Mini 779 - Killer in Smalltown Y - Over

[imaginality]

Hi, I'm Charles. My motto is "Better safe than sorry."

[imaginality]

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.

Since Tina's the only other blocking role we have, I am on board with the Tina = scum hypothesis. (I doubt she is SK since the SK has nothing to fear from the stalker - the SK's kill is invisible to investigative roles.)

Vote: Tina

[imaginality]

Apologies for jumping the gun earlier. Vicki's suggestion makes sense.

Top of the page vote count:

Tina

has 2 votes (Richard, Charles)
Nobody else is voting.
9 alive, eh, 5 to lynch.

[imaginality]

First of all,

Unvote

- want to see what the claims reveal.

A couple of Richard's latest comments are on the crappy side of dubious:

Obviously no one could have protected the nurse because the only person who could have protected her is herself, which is illegal, ditto for the herbalist).

Not true. You're right that Jennifer couldn't have protected Amy from the scum kill. But Bruce could have defended her, Mary Rose could have too (admittedly with a risk of killing her), and I could have kidnapped her. So Tina's question is not craplogic.

Even if I am scum (or Tom) we would be fairly useless to the mafia (and maybe even helpful to the town, because we would still help find the SK).

Very not true. The mod specifically said the SK's kill is invisible to investigative roles and that the SK has their normal night action as well as their kill. That makes Richard the Stalker and Tom the Peeper both useless for catching the SK.


However I also disagree with this from Tina:

Two investigative roles in one town seems too much, so I think one of them is scum (very probable, at this point, since almost half the remaining players are scum. in one way or another).

Wouldn't the alignments have been distributed randomly amongst the roles? In which case there was 4/12 * 3/11 = 12/132 = 1/11 chance of them both being scum, 8/12 * 3/11 + 4/12 * 8/11 = ~5/11 chance of one of them being scum, and 8/12 * 8/11 = ~5/11 chance of neither of them being scum.

So the chance of one or both of them being scum is only slightly higher than the chance of neither being scum.

[imaginality]

Summary of the claims so far:

Misty the Librarian -

chose not to target anyone

John the Advertiser -

targeted Kevin the Home Invader

Mary Rose the Split Personality -

chose not to target anyone

Tina the Stripper -

targeted Richard the Stalker

Bruce the Martial Artist -
Charles the Kidnapper -

targeted Mary Rose the Split Personality

Richard the Stalker -
Tom the Peeper -
Vicki the Model -

[imaginality]

Claimed actions and results:

Misty the Librarian -

chose not to target anyone

John the Advertiser -

targeted Kevin the Home Invader

Mary/Rose the Split Personality -

chose not to target anyone

Tina the Stripper -

targeted Richard the Stalker

Bruce the Martial Artist -
Charles the Kidnapper -

targeted Mary Rose the Split Personality

Richard the Stalker -

targeted Bruce the Martial Artist; no result (claims roleblocked)

Tom the Peeper -

targeted Bruce the Martial Artist; saw Richard visit Bruce

Vicki the Model -

[imaginality]

I find it hard to believe a watcher would be able to see a roleblocked tracker visit his target, but I also don't see why Tom would lie about it - given that Tina had already confirmed she roleblocked Richard.

Equally I don't know why Richard would claim roleblocked if he wasn't. I mean I could see him claiming it to frame Tina but since Tina confirmed she roleblocked him...

Possibilities I see:

1. Watcher saw roleblocked tracker (not usually how it happens)

2. Richard lying about being roleblocked, to frame Tina who lied about blocking him (with both of them scum, trying to get one lynched to get the other cleared)

3. Tom lying about seeing Richard (to frame Richard and Tina?)

4. Me blocking Tina (which I didn't, but if I had, this would mean Richard is fake-claiming being roleblocked, suggesting Richard and I are scum framing Tina)

Any others?

[imaginality]

I agree with Misty, John and Richard that Tina blocking our tracker is not pro-town but I'm not keen to run Tina up to L-1 just yet.

It's also worth noting that even if Tina is scum, she didn't make the scum kill since we know she blocked Richard.

(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?

[imaginality]

Not if you didn't know that Tom would still see Richard despite Richard being roleblocked.

