Mini 793: Scrubs mafia- GAME OVER

[Furry]

If I think someone is town though, I am going to defend them to the end. Admittedly I thought slicey would flip scum which is another reason I prefered no lynch, but I would rather have a no lynch then a lynch on

my strongest town read

.

Where did you state this? You're getting scummier and scummier if you fail to respond.

First of all hun, no

threats

. That has a pretty nice potential of getting a backlash from me thats

not going to be pleasant

.

Irrelevant to point out maybe, but man what Irony!

Yeah I know, it was a joke. But if he is going to get threaty, im going to be threaty

[Brandi]

I wouldn't take the threats of a single player to heart regardless. Even if I agree with most of his ideas thus far in the game, I don't believe any one person can dictate the town.

[veerus]

Brandi's fishing for night action reactions reminds me strongly of one of Tar's standard scum tells. And his tells are right on the money way too often for me to ignore one here.

vote: Brandi

[Brandi]

Brandi's fishing for night action reactions reminds me strongly of one of Tar's standard scum tells. And his tells are right on the money way too often for me to ignore one here.

vote: Brandi

Stop strawmanning me. I never asked for NIGHT ACTION reactions, I was asking for OPINIONS on the DEATHS. Not HOW they died, not WHY they died, but opinions on the players THEMSELVES.

Everyone up until GORRAD had posted, had casually given their thoughts, he was the ONLY ONE who said NOTHING on the matter, and so I asked him what he thought. That isn't FISHING, not in the least.

Kthx.

[veerus]

Is a reaction not an opinion?

And who do you mean by everyone? Until you started fishing, no one said anything about Slicey/DDD, except Furry who merely stated his opinion.

[Brandi]

merely stated his opinion.

And yet this is exactly what I've been asking for. Someone to "merely state their opinions" as I have done, as I have asked. Nothing MORE, nothing less. So stop putting words in my mouth, thank you

[veerus]

By splitting hairs you're further convincing me that my suspicions are correct. Furry's was a simple conclusion based on the events that happened. He said it of his own volition.

You, on the other hand, went on a tirade about how it sucks that Slicey was killed and why, oh why, was DDD targeted? Oh, and what does everyone else think?

[Dr. Perry Cox]

Votecount

2 Brandi

(Gorrad, veerus)

1 Furry

(Brandi)

1 Gorrad

(Fishythefish)

1 Tzeentch

(Furry)

Not voting: BrianMcQueso, Lindisfarne, Tzeentch, hp [leaves]

[Fishythefish]

Furry's "I told you so" bit doesn't sit so well, but since he did express his opinions yesterday (195 makes things clearest), I don't have a big problem with it. Brandi's reaction to the nightkill... well, I don't really see this. What's scummy about wanting night action reactions? This doesn't feel like information it's useful for scum to fish for.

Tangentially, Brandi's use of capital letters is starting to get to me. Never mind that they are a rather ugly of way of providing emphasis, by using them so often you take away their effect of isolating, and it ends up just feeling like being shouted out. Not a tell of any kind, but I'd find your posts much easier to read if you used caps much more sparingly.

[BrianMcQueso]

Definitely not role fishing in the least. Scum and town react differently to deaths.

Do you think anything productive can come of getting people's opinions on dead players? Mafia and town will act differently when they know different things. At this point, everyone knows the same information about those players, and we all know that the dead players were innocent, so every opinion will be colored by that information, town and scum alike.

I was fine with a Brandi vote yesterday, and combined with her behavior today and result of inHim's alignment flop, I only feel stronger about that now.

vote: Brandi

On the other hand, Day 1 No Lynch is like, the worst idea, ever. Furry makes me very, very nervous. Also not happy with his attitude towards the cases brought against him.

[Brandi]

@Brian: Maybe not too productive, it's just to start discussion, and perhaps a way to you know, SCUMHUNT?

@Veerus: Oh, and I'm not splitting hairs, it's just annoying to me when people are blindly ignorant and don't know HOW TO READ. I am a WOMAN after all, I tend to get irritated easily. That is just how I PLAY. Deal with it. Also, I never went on any such "triade" as you speak, you're making up shit again. I asked a simple question, and oddly I got voted for it. If you couldn't tell from my large ass case on INHIM, I used a lot of CAPSLOCK to help enforce my POINTS. (Oh, like I'm doing right now?)

Brian, you're also an idiot if you think my alignment has anything to do with inhims. He was scummy, he deserved to be lynched, end of story. I pushed a lynch against the scummiest player, and I am PROUD OF THAT, because I did what a good member of the town should do, work hard to build a case against a person who acts like scum.

