xkcd

by **Azrael001** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 7:19 am UTC

I investigated FAOT, he is a student. This makes me more inclined to think that mostlynormal was hoping to get us to lynch two town.

Vote: mostlynormal

by **Azrael001** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 7:45 pm UTC

I really think that Mostlynormal is the obvious choice here. Of the people that are left we have something like four reported town.

roband Town from fearless (least trusted result because of weirdness)
Azrael001
mostlynormal
Adam H I got town
ForAllOfThis I got town
mpolo I got town
Boomfrog

It is insanity to be lynching reported town when there are people who are scummy and not investigated. If the investigations are right, then we will be spending two days lynching town. mostlynormal pushing for the double, and now triple lynch strikes me as scum knowing what the results of both lynches will be.

If you don't trust me, you should be lynching me so that you can confirm or not my investigations.

by **Azrael001** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 8:32 pm UTC

fearless was supposedly blocked by the person who she investigated. This is why the results are the least trusted. Notice however that I am not trying to lynch roband right now however, I'm trying to lynch you.

by **Azrael001** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 8:50 pm UTC

That both of them have investigation results that have come up town?

Unless there is some scum power that can consistently obfuscate the results of an investigation, which would be both extremely powerful, and not really something that I would expect in a "newbies game", then none of the results are trustworthy and we are back to square one.

That is why I propose lynching mostlynormal, and then, if we haven't won, every remaining player but me will have been investigated, which would then imply that there is a godfather, which is probably roband.

by **Azrael001** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:24 pm UTC

I mean in the absence of a godfather, there are few other ways that a result could be obtained that is incorrect, especially in a game that shouldn't have experimental new roles.

Assuming that the roleblock was messed up in some other way, there is no particular reason to think Roband has any greater likelihood of being a godfather than anyone else.

Personally I think that we'll win as soon as we lynch you.

by **Azrael001** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:44 pm UTC

Has there really only been one scum death? I didn't do a mental count. No, I don't think that there is only one scum left, but I do think that it makes more sense to use the pool of people that haven't been investigated and reported town before lynching someone who has a slim chance of being the godfather.

by **Azrael001** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 10:54 pm UTC

I'm not certain, but I do have hunches that I trust more than I should at times. Cross-pollination from Firefly had me thinking that we'd hit more scum than we did.

by **Azrael001** » Thu Feb 23, 2012 5:24 pm UTC

I still think that mostlynormal is scum, and I think that if we follow his "lynch everyone" plan then we will lose.

by **Azrael001** » Thu Feb 23, 2012 6:49 pm UTC

Sigh.

by **Azrael001** » Wed Feb 29, 2012 8:32 pm UTC

Is it later yet?

by **Azrael001** » Mon Mar 05, 2012 6:35 pm UTC

Bump?

by **Azrael001** » Tue Mar 06, 2012 1:49 am UTC

At least you lot have all got people that you could have been messaging. I've got no one, you killed them all. I'm so lonely. :cry:

by **Azrael001** » Tue Mar 06, 2012 9:15 pm UTC

I am also fine with this.

by **Azrael001** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:00 pm UTC

I am still mad about getting our whole house outed on day one, but I'm glad that you stepped up and took over the game for everyone.

I was aiming for a Ravenclaw win as well as town, which made me more inclined to vote Gryffindor while they were winning.

by **BoomFrog** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 7:49 am UTC

Hello everyone, I've read most of the last day and skimmed the fearless debacle, I didn't read pretty much anything from D1 yet. Does someone have a list of all the confirmed night actions that have happened so far since this seems to be the center of the debate.

N1:
Fearless investigates Roband gets Town.
Roband roleblocks Fearless but it didn't work.
Hufflepuff?
Slitherin?
No kill

N2:
??

N3:
Roband roleblocks FAOT
FAOT protects mpolo
Mpolo watches Roband, confirms Roband targeted FAOT and no one targeted Roband.
Azreal checks ??
No Kill

N4:
Azreal checks FAOT
Greenlover killed

by **BoomFrog** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 8:08 am UTC

Seriously Mr. Pot? I didn't want to get into this yet but, reading through yesterday was exactly like reading through your last day alive in Smalltown.

by **BoomFrog** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:11 am UTC

Yeah, you were scum and the lynch had been building against you and you got very aggressive and "100% convinced" that I and awan where scum.

by **BoomFrog** » Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:26 am UTC

Action notes:

Spoiler:

roband wrote:Night 1 funny business must have had something to do with Tim.
If you take night 1 and Tim out of this game completely, it becomes very obvious. Therefore, could Tim be to blame for the weirdness on N1? Maybe.

