|
|
Post by Commy Pandy on Jun 20, 2009 12:03:20 GMT -5
Should selling out be allowed in the game? Obviously I'm referring to SDSgate. Like I said in the other thread, I handled it the way I thought best but we can outlaw it if that's what makes everyone comfortable.  |
|
|
|
Post by RowBoat on Jun 20, 2009 13:02:09 GMT -5
I think that selling out is fine as it forces mafia to also have to work together a bit more and be more calculated in their decisions. They basically have to work harder to keep themselves off the radar as much as possible, making it a better and more challenging game overall. And since posting PMs saying what roles are is already forbidden under the rules, I don't think there has to be a rule forbidding any selling out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darkest on Jun 20, 2009 14:20:49 GMT -5
Obviously I vote no, I thought it was very cheap how SDS was allowed to sell me out. I may have had a chance. I was still plotting out what I was going to do. And I remember someone was talking about how after Caleb, we all 'dropped like flies' or some such, but I only dropped because I was sold out. Just saying. Also, in response to what Cloud said in the final, thus far, post in the sign-up thread, there hasn't been a precedent for this, thus far, where a mafia has used this to his advantage, getting someone else killed. Otherwise, I would be fine with it, because they would still distrust the ex-mafia. But instead, they believed every word he said because he just confirmed their 'suspicions'. And therefore, I was killed. It just feels like cheating to me, and I think it takes away from the game.
Also, on a side note, I think that 'dead' people shouldn't be allowed to advise those still alive, or even really continue talking about mafia with them. I don't know about you guys, but for me, dead is dead.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloud390 on Jun 20, 2009 14:41:19 GMT -5
After thinking about it a bit I'm with Darkest on this. It's not fair one bit for the other mafia members.
|
|
|
|
Post by RowBoat on Jun 20, 2009 14:42:52 GMT -5
Well that's the point. You and SDS were top suspects and you were probably next on the chopping block after him. I was inclined to disbelieve him personally, but considering how avidly you defended Zen with no proof and then he turned out to be mafia, you were basically caught with your pants down long before SDS ever switched sides.
No one really said anything when they were dead, other than tally up votes or state factual information, like, "In round two, this person voted for that person." It's stuff that was mostly done just to move along the game rather than waiting for a 'living' player to do it. But SDS wouldn't have been able to reveal that you were mafia if he had died, but that wasn't the case since you killed Rosie instead.
That's really the main reason I don't see a problem with changing sides so long as that person doesn't immediately start revealing names of his teammates because mafia could still kill that person if they were a credible threat, or that ex-mafia member can basically lie, making them just as unreliable as the mafia members who pose as citizens during the daytime. All SDS did was help put a seal on a case that was already pretty much decided.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloud390 on Jun 20, 2009 14:44:45 GMT -5
It's still not fair though whether we believe the person or not. Plus why should mafia be allowed to switch their roles when no one else can? The mafia shouldn't have to deal with an extra citizen though that can throw a whole plan out of whack. That's like the sheriff going from sheriff to mafia and tell mafia everyone he investigated and their roles, and then it makes it hard on the citizens because that's ANOTHER mafia member they'd have to kill. It has to stay as equal as possible for both playing fields.
|
|
|
|
Post by RowBoat on Jun 20, 2009 14:49:15 GMT -5
But they're not allowed to. It's 50/50. SDS could have easily just died right when he revealed himself. Or, he could have been lynched by the citizens that had already turned against him. And really, is there any other scenario where mafia would want to take that risk of potentially dying unless everyone was ready to kill them to begin with?
|
|
|
|
Post by Darkest on Jun 20, 2009 14:49:33 GMT -5
But we don't know for a fact it was decided. Without SDS's input, it may have ended a tie between me and, say, Moon. We won't know, however, since that isn't what happened, so there is no point in trying to use that to your advantage.
