Mini 530: Guitar Hero Mafia: It's Finally Over

[Thanatos]

Has, you said you were going to continue your thoughts on everyone involved. I tend to agree with you, but I'd like to ask some questions that should wait until I have a clearer Idea of where you stand in this game.

[Thanatos]

Wait, not Has. HC.

[Haschel Cedricson]

Free time coming up tonight, so I'll have something for real this time.

[Atticus]

Vote Count

Gorrad (1): Haschel cedricson
Haschel Cedricson (2): Gorrad, TheSweatPantsNinja
TheSweatpantsNinja (1): ChaosOmega

Not voting (4): Thanatos, Dark Ermac, perfect628, hasdgfas

For reference (has, HC) what I'm annoyed at is the Nibbler avatars.

[hasdgfas]

For reference (has, HC) what I'm annoyed at is the Nibbler avatars.

Also, thinking about what Gorrad claimed, is it possible that he claimed something ridiculous like that just to try to survive and use a detrimental ability tonight then claim WIFOM tomorrow when he's alive? I've seen it done in older games before and wondered what other people thought of the possibility.

[Haschel Cedricson]

Sorry 'bout the delay. I was browsing the forums and rereading the thread when my roommate said "Hey, there's Rock Band at Jex's house. Wanna come?" I did, and when I came back... well, let's just say I don't want to submit you all to any more drunk posts.

Okay, there are eight people left alive. However, Dark Ermac and perfect628 have needed replacement for quite some time. Therefore, there are effectively six active players. I am pro-town*, so that lowers it even further to five people to be closely scrutinized. It is possible that Dark Ermac or perfect628 are Mafia. However, neither of these two can be the SK, because both needed replacement well before night started. Therefore, the SK is amongst the active five. Likewise, Dark Ermac and perfect628 cannot BOTH be the remaining Mafia, as if that were the case, no Mafia kill would have been submitted.

So, out of ChaosOmega, Gorrad, hasgfas, Thanatos, and TheSweatpantsNinja we have at least two scum.

hasgfas is clear in my mind, as no other explanation for how the day was extended has been offered.

Let's take a look at Jex/TSPN. Jex really only had three posts of substance before being replaced, but they appear to be pro-town. She gives a logical case against DG, and then when DG explains later on, Jex asks one more question of clarification before unvoting in a later post. I enjoy logic that is consistent with itself, and Jex throws up no major flags.**

Now, TSPN jump-starts the game by putting d3s at L-1. Later, when SM replaces in, he unvotes to give her a chance to defend herself, but apparently he was comfortable enough with his vote to forget that he unvoted, as a few posts later he says

"I think my vote will stay on SM for now, because of d3sisted's play. Particularly I don't like his seeming inattention to detail and vote switching, like he's trying to find any bandwagon that will stick.

" From this, one can infer that he agrees with the case on SM at some level.

DG is lynched and found to be scum. In his first post of the day, TSPN now no longer finds SM scummy:

while d3sisted's play was lazy and inattentive, it wasn't all

that

scummy...

So, d3s goes from being scummy enough to put at L-1 to still-scummy-enough-to-think-he's-voting-for-the-replacement to "[not] all

that

scummy." It's possible he changed his mind overnight. It's also possible that he knows SM is innocent. I can't tell which of these is true.

Other things I notice about TSPN: I understand the second part of his initial vote on Gorrad (the jester stuff) but not the first (order on the DGwagon). Also, his post 488 appears to defend me against Gorrad at the same time he is voting for me, which is a bit of a contradiction. Post 443 strikes me as disingenuous; I'm not sure if he himself believes what he says.

There are enough inconsistencies in TSPN's play to bother me, but he makes (mostly) good points about Gorrad, which combined with my distrust of his claim means that I'm not shifting my vote yet.

This took longer than I thought, so I'll come back later tonight for ChaosOmega and Thanatos.

*Obviously you only have my word that I'm pro-town, but in order for you to understand my logic, you have to understand my postulates.

**Out of all the people I've ever played Mafia with, IRL and on forums, Jex is the hardest person for me to read.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

DG being scum pushed me a long ways toward feeling better about SM being town.

And I think of being on the end of a scum wagon early in a game as a minor tell. A minor one, but a tell nonetheless.

Huh. I had forgotten that I had unvoted her, actually. Well, it was a while ago, I think that's what happened.

And yes, I defended you while voting for you, but, well, its not like my vote had a lot of teeth.

[Gorrad]

Ok, I got an idea. I'll motivate someone I think is town tonight. We've lost three vanillas, I would assume no more than one more. Good odd's I'll hit someone with a power role, they can confirm that I motivated them, and bada bing bada boom I'm confirmed. A scum motivator is just nuts.

[ChaosOmega]

Gorrad: I like the motivating someone pro-town plan. I think it's a great strategy. Especially if they confirm it hit them, so that way we can lose two power roles as opposed to one.

And TheSweatpantsNinja, as to why I think you're scum. Two of your more recent posts have struck me the wrong way. The first one:

I think she's town. But may as well wait until we know for sure before deciding what to do next.

You say this right before the lynch scene is posted, showing SeraphicMirth to be a townie. It looks like you posted that to look innocent. It looks like something scum would say, knowing that it's a mislynch. As for your second post:

If he's not dead tomorrow, then we should probably lynch him then.

