|
Post by Paranoia on Sept 12, 2013 0:25:17 GMT -5
I didn't see Pleonast as a good choice to protect last night - and I still don't know why scum targeted him why not go after the doc? Why go after someone who is yes giving information to town but only on low posting players all scum had to do is post some and they would be off the Pleonast rader for day. Than today someone posted that non active scum are harder on the scum team than non active town is on the town team and it click - that is why Pleonast was killed. Either Paranoia or Jaade are non active scum. Therefore Vote: Jaade as she is already on her way to a lynch or maybe Paranoia is a better choice. I'm betting one of them is scum "non-active". It's entirely possible Jaade is scum, however I know I am not, and the only day I really missed was day three. So I'm wondering if we just have the misfortune of having inactive town about to be lynched simply because scum might have shot pleo because he was *maybe* investigating one of their own, when a scenario just as likely - he got shot because Pleo was poking at and dissecting things and had an investigative power - could also be in play, so yes, Pleo would have been a good protective choice. Scum might not go after the doctor because the (claimed) doctor was under heavy suspicion still after claiming, might be scum herself, or could be self protecting. And considering we've had two players flip vig n' backup vig I also think it's possible scum had a doctor themselves, especially if there are still more killing roles out there.
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on Sept 12, 2013 0:54:49 GMT -5
I haven't played in many games with third-party players who weren't serial killers. SKs are extremely dangerous to everyone, obviously. I don't know what other types of 3rd party players exist but if they aren't harmful to Town, I agree with whoever said that people who focus on 3rd party too much might be trying to distract Town from Scum votes. (Sorry, can't scroll back on my phone and I'm pretty convinced I'm in the early stages of Alzheimer's ) SisC, thanks. I did realize that but was just using a more general type of third-party. I agree that swammerdami's posting is really distracting now that it has been pointed out. I can't imagine scum drawing attention to himself that way, but I can't see a Town reason to post "tersely" or not say too much. This needs to be better explained. I'm not willing to put a vote down on it yet, because I can't see a good scum reason for it. I don't buy that it is self-imposed though. On the third hand (ha), I can't see it being a mod rule for a third party, because this is drawing so much attention to him. The last time I saw someone continually changing their vote to people who were "too quiet" it was a scum trying to vote without being questioned for the reasoning. I didn't like it then and I don't like it now so Vote: PleonastLet me clarify by saying I find this a perfectly valid tactic in the later game, voting for those who are continually, out-of-character quiet. Voting Bill for not posting frequently is like voting peeker, pizza or Meeko for posting in ways that most of us find strange. Voting for people who haven't voted yet, I find a little more scummy. Why pressure people into making votes that they may not believe in? To me, it is one of those situations in Mafia games where I feel damned either way. Either I place an early vote and appear scummy for changing it later, or I place a later vote and appear scummy for jumping on a bandwagon or casting a "one-off" vote. It seems to be that there are many variables in the voting process and I consider voting to be a serious duty for Town. I find vote analysis very useful most of the time but I think Town is tripped up more often by "pressure voting" than Scum. Awesome that we caught scum on the first Day! Sorry I wasn't around to see it, I dropped my daughter off at college Thursday/Friday. I have some catching up to do. I was coming in to say that I'm working my 4th 12 hour shift in a row and I can barely make sense out of the posts here, as my brain is fried. I'll be back to analyze and cast my vote tomorrow night when I'm off BUT Damn it, swammerdami. Seriously. You need to stop. I have never wanted to vote for someone so badly just to alleviate a distraction. I don't find this posting style helpful to Town at all. If you're scum, keep it up. It will surely get you lynched at some point. That's one thing that frustrates me if you are Town. If you're Town, you're hurting us by causing a distraction and being completely unhelpful. I don't understand the point of your haikus, I don't think they are helping you be concise and they