Heck, I'm basing some elements of Spider-Man Mafia 3 off of Epistemology mafia, which is probably as big a compliment as I can give to a designer. So kudos, Cato.

i'm working on epistemology 6 so assuming rubik runs 3 at least two of you are going to have to step up

Since so many people seem to want to run their own games, I feel that I should define what features are necessary for a game to be epistemology mafia, and what features are simply commonalities between the two instances of the game that I ran.

Epistemology mafia is any game which follows these rules:

This is epistemology mafia. Unlike most mafia games, you will not only be deducing information within the parameters of the game, but deducing information about the parameters of the game. I will give you incomplete information, but I will not lie to you. The rules are simple enough: There are X players and 3 or more factions. Each player belongs to some number of factions. When all the players from a faction are killed, the faction is eliminated. When only 2 factions remain, the game ends, and anyone still alive is declared a winner. During the day, players may communicate with each other through the thread, or via private messages. You are not obligated, or even recommended to be honest about anything in either the thread or private messages, although you are forbidden from using meta-game information, such as screenshots of PMs from other players or myself. During every day except the first, players vote on someone to lynch. The person with the most votes is lynched, and the game moves to night time. In addition to their faction, each player has up to one role. This role grants them some abilities, many of which can be used to gather additional information about the game, and some of which may be used during the night.

Where X is a number of the designer's choosing. Anything not defined by these rules is at the individual designer's discretion.

You've done it Cato. You've created a meme.

This.

I wasn't focused on making anyone lose, I just wanted my alliance to win.

Per the rules, alliances don't win. It specifically says that the game ends when only two factions are left and then the remaining living players win. There is no faction victory in this game.

But if all you cared about was for your faction to be one of the last two alive, to the point where you were willing to lose to make that happen, then congrats on achieving your personal goal. I'd argue, however, that by not playing towards your own win condition, you in effect were trolling the game. XD

Everyone has personal goals.

Rules don't forbid them.

Not playing towards the win condition set out by the mod, or deviating from it to some degree to achieve a personal goal is something that definitely leaves a bad taste in some player's mouths. I don't particularly care, personally, because I just see players doing that as another obstacle to play around.

It is probably in poor taste to do so, but mafia is, in many ways, a game of poor taste, So i would not really expect much less.

Poor taste is telling someone else how to play the game. As long as ru -- heh. It only matters that you are not telling someone else how to play. Unless you want to be that person in which case more power to you.

It is a game at the end of the day.

If you want to mess around when you're playing solitaire, that's ok, but epistemology mafia is a multiplayer game, and when you don't play the game according to the rules (and the rules say that the goal of the game is to be alive at the end), you interfere with other people who are actually trying to play the game. When you don't play to win, you're making the game less dependent on how the other players play, and more dependent on whether your whims happen to help or harm their chances.

What if the game starts looking too easy and you decide to pick up some additional objectives?

I think numbers tried that last game. It didn't end well.

This is true to some extent, but PK could still win ten times out of ten in situations where other people would lose ten times out of ten. Mafia is a game of psychology before its a game of diplomacy. That's my anyway.

The rules don't compel you to follow them. They only state the consequences should you fail to do so.

Make a rule that says people can't screw around. That's a matter of perspective though.

Game. Pure and simple.

there's no rule that says a dog can't play baseball

I really think you guys are freaking out about this a little too much. Also I don't understand the point of grouping people together if it's just a free for all game. I was given a teammate so I looked out for them simple as that.

You're doing fine. They're more focused on the literal wording and ideal way of playing. How you played is perfectly fine.

I don't think anyone is freaking out over anything. We're just talking about whatever's on our mind while we wait for the next mafia to start.

I thought about it, and I agree with KoD. People should just play how they want.

I agree too. Ultimately, you should play however you want.

But if the mod says players x, y, and z win, and the rest of the players lose, it's kinda poor sportsman like conduct to say "No, silly Mod, I won because I had my own wincon which was different from the one you gave me."

Fable wasn't playing to win, he was playing to see to it that the Communists were one of the last factions left alive at the end. Fable got what he wanted and could and should probably feel like he achieved a personal victory, but don't go disregarding the mod's game intent in doing so. That's just silly.

Fable achieve what he was trying to achieve for whatever personal reasons he wanted to achieve them. Good for you Fable. But Fable didn't achieve the mod's win condition anymore than I did.

I'm also not freaking out about anything, I'm just engaging in this discussion. I don't take this that seriously. Think/do whatever you want.

you're telling people how to play the game right there

Which is why player defined objectives or the possibility of lack thereof run counter to the experience, and even the integral nature of what it means to be a game. Rather, it devolves into play.

Because the game is fundamentally different if you remove the groupings. The end-condition of the game itself would have to change, several abilities would not function, and you would not be disincentivized from removing certain people in the game.

I'm freaking out.
Or more like, smoldering with disapproval. Relative to my usual state of being.
I'm very opinionated on what it means to have what is apparently not common courtesy when it comes to playing a game with other people, but I don't think that was any secret.