|
Post by Renata on Oct 5, 2010 8:49:12 GMT -5
I've cleaned up bhok'aral dens that smell better than your arguments, Maniac.
1. I voted for you twice, IIRC, so your effort in putting scare quotes around "pre-existing" as if it means nothing is wasted. It's not that you didn't talk about what I want you to talk about -- it's that what you did choose to talk about, ever since the retracted vote on Eleanor, is all but meaningless. You made a big noise at the end of day one and the beginning of day two that there was something interesting to be found in the end-of-day votes on day one. And other than a lengthy response to Marcel regarding some tangent or other, that's the only thing you commented on, that entire day. And at that, it wasn't even worth it -- when it came right down to it there was nothing in all your observations to be worth placing more than a weak one-off vote on Lieutenant Columbo for. So you didn't have something specific to day with the post I originally flagged as looking like no more than "I need to say something right about now" noise. You are a smart man. Your thoughts have focus. But in this game? None.
2. As for your claim -- when I first read it, I was leaning towards Stay-Puft being a serial killer and having lied about the redirection. So why did Batman survive with results in hand? Why would the people going around MURDERING PEOPLE AT NIGHT allow it? There was no evidence they even tried to kill him, or had roleblocked him, or redirected him, or anything -- did they somehow want his investigation to happen? I had all kinds of speculations going through my head. Heehee I almost said crazy speculations.
Your claim initially seemed to make sense of all of that, it was like a sparker going off. (At a safe distance, of course.) They might have sent a roleblocker or redirector after all (or even, as I wondered in the post I made at the time, a killer?), and it was only your power that allowed Batman to get his result. That's an obviously townie thing to do, so you're off the hook. It was only Ramesh's challenge that led me to think it over again and see the flaw: if Stay-Puft was redirected after all, or if the MURDERERS sent a killer of their own who was prevented in some other way from carrying out the kill, then there would be no need to interfere with Batman in any way that your claim could have prevented, hence no reason to believe you actually did anything, hence no reason for me to give you townie credit for it. The claim could be compete fiction, for all I know.
You can put the knife down now.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Oct 5, 2010 8:56:57 GMT -5
Sorry I haven't been around. This week is a killer for me. Tons of meetings and next week is mid-terms and I'll just say my workplace is a little nastier this week than last. On top of that my son is getting married this coming weekend and it's my job to make sure all the grandmothers and aunties get to the right airport at the right time. Gah!
Rosarche; I was not posting in code, just being stupid. It's the drugs you know. I need to reread this thread
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Oct 5, 2010 9:03:08 GMT -5
(Congratulations!)
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Oct 5, 2010 10:13:11 GMT -5
On top of that my son is getting married this coming weekend and it's my job to make sure all the grandmothers and aunties get to the right airport at the right time. SQUEEK (Mazel tov. And, also, I'm sorry.) so you believe his claim without question? SQUEEK (That's an interesting take on what I said, and you know perfectly damn well that I don't. However, I would like to hear another explanation for why -- if we're assuming a mass redirect on Night Two -- you weren't redirected to yourself.) And I don't believe you answered my question from yesterday on why you think there may be pfk's with mutual wincons SQUEEK? (Really? I wonder what this was, then: yes, it is a wierd question - why would you think pfk's shared a wincon but didnt know it? SQUEEK. (I don't think they do. I asked if it was possible, given the two factors that I mentioned in that post -- Buddy's WiFoM regarding two Scum teams and the strangeness of a Power Stealer as PFK. Plus, having played in Blocky games before where people had really odd wincons (cf the Mad Scientist game, where my wincon as the mad scientist was to find and improve a specific character). Actually, I had the jester-by-proxy idea first, then the shared-win PFK idea, and please don't ask me to trace my thought processes backward any further on that because I'm not sure I can. ) ) Indeed, given your question, I'm thinking that there must be quite a few pfk's in this game for that question to even have relevance. SQUEEK (Well, it's not like you weren't thinking that already, after all, in the post that my original weird question was responding to, you said: Power Stealer as a 3rd party is rather unusual - indeed, it would be a pretty tough role to try and win with. More importantly, he wasn't an SK - and we would almost certainly expect an SK in a game with 25 folk. So that does suggest that there are multiple PFK's. ) SQUEEK (If anything, it was the intersection of your multiple PFK idea plus Buddy Christ's thoughts about a second Scum team that provoked my question. Because I sure as hell have no idea if there are other PFK in the game besides The Narrator.)
