|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 10:46:57 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Jan 20, 2012 10:46:57 GMT -5
PS: Pleonast - you misplaced my vote for Hoopy Frood
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 11:31:59 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Jan 20, 2012 11:31:59 GMT -5
Hmm,
Looking back at the end of Day 1 and the voting structure, I have come to the conclusion that there was no real rush to try and save Mahaloth once Idle Thoughts claimed first.
At that point he was the only other viable end of Day candidate and he did very little to try and save himself. I would not be surprised if he was a Wolf and that he was given up as a lost cause.
Two other people, texcat and squid did get later votes, but nowhere near enough to make them viable lynch candidates as well.
Effectively, Idle's claim lynched Mahaloth.
If Mahaloth is a Wolf, I would expect the later voters on Idle Thoughts to be wolves along with those who voted elsewhere after Idle's claim, as it would be easier to ensure a No Lynch by not getting to the right number of votes.
Something to look at, I guess.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 11:52:36 GMT -5
Post by gnarlycharlie on Jan 20, 2012 11:52:36 GMT -5
If Mahaloth is a Wolf, I would expect the later voters on Idle Thoughts to be wolves along with those who voted elsewhere after Idle's claim, as it would be easier to ensure a No Lynch by not getting to the right number of votes. Something to look at, I guess. i would agree with the logic in games where there is only one vote per player. but with multiple votes, i think those later votes aren't as suspicious as they usually would be.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 13:56:34 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Jan 20, 2012 13:56:34 GMT -5
I'm feeling quite confused in this game right about now. I don't understand why the masons felt this need to rush out and claim. Especially peeker's, since he made it seem like it was a game winning move when it actually made no sense whatsoever. And then for the rest of them to follow suit? Ugh.
I also don't understand your argument for why I am a Wolf Idle. You seem to be saying that since I knew you were not-Wolf, I jumped at the chance to move my vote off Maha. If I'm a Wolf, why the hell did I vote Maha in the first place? And if the answer is to bus for cred, why did I remove it before you claimed? Those two actions are inconsistent with each other. And if instead the argument is that I was looking for an excuse to remove my vote from him that I found in you, why did I move it back after you claimed instead of hunting for someone else to vote for? This vote feels very omgus to me, and there doesn't seem to be much logic behind it. Which explains of course why Ed jumped on it, since his new playstyle seems to be who gives a shit about making sense or even thinking.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 14:44:05 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 20, 2012 14:44:05 GMT -5
. Which explains of course why Ed jumped on it, since his new playstyle seems to be who gives a shit about making sense or even thinking. au contaire, it makes sense and I give a shit. I'm just not terribly concerned with explaining it to you. No offense. I agree with it. it seems reasonable, and by trusting, for now, Idle, septimus, Jan, peeker, and myself, I figure most of my votes are actually likely to be for non-Town players even if just picked randomly. Add in Idle's reasoning, and it's a comfortable place for my vote right now.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 14:51:23 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 20, 2012 14:51:23 GMT -5
I'm feeling quite confused in this game right about now. I don't understand why the masons felt this need to rush out and claim. Especially peeker's, since he made it seem like it was a game winning move when it actually made no sense whatsoever. And then for the rest of them to follow suit? Ugh. What I found a bit odd is that after peeker claimed Mason, we apparently had two other Masons who attempted to handshake with other players, and not with peeker. Since the Masons didn't know each other at the beginning of the game, that seems like a missed opportunity, doesn't it? Unless they both thought peeker was lying, but in that case why did they claim at all when they had nothing to show for it? I'm also not sure about the timing of septimus' Coroner claim. It seems to me that it came rather early, and would have been better saved for another cycle or two. But I do tend to play close to the vest, so perhaps it's just a difference in playstyles.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 15:51:40 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jan 20, 2012 15:51:40 GMT -5
