Team Vibe Structure Idea (with example of Muffin Man)#3502

I don’t know if Staff Team of Flicker ever thought of this structure to organize. I don’t mean like the way game organize is worst. I feel like maybe Team need the help with idea of structure to improve the understanding of the Flicker. Or like I’m giving you a idea.

[Solvers] Good Team-
Solving the game. Catch Evil

[Controller] Evil Team-
Controlling the game

[Engager] Neutral Team-
Engaging the game like
-Disruptive/Chaotic Engager (Like Clown)
-Supportive Engager

For example, Muffin Man. I don’t think Muffin Man should be in Good Team. Muffin Man doesn’t do much work of solving the game, while their ability is very much about engaging the game by giving muffin. So I feel like Muffin Man should be in neutral Team.

And, Muffin Man can give muffin to Evil. That is not giving the Good Team. That engaging to support the Evil. Like Muffin Man is supportive Engager.

The question is Does giving Muffin to Evil Team count as Good Team who have goal to solve who is in Evil Team? or Does giving muffin count as Neutral to engage the game?

I hope this idea of Team Vibe would helps support the role organization to improve the future of Flicker Game. If this is not useful or need to change, I don’t mind about that.

Neutral isn’t a team, and the distinction matters! It’s a class of roles that have their own dedicated win conditions SEPERATE from both teams. The important bit is that their win conditions are actually interesting to achieve, and impact the game in the process!

Making roles neutral purely off of their abilities not seeming good or evil enough is usually unwise, since they won’t have a proper condition, and often get a generalist win condition like “survive until the end”, or “use your ability X times” slapped onto them. Which are generally boring to play against, and as; and either have little, or far too much impact on the game. Win conditions CAN be made to suit their ability specifically, but neutrals in general are very delicate to balance, and in most cases making a neutrals win condition alongside, or before considering abilities will yield far better results than shoehorning in a WINCON onto an existing ability!

Unfortunately this is hard to express as clown is the only neutral and is flawed with lacking meaningful counterplay in most cases, as even obvious clowns often get voted, and speaking up to oppose voting them often makes you their target! Despite this I CANNOT stress enough how important a good win condition is for a neutral, and neutrals with abilities that don’t tie into their win condition at all, or have abilities that barely do, or have non impactful win conditions with impactful abilities, like “Neutral Psychic” <I shudder just thinking about that one>, are horrid to play against for both sides!

I feel like I need more to understand what Flicker understanding of win condition.

What do you mean by win condition? What your thought on win condition?

Also, I don’t mean neutral psychic should be exist in my idea. Having neutral psychic can make game unfair and that’s not okay.

But I think I mean like neutral is about focused on whole gameplay include players to engage both good and evil team. Like Without neutral roles, the gameplay becomes too quiet and harder on people not getting something new.

And psychic doesn’t engage people to communicate. They wait for night to get clue.

Maybe try think of asking “does this role engage the whole gameplay to communicate something new in how people respond? If not, then it not part of neutral.”

About communication. I don’t mean like forced everyone to communicate. I mean like communicate if they feel comfortable to communicate.

Win condtions are what make neutral roles… well neutral. Without a good win condiction(aka none or just survive) they’ll just end up siding with the good team and you might as well make them good at this point(That is what happend with Mafia’s Pre V2.2 sabotuer). This is the counter point for neutral Muffin Man. Also may I remind you that muffins are cosmetic and don’t support anyone and even so any role can support any team.

I have some questions about win condition since I keeps think about them.

Is win condition about understand the role alone in what to do for winning? Or is it about foucsed on expanding from role to whole gameplay showing simple role carry complex Flicker experience that can goes many way to win?

I think role in gameplay can be one way but players can bring many way to do onto their role they having.

Like if every simple role have many way to do complex Flicker experience, then I think this is the game of Flicker. Many way to win is a game.

I try to understand the flicker idea of win condtion. But I think the question is, What kind of win condition to focused on? What kind are y’all trying to build?

I want to add this to said that I don’t want any of you feel pressure in what to answer.

