Claiming as an unlynchable, unkillable killer who happened to kill town day 1?
Sounds almost like a jester, hence the reason only an FOS and not a vote.
Actually, the best strategy is to ignore them if you can. If you have no viable scum candidates at the end of day 1, they might be a good alternative, but it's better to go after scum than third party.Vi wrote:I can kind of understand your motive for killing the Man of the Box, and I'm going to assume that we're not going to get more of a reason than you've given for why you chose to do it now...
Okay, I'm not particularly worried about you.
----
Chaco, why Jahudo?
Jebus, why xofelf?
@MonkeyMan, what is the best strategy to employ with Jesters?
You're willing to go along with his unrealistic claim, so automatically everyone else is?Jahudo wrote:What happens if we try to kill someone who is unlynchable? I feel like this question came up in a fl game before...
I'm willing to go along with Sera's claim for now. I don't need to know his abilities or junk, but he better not get lazy. Better not.
Vote: MonkeyMan576
I appreciate that opinion, but I disagree with it...getting scum day 1 is always the optimal strategy.Chaco wrote:Sorry to interject, but ignoring them is a losing battle. I feel it's best just to lynch them and get them out of the way, so long as it won't end the game.MonkeyMan576 wrote:Actually, the best strategy is to ignore them if you can. If you have no viable scum candidates at the end of day 1, they might be a good alternative, but it's better to go after scum than third party.
I think he might be fakeclaiming the kill in order to get lynched.Yosarian2 wrote:Um...so you think he's a jester with a daykill? Really?MonkeyMan576 wrote:FOS: Seraphim
Claiming as an unlynchable, unkillable killer who happened to kill town day 1?
Sounds almost like a jester, hence the reason only an FOS and not a vote.
Also, "let's not lynch X because he might be a jester" is a bad argument. If you think someone is a jester on day 1, you generally want to lynch them anyway.
What's scummy is expecting people to just assume you are telling the truth.Seraphim wrote:The jester speculation is IMO incrediblyscummy.
Are you voting him thinking he is a jester, lying scum, or just to test his claim?Yosarian2 wrote: I, for one, am willing to try. vote:Seraphim
So are you saying that unless a role can be proven wrong, you shouldn't be voted on or lynched?Snow_Bunny wrote:Wow... Massive fail. If you are really Kamina, you suck at it. Way to screw town.
Anyways, it is true that the giga drill breaker post could mean that he is indeed Kamina, but it could have just as well been a bluff (he could have sent his choice via PM). So, no clue there.
The claim is highly unbelievable as the role would be really broken (even if it's momentary).
Btw, I once played a game with an unlynchable townie. He was lynched day 1, but he didn't die. The day just ended with a no-lynch.
In conclusion, though Seraphim's action may seem scummy, there's really nothing to prove his role wrong (other than speculation about the setup, which isn't good).
Way to avoid my question. What level of conclusiveness would there need to be for you to vote? And WIFOM is only one element of the case against him. His actions seperate of WIFOM is scummy in an of itself.Snow_Bunny wrote:EDWOP: Screwed the post. Here's the good one:
No. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that, currently, his action is just a bunch of wifom, and thus nonconclusive for me to lay down a vote.Snow_Bunny wrote:MonkeyMan576 wrote:So are you saying that unless a role can be proven wrong, you shouldn't be voted on or lynched?Snow_Bunny wrote:Wow... Massive fail. If you are really Kamina, you suck at it. Way to screw town.
Anyways, it is true that the giga drill breaker post could mean that he is indeed Kamina, but it could have just as well been a bluff (he could have sent his choice via PM). So, no clue there.
The claim is highly unbelievable as the role would be really broken (even if it's momentary).
Btw, I once played a game with an unlynchable townie. He was lynched day 1, but he didn't die. The day just ended with a no-lynch.
In conclusion, though Seraphim's action may seem scummy, there's really nothing to prove his role wrong (other than speculation about the setup, which isn't good).
95%(or more) percent of lynches aren't based on proven fact, in my experience.
Uh, whatever. You are quick to come to conclusions. You must be the best mafia player ever.SocioPath wrote:MonkeyMan576 wrote:Sounds almost like a jester, hence the reason only an FOS and not a vote.You other awesome reactions.MonkeyMan576 wrote:Actually, the best strategy is to ignore them if you can. If you have no viable scum candidates at the end of day 1, they might be a good alternative, but it's better to go after scum than third party.
Anywho, time to find your scumbuddy.
UnvoteObvious coaching to scum buddy.Chaco wrote:Sorry to interject, but ignoring them is a losing battle. I feel it's best just to lynch them and get them out of the way, so long as it won't end the game.MonkeyMan576 wrote:Actually, the best strategy is to ignore them if you can. If you have no viable scum candidates at the end of day 1, they might be a good alternative, but it's better to go after scum than third party.
Vote: Chaco
Let's just say it would be very unlikely that both unlikely scenarios would both be true. More of a hunch than a definitive statement.Yosarian2 wrote:What? Why would you assume that?MonkeyMan576 wrote:Either he is lying about the day not ending or his is lying about being lynchproof. It would behoove us to find out which.
