The Manor: Chzo Mafia (Game Over!)

[Lamont_Cranston]

If, for the "good" of the town it has to be drunk, I can only advocate a total and dedicated random assignment with the criteria specified before the role.

[Lamont_Cranston]

* roll

[Sajin]

@321Lamont- Anser the last question please.

@All Would a diceroll 1-19 by hohum and the drink be given to the result as according to post 1 be acceptable? Type /agree if you find this ok.

[Lamont_Cranston]

I could say the same thing about a Vig shot- The vig could kill a townie. Does this mean the Vig should not shoot? The lynch could lynch a townie. Are you advocating no lynch then?

A lynch is an informed decision to reveal the role and remove from the game a particular player. The results are almost 100% guaranteed.

Giving an item to someone where the results are unknown is a total

crap shoot

, emphasis on

CRAP

.

I'm not a big fan of vigging without a concrete reason and I am a HUGE fan of a fully informed village lynch.

[Sajin]

unvote: vote Lamont

I want to see in the confines of your argument how you are not advocating no lynching today.

[Amished]

First off, @TAJO: read the drop post again.

This is the first

randomised

item drop of the game.

IT IS NOT BALANCED TO BE PRO-TOWN OR ANTI-TOWN. It is a random drop, probably from a list of potential drops that might come throughout the rest of the game. Therefore your statement that it's pro-town is overly optimistic. While items can make the game swingy, who's to say the next one won't make it swing the other way, or bring it back. Or that item be neutral, and one of the next will reduce the effects of an earlier item?

On a theme note: Who here has played/watched the chzo/x days a stranger series to be relatively familiar with them? I've played them once, and I'm trying to remember something from the 2nd? game I believe.

This isn't italicized/red for mod color, nor green for a mod request so hopefully this won't be a problem....

Unfortunately, since I've been gone all day I've missed a fair amount (which I'm kinda glad for since we're all being active (gj guys and gals)). The way I see it, the only people that should be relatively unafraid of the decanter are VT's (or weak pro-town PR's) or people that know the effects. Therefore I do not want to risk our power roles as we almost certainly have more than mafia, and I disagree vehemently with any random force of drinking the liquid. Another side point that I wanted to make here: not choosing to drink it is a null-tell in my book. I can see both pro-town and pro-scum motivations for not drinking it. While I believe it to be a null-tell for not wanting to drink it, I feel it's a *very slight* townie tell to volunteer, while anti-town to force people to drink it.

@Sajin: I didn't think Lamont's position was that muddled. He likes having a majority weigh in on somebody scumminess/proof of role (lynching), but is wary of one person being manipulated or not seeing the whole picture. Especially in this case, where the results are an unknown quantity.

[Sajin]

Yes but in mafia results are an unknown quantity quite often. Which is the point (especially with this theme). Roles like millars and bus drivers mess up certainty. In a game like this especially, certainty is a luxury.

His position on why we should not drink the elixer (because of the uncertainty) would lead me to believe he would advocate a no lynch (because of the uncertainty) with the same principles.

Also- Why did you feel the need to defend him?

[Naomi_Saotome]

we need to generate discussion. how does everyone feel about no lynches?

Anyone who advocates NL Day 1 is advocating an advantage for the Mafi. Basically its like saying, "Let's pretend D1 never happened".

Why would you even think of advocating this?

Actually Lamont has stated that it would be a bad idea to not lynch day one

I think Sajin, he finds you to be scum

[Amished]

@Sajin: It's not for Naomi's thoughts (while I do find you to be scum), but I defend those who have *CRAP* arguments put against them. Everything I've pointed out that you've said should have been reasoned out/read a little more fully imo. Lamont's position was crystal clear to me in this most recent case. I felt your position against hohum was unreasonable as well (making him try to guess whether it'd be beneficial or detrimental, when I clearly don't think that we can). You've also miscredited me with a quote (the 50% thing) and all of this add up to somebody that's not paying attention to the game and/or not thinking about it. I think a more common pattern than me "defending" Lamont is me criticizing your arguments and apparently playstyle.

Furthermore, I was talking about the uncertainty of the effects, when we have no evidence one way or another to decide on what the potion will do. Millers, bus drivers, commuters, they're all *predictable* yet uncertain. This decanter fails the predictable part of those situations. Lynches are often predictable things (if not *always* the role of the lynch, though it can be sometimes with a cop result or whatever), especially if it's not under the imminent shadow of a deadline. With that you can judge the wagoners/voters much more clearly, further dividing the rift between the two situations. Either way, there's still an amount of certainty with a lynch: you can be certain they're going to die (except in the rare and obvious case of unlynchable). That effect can overall have a positive outcome on the town, even if the person was a townie. Getting rid of a scummy looking player, a lurker, or confirming a roleclaim are all pro-town outcomes from a townie lynch. There's easily much less uncertainty in a lynch than giving a random person (that you suggested to do) a random effect, while on top of that not having anybody be accountable for the action. Hell, a dayvig is less uncertain than doing this.

[Sajin]

@Amished-
You did bring up 50/50 first, post 242, your the one that is misrepresenting me.


Ah, but the bus driver/Millar are only predictable if you know they are in the setup. If you do not know the setup, much like our decanter case then the possibility of them existing messes up the certainty of an action. The decanter is just like the aforementioned situation because we do not know what it does. Does this mean we do not account for it? No.


Overallpoint- Why would you want to throw away something that is potentially verifiable?

[Pablo Molinero]

Just caught up. Sorry for being away, folks.

The discussion on percentage in the decanter is worthless speculation. Any time numbers are brought into mafia I cringe and immediately hate those who try and use them.

I find it odd that hohum says he's waiting to use it on someone "who he doesn't like".

