Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[notquitethere]

Flabort

Oh, ahah, at first I thought you said "has yet", not "had yet", I was going to ask you what question I missed.
Unless I did?

No, you're fine. And being willing to re-examine your own cases (without necessarily second-guessing yourself) is a good town trait. Unless you do anything ridiculous, I think you're OK to live today.


Toaster

Zombie Urist
Does he only post from his phone?

Typically, yes.

Apparently not, according to his latest post. But it's nice of you to defend him.

That reasoning is all well and good, but frankly I'm not sure I trust your intentions.  The first time you did it was two full days before day end.  Just a bit over 24 hours from game start, even!  That's waaay too far in advance to be playing that sort of card.  You then did it again 12 hours later.

You're right that it was a bit too early to do that. I was a bit confused over how much longer the day was going to be, but that's not really an excuse. If we played the game from scratch I'd use this tactic later in the day. This makes me enthusiastic, but it doesn't make me scum.

Sure, getting people to talk is good, but I don't trust where you are going with this.  It almost looks like you're setting up to drive a mislynch on someone D2 if they're on a mislynch today, especially the underlined bit in the quote above.

Obviously not everyone who mislynches someone is goign to be scum. No, nothing like that. I'm more interested in looking at reactions and things should scum flip. Who was in favour of doing what, etc. My day 1 technique has been to try to elicit as much useful information to mine if necessary on future days. I also hope that we lynch scum today, and by making everyone aware of who is going to be lynched at any given moment, I hope for a more considered lynch than often occurs.

I can see how you might think any of this is poor play, but I'm not sure how you're jumping from that to thinking it's a particularly scum play. I almost always play in ways people disagree with: am I scum in every game?


ZU

@NQT I disagree that everyone is responsible for mislynches. At least not everyone is equally responsible. It looks to me that you want to equalize the blame for mislynches.

I'm not trying to equalise the blame: but point out that all of town allows mislynches to happen when they don't press more compelling cases. No one gets a free pass to play poorly. I understand your busy, but do you really think I'm the best candidate for lynching today? And will your reasons stand up tomorrow?


Jiokuy

I feel like this game despite being very active, has failed to achieve much of anything. All of the side (not IG / Flabort) hunts seem to be met with deflection, or fizzle out. I'm slightly afraid this might be a game with very few townies in it from how everyone has been playing. I wish I could spark a new debate, I just haven't played enough games to know how to ask the hard questions. . .

Well, right now I'm the lynch candidate— do you think ZU, Toaster and Jack have a strong case? What do you think of the players that posted a dozen times or less?

I guess I'm used to a lot less emotional mafia. :l I'm looking for the ephemeral good question, but I can't even see who to target. Who do I vote for when the town are acting scummy?

What counts as scummy play in your eyes?

With that said. I'm really curious about the "bad stuff" IG said his revive had a 50% chance of stirring up. Why again would we even consider taking the risk of letting something out?

It's a good question. It depends what kind of risk we feel like taking. 50/50 isn't amazing odds. I was Priest in the last game and raised someone and they were fine, but they still got lynched because no one could trust them. Both town and scum got a free night action out of the whole debacle, but as it ended in a scum win that wasn't really to town's favour. Are you in favour of no revives then?


Jack

You assert that everyone should be open about their opinions on each major lynch push.  For some reason, though, it took Persus pointing out the lack of your opinion on IG for you to give even the vague preliminary thoughts you gave on him.  Why didn't you give at least that much in the first place?  Why hold yourself to a lower standard than everyone else here?

I knew that I was going to go and do a measured read on everyone before the end of the day and comment on whatever lynch was happening. I just wanted to be sure everyone else was going to do that too. I can trust myself to eventually act in a day, but not anyone else. But I can see that in the short run that comes across as lazy or passive. But now that I've delivered on my promise of reads and am commenting on the case against the lynch candidate (myself), can you see that my apparent double-standards weren't really double-standards? You're right that in asking things of others I should have been leading from the front, but is this kind of mistake a specifically scum mistake?

