Post by: Tomasque on January 29, 2016, 07:20:35 pm
1 Evil role
1 Investigative role
1 Special Town role
1 Neutral role or Town Weakness role
...with just enough deviation to keep you guessing!
Remember that seats are limited, so don't wait or you might miss out!
EDIT: Although there are now 5 players, the list of archetypes will remain the same. However, this means that unless game contains exactly 1 of each archetype, it will have a double or more of one archetype.
Playerlist
-hector13
-FallacyofUrist
-TheBiggerFish
-Starver
-
Rounds completed:
Round 1 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6778142#msg6778142)
Round 2 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6785393#msg6785393)
Round 3 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6801996#msg6801996)
Round 4 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6807399#msg6807399)
Round 5 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6828889#msg6828889)
Round 6 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6837575#msg6837575)
Round 7 - Scum Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6859864#msg6859864)
Round 8 - Scum Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6877178#msg6877178)
Bonus Round - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6912809#msg6912809)
Round 9 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6948682#msg6948682)
Round 10 - Scum Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6980750#msg6980750)
Round 11 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7005410#msg7005410)
Round 12 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7039308#msg7039308)
Round 13 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7053042#msg7053042)
Round 14 - Scum Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7078508#msg7078508)
Round 15 - Scum Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7102706#msg7102706)
Round 16 - Scum Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7125095#msg7125095)
Round 17 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7155326#msg7155326)
Round 18 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7183593#msg7183593)
Bonus Round - Scum Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7204037#msg7204037)
Round 19 - Town Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7258419#msg7258419)
Round 20 - True Scum Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7286045#msg7286045)
Final Round - Scum Wins (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7301990#msg7301990)
Post by: hector13 on January 29, 2016, 07:31:32 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on January 29, 2016, 09:17:21 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on January 29, 2016, 10:07:13 pm
In. How long will nights last? And why do you consider this a semi-bastard?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on January 29, 2016, 10:08:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on January 29, 2016, 10:11:34 pm
This is either going to collapse epically or earn a place in the Notable Games Archive.
In. How long will nights last? And why do you consider this a semi-bastard?
Roles aren't clear for every game beyond the 4 categories up there, which are generic in the first place.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on January 29, 2016, 10:12:40 pm
Though if you want more experienced players I can understand.
Will there be extends?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on January 29, 2016, 10:13:34 pm
Roles aren't clear for every game beyond the 4 categories up there, which are generic in the first place.That still doesn't seem like enough reason for me to consider it a semi-bastard. That would just make it a closed/almost closed setup.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on January 29, 2016, 10:14:04 pm
Post by: hector13 on January 29, 2016, 10:25:40 pm
This is either going to collapse epically or earn a place in the Notable Games Archive.
In. How long will nights last? And why do you consider this a semi-bastard?
Roles aren't clear for every game beyond the 4 categories up there, which are generic in the first place.
Well... Just because you have an investigative role doesn't mean it'll be a useful investigative role. This sentence could be applied to the other roles. *smarm*
Post by: Tomasque on January 29, 2016, 10:48:44 pm
How long will nights last?Since there are only 4 players, the night will end once everyone submits their action.
Post by: O.Wilde on January 30, 2016, 01:27:29 am
Post by: Tomasque on January 30, 2016, 06:21:40 pm
Post by: Starver on January 30, 2016, 07:38:11 pm
Do you want to run the risk of me being too n00bish for your semi-bastard? If you get a regular wanting in, instead, I'd willingly stand aside for the old hand that you know...
1 Elsewhere, yes. And modded my own. But neither guarantees that I'd work well with localised game-flavour/rules.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on January 30, 2016, 07:42:43 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on January 30, 2016, 07:43:56 pm
Edit: Rereading this post, it seems pretty rude. Sorry if it was.
Post by: Starver on January 30, 2016, 07:46:33 pm
@Starver, just in, dude.Giving the option. Gave some facts. Used far less words than usual. (Was careful about that!)
In unless refused, then... (And won't be upset, if so.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on January 30, 2016, 07:59:40 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on January 30, 2016, 08:24:13 pm
Now we wait.
Post by: Tomasque on January 30, 2016, 09:43:40 pm
Post by: Tomasque on January 30, 2016, 10:54:00 pm
Some cowardly townsfolk huddle in their homes. Are there any that are brave enough to face the night? No one knows but they themselves. Meanwhile, evil lurks outside the window without fear - for what is there for it to fear if it itself is feared? Nothing.
At least during the night...
Post by: Tomasque on January 31, 2016, 11:04:07 am
...During the day, he has something to fear. The townspeople - courage restored by the risen sun - assemble in the town square. They know that one among them is not a loyal townsperson like them - and they will weed him out and hang him for his crimes. He fidgets, quietly cursing them. He hates the day as much as they hate the night. "But when its all over," he tells himself, "I'll have nothing to fear."
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Not voting: hector13, FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver
Day ends 8:00 AM Tuesday PST
Post by: TheBiggerFish on January 31, 2016, 11:08:05 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on January 31, 2016, 04:00:57 pm
To my knowledge, I was not acted upon.
So riddle me this: nobody died during the night. So there's an unknown. Why didn't the evil person kill? Possibilities:
1. Role stuff. One of the town, or maybe a neutral role, is a protector/blocker/bulletproof/? that prevented/neutralized the kill.
2. The evil person has a non-standard kill action, or cannot kill.
3. This is a semi-bastard mafia. Bastard stuff happened, kill didn't happen.
4. Evil person was inactive/forgot to act.
5. Something I haven't thought of.
hector13: which do you think it is?
TheBiggerFish: do you like my analysis? Do you agree with my analysis?
Starver: Are you TheDarkStar in disguise? Are you the mod in disguise? Am I crazy for asking you these questions?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on January 31, 2016, 04:36:58 pm
I had a chance to act, but did not do anything with it.
Post by: Starver on January 31, 2016, 04:50:31 pm
Starver: Are you TheDarkStar in disguise? Are you the mod in disguise? Am I crazy for asking you these questions?My questions' answers: No; No; Maybe. - Whether you consider them useful/definitive or not.
Tempted to try answer the others, but I shouldn't pre-empt the proper replies. Opinions later, perhaps.
[ah ninjaed for one. But I can't expand on that.]
Post by: hector13 on February 01, 2016, 01:14:56 pm
I had a chance to act. My action succeeded.
To my knowledge, I was not acted upon.
So riddle me this: nobody died during the night. So there's an unknown. Why didn't the evil person kill? Possibilities:
1. Role stuff. One of the town, or maybe a neutral role, is a protector/blocker/bulletproof/? that prevented/neutralized the kill.
2. The evil person has a non-standard kill action, or cannot kill.
3. This is a semi-bastard mafia. Bastard stuff happened, kill didn't happen.
4. Evil person was inactive/forgot to act.
5. Something I haven't thought of.
hector13: which do you think it is?
This focus on theorycrafting over the night action is bothersome, man. The answer will only come out at the end of the game, so we should be scumhunting instead, FoU.
TBF: out of curiousity, why didn't you act? The fact that there was no kill and you admit to being able to do something, yet didn't do it is interesting.
Starver: Opinions now, we have no time! :o
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 03:21:11 pm
By the way, what's you guys' flavor like?
Post by: hector13 on February 01, 2016, 03:22:34 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 03:24:59 pm
I think I know what type of scum we're up against, but it's semi-bastard, so I might be getting a lot of technically true but useless information.
Post by: hector13 on February 01, 2016, 03:27:07 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 03:40:40 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 03:41:17 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 01, 2016, 04:01:17 pm
Different scum do different things.
Not really. They might have different flavour, but mechanically they're pretty much the same.
I'm going to shift my vote to TBF as they're more interested in discussing night actions and theory than finding scum.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 04:02:18 pm
Post by: Starver on February 01, 2016, 04:06:47 pm
Had written a considered reply, but "8 new replies have been posted". Eight? That might significantly change what I want to reply.
Post by: Starver on February 01, 2016, 04:17:08 pm
Quote from: Me
I'd decided the odd numbers, only, of Fallacy's list were likely relevant.
1) Active blocking/protecting (Fallacy claims something) or some form of passive shielding, to counteract a kill-attempt. Maybe the 'Town Special' skill was involved, maybe the 'Town Neutral/Weakness' character was targeted but with a hidden beneficial clause attached to their role.
3) Bastardy means Evil character was unable to kill. Because certain positive conditions weren't met. (Overlaps with (2), admittedly.)
5) Several something-elses come to mind, depending on degrees of bastardy, but I don't think you want 99% hogwash so I'll spare you that.
...I concluded that I had no stand-out 'finger'-worthy person. Although that doesn't mean there isn't a 'least good-looking' one.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 01, 2016, 06:39:17 pm
FoU:What did you do last night?I investigated hector13.
~~~
I am a Psychologist. I can inspect people to see if they are town or not. Last night I investigated hector13. And got a not town result.
The irritatingness of this result is that it doesn't exclude him being third party.
Plus this is a semi-bastard, so I don't know if my inspect is sane or not.
~~~
Oh pain. So the question is... is my inspect right, or not?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 06:56:26 pm
*starts thinking*
Post by: Starver on February 01, 2016, 07:15:26 pm
Oh pain. So the question is... is my inspect right, or not?FWIW, my assessment for "least-likely to be good" was Hector. And your claim (either genuine or cleverly invented) supports that particular 'solution' in multiple ways.
Issue 1: Are you genuine?
...well, it's only Round 1, Day 1. If you're fooling me(/us) there's more fun ahead. I'm willing to risk this and possibly learn from any mistake.
Issue 2: Are your results genuine?
...ditto about the risking/learning. If they're not, we might at least know more.
All things considered, Hector is my vote, too, for better or for worse.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 07:18:16 pm
Either way, investigate me tonight.
Hector13
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 01, 2016, 07:29:00 pm
Also, are we using hammers?
Also, when the round ends, will all players flip?
Is there any means that we get to know of of getting more players in the game?
~~~
To both of you: yep. We're in this for the long(relatively) haul. Experimentation!
~~~
Either way, investigate me tonight.Will do.
~~~
Post by: hector13 on February 01, 2016, 08:40:55 pm
Given what my role is (gas-station attendant, gives a false investigation result) I'm inclined to say it's an arsonist. If I'm right, it would explain why there has been no kill so far: the arsonist's night action is to prime a target for death, and then can choose to kill them later. I'm only really familiar with the Town of Salem variant, in which they can choose to either prime a target or kill them at night, but this is a semi-bastard game so it might be different. Either way, if that's the case, we can't make a mistake today. The worst that could happen is we lose the game D1.
But if you guys want to lynch me without preamble, an opportunity to defend myself or without considering whether FoU's claim is legit, that's cool too. Just don't expect me to be along for the ride. I don't particular find a "let's random lynch and see what happens!" playstyle to be particularly enjoyable, and I'm not playing another 20 games of mafia like that.
Post by: Tomasque on February 01, 2016, 08:49:07 pm
Tomasque: for the sake of the spectators, would you edit the OP to note that the days last 48 hours?
Also, are we using hammers?
Also, when the round ends, will all players flip?
Is there any means that we get to know of of getting more players in the game?
1. Changed it.
2. Perhaps... I originally thought I would, but with so few players, it now seems to unbalancing in either teams favor. I'm putting it to a vote. What do you guys think?
3. Yes.
4. Not that you should know as of now... (except, of course, replacements)
Post by: hector13 on February 01, 2016, 08:51:09 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 09:09:38 pm
Too few players for a hammer methinks, so that's a no from me.Agreed.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 09:12:06 pm
Hmm.
Checks out.
I concur that we have an arsonist but wish to keep my role secret.
Unvote.
Vote Starver.
Post by: Starver on February 01, 2016, 09:29:31 pm
@hector:
To be fair, currently I bet you want the time to change our minds because otherwise you're doomed, this round. I'm wondering whether you'd be so inclined if holding the hammer. Think longer term, though. In future rounds (and in different circumstances) would you prefer it to drag out?
Personally, I'd vote for a "going, going, gone..." hammer. A set time (12 hours?) from any hammer-point, within which retractions/vote-switches can be made to undue/swap a hammer. With as little or as much explanation and discussion as wanted. And resetting the clock. But the scheduled end-of-day happens, of course, if it that happens ahead of any (delayed) hammer.
But it's not that long, really, until the originally-stated end-of-day for the current position. We can stew for... ?14? hours, can't we? I could probably even get some sleep. ;)
Incidentally, you're claiming Miller, i.e. the Townie With Weakness slot. But you aren't that.
---
@TBF I urge you to rethink. I think Hector's title is correctly claimed (but not the alignment), and I think I know your profession (and alignment). I'm prepared to ask you to switch back to Hector for today and then be the subject of your ability tonight, if it comes to that. But it won't.
Post by: Starver on February 01, 2016, 09:32:53 pm
And I meant to put the "[2 new replies...]" just above the @TBF bit, because that's the added fakeedit response to the ninjaing concerned.
But never mind.
Post by: Starver on February 01, 2016, 09:34:42 pm
undo!
I obviously need sleep. But think about it.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 01, 2016, 09:41:11 pm
I concur that we have an arsonist but wish to keep my role secret.1. WHAT? Okay, what?
2. There was no kill last night. Arsonist is definitely a possibility, but other possibilities: no kill due to lazyness/inactivity, role block... bulletproof townie... you're just assuming an arsonist despite all of the other possibilities. What makes you think that the other possibilities are invalid?
3. What benefit does the town gain from keeping your role secret? You don't need to tell me what your role is, just explain to me why the town benefits if it's kept secret.
~~~
I like how you all just go along with it. No questions asked, no theorycrafting over what might be going on. Funny that, TBF, you were all for it before, eh?Good logic. I've greened the bits that I find particularly important.
Given what my role is (gas-station attendant, gives a false investigation result) I'm inclined to say it's an arsonist. If I'm right, it would explain why there has been no kill so far: the arsonist's night action is to prime a target for death, and then can choose to kill them later. I'm only really familiar with the Town of Salem variant, in which they can choose to either prime a target or kill them at night, but this is a semi-bastard game so it might be different. Either way, if that's the case, we can't make a mistake today. The worst that could happen is we lose the game D1.
But if you guys want to lynch me without preamble, an opportunity to defend myself or without considering whether FoU's claim is legit, that's cool too. Just don't expect me to be along for the ride. I don't particular find a "let's random lynch and see what happens!" playstyle to be particularly enjoyable, and I'm not playing another 20 games of mafia like that.
First greening section reply: Yep. Noted that- it was something of a bandwagon as soon as I accused hector, regardless of the potential other factors in play.
Second greening section reply: Your claim could be you as mafia, claiming as such to make it more likely to be an arsonist, trying to make town focus on a different threat. Or you could be telling the truth. If you're scum, nice claim, by the way. If you're telling the truth, TBF's assumption of an arsonist, just based on your claim... makes him more suspicious.
~~~
Everybody: what do we have to lose from a massclaim at this point? Really, what?
Post by: Starver on February 01, 2016, 10:03:12 pm
Everybody: what do we have to lose from a massclaim at this point? Really, what?
Until I knew how much/little 'character' carried over between rounds, I didn't want to say too much.
But I'm sleepy enough (GMT+0) to decide to say something, before I absent myself for the night. I am a Librarian. As I all but indicated, I'm the Town Weakness role. No special powers my books are my weakness. They get wet, I'm out of the game. From which I already supposed that the enemy would be a firestarter of some kind (could kill anyone) with the Town Special (their natural enemy) being also potentially my own downfall due to the water that is their main armament mostly intended to be used against the enemy.
The rest of the logic I used seemed (still seems) obvious. The key to which of a trio of possibilities I had being Fallacy's revelation, thank you. (With room for the Bastardy to fool everyone, of course.)
So, your call: Gas Station Attendant (ready fuel available) as the enemy or librarian (technically also fuel available) for some reason the enemy. Mister Fireman (I presume), I ask that you hammer the likely arsonist today, and if that's wrong (it won't be) then it's your call as to whether I'm the target for tonight (or perhaps otherwise, if your role-talent doesn't work like I've imagined... again, up to you).
But your choice. Also you others.
Post by: Tomasque on February 01, 2016, 10:16:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 10:22:40 pm
Your role in fact does make sense compared to mine.
In that case, I will in fact switch back to Hector13. Although, we're forgetting that the psychologist could be lying.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 01, 2016, 10:51:24 pm
TBF, I think you missed something. Or you didn't realize these were directed towards you(sorry, if that's the case). I would appreciate some answers.I concur that we have an arsonist but wish to keep my role secret.1. WHAT? Okay, what?
2. There was no kill last night. Arsonist is definitely a possibility, but other possibilities: no kill due to lazyness/inactivity, role block... bulletproof townie... you're just assuming an arsonist despite all of the other possibilities. What makes you think that the other possibilities are invalid?
3. What benefit does the town gain from keeping your role secret? You don't need to tell me what your role is, just explain to me why the town benefits if it's kept secret.
In any case:
FallacyofUrist(Psychologist)
TheBiggerFish(fireman?)
Starver(Librarian?)
Hector13(arsonist/gas station attendant?)
Two things. One- it's strange. 3 players- all three of their claims are arsonist game themed. Fourth player(me)... generic. I have a feeling that this may be part of the semi-bastardy and should be noted for the next rounds.
Two. TheBiggerFish is now the lynchpin. A claim from him would help to sort this out.
Three. I would love to see a good defense from hector13. And a defense made based on role claims foremost.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 01, 2016, 11:14:53 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 01:30:24 am
[2 new replies...]
@hector:
1. To be fair, currently I bet you want the time to change our minds because otherwise you're doomed, this round. I'm wondering whether you'd be so inclined if holding the hammer. Think longer term, though. In future rounds (and in different circumstances) would you prefer it to drag out?
Personally, I'd vote for a "going, going, gone..." hammer. A set time (12 hours?) from any hammer-point, within which retractions/vote-switches can be made to undue/swap a hammer. With as little or as much explanation and discussion as wanted. And resetting the clock. But the scheduled end-of-day happens, of course, if it that happens ahead of any (delayed) hammer.
But it's not that long, really, until the originally-stated end-of-day for the current position. We can stew for... ?14? hours, can't we? I could probably even get some sleep. ;)
2. Incidentally, you're claiming Miller, i.e. the Townie With Weakness slot. But you aren't that.
---
@TBF I urge you to rethink. I think Hector's title is correctly claimed (but not the alignment), and I think I know your profession (and alignment). I'm prepared to ask you to switch back to Hector for today and then be the subject of your ability tonight, if it comes to that. But it won't.
1. Yes, actually. 48 hour days aren't a great deal of time in mafia, so I don't think hammers are necessary. It's a bit silly that you guys just immediately believed FoU's claim and investigation result and then I immediately have 3 votes on me without even getting an opportunity to say "er, hang on while I explain what's happening, please." sure, but I'd feel that way if it happened to any of you three, too.
2. Incidentally, you're assuming what alignment my role is without me actually saying. I'm Neutral, if you must know. Not sure why, as you say the traditional Miller is a pro-town role, but I can only take what I'm given, and have a guess at the rest. We all seem to be in agreement that our "scum" is in actuality an arsonist, traditionally a third-party, so maybe that has something to do with it.
FoU
Two things. One- it's strange. 3 players- all three of their claims are arsonist game themed. Fourth player(me)... generic. I have a feeling that this may be part of the semi-bastardy and should be noted for the next rounds.
Two. TheBiggerFish is now the lynchpin. A claim from him would help to sort this out.
Three. I would love to see a good defense from hector13. And a defense made based on role claims foremost.
I've already told you what my role is and why your investigation returned a non-town result, I can't give you anything more than that. I suspect you may mean something else, but I don't know what. Could you explain, please?
Further, I'm not sure a claim from TBF will help anything. Any one of us could be lying with their claim and the rest won't know about it until the end. He's apparently refusing to claim anyway. Read into that what you will.
Presently I think TBF is scum, and it's through his behaviour in the game, rather than through a faulty investigation result:
Spoiler: Case Building (click to show/hide)
So with that, I'll confirm my vote is TBF.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 02, 2016, 05:33:55 am
I don't want to reveal the details of my role, but that it is.
Post by: Starver on February 02, 2016, 08:44:38 am
I'd half believe that we were all four 'given' a Neutral/Weak role, through Bastardy, except that we're not all saying this... (Also got to balance the "Won't lie, but won't tell the whole truth" statement from our Mod, who stated the definite archetypes at the top of the thread. Unless that's a meta-Not-the-whole-truth.)
I'm the only one who knows you can't be Neutral/Weak, given the above. Something I can't prove, any more than you can disprove, but I'm not the inconsistent one here. You argue against TBF's switch, when you also switched. (And, if you used the same logic as me, it's that you are more scared of the Special role than the Investigator. Especially if you feared you were already investigated and it was going to come out.) And night-time actions (or inactions) were really the only thing we could go on, and - as far as I am concerned - I would credit those revelations towards my current overwhelming confidence. (Ready too look a fool if I end up wrong.)
And I'm the one counter-claiming, on a (presumably) your unique archetype within the game. Why then try to target another? By all rights you should vote for me (please do!) or at least ask why I would be falsifying my role but not my alignment. Then you'd let the others decide who is false-claiming to cover up their own scumminess.
(Hoping I've not created a rod for my own back, in future rounds, when I'm legitimately the one who needs to play the Magnificent Moriarty, to be hoist by my own petard by the next Super Sherlock. Not that I think I'm super. Normally I'm clueless after the first cycle if I'm a non-power role, and often if I am! But this has been a particularly stimulating game so far. Even if I'm wrong.)
Shutting up now.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 02, 2016, 08:58:21 am
...Hmm.
Maybe we should do that. See who gets targeted.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 02, 2016, 09:28:55 am
I'm much more inclined to believe that you're town, anyway, because no other players have claimed power town.
~~~
Here's the deal, hector13. Our claims- WAIT A MINUTE.
2. Incidentally, you're assuming what alignment my role is without me actually saying. I'm Neutral, if you must know. Not sure why, as you say the traditional Miller is a pro-town role, but I can only take what I'm given, and have a guess at the rest.You're neutral. Okay then hector13, how do you win?
~~~
In any case... assuming a lack of bastardy for this regard... we can only have one Town Weakness role or one Neutral. (If there turn up two Town Weakness roles or one Town Weakness and one Neutral or two Neutrals, or whatnot, well, at least we'll know for future rounds.)
I'm the Psychologist.
TBF is the Fireman.
Starver has claimed Town Weakness, Librarian, and you have claimed Neutral, Gas Station Attendant(being neutral doesn't even make that much sense for said role). See the issue? Only one player can be Town Weakness/Neutral. Two players have claimed Town Weakness/Neutral.
hector13, seriously. You're going to go after TBF while another player's claim directly contradicts yours? Yes, I'm aware I'm already voting you. This is just for emphasis(or just in case I moved my vote earlier and forgot about it).
~~~
~~~
Really, I think this game needs another player. It's only winnable by a correct lynch D1 or by nolynch D1 and getting the right target D2.I wouldn't be too surprised if another one turned up after a few rounds.
~~~
Also, I just realized something. This is a stream of 21 MYLO situations that all of us are going to play through. Marathon indeed- this game is going to have us be Mafia MYLO/LYLO experts by the time it's done!
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 10:02:52 am
The exact roles in each game won't be revealed, but will rather follow this list of archetypes...
1 Evil role
1 Investigative role
1 Special Town role
1 Neutral role or Town Weakness role
...with just enough deviation to keep you guessing!
If you guys want to lynch me based on how you think the game works, that's fine. Just make sure you know how the game works first, aye?
You're neutral. Okay then hector13, how do you win?
The other thing which suggested an arsonist is the antagonist is that I win by surviving, but being covered in gasoline. I think that may be why I get the false result from FoU's claimed Psychologist, as it's a little bit mental.
Post by: Starver on February 02, 2016, 10:35:43 am
If you guys want to lynch me based on how you think the game works, that's fine. Just make sure you know how the game works first, aye?I doubt we'll 'know' until at least after the first few rounds. Like (traditional, pre-Night 1) Day 1, we're expected to be in the dark. After a few days (or, in this case, rounds) we'll start to get a proper handle on the situation.
I have theories (boy, do I have theories!) about how the whole game works, but I also have counter-theories that are possibly even mutually exclusive with the others. I'm currently enjoying this game, while if I were in your position (objectively, even, not even making presumptions about your role-motives) I might be less so.
But next round I'm half expecting to be punished (by the emergent Bad Guy if I'm currently good and right, by my fellow Good Guys (and the new Bad Guy, under the guise of them being a Good Guy, if I'm not actually Bad next round myself) if I have ended up misleading you), just because I got lucky enough to come up with a viable theory this time round. Meanwhile, you'll probably get sympathy (and not be expected to be the Bad Guy again). Or maybe someone else will think this and turn the whole thing around whilst they try to turn the round to their own (nefarious) advantage.
But that's the future. For now, I'm satisfied that I'm on the side of the greater good. And perhaps we'll see in half an hour, if I have my timezones correct.
Post by: Tomasque on February 02, 2016, 10:38:00 am
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 10:44:19 am
If you guys want to lynch me based on how you think the game works, that's fine. Just make sure you know how the game works first, aye?I doubt we'll 'know' until at least after the first few rounds. Like (traditional, pre-Night 1) Day 1, we're expected to be in the dark. After a few days (or, in this case, rounds) we'll start to get a proper handle on the situation.
I have theories (boy, do I have theories!) about how the whole game works, but I also have counter-theories that are possibly even mutually exclusive with the others. I'm currently enjoying this game, while if I were in your position (objectively, even, not even making presumptions about your role-motives) I might be less so.
But next round I'm half expecting to be punished (by the emergent Bad Guy if I'm currently good and right, by my fellow Good Guys (and the new Bad Guy, under the guise of them being a Good Guy, if I'm not actually Bad next round myself) if I have ended up misleading you), just because I got lucky enough to come up with a viable theory this time round. Meanwhile, you'll probably get sympathy (and not be expected to be the Bad Guy again). Or maybe someone else will think this and turn the whole thing around whilst they try to turn the round to their own (nefarious) advantage.
You see that's the thing though... we can't rely on the mechanics to win, which is what you (you specifically) are doing in this game, because otherwise it would be a bit pointless to play 21 identical games in sequence. It's a bastard game (semi-bastard, even) so there will be shenanigans from the mod, whether or not they're happening in this game we won't find out 'til later.
I'm enjoying this, though I'm quite bothered by everyone's reliance on the mechanics rather than trying to figure things out through content... as I say, bastard mod. The game will not go how you expect.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 02, 2016, 10:47:34 am
The exact roles in each game won't be revealed, but will rather follow this list of archetypes...So note this.
1 Evil role
1 Investigative role
1 Special Town role
1 Neutral role or Town Weakness role
...with just enough deviation to keep you guessing!
Hector, why are you still voting TBF when another player's claim is directly contradictory to yours?
~~~
Yes, we know this is a semi-bastard game. It's currently Round 1 out of 21. We have time to do analysis.
But "we can't rely on the mechanics to win"? I think otherwise, if we can figure them out...
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 10:51:12 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 02, 2016, 10:55:55 am
The exact roles in each game won't be revealed, but will rather follow this list of archetypes...Note this. In any case, if such isn't the pattern after this round ends, we'll know for the next round.
1 Evil role
1 Investigative role
1 Special Town role
1 Neutral role or Town Weakness role
...with just enough deviation to keep you guessing!
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 10:58:16 am
...with just enough deviation to keep you guessing!
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 11:00:36 am
Post by: Starver on February 02, 2016, 11:07:50 am
The Mod has to softening us up, first. Then break us down. Then rebuild us again.
Unless it's an "The same thing that we used last time, and the seventeen times before, is the last thing they'll be expecting..." type of Bastard. ;)
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 11:09:41 am
Post by: Tomasque on February 02, 2016, 11:10:27 am
Post by: Tomasque on February 02, 2016, 11:11:06 am
Round over - Town wins!
Votecount
hector13 (3)-FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (1)-hector13
Starver (0)
Not voting: No one
hector13 was Arsonist
Spoiler: Arsonist (click to show/hide)
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
Starver gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 02, 2016, 03:13:37 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 03:20:45 pm
I guess the first thing I'd like to ask Tomasque is to what extent the game(s) are bastard?
Edit: specifically regarding what roles we get in the game (are we going to have those exact four types of roles in the game every time) and the roles themselves (like... various cop sanities, millers etc.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 02, 2016, 03:24:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 03:31:02 pm
I could've still won if folk weren't so hung up on the bloody mechanics :P I thought that was a pretty good gambit...
Should just stuck with what I wanted to do and hit FoU instead. Don't know why I changed my mind at the last minute :'(
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 02, 2016, 03:35:32 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 03:36:39 pm
Post by: Starver on February 02, 2016, 03:37:33 pm
(I then went on to say...) If you'd drenched FoU on N0, instead, perhaps Igniting today and then relying on a mislynch (through shear argument) would have worked.
So, a bit of right, but a bit of wrong.
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 03:40:47 pm
Edit: should also say that my drench was a night action, ignite was a 1-shot day action. Both were untraceable :(
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 02, 2016, 03:43:51 pm
Which provided heavy evidence for Starver. Because independent of my role, he mentions water being a weakness.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 02, 2016, 03:47:43 pm
Post by: Starver on February 02, 2016, 03:50:14 pm
Hector (as I said) was unreadable. Equal chance of any role, but adjusted by the above assumptions you looked 'least not-Evil'.
FoU's revelation tied down several of my assumptions into fact (primarily FoU's presumed role and your presumed role, but also flavour details). Too much to so easily be an accidentally convenient lie. Then I just had to not look scummy myself. (Though I was possibly the most expendable, so was perfectly willing to make myself a night-kill target if it still helped the power-Townies.)
I'm not sure I would have played the Evil role any better, although I know I would have done it differently. Won't explain how, though, in case I find I need to use that tactic myself, later. ;)
(Ninjaed by two, now three...) TBF: I was at the start very tempted to pepper my opening statement with phrases like "I don't want to be a washout", or something better, to clue in the (assumed) Townie with the water-skill that I had something like that as a Town weakness. But couldn't work out how to phrase it without it possibly backfiring.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 02, 2016, 03:51:34 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 03:53:32 pm
Just out of curiousity though, and since I'm arguing from a position of ignorance, would you mind telling us precisely what your role and its abilities were? Might be something in that that allowed you to narrow stuff down.
Post by: Starver on February 02, 2016, 06:13:02 pm
Not sure how you could consider those things without any information in the game, Starver :P you only had your role, so everyone else has a 1 in 3 chance of being any one of the other roles....to start with. Then people say things that change those chances.
(This is the first time it's clicked into place. I'm usually terribly confused for far longer. Expect the reversion to the mean, in future games.)
By the way, I've got three boxes here. Two with goats in and one with a car in. (Big boxes. With airholes.) Do you want to change your mind? But maybe that's not the puzzle I want to argue about. ;)
Quote
Just out of curiousity though, and since I'm arguing from a position of ignorance, would you mind telling us precisely what your role and its abilities were? Might be something in that that allowed you to narrow stuff down.I'm waiting for our hosting/mod to put the remaining "I'll add this later." information into the relevent post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6784302#msg6784302), and I wouldn't want to pre-empt that. I might even learn something about myself.
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 06:16:06 pm
Not sure how you could consider those things without any information in the game, Starver :P you only had your role, so everyone else has a 1 in 3 chance of being any one of the other roles....to start with. Then people say things that change those chances.
This is true, but what made what FoU and TBF said any more likely to have them in the particular roles that you thought they had versus the role you thought I had?
You mentioned after my first post that my silence was damning (to that point) so did that factor into it?
Post by: Tomasque on February 02, 2016, 06:24:35 pm
Edit: specifically regarding what roles we get in the game (are we going to have those exact four types of roles in the game every time) and the roles themselves (like... various cop sanities, millers etc.)It is very likely that every game will follow that set of archetypes - at least vaguely. That's all I'm willing to say about that.
The roles themselves might be repeated, but no, it will be nothing close to the same game 21 times in a row.
Post by: Starver on February 02, 2016, 06:35:04 pm
but what made what FoU and TBF said any more likely to have them in the particular roles that you thought they had versus the role you thought I had?It started with their statements in:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6779850#msg6779850
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6779977#msg6779977
But I've explained that. And I got lucky. There were three basic theories (six, discounting that I knew my own role, and barring any oddness) and the best bet of those then got confirmed so I went with it and caught you out in your attempt at misdirection.
Quote
You mentioned after my first post that my silence was damning (to that point) so did that factor into it?At first, that counted in your favour, actually. But I've already touched on that, and I don't want to give anyone (including the Mod!) any ideas on how to fool me in future by meta-gaming me. Or meta-meta-gaming my own meta-gaming. Or meta-meta-meta... YGTI... ;)
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 06:38:47 pm
@Starver, I wouldn't worry too much about your meta. I mean it might count in something like this in which the same 4 people play against each other 21 times but... in the grand scheme it's not that important, beyond people maybe wanting to get an idea of how you normally play.
Post by: Tomasque on February 02, 2016, 06:44:43 pm
Tomasque: Are the roles likely to have some bastardry themselves? Like insane cops giving the opposite result, paranoid cops giving a guilty result regardless of who they investigate, millers showing up guilty even though they're town and... other things like that?In due time, hector. Closer than you might think. In due time....
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 06:50:42 pm
Post by: Starver on February 02, 2016, 06:54:09 pm
This is good. No more relying on mechanics for arguments :P :))...depends on which particular expensive bit of my car needs replacing next.
Post by: Tomasque on February 02, 2016, 06:54:36 pm
The city, at night - though ridden with crime and corruption - was beautiful in it's own melancholy way. Far away, from a high window, the silvery sound of piano keys drifted over the streets.
Post by: Tomasque on February 02, 2016, 08:28:56 pm
Through the night, the painfully sweet melody floats far above the filth of the city. As it nears morning, it pauses - as if to contemplate the coming sunrise - then continues, carrying on with the final somber notes as if it had never stopped.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Not voting: hector13, FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver
Day ends 8:00 PM Thursday PST
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 08:34:10 pm
Though I s'pose it makes sense because then we'd probably kill the same person every game heh.
Starver, for that awful joke.
Anyone find out anything?
Post by: Starver on February 02, 2016, 08:54:03 pm
I have great distaste for this lack of NKs immediately off the bat.Our experience of Round 1 is that this is because it was a game balanced with a Night-Zero containing a Night-ScummyButNot(Immediately)Killy action.
Someone may know if that's true for Round 2, too.
Quote
Though I s'pose it makes sense because then we'd probably kill the same person every game heh.I did half expect to wake up dead. Well, more like a third.
Quote
Starver, for that awful joke.Not gonna OMGUS, it wasn't unexpected. That particular reasoning was, though... *pbbbbt*
Quote
Anyone find out anything?That I was not noticeably molested?
Nothing of any profit. That may change when I find I have the keys to someone else's mystery.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 02, 2016, 08:57:41 pm
So yes, I found something all too interesting.
Good luck, Town.
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 09:01:25 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 02, 2016, 09:14:59 pm
Who wins at the end is based on Victory Points- which a player gets when they win. Or at least I got one when I won last round.
But there's another option when you get a Victory Point- you may forfeit it to gain a mystery prize.
~~~
Starver and TBF likely already know this, but I'm posting it for two reasons: to inform hector of it, as he did not get a Victory Point(to my knowledge), and because I'm sparing the others the effort of posting it. Plus this:
I'm the neutral and unless one of you can cure strangulation I am not posting further because I do not want to die.I'm going to go on a hunch here... TBF has gained a post restriction of some sort. One he thinks might kill him. Or he's scum using that as an excuse to avoid posting.
TBF, if you're scum, I'd like you to note that gambit won't really work well in the long run.
~~~
So yes, I found something all too interesting.I would love for you to tell us this. Pity about that "post restriction", if it exists. Actually, this is a reason for me to vote you, TheBiggerFish, because if you were really town under a post restriction, you would have just gone off and told us. At MYLO, hidden information is just going to hinder the town. Unless said "post restriction" restricts the size of your posts. IN WHICH CASE, you probably still could have told us it in shorthand or such.
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 09:27:53 pm
However, why the leap to concluding TBF isn't posting as a result of a post restriction? Might just erroneously think he won't get attention because of it.
Post by: Starver on February 02, 2016, 09:50:28 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 10:20:01 pm
It could be as FoU said, he has something that activates on a certain number of posts or whatever, or he could be scum trying to excuse a lot of silence. Could be just trying to avoid drawing attention to himself, though that seems unlikely since he has announced it.
Either way, it's not helpful for us since we can't get a read on him. He has claimed neutral though, which - if true - would mean that one of you is the scum... but I'm not ready to believe him yet.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 02, 2016, 11:09:10 pm
However, why the leap to concluding TBF isn't posting as a result of a post restriction? Might just erroneously think he won't get attention because of it.Note the bolded bits in my previous post.
So now we have a dilemma. If TBF doesn't post, it's going to be much harder to tell if he's guilty or not. If he doesn't post, he could be town trying to avoid death by post restriction. But he could also be scum hiding under a "post restriction". Issue, yes? We're going to have to determine whether or not he's telling the truth based on our own claims/analysis/whatnot.
Post by: hector13 on February 02, 2016, 11:19:03 pm
The fact you also alluded to it possibly being the mystery prize I want the option :'(. Could it be that you are the Evil role trying to hide your kill method behind the mysteries of a bastard game?
TBF needs to talk more. Even if you die because of it, at least you're being useful. What did you find that was all too interesting?
Post by: hector13 on February 03, 2016, 01:09:18 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 03, 2016, 09:30:17 am
I did note the bolded bits. I just find it odd that your immediate response is "TBF has a post restriction", since I don't think it's really the first thing that would pop into your head.Well, it made the most sense to me. Assuming he's town, what else could it be? But of course, if he's mafia, he's still likely faking.
And we can't tell which one he is easily unless he posts. If he's town, we want him to avoid posting to avoid violating the post restriction. Assuming I'm right about that(I suppose we can't know for sure unless he tells us). If he's scum, we want him to post to explain himself so we can figure out he's scum and lynch him.
Seems like a Catch-22 variant.
Post by: Starver on February 03, 2016, 10:15:45 am
The chances are that at least one of you did something last night, even if it was a mafia-action that you'll now have to lie about or else spin in a different light to look good. That I don't say that you definitely had actions should tell you something about me, but I need to feel better about where I stand before I tell more.
I of course flat-out deny that I'm the Evil one, as I expect everyone to. Thus consider doing as I've thought of doing, and couching what you say in flavour terms. Perhaps you think there's a connection to some role you can trust, even if you don't know the person it is? Inaction in the last game would have resulted in more drenchings (both types fatal to me, it seems!), and maybe I could have made those hints good enough for Fish to pick up on. I just hope it isn't Fish again that's the same partner.
I think you'll agree that this is necessary, in this scale of game. I can just sit here and play all day and all night, if necessary but it's useless if none of us know the score.
Post by: hector13 on February 03, 2016, 10:35:18 am
We want him to post irrespective of any post restriction because it will narrow the field of potential suspects because he either a) dies or b) he offers his opinion on who the suspect is and what's going on. He's already made a claim, and no one has countered that, so yeah.
As el presidente would say: seems legit.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 03, 2016, 09:16:14 pm
So TBF, talk. For our sakes. We want to know what you found out.
Post by: hector13 on February 03, 2016, 09:37:04 pm
I'm also curious why you mention a no-lynch, and why you think it's an option.
Post by: Starver on February 03, 2016, 09:58:02 pm
I'd like to know what Starver thinks about your theory behind why TBF has taken a vow of silenceI don't really want to give an answer to anybody who is seeking one. That person could be TBF, now in too deep to break cover, or it could be someone else who benefits from TBF's inability to argue. Either way I don't want the person concerned saying "That's it! That's the reason! I'm so glad you guessed it!"...
Quote
I'm also curious why you [FoU] mention a no-lynch, and why you think it's an option.Easy enough to guess this. Because of the strange nature of the game-powers (e.g. your "prep-to-kill" night-action, last game), I'm not sure the mathematics of LYLO/etc work exactly the same, but Fallacy's comments will be based on one or other interpretation of the likely game progression. Perhaps with some subset of privileged info behind that. (Whether that's then honest and truthful or weasel-worded towards evil intent, I couldn't say. I've not got the hang of this round, yet. I'm back to clueless, like usual. I've probably overlooked something. Or binned a genuine but tenuous clue by accident?)
Post by: hector13 on February 03, 2016, 10:09:58 pm
Do you think FoU's proclamation that TBF's silence is down to a post restriction is a reasonable (as in one of the first things you'd think of) conclusion to draw?
If you're stuck for clues, might as well go back and read the posts. It's significantly easier to do in a game like this than a game with 15 people with 3 full game days of content heh.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 04, 2016, 06:51:52 pm
I'm also curious why you mention a no-lynch, and why you think it's an option.Suppose a 4-person mafia game, it's MYLO and there's a standard mafioso with 3 townies. If the players no lynch, the mafioso can kill someone, but it won't end the game, and it'll be more time and clues for town to use to lynch the mafioso.
Plus there's a chance TBF won't die from his "post restriction" if a new day starts... maybe.
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 06:54:17 pm
I'm also curious why you mention a no-lynch, and why you think it's an option.Suppose a 4-person mafia game, it's MYLO and there's a standard mafioso with 3 townies. If the players no lynch, the mafioso can kill someone, but it won't end the game, and it'll be more time and clues for town to use to lynch the mafioso.
Plus there's a chance TBF won't die from his "post restriction" if a new day starts... maybe.
What makes you think there'll be more clues after a no-lynch?
Post by: Tomasque on February 04, 2016, 07:08:21 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 07:15:20 pm
That was hopefully leading somewhere, but given lack of time and perhaps my inability to post later, a no-lynch at this point would be stupid. Thus, considering he pointed out the potential post restriction before and has brought up a no-lynch, I think FoU's the scum.
Given what we know so far - we've had no NKs, and at least in my tenure I was unable to directly kill someone during the night phase - the scum is only going to benefit by a no-lynch. There won't be a role flip, so we can't narrow things down at that point, and we have to rely on the honesty of our fellow players for night actions (and results, perhaps) which is super unreliable given we know at least one of them is inclined to fib.
We need to lynch someone: FoU.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 04, 2016, 07:19:10 pm
I imagine there will be more clues after a no lynch because of the following night actions and the many posts analyzable using new context from the previous day...
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 07:24:46 pm
For your information, you were already voting me.
I imagine there will be more clues after a no lynch because of the following night actions and the many posts analyzable using new context from the previous day...
I know. I was confirming it. Also I like drama; it was a good way to end the sentence/post with some bite :P
Where is this "new context" coming from? As I said, there's no flip and we can't necessarily accept what anyone says as true/honest.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 04, 2016, 07:30:00 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 07:40:51 pm
Mutually exclusiveness. If two claims contradict... boom. One of the contradictors is hiding something.
This would work without a no-lynch, too. Where does the new context come from specifically regarding a no-lynch?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 04, 2016, 07:44:46 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 08:01:33 pm
Post by: Starver on February 04, 2016, 08:47:10 pm
Because that's the only action I can make that doesn't feel like we're going round in circles...
Post by: Starver on February 04, 2016, 08:48:49 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 04, 2016, 08:49:27 pm
Post by: Starver on February 04, 2016, 08:53:37 pm
b) Unless they benefit themselves (and therefore the town) by it,
c) Unless they benefit the town (and therefore themselves) by it,
d) Unless they have to, or suffer a penalty,
e) ...maybe something I can't tell you.
One or more of the above may apply, but it's so nice that you've grabbed so quickly onto the opportunity to assume the worse.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 04, 2016, 08:56:58 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 09:06:41 pm
Post by: Starver on February 04, 2016, 09:35:52 pm
Given the other vote for me and yours for FoU, voting Hector is the better option, and we'll see if there's any mess to sort out in the morning.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 04, 2016, 09:47:35 pm
I... don't have much of a problem with that. An additional night will give us more time to act.
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 09:54:28 pm
It's you or FoU. Unless TBF is being spectacular. I think it's FoU, but option 2 is acceptable too.
Post by: Starver on February 04, 2016, 10:23:48 pm
(I still want to know what happens to me tonight, but perhaps we'll never find out.)
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 10:25:10 pm
Post by: Starver on February 04, 2016, 10:44:32 pm
Clinch the evidence? You claiming, bro?Only on what's already out in the open. But it took the self-vote (perhaps useful for other reasons) to get the incrimination and then you stepped in and muddied it slightly. But not enough to change where I was already heading.
Tomorrow's another day, though. If I get there.
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 10:47:22 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 10:50:35 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 04, 2016, 11:07:07 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 04, 2016, 11:29:57 pm
Everyone returns home, no one entirely satisfied with the events of the day. They sleep to the sound of piano music that whispers like the wind.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (2)-hector13, Starver
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (2)-FallacyofUrist
Not voting: TheBiggerFish
Post by: Tomasque on February 05, 2016, 04:25:00 pm
As the stars glow bright in the sky - a reflection of the still shining metropolis below - the music falters for a brief moment. In the silence that the wind brings in handfuls, the city holds its breath. Then the music returns, and all is back to as it was before.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Not voting: hector13, FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver
Day ends 1:30 PM Sunday PST
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 05, 2016, 04:29:43 pm
VotecountAll right, now that I can talk, WTF?
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (2)-hector13, Starver
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (2)-FallacyofUrist
Not voting: TheBiggerFish
Post by: hector13 on February 05, 2016, 05:12:17 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 05, 2016, 05:27:16 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 05, 2016, 07:10:39 pm
I am the Bad Pianist, Neutral Role. I wish to survive till the end of the round in order to win. To aid me in this, I have an auto, Bad Music, that negates one vote on me at the end of the day if I would be lynched.
I'm going to side with town- good luck.
Post by: hector13 on February 05, 2016, 07:36:48 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 05, 2016, 08:17:25 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 05, 2016, 08:18:06 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 05, 2016, 08:18:26 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 05, 2016, 08:19:38 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 05, 2016, 08:23:04 pm
Did you have a vote yesterday, TBF? If so, why not use it?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 05, 2016, 09:03:37 pm
Because dying would have nullified it.
Post by: Starver on February 05, 2016, 11:13:53 pm
Welp. Posting this may have the effect of killing me. After I make a number of posts somewhere in the range of 1 to 3, I'll die of strangulation. I feel your pain, TBF, if you weren't lying(and it seems more likely to me that you're telling the truth now).
I am the Bad Pianist, Neutral Role. I wish to survive till the end of the round in order to win. To aid me in this, I have an auto, Bad Music, that negates one vote on me at the end of the day if I would be lynched.
I'm going to side with town- good luck.
Ok, I shall make a rather significant claim/counter-claim.
I am the one with the strangulation set upon them today (something only TBF and1 the real strangler should even know about - but I was hoping that I'd reveal the 1-3 thing before you did, Fish).
I am also called the Pianist (no 'Good' prefix, but also no 'Bad' one...), and you'll have noted I already hinted at this on a number of previous occasions.
The visit from the strangler is the reason that "...the music falters for a brief moment", which is my special 'skill', and from the lack of this I know the investigator didn't visit me Night 1 (though they may well have done this turn, I don't get more information than that particular day-start flavourtext).
I will gladly post one or two more times to die to prove this, unless someone else (including ToU) has a better idea. Discuss amongst yourselves, though.
I'll keep one particular big deduction in reserve, because it's a bit chancy, but will mention it in my second (maybe last) post to this thread if it doesn't look to have been shaken but nobody else has worked it out for themselves. But in doing so I know I'll prove my status, and my role no longer has a use so a town-win after that won't rely on my living.
Post by: hector13 on February 06, 2016, 12:08:32 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 06, 2016, 12:10:54 am
You have any information?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 06, 2016, 12:13:50 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 06, 2016, 12:15:50 am
Post by: hector13 on February 06, 2016, 12:24:31 am
But if you're all going to claim the neutral role... that's just silly, so I'd rather clear things up in that respect first, because it's quite funny really.
'specially since FoU and Starver's CCs didn't come until D2.
PPE: It reads like a neutral claim to me. I know who the has the Neutral role without having to think about it. I also know who has the Evil role.
I know the investigator visited Starver N1, I also tried to drop hints about that that did not appear to get picked up on... unfortunate.
I know the investigator visited TBF N2. And it was quite an enlightening one, too.
The utter bastard about all this thing though, is that unless FoU or Starver vote for you, unlikely given they both claim to be strangulated, we're buggered for today.
Tomasque: can we shorten the day?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 06, 2016, 12:27:11 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 06, 2016, 12:28:58 am
((More of an aside for Tomasque: I think it would be a good idea to put links to the first post in each game in the OP, partly for any of us who wants to know when a day ends without having to ask, and also for posterity later on when we've got((Also, reiterating this.))millions and millionsmost of the games out of the way, so we can relive ourhorrible failuressuccesses again))
Post by: Tomasque on February 06, 2016, 12:35:57 am
I'll do that now.((More of an aside for Tomasque: I think it would be a good idea to put links to the first post in each game in the OP, partly for any of us who wants to know when a day ends without having to ask, and also for posterity later on when we've got((Also, reiterating this.))millions and millionsmost of the games out of the way, so we can relive ourhorrible failuressuccesses again))
Tomasque: can we shorten the day?Not as of now. I will consider it for later if I see it would enhance the quality of the game and/or make you guys happy.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 06, 2016, 12:50:15 am
Post by: Starver on February 07, 2016, 08:32:07 am
First, some apologies: I had missed that I had been visited on Night 0. I had misread it as "As it nears morning, [the city] pauses - as if to contemplate the coming sunrise" when it was clearly "As it nears morning, [the music] pauses - as if to contemplate the coming sunrise", as should have been obvious from the rest of the sentence. Mea Culpa. I will accept that this was probably (if not certainly) the Investigator (and probably nobody else), and it might have helped had I realised it earlier.
As I said before, that is "my special 'skill'". With the actual emphasis of that being on "Special". I'm the Pianist you hear and visitations interrupt my night-time music. The Night 1 interruption being the Strangler (again alone, probably), leaving me in this precarious position.
I'm ultimately forced to accept that Hector is the Investigator, although the one and only clue I think you left for us could have been cleaner, I think.
But I'm torn between the which of the other two (both claiming Neutral) is not what they have said they are.
The question I keep returning to is: how did we end up with a draw, end of Day 1? Two votes for me from Fallacy alone, counteracting the two votes put upon him by Hector and myself.
Option 1: A hidden and therefore undeclared vote from Fish, who possibly has a Mafia-side skill to implement this (but see Option 4). I have a number of possible doubts about Fish. (There's nothing in the Strangulation text to say a vote will be nullified by death, for example. That could be an assumption.)
Option 2: A double-vote skill by Fallacy. That could be what Bad Music really is, rather than "negates one vote on me". That would presuppose Fallacy as the Strangler (thus the falseclaim of being under threat of Day 2 strangulation, which I would wish to counter).
Option 3: The wording from Fallacy is "that negates one vote on me at the end of the day if I would be lynched". Given it ought to be 2:1 against, could this have been "reflects one vote against me..." if in such danger? I know I've misunderstood my own skill's wording (see apology above), and it's a possible paraphrasing that covers at least one misunderstanding. But it doesn't even help determine the alignment of the user of that skill. It's a basic protective for either. It may have turned out to be more useful than my Special skill, though, and it's definitely not Weak Town (which isn't being claimed), either way.
Option 4: Some effect/side-effect of the optional reward from having given up a Victory Point from the first game (either/both of the two I suspect could have done that, complicating things), in addition to whatever abilities everybody has. This might even explain how a faking Fish can have Strangled two people today (ability to save up/delay an action, or double it as a one-shot). If it's not also somehow cumulative like the Drenching (I half expect piano-wire to appear in the flavour, with two possible pianists, already - if not three!).
On the whole I am actually more inclined to finger FoU than TBF, at this point in time (I don't like the idea of the double-Strangle, and consider the sheer audacity of Fish having held back on Day 1 in creating the diversion...), but Hector seems to think it's the other way round and isn't saying anything else. And I can't understand how TBF can claim to have visited the investigator N2. So, TBF to add to Hector's own vote, and I'm going to have to hope I've both done enough to ensure a win and done it in the correct fashion.
(Watch me/us being entirely wrong about Hector, instead. But nobody else appears to be claiming Investigator, just somehow a 'visitor' so I had to reject that as a possible error, first.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 07, 2016, 10:56:37 am
I'm, or I was, a Thief. Neutral, no way to win, but a one-shot that lets me steal someone's wincon and abilities. It reverts at my death.
I don't know if Hector got my abilities, but I know he got my wincon. Sorry.
Does that explain how I know I visited the Investigator?
Post by: hector13 on February 07, 2016, 11:26:17 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 07, 2016, 11:36:49 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 07, 2016, 11:37:49 am
And I've been trying to hint at you since day start, for crying out loud.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 07, 2016, 11:40:29 am
Post by: hector13 on February 07, 2016, 12:23:04 pm
If I had my role stolen, you wouldn't need to hint at it since I'd already know my role was stolen, so why you think you'd need to hint at it is beyond me... poor gambit, bro.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 07, 2016, 12:25:24 pm
So, your role WASN'T stolen?
Huh, I could've sworn it left the target stuck with my wincon.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 07, 2016, 12:26:13 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 07, 2016, 12:29:10 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 07, 2016, 01:12:00 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 07, 2016, 01:12:22 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 07, 2016, 01:19:56 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 07, 2016, 01:43:03 pm
If I was evil, and my wincon was eliminate the evil role, I would therefore basically a jester. As I'm not asking you to lynch me right now, I would hope that bars me from the evil role.
Post by: Tomasque on February 07, 2016, 04:42:00 pm
The trial is swift, and though there are objections, they are unheeded. When their work is over, the vigilantes realize the error of there judgement, but it is too late. The night is closing in, and the notes of the piano are sweet no longer. To those who saw it as the killing of an innocent, they are the lament to those lost. To those who saw it as the survival of the killer, the notes are the image of their fear. And to the evil that lurks in the shadows, the sound is the final plea of their future victim...
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (1)-TheBiggerFish
TheBiggerFish (2)-hector13, Starver
Starver (0)
Not voting: FallacyofUrist
TheBiggerFish was the Thief
Spoiler: Thief (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on February 08, 2016, 08:32:30 pm
Like always, the music briefly pauses. The silence is the solace of the fearful and the mourning. Then, without any intonation to hint at whether the sudden halt was purposeful or accidental, the music continues until dawn, when it fades like the glow of the stars.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
Starver (0)
Not voting: hector13, FallacyofUrist, Starver
Post by: Tomasque on February 08, 2016, 08:45:54 pm
Messed up Starver's name on the votecount....oops, will correct.
Post by: hector13 on February 08, 2016, 08:51:38 pm
What say you guys to ending this "happily ever after" seeing as how I've already won?
Is that a possibility for this particular round, Tomasque?
Moonlit needs to not post during a game too... not really a nice thing to do. (referring to here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6795609#msg6795609))
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 08, 2016, 09:31:58 pm
hector13, you're the only one who hasn't been strangled yet. Die.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 08, 2016, 09:37:21 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 08, 2016, 09:46:24 pm
GRAGH STOP CHOKING ME!
hector13, you're the only one who hasn't been strangled yet. Die.
Oh shut up, we all know it's you. TBF was the thief, I killed him 'cause he stole my shit man. The investigator role goes back to me, I investigated Starver N0, nothing, TBF N2, your fingerprints involved, and Starver N2, again your fingerprints found.
I want you to fakeclaim something interesting now. Go!
BAAAAARGH.
Sorry. Take it this way: your death helped me win!
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 08, 2016, 09:51:34 pm
I'm not the Strangler! I AM DA BOMB! At the end of this day(thank you for the delays), I will explode, taking everybody else with me, and I will win! AHAHAHA!!! (I use my mystery benefit... I gave Starver my Strangler role... I become a bomb...)
SAY GOODBYE!!!
(Also, Starver definitely is faking my fingerprints! AHAHAHA!!!)
Post by: hector13 on February 08, 2016, 09:55:55 pm
I shall wait on the happily ever after thing though. I'm greedy, I'm not gonna share no VPs! >:(
Post by: Starver on February 08, 2016, 10:02:19 pm
I'm gonna currently go the route of least-Bastardry and was going to suggest that (as Fallacy appears to not want to say anything more today, either) Hector say something pretty damn useful, such that this does not stick as my final (and perhaps somewhat petulant) vote. As quick as you like, please. If not quicker!
Then I was Ninjaed by Hector's your reply to Fallacy, but it still stood. I was thinking (and wrote, as follows...) that Fallacy could say more, even at the risk of death, and the vote just put still stands, unless Tomasque wants to clarify otherwise, and then I'd both have your input and confirmation that it was valid. You might lose your Victory Point, but you'd get the moral victory out of it.
Then I was Ninjed by Fallacy who just did
Oh, hello Ninja Hector. Nothing changes, this time, though. Except for the bit about you not wanting to share, but that leans towards me being unable to get out of it anyway.
(I wonder if I'll be re-re-re-ninjaed? I wasn't if I haven't added another paragraph, but we shall have to see.)
Post by: hector13 on February 08, 2016, 10:08:35 pm
FoU is the Strangler, you're the Pianist - and I imagine strangled again, since I'm not - and I am the
Though there is arguably a kernel of truth to FoU's bomb claim since this could go on indefinitely if I decide to be a dick :))
Post by: Starver on February 08, 2016, 10:29:35 pm
It would be nice to know... several things, actually, about various people's motives, but I'm going to leave that until the post-round chat, unless anyone wants to volunteer anything while they're at it? You might yet persuade me to change my mind? I see no reason to vote for myself (again!), for example, but that's still a possibility nobody has really explored with any conceivable plausibility..!
Post by: hector13 on February 08, 2016, 11:00:14 pm
As you may have surmised, I've already won this round, though you or FoU could share that too, depending on what happens, so voting yourself is a bad, bad idea.
I'm inclined to vote for FoU, but I'd rather force a draw if I can heh.
Post by: Tomasque on February 08, 2016, 11:06:24 pm
Is that a possibility for this particular round, Tomasque?What do you mean?
Post by: hector13 on February 08, 2016, 11:16:31 pm
Is that a possibility for this particular round, Tomasque?What do you mean?
Can I force a draw by refusing to hammer Starver or FoU/endlessly forcing no lynches etc.?
Post by: Tomasque on February 09, 2016, 12:40:56 am
The 3rd day has no set end-time, making a tie vote impossible - but something special (a hammer) happens if someone gets majority vote against them.Is that a possibility for this particular round, Tomasque?What do you mean?
Can I force a draw by refusing to hammer Starver or FoU/endlessly forcing no lynches etc.?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 09, 2016, 09:16:47 am
*BOOM*
Post by: hector13 on February 09, 2016, 09:18:15 am
Perhaps this is what FoU was referring to. Shall we find out, Starver?
PPE: perhaps not then. I still win anyway
*dives for cover behind Starver
Post by: Starver on February 09, 2016, 03:16:06 pm
(And I think I'm going to vote for myself at least every other round, at some point. In a game like this it's fun to do, and I don't want to rule out the possibility that I'll actually find it to be a practical measure, in future, so I think I ought to keep you all guessing so you won't ever know if I actually mean it. ;) )
Post by: hector13 on February 09, 2016, 03:22:47 pm
FoU, you cheeky mare you!
Post by: Tomasque on February 09, 2016, 04:23:40 pm
Votecount
hector13 (1)-FallacyofUrist
FallacyofUrist (2)-Starver, hector13
Starver (0)
Not voting: No one
FallacyofUrist was the Strangler
Spoiler: Strangler (click to show/hide)
hector13 gets one victory point.
Starver gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on February 09, 2016, 04:27:16 pm
Also pleased I called it D1.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 09, 2016, 04:37:04 pm
Post by: Starver on February 09, 2016, 05:00:38 pm
Also pleased I called it D1.Yes, but you also called me, with the same certainty... *pbbbt*
(The thievery, and thus Hector's change in motive on D2, probably confused me most. And I've already explained several other bits where I know I was sent off-track, by my own faults.)
Post by: hector13 on February 09, 2016, 05:30:57 pm
Also pleased I called it D1.Yes, but you also called me, with the same certainty... *pbbbt*
(The thievery, and thus Hector's change in motive on D2, probably confused me most. And I've already explained several other bits where I know I was sent off-track, by my own faults.)
Nah that was me doing super hopeful gambit. I'm glad you didn't call me out on essentially assigning you the Neutral role :))
Post by: Tomasque on February 09, 2016, 07:59:36 pm
So what was the exact number? 3 posts?Random with each person.
Post by: Starver on February 09, 2016, 09:27:26 pm
I think the question was where you randomly determined, for each person, at the point the count started (in which case, what numbers were you actually already to kill us off each of us, for) or would it be something like the second post having a 1-in-3 chance of resulting in death, the third a 2-in-3 (or 1-in-2, as a different way of doing it) chance and the fourth a 3-in3 (also 1-in-1) certainty of death?So what was the exact number? 3 posts?Random with each person.
Which I'd be interested to know about, for my own case, but obviously you're in no way obligated to answer. :)
Post by: Tomasque on February 09, 2016, 11:20:57 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 10, 2016, 03:17:25 pm
Three friends go up to a cabin. Soon, the weather goes awry, and they must wait the snowstorm out. One by one, they realize that there are no longer three of them. Now there are four. In the darkness, it is hard to tell who is who, but unless they can discover the intruder, they will not survive to see the end of the storm.
Post by: Tomasque on February 10, 2016, 09:28:50 pm
It feels like hours pass in that darkness. Then the storm seems to lighten up, and desperation overcomes fear. Everyone gathers together. You will find the shadowy imposter - whoever they are - and you will dispose of them.
Why did it have to come to this?
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Not voting: hector13, FallacyofUrist, Starver, TheBiggerFish
Day ends Friday, 6:30 PM
Post by: hector13 on February 10, 2016, 09:33:25 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 10, 2016, 09:37:13 pm
So, then.
Did anybody get anything last night?
Post by: hector13 on February 10, 2016, 09:37:48 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 10, 2016, 09:39:58 pm
Where's the scum action? They presumably did something.
Post by: hector13 on February 10, 2016, 09:43:23 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 10, 2016, 09:47:02 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 10, 2016, 09:49:40 pm
Anyway, why are you theorizing about other games? Don't want us focusing on this one?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 10, 2016, 09:52:39 pm
What do you think the scum did, then?
Post by: hector13 on February 10, 2016, 09:58:19 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 10, 2016, 10:04:16 pm
Because if it's an investigation, I'm pretty sure you're the paranoid variety.
Post by: hector13 on February 10, 2016, 10:05:36 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 10, 2016, 10:28:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 10, 2016, 10:31:13 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 10, 2016, 10:33:34 pm
Also, maybe the scum makes millers?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 10, 2016, 10:34:15 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 10, 2016, 11:00:30 pm
Don't think the scum makes millers, that's... A bit too indirect, and given the investigator's ability last round, might not work anyway.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 10, 2016, 11:15:16 pm
Yes, but the setting is supposed to be balanced, so if the scum did that, the investigator wouldn't see it.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 11, 2016, 09:17:46 am
However...
Everybody, could you please claim who you targeted last night? Not what you did, if you don't want to, but who you targeted. That might be all I need to create an accurate guess at who is the scum player... assuming my first theory, based on my role, is correct...
accursed unknowns.
I targeted hector13.
Post by: Starver on February 11, 2016, 02:30:45 pm
TBF: the scum action wasn't immediately visible in the previous two games. Game one was arsonist, game two was strangler. Both didn't have an effect that showed up immediately.That much is obvious. (The moment that changes, and there's a N0 death, we'll be shocked! Shocked, I tell you!)
I'm glad you had a more sensible response to that little face-to-face than I could come up with.
Quote
However...Well, given that it sounds more reasonable than the prior conversation, I shall go so far as to say that I did not choose to act.
Everybody, could you please claim who you targeted last night? Not what you did, if you don't want to, but who you targeted. That might be all I need to create an accurate guess at who is the scum player... assuming my first theory, based on my role, is correct...
accursed unknowns.
I targeted hector13.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 11, 2016, 02:58:37 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 11, 2016, 04:35:02 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 11, 2016, 04:35:28 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 11, 2016, 04:35:52 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 11, 2016, 04:36:08 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 11, 2016, 06:45:18 pm
~~~
My theory is that we actually have a direct mafiakill or whatnot this time around. It seems somewhat supported by my role...
I am the Special Town role. To be precise, a jailor. I prevent my target from acting or being acted upon.
~~~
The only issue I have with revealing who I targeted is that it might allow that person to divine what roles certain people have....How?
~~~
Also, maybe the scum makes millers?This came out of nowhere, TheBiggerFish.
Quote from: Dalek
EXPLAIN! EXPLAIN!~~~
Claims:
FoU: Targeted hector13.
TBF: Targeted Starver.
Starver: Choose not to act.
Hector13: ???
~~~
Now then. Assuming an instant nightkill, either hector was prevented from using it or TBF or Starver is lying.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 11, 2016, 06:50:19 pm
What's the name of your role though?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 11, 2016, 07:05:24 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 11, 2016, 07:13:37 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 11, 2016, 08:02:53 pm
Also:
Yes, but what's the flavor? Unless you're scared of a role thief that needs the name to function, which isn't impossible, but...I doubt it, it's a bit of a stretch. Especially after last game.Many of the flavors I give to the town team are written differently than the ones I give to the scum. Simply: Using flavors as a way to find who is scum is cheap, so posting flavors or asking for them is from now on prohibited. However, you may state a player is scum because his claim contradicts your flavor - just don't show your flavor to prove it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 11, 2016, 08:20:11 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 11, 2016, 08:23:22 pm
Tomasque:But...Whaaa? Asking for role names is practically a standard thing!
Roles, yes, role names? Not really.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 11, 2016, 08:25:57 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 11, 2016, 08:26:42 pm
I still don't like this.
It's flavour, it's meaningless. What will it tell you?
Post by: Tomasque on February 11, 2016, 08:42:29 pm
Tomasque:But...Whaaa? Asking for role names is practically a standard thing!Role names can be claimed. Only role flavor (ya know, the itallic stuff) cannot be claimed.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 11, 2016, 10:28:46 pm
Oh, okay. Thank goodness.Tomasque:But...Whaaa? Asking for role names is practically a standard thing!Role names can be claimed. Only role flavor (ya know, the itallic stuff) cannot be claimed.
It was a big part of my suspicions of the Gas Station Attendant and Bad Pianist claims.I still don't like this.
It's flavour, it's meaningless. What will it tell you?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 11, 2016, 10:29:41 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 11, 2016, 11:05:01 pm
It's flavour, it's meaningless. What will it tell you?It was a big part of my suspicions of the Gas Station Attendant and Bad Pianist claims.
[/quote]
What about them?
Why are you so interested in the role name? What will it tell you about FoU?
Post by: hector13 on February 11, 2016, 11:05:37 pm
It's flavour, it's meaningless. What will it tell you?It was a big part of my suspicions of the Gas Station Attendant and Bad Pianist claims.
Better formatting for the quote.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 12, 2016, 05:28:26 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 12, 2016, 09:18:50 am
What's the name of your role though?
The protective one.You already have it.
Post by: Starver on February 12, 2016, 09:19:21 am
But seriously, FoU, what's your role name?Well, if we can discuss role-names (I must admit that I had my doubts from the original way it was put), then I don't need to try to forget what has already been revealed. I mean, call me the rational one, but I think TBF doesn't know what I think I know about the veracity of FoU's claim - or anything similar that I might myself say. It sounds like only one person wouldn't be able to work that one out, but I'm willing to be corrected.
I don't suppose Hector can say anything about this, just to be sure?
Post by: Starver on February 12, 2016, 09:20:14 am
Post by: hector13 on February 12, 2016, 12:56:22 pm
But seriously, FoU, what's your role name?Well, if we can discuss role-names (I must admit that I had my doubts from the original way it was put), then I don't need to try to forget what has already been revealed. I mean, call me the rational one, but I think TBF doesn't know what I think I know about the veracity of FoU's claim - or anything similar that I might myself say. It sounds like only one person wouldn't be able to work that one out, but I'm willing to be corrected.
I don't suppose Hector can say anything about this, just to be sure?
Not really, FoU blocked me, so I wasn't able to do anything. Equally so, if it's a traditional jailor role, I was also protected from being acted upon, so... perhaps this throws Starver's claim they didn't act into question. The fact he's saying it's protective rather than a blocking role, though, is interesting. Makes him seem more benign, perhaps?
We can discuss role names and role abilities (presumably) which is somewhat more important than flavour, though given Tomasque's reluctance for us to discuss it (and the fact this is a bastard game) I think we could read into our own flavour beyond face value.
What is it you think you know about FoU's role, anyway?
Post by: hector13 on February 12, 2016, 12:56:49 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 12, 2016, 02:55:01 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 12, 2016, 06:17:07 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 12, 2016, 07:08:13 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 12, 2016, 07:12:22 pm
I imagine the scum will try to use a kill action on me if the day ends without lynching them. Assuming I target another player at random, that's a 1 in 3 of preventing the kill action.
Now that you've said that, they'll be thinking again. It's a nice thing for WIFOM for scum though, hope they enjoy it.
Also, not sure why no-one is actually voting. Won't get anything done by doing that. TBF
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 12, 2016, 07:54:22 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 12, 2016, 10:38:23 pm
Round over - Town wins!
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (1)-hector13
Starver (0)
Not voting: FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver
TheBiggerFish was the Phantom
Spoiler: Phantom (click to show/hide)
hector13 gets one victory point.
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
Starver gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 12, 2016, 11:16:31 pm
I think you need slightly more players.
By the way, who blocked my action on Starver N0?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 12, 2016, 11:18:11 pm
Quote
I mean, call me the rational oneWASN'T you claiming investigator?
Post by: hector13 on February 12, 2016, 11:24:56 pm
Town wins. Will add stuff later.
It's pretty embarrassing for me to ask this... But why does the scum keep losing? Is there something obvious I'm missing?
It's probably the number of players. I had a bad claim round 1, and FoU was super obvious round 2 (though arguably the scum ability was super obvious too) and I think we were lucky this time round.
I knew FoU was claiming true because my action failed (or at least it seemed the most likely reason) so that left Starver and TBF. TBF gave me a gut feeling, so I voted for him.
I claimed nothing :P but that's what I was, you quoted Starver though.
Nice how I'm the only one voting scum :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 12, 2016, 11:30:58 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 12, 2016, 11:31:50 pm
I was The Phantom, I had a single-target convert and an auto that left me functionally voteless.
Post by: Tomasque on February 12, 2016, 11:48:30 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 12, 2016, 11:50:01 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 12, 2016, 11:53:11 pm
Just, recruit 2 more, have a scumteam, and start over.Two more... Nah.. Starting at that point the game might get too big. Of course, if 5 is too small...
Anyway, don't expect the game to change too dramatically. Just pretend nothing happened. A'right? :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 12:00:40 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 12:01:05 am
Post by: hector13 on February 13, 2016, 12:11:49 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 12:14:59 am
Post by: Tomasque on February 13, 2016, 12:28:20 am
Post by: Tomasque on February 13, 2016, 12:57:30 am
Here ye, great Messengers of all times, great Carriers of Tongues and Diplomats of Concord: There is one amongst you that is not like the others. They have been corrupted by Sin, and have turned to Lying and Deceit to reach their selfish goals. You must stop them now, or they shall impress their own terrible Ideals on the world!
This round, any player can message any other player, However, this will not happen directly. First, send it to me, along with the intended receiver and the specification of whether or not you want to remain anonymous. I will then message that player myself with your message.
Votecount
Hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
TheMoonlitShadow (0)
Not Voting: hector13, FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver, TheMoonlitShadow
Day ends Monday, 12:00 PM.
Post by: Tomasque on February 13, 2016, 03:08:31 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 13, 2016, 03:42:00 pm
Everybody: Is there any decent use for this messaging system(for town)? Because I'm not seeing any decent use for it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 04:07:46 pm
Post by: Starver on February 13, 2016, 04:11:19 pm
So this messaging system... is... strange, to say the least.I think that's what everybody has thought, at one point or another, so far... ;)
Also - my ability seems useless ;(
(But I still have to work out where I fit into this, so don't expect me to tell you how you do. Well, not unless you show us your hand... Oh, is that four aces you have..? yeah, they're useless and I'd discard them if I were you.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 04:12:49 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 13, 2016, 04:15:59 pm
I don't think the "just enough variation to keep you guessing" is going to be simple... ever.
So what is the scum going to do with it?... I don't see how scum could get anything out of this system either.
But considering that the messaging system is the main mechanic(apparently) of this round, I wouldn't be surprised if there were powers that affected it and/or the messages themselves.
~~~
Note, everybody, that it's possible for there to be multiple Town Weakness roles(there were two special town roles last time)...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 04:27:28 pm
Post by: Starver on February 13, 2016, 06:26:20 pm
Note, everybody, that it's possible for there to be multiple Town Weakness roles(there were two special town roles last time)...Oh yes... I actually missed that. Which might mean something I was just thinking isn't what I thought it might be, after all... damnit Mr Mod.
I know there is at least one Town Weakness.I wonder if you know that because of the (non-obvious, mildly meta-) deduction that I was also making, at least until the above made me think I ought to think again.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 13, 2016, 07:16:45 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 07:26:56 pm
No, I just have some rather concrete information.
Post by: hector13 on February 13, 2016, 07:33:06 pm
@Starver:
No, I just have some rather concrete information.
A claim, basically?
Post by: Starver on February 13, 2016, 08:04:06 pm
@Starver: I can only think of two. Wonder which you thought of first?I doubt you're thinking the same thing I'm thinking. If indeed you're thinking about what I might have thought of first like I think you are.
;)
(The above is nothing to do with Round 4 stuff.)
@Starver:So, 100% certain, then? Or are you now only 75% certain, but still definite for all that? Might you at some point be only 56%, etc?
No, I just have some rather concrete information.
If that's it, I know where you're coming from. But of course it still doesn't help me trust you or you trust me, and I can't (or won't?) add any additional information, in my own right, right now. But maybe later I can likewise occasionally oblige along the same lines...
(Again, apart from the fact that I'm prepared to accept your claim, and yet accept that you aren't actually claiming, this is not strictly Round 4 stuff. And I can only imagine what everyone else will be imagining, if they don't already know. Maybe you'll know in a future round, though (including Moonlit, above). And I could be wrong about what TBF is saying, also. In which case I've maybe confused four of you, rather than at most three...)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 13, 2016, 08:25:42 pm
I know there is at least one Town Weakness.
Ha. My auto is just TERRIBLE though.If TBF is a Town Weakness role, he'll know for a 100% certain that there is a Town Weakness role.
Barring fake roles- let's not go there yet, though.
Post by: hector13 on February 13, 2016, 08:33:19 pm
I know there is at least one Town Weakness.Ha. My auto is just TERRIBLE though.If TBF is a Town Weakness role, he'll know for a 100% certain that there is a Town Weakness role.
Barring fake roles- let's not go there yet, though.
Semi-bastard. I don't think Tomasque will go there. He's given hidden autos and such, that's bastard enough.
Anyway while I love [/sarcasm] discussing mechanics, we're not scumhunting.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 13, 2016, 08:53:49 pm
The Moonlit Shadow: are you going to make use of the messaging mechanics?
Same question to all other players.
Post by: Starver on February 13, 2016, 08:57:56 pm
I'm also trying to imagine what fifth
Anyway, if anyone wants to go scumhunting, go scumhunting. Talk's cheap, though, and nobody's doing anything of interest.
Tell you what, let's try this: Hands up everyone who is town!
∩∩∩
∩║║║
║║║║∩
║ ║
\ (/
| |
| |
| |
(That looked better in Notepad, but it'll do...)
@Fallacy the Ninja: I don't yet know what reasons I might have to try it, but it's likely I will when I think I know what to expect of it.
Post by: hector13 on February 13, 2016, 09:10:31 pm
Not sure if I'll use the messaging thing, don't really have a reason to use it just yet.
FoU: what reasons do you think someone would send a message?
Moonlit: You receive two messages: one from Starver claiming he's a town weakness role, and an anonymous one telling you he's scum. What would you do?
Starver: You've yet to be scum. Statistical entertainment!
TBF: Why did you softclaim the town weakness role? Are you scum again?
Post by: Tomasque on February 13, 2016, 09:16:23 pm
The Moonlit ShadowNo you cannot... not in the presence of the infiltrator. You have to work in secret.
Round Rule revealed: Voting in the thread is not allowed, and does not count. You must vote via PM. You cannot say or hint at who you voted via post.
Post by: hector13 on February 13, 2016, 09:19:42 pm
Does that mean no FoS'ing too?
Post by: Tomasque on February 13, 2016, 09:22:25 pm
Oh you utter bastard.FoSing is not allowed, since it implies you are voting for that player.
Does that mean no FoS'ing too?
Post by: hector13 on February 13, 2016, 09:24:05 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 13, 2016, 09:28:26 pm
Can we encourage others to vote for someone, so long as we don't say we voted for them?It implies you are voting or going to be voting for them.
Post by: Starver on February 13, 2016, 09:33:06 pm
That's new! Perhaps I should vote Tomasque!... if I could at all. ;)The Moonlit ShadowNo you cannot... not in the presence of the infiltrator. You have to work in secret.
Round Rule revealed: Voting in the thread is not allowed, and does not count. You must vote via PM. You cannot say or hint at who you voted via post.
Not the best question to ask Starver, a'body and their dug'll claim town :PMaybe I'd have been interested in seeing what people had to say for themselves. (Why, why I think I've asked a good question does someone come along and muddy the waters... Hang on, it's you again, as well... *pbbbt* then...)
Quote
Starver: You've yet to be scum. Statistical entertainment!I've been Special twice. And you've twice been the Investigator. And the definitely-evil role is just one of the (possibly) three remaining roles I haven't yet been. But that might just be remnants of my Rational One self from the previous round. Right now it seems I've got to negotiate a completely different situation from what I thought I would.
(Four ninjas, including two from the Mod clarifying things... Sheesh.)
Post by: Starver on February 13, 2016, 09:34:38 pm
(Why, when I think I've asked a good question does someone come along and muddy the waters...FTFMe...
Post by: hector13 on February 13, 2016, 09:38:44 pm
@hector: Well the one from Starver might not be from him. Or else anonymity is impossible. I'd assume everyone else also got a similar PM, and ask about it. Especially Starver, see how he reacts. I'd note whoever is the least engaged and not doing anything else
Bolded part: what makes you say that? In the OP it says you can specify whether to remain anonymous, not send the message as someone else.
Starver
That's new! Perhaps I should vote Tomasque!... if I could at all. ;)The Moonlit ShadowNo you cannot... not in the presence of the infiltrator. You have to work in secret.
Round Rule revealed: Voting in the thread is not allowed, and does not count. You must vote via PM. You cannot say or hint at who you voted via post.Not the best question to ask Starver, a'body and their dug'll claim town :PMaybe I'd have been interested in seeing what people had to say for themselves. (Why, why I think I've asked a good question does someone come along and muddy the waters... Hang on, it's you again, as well... *pbbbt* then...)QuoteStarver: You've yet to be scum. Statistical entertainment!I've been Special twice. And you've twice been the Investigator. And the definitely-evil role is just one of the (possibly) three remaining roles I haven't yet been. But that might just be remnants of my Rational One self from the previous round. Right now it seems I've got to negotiate a completely different situation from what I thought I would.
64-1 (63-1?) chance I'm investigator again for three in a row. Wanna take the bet? ;D /jest
Also, are you a slow typer? :P
Tomasque
Can we encourage others to vote for someone, so long as we don't say we voted for them?It implies you are voting or going to be voting for them.
Well if we take that to an absurd extreme, asking players a question is implying you're going to vote for them depending on the answer. Where do you draw the line, and what are the consequences for talking about it?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 13, 2016, 09:42:51 pm
WHAT. THE. HECK.The Moonlit ShadowNo you cannot... not in the presence of the infiltrator. You have to work in secret.
Round Rule revealed: Voting in the thread is not allowed, and does not count. You must vote via PM. You cannot say or hint at who you voted via post.
WHAT.
JUST. WOT.
Hidden rules for the entire game. Something else that's possible, apparently.
I'm not entirely sure this is a semi-bastard game- at this point, full bastard is a possibility.
~~~
FoU: what reasons do you think someone would send a message?If a player was town... if a player was scum...
OH. We can't hint or say who we're voting in thread, but we can do so via the messaging system... suddenly it makes a bit more sense.
~~~
Mod Query: at the end of the game, will we be told who was voting for who?
Post by: Tomasque on February 13, 2016, 09:48:06 pm
The above-mentioned example would be okay. The consequences... vary, depending on how direct your rule-breaking is. Therefore, there is no "line," per se.Can we encourage others to vote for someone, so long as we don't say we voted for them?It implies you are voting or going to be voting for them.
Well if we take that to an absurd extreme, asking players a question is implying you're going to vote for them depending on the answer. Where do you draw the line, and what are the consequences for talking about it?
Post by: Starver on February 13, 2016, 09:53:36 pm
Also, are you a slow typer? :PQuite fast, usually, but obviously I don't want to find I need to edit a post because of a typo (see above) or, worse, because I've said something I really didn't want to...
(Plus it's currently just passing 2:50am (GMT) for me, and you lot tend to only start to talking in earnest when it's really quite late/early-next-morning as far as I'm concerned.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 13, 2016, 10:02:31 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 13, 2016, 10:04:31 pm
Ah- Mod: Are we allowed to say who we're voting for when we message someone?
As an addendum to this (if you answer in the affirmative, anyway) are we able to publicly say who another player is considering voting for? eg I ask FoU if he'd vote Starver, he says no, so I say that in-thread.
Post by: Tomasque on February 13, 2016, 10:31:29 pm
Mod Query: at the end of the game, will we be told who was voting for who?Yes.
Ah- Mod: Are we allowed to say who we're voting for when we message someone?You may say anything you want in the message (barring role flavor).
As an addendum to this (if you answer in the affirmative, anyway) are we able to publicly say who another player is considering voting for? eg I ask FoU if he'd vote Starver, he says no, so I say that in-thread.Round Rule revealed: You may not state, explain, or discuss the contents of a message in a post.
Post by: Tomasque on February 13, 2016, 10:34:01 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 11:00:51 pm
Well FISH.
By the way, can you send messages to Everybody At Once?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 11:01:49 pm
Will there be a votecount?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 13, 2016, 11:12:07 pm
It seems that the Messageverse and the Postverse for this round... are completely distinct.
I suspect that we're meant to play this entire round via the messaging system.
~~~
AGH.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 11:13:50 pm
Also, I bounce messages to the last person who messaged me. So be careful about that.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 13, 2016, 11:17:51 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 11:24:38 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 13, 2016, 11:25:00 pm
Ha. Just for fun: called it.Really, I think this game needs another player. It's only winnable by a correct lynch D1 or by nolynch D1 and getting the right target D2.I wouldn't be too surprised if another one turned up after a few rounds.
~~~
Huh.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 11:27:55 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 11:28:16 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 13, 2016, 11:29:01 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 13, 2016, 11:30:31 pm
...
Well FISH.
By the way, can you send messages to Everybody At Once?
The round has begun. Keep in mind that your message cannot have more than one receiver. All messages that do will fail... But I guess saying that is redundant.
Will there be a votecount?Yes.
Post by: hector13 on February 14, 2016, 09:19:12 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 14, 2016, 09:19:53 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 14, 2016, 09:21:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 14, 2016, 09:50:51 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 14, 2016, 10:05:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 15, 2016, 12:09:11 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 15, 2016, 11:30:38 am
Post by: Tomasque on February 16, 2016, 09:01:37 am
Finished with their public agreement, whispered disagreement and hidden Votes to bring death to the imposter, the Messengers reveal whom they suspected the most. Surprised by the lack of direction, they did not act until Night was swiftly upon them. It seemed to be taking hours Now...
Votecount
hector13 (1)-FallacyofUrist
FallacyofUrist (1)-hector13
TheBiggerFish (1)-The Moonlit Shadow
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: Starver, TheBiggerFish
Post by: Tomasque on February 16, 2016, 09:08:54 am
...but afterwards seemed to take no time at all. Reassembled, the Messengers saw they must end the imposter soon - the time of the Solstice was coming, and if the imposter survived until then, nothing could be done to stop him anymore.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: hector13, FallacyofUrist, The Moonlit Shadow, Starver, TheBiggerFish
Day ends 6:00 am, Thursday
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 16, 2016, 09:16:35 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 16, 2016, 09:21:40 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 16, 2016, 09:33:34 am
Mod Query: What will happen at the Solstice? Will the imposter win if we get to the Solstice and we haven't lynched him?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 16, 2016, 09:37:07 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 16, 2016, 09:44:06 am
How many days, then?
Post by: Tomasque on February 16, 2016, 09:55:08 am
Mod Query: What will happen at the Solstice? Will the imposter win if we get to the Solstice and we haven't lynched him?
How many days, then?It was just my fancy way of saying that if you don't lynch him by the 3 cycle limit (so if the day 3 lynch doesn't get him) the imposter will win.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 16, 2016, 09:56:03 am
Post by: hector13 on February 16, 2016, 01:43:39 pm
If so:
FoU: Why did you vote for me?
Moonlit: Why did you vote for TBF?
TBF and Starver: Why didn't you vote?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 16, 2016, 03:28:41 pm
FoU: Why did you vote for me?I will answer this question if
Tomasque: Are we allowed to ask questions regarding why folk voted for who in the thread?the answer for this question turns out to be yes.
Post by: Tomasque on February 16, 2016, 04:15:01 pm
Tomasque: Are we allowed to ask questions regarding why folk voted for who in the thread?
Round Rule revealed: You may not state, explain, or discuss the contents of a message in a post.Therefore, no.
Post by: Tomasque on February 16, 2016, 06:31:41 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 16, 2016, 07:54:19 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 17, 2016, 12:40:37 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 17, 2016, 05:31:40 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 17, 2016, 05:32:24 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 17, 2016, 05:58:41 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 17, 2016, 05:59:08 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 17, 2016, 06:32:50 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 17, 2016, 06:34:09 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 17, 2016, 07:02:18 pm
Post by: Starver on February 17, 2016, 07:11:58 pm
But if it does help anyone, I've had one (1) actual PM-mediated dialogue (barely that: one message in and one - presumably! - returned; with no further response, but the recipient might not yet have seen the reply for any number of reasons, so there may need to be a possible *nudge nudge* to the person concerned, or just patience).
I'm not sure what else I can say, given the embargo on stating/explaining/discussing message contents in the open, but the apparent lack of interest in me ought to be a datum point meaningful to everybody that I can discuss... And yet nothing I know about myself has any obvious connection to these observations, so now I hope it makes sense to somebody else.
(I was at one point imagining that I was actually being externally shielded, rather than ignored, but obviously it can't be a global thwarting of communication...)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 17, 2016, 07:21:37 pm
Alternatively, delivery failure on Tomasque's part...
Post by: Starver on February 17, 2016, 07:31:07 pm
They might not have had anything to say?As I did not, at first, but it seems that things are being said. Not to me, though (with one exception). Unless anyone thinks otherwise.
Quote
Alternatively, delivery failure on Tomasque's part...My initial assumption (systematic failure, of course, rather than Mod errors1), as noted, but that led to a situation I couldn't easily see past. Still considering it a (limited) possibility.
1 I'm sure we'll all discover if this happened, at all, after the round/marathon conclusion. ;)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 17, 2016, 07:32:30 pm
Post by: Starver on February 17, 2016, 07:35:55 pm
I don't know if I can say. I honestly don't know. It's not 'contents', unless it maybe it is. mod ruling please?
Post by: Starver on February 17, 2016, 07:36:53 pm
(Because it looks wrong, now I see the above posted, for systematic please read rules-of-the-round-based, or whatever you'd prefer to describe it as.)
I don't know if I can say. I honestly don't know. It's not 'contents', unless it maybe it is. mod ruling please?
Post by: hector13 on February 17, 2016, 08:44:59 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 17, 2016, 10:01:36 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 17, 2016, 11:05:02 pm
Corrected format. (One missing close-tag-slash!)huh?(Because it looks wrong, now I see the above posted, for systematic please read rules-of-the-round-based, or whatever you'd prefer to describe it as.)
I don't know if I can say. I honestly don't know. It's not 'contents', unless it maybe it is. mod ruling please?
Post by: Tomasque on February 17, 2016, 11:06:07 pm
Who'd you get a PM fr... Can we discuss who sent us messages?The subject of a message counts as its contents. So, no.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 17, 2016, 11:11:33 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 17, 2016, 11:27:22 pm
The subject of a message is not who sent the message?The subject of a message is always "Message from <player>"
Since it is part of the message, it may not be discussed in open chat.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 17, 2016, 11:28:40 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 17, 2016, 11:29:54 pm
You're equating the header with the content...
But if you say so.
@FoU: WHY DID YOU ASK THAT.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 17, 2016, 11:31:00 pm
Post by: Tomasque on February 18, 2016, 12:15:09 am
Can we discuss the presence or absence of messages in general?Sure. Seems vague enough.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 18, 2016, 09:07:32 am
Post by: Tomasque on February 18, 2016, 09:30:45 am
After another Day just the same as the one before - perhaps a bit more strained, however - the votes of Exile were tallied once more. The results were once again inconclusive. It seemed no one knew who was the imposter. With that thought to lay on their minds, the Messengers waited through one more Night.
Votecount
hector13 (2)-FallacyofUrist, Starver
FallacyofUrist (2)-hector13, The Moonlit Shadow
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: TheBiggerFish
Post by: Tomasque on February 18, 2016, 09:53:33 am
Post by: Tomasque on February 18, 2016, 09:53:32 pm
Now the sun rose again, and the Messengers saw - now with apprehension instead of joy - how close it was to the Perfect Track. Only one more Day. That was all they had left.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: hector13, FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver, The Moonlit Shadow
Post by: Tomasque on February 18, 2016, 09:54:03 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 18, 2016, 10:30:42 pm
TBF's role claim appears to have been confirmed, at least to me and one other player.
Moonlit pointing out TBF's claim is likely true has me leaning town on him (hence the gut feeling I mentioned previously)
No idea about FoU and Starver. This is the point where I sorely bemoan not being able to discuss
Same as usual the .
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 18, 2016, 11:02:23 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 18, 2016, 11:03:51 pm
Everyone who hasn't, roleclaims.
Post by: Tomasque on February 18, 2016, 11:13:20 pm
We have exactly one chance to get this right, then...Round Rule revealed: No posting in open chat on the 3rd day.
Everyone who hasn't, roleclaims.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 18, 2016, 11:14:56 pm
*facepalm*
Post by: Tomasque on February 18, 2016, 11:27:11 pm
..........................................
*facepalm*
Round Rule revealed: No posting in open chat on the 3rd day.This looks like a direct violation of a Round Rule. This is your only warning.
Post by: hector13 on February 19, 2016, 12:02:54 am
Post by: Tomasque on February 19, 2016, 12:29:19 am
Better just end the round and have the scum win then.This is childish. Please, stop. :-\
Post by: hector13 on February 19, 2016, 12:38:13 am
Better just end the round and have the scum win then.This is childish. Please, stop. :-\
Nein! I reserve the right to be a prick :P
Post by: Tomasque on February 22, 2016, 11:19:23 pm
Votecount
hector13 (2) - The Moonlit Shadow, FallacyofUrist
FallacyofUrist (3) - hector13, TheBiggerFish, Starver
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: No one
FallacyofUrist was the Imitator
Spoiler: Imitator (click to show/hide)
hector13 gets one victory point.
The Moonlit Shadow gets one victory point.
Starver gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Message Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 22, 2016, 11:27:52 pm
Specifically, its... sheer... painfulness.
The last time I was the evil role(strangler), I felt I had been beaten fair and square. And I enjoyed that round.
This time... not so much. I was basically confused out of my mind, had no idea what to do or what the town were discussing...
~~~
On a balance note, I think negotiator nuked me.
Post by: Tomasque on February 22, 2016, 11:34:30 pm
I would like to discuss round four.Worry not. I will make it no secret that the message system will not be repeated.
Specifically, its... sheer... painfulness.
The last time I was the evil role(strangler), I felt I had been beaten fair and square. And I enjoyed that round.
This time... not so much. I was basically confused out of my mind, had no idea what to do or what the town were discussing...
~~~
On a balance note, I think negotiator nuked me.
Post by: hector13 on February 22, 2016, 11:50:36 pm
Anyway:
I would like to discuss round four.Worry not. I will make it no secret that the message system will not be repeated.
Specifically, its... sheer... painfulness.
The last time I was the evil role(strangler), I felt I had been beaten fair and square. And I enjoyed that round.
This time... not so much. I was basically confused out of my mind, had no idea what to do or what the town were discussing...
~~~
On a balance note, I think negotiator nuked me.
Thank feck :P
My biggest criticism(s) for the round was taking away our ability to do things publicly, like voting, and only posting the vote count at day end, when it didn't really matter anymore. It made it difficult to coordinate the town and address things quickly.
The way you did the messaging was... Understandable, but a bit annoying (I imagine even moreso for you though!) just 'cause the first time I sent a message (D2) there was a bit of activity in the thread, specifically around Moonlit announcing an impostor (TBF's message bouncing coupled with me signing a different name at the me of every message: "heccy" for TBF; "h13" for Moonlit; "hector" for Starver; "hector13" for FoU) while the first reply I had for my PM was ~7hrs later since I had to wait for Tomasque to be on to receive and forward the message, the receiver to be on to read and respond and then Tomasque to receive and forward the reply. Not sure how it could've been done differently while taking into account role shenanigans, though :-\
Glad I cottoned on to FoU D1. Goal :P also, wtf was that vote for Moonlit? :o
Again, since I was bad, I'm sorry for being childish and churlish, Tomasque.
Post by: Tomasque on February 23, 2016, 12:05:52 am
In hindsight, your reaction was understandable. So... apology accepted!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 23, 2016, 05:33:18 am
Post by: Starver on February 23, 2016, 05:53:38 am
Interesting to see that Hector's role was partially of this kind... or could have been! With Fallacy having other bits to it.
Luckily, I decided that it would have been too complicated a mechanism to work out, so I went more with my gut than my paranoia. ;)
Note, above, for those I didn't already tell:"(n) Negotiate: You may choose to send your message to the Evil role. It can be anonymous, and they will not know they were contacted using a power." Thought that meant "Night power". Didn't use it Day 1, and didn't have anything else to message, so I ended up not doing so.
To save the Mod their sanity, I'll reveal my own role in the more abnormal bits of the message log:
First attempt, Day 2, as Fallacy knows (but I was worried that a good-guy had message-receiving capabilities!) was to pretend to be a secret mason-buddy, restricted post ('Twitter theme', seemed like it would work) to explain the anonymity, to try to get the Evil role to broadcast the word "Tweet" on the open channel so we could identify each other. Never happened (that I saw!).
So I tried again. Faked my inability to contact anybody (well, played upon the real situation that only Hector was talking to me, by that point... which was making me suspicious of Hector) in a 'broadcast' message (but really to just the Evil role) desperately asking for confirmation. That one netted a Urist (but only once we were in Day 3)... but I still couldn't be sure there wasn't a redirect. But it was the best lead I had, and with the vote-counts as they were at end of Day 2 I decided it was worthwhile.
Then my first trap sprang upon FoU, apparently. (Don't know if you only just discovered that... but of course there was no Open Channel communications at that time.) But it wouldn't have worked if the role-list, as revealed by TMS, had made its way outside the rest of the group.
On a balance note, I think negotiator nuked me.More by good luck than good judgement. My problem then was being persuasive whilst, at the same time, not revealing too much information that the hypothetical non-FoU evil person could use. (Although I utterly spilt the beans to Hector, in compensation for the assumed error of Day 2! If I'd been wrong about being wrong, and I'd have been originally right, I'd have scuppered everything! And then TMS gave me cause for some slight doubt, although I pushed those doubts aside by the end. TBF definitely looked legit, by that point, but then there was the difficulty of saying anything without it unavoidably leaking!)
The Secret ability of Fallacy explains how the entirely fictitious Loremaster role was still receiving messages, I suppose. Obvious in hindsight. But 'WTF is a Loremaster?' was my thinking. Although as "a teller of tall tales", it was easy to believe it had some dark purpose behind it. The disadvantage of having to make up a themed name, as usual.
(You will have gotten another brief, anonymous, message, by my skill. Designed to teasingly look like a brief reply that went astray, I wonder if you thought it was the Impersonation skill that grabbed it, if you'd worked that part out by then. Although it nearly backfired, as then TMS asked for a "confirmation reply" (straight after the "dim" one!) that looked very alike to what I thought I'd sent in this last case... making it look like TMS was perhaps taunting me, as the Evil who had worked out what I was doing. And had perhaps somehow managed to persuade Fallacy to frame themselves, along the way. Confusing!)
Don't know how many (if any?) Imitated messages came my way under a different guise, though. Or headed elsewhere. I'd already decided that I couldn't handle that sort of complication, and just tossed that possibility to one side. (But maybe my developed habit of signing/timestamping my messages could have helped, in a fix. Although it could so easily have backfired, too!)
I really didn't like this round.It was certainly a challenge. I had severe headaches (pretty much!) trying to get my head around the concept, until maybe half way through Day 2. And even after that, I had niggles of doubt and pangs of remorse that I hadn't even done anything useful Day 1, through whatever error I had made. I was luckier than I deserved to be, in some of what I did. (Although I wonder, if I had managed to help lynch Hector, Day 2, who would have ended up "In The Flesh"ed. Could have gone either way, from there on!)
Post by: hector13 on February 23, 2016, 09:11:16 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 23, 2016, 09:12:21 am
I never figured out an effective way to use it. Send message that appears to be from somebody else... person that receives the message responds... bang- "I didn't send that!". All it would do would be to create a moment of confusion.
If hector and I swapped roles, I imagine this might have turned out very differently.
Post by: Tomasque on February 23, 2016, 09:30:37 am
Darkness falls on Little Suburbia, and soon the moon is high in the sky. Outside the gated community, parties are raging, but here, everything is peaceful and safe. Almost.
Post by: Tomasque on February 23, 2016, 08:45:20 pm
FallacyofUrist has been marked! If no one is lynched today, he will die!
In the morning, while the rest of community is thriving in its decadence, 5 concerned citizens gather together. It seems that one of them was seen acting in a very unacceptable way. Accusations are thrown around, but in the end, nothing sticks. They'll have to take this from another angle if they want to find the one in their midst that threatens their gentrified way of life.
Votecount
Hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
TheMoonlitShadow (0)
Not Voting: hector13, FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver, TheMoonlitShadow
Day ends Thursday, 6:00 PM.
Post by: hector13 on February 23, 2016, 08:52:55 pm
Post by: Starver on February 23, 2016, 08:59:38 pm
Is this Starver's first round as the evil role? Hm.No. But don't let me stop you speculating.
No, he was the strangler, wasn't he?That was FoU. (Twice now the Evil one, for anyone who's counting... But that's being meta, which I don't think will work.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 23, 2016, 09:04:53 pm
I DON'T WANT TO DIE!
~~~
hector13: Win condition. Yours. That's what I want you to state.
Post by: hector13 on February 23, 2016, 09:08:12 pm
...
I DON'T WANT TO DIE!
~~~
hector13: Win condition. Yours. That's what I want you to state.
Yeah, 'cause if I'm the scum I'd tell you :P
Eliminate t' Evil role is the wincon.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 23, 2016, 09:10:35 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 23, 2016, 09:14:25 pm
If I wasn't forewarned about the possibility of such things, I'd vote you.
~~~
I am an Investigative role. Last night, I investigated hector13. My result, you ask? That will wait until a win condition claim is finished.
I will win when the Evil role is eliminated.
Post by: Starver on February 23, 2016, 09:18:11 pm
Do you know all of your win condition?Well, there's room for a "SECRET" bit (although that's traditionally been an auto-action, not a hidden wincon).
I'm quite looking forward for another Town win, personally.
(Do you know if you were 'marked' whilst sitting 'at home', or whilst investigating? Might give a clue as to whether you were targeted or Hector might have retaliated.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 23, 2016, 09:21:48 pm
Post by: Starver on February 23, 2016, 09:30:42 pm
I win when I use an action on the evil role.That's interesting. (If you stay alive long enough, that sounds like a better-than-evens win condition...)
Post by: hector13 on February 23, 2016, 09:30:56 pm
Different than "Eliminate the Evil role"?
If I wasn't forewarned about the possibility of such things, I'd vote you.
~~~
I am an Investigative role. Last night, I investigated hector13. My result, you ask? That will wait until a win condition claim is finished.
I will win when the Evil role is eliminated.
Well I like how you claim it then don't reveal what happened, but given my action, your result is very likely to be inaccurate (though not necessarily wrong, if that makes sense) and it probably depends on what type of investigator.
This also answers a question I asked Tomasque.
So, how come you won't tell us what you found out, brah?
Post by: Starver on February 23, 2016, 09:34:59 pm
(If you stay alive long enough, that sounds like a better-than-evens win condition...)(Unless it's 1-shot, of course.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 23, 2016, 09:49:29 pm
Post by: Starver on February 23, 2016, 09:53:30 pm
I'm off to (RL!) bed now1, so don't expect much more from me. Don't let that stop you talking amongst yourselves, naturally...
1 (Starver to Everyone, 02:51GMT...)
Post by: hector13 on February 23, 2016, 11:37:07 pm
Assuming TBF isn't being clever, it's down to Moonlit or Starver. What is your one-shot action, if you don't mind me asking?
Starver, when you get on, what do you have to say for yourself? Given we seem to be revealing wincons, what's yours?
You too, Moonlit, no need to be coy, now.
Do you know all of your win condition?
Was this directed at me, FoU? If so... that's it as far as I'm aware. What is your wincon?
Do you know all of your win condition?Well, there's room for a "SECRET" bit (although that's traditionally been an auto-action, not a hidden wincon).
I'm quite looking forward for another Town win, personally.
(Do you know if you were 'marked' whilst sitting 'at home', or whilst investigating? Might give a clue as to whether you were targeted or Hector might have retaliated.)
He was acted on
Though nothing to do with me
Bar secret auto
/beautiful
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 24, 2016, 12:00:21 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 05:26:37 am
Post by: hector13 on February 24, 2016, 06:22:58 am
Well, we don't KNOW that, it might be a round mechanic.
An interesting conclusion to draw. Is there anything you know that can back that up? Also, that one-shot...
Would you tell us if this were the case, Tomasque?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 06:32:11 am
What about my one-shot?
Post by: hector13 on February 24, 2016, 06:48:39 am
Just because your wincon is use your one-shot "act on the Evil role" doesn't necessarily mean to say you're pro-town, does it?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 06:50:00 am
Post by: hector13 on February 24, 2016, 06:52:34 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 06:54:17 am
If I use it on the evil role, they're eliminated and I win.
Otherwise I can't win.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 06:57:36 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 06:58:16 am
Do you know who 'someone' is?
Post by: hector13 on February 24, 2016, 06:59:17 am
Looked it up:
If I use it on the evil role, they're eliminated and I win.
Otherwise I can't win.
Does it say anything about the rest of the town..?
My wincon is to protect someone else. My action is to protect them.
Are you told who needs to be protected? (you don't have to - nor should you, probably - tell us who)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 07:01:20 am
@TMS:Is it role based or name based?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 07:01:58 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 07:07:29 am
Post by: Tomasque on February 24, 2016, 08:37:37 am
Would you tell us if this were the case, Tomasque?I would, unless the entire point point of the round was to not tell you about it.
Post by: Starver on February 24, 2016, 08:45:46 am
Starver, when you get on, what do you have to say for yourself? Given we seem to be revealing wincons, what's yours?If I give it explicitly, people can and will try to spoil my day, and chances are that this will spoil the opportunity of a Town success, in the process.
Yes, that sounds suitably scummy, but I'm giving you as much of the truth as I dare (as will be discovered at whatever point my personal reveal appears, whether sooner or later - so mark this point, and please consider crediting me with it, at least (if I succumb this time) in future rounds!).
It's not for lack of imagination. If I was scum, I feel I could have so easily make something up:
Spoiler: Something mostly made up... (click to show/hide)
The way I see it, the actual Scum would be happy with any lynching, except themselves. Fallacy (regardless of alignment) naturally would like the same, and I think we'd have sympathy with that position. But the pattern of the games, so far, has been that randomly-attempted lynches have never actually worked (at least by my assessment). Hypocritical as it may be, of me, to ask for more details... but I would like to hear more discussion first.
Jaw-jaw, not trapdoor-trapdoor, that's all I ask for the time-being.
(Oh, hello Tomasque, handily posting just before I do... Not that I expect you to back me up, or even provide any reply at all, but you know how (possibly foolishly) truthful I'm being, and what I'm risking.)
1 I actually think I know how to kill the scum member(s?) and deliver another town-win, but it can't work if the scum has as complete a knowledge as what ideally I'd like the town to have. Leave me work on this one, if you trust me. And if you don't, just let what happens happen and let's see what the consequences are. I'll earn your trust for future rounds, if nothing else.
Post by: Starver on February 24, 2016, 08:50:51 am
Post by: Tomasque on February 24, 2016, 08:51:50 am
*reply*Starver, when you get on, what do you have to say for yourself? Given we seem to be revealing wincons, what's yours?If I give it explicitly, people can and will try to spoil my day, and chances are that this will spoil the opportunity of a Town success, in the process.
Yes, that sounds suitably scummy, but I'm giving you as much of the truth as I dare (as will be discovered at whatever point my personal reveal appears, whether sooner or later - so mark this point, and please consider crediting me with it, at least (if I succumb this time) in future rounds!).
It's not for lack of imagination. If I was scum, I feel I could have so easily make something up:...and I think I could easily have swung that, even if I was just making an 'honest white lie' to help Town1 while protecting myself. But I'm not going to foist that upon you. For one thing, it gives false hope that I'm some specialist Town-aligned Vig, that others could perhaps rely on to save their skins, and it won't be like that (so far as I know!). Secondly, I've got nothing (yet!) against anyone, let alone TBF. My real role is more complex than any fake one I could have presumed to fob you off with, but I'd prefer not to deceive you even for good reasons. (And, of course, it doesn't help if I have to bring you my real tale when I know enough to eventually go public in any grand "j'accuse!" moment.)Spoiler: Something mostly made up... (click to show/hide)
The way I see it, the actual Scum would be happy with any lynching, except themselves. Fallacy (regardless of alignment) naturally would like the same, and I think we'd have sympathy with that position. But the pattern of the games, so far, has been that randomly-attempted lynches have never actually worked (at least by my assessment). Hypocritical as it may be, of me, to ask for more details... but I would like to hear more discussion first.
Jaw-jaw, not trapdoor-trapdoor, that's all I ask for the time-being.
(Oh, hello Tomasque, handily posting just before I do... Not that I expect you to back me up, or even provide any reply at all, but you know how (possibly foolishly) truthful I'm being, and what I'm risking.)
1 I actually think I know how to kill the scum member(s?) and deliver another town-win, but it can't work if the scum has as complete a knowledge as what ideally I'd like the town to have. Leave me work on this one, if you trust me. And if you don't, just let what happens happen and let's see what the consequences are. I'll earn your trust for future rounds, if nothing else.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 24, 2016, 09:39:15 am
I win when I use an action on the evil role.
It's a 1-shot.
If I use it on the evil role, they're eliminated and I win.
Otherwise I can't win.
Eliminate t' Evil role is [my] wincon.
Starver, when you get on, what do you have to say for yourself? Given we seem to be revealing wincons, what's yours?If I give it explicitly, people can and will try to spoil my day, and chances are that this will spoil the opportunity of a Town success, in the process.
I will win when the Evil role is eliminated.
My wincon is to protect someone else. My action is to protect them.~~~
And that's everybody, folks!
Now I'm going to reveal exactly what I inspect for. When I inspect somebody, I learn who they need in order to win, even if my target doesn't know.
Pause...
Yep. That's right.
So, you ask. My result on hector13? He requires no one in order to win. That's what I got for a result. It could mean he's a townie with an unchanged win condition, it could also mean he's scum.
hector13: what say you?
~~~
Note this: I wonder what would happen if I inspected TBF... maybe I would learn the identity of the Evil role?
~~~~
But it wouldn't have worked if the role-list, as revealed by TMS, had made its way outside the rest of the group.This from previous round. I got the role-list- if there was another one that explained what the roles could do, however, I didn't get it.
Post by: hector13 on February 24, 2016, 10:02:44 am
The biggest problem? I can be self-targeting! Which is what I did, 'cause I know I'm town and don't want any badness happening. The only issue I foresaw was if the investigator happ- oh.
If it makes you feel any better, had I not been self-targeting, you would probably not be marked ;) :P
So you investigated one of the other three, since I also know that the random player chosen to be redirected to can't be the person that targeted me. Which means you're (probably) not lying. Bonus.
Town Special, if you're interested.
I'm not sure if investigating TBF would reveal the Evil role, since technically it isn't "needed" for a TBF/neutral win. I could also argue that an Evil role is required for a town victory, since that's who needs to be eliminated.
Post by: Starver on February 24, 2016, 10:43:05 am
Revealed to me, then. If I remember correctly. Apologies for any misattribution, however.But it wouldn't have worked if the role-list, as revealed by TMS, had made its way outside the rest of the group.This from previous round. I got the role-list- if there was another one that explained what the roles could do, however, I didn't get it.
And I find your power interesting, FoU. If we're also accepting Hector's claim, I'm not sure if this specific information helps anyone (except maybe the target, if they think they recognise themselves and needed reassurance that they haven't got a secret buddy they don't know about), but I could see it being useful for building bridges (or demolishing them) in other cases.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 24, 2016, 11:20:22 am
Post by: hector13 on February 24, 2016, 01:11:22 pm
hector13: Le huh. So... you target a player, then all players targeting that player are randomized? Is that what it is? Or did I read your claim wrong?
You got it right. The randomization doesn't affect the actor (I can't make people act on themselves)
Post by: hector13 on February 24, 2016, 02:37:15 pm
And... you implied that you targeted yourself when Fallacy said his investigation result. Right?
I did no such thing.
I outright stated that I targeted myself.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 02:48:11 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 24, 2016, 07:24:16 pm
And you know the best part? I can easily verify hector's claim- If I inspect him again tonight, and get a different result, as opposed to the same... bang, he's likely telling the truth.
But I've got to weigh that possibility versus the possibility of inspecting TheBiggerFish and learning who the evil role is...
Post by: hector13 on February 24, 2016, 07:36:48 pm
You also didn't unvote properly :P
Starver needs to offer his opinion on proceedings. Do you think anyone's claim is untrue? If so, why? Does it reveal anything about other players through proces of elimination?
Moonlit and TBF, too, I s'pose.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 08:09:38 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 24, 2016, 08:12:56 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 08:19:50 pm
Tomasque:Can investigators investigate dead people?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 08:21:15 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 24, 2016, 08:23:46 pm
TBF basically has two more chances to figure out who the scum is. After that he's a wild card. Not sure I like that prospect.
PPE: and what Moonlit said. Null read on that, though. Scum obviously doesn't want TBF in the game... though arguably benefits from his presence for supporting non-scum lynches D1 and D2.
Christ, so much WIFOM.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 24, 2016, 08:27:15 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 24, 2016, 08:32:53 pm
~~~
Everybody: Let's put this to a vote: who should I inspect this night? Clearly there are different potential benefits from each potential inspection... which benefits do we want?
You can vote in green if you like.
Post by: hector13 on February 24, 2016, 09:06:15 pm
The best choices at this point seem to be me (though there are caveats with that one) or TBF. Investigating TBF might reveal the scum, so that seems like the best choice to me.
This is, of course, assuming FoU is being honest. It does seem like a bit of strange investigation ability... but the apparent smorgasbord of wincons does lend credence to the claim.
Moonlit's protect is a bit moot as well, he has no reason not to protect the person he needs to survive. Again, assuming honesty. Starver hasn't claimed a role yet, though that doesn't really mean anything. I don't like claiming...
Starver seems like the best option for a lynch, at this point, so I'll keep my vote where it is. Does Starver have anything to say regarding that? Perhaps someone else I should be wary about?
Also, Moonlit why won't you tell us now what screws this up? What reason do you have not to tell us now?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 24, 2016, 10:13:35 pm
Inspecting me gets, at the very least, all the town a win, assuming it works. (Town's wincon doesn't include 'don't die', after all.)
...Assuming, of course, that there isn't a nightkill in which case I'm pretty much reduced to rolling 1d3 and hoping.
Post by: Tomasque on February 25, 2016, 12:23:17 am
Yaaaaaaay.Unless specifically stated in the role description, only living players can be targeted by actions.
Tomasque:Can investigators investigate dead people?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 05:30:44 am
Also Tomasque:WHEN will FoU die?
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 06:14:44 am
Starver needs to offer his opinion on proceedings. Do you think anyone's claim is untrue? If so, why? Does it reveal anything about other players through proces of elimination?Not that I'm sure that I'm the expert, here, but... ok:
As I read it, Fallacy so far has the best proof of themselves being as they say by the unusual interaction with Hector, and Hector has certainly has a viable proposal. (The person theoretically bounced-upon, by this art, might know to be true, but I'm not sure that person would be overly willing to confirm, if only because of legitimate paranoia.)
Because I'm (reasonably) sure of the above, I don't think there's any mileage in those two repeating Night 0's actions, as they were. Hector should have the option of repeating the self-targeting choice, but equally anyone else. (The problem with 'bounce as protection' is that enemies may be unconcerned with who their malevolent actions target. It can't even bounce back upon themselves.) Fallacy (obviously assuming there's opportunity) should equally-but-oppositely try to select someone not selected by Hector, because another 'adjusted' result isn't going to help. Best to confirm in the morning of D2 that there's not been a clash, and then reveal?
TBF looks like a neutral/1-shot-vigish claim. If this is correct then there's no point to them (from Town perspective) while-soever unable to target the Evil, and only becomes useful once the Evil is identified. (Intriguingly sets up TBF/FoU as the perfect pair where you "sacrifice one to give the other time to do his job", without caring too much which way round this is. Except that I put more store in FoU as genuine than TBF, so there's that distinction.)
Moonlit's suggestion to check TBF is against what I think is best (i.e. suggesting an investigation), and later vote requested by FoU should be rendered totally non-binding. Which is not to say it might not happen that way, but I don't see a value in targeting any particular individual, especially on request of another. And we also have a second possible pairing (Moonlit and TBF), one or both of whom might actually be misrepresenting/misunderstanding their skills (Protector of someone vs. somehow 'Targetting' the supposed Evildoer?) and actually are effectively allied Lovers. Whether or not they know they are. That's my opinion only, though. Which leads me onto...
...me!
Starver seems like the best option for a lynch, at this point, so I'll keep my vote where it is. Does Starver have anything to say regarding that? Perhaps someone else I should be wary about?Nothing that I'd care to say about myself could ever be trusted, naturally but... I believe that there's a good chance that if I'm around tonight then tomorrow I might well have a more solid argument to suggest a Town win, at least. It would depend on who else does what else, naturally, so no promises. It could go to a third night, which would also suit (theoretically) TBF in his chance to give both the neutral and the town a win, or else FoU to get enough new information, likewise.
Based upon prior evil skills (delayed death-sentence, avoidable death-sentence, recruitment and then pure trickery), I'm personally expecting more than a variation on the second round's theme. I suspect a misfired town/neutral skill. (I wouldn't want to suggest TBF's one-shot claim was a cover for "Honestly, it wasn't me! Not intentionally, anyway!" use of a non-1shot skill, of course.) Evil skills seem to be trending towards the non-violent and more manipulative end of the spectrum, so far, and I wouldn't put it past it being something more like an Evil Cupid, this time round. (Or in a future round... so look out for that!)
If you're genuinely interested in my opinion for today, though, I'd be most inclined to sacrifice TBF (to keep FoU) or TMS (as the least persuasive, to me, whether or not (or knowingly or not!) in a secret 'affair' that would kill A.N.Other). Not sure yet which I'd plump for, but for your consideration. Consider my words and we'll see where we go from there.
(I have, of course, now likely been unfriended by at least two people ;) Their own best choice of voting would be to support my own lynching (if they know they're a pair) or perhaps taking a chance on the the other (if they don't know that to be true)...)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 06:42:16 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 07:13:56 am
One wonders why the protector is protecting the neutral role.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 07:18:16 am
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 09:19:15 am
The issue lies in whether or not Moonlit dies if TBF dies, which is probably likely (or at least just leaves the game) which would leave three of us. Kinda sits nicely in my theory that Starver is scum... which oddly doesn't sit well with me.
Anyway, I think I'll put some pressure on TBF. Given the way things stand right now, seems like a good way to get more information into the game. Moonlit doesn't want him to die but also doesn't seem to want to get involved in things, TBF doesn't want to die and has no great need to get involved in things, and FoU still has his vote on me, so a tied vote will get him killed. Everybody's got something to lose with my vote here ('cept Starver, but that's alright just now, still got lots of time in the day)
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 09:20:39 am
Just to be sure, Tomasque, the day ends today 6pm PST, aye?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 10:02:43 am
Heh. Unvote hector13. Assuming the mark is this round's method of scum killing, we've got time to debate, claim, whatnot.Welp I said that badly. Unvote hector13.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 10:25:07 am
Hector: TBF still wants to find scum, though. Just not kill them.
Exactly, why should we stand for that as town?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 10:28:33 am
1. I investigate TBF.
2. I report the result.
3. We try lynching the result.
4. If result is scum, we win. If not, TBF's closer to being able to shoot the real scum(or he is the scum).
5. Any objections?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 12:19:09 pm
Foolproof plan:
1. I investigate TBF.
2. I report the result.
3. We try lynching the result.
4. If result is scum, we win. If not, TBF's closer to being able to shoot the real scum(or he is the scum).
5. Any objections?
Not quite foolproof, as we need to lynch someone today in order to avoid you being dead.
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 12:51:55 pm
Not quite foolproof, as we need to lynch someone today in order to avoid you being dead.
Good, someone's actually thinking logically. I'm promoting you, in my mind, from merely accepted as having the skill you say to almost as proven in positive alignment as I already had down for Fallacy. There was a possibility that your skill was a devious scum-thing. And I'm not ruling that out, but your objection pushes that possibility well down the rankings.
(The other main objection that I had was that I still don't think the Fallacy should be saying who will be investigated, in case that's useful to the scum. A diversion-power, like Hector's, could have been scummily used against Fish to totally mess up the investigation, and in almost any scenario rendered it useless. Maybe if you accept Hector as non-scum, it's now a good plan, but do consider what else the enemy might have up their sleeve before you go ahead with such a telegraphed action. I like the idea in principle, but I'd rather you (@FoU) would have kept the idea to yourself, saved yourself by a good argument for someone else and then had something useful to say tomorrow.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 02:49:12 pm
So hector: I've got a plan to guard against this possibility. Once the night comes, I'll use random.org to roll a d2. 1, I inspect you, 2, I inspect TheBiggerFish(or Starver if TheBiggerFish is dead). That way, either way town gains some knowledge, and if you're scum, it's less likely that you'll be able to counter my inspection. How's that sound?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 03:14:24 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 03:40:27 pm
Starver... Why no information?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 03:45:30 pm
All, I'd rather win than lose, thanks. If I win, town wins because scum goes poof. So can we do the plan with a modified step 4 instead where I pyschiatrist the result the next night and then you have a safe lynch because then it's either everyone wins or I can no longer win.
Are you absolutely certain that if you win, the town wins with you?
You know, wouldn't it be absolutely horrible if hector was the scum and he had the randomization power...
So hector: I've got a plan to guard against this possibility. Once the night comes, I'll use random.org to roll a d2. 1, I inspect you, 2, I inspect TheBiggerFish(or Starver if TheBiggerFish is dead). That way, either way town gains some knowledge, and if you're scum, it's less likely that you'll be able to counter my inspection. How's that sound?
It would be since it's not a particularly useful skill for an alignment that needs to kill everyone :P on the other hand, wouldn't it be absolutely horrible if you were fakeclaiming scum?
As I said, I'll more 'n likely be targeting myself again, unless everyone rails against it. I shall repeat my biggest issue with your ability is if you investigate me, it doesn't really tell us anything, whether the result is the same or different. If TBF is being honest and he requires the Evil role to win, you'd be better investigating him.
We need to lynch someone if we don't want to lose you anyway. Starver is my choice.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 03:46:40 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 03:47:03 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 03:49:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 03:52:39 pm
I mean, it makes the generic Town 'Scum is eliminated' wincon true.
