Yes, I thought it meant VT. That is the obvious implication of being 'pro-town' and 'unremarkable.' This is a normal game, so I expect any role to be 'unremarkable' in the sense you are suggesting.
The Fonz wrote:So it makes sense for him to not claim as townie, and also as doc. So by not claiming, he leaves the scum in the dark as to whether he's powerrole.
Only if he doesn't get lynched - which is your core assumption, that he might yet get out of it. Everyone knows who he is if he does get lynched, unless he's something beyond a plain townie or doc anyway.
Well, quite. Again, if he is VT, the sole consequence of his claiming would be to get himself lynched, and if by some miracle a townie claim doesn't get him lynched, the town will be in a worse position than if he hadn't claimed. A vanilla townie should NEVER EVER EVER claim day one.
If he's our doc, I'd agree that he's taking a big risk here, one that I probably wouldn't take myself. But it's a logically consistent position that the payoff of not getting lynched as a claimed doc is barely better than getting lynched, so it's better to gamble on surviving without claiming (for which the payoff is hugely superior to either alternative).
The Fonz wrote:The antitown reasons you've suggested amount, basically, to 'too townie.'
You're going to have to explain this for me. I thought he was scummy so I voted him. Other people agreed with him and he got to lynch -1. Then he's refusing to claim, and dragging it out limiting our options as the deadline draws closer. How is this "too townie"?
I'm not suggesting your
entire case
against him is 'too townie.' I'm saying this specific bit is too townie:
5) You're scum hoping to confuse us and avoid a lynch by doing something that rarely makes sense.
In response to this:
I'm entertaining the possibility that I'm wrong (shocking, eh?) and he's pro-town with a good reason for being tight-lipped, but I don't see how I can act on it as it seems much less likely than the obvious conclusion: he's scum (or otherwise anti-town) and he's bluffing.
That's not the obvious conclusion. Scum generally aren't enormously reticent about claiming power-role to save their own hides. Which brings us back to your point five. It's possible, but wouldn't be the first thing I thought of, that he's scum trying to confuse us. Frankly, I think the most likely explanation is one you've ignored: inHim has a policy/habit not to claim day one, regardless of alignment, and it's no tell at all. He's already told you if you're convinced by his prior actions that he's scum, then you should be voting him.
Here's another question: who
should
claim at lynch -1? Your logic suggests that everyone should hold on to that chance of surviving without a claim and fight to the bitter end. If you ask me, that sounds like a great way to get shit Day 1's where Every. Single. Person. refuses to play ball because, hey, they might get away without getting lynched, and then the town has to make blind lynches if they want a lynch at all.
Well, no, the town doesn't have to make blind lynches. You lynch the scummiest person, same as you always would.
To answer the actual question though, I don't myself support the 'never claim as doc day one' position, so I'd say any power role. What I'm saying is I understand the position, it has some merit, and it's not necessarily scummy. If you bought 'never claim as doc' the answer would be 'Any powerrole that isn't doc.'
