Draft of Normal Guidelines/Rules Changes

[Mr. Flay]

Your ideas for whitelisting makes sense. (Hopefully) more roles will be whitelisted than blacklisted, over time.

[Hoopla]

How far does the lying to the players rule go? There's a wide gray area between Deathmiller and GF-with-no-Cop. For example, what if I put in a Nurse with no Doctor? I think the rule needs more work.

Yeah, I think this rule is rather difficult to define, considering lying to the players is a fundamental element in some of the explicitely normal roles (see; Godfather, Varying Cop Sanities, Miller) - infact cops really are the main offenders flaunting this rule, and they get away with it largely because they've been at the heart of the game for so long. I suppose that's like anything really - anything deemed important to a system will be accepted along with it's ungainly baggage, until the point where it's importance no longer outweighs it's flaws. In the interest of creating a more definitive rule on lying, it's hard to keep a straight face while proposing that varying cop sanities are normal.

The problem with cops, as I see it, is that their results create a forced play for the town, that is almost impossible to go against, even if you suspect a Godfather/Miller/Whatever might exist. The value of working with a 'confirmed' alignment and the smallish odds of results actually being wrong is what locks this in as a certainty. It's like catching a full house in Texas Hold'em and then questioning to call an all-in because there's a chance of a 4-of-a-kind existing. It's a long-shot, and you'd be playing suboptimally if you declined to take that bet, because more often than not you would win. Thinking role information might somehow be wrong falls under the same umbrella, and as a mod you shouldn't be asking players to play the game that way.

Other MD thinkers have commented on cops being a blunt tool for balance, and I agree with the assessment. It's a dirty injection of power that provides the ultimate information - someone's alignment. Some clever fella back in the day decided it would be a good idea to offset this power by adding silly modifiers to make results less absolute. But towns don't stop lynching (or not lynching in the case of an innocent) on this outside chance, and you're just fucking towns over if they're following false orders from a role, with consequences ranging from back-to-back mislynches (which is basically game over in a Mini Normal) to assumed innocent surviving as Godfather until endgame. Cops are blunt and dumb the game down a lot, but we seem to accept this mediocrity quite easily because they've been a fundamental part of mafia for so long.

The excuse I see paraded out to advocate cop sanities as normal is that the cop knowing he is sane makes the role too powerful, and sanities are necessary to offset this. But they are not toning down the power or influence the role has, they're just making the results occasionally wrong, which pisses off everyone when they're followed and adds nothing to gameplay. I challenge anyone who reads this post and endorses the cop sanities as normal, to craft a balanced 12-player set-up with a paranoid, naive or insane cop, because I'm finding it hard to legitimately do, without reverting to a 2:10 base. The ironic thing is, we're including sanities because we think the inclusion of a sane cop with towns knowing it's guarenteed to be sane would be overpowered/unbalanced, but then try to fix this problem by including games that are even more unbalanced.

But with the inclusion of mafia roleblockers, macho cops, X-shot cops, less doc/cop combos, or even if Godfathers and millers were to hang around - isn't this enough to effectively neutralize the cop's influence? Why do sanities need to exist? They are rarely used these days in Mini Normals and I would argue rarely balanced to offset their (generally) anti-town results. The argument of needing them to minimise the power of the role is foolish. Vigs and Jailkeepers are very powerful in Mini Normals, but we don't insist on blanks or insane JK's. To finally hammer home the point that cops aren't as influential as people think, here is the list of the last 50 Mini Normal games with cops and when they've perished;

Time of Cop's Death in Last 50 Closed 12 Player Mini Normals:

Day 1/Night 1: 14
Day 2/Night 2: 16
Day 3/Night 3: 6
Day 4/Night 4: 4
Survived/Endgamed/Day 5+: 10

