|
Day Two
Sept 15, 2009 15:40:59 GMT -5
Post by hockeyguy8435 on Sept 15, 2009 15:40:59 GMT -5
Assuming Parzival isn't lying, there can be only three scenarios: 1) He could be a Magician who is now basically vanilla. - The most likely scenario, I think. 2) He could be a Vampire, but only if Ed is a Wolf or another Vampire. - Unlikely. I can't think of a motivation. 3) He is some other role that has a secret power that told him. - More likely than 2 but not as likely as 1. Parzival can't be a Scotsman, as it would have been revealed to us. Dunno what to make of it, since it doesn't really mean anything to us that Ed tried to kill someone. He's already dead, so we can't accuse him of anything. --FCOD If he's the Magician then I urge him to claim as much. That way we know, and don't just assume. Also, that way we have a claim on record, so if he is lying, their can be a possible counter down the road. There's no real risk in him claiming Magician now, since he's Vanilla. I'll have to go back over the roles, but there is a Town protection role, right?
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 15, 2009 16:03:09 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 15, 2009 16:03:09 GMT -5
And I pointed out that we didn't know that yet, and CIAS said: So [ color=red]unvote peeker[/color][/b] [ color=blue]vote CatInASuit[/color][/b] Because as I've already said, I think it's too much to assume that there was a cross-kill last night until we know more.[/quote] Perhaps you would like to explain how I would know that there were cross-kills last Night. Personally I don't know, but I also look forward to you telling me why having Cross-kills from the scum is a bad thing. Oh yeah, it was really bad phrasing. Almost scum like. Wow, a throw away vote with no justification. Care to explain what your thoughts are as to why you placed that vote? Hmm, fair enough. I'm sure we will find out in due course. vote Mr. Blockeyand here it is... Well that's really really really really annoying In an open setup too *hugs his secret power* that is really bloody annoying go ahead and lynch me though If he does have a secret power, it is definitely best to vote for lynch now. [/quote] This is the only public possibility for Town protection. There may be more in a secret role:
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 15, 2009 16:06:15 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 15, 2009 16:06:15 GMT -5
hmmm, wrong open composition tab. Sorry. Peeker - I'm with you. Parzival is claiming Ed had a killing role; Death by Iroby is suggesting that a reading of the rules means that Parzival has to be either a Scotsman or a Magician, and Cookies' and Natlaw's running theory is that Parzival would have to be a Magician and now be powerless, on the theory that a Scotsman would be revealed by the mod. I think. Not entirely true, at least for my part. In my mind is possible that Parzival is at this moment (in no particular order): -a soft-claiming Magician who survived Ed trying to kill him -a soft-claiming holder of a secret power that allowed him survive a kill and know the identity of his attacker -a soft-claiming holder of a secret power that allowed him to see Ed attack someone, whether it is by targeting Ed or his intended victim. -lying This is the only public possibility for Town protection. There may be more in a secret role:
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 15, 2009 16:30:06 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Sept 15, 2009 16:30:06 GMT -5
I'm not quite sure whether Cat is scum or not. Kind of fishy, though. whoa whoa, wait a minute. i assume when you say Cat you mean cias not kat.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Sept 15, 2009 16:47:04 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Sept 15, 2009 16:47:04 GMT -5
Question: Parz, why did you even claim? If Spec Ed comes up as Wulf or Vamp tomorrow, then your info is irrelevant. If he came up as vig, it's only slightly relevant. And you had no reason to claim otherwise. It's...fishy.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 15, 2009 17:28:01 GMT -5
Post by hockeyguy8435 on Sept 15, 2009 17:28:01 GMT -5
Question: Parz, why did you even claim? If Spec Ed comes up as Wulf or Vamp tomorrow, then your info is irrelevant. If he came up as vig, it's only slightly relevant. And you had no reason to claim otherwise. It's...fishy. I agree. It's extremely convenient. That's why I want a claim. I have no doubt what he says is true. We'll know in a Day or so that he lied if he did. There's no need to. I want a claim so we have record of it, therefore someone can counter him if he's lying. If he was the Magician, he's now Vanilla, so why not claim if that's what he was? His silence is suspicious.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 15, 2009 17:30:58 GMT -5
Post by hockeyguy8435 on Sept 15, 2009 17:30:58 GMT -5
