Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?
February 14, 2010 10:44 AM Subscribe
No one is drunk or under any narcotic influence, and yet all three men are moments away from what Fitzpatrick will later describe as "a mindfuck". A year on, Gibson concurs. "It left me with the sense that one of my basic anchors on reality had been ripped loose," he recalls. Wales still talks about the all-nighter with reverent awe:"It was amazing. It was a work of art. It was a thing of beauty."It was, more specifically, a parlour game.
All I saw before I clicked was "drunk," "narcotic influence," and "Gibson." Not really what I expected.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 10:51 AM on February 14, 2010 [3 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 10:51 AM on February 14, 2010 [3 favorites]
It sounds exactly like Cops and Potheads
Ha! I knew Howard didn't invent that game!
posted by The Whelk at 10:52 AM on February 14, 2010
Ha! I knew Howard didn't invent that game!
posted by The Whelk at 10:52 AM on February 14, 2010
Sounds fun, though there's an element of "you had to be there" to the article. Also this Dimitry guy sounds very annoying.
posted by Artw at 11:03 AM on February 14, 2010 [10 favorites]
posted by Artw at 11:03 AM on February 14, 2010 [10 favorites]
I've always called this basic game "mafia." We played it in grade school.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 11:04 AM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by Solon and Thanks at 11:04 AM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
This could be reworked with "commenters" and "trolls" taking turns denouncing each other and flaming out until the moderator closes the thread.
posted by GenjiandProust at 11:06 AM on February 14, 2010 [10 favorites]
posted by GenjiandProust at 11:06 AM on February 14, 2010 [10 favorites]
Oh, my bad, that's what I get for commenting before finishing the article. I see they explain the twist that makes it different.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 11:06 AM on February 14, 2010
posted by Solon and Thanks at 11:06 AM on February 14, 2010
I really like Werewolf, though I've never played it in person. A friend of mine wrote up a wolfbot a while back that would adjudicate games played in IRC, which is a weird neutered version of the experience since observation and interaction is so fundamentally gutted, but even at that it made for good (and really quick) fun with a bunch of us who know each other in real life trying to find some way to carve out a rhetorical or statistical edge over a series of games.
There's something about the pure strategic evenness of the game that's appealing in the same way as, but on a very different tactical scale from, something like Diplomacy—in both cases, you can't rely on some lopsided game mechanic to save you from poor play; in both cases you're stuck having to reason n levels of second-guessing what your fellow players are really thinking vs. what they're saying; and in both cases playing well can translate far more directly to hurt feelings than in something like Monopoly.
posted by cortex at 11:09 AM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
There's something about the pure strategic evenness of the game that's appealing in the same way as, but on a very different tactical scale from, something like Diplomacy—in both cases, you can't rely on some lopsided game mechanic to save you from poor play; in both cases you're stuck having to reason n levels of second-guessing what your fellow players are really thinking vs. what they're saying; and in both cases playing well can translate far more directly to hurt feelings than in something like Monopoly.
posted by cortex at 11:09 AM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
Played this a couple of times on the Quarter To Three forum. Variations were Vampire and The Thing. It got pretty intense considering that all interaction was via PM. I'd like to try it live one day.
posted by Splunge at 11:16 AM on February 14, 2010
posted by Splunge at 11:16 AM on February 14, 2010
I've actually been playing this a lot at parties recently - I don't know why it became popular again seemingly out of nowhere, interesting to see that it's not just among my social circles.
When I'm a townsperson I prefer to die early, so that I can watch all the action unfold. I hate ending up in the final few, where I have to decide who's who and know that I'm probably getting gamed by the mafia.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 11:20 AM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
When I'm a townsperson I prefer to die early, so that I can watch all the action unfold. I hate ending up in the final few, where I have to decide who's who and know that I'm probably getting gamed by the mafia.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 11:20 AM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
And I should say, I've pretty much always played with the Seer variant, where aside from the clueless villagers and the coordinating werewolves, you also have one special villager who during a separate portion of the night phase is allowed to silently indicate one player and have the moderator confirm whether or not that player is a wolf.
The Seer is an unconfirmed title, of course, so there's no reason by default that anyone else, villager or wolf, would know who the Seer is. Nor is there any specific proof a player could provide to establish that they really are the Seer. How this little extra bit of friction and information mixes things up is pretty interesting.
posted by cortex at 11:23 AM on February 14, 2010 [3 favorites]
The Seer is an unconfirmed title, of course, so there's no reason by default that anyone else, villager or wolf, would know who the Seer is. Nor is there any specific proof a player could provide to establish that they really are the Seer. How this little extra bit of friction and information mixes things up is pretty interesting.
posted by cortex at 11:23 AM on February 14, 2010 [3 favorites]
Claiming that you're the seer would seem to be the fastest way to get eliminated from the game.
