Mini 589: SSBB Smalltown Mafia (Game Over!)

[The Fonz]

Mmmm, feel that bumpy goodness.

[Anatole Kuragin]

Well, that was misinterpreted by seemingly everyone.

The argument was never that we should kill people based on personality in lieu of scumminess, but this was a better argument against them than their role or jokearound stuff on day one. Most of the day one votes start as a joke then evolve into a bandwagon that kill an innocent because he joked about something. And since it was made very clear that roles are independent of character, that would be just as stupid to kill someone for.

And @ PEG: did you actually read what you're quoting? They're not related at all.

[dahill1]

Gob should not be roleblocked, and dahill1 should target the same player as Gob does. Why? Because this will prevent him from killing using either method if he's mafia. Since the poison ability negates the two protective roles, which can prevent any other kill, we don't want it used just yet.

also, i will agree to target whomever the town wants me to (i'm thinking possible side-vote?). however, i don't see how targetting Gob (Pikachu) would accomplish anything. wouldn't i just poison both him and whoever he hides with? sorry i don't reallly understand, can you explain this a little more please? thanks.

[dahill1]

It's not going to help trying to lynch the best/worst roles, what have to go off of right now is how people act following the jokearound stage. I'd suggest going through the assholes first then the non-contributing lurkers.

ok first of all, this post (which is the one in question) doesn't seem like a joke to me, personally. you could have at least included a smiley or a "lol" in there, and it probably wouldn't have been such a big deal. you say that

The argument was never that we should kill people based on personality in lieu of scumminess

well that last sentence in the first quote pretty much contradicts that. it seems like you were going lynch

because

of personality. you say it's a joke, but personally it didn't seem like one to me, so my vote stays.

[The Fonz]

Gob should not be roleblocked, and dahill1 should target the same player as Gob does. Why? Because this will prevent him from killing using either method if he's mafia. Since the poison ability negates the two protective roles, which can prevent any other kill, we don't want it used just yet.

also, i will agree to target whomever the town wants me to (i'm thinking possible side-vote?). however, i don't see how targetting Gob (Pikachu) would accomplish anything. wouldn't i just poison both him and whoever he hides with? sorry i don't reallly understand, can you explain this a little more please? thanks.

No, I'm not saying you should target Gob. I'm saying you should target the SAME PLAYER AS Gob. If both you and Gob target the same player, that player should be announced as growing in the morning, and Gob will either be living, if that player's town, or dead, if that player's scum. If you do, and he doesn't, then that player will wake up coughing, and we'll know Gob is scum. If someone else, or no-one, wakes up coughing, we'd know you're scum. If Gob dies, we know the target is scum, and if Gob lives and the target grows, we know that the target is town, and neither of you is the mafia killer.

Note: this relies on no-one else targetting Gob/Dahill's target.

[goborage]

Firstly, it occurs to me that goborage should declare his target before night falls. This will mean that the hider essentially becomes an investigative role- if gob dies, we know the target is scum. If Gob lives, we know those two players are of the same alignment (since scum could lie about having hidden behind scum, although that risks detection by the tracker).

Gob should not be roleblocked, and dahill1 should target the same player as Gob does. Why? Because this will prevent him from killing using either method if he's mafia. Since the poison ability negates the two protective roles, which can prevent any other kill, we don't want it used just yet.

I agree that my role would be best used as an investigator but I don't get the Pikachu/Mario targeting the same player idea. Wouldn't the player targeted by Mario simply die? If we don't want Mario to use his ability we can simply tell him not to. It's not like he can hide it anyways. In fact I'm leery of any vig role using their power atm.

Me being an investigative role isn't perfect though. If Lucas is scum, he can coordinate a roleblock/NK that will kill me and make my protector look like scum. If asked he can simply say he protected someone.

Anyways I'm all for discussion about night action duties.

[dahill1]

No, I'm not saying you should target Gob. I'm saying you should target the SAME PLAYER AS Gob. If both you and Gob target the same player, that player should be announced as growing in the morning, and Gob will either be living, if that player's town, or dead, if that player's scum. If you do, and he doesn't, then that player will wake up coughing, and we'll know Gob is scum. If someone else, or no-one, wakes up coughing, we'd know you're scum. If Gob dies, we know the target is scum, and if Gob lives and the target grows, we know that the target is town, and neither of you is the mafia killer.

Note: this relies on no-one else targetting Gob/Dahill's target.

oh ok, that makes sense.
yep i'll agree to do that

[goborage]

NM I should have read the first page more closely. Ya the player targeted by Mario would receive a super mushroom. Wouldn't simply telling Mario not to do anything at night serve the same purpose?

[pickemgenius]

And @ PEG: did you actually read what you're quoting? They're not related at all.

So we should "go through" assholes and non contributing lurkers first, but at the same time we shouldn't go after people because of playstyle?

