DoomYoshi wrote:Your argument:
point A; therefore no claim
however, any rational person can see point a to be false; therefore you want a claim
Is this a response to Aage's post? I really don't see the logic behind what you are saying.
I will say if TFO is being truthful about a role block (To any town who had a role block related ability that they used on someone else, don't claim, most likely it was just someone else who did the blocking. If we are to assume that Jonty told the truth about his abilities (I don't see a reason to lie heavily as Neutral Chaotic but then again there was no advantage to lying about his alignment that I can see) I would still say there's room for 2 (maybe more) town or non-scum roles with blocking potential as well as potential scum blockers) that does not prove his is not mafia but it does lend evidence to him being town and eliminates the potential for him being cult. As far as could he be lying? Yes he could but that's heavily WIFOM and while I have no argument with WIFOM being used in a case to some extent (my Jonty case had some WIFOM involved), no case should ever be based solely on WIFOM. Especially considering that the WIFom on this case seems particularly weak and reaching for something. Frankly there are several WIFoms that can be made as to why TFO knows there is a cult that I won't get into (I'm starting to regret my statement yesterday as claiming that there is a cult as the cult leader himself even as a throwaway comment). All we can say for certain is that TFO's role somehow relates to cult. So all this being said, it is not worth a role blocker coming out and confirming that he blocked TFO either. So long story short, no one with a role blocking role should claim whether they wish to confirm or deny TFO being blocked. Considering all the possible wifom arguments and that even if TFO was recruited he makes a poor candidate for lynch, something that safari has heard before several times I'm sure, this actually makes me somewhat suspicious of Safari's motivations in voting TFO.
safariguy5 wrote:I suppose the upside to TFO claiming the roleblock would be that he assumes a town player roleblocked him. But if that is true, then it means that he has an action that is more than one-shot as some of the other claimed powers are. Which means it could draw mafia roleblock to him instead.
Downside of the roleblock claim is that mafia can roleblock him in lieu of a better target. As of yet, nobody has claimed anything that would make it worth mafia's time to roleblock so I would assume they would target TFO now even if town stops roleblocking him (assuming it was a town roleblock in the first place yesterday night).
So all in all, I see little to no upside in TFO claiming his roleblock. In fact, although it verges on WIFOM, wouldn't TFO be a perfect recruit candidate for cult? He already did all the damage he could with the reveal, so unless he's unrecruitable, it makes the most sense to recruit him since he's built some town cred for the preemptive reveal.
vote TFO
Furthermore, it would be a bit hypocritical of me to make a case about TFO announcing that he was role blocked when he maybe needed not to as I have done it in the past in an effort of full disclosure. Besides as evidenced above I don't really find it grounds for making a case.
As far as Greg claiming any action, I would not unless he already feels he has a strong indication on scum from whom he watched which doesn't seem to be the case and Greg seems to remember enough not to fully claim his action uselessly (Even saying no one visited them is arguably too much information). Again several reasons for this, I'll let everyone figure these out on their own as saying some of them can give scum/cult unnecessary information on how to counter this.
I highly doubt that newguy was a vig kill.
1. Most importantly Newguy did not seem overly suspicious to me and from others reactions, neither did he seem overly suspicious to other people.
2. Considering he was the alternate wagon (not including no lynch as that is irrelevant in the face of a vig) yesterday was on MoB=. He seems like would have been a better candidate for a lynch.
3. The lack of another kill and no mention (as far as I saw) of a save or blocked kill, leads me to think that this was mafia and not town.
4. The lack of evidence of what his role/alignment leads to evidence of a janitor type role which is usually sided with the mafia and the opposite of useful to town leads further evidence of this being a mafia kill.
Finally, Rodion brings up a good point about arguments made yesterday about lawful not having kills as I could potentially see that as being too powerful to give all chaotic roles having the town/non-scum killing roles and does make a very WIFOMy weak argument. A list of those who brought forth this argument.
1. Stubbs:
StubbsKVM wrote:Lawful and an unblockable kill?
Stubbs also appears to make a lot of quick one liner comments that can be scummy and usually don't help. "Nothing to report" is not a valid reason to post. You report something if you did find something but unless you are just absolutely saying you have nothing is only valuable to explain away absenses (again not necessarily scummy, I made a post day one basically saying I had nothing to go on just so I wouldn't be silent too long). To provide a full list of comments from stubbs excluding joke votes:
StubbsKVM wrote:Okay, I'm back. Looks like it's claim time for the wolf.