Just handwave N1 away? I'm not talking about the fearless not-actually-roleblocked which is very weird, I'm talking about the lack of a nightkill. The roleblock obviously didn't stop the kill, therefore it was withheld or blocked by the doctor. The doctor protected FAOT N1 and that was known amongst hufflepuff. Therefore FAOT is town or he is scum who decided to withhold the kill to earn towny cred D1. However, considering that t1mm didn't know where the RB was going FAOT wouldn't necessarily get any town cred out of the move, and give up a NK is a high price to pay, it virtually guarantees that there will be an extra lynch and extra night of investigations which is terrible for scum. There's no reason they would try something so desperate on N1. Therefore there are no scum in Hufflepuff.

I also agree with MN's reasoning that one of FAOT or Roband must be scum according to the results N3. Therefore Roband is scum.

I'll wait on hammering though in case someone sees a flaw in my logic.

by **BoomFrog** » Tue Mar 06, 2012 5:11 am UTC

Lataro wrote:Edit: Alternatively to it being dead, all remaining players could truthfully send their role PMs to an outside player and that person takes over as mod to finish it. I'd volunteer, but there would be zero flavor, and I'd pry drop the house scoring to make it easier, so if someone else wanted to, and actually knew the flavor crap involved, that would pry be best.

If no one else is volunteering to mod I would be happy to have Lataro do this. Drop house points, and if GoP ever comes back he can update the house points and declare extra wins whenever that may be.

by **BoomFrog** » Thu Mar 08, 2012 9:46 am UTC

Well there are some ways, but a GF FAOT makes a lot more sense. Still I'd rather lynch MN first but I guess that can wait until tomorrow.

by **BoomFrog** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:35 am UTC

There is either a GF or scum have a redirector and have either gotten very lucky to avoid the watcher when using it or AdamH is scum since Adam is the one doing most of the private targeting in slitherin right? And either Adam has tricked all of town, or he actually is town, I'm not going to do a reread and I'm just going to assume that's right, because if Adam is scum then where really just rolling a die here at this point.

Still no idea what happened D1. Withheld kill doesn't make much sense on D1 when it very well may be totally wasted wine.

I'm going to go with:

Vote: FAOT

by **BoomFrog** » Tue Mar 13, 2012 3:42 am UTC

Well yesterday I was entertaining the possibility that AdamH might be scum, since, as he's said, scum has been VERY lucky to avoid slitherin tracking. However MN did a pretty good job of convincing me that he is scum last night so I'm comfortable just lynching him right now.

FYI, I let him use the doctor since a probably-scum doctor is still better then no doctor and he refused to let me have the doc. He protected mpolo.

I don't see how NL really helps us, we're down to a 50/50 here either way.

Vote: Mostly Normal

Ninja'd, but that really doesn't change anything.

by **BoomFrog** » Tue Mar 13, 2012 6:14 am UTC

Mostlynormal wrote:any kind of redirect power that got lucky twice in a row.

If Adam is scum and he (or FAOT) had a redirect power then once there was only one Ravenclaw left they didn't have to be lucky at all to have the cop keep returning town results. And since Scum-Adam was doing the tracking scum weren't in danger of being caught. No luckiness needed.

However, you never considered that and just completely assumed I'm scum. Town-MN would have had at least a bit of doubt. And town-MN would have preferred a chance that I could be a useful doctor over having a split vote and no one using the power.

by **BoomFrog** » Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:52 am UTC

mpolo wrote:MostlyNormal targeted I last night and be'd targeted by no one.

Hence: MostlyNormal be town. Which leaves 2 possibilities, only one of which be very convincing:

A) Adam H be a _second_ godfather…

OR

B) BoomFrog be scum.

For obvious reasons, HULK doubting A with a most sincere doubt.

Therefore, BoomFrog must be scum.

Vote: BoomFrog

Or

C) Mostlynormal withheld the kill to create wine?

by **BoomFrog** » Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:57 am UTC

Damn. So mpolo: would you have hammered MN if I had voted for him D5 (the second to last day)?

Mostlynormal wrote:Also good play Boomfrog giving me the doctor, it was so sudden and unexpected that I doubted myself for a moment. But I think trying to cast doubt on Adam ended up getting you lynched, at the end you came across alot as just trying to survive.

