Mini 948 - Victorian Vampire - Game Over

[Darox]

Darox, you really should not claim or tell us anything about your role, even the flavor, unless you really have to.

Why?

[JoshTheStampede]

Darox, you really should not claim or tell us anything about your role, even the flavor, unless you really have to.

Why?

Well, if you mean "Why shouldn't I claim?", it's because claiming tells the mafia who you are, particularly if you are claiming a power role.

If you mean "Why shouldn't I tell you about my role flavor?", it's because the flavor may give clues to the role's actual game function, and it's basically softclaiming.

Now, I don't know what the heck an "Innkeeper" role would do if that is what you were claiming, but I was advising against explaining further unless you really think it would help the town by doing so, which it usually wouldn't.

[SpyreX]

Ok, slight derail for a moment because woosh.

Tech is a statement normally signifying sarcasm. Like, if I said "I am the hoppy bunny" and then the next post someone asked who I am a proper reply would be "See above. Reading is tech."

Now, obviously I find Josh's wacky antics even more awesome with going after Darox for doing... nothing?

[JoshTheStampede]

Now, obviously I find Josh's wacky antics even more awesome with going after Darox for doing... nothing?

I'm not going after him, I'm just telling him it's a bad idea to roleclaim.

[SpyreX]

...

The reason "roleclaiming" is bad isn't because of the knowledge of a word. Its the implied knowledge of what that word means - i.e. mafia know a cop needs to go away because they know what a cop does.

Innkeeper is a word. With no defined rules. This is not roleclaiming.

[Slaine Hayes]

I'm still so confused over the whole SpyreX situation.

Unvote

[JoshTheStampede]

...

The reason "roleclaiming" is bad isn't because of the knowledge of a word. Its the implied knowledge of what that word means - i.e. mafia know a cop needs to go away because they know what a cop does.

Innkeeper is a word. With no defined rules. This is not roleclaiming.

I know that. Jesus, dude, actually read my posts. I wasn't accusing him of roleclaiming, I was telling him NOT to roleclaim. He said he was an innkeeper and a bunch of people asked what that meant. Answering them would have been a bad idea.I wanted to make sure that he wasn't going to follow up on his Innkeeper thing by explaining it further or claiming.

Are you just intentionally misinterpreting what I said or do you really not understand? There's no "wacky antics".

[CryMeARiver]

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

[SpyreX]

He didn't roleclaim.

In no way was that anywhere close to it where saying "don't roleclaim" makes any sense.

Much like saying I was rolefishing when in no way I was.

Good to see we've reached the LRN2READ part of this though. Soon is the vehement anger, and then the resignation. Then the scum flip.

[JoshTheStampede]

He didn't roleclaim.

In no way was that anywhere close to it where saying "don't roleclaim" makes any sense.

Much like saying I was rolefishing when in no way I was.

Good to see we've reached the LRN2READ part of this though. Soon is the vehement anger, and then the resignation. Then the scum flip.

I'm gonna explain this slowly. If that doesn't work I can draw a diagram or something. I'll leave the vehement anger and the scumflip for you, though, thanks.

I know he didn't roleclaim. I thought that he was heading in that direction though, and so I was warning him to not roleclaim. I never said he roleclaimed, I never accused him of it, so stop saying that.

One more time, I thought that he might have been heading for a roleclaim, since people were asking what he meant about the Innkeeper thing. So, before he potentially roleclaimed, I said that he shouldn't.

Do you understand now? Or are you going to not read this post either and just say BUT HE DIDNT ROLECLAIM again? Because I don't really know if I can make it any simpler.

[Yosarian2]

...

The reason "roleclaiming" is bad isn't because of the knowledge of a word. Its the implied knowledge of what that word means - i.e. mafia know a cop needs to go away because they know what a cop does.

Innkeeper is a word. With no defined rules. This is not roleclaiming.

However, name-claiming for no reason is also a bad idea, although not as dangerous as role-claiming.

[JoshTheStampede]

...

The reason "roleclaiming" is bad isn't because of the knowledge of a word. Its the implied knowledge of what that word means - i.e. mafia know a cop needs to go away because they know what a cop does.

Innkeeper is a word. With no defined rules. This is not roleclaiming.

However, name-claiming for no reason is also a bad idea, although not as dangerous as role-claiming.

This is very true. It's also dangerous even if the particular name is not a giveaway, because it might lead to others nameclaiming when they DO have more obvious flavor connections.

For example, if Darox comes out and says "Hey guys I'm the Innkeeper" no one really knows what that means, but if it causes Player B to then say "Yeah, I'm the Vampire Hunter" or "I'm the Holy Water Salesman" or something it's a lot worse in terms of bullseyes for the nightkill.