Don't you mean omega wolf? Oh, is that what shows up as Town if investigated? I guess I switched them around in my mind. Why would I be unsure? If you don't believe me, then just say why. I don't get this logic. My life is already shortened and probably on a limited time. Better for me to share what results we get now than to wait, I think. This irks me. If he was a town player, there is no reason to mention this, unless Guiri was about to be lynched. Saying it up front is tantamount to asking someone to NK him. At this point I would not be surprised if Idle was Cabal again. His protestations and play do not strike me as townie So you'd rather I die with the info that people are probable town and ANOTHER Witch get revealed and shown to scum? That strikes me as being anti-Town, not anything I'm doing. I'm claimed, I'm out in the open now...no reason why I shouldn't be fully honest and forthcoming with information. If I'm a Wolf, why the hell did I vote Maha in the first place? You vote didn't matter at the time. We were tied. Someone could have very easily pushed me out in front. If not an unsuspecting, ignorant Townsperson, then another Wolf. It was only after I pushed him into the lead and put him at danger of being the lynchee did you make it tied again and removed that danger. Also, I'm not voting for you, so I don't know where you saw a vote or what vote you're talking about. You're seeing things not there.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 16:32:43 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 20, 2012 16:32:43 GMT -5
<font style="font-size: 12px;">NETA: I'd look to those who were voting for me yesterDay BEFORE I claimed. As opposed to those who voted for you after you claimed? Regarding the Vicar's failure to bless mahaloth: - He failed to get his action in before Dusk
- He was blocked by the Cabal
- He was blocked by some Secret Power
- He doesn't exist
I include the last option purely for completeness sake, as I think the Vicar is an essential role in this game. If he didn't fully understand his role, it's possible he might not have realized it's a Day action, or that he could bless the 'soon-to-be-lynched' rather than having to wait for someone to be killed. If that's not the case, then it's quite possible that the Cabal knows the identity of the Vicar, though I don't think that should be a big problem, since they dislike Zombies as much as the rest of us. If a Secret Power blocked the Vicar, then that may or may not be trouble, depending on who has it. Cabal can't block Day powers, so I doubt they know who the vicar is. Vote: vote gnarleycharlie For giving a bullshit secondary reason for voting me (and not even acknowledging the bullshit after I pointed it out.) The main reason would have been fine on its own. With the secondary, it seems he's trying to overjustify. Now, looking at the non-voters Vote: vote Innerstickler Yesterday's reason for voting him is a bit weaker since it's Day 2 now, but at the same time, he was one of those that finished the Day without a vote. In fact, he didn't even vote at all. Leaving us no record to work from, yet he was here posting (at least in the beginning), so it's not a case of not being able to post. As far as other people who didn't vote: MHaye already explained his lack of vote (well, late vote, but in the end it's the same). And he always waits for Day end regardless of alignment. BillMc and hirkatbawa get a pass. They haven't even posted Day 1, which means they probably were not around. (Though, they should have been around for at least part of the Day based on their posts in the away thread.) Deon said he was having PC problems, and only posted once. So he probably wasn't around either. But after looking at the above, there is one thing about Inner Stickler, although he was posting fairly regularly, he disappeared sometime on Sunday, so it's possible he had issues as well. I'll leave the vote for now until he comes and at least gives us some thoughts about the latter part of Day one.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 16:35:38 GMT -5
Post by septimus on Jan 20, 2012 16:35:38 GMT -5
I also do not understand the motives for claims by Masons. But I'm not sure my own claim was wrong. I'm also not sure about the timing of septimus' Coroner claim. It seems to me that it came rather early, and would have been better saved for another cycle or two. If I'd known Night 1 would bring but a single corpse and I'd get no identity for it, I should have waited, but assuming 2 or more interesting reports by Dawn 2, I'd surely claim earlyish in Day 2, anyway. Sharing the information might be best; and I don't want Town to waste its energy being suspicious of me. As far as the timing, early Night 1 might be at least mildly helpful for a few Town powers: Warlock, Vig, Seer. A disadvantage might be drawing an NK against myself, but for Wolves to pass up an NK Witch attempt to shoot me might be net plus for Town. I was still dithering when I saw Drain Bead complain about suspense in the Night thread. I requited her, also relieving my own tension as otherwise I'd be wondering all Night when I was going to claim.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 16:42:37 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 20, 2012 16:42:37 GMT -5
