|
Post by special on Apr 17, 2011 21:07:10 GMT -5
Vote scuzzlebutt Not a power role I don't think but still SCUM Can you explain what you meant by this and how you came to that conclusion?
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 17, 2011 21:07:17 GMT -5
TY . double checking 'facts" and used the wrong preview/post
|
|
|
Post by BobArrgh on Apr 17, 2011 21:07:38 GMT -5
I think Scuzzlebutt made a mistake, but I don't necessarily think it was a Scum mistake. I think it was more of a newbie/misunderstanding mistake. I think her "case" on GnarlyCharlie is weak at best. Sorry, Scuzzlebutt, but I think you are way, way off-base on this one.
Regarding the lack of a Scum kill, a couple of thoughts crossed my mind:
1. The Scum were blocked; 2. The Scum kill was redirected on to Joanie; 3. The Scum decided not to kill last Night; 4. The Scum forgot to kill last Night.
The way the Scum have been playing this game, I'm almost tempted to think it was #4. ;D
I agree that Greedy Smurf needs to go.
Vote Greedy Smurf
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 17, 2011 21:09:10 GMT -5
Vote scuzzlebutt Not a power role I don't think but still SCUM Can you explain what you meant by this and how you came to that conclusion? You don't like my D4.14 explaination? Or the power role part?
|
|
|
Post by BobArrgh on Apr 17, 2011 21:10:04 GMT -5
Either one, LightFoot. Actually, how about explaining both?
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 17, 2011 21:11:45 GMT -5
Can you explain what you meant by this and how you came to that conclusion? You don't like my D4.14 explaination? Or the power role part? The power role part. That's why I left it in the quote
|
|
|
Post by septimus on Apr 17, 2011 21:16:19 GMT -5
Nine dead, five claims or partial claims, eight unclaimed. It has been moved and seconded that Greedy Smurf claim first. In following order, remaining players are scuzzlebutt (please claim without waiting for Greedy), renata, guiri, Sister Coyote, BobArrgh, Idle Thoughts, gnarlycharlie.
1. Sister Coyote - ?? 2. Mr. Special Ed - claimed Daphne, might be kidnapped
3. BillMc: Templeton, Butler, Adviser 4. Suburban Plankton - claimed Frank Roper, rescuer 5. Mahaloth/BobArrgh - ?? 6. peekercpa/Idle Thoughts - ?? 7. MentalGuy - claimed Bambi, searcher 8. gnarlycharlie - ??
9. Inner Stickler: Prudence, Maid, Searcher
10. FCOD: Shaggy, Scum Dog Catcher 11. Dr. Septimus Strangelove - claimed Yabba Doo, can pass snacks at night 12. Greedy Smurf - ??
13. archangel: Abel Strangeways, Owner, 1-shot vig 14. scuzzlebutt - ??
15. Joanie: Lou Bradley, Ghost
16. storyteller: Charles Smiley, Painting, Watcher
17. Captain Pinkies: Scooby Dum, Alpha
18. romanic: Keith Barkley, Dog Trainer
19. Paranoia: Tim Smith, Mason 20. Renata - ?? 21. LightFoot - name?, claimed Scotsman 22. guiri - ??
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Apr 17, 2011 21:18:40 GMT -5
Joanie is town which puts gnarlycharlie at the top of my suspect list. He voted for BillMc on day 1 and Paranoia (sp?) on day 2 and now the dearly departed Joanie on day 3. i actually voted for Romanic who is also gone. i did note to myself after Night 2 that all those i voted for in the Days were NKd after. it could be coincidence, someone trying to cast suspicion on me or someone who HAS to NK whomever i vote for. after seeing Julie's explanation, I don't see why she would say Joanie was town. until i get an explanation: Vote Scuzzlebuttmoving on, i admit there may no longer be scum just PFKs. i'm stumped why Scum would not NK anyone. it's a first for me.