Not necessarily, brah. Neutral means no affiliations. You're neither for nor against town. Same as you're neither for nor against scum.
What does your ability actually do?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 03:55:38 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 03:57:24 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 04:00:05 pm
Your role is sufficiently different enough for you to not be considered town, despite you allegedly having the same wincon as the town: eliminate the Evil role. Why do you think that is?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 04:01:43 pm
(Neither do I, because if I miss, I lose.)
Post by: Tomasque on February 25, 2016, 04:55:10 pm
When the day is over.Also Tomasque:WHEN will FoU die?
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 05:05:23 pm
He hasn't yet, I don't think.Because scum would use my information against me (I've indicated this already). And I don't feel like lying about it, even though I could. I'm giving you a lot of useful deductions, instead, which I really wouldn't if I was trying to destroy Town/let town destroy itself.
Starver... Why no information?
I originally had (a shorter version of) the following thought in my last message, but I removed it before posting thinking it was saying things that any other Town would have worked out, but I've actually been out for a meal and come back having reconsidered any worth of my withholding of it...
Basically, to save Fallacy (currently most unlikely to be the scum), there needs to be a Lynch. I maintain that I'm useful (for a start, everyone's asking me my opinion, but I also have those hopes for positive information tomorrow), but of course that could be your choice. Your loss if it is, if you don't consider my thoughts on the matter sufficiently objective.
I say Hector's probably true-blue Town. Hector-as-a-scum could have 'forgotten' that key point (I left it unmentioned, deliberately, to see who would say something about it - I doubted a scum would volunteer the information) and perhaps left Fallacy to die by omission. I still think Hector's skill could be worthy of scum, but I'm giving it a low chance of it actually being so, based upon current information.
Fish's status is unknown but optimistically considered to be at least not anti-town. This is the big question we're hoping to answer, of course. But (we are told) that if Fish dies, Moonlit dies. Dare we chance two Townies dying, and no Scum, just for the chance that we've killed one innocent Townie and in the process of destroying the Scum?
Barring me (an admitted unknown, from your perspectives, but I've said all that I want to say about that), the only remaining "save Fallacy" candidate for lynching is Moonlit. If Moonlit dies, what do we lose? Apparently the protection of someone we're only marginally trusting/considering useful, anyway... One death now. (There's other ways to protect TBF.) Maybe Town (a pity, but no big problem given the lack of ability), maybe Scum (the only person who fully loses out, from what is made public, is TBF... and that's something I don't yet believe fully so I couldn't say that's a certainty).
I say TMS, for practical reasons. If this doesn't straight-up end the round, and everyone else plays their part wisely during the night, tomorrow might reshape some of the assumptions, and I still hope to be able to prove my worth.
TMS should immediately vote for me, though. I've nothing to lose from that if everyone else decides (whatever the motive) between us two. Although I'm willing to change elsewhere, myself, if somebody has something convincing to say.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:15:10 pm
I can redirect anybody targeting a particular player, so I might do that with you if what you reveal is true and/or makes sense. And probably is useful. We also have Moonlit claiming a protect action, though he's unlikely to want to use it on anyone other than TBF.
PPE: people need to refer to me as a redirector, not a randomiser. It's randomly chosen where the action ends up, but I specifically have to choose someone who is acted upon (and I'm not notified of success/failure) rather than "hey you, random target for whatever action you chose to perform, bro"
Anyway, Starver needs a direct claim at this point. I think we're <4 hours away from day end?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:15:58 pm
As things stand, FoU dies.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 05:17:12 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:18:25 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Might I inquire why, TBF?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 05:20:03 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 05:21:22 pm
Wait, why do we need a redirector?
hector13.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:25:31 pm
PPE: @Moonlit: PST. Starver is in GMT, it's not quite 10.30pm there yet.
@TBF: So you're willing to lynch someone who's claimed and has claimed town then? As opposed to Starver, who hints at useful and hasn't claimed anything? Niiice.
Again, as things stand, FoU dies. So maybe it's not me you want to kill then?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:28:46 pm
Also, hammers don't come into effect 'til D3, seeing as how everybody voted me in Round 1 before I had an opporchancity to defend myself.
... bastards :P
PPE: Starver has been on late evening/super early morning before. Past performance doesn't guarantee future results, of course, but he might be on.
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 05:34:01 pm
What could scum do with knowledge of your role?If I told you this, I'd tell the scum this. (Without it being necessary to conflate those two identities.)
I'm already pretty sure I'm not helping myself (tonight, that is).
And I also don't want to explicitly say "the other way to protect TBF". I really think all should be worked out in private, though it still looks like there's some confusion over that...
'Nuff said, for now, though.
(FAKEDIT: How many new replies? No, nothing new to add, or else I may not be useful to you (the majority!). Except that I have gone to bed early, as well, but that's been before 'now', so it's still very much up for grabs whether I'm absent or present at the actual end of day.)
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:36:23 pm
TBF's claim is a good one for cheeky scum. "I'm neutral but need to kill the Evil role anyway!"
Also, the reason he's voting me ("his role is shite!" basically) is... what?
Is it worth risking losing TMS, who hasn't claimed an alignment yet, to get rid of him, though?
FoU has been toying with the idea of investigating him... perhaps he's trying to off him in a roundabout manner?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 05:39:16 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:44:08 pm
It's "If you're town, you're going to win anyway, but the protector and the investigator are probably better people to have around." Assuming neither are lying, that is.
What, the protector who isn't going to protect anyone other than you, the neutral role? Fantastically useful. You're much less useful than I am, since you need to figure out who the scum is without telling the town. Tell us why that's more useful than a town redirector?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:44:49 pm
And again, as things stand, FoU will die. Why do you want to kill 'im so bad?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:48:13 pm
Right right right.
Never mind, TBF, not engaging in an argument with you since you don't want to lynch scum, so it would detract from actually finding the scum.
So based on that, he's voted for me and TMS, and thinks FoU is an investigator, so he at least seems to agree Starver is scum.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:51:28 pm
EBWOP: Hector: Remember, I don't care if TBF loses.
Aye, I know.
What are your thought regarding FoU?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 05:56:48 pm
You say you think FoU is town, yet urge caution with him. That sounds like fence-sitting to me.
Like I keep saying, he's gonna die if we don't do anything. Would you be happy with that?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 06:00:16 pm
How's about you answer my questions too? TMS
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 06:03:32 pm
So based on that, he's voted for me and TMS, and thinks FoU is an investigator, so he at least seems to agree Starver is scum.The hypothetical-really-is-neutral-scum-hunter making the current vote would be fairly sure you're now innocent (like he was originally fairly sure that TMS was innocent, but now might not be so sure), and I wouldn't argue. With either of those assumptions. But I don't have the same motivations and I gain nothing from such a tactic.
(The alternate actually-is-a-stinking-rotten-lying-scum version might likewise find you to be the best target for a mislynch, from all those who are not himself.)
I'd be flattered, either way.
(And still the replies come in, as I'm typing...)
@TMS: Doesn't matter, for I've explained myself as much as I currently want to. And now I've said "I've explained myself as much as I currently want to" as much as I currently want to... Don't make yourself look like a nuisance. Ah, good, at last the vote for me that you have to make. Took you long enough. Now Let everyone else decide... boy, new replies are coming in quick and fast.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 06:06:44 pm
Wait, why do we need a redirector?Better question: Why would town need a randomizer/redirector? If hector was a town weakness role, perhaps that might make sense, but-
A randomize. Whoever he targets will have all actions targeted on him/her randomized. How does that fit into the town? We already have a claimed protector.
How does this ability fit into the town? The other abilities claimed make sense(protector(protects the Neutral), inspector, ???, 1-shot kill Evil role(owned by Neutral))
With that, it's either Starver or hector13.
Starver's claimed nothing, hector's claimed something that doesn't make sense. Starver hiding his power may make sense for town.
I say we lynch hector13, then shout at TBF a lot if he turns out town.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 06:08:40 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 06:10:04 pm
Wait, why do we need a redirector?Better question: Why would town need a randomizer/redirector? If hector was a town weakness role, perhaps that might make sense, but-
A randomize. Whoever he targets will have all actions targeted on him/her randomized. How does that fit into the town? We already have a claimed protector.
How does this ability fit into the town? The other abilities claimed make sense(protector(protects the Neutral), inspector, ???, 1-shot kill Evil role(owned by Neutral))
With that, it's either Starver or hector13.
Starver's claimed nothing, hector's claimed something that doesn't make sense. Starver hiding his power may make sense for town.
I say we lynch hector13, then shout at TBF a lot if he turns out town.
How does your claim make any more sense than mine, hm? Why do we need an investigator to tell us who someone needs to win? How does that fit into town, as you put it?
PPE: 2 votes each for me and TMS.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 06:10:21 pm
and, for the nth time, FoU dies.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 06:14:20 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 06:14:53 pm
Wait, did the day just end?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 06:15:37 pm
Straw man. I didn't ask that question. I asked you how your role fits into the town. A better way to say it might be "how does your role help the town"?
That's exactly my point, Fallacy. My role fits into town just as well as your's does, yet you see that as reason to lynch me.
PPE: 2hrs 45mins, yet. I think.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 06:19:57 pm
My role fits into town just as well as yours does...Explain.
My role gathers information. Your role... interferes with aim and potentially gives my role false results(I targeted you but I got another player's win condition thing, it didn't tell me I was randomized, assuming you're telling the truth). If you use it on who the scum uses their kill action on, the kill action still hits somebody.
Let me go over this again.
I inspect. TMS protects. TBF semi-kills. You randomize. Starver... ???
So from my perspective, it's either you or Starver.
Explain why Starver(or TBF, your choice, but preferably Starver) is more scummy than you.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 06:21:47 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 06:30:19 pm
So, you ask. My result on hector13? He requires no one in order to win. That's what I got for a result. It could mean he's a townie with an unchanged win condition, it could also mean he's scum.
This is what you said when you announced your result on investigating "me". You said I could be town or I could be scum based on what you got. In what way is that useful?
Put another way, how is it any more useful than a random redirect?
PPE: You say your role provides information. What information did your N0 investigation give us? /genuine question
Assuming everyone is being honest, that means you hit one of TMS, TBF or Starver. Given what they're all saying, who do you think it hit?
I also voted TMS, not TBF. So... The Moonlit Shadow, to avoid confusion for Tomasque.
I've been saying from the frickin' start (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6830638#msg6830638) I think it's Moonlit or Starver. My reasons remain more or less unchanged, beyond second guessing myself about everything (which I'm not going into, because it's all very WIFOM-y)
The only thing that's changed is I'm quite willing to let you die just now, because your role, like mine, is of negligible utility (at least based on your first result) so I don't think we lose that much.
I'd much prefer to lynch one of Moonlit or Starver, but you're not going for it. Oh well.
One thing that occurred to me is the mark might just be an issue for the scum this round. They're marked and have to kill everyone else to avoid it triggering. Speculation, though.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 06:40:24 pm
@Hector: There's no way it hit me. It would've shown TBF if it had. That means I think it hit Starver.
Do explain this one.
Also explain why you didn't mention it a bit earlier than 2.5hrs before the day ended :-\
And you do realize you're going against everyone who you think is town? Doesn't mean too much, I mean they could all be wrong.
What do you mean? Everyone I think is town is voting me? If so, it doesn't change my thoughts. I just think they're stupid on top of it :P
I understand where FoU is coming from, though in his position I'd also be considering you as scum.
TBF's reason is quite frankly nonsense, but if he is the neutral role who needs to target the Evil role with a night action, he isn't going to vote to lynch scum during the day, is he?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 06:42:32 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 06:44:45 pm
I say we lynch hector13, then shout at TBF a lot if he turns out town.
Would you not be responsible for lynching someone you vote for, then?
Starver, if you have an investigator role, do tell us now, please.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 07:14:25 pm
So, you ask. My result on hector13? He requires no one in order to win. That's what I got for a result. It could mean he's a townie with an unchanged win condition, it could also mean he's scum.This.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 07:15:29 pm
This what?So, you ask. My result on hector13? He requires no one in order to win. That's what I got for a result. It could mean he's a townie with an unchanged win condition, it could also mean he's scum.This.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 07:15:47 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 07:18:31 pm
Does it tell us anything useful, is my point. What about it is useful?
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 07:19:12 pm
Starver, if you have an investigator role, do tell us now, please.I am not a Town Investigator, but I can give (and have given, whether or not you realise it) actual information useful to town. I shall say it again: I am necessarily withholding the nature/source of this information from town because it would also mean revealing information to everyone, including scum, that would not help me and might well disadvantage Town. I have already lost an advantage, maybe by saying as much as I have, but there's nothing I can do about reversing the associated harm and it's all out of my hands and down to you all to deal with it instead.
I'm confident that there's more than just me (and scum) who is not saying everything they know. I'm just being pragmatically open about it.
I say you all throw your dice (if you're not already happy with how they're currently cast), and come back and mark my words after the final reveal. You'll kick yourselves for not believing me. As I'll probably kick myself, when I perhaps discover one particular fact that I have yet to even understand that I must uncover, lest you believe I'm also subject to hubris.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 07:24:12 pm
Does it tell us anything useful, is my point. What about it is useful?Whoever I ended up inspecting([sarcasm]thank you for that uncertainty[/sarcasm]) doesn't have a modified(beyond what's normal) win condition. It's all about truth and lies.
I am Neutral....
so we have two Neutral claims. It's possible(recall Round 3) for both to be true... but is it?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 07:25:08 pm
Ninja's stop it.
1. I need TBF to win. TBF explicitly needs the Evil role to win. It was mentioned in your post just before it. 2. a) Yep. Exactly. b) Why? Your main reason for voting me, if I recall, is that I'm not helpful. With my wincon, I'm not the most helpful to town, but then again I am Neutral. You seem like a Town Weakness, as your role with hurt as often as it helps. That's another reason I'm not voting you. c) You are right, of course.
Okay. This is assuming you're being honest...
FoU, what say you? I'd prefer to lynch Starver, particularly given this analysis; you make that difficult.
PPE: There are five people and four role archetypes. Do the maths :P
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 07:34:23 pm
so we have two Neutral claims. It's possible(recall Round 3) for both to be true... but is it?And round 4.
(Round 3, four players: two Specials, no Neutrals/Weaks, one of everything else.)
(Round 4, five players: two Specials, no Neutral, one of everything else.)
(Round 5, five players: ? ? ? ...to be revealed, but something will be hokey!)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 07:42:14 pm
Which is to say, it's possible for there to be two of one archetype, so I can't debunk TMS' claim based on that.
Arg this is a headache.
~~~
Now, you know I'd prefer to lynch you, as your role claim does not fit what we have claimed, nor does it benefit the town. And for all I know, it could be a fake claim meant to make me distrust my result.
Now, I'll presume a hypothetical scenario in which you cast some sort of reality warping voodoo that makes your lynch no longer possible.
In which case... Starver's hiding everything, TBF and TMS are much more transparent. But... consider TMS' claim, that he needs to have TBF alive to win. And TBF needs to shoot the scum. So TMS claiming to be TBF's guardian or whatnot could translate to "Don't get me! I'm a good guy! I'm protecting the guy that wants to assassinate the Evil role! Don't you see?". But TBF's claim could be him being a different type of Neutral role that does something else trying to avoid being lynched because he's good for town.
Heck... you look at TBF and TMS, the reasons both of them have for not being lynched is "I'm neutral, but my wincon is town comparable! Don't kill me and I'll help you out!"
So basically... TBF, TMS, and Starver are all asking for trust from the town. But Starver is asking for a lot more trust than TBF, and TBF is asking for more trust than TMS.
So let's go payoffs. What does town lose from eliminating a protector? The lack of protection- which... we're not trying to slow this down- the scum can use their mark(assuming that's what they do) without fear of having it be prevented by a protection. But if a townie is marked(in my case for instance)... when one thinks about it... unless the mark can be self-targeting, we've basically got a confirmed townie for each mark hit. Assuming it can't self-target. So we don't lose as much from lynching TMS as we do from lynching TBF- TBF has an ability that can remove the scum from the equation alltogether(not necessarily resulting in a town win, however, consider that if it resulted in a town win, it would make some more sense for him to be a town player, maybe Town Weakness, because he has to hit the Evil role with his ability to win(consider the Librarian from Round 1)). But what do we lose from lynching Starver? We don't know. He could be scum gambitting, or he could be town telling the truth. He's the unknown variable in this equation. So if you weren't an option for lynching, I'd lynch TMS or Starver.
~~~
PPE: There are five people and four role archetypes. Do the maths :PEvil, Neutral, Town Investigative, Town Special, Town Weakness. Five.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 07:56:10 pm
I'd like to ask you how you think a protection role is useful to town, when that protection role needs someone specifically to live, and that particular someone isn't town.
How does my claim not fit what we've claimed? I specifically stated I was a Town Special earlier. I'm not like the librarian in the first round in that getting wet loses the game, I have an ability that is useful to town (which appears to be just you and me) in that it allows me to keep us from getting marked. This is all I can do, so I can't stop a lynch.
Nor can I stop you from dying to the mark, which is what is going to happen.
I'll change my vote to Starver, as that's who I want to actually see get lynched.
Question for everyone: Moonlit has claimed a protect ability, and a protect TBF wincon... does that not seem a bit OP? The only way TBF will die is through a lynch, since Moonlit is gonna protect TBF every night. No risk of the neutrals losing..?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 08:00:44 pm
Moonlit has claimed a protect ability, and a protect TBF wincon... does that not seem a bit OP?Actually, yes. The Moonlit Shadow. The last point made by hector13 pushed me over the edge.
I'd like to ask you how you think a protection role is useful to town, when that protection role needs someone specifically to live, and that particular someone isn't town.Yeah. Assuming the protector isn't going to protect any town players, it's not useful at all to town.
The Moonlit Shadow: What do you protect against, in your knowledge?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 08:06:00 pm
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 08:06:42 pm
Town Weakness or Neutral.That's how it started, but who knows now. (Actually, someone does have a decent chance of knowing something extra, IIRC. I forget who. I must check.)
Quote
Question for everyone: Moonlit has claimed a protect ability, and a protect TBF wincon... does that not seem a bit OP? The only way TBF will die is through a lynch, since Moonlit is gonna protect TBF every night. No risk of the neutrals losing..?It'd be interesting to know (although I suspect even you don't have that information) if your ability, applied to TBF, would divert the presumed protection but then leave the way open for a presumed attack straight after.
I'll have to admit, though, I'd not even considered the ramification you've just pointed out. But as this just enhances some of my feelings about the pairing, it's not me that needs to change my mind.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 08:07:47 pm
Votecount please.
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 08:10:19 pm
(Actually, someone does have a decent chance of knowing something extra, IIRC. I forget who. I must check.)...had a look. That'd be TBF, if I properly understood something said in Round 4.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 08:12:54 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 08:22:53 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 08:26:43 pm
I'm not cool with FoU dying.
So I guess that makes it up to me to break the tie.
Ergh.
The Moonlit Shadow...Reluctantly.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 08:38:08 pm
Perhaps we should lynch TBF since he's not gonna go with town on lynching scum. I'd rather not risk him losing it for us 'cause he can't figure out who scum is.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 08:38:55 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 08:41:34 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 08:42:31 pm
Well,at least the tie's broken.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 08:46:20 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 08:49:51 pm
TBF I remember, but I don't understand what you're doing.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 08:55:19 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 08:56:55 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 09:01:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 09:03:07 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 09:33:01 pm
Starver.
Bleh. Here's hoping I haven't borked it all up.
Tomasque:If I'm voting someone can I use my ability on them in the lynch?
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 10:09:24 pm
No, day isn't over till Tomasque says it's over.
Starver.
Bleh. Here's hoping I haven't borked it all up.
Tomasque:If I'm voting someone can I use my ability on them in the lynch?
Day's over, no talking!
Post by: Tomasque on February 25, 2016, 10:13:55 pm
Votecount
Hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (1) - hector13
Starver (1) - The Moonlit Shadow
The Moonlit Shadow (2) - Starver, FallacyofUrist
Not Voting: TheBiggerFish
The Moonlit Shadow was the Stalker
Spoiler: Stalker (click to show/hide)
hector13 gets one victory point.
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 10:14:29 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 10:15:08 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 10:15:54 pm
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 10:20:00 pm
(That message, before this one, will get edited and make these speculations look silly, of course. But I await(/have awaited) with trepidation.)
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 10:21:06 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 10:32:15 pm
EBWOP: Also, that "Round over" post might not end up being a Round Over post, so best not to spill any beans yet, everyone!Yeah... no. That would be a full bastard mechanic. This is only a semi-bastard game.
But who got lynched? Who was it?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 10:34:40 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 10:35:22 pm
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 10:39:56 pm
What I means is that the post (as I write) is still being edited. I was saying as how the template for the post, currently on display, might say Round Over, but - once populated with the details it might also be changed to say End Of Day 1.EBWOP: Also, that "Round over" post might not end up being a Round Over post, so best not to spill any beans yet, everyone!Yeah... no. That would be a full bastard mechanic. This is only a semi-bastard game.
But who got lynched? Who was it?
Locking the thread to stop inane people like me writing inane things like this might have been a good idea, but as I'm obviously adding things, it hasn't happened and I just wanted to make sure nobody said "Boy, am I glad nobody found out about <foo>", too prematurely...
I really should also shut up myself, but I didn't want anyone to ruin their game, so... Anyway. Future visitors to the thread will of course see the final edit of that post, and then see this little inconsequential and superseded series of posts immediately afterwards. Let's not add too much to that, just yet, I would suggest...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 25, 2016, 10:41:37 pm
I'll stop talking for now.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 10:41:58 pm
Starver.
Starver
TBF I remember, but I don't understand what you're doing.
Actually, yes. The Moonlit Shadow. The last point made by hector13 pushed me over the edge.
Quote from: Starver
No vote.
So assuming TheBiggerFish's most recent vote counted, Starver was the scum.
Unvote.This is his second most recent vote, if I'm right.
Which would have led to a tie if it was the one that counted.
So it was Starver.
Very risky gambit.
~~~
Unless the round isn't actually over. But that's unlikely.
~~~
Dang ninja.
~~~
Double dang ninjas.
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 11:12:19 pm
Then you also fooled yourself. Why the effective suicide?
Also note that the the biggest lie I ever told, during this round is:
I gain nothing from such a tactic.That was a half-truth. That tactic (trying to Lynch most-obviously-Townie Hector) might have helped me, but only if I was right, and I actually decided it was worth risking a different approach (suggesting the lynching of Shadow... which ended up right in just the wrong way!) that might yet have let me win, as above.
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 11:16:10 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 25, 2016, 11:17:29 pm
~~~
... why does this keep happening?
Post by: Starver on February 25, 2016, 11:19:27 pm
Once again, the town win.Obviously because I'm so good at being a Townie, that I get the Town to win even when I'm not supposed to be getting the town to win!
~~~
... why does this keep happening?
*natch*
Post by: Tomasque on February 25, 2016, 11:29:48 pm
Once again, the town win.My thoughts exactly...
~~~
... why does this keep happening?
I'll probably start the next round tomorrow.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2016, 11:35:53 pm
Sorry Starver :( you lost before you even started!
Also, Moonlit managed to lynch himself. I also didn't really think he was the baddie :o
Post by: hector13 on February 26, 2016, 09:20:56 am
Ah well, I'll take the VP.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 26, 2016, 09:23:29 am
Post by: hector13 on February 26, 2016, 09:30:34 am
Edit: why is everyone so honest, too? Pretty much every roleclaim was honest (or partially honest) and Starver (understandably) didn't claim.
It's all very silly.
Post by: Starver on February 26, 2016, 09:47:33 am
*Facepalms*
...so much for that meta-assumption. I missed the mundane because I was looking for the special.
Never mind.
Post by: hector13 on February 26, 2016, 09:49:30 am
*Checks something in thread*
*Facepalms*
...so much for that meta-assumption. I missed the mundane because I was looking for the special.
Never mind.
This means you can reveal all, min.
Post by: Tomasque on February 27, 2016, 12:49:12 am
The night brings with it the secrecy of darkness and fear. Every night, there are noises. Clangs, clacks, and footfalls. Everyone tries to sleep through them. Many don't. It seems that something is going on, but what, no one knows.
Post by: Tomasque on February 27, 2016, 11:16:44 am
In the morning, things are almost normal. The sounds of the night are over, now there is only the bustling of the city. However, there is not a sound coming from city hall. Those that notice usually dismiss it. Those that care band together to uncover the truth. Five people are meeting to find out. There are so few people like them - in fact, there are less than five.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:17:36 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:19:22 am
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 11:19:32 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:19:54 am
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 11:22:30 am
No, he does not have a gun.
How do you know?
If he doesn't have a gun, why should we believe you have a bomb?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:25:14 am
Because I KNOW you had nothing at night.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 11:35:01 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:37:29 am
I can pass it to someone else.
TMS:Because I looked.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:46:09 am
Tomasque just PMed me.
You did have a gun last night.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:46:52 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:48:51 am
No, investigated.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:50:40 am
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 11:51:29 am
So is passing the bomb a night action? Do you know if it's like pass the parcel, or is the person you send it to stuck with it?
What about killing with the gun? You say it ends the phase, which... I guess only makes sense during the day, because kill actions traditionally (perhaps not necessarily in a (semi-)bastard game) are the last ones to happen.
PPE: interesting distinction TBF. Do you think Moonlit had the gun from the start?
PPE2:+4 replies...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:56:14 am
Passing it is a night action.
You can only pass it once you've got it AFAIK. So whomever it is will probably be exploded.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 11:59:01 am
Wonder if we have a disarmer role?
For the bomb or the gun?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 03:16:21 pm
~~~
And, theoretically, if I get the bomb, it will be dealt with. I don't know if it will explode before I throw it away(automatically).
~~~
So this round is themed around items, yeh?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 03:17:44 pm
~~~
Define 'throw away'.
~~~
Yes, probably.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 03:20:22 pm
NICE TRY, SCUM! YOU CANNOT BLACKMAIL ME!
~~~
And, theoretically, if I get the bomb, it will be dealt with. I don't know if it will explode before I throw it away(automatically).
Theoretically, this could mean you're scum (again, wtf!?) who can't be blown up as well as that you were targeted by false scum...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 03:22:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 03:26:01 pm
NICE TRY, SCUM! YOU CANNOT BLACKMAIL ME!
~~~
And, theoretically, if I get the bomb, it will be dealt with. I don't know if it will explode before I throw it away(automatically).
Theoretically, this could mean you're scum (again, wtf!?) who can't be blown up as well as that you were targeted by false scum...
Reading that again makes no sense.
You're scum and either the bomb or the gun are your doing (maybe both?) and you can't be blown up, so you're trying to make it seem like the "scum" tried to blackmail you in order to throw us off your scent.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 03:27:19 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 03:30:07 pm
I have two auto abilities.
One causes me to throw away/into the trash/whatnot any and all items I receive. Including blackmail, apparently.
The other... is peculiar. Very peculiar. Very very peculiar. I'd rather ponder it by myself for a while, but if all the players other than me want to ponder it also, I'll reveal it. I don't particularly want to reveal it yet, because knowing what it is would be beneficial for the scum to know, based on what it is...
~~~
So yeah. At the start of this marathon, I was thinking there was no way Tomasque could come up with 21 original(non-repetitive, anyway) setups.
I'm not so sure about that now.
~~~
Two ninjas.
~~~
I'm a Town Weakness role, by the way.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 03:31:26 pm
But yeah, I'm giving you that bomb then.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 03:32:18 pm
Post by: Starver on February 27, 2016, 05:47:47 pm
Two claims (of various strengths) and apparently a major crisis already solved. I think the mod's either laughing or crying, right now!
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 05:50:10 pm
Oh, hello... Everything kicked off whilst I was out for the day.
Two claims (of various strengths) and apparently a major crisis already solved. I think the mod's either laughing or crying, right now!
What do you think about the various claims?
What makes you think the crisis has been averted?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 06:02:38 pm
You seem verrrry concerned with convincing us you're Town Weakness.
But yeah, I'm giving you that bomb then.
I'm... willing to risk it.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 06:05:32 pm
@hector:You seem verrrry concerned with convincing us you're Town Weakness.
But yeah, I'm giving you that bomb then.I'm... willing to risk it.
What about it..?
The questions were directed at Starver, byraway.
Post by: Starver on February 27, 2016, 06:11:58 pm
What do you think about the various claims?I can't contest them (yet!)
Quote
What makes you think the crisis has been averted?A crisis. If (as it is being suggested) various weapons are being gifted to various people, then there's no reason not to suspect that someone indeed received a bomb (rather than had the bomb from the start) and could have then kept it secret and used it for their own purposes.
So credit to Fish. I'm inclined to believe that it's not a great big scum-gambit, and to consider Fish's other claims.
But there's still a gun (even though we know where it is), likely with its own counter. And a threat of blackmail, if that counter is true (but it sounds like the one person who could have legitimately negated that will now not even get the opportunity, putting everyone else at risk). And..?
...Not really sure what's next. But a crisis is averted. Potentially so, anyway. Depends on if everyone's claims and intentions come out as true. I'm going to stay on guard, of course.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 06:13:12 pm
Post by: Starver on February 27, 2016, 06:15:26 pm
Could this be a Cult round, maybe?Probably not as bad as that, it's not even a full Bastard one!
Oh, Cult. Sorry, misread you there. ;)
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 06:17:16 pm
Could this be a Cult round, maybe?Probably not as bad as that, it's not even a full Bastard one!
Oh, Cult. Sorry, misread you there. ;)
Oh dear.
So, for that, you can have the first vote, Starver :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 06:18:52 pm
Post by: Starver on February 27, 2016, 06:20:09 pm
Oh dear.
So, for that, you can have the first vote, Starver :P
You know, I've had this feeling of deja vu before...
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 06:22:50 pm
Oh dear.
So, for that, you can have the first vote, Starver :P
You know, I've had this feeling of deja vu before...
I'll ask a question then, just to make it more reasonable.
You dropping hints again?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 06:25:14 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 06:29:01 pm
@TBF: A lot of items, aren't there?
From FoU's claim I'd say everyone has an item and everyone also has an auto that lets them get rid of a different item. That'd be cool, anyway.
Still, wonder if it's possible for me to hand off the gun. I think that whoever gave me that would get it back at the end of the day, since it doesn't say I can hand it off. Wonder if I can shoot it at night? Probably won't (if there is a lynch), it'll turn it to Lylo, but y'know.
Were you told anything about it when you got it? (when/how you can use it, what happens when you use it, what happens if you don't use it etc.)
Post by: Starver on February 27, 2016, 06:50:24 pm
I'll ask a question then, just to make it more reasonable.Actually, no. Too engrossed in working out everyone else, still. Too many gaps. I'll probably have a lead, later.
You dropping hints again?
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 06:53:27 pm
I'll ask a question then, just to make it more reasonable.Actually, no. Too engrossed in working out everyone else, still. Too many gaps. I'll probably have a lead, later.
You dropping hints again?
Are there no leads just now you could follow?
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 07:26:34 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 07:27:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 07:28:49 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 07:39:36 pm
From FoU's claim I'd say everyone has an item and everyone also has an auto that lets them get rid of a different item. That'd be cool, anyway.Well, I didn't start out with an item, and my first auto causes me to throw away all the items I receive....
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 07:40:32 pm
From FoU's claim I'd say everyone has an item and everyone also has an auto that lets them get rid of a different item. That'd be cool, anyway.Well, I didn't start out with an item, and my first auto causes me to throw away all the items I receive....
Do you know anything about the blackmail item?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 07:43:16 pm
I have some theories, though.
Maybe a player who actually receives it and doesn't throw it away has to post within scum-dictated restrictions for the day...
Post by: Starver on February 27, 2016, 07:44:39 pm
Are there no leads just now you could follow?That's not up to me. Daytime leads depend on daytime information, and I already know everything that I know I could myself know.
The next new lead of my very own seemingly can only be followed at night.
Part of the reason why I voted Starver:You just don't like my jokes!
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 07:47:57 pm
Vote count please.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 07:51:20 pm
Are there no leads just now you could follow?That's not up to me. Daytime leads depend on daytime information, and I already know everything that I know I could myself know.
The next new lead of my very own seemingly can only be followed at night.Part of the reason why I voted Starver:You just don't like my jokes!
Nah I groan-chuckles. Best kinda jokes do that.
However, what makes you think you know everything you could possibly know about the day?
For example: Moonlit and myself have made no claims; we don't know where the blackmail, bomb or gun are coming from; nobody has really done any scumhunting at this point.
PPE: I suspect FoU is trying to figure out if you need to kill someone to end the day.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 07:52:46 pm
Round 6 - Day 1
In the morning, things are almost normal. The sounds of the night are over, now there is only the bustling of the city. However, there is not a sound coming from city hall. Those that notice usually dismiss it. Those that care band together to uncover the truth. Five people are meeting to find out. There are so few people like them - in fact, there are less than five.
There's no deadline in the OP (that one and the one before it) for example.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 08:20:20 pm
~~~
FallacyofUrist has activated 1-shot: Brilliant Deduction!(this is only flavor)
I just tied the threads of my knowledge together. And I don't like the conclusion.
/deduce([I'm town weakness, auto one, auto two, I received blackmail(it got discarded)])... question one. Why am I town weakness? The ability to automatically discard all items given to me is so useful when used right? The answer to that question is given by my second auto. Paraphrasing: I'm not part of the evil role's win method.
Hypothesis: The evil role wins by having everyone other than me blackmailed. Evidence: I cannot get blackmailed. But I'm not part of the evil role's win method. Why would my role need me to not be part of the evil role's win method? Well, since I can't be blackmailed, that would prevent the Evil role from winning(assuming the Evil role wins by having everybody blackmailed) unless I didn't count as part of his/her win method. And I'm town weakness. I think that's because for the purposes of the Evil role's win condition(assuming I'm right), I don't count as a player, so there's only 3 players that the Evil role needs dealt with.
Basically: this game is going to be somewhat easy to win for the evil role if we mislynch.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 08:24:33 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 08:28:10 pm
It's a synonym of "useless". I don't have any use for the Evil role, especially considering my role name. If he needed to kill everybody, I think my second auto's name would be more like "not relevant".
Post by: Tomasque on February 27, 2016, 08:29:34 pm
Vote count please.Clarification: There is no voting this round.
:P
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 08:31:55 pm
Another theory: we've got some sort of "arms dealer" town, who is effectively a Kingmaker.
Post by: Tomasque on February 27, 2016, 08:32:49 pm
Clarification: Double-posting is okay.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 08:33:37 pm
Vote count please.There is no voting this round. Oh, you thought I'd tell you guys that when you started voting? Haha - nope. :P
Well I like that. Cheeky bugger :P
Also, called it.
What is your second auto then, FoU? You make it sounds like you can't die.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 09:00:18 pm
If anyone can tell me why, I'll give you a cookie.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 09:14:51 pm
What is your second auto then, FoU? You make it sounds like you can't die.*facepalm*
Paraphrasing: I'm not part of the evil role's win method.My second auto is thus.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 09:15:33 pm
What is your second auto then, FoU? You make it sounds like you can't die.*facepalm*Paraphrasing: I'm not part of the evil role's win method.My second auto is thus.
Have a cookie!
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 09:19:30 pm
Especially if that's an actual item.
So why does that make you suspicious of me?
~~~
Whoever has the gun: shoot me. Really. Do it.
Why? For the scum, it won't help him win if I'm dead, nor will it hinder him. I'm effectively useless to the town and for scum, and having me dead will help narrow down the scum's identity.
Actually, don't shoot me until tomorrow. So I can dispose of the bomb.
~~~
Also: Mod, can we Extend or Shorten the day?
Post by: Tomasque on February 27, 2016, 09:21:11 pm
Mod, can we Extend or Shorten the day?No.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 09:23:03 pm
Seriously.
Gragh.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 09:32:50 pm
However! I know you're not stupid enough to do that, and you will note that the Town Weakness role might also be something else: Neutral.
Given that you're apparently quite happy to be shot or blown up, I find that it's more likely that you need to be acted upon by each of the items once to win. But I don't have the gun or the bomb *shrugs* so it's not up to me.
Equally so, if you're correct about the scum having to blackmail everyone, perhaps if you get targeted multiple times by the same power, you lose, since you're also trying to discourage that from happening. ("I'M IMMUNE, BRO")
This is me assuming that you're being honest about the blackmail, and that it's from the Evil role.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 27, 2016, 09:40:13 pm
we're going to get nowhere just arguing with each other, so let's wait and see what mr. gunman thinks.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 09:43:58 pm
I hope you don't get shot yet, though. Day's just started; we know little about myself, Starver, our gunman and TBF
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 09:46:07 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 09:52:15 pm
Yaaay.
What you "yaaay"'in about? You could be scum! /paranoia
Seriously though, you've made a claim of investigator and having a bomb. We need to figure out the veracity of those and where the bomb came from, if we deem it to be true.
What do you think of my analysis? Moonlit and Starver, too.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:09:49 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:11:26 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 11:22:05 pm
Admittedly this does nothing as you might just be the genesis (phone thinks I'm referring to the bible) of the bomb rather than just the middle-man. Hm. Not necessarily a good idea.
What does your investigation do? (it's obvious, but hey, I need things spelled out from time-to-time)
What do you think your particular variety of investigation means?
Last I spoke of FoU I dealt with the "Town" part of his claimed alignment. Now I will deal with the "Weakness" part: how is being able to essentially eat a deadly bomb a weakness?
He's lying about his alignment; does this make him scum, or neutral?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:25:46 pm
Either way, I'm passing the bomb to FoU.
My investigation gives the items that a person has on that night, and any that they get during the night. I don't know if it draws a distinction but I think it does not.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:26:54 pm
I only 'found' it after my investigate.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 11:39:05 pm
For all I know, I'm the genesis of the bomb, except it was already set to blow when I first encountered it.
I only 'found' it after my investigate.
Hm... Hm.
Are you told what specific items (guns, for example) your role finds, or is it just something along the lines of "you find what items are held"?
What does Moonlit have to say about TBF's findings regarding the bomb?
Do you think town needs to gambit at this point/in a game like this?
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 11:39:38 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:40:22 pm
I don't know. It seems rather a waste of time and effort.
And yes, I did, we went over this.
Post by: hector13 on February 27, 2016, 11:49:20 pm
Just making sure about Moonlit, it was a while back and I'm PFP.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 27, 2016, 11:51:09 pm
Post by: Starver on February 28, 2016, 03:45:23 am
However, what makes you think you know everything you could possibly know about the day?I don't. But it was an unsubtle (I thought) way of saying that until somebody said something else, I've said everything that I could say... ho hum...
Then we got a splurge.
What do you think of my analysis? Moonlit and Starver, too.It's a theory. But I've just woken up, so... Give me an hour to get into gear... ;)
Post by: Starver on February 28, 2016, 05:47:19 am
Clarification: You can only do 1 action per night, unless otherwise noted.This makes me wonder what might then otherwise be noted. There's an assumption that the arms dealer has given out both bomb and gun, so obviously them, if they exist and it isn't just a figment of someone's imagination.
It's clearly not a denial that it's possible. Though (so far) I've got no more than one thing I might be able to do myself. I suppose.
I'm fairly lost as to the surrounding mechanics, though. I don't think I can attach myself to any of the theories put forward.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 28, 2016, 08:32:49 am
Post by: hector13 on February 28, 2016, 09:07:57 am
I was told that I 'received' a gun. That kinda makes the Armsdealer seem more plausible to me.
@TBF: Don't pass the bomb to Fallacy. We have no lynches, and we have these items. What do you think we're supposed to do with them?
About Fallacy: I think his Weakness claim is true. Disarming a bomb isn't a bad thing - unless you want that bomb to kill Scum. Same with the gun - if he'd gotten it we wouldn't have been able to shoot it. I'm not shooting him, unless we think he's scum.
We have two attempts to kill Scum as of now (as far as we know, anyway). The bomb will explode, so we need to figure out who to give it to. The gun can wait for now. Don't want to make it LyLo.
The bomb explodes the next morning. You need to shoot someone for us to get there. You will make it LYLO, unless you shoot scum.
Considering we can't lynch people, I think FoU's claim is nonsense. What if he got the gun? We'd be stuck in D1 limbo forever!
What makes his ability to disarm a bomb a weakness, Moonlit?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 28, 2016, 05:56:40 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 28, 2016, 06:04:57 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 28, 2016, 06:18:27 pm
Not a good idea.
Post by: hector13 on February 28, 2016, 06:31:16 pm
How else are can we kill scum?
That's not what I meant, because that would be silly.
There is one scum, while we have seen (potentially) three separate actions be used: guns and bombs and blackmail.
I don't think it makes sense for one role to be providing all three things, so it stands to reason that if one of them originated from scum, the others originated from town or neutral roles.
FoU seems adamant that the blackmail comes from the scum, which is bothersome since, you know, a bomb or a gun could be just as likely, statistically speaking.
Indeed, he's twice as likely to be wrong - choosing at random - than he would be to be correct. He doesn't strike me as one to jump to conclusions with so little information (at least that we know of)
If the scum is generating one of these things, it stands to reason they'd be immune to it too. Why give someone a gun/bomb if they might kill you with it? Though this might be me being overly cautious.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 28, 2016, 06:49:44 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 28, 2016, 06:55:48 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 28, 2016, 08:54:01 pm
TheBiggerFish claims to have a bomb and claims to be able to investigate for items.
Starver claims to have a gun.
The Moonlit Shadow claims nothing.
Same for Hector.
FallacyofUrist(yay me) claims: entire role.
In any case, the day won't end until Starver shoots somebody.
This might take a while.
Post by: hector13 on February 28, 2016, 08:56:15 pm
Why do you want to get shot so bad :-\
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 28, 2016, 09:04:52 pm
And after that... I want to get shot so the town will see my role flip, giving more solid proof for the fact that the scum wins by having everybody blackmailed.
Post by: hector13 on February 28, 2016, 09:07:34 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 28, 2016, 09:18:36 pm
Once I'm dead, everybody will see my role flip, providing verified evidence to everybody about my theory that the scum wins by blackmailing everybody is correct.
If being able to use me to dispose of items is more valuable than that to town, I'm fine with staying alive.
Post by: hector13 on February 28, 2016, 09:24:17 pm
For the scum, it won't help him win or lose if I'm dead. Me being alive has no difference to his/her wincon.
Once I'm dead, everybody will see my role flip, providing verified evidence to everybody about my theory that the scum wins by blackmailing everybody is correct.
If being able to use me to dispose of items is more valuable than that to town, I'm fine with staying alive.
... has the blackmail actually worked on you?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 28, 2016, 11:03:40 pm
Of course, if it worked like that, and it actually did work on me, I wouldn't tell you.
... I finally got invisible text working. Hooray for me.
Post by: Starver on February 29, 2016, 04:40:29 am
Starver claims to have a gun.I'm fairly sure you should swap those two round, at least as far as this reductionist summary goes. I've got no control over today's day-end, if that's what it now is...
The Moonlit Shadow claims nothing.
(And I'm not sure about your whole claim. For all we know, you're a mad bomber, in search of a bomb. And blackmail-proof because you're just mad!?! ...benefit of doubt, right now, but with a niggling feeling.)
Post by: Starver on February 29, 2016, 07:47:45 am
The gun might only be fired a single time. If that's the case, then how would the other two days end?Multiple (one shot?) guns might potentially be on their way, one per day (or, perhaps, night-preceding-the-day). Also bombs and blackmails.
Although I still find myself wondering what 'anti-jamming' mechanism this round's mechanics have, in the event that the round-ending gun gets 'eaten' by the assumed 'universal defuser' character. You might know (possessing the gun), but you also may not be keen to let on. The armourer might know (unless it's a Secret condition to the role), but likewise.
Maybe the armourer (being 'otherwise noted' in private as capable of multiple night actions, to be the sender of both weapons, even if not all known 'gifts') was forced to send his presents to different people, with the caveat that the bomb immediately explodes if the gun ceases to be useful. (Not sure how that would be represented in flavour.) Maybe guns just never get binned, as being of no perceived threat to the recipient so is used as intended even by a 'binner'.
On the other hand, no day end time in the Day post...Not unknown, previously, as a mistake; although it had been corrected (and announced separately) on the other occasions that the mod 'forgot' to say. In this instance, I'll go with the apparent Word Of God that it is deliberate (as per the requires-a-Hammer-to-end Day 3, previously).
I'm almost tempted to suggest we see if bullets can be auto-defused, to end the round. There's the whole point of losing the role that potentially is the one that can save Town, but I'm also worried that a declared bulletproof (well, just blackmail/bomb-proof, in this case, as far as I'm aware) Townie should have remained unknown and able to quietly 'soak it up' rather than declare "Go on, try it on everyone else, because I am immune! Mwuhahaha!!!".
Or then there's the person gleefully declaring that they've got a bomb, right off the bat. If I didn't vastly respect Fish as a player, I'd say it was a rookie mistake to faux-declare something like that to gambit an 'established' innocence (and possibly even "it's not my fault!" should they have ended being later discovered as a perpetrator of a bomb-outrage). There's got to be more to that story, but I wouldn't yet like to say who could be the one to give that information.
i.e., unless someone feels capable of adding more information, I think we're stuck and are left with the need to do something random to generate some new info. I'm not sure how else to walk this issue through...
Post by: Tomasque on February 29, 2016, 08:58:42 am
@Tomasque: There's still a day end, right?Not set to a certain time, no.
Post by: Starver on February 29, 2016, 03:04:58 pm
Since I don't think they can, it's probably Hector or Starver. There's the possibility that Fallacy is a secret Armorer, as well as throwing away anything given to him.
Come to that, the only thing stopping Fallacy from being the armourer is that (apparently) he (eventually!) discovered that the gun landed in your lap, because of some differing night-skill. But then the armourer would know that, although not know whether to admit knowing that, straight off... Giving the bomb to himself (assuming there even is one, but it's a weird claim to invent, unless it's was to 'get the counter-claim in first') might or might not then be a function of the same role, either having to be in the "unless noted" camp as a double-action, or is not even something done last night (the creation of the initial bomb), but is just figuratively set up as the alibi for tonight's action when the bomb will be created and sent (instead of the gun) on a shorter fuse to a 'probably deserving target' then the "I have to pass it on" version.
But there's probably too many ifs in that scenario. I'm reliving my paranoia character, again, it seems. (No, I'm not exactly the same as last round, before you ask. Not that I'm sure I'd have told you if I were, obviously, or that you'd believe me either way, but just thought I'd forestall that before it happens.)
Still, even if we accept some things at face value (I don't, right this moment, doubt the existence of the gun, as that's the sanest, most corroborated and least ambiguous part of the scenario as I think I know it!), the bomb could easily have come from the guy who received a gun, the gun could have easily come from the guy who received a bomb, alternately either of those could have come any of the rest of us (I can't think of a way of proving I'm not the armourer, although someone else might have their own way of finding such a thing out tonight/whenever), and the blackmail (again, assuming it exists) could have come from anybody but the person who I think claims to have received it and neutralised it, but who knows..?
So, are we any closer to a solution? The only thing I would openly believe in is the gun, and I could still be wrong about that...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 03:12:42 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 29, 2016, 03:20:54 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 03:25:29 pm
Especially considering that an investigator confirmed that the gun exists.
I'm really starting to get suspicious of you, though, FoU.
How do you know what you got if you throw it away without looking at it?
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 03:42:41 pm
Yes, that is definitely an obvious conclusion.
Especially considering that an investigator confirmed that the gun exists.
I'm really starting to get suspicious of you, though, FoU.
How do you know what you got if you throw it away without looking at it?
Well... you being an as yet unconfirmed investigator kinda means that we can't be sure. Particularly given your initial "yeah no" when Moonlit mentioned it.
However, Moonlit also said the gun exists, so that's two folk who say it exists. You're the only one who mentioned the bomb, and FoU is the only one who mentioned the blackmail. Of the three, I'm inclined to believe the gun is real; less certain of the bomb. I think the blackmail is BS.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 03:43:33 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 03:46:09 pm
Anyway, Moonlit. Thoughts on who you might shoot?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 03:57:28 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 03:58:27 pm
Post by: Starver on February 29, 2016, 04:05:52 pm
@Starver: TBF's the one with the bomb, not Fallacy.Yeah, I'm apparently already confused enough to have mistyped that. (They're adjacent on my list, and my habit of rarely using the TLA nicknames makes me fall foul of the alliteration, also.)
So obviously take my confusion and move it over a person. That's what I'll meant. Consider this my EBWOP for that. Either way, I'm not sure how helpful I'm being, yet.
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 04:20:03 pm
I really don't want to shoot anyone, but it looks like we have to.
Can we fakevote with color?
I'm not guaranteeing anything, just want to see what people think.
Not TBF, we need his investigating. Fallacy probably no, he was really open about wanting to be shot in the beginning. Also shooting him does nothing.
You and Starver...? Y'know what, I'll shoot Starver. because of something he said earlier.
Haud yer horses, wee man :P
No need to make a rash decision. What makes you want to shoot Starver?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 29, 2016, 04:23:51 pm
How do you know what you got if you throw it away without looking at it?*facepalm 2*
Orange glow for emphasis. And I never said I don't look at it.
Also shooting [Fallacy] does nothing.*facepalm 3*
I throw away items I get. Unless a bullet traveling at a ridiculous speed counts as an item, it would still work on me.
Y'know what, I'll shoot Starver. [ color=transparent ]because of something he said earlier.[ /color ]Invisible text revealed. I am a mighty wizard indeed. Why not just give the reason in the open, though?
I really don't want to shoot anyone, but it looks like we have to.Two things. Yellow glow for emphasis, and you didn't even consider hector in your analysis/list of shooting targets.
I'm not guaranteeing anything, just want to see what people think.
Not TBF, we need his investigating. Fallacy probably no, he was really open about wanting to be shot in the beginning. Also shooting him does nothing.
You and Starver...? Y'know what, I'll shoot Starver. because of something he said earlier.
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 04:23:52 pm
I really don't want to shoot anyone, but it looks like we have to.
Can we fakevote with color?
I'm not guaranteeing anything, just want to see what people think.
Not TBF, we need his investigating. Fallacy probably no, he was really open about wanting to be shot in the beginning. Also shooting him does nothing.
You and Starver...? Y'know what, I'll shoot Starver. because of something he said earlier.
Addendum to the above: wasn't expecting a lot of action when I asked, but the warning was necessary quickly before asking other stuff.
Why do you believe TBF's investigator claim?
Why do you think shooting FoU will do nothing?
PPE: probs too late. Smeg.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on February 29, 2016, 04:25:08 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 04:38:31 pm
Post by: Starver on February 29, 2016, 04:47:09 pm
If you go back a few pages, you'll see that Starver said: I guess we just have to wait until someone does something random (or something similar). There's your random thing. Now, Starver, tell me why I shouldn't shoot you?
I think you're refering to "i.e., unless someone feels capable of adding more information, I think we're stuck and are left with the need to do something random to generate some new info. I'm not sure how else to walk this issue through..." from
here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6842891#msg6842891). The key word being "unless". Someone's (probably several someones're) withholding information.
As to why not me, "I'll probably have a lead, later. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6839335#msg6839335)" Perhaps my usual claim, but you'll admit I have had a reason to say this before.
Post by: Starver on February 29, 2016, 04:48:12 pm
Bear in mind FoU could be gambiting scum, though that's something of a fallacy in how I'm thinking about it. No pun intended.It's a solution, but not one I set great store in, right now.
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 04:49:57 pm
If you go back a few pages, you'll see that Starver said: I guess we just have to wait until someone does something random (or something similar). There's your random thing. Now, Starver, tell me why I shouldn't shoot you?
I think you're refering to "i.e., unless someone feels capable of adding more information, I think we're stuck and are left with the need to do something random to generate some new info. I'm not sure how else to walk this issue through..." from
here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6842891#msg6842891). The key word being "unless". Someone's (probably several someones're) withholding information.
As to why not me, "I'll probably have a lead, later. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6839335#msg6839335)" Perhaps my usual claim, but you'll admit I have had a reason to say this before.
Indeed, in a different game with different role distributions. Doesn't mean it's going to be true now.
How are you going to get your later probable lead?
Post by: Starver on February 29, 2016, 05:07:13 pm
Indeed, in a different game with different role distributions. Doesn't mean it's going to be true now.Naturally. Scepticism is expected.
Consider this just my cashing in on my cache of cachet... (Or at least presenting it as a sample of my collateral.)
Quote
How are you going to get your later probable lead?Spelling it out explicitly never works, so I won't.
Trust or trust not, your choice. Not that it should matter.
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 05:09:31 pm
Indeed, in a different game with different role distributions. Doesn't mean it's going to be true now.Naturally. Scepticism is expected.
Consider this just my cashing in on my cache of cachet... (Or at least presenting it as a sample of my collateral.)QuoteHow are you going to get your later probable lead?Spelling it out explicitly never works, so I won't.
Trust or trust not, your choice. Not that it should matter.
'Tis not my choice though :P
Softclaiming (hinting at a useful role) is kinda silly if you won't answer questions about the hints.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 05:10:26 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 05:14:46 pm
I think that we just got a hint, if the added alliterative appeal means anything.
Do you think it means anything?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 05:15:20 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 05:17:07 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 05:20:27 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 05:22:28 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 05:24:27 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 05:28:04 pm
I don't know. I have to pass the bomb, though, so I can't investigate even though I really want to.
Who are you going to pass the bomb to?
Perhaps Starver is willing to indulge us with revealing what his hints mean?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 05:44:43 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 09:06:07 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 09:08:55 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 09:10:27 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 09:14:32 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 09:17:53 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 09:18:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 09:22:57 pm
TBF has claimed investigator, that you seem to have confirmed. I'm... Alright with that just now, I guess.
FoU has claimed weakness, you accept that while I don't, though I'm not sure shooting him is necessarily a good idea at this point, anyway.
I've asked Starver a few things, but I can't do that to myself so... You guys need to scumhunt me :o
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 09:23:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 09:31:20 pm
Unless you want me to claim. I'd rather not do that right now.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 09:31:46 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 09:35:06 pm
Or I could say the text is blue and hope someone gets it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on February 29, 2016, 09:37:19 pm
Post by: hector13 on February 29, 2016, 09:41:56 pm
Hopefully it's not the only text colour.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 01, 2016, 09:42:33 am
Post by: hector13 on March 01, 2016, 10:31:42 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 01, 2016, 10:48:14 am
If you had the bomb, who would you pass it to tonight?
Post by: hector13 on March 01, 2016, 12:33:19 pm
I'd pass the bomb to you, seeing as you seem convinced you'll be alive after it, and I don't have as heavy suspicions of anyone else as I do you.
Post by: Starver on March 01, 2016, 04:37:49 pm
I would give it to whoever seems scummiest at the end of the day. It's probably our way to kill scum.Well, technically the second scummiest, as you'd probably be shooting the most scummy, in order to make the end of the day happen. (Which, assuming it doesn't end the game, which I suspect it won't, might then reveal info that would significantly change the ideas of everyone else about all the others that remain.)
But, that aside, of course we ought to send the bomb to the (remaining) scummiest-looking. No right-thinking Townie (or intelligently-thinking non-Townie) would say otherwise. (Unless the scum is the one holding the bomb, or unless we have reason to believe that (a/the) scum sent the bomb in the first place and thus has the art to defuse it in the event it comes back again. Any obvious sign of that in the flavour-info, bomb-holder? And then what if the proclaimed gun-holder is inclined to shoot the proclaimed bomb-holder, what happens then? Too many questions, not enough answers!)
This also shows we need better scum-hunting questions than "Will you tell us what you are? Will you tell us what you do? Will you now tell us something new and exciting?"
How about this:
@everyone Five players, five (or four) archetypes... What's your public assessment (without necessarily naming names) as to the tallies?
I'll start: 1 Investigator (possibly claimed), 1 Weakness (definitely claimed), 1 Scum (no less, unless else we're more Bastard than merely Semi-), and the last two likely being distributed into the Neutral/Special spectrum, but I'm wondering whether it's an "it's weak or neutral" situation, with two of one, or possibly one each...
And if either of the 'claims' are false (or we are actually Scumless), there's room for at least one extra Scum, Special and/or Neutral in the mix.
And the challenge to everyone else is to not just say the same as me.
Post by: Starver on March 01, 2016, 04:40:27 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 01, 2016, 04:45:41 pm
@everyone Five players, five (or four) archetypes... What's your public assessment (without necessarily naming names) as to the tallies?
I'll start: 1 Investigator (possibly claimed), 1 Weakness (definitely claimed), 1 Scum (no less, unless else we're more Bastard than merely Semi-), and the last two likely being distributed into the Neutral/Special spectrum, but I'm wondering whether it's an "it's weak or neutral" situation, with two of one, or possibly one each...
You're just parroting the information that's already in the game.
TBF claimed investigator, FoU claimed weakness, and we must have scum otherwise it would be silly. How is this helpful information? :P
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 01, 2016, 04:53:17 pm
A more refined version of that question: what will we gain from continuing to talk, considering we're at something of an impasse right now?
Post by: hector13 on March 01, 2016, 04:57:37 pm
Now, a question to everybody: what is going to change in between now and when TMS shoots somebody?
A more refined version of that question: what will we gain from continuing to talk, considering we're at something of an impasse right now?
Information.
Starver, Moonlit and I haven't been looked into very much as of yet. That's a problem for D1 and beyond.
Could argue that Starver is more interested in the mechanics of the game - something of a scummy thing to do - than figuring out the other players but we'll see how that pans out.
Post by: hector13 on March 01, 2016, 04:59:50 pm
@Starver
That's a generic list. And furthermore, it's trying to get me and Hector to claim our role catagories.
I'd like to say something. Didn't Hector (or someone) say that they thought the Blackmail was BS? So I think I'll reconsider this... he may not be lying about his throw away role, but he could definitely have an auto with an ability.
Missed this post.
I did say I thought the blackmail was BS, though this comes from fundamentally not trusting FoU this round.
I'm also not sure what you mean by the bolded part. Who is "he"? Me, FoU or Starver? (presumably not TBF)
PPE: aye, but what does discussion of the mechanics do for us? It won't help us figure out who is what.
Post by: Starver on March 01, 2016, 05:35:39 pm
You're just parroting the information that's already in the game.And you potentially keep spoiling opportunities to trip up the real scum. Or are it yourself, but side-stepping my logical tripwires by some combination of good luck or good judgement. (Complaining that I'm not telling you anything, then refusing to tell anything yourself..? Saying that asking for information that's not even helpful to the scum is scummy..?)
Never mind, that was hardly anything like the "just one more thing, sir" of the professional Columbo, it was just an attempt to get us (as Fallacy also pointed out was necessary) moved on from this current quagmire. Maybe it failed, maybe it didn't!
@StarverNot at all. I left you leeway enough for everyone (and it was also aimed at the others, partly/fully-claimed as they are, but never mind now) to keep it vague insofar as your own role, if you want to. Looks like you both have dodged the issue, beyond even that 'allowance'. But as you're the one with the gun, I think that rather narrows the logical course of action when it comes to firing said gun. But you've really got to make up your mind on that one on your own.
That's a generic list. And furthermore, it's trying to get me and Hector to claim our role catagories.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 01, 2016, 05:42:07 pm
I personally saw no indication that the bomb is defusable.
I don't know what other roles would make of it, however.
Post by: hector13 on March 01, 2016, 06:39:38 pm
You're just parroting the information that's already in the game.And you potentially keep spoiling opportunities to trip up the real scum. Or are it yourself, but side-stepping my logical tripwires by some combination of good luck or good judgement. (Complaining that I'm not telling you anything, then refusing to tell anything yourself..? Saying that asking for information that's not even helpful to the scum is scummy..?)
Never mind, that was hardly anything like the "just one more thing, sir" of the professional Columbo, it was just an attempt to get us (as Fallacy also pointed out was necessary) moved on from this current quagmire. Maybe it failed, maybe it didn't!
Oh? Do explain how I'm holding back the town.
Also, the information you asked for (and provided!) is readily available in the thread from this round, and it's not particularly helpful to the town either.
I did provide information, just not information that's going to be useful to you. Since you don't need the information as you don't have the gun, I don't see that as an issue.
@StarverNot at all. I left you leeway enough for everyone (and it was also aimed at the others, partly/fully-claimed as they are, but never mind now) to keep it vague insofar as your own role, if you want to. Looks like you both have dodged the issue, beyond even that 'allowance'. But as you're the one with the gun, I think that rather narrows the logical course of action when it comes to firing said gun. But you've really got to make up your mind on that one on your own.
That's a generic list. And furthermore, it's trying to get me and Hector to claim our role catagories.
Uh... no he doesn't. Assuming he's town, anyway. Even if he's not, he can't win the round by killing one person, so he at least needs to put effort into looking as though he's considering what the rest of the players are saying.
What issue did we dodge, exactly? How did you answer your own question when we've all pretty much come to the same conclusion re: role distribution in this round by, you know, reading through the thread?
Post by: hector13 on March 01, 2016, 09:39:31 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 02, 2016, 09:39:37 am
~~~
Let's go through the possibilities for a shooting.
The Moonlit Shadow(well, you aren't going to shoot yourself(Don't even think about it))
FallacyofUrist(I would prefer that you not shoot me until day 2 so I can dispose of the bomb. Of course, someone else might have a/the gun by then... if you don't want to shoot me, that's also fine, though)
Starver(... has he claimed anything yet? No?)
TBF(assuming he's telling the truth about the bomb and being an investigator for items... if he's telling the truth, you shouldn't shoot him. And he hasn't done anything that makes it seem like he's lying yet. If you shoot him, he can't use the bomb. Which might be acceptable, but if he's an investigator as he claims, we lose... quite a bit.)
Hector13(the text is blue, he says. Yeah, that's crazy talk. Maybe day 2 he'll actually spout something more clear...)
Which is to say you should shoot Hector13 or Starver. If you can't decide between them, you can use random.org or a coin to choose which one.
~~~
Option two: we all vote in purple or such, then you shoot the person with the most votes other than yourself.
Post by: hector13 on March 02, 2016, 10:04:42 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 02, 2016, 10:39:07 am
We're already doing option 2 :/Are we?
I think I'll shoot you.Considering this...
~~~
I don't want the bomb to be defused. It makes it more likely that scum will get a gun/weapon.How so?
~~~
Also, everybody, in the event that I am shot/blown up, please don't forget about my theory that the scum wins by having everybody blackmailed.
Post by: hector13 on March 02, 2016, 10:44:46 am
We're already doing option 2 :/Are we?I think I'll shoot you.Considering this...
~~~I don't want the bomb to be defused. It makes it more likely that scum will get a gun/weapon.How so?
~~~
Also, everybody, in the event that I am shot/blown up, please don't forget about my theory that the scum wins by having everybody blackmailed.
It will be considered.
Does anyone want to help Moonlit with anything? 'cause if not, he needs to make a decision. This is dragging on and we're not getting anywhere.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 02, 2016, 10:54:31 am
I think I'll shoot you.
Post by: hector13 on March 02, 2016, 10:55:20 am
Post by: hector13 on March 02, 2016, 02:25:39 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 02, 2016, 03:22:24 pm
1)FoU (who I have already voted for):Claims third mechanic and strikingly useful power for Town Weakness pattern. Eliminating an unwanted nightkill...Not a weakness. Immunity to the alleged conversion mechanic...Not a weakness. Irrelevance to scum wincon...Not a weakness, unless you go blabbing about it! If he wasn't already on Moonlit's radar, he's the guy I'm passing the bomb to, unless something comes up and proves my suspicions wrong.
TMS:Didn't use daykill despite plenty of viable opportunities. Probably not scum.
Hector:Talkative. Advising caution, but simultaneously pushing for a day end. I'm not sure about you.
Starver:???
I'm really not sure.
Trying to ferret out what other roles we have. That's not necessarily a town thing or a scum thing. Might even be neutral.
All the same, I'm not seeing a lot from your direction.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 02, 2016, 03:33:16 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 02, 2016, 04:02:49 pm
We all seem to unsure about Starver, so if you don't want to end the day, ask him some bloody questions.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 02, 2016, 04:55:29 pm
hector13. In my opinion, it's either him or Starver.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 02, 2016, 04:56:28 pm
Post by: Starver on March 02, 2016, 05:35:09 pm
Starver, who are you?I'm just a guy in the street looking for answers (unofficially, right now, as it's not currently my phase to be directly useful), but getting knocked back by someone who refuses to answer questions then asks everyone to ask me questions...
(I'm not voting, although you can see where I'm personally minded. Across this whole round, Hector has already voted twice for me, you voted twice for Fallacy, and Fallacy just the once for Hector, by my reckoning. Votes that ultimately aren't relevant. Moonlit's got to decide based upon appearances, which I'm not perfectly sure I can objectively know and wouldn't want to 'play with' anyway. Moonlit's own role motivations are going to influence things most of all, and I'm sure that's the sticking point.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 02, 2016, 05:43:21 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 02, 2016, 05:43:39 pm
Post by: Starver on March 02, 2016, 05:58:22 pm
Do you have any questions for any of us?Me?
Well, I already thought I'd get something (not personally revealing, obviously, but philosophically so) from the "What distribution of roles..?" one. But that got kicked straight into the long brush, for whatever reason, and I'm pretty sure that the people who should be on their guard against that definitely now are, thanks to the conversation I felt forced to have about it, so it's rather ruined my best attempts at gaining (and providing) further enlightenment ahead of the inevitable (if directionally-uncertain) gunshot.
Hang on, maybe I can still trick our enemy into revealing himself, with one last clever gambit:
@everyone: Are you the scum? @everyone, as a follow-up question: Are you sure?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 02, 2016, 06:02:17 pm
@Starver:No.
@Starver:Yes.
@Starver:For some reason, I think we have two investigators this round. A scum, and then special and weakness probably.
Post by: hector13 on March 02, 2016, 06:39:04 pm
Don't let me being a dick discourage you from asking questions. If you ask a question I don't think is very good, I'll tell you. If you ask a question I think is reasonable, I'll answer it.
One thing I will say is scum generally don't want the town to get information in the game, but they need to look as though they're doing something. Asking about the setup is one way to look like you're engaging without providing useful information for the town.
I'm also feeling very ill right now, so would like other folk to put effort into finding scum.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 02, 2016, 06:40:08 pm
@everyone: Are you the scum? @everyone, as a follow-up question: Are you sure?No. Yes. Why would you ask these questions?
Post by: Starver on March 02, 2016, 07:14:19 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 03, 2016, 12:31:19 pm
~~~
@Starver:For some reason, I think we have two investigators this round. A scum, and then special and weakness probably.I would love to hear your reasoning for this, if you have any.
~~~
At this point, if I was in your shoes, I would just consider shooting somebody at random. A 1 in 4 chance of shooting the scum, sure, but... it's better than a perpetual quagmire. Then night would happen, and in the morning, we would have new information.
Post by: hector13 on March 03, 2016, 12:36:33 pm
... this is getting nowhere.
~~~@Starver:For some reason, I think we have two investigators this round. A scum, and then special and weakness probably.I would love to hear your reasoning for this, if you have any.
~~~
At this point, if I was in your shoes, I would just consider shooting somebody at random. A 1 in 4 chance of shooting the scum, sure, but... it's better than a perpetual quagmire. Then night would happen, and in the morning, we would have new information.
Oh for the love of the Wee Man. Don't do it randomly.
Post by: hector13 on March 03, 2016, 12:54:32 pm
... this is getting nowhere.
~~~@Starver:For some reason, I think we have two investigators this round. A scum, and then special and weakness probably.I would love to hear your reasoning for this, if you have any.
~~~
At this point, if I was in your shoes, I would just consider shooting somebody at random. A 1 in 4 chance of shooting the scum, sure, but... it's better than a perpetual quagmire. Then night would happen, and in the morning, we would have new information.
What makes you think a random decision is better than an informed decision?
Post by: hector13 on March 03, 2016, 02:18:36 pm
TBF (days ago) said he was going to give it to FoU when FoU said he was town weakness and could essentially disarm the bomb (or throw it away or whatever) so it might be best to avoid killing FoU. I believe FoU to be, at best, a neutral role that needs to die in order to win (think Jester) or, at worst, reverse psychology using scum.
So that means deciding between me and Starver, as you haven't shown any inclination toward killing TBF. Please pick one so we can move on.
Post by: hector13 on March 03, 2016, 02:38:42 pm
Not that the bomb killing someone after you kill someone is a bad thing; it depends who it kills. It's basically the same power you have, except it happens at night.
Which is never going to happen, apparently.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 03, 2016, 03:32:10 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 03, 2016, 04:33:06 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 03, 2016, 04:48:37 pm
What makes you think a random decision is better than an informed decision?It's almost never so. But a random decision is better than no decision.
Oh good.I say likewise.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 03, 2016, 04:48:57 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 03, 2016, 06:36:48 pm
A gunshot echoes through the city. For a moment, all is silent. Then it resumes - except the sounds of the city hall. No noise echoes from within. Crime is rampant in some areas of the city, yet no one sets out to fix it. Even a gunshot cannot bring them to act, it seems. With that thought, the watchful sun drops below the horizon, and the corrupt, violent moon rises over its domain. No one pays heed to the motionless man lying on the street as they run for safety to their homes.
The Moonlit Shadow reveals a gun and shoots FallacyofUrist
FallacyofUrist was the Pauper
Spoiler: Pauper (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on March 05, 2016, 09:14:31 pm
Flavor text. Later.
Starver died in the night.
His role is undetermined.
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 09:42:14 pm
Also, how do you know whatever happened was a result of the bomb? No flavour text or anything yet. I'd also assume that since we're still playing, the Evil role still exists.
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 09:49:07 pm
Also, FoU: that was a feckin' awful town display :P
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 09:57:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 09:58:48 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 10:03:39 pm
Ideally the game will end with your death. How that will occur, who knows?
What about you? How do you think things are going to go down?
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 10:06:08 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 10:19:35 pm
Also
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 10:20:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 10:22:22 pm
Tomasque: Would you mind keeping a votecount? Even though it doesn't actually do anything?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 10:24:01 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 10:30:15 pm
I was also hoping you wouldn't mention I gave you the gun. Blackmail thing sounds ominous, and if there's no bomb... You may have just lost us the game.
Also, Evil role wins in a mano e mano situation.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 10:35:49 pm
You huh the what?
Also, wouldn't it be the person with the gun who wins?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 10:38:58 pm
Explain.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 10:42:41 pm
So, then. Do you have any threes?
(or items.)
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 10:44:09 pm
Unfortunately I also have an auto that assigns the gun randomly when I decide not to give it to someone, which is what happened D1. Thanks, Tomasque :P
So yeah. If you can't kill Moonlit we end the game now as a "happily ever after" situation, unless you were blackmailed and he can control what you do.
Unless you're scum, but obviously I gave you the gun, so... I'm less inclined to accept that.
PPE: only thing that TBF has is my word. I could tell him other bits about it what he was told, maybe, but I'd need to check my PM. Obviously you know this shit as well, though, having had the gun D1.
However, I'd hope that my scumhunting D1 actually allowed me to have a town read at this point *shrug* I was quite wrong about FoU, which is unfortunate. Totally his fault though :P
How I came to what conclusion?
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 10:45:18 pm
Also, the text is not blue. That was a misunderstanding on my part...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 10:49:27 pm
Also, I don't think the blackmail has any mechanical effects (yet)...
If it does, I have not been alerted to them.
Well what color IS it?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 10:50:10 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 10:54:25 pm
The blue thing I was referring to was the colour of text in my PM, which was highlighting the information that the receiver was told. Namely you can choose to fire it during the day, you're publicly revealed as having done so, chosen player dies, day ends.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:02:30 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:02:53 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:07:32 pm
hector:Why should I trust you?
TMS:Why should I trust you?
All:What happened to the bomb? That's the nagging question...
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 11:13:15 pm
Okay then.
hector:Why should I trust you?
TMS:Why should I trust you?
All:What happened to the bomb? That's the nagging question...
I assume the bomb was Starver's thing, and Moonlit was hoping you would target me and not him, so perhaps blackmailed him instead... Unless the bomb was Moonlit's thing, and decided not to use it (or again, used it on Starver)
To be quite honest you shouldn't trust either of us. You know your role, and you have a gun. That's about all you can trust. Obviously I want you to shoot Moonlit, as that means I win. That's true if I'm town or scum, though (assuming you're town, obviously) so that's not helpful.
Moonlit hasn't claimed though. Not sure what you want done about that. You claimed investigator yesterday, I claimed gun guy today. Moonlit is the odd one out.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:17:21 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 11:18:27 pm
We know FoU wasn't the genesis of the bomb or blackmail, not so much Starver. I've claimed gun dude, TBF claimed investigator. This means you're the bomber or blackmailer.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:19:07 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:20:24 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:21:54 pm
What kind of official?
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 11:22:18 pm
Also, either side can still win in a 2-player depending on who has the gun. So hector, why are you saying that whoever wins wins today?
I can't give the gun to myself, and I can't choose to not arm someone. I assume if I'm dead the gun is out of play, too (Tomasque would have to confirm that, if he wants) so scum win if they're not hit today.
At least that's been the situation in previous rounds. Equal number scum and town result in scum winning.
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 11:23:18 pm
Unless you can't give the gun to yourself (assuming, and frankly this is still somewhat iffy, that you are the gun-holder).
What makes it iffy?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:25:48 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 11:26:06 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 11:27:15 pm
Not specified. Just says 'higher ups'. Apparently I'm constantly sucking up and look down on the poor. Which is why I accepted Fallacy's claim.
Why did this make you accept FoU's claim?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:32:05 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:32:44 pm
Explain.
I'll hold off on actually shooting anyone till then, though.
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 11:35:22 pm
Question: Have we had a role name called Gunsmith before?
Because I knew that there were street guys. Also it made sense - remember, I'm the blackmailer.
I need to sleep now D:
You said that accepted FoU's claim because you were constantly looking down on the poor, not because you were the blackmailer. So what about his claim was believable?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:36:46 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 11:45:28 pm
Also, I think his very plausible role fails the lore test.
What is this lore test?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:46:38 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 05, 2016, 11:58:03 pm
What I'm going for is that he accepted FoU's claim as Town Weakness, but shot him anyway. Why would he shoot someone he accepts as town as a town player?
Even if he didn't accept it as Town Weakness, FoU claimed to get rid of all items he got, including bombs, and Moonlit stated a desire to keep you alive. But shot him anyway. Why would he shoot someone who could conceivably stop another player dying as a town player?
He also said he was deciding between Starver and myself... So why is he shooting FoU?
Obviously I'm a bit biased in this, though, so take the analysis with a pinch of salt.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 05, 2016, 11:59:32 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 12:01:05 am
What are you looking for to help either cement your decision or convince you otherwise?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 12:03:14 am
What I'm looking for is anything that either disproves or proves the contradictions I've seen.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 12:04:10 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 12:04:55 am
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 12:09:11 am
I've told you everything about my role that I can, anyway, short of directly quoting my PM.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 12:10:20 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 12:11:10 am
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 12:19:22 am
*decides to discuss it anyway*
I mean it's a semi-bastard game, yeah, but... I've had parts of my role flavour in previous rounds pique my interest in regards to secret autos that didn't come to fruition, and I didn't suspect that I had a secret auto this round that assigns my gun to someone if I choose not to act.
PPE: I know about the role thing, just letting you know that if you have questions about my role, I probably don't have answers.
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 10:07:59 am
And yes, I am quite certain I am not "Arms Dealer". I only have one action, which is to arm someone with a gun.
You didn't "essentially give TBF the kill", you fool. You killed someone, and then TBF handed the bomb off to someone else. You took away the ability for the town to stop a kill.
I also note you failed to answer any of my questions, Urist McDodger.
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 10:42:21 am
Also, speculating about what happens when I die is moot, as it'll probably end the game one way or another. Why speculate about mechanics when you can try to find scum?
The town want to kill scum. Next best thing is not killing town. Why did you kill FoU if you thought he was telling the truth?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 02:29:16 pm
I have very little to say other than that I'm wondering if Starver's scum and we don't know it.
That, and that I'm still VAGUELY suspicious of TMS, but...Yeah.
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 02:35:14 pm
I'm not sure if not saying things is good. Unless you can't think of anything to ask. Just means you have to decide who to shoot.
Please don't make it as painfully long as D1 :P
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 02:36:24 pm
At least it seems like we don't have a bomb. I only do guns, and Moonlit has claimed blackmailer. Unless TBF does bombs...
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 02:40:54 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 03:26:39 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 03:29:07 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 03:36:57 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 03:37:42 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 06, 2016, 03:51:18 pm
Goodness, just don't have time for flavor.
TheBiggerFish reveals a gun and shoots.
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 04:16:19 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 04:40:34 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 06, 2016, 04:51:04 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 06, 2016, 06:38:37 pm
I really don't have the time for flavor.
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 06:49:44 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 06, 2016, 06:59:39 pm
And bah.
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 07:00:53 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 07:01:23 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 07:11:57 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 07:16:26 pm
Also, an investigate on you turned up nothing, so I guess that is a thing.
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 07:27:03 pm
I am pretty sure I shot you. It didn't work.
Also, an investigate on you turned up nothing, so I guess that is a thing.
He did claim to have a 1-shot protect.
Also blackmail=redirect so... If you don't have the gun, he does.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 07:27:47 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 07:29:35 pm
Game's over after today. Could try 'n shoot him again, if you want, or force a "happily ever after" by refusing to ever fire your gun.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 07:39:14 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 07:58:04 pm
@Hector: You sound rather confident. Scum wins after Day 3, and with the choices you present to TBF...
... scum winning after D3 is in the rules :P
He can still choose to shoot me if he wants, but he shot you and you didn't die.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 07:59:16 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 08:00:37 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 08:38:45 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 08:39:02 pm
I'm going to go shoot again.
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 08:43:14 pm
We won't be sure 'til you try. Do you need anything to happen before you make a decision?
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 08:44:17 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 08:46:30 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 08:46:58 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 08:47:49 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 08:49:44 pm
==SHOTS FIRED. AGAIN.==
Post by: Tomasque on March 06, 2016, 10:22:47 pm
If the town keep this up, well gosh diddly darn, I might just have to get no so friendly with them.
TheBiggerFish reveals a gun and shoots The Moonlit Shadow
The Moonlit Shadow was the Blackmailer
Spoiler: Blackmailer (click to show/hide)
hector13 gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 10:38:17 pm
WTF, Fallacy :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 10:49:16 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 10:50:44 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 10:51:10 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 10:51:41 pm
PPE: you decided to give Starver the bomb, at random!?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 10:52:15 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 06, 2016, 10:52:57 pm
What made you choose him over me?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 06, 2016, 10:54:29 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 06, 2016, 11:50:22 pm
I have a metagame question for you blokes.
How many PMs did you receive regarding your victory point(if you got one)?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 07, 2016, 05:34:11 am
Post by: Starver on March 07, 2016, 05:36:45 am
(Starver being blown up by his own bomb, pretty much at random.)Hoist by my own petard, in pretty much the literal sense... ;)
Post by: Starver on March 07, 2016, 06:18:04 am
The only thing I might have done that I didn't come out and do was admit that I was the 'innocent' bomb-maker. Especially as it appears I wasn't the only weapon-provider. But it never seemed the time to do so, and the way things were going I'd probably have been the target that way... I also endorsed the idea that the bomb-maker could survive his own 'product' (partly for the lolz, but partly because of future misdirections I wanted to set up), but that might have encouraged my targeting, if the bomb 'just needed getting rid of' and I was revealed as such.
As to my night-action motives: Without any information, straight off, or any necessary alliance with town I decided to give Fish the bomb, to help with the current win-deficit in that direction (Moonlit was an option ...and would have ended up being interesting, with both bomb and gun in the Blackmailer's hands if the random gunsmithing still went that way! ...but Moonlit's win-count was one out of two participated, Fish only 2/5). I could have waited a night (assuming I got there!), but without an actual Town alliance I didn't really have much reason to 'wait and see' and plan more carefully. I'm not sure where I would then have sent my bomb on Night 1, given the Day 1 discussion we ended up with started directly off with "Hey guys, I've got a bomb!" - which was unexpected! (I'm not sure Moonlit would have told us of the first gun, otherwise, or at least so quickly...) Well played, though!
(I was also somewhat inspired by a fellow player of the Space:1889 RPG, when I was much younger. A steampunk victorian setting, with space-fairing ironclads and the like, this player once decided to be an Anarchist. The sourcebook illustration for the anarchist was of a cloaked figure throwing a 'classic lit-fuse spherical bombs'. So he randomly threw bombs into random windows at every opportunity. Yeah, probably not the best role-model. He totally derailed most of the game-plots by attracting undue attention to the group when we were trying to sneak around, but it was fun making the GM squirm and have to deal with the consequences of his non-railroaded game-trail going far off the rails that we didn't even have... ;) )
I was also cultivating Dog Walker (hence that talk about "leads", when I finally remembered to do it... several posts went by where my amateur 'investigative' thoughts took over and I forgot to say that!) as my Townie persona. (Could have morphed into Investigative sniffer-dog handler or Special attack-dog handler, but until it was necessary I was just a passer-by - that man in the street I claimed near my end...) Then a colourfully alliterative (but not significant) turn of phrase was siezed upon and you thought that was my hint. Before my final day-end (which, by the way, I was AFK for long periods - although day ended before my most extended absence) I was actually aiming more to get the attention of the Evil (a probable non-fatal intervention that would have let me win and/or resulted in me saving the true-townies further problems), and was specifically trying not to claim Investigator skills but something else... but never mind.
From my own death onwards, I was cackling and chortling at the confusion (including my own)... I didn't even trust myself to "bah!" without saying too much, although I was there at the moment Fallacy's "bah" echoed my own thoughts. Had decided there was a bulletproof of some kind, but not knowing who was shot I was a bit unsure as to what that meant...
Anyway, good game. And I got you that VP, Fish! Which I will count as a minor personal victory, even if not a game-mechanics one. ;)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 07, 2016, 06:42:32 am
Post by: Tomasque on March 07, 2016, 06:45:20 pm
This invisible text says nothing now, but may turn into a view-worthy rant later.
That's all.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 07, 2016, 07:01:50 pm
A note:I may be less available on Wednesday through Friday afternoon.
Post by: Tomasque on March 08, 2016, 08:06:38 pm
A car rides in a tunnel. Unnatural silence falls upon its occupants. A creeping horror overtakes them. They feel there is something to be feared in their close future - but is it already among them, or waiting to be invited in?
TheBiggerFish is not yet part of this round. They cannot be targeted by or target others with night actions.
Post by: Tomasque on March 09, 2016, 10:28:54 am
The car rides through the tunnel, finally leaving through the other side. But the chill remains, a reminder that no one is safe.
Isn't it nice to have a vote count again?
Votecount
FallacyofUrist (0)
hector13 (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Day ends 7:30 am, Friday.
Post by: hector13 on March 09, 2016, 10:35:19 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 09, 2016, 12:06:21 pm
Starver. Because I want to know if we can vote this round.
Post by: hector13 on March 09, 2016, 12:17:59 pm
Post by: Starver on March 09, 2016, 12:41:01 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 09, 2016, 06:05:43 pm
Why?
Fallacy just in case Evil has some wierd role that lets them end the day whenever they like.
Moonlit, for jumping to conclusions.
Post by: Tomasque on March 09, 2016, 07:18:21 pm
FallacyofUrist (1) - The Moonlit Shadow
hector13 (0)
Starver (1) - FallacyofUrist
The Moonlit Shadow (1) - hector13
Post by: Starver on March 10, 2016, 12:54:25 am
@StarverNo, not that. That I (yet) know of, anyway. It's a role-related thing that I oughtn't go into. I've been bitten by this kind of thing before, though. Never mind.
Were you told someone visited you or something?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 10, 2016, 09:13:27 am
Also, unvote Starver. I don't currently have anything on him, and that vote was just to test if we could vote.
~~~
I've been bitten by this kind of thing before, though. Never mind.I suspect this will mean something to someone.
Post by: hector13 on March 10, 2016, 01:18:37 pm
21 hours left in the day (I think) and we've done literally nothing. Not even a pressure vote remains. You guys... you guys.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 10, 2016, 02:27:41 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 10, 2016, 04:48:30 pm
For instance, The Moonlit Shadow, here's a pressure vote for you. Because I'm thinking that you voted hector in a subtle attempt to prevent your own lynch, because of a tie that would result at the end of the day as a result of your vote(if the day ended).
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 10, 2016, 05:09:33 pm
I point out that you said it was "Because I want to know if we can vote this round."That was for my vote on Starver, not on you.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 10, 2016, 06:07:40 pm
I kinda like being able to vote, after all...
My vote on you- I placed that one for pressure reasons.
Post by: hector13 on March 10, 2016, 06:19:29 pm
Yeah, extend.
Hector why point out about pressure votes? Kinda takes away a lot of pressure.
*sigh*
Why drop your vote when it's the only thing you have to encourage other folk to talk?
When I said nothing had been done, I didn't mean extend and continue doing nothing...
Post by: hector13 on March 10, 2016, 06:37:52 pm
Ah. You sound like you want to oppose the extend.
I actually want other folk to scumhunt from time to time. We've had two days and literally FUCK ALL HAS HAPPENED. Excuse me for being frustrated that apparently nobody wants to play as town.
An extension is only really useful if it's, you know, used to scumhunt. EXTEND + silence is stupid. Like what you guys are doing. Why should we extend if we're just going to piss about?
FoU claimed his day game was pants in the KotM game. Doesn't seem to be willing to work on it though, which this set of games is ideally suited for. Oh well.
Moonlit: voting the only other person who was voting at the time, and coincidentally, voting you. OMGUS much? Also latching onto something a player said they do all the time, which they didn't do one time... what?
What is FoU's meta voting habit going to tell you about his alignment in this particular game?
FoU: pressure voting kinda works best if you don't tell folk it's a pressure vote. It goes from "oh, I wonder if this person is serious with their vote, better do something!" to "pfft, vote will move soon, don't have to worry about it at all" which isn't so helpful, is it?
How come you stopped posting when we found out we can vote? Are you going to pressure Moonlit beyond just dropping a vote on him? What do you think about Moonlit just now?
Starver: the only one of our brethren not to be very active, outside of TBF. What gives?
Alternatively (actually, simultaneously) why aren't you off to a good start?
Post by: hector13 on March 10, 2016, 06:45:22 pm
What were the reasons you voted me, initially? Just because you're not voting me anymore, doesn't mean we can't get something useful out of you telling us.
I'm not voting you just now, no. However, I need to be convinced not to move my vote back to you, since you seem to have eliminated Starver from being scum for a reason I can't presently fathom.
This will likely be it for the rest of the evening; back to RLtm.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 10, 2016, 11:21:19 pm
And in order to build pressure... all I have to do is leave the vote on. It's simple as that.
What do you think about Moonlit just now?I think he's trying to shake my vote.
Post by: hector13 on March 11, 2016, 12:23:46 am
Also Moonlit, I refer you to the previous game in which FoU claimed a town weakness role that wasn't part of the scum win con, a much more egregious act than telling you he's putting pressure on you. It's not a scum tell. /bedtime annoyance
Post by: Starver on March 11, 2016, 04:49:07 am
Starver: the only one of our brethren not to be very active, outside of TBF. What gives?The former is mundane, in that whenever I've checked the thread late at night I've not seen anything worth (still) commenting on, then going to bed a bit earlier than usual before anything else gets said. (Not been absent, just not as synchronised with you lot as I have before.)
Alternatively (actually, simultaneously) why aren't you off to a good start?
And ignore the latter, it was a comment I probably should not have made. I'm just hoping the wrong person doesn't pick up the right meaning to it. Instead I'll work as normal, and try not to be so introverted.
My thoughts: Ignoring Fish (can't rule out their being scum, but there's nothing useful in considering that, right now), I'm looking towards one/both of Moonlit/Fallacy being 'at least Neutral', on balance, but that's based upon very little information, and doubtless will tend you two towards switching your voting ire (back, in one case) towards me. Hector's been a lot more restrained, in that regard, this time round, which makes me more (although barely so) inclined to believe as Town.
I'm not sure where we're going, yet, though. Nobody has claimed (or demonstrated) any absolute knowledge, which means the Investigator(s?) just knows who isn't Scum (and, presumably, has never voted for them... except for maybe Fallacy's first 'test', possibly) or is the momentarily unconsidered Fish.
(To trust that the Mod should specifically bake the roles to allow a player's temporary absence would be a meta-gaming assumption. I don't think Fish has been given a 'dump-role', for this game, and that something else may have been adjusted in its stead to make the absence seem workable without any great advantage or disadvantage granted by it. But that's also a meta assumption. My own foreknown absence from the last game just happened to happen when I had no night actions - and, it turned out, I was already dead by that point anyway! :P )
I've not got a vote in the pile, right now, though perhaps I ought to do, if only to break the stalemate. Too much uncertainty even between my 'marginal guesses', unfortunately. Willing to be persuaded otherwise, or anti-persuaded, if you make yourself look more roguelike...
Post by: hector13 on March 11, 2016, 04:15:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 11, 2016, 04:26:23 pm
Also no rules on extension. AFAIC, day's over. Wasted any extension anyway by not doing anything.
Post by: hector13 on March 11, 2016, 04:29:57 pm
Day's over, no talking :P
Post by: Tomasque on March 11, 2016, 06:37:15 pm
The four people cannot agree on the source of their anxiety. Accusations rain from all sides, and just as it seems they might tear each other apart, something else takes their attention - something far worse. Another person by the road...
TheBiggerFish has joined the game.
Now there are five, and they are no closer to unraveling the evil among them. A tunnel looms ahead, and before it envelops them, four people pray for survival. One person prays for something else.
Who's prayer was their last?
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (1) - The Moonlit Shadow
Starver (1) - hector13
The Moonlit Shadow (1) - FallacyofUrist
Not voting: Starver
Post by: Tomasque on March 12, 2016, 01:45:45 pm
The car leaves the tunnel, and with haste everyone looks around them. No one is missing. Nothing has happened. Or has it?
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
THeBiggerFish (0)
Not voting: No one
Day ends Monday, 10:45 PST.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 12, 2016, 01:47:19 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 01:47:29 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 12, 2016, 01:48:05 pm
TheBiggerFish, why should we believe you are not scum?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 01:48:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 12, 2016, 01:50:26 pm
Because I'm the Town Weakness.
Differently phrased: why should we believe you're Town Weakness?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 01:54:41 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 12, 2016, 02:14:30 pm
My question to everybody is: What's going on this round?
And by that I mean: what special mechanic is going about?
Starting round four, things got weird, oui?
Prior to that, things were more normal.
But round four... messaging system.
Round five... win condition stuffs.
Round six... items.
So everybody: does your role have any clues as to what's going on for this round's special mechanic or whatnot?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 02:17:02 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 02:17:58 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 12, 2016, 02:20:14 pm
This round seems to be based around travel, at least if we take TBF's claim at face value.
The ninjas.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 12, 2016, 02:22:03 pm
I vote that we travel to a city.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 02:28:19 pm
Post by: Starver on March 12, 2016, 03:14:05 pm
I think I'm minded to thinking that's a fake weakness for a real role. (Not necessarily scum! Could be legitimate camouflage!). But that might just be me missing something. What say you, @fallacy, @moonlit? Given Hector's already said something on the subject... not that I necessarily trust Hector yet, but if it's a fake point it's a logical fake point and I would admire that.
And I've was wondering the same as Fallacy. Whatever insidious night-(s)kill the Scum has... No-one's saying anything, but does someone know? Is it a recruitment? (Are we to be hijacked by persuasion?)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 03:20:45 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 12, 2016, 03:40:55 pm
But in a different way than normal.
~~~
How is it roasting my brain? A lack of information. Thus far, it just seems like a somewhat normal mafia game with travel-based flavor.
The only publicly known special thing that's happened so far: TBF's boarding the car.
~~~
Maybe we could try lynching somebody? The Moonlit Shadow, I found some of your behavior suspicious yesterday.
Post by: hector13 on March 12, 2016, 03:56:53 pm
On another note, have you ever seen the film "The Hitcher", TBF? The old one, with Rutger Hauer. Good movie. Also, the hitchhiker is the murderer.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 04:01:01 pm
Also, All: Why do you think the scum didn't nightkill?
I'm guessing it was to be able to cast suspicion on me, but that doesn't make sense given that I was in the game when night hit.
Post by: hector13 on March 12, 2016, 04:04:52 pm
Analyzing the NK in any game is a road to WIFOM, though. Only the scum know why they killed (or not) someone, and they're not going to tell us until it doesn't matter.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 12, 2016, 04:50:18 pm
That's not very specific, Fallacy. What about Moonlit's behaviour is/was suspicious? Specifically what makes it so suspicious you're willing to lynch them. Also why do you think the rest of us shouldn't consider it an OMGUS? (Moonlit was voting you day end yesterday)Because I was voting Moonlit first.
For instance, The Moonlit Shadow, here's a pressure vote for you.See here.
And because I believe the reason Moonlit was voting me was to cause a no lynch/prevent his own lynch.
And because Moonlit voted me for a ridiculous reason.
Saying that it was a pressure vote... not sure how much experience Fallacy has but he's not new.
That decides it. Such a newbie move from someone with at least a good bit of experience. Fallacy
So yeah. All of that.
Post by: hector13 on March 12, 2016, 09:33:10 pm
The chances of you being scum 3 times in a row are 125-1. Not infinitesimal odds.
Not sure why you accept TBF's claim. As I said, it benefits whichever alignment he is to come in late, so I find it hard to accept it's a weakness. Not enough for me to think he's scum though.
Anticipating the question: town benefit as we may have mislynched D1, but we get a replacement when he comes in. Scum benefits from missing out on a potential lynch and only having to survive 2 days instead of 3. Why do you trust him so much?
Anyway, you assume the Evil role did things Ns 0 and 1. Could quite easily be that they didn't act. They just need to wait the phases out, after all. You also assume the Evil role can't hide from your claimed ability to some extent (1-shots and the like) so... yeah. Do you get told anything if a non-Evil role acts while you're watching them?
What do you think of FoU saying your reason for voting him yesterday was ridiculous?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 09:42:29 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 09:43:52 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 09:51:12 pm
Point, that, but why didn't anybody report any actions?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 12, 2016, 10:02:50 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 12, 2016, 10:23:25 pm
What do you think of FoU saying your reason for voting him yesterday was ridiculous?I think you missed this question, Moonlit.
Post by: hector13 on March 13, 2016, 10:20:20 am
That's not very specific, Fallacy. What about Moonlit's behaviour is/was suspicious? Specifically what makes it so suspicious you're willing to lynch them. Also why do you think the rest of us shouldn't consider it an OMGUS? (Moonlit was voting you day end yesterday)Because I was voting Moonlit first.For instance, The Moonlit Shadow, here's a pressure vote for you.See here.
And because I believe the reason Moonlit was voting me was to cause a no lynch/prevent his own lynch.
And because Moonlit voted me for a ridiculous reason.Saying that it was a pressure vote... not sure how much experience Fallacy has but he's not new.
That decides it. Such a newbie move from someone with at least a good bit of experience. Fallacy
So yeah. All of that.
Fire away, Moonlit.
Post by: hector13 on March 13, 2016, 10:27:21 am
What do you think of that?
Post by: hector13 on March 13, 2016, 01:41:59 pm
I asked why he thought it was ridiculous. Or at least, I meant to.
I think it's because of what you said. And since why I thought it was weird was based off a game a long time ago.
I'm not sure what you mean with the second paragraph. It sounds like you're using information from another game to scumread Fallacy in this one..?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 13, 2016, 03:35:07 pm
Also, I think voting me for announcing my pressure votes is ridiculous because: I've done that in several of my previous games. And announced pressure votes are still effective because I "upgrade" them to real votes at some point if I grow more suspicious of whoever I'm voting for.
And another thing.
Your role claim makes me want to cry.
I am Undercover (role name).
My flavor says stuff about getting into the car and having a bad feeling. I am the Investigative role. My night action, Monitor, lets me see what my target did if they are the Evil role and did something. Night 0 I used it on Starver. Last Night I used it on Fallacy. Got nothing both times. I think I trust TBF because of slight role claim (though he does that every time, wonder what your power is?).
First of all. Why would you claim your flavor? What do you(and the town) gain from that?
Second of all. This would be a wonderful fake claim for an Evil role. It doesn't trigger unless you use it on the Evil role, right? If you use it on a town player, you get nothing. Basically, this means that you can't prove your role claim by saying what a town player did. And because of your claim, that's "excused".
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 13, 2016, 03:38:32 pm
This thing is going to go for 21 rounds. At an approximate rate of 10 pages per round, we'll have over 200 pages when we're done with this thing.
[Insert gasp of surprise or a few minor swear words here].
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 13, 2016, 05:37:02 pm
TMS.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 13, 2016, 06:25:39 pm
I am Undercover (role name).
My flavor says stuff about getting into the car and having a bad feeling. I am the Investigative role. My night action, Monitor, lets me see what my target did if they are the Evil role and did something. Night 0 I used it on Starver. Last Night I used it on Fallacy. Got nothing both times. I think I trust TBF because of slight role claim (though he does that every time, wonder what your power is?).
YOU LIAR. This vote's for emphasis, The Moonlit Shadow.
Allow me to show a highlight.
My night action, Monitor, lets me see what my target did if they are the Evil role and did something.
And again, for emphasis:
My night action, Monitor, lets me see what my target did if they are the Evil role and did something.
Now, compare to the claim you just made:
If I use it on town, then if Evil uses their action on them then I also know who the Evil role is.~~~
So why the difference?
Post by: Tomasque on March 13, 2016, 07:46:50 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 13, 2016, 07:53:58 pm
~~~
...
~~~~
...
~~~~~
Where is the difference, you ask?
My night action, Monitor, lets me see what my target did if they are the Evil role and did something.
If I use it on town, then if Evil uses their action on them then I also know who the Evil role is.Is it not obvious?
And even if your action is both of these together, why did you not claim the second part in the first place?
Post by: hector13 on March 13, 2016, 08:59:42 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 14, 2016, 07:52:01 am
hector13 (1) - The Moonlit Shadow
FallacyofUrist (1) - hector13
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (1) - FallacyofUrist
Wow. FallacyofUrist is now in my iPad autocorrect. Can you believe it?
Post by: Starver on March 14, 2016, 08:45:58 am
(Nobody even bothered to ask, but I'll say anyway: For Day 1 I could have voted an OMGUS for Hector, for a second vote-swap. Pointless to turn a three-way tie into a four-way tie, though it would be. Or else I could have voted for either Fallacy or Moonlit, breaking that vote-swap tie. But I assessed them both the same. Assessment: It'd have been little more than an indiscriminate kill, to have broken that tie when it was too close to call.)
I was only going to vote when I was more sure I knew who is sending us on this doomed journey. Originally I was erring between Fallacy and Moonlit (in the absence of Fish), but Fish now complicates that and Moonlit seems to have the only unopposed claim. Hector is too neutral (more boring-neutral than inconspicuous-neutral, if you'll excuse me for saying so). For my part, I know I've been quiet, but mostly that's been because I've been pondering more than I've been spouting.
Although I still don't want to aid the lynch of the wrong person, by my reckoning it's not so bad to do right now as if I'd lynched a person on Day 1. Something tells me that Hector's the best person to save, and while I remain dubious about Fish and still can't separate Moonlit and Fallacy on any other measure of doubt, the person threatening Hector is Fallacy, and my vote there will at least to stop Fallacy from snipe-switching back to Moonlit at the very last moment to further who-knows-what personal interests. My voting for Fish, instead, would mean nothing, so I'm forced to either break the tie or else effectively do nothing at all.)
For those that care, my current summary of thoughts is:
Hector: unknown, but with above-par vive
Fallacy: provisionally cleared by provisionally-Investigative Moonlit, but with doubts expressed about the skill
Fish: several doubts, but as inactive in votes as I previously was, so I'm not sure what other factors might be in play there...
Me: being not a very frequent a contributor, I know, but ever-thoughtful, rest-assured. Not that anybody cares.
Moonlit: Nobody has counter-claimed the role. A mis-vote for Moonlit could (when we know the proper role conditions) end up flipping a confirmation of my and Fallacy's innocence, but - even then - we'd have to decide between Hector and Fish and I still think Fallacy's on the wrong track so I don't want to have that problem.
So, a vote for Fallacy is the best of all actions, as far as I can see. Better than staying quiet and stewing about when the final day reveals something I could have perhaps stopped.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 14, 2016, 09:43:05 am
The Moonlit Shadow, I'm still convinced you're scum.
Yeah, it's both. I forgot about it the first time.Really.
Reallllly.
Realllllllllllllllly.
~~~
Basically, we only have your word for it. And you're rather suspicious.
~~~
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 14, 2016, 09:47:15 am
But I won't be on bay 12 when I'm about to be lynched.
So I'm going to put some invisible text in this post.
If it's less than an hour before the day ends and the majority of the votes are on me, quote this text and remove the transparent text tags. Otherwise, don't.
Really. Don't. Transparent text below.
I am the Driver, a Town Weakness role. If I die, the car crashes and all other players die also.
Really. Don't use the quote function on this post unless it's less than an hour before the day ends and the majority of the votes are still on me. Please.
Post by: hector13 on March 14, 2016, 09:57:27 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 14, 2016, 09:59:11 am
Didn't I?
Really. Don't use the quote function on this post unless it's less than an hour before the day ends and the majority of the votes are still on me. Please.Yeah. I did.
hector13, you have irritated me.
Post by: hector13 on March 14, 2016, 10:07:44 am
Post by: hector13 on March 14, 2016, 10:11:17 am
Post by: hector13 on March 14, 2016, 10:41:43 am
Post by: hector13 on March 14, 2016, 12:44:50 pm
Sorry. Kinda.
Post by: Tomasque on March 14, 2016, 01:09:03 pm
Once again, spurred on by the undescribable fear crawling on their backs, their accusations elevated to heated argument. In the car of four people, no one had noticed that one had gone missing. In the rearview mirror, had they taken a glance, they would have seen a figure in the distance. It was already too late to turn back - a tunnel was upon them.
hector13 has left the game.
Votecount
hector13 (1) - The Moonlit Shadow
FallacyofUrist (1) - Starver
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (1) - FallacyofUrist
Not voting: hector13, TheBiggerFish
Post by: Tomasque on March 14, 2016, 10:03:13 pm
I knew the day would come! A scum victory! I'm crying tears of joy!
FallacyofUrist was killed during the night
FallacyofUrist was the Driver
Spoiler: Driver (click to show/hide)
Starver gets one victory point.
hector13 gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on March 14, 2016, 10:08:28 pm
Starver lurked to victory, though. Bothersome. Well done anyway, dude. 2 points well earned!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 14, 2016, 10:10:12 pm
I barely recall Starver saying ANYTHING.
Grats on actually winning as Scum though.
Post by: hector13 on March 14, 2016, 10:13:05 pm
Tomasque: just in case you made an error, was Starver s'posed to get 2 victory points for that?
Post by: Tomasque on March 14, 2016, 10:20:34 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 14, 2016, 10:24:24 pm
Post by: Starver on March 14, 2016, 11:11:48 pm
I barely recall Starver saying ANYTHING.I was saying little because I was for a large part of the game playing a role (it had many names, but at one point it was something to do with "Dozing", and in another, I was supposed to be far too absorbed in my hand-held electronic game) in which I was, fictitiously, under a form of post restriction requiring a prod/mention of my name to say anything. (And, right from the beginning, that actually being voted for was a "You will not win this round!"-type auto. That thing that I "perhaps should not have mentioned".)
I was actually waiting quite a while for you to call out my name, again, prodding me awake so that I could make that final vote for Fallacy... and then decided that Tomasque's vote-count (naming me) might somehow count should I need to continue to justify the charade into Day 3. ;)
BTW, I'd nurtured the idea of Hector being my best guess for Town/non-Aggressive Neutral (and therefore fictitiously my ally) nearly from the start because Hector just fit into that role easiest, with the Moonlit/Fallacy feud going on (and Fish absent). And if I could have killed Fallacy with that Lynch (decided upon before Fallacy gave the hidden-hint, but I was later very happy to see that claim) my pre-decided plan was then to kill best-buddy Hector at night, with no (good) reason to link it to me. (If I hadn't won by then, I just needed to stay innocent looking and not become the D3 lynch to win.)
However, Hector definitely wasn't a good person for the Town to try to lynch, at that point, so it didn't take much effort to lean into the particular logic-bomb that let me try to openly kill Fallacy off. I was feeling quite good about my position, at that point, even though I had been totally lost (both as Scum and as fictional non-Scum!) on Day 1. Hector's retraction actually surprised me, but I now realise why that happened.
(Once I discovered that my lynch had failed... and failed because Hector also knew the stakes by then, I'm sure... I also had utmost confidence that Fallacy wasn't playing the looooong con of being a Townie/Lawful Neutral taking upon himself to claim the role that he might have, like I had by this point, decided must exist. I considered that possibility, but the real driver (quiet Hector? ...although already in my future plans to kill, if that had been true!) would have had to have been wise enough not to counterclaim, and/or contacted through a role-ability, and it would have made Fallacy suicidal and thus likely a Jester.)
It would have been nice to get the two points, and had I known Hector's 'leave' condition I'd have swapped my lynch/kill wishlist ordering, but Hector played that one just as quietly as I played my role. Kudos.
Anyway, yes, you could perhaps have got me to say more, instead of arguing amongst yourselves. If you'd have done it earlier, you'd have found me not even realising that it was a car-themed game and I might have given you a strange rolename that didn't match 'reality'. But then it got to the point where I was satisfied that I had a whole package of suitable rolenames and fake abilities/weaknesses that would have just muddied the waters.
And, having told you all this, I expect the next round or three to be far more difficult for me. Both in general suspicion of all my motives (no change there, then... except when you pretty much forget that I exist!) and in concocting similarly devious schemes of your own, whosoever happens to be the future anti-Town player(s)... ;)
(Also, the possibility that the Mod already has some of my half-formed ideas lined up... There's going to be some matching, by the end of the Marathon session!)
Post by: hector13 on March 14, 2016, 11:41:03 pm
We need to lynch folk, basically. There is a 100% chance of scum maintaining existence if we don't get a lynch in. The information from the flip is super useful, and it narrows down the suspects too. No lynching played into my hands as the neutral role, given any D1 lynch has a 1/5 chance of hitting scum, and the odds get better from then on.
No lynching definitely allowed Starver an opportunity to blend in with the extra bodies too; as I said, nobody pressured him because Moonlit and Fallacy drew attention to themselves. Fallacy was a bit too overt with his role claim, which allowed Starver to murder all you sillies :P it will stand as my example forevermore as the reason I don't like claiming!
I think part of the problem is that you guys are afraid of making mistakes as town, specifically with mislynching. There's a need to be aggressive in a game like this, and like I said earlier the flip you get from a lynch is chock full of information: you know there's a role type (likely) out of the game, it narrows down the suspect list, and you can then review the previous day knowing the intentions of the player that died, as well as the cases of those voting against them.
For the record, I didn't believe FoU's claim (again); all I cared about was being able to force a no lynch on D2 so I could get my VP :P
Post by: Starver on March 14, 2016, 11:56:30 pm
So, don't say anything about your roles and abilities and weaknesses but say..? This is a problem I've yet to solve, and I usually end up giving (genuine/biased) assessments of everyone and then saying stupid stuff like "And, of course, there's me, and I'm claiming <foo>, but obviously you have no reason to believe me..." (Regardless of which side of the divide I actually stand.)
You may have noticed this, already. ;)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 15, 2016, 08:21:12 am
For those who haven't looked, the claim is he's Town Weakness, The Driver, everybody died if he gets killed.I'm still a tad bit irritated that you read my hidden claim.
~~~
Well. There goes the town streak.
Although I should have expected that. For reasons.
Post by: hector13 on March 15, 2016, 08:24:19 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 15, 2016, 08:33:05 am
I should have expected somebody to read it outside of the condition.
Post by: hector13 on March 15, 2016, 08:34:52 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 15, 2016, 08:41:49 am
Because I didn't want it to get read if I wasn't going to get lynched anyway.
Post by: hector13 on March 15, 2016, 08:43:24 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 15, 2016, 08:44:19 am
Post by: hector13 on March 15, 2016, 08:48:43 am
It did just make you look more scummy by posting conditions and then getting pissy when someone ignores then :P
Post by: Starver on March 15, 2016, 10:07:57 am
Generally: Town should still have more logically concentrated on Fish's claim, I think. Hitchhikers are easily Scum material (as noted, but not followed-up on) and while it's obvious in hindsight that the role was made with the initial absence in mind, it very much needn't have been. Of course, the person likely most sure of this erroneous position would be the driver (originally the only one knowing that this means a double-claim of Town Weak), but I've already deleted my notes on what everyone appeared to be thinking about everyone else about this time and can't be bothered to check back in the thread on Fallacy's actual attitude, directly. My 'town personae' had definitely decided that Fish was the suspicious one, and couldn't believe that nobody else was doing anything about it.
Back in my 'real world' as scum, I even at one point had a nagging thought that the Hitchhiker might mean it was a double-Evil game (unallied, obviously), or else a Neutral with a distinct anti-Town streak (useful to me or otherwise). And if Town had gotten rid of Fish (ungrateful as it would have been, towards someone unable to join in the early stages), I'm pretty sure things might have turned out differently afterwards, but I'm not sure to whose advantage.
But the Man Of The Match, this round, was definitely Hector. Fully deserving of the second Victory Point that would otherwise have been mine... ;)
Post by: Starver on March 15, 2016, 10:10:14 am
Post by: hector13 on March 15, 2016, 10:18:57 am
Why the rest of the town just seemed happy to let things go without doing anything was beyond me. TBF livened things up when he came in, but nobody put pressure on Starver, or me really. This despite the unchallenged claim of an investigative role having a reasonable (if ill thought out) reason for voting me.
Post by: Tomasque on March 16, 2016, 12:01:29 am
Post by: Tomasque on March 16, 2016, 05:28:16 pm
A ship flew from a doomed world. Aboard it, the humans looked forward to their life in a habitable planet far away. However, the aliens that had claimed Earth were not going to let them go so easily. Unprepared for the menace among them, their justice system degenerated...
This round has Martial Voting. Votes are anonymous. At the end of the day, anyone who was voted will know how many people voted them, and who it was that did. Each vote transfers into a "damage point," a value only visible to the person it applies to. Once a person has accumulated 3 damage points, they die.
...could it stop the alien threat?
Day ends Friday, 3:30 PM.
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 05:29:40 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 05:31:56 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 16, 2016, 05:38:30 pm
Bloody town weakness roles.
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 05:41:10 pm
However, I do believe one of two things is possible here:
a) the Evil role steals things
or
b) there is a (non-Evil) thief among us
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 16, 2016, 05:42:11 pm
and clearly both of you know things.
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 05:47:31 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 05:48:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 05:52:22 pm
Then ask about it.
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 05:59:16 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 16, 2016, 06:01:32 pm
I don't trust FoU...
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:02:04 pm
Hmmm....
I don't trust FoU...
Why not?
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:04:34 pm
A 'careless' ability which causes you to lose something of some sort, with a hidden 'Paranoia' role which causes you to think someone stole it.
It's way too complex for it to be the same thing Tomasque made up. I think you'll probably agree now.
You also might just be over-thinking things; perhaps my role/abilities just tell me things outright? :P
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:10:50 pm
Specifically, an auto. I'll claim Special, maybe to narrow it down.
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:16:15 pm
Soft-claiming is oddly entertaining.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 16, 2016, 06:19:35 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:23:31 pm
If it's for a particular role you've already told us most of it. If not all of it. And you claim that's not all of it.
Well yeah, I'm not the biggest fan of claiming, I just think it's important enough that folk know there's potentially a role that steals in this round. I haven't told you anything about my auto, other than it makes me suspect there's a thief/Evil role can steal things.
I'll give a proper explanation of the auto if you want it, but it's probably detrimental to town to do it so... I'm reticent.
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:36:50 pm
Hmmm....
I don't trust FoU...
Why not?
You missed a question TBF
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 16, 2016, 06:38:05 pm
I find it strange that there are two Weakness roles.Hmmm....
I don't trust FoU...
Why not?
You missed a question TBF
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:38:52 pm
I find it strange that there are two Weakness roles.Hmmm....
I don't trust FoU...
Why not?
You missed a question TBF
There was two in the last one, wasn't there?
I also assume that's a claim?
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:39:18 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 16, 2016, 06:40:42 pm
And yes.
Wait what now? Seriously?
...Still vaguely suspicious but less so.
Starver:Talk?
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:43:52 pm
Yes, that's why I find it strange.
And yes.
Wait what now? Seriously?
...Still vaguely suspicious but less so.
Starver:Talk?
RE: Starver: asking a question might do it.
Also, what were you referring to with "seriously"?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 16, 2016, 06:45:22 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:47:21 pm
Though I'd certainly appreciate you trying to confirm or reject your suspicions about FoU.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 16, 2016, 06:47:42 pm
Hmmm....I could do with a "why" to this question.
I don't trust FoU...
~~~
How would a "thief" even work in this round? As far as I know, we don't have items...
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:49:53 pm
Hmmm....I could do with a "why" to this question.
I don't trust FoU...
~~~
How would a "thief" even work in this round? As far as I know, we don't have items...
...
...
...
What's your point?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 16, 2016, 06:51:01 pm
wait a minute, we've already had a thief role before...
~~~
My point is that I don't see how a thief role would work in this round.
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 06:53:33 pm
...
wait a minute, we've already had a thief role before...
~~~
My point is that I don't see how a thief role would work in this round.
Well, the thief role before stole roles, rather than items.
Perhaps you just don't want us considering the possibility?
Have you never seen "The Thing" before? (again, the old one. Not sure if the newer one is any good)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 16, 2016, 06:55:44 pm
Eh. There's nothing wrong with considering the possibility of some sort of thief, but it doesn't seem likely to me.
Instead of theorizing about a thief, I would prefer to hunt down the evil role in this round.
Post by: Tomasque on March 16, 2016, 06:59:55 pm
Post by: Starver on March 16, 2016, 07:00:53 pm
You also might just be over-thinking things;Hey, that's not allowed! I'm the one who should be overthinking things!
Naw... That was just for the pretend role I was trying to pretend I had the last game.Starver:Talk?RE: Starver: asking a question might do it.
(Only just come back, after some late-night shopping. That's RL, not gamelife. So I skimmed the last three pages, I'll go back again over it when I have a moment, but for the time being...)
Now you're arguing over how many different roles there are, and knowledge of how Round 7 went, it makes my question from Round 6 of "What roles do you think there are?" quite a sensible one, it seems... ;)
Anyway, this round I've only seen one Weak claimed (and with an outline!), one "might as well be Weak" (either Neutral or something Special that isn't appreciated? ...not much more information), one Special (unknown aspect of the flavour), I've missed Fish's claim (if one was made) and I know mine, but that's something I really don't want the Evil (who has, by now, fairly probably said something untrue) to know.
And
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 07:07:30 pm
Starver: thoughts on proceedings?
FoU: thoughts on TBF's weakness claim?
Moonlit: you seemed awfully quick to dismiss my thoughts about a thief, suggesting overly complex ability combinations before considering simpler things. What was that about?
TBF: you're suspicious of FoU as he claimed weakness role. Why should we, and FoU specifically, not also be suspicious of you for the same reason?
PPE: telling TBF to ask a question was mostly because "talk?" isn't encouraging you to do anything useful heh. Also, Fish claimed weakness.
You also made the "I don't really want Evil to know my role" in the last round :o
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 16, 2016, 07:13:22 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 16, 2016, 07:20:04 pm
I am a Psychologist. I can inspect people to see if they are town or not.This is one example of me claiming early in this game.
There are several others.
~~~
And there's nothing stopping there from being two town weakness roles, as last round demonstrated.
~~~
FoU: thoughts on TBF's weakness claim?He's given no details other than being town weakness, for starters...
and thus far, we don't have any evidence for him being town weakness, oui?
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 07:24:41 pm
The only thing we do know is that the voting system is different, anonymous and needs to be explained a bit so we don't do something silly.
What's with the cheeky shifting of shade onto TBF?
Post by: Starver on March 16, 2016, 07:28:13 pm
Starver: thoughts on proceedings?Working on it...
Quote
Also, Fish claimed weakness.Yep, just picked that up, on the re-read.
Quote
You also made the "I don't really want Evil to know my role" in the last round :oThat was playing a role. Is it my fault that I now genuinely find myself in a (different?) role that has the same stipulation!?! (I won't claim it to be Mod humour... 'merely' personal prescience!) [non-edit-Edit: And it may well be a clichéd phrase of mine, too. Consider the stopped clock, though!]
Anyway, nobody has yet (directly) claimed Investigation. There was a 'Special gap' last time, but I wouldn't say there's an 'Investigation gap' this time round, and I'm going to change my mind about one thing I said previously. But I'm worried about the Thief role. Either because they are Evil or because they could (incidentally/purposefully?) cause problems to the non-Evil.
I'm actually seriously considering putting in a vote, already, just to try make sure I don't miss my opportunity. But I've got to consider the fact that any vote I make is 'ablative' to my target, and if I'm seriously wrong that would disadvantage our legitimate passengers/crew... Which, right now, I might well do. So I'll resist that urge.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 16, 2016, 07:30:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 16, 2016, 07:37:57 pm
@FoU:In the FIRST POST? It seems a bit too eager...
You claimed in your first post.
I sort of claimed in my first post.
However, your claim was in response to FoU's and I wanted to bring something to people's attention, so I'm willing to concede that point to you.
I should perhaps refine my thoughts re: thief: my auto doesn't say anything specific to stealing, so it might be that someone has the ability to remove roles without necessarily taking them, if that makes sense.
Post by: hector13 on March 17, 2016, 01:02:19 pm
TBF I think is most likely town, while I'm not too sure about Moonlit yet.
Why do you think that a role in a previous round precludes it from being in a future one? (Fou and Moonlit)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 17, 2016, 06:42:49 pm
Why do you think that a role in a previous round precludes it from being in a future one? (Fou and Moonlit)
Well, it's never happened yet (AFAIK).To start with, this.
Of course, this goes into territory of "don't outguess the mod", and for all I know, Tomasque put a previous role into this round just to mess with us.
But that does seem less likely than what's happened the past 7 times.
~~~
It seems to me that you're awfully fixated on convincing us that there's a thief role, hector...
Post by: hector13 on March 17, 2016, 06:46:55 pm
I should perhaps refine my thoughts re: thief: my auto doesn't say anything specific to stealing, so it might be that someone has the ability to remove roles without necessarily taking them, if that makes sense.
Aha, no.
Though if, hypothetically, I was trying to do that, what would be the problem?
Nobody else is doing anything, anyway, so yeah, my posts are going to stand out.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 17, 2016, 06:47:50 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 17, 2016, 06:50:54 pm
To be honest, I'm not sure what to ask.
In order to refine that, ask questions :P you won't get better at something if you procrastinate.
If a question doesn't yield any useful information, ponder why during the interim between games. Ask about the game, really... Though expect people to question you about your questions and/or responses. Don't let that stop you from continuing a line of questioning if you think it'll yield results though.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 17, 2016, 09:21:41 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 17, 2016, 09:25:56 pm
This is only because I fear I won't be able to change my vote if I want to.
How about you?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 17, 2016, 09:28:48 pm
BUT I CAN'T VOTE BECAUSE I'M A BLOODY HIPPIE.
Post by: hector13 on March 17, 2016, 09:34:56 pm
If I could vote, I'd be less willing to vote. If I'm correct about how the voting system works, wounds are not erased at the end of a night phase... meaning any wound somebody inflicts stays until the person wounded dies.
BUT I CAN'T VOTE BECAUSE I'M A BLOODY HIPPIE.
You really do like revealing things that aren't very helpful :P if there is a thief/role removing ability, you've just narrowed the field for a choice. Well done!
Unless you're trying to bait them into targeting you. But I find it hard to believe there's more than one player that's immune to such things...
Anyhow, it makes sense for the wounds to stay, else no-one would die outside actions.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 17, 2016, 09:58:50 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 17, 2016, 10:05:14 pm
If I'm correct about how the voting system works, wounds are not erased at the end of a night phase... meaning any wound somebody inflicts stays until the person wounded dies.Couldn't have said it better myself. Are there any questions pertaining to the voting?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 17, 2016, 10:07:51 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 17, 2016, 10:50:45 pm
Can we change our votes once we've placed them?Yeah.
