|
Post by Hal Briston on Mar 28, 2008 9:56:23 GMT -5
I can tell you who I blocked last Night if you really want to know, and my reasoning for doing it as well. Excellent idea -- might just save your life. Anyway, I said from the get-go that I liked the case against Arturus, and his bizarre "yeah, don't forget about looking at me" bit screams "ploy" to me. But it's his ability claim that really gets to me -- role-blocker. Does anyone think that Mr. Freeze wouldn't have that as an ability? I know I've pointed out that not everything in an asylum needs to make sense, but c'mon... I know Hoopy hasn't claimed "role freezer" as his ability, but if we take out Arturus and he comes up clean, then it may be time for a good, hard look at Hoopy. But in the meantime (and pending his letting us know who and why he blocked last night), I'm going to: Vote ArturusWaitafrickingminute... I just reread the claim post, and noticed something I missed the first time around: You'd think Mr. Freeze would get the roleblocking ability instead, but nope, it's just me. What do you mean, "it's just me"? As in, you have the ability but you know Mr. Freeze does not? I see nothing in your role-claim that would indicate that...why would you say that? ~Double Post Deleted~
|
|
|
Post by Hawkmod on Mar 28, 2008 10:23:37 GMT -5
All right. I am safely ensconced at work, far from home improvement projects finished and un-, and am ready to contribute something substantive. To do so will require substantial re-reading, which I will do presently. In the meanwhile, though, I'd like to point out that at present, the plurality of the group's votes are on a player who has claimed a pro-Town role that is almost surely in the game and that has not been counterclaimed. The only reasoning I have seen to justify this is that "we lynch killers as policy," which is both not historically true and bad policy. My focus on the latter half of this Day is going to be on the people voting for CatinaSuit. I currently believe there is about an 60% chance that he is Town, a 30% chance that he is a free agent enemy of the Town, and a 10% chance that he is a Do-Gooder. What that means is that, given that he can (or could, before he was forced to clai) kill, I think there's a 90% chance that the Do-Gooders want him dead. One of them voted for Cat, I'll bet my awesome New York Giants labeled multipurpose utility tool on it. Re: atarus - anyone else plan to claim pro-Town roleblocker? That would simplify matters considerably. Well, at this point we don't have an alleged pro-town killer, we have an alleged pro-town vanilla. CIAS did explain his lynch of Sinjin a bit better while claiming. I really wish he had done that earlier, for that is what bothered me, not the role claim. At any rate, I'm going to downgrade CIAS from likely scum to possible scum. However, I do not currently find anyone else to be particularly suspicious. So, I'm going to leave my vote where it is for now. I'd rather lose a vanilla if I'm wrong than a power role.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Mar 28, 2008 10:35:04 GMT -5
Bwuh? That's two consecutive posts of mine that have been "edited to delete double-post". Not doubting that it's happening, but I haven't seen it. Let's call this a test post...
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Mar 28, 2008 10:38:17 GMT -5
Now that Cat has claimed, I don't see any reason to lynch him toDay. I am going to provisionally vote Atarus, because I don't think I have a vote on record yet for toDay, and I don't want to end the Day without one. I like the case that has been made so far, but I am also going to look at Hoopy Frood again. The confusion over the Baddies being Town is still nagging me. You know what? I just changed my mind. [colorblue] vote Hoopy Frood[/color][/quote] How in the heck does one change mind mid post? I mean, I've seen people change their minds in sequential posts, but in the same post? Never? To me, this says: "I want you all to think I'm writing what I'm thinking, so much so, in fact, that I'm not even going to go back and edit something I just typed. Look how townie I am, I don't even need to look over my posts, because I've got nothing to hide. I'M A BADDIE, PEOPLE!!!" Minor FoS. Not enough to warrant an orange one, but I just don't get it.[/quote] I just tend to type stream of conciousness - kind of like I talk . I proofread for errors, but rarely change content.
|
|
Darth Sensitive
Mome Rath
With great power comes great responsibility / That's the catchphrase of Old Uncle Ben
Posts: 18
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Darth Sensitive on Mar 28, 2008 10:49:07 GMT -5
Well, I am going to Vote: CatInASuit. You claimed in this post, and Rugger called you out here. I too have restrictions on my role, and like Santo, they are listed at "Roles/Abilities", above flavor text.
|
|
Darth Sensitive
Mome Rath
With great power comes great responsibility / That's the catchphrase of Old Uncle Ben
Posts: 18
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Darth Sensitive on Mar 28, 2008 10:50:27 GMT -5
BAH! EBWoP You claimed in this post...