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 17, 2011 21:21:48 GMT -5
It has been moved and seconded that Greedy Smurf claim first. In following order, remaining players are scuzzlebutt (please claim without waiting for Greedy), renata, guiri, Sister Coyote, BobArrgh, Idle Thoughts, gnarlycharlie. Um, why on Earth are you making the claim order. 1. I don't trust you 2. Not everyone has weighed in yet.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 17, 2011 21:23:09 GMT -5
You don't like my D4.14 explaination? Or the power role part? The power role part. That's why I left it in the quote I have no way of knowing that, really it was gut. If scuzzlebutt is one one of the last SCUM standing I would expect that she would not come off as under confident if she had a power . By my reasoning (as unseasoned as it is= but I used a bit of Idle's reasoning) there are probably 1 or 2 SCUM left. could be they are new / un involved players (or a combination of both) and they are "what do we do now" hence the CoverYourAss statement . I feel that scuzzlebutt is typing like an unsure what to say/ don't wanna say the wrong thing player. If I am the only person that sees that so be it. Renata's being quick to defend just bolsters my D1 thoughts about her too. before you ask I was learned b4 I ever got here that voters that are butterflies are most often a SCUM tell
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 17, 2011 21:27:49 GMT -5
FWIW I was not the target last night I asked. Do other players get told when they are targeted for a NK and they survive?
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Apr 17, 2011 21:29:30 GMT -5
Nine dead, five claims or partial claims, eight unclaimed. It has been moved and seconded that Greedy Smurf claim first. In following order, remaining players are scuzzlebutt (please claim without waiting for Greedy), renata, guiri, Sister Coyote, BobArrgh, Idle Thoughts, gnarlycharlie. 1. Sister Coyote - ?? 2. Mr. Special Ed - claimed Daphne, might be kidnapped 3. BillMc: Templeton, Butler, Adviser4. Suburban Plankton - claimed Frank Roper, rescuer 5. Mahaloth/BobArrgh - ?? 6. peekercpa/Idle Thoughts - ?? 7. MentalGuy - claimed Bambi, searcher 8. gnarlycharlie - ?? 9. Inner Stickler: Prudence, Maid, Searcher10. FCOD: Shaggy, Scum Dog Catcher11. Dr. Septimus Strangelove - claimed Yabba Doo, can pass snacks at night 12. Greedy Smurf - ?? 13. archangel: Abel Strangeways, Owner, 1-shot vig14. scuzzlebutt - ?? 15. Joanie: Lou Bradley, Ghost16. storyteller: Charles Smiley, Painting, Watcher17. Captain Pinkies: Scooby Dum, Alpha18. romanic: Keith Barkley, Dog Trainer19. Paranoia: Tim Smith, Mason20. Renata - ?? 21. LightFoot - name?, claimed Scotsman 22. guiri - ?? i just remembered Lightfoot claimed to be a Scotsman. IIRC, that means she can survive an NK. were you targeted Lightfoot?
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Apr 17, 2011 21:31:42 GMT -5
ETA
Lightfoot, i didn't see your post before asking.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 17, 2011 21:32:51 GMT -5
I didn't see any reason to keep it secret
|
|
|
Post by BobArrgh on Apr 17, 2011 21:35:54 GMT -5
I've never been a party to a mass claim, so I have no idea what the mechanics are supposed are or how they work. How do we decide the order? Or, more specifically, who appointed Septimus?
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 17, 2011 21:39:37 GMT -5
I've never been a party to a mass claim, so I have no idea what the mechanics are supposed are or how they work. How do we decide the order? Or, more specifically, who appointed Septimus? I'd rather have a mason publish an order. What do you say, Renata?
|
|
|
Post by BobArrgh on Apr 17, 2011 22:00:43 GMT -5
@Ed: That makes total sense, assuming we believe whoever claims to be a Mason.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 17, 2011 22:02:05 GMT -5
I've never been a party to a mass claim, so I have no idea what the mechanics are supposed are or how they work. ~~snip ~~ I need an EDucation on this subject as well
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 17, 2011 22:06:06 GMT -5
I've never been a party to a mass claim, so I have no idea what the mechanics are supposed are or how they work. How do we decide the order? Or, more specifically, who appointed Septimus? I'd rather have a mason publish an order. What do you say, Renata? Do you hav a reason to endorse Renata or did I miss something.? Renata and Bob are feeling suspect to me . you are messing up my radar Ed
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Apr 17, 2011 22:10:06 GMT -5
I am extremely displeased both that a) Ed thinks it's time to mass claim without much other input and that b) Septimus decided to take it on himself to assume the rest of us would be onboard with this.
