Mini 779 - Killer in Smalltown Y - Over

[Hypatia]

Hi I'm Mary. Except when I'm Rose.

[Hypatia]

I didn't kidnap Richard (like he says, his is the best investigative role we've got going for us). I kidnapped Mary Rose - because I didn't want to risk us waking up with another townie dead if she went psycho in the night. Just as well really, three dead makes it tricky enough as it is.

Your kidnapping was wasted; Mary and Rose chose not to target anyone.

[Hypatia]

(Possible players who made the scum kill: Misty, John, Mary Rose, Bruce, Charles, Vicki. Did not make the scum kill: Tina (roleblocked Richard), Richard (was blocked), Tom (saw Richard).)

I concur. Why didn't you block one of the killing roles to prevent scum from getting a free kill?

What killing roles (Besides Mary/Rose, who isn't exactly a killer)? I suppose you know of any I don't?

QFT, 'killing roles' plural is an interesting slip. Like Tina, I only see the one killing role listed, Mary Rose (and that's why I kidnapped her). What did you have in mind, Misty?

Mary finds it interesting that Mary Rose is in your first list of possible players who made the scum kill, even though you claim to have kidnapped us and to believe that Tina roleblocked Richard (therefore, did not block you). So if you're telling the truth you would have firsthand knowledge that we could not have made the scum kill; but it's not in your first list, even though you reiterate your claim in the "killing roles" paragraph. Why didn't you rule Mary Rose out?

Rose doesn't particularly think you're scum just because you kidnapped us; as you say it's prudent to kidnap us in order to keep the body count from piling up. But if Rose were scum Mary Rose would be the one to kidnap; it's got a plausible reason; it's not as scummy looking as kidnapping the watcher or tracker; and it's the one that can try to kill off scum.

--Mary Rose

[Hypatia]

First of all, I'm sorry to inform you and the other you that the post is very confusing, and it was hard for me to understand what you were trying to say (And I'm not completely sure I did).

I'll rephrase: I should have been clearer. And I am talking to Imaginality aka Charles the kidnapper.

I find it interesting that I am in your first list of possible players who made the scum kill, even though you claim to have kidnapped me and to believe that Tina roleblocked Richard (therefore, did not block you). So if you're telling the truth you would have firsthand knowledge that I could not have made the scum kill; but it's not in your first list, even though you reiterate your claim in the "killing roles" paragraph. Why didn't you rule me out?

I don't particularly think you're scum just because you kidnapped me; as you say it's prudent to kidnap me in order to keep the body count from piling up. But if I were scum my role would be the one to kidnap; it's got a plausible reason; it's not as scummy looking as kidnapping the watcher or tracker; and it's the one that can try to kill off scum.

From what I did understand, you're asking why you weren't ruled out as the killer if you were blocked? If so, Vicki did put you on the unlikely list both as the SK and mafia killer.

Oh yes,

Vicki/Tarhalindur

ruled me out later. But why didn't

Charles/imaginality

do so in his early list, especially since he would have firsthand knowledge that I couldn't possibly have killed? Instead he puts me as a possible mafia killer. Which I can't be if he kidnapped me.

Because if I were Charles/imaginality trying to find the killer, it would go like this:

* Tina, Richard, and Tom seem (assuming they're not lying) to be verified as doing other night actions. So they're not the mafia killer.
* Tina roleblocked Richard, so she did not roleblock me.
* I kidnapped Mary Rose, so she couldn't have done a night action.
* So Mary Rose could not be the mafia killer.

The last two are things that CHARLES HIMSELF claims to have done, so why wouldn't they figure prominently in his logic?

But if, for example, Charles/imaginality was scum who hadn't actually roleblocked me, but only claimed to (after all, I chose not to target anyone, and there doesn't seem to be a missing kill, and there's no stabbing kill), then he might forget what he claimed to do, and leave me off his list.

That said, you can still be mafia, but not the one who made the kill.

Yup, there's no evidence yet ruling me out as a mafia member.