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Mar 28, 2008 11:03:33 GMT -5
I elaborate my reasoning in post 77, about 3 below that one.
And, story, the case isn't that I think he is (was?) a pro town killer. My case is that I think he's lying, both about his alignment and the whole of his role.
|
|
|
Post by Boozahol Squid, P.I. on Mar 28, 2008 11:04:39 GMT -5
Final Votecount of the Day?
CatinaSuit 8 (ryjae,hawkeyeop,sinjin,tdpatriots12,drainbead,zuma,Santo Rugger,Darth Sensitive) Atarus 7 (TheDarkSmurf,Rysto,NAF1138,Hoopy Frood,Cookies,Hal Briston,CatinaSuit) ryjae 2 (dotchanByIrony,atarus) Hoopy Frood 1 (Hockey Monkey) Hal Briston 1 (storyteller) tdpatriots12 1 (molefan1981)
Not voting: MHaye,Brewha
9 hours until byebye.
|
|
|
Post by Rysto on Mar 28, 2008 11:09:13 GMT -5
atarus, who did you block last night and why?
|
|
|
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Mar 28, 2008 11:15:58 GMT -5
BAH! EBWoP You claimed in this post... I already pointed out Rugger's mistake on that. And I think someone else ( Cookies, maybe?) did as well. It was clearly spelled out in her PM that she would lose her powers if we claimed. Now you can argue her being scum for other reasons if you want, but nothing she said is contradicted by her PM. Now, for the real reason I'm posting. I will do a (almost) full claim, because people are asking. The almost is because I have a one-shot power that I'd rather not reveal, for the simple reason that revealing it will greatly reduce it's usefulness. If there is a strong desire to know what it is, I can be convinced to tell you, but understand that while the power will still work, it will be unlikely to yield any useful information. I am a role-blocker, as I've not so subtly bread-crumbed and as people have suspected. My PM is as follows: The reason I was wary of claiming after Atarus, was I wanted to see if any further discussion came out, because it is possible that some roles are doubled up. It's not unlikely that there could be two blockers. There are no vanilla here, and, after all, while a blocker is powerful power, like the vig, it's just as likely to fall on a friendly as not (and actually, out of shear numbers, more likely). Without information, the blocker is shooting in the dark. However, the nice thing about the blocker, is that by knowing who you block, you can try to glean from their postings the next day what effect you had. The vig's problem is that dead men tell no tales. For the first night I blocked Santo. Why? No good reason, other than I didn't have anyone I felt was definitely scum, and I had many that I felt could be either. He was on that list (so was CAIS). But out of everyone on that list, he had annoyed me the most the first day--no offense intended--so I figured that was as good a reason as any to block him. I have no clue what that did. It's why I was curious as to whether NAF was a target of a night kill or something else. We know why Sinjin survived, we don't know why NAF did. Now that being said I'll reiterate, if Atarus is town, I won't be surprised there are two of us. At the same time, it seems each one of us who have claimed full roles so far have either a very powerful role, or a one shot that makes up for the frustrating parts of our role. (Being able to avoid a kill is powerful, the vig himself is powerful because he can kill every night on his own, Doctors don't need a one-shot because they always have a guaranteed town they can protect--themselves.) Role-blockers are next to useless in the early stages. There isn't enough info to truly know what to do. I'm surprised that Atarus wasn't given a one-shot like I was.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Mar 28, 2008 11:16:21 GMT -5
Atarus 5 (TheDarkSmurf,Rysto,NAF1138,Hoopy Frood,Cookies,Hal Briston) Error -- six names there...
