The Syndicate

Silver Lantern wrote:Cool.

Also, I guess it is not considered rude AF to be posting all the time while dead like Marmot was doing?

I never thought something so trivial would bother me, but I found it surprisingly distasteful.

I wonder if Jack or Fred found it bothersome too coming from a site where we just do not post after death.

It's all good around here. If you're dead, just post bullshit. Posting on topic is illegal (*ahem*), but it's cool to post. We're all friends who kill one another.

I'm personally not a fan of dead posting, but so long as it remains about sandwiches and salad and is kept to a minimum then whatever. It crossed the line a bit in this game, that isn't representative of what's typical here.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'm personally not a fan of dead posting, but so long as it remains about sandwiches and salad and is kept to a minimum then whatever. It crossed the line a bit in this game, that isn't representative of what's typical here.

That's how I feel about it... usually. I'm relatively indifferent to dead posting, though it is occasionally fun to engage in it past just the one-time "I'm dead, thanks for game" post, even if just for "rezz pls" kind of stuff.

But yeah, if it does cross the line, which is pretty rare, I can fathom how it would be infuriating. It drives me crazy as a host to see a deadie post that could even very slightly influence the game. I'd say this community is pretty good about not violating that though.

I almost never post after death. Mostly because I'm usually full of rage and saying "F*ck this game, I'm never coming back. I'm not even going to post after the game is over."

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'm personally not a fan of dead posting, but so long as it remains about sandwiches and salad and is kept to a minimum then whatever. It crossed the line a bit in this game, that isn't representative of what's typical here.

I'm glad my dead posting was satisfying.

I generally refain from deadposting beyond super off topic stuff and a quick "go town" cause I'm worried I'll affect the game.

I didn't consider Marmot's posts to be rude, though.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:I generally refain from deadposting beyond super off topic stuff and a quick "go town" cause I'm worried I'll affect the game.

I didn't consider Marmot's posts to be rude, though.

Ditto for me as well. Once I'm dead I worry that even the simplest remark could influence a person somehow, so I keep quiet unless it's something completely off topic.

And I will always prefer faction wins to survivor wins. It's a badge of honor to be killed early in the game as a townie. Denying those players a share of the win is unfair.

Sorry for crossing the lines on the dead-posting.



I don't think informing people that the thread is locked is out of bounds.

Asking players to stop lynching my teammates, I meant no harm behind it, but I do see the problem with it, and I'll be careful about that in the future.



To those of you who aren't used to it, it is a thing here. We even have <dead> tags for dead players to post in red. I hope you don't take offense to it. I was just bummed that I was lynched so early in this game, since y'all are a blast to play with, and that's the only way I can voice it.

I am interested to know why a couple of you find it rude or distasteful. I've never encountered that mindset before, so I'm genuinely curious.

I know you meant no harm, Marmot. You weren't trying to cheat or anything, shit happens.

I think there's a tendency for players and hosts alike to severely underestimate the influence they can have on the game with certain behaviors. This goes for hosts taking and answering questions publicly, allowing players to discuss replacement decisions publicly, pretty much any dead post including those that seem meaningless, non-player posts -- everything can affect the direction of thread discussion and what is happening inside the minds of the players.

I mean no criticism of anyone here, because when it comes to this kind of thing I can be a stickler. It's why I almost never post anything when I am dead and I am a very quiet host.

I can only take mafia seriously about 50% of the time.

That percentage drops considerably when I'm dead.

When I started playing mafia, I did not understand the big deal against posting while dead. After awhile it just become something I understood to be the norm on my site.

I think part of the concern is that the dead player posting is usually not in the best position to determine if their post can influence a game or not. So as a general rule it's best to not post.

While I do not think your intentions were bad at all Marmot, and hey, I totally get having fun, we did have btsc going that allowed you to vent any thoughts you just had to get out.

There was even an express rule against posting while dead in this game. I was not necessarily offended by it, but it was irritating to me that everyone else was following the rule and you did not.

Don't feel bad about it at all though. Many things irritate me , and I do understand your intentions were harmless.

In my defense, I wasn't told there was a spectator BTSC chat until Day 6 or so.

Also, what's the Honorary Win poll option a reference too? Is that a joke I missed out on?

My host philosophy - my interaction is a deliberate mindfuck - if you read into it it could be to your benefit or your detriment. I'm probably rare, but it actually irritates me when people won't interact as hosts or deadies, and I actively dislike hosts who won't answer questions to all in thread and interact with their players. Coming to this site is supposed to be fun. It's not a maths exam. Heck, where I came from, reading the host posts could provide you with game information - and to me thats entirely fair play because hosts put in effort to writing the posts and want you to read them, and the information was equal for all factions. In addition, you'd banter with the host, and that was fine - the host should want EVERY player to try their best, and I think having banter with your players keeps them engaged and hoping to succeed.

Having said that, dead posting and non-player posting MUST be off topic. No exceptions. But 'rezz please' has been a long accepted thing to say. And hosts have to absolutely watch what they say behind the scenes to make sure they aren't giving anyone an advantage. But the day I stop bantering with my player set is the day I stop hosting.

I enjoy being quiet as a host. I'll answer any questions that need answering, but beyond that I stay as far away from the action as I can. Most of the fun in hosting is in watching players try to crack the nut you've given them. The less you say, the harder they have to work.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I think there's a tendency for players and hosts alike to severely underestimate the influence they can have on the game with certain behaviors.

I also want to directly address this.

Provide dead players or the host are staying within fair rules, when they influence the game, that's the problem of the active players. As a player, one has to figure out how to deal with it to not let it influence you.