Either A) the werewolves will kill you the moment that you announce it.
or B) the other villagers will assume that you're a werewolf and lying about it.
posted by empath at 11:37 AM on February 14, 2010
Either A) the werewolves will kill you the moment that you announce it.
or B) the other villagers will assume that you're a werewolf and lying about it.
posted by empath at 11:37 AM on February 14, 2010
While the game itself sounds cool, the writer is obviously ignorant of the Silicon Valley.
For one, Sonoma County is about as close to Silicon Valley as Fresno.
Secondly, it's not really that widely known around here, and I've never heard of anyone getting hired because of it, with the exception of Margaret Robertson... who wrote the article... from her home in the UK.
But hey, at least Wired does a convincing job of exaggerating its Silicon Valley creds while engaging in acts of high-tech namedropping... and that's what counts, right?!
If you're looking for the werewolves, I suggest you try searching on Madison Ave.
posted by markkraft at 11:37 AM on February 14, 2010
For one, Sonoma County is about as close to Silicon Valley as Fresno.
Secondly, it's not really that widely known around here, and I've never heard of anyone getting hired because of it, with the exception of Margaret Robertson... who wrote the article... from her home in the UK.
But hey, at least Wired does a convincing job of exaggerating its Silicon Valley creds while engaging in acts of high-tech namedropping... and that's what counts, right?!
If you're looking for the werewolves, I suggest you try searching on Madison Ave.
posted by markkraft at 11:37 AM on February 14, 2010
Ahh, good times. My post-college bilble study played a few games of mafia each week to get things rolling. In retrospect, that might explain why things went a little oddly, theologically speaking.
Our variant, with a large group, involved a "healer" who could protect one villager per round from being killed, a "detective" who could silently ask the game master if a particular person was one of the killers... And two or three designated killers.
I discovered quickly that the best path to success as a killer was to loudly claim that I was the detective, and ask that the healer keep me safe. The real detective rarely spoke up immediately, and if they did it was a matter of convincing the healer they were bluffing.
Fun game, that.
posted by verb at 11:40 AM on February 14, 2010 [3 favorites]
Our variant, with a large group, involved a "healer" who could protect one villager per round from being killed, a "detective" who could silently ask the game master if a particular person was one of the killers... And two or three designated killers.
I discovered quickly that the best path to success as a killer was to loudly claim that I was the detective, and ask that the healer keep me safe. The real detective rarely spoke up immediately, and if they did it was a matter of convincing the healer they were bluffing.
Fun game, that.
posted by verb at 11:40 AM on February 14, 2010 [3 favorites]
Also fun: assassinating yourself to discredit the seer/detective. That move proved... Effective but controversial in my group.
posted by verb at 11:46 AM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by verb at 11:46 AM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
Interesting. Wolfman hits theaters this coming week.
posted by Decimask at 12:00 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by Decimask at 12:00 PM on February 14, 2010
On a side note, as someone who grew up around here, it appears that the Silicon Valley is expanding.
You see, the area was called the Silicon Valley because it had the companies that created the first semiconductors. Not software. Semiconductors. Made of Silicon, even. (Fairchild Semiconductors, Intel, IBM, Apple...
It wasn't until the mid-90s that the term "Silicon Valley" started to include the mid-S.F. peninsula, because of companies like Oracle, Netscape, and various R&D labs and venture capitalists located near Stanford.
It took the dot-com boom to get people to start referring, lazily, to the web-centric parts of S.F. as part of the Silicon Valley.
And now, apparently, it extends all the way up to Sonoma as well.
Next stops... Redmond, Washington and Las Vegas... and basically anywhere online / in virtual space.
posted by markkraft at 12:02 PM on February 14, 2010
You see, the area was called the Silicon Valley because it had the companies that created the first semiconductors. Not software. Semiconductors. Made of Silicon, even. (Fairchild Semiconductors, Intel, IBM, Apple...
It wasn't until the mid-90s that the term "Silicon Valley" started to include the mid-S.F. peninsula, because of companies like Oracle, Netscape, and various R&D labs and venture capitalists located near Stanford.
It took the dot-com boom to get people to start referring, lazily, to the web-centric parts of S.F. as part of the Silicon Valley.
And now, apparently, it extends all the way up to Sonoma as well.
Next stops... Redmond, Washington and Las Vegas... and basically anywhere online / in virtual space.
posted by markkraft at 12:02 PM on February 14, 2010
Waah! I have never played this game, and I feel like I've been missing out.
...still, thanks for the post.
posted by not_on_display at 12:15 PM on February 14, 2010
...still, thanks for the post.
posted by not_on_display at 12:15 PM on February 14, 2010
Also fun: assassinating yourself to discredit the seer/detective.
