Sorry, posting restriction.Iammars wrote:Sure, why not?logicticus wrote:Can you have 2 sks?Heck, we could have 3 SKs and no mafia for all we know...
What exactly do you know? From your initial post, you seem to say that there are four scum, and three of them killed. I Are they all scum, or can they be vigis? And does it have to be to kill? Could it be that your role finds how many people left their house in general, and you assumed that they all killed, or does your role actually say that only scum that killed are counted?darquiel wrote:Nope, its how many scum are alive, it says so very very clearly. Im thinking maybe a Mafia of two and two SKs.
Don't be a smartass. When she claimed, she said that she knew how many scum were active that night. The next post she said that three scum killed. For all I know, "active" can mean killing or any sort of night activity. I want to hear a straight answer from her. Not "well, what do you think?" but rather a "I find out how many scum used their night actions" or a "I find out how many scum killed." I don't think it's much to ask, and I did about three days ago. I can't understand how the answer can be delayed by saying it's already been answered. I can't see how much trouble it is for her to actually answer it again if she already has, because I don't see an answer anywhere.Chaos wrote:Perhaps you should read the thread?Stewie wrote:I'm still confused as to which way it is.
I should have used a different choice of words... sorry.Stewie wrote:Don't be a smartdonkey.
And you should have corrected him when you had the chance, lyingbrian:logicticus wrote:Thats if you are penising around. I dont really know what you are doing. And if you are just penising around, its not helping the town at all find the scum, its just distracting. Thats why i think its bad.
LyingBrian wrote:besides "penising" around, do you care to explain why you think i'm "bad"?
I want to do it with Kristen Dunst.elvis_knits wrote: Have you been to Elizabethtown? I want to go there. I want to meet Orlando Bloom so he can introduce me to his friend Viggo Mortensen. O SNAP! He's already here! Hi RangeroFtheNorth!
I also think LB is our best lynch for today. He had weird voting patterns yesterday which were not attributed to a posting/voting restriction, today he is dodging questions about his role, and his role does not make any sense to me. If his role is true, then sk can't win, and mafia can only win if they don't lose x-1 players, where x is the total players in the scum group. Seems to overpowered to be true.Don Gaetano wrote: -----
I suggest that everyone who agrees that LyingBrianseemsto be our best lynchat the momentsay so in the thread. Remember 50% of us are scum. So in my opinion our best strategy for today is to have a 3/4 majority that agree on who should get lynched .
-----
I'm for lynching LyingBrian at the moment.
Why doesn't everone just write a short post saying if they agree or disagree.
No, my statement was correct, and it does not apply to all games, which was my point. If lying brian is telling the truth, mafia can only get rid of him if they have at least two players left. If they only have one player left, it would be a tie. Thus, LB's role is overpowered, thus he's scum. His further dodging of the questions asked about him with no real reason make me even more suspicious of him. I intend to vote for him really soon, but I'll wait a bit to keep the conversation going. Who knows, perhaps I'll see something more deserving of my vote. I doubt it though.halo freak wrote:Stewie shouldn't that be, the mafia can only win if they don't losemore thanx-1 players, where x is the total number of players in the scum group.
What is the point in that statement? Surely it is true in every mafia game.
The problem is that you can be half-lying. It is not uncommon for mafia to claim their ability (in your case night immunity) but claim town at the same time. If this is the case, if we don't lynch you now we probably won't be able to get rid of you at night, and by day the game could be over. Your claim is scummy, and so are your actions. The only thing I'm waiting for is for everyone to have the necessary ammount of posts to not get modkilled... which may have already been done, but I feel too lazy to count right now.LyingBrian wrote:i don't see the harm in letting me live at least 1 more day... anybody w/ a nightaction can target me, i've told you everything in my role PM almost word-for-word
I agree with you in that scum have a big advantage in claiming first. Therefore, I would like you to explainDon Gaetano wrote: I think Chaos and Stewie should roleclaim first. Because scum have a big advantage in claiming last, and I think they are most suspicious today.
Told ya.Chaos wrote:Yeah, I'm not buying it. With this many scum/killing roles, I find it really heard to believe that we would have a placebo doctor, who is essentially a vanilla townie...stewie wrote:inhimishallbe claim
Oh yeah, and there's that whole "I got my head knocked off by a bible" buisness.
I don't buy it at all...
1) For the same reason Don Gaetano thinks I'm scum... being somewhat truthfull about your role. However, unkillable is common for scum and sk, but not for town.LyingBrian wrote:1) also if i was scum, why would i claim to be unnightkillable? 2)i would be trying to keep as much information hidden as possible...
I think that the "everything else" bit clears Chaos, because it states that only inhim, roland, and himself would understand. You bring up a good point about chaos wondering why he would be reffered as "mr. shadow man" when he hasn't, which kinda puts me back on the fence... which I can prove by showing you the fence pattern on my ass.rajrhcpfreak wrote: the only thing that is confirmed by the night is that ____ was killed by a ____
everything else is flavor that only inhim, roland, etc. would understand.