[Hypatia]

Yep, I know that, but it makes sense for her to use her role as though she's a 50-50 vig, surely. Though it's not clear to me if she's protective simply by defending her target or by killing the attacker). Mary Rose, which interpretation is correct?

I assume, judging on my PM, it's just a protection, not a kill of the attacker.

Either way, if she protects rather than kill, at worst the only person at risk from that is the SK or mafia if they try to kill her target. While if she turns nasty, her target is at risk. So while we can't rely on her killing her target - as you say it's a 50-50 chance - in terms of what decisions she should make as to who she targets, I'd say she should act as though she's a vig.

That's the plan.

The 'just because' makes it sound as though my kidnapping you makes you suspicious of me. But your logic is "kidnapping me would be prudent for town to do, so therefore scum would do it to look pro-town." That argument sucks. At most all it means is my kidnapping you is a null tell, if town and scum would be equally likely to do it. (If that's all you meant, then I agree with that. But it sounded to me like you were suspicious of me precisely for doing something pro-town.)

No, my suspicion was aroused by your list that didn't include me. Then I thought: with my newly aroused suspicion, is your kidnapping of me townish or scummish? It could go either way. .

In any case you're either
* a townie who kidnapped me (plausible);
* a mafioso who kidnapped me while someone else did the kill (plausible);
* a mafioso who did the kill, therefore lied about kidnapping me (but is that logical? it seems like the mafia would want you to use your power to block a threat, and send someone else to do the kill--unless the other mafia people have more useful powers);
* or the serial killer who locked me up and did a kill.

#3 would need so many things in place that I think it's actually unlikely, now that I've done more reasoning.

[Hypatia]

We need to coordinate night actions.

Can you please explain why you think the benefits of publicly announced night actions outweigh the drawbacks of giving the scum the entire layout of what will happen?

[Hypatia]

About Charles' plan: do we know the order of night actions?

[Hypatia]

About Charles' plan: do we know the order of night actions?

We don't. I mean, I would think roleblocking/jailing > killing because well, otherwise it's not blocking/jailing. But I'm not sure why else it would matter?

Well I would hope that your action comes after my action, so that I wouldn't kill you before you could protect me...

[Hypatia]

@John - what's this about blocking Mary Rose?

If she's scum and left unblocked then there's a 50 percent chance she wrecks the town. I guess as long as she's directed to target a protected target and then the watcher and/or tracker are setup to make sure she targets the intended individual that would be fine as well.

As long as there's another level of "watching" on me to make sure that I AM blocked--because I have a 50% chance of a built-in failure.

Is there a way that we can tweak imaginality's plan so that Bruce and/or Richard aren't the sole confirmers of each other?

[Hypatia]

I think there's been a wile since we heard of Mary Rose, Vicki, Richard and Tom. Bruce's post has no real content but "Look at me! I'm not lurking".

I've been reading, just not posting. I agree on the Grimmy/Bruce. I would like to hear some reasoning from armlx/Misty, because I gotta say my intuition agrees with his insinuations.

I don't think we should No Lynch and right now I think Y/Tina might be our best shot. There's just no escaping the scumminess of blocking an investigative role.

[Hypatia]

I was waiting on the revelations from others.

Of course there's really nothing for me to claim about a target, but the mod did tell me what action I did.

[Hypatia]

Hypatia, target? Same with Imaginality (show it by voting then unvoting that person).

I targeted Charles/imaginality. The mod said I protected him. And later, when I asked, the mod confirmed that the silencing mechanism does not count as an attack.

[Hypatia]

We again have Mary Rose and Charles cross target, thus if Charles doesn't jailkeep her there's a 50% she kills him.

In an ideal world we could figure out a way to have me and/or Charles possibly stopping scum, even though our usual dyad is nice... I will think about this.

[Hypatia]

I am here, I am ready to claim. What order do we want to go in?

[Hypatia]

I targeted Charles, and Rose (protective) came out.

We should figure out two separate plans for tonight, while we judge between Bruce/Grimmy and Richard/malthusis. One in case we lynch scum; the other in case we lynch the wrong one, which means I should try to kill the one we didn't lynch.

[Hypatia]

I'm still here. Need to reread and rethink.