I don't get this logic. My life is already shortened and probably on a limited time. Better for me to share what results we get now than to wait, I think. So you'd rather I die with the info that people are probable town and ANOTHER Witch get revealed and shown to scum? That strikes me as being anti-Town, not anything I'm doing. I'm claimed, I'm out in the open now...no reason why I shouldn't be fully honest and forthcoming with information. Really? There are 3 witches. It's in the rules for Town's sake. All witches are privy to the same information. Once two witches are dead, the witches are pretty much out of the game. So at that point, with one witch left alive, an info dump is a no-brainer. Of course with one witch dead, there's an off chance that two witches could die the same night, so it might make sense for the witches to infodump at that point as well. But with all 3 witches alive, there really is no reason to infodump unless you find scum. Because all you are doing is giving the other factions information on who to kill. And you are the one saying Silver Jan was playing bad. If it weren't for the fact that if you aren't a witch, that fact will become apparently pretty quickly, I'd be voting you. Because you might be a witch, but you certainly aren't playing one well.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 16:49:52 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Jan 20, 2012 16:49:52 GMT -5
Cabal can't block Day powers, so I doubt they know who the vicar is. True. Having a lot of Day Powers in a game is something I'm not used to; I'll need to remember to keep that in consideration during this game.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 16:50:56 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 20, 2012 16:50:56 GMT -5
I also do not understand the motives for claims by Masons. But I'm not sure my own claim was wrong. I'm also not sure about the timing of septimus' Coroner claim. It seems to me that it came rather early, and would have been better saved for another cycle or two. If I'd known Night 1 would bring but a single corpse and I'd get no identity for it, I should have waited, but assuming 2 or more interesting reports by Dawn 2, I'd surely claim earlyish in Day 2, anyway. Sharing the information might be best; and I don't want Town to waste its energy being suspicious of me. As far as the timing, early Night 1 might be at least mildly helpful for a few Town powers: Warlock, Vig, Seer. A disadvantage might be drawing an NK against myself, but for Wolves to pass up an NK Witch attempt to shoot me might be net plus for Town. I was still dithering when I saw Drain Bead complain about suspense in the Night thread. I requited her, also relieving my own tension as otherwise I'd be wondering all Night when I was going to claim. At this point, it's unlikely even the wolves would try to kill you even if they didn't know of any better targets. The advantage the wolves have by killing you is that you aren't a vamp, so there's no outward risk. However, they will be killing off a key piece of information that all factions at this point benefit from having. As for why you were blocked, it's possible the killing faction's power (and I'd be will to bet it's the wolves, since freemasons are safe targets) is to block you and learn the role themselves. That way they deny the information to everyone else while still getting it. And it sounds like something right up Pleo's alley to stick in a game.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 17:01:19 GMT -5
Post by septimus on Jan 20, 2012 17:01:19 GMT -5
Some may hate me for this vote, but...
Merestil shows up near deadline, complains about being busy, yet makes long pro-Town post, finally contradicts self to vote Mahaloth at 12:00 noon exactly. If someone had unvoted Mahaloth saving the Wolf, Merestil's post after the deadline (it isn't hard to synch one's machine to idlemafia clock, and surely Merestil was very aware of the deadline) would have saved Mahaloth, yet Merestil's cred might improve later, when Maha flips Wolf.
Do I strongly suspect Merestil Haye is a Wolf who did this trick? Not really. But I know many of you are good enough to behave smartly pro-Town while using artifice. Since I intend to place several votes today, a tentative one may be in order to call attention to this.
