I have a stupid question

[KittyTacky]

What would you do as a mod if a vig submitted the action of shooting a revealed innocent child? Do you modkill, prevent their action from going through, or just let it slide?

Disclaimer: I would never do this.

[Nexus]

You let it slide. Just because someone is an Innocent Child, it doesn't mean that they are useful to Town. If they are spamming the thread, or otherwise causing issues with the game, then a vig kill is a perfectly reasonable course of action.

[KittyTacky]

What about the slightly contrived scenario of the (Activated) IC revealing late in the day, not saying much afterward, then the game going into the night (and the vig wasn't going to policy shoot them anyway)?

[Enchant]

What would you do as a mod if a vig submitted the action of shooting a revealed innocent child? Do you modkill, prevent their action from going through, or just let it slide?

Disclaimer: I would never do this.

Let it slide, but will not allow said player in future games.

What about the slightly contrived scenario of the (Activated) IC revealing late in the day, not saying much afterward, then the game going into the night (and the vig wasn't going to policy shoot them anyway)?

Let it slide, but will not allow said player in future games.

[Datisi]

i think it's supposed to be looked at on a case-by-case basis: is the vigilante trying to win? this scenario sounds comparable to mafia shooting one of their own during the night. if there is a clear strategic/tactical reason for that and the person is genuinely trying to win, let it slide. if they're doing it to gamethrow, probably ask a listmod what to do. or just force-replace them, breaking the "play to your wincon" rule is good grounds for a force-replacement, imo.

[Enchant]

But watching Vigs killing Innocent Childs are fun...

[Nexus]

Ultimately, your job as moderator is to facilitate the game. If you stop the kill from going through, you're changing the rules of the game, and it is undue mod interference.

[Enchant]

Ultimately, your job as moderator is to facilitate the game. If you stop the kill from going through, you're changing the rules of the game, and it is undue mod interference.

Question was "What i would do as mod". Thankfully i am not mod.

Force-replace is best action of course, but i think it should be applied regardless of what reasoning Vig using. It's bad habit of letting vigs shot confirmed towns, explain this as somehow "genuine" winning strategy (which are not), and then get away scotfree. There's exist variants where it could make sense, but no one listed it here yet.

[Nexus]

Force-replace is best action of course

I think if you force-replace a player as a result of their actions, you are probably confirming them as town which would be a bad thing.

[Datisi]

just don't say why you're replacing them?

[shiki]

There's exist variants where it could make sense, but no one listed it here yet.

there are plenty of these right;

like if you’re a compulsive night 2 vigilante in a micro and two mafia are alive and an innocent child revealed themself during day two and you feel very strongly that you will be double stacking with the mafia if you shoot the innocent child and! that if you shoot outside of the innocent child you will be just as likely to hit town (thus losing the game) as mafia

[KittyTacky]

Ultimately, your job as moderator is to facilitate the game. If you stop the kill from going through, you're changing the rules of the game, and it is undue mod interference.

Does this override gamethrowing beyond a reasonable doubt if they don't admit to gamethrowing? That is a gripe I have with Town Of Salem's moderation, and even there shooting a revealed mayor (activated innocent child + activated triplevoter) is throwing unless the mayor is themself blatantly throwing.

[shiki]

(in most situations the vigilante would be assumed to be trying to double stack with the mafia anyway due to it being a revealed innocent child and there are just thousands of situations that could make this at least a consideration and it’s not like a moderator can ask the player’s intentions without influencing the game so i'm pretty sure this has to be let through in most cases and potentially looked at by listmods in postgame)

like what if the vigilante is mistakenly functioning under the assumption that they must use their role? like if there is any non-game throwing explanation possible i think a game moderator has to give benefit of doubt and leave it up to list mods to make post game judgment

[KittyTacky]

Yeah, a compulsive vig is the exception because they could well be trying to stack their kill.