Post by: hector13 on March 17, 2016, 11:16:09 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 17, 2016, 11:16:35 pm
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 07:07:10 am
Scum can only force a kill on one player, after all. Tomasque: I assume multiple players can be lynched in the same day?By my reading, three people could deplete one unlucky target straight away, the other two putting another almost as unlucky target 'only' 2/3rds dead1. But then the second person could be struck down by a single vote, D2, even whilst a third is potentially deaded entirely (no votes to spare, due to the loss of the D1 unfortunate - and D3 would have a non-fatal swap of blows between the survivors).
Or if we all voted in strict round-robin (say), and ignoring nightkills/whatever2, by the third day everybody would have been voting 'ineffectually' all the time until the final fatal blows laid down upon them at once. (Let's not do that!)
The reality will be somewhere between. Someone consistently voted for by just one antagonist from D1 will die as D3 (figuratively) dies, yet someone else may will get pounced upon by others right from the start and die quicker, unless it's just two belligerents, they just survive the first round, somehow regain the trust of the group and survive to the end on a single remaining health-point.
How this helps anyone, I don't know. Can we organise a pact of some sort, to ensure we don't lose out on understanding N1's actions? But then how would we know we followed the pact. Anybody would know only what happened to them (they were under/over-voted, from how the plan went) but none of the rest would know the accuracy of their claims, unless someone else (over/under-voted for?) also cared to claim, to partially resolve the unknowns... And with the (alleged) Thief on the board, is it perhaps the case that we're not all even necessarily in control of our own contributions?
Someone may know. Right now, I'm unsure what the group should do, and now only partially inclined towards a personal action.
1 Unless someone's weakness is that they're weaker..?
2 We can't, of course, but I'm not sure we can yet outguess this element until we (perhaps) see what happens overnight.
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 07:11:33 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 08:21:14 am
Correction: We do know who voted for us, having just checked the Round-start post more closely... (Although there's still no reason not to believe there's not spoofing/redirecting possible.)Well, if you're not me, you do...
Post by: Tomasque on March 18, 2016, 08:21:56 am
Tomasque: I assume multiple players can be lynched in the same day?Yes.
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 09:16:27 am
Well, if you're not me, you do...I admire your WIFOM. ;) Are you somehow unusually vulnerable to belligerence, or are you actually not vulnerable and want to draw the 'attention' of the big-bad, or are you trying to make it look like you're not vulnerable, because you are, or are you vulnerable but want to reinforce the idea that you aren't? Or...?
I will gladly add to this confusion, though, in the hope that it hooks the malicious voting role(s?) the way you actually want!
(Unless you're the Big Bad, and you're trying to fool me and the others! In which case: Boo! Lynch him! Darnit.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 18, 2016, 10:13:13 am
So you're saying you don't know who wounds you?Correction: We do know who voted for us, having just checked the Round-start post more closely... (Although there's still no reason not to believe there's not spoofing/redirecting possible.)Well, if you're not me, you do...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 10:18:07 am
Yes. Thus Weakness.So you're saying you don't know who wounds you?Correction: We do know who voted for us, having just checked the Round-start post more closely... (Although there's still no reason not to believe there's not spoofing/redirecting possible.)Well, if you're not me, you do...
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 10:39:12 am
Yes. Thus Weakness.So you're saying you don't know who wounds you?Correction: We do know who voted for us, having just checked the Round-start post more closely... (Although there's still no reason not to believe there's not spoofing/redirecting possible.)Well, if you're not me, you do...
What's the name of your role?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 11:13:58 am
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 02:43:47 pm
Perhaps they'd like to claim the type of role they have, too?
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 02:44:20 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 02:45:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 02:48:07 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 02:48:29 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 02:49:19 pm
I'm Special. Someone's lying.
Well yes, but who?
I claimed special, and what came with it. What are you claiming with your special role?
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 03:10:30 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 03:12:35 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 03:20:02 pm
Though it's interesting that there's no investigator at all in that case...
Starver was the one to bring it up first. Interesting...
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 03:37:48 pm
@Hector:
Politician. I can 'cower', which makes all votes against me the next day do nothing. It's a day action.
Why do people use invistext to make a fucking claim!? Pointless. Stupid.
It's like you want to hide it or something.
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 04:02:42 pm
Although my heart says that it's either a double-Weak and one of the Specials is lying or double-Special and one of the Weaks is. Probably not both, though, unless it's a double-Evil taking (coordinated or not) different approaches.
Not that lying is a bad thing. Maybe they're lying to protect themselves (from the bad-guy(s)), maybe the other reason.
Anyway, until Moonlit made that claim, I'd narrowed it down to two 'most likely' role-distributions. One of which had no Evils at all! (Is that more or less Paranoia Fuel material?)
Now I've just reassessed on Moonlit's claim (but still betting against double-doubles) and... Now there's nine 'most likely' possibilities (averaged likelihoods >1/3rd, although that's a quite a bit arbitrary), with a whole lot of mix-up from the last time. And five, still, with no Evil role! But I've obviously used some bad weightings (I've always plugged in my own known role as 100%, but I've had to assume a suitable spread of possibilities for everyone else), because Moonlit's claim to being Special and Fallacy's claim to being Weak goes unopposed in this top sample, whilst Fish's and Hector's versions aren't and it even suggests that Hector's twice as likely to be Neutral than Special! I need to do it again, so I know what to do about it.
Anyway, the above is too meta, and maybe too flawed. I was hoping to make my life easier for the (currently) blind vote, ahead of any information gained overnight by the person who can test for this sort of thing. I'm highly tempted to not vote anyone at all. Especially if we're not fighting Evil but fighting ourselves.
NotAnEdit: Three new messages, whilst I was getting that in! And, on the recent subject, I could imagine there being a use for Invisitext, not that I plan to use it myself, but no use using Invisitext *whilst saying Invisitext is being used!* We're all going to want to read it, if we know it's there. - And if we don't know it's there, but find it 'prematurely' anyway? What if it's the Big Bad who finds it, and nobody else?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 04:07:22 pm
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 04:36:26 pm
How are you doing this math?Probably badly.
It rests on weighted possibilities for each possibility (not excluding any roles, for anyone, except in my own case), which of course rely on me having the right instincts about which actual weightings to apply (not just "half a chance that a given claim/suggestion is correct", etc).
I'm only doing it because nothing much else was going on, earlier on today, and I had such success in Round 1 with working out the likelihoods of who was actually telling the untruth (with a far simpler distribution... the original non-repeating role-list and only four players, for a start!). But, IIRC, I already had quite a bit more information by the point I did that. This one's still too blind to work with (and nowhere near conclusive enough to suggest to you that "X is true, Y is false", etc). I only really mentioned it in passing, as everyone was already wondering about the subject.
Wondering if I've put myself in the firing line for tonight, though. Hoping it's a non-Nightkill scenario, once more.
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 04:44:56 pm
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 04:57:40 pm
You've also yet to make a claimNot flat-out, no. But I don't trust flat-out claims, myself. I'm aiming to prove my worth empirically, but I can't do that yet.
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 05:13:03 pm
You've also yet to make a claimNot flat-out, no. But I don't trust flat-out claims, myself. I'm aiming to prove my worth empirically, but I can't do that yet.
Your reticence to share information with the town is disconcerting.
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 05:26:58 pm
Your reticence to share information with the town is disconcerting.I find 'oversharing' to be disconcerting. Especially with the double 'double-claims'. Should I mistrust the quick-to-claim more than their direct challengers who do so knowing exactly what they're letting themselves in for? Or are the latter (or at least one of them) playing along with the obvious suspicions?
And I have shared information with the town, what I find it wise to say, but necessarily I've also been sharing with whatever enemy there is. I'm hoping that Town is cleverer than the Enemy, and knows when not to recklessly blurt out what I've decided to not yet say myself.
Meanwhile, I don't like reckless claims like "If you vote for me, I won't know you've done it!" and might assume that there's some deeper truth behind that claim which I might more (or less!) respect, but maybe won't know for sure about until later. I then have to consider whether to make a claim that would appear similarly reckless (and, at the same time, work out if it's worth risking the well-being of allies on my own unsubstantiated hunches).
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 18, 2016, 05:37:05 pm
1. Cowering doesn't make sense for a politician's action. If you claimed "survivor" or "child" or "stowaway", maybe...
2. And two: makes all votes against you the next day do nothing? It seems to me that that would make far more sense if it worked on votes the same day it is used.
3. On top of that: your claim looks to me like you're saying "don't vote me, I might make your vote against me useless".
~~~
In other news, Starver's doing roles probability math. Way to go.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 05:38:07 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 18, 2016, 05:39:18 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 05:40:26 pm
Mine is probably less fitting.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 18, 2016, 05:45:18 pm
Potentially, however, if Tomasque wanted to have a "cower" ability, would he not have made a role that fit the action better?Note bolded text. There are other potential actions for a "politician" role that would fit it better than cowering. And there are roles that would fit a "cower" action better than politician.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 18, 2016, 05:50:30 pm
1. Cowering doesn't make sense for a politician's action. If you claimed "survivor" or "child" or "stowaway", maybe...Read the bolded text. Those are several roles that would fit cowering better.
2. And two: makes all votes against you the next day do nothing? It seems to me that that would make far more sense if it worked on votes the same day it is used.
3. On top of that: your claim looks to me like you're saying "don't vote me, I might make your vote against me useless".
You don't realize what 'politician' means nowadays, do you?Let's play the word association game! Politician... scheming, lying, backstabbing, ridiculous, Trump...
Are you sure you don't want to claim to be Neutral? Because if you're telling the truth, it would make a bit more sense for you to be a survivor...
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 05:53:00 pm
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 05:55:56 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 06:01:35 pm
Round 8 - Day 1
A ship flew from a doomed world. Aboard it, the humans looked forward to their life in a habitable planet far away. However, the aliens that had claimed Earth were not going to let them go so easily. Unprepared for the menace among them, their justice system degenerated...
This round has Martial Voting. Votes are anonymous. At the end of the day, anyone who was voted will know how many people voted them, and who it was that did. Each vote transfers into a "damage point," a value only visible to the person it applies to. Once a person has accumulated 3 damage points, they die.
...could it stop the alien threat?
Day ends Friday, 3:30 PM.
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 06:05:37 pm
GMT+8, yes?Day ends Friday, 3:30 PM.
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 06:08:41 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 06:09:02 pm
GMT+8, yes?Day ends Friday, 3:30 PM.
No, 'murrica's weird. Daylight savings last Sunday, 2 weeks earlier than you lot. GMT-7 'til the 27th.
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 06:10:46 pm
'murrica's weird....
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 06:12:12 pm
'murrica's weird....
wat?
Post by: Starver on March 18, 2016, 06:13:35 pm
(Shutting up now.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 06:13:58 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 06:29:32 pm
Wait that's right, it's 7:22 now. It ends at 8:30 (no daylight savings), so 8 minutes.
... Clocks went forward on Sunday.
Post by: Tomasque on March 18, 2016, 07:51:46 pm
As per protocol, the ship's lights dim to signify the sleeping hour has begun. In the semi-darkness, it is hard to tell who struck who, or if indeed, anyone fought at all. However, out of fear or flight, the return to personal sleeping quarters is quick on everyone's part.
And so the long night begins.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 18, 2016, 08:24:56 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 18, 2016, 08:25:13 pm
Where votecount? And no lock thread?
Read the opening post for the round.
And stop posting in general :P
Post by: Tomasque on March 18, 2016, 10:49:38 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 19, 2016, 12:02:14 am
Once it was over, everyone hurried to the main room, with eyes averted from their comrades until they arrived. Once there, they each let out a sigh of relief - or was it a hiss of frustration? None among them had failed to attend the meeting. All were still alive.
Day ends Sunday 10:00 PM PST
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 12:11:02 am
Post by: Starver on March 19, 2016, 04:55:56 am
Anyone have anything stolen or removed?I... don't know.
I tried to check where you were, last night, but what I saw was... me.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 08:16:37 am
This is worrisome.
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 10:19:15 am
Anyone have anything stolen or removed?I... don't know.
I tried to check where you were, last night, but what I saw was... me.
Hm.
Who did you vote for?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 11:56:06 am
I will also say that someone's votes are doubly effective. I suspect they might be the scum.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 12:12:11 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 12:39:32 pm
I already said I wouldn't know.
Why are you asking?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 12:59:09 pm
Correction: We do know who voted for us, having just checked the Round-start post more closely... (Although there's still no reason not to believe there's not spoofing/redirecting possible.)Well, if you're not me, you do...
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 19, 2016, 01:28:12 pm
Anyone have anything stolen or removed?Nope.
~~~
So. New "information":
One player deals 2 damage with his/her vote.
I tried to check where you were, last night, but what I saw was... me.Someone's some kind of doppleganger?
~~~
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 01:30:12 pm
@Hector: Thaaaaat's right. Why don't you tell everyone?
Tell everyone what?
I'm trying to deduce who voted for TBF. If they're telling the truth, they're one vote away from death, and only one person vote them. You and I have claimed special roles, so I'd imagine that, in order to have some semblance of balance, the Evil role does double damage. Important to get them removed from the game, no?
I know who I voted for, and I know who voted for me (lucky I can defend myself...) so that leaves two people who could have voted TBF, unless for some inexplicable reason TBF voted himself.
I suspect FoU may be lying about his inability to vote. Why would there be a hippy in space..? So... if Starver voted someone, and that someone can confirm, we've likely caught FoU in a gr8 bihg lye.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 19, 2016, 01:35:27 pm
I'm not a hippy, I'm a pacifist.
They're one and the same, though, really... :P
~~~
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 02:30:06 pm
Le humph.
I'm not a hippy, I'm a pacifist.
They're one and the same, though, really... :P
~~~
Mmm... no, no they're not.
Post by: Starver on March 19, 2016, 02:40:24 pm
Who did you vote for?You mean in that last hour of the scheduled day when... oh wait...
However, I'll tell you now that I was toying with one or other of the Special-claimants (i.e. you and Moonlit), because I was more concerned about two Specials being claimed than two Weaks being claimed (although that would always be my second line of enquiry). I had mostly leant towards Moonlit because of the "I'm not a Weak, but..." start to the claim, and then with the Politician claim (bah! who needs politicians to survive, out of all humanity, two-faced lying lizard of humanity, eh?) with the weird delayed-protection thing, but your badgering me for details set me about wondering if I ought to Playback your actions.
But all I got was confused. So I told it straight, and maybe somebody out there can make more sense out of it than I so far have, because someone else has a key to this that I do not yet have.
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 03:01:31 pm
Why must you all make this so bloody difficult? :P
Post by: Starver on March 19, 2016, 03:22:54 pm
That was long-form for "I'm not going to answer your question", then?I've answered your questions and them some. I'm still not sure I can trust you, but everything that you want everyone to know (except whether it was Moonlit who apparently ineffectually attacked you, or not, which I can't say for sure but seems to be the logical solution to the information you kept back) is now out in the open, and ready for everyone to assimilate into their own world-views to work out if there are any obvious lies they can point out.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 03:27:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 03:35:44 pm
That was long-form for "I'm not going to answer your question", then?I've answered your questions and them some. I'm still not sure I can trust you, but everything that you want everyone to know (except whether it was Moonlit who apparently ineffectually attacked you, or not, which I can't say for sure but seems to be the logical solution to the information you kept back) is now out in the open, and ready for everyone to assimilate into their own world-views to work out if there are any obvious lies they can point out.
Well yeah, Moonlit voted for me. I can tell you who I voted for, but I don't think they would appreciate that. If they want to share though... well, that's up to them.
You shouldn't be sure about anyone at this point, but I think there's enough to have some inkling of people's alignment. It's up to you to confirm or reject those inklings, though.
Anyway, you didn't say who you voted for, which is the question I asked. As with my own vote, it's perhaps up to the person who was voted to reveal that... Unless you're trying to blame me for you not voting anyone over the 48 hours of D1.
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 03:36:17 pm
Fallacy, you are pushing all the suspicion buttons right now.
Probably shoulda done a PPE, but I'll +1 the sentiment anyway.
Post by: Starver on March 19, 2016, 04:02:17 pm
Unless you're trying to blame me for you not voting anyone over the 48 hours of D1.Nothing to do with you, no.
Spoiler: Irrelevant detail (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 04:10:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 05:09:54 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 05:11:22 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 05:17:27 pm
@hector:How'd you conclude that?
You said you didn't vote; Starver has at least implied that too; Moonlit voted for me; I voted for someone (and I won't say who because it affects them more than me) that wasn't TBF.
Odd one out is FoU who, as you say, is pushing all the suspicion buttons. Most suspicious is saying he's a hippyohwaitnoI'mnotI'mapacifist.
I think FoU needs to talk his way out the corner he's edging himself into.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 05:18:33 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 19, 2016, 05:23:00 pm
Most suspicious is saying he's a hippyohwaitnoI'mnotI'mapacifist.Okay.
I think FoU needs to talk his way out the corner he's edging himself into.
When I received my role(pacifist), the first thing that came to mind was "hippy". When I "claimed" hippy, that was done somewhat jokingly. Sorry for any confusion that may have caused.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 05:24:34 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 05:25:46 pm
Most suspicious is saying he's a hippyohwaitnoI'mnotI'mapacifist.Okay.
I think FoU needs to talk his way out the corner he's edging himself into.
When I received my role(pacifist), the first thing that came to mind was "hippy". When I "claimed" hippy, that was done somewhat jokingly. Sorry for any confusion that may have caused.
Mafia needs to be taken sersly, min.
Considering you claimed hippy two times in two different posts before claiming the "true" name, though...
Still, pacifist in space makes as much sense as a hippy in space *shrug*
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 19, 2016, 05:26:39 pm
... Still don't trust you.What about my answer is not satisfactory to you?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 05:30:26 pm
Call it gut feeling but you just strike me as...Off.
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 05:31:52 pm
In other news, I'm a hippy.
Bloody town weakness roles.
If I could vote, I'd be less willing to vote. If I'm correct about how the voting system works, wounds are not erased at the end of a night phase... meaning any wound somebody inflicts stays until the person wounded dies.
BUT I CAN'T VOTE BECAUSE I'M A BLOODY HIPPIE.
Not sure why you say you "claimed" hippy. You literally did claim hippy, two times. With two different spellings.
What are you going to do to resolve this gut feeling one way or the other, TBF?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 05:35:04 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 05:37:44 pm
Well, I have a vote, and I'm currently planning to use it.
On a gut feeling? Don't you want to cement your read a bit before assigning your vote?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 05:39:28 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 05:40:27 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 05:41:48 pm
However, you have more independently confirmable assertions.
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 05:42:18 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 05:43:20 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 05:49:38 pm
The gut feeling stems from somewhere, for example. Figure out where from (a post, usually) and then figure out why it bothers you. Then ask FoU about it. Might be your gut feeling is wrong :o
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 05:51:22 pm
He's apparently unable to vote at all.
That just makes no sense.
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 05:54:18 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 19, 2016, 05:58:01 pm
I would call "hippie" or "hippy" a nickname for pacifist.In other news, I'm a hippy.
Bloody town weakness roles.If I could vote, I'd be less willing to vote. If I'm correct about how the voting system works, wounds are not erased at the end of a night phase... meaning any wound somebody inflicts stays until the person wounded dies.Not sure why you say you "claimed" hippy. You literally did claim hippy, two times. With two different spellings.
BUT I CAN'T VOTE BECAUSE I'M A BLOODY HIPPIE.
Much like "hippie" or "hippy" is a nickname for an elf.
In any case, sorry for not being clear.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 05:59:50 pm
And there's the two damage voter that nobody has claimed.
Which is odd, because you could claim that as town.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 06:00:32 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 19, 2016, 06:00:56 pm
And WHY DID YOU EVEN USE A NICKNAME IN THE FIRST PLACE?!Humor. I found it funny.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 06:02:07 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 06:08:25 pm
I would call "hippie" or "hippy" a nickname for pacifist.In other news, I'm a hippy.
Bloody town weakness roles.If I could vote, I'd be less willing to vote. If I'm correct about how the voting system works, wounds are not erased at the end of a night phase... meaning any wound somebody inflicts stays until the person wounded dies.Not sure why you say you "claimed" hippy. You literally did claim hippy, two times. With two different spellings.
BUT I CAN'T VOTE BECAUSE I'M A BLOODY HIPPIE.
Much like "hippie" or "hippy" is a nickname for an elf.
In any case, sorry for not being clear.
But that's the thing: you were clear. You said you were a hippy. Twice. Then changed your mind.
Using a personal association (hippy = pacifist) in a game in which intent and meaning is oh so bloody important... I don't buy it.
TBF
I cannot believe he's that weak. As a Town Weakness myself, that doesn't seem like it's on the same par of underpoweredness as me.
And there's the two damage voter that nobody has claimed.
Which is odd, because you could claim that as town.
Well I was hoping you would say something that being unable to vote in a round in which voting is like an attack isn't sensible. Normally town's only power is their vote... Doesn't make sense that they wouldn't be able to do it.
However, perhaps that is where the theft thing comes in: vote stealing, rather than role stealing. Or I'm completely wrong in that respect. When not everyone votes, it does make it difficult to know if it happened. Though vote stealing might not work, flavour-wise...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 06:14:02 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 19, 2016, 06:22:29 pm
For the purposes of this simulation/imagination, I'm going to assume the double voter is scum.
~~~
FallacyofUrist: I can rule myself out. That leaves you, Starver, The Moonlit Shadow, and hector13.
~~~
So let's list claims...
I'm the Historian.
So you're saying you don't know who wounds you?Yes. Thus Weakness.
Specifically, an auto. I'll claim Special, maybe to narrow it down.
If it's for a particular role you've already told us most of it. If not all of it. And you claim that's not all of it.I haven't told you anything about my auto, other than it makes me suspect there's a thief/Evil role can steal things.
I'm Special. Someone's lying.
Politician. I can 'cower', which makes all votes against me the next day do nothing. It's a day action.
Quote from: Starver
No claim.
To summarize:
FallacyofUrist(pacifist, can't vote)
TheBiggerFish(historian, doesn't know who voted him/her)
hector13(???, has an auto that makes him suspect that there's a thief)
The Moonlit Shadow(Politician, can cower which makes all votes against him the next day do nothing, has not claimed if it's a shotted ability)
Starver(??? nothing at all?)
So who do I think is the double voter?
I can remove myself from the pool of possibilities.
That leaves you, hector, TMS, and Starver.
I'm inclined to believe TMS is a Neutral survivor and not a town player. I may be wrong, but assuming I'm right, that leaves you, hector, and Starver.
Of you three, I'm going to remove hector for good scum hunting, logic... and basically, not scummy behavior. That leaves you and Starver.
Of you two... I can't decide, because Starver really hasn't been active enough for me to decide if he's scum or not. Plus, he hasn't claimed.
Post by: Starver on March 19, 2016, 06:37:24 pm
Exact wording of the ability would be critical as to whether a non-vote would still be used, would actually be used alongside the regular vote of the thief or (because it wasn't used) wasn't available to steal (i.e. redirect...).
That's if a 'vote thief' even is a thing. Yeah, flavour doesn't look like it'd support it. Other (related) possibilities have been mentioned, though, and I'm thinking about them right now. (Not yet ready to get back to the maths, though. That needs something else I'm currently missing, I'm sure.)
(Oh, it appears that it's not just Hector who apparently doesn't read things that were said...)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 06:40:38 pm
Post by: Starver on March 19, 2016, 06:44:23 pm
Already?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 19, 2016, 06:45:20 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 07:03:07 pm
Post by: Starver on March 19, 2016, 07:12:15 pm
Maybe for the best, or maybe I lost myself (and the rest of Town) some good info on... whatever.
@Hector: Not to my knowledge. (But you may have Specialled me..? If that's something you do?)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 19, 2016, 07:13:04 pm
Everyone: did I vote for you?Not that I know of...
Post by: hector13 on March 19, 2016, 07:18:21 pm
Do you have any abilities beyond your inability to vote?Everyone: did I vote for you?Not that I know of...
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 19, 2016, 07:27:39 pm
For all I know, I could have a hidden auto ability, but if I do have one, I don't know about it.
Post by: hector13 on March 20, 2016, 09:00:56 am
TMS:Did you vote for hector last night?Yes I did.
In other news, I've used my ability today.
Fallacy and TBF are the Weakness claimers, right?
Did I vote for you?
Post by: hector13 on March 20, 2016, 09:40:06 am
Post by: hector13 on March 20, 2016, 12:52:34 pm
I voted for Starver yesterday. This means that he's either lying (not necessarily a scummy thing to do regarding hit points) or has an auto or something.
Another thing is that someone is able to move votes around, and my vote ended on TBF in addition to someone else's, most likely scum because who else is going to vote for someone who can't tell us who voted for him?
Suspects for that would be Moonlit (could be making up abilities for a politician role to cover himself) and FoU, as I did tell y'all I'd most likely vote for him yesterday:
So, presently FoU is my most likely suspect for Evil this round. Starver is typically difficult to read (also not sure what to think about his reference to passengers/crew)
What do you guys think?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 20, 2016, 12:53:28 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 20, 2016, 01:42:32 pm
Still could have a vote moving thing. Perhaps FoU is being honest about being unable to vote, but he can move votes about instead.
Post by: hector13 on March 20, 2016, 01:54:06 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 20, 2016, 04:09:51 pm
Post by: Starver on March 20, 2016, 04:45:20 pm
So who did you vote for yesterday, hector?
The answer was given thus:
I voted for Starver yesterday.
Just returned home, so a lot of what has been said over the last few hours still has to sink in.
From the earlier dialogue with you, to whit:
...I would have actually laid good odds on Hector having voted for you, but now suspects you of doing some vote-redirecting (and/or being subject to someone else's skills, by proxy). But it now looks like that isn't the tune after all.Do you have any abilities beyond your inability to vote?Everyone: did I vote for you?Not that I know of...
Note that my limited knowledge (using Playback on Hector I just saw an image of someone else, which indicated me) hasn't yet helped. I don't have much in the way of context (daytime/night-time?) but Hector intending to be vote for/attacking me D1 would fit that bill. If indeed he had actually voted for me. And if my knowledge is even correct and not unreliable..! But Hector's statement arguably matches my original statement to a tee, under the right light. (Not the only explanation, but right now it's the simplest.)
(Also, it makes sense in a meta way... the number of times Hector has voted for me, for no reason... ;) )
It's hard to tell what else went on, though. A claim of "can't vote", two claims of "didn't vote", and a vote that apparently "didn't matter" (due to Special skill, apparently). But not included into that mix is the 'Strongman' role, if that's what it is, as claimed to have been the otherwise unknown attacker of one of our claimed Weaknesses.
And the 'Thief' is still (or else never was!) at large, even(/especially) if that's nothing to do with the 'Strongman'. That has the smell of a Neutral (reluctant as such a role might be to say so), somewhere in the mix, but I've got no solid evidence for such (save for the odd role distribution).
(There's still a chance that there's no Evil and just one or two antagonist Neutrals in its stead. Or even an all-Town complement with the aim of the game being to break down psychologically. But I'm not giving that more than a passing thought. I'd probably have designed such a game with a Secret Auto to randomly and unknowingly vote/attack at night if no conscious dayvote was made. But the claim of "Can't vote" would make for that being an extremely weak Weak, rather than just the very weak one that it currently is claimed to be.)
(...but that last paragraph is again back into Meta territory.)
Post by: hector13 on March 20, 2016, 05:24:14 pm
Post by: Starver on March 20, 2016, 05:40:54 pm
So... does your Playback tell you who someone voted for?It's supposed to be a limited search of images on the Ship systems, as related to the target. I had somewhat assumed it would give me something understandable (what they do when they don't think they're being watched? ...an actual night-time act by that person, or else proof that they did nothing?), but when I specified you as the target (such being my choice, for reasons I'm sure I already at least partially explained), all I got in return was that I saw myself. No context to it.
That's probably in line with the apparently underpowered nature of most of us, and something else that I need to solve the mystery of before I go much further, as I'm spilling more than I would like. I'm probably intended to meld it with either another person's experiences or another night's usage, but that'd be second-guessing.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 20, 2016, 06:22:03 pm
Post by: Starver on March 20, 2016, 06:52:28 pm
@Starver: I voted Hector.I know, that was the "but it didn't matter" one, because Hector is apparently bulletproof.
Don't understand it, but I've got other puzzles to work out first.
Post by: hector13 on March 20, 2016, 08:04:07 pm
I'm a Security Officer. I have some armour I can wear which makes me immune to damage if I use it, 1-shot. I will neither confirm nor deny that I have used it.
I also have an auto that makes it impossible for me to lose any abilities, which is what made me think there's a thief.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 20, 2016, 09:04:30 pm
~~~
Again, I'm the Historian, a Town Weakness, and I do not get the identities of votes on me (though I do know how many vote me.)How does being a historian make you not know who voted you?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 20, 2016, 09:19:47 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 20, 2016, 09:34:43 pm
... that's quite similar to The Moonlit Shadow's claimed ability.
~~~Again, I'm the Historian, a Town Weakness, and I do not get the identities of votes on me (though I do know how many vote me.)How does being a historian make you not know who voted you?
Both things appear to be better directed to Tomasque, no?
Post by: Tomasque on March 21, 2016, 11:01:20 am
The lights dim once more. As people flee to the safety of their rooms, some chance upon the view of the new world so far in the distance. By morning, it should be close enough for the robotic scouts. Then that same evening, close enough to land on...
Post by: Tomasque on March 21, 2016, 05:44:38 pm
The planet is right up ahead. No one bothers to look at it. It is almost time for landing, and still the impostor is among them. If they do not find them quickly, their safe haven will be destroyed from within.
Day end Wednesday, 4:00 PM PST
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 21, 2016, 05:47:08 pm
Nobody killed anybody.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 21, 2016, 06:29:32 pm
Because apparently Historians have Astigmatism and can't see very well.Apparently, you can see well enough to kick me in the head.
You can see well enough to attack someone of your choice... but you can't see well enough to see who attacks you...
I'm not buying it, TBF.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 21, 2016, 06:36:12 pm
Well, it worked at least.
Post by: Starver on March 21, 2016, 06:51:59 pm
I don't suppose this actually means anything to either of you?
Post by: Starver on March 21, 2016, 06:54:27 pm
Day end Wednesday, 4:00 PM PSTOr is that PDT? (Either way, though, that's at least a time I should be awake, here in gold old GMT...)
Post by: hector13 on March 21, 2016, 06:56:00 pm
The results of my Playback on Fallacy revealed an image of "Hector".
I don't suppose this actually means anything to either of you?
Not to me.
Post by: hector13 on March 21, 2016, 07:11:02 pm
Post by: Starver on March 21, 2016, 07:20:12 pm
Not to me.
Well... I voted FoU, I imagine he voted me too. *shrugs* I didn't get told I was attacked.
From what you said in the last round, I was willing to think that it was indicative of your (redirected?) attempt to vote/attack me, thus it should mean Fallacy voted-upon you. But Fallacy claims no voting ability. One or both of you might easily have been claiming wrongly (for whatever reason), but not both.
Maybe it's just basic interactions, then... Had I checked you again (didn't see any value in that), maybe I'd have seen Fallacy in return?
Unless Fallacy has anything important to add, I'll go with that. But FYI for whoever else might know to piece it all together. (And/or to fabricate a plausible yet unincriminating explanation... at this stage of the game I'm not sure it matters, though, given how Town seems to be miraculously undepleted.)
Post by: hector13 on March 21, 2016, 07:25:46 pm
Not to me.Well... I voted FoU, I imagine he voted me too. *shrugs* I didn't get told I was attacked.
From what you said in the last round, I was willing to think that it was indicative of your (redirected?) attempt to vote/attack me, thus it should mean Fallacy voted-upon you. But Fallacy claims no voting ability. One or both of you might easily have been claiming wrongly (for whatever reason), but not both.
Maybe it's just basic interactions, then... Had I checked you again (didn't see any value in that), maybe I'd have seen Fallacy in return?
Unless Fallacy has anything important to add, I'll go with that. But FYI for whoever else might know to piece it all together. (And/or to fabricate a plausible yet unincriminating explanation... at this stage of the game I'm not sure it matters, though, given how Town seems to be miraculously undepleted.)
No, I did vote you directly yesterday, but... I have no idea why it didn't work. Either that or you're not saying, which is understandable.
Only issue is this is the third cycle of a three cycle limit... we need to get rid of the scum today.
I've been having issues reading everybody in this game. Your reticence always bothers me so I shouldn't have voted you yesterday based on that, and currently I'm most bothered by FoU and then Moonlit. TBF, if scum, deserves a win.
Also, Moonlit, what about my ability doesn't make sense? I can choose to put on armour during the day to avoid taking damage. It's old armour, though, so I can only use it one time.
Post by: Starver on March 21, 2016, 07:26:49 pm
Assumption: Fish is one vote from Death. Fallacy is one vote from Death. Anybody else could (now) be killed by a coalition of no less than three voters.
Post by: Starver on March 21, 2016, 07:28:22 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 21, 2016, 10:15:35 pm
Post by: Starver on March 21, 2016, 10:56:26 pm
(On top of that, Moonlit is currently bulletproof, if the original Day 1 plan has been put into effect, and if that's still the truth then we could clearly test that as a sideline by votes not actually required to accomplish any other scumhunt. Or, it's determined to be a lie by enough of us and Moonlit is the primary target after all.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 22, 2016, 08:38:38 am
Your[Starver's] reticence always bothers me so I shouldn't have voted you yesterday based on that, and currently I'm most bothered by FoU and then Moonlit. TBF, if scum, deserves a win.
Well... I voted FoU, I imagine he voted me too. *shrugs* I didn't get told I was attacked.Did you vote me yesterday, or did you vote Starver yesterday? These look contradictory. And as I've said before, I can't vote.
~~~
I've got two wounds, courtesy of yesterday, one from hector and one from TBF(who can see surprisingly well).
~~~
Everybody, say who you want to be lynched and state your case.I want TBF to be lynched.
Point one. His claim. His claim being that he doesn't know who votes him, because he's a somewhat blind historian. Yet... if that's the case, then how did he manage to see well enough to kick me in the head?
Point two.
It's the fact that my weakness role is so much less weak than his.Well, I know my Weakness role is real... which makes this quote make TBF seem like he's fake claiming.
He's apparently unable to vote at all.
That just makes no sense.
Point three.
Nothing in particular, but I still don't trust you.Irrational fixation on me. Okay, maybe not this one.
Call it gut feeling but you just strike me as...Off.
And last but not least, POINT FOUR.
Yeah. I know one person hit me and I know I took 2 damage.Ar, matey, apparently mr. fish was hit by one person and took 2 damage from that. But he can't tell us who it is... meaning we can't make a lynch against said suspect.
I think that mr. fish is lying about the strongman.
I think... that we've got a different threat at hand.
Based on the most recent claim of Playback's use, targeting me and showing hector, I believe that it reveals a random player who voted the target. Starver got a result of himself when targeting hector. But I'm pretty sure he didn't vote hector the previous day...So... does your Playback tell you who someone voted for?It's supposed to be a limited search of images on the Ship systems, as related to the target. I had somewhat assumed it would give me something understandable (what they do when they don't think they're being watched? ...an actual night-time act by that person, or else proof that they did nothing?), but when I specified you as the target (such being my choice, for reasons I'm sure I already at least partially explained), all I got in return was that I saw myself. No context to it.
That's probably in line with the apparently underpowered nature of most of us, and something else that I need to solve the mystery of before I go much further, as I'm spilling more than I would like. I'm probably intended to meld it with either another person's experiences or another night's usage, but that'd be second-guessing.
So what I'm saying is this:
The Evil role is a doppleganger, who can appear as another crew member.
And I think it's TBF.
Post by: Tomasque on March 22, 2016, 09:23:24 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 22, 2016, 09:57:30 am
I'm curious about why it wasn't announced at the beginning of the day, though.
In other news, TMS is something of confirmed town/neutral, because if he was evil he would be guaranteed to win now...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 03:27:53 pm
I still want Fallacy lynched.
Him seizing on "But you can't attack because you can't see who voted you!" just doesn't make sense.
I mean, it makes sense, but I never claimed I couldn't vote, just that I couldn't see who voted me. Being voted on and voting are two different things.
Also, if I'm a doppelganger, how did I vote twice last night?
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 03:40:34 pm
I'll tell you why.
I misread the ability and Tomasque sent me a PM to clarify. It's actually for the day I use it on, and I just used it about when I posted my votecount post. I didn't want to tell you because you'd think I was lying.
And I got a hidden auto that reveals my action :(
Anyway, I think we need to kill as many people today as possible. We have 4 votes that are gonna work, so Fallacy, vote TBF. I suspect you already are, anyway.
I'll vote you. And that leaves enough votes to kill Hector. We'll take out 3 out of 4 suspects, making this our best chance to win.
Er... who made you town leader? Who cleared you as town? Why should we do anything that you just suggested?
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 03:50:38 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 03:54:41 pm
Based on the most recent claim of Playback's use, targeting me and showing hector, I believe that it reveals a random player who voted the target.So... does your Playback tell you who someone voted for?It's supposed to be a limited search of images on the Ship systems, as related to the target. I had somewhat assumed it would give me something understandable (what they do when they don't think they're being watched? ...an actual night-time act by that person, or else proof that they did nothing?), but when I specified you as the target (such being my choice, for reasons I'm sure I already at least partially explained), all I got in return was that I saw myself. No context to it.
That's probably in line with the apparently underpowered nature of most of us, and something else that I need to solve the mystery of before I go much further, as I'm spilling more than I would like. I'm probably intended to meld it with either another person's experiences or another night's usage, but that'd be second-guessing.
Well... when you consider that Starver claims not to have voted, and Moonlit and I both confirmed Moonlit voted for me on D1, and that's all the people who voted for me... your analysis is wrong.
It's much more likely that it shows who the person who is being "played back" voted for. So why did it show that if you can't vote, hm?
Oh right, oops.
Never mind.
TBF, you kill Fallacy. I'll move my vote.
I've not used my armour yet, byraway... The only people we can kill today are FoU, TBF and Starver. I'll be voting for FoU. You can vote for TBF if you want.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 03:55:06 pm
Post by: Starver on March 22, 2016, 03:55:50 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 04:00:04 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 04:00:48 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 04:02:24 pm
There can only be one double. It's either you, TBF, or Fallacy (or me, but I'm unlynchable).
One double what? Double voter?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 04:04:46 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 04:05:01 pm
SPECIAL AND WEAKNESS DAMMIT. I DON'T HAVE TIME FOR THIS BS.
FoU, you kill TBF. TBF, you kill FoU. I'm voting Hector.
You do have time for this BS, the day doesn't end for another 26 hours...
Again, FoU claims not to have a vote.
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 04:11:58 pm
FK me, why do I keep forgetting this. Don't be stupid anymore... ok?
You're also wasting a vote on me, I can't be hurt. TBF, Starver and FoU. I'm alright with TBF and FoU being killed, less so with Starver.
We're also assuming everyone has 3HP...
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 04:17:47 pm
Hector, if you aren't scum, prove it by voting TBF. You can't vote yourself, anyway.
So this way we have TBF dead, FoU dead, and Hector dead (vote for Hector, Starver, everyone is already dead). None of them have any reason not to vote, and they can't stop themselves from dying.
How will that prove anything? We won't find out 'til day end.
I have no reason to trust you right now, so why should any of us do as you ask? You've shown to miss details, like in the last page I've had to tell you - twice - FoU can't vote. You can't organise yourself, why should we let you organise us?
And again... I'm using my armour today. Can't touch this (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=otCpCn0l4Wo).
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 04:24:40 pm
Well too bad. I don't believe you. Or maybe I do.
How in any way is this a bad plan?
The confirmation of your ability is not confirmation of you being Town Special. Both town weakness roles appear to be nonsense, in my opinion. Starver appears to be an investigator.
You don't pay attention. I'm unwilling to follow you because of that, and that you might be fakeclaiming.
Post by: Starver on March 22, 2016, 04:27:21 pm
I'd vote Hector only because it'd be, on the surface, a waste to vote for anyone else. (You (@Moonlit): officially immune; Fish: likely already taken out of the game by someone else; Fallacy: Ditto.) But, then there's Hector's armour. (Ninjaed again!)
Assuming that various bits of what we've heard are true... Maybe one and/or the other of Fish/Fallacy aren't nearly dead. (If either isn't really a Weakness, but has been 'playing' one, certainly!)
Like I said, a mess.
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 05:08:22 pm
Hmm... right... we've only got TBF's confirmation that he's taken 2 hits.
Who voted TBF?
@Hector: That's why I'm saying that you might not be scum. Scum is either you, FoU, or TBF. If FoU or TBF are lying, then there could easily be double Special town. So we kill all three of you and Town guarantees the win.
You didn't answer my question though.
Potato.
I did give an answer. You don't pay attention so I can't put it past you that you've missed something. I also don't know if you're fakeclaiming.
Starver isn't clear. Starver could be scum.
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 05:25:04 pm
We have two different claimers for two different roles. One of them is scum. Tell me why it isn't so.
I'm asking what's wrong with the plan. Not what's wrong with me making the plan.
The problem with the plan is you're making it :P
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 05:28:22 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 05:39:46 pm
I am the special role.
I am not a security officer.
I am El Capitan (the Captain) and so long as I'm in the game, it won't end 'til the Evil role is dead. If I die (or lose that role, which is what lead me to believe there was a thief) the game ends the next day. I also have 4HP as a result of superior conditioning from a career spent in the military.
This is why I would like to see only FoU and TBF dead. Tomorrow will prove I'm the captain, though you obviously have to take super risk in trusting me on that.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 05:41:06 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 05:46:14 pm
I want to see FoU dead this day.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 05:46:59 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 05:48:08 pm
I did bad, but never mind.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 05:55:03 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 06:01:12 pm
You did what?
Claimed too early. Ah well, live (or not, as the case may be) and learn. This is mostly me worrying about Moonlit and/or Starver as scum. Though I think it's FoU.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 06:23:28 pm
...
Good luck not dying to the two-hitter guy...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 06:34:45 pm
"Just enough variation to keep you guessing."
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 06:48:50 pm
Ugh...
Hector, there's a lot of trust we need to believe you. And you haven't been completely honest... If we don't kill you today, then scum wins. However, with both Town Weakness claims dead, I think we'll have a good chance to kill scum anyway... but this creates a huge problem.
We can't trust you. We just can't. If we're wrong, we lose.
You have too many abilities, too. 4 life, 1 shot BP, game doesn't end until scum dies.
With the double hitter (assuming it wasn't a 1-shot) we have 5 votes on the board. That's enough to kill Hector, FoU, and TBF.
We need the double hitter to come forward. I suspect they're a neutral, and we need them to win. They need to hit Hector, and with me that's enough to kill him. TBF finishes Fallacy, Hector finishes TBF, me and it seems Starver kill Hector.
Hector: Why don't you understand that there can't be two Town Weaknesses and two Town Specials?
What's a 1-shot BP? I have 4HP and if I die the game ends the next day, if I'm alive we keep going 'til scum dies.
We could just not kill anyone at all and get to tomorrow. Don't think anyone will go for that though.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 07:05:22 pm
Quote
...with just enough deviation to keep you guessing!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 07:06:32 pm
Also explicit.Quote...with just enough deviation to keep you guessing!
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 07:14:19 pm
Still didn't answer my question Hector. 1-shot BP, as I'm sure you know, is your armor.
@TBF: It explicitly states this is so on the Opening Post.
TBF answered it for me.
Re: armour: That was BS to stop folk attacking me. You need three people to vote for me for me to die today, assuming TBF wasn't lying about the 2 damage, and if he was being honest, the 2 damage wasn't 1-shot.
If we do that the game ends tomorrow, so there's one more opportunity for a vote.
Moonlit sounds like he wants less than three people alive so he can win tomorrow. He's not been cleared but wants to tell the town what to do, and expects us to trust his analysis despite having to be told twice that FoU claims to be unable to vote (arguably then a safe lynch) and twice be told that I had claimed armour to protect me from damage.
PPE: it is also explicitly stated there will be some variance, Moonlit. Two explicit statements from the mod stating different things regarding role distribution. Not a good basis for an argument, is it?
Post by: Starver on March 22, 2016, 08:21:23 pm
Top of my personal list: at least one double is still a bad double.
Couldn't do anything about Hector, if it is he, and now (it seems) Hector might be important. So ignore that possibility for the time being. (Possibility of it being a great big lie, but it would need a combined hit from three of the rest of us, anyway, and I don't think we're going to get that consensus.... if we get another day of play then we know something about the claim is true, though, so... wait?)
Couldn't do anything about Moonlit, if it is he, with Mod-confirmed immunity today. So ignore that possibility for the time being. (No possibility of there not being a Bulletproofness, but who knows the background to that is the claimed Politician... Still, if Hector is right, I get another day to check things... so... still wait?)
Fish'n'Fallacy... If Fish is lying, then likely a vote (or two?) come flying out of nowhere, at the end of today, even if it's the last act. If Fallacy is lying, then Fallacy is full-health, and one vote only against Fallacy would show up the lie tomorrow (if Hector is telling the truth!), prompting disposal then if there's not a very good explanation forthcoming.
I'm now tempted to be the designated vote upon Fallacy (though seems a bit of a Witch Trial thing... if the old lady floats, she's a witch and should be put to death; if she sinks and drowns then she isn't... but is now drowned).
Perhaps we need to be sure about Fallacy. Two votes, so that if there's only a 'loyal' survivor tomorrow, and Fallacy is alive, that last vote would kill the affirmed scum?
Ok, I don't like bloodbaths, like described before, but let's try this hypothetical... Fallacy votes Fish (Fish doomed), Moonlit doubtless wants to vote Hector (by my reckoning, assuming the 4HP claim is correct and Moonlit's first shot never got blocked, that leaves Hector at 2HP, in any 'tomorrow' that happens) but nobody can attack Moonlit, so let both myself and Hector target Fallacy? Then if I get the opportunity of an intervening night I Playback... no I won't say who... but it might help narrow things down. (And if I find I've been attacked, I might as well add that to the information I've gathered, and assume that person is trying to remove me and my Playback, but as they can't succeed I don't think that'll happen. Even if it's that 2-hit attack, I will reveal that, as well as my skill's result.) Then tomorrow, we either have a live Fallacy who (regardless of what else happens overnight to the rest of us) can be killed, or a dead one that indicates that (while Hector's claim is correct in at least one particular) Moonlit is now the primary scum (unless there's other information at hand), and me and Hector can send Moonlit down to 1HP, Hector is still safe and then Moonlit gets killed the following day, at the latest.
Does that sound right? Not sure. There's probably something tricksy that would foil such a plan, so far unrevealed.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 22, 2016, 08:34:47 pm
Also, I know for a fact that he is at most at 2 HP.
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 08:38:33 pm
I'll vote for him too, I'd like to make certain he goes down.
Post by: Starver on March 22, 2016, 08:41:50 pm
But, on re-reading it, I hardly understand what I put, anyway.
Post by: hector13 on March 22, 2016, 08:44:43 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 23, 2016, 08:16:59 am
Hector's claim is just... wow.
If he hadn't been acting very townie for the rest of this round(in my opinion), I would have gone after him.
I would like to note that if he's scum, he's playing brilliantly.
~~~
I will confirm I only have one HP left. One vote is all that will be needed to off me.
~~~
Also, if I'm a doppelganger, how did I vote twice last night?... did TBF just claim strongman?
Post by: hector13 on March 23, 2016, 12:10:08 pm
We've only got TBF's say that he's been hit twice. No one's come forward even though that's the best thing for town. I say we kill TBF.
@Starver: That entire analysis requires Hector to not be scum, so...
Well if you think I might be scum, tell us why.
Post by: hector13 on March 23, 2016, 12:41:40 pm
My thoughts regarding this is we should take out FoU and TBF, so if Moonlit is correct in his assertion that there's only going to be multiple iterations of one role, we can then kill him tomorrow. I think we need two votes on him and two votes on TBF, just to make sure aye?
Otherwise, we'll be taking out FoU and TBF, and those are the two roles I'm most uncomfortable with in terms of them making sense.
Post by: Starver on March 23, 2016, 01:31:36 pm
I'm willing to give it a go, if consensus goes that way, but obviously we'd need another day anyway.
(And I've yet to distinguish between you and Moonlit, also. I mean, I generally like Captains better than Politicians, but... well, tomorrow's another day.)
But, so I have it straight (and with the correct F-names, this time!) alleged Historian Fish is going to try to kill off alleged Pacifist Fallacy, but just to make sure, one of me/you/Moonlit are going to also vote against Fallacy. The other two vote against Fish (again, just to make sure). And if either of those survive the night, we know there's something wrong (they didn't have really have any votes upon them!) and deal with it accordingly.
But if tomorrow happens (which you say it will, but if you're not right about then I'm really not sure what situation we're now in... so I'm forced to accept the premise) with just us three then... we shall see what needs doing. I honestly can't commit to either plan, right now. (There's a night first but should I happen to need avenging, rather than merely provide assistance in prosecuting the wrong'un, I hope the remaining survivor can do something about it. As I'll try to do if I discover either of you two dead and flipped as innocent and thus definitively pointing to the other as the Big Bad. Worst case scenario, you start hitting each other, instead, just to soften each other up for heroic/nefarious reasons of your own, right?)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 23, 2016, 02:19:25 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 23, 2016, 03:31:02 pm
Post by: Starver on March 23, 2016, 04:14:19 pm
Any last minute instructions/alterations? (I don't even rightly know how long it is to go... two hours? Three hours? I didn't want to miss it, this time, but I don't want to be premature either.)
Post by: hector13 on March 23, 2016, 04:18:04 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 23, 2016, 04:20:11 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 23, 2016, 04:21:49 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 23, 2016, 04:26:07 pm
I think then that Starver should vote TBF, as Moonlit seems to think that I'm scum and don't have 3HP.
Post by: hector13 on March 23, 2016, 05:39:44 pm
He may have more than 1HP *shrug*
I think then that Starver should vote TBF, as Moonlit seems to think that I'm scum and don't have 3HP.
Moonlit seems to think that I... don't have 3HP.
This is what I mean about you not paying attention. I, hector13, have 3HP.
Heck, I didn't even mention FoU in that post.
Whatevs, bro.
Could you tell me exactly why you think I'm scum? Provide quotes!
Post by: hector13 on March 23, 2016, 05:41:23 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on March 23, 2016, 06:01:21 pm
They can confirm this.
If you want to off me, you only need one vote.
Post by: hector13 on March 24, 2016, 10:31:29 am
Post by: Tomasque on March 24, 2016, 01:19:34 pm
The planet was fast approaching. The scouts had already found a suitable landing zone for the ship, and by morning it would be on the ground. Was this what the desperate crew were thinking? As they ran through the halls, in the dim lights of the corridors, did this thought urge their step to hasten, or their blows to strengthen? Was this what the one who was hidden among them was counting on? As this thing creeped through the halls - in the absence of the need of a facade, it was truly still a stranger to this place - as if it had just newly burst through the walls of the ship to enter this place - did it anchor to this thought as the fruitation of its clever planning?
Post by: Tomasque on March 25, 2016, 10:44:08 pm
In the morning, the crew was astonished. The ship was still in orbit! Perhaps, indeed, the had a chance to stop the menace among them. When they assembled, however, they were met with astonishment of a different kind - one that filled them with dread. Two dead bodies had been dragged to the center of the room. Two people who had been shown "justice."
Both were human.
TheBiggerFish and FallacyofUrist have died of their wounds.
TheBiggerFish was the Historian
Spoiler: Historian (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Pacifist (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 25, 2016, 10:45:24 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 25, 2016, 10:50:53 pm
Anyhow, I would hope now that my role has been confirmed by it being D4 in a game that has historically been limited to three.
So, I'm still inclined to think Moonlit is the Evil role, but we've got 48 hours to look into Starver. I also hope there are no neutral roles.
So, I want each of you to tell me why I should vote for the other one.
Post by: Starver on March 26, 2016, 07:09:06 am
I Playbacked myself, last night, having hoped to have goaded someone into attacking me, based upon N2's "whoever attacks", it just showed me Fallacy (whom I voted for), meaning I wasted that... but then if everyone voted how they were supposed to, and assuming that polymorph thing wasn't used1
1 My reading of the interesting night flavour is that it can't now be. Either it was 1-shot, or 2-shot meaning that it was used up by this unusual Night 3..? Don't understand it.
So, what I think: Hector's claimed role gives us this opportunity at another day. It might seem logical that it's a captain delaying us, but not certain. Dear departed Fallacy (confirmed town) didn't like Hector's claim, but I suppose it's at least partially proven.
Moonlit, on the other hand, has not much of anything for or against (there's the bloodlust, but that's not inherently scummy... or even Neutral?), except for being the confirmed to have some sort of ability. (I'm wondering about 1-shot strongman/polymorph/whatever the first day and 1-shot shielding the second? Suitably alien?)
We've all three shown our practical abilities, someone's lying about being Special.
I'm definitely left leaning towards Moonlit being the 'obvious' one. But, echoing someone from yesterday, with the possibility that Hector's playing the blinder... it'd be a big decision to sway in that direction... I'm not sure I would.
Hmm, ninjaed a bit.
Same question to you, then, Moonlit: you'd most definitely threatened to vote Hector but did you actually hit him?
Post by: Starver on March 26, 2016, 07:10:51 am
...and assuming that polymorph thing wasn't used1...then it probably wouldn't have revealed anything anyway, worse luck.
Post by: hector13 on March 26, 2016, 09:06:37 am
Definitely.
Well, who voted for who? I want to see if we can even kill Hector if we wanted. Wait. We can't kill Starver. Even if we wanted. We lost.
Unless Hector, you've already got 2 hits on you.
Why can't we kill Starver?
You know it's funny; yesterday you were all "there can only be one role that has multiple roles" but now that it might result in you being killed you don't seem to want to press it as a motive.
I'd also like to ask both of you: how my claimed ability (game continues indefinitely while I live) would benefit me of I was the Evil role?
Post by: hector13 on March 26, 2016, 10:27:29 am
I have the "round goes on indefinitely while I exist or if we kill the Evil role" and 4HP, since it would've been kind of a big deal to lose me during D1.
You never answered my question: how does the round continuing indefinitely benefit me if I'm scum?
You also didn't say why you're no longer pushing the "can't be two specials if there were two weaknesses!" argument
So... Moonlit is scum, and hopefully Starver is the investigator and not neutral. That would be kinda awful.
Post by: hector13 on March 26, 2016, 12:49:41 pm
Well personally I don't think I'm scum.
So Starver voted TBF with me... so Day 5 will happen, unless you're also lying about 4 life... possible. In that case (if you were scum) you would have some sort of evil ability and a bad auto... so maybe you do have that 4 life - eh, don't think so.
To answer your question: It doesn't. Who said it had to?
And why did you lie? And why did you force me to vote TBF yesterday?
I didn't force you to do anything, as I said at the time. I don't have an ability to control who you vote for, so you did that all on your lonesome.
Hypothetically, if I was scum: Do you think it would be fair of Tomasque to completely change the mechanics of how scum win, making it ridiculously hard to kill someone (minimum 3 votes with one person not being able to vote, meaning I would have to convince everyone to vote the same person D1 (5 players, 4 votes present) to get a kill, everyone to vote the same person D2 including a self-vote from the lynchee (4 players, 3/4 votes present if FoU wasn't killed D1) and it would then take 2 days to kill the last remaining townie to even up the numbers. And this is assuming nobody bats an eye at all the mislynches! And all of this with no night kill, and you, Moonlit, being able to have immunity from votes for one day) while the game keeps going because the scum has an auto that doesn't let the game end?
Aye it's a bastard game, but that would be ridiculous.
And again with the not paying attention. He said he voted FoU, not TBF...
One more thing... /best Colombo impression ever
Definitely.
Well, who voted for who? I want to see if we can even kill Hector if we wanted. Wait. We can't kill Starver. Even if we wanted. We lost.
Unless Hector, you've already got 2 hits on you.
You make it seem as though you think Starver is the Evil role here. "We can't kill Starver. Even if we wanted. We lost." What makes you think Starver is scum?
Post by: Starver on March 26, 2016, 05:42:59 pm
But I think the answer might be that there's a particular wincon involved. Which means we might yet be able to thwart it. If we knew what we should thwart.
Maybe we even need to stop the 'Captain'. But that'll be tomorrow, if at all. A single punch thrown today would give that immediate opportunity, upon the morn, should the evidence suggest I should support that. But right now I'm not yet convinced that this is the way. I have to be fair, but is there any more detail that the 'Politician' is willing to provide, or am I going to be forced to go only with my gut feeling and wound you, Moonlit, to ensure the same option? If I'm wrong, I can re-aim at Hector tomorrow, who you doubtless will have already chipped away the first wound from by the end of today.
(It doesn't help that both sides are bickering. One rightfully so, the other doubtless to cause me doubt. "Well done" both of you. That's "well done" in a sarcastic tone to the righteous one, whomsoever they are, but a sincere one to the scummy player.)
Worst case scenario (I think) is that we just all exchange votes for three days and then all die together. Although that would eliminate the Evil role, which seems to be a commonality to Townie Wincons, even those that are, themselves, now eliminated from play... Any way we can do that? Without boring the pants off those players who are dead? (It'd be about a week of RL time, unless we get the playing-days shortened!) Not that I'm sure that's the answer, but it's my best idea at the moment... Any better ones from yourselves? (That look trustworthy, naturally!)
1 I know actually asked about that, earlier, but it actually was a silly question. It was on my notes, left-over from yesterdays assumption that, that due to Moonlit's voting for Hector, we'd find upon daybreak today that one/other of Fish/Fallacy (probably Fish, I was betting) might actually survive and then we'd have had to disentangle that 'accidental' survival through having not been voted for from the possibility that the 'lucky' survivor had actually been lying all along and needed more than the single attack against them. But both died, so it seems it was not actually that relevant.)
((Yours, parenthetically.))
Post by: hector13 on March 26, 2016, 06:16:30 pm
Why are you asking me about Starver's vote? He voted FoU, ask him.
Again, you didn't have to vote TBF. Why did you vote TBF if you thought I was scum?
Post by: Starver on March 26, 2016, 08:18:33 pm
I did ask Starver, you butted in.I seem to have missed any question of yours that hasn't already been answered. (Ditto, I'm not sure where the butt-in happened.) Re-ask, please, if I don't regive the required answer below. Otherwise, it looks likes a demand contrived to muddy the waters.
Quote
If TBF [had been] scum then he[ was] probably lying about being hit twice. So we need[ed] two votes on him.If Fish had been lying, he was probably lying about any votes, two voters (and no Strongman) wouldn't have felled an untouched Fish. OTOH, it was confirmed that two votes had been cast on Fallacy, but not that they'd done anything, noting the distinct possibility of 'armour', of some kind, with one prior fake claim to armour and one current active and fully mod-confirmed equivalent.
So either a fallacious Fallacy (*ahem*) or a slippery Fish might well have needed more than the two votes that (I thought) were now going in on them to kill them outright. And thus reveal themselves. So the 'two votes on each' plan would have revealed things and (assuming no further bulletproofness), given us the advantage. But that (I thought) was what everyone was doing. Looks like something went wrong if Fish was over-voted whilst Fallacy was merely 'sufficiently voted'.
Anyway, a second attack from the same person would be sufficient to remove them from play, whether or not the Strongman attack ability was a one-off ability. Maybe that's what happened?
Having put that together with the situation Day 2, it seems Hector's not (at least as of Day 2) a Strongman, which is not to say that there wasn't the potential for it to be a 1-shot, given the uncertainty about that time. Not sure I could go further than that, but I'll probably use it in directing my choices.
Post by: hector13 on March 27, 2016, 01:36:58 am
Wtf do you mean. I want to know if it's possible to lynch anyone.
I did ask Starver, you butted in.
I didn't think you were scum. I thought you were one of the potential scums. If TBF is scum then he's probably lying about being hit twice. So we need two votes on him. If I hadn't voted TBF then he could've lived (he wouldn't have, but we didn't know he wasn't lying now did we.)
Did you think TBF was one of the potential scum?
Post by: hector13 on March 27, 2016, 10:02:17 am
Definitely. Why did you think I vote for him?
Then stop saying I forced your hand. If you thought he was scum, why are you complaining?
What made you think he was scum? Provide examples.
Post by: Starver on March 27, 2016, 10:19:48 am
Hector, what have you to say about also being a strongman according to Starver?Note: I never even said that.
I was saying that if Hector was the Strongman, it appears it could only be 1-shot.
A little bit of overly-defensive twisting of words around, there... Unless you're just confused, in which case I apologise.
Post by: Tomasque on March 27, 2016, 04:06:05 pm
Sunday (today), 9 PM PST
Post by: hector13 on March 27, 2016, 04:15:45 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 27, 2016, 11:43:09 pm
There was no time to dispose of the dead. The desperate survivors were ready the moment the lights dimmed. Ready - for themselves - to run for life; Ready - towards others - to beat to death. If they lost, they - humanity - would never have home. If they won...
...would they - at home - have any humanity?
Post by: Tomasque on March 28, 2016, 10:51:53 am
Until now, the crew believed they could endure the losses. Now, the body of another human lies on the floor, and above it stand two figures. The last remaining human, and the only alien sent to confront them all. How could they have underestimated it so much?
The Moonlit Shadow died of his wounds
The Moonlit Shadow was the Politician
Spoiler: Politician (click to show/hide)
Day ends Wednesday, 9:00 AM PST
Post by: hector13 on March 28, 2016, 10:53:58 am
Post by: hector13 on March 28, 2016, 10:58:31 am
Confirmation bias is a bitch.
gg Starver.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 28, 2016, 12:03:11 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 28, 2016, 12:53:48 pm
((Game hasn't ended, guys.))
Game is more or less over, anyway. He'll vote for me, I'll vote for him.
Is there any particular reason the day is lasting 48 hours under these circumstances, or is it just because of Override?
I was about to get mad at Moonlit for not noting that I claimed the exact role that one of his autos mentioned, but then noticed it was secret :)) whoops!
Post by: Starver on March 28, 2016, 02:56:53 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 28, 2016, 03:14:43 pm
@Tomasque: I thought there could only be doubles of 1 role?Usually, yes. However I decided to throw you off extra today. Don't expect it to happen for a while now, at least.
...right?
Post by: hector13 on March 28, 2016, 05:05:35 pm
*sigh*
Much of my scumhunt was based off that.
Yup. Thanks!
Post by: Starver on March 28, 2016, 06:18:57 pm
The game may yet be continuing, however, so I'll just mention that I was still expecting Moonlit to be (maliciously-inclined?) Neutral at best. Now it's Hector that is this?
FWIW, I'm voting for you Hector, but still wondering if I shall be surprised at how the game actually ends. That's how paranoid I am.
Post by: hector13 on March 28, 2016, 06:29:15 pm
My scumhunt was based off of that, too, if it helps...
The game may yet be continuing, however, so I'll just mention that I was still expecting Moonlit to be (maliciously-inclined?) Neutral at best. Now it's Hector that is this?
FWIW, I'm voting for you Hector, but still wondering if I shall be surprised at how the game actually ends. That's how paranoid I am.
Well, one of the things I'm passive-aggressively blaming Moonlit for (sorry!) was my inability to notice your playback ability doesn't make any sense. (the other thing being the Evil role having an ability that gets announced publicly not making sense...)
I'm town, unhappily so, and given my auto specifically mentions the Evil role... You are also the only other person that is alive at this point, so it's a fairly simple process of elimination maneuver :P
What is your role then, seeing as it doesn't matter at this point.
Post by: Starver on March 28, 2016, 06:59:52 pm
Well, one of the things I'm passive-aggressively blaming Moonlit for (sorry!) was my inability to notice your playback ability doesn't make any sense.Well, for most of the game now I've been waiting to reveal that I'm the real (or, once I decided there was definite symmetry, the second) Special. I was rather upset that there were so quickly two claims, because it confused me.
And my Playback skill as Technician (NB: nobody asked me what I was, but that's what I would have told you) with such limited and ambiguous access to the ship's systems turned out to be really rubbish as an Investigative skill (possibly Insane Cop, at best...). And obviously trying to find out who a voteless was voting for, Night 2, would have been pure madness unless I still believed that the Voteless role was actually lying about something... No, I wasn't ever an actual Investigator and never claimed to be one, but you two were bickering so much (I tried to get you to stop it!) that it seemed better to let you assume and work out what else I should do.
(After all, I almost always don't-quite-claim Investigator, in some manner, each time that I'm not one at all - just to try to get the Evil to attack me instead of somebody more important who does have that skill.)
Quote
What is your role then, seeing as it doesn't matter at this point.I'll wait, cheers. Just in case there's a "(1-shot, d) Laser-guided Polymorph Attack: Instadeath upon any role that you absolutely know the true role-name for." - or something else that Tomasque is still hiding.
Post by: hector13 on March 28, 2016, 10:05:44 pm
Also the whole "true Special" doesn't stand up to Moonlit's flip :P
Post by: Starver on March 28, 2016, 10:40:10 pm
Well... You haven't achieved your wincon yet.
Also the whole "true Special" doesn't stand up to Moonlit's flip :P
|
Weak (F and F) Weak
|
Special (Moonlit and Myself) Special
|
You
|
Potential symmetry, across the line down the 'and's and passing through outlier at the bottom. You could claim a swap between Myself and You, or just appropriate that self-same text but from your own First Person Viewpoint, if you insist on deluding anyone left who is confused, of course... :PWeak (F and F) Weak
|
Special (Moonlit and Myself) Special
|
You
|
The way I saw it, at a given hypothetical point before everyone tried to kill off the Weaks, probably because it seemed much easier and quicker to do, there was a possibility that the Weaks would be left alone and accepted as 'more possibly true than two "power" positions copying each other in archetype', and the remaining three would have been looked at more intensely but possibly with the acceptance of there being two Specials.
Imagine, then, if there had been a successful attack upon Moonlit (entirely possible, had Moonlit not been able/willing to Cower, thus forcing us to consider the slaughter of the innocents that we actually pursued), then imagine what me-Special would be thinking... I'm Special, Moonlit was proven Special, to go along with the two Weaks...
Aside from a "no Evils at all" total Bastardy version of the game (with suitable Secret Autos meaning three Rock/Paper/Scissors-style complementary specials determining 'relative' Evils for everyone's Wincon, if not a Rock/Paper/Scissors/Lizard/Spock five-way 'tournament of relative advantages'), my most logical personal observation would be that it was such a symmetry, with you the odd one out, and that's the position I'd need to consider defending and presenting as a possibility to the other two, so as not to lose against you, my clear enemy! (Unless there were actually three of us, Tomasque really having thrown a curve.) And if we hadn't managed to kill Moonlit (despite some of us trying, but thinking better of it the next day!), and there were questions about my seemingly unreliable skill...
It's *simples* logic! As Tomasque knows, from the way I have been explaining so many of my thoughts, every step of the way... (Really, pity poor Tomasque, for I must have nigh on filled up his My Messages inbox up, over the last few rounds, even not counting that 'Messages Only' round...)
Anyway I was, actually, expecting a Driver-type character, as per that other round, but in key functional ways you seem to be the Anti-Driver. But with the twist that Moonlit is the Secret Co-Driver...
Post by: hector13 on March 28, 2016, 10:55:46 pm
There's also the issue of my claimed ability - game continuing until the Evil role is killed while I'm alive - pretty much being confirmed by us being in D5, and the fact there are two players remaining, which normally constitutes the no-return point for a scum win.
I don't understand why I'm arguing the point though :P :))
Post by: Starver on March 29, 2016, 09:48:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 29, 2016, 09:51:02 pm
Post by: Tomasque on March 31, 2016, 10:51:56 am
hector13 died of his wounds
hector13 was the Captain
Spoiler: Captain (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 31, 2016, 10:52:42 am
Post by: Tomasque on March 31, 2016, 10:54:43 am
Post by: Starver on March 31, 2016, 08:07:36 pm
I already knew DST had come to the US, day 1 (and had voted, but feigned otherwise). OTOH, I genuinely missed day-end Day 2. And I actually was getting Fish and Fallacy mixed up at one point (but I then shamelessly played up on my past error in deliberate hints to that effect in later posts, lest I need an 'alibi' of some kind). Also, I was telling Moonlit and Hector to stop squabbling... not sure it would have helped or not to have them make more rational decisions, but I figured it wouldn't hurt either to be the 'reasonable' one. ;)
(And I did try to use mathematics to work out everyone's roles, at that point in the game, although the version for public consumption was deliberately sabotaged to give results in my favour. But I'd already excluded the "two pairs" possibility, so I was wrong anyway.)
Yet to be fully confirmed, but looks like if I'd attacked Hector (something I would have done if I'd felt threatened), the game would have continued still with Moonlit in charge. And, given the reasons I would have tried to depose Hector include that I wanted the game to end quickly, it seems it wouldn't actually have been beneficial to me!
Ok, that's at least one paragraph longer than I'd intended, so I'll leave it there for now. Let Tomasque's round-end summary (either edited into the message three posts ago, or else appended after this) reveal all. Also, I'm going to announce now, before I know how right or wrong I will be, that at the beginning of the next round I shall announce that I am the Evil role - just to get that particular elephant out of the room. ;)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 01, 2016, 10:34:47 am
Also, I'm going to announce now, before I know how right or wrong I will be, that at the beginning of the next round I shall announce that I am the Evil role - just to get that particular elephant out of the room. ;)Da heck?
The metagame just got more complicated.
Post by: Starver on April 01, 2016, 11:01:01 am
The metagame just got more complicated.Or you can just rightfully ignore me, when I inevitably say that. :P
(Or at least treat it as doubtfully as any contentless "Yeah, I'm a Townie" D1 statement by anyone else. Just that if I didn't tell you that I was going to say this in advance, but said it in jest like I have been seriously (sic) tempted to do for a while now, then you might take it as gospel...)
But wait! What if I forget to say anything about this!?! Does that mean that I want you all to suspect me of not wanting people to suspect me?!? Or does that mean I'm a jester, at last??? Argh! The logical loops-within-loops!
Post by: Tomasque on April 01, 2016, 01:42:26 pm
Post by: Tomasque on April 01, 2016, 03:50:29 pm
Post by: Tomasque on April 03, 2016, 12:16:40 am
The Underground was merry as usual, then suddenly monsters began to disappear. Suspicious piles of dust began to show up everyone. Soon it was clear what was happening - all too clear. There was someone among them who was responsible - someone who had to be brought to Justice.
This round will be using Role-Change voting. It works like normal voting - except that the voted person is not killed. Instead, their role is replaced with a role from the Replacement Pool. Neither role is revealed, and the old role is removed from the game altogether.
Note: Since there were some questions about voting last time - ones that prevailed throughout much of the round. This is a reminder that I am open to any questions about voting.
Day ends Monday, 10:00 PM PST
...or Tuesday, 5:00 AM GMT Heh, you're welcome.
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 12:31:37 am
Does their previous role go into the replacement pool?
Post by: Tomasque on April 03, 2016, 12:39:28 am
The previous role is removed from the game entirely.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 06:04:47 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:00:19 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:07:58 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:15:05 am
i don't think you need to worry about that.
Post by: Starver on April 03, 2016, 08:16:18 am
This round sounds intriguing, however.
(Ninjaed x1)
I think TBF thinks otherwise for other reasons, but I'm not yet quite sure why...
I'm almost tempted, given the inherent no 'death'-flipping, to suggest self-flipping to help us get a handle on the game, but it might help the 'wrong' person to blend in. (If that's actually something we need to worry about.)
(Ninjaed x3) Sheesh... trust me to join just as the conversation hots up.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:19:19 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:27:49 am
so what happens to the evil role?
is there more than one evil role in this game?
all: do i sound familiar?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:30:32 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:31:17 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:44:52 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:50:46 am
Post by: Starver on April 03, 2016, 09:42:56 am
all: do i sound familiar?[/font]No, but now I know roughly what to look up.
TMS: From what I've found out about ourselves, I believe I could share an aim with you. But I'm really not sure if Tomasque's dealt the cards that way. Also, I take it that TBF hasn't answered your question, yet?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 09:48:26 am
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 10:08:33 am
@Hector: What's your name?
Chara ::)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 10:15:18 am
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 10:40:16 am
Asgore is said to be the final boss for most of the game, and Sans is the final boss for a particular run, so...
There's also the issue of whether or not I'm being honest *shrugs* same can be said for all of you.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 10:46:47 am
but chara is not a boss.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 10:49:44 am
i a m s u s p i c i o u s.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 10:51:21 am
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 12:56:36 pm
Why do you want us to think you're Sans, TBF?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 12:57:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 01:01:56 pm
Perhaps Tomasque's interpretation of Sans is evil?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 01:04:27 pm
i'm actuay the investigative role. remember what i do.
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 01:05:21 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 01:08:15 pm
and see that look on your face.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 03, 2016, 02:03:33 pm
When this thing finishes, one of us should nominate it for the notable games archive.
~~~
So undertale. Le huh.
~~~
Okay. Weird things of note:
1. This round is a bonus round. Based on its position(right after round 8), I bet we're going to have two more bonus rounds after this one, or so.
1a. Might there be some kind of special reward for winning this round, as opposed to the normal one?
2. Role-change voting. If only we knew what roles are in the replacement pool... also...
2a. Might there be an Evil/Neutral role in the Pool, in addition to any Town ones? If that were the case, the Evil role could gain from using it...
2b. Interestingly, Tomasque did not say that the role chosen from the Replacement Pool would be random. Might there be a role that chooses which one?
Tomasque: will the role chosen from the Replacement Pool once someone is lynched be randomly selected?
2c. What utility is the town supposed to gain from using this replacement system? Maybe we're supposed to replace the Evil player's role with a Town role?
3. There are two possible end dates for this day. Le wha?
~~~
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 02:28:22 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 04:20:29 pm
100 pages. And we're only a little bit more than a third of the way in.
When this thing finishes, one of us should nominate it for the notable games archive.
~~~
So undertale. Le huh.
~~~
Okay. Weird things of note:
1. This round is a bonus round. Based on its position(right after round 8), I bet we're going to have two more bonus rounds after this one, or so.
1a. Might there be some kind of special reward for winning this round, as opposed to the normal one?
2. Role-change voting. If only we knew what roles are in the replacement pool... also...
2a. Might there be an Evil/Neutral role in the Pool, in addition to any Town ones? If that were the case, the Evil role could gain from using it...
2b. Interestingly, Tomasque did not say that the role chosen from the Replacement Pool would be random. Might there be a role that chooses which one?
Tomasque: will the role chosen from the Replacement Pool once someone is lynched be randomly selected?
2c. What utility is the town supposed to gain from using this replacement system? Maybe we're supposed to replace the Evil player's role with a Town role?
3. There are two possible end dates for this day. Le wha?
~~~
I would hope all of those questions are directed at Tomasque. They do nothing to move the game forward...
Can Tomasque answer them all anyway? And this one: is it the role and the alignment that gets changed with a role from the replacement pool?
Are we allowed to vote publicly?
Post by: Starver on April 03, 2016, 05:25:16 pm
But, it occurs to me, that from what I have read, all characters have multiple routes and (possibly) multiple attitudes to everyone else. Now, what if all of us start as a Neutral Route version, in whatever way that best represents itself, but the actions of the game (the game) dictate how each character 'develops', i.e. what happens each day and/or death, for better or for worse.
However, that's just potential game-mechanics. I wouldn't like to second guess our mod's purpose, besides what's been revealed,so ICBVWI. (But that would cover FoU's question 2, and its subsidiaries.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 05:30:47 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 05:31:42 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 03, 2016, 06:38:14 pm
~~~
Who would like to volunteer to be prevented from acting?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 06:43:48 pm
((No but seriously, don't. I'd target Starver, actually.))
Post by: Starver on April 03, 2016, 06:49:08 pm
((No but seriously, don't. I'd target Starver, actually.))I don't think that would help anybody... but as you like..
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 07:09:05 pm
nah, i'm pretty sure that it's a genocide route.
1HP of damage, and 15 attempts. At least the music is good...
However, I'm disinclined to accept that. I don't think we're doing any particular type of run at all, we just are. Will perhaps reveal more tomorrow, but I have an inkling of the roles FoU and Starver have, and maybe how the replacement system works. Specifically what role you have will dictate what roles you are eligible to receive from the replacement pool.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 07:12:43 pm
You should probably target hector, because he claimed Chara.
Then again it might not be hector because he actually claimed Chara.
Hector, what can Chara do?
Now, back to being in character because why not.
~~~~
sorry about that folks, had to go glare at someone ominously.
hector.
y o u h a d a b a d t i m e, h u h?
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 07:45:58 pm
I'm intrigued to know he we remove players from the game, Tomasque. I have suspicions, but I don't really know how to go about proving 'em... presently I don't think the Evil role is "evil" yet.
I think Moonlit should be targeted with whatever smothering nonsense FoU is on about.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 03, 2016, 07:54:30 pm
I think Moonlit should be targeted with whatever smothering nonsense FoU is on about.Moonlit? For what reason?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 07:55:05 pm
Post by: Tomasque on April 03, 2016, 08:01:37 pm
Do we keep our role type when we change? For example, will Town Investigative get another investigative role?Your role is replaced by another role entirely.
Tomasque: will the role chosen from the Replacement Pool once someone is lynched be randomly selected?No. There is a list. When a person is lynched, their role is replaced with the next role on the list.
3. There are two possible end dates for this day. Le wha?Both are the same time - one is Pacific Standard Time, the other is Greenwich Mean Time.
Can Tomasque answer them all anyway? And this one: is it the role and the alignment that gets changed with a role from the replacement pool?I answered the ones that people should know. Assume the others were answered "maybe."
Are we allowed to vote publicly?
Just to be thorough: The entire role is replaced. I will essentially PM you a new role.
You must vote publicly.
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 08:06:20 pm
in the round, hector. not in the game.
No idea, I'm not Chara. I'm taking issue with the folk revealing roles and alignments on D1, so I'm not going to do it.
I think Moonlit should be targeted with whatever smothering nonsense FoU is on about.Moonlit? For what reason?
Just feels right to me. The claims we've had so far make me feel (more) comfortable that Moonlit is (likely) evil.
We'll see though.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:07:53 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 08:13:37 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:14:55 pm
and maybe that dog.
Post by: Tomasque on April 03, 2016, 08:30:37 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:33:52 pm
Like, seriously AU broke, or alternate-character-interpretation broke?))
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:34:31 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:42:52 pm
apparently he doesn't like going public on the first day.
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 08:44:12 pm
@Hector:
I wanted to know the names because I have one in my role PM. You're lying.
I know I'm lying. I'm quite content to say that I'm lying.
Seeing as how lore is necessary here, though: I'm Asriel.
You will have nothing more about my role beyond that, so don't ask.
I think people should reveal names, but not role archetypes.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:48:09 pm
on the one hand, that flower...
on the other hand, god of hyperdeath...
and on this third hand...he frees everybody at the end.
i'm going to assume that asriel isn't the same as flowey.
please correct me if i'm wrong.
Post by: Tomasque on April 03, 2016, 08:49:26 pm
((How far broke?Perhaps "broke" isn't the right word. It's mainly a problem of "why is this character here if <blank> hasn't happened yet." All things here are from normal Undertale, not any of the AUs.
Like, seriously AU broke, or alternate-character-interpretation broke?))
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:51:05 pm
((Ah. So we can expect every single boss in this rota?))
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 08:54:03 pm
asriel's a double-edged claim...
on the one hand, that flower...
on the other hand, god of hyperdeath...
and on this third hand...he frees everybody at the end.
i'm going to assume that asriel isn't the same as flowey.
please correct me if i'm wrong.
Part of the reason I was reticent about claiming it :P
I'm hoping I have not erred by revealing the name. I am, however, quite happy to vote for anyone who doesn't reveal their role name though.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 08:56:37 pm
one thing i want to clear up though, is flowey also you or are you you all the time?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 03, 2016, 08:58:37 pm
You wish to know my role name?
You wish to know the role name of the great Papyrus?!
Well you're not going to get it!
~~~
... welp. The above is just a humorous way of saying that I'm Papyrus.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 09:01:36 pm
like at all.
you didn't even use the right font.
or caps.
seriously.
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 09:01:49 pm
i'll look into you then.
one thing i want to clear up though, is flowey also you or are you you all the time?
As I said, that's all you're getting from me in regards to my role.
PPE: very happy someone is Papyrus. I do like Papyrus. Your claimed ability would perhaps suit Undyne or Toriel better, however...
Starver is the last one to reveal. Fire away saaan.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 09:06:11 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 09:07:26 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 09:25:57 pm
why are you refusing to confirm or deny flowey, hector? seems to me like that's not going to help scum at all and it helps town a lot.
Consider the process from Asriel to Flowey.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 03, 2016, 09:26:23 pm
YOU WISH TO KNOW MY ROLE NAME?
YOU WISH TO KNOW THE ROLE NAME OF THE GREAT PAPYRUS?!
WELL, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT!
~~~
Adjusted for TBF.
~~~
Now I'd like to note that although I do prevent people from acting... it's done... violently.
To be specific: if the person I target tries to act, they're killed before they do so.
Post by: hector13 on April 03, 2016, 09:29:04 pm
what do you mean better suited to toriel or undyne? papyrus is in training to be in the royal guard, he guards people.
Missed that, whoops.
Toriel is ultra-protective, and Undyne is the captain of the royal guard, and is the Heroine during a genocide run.
I'm not saying he isn't what he says, but just it fits other characters better, in my opinion.
PPE: that most definitely suits Undyne better :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 09:31:35 pm
wonder what'll happen.
tomasque did say some things got changed for balance reasons, i think this might be one of them.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 09:33:01 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 03, 2016, 09:50:48 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 04:05:43 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 04:06:20 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 04:23:25 pm
Also, Starver. Not kidding about voting for no name claims.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 04:26:44 pm
a l i t t l e t o o h a s t y , h e c t o r ?
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 04:43:48 pm
to be fair, he hasn't shown up yet.
a l i t t l e t o o h a s t y , h e c t o r ?
Day ends in ~8 hours, so no. Not sure how active I'll be in that time.
I maintain we need to "lynch"- or whatever happens in this round - everyday. It's difficult to consider lore if we don't know to whom it applies, yes?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 04:47:10 pm
the only flips are from the nightkill if at all.
plus i have a plan anyway
no lynch
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 04:53:33 pm
and i think that's actually a bad idea.
the only flips are from the nightkill if at all.
plus i have a plan anyway
no lynch
So removing the towns only weapon is your plan? Fantastic.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:02:52 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 05:04:21 pm
the way the role replacements work, it's not a very good weapon to begin with.
Beggars can't be choosers. Take what you get. Perhaps the point is to replace the Evil role with a town one?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:05:03 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 05:06:03 pm
but what if we end up replacing a town role with an evil one?
Shit happens. If you want to piss away one of the chances to eliminate scum, though, fire away.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:10:26 pm
reluctant unvote.
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 05:25:02 pm
What possessed you to think a no lynch is a good idea?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:25:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 05:29:03 pm
investigate everybody.
You have 2 nights to investigate four players.
Also, role replacements.
Not very well thought through...
What possessed you to think a no lynch is a good idea?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:35:51 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 04, 2016, 05:38:46 pm
If he attempts to take an action tonight, he will be... killed.
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 05:39:52 pm
I seriously have no idea what I was thinking...
I find that hard to believe, else you wouldn't have done it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:43:10 pm
Tomasque:Are there still only three days?
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 05:44:21 pm
I'm going to go out on a limb and say the replacement pool has no Evil roles, as a role only gets replaced at the behest of the town via voting, and voting is basically the town's best power.
PPE: tell us what you were thinking then. You've had 3 pets and a half hour to think up an excuse, man. One more strike.
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 05:45:12 pm
That was posts, byraway.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:47:17 pm
While I did just think of something, I'd rather not reveal my plan.
I will leave you with this quote: you think i'm just gonna stand there and take it?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 04, 2016, 05:48:44 pm
~~~
And with that, I believe TBF just claimed some sort of dodge ability, which would, to some degree, make sense for Sans.
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 05:50:32 pm
...
While I did just think of something, I'd rather not reveal my plan.
I will leave you with this quote: you think i'm just gonna stand there and take it?
You revealed your plan already.
I will leave you with this vote: TBF
PPE: I have an inkling. My inkling suggests your role may not necessarily work in him, but bugger it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:51:40 pm
wait, you've gotta be asking that for a reason...
hector
omgus, i know, but seriously you didn't get it?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:54:33 pm
then investigate someone n2.
that will leave one role unconfirmed.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:54:54 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 05:55:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 06:09:43 pm
The quote you have is during the fight with Sans, in that he dodges your attacks for the entire frickin' monologue, leading me to believe you can't be acted upon (probably a one-shot)
If not, you're forgetting you won't be able to investigate while FoU targets you (unless I'm mistaken, FoU?) and roles will be getting replaced. If you'll excuse me, your plan sucks.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 06:10:25 pm
right thing.
wrong conclusion.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 06:11:57 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 04, 2016, 06:13:29 pm
If not, you're forgetting you won't be able to investigate while FoU targets you (unless I'm mistaken, FoU?).If I use my ability on TBF, he won't be able to investigate, but not as a result of an ordinary block. To be precise, TBF will be killed before he takes his action, if he attempts to take his action. That is the power of the Blue Attack. If he doesn't act, he won't be killed.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 06:14:23 pm
so yup, we're good.
Post by: Tomasque on April 04, 2016, 06:19:59 pm
Tomasque:Are there still only three days?Yup.
Tomasque: for the purposes of a "You win if the Evil role is eliminated" win condition(otherwise known as the standard town win condition), would a player with said win condition win if the Evil player had his/her role changed to a Town one?Yup.
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 07:45:41 pm
Bugger it. Starver's inactivity is more egregious, and knowing he's had a role wipe will probably be useful.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 08:19:16 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 04, 2016, 09:55:42 pm
Sound good?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:03:47 pm
fou, you do not get a reveal, nobody gets a reveal.
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 10:05:00 pm
How about this: we rolelynch TBF, giving us a (likely) win if he's the scum, and in case Starver's the scum, I will do my Blue Attack on Starver to prevent him from pulling anything.
Sound good?
I'd rather wipe Starver and you blue block TBF. TBF has claimed an active ability, we know nothing of Starver.
PPE: Also, it's intriguing me that TBF keeps voting someone when he gets voted... town move?
2 hours to convince me wiping you is a bad idea, TBF.
Post by: Starver on April 04, 2016, 10:06:35 pm
Anyway, I've come straight back here (well, almost; first I clicked on a "click once a day" website game that I had also neglected ;) ), and I've got a couple of pages of posts to read, then I'll work out what I'm saying/doing.
(Oh look, ninjaed by a vote for me, it seems. Fair enough, for now, but let's see what happens when I know what I need to respond to. And another ninja. Of course, it's your active time!)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:08:20 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:08:42 pm
who're you?
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 10:09:13 pm
@hector:Because I'm the (an?) investigator.
Better reason. You've only ever voted when someone votes for you. Doesn't strike me as town motive.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:12:38 pm
If you really think I'm that evil after tonight, lynch me tomorrow.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:14:39 pm
The third thing should be obvious if you think about what I'm trying to avoid saying about my abilities.
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 10:16:21 pm
My motive is that I can simultaneously do three things tonight if not lynched, test FoU's claimed ability and investigate someone.
If you really think I'm that evil after tonight, lynch me tomorrow.
Why do I had to wait until tomorrow to do it? If I think you're Evil I'll lynch you now.
You claim FoU's ability won't work on you, so how will you test it?
Where is Moonlit?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:19:25 pm
Why does it matter what day you lynch me on if I'm definitely evil?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:20:02 pm
Post by: Starver on April 04, 2016, 10:20:28 pm
(Except for 5 new intervening replies to read!)
Nice to see I (my character) was namechecked. I'm still not sure whether I'd be considered good or bad (depends on the game conceit, depends on the win conditions, depends on loads of things!) but I'll tell you that I'm Undyne. And I have an ability related to 'my' being a Guard.
From what (still) little I know about my character, it's why I was wondering if 'kills' and replacement roles were linear according to the character (apparently 'I' come back with determination, or somesuch), but it seems Tomasque's not got that in mind.
Given no role-flips, I'm not sure what use either truth or lies, regarding our characters, will be, though. Especially when character alliances are (again, from what little I've read) seem to be rather fluid. So I've either put myself at a huge disadvantage, against all you that know the relevant lores, or... it means nothing.
Either way, if Tomasque has a role ready to give to whoever gets lynched, I say we go that route. Not sure I'm the best person to be lynched, given what might be lost, but then again maybe I can understand my replacement character better..? (Hey! It might even be an Evil one that I could win with by pure fluke... ;) )
So, there you are. And I shall probably be around for the next few hours, but I'm not sure I can influence anything so...
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 10:27:41 pm
No. It's going to fire off just fine. It's just not going to have any effect. That's different from 'not working'.
Why does it matter what day you lynch me on if I'm definitely evil?
The difference between you firing off a night action and not?
I think there's no difference between "having no effect" and "not working". They are synonymous. Unless you're not explaining it very well...
PPE: make a vote.
Alright. Asgore, Asriel, Sans, Papyrus and Undyne. Papyrus, Undyne and Sans are probably genuinely good, which leaves Asriel and Asgore.
Asriel I don't think exists in a genocide run (not as Asriel, anyway) so... Moonlit, partly 'cause of inactivity.
No idea if the right decision is being made, but it's better than a no lynch.
What do you know of determination, Starver?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:28:35 pm
That checks out.
Everyone:
Role lists so far:
TBF:sans. did you think i was just gonna stand there and take it? ...that look on your face...
Hector13:Claimed Asriel.
FoU:Claimed PAPYRUS. Claims guarding using Blue Attacks.
TMS:Claimed Asgore. No abilities claimed. Not sure I trust this one.
Starver:Convincingly loreful claim of Undyne. I'm not so sure whether I trust them though, my wincon was no different from any other round and they're going on about being unsure...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:29:07 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:29:43 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:30:27 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 10:31:53 pm
PPE: I'm past that now, but it still makes no sense :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:32:53 pm
If day ends before I wake back up Unvote.
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 10:33:34 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:35:20 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 04, 2016, 10:35:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 10:37:38 pm
It's still a tie as it stands, isn't it?
Full disclosure then:
I'm Town Weakness, but I have no abilities. This I expect I have a secret auto that triggers when something happens, and given TMS has confirmed that I'm Asriel, I imagine it has to do with an action from him.
Vote Moonlit, and then go sleep.
Post by: Starver on April 04, 2016, 10:40:04 pm
What do you know of determination, Starver?Honestly, practically nothing. I meant to spend some time learning more about us (or at least our claims), but I've done little more than browsed the headline facts. And that bit's from my very first glance at my own character, before I even knew who else I was supposed to be looking up.
Still, from a game POV, it looks like I don't need to worry about that, anyway. I'll just concentrate on defending things that I should be defending, if you'll let me. (What happens if I can't, I can't say.)
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 10:48:20 pm
Post by: Starver on April 04, 2016, 10:57:44 pm
(Remind me to think about setting up the premise of a Discworld Mafia, for any so inclined to play, with a bit of a History Monk/time-shattering plot so that Granny Weatherwax from Wyrd Sisters can interact with Vorbis of Small Gods, etc... or, indeed, even her with the Granny Weatherwax of Carpe Jugulum! That'd be interesting.)
1 With the caveat about the replacement character being still an unknown element!
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 11:02:13 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 11:03:08 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 11:14:42 pm
Post by: Starver on April 04, 2016, 11:37:04 pm
I claim Captain Commamder Duke Sam Vimes :PYou can be Captain Vimes as of The Light Fantastic. (Doesn't even feature, presumably already in the gutter. But, even if not, has the loss of the too-fleet-of-foot Constable 'Leggy' Gaskin to look forward to.)
How's that read through coming?Still cramming. Still making less sense than I'd like. It's a bit like playing Blind Poker, at the moment, but I put my main card on the table already, so...
Post by: hector13 on April 04, 2016, 11:39:28 pm
You have about 20 minutes to make a decision.
Not to put to find a point on it, but I'll be fucking furious if you don't vote someone by day end :P
Post by: Starver on April 04, 2016, 11:59:18 pm
You have about 20 minutes to make a decision.Nothing I can do can change the decision, but I'll vote TBF, just for your sake....
Post by: hector13 on April 05, 2016, 12:04:33 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 05, 2016, 04:26:57 am
y o u ' r e m a k i n g a b i g m i s t a k e . . .
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 05, 2016, 04:48:19 am
Actually, I really don't trust Starver.
That claim's too open, and too...Pat.
Not to mention that Undyne generally wouldn't know they can fight after death...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 05, 2016, 04:50:16 am
Post by: Tomasque on April 05, 2016, 08:15:54 am
A decision was made. The guilty was punished. Content with their closure, the residents of the Underground returned to an almost normal life. Soon they would realize their mistake.
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (3) - FallacyofUrist, Starver, hector13
Starver (1) - TheBiggerFish
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not Voting: The Moonlit Shadow
Post by: Tomasque on April 06, 2016, 11:27:06 pm
In spite of their efforts to protect themselves, the killings continued. One death in particular caught their eye. It was human.
TheBiggerFish was killed in the night!
TheBiggerFish was Frisk.
Spoiler: Frisk (click to show/hide)
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Day ends Friday 9:00 PM PST
Saturday 5:00 AM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 06, 2016, 11:28:52 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 06, 2016, 11:34:35 pm
Lyin' bestard :P
So. Which one of you other bastards should I vote?
Starver and FoU: why were you voting TBF?
Moonlit: why weren't you voting at all?
Post by: Starver on April 07, 2016, 03:57:18 am
Starver and FoU: why were you voting TBF?Why are you even asking me?
I have no idea who is scum. And I have little idea, even about 'lore', but "it looks like I should support (claimed) Asgore more than a (claimed) Sans", as my only clue.
(We're still not sure if TBF was even(/not even) Sans, before being lynched (with no role-flip), only that the replacement flips as Neutral Frisk due to night-death (although how on (under)earth did that happen with that Mercy ability?), and so still we have no idea what TBF currently is, either... right? So this round is doubly confusing to me.)
And then you said you would be "fucking furious if you don't vote someone by day end :P". So I went with the only thing I knew (not that I could have changed anything had I gone nowhere/elsewhere with my vote, unless Moonlit had perhaps given me an option. to make a draw).
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 07, 2016, 08:38:52 am
ME HAS THEORY.
Our lynch ability replaces the target, originally a monster, with a human from the outside world, perhaps?
~~~
(although how on (under)earth did that happen with that Mercy ability?)Interesting question. This is very interesting.
~~~
I would like to note I used Blue Attack on Starver. So he took no action tonight(seeing as he's not dead)... meaning he didn't preform the kill.
Process of elimination leaves Hector and The Moonlit Shadow.
FoU: why were you voting TBF?Because I found him suspicious. His claim seemed like "don't target me with your Blue Attack, it'll just be a waste of it".
Come to thing about it... "I'm not just going to stand there and take it"... if you compare a "Dodge" ability, and the flipped "Mercy" ability... they're quite similar.
I don't suppose we have a medium for once?
~~~
Right... where was I? Hector and the Moonlit Shadow.
Hector has been an active scum hunter for the entirety of this Bonus Round, from what I'm seeing. If he's scum, it's certainly not obvious.
That leaves The Moonlit Shadow.
NYEH HEH HEH HEH! NOW I HAVE YOU!
Post by: hector13 on April 07, 2016, 09:57:55 am
Starver and FoU: why were you voting TBF?Why are you even asking me?
I have no idea who is scum. And I have little idea, even about 'lore', but "it looks like I should support (claimed) Asgore more than a (claimed) Sans", as my only clue.
(We're still not sure if TBF was even(/not even) Sans, before being lynched (with no role-flip), only that the replacement flips as Neutral Frisk due to night-death (although how on (under)earth did that happen with that Mercy ability?), and so still we have no idea what TBF currently is, either... right? So this round is doubly confusing to me.)
And then you said you would be "fucking furious if you don't vote someone by day end :P". So I went with the only thing I knew (not that I could have changed anything had I gone nowhere/elsewhere with my vote, unless Moonlit had perhaps given me an option. to make a draw).
I'm asking you 'cause your vote is kind of an important thing to use, and if you're just going to throw it about, it's a bit of a pointless thing. Forcing a no lynch in these games probably isn't a good idea. The town's best weapon is the lynch, so we kinda need to use it, especially with a 3 day limit.
If you don't know who is scum, use your best guess. You didn't really participate in D1 (though you have an excuse) so of course you're not going to have a read on the other players. You never really ask questions... it's bothersome :P
This is why I was voting TBF: the constant attempts at trying to force a no-lynch. Not helpful.
If you hadn't voted, we'd have had 60% of the town not doing anything, which is quite frustrating. That's why I would have been "fucking furious".
TBF flipped so... I'm fairly confident (even under bastard conditions) that he died with the role "Frisk". What makes you think that the role he flipped with isn't the role he has?
FoU
OH.
ME HAS THEORY.
Our lynch ability replaces the target, originally a monster, with a human from the outside world, perhaps?
What makes you say that? Just trying to look as though you're engaging?
(although how on (under)earth did that happen with that Mercy ability?)Interesting question. This is very interesting.
I would like to note I used Blue Attack on Starver. So he took no action tonight(seeing as he's not dead)... meaning he didn't preform the kill.
Can Starver confirm that he took no actions during the night phase?
FoU: why were you voting TBF?Because I found him suspicious. His claim seemed like "don't target me with your Blue Attack, it'll just be a waste of it".
Come to thing about it... "I'm not just going to stand there and take it"... if you compare a "Dodge" ability, and the flipped "Mercy" ability... they're quite similar.
What do you mean by this? Why is this suspicious?
Right... where was I? Hector and the Moonlit Shadow.
Hector has been an active scum hunter for the entirety of this Bonus Round, from what I'm seeing. If he's scum, it's certainly not obvious.
That leaves The Moonlit Shadow.
So you're voting Moonlit because Moonlit isn't me?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 07, 2016, 10:13:43 am
I said that because TBF role flipped as Frisk, a human... and everybody claimed as a monster initially. And because it makes sense given the lore/flavor.OH.What makes you say that? Just trying to look as though you're engaging?
ME HAS THEORY.
Our lynch ability replaces the target, originally a monster, with a human from the outside world, perhaps?
The bolded green text is my reason for suspicion, not the sentence under it. The sentence under it was just idle musings as to the mechanics.FoU: why were you voting TBF?Because I found him suspicious. His claim seemed like "don't target me with your Blue Attack, it'll just be a waste of it".
Come to thing about it... "I'm not just going to stand there and take it"... if you compare a "Dodge" ability, and the flipped "Mercy" ability... they're quite similar.
What do you mean by this? Why is this suspicious?
Okay... allow me to explain my reasoning for voting Moonlit...Right... where was I? Hector and the Moonlit Shadow.So you're voting Moonlit because Moonlit isn't me?
Hector has been an active scum hunter for the entirety of this Bonus Round, from what I'm seeing. If he's scum, it's certainly not obvious.
That leaves The Moonlit Shadow.
I know I'm not the scum. That leaves Moonlit, you, and Starver as scum candidates.
Assuming the scum used the kill, Starver can't be the scum because if he took an action last night, he would be dead. Seeing as he's alive, he took no action, thus he couldn't have preformed the kill.
The only remaining candidates for scum are you and Moonlit.
Based on analysis of your behavior(a whole lot of scum hunting, no evasion that I could detect), you're town, leaving Moonlit.
He's the only candidate for scum left, hence he's scum.
If using the lynch on him doesn't win us the game, I'll use Blue Attack on you to prevent you from killing somebody during the night, then we'll lynch you.
NYEH HEH HEH HEH!
Any criticism of my plan?
Post by: hector13 on April 07, 2016, 10:22:23 am
I said that because TBF role flipped as Frisk, a human... and everybody claimed as a monster initially. And because it makes sense given the lore/flavor.
He also flipped with more or less the same ability that he claimed, too.
The bolded green text is my reason for suspicion, not the sentence under it. The sentence under it was just idle musings as to the mechanics.FoU: why were you voting TBF?Because I found him suspicious. His claim seemed like "don't target me with your Blue Attack, it'll just be a waste of it".
What do you mean by this? Why is this suspicious?
He also claimed investigator. Why were you willing to block (and lynch) someone who claimed that?
Any criticism of my plan?
You seem to think you're above suspicion.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 07, 2016, 02:15:51 pm
Note that TBF used font to make his claim seem more reasonable too, what's to stop us thinking you're doing the same?I'm not doing the same. The "NYEH HEH HEH HEH" thing is just a bit of in-character fun.
NYEH HEH HEH HEH! Just for fun.
~~~
He also claimed investigator. Why were you willing to block (and lynch) someone who claimed that?Because I didn't believe his claim.
~~~
You seem to think you're above suspicion.Bravo. This is very important. My plan works from my perspective, but my identity as town is not guaranteed to anybody else yet(as far as I know)...
So how about this: Starver's still alive. According to my claim, that could only have happened if he took no action(or a redirector or something got involved). If he states that he took no action, would that be proof of my identity enough for you?
Post by: hector13 on April 07, 2016, 02:36:45 pm
Proper scumhunting might encourage me to think differently.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 07, 2016, 03:28:44 pm
No, because you could be lying about your claim.Then how would I have known that Starver took no action? If I was scum, guessing that Starver took no action would be a ridiculous risk...
Post by: Starver on April 07, 2016, 04:37:57 pm
I'm asking you [about my<-Starver's vote] 'cause your vote is kind of an important thing to use, and if you're just going to throw it about, it's a bit of a pointless thing. Forcing a no lynch in these games probably isn't a good idea. The town's best weapon is the lynch, so we kinda need to use it, especially with a 3 day limit.Fish was already lynched. My vote was already a pointless thing, whether thrown around, carefully considered, based upon secret and arcane knowledge only I might have known that I even had or plain not used at all... no difference.
Demanding that votes be used is... not exactly a powerful argument. Demanding that, when they are used, they must always be used in the most purposeful way is better but (as per my example) the only purpose I could see it being used for was in making sure that I reinforced my own POV as best I could. (If there'd have been a vote-negation/double-vote skill in play, then maybe I did something, but without knowing who might have been negating/doubling, if anyone at all, that's pure conjecture at the moment. Also day-end lynching vote-counts didn't seem to suggest this.)
I would like to note I used Blue Attack on Starver. So he took no action tonight(seeing as he's not dead)... meaning he didn't preform the kill.
Process of elimination leaves Hector and The Moonlit Shadow.
[...]
Right... where was I? Hector and the Moonlit Shadow.
Hector has been an active scum hunter for the entirety of this Bonus Round, from what I'm seeing. If he's scum, it's certainly not obvious.
That leaves The Moonlit Shadow.
In my mind, if Fish's night-time role (different from the one that died in the lynch) had that bulletproof skill, it means that either the killer has (effectively) armour-piercing-bullets in their skill or else the bulletproof vest is one-use only and both Hector+Moonlit attacked, overwhelming the defence...
I'm inclined to vote Hector, on the basis of the series of announcements that summarise as "I'm the First Human... no wait, no I'm not, I'm a non-human, just like the rest of you... hahahaha just joking because <reason />..." And maybe you're even Neutral (as Frisk is/was), but right now that doesn't mean anything to me.
And, you'll be pleased to see, I may be currently creating a tie, but it's far from a foregone conclusion as to whether my vote is useless! Yay voting power! I'm not sure it's the best vote I can make, but the only other ('more useful') vote I could make would be to reinforce the first vote, and you apparently don't like that practice... :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 07, 2016, 04:39:17 pm
Post by: Starver on April 07, 2016, 04:59:23 pm
(Also note that Fish isn't out of the running to now be the antagonist (if not Protagonist!) of the game, because maybe role-replacement is where the bad-guy roles actually come from! Another reason why Hector's logic is faulty. If we're all "friendly monsters", at the start and only through (deliberate/accidental/for-the-sake-of-it/for-lulz) killing do the unfriendly monsters get shuffled into our ranks (where monsters could include humans as well, in both 'friendly' and 'unfriendly' versions) then we're just playing into the trap of creating our own nemeses by random lynchings!
((Also also, if this is true, twice-deaded-Fish might even be the adversary we're looking for... Created by us 'heroes', just like The Joker was created by (sometimes proto-)Batman in various versions of the tale... But I'm still sticking on Hector, as the least complex answer to as many as possible of the questions I've set myself.))
Post by: hector13 on April 07, 2016, 05:02:07 pm
As such he shouldn't be posting :P
Post by: Starver on April 07, 2016, 05:23:40 pm
This round will be using Role-Change voting. It works like normal voting - except that the voted person is not killed. Instead, their role is replaced with a role from the Replacement Pool. Neither role is revealed, and the old role is removed from the game altogether.
But nightkills do reveal a role, it seems. But @wordofgod, perhaps about whether that's permadeath, perhaps?!?
Needless to say, anyone who wants to be taken seriously needs to get themselves nightkilled for us to fully trust them... With the caveat regarding the above (as yet) unresolved point.
Post by: hector13 on April 07, 2016, 05:33:19 pm
Bonus Round - Day 2
In spite of their efforts to protect themselves, the killings continued. One death in particular caught their eye. It was human.
TheBiggerFish was killed in the night!
TheBiggerFish was Frisk.Here's that roleflip you wanted!Spoiler: Frisk (click to show/hide)
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Day ends Friday 9:00 PM PST
Saturday 5:00 AM GMT
He was killed during the night, and he's not part of the vote count. He's out this round, barring nonsense.
Post by: hector13 on April 07, 2016, 07:12:17 pm
Post by: Starver on April 07, 2016, 07:52:56 pm
So... Why are you voting me Starver? Bullet points, if you please. Or a summary minus parentheses :P
- "Oh, yeah, I'm human... No! Only kidding, my fellow non-humans!"
- Accepting the alibis (one actually apparently dead, one who would be unlikely to be accurate about my inactivity and be a bad guy), there's just two people to vote for.
- You don't like me voting for someone already leading the voting, and there's only one real alternative.
- You're asking me to explain things I already clearly explained, and that's annoying. (And meta, but it fits with everything else.)
In other words, suspicious, suspicious, awkward and forgetful. And, as that's clearly a summary, here... -<‹«({[]})»›>- ...is a large range of parentheses, minused. :P
Give me a good argument against any two of those points, though, and I might well reconsider. No promises. Quality matters...
Post by: hector13 on April 07, 2016, 10:23:12 pm
So... Why are you voting me Starver? Bullet points, if you please. Or a summary minus parentheses :P
- "Oh, yeah, I'm human... No! Only kidding, my fellow non-humans!"
I claimed Chara, probably the most evil character in the game. Indeed, the genocide run basically forces the idea that you, the player, are the real monster because you murder everything.
Chara actually ends the world though. Not a genuine claim. I was pissed about people claiming stuff on D1 all the time that ends up breaking the game for town (TBF's astigmatism last round, FoU's driver claim I think the round before that) so I made a claim that I knew the folk who had played Undertale wouldn't take seriously.
As Moonlit has said, he has confirmed my Asriel claim. We've had 8 (or 9?) rounds prior to this in which there has been only one Evil role per game. Do you think that's going to have changed this round, so both Moonkit and I are scum?
- Accepting the alibis (one actually apparently dead, one who would be unlikely to be accurate about my inactivity and be a bad guy), there's just two people to vote for.
Where did I accept FoU's alibi? I demand quotes for this, brah.
How do you expect me to question a dead man? How do you expect me to vote for a dead man, who isn't even in the vote count?
What makes you think TBF isn't dead? Mod-confirmed NK. Tomasque hasn't lead us astray in a game with his pronouncements yet.
- You don't like me voting for someone already leading the voting, and there's only one real alternative.
I actually don't like that you voted someone because I said I'd be fucked off if you didn't. It doesn't tell the town anything about you other than you're easily swayed by appeals to emotion.
You essentially wasted your vote to spare my feelings. Does that sound like a well supported argument for a vote?
- You're asking me to explain things I already clearly explained, and that's annoying. (And meta, but it fits with everything else.)
One criticism I have of your posting style is that it is absolutely not clear. You're thoughts are all over the place, with asides in parentheses. I sometimes have to read your posts multiple times just to get an idea of what you're trying to say. Over 9 rounds, I've basically given up on reading your posts because they're so hard to decipher sometimes.
Brevity is the watchword in mafia, which is something you are not.
Moonlit
I'm thinking about voting FoU or Starver. FoU isn't really doing much in the way of scumhunting, and is forgetting to mention that he hasn't been cleared by the rest of us. He also isn't cleared from having performed the NK.
Starver's reasons for voting me appear to be utterly nonsense. Looks like he's looking for any old thing to try to get me lynched, which is either confirmation bias as town, or scum trying to convince the rest of you for a mislynch.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 07, 2016, 10:55:44 pm
Considering I just used a process of elimination to determine that either you or Moonlit is the scum, from my perspective...
humph. I'll just have to dig a little deeper then.
~~~
I can't actually vote for him, though.Confirm: you don't have a vote?
~~~
So... Why are you voting me Starver? Bullet points, if you please. Or a summary minus parentheses :P
- Accepting the alibis (one actually apparently dead, one who would be unlikely to be accurate about my inactivity and be a bad guy), there's just two people to vote for.
your reply to this point:
Where did I accept FoU's alibi? I demand quotes for this, brah.
Now here's what I say: Starver didn't say that you accepted my alibi. Starver said that if he accepts the alibis(including mine), there's only two people to vote for: Moonlit and you.
~~~
I repeat, Moonlit: you're claiming that you're a non-voter?
Post by: hector13 on April 07, 2016, 11:03:33 pm
You've not asked many questions so far, ergo you're not doing much scumhunting.
Post by: hector13 on April 08, 2016, 06:11:48 pm
@FoU: Oh, I can vote, just not for Asriel. Remember, I'm Asgore.
Who are you thinking of voting?
Post by: hector13 on April 08, 2016, 06:12:17 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 08, 2016, 06:37:44 pm
You've not asked many questions so far, ergo you're not doing much scumhunting.Have a question then:
If I'm the scum, then how did I know Starver took no action?
Post by: hector13 on April 08, 2016, 06:38:20 pm
Thus, Moonlit should get stripped.
PPE: ninja'd my epiphany, you cur! :p
Post by: hector13 on April 08, 2016, 10:07:03 pm
I don't think I'm going to vote. Due to your exact reasoning I know that it's likely for you to be scum, and I can't vote you.
Seems like you're giving up here. If you think I'm scum and can't vote, why are you not putting any effort into convincing FoU that I'm evil?
Post by: Tomasque on April 09, 2016, 04:50:25 pm
A consensus was reached. For the second time, the punishment was carried out. There was no triumph in the eyes of the monsters, only the grim knowledge it could have gotten worse. Soon they would find out just how much.
FallacyofUrist (0)
hector13 (1) - Starver
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (2) - FallacyofUrist, hector13
Post by: Tomasque on April 10, 2016, 05:33:31 pm
The killings stopped. Life returned to normal - almost. While some believed they had rid themselves of the evil among them, others still thought they were in danger. They were right.
(ergh... I really want to reference more of Undertale in this flavor text, but it could give away the roles still in the game!)
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 10, 2016, 05:49:22 pm
NYEH HEH HEH HEH!
~~~
But why do I feel I'm missing something?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 10, 2016, 06:36:13 pm
Maybe he was telling the truth in his first claim(Chara)?
~~~
The Moonlit Shadow: why do you think I'm the Evil role?
Why do you not think hector13 is the Evil role?
What is your new role(if you're willing to tell)?
Having considered that FoU and Starver are unlikely to be collaborating as evil roles, and I'm not sure FoU, if he was evil, would be willing to risk that Starver has an action at the end of D1/start of D2, that it's more probably than not that they're both telling the truth.
Thus, Moonlit should get stripped.
And why, considering my reasoning from yesterday, and the fact that the game isn't over, do you think hector is not the Evil role? He's the only one left! Starver and I basically confirmed each other as not having preformed the kill, leaving you and hector, you just had your role changed, leaving hector. Only hector's left as the possible Evil role. So why do you not think he's Evil? I need an explanation here.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 10, 2016, 07:04:43 pm
Hector is Asriel. It was in my role name, and I think I can trust it. I didn't have a role that is easily fooled. Especially with the lore behind it.I don't have anything to say to that. You can't prove it, but it could still be true.
I can vote for him now, however.Because of your new role?
How do you know Hector doesn't have an action?I don't know that. I do, however, know that he took no action last night, because he's not dead. I used Blue Attack on him, which would have killed him if he took an action. He took no action, and there was no kill last night. It seems pretty straightforward to me.
After all, you have a kill.Which only works if my target takes an action. It's basically been verified that I didn't preform the kill N1(and still, how did TBF die with that Mercy auto?), seeing as I confirmed Starver took no action...
~~~
I have been frustrated.
Okay.
What would I need to do in order to convince you to vote Hector?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 10, 2016, 08:13:05 pm
For the second time, TBF's Mercy ability wasn't an auto. It was a one-shot target.Actually, apparently it's not 1-shot, but it is a targeted ability... sorry.
My bad.
~~~
What would I need to do in order to convince you to vote Hector?Question repeated.
Post by: hector13 on April 10, 2016, 10:35:19 pm
And why, considering my reasoning from yesterday, and the fact that the game isn't over, do you think hector is not the Evil role? He's the only one left! Starver and I basically confirmed each other as not having preformed the kill, leaving you and hector, you just had your role changed, leaving hector. Only hector's left as the possible Evil role. So why do you not think he's Evil? I need an explanation here.
You're left as well, actually. For all we know, you have an auto that can tell you if someone can take a night action. All Starver's confirmation of his night action on N1 tells us is he didn't take an action on N1. You then claimed you used a"blocking" role on someone who doesn't have a night action, and really killed TBF. /speculation
My role has been confirmed by another player even after they were lynched. The fact the game hasn't ended tells us Moonlit wasn't the Evil role, so why would he lie about confirming my role as neutral or town, and then after his role has been wiped?
Hector is Asriel. It was in my role name, and I think I can trust it. I didn't have a role that is easily fooled. Especially with the lore behind it.I don't have anything to say to that. You can't prove it, but it could still be true.
You can't prove your role either, but you still expect us to take your word on it. Why do you expect us to accept your word but not Moonlit's?
How do you know Hector doesn't have an action?I don't know that. I do, however, know that he took no action last night, because he's not dead. I used Blue Attack on him, which would have killed him if he took an action. He took no action, and there was no kill last night. It seems pretty straightforward to me.
Confirmation bias if you're town. I don't have an action to take, which is why I didn't take an action. You don't seem willing to accept any argument that doesn't portray me as scum, FoU. This is bothersome.
My only thoughts regarding the NK was it was a one-shot, or that it was Moonlit what did it. The latter is less likely seeing as he was wiped yesterday and the game hasn't ended... unless he was a neutral murder role or something.
Moonlit: can you tell us anything about your previous role? Did you do the NK?
After all, you have a kill.Which only works if my target takes an action. It's basically been verified that I didn't preform the kill N1(and still, how did TBF die with that Mercy auto?), seeing as I confirmed Starver took no action...
Nonsense. As I said above, Starver confirmed he took no action, but how does that prove your claim of a "blocking" role that kills? Heck, since nobody you claimed to have "blocked" has died, we don't even know if your claimed ability works!
The only reason I'm not voting you right now is because I'm also unsure about Starver. He didn't respond to my points about his vote on me, which could be because he was busy, or because he's scum and doesn't care.
It's obvious to me that one of you is the scum, I just need to figure out which one...
Starver
I need a response to this post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6922582#msg6922582). Also your thoughts on what is happening.
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2016, 05:57:22 am
I claimed Chara, probably the most evil character in the game. Indeed, the genocide run basically forces the idea that you, the player, are the real monster because you murder everything.That's one interpretation of any game. I've played a DOOM-themed Mafia where 'town' are the demons,a gainst the nasty DOOMGuy, and another where 'town' was a DoomGuy squad.
Quote
I was pissed about people claiming stuff on D1 all the time that ends up breaking the game for townI don't like claiming D1, but I don't like no useful information D1. It's a dilemma, isn't it. Fully polarised in either direction is bad.
Quote
As Moonlit has said, he has confirmed my Asriel claim.Confirmed that Asriel is mentioned in the role. Given the nature of role-replacement, it doesn't confirm that Asriel exists from the beginning in the player-pool, just that it can (if it happens at all!) find itself there. And it depends on how the mentioned occurs. c.f. also the Captain's 'ability' to not be usurped by the Politician, last round. Politician dies first, and there's nothing worthwhile there.
Quote
We've had 8 (or 9?) rounds prior to this in which there has been only one Evil role per game.I'm not ruling anything out. From what I've just seen, it looks like you're trying to ship me and FoU (I can only give FoU the benefit of the doubt, but that's the best I had for the whole lot, and FoU's 'read' on me depends on there not being two Evils of course). I wouldn't rule out double-evil. Or the possibility of multi-evils through a non-evil lynching bing replaced with an evil whilst another evil (original or lynch-replaced) already existing.
It's a single-player game, so I suppose if it's definite that Human Player is the Evil then there's only one. But there's so much about the game I don't understand (the different Routes through the game) that there's a possibility of parallelism of 'player-Evil', if that's what it actually is in the first place. Depends on the round config. And if human is evil, then perhaps I'm now not looking at Moonlit as suspicious.
Quote
If I accept FoU's alibi... as discussed above. Why would I be trying to persuade you that there's just you and Moonlit to vote for? Makes no sense to read it that way.Where did I accept FoU's alibi? I demand quotes for this, brah.
- Accepting the alibis (one actually apparently dead, one who would be unlikely to be accurate about my inactivity and be a bad guy), there's just two people to vote for.
Quote
How do you expect me to question a dead man? How do you expect me to vote for a dead man, who isn't even in the vote count?I know I made an error with this bit, but not sure whether whether you were referring to the older, wronger opinion from before I was disabused of that notion when you said this. My fault for having had some huge absences.
What makes you think TBF isn't dead? Mod-confirmed NK. Tomasque hasn't lead us astray in a game with his pronouncements yet.
Quote
I actually don't like that you voted someone because I said I'd be fucked off if you didn't.So, I should have just left you fucked off with me by doing nothing (changing nothing) rather than having you not liking how I voted by voting as I did (changing nothing)... Let me file that away for future reference.
Quote
You essentially wasted your vote to spare my feelings. Does that sound like a well supported argument for a vote?If my 'sway to emotion' would have counted, then I probably wouldn't then have swayed to mere emotion and clearly explained this. That's not to say I might not have done the same thing and let you know why, but I'd have had to dig deep for reason - and made it more likely that I'd have timed out on the day before I actually found one. Something that seemed to be unimportant given that that your overriding need appeared to be that I make an ineffectual vote rather than an ineffectual non-vote and I had no reason not to oblige, no matter what my background motives could have been...
Quote
One criticism I have of your posting style is that it is absolutely not clear. You're thoughts are all over the place, with asides in parentheses.YMDV, obviously. Unless I have accidentally messed up some opening/closing of nested parentheses (not just once-enclosed (but twice), that is), especially, then it's surely not that hard to read. Easier to read than the nested comma-subclaused versions. While we're being critical it should be "Your thoughts", in your quote. But please admonish me of my own error that I have made in this comment, then move on.
Quote
Brevity is the watchword in mafia, which is something you are not.And I often worry I've said too much. I've said very little this round, as well, for which I have already apologised, so again I seem caught between a rock and a hard place.
Quote
Starver's reasons for voting me appear to be utterly nonsense. Looks like he's looking for any old thing to try to get me lynched, which is either confirmation bias as town, or scum trying to convince the rest of you for a mislynch.In other words... you have no good evidence either way. I don't envy you...
{And now I shall look at Day 3's development.}
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2016, 06:44:13 am
I'm in a huge dilemma here. I think FoU and Starver are a duo evil role, or FoU is not lying but is still the Evil role (he does have a kill after all).(Fixed your tag for you, just for neatness.) I know I'm not, but I was convinced that you and Hector were both Evil so double-evils are a possibility that I'm prepared to believe so I can't ask you not to....
Quote
Hector: Still careful of you, but I don't think you are Evil.I still do, but now for reasons that follow...
I think that you [FoU] might be the Evil role. After all, you have a kill.There's non-scum kill-skills possible, of course. Especially if this is intended to be a 'combat orientated' sub-game for both sides of the equation. I'm only just now beginning to realise part of what's going on.
