Mini 948 - Victorian Vampire - Game Over

[cruelty]

omgus

vote spyrex

(actually for being in almost all my recent games).

zang if i had a second vote it'd be for you for the same reason.

[cruelty]

early bandwagon, let's go

[cruelty]

i don't see how a flaming torch is of much use at all. a pitchfork is a much more effective tool.

unvote, vote zang

[cruelty]

a flaming torch is a stick with a flaming rag on it. a pitchfork is a multi-pronged tool of stabby ecstacy. it's a no-brainer.

[cruelty]

unvote, vote ooba

Don't really like the early-game, hopefully this will move it on a bit.

[cruelty]

It is quite possible that

the only way to answer for part A is to claim

or to make a hell of a defense.

Eh?

[cruelty]

Spyrex what's tech?

[cruelty]

yeah, but wtf does tech mean?

[cruelty]

Tend to agree with Spyrex, the contradiction between Josh's question and latter statements is troubling. Troubling enough to

unvote, vote Josh

.

I'm embracing the ability to throw my vote around in this game. It's liberating.

Also Spyrex you seem different this game.

I'm guessing it's your role because there hasn't really been any occupation named innkeeper since the 1800's

Honestly bro you crack me the fuck up. Having you in my games makes it a much more cheerful experience for me.

[cruelty]

I'm embracing the ability to throw my vote around in this game. It's liberating.

you're not used to being able to move your vote around?

no, i have the ability to but don't - normally i'm a very cautious voter. decided to change it up for a couple of recent games.

[cruelty]

Ok, wow. If you guys think that me warning Darox not to claim (which, admittedly, was overly cautious) makes me scum, I don't know what to tell you.

It's not that you didn't want him to claim, it's that your desire for him not to claim came after you asked for more info. Like you suddenly realised how bad you looked.

I'm not sure why you think scum would go out of their way to prevent claiming when it only helps them, but maybe you have thought about this more than I have.

Because it looks bad. Also, as I said, I don't believe your initial intent was to prevent the claim, in fact, quite the opposite.

Yes, I was one of the original people who asked Darox to clarify about Innkeeper. But then, after I posted, I realized that was a bad idea to ask, and so I warned him, as we have discussed.

"Oh shit, this looks bad. I think I'll now assume a contradictory position to make myself look better".

As for my vote, the three people on my wagon had totally valid reasons to be there, though of course I think the reasons are incorrect. Cruelty, however, chimed in just to say he agreed with SpyreX's crazy "point", and threw his vote in too, in what I think is a huge opportunistic bandwagon vote.

This would be a much more valid point if my vote wasn't justified by your actions. Should I have made up some other reason to vote for you? Am I not allowed to agree that (X) is scummy and is voteworthy? Get outta here son.

I know I'm going to get accused of OMGUS here, but

unvote, vote cruelty

. Please note that I don't have any problem with the other people on my wagon, and so this is not an OMGUS vote.

lol?

- that doesn't make it not an OMGUS vote.
- you're extraordinarily worried about it being OMGUS (really man, it's 2010, we're lax about that shit).

[cruelty]

I'm embracing the ability to throw my vote around in this game. It's liberating.

Your softclaim of VT is noted.

you're reading way too deeply into that.

[cruelty]

I'm here, I'm just waiting for someone to say something.


At this point I'm happy with my vote on Josh for his contradiction and I'm dubious of Magna's softclaim quote.

[cruelty]

Which do you think is more likely: That I'm a townie who misspoke, or that I am literally the worst scum player ever?

Exaggerating the situation a little, aren't we?

[cruelty]

if you're exaggerating then the question becomes invalid.

i think you're scum (at least, you're the scummiest thus far, with the caveat that it's still earlyish day 1) that made a fairly understandable (but glaring) mistake.

[cruelty]

If you actually thought I had killed Josh, your reaction should have been of curiosity to see what Josh turns up as. The very fact that you said "Oh shit" and proceeded to vote me

gives me the impression that you already knew his town alignment.

This is a stretch (at best).


Having said that I see the contradiction you're pointing to and acknowledge it, I just can't find it in my heart to vote for Zang. This sort of thing is typical of him; he's a classic VI.


I've never seen that gambit before but not a fan, seems unethical. -1 cool point m'man.

Of course, who am I to stand in the way of a bus. Only problem is that everything in this tryst points to Josh being a more valuable scum-PR.

You're implying that the kill gambit was in fact a smokescreen for the real gambit; pulling the heat off Josh? (That's rhetorical, I know the answer, this is more for future reference).