This is very dangerous, though. It reduces your numbers and if you do it right after the seer/detective makes his claim it looks very suspicious.
posted by kenko at 12:24 PM on February 14, 2010
This is very dangerous, though. It reduces your numbers and if you do it right after the seer/detective makes his claim it looks very suspicious.
posted by kenko at 12:24 PM on February 14, 2010
Parlor games with strangers: the introvert's nightmare.
posted by the littlest brussels sprout at 12:30 PM on February 14, 2010 [6 favorites]
posted by the littlest brussels sprout at 12:30 PM on February 14, 2010 [6 favorites]
We've played Werewolf a lot at our game nights. It's great fun and is a good balance for no pressure everyone-can-play games like Apples to Apples. The variants are interesting and we've had the moderator throw in the all-villagers tweak as well. It's a good game, though it does become tiring after a while. At SXSW last year there was a bit of a backlash against it, with Barcamp, I believe, proudly proclaiming that there would be no Werewolf at their event.
posted by jeffkramer at 12:31 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by jeffkramer at 12:31 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
the all-villagers tweak as well.
Wow, that's sadistic.
posted by kenko at 12:46 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
Wow, that's sadistic.
posted by kenko at 12:46 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
This is very dangerous, though. It reduces your numbers and if you do it right after the seer/detective makes his claim it looks very suspicious.
true. A lot of it is about weighing the crowd you're playing with. In the most successful instance, we had both made vigorous "if i'm dead tomorrow, you know who was right!" claims. When everyone woke and I was gone, he tried to insist it was a double-cross, but no one bought it.
Oh, man. This is the hipster version of "let me tell you about my level 9 paladin," isn't it?
posted by verb at 12:56 PM on February 14, 2010 [3 favorites]
true. A lot of it is about weighing the crowd you're playing with. In the most successful instance, we had both made vigorous "if i'm dead tomorrow, you know who was right!" claims. When everyone woke and I was gone, he tried to insist it was a double-cross, but no one bought it.
Oh, man. This is the hipster version of "let me tell you about my level 9 paladin," isn't it?
posted by verb at 12:56 PM on February 14, 2010 [3 favorites]
How can you have all villagers? Doesn't it become clear what the deal is when nobody dies in the werewolf phase?
posted by invitapriore at 1:01 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by invitapriore at 1:01 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
We're all villagers. Isn't that the deal with the Salem witch-hunts, the Spanish Inquisition etc? Distrust and paranoia and superstition makes the peaceful villager act like a murderous werewolf.
posted by robotot at 1:02 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by robotot at 1:02 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
More details on the all villager game here.
(along with a discussion of the optimal villager strategy.)
posted by empath at 1:05 PM on February 14, 2010 [5 favorites]
(along with a discussion of the optimal villager strategy.)
posted by empath at 1:05 PM on February 14, 2010 [5 favorites]
It sounds exactly like Cops and Potheads. That game never blew my mind. Should it have?
How high were you?
posted by Evilspork at 1:07 PM on February 14, 2010
How high were you?
posted by Evilspork at 1:07 PM on February 14, 2010
is this something i would have to not do drugs to understand?
posted by nathancaswell at 1:10 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by nathancaswell at 1:10 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
Aha! So *this* is what Google Wave is good for!
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 1:18 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 1:18 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
I always enjoyed the variant we played at university. Especially fun when Chewbacca brought a round to an end in dramatic fashion.
posted by nangua at 1:21 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by nangua at 1:21 PM on February 14, 2010
The games I played, we never had a healer. Reading empath's link makes me think this was the right idea. Thus, the self-outing of the seer (well, it was mafia, so it was the detective, but same thing), was an extremely dangerous move. I remember the mafia losing more often than winning, but not by much. I think the healer is too powerful.
Another community (warning NSFW) I'm part of plays very complicated mafia games regularly. I've always been a little intimidated by just how many roles they have.
posted by Hactar at 1:23 PM on February 14, 2010
Another community (warning NSFW) I'm part of plays very complicated mafia games regularly. I've always been a little intimidated by just how many roles they have.
posted by Hactar at 1:23 PM on February 14, 2010
We play it quite often at parties, and while it is fun, it certainly is not a MIND-BLOWING LIFE CHANGER. As a matter of fact, I find it quite stressful, but that's because my friend think I'm pretty good at it, so are always trying to bump me off early.
posted by arcticwoman at 1:45 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by arcticwoman at 1:45 PM on February 14, 2010
werewolf is very popular among the RailsCamp and wider Rails community. Pat seems to be spreading it everywhere he goes.
posted by honest knave at 1:49 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by honest knave at 1:49 PM on February 14, 2010
I wonder if Werewolf is still distracting Ruby developers from their hacking at conferences.
posted by pmdboi at 2:00 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by pmdboi at 2:00 PM on February 14, 2010
pmdboi: I think I have not been the only person to occasionally be disgruntled at the amount of WereWolf and Urban Terror at Ruby events.
posted by honest knave at 2:06 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by honest knave at 2:06 PM on February 14, 2010
There wolf. There castle.
