I do know better than that. Forgot that the alpha was a godfather! Chronos, your scheme makes a little more sense, limiting the risk to the power roles.
And putting the masons at risk, but not exposing anyone.
We have more power at 14 us to 5 them. The regular strategy likely leaves us at 12 to 5 come the next day unless we get very lucky.
If that’s the plan, then I’d like to be replaced. I signed up to play mafia, not look for rules loopholes and exploit them. I have no interest in winning a game in that manner. I’d imagine storyteller feels the same way.
Look, mafia is a social game. It’s meant to be fun and interactive. A plan like that is like showing up to poker night at my house in sunglasses and a hoodie, loudly mocking them, trying to get me on tilt, shoving all in, and generally acting like you’re Phil Helmuth vamping for the camera. You might increase your odds of winning, but I don’t want to play with you ever again.
I’m still voting jsexton, but I agree with this part of his last post 100%. Can we just play?
I guess the good thing to come from this is that it gives me a townier read on chronos and biotop. That is a pretty good plan (aside from my objection above) and it’s hard to see scum proposing it.
unvote chronos
Thirded. I don’t care how scummy it makes me look; I have no interest in playing the game Chronos and Biotop describe.
Chronos, your plan is excellent. I have spent the better part of two days puzzling over how to best use our town’s tiebreaking power. Wouldn’t it be great if Alpha got paired up with another wolf!
Anyone else?
Also, if you object to this and you are not a wolf, can you please tell us a better plan for using the tie-breaker power we have been given? One guaranteed to expose the Alpha wolf?
At this point, especially with it being a newcomer game, I would support storyteller changing the tie-breaking rule to the standard “who got the most vote first” rule.
To be fair, probably for Day 2 since we are in the middle of a Day, but I’d even support changing the rules now to make the game go more normally.
But how can we ignore a rule that gives us an advantage? What was the purpose of the rule otherwise? Again, I am new at this. I didn’t see this as a loophole, but I did think it might make wolves squirm.
Fair enough. If storyteller wishes to change the rules, I will not object. I am the newbie. But gosh darn it I like to win.
Taking the idea to its logical conclusion:
All the Masons identify themselves and abstain from voting, then EVERYBODY ELSE VOTES FOR THEMSELVES. We lynch wolves five days in a row and go home.
It’s a brilliant plan, except for the part about being no fun.
Unless someone can come up with a reason why this wouldn’t be a forced win for Town, I would appeal to** storyteller** to change the tiebreak mechanism. We still have over five real days left in Day One, so I don’t think it would be problematic to change now rather than waiting for Day Two.
We can award you a Special Medal for Brilliance, because that really was a great idea.
Thanks. Would that the medal ward off wolves. Silver, maybe?
Anyway, I see the objections and wait for a ruling from our moderator. But I am going to be mighty pissed if I end up finding out I am being played by a bunch of wolves.
One last thought on this and then I am really going to go to bed. Perhaps the rule does not have to be changed.
If town players don’t want to use the tie rule to extreme measures, then it will not happen. Players can voice their objections – or not — and it will be up to town players to guess whether the objections have more motivation than just the concern for the spirit of the game.
How the tie rule, if left in place, would effect the later parts of the game is unclear to me. But any ruling by** storyteller **should be respected. Now good night. Tomorrow is a long day at the mill.
Yeah, I was actually going to suggest last night that Storyteller change the rules, but I decided I’d wait to see some other reactions first. I think we’ve now seen about as many reactions as we’re going to, so I’m going to
Unvote Dante G
Vote TexCat
Even in the (unlikely) worst-case scenario, Biotop’s plan would have left us at a strong advantage, killing multiple wolves. That’s worth some slightly-increased risk to our power roles, and I think TexCat knew it. I think that she panicked, and made the blunder of trying to fight the plan herself instead of appealing to Storyteller. In short, I think that TexCat is very likely to be a wolf.
Now, then, about that broken rule: My suggestion to Storyteller for a rule change, which he is of course free to disregard if he chooses, is that the tiebreaker roles can submit their preference for the tiebreak via PM. This would make it possible, for instance, for the current top tiebreaker (First Mason until e dies, then Alpha Wolf and so on) to break a tie without weighing in on one side or the other and possibly exposing emself. A wolf tiebreaker could even vote one way and tiebreak the other, for obfuscation (well, a mason tiebreaker could do that, too, but they probably shouldn’t want obfuscation). This rule change would, I think, preserve as much as possible of the original intent of the rules, but remove the auto-win option.
I signed up to play Mafia, and this:
is not Mafia.
Well regardless of rule changes I’ll get some analysis in later , bee neck deep in boxes .
I don’t think that the rule in and of itself is broken, I do think that it could be abused if everyone cooperated. I recommend that no rule change take place, and we just continue playing normal Mafia. If a tie comes up, we can use it to gain extra info but I don’t think we should worry too much about trying to engineer a tie.
Rules are rules. For example, consider check-and-raise in poker. Some outlaw this ploy, some don’t; but what makes no sense is to not outlaw the ploy and then feel abused if someone uses it. Part of our task is to debug the rules.
The Biotop-Chronos-Thing Fish plan is brilliant, but it’s not going to be adopted so further discussion of it (including the rest of this post 
) is off-topic.
Anyway, it wouldn’t guarantee victory even if all Townies cooperate. One second before EOD a Wolf will move his vote to force a misLynch. We Lynch him Day 2 of course, but Day 3 Wolves cause another misLynch. Wolves would take care to expose their scummiest-looking Wolves and Kill the towniest-looking Townies. On Day 9 after 4 mislynches, it would be 2-1 and Scum would have 67% win chance. That’s with all Townies cooperating; if even one Townie refuses to be “herded,” Scum might win easily.
The last-second vote shenanigan could be avoided with a rule proposed 3 years ago by sachertorte:
But I don’t recall seeing this excellent concealed-EOD policy applied yet in a real Mafia game.