|
|
Darth Sensitive
Mome Rath
With great power comes great responsibility / That's the catchphrase of Old Uncle Ben
Posts: 18
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Darth Sensitive on Mar 28, 2008 11:19:55 GMT -5
Hoopy
It's spelled out specifically in my role when my powers will work too, in the roles/abilities section.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Mar 28, 2008 11:24:14 GMT -5
Probably the last post of the Day for me and the game if some of you get your way. The only reason I can think that atarus can know what Hoopy Frood is, or is not as in this case, is if they are on the same team, ie: Do-Gooders or PFK. Or is that tomorrow's lynch? So citing the above and the need to save my skin yet again. unvote brewhavote atarusGood luck town, I hope the analysis left behind proves useful.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2008 11:24:16 GMT -5
Based on an (alleged) sample of two, we seem to have some folks right back at the idea that differences in role PM syntax are compelling evidence for putting someone in a chair. Can we talk about this for a bit? There are apparently precedents that PMs are not identical in phrasing, or capitalization, even for individuals on the same side. Is there something inherently more scummy about differences in how restrictions are phrased in a PM?
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Mar 28, 2008 11:25:21 GMT -5
Hoopy, I do find it unlikely that there would be two role blockers on one side. That means it's likely that you and Atarus are on opposing sides. The question is which one of you is lying?
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Mar 28, 2008 11:27:54 GMT -5
What do you mean, "it's just me"? As in, you have the ability but you know Mr. Freeze does not? I see nothing in your role-claim that would indicate that...why would you say that? I just assumed that there wouldn't be two pro-town roleblockers in the game, considering the examples we've had so far of other roles (i.e. people getting stabbed in the neck and having their mouth go numb, secret-post-restricted Vig, Bat-shark repellant). But yes, you're right. I do not have any secret wink-wink, nudge-nudge information on Mr. Freeze. It was just my own hypothesis. And on preview...bwuh, well I guess my hypothesis was wrong. Heh. atarus, who did you block last night and why? Funny you should ask! I blocked Rysto last night. I first eliminated anybody that had been considered "possibly townie" from the role PM/alleged claims hooplah that occurred on Day One. Then I eliminated anybody I considered to be playing conservatively because I felt it was more likely that I would hit an important townie role if I blocked in that group of people (i.e. a doctor or a detective). I landed on Rysto because he's been very outspoken and one of the high prolific posters. While I had no reason to believe he's scum, I figured my scumdar is never 100% perfect and if he is a townie there's a better chance I won't end up blocking an ability that's vital to the town having at Night. I'll get to my opinion on Hoopy's post in my next post to just get this out there while I'm writing it up.
|
|
|
Post by Boozahol Squid, P.I. on Mar 28, 2008 11:28:14 GMT -5
Atarus 5 (TheDarkSmurf,Rysto,NAF1138,Hoopy Frood,Cookies,Hal Briston) Error -- six names there... Thanks, fixed and updated.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Mar 28, 2008 11:31:30 GMT -5
Is there something inherently more scummy about differences in how restrictions are phrased in a PM? Cookies, if this were a standard game, then I would be inclined to say there was. There wouldn't be nearly as many variables, and a lot of the PMs would be "You're vanilla. Have fun, Citizen of Gotham". However, with everyone getting complex, detailed PMs, two different mods putting them together, and those mods already stating that they went out of their way not to make the PMs game-breaking, I'm inclined to this that no, it's not necessarily more scummy.