[The Fonz]

Firstly, it occurs to me that goborage should declare his target before night falls. This will mean that the hider essentially becomes an investigative role- if gob dies, we know the target is scum. If Gob lives, we know those two players are of the same alignment (since scum could lie about having hidden behind scum, although that risks detection by the tracker).

Gob should not be roleblocked, and dahill1 should target the same player as Gob does. Why? Because this will prevent him from killing using either method if he's mafia. Since the poison ability negates the two protective roles, which can prevent any other kill, we don't want it used just yet.

I agree that my role would be best used as an investigator but I don't get the Pikachu/Mario targeting the same player idea. Wouldn't the player targeted by Mario simply die? If we don't want Mario to use his ability we can simply tell him not to. It's not like he can hide it anyways. In fact I'm leery of any vig role using their power atm.

Because if anyone else targets the same player as Mario, that player doesn't get poisoned, but grows instead.

The point of having him use his ability in a town-dictated manner is, we know it won't kill, and it'll prevent him from performing the mafia kill, plus we'll know whether he's actually done it or not, so he can't get out of it.

Me being an investigative role isn't perfect though. If Lucas is scum, he can coordinate a roleblock/NK that will kill me and make my protector look like scum. If asked he can simply say he protected someone.

Well one, that plan requires two scum to target you, with a tracker still around. Two, he can only do it once. Three, if Pikachu dies whilst hiding, the ONLY explanations are the protector being scum, or you being RBed. So if the protector comes up town, he's outed as scum.

A more likely issue, I think, is that scum are likely to kill the target if the target is town- they can't afford confirmed innocents, so I'd suggest using a less useful role as the target - me, PEG, or JTP.

[Lawrencelot]

OK guys, some game theory for starters.

Firstly, it occurs to me that goborage should declare his target before night falls. This will mean that the hider essentially becomes an investigative role- if gob dies, we know the target is scum. If Gob lives, we know those two players are of the same alignment (since scum could lie about having hidden behind scum, although that risks detection by the tracker).

Gob should not be roleblocked, and dahill1 should target the same player as Gob does. Why? Because this will prevent him from killing using either method if he's mafia. Since the poison ability negates the two protective roles, which can prevent any other kill, we don't want it used just yet.

Sounds good, but how can we be sure that no one else targets the same player as goborage and dahill1?

I would suggest we have everyone who has a night action claim in a random order tomorrow morning. There's an argument against this- scum knowing who the protective roles are minded to target is useful to them- but see the last smalltown, where the doctor role wasn't made to claim, and performed two of the three scumkills.

Can you elaborate on that doctor scenario, because I haven't read that game. The doctor was scum and performed 2 kills? How would it have made a difference if he had to claim his target? Wouldn't he just say he targeted someone innocent who did not die?

Link: this role is useless for an SK. Mafia could make good use of it.

It's actually a complete liability for mafia. I'd suggest we insist on its use- even though it's actually bad play for a town player to use it in isolation, it's even worse for a scum or SK player to use.

I'm not sure if I'm gonna use my power right away. I mean, I could target a role that's good for town, but if that player is scum and is vigged, we lose a lot.

Fox: a bit dangerous in the hands of scum.

Not so much- deters nightkills. Sure, it prevents viggings, but it's one-shot, and the possibility of its use can give scum fits. This is the role which most fits the doctor paradox- keeping quiet about whether it's been used or not is clearly optimal if the role is town, but allows a lot of leeway if scum. Thoughts?

I think it's better if he doesn't claim whether he used his power or not. It's better that scum doesn't know it, then that town does know it. If we think he's scum we can always lynch him. I think it's best if a protown player with a NK doesn't target him at all, while Ike for example should not be lynched at all (or we should set up some plan with a scum hammering or something).

Samus: not dangerous in the hands of scum.

Yup, in fact a liability since it has to be used.

You mean, because we're claiming our targets? I didn't think of that. Well I think Samus-scum could just use the scum kill and claim an innocent on his scum-buddy.

Ike: useless but dangerous in hands of SK, pretty dangerous in the hands of mafia.

My own role: effectively requires town to double-lynch if it wants to kill me. Benefits whichever side it's on, tbh.

You don't need to be double-lynched. Or did I read it the wrong way?

I have a feeling that there will be many kills each night btw, seeing all those 1-shot vigs.

You mean, two? Just because vig abilities exist, doesn't require their use.

And Mario, and Ike's counter, and the Mafia kill and the SK kill. This could result in 6 deaths in 24 game-hours, theoretically speaking. And with Pika's role, make that 7.

[The Fonz]

Sounds good, but how can we be sure that no one else targets the same player as goborage and dahill1?

We can't. But if they promise not to, then do anyway, then they risk being caught in a lie.

I would suggest we have everyone who has a night action claim in a random order tomorrow morning. There's an argument against this- scum knowing who the protective roles are minded to target is useful to them- but see the last smalltown, where the doctor role wasn't made to claim, and performed two of the three scumkills.