Vote: Merestil Haye
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 19:02:26 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jan 20, 2012 19:02:26 GMT -5
But with all 3 witches alive, there really is no reason to infodump unless you find scum. Because all you are doing is giving the other factions information on who to kill. I disagree, respectfully. I don't see the logic behind revealing who is what as soon as I get it AS long as I'm already claimed.You cannot convince me it's bad to reveal people who are possible town. Scum will already know they're not on THEIR side (wasn't it you that pointed this fact out to be yesterDay, by the way?), so chances are, they're going to try killing (if they can) everyone who is NOT them anyway. I can't see how it can ever hurt slowly growing the list of possible Town. All for one. For two, if I die without ever having revealed the info gotten, that leaves only 2 witches and as soon as one reveals what they know, they're only half as powerful...because then they either protect themselves every night or risk being killed off. That pretty much takes investigating out of the question. Right now we're able to investigate AND still report on all findings...better to have Guiri placed in the "probable town" then have me killed toNight and him on the lynching block tomorrow without me to say "HEY, NO WAIT, HE COULD BE TOWN!" Again, this seems to me to be a no brainer. No idea why you think it's a good thing to keep quiet about it.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 19:03:26 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jan 20, 2012 19:03:26 GMT -5
NETA: "I don't see the HARM behind revealing who is what" that should read. Not logic.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 19:10:50 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jan 20, 2012 19:10:50 GMT -5
Let me put it like this.
Scenario: Let's say I hadn't ever said anything toDay And then I die tonight, somehow. And then Guiri tips someone's suspicion meter tomorrow and gets a bunch of votes. Who is around to say "Guiri investigated as town"?
What, would you have ANOTHER WITCH reveal themselves just to say it? If yes, I'd say that was anti-town thinking. Because why have another witch reveal themselves when they could stay in hiding and find possible scum? Especially when I could have revealed that info toDay.
So if that scenario happened, do you agree that me saying something now is a good thing? Well, since it IS a (very) possible scenario, you can thank me now. : )
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 21:00:05 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 20, 2012 21:00:05 GMT -5
You know what's also a very possible scenario? Wolves attacking vampires. You know what you get for that? Dead wolves.
And, another thing, vampires want to take out town first, wolves second. Because wolves help the undead achieve their goals. And vampires don't need wolves dead to win. They just need to outnumber everyone that's not undead. So really, one death is as good as any other to them, and if the wolves get wiped out, the undead lose an effective kill. So they're also apt to target town first as well. Granted, they might just shoot into the unconfirmed pool so as to avoid risk of magician or warlock tricks on confirmed town, but there's no guarantee that they'll avoid such a fate even if they do. The difference is, you've given them info they didn't have before. Info they can now use as well. And the more town targets you expose, the easier it is for both vampires and wolves to not target the same people, thereby increasing the death rate of townies, good for both wolves and undead, bad for Town.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 21:00:59 GMT -5
Post by texcat on Jan 20, 2012 21:00:59 GMT -5
Let me put it like this. Scenario: Let's say I hadn't ever said anything toDay And then I die tonight, somehow. And then Guiri tips someone's suspicion meter tomorrow and gets a bunch of votes. Who is around to say "Guiri investigated as town"? What, would you have ANOTHER WITCH reveal themselves just to say it? If yes, I'd say that was anti-town thinking. Because why have another witch reveal themselves when they could stay in hiding and find possible scum? Especially when I could have revealed that info toDay. So if that scenario happened, do you agree that me saying something now is a good thing? Well, since it IS a (very) possible scenario, you can thank me now. : ) I have to disagree with most of this. First you have endangered Guiri. Who are the scum going to kill first? Why would they dip into the unknown pool when they can kill known town members? At some point, the witches need to give us a list of investigations, but if they give us one a day, and the scum kill off one a day, are we any better off? We really don't have a smaller pool to lynch from because the scum is killing off knowns as soon as we find them. Compare this with the scum shooting into an unknown pool where they might hit vampire, or they might hit a Cabal. Then on Day N, the witches release their investigations, and the scum can't kill off all of them before we find the scum. "And then I die tonight, somehow." I don't want to know who you are protecting now, but if I were you, last night, I would have protected myself. So, the possibility of dieing seems remote. And supposing you do die, what are the chances that Guiri is going to be lynched? And even supposing that Guiri is up for lynch, the other witches are going to need to come out pretty soon anyway. With 3 you are fairly safe that you won't all be killed off, but with 2, you need to start thinking about claiming anyway.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 21:02:54 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 20, 2012 21:02:54 GMT -5