Use one which is not him, which might encourage him to actually post his picture.rajrhcpfreak wrote:ive already been nagging roland for one....
i could use the one i have of him, but i dont think he would like it.
What are you talking about? I think I made it pretty clear that I have no direct connection to the "word of God" killer. All I said is not in conflict. Night one, I prayed for Fritzler, and he died, which led me to believe that I was useless, but I later realized that I could have been blocked, framed, or other. I did not claim placebo doc because raj wouldn't tell me "you are a placebo doc," that would be stupid. Ielvis_knits wrote:People that died by the word of God are N1:Ibaesha (Lacey, cop)Stewie wrote:Fritzler night one, darquiel every night after that exept yesterday, when I protected
Chaos (didn't think darquiel would get attacked... my bad).
and N3: HaloFreak (Sara, investigator)
Hey, so if Stewie is a placebo doc whose power doesn't always work (and sometimes backfires), he should have said he protected Ibaesha N1 -- because she is the one that died from the word of God, not Fritzler.
If Stewie sticks by his claimed actions, it seems IMPOSSIBLE to me that we have one player who protects by the word of God and ANOTHER player who kills by the word of God.
) and you don't seem to be bothering him about it. At least my role is feasable gameplay-wise. Furthermore, this game is wacky enough to have someone frame me in that fashion (kill in the way I would kill if I would).How does my role sound made up? inhim is religious... he prays to try and save people... pretty straight foward. The only messed up part is the fact that there's a killer who kills in the same fashion inhim would kill. Furthermore, as wacky as all this seems, my role does not break the game. Would raj make a game in which roles make little sense or no sense at all? Sure. So far he has. Would he make a broken game? Doubt it. How does my agument work better against me, when while my role doesn't seem feasable storyline-wise, LB's is not feasable game-wise.Stewie, saying that LB's role sounds completely made up doesn't even come close to explaining how made up your role sounds. The fact that you're trying to draw attention towards LB using arguments that work even better against you, doesn't make you look any better. But I agree that a quick lynch wouldn't be in the town's interest.
elvis... I will explain later in this post.LyingBrian wrote: @Stewie
if you're innocent, then who do you suspect most, Don Gaetano, or elvis_knits, & why?
I did not vote at all days two and three because of one very simple reason. I joined thinking this would be a normal game, but that is far from the truth. We are playing a themed game, not only role-wise, but also game mechanics-wise. The mechanics of the game make it fast paced, which makes it really hard to catch up if you were away (which I kinda was, in the sense that I was too busy to post anything) and it gives you very little time to make up your mind. Being busy as I was, I was not able to make up my mind on time. The same reason applies as to why I didn't post much. If you check my other activities on the forum, I am on only one other game, and I barely posted in it. I did make a vote yesterday, but it was too late for it to count, so I understand if you are not going to count it... my point is, I was able to make up my mind, but it was too late.LyingBrian wrote: @Stewie
would you mind explaining why you did not vote at ALL on either D2 or D3? (your vote after the deadline on D2 was not counted in the official vote count, so i'm not counting it) also, you have the fewest # of posts w/ 31... Don Gaetano has 77, LyingBrian has 82, elvis_knits has 88, which means everybody has at least 2x as many posts as you do... any explanation besides lurking?...
To answer LB's first question further, I am starting to think that elvis is the remaining scum not only because LB is obviously not, but also because of statements such as these. The last time I heard someone specifically saying a theory I had was wrong, they turned out to be scum, and from the tone of your writting, I think this is the case again. In fact, that game also was a framing issue... I said I had been framed, and the scum said that it was impossible... I can link to the game upon request, but right now I'll go to my next point.elvis_knits wrote: Stewie - I think I've already said that I can't buy that he is inHim and prays for people to be saved, but there is another player that frames him by killing by the word of God.
I never said I used the word of God to protect.elvis_knits wrote: How is it possible that Stewie uses the word of God to protect and another player uses the word of God to kill?
That's the whole point. We are four, there's only one sk left. If we let the sk kill someone, then there would be three people left. I there are four people and one of them is scum then the odds of lynching scum are 1/4. If there are three people and one of them is scum, the odds of lynching scum are 1/3. 1/3 > 1/4, therefore it is a smart move to vote no lynch.elvis_knits wrote:I think no-lynch is suspicious because I think it gives the SK a free kill tonight. First you talk about no-lynch, then you talk about Don agreeing not to protect anyone. Do you WANT someone to die?
1. read up.Don Gaetano wrote: Elvis is a criminal mastermind, if she's scum. Becasue:
2. She's been very active from the day she replaced RabidRodents.
3. She's actively looked for scum, and defended other players when she believed them (namely LB day one, who has to be innocent if Elvis is scum). Something most scum are too afraid to do, since it puts them in the spotlight, and leaves a posting and voting record that other people can point out as suspicious if someone you defended turns out to be scum, or someone you attacked turns out to be innocent.
