The Syndicate

First impressions:

MovingPictures07 wrote:It seems this Day 0 poll may be quite meaningful, upon first glance. What do you all think?

Too concerned with being "first" to read the rules.

'Tis a good thing the rules did not say, "The first person to post will be modkilled."

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:One day when I have nothing else to do I am going to do a lengthy study on adverb usage in mafia and prove once and for all that it's always meaningless.

This statement demonstrates that 3J doesn't understand the "adverb thing." It's far more nuanced than people using words that end in -ly.

And DH clearly doesn't get it either, though that comes as no surprise.

TinyBubbles wrote:yes, i'm evil. badder than you could ever suspect! better lynch me now, doo eet.
actually i thought the position 1 also had many protector - ish options, compared to some of the other positions.

First time TinyBubbles is admitting to being bad rather than being astounded at being good. Probably evil.

I'm taking the first position.

Adverb theory is so dumb, anyone who takes it seriously should punch themselves in the face.

DharmaHelper wrote:Adverb theory is so dumb, anyone who takes it seriously should punch themselves in the face.

By calling it "adverb theory," you've demonstrated a remarkable understanding of the concept itself and also what a theory in general is.

Epignosis wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Adverb theory is so dumb, anyone who takes it seriously should punch themselves in the face.

By calling it "adverb theory," you've demonstrated a remarkable understanding of the concept itself and also what a theory in general is.

By calling it a concept, You've demonstrated you know what the word concept means.

So excited for this game. And I forgot how much I like LC's writing. And I just read through everything, and my brain is full. A few thoughts:

Adverbs tell us nothing as a general concept. Adverbs could be instructive for a particular player's writing style. And reactions to accusations really tell us more than the accusations themselves.

Sarcastic orange was actually a democratic process--it was between orange and grey. There's a whole thread on it on LP. So happy that orange won.

This player list is frigging amazing and so happy to see some old friends/nemesises back.

The Evil Role Power that Cannot be Named is terrifying.

Someone said something about potentially avoiding position 2. I am guessing, having played several Rock Con games, that they have a failsafe/balancer in effect so that such cannot happen. They both like their roles too much (especially insane ones) that they wouldn't make it systemic for any of the role functions to not be used.

Similarly, it would not surprise me at all if The Evil Role Power that Cannot be Named were actually an entirely innocuous power that Rock Con is just taunting us with so that we're all terrified. Same with other recycled role names.

And have now edited, remembering (I think) that there was a role in a Rock Con game that gained power the more it was mentioned. Or something like that.

No idea what option to vote for.

Host question: If someone is unrecruited at end game, what happens?

DharmaHelper wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Adverb theory is so dumb, anyone who takes it seriously should punch themselves in the face.

By calling it "adverb theory," you've demonstrated a remarkable understanding of the concept itself and also what a theory in general is.

By calling it a concept, You've demonstrated you know what the word concept means.

A concept is an abstract idea. "The adverb thing" is not an abstract idea with no objective or concrete rules.

Bitch.

*is an abstract idea

Got me all in a huff now.

Epignosis wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Adverb theory is so dumb, anyone who takes it seriously should punch themselves in the face.

By calling it "adverb theory," you've demonstrated a remarkable understanding of the concept itself and also what a theory in general is.

By calling it a concept, You've demonstrated you know what the word concept means.

A concept is an abstract idea. "The adverb thing" is not an abstract idea with no objective or concrete rules.

Bitch.

You called it a concept tho.

Hello, fine players. I've collected some questions and put them all in a nice post, which will be posted as soon as Black Rock gets home and approves the quality of the answers.

I hope you all enjoy this Day 0 and the following Day 1. It's a really special time in the game, where everyone is still alive. Anyone can post, anyone can vote. All too soon, we will begin losing exciting players and beautiful roles to the icy grip of death. Please know that each of your deaths - Civvie, baddie, and indy alike - are mourned by your hosts.