Question: Parz, why did you even claim? If Spec Ed comes up as Wulf or Vamp tomorrow, then your info is irrelevant. If he came up as vig, it's only slightly relevant. And you had no reason to claim otherwise. It's...fishy. I agree. It's extremely convenient. That's why I want a claim. I have no doubt what he says is true. We'll know in a Day or so that he lied if he did. There's no need to. I want a claim so we have record of it, therefore someone can counter him if he's lying. If he was the Magician, he's now Vanilla, so why not claim if that's what he was? His silence is suspicious. Let me clarify. I ave no doubt that his claim of Ed attempting a kill is true. There wouldn't be any reason to lie about that, as we'll know Ed's role and alignment in a matter of Days. It's his claim on how he knows what Ed did last Night that is fishy. The only Town roles are Scotsman and Magician, and the mod would tell us if he was the Scotsman. So if he's the Magician, come out and say it. Nothing to lose anymore as he's Vanilla.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 15, 2009 19:02:00 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Sept 15, 2009 19:02:00 GMT -5
I don't like making assumptions about Night Kills--in fact, I've had a pretty good history of catching scum who seem to show too much interest in talking about Night Kills (in fact, the question of "why did X get killed last Night" is an automatic policy Finger of Suspicion in my book) Nightkills are always a tempting subject to talk about, especially in early game, for both sides of the game. Perhaps I am painting with a broader brush this time around, but it was the particular wordings of Natlaw and Nanook that I found a little hinky (but not hinky enough to vote yet). Yeah, it's been a while since I read Page 1. Didn't notice that Special Ed is now an ex-Ed.Natlaw's puzzlement about why Meeko and SpecialEd's deaths smacks of both 1) trying to hard to sound Townie, and 2) a little bit of Perfect Information Syndrome, as he seems certain that both of those were scumkills (whereas it seems just as likely that one was a vilgilante and/or a magician redirect). <bolding and fonting mine> kind of like to talk about night kills a bunch don't we. yeepers again
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 2:46:46 GMT -5
Post by bufftabby on Sept 16, 2009 2:46:46 GMT -5
kind of like to talk about night kills a bunch don't we. yeepers again kind of like to smudge buff a bunch, don't you? now i know i've been giving buff a hard time how multiple votes, to me, lend themselves to less rather than more accountability. but voting for dead folks. now c'mon are you all fucking with me or are we just carrying this multiple votes equals greater accountability to the extreme. sister should be voted for her remark. that's a fuck up even if she is town. cias should be chastised for goodness sake. holy crud we hope for cross kills but we can't be sure but yet you ask for more as if you know. lukers should be voted because this game moves and twists quick so laying low is being non town oriented. so parzival let's see what happens when you get bolded. buff should be voted because she espouses a really bad strategy regarding votes and accountability (as well as that booger eating blockey) hey, vig. paying attention. and fuck, even cookies should be voted for fishing like a mofo even if it might be town oriented. otie dotie. ok, did i piss enough folks off. is that substantive enough for you, cookies? Just how many votes would you like me to have on the table, then, peek? You can't seem to decide. i thought i was clear. it's the loneliest number. two can be as bad it's almost as bad as the loneliest number. if you add an e to no it'll be the saddest experience that you'll ever do actually it's worse than two since she went away. but yet, my position has not changed. i was scummy yesterday and today miraculaously i have been healed? and what about sister? you don't find her comment regarding others scummy? i ask merely for the threshhold that you are using. not unreasonable, methinks. for if the tab is to set a benchmark does it not seem equitable that us lesser players should be made aware in order to endeavor to meet said benchmark? and btw this is a smudge. blockey agreed with you regarding multi votes. You wanna tell me how it's a "throw away vote"? i'll tell you how it's a throw away vote. Day one you end up with votes on squiddy, me and natlaw. squiddy was admitted something. me because of the multi vote thing. natty because of, it appears, a bad quote reference. 1=1=1. so we are all in the same boat as far as your votes go. toDay we get a vote on cias and a vote on blockey. now there is no discussion about whether pede is full of anything or regarding that it appears that blockey is gonna drink his kool aid like squiddy. 1=1. they are both in the same boat. now my position has not changed regarding your reason for voting me yesterDay. matter of fact i think you are proving my point. but yet, no vote so far. that's why it looks like a toss away to me. it has the same weight as the vote for someone who looks scummier. non accountability is a good place for non town aligned to be. if it weren't for that damnable buff and her blatant disregard for the value of votes this would never have happened. i kid, i kid. i still disagree with your opinion, however. Why so smudgy, dude? You seem to wanna smudge until somebody else picks up your dirty work for you. It's just too bad there's not some way for you to formally declare your suspicions of me, so as to, oh I dunno, have some accountability.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 6:58:26 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Sept 16, 2009 6:58:26 GMT -5
