Print

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

[TheBiggerFish]

(To clarify, that night ability Frisk had is single-target.)

[Starver]

So, it seems that what I termed a "one use" bulletproofness (not meaning to imply "1-shot [sic] bulletproofness", merely one-at-a-time in usefulness) may well have been relevant.  Now, either: you (Fish) know something that you aren't allowed to tell us, now that you aren't Frisk any more; you (Fish) never actually got to know much more than your're telling; or, you didn't even get to know anything, any choices that were made (and it appears that there were few) were all done for 'you' (Frisk) automatically because it didn't matter anyway who you actually got killed by.

(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.))

[hector13]

Fish is out of the running to be the antagonist. He's dead.

As such he shouldn't be posting

[Starver]

Hector:

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.

[hector13]

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.

Spoiler: Frisk (click to show/hide)

Frisk
Why did you go near that mountain in the first place? Well, now you're down here, and it looks like the only thing to do is to find your way out.
Archetype: Neutral role
Wincon: You win if you survive until the end of the round.

(n) Mercy: If your target would Night Kill you, their action fails immediately.

Here's that roleflip you wanted!
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.

[hector13]

So... Why are you voting me Starver? Bullet points, if you please. Or a summary minus parentheses

[Starver]

So... Why are you voting me Starver? Bullet points, if you please. Or a summary minus parentheses

• "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.

Give me a good argument against any two of those points, though, and I might well reconsider.  No promises.  Quality matters...

[hector13]

Starver

So... Why are you voting me Starver? Bullet points, if you please. Or a summary minus parentheses

• "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.

[FallacyofUrist]

... you say I'm not doing much in the way of scum hunting.
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

• 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?

[hector13]

Exactly, from your perspective. PoE isn't scumhunting, it's deductive reasoning, and it's not something you can share with us because you have different information than the rest of the town. You've shared what of your information helped you reach that conclusion, but that could all be bullshit for all the rest of us know.

You've not asked many questions so far, ergo you're not doing much scumhunting.

[hector13]

@FoU: Oh, I can vote, just not for Asriel. Remember, I'm Asgore.

Who are you thinking of voting?

[hector13]

Starver: thoughts on Moonlit and FoU?

[FallacyofUrist]

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?

[hector13]

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.

PPE: ninja'd my epiphany, you cur! :p

[hector13]

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?