[imaginality]

Cannot be the SK:
- Y (Tina - malthusis/Richard claimed roleblock on night SK successfully killed)

The SK can kill in addition to performing their night action. So Tina could be SK and still have blocked Richard.

On the other hand, Richard can't be SK since he was blocked (unless Tina were lying about blocking him which looks unlikely to me)?

[imaginality]

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.

(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).)

It's worth noticing that I listed

myself

in that list too. Because it's not confirmed (objectively) that I kidnapped you. Obviously I know I did, but there's no independent evidence, and I was writing my list from the viewpoint of the town as a whole, not me independently.

Likewise, I know you were kidnapped, but the rest of the town doesn't know that for sure. So I listed you in the possibles as well.

Obviously, from my perspective I don't think you're the mafia killer, just as I know I'm not the killer. I was just putting a list out there that we could all agree on.

[imaginality]

Oh and I also take issue with:

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.

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.)

Aside from reducing the potential deaths last night, the other benefit to kidnapping you was keeping you alive so you can make a more informed vig choice tonight.

[imaginality]

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?

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.

[imaginality]

Mod: you realize John's vote counts as 2, so Y is at L-1?

I thought he targeted Kevin? Hard to convince someone to let you vote for them if they're dead, no?


I agree that of the night actions we know about, Tina blocking you is the most anti-town one. (There were several better targets to block, in my opinion: Mary Rose, John, Kevin and Misty.)

It seems like her main defense (see posts 53 and 99) is "I targeted Richard because I thought it likely that one of the two main investigative roles would be scum" - which whether or not it's true seems like a weak reason. Surely we'd have a better chance of figuring out which of Richard and Tom are scum (if either is) if we get results from both of them rather than blocking one? It's not like we're going to naively trust any information that we gain from people's night choices, after all.

if I was scum and I have an investigator, I would send [Richard] to kill because the town trusts him and it's really easy to make up a target

I don't think it's so easy. A lot of players here have targets of their own, so he'd either have to (i) guess who they'd target (ii) fake his result, which seems something of a gambit for day 1, or (iii) target Vicki (our only non-targeting player).

[imaginality]

I don't see any major holes in your plan, Misty, aside from the "if X and Y are both scum" stuff. Which is kinda hard to avoid with any plan, at this point.

I'm not sure the benefits of aligning our roles outweigh the costs particularly since we need to block kills tonight as much as possible. But if we are going to consider plans, here's an alternative plan I thought of:

We lynch Tina.

Richard stalks Bruce.
Bruce protects someone.
Tom watches Bruce.

I target Mary Rose and vice versa.

John targets Vicki or Bruce (flips a coin).

Misty targets me.

This way:

If Bruce does not protect someone, Richard would know. (Also if Bruce protects someone and dies, Richard would know who Bruce's target was.)
If Richard does not stalk Bruce, Tom would know.
If Tom does not watch Bruce, there is a 50/50 shot of him being caught out depending if John targeted Bruce or not.
If Vicki does not self-watch, there is a 50/50 shot of her being caught out depending if John targeted Vicki or not.
If I do not jail Mary Rose, there is a 50/50 shot of her vigging me.
If Misty does not target me, we will know.
If John does not steal someone's vote, we will know.
Mary Rose cannot kill.

Advantages:
Lynching Tina over lynching Vicki (Tina looks scummier to me).
The scum don't know who Bruce will protect.

Disadvantages: If various pairs of people are scum, it fails.

Note: We could alter the plan above to lynch Mary Rose, and have me and Tina roleblock/jail each other (so if either of us don't roleblock, we will be roleblocked by the other and unable to kill). But I would rather lynch Tina than Mary Rose.

Note2: We could lynch Vicki, and have Tina and Mary Rose target each other, and me jail either John or Misty. Again though, I think Tina is more likely scum than Vicki.

[imaginality]

Pretty sure she doesn't because:

SPECIAL GAMEPLAY
1. Every player has a nighttime power, which is public knowledge, based on your character.
2. Three characters have been randomly selected to be Gangsters (mafia). Every night, one gangster must forgo their usual night action to carry out the kill.

Based on this it sounds like Vicki's self-watching is her nighttime power which she'd have to forgo to make the kill (if she's mafia).