Spoiler: Raw data

Mini 985 - N3
Mini 977 - N1
Mini 973 - N4
Mini 967 - Endgamed
Mini 962 - Survived
Mini 955 - D1
Mini 944 - N2
Mini 930 - N4
Mini 911 - D2
Mini 905 - Endgamed
Mini 903 - N2
Mini 895 - D1
Mini 873 - N3
Mini 868 - N2
Mini 859 - N1
Mini 845 - N3
Mini 844 - Survived
Mini 839 - N3
Mini 838 - D1
Mini 835 - Survived
Mini 827 - Endgamed
Mini 823 - N2
Mini 816 - N4
Mini 813 - N2
Mini 807 - N2
Mini 802 - N3
Mini 795 - D1
Mini 792 - N2
Mini 777 - Endgamed
Mini 765 - N1
Mini 747 - D1
Mini 745 - N1
Mini 738 - Survived
Mini 737 - N3
Mini 735 - D1
Mini 725 - N2
Mini 714 - N2
Mini 703 - D1
Mini 701 - N4
Mini 673 - N2
Mini 672 - D2
Mini 650 - N1
Mini 628 - D6
Mini 624 - D1
Mini 618 - N2
Mini 601 - N2
Mini 597 - Endgamed
Mini 595 - N2
Mini 592 - N1
Mini 585 - N2

As you can see, it really is rather rare for cops to live to the point where they have 3 investigations to claim (Day 4 or longer), and even then, their results might have been blocked or been upon now corpses, or their claim not even believed if they're in mylo/lylo. It's debatable how much damage having two results could do, but even then, cops only live to that point 40% of the time, and again, that is subject to them choosing to claim, being believed, not being blocked, not having results on corpses.

Another point of interest I'd like to add. I had to filter through the 130 games to find those 50 instances of cops existing in the set-up, which shows a dying trend in the overall use of cops. Players are slowly moving away from this role - we don't need to carry sanities into normal territory, because they're unfun, exceedingly rare, and I think abnormal. I'm okay with Godfathers and millers (I guess), but sanities need to go because they don't improve the game in any way, and won't change how the regular sane cop is played.

[xvart]

How far does the lying to the players rule go? There's a wide gray area between Deathmiller and GF-with-no-Cop. For example, what if I put in a Nurse with no Doctor? I think the rule needs more work.

I don't think there is a gray area between Death Miller and GF/no cop. In my opinion, they are completely different as the Death Miller is a blatant lie whereas a Godfather without a cop is more an assumption on the player's part that there is a cop. My second game on the site had a Godfather/no cop/tracker and I thought the paranoia aspect was an interesting idea. I guess the Death Miller is a blantant attempt to deceive the town whereas the GF/no cop is the scum deceiving themselves.

xvart.

[mith]

Does the "random element" qualifier also apply to Mods who choose an NK target(s) for scum who miss the night deadline without specifically saying No Nightkill?

I'll say yes for now; the default rule is "if you don't get a choice in, you lose it". (I'm open to being convinced here, though; I don't feel that strongly about it either way.)

If it were allowed, it would certainly need to be in the public rules.

Gunsmith and Weak Doctor are the only glaring omissions I see from the whitelist. Macho (can't be protected from Night-Kills) is a good modifier that can be safely applied to most roles without affecting too many things, and I've started seeing 'Weak' be attached to other roles as a modifier too.

The main issue with the Gunsmith (and similar roles - basically, any "Cop" which gets positives on some scum and some town, but with a high/low enough scum ratio to give information) is defining a "standard" for it. Does a "normal" Cop have a gun? Etc. zoraster covers this in a later post.

Having additional modifiers is a good idea - need to decide what those are, though.

Are you going to limit which version is used? *strongly favors the second one*

I favor the second (confirm Innocent Child at any time, rather than at the beginning of the game) as well; it would probably be standardized to one or the other though, yes.

Innocent Child could probably be dropped to the "greylist".

Are Governor's considered normal roles? I thought they were.

Greylist, probably. Messing with the lynches = meh.

Traitor definitely needs standardization before we roll this out.

Yes.

So what was the decision about nightless games? Are they not normal?