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Natlaw on Oct 5, 2010 10:25:43 GMT -5
Seems many powers are strong but limited; the Mime's mass Roleblock; the Dr/Ed's Vig ability; the Maniac's booster. What would Scum have to counter those? Or would Scum have typical power with no exceptional qualities, just able to use them every Night? Let's look at the Jail. Not much but it shuts down a player for a Day. Does seem to stop them from getting results, by Elinor's account. Total hasn't claimed so don't know what she was doing. From what I understand, Eleanor claimed she didn't get to protect Night Two and as a result Batman's investigation might have failed because Galadriel was jailed Night Three (and not because he was blocked).
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Oct 5, 2010 10:40:04 GMT -5
SQUEEK (Total hasn't claimed, but she did mention yesterday that she is able to "share someone's bed" for a night. What the hell that means in game terms, I have no clue.)
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Oct 5, 2010 11:12:03 GMT -5
Wasn't there similar color in Mahaloth's Wild West game where the character was a prostitute and doc?
|
|
|
Post by Mahaloth on Oct 5, 2010 11:14:48 GMT -5
Wasn't there similar color in Mahaloth's Wild West game where the character was a prostitute and doc? Oredigger(town) was a slut and could roleblock by distracting someone for the Night. Somone(I forget who) was a prostitute(scum team) and was also a roleblocker.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Oct 5, 2010 11:18:24 GMT -5
Ah, well. That makes even more sense than a doc. Of course we already have a dead town roleblocker and two town roleblockers seem unusual. So either Total is scum or I'm completely offbase. Rats, I was so hoping that I was on to something.
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Oct 5, 2010 11:18:46 GMT -5
Batman has expressed disbelief in my role power, which, I guess, is fair enough on his part. I have no answer to it, of course, and no way to argue it. I'll just point to the track record of Towns trying to guess at what powers are and aren't believable, point to Blockey's track record as a mod who enjoys creating quirky roles, and let it go at that. we should believe you because blockey likes creating quirky roles? Well, not quite at that, actually. Batman: You were not role-blocked on Night One, and got a result (indeed, identified Scum!). You were role-blocked on Night Two. Do you wonder, even a little bit, why the Scum chose not to role-block you on Night One? Figure they were just being generous about it? I acknowledge that there are multiple possible explanations, but is it really so far-fetched to imagine that my device is among them? well your device, if it exists, has obviously got a quirk as there was a mass block night 1 - losing track of your cover story already?
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Natlaw on Oct 5, 2010 11:27:47 GMT -5
SQUEEK (Total hasn't claimed, but she did mention yesterday that she is able to "share someone's bed" for a night. What the hell that means in game terms, I have no clue.) If this was in response to my post it doesn't matter what Galadriel claimed. -Eleanor releaved as jailed at Dawn D3 but her posts Today indicate that here N2 action failed as well (in that she targeted Batman but was not seen there) so she was either blocked or the jail prevented it. But I would like Eleanor to confirm that as it wasn't spelled out precisely like that. -Batman got no result N3 and Dawn D4 his target shows up jailed so again it could be the jail preventing the action and not a blocker. I don't see a reason for town or third party/pfk to jail (possible) doctors so I'm assuming it a scum power at this point.
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Oct 5, 2010 11:31:45 GMT -5
Looks like puffy was telling the truth. Here's my list: People with info (with varying reliability). Let me know If i've missed anything. 1 BillMC: Batman: Claimed Cop -- Night 2 Investigated Drain Bead: Confirmed Results. 3 Kat: Gir --Seen at batcave Night 2, has no knowledge of it. 5 Sister Coyote: Death of Rats --Dirx Claimed Roleblock Night 2. 6 Sinjin: Big Sister -- Jailed Night 2/Day 2 7 Total Lost: Galadriel --Seen at batcave Night 2, has no knowledge of it. 8 Timmyfellinthewell: Rorschach --Seen at batcave Night 2, confirmed. 9 Cometothedarksidewehavecookies: Nakor 10 Storyteller: generic homicidal maniac --Claimed to have "Enabled" Batman night 2 15 Special Ed: Dr. Rajesh Ramayan Koothrappali --Claimed Gimped Vig --Seen night 3 with Stay Puft 22 Mahaloth: Zeddicus "Zedd" Zu'l Zorander --Claimed Role Cop/ Threat Cop --Claimed to investigate Batman Night 2, unconfirmed. --Claimed to investigate Jack Skellington, who is no threat to town. --Claimed to be redirected Night 3 --So the claim means he can not be observed, but can be redirected. ( ) 25 Meeko: Marcel Marceau --Claimed One Shot Mass Block People that we have no info about. 4 Inner Stickler: Jack Skellington 12 severedelays: Elizabeth Bathory 18 Hockey Monkey: Dexter Morgan 19 Natlaw: Nordom the Modron 21 NPhase: Iskaral Pust 23 Paulwhoisaghost: Meeko So with no deaths on N2 and two deaths on N3, we def have two active killers. Now puft says he was redirected to me - so it's reasonable to assume that other killers were also redirected to me. So the killers were in the batcave. Galadriel and Gir, like Puft, say they weren't in the batcave, but the Mason's say they were. Galadriel is jailed -- now why jail her, she ddnt claim anything - this smells more like a scum ploy; which leaves Gir as the possible culprit. So this boils down to do I believe Story, in which case Gir is most likely the killer. Or are they both full of it?