I didn't really want to spread suspicion on AdamH but I was just trying to avoid looking 100% sure.

by **BoomFrog** » Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:48 am UTC

But, I.. grrr. Yeah, I guess I "thought through" the scenario too fast, since I had actually thought it through the night before. Damn. But if we did NL then scum would have withheld again, because scum is screwed if they try to kill and don't kill the tracker. Oh well. Good game everyone.

by **BoomFrog** » Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:17 pm UTC

Wut? No kill would have gotten you in the same ammount of trouble.

by **Chandani** » Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:41 pm UTC

Confirm!
I now declare this post to have content. YAY.

by **Chandani** » Wed Jan 18, 2012 6:12 pm UTC

mpolo wrote:The big question is: Does the conspiracy have night-kill, or are they a cult? The second is very possible from flavor, though the first would be much more traditional. We will presumably know more on that question after the first night.

... I guess reading the rules is useful at times.

First post wrote:7 - Conspirators may only pm each other at night, and have a factional kill, which may be taken in addition to any other actions the player may have.

I'm not sure what to make of everyone's discussion about this, since it is clearly stated, but since most of the players here are old, they might have skipped it since they thought it was the not-very-game related.
I just find it kind of weird that A) No one looked it up and B) No one even tried to ask the mod (though that could be justified with the setup being semi-closed/closed).
I also doubt that the conspirators are a cult since they also have a kill.

And then there's this...

greenlover wrote:
mpolo wrote:If it helps in trying to track down if there are independents or non-house-aligned anti-towns here, I'm willing to share the fact that there are only three members of my house in the first year.
I'm willing to bet that that's true for every house, since I think its unlikely for any house to be made up of two players...? So, I think its a pretty solid possibility that we don't have any independents this game, or at least any independents that are separate from a house.

... As long as there was a player amount of a multiple of four, then there would be no independents. THIS WAS CLEARLY EXPLAINED IN THE SIGNUPS. In fact, that's one of the reasons why I signed up-to have 12 players in the game.

FOS at mpolo for not reading the rules/contributing random, distracting stuff to the game
IGMEOY at everyone else who doesn't seem to be thinking (roband for talking about cult tangent since he didn't read the rules, greenlover for not remembering setup details, FAOT for claiming doctor to prove there's a scum kill... and I think that's it at this point)

ninja'd by tim, who repeats second point (btw, quotation marks have to be ", not ')

by **Chandani** » Wed Jan 18, 2012 6:17 pm UTC

Well, really, if mpolo had read the rules in the first place, we wouldn't have even had this discussion.
The lack of rule-reading by others made the problem worst, that's all.
Thus why you got an IGMEOY rather than a FOS.

by **Chandani** » Wed Jan 18, 2012 7:53 pm UTC

Well... powers were stated in the sign-up thread, but as GOP said...

Gopher of Pern wrote:I will say the powers had changed from what I mentioned in the sign-up thread. The change was decided before roles were assigned.

So your guess is as good as mine.

by **Chandani** » Thu Jan 19, 2012 11:28 pm UTC

Lataro wrote:
mpolo wrote:I think that Lataro is asking us to claim house NAMES, not house POWERS. If there are in fact only 3 scum, one of the powers is unknown to them, and can be actively used against them. If there are four scum divided into all four houses, then the scum can essentially foil any power except for a straight-up cop. In that sense, protecting FAOT to save the doctor power is futile, as scum can easily kill the other non-scum on his team. And then the scum member of the team can prevent any further doctors.

We have to re-establish some of the town control over the town powers. Perhaps the way to do this is to elect the person to carry out the power by majority vote, but give that person complete control over the target, so that (unless we're all hopeless at this) at least some of the town powers go through without scum knowing about them.

RE: Two scum in one house: it's certainly a possibility, though it means that at least one town power is essentially permanently out of town's hands, which would disadvantage us even more. We only have four powers, after all, and very possibly four scum to root out.

Unvote

Bold is mine in quote.

I absolutely think this is an awesome idea in this situation. This way, if scum try and block powers with voting in house chat, they are instantly outed. If we know who is in each house, as he said, NOT THEIR POWER, except, FAOT's case, then we can pick who seems the most likely to be town among the houses, and force the other members to vote in line with that person on how to use the power. I like this, good thinking, it has earned you an unvote.