Unchanged vote count:

Tina has 3 votes

(Richard, John, Misty)
Richard has 1 vote (Tina)
5 are not voting (Bruce, Charles, Mary Rose, Tom, Vicki)
9 alive, eh, 5 to lynch.

[imaginality]

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?

[imaginality]

Suggested claim order:

Tom (confirms he saw Richard target Bruce)
Bruce (says who he protected)
Richard (confirms he saw Bruce visit who Bruce said he did)

Vicki (says if she saw John target her)
Tom (says if he saw John target him)
John (confirms if he targeted Vicki or Bruce)

Misty's action is confirmed if I'm silenced.
My jailing of Mary Rose is 50% confirmed if I'm alive.
Mary Rose being jailed (and therefore cleared of making any kills) is also 50% confirmed if I'm alive.

[imaginality]

Oh. Yep, I think there's zero percent chance of you being able to kill me if I jail you (assuming I am not roleblocked myself). So even if you go nutzo on us, you won't kill me or be at risk of others killing you, you'll be protected safe and sound in my nice cosy little

dungeon

hideaway.

[imaginality]

I've thought some more about it, and here's one plan that comes to mind if we decide to no-lynch today:

Richard stalks Bruce.
Bruce protects someone.

Tom watches John.

Mary Rose targets John.

I target John and vice versa.

Tina targets Misty or Vicki.

Misty targets John.

Vicki self-watches.


Claim order:

1. Vicki says whether she was roleblocked.
2. Tina says whether she roleblocked Vicki or Misty.

3. Tom says whether he saw Mary Rose, Misty and me target John.

4. Richard says who he saw Bruce target.
5. Bruce confirms who he targeted.

I think this covers everyone's actions... Vicki has a 50% chance of guessing if she was roleblocked, but that deters the mafia from choosing her to make the kill in any case. Similarly if Misty is mafia there is a 50% chance of her being blocked.

This plan still allows Bruce to choose his target to protect, as well John being protected by my kidnapping him, and has the advantage that two people will be roleblocked (John, and Misty or Vicky).

I think this makes it pretty hard for the mafia to get away with making a kill unless they work together in combination - which means if we catch one of them we probably catch two.

Can't do a lot about the SK, but at least the two protects and two roleblocks have some chance of stopping them.

Thoughts?

[imaginality]

Think you're thinking of my protection (the kidnapping). Bruce the martial artist only protects, doesn't roleblock, unless I'm missing something?

[imaginality]

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

Well, we could fall back on the other plan I suggested:

We lynch Tina.

Richard stalks Bruce.
Bruce protects someone.
Tom watches Bruce.

I target Mary Rose and vice versa.

John targets Vicki or Bruce (flips a coin).

Misty targets me.

This way:

If Bruce does not protect someone, Richard would know. (Also if Bruce protects someone and dies, Richard would know who Bruce's target was.)
If Richard does not stalk Bruce, Tom would know.
If Tom does not watch Bruce, there is a 50/50 shot of him being caught out depending if John targeted Bruce or not.
If Vicki does not self-watch, there is a 50/50 shot of her being caught out depending if John targeted Vicki or not.
If I do not jail Mary Rose, there is a 50/50 shot of her vigging me.
If Misty does not target me, we will know.
If John does not steal someone's vote, we will know.
Mary Rose cannot kill.

Suggested claim order:

Tom (confirms he saw Richard target Bruce)
Bruce (says who he protected)
Richard (confirms he saw Bruce visit who Bruce said he did)

Vicki (says if she saw John target her)
Tom (says if he saw John target Bruce)
John (confirms if he targeted Vicki or Bruce)

Misty's action is confirmed if I'm silenced.
My jailing of Mary Rose is 50% confirmed if I'm alive.
Mary Rose being jailed (and therefore cleared of making any kills) is also 50% confirmed if I'm alive.

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.

This plan doesn't ensure you're blocked (yes, I know I'm town, but from an objective perspective that's not proven beyond doubt yet (Grimmy and I could both be scum)), but it does at least ensure that if I don't kidnap you I'm placing myself in the firing line.

