Print

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

[Jack A T]

Got an answer back from zombie.  My power would have worked on the dead: the image would be revealed separately from the roleflip, then revealed again as part of the roleflip.  Thus, I was blocked separately from the shift to Persus.

Everyone: any speculations on who Persus targeted with Goblin Christmas?

Fallacy: Sorry, missed this initially.  Probably one of the experienced players.

[flabort]

Everyone: any speculations on who Persus targeted with Goblin Christmas?

Not me. Can't say who Persus would have picked, but the ability does explain why the night continued for a few hours after I thought it would end (so that he could pick a target).

I can't tell if this is sarcastic or not.

flabort: Snide, but not sarcastic.  I am legitimately astounded.

Anyways, I trust that you're telling the truth.

Would you care to explain why?

Not at the moment, I hope you don't mind waiting for the right time for me to reveal that. In the meantime let's say I'd like you to use your "1-shot picture reveal" on me tonight, assuming I survive.

Teneb What is your opinion on what happened day 1? Does anything stand out as new information to you now that two people are dead?

Fallacy Despite the doubt cast on you during day 1, what is your outlook beginning on day 2?

TheLoneStar Who do you find second-most suspicious, and why?

PPe: Jack, who would you say those experienced players are?

[FallacyofUrist]

Anyway, any narrative of me being the killer must deal with one thing: my claims in thread today.  Sorry to drag you into WIFOM, but it has to be dealt with: Why would killer me claim both the redirect or randomize and the action failure?  Why not just the latter, explaining the failure without connecting me to the dead?

Your question: "Assume I'm killer, why would I claim both action-redirect/randomize and failure?"
Well. In my opinion, a killer wouldn't be likely to do that. But a townie, wanting to give information to his fellows, might. On the other hand, a failure is a suspicious thing: you might have never had that ability in the first place(could be scum pretending to have the ability but saying it failed to cover up the lack of ability). If you, as the killer, claim you were redirected... that connects you to Persus.
You're right, you just WIFOMed me. This is hard to think through.

Answer: if you're the killer, claiming you were redirected to Persus creates a low-tier(mini) refuge in audacity. Why would a villain tell you he targeted the person who died? If you're town, you also would want to claim your redirect to give the town information and to act as a semi-alibi. In short... in my opinion, for the moment, both town and scum would want to claim the redirection(fake or not). A less experienced player might not have tried that if scum, however. Since you're very experienced, that doesn't help me. Hm hm hm.

Fallacy Despite the doubt cast on you during day 1, what is your outlook beginning on day 2?

TheLoneStar Who do you find second-most suspicious, and why?

Oh come on, his username is TheDarkStar, not TheLoneStar! On a more serious note, my outlook is good- we still have a rather large buffer of people in the way of the scum(more time to find them) and I intend to find the traitors in our midst, to the best of my ability.

[flabort]

Oh come on, his username is TheDarkStar, not TheLoneStar!

I could have sworn this was the image he sent in:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But maybe my algorithms are off.

Also on a more serious note, have you seen the trailer for the sequel?

my outlook is good- we still have a rather large buffer of people in the way of the scum(more time to find them) and I intend to find the traitors in our midst, to the best of my ability.

What would you consider acceptable losses to this buffer before crunch time kicks in?

[Deus Asmoth]

What exactly did you do around the test besides asking people what they thought about it towards the end of the day (i.e, not an initial part of the test)?

Deus: Ah, now I see what you're doing: reducing my test to the surface appearance of the very start of it and ignoring the rest.  Not even looking at the explicit statement I've made about wider intentions behind the initial claim post, of course:

Tiruin: Writing it in the style of NQT's claims allowed me to get attention while ensuring a strong link between his claims and mine in debate.  Also, it was fun.

Why are you looking at my test in such a surface-level, limited way?  Is this how you normally look at in-thread behaviour in Mafia?

I'm looking at your test in a surface level way because that's the definition of your test that you used for the majority of day 1 (ie back in the exact same post as you just quoted):

Everyone: Taking what you know about me and what you know about NQT into account, do you support my decision to carry out my test?  Explain your answer.  This will not change my plan for tonight.

So are you referring to that inspect which did nothing and therefore didn't accomplish much other than as a reaction test for NQT when you ask people about your test or are you talking about how everyone else responded to it?

[FallacyofUrist]

Assuming a loss of two people per cycle, we have 9 people left... if that thing in the opening flavor post is right, there are 3 scum(might be wrong...)... assuming no deaths in scum... we did start with 11 people, right?

(3 scum, 6 non-scum) (3 scum, 4 non-scum) So we can lose two townies this cycle without a loss, but after that we get to LYLO(assuming there were 3 scum to begin with). Once we get to LYLO, it's real crunch time. For now, we still have Time.

[Tawa]

Tawa: This feels like you're trying to find an excuse to kill off NQT, more than anything else.  There's a disconnect, I think, between your vote and your reasoning.  Let's start with a few questions:
*What exactly does my action being redirected to the NK target say about NQT?
*What alignment do you think NQT is?
*Do you think NQT was the redirector?
*Do you think I am telling the truth about my action and what happened to it?
*What does my action's failure, and my explanation of it, say about me?
*Why would a town-hostile redirector redirect my action to someone they knew was dying?  Keep in mind my strong hints of the action being an NK.