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Oct 5, 2010 12:31:04 GMT -5
As much as I wonder just what the scum were up to with their own kill if they chose to redirect Stay-Puft to you, I don't think it follows that his redirection implies other killers also targeted you (by redirection or otherwise).
I don't follow why Galadriel being jailed as a scum ploy makes Gir the possible culprit, or how Story plays into this. Can you explain? I'm sure it makes sense in his head, but he's a bat -- the thing probably needs a good dusting. Mogora!
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Oct 5, 2010 12:43:04 GMT -5
Batman has expressed disbelief in my role power, which, I guess, is fair enough on his part. I have no answer to it, of course, and no way to argue it. I'll just point to the track record of Towns trying to guess at what powers are and aren't believable, point to Blockey's track record as a mod who enjoys creating quirky roles, and let it go at that. we should believe you because blockey likes creating quirky roles? That's a poor summation of my point and you know it. The point is, you shouldn't disbelieve me because blockey likes creating quirky roles. You're smart enough to know the difference, so I won't belabor the point, but seriously, if what you're trying to argue were a valid approach, then you should be arguing for a mass role claim. We could then pick out which powers sound wrong to us and lynch those people. But of course, that wouldn't work, because whether or not a role sounds implausible to one player with imperfect information doesn't have anything to do with whether the role is likely to be in the game (especially not with this moderator, but it's really true of any game). I'm much more interested in examining behavior then I am trying to second-guess the moderator. You know why? Because trying to second-guess the moderator leads to people being entirely wrong. As you are here. [/quote] Yeah, you got me. I'm Scum, so I forgot that Night One existed. Come on. I obviously meant "Night Two" and "Night Three", respectively. But thanks for ignoring the meat of the argument and trying to play gotcha games; that'll help us all out! For what it's worth, I don't find your suspicious for any of this, simply because you always seem to have a bug up your butt about me when we play together, and look for reasons to vote for me if you possibly can. Keep trying; sooner or later you'll do it when I actually am Scum. It's not this time, though.
|
|
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 Oct 5, 2010 13:09:12 GMT -5
Ah, well. That makes even more sense than a doc. Of course we already have a dead town roleblocker and two town roleblockers seem unusual. So either Total is scum or I'm completely offbase. Rats, I was so hoping that I was on to something. Please tell me you are not basing any gameplay (thoughts or actions) of this game on roles and color from a previous game.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Oct 5, 2010 13:26:21 GMT -5
To clarify: I did not find out that I didn't protect Batman until the masons posted in thread that I was not seen in the Batcave. Subsequently:
1) I asked the mods if they received my protection order. 2) They said they did but provided no other info. 3) I threatened them all with a dead trout and asked them specifically if my being in jail prevented me from attending the Bat bash and hovering over the pointy-eared guy all night. 4) They answered in the affirmative.
As I understand it jail lasts an entire 24 hour game Night/Day cycle.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Oct 5, 2010 15:18:28 GMT -5
Please tell me you are not basing any gameplay (thoughts or actions) of this game on roles and color from a previous game. Total talked about getting in bed with players. That could be Total being flirty or it could be her description of her role. I'm just wondering about what roles might use a color like that. Also, there's the possibility that the game designers saw a mechanic or description they liked in a previous game and decided unconsciously or not to include it in this one. I would make a comment about your gameplay but so far I have seen very little of it, Fluffernutter.