Some have noticed that there could be a lot of carnage in this game. Know that there is likely to be a couple of resurrections in play at some point, barring some early death of key roles, so no one is beyond hope until all is said and done.
Archangel

Long Con wrote:Please know that each of your deaths - Civvie, baddie, and indy alike - are mourned by one of your hosts.

Fixed.

DharmaHelper is perpetually beyond hope.

Check out MP's adverb usage before and after my interaction with him, and then check out his adverb usage during my calling him out about being bad for using adverbs. Drastic jump. Got em.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hello, Serenity!

Why is your avatar not Mal's spaceship?

Have you read the game?

S~V~S wrote:

nutella wrote:Ugh, looks like all the positions have some bad stuff.

What's all this about adverbs? Discourse analysis in mafia, eh? Could make for some cool linguistic research

Serenity, now that's interesting...

Serenity is the Game Moderator, not a role or game related. We are trying out having the game mods be anonymous for a game or two. Just wanted to let you know this, since it is not game related.

Linki~ the Hunger kills you for even alluding to its existence. It targets you with a requirement, and you must fulfill it without alluding, or even hinting in any way, to being targeted, or it kills you right on the spot. It is very perilous.

I love the Hunger, we can never let it go. It belongs in Recruitment always.

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:Please know that each of your deaths - Civvie, baddie, and indy alike - are mourned by one of your hosts.

Fixed.

We have a debate going, which host do you think is more likely to mourn the players deaths?

aapje wrote:@Hosts:
36 players, 32 named roles and 5 vanilla. Is this correct or are there only 4 vanilla roles?

Canucklehead is indeed the 37th player. Although she missed the official signups, she made it before role assignment. And it's Canucklehead. We have much history with Canucklehead, denying her honoured entry was simply not an option.

Ricochet wrote:The Spinner can also gain immunite to Ubzy and Azura kills, but I'm not seeing them having any kill positions. Or do they?

Ubzargan's team and Azura's team will alternate kills every other night, in the usual way.

aapje wrote:Made a list of what power are active on each position.

Thanks! A link is in the fourth post.

I really enjoyed this post:

aapje wrote:Are some of the powers usable a limited number of times or are all powers usable whenever the corresponding position is effect?
All powers are usable whenever the corresponding Position is in effect.

For instance, could the lynch be switched every time position 2 or 5 comes up?
It is possible.

Which teams are the civvies and who are the baddies? Based on the descriptions I'd say Caelia and Ahriman as civvies while Ubzargan and Azura sound more like baddies. However only the first 2 have kills listed. Or do the baddie teams have kills regardless of position?
Caelia and Ahriman are Civvies, Ubzargan and Azura head up the baddie teams. The baddies kill like they do in most two-baddie-team games.

Will we get more elaborate descriptions on some of the roles? Quite a lot aren't very clear what they do.

I'll look into it. Some, you may just have to wait and see. Some clarifications may be made as a secret revealed to a lucky player at some point.

Russtifinko wrote:So I was under the impression that starting off no one would have a faction, but almost all the roles have one listed. Can the recruiters only recruit factionless roles, or can anyone be recruited and lose their current faction?
Your starting Clan does not indicate your loyalty in the current conflict. Most roles may be recruited to any team, regardless of their Clan. Ubzargan’s baddie team may end up stacked with Children of Serenity roles. During these chaotic times, people are choosing to follow strong leaders over tradition and clan loyalty.

And is it possible we'll only cycle through 3 positions all game long if we want?

Seems like a cool plan, but I doubt it.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:How many times have I nightkilled Black Rock on Night 1?

I can't stop BR if she wants to vote for you on Day 1.

Epignosis wrote:'Tis a good thing the rules did not say, "The first person to post will be modkilled."

Let's do that for Arkham.

LoRab wrote:Host question: If someone is unrecruited at end game, what happens?

Thanks, LoRab!

Unrecruited survivors at the game's end will get a win.

