1025 Tarot Mafia (Over!)

[MacavityLock]

I (after a bit of back and forth) understand and confirm my role.

[MacavityLock]

Everyone please answer the follwing question. How much do you know about tarot, divination, and western hermetic traditions in general? (I've been reading tarot for twenty-seven years, including a brief stint as a "psychic friend," public busking, working the occasional event booth, and tutoring a small number of students. I spent more than a decade of that time studying related arts.)

Know very little about tarot. I joined this game because of mod and player list.

@Mac:

Softclaiming in the confirm phase? Really?

You know how dram said that some people were confused by their role PMs? I was one of them. As per the queue, there are no vanillas in this game. I don't really think I gave anything away.

I think gender claiming is problematic. See: The Chariot, The Lovers, Death, Wheel of Fortune, The World. Then again, this may be an issue of me not being all that familiar with reading of tarot.

[MacavityLock]

Wait a second, there's Hebrew alphabet stuff conjoined with tarot reading? I guess I shouldn't be all that surprised...

[MacavityLock]

I think it's more to do with what gender you've been given in your role PM as opposed to the gender of your actual tarot.

Ah yes, I see. I didn't even notice: me and my role are the same gender, masculine. <He says in a deep and resonant baritone.>

[MacavityLock]

On other matters, it's page three and I don't have any reads yet.

Has the game even started yet?

[MacavityLock]

On other matters, it's page three and I don't have any reads yet.

Has the game even started yet?

Scratch that. I have one read.

VOTE: MacavityLock

Well, has it?

[MacavityLock]

I'm not interested in voting until we actually have a rules post, but I do think that Switz will be getting my vote when the game does start, mostly for this quote:

Interesting call by Ythill on the number of Major Arcana =/= 24. Not really sure why he mentioned it though, because it would have been a wonderful thing to keep under wraps if scum do only have 1 card apiece--although that's obviously not confirmed by any stretch of the imagination.

Scum having only 1 card apiece is almost certainly wrong, and it only takes a single quick thought (trust in the mod to not create a broken setup) to realize that. Feels like he's trying to lay the groundwork for messing with legitimate claims later.

Capn also raises my hackles, if only slightly. He reads like he's trying too hard to be cutesy for my taste.

[MacavityLock]

Switz, not Ythill. And your discussion of it was an off-hand comment, not an effort to make it seem plausible. (See: "not confirmed by any stretch of the imagination") That whole discussion of intent, you know?

[MacavityLock]

Vote: Switz

On other matters, it's page three and I don't have any reads yet.

Has the game even started yet?

Scratch that. I have one read.

VOTE: MacavityLock

Yt, if I had said "Why are you complaining?" would that have changed things? Because that was my point.

[MacavityLock]

Do you think Kise will dayvig you because I told him to?

No, not particularly. Where does this question come from? I'm trying to rebut your scum-read of me.

I think I'd dislike your stance that it's okay to have no reads at all on page 3 no matter how you worded it.

Why set a clock (or a page limit) on when a game starts to reveal useful tells?

[MacavityLock]

Right, but you didn't bother trying until after I suggested you were a better dayvig target than NS.

It was more in response to this:

@SC:

It's just because he's distancing with his buddy. Don't feel bad.

The fact that you were still hammering at it meant that it was time for me to respond.

Page 3 is an arbitrary number and is not important for our conversation. The point is that you mollified me in such a way as to suppose that dram's V/LA meant we should be disregarding information, or at least not taking it seriously. That's an anti-town stance in and of itself.

I never said anything about disregarding or not taking things seriously, though I see how you could have read it that way.

That you did it with no regard for my alignment makes it worse.

And why do you think my question wasn't to see if I could get a tell from you? Complaining about not finding something yet might suggest trying too hard, which might suggest the scum over-compensating tell.

Not exactly a scum-claim but good enough for now, especially after your attack on Switz.