[Yosarian2]

Josh, I think we can stop talking about role-names and role-claims now, it's not something that should be discussed in excess detail right now. The "don't claim anything without a reason" point has been made, let's drop the subject if possible.

[ElectricBadger]

Vote Count:

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

(2) SpyreX: Ooba, JoshTheStampede
(2) Ooba: Darox, cruelty
(2) CryMeARiver: MagnaofIllusion, Yosarian2
(3) JoshTheStampede: easjo682, TheSkeward, SpyreX
(1) Slaine Hayes: CryMeARiver

(2) Not Voting:Zang, Slaine Hayes

Day One ends by April 20th at toll of midnight PST.

Rats pour from the ancient Roman sewers, swarming through the streets and homes as though something were moving below, an evil that instilled even such base creatures with absolute terror.

[SpyreX]

Sorry Yos no way this gets dropped. Its like some kinda magic roadmap leading to scumtopia.

I'm gonna explain this slowly. If that doesn't work I can draw a diagram or something. I'll leave the vehement anger and the scumflip for you, though, thanks.

I know he didn't roleclaim. I thought that he was heading in that direction though, and so I was warning him to not roleclaim. I never said he roleclaimed, I never accused him of it, so stop saying that.

One more time, I thought that he might have been heading for a roleclaim, since people were asking what he meant about the Innkeeper thing. So, before he potentially roleclaimed, I said that he shouldn't.

Do you understand now? Or are you going to not read this post either and just say BUT HE DIDNT ROLECLAIM again? Because I don't really know if I can make it any simpler.

Explain it as slow as you want. Lets go back a page and look at the exchange:

I'm an Innkeeper.

What does that tell you?

Is this some sort of role claim or is this your actual profession? I am now a little bit confused...

What is that supposed to mean?

Darox, please explain your innkeeper comment. Is that some sort of flavorclaim?

So, we've got some amazing (one could say tech) results from Darox's statement. Including, *gasp* Josh.

But, maybe, maybe Josh is right. Maybe this is the preamble to Darox opting to spill all his dark secrets for fun and profit.

CryMeARiver wrote:
Is this some sort of role claim or is this your actual profession? I am now a little bit confused...
Zang wrote:
What is that supposed to mean?
JoshTheStampede wrote:
Darox, please explain your innkeeper comment. Is that some sort of flavorclaim?

Guess.

Yes. This looks like the response of someone who is about to just flood the thread with unnecessary information.

Further, and I'll showcase this because its really important:

Darox, please explain your innkeeper comment.

Is that some sort of flavorclaim?

Darox, you really should not claim or tell us anything about your role,

even the flavor,

unless you really have to.

So, on top of the cognitive dissonance in

asking a question that he says shouldn't be answered

we have another interesting tidbit: this behavior, done by two other people, doesn't even warrant an FoS.

Instead, the vote is served better on someone he says he no longer finds scummy.

And, well, lets say its not the behavior. What is it?

This is very true. It's also dangerous even if the particular name is not a giveaway, because it might lead to others nameclaiming when they DO have more obvious flavor connections.

For example, if Darox comes out and says "Hey guys I'm the Innkeeper" no one really knows what that means, but if it causes Player B to then say "Yeah, I'm the Vampire Hunter" or "I'm the Holy Water Salesman" or something it's a lot worse in terms of bullseyes for the nightkill.

This mountain. Its covered in oil. It, in fact, makes the slope slippery.

Perhaps, the slipperiest of slopes.

Darox saying guess != Bob, Slayer of Vampires, thinking that is A-OK behavior.

[easjo682]

This is very true. It's also dangerous even if the particular name is not a giveaway, because it might lead to others nameclaiming when they DO have more obvious flavor connections.
For example, if Darox comes out and says "Hey guys I'm the Innkeeper" no one really knows what that means, but if it causes Player B to then say "Yeah, I'm the Vampire Hunter" or "I'm the Holy Water Salesman" or something it's a lot worse in terms of bullseyes for the nightkill.

I'm pretty sure EB (our mod) is smart enough to give the flavour roles no connection to their alignment role
Also incase you hadn't noticed nobody jumped up and down and made a claim because one person did, people rarely do in mafia unless it alignment claim close to lynching

[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.

[Yosarian2]

Sorry Yos no way this gets dropped. Its like some kinda magic roadmap leading to

scumtopia

accidentally outing every town power role.

Fixed.

[easjo682]

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?

[JoshTheStampede]

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. 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.

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. I dont FOS the other people who asked becuase I assume they made the same mistake I did, asking for info about a curious statement, and then maybe realizing afterward that it was a mistake to ask.