I've seen plenty of tunneling based on this kind of external information and be wrong nearly every time. Perhaps I've just been brought up in a community where you quickly realise that as much information as you might perceive people are providing while you're playing - the reality is that if you base decisions off it you're probably going to be entirely wrong. I think active players severely overestimate the actual value and relevance of the posts that end up influencing them. That's not to say they don't have influence... just that it's on the people who are influenced.

Dead on-topic posting, host information... these things are part of the design space that should be available to hosts as well, provided it's balanced.

Having said that... I did host a game where dead posting was outlawed, and I had to put it in bold and red in the rules and PM players to remind them, because I know that unless you are that forceful about it, our culture here is one that allows deadposting and you'll just see it happen naturally.

Sloonei wrote:I enjoy being quiet as a host. I'll answer any questions that need answering, but beyond that I stay as far away from the action as I can. Most of the fun in hosting is in watching players try to crack the nut you've given them. The less you say, the harder they have to work.

Perhaps I just have a knack for creating more nuts when I talk

Honestly it's quin that deserves the honorary win.

The majority of the time I think this stuff is innocuous. There have been a few cases though where I have personally been influenced by a dead post, or more frequently a host post, in a way that has aided my hunt rather than hinder it. Indeed I think that raises the most frequent "mistake", if it should be called that: hosts interacting directly with players in the midst of a hunting effort, solicited or even unsolicited, in such a way that it becomes clearer than before that the hunter genuinely does not know something. I could call it a "host slip".

This isn't something I would raise a stink about, because I don't care that much. Most people aren't bothered and that's good enough for me.

Since this dialogue is happening in the Phenon thread, I want to make it clear that I have no complaints about the way you ran your game sprityo. It was great fun and you did a great job.

Golden wrote:Honestly it's quin that deserves the honorary win.

But what does the poll option mean?

We played one RYM game where the host just entirely turned off the restrictions against dead posting -- dead players could post whatever they wanted on or off-topic. It was actually the same game where I blew up a thousand people.

That was... interesting.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:We played one RYM game where the host just entirely turned off the restrictions against dead posting -- dead players could post whatever they wanted on or off-topic. It was actually the same game where I blew up a thousand people.

That was... interesting.

I like it as a design space, it could be interesting.

G-Man's also talked about the game where people just stay as full participants when they die, which is also interesting.

Both are harder to balance though. And the wifom must be intense.

Golden wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:We played one RYM game where the host just entirely turned off the restrictions against dead posting -- dead players could post whatever they wanted on or off-topic. It was actually the same game where I blew up a thousand people.

That was... interesting.

I like it as a design space, it could be interesting.

G-Man's also talked about the game where people just stay as full participants when they die, which is also interesting.

Both are harder to balance though. And the wifom must be intense.

I've thought about this concept too. It's essentially the dumbed down version of the jokey stump-mafia game I mentioned earlier in this game

Marmot wrote:

Golden wrote:Honestly it's quin that deserves the honorary win.

But what does the poll option mean?

A joke.jpg

Golden wrote:My host philosophy - my interaction is a deliberate mindfuck - if you read into it it could be to your benefit or your detriment. I'm probably rare, but it actually irritates me when people won't interact as hosts or deadies, and I actively dislike hosts who won't answer questions to all in thread and interact with their players. Coming to this site is supposed to be fun. It's not a maths exam. Heck, where I came from, reading the host posts could provide you with game information - and to me thats entirely fair play because hosts put in effort to writing the posts and want you to read them, and the information was equal for all factions. In addition, you'd banter with the host, and that was fine - the host should want EVERY player to try their best, and I think having banter with your players keeps them engaged and hoping to succeed.

Having said that, dead posting and non-player posting MUST be off topic. No exceptions. But 'rezz please' has been a long accepted thing to say. And hosts have to absolutely watch what they say behind the scenes to make sure they aren't giving anyone an advantage. But the day I stop bantering with my player set is the day I stop hosting.

This is largely how I am when hosting too; I love interacting with my players in thread and giving them the answer to questions.

Golden wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:We played one RYM game where the host just entirely turned off the restrictions against dead posting -- dead players could post whatever they wanted on or off-topic. It was actually the same game where I blew up a thousand people.

That was... interesting.

I like it as a design space, it could be interesting.

G-Man's also talked about the game where people just stay as full participants when they die, which is also interesting.

Both are harder to balance though. And the wifom must be intense.

Even better. Allow info drops in this dead-participant game, but never flip roles on death. Closed setup.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:We played one RYM game where the host just entirely turned off the restrictions against dead posting -- dead players could post whatever they wanted on or off-topic. It was actually the same game where I blew up a thousand people.

That was... interesting.

Vito only hosted maphia games.

speedchuck wrote:

Golden wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:We played one RYM game where the host just entirely turned off the restrictions against dead posting -- dead players could post whatever they wanted on or off-topic. It was actually the same game where I blew up a thousand people.

That was... interesting.

I like it as a design space, it could be interesting.

G-Man's also talked about the game where people just stay as full participants when they die, which is also interesting.

Both are harder to balance though. And the wifom must be intense.

Even better. Allow info drops in this dead-participant game, but never flip roles on death. Closed setup.

Wow. I love this idea. Now the question is how to balance it...

Golden wrote:

speedchuck wrote:

Golden wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:We played one RYM game where the host just entirely turned off the restrictions against dead posting -- dead players could post whatever they wanted on or off-topic. It was actually the same game where I blew up a thousand people.

That was... interesting.

I like it as a design space, it could be interesting.

G-Man's also talked about the game where people just stay as full participants when they die, which is also interesting.

Both are harder to balance though. And the wifom must be intense.

Even better. Allow info drops in this dead-participant game, but never flip roles on death. Closed setup.

Wow. I love this idea. Now the question is how to balance it...

Easy. Add time travel mechanics.