/Young Frankenstein
posted by BitterOldPunk at 2:29 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
/Young Frankenstein
posted by BitterOldPunk at 2:29 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
The Something Awful forums has a quite active Mafia community in the Traditional Games subforum.
I've played it a few times, both in real life and on the forums, and it's quite interesting how the game changes, but also how much it stays the same in forum form. Instead of the average hour-long game, you get games that can extend over several months, with a game-day easily lasting a week each. Since everything you say stays on your "record", every word you write will be weighed and analyzed, and while the lack of face-to-face contact becomes a bit of a disability, you gain the ability of having the vote record of every person transparently laid out.
They also have a tradition of making quite non-standard games, with roles and mechanics that can completely turn Mafia upside down, thus keeping the community from getting bored and going stale.
posted by ymgve at 2:33 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
I've played it a few times, both in real life and on the forums, and it's quite interesting how the game changes, but also how much it stays the same in forum form. Instead of the average hour-long game, you get games that can extend over several months, with a game-day easily lasting a week each. Since everything you say stays on your "record", every word you write will be weighed and analyzed, and while the lack of face-to-face contact becomes a bit of a disability, you gain the ability of having the vote record of every person transparently laid out.
They also have a tradition of making quite non-standard games, with roles and mechanics that can completely turn Mafia upside down, thus keeping the community from getting bored and going stale.
posted by ymgve at 2:33 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
I played this game with a then-boyfriend and all his old friends from grad school. They would always kill me off right away, and then not talk to me for the rest of the game. I remember sitting there feeling stupid and excluded.
I'm sure this can be a fun game for a group of friends who already all know each other. But for a party game where the point is for everyone to have fun and get to know each other, I'll stick with Apples to Apples. Because this game sucks at that.
posted by Toothless Willy at 2:34 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
I'm sure this can be a fun game for a group of friends who already all know each other. But for a party game where the point is for everyone to have fun and get to know each other, I'll stick with Apples to Apples. Because this game sucks at that.
posted by Toothless Willy at 2:34 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
I'm completely missing something, or Jane McGonigal isn't as awesome as she thinks she is, or I'm awesome, or things that are hard to realize from the inside are easier from the outside, because that "optimal villager strategy" with the healer and the seer seems pretty dang obvious. Once the villagers trust that they know who the villager and healer are, the game is essentially over. This "strategy" is simply a way to quickly establish to everyone's satisfaction who those two players are. The only way to prevent it is through blind luck by killing the seer on the first night, or by tricking the villagers into not knowing who the seer is on the first day by one or more werewolves also claiming to be the seer. In fact, if someone claims to be the seer a werewolf has to also claim to be the seer or the game is basically over. Except that, again, only blind luck would save the werewolf who claimed to be the seer at that point.
I do play a lot of games of many different varieties so perhaps this is non-intuitive to people who aren't so heavily involved ina wide variety of game types. Probably most people are just really bad at game theory.
But it's completely obvious that this will win if the villagers all cooperate.
In real life, as in the article, I'm sure you'd run into a lot of villagers who won't cooperate. But it is silly to act like this strategy is some sort of big insight. Any good game player should be able to identify it simply based on the rules of the game with basically no experience playing it.
Frankly, the seer-healer small group ruleset is extremely flawed. Of course the rules for Diplomacy mean that certain nations have an advantage over others and that's still an awesome game.
posted by Justinian at 3:07 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
I do play a lot of games of many different varieties so perhaps this is non-intuitive to people who aren't so heavily involved ina wide variety of game types. Probably most people are just really bad at game theory.
But it's completely obvious that this will win if the villagers all cooperate.
In real life, as in the article, I'm sure you'd run into a lot of villagers who won't cooperate. But it is silly to act like this strategy is some sort of big insight. Any good game player should be able to identify it simply based on the rules of the game with basically no experience playing it.
Frankly, the seer-healer small group ruleset is extremely flawed. Of course the rules for Diplomacy mean that certain nations have an advantage over others and that's still an awesome game.
posted by Justinian at 3:07 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
In fact, since this game is likely usually played by people trying to extract as much fun as possible, and that fun probably (to them) stems more from sowing confusion and having lengthy intrigue rather than guaranteeing winning and doing so as quickly as possible, the optimal strategy would (I suspect) fail a lot.