DharmaHelper wrote:Fun Fact: The classic "The Story So Far" thingy on the front page of every game? That dates back to Fringe Mafia on STV, the first game hosted by Aces and myself. We created that. You're welcome.

An excellent innovation.

Black Rock wrote:

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:Please know that each of your deaths - Civvie, baddie, and indy alike - are mourned by one of your hosts.

Fixed.

We have a debate going, which host do you think is more likely to mourn the players deaths?

Interesting... who is on what side of the debate?

(I meant BR.)

Golden wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:Please know that each of your deaths - Civvie, baddie, and indy alike - are mourned by one of your hosts.

Fixed.

We have a debate going, which host do you think is more likely to mourn the players deaths?

Interesting... who is on what side of the debate?

(I meant BR.)

Well of course LC thought you meant I would not be mournful, and I thought you meant he wouldn't.

To be clear, you meant I care?

BR cares.

One of these is true of LC however:

1) He has no soul
2) He is an emotionless automaton
3) He will, on occasion, be too busy cheering at how awesomely a mechanic worked out to truly mourn the death
4) He simply doesn't like anyone on the players list
5) He's only the co-host, so he isn't fully emotionally invested

I think it's probably position 3, but I'll leave it open.

Golden wrote:BR cares.

One of these is true of LC however:

1) He has no soul
2) He is an emotionless automaton
3) He will, on occasion, be too busy cheering at how awesomely a mechanic worked out to truly mourn the death
4) He simply doesn't like anyone on the players list
5) He's only the co-host, so he isn't fully emotionally invested

I think it's probably position 3, but I'll leave it open.

I win!

I hate my iPad. I had a post but it froze and I lost the whole damn thing.

In short it said I have not spoken up yet because I could not wrap my head around the game. I have spent some time reading though, and I think I am getting a handle now...

To summarize what I said much better in my first version of this post *insert explitives under my breath* I believe it reads as though the followers of Caelia and Ahriman are most likely civ groups. But there is enough gray area in there that I am concerned that a surprise is lurking the alignments. The only thing that is clear as far as alignments go is that the followers of Terra's will most certainly be neutral, lol.

All this talk of avoiding certain positions is most likely pointless, both hosts have made it pretty clear that won't happen. BR explicitly stated that things will happen to force certain positions. So yeah, nice in theory, useless in reality I think.

Hosts, the Brutal Executioner, does the designated kill refer to the recruited players or the originating clan? Does this role just kill one from that clan at randomly how is this kill directed?

Spacedaisy wrote:I hate my iPad. I had a post but it froze and I lost the whole damn thing.

In short it said I have not spoken up yet because I could not wrap my head around the game. I have spent some time reading though, and I think I am getting a handle now...

To summarize what I said much better in my first version of this post *insert explitives under my breath* I believe it reads as though the followers of Caelia and Ahriman are most likely civ groups. But there is enough gray area in there that I am concerned that a surprise is lurking the alignments. The only thing that is clear as far as alignments go is that the followers of Terra's will most certainly be neutral, lol.

All this talk of avoiding certain positions is most likely pointless, both hosts have made it pretty clear that won't happen. BR explicitly stated that things will happen to force certain positions. So yeah, nice in theory, useless in reality I think.

Hosts, the Brutal Executioner, does the designated kill refer to the recruited players or the originating clan? Does this role just kill one from that clan at randomly how is this kill directed?

It is originating clan, your clan does not change with recruitment just your alignment.

Okay, so I'm likely only going to skim the game up to this point, I just never have time for Day 0's, it seems. I arbitrarily chose Position 2 in the poll. From the look of all of the roles, each position seems to have its issues so really, where we start seems to me not very important.

How are people going to handle the unrecruited side of things? Last game, I rather infamously flamed out, and it all started when I admitted that I didn't give a crap who got lynched since I was neutral. There was more to it than that afterwards, but that was essentially the big issue. It was pointed out that the rules of R3 said that an unrecruited player was sort of a civ, but in THIS game, I see the rules state that an unrecruited player is neutral and has only to survive to win. So how does that play out this time? Are you guys still feeling like it makes more sense to "think civ"? Or is this sort of a LMS format that segues into a more traditional team format, with an awkward middle?