Sajin is trying way too hard for something that isn't there around pg 10-11 when he's prodding like hell at hohum. Those votes on him are warranted.

I'm up for drinking it if a volunteer is needed. Even though it's a bleedin' Chzo game (*gulp*), I'm in the "What the hell, right? Tally ho!" camp. I'm also for volunteers, since I think randomzing is pretty anti-town, because if we hit a power role, it could mean bad things for us.

I've played the X-Days Series, and remember the theme of the manor's killings passing out/being possessed and killing people. Great fun. As for any liquid, there was cola in Trilby's notes (game #3) that when you drank sent you to the shadow realm (didn't kill you, but things got dangerous/freaky). Hrm, despite all that, I'm still damned curious.

[Devestation]

Sajin: How do you plan to verify whats in the decanter?

[Nyx]

If, for the "good" of the town it has to be drunk, I can only advocate a total and dedicated random assignment with the criteria specified before the role.

I agree totally with you and forgot that by rolling before deciding if we should drink it or not it's corruptable.
On the other hand I think we should force Hohum to follow the decision that we as group decide on before he makes his own. For obvious reasons.

[Sajin]

Sajin: How do you plan to verify whats in the decanter?

I didn't say it definitely was, only that it could be. Depending what the result was.

[Amished]

Then I suggest that you make your statements a bit more clear, Sajin. At that time I thought it would either be good or bad (not a *potential* combo of both). Therefore, since we don't know what it does, it's just as likely to be good as bad, no? Your logic is still bad.

And you don't know if a dayvig/serial killer(well, this one is debatable )/jailkeeper/paranoid gun owner/whatever is in the game. What the hell is your point? As soon as they claim if they're in the game, we can deduce their past and future actions from it, while also having it fit on a predictable course. Taking this is a one time deal. We do not know what's in it, we'll most likely never have an opportunity to use this exact thing again, so it's both random and unpredictable.

So you're asking me why I want to throw away something that *could be* verifiable, when it *could be* unverifiable, while it also *could be* very bad, more likely to hit town than scum (probably no matter what method we use), and if we do use it randomly we *could* lose a town power-role. Who's to also say that it won't hit scum, be beneficial, but all they get is a PM and they can either lie about the contents or make it appear more pro-town when they're obviously not.

However, with 5? people that either volunteered or supported forcing it on somebody else, I'm not as against having somebody drink it voluntarily as I was before. It's possible that all of the volunteers are scum, but I highly doubt it. In that case, I view it as something selectively random. While I don't trust anything in a Chzo theme, it could very well be beneficial (I'll be the first to admit that I don't know what it does). Therefore with the chance that it's beneficial, and that I don't believe all the people volunteering to drink it are scum it's a fair chance to help the town, while also leaving the chance if any scum are there to still help the town.

Finally, would you be willing to drink the decanter voluntarily?

@Pablo: I realized what I was thinking of: In the hotel one Trilby took pills (not any sort of drink) to keep things "normal". I had taken a more overall view to the series, and not just focused on the first one in the manor. Even on the ship, people were possessed, and while everyone saw blood, nobody ever really drank it. There isn't much precedence in the series for this, so it'll be more of a mod creation.

[Stephoscope]

@321Lamont- Anser the last question please.

@All Would a diceroll 1-19 by hohum and the drink be given to the result as according to post 1 be acceptable? Type /agree if you find this ok.

/agree

But I would still support forcing it on terrified Lamont, with majority's approval

[Xtoxm]

/agree

[Lamont_Cranston]

As a side note, the following people have become semi-lurkers:

Unofficial
Nueva
Malkon

(100% lurk)

Alabaska

(sickness verified?)

Kratos
Pablo

For my opinion of the performance of these players, please see my wiki.

[Amished]

Umm, I'm not seeing your Wiki, Lamont >_>

[Stephoscope]

Umm, I'm not seeing your Wiki, Lamont >_>

Well duh, it requires electricity.

[Amished]

.... way to be useful Steph.

I click on my wiki link, it takes me to my page. I click on yours Steph, and it says you're male. I click on Lamont's and it says it doesn't exist yet.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Amish, I think at this point whether Mafi want to drink it or not is major WIFOM.

What do you think about the potential abuse factor that could be possible? Does it bother you enough to use a random assignment instead?

Frankly with all this confusion on just trying to apply logic to its use, I think your best argument is not to use it and the following players have advocated this:

Devastation
Hohum
Amish Ed
Naomi
Lamont_Cranston

Just want the record to be clear because I am in 100% agreement with the fact that the town is more likely to be harmed by its use.

I only posted the random assignment because I was going to sleep.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Ok my wiki has been deleted and this does not appear in their logs.

I won't be using the Wiki feature anymore...

Anyway, my wiki stated that if a person is a semi-lurker (posting content just frequently enough to avoid replacement and said content is not analysis which helps the town) I will advocate their lynch mercilessly. Total lurkers I will let replace however.

[Pyromaniac]

We cannot do random. This is not because I was selected by the random but, even if shadow knight was selected I would say the same thing. There is one reason for this, the possibility of whomever does the random being scum. We would not get a random result, we would get a result that DEFIANTLY did not say to give it to one of their scumbuddies. There is only one thing we know for sure about each others roles, assuming hohum's role does not say that the goblet is not harmful, if he is scum then I am town. We cannot trust anybodies random. I think that the person who has the most votes, with FoS counting as half a vote, should be forced to drink it. I do not know much about Chzo manor but, they would probably not give us two lynches. Now, I also doubt that they would give us a broken ability. It would be bad if it gave some good ability and we guessed right about the scum. I would be willing to risk that. Anyways, it seems more likely that this is supposed to balance the village in a detrimental way.

[Xtoxm]

Pyro: Diceroll function IS random, it cannot be mainpulated. If it has been fixed, it says so.