Print

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

[Mindmaker]

Should they at some point deter from what they said, we'll have documented proof to present against them.

Oh, that's devious. I'll keep in mind that you're clever.

But what people think they would do in a situation is sometimes not what they actually do. How worth it is to have these responses on hand if one of these situations ever comes up? If I acted differently, I know I would say "Fuck what I said earlier," especially if I believe the way I acted was the right choice.

It at least keeps them from outright denying it and it allows for a basis to go by. It's not supposed to be an oh-my-golly-you're-scum! tell, merely some useful material to have later in the game when it's relevant that could lead to more questions, pressuring, and a possible scum slip if they have inconsistent or lousy reasons for going against their previous claims.

If you only use it to ask additional questions, than it's ok.
I wouldn't accept is a fool-proof evidence, as long as deviations can be properly justified.

What's your standpoint on this? How much deviation can you accept, when it's properly justified? Does LyLo overrule this?

[Mindmaker]

What about if you have a suspect the rest of the town doesn't agree with? What should you do?

Elaborate why my suspect looks scummier to me than theirs.
If they cannot be convinced and their cases against other suspects would be lacking, I would go after my target.

Are we talking about light or heavy suspicion?

How about you elaborate for both?

When under heavy suspicion, it really depends on how much input I can expect from the other players.
Are they deadlocked in their decisions, not ready to participate in further discussion? Ignore them, do what I think is right.

Are they ready to talk and are they analyzing the different theories, that have been presented? Wait for a bit longer.

When under light suspicion, just make a mental note of that player, present my suspicions and continue scumhunting.

[NativeForeigner]

Should they at some point deter from what they said, we'll have documented proof to present against them.

Oh, that's devious. I'll keep in mind that you're clever.

But what people think they would do in a situation is sometimes not what they actually do. How worth it is to have these responses on hand if one of these situations ever comes up? If I acted differently, I know I would say "Fuck what I said earlier," especially if I believe the way I acted was the right choice.

It at least keeps them from outright denying it and it allows for a basis to go by. It's not supposed to be an oh-my-golly-you're-scum! tell, merely some useful material to have later in the game when it's relevant that could lead to more questions, pressuring, and a possible scum slip if they have inconsistent or lousy reasons for going against their previous claims.

If you only use it to ask additional questions, than it's ok.
I wouldn't accept is a fool-proof evidence, as long as deviations can be properly justified.

What's your standpoint on this? How much deviation can you accept, when it's properly justified? Does LyLo overrule this?

It's not meant to be fool-proof.

The amount of deviation is almost entirely situational. If they can properly argue for it, then fine. But the larger the deviation, the more justification they'll have to give. For instance, if the king goes for a blind shot and mislynches despite the town's wishes when they had previously said they would have gone with what the town wanted, he'll have to give an extremely reasonable excuse as to why he went against his word and he might just end up taking heat despite what he says. However, if no one's really sure who scum is and the king decides to lynch a lurker since arguments are getting absolutely nowhere (despite saying earlier that he would rather target the scummiest town than a lurker), then it would be a lot easier to explain (i.e. They weren't much help and I felt it would be better to get rid of a useless towny than lynch a possibly helpful one).

Now, question for you (since I forgot you, sorry): You are king and no one's sure who is scum, even you're not sure. No one can come to a consensus and nobody's getting anywhere. Town figures it's better to let the king decide to gather more information for the next day base off the NK or some other possible details that might pop up. How do you handle this? Assume that there are lurkers and very slightly scummy players.

[Dariush]

So, five pages of talk and not a single useful thing said.

Dariush: Same scenario as Jokerman, but you know almost certainly that someone other than the town's pick is scum.

You mean that the town's pick is 100% town and they don't know it? Then I'll do my own decision. Actually, I would do the same even in Jokerman's question.
Why do you and webadict ask different people different questions, not related to what they said previously in the game? Are you scum and don't care who gets executed (well, except a power-role)?
Or are you the Kingmaker and will base your choice on our answers?
Ottofar, and what if there are no doctors? We just lose the Kingmaker? Too risky in my opinion.
Jim, why didn't you start attacking me from first minutes as is your tradition? Are you hiding something?

