I know been too long - almost missed this one too but managed to weasel my way in.

So far I don't have too many thoughts / reads - I've quickly parsed but not too too much. With the new people in I'm not sure how much I'll get out of Day One. I'm a *huge* fan of the No Lynch Day One *sarcasm off* ;)

I like having Flub as a sounding board - I don't envy the people making choices on what to do with him / how much to invest in keeping him around.

I'm not playing ignorant. I am. Of course regular scum would try to prep Scene for a claim on the next Day. But if Scen is SK, there is no way to tell what he is thinking. Hell, even if he is regular scum, there is no way what he is thinking and if he would follow anyone's advice. He hasn't been big on following advice like "read the rules" either, that he got ingame. As I said, probably he thought for some reason that not revealing who he protected would look towniest. But why are you so insistent on that point? Do you know what was said in the scum-chat?


Why do you assume that there was a second NK attempt? It's not a given that there is a SK! So where does your conviction that scum was roleblocked come from?

Because there's no guarantee that investigation is possible, and because it's bad form for the investigators to investigate who people tell them to investigate. (especially super-dodgy about-to-be-lynched people)

Semi-Open Setup Like!!!


hohoho very amusing. But you did draw something to my attention - is it not somewhat out-of-character for trent to use second-guessing the mod as an argument for lynch?


There's no guarantee of a serial killer. As I understand it we've got a 3/7 chance based on what we know of the seup so far. I'm sure someone's already pointed that out but I'm writing as I read.
Also hello and welcome!
bye dessimu );


^ah it was lifthrasil that pointed it out, but he chose to go along the lines of "what's that supposed to mean??? Where are you getting this information?? eh??? EH????"

I guess I'll join in with him. EH???

Listen my reason for not revealing who I protected is because if I can't protect the same player 2 nights in a row Scum will know whoever I protected last night can be lynched. This way there is a chance I block a nightkill. I thought that would be obvious but no it's Scene being irrational again.

So you're advising not to analyse based on logic. Good tip if you're Scum.

Exactly how am I second guessing the mod?? This is what supplementscene said “I'm on a final warning from ZFR after my error at the end of Day 1. I can't even double post apparently.” He states he’s on a final warning and can’t evem double post. I’m not second guessing the mod at all, I’m doubting what supplementscene claims. Thanks for the shade though, it’s been sunny out.

Ah, I didn't bold this:
Any chance of making it 2 (or more) hours later? This time was, and is most likely going to be, impossible for me to be here for.

Conclusion? No. Seeing potentially interesting patterns in different behaviour, which should be worthwhile to examine later? Yes, most certainly.

Purely on the basis of the actions as I summed them up (so not going back to judge any justification given), dedo stands out for unvoting without voting anyone else, mchack and HSL stand out for their SPF wagon attempt, bookwyrm stands out for moving his vote to scene, trent stands out for questioning dedo and not voting anyone, Vitek stands out for only commenting and leaving his vote on a wagon which was going nowhere, and Joe, Lift and SPF stand out for not standing out. (Yes, I now mentioned everyone who was active.) :)

I'll refrain at the moment for assigning any leans to these particular actions. Some weigh more heavily on my mind than others, but I learned on early in my mafia career that it doesn't pay for town to be too vocal about town-reads, as that just gives scum a handy list for who to target.

Thank you. That clarifies things for me.
I'm however now somewhat uncertain - due to your final comment about Vitek - if you still consider it likely that scene and Vitek are a team, or if you've backed away somewhat from that belief?
If it's the latter, then could you say a bit more about which parts of Vitek's posts from between #231 and #411 caused this shift in thinking? (For easy reference, the Vitek posts in that span were #274, #276, #280, #282, #293, #305, #350, #358, #362, #367, #375, #380 and #393. Some substanstive, but also quite a few one-liners, so it shouldn't be too much to go through.)

Because I can't envision a scum mindset where they would've spent a NK on something which isn't directly beneficial to them. (And yes, that could've been either him suspecting one or more of them, or potentially him suspecting someone whom they'd otherwise find hard to mislynch, so they could try and construct an argument there, though WIFOM.)
Thinking about what you mean with your question: granted, they might've targetted him because of suspecting a PR as well.

To avoid (claims of) mistakes with the hammer, could you include how many it takes to achieve lynch in your vote counts?

Which particular subjects would you want to discuss in that extra time? Your interests feel somewhat... opaque to me.

That said, still a good point. A hasty lynch would only benefit scum. And I can only see people falling over themselves to jump on the wagon today - particularly if they weren't yesterday - as trying to score easy town points. (It's more than obvious that we have the numbers to get him lynched. Since I'm not yet on record for this: he's still my prime lynch target. Also note to self: check back to see who still expressed potential belief in his claim and thus might've been trying to gouge the potential for saving him.)

Same question to you as to Joe: Which particular subjects would you want to discuss in that extra time? Your interests not only feel opaque to me, you also seem to be chiefly responding to questions, and not so much pursuing anything yourself (that's my feeling based on what I remember - I apologize if rereading you will reveal that I'm wrong).

Welcome!

Out of everything on D1, people's choices with regard to Flub is the one thing you feel like mentioning?
Please clarify who "the people" would be who would have any difficulty making a "choice" on what to do with him?