I'm happy either way, I just need clarity for my own sense of sanity, lol.

Hosts, one question about the clans. I see that you've mentioned how they aren't really tied to the recruiting leaders, that the leaders will recruit players who happen to be from any clan, but do the leaders get any kind of bonus if they happen to recruit someone from their clan?

I don't see any change to the roles, but then I haven't got any notes. Does anyone see what changed?

Oh, likely the added Q&A, ignore me.

timmer wrote:Okay, so I'm likely only going to skim the game up to this point, I just never have time for Day 0's, it seems. I arbitrarily chose Position 2 in the poll. From the look of all of the roles, each position seems to have its issues so really, where we start seems to me not very important.

How are people going to handle the unrecruited side of things? Last game, I rather infamously flamed out, and it all started when I admitted that I didn't give a crap who got lynched since I was neutral. There was more to it than that afterwards, but that was essentially the big issue. It was pointed out that the rules of R3 said that an unrecruited player was sort of a civ, but in THIS game, I see the rules state that an unrecruited player is neutral and has only to survive to win. So how does that play out this time? Are you guys still feeling like it makes more sense to "think civ"? Or is this sort of a LMS format that segues into a more traditional team format, with an awkward middle?

I'm happy either way, I just need clarity for my own sense of sanity, lol.

Hosts, one question about the clans. I see that you've mentioned how they aren't really tied to the recruiting leaders, that the leaders will recruit players who happen to be from any clan, but do the leaders get any kind of bonus if they happen to recruit someone from their clan?

Quite the question... indeed.

timmer wrote:Oh, likely the added Q&A, ignore me.

A role was added

Black Rock wrote:
Quite the question... indeed.

Nothing takes the stuffing out of a joke like a failed youtube link.

timmer wrote:Nothing takes the stuffing out of a joke like a failed youtube link.

So it wasn't just my browser....

Black Rock wrote:

timmer wrote:Nothing takes the stuffing out of a joke like a failed youtube link.

So it wasn't just my browser....

No, I don't get the fail. The link is correct, it's good ol' Drama Prairie Dog.

S~V~S wrote:

reywaS wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Everyone should vote the number that comes after 4 and before 6.

How many sides does a pentagram have?

How many letters are in mafia?

How many times have I nightkilled Black Rock on Night 1?

A pentegram has 10 sides. 5 points...10 sides.

I think he's thinking of a pentagon, that has 5 sides. He seems to have his polygons confused.

Maybe I intentionally worded them that way.

DharmaHelper wrote:Adverb theory is so dumb, anyone who takes it seriously should punch themselves in the face.

Should they do so enthusiastically?

Black Rock wrote:I am thinking Day O could be about 24 hours but also could be longer, I did not put a poll timer on so people had time to check in. We will also be pushing the time further as nights work best for us.

Day O is followed by Day P.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

reywaS wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Everyone should vote the number that comes after 4 and before 6.

How many sides does a pentagram have?

How many letters are in mafia?

How many times have I nightkilled Black Rock on Night 1?

A pentegram has 10 sides. 5 points...10 sides.

I think he's thinking of a pentagon, that has 5 sides. He seems to have his polygons confused.

Maybe I intentionally worded them that way.

DharmaHelper wrote:Adverb theory is so dumb, anyone who takes it seriously should punch themselves in the face.

Should they do so enthusiastically?

Black Rock wrote:I am thinking Day 0 could be about 24 hours but also could be longer, I did not put a poll timer on so people had time to check in. We will also be pushing the time further as nights work best for us.

Day O is followed by Day P.

Have you been told to F off lately?

Black Rock wrote:Have you been told to F off lately?

