|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 28, 2012 7:47:37 GMT -5
Ok, convince me how and why they are all Cabal in a way that does not break the game. I can't. Of course, explain how a Cabal can be exposed as a Scotsman during a game and it not be broken. Why not? You must have thought something to make you think that all the Freemasons were Cabal. What was it? I'm still just a town scotsman as we will find out in 7 or so hours time.
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 28, 2012 7:50:17 GMT -5
I can't. Of course, explain how a Cabal can be exposed as a Scotsman during a game and it not be broken. Why not? You must have thought something to make you think that all the Freemasons were Cabal. What was it? I'm still just a town scotsman as we will find out in 7 or so hours time. It was all of them except Ginger flipping as cabal. The thought occurred to me that one way to turn was to investigate the primary Cabal member. Do you have a returned not-town records of Silver Jan? and of Peeker? I don't have my notes here at work.
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 28, 2012 7:50:54 GMT -5
it just might be that Pleo didn't forsee all of the masons becoming Cabal.
Or that the Town secret power could counteract this, but it lies dormant in death or in an inactive.
As Cabal vs Freemason seems a battle between groups on the fringes of religion, maybe the Vicar had some role to play
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 28, 2012 8:09:30 GMT -5
Your results are on #145 of Day 4.
Day 1 Peeker shake Ed - No Jan shake Ed - No JBG shake septimus - No guiri shake peeker - Yes Subplank shake peeker - Yes Hoopy shake peekercpa - Yes
Day 2
Peeker shake Jan - Yes Jan shake Peeker - Yes Guiri shake Jan - Yes Boozy shake peeker - No gnarly shake peeker - No BillMc shake peeker - No
By this point, everyone alive had shaken with peekercpa, 3 gave a yes on Day 1 only, 3 gave a no on Day 2 only.
Day 3 peeker - no result jan - no result guiri shake Boozy - Yes SubPlank shake guiri - Yes Boozy shake Jan - No Hoopy Shake guiri - Yes Gnarly shake Jan - No BillMc shake Gnarly - Yes
From this point on the mason handshakes have all been successful between: SubPlank, Boozy, Hoopy, Gnarly, BillMc
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 28, 2012 8:16:58 GMT -5
In the above, there is one mistake - SilverJan handshook peeker on Day 2 and gave an affirmative answer. The only one on Day 2.
If recruitment was by handshaking the main Cabal member, why didn't Boozy, gnarly and BillMc also give affirmative answers in the same way as Silver Jan.
This discrepency only really makes sense if SilverJan was the sole recruit at that point, and the others were not.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 28, 2012 8:28:39 GMT -5
Looking over the handshakes again, I really do think that Cabal - Freemason recruitment could only be carried out one person at a time.
If there was a mass recruit, the Cabal would have been sorted out by Day 2, not Day 3 as I earlier thought and it would not have mattered what handshaking mechanism was used because they had all been recruited.
Seeing as Silver Jan was caught out on Day 3, I have no reason to believe that guiri would not have been caught out on Day 4 and BillMc on Day 7, should it have been required by using a freemason handshake circle.
The problem for the Cabal is that a continued use of handshaking immediately highlights any recruitment carried out, unless it has either recruited every Freemason to be Cabal or it has been done so many times, people get complacent, when people can hide.
I believe it is far more likely peekercpa recruited SilverJan on Day 2, guiri on Day 3 and BillMC on Day 6 directly before he was lynched.
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 28, 2012 8:29:30 GMT -5
In the above, there is one mistake - SilverJan handshook peeker on Day 2 and gave an affirmative answer. The only one on Day 2. If recruitment was by handshaking the main Cabal member, why didn't Boozy, gnarly and BillMc also give affirmative answers in the same way as Silver Jan. This discrepency only really makes sense if SilverJan was the sole recruit at that point, and the others were not. Ok. I do hope you're right.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 28, 2012 8:34:02 GMT -5
Ok. I do hope you're right. So do I.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 28, 2012 8:35:16 GMT -5
Ok. I do hope you're right. At least this way, only one of us looks like an idiot when we get to read the spoiler boards.
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 28, 2012 9:10:28 GMT -5
Ok. I do hope you're right. At least this way, only one of us looks like an idiot when we get to read the spoiler boards. Would you agree that if there are more Cabal that Hoopy is likely one? What also troubles me is, if recruitment was infrequent, wouldn't 8 Masons make the game somewhat broken?