definitely give us nothing in the way of insight or helpful conversation. I also do not like abstain's vote on Bill. I'm fairly sure Bill is not town, and fairly sure they are not scum, either. That means they are not a lynch target, unless someone can make a case that they're a win stealer. I think abstain's vote is a subtle attempt for scum to get us to mislynch while maintaining plausible deniability by voting for non-town. ] vote abstain for voting for a likely third-party. I'm almost ready to vote swammer for their difficult to read posts. Maybe to Tomorrow. I'm also not unhappy to see a KidV lynch. They've been acting purely defensively, without contributing much in the way of finding scum. Very similar to Meeko in that regard. There's always a first. But I haven't seen a slip like that made intentionally. Especially because in this group, any indication that a player is not town usually results in a swift death by lynch or Vig. I think we've finally evolved to the point where third-parties are not immediately killed, but that would not've been obvious when the slip was made. So while we can't be certain of Bill's alignment, I think it's clear what the most probable answer is: neither town nor scum. This is a rather self-serving statement. Yes, you do get a little not-scum credit for boosting Mahaloth to a two-vote lead, but really only silverjan gets a full share. Your post here feels a lot like riding their coattails. Unvoting does not remove the suspicious nature of the original vote. Pleonast has said nearly everything I wanted to say after catching up on the thread. I also thought Dizzy's post seemed to be trying too hard to scream that she was Town and taking credit for something that maybe wasn't so genuine. On the other hand, I haven't gotten a scummy vibe from any of her other posts yet. Colby's post doesn't look like it belonged on a different board to me. He said no one seemed very scummy (paraphrased). Why would he say that on the scum board? I don't see many cryptic posts on the scum boards. I felt more like he might be a lover role, as someone else mentioned. I am not happy that swammerdami hasn't returned since his last post, especially since it doesn't give us any info. I don't believe putting down words is enough when those words are just this side of nonsensical. Vote: swammerdamiThe thing I find most interesting from Jaade is the fact they completely failed to mention the KidV lynch at all, because by that point I am fairly sure I was ranting n' raving about it since I was that damn sure at the time. In fact they seemed to sit on the sidelines quite a bit tossing easy votes that she really didn't push for. Also of note is her getting on pleo's case about 'pressure' voting while tossing a pressure vote at swammer to get him to stop posting in haiku during day two, while actually making no real effort to contribute real suspicions. Maybe this is me trying to sell the Jaade lynch to myself because I'm not particularly sure I like lynching someone who's inactive. Other than that there's Meeko who's kind of refusing to offer anything beyond vaguely attacking his detractors. Bleeeeeehhhhh. Unvote: scathachI need more time to think.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on Sept 12, 2013 4:27:29 GMT -5
... assuming it is a Freudian slop, would lead to inaccurate conclusions.... Was that your own Freudian slap, Cookies?... I meant Freudian slip ... or slop (space for rent) ... or something. Anyway isn't such a Freudian slip self-referential and in violation of the axiom of separation?(Post deleted. It was self-referential and caused Proboards software to hang.)
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 12, 2013 11:44:34 GMT -5
Isn't that cute. My avi still works even when it gets hit with a shrink ray. How have I not noticed that before?
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 12, 2013 12:06:15 GMT -5
I need more time to think. Well, you have until 2 p.m. tomorrow per the mod.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 12, 2013 13:38:27 GMT -5
... I meant Freudian slip ... or slop (space for rent) ... or something. Anyway isn't such a Freudian slip self-referential and in violation of the axiom of separation?(Post deleted. It was self-referential and caused Proboards software to hang.) Recursive recursion. Also, let's see how small cookies' icon gets before it breaks.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Sept 12, 2013 14:13:18 GMT -5
(Post deleted. It was self-referential and caused Proboards software to hang.) Recursive recursion. Also, let's see how small cookies' icon gets before it breaks. to the notion of shrinking cookies avitar; Why Mr.Anderson, why?