I was told to 9 days ago if you know what I mean. :P

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Black Rock wrote:Have you been told to F off lately?

I was told to 9 days ago if you know what I mean. :P

So long ago... of course you needed to be reminded.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Black Rock wrote:Have you been told to F off lately?

I was told to 9 days ago if you know what I mean. :P

But he persisted and got a win anyway.

Golden wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Black Rock wrote:Have you been told to F off lately?

I was told to 9 days ago if you know what I mean. :P

But he persisted and got a win anyway.

That was back on Day F.

Read through role positions and felt 3 was best served so i voted that.

Will hopefully post more tomorrow. Got a lot of catching up to do and no time to do it.

Hi everyone. Just got caught up. I don't have much preference for which one we start with. Too many factors to consider for me right now, they all have good/bad outcomes (as others have pointed out) so

I'm going with number four because it's my fav number!

Banter, mechanics talk and MM being told to piss off.

My favorite kind of catch-up after waking up.

I voted 1.
They all seems to have options for shenanigans, but atleast 1 has the option for a Lynch pardon... And if there's one thing that sucks, it's getting lynched D1 in Recruitment Mafia

Voted for 4. I'm bored by the two man race between 1 and 5.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Russ, you managed to use the word interesting twice in pne sentence which is even worse than using adverbs. You're so bad.

is this serious or sarcasm?

In this moment, I am not being serious.

But I do believe that mafia is more apt to use descriptors like "interesting" or "odd" because they call out behaviours without stating their own opinion.

Can interesting and odd not be opinions? For instance: "I think your face is odd". That's an opinion!

I do know what you mean though and I'm guilty of having done it myself on occasion. If something is "interesting" or "odd" or "the most ludicrous idea since the silent fire alarm", say why!

Epignosis wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Adverb theory is so dumb, anyone who takes it seriously should punch themselves in the face.

By calling it "adverb theory," you've demonstrated a remarkable understanding of the concept itself and also what a theory in general is.

I swear if this game devolves into ranting about adverbs for too long I'm going to start accusing a new linguistic concept of being worse than Hitler for each post made on the subject.

timmer wrote: How are people going to handle the unrecruited side of things? Last game, I rather infamously flamed out, and it all started when I admitted that I didn't give a crap who got lynched since I was neutral. There was more to it than that afterwards, but that was essentially the big issue. It was pointed out that the rules of R3 said that an unrecruited player was sort of a civ, but in THIS game, I see the rules state that an unrecruited player is neutral and has only to survive to win. So how does that play out this time? Are you guys still feeling like it makes more sense to "think civ"? Or is this sort of a LMS format that segues into a more traditional team format, with an awkward middle?

I'm happy either way, I just need clarity for my own sense of sanity, lol.

Well I'm expecting this game to be much like Fight Club was for me, where I spent the whole thing openly advertising how much I'd love to be recruited only for it to never happen until it didn't really matter any more. So this issue probably applies to me. I think it always makes sense to "think civ", but I've never played a recruitment game before (despite it being one of my most favourite game mechanics ever) so maybe I'm wrong.

And sanity is overrated.

Bullzeye wrote:

timmer wrote: How are people going to handle the unrecruited side of things? Last game, I rather infamously flamed out, and it all started when I admitted that I didn't give a crap who got lynched since I was neutral. There was more to it than that afterwards, but that was essentially the big issue. It was pointed out that the rules of R3 said that an unrecruited player was sort of a civ, but in THIS game, I see the rules state that an unrecruited player is neutral and has only to survive to win. So how does that play out this time? Are you guys still feeling like it makes more sense to "think civ"? Or is this sort of a LMS format that segues into a more traditional team format, with an awkward middle?

I'm happy either way, I just need clarity for my own sense of sanity, lol.

The bolded/underlined is what I'm thinking will happen.

But, then again, I imploded in The Flash because everyone was talking 'civ civ civ' when it was clearly a faction game, so my thoughts may be different than others'. :P