[Official] D&D Mafia ~ Endgame

[dazza2008]

I must have missed what we know he lied about. I looked back through and I do not know what you mean. Can you point it out please? Sorry for being an idiot(if I am).

fastposted.

[rishaed]

I'm having a hard time believing the role. You're basically saying you're a super-JOAT, as you get to pick your own abilities from a list.

I don't trust it.

On one hand it'd be quite hard to make up all the roles inside of it. On the other hand....He's probably a top pick on the recruiting list if he doesn't get lynched and he's telling the truth..... Others have posted D&D flavour that seems contrary, and I find it to be wrong because it's so powerful, but yet you claimed neutral alignment and not chaotic/lawful. Remember that Edoc said that the more powerful roles would go to the ones that are either lawful/chaotic. I think he's lying about alignment at least, if not about his role. My vote stands.

Some say that sorcerors don't have to prepare their spells (thus would be able to use them that night). I have more issues with the alignment for said reasons. He claimed good/neut. but has a superpowerful role. Edoc straight up told us that the weight of the PR (power role) would be effected by alignment. It is too powerful for a good/neut alignment. I would wager chaotic alignment more than lawful alignment on this one, which also leaves perhaps the possibility for him to be the cult recruiter fake claiming.

[StubbsKVM]

vote rishaed

you're pushing it.

[rishaed]

vote rishaed

you're pushing it.

An OMGUS? Nice reaction. I just did exactly what dazza wanted, pointed out why I was voting you. If you really want to vote someone who is presenting a case, find either a counter case or focus the attention on another case. Only another reason to keep my vote on you.

[strike wolf]

The my role is important" argument means nothing. Its just a common argument for when the accused has no other defense. The OMGus does not help his case at all. Im ofinding myself more convinced that Stubbs is the right lynch. I will delay if others feel they still want to talk but I personally dont have anything on my mind worth addressing.

[aage]

I agree with Strike's sentiments. There isn't anything else to be gained from putting pressure on Stubbs, either we decide to lynch or we decide to spare him. I'm not going to remove my vote. Mostly because his latest post is too non-caring for a town player.

Do what you want. You'll be losing a powerful allie if you decide to lynch me.

Are you bitter? Did we not pay enough attention to your minuscule posts? Is this wagon unreasonable? Do you think you're misunderstood? Did we miss the post in which you explained why your role does make sense? Or do you really not give a damn? (You are aware this is an official game, right?)

Either way, this looks bad on you.

[Rodion]

I find Stubbs' claim fishy as well, but there is no need to actively "hammer" him. As things are, he'll be killed come the deadline. On the off chance he is town, I'd like him to have the time to make one more post that deeper explains his role and actions or lack thereof.

No, but there's also no need forever to wait either. This day has already been quite damaging and in my PoV, I think it's best to cut losses and lynch him unless something really good comes back. Am I rushing the lynch? No, I could have hammered. However, I am letting Stubbs know that his time *IS* running out and that he better get his shit together.

I get it. I was just signaling that I didn't want anyone to hammer before he got to explain himself. Now that he did we can move on and hammer as far as I'm concerned.

I must have missed what we know he lied about. I looked back through and I do not know what you mean. Can you point it out please? Sorry for being an idiot(if I am).

fastposted.

The lie is saying that, as a sorcerer, he has to prepare a spell (wizards need to prepare; sorcerers do not).

Everything else is just speculation: sorcerers tend to be chaotic, but some can be lawful, so that is not an issue. The thing about a non-extreme alignment being powerful is also speculation, as we could never really know exactly how powerful Stubbs' claimed spells are before he ever got to claim them.

[rishaed]

I object rodion, dare say it is fact unless edoc decided to screw with us in this thread
Official D&D in Discussions thread
from that thread
[quote="edocsil]The majority of players would be (neutral, good), a modest number of (neutral, neutral) and a smaller group of (something, evil). The (neutral, good) can all win together and would be "town". The (lawful, good) and the (chaotic, good) would win with town but not with each other. (lawful, evil) and (neutral, evil) would represent the scum. (Chaotic, evil) would be something that could only win by itself. Some sort of solo dominator, SK, Cult, Arsonist, or other such thing is possible.

Basically lawful can't win with chaotic, and evil can't win with good, unless all good and evil living are lawful. Good and lawful players would not have to survive to win, so long as their WC was met before the game ended. The more "extreme" a role is the more powerful it would be. (Chaotic, good/evil) would both have powerful abilities, while (neutral, neutral) would have it's primary power in the vote and something to help them survive. (Lawfull, good/evil) would be somewhere in between in terms of power. [/quote]
This is why I am voting stubbs after he claimed, and why I reasoned as such. If he would have claimed chaotic/lawful I might have unvoted him.
This should also put to rest which factions are scum and which are "town".

[rishaed]

I object rodion, dare say it is fact unless edoc decided to screw with us in this thread
Official D&D in Discussions thread
from that thread

The majority of players would be (neutral, good), a modest number of (neutral, neutral) and a smaller group of (something, evil). The (neutral, good) can all win together and would be "town". The (lawful, good) and the (chaotic, good) would win with town but not with each other. (lawful, evil) and (neutral, evil) would represent the scum. (Chaotic, evil) would be something that could only win by itself. Some sort of solo dominator, SK, Cult, Arsonist, or other such thing is possible.