"Here is a tell that makes me think Mac might be scum. There is a tell that makes me think Switz might be scum. Mac voted Switz. Therefore, THEY ARE SCUM TOGETHER." This is ridiculous.

P.S. I articulated why I think Switz might be scum better than you did, i.e. not at all.

[MacavityLock]

Yikes. What would it would look like if I overcompensated my town play.

Why wouldn't my inquiry be legitimate?

And it was more like... Mac is scum, Switz is also scum, therefore they are scum together. Mac then singled out Switz for something that others were discussing, therefore he was distancing.

No one else was discussing the particular quote and scumtell that I raised.

[MacavityLock]

And my qualification of the statement (not confirmed by any stretch of the imagination) would indicate the idea was less plausible than my preceding statement made it sound, would it not?

It's called reading between the lines. "Not confirmed" -> "Plausible".

As I said, it's the intent with which you were discussing it that tipped me. Yt said nothing about number of cards in conjunction with alignment. SC's discussion of it seemed more innocent than yours. I already answered this.

[MacavityLock]

I didn't actually receive a prod, but I will post something here today.

[MacavityLock]

Switz, you haven't really explained why you voted for me.

Jarti needs to provide his case too.

It was a response test. I was testing to see what tyour response would be, and see if I that it was pro-town.

In what way do you assess his response as pro-town?

The most feedback I get is that I am directing PRs in a game. If you are X role (as in investigation role or killing role) I am not directing you. Use your own darn lists. If you are following my lists, your scum hunting confidence is very low.

Why pre-apologize for this?

@DTM:

I hope you have an investigation card.

Problematic, as you were on his "To be investigated" list. You want to get investigated?

[MacavityLock]

Sure. I mean, if he's going to be distracted by my play, then it's best for everyone if he confirms me to be town.

Or... maybe I'm a GF... (spooky)

If you're town, shouldn't you want investigations to go toward scum rather than get wasted on a townie?

----

Switz, you haven't really explained why you voted for me.

Mostly just in response to you choosing me over SC and Ythill to attack for "speculation" earlier in the game, and then trying to pass it off as some sort of "discussion of intent." It still doesn't make sense to me but it's really not enough for me to keep voting you.

Unvote

So... OMGUS then?

----

One of the cards I have can do something that you find very important given discussion, but something may happen that'll make it more useful later. I'll let you discuss this (think about what I'm hinting at), then you guys tell me whether I should do it.

On the "not yet" wagon.

[MacavityLock]

If you're town, shouldn't you want investigations to go toward scum rather than get wasted on a townie?

I love being confirmed town. Are you really trying to turn a casual bit of wishful thinking into a tell?

I'm asking about it because I want to figure out if it

is

a scumtell here. Am I not allowed to ask the question?

Why would it be scummy of me to have a non-optimal opinion?

Encouraging non-optimal, but viable, play can be a pretty good way for scum to manipulate town into doing things that they don't realize are bad for them.

I don't quite see Mac as scum.

His stance on how investigations should be recommended is something I'd argue against in Mafia Discussion, so it has no indication on his motives from what I can tell.

Either way you slice it, investigators get their easy reading on someone. I view Mac more as stern townie than scum at the moment.

I'm not sure I completely understand what you mean in the sentence I bolded. You'd argue against it, therefore it carries no meaning towards my motives? Or do you mean that you feel it's more of a MD debate, therefore you read as null?

----

Re: Death card claim debate

We know that a) Yth is town-confirming the Death player, and b) everyone has checked in with no one being interested in claiming to be the Death player. If that's all the info we get on this today, I'm kind of okay with that.

Oh, and by the same point, there's no reason for the person to play Death to not step forward. They are essentially a vanilla townie at this point.

Is both wrong and scummy. First, as has been mentioned, Death player can play either the normal or reversed ability from his/her second card. However, given that Capn's interpretation was that Death player is now vanilla, this request is a blatant attempt to out an assumed-powerless (and therefore not-NK-worthy) player. Big red flags.

c. If Death is a passive card, we already know cards are one-shot abilities and that means someone day actioned and it did something.