1) Compared to Yesterday, there isn't that much new to talk about except the Night kills. 2) I said at least one was likely a scum kill, not that both must have been scum kills. Natlaw, there were three kills last Night, not two. Why do refer to "both of them" instead.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 7:32:36 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Sept 16, 2009 7:32:36 GMT -5
Assuming Parzival isn't lying, there can be only three scenarios: 1) He could be a Magician who is now basically vanilla. - The most likely scenario, I think. 2) He could be a Vampire, but only if Ed is a Wolf or another Vampire. - Unlikely. I can't think of a motivation. 3) He is some other role that has a secret power that told him. - More likely than 2 but not as likely as 1. Other options include: If Special Ed was a Wolf, Parzival is also a Wolf, knows the attack failed and can role claim Magician and hope to hide behind it because he would effectively be "vanilla". And yes, I consider him smart enough to try and pull this off. You inference is that you are a Magician and that you were attacked by Special Ed who you passed onto someone else. No other town role is really appropriate given your statements. That makes you vanilla at this point in time. Possibility 1. If Special Ed was a Night Killer and his attack failed due to Witch protection or Cabal block, that means we had three deaths last Night with one failed kill - giving four possible deaths? Given my earlier feelings on the setup, that means we would have had at least 4 and possibly more if a Vig existed, maybe 5 deaths on Night 1 if they had all hit. This I consider really really unlikely. Possibility 2: Special Ed was a Night Killer who hit a Vampire and was killed by backlash. This fits in slightly more with how I feel the game to be balanced and much more likely from what you have inferred. What I don't understand is why you would not fully claim all you know. If you are a "vanilla" Magician you are no real threat to the other scum teams, but you can reveal who Special Ed was attacking now giving us another scum in the hand in case any investigation does not produce one tomorrow. If you have a better reason for not claiming, I look forward to hearing it. PS: FCod - I'm surprised you didn't think of this option as well. Or did you prefer not to mention it. (smudge, smudge)
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 8:04:03 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Sept 16, 2009 8:04:03 GMT -5
well use whatever term that floats your boat.
we've going round and round about this multi vote thingy. you obviously feel one way, i another. we have both stated our positions. i still disagree with yours and, apparently, you with mine. some of the other comments have been my, once again apparently, lame attempts at levity. if not taken that way then, meh.
regarding dbi.
i just thought is odd that she was suggesting a vote for a dead person as a possibility. hence the whooshed statement. yaknow i understand that i am not that good at this game but even i understood the implications of the claim and possibilities it was that comment that caused me pause.
so when she responded about not really paying that much attention to who had been killed i thought it intersting that she had been involved in the discussion about reasoning behind the Night kills. so much that she mentioned ed by name. i just thought that rather inconisistent.
so if you want to define pointing out inconsistecies as smudging, meh.
and so if you want to characterize my posts, especially regarding you, as a smudge feel free. however, i don't necessarily consider your multiple votes on me as a ringing endorsement, either.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 8:16:24 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on Sept 16, 2009 8:16:24 GMT -5
Other options include: If Special Ed was a Wolf, Parzival is also a Wolf, knows the attack failed and can role claim Magician and hope to hide behind it because he would effectively be "vanilla". And yes, I consider him smart enough to try and pull this off. You're right, I didn't even think of that. I've been way distracted by my job lately. You inference is that you are a Magician and that you were attacked by Special Ed who you passed onto someone else. No other town role is really appropriate given your statements. That makes you vanilla at this point in time. You're talking to Parzival now, right? 