[NativeForeigner]

So, five pages of talk and not a single useful thing said.

Dariush: Same scenario as Jokerman, but you know almost certainly that someone other than the town's pick is scum.

You mean that the town's pick is 100% town and they don't know it? Then I'll do my own decision. Actually, I would do the same even in Jokerman's question.
Why do you and webadict ask different people different questions, not related to what they said previously in the game? Are you scum and don't care who gets executed (well, except a power-role)?
Or are you the Kingmaker and will base your choice on our answers?

I actually already answered this recently. [ur=http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=73922.msg1860424#msg1860424l]Here[/url].

[Ottofar]

Ottofar: You just mislynched as king. A good portion of town was with you, but those that weren't are a little suspicious. How do you handle this?

Not like I'm ever gonna  be the king, but "I  went as  majority wanted"

[Ottofar]

Oh, and if KM is killed, new one will be elected.

[webadict]

I think I'll ask the kingmaker to claim now. However, if you do not wish to, fine by me.

[Ottofar]

That'd be me.

[Mindmaker]

Now, question for you (since I forgot you, sorry): You are king and no one's sure who is scum, even you're not sure. No one can come to a consensus and nobody's getting anywhere. Town figures it's better to let the king decide to gather more information for the next day base off the NK or some other possible details that might pop up. How do you handle this? Assume that there are lurkers and very slightly scummy players.

Inquire about the scumminess of said players and see if the suspicion deepens, in which case they might become a my target for fruther questioning and possibly my lynch.
If their scumminess lifts or stays the same in the process, prod the lurkers, threatening them with a lynch and see who delivers the weakest arguments.

In any case, ask the remaining players, what they think about lynching said person.

So, apart from inconsistencies in a players answers, what are your main scumtells?

[Jim Groovester]

Jim, why didn't you start attacking me from first minutes as is your tradition? Are you hiding something?

I only attack people with good reason.

The subtle implication of all of this is that all the other times I attacked you, I had good reason. And I would be right about this. Further, I do not have reason to attack you now.

If you can't live without me attacking you, I'll be happy to oblige you.

[NativeForeigner]

Now, question for you (since I forgot you, sorry): You are king and no one's sure who is scum, even you're not sure. No one can come to a consensus and nobody's getting anywhere. Town figures it's better to let the king decide to gather more information for the next day base off the NK or some other possible details that might pop up. How do you handle this? Assume that there are lurkers and very slightly scummy players.

Inquire about the scumminess of said players and see if the suspicion deepens, in which case they might become a my target for fruther questioning and possibly my lynch.
If their scumminess lifts or stays the same in the process, prod the lurkers, threatening them with a lynch and see who delivers the weakest arguments.

In any case, ask the remaining players, what they think about lynching said person.

So, apart from inconsistencies in a players answers, what are your main scumtells?

Right now I don't see very many scumtells in people. Zrk2, of course, but I'm trying not to jump on him and fall for the same trap I did in BM. If you're asking what I look for, I look for OMGUS, unexplained strange actions, mild lurking, inconsistencies in their actions, strange or jumpy behavior, and a little bit of gut feeling.

[Zrk2]

Jim Groovester: What have I done that is strange?

Webadict: I was pointing out things I thought that might be strange. Why do you think I am scummy?

Jokerman-EXE: You just sounded like you were sucking up at the beginning, you sounded too nice.

Nativeforeigner: I would consider lynching him to make me look like a sure-fire townie. I know I blew chunks in BM, I just figured 'You learn by doing.' and just did whatever in an attempt to learn. Thank you. However, your attempts to help me do seem to make us appear a little scummy.

Pandarsenic: You were more insulted then warrented by having it suggested you may be scum. It seems like an over-reaction. Justify it.

Mindmaker: I meant generc, I don't think openings can create any scumtells because even scum open the same way. Also, changing plans is not a scum tell, it is adapting to the new climate.

Ottofar: You are unequivocally claiming to be knigmaker?

[Ottofar]

Yup.

[Zrk2]

Ok