Therefore two cards must have been played already.

Therefore Ythill is claiming that he caused death to be used up or he knows that someone caused death to be used up. This makes no sense and it's a kin to outing BP players. That's horrible and makes no sense from Ythill's end.

Explain bolded? Seems like a logical leap.

[MacavityLock]

Let me rephrase my point. DTM threatens to investigate me. I tell him to bring it on. Then you're all,

OMG, Yth is leading the cop to a sub-optimal target

. Frankly, it looks like you're twisting my meaning and I don't like it.

I think you've got it exactly. DTM put you on his "I'd investigate you" list. You said "go for it". I can see that as encouraging bad play, which I think can be scummy, therefore I'm questioning you about it. I'm not sure where the meaning-twisting is there.

I mean, why don't you have a problem with DTM leading the cop card(s)?

He made a reasonable case for putting you on his "to investigate" list, and (barring the two of you being scumbuddies) doesn't know whether or not you're a sub-optimal target. Why would I have a problem with it?

----

Today's Card: The Queen of Pentacles

Today's Card has been changed to: Death

Not really if Dram announces what cards are played in the day. If 2 cards are played both the Queen of Pentacles and Death were played.

Was this the response to my question?

[MacavityLock]

The twist is you making it more serious than it was. Whereas he was actually suggesting that investigations go a certain way, I was merely shooting him a for it.

OK, that's fine. You're saying that your response to DTM was not meant to be taken seriously. I don't think we need to go any deeper than that on the issue.

What were my other possible responses? Instruct him not to investigate me? Ignore him? I'm assuming you'd paint those things as scummy as well. So what you're saying here is that DTM making that statement means I'm scum, which is ridiculous.

Actually, no, neither of those things strike me as particularly more scummy than what you did, but there are also other responses you could have made. Defending against the case in an effort to move yourself of the "investigate list" without direct instruction, for example. Also, I dislike that you're detailing what "I would have done". Don't presume.

Just FYI, Yth, while you are in my top half of my scum list right now, you're not in my top 3. Please note the difference between questioning and accusing.

----

Preview edit: Kise, thank you for clarifying.

[MacavityLock]

@Mac:

Just FYI, the difference between questioning and accusing is seriously blurred in the loaded question you posted. "If you're town, shouldn't you want investigations to go toward scum rather than get wasted on a townie?"

How so? I'm going to gauge your response, and answering "No, and here's why: X, Y, Z" is a legitimate response. I probably won't agree with that response, but that response will hopefully help me decide whether what you did was scummy or it's a play-style thing.

And if that's a loaded question, than so is every other question ever asked. Just phrase everything as "If you're town, shouldn't you not blah blah blah instead of blah blah blah-ing like you did?" and you're all set.

[MacavityLock]

Yth, find me one post wherein I accuse you of being scum, and I'll give you a cookie (and you can accuse me of backtracking).

[MacavityLock]

Really, SC? You're not even going to

consider

the possibility that's he's a mafia roleblocker?

[MacavityLock]

Really, ML? You're going to suggest that it is in my best interests to help scum?

When did I suggest that? Immediately after his claim, you don't question him at all, just talk to him as if he is town.

----

Mac:

I already did. Make my cookie penut-butter chocolate chip, please.

Now

you're

twisting. What you pointed out was a question, one that's no more loaded than any other that people have asked in this game.

In the case of the Emperor,

it doesn't matter what Switz's alignment is

and him using it as directed is entirely verifiable (by me) overnight.

What do you mean by that?

[MacavityLock]

Really, ML? You're going to suggest that it is in my best interests to help scum?

When did I suggest that? Immediately after his claim, you don't question him at all, just talk to him as if he is town.

You accused me of not taking the possibility that Switz is a Mafia roleblocker into account. I answered his question assuming he is town for a very good reason:

if he's scum, my opinion only matters to him if I am his buddy.

