Shakespeare Mafia II - Epilogue

For your simulated organized crime needs.

Moderators: jestingrabbit, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Djehutynakht » Thu Apr 28, 2016 6:59 pm UTC

Oh the gentle blade of ice
Doth come through and make things nice.
Sirgabriel, if he speak true,
I 'pologize my vote for you.

Unvote

But now, o now, gentle Sabrar
We come back to our old thing.
Now it seems the chance is much more far
That redirect powers we both here bring.

Why, I ask, do you claim Don John?
A bastard vying to bring down his brother?
It sounds like for Iago, the traitor now gone,
Your role makes for his significant other.

Both of you second to great men in power
Wouldnt that be the plot of the hour?

Yet if thus, the public claim vexes me,
So then, I must ask, prithee speak truly.

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Echo244 » Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:09 pm UTC

Sabrar wrote:And th're is the Vig claim I wast hoping to avoid, as shouldst Djehutynakht beest scum with redirect'r ability it becomes impossible to useth safely from h're on anon.


And yet, one scum remains, by my accounting? One scum has fallen; a Lyncher-and-town-win independent also. I do not think there can be more than one scum; I think that one more independent is a possibility, but no more. Let us use our numbers, and time, as an advantage.

As for who is that scum... that's complicated.

If Dje lied about the redirect, we have SirG's immunity and freezeblade's kill explaining the acts of the night.

If Dje speaks the truth... things get complicated. Either SirG lied about his immunity, and truly was redirected to kill Carlington (stacking with freezeblade's kill), or SirG speaks the truth about immunity, Dje redirected no active power, freezeblade still shot Carlington, and we know nothing for certain.

I don't believe that there are multiple liars. Either one, or none.

Back to old-fashioned scum hunting, I suppose.

Town

Echo
jimbob
freezeblade
SirG
Sabrar
Dje

Scum

Dje being scum neatly explains everything. Perhaps too easily. But the bold swift vote-then-claim felt like scum getting in first. SirG's explanation relied on someone else popping up later to claim vig, whereas if SirG really was scum-redirected-by-Dje he'd not know about the vig (ruling out a third scumbuddy here). freezeblade as lone remaining scum would have to have chosen to shoot Carlington, which makes no sense. Sabrar and jimbob are not among this tangle of pointed fingers, but Sabrar's fear of a redirection power in the hands of scum, reminds me of his own power.

My suspicions began with Dje; perhaps they should have moved on. I too worry about Sabrar. jimbob seems trustworthy thus far. SirG and freezeblade are somewhat linked by claims, claim order, and outcomes, and I think only one scum remains.

I have answered the questions of jimbob, and yet beg his forgiveness, for I feel the puzzle is not yet crack'd.

Ninja'd by a couple of posts... it seems we agree, this puzzle is yet not solved. And yet, many corner and edge pieces do we have.
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:37 pm UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:Why, I ask, do you claim Don John?

I claim'd Don John as that gent's who is't I am and proudly doth I wear his mantle. As our lady did noted bef're I hadst my choice of noble from amongst yond illustrious cast and I've hath decided upon 3 who were m're closeth to my age and did avoid Leonato and Don Pedro whom I felt I couldst not do justice. I presumed roles would beest assign'd randomly and off'r'd up possibilities of both hero and villain (and fool). Imagineth my surprise when I received a traitor by name but not by act. But yond shouldst not surprise thee this much, as wasn't Puck independent in the previous incarnation of this v'ry game, 'r is't not true that Brutus is most likely on the same side as the rest of us? I feareth you start to misrepresent facts again like thee did bef're when thee first did attack me.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Djehutynakht » Thu Apr 28, 2016 8:05 pm UTC

For one who misrepresentation claims
I fear that you oft do the same.

Im merely looking at what Ive been told
To make a conclusion, even if it seem bold.