*Wins the simulpost war*
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 21:05:56 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jan 20, 2012 21:05:56 GMT -5
You know what's also a very possible scenario? Wolves attacking vampires. You know what you get for that? Dead wolves. I read the rest of your post, but just quoting this part of it because I need something to quote to reply. The way I see it, I made a good point and you made a good point..we'll probably just have to agree to disagree. I should note, however, that the other witches thought it was a good idea for me to report what I get as I get it, too...so I'm not the only one that thinks this way. Now don't you feel bad you argued against it? Now the wolves are going to know you're not a witch! Ohhh, that's right....they'd probably know that just from the fact that I'm voting for you, too.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 21:13:39 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jan 20, 2012 21:13:39 GMT -5
I have to disagree with most of this. First you have endangered Guiri. Who are the scum going to kill first? Why would they dip into the unknown pool when they can kill known town members? I see your point and raise you a "Why would they bother killing an unknown Townsperson when they could kill who they believe to be a Coronor or Freemason instead, of which we have a claim of each? In my mind, it breaks even, but A: The numbers go down making them have a harder time to hide along with B: If they're killing other members, they're not killing the Witches, which allow us to investigate again and again. I disagree...and I think this is one of the things that is neither wrong or right, rather just based on what a player thinks. If I'm one of two witches (and nobody knows about me yet), I'd try to investigate as long as possible to get away with it before I have to claim...because then all you can really do is keep protecting yourself.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 20, 2012 22:42:17 GMT -5
Post by gnarlycharlie on Jan 20, 2012 22:42:17 GMT -5
Vote: vote gnarleycharlie For giving a bullshit secondary reason for voting me (and not even acknowledging the bullshit after I pointed it out.) The main reason would have been fine on its own. With the secondary, it seems he's trying to overjustify. you consider my secondary reason bullshit but consider my primary reason valid. so you're still agreeing with me? you call my case 'overdoing' it. i call it making a case with all that i found suspicious. sometimes a player cites one reason. some people cite more. if a point is later found to be refuted, it doesn't invalidate the entire case. if that's your only reason for voting me, that's weak-ass sauce. for your flimsy reason and for agreeing with my primary reason Vote Hoopy Frood
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 21, 2012 0:02:00 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 21, 2012 0:02:00 GMT -5
you consider my secondary reason bullshit but consider my primary reason valid. so you're still agreeing with me? you call my case 'overdoing' it. i call it making a case with all that i found suspicious. sometimes a player cites one reason. some people cite more. if a point is later found to be refuted, it doesn't invalidate the entire case. if that's your only reason for voting me, that's weak-ass sauce. for your flimsy reason and for agreeing with my primary reason Vote Hoopy Frood[/b][/color][/quote] I didn't say I agreed with your primary reason. But your primary reason really comes down to a matter of opinion. And your primary reason is the same one that both Idle and Ed are using (and beat you to the punch toDay, and Idle beat you to it yesterDay). And notice that I now have four votes on me, only 3 of which I really count as votes (since CIAS is using a unique method for votes). It's really telling that your only repeat vote toDay is a piggyback on two others, one of whom is very likely town, and the other who I believe is town.(I've observed Ed in other conspiracy games. I got to experience as a spoiled observer the whole Ed/Meeko wolf thing. I completely believe Ed is not a wolf. He could be cabal or undead, but since his first two roles he didn't get, it's unlikely he requested cabal (unless everyone was chomping at the bit to be a cabal, which I don't think is very likely based on previous games' requests). Which pretty much leaves undead or town. Now, if he really wanted to be undead, there are only two undead roles. And he didn't get his first two choices, so he'd likely be town. Maybe undead were first and third, but I doubt it. So really, I believe both Ed and Idle to be town. So even if I disagree with their reasons for voting for me, I think their motivations are at least coming from the right place. You, on the other hand, have done nothing but piggyback on them. Plus, you gave a bullshit reason for voting me, even if it wasn't the main one. Note that not even Idle complained about me not unvoting him. But you took the easy route, didn't you. And you even voted me as the third legitimate vote, which while a hackneyed trope, still gives me a bit of a quirked eyebrow. Honestly, if I could vote you twice, I would. Because you are the scummiest thing I see right now. You barely post, and when you do, it's pretty much lazy cases.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 21, 2012 0:56:07 GMT -5