It's fine though, I can still scumhunt effectively with people voting for me. It only helps to further give information to the town.

So yah, good luck with your baseless idiotic case, let me know how that works out for you. As for myself, I'm voting the guy who is in support of a No Lynch, you know, actually scum hunting.

PS: LURKERS NEED TO START POSTING NAO, KTHX. There are still a lot of people I have yet to get ANY sort of read on, and I'd hate to think there is scum that is just not contributing at all - doing nothing- and getting away with it.

[Brandi]

Tangentially, Brandi's use of capital letters is starting to get to me. Never mind that they are a rather ugly of way of providing emphasis, by using them so often you take away their effect of isolating, and it ends up just feeling like being shouted out. Not a tell of any kind, but I'd find your posts much easier to read if you used caps much more sparingly.

Fishy - it's a habit sometimes, I might actually try to tone it down a bit from now on. It's just difficult sometimes, but I guess I am getting a little emotional because I feel that some people are just being really really ignorant, and I hate it when I don't know how to effectively explain what I mean to someone without them putting more words in my mouth...all the time anyway. I suppose I just need to work harder to being more neutral. I'm still trying to stop using "=P :B ^_^ >_> :3" etc in games as well, then again I don't think that bugs people as much.

[Brandi]

PS: I might be "pushing it" with my slight insults, so I'm sorry If I'm out of line with that.

Also another thing:

Furry's was a simple conclusion based on the events that happened. He said it of his own volition.

Exactly what I did, exactly what I asked for.

about how it sucks that Slicey was killed

I never said it sucked that Slicey was killed. At this point, I can definitely see WHY he was killed, and I think who ever killed him was looking in the right direction. At first I thought that perhaps he wasn't the best choice- and now I can kind of see that yes, indeed, he was pretty scummy, and probably would have ended up being lynched today if he wasn't NK'd.

why, oh why, was DDD targeted?

Over dramatic- I think, no. I just thought it was odd because I was more so expecting MYSELF to be night killed, because I have definitely been a more prominent/hardworking/noticeable pro-town player. But then again, perhaps I was just the obvious choice, so they picked someone else at random. I also thought it was odd because in the back of my head I felt that DDD was a bit scummy himself, if only for a gut feeling, so I wasn't expecting that.

Perhaps I went a bit in depth on my opinion, I didn't ask for Gorrad to go in depth, and I said if all he thought was - he didn't know what to think - well that'd be fine too. It wasn't too important, it's just good to make sure no one is avoiding topics for discussion.

There are many ways in which asking for opinions on the people who were killed can help the town, and I suppose even vice versa. But to immediately assume that I am only doing it to "role fish" or whatever, is very ignorant.

That's like instantly assuming that the only reason someone votes for someone is because they are trying to get a quicklynch on a townie. "Only scum make votes!" Yah- no.

[Fishythefish]

I just thought it was odd because I was more so expecting MYSELF to be night killed, because I have definitely been a more prominent/hardworking/noticeable pro-town player. But then again, perhaps I was just the obvious choice, so they picked someone else at random.

These seems hugely false. You were very vehemently in favour of lynching inHim. inHim townie. Rightly or wrongly, a backlash in this sort of situation is common- plus, you had one of the more serious wagons yesterday. I find it unbelievable you would see yourself as a likely kill.

[Furry]

Need to take a look at this brandi wagon tonight it would seem...

[Furry]

And the claim certainly doesn't help.

*facepalm* ok seriously people. Just about every role can work as any alignment given how the game is balanced. Give me any role and I bet I can throw together a somewhat balanced mini in about ten minutes. If this is about role name thats even more annoying. Any good mod will give scum fakeclaims, or they will all be roles that are townie sounding. Name/Role claims should be taken on if they fit flavor if you are going to attempt to bust on it. If inhim claimed doctor, then yeah, thats flavorfail. RB is not.

And finally, putting my words into my mouth. I'm perfectly aware that flavour and mechanics are rarely linked that strongly (in fact, I've made note of your seeding of potential doubts for the future), and it's interesting you didn't ask

why

I thought the claim didn't help.

One of the most common power roles to give scum is roleblocker. In addition, the only way to test the power involves a pro-town power role losing their role for a night, then willingly stepping forward to state this. What's more, the only way to reliably test involves a power role stepping forward BEFORE being blocked - making them an obvious target.

In other words, it's one of the most reliable scum claims there is - it's a power role, but one which is both near-impossible to test without giving the scum information and one which is very likely to go to the scum.

