Print

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

[Maximum Spin]

Toaster claiming Null Miller makes no fucking sense as scum.

You misunderstand. Toaster is a mafia quasi-ascetic roleblocker. The claim was probably true. Since he appears to be flavored as some kind of hurricane, it makes sense that nobody could get close enough to investigate him.

Honestly, I would have been willing to believe that Toony was just tunnelling at first, but this is below your level, so you could really be the partner.

I hope I can count on at least one of you to tie that vote. >:|

[EuchreJack]

As for my action, I gave a radio to Maximum Spin.

[webadict]

Ah, but Toonyman going down the ToonyTunnel means he's town, Web.

Euchre, do you absolutely 100% believe Toony is Town? Did you get a gun? I literally can't think of anything else that you could get from Toony that would indicate why you think he's Town. I think you are wrong here. Toony could've actioned you twice.

@Toony: I actually was hoping the Mafia killed Max N1 because he was flaunting his role and it was an easy way to get rid of him because he's unreadable half the time. I was actually wondering if Roden was some type of Mafia meant to throw the Millers off or if Toaster might somehow be scum, but I'm much more confident that Max is lying and Toaster is telling the truth. Either that, or you actually did prime Euchre or something.

@Maximum Spin: Okay, but that still brings attention to Toaster that he doesn't need. If Toaster is scum, why bother? I mean, it makes more sense for you to be going after Roden for bothering to check as a 75% Cop. Actually, that's probably more ToonyMan should be going for that, since that fits his usual Town MO. The issue here is that there wasn't a kill and you were blocked because you did it. I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but that's pretty solid evidence to me.

What you could argue is that since we're at an even number, we could simply go for a No Launch Today, but your retaliation vote seems to indicate that Toaster hit true, and you and ToonyMan weren't expecting a Roleblocker.

[Maximum Spin]

you to be going after Roden for bothering to check as a 75% Cop.

What makes you think he did? That wasn't my impression.

Your entire theory of Toaster being town from the beginning has been premised on the assumption that a scum toaster must be lying about the claim. Even here, you say "I'm much more confident that [...] Toaster is telling the truth." But what if he is telling the truth about his role and scum? This is not inconceivable. I mean, you literally just saw me do it in another game.

I'll grant you that I don't have much data on Toaster as a player, maybe he is usually a boat-non-rocker, but I'm never going to accept the theory that someone can't be mafia because of audacity. Audacity is easy.

Anyway, I don't want a No Lynch, I want a lynch of someone who will narrow down the suspect list. I think Toaster is the best lynch candidate.

[EuchreJack]

Hm, so one item of analysis is WHY did Toaster roleblock Max?

We'll start from the beginning:
@Toaster: WHY did you roleblock Max? There were plenty of others you could roleblock, so why Max?

[Roden]

...Wait, Max, you were Roleblocked? Who did you target? You're implying you targeted Toaster, but I'd like you to confirm that for me first.

[Maximum Spin]

...Wait, Max, you were Roleblocked? Who did you target? You're implying you targeted Toaster, but I'd like you to confirm that for me first.

I am absolutely not implying that, why do you think so?

[Roden]

...Wait, Max, you were Roleblocked? Who did you target? You're implying you targeted Toaster, but I'd like you to confirm that for me first.

I am absolutely not implying that, why do you think so?

Because you're claiming Toaster Roleblocked you, and you then called him Ascetic.

[Maximum Spin]

Because you're claiming Toaster Roleblocked you, and you then called him Ascetic.

Oh, no, I suggested he's quasi-Ascetic because he claimed that investigations on him would fail, and also has some action he used to roleblock me (or else how else would he know to blame me for the no-kill?). I think he just has a theme of pushing people away (apparently using storms), like my fire theme last round.

I targeted EuchreJack, for the record, but it ended up not mattering.

[EuchreJack]

@Toaster: Did you get any results from your role blocking?
Red text of please answer my questions variety

[Roden]

Hmmm...ok. But something isn't adding up.

I targeted Toaster last night but was also Roleblocked. I thought he might've been lying and was actually just Ascetic, but you're also claiming that you were Roleblocked. My Unreliable passive can't cause my action to fail either, I was specifically told something else caused it to fail. This is why I asked if you targeted Toaster.

Toaster can still be Ascetic I guess, since I don't know how we both could've been blocked here otherwise. But I'm just not sure why he would lie about his role if he's town. Then again, I'm not sure why anyone would waste their Roleblock on me just to stop me from confirming that Toaster is Null to investigations.

Why did you target Jack, btw?

[EuchreJack]

Toaster can still be Ascetic I guess, since I don't know how we both could've been blocked here otherwise. But I'm just not sure why he would lie about his role if he's town. Then again, I'm not sure why anyone would waste their Roleblock on me just to stop me from confirming that Toaster is Null to investigations.

I thought Toaster was pretty honest about being unreadable from the beginning.

[Maximum Spin]

Why did you target Jack, btw?

Jack has asked me not to claim until d3. I just thought it would be useful to do so.

[EuchreJack]

Why did you target Jack, btw?

Jack has asked me not to claim until d3. I just thought it would be useful to do so.

To clarify, I've asked Max not to claim his role.  I also told Max to reveal that he targeted me.
The nature of that role should be reserved for after it actually gets used, whatever it might be.

[Maximum Spin]

Oh, I probably didn't phrase that very well, did I.

What I meant was: I just thought it would be useful to target Jack, but I'm not going to explain why because he (in the time since, having given me a radio) asked me not to claim yet. Not that him asking me not to claim retroactively induced my decision to target him, or something. Sorry I didn't express that well.