Can you elaborate on that doctor scenario, because I haven't read that game. The doctor was scum and performed 2 kills? How would it have made a difference if he had to claim his target? Wouldn't he just say he targeted someone innocent who did not die?

Well, he, or should I say, I, would have risked being caught in a lie due to the number of investigative roles in the game. As it happens, the town players didn't investigate in such a way that would reveal anything, and one of the investigative roles was my scumbuddy.

I'm not sure if I'm gonna use my power right away. I mean, I could target a role that's good for town, but if that player is scum and is vigged, we lose a lot.

Right. But I think we, as a town, should insist you use it.

Fox: a bit dangerous in the hands of scum.

Samus: not dangerous in the hands of scum.

Yup, in fact a liability since it has to be used.

You mean, because we're claiming our targets? I didn't think of that. Well I think Samus-scum could just use the scum kill and claim an innocent on his scum-buddy.

Yes. Scum can claim to have targetted one another. But it creates a link between the two, and it's easily possible that it could go wrong.

Ike: useless but dangerous in hands of SK, pretty dangerous in the hands of mafia.

My own role: effectively requires town to double-lynch if it wants to kill me. Benefits whichever side it's on, tbh.

You don't need to be double-lynched. Or did I read it the wrong way?

If town chooses to lynch me, they're effectively lynching two people- me, and whoever hammers.

I have a feeling that there will be many kills each night btw, seeing all those 1-shot vigs.

You mean, two? Just because vig abilities exist, doesn't require their use.

And Mario, and Ike's counter, and the Mafia kill and the SK kill. This could result in 6 deaths in 24 game-hours, theoretically speaking. And with Pika's role, make that 7.

That's two one-shot vigs. One role that we can prove isn't used, and the usual two scumkills. Obviously, the later the better in terms of town vigs, but players have to balance that against the chance of dying themselves and never getting to use it.

[Anatole Kuragin]

It's not going to help trying to lynch the best/worst roles, what have to go off of right now is how people act following the jokearound stage. I'd suggest going through the assholes first then the non-contributing lurkers.

ok first of all, this post (which is the one in question) doesn't seem like a joke to me, personally. you could have at least included a smiley or a "lol" in there, and it probably wouldn't have been such a big deal. you say that

The argument was never that we should kill people based on personality in lieu of scumminess

well that last sentence in the first quote pretty much contradicts that. it seems like you were going lynch

because

of personality. you say it's a joke, but personally it didn't seem like one to me, so my vote stays.

I didn't say it was a joke, I said it was misinterpreted.

[Anatole Kuragin]

And @ PEG: did you actually read what you're quoting? They're not related at all.

So we should "go through" assholes and non contributing lurkers first, but at the same time we shouldn't go after people because of playstyle?

Not *instead of* scumminess, no.

[curiouskarmadog]

LOL, I am in another small town game with fonz….(still bitter about your mafia win last time).

I would suggest we have everyone who has a night action claim in a random order tomorrow morning. There's an argument against this- scum knowing who the protective roles are minded to target is useful to them- but see the last smalltown, where the doctor role wasn't made to claim, and performed two of the three scumkills.

Yeah, Fonz leaves out he was the doctor. LOL, I totally agree with this. Like the last Small town game (heroes) I think we should dice roll random claim.

Wow, my vote on AK got some quick votes that followed.

Unvote

, for now, we still have a lot of conversation needed today from someone to have that many votes quite yet.

Also, I want everyone to confirm that we are indeed claiming in random order tomorrow our night actions. If someone has a problem with it, I would like to know why today, versus tomorrow.

[JamesThePhox]

I'm fine with claiming night actions.

[MafiaSSK]

I'm also fine with claiming my night action.

I'll also post tomorrow more on my view of the game,

[Gorrad]

Fine with claiming night action here.

[Anatole Kuragin]

If we claim that we're investigating someone who turns out to be mafia, isn't that a bit regressive for the town?

[Gorrad]

Pst, AK, we're claiming AFTER we perform the night actions.

[Lawrencelot]

Pst, AK, we're claiming AFTER we perform the night actions.

Except for Dahill and goborage, if everybody agrees with Fonz's plan. I'm fine with claiming my night action.

[Xdaamno]

Mod: does hiding protect from poison?

Good catch; no, it does not.

[The Fonz]

OK.

But hiding behind someone DOES count as 'targetting' them with a nightaction, right?

I think we should randomise Gob's target from the following players:

Me
PEG
JTP
Anderson

Anyone disagree?

And thoughts on whether we should require Lawrence to use his power? I say yea.

[Xdaamno]

But hiding behind someone DOES count as 'targetting' them with a nightaction, right?

Yes, it does.

[pickemgenius]

don't disagree.

i'ma terrible nightkill.