What's a convincing pro-town reason to kill another townie? I can't think of one. Why not wait until you have more information?Vi wrote:And before Rule 18 was clarified and thus it was only possible to attempt to lynch Seraphim OR lynch someone else, would you say that his lynch was the only option?Yosarian2 101 wrote:Well, it is. Duh. If he's telling the truth, then we lynch him, find out __ he's telling the truth, and then find scum. It's simply the correct move here.Vi wrote:For spearheading this lynch like it's the only option we have.Cobalt 97 wrote:Vi, why do you want to lynch Yos?
(Also, nice lack of "if" )
Did you read my post? I specifically said that I did NOT think Seraphim is a likely to be VI who'd daykill someone and then lie about his role as town, which is part of the reason we SHOULD lynch him, because I think he's probably either telling the truth or lying scum.That and calling out Seraphim like there's an out-there chance he's a n00by inexperienced player and not someone who has been on this site for about as long as I have (not to mention someone who /ins for a lot of bastard games).I don't read anyone else's posts and I do just fine
I can see a pro-Town motive for killing Boxman. Contrastwhich is so ambiguously closed-minded that I find it scummy.Yos2 79 wrote:On the other hand, there'sabsolutly no reasonfor a pro-town day-vig to vig early in the day instead of later, when he might actually hit scum. None at all.
His actions so far this game would make the most sense if he's a scum day-killer, like a day-SK or a mafia with a one-shot kill, running a gambit to try to use his daykill to "confirm" himself.That's not the only explination,but just based on his daykill and the weak explination he gave for it (not to mention his SK-claim before that), it makes the most sense.
Why do you believe this?Jahudo wrote:Just to clarify my stance, I believe that hammering Seraphim will do nothing. Day will not end, fl will shrug and say to keep playing, and then we'll all unvote and find scum.
Now let's here more from Jebus, xofelf and Cacho. They really haven't given an opinion on Sera yet.
Why do you think he is scum again?Vi wrote:Snow_Bunny 131 wrote:Didn't Vi used to have a FE avatar as well (Mia, IIRC)?
Any roads, I still think it's a waste of time to lynch Sera because of the kill. But well, that's just me.
They actually made a high-quality version of Mia's OA. Official fanservice is go :arrow:
Seraphim has definitely been lynched by now; talking about it at this point is basically pointless.
Now that that's over with I think we need to hurry up and find scum already. Like Chaco, specifically.
I am not advocating a no lynch. I just want to see what happens if I vote her.SocioPath wrote:Please describe this "one way" and "one path" to me.MonkeyMan576 wrote:Your insistance that we only play one way and only use one path isn't very logical or pro town.
FL treats lynches of non-players, whether its the mod, or just not a player in the game, as a NO LYNCH.Cobalt wrote:I can't imagine the day ending on a no-lynch if we reach majority on a non-player. Wouldn't the votes just not count?
SO STOP THE NO LYNCH DISCUSSION
UNVOTE
VOTE: COBALT
TMI.Vi wrote:Either it's a fake post restriction - in which case we immediately kill him the first time he tries anything funny with it - or it's a genuine post restriction, in which case if nothing else it's entertaining.Cobalt 205 wrote:It's 9 pages in, nobody is obvscum. He's a good start, though.
Vi? You said you would comment on him?
At this time I'm on the fence about SP; half his posts are things I can fully agree with and the other half (like this most recent one) aren't. I'm disappointed that he didn't bother to try and confirm whether he had a post restriction; some mods say "LOL you have a post restriction and can't tell anyone" which is neither fun nor works (as in SP should be able to find a way around that stipulation).
Even so offering to off SocioPath purely on the basis of having a post restriction doesn't change my mind about Chaco at all. The only thing that would give me pause is a role in this setup, whichI'm intimately familiar with(read: it almost got me lynched regardless of what I did in the topic) and came from a setup that forbiddanlight is not only guaranteed to know about but would likely steal from. (Giant's Mask btw)
Nothing like some OMGUS. Convinent that you had enough time to dodge my original question, but not really answer it, and then were V/LA when pressed, and now conveniently enough you target me, after I've voted you, but you don't have time to elaborate.Snow_Bunny wrote:Sorry, which question again?MonkeyMan576 wrote:Snow Bunny never answered my question, so something fishy there...
Unvote:
Vote: Snow Bunny
You do know I was V/LA, right?MonkeyMan576 wrote:
Snow Bunny is at the top of my scum list right now for lurking.
I'm getting scum vibes from MM right now, but I still don't have much time to elaborate that now.
About SP, he's not striking me as scum, and the post restriction seems real to me. In general, I'm getting a townish vibe from him.
@Chaco: Why exactly SP as your would-be target? Just because his role, which you guess?
Snow_Bunny wrote:Sorry, which question again?MonkeyMan576 wrote:Snow Bunny never answered my question, so something fishy there...