'Cause at first I thought you were addressing me. Possibility 1. If Special Ed was a Night Killer and his attack failed due to Witch protection or Cabal block, that means we had three deaths last Night with one failed kill - giving four possible deaths? Given my earlier feelings on the setup, that means we would have had at least 4 and possibly more if a Vig existed, maybe 5 deaths on Night 1 if they had all hit. This I consider really really unlikely. I agree. I don't think can have 4 NKs, not counting any one-shot powers. Possibility 2: Special Ed was a Night Killer who hit a Vampire and was killed by backlash. This fits in slightly more with how I feel the game to be balanced and much more likely from what you have inferred. Again, if this was the case then Parzival is a Vampire and I don't see a whole lot of motivation for him to say anything. If I were a Detective, I'd be investigating Ed's death toNight after P's claim. Unless P is trying to out a Detective, I don't see a lot of value for him to claim if he's a Vampire. What I don't understand is why you would not fully claim all you know. If you are a "vanilla" Magician you are no real threat to the other scum teams, but you can reveal who Special Ed was attacking now giving us another scum in the hand in case any investigation does not produce one tomorrow. If you have a better reason for not claiming, I look forward to hearing it. I agree here as well. The only reason to not fully claim is if P has a secret power that informed him or he doesn't want to reveal he isn't Town. Either way, I think he needs to claim. Until that time, Vote: Parzival . PS: FCod - I'm surprised you didn't think of this option as well. Or did you prefer not to mention it. (smudge, smudge) I honestly didn't think of it. I spent like 10 minutes reading the rules thread trying to think of any possibilities and those three are the only ones I came up with. --FCOD
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 8:35:31 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Sept 16, 2009 8:35:31 GMT -5
Other options include: If Special Ed was a Wolf, Parzival is also a Wolf, knows the attack failed and can role claim Magician and hope to hide behind it because he would effectively be "vanilla". And yes, I consider him smart enough to try and pull this off. I'm satisfied Vote: Parzival at this point, now that I know of a legitimate scum motivation to match the lack of townie motivation.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 9:07:28 GMT -5
Post by hockeyguy8435 on Sept 16, 2009 9:07:28 GMT -5
Assuming Parzival isn't lying, there can be only three scenarios: 1) He could be a Magician who is now basically vanilla. - The most likely scenario, I think. 2) He could be a Vampire, but only if Ed is a Wolf or another Vampire. - Unlikely. I can't think of a motivation. 3) He is some other role that has a secret power that told him. - More likely than 2 but not as likely as 1. Other options include: If Special Ed was a Wolf, Parzival is also a Wolf, knows the attack failed and can role claim Magician and hope to hide behind it because he would effectively be "vanilla". And yes, I consider him smart enough to try and pull this off. You inference is that you are a Magician and that you were attacked by Special Ed who you passed onto someone else. No other town role is really appropriate given your statements. That makes you vanilla at this point in time. Possibility 1. If Special Ed was a Night Killer and his attack failed due to Witch protection or Cabal block, that means we had three deaths last Night with one failed kill - giving four possible deaths? Given my earlier feelings on the setup, that means we would have had at least 4 and possibly more if a Vig existed, maybe 5 deaths on Night 1 if they had all hit. This I consider really really unlikely. Possibility 2: Special Ed was a Night Killer who hit a Vampire and was killed by backlash. This fits in slightly more with how I feel the game to be balanced and much more likely from what you have inferred. What I don't understand is why you would not fully claim all you know. If you are a "vanilla" Magician you are no real threat to the other scum teams, but you can reveal who Special Ed was attacking now giving us another scum in the hand in case any investigation does not produce one tomorrow. If you have a better reason for not claiming, I look forward to hearing it. PS: FCod - I'm surprised you didn't think of this option as well. Or did you prefer not to mention it. (smudge, smudge) Another thing about the Magician, they need to pick someone to die for them at Night if they are chosen. If Parzival was the Magician, then he'd be told Ed attacked him, but the kill would bounce to someone else. Who? Did Parzival pick Ed, and coincidentally the kill backfired on him, or did he pick someone else and someone else then killed Ed? Parzial NEEDS to claim. Until then I will also Vote: Parzival . The only Town role he could possibly have is Magician, and lack of a claim leads me to believe he isn't Town.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 9:32:17 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Sept 16, 2009 9:32:17 GMT -5
Possibility 1. If Special Ed was a Night Killer and his attack failed due to Witch protection or Cabal block, that means we had three deaths last Night with one failed kill - giving four possible deaths? Given my earlier feelings on the setup, that means we would have had at least 4 and possibly more if a Vig existed, maybe 5 deaths on Night 1 if they had all hit. You call it unlikely, but the fact is that it has happened. In Night 1 of Conspiracy 2 we had three deaths on Night 1. However, there were no less than four killers roaming the streets; one Wolf, two Vampire and a Vig. The failed kill was due to one of the Vampires trying to chow down on the Reverend Peekercpa (a protection option you omit to mention in your analysis.). A possibility should not be dismissed on the basis that it is unlikely on the face of it. In the absence of evidence, don't dismiss the improbable options.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 9:57:40 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Sept 16, 2009 9:57:40 GMT -5