Prod received ... tax season is coming to an end and I've been working too long hours this last week.

Post with content coming Sunday in the afternoon. Till then sleep.

Noted. Sunday afternoon.


@Y2; is your vote solely because of his lack of contribution?

[cruelty]

If you were really dubious you would have said something back with your first response. Any reason why you waited until after the hue and cry from Sprex, Darox and easjo before expressing it?

I did say something, two posts later.

Aside from the fact that cool points mean nothing what about the play seems unethical to you? It was a pressure tactic.

I don't know how relevant this question is, but I'll answer and then be done with the subject. I think there's a fairly distinct line to be drawn between lying as part of the game (fakeclaims etc) to lying with the express purpose of making a player think they're

out

of the game.

There's a difference between lying (and outwitting) somebody, and abusing mechanics (that we generally trust in) to gain an unfair advantage.

[cruelty]

bleh i'm having real problems getting the site to work, this game in particular is refusing to load a lot of the time.


getting sick of the back and forth between spyrex and josh. that said, i don't get a town/town vibe from the argument (hence my vote remaining on josh).

i'm not really sure what y2 is up to, i see his posts, i read his posts but i come away feeling slightly dissatisfied. not sure why, it seems to be difficult to articulate. slight discomfort noted, though.

also not real thrilled with darox at all. there's a lot of statements without explanation, rhetorical questions, questions with no follow up.

this aside i'm having difficulty working out what's important, i'm not up to much day 1 (have real trouble getting any sort of read without facts (read: night kills/actions) to base things on) so this isn't anything new to me, but this game seems to be meandering along with no real rhyme or reason.

in conclusion, lynch josh.

[cruelty]

huh you're a kiwi too


the impression i get is that you ask questions to look busy as opposed to genuinely seeking answers.

[cruelty]

yeah i'm in chch, easjo.


@ooba, is that list in order (would you prefer to lynch spyrex over josh?)

However I still hold that him asking for the more info on the role and then backtracking shows townishness. I'd put a SpyreX lynch over a Josh one.

noted for future reference.

[cruelty]

oh josh i'm going to the supermarket later, i'll pick up some tissues while i'm there.

[cruelty]

don't think it was a hammer. in fact, i'm pretty sure you know it wasn't too.

[cruelty]

don't think it was a hammer. in fact, i'm pretty sure you know it wasn't too.

I'm pretty sure if I knew it wasn't I wouldn't have posted that

mm, yeah.

[cruelty]

the f is a weak vigi?



i also thought traitors were a one-way relationship, but eh, not gonna get carried away with that.

i guess the interesting thing about the traitor flip is that it doesn't give us anything to work with re: the wagon, because if it was a one-way relationship then there's a 50% chance scum thought they were lynching town. imo this was the worst possible role reveal because we don't really have anything concrete to work with.

having said that,

vote: magna

[cruelty]

sorry, thought i'd posted recently here.

ooba i aint gonna answer that right now.


not really feeling the darox/cmar battle, it seems like darox is being a little pedantic - i sort of understand what cmar was saying, although it was a dumb way to phrase it.

Hahaha

Unvote, Vote: CMAR

Did a quick rundown on Josh's ISO.

Guess who is never mentioned?

Not once. Quoted once that I saw, but never talked about.

this also works in reverse, there's a couple of posts early on where he defends josh/attacks slaine hayes (specifically his iso 25). although, it is noted that CMAR did entirely avoid the whole josh rolefishing issue.


also noted is this:

MORE IS TO COME! I don't have time for the rest

so obviously there was more you intended to say about slaine hayes. but;

Is this not a hammer? Mod?

then

He was replaced. Providing more would be kind of ridiculous since it'd be hard for him to respond.

this is untrue. if you've got a read that is so strong it persists onto his replacement, then it's absolutely worth mentioning. nobody special hasn't really done anything of note since replacing in, so slaine hayes's contribution is still fairly relevant.

i think i'll

unvote, vote CMAR

and see what falls out.


oh yeah, ps:

Yes, I think that everyone is picking at straws and completely misinterpreting with the Josh-Spyrex argument and the whole thing is rather ridiculous

hmm??

[cruelty]

i feel like this has stagnated.

how does everyone feel about a CMAR speedlynch to spice things up?

[cruelty]

well i guess that'd depend on the reason for my prod - was i bored with the stagnation, or did my inactivity cause said stagnation?