1. I'm not sure what it does--maybe redirects his actions to whoever he nightkills--but the point is that you got redirected to the guy who got killed while targeting NQT, which is most likely not coincidental.
2. Mafia or SK.
3. Yes.
4. I have no reason to not believe you.
5. It means you've either uncovered very strong evidence of NQT being mafia or SK or that you're scum who is inexplicably drawing attention to himself by saying he used an ability on the nightkilled player.
6. To stop you from uncovering any information on anybody.

[notquitethere]

So if you'll recall, this was the vote count after 4mask voted:

Votecount:
Tiruin -
Teneb -
TheDarkStar -
Deus Asmoth -
FallacyofUrist - flabort, 4maskwolf
Persus13 -
Jack AT -
Tawarochir - Teneb
4maskwolf - Tawarochir
flabort - Jack AT
notquitethere - TheDarkStar

Not voting: Tiruin, Persus13, FallacyofUrist, Deus Asmoth

My thinking is that scum must not have cared about any of the possible targets being lynched. I'm inclined to believe Jack's claim, because it's fiddly enough to be true (being redirected AND blocked) and his power makes sense for the set-up. I also believe it's not likely a town player would block him. However a part of me just thinks he was just covering for the scum kill. That said, thinking on it some more, scum knew they wouldn't be able to lynch Persus today (as he's too new) so that's a small reason in favour of night killing him.

So my list of suspects today are:

Tiruin
Teneb
TheDarkStar
Deus Asmoth

So for now my vote is on Deus Asmoth who was most keen to tell me what a scum player may or may not decide to do. (And yes this isn't a reason in itself to vote you, I need to go back and see which of you looked worst.)

I'll have replies to people and a more in depth look at players later.

[Deus Asmoth]

So for now my vote is on Deus Asmoth who was most keen to tell me what a scum player may or may not decide to do. (And yes this isn't a reason in itself to vote you, I need to go back and see which of you looked worst.)

This is some pretty strange reasoning as far as I can make out. Disagreeing with you over whether Persus could have been the kill target makes me placeholder scum?

FoU

Assuming a loss of two people per cycle, we have 9 people left... if that thing in the opening flavor post is right, there are 3 scum(might be wrong...)... assuming no deaths in scum... we did start with 11 people, right?

(3 scum, 6 non-scum) (3 scum, 4 non-scum) So we can lose two townies this cycle without a loss, but after that we get to LYLO(assuming there were 3 scum to begin with). Once we get to LYLO, it's real crunch time. For now, we still have Time.

How likely do you think it is that we can lose two townies today without losing the game considering that you had NQT pegged as a mafia ally yesterday?

[FallacyofUrist]

... if mafia ally counts as mafia for win condition purposes, losing this day kills us. (I think).

How likely is it that we can lose two townies today without losing the game? It comes down to the roles, doesn't it. If the townies we lose are weak in power, our chance of winning won't decline too much(still feasible to win), but if they are strong in power... you can imagine the result. Of course, a lot of this game isn't anywhere near chance and probability- it's hard to judge what the likelihood of lynching scum is when it's not random(we're hunting scum, not randomly shooting townies).

If NQT is actually a mafia ally...

We need some activity from those who are inactive(Tiruin, Teneb, whatnot) to solve the mystery of mafia.
~~~

That is the question. Though mafia ally makes sense, so would survivor, serial killer, and a whole host of other roles. His death may or may not even clear up this mystery, if he's telling the truth about his obscured role flip.

NQT, the fact remains that you are rather suspicious. Doth thou have anything to contribute?

[notquitethere]

Fallacy you're like a broken record. My D1 claims were just to rustle people up and give me something to work with. I'm confident about hitting scum today and you can all expect my usual analytical style. Also it's weird to ask me of I've got anything to contribute when I've literally just made a solid post narrowing down a list of suspects for the day. Have you got anything to say against my rationale?

I'm stuck on my phone right now but I'll get some proper posts in on Sunday.

Tawa, I'm not sure I get you reasoning. Do you think the scum team redirected Jack onto Persus to frame him? How does that indite me?

[notquitethere]

Flabort

votecount:

Where is NQT's vote?

The votecount is correct.

I find it odd that you never followed up on this.

[Teneb]

I'm having to deal with health stuff, both mine and others. I'll have to ask for replacement.

[FallacyofUrist]

Fallacy you're like a broken record. My D1 claims were just to rustle people up and give me something to work with. I'm confident about hitting scum today and you can all expect my usual analytical style. Also it's weird to ask me of I've got anything to contribute when I've literally just made a solid post narrowing down a list of suspects for the day. Have you got anything to say against my rationale?

Oh, your rational is fine- what's suspicious is the fact that the "test" on you failed- redirected, Jack claimed. That very well could have been your doing.

[flabort]

Flabort

votecount:

Where is NQT's vote?

The votecount is correct.

I find it odd that you never followed up on this.

Once ZU said it was correct, despite your absent vote, I knew that there must be a reason for it. Since you didn't volunteer the information, I figured there was nothing out of the ordinary going on and you'd been vote-blocked or had it stolen. I mean, given this is a BYO, there's going to be vote-shenanigans. ZU's answer was good enough for me.