Nightless is fine for open, certainly. Given that most closed-game roles are night abilities, not sure what the point would be.

Other mechanics (Deep South, Lights Out, etc.), probably not normal (but open to discussion).

I don't really see any good reason why traditional Cop is planned to be allowed in Normal games when the two roles that do the best job of countering it (Mafia Redirector, Mafia Framer) seem to be disallowed (the former by the no redirection clause, the latter by the no lying to players clause), using nonsane sanity is rare, and I don't think giving roleblocking as a factional ability is normal, but whatever.

The fully functioning Sane Cop is arguably the strongest, swingiest, and least fun role that we use. But of course it's Normal.

Mafia Framer could probably be allowed with some proper wording of the Cop role PM. The problem is much the same as what Hoopla points out with non-Sane Cops, though - the Cop is correct, in most cases, to assume that his results are valid, and a successful frame job is just punishing the town.

Does this mean the first group can't be werewolves?

As written, yes. If we come up with standards for Werewolf equivalents for the various whitelisted roles, then perhaps this could be changed. (Note there's now nothing restricting you from calling the Mafia group "Werewolves" in your flavor, you'd just have to call them Mafia in the role PMs - which of course isn't entirely satisfactory, but it's a necessary compromise for allowing flavor while keeping role names/role PM wording from affecting game play.)

I think lying here is intended to be actual lying rather than lying by omission. So GF-without-cop and nurse-without-doctor are both perfectly fine so long as you don't say in the role PM that there IS a cop or there IS a doctor.

This. (I originally had "Nurse-without-doctor" as explicitly not-whitelisted, but zoraster talked me out of that - but even that wasn't a lying issue, just a "outside-expectations" issue.)

Speaking of that, we should probably clarify which kinds of roles should receive notification that they have been roleblocked in a Normal game if we haven't already

Noted.

[snip]

Players are slowly moving away from this role - we don't need to carry sanities into normal territory, because they're unfun, exceedingly rare, and I think abnormal. I'm okay with Godfathers and millers (I guess), but sanities need to go because they don't improve the game in any way, and won't change how the regular sane cop is played.

I find this argument pretty persuasive. Anyone on the other side of this want to chime in?

---

Not seeing any great demand or compelling arguments in favor of post restrictions, lyncher, survivor, etc. For those arguing for them, remember that "usable" does not mean "normal". Normal is meant to be a little restrictive.

A little more demand for redirectors - this may be a "no for now, but let's discuss ways they might be included that fits within the normal framework" sort of thing. But I think there are good arguments against inclusion, as well.

[Oso]

Does the "random element" qualifier also apply to Mods who choose an NK target(s) for scum who miss the night deadline without specifically saying No Nightkill?

I'll say yes for now; the default rule is "if you don't get a choice in, you lose it". (I'm open to being convinced here, though; I don't feel that strongly about it either way.)

If it were allowed, it would certainly need to be in the public rules.
..

I guess I should have qualified it in this thread as well but I did qualify that in another thread. Post is short so I'll copy paste it here:

I would think that if the scum(or any PR with a night action) can't agree on anything, is too lazy or flakes, then that would all fall under the same category. Penalization through forfeiture of their night action.

But that isn't what I had in mind when you used my quote. It was predicated on a very general idea that a game would have a role in it that, for whatever reason the mod thought, needed to perform their action every night unless they specifically declined it or that a role was compulsory. Ex: An SK that was required to attempt a kill every night.

By the strict definition of the rules Mith put forward, a compulsory <anything> would be disallowed in a Normal game because it might require the Mod to make a random choice if something should happen to the player that is in that spot (RL emergency, flaking, ect, ect....)

Granted, I am guessing that exact situation would happen so seldom it could probably be addressed under the catch-all "Mod's discretion" when it came up.

It was just a short, not well thought out comment I made after reading Mith's revised ruleset.

[Mr. Flay]

Does the "random element" qualifier also apply to Mods who choose an NK target(s) for scum who miss the night deadline without specifically saying No Nightkill?