Possibility 1. If Special Ed was a Night Killer and his attack failed due to Witch protection or Cabal block, that means we had three deaths last Night with one failed kill - giving four possible deaths? Given my earlier feelings on the setup, that means we would have had at least 4 and possibly more if a Vig existed, maybe 5 deaths on Night 1 if they had all hit. You call it unlikely, but the fact is that it has happened. In Night 1 of Conspiracy 2 we had three deaths on Night 1. However, there were no less than four killers roaming the streets; one Wolf, two Vampire and a Vig. The failed kill was due to one of the Vampires trying to chow down on the Reverend Peekercpa (a protection option you omit to mention in your analysis.). A possibility should not be dismissed on the basis that it is unlikely on the face of it. In the absence of evidence, don't dismiss the improbable options. That is true: I have made one very large assumption with this analysis. If A Vig exists, they would not operate on Night 1. Don't forget in Game 2, the Vig hit town on Night 1 at random. If both of them are true, then the above holds and that is what I consider unlikely. If a vampire also hit a vicar, then we have 1 missed vampire kill 3 actual kills 1 inferred missed Special Ed Kill At that point we probably have a Vig operating on Night 1, but we are still at 5 possible killers at Night. Nope, not seeing it as really possible again. Alternatively we could have 1 missed vampire kill 2 actual kills 1 vampire rebound accouting for Special Ed leaving 4 killers still and parzival "the magician" knowing the existence of a vampire. Which still leaves 1 furry, 2 vamp + a vig wandering around, special bonuses not included. This is more likely but leaves no reason as to why Parzival would not fully claim.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 10:33:39 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Sept 16, 2009 10:33:39 GMT -5
I have no quibble with the idea that we can evaluate scenarios for likelihood. What I object to, at this stage, is dismissing a scenario because "it is unlikely." We've seen any number of unlikely scenarios happen.
All I ask is that we not reject them outright without some evidence; something which, in this game, is in short supply right now. Tomorrow morning we can revisit this discussion with some actual evidence to assess the likelihood of all these hypotheses, and perhaps be able to narrow the field down a bit.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 10:37:40 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on Sept 16, 2009 10:37:40 GMT -5
Yeah, I have nothing else to say about it, and I don't see what anyone else can add to the discussion either. Well, unless someone else would like to half-claim, that is.
At this point, I'm content to just wait for Night and see what we learn tomorrow.
--FCOD
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 12:00:55 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Sept 16, 2009 12:00:55 GMT -5
The biggest problem we have had so far is that with two "gimme" lynches, conversation has been a bit lacking.
And besides, given that we could lose another few people by morning and its fluff all Night, the more we can put down now the better, lest we lose any good ideas, thoughts or understanding.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 12:12:58 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 16, 2009 12:12:58 GMT -5
The longer Parzival doesn't elaborate, the worse it is looking for him. It seems very unlikely that a Vampire who had survived being attacked by Ed would expose themselves in such a way, unless he's banking on a Magician not being in the game, trying to set up a false Magician claim? But it also seems likely that a true vanilla-ized Magician would just come forward with a full claim including the proxy, especially in our current data-challenged situation, so if it is a false claim set up it is not very compelling so far.
Vote: Parzival to see what is in his head if not his magic bag.
|
|
Parzival
Mome Rath
Let's all strive to do our best today![on:forgot to log out][of:forgot to log in]
Posts: 201
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 12:18:22 GMT -5
Post by Parzival on Sept 16, 2009 12:18:22 GMT -5
Okay, I missed something in the rules that now that I notice it, makes no sense for me not to claim. Primarily I don't want anyone wasting protection on me.
I am The Magician. Last night I chose a proxy since the information gained is certainly more useful in my opinion. And I was lucky enough to actually get targeted. Which would have been great, except the name of the killer was someone who showed up dead. And my proxy turned up alive.
Previously I didn't want to start a discussion or potentially accuse someone before we had more knowledge on Ed. What I missed was that the Scotsman is revealed to everyone on attack, which means that can't be my proxy.
Which leaves, barring special powers, only two options:
a-My proxy was protected. That makes them possibly but not definitely a Witch. b-My proxy is a Vampire.
