Ah well, I am sorry if my joke ruined an idea you actually had. I guess I do see one way that setup might work.

Contemplated? Most assuredly. Took is seriously? Not really.

Exactly. Players would figure it out pretty fast, and then the joke would be done. You could make it a fast game, where the first one lynched wins, and then just game-over it. But, at that point, it is almost not even a Mafia game, and fairly far into Bastard Mod territory by my reckoning. (edit: I mean, even one Jester can be considered a bastard set-up, technically)

It depends on how much work you want to put in, and how long it takes you to evaluate different scenarios. At a rough guess, you'll be doing probably half the work before the game starts, and then Day Start and Day End will be big times for mod duty. Assuming no real issues come up, you can settle down to an active observer state during the Game Day.

If you are adding flavor work, I'd guess modding takes roughly as much time as playing (though differently distributed). Adjust that assessment up or down, based on how much flavor work you want to put in. Adjust that assessment up if problems arise during the game (need replacements, need to prod, etc.).

I did play in an "everyone is a bus driver" game years ago.

Worst setup I've been in thus far.

No Flip, and maybe each player has a single vig shot. Should be an amusing Day 1 for the mod, seeing who can come up with the worst arguments and stuff.

But as Krypsyn says in the next post, it is pretty much a complete Bastard Mod setup.

I found moderating to be far easier than playing, because you don't actually have to pay attention to posts as much. Really, you just want to read enough to make for decent flavor in the Dusk Post (if desired) and to tally up the votes for the occasional Vote Count. Except for the OP and PMs, I pretty much did flavor on the fly for my High School game.

Good to know. I will ponder a little more about the setups and will probably join the hosts list.

I agree, mid-game Day it is quite a bit easier than playing, for precisely the reasons you state. I'm mentally adding in the work pre-game to the mod effort, though that might not be entirely fair since someone can take as long as they like in developing the game and balancing it.

Mod questions, vote counts, and enforcing mod rules are the biggest things to worry about during the game (and flavor, depending on how much you want to write), and you can mostly skim posts for that. It isn't like we require completely accurate vote counts and stuff from the mods every time. ;)
I strongly suggest assistant modding first, hopefully with someone chatty. Nothing really helps prepare you for unexpected situations like watching someone else frantically running around behind the scenes trying to keep things from blowing up.

Sweet! Will have it in mind :)

Yes, this is good advice. Some games run relatively smoothly, but other games can be a mine-field of replacements or other issues. My best advice for newer moderators is to run a smaller game (so getting replacement isn't difficult, if it comes down to it) and to have the set-up checked by an experienced moderator before hand, just so one can be better prepared for situations that may crop up with the set-up.

As with most projects, and as Bookwyrm627 states, preparation is your ally. Problems will invariably crop up, some anticipated, some not, and having a plan in place before hand really helps to deal with these bumps quickly and efficiently.

This reminds me of a game where I had the players submit their own made up roles. I pared down the list and then ran the game randomizing roles.

Some of the collisions were spectacular!!

One I remember was a Parrot (mime) mimicked a Professor Farnsworth action (gift a Doomsday device to another universe) and a Forger (re-director).

The Doomsday box within a box kind of became a paradox after Day Three.

From what I've seen, when players unvote before voting someone new, it's a bit easier to track down (or it would be easier for myself). One question though - when the night actions happen, is there a general rule of in which order to treat these actions, or is it completely up to the moderator?

It's something to ponders, because if actions are time sensitive (first come - first serve), then there's some tension put on mafia players. For if they wish to succeed, they want to have a discussion and that takes time. But it doesn't take much time for neutral or some Town roles to determine their choice. And that can greatly influence the game.



For example, player A is mafia; player B is serial killer; player C is town. Night starts, actions are time sensitive. SK has made his choice during Day time to kill player A. So he is first to contact moderator "I did it again. I sent another soul to the gardens of Eden. I killed player A". In the meantime mafia decides to kill player C. Player A makes the kill. He informs moderator of the action about 12 hours after the Night started.

In conclusion... If actions are time sensitive, SK has killed mafia killer and townie lives, mafia is one player short. If actions are not time sensitive... What then? Up to my judgement?

Up to the moderator. Generally it isn't done on a first-come first-serve basis because of exactly the examples you give, it's simply not very fair. In a game like the all-mafia game, it is a bit more balanced (though not entirely because there is still a huge factor of varying time-zones of people in different groups making for a disparity in ability for quickness in making decisions) but still not entirely fair for that sort of thing.

I definitely recommend having your own rule system established based on how it works best for your game. Mechanics that make sense or abilities that lend to 1 taking place before another, or they all take place but then specific rules for blocks if they happen, etc.

I suggest this system: http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Natural_Action_Resolution