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Sept 12, 2013 14:14:03 GMT -5
(Post deleted. It was self-referential and caused Proboards software to hang.) Recursive recursion. Also, let's see how small cookies' icon gets before it breaks. to the notion of shrinking cookies avitar; Why Mr.Anderson, why?
|
|
|
Post by FruitAndGarbage on Sept 12, 2013 15:17:00 GMT -5
Yes that is true here too. I still don't think Jaade is a good lynch for toDay. I don't think they're more likely to be scum than I did before just because I know they could be active off-board without logging on to this one; the question was mostly just to find out if it was even possible for them to be scum at all if they haven't been online. It would have settled things nicely to find out that storyteller required an on-board PM to finalize actions, since jaade wouldn't have been around to make one. Since that's not the case, I'm no more or less sold on the possibility. As I said when I placed my vote on jaade today, I was really hoping it would make them come back to the game rather than with the firm intention of lynching them: it would have been far preferable to have another active town player than to lynch someone just because they're lurking. That said, doing to failed to produce that result, and I think that now's the point in the game to fix this potential problem before it starts to get more salient down the line. In the original discussion about lurker-lynching, I proposed that day three or four is about the time when the town still has the numbers to weather a mislynch in the event of a lurking townie and doesn't have to worry too much about the scum manipulating the vote in the absence of sufficient players to counter it, and I still maintain that position. If we wait much longer, it'll soon get to the point where even one fewer vote than we ought to have leaves a significant opening for scum to run the day. Don't get me wrong, if there was One Obvious Candidate for a scum lynch I'd be on them instead of jaade in an instant, but there's not. I'd go for someone I reasonably thought was PFK first, too. But right now, the strongest candidates for the lynch are unlynchable, suspicious for bad play and defensiveness rather than actual scumminess, or suspicious in a way that would just as easily be townie-but-wrong rather than scum. Regardless of the outcome of a jaade lynch, the the town will benefit: either we'll take out an anti-town player, or we'll safeguard ourselves from a situation like SisC described. A lynch on anyone else has much more potential to go wrong for the town, with scenarios like taking out a power role or falsely implicating another town player and setting up a second mislynch down the line being among the most obvious ones. A lynch on jaade, at this point, is the safest option, and it's worth remembering that playing safely is always the town's best bet. We win just as much by lynching literally everyone but two town players on the last possible day of play as we do taking big risks that pay off and ending the game in half the time; the primary difference is that if those risks don't pay off, it's much easier to end up losing than with slow, methodical play. In this case, I think that means one way or another ensuring that nobody hampers the town's ability to lynch; all the other suspects will be here tomorrow, too, and I doubt the scum is going to overrun twelve players overnight if we take jaade out and it turns out they're town. But I'm always willing to consider my own strategy is wrong or I'm missing part of the picture (see: abstain being bombed rather than the target of another killing faction. doip); why do you think a jaade lynch is particularly inadvisable, or that another lynch is the best option? Which lynch would be your favorite at this point?