Our good dear Lord said from logic comes the team
And Iago and John just logically seem.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Thu Apr 28, 2016 8:14 pm UTC

Apologies for breaking character again, I don't trust flowery language to convey my full meaning and don't have the time to clear it up.
@Djehutynakht:
1. You suggested here that I 'cleverly' avoided my own question by not stating directly that I chose my characters from the play I claimed. This is factually untrue as i) I replied here in concrete statements to Echo about my choices and ii) it was not my own question to begin with but SirGabriel's (minor matter, I know).
2. Then even after I cleared up the 'royal we' issue upon which all your suspicions lay you still stated that I was your number one suspect without any reason.
3. As already mentioned you gave no sign about finding SirGabriel scummy D1.
4. Finally first you placed an OMGUS vote on me, then jumped whatever wagon seemed convenient to save your own skin. That in my mind reeks of desperation and is not a townie play.

Vote: Djehutynakht

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Djehutynakht » Thu Apr 28, 2016 8:33 pm UTC

Of course id vote to save my skin
D1 Im the only one I know what's in.
If instead the vote was on you
Would you truly any different do?

I dont see reason for your vote
Except displeasure to emote
What have I done but play the game?
I made guesses, hunches, mistakes. We all do the same.

For one who cries an OMGUS so
OMGUS is why your vote is in the fro.

User avatar
mpolo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:24 pm UTC
Location: Germany

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby mpolo » Fri Apr 29, 2016 3:39 am UTC

In response to a PM question: If at day end, there is a tie vote between two players and all players are voting for one of those two and no one is abstaining, then there will be no lynch. (Thus the last day cannot result in being simply a speed contest.) I didn't notice that that edge case wasn't there in the rules I quickly copied from another game…
Image <-- Evil experiment

User avatar
jimbobmacdoodle
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:40 pm UTC
Location: NP 811/The Present

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby jimbobmacdoodle » Fri Apr 29, 2016 8:24 am UTC

The Wheel of Time turns and as the tides change, our focus must shift elsewhere. Let us now look at each player in turn to see whose claims add up from a logical point of view. For this purpose, I believe that there be but one scum and that only scum wilt lie.

To first the chill of freezeblade let us turn. He hath claimed Carlington to kill. Were this to be lie, that man's killer must we elsewhere seek. The only other way he could have died is if DJ tells the truth, making SirG scum. But that means freezeblade is not. Therefore freezeblade cannot be scum.

Second, let us turn to SirG the knight. He claimed to be bulletproof and knew he was the scum target last night. If he lieth, that means he must have been scum and the killer, or that another player doth lie and concealeth a protective ability. Then that meaneth that DJ hath redirected him and there were two causes of Carlington's death. He could be scum.

Third we move our attentions to DJ who rapidly voted at the start of day. If he telleth the truth, it is possible also for SirG still to be Town, and that DJ's power did nothing. He lying is also possible, and simply maketh him the killer who targeted SirG. He could be scum.

Fourth in line is Sabrar. His redirect would have done nothing last night it seemeth. If he telleth the truth it simply meaneth that Carlington wast not the killer last night. If DJ is telling the truth, methinks that Sabrar a likely candidate for villainy is, but this is not guaranteed.

Finally we turn both to myself and Echo, neither of whom claim anything to do with this mess. Alas, it is possible that one of us the killer is, although I myself knoweth myself to have nothing to do with this villainy.

So, this attempt to look at the claims logically has failed much more to conclude than what Echo hath said. Freezeblade is town, of that I am certain, which means to me that one of four is scum. Sadly, there is not enough time to lynch each one in turn. Further conclusions must now wait until I hath reread the script this Monday.

Instinctive town to scum list based on the fact that I do not think it particularly likely that there are two redirectors in such a game, although it is not impossible:

Town
Jimbobmacdoodle
Freezeblade
Echo
SirGabriel
Sabrar
DJ
Scum
BlitzGirl the Primordial
matthewglen wrote:Cueball looks concerned.

Image

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Echo244 » Fri Apr 29, 2016 8:42 am UTC

jimbobmacdoodle wrote:Second, let us turn to SirG the knight. He claimed to be bulletproof and knew he was the scum target last night. If he lieth, that means he must have been scum and the killer, or that another player doth lie and concealeth a protective ability. Then that meaneth that DJ hath redirected him and there were two causes of Carlington's death. He could be scum.


This I ask: If SirG was scum, how would he have known that freezeblade doubled the kill, and made plausible a case where Dje lied? By claiming immunity, and that someone else (he knew not whom) killed Iago, I think SirG speaketh the truth. Had he been scum, he would have claimed PGO to explain the death - not an immunity, which would have required another player (that he didn't know about) to claim the kill.

