Toaster, you latch onto Jack very quick, it's your first post. You tell us about how you've played before, about voting after everyone says what they want. How much does what Jack says/does look like typical play from games you know, is common scum-tactics?
It's very unusual from games I know, and isn't found in town or scum tactics. There, no one talks about people unless they are suspicious about them, so supporting another player in a way other than jumping on their bandwagon just feels out of place to me.
So this specific conversation at the start of the game is the only thing that really jumps out at me; nothing else catches my eye like that.
I like the point you make, sort of. My first read of it, I kinda nodded along. Nice opener, the way people interact with its mix of logic and illogic - could be a very townie thing to probe! But, trying to wrap my head around it - because that's not an opener, an RVS thingy. You mean it, near as I can tell.
Yes, I mean it. I wasn't trying to probe people's reactions to it, I was trying to convince them that EuchreJack is the mafia. Is this a bad strategy? I have barely played any games with an RVS, so I just went off of my instinct.
But you also kinda probe and try to get ideas/interaction? "Is it just me, or does this feel extremely suspicious?" Is that sort of tentative style your normal way to talk as well? I don't see much of it in the rest of what you've said so far, so I'm really curious.
Yes. I only be confident in something when I know something is definitely true, such as if I have an investigative role. I'm working on being more firm since that's of course more persuasive, but if I'm confidently wrong in my accusations I'll be next on the chopping block.
And I note that those who disagree with you, you confront. You were not just... honestly checking how people think. You're chasing this, you want this.
I currently have a fear that maybe you and Mater are teamed anti-town, and Jack is anything but on your team. I can see a 'flip Jack, then say Mater must be fine since Jack was [whatever but not your team]'. That's totally ignoring Mater individually, I haven't deep-read him yet (Difficult day. So far I'm deep read on Sal and Jim and now you). But I'd love to hear more about your thoughts about what you see.
Ahh, so you think that I might be teamed with Mater since I've put most of my arguments into trying to prove Jack is mafia. I genuinely didn't think of that, and the whole gimmick with the flip and trying to confirm Mater is new to me.
I'm focusing on Jack because he seems much more suspicious to me. Of course, Mater is mafia if Jack is mafia, but while my reasons for suspecting Mater hinge solely on associations with Jack, I have more concrete evidence for Jack being mafia in the form of that suspicious post.
You bounce between,
An unconfirmed roleclaim doesn't really warrant not taking actions on Magma at all, and this could really benefit Mafia if Magma was mafia.
And because EuchreJack may be trying to cause this, I'll vote him.
And:
Because Magma roleclaiming in and of itself isn't that suspicious, but Jack coming to his conclusion is. So Jack is more suspicious than Magma, and might just be roping Magma into this.
I'm really confused about your thinking here. Magma either is or isn't maf. If he is or isn't, Jack either is or isn't.
If Magma ISN'T maf. Can you see a maf Jack saying what he said?
If Jack isn't maf (or other teamed anti-town) with Magma, can you see Jack saying what he said?
I dunno. Toaster, your reasoning works perfect for me if you're teamed anti-town with Magma; you set up for an illusion of 'oh, Jack wasn't teamed with Magma, so Magma's fine too/was always not that sus'. I really need help to get what you're doing and how you think it works.
In my view, I was pretty consistent with my arguments and I would like to hear why they sound inconsistent to you. I thought that both Jack and Magma were suspicious, but Jack is much more suspicious than Magma.
I am not teamed anti-town with magma, I am only not voting Magma because I am more suspicious of Jack. And if I did say "Jack wasn't teamed with Magma, so Magma's fine", I would be committing the fallacy of denying the antecedent in a game hosted by someone with
fallacy in their name.
Currently the two players that catch my attention are of course Tricmagic because of his vote power and Vermilion because of the strange soul power thing.
What does 'catch your attention' mean here? Anything about alignment, or just 'wow, lookie there!'? At the time you commented on Tric's vote power (reply #241), NQT had already started the game with 2 votes. Did you miss that, or it's not interesting why, compared to Tric's?
Wow, lookie there! I was interested in their hat mechanics, nothing else.
Think what you want about me, but I'm going to be really stubborn on the EuchreJack and Magma Mater issue. It's one of the only actual pieces of evidence that we have on day 1, and the night game's complexity could be lessened if we got it over with and investigated Magma first thing instead of avoiding it till we have no choice.
As someone (I forgot who) said, this is a perfect excuse for the mafia to not get read, and the extra complexity with the bussing sounds like it was hastily added in to make it seem plausible.
stares Yeah. I don't feel safer. And... how is this evidence and not supposition?
We have evidence that Tric has bloodstained sunglasses, our mod said so. We have evidence both Tric and NQT have 2 votes today. What are you doing/thinking/mean?
The goal of 'investigate Mater anyway' can be discussed. But that too can benefit anti-town. Because if investigations are going towards a known target, this may be usable for anyone who wants to control where they go. I expect each player who can investigate's gonna make their own decisions about what to do (same as everyone who can't investigate).
Whoops. I admit to not communicating well at all and not reasoning fully into this. Instead of evidence, I mean something that feels the most suspicious to me, and what I think reveals the most about the person. I also retract my claim about investigating Mater anyway because of these points.
I still am firm in voting EuchreJack though. I won't lose sight of my actual suspicions over some wrong usages of words.
I mostly agree with this list, probably since I'm too lazy to form coherent opinions on all 14 people here.
Yeah. You're... not really focusing on anything except the one issue you picked in your first post, right? And that Tric (but why not NQT?) and Verm catch your attention, whatever that means. I would really like to understand more about what the game looks like from your eyes.
I can't focus on multiple things at once, and I can't vote twice. It would be kind of hard to be suspicious of two separate people at once, and my attention can be easily diverted so I'm trying not to get tangled into other things.
I explained Tric and Verm catching my attention above.
Author
Topic: FBYOR 7 - Day 2 - Ineffable (12 / 14) (Read 13071 times)