[imaginality]

Note: If Vicki is right that we have to lynch John today, then we can use the same plan as above but with Tina roleblocking Vicki (if she doesn't, Vicki will know; if she does then Vicki can't make the mafia kill in any case).

[imaginality]

Problem is if we lynch Tina, then we can't block both you and Mary Rose. The best we can do is kidnap you and have Mary Rose target you, or vice versa.

[imaginality]

Actually, John can't make the scum kill under my plan (we'd know he hadn't used his power). It could only be Vicki, Tom or me, each with a 50% chance of getting caught out.


I like my plan if Tina is scum or SK, I think it should work well in either case. It's only if Tina flips town that things get worrying - at 4 town, 3 scum, 1 SK, even if scum and SK cross-kill, if John is scum the double vote would let scum force a no-lynch at 4 vs 2.

[imaginality]

First thoughts: This plan (basically a slight twist on my plan in 155/156 above) looks fine to me.

Your point that we may not be able to afford to lose Bruce to a mis-protect tonight is a good one - I was thinking that keeping the scum guessing as to his target was important, but you're right that we pretty much have to avoid any excess deaths tonight to have much of a chance. Limiting his target choices also makes us less reliant on Richard being town.

Regarding your con, it's an acceptable risk - if Tina as scum blocks me, there is only a 25% chance of me being killed (it would require both Mary/Rose being evil tonight

and

Bruce protecting Vicki instead of me).

While Tina's blocking Richard is anti-town, her role is more valuable to us if she is town than John's due to her ability to block scum/SK from killing. John's been pretty happy to go along with any plan that sees Tina lynched or a no-lynch, so I could see Tina being town if John is scum. (Hope so - we could really do with a successful block and/or protect.) And John's night action last night isn't confirmed (easy for a scum vote-stealer to claim to have targeted the dead guy)... yep, I can see enough possibility of John being scum to be okay with lynching him today, taking into account the night action interactions as discussed.

So: as things stand, I'm good with your plan.

[imaginality]

1) If we mislynch today then there's a good chance we lose. 2) Co-ordinated night actions will find scum.

We don't actually have time on our side in this set up. We have to go for it.

I have to side with Misty about this. At the moment we're 5-3-1.

No-lynching lets scum kill for sure (we can only block two people, there are three scum). Unless Bruce blocks their kill - but if Bruce protects randomly, there is more chance of him dying by protecting, while if he limits his targets in advance by protecting me again since he didn't die last night, it means scum can kill for sure by avoiding targeting me.

And the SK has a 7/9 chance of killing (again assuming Bruce doesn't protect successfully) since they can kill and perform their night action, unless they're blocked, and we can only block two players.

Tina and John being a scum pair would also be incredibly bad for us if we assign Tina to block John. (Similarly Tina and Mary Rose if I kidnap John and Tina is assigned blocks Mary Rose.)

The other problem is that even with the best result (SK no kills, scum kill (two no-kills just leaves us back where we started)) any no-lynch plan we come up with at best has a couple of players who have a chance of guessing right as scum and 'confirming' their action. Or of course of just countering the other player (if one of Bruce and Richard is scum, for example).

So assuming scum are smart, at the very best we have a ~50% chance of lynching scum tomorrow. And various ways we can lose.

Whereas lynching today (even if we say for the sake of argument that it's a random lynch) we have 4/9 chance of lynching scum/SK (44%, and putting us in a better position - 5/2/1 or 5/3 vs 4/2/1 or 4/3 if we no-lynch).


Hmm, quantifying it has made it clearer to me that Vicki and Misty are right, lynching today beats no-lynching and waiting.

Vote: John

[imaginality]

EBWOP: I didn't mention the possibility of cross-kills: sure, SK and scum might cross-kill if we no-lynch, but there's pretty much just as much chance they might do that if we lynch (slightly less chance if we lynch scum and go into night 5/2/1, but slightly more chance if we mislynch and are 4/3/1, versus 5/3/1 for no-lynch). So that seems to be a wash to me.

[imaginality]

Wow Bruce, fence-sitting much?