I consider it one from two. Our claimed redirecters - Dje and Sabrar.

I'm leaning Dje. Some unknown mechanism ensured his D1 survival. Sabrar was voting the other way. If both Dje and heuristically were town, why would Sabrar tip the balance and betray a power?
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Fri Apr 29, 2016 8:53 am UTC

Echo244 wrote:This I ask: If SirG was scum, how would he have known that freezeblade doubled the kill, and made plausible a case where Dje lied?

Mayhaps he hoped we'd assume our Vigilante wouldst not be revealing themselves?
Echo244 wrote:Had he been scum, he would have claimed PGO to explain the death

This I feareth thee've did get wrong, he couldn't has't claim'd PGO as Djehutynakht supposedly target'd him as well but didn't kicketh the bucket.

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Echo244 » Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:36 am UTC

If SirG was scum and carried out the kill, and Dje's redirect had caused the death, how would SirG have known there was a vigilante? If SirG was scum and did not carry out the kill, how did he know a Vig and not PGO caused Carlington's death, allowing him to claim immunity and leave freezeblade to claim the kill?

SirG as scum claiming PGO would have made sense, as Dje's supposed targetting of him could have been painted as another lie. It'd last right up to the point that someone else targeted him, but nyuh, it's not the most outlandish scum tactic I've heard of...

With two out of six players - jimbob and SirG - away for half this game day (the weekend, and Monday) would an extension be sensible?
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

User avatar
mpolo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:24 pm UTC
Location: Germany

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby mpolo » Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:48 am UTC

I am open to extending… Since weekend traffic drops to near null, it's going to be hard to get a consensus up. I will tentatively extend to Wednesday, but if everything is decided before the normal deadline, you may vote for Day End for Tuesday independently of your normal vote.
Image <-- Evil experiment

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:51 am UTC

Echo244 wrote:If SirG was scum and carried out the kill, and Dje's redirect had caused the death, how would SirG have known there was a vigilante?

He wouldn't. He'd assume that there was no Vigilante and when none of us claimed it he could argue that the Vigilante wished to remain hidden. I hope this makes it more clear.
Echo244 wrote:SirG as scum claiming PGO would have made sense, as Dje's supposed targetting of him could have been painted as another lie.

Scum needs to get 2 mislynches so any tactic that is dependent on painting only 1 other player a liar is doomed to fail.

User avatar
jimbobmacdoodle
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:40 pm UTC
Location: NP 811/The Present

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby jimbobmacdoodle » Fri Apr 29, 2016 10:18 am UTC

@Echo - A PGO could not have caused Carlington's death if SirG was the killer, unless DJ (the presumed target of Carlington with Sabrar's redirect) was the target, and DJ had already claimed his ability (unless you think a redirector and PGO would be combined).
BlitzGirl the Primordial
matthewglen wrote:Cueball looks concerned.

Image

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act I, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:10 pm UTC

jimbobmacdoodle wrote:Carlington hath said something that hast caught my eye and suggesteth him to be no scum player. This information I'd be willing to share, but I doth hope from others this same clue I wilt find.

In light of recent events wouldst thee mind sharing what thee hath found?

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act I, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Fri Apr 29, 2016 2:36 pm UTC

freezeblade wrote:My meta as it does currently stand
shades towards great hatred of first game day
all idle chat with ne'ry a conclusion
gleaned from results of nocturnal passing

If't be true thee art not a full Vigilante, wherefore didst thee decide to use thy kill N1? By your own admission thee pref'r waiting until th're art claimed results from previous nights.

User avatar
jimbobmacdoodle
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:40 pm UTC
Location: NP 811/The Present

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby jimbobmacdoodle » Fri Apr 29, 2016 2:39 pm UTC

'Twas something slightly wrong. I thought the way that he phrased something to do with false claims implied that he did not realise that the moderator had provided scum with such things. However, the moderator had himself said that they had false claims, so I thought that Carlington hath revealed that he did not have this knowledge, which scum certainly would have. I did not wish to reveal this so that I could "confirm" others in this manner, but I believe the time for that is now past, and indeed it is clear to me that my reasoning was incorrect.
BlitzGirl the Primordial
matthewglen wrote:Cueball looks concerned.