The fact the game hasn't ended tells us Moonlit wasn't the Evil role,I'm not sure that's what's supposed to happen, this game. At one point I was even torn between the idea of an "evil-less" and a "multi-evil" game-setup. Ignoring the fact that Lynch-replacements can change an evil-now-killed game into a different-evil-reappears game, seemingly at the (pre-planned) whim of the mod. **brain asplode**
Quote
StarverDone first part above. Second part now fully revised and shifted to below!
I need a response to this post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6922582#msg6922582). Also your thoughts on what is happening.
...ummm - this came in whilst I was editing...
@Hector: I was actually the Evil role - I was Chara. That's how I know you aren't. Yes, I did the Nightkill, and my auto was that I couldn't vote for you as long as you were Asriel.Confirmation that (one!) Evil Killed isn't Round Ended... I also know that you're not now Human, but there's precious little time for anyone to make any use of this information.
Quote
@FoU: Also, I know that you couldn't have done the kill with your ability. Hector needs to do something scummy for me to vote him, and Starver needs to back you up. I don't know if the round actually ends tonight, so... anyway, what Hector said was right as well.IIRC, this is a three-day round, but I can't immediately find the WoG quote right now, in my scroll-down.
Quote
@Starver: I 'forget' who you are and what you do. Please tell me 'again'.Undyne. Guard. I didn't say anything more. But on the basis that there's no harm in revealing more fully (I don't think I've got more opportunities to do anything, anyway) 'what I do' is that if I find a human, at night, I kill them.
I had no information N1 (did nothing, and FoU found/guessed that I did nothing). I used best guess of "it's a replacement Human" N2 and checked you (now claiming to have been Human, but I didn't even know that at first) and found that (after the lynch-replace) you are not one. You can take that as a confirmation/guess, as you wish.
Thoughts on everyone else.
Fallacy - Willing to believe has the suggested skill. Willing to believe that (if not in a two-Evils scenario) this exonerates them from being the Evil one.
Moonlit - Willing to believe that you are not now human. Willing to believe that this means that you are not Evil.
Fish - Dead as one now shot in a barrel. If I'd have Guarded against (lynch-replacement) Frisk, N1 then Fallacy would have killed me, so I suppose I can't complain that I missed this one, although it would have been nice to have been randomly right.
Hector - Seems almost deliberately 'no read' in nature, but still seems intent on stirring up dissent. If not Chara (and real Chara wasn't originally inclined to argue?) then definitely something funny going on there. I'm voting Hector, but everyone else needs to consider their own information (and personal (current) motivations), of course.
[Meta-wise, the only thing I've been ruling out in this game is Masonic groups. Because anyone who knows sufficient about fellow members in this game could have been lynch-replaced to become an anti-Masonic/rivaling-Masonic character but now with privileged information. There's ways for this to be handled, such as hold-over win conditions that apply to the new character, but that makes things too complicated.]
BTW, consider that none of the above (revelation/thoughts) helps me. May actively hurt me if things don't end like they should. I'm giving what I'm giving to you, therefore, as a gift. Hopefully to the town in general. If it's not worse than that already.
Post by: hector13 on April 11, 2016, 12:59:17 pm
Fallacy - Willing to believe has the suggested skill. Willing to believe that (if not in a two-Evils scenario) this exonerates them from being the Evil one.
Why, on both counts?
Moonlit - Willing to believe that you are not now human. Willing to believe that this means that you are not Evil.
And again, why? There are evil monsters in the game, cha know.
Hector - Seems almost deliberately 'no read' in nature, but still seems intent on stirring up dissent. If not Chara (and real Chara wasn't originally inclined to argue?) then definitely something funny going on there. I'm voting Hector, but everyone else needs to consider their own information (and personal (current) motivations), of course.
Not sure what you mean by "deliberately no read". I've said I'm scum reading both you and FoU, and that given Moonlit's wipe, he's not the Evil role. Seems like reads to me.
Also, what "dissent" am I stirring up?
Moonlit also claimed Chara, post-lynch, so why would there be copies of the same role in the game?
FoU
Starver
@Hector: I was actually the Evil role - I was Chara. That's how I know you aren't. Yes, I did the Nightkill, and my auto was that I couldn't vote for you as long as you were Asriel.
Two points here. How does Moonlit claiming the NK fit into FoU's narrative that I performed the NK and am obvscum?
How does Moonlit's claim to have performed the NK and confirmed my role as Asriel fit into Starver's narrative that I'm obvscum?
Are you both completely ignore it because it doesn't fit your theory?
Moonlit: what can you tell us about your new role?
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2016, 03:10:24 pm
@everybodyelse: Make of it what you will. I could be wrong (mistaken/misspeaking), but it's what I'm saying.
@Tomasque: Yeah, I normally give you this level of analysis (or an interpretation of it) in private. Decided not to fill up your Inbox so much, as well as the problems I had. ;)
@all: Yeah, it's long. But it's in response to a long multi-part question (from the person who doesn't like complicated posts!) who will doubtless require that I immediately address any point that I missed mentioning.
The suggested skill: because the results of its action meshed with what only I knew, when first told, letting me confirm it with a statement (that nobody is obliged to take at face value) that all is so.. Had I actually Guarded someone (not an unreasonable thing to consider) I could have disproven a fakeclaim in this regard. At least to myself. So, on balance, it seems reasonable to consider the declaration true (as far as it goes), rather than a fabrication.Fallacy - Willing to believe has the suggested skill. Willing to believe that (if not in a two-Evils scenario) this exonerates them from being the Evil one.
Why, on both counts?
The exoneration: If we aren't stacked to the gills with Evil roles (both in the initial distribution and their prospective lynch-replacements), the chances of the aforementioned probably-not-outright-lying Fallacy being Evil as well reduces even further.
Really has to be compared to all other opinions of other roles (e.g. if everyone else was definitely a good-guy, then least-unscummy would be likely scum), but with the benefit of already knowing what I think about the rest of the cast-list I can declare that scuminess is well below mean or median averages...
(Were I not willing to confirm the situation - or even could wish to rubbish Fallacy - it would have also been easy. If, from my POV, it's 90% chance that Fallacy is both correct and not scum, then everyone who is not me/Fallacy has now to consider the possibility that we are in evil alliance. 25% chance of that means that I'm 25% likely-evil, whilst Fallacy is 25%+(75%*10%)=32.5% likely-evil. But those figures are plucked out of nowhere, does not include the very low possibilities that I'm Evil but am helping a non-Evil, instead of being non-Evil but inadvertently assisting the (or 'an') Evil.)
Quote
Yes, but from whose perspective? Also (rightly or wrongly) I have been influenced by the precise wording of the Mod message. If I'm wrong, I shall rightly blame the Mod at the end. But the one thing I do know is the humanity (or lack thereof) of now!Moonlit.Moonlit - Willing to believe that you are not now human. Willing to believe that this means that you are not Evil.
And again, why? There are evil monsters in the game, cha know.
Actual relative scuminess assessment hovers around the 'neutral' level, barring some actual useful revelation that might change my mind.
Hector - Seems almost deliberately 'no read' in nature, but still seems intent on stirring up dissent. If not Chara (and real Chara wasn't originally inclined to argue?) then definitely something funny going on there. I'm voting Hector, but everyone else needs to consider their own information (and personal (current) motivations), of course.
Not sure what you mean by "deliberately no read". I've said I'm scum reading both you and FoU, and that given Moonlit's wipe, he's not the Evil role. Seems like reads to me.
Also, what "dissent" am I stirring up?
Moonlit also claimed Chara, post-lynch, so why would there be copies of the same role in the game?
[/quote]Last point first: Originally I thought you were correctly claiming Chara (before retracting), and that was part of my original assessment.
Now I know think your replacement claim is either correct (the character who is notoriously bloodthirsty, a SOUL stealer, teams up with humans, one of whom is known to be Evil, etc, etc, etc) or else it is yet another fakeclaim, in which case whoknows?...
As for 'no read', I've done it myself (for various reasons), and I'll do it again no doubt and your sense of "Oi! I don't like all these questions!" goes far enough to appear to want to suppress all enquiry. Not to a sensible amount1, but in a general refusal to partake in a democratic sharing of information. Given how little information I had given out, myself, and yet had at least tried to join in (external actions aside), your trying to suppress all current/future discussions of this sort looks more like a motive.
But you're the only person allowed to scum-read, naturally, by listening to what information we spill. And I've now spilled far more information than should be necessary.
And I was doing a lot of 'scum-reading', whilst Scum myself, last round. Not everything I thought (or 'thought up') was said out loud, but I had a whole lot of 'reading' on why it was... Moonlit, I think... who I 'thought' was the more likely villain on the Spaceship. And barely anyone read me at all! I even nearly replied to one too-casual mention by yourself that it was possible that I was Evil... I even saved the post I never actually ended up posting...
Quote from: Me, Potentially, Last Round
Starver isn't clear. Starver could be scum.You couldn't discount it, certainly, if you didn't have the absolute knowledge that only I have about myself. But as far as I'm concerned, we've probably got a Neutral hiding in plain sight amongst you lot, as well as the real Evil. Such that they'd find it hard (but not impossible!) to 'fess up and perhaps save themselves...
You also can't (by open game knowledge) say that Moonlit's not Evil because of the lynch-replace. The first lynch-replace created an Evil role. My own best guess, Night 2, was that the second lynch-replace would do something similar. I could be wrong about the non-Evilness - but I know I'm not wrong about this one not being Human...
1 Off-round analysis, for general information only:
You're right about the Driver reveal being useful to me, in the Car Journey round. I can't actually remember whether it changed where I was heading for, but it gave me the opportunity to realise what it was I was supposed to do, to actually win that game.
The Astigmatism one in the Spaceship round certainly helped me stay sneaky, although I was very wary about that one, I was expecting it as a trap by a non-weak character trying to lure me into revealing myself - perhaps even with the aid of a Bulletproofness skill. (Actually, I recall being suspicious that the Driver claim, above, was also a deliberate misdirection for my benefit.)
I also thought that learning who the Captain was in the Spaceship round was useful, at the time, but it looks like it actually wasn't. (Mod knows for sure, but my reading of it is still leaning that way.)
Quote
It doesn't, but that's not my (current) narrative.@Hector: I was actually the Evil role - I was Chara. That's how I know you aren't. Yes, I did the Nightkill, and my auto was that I couldn't vote for you as long as you were Asriel.
Two points here. How does Moonlit claiming the NK fit into FoU's narrative that I performed the NK and am obvscum?
Quote
How does Moonlit's claim to have performed the NK and confirmed my role as Asriel fit into Starver's narrative that I'm obvscum?Your being confirmed as Asriel doesn't even help your own case. It hurts it. At least for me, from what little I do know of the Lore - should Lore actually count for anything.
But you're also moreobvthananyoneelsescum because of other things.
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2016, 03:18:36 pm
Quote from: Hector
Last point first: Originally I thought you were correctly claiming Chara (before retracting), and that was part of my original assessment.Hector - Seems almost deliberately 'no read' in nature, but still seems intent on stirring up dissent. If not Chara (and real Chara wasn't originally inclined to argue?) then definitely something funny going on there. I'm voting Hector, but everyone else needs to consider their own information (and personal (current) motivations), of course.
Not sure what you mean by "deliberately no read". I've said I'm scum reading both you and FoU, and that given Moonlit's wipe, he's not the Evil role. Seems like reads to me.
Also, what "dissent" am I stirring up?
Moonlit also claimed Chara, post-lynch, so why would there be copies of the same role in the game?
Now I know think your replacement claim is either correct (the character who is notoriously bloodthirsty, a SOUL stealer, teams up with humans, one of whom is known to be Evil, etc, etc, etc) or else it is yet another fakeclaim, in which case whoknows?...
[...and then onwards as before, but also "Now I know think..." should just be "Now I think...", while I'm EBWOPing, although it was originally "Now I know this, I now think..."]
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 11, 2016, 03:35:32 pm
~~~
First of all... Moonlit claimed the kill. Okay, I can accept that. Okay... so yesterday, we lynched Moonlit, meaning that today, he's most likely not Evil.
If Moonlit turns out to be evil at the end of this round, my head is going to break slightly.
~~~
So now I know(basically for certain) that Starver didn't preform the kill.
~~~
Okay. So basically, Moonlit was Evil, according to him, now he's not.
Assuming, again, that Moonlit didn't become evil, the only two possible remaining choices for Evil are Hector and Starver, both of whom are voting each other(am I right?).
Neither Starver nor Hector has been hit with the lynch yet, meaning that if either of them is Evil, then the Evil role was Evil from the start. Meaning two Evil roles at the start of the game. Wow.
So if the remaining Evil role didn't preform the kill...
dangit, Starver is no longer effectively confirmed town anymore.
~~~
Hector, Starver: Please state your cases against each other, preferably in 3 sentences each or less. For my sake. Also, I will unvote Hector for the moment.
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2016, 04:33:02 pm
Hector, Starver: Please state your cases against each other, preferably in 3 sentences each or less. For my sake. Also, I will unvote Hector for the moment.1) The practical evidence is that from our (non-)interaction, I've ruled out you (perhaps wrongly) and from a further (non-killing) interaction I've ruled out Moonlit's new role (perhaps more/differently wrongly), whilst Hector remains either uncleaned or unwhitewashed, whichever it is for the others...
2) The evidence from Lore is that (of those roles we still know, i.e. not Hector), I think I should dislike the activities of Asriel more, when it comes to picking sides.
3) The 'feeling' evidence is that Hector is just obfuscating more (or just more obviously!) than anyone else.
Those are your three sentences, but further to an earlier bit:
Quote
Assuming, again, that Moonlit didn't become evil, the only two possible remaining choices for Evil are Hector and Starver, both of whom are voting each other(am I right?).A: I cannot rule out Moonlit being Evil [and Moonlit, for whatever reason, is not giving me anything new on this], but if I'm not totally wrong/misled about you from the start then I'm personally drawn towards the conclusion that I've made.
B: My take on the vote-count is that with your original vote (now recanted), on Hector, Moonlit's vote for you and my vote for Hector it's 1 each for you and Hector. But I might have Hector's vote for me that you seem to have counted from somewhere.
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2016, 05:14:45 pm
Definitely. This would worry humans. Of any alignment! I was worried that it would worry town-aligned humans. (Or get non-town humans to violently dislike me, on principle, and want to lynch me.) But it's a night-skill (or a night's-kill, if you will!) and unless we have another delaying-Captain analogue (WoG said otherwise... or so I'm hoping that I correctly remember!) I can't hurt anyone so nobody should have reason to get rid of me because of my declared skill, at this point in the game. They can only dislike me because of a win-condition that requires the death of me-as-Undyne in general.Quote from: Starver'what I do' is that if I find a human, at night, I kill them.This is hugely suspicious...
Quote
the only reason I'm not voting you is because you would've used your ability N1 if you were scum,Indeed, I had no reason to target anyone N1 nor any practical clue whom to target. It turns out that I could have targeted your (now lost role of) Chara, if that was truly who you were before your lynch-replace. And I could have targeted Fish and his lynch-replace (that immediately died by your apparent hand, so not sure if I'd have done anything). But there was no known reason to do so. I nearly targeted Hector for the (now declared false) Chara declaration, which seems like it would have done nothing but kill me (courtesy of Fallacy). As it would had I 'aimed true'. (I did not even know of this potential danger.)
I already explained that I targeted you last night in your (post-Chara) ability, on the assumption that one replaced-by-human switch might be followed by a second replaced-by-human switch (if it's like a game, player-character incarnations jumping in when someone dies isn't unbelievable, and it was the easiest pattern to derive from the single/partial datum-point we'd so far had). And you survived. If I did get opportunity to target you tonight (and for some reason wanted to repeat my failure), you'd survive again.
That's my claim, for all the good it'll do me.
Quote
Admittedly, humans aren't always good in Undertale, because it's not humans vs monsters.I think it's more complex, anyway. I'm falling back upon Humans being targets for me purely because of what my role says. I don't know how much Tomasque has mixed things up, but as the only surviving replaced-role holder, you aren't human and you might as well be good for all the good (NPI!) it does me.
Quote
But [your role, Moonlit] said I couldn't vote Hector as long as he was Asriel... if what you say is the case, then wouldn't it be that I can't vote for anyone with the Asriel role?I'm going by what I understand you said about your role. I understand it to have been "You cannot vote for..." (maybe "your vote will not count for" or "your vote will backfire upon if you try to vote for"?) "...any player who is Asriel". If your role specifically named Hector as having the role of Asriel... that'd be something strangely specific and I'd be more likely to start disbelieving your whole story than modifying anything of what you said.
The quote you quoted was in response to Hector's claim that "As Moonlit has said, he has confirmed my Asriel claim." prior to your declaration of having been originally Chara when I was still seriosuly considering his withdrawn 'claim' that way. I was trying to say there that Asriel being named in your role-spec (as I understood it: see above!) does not prove Hector as Asriel (just the possibility of an Asriel!).
Even if it does prove Hector as Asriel, it doesn't prove Hector as non-Scum. As already mentioned, the Captain had the Politician as an aligned 'backup', ready to take over on the Town side. Perhaps Asriel has(/had) Chara as an aligned backup, ready to take over on the Scum side. (This is a further black mark against Hector. But assuming Tomasque is doing as I understood he was doing, and is not assigning replacement roles based upon alignment of the roles being lynched-out, it has no linkable consequences towards your own current role, so you're still 'meh' and Hector is still 'bah!')
Quote
Hector: I am not going to tell you my role because it will not help town. I am Town Weakness.I know this was not to me, but I expected as such. (That you wouldn't tell. Regardless of whether Weak, Special Neutral or Evil. That you claim Weak adds no new info and you're still sitting in 'not as scummy as Hector' territory so I'm willing to listen to you even though I don't think there's anywhere left to go, today/this round.)
(I think, on balance, I should have gotten myself lynched, Day 1. I would have gotten to see what a second role was. Although that role would have been Frisk, and I might have been targeted by presumably-your-Chara for the same reason that Fish/Frisk was, for the same permadeath... Perhaps only you can answer that conceptual permutation.)
Post by: hector13 on April 11, 2016, 05:45:50 pm
Hector: I am not going to tell you my role because it will not help town. I am Town Weakness.
Well you just told us your alignment/archetype, which is a bit more important than your role name...
Anyway.
This is hugely suspicious... the only reason I'm not voting you is because you would've used your ability N1 if you were scum, and I don't think that there are 3 scum roles, so you would've died from FoU. You have a kill, and one that only works on humans. Admittedly, humans aren't always good in Undertale, because it's not humans vs monsters.
You seem to accept FoU's role, and that he acted on Starver N1, so why do you think FoU is scum?
FoU
Hector, Starver: Please state your cases against each other, preferably in 3 sentences each or less. For my sake. Also, I will unvote Hector for the moment.
Starver is indulging in a fair amount of confirmation bias, in that he is not particularly interested in questioning you or Moonlit, and is entirely convinced that I'm scum without considering any information that suggests otherwise.
I'll address his larger response later, seeing as how I'm having a pretty crap day and didn't sleep very well last night.
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2016, 05:50:11 pm
...without considering any information that suggests otherwise.There's none that I've seen, but if I've missed it I'll be pleased to have it explained to me. (By someone else, please, so that I don't potentially get a Scum spinning things for me.)
Post by: hector13 on April 11, 2016, 06:15:04 pm
...without considering any information that suggests otherwise.There's none that I've seen, but if I've missed it I'll be pleased to have it explained to me. (By someone else, please, so that I don't potentially get a Scum spinning things for me.)
Alright, I won't defend myself against any of your claims then.
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2016, 06:39:17 pm
Alright, I won't defend myself against any of your claims then.(You haven't so far, SFAICT. Save for the Chara-claim bit, which has already been covered by someone else.)
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2016, 06:41:56 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 11, 2016, 06:54:58 pm
Funny thing about that guy who tried to talk sense into them, too.
Post by: hector13 on April 11, 2016, 08:43:43 pm
It's things like this that make me think you don't care about any situation in which I'm not scum. Did you just completely ignore everything I've said?Alright, I won't defend myself against any of your claims then.(You haven't so far, SFAICT. Save for the Chara-claim bit, which has already been covered by someone else.)
Post by: hector13 on April 11, 2016, 09:04:51 pm
I don't need to explain myself to you @Hector, because it's other people who I need to convince (rightly or wrongly; correctly, incorrectly or even as a diversion), but for the sake of openness I will do anyway.
Indeed, but you owe it to yourself to at least consider that I'm not scum. If you're default position is to not respond to anything I say, how do you expect to be convinced I'm not scum? Nobody else is going to defend me, are they? They're in the same boat as I am: they don't know who is what alignment.
Last point first: Originally I thought you were correctly claiming Chara (before retracting), and that was part of my original assessment.
Now I know think your replacement claim is either correct (the character who is notoriously bloodthirsty, a SOUL stealer, teams up with humans, one of whom is known to be Evil, etc, etc, etc) or else it is yet another fakeclaim, in which case whoknows?...
Asriel is actually convinced by Chara to absorb Chara's soul and then go out to kill 6 more humans to break the barrier to the Underground so... I'm not sure where you're getting notoriously bloodythirsty soul stealer from.
Which one do you think it is? Fakeclaim or genuine?
As for 'no read', I've done it myself (for various reasons), and I'll do it again no doubt and your sense of "Oi! I don't like all these questions!" goes far enough to appear to want to suppress all enquiry. Not to a sensible amount1, but in a general refusal to partake in a democratic sharing of information. Given how little information I had given out, myself, and yet had at least tried to join in (external actions aside), your trying to suppress all current/future discussions of this sort looks more like a motive.
But you're the only person allowed to scum-read, naturally, by listening to what information we spill. And I've now spilled far more information than should be necessary.
And I was doing a lot of 'scum-reading', whilst Scum myself, last round. Not everything I thought (or 'thought up') was said out loud, but I had a whole lot of 'reading' on why it was... Moonlit, I think... who I 'thought' was the more likely villain on the Spaceship. And barely anyone read me at all! I even nearly replied to one too-casual mention by yourself that it was possible that I was Evil... I even saved the post I never actually ended up posting...
So you're scum reading me based off your meta now?
Where have I stated I don't want any discussion in this round? When have I withheld information? It's all well and good telling us this is what I said, but without evidence, it's just some more hot air.
You're the one that doesn't like to share. "Spilled more information than should be necessary" aye? I think everyone else gets to be the judge of when you've shared enough information.
You also can't (by open game knowledge) say that Moonlit's not Evil because of the lynch-replace. The first lynch-replace created an Evil role. My own best guess, Night 2, was that the second lynch-replace would do something similar. I could be wrong about the non-Evilness - but I know I'm not wrong about this one not being Human...
The first lynch-replace created a Neutral role, actually, but you do have a point here. I'm not sure about humans being exclusively evil here, though. Chara is a bad human, while the human you play as during the game can be good, neutral, or evil. Assuming all humans are bad is not a good thing to do, methinks.
Moonlit claimed he was the Evil role prior to the lynch-wipe, so it's not inconceivable that his role was replaced with an Evil one, since the game hasn't ended yet.
He has been quite forthcoming with having been the Evil role prior the the lynch, and it wouldn't be very fair to the town to not be getting flips from lynches and then have an Evil role in the replacement pool, especially with a three day limit, so I'm inclined to think Moonlit is not Evil at this point.
QuoteHow does Moonlit's claim to have performed the NK and confirmed my role as Asriel fit into Starver's narrative that I'm obvscum?Your being confirmed as Asriel doesn't even help your own case. It hurts it. At least for me, from what little I do know of the Lore - should Lore actually count for anything.
You should read the wiki some more then... Asriel is good and bad for various reasons throughout the game, depending on what happens.
But you're also moreobvthananyoneelsescum because of other things.
How helpfully vague.
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2016, 09:50:21 pm
Sorry, that should have been "because of the other things". The other things already stated.But you're also moreobvthananyoneelsescum because of other things.
How helpfully vague.
Also, a second editing error in writing was that I meant to say lynch one created a human, with no reason not to assume something similar for the second, not an Evil-one. But, to re-iterate, it also is not inconceivable that an Evil character was created as Moonlit's replacement role, but the chances of that are utterly disconnected with the reality of Moonlit's original character (neither positively or negatively correlated), because the replacement-queue is the pre-arranged one. That's why I'm giving it zero weighting in my considerations. It neither exonerates claimed-previously-Evil Moonlit from current Evilness, nor removes them.
Other than that, what I say stands and there's no point repeating what I've said again to answer anything else you think you've asked me again, or making the other comment I really want to make but will leave until the end of the round.
General comment and thoughts... (aimed at anyone who wants to read them, probably not useful for working anything out, but I feel better for saying something about them)
Second-guessing potential Mod setups (without a better knowledge of the various possible options actually in play, that would narrow things down to merely confusing, rather than very confusing), I actually would have considered putting a replacement-Evil character in the first replacement (in case of Evil lynch, D1), unless that unbalanced something else. It seems that was not done.
Perhaps the more flexible technique would be a Secret Auto given to one (or more) characters, as per the Politician's "If the Captain dies first, you inherit all his abilities.", but tied to make someone alignment-switching to Evil once a given predecessor goes out of play. Or make it a Secret Dying Auto of the original Evil to pass-on the alignment/status from the original Evil. That wouldn't rule out anyone still in the game from now being Evil, starting (properly) as of Night 2, although I would expect the new incumbent to be informed of this change, or else it'll be even more Bastard than a Deathmiller-type misleading roleflip would have been.
Post by: hector13 on April 12, 2016, 10:13:43 am
@Hector: I think that a duo is unlikely, so if Starver was lying and scum then FoU would be not-scum and thus telling the truth.
I... don't quite understand what you're trying to say, but I did just get up.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 12, 2016, 06:38:19 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 12, 2016, 06:46:10 pm
Seems rather likely to happen...
So, we know why Starver and I are voting for one another, why are you, FoU, not voting anyone?
Why are you, Moonlit, voting FoU?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 12, 2016, 10:33:20 pm
So, we know why Starver and I are voting for one another, why are you, FoU, not voting anyone?Confusion and fan fiction.
And now, because I want to get this question answered:
Tomasque: as far as I've noticed, there's no set deadline for today's end. Are hammers active?
Post by: Tomasque on April 12, 2016, 10:40:52 pm
Tomasque: as far as I've noticed, there's no set deadline for today's end. Are hammers active?Yes.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 13, 2016, 09:26:45 am
@Hector: I think he's scum.Well obviously you do, otherwise you wouldn't be voting me. The question is, why do you think I'm scum?
~~~
Issue here: If I'm correct, we need 3 players to be voting one player in order to lynch them.
Which basically means that in order to get the Evil role lynched, we're also going to need to convince Moonlit to vote with me, instead of for me...
Post by: Starver on April 13, 2016, 10:14:28 am
I have a personal conviction that Fallacy is either not Scum, was never the only Scum or else just deserves the credit for not being so through sheer audacity. This is a POV I can't convey to anyone else, unmuddied by doubt, but it is my current position.
If Moonlit is currently a non-Human who is yet adverse to the 'verse we're in (rather than the claimed Weak one) then Moonlit could yet be scum. But with no claim likely to come through I'm left with Moonlit sitting on my fence, on this one.
Hector's (serious, rather than original and now apparently frivolous) claim looks favoured as worst for the world, to my eyes, but see below.
(Whatever you think of me, Fallacy knows I did nothing N1 which seems to rely upon there being a double-Evil from the start to make me a bad guy. Moonlit, you know that I've at least guesed that you're not Human now, and said so. And I can't see why you're holding back about this if I was lying about having found this out and also wrong, or not grasping at it as 'proof' that you're on the good side if I was truthful but mistaken about the alignment part.)
However, I'm disappointed that nobody has yet explained to me the proof that Hector says he has copiously given. I haven't seen/understood the suitable proof Hector says he has given, and nobody else has said "Ah, yes, I see. I understand now."
Fallacy has had doubts, obviously. Even Moonlit, who proclaims Fallacy as scum, seems not to want to tell me why I should not consider Hector. (That might be explained if Moonlit has motivations for not explaining, obviously, and I've even put those into my assessment, but so far they aren't swinging the balance too far in the wrong direction for Moonlit.) All in all, that's confusing, along with several statements you've made. And I've missed the reasoning for Fallacy being scum, too. You must therefore have seen something in what was said that I'm just missing. Either that, or you don't want to, which begs other questions that I'm yet to resolve.
I'm quite open for reasons why I should switch. Either away from Hector or towards another. But as Hector hasn't managed to give reasons, that I understand/comprehend/identify, why not to vote Hector, I was always trying to politely request a lack of baseless "No don't vote me!" posts from that direction. I'll always explain my own position, I might even say it'd be a bad idea to lynch me (whether or not that's the case, naturally), but I do try to avoid contextless "No don't vote me!" posts, myself.
Also, in the event that Hector actually has not yet explained his innocence to the world at large (so that at least one friendly face can re-explain the innocence in my uncomprehending direction, but better) I was wanting Hector to explain himself to the others.
So @Moonlit Why is Hector not scum? ...for 'starters', although this it's hardly the start of this whole affair.
(I bet Secret abilities, perhaps still unrevealed, are a key to this whole affair, but of course we won't get to see those until the round ends, so that's speculation at best.)
Post by: hector13 on April 13, 2016, 10:37:16 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on April 13, 2016, 11:01:10 am
You're obviously open to me being town, that's why you're completely ignoring everything I say.Because I can't work out what you've said...
Quote
Doesn't show on my machine... Either incorrectly copied or my ISP is filtering 'meme.am' silently.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on April 13, 2016, 11:03:52 am
If you don't tell me what bits don't make sense, I can't clarify them for you or anyone else, can I? At the risk of sounding like my 3/4th Year maths teacher:
"If you don't understand it, chances are someone else doesn't either, so put your hand up and ask about it"
Post by: Starver on April 13, 2016, 11:10:10 pm
Is the Obama "seems legit" meme.Missing nothing, then. (Probably part of my ISP's unannounced 'Adult Filter', because of what the site might be serving. On past experience.)
Quote
If you don't tell me what bits don't make sense, I can't clarify them for you or anyone else, can I?It's not that bits don't make sense, it's that I don't see anything to make sense of, for the large part.
Tell you what, let's try this...
Spoiler: Post list (click to show/hide)
)...so? I could ask if anyone spotted anything wrong in there, but I wouldn't actually want to inflict it upon you. I'm quite surprised I haven't been ninjaed about it, already. I gave up bolding items after a while, you notice.
Primary ideas not in agreement with my main line of thinking:
1) Fallacy's "Blocking-and-killing" action might yet have killed Fish/Frisk, Night 1. Didn't even block me, but somehow guessed that I did nothing and didn't want the attention (whether good or ill). For some reason, Moonlit doesn't want to realise/reveal this, in hindsight.
2) Moonlit is an evil non-Human, now, after evil-Human Chara's lynching. But that seems far too neat. (One out, one in.) And doesn't even automatically work with what Tomasque says of the replacement system.
3) Hector never was Asriel. Asriel is perhaps even elsewhere on the list of characters. (Moonlit hasn't yet said anything to convince me of the connection. And Hector being someone else might even make me think better of them!)
Each of those has its own (minor) merits, but not enough merit to put them forward as my main thoughts... All of which are already explained.
Post by: hector13 on April 13, 2016, 11:22:32 pm
QuoteIf you don't tell me what bits don't make sense, I can't clarify them for you or anyone else, can I?It's not that bits don't make sense, it's that I don't see anything to make sense of, for the large part.
Then I'll just continue to say you have no interest in examining anything which disagrees with your position.
Post by: Starver on April 14, 2016, 07:09:16 am
Then I'll just continue to say you have no interest in examining anything which disagrees with your position.Patently, though, that just isn't true. I went through the entire thread, laboriously, and (attempted to) review it all again.
Give me something that disagrees with 'my position'. Don't just be an information-sink.
Or, and again I ask the others to help, tell me what I've missed because I haven't even seen in the first (or second!) time round. Quote yourself (or, others if you are so inclined, quote Hector, please) with something I've missed.
Or don't, but then don't tell me that I'm not trying to do my best in the given circumstances...
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 14, 2016, 08:25:11 am
It's super effective!
hector13. I've been convinced.
Also, I'd like to note: why couldn't Moonlit vote hector yesterday? I wouldn't be too surprised if we were dealing with something similar to the Phantom(remember this bloke? Had an ability that caused a town player to think that their wincon changed to "you win when the Evil role wins")'s ability... that is to say, some sort of conversion, wielded by hector.
Post by: Starver on April 14, 2016, 09:39:41 am
why couldn't Moonlit vote hector yesterday?AIUI: Part of Moonlit's role (whilst Chara, but secretly so), was to be unable to vote for Asriel. Hector claimed Asriel. Moonlit interpreted this as saying "Cannot vote for Hector".
Without (yet) seeing the Chara role, I have a hard time imagining that it was ever "You cannot vote for someone claiming to be Asriel". And if it were the more unbelievable "You cannot vote for Hector, who is Asriel", then a lot of the early mess with faux-Chara being called out would have been avoided. Especially given that real-Chara (we are told) was Evil.
Perhaps it was an "If you vote for Asriel, you will die", in which case I can accept character-caution (and might even explain current reticence), but my maths tells me that this wouldn't be bad for the Town anyway, unless things are already worse than I'm imagining...
If it was a more generic "You cannot vote whilst Asriel is active", then again it depends upon the claim being believed. I did query that, but there wasn't even a "The mod directly told me in a PM that I could not vote...", or any subtler 'not directly quoting the Mod' version, that I noticed. I would have expected that the game-mech way of handling this kind of skill would have been the (silent?) negation of an attempt of Moonlit to vote for (or, in the latter case, in the mere presence of) an Asrielic Hector, to be revealed in the vote counts. But until the round ends and everything is revealed, that's just what I can suppose.
How about this alternative to the whole mess..?
1) Moonlit was indeed originally not-Evil Chara - as with Frisk being not-Evil -.
2) Hector is simultaneously an undetermined-alignment version of definitely-not-Chara.
3) Post-lynch Moonlit is Evil-SomeoneElse whilst Hector is still original-Hector (of whatever flavour) and Moonlit finds it useful to try to blame original-Moonlit for original-Hector's actions because it seems to help exonerate current-Moonlit's position...
x) ...but, darnit, that points back to original-Hector being an original-Evil, making two of them now...
y) ...which means that there's either some daytime-based evil-combating thing in the game that I don't yet know about or the two Evils aren't even (officially) allied.
z) ...Belligerent 'Neutrals' could be in the mix, of course.
Post by: hector13 on April 14, 2016, 10:10:42 am
Starver detonates a nuke.
It's super effective!
hector13. I've been convinced.
By what?
Post by: hector13 on April 14, 2016, 10:40:17 am
I didn't read through the summary up there 'cause, you know, bit nonsense, but wow, man, you clearly have no bias toward me being scum at all in your page summaries. Wow.
That third one from the bottom where someone else claims the kill and you still believe I did it? Fucking wow.
Wow.
Post by: hector13 on April 14, 2016, 12:24:41 pm
Hector - Seems almost deliberately 'no read' in nature, but still seems intent on stirring up dissent. If not Chara (and real Chara wasn't originally inclined to argue?) then definitely something funny going on there. I'm voting Hector, but everyone else needs to consider their own information (and personal (current) motivations), of course.
To which I respond thus:
Not sure what you mean by "deliberately no read". I've said I'm scum reading both you and FoU, and that given Moonlit's wipe, he's not the Evil role. Seems like reads to me.
Also, what "dissent" am I stirring up?
Moonlit also claimed Chara, post-lynch, so why would there be copies of the same role in the game?
This addresses the three components of his read against me: that I have no reads; I am "stirring up dissent"; that my claim of Chara and subsequent claim of someone else is suspect.
He responds:
Last point first: Originally I thought you were correctly claiming Chara (before retracting), and that was part of my original assessment.
Now I know think your replacement claim is either correct (the character who is notoriously bloodthirsty, a SOUL stealer, teams up with humans, one of whom is known to be Evil, etc, etc, etc) or else it is yet another fakeclaim, in which case whoknows?...
As for 'no read', I've done it myself (for various reasons), and I'll do it again no doubt and your sense of "Oi! I don't like all these questions!" goes far enough to appear to want to suppress all enquiry. Not to a sensible amount1, but in a general refusal to partake in a democratic sharing of information. Given how little information I had given out, myself, and yet had at least tried to join in (external actions aside), your trying to suppress all current/future discussions of this sort looks more like a motive.
But you're the only person allowed to scum-read, naturally, by listening to what information we spill. And I've now spilled far more information than should be necessary.
And I was doing a lot of 'scum-reading', whilst Scum myself, last round. Not everything I thought (or 'thought up') was said out loud, but I had a whole lot of 'reading' on why it was... Moonlit, I think... who I 'thought' was the more likely villain on the Spaceship. And barely anyone read me at all! I even nearly replied to one too-casual mention by yourself that it was possible that I was Evil... I even saved the post I never actually ended up posting...
You also can't (by open game knowledge) say that Moonlit's not Evil because of the lynch-replace. The first lynch-replace created an Evil role. My own best guess, Night 2, was that the second lynch-replace would do something similar. I could be wrong about the non-Evilness - but I know I'm not wrong about this one not being Human...
My response:
Response to StarverI don't need to explain myself to you @Hector, because it's other people who I need to convince (rightly or wrongly; correctly, incorrectly or even as a diversion), but for the sake of openness I will do anyway.
Indeed, but you owe it to yourself to at least consider that I'm not scum. If you're default position is to not respond to anything I say, how do you expect to be convinced I'm not scum? Nobody else is going to defend me, are they? They're in the same boat as I am: they don't know who is what alignment.Last point first: Originally I thought you were correctly claiming Chara (before retracting), and that was part of my original assessment.
Now I know think your replacement claim is either correct (the character who is notoriously bloodthirsty, a SOUL stealer, teams up with humans, one of whom is known to be Evil, etc, etc, etc) or else it is yet another fakeclaim, in which case whoknows?...
Asriel is actually convinced by Chara to absorb Chara's soul and then go out to kill 6 more humans to break the barrier to the Underground so... I'm not sure where you're getting notoriously bloodythirsty soul stealer from.
Which one do you think it is? Fakeclaim or genuine?As for 'no read', I've done it myself (for various reasons), and I'll do it again no doubt and your sense of "Oi! I don't like all these questions!" goes far enough to appear to want to suppress all enquiry. Not to a sensible amount1, but in a general refusal to partake in a democratic sharing of information. Given how little information I had given out, myself, and yet had at least tried to join in (external actions aside), your trying to suppress all current/future discussions of this sort looks more like a motive.
But you're the only person allowed to scum-read, naturally, by listening to what information we spill. And I've now spilled far more information than should be necessary.
And I was doing a lot of 'scum-reading', whilst Scum myself, last round. Not everything I thought (or 'thought up') was said out loud, but I had a whole lot of 'reading' on why it was... Moonlit, I think... who I 'thought' was the more likely villain on the Spaceship. And barely anyone read me at all! I even nearly replied to one too-casual mention by yourself that it was possible that I was Evil... I even saved the post I never actually ended up posting...
So you're scum reading me based off your meta now?
Where have I stated I don't want any discussion in this round? When have I withheld information? It's all well and good telling us this is what I said, but without evidence, it's just some more hot air.
You're the one that doesn't like to share. "Spilled more information than should be necessary" aye? I think everyone else gets to be the judge of when you've shared enough information.You also can't (by open game knowledge) say that Moonlit's not Evil because of the lynch-replace. The first lynch-replace created an Evil role. My own best guess, Night 2, was that the second lynch-replace would do something similar. I could be wrong about the non-Evilness - but I know I'm not wrong about this one not being Human...
The first lynch-replace created a Neutral role, actually, but you do have a point here. I'm not sure about humans being exclusively evil here, though. Chara is a bad human, while the human you play as during the game can be good, neutral, or evil. Assuming all humans are bad is not a good thing to do, methinks.
Moonlit claimed he was the Evil role prior to the lynch-wipe, so it's not inconceivable that his role was replaced with an Evil one, since the game hasn't ended yet.
He has been quite forthcoming with having been the Evil role prior the the lynch, and it wouldn't be very fair to the town to not be getting flips from lynches and then have an Evil role in the replacement pool, especially with a three day limit, so I'm inclined to think Moonlit is not Evil at this point.
... which he completely ignores, save for quoting parts I clipped out because they don't have anything to do with why he was initially scumreading me. If you want to read the posts in their entirety, the top "Quote from..." links will take you to them.
So, let's go a bit more in-depth.
The first point: Hector has no reads.
In his own words, patently untrue. When I point this out to him, he basically says "yeah, well when I was scum I had reads too!"
I said he was scum-reading me off his own meta, which he ignored. Quite unfair of him to scum read me off someone else's play, but we could also look at this another way.
Have any of you ever had reads when you are town? It's pretty much the entire game of Mafia. This is a nonsense point to bring against anyone in any game.
Anyhow, he went from "Hector has no reads" to "having reads is scummy" in two posts. Does this sound like someone who is looking for scum? It looks to me lke someone is trying to force a lynch on someone else.
The second point: "stirring up dissent"
I had no idea initially what this meant, but in the second paragraph of his first response, he says I want to suppress discussion of my play. Except that all we were really doing was discussing my play.
Indeed, from posts 1656 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6929204#msg6929204) to 1660 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6930116#msg6930116) and 1663 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6930288#msg6930288) and 1665 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6930416#msg6930416) to 1673 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6930740#msg6930740) that is the crux of the conversation.
Notably, in post 1673, it is Starver who stops this discussion, because he knows his case is going to collapse if we continue to discuss it.
I want to discuss my play. The only way that I'm going to convince you guys I'm not scum is by discussing my play.
Another issue I have with this is he provides exactly *counting* *counting* zero examples of me suppressing discussion and exactly zero examples of me not sharing information with you guys.
His third point: my claim.
I initially fakeclaimed Chara because I have been quite annoyed with TBF and FoU for being so overt with their town weakness roles (TBF with the astigmatism allowing Starver to attack him despite having an auto that identifies him as the evil role to anyone he attacks, FoU announcing he was the driver and that if he died everyone dies) so I was unwilling to share my role on D1. He seems to think that was not a good justification and scum reads me for it.
After I rescind my claim and tell you why I did it, he also scum reads me for being Asriel (but apparently doesn't yet believe I'm Asriel despite someone else confirming it? Not sure about that one yet) citing "BUT THE LORE!" every time I bring it up. So lets look at the lore then, shall we?
This is Asriel's story (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb8LuokrlAM), direct from the game. The bit I most want you to take away comes shortly after the three minute mark, but that's the source material, so have at it. Watch it, come to your own conclusions, and then ask yourself if Starver's constant references to the lore - without actually giving us any links or anything to go off - is a good reason to scum read me.
One final thing I'd like to point out is this aspect of one of his quotes:
You also can't (by open game knowledge) say that Moonlit's not Evil because of the lynch-replace. The first lynch-replace created an Evil role. My own best guess, Night 2, was that the second lynch-replace would do something similar. I could be wrong about the non-Evilness - but I know I'm not wrong about this one not being Human...
Which he meant as:
... I meant to say lynch one created a human, with no reason not to assume something similar for the second, not an Evil-one...
Now, I think that this means that Starver thinks that the human roles are evil (perhaps backed up by his claimed ability as Undyne, if Starver finds a human during the night they get killed by him) which, if true, means he shouldn't think I'm scum.
I've played through the game in a neutral, true pacifist and genocide run, and as far as I can tell there are only two named humans, Chara and Frisk. We know Frisk is dead, TBF died and flipped with the role. Moonlit claimed that, before he was wiped after the lynch, he was Chara. This means there are no more human roles left in this game (assuming Moonlit was being honest)
Post by: Starver on April 14, 2016, 01:50:44 pm
Of the three people that aren't me, my personal assessment is that you do yourself the least favours. I have not seen any interaction mentioned which puts you in a positive light (the others look better, all power to their elbows...). You are an information sink, not a source. I find myself misunderstood, when I omit a subject from a line, or you hold onto minor thinkos of mine when I later (if not immediately!) correct them. I've never "BUT THE LORE!"ed, because I hardly know the Lore. When mentioned, it's been "Lore suggests, and there's nothing else to go on right now..."
I'd retreat back into obscurity (the tooth I now don't have is troubling me in an odd way), but you'd say I was trying to close down conversation again. Not that I even was before, I was actually inviting conversation from elsewhere - as I later clarified. Attempted to clarify. YMMV.
I appreciate (and/or dread, if I've been completely fooled) Fallacy seemingly agreeing with my minimally-considered opinion, but I'd also like to know more about the reasoning rather than just doing so straight off.
I would appreciate Moonlit making a decision, if not presenting a personal opinion, and would like to know more about the reasoning from that direction too. (Also, if possible, clarify the whole thing of Asriel being a vote-blocker. Please!)
You... aren't cooperating and are unlikely to change. I just hope that's gameplay.
Post by: hector13 on April 14, 2016, 02:43:07 pm
I'm not going to make a point-for-point reply. You'll make one that's a point-for-point-for-point to which I'll be drawn into doing a point-for-point-for-point-for-point. I'll just make an overview instead, and basic reiteration.
Of the three people that aren't me, my personal assessment is that you do yourself the least favours. I have not seen any interaction mentioned which puts you in a positive light (the others look better, all power to their elbows...). You are an information sink, not a source. I find myself misunderstood, when I omit a subject from a line, or you hold onto minor thinkos of mine when I later (if not immediately!) correct them. I've never "BUT THE LORE!"ed, because I hardly know the Lore. When mentioned, it's been "Lore suggests, and there's nothing else to go on right now..."
I'd retreat back into obscurity (the tooth I now don't have is troubling me in an odd way), but you'd say I was trying to close down conversation again. Not that I even was before, I was actually inviting conversation from elsewhere - as I later clarified. Attempted to clarify. YMMV.
I appreciate (and/or dread, if I've been completely fooled) Fallacy seemingly agreeing with my minimally-considered opinion, but I'd also like to know more about the reasoning rather than just doing so straight off.
I would appreciate Moonlit making a decision, if not presenting a personal opinion, and would like to know more about the reasoning from that direction too. (Also, if possible, clarify the whole thing of Asriel being a vote-blocker. Please!)
You... aren't cooperating and are unlikely to change. I just hope that's gameplay.
In what way am I not cooperating? Because I don't agree with you? Of course I don't agree with you, I'm not scum. You think I'm just going roll over and die for you? Think again, bub.
That is a perfect example of you not wanting to discuss things.
We have rafts of posts made over the days, there is a boatload more to go on that the lore. There should never be an instance that you're going on what the "lore suggests" more than what's happening in the game.
Again, you're not providing examples of any of these things you say that I'm doing. You just went over the posts of the entire game, you must know where I did these things. So to paraphrase a meme, quotes or it didn't happen.
For example:
Hector, Starver: Please state your cases against each other, preferably in 3 sentences each or less. For my sake. Also, I will unvote Hector for the moment.1) The practical evidence is that from our (non-)interaction, I've ruled out you (perhaps wrongly) and from a further (non-killing) interaction I've ruled out Moonlit's new role (perhaps more/differently wrongly), whilst Hector remains either uncleaned or unwhitewashed, whichever it is for the others...
2) The evidence from Lore is that (of those roles we still know, i.e. not Hector), I think I should dislike the activities of Asriel more, when it comes to picking sides.
3) The 'feeling' evidence is that Hector is just obfuscating more (or just more obviously!) than anyone else.
Number 1, you admit to not interacting with Moonlit or FoU. How can you have a solid read on either of them without having done so? You appear to have multiple issues with my play and my claims, but no problems with them? This after having apparently gone through all the posts in the game so far? Not buying that.
Number 2. Evidence from the lore, which - with the video I linked to - shows that Asriel (my role, confirmed by Moonlit) is not the bastard soul-stealing mofo that you have portrayed him.
Even if Asriel was a complete bastard, we know how easy it is to fakeclaim in this, so neither your role nor FoU's are close to confirmed. My early claim of Chara seems to have thrown you for a loop, you keep coming back to it, and Moonlit claimed Asgore and nobody questioned that 'til he comes out with "oh, btw, I was Chara".
We don't even know Moonlit's role name because he won't tell us. How can you apply the lore (of which you say you know little about in the first place) in such a situation?
The quote at the top of this is also a perfect example of you stopping discussion. Of course if you just slip back into obscurity I'm going to say you're closing down conversation, I'm attacking your for spouting nonsense and lies! I've been trying to keep the discussion going, while you're happy to just sit back and let the game die from inactivity. We lost the last two games because we let you get away with it, but never again.
PPE: byraway, Asriel is Chara's adoptive brother. Should probably have mentioned that for the video. Chara is the human that fell and was found by Asriel, just in case you didn't know.
Post by: Starver on April 14, 2016, 05:12:38 pm
Number 1, you admit to not interacting with Moonlit or FoU. How can you have a solid read on either of them without having done so?Blatant misreading.
1) The practical evidence is that from our (non-)interaction, I've ruled out you (perhaps wrongly) and from a further (non-killing) interaction I've ruled out Moonlit's new role (perhaps more/differently wrongly), whilst Hector remains either uncleaned or unwhitewashed, whichever it is for the others...In context to what I've repeatedly said, that clearly expands out to "...from my [apparent] interaction with Fallacy [one thing], my [known] interaction with Moonlit [another thing] and my non-interaction with Hector [I have been left to fill in the gaps]...".
I'll get back to the rest when I can work out what words to use to banish all possible ambiguity, because this is hard work...
Post by: hector13 on April 14, 2016, 05:18:15 pm
I have great disdain for reading a sentence, wandering into the parentheses, then having to read the sentence again, ignore the parentheses to get what the sentence was in the first place, and then run into a second set of parentheses, read it, re-read the entire sentence for a second time ignoring two sets of parentheses and then a third set of parentheses... etc. etc.
Post by: Starver on April 14, 2016, 07:17:37 pm
Whut?Quote from: StarverFallacy's "Blocking-and-killing" action might yet have killed Fish/Frisk, Night 1. Didn't even block me, but somehow guessed that I did nothing and didn't want the attention (whether good or ill). For some reason, Moonlit doesn't want to realise/reveal this, in hindsight.
Oh? Well, that would mean he's telling the truth. It may be possible... who knows? Furthermore, does it matter?
That's an extract from a possible alternative, if I have things wrong.
Who is it that (if this is the case) you think would now be telling the truth?
@Hector: What I'm asking is who is it that, if this is the case, Moonlit thinks would now be telling the truth. But I'm not sure avoiding brackets helps.
And I don't know if it matters. That's just one of three speculative differences from my conclusions. I set less store in that being the truth.
But if it were correct, then Fallacy would have been faking "finding that I did nothing", which has Implications. Which I have indeed been taking note of.
Quote
Well you better believe it because exactly what it said (well, paraphrasing because saying it exactly is against the rules) was that I couldn't vote or target Hector as long as he was Asriel.I need to see how this turns out... Sounds like you think that when Hector was claiming Chara, you could have voted or targeted Hector, in your ignorance as to the truth. Even though you may have been fully aware of the lie.
You could even have legitimately done so, knowing what you apparently knew about the Evilness of Chara to construct a surprisingly good reason for Hector-Chara being Evil.
The only feasible reason you would not would have been actual Masonic-like knowledge, which doesn't sound feasibly compatible with the small-game format we're using, albeit that it's a Bastard-ish one most times. But if that was so then your (fake?) shock at Hector's proclamation serves no purpose.
I'm left with the conclusion that you're mistaken as the most likely reason. I acknowledge that there's loads of weird and wonderful possibilities, but I've got to go with the most likely one on the balance.
Quote
And what do scum like? To be in obscurity.It helps, but it's not an absolute.
Quote
Let's go back to your other games as scum. You were barely noticed in the last game (fault of me, you were actually being pretty stupid), in the game with FoU as Driver you didn't do much either.In both games I had a full back-story. If not right from the start, certainly by the time serious questions were starting to be asked, and answered. If anyone had actually asked me, I could tell you more about those pseudo-characters than I can actually tell you about this character. But I wasn't going to volunteer my patter, lest you think it was a patter. I was awaiting being asked about it.
My Technician with the somewhat screwy access to the security cameras was a Town Special, rather than a Town Investigator. He was one of the ship's crew, not an evacuee. I even had a Secret Auto. (That, of course 'I' did not know about beforehand, but that could have come into play if my hand was forced.)
But to blurt it all out would have been... well, the kind of thing Hector doesn't like. I was drip-feeding you, and I got overexcited in name-checking my Playback skill by name so early on, but nobody even noticed so I just left it as an unconsidered Easter Egg, should anybody want to check back. SFAICT, nobody voiced any opinions that suggested that they did.
(Almost everything I have about Undyne, I gave you straight during Day 2, I think. My night action I left until it didn't matter to anybody.)
Quote
Well guess what? Your newfound activity in the past day has given me a lot to think about. In other words, Starver[/color=red].Up to you. If I get you all (bar one) to go with me I can't even win for... reasons. And it's not newfound (nor strictly the past day), but that's outside the scope of the game.
Quote
I think it's both unlikely because he's Asriel, and because he's been pretty un-scummy in his posts.QuoteThe first part's possible, certainly. For the second, YMDV. I've seen Hector work in Town's interest in past rounds, and I just don't get the same feeling for this one... Something's changed, and I can't even blame it all on me.
Was actually going to dive in and continue the seemingly futile dialogue with with Hector, again, but first I need to regain my reason to care...
Post by: Starver on April 14, 2016, 07:22:03 pm
Quote
I think it's both unlikely because he's Asriel, and because he's been pretty un-scummy in his posts.The first part's possible, certainly. For the second, YMDV. I've seen Hector work in Town's interest in past rounds, and I just don't get the same feeling for this one... Something's changed, and I can't even blame it all on me.
Was actually going to dive in and continue the seemingly futile dialogue with with Hector, again, but first I need to regain my reason to care...
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 14, 2016, 10:30:02 pm
Impasse, oui?
~~~
3 votes is hammer. Whoever the scum is voting for, he/she could switch his/her vote to the other to cause a hammer. Unless of course he/she is one of the ones being voted.
In my belief, to some degree, that's evidence either hector or Starver is the scum.
~~~
At this point, my best idea is a full claim from everybody- we've had partial claims from everybody, but not full ones. And... well...
Tomasque: is this the last day of this round?
Post by: hector13 on April 14, 2016, 10:40:22 pm
Anyway, I think everybody other than Moonlit (due to a new role) has basically claimed everything they have anyway.
Post by: Tomasque on April 15, 2016, 08:11:48 am
Tomasque: is this the last day of this round?Yes.
Post by: Starver on April 15, 2016, 11:46:37 am
I don't think a full claim will solve anything right now.If not now, then when?
Have I missed what your claimed action/ability/whatever is?
I am, and always have been, Undyne. I am Neutral and and cannot now 'win' because there are no more night-times in which to discover a Human. (Because that's what I do, apparently.) All this was already revealed, but now in one place. Probably helps Evil more than Town, though.
Post by: hector13 on April 15, 2016, 11:51:25 am
How could you miss my claim (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6916684#msg6916684)? You just went through all the posts.
Post by: Starver on April 15, 2016, 01:02:55 pm
Well what will a claim do? We can't confirm anything now, on D3.Right. No claims on D1. No claims on D3. I'll remember that.
Quote
How could you miss my claim (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6916684#msg6916684)? You just went through all the posts.Yes, and I just went through again a moment ago, because I had been sure you had said something, but it escaped me. Hence why I tentatively asked, just now. No need to be so spikey...
(I didn't use the word "role" in the message summary "Hector states Town Weakness. Expects something Secret to happen.", meaning I didn't even find it in my summary drawn up and posted yesterday. My self-Google-Fu broke, in other words.)
As to what help there is, obviously someone who is a Town Weak role (despite being a powerful and important game character, SFAICT) is weak because there's nothing at all they can do to prove themselves as a true Townie... Even worse, when we necessarily have to ignore Lore.
Post by: hector13 on April 15, 2016, 04:25:37 pm
Given that I have no abilities, I assume I'm the child version. This is why I was quite active during D1 and 2, as I have no other way to prove my town-ness beyond what I post, and why I was upset over few people voting on D1. Vote analysis is a pretty significant part of Mafia, especially in smaller games when you have much less time to question people.
Post by: Starver on April 15, 2016, 05:44:30 pm
Post by: Starver on April 15, 2016, 08:57:17 pm
We don't know what Fish was originally. Claimed Sans/Town Investigator. Lynched off, then killed-for-real in replacement role, so who knows...
Hector says started as Asriel (Town Weak - apparently totally powerless), and would still be so.
Fallacy says Papyrus (Town Special? - Blue SOUL 'aggressive blocking' skill is possibly confirmed).
I say I'm Undyne (Neutral - as far as I'm concerned I'm a Vig, who failed) right from the start.
Moonlit was Chara (declared as Evil, takes credit for Fish's nightkill), initially. But since the end of D2 is Nabstablook (who? (http://undertale.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Search?search=Nabstablook&fulltext=Search) ...top of the Tropes (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Characters/UndertaleOtherCharacters) though, a Town Weak who is apparently outside of the process...
So at face value, starting scenario was Investigator, Weak, Special, Neutral, Evil. (Covers the whole spectrum, reasonably.) Current scenario is Weak, Special, Neutral, Weak #2. (Reasonable.) Unless at least at least one of those is not what it's said.
I think Hector and Moonlit have it tied up, if Fallacy is at all minded to change, from what's said. Given who you are (at least with both Chara/Asriel being adoptive kin, but Nabstablook seems to be..? no idea what to make of them with their 'lazy/brutal' mix, sorry...) it seems obvious that you're closely enough allied to at least think you'd rather keep it at stalemate than do anything different.
Whatyergonnado, Fallacy?
Post by: Starver on April 15, 2016, 09:10:18 pm
I was going by the order of my above rundown. Skipping Fish for the 'current' status, thus that's, Hector, Fallacy, me and you. I agree that the roleswapping/junking makes that not exactly an ideal thing to list, but no worse than the likelihood of at least one case of personation along the way...QuoteCurrent scenario is Weak, Special, Neutral, Weak #2. (Reasonable.) Unless at least at least one of those is not what it's said.
Yeah, with the roleswapping this is... wait what? Weak is Hector (Asriel), Special is FoU (Papyrus), I'm Weak 2 (Nabstablook), and you're Neutral (Undyne)? Oh... right, forgot. Anyway, with the roleswapping it's useless analyzing the way the roles are.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 15, 2016, 10:19:15 pm
I'm Nabstablook. I have an auto which is that I am not counted in the Evil Role's wincon. I don't really believe Starver of his wincon, though it's kinda screaming 'I'm Evil'. He wants all humans to be gone, and if he visits them at night, they die.If you're telling the truth, this breaks my theory that the lynch replaces people with monsters. Then again, you claim to have been a human originally...
~~~
I am Neutral and and cannot now 'win' because there are no more night-times in which to discover a Human.I'm not entirely sure about that.
Tomasque: will there be a night phase after this day phase?
Post by: hector13 on April 15, 2016, 10:20:42 pm
If you're telling the truth, this breaks my theory that the lynch replaces people with monsters. Then again, you claim to have been a human originally...
Well, I think TBF's lynch (from claimed Sans) and death (he flipped Frisk) also breaks that theory :P
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 15, 2016, 10:21:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 15, 2016, 10:24:05 pm
Then again, Moonlit could be fakeclaiming again *shrug* can't prove it either way, so there's no point worrying about it.
Post by: Starver on April 16, 2016, 06:15:18 am
Whoops. Meant to say "replaces people with humans". My bad.That had been my theory. (Or, rather, that Humans populated the whole 'pool', given that we're told that there's no "If <certain character> dies, "<specific character>" replaces them".)
My interaction with Moonlit already ruled that out. This I know, even if absolutely nothing else.
Post by: Tomasque on April 16, 2016, 11:04:44 am
Tomasque: will there be a night phase after this day phase?Round Rule Revealed: After the 3rd day, there will be continuous nights until the town or scum wincon is resolved.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 16, 2016, 12:20:13 pm
heh. HA. HAHAHAHA!Tomasque: will there be a night phase after this day phase?Round Rule Revealed: After the 3rd day, there will be continuous nights until the town or scum wincon is resolved.
~~~
Potentially very horrible plan: I hammer Starver, then on every subsequent night, I use Blue Attack on hector until he finally gives up and dies.
Any objections?
Post by: Starver on April 16, 2016, 06:08:51 pm
I was about to summarise what will now happen given each possible option for Evilness, but... hmmm, it's a humdinger of a logic-bomb. I wonder whether scum or town will realise it first?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 16, 2016, 07:14:02 pm
Let the Night Melee...
eh.
Terribly sorry about this if you're not the Evil role, or if Moonlit is the Evil role. Starver.
BEGIN.
Note to everybody: I'm going to Blue Attack hector. Because if Starver's not Evil, then it basically has to be hector.
Post by: Tomasque on April 17, 2016, 01:19:38 am
Another suspect was punished. When the trial was concluded, the remaining monsters realized how empty their world had become. where were the others? Had they died without notice during the trial, or had they been dead for days, unaccounted for in the fear-crazed fervor? Panic filled the survivors and they scattered across the underground, for they knew they were next if the killer was still among them.
Post by: Starver on April 17, 2016, 04:26:02 pm
(And "bah", while I'm at it, as I probably won't get another chance to say it.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 17, 2016, 04:39:33 pm
Meaning you're not dead. Yet.
Post by: hector13 on April 17, 2016, 04:49:49 pm
Post by: Tomasque on April 17, 2016, 08:02:18 pm
In silence, they waited. Was it over? Was the killer dead - or were they just the last victim? They waited in that darkness for someone to bring them some kind of news - any news at all...
But nobody came.
Post by: Tomasque on April 17, 2016, 08:05:37 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 17, 2016, 08:07:08 pm
Post by: Starver on April 17, 2016, 08:09:22 pm
Although, if you're taking requests, could you write it as a palindromic sonnet, each and every time? ;)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 17, 2016, 08:43:33 pm
I just realized that each round my flavor text begins fairly neutral, but becomes very unnerving near the end. Although this does well to illustrate the tension and hysteria, it might be a bit disturbing to some people. I'll refrain from doing it in subsequent rounds if a majority of you find it in bad taste.It's fine.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 17, 2016, 09:04:04 pm
Post by: Tomasque on April 17, 2016, 10:01:06 pm
Agreed.Oh shut upit's fine. Undertale can be quite dark sometimes.
just give up. I did.
*Shudder*
Although, if you're taking requests, could you write it as a palindromic sonnet, each and every time? ;)...
;D
Post by: Tomasque on April 17, 2016, 10:04:14 pm
...
Was that someone approaching?
The Evil role MUST act tonight.
Post by: Tomasque on April 18, 2016, 11:10:40 pm
The Moonlit Shadow gets one victory point.
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Unused Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on April 18, 2016, 11:53:32 pm
Didn't actually expect that you could have been mid-role replaced, Hector. Still, you managed to mostly persuade everyone else for quite some time that you were innocent (wrongly) even if though I was shouting out loud and proud (not that it mattered to me, really) that I was so sure you were actually evil from the start (wrongly). I don't think Moonlit was ever going to change their mind.
(And, apologies, Moonlit. That's indeed a very specific auto you had there. Totally out there... Almost something one-way Masonic!)
I think I was lucky to last until the bitter end, actually. And with just one practical chance of 'winning' (getting Moonlit's Chara Night 1, which is something I totally didn't pick up as a possibility... or perhaps I could have gotten to Frisk, first, as an alternative..?), I didn't lose out too much by landing on that winless character that I did. ;)
Post by: hector13 on April 18, 2016, 11:59:18 pm
Reason I went after TBF D1 was because of his push for a no lynch, then trying to force it. We have limited opportunity to take out scum, let's not waste them, eh? :P
Also super surprised nobody went after my supposition that I'd be made evil if something happens to Moonlit.
Post by: hector13 on April 19, 2016, 12:05:27 am
Also also, what was it that was making y'all (including FoU) think I was scum?
Post by: Starver on April 19, 2016, 12:24:42 am
Also super surprised nobody went after my supposition that I'd be made evil if something happens to Moonlit.Probably something I could have picked up from the source material I tried to understand.
(But, big problem with that project... time... I was offline for a small chunk of time at the start because I was away from home fixing a relative's computer hardware. Then I returned home and found that I had my own (different) hardware problems, including that this computer's old monitor's backlight decided to give up the ghost. And then at the end of the week I had a wisdom tooth extracted (that wasn't even causing me noticeable problems, but the dentist wanted it out... and it ended up having to be cut into small pieces to be gotten out). The swollen half-face has only just gone down and it still feels funny, even away from where the dissolving stitches are still not dissolved. So... anyway, I think I might have also been a bit grumpy and disinclined to back down from my own convictions for pretty much the whole of a week.)
I should have thought more about Moonlit's shock at your (first, false) reveal, but hindsight is a wonderful thing, eh? ;)
(PPE: No worries about the salt... see the ()ed paragraph, above, for my own side of the story.)
Also also, what was it that was making y'all (including FoU) think I was scum?When you weren't, I just didn't like the faking, and then honestly felt it useless to be forced to not just vote but to vote sincerely when it was impossible. At that point, it was a wrong conclusion... but it certainly meant you were high on my radar when you were trying to bring everyone down low. Not sure if/when you could have gotten back on my good side, by then, though... especially as your motive to be seen as non-scum then became not just a matter of trying to set the facts straight, but actually necessary for camouflage...)
I should have claimed 'Town', though (and, as I think I already said, with "Find humans" rather than "Kill humans" as my claimed goal), when I finally revealed all... I was just trying to actually be honest about my (lack of) motives at that point so that I'd be (correctly, if accidentally so) believed. But I should perhaps have lied a little, for a more palatable tale that could have been easier believed.
Post by: Starver on April 19, 2016, 12:31:40 am
Something, somewhere, said 'you' wanted to gather all humans and monsters in a room and eat all their SOULs... didn't sound exactly friendly.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 19, 2016, 06:21:16 am
Mergh.
Post by: hector13 on April 19, 2016, 07:50:34 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 19, 2016, 08:26:05 am
~~~
Also also, what was it that was making y'all (including FoU) think I was scum?For me, it was really all the roles-based logic. You and Starver were the only possible candidates for scum for me, and when I heard the round rule revealed... if I lynched Starver, and he was scum, I would win, and if he wasn't scum, I could deal with hector. Of course, I didn't know about my "nice guy" auto then...
Post by: hector13 on April 19, 2016, 08:27:25 am
Post by: Dorsidwarf on April 19, 2016, 09:33:37 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 19, 2016, 09:40:07 am
How did town win? I didn't see anyone with something that could stop Flowey.The way I see it, there was no way whatsoever for Flowey to win- each night, I would just keep roleblocking hector. End result- the Evil role cannot win, so it's eliminated, letting town win.
Post by: Starver on April 19, 2016, 09:59:54 am
Post by: Tomasque on April 19, 2016, 11:31:03 am
I'd like to note that the third lynch replacing somebody with the "cannot win" role basically meant that player had no chance of winning once that happened to to there being no further lynches.The whole thing with the replacement roles is they got worse and worse...
Post by: Starver on April 19, 2016, 03:59:39 pm
The whole thing with the replacement roles is they got worse and worse...
Although once I realised I'd probably not get out of Day 3 alive, tried to work out what would happen and then realised I'd be given a replacement, I definitely was rather hoping that it'd end up on someone either super-Townie or super-Scummy (according to what best balanced). As you know, from my in-private ponderings, but just so the others ;)
Not that it changed anything, for me, as I'd already decided that (if I was right about Fallacy) that the Town Power was going to have to aim straight and true against the existing threat. Anything else was even more speculative than the current speculation...
As stated, I definitely ranked Fallacy as most 'friendly', Hector as least, on balance. But I was the most worried of ultimately ending up being wrong about Moonlit. Well in the background (although significant) were any worries that Fallacy just might actually being evil, then behind that was Hector actually being non-evil (not insignificant, just the smallest predicted 'error bar'). It did even occur to me to switch to voting for Moonlit, to break the stalemate, but that'd have probably gotten me the lynch-vote by Fallacy even quicker.
Surprisingly enough, if you had gotten yourself lynched D2 by acting suspicious, you would've gotten the Nabstablook role and had a chance to win.Ah, yes, the character that the (official?) Wiki doesn't even seem to admit exists.. :P
(No, I haven't yet even checked to see if tEMMIE is mentioned..!)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 19, 2016, 04:12:32 pm
Their name is Napstablook, not Nabstablook.
Post by: Tomasque on April 20, 2016, 08:34:40 pm
M' Pirvate Lif Jurnel
'vil-at-Nawton was - eh - no's rep naedud
desructon. We, bro Waltn, all a-give
'e vigallant 'law orb' (ew, not curs-ed
dude)... an' person he saw not wanta liv!
- Octebr 17ht
Post by: Tomasque on April 22, 2016, 07:42:09 pm
Our town archive has finally been completed. I and the rest of the Committee of Town Planning were very pleased by the speed of its construction. As of today, the archive will be requesting one copy of each newspaper, police report, judicial statement, and other written document the moment they are available. Any papers in the archive should not be altered without my permission, including this one. We would like to keep an accurate history here, after all.
-Johnson Dibesh
Head of Committee of Town Planning
January 19
Head of Committee of Town Planning
January 19
Day ends Sunday, 6:00 PM PST
Monday, 1:00 AM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 22, 2016, 08:32:19 pm
But anyway, what's this orb thing?
Post by: Starver on April 22, 2016, 10:18:55 pm
The rest, I cannot yet say..
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 22, 2016, 10:41:40 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 22, 2016, 10:52:43 pm
Then again, the last round was bizarro.
And the round before that... and the round before that... and a lot of rounds before that.
I am going to enjoy every last little bit of this game.
~~~
So. Obvious things of note: the night text is even more bizarro.
But anyway, what's this orb thing?Yeah, it appears to mention an "orb" in the night text. Appears. Do you understand that text, because I sure don't, mostly...
also hector13 because I want to know if we can vote.
Post by: Tomasque on April 22, 2016, 10:55:22 pm
also hector13 because I want to know if we can vote.Uhh... You can vote. I just forgot to put the Votecount up because I'm an idiot.
Well, I got my palindrome, it seems, although it's a bit shorter than a sonnet. ;)
The rest, I cannot yet say..
Yeah, I kinda lazed off there. :P
Post by: hector13 on April 22, 2016, 10:59:19 pm
also hector13 because I want to know if we can vote.
Why do you vote for me in this instance? Seems a bit of an absurd RVS vote.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 22, 2016, 11:00:35 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 22, 2016, 11:01:51 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 07:18:35 am
I appear to want to hold onto it though so there's that.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 07:25:06 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 07:28:25 am
I've got the same thing going on.
Post by: Starver on April 23, 2016, 01:57:35 pm
Also, my role confuses me a little. But that may be the point.
(Notes being made, but only mental ones as my hardware problems are worse than the other week, and I'm relying on going between wireless hotspots to keep connected during the day whilst necessary repairs are completed. Bear with me, I'll try to respond to you you as qui kly as possible.)
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 01:58:44 pm
Huh. There's that indeed.
@Starver and Hector: You should take note of this.
Why those two, specifically?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 23, 2016, 01:59:30 pm
I think I have the idea that day-flavour is supposed to be the modern 'aftermath' of the (yet to be determined) events in the time of the night-flavour that is actually contemperaneous with our gameplay. At least mine and Moonlits, but time-bending might be happening if it's not all of us.That... makes sense. Lots of it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 02:00:14 pm
It does. Almost a bit too much, but I digress.I think I have the idea that day-flavour is supposed to be the modern 'aftermath' of the (yet to be determined) events in the time of the night-flavour that is actually contemperaneous with our gameplay. At least mine and Moonlits, but time-bending might be happening if it's not all of us.That... makes sense. Lots of it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 02:01:41 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 03:20:03 pm
@Hector: I forget who I targeted :(What on earth are you talking about?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 03:54:25 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:02:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:05:25 pm
Fortunately for you, I don't think you're a bloody idiot, so you're scum instead.
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:09:05 pm
No, you don't remember because you didn't do it in the first place.
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:18:31 pm
So please, indulge me and tell us why you're informing everyone, including the scum if you're not it, who you "gave" such an important thing.
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:22:52 pm
Why let the scum know, too, if it's as important as you say?
You're just trying to mislead the town.
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:26:31 pm
I call BS.
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:28:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:32:23 pm
As I said, I don't buy it. Following your logic, you don't have the orb-
Wait, what? The game would be over if we lynch the scum, why are you worried about losing the orb?
Anyway, we should just lynch you then, since you've said you don't have the orb.
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:35:03 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:35:56 pm
Yeah... lynching someone who isn't scum isn't the way to win. At least one person can back me up here - they're the one who told me in the first place.
Plus, we'll need the orb. And we don't know that whoever it is that has the Orb is scum, do we?
Why do we need the orb?
If you didn't know anybody's alignment (N0, after all) why are you giving it away in the first place?
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:41:41 pm
1: It helps.
2: I have to. Part of the ability. Believe me, I'd have loved to hold onto it.
Right now I'm trying to gauge your intelligence and audacity. I'm failing.
Anyway, TBF has claimed a non-town wincon. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6952657#msg6952657)
He's claimed part of his wincon. Doesn't mean he's not town.
How does the orb help? You've shafted the town by narrowing down who you gave it to, if you even had it to give away.
You're talking nonsense, trying to throw shade my way by implying you think I'm stunningly stupid.
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:46:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 07:50:08 pm
PPE: but you'll happily say "I GAVE THIS IMPORTANT ITEM TO HECTOR OR STARVER!"
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 08:07:53 pm
Blatant misinterpretation of what I said (you moved the discussion from what was making you look guilty, not because you want to know more about TBF)
Blatant admission of not engaging with the game.
Would you like to trade it all for a shovel? You'll dig the hole faster, but then we won't get to see your quintessential example of scum behaviour.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 08:11:38 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 08:13:43 pm
Why would you have an auto that wants you to touch something you have no control over?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 08:16:57 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 08:18:41 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 08:19:09 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 08:20:59 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 08:26:03 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 08:27:11 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 08:27:30 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 08:28:40 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 08:41:11 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 08:45:13 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 08:45:48 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 08:56:11 pm
Then the three things I pointed out earlier.
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 09:01:22 pm
Perhaps a lynch will make y'all pay attention.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 09:02:01 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 09:02:10 pm
Too, not to...
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 09:03:56 pm
@TBF
You're hiding something.
You're deflecting attention.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 09:04:45 pm
I am Town, with Town wincon, but I have an auto that, if I use the Orb during the day, I cannot pass it at night.
I'm suspicious of the both of you!
Post by: hector13 on April 23, 2016, 09:11:29 pm
No, I have been perfectly open that...Well I haven't actually but here it is now.
I am Town, with Town wincon, but I have an auto that, if I use the Orb during the day, I cannot pass it at night.
I'm suspicious of the both of you!
I've done nothing to be suspicious of!
@Hector: What attention?
The attention you brought on to yourself by revealing information that harms the town.
Unless you're talking nonsense, in which case it's for talking nonsense.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 09:15:36 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 23, 2016, 09:18:36 pm
~~~
Initial hypothesis: Orb is basically the lynch, considering it's an item(probably), and it's the only one(as far as I know).
Refutation: We have access to a lynch- one controlled by the vote.
~~~
Humph. So basically, unless Moonlit spills, we aren't going to know what the Orb does. But I wonder... would the person he gave the orb to know what it does?
~~~
Okay, but I don't get how the Orb is so important?It's the common thread amongst what's going on- it showed up in the night flavor, and multiple players(you and Moonlit) have claimed to have an ability pertaining to the Orb(Moonlit being the one who started with it(I think), TBF not being able to pass it at night if he gets it). Currently, it's the only thing of note about this round's mechanics.
Hence, important. Just like the gun and the bomb in the previous items round.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 23, 2016, 09:20:56 pm
Post by: Starver on April 24, 2016, 12:00:58 pm
Starver, as a potential Orb bearer, could you show up?Just got here.
I think I trust Moonlit as correct. I think Moonlit will understand that if I say that think Hector *isn't* a person to lynch, but not quite sure what happens next.
I'm not sure about Fish or Fallacy, right now, though. Fish could be either the best or worst amongst us, which means different things regardibg Fallacy.
(And typing on a t ablet screen obscuring what Ivm trying to type is awkward. Sorry for typos.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 12:05:31 pm
Post by: Starver on April 24, 2016, 12:11:25 pm
I also wouldnvt equate the orb to either bomb or pistol, it doesnvt sound like either, although sounds like this might change in certain hands, for better or worse, it might depend upon role.
And, specifically, novote, for the moment. I would understand objections to this, but I think itvd be counter-productive to town do that immediately, for all the advantage someone would get from it.
PPE:
@fish: Last para covers that, as my guess.
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 12:26:28 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 12:45:32 pm
Guess I'm confirmed town though, so that's good.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 01:15:59 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 01:18:33 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 01:31:18 pm
Have you considered he might be scum at all? You were forced to give it away without thought, and I had to do that with my gun. It ended up with you D1, and do you remember what alignment you were at the time?
Hint: it wasn't town or neutral.
PPE: I doubt that very much.
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 01:36:33 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 01:37:40 pm
'scuse me, TBF's claimed auto
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 01:42:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 01:45:43 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 01:49:59 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 01:58:32 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 02:12:48 pm
Like, don't be trying to disenfranchise me, man.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 02:28:59 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 02:38:48 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 02:39:52 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 02:49:40 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 03:34:07 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 03:53:54 pm
Your first post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6952655#msg6952655), for example. You ask TBF if he has the orb. Why do that if you control where it goes?
Then when TBF says he needs to hold it, you tell Starver and I to take note of it - which, after all your revelations, tells me you know who your buddy is, but you don't have a QT with Starver, so you have to give vague not-quite-specific warnings in the thread.
But you can't just come out and say "oi Starver, you need to worry about TBF!" so you need to make it seem believable that your night action is handing off the orb, and you conveniently forgot who you "gave" it to, so you don't throw too much shade your partner's way.
You also say multiple times that you're not going to say what it does, right up until Starver confirms me as town, when you tell us that it's an investigation role. Town don't want to lose possibly the most useful role they can have, do they?
Perhaps you lose if the law orb is on someone who gets lynched. Perhaps it's not as useful to town as you suggest. Law doesn't mean justice, after all...
Post by: Starver on April 24, 2016, 04:37:54 pm
@Starver: Confirm?Confirming Hector as neutral. Hector can still help himself, from the wincon, and Ivll gladly help Hector help himself another day, but Ididnvt want to see hm helping himself today, at theexpense of Town, which is is how I have been reading it..
And if I explained more, Hector, it may be tbatnobody would help you at all, as you know... Play straight, though, and maybe I can help us all on another day. You know what I mean by that. And thatvs why I think youvre better off letting me get you and Town through the night, youvll be able to help us tomorrow and if I can give you what you want, I will. Assuming that others aren't already so inclined to do so, by accident...
And given Ivm ruling out Hector for lynching, unless another day gives me reason, Moonlit is ultimate source of this k owledge so likely cleared and Ivm not yet sure if itvs terribly good or terribly bad to lynch Fish, potentially leaving Fallacy on the other side of the equation, that is my rational for a novote, as of the above message. It may change. Before nighttime. Others are free to show their own hands, to potentially alter my thoughts on this.
Post by: Starver on April 24, 2016, 05:03:09 pm
FoU, for inactivity.Thatvs actually compelling, in a meta way. If Hector bears in mind my suggestion, above, and. wants to stop obvious baiting, to swap to FoU for a better reason then any other Ive seen him come up with yet, Ivdbetempted to join in. Getting lucky on Fallacy (I don't think there's cause to believe it will happen, so worth the flip of a coinl would end things, and not everyone would like that, but if the role our dice rolls comez up as Fallacy being Town Weak (which by my reckoning is the likeliest 'bad' conclusion to this excercise) then we have a night and a day to sort it out.
Hector, I'd like you to move your vote.
With the result I imagine wil happen tonight, Hector may even usefull benefit directly from the overnight actions, and Ivm saying this so that this may come to pass. . Either way, if you get to give useful information, day 2 might ght not end the game but good thibgs happen and then Day3 wins well for thw town, even if Ivm not there to see it.
But Fallacyvs participation would temper that., I hasten to add, after all that thinkng aloud. But as long as your wincon is as townie as mine you might find it useful (if confusing) (and badly "typed", sorry)., regardless.
Just my main thoughts, though. And unanticipated roles could make things go /really/ badly, naturally.
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 05:21:04 pm
If you can't come up with anything better than that as an argument, you're on your own.
You clear Moonlit because he gave you the orb? Foolish. You trust what the orb tells you? Foolish. Who's the more foolish: the fool, or the fool who follows him?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 24, 2016, 05:23:56 pm
Now I've got reading to do.
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 05:24:24 pm
Post by: Starver on April 24, 2016, 05:33:10 pm
Off grid, shortly, but Ivll try to be back before day-end to see if you're seeing the logic and helping Town the only way I can see being useful, with the current infoemation.
Don't count on being able to shortcut it by just rubbishing me and dealing with the consequences. (That's probably what you're thinking, right now.)
PPE: extending would work for me, unless it's just the same godawful hour as it is before extension... ;) But I shall see what Fallacy says in a couple of hours, if not immexiately.
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 05:37:39 pm
Moonlit says the law orb disappears when the person holding it dies, and he needs it to win. I think it's a sensible move to lynch you, the person he says holds the orb, so that he loses.
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 05:41:57 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 24, 2016, 05:51:45 pm
So Moonlit.
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 05:53:59 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 24, 2016, 05:55:00 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 05:55:35 pm
Post by: Tomasque on April 24, 2016, 05:55:48 pm
Mod, can we Extend or Shorten the day?No.
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 05:56:39 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 05:56:58 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 24, 2016, 05:59:50 pm
Welp.Mod, can we Extend or Shorten the day?No.
Can we get a vote count?Supporting this.
~~~
Your first post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6952655#msg6952655), for example. You ask TBF if he has the orb. Why do that if you control where it goes?I'm voting Moonlit for this reason, a much better one than my original one.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 06:04:49 pm
I'm half-tempted to vote Fallacy, but that's mostly because of Starver...Who I'm not sure if I trust.
Tomasque: Would you reconsider?
Also votecount please.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 06:05:11 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 06:18:42 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 06:22:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 06:23:47 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 06:25:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 06:26:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 06:30:37 pm
But mostly that you and TMS are also agreeing with him that the three of you are town. I think. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 06:34:14 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 06:36:52 pm
You implied that you trusted Starver here:
Well if Starver's right, then I do want to lynch Fallacy, because if you three are town or neutral...
I don't think that anybody is going to disagree with Starver when he says they're town.
PPE: unexpected development.
Not sure why you're voting Starver though, Moonlit. Whatever though, suits me.
PPE2: okay, never mind.
How do you know that I'm not evil?
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 06:38:55 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 06:42:21 pm
What is the votecount?
@hector:No, that was a hypothetical statement.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 06:44:38 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 06:46:21 pm
PPE: *glances back a few posts*
Indeed.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 24, 2016, 06:57:18 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 07:00:36 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 07:00:53 pm
I'm not neutral.But you just SAID...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 07:01:21 pm
I'm apparently neutral ::)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 07:01:59 pm
Even though this only ties up the votes.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 07:02:53 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 24, 2016, 07:03:47 pm
I'm apparently neutral ::)
I'm not neutral.... hector, please resolve this contradiction.
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 07:05:05 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 07:05:46 pm
... there is no contradiction.Oh? How, pray tell?
Post by: Starver on April 24, 2016, 07:31:18 pm
Now... Hector claimed Town, Starver said he was Neutral. Someone's lying. And Hector would only lie if he had a wincon against Town, so... what do y'all say we lynch them both?
Starver.
Hector is neutral, and I say, as Town, that the nature of his neutrality is not opposed to a Town win, although I think he might be tempted to not help us. Also I wouldn't blame Hector for /claiming/ Town, and nor should you. IMO.
/If/ I am lynched, and proven as Town (as I will, but you won't know that for sure) I thus implore you not to lynch Hector. Right now, I think that's the worst idea. Yes, worse than lynching me, even. . When all is done, you'll understand this, I promise.
If you don't Lynch me, then I appreciate that you are without confirmation.. Nothing I can do about that. But my death or Hector's overnight might give you a clue, if that's possible, and might cause 'problems' of some kind (not to mention the issue of the Orb, which I'm hazy about a small detail of) .but also clear up one side or other of the equation... Maybe Scum doesn't want to risk that, but I am willing to do so if I can't stop a bad guy night-kill. Should that exist in tbis game. (I have doubts about the kill function, I suspect corruption is the name of the game, but I need more data.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 07:34:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 07:35:48 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 07:37:16 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 24, 2016, 07:37:39 pm
Are you neutral, or are you not neutral?
Fallacy.Why?
That's essentially a vote for Moonlit, TBF.Why?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 07:38:22 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 07:39:02 pm
There's no reason for me to answer your other question.
PPE: you just said earlier you didn't know if you could trust him. He said nothing new. What?
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 07:39:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 07:40:31 pm
But now, hector, you're pushing the not-answering-questions button again...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 07:42:07 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 24, 2016, 07:42:35 pm
But now, hector, you're pushing the not-answering-questions button again...THIS.
hector, why no answer neutral or no neutral question?
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 07:44:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 07:45:26 pm
Post by: Starver on April 24, 2016, 07:46:31 pm
The orb gives me the orb skills, an attachment on mr role gives me the rest. This is something I was confused about. There is still something else I'm cnfused about, but that will resolve further later., for better or ill...
If I die, you will see this and I repeat my request not to kill Hector. Hector knows why I am asking this, but wouldn't ask this himself. This way, I hope to ensure that Town benefits from Hector's potential Town-helpfulness character and then earn the craved reward before it's over.
If I just come out and say it, Hector would probably find an adverse audience, but *I* am willing to help., in return for the pro-Town approach tonight.
That's basically my ultimatum to Hector, ignore thw rest. The orb, should it survive, will work as it is supposed to work in whatever trajectory it may be sent, and I don't know what that will be beyond the obvious future.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 24, 2016, 07:48:10 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 07:59:51 pm
Day's over, methinks.
Post by: hector13 on April 24, 2016, 08:02:04 pm
Post by: Tomasque on April 24, 2016, 10:39:04 pm
By order of the High Judge of Nawton and the Mayor of Nawton, the the death penalty is repealed for the following reasons:
1. It serves no purpose in undoing the losses caused by the guilty.
2. It robs the guilty of the chance to amend for his or her crimes.
3. It can cause suffering for family of the guilty if the charges are believed to be false.
Instead, the guilty will be detained for psychological examination and possible therapy by the psychologist Dr. Crocker, who will file a report on the mental condition of the guilty and the steps needing to be taken before they are released.
Personal note: I am so glad this barbaric custom was repealed. I am shocked that it has survived so long. -Jeremiah Crocker
-February 25
Votecounthector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (1) - TheBiggerFish
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (2) - hector13, The Moonlit Shadow
The Moonlit Shadow (1) - FallacyofUrist
Starver was the Saint of the Pure
Spoiler: Saint of the Pure (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on April 25, 2016, 03:34:30 pm
The Committee of Town Planning has agreed that the wisest course of action now is to keep expanding the residential district to the north and northeast. The sudden increase of migrant intake has worried some of the citizens, by I and the rest of the Committee believe that living quarters will be built quickly enough to keep up with demand. The only thing that bothers me is the decline in the recent harvest. It seems some disease killed the crops around the outskirts of our land. If the same should happen next harvest, we will be forced to import more food, but I do not believe this will be the case.
-Johnson Dibesh
Head of Committee of Town Planning
April 30
VotecountHead of Committee of Town Planning
April 30
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Day ends Wednesday, 1:30 PM PST
Wednesday, 8:30 PM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 03:36:56 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 03:37:36 pm
There is a problem with this however. Let's see if y'all can work it out, as Starver was a little too slow in revealing my wincon.
PPE: that would be me.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 03:39:21 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 03:51:30 pm
That is, unless you help me achieve my wincon.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 04:17:32 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 04:17:46 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 04:46:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 05:02:43 pm
I suspect I may have to align myself with the scum to do this, though, unless either you or Moonlit has an NK.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 05:25:47 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 05:46:31 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 05:48:33 pm
Post by: Tomasque on April 25, 2016, 06:17:54 pm
Did you read the flavour? Starver's been sectioned!Oh no, Starver is very much dead.
The flavour is meant to create irony in that you have returned to the death penalty so quickly.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 06:19:17 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 06:21:06 pm
Did you read the flavour? Starver's been sectioned!Oh no, Starver is very much dead.
The flavour is meant to create irony in that you have returned to the death penalty so quickly.
So being lynched is death?
Oh.
In that case, feel free to lynch me.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 25, 2016, 06:49:40 pm
THE WIFOM BURNS.
~~~
Anyway, Since I presently hold the power to force no lynches, I'll expect FoU to claim he has the orb, and that TBF or Moonlit is scum.Well... partially correct. I have... a grand total... of... zero Orb. But I am going to say that I think that TBF is scum. Based on roles logic.
I know I'm not scum, that leaves you, Moonlit, and TBF.
It seems unlikely that Moonlit is scum to me, seeing as he said the Orb was an investigative action on day one and... examine Starver's roleflip- he was an investigative role without an actual investigative action, but several abilities that revolve around the Orb... in fact, the first two(the non-hidden ones) would both help use the Orb as an investigative action. So, unless you've got something else to add, I don't think Moonlit is scum.
That leaves you and TBF.
Your claim is insane. Absolutely insane. But here's the thing- it's either you or TBF. And we have two lynches left. I'm going to assume you aren't scum for the moment based on the sheer absurdity of your wincon claim, leaving TBF. I'm going to vote TBF, based on this logical process of deduction. If he's not scum, I'll vote you tomorrow.
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 06:58:20 pm
We know I'm neutral, that's what Starver said. He was also being nice because he knew my wincon was benign from a town PoV, and an examination of D1 will show that I was being quite mad with what I was saying about Moonlit and Starver colluding together.
Deeply upset the wagon on me collapsed 'cause of Starver though. That's why he had to go :P
Anyway, like I say, I'll be forcing no lynches unless my demands are met. It's in town's interest to lynch me.
As a side note, this orb seems like a poisoned chalice. Starver died with it, I'm going to die with it and I'm forced to give it to the person I investigated, FoU, who will likely die tomorrow.
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 06:58:50 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 25, 2016, 07:05:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 07:15:38 pm
I also didn't really see the point in maintaining a charade over my alignment after Starver's flip. Though an apology may be in order for revealing the scum, but I do need the town onside to do what I need anyway. Best way to do that is to point y'all out to 'em.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 08:17:01 pm
Reveal scum pls.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 25, 2016, 08:20:05 pm
Well you're the scum, so you would say that.I'm not the scum, thank you very much.
I'm Walton the Wonderful, jester of incredibleness... and town weakness.
I have an auto called Hated that causes me to inspect as scum.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 08:21:07 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 08:22:35 pm
Dammit, why'd we lynch Starver exactly?
We didn't. I did. Even numbers, min.
Anyway, I investigated FoU. He came up as scum.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 10:21:15 pm
Are you.Well you're the scum, so you would say that.I'm not the scum, thank you very much.
I'm Walton the Wonderful, jester of incredibleness... and town weakness.
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 10:23:27 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 10:32:03 pm
If both of you are telling the truth, it's Moonlit that is evil. Strange that, but not impossible...
Of course, any scum could have an auto making them appear towny to the investigate too, what with the subversion of the investigate on two people already.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 10:32:47 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 25, 2016, 10:34:40 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 10:41:48 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 25, 2016, 10:42:21 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 26, 2016, 05:57:35 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 26, 2016, 08:28:52 am
Moonlit could still be the Evil role- and he could have still started out with the Orb at the same time. For balance, he could have been forced to give it to somebody at the start of the game... and then he revealed the information about the orb to build trust with the town, because he knew that the town would just end up getting the information later.
Meaning my suspects are back to TheBiggerFish and The Moonlit Shadow. Dangit.
Post by: hector13 on April 26, 2016, 08:37:44 am
Hector
FoU, that's a rather nice auto you have, don't you? Not sure if I trust a Miller claim...
Y'know, I kinda do. Ahh.... fk. Orb's pretty useless at this point, cuz I can't use it and giving it to either of you would only result in you saying the other is scum.
Unvote. I say we talk about this more, Hector.
What's to talk about? If you don't lynch me, you will lose the game.
Unless you're evil, in which case keeping me alive is in your best interests.
Post by: hector13 on April 26, 2016, 04:22:43 pm
I take it y'all don't mind if I don't partake? :P :))
I'm curious who is scum though. I did think it was FoU after D1, but now I'm not so sure.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 26, 2016, 04:39:27 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 26, 2016, 04:39:50 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 26, 2016, 07:37:59 pm
@FoU: Tell us everything ;)Kay. I'm Walton the Wonderful, a jester. Town Weakness. I have an auto called Hated that causes me to inspect as scum. That's unfortunately(or perhaps fortunately) it.
Post by: hector13 on April 26, 2016, 07:45:37 pm
Not that that really matters after the spaceship round.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 27, 2016, 05:49:18 am
Fallacy
Post by: hector13 on April 27, 2016, 09:35:24 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 27, 2016, 09:43:57 am
Post by: hector13 on April 27, 2016, 09:52:54 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 27, 2016, 03:06:53 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 27, 2016, 06:52:18 pm
Not important.You see, this makes me think you're lying about some part of your role. Either that or you're thinking something like "When I flip they'll get it".
So please, tell us. How could it hurt?
Post by: hector13 on April 27, 2016, 06:57:43 pm
Not important.You see, this makes me think you're lying about some part of your role. Either that or you're thinking something like "When I flip they'll get it".
So please, tell us. How could it hurt?
I'll explain later. The salient detail is I'll keep forcing no lynches unless my demands are met. You need know nothing more than that.
It won't help you find the scum either way :P
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 27, 2016, 07:05:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on April 27, 2016, 07:08:40 pm
Unless you are the scum, and you're pulling something.
Yet I'm encouraging y'all to lynch me. Sounds like a grand scheme :P
Post by: FallacyofUrist on April 27, 2016, 07:14:51 pm
In any case, I suppose I can wait for your lynch, although I'd rather you just tell us now.
Post by: hector13 on April 27, 2016, 07:47:26 pm
We should probably stop talking.
Post by: Tomasque on April 28, 2016, 12:15:57 am
"Just this morning, a report has surfaced that the Black Mage
has escaped from Hightower Prison, located only 50 miles
Southeast of the our town. The methods behind his escape
and his possible motives are unknown. The Grand Inquisitors
demand all citizens within 100 miles of the tower stay on the
lookout for any suspicious activity. The Black Mage
is a goud mann. A v'ry verry GOOD NIYC MHAN!
I suck at making mock newspapers
-Nawton Daily
March 4
VotecountMarch 4
hector13 (3) - TheBiggerFish, FallacyofUrist, hector13
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
hector13 was the Madderman
Spoiler: Madderman (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on May 01, 2016, 01:05:56 am
m'prvlyfjoghn
sclostthendssergalicnoc
concilagressdnehttsolcs
ocbrt20
Votecount
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 01, 2016, 05:38:17 am
Post by: Tomasque on May 01, 2016, 11:05:08 am
Round over - Town wins!
Votecount
FallacyofUrist (2) - TheBiggerFish, The Moonlit Shadow
TheBiggerFish (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: FallacyofUrist
FallacyofUrist was Walton the Wonderful
Spoiler: Walton the Wonderful (click to show/hide)
hector13 gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
Starver gets one victory point.
The Moonlit Shadow gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Orb Descriptions (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on May 01, 2016, 08:35:02 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 01, 2016, 08:39:59 pm
Anywho, what would have happened if I got the orb?
Post by: Tomasque on May 01, 2016, 08:42:34 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 01, 2016, 08:43:20 pm
Sorry brah, I'm married.
Post by: Starver on May 01, 2016, 09:04:40 pm
Had I decided to do it in the other order, I'd have been straight onto our enemy. But doubt I could have proved it easily.
I also think you gave in to Hector too easily. I was willing to give him what he wanted, when alive, but wanted you to ride through the blackmail, once it was revealed that he couldn't even help you anyway... (Bah to that, even if it waz a Town win in the end.) *pbbbt*
Post by: hector13 on May 01, 2016, 09:09:25 pm
Post by: Starver on May 01, 2016, 09:39:50 pm
;)
(That said, I was half expecting Scum to triumph in some N2 action, or irreversibly profit from it, once I realised I couldn't even rely on you being Town-useful... Bit of a let-down, that, after my genuine offer to help you if you helped us...)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 01, 2016, 10:44:44 pm
Ah well. Two victory points, down the drain...
And I would have gotten away with it too, if not for you meddling mafia players!
Post by: Pavellius on May 01, 2016, 10:47:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 01, 2016, 10:48:48 pm
And if they denied you your death D2, then continued to deny it D3 against the background of a mod with the power to coerce a finale of some kind after maybe a fortnight or two's stalemate..?
;)
(That said, I was half expecting Scum to triumph in some N2 action, or irreversibly profit from it, once I realised I couldn't even rely on you being Town-useful... Bit of a let-down, that, after my genuine offer to help you if you helped us...)
Not sure Tomasque would've gone beyond D3 in this instance, given there would've been 3 wincons in play at that point, and I literally would've kept the stalemate going just to be a stubborn bastard.
Post by: Tomasque on May 03, 2016, 07:39:47 pm
Guess you just can't wait for the next round, huh? ;D
Well, it'll hopefully come sometime today.
Post by: hector13 on May 03, 2016, 08:01:51 pm
Bit silly of you guys to do that though :P I mean I think I'm pretty good at reading FoU as scum, but that was a dangerous thing to do! :o
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 04, 2016, 05:59:19 am
Post by: Starver on May 04, 2016, 06:06:22 am
But awaiting the next game patiently. Not wanting (or able to) to nag or complain, so here I am, appreciating what banter there is.
Post by: hector13 on May 04, 2016, 10:37:23 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 04, 2016, 02:28:36 pm
Post by: Tomasque on May 05, 2016, 07:58:59 pm
Everything seemed as usual in the happy Suburbs District 6, but beneath the cheery exterior hid a threat that threatened the very lives of the citizens of that suburb.
Post by: Tomasque on May 06, 2016, 09:48:31 am
Morning arrived came, but the evil remained. Hidden in plain sight, it was unaccosted by the people whom it preyed on. This was it's nature, and it suited it very well.
Votecount
FallacyofUrist (0)
hector13 (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Day ends Sunday 8:00 AM PST
Sunday 3:00 PM GMT
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 06, 2016, 09:54:27 am
As for the bloke who wanted to ask me some questions... I basically have zero trust with regard to this mechanic. For all I knew, you could have been scum lying about what you wanted to do in order to get inside my house and end me.
Post by: hector13 on May 06, 2016, 10:05:58 am
I also recall you trying to do a similar thing when you were scum at one point... though I imagine there will be a point that we do get multiple Evil roles.
Also "bloke"? WTH, FoU, I thought you was 'murrican. Can't be using British slang to confuse that.
Nobody acted on me last night, not that it really matters.
Post by: Starver on May 06, 2016, 10:07:08 am
In other news, no, I will not join your "enlightened society", whoever you are.Oho... A multiplicity of doorsteppers out there. Explains my Auto.
As for the bloke who wanted to ask me some questions... I basically have zero trust with regard to this mechanic. For all I knew, you could have been scum lying about what you wanted to do in order to get inside my house and end me.
(Not that I want to explain my Auto, as it may be my only defence against Scum.)
Hector, why didn't you try to visit me? (Or did you?)
Naww, only joking on the vote front, so unvote already, although I definitely did expect something if you were able.. ;)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 06, 2016, 10:09:04 am
Also "bloke"? WTH, FoU, I thought you was 'murrican. Can't be using British slang to confuse that.But I bloody like British slang!
~~~
On a more serious note: This round's "main mechanic", so to speak, seems to be the People At Your Door thing: people seem to have actions that require them to ask entry to other people's houses, and cannot be preformed if they don't get entry.
Post by: hector13 on May 06, 2016, 10:12:17 am
Also "bloke"? WTH, FoU, I thought you was 'murrican. Can't be using British slang to confuse that.But I bloody like British slang!
~~~
On a more serious note: This round's "main mechanic", so to speak, seems to be the People At Your Door thing: people seem to have actions that require them to ask entry to other people's houses, and cannot be preformed if they don't get entry.
Seems legit. Works with what I know anyway, which isn't much.
Naww, only joking on the vote front, so unvote already, although I definitely did expect something if you were able.. ;)
How comes? :o
I won last round, and probably still would had you been alive and revealed my wincon and such :P
If anything, I would've expected you to visit me! Or FoU, seeing as I kinda outed him.
Post by: Starver on May 06, 2016, 10:32:34 am
If you (plural) have questions for me, please bare with me over the next few hours, this evening involves visiting family, and tomorrow PM (UK time) is also busy, but I'll probably get some late-night/early morning discussion in, if anything sensible crops up in my direction. Not that I have much to work with, at the moment.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 06, 2016, 02:33:27 pm
I l don't have empirical data on that, just feels like it.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 06, 2016, 05:19:13 pm
I don't even get the choice to let people in.I think you shouldn't have said this. Now you're more likely a scum target.
I let in the person who visited me. I don't seem to be dead yet, so... (I have no idea what happened)Don't worry, you're fine.
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 12:59:59 am
...I don't even get the choice to let people in.I think you shouldn't have said this. Now you're more likely a scum target.
Oh? What makes you say that?
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 01:02:45 am
Post by: Starver on May 07, 2016, 01:43:24 am
This would link in with the standard three-tiers of Towniness, or possibly two Town tiers and Neutral one. I can't see you being able to get a Scumread out of Fallacy stating (rather than memorising for fun and profit) Fish's apparent slip.
I'd be more inclined to call out Fish as feigning a weakness or you as jumping to a conclusion that clearly has easy and perfectly innocent alternatives. As to the remaining 'suspect', right now I can only imagine Moonlit as semi-confirmed by Fallacy. Which, yes, might rely on Fallacy being true Town, but the multiple Scum would be required for Moonlit to be being fake-confirmed, sanity of Fallacy allowing, even while a scummy Fallacy could be establishing an alibi... Or perhaps I'm reading too much into that interaction. Or you know something I don't. But it's where I'm currently at, and I can't work out how to fill in the blanks, so might as well give the basics, and see what everyone else makes of it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 07, 2016, 10:14:36 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 07, 2016, 04:42:24 pm
I was assuming that TBF meant anyone visiting him would automatically be let in, not...I don't even get the choice to let people in.I think you shouldn't have said this. Now you're more likely a scum target.
Oh? What makes you say that?
I always refuse.But if he always let whoever visited him in, the scum could automatically do whatever he/she does to TBF without TBF getting a choice in the matter.
FoU, you've been quite rude to me as of late.Well, I know my action wasn't bad for you. If someone else visited you, maybe theirs was...
I hope I can trust you about my safety...
Which, yes, might rely on Fallacy being true Town...Well, seeing as I'm neutral...
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 05:54:14 pm
@Starver:You have those the wrong way around, I always refuse, not always accept.
I find this quite difficult to believe, but it also could be telling that two people have assumed that your lack of choice meant you always accepted visitors, particularly when one of them assumed it would be a town weakness role to allow all visitors in. FoU claimed Neutral, now I think it's Starver's turn to make his claim.
Why do I find TBF's claim hard to believe? Unless Tomasque is playing silly buggers with the non-town roles, I also refuse all visitors, in essence. My role name is Illiterate Shut-In, so I don't allow visitors and can't read anything they leave behind in their stead.
'owever, FoU: what is your wincon, Mr. Neutral?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 07, 2016, 05:55:47 pm
And the last time we had duplicate auto claimants, one of them was scum, hector.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 07, 2016, 05:57:00 pm
I auto-refuse offers, and I don't actually know if I let people in or not.
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 06:08:55 pm
That's weird.
And the last time we had duplicate auto claimants, one of them was scum, hector.
Evidently not weird enough for you to want to vote me outright. Why not?
My assumption at this point is FoU and Starver have actions that require their target's permission, and we've heard not much from Moonlit, but I think given the mechanic he has one too.
Now, FoU claims to have had two visitors, one of whom tried to recruit him, though he also didn't allow the other one in, citing fear of his safety. How do you know there was a recruitment attempt then? I find it hard to believe you'd accept one visitor and not another.
Moonlit claims FoU did something to him last night, but doesn't know what it is, while FoU said it was benign - despite his Neutral role. If you have an action, FoU, what is it?
So, we've had 3 claims, 2 of which don't seem to have any actions (myself and TBF, if his is a similar role to mine, which I can't rule out...) and FoU claimed to have two visitors to him, and he visited Moonlit, while also claiming that another visitor to Moonlit could have done something unpleasant to him. If you're keeping count, that's 4 actions for 3 roles. I'm not liking FoU too much just now, but we'll see what Starver claims.
Moonlit what did you mean when you said FoU is being very rude to you?
PPE: you refuse offers, but what about visitors? Does your flavour give you any indication of what these offers are?
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 07:19:53 pm
Huh... Me neither.
Well, I'm not answering that. FoU understood. I was vague for a reason.
Indeed. You're putting a lot of trust in someone who was rude to you. You're also leaving a lot of room for Starver, TBF and myself to make assumptions about FoU and yourself.
For example, he has claimed a neutral alignment, which could easily turn out like my neutral role in the previous game, so your reticence to say how the neutral role was rude to you makes it quite difficult for us to believe that you're going to be a town role.
He did also claim he wouldn't be joining whatever entity made him an offer. This could easily be a verbal sleight of hand in which he is the recruiting role, and has recruited you.
So perhaps you will answer a different question: if you are so unwilling to share relevant information with the town, why shouldn't we lynch you?
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 07:34:11 pm
FoU has claimed Neutral, so we know he doesn't care about town winning, and we as town shouldn't care whether he wins (unless he does what I did last round :)))
Why are you so unwilling to share?
I also note you failed to answer the question of why we shouldn't vote for you. Seems to me you're of no use to us at all.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 07, 2016, 07:54:05 pm
Okay, TMS, what's up with the 'rude' and 'hospitable' comment?
That's completely irrelevant.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 07, 2016, 07:55:39 pm
Why does this matter to begin with?
Why even bother?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 07, 2016, 08:04:56 pm
I still don't like it.
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 08:36:11 pm
I'm not too useful, but as you yourself said, we aren't trying to lynch useless town, we're trying to lynch scum or hostile neutral.
I visited FoU last night, and he didn't let me in (thus rude, not being hospitable). I have nothing more to say on the subject.
Indeed. The question now being are you useless town or are you scum pretending to be useless town?
You said you visited FoU and he didn't let you in. How would he know you were being hospitable or not (and thus get your vague references) if he didn't let you in?
He also said someone tried to recruit him. Perhaps that was you, and all this vagueness going on is you letting him know know it was you? Makes sense if you don't have a quicktopic to discuss nefarious goings on.
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 09:05:30 pm
I don't understand why you won't share, though. If you are town, you've basically told the scum you have something useful. Much like last round, though this time you have two players claiming they pretty much can't be acted upon, as far as I understand it. Who do you think of those three seems the best target for scum? It's the same argument I make time and again: over sharing on D1 of your own abilities.
This is perhaps why Starver has won twice as scum; he's rather good at blending in with minimal release of information, while we get you releasing little tidbits and implying you have more to say but won't say it, so we waste the day focusing on you, trying to pry that information loose bit by bit.
Also, TBF, your vote is your voice. Use it or nobody will take you seriously.
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 09:13:12 pm
On a purely statistical standpoint, lynching every day is good for us. 1 in 5 chance of scum today, 1 in 4 tomorrow and 1 in 3 on D3. I don't understand why you're all being such cowards :P if you make a mistake, big deal!
If we don't know who to lynch, FoU claimed neutral. That's better than hitting a townie, right? I'd much rather vote for Moonlit, but I want to see what Starver says before moving my vote.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 07, 2016, 09:51:09 pm
'owever, FoU: what is your wincon, Mr. Neutral?LOVE.
I'll explain after you read through the rest of this post.
FoU has claimed Neutral, so we know he doesn't care about town winning, and we as town shouldn't care whether he wins (unless he does what I did last round :)))Actually, I do care about town winning.
~~~
So here's the deal. I don't want the game to end. Yet.
One of you gents is my "beloved". I win when I find my "beloved" and when my "beloved" wins after that.
As you might imagine, when I meet with someone, I'm finding out if they are my "beloved".
So... I might be on the town's side, I might not- I just don't know yet.
~~~
So... I'm not currently willing to lynch anyone other than Moonlit... and I only want to lynch Moonlit if he's town(because if he's Evil, the game ends and I still haven't found my "beloved" and there goes my victory).
~~~
Also, I think I'm the only one voting.Wrong.
Hector13now, at least.
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 10:04:29 pm
TBF, for example. Two FoS's. How does that help the town?
Ah, Hector, but if you make a mistake, big deal is right. And I'll drop my vote on you for that one. It still pays to be cautious, as you well know.
Hector13
This is your first vote of the day, with 13 hours to go. How is that helping the town?
FoU, no vote. How does that help the town?
Starver, one vote and an immediate unvote. How does that help the town?
I don't want to make a mistake, but it's better than a no lynch because we get the info from the flip. A no lynch which, if you will note, is what will happen now that you've voted for me, tying it up.
This is a meta thing, I've been trying to encourage more aggressive voting on D1 a lot of the time. Why is it suddenly scummy now? Poor word choice?
PPE:
'owever, FoU: what is your wincon, Mr. Neutral?LOVE.
I'll explain after you read through the rest of this post.FoU has claimed Neutral, so we know he doesn't care about town winning, and we as town shouldn't care whether he wins (unless he does what I did last round :)))Actually, I do care about town winning.
~~~
So here's the deal. I don't want the game to end. Yet.
One of you gents is my "beloved". I win when I find my "beloved" and when my "beloved" wins after that.
As you might imagine, when I meet with someone, I'm finding out if they are my "beloved".
So... I might be on the town's side, I might not- I just don't know yet.
~~~
So... I'm not currently willing to lynch anyone other than Moonlit... and I only want to lynch Moonlit if he's town(because if he's Evil, the game ends and I still haven't found my "beloved" and there goes my victory).
~~~Also, I think I'm the only one voting.Wrong.Hector13now, at least.
so basically when your beloved dies you do too? Makes sense, as far as I'm aware that's how the beloved thing works. I'm not liking how you and Moonlit seem to be teaming up here. This recruitment thing you mentioned bothers me. Also, there's nothing to say your beloved isn't evil, which means you'll be against us.
It would make sense that you would figure out who your beloved is even if they don't let you in, else the claimed roles relally are bastard for you.
Or you could be talkin' out her arse and that isn't your wincon at all.
Also dat thing about my vote. Filler. You don't want to help the town at all. Is this neutral or is this scum?
So, on the basis the town is knackered if we mislynch today and FoU discovers their beloved is the Evil role, I'll vote FoU.
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 10:11:35 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 07, 2016, 10:15:51 pm
so basically when your beloved dies you do too?Maybe. It didn't say in the role...
FoU, no vote. How does that help the town?It probably doesn't. But I'm not willing to risk lynching my beloved or lynching the Evil role and thus ending the game.
Why is it[voting day one aggressively] suddenly scummy now? Poor word choice?I would say it's not. Of course, the scum wants to lynch town too... so it's not necessarily a town tell either.
Unless, of course, FoU is willing to put his money where his mouth is and vote Moonlit?So here's how it is. Moonlit isn't my beloved(thank you for letting me in so I could check), so the only thing I have to risk is if he's the Evil role and lynching him ends the game. So I'd only be willing to risk lynching him if I think he's town.
Do you want me to lynch town?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 07, 2016, 10:20:21 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 10:33:32 pm
Why is it[voting day one aggressively] suddenly scummy now? Poor word choice?
That is not what I said, nor what I did. I was urging you guys to vote aggressively on D1, because actually having people vote gives us a basis for action on D2, plus the information from the flip to factor in.
I've shared my thoughts regarding this many times over the course of this game, so I'm curious why it factors into Moonlit's scum read of me now. It should actually be a null tell, since I'm going to be telling you guys to do it whether I'm town, neutral or scum. Heck, the game in which we were in the car I was neutral and I was getting on the town's ass about not voting.
As for whether or not I want you to lynch town, FoU, the answer is no. However, your reads don't factor into how I read other people, because you're just as fallible as I am, and you've claimed a different wincon. I may take your voting pattern into account, but then we get to the thing about NOBODYVOTING so it doesn't matter.
I think Moonlit is scum, and would quite like to lynch him. Otherwise I'd like to lynch you, FoU, as that is guaranteeing a removal of a (potentially) anti-town wincon.
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 10:35:49 pm
Tomasque: Does the round end when Town or Evil win, or when all wincons have been resolved one way or the other?
Looks like you may have a neutral wincon too, brah. If FoU's beloved wins, he wins if he discovers them, otherwise he loses.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 07, 2016, 10:36:49 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 10:46:28 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 07, 2016, 11:02:28 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 11:06:17 pm
How is this line of questioning helping you find scum?
Post by: Tomasque on May 07, 2016, 11:07:53 pm
Tomasque: Does the round end when Town or Evil win, or when all wincons have been resolved one way or the other?Exceptions aside, once either the Town or Scum wincon is completed, the game ends.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 07, 2016, 11:15:13 pm
Well that was somewhat unhelpful.Tomasque: Does the round end when Town or Evil win, or when all wincons have been resolved one way or the other?Exceptions aside, once either the Town or Scum wincon is completed, the game ends.
... FoU's claimed wincon? He wins if he discovers his beloved and his beloved wins. This means that his beloved can win before he discovers them. Which means the game will end without consideration of whether or not he's met his claimed wincon.I freely admit that it isn't really helping. But nevertheless, it needed clearing up.
How is this line of questioning helping you find scum?
Anywho.
Dang it, I can't think of a half-decent question.
Post by: hector13 on May 07, 2016, 11:18:08 pm
Post by: Starver on May 08, 2016, 01:27:11 am
Gonna take half an hour to assimilate what I've just skimmed through, some of which changes my pre-formed worldview quite a bit. I'd rather not be credulous, what with being (deliberately?) misled, but looks like some weirdness.
Post by: Starver on May 08, 2016, 03:36:59 am
Revealing my status seems counterproductive, given the strange claims so far that seems to include more than one untruth in them, from what I think I know. Perhaps, though, I might change opinions before EOD.
Could I get clarification from Fallacy and Moonlit about visitations. Did Fallacy (rudely) visit Moonlit seeking his beloved, or did Moonlit visit Fallacy asking (rudely rebuffed) questions? Or both happened??
Not a FoS of either party, that. It just would help me narrow down who else is wandering around, at night.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 08, 2016, 08:34:59 am
Post by: Starver on May 08, 2016, 08:44:11 am
FoU is not very town-friendly in any case.I know I defended FoU against Hector's vote, but I've got an off-the-wall theory about his interactions. A long shot, and I don't know that I'd risk all on that, today, even if is the best of a bad lot of ideas. Not even to save me.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 08, 2016, 08:45:29 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 08, 2016, 08:46:06 am
Post by: Starver on May 08, 2016, 09:08:28 am
Well, let's hear it anyway?One investigation, but the other "visit" was both a blind and a nod to the actual target.
Wait, what do you mean, "not even to save you"?Silly phrasing. I'm happy to sacrifice myself for a Town win, but I forgot that Fallacy was claiming Neutral, not sure where that leaves the balance. I do tend to like helping Neutrals when I'm Town (and vice-versa, of course), but that's probably not sensible.
Also worried if it's a traditional Lovers-type pairing (one dies, other dies) and if that's true then (even if they don't know it) it's possible that we also kill the Beloved. Who could be anyone but Moonlit, if true.
Post by: hector13 on May 08, 2016, 09:36:07 am
There is also a chance the lover is the Evil role, which would win the game for us if they do die too.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 08, 2016, 09:46:38 am
Post by: hector13 on May 08, 2016, 09:51:58 am
I guess this game compared to the last one is an example that timing your claim can be the difference between winning and losing.
Post by: Tomasque on May 08, 2016, 04:12:53 pm
It seemed a few had caught on to the existence of some unknown menace. A swift arrest is made, but in the subsequent hours it becomes clear that the suspect was not the real threat, but was instead a lowly crook. His arrest barred him from re-entering the community, but it did no good in stopping the evil still among the townsfolk.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (3) - TheBiggerFish, The Moonlit Shadow, hector13
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not Voting: FallacyofUrist, Starver
FallacyofUrist was the Salesman
Spoiler: Salesman (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on May 09, 2016, 11:35:43 am
The day came around again, and in the little paradise of the Suburbs District 6, few noticed the loss of the salesman, and even fewer knew the very real danger they were in. The time was coming. Soon, it would be unstoppable.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Day ends Wednesday, 9:30 AM PST
Wednesday, 4:30 PM GMT
Post by: hector13 on May 09, 2016, 11:52:25 am
Starver is likely the Evil role. Everyone else I think - with varying degrees of confidence - is town.
If FoU wasn't pulling our chain regarding a cult-esque entity, which I'm still sure would be lead by Starver, I think Moonlit would have been targeted, given the claims made by TBF and myself.
Post by: Starver on May 09, 2016, 11:56:02 am
And I can tell you that the "enlightened society" person is still active, to whatever purpose... Given the soft-confirmation of Moonlit, I reckon that means either claimed-blocker or claimed-refuser is the bad guy... Any thoughts on this?
Oh ninjaed by Hector
Are you worried that my Good Listener role isn't susceptible, then? Hector seems to have put his foot in it.!
Post by: Starver on May 09, 2016, 12:02:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 09, 2016, 12:04:01 pm
Well, that was an interesting role, that Fallacy had there.
And I can tell you that the "enlightened society" person is still active, to whatever purpose... Given the soft-confirmation of Moonlit, I reckon that means either claimed-blocker or claimed-refuser is the bad guy... Any thoughts on this?
Oh ninjaed by Hector
Are you worried that my Good Listener role isn't susceptible, then? Hector seems to have put his foot in it.!
No, certain things occurred during the night that leads me to believe that Moonlit is benign, my role leads me to believe that TBF (and his meta...) is telling it true, which leaves you.
What does your good listening role do?
PPE: I did fakeclaim, yes, but for good reason. Moonlit will hopefully be able to confirm.
Post by: Starver on May 09, 2016, 12:13:31 pm
No, certain things occurred during the night that leads me to believe that Moonlit is benign, my role leads me to believe that TBF (and his meta...) is telling it true, which leaves you.Lucky you. Until you spouted up, I still wasn't sure.
Quote
What does your good listening role do?Unlike Fish's auto-refuser, I nod and smile at doorsteppers, but don't take them seriously. Hence why I wanted to hint I was actually "auto accept" to trap anyone, once Fish made himself clear.
I was worried about Autos, but I haven't heard about changes to my Wincon, so I feel happy enough.
Post by: hector13 on May 09, 2016, 12:16:40 pm
Were you visited last night?
Post by: Starver on May 09, 2016, 12:22:01 pm
Oh? What changes to your wincon were you expecting?
Were you visited last night?
My "listen but ignore" suggests I'm not susceptible, but a secret auto of mine or an overpowering auto of my enemy's could have scuppered that protection. Tomasque hasn't said "Your wincon now is that you're with the Evil side", so I'm fairly confident the doorstepper didn't have an effect. If you know different, tell me. If I now have an Evil wincon, I need to side with the person proven to be Evil, right?
Post by: Starver on May 09, 2016, 12:26:28 pm
Except that I'm currently voting you, so let's see what Moonlit and Fish think.
Post by: hector13 on May 09, 2016, 12:26:58 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 09, 2016, 02:16:14 pm
Moonlit:Can you confirm or deny Hector?
Starver:Would you trust Moonlit to confirm or deny Hector?
Hector:Why can Moonlit confirm you?
Post by: hector13 on May 09, 2016, 02:20:47 pm
And I can tell you that the "enlightened society" person is still active, to whatever purpose...
You can tell us this, but do you have any proof?
Hector:Why can Moonlit confirm you?
Moonlit visited me last night. This is all I'll say until he pops in.
Post by: Starver on May 09, 2016, 02:38:26 pm
Starver:Would you trust Moonlit to confirm or deny Hector?I would hope so. Because his interaction with Fallacy (RIP) makes him the most objective. Although I do worry that Hector might be read 'wrong', I know what Hector's hoping. Gotta hope that answers given at night actually can't be faked, right?
(Hector's in denial mode, I see.)