[imaginality]

But in this set-up, D³ (forgot character name at the moment) has a good point

If you mean John's claim that a no-lynch today makes us less likely to be in a losing position tomorrow, I still think that is countered by my point:

The other problem is that [...] assuming scum are smart, at the very best we have a ~50% chance of lynching scum tomorrow. And a few ways we can lose in the night still.

Basically, our chances of random-lynching successfully today = 44%. (And I'd argue that Tina, and John too, are slightly better than random lynches, anyhow).

If we mislynch: yes, we are fairly likely screwed.
If we lynch scum: we have a better chance of pinning the remaining scum down from the night actions than if we no-lynch (e.g. if one scum member is targeted to be blocked/kidnapped, the other one is forced to make the kill, if they want to kill successfully).

No-lynching gives up:

(a) our arguably-better-than-random chances of lynching scum today
(b) our chances of getting a better result from the night actions, if we lynch correctly
(c) our slight chances of still somehow winning despite a mislynch (e.g. with cross-kills)

for:

a chance to lynch tomorrow with odds likely to be only slightly better than they are today, and with defeat even more certain if we mislynch tomorrow than if we mislynch today.

[imaginality]

Vote: John

[imaginality]

Unvote

[imaginality]

Vote: Tom

[imaginality]

Nice to be able to talk again. I have a few thoughts about how yesterday went down, but I will hold off until we see what today's claims reveal.

[imaginality]

Also waiting on results before commenting.

[imaginality]

From my perspective:

John must be town because if he's double-voting scum they can already force a win.
Which means that either Richard and Bruce are both scum, or Mary Rose is scum along with one of them.

Sidenote from others' perspective: I can only be scum if Bruce is also scum, since he claims to have protected me and he's a weak doc. (It's possible he is scum and I am not, but the reverse is not possible.)


Anyhow, returning to my perspective, the fact that a mislynch means Mary Rose is scum along with (whichever of Richard and Bruce didn't get lynched) means any plans have to go out of the window: if we mislynch, I will be targeting you or your scumbuddy at my discretion - to give John and I the best chance of blocking the scum kill, since we could only win in the mislynch scenario if we block your kill.

Now, if we lynch scum, then there is more room for a plan to work. I'll think about what plan could work for that scenario and post more on this later.


My current thinking about who is scum:

Reasons for Mary Rose and (one of Richard or Bruce) to be scum: it explains the strange choices scum have made. I jailed Mary Rose both nights, so last night only Tom or (whichever of Bruce and Richard is scum) could have made the kill. Similarly last night only (whichever of Bruce and Richard is scum) could make the kill.

Mary Rose would pretty much be confirmed scum if she submitted the kill since the mod's rules state that scum must submit a kill - no-killing isn't an option for them. So as I say, I can see why scum would feel pressed to try a gambit of some kind.


Reasons why Richard and Bruce could be scum together: mainly that, it seemed to me, Tom gave up very quickly yesterday. It makes me wonder if scum have something planned. Since their night actions are inter-related, if all three are scum I could see them thinking it's worth sacrificing one, even two of them to confirm the third.

(This also, to me, suggests Richard is a touch more likely than Bruce to be scum because it was him vs Tom yesterday so if Tom was only trying to get one of them confirmed as town it's more likely to be him.)

[imaginality]

Following up:

If we lynch Richard and he's scum, that clears me as town (I can only be scum if Bruce is too). In that scenario, I think this is the best plan:

Bruce protects John
I kidnap Mary Rose or no-one
John steals Mary Rose's vote.
Mary Rose targets Bruce

If John dies, Bruce is scum.
If I die, John will know if I kidnapped Mary Rose (if he doesn't have a double vote) and Bruce is scum. (If I didn't block her, John will have to decide between the two of them, but there'll be a chance a town Mary Rose will have killed Bruce during the night to win it for us already.)
If Bruce, as scum, gets sneaky and targets Mary Rose hoping for a no-kill (because she's likely kidnapped by me) in order to frame her - no worries, we rinse and repeat until he gets unlucky and actually kills her.

That plan seems pretty good to me, hard to improve on. I'm not sure yet what's the best plan for if we lynch Bruce and he turns up scum, will think more about that.

Where is everyone?

[imaginality]

Charles, take a look at D1 again, I feel like there should be something there to break this open, but I'm just missing it.