|
|
|
Post by septimus on Oct 5, 2010 15:50:15 GMT -5
2) They said they did but provided no other info. 3) I threatened them ... 4) They answered in the affirmative. I can understand Mafia rules in which players are forced to remain ignorant about some mechanics. But Mods suppressing info and then providing it only in response to a particularly insistent sequence of PM's?? I'm just a Mafia novice, but that sure doesn't seem right. (I'm not doubting Eeanor, just curious about Mod behaviour.)
|
|
timmy
Mome Rath
In the frozen land of Nador they were forced to eat Robin's minstrels. And there was much rejoicing
Posts: 189
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by timmy on Oct 5, 2010 15:58:04 GMT -5
Ah, well. That makes even more sense than a doc. Of course we already have a dead town roleblocker and two town roleblockers seem unusual. So either Total is scum or I'm completely offbase. Rats, I was so hoping that I was on to something. With one Town Roleblocker dead, thought Total might be a backup or have a similar power that enables her to block players. Fits with the idea of having two investigative roles and two two Vig roles in the game. Think Scum jailed her to prevent being blocked, and NK'd claimed Roleblocker. All this is conjecture since we don't know for certain about the other two claims: the Vig and the Seer. Could all be smoke and mirrors.
|
|
timmy
Mome Rath
In the frozen land of Nador they were forced to eat Robin's minstrels. And there was much rejoicing
Posts: 189
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by timmy on Oct 5, 2010 16:01:27 GMT -5
But Mods suppressing info and then providing it only in response to a particularly insistent sequence of PM's?? I'm just a Mafia novice, but that sure doesn't seem right. (I'm not doubting Eeanor, just curious about Mod behaviour.) Did anyone get Mod confirmation about Night 1 actions? Can't recall if anyone spoke up, thought Mass Roleblock canceled everything.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Oct 5, 2010 16:23:32 GMT -5
2) They said they did but provided no other info. 3) I threatened them ... 4) They answered in the affirmative. I can understand Mafia rules in which players are forced to remain ignorant about some mechanics. But Mods suppressing info and then providing it only in response to a particularly insistent sequence of PM's?? I'm just a Mafia novice, but that sure doesn't seem right. (I'm not doubting Eeanor, just curious about Mod behaviour.) In defense of the mods. The first question asked a specific question that could be answered with a yes or a no. The super-mod was not available to answer at that time so one of the minion-mods responded with with a very minimal answer not wanting to step on his god-mod's toes. I then asked a more specific question, while swinging the trout, and I got a more specific answer that was jointly decided upon by the minion-mods and the god-mod. I have no idea if the mods gave me a better answer the second time because they were intimidated by the trout or aroused by the trout. Maybe you can ask them that question.
|
|
|
Post by special on Oct 5, 2010 16:53:30 GMT -5
Ah, well. That makes even more sense than a doc. Of course we already have a dead town roleblocker and two town roleblockers seem unusual. So either Total is scum or I'm completely offbase. Rats, I was so hoping that I was on to something. With one Town Roleblocker dead, thought Total might be a backup or have a similar power that enables her to block players. Fits with the idea of having two investigative roles and two two Vig roles in the game. Think Scum jailed her to prevent being blocked, and NK'd claimed Roleblocker. All this is conjecture since we don't know for certain about the other two claims: the Vig and the Seer. Could all be smoke and mirrors. what made you think Total was a back-up/second roleblocker?
|
|
timmy
Mome Rath
In the frozen land of Nador they were forced to eat Robin's minstrels. And there was much rejoicing
Posts: 189
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by timmy on Oct 5, 2010 17:25:32 GMT -5
what made you think Total was a back-up/second roleblocker? Going by what someone upthread mentioned. Something about her spending Nights with a player. Could be a roleblocking ability. All speculative. Up to now thought she had not made any sort of claim.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 5, 2010 18:36:38 GMT -5
Chitter...
Little Indian Girl: If Zedd were to investigate my role Tonight, and the watcher were to watch him as well, then we can definitively prove that he is telling the truth without losing too much. I can't say much more without outright claiming and thus ruining the entire process, but my role is such that the role investigation part of his power can be confirmed.... but why do we care about that? Isn't that just something that scum would want to know? Who has what role.... shouldn't we be concerning ourselves with alignment instead?
And to that effect, what use is "not a threat to town" to anyone? There are too many variables... as mentioned, does a town vig show up as a threat? Does a scum godfather show up as not a threat? Would a 3rd party with a power that is potentially harmful to town (meaning someone that could win with town, but who's power could set town back) show up as a threat or not? The info is useless until those kinds of questions are answered.
I suggest that Zedd be asking the mods some serious questions concerning his power and hypothetical outcomes. He doesn't seem to understand his power at all, and that makes it useless.