And I was telling Zen to stand up for himself, not defending him personally. Maybe I said it might not be him, but I never said once, "You guys are wrong, Zen isn't Mafia."
Plus, my mother arrived to pick me up before I realized SDS had changed sides, and voted before that too. I had been short on time, and I just PM'd Meep that I would kill Rosie. So I really had no time to even register SDS as a threat, let alone send another pm saying to kill SDS instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloud390 on Jun 20, 2009 14:53:46 GMT -5
All I'm saying is it is NOT fair to mafia. Why should they have to burn a kill on an ex mafia? Say for instance Darkest did kill off SDS, well that would have done a whole lot of nothing for him, and in reality actually hurts him because it was an extra citizen from the day previous.
In the end Mafia is a team just like in a sport. It's like having the quarterback go to the opposing team and telling them the 3rd down play to the defensive coordinator. It's not fair.
*EDIT*
With the 50/50 (yea-affirmation as in "yay!" vs. yeah-confirmation as in "yes, that is correct". Think before you post!) they aren't guaranteed the ability to switch roles but they still get a shot at it. 50% is better than 0%
|
|
|
|
Post by RowBoat on Jun 20, 2009 15:03:34 GMT -5
My point is that in the round where SDS made his defection, people were only pointing fingers at you and SDS. And still, of everyone else, you offered the most spirited effort of trying to get Zen out of hot water is my point. It looks incriminating, just like it would have if me and Rosie had been wrong about Caleb. It has nothing to do with how tactfully you feel you defended him.
Then that's a specific personal issue to deal with. But I doubt that's a scenario that will be facing the remaining mafia members in every single game is my point. I feel it'd be a mistake to keep SDS alive because he seemed poise to rat out everyone. So actually, when he was kept alive, I was inclined to believe that he was just spewing BS because you spared him, presumably just to mislead the citizens for a few rounds and maybe eek out a win.
All I'm saying is, in the last game, which is the only real precedent we had to go by, both you and SDS already had targets on your back. All SDS did was paint the red bulls eye on it for some people, but for people like me who are suspicious of everything, it may have easily just taken you out of contention as a potential mafia member.
And since you made the team metaphor, Cloud, you have to remember team unity too. I'd compare Darkest and SDS' handling of the targets on their respective back to Kobe and LeBron trying to play on the same team: they'd both want to do their own thing. But mafia, if you wanna win requires a lot of unity for both sides and if there was poor communication between SDS and Darkest then it's their own fault for turning on each other.
As I already said too, no one would have realistically believed SDS, but he just reinforced suspicions that were present to begin with. So the mafia doesn't have to waste a kill if the remaining member(s) were never accused of wrongdoing. Like if Delcage was the last mafia member, he might not have had to kill SDS simply because you were the only one to ever really accuse Delcage and you turned out to be wrong in all your suspicions.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloud390 on Jun 20, 2009 15:05:43 GMT -5
But Kobe and Lebron did play on the same team and won a gold medal  That's here nor there but I just wanted to point that out haha. I agree with your points Robo don't get me wrong, I think it would make it more fun but I also agree with Darkest in how it can be extremely unfair. *EDIT* I think the hardest reason I personally am on the fence in a sense is that this is the first time this has been used and it worked against Darkest. I mean (yea-affirmation as in "yay!" vs. yeah-confirmation as in "yes, that is correct". Think before you post!) we were probably going to vote for him anyways but ehhh, I'm not so sure anymore which one I'm for. |
|
|
|
Post by Darkest on Jun 20, 2009 15:24:35 GMT -5
Okay, I present a compromise: We should allow it this time, and if it screws with the game, we'll ban it; if it adds to the game, we'll keep it with maybe a few minor, as meep said, stipulations.
|
|
|
|
Post by DelCage on Jun 20, 2009 15:58:07 GMT -5
The reason I was originally bringing it up was because it seemed like a really cheap way to ruin the game. When Rosie wanted to quit, she wasn't allowed to. But when SDS wanted to change teams, he could. What if the Mafia has a disagreement on who to kill? Or what if someone just sees their Mafia team in the beginning and it isn't their friends and they just decide to quit and rat everyone out? I also agree with Cloud that it sucks to have to waste a kill on an unplanned-for citizen.
