Mini 277 - Webcomic Mafia - Game Over!

[Aelyn]

*bump* over locked threads.

EDIT: Given the fact that the night was over a weekend, I have extended the night deadline to

1:00 pm Wednesday GMT

(just under 24 hours from this post). Any choices not in by the deadline will be randomised.

[Aelyn]

Day breaks once more, and remarkably there's still no deaths other than the seppeku Miko committed.

It is now Day2.

With 11 alive, it is 6 to lynch.

[Thok]

Curious. I wonder if we have a cult-that would explain the lack of nightkills so far.

[TSAGod]

Curious. I wonder if we have a cult-that would explain the lack of nightkills so far.

Wouldn't just having a cult be completely rediculous though?

If there isn't a nightkill element, then what's to stop us from no lynching everyday so we all become cult members and win?

[Thok]

Some of us might have major win conditions that require us to avoid being culted?

[Adele]

Isn't it rather more likely there are protection-related roles / roleblockers etc?

[bertrand]

Isn't it rather more likely there are protection-related roles / roleblockers etc?

Yeah. The Roleblocker should probably aim at the same person again and see what happens.

[Adele]

The Roleblocker should probably aim at the same person again and see what happens.

Should he? How do you know the scum can't choose who to send out? Or maybe you're scum and know the lack of kill had nothing to do with a roleblocker.

FOS: bertrand

. That post could easily have positive intention behind it, but it could just as easily be scummy.

[TSAGod]

If a roleblocker did stop it, would it make sense to out themselves for the scum? The doctor may have done it instead, but it could net us a quick scum.

[Fuldu]

If a roleblocker did stop it, would it make sense to out themselves for the scum? The doctor may have done it instead, but it could net us a quick scum.

The roleblocker shouldn't out themself on the off chance that they were the reason for the lack of a kill. Too many other possible explanations, not the least of which is that the scum have second win conditions that make choosing not to kill a feasible strategy.

The only reason I would want a roleblocker to come out at this stage is if they blocked the same person both nights. Then there's a good chance they've found scum. Otherwise, the odds aren't to the town's benefit at this point.

[Pie_is_good]

The roleblocker shouldn't out themself on the off chance that they were the reason for the lack of a kill. Too many other possible explanations, not the least of which is that the scum have second win conditions that make choosing not to kill a feasible strategy.

QFT.

It's too early to determine anything from Roleblockers claiming, and it's entirely possible that the roleblocker, should there be one, isn't responsible for the kills (or lack thereof).

[bertrand]

The only reason I would want a roleblocker to come out at this stage is if they blocked the same person both nights. Then there's a good chance they've found scum. Otherwise, the odds aren't to the town's benefit at this point.

That's why I said to aim at the same person again.

[Fuldu]

The only reason I would want a roleblocker to come out at this stage is if they blocked the same person both nights. Then there's a good chance they've found scum. Otherwise, the odds aren't to the town's benefit at this point.

That's why I said to aim at the same person again.

Except that in the long run that's a bad strategy.

If

the roleblocker did that, then I'd want to know about it because in this particular instance it might mean we got lucky. But that doesn't mean that a roleblocker

should

do that.

[Akonas]

I rather liked my death scene. Oh well. Go town!!!

[Nemesis]

Yeah, sorry about that Akonas.

Bertrand has been acting fairly scummily all through this game, I don't know if he's scum, town or something in the middle. Guiding power roles is not usually a good idea.

Besides, we must have more than an SK to worry about...

If the roleblocker + the doc were lucky then neither of them might know which night they were lucky on anyway. I think we should stop trying to guide the power roles, I also think powerroles shouldn't come out yet.

If the roleblocker wasn't lucky and roleblocked the same person twice then it was the doc who was lucky and the roleblocker will make us lynch the wrong person as well as make the doc protect him in future thus giving scum a free kill.