But it's still not exactly a stunning insight.
posted by Justinian at 3:09 PM on February 14, 2010
But it's still not exactly a stunning insight.
posted by Justinian at 3:09 PM on February 14, 2010
Yeah, the existence of that strategy just seems like a reason not to have the healer-function in the game at all.
posted by kenko at 3:10 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by kenko at 3:10 PM on February 14, 2010
A quick and easy fix would be to make it impossible for the healer to heal himself.
posted by Justinian at 3:15 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by Justinian at 3:15 PM on February 14, 2010
(since, obviously, it would be suicidal for the healer to publicly reveal himself)
posted by Justinian at 3:15 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by Justinian at 3:15 PM on February 14, 2010
Yeah, it can be a very fun and creative game, but a life changing mindfuck?
It was, like, really spiritual and the moderator is like a cruel deity or maybe even the cold universe or something.
Yeah, totally, and it makes it so obvious how heavily we rely on subjective social contructs, you know?
...
...
I don't think we're supposed to be talking because we're dead.
posted by defenestration at 3:25 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
It was, like, really spiritual and the moderator is like a cruel deity or maybe even the cold universe or something.
Yeah, totally, and it makes it so obvious how heavily we rely on subjective social contructs, you know?
...
...
I don't think we're supposed to be talking because we're dead.
posted by defenestration at 3:25 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
Am I the only that just prefers a good game of questions?
posted by inigo2 at 3:39 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by inigo2 at 3:39 PM on February 14, 2010
Is questions really comparable with werewolf?
posted by nangua at 4:02 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by nangua at 4:02 PM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]
A quick and easy fix would be to make it impossible for the healer to heal himself.
Really, how could the healer heal himself? If he's dead, he's dead. Dead peopletell noheal no others.
posted by kenko at 4:09 PM on February 14, 2010
Really, how could the healer heal himself? If he's dead, he's dead. Dead people
posted by kenko at 4:09 PM on February 14, 2010
I'm completely missing something, or Jane McGonigal isn't as awesome as she thinks she is, or I'm awesome, or things that are hard to realize from the inside are easier from the outside, because that "optimal villager strategy" with the healer and the seer seems pretty dang obvious.
Well, healers/seers aren't in every game, most people are playing near strangers, and most people only play a few games here and there in their lives, ever, so it's probably not worth even developing an optimal strategy until you play a few games with the same ruleset and people in a row.
But yeah, given a reasonable number of players and a consistent set of rules, I imagine it wouldn't be hard to come up with lots of 'plans' that have a 90% success rates.
posted by empath at 5:10 PM on February 14, 2010
Well, healers/seers aren't in every game, most people are playing near strangers, and most people only play a few games here and there in their lives, ever, so it's probably not worth even developing an optimal strategy until you play a few games with the same ruleset and people in a row.
But yeah, given a reasonable number of players and a consistent set of rules, I imagine it wouldn't be hard to come up with lots of 'plans' that have a 90% success rates.
posted by empath at 5:10 PM on February 14, 2010
huh. this game doesn't seem like much fun at all. it would seriously get in the way of drinkin'.
posted by lapolla at 5:31 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by lapolla at 5:31 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
Is questions really comparable with werewolf?
Wouldn't it depend if you're a werewolf or not?
posted by inigo2 at 5:33 PM on February 14, 2010
Wouldn't it depend if you're a werewolf or not?
posted by inigo2 at 5:33 PM on February 14, 2010
huh. this game doesn't seem like much fun at all. it would seriously get in the way of drinkin'.
Haha, mostly it works as a good way to include new people and/or non-drinkers in a party. Or you can just drink for every round you survive. It's especially entertaining when people are drunk.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 5:45 PM on February 14, 2010
Haha, mostly it works as a good way to include new people and/or non-drinkers in a party. Or you can just drink for every round you survive. It's especially entertaining when people are drunk.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 5:45 PM on February 14, 2010
Aren't we talking about Werewolf? What's all this talk about villagers?
posted by kaibutsu at 6:04 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by kaibutsu at 6:04 PM on February 14, 2010
Werewolf! Constant rounds of werewolf in the basement of the honors (read: nerdy and sober) dorm at Northeastern my freshman year led to things like my having friends, my first ever real boyfriend, something to put on my first resume (long story there), and a growing ability to make small talk with the fellow dead people. You were a good game, werewolf. A good game.
posted by Mizu at 6:42 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by Mizu at 6:42 PM on February 14, 2010
Based on experience of Werewolf/Mafia in two different groups, it helps if 30% of the WW group are "shifty motherfuckers" in appearance, and isn't as fun as you'd think if you're playing with a group of dang hippies. I'm not sure if those two variables apply at all to silicon valley.
posted by subbes at 7:27 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by subbes at 7:27 PM on February 14, 2010
Hrmm. MeMail me if you are game for doing a Wave version of this (well, a Mafia-ish version) next weekend (Feb. 20th/21st). I'm thinking 8:00 Eastern time. (I have Wave invites if that's an issue.)