4. Her posting restrictions are as good as confirmed because RabidRodents had them day one, and I doubt even Raj would make a role that kills by the word of god during the night, and talks about horses and Elizabethtown during the day.
5. Her role is very plausible since there's been townies with only a posting restriction, or minor ability already confirmed/killed (same thing). Easy to fake, but still...
2. What does that prove? Lurker = scum is a fallacy, but active player = not scum is and even greater fallacy. Scum are active too because people happen to believe the first fallacy.
3. Something scum are too afraid to do? Scum know that most people are town (there are very few exeptions to this, and this game is evidently not one of them). Defending a person yields a high chance of defending someone innocent, which in turn yields a great reward. I've seen it done (although in this case, no specific examples come to mind) and it works pretty well.
4. His post restriction is not confirmed, because it's so obvious that he could easely see what the player he replaced was trying to do and follow up on it. Furthermore, she might not kill by the word of god, but surely he can make it seem as if he killed by the word of god, as a framer.
5. I think that by now we should know better than to judge a person's posibility of being scum on how plausible their roles are. LB's role is unplausible, but apparently it is true, since he would have otherwise voted for me, thus ending the game. Unless he's toying with us... but I doubt it very much.
Don Gaetano wrote: Stewie on the other hand is very suspicious because:
1. He's been lurking the entire game except under direct fire.
2. He's been very careful not to defend or attack anyone to seriously before the end game, and usually only when other people have already voiced their opinion on the subject, and even then normally only recycling the arguments of others.
3. He's InHim, the last killer kills by the word of god... need I say more.
4. He's claimed to be a doc that either can't protect people, or can only protect people against the word of god. A very weak role, and not very plausible IMHO.
5. There's already a doc in this game, me. How often do you have multiple docs in a 12 person mini?
I had prepared a long ass post, and lost it, so I'll just summarize it. Firstly, I don't think raj made a role to screw me over, but a role that could screwDon Gaetano wrote:There's atleast one thing we all should agree with. If Stewie isn't scum Raj must have created the setup precisly to fool us into lynching Stewie. If he had someone kill by the word of god, and not letting it be inHim.
Considering there was 4 scum with a total possiblity of 3 kills each night, that sounds incredibly unbalanced. 4 scum with a total possiblity of 3 kills each night, is almost unbalanced by itself, and since LB's role doesn't make a SK victory impossible that doesn't equal things out at all. Scum could just refrain from attacking LB, like they must have done, if they weren't stupid.
-----
He also took a lot of time before he claimed, letting him think theese things through.
From Don's point of view, it's the only possible scenario. He knows he isn't scum, and he knows that LB isn't scum. Also, I from what I can gather you are #2 in LB's suspicion list, after me. So if I died, you'd get lynched the next day.elvis_knits wrote: How come if Stewie dies I have to be scum? Why can't it be LB, or you, for that matter? I don't think either of you are scum, but why would it be impossible that anyone other than me would kill Stewie?
Also, I take it that nobody else has ever seen a game with a "framer" role, as none of you said you have. Doesn't that sort of prove Stewie is BSing us? I am not even convinced that a "framer" role even exists.
1. Sk framer... same diffDon Gaetano wrote:The remaining killer is a sk, so there can't be a mafia framer.
And the mafia framer in the game you pointed to, just reversed the investigation of cops. A completely different ability.
And of course:Fritzler wrote:YouDon Gaetano wrote:And who would protect Fritzler the first night anyway...?female dog.
Don Gaetano wrote:Fritzler wrote:YouDon Gaetano wrote:And who would protect Fritzler the first night anyway...?evil woman.
Now that you mention it, perhaps scum doesn't know what else could go wrong, and would rather play it safe.Don Gaetano wrote:In the end-game, when scum will win if anyone but them gets killed, it does. Unless scum decides to play with the town instead of winning right away, and I actually think that would just be rude because it wouldn't help the scum to win, and would only drag out the game for no reason.Just because somebody doesn't put on the lynching vote at a certain time doesn't mean they can't be scum.
I've already posted all my aka's, there's no other identification given in my PM.So, Don, you didn't say what your role's AIM screenname is
1. No, because people who knew the theme would lie. Note how people knew roland was mafia. Also, different game mechanics (shot clock) qualify as themed.rajrhcpfreak wrote:1. i thought it might be a theme, but inhim told me to go ahead with a reg. you didnt need to know anything about the people. just say a name, john or somthing.
2. darq, halo (sara) has a restriction simular to you, you could have used it to your advantage.
4. its the flavor of a raj game. in chat i give a shotclock and a restriction.
Well, the only balancing factor to your role was the fact that nobody should have believed you. You were supposed to be an easy lynch, and you were, but then I had to claim. And that's the real reason why I waited... didn't wait long enough though.LyingBrian wrote: P.P.S. NEVER again can somebody say NOBODY would have a un-nightkillable TOWNIE!!