On the flip side, it is true that it adds a fun element to the game. I liked that it was 50/50 (although 60/40, death/survival is probably fairer, and you can use a random number generator for that), because it isn't a sure thing. Its a variable, which can make it fun.
What if the stipulation was a trade? If a Mafia member trades, they survive and become a citizen. The remaining Mafia Members get to "coerce" a citizen into their Mafia.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloud390 on Jun 20, 2009 16:00:37 GMT -5
I think I'd be fine with it IF the mafia member could not do it when it meant certain death like in SDS's cases. I mean come on. If we didn't know WHICH person switched sides I think that could make it totally fair because then we have no idea who switched.
|
|
|
|
Post by ZuZu on Jun 20, 2009 16:09:31 GMT -5
Well, I'm gonna say no.
You've been given a role, so you should keep it.
The only motivation the mafia should have to work together is that if they don't, it will be harder for them to win. I just don't see a point in keeping this allowed.
Heck, if we wanted to mix things up, we could just add in another role.
|
|
|
|
Post by RowBoat on Jun 20, 2009 16:28:15 GMT -5
So last round's mafia is opposed to keeping that option around, lol, not surprised. Frankly, I just don't see the switch as being entirely fatal to the mafia's survival. I just think a good set of mafia members could easily use the switch to their advantage. I don't know how I feel about the citizen switch, I don't see anything wrong with how it was handled last time personally.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloud390 on Jun 20, 2009 16:30:08 GMT -5
So last round's mafia is opposed to keeping that option around, lol, not surprised. Frankly, I just don't see the switch as being entirely fatal to the mafia's survival. I just think a good set of mafia members could easily use the switch to their advantage. I don't know how I feel about the citizen switch, I don't see anything wrong with how it was handled last time personally. Honestly if given the option I would probably use it (if I was mafia) for that very reason. It's just needs to be limited down. Knowing who switched kills it and it shouldn't be allowed just to avoid death you know? |
|
|
|
Post by Commy Pandy on Jun 20, 2009 17:13:25 GMT -5
Kobe and Lebron having to put up with each other during the Olympics is waaaaay different than being teammates in the NBA.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darkest on Jun 20, 2009 17:20:51 GMT -5
Click here for an online die roller. I've already said my opinion, and I think a switch would be good. But leave the citizens, and ex-mafia/ex-citizen, in the dark about who was switched. As in, the ex-mafia knows they were switched, but the ex-citizen also doesn't know who they were switched for. It's up to the original mafia whether to tell the newbie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Commy Pandy on Jun 20, 2009 17:36:12 GMT -5
There's no way I'd allow the option for citizens to switch over. The role of citizen is the most unfortunate position anyone can get in the game (or at least that's the general opinion) Everyone would try to switch over in the first round.
The concept of selling out just seems very real to me. Suspects cut deals all of the time to get a break on their sentences. I personally don't think that SDS' move ruined the game per say for anyone but Darkest, lol. The problem I do foresee is that every mafia member and their momma will confess and hope for redemption as soon as they're in the hot seat. have Plus, I already see multiple situations in which members would try to sell out for personal reasons.
As for the dead, there is the 'Dead men tell no tales' rule which is followed as well as I expect it to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darkest on Jun 20, 2009 17:57:48 GMT -5
Well then Meep, if you are trying to make it realistic, one could bring up the whole idea of mafia laying low in a safehouse somewhere, or bandits skipping town. Then what would happen? The citizens wouldn't be able to lynch anyone, and we would have mafia winning every time.
On a side note, anyone could always plead the fifth if they're being harried. That always works...