I am not a fan of mass claims, and while we've had a number of claims this game some of them have been proven to be false, so I fail to see what good a mass will do at this point. Assuming Scum were roleblocked, a mass claim will tell them who they need to kill to stop that. Likewise, a PFK who needs to avoid being roleblocked will be able to do the same. If investigators have information, I trust them to reveal it at the point they feel is most beneficial for Town; given the strangeness and apparent importance of location this game, I don't know that it's safe to assume anyone has results at this point.
Ed, why do you think Now is the time?
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 17, 2011 22:10:31 GMT -5
@ Ed: That makes total sense, assuming we believe whoever claims to be a Mason. We can. If there's only 1 of them, they can claim. If someone counters, then we'll know that 1 of them is lying. I'll take that any Day, but especially with 4 dead Scum. If there are 2 or more, then they can confirm each other. I suppose there is a remote chance that there was only 1 Mason. But we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. And the Scum would have to take a big risk, since a Mason should be claiming first before anyone else.
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 17, 2011 22:11:23 GMT -5
I'd rather have a mason publish an order. What do you say, Renata? Do you hav a reason to endorse Renata or did I miss something.? Renata and Bob are feeling suspect to me . you are messing up my radar EdJust thought I'd ask her opinion
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Apr 17, 2011 22:12:15 GMT -5
Bob & Lightfoot: Usually, the "order" of a mass claim is determined by Mason or other "trusted" Townie. Not always, of course, but I really don't like Septimus' assumption that he is now a Trusted Townie, because -- at least for me -- he's not.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 17, 2011 22:17:18 GMT -5
I'm not altoghether sure what a Mass claim entails. Can I have someone's definition please?
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 17, 2011 22:17:20 GMT -5
I am extremely displeased both that a) Ed thinks it's time to mass claim without much other input and that b) Septimus decided to take it on himself to assume the rest of us would be onboard with this. I am not a fan of mass claims, and while we've had a number of claims this game some of them have been proven to be false, so I fail to see what good a mass will do at this point. Assuming Scum were roleblocked, a mass claim will tell them who they need to kill to stop that. Likewise, a PFK who needs to avoid being roleblocked will be able to do the same. If investigators have information, I trust them to reveal it at the point they feel is most beneficial for Town; given the strangeness and apparent importance of location this game, I don't know that it's safe to assume anyone has results at this point. Ed, why do you think Now is the time? OK, let's take it in order: 1. It's Day 4, and we have 4 dead Scum. Now is the time to lock people into claims. 2. If the Scum were blocked, then our roleblocker knows who they blocked! 3. Same applies to a SK! 4. We can lock people into claims that might be able to be proven or disproved with the results of investigators of any type (alignment or watchers/trackers) 5. The Scum (or SK if we have one, since it's likely both are playing solo now) can take the chance to kill any investigators, but that will only confirm their results. Now, the players who really won't want to have a mass claim right now are likely to be our remaining Scum (I can't imagine more than 1) and or SK. Which one are you, Sister? PS, if you're the SK, Sister then bravo! and thanks for the assist. PPS, if you're not a Vigilante or a mason, I'll eat my hat, Renata. I'll probably eat it anyway. It one of those Carmen Miranda hats.
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 17, 2011 22:18:02 GMT -5
I'm not altoghether sure what a Mass claim entails. Can I have someone's definition please? Everyone claims their name and role. Then, once that is done, investigators, roleblockers, protectors etc., can reveal the actions they took
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 17, 2011 22:31:19 GMT -5
Could be dangerous, since we don't know what roles we have left?
In my PM I was not given a name. I know that I am a scotsman. I deduce the reason that there were multiple kills on some Nights is because some roles are tied to others (ie if they die you die too)
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 17, 2011 22:33:32 GMT -5
Could be dangerous, since we don't know what roles we have left? In my PM I was not given a name. I know that I am a scotsman. I deduce the reason that there were multiple kills on some Nights is because some roles are tied to others (ie if they die you die too) You don't have a name? And I don't share your conclusion. I'm assuming that we have multiple killing roles.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 17, 2011 22:43:26 GMT -5
@ ED NO my PM did not include a Name. ( I don't know if that can be verified)
I know for certain that there is atleast one character in the game that can be killed if the character they are 'tied' to is killed. given the multiple NK's I guess there were more than one
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 17, 2011 22:47:55 GMT -5
@ ED NO my PM did not include a Name. ( I don't know if that can be verified) I know for certain that there is atleast one character in the game that can be killed if the character they are 'tied' to is killed. given the multiple NK's I guess there were more than one How do you know that for certain?
|
|