Mafia CLVI: Charity Mafia: -- Pure of Heart Win!

[Zoomzip]

Game State
Game Over, Town Victory

Rules
https://docs.google.com/document/d/18TS ... sp=sharing

Roster

1. Thyrfing as The World Wildlife Fund, Eliminated Day 1
2. ASUDevil Keirador as The National Organization for Women, Eliminated Night 2
3. Telleo as The Long Now Foundation, Eliminated Night 1
4. SJG11 as The Girl Scouts of America, Eliminated Day 3
5. Happymeal
6. Condude1 as The Public Broadcasting Service, Eliminated Day 2
7. Harb as The TOR Foundation, Eliminated Night 3
8. Fuddin Dodgy56
9. Justy

Reserves: Jordan767, Shadowfriend1, Keirador, Dodgy56, Mhsmith0

[Zoomzip]

Game Map

• Rules
• Sign Up Thread
• Night 0
• Substitution: Keirador replaces ASUDevil
• Day 1 Begins
  
  • Day 1 Extended 12 hours
  • Checkpoint: Q2 end
  • Checkpoint: Q3 end
  • Day 1 End: Thyrfing was eliminated. He was the World Wildlife Fund, and Pure of Heart. Substitution: Dodgy56 replaces Fuddin
• Day 2 Begins: Telleo was eliminated Night 1. She was The Long Now Foundation and Pure of Heart. Telleo also joins as Assistant GM
  
  • Checkpoint: Q2 End
  • Checkpoint: Q3 End
  • Day 2 End: Condude1 was eliminated. He was the Public Broadcasting Service, and Corrupted.
• Day 3 Begins: Keirador was eliminated Night 2. He was The National Organization for Women and Pure of Heart
  
  • Day 3 Ended by Town: SJG11 was eliminated. He was the Girl Scouts of America and Pure of Heart
• Day 4 Begins: Harb was eliminated Night 3. He was The TOR Foundation and Pure of Heart.

GM Rulings

GM ANNOUNCEMENT: RULES CLARIFICATION

The rules suffered from an unfortunate typo in the last sentence of the section "Night Kill." In the section Night Kill, the last sentence should read as follows:

If they [the corrupted players] agree on a target but NOT on the player to take the night kill action, the GM will select a player to take the night kill action.

The rules have been updated accordingly and this clarification placed at the beginning of the thread

When at least a super-majority (two-thirds) of players have requested to end the day, the GM will end the day upon becoming aware of that game state. If the super-majority is reached, and then unvoted, the GM will still end the day upon becoming aware that the super-majority had been reached.

[Zoomzip]

Fundraising has always been a challenge for non-profits, and it seems these days more than ever. While there are record donations, the donor pool seems to be a dwindling percentage of the population. Still, these noble organizations soldier onward. Yet there are stories, rumors, furtive whispers over glasses of pinot noir, hushed asides in the corridors after TED talks -- somebody is playing dirty, intentionally looking to grab a larger slice of the pie for themselves...

IT IS NIGHT 0

Day 1 will begin around 2300 GMT on Wednesday, 7 December 2016

[Zoomzip]

GM Announcement
Keirador has replaced ASUDevil

[Zoomzip]

At first it is dismissed as a flight of fancy or the rambling of well meaning but deranged conspiracy theorists, but then an interview in the Huffington Post: "Yes, I was hired to spread disinformation, to make other charities looks bad so that my employers could profit from the increased donor base. I quit because it didn't feel right, but I know they are still out there." But now it is on the others to use their resources, raise their own donations, and find a way to restore the non-profit world back to the way it was.

It is now DAY 1
Day 1 will end approximately 2300 GMT 10 DECEMBER 2016

GO

[condude1]

Ok guys. I'm excited to start this one!

A few questions off the bat, with my answers to them:

1. Do you think that roles are alignment-relevant?
2. Should we reveal anti-town roles (framers, millers, vigs, even blockers all are thought of as not very town friendly, to name a few)
3. Should we reveal information that we know about the game state without endangering our role. (Ex. A miller says "I know that there are roles that screw with investigation results.")?

In response to #1: I think roles are not alignment-restricted. This game is unique in that a scum doctor can accidentally save someone, for example, such that pro-town roles are pro-town, no matter who controls them, and vice versa.
As for #2, I'm going to say no again, barring millers. The common arguments apply.
#3, I say yes. The example given could be any number of roles, and as such, if we have knowledge of anti-town roles in the game, we should reveal that they are out there. I think it keeps infosec intact while giving us an idea of what to be on guard for.

Those are just preliminary thoughts, I'm sure there's a way to improve our odds that I'm not thinking of ATM.

[condude1]

I entirely expected to be PPE'ed there.

In other news, it's into exam season, so that means I'm commuting less, but studying more. Expect lots of smaller interactions, but fewer monolithic posts.

[condude1]

Ah heck, who am I kidding? I'll be posting a ton, I can't study 24/7!

[condude1]

One last thing:

Fuddin: We've had some trouble with new players doing very little because they feel unqualified to make decisions in the game. Your participation is as valuable as anyone else's, and mistakes are often the easiest way to learn (and you'd be surprised how little the town will scumread you for mistakes). I'm assuming you're town here, because if you're mafia, you have someone to lean on if you need it.

The worst thing you can do is sit back and watch. It gives us nothing to go on, and will only cripple us if you're town, or leave the town one fewer person to screw with them if you're mafia. There's also a decent chance of you getting taken out by a vig if you aren't posting much. So, that being said, jump in with both feet, and don't be afraid to ask questions, no one here bites (except Sjg11 ).

[sjg11]

Just trying to think about how we can have some sort of organisation/at least some form of respectable mechanical discussion and debate...

How about we have one player who volunteers to target someone who the town wants to investigate and which all potential town investigative roles can target?

So, for example, we have one, and only one player, stating in thread that they will target the player who gains the second most lynch votes in the thread. All vigilante roles can target that player to attempt to minimise the impact of any potential vigilantes in the game?

I'm suggesting this because I think that gaining some level of certainty with regards to targets could be incredibly useful to us.

Another suggestion is that everyone reveals who they're going to target in the thread before they do so. I... just think that that's too open to manipulation for the Mafia. Moreover... I kind of want to gain the data from how people decide who they're going to select every night.

If we follow my plan/vague idea of a plan, then my suggestion would be that any vig roles target that player. Investigative roles can do what they like. Doctor roles should remain unpredictable but should strongly consider targeting our daily vig sacrifice. No, wait, avoid doing so during Night One so that we can see if there are any actual vigilantes in the game during Night One and can then react accordingly on Day Two coming up with a new tactic.

So, in conclusion this is my plan:
One player volunteers to target the player with the second most lynch votes in the thread.
All vigilante roles target that player so the player with the second most lynch votes die tonight.
Doctors avoid protecting that player so that we can see if there are any vig roles in the game tonight.

There is still the possibility that Blockers screw things up by targeting a vig... but I think this is the best way for us to neuter any potential vigilante roles now before they become too dangerous.

The fact that vig roles were mentioned in the rules makes me worry about them and makes a desire to holster them my main concern today.