I did notice a couple of relevant things when I had a read-through last night. I should have the chance to write up my thoughts into a post later today; watch this space.

[imaginality]

Hi, long-ish post here so I'll start with the summary.

I read through Richard's, Bruce's and Mary Rose's posts, and I'll look through Tom's later for good measure. My conclusions so far:

Richard: some suspicious stuff in his posts, some possible links with Tom, not really much to connect him to Bruce or Mary Rose

Bruce: a few suspicious things in his posts too, no clear links with Tom, not much to connect him to Richard or Mary Rose

Mary Rose: not much if any suspicious stuff in her posts, no clear links to Tom, Richard or Bruce

Thoughts on Tom's post's to follow later as I've run out of time here... at the moment I'm leaning Richard, with Richard-Bruce ahead of Richard-Mary Rose as a scum pairing.





Thoughts on Richard's posts:

- Post 7: votes Tina for blocking him

The way he came straight out with this tingles my spidey-sense a bit. Considering he didn't know for sure it was Tina (could have been me), and also if he'd waited before revealing he was roleblocked, it would have kept everyone else honest (they'd be worried about him countering them if they lied about their night action and he'd tracked them). So why this post so soon? One possibility is it's over-eagerness, but here's another theory that seems plausible to me: scum may have had a pre-arranged plan for how they were going to play day 1, but Tina blocking Richard made her such an easy lynch target that he figured it was important to let his buddies know: "Hey, change of plan, let's get Tina lynched."

- post 9: questions Bruce's assumption that John used his power

Null tell

- post 11 (56): reacts to Tina's counter-attack

I pointed out in (57) that a couple of his arguments in this post are dubious. The way he's stretching here in his attack on Tina is a touch scummy, I think. Like he sees her just as a lynch target and is more concerned with persuading others to lynch her than actually determining if she's scum or not.

- post 12: reason for targeting Bruce

I think I drank too much that night Razz and targeted Bruce (I somehow thought he was a vig?)

This doesn't make sense - no need to track a vig, really... Now, I happen to think tracking Bruce was a very good move given he's a weak doc - if Bruce was dead, Bruce's target could be scum assuming Bruce wasn't the night kill. But I am wary of the fact Richard isn't sure why he tracked Bruce. Is it that he's scum, and followed a scumbuddy's plan without thinking too hard about justifying his night choice?

- post 14 (76): paranoia

In response to Misty's "Something's up with the tracker and watcher I think"

Oh, I see...
You think that me and him are scum and had planned this in advance do you?

That seems way out of the blue. Misty never said anything of that sort, just nodded towards out the (apparent) contradiction between the tracker and watcher result claims. Could have been that one was scum, or the other, no reason why it had to be both of them working together. Now if Richard knew he and Tom were both scum, that would provide a bit of explanation for this paranoid leap.


25 - Doesn't vote for Tom straight up:

I'm going to hold off votes of course till all of the claims come in, but there's no way in my mind that you're not scum right now.

At first I thought this was a bit of a contradiction with how he voted Tina straight off day1. But I guess day1 we had 5 v 3 v 1, whereas day2 we were in lylo. So his caution here is fair enough.


27 - comment to Tom:

(Note to Tom scum: Why did you so obviously reveal yourself? and even better, why didn't you kill me?)

This reads a little bit like: "Come on, put up more of a fight so people believe we are on opposite sides!" I can see a scum Richard deciding it's better to draw attention to Tom's lacklustre defense himself than someone else do so later.

And the "Why didn't you kill me?" is an entirely pointless question to ask, so asking it just makes it look like Richard wants to seem confused.


Thoughts on Bruce's posts:


- post 3 (translation of post 1): commenting on results of night kills

If this was a bit more "oh noez, that night sucked, woe is us" I'd find it scummy, as it is it is a bit more matter-of-fact about it, I think, just a "okay, so this is how it is" kinda post. Null tell

- post 5: answers Richard's question

Nothing suspicious about their interaction that I can see, just noting the fact that they did interact.

- post 6: reason for protecting me

He gave a reason for choosing to protect me. Null tell in itself but a contrast with Richard

- post 8: choosing who to protect

Im reading through to see who is the most cleared as town so I dont pick the wrong person to protect.