That's not true at all. If he's scum, he could use it for buddying, or could use it to set you up. Not considering that is either scummy or very short-sighted.

I'm still pro-Switz getting lynched.

[MacavityLock]

Well, if Ythill has magical confirmation powers, even a stupid confirmed townie is better than a dead one...

But if Ythill's powers are suspect, as has been demonstrated by DT, either is a good lynch, really.

Yth has so far said something about "it doesn't matter what alignment he is", which is disturbing in itself, but it more suggests to me that Yth has power-confirming powers, not town-confirming powers. Which is why I remain onboard for the Switz lynch.

[MacavityLock]

What's the case on macavitylock? I remember him saying something that struck me as pro-town and I don't remember him coming off as especially scummy.

That's because there is no case on me. Soc thinks he can follow Yth safely, but that's not the way this game works. This is annoying though, because I also had a town read of ani.

If Switz isn't going today, I'd prefer Capn as the next choice, but I think I can get behind SC as well. Not seeing the game from the town perspective definitely falls under his scum meta. And if SC is scum, then I doubt that Switz is.

[MacavityLock]

@Mac:

My read on you is based on you excusing my lack of reads in the early game

Misinterpretation of what I said, though again, I understand how you could have gotten there.

your selective attack on Switz

How is it selective? I found a tell, and I voted it. That tell wasn't "discussing the 1 card=scum theory", it was "making the 1 card=scum seem plausible", which didn't apply to either you or SC.

your defense following my instruction to Kise to dayvig you (rather than my vote)

The fact that you were continuing the attack meant that it was time for me to respond.

and your slippery wierdness following my conversation with DTM involving investigations.

What do you mean by "slippery weirdness"? I think that requesting getting investigated as you did (though you say it was not entirely a serious request) is anti-town at best, and I called you out on it.

Also, I still haven't received that cookie... instead, I got an ad populum excuse.

Let me repeat, you found a question, not an accusation. Check it again if you like and amazingly, you'll find a question mark. If you think it was a loaded question, whatever, but it was a serious question to me and I expected an answer. Now find a post where I accuse you of being scum, and you'll get the cookie. Also, where is ad populem in my posting?

You have still not answered why "it doesn't matter what alignment [Switz] is".

[MacavityLock]

And I'd love to know where your scum read of me comes from.

Tell me, what is his opinion on anyone other than Switz? I can't tell from his posts.

I've provided some opinions (e.g. see Capn, Yth), but especially in the early stages of a game, I'm a question asker, as both town and scum.

Also, his Switz suspicion feels calculated, though I would need more time and a better vocabulary than I have to explain why with any sort of clarity.

Vaguest suspicion ever.

[MacavityLock]

OK, well, it looks like idiots and scum are probably going to follow Yth off a cliff. Just for funsies, everybody who is voting for me, please post your #2 lynch choice. Everyone who votes me after this post, please also provide your #2 lynch choice in the same post that you vote for me.

[MacavityLock]

Please stop putting words in my mouth, Yth.

Reck has been on the taking-no-initiative scummy side of things for a while now.

[MacavityLock]

The putting words in my mouth referred to the "stunning claim" comment. Given your follow-up post, I may have misinterpreted what you meant, though. As for Reck, it was a fair question and I gave you my answer.

Yes, I do understand what you're talking about. There are exact details that you may or may not understand.

[MacavityLock]

Hmm. You're focused on different things than I am, I think. A question: Did you think that my softclaim has to do with "off a cliff"? If so, that was unintentional. If not, I still think we're not talking about the same thing. Anything I have done thus far has been to softclaim a power, not a card/flavor. We can pick up this discussion in the morning, as I'm tired and am going to bed.

[MacavityLock]

If so, that was unintentional.

But was it accurate?

And now, of course, we need to think about who might know what we're talking about.

I'm sooooo glad I got a spot this game.

Erm. Maybe. If you're thinking of a Decemberists song off of Picaresque, then yes, accurate, but oddly not what I was referring to originally.