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Sept 12, 2013 16:08:19 GMT -5
I have a couple of problems here. First, I think a Meeko lynch does the same thing. Either we'll take out an anti-town player, or more likely we'll lynch scum. Any lynch has the possibility of taking out a town power role. Does that mean we should play safe and not lynch? A Jaade lynch is not any "safer" than a Meeko lynch, and the Meeko lynch has the possibility of taking out the jailer. Unless Jaade is using smoke signals, she can't be the jailer. And you could argue that a Meeko lynch is safer. Jaade is not here to claim a power role if she has one, but Meeko could claim. But "safe" and "mafia" do not belong in the same sentence in my book.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Sept 12, 2013 16:08:44 GMT -5
Yes that is true here too. I still don't think Jaade is a good lynch for toDay. Don't get me wrong, if there was One Obvious Candidate for a scum lynch I'd be on them instead of jaade in an instant, but there's not. I'd go for someone I reasonably thought was PFK first, too. But right now, the strongest candidates for the lynch are unlynchable, suspicious for bad play and defensiveness rather than actual scumminess, or suspicious in a way that would just as easily be townie-but-wrong rather than scum. Regardless of the outcome of a jaade lynch, the the town will benefit: either we'll take out an anti-town player, or we'll safeguard ourselves from a situation like SisC described. A lynch on anyone else has much more potential to go wrong for the town, with scenarios like taking out a power role or falsely implicating another town player and setting up a second mislynch down the line being among the most obvious ones. A lynch on jaade, at this point, is the safest option, and it's worth remembering that playing safely is always the town's best bet. We win just as much by lynching literally everyone but two town players on the last possible day of play as we do taking big risks that pay off and ending the game in half the time; the primary difference is that if those risks don't pay off, it's much easier to end up losing than with slow, methodical play. In this case, I think that means one way or another ensuring that nobody hampers the town's ability to lynch; all the other suspects will be here tomorrow, too, and I doubt the scum is going to overrun twelve players overnight if we take jaade out and it turns out they're town. But I'm always willing to consider my own strategy is wrong or I'm missing part of the picture (see: abstain being bombed rather than the target of another killing faction. doip); why do you think a jaade lynch is particularly inadvisable, or that another lynch is the best option? Which lynch would be your favorite at this point? Well since I have been advocating for the lynch of Meeko all day and voted for him right off the bat, I think that the answer to your last question would be obvious by now. What would an Obvious Scum candidate be in your opinion? One who declares in thread that they are scum? I've only seen that happen once. How many times have you seen it? By your high bar of scummitude we should never lynch anyone, just let the scum pick us off by night time attrition. Please tell me under what circumstances would you ever vote someone?
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 12, 2013 16:33:52 GMT -5
A Jaade lynch is not any "safer" than a Meeko lynch, and the Meeko lynch has the possibility of taking out the jailer. Unless Jaade is using smoke signals, she can't be the jailer. You've said this a couple of times now (or, maybe someone else said it first and I'm just blaming, you, I don't know), but the smoke signals statement is as likely to be false as true. I can think of at least two other possibilities that would allow Jaade to be Scum, one that has been mentioned and one that has not: First, Jaade is logging on only to the Scum board, and is communicating with the mod there. Second, Scum are allowed or required to act in a coordinated fashion (e.g., Mahaloth as Godfather submitted all actions for all Scum players, and the responsibility/ability "trickles down" through the scum team), and decisions about Jaade's actions can be submitted without Jaade's direct input. And I'm sure there are other possibilities I can't come up with. Which is not to say Meeko couldn't be the jailer. I just don't think we can rule out the possibility Jaade is, either.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 12, 2013 17:17:06 GMT -5
That said, I'm not arguing that lynching Jaade is any "safer" -- there are no safe lynches in Mafia.
Just like there is no crying in baseball.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Sept 12, 2013 17:44:03 GMT -5
Yes, I agree that it is possible for Jaade to be the jailer, but think it is highly unlikely. I think Meeko is the jailer. He jailed himself. He was then unable to jail anyone on N2. He jailed Patricia N3 because she was more likely to be lynched than he.
The way I see it, playing it "safe" by lynching Jaade is just delaying. We'll be back in the same position Tomorrow and Meeko will be free to jail Patricia again.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 12, 2013 17:53:46 GMT -5
Scum would totally do that, but why would he be willing to prevent himself from acting?