Image

User avatar
freezeblade
Posts: 1042
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:11 pm UTC
Location: Oakland

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act I, Scene I (Day)

Postby freezeblade » Fri Apr 29, 2016 4:11 pm UTC

Sabrar wrote:
freezeblade wrote:My meta as it does currently stand
shades towards great hatred of first game day
all idle chat with ne'ry a conclusion
gleaned from results of nocturnal passing

If't be true thee art not a full Vigilante, wherefore didst thee decide to use thy kill N1? By your own admission thee pref'r waiting until th're art claimed results from previous nights.


Look back upon my post from first day past / And you shall see my suspicion and note
Of the scummy behavior Carlington / Hath portra'ed himself, yet not of much note
At the time of choosing my target though / wishing I had more information there
Yet "use it or lose it" and so they say / For tonight I have but no such power
Belial wrote:I am not even in the same country code as "the mood for this shit."

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:10 pm UTC

@jimbob: thank thee f'r the answ'r, yond seemeth like a well enough reason.

@freezeblade: I hast not questioned thy target, I wast curious wherefore thee hath used thy ability at all. But if thee claimeth yond it wast only available N1 then it wouldst make sense.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Djehutynakht » Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:40 pm UTC

As to touch yesterday's lynch
I confess I did get out of a pinch
But I have no idea why I survive
And Iago took a most ignoble dive
The reason eludes me unless it be
Some secret game ability
Or unless some player have them ability
To change the votals as they choose with anonmity

User avatar
SirGabriel
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:54 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby SirGabriel » Mon May 02, 2016 8:29 am UTC

I'm back. I don't think I have any thing to add at the moment, but if you have questions for me, feel free to ask.

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Echo244 » Mon May 02, 2016 3:11 pm UTC

I too return. And having not been idle in the meantime.

Unfamiliar as I was with Much Ado About Nothing, I took time to study the work, thus to learn more of the character of Don John, here claimed as character by Sabrar. And what did I learn? A villain, through and through; from spite doth he seek to hurt Claudio through his betrothed; a thousand ducats doth he offer for services render'd in this cause; no care has he for the honour or life of the lady whose name he doth besmirch; and when undone his plot becomes, no repentence does he seek, but rather, fly from Messina only to be be ignominiously captur'd, as report'd in the final act.

John the B*st*rd doth Shakespeare call him; sometimes, in directions, B*st*rd alone. Thus lies the judgement of his creator. And hey, let us hear his own words, as he plotted against Claudio:

Shakespeare wrote:It must not be denied but I am a plain-dealing villain


I found the claim of this character to be odd; who should claim a villainous part, that has somehow become one with the town?

One who fears the role-cop, as Sabrar mentioned in but his second post of the game.

Sabrar wrote:assuming there's a role-cop among our midst it might force scum to be more truthful than they would like


Thus, truth you told, of name, perhaps of power. In front of thyself, did thou place the poison'd wine, in order that you may fear not a role-cop. And I am drawn back to the words of the mod: that characters have been chosen, for their likelihood of working together. What do we know, for sure? That Brutus stands in our midst, and Hamlet, poor Prince, lies dead, having failed to find his mark. That Iago hath fallen, from freezeblade's shot. And that six of us remain.

I draw attention back to Iago. Wikipedia doth say:

Wikipedia wrote:Iago is a fictional character in Shakespeare's Othello (c. 1601–1604). Iago is the play's main antagonist, and Othello's standard bearer. He is Emilia's husband, who is in turn the attendant of Othello's wife Desdemona. Iago hates Othello and devises a plan to destroy him by making him believe that his wife is having an affair with his lieutenant, Michael Cassio.


A plan to destroy another, by making him believe that his wife/betrothed is unfaithful. Doth that sound familiar, Don John? I submit that there can be few such pairings better suited to working together, for ill ends, from the Bard's works. Dje's comment earlier did lead me to consider this, and having researched it, I think it to be a thread - not strong, and yet, not useless. The protestations of innocence... ring not quite true, to my ears.

What more is there?

Sabrar wrote:Scum needs to get 2 mislynches so any tactic that is dependent on painting only 1 other player a liar is doomed to fail.