[MacavityLock]

Magnus should have claimed by now. I would also rather have a lynch than a No Lynch.

Unvote. Vote: Magnus.

This is L-1.

[MacavityLock]

Jarti, why Soc?

Time to do some partner analysis-y stuff. I've got some ideas for a few deeper dives after a first pass, but I don't feel like giving those out just yet.

@mod

, two things. 1) Do we have a Mitsuru replacement yet? 2) SC's listed cards in the first post are different from those in his death post. Which is correct?

[MacavityLock]

Damn, Yth, that was pretty much exactly my list. A question: Why is Prox not possible Maf?

[MacavityLock]

Sorry Yth, that was a misunderstanding then. I do not have The Fool. The song I was referring to, only after the fact, was "We Both Go Down Together".

[MacavityLock]

Yeah, if I can have any effect at this point, I should do a VOTE: Jarti.

[MacavityLock]

You've got to be f'ing kidding me. Who let the person with "The VI has arived" sig to join this game?

[MacavityLock]

Hey guys, let's wait until the mod shows up and explains what exactly just happened (be it end of day, shotty fucking with us, etc.) before anyone throws more votes down. I'm pretty sure that if shotty was in fact fucking with us, Jarti would now be at L-1. In fact, UNVOTE: Jarti

[MacavityLock]

Read rule 19.

[MacavityLock]

Hey guys, guess what I found? (Remember, Jarti replaced NS.)

24)

Cards:

Most roles are built like the following one. Only one power from each card may be used, the card disappearing upon use.

"Quote of sort about the arcana pawning the humans"

OOO, you are an

Innocent (gender)

, touched by the (card1) and the (card2).

I am male.

Here's my role PM to verify:

Jarti, You are

The Arcanist

, child of the cards.

He's not Innocent, and he doesn't have a gender. I smell an androgynous guilty rat.

Still, no need to rush things. I'd recommend deleting card uses if you can.

[MacavityLock]

No actions from this guy.

[MacavityLock]

Let's just be calm, civil, and let everybody claim targets and success/failure before we go using new abilities today or telling what abilities do/did.

[MacavityLock]

Stop it! Stop claiming shit! Why do all you idiots keep doing this? Claim your target and whether or not your card successfully activated! That's all!

[MacavityLock]

@mod

, please prod Switz and Kise.

[MacavityLock]

Do we have a math geek in this game? I'd like to see the percentage chance of lynching scum with Prox's card versus without it, assuming random lynches.

Ooh, ooh, me me!

I ran 3 scenarios, under entirely random lynches. Feel free to check my math or assumptions.

Scenario 1: 2 Maf, 1 SK, 6 Town

No Double Lynch

• Kill Maf: 22.2%
• Kill SK: 11.1%
• Kill town: 66.7%

Double Lynch

• Kill 2 Maf: 2.8%
• Kill 1 Maf & SK: 5.6%
• Kill SK, 1 town: 16.7%
• Kill 1 Maf, 1 town: 33.3%
• Kill 2 town: 41.7%

Scenario 2: 1 Maf, 1 SK, 7 Town

No Double Lynch

• Kill Maf: 11.1%
• Kill SK: 11.1%
• Kill town: 77.8%

Double Lynch

• Kill Maf & SK: 2.8%
• Kill SK, 1 town: 19.4%
• Kill Maf, 1 town: 19.4%
• Kill 2 town: 58.3%

Scenario 3: 2 Maf, 7 Town

No Double Lynch

• Kill Maf: 22.2%
• Kill town: 77.8%

Double Lynch

• Kill 2 Maf: 2.8%
• Kill 1 Maf, 1 town: 38.9%
• Kill 2 town: 58.3%

Of course, our lynches are unlikely to be random.