Post by gnarlycharlie on Jan 21, 2012 0:56:07 GMT -5
you consider my secondary reason bullshit but consider my primary reason valid. so you're still agreeing with me? you call my case 'overdoing' it. i call it making a case with all that i found suspicious. sometimes a player cites one reason. some people cite more. if a point is later found to be refuted, it doesn't invalidate the entire case. if that's your only reason for voting me, that's weak-ass sauce. for your flimsy reason and for agreeing with my primary reason Vote Hoopy Frood[/b][/color][/quote] I didn't say I agreed with your primary reason. But your primary reason really comes down to a matter of opinion. And your primary reason is the same one that both Idle and Ed are using (and beat you to the punch toDay, and Idle beat you to it yesterDay). And notice that I now have four votes on me, only 3 of which I really count as votes (since CIAS is using a unique method for votes). It's really telling that your only repeat vote toDay is a piggyback on two others, one of whom is very likely town, and the other who I believe is town.(I've observed Ed in other conspiracy games. I got to experience as a spoiled observer the whole Ed/Meeko wolf thing. I completely believe Ed is not a wolf. He could be cabal or undead, but since his first two roles he didn't get, it's unlikely he requested cabal (unless everyone was chomping at the bit to be a cabal, which I don't think is very likely based on previous games' requests). Which pretty much leaves undead or town. Now, if he really wanted to be undead, there are only two undead roles. And he didn't get his first two choices, so he'd likely be town. Maybe undead were first and third, but I doubt it. So really, I believe both Ed and Idle to be town. So even if I disagree with their reasons for voting for me, I think their motivations are at least coming from the right place. You, on the other hand, have done nothing but piggyback on them. Plus, you gave a bullshit reason for voting me, even if it wasn't the main one. Note that not even Idle complained about me not unvoting him. But you took the easy route, didn't you. And you even voted me as the third legitimate vote, which while a hackneyed trope, still gives me a bit of a quirked eyebrow. Honestly, if I could vote you twice, I would. Because you are the scummiest thing I see right now. You barely post, and when you do, it's pretty much lazy cases.[/quote] call it what you will. you seem to be the only one who has problems with it. i may not post often but that has never been a scum tell especially for me. my posts in this game have been short but not necessarily lazy. i gave my reasons. i don't think i even piggybacked on anyone's case although that again isn't a scum tell. it is a player's goal to get others to agree with you whatever alignment you may have.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 21, 2012 4:34:04 GMT -5
Post by guiri on Jan 21, 2012 4:34:04 GMT -5
I'm going to VOTE HOOPY FROOD for the extremely weak reasoning (IMO) he gave for voting for me yesterDay. I would have voted for him yesterDay as well if I hadn't voted for Mahaloth in order to try to save myself from a lynch. Can't you vote more than one player? texcat was a Lynch contender yesterDay, yet drew no votes from anyone who didn't vote mahaloth. Mightn't Wolves have voted texcat if he weren't one of them? Vote: texcat This, In addition to my reasons from yesterDay. Vote: texcat [/color] Because you were confused about your role. I don't get this logic. My life is already shortened and probably on a limited time. Better for me to share what results we get now than to wait, I think. No, you've signed my death warrant. I don't think any townie would have complained if you simply stated that your result was Town. If you'd found a wolf, undead or cabal, sure, share the result and get them lynched, but with a Town result, all you do is help the other teams. There's a dead claimed mason, two live claimed masons, a coroner, a claimed witch, and by claiming I'm town, you're saying I'm not a witch. What do you think the others will deduce? Short of multiples of the claimed roles, I must be a Detective, Magician, Scotsman, Witchdoctor, Warlock, Seer, Vicar, or Vig- aren't most of them juicer targets than a mason? I'm claimed, I'm out in the open now...no reason why I shouldn't be fully honest and forthcoming with information. You had reasons earlier: I'm not going to reveal who the Witches protected for obvious reasons (but just in case those reasons aren't obvious: don't want to give scum teams any guess on how we're doing it)... Anyway...