And as you probably missed my question from #408 as I couldn't yet quote you for it:
"as I've never played with you before, nor seen you play before that I recall: Can you tell us a bit about your mafia experience / play style / stuff like that?"

It's not that you're being irrational again, it's that by now at the very latest you should know what you can and can't do as the Doctor you claim to be. No "if this" or "if that" and "buts" in arguments you could have easily picked up from what has been earlier mentioned and discussed. Do you see the difference?

But tell me, what do you see as more beneficial to town:
- the Doctor trying to keep scum in the dark in hope they prevent a/the N2 NK when the Doctor's already at L-2, and may not even live till N2 to take an action, not to mention that the Doctor may well protect one of the scum (remember, he doesn't know who the other townies are, and it has happened), or
- the Doctor coming clean so they have an actual chance of escaping the noose, and do their thing during N2?


Off to catch up.

Oh, except for flub. He really is like a tree stump! :)

The established norm for doctor protection is the restriction of not protecting the same player twice in a row. To do otherwise is quite game breaking.

For instance: Cop claims on Day One and doctor protects until all scum are lynched. Simplified but you get the idea.

So the revelation of you can't protect the same player 2 nights in a row is well known. Sorry.


So

Much

Sass.

*patiently waits 10ish minutes.*

I hit the button before I finished my thought.

Your alleged protection has little reference on mafia or SK targets. Did your protection guarantee towniness?? Did you protect scum or SK??

That's an elephant crossed with a rhinoceros.

You need to spill your guts before you are hammered.

Welcome, Ixamyakxim, good to have you in a game again! If you're scum, here's to you dying sooner than later!

If I understand your argument correctly (I had to read it a few times) you're saying that, based on your understanding of the setup, there were two NK attempts, and one of them was successfully roleblocked. If so:

1. what about your understanding of the setup makes you think that, and
2. who (as in which side, not player) do you think did the roleblocking?



I wouldn't have insisted if it weren't for the way you replied.

In post #431, I asked you if you thought that the mafia wouldn't have prepped supplementscene, should he be one of them, and should he be the SK, if you thought that he wouldn't (also) use the Night time to prepare for his defence on D2. I asked nothing about your knowledge or thoughts on what the preparation of either side would entail, nor did I imply, or even assume, you're a mind-reader, and thus didn't ask you to share what each scum were thinking.

And yet in post #443 you replied exactly on the point I didn't inquire about, prefacing it rather emphatic with "I have no clue". Came across as waving a tad too hard the "I'm a good little townie, I can't possibly know what scum were doing N1" card, which I pointed out in post #448 (note: I misplaced the italics, that should read "that ignorant", not "that ignorant"), not to mention that you'd be equally ignorant as the SK (it's still possible he's in play). I even gave you a way out of that with the last part of my post #448, and while you took it, you still felt the need to proclaim h̶o̶w̶ ̶i̶g̶n̶o̶r̶a̶n̶t̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ that you are ignorant.


And if anyone's still around, bump please!

Ah thanks for this - I went over the wiki (ignoring the Mason stuff that we know isn't in the game) and thought the SK was always in and the other power roles were rolled for. So it's more likely a sub50% chance - I'm going to go back into my "Don't assume power roles" mode. Generally I hate speculation who might be the crosseyed, one shot, backwards lover-cop.

And why exactly do we know that?


I'd still like an answer on your assumption of a RB preventing a NK.



It certainly would, so could you point me to what you're doing with it, asides from the following?



I'm not sure I follow you on that second-guessing the mod as an argument, but I'm reading trentonlf's post as following:

supplementscene claimed he's on his last warning from the mod, and would be mod-killed, should he even double-post (apparently), basically using the mod as part of his defence. supplementscene then goes one step further, and asks the mod to intervene in a way that would effectively confirm (or condemn him). And the post where he's asking for that is also his last infraction.

trentonlf calls supplementscene's truthfulness into doubt on the latter's own statement once he double-posts; should he be telling the truth, he should expect to be mod-killed after post #438, else he's lying.

Is that what you meant with second-guessing the mod as an argument? If not, could you rephrase/elaborate?


While there's no guarantee a SK is in play, there's also no evidence that there isn't one. I don't think it's prudent of town not to keep that in mind, especially this early in the game, as discarding the possibility creates a false sense of security.

And I'd still like an answer to my question from post #321.



So, where are questions/interactions you initiated?

Also, could you answer Vitek's question from post #305?



That's not the only thing I meant with my question, there are a couple of other factors in scum's choice for the NK. And given that you're a pretty smart, observant and analytical type - should I now wonder why you didn't include them here?


Bookwyrm627, Bookwyrm627, come out wherever you are.

1...2...3...Not it!

So glad you're playing.

It was announced here or signup - no cult - or at least not a cult that causes a player to switch sides. So as far as I'm concerned - scum is scum is scum, town is town is town.

As far as the roleblock - I was expecting a SK, I was expecting 2 NK and when there was only one... For now I'm not going to assume SK like I was before so I won't assume a failed NK. But like you, I'm not also going to totally write off the SK (like Joe said it could be around a 3 / 7 chance to have one). I'm just not going to speculate too much more on it unless we start seeing a night or two of wild numbers of kills.