Struck me as weird at the time, because I was assuming he was thinking from a preservation point of view - i.e. protecting me again would mean he wouldn't die. Thinking about it from a "if I protect someone else I can clear another player" viewpoint though, this makes sense now.

- post 8: against no-lynch

Doesn't give any reason, just agrees that no-lynch is bad. I think it was at least worth considering given the dire straits a mislynch could have placed us in. Seems to me that scum would be happy to jump onto the 'no to no-lynch' side without any other comment like this, given Tina was in the firing line. This isn't a strong point though, just a gut feeling really that Bruce seems to want the town to like him and is happy to go with whatever others think best.

- post 14: reason for protecting John

I figured it was a safe bet, and he or I would have been likely targets for night kills.

The second half of that sentence I agree with - John was a likely target. Not sure why he was a 'safe bet' for Bruce to protect though - he wasn't clearly town. Safe bet for scum to protect though...

Also important to note that Bruce posted his target ahead of Richard naming Bruce's target. This stuffed up our chances of testing Richard's night action.

To me this suggests either Richard and Bruce aren't working together, or Bruce got confused about their plan somewhere along the line. (It's unlikely it was deliberate, I don't see what scum would gain from it.)

- post 17: 'still alive'

This could explain how I am still alive after protecting John.

? John was proven town as soon as day 2 dawned and he didn't use his double vote to vote the scum team to an easy win. This quote smacks a little of scum automatically trying to cast suspicion as widely as possible.


Thoughts on Mary Rose's posts:

- post 1: no-targeted

Slight pro-town points, since a random vig (or 50% chance of one) on night 0 was unlikely to help us

- posts 2-4: questioning me re. my post

I actually like this, re-reading, Mary Rose seems genuine with her questions here. And she actually read and listend to my explanation. I like how she considered all the possibilities (at the end of post 4).

- post 5: against making a plan for the night

I can see where she's coming from - the element of surprise can be a handy weapon - but there's no harm in at least discussing a plan. If even the best plan we can think of is flawed, we don't need to actually go with it.

- post 8: discussing the plan

Makes good points here, noting she has 50% chance of not killing me if I don't block her, and hoping to look for better options for the Bruce-Richard pairing.

- post 12: discussing the next plan

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.

She didn't follow this up, but that may just have been because Tom self-hammered before she could do so.

[imaginality]

I didn't get a lot from Tom's posts. No obvious giveaway links to other players.

The main thing for me is, like I said earlier, I still sense that he gave himself up too easily on day 2. I would've thought if scum were Bruce and Mary Rose, he would've tried a bit harder to get Richard lynched. Their gambit assumes he'll get lynched, but on the off-chance he succeeds in out-arguing Richard, scum would win straight away. Whereas with the Richard = scum theory, there's less motivation for him to defend himself to the death, since one scum is going to be lynched either way.


Looking at scum triads, and how the night kills could have gone, doesn't crack the case wide open, because there are plausible options whoever the scum are:

With Tom, Richard and Bruce:

Night 0 and Night 1, any of them could have made the kill. Bruce would be a good call for making the Night 0 kill, because Richard could 'confirm' Bruce's claim to have protected me. Night 2, either Richard or Bruce could have made the kill.

With Tom, Richard and Mary Rose:

Mary Rose didn't make the kills, because I kidnapped her. I'd guess Tom made the kill Night 0 since he had a fair chance of getting his claim through, unless they were planning to frame Bruce Day 1 (and switched tack to targeting Tina as an easier target). I'd assume that they'd have decided Mary Rose should use her night action (easy for her to claim she no-targeted when I revealed I roleblocked her), in the hopes of getting a bonus kill. Night 1 killer could have been Tom or Richard, and Night 2 had to be Richard.

With Tom, Bruce and Mary Rose:

Mary Rose didn't make the kills, because I kidnapped her. Night 0 killer could have been Tom or Bruce (though if it was Bruce, they got very lucky that Tina happened to role-block Richard). Again, I'd assume that they'd have decided Mary Rose should use her night action. Night 1 killer could have been Tom or Bruce, and Night 2 had to be Bruce.