Unvote:
Vote: Snow Bunny
SnowBunny wrote: No. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that, currently, his action is just a bunch of wifom, and thus nonconclusive for me to lay down a vote.
Monkeyman576 wrote: Way to avoid my question.What level of conclusiveness would there need to be for you to vote?And WIFOM is only one element of the case against him. His actions seperate of WIFOM is scummy in an of itself.
I already answered that. You're beating a dead horse.Cobalt wrote:I saw Monkey's vote, remembered that the last vote count had Chaco at 4, but forgot Socio had unvoted in one of his posts. Counting mistake.
Why aren't we pressuring SP? His post restriction seems to make it close to impossible to communicate effectively. I find it more likely that a really severe PR is faked.
Also, I don't think MM denied placing the L-1 vote after I mentioned it. Then he says he was aware of the VC. So why did he call for a claim if he knew it was not L-1?
It's easy to pin somebody as acting "odd" when they are under the microscope the whole game. Being active early game isn't scummy, lurking is.Yosarian2 wrote:...what?Jahudo wrote: It's either Yos or snow as they're now pushing the Monkey lynch, who is a red herring and has looked like an easy target all day.
Quite a few people have voted or expressed suspicion on Monkeyman, Jahudo, because he's been acting scummy-odd all game. I find it odd for you to single me out.
Anyway, I dislike that daykill. If there are two daykillers, they're probably not both town.
He was (probably) daykilled...no one has taken responsibility. It sucks that we are minus a double voter though.xofelf wrote:okie dokie.. i have read the things i missed.. and my brain did explode... how in the hell did SP die? twould be nice to figure that out... i'm gonna have to do another run through.
But, that's gonna have to be in a couple hours... my attention has been dragged elsewhere, yet again.
Of course, SB doesn't actually have the time or inclination to actually build a case against me(or post anything useful whatsoever), so the only thing she has going for her is that she thinks she believes I'm scum more than I believe she's scum.Snow_Bunny wrote:Sounds about damn right to me! I'm that confident Monkey is scum.Jahudo wrote:I'll trust you only if you're right. But if he flips town, then we can't trust you. And if we can't trust you, you must be lying scum. And if you're lying scum, we lynch you tomorrow. That sound about right?Snow_Bunny wrote:Monkey is scum. Trust me.
This is crazy talk. Only scum know for sure who is in the town and who is in the mafia. So to suggest that me not guessing that Kamina is town, makes me scum is not only absurd, but super scummy on your part. It implies that you DO know who is in the town and the mafia. And if you DO know, then you MUST be scum.Snow_Bunny wrote:Well, it's your fault you give me such an epic-less character.DA MOD wrote:Hmmph, do you realize how painful it is for me to read posts from a sad, weak, uninspired person like you? Without hot blood, your posts are harder to read than it is to swim through molasses
That's because I knew you didn't have the hot blood to handle a REAL role, you nonconforming passive wench.
Mod note: Just to be clear I am not commenting on Snow Bunny's actual role whatsoever, whether she has an awesome role or a not so awesome one. I would not appreciate speculation along these lines
That's a common problem in theme games: mass name claim. It can break most games in an instant if scum is not wise enough. Any roads, why are you asking me this? MM didn't supposed Kamina was town, thus, I'm guessing he doesn't have a Dai Gurren Dan role. It would have been obvious otherwise that Kamina is town. Also, there can't be a TTGL without Kamina. That would be, like, crazy.Jahudo wrote: @Snow_Bunny: Do you think scum aren’t given safeclaims from people in team Dai Gurren? If so, wouldn’t the game be breakable by a character claim?
Do you think only MM was going for an easy mislynch on the voting miscount, or do you think Cobalt or someone else was in on it too?
Or the mod doesn't have things in place to prevent...problems like these from arising ^-^. I'm confident that a massclaim would lead you nowhere. I also do NOT advocate attempting it.
Yes, I also think MM was going for an easy mislynch there. I've seen cases in previous games where mafia have tried that early on, based on a bad votecount.
Snow_Bunny is an active lurker. She's not actually posting any content, and is scummy.Yosarian2 wrote:Chaco: Please don't instant lynch anyone. Your ability, if used to end the day early without a lynch consensuss, only hurts the town, becuase it just means we get less wagon info then we should.
Because for the moment I'd rather be voting a lurker. Activity in this game sucks, and it was especally bad when I cast my lurker-vote. Town must never allow the game to stall out, ever, or town loses. It just happened to me again in a recently completed game, Warewolves of Millers Hollow.Vi wrote: There's a three-person wagon on Snow_Bunny right now. Why aren't you on it?
90% of her posts have no actual content besides saying that I'm scummy. She only gave the supposed slip reason when pressed.Yosarian2 wrote:That's not true either. She's actually been trying quite hard to get us to lynch you, for one thing. You may think that's scummy, but it's certainly content, by any sense of the word.MonkeyMan576 wrote:
Snow_Bunny is an active lurker. She's not actually posting any content, and is scummy.