All of this, of course, is only relevant if he is telling the truth.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 5, 2010 18:46:48 GMT -5
Chitter....
Little Indian Girl: Almost forgot to mention... if there is concern over a busdriver, and me getting swapped with someone else, then the watcher could target me instead. That way they will know if Zedd is BSing about visiting me, or if he got results on someone else. Or they could watch him and know if he was redirected or otherwise targeted. A little WiFoM there... and either possibilty helps to prove that what he says is accurate.
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 5, 2010 18:55:25 GMT -5
Galadriel and Gir, like Puft, say they weren't in the batcave, but the Mason's say they were. Galadriel is jailed -- now why jail her, she ddnt claim anything - this smells more like a scum ploy; which leaves Gir as the possible culprit. So this boils down to do I believe Story, in which case Gir is most likely the killer. Or are they both full of it? Chitter? Little Indian Girl: Ok.... I don't understand the logical path leading to the last question.... Nor do I understand the logical path leading to a scum ploy where in TG was jailed by her fellow scum. Here's why I don't get it: 1. Why didn't they jail Eleanor again? 2. Why didn't they jail Batman? He was just watched, so the likelihood of him being watched again was reduced... 3. Jailing/maiming one of your fellow scum is SOOOO last year. 4. What gain do they get from it? With the amount of discussion already going around that it should never be assumed that "scum wouldn't do that" they can't really expect that much TC from it.... and should have even expected some doubt and suspicion about it... 5. I think they would have set it up better. It doesn't make sense as is.... too many gaps in logic leading up to the reason for her being jailed. 6. Because of 4 and 5, it makes sense to jail her if she isn't scum because she now has suspicion on her, and it doesn't make sense.... thus adding to the general confusion of everyone not in the know.
|
|
|
Post by special on Oct 5, 2010 19:57:54 GMT -5
Chitter.... Little Indian Girl: Almost forgot to mention... if there is concern over a busdriver, and me getting swapped with someone else, then the watcher could target me instead. That way they will know if Zedd is BSing about visiting me, or if he got results on someone else. Or they could watch him and know if he was redirected or otherwise targeted. A little WiFoM there... and either possibilty helps to prove that what he says is accurate. All of this generally requires that we trust you. Something I'm not willing to do at this point.
|
|
|
Post by special on Oct 5, 2010 19:59:25 GMT -5
4. What gain do they get from it? With the amount of discussion already going around that it should never be assumed that "scum wouldn't do that" they can't really expect that much TC from it.... and should have even expected some doubt and suspicion about it... wait. So because it would lead to a Scum wouldn't do that defense, then Scum wouldn't do that?
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 5, 2010 20:09:40 GMT -5
Chitter.... Little Indian Girl: Almost forgot to mention... if there is concern over a busdriver, and me getting swapped with someone else, then the watcher could target me instead. That way they will know if Zedd is BSing about visiting me, or if he got results on someone else. Or they could watch him and know if he was redirected or otherwise targeted. A little WiFoM there... and either possibilty helps to prove that what he says is accurate. All of this generally requires that we trust you. Something I'm not willing to do at this point. Chitter? Little Indian Girl: How does it require that you trust me?
|
|
|
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Oct 5, 2010 20:18:24 GMT -5
4. What gain do they get from it? With the amount of discussion already going around that it should never be assumed that "scum wouldn't do that" they can't really expect that much TC from it.... and should have even expected some doubt and suspicion about it... wait. So because it would lead to a Scum wouldn't do that defense, then Scum wouldn't do that? Chitter... Little Indian Girl: I didn't say that... I said that it would bring suspicion on TG. So while it's possible, it was either not well thought out, or a bad idea.... if she is indeed scum being jailed by another scum. It's WiFoM.... we say "scum wouldn't do that"... but they would because that's what they know everyone is thinking... But after having spent all game saying "scum wouldn't do that" is a big mistake because yes they would, it would be a bad idea for them to follow a course of action assuming town would say "scum wouldn't do that". Look at the list of players.... this isn't Amateur Hour.... Anyone on scum side who thinks they could so easily pull the wool over the eyes of these players is playing like a fool. Which brings me back to the fact that this isn't Amateur Hour.... the players on the list who might be scum wouldn't expect such a basic scum ploy to really play out. But like I said.... it's all WiFoM... just as much as we can't take it as evidence of TG being Town.... we can't use it as evidence of her being scum either.... it's bunk.... useless info...
|
|