All three of the above are possible, so we can't rule out any of those pairings by looking at who made the kills. (And just to complete this analysis from others' perspective, yes, the Tom, Bruce, Charles triad is also possible - e.g. I could have made the kill Night 0, Tom Night 1, and Bruce Night 2.)

[imaginality]

Mod: I think we need a massprod.

This.

So on it.

[imaginality]

John, as I stated earlier: if we mislynch, and I've named my target, scum can win by targeting someone else. There will be two scum left, and I can only kidnap one. At that point, we can only win if (a) we block their kill and (b) either you get a double vote, or Mary Rose (if town) successfully vidges scum. Because of (a), I request the right to change my announced target if we mislynch.

Otherwise, these are my targets.

If we lynch Richard and he is scum:

I will kidnap

you

to protect you, and Mary Rose should target Bruce. Bruce should protect me. This plan is best because we can rinse and repeat until:

(a) I die (Bruce is scum)
(b) Bruce dies (vidged by Mary Rose, or Mary Rose is scum)
(c) No-one dies for e.g. 3 nights running (only 1/8 chance that Mary Rose is town)

If we lynch Bruce and he is scum:

I will kidnap Richard, and Mary Rose should target Richard. Richard should track me. If there's no kill, we rinse and repeat until:

(a) I die (Mary Rose is scum)
(b) you die (Mary Rose is scum unless Richard saw me target you in which case I am scum)
(c) No-one dies (proving I am not scum) in which case it's between Richard and Mary Rose. (At that point, perhaps the best plan is if I then kidnap you

or

kidnap Mary Rose, and Mary Rose tries to vidge Richard. Not sure.)

If we lynch Mary Rose and she is scum:

I will kidnap Richard with 7/8 probability, and Bruce should protect you. You should steal Richard's vote. Then:

(a) if you die, Bruce is scum
(b) if I die, Bruce is scum if you couldn't steal Richard's vote (7/8 chance I kidnapped him), otherwise if it's the 1/8, then it's either Richard or Bruce
(c) if Richard or Bruce dies, the other is scum
(d) if no-one dies (because Richard is scum, or because Bruce targeted Richard and I kidnapped Richard) we repeat until we hit a night when I don't kidnap Richard, after which case (a) (b) or (c) will apply


I hope those plans make sense to you. I definitely think they are our best options, assuming we lynch scum. Any questions, just ask. I will definitely abide by these plans.

[imaginality]

To go with Tom's possible slip that John spotted, there's also Richard's latest post:

What am I really supposed to say? Other then my word against Bruce's, I can't really bring anything else (that I can only have) that implicates him any more. I'm going to reread, but it looks like it's going to be finding a needle in a haystack to find anymore.
(That's

an advantage

of Tom folding so fast: he didn't say much to implicate anyone).

Hmm. It's only an advantage from a scum perspective...


I'm holding off voting for now until John (or others, but John in particular) has a chance to comment on the night action plans above, and in case Mary Rose uncovers something dramatic on her re-read (but that's unlikely I think, there's not a whole lot to re-read). After that, as things stand, I'm going to vote for Richard.

[imaginality]

I think you misunderstood me:

I was saying I need to be secretive about my kidnap target only if we

mislynch

today. Because if we mislynch, there will be two scum left, and we can't prevent them from killing successfully if we announce in advance who I will kidnap.

If we choose correctly, lynch scum and only have one scum left, then yes, your plans will work fine, and I'm more than happy to go along with them.

[imaginality]

Okay, since I was leaning towards voting him anyway...

Vote: Richard

[imaginality]

Yep, thanks for modding, Prof. Guppy - I liked your laidback, dryly humorous flavour, eh.

Ash's enthusiastic self-hammer D2 was a neat touch, I think it helped us sell the case that he and Richard were both scum. And Grimmy did a nice job of staying out of the fray all the way through, which meant he was able to sit back on D3 and let John and I find reasons to vote Richard.

Starting from a good position (three townies dying N0 was a tough break for town) took some of the pressure off and meant I was able to suggest plans that I genuinely felt were the best ones from a town perspective. My N1 plan did back us into a bit more of a corner than I'd intended, mind you, but Ash was happy to take the fall to keep the attention off Grimmy and me.