StubbsKVM wrote:Seems like I missed a lot.
Well, I could parrot what has already been said, but I won't.
I think we should focus on finding the cult recruiter first and worry about everyone else later.
StubbsKVM wrote:I think the case on you is pretty good actually. I also like how you're now trying to discredit me for not commenting on it.
I'm waiting for an official votecount before putting my vote down, plus I was focused on another mafia game here. Considering that took a lot of time and effort, I simply wrote a short post here, to show I'm still around and following.
First comment that involves more than three sentences and has significant contribution. Also a possible explanation for why his posts had been short as well as his absence from the game to that point. It was a response to Jonty asking how he proposed finding the cult recruiter.
StubbsKVM wrote:That's L-2 right?
StubbsKVM wrote:Lawful and an unblockable kill?
As seen above.
StubbsKVM wrote:I am still game for a Jonty lynch.
vote Jonty
Lawful with an unblockable kill doesn't make sense to me.
Reconfirming above statement in regards to lawful/kills argument. Also first non-joke vote in the game.
StubbsKVM wrote:There have been some unvotes, so I don't think I'm rushing anything.
Response to people saying to slow down on Jonty after his vote.
StubbsKVM wrote:strike wolf wrote:Alright, I hadn't realized it had been so long since I had posted. I suppose ultimately unvote
I'm still highly skeptical of Jonty's role but as has been mentioned it's one that can potentially be proven. Beyond that, I suppose I really don't have much to say.
He can prove his abilities, but he can't prove his alignment.
StubbsKVM wrote:Can you guys explain to me why you don't want to lynch Jonty, our only lead to the cult.
But are all suddenly interested in MoB, for not wanting a lynch because it favors the cult?
StubbsKVM wrote:vote nolynch
I am not lynching MoB today.
StubbsKVM wrote:vote Jonty
Looks like this is on the table again.
StubbsKVM wrote:nothing to report.
So to summarize, I think it works best to start with the cons and state the counter-argument pro to each:
Con: The vast majority of his posts are very short. He has had 15 posts since his confirmation which is decent, not great but it is not bad either.
Pro: Just because a post is short does not mean it's without substance, many of his posts against Jonty did have a degree of substance to them.
Overall: Some posts with low content do not justify all his posts with low content and many do seem to be as said earlier throwaway comments.
Con: You could argue that he bandwagoned twice on Jonty, once on no lynch and passively on gregg.
Pro: The passive argument for a bandwagon on greg isn't that strong and while he did vote Jonty twice, he seems to have a similar explanation for the original unvote as I do but was clearly a supporter of the lynch in between and unvoted only because it did not appear feasible at the time.
Overall: this still doesn't lend strong support for his no lynch vote but one vote cast solely following town does not equal ritual bandwagoning.
Con: He is amongst those arguing the lawful probably wouldn't have kills argument.
Pro: While weak and wifomy, there is no evidence yet that he and others aren't correct on this matter.
Overall: It may not be proven but it's still a weak case.
Overall opinion of stubbs: I like him as a potential scum candidate but I am not sure he is my top candidate and I will not vote for him yet. Further examination, I would also I have no strong evidence to support that he would be the cult leader over mafia. This does not redeem but if I was to say find someone I strongly felt was cult leader specifically, I would vote for them over a someone who appeared equally scummy in a general sense.
2. Aage
aage wrote:Sorry for the double post, forgot to respond to the actual claim...
StubbsKVM wrote:Lawful and an unblockable kill?
Same, that's why I asked for the class. I can see why a regional traveller would have commute, I don't see why it would have an unblockable kill nor why regional traveller would be lawful aligned. Your race explains the commute and block ("[Gnomes] are skilled with illusions", ~wiki) but WHY would a lawful guy get killing powers?
Besides, regional traveller isn't a class in DnD, and I'm getting the idea it's more of a rogue (based on his abilities), but I'll buy it. If you had made one up, you would've googled "DnD classes" and picked one of those instead.