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 28, 2012 9:21:00 GMT -5
At least this way, only one of us looks like an idiot when we get to read the spoiler boards. Would you agree that if there are more Cabal that Hoopy is likely one? What also troubles me is, if recruitment was infrequent, wouldn't 8 Masons make the game somewhat broken? From the handshakes on day 6, if one of the Freemasons is a Cabal, they are all Cabal - no inbetween. I mentioned it earlier in the game, that having 8 Freemasons and 3 Witches in the game is unfair given the size of confirmed pool you can create. Until Idle was able to prove it on Night 4, I was pretty convinced there were no Witches at all given the number of Freemasons. Recruitment goes some way to even the balance though and adds a certain amount of paranoia.
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 28, 2012 9:32:20 GMT -5
Would you agree that if there are more Cabal that Hoopy is likely one? What also troubles me is, if recruitment was infrequent, wouldn't 8 Masons make the game somewhat broken? From the handshakes on day 6, if one of the Freemasons is a Cabal, they are all Cabal - no inbetween. I mentioned it earlier in the game, that having 8 Freemasons and 3 Witches in the game is unfair given the size of confirmed pool you can create. Until Idle was able to prove it on Night 4, I was pretty convinced there were no Witches at all given the number of Freemasons. Recruitment goes some way to even the balance though and adds a certain amount of paranoia. So do you think Cabal was limited to recruiting 3 of the freemasons? and the rest are honest? Do you think they ever had the power to impersonate masons? and do you think that went away at some point? what if this...the secret power was that for 1 Day, any Mason could impersonate a Mason. what if while impersonating a Mason, any Mason investigating them would also turn into Cabal. That would mean> D1: Peeker seen by Jan and guiri D2: Jan seen by Bill D3: guiri or Bill...seen by...? What post has the list of how the masons shook hands?
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 28, 2012 9:57:28 GMT -5
So do you think Cabal was limited to recruiting 3 of the freemasons? and the rest are honest? Do you think they ever had the power to impersonate masons? and do you think that went away at some point? what if this...the secret power was that for 1 Day, any Mason could impersonate a Mason. what if while impersonating a Mason, any Mason investigating them would also turn into Cabal. That would mean> D1: Peeker seen by Jan and guiri D2: Jan seen by Bill D3: guiri or Bill...seen by...? What post has the list of how the masons shook hands? I don't know if the Cabal were limited to three recruits but it would seem reasonable. I did think it possible that one of Hirka and deon were Cabal, but consider it unlikely now. I do think the Cabal got a one-off handshake replicate to allow them to pass as freemason - which is what peeker did on Day 1. Beyond that - nada. Why not just have peeker recruit someone as a secret power on a given Day. Why does it have to be done through a handshake?
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 28, 2012 10:36:20 GMT -5
Freemason Handshakes part deux
Day 4: SubPlank shakes Hoopy - Yes Hoopy shakes Boozy - Yes Gnarly shakes Subplank - Yes Boozy shakes Gnarly - Yes BillMc shakes Hoopy - Yes ( no confirmation back from Hoopy)
@hoopy - Why didn't you say that BillMc had shaken with you on Day 4?
Day 5: Hoopy shakes hirka - No gnarly shakes BillMc - Yes SubPlank shakes Gnarly - Yes BillMc shakes hirka - No Boozy - no shake
Day 6: BillMc handshakes Boozy - Yes Hoopy shakes SubPlank - Yes SubPlank shakes BillMc - Yes Boozy Shakes Gnarly - Yes Gnarly shakes deon - No
Looking at the above, there is enough crossover between all the masons that if anyone had been recruited on Day 4 or 5, they would have been noticed.
They were either all recruited by this point or all freemason by the end of Day 6.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Feb 28, 2012 10:39:38 GMT -5
Unfortunately, I have a long meeting today from before lunch to at least 2pm. That means Dusk results will be at least 2 hours late.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Feb 28, 2012 11:03:24 GMT -5
You know, some further input from the Masons would be useful.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Feb 28, 2012 11:42:01 GMT -5
You know, some further input from the Masons would be useful. I'm back. Sunday and Monday turned into the 'Perfect Work/Home Storm', so I wasn't able to participate...but I'm here now. What would you like to know? I find it interesting that CatInaSuit voted for End of Day as soon as Inner Stickler received 6 votes. It seems like he wanted the Day over with before we had a chance to consider other options. I think that the Omega Wolf must be either Inner Stickler or Sister Coyote, since I doubt very much we have two Warlocks. The Vampire could be CIAS, or it could be one of the absent players, or we might not have one (though I think this is unlikely). There's also a possibility that we still have more than just the Omega Wolf left.