Quick questions: Do you normally prioritize this sort of procedure over voting for suspects?  Did you feel that your vote would do any good where it was?

Yes, on Day 1, definitely. I don't move my vote during the day until my questions have been responded to and worries on such and such a point are allayed: I believe in proactive use of a pressure vote on Day 1. The caveat to this is that before the end of the day, I'll always switch to the most scummiest player regardless; unless I need to break a tie, in which I'll vote whichever of the tied candidates is most suspicious.

[Jim Groovester]

Okay my read is done. I should be up to speed on all the happenings.

If the day has not been extended then let's get an extension going.

@notquitethere: Quick to accuse aren't you? Afraid you will slip up and reveal your true nature?

Why not vote him since it's the RVS?

Also, I checked the timestamps on the posts and I can believe you were in the middle of typing your post when NQT posted.  That's why I unvoted without waiting for a response.

When did you check and/or notice this?

*reads above post before my post*
Woah wait Toaster. While the option for survivors to side with the scumteam exists, its an option and not a fact that they will side with them.

Did you vote Toaster because of a difference of opinion in survivor play style?

I was assuming flabort was town at that point

The only thing I know about flabort is that he is town.

Assuming he is town and knowing he is town are two different things. Please clarify.

Im perfectly willing to revive mislynches, everyone.

I'd rather mislynches stay dead than have a 50% chance of coming back as something worse.

I think you were convinced you were going to be lynched, and so you fakeclaimed a third party role in order to prevent yourself from getting lynched.

Now, I haven't played very much with Imperial Guardsman, or at all, but does he seem like the kind of player who has the mental capability of pulling off a third-party fakeclaim with any degree of competency?

Your casual dismissal of his claim makes me suspect.

What the hell are you doing??? I have a pretty good feeling that you're being upfront about this, but unless you're bluffing the crap out of scum into killing Flabort you've completely screwed yourself and it's only Day 1! Have you read the third Witches' Coven? Do you know what happened to Tiruin after she blabbed about being a third-party helper for the town on Day 1? She fucking lost hard!! I hate big mouths, what are you doing claiming this early and endangering yourself and Flabort? Why can't you keep some damn secrecy from the players who will  be killing us during the night??

I'm curious to know why Imperial Guardsman's horrible play is provoking such a reaction.

*angrily storms out and goes drinking with Jim and ZU

*brofist*

Jim You have yet to post anything relevant or, dare I say it, new. You jumped on the IG conversation when it was cooling down, and answered some quick questions (mostly with the answer of being too busy to answer). Do you have anything relevant or new to say?

You don't say. It's almost like I have not been physically present to actually do anything with this game.

Who gives a crud if a conversation about a topic is winding down if I still have questions? I'm going to ask them anyway.

It's not all that I have on him, however, I'd have to go over my notes and cross-reference them in order to form a concise thought.
And he's slowly turning that rating around now.

What? How?

Wow that's a weak case. Unvote.

I agree with you that your case on Toaster was weak. Why did you vote him in the first place?

Toaster, maybe, but my case on him is too weak to pursue.

So you suspect Toaster but you don't have enough dirt on him to justify a vote? Or is it because you fear reprisal if you do vote him? From your posts it sounds more like the latter.

I have to say I'm neutral on the NQT vs Toaster argument: if someone got mislynched, I'd feel it would be partially my fault, but mostly the fault of whomever I suspect of being scum and/or is voting the lynchee.
Meaning, I agree with NQT that everyone has a hand in mislynching, but not everyone is quite as to blame as the people who push everyone else into the lynch.

I don't understand why you are weighing in.

Groovester: Now that you are up to date, could you tell us your general feeling about each player?

Jack A.T. - Reasonable attacks and arguments. Is active and making efforts to pursue topics of interest. Null read to slight town.