Jonty claims to be allied to town (n/l and g/n can win together) but his abilities don't exactly help town. I would be fine with a lynch, day 1 deadlines in four actual days and we would probably get a no lynch if we pursued other cases. I would be fine with that too, btw. No need to cheat anyone out of a premium prize on day one because he's neutral, and not lying about it.
unvote.
Aage also seems to doubt the unblockable kill however this post specifically appears to be as much a case of doubting it due to the class claim as his alignment claim. It's also worth noting that ultimately he believes Jonty's claim well enough that he does not vote him and states as much later on.
Conclusion: Based on a brief reading, I have no current reason to believe Aage is not town. A full, less cursory look at his posts may turn up something more solid but considering the evidence I have seen of him, I have not seen reason to believe he is town. I will not reiterate this a third time.
3. MoB Deadly
MoB Deadly wrote:It isn't a case but I want to keep going with jonty
Do you have anything in terms of flavor that can help us?
Like WHY are you lawful instead of good/netural? Is there a reasoning/motivation?
And also can you share why you have an unblockable kill?
I just feel like between lawful and this unblockable kill, jonty is hiding something from his PM.
Ultimately, he was not on the Jonty wagon. From my readings:
MoB Deadly wrote:So..... I don't really want to be the one to do this but time is always ticking and with such a large game it will be VERY hard to get enough momentum on a case for a lynch. I REALLY don't want us to sit idly for a week, then try to put random pressure with a bunch of inactive players on Day 1
1) Most standard mafias call for at least 2 claims. I think that is a minimum for a game this size.
2) Of course it depends on the claims, but ideally we want a lynch so we have SOME information to our advantage in future days
3) The longer we wait the harder it will be do achieve this. It will take time to build momentum on a person, especially with the crappy cases we can make Day 1. It will take time for that person to respond to that pressure with a counter case - or to even force a claim. Then repeat the process again and make a decision on a possible lynch. It would be easier if we have 12 players or so, but with 19 players.... I think this could be a difficult task so that is why I want to get things started asap.
And yes obviously I could be mafia, but at the same time I am drawing a lot of attention to myself with this post.
So.... the pressure HAS to be mostly random, there won't be any convicting evidence this early in the game.
My Proposal:
We all cast 1 single vote. Whoever has the most votes at X deadline, we pressure for a claim.
Even if people dont follow along, hopefully we get some solid progressive activity starting here.
Vote Skillfull for my 1 vote for random pressure. My favorite number is 3 and he is player 3. And I do not believe he has checked in yet.
This caught my attention but based on it alone, I don't feel I have a strong argument. Secondly his next post brought up a very good point.
MoB Deadly wrote:I wish Rodion was playing, we could just vote him because he's
always mafia
Moving on:
MoB Deadly wrote:DoomYoshi wrote:Ever notice that there isn't anything in the rules that says a horse can't climb a rope? Well, there isn't, so I am going to continue trying to do this.
Theory Question:
Is there an advantage in fakeclaiming (not counting the Chaotic Evil SK?)
I was thinking about this as well. The way I am thinking is that most "divisions" probably have mostly equal number of players. I am thinking there is probably more Good than Evil players, because probably there will be more Evil doing killing than Good?
But I think the Neutrals will add a nice element to the later stages of the game, and I don't think they really have to fake claim.
Neutal Lawful
Neutral Neutral
Neutral Chaotic
The biggest curveballs is the
Good Chaotic
Evil Lawful
And of course everyone has to fear the Evil Chaotic.
That Role must have been fun to make
And since there are so many alignments, it will be very hard to catch people in lies. I feel like everyone has more freedom to make stuff up. I haven't been so excited for a complex mafia ever since Mr. Squirrels Adventurer unfinished mafia
The bolded red statement caught my attention for this post mainly because he stated it as matter of fact that there is only one role. I can't condemn for this because even on this page right above this comment, Doom mentioned the possibility of a chaotic evil SK.
MoB Deadly wrote:Yeah my first impression is that CE could be an SK with an alternate win condition. Maybe has to kill a VIP or a specific group of people
Or a Cult would make sense
Jester could make sense as well
Just wanted to make a comment I am pretty sure I hadn't made previously, I highly doubt a chaotic evil Jester simply because since everyone was against them already it would be way too easy to get yourself lynched as one.
MoB Deadly wrote:aage wrote:betiko wrote:aage wrote:DoomYoshi wrote:
The watcher can win with 2 different evil factions... does that mean you treat him as a survivor? Your win conditions overlap 50%.
