Blitz 3: Dead of Winter Mafia - Game Over

[pisskop]

Scum could make a player claim? Or fakeclaim?

I like the idea.

[The Silver Bard]

you should have made yourselves get a PR. :v

Maybe, but the hassle of having a postrestriction is big. It is hard enough to write sensible stuff in thread, and to try to push your own agenda without having to take into consideration a postrestriction as well.

[The Silver Bard]

Scum could make a player claim? Or fakeclaim?

I like the idea.

Town didn't need our help fakeclaiming If we count your guilty on Makoto as a semi fakeclaim there was 3 fakeclaims from town in this game.

[The Silver Bard]

Anyways I am off.

Have fun reading the scum PT. The last days is pretty much like reading the diary of manic-depressive.

[Titus]

I would love your feedback later. I like the mechanics here and thought it was overall balanced.

[davesaz]

We had a good chance up to the point where a gun landed in the hands of someone who always scum reads me.

[Klingoncelt]

Good Game, everyone.

Sorry I was a dumbass and outed my secondary win condition, total brainfart there.

Titus, thanks for hosting, I'd like to /pre-in for any more Blitz games you run!

[Titus]

It takes me awhile to design a game, so we'll see.

[Ranger]

Personally, I wasn't fond of secondary win conditions that the target did not know how to fulfill (see, my wincon would have been easy if I had known it was Scorpious, but without me having known, I had a 1/10 chance, 10%, of fulfilling it, at best: what if Scorpious had obvtowned himself?), so my main gripe with the game is that. I felt screwed over because I knew that there was no way I could ever actually fill my secondary wincon without blind luck, because you ALSO held the restriction (which I really, really didn't understand the point of) of not allowing us to claim (not even through paraphrase) our secondary wincon.

I played the game as straight-up town, specifically because I knew I was not winning, so if you want to design a secondary wincon, you need to make sure the person actually holds a realistic chance of fulfilling it, else they simply won't bother with it. Which means that for me, the advice I would have is either make the conditions slightly more benevolent (just telling me my target was Scorpious would have helped!), or far more easily, just drop the stupid restriction on not claiming secondary wincons. I felt that aspect added nothing to the game. Secondary wincons are a great idea, but if you're not allowed to so much as paraphrase them, then they become a hindrance.

I feel like if you wanted to stop people from claiming their secondary wincons, a better route than modkilling them would be to give them incentive not to. For instance, a great way to stop me from claiming would be to warn me that there may be someone with a wincon that conflicts with mine. (Which, strictly speaking, was true. While Scorpious and I could both fulfill our wincons, it'd be far more likely that they'd be mutually exclusive, with one of us winning at the cost of the other.) Instantly, that gives me a reason to hold back from claiming.

[davesaz]

I would have approached that wincon (be the 2nd vote) by immediately 2nd voting each player as the opportunity presented itself. Though that may only be possible for a constantly active player. And you're at the mercy of someone voting each player first -- if your (unknown) lover is never voted then you're screwed.

[davesaz]

One of the challenges for scum in this setup is not to let on that you know a strange action is a secondary wincon.

[Titus]

Ranger, the moment you claimed Scorpious should have voted you.

Scorpious said Love several times. He should have voted you too.

@934, Yup. Still I would expect some attempts at self wagoning. I would have allowed a wagon on the dead as well.

[A Royal Saint]

Go everyone! Sorry had RL after I died.

Nice game sis!

Overall great work Bard and davesaz!

[Equinox]

Mine?