[cruelty]

why is it unreasonable that josh as scum (and knowing who his partners were) wouldn't want to incriminate them?

it seems to me to be a perfectly valid point. logical and reasonable.

You responded to this point by saying "Of course Josh knew who the scum was, he was a doctor."

This may be true, but is irrelevant, because what I was saying is that the other scum probably didn't know who HE was

. I don't know if you read my post backwards, SpyreX, or if you deliberately misunderstood me."

this is what i was looking for - you can concede that yes, josh (probably, possibly) knew who the other scum was/is (a stance which you border on contradicting in post 435). if he never mentioned you, then it seems to me to be a reasonable conclusion that you're either so townie that he thought he had no chance of getting you lynched, or he didn't want you lynched.


oh and to clear this up:

Yes, I thought that was a hammer. I have no idea what that is meant to show.

the point wasn't that you thought it was a hammer, it's that you promised a case, disappeared for 5 days and then came back and didn't pick up where you left off. still haven't, to be fair.

i think a case against slaine is still valid, the playerslot still exists so even though he can't defend himself i'd still like to see what you've got, and how it has or hasn't been resolved by NS's play.

[cruelty]

]
So once I finish posting my case, you have no reason to vote me? Sounds good. With this in mind, no one hammer please. Actually, I'd appreciate it if one person could unvote that way I can't be quick hammered, yet the pressure is still on me.

nah, once you post your case nobody will have a reason -not- to vote you. your potential use will be exhausted.

[cruelty]

not sure what you want me to respond to. also not sure what's wrong about pressuring a wagon on a guy i think is scum.

i thought magna's post was dubious but given i had no real reason to be suspicious of him at the time, it didn't seem worth getting into.

Why didn’t you vote CMAR here? Subtle pressure without committing to the wagon.

that was less about pressure and more about wanting an explanation. which i never got. forgot about that, good one. there's another couple armloads of wood for CMARs pyre.

(as for why didn't i vote, shrug, probably would have if josh hadn't imploded a couple days later, i was holding off for an answer).



also lol @ bringing up my speedlynch post. world's most brazen scum, right here. gimme a break.

[cruelty]

it'll never happen

[cruelty]

mod can we get a prob on easjo

[cruelty]

mod can we get a prob on easjo

The only person we have a "prob" with is you ..

touche.

Would like to point out the similarity of "scum wifom" in the following two posts:

Which do you think is more likely: That I'm a townie who misspoke, or that I am literally the worst scum player ever?

also lol @ bringing up my speedlynch post. world's most brazen scum, right here. gimme a break.

lol, fair point. i think contextually the two are different though. i'm not trying to present my original post (speedlynch cmar) in a false light, i -would- like CMAR lynched and i'm not trying to sneak away from a slip up.

[cruelty]

yep. i'm aware that saying this means literally zero, but i wasn't actually trying to defend the point, was just vaguely amused at you using it to tie me to the skeward.

[cruelty]

d to posting as my other account, which has a strong personality and an established rep.

yawn.


incidentally to belatedly answer your question, i don't really want to vote ns today. i want a cmar lynch, i'll only move my vote to ns to ensure a lynch, and it will be done very grudgingly.

[cruelty]

- cruelty, does not comment about NS over the last four pages. His only post states that "He would only vote NS grudingly". Surprise, surprise ..

it's unreasonable to not be thrilled about lynching someone other than your strongest scumread?

i'll humour you guys and look into NS a bit deeper over the weekend, see if i see what you're seeing.

[cruelty]

cmar stop quoting giant posts it's fucking annoying when you're just adding an inane comment at the bottom.

like i said i'm kinda sorta too busy to add serious content right now (irl drama) but i am reading and staying up to date. i'll post updated thoughts over the next day or two.

[cruelty]

I think that I've pretty much proved my towniness with my Role PM quote,

lol what?

What do you mean mod confirmed scum role? I don't remember any of that.

facepalm.

[cruelty]

unvote, vote VV

L1.

btw guys i have to apologise for my lack of content, i really didn't want to say anything/bring rl into the game but a close family member was diagnosed with cancer last week and i'm kinda struggling with it a bit. i'll stay in the game and get active, but the last week or so has been pretty tough. i'm not deliberately lurking i'm just not particularly motivated at the moment. i'll get my activity back up this week.

[cruelty]

fine with massclaim.

[cruelty]

i don't care what way it's done, i'd just prefer we didn't fuck around and drag it out.


also not a big fan of scumlists, so given the choice i'd prefer popcorn.