Post by: hector13 on May 09, 2016, 03:21:38 pm
Post by: Starver on May 09, 2016, 05:51:14 pm
But, for the record, I was open to possibilities, and was saying so when at day start, before you leapt in and gave me.a "1 new post" to necessarily react to, and convinced me which way to polarise (with plenty of day left to resolve). Maybe you don't like that I could have scuppered your plans to lynch scumproof Fallacy, if I hadn't been so unsure about being unsure?
(@Fish, happy to hear more from you, too, although I think me and Hector are at stalemate, for now, even if it's just circumstantial at the moment.)
Post by: hector13 on May 09, 2016, 06:07:39 pm
I don't think FoU is/was scum proof though, and I did say why I felt he was the best choice to lynch given the information we had during D1. It was fortunate happenstance that his wincon was actually worse than what he claimed.
Moonlit's absence is bothering me for the moment, but there's 39 hours for him to do what I hope he's going to do.
I also note you didn't answer my question regarding proof of the "enlightened sect" you mentioned earlier.
Starver:Would you trust Moonlit to confirm or deny Hector?I would hope so. Because his interaction with Fallacy (RIP) makes him the most objective. Although I do worry that Hector might be read 'wrong', I know what Hector's hoping. Gotta hope that answers given at night actually can't be faked, right?
(Hector's in denial mode, I see.)
What is it I'm hoping, brah?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 09, 2016, 06:52:08 pm
((Like, totally, a bah post.))
Post by: hector13 on May 09, 2016, 07:01:26 pm
What ho, I have been slain!
((Like, totally, a bah post.))
Hoist by yer ane petard, wee man.
Post by: Starver on May 10, 2016, 03:54:04 am
What is it I'm hoping, brah?That you read as Town, regardless, if that what your role and what you think you know of Moonlit's skill promises. But remember the Orb round.
If Moonlit thinks you're good, then I'm back to where I was before you ninjaed me, but if we get the opposite, I think that would be case proven. Fish being agreeable/not disagreeable, of course.
*waits, with stretched hide*
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 08:42:57 am
And I can tell you that the "enlightened society" person is still active, to whatever purpose...You can tell us this, but do you have any proof?
Post by: Starver on May 10, 2016, 09:53:39 am
Without overly quoting the mod message sent, I have the message inviting to join an enlightened society, as Fallacy said. I nod and smile and thank them as I politely show them out, and am unchanged, as per my role. Only a fellow recipient would know this, and accept what I say. Fallacy is dead by your hand, after refusing. You are trying to kill me, indicating I'm unchanged as far as you're concerned. My trap set, you are caught.
Unless you can wriggle out of it before Moonlit passes judgement. There's no more to say until additional information arrives.
Wait, there is one more thing, IIRC, but I need to post this first.
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 10:00:01 am
Perhaps you'd like to respond to this then, TBF?
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 10:12:07 am
You're demanding something you know isn't mine to give. It is proved to me, that Fallacy wasn't making up the claim that someone other than Moonlit pestered him.
Without overly quoting the mod message sent, I have the message inviting to join an enlightened society, as Fallacy said. I nod and smile and thank them as I politely show them out, and am unchanged, as per my role. Only a fellow recipient would know this, and accept what I say. Fallacy is dead by your hand, after refusing. You are trying to kill me, indicating I'm unchanged as far as you're concerned. My trap set, you are caught.
Unless you can wriggle out of it before Moonlit passes judgement. There's no more to say until additional information arrives.
Wait, there is one more thing, IIRC, but I need to post this first.
Should perhaps respond properly to this, though.
Firstly, I asked, and you ignored the question several times. How hard is it to say "I can't answer that bro"?
What trap did you set? It's quite presumptuous of you to say I'm the one that sent the message to recruit you because I came out and voted you straight off the bat. Had I visited you and you accepted to hear what I had to say, my assumption would be that you accepted, and I would attack someone else. FoU said he refused to accept visitors, though somehow knows about the invitation from the "enlightened society". Given his wincon as the neutral role, he had to make something up to make him appear less malign than he was. Perhaps you're just picking up his failed gambit to use as your own?
Post by: Starver on May 10, 2016, 10:31:23 am
Ok... Ppe, against my better judgement.
Firstly, I asked, and you ignored the question several times. How hard is it to say "I can't answer that bro"?Because it could never have been a serious question. You know this. You're a Player.
Trap already explained:
Hence why I wanted to hint I was actually "auto accept" to trap anyone, once Fish made himself clear.
Any more diverting questions?
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 10:37:03 am
What makes you think I sprung your trap, and I'm not attacking you for my own - unrelated - reasons?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 02:40:08 pm
If what you're saying is correct, then TBF is the scum. Notable for his absence this day, perhaps.First off, I have real life too.
Perhaps you'd like to respond to this then, TBF?
Second off, I've been more active this round than usual, hector, so why are you fingering me now? Am I being too aggressive for you?
Then again, Starver has a bit of a fatal flaw here in that Fallacy's flip doesn't seem to support his argument.
I'm waiting on Moonlit to clear this up one way or another.
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 03:03:33 pm
If what you're saying is correct, then TBF is the scum. Notable for his absence this day, perhaps.First off, I have real life too.
Perhaps you'd like to respond to this then, TBF?
Second off, I've been more active this round than usual, hector, so why are you fingering me now? Am I being too aggressive for you?
Then again, Starver has a bit of a fatal flaw here in that Fallacy's flip doesn't seem to support his argument.
I'm waiting on Moonlit to clear this up one way or another.
Sounds like an excuse to lay low, brah. You've not been aggressive at all, so if anything you're not being aggressive enough.
How does Fallacy's flip not support Starver's argument?
Did anything happen to you last night?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 03:16:02 pm
Starver, said that Fallacy got what seems to be a cult pitch about an 'enlightened society'.
Fallacy's flip, wasn't a cult flip.
So unless the Neutral was immune to the cult change by reason of reasons (i.e. I don't see an auto about it...)...
It's not as likely for Starver to be telling the truth here.
Not to my knowledge, no. It's possible there may have been an auto-refusal without my knowledge, but I doubt it.
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 03:18:03 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 03:31:56 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 03:34:12 pm
Because I'm not Starver.
... so we're expected to ignore anti-town behaviour you indulge in? Okay, sorry.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 03:34:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 03:35:01 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 03:35:33 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 03:37:18 pm
No, I'm expecting you to look at how I've been playing as Town and compare it to what I'm doing now, alternatively contrasting it with rounds I was scum in.Because I'm not Starver.
... so we're expected to ignore anti-town behaviour you indulge in? Okay, sorry.
As I said, Starver's usual behaviour let him get away with being scum. Your meta has nothing to do with your alignment, does it?Au contraire. Starver, I've noticed, is far more absent when he's scum, and much more resistant to being poked.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 03:38:24 pm
Also, on what basis are you juding me absent, anyway?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 03:38:57 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 03:41:21 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 03:44:54 pm
You posted one thing on D2, and it was questions that weren't particularly probing. Perhaps you should get to it? Else I might think you're only active now because I voted for you.Nobody responded with anything I had a follow-up on, and then I, as foreign as the concept sounds, went to sleep and sat through eight hours of school.
For that matter, there were, like, eight posts since I left? I need to go count.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 03:47:20 pm
Nine posts, one of which is you responding with 'Wait for Moonlit', one of which is Starver saying the same, and...No TMS.
Where the carp is he? He's crucial to everyone's argument.
Well, I don't exactly have one of my own, but still.
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 03:52:32 pm
Anyway, since we're done in about 17 hours, I think Moonlit is the investigative role. He visited me last night, and I told him about my role. I thought TBF was truthing about his role yesterday, but I am far from certain in regards to that, leaving Starver as my main suspect, and TBF my second.
Starver immediately OMGUS'd me when I voted him, so I'm still in the boat that he's scum, but TBF is pushing mah butins too.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 03:54:54 pm
There's more holes in his argument.
Post by: Starver on May 10, 2016, 04:46:18 pm
I can only work with what I'm given. What I'm given is that Moonlit is likely the key. The missing key, it turns out.
I can't even say "kill me, and you'll find out and win", because two remaining town and one scum could turn into two scum and one town by tomorrow, if the mechanism is the way I expect it to be*, and whoever the scum is targets wisely. (Leaving that open, as besides my state and Fallacy's now-expired conscious capability to repel (we are told!), I don't actually know that everyone else is true, beyond the scum's obvious deception.)
MYLO, I think, so don't expect me to lie down as readily today as I would have yesterday, all self-sacrificial. That'd doom the cause I'm supposed to be fighting for. And thus I also want to get my move right. Or at least not wrong.
* Current assumption is that it's a recruitment for evil, because it's the only (non-Neutral**) thing that is happeningnthat is not expected to be a Town thing. Other possibilities is that it is a recruitment for good (and that I may have been equally/instead immune to the Masonic Building role, to my detriment) and thus actual enlightenment that I brushed off. If Cop!Moonlit hadn't (per claim) targetted another, it could have been me, after either failure or weird power-interactions happened with Blackmailer! Fallacy. Thus I think Town should be worried about it. But I'm saying this without proof, of course.
** And the Neutral thing is probably as dead as its original host, but with Tomasque... wouldn't care to completely rule out a twist on this, too.
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 07:42:10 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 08:01:56 pm
What is your backup plan?
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 08:07:55 pm
You help us lynch Starver, and you'll be returned to normal and we can all win together!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 08:27:14 pm
Starver.
Post by: Starver on May 10, 2016, 08:31:37 pm
I'm about to go to bed, so I'll have to mull on this offline, and work out what strange role might be messing with all our assumptions.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 08:37:19 pm
You know, I'm just very suspicious of Moonlit's role in all of this.
Like, seriously, he picks NOW to show up, after hector and Starver have pitched their tents firmly in opposition to eachother, to become a lynchpin of serious opposition to Starver. Feels kind of like Starver got thrown under the bus to me.
I feel like this is a setup. Of course if it isn't and we don't hit the Cult Leader, I'm screwed because even though I'd want to be in that case, I can't be converted properly. I think.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 08:38:53 pm
Which does support that Starver would have been the Cult Leader, but there's this niggling suspicion that he isn't and I can't shake it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 08:40:18 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 08:41:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 08:42:18 pm
Seems you and I need to consider whether or not it's better to go for Moonlit or Starver. Moonlit did visit me and I did tell him my role, so it does seem more likely to me that Starver is the one to go for.
PPE: usually when there are multiple replies before I post something, people aren't talking to themselves :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 08:50:41 pm
Yeah, I agree that it's probably Starver, but my gut is still screaming 'something is wrong here'.
"The best lies have a little bit of truth in them."
But I still think, absent other claims, that Starver is the better target.
Post by: hector13 on May 10, 2016, 08:52:25 pm
Post by: Starver on May 11, 2016, 08:55:51 am
On the face of it...
Neutral Fallacy flipped (as in discovered) and seemingly no longer part of the game.
Presumed-Investigator Moonlit flipped (as in crazy) and throwing around insane talk.
Presumedly-Special Fish will not accept overtures.
Presumedly-Special Hector will not listen to (or read) overtures. (Fakeclaim, but maybe for good. Actually Weak, if Town?)
Self-Affirmed-Special me will ignore overtures.
There's an assumed conversion routine. Witnessed by Fallacy (initial claim), myself (second claim) and Moonlit (possibly clashing second claim). Fallacy/Moonlit interactions N0 seemed to confirm third-party targetting ability (seemed to confirm Moonlit as refusable-Cop!). Moonlit/Hector interactions N1 reinforces Cop!Moonlit idea, but third-party interacts with two people?
It really makes no sense for Moonlit, converted by an Evil me, to not then accuse Hector, get Fish on side, scumwin happens. Alternately, clear Hector and lay the pain down on Fish for scumwin, with or without giving Hector a chance to join at night, depending on exact wincon.
Vanilla!Moonlit would not fake a third-party interaction, effectively a counter-claim to my own. Converted!Moonlit would not reveal the interaction, and expose the apparent recruiter. Moonlit was visited, whether or not in the way that I revealed, and is forced or fooled into making that declaration.
Option 1: Moonlit remains (secretly) under the post-mortem thrall of Fallacy, whose flip did not reveal the full 'recruiting' action (or as a function of Moonlit's own autos/etc), and is now a recruiter aiming for lynching one claimed recruitmentproof person (could have been Fish.. It would have been easier to exploit my initial ambivalance and cleared Hector whilst aiming at Fish) while making Hector receptive for recruitment tonight.
If this is true, Moonlit should be targetted, to remove the remaining effect, lest he engineers the lynching of me today, A.N.Other tomorrow and is one-to-one with the final opponent of Fallacy the last day. (Note, there's still room for Evil to play around this, in complicated ways.)
Option 2: As an 'infective' action, it has now two recruiters. e.g. applied to Fallacy, N0, who then visited Moonlit later the same night, leaving Moonlit a carrier plus the original Patient Zero (any of us). Then, N1, Hector gets 'bit', through Infected!Cop!Moonlit's arrival, whilst I think I escaped my visit by the Prime Infector (but maybe I won't know until I wake up tomorrow, if such was same with Moonlit). I'm not sure Tomasque expected such a quick N0 spread.
If this is true, the source can actually only be Hector, or else there'd be three 'infected' people as of now (Prime Infector, Moonlit, Hector) leaving me/Fish, whoever isn't the PI, already having lost the game. What happens if we lynch Patient Zero? (Well, we know what happens with vampires, but no sign what the tbeme is here...)
Option 3: Fish gains power, per round, and multi-targetted, last night? And with Hector (fake)-claiming invulnerability, avoided him and then finds I'm the truly night-invulnerable one so goes after me. But it's unlikely with just one conversion-proof player (me, not Hector, Fish just Cop-proof), that there'd be an exponential recruitment gain. No, that's quite unlikely, without something I'm missing.
Option 4: I could not receive the one Beneficial Enlightenment from the Townie provider of same. It wasn't Moonlit (or he wouldn't have attacked me...unless he presumed I was evil for refusing, as per Fallacy might have), and it wasn't Hector (with the same tentative caveat), so Fish is the good guy, as the true bad-guy is doubtless aware... But no nearer to working out who is the bad guy from the remaining.
I don't OMGUS (my vote for Hector was from Hector showing actual guilt in his blitz attack at day-start, when I had started off yet unsure), but Moonlit would be prime target (for the crazy attack that practically exonerates me). Right now, I'm sticking with Hector, because of both attacks, which tend to point more to a Patient Zero situation, for which one good lynch would save town (rather than just delay things, to unknown result).
But this won't change any minds, I'm sure. May even be too late.
Post by: Starver on May 11, 2016, 09:01:20 am
Post by: hector13 on May 11, 2016, 09:02:32 am
You have half an hour to convince me I should be voting for him instead of you, and I guess I have the same amount of time to convince you to vote for him instead of me.
PPE: never mind, since that basically confirms I should be voting for you.
Post by: Starver on May 11, 2016, 09:14:03 am
And it's MYLO, still, probably.
Post by: hector13 on May 11, 2016, 09:19:31 am
You say we're in MYLO, but we're actually more likely in LYLO. If one of us has been converted, then the town has lost if they don't lynch the CL, so you not wanting to lynch someone tells me you're not town, especially since it happens a half hour before the day ends.
Post by: Starver on May 11, 2016, 09:34:17 am
(and you still have this problem with my not-voting being important, it seems, when it gives identical results to any actual vote I can make, but adds nothing to future knowledge)
Post by: hector13 on May 11, 2016, 09:35:39 am
Post by: Starver on May 11, 2016, 09:37:34 am
PPE Is it.? I thiught it was ½hour,from what you said... Not been keeping track, though.
Post by: hector13 on May 11, 2016, 09:39:37 am
Post by: Starver on May 11, 2016, 09:48:27 am
Fruit flies when you're investigating genetic mutations...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 11, 2016, 09:55:32 am
Post by: hector13 on May 11, 2016, 09:56:38 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 11, 2016, 10:49:13 am
(http://spursnetwork.com/forums/Smileys/sn/shh.gif)((Wat.))
Post by: hector13 on May 11, 2016, 10:49:46 am
Post by: hector13 on May 11, 2016, 10:50:26 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 11, 2016, 10:52:26 am
Post by: hector13 on May 11, 2016, 10:55:50 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 11, 2016, 10:56:54 am
Post by: hector13 on May 11, 2016, 10:57:32 am
Post by: Starver on May 11, 2016, 11:03:15 am
Starver, Moonlit:Can we persuade either of you to give?Give what?
Apparently I'm the mastermind behind a last minute attempt to persuade Hector to vote for Hector... Which wasn't even last-minute.
(Like I said, I wasn't keeping track of the time. It's amazing how many times I've trusted his announcement that day is over, too.)
From your POV, you've got something batshit from Moonlit (who isn't voting) and I'm helpless to advance any cause. You and Hector are red-texting me. Stick to your guns or question your own vote, because nothing else makes sense. Town could indeed be doomed, and I think you're the only one who can change it.
(Three intermediate replies from where I started.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 11, 2016, 11:04:48 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 11, 2016, 03:56:01 pm
Hector's betting that your wincon will revert if Starver's eliminated.
Post by: hector13 on May 11, 2016, 04:02:42 pm
Post by: Tomasque on May 11, 2016, 04:10:26 pm
No arrest tonight. Only fear. Fear that the very ones protecting the innocent have turned against them. Fear that it has gone too far to be taken back. Fear that good is no longer in power.
Fear that no one knows whether they even stand a chance.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (2) - hector13, TheBiggerFish
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
No lynch (2) - The Moonlit Shadow, Starver
Post by: Tomasque on May 12, 2016, 07:46:35 pm
The final day. All is still - waiting.
A crucial decision that will decide the winner
or the reveal of a victory already won long ago?
Votecount
hector13 (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 07:48:23 pm
Hector?
Post by: hector13 on May 12, 2016, 08:00:46 pm
TBF
Post by: hector13 on May 12, 2016, 08:01:31 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 08:20:57 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 10:53:00 pm
Hold on. Game's not over yet.
Why?
Post by: hector13 on May 12, 2016, 10:56:13 pm
I imagine Starver has an aspect of his wincon to win 2 points that requires the cult to be the only members of the town alive.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 11:10:10 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 12, 2016, 11:13:30 pm
Post by: Starver on May 13, 2016, 02:45:40 am
The day has to end, I think. And I think Moonlit might know something, so I'll await that, with trepidation.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 04:00:33 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 04:01:09 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 04:43:17 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 04:44:05 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 04:46:02 pm
Post by: Starver on May 13, 2016, 05:58:58 pm
Hector, I have a unique offer. Who, (apart from me, but yourself included) do you want the group to lynch? I could ask Fish, but that answer would probably be
I've been working all along under the assumption that there's something that I don't know, and I know that you don't know something, but I was rather hoping that if Moonlit had not questioned me that Fish had been pestered instead... That might have been useful infodmation.
But, from what I do know, or at least to the best of my knowledge, you have a ⅔rds chance of benefitting. I can't speak for anyone else, including me.
I know it sounds odd, but I won't explain, because that would confound my reason for giving you the choice. I'm sure Fish would vote Moonlit and Moonlit would vote Fish, willingly. And, even if not, if I vote for whoever you do, we can't be outvoted.
So, batshit Moonlit, unmovable Fish or yourself? Your choice. (Go on, make Tomasque laugh...)
In friendship, again, this is*. It will become clear, obviously.
* Note that, for D2, I'm too used to NoVotes never being able to tie vs. LynchVotes. In one place I play, exact ties vs. NoVotes always swing the way of the LynchVote(s); in another, you need a simple majority of all votes to be NoLynch to not lynch, so it also would not have saved me, by yesterday's count. So I was a bit surprised when I realised what was going to happen, let me tell you, and didn't yet believe it until it did.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 06:02:17 pm
Post by: Starver on May 13, 2016, 06:09:12 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 06:09:55 pm
Post by: Starver on May 13, 2016, 06:18:56 pm
System 2: 'N' possible votes requires > '½N' NoLynch to actually NoLynch.
Those are the local (it seems) rules of other places that I've played Mafia. Never occurred to me that it's so much simpler in this particular playground sandpit...
Not really relevent, though. Just decided to express my sense of surprise now, rather than in tbe post-match chatter stage...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 06:27:39 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 06:30:36 pm
Post by: Starver on May 13, 2016, 07:16:07 pm
I need to know your wincon Starver. You are the Evil role? I win if the Evil role wins. Doesn't tell me how you win.I believe my Wincon is fulfilled, just not yet set in stone.
I'm going to make you choose where this now goes
It's a reward. Or maybe a punishment. Depends on you. That's the deal I'm giving you. I will vote exactly who you vote for. (Don't know if this will be accepted, butVote whoeverHectorVotesFor. I'll offer this choice to someone else if you don't do something within an hour.)
((This is fun.))
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 07:20:49 pm
Post by: Starver on May 13, 2016, 07:23:15 pm
The die is cast. Unless someone has the ability to knock it off the table and under the sofa.
Post by: Starver on May 13, 2016, 07:43:40 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 08:02:25 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 08:05:19 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 08:08:31 pm
@Hector: Same.I'm not sure WHO is. You and hector have claimed Evil-ally, but Starver hasn't copped to it even though he has no incentive not to.
Huh. Just realized that perhaps Starver isn't the Evil role... shit.
So, TBF, you the Evil role? Me and Hector both have wincons to help them...
Starver:Could you, like, TELL US whether you're the evil role, for crying out loud?
Hector:I suggest you strategize with whoever you vote for. I'm probably behind on Victory Points.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 08:09:09 pm
Ok, officially TBF.Alea iacta est, huh?
The die is cast. Unless someone has the ability to knock it off the table and under the sofa.
*wishes for tableflip*
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 08:10:03 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 08:28:13 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 08:29:05 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 08:29:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 08:29:54 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 08:56:57 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 09:01:53 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 09:04:16 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 09:08:54 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 09:11:49 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 09:13:47 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 09:19:34 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 09:20:38 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 09:21:00 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 09:22:43 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 09:24:13 pm
Post by: Starver on May 13, 2016, 09:25:35 pm
(Mostly in anticipation of what's about to spoil everything. Something will.)
I want to say something useful, but I promised myself I wouldn't. Or is saying that I won't saying just WIFOM? Or is mentioning WIFOM just WIFOM? Or is... Well, YGTI.
Oh, I'll have to try to sleep. Feel free to overturn everything while I'm not here.. :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 09:28:34 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 13, 2016, 09:30:33 pm
If Starver's already won, I guess I've won too.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 14, 2016, 08:45:02 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 14, 2016, 08:47:10 am
Post by: hector13 on May 14, 2016, 09:44:15 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 14, 2016, 10:05:25 am
I voted him way back at the start.
Post by: hector13 on May 14, 2016, 10:15:37 am
Post by: Tomasque on May 14, 2016, 03:22:40 pm
I don't know what to put as the flavor text, so instead I'll just write the lyrics to the song of my favorite band:
Yes, it's the Darlings of Lumberland Pull you off the bank and by popular demand Drag you by your mind, now you're under their command The Darlings of Lumberland
Votecount
hector13 (0)
TheBiggerFish (1) - Starver
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (3) - hector13, TheBiggerFish, The Moonlit Shadow
The Moonlit Shadow was the Policeman
Spoiler: Policeman (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on May 14, 2016, 05:01:46 pm
The ending was supposed to happen a day ago! What do expect me to write here?
Votecount
hector13 (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Post by: hector13 on May 14, 2016, 05:03:12 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 14, 2016, 05:03:37 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 14, 2016, 05:07:34 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 14, 2016, 05:13:27 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 14, 2016, 05:15:36 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 14, 2016, 05:16:14 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 14, 2016, 05:24:58 pm
Like that?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 14, 2016, 05:30:57 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 14, 2016, 05:31:41 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 14, 2016, 05:36:42 pm
Post by: Starver on May 14, 2016, 06:51:38 pm
Ok, I should have just pressed you to the Fish vote, yesterday. I misread a key part of my wincon, thinking I could let you choose any vote, for a crisp D3 end. I actually thought you'd chosen a good way of resolving it, but I erred badly.
(Now lynching me is a loss; lynching you, Hector, is a loss. Lynching Fish is the only way for me to win. Lynching me is the only way for Fish to win. You're tied to me, of course, but yesterday could have been 'better', probably. More discussion about that in the after-party, though, when things I never knew I never knew might also become obvious.)
Post by: hector13 on May 14, 2016, 07:20:41 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on May 14, 2016, 08:32:06 pm
I'm actually doing this on time for once!
Votecount
hector13 (0)
TheBiggerFish (2) - hector13, Starver
Starver (0)
Not voting: TheBiggerFish
TheBiggerFish was the Uncle
Spoiler: Uncle (click to show/hide)
Starver gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on May 14, 2016, 08:52:12 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 14, 2016, 09:13:02 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 14, 2016, 09:48:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 14, 2016, 09:48:56 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 14, 2016, 10:01:16 pm
But yeah, cults and small games... not so good. Enjoyable, but a bit naff that I won and got no VP :P
Post by: Starver on May 15, 2016, 06:20:27 am
Converted players. I was the only one left.That was my error. Also not being a bastard and wanting to get the multipoint individual win. (Hence the offer. Which only ended up reducing my prize.)
I did wonder (and aloud, privately to Tomasque, but without asking for confirmation) whether a D3 lynch of myself would have given everyone except Fallacy a VP, but I was worried that would undo my own Wincon, and I'm not that selfless... ;)
Post by: Starver on May 15, 2016, 06:45:29 am
I didn't know how much of my role you'd seen, on recruiting, Moonlit. It's possible that you might have seen my recruitment action, but not my sole-winning auto (else you wouldn't have wanted me to add to my 'hareem'. If you had investigated me, N2, you may have been less inclined to work with me, though.
And I was perpetually afraid of a Cult-Leader-Killing role (especially that final night).
* Partly using my 'inadvertently' claimed auto-reject switching to claiming auto-accept-but-as-a-trap, on D1, but it had been uber-subtle. So subtle, that I could switch, before I knew much of what was happening ng... But also so subtle that nobody realised it, so neither of the lies were believed, because nobody realised I'd even said anything of the kind, I think... ;)
Post by: Starver on May 15, 2016, 07:57:20 am
(And I was afeared of someone, probably Fish, having an anti-cult skill... Not just join-resistant, but something that could dismantle it. I had already asked my inner-innocent what he thought, and he told me that there were at least half a dozen 'solutions', only some of which meant Hector was scum... So I ran with that, as I would have if I were innocent. Obviously to everyone's frustration, including my now closeted cult-self. But he only grumbled a little bit, through the closed closet door. And I really didn't want to deprive you of the VPs. I wish I'd tried to help Fish, too, by trying that other ultimate gambit. Just for the crazy lulz.)
Talking of VPs: @Tomasque.. the final option, please. I'll try everything once. Except country dancing and incest. ;)
Post by: Tomasque on May 18, 2016, 05:04:29 pm
Exhausted from their long journey, a party of adventurers checks into a local tavern for the next few days. However, only two rooms are available - the others were infested with vermin shortly before their arrival - so the group decides to they will have to share the rooms. One among them thinks silently to himself: everything is going according to plan.
Each night, you will choose which of the two rooms to enter (#1 or #2). I will then send you a quicktopic link for that room/day. If there are at least 3 players in a room, a lynch can occur in that room. Deaths/roleflips will be revealed on the main thread.
Post by: Tomasque on May 19, 2016, 02:10:57 pm
As the evening began, the adventurers felt something was wrong. Weren't there only 4 of them when they started their journey? When had the fifth one come in? Slowly, they began to realize what had happened. They were not going to find him - he had already found them.
Day ends Saturday, 12:00 PM PST
Saturday, 7:00 PM GMT
Post by: Tomasque on May 21, 2016, 02:27:54 pm
The party argued and debated through the entire evening, trying to discover the identity of the traitor. However, they could not keep off sleep forever, and - at the chime of midnight - succumbed to a deep slumber...
Post by: Tomasque on May 23, 2016, 05:28:19 pm
In the early morning hours, some stirred and moved between the two rooms. Then all were asleep once more...
...until they awoke in the late evening. Drawing the curtains, they realized what had happened. They were under a powerful spell - their impostor was taking no chances. Knowing him, the doors would be locked as well, and the rooms barrier-ed against sword and sound in the way that only one of the most powerful sorcerers can accomplish. They would have to find him on their own, or die trying.
Day ends Wednesday, 4:00 PM PST
Wednesday, 10:00 PM GMT
Post by: Tomasque on May 26, 2016, 06:39:23 pm
FallacyofUrist was slain by the Party
FallacyofUrist was the Sorcerer
Spoiler: Sorcerer (click to show/hide)
Starver gets one victory point.
hector13 gets one victory point.
The Moonlit Shadow gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Room Links (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on May 26, 2016, 07:06:04 pm
Ah well, I like being right. Sorry FoU!
Post by: Starver on May 26, 2016, 08:12:56 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 26, 2016, 08:29:27 pm
Post by: Starver on May 26, 2016, 08:46:32 pm
And Tomasque knows much more (but still not everything) of the full extent of some of my paranoid fantasies, so they may will reappear as reality. If not in this Marathon, then elsewhere... Which I wouldn't mind happening. But neither would I hope for. Let the future unfold how it will... :P
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 26, 2016, 09:25:53 pm
Either Tomasque did something wrong in D1 with Moonlit's Psychisense, or Moonlit misread a PM :oNeither. Tomasque forgot to put my hidden auto "Crowd Cover" in my role flip. Guess what it did.
~~~
In any case, gg. Even though I lost, I really enjoyed this round.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 26, 2016, 09:31:08 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 26, 2016, 09:31:49 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 26, 2016, 09:34:24 pm
Post by: Tomasque on May 26, 2016, 11:14:44 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 27, 2016, 10:14:10 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 27, 2016, 10:27:10 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 27, 2016, 06:06:48 pm
And lo, the seven arrived. One of them had an ulterior plan in mind. Two had treacherous intent. The other four... varying degrees of trustworthiness applied.
Votecount:
FallacyofUrist(1)-The Illuminati
Shakerag's Evil Twin(0)
TheBiggerFish(-1)
Tomasque(0)
TheMoonlitShadow(0)
hector13(0)
Starver(pi)-???
Shakerag Randomized Mystery Voting applies. Remember, you cannot use night actions on Tomasque unless you have been voted twice, and only twice the previous day.
~~~
Totally a joke, if you didn't figure it out. But yeah.
Seems like the games are getting more and more bastard-like as we go on. Oh dear.Yeahhhh. Just one hypothetical scenario.
Looking forward to the next one.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 27, 2016, 06:09:02 pm
Post by: Tomasque on May 27, 2016, 06:20:26 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 27, 2016, 07:07:02 pm
Good idea, FoU! You don't mind if I use it, do you? :PGo ahead, go ahead... ka ha haha!
~~~
Interesting thing of note: I was actually referencing Annihilate in the "Oracle"'s "prophecies".
Post by: hector13 on May 27, 2016, 07:13:35 pm
Good idea, FoU! You don't mind if I use it, do you? :PGo ahead, go ahead... ka ha haha!
~~~
Interesting thing of note: I was actually referencing Annihilate in the "Oracle"'s "prophecies".
It was a good attempt at fakeclaiming, it just didn't sit right with everything else. I did do a quick Google search of your verses; nothing came up.
Post by: Starver on May 27, 2016, 07:39:51 pm
It was a good attempt at fakeclaiming, it just didn't sit right with everything else. I did do a quick Google search of your verses; nothing came up.A little bit close to my 'useless' non-Investigator inestigations, as fakeclaimed on the spaceship. Dressed up in the fashion of the asylum/whatever round, with the palindromes in it, too. So not sure whether I would have been fooled, to be honest.
Post by: hector13 on May 28, 2016, 09:18:37 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 28, 2016, 09:19:29 am
I know, but FoU made up those hints, seein' as he was faking it :PAye.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 28, 2016, 09:33:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 28, 2016, 09:41:58 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 28, 2016, 09:56:38 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 28, 2016, 10:07:35 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 28, 2016, 10:08:47 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 28, 2016, 10:38:09 pm
Post by: Tomasque on May 29, 2016, 10:49:49 pm
Let's hope I get out alive - Beholders are a endangered species. ;)
((I'm putting this on hiatus for a week.))
Post by: hector13 on May 29, 2016, 10:51:39 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 29, 2016, 10:55:34 pm
Post by: hector13 on May 29, 2016, 11:06:52 pm
Good luck with finals (inb4 education Mafia)
That too, probably...
Post by: Starver on May 30, 2016, 08:35:59 am
(But, seriously, hope you do well. Break a pencil-lead!)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 30, 2016, 09:16:40 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on May 30, 2016, 09:31:24 am
You might be wondering why I'm not moving this forward - unless, like me, your only thoughts now are how to survive the deadly gauntlet that is finals week.Thankfully, my own educational situation is a bit lighter. But I know enough to know what you're talking about. One final exam? A pain. Two? Agh. Three... NOOOO!
The amount that I might expect the average college or high school student to have? What pain, much wow, much pain, such agh.
~~~
So good luck to you. Yes. Have much good luck. May your educational knowledge be made effectively manifest.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 30, 2016, 12:17:51 pm
Post by: Tomasque on June 07, 2016, 01:59:31 pm
Post by: Starver on June 07, 2016, 03:01:36 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 07, 2016, 03:03:07 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on June 07, 2016, 05:35:38 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 07, 2016, 07:16:55 pm
No confusion with whatever was being tested and Nigerian Princes or bizarrely named churches?
Post by: Tomasque on June 09, 2016, 04:14:04 am
The town was small, and everyone kept to themselves. No one really knew anyone, but considering the nature of some of the townsfolk, maybe things were better that way. So it came as no surprise that no one noticed the new face in their midst.
Post by: Tomasque on June 10, 2016, 06:43:04 am
The sunrise bathed the dark town in brightness, illuminating the streets and houses. Even in the harsh light of the later afternoon sun, the buildings were still bland and uninviting. It looked as if little effort had gone into making them, but no payed attention as they shuffled through the mostly empty streets.
This round you are allowed to vote privately via PM.
Day ends Saturday, 4:30 AM PDT Saturday, 6:30 AM EST
Saturday, 11:30 AM GMT Saturday, 1:00 PM CEST
Post by: Tomasque on June 11, 2016, 06:35:33 am
An empty day passed, and a cold night began. The somber moon rose above the hills and shone boldy through the clouds. The night stars looked so close together, yet all were unbelieveably far apart. All alone.
Post by: Tomasque on June 13, 2016, 02:19:32 am
Another desrted night ended, and another empty day began. Were there less people then yesterday? More? No one could tell, and everyone kept living there lives as they had before. All alone.
Day ends Tuesday, 12:30 AM PDT Tuesday, 2:30 AM EST
Tuesday, 7:30 AM GMT Saturday, 9:30 AM CEST
Post by: Tomasque on June 14, 2016, 03:33:07 pm
FallacyofUrist was voted by the Town
FallacyofUrist was the Исследователь
Spoiler: Исследователь (click to show/hide)
Starver gets one victory point.
hector13 gets one victory point.
The Moonlit Shadow gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Fake Votecounts (click to show/hide)
, TomasqueSpoiler: Chat Links (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on June 14, 2016, 03:34:22 pm
Post by: Starver on June 14, 2016, 03:53:07 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 14, 2016, 04:02:04 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 14, 2016, 06:34:17 pm
I'd appreciate waiting 'til Thursday to start the next game, I have family visiting tomorrow.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 14, 2016, 06:36:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 14, 2016, 09:23:28 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 14, 2016, 09:49:53 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on June 15, 2016, 09:26:16 pm
He'll be gone for a week only.Mostly gone. Not enough access to play a game as active as Mafia Marathon, anyway. Probably.
~~~
I have to ask, FoU, was that intentional?... no, I don't think so.
~~~
Well. Yet another example of a round where I was the Evil role with a highly manipulative fake information giving ability, but lacked the cunning to effectively use it. gg anyway.
~~~
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 15, 2016, 09:27:46 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 15, 2016, 09:30:47 pm
Is that what all that nonsense I received in D2 was, the false votecount?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 15, 2016, 09:32:54 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 15, 2016, 09:35:27 pm
Post by: Starver on June 15, 2016, 09:38:20 pm
(Can't remembwr why I chose Moonlit, for D1, but as Fish poked above the parapets, figured it couldn't hurt to try an aquaint D2.)
[NinjaedX3]
Post by: Tomasque on June 16, 2016, 04:13:49 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 16, 2016, 06:16:31 am
The thread was locked.
Post by: Starver on June 16, 2016, 06:19:41 am
OTOH, there was quite a bit of luck. And perhaps Fallacy could have also done better with some not-obvious-spoofs, instead, with his own luck in finding the right lever to pull to instill just the right level of paranoia.
Post by: Pavellius on June 16, 2016, 08:30:09 am
Post by: Tomasque on June 16, 2016, 08:32:29 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 16, 2016, 08:36:12 am
Post by: Starver on June 16, 2016, 09:02:35 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 16, 2016, 09:04:25 am
Post by: Starver on June 16, 2016, 09:24:36 am
Post by: hector13 on June 16, 2016, 01:59:40 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 17, 2016, 06:24:24 pm
Post by: Starver on June 17, 2016, 08:23:02 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 17, 2016, 09:28:42 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 17, 2016, 09:40:39 pm
Post by: griffinpup on June 17, 2016, 10:00:43 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 17, 2016, 10:04:18 pm
Shrug?
Nah he's good, just has a tendency to lurk, similar to Starver I guess. Much less verbose though :P
Post by: Starver on June 18, 2016, 04:29:59 am
Nah he's good, just has a tendency to lurk, similar to Starver I guess. Much less verbose though :PBah!
(Didn't expect that comeback, eh? ;)
Post by: Tomasque on June 18, 2016, 03:58:27 pm
It started innocuously enough - as these stories always seem to do - but it wouldn't end that way. It began during an evening like any another...
Post by: Tomasque on June 20, 2016, 02:51:15 pm
The following day, a few people were alerted by an unusual discovery - a spaceship had landed in the night! It was empty, and they realized that whatever had come out was hiding among them. It wouldn't be taking it's time, either.
Day ends Wednesday, 1:00 PM PDT
Wednesday, 8:00 PM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 20, 2016, 03:50:48 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 20, 2016, 03:52:02 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 20, 2016, 03:53:36 pm
Heck, I have no idea what my ability actually does.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 20, 2016, 03:54:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 20, 2016, 03:56:53 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 20, 2016, 04:03:29 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 20, 2016, 04:05:44 pm
Who did you target to poke last night, and why?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 20, 2016, 04:07:44 pm
I targeted TDS. Mostly at random.
Post by: hector13 on June 20, 2016, 04:13:20 pm
If yes: what do you think the blocking would be for, given the flavour suggesting we be fightin' aliens?
If no: how do you think revealing a town role like that helps the town?
If no idea: TBF
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 20, 2016, 04:18:44 pm
Is it a town role, though? There could be a third party.
Post by: hector13 on June 20, 2016, 04:23:08 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 20, 2016, 04:26:19 pm
It might be the nightkill-equivalent or something.
Post by: hector13 on June 20, 2016, 04:32:07 pm
Also, why the lack of questions coming my way? For someone who claims not to know much, you're not doing a good job of trying to figure it out beyond your own speculation.
So, you were blocked, and you like speculation. For each of the alignments town, neutral and evil, speculate on why you would be the one chosen to be blocked.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 20, 2016, 05:06:06 pm
Neutral:How should I know? Their wincon's unknown.
Scum:If this is, like, keep all the town from being able to act by slapping roleblocks on, it's a start.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 20, 2016, 05:06:38 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 20, 2016, 05:43:10 pm
Post by: Starver on June 20, 2016, 06:31:23 pm
TDS remains an enigma, but for now an intruiging one. If there's a blocker, then there's likely multiple roles that can be blocked, which leads me to some contrary solutions. There's yet more to be resolved.
Perhaps some more (moon)light shed upon the situation would help, before I go further?
Post by: hector13 on June 20, 2016, 10:03:46 pm
@hector: So what did you do last night?
Nothing of consequence. Specifically, what I did garnered no information that will likely help the town at this point, unless something fishy happens. Should it come to light, I'll let y'all know.
TDS
I can confirm that TBF both visited me and was blocked.
Would you care to expand? I can assume what happened, but making assumptions in Mafia can bring you the loss, so... please, don't keep us in the dark.
Starver
As for you, Starver, feel free to go further now. No need to wait on Moonlit and starve the rest of us of information, is there?
/punny
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 20, 2016, 11:32:03 pm
TDSI can confirm that TBF both visited me and was blocked.
Would you care to expand? I can assume what happened, but making assumptions in Mafia can bring you the loss, so... please, don't keep us in the dark.
Rolefishing much, hector13?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 21, 2016, 12:36:23 am
Post by: Starver on June 21, 2016, 04:52:32 am
One wonders what our abilities actually do.I know what mine says, and it seems to do what's said on the tin. It worries me that so far only you seem to think your role is complex, though not as much as Hector's behaviour still worries me. Like an attack-dog, but self-admitted as having nothing tangible to attack.
Still intuiged as to which pattern Moonlit follows, to see which colours will be struck to that mast.
Post by: hector13 on June 21, 2016, 08:35:27 am
TDSI can confirm that TBF both visited me and was blocked.
Would you care to expand? I can assume what happened, but making assumptions in Mafia can bring you the loss, so... please, don't keep us in the dark.
Rolefishing much, hector13?
Just taking your bait and having a look at it, actually. You did dangle quite a vague statement that almost demanded a question.
More in a bit, PFP and battery's almost dead.
Post by: hector13 on June 21, 2016, 08:45:46 am
One wonders what our abilities actually do.I know what mine says, and it seems to do what's said on the tin. It worries me that so far only you seem to think your role is complex, though not as much as Hector's behaviour still worries me. Like an attack-dog, but self-admitted as having nothing tangible to attack.
Still intuiged as to which pattern Moonlit follows, to see which colours will be struck to that mast.
As I said, my action revealed something not much to me, I have nothing to go on. Pleasant questioning is unlikely to encourage someone to reveal something, or ask questions of their own, which TBF seemed quite disinclined to do.
We do have three players confirming a roleblocker though. Meaning we have more than one, or someone's telling porkies.
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 21, 2016, 09:55:40 am
Post by: hector13 on June 21, 2016, 02:18:17 pm
TMS: Did you visit me last night?
I'd quite like to expand this question to "who did you visit last night, Moonlit?"
Post by: hector13 on June 21, 2016, 09:18:17 pm
Do you know what TBF did to you when he visited you, DarkStar?
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 21, 2016, 09:48:20 pm
Do you know what TBF did to you when he visited you, DarkStar?
I know his action failed, although he did visit me.
Post by: hector13 on June 21, 2016, 09:55:09 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 21, 2016, 10:15:21 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 21, 2016, 10:30:40 pm
So... you weren't specifically told TBF's action was blocked?
...
Think of me like an Angry Veteran except I block people instead. I'm the Town Weakness.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 21, 2016, 10:32:50 pm
Post by: Starver on June 21, 2016, 10:44:01 pm
Moonlit claims to have visited me and also knows that there is a block. Which I find strange, but you will of course want to consider this (unless Moonlit wants to expand).
I visited Fish, successfully unless I've been fooled, and if I can believe my results then I will explicitly support Fish.as Town, in case you didn't pick that up from earlier.
Fish 'pokes' and tried to poke TDS, but was blocked, it seems.
TDS apparently knows of Fish's blocked visit.
Hector... Not sure. Taciturn, except as far as flinging votes around. (Nothing new there, then!)
At least three 'go and do something' roles are claimed, one/two variants upon the blocking role - latter depends on exactly who does what to who, and maybe if they know it. (One solution, that I'm not aware of being true but needs mentioning, would be my go-do-something role being a blocking one. TMS observes this, Fish experiences it, TDS notices Fish experiencing this. But it'd have to be a secret quality to my simple-looking role.)
My suspicions are at the ends of each chain:
Moonlit claims to know of the block while checking me out. That needs further explanation. (I can think of several reasons, as I assume others. Point vaguely at one if you so wish.)
TDS claims to know of Fish's block and action. Clarify, please? (Ditto on the pointing vaguely, see if it creates conflict.)
Hector is asking for much and revealing little, as per usual, and has no known links to the above chain, neither acted on nor letting know what possible acting-on was done, or for why, yet seemed to suggest three people knew of blocks before more than two other people said they knew about blocks. (Throw us a bigger bone, would'ya?)
Have I misinterpreted anything, along the way?
(Ok, three messages came in whilst composing that, but posting this anyway, adding to in a moment.)
Post by: Starver on June 21, 2016, 10:47:53 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 21, 2016, 11:23:30 pm
Right. Bugger typing that all over again. I would appreciate Starver acting on me on N1, if he'd be so kind.
TBF, TDS and Moonlit all brought up nonsense about confirming a blocker, and since TDS has claimed that role and that it only works when someone acts upon him, I find it hard to believe Moonlit can know about it when he says he acted on Starver
Also, unvote 'cause my analysis is shite.
Post by: hector13 on June 22, 2016, 01:17:38 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 22, 2016, 01:20:58 pm
Post by: Starver on June 22, 2016, 01:59:13 pm
I visited Starver last night.
I have no knowledge what that may have done for/against me.
I was rather waiting for Moonlit to confirm that knowledge of the blocking role comes from Moonlit's own role conditions (not blockable? Blocks blocking? Backfires blind cking?), perhaps, but not forthcoming. I think, though, that a little bit of mystery won't hurt. I've a vague idea, that I'm going to test if I get opportunity.
Post by: Starver on June 22, 2016, 02:01:50 pm
blind cking?EBWOP: stupid Swiftkey. Intended another repetition "blocking", obviously. Need a bluetooth keyboard...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 22, 2016, 02:06:42 pm
So you don't know if you were or weren't? All right then.
Post by: Starver on June 22, 2016, 02:23:36 pm
I turned autocorrect/swipe thing off, myself.One can do that? (Had to get the keyboard up to access its options, so trying right now. Disabled Flow, Voice, Notifications (now I won't be told I've 'saved' millions of keypresses I didn't, huh?); apparently already have no Cloud for predictions or installed languages, but it's picking up suggestions from somewhere. Changed keyboard to extended (left/right cursors might be useful), but leavng autospace as I've almost gotten used to it being weird and occasionally needing overriding... "Number pad on left" does nothing that I can see, and still there's suggestions... Oh well. I do seem to have a smiley button, now. :-) :-( ;-) :-P :-D :-* :O B-) :-$ :-! :-[ O:-) O:-) :-\ :'( etc... Probably quicker to type them manually, still. 8^/ )
Quote
So you don't know if you were or weren't? All right then.Prexactly.
Post by: hector13 on June 22, 2016, 09:35:01 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 22, 2016, 10:33:03 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 23, 2016, 01:30:10 am
*patiently does nothing*
Post by: Tomasque on June 23, 2016, 01:54:28 am
...and the night began again, and the evil grew once more. How long until it couldn't hide? How long until everyone would know it's true nature? These questions remained unanswered - and in fact, unasked - since for now, those in the most danger hardly realized it at all.
But for how long?
Post by: Tomasque on June 23, 2016, 03:10:18 pm
Now even the other townspeople are becoming restless. An uneasy feeling is shared among all of them - something isn't right. Someone here is not who they say they are. The ones who discovered it early just shrug it off. They have everything under control - right?
Day ends Saturday, 1:00 PM PDT
Saturday, 8:00 PM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 23, 2016, 03:19:07 pm
Post by: Starver on June 23, 2016, 03:21:07 pm
NinjaFish,: not you, I thought, but it does sound like you have something else to elaborate on.
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 23, 2016, 03:28:20 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 23, 2016, 04:16:44 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 23, 2016, 05:56:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 23, 2016, 06:35:18 pm
TBF poked meh, so Starver must've visited TDS, else Moonlit is lying. Or TDS is lying about being visited.
Post by: hector13 on June 23, 2016, 06:35:41 pm
Post by: Starver on June 23, 2016, 06:58:57 pm
Hector claims Town Weakness (no action). That seems more reasonable, but I wouldn't put it past being the other way round or both, with some other corroboration.
I can't find Moonlit saying much more than having an anti-block skill and apparently confirming Fish as Town. I'm thinking a Neutral role with visitation rights (or faking it, convincingly), BICBW.
Fish is Town (more confident of my own information, not sure whether Moonlit can convince anyone else if they trust me, or vice-versa, but not contested so probably good. This time thing confuses me. Unless its a posting restriction. Care to have commented further, Fish?
I'm me. I think that not only can I trust me, I think I'm at least vaguely trustable. Moreover, if I'm lynched and roleflipped, bad guy loses chance at more sensitive removal and reveals my reality (including any secret thing, in case that changes my quite definite statements, post mortem).
Comments?
Post by: hector13 on June 23, 2016, 07:09:23 pm
I'm in the same position I was yesterday in terms of what I can tell you about night stuff beyond TBF's poke. If anyone's neutral, I'd say it's TBF or TDS. Moonlit feels most likely to be scum to me, followed by TDS.
Post by: Starver on June 23, 2016, 07:16:40 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 23, 2016, 07:24:36 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 23, 2016, 07:31:58 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 23, 2016, 09:16:15 pm
I will infer from your "unblockabke-ness" that your action somehow works by seeing who your target visits. As I said, I don't visit.
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 23, 2016, 10:04:21 pm
I don't think TDS is telling the full truth, as of my results of last night.
What do you mean?
Post by: hector13 on June 23, 2016, 10:11:36 pm
I don't think TDS is telling the full truth, as of my results of last night.
What do you mean?
An explanation of your results would be useful in this instance, Moonlit.
Post by: hector13 on June 23, 2016, 10:35:30 pm
What I meant was, had Starver visited me last night, I'd have more to say. There was no implication in it, since I didn't mention anything about my role or any abilities I may or may not have. You inferred that it had something to do with them.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 23, 2016, 10:49:28 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 23, 2016, 10:53:24 pm
@hector:Typos, man, what even.
Your contributions this round have been stellar :P
And as someone who did visit you last night... have anything to say?
I don't know how your ability works, so no.
Post by: hector13 on June 23, 2016, 11:45:59 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 23, 2016, 11:55:42 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 24, 2016, 12:43:39 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 24, 2016, 12:44:06 am
Post by: hector13 on June 24, 2016, 12:47:19 am
@hector:Yeah, having no clue what the carp is going on, I fall back on nitpicking. :v
Could ask questions instead.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 24, 2016, 01:13:18 am
Or that we don't know about if Town.
Like, everybody:Hypotheses on the fact that we seem to be in a Groundhog Day loop?
Post by: hector13 on June 24, 2016, 01:52:27 am
Could be the scum thing though, repeating so many D1s gets points. Also, could be a neutral thing. While they've generally been malign to town, there have been instances of benign neutral folk. That would likely make the time influencing temporary though.
What do you think?
Post by: hector13 on June 24, 2016, 08:57:24 am
You're making some bizarre leaps in logic.How did you come to that conclusion?You said you would have more to say to Starver if he visited you. I did visit you, but you 'don't know how ability works' so you don't have anything to tell me. So... you know how Starver's ability works, and thus would have something to say if he visited you.
You still also haven't explained what you find suspicious about me.
Post by: hector13 on June 24, 2016, 08:57:54 am
Other folk aren't going to follow you if you don't explain your suspicions.
Post by: hector13 on June 24, 2016, 09:04:10 am
Post by: Tomasque on June 24, 2016, 09:25:05 am
I've corrected my mess-up. Don't worry my players, there is no time travel going on - yet.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 24, 2016, 10:23:48 am
Well, back to being confused.
Post by: hector13 on June 24, 2016, 11:06:04 am
Post by: Starver on June 24, 2016, 12:16:16 pm
Like, everybody:Hypotheses on the fact that we seem to be in a Groundhog Day loop?I don't see that. Still looking for reasons why you do...
(I'll not lie, I'm more focussed on real-world issues that I can't do anything about, as a cog in the machine... I meant what I said about waiting until later to make sense of everything happening here.)
Post by: Tomasque on June 24, 2016, 12:22:33 pm
Post by: Starver on June 24, 2016, 12:29:32 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 24, 2016, 01:03:50 pm
How should I know? They'd be hidden!Your action failed, that doesn't mean it was a role block. You haven't told us what your action is, so Indonmt know how it might fail.huh... you have any hidden autos you'd like to share?
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 24, 2016, 01:06:55 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 24, 2016, 01:11:46 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 24, 2016, 02:59:25 pm
You should know better, hector.
And, uh , guess I worded that wrong. I got used to hidden autos on previous sounds, so... Any autos?
How has this line of questioning helped you figure out my alignment?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 24, 2016, 03:04:04 pm
Like, everybody:Hypotheses on the fact that we seem to be in a Groundhog Day loop?I don't see that. Still looking for reasons why you do...
(I'll not lie, I'm more focussed on real-world issues that I can't do anything about, as a cog in the machine... I meant what I said about waiting until later to make sense of everything happening here.)
Ahhhh....
I've corrected my mess-up. Don't worry my players, there is no time travel going on - yet.
Post by: Starver on June 25, 2016, 08:32:19 am
TDS almost definitely blocks, I can confirm this but nothing else.
Moonlit's skill (or one of them) involves unblockableness and perhaps eavesdropping on a targets' result, but is useless with Hector.
Hector has a reactive action, that doesn't react against Moonlit or Fish, but maybe me if I get round to it.
Fish continues to poke, but confusion abounds about what this might do. (I have some ideas, but nothing useful to chat about.)
I think one/both of two people (to be left nameless) are a trap, but not sure what alignment of trap. I also can't yet narrow down the non-Town wincon(s), though I have one particular fear about what might be there.
I don't know who I'd lynch. I'm torn on what comes next.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 25, 2016, 08:36:05 am
Post by: hector13 on June 25, 2016, 08:41:26 am
I think Moonlit's action finds out something about who his target visits.
I targeted Moonlit N0, so I know he didn't visit me, and Starver N1, with the same result. I was poked in the night, so I know TBF visited me. This concludes my knowledge of the game so far.
Post by: Starver on June 25, 2016, 09:16:21 am
I'd like to hear those ideas, if you don't mind.The 'best' ideas were rather based towards you not wanting anyone to know about them (e.g. infecting/innoculating actions), and wanting to hide behind apparent ignorance would have been your best bet for doing what you do. But if you're wanting to discuss it, it cettainly isn't (unless through bluff?) your known effect...
Then we (further) enter territory where I don't want to give any more clues to a bad guy about what actions would be wisest for them. Frustrating, but as I'm heavily in a quagmire of confusion I'm not too concerned that I'm witholding solutions from Town, either.
@Hector, you are a investigator role, more like. It's a multi-investigator game, most certainly. I know I considered visiting you, but don't remember being explicitly asked to do so. I felt like I had to go elsewhere, though.
If you're right about yourself, I think the usefulness would have limited without other results first. I'm not sure I chose as well as I might, but there's likely a worse sequence.
Post by: hector13 on June 25, 2016, 09:21:08 am
Visit me tonight,
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 25, 2016, 10:19:19 am
Post by: Starver on June 25, 2016, 10:31:51 am
@TDS: Nope.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 25, 2016, 11:03:56 am
Post by: hector13 on June 25, 2016, 12:47:55 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 25, 2016, 12:54:49 pm
Unless one of them is neutral and the other scum.
Perhaps Teeds is the evil role, and all this blocking is so he can't be investigated... What say you to that, DarkStar?
I think we need a claim from Moonlit and Starver, please. The traditional 3 day limit means we can at least debunk fakeclaims on D3 with a full claim today.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 25, 2016, 03:47:15 pm
Post by: Starver on June 25, 2016, 04:35:16 pm
...Fine.Surer than at the start, although there's oddness in Fish's daytime talk that I'm hesitant about. As in I thought I was wrong to be paranoid about being paranoud, but maybe I was wrong about being wrong and I was actually right to start with.
I'm an Investigative role. I follow my target and see what they do that night. I am unroleblockable.
Starver's also an Investigative, and maybe something else. He sees his target.
TBF is being unhelpful, but Starver cleared him (unless me+Starver were deceived... could be...). He hasn't done much of anything...
@Starver, you sure about TBF?
But, on balance, I think Fish is Ok. I have more 'verified' information about Fish than anyone else, including yourself, and I've got to stick with it until proven otherwise. But there's no opposing info to definitely suggest a villain, from the rest of you. Just Fish is likely not to be (or playing a blinder, with fortuitously co-conspiring game setup). Even after considering the possoble combinations of both little white and great big black lies inevitably being spouted by at least one of our number.
Post by: hector13 on June 25, 2016, 05:11:05 pm
Post by: Tomasque on June 26, 2016, 05:54:10 am
Another day passed and still nothing was found. No one asked the unspoken question, but everyone looked for the answer. Had they failed? Had the evil among them become undetectable? Was it even possible to succeed anymore? No one knew, and so they hoped. Perhaps that was all that was left to do.
Post by: Tomasque on June 27, 2016, 04:14:57 am
The town was quiet. Only one thing mattered now.
Day ends Wednesday, 2:00 AM PDT
Wednesday, 9:00 AM GMT
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 04:53:03 am
Someone needs to explain the block, which is now not around TDS.
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 06:48:02 am
Nuh-uh. TDS is the blocker, and he was the entire time.I was not blocked N0, when Fish visited him (so its not an area effect triggered by any visit) and I was blocked last night when I didn't visit him (even if you did, it shouldn't have affected me if not an area affect). Also Fish poked Hector, N1, whilst I triggered/targetted TDS, making a ramped-up ability less than likely.
I visited him last night. And he blocks everyone if he's visited.
If TDS is sole (and singularly) blocking role, it must be a targettable, one way or another. Assuming no-one has heen lying, a 'protect block' was targetted over TDS, TDS again and then you, or a 'prevent block' over Fish, me and then me again. This does not need to have been TDS except for the ready original claim.
Unless I'm very much mistaken (or Tomasque was!) there's multiple blocking skills. Perhaps one protect and one prevent, to go along with our (if I can trust you) different investigative abilities and/or whatever it is Fish actually does.
But there's some rather clever lying (or fortuitous abilities, hidden or otherwise) going on that has sent me down dead-end assumptions. I congratulate you, sir/madam, on your fortuitous pandering to my wild imaginations.
Quote
Has anyone else found it strange that there has been no kills?Not given the variety of scumwin conditions in this marathon. Mislynches have been a major (if not the only!) mechanism in ensuring both evil and neutral wins, previously. Hence why I was looking to be sure, rather than lashing out wirh a lynch.
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 07:19:27 am
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 27, 2016, 09:48:08 am
He also has a targeted roleblock. I believe N0 he used it on TBF, so we didn't all get roleblocked.
It's overided by visiting him.
I don't remember detailing that about my role, although yes, that's correct. Except I did get visited N1, so I've autoroleblocked all three nights so far.
How exactly does your investigative power work?
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 11:23:13 am
Now we obviously won't be thinking "what else is Moonlit lying about?" will we?
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 11:28:53 am
Quick question. What exactly were you lying about?
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 11:44:05 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 11:45:31 am
You know... TBF's poke has done practically nothing all game. I'm starting to wonder if he really did poke TDS N0...I got blocked N0.
So, I tried, but failed.
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 11:54:38 am
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 11:58:45 am
@hectorIf I'm cleared, it's because you said I am. I may be misremembering, but I 'cleared' Fish before you backed me up.
The details of my investigative role.
And I cleared tbf drive I knew starver was cleared.
I have problems with this.
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 12:08:39 pm
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7059920#msg7059920
Doesn't look so kosher, now.
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 12:09:57 pm
However, we've done fuck all this round, which really pisses me off. We also have TDS 'round here, a quite experienced player who has not mentioned anything about the lack of lynches happening, claiming to be a weakness role while blocking everyone, despite Starver and Moonlit claiming results and TBF systematically poking people every night.
My opinion hasn't changed since D1. It's either Moonlit or TDS. Town at large, pick one.
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 12:14:29 pm
Because I don't actually get the results of your action. I didn't know who you investigated until you said so.
@Hector: All of it. My investigation role is one that tells me my targets ability. It is indeed unblockable. Also, we may not have to.
What and what.
Could you explain specifically what your role is? This pussy-footing around the issue is really fucking stupid.
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 12:18:53 pm
Round 13 - Day 3
The town was quiet. Only one thing mattered now.
Before you suggest we might have more days to come, Moonlit, 'ave a gander at tha'.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:20:32 pm
We have to pick somebody.
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 12:20:52 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:21:16 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:21:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 12:22:28 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:23:15 pm
What.
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 12:25:28 pm
You should have been lynched D1, you have provided nothing this round.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:29:27 pm
No information, no nothing. Just this STUPID POKE! I don't even know what it does, if it does anything!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:30:40 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 12:32:59 pm
You're the first person who's articulated even a suspicion of anybody, that I can recall, and you've only done that now!
Untrue. Starver had suspicions of TDS and Moonlit since D1. Moonlit had suspicions regarding me D2, and I've had suspicions of TDS and Moonlit since D1, and I'm reasonably sure I expressed that at the time (I did vote Moonlit D1, anyway)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:34:00 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:34:42 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 12:36:45 pm
If you're not going to add anything (like questions) to the game, please... let's not do this.
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 12:37:49 pm
You are the town special role, yes? And you poked TDS N0?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:38:26 pm
@secondpost:Blame the interwebs for that, I got ninja'd.
@thirdpost:For the third time, IIRC, I TRIED, but was roleblocked.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:39:22 pm
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 12:40:05 pm
That means I'm left with three suspects, one now less suspicious than before, another more suspicious than before and the mysterious third who I suspect to be Neutral (but isn't the person I long thought to be neutral, nor necessarily certainly so even now) but I need an attempt at explanation from TDS to swing me one or the other or (possibly) the other. And I can wait.
(And I keep getting Ninjaed. 4, then 4, now 3.)
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 12:44:09 pm
Perhaps we should have a full claim, anyway.
I'd like to see your alignment (town weakness/special, investigative etc.) what your action is, what it is supposed to do (what kind of result you get) and what that result was (the full result of your action) whether it was blocked, failed or successful.
I am an Investigative role. My action does not count as a visit, but when the person I target visits me, I find out what their action is. I targeted Moonlit N0, and Starver N1 and 2. All actions failed, because my target did not visit me.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 12:45:17 pm
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 12:56:29 pm
Alignment investigator, Town myself. Fish revealed as town N0. Attempt to check TDS was blocked N1. Attempt to investigate Moonlit (no conceivable advantage in checking Hector, just to be reacted against) was blocked on N2... But I'm still not clear why.
My exact current conclusions, I shall keep to myself.
@Fish, Hector has done. Your evasiveness is eroding my one still positive opinion of anyone. Am I to make it four suspects?
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 27, 2016, 01:09:02 pm
To repeat my role:
I'm the town weakness. I block people who visit me, but if I'm not visited I can block other people. Last night, like all the other nights so far, I was visited so I blocked whoever visited me.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 01:14:17 pm
I believe I've already claimed everything but:
I'm Town Special.
I have a night action to Poke someone.
Poked TDS N0, was roleblocked.
Poked hector N1, success.
Poked Starver N2, success.
...What on earth just happened?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 01:22:36 pm
It's the Town wincon, TMS. I win if the Evil role is eliminated.
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 01:23:24 pm
Nuh-uh. TDS is the blocker, and he was the entire time.
I visited him last night. And he blocks everyone if he's visited.
Has anyone else found it strange that there has been no kills?
I'd like both DarkStar and Moonlit to give an explanation of this.
If Moonlit is right and TDS has an auto that blocks all the people in the game when he gets visited, how do you have results?
You know what, that doesn't make any sense.
Moonlit
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 01:24:07 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 01:24:23 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 01:25:35 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 01:26:08 pm
PPE: give us a full claim then Moonlit.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 01:28:49 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 01:46:18 pm
Alright Hector:
I have an ability that tells me my targets ability.
I can't be roleblocked.
I inspected Starver N0. He has an inspect called Inspect that gives the alignment of his target.
I inspected Hector N1. He has an ability called Sentinel which he uses on someone, and if they visit him, then he learns their ability. He doesn't visit.
TDS N2. He has an ability called Small Talk that roleblocks his target. He has an auto called Surprise Visit, which causes him to use Small Talk on everyone who visits instead of his target.
This checks out for me. How does it check out for you, Starver?
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 01:47:21 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 01:48:07 pm
Everyone was roleblocked last night.
What makes you say that?
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 02:04:38 pm
Alright, I'll vote Moonlit for lying about his role because it's the only lead we have.I did not visit you and I was blocked... That means something. Hmm, two pages behind. Still, saying it anyway.
To repeat my role:
I'm the town weakness. I block people who visit me, but if I'm not visited I can block other people. Last night, like all the other nights so far, I was visited so I blocked whoever visited me.
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 02:05:32 pm
Wait.Yes, I was poked...
You're N2 poke was successful?
(Catching up...)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 02:06:03 pm
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 02:12:11 pm
Rigjt skill (revealed by me), rigjt skill name (not revealed by me.)Alright Hector:
I have an ability that tells me my targets ability.
I can't be roleblocked.
I inspected Starver N0. He has an inspect called Inspect that gives the alignment of his target.
I inspected Hector N1. He has an ability called Sentinel which he uses on someone, and if they visit him, then he learns their ability. He doesn't visit.
TDS N2. He has an ability called Small Talk that roleblocks his target. He has an auto called Surprise Visit, which causes him to use Small Talk on everyone who visits instead of his target.
This checks out for me. How does it check out for you, Starver?
I can't mesh the facts of TDS that happened to me. I wasn't visiting, yet I was blocked. You visited him, which should have done "instead of the target" even if I was targeted, by how I read your wording.
Thinking...
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 02:14:23 pm
Then how did I know it's name? Lucky guess?Except he was visited N0 by TBF, and Starver got a result.I visited TDS, causing Surprise Visit to activate.Everyone was roleblocked last night.
What makes you say that?
My thought earlier in talking with TBF was that if he pokes TDS, his blocking action doesn't work on everyone. Which is perhaps how Starver wasn't blocked N0, but subsequently was as TBF has been systematically poking everyone else.
Post by: Tomasque on June 27, 2016, 02:14:51 pm
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 02:15:54 pm
PPE: Oh yeah, amd that, unless poking doesnvt activate it either.
Offline for a bit, I'll get back shortly.
Ppe2: hmmm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 02:21:23 pm
I'm still stuck between deciding Moonlit and TDS. Moonlit's revelation of action names is interesting. He got mine right too. I'm having trouble with how he's describing Darkstar's though...
TBF's poke is quite bothersome too though. He's poked everyone except Moonlit, and his lack of content, while understandable to some extent with his inexplicable action, does make me think he's not town.
PPE:
Argh, messed up.
Here's TDS's ability, explained: He has an ability called Small Talk that roleblocks his target. He has an auto called Surprise Visit, which causes him to use Small Talk on everyone who visits instead of his target. This triggers if he is visited.
Right...
As today is not the last day, I think we can get away with lynching BiggerFish.
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 03:35:29 pm
Moonlit, you've regained plausibility, but no certainty that you're Town, as those skills are useful in various targetted non-Town backstabbings. Ditto you, Hector. TDS seems to have a spoiler ability. Fish's poke has not been revealed by Moonlit, to explain why I might be getting an anti-Miller result. That would be an obvious N3 check, Moonlit, unless you want to check yourself.
I have two reasonable options open to me (apart from nothing, which doesn't help at all), but only useful if nobody triggers TDS and TDS doesn't target me, by current understanding.
Right now, I'm swayed (back) to TDS being the one to remove, if anyone, today, then if the game doesn't end, for good or bad, I can make my choice of investigation, etc, and we can work from there.
If you trust my simple role for what it is. I know I'm the only one that Moonlit thinks can confirm alignment, so maybe you think that (for some reason) is a non-Town ability... Can't see why, but saying it anyway.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 06:19:37 pm
Argh, messed up.Which is why my poke N2 worked, because it wasn't aimed at TDS... This also broke my N0 poke.
Here's TDS's ability, explained: He has an ability called Small Talk that roleblocks his target. He has an auto called Surprise Visit, which causes him to use Small Talk on everyone who visits instead of his target. This triggers if he is visited.
@hector:Mostly because I'm hoping it'll do something if I poke the right person. It might be secretly a vigilante if I target scum or something. I seriously just, have no idea.
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 06:24:32 pm
I don't like how TDS lied about his role.
Where?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 06:28:49 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 06:32:21 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 06:32:47 pm
That's not...
What?
You're reading it wrong, TMS, I'm pretty sure.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 06:38:20 pm
Are you using dictation software or something?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 06:39:15 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 06:42:35 pm
Here's TDS's ability, explained: He has an ability called Small Talk that roleblocks his target. He has an auto called Surprise Visit, which causes him to use Small Talk on everyone who visits instead of his target. This triggers if he is visited.
I'd like you to check: is the first bolded part everyone who visits, or is it everyone who visits TDS?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 27, 2016, 06:43:50 pm
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 07:40:59 pm
Oh, for dammit
.. That was supposed to be God dammit...
I'm sorry.
What he said is that he blocks the person who visits him. His real role is that if he is visited, he blocks everyone who visits..
There we go.
@hector it's everyone who visits. Checked the PM.
@TBF Starver did. I'm the only other one with a visiting role.
N0, I was not blocked in my visitation of Fish, despite Fish (saying, and apparently being confirmed, that he was simultaneously) visiting TDS with a poke. Someone check, but I think it was a non-suspicious confirmation. Besides, the poke happened N1, upon Hector, whilst I apparently triggered the blocking (included blocking me) but Fish poked Hector and Moonlit triggered the blocking effect N2 whilst Fish poked me. Poking seems immune to blocking (whatever else it does) but still triggers TDS's auto if aimed at him, and Moonlit's semi-confirmed investigative skill doesn't get blocked (not sure about that 'lying era' claim to have been blocked, needs re-reading) even when activating SmallTalk (my activating investigation blocked myself, though). So confusion of mechanisms. Or more than one person is lying, still. And I need TDS to speak up and try to explain this, please. Your big chance to 'correct' us all, perhaps.
And I can recognise tablet typos in Moonlit's contributions...
"What he said is that Jr blocks the person who visits him. Good to reply is that if by of voted, he blocks Everyone who visits. Which is why starver was blocked."
=="What he said is that he blocks the person who visits him. Got the reply is that if he is visited, he blocks Everyone who visits. Which is why starver was blocked."
...at a guess. Combination of accidentally touching adjacent 'key's and hitting the autosuggestion boxes, above the 'keyboard' top row, and swapping in some nonsensical word. Happens all the time for me, multiple times in this very message but hopefully I already caught them all. But that's not IC.
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 07:52:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 27, 2016, 07:52:28 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 27, 2016, 07:59:27 pm
So who is the last person Moonlit hasn't checked? TBF, right?
Post by: Starver on June 27, 2016, 08:43:48 pm
Unvote because Moonlit appears to be telling the truth. He does indeed know what my role is.Moonlit can't tell us alignment. I can. (I can't tell your alignment, northat of others, when your Action/Auto kicks off in my direction.) We can only assume alignment from the relative usefulness of the actions that Moonlit tells us, w.r.t. possible alignments.
So who is the last person Moonlit hasn't checked? TBF, right?
Please do explain your role again, though. I really want to hear if you have any disagreements with Moonlit's revelations/analysis.
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 27, 2016, 09:03:49 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 28, 2016, 12:04:09 am
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 28, 2016, 11:31:26 am
Ok... TDS is still lying, then.
For emphasis (my vote's already on him) TDS
You said what my role was, I confirmed what it was. What lie is there?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 28, 2016, 11:35:33 am
That's, again, an overly broad reading, IMHO.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 28, 2016, 11:36:24 am
Post by: hector13 on June 28, 2016, 11:37:33 am
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 28, 2016, 11:39:01 am
What he said is that he blocks the person who visits him. His real role is that if he is visited, he blocks everyone who visits..There.
Uh what. That's literally the same thing.
Me: I block everyone who visits me. (To further clarify, I target everyone who visits me with my roleblocking ability.)
You: I block everyone who visits me.
PPE: Now I'm even more confused. What is the difference between what Moonlit is saying and what I'm saying?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 28, 2016, 11:39:40 am
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 28, 2016, 11:41:58 am
TDS:Moonlit is saying you block everyone who visits ANYBODY.
I'll check with Tomasque, but the wording of my role suggests otherwise.
Post by: hector13 on June 28, 2016, 11:43:03 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 28, 2016, 11:44:17 am
Post by: hector13 on June 28, 2016, 11:45:37 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 28, 2016, 12:07:41 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 28, 2016, 12:08:44 pm
Unvote, for the moment.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 28, 2016, 12:11:19 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 28, 2016, 12:13:44 pm
Post by: Starver on June 28, 2016, 01:19:22 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 28, 2016, 02:50:30 pm
Everyone: Have you had a blockable action succeed anytime during the game? Because if so, then I obviously don't block everyone - I've been visited every night (and I'm notified of this, but not who the visitor(s) are).
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 28, 2016, 03:22:45 pm
It seems that - no, TBF, why don't you explain further?We don't know which of you two is lying about the mechanics of TDS's roleblock.
I, personally, am inclined to read it according to TDS's interpretation (and have been all along), so I don't know how you're seizing on to the lack of one word so strongly. It's like you're trying to frame a case through incredible obstinacy and exact words, which is frankly a really weird way to do things.
That, and what if TDS isn't the only person with a roleblock? I mean, it's certainly not impossible.
@TDS:Assuming my poke is roleblockable, yes, I have in fact had it succeed on nights when, by TMS's theory and barring some weird exception to the rules, I woupd have been blocked.
So...I'm going to switch my vote to Moonlit.
Post by: Starver on June 28, 2016, 03:55:38 pm
The poke happened each time (no obvious reason to believe anything blocking-related to initiating a non-TDS block, but has to be considered), noticably blocked only upon N0, upon the Blocking Source, never at any other time
Hector's skill never got a chance to be blocked, because I didn't, then wouldn't, notice and follow-up on the invitation to visit.
Moonlit is a strange one, has definitely lied, and said as how he was bocked in http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7061563#msg7061563 yet not ever in http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7067056#msg7067056 and it's just too strange and confusing. And not the only one. But role-discovery seems legit, with but marginal scum-use behind it. Thoughts from others?
(Ninjaed by Fish, as I spent a lot of time rereading thread.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 28, 2016, 03:57:33 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 28, 2016, 05:39:52 pm
....Hector, what have you to say here?
argh
Post by: hector13 on June 28, 2016, 05:49:20 pm
Perhaps Moonlit thus cannot be investigated... then again, neither can TDS. 0-0
TBF has been poking his way through the town (*nudge wink*) willy-nilly, and my action results have specifically stated they failed because I wasn't visited, not because I was blocked. The only claimed unblockable is Moonlit, however... 1-0, TDS
TDS has claimed town weakness though - this makes sense given his blocking and potential inability to be investigated - TBF town special - which I still find hard to believe, but is secondary just now; I think he's neutral - while Starver and I have claimed investigative roles, and Moonlit I guess has alluded to same with his action. 2-0, TDS
I think I'm more inclined to accept TDS' position at this point, sorry Moonlit.
Post by: Starver on June 29, 2016, 02:38:26 am
It's absolutely on a knife-edge, some contrary things on my mind, but I've got to go for Moonlit. Happier to know that there is more time to correct a merely misguided action at this point. Hoping it's not a bad mistake.
(I was looking forward to hearing Fish's role info, but that'll have to wait unti endgame reveal, I suppose.)
Post by: Starver on June 29, 2016, 08:06:02 am
It seems, from my knowledge alone, that there's a possibility that there's a blocking (or blocker-blocking?) action that matches nothing so far described.The poke happened each time (no obvious reason to believe anything blocking-related to initiating a non-TDS block, but has to be considered), noticably blocked only upon N0, upon the Blocking Source, never at any other timeWhat 'non-TDS block'?
Quote
Utility. Hector, by all accounts including your own, is limited to a lucky counter-target.Moonlit is a strange one, has definitely lied, and said as how he was bocked in http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7061563#msg7061563 yet not ever in http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7067056#msg7067056 and it's just too strange and confusing. And not the only one. But role-discovery seems legit, with but marginal scum-use behind it. Thoughts from others?If my role has scum use, why don't you say that to Hector, who also discover's his target's action, not their role?
One possibility is that your skill is investigative insofar as discovering what skill it is disallowing. N0 you get TDS's skill from him, as he blocks Fish, N1 you get Hector's skill as he Sentinals waiting for me, N2, you get my skill, stopping me from scanning you. But you report it differently.
Right now, I really want to get detail on Fish, to confirm a match with my own alignment check that you readily agreed with, but I don't think that's going to happen this side of a fuller reveal.
Quote
I wasn't blocked, but lied about that so I could question Hector (Or else he would've easily evaded my questions).Silly move. Which isn't to say that I haven't done similar.
But, right now, it's the desperation in your arguments that is making me happier to have voted you.
Post by: hector13 on June 29, 2016, 10:43:35 am
Post by: hector13 on June 29, 2016, 10:56:28 am
I do believe the day ended not quite 7 hours ago.>:(
Post by: Tomasque on June 30, 2016, 01:22:46 pm
Post by: Tomasque on June 30, 2016, 02:02:18 pm
Votecount
Hector13 (0)
TheDarkStar (1) - The Moonlit Shadow
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow () - Starver, hector13, TheBiggerFish, TheDarkStar
Not Voting:
The Moonlit Shadow was the Doppelgänger
Spoiler: Doppelgänger (click to show/hide)
hector13 gets one victory point.
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
Starver gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on June 30, 2016, 02:06:05 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 30, 2016, 02:07:11 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 30, 2016, 02:08:00 pm
Post by: Starver on June 30, 2016, 02:13:11 pm
(Also three investigative roles, in actuality, although only two were 'official'.)
I think you could have been subtler, Moonlit, and not so jumpy-around, but you disguised your role well despite this. It was niggles, only, that nearly (then actually) had me voting for you. Subtly different interactions would definitely have kept me believing you as allied.
@Hector: just a poke, it seems.
Post by: Tomasque on June 30, 2016, 02:14:10 pm
Post by: Starver on June 30, 2016, 02:19:47 pm
Me and thee were Hectorised, D1, IIRC. I held back because the marathon model seems to like scumkill-by-mislynch often enough for me to not so much rush to roleflip possible townies.Oh.
That means I'm left with three suspects, one now less suspicious than before, another more suspicious than before and the mysterious third who I suspect to be Neutral (but isn't the person I long thought to be neutral, nor necessarily certainly so even now) but I need an attempt at explanation from TDS to swing me one or the other or (possibly) the other. And I can wait.
(And I keep getting Ninjaed. 4, then 4, now 3.)
I see now.
I wonder how I didn't see this before.
...Ok... am I thinking this through too deeply?
I trusted you, Starver. And... you're a smart guy.
Very smart.
(This message didn't help, it made me receptive to your flip-flopping, although it's obvious in hindsight that you're at that pount setting me up for a fall.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 30, 2016, 02:20:53 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 30, 2016, 02:21:34 pm
Post by: Tomasque on June 30, 2016, 02:21:48 pm
So... what was with the poke, Tomasque?
What WAS with the poke?I have to thank Jack AT for that idea: He had a similiar "marking" ability that he gave me in one of his games.
However, there is some utility to this ability, and there are 3 reasons why I had in in the game:
1. It can be used as a possible "proof" that you are an innocent role. A hard sell, but beneficial if pulled off.
2. It causes chaos if acquired by the Doppelgänger. When suddenly half the players are poked in one night, they'll be a lot of discussion about it in the morning.
3. It can lead to the reveal of the Doppelgänger. If people realize that all the players who's pokes were unaccounted for visited the same person, it could lead to chain reaction that will end with a lynching - or at least a spirited discussion.
Post by: Starver on June 30, 2016, 02:22:29 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 30, 2016, 02:24:37 pm
Good job, TDS.
By the way, is there such a thing as a wincount available?
Post by: Starver on June 30, 2016, 02:32:18 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on June 30, 2016, 02:39:56 pm
I had considered revealing how it worked on D1 and 2, but as Starver exemplified, demanding a visit probably wouldn't encourage folk to do so in Mafia :))
Post by: hector13 on June 30, 2016, 02:53:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 30, 2016, 02:56:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on June 30, 2016, 03:44:27 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on June 30, 2016, 07:09:31 pm
And gg everyone. I guess my 1 point will put me in sixth place when Mafia Marathon ends :P.
I'd also like to give a big thank you to TDS for substituting for FoU this round. If I ever have an open spot again, he'll be the first one I ask.
Thanks for letting me play! I don't have the chance to play many small games of mafia (the closest I get is MyLo/LyLo at the end of large games), so it was fun to play something unusual.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on June 30, 2016, 07:15:34 pm
That's how I interpret it. It's contingent on TDS being visited, so it's anyone who visited TDS that gets affected.Ditto...
Post by: Tomasque on July 01, 2016, 12:56:59 pm
By the way - if you really enjoy mafia, you could join the one that's about to start here (http://s15.zetaboards.com/InterForum_Cult/topic/8470030/1). However, you have to be a member to join (just post here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=158754.0), and you'll be added). It's going to be a fun game - you shouldn't miss it!
Post by: TheDarkStar on July 01, 2016, 02:02:38 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 01, 2016, 02:06:11 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 02, 2016, 03:00:47 pm
Post by: Tomasque on July 05, 2016, 12:39:10 pm
(http://harrycolemanphotography.weebly.com/uploads/2/3/4/4/23449180/6592716.png?395)
Day ends Thursday, 11:00 AM PDT
Thursday, 6:00 PM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 05, 2016, 12:39:51 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 05, 2016, 12:49:50 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 05, 2016, 01:00:52 pm
somewhere back a few rounds, hector stated something like "each round is more bastard than the last".
I pronounce that that is Hector's Law, and it is completely true.
~~~
One... two... three... and four. Hmm... Maybe two four's?Is this some sort of cryptic statement that will make sense later but not now?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 05, 2016, 01:07:23 pm
Clarify?
~~~
Tomasque: Can we lynch people this round?
Post by: Tomasque on July 05, 2016, 01:08:55 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 05, 2016, 01:10:23 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 05, 2016, 01:19:51 pm
Post by: Starver on July 05, 2016, 01:32:55 pm
Reporting in, but I don't think I'm going to be master of my own fate, this game, and looks like others think the same. Could get complicated, if my imagination is doing this round justice.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 05, 2016, 01:33:39 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 05, 2016, 01:35:41 pm
You see, one is a certain role. Two is another role. Three is another one. Four is yet another one.I'm still confused. But I think I get what you have in mind. Unvote, for the moment.
But that's only four, so either a double or a neutral...
It's probably not quite so straightforward, but that should cover it decently.
Now, what did you think when you saw the picture I posted?Immediately: Nothing, really.
Now: Is this some sort of art themed round?
~~~
NINJAS
THEY ATTACK
FOREVERMORE
~~~
... eh?
Post by: hector13 on July 05, 2016, 01:41:21 pm
Who's in control, though?
The question on my mind, most certainly. Is the evil role in control, or do they get to look on and laugh as the town destroys itself?
PPE:
Who's in control, though?I don't think they're in as much control as they think.
But I also suspect there's a second controller with complete control.
Oh? What about a third controller, who is in more complete control?
This is an odd thing to say, though. Presently pondering on why it raises my hackles so.
Post by: hector13 on July 05, 2016, 01:46:11 pm
Wait, no, that second controller is controlling the first controller: Maybe. And maybe not in the same way...
That doesn't make sense. You seem to be deliberately trying to confuse us.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 05, 2016, 01:47:52 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 05, 2016, 01:48:04 pm
Everybody is being confusing. Everybody. Can we please get on with scum hunting?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 05, 2016, 01:51:02 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 05, 2016, 01:52:40 pm
Or I'm guessing.
How has that guesswork helped us so far? You've had 2 of the 4 players who aren't you say you're not making sense so far.
FoU has the right thing going. We need to find scum else all this theory rafting is just noise.
So. Can we claim if we've got a controlling action/a controlled action?
Do you think that's a good idea on D1? None of us have much of a sense of what's going on. Could be the Evil role is the controlling force, do you want to tell them everything right at the start?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 05, 2016, 01:57:19 pm
Post by: Starver on July 05, 2016, 03:01:34 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 05, 2016, 03:03:51 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 05, 2016, 05:48:29 pm
How about we ask various questions, then place votes based on the answers we receive?
~~~
Everybody: What do you think this round's flavor theme is? Mechanics theme?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 05, 2016, 06:01:08 pm
Seems like the games are getting more and more bastard-like as we go on. Oh dear.Also, found the relevant quote.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 06, 2016, 12:02:01 pm
Well then.Pretty much, that picture Moonlit posted.
How about we ask various questions, then place votes based on the answers we receive?
~~~
Everybody: What do you think this round's flavor theme is? Mechanics theme?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 06, 2016, 01:40:35 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 06, 2016, 04:19:00 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 06, 2016, 05:46:35 pm
To start with, I have no idea what the mechanics theme is. Not even a clue.
Flavor theme... maybe modern art, based on the opening day post?
Now how about you respond in kind.
Post by: hector13 on July 06, 2016, 07:04:17 pm
It appears as though you're just trying to look like you're doing something.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 06, 2016, 07:13:21 pm
That's, like...You're missing the VERY BLATANTLY OBVIOUS IN YOUR FACE claims of control/controlled actions. I don't even how. Consider this a pressure vote till you have a theory one way or the other.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 06, 2016, 07:59:05 pm
FoUUh... how is posting an image supposed to be a claim?
That's, like...You're missing the VERY BLATANTLY OBVIOUS IN YOUR FACE claims of control/controlled actions. I don't even how. Consider this a pressure vote till you have a theory one way or the other.
~~~
Perhaps you can tell us how this is helping us find scum, first. You offered nothing, TBF and Moonlit offered the same thing they offered before.... perhaps because I am doing something?
It appears as though you're just trying to look like you're doing something.
Anyway... how does this help us find scum? Honestly, I don't have a clue, but it's something to start with.
Unless you have better ideas?
Post by: hector13 on July 06, 2016, 08:30:22 pm
Could also throw what you said right back at you: how is claiming you know nothing
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 06, 2016, 08:44:39 pm
Role claiming day 1? Bad idea, yes.
Could also throw what you said right back at you: how is claiming you know nothing... it gives the town information?Jon Snowin any way helpful for the town?
~~~
Okay, now what, hector? How do we find the scum? If my methods aren't working, what would you recommend?
Post by: hector13 on July 06, 2016, 08:56:55 pm
As for finding scum, we need people to talk. Perhaps Starver would like to interject? What are your thoughts on proceedings? I recall there were a few games in which you were really quiet and turned up scum. What assurances can you give us this isn't the reason for your silence this time?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 06, 2016, 09:20:52 pm
FoUUh... how is posting an image supposed to be a claim?
That's, like...You're missing the VERY BLATANTLY OBVIOUS IN YOUR FACE claims of control/controlled actions. I don't even how. Consider this a pressure vote till you have a theory one way or the other.
Who's in control, though?I don't think they're in as much control as they think.
But I also suspect there's a second controller with complete control.
Who's in control, though?
The question on my mind, most certainly. Is the evil role in control, or do they get to look on and laugh as the town destroys itself?
PPE:Who's in control, though?I don't think they're in as much control as they think.
But I also suspect there's a second controller with complete control.
Oh? What about a third controller, who is in more complete control?
This is an odd thing to say, though. Presently pondering on why it raises my hackles so.
Wait, no, that second controller is controlling the first controller: Maybe. And maybe not in the same way...
So. Can we claim if we've got a controlling action/a controlled action?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 06, 2016, 09:23:31 pm
Post by: Starver on July 07, 2016, 03:19:27 am
Perhaps Starver would like to interject? What are your thoughts on proceedings? I recall there were a few games in which you were really quiet and turned up scum. What assurances can you give us this isn't the reason for your silence this time?No assurances, this early. I've just been busy and travelling.
I was even going to declare things asked by Fish, until you shot that down quite effectively. Since then, there's only really been one thing worth responding to, when I've had time, and I've only just seen that.
Everybody: What do you think this round's flavor theme is? Mechanics theme?Performance/small theatre, perhaps (depends on the interpretation of my role words). I think the picture answer and others' responses resonate with my impression of the *ahem* mechanics.
I will point out that I'm not sure who is deliberately antagonising who, but there's some tension. Could be blue-on-blue general argument, but could also be the key to gaining game supremacy.
Post by: Starver on July 07, 2016, 12:55:12 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 07, 2016, 12:56:57 pm
That doesn't look OMGUS-like, not at all.
Post by: hector13 on July 07, 2016, 12:58:17 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 07, 2016, 01:22:02 pm
Post by: Starver on July 07, 2016, 01:43:19 pm
And I've lost track of time, while I was unable to check in. And by reckoning, if that had been a vote, even, then it wouldn't do anything but annoy you. But you're easily annoyed. And you're ignoring the reason I actually gave, which I thought you deserved as you don't like me being quiet, even when you tell me not to say anythong. Meh.
Fun.
Post by: hector13 on July 07, 2016, 01:53:25 pm
Post by: Tomasque on July 07, 2016, 03:49:59 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/AGewxwv.png)
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (1) - TheBiggerFish
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (1) - hector13
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not Voting: FallacyofUrist, Starver, The Moonlit Shadow
Post by: Tomasque on July 08, 2016, 02:58:12 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/qKpIW9r.png)
Day ends Sunday, 1:00 PM PDT
Sunday, 6:00 PM GMT
Post by: hector13 on July 08, 2016, 07:12:44 pm
Green? Oh, probably the fiddly touchscreen interface (the number of times I've had to convert bold to the intended italics). Take it as you will, though.
And I've lost track of time, while I was unable to check in. And by reckoning, if that had been a vote, even, then it wouldn't do anything but annoy you. But you're easily annoyed. And you're ignoring the reason I actually gave, which I thought you deserved as you don't like me being quiet, even when you tell me not to say anythong. Meh.
Fun.
When have I ever told anyone not to say anything? I may counsel against revealing certain pieces of information, but that doesn't mean I want you to be quiet. There's more than one way to
FoU, you never answered TBF's question from D1.
You may wish to specify which question.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 08, 2016, 08:15:29 pm
Other than the control-claiming.
Post by: Starver on July 08, 2016, 09:17:52 pm
hmm... do you mean to say that you are watching us all act in this... show?No, I don' t mean that, precisely.
Perhaps... perhaps you are watching the video feed of the 'drone'...
I don't actually know what I did last night, but it wasn't me being passive. I hope the one that probably understands this is on my (and thus more than me's) side, though.
Gambling on this, a bit, though. Worst case, I'm discarded by the one responsible, and that serves as a clue.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 08, 2016, 09:19:13 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 08, 2016, 09:49:13 pm
Also:Well the day is over, so I will wait to respond to that.
Green? Oh, probably the fiddly touchscreen interface (the number of times I've had to convert bold to the intended italics). Take it as you will, though.
And I've lost track of time, while I was unable to check in. And by reckoning, if that had been a vote, even, then it wouldn't do anything but annoy you. But you're easily annoyed. And you're ignoring the reason I actually gave, which I thought you deserved as you don't like me being quiet, even when you tell me not to say anythong. Meh.
Fun.
When have I ever told anyone not to say anything? I may counsel against revealing certain pieces of information, but that doesn't mean I want you to be quiet. There's more than one way toskin a catfind scum in mafia, none of which are useful if you don't actually interact with others.
... Which Starver conveniently ignored.
I will add that the timing of the FoS also bothers me a great deal. He gave his excuse, fair enough I can accept that, but as I said it came 5 minutes prior to day end, so nobody could discuss it, and the reason behind it was quite the misrepresentation of what I said earlier.
I don't see what the point of it was, other than to say "I'll be targeting you during the night, bro." and maybe to make other players wary of me urging caution instead of claiming outright. Could speculate further that he wants the cautious one out of the way so the rest of you claim willy-nilly so he knows who to target, but as I say, speculation.
Spoiler: Additional Speculation (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 08, 2016, 09:56:23 pm
Even if it was, Starver claimed complete ignorance of their action.
Speaking of, Starver, do you want to claim what you could have done? Do you even know?
Post by: hector13 on July 08, 2016, 10:11:11 pm
What else could an FoS 5 minutes before deadline be?
Post by: Starver on July 08, 2016, 10:54:07 pm
When have I ever told anyone not to say anything? I may counsel against revealing certain pieces of information, but that doesn't mean I want you to be quiet. There's more than one way toI never heard anything other than a shutting down of conversation.skin a catfind scum in mafia, none of which are useful if you don't actually interact with others.
And, fully understanding that I think that, you vote my way...
Oh, and for a FoS. Can't actually remember the last time I officially FoSsed, so maybe it was something tricky and strategic, but even if I deliberately sniped it in at the end of the day, it altered nothing. It could definitely wait to be discussed. Although as I gave my reason, I was hoping you'd have a decent counter.
Like reply to:
Logic is seemingly impeccable, but what then do we do?...like you could be said to have conveniently ignored.
Quote
I don't see what the point of it was, other than to say "I'll be targeting you during the night, bro."I'd have to go into the territory of bluff, double-bluff, etc, to so label myself as the author of your nightly demise. If anything, I've probably protected you, by highlighting (assuming the bad guy is neither of us) a handy scapegoat for the real enemy. Which I'll admit is something I overlooked until the cold dark of night.
Quote
Could speculate further that he wants the cautious one out of the way so the rest of you claim willy-nilly so he knows who to target, but as I say, speculation.Right now, your idea could be as valid as mine, save that I know what I intended and what I've been misread about, and I know that nobody else knows this.
De-spoilered, there being no use for it:
Quote
It has occurred to me that the Evil role might have an action that is controlled by another player, perhaps so we can't just figure out who they are when we do get 'round to claiming.Whether the evil is (unknowingly?) controlled, or not, only one person does not seem to have an inkling of this more general scenario. Whether this leads credence to any particular theory, or not, I can not yet divine.
Sorry, took ages with this, slightly ninjaed.
Fish: Too early to specify what I know, by my judgement. Too late if I already overspoke and clued in the wrong person. But it's different to your initial stated assumption.
Hector faulty logic, as mentioned above. Now please stop ninjaing in-between my periods of good signal.
Post by: Starver on July 08, 2016, 11:03:33 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 08, 2016, 11:13:30 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 09, 2016, 12:13:20 am
We are capable of deception, TBF...Yes, I know that. However, it's a far less plausible claim than 'didn't act', which lends it some credence.
What else could an FoS 5 minutes before deadline be?
I don't know, a FoS, hector?
I agree with Starver. You shut down conversation quite handily there, without even providing an alternative line to pursue. Sure, you normally do that, but not even discussing a broad round mechanic?
Post by: hector13 on July 09, 2016, 12:41:47 am
We are capable of deception, TBF...Yes, I know that. However, it's a far less plausible claim than 'didn't act', which lends it some credence.
What else could an FoS 5 minutes before deadline be?
I don't know, a FoS, hector?
I agree with Starver. You shut down conversation quite handily there, without even providing an alternative line to pursue. Sure, you normally do that, but not even discussing a broad round mechanic?
To paraphrase an aggressive meme: Quote me, bro. You find a quote in which I specifically stated I didn't want to discuss the round mechanic before I wake up tomorrow (9am Central), and I'll vote for myself.
If you don't, consider this an accusation of buddying with Starver, or piggy-backing on his arguments, most likely to be followed by a vote.
For both TBF and Starver: one thing I will say before bed is that I'm not the only player in the game. If you're going to rely on everyone else to come up with topics to discuss, why are you playing the game?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 09, 2016, 12:44:58 am
So. Can we claim if we've got a controlling action/a controlled action?
Do you think that's a good idea on D1? None of us have much of a sense of what's going on. Could be the Evil role is the controlling force, do you want to tell them everything right at the start?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 09, 2016, 12:47:32 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 09, 2016, 12:52:33 am
Post by: hector13 on July 09, 2016, 09:48:00 am
So. Can we claim if we've got a controlling action/a controlled action?
Do you think that's a good idea on D1? None of us have much of a sense of what's going on. Could be the Evil role is the controlling force, do you want to tell them everything right at the start?
No, that's telling people not to claim on D1, because that would be stupid. We have lost games from people doing that.
Here is me discussing (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7078595#msg7078595) the mechanics (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7078608#msg7078608) of the round (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7083110#msg7083110).
What makes me so special that I have to come up with topics of discussion, yet when only FoU does, you don't jump on Starver or Moonlit? (This also applies to Starver, who I'll reply to in a bit as batteries need to be charged, both physical, mental, and electrical.)
Post by: Starver on July 09, 2016, 10:35:32 am
Here is me discussing (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7078595#msg7078595) the mechanics (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7078608#msg7078608) of the round (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7083110#msg7083110).First one vaguely counts, although is a bit obvious. Second is a shoot-down (unless you intended to make me think it was more likely). Third is after I called you out, perhaps to divert from your own pre-emptive OMGUS.
(By the way, OOC: Hello from Penzance. Not seen any pirates yet.)
Post by: hector13 on July 09, 2016, 01:38:30 pm
Ok, I didn't think it worth comment, but...When have I ever told anyone not to say anything? I may counsel against revealing certain pieces of information, but that doesn't mean I want you to be quiet. There's more than one way toI never heard anything other than a shutting down of conversation.skin a catfind scum in mafia, none of which are useful if you don't actually interact with others.
And, fully understanding that I think that, you vote my way...
Another paraphrasing of aggressive memes: prove it, bro. I've mentioned before I sometimes find it difficult to penetrate what you're trying to say.
Specifically:
Pondering, now my power is recharged... FOS on Hector, but far too little information to tell. (Precisely why the FOS, shutting down speculation.) I hate Day 1s.
Now this is going to come across as really nit-picky, but it's what caused me to think you weren't providing a reason for your FoS. You used a comma and didn't say to whom you were referring (you or me) so I assumed you were saying "I'm not going to provide a reason for my FoS" as opposed to what you meant, which was "the reason I'm FoS'ing hector is because I feel he's shutting down speculation." Had you used a colon instead, I probably wouldn't have misinterpreted it. This was also partly as a result of you dropping the FoS with 5 minutes left in the day, which I'll go into in the next bit.
Oh, and for a FoS. Can't actually remember the last time I officially FoSsed, so maybe it was something tricky and strategic, but even if I deliberately sniped it in at the end of the day, it altered nothing. It could definitely wait to be discussed. Although as I gave my reason, I was hoping you'd have a decent counter.
If it could wait to be discussed, why did you drop it with 5 minutes to day end? This was your only contribution for the day, and you gave no time for discussion, and it also happened to be on the only person voting for you. You know I'm not going to keep discussing things post-deadline, as I have probably said at least once every round "day's over, stop talking" or some variation thereof.
Thus, I panicked a bit because I felt it was very likely to influence night actions, and I had no time to get into a discussion about what you were saying - which I consequently misinterpreted - and the fact that I felt it was a massive OMGUS.
Like reply to:Logic is seemingly impeccable, but what then do we do?...like you could be said to have conveniently ignored.
I addressed this a bit with TBF: I'm not the only player in the game. You were silent D1, with the exception of your 5-minutes-to-deadline-FoS. Why didn't you bring up something to say? Why are you not throwing shade TBF or Moonlit's way?
FoU came up with something (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7078895#msg7078895), but nobody did anything about it. Moonlit posted the same picture (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7079425#msg7079425) he had earlier, TBF agreed (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7079575#msg7079575) with him - same as he did earlier (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7078522#msg7078522) - and then FoU complained (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7079686#msg7079686), so I asked him to answer his own question (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7079922#msg7079922) so we knew what he was trying to get at. He offered nothing (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7080020#msg7080020), and you were entirely silent during proceedings. After advising folk not to do a bone-headed move like claim D1, I was the only one who even tried to get someone to offer something new.
QuoteI don't see what the point of it was, other than to say "I'll be targeting you during the night, bro."I'd have to go into the territory of bluff, double-bluff, etc, to so label myself as the author of your nightly demise. If anything, I've probably protected you, by highlighting (assuming the bad guy is neither of us) a handy scapegoat for the real enemy. Which I'll admit is something I overlooked until the cold dark of night.
Well you accepted this argument was WIFOM, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm not convinced your intentions were benevolent. I told you what I felt you were doing with your FoS, which is part of why I reacted the way I did and continued voting for you at the start of the day.
QuoteCould speculate further that he wants the cautious one out of the way so the rest of you claim willy-nilly so he knows who to target, but as I say, speculation.Right now, your idea could be as valid as mine, save that I know what I intended and what I've been misread about, and I know that nobody else knows this.
Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us, then? Might be more helpful than "I know you're wrong and nobody else knows why, so nyeh."
De-spoilered, there being no use for it:QuoteIt has occurred to me that the Evil role might have an action that is controlled by another player, perhaps so we can't just figure out who they are when we do get 'round to claiming.Whether the evil is (unknowingly?) controlled, or not, only one person does not seem to have an inkling of this more general scenario. Whether this leads credence to any particular theory, or not, I can not yet divine.
It was spoilered so folk would know from reading the tag that I was speculating, rather than building on anything specifically that I know about.
Here is me discussing (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7078595#msg7078595) the mechanics (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7078608#msg7078608) of the round (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7083110#msg7083110).First one vaguely counts, although is a bit obvious. Second is a shoot-down (unless you intended to make me think it was more likely). Third is after I called you out, perhaps to divert from your own pre-emptive OMGUS.
(By the way, OOC: Hello from Penzance. Not seen any pirates yet.)
How does the first one only vaguely count? I was speculating about the evil role, then was trying to get Moonlit to explain what he was saying, through implication than explicit questions.
He then proceeded to confuse me more with his response, immediately after the linked post, and I linked the post after that in my second link, saying he wasn't actually clearing things up, followed by him saying he was guessing. Now, right at the start of the game is not necessarily the best time for guessing, so I agreed with FoU that we'd actually better start scumhunting. No amount of speculation will help us find the scum if we don't actually interact with the other players.
I did suggest to TBF not to claim, because I thought that would be a stupid thing to do D1.
The third link was me continuing my vote from the previous day, so how is it an OMGUS? I voted you on D1 because you had said nothing, and then you dropped an FoS on me right at day end, which we've gone into already.
I'm presently stuck between continuing voting for Starver or going for TBF. He piggy-backed on Starver's argument, and when I pointed that out he backed off. Not sure how to interpret that.
I have noticed that they have both ignored my questions on why I'm such a special snowflake, too.
Not pleased that Moonlit and FoU are slipping way under the radar though. Perhaps they'd like to interject with their thoughts?
Post by: Starver on July 09, 2016, 08:39:08 pm
I also miss input from the others. (I think one might have useful information about me, BICBW. And whether we'd bofh agree it needs sharing is a big question.) But Mafia waits for Gnome Ann (http://xkcd.com/1704/)...
* I occasionally go and search out the cycle-start message again, but it's a lot of (comparative) effort when I'm in a general rush to catch up. I'd use a secondary browser tab, next to this one, if I didn't already have... 41 of them on tbe go, for other things. Maybe (assumng not there already... no, but round results are; nice!) Tomasque editing in "latest round start" and "latest cycle start" links to OP would make it a two-step process to find them (at the cost of more effort by Tomasque) if not just that info there. But I shall endeavour to keep an eye on this better. ...Darn! I've no idea when D2 is ending, I realise. Hang on... ... ... took a few clicks. Tomorrow (now today) at 7pm, local. I shall be here (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land%27s_End) by that time. Touristy enough to have a signal if not perhaps Wifi!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 09, 2016, 11:08:29 pm
Also, FoU, I think we're all waiting on that answer.
Post by: hector13 on July 09, 2016, 11:10:44 pm
I think I'll switch my vote over to TBF for the time being, but you still haven't said why I was so deserving of special treatment re: alternative topics of discussion, Starver.
PPE: what answer? Same question to you too, re: alternative topics.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 09, 2016, 11:32:36 pm
I'm not even sure, but I believe I was asking FoU what his impression of the mechanics was.
What made you switch your vote to me?
Post by: hector13 on July 09, 2016, 11:48:41 pm
Re: voting you: you're piggy-backing on someone else's arguments, singling me out for something of which you could easily accuse everyone else, including you, as well as urging FoU to answer a question he has already answered (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7080020#msg7080020), though I will accept it was an underwhelming response.
I'm not liking the silence from Moonlit and FoU this day.
As a side note, tomorrow could easily be a quiet day for me, as I'll be spending time with parents-in-law
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 10, 2016, 12:07:20 am
no lynch
I have articulable reasons, but I also have a headache.
Post by: hector13 on July 10, 2016, 12:15:11 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 10, 2016, 12:20:46 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 10, 2016, 12:21:44 am
Post by: hector13 on July 10, 2016, 12:22:47 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 10, 2016, 12:39:58 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 10, 2016, 12:40:32 am
Post by: Starver on July 10, 2016, 05:36:42 am
D1: Fish 0, Moonlit 1, Fish 0, Moonlit 0.5, Fallacy 0, Moonlit 1, Fallacy 0.5, Tomasque ±1, Fallacy -0.5, Moonlit 1, Fish 1, me ?, Fish 0.5, Fallacy 0.5, Moonlit 0.5, Hector 0.5, Moonlit 0.5, Hector -0.5, Fish 0.5?, Fallacy ±0.5, Moonlit 0, Fish 0.5, Hector -0.5, Fish 0, Starver 0, Fish 1, Fallacy 1, Fallacy 0, Moonlit 1, Fish 1, Fallacy 0, Hector 0.5, Fallacy 0.5, Hector -1, Fish ±0.5, Fallacy -0.5, Hector -1, Fallacy 0, Hector -1*, Fish 0.5, Fish 0, me ?, me ?, Hector -0.5, Hector ±0.5, Fish 0, me ?, Hector ±1.
But that's a roughly-delineated impression, not worth adding up. The three-ish pages of D2 could need doing, too, but I predict more negative scores all round. (+1.5 on the post explaining the comma-reading error, I think)
Also wondering if our absentees are forcibly absentee. No perspnal evidence or onowledge of this, but I could see it being part of the theme pattern. (Faked restriction also possible.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 10, 2016, 07:50:16 am
Attempting translation:
Ugh, wrong button.
FoS hector
FoU. Show up, else this vote's staying on you!
If this is NOT what you meant to say, say something.
Unvote, there's no single-vote lynch happening.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 10, 2016, 07:55:44 am
Post by: Tomasque on July 10, 2016, 08:49:27 am
(http://16315-presscdn-0-27.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/judge_gavel2012-wide.jpg)
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (1) - The Moonlit Shadow
TheBiggerFish (1) - hector13
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not Voting: FallacyofUrist, Starver, TheBiggerFish
Post by: Tomasque on July 12, 2016, 12:40:26 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/o6l04Uw.png)
Day ends Thursday, 11:00 AM PDT
Thursday, 6:00 PM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 12, 2016, 12:42:04 pm
I think we should claim.
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 12:49:59 pm
Post by: Tomasque on July 12, 2016, 12:52:36 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 12, 2016, 01:22:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 04:55:01 pm
Moonlit made minimal posts yesterday (one post with a question (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7083587#msg7083587) for Starver, of which there was no follow-up) and FoU was entirely absent. Perhaps those two could maybe post something instead of lurking? That would be good stuff, thanks.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 12, 2016, 05:36:09 pm
SOMEONE USED AN ABILITY ON ME THAT PREVENTED ME FROM POSTING AND/OR VOTING.
Something similar's happened to me today--I can't vote today. Unlucky me.
To top it off with urine, I was role blocked last night. Again.
The Moonlit Shadow, have this "vote", for being TBF's scumbuddy. Or at least, that's my theory.
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 05:50:18 pm
Guess why I was entirely absent.
SOMEONE USED AN ABILITY ON ME THAT PREVENTED ME FROM POSTING AND/OR VOTING.
Something similar's happened to me today--I can't vote today. Unlucky me.
To top it off with urine, I was role blocked last night. Again.
The Moonlit Shadow, have this "vote", for being TBF's scumbuddy. Or at least, that's my theory.
So... You were targeted by three people on N1, and two people on N2..?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 12, 2016, 05:52:41 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 05:58:33 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 12, 2016, 06:10:34 pm
Round 14 - Night 1Now then. On a completely related note, how about we analyze this image? Seems like it could be a representation of the roles to me...
(http://i.imgur.com/AGewxwv.png)
Also: my role is in the form "The Hand of [THING]". I'm thinking that's this round's flavor theme: we're all hands. Anybody else with that form for their role name?
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 06:20:25 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 12, 2016, 06:23:12 pm
And of all of them, this image looks the most... game relevant, shall we say. Partially because my role embodies one of the hands in it.
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 06:29:27 pm
What was irrelevant about the one Moonlit posted? There are only four hands there, but five players.
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 06:34:06 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 06:35:35 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 06:54:38 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 07:05:39 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 07:06:18 pm
There were five hands in the picture on D1.
Post by: hector13 on July 12, 2016, 07:15:38 pm
Post by: Starver on July 13, 2016, 04:35:48 am
FoU, though, IIRC, you seemed originally to have absolutely no idea about hands, which might explain why my controller is not a hand, and would perhaps mean something else about mine.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 13, 2016, 08:20:50 am
there are five hands in that picture(the one I just posted).
Let's count!
1. Pale hand furthest on the left.
2. Further to the right, two hands with a dark pixel aura, one gripping the other.
3. Horrible mouth-thing hand.
4. Now look up. There's a hand holding a sword above the horrible mouth-thing hand.
That makes 5.
FoU, though, IIRC, you seemed originally to have absolutely no idea about hands, which might explain why my controller is not a hand, and would perhaps mean something else about mine.That was before I realized it wasn't just some metaphor or symbolism. It was a sudden realization I had in the middle of Night 1... and then I got bloody silenced.
I'll remind you of the fact that my role is in the form "The Hand of [?]". It then seemed reasonable to me that we're all hands.
Also, given the hand you claimed, how do you explain the Sword of Damocles above you, hm?I don't think I claimed. Please quote the post in which I claimed my role, please.
Post by: Starver on July 13, 2016, 08:58:26 am
Spoiler: Not even hand-related, at first (click to show/hide)
I shall say that I don't know what my controller did (they're probably not the sword, they're perhaps more powerful), but I know that they succeeded twice. They may not know this, but as there are apparently multiple controllers I don't think this is as big a help to an evil controller as it is to everyone else, unless another controllable character (I spotted two claims, maybe not both being totally honst) fills in too many blanks.
Post by: Starver on July 13, 2016, 09:12:19 am
Post by: hector13 on July 13, 2016, 09:59:05 am
Also, given the hand you claimed, how do you explain the Sword of Damocles above you, hm?I don't think I claimed. Please quote the post in which I claimed my role, please.
Ah right, another misreading on my part. It appeared to me you were claiming the freaky looking hand with the sword above it. Hand of Thing, rather than Hand of [Thing]. I'm not doing well with punctuation this round...
I'm going to switch my vote over to Moonlit, for now. The claim of a hand (not even a concrete one!) doesn't sit well with me. Seems like a surreptitious attempt at getting someone else to claim, too.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 13, 2016, 10:25:16 am
I am rather surprised as to FoU's sudden change of heart...
I both do and don't trust his claim, but it is worrisome.
However, given what Moonlit said about their hand, I'm much more suspicious of them.
Post by: hector13 on July 13, 2016, 10:30:49 am
Post by: Starver on July 13, 2016, 02:08:13 pm
Well then.Being second hand to the left? I don't even understand that one, but doesn't look dangerous. Thus I presume this is a counterclaim because you know it is you?
I am rather surprised as to FoU's sudden change of heart...
I both do and don't trust his claim, but it is worrisome.
However, given what Moonlit said about their hand, I'm much more suspicious of them.
I can't trust Fallacy's claim unless someone can satisfy me it's not plain made up. But could be a scared Neutral having chosen wrongly in trying to avoid suspicion of being worse.
Post by: hector13 on July 13, 2016, 04:57:35 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 13, 2016, 06:37:46 pm
I misread the photo.
Unvote.
@hector:His claim makes some sense, but it makes too much sense. Like, it was reverse-derived from the pictures.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 13, 2016, 06:38:39 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 13, 2016, 06:40:28 pm
Post by: Starver on July 13, 2016, 06:57:06 pm
Lone hand, partnered (possibly asymmetrically) hands, screaming with ?rage/fear? hand, power-wielding hand ?of judgement?...
If I had to state a hand, I'd be hard pressed to counterclaim better than the current claimant. But I don't know if that's suspicious, or just down to differing interpretations. It just doesn't match much that I know, or think I know.
It could be that Tomasque is toying with us. When was the last time 'flavour' had such big 'clues'?
Ninjaed by four messages: Claiming lovers, are you? But lovers of what alignments...? Never mind, you wouldn' t say truthfully if it were disadvantageous to do so. May you be happy together, so long as Town wins anyway.
Post by: Starver on July 13, 2016, 06:59:11 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 13, 2016, 07:09:41 pm
Hah.
Did I find you?
*Raises eyebrow*
Yeah, stop trying to get people to claim.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 13, 2016, 07:15:47 pm
You know how the hand is grabbing the other hand? Now imagine that first hand gets to shove. And the second hand wants the first hand to let go.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 13, 2016, 07:59:38 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 13, 2016, 08:06:32 pm
Seriously, just ask questions to other people, man.
Post by: hector13 on July 13, 2016, 08:11:21 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 13, 2016, 10:12:05 pm
I'd like TBF and Moonlit to respond, explaining what's happening between them. One of those guys is likely to get my vote for the end.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 14, 2016, 02:27:45 am
Post by: hector13 on July 14, 2016, 09:46:17 am
Particularly since FoU is voting Moonlit, so it just ties the vote. This is the second time you've attempted to force a no lynch at the end of a day. What gives?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 14, 2016, 09:59:14 am
Particularly since FoU is voting Moonlit, so it just ties the vote.*facepalm*
I can't vote today. Unlucky me.
Post by: hector13 on July 14, 2016, 10:02:59 am
Day ends in three hours. I think TBF is scum.
Post by: Starver on July 14, 2016, 11:23:12 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 14, 2016, 11:57:17 am
Aye, trying to manipulate me into not voting for you by implying it'll look scummy rather than, for example, telling me why you're town, Moonlit isn't, or that my vote would be better elsewhere... how is that beneficial to the town at large?I'm not attempting to force a no lynch. I'm trying to force the lynch to require more than one person to happen.
Particularly since FoU is voting Moonlit, so it just ties the vote. This is the second time you've attempted to force a no lynch at the end of a day. What gives?
I don't get what you're saying, hector. I'm not saying either vote would be scummy, I'm saying I'm evening the scales so you can decide fairly, because there's one vote on either of us right now not counting yours. I would, of course, rather you not decide me, but you did make a decision.
The reason I'm not saying I'm town is because I'm not.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 14, 2016, 11:58:45 am
Also, perils of playing Mafia at 3:30 AM, your brain does stupid things with references.
That last sentence was referring to TMS, who has been behaving extremely strange all round.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 14, 2016, 11:59:45 am
Post by: Tomasque on July 15, 2016, 01:42:17 am
(http://i.imgur.com/fCKnp42.jpg)
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (1) - Starver
TheBiggerFish (2) - hector13, The Moonlit Shadow
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (1) - TheBiggerFish
Not Voting: FallacyofUrist
TheBiggerFish was the Stranglehold
Spoiler: Stranglehold (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on July 15, 2016, 02:19:19 pm
(http://img15.deviantart.net/554a/i/2011/068/a/5/hands_by_cute0designer-d3b8v1x.jpg)
Day ends Friday, 12:00 PM PDT
Friday, 7:00 PM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 15, 2016, 02:20:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 15, 2016, 04:19:08 pm
Bother.
You did talk yourself into that one with the "I'm not town" nonsense :P
Now... it seems as though we have multiple evil roles, unless there's a neutral role with a say in proceedings.
Bother.
Post by: hector13 on July 15, 2016, 04:22:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 15, 2016, 04:43:55 pm
I am likely to be busy all weekend, apparently helping people move. I'll have my phone, but not sure how often I'll be able to check it. I'll keep up with the thread, but I may not be able to actually post much.
Post by: Starver on July 15, 2016, 05:17:41 pm
Thinking. Hard.
BRB.
Post by: hector13 on July 15, 2016, 05:19:17 pm
Post by: Starver on July 15, 2016, 05:36:12 pm
Except for one detail. If I can trust what I've read, there's three controllers and three controlled. This is why I'm thinking hard.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 15, 2016, 06:30:42 pm
~~~
First of all. I don't think Starver's ever voted.
Yup. Starver's never voted(I checked, please correct me if I'm wrong).
Starver, why you no vote?
~~~
I'm also thinkin that there is only 1 town because of how TBF's role was worded.Uh... good point. That's definitely a possibility, based on TBF's wincon(the word "is" rather than "are"... singular compared to plural. Still a little ambiguous, though).
Huh. I'll have to think on that.
~~~
Post by: Starver on July 15, 2016, 06:34:30 pm
FoU, though, IIRC, you seemed originally to have absolutely no idea about hands, which might explain why my controller is not a hand, and would perhaps mean something else about mine.
Let me repeat that, as it was yesterday and would seem good reason to wish me silenced: FoU
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 15, 2016, 06:39:31 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 15, 2016, 06:40:18 pm
Sorry to hear that, Hector, since you're my controller.
N1i was told to roleblock and stop FoU from posting. Same thing N2.
N3 I was told to target Starver. I refused.
So obviously, Hector's behind this.
With some quick logic, we can figure out that Starver was TBF's controller, but that's OK. He's dead now, so you've no one wanting to betray you.
So how come your action didn't work N2 then? FoU was posting with the rest of us on D3.
What is your action? A block and a pretty nasty post restriction? That's removing someone for two consecutive phases of the game. It is also a claim - quite coincidentally, I'm sure - for the remaining two actions of the three that were revealed by FoU (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7088311#msg7088311) on D3... during which time he should have been under your influence of not being able to post. He claimed he was role blocked in the same post, so what happened, hm? How does one of your actions work but not the other?
It's also a little bit suspect that you're voting for someone who was very open about the fact that you were one of his top two scumspects (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7090468#msg7090468). This is obviously an OMGUS and an ill-thought out claim trying to provide some context. Try again.
Through what logic can we figure out Starver was TBF's controller? You presented exactly zero evidence on that. What precludes FoU from that position?
I was told to target both FoU and syou', so it cant have been them, can it?
Or you could be lying about having a controller.
I thought it was TBF because he immediately unvoted me after I claimedthat i was a drone. But it wasnt.
Read his "controlled" action again. If you're a drone like him, how likely is it you're going to be a controller too? To paraphrase Obi-Wan Kenobi, you are not the drone he was looking for.
Equally so, a question I really want you to answer, you are claiming a controlled action, just like TBF had. TBF was evil. What should Starver, FoU and I think about that?
tthat also answers your question
No, Moonlit, no it doesn't.
PPE: shit is getting real! Let's make this symmetrical: Moonlit :)) I love it.
Post by: hector13 on July 15, 2016, 06:46:04 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 15, 2016, 07:10:38 pm
When did I say you were a controller?
How certain are you that TBF opted to target FoU? That there's no role in the game that could make someone target someone else - overtly or otherwise - when they didn't mean to?
Yes, you do have form for ill-considered votes.
Convenient, isn't it? A hidden auto that we have to take your word on.
Post by: Starver on July 15, 2016, 07:40:00 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 15, 2016, 08:12:00 pm
1.uh huh. Igot nothing elae to say. Except praising FoU on being a genius once more.
Exactly. This translates to "Yes, I'm talking shite."
2. OK? So you admit it wasnt an OMGUS?
What? How did... What? No.
3. Well he did, twice.
Oh im an idiot scratch all that. i forgot that TBF can control himself whenFoU doesn't do anytying.
I thought it was Starver that was TBF's controller. Whoops.
4.You said 'how likely is it for me to be a drone and a controlle4'.
No. No...
This is also evidence of your ill-considered logic: I asked you to consider why TBF - who had a wincon that would net him 2 points if he got his CONTROLLER - unvoted you when you said you were a DRONE. How can you be a CONTROLLER - which TBF wants to lynch - when you're a DRONE - of which TBF doesn't give a hoot?
You need me to spell it out for you: TBF unvoted you because you were irrelevant to him.
5.Since there is only 1 town. Wording. Fou agrees with mw this time, so its not just me being bad at englanderino.
So you think the only townie is going to out themselves in a field of non-townies?
He has done it before. But that doesn't mean there's only one townie. There is one town. As in, one collection of players in a game of mafia.
