Standard Baker procedure you receive something in the night you claim it to let the other person know it worked etcIn post 1148, Andrius wrote:Persivul is 100% town.
I am confirming receipt of something I received in the middle of the night.
You know who you are.
Was suspicious the whole thing was a buddying attempt, like, THANKS FOR NOT LYNCHING ME IM POWERFUL TYIn post 1151, Andrius wrote:I have to admit though: you were right to send it to me.
I'm not sure what I think of your first line though.
Regardless, I trust you.
Still was a townread.
The concern over buddying and/or paranoia over scum Strahd messengering people as a FREE action was suspicious.In post 1241, Andrius wrote:FULL DISCLOSURE:
I received a message from someone overnight.
They basically told me that they have a similar role to Jason's but stronger and more.
Said they hope I'm a True Friend.
Capitalized letters were theirs.
While I appreciate the vote of confidence messaging me, I can't help shake the fact that this is all sorts of troublesome.
Because Messenger as a not free action is pointless.
The fact that drealmers HAS this as a free action confirms my thoughts.
The fact that he didn't track last night is, frankly, worrying.
Healthy amount of skepticism.In post 1242, Andrius wrote:If it weren't for this I'd still be townreading them.
Clarifying to someone.In post 1245, Andrius wrote:They specifically told me who it was, implying that they wanted to in what could have been an anonymous message.
Messengering and other actions is strong... if the person would actually DO the other action.In post 1246, Andrius wrote:Thoughts:
+This person can, presumably, both message and do their action in the night. Which is strong. Two actions one night, strong. Unless messaging is free.
+Which makes me instantly suspect scum from mod-side.
+If town, this person is somewhat of a protective role, due to the relation to Jason.
+Again, the mod-side argument is scum should also have a protective role.
Again, healthy amount of skepticism. The only innocents are bodies.
Scum should also have a form of protective ability.
The TRUE FRIEND was unsettling.In post 1247, Andrius wrote:Sly, you're talking about cologne.
I'm wondering if that's what this is.
Especially given the fact that I thought it was buddying and the fact that you don't know me well enough to simply state your name as reason to trust me.
Messenger is stupid for sole role at night.In post 1251, Andrius wrote:I mean, if this is indeed POWER HEAVY and/or ROLE MADNESS then, yeah, we should expect some overlap.
That being said, scum also have roles and they have to be balanced within their team so they'll likely have THINGs as well.
Not to mention a Traitor.
Doesn't change the fact that we're scumhunting first and scrutinizing claims as a secondary means of finding scum.
Scum have powers too.
There is value in pretending to be town.
Dunn brought up the fact that the messenger might be trying to frame someone.In post 1255, Andrius wrote:This is possible, but their tone/words makes me believe they are who they say they are.In post 1254, Dunnstral wrote:between the messenger and pine I'm much more likely to believe that pine is scum.
Also, keep in mind that they could have fake identified themself through the anonymous message.
It made sense, to me, that drealmerz would write some TRUE FRIEND crap since we're not friends and don't have a history together to simply say I AM DREALMERZ NO WORDS ARE NECESSARY JUST LOOK INTO MY EYES.
Asking TownSlySly his thoughts. Because this is clearly bothering me and Sly is best bro in this game.
This post in particular made me feel like it wasn't drealmerz who sent the message because he was playing cute re: messenger.In post 1316, Andrius wrote:No, I think 3 scum and a traitor is totally viable in a power-heavy, known-swingy game.In post 1313, drealmerz7 wrote:scum:
culted
andrius
slysly
shaziro
my view on persivul has switched to more likely completely wrong/misguided town
I think there are 3 scum because of the traitor, otherwise I'd be inclined 4 because of the seeming powers out there
I don't think multiple traitors makes sense
a messenger sounds interesting, not familiar with those type of mechanics so much so really no idea how it'd work
this is a flavor game and all the things have been flavor heavy - can you tell us how the message was relayed to you, andrius? the sender identified themselves and you believe it was them, did they just come to your room at night and talk to you? whatever you can share would be good, I think, at this point, since you've pretty much outed the more crucial info, which:
I have a hugescum ping here because you've outted their role (even if not fully, but to a degree that I'd be uncomfortable with if I were the messenger, of course not confirming nor denying if I am or not) it seems they trusted you with some private info and you dislcosed it, even if anonymously.
Mod PM'd me a separate message from the DAYBREAK general one we all got.
For someone who frowns on outing this, you want details?
If I add flavor people might reverse-engineer what type of role it came from.
Also I disagree with your "hugescum ping" here because its weak as shit.
If I received a message that said DIE ANDY DIE you think I wouldn't out it?
And hey, what I received smelled of cologne so I definitely think it was a buddying attempt.
People who know me know they don't have to send secret messages to get at my heart.
He's barking up the tree but he doesn't want to commit.
I inferred it wasn't him.
It was.
lol
Explaining messenger to the yet-unrevealed messenger.In post 1318, Andrius wrote:Messenger is simply (with/without flavor ofc)
YOU RECEIVED A MESSAGE DURING THE NIGHT:
"WORDS"
Sender may or may not be named. Mine chose to reveal himself, or at least claim who he said he was.
In post 1321, Andrius wrote:UhhhhhhIn post 1319, drealmerz7 wrote:yeah that's not what I was looking for but if you don't want to share that's cool I won't push it
This post was also another ITS NOT DREALMERZ since he's asking about flavor.In post 1322, Andrius wrote:You know what.
I think this confirms my TINFOIL. The messenger might be STRAHD. Could be a means of reaching a traitor that doesn't cost an action.
The messenger claimed to beSpoiler:
For someone who's scumreading me for outing him, he sure wanted to know about the flavor etc.
It made me think it wasn't him and felt that outing the fact that someone was framing him was something the town should know.
In hindsight, if he didn't want to be outed, why did he push so hard for info/flavor that he already knew?
Especially since he didn't actually tell me anything about his role other than the receipt of the message and vague IM STRONGER THAN JASON.
Subtly claiming the flavor.
Explaining.In post 1332, Andrius wrote:If this wasn't me being overt about flavor I don't know how else to do it.
drealmers in a tiffy over the whole debacle.In post 1335, Andrius wrote:drealmerz please.
Think about it.
I know nothing about your role.
That could be scum/ someone else trolling for all that.
I don't know how you're getting scum from this. At all. There's no play one way or the other regarding messengers.
I don't KNOW you're the sender. Nothing confirms you as sender. Mod didn't name you.
I hesitated because if it WASNT YOU you wouldn't need to ASK FOR FLAVOR you could have just been tee hee I know what it is because its me and not said anything.
You didn't have to bark up your own tree.
Again, if he didn't want to be outed, why push?
The only thing the thread and I knew was that he was a messenger at this point.
His overreaction was what led him to the fullclaim.
Not me.
Thought process.In post 1342, Andrius wrote:Which is why I didn't say anything immediately.
You played ball with me.
Then I got the impression it wasn't you.
And then you didn't even have to confirm/deny.
shrug
Explaining.In post 1354, Andrius wrote:Look I get you had some plan as to what I'd do.
Sorry I don't conform to your intended outcome.
I play openly and, frankly, the TRUE FRIEND thing was straight-up buddying.
I may not be here tomorrow. Might take a day from this site.
TRUE FRIEND still worst part of the message.
STRONGER THAN JASON is #2.
Agreeing that dreamlerz is making this his one big deal.In post 1387, Andrius wrote:In post 1385, Shaziro wrote:I do think Dreal is panicing a lot for something that shouldn't be that major. I don't know that it's scummy to do so, though.