Same request to you as to meeko: Convince me? Because right now, I'm just not seeing it.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Sept 12, 2013 18:18:43 GMT -5
Scum would totally do that, but why would he be willing to prevent himself from acting? Same request to you as to meeko: Convince me? Because right now, I'm just not seeing it. Because It seemed like a good idea at the time? Because he was trying to give himself town cred, which seems to be working for some? Because he didn't read his role real carefully and didn't realize he wouldn't be able to act? Given you can't see a case on Meeko, and you can't vote for Patricia who do you think is scummy? Anyone? no one? should we all just sit around singing Kumbaya and vote no lynch? Hope that if we lynch Jaade, someone else will go missing so we can vote them off the island next? Same request to you: Defend Meeko , convince me that he has been acting pro-town, show me evidence of his scum huntery.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 12, 2013 18:26:15 GMT -5
If Meeko flips as a scummy jailer, I don't think that would count against Patricia. There are all sorts of things that do count against Patricia, but a scum jailer jailing her would be a null tell imho. Going back to my first post toDay when I posit some reasons for the jailer going after Patricia. Due to the nature of the power, as both protective and role-blocking, the motivation could go either way.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 12, 2013 18:34:21 GMT -5
I think Meeko's acting same as he always does: pro Meeko. Which makes him hard to defend or condemn, if I'm being perfectly honest.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Sept 12, 2013 19:06:02 GMT -5
I think Meeko's acting same as he always does: pro Meeko. Which makes him hard to defend or condemn, if I'm being perfectly honest. So given that, why do we not just vote him off Day 1 if there are no scummy, scum, scum slips? Do we always have to keep him til the end in case he's the anti-town townie, vs the anti-town scummie? Is he just some sort of mascot and unless we waste an investigation on him he's our Schrodinger's cat til he either wins/loses with town or wins/loses with scum?
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Sept 12, 2013 19:08:49 GMT -5
I think Meeko's acting same as he always does: pro Meeko. Which makes him hard to defend or condemn, if I'm being perfectly honest. So given that, why do we not just vote him off Day 1 if there are no scummy, scum, scum slips? Do we always have to keep him til the end in case he's the anti-town townie, vs the anti-town scummie? Is he just some sort of mascot and unless we waste an investigation on him he's our Schrodinger's cat til he either wins/loses with town or wins/loses with scum? First off, I'm a raccoon, not a cat. (But I know the thought experiment.) Second off, I will take the notion of being lynched day 1 in every game I play as the compliment you intend it to be. .... You did mean it as a compliment, right?
|
|
|
Post by FruitAndGarbage on Sept 12, 2013 20:56:02 GMT -5
Well since I have been advocating for the lynch of Meeko all day and voted for him right off the bat, I think that the answer to your last question would be obvious by now. What would an Obvious Scum candidate be in your opinion? One who declares in thread that they are scum? I've only seen that happen once. How many times have you seen it? By your high bar of scummitude we should never lynch anyone, just let the scum pick us off by night time attrition. Please tell me under what circumstances would you ever vote someone? Those are pretty broad generalizations to make given that the course of action I lined out was specific to this exact situation, not intended to be taken as gospel (or even my personal playstyle) in general. The only part that did mean "always and forever" was the part about playing safe rather than rashly, and there was some misinterpretation (or mischaracterization) there too: safe doesn't mean never vote or act unless you know with exact certainty that a player is scum, it just means to always make a cost/benefit analysis to any given course of action and select the option with the lowest chance to produce negative results or the most compelling reasons to choose it. I'm well aware that jaade could be a town player with a power role; I also know that very few scum players announce their alignment in the thread, and on most occasions I've seen it happen, it's been late-game and done to recruit neutral third-parties in an attempt to end the game faster. I'm not arguing either of those, and don't mean jaade is a safe lynch because I'm ignoring the possibilities. Let me line out my thought process since I guess I wasn't very clear about what I meant: In this situation, there is no outcome of the jaade lynch where the drawbacks outweigh the benefits, to my estimation. This is because as an inactive player, they are inherently anti-town, even if their