[VitaminR]

All this talk of power roles is a bit useless. The only people who can judge whether to come forward or not are the roleblocker/docs themselves. They have the information, not the town.

If there isn't a nightkill element, then what's to stop us from no lynching everyday so we all become cult members and win?

Eh? That's not even how cults work.

Also, I think Thok's point was that we might have a cult instead of an SK to partially explain the lack of nightkills. Again, speculation is a bit useless. We need solid evidence, people!

[TSAGod]

Also, I think Thok's point was that we might have a cult instead of an SK to partially explain the lack of nightkills. Again, speculation is a bit useless. We need solid evidence, people!

Okay...I'll claim then. I'm the cult leader....[/sarcasm]

um...

vote Thok

for getting us off of lynching scum and instead getting us to figure the setup out, based on one lynch and a lack of kills.

[Pie_is_good]

I'll agree with TSA on this one.

Vote: Thok

Basing a risky short-term strategy on very limited information is bad play.

Oh, and if anybody has sigs turned off or whatever: I'm going to be out of town from
Saturday the 18th to Friday the 24th.

[Fuldu]

I'll agree with TSA on this one.

Vote: Thok

Basing a risky short-term strategy on very limited information is bad play.

I don't see Thok as having proposed any sort of strategy at all. He merely suggested the existence of a cult. bertrand was the one proposing a risky short-term strategy.

As of now, though, I'm not sure if I want to vote bertrand for that or vote Pie for placing a vote on the basis of an inapplicable argument.

[Nemesis]

As of now, though, I'm not sure if I want to vote bertrand for that or vote Pie for placing a vote on the basis of an inapplicable argument.

Pie was a sheep, TSAGod had the weird reason. 3 potential lynchs, I'd rather go for Bertrand out of the three but I am in no hurry to vote.

[StevieT92]

Vote: Bertrand

. I just generally think he's scummy, and too controlling.

[Fuldu]

Pie was a sheep, TSAGod had the weird reason. 3 potential lynchs, I'd rather go for Bertrand out of the three but I am in no hurry to vote.

TSAGod's reason for voting isn't a great one, but his description of Thok's actions is factually accurate. Thok did move the discussion toward issues of setup, even if in what I would consider a fairly harmless way. Pie was saying he was promoting a "strategy," which is at odds with any interpretation I can come up with for Thok's posts.

[VitaminR]

Okay...I'll claim then. I'm the cult leader....[/sarcasm]

Well, at least that sarcastic remark was justified and appropriate.

Pie was a sheep, TSAGod had the weird reason. 3 potential lynchs, I'd rather go for Bertrand out of the three but I am in no hurry to vote.

Whoa.. 3 potential lynches? Based on that?

Vote: Nemesis

for limiting the town's scope based solely on two votes on a slow day 2 and a new player's eccentric behaviour.

[Nemesis]

I was saying that for those couple of posts there was a number of people who had said something scummy and I didn't want to speedlynch any of them. That means I was doing the opposite of what you are saying... I was saying we shouldn't lynch any of them now and we should keep this in mind. Lynches this early in the day mean hardly anyone has to actually say something that could come across scummy.

In case you forgot I defended Pie earlier and said Bertrand was acting scummily earlier as well... I also voted for TSAGod. None of those actions did a lot and we ended up lynching someone else because they wouldn't claim. I feel that if we let people slide then we will do the same thing so keep this is in mind later, but I also feel that some people who don't really post are just avoiding suspicion totally and we shouldn't allow that to happen either. I will vote later, just not yet... I want more discussion before we consider lynching someone and because I want more discussion it means that I am not limiting the town's scope as you say I am...

[bertrand]

Vote: Bertrand

. I just generally think he's scummy, and too controlling.

What the hell, I just made a suggestion.

If you think it's a bad idea, tell me. But I still think the role blocker should aim wherever he did again, as it could net us a quick scum. I don't see how that's a bad strategy. Someone explain it please.