Someone mentioned it before, but that's a shitload of WIFOM. This post, plus your post before casting doubt on his role, makes it look like you're trying whatever you can to get Gorrad lynched, whether it be today or the next day.

[Thanatos]

DG pushed you to believing she was Town? If anything, it should have done the exact oposite. The cornerstone of my case on her was her distancing with DG.

[Gorrad]

CO, it means we get twice the power role as well. If I accidently hit scum or SK, then no one claims and I'm confirmed. If I hit investigative, we get twice the chances of outting scum. If it's protective, they shouldn't claim. I'm willing to be lynched over a doc getting NKd. If it's some other role, I dunno, but I'm hoping for investigative here.

[Thanatos]

How exactly does your power work, anyways?

[Thanatos]

And how does someone NOT claiming confirm you?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

The cornerstone of my case on her was her distancing with DG.

Yeah, but, as I said at the time, I didn't really buy the distancing argument. It didn't make sense to me that as scum she would push a bandwagon onto a fellow scum.

And sure, I could be scum supporting a townie to make myself look good. I'm not expecting to be cleared based on defending SM, but (and this isn't the only game where this happened to me) I hate how people who bandwagon a townie turn on the people who didn't, as if its

more

suspicious to not be on a townie bandwagon. Its like an invitation for the scum to bandwagon townies. I certainly don't see how you've proven that its any more likely that I was scum because I wasn't on the SM bandwagon.

As for gorrad: Yeah, I want him dead, because I think he's scum, and I don't completely buy his role. However, unless we should happen to have two doctors, with that claim and with two killing groups, he's dead. If he's not dead, hopefully he'll have confirmed his role, but if he's not, then yeah, I'd probably start off going with a gorrad wagon unless I have a good reason not to. He's got a day's reprieve from me because of his claim, but only a day.

[Gorrad]

The way my role works is that each night I tell the mod that I want to protect someone, or I want to motivate someone. Then that person is protected or motivated. If I hit a killing role, I'm confirmed because we have three kills and no one has to claim. I'm trying not to hit a killing role.

In other news, both TSN and HC are looking scummy to me. They should probably die.

[Thanatos]

So does the person become alerted to the motivation?

[Gorrad]

I'd assume so. Otherwise they wouldn't know to pick a second target. If they don't have a night action, they probably wouldn't.

[Haschel Cedricson]

My night has become booked by, of all things, my Basketball Coaching class, so no long post tonight.

I would like to ask, though, Gorrad has said several times that I am scum, with no reason other than "both TSN and HC are looking scummy to me" and "Tommorow, kill Haschel. He's scum." Do you have anything that can actually be defended, or is your case just OMGUS?

[Gorrad]

Ah, sorry. It's 10% OMGUS, 90% SM's arguments yesterday. We know SM to be town now, and she was adamant about your lynch. People should reread from the time she came in if they haven't already, it's a good read. TSN's trying to lynch me as a power role, already setting up his vote tommorow. Seriously, as OMGUSful as it is, is it that hard to believe my claim? Given Hasd's role, is another nonsong power role that surprising? Plus I can bloody well prove my role by motivating, and you're STILL suspicious. Motivator is NOT a scum role.

Don't set up a lynch on a confirmable role. It's not bloody well smart!

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Well, I agree with that. Which is why I'm no longer voting for you today. But I'm suspicious of you, and hence suspicious of the claim. So you'll excuse me if I'm not immediately convinced you're pro-town. The OMGUSy, any-port-in-a-storm accusations aren't really helping me out either.

[Haschel Cedricson]

Alright, I reread ChaosOmega and Thanatos, but nothing useful jumped out at me. I did note Thanatos' belief in Gorrad's claim, which I disagree with, and ChaosOmega has this tendency to vote first and explain later that I don't particularly care for, but both players seem to be using internally consistent logic.

Gorrad: I am aware that the motivator is, in theory, testable. But as I mentioned before, I think the odds of you actually having the motivator role are not very good. I just can't shake the feeling that if we go to night, whoever you target will conveniently have also been targeted by scum.

As for the 90% of your case against me that was based on SeraphicMirth's arguments, I'd like you to reread post 386.

ChaosOmega: Do you believe Gorrad's claim? Why or why not?

[Gorrad]

I read it. It doesn't change my opinion. I'm town, Hasd is pretty close to confirmed, and she stated clearly that you were next on her list.

Also, the whole 'made a DG-d3sisted connection' thing? D3sisted was a terrible player. You could have been bussing DG and setting up a d3sisted lynch, or you could have been expecting to lynch d3sisted and were going to use that to say that DG was less scummy. Either way, you pointed out a connection between a scum and a town. That's not a tally in your 'pro-town' spot.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I just can't shake the feeling that if we go to night, whoever you target will conveniently have also been targeted by scum.

That feels like setting up some WIFOM of your own to me.

[Haschel Cedricson]

That feels like setting up some WIFOM of your own to me.

I don't see how that's WIFOM at all.

[Thanatos]

Ok, let me settle this right now.

Mod: IF there is, and feel free to make it up on the fly if there is not, but if there is a Motivator role, would we be made aware we had it. At the very least, tell us if you can't answer

You can motivate someone. Anyone. even if it hits a scum, then we'll have a solid lead when (if) you turn up truthful.

At the very least, there's no reason to kill him today, I feel. If anyone sees a problem with this, feel free.