Like, I’m not here for perfect answer. I’m here for your understanding in what you got to show. I’m not more experienced in how to build Flicker so I’m here to ask what you got.

And, saying both “I don’t know” and “I don’t have answer” are not weak in how i think. It’s honesty to show me what you got in mind and I respect that. And, I think that means we can try work on what is missing to build up if you feel like you want to said “I don’t know.”

I’m here for my understanding to your understanding. Not debating in which is better. But, to expand the idea wider in between us.

I try to think of example for Neutral Muffin Man. And, here how I got in thought.

Try Imagine using muffin man role being in neutral team,

• You can hate them and be like not going to give you a muffin, that is game.
• You can be like i trust you and let me give you a muffin, that is game.
• You can give nothing to trick people thinking there no muffin man, that is game.

And why am I saying every actions is game? It’s because it give any team to engage with those actions more than silence.

There no way that muffin man can be like useless when they have many actions to make. And, I think having “Neutral” muffin man can make many actions more than having “Good” muffin man to do less.

If we give them few ways to make action, Flicker rarely becomes a real game. I feel like it need the idea that able to show many way to make real game differently. Not repeating the same kind of action in one way and rarely a game. Actions in many way can make game so differently depends on how player choices to act in every round.

I still don’t know what kind of win condition for Neutral muffin man to do but I think maybe create an engagement kind of win condition. Not solving kind of win condition.

I think with current idea flicker of roles and teams, all roles are in game spot except muffin man. I feel like Muffin man should be in neutral so they can have many actions to make than being in good team. Just suggesting how I think.

[Structure Expansion Update]

I think idea of Team vibe structure is doing like Win Condition Types in how I think as I evolve to expand the understanding.
Every type define the team alone itself.

[Solver] Good Team use “Solving” kind of win condition
[Controller] Evil Team use “controlling” kind of win condition
[Engager] Neutral Team use “engaging” kind of win condition

After I studied about Mafia’s Pre V2.2 sabotuer issue [According to BirthdayMabel, above this message] since I’m unaware about that. I support issue to expand the idea.

About “survive until the end.” I think surviving can be actions to observe. And, Surviving to observe is part of “solver” which give them to be part of Good Team.

I think If goal is about survive or solving, it easier to become Good Team. If role isn’t supposed to become good team, then I think it need to be in different kind of win condition to change the vibe of team itself.

Muffin Man in example. Muffin Man doesn’t do action of solving. I mean, Muffin Man can do survive to observe, but ability of giving muffin doesn’t really do much on solving to observe.

Like Muffin Man would be asking people “Who want Muffin?,” to become a goal of interaction with muffin to give. That’s not solving. That more like engaging people to respond.

Asking for muffin is lower the focuses on goal of solving. Giving muffin is a distraction away from solving. It easier not to help Good team when they in distraction of giving muffin.

WIth my help of AI partly, I think “Neutral” Muffin Man with Engagement kind of win condition would be like “successfully hand out 3 muffins before end the game” while they can communicate to engage through muffin in many way. But, that’s idea I got right now.

That last paragraph breaks an SDRC rule. You also can’t have the win condition be having a role use their ability a certain amount of times if their ability isn’t hard to use.(This is just a survival win condition in different wrapping paper.)

And all good team members can sabotage the game. No one plays perfectly. And compared to(other distractions Flicker had in it’s lifespan) Muffin Man isn’t that bad.

Muffin Man is a simple role. The problems you have with it can be applied to survivor(it getting removed is unfortunately to me unlikely). It and twin just gives you easy ways to confirm you are good.

There isn’t a problem with it with the restrictions of the delevopers.

The actions you explain for a neutral Muffin man also break another SDRC rule for neutral. You also have to make the role have in impact on the game.

I feel like this suggestion need more discussion. And that would be too much for me to handle my life. So I decide to leave this suggestion to lower them down. Meaning that I may not revisited them.

I want to add that I feel like rules need to expand the understanding to improve the Flicker game itself. Like I think some of natural player-understanding is missing. I mean the game need to connect something that give player playable differently. Not having same pattern repeatable in some part.

And, Thank you for help build my own understanding. Same thing with suggestion #3480