I'll say yes for now; the default rule is "if you don't get a choice in, you lose it". (I'm open to being convinced here, though; I don't feel that strongly about it either way.)

If it were allowed, it would certainly need to be in the public rules.

I think either "missed action" or "randomized" are Normal enough to qualify, but the mod should specify in their rules.

Another thing that will fit in this category is how Deadline Lynches work (half of half, half of cast votes, full majority, etc).

[Fishythefish]

One point in favour of randomising missed actions is that some actions are compulsory (notably the kills of certain roles). You have to randomise those if they are missed; it seems a bit odd to rule out randomising other missed actions.

[Ythill]

On cop sanities and framers: I think that the problem with these things not functioning to weaken the cop's influence stems directly from the fact that they are not often used. From what I understand, the purpose of including them is to make cop results a factor for consideration more equal to other game factors (wagon analysis, tells, claims, etc) rather than something that causes other factors to be disregarded entirely. I certainly like GFs, Millers, and Framers better than the various cop sanities, because they present exceptions to cop accuracy on a case-by-case basis rather than a game-by-game basis.

I really can't see why Framers should be off the white list if Millers and GFs are on it. They have a very similar game effect, and require skilled targeting to be effective. I'd much rather see them added to the whitelist and cop sanities removed, but I can live with either.

Then again, I'm concerned with the general depth of standardization that seems like it's on the horizon here. I think we're already got a newbie queue and an open queue which are highly standardized, and there's a reason you usually don't see me playing or modding in those games. On the other hand, we've got theme queues where there is an expectation that mods can and will do whatever they like. The further we restrict normals, the more of a gap we're going to leave, meaning that there will be an increasing number of games that don't fit into any of the restricted queues but also don't meet expectations as theme games. Frankly, they are the games I prefer. I feel like normals are already (slightly) too restrictive, and yet I don't always want to play in one of the completely wacky games that show up as themes.

I understand that role lists and flavor restrictions are desired by the majority but if we're going to standardize how deadline works, which version of the innocent child is official, exactly who receives RB messages, etcetera... then we're taking it too far.

[Mr. Flay]

I understand that role lists and flavor restrictions are desired by the majority but if we're going to standardize how deadline works, which version of the innocent child is official, exactly who receives RB messages, etcetera... then we're taking it too far.

I'm curious why you think knowing how a role might work (if it's in a game) is taking it too far? Isn't the point of the game the scumhunting, not modguessing/fakeclaiming? EVERY time I see a game degenerate into a discussion of role mechanics, it seems to make most of the players dissatisfied that they've gotten away from actually voting/figuring out the factions for themselves.

I guess I've never viewed the basic game as being about figuring out the

roles

, but the

alignments

of those holding the roles. Mutations/Themes are obviously different beasts entirely. I'm also thinking about the origins of the game, Face-to-Face. You HAVE to know how the roles work there, because there's no PMing the mod allowed.

[Ythill]

I'm curious why you think knowing how a role might work (if it's in a game) is taking it too far?

IME, knowing exactly how all the roles work doesn't reduce setup speculation, it increases it. The more concrete the information available to the players, the more they will base their decisions on that information. But, really, my statement didn't have much to do with this aspect of standardization. As can be seen in my standard ruleset, I like it if the expectations of how things work are provided explicitly

by the mod

.

My problem with overly standardized normals is I think that the practice reduces creativity and options. For example, there are people who prefer to mod and play with deadline lynches and there are others who prefer to play and mod with no lynch at deadline. Plus there are people who prefer a wide range of methods for adjudicating one of the above. If we make a global rule about how deadlines are handled, then we exclude people with preferences outside those restrictions, stifle comparison discussions, and create a large amount of games that don't fit into any of the queues. It seems ridiculous to force someone to play and mod in the theme queue if all they want to do is use a different style of RB messages or whatever.