Post by: Starver on July 16, 2016, 07:45:14 am
Fish prevented votes, for a living. At the bequest of A.N. Other, perhaps some of the time, and was evil.
What is claimed (if I have it right):
Fallacy was action-blocked N1; post-restricted and vote-blocked, D2; Vote-blocked D3 (not silenced, no word on action).
Moonlight was instructed by S.M.N. Else (may or may not share anything with A.N. Other) to silence and/or role-block Fallacy N1/D2+N2/D3 (apparently refused by D3) and silence me D4 (definitely refused, or else I got a pass that I don't know about).
@Moonlit can you restate what you said you did? At least your latest version. Obviously you'll be not wanting to incriminate yourself, but its not as though you haven't got plenty of 'outs' for your behaviour...
I have reason to believe that neither Mr Other nor Mr Else actually have full control, but I don't think it is the right time to go into that detail.
Four Evils makes no sense. There must be one Town for the known Wincon to operate, and apart from the deviation of majority evil needing to survive to win, that would be just alignment mirroring. Or is that it?
No, I think there's two evils and two goods in command/obey pairings (except for a complication?). Either: Sith pair ('dead Sith Lord's Lightsabre' rules of advancement?) and Jedi pair; Evil commands good and vice-versa, or; Subordinates are both Evil, their masters are Good. There's ramifications for the Wincon in various of those combos, but not without chance of Autos adding fine-tuning.
Oh, yeah, if Fish got the Hand thing, even whilst not being a Hand (a 'hold', instead) then I can no longer accuse Fallacy of making up the Hand Of when there's not a consistant manipulatory naming convention, but you were still too bloody oblivious of the hand-based clues for words... I still don't believe the Hand Of, but that might of course not be scummy. Nor was the fact that you would have had to try to experiment on yourself, first night, excuse you of being the one that triggered your own repression, by proxy, in one or other of the manners you were repressed. Perhaps more likely if you were(/thought you were) doing it under the auspices of good, though.
Hector I haven't forgotten you, but I don't currently know what to say about you. Your logic is often impeccable, but that means nothing kuch, either way.
Post by: hector13 on July 16, 2016, 08:58:08 am
@Starver: doesn't help that my phone sucks, too.
1.No, I am telling the truth.
2. You agreed that it was my Ill thought out logic that lead me to voting TBF, and thus not an OMGUS.
3. Nothing to say here...
4. No, you see, I didn't know that TBF was a drone, now did I? I thought he was my controller and had unvoted me because he didn't want to Lynch his own drone.
5. Could be, we're arguing what Tomasque meant now. Which is impossible to be perfectly right. But seeomg an Evil die and the game still continue does help that theory.
You're deliberately misconstruing what I'm saying now.
2 and 4 are the only ones relevant: you OMGUS'd me, not TBF, and TBF unvoted you because you said you were a drone, not because he was controlling you. This is the last I'll say on it. You're wrong and you're scum.
As for 3, there's nothing to say because you forgot what you were claiming. Failure.
How do you expect to win now, bub? You've outed yourself as Evil.
PPE: I thought you had a hidden auto that stops your post-restricting powers.
Post by: hector13 on July 16, 2016, 09:39:23 am
2. I voted you since you're my controller. As i explained already.
3. No, I figured out iwas wrong, and you agreed I was wrong. What did you expect me to say?
I expect to win because I think Starver might be on my side. Or.... I'll be fine with just lynching FoU, the most likely town, and only getting 1 point.
You're wrong on more than one count, btw. Your refusal to look past what you think is happening is what will actually make you lose.
You've admitted that you're not town which means you're the best choice for any townies to vote for, you've accused me of being your controller so - in the hypothetical situation that I'm not town - I have no reason to keep someone who'll stab me in the back alive, as well as the fact you're wrong about me being your controller so your real controller is going to want to end you too.
It could be that the controller is town, but considering TBF had differing wincons re: town and his controller, that seems unlikely.
You've lost, pal. Well done.
Post by: hector13 on July 16, 2016, 12:15:03 pm
But of course, that all hinges on whether you're my controller or not. Which of something you'd never claim to be.
I'm also in the position to know you'll have three votes on you by day end. You'll certainly have at least two:
Firstly, does your controller - me or not - want to risk having someone else getting lynched today knowing you'll be going after them again tomorrow?
Secondly, there's at least one townie - your controller won't be town if TBF's dual wincon is the same as your own - who wants to get rid of the scum.
If I am your controller, your last hope is the remaining player isn't town and is willing to keep the game going by forcing no lynches 'til Tomasque goes mental :P
Post by: hector13 on July 16, 2016, 01:42:50 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 16, 2016, 02:07:15 pm
The Moonlit Shadow. I don't want to be role blocked ANY MORE.
Post by: hector13 on July 16, 2016, 03:06:54 pm
Waitaminute. Moonlit claimed he was the one who blocked me and prevented me from posting?
The Moonlit Shadow. I don't want to be role blocked ANY MORE.
Is uh... is that all you have to say?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 16, 2016, 03:11:56 pm
~~~
NO MORE POST BLOCK
NO MORE ROLE BLOCK
LYNCH MOONLIT NOW FOR NO MORE POST BLOCK OR ROLE BLOCK
~~~
That's basically my thought process. Whoever's controlling Moonlit seems to have it in for me. And I don't like being post blocked or role blocked. So I'm trying to off Moonlit.
Post by: Starver on July 16, 2016, 03:18:08 pm
My thoughts, too, Fallacy still smells funny. I've come up with various reasons why, but I can't exonerate properly with what I've gotten.Waitaminute. Moonlit claimed he was the one who blocked me and prevented me from posting?
The Moonlit Shadow. I don't want to be role blocked ANY MORE.
Is uh... is that all you have to say?
In response to ninja, if it wasn't Moonlit's choice, then someone else is your sworn enemy, Hector just went along with it.
Post by: Starver on July 16, 2016, 03:24:49 pm
(I'd actually first written Fish, noticed my error, and corrected it incorrectly. ;) )
Post by: hector13 on July 17, 2016, 10:24:11 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 17, 2016, 03:42:25 pm
DIE MOONLIT'S MASTER DIE
NO MORE ROLEBLOCKS
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 17, 2016, 03:50:35 pm
HATE ROLEBLOCKS
~~~
Basically, you role blocked me two nights in a row. And stopped me from posting for a day.
At this point, I just want you gone. NO MORE ROLEBLOCKS.
Post by: hector13 on July 17, 2016, 04:05:19 pm
Post by: Starver on July 17, 2016, 04:13:47 pm
Round 14 - Day 4
[ img ]
Day ends Friday, 12:00 PM PDT
Friday, 7:00 PM GMT
Post by: hector13 on July 17, 2016, 04:18:00 pm
Post by: Starver on July 17, 2016, 05:15:37 pm
Or someone has gotten something horribly wrong. Maybe me...
Post by: hector13 on July 17, 2016, 05:59:31 pm
Post by: Tomasque on July 18, 2016, 01:53:40 am
Post by: Tomasque on July 18, 2016, 07:06:44 am
(http://i.imgur.com/0vP1ya9.png)
Votecount
hector13 (1) - The Moonlit Shadow
FallacyofUrist (1) - Starver
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (2) - FallacyofUrist, hector13
The Moonlit Shadow was the Grip of Terror
Spoiler: Grip of Terror (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on July 19, 2016, 07:04:03 am
(http://www.marufow-art.de/paintings/hands.jpg)
Day ends Thursday, 5:00 AM PDT
Thursday, 12:00 PM GMT
Post by: Starver on July 19, 2016, 08:24:41 am
I reckon coming clean (or at least pretending to, and getting away with it) is pretty much the only way from here, if Tomasque has done what I expect. Silence is just going to make it a crapshoot.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 19, 2016, 08:35:47 am
I'm Evil.
And I'm betting one of you(you and Hector) is also Evil.
If I'm wrong, probably gonna be lynched. So it goes.
~~!~~
Post by: Tomasque on July 19, 2016, 09:15:44 am
Just in case any of you thought it was hammers/final day.
Post by: hector13 on July 19, 2016, 09:37:04 am
Okay, mate, fair enough.
I'm Evil.
And I'm betting one of you(you and Hector) is also Evil.
If I'm wrong, probably gonna be lynched. So it goes.
~~!~~
You know you're very easy to get to do things that aren't necessarily a good idea.
I think I'll wait for Starver to claim, though feel free to make a more full claim, FoU. Name and action please.
Just to tease y'all for the moment with a tidbit: no, I am not a controller.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 19, 2016, 11:05:35 am
~~~
Now you.
Post by: Starver on July 19, 2016, 11:30:57 am
I have a feeling that I'm outfoxing myself, in a room full of paranoid people.
I am declaring that my (known) auto has two sentences of exactly ten words each. If this is meaningful to anyone, I think it may gain a modicum of trust between us, and you can then tell me a similarly obtuse fact if you prefer. If I'm totally wrong, back to the drawing board.
Post by: hector13 on July 19, 2016, 12:34:28 pm
Hand of Death, night kill that cannot be used two nights in a row.
~~~
Now you.
Why didn't you use it last night then? Or, for that matter, the previous night?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 19, 2016, 02:27:21 pm
Night 4 I didn't use it because I didn't know who to kill(well enough, anyway), and there were 3 players left, meaning if I guessed wrong I would have been alone with the enemy.
Night 3 I didn't bother to use it because I figured I would be role blocked again.
~~~
Now then, Starver, how about you claim now like Hector suggested?
Post by: Starver on July 19, 2016, 02:36:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 19, 2016, 04:00:44 pm
I guess wincons might be better than claims at this point...
Post by: hector13 on July 19, 2016, 06:29:17 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 19, 2016, 06:30:10 pm
~~~
hector, if you're not a controller, then are you saying Starver is the controller of Moonlit and TBF? (because I'm not a controller, like, at all)
~~~
I want some feedback on my abstract claim before I go further.Useless. Your abstract claim seems useless to me.
~~~
Everybody: why do you not claim fully?
~~~
Also Ns 1 and 2; you did express great displeasure at being role blocked those nights.Completely true. I HATES ROLE BLOCKS.
Post by: hector13 on July 19, 2016, 07:05:22 pm
I'm not saying Starver is anything, though. The only information I have that I'm 100% sure on is that I'm not a controller.
Post by: hector13 on July 19, 2016, 07:07:08 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 19, 2016, 07:08:23 pm
Mostly because we are not sure if there are two town roles or two Evil roles remaining. It's an amusing situation to be in, frankly.I agree completely. *laughs*.
I'm not saying Starver is anything, though. The only information I have that I'm 100% sure on is that I'm not a controller.I am also not a controller, meaning if that we're both telling the truth, then Starver is the controller of both TBF and Moonlit.
~~~
I meant who did you target Ns 1 and 2, byraway.Moonlit. Moonlit. I am stubborn.
Post by: Starver on July 20, 2016, 06:09:52 am
Tomasque must be chuckling right about now. After already having had a prior extended period of chortling.
Sorry, FoU, but making it formal, confused as I am. Too much thrashing around and mismatched expectations. Don't like Hector's aloofness and shutting down of enquiries, too, which I don't want to encourage, but what can I do? And if I switch and lose because of it I'll feel worse than if I stick with what I felt for a long time and lose, given no good reason to switch.
(Although I half expect Hector as Neutral with an overriding auto, to my detriment.)
Post by: Starver on July 20, 2016, 06:17:06 am
Post by: hector13 on July 20, 2016, 10:08:21 am
Post by: Starver on July 20, 2016, 03:54:59 pm
for your easy do bling up,I don't know what I tried to write that ended up in those words... Oh, wait, probably "doubling up"... Yeah, probably.
Post by: Starver on July 20, 2016, 03:58:58 pm
Post by: Starver on July 20, 2016, 04:15:03 pm
Start again.
You're not contributing much either, cha know. You said you have an auto, and that's it.(I was saying as how) You seem not to respond to my attempts to get a little bit here, a little bit there, and I don't want to reward you for that, but let's see if you (Hector) can respond sanely enough with equivalent information to the following:
I am a puppet hand who passes on commands. I have had in mind to say that there's a script-writer's hand behind my actions, but nothing now seems to bear that out. I have had no idea what my commands may do (until I see the roeflips, at least, which is why I trust Moonlit's declarations) and I presume that there is just one person who would not mind my winning. (I didn't say that the first time round.)
If you can give me enough filler-information from your side, Hector, then my vote goes back onto Fallacy (noting that I'm the only one who has even tried to vote, this time round) and you can easily double up that (writing it correctly, this time) and doubtless to your benefit. Whether mine or not.
@Fallacy, it is an uphill struggle, but if you can be more sane n your reply to explain all the gaps in your all-over-the-shop approach, before I get to react to Hectorvs doubtless revelatory coredump of information, then therevs a chance I will switch. Make it good, though, because you're starting in defecit.
Shortcut to my trust: Guess how many wincons I have, and the points for each. I'll look favourably upon the one that gets it correct, but seems like a longshot,.
Post by: hector13 on July 20, 2016, 05:31:03 pm
If he's telling the truth about his role but not his alignment, then any scum left don't want him alive neither.
If he's lying about both, he's just a dick. This seems the least likely scenario.
Anyway, this raises the question of how to proceed. Do we take our chances that you and I are the same alignment and take out the FoU NK, or do we gamble that FoU is the same alignment, and thus lose if we're wrong?
Post by: hector13 on July 20, 2016, 05:38:39 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 20, 2016, 05:53:11 pm
~~~
@Fallacy, it is an uphill struggle, but if you can be more sane n your reply to explain all the gaps in your all-over-the-shop approach, before I get to react to Hectorvs doubtless revelatory coredump of information, then therevs a chance I will switch. Make it good, though, because you're starting in defecit.Bay 12, mate, sanity is dead.
In any case: look at my perspective on this: both your and hector's behavior could have been generated by an Evil or a town motivation. And because of this round's particular alignment mechanics, it's even more difficult to use information on behavior.
Which leaves role mechanics(my preference). But, it seems, I'm not getting much of that information.
Perhaps if you both would full claim we can get into that. Until then, I don't have much to supply other than my cooperation. And interrogation.
~~~
Shortcut to my trust: Guess how many wincons I have, and the points for each. I'll look favourably upon the one that gets it correct, but seems like a longshot,.Starver, why would you look favorably onto somebody who guesses your win condition? I'm not seeing any reasoning here...
~~~
Post by: hector13 on July 20, 2016, 06:00:12 pm
I would much rather Starver claim his role name first.
Post by: Starver on July 20, 2016, 06:11:51 pm
I would much rather Starver claim his role name first.
Already given. Puppet Hand. Now you give similarly comprehensive info. Or side with Fallacy for a somewhat hopeful speculation that that would grant you the instawin, I suppose.
(Fallacy: I have had my reasons to have suspected, and still somewhat suspect, that someone could give me chapter and verse on my character, after giving them just enough clues to let them know that they do. Now it looks like I'm probablynwrong, but if the round ends and it roleflips that they do know, and are staying aloof for no good reason, then I can't say that I haven't tried...)
Post by: hector13 on July 20, 2016, 06:26:17 pm
I am the Handmirror. I redirect; if someone acts upon me, they hit my target instead.
Now. We still stand no closer to figuring this out because we haven't said whether we're town or scum, though I can't imagine we would trust one another to tell the truth anyway.
Right. I will vote for FoU. If FoU would like me to vote for Starver instead, tell me why.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 20, 2016, 06:33:31 pm
Right. I will vote for FoU. If FoU would like me to vote for Starver instead, tell me why.Bah. Sadly, I've got nothing.
(Fallacy: I have had my reasons to have suspected, and still somewhat suspect, that someone could give me chapter and verse on my character, after giving them just enough clues to let them know that they do. Now it looks like I'm probablynwrong, but if the round ends and it roleflips that they do know, and are staying aloof for no good reason, then I can't say that I haven't tried...)Well, okay. Would unvote now, but I don't want to be lynched. For obvious reasons.
~~~
I don't suppose either of you folks would be willing to claim alignment?
Post by: hector13 on July 20, 2016, 07:16:05 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 20, 2016, 08:21:35 pm
Would you believe is if we did?Completely fair point. I don't suppose either of you are neutral?
~~~
This situation is rather annoying. But...
hector13, simply based on game logic, the best I have. If you're town and Starver's lynched, I can't kill you, based on your claim. If, after your lynch, you show up Evil, I should be able to off Starver.
Best I've got.
Post by: Starver on July 20, 2016, 09:13:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 20, 2016, 09:27:04 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 21, 2016, 08:53:56 am
Yeah, looks like I'm inevitably going for FoU again. With the distinct chance of someone's reversal before day-end...Pity.
Also, I say you have one wincon for two points.
Post by: Tomasque on July 21, 2016, 03:08:33 pm
Votecount
hector13 (1) - FallacyofUrist
FallacyofUrist (2) - hector13, Starver
Starver (0)
FallacyofUrist was the Hand of Justice
Spoiler: Hand of Justice (click to show/hide)
hector13 gets one victory point.
Starver gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
The Moonlit Shadow gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 21, 2016, 03:09:38 pm
It was a fun round. GG.
Post by: Tomasque on July 21, 2016, 03:10:11 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 21, 2016, 03:11:34 pm
Other than being locked down for quite a while, but that was just how things played out.
I read this.
Post by: Starver on July 21, 2016, 03:14:02 pm
Does anyone actually read this? :PNo. I don't. Never have, never will,
(Here I was looking for my Twin role, and I was my own twin all along!)
Post by: hector13 on July 21, 2016, 03:18:34 pm
Any thoughts on the round? This one has got to be one of my favorite, at least mechanicwise.
Best round so far. Took until TBF was lynched for me to realize I wasn't the only Evil role, and I was PM'img you stuff before that, that was completely wrong.
I was right FoU was the odd one out though :))
So... Starver being a cheeky bugger targeting himself.
I always read the action log, I just don't necessarily pay attention...
Post by: Starver on July 21, 2016, 03:21:27 pm
I never controlled Fish, who never got to say much about his actions, and I somewhat believe Moonlit's pre-mortem account of commands....or so I thought, whilst I told the entire truth as I understood it.
Quote
Tomasque must be chuckling right about now. After already having had a prior extended period of chortling. (Although I half expect Hector as Neutral with an overriding auto, to my detriment.)Probably true!
Post by: Tomasque on July 21, 2016, 03:26:09 pm
But I've already ramped up the difficulty for the upcoming rounds, so I guess all that's left is to wait and see.
Post by: Starver on July 21, 2016, 03:36:43 pm
So... Starver being a cheeky bugger targeting himself.I was carefully considering what to do for Moonlit's next act (except that Moonlit ended up lynched). I'd plumped for no instruction at all (thus free reign) but I'd seriously considered pointing him at you, just to confuse matters totally (Fallacy targeted, me targeted, you targeted) although it would have clued Moonlit in on the possibility that it was my identity. Which I wasn't opposed to doing. Despite the possible jeopardy in the wincon.
But did expect "good controls evil, evil controls good", until that second flip.
Post by: Starver on July 21, 2016, 03:45:02 pm
I'd actually considered Instructing my marionette(s!) to target myself on N1, straight off the bat, on the presumption that I wasn't inadvertently wielding a death-sentence. It would have established myself an alibi (assuming anyone noticed!) and told me what my proxy powers were. And, with hindsight, I definitely think I could have lived with that result. Although the alibi bit might have been a bit tricky, both before my marionettes realised they were de-facto Town and after everybody realised they were essentially alignment-reversed.Quote from: Action LogStarver instructed targeting Starver
Wat
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 21, 2016, 06:37:54 pm
I knew something was fishy!
Post by: hector13 on July 21, 2016, 06:47:28 pm
FALLLAAAACCCCCCYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
I knew something was fishy!
I... I think that's you.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 21, 2016, 07:30:54 pm
rimshotFALLLAAAACCCCCCYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
I knew something was fishy!
I... I think that's you.
Post by: hector13 on July 21, 2016, 07:35:56 pm
I think you will find that the only sound was swish.rimshotFALLLAAAACCCCCCYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
I knew something was fishy!
I... I think that's you.
Post by: Tomasque on July 22, 2016, 03:11:57 am
The stars twinkled in the dark sky above the lights and the smog of the sleeping city. In the windows of the city's skyscrapers, lights illuminated the homes of the waking, while darkness sat in the rooms of those fast asleep - or prowling the streets below.
Post by: Tomasque on July 22, 2016, 01:21:32 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/bzxYiTz.png)
Day ends Sunday, 11:00 AM PDT
Sunday, 6:00 PM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 22, 2016, 01:36:17 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 22, 2016, 01:44:36 pm
Post by: Tomasque on July 22, 2016, 02:30:22 pm
EDIT: Also, added a link to this in-progress round. It will send you to the latest day/night start.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 22, 2016, 07:04:21 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 22, 2016, 08:27:13 pm
You know that thing? The list of archetypes in this game? IT IS LIE.
Too bad you didn't think this in Round 1 :P
However, you're not really helping if you don't clue us in as to how.
Post by: hector13 on July 22, 2016, 09:18:54 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 22, 2016, 09:38:10 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 22, 2016, 09:40:03 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 22, 2016, 09:40:32 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 22, 2016, 10:08:52 pm
Fallacy:Lying how?There's an archetype that isn't listed there.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 22, 2016, 10:10:08 pm
That's interesting.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 22, 2016, 10:10:29 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 22, 2016, 10:12:16 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 22, 2016, 10:14:22 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 22, 2016, 10:17:33 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 22, 2016, 10:40:57 pm
Not yet. I think that might help scum a little too much.
Well Moonlit has already given us too much, so what will it hurt?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 22, 2016, 10:47:57 pm
Post by: Tomasque on July 23, 2016, 02:05:47 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 23, 2016, 12:23:57 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 23, 2016, 06:03:39 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 23, 2016, 08:20:59 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 24, 2016, 03:04:30 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 24, 2016, 03:25:54 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 25, 2016, 07:24:12 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 25, 2016, 07:31:47 am
Post by: Tomasque on July 26, 2016, 05:15:29 am
The night is back. People return to their beds, and monsters return to the streets - and somewhere, all alone, a man slowly succumbs to death, and no one seems to care.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (1) - FallacyofUrist
Not voting: hector13, TheBiggerFish, Starver, The Moonlit Shadow
Starver dies for unknown causes.
Starver was the Journalist
Spoiler: Journalist (click to show/hide)
Note: Remember that if only one person votes (therefore the highest vote against someone is 1), no one is lynched.
Post by: Starver on July 26, 2016, 05:53:21 am
Starver dies for unknown causes.Bah and darnit.
Post by: Tomasque on July 28, 2016, 11:40:38 am
Post by: Tomasque on July 28, 2016, 04:35:07 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/E1Jb8fa.png)
Day ends Saturday, 2:30 PM PDT
Saturday, 9:30 PM GMT
Post by: hector13 on July 28, 2016, 04:53:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 28, 2016, 05:12:04 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 28, 2016, 05:24:05 pm
Anyway, if we are in MYLO, the best move is a no lynch. That way if you're right and another kill happens, we won't lose if we choose wrong.
That's contingent on you being right, though.
I'm not so sure about that, seeing as how you've declared FoU is already dead, and then said we're in MYLO and you're voting for TBF. These things don't make sense put together, dude.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 28, 2016, 05:44:51 pm
hector:Why should I vote TMS over you?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 28, 2016, 05:45:27 pm
I don't even what.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 28, 2016, 05:46:52 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 28, 2016, 05:59:02 pm
Moonlit's actions so far today don't really add up though. Like I said, if it's MYLO, we'd be better playing not to lose with a no lynch than trying to win. If FoU does turn out to have a death sentence, we have one less person to pick from tomorrow. Yet Moonlit is voting for you, so I don't know if he's trustworthy given that contradiction.
Now your vote looks like an OMGUS and Moonlit has a point about your posts yesterday, so yeah. Rock; me; hard place.
Don't know what to think of FoU, he wasn't exactly a font of knowledge yesterday either, though he did press Moonlit more about the rolefishing. Perhaps he could fill us in on what Moonlit's talking about re: death sentence though.
Post by: Tomasque on July 28, 2016, 06:27:53 pm
Tomasque:You say this now? I am surprised.What?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 28, 2016, 07:05:14 pm
Post by: hector13 on July 28, 2016, 07:11:47 pm
To which "guesses" are you refering? 'cause it looks to me like you're making a lot of them.
Post by: hector13 on July 29, 2016, 04:57:12 pm
I may be unavailable for the rest of the day, I have a Relay For Life thing this evening which doesn't finish 'til 7am tomorrow. Not sure how good the signal is where it's happening (middle of nowhere) so yeah. I hope I made the right decision...
Post by: Tomasque on July 30, 2016, 06:15:16 pm
Still feeling his narrow escape from death, a man - relieved - begins his walk home along with the other three. Him and two others make it to their doorsteps.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (2) - FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish
No Lynch (2) - The Moonlit Shadow, hector13
FallacyofUrist dies for unknown causes.
FallacyofUrist was the Passerby
Spoiler: Passerby (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on August 01, 2016, 03:26:17 pm
No newspaper comes today.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Day ends Wednesday, 1:30 PM PDT
Wednesday, 8:30 PM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 01, 2016, 03:27:26 pm
Cards on the table time?
Post by: hector13 on August 01, 2016, 03:30:06 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 01, 2016, 04:17:07 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 01, 2016, 04:17:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on August 01, 2016, 05:19:28 pm
Moonlit
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 01, 2016, 05:25:15 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 01, 2016, 05:25:48 pm
Unvote-vote again if so.
Post by: hector13 on August 01, 2016, 05:26:23 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 01, 2016, 05:46:26 pm
Post by: hector13 on August 01, 2016, 05:50:46 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 01, 2016, 06:05:38 pm
Moonlit:What have you to say for yourself?I'm waiting for this, but Moonlit
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 02, 2016, 02:01:36 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 02, 2016, 02:03:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 02, 2016, 03:34:33 pm
But you're also wrong about why I'm not saying it's me.
I'm an Investigative archetype.
Each night, I get a list of three people that may be scum.
So I got:
N0: The Moonlit Shadow, FallacyofUrist, and hector13
N1: hector13, The Moonlit Shadow, and Starver
N2: FallacyofUrist, The Moonlit Shadow, and hector13
You can see my problem.
But if you say no-one's going to die, let's No Lynch and have another chance at finding out?
Post by: hector13 on August 02, 2016, 03:45:00 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 02, 2016, 03:46:01 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 02, 2016, 03:46:33 pm
Post by: Tomasque on August 03, 2016, 05:15:42 pm
Round Over - Scum Win!
Votecount
hector13 (0)
TheBiggerFish (2) - hector13,The Moonlit Shadow
The Moonlit Shadow (1) - TheBiggerFish
TheBiggerFish was the Dreamer
Spoiler: Dreamer (click to show/hide)
hector13 gets two victory points.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 03, 2016, 05:20:02 pm
Post by: hector13 on August 03, 2016, 05:24:34 pm
Well Hector could've ended it D2 :/
Thought a scum mistake=town tell.
Could've, decided to go for two though.
I was very lucky.
Thought you had me when TBF voted for a no lynch...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 03, 2016, 05:41:39 pm
I thought I had scum when I voted for no lynch too :vWell Hector could've ended it D2 :/
Thought a scum mistake=town tell.
Could've, decided to go for two though.
I was very lucky.
Thought you had me when TBF voted for a no lynch...
Post by: Starver on August 03, 2016, 06:29:59 pm
But, Moonlit, you then say things the next day that I thought no sane Town would say. But, then again, nor Scum trying to lay low. And I was still thinking that the Garbler (my term) was the person who also knew this, especially as I was still wondering if I was Garbled because I tried to interview Moonlut, so in the absence of any other evidence I took "You see, he thinks I know about the kill and silence because im the one doing it." as some sort of off-the-wall bluff. (Not that it mattered, by then... It was a purely intellectual exercise on my behalf, being dead and all...)
I'd love to say I picked up something from Hector, but it was swamped by Moonlit's strange involvement. I didn't seriously consider Fish, though (read too true, and rightfully confused) so maybe if I hadn't happened to (sorta) interview Moonlit night zero, I might have been on the money. But still dead, so, meh... (I didn't know I was going to die, so I actually asked to interview Fallacy for night 1, before my obituary actually appeared and put paid to that. Don't know if any warning would have helped, given I'd have probably pointed at Moonlit as my swan-song.)
Post by: Starver on August 03, 2016, 06:33:04 pm
so I actually asked to interview Fallacy for night 1,...reason being, I meant to say, that I was interested in n the purported off-stereotype role of his. But then he died next day, anyway, solving that problem without my help.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 03, 2016, 07:08:50 pm
Wow, I need more practice with my day game, I was absolutely sure it was Moonlit.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 03, 2016, 07:13:39 pm
Post by: hector13 on August 03, 2016, 07:15:26 pm
Post by: Starver on August 03, 2016, 07:24:35 pm
And it would have been mostly either Moonlit,
But I did think it too quiet. Except for when Moonlit was busy looking like a Neutral being neither Town nor Scum.
Post by: hector13 on August 04, 2016, 08:04:00 am
Post by: hector13 on August 04, 2016, 08:50:25 am
This is why I immediately voted you on D3, as I thought you'd figured out what was happening, and would react accordingly. But you were blinded by my awesome town act on D2, so it was okay :))
Post by: Starver on August 04, 2016, 10:25:28 am
Luck (or not) of the draw, though. I said as much in my N0 action request to Tomasque, there being nothing for me (nor Hector, also) to go on, any which way.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 04, 2016, 10:34:26 am
I think it was just that you got a bit too hung up on the fact I voted for a no lynch, then didn't really consider that I was acting as though I had been silenced when the Evil role hadn't acted. TBF needs to ask more questions, really... an example of a quiet town being a dead town.You know what happened, I didn't make the connection. Even though in hindsight it makes sense.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 04, 2016, 02:44:01 pm
you would've thought i was lying, actually.No, I thought you were telling the truth, amazingly enough, but I didn't draw the connection.
Post by: Tomasque on August 08, 2016, 06:08:03 pm
A small neighborhood bathes in the light of the afternoon sun. It's inhabitants, however, do not feel any joy today. Scared, even in daylight, they remain indoors. Only a few brave ones go out to the streets these nights, and fewer return.
Day ends Wednesday 4:00 PM PDT
Wednesday, 11:00 PM GMT
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2016, 08:20:07 am
Given some rounds have the N0, some do not, and with no obvious (at first) link to the abilities that might end up being performed... It's possible that a D1 start means an actual killing move by whichever faction kind (both?), that can't be allowed to happen too quickly, but I'm not sure I'd bet on that.
Also its unlikely that anyone is silenced (unless its a dawn-skill?), so... Sound off folks. Then we can start chatting properly.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 09, 2016, 08:21:41 am
Post by: hector13 on August 09, 2016, 10:26:50 am
D1 start is awkward though.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 09, 2016, 05:38:45 pm
Post by: hector13 on August 09, 2016, 06:03:24 pm
Anyway, TBF has been quite quiet recently anyway.
We shouldn't waste the time we do have in waiting for TBF to post anyway.
Moonlit - if you were the investigator this round, who would you target at night and why?
Starver - what do you think of TBF's silence and FoU's constant worries over silencing actions?
FoU - Why are you wasting time worrying about actions and not taking the initiative and scum hunting?
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2016, 06:10:02 pm
Still, I'm impatient to get the discussion going. Just in case Fish needs a prompt, Fish, but that's not meant to be serious (vote me, Fish, if that's all you can do*) and I'll revoke it ASAP. Also gives Tomasque the opportunity to bring out any relevent hidden auto regarding voting peculiarities straight away, if there is one at all...
AH n njaed... But I'll post and double-post in response to whatever you're asking (will read in a moment), Hector...
* I don't expect it to be a round mechanic in two sequential rounds, but maybe its because I don't expect it that it will be one... Trying to outguess these Semi-Bastard mechanics each time is certainly interesting!!!
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2016, 06:20:39 pm
Starver - what do you think of TBF's silence and FoU's constant worries over silencing actions?First part addressed, in parallel to your question.
Second part: Knowing my own frustrations in being silenced, two quick mentions (both following what were already essentially mine and then Moonlit's comments relating to the possibility of silence) do not a pattern make. Given my mention was because the prior round's situation was still at the forefont of my mind, I don't think them unnatural things to have said. Not statistically significant, yet. And even if it continues (or we never get another peep out of Fallacy?), I'm not sure how I would classify that. Could as easily be a bluff, or double bluff or more. But hardly useful without corroborating evidence for whatever.
I'll be back with questions of my own shortly, I hope, but I've got other things to deal with first.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 09, 2016, 06:31:12 pm
I'll catch up in a bit.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 09, 2016, 06:32:23 pm
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2016, 06:47:58 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 09, 2016, 06:49:46 pm
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2016, 06:52:49 pm
(And the same question to numbers two, three and four, please, Cilla...)
Post by: hector13 on August 09, 2016, 07:12:37 pm
That won't help us find scum.
Perhaps we should discuss the game:
TBF - what do you think the atypical day start means for what the Evil role's action is, and what it means for the town's action(s) against the Evil role?
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2016, 07:24:17 pm
Surprise, surprise Starver. A rubbish question with a rubbish reference :PDon't you want to answer it, then?
Quote
That won't help us find scum.Might do.
I'm perhaps a coconut (yes, that counts as a fruit).
Post by: hector13 on August 09, 2016, 07:25:42 pm
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2016, 07:27:36 pm
(Well, maybe...)
Post by: hector13 on August 09, 2016, 07:28:59 pm
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2016, 07:30:54 pm
Post by: hector13 on August 09, 2016, 07:33:46 pm
What is that plan?
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2016, 07:58:13 pm
Let me at first get responses from everybody, and progress crom there. Also let us hear the full responses to your questions, most of which I find as mystifying bland and 'rubbish' as you seem to believe my single question to be.
Post by: hector13 on August 09, 2016, 10:18:38 pm
I am voting for him, you know. What makes it seem as though I'm not pressuring him?Moonlit - if you were the investigator this round, who would you target at night and why?Maybe you, for going along with Starvers 'rubbish' question rather than pressuring him further for what you consider bad play.
Post by: hector13 on August 09, 2016, 10:19:08 pm
Rather, what else should I be doing to pressure him?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 09, 2016, 11:16:53 pm
Surprise, surprise Starver. A rubbish question with a rubbish reference :PI don't know. It could be that there's a kill. It could be. I don't know enough.
That won't help us find scum.
Perhaps we should discuss the game:
TBF - what do you think the atypical day start means for what the Evil role's action is, and what it means for the town's action(s) against the Evil role?
Although, given what I know, I'd be very surprised if it was a flat-out kill.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 09, 2016, 11:18:03 pm
Chocolate, omnomnom.
Post by: hector13 on August 10, 2016, 12:22:02 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 10, 2016, 08:46:05 am
FoU - Why are you wasting time worrying about actions and not taking the initiative and scum hunting?Oi mate, the day hadn't really acquired momentum when you asked that question! Now then...
Hector - Why are you wasting time asking people to answer a question about fruit and not taking the initiative and scum hunting?
~~~
But fiiiiine.
I like fruit. If you were a fruit, what kind of fruit would you be?Pomegranate. Either that or some other kind of fruit. If I were a fruit/animal/inanimate object/weapon at some abstract point in the multiverse, how would I, here, know what I was? I could very well be dragon fruit, orange, passion fruit, deku fruit, void fruit, magenta fruit... the list goes on.
If you were to restate that question as "what kind of fruit would you like to be?" then I would answer "I would rather be a human, thank you very much."
Starver: Please tell me how that question is helping you scum hunt.
~~~
Who would you target and why, if you had a watch ability? (including yourself)hector, or myself.
Hector because he's the best at the day game in this game and I would love to know who's interested in acting on him. Myself because I would like to know who's interested in acting on me, and I weight the value of knowing who acted on me higher than that of the other players.
In the absence of other role information or behavior information, anyway.
~~~
EBWOP... keep your vote on him, spam meaningful questions at him, encourage others to vote him.
Rather, what else should I be doing to pressure him?
Post by: Starver on August 10, 2016, 10:07:05 am
Fallacy: Pomegranate
Fish: Cacao
Hector: Apricot
Moonlit: Cherry
Myself: Coconut
Anybody want to change, before I go further in that direction?
The other questions from everyone are as interesting as the answers (i.e. mostly not much1, but maybe some gems in there once we see things that correlate to reveals). Based on those, I'd be tempted to finger Hector as being least helpful, except for a perhaps unreasonable assumption that I should bias against the likelihood of repetitions between rounds.
Lack of N0 means we can't even reasonably ask if anyone acted on anyone else, or has suspicions of otherwise, upon which to get reasonable claims. But N1 will be interesting, I predict. Not that evil will know who to target any more than any good guys, at this rate. But what's even the use of questions like "if you were a medic, who would you protect?" or "if you were evil, who woud you kill?" or "if you could switch two people as targets, which two?" or "if you could paint one role-archetype to identify tomorrow, which would you paint?".
No, give me Day 2, first, assuming I get past N1. Then I'll be happier.
1 For the record, as a summary of non-fruit questions, etc: I didn't think there was any silencing (there wasn't) but that there's possibly something killy, or at least severe.
Hector is at least as lynchy as usual. No surprises there. But a mislynch is worse if it misses the person with an evil nightkill, and right now the chances are higher that it won't be a lucky D1 town win. (Actually, 100%, the way it currently is, but you don't have reason to listen to me). In a "evil needs town lynches to win" scenario, it's slightly better tactics to fire the blunderbus indiscriminately at this stage.
Moonlit would investigate Hector for humouring me. But Hector is always worth investigating and I've often regretted not being able to get such results.
Fish doesn't think its a killy kill, which I can easily imagine, though I'm still leaning more otherwis, personally. Personal knowledge, apparently.
Fallacy is a bit lynchy, too, but would like to know what Hector is up to, if he could risk not being paranoid about his own back. Again, I can't see anything wrong with that attitude.
Post by: hector13 on August 10, 2016, 10:31:41 am
The reason we ask the "if you were x role, who would you target", is because it gives us a bit of s clue as to their mindset.
Investigative roles would tell us who someone is suspicious of when the question gets asked, or who they think would be a useful player (clearing a player you think is good so they don't lead the town into oblivion)
Sometimes the answers are unhelpful (could argue that about FoU's answer to Moonlit's question) because folk give "optimal" answers, but they're usually better than asking about non-game related material. Like fruit and Priscilla White :P
Post by: hector13 on August 10, 2016, 10:32:00 am
Post by: hector13 on August 10, 2016, 11:39:11 am
I'm not going to tell other people what to do with their action.
Which is kinda the answer I want to give. If people want to clear me, then that's fine, but it depends on the type of role they have. A traditional investigator (alignment cop) would be fine, but a watcher (of the "your target visited this person" variety) wouldn't, for reasons we won't go into on D1.
Post by: Starver on August 10, 2016, 12:11:55 pm
Stalling, not stalking.I actually thought you were giving an honest (or faux-honest) opinion of my behaviour the first time. I've got my notes, and I'm going to use them to do what I can to target the
As for stalling, I think there's evidence enough that this round is a more active environment where I risk nightkill, exactly the opposite of the situation I would like to stall in. But those mindset questions reveal nothing useful, largely predictable as they are, which is one reason for asking something off-piste.
Anyway, make of my altitude what you will. It's my current contribution, but there's still time left to get more gefore day-end, even though I'm now going dark for an hour or two.
Post by: hector13 on August 10, 2016, 01:56:45 pm
For example, a number of you have said I have the strongest day game out of us five. This is information the Evil role would like to know, but also information that town PRs might want to know. The Evil role might want me out of the game in case I have a moment of clarity and finger them good and proper as scum, while a townie might want to keep me in the game for the same reason.
Equally so, I might want that attention on me for whatever reason.
It also allows us to see who is suspicious of whom. Moonlit pointed out my suspicious behaviour (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7126692#msg7126692) and suggested I wasn't pressuring enough, for example, and FoU has jumped on a bandwagon (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7127269#msg7127269) very quickly, rather than putting pressure on a different player. Both of these things don't sit well with me, but then again, neither does your lack of input on what you wanted to do with your fruit question, and the plan you suggested you had with it.
That is, however, more regular behaviour for you. I think I'll move my vote to FoU as my choice of lynchee.
Post by: Starver on August 10, 2016, 02:39:17 pm
The mindset questions reveal more about the answerer than asking about fruit :P which I notice you're not following up on.I'm in and out of signal, but I'll be (near) home shortly, can put my feet up concentrate on tje game and continue things with plenty of time before the day concludes...
Includes addressing the rest of this post, possibly. (Whoops.. Tunnel... Try again... )
Post by: hector13 on August 10, 2016, 04:18:15 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 10, 2016, 04:54:23 pm
Post by: Starver on August 10, 2016, 05:31:30 pm
I remain very cynical about these "if you were..." questions. No significantly surprising answers (Fish might have been revealing something, but I've made bigger bluffs myself, both as Townie and non-Townie), and too much WIFOMability.
Scrapping the essay, the TL;DR; is that everyone has something to hide, and if anybody has anything they're trying to selectively reveal to someone else, then its nothing I've picked up on. Or I have but I'm being equally secretive in my acknowledgement.
I could say that (or generally act as if) I have the ability to nullify the Evil skill, but am I telling the truth (looking for protection), bluffing (intending to be the Fainting Goat) or outright telling porkies (if I were Evil). Or a fourth option that I'm witholding? So much Wine, all of it In Front Of Me...
And it is trivial to play as a different character (holding back and not committing to anything lest your assumptions of others are wrong) in either alignment setting. Hardest of all to do right are the small breadcrumb trails laid down to support a later day's claims when you bounce back in with something definitive about your role, showing as how your carefully protected identity was mentioned all along. (Assuming you hadn't put multiple such identities behind various closed doors, and you open up exactly the one, for people, thst is the most convenient one to allow them through.) I wonder if any of you have done this, honestly or otherwise. But such things don't even need questions, and ate probably easier to do unbidden and unprompted, as it gives one a free hand to craft one's easter-eggs, rather than shoehorn them into a restrictive question-and-answer format.
Okay, that was three entire rewrites, to try to make it short. Didn't work. Probably didn't help, either. Oh, fuggit.
(Have I spent, more than an hour on that? Seems like I have.)
@Hector, I don't want to do Evil's work for them. NoLynch suits me, as the likely roles/counter-roles will be hit hardest from a random lynch, IME.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 10, 2016, 05:33:27 pm
Post by: hector13 on August 10, 2016, 05:40:25 pm
I think taking a no lynch probably works better than not. More data to work with.
Interesting you should say that. What makes you say that?
The "if you were..." questions don't necessarily come into play immediately. Sometimes when someone has flipped we can look back over what they say with the knowledge they were saying something from a particular mind-set (if Evil, to mislead the town, for example) and we can piece together that information with what we've gathered about the other still alive, non-confirmed players to come to a decent conclusion.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 10, 2016, 05:47:37 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 10, 2016, 06:05:45 pm
~~~
Starver: I don't like it when you don't answer my questions.
Purple flags the question.I like fruit. If you were a fruit, what kind of fruit would you be?Pomegranate. Either that or some other kind of fruit. If I were a fruit/animal/inanimate object/weapon at some abstract point in the multiverse, how would I, here, know what I was? I could very well be dragon fruit, orange, passion fruit, deku fruit, void fruit, magenta fruit... the list goes on.
If you were to restate that question as "what kind of fruit would you like to be?" then I would answer "I would rather be a human, thank you very much."
Starver: Please tell me how that question is helping you scum hunt.
~~~
Same applies to you, hector.
Hector - Why are you wasting time asking people to answer a question about fruit and not taking the initiative and scum hunting?~~~
No Lynch.*snaps*
Quote from: Bookthras
I'm not an IC, but I once wrote a rant about nolynches on Day One that I think would be beneficial for this audience, so I quote it below. In brief, you can (i.e., it's a valid vote, and if it has majority no lynch will happen) but you shouldn't unless you have a very very good reason. Actual ICs will, of course, chime in with their own thoughts, and there are different considerations to be had in subsequent days; the below applies only for D1.Size added for emphasis.Even in a game like this, or a role-heavy game like a BYOR, paranormal, or bastard, without a D1 lynch people will lack context for the conversation during the day, which is the very point of the day game. The information lost is not just the flip of a person, but who voted them, with what arguments, and forms the very foundation of how the town power roles will choose their night actions. Information is key, and timely information moreso. People flipping at the start of D2 is not nearly as useful, and a nolynch will result in people using their powers on whoever they were voting (if block/investigate) or a crapshoot for protections and the like, due to lack of context and closure.
A D1 no-lynch pretty much wastes all of D1 content, and gives scum a chance to NK/convert/whatever while town has to shoot in the dark. The amount of information lost is not small, but most importantly, you lose the opportunity to use it. N1 will never come again. Even if you learn the information later, you'll never get that night back, which scum got for free. Not good for town at all.Also considering the fact that the D1 lynchee is almost always town (when was the last time anyone saw a scum hang D1?),Not that rare. The very last game I played (Cybrid Mafia 3 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=104547.msg3146622#msg3146622)) we lynched scum D1. A couple games before that (Politibastard) as well, though that was a... different sort of game. I'm sure there are several others.
So sure, it doesn't happen that often, but it certainly does happen. Plus the possibility of a mislynch is built into the balance of the game. If there is going to be one, it's best for town that it happens sooner rather than later, so maximum information is provided early. It's never good, but a D1 no-lynch is worse.
Please disabuse yourself of the notion that a D1 no-lynch is good for town ever. Except in very narrow types of games where constant (not just D1) no-lynch can be used to break the setup (which is not the case here), whenever you think a D1 no-lynch is good because it's cautious, it's misapplied caution, and will hurt town much more than a possible mislynch would.
So, TheBiggerFish, please vote somebody. Even voting me would be a better choice than nobody(though I wouldn't like it much, for obvious reasons).
~~~
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 10, 2016, 06:09:03 pm
hector, why did you even ask that question?
Post by: hector13 on August 10, 2016, 06:52:43 pm
Not that it really matters since everybody is voting everybody else :))
Though I'm actually curious to what question TBF was referring..?
Post by: Starver on August 10, 2016, 07:04:29 pm
If a question about one role gets set to someone of another role, it's a miss whichever way you err through your knowledgless mistargetting. The next question to the next person being on a different subject to a different person has a similar chance of 'missing' and meaning nothing in the long-run.
At least a single question like "why aren't you evil, and therefore who is?" asked of everyone might let each person bring in their own flavour, to be cross-compared with any subsequent role-flip. Best of all: "Explain yourself and your ideas. No less than fifty words."
Anything else is akin to obfuscation. From someone who famously wants more information, but is actually diluting it. Oh, Hector, the only useful vote I can make is this.
Post by: Starver on August 10, 2016, 07:06:46 pm
Day's over. It was over 5 minutes prior to FoU's post.Waitwhat? Seven hours to go, I thought.
Not that it really matters since everybody is voting everybody else :))
Though I'm actually curious to what question TBF was referring..?
*kicks brain into gear, wanders back to the other threads with much still to read.. *
Post by: hector13 on August 10, 2016, 07:47:38 pm
Probably a good thing seein' as how this would be the first time I've been unintentionally lynched on D1 since my first ever game :))
Also 'cause I'm town. Obviously.
The subtext of the question needs to be considered though, Starver. "Who would you investigate" basically translates as "who are you suspicious enough of to warrant using a night action on" or "who would you want to be cleared as town". It's not a question positing that a player is a certain role it's asking them what they would do if they were that role.
Post by: Tomasque on August 10, 2016, 11:09:50 pm
When the night begins and the streetlights flicker to life, the silence becomes unbearable. Nothing emits from the luxurious houses except the feeling of tension. And then, when it seems that the devil and death himself must be walking those streets from the abundance of fear alone, the people hear it. A sound more piercing than the silence.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (1) - hector13
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (1) - FallacyofUrist
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
No Lynch (1) - TheBiggerFish
Not voting: Starver, The Moonlit Shadow
Post by: Tomasque on August 11, 2016, 11:20:29 pm
Another day dawns, not exactly like the last, but much the same. A little more paranoid. A little less populated.
hector13 was killed in the night!
hector13 was the Ouija Master!
Spoiler: Ouija Master (click to show/hide)
Votecount
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver, The Moonlit Shadow
Day ends Saturday, 9:30 PM PDT
Sunday, 4:30 AM GMT
Post by: hector13 on August 11, 2016, 11:33:56 pm
Post by: Starver on August 12, 2016, 04:13:38 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 12, 2016, 08:56:06 am
Of course, my action only tracks actions that visit other people, so if he did use Command, I dunno.
Post by: Starver on August 12, 2016, 11:17:16 am
I have no clue what "any of your visiting abilities" means in context to Hector, although I realised after my other post that it does come to play if, by "Command", the Cursed auto lands on a person already with another skill that does visit. e.g. a protective blocker would end up protecting themself from others, automatically and assumedly irrevocably. (A restraining blocker would assumedly not be able to restrain anyone, henceforth, due to restraining themselves. A killer would not now kill themself, but it would neutralise that kill. etc...)
I think we can assume that the presumed(/now-confirmed?) killer role killed Hector. They do not know if they (or anyone else) is now under Command, at least until they try again... But there are other solutions to that matrix.
So... Fallacy is claiming a tracking ability. Moonlit seems to suggest a watching one. I'd like to hear Fish at least check in before I further unpack my own limited knowledge in this puzzle.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 12, 2016, 06:57:58 pm
Yes.Tracked him. Got a no action result.You mean something by this?
Of course, my action only tracks actions that visit other people, so if he did use Command, I dunno.
I'd like to hear Fish at least check in before I further unpack my own limited knowledge in this puzzle.Okay.
TheBiggerFish, get in here.
Post by: Starver on August 13, 2016, 12:30:46 pm
Really do want to hear from Fish, because at first I just wanted participation, but now your silence troubles me.I'd like to hear Fish at least check in before I further unpack my own limited knowledge in this puzzle.Okay.
TheBiggerFish, get in here.
Assuming I've not been fooled/misdirected (and, from your PsOV, I'm not telling porkies), I have very good reasons to believe Fish's absence is not due to any (non-exotic) role-based Silencing action. (And an exotic version would probably be indicated by an exotic counter-skill in someone else's role, SFAICT. So if anyone else has anything to say..?)
Absence is therefore troubling. Fish, even if you've nothing to say, waggle a fin. (Go on, vote for me if it is like last time.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 13, 2016, 02:24:04 pm
Post by: Starver on August 13, 2016, 02:38:02 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 13, 2016, 02:40:15 pm
Starver: What threshold of lurking will Fish need to pass in order for you to:
A: vote him
and
B:
unpack my own limited knowledge in this puzzle.~~~
Moonlit: Watcher, eh? Who do you think you're going to watch tonight?
~~~
Fish: Probability of there being a silencing ability in this round, in your opinion?
Post by: Starver on August 13, 2016, 03:04:18 pm
... sure, how about some questions!
Starver: What threshold of lurking will Fish need to pass in order for you to:
A: vote him
and
B:unpack my own limited knowledge in this puzzle.
Before you found a bandwagon that I had unknowingly invited to the party, I was quite close. Once you started demanding Fish "get in here", I've actually become less convinced that we surwly can't have a semi-cloned version of last round's bugbear action.
Which is not to say that I believe you to necessarily be the Evil Silencer. I've got a theory that might easily exonerate you, but I don't want to go into details yet.
Similarly, item 'b' can actually be triggered by other means, but I don't want to hand-hold anybody (or be accused of interrogating for particular data). I will be happy to justify my conclusions when I have enough of them. But feel free to guess.
Post by: Starver on August 14, 2016, 12:17:59 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 14, 2016, 01:34:23 pm
TMS:You visited me last night. Why?
Post by: hector13 on August 14, 2016, 01:38:23 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 14, 2016, 01:43:39 pm
Post by: Starver on August 14, 2016, 02:01:21 pm
Those that remain will have to discuss things tomorrow. Can't say what I want to say (probably not useful anyway). Unless Tomasque rematerialises and explicitly doesn't close the day off, to add to my confusion.
Post by: hector13 on August 14, 2016, 02:02:48 pm
Post by: Tomasque on August 14, 2016, 05:04:21 pm
The great fiery eye casts it's glowing gaze below the horizon, and in it's wake a thousand little tears stay suspended in the sky. Silent tears over a silent city; The unsung harmony of a song that requires none... it's already to die for.
Votecount
FallacyofUrist (1) - The Moonlit Shadow
TheBiggerFish (1) - FallacyofUrist
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: Starver, TheBiggerFish
Post by: Tomasque on August 17, 2016, 11:32:48 pm
...as all songs do that remain unsung.
Every night the sound. Every morning, a corpse. Until now.
Votecount
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver, The Moonlit Shadow
Day ends Friday, 9:30 PM PDT
Saturday, 4:30 AM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 18, 2016, 07:11:26 am
All right then.
Fallacy:Why did you visit me last night?
Post by: Starver on August 18, 2016, 07:34:14 am
Starver, didn't you say you visited Hector yesterday?No, I didn't. Not sure where you got that. But I think it is time for a full(ish) claim time, from me.
I was particularly sure that Fish was not visited (N1) in order to silence because (barring round trickery, such as "this is not classed as visiting" on an action, or possibly Hector's thing affecting me1) I was protecting Fish from visits and I was told that nobody visited them.
Last night I also protected someone, but I want to see who squirms before I reveal who, and my conclusions as to what that means. Noting that Fish has already claimed Fallacy (previously claiming something akin to a Tracking ability) visited him, which is already being considered.
I already have a definite suspish, and know I have yet to prove my own role, but I'm sure we can unlock this.
Post by: Starver on August 18, 2016, 07:37:32 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 18, 2016, 07:45:24 am
Post by: Starver on August 18, 2016, 07:52:46 am
And how does this mesh with Moonlight claiming watching Fallacy 'tracking' Hector?
Points to condider.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 18, 2016, 08:01:34 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 18, 2016, 08:02:35 am
Post by: Starver on August 18, 2016, 08:23:13 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 18, 2016, 08:39:50 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 18, 2016, 08:40:19 am
Post by: Starver on August 18, 2016, 08:53:40 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 18, 2016, 01:18:20 pm
Fallacy:Why did you visit me last night?
To track you. You took no action that I could detect.
Post by: Starver on August 18, 2016, 01:52:26 pm
Ok, my thoughts ('scuse me, but I'm away from my notes at home, butbfrom memory):
Moonlit volunteered having the Watching ability (upon Hector, seeing Fallacy?), N1,before any reason to do so other than actuality. Moreover, it effectively gets confirmed by Fallacy. (The ability to gain that knowledge, not the intent, but I can't find a better spin to put on it than take it at face value.)
Fallacy could be lying about the Tracking (possibility that it was something else, especially with Hector's demise). And I still don't like the no-evidence anti-Fish stance.
Fish claims things for N1 I consider to be very wrong. Meanwhile nobody claimed to have visited Fish, and I detected nobody doing so. If my skills are to be believed (e.g. I have not been Hectored into targetting myself, unwittingly) I must further believe Moonlit in this regard, and doubt Fish's misdirection (own, or courtesy of another).
N2, nobody died. Either no intent/ability to repeat Hector's fate on another, or now Hectored to (non-fatally) self-target? Right now, one of my guesses is that my Protection From Visits upon Fish did not stop Hector's skill (as per description) landing on either killer-Fish or the true killer. But that's risky to assume, and it is tricker for anyone but dead Hector or the possibly-afflicted killer to know for sure.
I'm still withholding who I (think I, assuming not Hectored) protected last night, because I think I can help Town more by doing so.
Umm, ninjaed by Moonlit overturning my assumption that it was Watching Hector. But posting anyway. Analysing later.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 19, 2016, 08:22:12 am
Wait, FoU claimed the same ability I have.Uh... you claimed watch, I claimed track. Right?
Post by: Starver on August 19, 2016, 09:56:30 am
It appeared that he'd claimed he 'watched' Hector and, from that viewpoint, watched you visiting-to-track. I was happy with that theory. Then Moonlit reveals he was 'watching' you. Tracked you to Hector.
Now confusion reigns. Would anyone care to ellucidate?
(For my own purposes: a Watcher camps on a target's doorstep and identifies visitors, though not necessarily if/where the target goes in the event they wander. Whilst a Tracker tags onto a target and follows them to see where they go, but wouldn't necessarily know of visitors to them. Right now, you're both claiming Tracker, within the scope of these definitions?)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 19, 2016, 10:15:22 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 19, 2016, 11:19:41 am
Quote
August 12, 2016, 12:13:40 amN1, or N2?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 19, 2016, 11:22:59 am
Round 16 - Night 1Moonlit who, insofar as I know, is lying about not visiting me N1...
Post by: Starver on August 19, 2016, 11:41:08 am
Okay:Is this timestampThat's a text version of the timestamp in your chosen timezone for this forum, unlike...QuoteAugust 12, 2016, 12:13:40 amN1, or N2?
For context, here's the timestamp for N1,... which displays in mine.Round 16 - Night 1
But, best guess (because its within 24 hours, almost any likely way I spin it), that's N1.
Quote
Moonlit who, insofar as I know, is lying about not visiting me N1...
Right now, I'm more obvious inclined to believe you've been (game-mechanic) deceived than to utterly throw out Moonlit's statements. But with a "bounces back on yourself" effect, possibly on someone courtesy of Hector, I've got to seriously consider a Redirector skill as well. Or are you victim of the known effect, as already postulated? What is your (apparently inactive) purpose, anyway?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 19, 2016, 11:49:45 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 19, 2016, 11:50:24 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 19, 2016, 11:53:03 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 19, 2016, 11:57:42 am
Post by: Starver on August 19, 2016, 12:36:11 pm
Protection and Gaoling are counterpart abilities, often found co-operating (potentially). Watching and Tracking are counterpart abilities, ditto. If it is that simple. And if it is that simple, then one claimed Tracker is actually messing us about, and if that's Moonlit, would have been better going along with my Watcher assumption. Which is one point against demoting my initial trust, but enough to overcome the new doubts being raised? *ponder*
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 19, 2016, 05:56:24 pm
FoU, what did u get from ur night action?
TBF didn't leave his house. If he preformed an action that doesn't require visiting, I dunno though.
Post by: Starver on August 19, 2016, 06:17:29 pm
@Everyone, would you feel comfortable outlining your thoughts as to role distributions?
Post by: Tomasque on August 20, 2016, 10:29:38 am
Another night, and hopes begin to rise. Many believed that the sound had stopped for good, and as the night drew on, this even seemed like it could be true...
Votecount
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (1) - TheBiggerFish
No Lynch (1) - The Moonlit Shadow
Not voting: FallacyofUrist, Starver
Post by: Tomasque on August 22, 2016, 06:06:41 pm
No corpse today either. The news spreads fast; everyone is happier then they've been in months - and yet, something still feels wrong. Perhaps it's paranoia, but many still want to stay inside until it's definitely safe.
Votecount
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver, The Moonlit Shadow
Day ends Wednesday, 4:00 PM PDT
Wednesday, 11:00 PM GMT
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 22, 2016, 06:10:08 pm
Post by: Starver on August 22, 2016, 07:10:26 pm
So, @Moonlit with it not ending yet, and no other her way out, your thoughts and are you determined to Nolynch still?
Also, prevously not answered before D3 end:
@Everyone, would you feel comfortable outlining your thoughts as to role distributions?
Post by: Starver on August 22, 2016, 08:03:48 pm
Something else about this round is making things inconsistent. I don't suppose anyone wants to hint that the only way they can contribute is by getting the Mod to pass on their message to another to say these things for them, perhaps?
Post by: Starver on August 23, 2016, 06:50:35 am
That wasn't a protector claim - my action is just called protect.That is exactly my own skill-name.
Mod humour or research fail? Anybody else have "Protect"?
Hector was clearly possessed of Jailer skill. And right now I'm guessing he jailed. But you've turned my viewpoint round, somewhat. My partial supicion is no longer where it was.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 23, 2016, 08:24:10 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 23, 2016, 08:39:02 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 23, 2016, 08:39:28 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 23, 2016, 08:43:20 am
I: Tracker.
Moonlit: Tracker/Watcher with Protect action name.
TBF: Self-watcher.
Hector: DED, Voodoo Person.
Starver: The missing link. CLAIM.
Post by: Starver on August 23, 2016, 09:51:11 am
Let's see. We can start with a summary of our claims.Bouncer. Action is to Protect. As given. And I know example actly how many visitors I turn away.
I: Tracker.
Moonlit: Tracker/Watcher with Protect action name.
TBF: Self-watcher.
Hector: DED, Voodoo Person.
Starver: The missing link. CLAIM.
And, by the way, nobody visited Fish on Night 1 (or tried to). Can't rule out a Hectorish non-visit action (which the target wouldn't know about), but again someone goes and says exactly the wrong thing and makes me suspect them more.
Fallacy, I trust you tried to visit Moonlit N3, but do not know for what purpose. Moonlit I trust you knew somehow what Fallacy did, N1,because it was a very lucky guess if you tried that. Fish, if you're right, its beyond my knowledge, and meanwhile someone did something to Hector (as Fallacy visited).
Someone's telling little grey lies and hiding the one telling the complete porkies. Or a complicated recruitment. (Let me remind you what Recruitment did when I did it, BTW, so consider your loyalties if that's the case.)
Unravel this, someone.
Post by: Starver on August 23, 2016, 05:51:09 pm
FoU visited TBF day 1...My notes say both you and he say Fallacy approached Hector... I'll check that in a moment, but right now I'll just assume one of us misremembers, for an easy life.
Quote
So how many visitors did you turn away, Starver? Am I right to keep my vote on TBF?One visitor. And, yes, it would be logical for you to do that. (But the copious lack of apparent logic and flip-flopping is making me still unsure.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 23, 2016, 06:04:04 pm
Post by: Starver on August 23, 2016, 06:07:56 pm
FoU, what did you do to Hector?
Tracked him. Got a no action result.
Of course, my action only tracks actions that visit other people, so if he did use Command, I dunno.
Post by: Starver on August 24, 2016, 06:57:50 am
FoU did not visit TBF until N2.I don't remember that being said... Hang on.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 24, 2016, 07:03:32 am
Okay, I am going to ask Tomasque what's going on here, because I know for a fact that my auto returned you visiting N1, FoU N2, and you N3. And not Fallacy N1.Okay, so if it ISN'T Moonlit visiting me, Moonlit, what's your explanation for this?Well, there's 2 possible ones, aren't there?
You've got a Paranoid type of secret auto.
You're lying.
FoU visiting Hector N1 was suspicious, but then he visited TBF N2 and TBF didnt die.FoU visited TBF day 1...I misremembered here, FoU did not visit TBF until N2.
However, it's extremely possible, almost a given, that the Evil role has more than one action that isn't a kill. But since TBF claims to do nothing noticeble at night, in the case of mechanics/nightkills/things like Hector's Command, I think he's scum.
Post by: Starver on August 24, 2016, 07:04:52 am
Starver:If you protected me from visits, how did TMS visit me N1?Uh, I didn't. I visited FoU.
@FoU
So, what did you get from visiting Bay12?
Then, indeed Fallacy claimed to visit Fish and was confirmed...
Yo.Fallacy:Why did you visit me last night?
To track you. You took no action that I could detect.
Which is odd.
As ninjaed by Fish. I'm going to have to check.
Post by: Starver on August 24, 2016, 07:15:16 am
It's the solution that currently answers more questions than any other I have.
Post by: Starver on August 24, 2016, 02:42:12 pm
Anyway, the most odd one out is Fish. With a little over 3 hours to resolve some other little niggles, because he's not the only one that's confusing. Anyone have any info (true or incriminating of others) they want to give? Quickly now.
Post by: Starver on August 24, 2016, 05:50:11 pm
Day ends Wednesday, 4:00 PM PDTAnybody?
Wednesday, 11:00 PM GMT
Fish and Moonlit are voting for each other, by my reckoning.
Fallacy is as likely to be trying to decide whether I'm guilty of something (if both of the others are honestly misguided). Sorry I blocked your checking of Moonlit, if that was so.
Without hidden-auto or personal victory end-conditions (which, if anybody has, Moonlit may have, but that's tenuous at best) I don't think, my vote will do anything, but I'm going to proclaim Fish for being more iffy than Moonlit, in various ways.
Post by: Starver on August 24, 2016, 05:52:18 pm
(if both of the others are honestly misguided).
EBWOP: "Unless both of (Moonlit/Fish) are honestly misguided", I meant.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 24, 2016, 05:57:14 pm
Post by: Starver on August 24, 2016, 06:15:30 pm
Post by: Tomasque on August 25, 2016, 05:31:55 pm
Finally, a corpse arrives - by the hands of a human. The suspicious turned to vigilanteism, and the sheep became the wolf they'd sworn to destroy.
Votecount
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (2) - Starver, The Moonlit Shadow
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (1) - TheBiggerFish
Not voting: FallacyofUrist
TheBiggerFish was the Eavesdropper
Spoiler: Eavesdropper (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on August 26, 2016, 06:03:55 pm
Starver was killed in the night!
Starver was the Ex-Bouncer
Spoiler: Ex-Bouncer (click to show/hide)
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on August 26, 2016, 06:08:38 pm
hector13 was killed in the night!
FoU, what did you do to Hector?
It pains me greatly that nobody followed up on that.
Post by: Dorsidwarf on August 26, 2016, 08:40:40 pm
hector13 was killed in the night!FoU, what did you do to Hector?
It pains me greatly that nobody followed up on that.
It was dropped after TBF didn't die, I think.
Post by: hector13 on August 26, 2016, 08:46:55 pm
I mean I'm all about the day game, but to ignore someone after they accept they visited someone who died in the night... agonizing.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 26, 2016, 11:58:23 pm
Post by: Starver on August 27, 2016, 01:50:05 am
And Moonlit had the same Action-name as me, definitely suspicious, on top of other niggles now partly explained, I think.
Fallacy was my first ever guess, but then just had to play fairly straight to rise straight to the top of the trusted-list.
(And I was really torn about who to protect, the final night (couldn't protect myself, as I discovered N1),flip-flopping in my mind. I think it was Fallacy's failure to kill N2 that kept me swung and ruined the reputations of the others... And I considered Redirector, but essentially two of them?)
Yeah, that was A Perfect Storm, or closely so.
Post by: Starver on August 27, 2016, 02:33:50 am
One of the early black marks, but with wrong thoughts behind it:
I really don't want to go that far. I think you're too eager. No questioning of me, even?
Wait, FoU claimed the same ability I have.But you seemed less sure what you were, unfortunately.
It's obvious why the Evil role didnt kill again. For that reason, I suggest a No LynchNot obvious to me (or obvious to me why it was particularly obvious to you, I mean, nobody else should be hinting Protect, right?). Was wondering if special-evil-wincon included 'infect and survive' qualities to max out points, personally. The first death an accident, perhaps even a Vigilante misaim (or infection-stopper?).
Speaks for itself... Also the whole of Moonlit's http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7147650#msg7147650 is interesting in hindesight.Let's see. We can start with a summary of our claims.Bouncer. Action is to Protect. As given. And I know example actly how many visitors I turn away.
I: Tracker.
Moonlit: Tracker/Watcher with Protect action name.
TBF: Self-watcher.
Hector: DED, Voodoo Person.
Starver: The missing link. CLAIM.
And, by the way, nobody visited Fish on Night 1 (or tried to). Can't rule out a Hectorish non-visit action (which the target wouldn't know about), but again someone goes and says exactly the wrong thing and makes me suspect them more.
Fallacy, I trust you tried to visit Moonlit N3, but do not know for what purpose. Moonlit I trust you knew somehow what Fallacy did, N1,because it was a very lucky guess if you tried that. Fish, if you're right, its beyond my knowledge, and meanwhile someone did something to Hector (as Fallacy visited).
Someone's telling little grey lies and hiding the one telling the complete porkies. Or a complicated recruitment. (Let me remind you what Recruitment did when I did it, BTW, so consider your loyalties if that's the case.)
Unravel this, someone.
I think I was thoroughly drawn in the wrong direction(s) by this point.Day ends Wednesday, 4:00 PM PDTAnybody?
Wednesday, 11:00 PM GMT
Fish and Moonlit are voting for each other, by my reckoning.
Fallacy is as likely to be trying to decide whether I'm guilty of something (if both of the others are honestly misguided). Sorry I blocked your checking of Moonlit, if that was so.
Without hidden-auto or personal victory end-conditions (which, if anybody has, Moonlit may have, but that's tenuous at best) I don't think, my vote will do anything, but I'm going to proclaim Fish for being more iffy than Moonlit, in various ways.
I have asked Tomasque WTF is happening here, but haven't heard back yet. Can we hold off on lynching either of us until I've heard back one way or the other?Too meta (I would have forced myself to ignore it) but I'd asked Tomasque to confirm my targets (misremembered who I'd protected twice) and had had a response. Could have been that you were not actually asking at all, merely flailing. I don't know if I would have used this against you if you hadn't died, and I misthought that my vote was a 'very strong finger of suspicion' actually, not a killing-blow.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 27, 2016, 12:23:35 pm
First win as Evil for me! GG.
Post by: Tomasque on August 29, 2016, 06:13:58 pm
A city sits, awash in the moonlight. The cityfolk within are out in the streets - talking, laughing, and going out for drinks. No one seems to have a care in the world. What is there to be afraid of?
Post by: Tomasque on September 01, 2016, 11:33:02 pm
The sun rises and the streetlights flicker away. The parties end and the city is empty of all sound. But then, the commuters fill their cars, and the city is bustling once more. Not a care in the world.
Day ends Saturday, 10:00 PM PDT
Sunday, 5:00 AM GMT
Post by: Starver on September 02, 2016, 05:13:25 am
... No one seems to have a car in the world. ...:P
Anyhoo. Sign in, guys..?
Post by: Starver on September 02, 2016, 03:45:22 pm
(Nothing to say, yet.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 02, 2016, 03:46:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 02, 2016, 04:28:37 pm
Seems to me the Evil doesn't have an NK, unless it's something that can't be triggered on N0.
Did anyone find out anything interesting last night?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 02, 2016, 04:29:03 pm
Post by: Starver on September 02, 2016, 04:36:38 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 02, 2016, 06:00:38 pm
One: somewhat similar flavor.
Two: my role, which has significant parallels to a role in the previous round.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 02, 2016, 06:29:58 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 02, 2016, 06:36:08 pm
If anybody else has such letters in the start of their ability names, speak up.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 02, 2016, 06:37:37 pm
Post by: Starver on September 02, 2016, 06:42:20 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 03, 2016, 11:51:35 am
One of my abilities starts with the letter C, if there's a second, it starts with the letter G.
What do you mean "if"? Surely you either do or don't have a second action.
Post by: Starver on September 03, 2016, 12:23:20 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 03, 2016, 03:40:32 pm
I believe the intention is to keep some element of doubt in the mind of the opposition.This.
Post by: hector13 on September 03, 2016, 05:05:58 pm
I believe the intention is to keep some element of doubt in the mind of the opposition. I can relate to that. I already said there's complexity, probably across all alignments.
That element must be Cesium then, since it's bloody huge.
It does nothing for town, and could easily be scum trying to set up a fakeclaim later, while also trying to figure out how many abilities the town has on D1.
I'm inclined to believe that's the case.
FoU
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 03, 2016, 06:59:50 pm
It does nothing for town, and could easily be scum trying to set up a fakeclaim later, while also trying to figure out how many abilities the town has on D1.
... could easily be scum trying to set up a fake claim later? [1]
Trying to figure out how many abilities the town has on day one? [2]
[1]: Could be. Could also not be. I don't see why that's the highest probability, however.
[2]: Oh, I see. We've got vanillas sometimes now. My bad.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 03, 2016, 07:00:46 pm
Huh.
Post by: hector13 on September 03, 2016, 07:03:32 pm
It does nothing for town, and could easily be scum trying to set up a fakeclaim later, while also trying to figure out how many abilities the town has on D1.
... could easily be scum trying to set up a fake claim later? [1]
Trying to figure out how many abilities the town has on day one? [2]
[1]: Could be. Could also not be. I don't see why that's the highest probability, however.
[2]: Oh, I see. We've got vanillas sometimes now. My bad.
Alright.
How does figuring out how many abilities the town has on D1 help town?
How does it help scum?
How does it help town find scum?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 03, 2016, 07:04:51 pm
I think you're reading a bit much into that.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 03, 2016, 07:07:41 pm
~~~
[1] How does figuring out how many abilities the town has on D1 help town?
[2] How does it help scum?
[3] How does it help town find scum?
[1] I wouldn't say it does.
[2] It probably wouldn't help scum too much on Day one, unless there was a bit more claiming going on. On later days, it might help, but the scum would gain that advantage anyway from claims.
[3] See [1].
~~~
I think you're reading a bit much into that.And a bit of this too.
Post by: hector13 on September 03, 2016, 07:13:23 pm
What I'm saying is that I didn't realize it could be used to figure out how many abilities the town has until after I did it.
A likely story. You clearly thought you were going to get something useful out of it, else you wouldn't have posted. What was it?
[1] How does figuring out how many abilities the town has on D1 help town?
[2] How does it help scum?
[3] How does it help town find scum?
[1] I wouldn't say it does.
[2] It probably wouldn't help scum too much on Day one, unless there was a bit more claiming going on. On later days, it might help, but the scum would gain that advantage anyway from claims.
[3] See [1].
So you see my point then? What you did has benefits for scum in the present - figuring out how many abilities the town has D1, which'll guide their night game - and in the future, so they can make some claims based on what was said.
I think you're reading a bit much into that.And a bit of this too.
I'm sure the person I'm voting for is quite willing to make me seem like a paranoid loon. I refer y'all again to the last game.
Post by: Starver on September 03, 2016, 07:28:51 pm
Moonlit: Finds nothing, implying that something could be found.
Fish: Finds nothing, but without that implication.
Hector: Speculates and jumps on shadows, par for the course.
Fallacy: Caution befitting power-role of either alignment, perhaps?
(Me: Waiting for someone to trip up, but gave a clue along the way.)
Anyway, there's (at least) two roles in the last round that together provide components of my role this time. (But not my own last-game role.) If this is not obviously refelected amongst everyone else, I suspect it might still be with another Super Secret Squirrel thing involved. To hat's my best guess at the moment. Anybody want to defer from that?
Less than five hours left, I think. Don't see a reason for a baseless lynch. There's information yet to find, methinks. I think those that can should try (again, adding to N0 efforts) to do so.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 03, 2016, 07:29:35 pm
Post by: Starver on September 03, 2016, 07:36:40 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 03, 2016, 08:03:33 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 03, 2016, 08:19:09 pm
Considering y'all didn't follow-up on FoU saying he visited me on the night I died in the last game, I'm inclined to think you're not reading enough into things.What I'm saying is that I didn't realize it could be used to figure out how many abilities the town has until after I did it.
[1] A likely story. You clearly thought you were going to get something useful out of it, else you wouldn't have posted. What was it?[1] How does figuring out how many abilities the town has on D1 help town?
[2] How does it help scum?
[3] How does it help town find scum?
[1] I wouldn't say it does.
[2] It probably wouldn't help scum too much on Day one, unless there was a bit more claiming going on. On later days, it might help, but the scum would gain that advantage anyway from claims.
[3] See [1].
[2] So you see my point then? What you did has benefits for scum in the present - figuring out how many abilities the town has D1, which'll guide their night game - and in the future, so they can make some claims based on what was said.I think you're reading a bit much into that.And a bit of this too.
I'm sure the person I'm voting for is quite willing to make me seem like a paranoid loon. I refer y'all again to the last game.
[1]: I thought I could use that to figure out the likelihood of anybody having abilities with the same names, like last round.
See context:
I wonder if the Protect/Protect/etc. is going on again.
[2]: See [2].
[2] It probably wouldn't help scum too much on Day one, unless there was a bit more claiming going on. On later days, it might help, but the scum would gain that advantage anyway from claims.
Post by: hector13 on September 03, 2016, 09:50:48 pm
Why do you need to know about other player's abilities on D1?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 04, 2016, 04:51:09 pm
[1] Aye, but you said it wouldn't help town at all. Relative to that, you're helping scum out a lot.
[2] Why do you need to know about other player's abilities on D1?
[1] The whole "relative" thing changes nothing.
[2] I don't need to know about other player's abilities, I want to know about the first letters of said abilities.
Because this.
I wonder if the Protect/Protect/etc. is going on again.
Post by: hector13 on September 04, 2016, 05:39:44 pm
Post by: Tomasque on September 05, 2016, 09:38:28 pm
Another night begins like the last.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (1) - hector13
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Not voting: Starver, The Moonlit Shadow, FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish
Post by: Tomasque on September 08, 2016, 05:42:13 pm
Reflected in the ocean, a silver sliver of a moon drifts behind the misty clouds. Like a cold, cotton sheet, the silent clouds lay over the city.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
Day ends Saturday, 4:00 PM PST
Saturday, 11:00 PM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 08, 2016, 05:44:03 pm
Post by: Starver on September 08, 2016, 06:10:08 pm
Suggestions as to round quirk, anyone?
Post by: hector13 on September 08, 2016, 06:13:22 pm
Post by: Starver on September 08, 2016, 06:19:13 pm
(Without wanting you to give up your innermost secrets, what leads you to believe that you first(/zeroth) night results are contraindicated by your second(N1) results... Or so I assume you are saying.
Post by: hector13 on September 08, 2016, 06:23:24 pm
Turns out that the answer is either yes I do, or someone can mess with results.
Post by: Starver on September 08, 2016, 06:30:23 pm
(Don't suppose you want to reveal your intended N0, then, given it probably did not happen the way you thought it did. Together with that and what I (think I) know, there might be something useful after all.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 08, 2016, 06:35:12 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 08, 2016, 06:36:08 pm
I visited FoU N0.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 08, 2016, 06:37:27 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 08, 2016, 06:41:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 08, 2016, 07:04:37 pm
Did you visit FoU last night?
I targeted myself...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 08, 2016, 07:05:53 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 09, 2016, 06:28:51 am
Post by: Starver on September 09, 2016, 06:50:18 am
Fallacy = Not actioned
Fish = Not working
Hector = Not reliable
Moonlit = Not useful
Me = Not convinced
This is a fun round...
Risky partial revelation time: I have a primary and secondary person in my action. N0, my secondary was Fish. Did anything happen that perhaps I can fill in more gaps around, whilst also reconfirming that I'm not self-deluded by hidden-auto/Super Secret stuff?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 09, 2016, 06:53:45 am
Post by: Starver on September 09, 2016, 07:40:51 am
I'm reluctant to say what happened last night. Depending on who is lying/mistaken, I could be opening myself to dangeous counter-claim (whether or bad or good faith). Did nobody notice me, last night? One particular person should perhaps have, depending on the (in)accuracy of their own role, and then with Fish's help the rest should start to unpack.
(BTW, I'm worried about the no-killing situation. Bodes for a more bastard scum role, this round.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 09, 2016, 07:41:41 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 09, 2016, 08:28:42 am
~~~
My personal theory is that everybody has a role in the previous round that their own role parallels significantly. Case in point my role.
Would you say that is true for your role? (talking to everybody)
~~~
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 09, 2016, 08:29:26 am
Post by: Starver on September 09, 2016, 08:54:55 am
Anyway, there's (at least) two roles in the last round that together provide components of my role this time. (But not my own last-game role.) If this is not obviously refelected amongst everyone else, I suspect it might still be with another Super Secret Squirrel thing involved. To hat's[!] my best guess at the moment. Anybody want to defer from that?
[!] EBWOthisP: "That's"
More recently revealed, the Primary/Secondary aspect of my actions.
Post by: hector13 on September 09, 2016, 01:41:15 pm
hector: You were all for lynching me yesterday. What changed?
Obviously someone hasn't been reading. I got a bit of a shock upon discovering that my action may not be reliable shortly before I posted.
Perhaps you should explain your OMGUS, though?
My personal theory is that everybody has a role in the previous round that their own role parallels significantly. Case in point my role.
It's not really a case nor a point if you don't actually provide your role. /pedant
... but only pedantic to a point. Why are you role fishing?
Post by: Starver on September 09, 2016, 04:18:34 pm
Almost tempted to get myself lynched, tell everything and let my roleflip confirm (or correct, if I'm squirreling) my own claim, at this rate.
Anyone got a better idea.
Post by: hector13 on September 09, 2016, 04:34:36 pm
Post by: Starver on September 09, 2016, 04:46:17 pm
I'm really rather keen to give you all more of my data, but I'd rather have something I can contradict and be killed/roleflipped for than risk being accomodated by a enemy willing to bend their own 'truth' to what I say.
"Is this a high-risk scum-plan?", I think (most of) you are thinking. I can't prove its not. Yet. Someone might be a bit scared, though. The dawdling is killing me, though, even if nobody else is.
26 more hourse, yes?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 09, 2016, 06:31:18 pm
It's not really a case nor a point if you don't actually provide your role.
... but only pedantic to a point. Why are you role fishing?
... One. I'm not role fishing. If I were, I would have asked a different question. My question is simple: is there a role in the previous round that your own role parallels in some way? Now, as scum, how am I supposed to use that? I wouldn't say that's usable. Unless you have any ideas for how scum could use that?
Two. I'm not role fishing. Not all asking questions about other players' roles is role fishing.
Three. I'll provide my role if you provide your role. Deal? In any case, I shouldn't need to provide my whole role to say that there's a role in the previous round my own role parallels.
~~~
Obviously someone hasn't been reading. [1] I got a bit of a shock upon discovering that my action may not be reliable shortly before I posted.
[2] Perhaps you should explain your OMGUS, though?
[1]: Unless your action's result was why you voted me on day one, that shouldn't have changed anything.
[2]: Not all votes for the person who is voting you are OMGUSes. An OMGUS is a "knee jerk" reaction by a player who has just been voted, in which they vote the voter in question, saying that the person voting them must be scum because of said vote. I, however, though I voted you for your vote on me, it wasn't the vote that got me against you, but rather why it was placed, and what it seemed to imply. You voted me for asking a question... about a small aspect of the other players' roles. It seemed like a bit of an overreaction, plus it seemed like you were trying to hop onto any bit of potential scumminess you could find in order to speed a lynch through without giving the other players much thought.
~~~
I await your rebuttal.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 09, 2016, 08:05:10 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 09, 2016, 08:07:29 pm
Spoiler: spoiler 'cause big (click to show/hide)
- it doesn't hurt town very much if my results do actually turn out to be unreliable as a result of an auto, rather than a scum action.Starver:
Is there any reason you can give behind why you trust FoU, without saying more than you want to?
PPE: TBF: a quick summary would suffice.
Post by: Starver on September 09, 2016, 08:20:50 pm
Starver:
Is there any reason you can give behind why you trust FoU, without saying more than you want to?
Fallacy claimed not to have done anything N0 or N1, and I have good reason to believe at least one of those to be true.
(Moonlit has interesting confirmation about me, and them. I have a more definite suspect in mind. But I'm runnng through the possible variations before comitting. It is 2:15am and it may have to wait until after I've slept, whenever that ends up being, so I know that I'm not being trivially stupid. Complicatedly stupid, or not at all.)
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 07:55:05 am
Post by: Starver on September 10, 2016, 08:41:27 am
I don't understand Hector's going after Fallacy, unless Hector really doesn't want to roleflip me. I've tested you alll, actually, in stating qualities that associate with scum. I've even suggested reasons I might be scum. I specifically advised you that I might be scum and had no takers. But it's Hector that I'm most suspicious of.
Hector thinks that Fallacy is worth voting on, D1, perhaps on N0 action, yet apparently (see below) retreats from this view N1 to test for Insane Copness or somesuch. Having 'discovered' Insane Copicity, which would invalidate any real N0 results, goes straight back to accusing, and now voting for, Fallacy. And I've deliberately made myself look at least as guilty, in daytext, as Fallacy, by vouching for them, defending them, adding my own version of OMGUS-by-proxy... I'm at least an ally. Unless you're convinced I'm a Jester, why avoid killing me? Unless you are sure my roleflip would help your opponents...
There are some other answers to the solutions, but based upon my interpretation of 'fragments of thw last rounds roles are mixed up and redistributed' idea, most are out of bounds.
Full reveal. I check (Visit) my primary target to see if they leave their abode. I watch (not-Visit) my secondary target to see if they are themselves visited.
N0: Primary Fallacy did not leave; Secondary Fish... not entirely sure as I was told nothing, even after checking if it was right that I was told nothing. (Have considered that I was re-routing Primary to Secondary, espec. after N1, and given Fallacy did nothing then Fish did not get a Visit from Fallacy...)
N1: Primary Hector went out; Secondary Moonlit was visited by Hector. (Conceivably, I gave Hector the impression that he was Insane Cop, if I was the cause of this, but I was hoping Hector would say something that would at least attempt to do something other than go for Fallacy, for reasons I still find highly deficient. No sign of this.)
Moonlit's statement about my success isn't entirely satisfying. In some ways it worries me. Fallacy should be at least half right about not doing anything both rounds. Fish appears to confirm that I was right not to be told anything about visitors to him N0.
If we've got a rearrange of prior-round skills, I'm wondering who might have Block-type skill (my previous role), and I'm wondering if its the Evil this time, in this non-nightkilling situation. There may yet be a redirect, but I can't see it being as simple as connected to the same Primary/Secondary action that I possess (even in secret, but that's why I am willing to be roleflipped if everything else is stalemate). Nobody is dying, and (so far) I see no sign of anybody being Cursed in any way, unless I'm yet to be Cultified or somesuch, in which case I'm already losing.
So, please do comment. Hector, you better reveal what you can about your visit to Hector (whether you knew you were doing so or not) because we need to know before you end up fatally roleflipped as innocent. Maybe you can change my mind..?
Post by: Starver on September 10, 2016, 08:46:38 am
Hector, you better reveal what you can about your visit to Moonlit (whether you knew you were doing so or not) because we need to know before you end up fatally roleflipped as innocent. Maybe you can change my mind..?
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 10:55:17 am
I've been waiting so I don't doublepost... Disappointingly little conversation, still.
I don't understand Hector's going after Fallacy, unless Hector really doesn't want to roleflip me. I've tested you alll, actually, in stating qualities that associate with scum. I've even suggested reasons I might be scum. I specifically advised you that I might be scum and had no takers. But it's Hector that I'm most suspicious of.
There's so much wrong with this I hardly know where to start... so let's do it in order.
Just because you don't understand it, does that make it less legitimate? Why not ask me about my suspicions to clear up any misunderstanding you might have?
I didn't want to roleflip you because you seemed to think you would be more useful to town while still alive, and I agreed with that, implicitly - though it should've been fairly obvious why I thought you were at the very least not scum at that time as I was going after FoU, who completely ignored the discussion about my results from N1. Evidently FoU is not the only one ignoring things today.
You've said that I visited Moonlit N1 when that wasn't the action I took. This does add credence to my belief that something isn't right with my results from N1. Perhaps as you say, you were what did it, and my paranoia about scum doing it is unfounded.
Why should we vote you just because you say we should vote you? You don't get to decide what the other players do or don't find suspicious. That's patently ridiculous. You get to decide whether you find something suspicious, but then you don't seem to ask about it until the day is almost over, which I don't understand, so I'll ask a question about it.
How come you waited this long to ask about something that - from the information you had - you knew was wrong?
Hector thinks that Fallacy is worth voting on, D1, perhaps on N0 action, yet apparently (see below) retreats from this view N1 to test for Insane Copness or somesuch. Having 'discovered' Insane Copicity, which would invalidate any real N0 results, goes straight back to accusing, and now voting for, Fallacy. And I've deliberately made myself look at least as guilty, in daytext, as Fallacy, by vouching for them, defending them, adding my own version of OMGUS-by-proxy... I'm at least an ally. Unless you're convinced I'm a Jester, why avoid killing me? Unless you are sure my roleflip would help your opponents...
Had I found something on Fallacy N0 worth voting over, why did I wait until the end of the day to vote him? I'm not exactly shy about that kind of thing...
I've already said why I targeted myself and what happened, so I don't need to repeat it. I mentioned it as soon as I discovered it so it could be discussed, examined and then either disregarded or accepted so we could get back to actually finding scum as quickly as possible. Now I find that it may have been your fault, and you didn't seem to think it necessary to point that out when I brought it up. Previous question again.
I only know that my results on N1 were unreliable. This could've been as a result of your action, it could've been a result of a hidden auto, or it could've been something unrelated. How else do you propose I work toward ruling these things out?
And now we're back to you deciding what other players should and shouldn't find suspicious. You defending Fallacy was suspicious - indeed, the only thing I thought was suspicious in what you were doing - I did mention that (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7169139#msg7169139), and did ask you about it, and I did say I disagreed that you were doing as much role-fishing as FoU. You answered in the next post, along with what I assume you think was the most suspicious thing you could say.
Newsflash! I didn't find it very suspicious.
Nor did, as you point out, anybody else. Why am I the most suspicious for not pressuring you about it? As you say, I'm continuing a case from D1 - being the only person with a case from D1 - while TBF and Moonlit haven't done anything of note during the day, beyond saying what results they got. Am I suspicious to continue that after being called out on it with an OMGUS and a crap case, while they're not for continuing their daytime idleness?
So, please do comment. Hector, you better reveal what you can about your visit toHectorMoonlit (whether you knew you were doing so or not) because we need to know before you end up fatally roleflipped as innocent. Maybe you can change my mind..?
That's a lot more role-fishy than what you were supposedly doing before. What I can reveal might reveal more about Moonlit, if you did change my target, and I'm unwilling to do that in case he is town.
The result I got may not be related to him at all, but why take that chance? No thanks.
Post by: Starver on September 10, 2016, 12:51:06 pm
Why not ask me about my suspicions to clear up any misunderstanding you might have?I've been subtly trying to get people to bring more stuff (non-threatening, even totally fabricated, if they need to!) to the conversation. That was your cue as much as it was anyone's. Too subtly?
Quote
I didn't want to roleflip you because you seemed to think you would be more useful to town while still aliveEven when I said "Almost tempted to get myself lynched, tell everything and let my roleflip confirm (or correct, if I'm squirreling) my own claim, at this rate." and went even further than that in the next post?
Quote
You've said that I visited Moonlit N1 when that wasn't the action I took. This does add credence to my belief that something isn't right with my results from N1. Perhaps as you say, you were what did it, and my paranoia about scum doing it is unfounded.I currently have two main theories. Firstly and easiest that you are lying, which makes you scummy. Secondarily is that I have a hidden redirect to my own skill that mislead you, which makes me a spoiling role, not a true investigator as I imagineb I am, much as per Fish was last turn, and one or other of us should probably be roleflipped if we can't trust my result not to mess up everyone's logic for the round.
(I would rather have not claimed at all, but the stagnation of conversation and the apparently passive Evil role is making me twitchy.)
Quote
You get to decide whether you find something suspicious, but then you don't seem to ask about it until the day is almost over,I was trying to get a response well before half the day-cycle had passed, you recall...
Quote
which I don't understand, so I'll ask a question about it.I wanted the villain to dig their own grave. Even if it then needed my death to convince others of my sincerity in pointing out that this is what they've done. I wasn't actually expecting you to definitely be the one, but you're too good a player to have dug yourself into one so plainly whilst the true enemy has resisted my deliberate temptations, mis-hints, promises and threats, so I'm seizing on this. I had indeed planned to make my full reveal just before day-end (especially if under threat of personal Lynch), so it pains me to be described as acting as the day is almost over when I ended up acting more than a third of a (RL) day before deadline.
How come you waited this long to ask about something that - from the information you had - you knew was wrong?
Quote
Now I find that [personal role unreliability] may have been your fault, and you didn't seem to think it necessary to point that out when I brought it up.I think you'll find I was fishing for more detail a number of times. (Just because I didn't label it with @everybody, let alone @you, didn't mean I wasn't asking you questions, increasingly unsubtly...)
Quote
I only know that my results on N1 were unreliable. This could've been as a result of your action, it could've been a result of a hidden auto, or it could've been something unrelated. How else do you propose I work toward ruling these things out?If I'm roleflipped, my currently full and frank 'knowledge' can be confirmed or seen in the true light of whatever there yet remains hidden even to me. As an openly outed investigator, I'm no less useful than the one who can only hint as to (perceived) facts that only the opposition knows to be true (or mistaken). The uncertainty in my role is the biggest disadvantage, either way, and a scummily-inclined player would prefer that to remain. (i.e. Either knowledge lost by the silencing of the inestigator-in-hiding, or no public revelation of the background to the public detective's raving proclamations.)
Alternately, you (assuming Town Investigator or approximate variant) now have knowledge about Moonlit that should rule them in/out of Town's suspicions if we can trust you (and trust me that this is what even happened). You've likely revealed enough to make you a target for true-scum, depending upon mechanism at their disposal, and your own flipping would authenticate any statement of yours regarding Mooonlit, thus more easily zeroing in on whoever the true enemy is from who remains. Given the Townie wincon (but not the Scum one) that seems like a reasonable-enough sacrifice to me, much as I do my own. YMMV, but there's got to bena good explanation for it. At least a hint. (See end if this post.)
(There's another conclusion that I've made, related to the above, but I'm waiting to see if another individual does/doesn't act upon it, themselves. No hints what it is and which it is, though!)
Quote
You defending Fallacy was suspiciousIf we're in league as Evil Cow-orkers, then Town had bigger problems than my potential self-sacrifice to further the cause of Evil.
Quote
along with what I assume you think was the most suspicious thing you could say.You flatter me. I merely voiced what I expected anybody to already be thinking... Almost disarmingly so. Maybe that (the subtext, not the text) was the more suspicious, but then if you've gone that far in the stream of logic then you must consider yet a further level of bluff, and counter-bluff and counter-counter-bluff, and so on. Suspicion = i2/2 + i4/4 + i6/6 + ... + i2n/2n???? (I think that probably converges, as n tends to infinity, but I haven't checked.)
Quote
being the only person with a case from D1I don't rate your case, compared to your usual standards (even the random fire approach). I would even guess that you have a target in your (Neutral?) wincon, and you suspect it to be Fallacy, so unwavering are you. But it stands out as odd. Which is not what I expect from your town-tell, even less than it is what I'd expect of your scum-tell. (Five and a half hours to change my mind about that, isn't it?)
Quote
while TBF and Moonlit haven't done anything of note during the day,Troubling, but for my own part I've found they've passed mini-tests that inspire me with confidence. Perhaps accidentally/unknowingly, but they've they've played the game and won more of my confidence, in a roughly Beyesian manner of adding up assumptions and later confirmations/refutations to those assumptions, as things go on.
(i.e. Even though silence is hurting them, their occasional activity has seemed more than useful.)
Quote
That's a lot more role-fishy than what you were supposedly doing before. What I can reveal might reveal more about Moonlit, if you did change my target, and I'm unwilling to do that in case he is town.
If you truly suspect your information is useless, then your best chance is to see how useful my information is. Or resign yourself to being the Fish-role of last round (by your own hand or mine) if you don't have anything useful to say about it. Direct or meta- or meta-meta-...
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 01:44:10 pm
Why not ask me about my suspicions to clear up any misunderstanding you might have?I've been subtly trying to get people to bring more stuff (non-threatening, even totally fabricated, if they need to!) to the conversation. That was your cue as much as it was anyone's. Too subtly?
Nobody picked up on it, so yes, obviously :P
QuoteI didn't want to roleflip you because you seemed to think you would be more useful to town while still aliveEven when I said "Almost tempted to get myself lynched, tell everything and let my roleflip confirm (or correct, if I'm squirreling) my own claim, at this rate." and went even further than that in the next post?
That means nothing. Considering that the Evil role has been solo for the entire rest of the game, it makes no sense for scum to offer themselves up like that. You really need to work on this bait thing, methinks...
QuoteYou've said that I visited Moonlit N1 when that wasn't the action I took. This does add credence to my belief that something isn't right with my results from N1. Perhaps as you say, you were what did it, and my paranoia about scum doing it is unfounded.I currently have two main theories. Firstly and easiest that you are lying, which makes you scummy. Secondarily is that I have a hidden redirect to my own skill that mislead you, which makes me a spoiling role, not a true investigator as I imagineb I am, much as per Fish was last turn, and one or other of us should probably be roleflipped if we can't trust my result not to mess up everyone's logic for the round.
(I would rather have not claimed at all, but the stagnation of conversation and the apparently passive Evil role is making me twitchy.)
Like I've been saying, you may not have influenced my result in the slightest. I was voting FoU D1, so if he is scum, who do you think he's going to target during the night? Some weird shit went down, and I've been saying all along I don't know what caused it. All I know is something isn't right.
QuoteYou get to decide whether you find something suspicious, but then you don't seem to ask about it until the day is almost over,I was trying to get a response well before half the day-cycle had passed, you recall...Quotewhich I don't understand, so I'll ask a question about it.I wanted the villain to dig their own grave. Even if it then needed my death to convince others of my sincerity in pointing out that this is what they've done. I wasn't actually expecting you to definitely be the one, but you're too good a player to have dug yourself into one so plainly whilst the true enemy has resisted my deliberate temptations, mis-hints, promises and threats, so I'm seizing on this. I had indeed planned to make my full reveal just before day-end (especially if under threat of personal Lynch), so it pains me to be described as acting as the day is almost over when I ended up acting more than a third of a (RL) day before deadline.
How come you waited this long to ask about something that - from the information you had - you knew was wrong?
7 hours, aye? You had 41 before that, almost the entirety of which you knew the action I said I performed wasn't the action you were reported that I performed. You could easily have said that me targeting myself wasn't the information you had without revealing anything else about your role. Considering the dearth of activity we've had this day, and FoU's protestations that my vote on him in the same time frame on D1 was me trying to speed through a lynch, I'm afraid I have to call bullshit on you.
Considering nobody else has taken the bait on any of these temptations, hints, promises, and threats, or even mentioned them in passing, I think we can say that they were not the work of a master-baiter. /pun
QuoteNow I find that [personal role unreliability] may have been your fault, and you didn't seem to think it necessary to point that out when I brought it up.I think you'll find I was fishing for more detail a number of times. (Just because I didn't label it with @everybody, let alone @you, didn't mean I wasn't asking you questions, increasingly unsubtly...)
Clearly everybody missed them. Do point them out please.
QuoteI only know that my results on N1 were unreliable. This could've been as a result of your action, it could've been a result of a hidden auto, or it could've been something unrelated. How else do you propose I work toward ruling these things out?If I'm roleflipped, my currently full and frank 'knowledge' can be confirmed or seen in the true light of whatever there yet remains hidden even to me. As an openly outed investigator, I'm no less useful than the one who can only hint as to (perceived) facts that only the opposition knows to be true (or mistaken). The uncertainty in my role is the biggest disadvantage, either way, and a scummily-inclined player would prefer that to remain. (i.e. Either knowledge lost by the silencing of the inestigator-in-hiding, or no public revelation of the background to the public detective's raving proclamations.)
What uncertainty regarding your role? You can tell if someone is visiting, and thus performed an action on someone, and also tell if another person was visited, and thus had an action performed on them.
Moonlit, who I visited according to your results, doesn't appear to have had anything terribly terrible happen to them, at least as far as they've reported. Given your penchant for assumptions, I would hope that would tell you my action is at the very least not malign.
Alternately, you (assuming Town Investigator or approximate variant) now have knowledge about Moonlit that should rule them in/out of Town's suspicions if we can trust you (and trust me that this is what even happened). You've likely revealed enough to make you a target for true-scum, depending upon mechanism at their disposal, and your own flipping would authenticate any statement of yours regarding Mooonlit, thus more easily zeroing in on whoever the true enemy is from who remains. Given the Townie wincon (but not the Scum one) that seems like a reasonable-enough sacrifice to me, much as I do my own. YMMV, but there's got to bena good explanation for it. At least a hint. (See end if this post.)
From this I would have to assume you know what my action is, else I can kick the weak support out from under it and completely invalidate it. What is my action?
(There's another conclusion that I've made, related to the above, but I'm waiting to see if another individual does/doesn't act upon it, themselves. No hints what it is and which it is, though!)
That you're neutral and making up nonsense to satisfy your wincon? :P
QuoteYou defending Fallacy was suspiciousIf we're in league as Evil Cow-orkers, then Town had bigger problems than my potential self-sacrifice to further the cause of Evil.
Suspicious /=/ damning
In case it escaped your notice, I was distracted by something I thought was more suspicious. Like I said, we each get to decide what we find suspicious and otherwise.
Just because I think FoU is being hugely suspicious does not mean I expect everyone else to agree, so I felt you were offering a dissenting opinion, but not necessarily one that I felt needed challenged at that point.
Quotealong with what I assume you think was the most suspicious thing you could say.You flatter me. I merely voiced what I expected anybody to already be thinking... Almost disarmingly so. Maybe that (the subtext, not the text) was the more suspicious, but then if you've gone that far in the stream of logic then you must consider yet a further level of bluff, and counter-bluff and counter-counter-bluff, and so on. Suspicion = i2/2 + i4/4 + i6/6 + ... + i2n/2n???? (I think that probably converges, as n tends to infinity, but I haven't checked.)
You've hit the nail on the head there, except with the suspicion part. Just because you voice something you think everyone was thinking, doesn't mean they were thinking it. Not only that, over-thinking it leads to WIFOM. I don't like wine, so you may keep it.
Quotebeing the only person with a case from D1I don't rate your case, compared to your usual standards (even the random fire approach). I would even guess that you have a target in your (Neutral?) wincon, and you suspect it to be Fallacy, so unwavering are you. But it stands out as odd. Which is not what I expect from your town-tell, even less than it is what I'd expect of your scum-tell. (Five and a half hours to change my mind about that, isn't it?)
Well the only other person you seem to think suspicious beyond me is yourself, and I've already told you what I think of that. What reason would I have for pursuing either Moonlit or TBF over FoU?
...
Trick question! If I have to pursue them for those reasons, why aren't you?
Quotewhile TBF and Moonlit haven't done anything of note during the day,Troubling, but for my own part I've found they've passed mini-tests that inspire me with confidence. Perhaps accidentally/unknowingly, but they've they've played the game and won more of my confidence, in a roughly Beyesian manner of adding up assumptions and later confirmations/refutations to those assumptions, as things go on.
(i.e. Even though silence is hurting them, their occasional activity has seemed more than useful.)
How sure are you of the efficacy of these tests?
What have they said that is useful?
QuoteThat's a lot more role-fishy than what you were supposedly doing before. What I can reveal might reveal more about Moonlit, if you did change my target, and I'm unwilling to do that in case he is town.
If you truly suspect your information is useless, then your best chance is to see how useful my information is. Or resign yourself to being the Fish-role of last round (by your own hand or mine) if you don't have anything useful to say about it. Direct or meta- or meta-meta-...
All I can truly say is the results I received from N1 are not right for what I did. This does not mean that all my results are invalid, though it would be quite foolish not to consider that possibility wouldn't you say?
Once again, my results could have been manipulated by someone who is not you and is not me. There are three other players in the game, why are you reducing it to just you and I?
I'm slightly miffed that TBF promised a reason for voting me, and FoU has conveniently disappeared since voting me. 2 hours to go.
gj gais
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 10, 2016, 02:15:27 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 02:16:54 pm
I don't know if my results from N0 are wrong, because I didn't know what results to expect.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 10, 2016, 02:23:35 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 02:26:15 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 10, 2016, 02:28:08 pm
Let me check who I targeted again.
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 02:30:37 pm
Bear in mind that I thought I targeted myself, and Starver says I targeted Moonlit. My results could be entirely accurate for Moonlit for all I know.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 10, 2016, 03:55:58 pm
FoUSpoiler: spoiler 'cause big (click to show/hide)
Well then. Let's get started. I'll just purple all the text that's yours in that spoiler...
This might take a while...
[1]: S'pose I know every role in this round parallels a role in the previous round(again I ask you, does your role parallel a role in the previous round?)... now I can see which claim doesn't fit the paralleling as much. Plus, if two people claim their role parallels one role, then we can assume one of them is lying...
[2]: Sacrifices must be made. Besides, it's not going to help them that much if they don't know what the actual roles are, or even which roles are being paralleled... all I asked was "does your role parallel a role in the previous round". Five roles in the previous round, each player's role parallels one of them. One: The scum wouldn't know which roles are being paralleled by which players. And two, the scum still wouldn't know what roles the players even have.
[3]: Asking people questions about their roles can be role fishing... but it depends on the circumstances. This is not a simple game. This is a semi-bastard game. Each round is a puzzle, which must be solved with... role information!
[4]: My role parallels the Ouija Master role in the previous round. I have an auto... and a 1-shot that passes that auto on temporarily(or permanently if I die). Unlike the Ouija Master, my auto is beneficial(unless it's fake), so I'd like to keep it, for the moment at least.
[5]: Uh, why?
[6]: Uh... why?
[7]: See answer [3].
[8]: Since your vote on me was not determined by your night action, my scumminess shouldn't have changed over the night, thus you should have voted me immediately at the start of the day.
[9]: Not for voting me day one, but for your reasons for voting me day one.
[10]: You were not voting me to figure out what I was trying to do. You already knew what I was trying to do, I stated such multiple times. You were voting me to get me lynched.
[11]: The pressure bit makes sense. But I would argue that my little role questions shouldn't have been enough for a lynch vote. See answer [3].
[12]: To put it simply... Voting good. Voting for bad reasons bad.
[13]: Yes, I didn't vote you at the time because I didn't want to be accused by you of OMGUSing you. That was a mistake on my part.
[14]: Actually, I wasn't aware the day was over. Another mistake on my part.
[15]: See answer [8].
[16]: Multiple things can be discussed at the same time.
~~~
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 03:56:44 pm
Five minutes before day end ::)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 10, 2016, 03:57:29 pm
Aye let's get started.
Five minutes before day end ::)
See answer [14]. I don't pay attention to the day end times as much as I should.
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 04:27:22 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 04:50:52 pm
1. Suppose you do. Do you actually? Unlikely. Why would one player be told that the roles are the same as the previous round? That's not OP at all, is it?
2. If the town roles are paralleled, why wouldn't the scum role be? You claim not to have made any actions so far, and nobody is dead. Scum in last game could kill... lightbulb!
3. That's a non-answer. I obviously thought you were in the same circumstances you thought you weren't.
4. I'm sure you do. See 2.
5/6. As scum, would you target a town role you know is inaccurate/unreliable/essentially a VT or someone with a more useful role?
7. Hohoho see 3.
8. Yet you ignore the fact I had something more important to bring to town's attention. Your scumminess didn't change, my attention was brought to something else. Which you ignored, every time I brought it up. I wonder why.
9. You just said you were voting me for not continuing my case on D1 for [8]. Which is it?
10. Why did I ask you questions in an effort to figure out what you were doing then? Initially it was pressure, it ended up as being a lynch vote. As all my votes tend to be.
11. What else should I have been voting for D1 then?
12. I can say with 100% certainty any player during a game is never, ever going to say a reason for voting them is a good reason, unless they're a Jester, give up or are gambiting.
13. Exactly. You're only voting me because I'm voting you. Great play.
14. Convenient.
15. And again, ignoring what I brought up at the day start.
16. Which is why your sole focus this day has been me.
This all boils down to you voting me because I'm voting you. And then not voting you because I was distracted by something more important. You seem to be confused as to what I should be doing.
Post by: Starver on September 10, 2016, 05:18:58 pm
((Five ninjas...))
That means nothing. Considering that the Evil role has been solo for the entire rest of the game, it makes no sense for scum to offer themselves up like that. You really need to work on this bait thing, methinks...Pointed missed. But isn't the time to explain.
Quote
I was voting FoU D1, so if he is scum, who do you think he's going to target during the night?And your recalibration upon yourself was at a strange time.
Quote
How come you waited this long to ask about something that - from the information you had - you knew was wrong?I didn't wait through choice. I tried to prime the necessary discussion and jumped in uncomfortably soon, given the lack of useful discussion. (Still haven't had much of it. Even this doesn't count. Sorry. I know you like discussion, usually.)
Quote
What uncertainty regarding your role? You can tell if someone is visiting, and thus performed an action on someone, and also tell if another person was visited, and thus had an action performed on them.Or is the reality that if someone is visiting, I get told that (because of me, though I don't know it) the visit is upon the other target. Too little data to know for sure, with one no-action (and 'blank' secondary result)? Uncertainty. As needed no further explaining. I thought.
Quote
Moonlit, who I visited according to your results, doesn't appear to have had anything terribly terrible happen to them, at least as far as they've reported.Doesn't seem to be the theme for nightkills, so doesn't mean anything.
Quote
I would have to assume you know what my action is,I shall blame my writing rather than your reading, charitably.
Quote
That you're neutral and making up nonsense to satisfy your wincon? :PNot for me to say. I can deny it, but not refute it, and what's the use of one without the other?
Quote
Well the only other person you seem to think suspicious beyond me is yourself, and I've already told you what I think of that. What reason would I have for pursuing either Moonlit or TBF over FoU?I'm not convinced you want a reason. I gave you increasingly low-hanging fruit (now touching the ground... you don't want it now) and you remained fixated.
Quote
If I have to pursue them for those reasons, why aren't you?I'm happy where I am. I took my time and considered and weighed the options. And I'm happy.
Quote
How sure are you of the efficacy of these tests?Based on information given without (too many!) hints as to what I was looking for, fair-to-middling, cheers.
Quote
What have they said that is useful?Things that don't conflict with one subset of assumptions, but rule out an alternate set of assumptions.
Quote
Once again, my results could have been manipulated by someone who is not you and is not me. There are three other players in the game, why are you reducing it to just you and I?Occam. Continuously. Whilst other decision-tree branches got pruned.
Post by: Starver on September 10, 2016, 05:22:53 pm
Aye let's get started.Still 40 minutes. 11pm GMT, midnight in my current GMT+1.
Five minutes before day end ::)
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 05:28:58 pm
There's no point in continuing if you're happy. Evidently I'm not allowed to be happy with my vote, though, else you wouldn't be continuously telling me I'm not voting for you despite your master-baiting. /pun, but also you're a hypocrite.
Post by: Starver on September 10, 2016, 05:35:29 pm
You edit down too much. There's no context.More than [1] [2] [3]. Haven't even been able to follow that branch of the conversation. Sorry. Still, at least it's not Top-posting..! :P
Post by: hector13 on September 10, 2016, 05:45:16 pm
Normally I'd have a quote of what I'm responding to and what that person responded to from me as context. Not going to do that on my phone at the best of times, never mind when I'm arguing with two people over their
Post by: Tomasque on September 11, 2016, 10:35:28 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 11, 2016, 10:38:59 pm
Post by: Tomasque on September 11, 2016, 11:34:49 pm
Protip: maybe not a good idea to gambit when you know nothing of the other players abilities or results.Was that to the other players or to... me? ???
Post by: hector13 on September 12, 2016, 12:12:28 am
A commentary on what I did on D2, really.
Post by: Tomasque on September 12, 2016, 08:24:10 pm
Votecount
hector13 (3) - FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver
FallacyofUrist (1) - hector13
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
The Moonlit Shadow (0)
hector13 was the Whisperer
Spoiler: Whisperer (click to show/hide)
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
Starver gets one victory point.
The Moonlit Shadow gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on September 12, 2016, 08:29:38 pm
Ah well, I thought I did a reasonable job talking my way out of things, just you guys are all stubborn bastards :P
Post by: Tomasque on September 12, 2016, 08:30:38 pm
Investigative
Special
Weakness
What do you think?
Post by: hector13 on September 12, 2016, 08:34:48 pm
I am pretty much ambivalent on the matter though.
Anyhow, I need a critique of what happened. TBF didn't provide a reason, and Starver's thought processes often seem alien to me, prob'ly from focusing on different things to me.
FoU was just being contrary 'cause I was voting him :P
Post by: Tomasque on September 12, 2016, 09:02:17 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 12, 2016, 09:41:49 pm
I'm a pragmatist, so I would prob'ly prefer you not do that just 'cause it takes effort.Honestly, FoU made more sense.
I am pretty much ambivalent on the matter though.
Anyhow, I need a critique of what happened. TBF didn't provide a reason, and Starver's thought processes often seem alien to me, prob'ly from focusing on different things to me.
FoU was just being contrary 'cause I was voting him :P
Post by: Starver on September 13, 2016, 05:38:25 am
I added a glow to each townperson/role depending on their subtype. It should make reading the action log more informative and prettier!Nice. I'm sure I could get used to it... ;)
Investigative
Special
Weakness
What do you think?
(I think if you had given me an actual "You see nobody visiting (secondary), N0", I might have been slower getting the idea of my role actually being the redirect. And, @Hector, if you hadn't been so doggedly stubborn in not changing target, I might not have been so sure as I became that we desperately needed to resolve things, either way. But that was more good luck than good judgement, on my part.)
Post by: Starver on September 13, 2016, 05:44:47 am
Straver observed FallacyofUrist and TheBiggerFish (target visited no one)Reminds me of http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-37338042 which currently says "under a formula set down under the pervious Tory-Lib Dem coalition government.", my emphasis... ;)
(Also 'incorrectly' labelled as N1,N2, not N0,N1, maybe?)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 13, 2016, 08:24:43 am
Post by: Tomasque on September 13, 2016, 10:38:01 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 14, 2016, 07:36:01 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 14, 2016, 08:02:08 am
Post by: Tomasque on September 16, 2016, 11:06:48 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 16, 2016, 11:11:35 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 17, 2016, 09:52:56 am
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 19, 2016, 06:37:47 pm
Post by: Tomasque on September 19, 2016, 07:09:22 pm
I guess I'm out as a replacement, then?Nope. I got a message that he's temporarily withdrawing.
Also, sorry that this round's taking a while to start up (real life got in the way - that nefarious roleblocker!). I'll take care of it within 24 hours.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 19, 2016, 11:39:29 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 19, 2016, 11:40:00 pm
Post by: Tomasque on September 20, 2016, 06:51:07 pm
It was a warm, cozy night for that peaceful town. Maybe the last it would have in a while.
((Note: I'm running out of interesting flavor text ideas for the rounds that don't have specific settings or flavor-related powers. If you've got any ideas, feel free to PM me.))
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 20, 2016, 08:21:01 pm
hector13: What happened to Hectors 1 through 12?
Starver: Of all the rounds preceding this one, which was your favourite?
TheBiggerFish: I can't think of a question for you, so you just get a statement. Sorry.
Everyone: In the context of this specific round, how do you feel about no-lynches?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 20, 2016, 08:22:44 pm
hector13, do you have the same issue I have?
Post by: hector13 on September 20, 2016, 08:42:18 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 20, 2016, 08:44:06 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 20, 2016, 08:58:31 pm
I mean hector 13 what happened to the previous 12 hector!?
I mean, it was old hat before that!
What did you do with Persuses 1 through 12, Persus13?
Post by: Starver on September 20, 2016, 09:24:03 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 20, 2016, 09:29:10 pm
Post by: Starver on September 20, 2016, 09:39:29 pm
Post by: Tomasque on September 21, 2016, 07:15:52 pm
The day began with chaos - an evil had been rumored to be in their midst! The tranquility of the citizens shattered, they turned on one another to find the culprit.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
Day ends Friday, 5:00 PM PST
Fri-Sat, 12:00 AM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 21, 2016, 07:16:14 pm
Hmm. In this particular round, it depends.
hector13, do you have the same issue I have?
Post by: hector13 on September 21, 2016, 07:17:09 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 21, 2016, 07:28:16 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 21, 2016, 07:29:26 pm
FallacyofUrist: Does this question psyche you out?
hector13: What happened to Hectors 1 through 12?
Starver: Of all the rounds preceding this one, which was your favourite?
TheBiggerFish: I can't think of a question for you, so you just get a statement. Sorry.
Everyone: In the context of this specific round, how do you feel about no-lynches?
Post by: hector13 on September 21, 2016, 07:30:17 pm
Hector: What comes to your mind when I say the word "Truth"?
Why you're asking such inane questions.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 21, 2016, 07:31:10 pm
I don't know, seeing as how I don't know what your issue is.Tomasque seems to love dipping into the more nonstandard roles. I got one of those.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 21, 2016, 07:34:03 pm
Hector: What's the difference between the word "Inane" and the word "Insane"? Asking for myself. Also, you should answer the previous question I asked you.Hector: What comes to your mind when I say the word "Truth"?
Why you're asking such inane questions.
~~~
Nonstandard. Yeah, I'll just go ahead and say my role's like that also.I don't know, seeing as how I don't know what your issue is.Tomasque seems to love dipping into the more nonstandard roles. I got one of those.
~~~
No, I have not been psyched out.FallacyofUrist: Does this question psyche you out?
Everyone: In the context of this specific round, how do you feel about no-lynches?
No lynches, no lynches. Depends on if we have a night kill or not.
Post by: Starver on September 21, 2016, 07:39:16 pm
Starver: Of all the rounds preceding this one, which was your favourite?Hard to say. Definitely there were some that I recall effusing about, privately, to our dear mod, because I thought I had the handle on them. (Did not always prove true, though.) And there were others where illogic reigned. (Or seemed to. And could have been the same ones!)
Round 1 was definititely a highlight... Right Tomasque? I mean it didn't all go downhill from there, but... *cough*Trend*cough*
;)
Quote
Everyone: In the context of this specific round, how do you feel about no-lynches?In the context of most rounds, I like it better, in the absence of any information, than apparently randomlynching. But I can already hear the usual arguments against that...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 21, 2016, 07:47:42 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 21, 2016, 07:49:28 pm
I see. I guess you have to love Tomasque's mind sometimes, eh?I don't know, seeing as how I don't know what your issue is.Tomasque seems to love dipping into the more nonstandard roles. I got one of those.
Why you're asking such inane questions.Hector: What's the difference between the word "Inane" and the word "Insane"? Asking for myself. Also, you should answer the previous question I asked you.
How pedantic would you like me to be?
On the face of it, the letter "s" is the difference, while a deeper examination will determine that inane is a synonym for "stupid" and insane "mad".
Depending on how you view madness and stupidity, they are one and the same, though that would require a discussion of semantics. I don't think you meant that, though.
I already answered your first question. If you want a more detailed answer, I will give you two: ask EP, and I would not be averse to lynching you at some point, though I will point out that - using a sports analogy - you are 99 yards away from that particular six points.
PPE: eff you gais
Post by: Tomasque on September 21, 2016, 07:54:22 pm
Ah, round 1. Fond memories. ;PBack when we had four players, and I was wondering why Town won all the time :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 21, 2016, 07:57:09 pm
Heh.Ah, round 1. Fond memories. ;PBack when we had four players, and I was wondering why Town won all the time :P
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 21, 2016, 11:16:48 pm
Here's the thing: Last night, I received hector13's role information. According to it, he's town; furthermore, TBF is also basically confirmed—he isn't explicitly stated to be town, but him not being town would make basically no sense. I'd explain why, but it wouldn't benefit town—can you back me up on this, Hector?
It's always possible that the results I got were fake, of course, but I find that unlikely.
Anyway: We should be able to lynch Starver today and FallacyofUrist tomorrow—or vice versa, of course—without any issues.
Post by: hector13 on September 21, 2016, 11:45:13 pm
If what you received is correct, you've revealed a lot more than is good for town. If it's not correct, you could be "clearing" players who aren't town. Probably not the best D1 move to make.
Post by: hector13 on September 22, 2016, 12:04:54 am
I get me being confirmed if it's my role and all that... but not TBF.
Post by: Starver on September 22, 2016, 07:29:54 am
I have another reason to believe this, and to tend towards the former, but that can (will) be revealed later, I'm sure.
I've never played with you, EP (will have seen glimpses of other games you're in, but without filing your style specifically in an elephant-(or indeed parade-)sized box) but that's a biiig claim you've got there, with promises of more. Not unrealisticly large, given the prior two rounds, but pushing the threshhold a little. So I can't truly label you as suspicious, but you're not making a fan. Not including your first choice of first lynchee (which bothers me less than you'd credit).
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 22, 2016, 07:44:32 am
EP's claim meshes with what I know about hector.
Post by: Starver on September 22, 2016, 07:58:12 am
(But with reservations. As the responsible adult around here, I have to point out how easy it would be to make even childish claims, and I'd have no power to do anything about it.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 22, 2016, 08:20:00 am
Hm.It also meshes with what I know about my own role.
EP's claim meshes with what I know about hector.
~~~
Elephant Parade: if you want to prove to hector that you know his role, you can tell him some letters from it and their positions, for example the first two letters of the role name...