Jim Groovester - Is the coolest cat ever. Town.

ToonyMan - Hasn't really posted that much. Got angry at Imperial Guardsman's play. Currently do not have a strong opinion of him. Null read.

flabort - Appears to be playing a passive game and is more concerned with his survival than finding and hunting scum. Leaning scum.

Persus13 - I can't remember his contributions but he doesn't believe Imperial Guardsman's claim and that bugs me. Feels like a lazy scum move.

notquitethere - I have no strong opinion about notquitethere. The asking people about the top lynch candidates does concern me but his explanation for why is reasonable. Null read. Apparently he's the current leader in votes? I don't think he should be lynched.

Tiruin - Looks like typical Tiruin stuff to me, despite low activity. Null read.

Toaster - Looks like typical Toaster stuff to me. The usual strong day game. Null read.

zombie urist - Terse, short, infrequent posts. Seems like ZU to me. Null read.

4maskwolf - Early in Day 1 reacted strongly to notquitethere and Ottofar for no apparent reasonable reason. He amended his opinion about Ottofar after examining the time stamps. Past that point, does not cause me any suspicions. Is snippy. Reads neutral.

Ottofar - Ottofar currently conforms to my expectations of Ottofar. Null read.

Jiokuy - I have no read on this guy because it seems like he has barely played at all.

Imperial Guardsman - I have confirmed my initial impression that he has no idea how to play mafia. I believe everything about his claim except for what he says flabort's alignment is. Third Party.


Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm let's go with flabort.

[Ottofar]

Meph, could we have an extension, and a votecount please

NQT

Ottofar, you've been quite narrowly focused. What do you think of Persus13's play so far?

I think he's been somewhat invisible, with a couple of posts with better content. I don't think he's activelurking though. His reasoning on why IG is falseclaiming his flavour doesn't, to me, seem too sound. I'm kinda null on him now.

Flaba flab

Ottofar, you claim Jim and Toony are reliable scum hunters. What do you think of their play so far this game?

They've been posting very little, ToonyMan has 4 walls of text with content, Jim has one. I'm trusting it'll get better from here, at least for Jim.


Also, I'd like to have IG live the day, we know everything about him, so his death wouldn't be too informational. He's a good vig target, though.

Instead, Unvote IG, Vote Jim. How come you focus on that one guy that's voting you?

[Persus13]

Persus why did u reapond for Toaster?

I responded because I thought that question was odd. If flabort was referring to IG, it wasn't a mislynch, because Ig's either scum (or third-party). If it was referring to anyone else, how did flabort know it would be a mislynch? If I see something strange, I poke at it.

If someone got mislynched, I'd feel it would be partially my fault, but mostly the fault of whomever I suspect of being scum and/or is voting the lynchee.

Have you ever lynched town before? The first one is always the hardest.

Jim:

Now, I haven't played very much with Imperial Guardsman, or at all, but does he seem like the kind of player who has the mental capability of pulling off a third-party fakeclaim with any degree of competency?

Sometimes. In Prince of the Mafia he's helped lynch/kill scum with some impressive reasoning. But I feel his claim isn't completely competent because I reread the thread, and noticed his past vote wasn't consistent with his claim.

notquitethere: Your top scum pick is a guy who was voting you because he was just posting from his phone?

Zombie Urist: What's your case on NQT?

Jiokuy:

I'm still seeing Zombie Urist as a null due to inactivity, but I under stand why.

Why did you just provide a read on ZU? Why not provide reads on everyone?

With that said. I'm really curious about the "bad stuff" IG said his revive had a 50% chance of stirring up. Why again would we even consider taking the risk of letting something out?

Priest revives have a chance of reviving a player as an SK. I assume IG has something similar if he's a third-party.

[notquitethere]

Sure, I'll throw out an extend.

Jim
If you believe IG's claim, then why don't you believe the part about Flabort's innocence?