role is town-aligned: it doesn't matter if they're a power role or not, because if they are genuinely AWOL, they're not using it anyway; it doesn't matter if they're alive for overrun purposes, because without their vote, the scum can tie up the lynch anyway; it doesn't matter if they have valuable information, because they're not sharing it. They can't contribute in any positive way, and can negatively impact the town by their inaction. Conversely, there are a number of positive outcomes to their lynch: most obvious is that they're scum and we get closer to winning by taking them out; they may also be a second PFK or an anti-town third party; even if they're neutral- or pro-town by their alignment, their play makes them a liability, which we curtail by lynching them. The absolute worst-case scenario of their lynch is that we narrow the pool of scum suspects and lose a townie that wasn't doing anything anyway. It's win/win. That, texcat, is what I mean by safe. Not that it's a sure thing, but there's little reason to believe so doing would hurt us. Anyone else, on the other hand, has the same potential benefits, but significantly more risks and fewer compelling reasons to want them dead. Everyone on the scum suspects list is lukewarm at best, and suspicious through belligerence rather than scumminess at worst. Even though there's not much reason in particular to suspect jaade is scum over any of them (or for many of them any reason to suspect them over jaade), the chance that their lynch would negatively impact the town is much greater (which is to say, that chance exists at all). It seems highly unlikely that the situation is going to change drastically overnight, which means that after we see who dies and how and what the result of the day's lynch was, we'll be in the same or better position to make a judgement on who to kill, whereas if we leave jaade alive, the situation could be the same, better, or worse. In a situation like this one where we can proceed slowly and likely make better choices in the long run or do something that may turn out to bite us later, I don't see a reason not to take the more reliable option. We know jaade can't do us any good, we know they can do us harm. The same can't be said about anyone else. Why not do something about it now, while even a five-person-strong scumteam (which seems unlikely given the number of third parties we've found as well as the presence of (a) PFK(s)) would be at a numerical disadvantage. As for what an "obvious candidate" is and how one can spot them... come on, at this point it feels like you're just being stubborn and deliberately not seeing what I mean because you disagree with me philosophically on lurker-lynches. There's lots of things that make someone obvious scum aside from claiming to be so: an investigator could reveal someone, someone's voting record could damn them, they could be caught in a lie, they could be ruled out by process of elimination because of things like masons and investigations, they might just be super obvious players. There's lots of things that would make someone a very attractive lynch target short of them giving up and claiming scum. That said, it doesn't even really matter, because I never said I'd only ever vote for such a player (as the fact that I've voted every day so far should show): all I said was only someone I was THAT convinced was scum would supercede a jaade lynch for me. Right now. In this situation. And as it is, no such player with such suspicious behavior exists! If someone were to come out of the blue and claim cop and finger someone else as having come up guilty, I'd say "screw this lurker noise" then and there, and that's all I meant by my One Obvious Candidate comment. Not that nobody should ever vote. That'd be silly. I will also say that my current bet is that Meeko is the jailer and the jailer is a town role, which is kind of why I'm specifically hesitant to lynch him, the entire jaade situation aside. Even if his play has been pretty anti-town, it just really seems like his role could be very beneficial later in the game. Especially because of how it's announced in the thread: there's very little reason to believe the scum would target someone who was announced to be unkillable, and if it turns out patricia is not a doctor, then the jailer is likely our only protective role. That means that on any night where a player is jailed and there is no kill, that player was probably the scum's only remaining killer; why not take advantage of the combination doc-and-block for the good of the team? That said, I'm only 60% sure Meeko's the jailer and 70% sure that the jailer is town, so... I may recant all this if situations change or more information comes out, but that's my gut feeling.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Sept 12, 2013 21:18:32 GMT -5
Ok, got it. There will be no scum hunting until the lurker is lynched and the super hero dick fingers all the scummy, scum, scum. Good luck with that kids.