It was the fact that he claimed roleblocker that tipped it over the edge for me. Not the fact that he claimed that Jordan was a roleblocker.

So you were outguessing the mod? Never seen a town RB I take it? As I have said before, give me a scum role, I will give you a setup for it. Dont WIFOM the setup though.

There also is blocking scum kills for town RBers though. Also if they do hit a town role that knows it, it confirms the role it hit when they claim. Best play for a RBer is to just aim for the scummiest player. They might stop a kill, they might end up confirming a PR of a scummy player that causes scum to need to scramble given that a lynch just got their role confirmed. I can go hunt for games with a town RBer if you want, bet I can find quite a few.

Just about every role can work as any alignment given how the game is balanced... If this is about role name thats even more annoying.

The first part says that any role can work as any alignment. Initially I read that as "Any character can work as any alignment", but the next bit - where you say it's worse if it's about the role name - seems to imply that the first bit was talking about the ability itself.

Please let me know if I'm misinterpreting this bit, but does that mean that you think we shouldn't take a person's claimed role into account when deciding whether or not to lynch them?

I mean WHO they claim is not important at all. Any mod worth a salt will not make the game breakable by nameclaim. What is important is what they claim in relation to their name claim, and what they claim if you strip all flavor from the game. For example vigs, I could see...

Hooch - Because hooch is crazy
Doug - Because he is a really bad doctor
Kelso - Because he fires people

If we had a claim of JD - Vig, now that doesnt make sense, and is a claim you lynch. Now if you have someone claim a cop with investigations on the obv-innocent and a dead player, then you lynch them regardless of a name.

On the other hand, I really liked your responses.

unvote

Reading brandi, hp, BMQ now.

[Brandi]

I just thought it was odd because I was more so expecting MYSELF to be night killed, because I have definitely been a more prominent/hardworking/noticeable pro-town player. But then again, perhaps I was just the obvious choice, so they picked someone else at random.

These seems hugely false. You were very vehemently in favour of lynching inHim. inHim townie. Rightly or wrongly, a backlash in this sort of situation is common- plus, you had one of the more serious wagons yesterday. I find it unbelievable you would see yourself as a likely kill.

You honestly don't think I was night kill worthy? Well - ok. I think it's evident that because I attacked an incredibly scummy player - scum might be scared I actually might catch onto one of them! (I'm definitely trying)

[Brandi]

So you were outguessing the mod? Never seen a town RB I take it? As I have said before, give me a scum role, I will give you a setup for it. Dont WIFOM the setup though.

Here you are saying not to outguess the mod.

If we had a claim of JD - Vig, now that doesnt make sense, and is a claim you lynch.

Here you are outguessing the mod.

Either it's not okay, or it is, make up your mind.

[Furry]

So you were outguessing the mod? Never seen a town RB I take it? As I have said before, give me a scum role, I will give you a setup for it. Dont WIFOM the setup though.

Here you are saying not to outguess the mod.

If we had a claim of JD - Vig, now that doesnt make sense, and is a claim you lynch.

Here you are outguessing the mod.

Either it's not okay, or it is, make up your mind.

Or you just didnt quite understand what I said.

Outguessing the mod for what roles (RB, vig, doctor etc) are what alignment, or are in the game or not is bad outguessing the mod. Now, comparing a roleclaim to a flavor claim is not really outguessing the mod as much as it is having a claim not make any sense. Theme games are made to put nameclaims with APPROPRIATE roles so the mod and players can have fun.

If the mod just put random roles with random names, I will be pissed beyond reason (even though current roles show this is not true). You dont outguess the mod for setup or what alignments roles are, in a theme you are allowed to lynch role-name claims that dont add up.

[Gorrad]

Brandi, no matter how scummy he was, you led a crusade against a townie. It takes a lot of ego to assume yourself to be a night kill after that.

[hp [leaves]]

I think the Brandi wagon is scum-driven.

I don't have a clean idea on Furry.

Let's just lynch our biggest lurker.

Unvote, Vote Brian

[Dr. Perry Cox]

Votecount

3 Brandi

(Gorrad, veerus, BrianMcQueso)

1 BrianMcQueso

(hp [leaves])

1 Furry

(Brandi)

1 Gorrad

(Fishythefish)

Not voting: Furry, Lindisfarne, Tzeentch

(Inactive players have been prodded.)

[Tzeentch]

And the claim certainly doesn't help.