Ottofar
Do you think Jim's point against Flabort is completely illegitimate?

Persus
Apparently he's posting from work rather than his phone, he's just quite busy. I'm voting him because he hasn't articulated a case and frequently ignores my responses. Failing to communicate with the person you're voting is a pretty typical scum move. It's looking like we're going to have an extension and I'll be making sure I'm targeting the person I find scummiest by the end of the day.

[4maskwolf]

Sure, I'll throw out an extend.

Jim
If you believe IG's claim, then why don't you believe the part about Flabort's innocence?

I'm going to answer this question for myself, since this question triggered me to remember something.  This is the flavor of IG, in his own words:

I am a mage in exile for murdering a guard who was protecting magical resources I needed to attempt to remove the Cultist God in supernatural 6 from memory, removing said gods power. It failed because cultist win in Sup 6. I need Flabort alive because he apparently decends from a long lost tree of warriors who fought the servants of these dark gods and one of his ancestors apparently weakened said god enough to force him into slumber. I must bring him to the point where the first follower of said cult god was contacted by the god, and use my magic and his blood to open a portal to said god's domain to slay him.

Nowhere in this does it say that Flabort is innocent: it says he is anti-cult.  So if he is mafia, there isn't a cult in this game.

IG: Does your flavor actually say that Flabort is guaranteed town and this got lost in the paraphrasing, or did you just infer that from the flavor?

[Mephansteras]

The Scribe's Tally Sheet
4maskwolf: Imperial Guardsman, ToonyMan
flabort: Jim Groovester
Imperial Guardsman: Persus13
Jim Groovester: flabort, Ottofar
notquitethere: Jack A.T., Toaster, zombie urist
zombie urist: notquitethere


Day has been extended to ~4pm Pacific Monday. 1 Extension remains this day.

[Imperial Guardsman]

IG: Does your flavor actually say that Flabort is guaranteed town and this got lost in the paraphrasing, or did you just infer that from the flavor?

It says that I must protect Flabort, an innocent member of the town.

[4maskwolf]

IG: Does your flavor actually say that Flabort is guaranteed town and this got lost in the paraphrasing, or did you just infer that from the flavor?

It says that I must protect Flabort, an innocent member of the town.

Thank you.

[4maskwolf]

It says that I must protect Flabort, an innocent member of the town.

The only problem with your claim of this is that you would say that even if it told you that he was scum, because you want him to stay alive.  I'm going to reserve judgement on this matter for now, it's just food for thought.

[Imperial Guardsman]

It says that I must protect Flabort, an innocent member of the town.

The only problem with your claim of this is that you would say that even if it told you that he was scum, because you want him to stay alive.  I'm going to reserve judgement on this matter for now, it's just food for thought.

That would invalidate the flavor.
I NEED A CULTIST ALIVE TO STOP THE CULT HURR

[4maskwolf]

It says that I must protect Flabort, an innocent member of the town.

The only problem with your claim of this is that you would say that even if it told you that he was scum, because you want him to stay alive.  I'm going to reserve judgement on this matter for now, it's just food for thought.

That would invalidate the flavor.
I NEED A CULTIST ALIVE TO STOP THE CULT HURR

Not all of the mafia types are cults, bud.  There are several other scum types and anti-town roles in this game.

[Imperial Guardsman]

I havent seen a supernatural with 2 thirds, and theres a 1/3 chance of Werewolves. The other two and the only other two I have seen are Vampires ( who can cult ) and Cultists

[4maskwolf]

I havent seen a supernatural with 2 thirds, and theres a 1/3 chance of Werewolves. The other two and the only other two I have seen are Vampires ( who can cult ) and Cultists

But your flavor specifically refers to the cult itself, as in cultists.

But enough of this bickering.

[Ottofar]

Ottofar
Do you think Jim's point against Flabort is completely illegitimate?

Nope, I just wonder why he chose to focus on him specifically.