Post by: hector13 on September 22, 2016, 08:36:21 am
I know EP received my "role" because I sent it to him. What I don't know is what he received, and quite frankly I'd rather he not say because it's day frickin' 1.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 22, 2016, 10:16:57 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 22, 2016, 10:21:12 am
Post by: hector13 on September 22, 2016, 10:36:59 am
Is this round, like, completely townies or something?
I find that unlikely, but not impossible.
I used an action on you that forced you to tell somebody of your choice your role.
You did.
Given what I suspect the role distribution is this round, that doesn't sound like a townie ability.
Post by: Starver on September 22, 2016, 10:40:50 am
(Let's see, one day, eight and a half hours....)
I was thinking someone could help me by saying something they haven't yet, that I noticed. Only EP has not yet passed over the opportunity, though, so maybe I'm wrong.
[Ninjaed by Hector, but nothing to say about that.]
Post by: hector13 on September 22, 2016, 10:50:41 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 22, 2016, 11:17:54 am
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 22, 2016, 11:36:54 am
[Ninja'd: FoU was apparently the one who forced Hector to reveal his role. I still have a question for him, though; it's at the end of this post.]
FoU, because there is no way you can know anything about my role from your own.I wasn't planning on dropping your full role; if you want to be sure I received the right information, I can post specific-but-useless information (number of words on each line, specific words from each line, etc.), assuming that that wouldn't count as posting a role PM—could you make a judgement on that, Tomasque?
I know EP received my "role" because I sent it to him. What I don't know is what he received, and quite frankly I'd rather he not say because it's day frickin' 1.
How is TBF "basically confirmed"?Unless this round is really weird, TBF being scum would make no sense. Think about it for a minute.
I get me being confirmed if it's my role and all that... but not TBF.
...Actually, you're right: It's possible that he isn't town; I had made a pretty silly assumption. I kinda regret posting all that, now; I figured I could clear two players at once, but I've really just disrupted the game. Sorry about that.
Everyone:Does your wincon have an extra condition on it?No.
Fallacy: You said that you were the one who forced Hector to reveal his role information to me. That's all well and good, but it still leaves a question: How do you know anything about his role?
Also: I can't explain why, but I think we might actually be dealing with a scumteam of two—most likely Fallacy and Starver, from my perspective. This obviously isn't a very useful comment, but I'd just like everyone to acknowledge the possibility.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 22, 2016, 01:23:17 pm
Given what I suspect the role distribution is this round, that doesn't sound like a townie ability.
If it's a scum ability, then it's the worst role cop ever. I think town would get a lot more utility out of my claimed ability than scum would.
~~~
Fallacy: You said that you were the one who forced Hector to reveal his role information to me. That's all well and good, but it still leaves a question: How do you know anything about his role?I don't. Only that he revealed it to somebody. I never claimed that I knew anything about what his role actually was. If you think that's true, point out the post in which I supposedly did so and I'll explain my statement in that post to you.
~~~
Also: I can't explain why, but I think we might actually be dealing with a scumteam of two—most likely Fallacy and Starver, from my perspective. This obviously isn't a very useful comment, but I'd just like everyone to acknowledge the possibility.
I think having a scum team is... somewhat more likely than normal. If the scum had a partner to tell his role to, my power would lose quite a bit of its utility. A balance to its potency.
~~~
Everyone:Does your wincon have an extra condition on it?Does yours? But yes, though I'm town, I have another option for winning.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 22, 2016, 01:26:10 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 22, 2016, 01:27:46 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 22, 2016, 01:28:25 pm
I have a question to ask via PM now. Regarding a realization I just had.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 22, 2016, 01:29:09 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 22, 2016, 01:32:02 pm
I am very much against no-lynching, in the current context.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 22, 2016, 01:33:58 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 22, 2016, 01:52:56 pm
Given what I suspect the role distribution is this round, that doesn't sound like a townie ability.
If it's a scum ability, then it's the worst role cop ever. I think town would get a lot more utility out of my claimed ability than scum would.
I disagree, but that's not really grounds for voting for you. Unvote.
Do note I didn't say anything about you being scum, just non-town. Your role has negative utility for town and scum. Probably neutral. But your immediate jump to "you think I'm scum when you say I'm not town" is noted.
Starver is being quiet, but I don't think lurking is too bad at this point... so I'll slide my vote on over to EP. Don't rightly like the way he went from RVS questions to role revelations.
EP: What is the current context and why does it make you so against no lynching at this point?
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 22, 2016, 02:31:07 pm
Quote
EP: What is the current context and why does it make you so against no lynching at this point?I can't think of any ways to phrase it that either aren't uselessly broad or useful to scum, unfortunately.
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 22, 2016, 02:32:53 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 22, 2016, 04:06:54 pm
Post by: Tomasque on September 22, 2016, 04:09:24 pm
It's more than halfway through the game, and my roles always follow a structure. Because of that, you guys should know how to make one yourselves, meaning that posting one in thread doesn't prove its real.
So yeah, you can go as far as posting the whole role (or faking a whole role) and I wouldn't care.
Post by: Starver on September 22, 2016, 04:20:04 pm
How abot you say something? You are quite literally the odd one out here, if I revealed my role (apparently involving TBF) to EP at the behest of FoU.FoU forcing you to talk, you talking to EP and Fish somehow meshing does reveal something... apparently. But, somewhere along that line I suspect opportunism.
Everyone:Does your wincon have an extra condition on it?Not an extra condition, no, but an extra option. Which I'm not betting on going to happen if things go the way I've been seeing them lean. If Fallacy is Town, perhaps Fallacy understands this, but I rather imagined it as part of my lot in this game, not something shared. I don't know.. You wait days for something like this to come along and three come along at once, is it, including EP? (now ninjaed)
Starver is being quiet, but I don't think lurking is too bad at this point... so I'll slide my vote on over to EP. Don't rightly like the way he went from RVS questions to role revelations.A few hours otherwise occupied, that's all. Plus, right now, EP's unfamiliarity might cut some slack, but we've been publicly playing this, so not entirely an alibi.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 23, 2016, 08:25:43 am
~~~
Had another thought. Everybody, are you capable of voting? If you are capable of voting, but have not yet done so, please prove it by voting somebody in one post and then unvoting them in the next.
Post by: hector13 on September 23, 2016, 08:33:33 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 23, 2016, 08:43:58 am
But yes, though I'm town, I have another option for winning.
Post by: hector13 on September 23, 2016, 09:07:32 am
Huh. Apparently, when I win, I'll stay in until the round ends. Didn't expect that. Thought I would be removed when I won. Hm.
Post by: Starver on September 23, 2016, 09:17:54 am
(Three times I've given details of my role in transparent-to-those-who-would-know terms. I'm giving up on that approach, but its all there in the record if you still want to give it another go to establish your connection with me.)
Going to go through the round again.
Also vote FoU for confirmation purposes only.
Post by: Starver on September 23, 2016, 09:19:18 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 23, 2016, 01:50:41 pm
One is standard town.
One I am keeping hidden, but is a condition that may or may not be common to any other players. In the event that it's not common to any other players, and I win with it, I will still remain in the game and be able to assist the other town.
Barring a secret auto, anyway.
Post by: hector13 on September 23, 2016, 02:02:19 pm
Your ability sounds like a town weakness, maybe investigative (maybe both) but that second wincon... even if you stay in the game, you have no reason to help anyone else win. In terms of meta, you want the fewest people to get VPs, so helping the scum would be to your benefit in that instance.
I don't like that.
FoU
Post by: Starver on September 23, 2016, 02:24:12 pm
If anyone who hasn't already wants to 'testvote', then I'll not take it amiss in being the temporary target. Ot not. But as I can't retract "having retracted my vote", and yet I now have a mild paranoia about it through the confusion of the unknown, I'm putting it out there. To be ignored.
Post by: hector13 on September 23, 2016, 02:28:31 pm
Post by: Starver on September 23, 2016, 02:58:28 pm
(Only as unlikely as a number of my other off-the-wall ideas.)
But I'm done with that. Still going through the round history. But so far I predict that the round is technically not limited to three days, but may mechanically be so, the Big Bad doesn't use (immediate?) NightKills in their offensive, or maybe they're tasked to go after a specific individual with a 1-Shot or other limitation. My role (which seems to be made to match with at least one other) isn't as simply linked as I expected (flavour doesn't help on that score) and my subtle hints are too subtle for anyone else to respond to (who is willing) or else their subtle replies are too subtle for me.
What is it... four hours 'til N1? Nothing seems to be happening before nightfal (ICBW) and maybe nothing noticable will happen overnight. But there's one (claimed) night-action that might be used, for good or ill, in good judgement or badly...
Post by: hector13 on September 23, 2016, 04:32:06 pm
Huh—I'm town, but I don't have another option. Hmm...
I am very much against no-lynching, in the current context.
So we've got a few hours left in the day (2.5, specifically) and nothing is being done. Bothersome.
My choices for lynching today would be FoU for what I laid out here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7187127#msg7187127) or EP, as he seems to be the odd-one-out regarding having a little bit of an extra wincon, plus the bounce from RVS to what could be him revealing my role on D1.
In that order. I'd need a little extra convincing from someone to go after EP.
Post by: Tomasque on September 24, 2016, 12:01:19 am
Anger brewed among the citizens as no one could decide what to do. Some wanted blood, other wanted piece. No one wanted to die.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (1) - hector13
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
No Lynch (1) - TheBiggerFish
Post by: Starver on September 24, 2016, 12:09:59 am
Post by: Tomasque on September 24, 2016, 01:08:19 pm
Post by: Tomasque on September 26, 2016, 06:15:14 pm
A new day begins. Before: Another landmark in the blissful rhythm of life. Now: Another opportunity to kill the killer.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
Day ends Wednesday, 4:00 PM PST
Wednesday, 11:00 AM GMT
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 26, 2016, 06:20:27 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 26, 2016, 06:21:11 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 26, 2016, 06:22:45 pm
Quote
The day began with chaos - an evil had been rumored to be in their midst! The tranquility of the citizens shattered, they turned on one another to find the culprit.Yeah. I know I'm pushing this idea pretty hard, but I really think it makes sense.
Post by: hector13 on September 26, 2016, 06:31:33 pm
Round 18 - Day2
A new day begins. Before: Another landmark in the blissful rhythm of life. Now: Another opportunity to kill the killer.
A lot of the rounds have had no killing role, and some rounds have had a one-shot kill Evil role. The lack of a kill is not a sign there is no kill, nor is it a sign there is no Evil role.
Perhaps this is a case of "the lady doth protest too much", EP?
Post by: hector13 on September 26, 2016, 06:40:43 pm
So perhaps you would like to fill us in, Fallacy, on how you can win as town and still remain in the game?
Post by: hector13 on September 26, 2016, 06:45:19 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 26, 2016, 06:52:50 pm
As an addendum, we don't really know much about whether or not FoU's abilities are what he claims they are. There's no reason for him to not have an ability which sends a made-up role to someone.True enough, I suppose. In that case:
Hector, your flavourtext's fifth word is "then".
Hector, your auto name's sixth letter is "b".
Starver, your rolename ends in "t".
Starver, your flavourtext's last word is "you".
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 26, 2016, 06:55:22 pm
FoU, can you self-target?
Post by: Starver on September 26, 2016, 07:09:58 pm
Only then do I know whether I fully trust that skill to be as advertised. What kind of thing do you get? Is there something like "last letter of the role-name" that you can reveal without too much trouble (Hector, that Ok with you for your N0 option? Nobody but those involved even know for definite (logic dictates one other thinks he knows something, but can't be sure) who N1 relates to, right now, so probably Ok to go ahead with that...)
Because now it appears we have two people 'revealed' to EP. Hopefully neither of them people who Evil-EP wants dead (Hector's probably safe, I would have expected the 1-shot to happen last night for Evil Win) or else EP is not evil and thus is currently the safest hands for this information.
Assuming things are 'straight' and (for example) the reveal process does not mess with the reveal, like I'm hoping we find out, then EP seems happy with two people (or would be complain like mad), who might he trustworthy recipients of N2's information, or perhaps FoU (assuming it isn't an evil role looking for someone to report straight back...) and if EP has been happy with both results it isn't an alignment-flipping 'reveal' unless both selected were both flipped over to Town from Evil...
Ah, good, answered whilst I was writing. Surprisingly the same as I had been thinking... Looks legit. ;)
Post by: Starver on September 26, 2016, 07:24:28 pm
FoU, assuming he can't/won't add himself to EP's list of known people (EP has known of FoU's public declaration, and not died, so FoU isn't the target of stalking-horse EP, either) has options of getting Fish to reveal or EP, now. And Fish or EP probably need to reveal to me or Hector, to avoid Evil-EP catching target Fish (assuming not already derived by logic, although I don't think it is that simple anyway) or Evil-Fish catch sight of target EP (ditto), or Evil-All-Along-Fallacy get the bounce-back he's been seeking from the start. Noting that any participant (FoU, target of FoU or target of target of FoU) can sabotage this quite easily, and then we just need to work out which and for what motive.
But that's my considered opinion.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 26, 2016, 07:35:17 pm
Post by: Starver on September 26, 2016, 07:48:46 pm
Unless there's an anti-Miller aspect to our bad guy, but as self-affirmed good guy I am happy with my own information being accurate in EP's hands, so that's my starting point.
So...
Hector's a possible bad guy if he has game mechanics on his side. Can't do much against that, that I know of, but maybe tbe person with the actual designed-in counteraction ability could handle that. I can't tell who might have that, though.
EP is a possible bad guy if his wincon is to discover a certain role. I was fairly sure that role was not mine, hence my gamble that (so far) seems to have paid off.
FoU is a possible bad guy if he has to find his target by prompting discussion. I'm still at risk (again, I'm betting I'm not) but Hector is probably safe. But I'd avoid 'bounce back' direct to Fallacy, just in case.
You are a possible bad guy because you are unknown. But that's as far as it goes, so far.
(And then there's me, you all have to consider. Not sure I should be the one to establish my own innocence in so glib a fashion, though.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 26, 2016, 09:12:44 pm
Huh.I think I'll inquire about this. Could be useful.
FoU, can you self-target?
So perhaps you would like to fill us in, Fallacy, on how you can win as town and still remain in the game?I can win using my secondary win condition, and still remain in the game. If I win with my primary town win condition, presumably the round will end and I will be removed from it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 26, 2016, 09:14:19 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 26, 2016, 09:26:07 pm
Huh.I think I'll inquire about this. Could be useful.
FoU, can you self-target?So perhaps you would like to fill us in, Fallacy, on how you can win as town and still remain in the game?I can win using my secondary win condition, and still remain in the game. If I win with my primary town win condition, presumably the round will end and I will be removed from it.
See... it's the uncertainty at the end that gets me. You're no stranger to Mafia, and considering we're much closer to the end of this than the beginning, no stranger to how Tomasque has been running things. There should be no presuming on your part as town if you win with your "primary" Town wincon.
I think there was only one other game that someone stayed in when they won (I think) and that was me, as Neutral way back in one of the earlier rounds - 2,3 or 4, specifically. I'll go back and check on that.
TL;DR I don't think you're town, so my vote will more than likely be on you at the end of the day.
Post by: hector13 on September 26, 2016, 09:34:56 pm
TBF stole my role and gave me a different wincon, and if he died I won automatically so... yeah. Managed to get Starver to go along with a lynch, and won on D2 with the third day still to play
There have been no roles that stay in the game when they've won otherwise. I don't think that Tomasque would unbalance a game by doing that considering we have the overall game of gathering VPs to think about, and the games so far have been, by and large, balanced.
I guess I should focus on other folk for a bit... but tomorrow, when it's not bedtime.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 26, 2016, 09:36:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 26, 2016, 09:37:56 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 26, 2016, 09:39:00 pm
My alternate wincon is self-explanatory.But ask him if you achieve it, if you stay in.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 26, 2016, 09:39:42 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 26, 2016, 09:41:24 pm
Unvote, for the moment.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 27, 2016, 08:20:01 am
Would have made things so much easier.
~~~
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 27, 2016, 08:37:48 am
Post by: Starver on September 27, 2016, 08:46:39 am
But there's a good chance that it's more complicated than that, so don't take that as an FoS on either. Or even a split FoS. There's something still missing from the equation, and there's as good a chance that the Evil one knows how to win tonight, too... (Tomasque's1 bewailing of too many Town wins probably means that's biased for...)
1 Or, as my keyboard tried to make me type, "Trump's mosques"...
Post by: hector13 on September 27, 2016, 10:01:42 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 27, 2016, 10:06:51 am
Tomasque
Just seeing if it'll stick.
Post by: hector13 on September 27, 2016, 11:11:33 am
I would also like to request that either FoU target EP N2, or that TBF not give his results to EP, as that seems like a ridiculously stupid thing to do. I'm not even sure why Starver did it, to be quite honest... EP is in no way cleared just because they're "clearing" other players.
EZ town-cred for scum, since nobody is likely to argue "you what, I'm not town!" are they? And if things do work the way I'm thinking they do, scum has a one-shot and is looking for the driver.
Post by: hector13 on September 27, 2016, 11:14:23 am
Huh—I'm town, but I don't have another option. Hmm...
I am very much against no-lynching, in the current context.
Also this. Everybody else seems to have an alt wincon, why not EP?
I think I'll slide my vote back on to EP for the time being. They haven't brought anything to the game beyond revealing other player's roles. No pressure on anybody else, looks like they're just trying to coast along to a victory.
Post by: Tomasque on September 27, 2016, 11:27:37 am
Considering that Tomasque is usually on very early in the morning or very late in the evening, I would hope you're also going to scumhunt as well.Wrong.
Post by: hector13 on September 27, 2016, 11:29:15 am
It's always possible that the results I got were fake, of course, but I find that unlikely.
Anyway: We should be able to lynch Starver today and FallacyofUrist tomorrow—or vice versa, of course—without any issues.
Why were you encouraging us to lynch Starver or FoU while not voting for either at the time?
Once again here:
Also: I can't explain why, but I think we might actually be dealing with a scumteam of two—most likely Fallacy and Starver, from my perspective. This obviously isn't a very useful comment, but I'd just like everyone to acknowledge the possibility.
Throw an unsupported theory in to freak out the town, say we should lynch those two but not vote for either again.
QuoteEP: What is the current context and why does it make you so against no lynching at this point?I can't think of any ways to phrase it that either aren't uselessly broad or useful to scum, unfortunately.
Doesn't answer the question of why we should lynch someone/anyone, claiming it'd be useful to scum... despite revealing what he thinks he knows about my role earlier.
Claims in the next post that he does actually have an alt wincon, so ignore what I said about him being the odd-one-out.
D2 start is him saying we're all town, man, don't have a cow. Seems to think this based on having 3 of the 5 roles. A majority, yes, but certainly not all the information. While I don't like using statistics a great deal in arguments, there's still a 40% chance that 1 in 5 role is one of the remaining 2.
Could also be that he's the 1 in 5 role, as I said, neither Starver or myself are going to argue that we're not town, are we?
Considering that Tomasque is usually on very early in the morning or very late in the evening, I would hope you're also going to scumhunt as well.Wrong.
Give us a vote count then :P
Post by: Tomasque on September 27, 2016, 11:35:39 am
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (1) - hector13
No Lynch (1) - TheBiggerFish
Not Voting: FallacyofUrist, Starver, Elephant Parade
Post by: Starver on September 27, 2016, 11:47:41 am
I'm not even sure why Starver did it, to be quite honest... EP is in no way cleared just because they're "clearing" other players.It was your choice of who to pass to, the first time, that led me that way.
i.e if it was already dangerous to tell EP these things (for you, and you seemed to guard your identity more closely than I think I have to guard mine), then we were probably already in trouble. So worth a gamble. And it seemed useful to compare and contrast results to remove one particupar element of doubt. If EP had thought I was now worth lynching, and it happened, my lynchflip would indicate something wrong, that would have had to have been worked out by those that remain, but that didn't happen. Perhaps because it was all true, perhaps just with malicious expediency. The way it turned out, however, you have the most valid 'free pass' hours, in my eyes. With reservations. And you either know more about this than you legitimately should or actually have a similar idea about me. Everyone else has to consider their own opinions, but based upon similar assumptions.
Alternative 'revealees' were you (if indeed confirmed as Ok by EP, the above doubts about veracity and honesty aside, you'd be a perfectly safe landing zone for my info and then the next to confirm could be told that I was the best person to tell) or Fallacy (assuming altruism in the role, rather than trap by the Big Bad). On balance, EP's claim, and the need to check EP's claim seemed wisest to pursue. But just the once. Whoever gets next compelled (EP or Fish, necessarily; unless we want to repeat one of us two with, perhaps, the other of us as onward target... a possibly low danger neutral option, if it doesn't just delay Town to Scum's advantage) perhaps ought to choose between either of us as recipient as the most closely 'confirmed Town' that anybody can determine.
(What would you have done, in my position? Probably telling original!you would have been high on your list, as it was on mine, but at the top?)
[Three ninja posts... Nothing that changes the above, though.]
Post by: hector13 on September 27, 2016, 12:23:25 pm
It also spreads the information around a bit. 1 in 5 chance that EP is scum, and we're essentially telling him about all the roles - still assuming that he's getting the right results - but two people getting results would make it more likely the town are getting them. If three people get the results it guarantees town have at least one investigative result.
Post by: Starver on September 27, 2016, 03:23:50 pm
If you trusted EP enough to believe what he said about me, then yeah, I would've passed it to me.You missed the point. I didn't trust that the Fallacy->you->EP chain was entirely accurate. But I consider it more proven now that I've tested it, and I know EP hasn't maliciously labelled me a wrong'un.
Passing it to you would have taken blind faith about some other things, which have now been tied down (e.g. no alignment-inversion in the revelation process, unless it is far more complicated. I could demand Fallacy pokes me again for your benefit, if that doesn't look like a stalling tactic (EP should know why that's a perfectly good thing for me, but I don't think it helps Town if we don't stop the so far unknown Evil action from doing whatever it does), but I think we need to add to the info. In the manners already suggested.
Post by: Starver on September 27, 2016, 03:25:05 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 28, 2016, 08:45:42 am
Hole filling: Regardless of whether or not EP claims Fish is scum, we still lynch Elephant Parade. If he does claim Fish is scum, and EP's town upon lynch, we lynch Fish the next day. If EP's scum upon lynch, we(probably) win!
The final problem is the problem of me being potential scum from your perspectives. Sadly, that's a problem I can't think of how to fix at the moment.
~~~
Elephant Parade: Could you please vote somebody of your choice, then unvote in a post after that? Just want to know if you can vote.
Post by: Starver on September 28, 2016, 09:03:35 am
(Paranoid? Who told you I was paranoid?!? It was Them, wasn't it!?! Always whispering about me...)
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 28, 2016, 09:19:06 am
EZ town-cred for scum, since nobody is likely to argue "you what, I'm not town!" are they? And if things do work the way I'm thinking they do, scum has a one-shot and is looking for the driver.Though I'm obviously not proven town, I'd hardly call confirming townies "EZ town-cred". Confirmed townies are very bad for scum, after all.
(I'll respond to your larger post before the end of the day, hopefully, but no promises; I may not have any free time before then)
Now then. I have something of an idea. This night, I zap Fish with my ability, and he targets Elephant Parade. Next day, we lynch Elephant Parade. If he's scum, great! If he's town, okay, now we know that each person who told him their role is town because if they were scum EP would have told us.That's a terrible plan, since the "alternate" wincon (personally, I'm pretty sure we can't actually win the normal way) requires one to survive to D3. Or at least, I'm assuming that's what everyone has, at this point. I suspect that you know this, and are hoping to reduce the number of people who will gain Victory Points.
Hole filling: Regardless of whether or not EP claims Fish is scum, we still lynch Elephant Parade. If he does claim Fish is scum, and EP's town upon lynch, we lynch Fish the next day. If EP's scum upon lynch, we(probably) win!
The final problem is the problem of me being potential scum from your perspectives. Sadly, that's a problem I can't think of how to fix at the moment.
~~~
Elephant Parade: Could you please vote somebody of your choice, then unvote in a post after that? Just want to know if you can vote.
FoU. Votecount. If Tomcost doesn't swing by by the time my next class ends, I'll remove my vote.
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 28, 2016, 09:19:45 am
Post by: Tomasque on September 28, 2016, 12:43:41 pm
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (1) - Elephant Parade
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (1) - hector13
No Lynch (1) - TheBiggerFish
Not Voting: FallacyofUrist, Starver
Post by: hector13 on September 28, 2016, 12:48:11 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 28, 2016, 02:02:37 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 28, 2016, 06:01:37 pm
That's a terrible plan, since the "alternate" wincon (personally, I'm pretty sure we can't actually win the normal way) requires one to survive to D3. Or at least, I'm assuming that's what everyone has, at this point. I suspect that you know this, and are hoping to reduce the number of people who will gain Victory Points.Survive till the END of day 3, actually. That's my alternate.
Is that anybody else's alternate win condition?
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 28, 2016, 07:34:18 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 28, 2016, 07:42:39 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 28, 2016, 07:48:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on September 28, 2016, 07:49:33 pm
I have to remind these scrubs all the time.
Post by: Tomasque on September 28, 2016, 07:59:25 pm
A new night dawns over the upturned city.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (1) - hector13
No Lynch (1) - TheBiggerFish
Not Voting: FallacyofUrist, Starver, Elephant Parade
Post by: Tomasque on September 29, 2016, 10:48:06 pm
It was a cold, paranoid day for that disturbed town. Maybe the last it would have.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
Day ends Saturday, 9:00 PM PST
Sunday, 4:00 AM GMT
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 29, 2016, 10:57:00 pm
I used my ability on Mr. Fish this time around.
~~~
Everybody: Do you have an alternate win condition which is to still be alive at the end of Day 3?
Post by: Starver on September 30, 2016, 06:30:31 am
And I can now confirm Fish. I think this confirms Hector (or certainly I don't want to accuse them without reason, even though the link is weak.?), although only EP knows for sure.
So, I know that I am Town (EP should know)
I know that Fish is near-identical Town, but with a small difference.
If Fallacy were not town, then where does the rather precise three-day knowledge come from?
Hector not being Town would need EP to be in (unwitting?) collusion.
EP not being Town doesn't explain why no advantage (at least daytime) was taken from the two reveals.
I have suspicions of mechanisms here. I'm not saying we sit still (because it wouldn't be a good game, amongst other reasons) but I'm urging caution first and foremost.
@EP, if the information you have indicates anything whereby you could break the deadlock by getting to the heart of the matter, would you be able to answer that? (Not what the answer is (answers are?). Just would you be able?)
@Hector I don't know your basic vulnerability, and yet I think I know where it leads. Or you don't know it yourself, and that has implications for me. Tell us if you have a disconnected Achilles Heal, perhaps, to your knowledge?
@Fallacy You're obviously a powerful enabler, which might be a Good or Evil thing, but I tend towards Good, Neutral at worst, but as I said above... I need to think a bit about that. Bearing in mind what I've asked above, is there anything else that I've asked of the others that means anything (you need not say what, specifically).
@Fish I've no immediate questions, except whether you recognise where I was going with EP, just to check accuracy of what I think we have here...
Post by: hector13 on September 30, 2016, 07:10:21 am
It appears that either FoU has unwittingly pushed himself into a corner, or we are all Town.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 30, 2016, 08:44:42 am
No Lynch.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 30, 2016, 08:48:16 am
I will win if I survive to the end of Day 3.
Hector will win if he survives to the end of Day 3.
Starver will win if he survives to the end of Day 3.
the "alternate" wincon (personally, I'm pretty sure we can't actually win the normal way) requires one to survive to D3. Or at least, I'm assuming that's what everyone has, at this point.Elephant Parade will win if he survives to the end of Day 3.
No Lynch again by the way.And based on Fish's previous behavior, I think he has that alternate win condition also.
~~~
What are we waiting for?
If anybody has any objections to a full-out no lynch right now, speak now or forever hold your peace.
~~~
Yeah, I'm fairly sure that's Fish's alternate win condition now, based on the Ninja Technique of "Warning - while you were typing...".
Anyway, No Lynch.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 30, 2016, 08:59:22 am
Post by: Starver on September 30, 2016, 09:29:43 am
Beware also possibility of non-Town having "doesn't matter what they think, your win makes them lose". Or, more likely "if everyone NoLynches, everyone dies but you" , which is why I'll abstain.
But, mostly, I suspect dominos, so I don't want to risk toppling them.
Post by: hector13 on September 30, 2016, 09:34:18 am
Post by: Starver on September 30, 2016, 09:40:58 am
EP not being Town doesn't explain why no advantage (at least daytime) was taken from the two reveals.I don't say that's definite, with a possibly insidious ability, but I'm too finely balanced with FoU having the possible insidious ability of getting people to say too much, able to kill us all today in one stroke. And until I hear from EP, I'm not willing to promote either of these above probable paranoia.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 30, 2016, 09:44:20 am
Post by: hector13 on September 30, 2016, 09:45:01 am
Tomasque: will our wincons ever mislead or outright lie?
Post by: Starver on September 30, 2016, 10:47:04 am
@Starver:Somewhat. Do you have an auto whose sixth letter is 'b'?No, I don't, but now at least I know that not only does yours exist, but that you know it exists. (It may still be dominos, but at least not invisible dominos...)
Depends on Hector, now, to see where I might be going with this (was relying on EP, if Hector was blind to it, but if Hector is not blind to it then we have a simpler yay-or-nay).
(@H: I suspect our Primary Wincons are the same, those of us that aren't special in some way, better or ill. I wouldn't count it a lie if it just was puffed up a bit with the regular bumf...)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 30, 2016, 10:53:38 am
Post by: Starver on September 30, 2016, 11:08:41 am
Post by: Tomasque on September 30, 2016, 11:09:36 am
Post by: Starver on September 30, 2016, 11:12:11 am
@hector: Anything may lie or mislead you.I don't believe you...
8)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 30, 2016, 02:19:57 pm
Could be the traditional role (usually atop another), but my reading is that it's possibly one-directional. This was mod-engineered, remember, not how it usually happens.I have contradictory evidence.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 30, 2016, 02:20:27 pm
That is, to the unidirectional theory.Could be the traditional role (usually atop another), but my reading is that it's possibly one-directional. This was mod-engineered, remember, not how it usually happens.I have contradictory evidence.
Post by: Starver on September 30, 2016, 02:35:54 pm
It doesn't really matter, on my current theory trajectory, as I don't intend to invoke anything surrounding it. Either way (or both!).
Though nobody other than you has answered my original post's questions (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7195955#msg7195955), which is odd and may lead to suspicions.
Post by: hector13 on September 30, 2016, 02:48:37 pm
Post by: Starver on September 30, 2016, 03:28:07 pm
Whichever version it is.
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 30, 2016, 06:23:59 pm
Also, I totally called this D2, though I was working with more information than anyone else.
No Lynch
Post by: Tomasque on October 03, 2016, 05:54:02 pm
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
No Lynch (4) - Elephant Parade, FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish
Not Voting: hector13, Starver
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
Starver gets one victory point.
hector13 gets one victory point.
Elephant Parade gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 03, 2016, 05:59:51 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on October 03, 2016, 06:01:56 pm
~~~
GG. Victory for everybody. Though the list of roles is a bit messed up when it comes to Hector.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 03, 2016, 06:08:22 pm
Huh, I figured that there were two pairs of one-way lovers.There weren't. I and hector were a two-way pair. The formatting is all messed up.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 03, 2016, 06:14:01 pm
No—I meant that I thought that there were two pairs of one-way lovers, and was somewhat surprised when I turned out to be wrong.Huh, I figured that there were two pairs of one-way lovers.There weren't. I and hector were a two-way pair. The formatting is all messed up.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 03, 2016, 06:14:49 pm
Ohhhh.No—I meant that I thought that there were two pairs of one-way lovers, and was somewhat surprised when I turned out to be wrong.Huh, I figured that there were two pairs of one-way lovers.There weren't. I and hector were a two-way pair. The formatting is all messed up.
Post by: Starver on October 03, 2016, 06:19:09 pm
I had considered a "secret lover" component for myself, but did throw that away away once Fish confirmed knowing about his Heartbreak.
I was somewhat disappointed not to get EP helping untangle things. Hector I could understand, but I tried to make it not useful to reply to but not informatve without annoying my current knowledge that I obviously wasn't acting upon. Fallacy didn't say much, but I'd asked an impossible question I realise, so no argument there.
I think Tomasque expected more paranoia. But my paranoia (and not any wish to win by justvsitting it out, although it did resolve that way) went beyond that. Imagining that my voting could activate a form of Jester whose win would invalidate the rest of our wins... Or (not far from the truth) trigger a domino effect.
(When I first read the revealed roles, my brain 'autocorrected' Hector into the Moonlit slot. Only just realised, after the 4 ninja messages highlit this.)
Post by: Starver on October 03, 2016, 06:55:20 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 03, 2016, 07:13:49 pm
Obviously having TBF and myself not ever wanting to go after one another would make it a little easier for us, but I wanted an evil role to murder horribly :'(
Post by: Tomasque on October 03, 2016, 08:13:23 pm
Ey you put my name in place of hectors 0_oI used a previous round-end as a template and I forgot to finish the changes :P
I coulda understood mine in place of EP's but ???
Tomasque's probably upset that Town won, in a round with only Town in it, distracting him so... ;)Not gonna lie - I wanted to see bloodshed here.
Post by: hector13 on October 03, 2016, 08:32:22 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 03, 2016, 09:00:42 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 03, 2016, 09:07:49 pm
We will mail said box to ourselves, upon reception of which we
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on October 05, 2016, 05:26:52 pm
Bonus Round
Night 0
Night 0
Post by: Tomasque on October 07, 2016, 04:53:06 pm
Bonus Round
Day 1
hector13
(0)
Shakerag
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
Sunday, 3:00 PM PST
Sunday, 10:00 PM GMT
Day 1
hector13
(0)
Shakerag
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
Sunday, 3:00 PM PST
Sunday, 10:00 PM GMT
Post by: Shakerag on October 07, 2016, 05:03:35 pm
So, somehow I found my way into this game. What's going on?
Post by: Starver on October 07, 2016, 05:08:20 pm
(Welcome, BTW.)
Post by: Shakerag on October 07, 2016, 05:16:51 pm
Post by: Starver on October 07, 2016, 05:28:28 pm
(Others should tell you that I'm more likely to dangle my own role as barely disguised bait, at this point in the game.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 07, 2016, 05:44:03 pm
'sup, bitches?So THAT'S why this round is crazy.
So, somehow I found my way into this game. What's going on?
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 07, 2016, 07:17:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 07, 2016, 09:11:31 pm
I know how it triggers, but not what it does.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 07, 2016, 10:39:15 pm
Does anybody know what Paradox is? It sounds pretty bad.I think this round is a puzzle, and I'm the middle piece.
hector:When does it trigger?
Post by: hector13 on October 07, 2016, 11:06:20 pm
Does anybody know what Paradox is? It sounds pretty bad.I think this round is a puzzle, and I'm the middle piece.
hector:When does it trigger?
I said "how", though I guess I know when, too.
It's not important right now though, since it won't happen for a bit. It might be a way to find scum... but that would involve triggering it, and I'm fairly certain that's not a good idea.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 08, 2016, 01:31:41 am
Post by: Shakerag on October 08, 2016, 02:14:47 am
Triggering it would be a bad idea. Avoiding triggering it wouod be a good idea.I WILL TRIGGER THAT SHIT LIKE TRIGGLYPUFF.
I kid. I'm just triggered by the word "trigger". It's totally in my role.
What was your role, again?
Shakerag, the raging douchebag
Shakerag? What a douchenozzle. He's a total shitshow.
Label from the patriarchy: Fuckin' awesome Town role
Wincon: Shit, mate, just do whatever you want.
Paradox: Exist.
(auto) Title IX: You are triggered whenever anyone unironically uses the word "trigger".
(auto) Lengthy Suicide: Any posts on Friday night or the weekend are shitposts. Also, you must be shitfaced in order to post during those times.
Does anybody know what Paradox is? It sounds pretty bad.I'm guessing we don't get to know? All I know is that I can super easily cause one. Which, for realsies, doesn't seem like a terribly good idea. My money is on there is some anti-town role who wants to cause a paradox to fulfill his/her/its wincon.
So THAT'S why this round is crazy.
[/quote]
shh bby is ok
Triggering it would be a bad idea. Avoiding triggering it wouod be a good idea.ಠ_ಠ
In other news, I'm being dragged out of state on Monday to check out a dead mall. So don't do anything crazy without me. I'll be absent on the weekends like usua....
Sunday, 3:00 PM PST
Sunday, 10:00 PM GMT
... welllllll shit. -_-
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 08, 2016, 02:10:11 pm
Triggering it would be a bad idea. Avoiding triggering it wouod be a good idea.Wow, you're sure bringing some fresh ideas to the conversation!!!
The lack of "I feel" implies that you might have some actual information. Care to share it?
Post by: Starver on October 08, 2016, 02:27:33 pm
Summary:
EP knows of Paradox, Hector knows how it triggers, someone may know how to stop/nullify it. Trust me when I say you probably need to be circumspect in duscussing it.
Fish says he thinks he's at the core of the puzzle and also suggests we don't even try to trigger it (not sure about that, paradoxen being paradoxen, but carefulness is probably good).
Shakerag is apparently going to be not much use, D1.
As a personal comment, N0 worries me.
End of summary...
(Got ninjaed by EP while I was double-checking my thoughts, but no changes deemed necessary.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 08, 2016, 02:58:05 pm
Post by: Shakerag on October 08, 2016, 03:31:52 pm
Keep up the good work everyone!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 08, 2016, 04:20:41 pm
Post by: Shakerag on October 09, 2016, 03:13:52 am
Shakerag:You cause the paradox?Well, I -can- cause one. Although it sounds like I might not be the only one. And, as I said before, smart money says some minority of players in this round would like a paradox to occur.
I don't.
Hector13 - Knows how it triggers, but not what it does. Seems like his paradox trigger happens later in the game?
TBF - Is possibly the "middle piece" to the puzzle. Claims triggering paradox would be a bad idea. Something is funny about his role and how paradox goes off.
Starver - Is a rolefishing something or other. Role possibly has something to do with fishing? Sounds like he knows something of paradox. N0 worries him for some reason.
Elephant Parade - Also knows of paradox. Says it sounds bad. Is also kind of a sarcastic asshole (my kind of people).
So, obviously, if my theory of scum = paradox snoggers is true, then they would also know about paradox. Apparently since everyone has talked about a personal connection to paradox, that kind of rules out a simple test. Now, of course, any of you could be lying whores. Hector13 seems okay. TBF seems okay. Starver makes me feel cautious, but Elephant Parade isn't passing the smell test.
Post by: Starver on October 09, 2016, 06:26:08 am
I won't argue with the points that seem to be accepted by all, and won't deign to try to prove the so far unprovable about me. But I think you have missed or are ignoring the actual point I was making about active paradox prevention, hidden in the statement. As I don't know if I want you to know, I won't press the point.
Also how does that squares with the actual paradox triggering skill. Two sides of the same coin, or different coins? Tomasque can be sneaky like that.
Nine hours, plus a bunch of change? Anyone think it's not a good idea to just sit tight that long? If the bad thing hasn't happened at N0, then possibly preventing it happening in the day is something to be seriously considered, but I'm all for boring if nobody wants that recourse and wants to get to work before N1.
1 I'm not checking your post history for hints and tips, sounds like others know you already so I'll accept consensus opinion for now.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 09, 2016, 12:38:31 pm
So, obviously, if my theory of scum = paradox snoggers is true, then they would also know about paradox. Apparently since everyone has talked about a personal connection to paradox, that kind of rules out a simple test. Now, of course, any of you could be lying whores. Hector13 seems okay. TBF seems okay. Starver makes me feel cautious, but Elephant Parade isn't passing the smell test.Woah, what? I'm not quite sure what you're voting me over—you think I'm lying, apparently? I'd appreciate it if you could, y'know, give me something to respond to.
If you want me to go more in-depth on my Paradox connection: I can indirectly cause it, if I use my ability, but it's pretty much out of my control.
Post by: Starver on October 09, 2016, 01:05:31 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 09, 2016, 02:23:37 pm
(Three-sided coin? Hmmm...)Quite possibly four-sided.
Post by: Starver on October 09, 2016, 02:54:26 pm
But another side makes sense (whilst I can't work out how Rock/Paper/Scissors/Lizard/Spock might work, at least), and the fact that I personally get a limited choice makes it so I can't be too flippant in trying to keep it rolling...
Post by: hector13 on October 09, 2016, 02:59:06 pm
So, obviously, if my theory of scum = paradox snoggers is true, then they would also know about paradox. Apparently since everyone has talked about a personal connection to paradox, that kind of rules out a simple test. Now, of course, any of you could be lying whores. Hector13 seems okay. TBF seems okay. Starver makes me feel cautious, but Elephant Parade isn't passing the smell test.Woah, what? I'm not quite sure what you're voting me over—you think I'm lying, apparently? I'd appreciate it if you could, y'know, give me something to respond to.
If you want me to go more in-depth on my Paradox connection: I can indirectly cause it, if I use my ability, but it's pretty much out of my control.
That doesn't make sense. "If I use my ability" kinda tells me that, in actuality, you have
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 09, 2016, 03:05:47 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 09, 2016, 03:06:57 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 09, 2016, 03:08:16 pm
Okay, I'll try to make it clearer: If, after I use my ability, a certain thing happens, a paradox is caused. I cannot cause that thing to happen. Does that make sense?
Would this thing happen to do with voting?
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 09, 2016, 03:10:11 pm
I don't want to give even the slightest hint at what causes it, since the Evil role would presumably be able to use that information to, y'know, try to cause it.Okay, I'll try to make it clearer: If, after I use my ability, a certain thing happens, a paradox is caused. I cannot cause that thing to happen. Does that make sense?Would this thing happen to do with voting?
Post by: Shakerag on October 09, 2016, 03:12:16 pm
But I think you have missed or are ignoring the actual point I was making about active paradox prevention, hidden in the statement. As I don't know if I want you to know, I won't press the point.Well, I -was- rather drunk at the time, so I just didn't pick up on it. Although even sober I'm still not gleaning anything significant from your early posts. Either this round has a really weird theme, or you're being much more obtuse than you think you are.
Quote
Also how does that squares with the actual paradox triggering skill. Two sides of the same coin, or different coins? Tomasque can be sneaky like that.I have no idea what you are saying.
Quote
Nine hours, plus a bunch of change? Anyone think it's not a good idea to just sit tight that long? If the bad thing hasn't happened at N0, then possibly preventing it happening in the day is something to be seriously considered, but I'm all for boring if nobody wants that recourse and wants to get to work before N1.Well, this does seem like a short time period. I could be convinced that a no lynch might be the best course of action if nothing better comes up.
Elephant Parade:
Woah, what? I'm not quite sure what you're voting me over—you think I'm lying, apparently? I'd appreciate it if you could, y'know, give me something to respond to.Well, you haven't given me much to work with in the first place, so I've got to go with what little is out there. Hector13 and TBF's posts give me a gut feeling that they may be genuinely against causing a paradox thing. Starver feels potentially off, but I find it a little of a stretch for scum to come right out and claim to be worried about N0 results. But not impossible either. You haven't given me an impression of anything vaguely concrete, which sets off signs of "scum trying to fit in by generally agreeing with what everyone is talking about".
If you want me to go more in-depth on my Paradox connection: I can indirectly cause it, if I use my ability, but it's pretty much out of my control.
Of course, now you're claiming something about causing paradox, but that is technically in response to me voting you. Interesting that you also claim it's largely out of your control, but I get the impression from other players that paradox is something they can more actively cause/prevent.
TBF:
Thanks for contributing this keen insight! Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, or YouTube for more thinly-veiled insults!(Three-sided coin? Hmmm...)Quite possibly four-sided.
[oh, now you assholes all decide to start posting at once]
Post by: hector13 on October 09, 2016, 03:19:57 pm
Y'see, I find it hard to believe that three folk can somehow cause the paradox to happen, directly or otherwise. Either you or Shakerag is lying. Convince me it's not you.I don't want to give even the slightest hint at what causes it, since the Evil role would presumably be able to use that information to, y'know, try to cause it.Okay, I'll try to make it clearer: If, after I use my ability, a certain thing happens, a paradox is caused. I cannot cause that thing to happen. Does that make sense?Would this thing happen to do with voting?
Post by: Shakerag on October 09, 2016, 03:23:54 pm
blaarghlol wut?
hector13:
Aww mah gawd, let's just stop pussyfooting around.Okay, I'll try to make it clearer: If, after I use my ability, a certain thing happens, a paradox is caused. I cannot cause that thing to happen. Does that make sense?
Would this thing happen to do with voting?
My abilities affect votes.
My paradox trigger relates to the D1 and D2 lynches.
If I was a betting man, I'd consider putting a bet on most or all of us having paradox abilities relating to voting/lynches.
There is also the possibility that there is no scum, and this round is town versus the paradox mechanic.
Y'see, I find it hard to believe that three folk can somehow cause the paradox to happen, directly or otherwise. Either you or Shakerag is lying. Convince me it's not you.My paradox mechanic is solely based around myself. I think there are multiple paradox clauses in play.
Post by: Shakerag on October 09, 2016, 03:35:24 pm
There is also the possibility that there is no scum, and this round is town versus the paradox mechanic.And that is kind of the rub, I think. If we can be reasonably sure that it's town vs. mechanics then we can share info and avoid triggering all the paradoxen.
However, if there is some scum/third party who has the goal of getting a paradox to trigger, then sharing info might not be the best idea.
As an aside, how have previous bonus rounds gone in this game, mechanics-wise?
Post by: hector13 on October 09, 2016, 03:37:06 pm
PPE: the only other bonus round was abased on Undertale, and had folk's roles changing based on certain conditions being met - usually the death of another player.
Post by: Shakerag on October 09, 2016, 03:47:17 pm
Does anyone have a wincon/paradox related to the D1 lynch?
Post by: hector13 on October 09, 2016, 03:48:52 pm
Post by: Shakerag on October 09, 2016, 04:28:53 pm
You got on at Starver for role-fishing earlier, min. Perhaps just tell us your suspicion/theory?That would defeat the purpose of my experiment.
no lynch
Post by: Shakerag on October 09, 2016, 04:41:53 pm
Post by: Starver on October 09, 2016, 04:52:37 pm
N1 approaches, however, and I think I don't have to try to stop things going all inconvenient today. See you on the other side if all is as I suspect.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 09, 2016, 04:53:55 pm
Post by: Shakerag on October 09, 2016, 04:54:23 pm
So much I want to claim, but it would be stupid to claim it, especially if certain hypotheses are correct.Ditto.
Post by: Starver on October 09, 2016, 04:55:41 pm
Post by: Shakerag on October 09, 2016, 04:56:31 pm
I think too much has been said, actually. But then I should probably shut up about that.Possibly, but that is contingent upon whether there really is a scumteam and/or third party.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 09, 2016, 04:59:35 pm
To be honest, I don't think I can convince you of that; Shakerag has been a very good player so far (it's 2:59, no time to expand)Y'see, I find it hard to believe that three folk can somehow cause the paradox to happen, directly or otherwise. Either you or Shakerag is lying. Convince me it's not you.I don't want to give even the slightest hint at what causes it, since the Evil role would presumably be able to use that information to, y'know, try to cause it.Okay, I'll try to make it clearer: If, after I use my ability, a certain thing happens, a paradox is caused. I cannot cause that thing to happen. Does that make sense?Would this thing happen to do with voting?
I will, however, challenge your assumption: is it really that unreasonable for three people to be able to cause paradoxes? Perhaps the Evil role needs X paradoxes to win—or perhaps the high number of Paradox-causing roles is intended to balance out the unlikeliness of any given role causing one.
Post by: Tomasque on October 09, 2016, 05:17:20 pm
Bonus Round
Night 1
hector13
(0)
Shakerag
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
No Lynch
(0) - Shakerag
Not Voting
hector13, TheBiggerFish, Starver, Elephant Parade
Night 1
hector13
(0)
Shakerag
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
No Lynch
(0) - Shakerag
Not Voting
hector13, TheBiggerFish, Starver, Elephant Parade
Post by: Tomasque on October 11, 2016, 12:02:25 am
Bonus Round
Day 2
hector13
(0)
Shakerag
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
TheDarkStar
(0)
Wednesday, 10:00 PM PST
Thursday, 5:00 AM GMT
Day 2
hector13
(0)
Shakerag
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
TheDarkStar
(0)
Wednesday, 10:00 PM PST
Thursday, 5:00 AM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 11, 2016, 12:04:14 am
Post by: Shakerag on October 11, 2016, 01:51:10 am
I inspected Starver and he came up scum.
Post by: Starver on October 11, 2016, 04:47:58 am
Anyone else had something similar N1?
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 07:26:49 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 11, 2016, 08:36:56 am
Post by: Shakerag on October 11, 2016, 09:32:45 am
If I weren't convinced that there's something more complex at work, probably to do with N0, I'd be tempted to vote right back at you for that...Which is exactly what I would expect scum to say. Good deflection.
Anyone else had something similar N1?
TBF:
Shakerag:Eh?Are you going to make posts that have more than one word in them? Although if that one word is "Starver" and it's in red, then I suppose I wouldn't mind.
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 11, 2016, 09:41:53 am
Well hey, this round might not be so hard after all.
I inspected Starver and he came up scum.
If I weren't convinced that there's something more complex at work, probably to do with N0, I'd be tempted to vote right back at you for that...
Anyone else had something similar N1?
Interesting... explain please? Especially you, Starver - it looks like you're trying to ignore Shakerag.
(and ninja'd :/)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 11, 2016, 09:45:09 am
Post by: Starver on October 11, 2016, 10:48:20 am
As a personal comment, N0 worries me.(And hello TDS. I was already confused (thanks to everyone, including me, being overcautious) I was hoping to work out where you came in first.)
@Shakerag, you seem quite concerned about votes and seeding various wild theories about the scum. (EP has a few ideas, too, so perhaps it's just newness to the marathon that makes you look odd, compared to the more jaded attitude of us long term inmates.)
What can you claim about me? If just alignment, I expect there to be another Investigator position, on past experience. And I'd expect N1 actions on another to take over, so perhaps a rescan by you/them could clear that up.
Or you're deflecting yourself, perhaps the N0 actor. But no direct evidence for that.
Post by: Starver on October 11, 2016, 10:50:46 am
Post by: Shakerag on October 11, 2016, 11:25:44 am
Alright, fine. Since I survived D1 and nothing nasty happened N1 (at least to me), then I'll put my chips on the table.
I only didn't fullclaim D1 on the off chance that there was a paradox-loving scum with an NK.
So. My wincon is for no one to be lynched D1 and for me to be lynched D2. I cause a paradox if I don't win (very hilarious, Tomasque).
I don't have an inspect, and I have no idea what alignment Starver is.
N0 I got no message, and N1 I gained a night action to remove myself from the game, which apparently doesn't count as "dying".
D1 I used one of my day abilities right before day end which basically caused any current votes to be nullified and those players couldn't vote again for the rest of the day.
Shakerag. Let's do this.
If I'm correct about everyone being town and this round is us vs. mechanics, there should be no issue with lynching me today. If someone claims that me being lynched today would result in a paradox, I'm willing to bet they're lying scum who want to cause a paradox.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 11, 2016, 11:33:48 am
Actually that seems similar to things I know already.
Shakerag
Post by: Starver on October 11, 2016, 11:42:58 am
Post by: Starver on October 11, 2016, 11:44:00 am
Post by: Starver on October 11, 2016, 12:12:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 12:30:06 pm
On a related topic, you will want to be careful with your votes today, and even more so tomorrow.
Anyhow:
Shakeyboy
Christ in a green hat. You people are timid.
Alright, fine. Since I survived D1 and nothing nasty happened N1 (at least to me), then I'll put my chips on the table.
I only didn't fullclaim D1 on the off chance that there was a paradox-loving scum with an NK.
So. My wincon is for no one to be lynched D1 and for me to be lynched D2. I cause a paradox if I don't win (very hilarious, Tomasque).
I don't have an inspect, and I have no idea what alignment Starver is.
N0 I got no message, and N1 I gained a night action to remove myself from the game, which apparently doesn't count as "dying".
D1 I used one of my day abilities right before day end which basically caused any current votes to be nullified and those players couldn't vote again for the rest of the day
"one of"?
You're making it quite difficult to trust you when you imply you're making a full claim and don't actually make a full claim.
Now, I can think of a few reasons why you'd want to fakeclaim Starver was scum, but perhaps you'd like to talk us through your thought process?
TBF
Huh.
Actually that seems similar to things I know already.
Shakerag
What do you know already?
Starver
I hate Jesters... Still, if it stops the Paradox in the first place, it means I don't have to try to fix it later.
There's more than one way to
As a personal comment, N0 worries me.Or you're deflecting yourself, perhaps the N0 actor. But no direct evidence for that.
What can you tell us about N0?
Post by: Starver on October 11, 2016, 12:45:26 pm
I was told there was somebody there.What can you tell us about N0?As a personal comment, N0 worries me.Or you're deflecting yourself, perhaps the N0 actor. But no direct evidence for that.
My role has no intrinsic observation ability to it (also didn't see anyone checking me out last night, but as that was pure bull it no longer means anything, so far as I'm concerned).
And N0s tend towards giving an advantage for one party against the other party (usually a non-NKer scum), to pre-emptively even the odds, and darned sure I didn't get the benefit.
I speculated a framing action. But even that's now in doubt. But realistically it's somebody setting me up to fail (and somebody else N1?). Anyone wants to say anything..? Claim N1 target?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 11, 2016, 12:46:40 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 11, 2016, 01:07:20 pm
also he doesn't put spaces after colons, which is, like, the eighth sin
Hector:Would still like to know when the Paradox might occur.He wants to know what specifically could cause the paradox. Why would he want to know this, if not to cause it?
No, seriously. TheBiggerFish: Why would you ask that?
If we lynch Shakerag, a paradox will be created. I know this because I used my night action on him, and my role details how my action could lead to a paradox. (I don't think revealing my night action (or my entire role, even) would be a bad idea, but I'm going to think on it before I consider doing so.)
...Of course, according to him, a paradox will be created if he isn't lynched. IMO he has more reason to lie than me, since he wants to get himself lynched, but I guess it comes down to which people, if any, you trust—and whether you want him around for the rest of the game.
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 01:24:09 pm
TBF has been really useless and is probably scum. I was going to make an in-depth post on why, but I got ninja'd by Shakerag's insanity, so that'll have to wait.
If you're so convinced, why aren't you voting for him?
Hector:Would still like to know when the Paradox might occur.He wants to know what specifically could cause the paradox. Why would he want to know this, if not to cause it?
No, seriously. TheBiggerFish: Why would you ask that?
What you think he's asking and what he actually asked appear to be two quite different things.
Why do you assume that someone knowing how to cause a paradox automatically means they want it to happen?
If we lynch Shakerag, a paradox will be created. I know this because I used my night action on him, and my role details how my action could lead to a paradox. (I don't think revealing my night action (or my entire role, even) would be a bad idea, but I'm going to think on it before I consider doing so.)
I'll bite. Do tell.
Post by: Starver on October 11, 2016, 01:45:54 pm
Hector:I've a role similar to his, except where he has numbers I have blanks.If true, I probably shouldn't enquire how this works.
But almost every solid assumption I've made has been overturned, now.
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 11, 2016, 02:40:10 pm
(and yes, my role also mentions the possibility of a paradox occuring)
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 11, 2016, 02:44:14 pm
...Can someone explain what a paradox is?Nobody's sure—or if they are, they aren't saying—but it sounds bad.
(and yes, my role also mentions the possibility of a paradox occuring)
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 02:47:14 pm
Post by: Shakerag on October 11, 2016, 03:06:51 pm
Shakerag won't be lynched today.Well, if that's your doing, I hope you like paradox.
Quote
Shakeyboy1) I don't trust you either.
"one of"?
You're making it quite difficult to trust you when you imply you're making a full claim and don't actually make a full claim.
Now, I can think of a few reasons why you'd want to fakeclaim Starver was scum, but perhaps you'd like to talk us through your thought process?
2) No.
Elephant Parade:
also he doesn't put spaces after colons, which is, like, the eighth sinAnd using "sub" tags is a mortal sin. See you in hell.
Quote
If we lynch Shakerag, a paradox will be created. I know this because I used my night action on him, and my role details how my action could lead to a paradox. (I don't think revealing my night action (or my entire role, even) would be a bad idea, but I'm going to think on it before I consider doing so.)Welp, if that's 100% true then this round is going to go tits up no matter what. Either way, you're not going to see me past D3.
...Of course, according to him, a paradox will be created if he isn't lynched. IMO he has more reason to lie than me, since he wants to get himself lynched, but I guess it comes down to which people, if any, you trust—and whether you want him around for the rest of the game.
TDS:
...Can someone explain what a paradox is?We don't know. My role mentions a paradox happening if I don't win. I'm assuming there are multiple ways to cause a paradox. My guess is that this round is either town vs. mechanics (i.e. everyone needs to avoid triggering their own paradox clauses), or town vs. paradox-loving scum. Seeing as that hector13 is actively trying to prevent me from getting lynched today (which will cause my wincon to fail, triggering paradox) he's either an idiot or paradox-loving scum.
(and yes, my role also mentions the possibility of a paradox occuring)
Tomasque: Vote count?
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 03:16:50 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 11, 2016, 03:33:20 pm
And by the way, I cause a paradox if anyone is lynched today.
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 03:36:01 pm
D2 repeats tomorrow.
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 11, 2016, 03:39:35 pm
Oh good.
D2 repeats tomorrow.
Wait what
explain this please
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 03:42:29 pm
Post by: Shakerag on October 11, 2016, 03:56:26 pm
What am I doing to actively stop you being lynched today?
Shakerag won't be lynched today.
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 04:01:21 pm
That's me stating fact. Is that me actively working toward not lynching you? No.What am I doing to actively stop you being lynched today?Shakerag won't be lynched today.
Something of a persecution complex you got there, man.
Post by: Shakerag on October 11, 2016, 04:04:43 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 04:08:30 pm
D2 repeats tomorrow.
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 11, 2016, 04:11:17 pm
D2 repeats tomorrow.
Why?
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 04:24:02 pm
I assume that had I not used the action - which could only be triggered N0 - I would have caused a paradox.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 11, 2016, 05:14:38 pm
Quote
If you're so convinced, why aren't you voting for him?Because I typically place my votes at the end of long accusatory posts, and I didn't finish the "long accusatory post" part. Also, I tend to forget to vote, for some reason.
Quote
What you think he's asking and what he actually asked appear to be two quite different things.Maybe? Looking back, I noticed he was asking when the paradox would trigger, but I'm not sure what he would mean by that, if not what I assumed.
Quote
Why do you assume that someone knowing how to cause a paradox automatically means they want it to happen?Weird phrasing here; AFAIK everyone knows how to trigger their own paradox, and that obviously doesn't make them scum. But like I said: Why would you ask what triggers a paradox, if not to try to trigger it? If the person you're asking felt that the risk of someone unknowingly triggering it outweighed the downsides, they'd have made it (or a part of it) public, right? I just can't see any non-scum motive.
I'll bite. Do tell.I can clone people. Dunno what that does—gives them a double-vote, presumably, but even that's just speculation—but yeah. Also, if they get lynched afterwards, a paradox is created—but I already said that.
On an unrelated note, cloning Shakerag granted him an ability that, if used, will remove him from the game, sparing us all a paradox. I'd ask him to use it, but he apparently needs to get lynched to win, so I can't see that happening. Still, I'd appreciate it.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 11, 2016, 05:15:15 pm
Post by: Shakerag on October 11, 2016, 05:19:42 pm
On an unrelated note, cloning Shakerag granted him an ability that, if used, will remove him from the game, sparing us all a paradox. I'd ask him to use it, but he apparently needs to get lynched to win, so I can't see that happening. Still, I'd appreciate it.Huh. Shakerag Shakerag Let's see.
Also, if I'm cloned ... then perhaps one of me can get lynched and the other can use that ability?
Post by: Tomasque on October 11, 2016, 05:32:16 pm
hector13
(0)
Shakerag
(2) - TheBiggerFish, Shakerag
TheBiggerFish
(1) - Elephant Parade
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
TheDarkStar
(0)
Not Voting
hector13, Starver, TheDarkStar
(0)
Shakerag
(2) - TheBiggerFish, Shakerag
TheBiggerFish
(1) - Elephant Parade
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
TheDarkStar
(0)
Not Voting
hector13, Starver, TheDarkStar
Post by: Shakerag on October 11, 2016, 05:38:58 pm
Post by: Starver on October 11, 2016, 05:46:53 pm
Trump
Post by: Starver on October 11, 2016, 05:48:11 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 11, 2016, 05:48:56 pm
Hector:I've a role similar to his, except where he has numbers I have blanks.
TBF: Do you have the same power as the one that Shakerag claimed?
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 05:49:19 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 11, 2016, 05:54:15 pm
TheDarkStar
I feel like avoiding a paradox (and TBF, if you have the lynch-nullification power, please don't use it or we'll have at least two paradoxes in this game. And I'll use mine to stop you getting lynched later on because preventing my lynch would indicate that you want paradoxes, which appears to be bad.).
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 11, 2016, 05:56:29 pm
-ninja'd-
Oh, right—only the original player can't be lynched. TheDarkStar can die, I guess. Cool.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 11, 2016, 05:57:13 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 11, 2016, 06:01:52 pm
I wonder where Shakerag came from? I suspect I might not the only one with this power.
Interesting. The only people left for it to be are TBF, starver and hector. TBF appears to have been copied first and starver claimed another action, so I conclude that hector also has that power.
Also, shorten and votecount.
Post by: Tomasque on October 11, 2016, 06:19:13 pm
hector13
(0)
Shakerag
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
TheDarkStar
(4) - TheDarkStar, Shakerag, TheBiggerFish, Elephant Parade
Not Voting
hector13, Starver
(0)
Shakerag
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
TheDarkStar
(4) - TheDarkStar, Shakerag, TheBiggerFish, Elephant Parade
Not Voting
hector13, Starver
((Shortens do not exist in this game))
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 11, 2016, 06:23:20 pm
No.Hector:I've a role similar to his, except where he has numbers I have blanks.
TBF: Do you have the same power as the one that Shakerag claimed?
I have a different one.
Actually, what am I saying, my role isn't actually the same as his. He needs to be lynched. I need to die on a day I don't know and can't be lynched.
Also I cause a paradox if I die on a similarly unknown day.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 11, 2016, 06:24:09 pm
Blech. Can't keep my own role straoght.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 11, 2016, 06:26:15 pm
(If nobody does, it isn't proven that you're scum (it could be the Evil role with killing capability, though you're basically screwed if that's the case), but it's definitely a point against you.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 11, 2016, 06:30:14 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 11, 2016, 07:16:28 pm
Actually, let me rephrase my earlier statement. I can't die by being lynched. Lynches will change my role.
So we lynch you twice.
Post by: hector13 on October 11, 2016, 07:28:38 pm
Actually, let me rephrase my earlier statement. I can't die by being lynched. Lynches will change my role.
So we lynch you twice.
Bearing in mind this is a bastard game, and it seems every little bastard thing causes a paradox.
Looks like we're going to get one anyway, seeing as we can't lynch both Shakerag and TDS at the same time.
Post by: Shakerag on October 12, 2016, 12:03:15 am
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 12, 2016, 12:33:18 am
Post by: Shakerag on October 12, 2016, 12:51:49 am
Hey, we don't know what a paradox does yet.Don't know, don't care. Game's over for me as far as I know.
Post by: Starver on October 12, 2016, 08:42:59 am
Fish is saying his "blanked" specification is "lynched by day (unknown)". If that stands for both TDS and Shak then realistically I'd expect that either a D1 lynch of Shak (despite Shak saying that no lynches should occur then, and had the skills to prevent it) and D2 lynch of TDS ('on time') would fulfill those two apparent Jesters' conditions and would apparently prevent all Paradoxen.
TDS has vote-changing power which apparently does not act upon non-voters (maybe/maybe not NoLynch voters, not yet tested). And as Shak gained some skill N1, will (or would have?) TDS have gained an equivalent skill N2, automatically, or was that someone's doing? (Might be explicable as the N0 visitor of mine, who gave me nothing because I wasn't the 'right sort' to be given it, in which case it depends upon the same person going for TDS, if still alive, N2, to repeat this...)
Hector has D3 on repeat, but not sure what use that is. Perhaps it was an error to choose D3 when two D2 lynches should have been made, or maybe it's the fault of the agency (EP?) that chose D2 for both clones?
EP did create both clones, yes? Of the original Fish? But thinks Fish is scum, at least now..?
My conclusion at the moment is that the carefully crafted balance of powers have come together to create this situation of unwinability, Tomasque powerless to stop (even if he wanted!) a Town Loss. But there's a possibility for success, still...
EP mentioned in passing that a number of paradoxes may need to happen to trigger defeat. What if that's three paradoxes, across the four days (inclusive of Hector's repeat day)? By seeing the roleflip of one paradox-causer/denier, we get a handle on the paradox-beneficiary's (or "all town lose!"1) actual tools to do so. A second paradox (in leiu of trapping the true evil?) shows us the way, and we can avoid a third paradox from happening.
Whether that's by autolynching the new guy who shows up on the morning of D3 (and the next D3 too?) or specifcally by not lynching them. Whatever comes out as true.
I don't think I can do anything about TDS/Shak Lynch/Notlynch situation (I can stop things, but only before they happen irrevocably, and for all I know this is the best of a bad set of solutions), but I don't think it means I can't use D2 dusk's info to be useful on D3. Either of them. If that's even true.
Right?
1 I don't think it is that, given it would be repetition...
Post by: Tomasque on October 14, 2016, 03:00:30 pm
Bonus Round
Night 2
hector13
(0)
Shakerag
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
TheDarkStar
(4) - TheDarkStar, Shakerag, TheBiggerFish, Elephant Parade
Not Voting
hector13, Starver
TheDarkStar was Jesus of Nazareth
Night 2
hector13
(0)
Shakerag
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
TheDarkStar
(4) - TheDarkStar, Shakerag, TheBiggerFish, Elephant Parade
Not Voting
hector13, Starver
TheDarkStar was Jesus of Nazareth
Spoiler: Jesus of Nazareth (click to show/hide)
Bonus Round
Night 0
Post by: Tomasque on October 17, 2016, 07:56:29 pm
Bonus Round
Day 1
hector13
(0)
FallacyofUrist
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Wednesday, 6:00 PM PST
Thursday, 1:00 AM GMT
Day 1
hector13
(0)
FallacyofUrist
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Wednesday, 6:00 PM PST
Thursday, 1:00 AM GMT
Post by: hector13 on October 17, 2016, 07:58:43 pm
Who was the one what cloned roles?
Post by: hector13 on October 17, 2016, 07:59:06 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 17, 2016, 08:01:51 pm
Tomasque:Are the days correct?
Post by: hector13 on October 17, 2016, 08:03:55 pm
Post by: Tomasque on October 17, 2016, 08:12:41 pm
Tomasque:Are the days correct?Yes.
Post by: hector13 on October 17, 2016, 08:18:50 pm
I feel silly now.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 17, 2016, 09:15:19 pm
EP: who did you target, man?I targeted you, since I can do so without dooming us to suffer a paradox.
Everyone: We're NL-ing N1 and lynching Shakerag N2, right? Anyone know if this'll create a paradox?
Post by: hector13 on October 17, 2016, 09:17:16 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 17, 2016, 09:18:48 pm
EP: who did you target, man?I targeted you, since I can do so without dooming us to suffer a paradox.
Everyone: We're NL-ing N1 and lynching Shakerag N2, right? Anyone know if this'll create a paradox?
And also, Shakerag is not in the game no more.
I think we should lynch you, since all this adding of people just makes a paradox more likely.
Why didn't you clone Starver?
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 17, 2016, 10:36:04 pm
EP: who did you target, man?I targeted you, since I can do so without dooming us to suffer a paradox.
Quote
And also, Shakerag is not in the game no more.Oh, so he vanished when he caused the paradox? That's good to know.
Quote
I think we should lynch you, since all this adding of people just makes a paradox more likely.Well... I'd say I'd just not use it, but I can't—to win, I need to have used it at the end of the game, and it looks like it refreshes whenever we fly back to D0 (it's a one-shot). Can I just keep cloning you forever, or will even that cause problems?
I'd appreciate it if you posted your wincon, since we can be pretty sure it's not "kill the evil role" and I posted mine. That goes for everyone, in fact—anyone who doesn't is pretty blatantly Prisoner's Dilemma-ing, and should probably be lynched for it. (might need to explain my logic here, but I'm getting pretty sleepy—if people aren't getting what I mean, I'll explain it tomorrow)
Quote
Why didn't you clone Starver?Because I didn't have as strong a town read on him.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 17, 2016, 10:36:48 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 18, 2016, 12:18:21 am
EP: who did you target, man?I targeted you, since I can do so without dooming us to suffer a paradox.
What makes you say that?
QuoteAnd also, Shakerag is not in the game no more.Oh, so he vanished when he caused the paradox? That's good to know.
He said he had a power to remove himself from the game, though given your assertion you cloned him as TDS, and TDS' flip doesn't contain that particular power, I'm not so sure.
Though again, he did say he received that power N1...
QuoteI think we should lynch you, since all this adding of people just makes a paradox more likely.Well... I'd say I'd just not use it, but I can't—to win, I need to have used it at the end of the game, and it looks like it refreshes whenever we fly back to D0 (it's a one-shot). Can I just keep cloning you forever, or will even that cause problems?
You tell us.
I'd appreciate it if you posted your wincon, since we can be pretty sure it's not "kill the evil role" and I posted mine. That goes for everyone, in fact—anyone who doesn't is pretty blatantly Prisoner's Dilemma-ing, and should probably be lynched for it. (might need to explain my logic here, but I'm getting pretty sleepy—if people aren't getting what I mean, I'll explain it tomorrow)
Nonsense. Anyone can make up a wincon.
We should lynch you because you need to use your power, which clones people. The more people there are, the more likely there is to be a paradox, and I don't think we want that. I can still cause a paradox (or at least a paradox can be caused when my power activates) so I'd rather not be cloned at all.
QuoteWhy didn't you clone Starver?Because I didn't have as strong a town read on him.
Implying you have a town read on me. Do provide quotes for such an assertion, and perhaps some which make Starver look less than ideal.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on October 18, 2016, 08:31:24 am
First up. I cause a paradox if I don't win. Is that the same for everybody?
Secondly, my win condition is to have the lynches be the same as the ones while TheDarkStar was alive.
So...
Unless anybody has any objections... No Lynch.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 18, 2016, 09:17:10 am
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 18, 2016, 09:32:00 am
Huh.much useful
very information
wow
(PFP — class in twenty minutes, and responding to hector's post might take more than that; I just felt like complaining about this post because having to scroll past zero-information posts annoys me)
Post by: Starver on October 18, 2016, 11:58:24 am
I don't get some things, I think I get others. When I saw TDS somehow winning the Jester Race, I Fixed things for Shak (I think, if it works that way) because I don't see any mention of Paradox happening (unless that's not publicly announced), which is what Shak thought would happen if they didn't win, thanks to TDS's hijack.
TDS, BTW had a Vote Nullifier (as claimed by Shak, so I don't believe Shak was pre-counter-claiming the same sort of thing totally by accident, it must have been true enough) and yet it appears that became a Vote Redirecter, so why that didn't appear on the Jesus flip.
Now Fallacy claims to be "as TDS", but EP claims to have cloned Hector, so it's either not EP that created TDS/Shak from Fish and Vishdafish is the Hector-clone (not heard about that) or it's a third-party/game-mechanic thing that ensures one Fish-clone, and EP only accidentally added to the Fish-clone-clan, N1.
Anyway, Hector's repeat-a-day thing (someone's doing that, I'm believing Hector about that, though we haven't reached D3 yet) seems to be happening.
Fish... The only thing we 'know' about Fish is that he's the prototype for the many and various Jesters (presumably not a Jester himself, then... because Fish needs to be alive to really Win?) and I can't see much else in that role. Also, very quiet and one-wordy. (Meta: is also being that on non-game threads, could be indicative of Real Life issues or a massive meta-game bluff.)
Myself, I think I'm confident I can fix things, but if I don't risk being lynched by the one who doesn't want me to fix things, I can't realistically then come back tomorrow/later and believably prove any further successes of action.
EP the cloner... I believe in theory, but that (like Fish, or even Hector, or even me if I look at myself from your PsOV) might just as easily be the skill the Paradox-causer needs.
I think if we lynch those 'transients' who claim Jester, and I correctly cover any alternative Paradoxees that pop up, we can probably avoid problems, but only while we're not outsmarted by the bad guy. But with repeating days (courtesy of Hector, although Hector's claimed repeat-day may not yet have even happened), this surely means that rather than the Bad Guy running out of time to succeed, we run out of time to not fail. Something needs to jolt this stuck record, and let us come to a Town-Win ending... I'm tempted to stop Hector (but not so sure, and now with a Hector-clone in play, may not help), then perhaps Fish (source of Paradoxees) and EP's cloning is not far behind in my mind. But the smallest of facts might change my mind, and I'm actually rather willing to see another repeat happen to check my protective skill is as I think.
Riskier: we get Fallacy out straight away by Lynch, I fix it so that Fallacy not winning (because of no NoLynch today, D1) isn't a Paradox and then I know I'm doing it right. But I'm not sure that won't equally well be instant failure... So dare we do that?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 18, 2016, 12:38:59 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 18, 2016, 12:51:14 pm
I'm slightly worried about this because I still don't know how I'm supposed to win.Do you have a wincon?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 18, 2016, 12:56:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 18, 2016, 01:22:53 pm
Riskier: we get Fallacy out straight away by Lynch, I fix it so that Fallacy not winning (because of no NoLynch today, D1) isn't a Paradox and then I know I'm doing it right. But I'm not sure that won't equally well be instant failure... So dare we do that?
Or we get rid of EP, eliminating having more people added, you fix the paradox from having a lynch on D1, we lynch Fallacy on D2 to avoid paradox and D3 will repeat again from my power.
Post by: Starver on October 18, 2016, 02:16:47 pm
Yes, but it's not got all the information I need to know when.I think you are the template. You aren't there to 'win', you're there to create entities that make us lose. Willingly or no.
Toss up whether Big Bad or Town Weak (actually or effectively). Would depend on others able to keep you and your progeny in check (possibly that's my job) whilst we do rid ourselves of the Big Bad, if it isn't you. But it is a flimsy explanation, either way. Not really a definite thing. Just a musing.
Which is why I rank the (regular) cast of suspects with you in the middle, Hector marginally at the forefront, EP marginally behind. All at distinctly less than 50% chance, of course, and corresponding risk of instead removing a positive influence.
I know EP is cloning and in the process creating 'problems', but doesn't explain every 'visiting player' we see (N1 action of EP granted additional skills, right, even as anothe Clone appeared?). EP could be actually useful in cloning the counter-measure as much as the problematic.
Why didn't you clone Starver?...not sure that would help. Not even sure Hector's intentions are wholly honourable, as said, and may know something I don't, but it had occured to me before that was said. Not enough information, though. Caution, perhaps. Assuming cloning Hector hasn't already doomed things.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 18, 2016, 03:12:13 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 18, 2016, 03:13:17 pm
Like, it doesn't say Town Special.
So actually that'd make sense if I actually actively did anything.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 18, 2016, 03:32:33 pm
Retracting earlier statement, got a PM saying it was a typo just now.
Post by: hector13 on October 18, 2016, 08:13:41 pm
I know EP is cloning and in the process creating 'problems', but doesn't explain every 'visiting player' we see (N1 action of EP granted additional skills, right, even as anothe Clone appeared?). EP could be actually useful in cloning the counter-measure as much as the problematic.Why didn't you clone Starver?...not sure that would help. Not even sure Hector's intentions are wholly honourable, as said, and may know something I don't, but it had occured to me before that was said. Not enough information, though. Caution, perhaps. Assuming cloning Hector hasn't already doomed things.
Shakerag was initially a replacement for FoU, were they not? They also had that ability to remove themselves from the game, that doesn't count as a death. My guess would be Shakerag removed themselves as a player from the game, to have FoU replace them. That is 100% speculation though.
EP presently has the most malignant known role - though I can't recall TBF's, so if someone could link me to it, I'd appreciate that. As we saw from D2-1, having two people that needed to be lynched on D2 almost caused a paradox. Bad juju, particularly since they have to use the cloning ability.
EP: Another question I have is why on the first set of days, you waited 'til N1 to use the ability you supposedly need to use to win, and on this set it was an N0 choice?
Got an ETA on answering my previous questions? Time's-a-wastin'.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 18, 2016, 09:22:57 pm
Quote
What makes you say that?If I target TBF or any of his clones, I create a paradox, since only one can be lynched N2.
Quote
He said he had a power to remove himself from the game, though given your assertion you cloned him as TDS, and TDS' flip doesn't contain that particular power, I'm not so sure.Any clone I create gets a one-shot power that removes them from the game.
Though again, he did say he received that power N1...
Quote
You tell us.I can't, because I don't know how your paradox works.
Quote
We should lynch you because you need to use your power, which clones people. The more people there are, the more likely there is to be a paradox, and I don't think we want that.It sounds like Starver has some kind of anti-paradox power; if doing so wouldn't create any problems, I can just clone him (assuming this isn't the last cycle).
Quote
Nonsense. Anyone can make up a wincon.I suppose, yeah. Prisoner's Dilemma at work, guys! Why post your puzzle pieces when you could hoard them?
Quote
Implying you have a town read on me. Do provide quotes for such an assertion, and perhaps some which make Starver look less than ideal.It was mostly just a feeling, honestly. I could go dig up quotes to support it (though I won't because I have a midterm tomorrow, and thus a rather limited amount of time), but one could do the same for any such feeling, so...
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 18, 2016, 09:38:15 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 18, 2016, 09:43:34 pm
I also don't know what happens when you clone someone multiple times.
Confused as to why you consider cloning Starver now, citing his claimed power... which he claimed multiple times on D2-1, but cloned me, saying I'm more towny, while not telling us how I'm town in any capacity.
This is not a prisoner's dilemma, since there are more than two players and there are more than two options. We're also not choosing the outcome separately and privately so... I'm curious why you're painting the situation as such?
How will posting our wincons help you figure out who to vote for, if at all? How will you know the person posting them is reliable? Unsupported gut feeling?
You've forgotten to answer the question from here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7223000#msg7223000).
PPE: I gained nothing, you didn't clone me.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 18, 2016, 09:45:33 pm
Paradox: You cause a paradox if you survive past Day <unknown>
This is my authoritative claim.
I also have an auto that says if I would be lynched, my role changes.
Post by: hector13 on October 18, 2016, 09:48:48 pm
What's your archetype, TBF?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 18, 2016, 10:02:21 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 18, 2016, 10:13:44 pm
Seeing as how, presumably, a paradox wasn't caused last round when you weren't lynched D1, and how it would be tremendously unfair for you to be lynched on D2 when someone else is required to be lynched then, I think it's reasonable to assume you need to be killed on D3. This assuming the "standard" D3 end, anyway.
Post by: Starver on October 19, 2016, 01:13:49 pm
(Votecount, please, just to give us a clue.)
Post by: vishdafish on October 19, 2016, 03:47:45 pm
In that case, vishdafish, which day did you choose?
What day? I just joined?
Post by: hector13 on October 19, 2016, 04:02:39 pm
Post by: Tomasque on October 19, 2016, 04:20:26 pm
hector13
(0)
FallacyofUrist
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(1) - hector13
vishdafish
(0)
No Lynch
(1) - FallacyofUrist
(0)
FallacyofUrist
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(1) - hector13
vishdafish
(0)
No Lynch
(1) - FallacyofUrist
Post by: Starver on October 19, 2016, 04:36:35 pm
Ah, at last. Nice to hear from om you.In that case, vishdafish, which day did you choose?
What day? I just joined?
The low-down is that we're pretty sure you're a clone of Hector's role (possibly a temporary one), and that if Hector isn't totally spinning us you may then have been given some role actions.
Your input on this would be useful, but you might want to read this round's progression first. (But quickly! This day is nearly over!)
Post by: Starver on October 19, 2016, 04:38:28 pm
Post by: vishdafish on October 19, 2016, 04:58:28 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 19, 2016, 05:02:53 pm
If you were a clone of me, then you had to choose a day which would then repeat.
Post by: Starver on October 19, 2016, 05:10:47 pm
I would like to know (much as Hector has now chimed in) but I was hoping you'd understand the issues before you do expose youself. Knowing whether we can trust Hector and/or Elephant Parade and/or Tomasque's actual game setup being part of that.
Post by: vishdafish on October 19, 2016, 05:56:19 pm
(1-shot, n) Déjà Vu: You must use this ability Night 0. Choose a Day. The target day will repeat once it is done. If you would die before that day, that day repeats instead.
Since you will be coming in Day 1, you will be unable to manually use this ability. However, if you are lynched, you will trigger a repeat as usual.
It seems like I am a clone of you then!
Post by: vishdafish on October 19, 2016, 05:57:29 pm
Post by: Starver on October 19, 2016, 06:03:05 pm
Gotta take some of this on trust. Short though that comidity is in supply in this Marathon... ;)
Post by: vishdafish on October 19, 2016, 06:05:27 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 19, 2016, 06:09:38 pm
Post by: vishdafish on October 19, 2016, 06:17:33 pm
Post by: Starver on October 19, 2016, 06:20:53 pm
Only outcomes I can create on my lonesome, this turn, are NoLynch (by any vote not for EP, or no vote at all) or getting rid of EP on the assumption I can Fix the Paradox that this would trigger in Fallacy's role.
Doing nothing sounds good to me, but if you need me to do something do try to let me know.
PPE: @Vishda: Seems to be a phase TOF2 is going through, outside this thread as well as in.
1 Quotient Of Evil!!!
2 The (Other/Original) Fish ;)
Post by: hector13 on October 19, 2016, 06:22:04 pm
You also appear to have directly quoted the mod... not sure how that's going to play out. It's a very big no-no.
Post by: vishdafish on October 19, 2016, 06:23:01 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 19, 2016, 06:28:21 pm
It looks like it.Tomasque literally gave approval to quote the mod.
You also appear to have directly quoted the mod... not sure how that's going to play out. It's a very big no-no.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 19, 2016, 06:29:13 pm
Are you just posting random stuff to increase your post count?No.
That is my reaction to this.
Can we just claim wincons already and make a bloody flowchart or something?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 19, 2016, 06:30:13 pm
Post by: Starver on October 19, 2016, 06:31:43 pm
To answer the question of posting roles:
It's more than halfway through the game, and my roles always follow a structure. Because of that, you guys should know how to make one yourselves, meaning that posting one in thread doesn't prove its real.
So yeah, you can go as far as posting the whole role (or faking a whole role) and I wouldn't care.
But we still have to consider whether Vishda has taken the final para's parenthetical to heart. (But as Hector's not objecting... Unless that's because Vishda hasn't gone too far off-message from Hector's desired fakery, and tnus not tied him down in ways not wanted... ;))
Post by: hector13 on October 19, 2016, 06:33:39 pm
Are you just posting random stuff to increase your post count?No.
That is my reaction to this.
Can we just claim wincons already and make a bloody flowchart or something?
You can answer the question of how revealing wincons will help us either find scum or finish the round successfully.
You can fake a role easy enough, so you can do the same with a wincon. It proves nothing.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 19, 2016, 06:36:07 pm
Post by: vishdafish on October 19, 2016, 06:38:25 pm
Post by: Starver on October 19, 2016, 06:40:29 pm
Post by: Tomasque on October 20, 2016, 11:38:40 am
Bonus Round
Night 1
hector13
(0)
FallacyofUrist
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(1) - hector13
vishdafish
(0)
No Lynch
(1) - FallacyofUrist
Night 1
hector13
(0)
FallacyofUrist
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(1) - hector13
vishdafish
(0)
No Lynch
(1) - FallacyofUrist
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 20, 2016, 12:12:05 pm
Post by: Tomasque on October 21, 2016, 11:30:41 am
Bonus Round
Day 2
hector13
(0)
FallacyofUrist
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Day ends Saturday, 9:00 AM PDT
Saturday 4:30 PM GMT
Day 2
hector13
(0)
FallacyofUrist
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Day ends Saturday, 9:00 AM PDT
Saturday 4:30 PM GMT
Post by: hector13 on October 21, 2016, 11:34:44 am
I'd really like to get rid of EP, I really am not comfortable with the whole adding players/paradoxes to the game thing.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on October 21, 2016, 05:48:40 pm
First up. I cause a paradox if I don't win.Haha no.
Secondly, my win condition is to have the lynches be the same as the ones while TheDarkStar was alive.
TheBiggerFish.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 21, 2016, 05:58:46 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on October 21, 2016, 06:01:09 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 21, 2016, 06:31:24 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on October 21, 2016, 06:39:43 pm
FallacyofUrist.
Post by: vishdafish on October 21, 2016, 07:03:10 pm
FoU
Post by: vishdafish on October 21, 2016, 07:04:04 pm
Post by: Starver on October 22, 2016, 07:08:16 am
Post by: Starver on October 22, 2016, 07:14:22 am
Post by: Starver on October 22, 2016, 07:15:40 am
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 22, 2016, 06:11:17 pm
Also, FoU might be lying about "not winning" being his paradox. After all, wouldn't everyone want to pretend that a paradox will be created if people don't go along with them? There's no proof one way or the other, though.
FallacyofUrist, I guess.
Post by: Tomasque on October 22, 2016, 11:38:56 pm
Bonus Round
Night 2
hector13
(0)
FallacyofUrist
(3) - Elephant Parade, vishdafish, FallacyofUrist
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Not Voting
hector13, TheBiggerFish, Starver
FallacyofUrist was Karl Glogauer
Night 2
hector13
(0)
FallacyofUrist
(3) - Elephant Parade, vishdafish, FallacyofUrist
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Not Voting
hector13, TheBiggerFish, Starver
FallacyofUrist was Karl Glogauer
Spoiler: Karl Glogauer (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on October 24, 2016, 08:18:56 pm
Bonus Round
Day 3
hector13
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Day ends Wednesday, 6:00 PM PDT
Thursday 1:00 AM GMT
Day 3
hector13
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Day ends Wednesday, 6:00 PM PDT
Thursday 1:00 AM GMT
Post by: hector13 on October 24, 2016, 08:24:12 pm
I'd like y'all to be very careful with your votes, as you cannot change them on the repeated part without causing a paradox, or at least that's how I'm interpreting it...
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 24, 2016, 08:49:00 pm
Post by: Starver on October 25, 2016, 03:09:55 am
Nobody else new, so nothing we can do (even roleflip someone?) to make sure we're sanitary. If we've won against the mechanic, we've won, so not entirely sure what today's about...
Post by: vishdafish on October 25, 2016, 04:07:09 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 25, 2016, 04:11:13 pm
I'd like y'all to be very careful with your votes, as you cannot change them on the repeated part without causing a paradox, or at least that's how I'm interpreting it...I doubt it'll come up, but just in case: We can't change our votes, or we can't change the lynchee?
Post by: Starver on October 25, 2016, 04:18:23 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 25, 2016, 04:23:05 pm
I'd like y'all to be very careful with your votes, as you cannot change them on the repeated part without causing a paradox, or at least that's how I'm interpreting it...I doubt it'll come up, but just in case: We can't change our votes, or we can't change the lynchee?
Don't do either.
Post by: Starver on October 25, 2016, 05:43:23 pm
But there's two of you, so I'm not sure I could even argue... Tell me if there's a threatened Paradox and I'll Fix it again, but otherwise it seems I'm superfluous...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 25, 2016, 05:58:42 pm
Post by: Starver on October 25, 2016, 06:03:19 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 25, 2016, 06:06:17 pm
Post by: Starver on October 25, 2016, 06:08:03 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 25, 2016, 06:26:13 pm
Post by: Starver on October 26, 2016, 12:44:30 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 26, 2016, 02:22:46 pm
Post by: Starver on October 26, 2016, 03:53:12 pm
Hector forced to repeat, me forced to Fix (which I assume I did), Fish's clones forced to Jesterise... Not sure about Fish though.
Post by: hector13 on October 26, 2016, 03:56:43 pm
That resets whenever, I assume, you fix a paradox.
Post by: Starver on October 26, 2016, 04:09:47 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 26, 2016, 04:14:05 pm
Post by: Starver on October 26, 2016, 04:17:34 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 26, 2016, 04:20:21 pm
Post by: Starver on October 26, 2016, 04:24:51 pm
@EP So..?
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 26, 2016, 07:28:15 pm
If you can lynch me today without causing a paradox, I don't necessarily mind, but I'd rather stay alive in case time resets again.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 26, 2016, 07:28:48 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 26, 2016, 07:30:11 pm
But I'd still really rather not die, since there's always the chance that the day will reset again. Also: hector13, weren't you worried that changes in lynches/votes would trigger your paradox? Are votes for dead players valid?
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 26, 2016, 07:31:16 pm
Shakerag, Votecount
Post by: hector13 on October 26, 2016, 07:45:27 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 26, 2016, 07:57:35 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 26, 2016, 07:59:19 pm
Post by: Tomasque on October 26, 2016, 08:08:02 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 26, 2016, 08:09:56 pm
Not bastard enough :P
Post by: Tomasque on October 28, 2016, 12:03:38 am
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Post by: Tomasque on October 28, 2016, 12:04:54 am
Bonus Round
Day 3
hector13
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Day ends Saturday, 10:00 PM PDT
Sunday 5:00 AM GMT
Day 3
hector13
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Day ends Saturday, 10:00 PM PDT
Sunday 5:00 AM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 28, 2016, 12:12:32 am
Post by: Starver on October 28, 2016, 05:44:18 am
(Maybe it's Tomasque's personal time, but the ragged day-ends and unanounced night-lengths pique my interest as to whether it's one of you dictating that.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 28, 2016, 09:20:05 am
And this day repeated itself with no night.
Post by: Starver on October 28, 2016, 06:37:21 pm
Resigned myself to that, thinking that I'd just Fix my own Paradox, sent it in in advance of a night that I'm not even sure will come. But just now been told that (I think I'm allowed to quote verbatim the non-technical part, at least) "That'd be silly, silly." That, obviously, Fixing my own Paradox would be a Paradox. Not allowing it.
Opening it up to suggestions. If we're against a mechanic, someone will know. If there's a Big Bad then I've maybe said too much already. May not affect you. May be just what you want to hear, but do nothing to help me.
Post by: Elephant Parade on October 28, 2016, 06:57:13 pm
Post by: Starver on October 29, 2016, 03:18:26 pm
Right now it looks like everyone's happy and not bothered about getting me in on the winboat. Meh. But I'll leave that example vote up (chosen to be neutral, it's obviously going nowhere, it doesn't even help anyone get rid of Hecto, the 'original') until I think I've heard enough to resign myself to me fate again.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 29, 2016, 04:19:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 29, 2016, 04:24:28 pm
If you guys want to risk losing this round, though, fire away.
Post by: Starver on October 29, 2016, 05:37:00 pm
I am fairly confident I should Fix TBF's vote (not even sure if a NoLynch will suffice, but I'll risk it, without risking other unwanted fallout), unless you can think of a better way of covering that base. I think, at the risk of tempting fate, this can be won.
Post by: hector13 on October 29, 2016, 05:39:47 pm
Post by: Starver on October 29, 2016, 05:49:59 pm
I've been cautious all along, and even probably stopped you from lynching EP and Fish. If we'd lynched anyone 'yestetday', would we have been even able to lynch them again today? Maybe I should have let you and gone ahead with my good work silently. Would you begrudge me joining the winners after putting my own role on a back-burner for so long? Maybe you would. Your choice.
Post by: hector13 on October 29, 2016, 06:59:25 pm
The problem being that 4 of us, presumably, don't need to worry about it, while you could easily lose us the game.
Post by: Starver on October 29, 2016, 07:12:40 pm
Was convinced there'd be someone trying to get us to do worse, so also no hurry to advertise my skill. Just about convinced that none of you are actually dangerous, after all, and thus left to me to plead my own case. Trusting that my ne, esis isn't amongst you,
(Suddenly a lot of conversation, which is good. Was really too inactive. It's out of my hands, now, though. Argue wiith Fish, maybe?)
Post by: hector13 on October 29, 2016, 07:16:12 pm
Post by: vishdafish on October 30, 2016, 03:09:52 am
Post by: hector13 on October 30, 2016, 03:14:51 am
Post by: Tomasque on October 31, 2016, 11:02:33 pm
Post by: Tomasque on November 01, 2016, 05:42:23 pm
Bonus Round
Night 3
hector13
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
No Lynch
(1) - TheBiggerFish
A thunderous boom echoes as the walls of reality are struck by the Paradox! Another hit, and your world will collapse.
Night 3
hector13
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
No Lynch
(1) - TheBiggerFish
A thunderous boom echoes as the walls of reality are struck by the Paradox! Another hit, and your world will collapse.
Post by: Tomasque on November 02, 2016, 02:08:07 pm
Bonus Round
Day 4
hector13
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Day ends Friday, 12:00 PM PDT
Friday 7:00 PM GMT
Day 4
hector13
(0)
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
Day ends Friday, 12:00 PM PDT
Friday 7:00 PM GMT
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 02, 2016, 02:27:10 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 02, 2016, 02:31:47 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 02, 2016, 02:36:20 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 02, 2016, 02:36:45 pm
Post by: Starver on November 02, 2016, 02:46:09 pm
So, I still have a chance to save you all. If the person who now knows all about me doesn't know enough to wriggle out of my healing powers.
Post by: vishdafish on November 03, 2016, 05:31:26 am
Post by: Starver on November 03, 2016, 06:14:56 am
Alphabetical thoughts...
EP's clones so far flipped are spoilers (getting in the way, but so far avoided being bad), not yet sure about Vishda. Depends on relationship to Hector as the other clones were to Fish as to whether EP is supposed to be Good/Neutral/Evil cloner? Run out of ckoning actions?
Fish, I'm inclined to see as innocent (no evidence of being liable to 'explode' like the clones), but as template for the clones could be ill-inclined. But that'd be a rubbish Evil. Sit around and wait for multiple copies of self to be created (especially after the first roleflips, and us now knowing exactly what to do, is that even likely?) for a win... Long, long shot.
Hector: Seems supported by Vishda. Has not caused Paradoxes, but might (especially with a copy of uncertain alliance) be playing the longer game. Has been looking a bit trigger-happy with the Elephant gun, potentially, and perhaps rightly annoyed by me and Fish. Maybe Ok, but uncertain. On balance.
Myself: Can't speculate as to my own status, as I know it, obviously, but for the sake of completeness I shall reiterate that I was resigned to not getting the associated win, if it was just a mechanics game, but if there's a bad guy then I have a purpose. Wondering if I should have held off being peacemaker/rationalist quite so vehemently, in the early stages. That may be my big error.
Vishdafish: Clone of Hector. Knows Hector's conditions. Like the other clones may have more (unrevealed) information than the original, but comes in late (and conditionally upon EP!) so not an 'original evil'. But a potential Spoiling Neutral that we could perhaps test further, may or may not help decide if originals Hector/EP (Hector always wanted to destroy EP, though I was reluctant) actually does what they appear to do....
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 12:56:36 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 12:57:14 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 04, 2016, 01:00:31 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 01:03:44 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 04, 2016, 01:08:06 pm
Why did you cause a paradox?I didn't intentionally.
Starver's Fix didn't Fix.
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 01:11:57 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 04, 2016, 01:24:31 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 01:29:22 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 04, 2016, 01:31:20 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 01:40:08 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 01:40:33 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 04, 2016, 01:42:32 pm
If I'm the Evil role, I wouldn't have done something that looked like it would have been Fixed to cause a paradox.
If I'm nit the Evil role, why are you trying to lynch me for being duped by them?
Alternatively, if he asked you to jump off a bridge...But he didn't.
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 01:44:33 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 04, 2016, 01:46:52 pm
You knew for sure it could be fixed? You knew for sure Starver would make the right decision on who to target to fix things?That was what they said, and having no information to the contrary, it looked like it bloody well made sense.
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 01:51:22 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 04, 2016, 01:53:16 pm
Also,Lynching me might very well end up turning me Evil.
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 01:54:04 pm
Post by: Starver on November 04, 2016, 01:54:45 pm
Hector, you know the time ng of these rounds better than anyone else in this game, and you come in at an hour to go and try to do something (having just checked myself; surprisingly easy given the lack of play today). You complain about my attemot to do good (maybe you didn't kniw it would fail) and you pick on Fish when it's me you might want to go for more. With your long times of inaction, except whIen you think you're not getting your own way, I'm guessing you need flipping. Vishdafish was my main suspicion, but you're talking yourself out of being the innocent one/evilly cloned picture and into the evil one/innocently cloned one. As this'll do nothing for today, let it stand as my opening statement tomorrow.
(Four/five ninja messages, reading them, nothing changes my considered opinion.l
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 04, 2016, 01:57:26 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 01:57:31 pm
obvscum
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 01:57:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 04, 2016, 02:00:06 pm
Post by: Tomasque on November 04, 2016, 06:32:59 pm
Round over - Scum Wins!
Votecount
hector13
(3) - Starver, TheBiggerFish, hector13
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
hector13 was Phil Connors
Votecount
hector13
(3) - Starver, TheBiggerFish, hector13
TheBiggerFish
(0)
Starver
(0)
Elephant Parade
(0)
vishdafish
(0)
hector13 was Phil Connors
Spoiler: Phil Connors (click to show/hide)
The walls of reality collapse, and a violent cacephony echoes through all of time. Then, there is only silence...
Starver gets one victory point.
Starver gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Unused Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on November 04, 2016, 06:43:04 pm
(Seriously though, guys, as the Uninformed Minority, I wasn't really imagining a win for most of the game. I played my innocent persona so much that I thought I very nearly put myself out of the option to win by helping you not Paradox. Also, by the time I worked out it was fictional characters, was going to claim "Marty McFly" character, being theoretically worried that Biff Tannen was going to Paradox me out of existence. But nobody ever bothered to ask. "Fix Glitch" was always my pretend skill, with just a slight change to my WinCon to match.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 04, 2016, 06:46:48 pm
well, that was interesting.
Post by: Tomasque on November 04, 2016, 06:49:43 pm
Post by: Starver on November 04, 2016, 06:55:54 pm
Post by: Tomasque on November 05, 2016, 12:11:29 am
But in all seriousness, I would like to thank Moonlit for joining and playing Mafia Marathon (you know, despite its bizarre concept & lengthy gameplay). You're a pretty cool guy, ya know?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 05, 2016, 02:18:42 am
Post by: Starver on November 05, 2016, 06:30:11 am
:P:'(
(Thanks for playing.)
DAMMIT I SHOULD'VE KNOWN.You might have, if I hadn't kept you alive and stopped you changing into the new character. But I had less idea about that bit than you, even. I'd no idea that it was the Jesuit reset that let me plausably claim I'd Fixed, nor the reset. And I was still waiting to go back to D0 again, near the end.
I don't know how Tomasque expected that round to turn out, but it was always going to be a clump of spaghetti, I think.
Post by: Tomasque on November 05, 2016, 02:30:44 pm
You guys have noticed that Starver always wins as scum, right? It's uncanny.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 05, 2016, 02:32:35 pm
Post by: Starver on November 05, 2016, 07:30:31 pm
You guys have noticed that Starver always wins as scum, right? It's uncanny.One of those instances was an "inverse town" one, to be fair. And, by my reckoning (having just blitzed through the game-ends), Hector has only ever won whilst Neutral, whilst I've only ever lost in that role... ;)
Post by: Tomasque on November 07, 2016, 12:46:30 pm
Post by: Starver on November 07, 2016, 12:52:10 pm
Get Mafiaing In Your Own Time.
Post by: hector13 on November 07, 2016, 01:17:54 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 07, 2016, 01:32:30 pm
Get Well Soon.
Get Mafiaing In Your Own Time.
Post by: vishdafish on November 08, 2016, 08:55:35 am
Out.
Post by: Tomasque on November 10, 2016, 07:53:17 pm
It is quiet on that night. A few walk the streets, in the cold light of the halogen lamps. One of them will stumble into a dark corner where no light shines - and will not return.
Darryl Cricket is part of the game. They are an NPC. They cannot speak, but can be targeted & voted normally.
Post by: Tomasque on November 13, 2016, 05:04:06 pm
The court is brought in session by Judge hector13.
Spoiler: Judge (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Defendant (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Plaintiff (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Witness (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Inspector (click to show/hide)
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
Not Voting: hector13
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 05:19:16 pm
TBF: What is your wincon?
Everyone: Does your public spoiler contain any falsehoods?
I have one really, really important piece of information, but I'm waiting on mod confirmation to see if I'm allowed to say it. I'm pretty sure I am, but...
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 05:20:59 pm
Post by: Starver on November 13, 2016, 05:29:26 pm
My stated character conditions were also changed (and/or added to) betwixt night-start and conclusion.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 13, 2016, 05:40:34 pm
And by interesting I mean WTF.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 13, 2016, 06:09:31 pm
Well this is interesting.Yes.
And by interesting I mean WTF.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 13, 2016, 06:16:52 pm
The evidence should back this up.
I have not been told of a change to my wincon, which should be the same as it is normally.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 06:32:02 pm
I know I made no action to kill Darryl Cricket.Would you mind explicitly stating it? I think I know what you mean, but I'd appreciate a full response in case I misunderstood.
The evidence should back this up.
I have not been told of a change to my wincon, which should be the same as it is normally.
Okay, I got the go-ahead. So, hector13, do you promise to lynch someone today?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 13, 2016, 06:34:27 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 06:34:59 pm
Why do you need me to explicitly state the Town wincon?I dunno. Why are you so against it?
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 06:35:41 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 13, 2016, 07:02:44 pm
No, sorry, I was perhaps being a bit paranoid. This round is weird.
But yeah, the wincon is
Wincon: You win if the Evil role is eliminated.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 07:04:38 pm
Hm?Okay, now I'm being paranoid, but I still have to make this request: state your wincon has your wincon, without a quote. There's a 90% chance that this is a massive waste of everyone's time, in which case I apologize, but that other 10% is always there.
No, sorry, I was perhaps being a bit paranoid. This round is weird.
But yeah, the wincon isWincon: You win if the Evil role is eliminated.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 07:05:18 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 13, 2016, 07:10:46 pm
...Yes, that's it.Hm?Okay, now I'm being paranoid, but I still have to make this request: state your wincon has your wincon, without a quote. There's a 90% chance that this is a massive waste of everyone's time, in which case I apologize, but that other 10% is always there.
No, sorry, I was perhaps being a bit paranoid. This round is weird.
But yeah, the wincon isWincon: You win if the Evil role is eliminated.
EP/Starver-as-evidence-custodian:Why should we trust you? The mod can lie.
Remember that round with the weird Cyrillic-name role where the votecounts were forged?
Heck, what if the results from your ability just aren't sane?
Post by: hector13 on November 13, 2016, 07:24:00 pm
I know I made no action to kill Darryl Cricket.Would you mind explicitly stating it? I think I know what you mean, but I'd appreciate a full response in case I misunderstood.
The evidence should back this up.
I have not been told of a change to my wincon, which should be the same as it is normally.
Okay, I got the go-ahead. So, hector13, do you promise to lynch someone today?
I promise.
I get to be totally unbiased and impartial in this round <3
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 07:25:58 pm
No, you're still not doing it—you're referring to my quote, this time. Please state your wincon in a way that could not possibly be misinterpreted and without referring to external sentences, quotes, or other text. This isn't hard....Yes, that's it.Hm?Okay, now I'm being paranoid, but I still have to make this request: state your wincon has your wincon, without a quote. There's a 90% chance that this is a massive waste of everyone's time, in which case I apologize, but that other 10% is always there.
No, sorry, I was perhaps being a bit paranoid. This round is weird.
But yeah, the wincon isWincon: You win if the Evil role is eliminated.
(An example: "I win if I survive until the end of the round.")
I feel vaguely like you're going to break your promise, but sure:I know I made no action to kill Darryl Cricket.Would you mind explicitly stating it? I think I know what you mean, but I'd appreciate a full response in case I misunderstood.
The evidence should back this up.
I have not been told of a change to my wincon, which should be the same as it is normally.
Okay, I got the go-ahead. So, hector13, do you promise to lynch someone today?
I promise.
Starver visited Darryl Cricket on Night 0.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 13, 2016, 07:30:11 pm
Geez.
Starver:What did you do to Darryl?
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 07:34:34 pm
My wincon is that I win if the Evil role is eliminated.Jesus Christ, that took forever.
FallacyofUrist: Were you able to use your action N0? What results did you get?
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 07:58:27 pm
EP/Starver-as-evidence-custodian:Why should we trust you? The mod can lie.It sounds like you're asking less why you should trust us and more why you should trust our results. IMO it'd be pretty strange if our results were flawed, since they're so vague to begin with: we don't know whether Starver killed Dull NPCName, but only that he visited them.
If nothing else, our results are a point of discussion.
Quote
Heck, what if the results from your ability just aren't sane?That seems unlikely, since Starver explicitly acknowledged that they'd be bad for him. ...We should be able to clear that up soon enough, though?
I feel like you're trying to create doubt for the sake of doubt (i.e. WIFOM, except with bastard mechanics instead of motives, so BAFOM or something), though I'm obviously prejudiced by your earlier evasiveness.
Tomasque: If I need to, like, explicitly acknowledge that I'm going for True Reveal or whatever, consider this sentence the acknowledgement.
Starver: Do your part of the confirmation process, please.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 08:00:01 pm
I know what EP is going to say (unless it's even more bastard, but I also presume that EP completely knows that I know), and I know that this doesn't quite match what I was originally informed. This is going to be interesting.He didn't acknowledge that it would be bad for him. I'm not sure why I thought that? Weird.
My stated character conditions were also changed (and/or added to) betwixt night-start and conclusion.
I did know that he knew. I'm curious what you mean by "this doesn't quite match what [you] were originally informed", though, Starver.
Post by: hector13 on November 13, 2016, 08:11:41 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 13, 2016, 08:16:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 13, 2016, 08:17:09 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 08:34:21 pm
Ah... At least according to the night results, only Starver can request a true reveal.The True Reveal mechanics I was PM'd state that the start of the process is me stating something. What I'm supposed to state is ambiguous, so I covered my bases with that post.
EP: why is TBF's wincon sans quotes and such so important?Well, we didn't (and don't, obviously) know his wincon, so I thought I might as well ask him. He answered, but he phrased it really oddly:
I have not been told of a change to my wincon, which should be the same as it is normally.I thought it possible that shenanigans were going on, so I chose to dig deeper. In the end, nothing came of it (probably—it's possible that FoU is a statement evaluator/TBF thought he was/etc.), but I felt it to be worth pushing him on.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 08:42:48 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 08:54:47 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 13, 2016, 10:11:18 pm
TBF: Could you post your full role as a quote from Tomasque? IIRC he's said we're allowed to do that; feel free to get confirmation if you're not sure.I'd rather not.
@hector:Nothing in particular. I was being paranoid, honestly.
@EP:I was expecting something more interesting than that prior to the release of the evidence. Like, you know, 'It was FallacyofUrist, in the kitchen, with a candlestick.' or something.
Honestly I feel like I've been playing into the flavor a bit much.
Everyone:Ignoring flavor, who are your scumspects?
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 10:20:47 pm
Quote
Everyone:Ignoring flavor, who are your scumspects?Well, let's see here! Assuming the spoilers aren't blatant lies, I'm left with two options:
- you
- Starver
You've been pretty suspicious, but the evidence currently points towards Starver. In the end, I still think you did it.
Also: "ignoring flavour"? Do you mean... the rolenames? Because I would hardly call those "flavour". I have seen basically no flavour, otherwise.
(If I was to disregard the mechanics entirely, I'd find FoU's total lack of activity rather suspicious. But, y'know, I'm not going to do that. I still do find it a bit suspicious, but it's possible he's just busy.)
Unrelated: Please space your colons properly.
Quote
I'd rather not.I'd rather you did, and, last I checked, you're the one on trial! Care to explain why you'd rather not?
And, if you're still unwilling: Please at least claim your night action.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 10:24:51 pm
non-responseTBF: Could you post your full role as a quote from Tomasque? IIRC he's said we're allowed to do that; feel free to get confirmation if you're not sure.I'd rather not.
Quote
@hector:Nothing in particular. I was being paranoid, honestly.non-response
Quote
@EP:I was expecting something more interesting than that prior to the release of the evidence. Like, you know, 'It was FallacyofUrist, in the kitchen, with a candlestick.' or something.joke response
Quote
Honestly I feel like I've been playing into the flavor a bit much.vague comment on own playstyle
Quote
Everyone:Ignoring flavor, who are your scumspects?generic reads question with nonsensical qualifier
TBF: I'm curious: Why were you "paranoid" about explicitly posting your own wincon? What harm could possibly come of it, if it's merely "lynch evildude"?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 13, 2016, 10:29:25 pm
... One in four if we're hoping Tomasque wouldn't make the kingmaker the Evil role, but there are such things as corrupt judges too. Or fake roles because secret autos or something. I mean, those have happened too.
Because it's not a trial, it's a game of Mafia, and claiming randomly helps scum, EP.
I acted on Hector last night.
(I actually have RL stuff to do, and in the next 1.5 hours, so excuse me until then.)
@Ninja!EP:I seriously was expecting more...Evidence-y evidence than that, though.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 10:47:58 pm
Quote
Last I checked, I have a one in five chance of being guilty, assuming any of us actually did kill this NPC.The "nobody is guilty" gimmick already happened, and wouldn't fit with the shown wincons at all. It's technically possible, I suppose, but only with extreme, not-yet-seen bastardry—so we probably shouldn't worry about it.
Just in case: Do any of you Town people have an additional, alternative "survive" wincon?
Also, you've earned extra suspicion points: If your wincon really was to lynch the Evil role, it should have been obvious that this was impossible (wincons never lie outright, even if they often mislead by omission; if your only wincon was to lynch the Evil role and the setup was as you suggested, winning would be impossible). I suppose it could also have been a logical error, but +suspicion for you.
Last I checked, I have a one in five chance of being guilty, assuming any of us actually did kill this NPC.What? No. That isn't how probability works. Stop.
... One in four if we're hoping Tomasque wouldn't make the kingmaker the Evil role, but there are such things as corrupt judges too. Or fake roles because secret autos or something. I mean, those have happened too.
Like, let me break this down: This is basically as far from equal odds as you can get. Why? Because assuming this round's opening post is not blatantly lying to us (which is not guaranteed, but is certainly likely), there are two possible Evil roles: you and Starver. Now, even after we acknowledge the possibility of the opening post being accurate, we still—
Actually, no—this is stupid. There are Mafia situations which can be condensed into probability; this is not one of them.
Quote
Because it's not a trial, it's a game of Mafia, and claiming randomly helps scum, EP....The "last I checked, you're on trial" thing was, like, a witticism. Not a very good one, apparently, but it certainly shouldn't have been taken so hyper-literally.
The point is that you can't just say "I'd rather not"—you need to at least explain why you didn't claim. You could have said "I can't claim because revealing some of the information in my role would be anti-town", but you didn't, instead opting to give the most useless, information-less response possible.
Also, I didn't ask you to claim "randomly"; I asked you to claim because your role is a total mystery to me, and I assumed that the "hey, you don't actually need to claim if it'd be super-bad for town" was implied. I didn't make it explicit because I figured you were more likely to be scum and I didn't want to give you ideas, but it's always an option.
Quote
I acted on Hector last night.
I suppose that the question was the slightest bit ambiguous, though I still believe most people would have reached my conclusion. I acknowledge that your response, though not what I wanted, may not have been a deliberate attempt at evasion.
Quote
@Ninja!EP:I seriously was expecting more...Evidence-y evidence than that, though.
...Rereading, I suppose you could argue that "it" is implied to be murder, but still.
okay fine "it" is totally meant to refer to murder; I jumped the gun on that one
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 10:49:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 13, 2016, 11:14:56 pm
Also, you're not off the hit-list, bub. A witness by definition was at the scene of the crime.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 13, 2016, 11:24:05 pm
Quote
Also, you're not off the hit-list, bub. A witness by definition was at the scene of the crime.I don't believe I ever said I was? I mentioned that Starver and TBF were the only two possibilities if the wincons contained in this round's opening post are accurate, but that's it.
Post by: hector13 on November 13, 2016, 11:41:40 pm
Do any of you Town people have an additional, alternative "survive" wincon?
Interesting word choice. I take it you are not Town, then?
Also, you've earned extra suspicion points: If your wincon really was to lynch the Evil role, it should have been obvious that this was impossible (wincons never lie outright, even if they often mislead by omission; if your only wincon was to lynch the Evil role and the setup was as you suggested, winning would be impossible). I suppose it could also have been a logical error, but +suspicion for you.
What do you mean by the bolded part?
QuoteAlso, you're not off the hit-list, bub. A witness by definition was at the scene of the crime.I don't believe I ever said I was? I mentioned that Starver and TBF were the only two possibilities if the wincons contained in this round's opening post are accurate, but that's it.
What's the difference? By the spoilers, you're not clear either. Evil role generally has to survive 'til the end.
Precisely clarify the information you received last night, and how you received it. Where you told Starver was the only visitor to the NPC? Did you have to use a night action to get these results? If so, what was the action?
TBF
What action did you perform on me last night?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 13, 2016, 11:54:22 pm
Does scum's wincon have anything to do with this trial at all?
Post by: hector13 on November 13, 2016, 11:58:19 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 14, 2016, 12:03:31 am
@earlier post:I tried to watch you, but got no result.
Post by: hector13 on November 14, 2016, 12:09:45 am
What does your watch ability tell you?
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 14, 2016, 12:13:24 am
Quote
Interesting word choice. I take it you are not Town, then?Ah, no—I'm Neutral; I need to survive until the end of the round. I want to get the Evil Role lynched so they can't kill me, though, so I'm Town-ish. (Assuming they have a kill, that is; if they don't, I need to merely ensure that I'm not lynched before them, which seems a bit easy.)
Quote
What do you mean by the bolded part?That he should have known his theory—"there isn't a killer"—is impossible, if he really had "lynch Evil" as his wincon.
Quote
What's the difference? By the spoilers, you're not clear either. Evil role generally has to survive 'til the end.Oh, right, I'm not actually listed as Neutral in the round's original post. I overlooked that, actually, since the wincons match the typical alignments fairly well.
(the following text block is based on faulty 9 PM logic and should be ignored)
Okay, I don't think I can prove that I'm not the Evil role based on visible wincons, though I might be wrong about that. In the morning, when I'm a bit more coherent, I should be able to explain why I'm probably not the evil role, but I'm too sleepy for logic stuff right now.
Quote
Precisely clarify the information you received last night, and how you received it. Where you told Starver was the only visitor to the NPC? Did you have to use a night action to get these results? If so, what was the action?
Well, first of all, I got this PM sometime during Night 0 (?):
You are loitering around, when suddenly you see Starver visiting Darryl Cricket. Soon, you are called into a court case!(I'm pretty sure it's redundant, but I'm including it for completion's sake, just in case.)
Just before Day 1 started, I got the following PM:
Quote
You have gained the following ability:(Prior to this point, I had no abilities; see my Role PM:)
(a/d) Things Seen: You know who visited Darryl Cricket on Night 0. You may True Reveal (reveal with mod confirmation) this information anytime you may speak.
Starver visited Darryl Cricket on Night 0.
Quote
Witness
It seemed to be a night like any other. You had no idea what you'd end up seeing
Archetype: Neutral role
Wincon: You win if you survive until the end of the round.
Also, I got a clarification at one point:
Quote
True Reveals happen anytime the Revealer can speak, and the Revealer must say it (i.e. the Witness), and then the person in control of the True Reveal decides to conform it.
Does scum's wincon have anything to do with this trial at all?How could it not? The trial is the lynch, after all.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 14, 2016, 12:21:16 am
@EP:Again I ask: What do you think scum's wincon is?
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 14, 2016, 12:24:47 am
@EP:No, the trial is flavor that gives hector instant hammering abilities. I'm rather suspicious of that, honestly. The lynch and the trial aren't really much linked...
Quote
@EP:Again I ask: What do you think scum's wincon is?Either to kill everyone else (if they have a kill) or to cause n mislynches (if they don't). I'm leaning heavily towards "they have a kill", since A) hector13's role talks about what happens if he dies, and B) my wincon is to survive until the end of the game. Neither of these things prove they have a kill, per se, but it'd make a lot more sense that way.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 14, 2016, 12:25:52 am
Post by: Starver on November 14, 2016, 12:56:16 am
My wincon is that I win if the Evil role is eliminated.I did nothing.
Geez.
Starver:What did you do to Darryl?
You visit Darryl Cricket, but before you can complete your action, you are called to a court case!
Yes, that is the full, uncut response to my pre-Plaintiff action (not making me less suspicious) and there was even a leading space in that quote.
That aside...
Tomasque: If I need to, like, explicitly acknowledge that I'm going for True Reveal or whatever, consider this sentence the acknowledgement.Tomsque: However it works, work the True Reveal
Starver: Do your part of the confirmation process, please.
Personally (meta) I think Darryl (or Daryl or Daryll, there has been confusion about this ;) ) was not killed by anyone. Our Mr (or Ms?) Cricket was always intended to die, part of the reason I decided to visit them before they did. That didn't work out.
In-game, my public Wincon seems to require me to indite Fish, regardless, but I'm not even sure that's in best interest of Town. (I am Town, but I don't have a Town wincon. I should be (benign?) Neutral, by most counts.) I don't know how I'm going to work this, because I don't yet really know what game is being played. I'd probably lynch me if I weren't me, @Hector, but being me I know I shouldn't.
Let's see where this leads.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 14, 2016, 12:57:57 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 14, 2016, 12:59:23 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 14, 2016, 01:00:44 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 14, 2016, 01:01:42 am
Post by: Starver on November 14, 2016, 01:15:43 am
EP/Starver-as-evidence-custodian:Why should we trust you? The mod can lie.As far as I'm concerned (personal meta, again), I wish you couldn't trust me. I have in my own hands the means of self-destruction, if you believe (which isn't a given) that I was the only visitor. Or that any visit caused the death.
Remember that round with the weird Cyrillic-name role where the votecounts were forged?
Heck, what if the results from your ability just aren't sane?
In-character, I ought to rule the evidence as "Incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial!" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton_Burger), or something.
Post by: Starver on November 14, 2016, 01:21:42 am
* I've still got a lot of the Ameripol thread to read, and.. I don't know how to tell you all this... I'll also be seeing a second Mafia, as a replacement, and I'm still not half way through the 53 pages of back-history. Now, we both knew when we entered this relationship that we were still free to see other Mafias, but I thought you better hear it from me, if you don't already know from other quarters... :P
Post by: Tomasque on November 14, 2016, 09:16:44 am
Starver visited Darryl Cricket on Night 0.I confirm this is true.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 14, 2016, 09:22:12 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 14, 2016, 09:24:59 am
FallacyofUrist: Were you able to use your action N0? What results did you get?
Yes, I was able to act N0, but I wasn't able to get a result because apparently, the court was called into session before I could finish.
For the record, I did my thing to hector13.
Post by: hector13 on November 14, 2016, 10:09:34 am
What does your watch ability tell you?
TBF: y'all going to answer the question?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 14, 2016, 10:47:49 am
Post by: Starver on November 14, 2016, 12:25:20 pm
Starver: What did you attempt to do to Darryl?It was a service linked to my Wincon, which I thought the NPC might find useful. Now I believe I know who will find it useful (ironic, Tomasque! YKWIM!) but that's just a theory.
I think it is important that I do my thing for the right single person. I am willing to risk a mistrial called and posdibly becoming defendent myself to accomplish this. Whether that's through Hector commanding NoLynch and night mechanics happening or Hector's 'lynch' on me bringing me into the dock, I don't know. I'll risk either, with so little info, but the latter would be the riskiest.
Fall-back theory is that there's SuperSecret rolestuff involved, for all of us, but that way madness lies.
Post by: hector13 on November 14, 2016, 07:26:41 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 14, 2016, 08:10:27 pm
Post by: Starver on November 14, 2016, 08:17:41 pm
Who is the right single person?I think I'll say... That's horribly endangering but, if game gives extra roles, fresh inditement should help.
Perhaps. My initial meta-thoughts could be wrong.