*facepalm* ok seriously people. Just about every role can work as any alignment given how the game is balanced. Give me any role and I bet I can throw together a somewhat balanced mini in about ten minutes. If this is about role name thats even more annoying. Any good mod will give scum fakeclaims, or they will all be roles that are townie sounding. Name/Role claims should be taken on if they fit flavor if you are going to attempt to bust on it. If inhim claimed doctor, then yeah, thats flavorfail. RB is not.

And finally, putting my words into my mouth. I'm perfectly aware that flavour and mechanics are rarely linked that strongly (in fact, I've made note of your seeding of potential doubts for the future), and it's interesting you didn't ask

why

I thought the claim didn't help.

One of the most common power roles to give scum is roleblocker. In addition, the only way to test the power involves a pro-town power role losing their role for a night, then willingly stepping forward to state this. What's more, the only way to reliably test involves a power role stepping forward BEFORE being blocked - making them an obvious target.

In other words, it's one of the most reliable scum claims there is - it's a power role, but one which is both near-impossible to test without giving the scum information and one which is very likely to go to the scum.

It was the fact that he claimed roleblocker that tipped it over the edge for me. Not the fact that he claimed that Jordan was a roleblocker.

So you were outguessing the mod? Never seen a town RB I take it? As I have said before, give me a scum role, I will give you a setup for it. Dont WIFOM the setup though.

There also is blocking scum kills for town RBers though. Also if they do hit a town role that knows it, it confirms the role it hit when they claim. Best play for a RBer is to just aim for the scummiest player. They might stop a kill, they might end up confirming a PR of a scummy player that causes scum to need to scramble given that a lynch just got their role confirmed. I can go hunt for games with a town RBer if you want, bet I can find quite a few.

Of course I know roleblockers can go to both scum and town. What I was saying (if you care to read my post) is that I’m also aware that roleblockers are a very common scum power role, are near-impossible for town to test without giving the scum a major advantage, and have historically been one of the most common power roles for scum to claim.

I’m not saying that roleblockers are scummy. I’m saying that a roleblocker claim doesn’t make me significantly less inclined to lynch.

But thanks for your totally irrelevant lesson, I appreciate my words being twisted and misinterpreted to look like I have no idea what I’m doing.

Just about every role can work as any alignment given how the game is balanced... If this is about role name thats even more annoying.

The first part says that any role can work as any alignment. Initially I read that as "Any character can work as any alignment", but the next bit - where you say it's worse if it's about the role name - seems to imply that the first bit was talking about the ability itself.

Please let me know if I'm misinterpreting this bit, but does that mean that you think we shouldn't take a person's claimed role into account when deciding whether or not to lynch them?

I mean WHO they claim is not important at all.

Any mod worth a salt will not make the game breakable by nameclaim. What is important is what they claim in relation to their name claim, and what they claim if you strip all flavor from the game. For example vigs, I could see...

Hooch - Because hooch is crazy
Doug - Because he is a really bad doctor
Kelso - Because he fires people

If we had a claim of JD - Vig, now that doesnt make sense, and is a claim you lynch.

Now if you have someone claim a cop with investigations on the obv-innocent and a dead player, then you lynch them regardless of a name.

On the other hand, I really liked your responses.

unvote

Reading brandi, hp, BMQ now.

So either names are irrelevant (as you initially argue) or they are actually a way of testing the potential veracity of a claim (as you later argue)? You’re arguing two opposite points here – as I read it, your answer to my question:

does that mean that you think we shouldn't take a person's claimed role into account when deciding whether or not to lynch them?

essentially boils down to “No, because yes.”

You’re saying we shouldn’t outguess the mod – but you’re also trying to argue that you should only do what “makes sense” in a flavour sense, despite:

Any mod worth a salt will not make the game breakable by nameclaim.

Also, I find this very interesting:

Or you just didnt quite understand what I said.

Outguessing the mod for what roles (RB, vig, doctor etc) are what alignment, or are in the game or not is bad outguessing the mod. Now, comparing a roleclaim to a flavor claim is not really outguessing the mod as much as it is having a claim not make any sense. Theme games are made to put nameclaims with APPROPRIATE roles so the mod and players can have fun.

If the mod just put random roles with random names, I will be pissed beyond reason (even though current roles show this is not true). You dont outguess the mod for setup or what alignments roles are, in a theme you are allowed to lynch role-name claims that dont add up.

You’re basically trying to tell us what we can and can’t accept as believable. You know what? That says to me that you’re setting up for future claims. You keep talking about not outguessing the mod, but you contradict yourself by then telling us where we are "allowed" to outguess the mod.