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:40 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:40 PM on February 14, 2010
There are, btw, werewolf gadgets and bots for wave already created.
posted by empath at 8:11 PM on February 14, 2010
posted by empath at 8:11 PM on February 14, 2010
(I have Wave invites if that's an issue.)
I'm pretty sure everyone has Wave invites at this point...
posted by inigo2 at 8:14 PM on February 14, 2010
I'm pretty sure everyone has Wave invites at this point...
posted by inigo2 at 8:14 PM on February 14, 2010
I'm pretty sure everyone has Wave invites at this point...
I've got gmail invites too...
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 9:38 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
I've got gmail invites too...
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 9:38 PM on February 14, 2010 [1 favorite]
lynch empath
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:34 AM on February 15, 2010
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:34 AM on February 15, 2010
Werewolf/Mafia is a great game (and bizarrely popular amongst Christians, for some reason). I loved moderating it with a few friends I knew well, mostly because of the moment of suspense you could generate at the end of a night phase.
"All players, open your eyes! It's morning. The sun is rising, the birds are singing, and it's a beautiful day. All the villagers rise from their beds to greet the dawn.
Except you, Craig, because you were viciously ripped to shreds in the night."
posted by ZsigE at 5:39 AM on February 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
"All players, open your eyes! It's morning. The sun is rising, the birds are singing, and it's a beautiful day. All the villagers rise from their beds to greet the dawn.
Except you, Craig, because you were viciously ripped to shreds in the night."
posted by ZsigE at 5:39 AM on February 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
But it's not a paradox for Frank Lantz, Werewolf fan and half the team behind New York games company Area/Code. "I am shocked, shocked!, by your implication that technically minded people might, on average, be lacking in the social-skills department," he says.so he's a mefite.
posted by shmegegge at 6:02 AM on February 15, 2010
and bizarrely popular amongst Christians, for some reason
Yeah, why would a game where everyone is predestined by fate to be either elect or damned, and you have to determine which of your friends are sufficiently faithful to remain in your circle of friends appeal to christians?
posted by empath at 9:47 AM on February 15, 2010
Yeah, why would a game where everyone is predestined by fate to be either elect or damned, and you have to determine which of your friends are sufficiently faithful to remain in your circle of friends appeal to christians?
posted by empath at 9:47 AM on February 15, 2010
yes, I got the reference. i was just joking because it's such a popular reference to make around here.
posted by shmegegge at 9:49 AM on February 15, 2010
posted by shmegegge at 9:49 AM on February 15, 2010
"Lynch Judas"
"Why me?"
"You're being too quiet."
"What about Jesus, he hasn't said a word."
"Look, I'm the cop, and I'm telling you that Judas is mafia and he's going to kill me before this night is over."
"Jesus, you always claim cop."
"Maybe I'm just lucky that way."
posted by empath at 9:50 AM on February 15, 2010 [3 favorites]
"Why me?"
"You're being too quiet."
"What about Jesus, he hasn't said a word."
"Look, I'm the cop, and I'm telling you that Judas is mafia and he's going to kill me before this night is over."
"Jesus, you always claim cop."
"Maybe I'm just lucky that way."
posted by empath at 9:50 AM on February 15, 2010 [3 favorites]
I love the part in "Harpo Speaks" where, during a game of Murder at Alec Woolcott's place up in Maine, Harpo, the murderer, partially unrolls the toilet paper in the guest bathroom and writes "you are ded" in lipstick, trapping one guest in the toilet for like 6 hours. The murdered guest, a novelist, swears she didn't mind and got a lot of mental composing done that day, but Woolcott was pissed and sent Marx into temporary exile.
posted by toodleydoodley at 9:56 AM on February 15, 2010
posted by toodleydoodley at 9:56 AM on February 15, 2010
a game where everyone is predestined by fate to be either elect or damned
While an ultra-Calvinistic Werewolf would be interesting to watch (maybe all the dead villagers get retroactively designated as werewolves?), I think it's more that this was the only time we could legitimately make wild accusations about each other's trustworthiness and indulge our suspicious natures for a change. Serves a useful safety-valve function in that respect, and of course it's also really fun as a way of bonding as a group. Even when you get killed.
Can't wait to try to introduce this to my current church, actually...
posted by ZsigE at 10:41 AM on February 15, 2010
While an ultra-Calvinistic Werewolf would be interesting to watch (maybe all the dead villagers get retroactively designated as werewolves?), I think it's more that this was the only time we could legitimately make wild accusations about each other's trustworthiness and indulge our suspicious natures for a change. Serves a useful safety-valve function in that respect, and of course it's also really fun as a way of bonding as a group. Even when you get killed.