True words, I think. That struck a chord with thy behaviour. Upon Dje, is placed your vote. And yet, no more do you speak of it, to persuade others to follow. You challenge jimbob, and freezeblade; I say that fog doth thou seek to create, doubt doth thou wish to sow. Where others wonder who is truly the one remaining scum, you have voted one way and yet seek to develop the potential to lynch others tomorrow.

And what of Dje, in this time?

He and Sabrar do bicker, over names and each other's OMGUS or self-preserving actions. Dje somehow survived the first day, despite the rules seeming to say that he should have been our victim. Further, does he claim, that anyone investigating him last night would have had a result of scum, through Sabrar's convenient redirection of Carlington onto him. This does ping me strongly; onto life, doth he grasp, more strongly than victory.

And yet, and yet. Sabrar's words reach me again. Two mislynches, must there be, with one scum remaining. How acts Dje in this regard? Poorly. For on Sabrar alone does his attention rest. If Dje be scum, 'tis like he seeks to but get through this day, at price of Sabrar's life; on the morrow, a new victim must he find. And yet, no groundwork doth he lay; should such a plan succeed, much gratitude must he have for Sabrar's efforts in this regard.

Thus, do I accuse thee, Sabrar, Don John. Dje pings me like a pinball table awarding bonus score; and yet, I find the case against you more persuasive.

FoS: Sabrar

In time, a FoS to become a vote. And yet, I will hear discussion first.

And yes, many words, and some will say, with little said. But bugger that, I like writing, and have but few creative outlets.
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Mon May 02, 2016 3:54 pm UTC

Having not studied the Bard's work so extensively I cannot offer any defense regarding thy accusations yond art bas'd on flavor. Forsooth they would maketh a stout argument wast I not to know mine own true alignment. I can only ask to beest judg'd by mine actions.
I bethink I've made my case about Djehutynakht quite clear, I did see nay need to push others to follow suit as they can maketh their own judgements.
I defy thy words about creating fog. T'is true yond my main focus is on Djehutynakht the present day but I wilt eke ponder the possibility that we're wrong. This is the reason wherefore I focus'd on others as well. Doth thee not concur yond the points I hath raised did need clarification?
Finally a point of sweet, delicious wine I might not but admit: wast I scum my best interest would be to attack SirGabriel tomorrow and leaveth the others be, bas'd on this quote:
SirGabriel wrote:It is the rest of you who must decide between him and me, or at least which of us to kill first, as the other may be lynched on the morrow if the one lynched today is not scum.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Mon May 02, 2016 4:03 pm UTC

EBWOP:
Echo244 wrote:How acts Dje in this regard? Poorly. For on Sabrar alone does his attention rest.

No exactly true as Djehutynakht's primary target was SirGabriel and just because an unvote happened does not mean that he cannot attack him tomorrow as well.

User avatar
SirGabriel
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:54 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby SirGabriel » Mon May 02, 2016 4:10 pm UTC

Sabrar wrote:Finally a point of sweet, delicious wine I might not but admit: wast I scum my best interest would be to attack SirGabriel tomorrow and leaveth the others be, bas'd on this quote:
SirGabriel wrote:It is the rest of you who must decide between him and me, or at least which of us to kill first, as the other may be lynched on the morrow if the one lynched today is not scum.

But that was before the vig had claimed. At that point I was not certain a vig would claim, but now that one has, there's no reason to think that one of us two must be scum. I'm keeping my vote on DJ, but I don't think it's very townie to present a clearly flawed plan as what you would do if you were scum.
I've wondered if DJ might be a jester, as his play seems very odd for a townie but very badly planned for scum, but in a game this size I would be highly surprised to see two third parties, so I'm going with scum.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Mon May 02, 2016 4:15 pm UTC

I didst not sayeth yond the statement hath to be true, just that it would beest convenient to use. I in earnest didst not ponder the implications of the timeline but thou art right of course.

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Echo244 » Mon May 02, 2016 8:00 pm UTC

Sabrar wrote:I didst not sayeth yond the statement hath to be true, just that it would beest convenient to use. I in earnest didst not ponder the implications of the timeline but thou art right of course.


Yet thou didst earnestly ponder the possibilities of SirG's claim with the prospect of a vig who had remain'd silent. This is what I had sought to explain earlier. I say again, fog dost thou cast.