Not trying to argue with you Meep, but we're trying to have fun, not make it realistic.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloud390 on Jun 20, 2009 18:11:34 GMT -5
Kobe and Lebron having to put up with each other during the Olympics is waaaaay different than being teammates in the NBA. Just a jooookkkeee made. |
|
|
|
Post by ZuZu on Jun 20, 2009 19:21:09 GMT -5
So last round's mafia is opposed to keeping that option around, lol, not surprised. Frankly, I just don't see the switch as being entirely fatal to the mafia's survival. I just think a good set of mafia members could easily use the switch to their advantage. I don't know how I feel about the citizen switch, I don't see anything wrong with how it was handled last time personally. I'd feel the same way if I hadn't been mafia. SDS and Darkest were already being targeted, anyways. |
|
|
|
Post by DelCage on Jun 20, 2009 19:23:52 GMT -5
There's no way I'd allow the option for citizens to switch over. The role of citizen is the most unfortunate position anyone can get in the game (or at least that's the general opinion) Everyone would try to switch over in the first round. The concept of selling out just seems very real to me. Suspects cut deals all of the time to get a break on their sentences. I personally don't think that SDS' move ruined the game per say for anyone but Darkest, lol. The problem I do foresee is that every mafia member and their momma will confess and hope for redemption as soon as they're in the hot seat. have Plus, I already see multiple situations in which members would try to sell out for personal reasons. As for the dead, there is the 'Dead men tell no tales' rule which is followed as well as I expect it to be. Whoa whoa, I never said give the citizens ANY choices. No way. Person X is in the Mafia with person Y and Person Z. Person X sells out. Citizens (A, B, and C, comprising the entire citizen population) would all know Person X WAS Mafia but is now a citizen. However, Person Y and Person Z would be allowed to select one Citizen to "coerce" into a Mafia. It is not an option. They choose Citizen B. Citizen B becomes Mafia and are informed as such, but only Person Y, Person Z, and Citizen B know that. The only snag I've thought of is if Person Y and Person Z select the Doctor or Sheriff  |
|
|
|
Post by ZuZu on Jun 20, 2009 19:27:21 GMT -5
Whoa whoa, I never said give the citizens ANY choices. No way. Person X is in the Mafia with person Y and Person Z. Person X sells out. Citizens (A, B, and C, comprising the entire citizen population) would all know Person X WAS Mafia but is now a citizen. However, Person Y and Person Z would be allowed to select one Citizen to "coerce" into a Mafia. It is not an option. They choose Citizen B. Citizen B becomes Mafia and are informed as such, but only Person Y, Person Z, and Citizen B know that. The only snag I've thought of is if Person Y and Person Z select the Doctor or Sheriff But then, what was the point of them selling out? After the switch, they're a citizen, there's no point in them doing some lying or other shady things to help the mafia when they aren't a part of it anymore. And when they did become a citizen, they could just reveal who the mafia members were. Who benefits? It's just unfair to those in the mafia. |
|
|
|
Post by DelCage on Jun 20, 2009 19:37:21 GMT -5
Person X bails because they think the Mafia is going to be the losing side (clearly why SDS sold out). So they benefit by joining what they predict to be the winning team. The Mafia gets a new person who is already in some position with the Citizenry and further confuses them. Citizen B...well, depends on how they play their cards.
Its jut an idea. I'm not super for it or anything, just an attempt to find a solution to a perceived problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by MILKO on Jun 20, 2009 21:03:46 GMT -5
I actually don't care D:
|
|
|
|
Post by Commy Pandy on Jun 21, 2009 7:40:49 GMT -5
So...I"m going take this as 'no selling out allowed'
|
|
|
|
Post by Ain on Jun 21, 2009 12:31:53 GMT -5
It shouldn't be allowed lol
|
|
|
|
Post by teamantisocial on Jun 21, 2009 12:33:50 GMT -5
fuck you SDS XD
|
|
[M:320]