If we do in fact have a SK, and we double mislynch, and both kills hit town, we're left with either 2 Town, 2 Maf, 1 SK - Town loses, Kingmaker, or 3 Town, 1 Maf, 1 SK - 2 LYLOs in a row at best. This suggests that we should most definitely

not

be double lynching.

Then again, if we do have a SK, I think the probabilities based on uniform random lynches above are completely wrong. The SK is almost certain to be Jarti, and we would almost certainly use one lynch on him. I'm not exactly sure what the best way to compute probabilities for that scenario would be. It heavily depends on the assumptions, most important question being: Do we assume that Jarti is almost certain to

not

be Maf?

----

Hey Jarti, explain the differences between your claimed role PM, the example role PM, and NS's gender claim. Also, an explanation of why you're voting me would be nice.

[MacavityLock]

Shotty, he hasn't used it yet, we're discussing if he should. Pay better attention.

[MacavityLock]

How do you guys do that? The probability thing.

Magic. Actually, just math. I'm a grad student in applied math (basically), so I know this stuff pretty well. And this is actually a pretty simple use of discrete probabilities, and it just boils down to multiplying the right numbers together. There's much more complicated stuff to do, such as, given evidence we've seen so far, what are the probabilities that we're in setup A vs setup B, for example. But it's almost certainly not worth it to examine here (yet, if ever).

I know mac, but really thay serves no town purposes, how does that help town?

I don't understand what this means. At all.

[MacavityLock]

EBWOP: That second quote of course should be attributed to Shotty. Sorry about that, Prox.

[MacavityLock]

I am (for once), making perfect sense. This card how no town benifits, unless scum out number town, but then it's game over, or if it's lylo, but then town automaticly wins

That card does have town benefits, especially if we're pretty sure we've nabbed two scum. What's the point of wasting it, as opposed to, you know, lynching as normal?

[MacavityLock]

Shotty, it all depends on what the actual setup is, and "unless scum are in our top two" completely contradicts "uniformly random lynches". It's comparing apples and oranges.

As for the second wagon, that potentially scum-controlled second lynch slot is an issue, and was already brought up by someone. It is certainly an argument against using the card.

Now again, even if we decide to lynch only 1 person today, what's the point of

wasting

the card? It might be useful tomorrow, or the next day.

[MacavityLock]

If I'm hanged, I'm using my card.

You're just saying that no matter what you'll do this? That it doesn't matter who the second wagon is? That's not particularly pro-town.

[MacavityLock]

I won't revoke a lynch, even if its on me, but if I'm going down, I'd prefer someone go down with me.

Why wouldn't you revoke your own lynch?

[MacavityLock]

Sorry, this week is one of my teaching weeks, ridiculously busy. I need to do a deeper read of the 4 mentioned before feeling comfortable with the voting bloc as given, but I think I am up for a Kise wagon at the moment. VOTE: Kise

There is the issue of his cards being similar to mine, which would suggest that we have different alignments.

Can you explain?

[MacavityLock]

Blah!

[MacavityLock]

Blech, confirmed godfather. You know, if that hadn't come out, I was thinking about pointing my vote your way, Reck.

I was also trying to wait for an opportune time to use my Hanged Man to put someone else in front of my death, but I never really felt like I had a comfortable target (who wasn't also immune to card effects). When I first got my PM, I was envisioning a scenario where I either put someone in front of my death and tied a second person to that person (using Lovers), thus popping two people as someone tried to kill me. Or, tying myself to someone with Lovers, taking them down with me. I never really ever felt comfortable with possible targets to do either. Booo.

Good job, scum.

[MacavityLock]

The QT was an interesting read, Kise called me obvtownass.

My favorite part was Kise saying "MacLock has this untouchable, New York attitutde, like he's from the Bronx or some shit." I'm not, but may have to sig anyway :}

dram, I do think it was a mistake to have not given The Arcanist an explicit gender and specifically called him Innocent. I don't think it affected the game a ton, but it definitely affected me somewhat.

shotty, still can't believe that you used The Sun in the way you did. Ending some night early was the obvious better option.