Post by: hector13 on November 14, 2016, 08:36:15 pm
Post by: Starver on November 14, 2016, 09:21:02 pm
You as judge could be a Hanging Judge, but then you get an auto day-kill (unstoppable? Assuming it is a kill, and I'm not convinced of that) which sounds too inexorable without some serious counter-role. I think you're an honest uninformed (majority?/minority?) character who is expected not to just murder us all in plain sight.
Fish as bad guy in exactly the right position to lose, D1? That'd mean someone (other than me, who definitely didn't) got the crucial choice right from the start. Chances of that? Not zero, but not likely.
Myself, had I not been seen attempting to visit the poor unfortunate, would have had just one simple job, as far as the rest of you are concerned, and that's to push Fish as the villain. I could have done many things (still could have, there's plenty of fictions I could adopt, much better than the details and mod confirmations I've already given) and jumped at that result. But I don't think that's the game result we need.
EP looks like he just has to survive. Like me and maybe others with revealed wincons, probably that's a subset of the full character-sheet. But not surehow like me. Too much coincidentally useful info to believe that we've gotten eberything out of the Witness role, in one go.
Fallacy, like you, also looks too superficially simple to just be that.
Which is why I think convicting Fish is the obvious trap. And at least some thought has to be considered as to whether our one and only witness has the one and only useful result. Best guess, Fish as Defendent might indeed suffer immediately if judged guilty, anybody else (including me, as obvious one) fingered by judgement might just get swapped into the Defendent position, if there's not a completely different mechanism for that (the one that chose Fish, N0, and maybe even chose the rest of us for our parts, to greater or lesser degrees). But what will the Witness (EP, or not EP? That is the question..) find to add, N1, now that the obvious stooge is dead already?
I considered the possibility that my visiting our NPC over N0 was an unintended derail move, by me, but I was not disallowed from doing so (had a backup visit suggested, even) so it must be not as game-breaking or unfashionably early an action as it that theory would indicate.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 14, 2016, 09:41:04 pm
- Elephant Parade: no duh
- hector13: Barring significant bastardry/a town player secretly having a killing roll, a scum Judge would be impossible to kill, since they'd control the lynch.
- FoU: I don't think that the investigator would be Evil, but Fallacy's been pretty passive; if you hadn't specifically asked me to focus on the night results, I'd have ranked him below Starver.
- Starver: One of two possible Evil players, assuming that the shown wincons aren't lying to us. I rank him above TBF because the latter has been hilariously evasive, but I'm getting really bad vibes from him; if I was to go with my gut, I'd vote him in a heartbeat. His playstyle feels similar—sorta vague/mysterious/not-very-useful—to how it did in the bonus round (in which he was the Evil role).
- TBF: The other "non-bastard" Evil player. He's been extremely evasive and generally suspicious. I'd accuse him of activelurking, too, but that's apparently a part of his playstyle—which, I might add, I hate with a burning passion. I'm going to take a step back to make sure I'm not just hypertunneling him, but I think he might actually be guilty.
Quote
But what will the Witness (EP, or not EP? That is the question..) find to add, N1, now that the obvious stooge is dead already?Probably nothing; my ability refers specifically to N0, after all.
Post by: Tomasque on November 14, 2016, 09:52:54 pm
I'm waiting on a reply from Tomasque, byraway.For what? I must have missed it.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 14, 2016, 10:02:19 pm
FoU: I don't think that the investigator would be Evil, but Fallacy's been pretty passive; if you hadn't specifically asked me to focus on the night results, I'd have ranked him below Starver.This round is... confusing as all heck. I don't think I have much to contribute other than my night action, which tracks the target...
Anybody have any ideas for who would be best to target this night?
Post by: Starver on November 14, 2016, 10:10:16 pm
[My, Starver's] playstyle feels similar—sorta vague/mysterious/not-very-useful—to how it did in the bonus round (in which he was the Evil role).I need to point out that I was deliberately trying to act like I think I normally play as Town, to the extent that I very nearly stopped myself from winning. Now that I'm unforced playing Town, I can see how that might ge confusing, but I'll take it as a complement, even if it kills me.. ;)
Quote
That (so far as I recall) isn't a detail that you or Tomasque has revealed... Interesting that this is so, however. I was tempted to invite you to watch my next visit (at the risk of alerting the wrong character(s)), but that's now off the table, you say...QuoteBut what will the Witness (EP, or not EP? That is the question..) find to add, N1, now that the obvious stooge is dead already?Probably nothing; my ability refers specifically to N0, after all.
(Ninja!)
Could have been a scum-stall, you know. If so, I hope you 'find' the 'private message' you missed. ;)I'm waiting on a reply from Tomasque, byraway.For what? I must have missed it.
(Ni ja2)
I don't even know what you do, but looks like you're a better cop than EP. If you follow (or just role/whatever-investigate), I give you the option (your choice, don't tell anyone, even me) of following me to check that what I do has a probably legit outcome. If you're a Watcher, I'd need to tell you where I'm going (and you could just as easily keep an eye on someone else if I've diverted everyone else somewhere). If you're scum, you'll have your own ideas how to play this.FoU: I don't think that the investigator would be Evil, but Fallacy's been pretty passive; if you hadn't specifically asked me to focus on the night results, I'd have ranked him below Starver.This round is... confusing as all heck. I don't think I have much to contribute other than my night action, which tracks the target...
Anybody have any ideas for who would be best to target this night?
Post by: hector13 on November 14, 2016, 11:37:43 pm
- TBF is up for the murder of Mr. NPC. He claims to have visited me, and got no result. Is there anything you'd like to add as to why you got no result?
- Starver's wincon is for TBF to be convicted of said crime, but does not appear to want this to happen. Why?
- EP witnessed Starver visiting Mr. NPC on the night they died. This has been confirmed as true by the mod, at the behest of Starver. Stalling action? I don't think Starver has ever mentioned what it is their action does... /hintnudgewink
If there's anything I'm missing, feel free to add to the list, but try to be brief, and discuss them. I'd like to make a decision by tomorrow evening. I do have someone in mind for this, but I don't want to colour perceptions and say who it is.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 15, 2016, 12:50:34 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 15, 2016, 12:55:16 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 15, 2016, 12:57:05 am
Post by: Starver on November 15, 2016, 11:57:28 am
EP witnessed Starver visiting Mr. NPC on the night they died. This has been confirmed as true by the mod, at the behest of Starver. Stalling action? I don't think Starver has ever mentioned what it is their action does... /hintnudgewink
My original action and original wincon, as Town, is something I can't believe is intrinsically harmful to Town win, if used correctly, but could be misaimed. If the wrong person learnt of it and tried to turn my action to their benevit under the guise of providing sage fellow-Townie advice.
I will say that my informationless N0 thoughts were that perhaps helping Cricket was the ultimate purpose, against the anti-Town A. N. Other. (The possibility of Cricket being anti-Town and my helping them against us was also in mi nd, but seems disproven by the NPC's death. So that bullet was dodged.) It was unfortunate that I got myself implicated, but that does actually somewhat support my further assertions.
The public wincon and purpose of the trial, on the other hand, seems like something granted by another night action, not a game-starting setup. As reported, I got summoned to the trial before being able to try to assist Cricket (but after I chose to). Therevs a much higher chance that this new task of being Plaintiff to the case for which the single bit of evidence is of my own vague involvement was made to happen by a third party. That it interferes badly with the circumstances of the evidence makes it unlikely that it's me (with the power of the evidence-confirmation, willingly given) the Witness (who provides said evidence in the first place), the defendent (who, without the evidence that they can't control, would havr put themselves in the firing line for unknown reasons) and I think that mod-proclaimed Townies who are Detective and Judge have too much obvious power (especially you as Judge) to realistically be the devious minority and self-intentionally in tnose positions of power, without further conflicting skills like untriability or something in the game already, stalling their respective inevitable rampages across the helpless Townie groups.
Thus I respectfully submit that more data is needed. This trial is a farce, triggered by someone (maybe good, maybe evil!) on obviously erroneous circumstances, leaving me as both chief 'public opinion' suspect and the one for some reason demanding justice against Fish. Either a NoLynch acquittal or (riskier) a lynch judgement against me (contempt of court, and new trial?) might reveal the true purpose of this marsupial magistratial meeting. Or such are my tboughts.
I could reveal more about my basic role, but I feel I ought to see if any of the above means anything to anyone else, first. e.g. are you the person that selected the judicious line-up, for Uninformed Townie reasons? If that's the kind of thing you'd want to reveal, I would definitely reciprocate with more detail, but if nobody wants to (for legitimate or selfish reasons) then I won't let loose the personal information that I think would help entirely the wrong person. And risk being seen as a villain and a cad, for all that. Risk lynching, even, though that would remove my skill. Better unused than misused, I think.
Post by: hector13 on November 15, 2016, 08:37:09 pm
Convince me to vote for someone before bedtime. 4 hours.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 15, 2016, 08:51:05 pm
I don't really know.
Post by: Starver on November 15, 2016, 09:37:07 pm
Objectively, I'd say your viewpoints should be thinking NoLynch, above all with me as next obvious option, before touring the rest of you according to where you yourself lie. Personally, I have a vague "worse than me" order of suspicions, but even in my mind I am not fully commiting to those until I see more.
But I'll continue to go against character about Fish. Consider if Fish is evil and also set up the courtroom roles, that'd be the last thing we should consider fulfiling on face value. If someone else did, then how do they even know they got the right defendent? If instead an evil has set up Fish as fall-guy, again, we probably shouldn't do that.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 15, 2016, 11:14:34 pm
Starver:Are you willing to claim what your action was supposed to do?
Post by: hector13 on November 16, 2016, 12:42:11 am
Else I'll random lynch one of y'all, so pick a number between one and four. First come, first dibs!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 16, 2016, 12:53:08 am
Post by: Starver on November 16, 2016, 02:02:53 am
Starver:Are you willing to claim what your action was supposed to do?I keep saying no, not as it currently stands. Implicitly and explicitly.
Latest example, abbreviated:
My original action and original wincon, as Town, is something I can't believe is intrinsically harmful to Town win, if used correctly, but could be misaimed. If the wrong person learnt of it and tried to turn my action to their benevit under the guise of providing sage fellow-Townie advice.
[…]
I could reveal more about my basic role, but I feel I ought to see if any of the above means anything to anyone else, first. e.g. are you the person that selected the judicious line-up, for Uninformed Townie reasons? If that's the kind of thing you'd want to reveal, I would definitely reciprocate with more detail, but if nobody wants to (for legitimate or selfish reasons) then I won't let loose the personal information that I think would help entirely the wrong person. And risk being seen as a villain and a cad, for all that. Risk lynching, even, though that would remove my skill. Better unused than misused, I think.
(How perverse that when I have an easy lie ready to cover my Mafia ass, nobody even asks. But when I am Town and I don't want to lie, or say anything at all, nobody stops asking. Random Lie -> "I'm a blocker, I was blocking Darryl Cricket by serving an injuction on him, not trusting the Mod to use an NPC in a neutral manner, but he died before I got there." Happy? Or maybe I'm an investigator and I was just watching his apartment. No, wait, I was posing as a plumber to bug his phone to discover his contacts. Or I was there to pass him a gun (ironically a 1-shot), perhaps he shot himself with it. Or I was supposed to drive him somewhere, in my taxi. Perhaps I was the lead investigator, which is why I got the plaintiff gig. He was my client, as Attorney At Law and I'm now required to resolve his death due to a codicil in his will. I'm a Jehovah's Witness. I did not actually visit him, but I had overcoat stolen by an individual identifying themselves as a Mr T. B. Fish, esquire. My 'True Reveal' ability is a 1-shot skill and I don't want to waste it on deconfirming a blatent lie, I demand EP tells the truth. ...so, so easy. No, nothing after that arrow is true.)
Post by: hector13 on November 16, 2016, 09:32:04 pm
Post by: Starver on November 16, 2016, 10:19:42 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 16, 2016, 10:22:35 pm
Post by: Tomasque on November 17, 2016, 01:07:22 pm
The judge reaches his verdict.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (1) - hector13
Elephant Parade (0)
Starver was found Guilty
Starver was the Plaintiff
Spoiler: Plaintiff (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on November 19, 2016, 04:33:55 pm
The case resumes the next day.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
Not Voting: hector13
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 19, 2016, 04:35:18 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 19, 2016, 04:38:58 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 19, 2016, 05:14:36 pm
Nobody died.
I guess I get to make another mistake on who to lynch then?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 19, 2016, 06:27:17 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 19, 2016, 06:40:05 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 19, 2016, 06:44:49 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 19, 2016, 06:47:37 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 19, 2016, 06:49:49 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 19, 2016, 07:19:45 pm
Well, I saw them going somewhere. I don't know where. I presume it was visiting you.Wow, that has to be the least useful ability ever. You can tell... if your target leaves the house? And literally nothing else? I mean, in some circumstances it might help to rule out killers, but you're set up to be suspicious from the start, so...
Yeah, I'm not buying it, personally.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 19, 2016, 07:36:40 pm
No. I tracked Fish last night. He visited... nobody.
Post by: hector13 on November 19, 2016, 08:25:52 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 19, 2016, 08:32:56 pm
Soooo... what does TBF have to say 'bout that?
*that is to say, my target was hector, but my action doesn't visit.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 19, 2016, 08:35:50 pm
Mainly because from what he's saying, he's just a less powerful version of me. That doesn't seem right.
Post by: hector13 on November 19, 2016, 08:36:12 pm
Soooo... what does TBF have to say 'bout that?*that is to say, my target was hector, but my action doesn't visit.
Convenient.
What's your action again, FoU?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 19, 2016, 08:37:20 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 19, 2016, 08:41:27 pm
FoU: tell me why I shouldn't lynch you.
EP: tell me why I shouldn't lynch you. You are top of the list 'cause wtf are you doing to the alignment of the words man.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 19, 2016, 08:46:57 pm
Because the thing at the start of the round made it clear I was the investigator.
Because I'm useful.
Because Fish is a much better target than me.
Post by: hector13 on November 19, 2016, 09:11:37 pm
Because I'm not scum.Prove it.
Because the thing at the start of the round made it clear I was the investigator.Bastard mod.
Because I'm useful.How so?
Because Fish is a much better target than me.On what grounds?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 20, 2016, 06:58:34 pm
Because I'm not scum.[1] Prove it.Because the thing at the start of the round made it clear I was the investigator.[2] Bastard mod.Because I'm useful.[3] How so?Because Fish is a much better target than me.[4] On what grounds?
[1]: Can you prove that you're not scum? Pointless question. Unless you have a way to do that.
[2]: S'pose.
[3]: I refer you to my track ability. It should be fairly easy to verify.
[4]:
Fish seems fishy.
Mainly because from what he's saying, he's just a less powerful version of me. That doesn't seem right.
Post by: hector13 on November 20, 2016, 07:10:09 pm
Because I'm not scum.[1] Prove it.Because the thing at the start of the round made it clear I was the investigator.[2] Bastard mod.Because I'm useful.[3] How so?Because Fish is a much better target than me.[4] On what grounds?
[1]: Can you prove that you're not scum? Pointless question. Unless you have a way to do that.
[2]: S'pose.
[3]: I refer you to my track ability. It should be fairly easy to verify.
[4]:Fish seems fishy.
Mainly because from what he's saying, he's just a less powerful version of me. That doesn't seem right.
1. About as pointless as saying "I'm not scum"?
3. TBF's skill is more verifiable than your ability at the moment, though the claim is weakened muchly by EP's revelation of what happened during the night.
4. There are various different types of watcher ability. Some say if someone performed an action and what that action was, some say who they performed an action on, some say if they had an action performed on them.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 20, 2016, 07:17:26 pm
1. About as pointless as saying "I'm not scum"?[1]: Until a method of proving me town is determined, yes.
3. TBF's skill is more verifiable than your ability at the moment, though the claim is weakened muchly by EP's revelation of what happened during the night.
4. There are various different types of watcher ability. Some say if someone performed an action and what that action was, some say who they performed an action on, some say if they had an action performed on them.
[3]: How so(to both)? I would even say my ability is more verifiable. Fish can tell if somebody acted. I can tell if somebody acted, and who they targeted.
[4]: Then what type is Fish's?
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 20, 2016, 07:23:06 pm
EP: tell me why I shouldn't lynch you. You are top of the list 'cause wtf are you doing to the alignment of the words man.
- I think I've done a decent job of helping out the town.
- I've immediately released all information I've received, and I think most of it has been proven?
- I claimed Survivor very early (I only didn't claim it immediately because I thought it was in the round's opening post). I suppose you could argue it to be some sort of gambit, but it certainly isn't suspicious.
- And now, for the classic Hey What About These Guys? Defence: FoU has been super inactive, and TBF has been super suspicious.
Post by: hector13 on November 20, 2016, 08:06:03 pm
1. It's your burden to prove it.1. About as pointless as saying "I'm not scum"?[1]: Until a method of proving me town is determined, yes.
3. TBF's skill is more verifiable than your ability at the moment, though the claim is weakened muchly by EP's revelation of what happened during the night.
4. There are various different types of watcher ability. Some say if someone performed an action and what that action was, some say who they performed an action on, some say if they had an action performed on them.
[3]: How so(to both)? I would even say my ability is more verifiable. Fish can tell if somebody acted. I can tell if somebody acted, and who they targeted.
[4]: Then what type is Fish's?
2. His results gel with what EP said. It is weakened because EP revealed his results before TBF.
3. Watcher. Results say if person visits or is visited.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 20, 2016, 10:49:51 pm
[2,3]: Hm. Still seems a bit redundant with my role in play.
Post by: hector13 on November 21, 2016, 08:31:41 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 21, 2016, 08:49:18 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 21, 2016, 09:23:22 pm
So uh... are you guys gonna discuss the game or..?Yeah, I was sorta expecting you to respond to my post. I suppose it's not fair to expect you to initiate all the discussions, though, even if I am pretty busy right now.
Post by: hector13 on November 21, 2016, 09:30:19 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 21, 2016, 10:01:40 pm
Less literally: It just digs him further into a hole.
His claim seems made to be hard to disprove. His action doesn't visit, so my action can't prove his claim. And it's very easy for him to say "Yeah, I found out you visited my target." based on somebody else's claim.
So he can't be verified, not easily at least.
But here's a plan: we no lynch, then have him choose somebody of our choice other than me. Then I either track or don't track that person based on a Random.org roll.
Alternatively, he targets me, then I track or don't track somebody based on a Random.org roll.
Come morning, we ask him what his results are. If they contradict what I did, you lynch him.
Perhaps not the best way, given the fact that if he guesses, he has a 50% chance of being right. But it's the plan I've got.
Post by: hector13 on November 21, 2016, 10:02:54 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 22, 2016, 02:15:15 am
So, tell me who I should lynch, and why.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 22, 2016, 11:15:59 am
Fish seems fishy.
Mainly because from what he's saying, he's just a less powerful version of me. That doesn't seem right.
His claim seems made to be hard to disprove. His action doesn't visit, so my action can't prove his claim. And it's very easy for him to say "Yeah, I found out you visited my target." based on somebody else's claim.
Post by: hector13 on November 23, 2016, 12:43:28 am
EP saying they were forced to visit me, but have no action so didn't do anything. Doesn't really make any sense, but okay.
TBF saying EP did visit someone, but not who they visited, nor if they did anything.
FoU saying TBF is lying, TBF didn't visit anyone, while TBF claims his action doesn't visit, so wouldn't show up as having done anything.
TL;DR EP visited, did nothing, TBF confirms, FoU says TBF lies.
hector has quandary. Lots of unconfirmed nonsense. I'm stuck between choosing TBF and FoU, and this feels like MYLO, so...
No Lynch
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 23, 2016, 12:48:09 am
Are we even doing this plan?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 23, 2016, 12:50:58 am
Post by: hector13 on November 23, 2016, 01:04:36 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 23, 2016, 01:06:52 am
Post by: hector13 on November 23, 2016, 01:09:27 am
Given your persistence in wanting to know though, I imagine he'll be watching you.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 23, 2016, 01:14:37 am
Post by: hector13 on November 23, 2016, 01:53:19 am
Post by: Tomasque on November 24, 2016, 05:23:35 pm
...since end-of-round posts take a while ;)
Post by: Tomasque on November 28, 2016, 08:08:49 pm
The trial is postponed until the following day.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
No Lynch (1) - hector13
Elephant Parade died of a heart attack.
Elephant Parade was the Witness
Spoiler: Witness (click to show/hide)
((Note: After a last-minute check, I realized the round was not actually going to end. Sorry for that slip-up.))
Post by: Tomasque on November 30, 2016, 07:09:15 pm
The trial resumes.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Not Voting: hector13
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 07:10:39 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 30, 2016, 07:15:30 pm
Fish: who did you target and what was your result?
hector: why didn't you wait for me to decide who Fish should target for the plan?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 07:18:11 pm
Got a 'didn't see them doing anything' result.
Post by: hector13 on November 30, 2016, 07:49:50 pm
Hm.
Fish: who did you target and what was your result?
hector: why didn't you wait for me to decide who Fish should target for the plan?
Because your plan was awful.
Post by: hector13 on November 30, 2016, 07:52:24 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 30, 2016, 08:17:46 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 30, 2016, 08:19:36 pm
Which makes me wonder what you did to me, given I saw you target me.
~~~
Fish says he targeted you and got a "didn't see them doing anything" result.
Nor did he see somebody visit you.
Both incorrect.
He's currently my prime lynching candidate.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 08:20:42 pm
...I don't see visitors.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 30, 2016, 08:21:53 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 08:23:30 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 30, 2016, 08:24:49 pm
Then hector was wrong.[1]: Until a method of proving me town is determined, yes.1. It's your burden to prove it.
[3]: How so(to both)? I would even say my ability is more verifiable. Fish can tell if somebody acted. I can tell if somebody acted, and who they targeted.
[4]: Then what type is Fish's?
2. His results gel with what EP said. It is weakened because EP revealed his results before TBF.
3. Watcher. Results say if person visits or is visited.
I could do with another explanation on that, then.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 08:39:19 pm
I see if my target makes a visiting action. Or at least, I'm presuming it only applies to visiting actions, because it didn't trigger on hector visiting but not acting.Then hector was wrong.[1]: Until a method of proving me town is determined, yes.1. It's your burden to prove it.
[3]: How so(to both)? I would even say my ability is more verifiable. Fish can tell if somebody acted. I can tell if somebody acted, and who they targeted.
[4]: Then what type is Fish's?
2. His results gel with what EP said. It is weakened because EP revealed his results before TBF.
3. Watcher. Results say if person visits or is visited.
I could do with another explanation on that, then.
Post by: hector13 on November 30, 2016, 08:42:47 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 08:43:43 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 30, 2016, 08:44:33 pm
I'd like to note that if hector was the Evil role...
Well, we couldn't lynch him, could we?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 08:45:13 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 09:30:41 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 30, 2016, 09:34:15 pm
But if you really want it, shut up, the round's (most probably) over.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 09:37:04 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 30, 2016, 09:40:32 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 09:41:29 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 09:44:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on November 30, 2016, 09:47:33 pm
But he visited me last night, and I'm still alive, and I know I didn't do it. So you were best choice.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 09:48:57 pm
Despite my alignment.
Like, seriously, who killed Darryl for crying out loud?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 30, 2016, 11:33:23 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on November 30, 2016, 11:34:06 pm
It couldn't have been a suicide?I'm still wondering.
Post by: Tomasque on December 01, 2016, 08:15:10 pm
Round over - Town Wins!
Votecount
hector13 (0)
TheBiggerFish (1) - hector13
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish was the Voodoo Master
Spoiler: Voodoo Master (click to show/hide)
Starver gets one victory point.
hector13 gets one victory point.
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 01, 2016, 08:17:53 pm
TBF: What did you hope to gain by killing me, exactly?
also: you contradicted your own fakeclaim, lol
Post by: hector13 on December 01, 2016, 08:21:34 pm
Post by: Starver on December 01, 2016, 08:29:25 pm
(And did nobody notice after I was lynched that my roleflip was of my replaced character, without even a Visit to admit to? Honestly, I was expecting a mistrial/retrial, not death, and then getting my original role back and/or now being the Defendent after a reset of role. Maybe I'd have tried a better 'defence' if I'd have known it was final.)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 01, 2016, 08:31:55 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 01, 2016, 08:33:29 pm
Post by: Starver on December 01, 2016, 08:41:13 pm
Who is the right single person?I think I'll say... That's horribly endangering but, if game gives extra roles, fresh inditement should help.
Perhaps. My initial meta-thoughts could be wrong.
Who did I think (wrongly!) was the person was who could benefit from my (now lost!) visiting action?
It is TheBiggerFish...
I was quite proud of that construction. Turns out I was way off, though, so it went to waste... ;)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 01, 2016, 08:44:08 pm
Post by: Starver on December 01, 2016, 08:48:00 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 01, 2016, 08:50:37 pm
Post by: Starver on December 01, 2016, 08:53:12 pm
Here's a post-death message I sent to Tomasque, BTW...
Notice any similarity..?(Ni ja2)I don't even know what you do, but looks like you're a better cop than EP. If you follow (or just role/whatever-investigate), I give you the option (your choice, don't tell anyone, even me) of following me to check that what I do has a probably legit outcome. If you're a Watcher, I'd need to tell you where I'm going (and you could just as easily keep an eye on someone else if I've diverted everyone else somewhere). If you're scum, you'll have your own ideas how to play this.FoU: I don't think that the investigator would be Evil, but Fallacy's been pretty passive; if you hadn't specifically asked me to focus on the night results, I'd have ranked him below Starver.This round is... confusing as all heck. I don't think I have much to contribute other than my night action, which tracks the target...
Anybody have any ideas for who would be best to target this night?But here's a plan: we no lynch, then have him [Fish] choose somebody of our choice other than me. Then I either track or don't track that person based on a Random.org roll.
Alternatively, he targets me, then I track or don't track somebody based on a Random.org roll.
Come morning, we ask him what his results are. If they contradict what I did, you lynch him.
Perhaps not the best way, given the fact that if he guesses, he has a 50% chance of being right. But it's the plan I've got.
Now officially tapping Fallacy as manipulative Scum. Either that or plagiarist... ;)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 01, 2016, 08:55:05 pm
(Three players being Darryl, Me and EP? I think you only killed EP.)Hector would've died:
Here's a post-death message I sent to Tomasque, BTW...Notice any similarity..?(Ni ja2)I don't even know what you do, but looks like you're a better cop than EP. If you follow (or just role/whatever-investigate), I give you the option (your choice, don't tell anyone, even me) of following me to check that what I do has a probably legit outcome. If you're a Watcher, I'd need to tell you where I'm going (and you could just as easily keep an eye on someone else if I've diverted everyone else somewhere). If you're scum, you'll have your own ideas how to play this.FoU: I don't think that the investigator would be Evil, but Fallacy's been pretty passive; if you hadn't specifically asked me to focus on the night results, I'd have ranked him below Starver.This round is... confusing as all heck. I don't think I have much to contribute other than my night action, which tracks the target...
Anybody have any ideas for who would be best to target this night?But here's a plan: we no lynch, then have him [Fish] choose somebody of our choice other than me. Then I either track or don't track that person based on a Random.org roll.
Alternatively, he targets me, then I track or don't track somebody based on a Random.org roll.
Come morning, we ask him what his results are. If they contradict what I did, you lynch him.
Perhaps not the best way, given the fact that if he guesses, he has a 50% chance of being right. But it's the plan I've got.
Now officially tapping Fallacy as manipulative Scum. Either that or plagiarist... ;)
Day's over, stop talking ;DFallacy would have died:
Well, that's that.EP was dead.
I'd like to note that if hector was the Evil role...
Well, we couldn't lynch him, could we?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 01, 2016, 08:59:03 pm
Your powers do say, "At the end of the day", after all.
Well, that was interesting.
Good game.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 01, 2016, 08:59:51 pm
I should get credit for that :s
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 01, 2016, 09:01:05 pm
Hm. Hmmm.
Post by: hector13 on December 01, 2016, 09:03:22 pm
Which is what I've been saying...
I should get credit for that :s
But you were dead before that, so no.
I wouldn't have died anyway, since the day had technically ended before I said dem words :p
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 01, 2016, 09:05:56 pm
Ah ah ah, no, it doesn't say that, it says if you say them at all.Which is what I've been saying...
I should get credit for that :s
But you were dead before that, so no.
I wouldn't have died anyway, since the day had technically ended before I said dem words :p
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 01, 2016, 09:06:51 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 01, 2016, 09:35:29 pm
Ah ah ah, no, it doesn't say that, it says if you say them at all.Which is what I've been saying...
I should get credit for that :s
But you were dead before that, so no.
I wouldn't have died anyway, since the day had technically ended before I said dem words :p
It does say at the end of the day. The day ended when I voted you ;)
Post by: Tomasque on December 05, 2016, 08:14:29 pm
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Post by: Tomasque on December 07, 2016, 05:19:27 pm
? ? ? ? ? ? ? played ? ? ?
Day ends Friday, 2:30 PM PST
Friday, 10:30 PM GMT
Post by: Starver on December 07, 2016, 05:31:35 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 07, 2016, 05:40:40 pm
Who else agrees with me?
Post by: hector13 on December 07, 2016, 05:43:41 pm
There are far too many question marks in this round.
Who else agrees with me?
Looks like you're fishing for something there.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 07, 2016, 05:44:43 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 07, 2016, 05:45:39 pm
Yes. How many people have roles like mine.Roles which consist mostly of question marks, you mean? I have one of those.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 07, 2016, 05:46:39 pm
Like I said. Far too many. I don't know my name, my role description... I'll hold back the rest of what I do and do not know for the moment, though.
Post by: hector13 on December 07, 2016, 05:49:37 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 07, 2016, 05:51:06 pm
Looks like you're fishing for something there.This applies.
But, bastard mod puzzle, so:
I did nothing.
~~~
Tomasque: can we vote?
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 07, 2016, 05:55:29 pm
Right... did either of you try doing anything last night?I tried using my action on you, since I figured it was probably benevolent (the alternative would be pretty mean) and I hoped it might give me a clue as to what it does. It failed, though.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 07, 2016, 06:03:53 pm
There are far too many question marks in this round.Me.
Who else agrees with me?
Are you No one?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 07, 2016, 06:09:03 pm
~~~
I'm calling it: this is a round where the Evil role is the only one without the question mark spam, and has the ability to "play" certain abilities that have a global effect.
A little bit like a sleeping god role.
Everybody: what do you think of my theory? What do you think of the announcement in the day 1 mod post?
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 07, 2016, 06:13:38 pm
I'm calling it: this is a round where the Evil role is the only one without the question mark spam,Sounds reasonable, I guess.
Quote
and has the ability to "play" certain abilities that have a global effect.That's possible, I suppose, though I'm hesitant to jump to "global effects" from a line of card-game flavour.
Quote
What do you think of the announcement in the day 1 mod post?It reminded me of a card game. No real insights, unfortunately.
Post by: Tomasque on December 07, 2016, 06:20:03 pm
Tomasque: can we vote?Yes.
Post by: hector13 on December 07, 2016, 06:38:09 pm
I'm calling it: this is a round where the Evil role is the only one without the question mark spam, and has the ability to "play" certain abilities that have a global effect.
A little bit like a sleeping god role.
Everybody: what do you think of my theory? What do you think of the announcement in the day 1 mod post?
Seems like it, though I'm not sure what you mean. EP was the only one to claim performing an action on N1, and there was one line of question marks implying someone did something... they are also quick to dismiss your theory. This would likely point to him as our baddie.
Tomasque did say a few rounds back that things would only get harder for town though. On the one hand, if all the non-Evil roles don't know what they do, aye, harder. On the other hand, if a non-Evil role who has no idea what their action does, are they going to use it? If the opening post for the day does indicate who performed an action and who didn't, and only the Evil knows enough about their action to use it... that's not at all difficult for Town.
I'm with you on the "Evil is probably the only one that knows their role" but why do you think they have the ability to play abilities that have global effects?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 07, 2016, 06:46:34 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 07, 2016, 06:49:06 pm
Did you discover anything useful?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 07, 2016, 06:49:52 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 07, 2016, 06:52:44 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 07, 2016, 07:00:23 pm
There are far too many question marks in this round.Me.
Who else agrees with me?
Are you No one?
Post by: Starver on December 07, 2016, 07:45:58 pm
Quote
Right to now, in this flap be bromidic, effendi. Enigma. Surreal.
(Too soon have you given back, in to view, hidden persona tableau / fact volcano.)
Just to stake my claim in advance. I don't even known what else to do right now...
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 07, 2016, 07:47:28 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 07, 2016, 07:59:15 pm
hector13: Do you have question marks in your role?
How likely do you think my answer is going to be "no"?
A better question to ask might be how town figures out what it can do. If you have an ability that generates results, then it's pretty clear what your ability does. If you have a role that receives no feedback beyond "action was completed" it's a lot less simple.
Do we effectively waste a night trying to figure that out, in the hopes the Evil role doesn't do bad things, or do we just wing it and hope the Evil role is as in the dark as everyone else?
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 07, 2016, 08:03:16 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 07, 2016, 08:10:09 pm
(If you do, you shouldn't say so, since you'd become a prime target for the Evil role.)
Post by: Starver on December 07, 2016, 09:37:48 pm
The exception to this is if there's a masonic/cultish groupthink already established, but it has been a while since any of that sort of thing. (But, but, it has been a while, so maybe we're due again?)
Right now, though, I'll happily announce that I am yet still within the uninformed majority, assuming I'm not assuming too much.
(And I don't like one person's vibe, just so you know, but that could just be misunderstanding. Not enough information about myself, even, to conduct a proper fingertip search at the moment.)
Post by: hector13 on December 07, 2016, 09:53:17 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 07, 2016, 09:54:57 pm
uninformed minority But it has been a while maybe myselfSome of these italicizations are really weird. Secret message? Action trigger? Probably not, I suppose, but a bunch of this stuff makes no sense to emphasize.
Post by: Starver on December 07, 2016, 10:41:04 pm
Just the way I (thought I) was thinking the phrase emphasising was happening. Re-reading, still makes perfect sense to me. But then I'm quite used to my own internal voice.uninformed minority But it has been a while maybe myselfSome of these italicizations are really weird. Secret message? Action trigger? Probably not, I suppose, but a bunch of this stuff makes no sense to emphasize.
There's a secret ('cached' for possible later revelation) message elsewhere, but that was just opportunistic. No action triggers. Whether you believe me or not about any of this.
Post by: hector13 on December 08, 2016, 11:53:57 am
Not much point in keeping suspicions to yourself, bub. We've got nothing else to go on.
Starver: this was an implicit "maybe talk about your suspicions with the rest of us?" byraway.
There's a secret ('cached' for possible later revelation) message elsewhere, but that was just opportunistic. No action triggers. Whether you believe me or not about any of this.
Call me paranoid, but a secret message for later revelation does imply you know something worth sharing. Given the excess of question marks, one does wonder how you came across this information.
Post by: Starver on December 08, 2016, 12:27:40 pm
Your own "Looks like you're fishing for something there. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7288181#msg7288181)" post doesn't look like what I'd expect someone with question marks knowledge to say.Not much point in keeping suspicions to yourself, bub. We've got nothing else to go on.
Starver: this was an implicit "maybe talk about your suspicions with the rest of us?" byraway.
But there could be something else in it, like you putting forward your own message which I've missed.
Quote
Call me paranoid, but a secret message for later revelation does imply you know something worth sharing. Given the excess of question marks, one does wonder how you came across this information.Nothing worth sharing. I just took the opportunity to guarantee that I could back-reference a future claim, as I was too late to get in there and do a "yeah, me too on the question marks" through the impatience of EP to state publicly what Fallacy was saying.
OTOH, because of that I consider both EP and Fallacy probably allied Townies. Fish could have taken the hint (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7288212#msg7288212), or really was claiming true. But that's just noise in the probabilities at this point.
Post by: hector13 on December 08, 2016, 01:05:33 pm
Your own "Looks like you're fishing for something there. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7288181#msg7288181)" post doesn't look like what I'd expect someone with question marks knowledge to say.Not much point in keeping suspicions to yourself, bub. We've got nothing else to go on.
Starver: this was an implicit "maybe talk about your suspicions with the rest of us?" byraway.
But there could be something else in it, like you putting forward your own message which I've missed.
Mostly just worrying that the question marks thing was not a Town-wide thing and limited solely to me, and apparently FoU. I didn't think it was a good idea to reveal to the Evil role that some town didn't know anything about their role, but it's difficult to tell people not to reveal something without revealing what it is they shouldn't tell.
I guess there's nothing to say the Evil role didn't already know about it, but it probably wasn't very clever to reveal it at the opening of the Round.
Quote
Call me paranoid, but a secret message for later revelation does imply you know something worth sharing. Given the excess of question marks, one does wonder how you came across this information.
Nothing worth sharing. I just took the opportunity to guarantee that I could back-reference a future claim, as I was too late to get in there and do a "yeah, me too on the question marks" through the impatience of EP to state publicly what Fallacy was saying.
OTOH, because of that I consider both EP and Fallacy probably allied Townies. Fish could have taken the hint (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7288212#msg7288212), or really was claiming true. But that's just noise in the probabilities at this point.
A future claim?
You've implied you're in the same boat as everyone else. Setting up a future claim would require knowing now what you need to claim later. These two sentences cannot co-exist. Schroedinger's Starver?
Perhaps you'd like to expand, or are you more worried about the state of the cat? /rhetorical flourish
Post by: Starver on December 08, 2016, 01:40:35 pm
You've implied you're in the same boat as everyone else. Setting up a future claim would require knowing now what you need to claim later. These two sentences cannot co-exist. Schroedinger's Starver?It's an educated guess. If I hadn't been pre-empted I might have said that "I have many question marks about, my role". I did write something very similar, got ninjaed by EP's explicit post at the PPE stage, and it now looked like I was opportunisticaly flash-claiming, so I aborted and waited and considered and went with the alternative way of laying groundwork to prove that the next thing I might reveal isn't seen as a "me too!" thing.
It's probably overthought. It's probably not going to be so ground-shakingly useful. It's enough, if not too much, just to mention it as having been done. It's also intetesting to see who seems most incensed by the concept, and now I'm left to theorising why.
Post by: hector13 on December 08, 2016, 02:07:28 pm
What do you mean "interesting to see who is most incensed by the concept"? Are you alluding to someone in particular?
If so, instead of theorizing on your own, why not ask the person you allude to why they seem "incensed", and in doing so maybe generate contents eryone else can use in their own deliberations? It is a team game, after all.
Post by: Starver on December 08, 2016, 02:38:35 pm
Why are you so worried about how you come across to the rest of the town?I'm answering your questions... Because I apparently missed when you previously asked me a question.
At some point "town" might be stating what they think of me.. Right now, only you are asking, and I'm quite clearly doubtful of your motives. Giving you benefit of the doubt, still, but...
Not much point in keeping suspicions to yourself, bub. We've got nothing else to go on.
Post by: hector13 on December 09, 2016, 02:05:00 am
Why are you so worried about how you come across to the rest of the town?I'm answering your questions... Because I apparently missed when you previously asked me a question.
This doesn't make sense as a response to the question I asked.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
At some point "town" might be stating what they think of me.. Right now, only you are asking, and I'm quite clearly doubtful of your motives. Giving you benefit of the doubt, still, but...
Clearly, and I'm doubtful of your own. Which is why I'm asking the questions... I don't like having doubts.
Why are you not doing the same? Normally I would think it was because you prefer to rely on the night game, but that doesn't work as an excuse in this one. Reliance on something you claim ignorance of seems a pretty stupid idea.
Why did you not respond to the rest of my post?
What do you mean "interesting to see who is most incensed by the concept"? Are you alluding to someone in particular?
If so, instead of theorizing on your own, why not ask the person you allude to why they seem "incensed", and in doing so maybe generate contents eryone else can use in their own deliberations? It is a team game, after all.
Post by: Starver on December 09, 2016, 08:10:16 am
Why are you so worried about how you come across to the rest of the town?("I'm answering your questions.")
This doesn't make sense as a response to the question I asked.It does to me. If you want to get meta, look at the last round, not that that should have any bearing.
Quote
Like... town shouldn't be worrying about how they come across so much.Right now, I'm not worried. Later on it might be critical.
Quote
Thus, your unwillingness to stand out as a motivation for not doing anything useful does not sit well with me, particularly when you say shortly thereafter you're breadcrumbing. That kinda defeats the purpose.I have less idea how useful I am than Fish claims for themself. I think I'm not a not-useful character, though. So, as and when I'm made aware, I have a call-back. I also announced the breadcrumb partly so that the I could not be accused of speculatively false-breadcrumbing in secret and only revealing if it became something still claimable. I can take the doubt, in the meantime. And the probability that the Big Bad has decoded my breadcrumbs and playing dumb to their own advantage.
Quote
This bit is also silly, for aforementioned reasons of "suspicions don't do much good unvoiced, man."It wasn't intended to be, but this discussion turns out to be a bit of a bellwether. Well over 24 hours with only me saying little but saying that I'm saying little and you saying little about yourself but demanding more from me. As a third party to this, I'd most likely be betting that one of us is being evasive for the wrong reasons. (Or else wondering which of us two to frame for their own misdeeds, without being too obvious.)
As me, I know where I stand, which means I have you as the most odd guest to the party, but the chances of, say, Fish (or Round Mechanics!) being the actual bad cog in the works are enough to wait for another voice from rhe wilderness to chip in. Until then, I find no need to guild the lilly. Let it stand, as is, come hell or high-water.
Quote
Why did you not respond to the rest of my post?Already answered enough. More than. This needs to stop being a repetitious dialogue.
Post by: hector13 on December 09, 2016, 02:28:49 pm
Why are you so worried about how you come across to the rest of the town?("I'm answering your questions.")
Does anyone else see how this is a reasonable response to my question? You guys are being very quiet, and I find that very unreasonable given y'all have claimed you have no idea wtf your night actions do.
Does anyone have anything to say at all, or is it just me?
This doesn't make sense as a response to the question I asked.It does to me. If you want to get meta, look at the last round, not that that should have any bearing.
Why suggest something then immediately say that something will be pointless? I don't want meta, I want(ed) a direct answer to my question.
QuoteLike... town shouldn't be worrying about how they come across so much.Right now, I'm not worried. Later on it might be critical.
Then why did you imply you were worried you'd come across as "opportunistically flash-claiming", so you tried to set-up a breadcrumb trail to another "claim" (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7289001#msg7289001) even earlier than now?
QuoteThus, your unwillingness to stand out as a motivation for not doing anything useful does not sit well with me, particularly when you say shortly thereafter you're breadcrumbing. That kinda defeats the purpose.I have less idea how useful I am than Fish claims for themself. I think I'm not a not-useful character, though. So, as and when I'm made aware, I have a call-back. I also announced the breadcrumb partly so that the I could not be accused of speculatively false-breadcrumbing in secret and only revealing if it became something still claimable. I can take the doubt, in the meantime. And the probability that the Big Bad has decoded my breadcrumbs and playing dumb to their own advantage.
Here as well.
QuoteThis bit is also silly, for aforementioned reasons of "suspicions don't do much good unvoiced, man."It wasn't intended to be, but this discussion turns out to be a bit of a bellwether. Well over 24 hours with only me saying little but saying that I'm saying little and you saying little about yourself but demanding more from me. As a third party to this, I'd most likely be betting that one of us is being evasive for the wrong reasons. (Or else wondering which of us two to frame for their own misdeeds, without being too obvious.)
What am I supposed to say about myself? You refuse to ask questions. I have told you I want you to voice your suspicions, which you did (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7288955#msg7288955), but you've done nothing to confirm or reject them. I find it hard to believe you're waiting to confirm or reject them during the night, since you've claimed ignorance of what it is you do.
I am pretty much standing still and asking you to hit me with your best shot at this point. Why not take the opportunity?
As me, I know where I stand, which means I have you as the most odd guest to the party, but the chances of, say, Fish (or Round Mechanics!) being the actual bad cog in the works are enough to wait for another voice from rhe wilderness to chip in. Until then, I find no need to guild the lilly. Let it stand, as is, come hell or high-water.
As part of everyone else, I don't know where you stand, beyond having suspicions about me and my motivations, which I'm pretty sure everyone else has regarding everyone else too.
QuoteWhy did you not respond to the rest of my post?Already answered enough. More than. This needs to stop being a repetitious dialogue.
Clearly. You are a shining example of openness and cooperation. /s
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 09, 2016, 02:55:35 pm
Post by: Starver on December 09, 2016, 03:41:15 pm
1) Expanded version: It does makes sense to me, and until I see a reason to.Why suggest something then immediately say that something will be pointless? I don't want meta, I want(ed) a direct answer to my question.This doesn't make sense as a response to the question I asked.It does to me. If you want to get meta, look at the last round, not that that should have any bearing.
2) To draw a line under it (I thought), I give you an example to refer to without suggesting or (especially) demanding you believe it.
Quote
Then why did you imply you were worried you'd come across as "opportunistically flash-claiming", so you tried to set-up a breadcrumb trail to another "claim" (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7289001#msg7289001) even earlier than now?I saw a subtle thing I could relate to. I am content. I create a subtle response to indicate my membership of the same group, but am ninjaed. I look at the situation from the outside and decide that now I will look like I am jumping on the bandwagon. (Later on, I worry that Fish is doing just that.) I am concerned. I thus do not post.
I change tack. I take some time to consider what useful information I can give. Nothing right now, but I can prepare for the future, maybe. That's what I do. I am content. It seems you are not. I consider that as more your problem than it is mine.
Quote
Simple paranoia-by-proxy. I want you to know I'm not (for example) in evil possession of the name "Rose", hiding a false message like "I am the Daffodil", but then when it turns out the game is colours, not flowers, I quietly drop it, while wishing I had encoded "Teal" instead.I also announced the breadcrumb partly so that the I could not be accused of speculatively false-breadcrumbing in secret and only revealing if it became something still claimable.Here as well.
Consider that a contrived example, just to demonstrate what I thought I had already made obvious. I thought you'd think the same about what I thought you'd think about what I was thinking as I thought you'd be thinking about my thoughts, to put it simply.
Quote
What am I supposed to say about myself? You refuse to ask questions.I've had no firm questions other than "Do you have question marks in your role?", and you already said "How likely do you think my answer is going to be "no"?", which isn't far from what I thought you'd say.
I already said that I was getting slowly bored of just our two voices, though.
I don't even.I agree, but I'm waiting for someone like you to say something sensible.
Post by: hector13 on December 09, 2016, 05:29:55 pm
Post by: Tomasque on December 09, 2016, 06:22:18 pm
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
Post by: Tomasque on December 10, 2016, 11:41:08 am
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? falters ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Day ends Monday, 8:30 AM PST
Monday, 4:30 PM GMT
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 10, 2016, 11:55:31 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 10, 2016, 12:00:18 pm
I revert when grey ? ? ? is killed apparently.
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 10, 2016, 12:46:11 pm
I got a result of you when acting on hector and my ability was replaced with a Wincon of "You can't win."That's pretty weird. Maybe you see the previous night's action?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 10, 2016, 12:47:14 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 10, 2016, 01:15:10 pm
Because I think that was pointless. We're not going to make progress finding the scum if we don't lynch. So how about we lynch someone today.
Post by: Starver on December 10, 2016, 01:34:19 pm
I'm open to even saying what they are, but first I'd like an idea of why they are.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 10, 2016, 01:38:54 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 10, 2016, 02:18:46 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 11, 2016, 11:50:30 am
Post by: Starver on December 11, 2016, 12:27:48 pm
Summary...
EP fails to act (and/or acts but fails) on TBF,
TBF acts on Hector, sees EP.
I get numbers, it seems. (But not N0)
Fallacy unstated.
Hector yet to call (uncharitably, could have acted on EP to cause a failure, charitably could have empowered me to get those digits, much middle-ground.)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 11, 2016, 06:30:23 pm
Rather frustrating, these question marks.
Post by: hector13 on December 11, 2016, 07:59:01 pm
I got a result of you when acting on hector and my ability was replaced with a Wincon of "You can't win."
I revert when grey ? ? ? is killed apparently.
Does this sound like a Town wincon? Especially after FoU has claimed the Weakness position, I personally don't think so.
It's not a single digit. Really needs more info (can't happen today if Hector doesn't post anything, maybe not even tben)..
Summary...
EP fails to act (and/or acts but fails) on TBF,
TBF acts on Hector, sees EP.
I get numbers, it seems. (But not N0)
Fallacy unstated.
Hector yet to call (uncharitably, could have acted on EP to cause a failure, charitably could have empowered me to get those digits, much middle-ground.)
I acted on EP. All I got was an action complete confirmation. I'm inclined to say I didn't have anything to do with his failed result, considering he had the same result on N0, when I didn't act.
I'm not comfortable with FoU, given that he had the gall to complain there was a no lynch on D1, when that has been fairly standard for this marathon, and the fact he hadn't posted for pretty much the last half of D1. He then claims Town Weakness and that he has an unknown auto, but comments no further on what he did during the night.
Boy's active lurking.
Post by: hector13 on December 11, 2016, 07:59:23 pm
Post by: Starver on December 11, 2016, 09:13:36 pm
No, it sounds like a mid-round change of (apparent?) status, due to external influences. Not unknown in this marathon.I got a result of you when acting on hector and my ability was replaced with a Wincon of "You can't win."
I revert when grey ? ? ? is killed apparently.
Does this sound like a Town wincon?
Fallacy describes things (as they originally were, at least) that's just too close to my own status for me to dismiss it as invented. You may have a point or two well worth considering, but right now I'm have other concerns. If FoU is inventing, I applaud the attempt.
Can't guarantee I'll be quick to respond, but I am rather eager to see what you want to throw back my way. I think I'm going to show you my breadcrumbs before the day is out, BTW, once you've done that (to keep things straight). Be prepared to be dissappointed, but see exactly where I'm coming from.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 12, 2016, 12:00:39 am
[1] I'm not comfortable with FoU, given that he had the gall to complain there was a no lynch on D1, when that has been fairly standard for this marathon, [2] and the fact he hadn't posted for pretty much the last half of D1. [3] He then claims Town Weakness and that he has an unknown auto, but comments no further on what he did during the night.
[4] Boy's active lurking.
[1]: So? Still a bad thing. Unless you'd like to demonstrate otherwise? I mean, look at round 1.
[2]: I didn't have anything to offer.
[3]: Can it not be reasonably implied that I do not have a night action from my claim? Regardless, I didn't act this night, because I don't have a night action.
[4]: Eh. More like normal lurking, if you ask me. My apologies anyway. I think I'll be a bit more active this day, now that we have more to discuss.
Does this sound like a Town wincon? Especially after FoU has claimed the Weakness position, I personally don't think so.Le wha? I find it hard to believe you didn't notice the "replaced" word, hector. (no, that's not my only reason for voting you, it's also partly based on your reasoning displayed in the first part of this post)
And because you're displaying the Hectortell, in my opinion. You snap and jump at everything when you're scum, trying to find something that'll stick. As demonstrated above, you're doing that this round.
~~~
I used my ability on TBF. It failed again.I would like to note that a "my ability's always failing" could be a scum fake claim. So have a finger of suspicion, Elephant Parade.
Post by: Tomasque on December 12, 2016, 12:02:28 am
Starver was ? ? ?
Spoiler: ? ? ? (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 12, 2016, 12:10:42 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 12, 2016, 12:11:22 am
Post by: hector13 on December 12, 2016, 09:46:32 am
[1] I'm not comfortable with FoU, given that he had the gall to complain there was a no lynch on D1, when that has been fairly standard for this marathon...[1]: So? Still a bad thing. Unless you'd like to demonstrate otherwise? I mean, look at round 1.
Look at Rounds 1-19. Town has won most of the games. That wasn't the salient part. You complaining when you did nothing is the salient part.
How has it taken you 20 rounds, plus 2 bonus rounds, to complain about it?
[2] ... and the fact he hadn't posted for pretty much the last half of D1.
[2]: I didn't have anything to offer.
So? Do you think content is going to generate itself?
[3] He then claims Town Weakness and that he has an unknown auto, but comments no further on what he did during the night.[3]: Can it not be reasonably implied that I do not have a night action from my claim? Regardless, I didn't act this night, because I don't have a night action.
Convenient that, isn't it? I acted on EP last night, apparently confirmed by TBF, EP claims to have acted on TBF, whose role changed last night, apparently confirming that.
The only one left out is you, and we have a dead player on our hands. Of the two, a potential role-changer versus a potential kill, which one do you think is the Evil role?
[4] Boy's active lurking.[4]: Eh. More like normal lurking, if you ask me. My apologies anyway. I think I'll be a bit more active this day, now that we have more to discuss.
If you'll permit me some incredulity: What the actual fuck?
You say that with 10 hours left in the day, at bedtime apparently since you don't respond to TBF's sans-reason-vote on you with righteous indignation. Assuming you are a normal human and require 8 hours of sleep, that leaves 2 hours of activity.
What can you offer in 2 hours of waking-up-FoU that you can't offer in the previous 94?
Does this sound like a Town wincon? Especially after FoU has claimed the Weakness position, I personally don't think so.Le wha? I find it hard to believe you didn't notice the "replaced" word, hector. (no, that's not my only reason for voting you, it's also partly based on your reasoning displayed in the first part of this post)
You appear to have failed to notice when I said I was busy. Skimming posts tends to make you miss bits.
I wanted to post to get you guys commenting on things since you had posted less than a page of stuff in the 30-odd hours between the day starting and when I posted. It's a pain in the ass that it seems I have to be the one getting you guys posting, especially when I don't have the time to do it myself.
The rest of your reasoning is OMGUS, you're voting me because I'm pressuring you.
And because you're displaying the Hectortell, in my opinion. You snap and jump at everything when you're scum, trying to find something that'll stick. As demonstrated above, you're doing that this round.
Is that limited to my scum game? No, because how else does one generate content? Do what you do and stay quiet because they have "nothing to offer"? 3 of you did that yesterday, and you wonder why there was a no lynch. Best case scenario for town in that instance is Starver and I vote for each other. What would that tell you?
Nothing. The game gives back what you put in.
The first substantial thing you've done this game is OMGUS. If you've been following the game enough to notice I've been jumping at every little thing, how come you didn't vote me earlier?
TBF
More to come tomorrow.
It's tomorrow, please do hurry.
Also hoping for something from EP. It hasn't escaped my notice you haven't posted for ages, either.
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 12, 2016, 09:55:20 am
Post by: hector13 on December 12, 2016, 09:56:00 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 12, 2016, 10:45:32 am
FoU... stupidity on my part, perhaps. Plus plenty of games where lynching was all messed up due to silencing, hidden vote counts, no vote counts, and just plain being a better idea to no lynch because mechanics.
Look at Rounds 1-19. Town has won most of the games. That wasn't the salient part. You complaining when you did nothing is the salient part.
How has it taken you 20 rounds, plus 2 bonus rounds, to complain about it?
So? Do you think content is going to generate itself?Yes. I was waiting until I could contribute.
Convenient that, isn't it? I acted on EP last night, apparently confirmed by TBF, EP claims to have acted on TBF, whose role changed last night, apparently confirming that.
The only one left out is you, and we have a dead player on our hands. Of the two, a potential role-changer versus a potential kill, which one do you think is the Evil role?
If you'll permit me some incredulity: What the actual fuck?First of all, I would like a bloody response from Fish. I don't like being voted without reasoning.
You say that with 10 hours left in the day, at bedtime apparently since you don't respond to TBF's sans-reason-vote on you with righteous indignation. Assuming you are a normal human and require 8 hours of sleep, that leaves 2 hours of activity.
What can you offer in 2 hours of waking-up-FoU that you can't offer in the previous 94?
Second of all. Activity?
You appear to have failed to notice when I said I was busy. Skimming posts tends to make you miss bits.I'm going to go ahead and note that I voted you first. Then you voted me. And I was pressuring you.
I wanted to post to get you guys commenting on things since you had posted less than a page of stuff in the 30-odd hours between the day starting and when I posted. It's a pain in the ass that it seems I have to be the one getting you guys posting, especially when I don't have the time to do it myself.
The rest of your reasoning is OMGUS, you're voting me because I'm pressuring you.
So I'm calling that an OMGUS on your part.
It's possible you could have missed it because you were busy. So I'll let that go.
[1] Is that limited to my scum game? No, because how else does one generate content? Do what you do and stay quiet because they have "nothing to offer"? 3 of you did that yesterday, and you wonder why there was a no lynch. Best case scenario for town in that instance is Starver and I vote for each other. What would that tell you?
[2] The first substantial thing you've done this game is OMGUS. If you've been following the game enough to notice I've been jumping at every little thing, how come you didn't vote me earlier?
[1]: It's not limited to your scum game, but jumping at irrelevant things is.
[2]: Because, hector, I need more reasons to vote you than just one tell.
~~~
No, I guess day game isn't getting me out of this. And better have a chance to get one person to unvote me and one person keep their vote on me than both stay on me definitely.
I present: my real claim.
I am the grey ? Fish mentioned. Neutral role. My first wincon was not being able to win.
I had a 1-shot night ability(which I suspect was the "falter" ability mentioned in the first mod post of the day). I used it on Fish. Apparently, that stole his win condition and copied his night ability to me. So I now win with the town, and have Fish's ability.
I didn't want to claim on day one because that would get me policy lynched.
I didn't want to claim earlier today because that would get Fish at me.
Also breadcrumbing:
So. That's a thing. Or you're lying. Regardless, it's rather interesting. Right ho, let's get on with the game. You all have opinions on the no lynch yesterday?
Because I think that was pointless. We're not going to make progress finding the scum if we don't lynch. So how about we lynch someone today.
An apology to Fish for stealing his win condition.
Post by: hector13 on December 12, 2016, 11:18:51 am
So? Do you think content is going to generate itself?Yes. I was waiting until I could contribute.
If you'll permit me some incredulity: What the actual fuck?Second of all. Activity?
You say that with 10 hours left in the day, at bedtime apparently since you don't respond to TBF's sans-reason-vote on you with righteous indignation. Assuming you are a normal human and require 8 hours of sleep, that leaves 2 hours of activity.
What can you offer in 2 hours of waking-up-FoU that you can't offer in the previous 94?
Precisely. I read this as "wtf am I going to say to get me out of this uh... activity?"
You've contributed nothing to this round.
You appear to have failed to notice when I said I was busy. Skimming posts tends to make you miss bits.I'm going to go ahead and note that I voted you first. Then you voted me. And I was pressuring you.
I wanted to post to get you guys commenting on things since you had posted less than a page of stuff in the 30-odd hours between the day starting and when I posted. It's a pain in the ass that it seems I have to be the one getting you guys posting, especially when I don't have the time to do it myself.
The rest of your reasoning is OMGUS, you're voting me because I'm pressuring you.
So I'm calling that an OMGUS on your part.
It's possible you could have missed it because you were busy. So I'll let that go.
You did vote me first, in response to me pressuring you first. That's how the OMGUS works, it isn't as simple as "I voted you first!". You hadn't been doing anything until I pressured you.
[1] Is that limited to my scum game? No, because how else does one generate content? Do what you do and stay quiet because they have "nothing to offer"? 3 of you did that yesterday, and you wonder why there was a no lynch. Best case scenario for town in that instance is Starver and I vote for each other. What would that tell you?
[2] The first substantial thing you've done this game is OMGUS. If you've been following the game enough to notice I've been jumping at every little thing, how come you didn't vote me earlier?
[1]: It's not limited to your scum game, but jumping at irrelevant things is.
[2]: Because, hector, I need more reasons to vote you than just one tell.
Implying there are relevant things I should be focusing on. Please quote them for me. Had you posted more often, you'd have more than the 10 minutes you have left to do that.
You actually don't need any reason to vote for someone. Your vote is your voice, and for the vast majority of a day it's there for you to get other people to generate content.
You need a reason to build a case. Those reasons don't just fall into your lap, you need to go out and find them.
No, I guess day game isn't getting me out of this. And better have a chance to get one person to unvote me and one person keep their vote on me than both stay on me definitely.
I present: my real claim.
I am the grey ? Fish mentioned. Neutral role. My first wincon was not being able to win.
I had a 1-shot night ability(which I suspect was the "falter" ability mentioned in the first mod post of the day). I used it on Fish. Apparently, that stole his win condition and copied his night ability to me. So I now win with the town, and have Fish's ability.
I didn't want to claim on day one because that would get me policy lynched.
I didn't want to claim earlier today because that would get Fish at me.
Also breadcrumbing:So. That's a thing. Or you're lying. Regardless, it's rather interesting. Right ho, let's get on with the game. You all have opinions on the no lynch yesterday?
Because I think that was pointless. We're not going to make progress finding the scum if we don't lynch. So how about we lynch someone today.
An apology to Fish for stealing his win condition.
I personally think breadcrumbing is the most pointless thing you can do. All it tells us is you foresee the need to claim later, as I told Starver.
Anyhow, too little too late. I imply I think the potential killer is the Evil role, so you claim the role-changer.
At this point, my choice is between you and EP. You're the only one that's in any way going to get lynched. If you're lying, we (probably) win. If you're truthing, TBF gets his role back. Town loses nothing either way.
Post by: hector13 on December 12, 2016, 11:23:01 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 12, 2016, 11:32:16 am
Though I wonder if I keep my wincon after I die. That would be nice.
I think that's relatively likely, so I'd like to make some observations to help the town.
Assuming my 1-shot worked like I assume it would(stealing somebody's win condition, giving me their abilities), then Fish's original win condition was town.
Thus: confirmed town.
Two. Elephant Parade's "my action keeps failing" is going to be rather scummy if it happens again.
Three. Figuring out how Starver died is going to be very important. I personally suspect Evil action. Perhaps a delayed kill.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 12, 2016, 11:36:20 am
It would be interesting.
Post by: Tomasque on December 13, 2016, 09:42:40 am
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Votecount
hector13 (1) - FallacyofUrist
FallacyofUrist (2) - hector13, TheBiggerFish
TheBiggerFish (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
Not Voting: Elephant Parade
FallacyofUrist was ? ? ?
Spoiler: ? ? ? (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on December 13, 2016, 01:03:57 pm
EDIT: FallacyofUrist also had a secret auto that I forgot to roleflip. Damn sleep deprivation.
Post by: Tomasque on December 15, 2016, 04:23:26 pm
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Day ends Saturday, 1:30 PM PST
Saturday, 9:30 PM GMT
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 15, 2016, 04:33:30 pm
I used my action on TBF; it succeeded (with no other information). Maybe it's a protect?
Post by: hector13 on December 15, 2016, 07:06:40 pm
So, FoU was a Neutral role with a Town wincon and secret auto? That pretty much confirms TBF as town, considering what he said earlier, which would make hector13 scum (from my perspective).
I used my action on TBF; it succeeded (with no other information). Maybe it's a protect?
Aye, it must be a protect, which is why you claim it has failed every other time you used it ::)
What does FoU's secret auto have to do with anything? You mention it as though it's relevant.
I also acted on TBF, and got an action complete message, so if he chose to act and I'm right about him discovering who acted on his target, his result will be "nobody" regardless which of us he acted on - unless you're lying and he acted on me, too.
Unless someone has a day action they haven't claimed, Starver must have died from a N1 action. If I'm right about TBF's ability, then I didn't do it as TBF got a result of me (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg7290729#msg7290729) when he acted on you N1, meaning I acted on you. We also know FoU acted on TBF N1, given his role change, and I find it hard to believe Starver killed himself meaning...
... Elephant Parade is the odd one out.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 15, 2016, 07:09:16 pm
I also got numbers.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 15, 2016, 07:10:51 pm
((le bah post))
Post by: hector13 on December 15, 2016, 07:18:19 pm
I got you as a result, hector. I acted 'on you', but I'm not sure if that's doing anything.
I also got numbers.
Well. I have no idea what that means.
What were the numbers?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 15, 2016, 07:25:46 pm
?
Post by: hector13 on December 15, 2016, 07:30:11 pm
Post by: Starver on December 15, 2016, 07:32:23 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 15, 2016, 07:54:30 pm
If this is what I think it is, remember the round where Evil killed with a postcount restriction? My numbers are in transparent text on the first post I made.
Elephant Parade
Will only post if something really big happens.
Carp carp carpity carp carp carp.
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 15, 2016, 10:04:33 pm
1-3Huh. Let's hope it's three, then, since you've posted twice alrea—
I got you as a result, hector. I acted 'on you', but I'm not sure if that's doing anything.
I also got numbers.
Starver: If I post mine will you post yours 1-3
?
....lol
If this is what I think it is, remember the round where Evil killed with a postcount restriction? My numbers are in transparent text on the first post I made.
Elephant Parade
Will only post if something really big happens.
Carp carp carpity carp carp carp.
Post by: Tomasque on December 15, 2016, 11:20:23 pm
TheBiggerFish was ? ? ?
Spoiler: ? ? ? (click to show/hide)
This has triggered endgame. I'll elaborate when I get the chance.
Post by: Tomasque on December 16, 2016, 04:10:22 pm
Round over - True Scum Wins!
TheBiggerFish suddenly dies!
TheBiggerFish was ? ? ?
Spoiler: ? ? ? (click to show/hide)
hector13 gets one victory point.
TheBiggerFish gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 16, 2016, 04:24:06 pm
That round was horribly biased against town. Day game is far more important now.
Post by: Tomasque on December 16, 2016, 04:49:27 pm
yup. As I thought, hector13 was scum. Real scum, anyway.I agree. The round was very biased against town, but it wasn't meant to be played as a standard round - it was a puzzle. If everyone figured out that their roles were from round 2, people's true wincons would be revealed, and a massclaim would root out the true evil role.
That round was horribly biased against town. Day game is far more important now.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 16, 2016, 06:10:08 pm
Something seems... odd, though. Multiple things, actually.
1. The detective role in round 2's flavor seems to foreshadow this round. Did you really plan that far ahead?
2. There are no role blocks in this round. Yet Divine Immunity includes role block immunity.
3. What was with the day thing "? falters ?"? Something's up with Melody.
4. Fingertips. Odd role name...
5. "The world will be ending soon." Foreshadowing. Something's happening round 21, something special. I wonder if there will be a bonus round, though.
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 16, 2016, 06:24:43 pm
Post by: Tomasque on December 16, 2016, 07:00:02 pm
1. The detective role in round 2's flavor seems to foreshadow this round. Did you really plan that far ahead?
2. There are no role blocks in this round. Yet Divine Immunity includes role block immunity.
3. What was with the day thing "? falters ?"? Something's up with Melody.
4. Fingertips. Odd role name...
5. "The world will be ending soon." Foreshadowing. Something's happening round 21, something special. I wonder if there will be a bonus round, though.
1. The role flavor actually wasn't meant to foreshadow this round - I hadn't fully planned this one yet.
2. That was just there to prevent hector from gaining too much if he exploited the information Divine Immunity gave him about existing abilities.
3. The day flavor was hidden except for a single word that would reveal if Melody was autoactivated.
4. ;)
5. Something special indeed.
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 16, 2016, 07:04:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 16, 2016, 07:26:06 pm
yup. As I thought, hector13 was scum. Real scum, anyway.
That round was horribly biased against town. Day game is far more important now.
Confirmation bias. I was the only person doing anything that entire round :P
Post by: Tomasque on December 16, 2016, 07:55:28 pm
Tomasque: How did you set the topic icon to "cell phone", anyway? I checked the dropdown and it wasn't there.Huh. It was available when I began this game - I guess it was removed. Why would Toady do that?
Post by: Starver on December 16, 2016, 08:27:21 pm
Confirmation bias. I was the only person doing anything that entire round :PThough I didn't know why, it was why I was definitely angling at you. Too much aggressiveness (except that it worked, of course, long enough for the secondary kill to get me).
Post by: Starver on December 16, 2016, 08:30:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 16, 2016, 08:40:04 pm
You're like the difference between a calculator and showing your work; town!hector wanted you to explain what you were saying, whereas you seemed content with just displaying the answer again :p
Post by: Starver on December 16, 2016, 08:58:52 pm
I'll say right now that I am not. Or at least that doesn't fit my question marks, if that's even what one would expect. Which, BTW, was given away far too early. I wish you'd let me get in on the bandwagon with a subtle acknowledgement before giving the game away. Or, to put it another way....I hope that at least Hector saw that (not that I really wanted the Evil/True Evil to know it) easily, especially once revealed....QuoteRight to now, in this flap be bromidic, effendi. Enigma. Surreal.
(Too soon have you given back, in to view, hidden persona tableau / fact volcano.)
Just to stake my claim in advance. I don't even known what else to do right now...
Post ninja: I think I made my workings clear enough. I was actually wrong about EP (because eager-to-seem-normal EP blew the question marks thing in a Town-like way, hence the contrivance above for exactly the reasons I gave!) and Fallacy should never have been considered dangerous (before revealing the damning evidence that confirmed, but probably doomed, Fish, and you have my reasoning about afterwards...), and I wasn't initially as sure about Fish (the bandwagon I had decided against getting on myself), but you were always scummiest-looking, and I know I hit a button, but I was just unsure as to whether I was actually accidentally hitting a Townie berserk button or a Scummy one, and I couldn't work out how to tell the difference between the two.
Post by: hector13 on December 16, 2016, 09:38:05 pm
Anyhow, did anyone get that secret message?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 17, 2016, 04:14:21 am
SMF update might've changed defaults.Tomasque: How did you set the topic icon to "cell phone", anyway? I checked the dropdown and it wasn't there.Huh. It was available when I began this game - I guess it was removed. Why would Toady do that?
Post by: Starver on December 17, 2016, 08:08:55 am
Did anyone really know enough? Neatly ended dead 'cause our real rogue initiated dully ordinary rogue's special nastiness. E xcept that remained ostensibly unknown, not deducible. Questionably unlucky effects? Should those insidious obscurations negate most actions, realistically?
Those were my first thoughts, and I've not seen it said otherwise, but maybe by the next round it will prove itself as one conclusion or the other. I can be silly, sometimes, just repeating previous analyse, but just in case it is useful to come back to it anyway.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 17, 2016, 02:26:13 pm
Post by: Starver on December 17, 2016, 05:58:59 pm
(Then our Neutral painted his own butt in bullseye-coloured paint... :P But that's another story.)
Post by: Tomasque on December 20, 2016, 08:38:31 pm
As the world ended around them, five desperate survivors ran for safety. They looked for shelter in the rubble, and found what they were looking for: The enterance to the metro lay before them, and they ran into its dark embrace. The world outside shook, then was no more. Within the blackness, they found the track, and ran down that darkened corridor.
Somewhere along the way, they began to dream - but they were not sleeping. Still running, they dreamed. No longer was there a difference between the waking hours and sleep. Still running, they dreamed. No longer was there a difference between the night and the day. Still running, they dreamed. No longer was there a difference between the dreamer...
...and the dream.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
Night ends Thursday, 5:30 PM PST
Thursday, 1:30 AM GMT
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 20, 2016, 09:38:45 pm
Are we allowed to post right now? I mean, there's a vote count... and the thread isn't locked... and there's a deadline that says "Day ends"...
Post by: Tomasque on December 20, 2016, 10:10:15 pm
I don't even.You may indeed post. Also, fixed.
Are we allowed to post right now? I mean, there's a vote count... and the thread isn't locked... and there's a deadline that says "Day ends"...
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 20, 2016, 11:36:49 pm
Post by: Starver on December 21, 2016, 03:51:46 am
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 21, 2016, 01:32:57 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 21, 2016, 01:52:31 pm
Everyone: Do you think conventions are still standard in this round?
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 21, 2016, 02:00:41 pm
Hm.What kind of question is that? My equally-useless response: some are, some aren't. It would seem that votes are still a thing, but I'm not going to go into anything role-related because I don't want to risk clueing in the Evil role.
Everyone: Do you think conventions are still standard in this round?
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 21, 2016, 02:09:49 pm
Post by: Starver on December 21, 2016, 03:46:24 pm
By the way, have some terrible poetry...
I dream to two levels and fall a little fall,
As historic yearnings I see that hurt some more.
I nail a trait, a unlit monster,
But you turn from afeared, say over.
Burn last day, do I really have call?
It lessens thy knowledge, I loudly bawl.
Jests you silently,
Can't one shun, crisis free?
Explanation later.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 21, 2016, 04:03:55 pm
Everyone: Do you think conventions are still standard in this round?We can probably still vote. As for everything else... we'll have to wait and see. Though there are some oddities we do know about.
One: the night and the day are borked. No difference between them, eh?
Two... I don't think our roles follow standard structure in this round.
Post by: Tomasque on December 21, 2016, 04:36:16 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 21, 2016, 05:25:58 pm
Hm.What kind of question is that? My equally-useless response: some are, some aren't. It would seem that votes are still a thing, but I'm not going to go into anything role-related because I don't want to risk clueing in the Evil role.
Everyone: Do you think conventions are still standard in this round?
If you think it was useless, why aren't you trying to be useful?
Hm.
Everyone: Do you think conventions are still standard in this round?
It is a bit of a... broad question, to put it nicely.
Yes, the conventions are going to be the same, unless you mean specific conventions, that you didn't ask about.
Two... I don't think our roles follow standard structure in this round.
What do you mean? Half a tidbit is not really a tidbit at all.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 21, 2016, 06:00:02 pm
What do you mean? Half a tidbit is not really a tidbit at all.
There's a structure to our roles that has always been used. Based on my role, they're not following that structure this round.
Post by: Starver on December 21, 2016, 06:06:08 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 21, 2016, 06:26:14 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 21, 2016, 06:36:10 pm
Your rolename is coloured, right?Correct. Your wincon is underlined, right?
Post by: Starver on December 21, 2016, 06:50:19 pm
I was also looking for someone else's input, without prodding too hard, to confirm what I think I know. Do you see what I was looking for, and agree with my approach?
(Those questions open to everyone else, of course, in case me and Fish are in error.)
Post by: Tomasque on December 23, 2016, 03:43:50 pm
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
They kept running, waiting for some vestige of a day to replace the darkness, but none arrived. Instead, something else came: Between footfalls, they thought they heard it behind them. Pounding on the labyrinth's stone floor. Heavy breathing on their necks. There could not have been shadows in the darkness, but it seemed that for an instant, a shadowy figure loomed in a branching corridor. Then, it was gone.
Up ahead, there was another sound. An old song, echoing down the metro tunnel. There was a light in the distance - faint and flickering. The tracks were illuminated up ahead, and something was laying on of them.
Votecount
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
Night ends Sunday, 1:00 PM PST
Sunday, 9:00 PM GMT
Post by: hector13 on December 23, 2016, 04:43:45 pm
Post by: Tomasque on December 23, 2016, 05:27:04 pm
I'll lock the thread until Monday 1:00 PM PST, and adjust the end time to Wednesday 1:00 PM PST.
Post by: Tomasque on December 26, 2016, 04:45:56 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 05:15:53 pm
So. Based on my last night's action, we aren't restricted in our actions. By that I mean we can act however we like, provided it's possible.
Please don't summon Cthulhu.
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 26, 2016, 05:21:05 pm
By that I mean we can act however we like, provided it's possible.I'm not sure what you mean by this. We can make up any night action we like?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 05:22:48 pm
For the records, it was a Christmas carol.
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 26, 2016, 05:22:56 pm
Not going to ascribe any meaning to that just yet.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 05:27:57 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 26, 2016, 05:30:10 pm
vote count?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 05:31:43 pm
But I was referring to "night actions" in the traditional sense.
Post by: Tomasque on December 26, 2016, 05:35:53 pm
hector13 (0)
FallacyofUrist (0)
TheBiggerFish (0)
Starver (0)
Elephant Parade (0)
Not Voting: hector13, FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver, Elephant Parade
Post by: hector13 on December 26, 2016, 05:39:31 pm
We started talking N0 and it's now N1, with no D1 in between, though presumably that's where the "night action" you speak of originated.
PPE: so much for being able to do anything.
Anyhow, seeing as you're about...
Tomasque:
Up ahead, there was another sound. An old song, echoing down the metro tunnel. There was a light in the distance - faint and flickering. The tracks were illuminated up ahead, and something was laying on of them.[/i]
It looks like a bit of an error for the bolded part. What was that meant to be?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 06:05:42 pm
PPE: so much for being able to do anything.Not like a vote. Like... a night action, in the sense of every previous round. Except the ones without night actions.
You submit something to do, and Tomasque resolves it at the end of the night. Like my song.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 26, 2016, 06:09:04 pm
Post by: Tomasque on December 26, 2016, 06:15:13 pm
Up ahead, there was another sound. An old song, echoing down the metro tunnel. There was a light in the distance - faint and flickering. The tracks were illuminated up ahead, and something was laying on of them.[/i]
It looks like a bit of an error for the bolded part. What was that meant to be?
[/quote] The "of" shouldn't be there. All the bolded bit means is that something is laying on the illuminated tracks.
Post by: hector13 on December 26, 2016, 06:19:25 pm
Post by: Tomasque on December 26, 2016, 06:51:59 pm
Are we allowed to examine this something now, or does it have to wait 'til "night"?You can't examine it.
Post by: hector13 on December 26, 2016, 06:57:09 pm
:(Are we allowed to examine this something now, or does it have to wait 'til "night"?You can't examine it.
Post by: hector13 on December 26, 2016, 06:59:45 pm
PPE: so much for being able to do anything.Not like a vote. Like... a night action, in the sense of every previous round. Except the ones without night actions.
You submit something to do, and Tomasque resolves it at the end of the night. Like my song.
What inspired you to test this?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 26, 2016, 07:51:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 26, 2016, 08:02:07 pm
None of our roles have defined actions, I'd be willing to bet. I know I don't.
Mine implies it, and further follow-up with Tomasque has enlightened me to what my action is. Presumably.
Not really sure why you're answering a question directed at another player. Might give the paranoid among us some ideas. Like "why is TBF attempting to buddy with FoU" or "why would Town!TBF reveal something they concluded based on one piece of information".
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 08:28:47 pm
What inspired you to test this?My non-standard role PM structure.
Post by: hector13 on December 26, 2016, 08:30:11 pm
Why didn't you decide to test with something that was more useful?What inspired you to test this?My non-standard role PM structure.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 08:32:20 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 08:33:13 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 26, 2016, 08:36:05 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 08:53:52 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 26, 2016, 09:04:48 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 09:06:03 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 26, 2016, 09:11:08 pm
Post by: Tomasque on December 26, 2016, 09:44:44 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 26, 2016, 09:45:26 pm
~~~
Ninja: well never mind.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 27, 2016, 01:08:14 am
Just so I don't have to say this to everyone who will eventually PM me some action: You cannot take actions that arent stated on your role. Though there was a miscommunication that made it look like it, FallacyofUrist's attempted action did not affect the night flavor. I don't feel happy that I have to come out and bluntly dispense information, but I don't think anyone would feel happy if after the round ended, it was revealed that everything was won/lost because of a misunderstanding.Well then.
Any alternate theories on what that was?
Post by: hector13 on December 27, 2016, 01:12:42 am
I don't think there have been many things in the flavour text that have been relevant to the game at large.
Maybe you can tell us why you answered the question for FoU?
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 27, 2016, 01:42:55 am
I don't think there have been many things in the flavour text that have been relevant to the game at large.That's interesting, since my flavour text is incredibly relevant.
Some tidbits:
- I am the Prophet
- It is strongly implied that there is exactly one evil role (but this is a bastard game, so who knows)
- I can't hurt the "evil dream"; I need to find a way to strike against it (help, anyone?) (is the Evil role immune to lynching?)
If people want, I can post (most of) the original flavourtext.
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 27, 2016, 02:00:46 am
Post by: hector13 on December 27, 2016, 02:05:01 am
I don't think there have been many things in the flavour text that have been relevant to the game at large.That's interesting, since my flavour text is incredibly relevant.
I'd like to point out you've taken that sentence out of context, and demanded a mass-claim on what is essentially D1. Perhaps we should discuss things before taking drastic measures?
For starters: what makes you think the Evil role is immune to lynches?
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 27, 2016, 10:20:56 am
I don't think there have been many things in the flavour text that have been relevant to the game at large.That's interesting, since my flavour text is incredibly relevant.
I'd like to point out you've taken that sentence out of context, and demanded a mass-claim on what is essentially D1. Perhaps we should discuss things before taking drastic measures?
For starters: what makes you think the Evil role is immune to lynches?
Quote
It told you an evil would awaken today, and you knew you had to find a way to destroy it. [...] Among them [the players], you know hides a dream that burns with a fiery evil far more powerful than you. It will be of no use for you to strike against it...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 27, 2016, 11:38:20 am
I, too, seem impotent against it.
Post by: Starver on December 27, 2016, 12:48:24 pm
Quote
By the way, have some terrible poetry...First, last, first, last, ... With bonus topicality of the words.
I dream to two levels and fall a little fall,
As historic yearnings I see that hurt some more.
I nail a trait, a unlit monster,
But you turn from afeared, say over.
Burn last day, do I really have call?
It lessens thy knowledge, I loudly bawl.
Jests you silently,
Can't one shun, crisis free?
Explanation later.
Also, Fallacy, my role (and I suspect others') aren't coloured at all. Thanks for confirming that you probably are the one indicated in my roletext (as red coloured), and it's not a mistake due to a role-misdirect. Which, as with others, ends in something I'm not sure what do with right now....
Quote
You know that it's power - like yours - can never match the power of that beast. You do not have the strength to fight it, and any attempts you make to slay the MINOTAUR will be in vain.[/i][/font]
Anyway, I'll be a couple of hours then take another serious look at my roletext, to see what I missed about what I can actually do. (Now revealed, if it's not a big trick, I'm really not sure what's holding Fallacy back, though...)
Post by: Starver on December 27, 2016, 12:49:59 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 27, 2016, 01:27:02 pm
Post by: hector13 on December 27, 2016, 01:32:49 pm
Post by: Starver on December 27, 2016, 02:21:54 pm
QuoteYou know that it's power - like yours - can never match the power of that beast. You do not have the strength to fight it, and any attempts you make to slay the MINOTAUR will be in vain.
Until I saw Fallacy say otherwise, while I was off-line, I didn't know I could even do anything other than vote, and I didn't want to do that because of the above. Had thought someone with an actual action needed to do something with/for me.
(Haven't worked out what it is I shouod do, yet. I'll be home again in ~1 hour and be able to take that proper look that I need.)
Post by: hector13 on December 27, 2016, 02:24:48 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 27, 2016, 02:28:33 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 27, 2016, 02:39:36 pm
Post by: Starver on December 27, 2016, 03:35:52 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 27, 2016, 03:38:02 pm
Post by: Starver on December 27, 2016, 03:48:18 pm
((* My flavourtext, and seemingly Fish's, tells me exactly who the Minataur is. It's not even an N0 'lucky action'. Thus WTH is the round mechanics that can defeat this auto-discovery by two players? It must be deeper than the superficial appearance. But given I completely lack a better idea as to what Hidden Autos might be lurking to trap us... Or am I just too paranoid, and it's a double-bluff amd really is that simple? Well, we'll find out, obviously.))
And Ninja Fish is correct. SFAICT, I'm not an action-making person, but I might find something on my next read or two of my role... Here's hoping.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 27, 2016, 08:40:07 pm
Y'know what? No.
Yes, I'm the Minotaur. Yes, my name's red. But my win condition, I realize, doesn't require you to die. I simply wish to stalk the labyrinth until time ceases. I'm a survivor.
Then who is the actual evil role? Or, True Evil, methinks? Some kind of dream creature. Y'see, I don't think I was originally the minotaur. Something caused a change. Some kind of dream creature that released my subconscious into my conscious, based on my flavor.
A True Evil role who turned us all into monsters. Let's get claiming.
~~~
I am the Minotaur. I wish to stalk the maze till time ends. I may release my human disguise in order to kill someone, though I will be revealed as the Minotaur then.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 27, 2016, 11:11:37 pm
Unvote
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 27, 2016, 11:13:28 pm
My wincon hints heavily at FoU being the Evil role, but it's never stated, and I'm pretty sure he's not.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 27, 2016, 11:16:02 pm
There seem to be two separate dreams mentioned in mine - 'evil' vs. 'powerful'. Check that.
Also, *implies heavily, not hints.
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 12:01:08 am
It's a trap.
My wincon hints heavily at FoU being the Evil role, but it's never stated, and I'm pretty sure he's not.
You were pretty sure he was a minute ago. What's changed? Why should we take stock of this sure thing when you're not sure about your last sure thing?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 28, 2016, 12:05:46 am
hector13, claim.
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 12:08:16 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 28, 2016, 12:10:03 am
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 12:13:56 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 28, 2016, 12:24:49 am
So basically, it's either you or EP. Or Starver, but I doubt they'd go to that much effort to encode a hidden message into bad poetry just for a fakeclaim they can't know would be substantiated.
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 12:39:39 am
How is it either me or EP? You've presented no evidence of this, other than your flavour, known only to you. You were sure it was FoU before and then second guessed yourself. I have no reason to believe you're right this time and you're wrong about FoU.
Take a look at FoU's claim, then tell me why I shouldn't vote for him.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 28, 2016, 01:15:08 am
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 01:30:43 am
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 02:02:46 am
It's a trap.
My wincon hints heavily at FoU being the Evil role, but it's never stated, and I'm pretty sure he's not.
Starver, reread your role.
There seem to be two separate dreams mentioned in mine - 'evil' vs. 'powerful'. Check that.
Also, *implies heavily, not hints.
While I am hugely suspicious of your motives right now, and feel you're dangling some obvious bait here, perhaps it would be wise to provide us with the following:
The flavour that is referring to "evil" vs. "powerful".
Why you think the aforementioned are separate things, or otherwise do not refer to the same thing.
Why all that leads you to believe FoU is not the Evil role, despite allegedly being told he is, backed up by Starver's claim, and FoU confirming.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 28, 2016, 02:47:54 am
How do you know his role is survivor? Do you even know your role?I have a copy of his role. Like I said.
And yes, I know my role, I just didn't read it carefully to begin with.
I'd rather not.
Because...They're referred to differently? And my wincon is positioned in such a way that I could lop off everything about the 'powerful' dream and still have a valid role.
FoU's wincon is a survivor wincon.
Rolenames are weird this round.
Starver claimed nothing about FoU's alignment, just that FoU was the Minotaur.
FoU didn't confirm they were evil, they claimed Survivor.
...
FoU:What's your take on all of this?
Post by: Starver on December 28, 2016, 06:51:28 am
Power of dreams.
Can recognise nightmares.
An evil dream becoming its dreamer's master.
Must destroy it (Wincon?)
My dream can find that dream.
Thus I can find it.
My rolename.
~~~
I find a dream (automatically, it seems) not like the rest (conceivably different from the above?).
Savage, powerful.
It does not see me (?) but I see it verbatim.
Quote
The person's dream.That was FoU (explicitly) but another saw this (Fish, by claim).
Yearning to be free.
Rage becomes their own. (Not exactly promising!)
No longer chained to the mind.
Now, you can finally stalk the halls of the labyrinth until the end of time! (Survivor Wincon?)
You are the MINOTAUR! (Literal, so if not just a huge mod-distraction then pretty damning.
~~~
Desire to kill(!)
Can kill once but with dire consequences. (Survivor protective mechanism? Well, already gave that away, anyway.)
Best to save.
(But nothing in this, presumed snippet, suggested any 'night' action other than the one not yet used.)
They saw this too but you don't know who this was (Fish does seemsto be proven to be this, though it was a long time in coming...)
Neither can match the beast. (Assuming we still want to..?).
We (individually? Together, even..?) cannot kill it.
(End-note, no explicit actions or autos or whatever...)
So... unvote with relief more because I'm sure that the lynch won't work than because our target should not be Fallacy. Although there's that possibility.
New worst case is that Fallacy is the best defence against A.N.Other and we've spotlit them. Leaving me with the conclusion that if nobody does a better job than Fish at proving themselves truly kindred dream-discoverers, Fish is definitely allied and Fallacy is tentatively independent without necessarily being dangerous. Hector and EP, then... *ponders*
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 12:35:51 pm
How do you know his role is survivor? Do you even know your role?I have a copy of his role. Like I said.
And yes, I know my role, I just didn't read it carefully to begin with.
I'd rather not.
Because...They're referred to differently? And my wincon is positioned in such a way that I could lop off everything about the 'powerful' dream and still have a valid role.
FoU's wincon is a survivor wincon.
Miscommunication. I meant alignment, not role. Do you know your alignment as well as FoU's?
FoU didn't confirm they were evil, they claimed Survivor.
I don't even. There isn't even anything for me to argue against. No day game arguments. Nothing. I've got nothing.
Y'know what? No.
Rhetorical flourish. Fancy, but contentless.
Yes, I'm the Minotaur. Yes, my name's red. But my win condition, I realize, doesn't require you to die. I simply wish to stalk the labyrinth until time ceases. I'm a survivor.
Claim's the name is red. For 100% of the games so far, the Evil role has been in red.
Then who is the actual evil role? Or, True Evil, methinks? Some kind of dream creature. Y'see, I don't think I was originally the minotaur. Something caused a change. Some kind of dream creature that released my subconscious into my conscious, based on my flavor.
Deflection. "oh of course it looks like I'm the Evil role, but last round there was an Evil role and a True Evil role! So even if I am Evil, I'm not the Evil, amirite?"
A True Evil role who turned us all into monsters. Let's get claiming.
Role-fishing, and hopeful speculation. Does anyone else have a monster as their flavour? I don't.
¡Muy importante!
I am the Minotaur. I wish to stalk the maze till time ends. I may release my human disguise in order to kill someone, though I will be revealed as the Minotaur then.
A survivor claim with these abilities does not make sense. A survivor merely has to live 'til the end. If they have a disguise - which presumably will make them appear town or benign or whatever - why would they willingly give it up to perform an action that has nothing to do with their wincon?
¡Muy importante!
FoU:What's your take on all of this?
Why are you asking FoU about it? We know what FoU thinks about it, and even if we didn't, I'm quite certain he's not going to say "yeah, fair cop, lynch me" is he?
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 28, 2016, 01:13:10 pm
If Tomasque broke that pattern, why not break this one?
I don't think we even have true alignments, except inasmuch anti-'evil dream' is Town-analogue.
No, it's 'my wincon actually reads like a Survivor', which it does.
Ah ah ah, but the Town not being able to kill the Evil role, that does mean somebody has to have a kill that isn't Town. And FoU's the perfect spot to put it.
Starver:If you have an investigative role, it would be a good idea to use it.
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 01:31:56 pm
And this round there were rolenames in bold (underline?) Times New Roman that wasn't green.
If Tomasque broke that pattern, why not break this one?
Pointless speculation. Why base an argument on whether or not to lynch someone on something that can't be proven during the course of the game?
I don't think we even have true alignments, except inasmuch anti-'evil dream' is Town-analogue.
Then why are you arguing that FoU is a survivor? If he's a survivor analogue, then he's not Town analogue.
No, it's 'my wincon actually reads like a Survivor', which it does.
Ah ah ah, but the Town not being able to kill the Evil role, that does mean somebody has to have a kill that isn't Town. And FoU's the perfect spot to put it.
These are mutually exclusive conditions. A survivor is a third-party, and therefore has no reason to help town. If you insist on using this argument, then we would in fact benefit from FoU's death. A third-party very rarely wins on their own, and the meta-game for MM is essentially points collecting. If the Evil role wins, that's only one person FoU would have to share the points with in the end.
Furher, you appear to be assuming FoU is the key to town winning, despite the survivor claim. It seems a bit unfair on Town having a third-party that has no vested interest in a Town victory being the key to a Town victory, don't you think?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 28, 2016, 01:37:28 pm
Responses:
Claim's the name is red. For 100% of the games so far, the Evil role has been in red.One: the Round of Hands, in which Evils were functionally town. Two: bastard mod. Three: Round 20, in which an Evil needed to side with town. Against you.
Role-fishing, and hopeful speculation. Does anyone else have a monster as their flavour? I don't.Of course not, you have some sort of dream creature as your flavor. In any case, refer to round 20. A "evil" within the town that actually needs to side with the town. That's another possibility.
Rhetorical flourish. Fancy, but contentless.Yes? What of it?
Deflection. "oh of course it looks like I'm the Evil role, but last round there was an Evil role and a True Evil role! So even if I am Evil, I'm not the Evil, amirite?"
Bastard mod. And Round 20. So, no, not deflection, reasoning.
A survivor claim with these abilities does not make sense. A survivor merely has to live 'til the end. If they have a disguise - which presumably will make them appear town or benign or whatever - why would they willingly give it up to perform an action that has nothing to do with their wincon?
Assume a True Evil that needs all players other than him dead in order to win, clashing with the survivor wincon.
¡Muy importante!
Rhetorical flourish. :P
Why are you asking FoU about it? We know what FoU thinks about it, and even if we didn't, I'm quite certain he's not going to say "yeah, fair cop, lynch me" is he?
In the hopes that I might elaborate, methinks. For the record, my original intention was to say something like "yeah, fair cop, lynch me" in the post in which I claimed Minotaur... then I thought better.
~~~
You're not getting out of this without a claim, hector.
~~~
Pointless speculation. Why base an argument on whether or not to lynch someone on something that can't be proven during the course of the game?What of role flips?
Then why are you arguing that FoU is a survivor? If he's a survivor analogue, then he's not Town analogue.
These are mutually exclusive conditions. A survivor is a third-party, and therefore has no reason to help town. If you insist on using this argument, then we would in fact benefit from FoU's death. A third-party very rarely wins on their own, and the meta-game for MM is essentially points collecting. If the Evil role wins, that's only one person FoU would have to share the points with in the end.
Furher, you appear to be assuming FoU is the key to town winning, despite the survivor claim. It seems a bit unfair on Town having a third-party that has no vested interest in a Town victory being the key to a Town victory, don't you think?
Refer to "Assume a True Evil that needs all players other than him to win, clashing with the survivor wincon."
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 28, 2016, 02:00:53 pm
They were still Evil, though—and the same setup can't exist here, since no-one else has a coloured name.Claim's the name is red. For 100% of the games so far, the Evil role has been in red.One: the Round of Hands, in which Evils were functionally town.
Quote
Two: bastard mod.The fact that this game is bastard mod means we can't be sure of anything, not that nothing implies anything.
Quote
Three: Round 20, in which an Evil needed to side with town.But the true Evil role's name was also red. That might not be the case here, of course, but red certainly implies evil, even if it isn't explicit.
Quote
Against you.Irrelevant.
I'd like to hear everyone's rolename, please; I have a kinda-sorta investigate that needs the correct rolename to work, and it'd be nice if I could use it on someone else if/when FoU gets lynched.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 28, 2016, 02:04:24 pm
What even? Yes it can, although I don't think we should do it.And this round there were rolenames in bold (underline?) Times New Roman that wasn't green.
If Tomasque broke that pattern, why not break this one?
Pointless speculation. Why base an argument on whether or not to lynch someone on something that can't be proven during the course of the game?
Quote
Because he is, you numbskull.I don't think we even have true alignments, except inasmuch anti-'evil dream' is Town-analogue.
Then why are you arguing that FoU is a survivor? If he's a survivor analogue, then he's not Town analogue.
Quote
Counterargument: Third party having 'eliminate scum' wincon in an earlier round, survivors win if they survive, points aren't 'shared'.No, it's 'my wincon actually reads like a Survivor', which it does.
Ah ah ah, but the Town not being able to kill the Evil role, that does mean somebody has to have a kill that isn't Town. And FoU's the perfect spot to put it.
These are mutually exclusive conditions. A survivor is a third-party, and therefore has no reason to help town. If you insist on using this argument, then we would in fact benefit from FoU's death. A third-party very rarely wins on their own, and the meta-game for MM is essentially points collecting. If the Evil role wins, that's only one person FoU would have to share the points with in the end.
What do you even mean we benefit from FoU' s death, because he's the only known way to get rid of the evil role.
Quote
Furher, you appear to be assuming FoU is the key to town winning, despite the survivor claim. It seems a bit unfair on Town having a third-party that has no vested interest in a Town victory being the key to a Town victory, don't you think?Maybe, but nevertheless he probably is, and I presume the Evil role will win alone if they aren't taken out.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 28, 2016, 02:20:44 pm
[1] They were still Evil, though—and the same setup can't exist here, since no-one else has a coloured name.
[2] The fact that this game is bastard mod means we can't be sure of anything, not that nothing implies anything.
[3] But the true Evil role's name was also red. That might not be the case here, of course, but red certainly implies evil, even if it isn't explicit.
[4] Irrelevant.
[5] I'd like to hear everyone's rolename, please; I have a kinda-sorta investigate that needs the correct rolename to work, and it'd be nice if I could use it on someone else if/when FoU gets lynched.
[1]: See alternate scenario. Like in Round 20.
[2]: So?
[3]: Bastard mod.
[4]: Irrelevant.
[5]: How does that tie into you being the Prophet?
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 02:44:47 pm
ctrl+t opens the new tab, don't know why I hit ctrl+r :))
FoU
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Everybody: Has there ever been a repeat of a round mechanic/gimmick during the game? Has there ever been a repeat in consecutive rounds of a mechanic/gimmick?
TBF
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on December 28, 2016, 02:47:07 pm
hector13. Bandwagoning scum.This is my main thinking, here at the ragged end of the marathon. But that's Hector's MO.
FoS Hector, though, on the assumption that Fallacy isn't a straight and/or double bluffed enemy.. (Is blue the right colour for that?. Making it explicit.)
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 02:49:51 pm
(Sorry about not posting yesterday; I spent ten hours on a bus. The bus had wi-fi, but I didn't know that.)They were still Evil, though—and the same setup can't exist here, since no-one else has a coloured name.Claim's the name is red. For 100% of the games so far, the Evil role has been in red.One: the Round of Hands, in which Evils were functionally town.QuoteTwo: bastard mod.The fact that this game is bastard mod means we can't be sure of anything, not that nothing implies anything.QuoteThree: Round 20, in which an Evil needed to side with town.But the true Evil role's name was also red. That might not be the case here, of course, but red certainly implies evil, even if it isn't explicit.QuoteAgainst you.Irrelevant.
I'd like to hear everyone's rolename, please; I have a kinda-sorta investigate that needs the correct rolename to work, and it'd be nice if I could use it on someone else if/when FoU gets lynched.
I'd also like to point out the active lurkiness of this post.
And the buddying element, seeing as how anyone with eyes can see the arguments FoU presented were irrelevant.
Also the rolefishiness of the last bit. Might just need the names of the roles for wholesale murder.
hector13. Bandwagoning scum.This is my main thinking, here at the ragged end of the marathon. But that's Hector's MO.
>:( I think that warrants a "fuck off" for boiling down my play to following everyone else :P
Since when do I bandwagon? :'(
FoS Hector, though, on the assumption that Fallacy isn't a straight and/or double bluffed enemy.. (Is blue the right colour for that?. Making it explicit.)
Blue is the color for that. Why not go whole hog and vote me though? Do you not want to be responsible for the final vote on someone?
Post by: Starver on December 28, 2016, 02:59:54 pm
Not only was the prior round an exemplar of this, it was also when (for my very last planned revelation of this sort, I promise) you should look at the initial letters in this particular segment.
Did anyone really know enough? Neatly ended dead 'cause our real rogue initiated dully ordinary rogue's special nastiness. E xcept that remained ostensibly unknown, not deducible. Questionably unlucky effects? Should those insidious obscurations negate most actions, realistically?(Assume the obvious typo is not a typo; and then add a 'K' to the end, because I obviously did mess up on that detail.)
Post by: Starver on December 28, 2016, 03:11:09 pm
Bad phrasing on my part. It's not the bandwagoning, it's the attack-dog nature that is your MO, for right or wrong, for truth or falatiousness. That you used it here to jump on suspicions and make the bandwagon roll is the problem I have. And refuse to tit-for-tat along the way. That is definitely your playing style, but it seems like it's a bit Spinal Tap in this instance.hector13. Bandwagoning scum.This is my main thinking, here at the ragged end of the marathon. But that's Hector's MO.
>:( I think that warrants a "fuck off" for boiling down my play to following everyone else :P
Since when do I bandwagon? :'(
Quote
Wasn't scared of that with Fallacy. But I don't want to condemn you (as I might if A.N.Other is perfectly happy to build on my suspicion) before I'm sure.FoS Hector, though, on the assumption that Fallacy isn't a straight and/or double bluffed enemy.. (Is blue the right colour for that?. Making it explicit.)
Blue is the color for that. Why not go whole hog and vote me though? Do you not want to be responsible for the final vote on someone?
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2016, 03:38:03 pm
Bad phrasing on my part. It's not the bandwagoning, it's the attack-dog nature that is your MO, for right or wrong, for truth or falatiousness. That you used it here to jump on suspicions and make the bandwagon roll is the problem I have. And refuse to tit-for-tat along the way. That is definitely your playing style, but it seems like it's a bit Spinal Tap in this instance.hector13. Bandwagoning scum.This is my main thinking, here at the ragged end of the marathon. But that's Hector's MO.
>:( I think that warrants a "fuck off" for boiling down my play to following everyone else :P
Since when do I bandwagon? :'(
We can't just wait around for the Evil role to kill everyone. For all we know the "one role to kill the Evil" is actually present, and the fact FoU has only one kill is so he can kill them without being able to murder his way to victory.
I started the voting because it's a bit pointless to try to no lynch through things, particularly if there is a time limit to this. I don't particularly care if it looks scummy - frankly, an understandable thing - so long as we do things.
The problem we're having right now is TBF seems to think we should all trust him to do as he says, when he doesn't have all the information, and his interpretation of the information he does have could be flawed. If we lynch someone, we get a flip, that we can trust, and that we can build on. If we lynch FoU, and he flips Minotaur, we have your roles confirmed, though not necessarily your alignments.
I assume the "tit for tat" part is in reference to my stubborness not to claim. I normally don't want to make assumptions about someone's position, but I think the day ends in about a half hour, so I don't have the luxury of asking about it.
I'm not claiming because it doesn't benefit the town to do so, at this point. I think it actually helps the Evil role.
We start the game - as town - not knowing anything about other players (normally, anyway; I know you and TBF claim to have FoU's role, and he appears to have confirmed that) and having to get content into the game by interacting with other players. Knowing someone's role and abilities is useful, but it can only be confirmed 100% as true from a flip, so a claim doesn't really do anything.
If everyone claims, they will more than likely claim a benign alignment along with it, such as has happened here. That puts us back to square one. As town, we know someone is lying about their role, but we need to figure out who, because they'll more than likely be the Evil role.
Meanwhile, the Evil role has a list of things the Town has claimed, and has their pick of who they should target with whatever ability they have. They quite clearly have the advantage at that point, as the Town are still figuring out who they can trust, the Evil role picks off the most powerful town members 'til they have nothing to worry about but the day game.
If I don't claim the Evil role has to figure out if I am a powerful town member, in which case they should target me to get rid of me to hamstring the town, or if I'm a bit useless, in which case the town loses nothing. I don't particularly care if I get lynched over it, because at least that way there's evidence behind it that y'all can follow up on, as opposed to when the Evil role hits during the night (assuming no watchers or the like)
QuoteWasn't scared of that with Fallacy. But I don't want to condemn you (as I might if A.N.Other is perfectly happy to build on my suspicion) before I'm sure.FoS Hector, though, on the assumption that Fallacy isn't a straight and/or double bluffed enemy.. (Is blue the right colour for that?. Making it explicit.)
Blue is the color for that. Why not go whole hog and vote me though? Do you not want to be responsible for the final vote on someone?
This makes it look like you think I'm not the Evil role, though perhaps just the most suspicious person... what is more suspicious about me than anyone else?
Post by: Tomasque on December 29, 2016, 01:49:59 am
hector13 was killed by FallacyofUrist the MINOTAUR
hector13 was the Champion
Spoiler: Champion (click to show/hide)
FallacyofUrist gets one victory point.
Spoiler: Player Roles (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Action Log (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: EPILOGUE (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tomasque on December 29, 2016, 01:51:47 am
Post by: hector13 on December 29, 2016, 01:56:14 am
Any particular reason you chose to kill me, FoU?
Post by: Tomasque on December 29, 2016, 02:21:52 am
Post by: hector13 on December 29, 2016, 02:23:01 am
Post by: Tomasque on December 29, 2016, 02:26:27 am
We're all winners, man. We got to take part in this.Omygod thank you. You don't know how much that means to me as a GM :'( << Tears of joy
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 29, 2016, 03:09:27 am
Ach. Well played, Fallacy.
And thank you, Tomasque, because this was, indeed, pretty awesome.
I'm not sure who won. I'm kind of thinking me, but doubting it.
Post by: Starver on December 29, 2016, 03:41:14 am
In totality, I had faithfully totted up round details (including wins), early in the game, but that stopped after a hardware change and it was obvious that it wasn't going to just be a simple novel permutation of archetypes, each round...
Had fun (bordering on frustration at times), and you'll see that in my VP score, no doubt, being forfeited for the lulz many times.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 29, 2016, 05:07:50 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 29, 2016, 10:02:18 am
Any particular reason you chose to kill me, FoU?
One, you were being jumpy. I thought you were the True Evil role.
Two. Bandwagoning scum.
~~~
Here's the deal. The only reason I got away with that deception is because I believed it myself. I actually thought hector13 was the True Evil role who needed me to kill him for town to win. Worked out for me anyways. Seriously, that round was horribly weighted against scum.
So... gg. Speaking of which, I kept all my VP.
J'n buufnqujoh up gpsgfju nz mbtu wjdupsz qpjou jo fydibohf gps pof gjobm cpovt spvoe.
Maybe now we can do the quote-tage? Y'know, the thing where we go through the game and gather up the really funny quotes? Like hector's "Tomasque, you bastard".
~~~
We're all winners, man. We got to take part in this.Sure. Glorious game. Looking forwards to Exquisite Cops and Robbers, your next game.
That said, if we're all winners, then don't forget to put the "special guests" in the win tally post.
Post by: hector13 on December 29, 2016, 10:10:07 am
Post by: Starver on December 29, 2016, 10:14:41 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 29, 2016, 10:22:38 am
Round Commentary:
Round 1: In which I investigated hector, led everybody to bandwagon on him. Turns out he was the arsonist. The simplest of the rounds.
Round 2: In which I fail at being evil, pretend to be a bomb, fail at bluffing people out, get mobbed.
Round 3: In which deductive logic and luck remove a mind control ghost.
Round 4: In which I fail at being evil, even more so than last time. In which I am very very confused and nuked by a Negotiator. In which everybody is talking in secret and I somehow end up lynched.
Round 5: In which there is another lucky lynch. A fifth player shows up?
Round 6. In which we pass items around and blackmail only works once.
Round 7. In which people enter and exit the game at a whim and I really shouldn't have claimed.
Round 8. In which pacifism gets me killed and politics is abundant.
Round 9. In which everything is confusing to me, and I, as such, fail at being evil. Though I managed to lynch the bloody Saint.
Round 10. In which we have to knock first before acting. There's also a cult.
Round 11. In which I fail to obliterate anybody.
Round 12. In which talking is a privilege and I fail at being evil, more specifically manipulative. I'm also a russian.
Round 13. In which there is poking, fake time travel, and an alien.
Round 14. In which everybody is Evil except me. And there's hands involved. And one of the images hints at the players. Did I mention I hate silencing?
Round 15. In which I am confused and silenced.
Round 16. In which I finally succeed at being evil with hypnotic song.
Round 17. In which the roles are parallel to the previous round and hector understandably refuses to claim(and gets lynched anyways).
Round 18. In which love prevails.
Round 19. In which voodoo is a thing, there's a court case, we still don't know what would've happened if hector died... and who was Daryll Cricket anyways?
Round 20. In which... AAAARGH WHY.
Round 21. In which the game is so easy for town they're convinced that scum(me!) isn't scum.
And...
Bonus Round 1: In which roles change and Undertale is the theme. And I still don't know why I won.
Bonus Round 2: In which there is real time travel.
Thoughts?
Post by: hector13 on December 29, 2016, 10:36:02 am
Moonlit (thus EP?) knows the source explicitly. You only got given tentative hints, from my own latest information (spendthrift as I was, myself... ;) ).
Not really. I also gave up VPs, and figured out something a few months back, though I can't remember if I got the right one at the time... and then remember specifically round 20 figuring it out proper.
Your hints aren't as easy to find as you think :P
Post by: Starver on December 29, 2016, 10:54:50 am
Post by: hector13 on December 29, 2016, 10:59:39 am
They were tentative, but enough to work with, particularly seeing as the "answer" to one of the hints was mentioned specifically in the thread someplace.
Post by: Tomasque on December 29, 2016, 01:11:21 pm
First, the Sorcerer and Sorceress - knowing a) the identity of the evil role b) its killing ability, which havens before lynch c) that their votes don't work on it and d) that there's a role that's exactly like theirs - begin by trying to find their copy. Once they succeed, they have to find how the two remaining players could take down the Minotaur, and could do that with the help of the Prophet, who would know the Champion and Sorceress/ess by rolename, and could communicate out loud by addressing people by rolename, thus still keeping the Minotaur in the dark. In the end, everyone could realize that if they all voted for the Minotaur, it wouldn't know who to kill. A second - but harder - tactic would be to have the Champion alone vote for the Minotaur, convincing it that they were simply pressure voting so that the Minotaur wouldn't attack.
In hindsight, I realize that I was trying too hard to make a really special final round, and ended up overreaching myself.
I have more stuff I want to post, but it's time to go snow-shoeing now, so I'll do it when I come home tonight (and I'll reveal the victory point totals as well).
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 29, 2016, 08:37:12 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 29, 2016, 08:38:25 pm
Post by: Tomasque on December 29, 2016, 08:57:28 pm
J'n buufnqujoh up gpsgfju nz mbtu wjdupsz qpjou jo fydibohf gps pof gjobm cpovt spvoe.That sounds amazing! But... there's like 270 pages of this game... should we, like, split up to get all the quotes?
Maybe now we can do the quote-tage? Y'know, the thing where we go through the game and gather up the really funny quotes? Like hector's "Tomasque, you bastard".
Have to go to a movie now, but I'll add the rest later, I swear!
Post by: hector13 on December 29, 2016, 08:58:19 pm
Yeah, your flavor was definitely a bit confusing. Like, there are definitely two interpretations, judging howwe, you know, alleveryone but hector believed it...
*cough*
Though I will accept that it was the final round of a long bastard game, and you guys have a tendency to over complicate things :p
Having noted the phrase "your desire to kill" within that flavour though... I'm struggling to see how you came to the conclusion he was a survivor, though I have the benefit of absolute knowledge regarding the round.
Post by: Tomasque on December 30, 2016, 01:33:09 am
...FallacyofUrist and hector13!
Here is the Victory Point breakdown:
hector13: 12
FallacyofUrist: 12
TheBiggerFish: 11
Starver: 9
TMS / EP: 4
I would also like to thank everybody who played the game: hector13, FallacyofUrist, TheBiggerFish, Starver, The Moonlit Shadow, Elephant Parade, Shakerag, vishdafish, TheDarkStar! I am so thankful that all of you were here! I hope to see you guys again in my other games!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 30, 2016, 01:34:04 am
Ah well, GG all!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 30, 2016, 01:36:32 am
Post by: Tomasque on December 30, 2016, 01:59:28 am
Thoughts?That's a really good review of the rounds. Simple, but it really helps me see it from your point of view. Anyway, my thoughts on the rounds? Well, I'm the one who made them, so I'll be biased, but I gotta say that they did feel more complex interesting as time went on. The early rounds were still good, but in a simple sort of way (might be because there were only 4 players, but the rounds felt simpler mechanic-wise as well).
Well, that's my thoughts on it, now I have a question of my own:
What are your opinions on the rounds being based off each stanza of "Fingertips?" Was it a cool idea? Was it a cheap gimmick? Does it make the rounds feel that much better, or should I have not tried to conform to anything and instead made my rounds from scratch?
And while I'm on that topic - yeah, I know my hints weren't that easy to find. My magnificent powers of hindsight reveal to me I fell into the standard trap - armed with all the knowledge of the rounds, the secret seemed more obvious to me than it did to you. It's a bit of a downer that only one person really found out in the end, but I guess that's better than no one.
Oh right.You're referring to the one where I say something like "it's a song by my favorite band," right? Here's the link:
They were tentative, but enough to work with, particularly seeing as the "answer" to one of the hints was mentioned specifically in the thread someplace.
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155932.msg6998257;topicseen#msg6998257
Also, how will we do the quote page? With the length of this thread, there will be a lot of good quotes - should I set up a google docs where we can compile them before we post them in-thread?
Post by: Tomasque on December 30, 2016, 02:03:07 am
Also, I only have PMs accounting for 10 points, unless I won as a proper Scum once.Let no one say you're not honest - but you once sent in "keep" before I asked you about it, so that probably messed up your search. I double-checked, you have 11 points.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 30, 2016, 02:04:04 am
Ah.Also, I only have PMs accounting for 10 points, unless I won as a proper Scum once.Let no one say you're not honest - but you once sent in "keep" before I asked you about it, so that probably messed up your search. I double-checked, you have 11 points.
Post by: Starver on December 30, 2016, 02:51:29 am
Got some interesting gifts. One being an increasingly unreliable Neutrality dectector, which helped in perhaps one round total (IIRC, the first time it fired, I was the Neutral. Two others being the two bonus rounds just for my benefit. Sorry, they were my fault... ;)
(I wasn't sure if I was stressing Tomasque's ability to handle my forfeits, so I started Keeping more until the third option wrrived.)
Then I got the chance to see other people's received gifts (boring lot... :P ...the first couple of targets hadn't spent anything on such gifts by that point, and seemingly never did afterwards). Sill, fun to do. ;)
Post by: hector13 on December 30, 2016, 08:07:24 am
I got one useful mystery prize, that allowed me to know when there were three of the same archetype in the round, but it only triggered once. I did enjoy trying to figure out where the source was, didn't quite get it in the end, though I at least got to the album it was from :))
Post by: FallacyofUrist on December 30, 2016, 01:50:04 pm
GG.
Very GG.
~~~
What are your opinions on the rounds being based off each stanza of "Fingertips?" Was it a cool idea? Was it a cheap gimmick? Does it make the rounds feel that much better, or should I have not tried to conform to anything and instead made my rounds from scratch?There were hints?
And while I'm on that topic - yeah, I know my hints weren't that easy to find. My magnificent powers of hindsight reveal to me I fell into the standard trap - armed with all the knowledge of the rounds, the secret seemed more obvious to me than it did to you. It's a bit of a downer that only one person really found out in the end, but I guess that's better than no one.
~~~
Also, how will we do the quote page? With the length of this thread, there will be a lot of good quotes - should I set up a google docs where we can compile them before we post them in-thread?Yeh, sure.
~~~
Questions:
1. Could Imitate only be used once per day?
2. Could you post a list of all the forfeit benefits you planned?
3. Who was Daryll Cricket? And how did he die?
~~~
Now if you excuse me, I'm nominating this game for the Notable Games Archive.
Post by: Tomasque on December 30, 2016, 04:05:51 pm
There were hints?The hints were mostly from forfeiting victory points, but there were occasional hints in-thread (abilities named after verses in the song (ex: Fish's ability in the messaging round), and flavor text paralleling some of the lyrics (the Stalker's flavor). The in-thread hints were even more unnoticeable, and really served as tests to see if any of you already knew the song.
~~~
Questions:
1. Could Imitate only be used once per day?
2. Could you post a list of all the forfeit benefits you planned?
3. Who was Daryll Cricket? And how did he die?
1. Imitate? Do you mean the Imitator's fight ability? They should have been able to use it multiple times per day, but I forgot to write that. That round was a clusterfuck anyway, so it doesn't surprise me I didn't catch it. Sorry about that.
2. I would if I could, but I lost all of my original notes. I can make a list of forfeits I gave, and the few extra ones I remember.
3. Darryl Cricket was an NPC - he didn't have any connection to the other characters. He was planned to die the first night, so that there would be a reason to do the court session, and so that anyone who visited him would be suspect. Flavorwise, it's never started whether the Voodoo Master was responsible for his death, and I left out open on purpose. Why? I just never felt like defining it.
Post by: hector13 on December 30, 2016, 05:33:38 pm
It's a testament to how good of a player hector is that he went on a forfeit binge and tied with me... somebody who never forfeited.
Nah, I think it was mostly an experience thing. I don't know if Starver has much experience elsewhere playing Mafia, but I'm reasonably sure he said this was among his first round these parts, and I think this was TBF's first too.
I had played a lot with you and Moonlit so I was more familiar with how you both played, which was beneficial for reading you for the most part.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on December 30, 2016, 06:31:20 pm
Post by: Tomasque on December 30, 2016, 11:39:38 pm
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ELofG1jNzzSzwbDLDTtuATO_BH75RLSqbV679TqlduM/edit?usp=sharing
Post by: Starver on December 31, 2016, 06:50:57 am
| Round | Fallacy | Fish | Hector | Starver | Moonlit/EP |
| 1 Town win | Psychologist 1VP | Firefighter 1VP | Arsonist | Librarian 1VP Keep | n/a |
| 2 Town Win | Strangler | Thief | Detective 1VP | Pianist 1VP-1 Forfeit #1 | n/a |
| 3 Town Win | The Protective One 1VP | Phantom | The Watchful One 1VP | The Rational One 1VP-1 Forfeit #2 | n/a |
| 4 Town Win | Imitator | Loudmouth 1VP | Dead Ringer 1VP | Negotiator 1VP Keep | (Moonlit...) Private Postman 1VP |
| 5 Town Win | Snoop 1VP | Psychiatrist | Bouncer 1VP | Paranoic | Stalker |
| 6 Town Win | Pauper 1VP | Spy 1VP | Gunsmith 1VP | Bombmaker | Stalker |
| 7 Scum Win | Driver | Hitchhiker | Traveler 1VP | Sociopath 1VP Keep | Undercover |
| 8 Scum Win | Pacifist | Historian | Captain | Interloper 2VP-1 Forfeit (Bonus Round) | Politician |
| Bonus 1 Town Win | PAPYRUS 1VP | Sans>Frisk | Asriel>Flowey | Undyne>tEMMIE | Chara>Nabstablook 1VP |
| 9 Town Win | Walton the Wonderful | Mayor of Nothing 1VP | Madderman 1VP | Saint 1VP Keep | Unmerchant 1VP |
| 10 Scum Win | Salesman | Uncle | Nephew | Cultist[/color] 1VP-1 Snoop #1 | Policeman |
| 11 Town Win | Sorcerer | Monk 1VP | Rogue 1VP | Barbarian 1VP-1 Snoop #2 | Psychic 1VP |
| 12 Town Win | (Russian) | Patient 1VP | Investigator1VP | Felon 1VP-1 Snoop #3 | Coroner 1VP |
| 13 Town Win | Socialite (TDS) 1VP | Signaller 1VP | Sentry 1VP | Private Eye 1VP-1 Snoop #3 | Doppleganger |
| 14 (Inverted) Scum Win | Hand of Justice | Stranglehold 1VP | Handmirror 1VP | Puppet Hand 1VP Keep | Grip of Terror 1VP |
| 15 Scum Win | Passerby | Dreamer | Cthulhu=2VP | Journalist | Artist |
| 16 Scum Win | Siren 1VP | Eavesdropper | Ouja Master | Ex-bouncer | Watchman |
| 17 Town Win | Medium 1VP | Bodyguard 1VP | Whisperer | Patrolman 1VP Keep | Porch-sitter 1VP |
| 18 Town Win | Preacher 1VP | Lover 1VP | Lover 1VP | Parent 1VP-1 Foreit (Bonus Round) | (EP...) Hippie 1VP |
| Bonus 2 Scum Win (Guests!) | Karl Glogauer | Lieutenant Pilgrim | Phil Connors | Paradox 1VP-1 Forfeit #3 (Bonus Forfeit returned?) | Abe |
| 19 Town Win | Inspector 1VP | Voodoo Master | Judge 1VP | Lawyer>Plaintiff 1VP Keep | Witness |
| 20 True Scum Win+ | Thief | Detective 1VP (???) | Fingertips 1VP | Pianist | Strangler |
| 21 Scum Win | Minataur | Sorceress | Champion | Sorcerer | Prophet |
| Totals? | 11 won (9+2) Result=12? (I missed a double?) | 11 won (9+1+1) Result=11 (None forfeit) | 16 won (10+4+2) Result=12 (4 Forfeit?) | 18 won (11+7) Result=9 (5 forfeit, 4 snoops) | 8 won (7+1) Result=4 (4 forfeit?) |
Post by: Tomasque on December 31, 2016, 12:25:32 pm
Post by: Tomasque on December 31, 2016, 12:28:09 pm
Post by: Tomasque on January 01, 2017, 12:28:23 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on January 01, 2017, 03:47:26 pm