So, I would like some clarification on the bolded idea (mpolo)
First: are you (mpolo) suggesting that all the players in the game elect who they want to completely control the house power?
Second: It sounds like you're advocating for a dictator who doesn't discuss the power (because of the whole 'this way scum won't know what powers are sent it': if scum is in the house and there's discussion, they would know, but if there is no discussion and that one person just picks it up, then they can't. And scum can't know powers used in other houses since they can't overhear the discussion). I'm... not very comfortable with it. Depending on how lucky we are, and how scum are distributed, and their amounts, we could hand all the powers straight to the scum who could do whatever the heck they want. Also, it just doesn't seem... right. I feel like discussion is important for making such decisions, since one player can be very biased/missing key points, but that's less likely with more.

Now, to Lataro's points.
1.Unless you're in the house, you don't know what's happening there. I doubt this is a very likely possibility, but couldn't people misinterpret a situation for whatever reason, tell us that this person is scummy for not doing what they wanted, and then it blows up into a they-said, they-said situation? Voting's a bit more concrete, and I'm not sure how scum could lie about votes in such a way that they wouldn't be caught, but if discussion starts getting dissected... The outside players can't see the actual discussion. They have to rely on paraphrasing and what others say. That wouldn't be very good.
2. Um... how we would force the others to follow the votes? I think house actions happen at night, when the rest of the players can't do anything or discuss. So, I mean, there could be retaliation after the fact, but I don't see how players outside the house could punish others for not following their leader since we couldn't know about it or vote during that time.

(Mod: House actions happen at night, correct?)

Also: it's kind of weird that people don't seem to mind that they're going to paint a big target on FAOT's house with this claiming. It is the doctor house.
And how does knowing who's in other houses help? I mean, I know who's in my house, I'm assuming you guys know who's in your houses, so if you really wanted that win, you would just try to keep your housemates alive, ignoring the importance of scumhunting and all that.
And really: if we ever have to reveal powers, guess what's going to happen then? Scum knows all who have the power and can start to kill them! For instance... let's say all the Slytherins claim their house. They have a cop. They reveal cop result (scum). Scum knows who to kill! YAY. Slytherin dies. And is sad. (ninja'd by Mostlynormal)

greenlover wrote:Think about it - Is someone's scumminess determined by what house they're in? No, not really.

But but but Slytherins are all EVIL! [/flavour fun]

I have more to say but this post is getting a bit long. Posting it before others start to move away from this discussion.

by **Chandani** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:07 am UTC

Double post:
If there is a roleblock, there is the issue that town could block town powers. (I'm only bringing this up since I thought it was mentioned in-thread; this could be other-game stuff melding with this game, so sorry about that if that's the case). I don't see a way around that, since announcing who would use the powers in-thread would basically paint large targets on them, and even stating who the roleblock is aimed at would allow scum to avoid it. I guess that's something town would have to risk, unless another option is thought up of.

I remember reading something about having a spokesperson for each house to say the results... if all house alignments are known, then it really doesn't matter who announces the results of the power, since then the power is connected to the house and it doesn't really save anyone from scum attacks. Spokespeople sound like a good idea, though if it's a cop result, then there is a giant target on the person.

Basically, it ends up to how much risk we want to put on a person. Most of these ways really don't seem to help that much, though...

by **Chandani** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:35 am UTC

greenlover wrote:I agree, however, that ensuring town control (or at least trying to) over the house powers is a good idea. I would venture to suggest that - instead of revealing the houses publicly - that each house elects within itself one person to select someone other than themselves to use the power each night. That way, if there's only one scum in each house, the town will ultimately have some say in the process of using the power. Thoughts, everyone?

That's a good idea, but considering the fact that there are only three people there, it's not much of a choice. And then it really doesn't work when there's two people in the house or less. Which will happen after this night, since there will be a kill and a lynch. It also doesn't work if there are two scum in a house. If there is no scum in a house, well, then it doesn't really have an effect.
I'm more supportive of collectively deciding who to target and handing the power to someone, though I know scum can have an effect on the decision. Unless you go a dictator route, I don't see any way to avoid scum influence other than not having scum in the house.

by **Chandani** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:40 pm UTC

I'm going to repost my questions in a neater manner so i can get some answers.

Mpolo (on your suggested idea waaay back when):
First: are you (mpolo) suggesting that all the players in the game elect who they want to completely control the house power?
Second: Are you suggesting a dictator over house powers?