Yes, but since good/neut outnumbers evil/anything,
and since we won't need to lynch the watcher and he won't need to lynch us, it doesn't matter and I don't care. Even if we end up with GL and GC killing each other off. They have no interest in killing me, I have no interest in killing them.
It's that simple.
you don't sound very good neutral to me aage
Even if I weren't I would still advocate their win condition because
they are town. I'm not saying DY is scum, g/n can win perfectly well with g/l. I'm saying if DY continues to ignore this, I suggest we hang him for scum alliance. You could hang me too, but I don't have scum alliance (or if I did, at least I'm not blabbing about it all over the topic).
f*ck. With so many players it is hard to find the trees through the forest here. I am kind of overwhelmed with everyone pulling in different directions.
1. I am tempted to put my vote on jonty, but I am going to hold off for now, I think we can find a stronger case if we keep discussion up.
2. Chaotic does NOT equal - anti-town. They may not be "as town" as good/neutral or good/lawful. But surely good/chaotic can win with town.
3. WTF is this soft claim by aage. I don't like that at all.
FOS Aage
4. Even though I agree with aage that town is mostly good/neutral, and I disagree with what most of DoomYoshi has said, I dont think DY looks scummy. I think aage looks more scummy than DY right now.
EBWOP
So here he is saying he feels Aage looks more scummy and he is tempted to vote Jonty:
two posts from him later:
MoB Deadly wrote:I was going to prefer to vote doomYoshi over jonty, but Strike wolf's post here makes a lot of sense.
I count 8 votes on Jonty I think that is L-2, I think it is time for a claim.
Now there is roughly a page worth of information between this and where he posted this but he seems to have a change of heart on who he should vote for as he says that he was before that latest post leaning doomyoshi which he stated outright over Jonty in the second post and is implied about Aage from the first post. So I would at least like for MoB to give his reasonings on this before I leave it be or forward my case.'
So overall, I'm not sure what to make of MoB. As I said the no lynch/subject to change case on him was weak IMO but some of this other stuff does make me wonder, though I can see most of it being coincidental or justified.
4. Dazza
dazza2008 wrote:Just caught up. My internet was down for a couple of days. Not sure if I believe Jonty or not. Seems odd that he has the kill to me. Not that I know loads about flavour but it seems odd.
He did make the same statement but his seems to be as much motivated on sheeping flavor due to limited game knowledge (not a crime or scummy, something we all do when we are unfamiliar with flavor). So I'm not reading too much into it.
5. Epitaph1
Epitaph1 wrote:I think jonty sounds like the equivalent to some kind of 3rd party survivor role. Commutes are strictly self-preservation, and RB'ing and unblockable kills sound like chaos if you ask me.
I'm not familiar at all with DnD, so I can't comment on the flavor too much. Regional traveler sounds weird, but I really have no idea.
Re: NL--I won't be upset if we'd rather go NL but, as I mentioned above, jonty's abilities strike me as chaotic which means there's a decent chance he's lying about his role.
I'll be busy this weekend, but I'll make an effort to get back before the deadline.
His overall contributions are fairly limited and most of the content seems to be saying the same as someone before him. None of this is necessarily damning but it is worth noting as I would say if nothing else that contribution wise he is the safest lynch presented thus far.
Based on this information I find Stubbs to be the best candidate and Epitaph to be the second best.
As far as why I had no vote at the end of the day, this doesn't really seem that important but basically, I didn't think mine was necessary at the end. I was pretty sure everyone knew where I stood on Jonty, I didn't think reinforcing that by revoting him needed to be done as he had enough votes that he appeared to be the lynch candidate with or without my vote and my vote certainly wasn't going to be used to prevent that. As far as initially unvoting, simply I had forgotten that Edoc stated that whoever had the most votes would be lynched (Yeah I had gotten myself really turned around on Day 1) and at the time it did not seem there was enough momentum to lynch Jonty. I had said every viable point I had about his case and others had brought up the issues with regional traveler and other possible doubts but there was little if any momentum at the time to lynch Jonty outside of those already voting him. So yes at that point, I thought keeping my vote on him seemed to be an effort in futility.
In conclusion, sorry if this is a tl;dr post to most of you.