|
|
Darth Sensitive
Mome Rath
With great power comes great responsibility / That's the catchphrase of Old Uncle Ben
Posts: 18
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Darth Sensitive on Mar 28, 2008 11:33:35 GMT -5
Based on an (alleged) sample of two, we seem to have some folks right back at the idea that differences in role PM syntax are compelling evidence for putting someone in a chair. Can we talk about this for a bit? There are apparently precedents that PMs are not identical in phrasing, or capitalization, even for individuals on the same side. Is there something inherently more scummy about differences in how restrictions are phrased in a PM? This is worth looking at - I think you have a shot of being right. I think I'll head back and look over claims and what not after my next set of classes.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Mar 28, 2008 11:35:20 GMT -5
For the first night I blocked Santo. I blocked Rysto last night. All right then... Santo? Rysto? Are either of you able to confirm or deny either story?
|
|
|
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Mar 28, 2008 11:36:48 GMT -5
Hoopy, I do find it unlikely that there would be two role blockers on one side. That means it's likely that you and Atarus are on opposing sides. The question is which one of you is lying? Lynch us both then. Really. I know I'm town (yeah, that's what they all say). I don't know that Atarus is scum. His actions could be scummy, but they could also be from a simple mistake and an honest belief that Kat wasn't scum. If he does get lynched today, and he turns out to be town, I'm pretty much dead. But seeing as how I'm a role-blocker, the scum aren't going to want me around for the end-game anyway, I'm not long for this game regardless. If you lynch us both, and we both turn out town, at least we know that there are roles that can be doubled up. No matter what, town will get info. If you are determined to lynch us both, lynch him first, because I've got the one shot. If you lynch me, it's gone, and so is any information that might be gleaned from it. I'll use it tonight. Unless the mod's are truly being bastards my one shot is not only guaranteed to go off, but I'll be guaranteed to not be night killed. Granted, we know there's a SK out there, and he can take out whoever doesn't get lynched, so I might not get my one shot off anyway. It's town's call. I've pretty much laid all my cards on the table, much earlier than I had hoped.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Mar 28, 2008 11:46:27 GMT -5
Rysto and Santo still need to be heard from, but with what we've got on the table now, I'm happy with my atarus vote. It's certainly not impossible, but I have a hard time believing there are two role-blockers on the same side. If atarus comes up as scum, then I'll put Hoopy in the "very likely town" file -- something I hope is the case if I'm correct in my guess about his secret ability.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2008 11:47:14 GMT -5
Lynch us both then. Really. Um. No? Knowledge that roles can be doubled up is very much not worth using two lynches to potentially kill two townies, imho.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Mar 28, 2008 11:54:05 GMT -5
Probably the last post of the Day for me and the game if some of you get your way. The only reason I can think that atarus can know what Hoopy Frood is, or is not as in this case, is if they are on the same team, ie: Do-Gooders or PFK. Or is that tomorrow's lynch? So citing the above and the need to save my skin yet again. unvote brewhavote atarusGood luck town, I hope the analysis left behind proves useful. I do hope you show up at least once more and reconsider. I know self-preservation is a survival instinct and kicks in when you're in danger, and while "anyone but me" is a great way to play games like Survivor (hey look my nerd is showing) in Mafia it's usually not the best move for a townie to make, especially if you are now a vanilla townie like you so claim. Okay, now Hoopy's post. Now, for the real reason I'm posting. I will do a (almost) full claim, because people are asking. The almost is because I have a one-shot power that I'd rather not reveal, for the simple reason that revealing it will greatly reduce it's usefulness. If there is a strong desire to know what it is, I can be convinced to tell you, but understand that while the power will still work, it will be unlikely to yield any useful information. Were people really asking? I mean, people were debating the idea about looking closer at you if I turned up town, but nobody was beating down the door saying you should role-claim. The reason I was wary of claiming after Atarus, was I wanted to see if any further discussion came out, because it is possible that some roles are doubled up. It's not unlikely that there could be two blockers. There are no vanilla here, and, after all, while a blocker is powerful power, like the vig, it's just as likely to fall on a friendly as not (and actually, out of shear numbers, more likely). Without information, the blocker is shooting