[shiki]

a non-compulsive vigilante could potentially be trying to stack the kill as well

it isn’t a question of whether or not what the player in question is doing is optimal but rather if it is possible they think that it could potentially have a positive impact on their team’s chances of winning

let’s say i am playing a micro normal as a vigilante and there is a revealed innocent child and we eliminated mafia day one and now it is night one

and my thought process is, well i have no idea who the partner may be, so trying to hit would just be random 1/6, so 5/6 to hit town, so better to not shoot

but! i also think there’s a 70% chance mafia will target the innocent child, so 70% of the time shooting the innocent child is the same as not shooting

and! i think that in the 30% chance the mafia target someone else, that as long as it is not me that i will claim mafia’s shot as my vigilante shot and find the mafia by reactions to this as only the mafia know that that isn’t what actually happened

so since i think it will either be the same or find the last mafia, i shoot the innocent child

have i done something wrong to the point of any moderator action needing to be taken?

and how could the moderator know this isn’t my thought process when i submitted the action et cetera

[shiki]

(to be clear i do not think this is necessarily the

correct

thing for one to do just that it is a thing one could do and while it certainly could be objected to and maybe a discussion should be had about this after the game and such i do not see how a moderator could reasonably stop that action from occurring)

[Enchant]

a non-compulsive vigilante could potentially be trying to stack the kill as well

Why?

There's blatant reason to holster instead.

[Something_Smart]

What would you do as a mod if a vig submitted the action of shooting a revealed innocent child? Do you modkill, prevent their action from going through, or just let it slide?

Contact a listmod. If it's unambiguously a gamethrow, they would probably advise you to force-replace (and extend the night so the replacement can choose a different action). If there's any possible intent to play to win, regardless of how stupid or misguided it seems, you let it slide. Note that you cannot ask them for an explanation of why they submitted it, as that would also be mod influence. (During the game, anyway. You should absolutely ask after the game.)

Just as a note, mods are never allowed to modkill or interfere in game actions without listmod approval. (You can force-replace without listmod approval, but if it's for a mechanical reason you should ask anyway, and you shouldn't reveal that it was a force-replace.)

[shiki]

a non-compulsive vigilante could potentially be trying to stack the kill as well

Why?

There's blatant reason to holster instead.

i mean, mayhaps the vigilante has reason to believe there is a psychologist in the game and does not want to be red-checked?

i am not arguing that shooting the innocent child would be optimal simply that i can easily envision situations in which it would not be intentionally gamethrowing

and i am not even sure that in the situation i outlined in my last post that shooting the innocent child would be significantly worse expected value than random shooting

and it seems very unlikely to me that random shooting would be punishable at all (even if it hit town) as it has the upside of potentially hitting mafia

(and it's not as though there aren't multiple players who have made known extremely negative expected value plays as semi-experienced players in newbie games in the past year or so so it's not like there is much of a track record for punishing plays highly unlikely to work out favourably)

[Ythan]

Ultimately, your job as moderator is to facilitate the game. If you stop the kill from going through, you're changing the rules of the game, and it is undue mod interference.

I come down right about here on this.

[TemporalLich]

My opinion would be this:

Let the obviously bad kill resolve as normal - and if there is no possible way for it to be a policy kill or 4D chess strategy and the game isn't bastard then also contact a listmod

Force replacing that player would compromise the integrity of the game by practically mod-confirming that player and therefore resulting in a compromised

slot

, and force replacements should look like force replacements for transparency and accountability purposes (you obviously shouldn't reveal why a player is force replaced though as that might compromise the game, unless it is for inactivity)

basically, a IC death and "{player} is being replaced." will possibly have {player}'s slot modspewed as town and therefore compromised.

[NorwegianboyEE]

You gotta reconcile what is mechanically allowed and what is not allowed based on the playing for wincon rule.
If the action is mechanically possible but could be argued to not be against wincon= acceptable.
If the action is mechanically possible but cannot be argued to be in the players wincon in any way: against rules.
In this case, reiterate that it is an illegal action and if not corrected, force replace.

As has been said, if the IC has reads or is playing the game in an manner in which the vigilante could argue is against towns wincon. Then shooting the IC would improve town’s chances at winning from vig’s perspective.

[Cheery Dog]

They're testing someones doctor claim?

[Cook]

someone in the town of salem community actually proved a test case where it is mechanically correct to shoot a revealed IC in MeLo in the case of cult

[TemporalLich]

Let me say this

The moderator is meant to be a neutral arbiter and facilitator of the game. Rejecting an action submission or force replacing someone because the mod thinks the action is game throwing is undue mod influence.

oh and cults are a bastard element anyway, and in a bastard game there's nothing saying that ICs have to actually be not lies.