|
|
|
Post by septimus on Feb 28, 2012 13:05:50 GMT -5
I think that the Omega Wolf must be either Inner Stickler or Sister Coyote, since I doubt very much we have two Warlocks. The Vampire could be CIAS ... CIAS can only be Town or Omega Wolf: Witches investigated him as Town. (see Idle's post #13 toDay.) Among those mentioned, CIAS is the one I want least to Lynch. But for me to Unvote unilaterally and create a 6-6 tie might increase confusion. Hoopy is the logical Lynch now, and I am very suspicious that none of the Masons are voting to Lynch him. The rest of us worry that the Mason Cabal is the real threat. If you Masons have really not turned bad, you should be happy to demonstrate it by Lynching Hoopy and letting Coroner identify his faction.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Feb 28, 2012 13:43:45 GMT -5
CIAS can only be Town or Omega Wolf: Witches investigated him as Town. (see Idle's post #13 toDay.) Right, I got CIAS and Inner backwards in my post. Either CIAS or SisC has to be the Omega, and Inner could be the Vamp (or another Wolf, or he could be Town). Why would you favor a SisC lynch over a CIAS one? What makes her more suspicious? I think the logical lynch is someone who has the ability to kill one of the Witches. Neither Masons nor Cabalists are in that group. As long as Ed and Idle live, the Cabal is not a present threat.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Feb 28, 2012 13:51:26 GMT -5
You know, some further input from the Masons would be useful. i'll bite. there's obviously at least one more Cabal among the claimed Freemasons. but is Cabal a threat now? we still have two witches, at least one wolf and a vampire, so Cabal cannot win. if we lynch Hoopy as Septimus wants, we may get Cabal but will be vulnerable to two NKs, one from the wolves and the other from the vamp. we may lose one or even two witches, leaving only Septimus as fairly credible Town. if Hoopy is Town, that would be even worse. by lynching Inner Stickler, CIAS or Sister, we have a strong chance of getting a killing role.
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 28, 2012 13:59:32 GMT -5
In the above, there is one mistake - SilverJan handshook peeker on Day 2 and gave an affirmative answer. The only one on Day 2. If recruitment was by handshaking the main Cabal member, why didn't Boozy, gnarly and BillMc also give affirmative answers in the same way as Silver Jan. This discrepency only really makes sense if SilverJan was the sole recruit at that point, and the others were not. I don't trust anything Silver Jan or peeker said on Night 2 or beyond. It could al be a ploy.
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 28, 2012 14:03:54 GMT -5
I think the logical lynch is someone who has the ability to kill one of the Witches. Neither Masons nor Cabalists are in that group. As long as Ed and Idle live, the Cabal is not a present threat. Do you believe, that with one lynch, we can eliminate all of the killing roles? Do you believe we would get the lynch correct? Do you realize that if we do kill one of 2 killling roles, and the other kills a witch, (who dies because of a Warlock curse) we lose to the Cabal. Or even if they don't die, we then must be sure to eliminate the Cabal before removing the last killing role?
|
|
|
Post by special on Feb 28, 2012 14:04:38 GMT -5
You know, some further input from the Masons would be useful. i'll bite. there's obviously at least one more Cabal among the claimed Freemasons. but is Cabal a threat now? we still have two witches, at least one wolf and a vampire, so Cabal cannot win. if we lynch Hoopy as Septimus wants, we may get Cabal but will be vulnerable to two NKs, one from the wolves and the other from the vamp. we may lose one or even two witches, leaving only Septimus as fairly credible Town. if Hoopy is Town, that would be even worse. by lynching Inner Stickler, CIAS or Sister, we have a strong chance of getting a killing role. Why is it obvious that we still have at least 1 Cabal left, fine sir?
|
|
|
Post by septimus on Feb 28, 2012 14:22:18 GMT -5
if we lynch Hoopy as Septimus wants, we may get Cabal but will be vulnerable to two NKs, one from the wolves and the other from the vamp. we may lose one or even two witches ... Ed has already presented Witches' plan: Protect Idle; have Warlock(s) quasi-Protect(*) Ed. Thus, we're safe for now; I want to Lynch those impeding future Lynches: absentees and Cabalists. Why is it obvious that we still have at least 1 Cabal left, fine sir? I have the same question. Since no Mason is helping us Lynch Hoopy, I'm beginning to agree with Ed: You're all Cabal. We need to start Lynching you now; I just hope it's not too late. And you Cabalists keep insisting that we have two Witches. Yeah, we can count. But why are you trying to pretend they're immortal? Scum should have been targeting them all along ... (* - Question about rules: If all Wolves and Undead are dead, one Witch alive, and one Witch temporaily dead awaiting resurrection due to Warlock enchantment, does Cabal win? I'm afraid the answer is Yes, and that this is now a likely outcome.)
|
|
|
Post by septimus on Feb 28, 2012 14:38:11 GMT -5
CatInaSuit - are you on-line? Please vote Hoopy. There's only 20 minutes left to act. You can prove your Scotsmanship another Day.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Feb 28, 2012 17:50:28 GMT -5
Day Seven is over.
|
|