Print

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

[Tomasque]

Round 8 - Day 4
 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)

Historian
 Though you are old and half-blind, your knowledge of human history secured you an escape from your invaded planet. But will history just repeat itself, with your ship doomed like the Earth it came from?
Archetype: Town Weakness role
Wincon: You win if the Evil role is eliminated.

(a) Astigmatism: You do not know who voted for you when the day ends.

  FallacyofUrist was the Pacifist

Spoiler: Pacifist (click to show/hide)

Pacifist
You knew that if they started a new world, it would be destroyed by war, so you went aboard the ship to introduce peace to their war-stained minds. Now the ship is in danger, and you find yourself conflicted. Isn't there a way to sort things out... peacefully?
Archetype: Town Weakness role
Wincon: You win if the Evil role is eliminated.

(a) Non-Aggression: You cannot vote.

[TheBiggerFish]

Dammit.

[hector13]

Well... This is going to either be fucking stupendous for town, or quite awful.

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.

[Starver]

From my perspective, I only know it's one of you two, not yet which one.

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 used<sup>1

1</sup> 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?

[Starver]

(Forgot to complete this thought before continuing!)

...and assuming that polymorph thing wasn't used¹

...then it probably wouldn't have revealed anything anyway, worse luck.

[hector13]

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?

[hector13]

I already said I don't have the bulletproof thing. I never had it. Ever. I said that yesterday... Starver also said who he was voting for. Pay attention

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.

[hector13]

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?

[Starver]

At this point, I think nobody can be killed today.  And Hector asks what benefit there would be to the hypothetical scummy-him to extend the 'expedition', and I don't exactly know.  But a hypothetically scummy-Moonlit would have had to have looked at the same circumstances and decided to extend it, by not voting Hector¹, and hoping to draw me into helping complete the task today.  (And ditto, for the sake of completeness, a hypothetical scummy-me, too.)

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.))

[hector13]

Why would you need to kill both of us?

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?

[Starver]

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.

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.

[hector13]

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?

[hector13]

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.

[Starver]

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.

[Tomasque]

Forgot to inform you guys of when the day would end:

Sunday (today), 9 PM PST