Every time I consider this prospect I come back to my opinion that heavily standardizing normals is going to create the need for another classification. Ideally, we'd have three different threads for each size game:

1. Basic roles, common set-ups, heavily standardized mechanics, zero flavor.
   
2. No bastard roles and limited role experimentation, normal mechanics with some breathing room for specific rulesets, light flavor that doesn't effect gameplay.
   
3. Theme games, experimental mechanics, and bastard moddery.

But I always come to the same realization... that we already have those classifications: newbie/open, normal, and theme. I don't disagree that a little bit of adjusting could make our system better, but I think that the current trends in this thread are going to narrow us down to newbie/open/normal and theme, which is problematic because most of the best games I've played and over half the games I've modded fall into the middle ground.

[mith]

Alright, the Normal Review group needs to get going, so this is what we're going to run with for now. This thread will remain for further discussion.

Normal Game Rules

Flavor:

In Newbie Games, only Mafia flavor is allowed, and Role PMs should follow the standard set by the List Mod.
In Open, Mini Normal, and Large Normal games, flavor is allowed provided these rules are followed:

• All flavor should be public; flavor is not allowed in Role PMs. Role names should be standard, or non-flavored if original.
• Flavor should have no bearing on the game - it should be possible for a player to read only the role reveals posted with the death scene and gain all information needed to play. This information should be formatted to stand out from the flavor.
  
• Flavor not based on Mafia must be entirely original. Games based on books, moves, video games, sports, real people, or any other source material are classified as Theme Games.

Setup:

• Closed
  Normal Games should satisfy the following rules:
• The game should have at least one Mafia group (of at least two members). A second anti-town group can be given a separate Mafia family name, or can be a Werewolf group. There should be no more than two anti-town groups, and no more than one Serial Killer.
• The game must contain at least one Vanilla Townie (allowed names include: Townie, Vanilla Townie, Innocent Townsperson, Citizen). A sample Role PM for the Vanilla Townie must be included in the rules post.
• Mechanics which are explicitly Non-Normal include:
  • Those affecting a role's alignment (no Cults).
  • Anything which significantly affects the core mechanic of majority/plurality lynches (no Kingmaker, for example).
  • Anything resolving with a random element, with the exception of missed night choices. It must be included in the public ruleset if you are resolving night choices in this way.
  • Post Restrictions (other than those included in the ruleset, such as "No quoting your Role PM").
  • Lying to the players, including False Role Reveals and "Scum Masons".
  • Night action redirection (no Bus Driver, Lightning Rod, Nexus, or Redirector).
  • Alignments other than Mafia/Werewolf, Pro-Town, and Serial Killer (no Survivor, Lyncher, or Jester).
• Roles which are explicitly Normal include: Cop (role PM must be worded in a way that leaves open the possibility of other roles affecting results, if such roles may exist in the game), Doctor, Vigilante, Roleblocker, Mason, Innocent Child, Jailkeeper, Tracker, Watcher, Gunsmith, Miller (self-aware), Bodyguard, Role Cop, Double Voter, Hider, Neighbor, Serial Killer, Traitor (
  need to specify/standarize mechanics
  ), Mafia Godfather (Investigation Immune and/or Nightkill Immune), Mafia-aligned versions of above roles, Mafia Framer, Backup versions, X-shot versions, Even/Odd-night versions, Non-consecutive-night versions, Macho versions (can't be protected from nightkills), Weak versions (die if target Mafia). (
  zoraster suggests having a subsection on the wiki for each whitelisted role that defines a "standard" for that role. For example, a normal Doctor is sane and can't self-protect.
  )
• Roles which are explicitly Non-Normal include: Non-Sane Cops, Ineffective versions of other roles
• New/variant roles may be included in limited number (no more than 1 in a Mini, 2 in a Large), and must be based on the usual game mechanics: Killing, Protecting, Investigating, Blocking, Voting.
• Games which are otherwise Normal may still be more suited to a different Queue. For example, a game with a large number of Doctors may be better run as an Open Game (after review in the Open Discussion Thread) or as a "Hospital" Themed Game.