I agree with Yosarian. This is a dumb line of conversation and it's getting us nowhere. I know you think you found some magic map to scumboland with this, SpyreX, but you're barking up the wrong tree here.

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. It's not scummy to be insane. It is scummy to claim to agree with illogical cases just so you can vote.

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.

[MagnaofIllusion]

1. It does make sense. They formed the wagon for information, who they targeted with it does not matter. If the wagon breaks apart just because he posted, they are back in square one, therefore I do not think it will just disappear. I do not agree with a claim out of Ooba and I do think the wagon should just dissipate, but try convincing the wagon of that.
2. I did not jump on Yosarian. I completely agreed that we should get the game moving forward. I just chose a different target with my attempted wagon.
3. I am not rolefishing and I highly disagree with a claim, I was just stating that it might come down to one.

I’m not going to let this just slide. Regarding your points –

1. Are you trying to tell us you know the motivation and reasonings for everyone who voted for Ooba? Because this sort of generalization is pure crap. I, who was on the bandwagon, voted for Ooba since he had exactly 1 post (confirming) and I wanted to see some contribution out of his slot.
3. You were role-fishing. You, who were not on the bandwagon, make a statement that a great defense (which is impossible given he was basically wagoned for RVS / inactivity reasons) or a claim might be the only way to make the wagon go away. You left an open-ended, soft request for a role-claim out there when you yourself were not on the wagon. It’s a perfect role-fishing chance since you can say, as you did above, “I didn’t want the claim, it was those on the bandwagon”. Not a single person who have voted for him even hinted at wanting a claim.

For clarity here are the original statements.

Ooba’s statement –

a) Bandwagoning to get some discussion started
b) And partly due to the fact that I had just made one post in the game and hadn't contributed

Your direct response –

It is quite possible that the only way to answer for part A is to claim or to make a hell of a defense.

But I'll keep my FoS on, like you, I don't really feel the need to move my votes or FoS's unless I have good reason to.

Why do you put such emphasis on FOSes as something of import? They are but an artifical construct by which to signify a certain stenght of your commentary. No-one (at least that I have ever seen) UnFOSes.

Yes, I was "fishing" for scum. Or, to be precise to see if the "why" for such an odd statement led to something far more interesting.

The inference here is that you have some inkling that some sort of game mechnics are involved that render the “links to the dead” important. So some might suspect you of having insider information that would be reasonable for a Mafian to possess.

I don’t agree that it is anything vote-worthy but to instantly ascribe sinister motives to everyone who questions you is a stretch at this point.

[TheSkeward]

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.

<snip>

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.

This is kind of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't', but it's still a valid point: newbie town would be more likely to freak out and say "everyone who's voting me is scum" then to say "yeah, you're all reasonable people with valid points against me except this one."

[SpyreX]

I'll deal with the other stuff in a while but apparently I'm slow so I need this to be its own post:

Explain to me, in the simplest terms, how Darox saying he is an Innkeeper opens the floodgates to town power roles outing themselves.

[ooba]

CryMeARiver needs more pressure.

Unvote. Vote: CryMeARiver

Explain to me, in the simplest terms, how Darox saying he is an Innkeeper opens the floodgates to town power roles outing themselves.

...
Lets discuss the merits and demerits of a massclaim in this situation

[JoshTheStampede]

I'll deal with the other stuff in a while but apparently I'm slow so I need this to be its own post:

Explain to me, in the simplest terms, how Darox saying he is an Innkeeper opens the floodgates to town power roles outing themselves.

I don't think you're slow. I think you're being intentionally difficult to try to make things look scummy when they are completely innocuous.

I didn't say it "opened the floodgates". I was being cautious, and trying to make sure that there was no claiming being done, or about to be done, or going to be done in the future. Roleclaiming, nameclaiming, any sort of claiming. I was trying to make sure none of it happened.

At worst, I was being OVERLY cautious and warning people who weren't going to claim anyway. There's no harm in that. I would rather warn too much and have it be unnecessary than not warn at all and have it turn out I should have.

That's all. There's no "slippery slope", no "wacky antics". I have been in games before where town has gotten screwed by someone claiming when they should not have, and so I was trying to prevent that.

I really don't understand why you are being so obtuse about this. Stop tunneling on me for something that is so far from being scummy that it's laughable. Right now your "case" on me is that I:

* voted for you because I didn't understand what the hell you were talking about with your fishing comment
* tried to prevent claiming, and was a little too overzealous in doing so.

Which one of those actions is scummy, again? Oh, that's right, neither one. Oh, right, I'm also "tech", which is apparently scummy even though literally no one but you knows what it means.