Basically lawful can't win with chaotic, and evil can't win with good, unless all good and evil living are lawful. Good and lawful players would not have to survive to win, so long as their WC was met before the game ended. The more "extreme" a role is the more powerful it would be. (Chaotic, good/evil) would both have powerful abilities, while (neutral, neutral) would have it's primary power in the vote and something to help them survive. (Lawfull, good/evil) would be somewhere in between in terms of power.

This is why I am voting stubbs after he claimed, and why I reasoned as such. If he would have claimed chaotic/lawful I might have unvoted him.
This should also put to rest which factions are scum and which are "town".

EBWOP

[StubbsKVM]

I am a bit pissed that you all want to lynch me regardless of my claim, yes.

The whole discussion on Why my claim is fake is pointless. I did not design my role. It does not make sense I need to prepare my spells. Nor does it make sense I have healing spells.

If I needed a fakeclaim, I would not have picked something as complicated as my role.

I don't think it's unfair I got pressured after not being around much.

What is unfair, is that I don't get to live to use my actions. I have no problem getting lynched before Lylo, but I am a powerful asset to town.

My future spells are very powerful and I think I should get the chance to use them.
One of them is a doc on 2 players on the same night.

[Rodion]

...

You missed the point. What I said is that you could not gauge how powerful Stubbs' claim was before he announced the spells he could have prepared: they could be strong spells or weak spells. That is why I find "Stubbs' role is too powerful for a neutral/good claim" to be a rather weak argument, since we never got to know exactly how powerful his claimed role was by the time that line of inquiry was raised.

[rishaed]

...

You missed the point. What I said is that you could not gauge how powerful Stubbs' claim was before he announced the spells he could have prepared: they could be strong spells or weak spells. That is why I find "Stubbs' role is too powerful for a neutral/good claim" to be a rather weak argument, since we never got to know exactly how powerful his claimed role was by the time that line of inquiry was raised.

These spells have a pretty big variety, and the day 4 spells are more powerful then the day 1 spells.

From this quote in his initial claim it is obvious that he not only gets to pick and choose on the spells, but also as time progresses they become stronger. Does that sound like a weak claim in this kind of game where aage claimed good/neutral and is a jailkeeper, greg's a watcher. Doom is lawful/good and a paladin and daykills which by logic is in between neutral and chaotic in power. Now I think Doom has hinted and from the scene he might have been forced to daykill Saf, but claiming good/neutral with a Super JOAT is stupidity.

[Rodion]

That still doesn't mean anything: perhaps he could have picked from a variety of shitty D1 spells and progressed until he got average D4 spells?
You seem to be supposing that his D1 spells were strong to begin with and that could not have been assumed from his original claim.

I'll make it clear to you inside spoilers just so I don't have to post again to explain something I deem irrelevant (because 1 lie is enough to lynch anyway, thus discussing the validity of a 2nd is unnecessary).

Spoiler

Take the following imaginary scenario. How is that incredibly overpowered?

D1 options
50% roleblock
doublevote

D2 options
track
roleblock

D3 options
commute
hide

D4 options
watch
doc

That's all moot because we now know he got doc D1 and BP D2, but that was not known by the time you concluded he was too powerful for his alignment.

[Epitaph1]

After a bit of reading, it appears sorcerers can be of any alignment. Regardless, I don't see us going with one of the others who have claimed over Stubbs for the lynch. Given his participation and possible lie, I'm comfortable going forward with his lynch.

[gregwolf121]

personally i think its doubtful that stubbs is lying about his role, his alignment does seem a bit off, but i don't think its worth a vote, although i wouldn't be upset if he was lynched

[MoB Deadly]

WAIT. TIMEOUT..........

If you "prepare" spells during the day and use them at night..... And you claimed which spells you created already.

How are you taking responsibility for Roleblocking TFO, if you did not Prepare that spell??????


Am I correct or did I just fall off my horse?

[dazza2008]

[Epitaph1]

WAIT. TIMEOUT..........

If you "prepare" spells during the day and use them at night..... And you claimed which spells you created already.

How are you taking responsibility for Roleblocking TFO, if you did not Prepare that spell??????


Am I correct or did I just fall off my horse?

Aage claimed to block TFO, not Stubbs.

[TheForgivenOne]

WAIT. TIMEOUT..........

If you "prepare" spells during the day and use them at night..... And you claimed which spells you created already.

How are you taking responsibility for Roleblocking TFO, if you did not Prepare that spell??????


Am I correct or did I just fall off my horse?

You fell off it.

[MoB Deadly]

Thats right. False alarm.

[StubbsKVM]

Well, I've given you everything I have.

I would advise taking a good look at rishaed and aage when I'm lynched.

[Commander9]

Assuming nothing comes up and no one wants to add something constructive and useful, most likely will hammer tonight.

[dazza2008]

I still believe the claim and don't want to vote but I can't see anything else happening.

[edocsil]

Well, this is where this is ending, so I'll slap the deadline on this. As per the rules Stubbs will be lynched, and scene will be this evening after I've made some dinner.

[Nebuchadnezer]

Can we still talk until then?