Can't wait to try to introduce this to my current church, actually...
posted by ZsigE at 10:41 AM on February 15, 2010
Regarding the All Villagers gimmick, I had been talking a couple days ago with some of the aforementioned werewolfery friends about the idea of a variable-allotment approach to the game where it's established explicitly up front that there may be between 0 and n wolves in any given round of play.
And some kind of value is attached to the acts of lynching (e.g. a small negative point total to each lyncher) and of confirmed wolf-killing (larger positive point total to each killer), so that players are motivated to approach the game with a mixed strategy that accounts for the possibility that they might sometimes be killing off innocents, and hence hurting their own personal scores, for literally no reason at all.
I hadn't realized how broadly variants of Mafia/Werewolf had been explored, so this is probably not a new idea. But the question of how to score (individual scores? "team" scores?) and how to deal with death in the absence of wolves and possible non-violent disengagement by an All Villager troupe, etc, is interesting to me.
posted by cortex at 10:56 AM on February 15, 2010
And some kind of value is attached to the acts of lynching (e.g. a small negative point total to each lyncher) and of confirmed wolf-killing (larger positive point total to each killer), so that players are motivated to approach the game with a mixed strategy that accounts for the possibility that they might sometimes be killing off innocents, and hence hurting their own personal scores, for literally no reason at all.
I hadn't realized how broadly variants of Mafia/Werewolf had been explored, so this is probably not a new idea. But the question of how to score (individual scores? "team" scores?) and how to deal with death in the absence of wolves and possible non-violent disengagement by an All Villager troupe, etc, is interesting to me.
posted by cortex at 10:56 AM on February 15, 2010
"Atwood uses this game to describe the relationship between the author, reader and critic: the writer is the murderer, the critic is the detective, and the reader is the victim."
posted by ovvl at 11:58 AM on February 15, 2010
posted by ovvl at 11:58 AM on February 15, 2010
In fact, if someone claims to be the seer a werewolf has to also claim to be the seer or the game is basically over.... Probably most people are just really bad at game theory.
I think most people are just really bad at game theory.
I've never played it, but from what I understand, a villager win means that all villagers, alive and dead, share in the win, correct? And likewise for a werewolf win?
Assuming that's correct, from a game-theoretical perspective, one's own death should not be considered a negative if it furthers the goal of one's side. Yet, there's probably a strong instinct not to be personally killed, regardless of game theory. Thus, werewolves are unlikely to claim to be the seer on the first day since they would be likely to be lynched, despite it being the only rational move from game theory.
It would be interesting to see whether this werewolf counter-strategy would be more widely used if the game were re-themed (but left identical from the point of view of game theory) so the players weren't "killed" but "incapacitated" in some way ("bound and gagged," maybe) with incapacitated players on the winning side "rescued" by their free brethren at the end of the game.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 12:29 PM on February 15, 2010
I think most people are just really bad at game theory.
I've never played it, but from what I understand, a villager win means that all villagers, alive and dead, share in the win, correct? And likewise for a werewolf win?
Assuming that's correct, from a game-theoretical perspective, one's own death should not be considered a negative if it furthers the goal of one's side. Yet, there's probably a strong instinct not to be personally killed, regardless of game theory. Thus, werewolves are unlikely to claim to be the seer on the first day since they would be likely to be lynched, despite it being the only rational move from game theory.
It would be interesting to see whether this werewolf counter-strategy would be more widely used if the game were re-themed (but left identical from the point of view of game theory) so the players weren't "killed" but "incapacitated" in some way ("bound and gagged," maybe) with incapacitated players on the winning side "rescued" by their free brethren at the end of the game.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 12:29 PM on February 15, 2010
I've never played it, but from what I understand, a villager win means that all villagers, alive and dead, share in the win, correct? And likewise for a werewolf win?
I wonder to what extent and in what ways different people score games, actually. I've always sort of seen Werewolf as a game-for-its-own-sake social activity, where scoring in some traditional sense doesn't necessarily matter, especially given that people are constantly changing teams depending on the draw of roles at the beginning of the round. The kind of scorekeeping I do in the games I've played tends to be more personal and situational—who lies when, who is good at talking themselves out of (or into) trouble, etc.
The sacrifice-for-the-good-of-the-team plan makes sense as one way to approach scoring—perhaps everybody on the winning team gets a point at the end of the round, and each person holds their own personal point total—but there's nothing to say scoring would have to work that way.
You might assign a point to every surviving team member at the end of a round, or even divide some total point award among survivors, which would create some more complicated incentives for behavior (and hence, I think, more interesting play).
Yet, there's probably a strong instinct not to be personally killed, regardless of game theory.