in the dark. However, the nice thing about the blocker, is that by knowing who you block, you can try to glean from their postings the next day what effect you had. The vig's problem is that dead men tell no tales. Agreed. I think if any power is going to be doubled up in this game I would say it'd be roleblocker, just because everybody has some sort of power role. Hell, we know there are Masons but we don't even know if they're just vanilla Masons. They could be superMasons! The only problem is, one scum has already come up Goon without any extra powers. If there are other scum Goons, the chances decrease in the likelihood of either of us blocking scum activity, and the reasoning for having two pro-town roleblockers also decreases. Now that being said I'll reiterate, if Atarus is town, I won't be surprised there are two of us. At the same time, it seems each one of us who have claimed full roles so far have either a very powerful role, or a one shot that makes up for the frustrating parts of our role. (Being able to avoid a kill is powerful, the vig himself is powerful because he can kill every night on his own, Doctors don't need a one-shot because they always have a guaranteed town they can protect--themselves.) Role-blockers are next to useless in the early stages. There isn't enough info to truly know what to do. I'm surprised that Atarus wasn't given a one-shot like I was. Unfortunately, I have no one-shot ability. I don't have anything extra and there's nothing besides roleblocking that I can do. I suppose if there's duplicate roleblockers we have to be different somehow. Heh. If you are determined to lynch us both, lynch him first, because I've got the one shot. If you lynch me, it's gone, and so is any information that might be gleaned from it. I'll use it tonight. Unless the mod's are truly being bastards my one shot is not only guaranteed to go off, but I'll be guaranteed to not be night killed. Granted, we know there's a SK out there, and he can take out whoever doesn't get lynched, so I might not get my one shot off anyway. I'm wavering between agreeing and disagreeing with this idea. I don't know...if you are pro-town, yes it's a better idea for me to go first IF either of us go, just so you can use your one-shot since I don't have anything like that. On the other hand, if you're not pro-town allowing you to use your one-shot (if you even have it at all) wouldn't be good. Bollocks. Time to ponder.
|
|
|
Post by Rysto on Mar 28, 2008 12:13:40 GMT -5
All right then... Santo? Rysto? Are either of you able to confirm or deny either story? Not sure. I don't think that I'd be informed if I were blocked.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Mar 28, 2008 12:15:19 GMT -5
For the first night I blocked Santo. I blocked Rysto last night. All right then... Santo? Rysto? Are either of you able to confirm or deny either story? Nope.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 28, 2008 12:16:21 GMT -5
Can you at least rule out the possibility that you tried to do anything at all that Night?
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Mar 28, 2008 12:20:59 GMT -5
Based on an (alleged) sample of two, we seem to have some folks right back at the idea that differences in role PM syntax are compelling evidence for putting someone in a chair. Can we talk about this for a bit? There are apparently precedents that PMs are not identical in phrasing, or capitalization, even for individuals on the same side. Is there something inherently more scummy about differences in how restrictions are phrased in a PM? I've pointed out several times I think CatInA is lying. Restrictions, an ability of the role, not being explicitly stated in the Ability section makes me think it was added on after the fact by the player. That was just the final straw, amongst other things. That being said: I just assumed that there wouldn't be two pro-town roleblockers in the game, <snip> And on preview...bwuh, well I guess my hypothesis was wrong. Heh.<snip> How do you know Hoody is pro-town? FoS atarus. In light of the recent developments, I have no problem voting for either one of these characters.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Mar 28, 2008 12:21:44 GMT -5
Can you at least rule out the possibility that you tried to do anything at all that Night? No.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Mar 28, 2008 12:24:09 GMT -5
I only problem with Ataurs's claim is that pro town roleblockers are an anti town mechanism. Roleblockers always hurt the town more than help.
If we are going to lynch someone because their power might be dangerous, I think Atarus is a better call than CIAS. His power is almost guaranteed to hurt the town while haveing an extreamly slim chance of helping it.
Hoopy having a one shot role block ability is slightly less anti town, though I would ask him to not just go using it willy nilly toNight like he plans to.
The case against Atarus is more than just his support of Kat, and FOS on anyone who is using that as the sole reason to lynch him or the sole reason to defend him.
I am comfortable with my vote.
|
|