[cruelty]

Welcome to Victorian Vampire! I suggest you add the topic to your Watch list and read over the rules.

You are Zaffeta the Gypsy. An ancient curse pulls at you; if killed, your soul will be lost. However, in return each night you may invoke the mystic power of the ancient Tarot; the cards may reveal the darkest sins of another player of your choice. You win with town.

Please reply to this message with the name of your role to confirm that you have read the rules. Good luck!

ie: cop.

investigated:
yosarian n1 (guilty, but died and was miller)
spyrex n2 (inno)


magna.

[cruelty]

one of magna/spyrex = scum, clearly there wouldn't be 4 weak vigis; 3 makes more sense in my mind.

the reason i investigated spyrex last night was a vague gut uneasiness, which is still there. i'm not sure why, but it is what it is.

clearly voting him would be a mistake today given the innocent result, so i think that i would prefer to ferret out darox/ooba/skeward (i think that zang is inno).


i'm not going to get into it right now, i have to quickly check other games then go into work, but i'll have a proper look at it tomorrow. this is more of a heads up about what i'm thinking.

[cruelty]

because we can use the vigis to clear/incriminate you.


if all three of you shoot at magna tonight (which a pro-town magna should have no issue with), then his flip (inno or guilty) will basically confirm you.

meaning today we can focus on the three amigos.


that was my initial thought, anyway. i think it makes sense (feel free to poke holes).

[cruelty]

i can't conceive that there'd be 3 vigi-millers + 2 scum in the game, that'd be bordering on bastard modding.

i'm not prepared to clear spyrex, i'd prefer we vigi'd magna and see what happens tomorrow.

i also don't want to investigate one of the other vigis, because if i get a guilty that has absolutely no benefit for town at all.

eg: i investigate magna, he flips guilty, we're back to miller vs godfather. if he flips innocent we're fucked anyway i guess.


this is moot, today i want to lynch one of ooba/skeward/darox. not sure which i like spyrex's points re: skeward but i'm not going to blindly follow. need to think about it.

[cruelty]

hmm why would i be lying as town?

also if you believe my claim does it really make sense for there to be (at least) 3 millers in the game? 3!?

[cruelty]

I think that each weak vig should kill whoever he thinks is scum out of the pool of weak vigs, since I agree that four is unlikely. I'm against lynching any of them today

...


Unvote; Vote SpryeX

i mean it's a fairly blatant contradiction, regardless of the gooey chocolaty centre of the post.

it's not like you at any point in the post pointed to a specific point and said ok, this is where i change my mind, spyrex clearly isn't a vigi and has to be scum.

[cruelty]

i read your post, i'm saying there isn't a really believable eureka moment in there.

7 left

1 lynch today
2 kills tonight

puts us at mylo tomorrow

or

1 lynch today
1 kill tonight (vigis no-kill)

gives us another mislynch before lylo


we need to discuss our best play tonight as well. do we wanna try and end the game mob-style or would people prefer to lynch?


preview edit:

zang it's somewhat irrelevant as we lose the ability to vigi after tonight anyway (it'd be far too big a gamble to vigi with 4 players alive).

[cruelty]

why would we no-lynch today?

[cruelty]

ok


we lynch skeward today (or whoever, but i'm leaning skeward)

magna and sprex shoot each other


zang flips a coin and shoots one of the two. this is pretty crucial, if he shoots at magna who doesn't die, then clearly spyrex is scum, and vice versa.

meanwhile i'll be investigating one of ooba and darox (or magna should skeward flip scum).



spyrex is not a roleblocker, so if skeward flips roleblocker we're golden. whoever zang decides will flip, if he hits inno then we can lynch the other for the

win.

if skeward flips town, then uhh

we go into tomorrow with zang probably/possibly blocked and 2 town down (probably me + skeward).

it'll be 5v2 lylo.



i

think

that works. zang not revealing who he's going to kill i think forces whichever it is out of spyrex/magna to kill the other and hope zang was shooting with them.

or they can shoot zang and gamble that zang didn't shoot them (i think vig kills > scum kills?), gives us a 50/50 either way and means scum can't really be 100% happy with their kill.

any other alternatives?

[cruelty]

isn't that basically what i just said?

[cruelty]

vote: skeward

zang you're up.

[cruelty]

frustrating

hate gfs ;/


i thought once skeward flipped that we had it, that there was no way there'd be a mafia roleblocker as well. alas.


also i have to apologize to town, my head really wasn't in this game at all.