After weighing the benefits and detriments of revealing the name, I've decided I'll name the proxy:
bufftabby
Just to remind everyone, I'm now vanilla town. I have neither any more powers nor information to share.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 12:40:38 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 16, 2009 12:40:38 GMT -5
Well that's clear as mud. Night 1 is turning into quite the onion to peel. If anyone was protecting buff, I think they should stay quiet for now.
Unvote: Parzival
Thankfully we can just lynch the confessed.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 12:41:05 GMT -5
Post by Natlaw on Sept 16, 2009 12:41:05 GMT -5
Natlaw's puzzlement about why Meeko and SpecialEd's deaths smacks of both 1) trying to hard to sound Townie, and 2) a little bit of Perfect Information Syndrome, as he seems certain that both of those were scumkills (whereas it seems just as likely that one was a vilgilante and/or a magician redirect). 1) Compared to Yesterday, there isn't that much new to talk about except the Night kills. 2) I said at least one was likely a scum kill, not that both must have been scum kills. Natlaw, there were three kills last Night, not two. Why do refer to "both of them" instead. I restored my quote from bufftabby - it should be obvious that 'both' at point 2) refers to the deaths of Meeko and special ed only. The original post by where I said 'at least one' was a scum kill and not 'certain that both' as bufftabby claimed: Unless we have more than one vigilante, I think at least one was a Wolf/Undead kill.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 12:45:42 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Sept 16, 2009 12:45:42 GMT -5
Thanks natlaw, that makes more sense.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 12:49:05 GMT -5
Post by Natlaw on Sept 16, 2009 12:49:05 GMT -5
I agree. I don't think can have 4 NKs, not counting any one-shot powers. I think you meant to say you think there weren't four (attempted) kills last Night? After weighing the benefits and detriments of revealing the name, I've decided I'll name the proxy: bufftabbyAny specific reason you picked her?
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 12:49:52 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Sept 16, 2009 12:49:52 GMT -5
Ok, options. If Parzival is being truthful. 1. Special Ed was a Vig, then bufftabby was protected. I would consider this really unlikely, as it involves A vig operating on Night 1. ( to MHaye ) 2. Special Ed was a vampire, then bufftabby is either a vicar or protected. This means a Vig took out Special Ed leaving us with 4 Night attackers operating on Night 1, including a Vig attacking Special Ed. Possible given his behaviour on Day 1. 3. Special Ed was a Wolf who attacked parzival and redirected onto a vampire bufftabby, resulting in Special Ed's death. Leaves 2 attacks an 1 failed attack on Night 1 which is my preferred guess. 4. Special Ed was a Wolf who attacked parzival and redirected onto a protected bufftabby. This means his attack failed and we had four attempted Night Kills on Night 1, probably including a Vig as well. And of course, if Parzival is lying, but knew who Special Ed attacked. 5. Special Ed is likely a Wolf who attacked vampire bufftabby. 6. Special Ed is likely a Wolf and bufftabby is a random person chosen. Of course, if bufftabby is revealed as anything other than something that can fit the above scenarios, parzival is toast. My guess is that bufftabby is most likely a vamp. There a probably a lot of other options though. Comments, bufftabby?
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 12:55:29 GMT -5
Post by PrecambrianMollusc on Sept 16, 2009 12:55:29 GMT -5
So you are the magician
You were targeted night one by Ed You picked Bufftabby as your proxy
Ed obviously failed to kill buffy because either a) Bufftabby is the scotsman - unlikely as it would have been revealed b) Bufftabby was protected c) Bufftabby is a vampire and ed is not a vigilante d) Bufftabby is a vicar and Ed is a Vampire
a, b and d may be true but would require that Ed was also attacked by someone else. That would imply there was a failed Ed attack plus an attack that killed Ed, plus an attack that killed Meeko and an attack that killed Story
C only requires that Ed attacked parzival and that Bufftabby is a vampire.
IF Parzival is telling the truth. My concern is it seams pretty damn lucky that not only did who ever Ed is (Wolf most likely) attacked Parzival, but that Parzival picked on probably a vampire.
I can understand his reticence on a full claim if he misunderstood the scotsman role.
Parzival - any idea why Ed would have targeted you? Why Bufftabby as your proxy - essentially by picking bufftabby you are saying he is the most likely scum that you thought of last night.
|
|
|
Day Two
Sept 16, 2009 13:01:44 GMT -5
Post by PrecambrianMollusc on Sept 16, 2009 13:01:44 GMT -5
errrrr or what CIAS just said
|
|