In the absence of any formal scoring system (and maybe in the presence of one, especially with newer players who haven't yet gotten their head around the dynamics of the game) I think these sort of confounding instincts make play interesting, yeah. And the conflict between for-the-team and for-survival playstyles is itself part of the fun, and can end up being an explicit part of the discussion in a mixed group.
posted by cortex at 12:51 PM on February 15, 2010
I wonder to what extent and in what ways different people score games, actually. I've always sort of seen Werewolf as a game-for-its-own-sake social activity, where scoring in some traditional sense doesn't necessarily matter, especially given that people are constantly changing teams depending on the draw of roles at the beginning of the round. The kind of scorekeeping I do in the games I've played tends to be more personal and situational—who lies when, who is good at talking themselves out of (or into) trouble, etc.
The sacrifice-for-the-good-of-the-team plan makes sense as one way to approach scoring—perhaps everybody on the winning team gets a point at the end of the round, and each person holds their own personal point total—but there's nothing to say scoring would have to work that way.
You might assign a point to every surviving team member at the end of a round, or even divide some total point award among survivors, which would create some more complicated incentives for behavior (and hence, I think, more interesting play).
Yet, there's probably a strong instinct not to be personally killed, regardless of game theory.
In the absence of any formal scoring system (and maybe in the presence of one, especially with newer players who haven't yet gotten their head around the dynamics of the game) I think these sort of confounding instincts make play interesting, yeah. And the conflict between for-the-team and for-survival playstyles is itself part of the fun, and can end up being an explicit part of the discussion in a mixed group.
posted by cortex at 12:51 PM on February 15, 2010
If anyone's interested there's an online version here: http://mafia.myshelter.net/
posted by daHIFI at 1:19 PM on February 15, 2010
posted by daHIFI at 1:19 PM on February 15, 2010
It's a mainstay at AtlasCamp gatherings. Loved by many.
~Matt
posted by mdoar at 1:53 PM on February 15, 2010
~Matt
posted by mdoar at 1:53 PM on February 15, 2010
Thus, werewolves are unlikely to claim to be the seer on the first day since they would be likely to be lynched, despite it being the only rational move from game theory.I'm no game theory expert, but in my experience, as long as both the seer and the healer are part of the game, claiming to be the seer early on (not the first night, but at least early) is almost always a winning strategy if you can lie well. If the real seer announces themselves before you, waiting a round or two and announcing that you are actually the seer and have confirmed that they are the werewolf works well, too.
Really, it all just boils down to how good of a liar you are.
posted by verb at 1:53 PM on February 15, 2010
I feel like I'm noticing people snark about typos a lot more, recently. I hope this trend dies quickly and painfully.
posted by shmegegge at 1:57 PM on February 15, 2010
posted by shmegegge at 1:57 PM on February 15, 2010
There's about 10 of us playing on http://mafia.myshelter.net/. Would really love to see some Mefites in there right now.
posted by daHIFI at 2:09 PM on February 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by daHIFI at 2:09 PM on February 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
I won't lie - the interface for that is pretty baffling.
posted by verb at 2:36 PM on February 15, 2010
posted by verb at 2:36 PM on February 15, 2010
waiting a round or two and announcing that you are actually the seer and have confirmed that they are the werewolf works well, too.
Except the real seer would know that the person claiming to be a seer would have to be a lying werewolf, and wouldn't waste a night's clairvoyance confirming it.
posted by straight at 3:40 PM on February 15, 2010
Except the real seer would know that the person claiming to be a seer would have to be a lying werewolf, and wouldn't waste a night's clairvoyance confirming it.
posted by straight at 3:40 PM on February 15, 2010
If the real seer announces themselves before you, waiting a round or two and announcing that you are actually the seer and have confirmed that they are the werewolf works well, too.
You'd have to be a pretty damn good liar to convince me that you were the real seer and inexplicably decided to wait a round or two before coming forward after a supposed werewolf claimed to be the seer. Like Here's-Your-Oscar level liar.
posted by Justinian at 4:44 PM on February 15, 2010
You'd have to be a pretty damn good liar to convince me that you were the real seer and inexplicably decided to wait a round or two before coming forward after a supposed werewolf claimed to be the seer. Like Here's-Your-Oscar level liar.
posted by Justinian at 4:44 PM on February 15, 2010
Interface for the web thing isn't too bad once you figure out the basics, but good god are there a lot of extra roles going around in there. I'm spending more time reading the wiki than playing the game.
posted by cortex at 4:51 PM on February 15, 2010
posted by cortex at 4:51 PM on February 15, 2010
You'd have to be a pretty damn good liar to convince me that you were the real seer and inexplicably decided to wait a round or two before coming forward after a supposed werewolf claimed to be the seer. Like Here's-Your-Oscar level liar.Well, that's one of the advantages of playing with a church bible study.
posted by verb at 5:23 PM on February 15, 2010 [1 favorite]
« Older Don't all the guys in the theater want to get into... | Look, Mildred, he's a lieutenant colonel! And... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by mccarty.tim at 10:49 AM on February 14, 2010 [2 favorites]