|
|
|
Post by Paranoia on Sept 12, 2013 21:46:20 GMT -5
Yes, I agree that it is possible for Jaade to be the jailer, but think it is highly unlikely. I think Meeko is the jailer. He jailed himself. He was then unable to jail anyone on N2. He jailed Patricia N3 because she was more likely to be lynched than he. The way I see it, playing it "safe" by lynching Jaade is just delaying. We'll be back in the same position Tomorrow and Meeko will be free to jail Patricia again. Speaking from how we know the role works, I don't think that's possible. Consider this: If the role blocks all night actions, how would they be able to jail them this coming night again? Ok, got it. There will be no scum hunting until the lurker is lynched and the super hero dick fingers all the scummy, scum, scum. Good luck with that kids. We need a hero.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Sept 12, 2013 21:55:32 GMT -5
I think Meeko's acting same as he always does: pro Meeko. Which makes him hard to defend or condemn, if I'm being perfectly honest. And did you think his reaction to being jailed was typical? It certainly would not have been my reaction. And I would have expected more of a reaction from Meeko. He usually acts quite forcefully when someone votes him; I would have expected the same sort of reaction to being jailed. And from Fruit: So therefore Meeko thinks that Patricia is town, and therefore the doc. A town jailer would never protect someone as scummy as I think Patricia is. And I guess you agree with Meeko. Patricia has not shared who she protected each night. We know she didn't protect SilverJan or Pleo. I wonder who she thought was more valuable? I do not believe either that Patricia is the doc or that Meeko is town.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Sept 12, 2013 21:58:31 GMT -5
Speaking from how we know the role works, I don't think that's possible. Consider this: If the role blocks all night actions, how would they be able to jail them this coming night again? The role blocks all of Patricia's actions for tonight. Meeko is free to act tonight. But Meeko was in jail N2, hence role-blocked, and guess what? no one was jailed D3.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Sept 12, 2013 23:21:25 GMT -5
Vote count, please.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 13, 2013 0:21:12 GMT -5
I think Meeko's acting same as he always does: pro Meeko. Which makes him hard to defend or condemn, if I'm being perfectly honest. And did you think his reaction to being jailed was typical? It certainly would not have been my reaction. And I would have expected more of a reaction from Meeko. He usually acts quite forcefully when someone votes him; I would have expected the same sort of reaction to being jailed. And from Fruit:So therefore Meeko thinks that Patricia is town, and therefore the doc. A town jailer would never protect someone as scummy as I think Patricia is. And I guess you agree with Meeko. Patricia has not shared who she protected each night. We know she didn't protect SilverJan or Pleo. I wonder who she thought was more valuable? I do not believe either that Patricia is the doc or that Meeko is town. Typical of Meeko? Yes, actually. Tacky joke and all; it just didn't feel notably odd to me. Though I won't argue that he tends to react strongly when voted.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 13, 2013 0:23:29 GMT -5
Speaking from how we know the role works, I don't think that's possible. Consider this: If the role blocks all night actions, how would they be able to jail them this coming night again? The role blocks all of Patricia's actions for tonight. Meeko is free to act tonight. But Meeko was in jail N2, hence role-blocked, and guess what? no one was jailed D3. There is another option, as well. The jailing is a passive effect from the jailer being "visited" and no one paid them any attention Night 2.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymrslizzy on Sept 13, 2013 6:13:44 GMT -5
Wait a minute. We don't know that the player in jail cannot act
The color only says that they cannot be the subject of an action. It makes sense to assume that you are in jail and therefore can't act but the color didn't say so.
Other thoughts. The jailer already had someone in jail on N2 so he couldn't jail the next player until the next night....so only every other even night he can jail?
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Sept 13, 2013 7:14:00 GMT -5
Wait a minute. We don't know that the player in jail cannot act The color only says that they cannot be the subject of an action. It makes sense to assume that you are in jail and therefore can't act but the color didn't say so. Other thoughts. The jailer already had someone in jail on N2 so he couldn't jail the next player until the next night....so only every other even night he can jail? Patricia's color was pretty clear: Meeko could help clear this up and just tell us whether he was able to act or not. But he certainly has not said anything denying it when I've claimed a few times that he would not have been able to act on N2.
|
|