The Syndicate

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Dom wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I dig it. And I don't dislike open setups. I have much less experience with them, but they're just as fun. The obvious cultural differences were probably what drew me here the most. The only standard here that I think I'd genuinely struggle with (and haven't seen yet) is the one that doesn't allow dead players to win the game.

Win conditions are totally up to the host.

I've been debating whether I should let the last 10 civilians alive win instead of just the surviving ones (or some number...). This would allow more talkative, but killed, civilians to win.

What about that civilian who does everything right, and gets NK'd on Night 1 as a result?

Then you did something wrong.

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:What about this as a compromise:

Night killed players of either alignment can win.

Lynched player of either alignment cannot win.

I still don't like this honestly, but I think it's at least a lot better.

THAT is something I've thought about but never pursued.

I like this because it lets a player have more control over whether they win or lose.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I dig it. And I don't dislike open setups. I have much less experience with them, but they're just as fun. The obvious cultural differences were probably what drew me here the most. The only standard here that I think I'd genuinely struggle with (and haven't seen yet) is the one that doesn't allow dead players to win the game.

You want to talk about this rule? Let's talk about this rule.

Where's Golden when you need him? :P

I've never been a fan of this either, but I always assumed it was just something that was up to the host. Most civilian win conditions require surviving to the end. Something like the "Epic Challenges" from BR and LC's recruitment game could see play as alternative win conditions for each role, perhaps only requiring that you play your role well to win... which requires a different kind of skill than just surviving.

fingersplints wrote:I usually don't read the roles until later in the game anyways, so not having them shown is actually an advantage for me.

linki JJJ in my (one time lol) experience I was given a list of "possible" roles not assigned to any civvie, but you can also role claim an ability so that was more the tricky part. You say you are a cop and then three others pop up. It's definitely fun, it just takes some getting used to. For me at least.

This sounds like a lot of fun.

I do think we could use more closed setup games just as a change of pace. I'm guessing that the format will be better represented on the next poll of games, not the current one.

Outing is discouraged in open setups because it inevitably leads to mass outing, where at endgame all the civvies have claimed roles and there's no longer anywhere for the mafia to hide. It's an evolving attitude as more hosts are building mechanics into the game to combat the downsides of outing: in Long Con's upcoming World Reborn game, roles are listed without alignment. You can claim a role but you're not making the mafia's job harder by doing so.

In my upcoming Warcraft game you can try claiming a role but it won't reveal your alignment and will have the added effect of potentially letting one of your enemies (who has the same exact role) know that you aren't on their team.

I'm of the belief that role claiming can be an essential strategy but it relies a lot upon the host's game design. As such, each game is different. I think that's part of the appeal of The Syndicate, we're not afraid to experiment with our own standards.