Open and Semi-Open Games can ignore some of these restrictions; will add a separate section for that.

[Plum]

Neighborizer? The standard version?

[animorpherv1]

I'm sorry, but as long as Bus Drivers aren't normal, I'm going to campain for them to be.

[Ythill]

Yay for including gunsmiths. I'm also very happy about the new flavor rules.

[Vi]

[*]Roles which are explicitly Non-Normal include: Non-Sane Cops,

Ineffective versions of other roles

[/*]

Does this include inadvertently ineffective roles (i.e. a Miller with no Cops)?

[Ythan]

I think he means roles whose actions don't work. You're thinking mountainous.

[Vi]

I think he means roles whose actions don't work. You're thinking mountainous.

Things like Naive Doctors are already off the list though.

[Ythill]

I believe that what Mith meant to say is "et al." As in, non-sane cops and other standard roles that function like non-sane cops, for example, naive doctors and blank vigs.

[Vi]

I believe that what Mith meant to say is "et al." As in, non-sane cops and other standard roles that function like non-sane cops, for example, naive doctors and blank vigs.

I'm not sure Blank Vig should be non-Normal if they're told it's a possibility. It hurts a lot less than Insane Cop.

[Oso]

Question then. Since Jailkeeper is on there I'm guessing that Paranoid Doc is still on the whitelist?

[shaft.ed]

Can flavor be allowed in Open Game Role PMs since they should be publicly posted anyway making them effectively public?

[Ythill]

Per the flavor thread, I'm assuming this is one of the exceptions Mith mentioned.

[MichelSableheart]

Question then. Since Jailkeeper is on there I'm guessing that Paranoid Doc is still on the whitelist?

Given the requirement that cop sanities are explicitly confirmed or unconfirmed, I don't think a simple "you are a doc" pm is acceptable for a paranoid doctor. Giving a list of possible sanities in the role pm may be acceptable.

[Oman]

I think he means roles whose actions don't work. You're thinking mountainous.

Things like Naive Doctors are already off the list though.

Both Inadvertant Mountainous have been run without naive doctors or cops In fact both of those games fall within my definition of "Specifically normal".

[Oso]

I believe that what Mith meant to say is "et al." As in, non-sane cops and other standard roles that function like non-sane cops, for example, naive doctors and blank vigs.

I'm not sure Blank Vig should be non-Normal if they're told it's a possibility. It hurts a lot less than Insane Cop.

Question then. Since Jailkeeper is on there I'm guessing that Paranoid Doc is still on the whitelist?

Given the requirement that cop sanities are explicitly confirmed or unconfirmed, I don't think a simple "you are a doc" pm is acceptable for a paranoid doctor. Giving a list of possible sanities in the role pm may be acceptable.

Ok, I think I'm getting why mith is going with two rulesets then. It is starting to look like people want whitlisted roles that can be used in Normal(closed) games freely. But, as he mentioned at the end of the last rules post, some restrictions may be lifted for open and semi-open games.

I see a trend of players say this is not 'normal' unless the player(s) are told there is a possibility of it happening which is giving me the impression that things like non-sane cops, doc flavors, ineffective vigs are still considered normal but should be excluded from closed games but can be used in open and semi-open and still be considered normal.

Or have I misunderstood something?

[Add on edit]
@MichelSableheart.
I wouldn't lump Doctor sanities in with Cop sanities on some reflection. An Insane, Naive or CPR Doc I'd say are definitely "non-normal" but in regards to say the weak or paranoid doc, niether qualifier negates the basic function of the role. Weak kills the Doc if they target mafia (and they aren't told this in the role PM I'm guessing) and paranoid is simply an add-on to the Doc. Both still function as a normal doctor and the weak/paranoid qualifier isn't triggered unless they target mafia or a PR. A Paranoid Doc's sanity is not in question. That's where I'm getting stuck. Jailkeeper is simply a Paranoid Doc that is told he blocks as well instead of having to guess at it. Maybe I'm just overthinking it