SirGabriel wrote:I've wondered if DJ might be a jester, as his play seems very odd for a townie but very badly planned for scum, but in a game this size I would be highly surprised to see two third parties, so I'm going with scum.


Hmmm. See, Dje's D2 play I can see the thoughts behind. From the sudden reversal of a scum kill to scum killed, as the target of a redirect... yeah, I can see the sudden leap to a simple conclusion and enthusiastic pursuit of that course of action - a simple conclusion that overlooks the idea that others might have played a part in the outcome. And then, suddenly backing up when, it turns out, there's another explanation.
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Mon May 02, 2016 8:12 pm UTC

Echo244 wrote:Yet thou didst earnestly ponder the possibilities of SirG's claim with the prospect of a vig who had remain'd silent.

Yep, but that was 3 days ago. I was in a haste in replying to you and forgot about it. What can I say? I make mistakes.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Djehutynakht » Mon May 02, 2016 9:49 pm UTC

SirGabriel wrote:I've wondered if DJ might be a jester, as his play seems very odd for a townie but very badly planned for scum, but in a game this size I would be highly surprised to see two third parties, so I'm going with scum.


The Fool was a rejected role
Though Puck has some similarity, I do extol.

I'm not a Jester, game's too small.
To help the town is indeed my call.

I do not know the last scum, but Sabrar is my guess
Two redirects are unlikely (though possible), I must address
I softclaimed my role end of D1, thought I was a dead man
I suppose D2 I was a fool, my identity out of the can.
Look here, no deception I've given in this game at all
I may be wrong, but I make my guess, and on them I stand tall.

User avatar
jimbobmacdoodle
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:40 pm UTC
Location: NP 811/The Present

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby jimbobmacdoodle » Mon May 02, 2016 11:05 pm UTC

Alas, my weekend event, followed by a general get together with my fellow committee members hast seen me return home a touch later than wouldst have been my preference. I therefore have not had the time that I would have hoped to review the thread and consider my position, though recent posts I have skimmed. I do see a solid argument against both Sabrar and DJ, whilst the case for SirGabriel seemeth mostly because of DJ's redirection. I don't believe I have had a chance enough to form a fair judgement and so to the others I do leave the choice, shouldst night fall before tomorrow evening. Mayhaps the moderator though a longer day will grant, to allowest me the chance to catch up properly and make a good call.

Request 18-24 hour deadline extension.

(I only walked back in my house less than half an hour ago, and need to go to bed. I might get a chance for a bit of a reread around 9am BST, but I'd rather spend a bigger amount of time doing so in the evening, if night has not yet fallen, so would appreciate the opportunity to do so.)
BlitzGirl the Primordial
matthewglen wrote:Cueball looks concerned.

Image

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Tue May 03, 2016 4:56 am UTC

Echo244 wrote:In front of thyself, did thou place the poison'd wine, in order that you may fear not a role-cop.

Just thought of this: were I scum I would have known about Carlington's ability well before my claim and realized that we have a standard cop instead of one who checks roles. Therefore I could have pretended to be Don Pedro for example and remained consistent with my earlier claims.

User avatar
SirGabriel
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:54 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby SirGabriel » Tue May 03, 2016 5:58 am UTC

Sabrar wrote:
Echo244 wrote:In front of thyself, did thou place the poison'd wine, in order that you may fear not a role-cop.

Just thought of this: were I scum I would have known about Carlington's ability well before my claim and realized that we have a standard cop instead of one who checks roles. Therefore I could have pretended to be Don Pedro for example and remained consistent with my earlier claims.

I'm confused. When did Carlington claim a power? And why would scum know about such a power? And how would knowing his role tell you there is no role cop?

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Tue May 03, 2016 6:09 am UTC

Carlington died N1 so we know his power. He was scum. If I were scum I would have known it previously from our chat. His ability points towards an alignment-cop so it's unlikely that we have a role-cop as well. Is this more clear?

User avatar
mpolo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:24 pm UTC
Location: Germany

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby mpolo » Tue May 03, 2016 6:26 am UTC

Deadline is currently: In about 24 hours

But soft you now! The fair vote tallies?
Nymph, in thy orisons be all my sins remember'd!

Djehutynakht (2): SirGabriel, Sabrar

Forsooth, if naught should change, Djehutynakht would not see the night.

