Mafia 44: Generic - Abandoned!

StrykkerVerde · Post Post #225 (ISO) » Thu Dec 29, 2005 3:49 pm

no problem Falcone,

Last Night I invited Shamrock and Vitamin#$%# to the bar because they seemed very non-threatening and I didn't think the scum would have seen any reason to kill them. Fortunately I was correct. And as soon as they show up they can confirm with the town that they were indeed there.

Also, now that they have been invited once, my role states that they can not be invited again.

naubol · Post Post #226 (ISO) » Fri Dec 30, 2005 4:54 am

Something to consider, just because Falcone was attacked, it doesn't mean he's innocent. Consider: It could have been a failed attempt by a vigilante, or he could have been scum on the way to kill someone else, and he was role-blocked, or hurt, or roughed up. And even though he voted for Twomz way early in the vote, (third), he still voted.

I'm not saying that I think Falcone is scum, but I'm curious.

Also, sus to armlx and snap, who sealed up that lynch, but also have seem, to me, to be rather uninformative and lurkish.

N

Shamrock · Post Post #227 (ISO) » Fri Dec 30, 2005 6:00 am

The *groan* was at Fritzler's horrible pun. "Oh, snap", and the guy's name is "snap", get it?

Shamrock · Post Post #228 (ISO) » Fri Dec 30, 2005 6:00 am

Oh, and yes, Strykker invited me.

Snap · Post Post #229 (ISO) » Fri Dec 30, 2005 7:13 am

>Well, all I can really say about the lynch is that I miscounted how many votes had already been placed. I honestly believed that I wasn't casting the lynching vote.

BrianMcQueso · Post Post #230 (ISO) » Fri Dec 30, 2005 8:41 am

Shamrock wrote:The *groan* was at Fritzler's horrible pun. "Oh, snap", and the guy's name is "snap", get it?

No, I don't.

I'm curious as to Naubol's attitude towards Falcone. While being shot at doesn't confirm you innocent, it does increase your standing a little bit. A townie is more likely to be shot at than a mafia. If there are two killing groups, a townie can be shot at by either group. A mafioso can only be shot at by the enemy group.

Naubol wrote:And even though he voted for Twomz way early in the vote, (third), he still voted.

Yeah, there were ten of us on that lynch. One person can't single-handed lynch someone (well, except me, because I'm ridiculously awesome like that), it takes half of us. It seems silly to single him out like that.

Shamrock · Post Post #231 (ISO) » Fri Dec 30, 2005 9:15 am

BrianMcQueso wrote: No, I don't.

There's an expression that goes "Oh, snap!" as an exclamatory remark. And the guy who posted the lynch vote was named Snap. So it was a lame reference to the expression and a lame reference to the name of the person.

Get it now?

Dranko20 · Post Post #232 (ISO) » Fri Dec 30, 2005 1:06 pm

Shamrock wrote:There's an expression that goes "Oh, snap!" as an exclamatory remark. And the guy who posted the lynch vote was named Snap. So it was a lame reference to the expression and a lame reference to the name of the person.

Get it now?

Another terrible joke like this can get one mod-killed. You have been fore-warned.

Shamrock · Post Post #233 (ISO) » Fri Dec 30, 2005 1:33 pm

It was Fritzler, not me!

BrianMcQueso · Post Post #234 (ISO) » Fri Dec 30, 2005 5:02 pm

I got it the first time on Day 1, but it amuses me to see people try to explain groingrabbingly obvious jokes.

Shamrock · Post Post #235 (ISO) » Sat Dec 31, 2005 2:16 am

You suck.

Snap · Post Post #236 (ISO) » Sat Dec 31, 2005 8:48 am

My net connection has gone down today (I'm posting this from a temporary dial-up connection), and may not be back until Tuesday or Wednesday, so I'm not lurking, it's just that my ISP sucks.

Fritzler · Post Post #237 (ISO) » Sat Dec 31, 2005 7:12 pm

Dranko20 wrote:
Shamrock wrote:There's an expression that goes "Oh, snap!" as an exclamatory remark. And the guy who posted the lynch vote was named Snap. So it was a lame reference to the expression and a lame reference to the name of the person.

Get it now?
Another terrible joke like this can get one mod-killed. You have been fore-warned.

FOS: Dranko

VitaminR · Post Post #238 (ISO) » Sun Jan 01, 2006 4:39 am

Just posting to say I'm back from my holidays and to confirm that I was in a mason group with StrykkerVerde and Shamrock last night. Although my limited access prevented any real discussion.

I'll try to post something coherent once I have the time to catch up and re-read.

Fritzler · Post Post #239 (ISO) » Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:24 am

That's cool.
Two questions.
Does it say the other players have to be pro town?
And
What prevents you guys from being a cult?