Nameclaims are relevant – for example, if you were to say “I’m Turk!” and someone else piped up “Wait, I’m Turk. How can you be Turk?” it would create another piece of information we can use when deciding who to lynch. However, almost any character can have almost any role, with flavour for justification. Similarly, any role (name or power) can be any alignment. Nonetheless, some power roles are more common for scum than others. This is simply a fact, and refusing to bear it in mind when voting is pure foolishness.

Long story short: I don’t trust people who contradict themselves, I don’t trust people who twist other people’s words, and I don’t trust people who try to tell us how to think, especially not when it defies normal (and well-tested) reasoning.

Vote: Furry

[Furry]

Tell me where you fail to follow me

1) There should be no nameclaim that makes you go "lets not lynch this person"
2) There should be no roleclaim that makes you go "that is a town/scum role"
3) You

should

be sure that the name claim fits the role claim
4) If the nameclaim down not fit the roleclaim, its a fakeclaim.

So from what you had bolded

WHO they claim is not important is covered by 1.

JD - Vig is covered by 3, that role makes no sense, ESPECIALLY as there are roles that make more sense as a vig in the game. Maybe in super fluffy happy bunny land there would be a vig that doesnt make sense, but in a game with doug, kelso, janitor, hooch etc... no, there are some roles that dont make sense. This is also going into 4.

For your last part, I feel the better the mod the farther away from the meta of regulation (RB/GF/goon) they go when making scum setups if they still can make a balanced, non-swingy game.

[Tzeentch]

Tell me where you fail to follow me

1) There should be no nameclaim that makes you go "lets not lynch this person"
2) There should be no roleclaim that makes you go "that is a town/scum role"
3) You

should

be sure that the name claim fits the role claim
4) If the nameclaim down not fit the roleclaim, its a fakeclaim.

So from what you had bolded

WHO they claim is not important is covered by 1.

Right here. The only way that a nameclaim can be unimportant is if who they claim has no bearing on your reaction whatsoever. You yourself state that it can, in your later points, so clearly who they claim IS important. Therefore, point one alone does not justify that statement. Even if you accept your points as valid (which I don't), that statement is refuted by points three and four.

Speaking of which, I also disagree with three. To assume that a character's role can only be an "obvious" one is to make an assumption about how the mod designs games - in other words, attempting to outguess the mod.

And I definitely disagree with four. I've already explained why, but I'll explain again in a moment.

Before that, though, it's worth noting that all four points are black-and-white (apart, debatably, from point three) - you do realise that in a game of incomplete information and with both logic and gut feeling playing integral parts, shades of grey are kinda an important part of the game? Just because I would never see a role and say "That's definitely a scum role" or "That's definitely a town role" (aside from the obvious case of a role with stated alignment, such as SK), that doesn't preclude me from saying "That's

more likely

to be a scum role" or "That's

more likely

to be a town role". Your rules above don't consider this possibility.

JD - Vig is covered by 3, that role makes no sense, ESPECIALLY as there are roles that make more sense as a vig in the game. Maybe in super fluffy happy bunny land there would be a vig that doesnt make sense, but in a game with doug, kelso, janitor, hooch etc... no, there are some roles that dont make sense. This is also going into 4.

Hm. Potential slip here - earlier you talked about

Outguessing the mod for what roles (RB, vig, doctor etc)... are in the game or not is bad outguessing the mod.

but here you say "there are roles that make more sense as a vig

in the game

... in

a game

with [various characters]" - I suspect a mild Freudian slip, and that you wanted to say "a theme" but have accidentally revealed that you have information.

That aside, I consider that it is the general consensus that using the most obvious characters for each role can lead to obvious game design, and therefore that being prepared to give characters roles which might not be immediately obvious is actually a good thing. Do you deny this?

I also contend that almost any character (in Scrubs or in almost any theme) can be given almost any role with valid flavour justification for that character having that role. This is not the first time I've mentioned this, but you haven't answered this point. Do you deny this?

For your last part, I feel the better the mod the farther away from the meta of regulation (RB/GF/goon) they go when making scum setups if they still can make a balanced, non-swingy game.

I agree that good mods can get away from this meta. It's interesting that you now accept that this meta does exist, though, because accepting that the meta exists means accepting that it is generally accepted that roleblockers are often found in scum groups. (Ugh, painful parsing. Let's try: For this meta to exist, it would need to be generally accepted that roleblockers are often found in scum groups. By accepting the existence of the meta, you are implicitly accepting that this is the general consensus)

Anyways, I've just noticed the time ( ) so I'm going to take my leave now. I look forward to seeing your response.