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 21, 2012 4:50:22 GMT -5
Post by guiri on Jan 21, 2012 4:50:22 GMT -5
As for why you were blocked, it's possible the killing faction's power (and I'd be will to bet it's the wolves, since freemasons are safe targets) is to block you and learn the role themselves. That way they deny the information to everyone else while still getting it. And it sounds like something right up Pleo's alley to stick in a game. Can a passive role, such as coroner, be blocked?
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 21, 2012 9:07:25 GMT -5
Post by Høøpy Frøød on Jan 21, 2012 9:07:25 GMT -5
As for why you were blocked, it's possible the killing faction's power (and I'd be will to bet it's the wolves, since freemasons are safe targets) is to block you and learn the role themselves. That way they deny the information to everyone else while still getting it. And it sounds like something right up Pleo's alley to stick in a game. Can a passive role, such as coroner, be blocked? Possibly. Every faction has a secret power and Pleo has used different powers for all factions in each the past four conspiracies. So that's 16 secret powers that have come out. And they've run the gamut. But I wasn't getting so much at the killers blocking the coroner role itself, but preventing the kill from being able to be read by the coroner at all. (Think when the coroners in real life have to rely on dental records because a body is mutilated/burned beyond normal methods of identification.)
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 21, 2012 9:55:47 GMT -5
Post by BillMc on Jan 21, 2012 9:55:47 GMT -5
My five day business trip turned into a plane, trains and automobiles two weeks on the road, including an emergency landing in a 747.
Will catch up on the game over the weekend.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 21, 2012 11:08:44 GMT -5
Post by Silver Jan on Jan 21, 2012 11:08:44 GMT -5
The reason I claimed Freemason was so that Town wouldn’t waste their time trying to lynch me when their energy could be better spent elsewhere.
I find it rather strange that both Peeker and I asked if Special Ed was a Freemason. I thought that Special Ed’s posts were subtly hinting that he was a mason but obviously I was wrong. I now wonder if he could just be coming across as Town or being really manipulative and wanting us to waste a day trying to find other masons. I think I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt for now but I will be watching him closely.
Other people on my tentative list of Town are Peeker (tentative because we have yet to confirm each other), Idle, guiri and Septimus.
I also noticed that Merestil Haye voted late and contradicted himself. First saying that he wouldn’t vote for Mahaloth and then doing exactly the opposite.
Vote Merestil Haye
I was all set to do another complicated (for me) post and then my Mam asked if I wanted to go out for lunch. Lunch...... think.... hmmm, lunch it was so I will get back to my analysis a bit later but I did want to post some of my thoughts.
|
|
|
Day Two
Jan 21, 2012 11:38:12 GMT -5
Post by special on Jan 21, 2012 11:38:12 GMT -5
I find it rather strange that both Peeker and I asked if Special Ed was a Freemason. I thought that Special Ed’s posts were subtly hinting that he was a mason but obviously I was wrong. so subtle even I didn't know I was doing it!
|
|