BrianMcQueso · Post Post #240 (ISO) » Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:38 pm

I'm under the impression that Strykker can't choose if he invites pro-towns or not... if he invited someone that didn't show up, that'd make him some sort of supercop. This doesn't confirm the three of them as innocent, it just proves Strykker was telling the truth about being able to invite people.

If they're a cult, then they've got some balls linking themselves together publicly. Besides, Strykker will be able to invite two different people tonight, further confirming him (because for some reason you're still doubting him). That's some cult if he can recruit two people each night.

I hate to admit it, but it looks like he's innocent, Fritzler.

VitaminR · Post Post #241 (ISO) » Sun Jan 01, 2006 11:57 pm

Shamrock, could you give a real response to Falcone's post? You have only responded to one remark. I didn't see why he picked you out at first, but I must say your lack of response (especially when Falcone can not post a lot) is starting to make me very suspicious of you.

What really struck me in the Twomz rush thing was that everybody seemed to be repeating the same easy arguments.

I think we need more posts from a lot of people, btw.

None of these people have posted since Dec 20:
Jediknight
Sineish
chamber
TSAGod
Blackberry
logicticus

Shamrock · Post Post #242 (ISO) » Mon Jan 02, 2006 1:47 am

What response do you want me to give? Despite the verbosity of Falcone's post, all he really said was talking about my *groan* comment, which I already responded to, and my lack of posting. My lack of posting is because, apparently unlike a lot of people on these forums, I don't post when I have nothing constructive to do or say.

TSAGod · Post Post #243 (ISO) » Mon Jan 02, 2006 6:45 am

Okay. I'm here, but I have a few questions about SV.

-Do you just form a mason group for a night, or do you get to investigate them to?

-How is the mafia involved in killing them? Do all of you die?

Fritzler · Post Post #244 (ISO) » Mon Jan 02, 2006 6:49 am

BrianMcQueso wrote:If they're a cult, then they've got some balls linking themselves together publicly. Besides, Strykker will be able to invite two different people tonight, further confirming him (because for some reason you're still doubting him). That's some cult if he can recruit two people each night.

wait, two people every night? that's cool

BrianMcQueso wrote:I hate to admit it, but it looks like he's innocent, Fritzler.

Vote: Shamrock

chamber · Post Post #245 (ISO) » Mon Jan 02, 2006 7:00 am

Sorry for not posting, I'm having trouble getting a feel for whats going on in this game, I think its a side effect of playing in to many. I'll try re reading the thread a couple of times and see if I can come up with anything constructive to add.

VitaminR · Post Post #246 (ISO) » Mon Jan 02, 2006 8:26 am

chamber, I have the same problem, but an occasional post (even if you have nothing to say) tells us you're still alive and watching.

armlx · Post Post #247 (ISO) » Mon Jan 02, 2006 8:30 am

All this speculation on Strykker being a cult leader.... No reason. For now his ability is proven, and on the off chance that he is we will find out soon enough.

Scummy tho, Snap seems to take the cake there.

Vote Snap

. I realize I did jump on the wagon on Twomz yesterday too, but Snap was doing stuff earlier that day.

Falcone · Post Post #248 (ISO) » Mon Jan 02, 2006 10:10 am

It seems that Strykker is cleared. It would be really nice if his role implies he gets info on the people he invites, or maybe roleblocks them (which would make sense flavorwise), but I guess that's a bit much to hope for.

I must say I really didn't get that the exchange between Shamrock and Fritzler yesterday was a joke. (English isn't my first language.) Some suspicion of Shamrock remains, because he was on the Twomz bandwagon, and because he's suddenly posting a lot since I voted for him.

It's slightly ironic that armlx is voting for Snap for putting the last vote on Twomz, since he himself was the second-to-last. I also wonder what "stuff" Snap has done yesterday, that makes him extra suspicious.

FOS: armlx

for that. Then again, I really don't like Snap's excuse that he wasn't aware that his vote was the last one needed for a lynch. It's an excuse that is also often used by townies, sure, but that doesn't mean we should let scum get away with it. So I guess I'll also

FOS: Snap

.

Oh, and I made a mistake in my previous post:

I'd also like to note that both of tonight's victims were voting for Twomz. Iammars was the first to vote for him with a random vote that he never changed, and LB was 5th, and first after the deadline was set.

LB was the 6th vote on Twomz, and the 2nd after the deadline was set. Doesn't really matter much I suppose.

jediknight · Post Post #249 (ISO) » Mon Jan 02, 2006 10:14 am

I'm so rusty...I keep forgetting to post. It doesnt help that I've been working on my house for the last two weeks and got sick kids.

I just don't have much to say at this point. And I'm not the type to just post for the simple reason of posting. We lost a doctor and a medic. So what did our masons discuss? I'd be interested in hearing what kind of theory they might have come up with.