Lataro:
1. How would we force the other house members to follow the votes?

(Context here)

fearless wrote:The way the mafia can gain control in this game is by eliminating all the townies that are in their houses first (thereby controlling the houses' abilities). if we know the house-members, it'll be more difficult for the mafia to go about eliminating a house completely without exposing themselves in the process. And I think it's important that we retain the house's powers for as long as possible.

i.e. If we're ignorant of everyone's positions, the mafia can go about targeting their own houses in the night cycles. But if we know everyone's positions, the mafia have to spread their targets more evenly, so then we would at least have one townie to vote against the mafia during the night cycles

Point taken. I don't think it's a strong point, since if there is one townie, one scum, and a tie occurs, then the action doesn't go through, which could be considered neutral since nothing happened, or helps scum since town can't gain information/do stuff to block kills.

After thinking about it a bit, I find the whole revealing house thing neutralish. I can't figure out a way for scum to use it against town, and it would help town to track stuff easier. I don't see how it would prevent people from going after the second win though. Most of my issues lie with the fact of how people want to use that information, mostly mpolo's and Lataro's ideas (context post has my issues). The other issue is that it would reveal all the members of the doctor house, which most people don't seem to have a problem with (it just bugs me that we're risking the doctor like that), and later risks if powers would be revealed, though that risk could be minimal depending on scum strength and people number at the time. I think Az's point about paranoia about why people are voting for someone is relevant, though: people could wonder why someone is voting for someone in their own house ("is the voter scum, or do they really think that?") or against the leading house, or be prejudiced against people in their own house. In that way, the extra information could serve as wine.

by **Chandani** » Sat Jan 21, 2012 1:14 am UTC

Adam H wrote:As fearless pointed out, if there are two scum in one house, then they probably will A) not housechat and B) be in favor of claiming. Ravenclaw meets both criteria in a big way, so major FoS to Lataro and Az. (Since fearless pointed this out, I'd say if there are 2 scum in ravenclaw, fearless isn't one of them. If there's only 1 scum in ravenclaw, then fearless is as suspicious as lataro or az.)

Well, actually, Az is against claiming, unless he changed his mind after his last post. Lataro claimed for him since Az was in the same house as Lataro.
Which doesn't paint Lataro is a good light at all.

Mpolo: Thanks for the clarification. Your idea makes a lot of sense, and is definitely more in-line with what I prefer. However, depending on scum distribution, electing a player might not work out that well, like if there are two scum in a house. But that's a risk I can't find a way to avoid, so in general, your idea makes sense.

by **Chandani** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:12 pm UTC

I'm willing to vote for Lataro as well. Claiming jester in this setup is weird. It is semi-open, and GoP never mentioned doing anything like separate roles in the houses in the sign-up thread, something which I would think would be mentioned.
Also seconding what tim said.

Don't see anyone really standing out with scummy activities. I found fearless's reversal on Lataro a bit weird, since I thought they were generally supporting Lataro's ideas, but I would have to do a longer re-read than what I just did. I just found the justifications for their vote a bit weak and out of nowhere.

by **Chandani** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:24 pm UTC

If that was directed at me, I wasn't going to hammer. Just telling people I was willing to vote for Lataro when needed.
Err... and I think I need to clarify on my last post. I don't see anyone else really standing out with scummy actions.

by **Chandani** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:55 am UTC

I had a post, but then I lost it. D:

Anyway... I think fearless gave a good reason for her vote. I don't think her justification is wrong, and since it was backed up by a housemate, I'm willing to believe it for now. I don't think Az is scum, so I think the information is reliable from him, at least.
Not sure what to think about fearless... Discussion is going on, but it's flying over my head for some reason. Probably will have to do some rereads again.
What I do know is this:
1. Fearless never asked for people to claim house powers. (Last post which explicitly mentions it is here) I didn't see anything which indicated she supported the idea, either.
2. There's no mention of talking about housechats, as far as I can tell (a search on chats in fearless's posts came up empty).
3. There's been a discussion on investigations... It could be that fearless is suggesting that as town, we should investigate Lataro rather than lynching him, though at first glance I agreed with FAOT's interpretation about the implications. Not sure what to think about it.

So I'll probably keep an eye on fearless for tomorrow.

Also:
Vote: roband
as placeholder vote. I'm a bit competitive and like earning as many points as possible.

by **fearless** » Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:06 am UTC

Yay I'm excited.

Got my role.

Who is online