O gentle jimbob, hast thou an extension till Thursday requested? Or is the current extension enough for thee?
Image <-- Evil experiment

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Echo244 » Tue May 03, 2016 8:22 am UTC

Sabrar wrote:Carlington died N1 so we know his power. He was scum. If I were scum I would have known it previously from our chat. His ability points towards an alignment-cop so it's unlikely that we have a role-cop as well. Is this more clear?


Thy claim lies clear. Good sense, it seems to make.

And yet, and yet. For this to happen, I doubt it came from chat. Your role-cop fear didst you voice at the very start of D1; what previous chat couldst thou have had? Only much later, did Carlington post - and we are told not whether scum have day chat. Would he have messaged you, to speak of alignment and power, without also posting to the thread, early on D1? The possibility, we cannot quite discount. And yet, too much you seem to know about what would be possible for scum.

'Tis but a thread. But several of these have I now gathered.

Vote: Sabrar
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Echo244 » Tue May 03, 2016 8:24 am UTC

EBWOP:

Can I suggest the slightly longer extension? Tonight would be long enough for jimbob to read and consider his choices; however, an extra day offers the chance for discussion, and him to ask questions and get responses, rather than just pass judgement on what he reads.
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

User avatar
SirGabriel
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:54 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby SirGabriel » Tue May 03, 2016 8:27 am UTC

Sabrar wrote:Carlington died N1 so we know his power. He was scum. If I were scum I would have known it previously from our chat. His ability points towards an alignment-cop so it's unlikely that we have a role-cop as well. Is this more clear?

Sorry, didn't get much sleep last night. Forgot Carlington was dead. But even if his power implies that there is a cop, that does not mean there can't also be a role cop.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby Sabrar » Tue May 03, 2016 8:40 am UTC

This is getting really frustrating, apologies for any perceived hostilities in my tone for I intend none.
I was not talking about my early 'concerns' (which were voiced in the open). I was talking about how on D2 I need not have revealed Don John as I could be reasonably certain that we don't have a role-cop and could instead have pretended to be someone else.
At this point I'm not sure whether you simply fail to consider the logic behind my words or are deliberately trying to build a case against me for tomorrow. You seem to have started with the assumption that I'm scum purely on flavor-based reasons while we don't even know your role or jimbob's or freezeblade's. Furthermore someone among us is Brutus, probably Town but you continue to disregard that as well.
The 'threads' you mentioned I already answered but there's no reaction from you, seemingly content to just let it lie. You treat my scum-hunting as creating fog and use your language ('And yet, and yet') to justify finding a reason to discard my explanations.

User avatar
jimbobmacdoodle
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:40 pm UTC
Location: NP 811/The Present

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby jimbobmacdoodle » Tue May 03, 2016 8:56 am UTC

Nay, I meant until Wednesday an extension to grant. Mayhaps I misread the deadline clock in my sleep-deprived state.

Did Carlington's ability allow him to frame who they visited or their role?

Did mafia know the ability of their teammate at game start?


I'm expecting to see answers of yes and either no or no comment. Carlington's role PM, assuming it doth be a direct copy, hath "redacted" in the name of the teammate but I doubt it included the ability, for rare it is mafia their teammate's ability to know before chat. Sabrar, I doth declare thy argument flawed.

It seemeth to me that Sabrar scared is, but whether it the fear of a murderer caught is, or that of an innocent victim, I do not yet declare. Tonight I shall read once more and a firm call make.

Hark, there is a ninja here - my statement ist no longer valid, but mayhaps some truth therein still is.
BlitzGirl the Primordial
matthewglen wrote:Cueball looks concerned.

Image

User avatar
mpolo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:24 pm UTC
Location: Germany

Re: Shakespeare Mafia II - Act II, Scene I (Day)

Postby mpolo » Tue May 03, 2016 9:14 am UTC

Carlington could name a person who would appear as scum to other people who investigated that person. The wording would also allow that a rolecop would receive a non-nefarious rolename, I suppose, though that is probably harder to define.

Thou hast the role PM from one member of the mafia. Thou canst make thine own conclusions. More will I not say.
Image <-- Evil experiment


Return to “Mafia”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], SirGabriel and 12 guests