignment and playing like a meme game just because I have to continually check the "bastard" flag because I don't want players to know in advance if I will or will not have certain elements in my game (like cult, for instance, which was used in what I think I would describe as a very balanced and otherwise reasonable game, the neighborhood, which jingle mentioned earlier.)

I feel like giving mods this option for communication with players can only be helpful

[chamber]

As a mod, can't you already communicate more if you want to? It seems like this would be more about how much information players can expect from all mods. Like you can already just post some version of that paragraph stating your goals during sign ups for your games right?

[Thestatusquo]

I do. For instance, here is what I said about the neighborhood. viewtopic.php?p=13010162#p13010162

[Thestatusquo]

I think its basically that the toggle currently asks like 3 different questions at once, all of which create wildly different dynamics. So why not just ask 3 different questions?

[RH9]

Hammerer is like the least bastard role imo, btw. It says that the player will always hammer when someone is put to E-1. They know that. They can tell the town that. Even if they don’t, someone hammering when you put someone to E-1 should be something you expect is possible.

Reading this has changed my mind. The main problem, which I had envisioned earlier, was that Hammerer was going to be played by an anti-Town player and a Town player was getting put on E-1. To be fair, Hammerer does seem less Bastard once you mentioned that they can reveal themselves.