Stars Aligned II - Game Over!

[iLord]

First post .

So, can anyone who played in the last one explain the merits and disadvantages of a noise claim for those who haven't read it? It doesn't look like a lot in regards to noise has been changed.

[iLord]

@dramonic:

[iLord]

Sounds good.

I heard noise and I did not ward.

[iLord]

Vote: Dramonic

Seems like the best reason to vote for somebody so far.

Please enlighten me as to what your intentions are with this vote.

Maybe he assumes we'll think he'd not be that foolish and thus do it again!

Vote Dramonic

I think claiming each day may be of benefit. I think the part about players not being around if we claim it later is somewhat valid, definitely.

Is this vote based on the above logic?

[iLord]

Also, I decided to Launder myself, and I chose Avolition because I essentially, over the period of the game, seem really scummy in every game I play, as well as I always seem to find townies scummy. By day 4, I should have some info to make an informed decision.

uh-huh.

Vote: animorpherv1

[iLord]

Wait, what could've scumAni done to gain an insanity? Stalk?

I never actually thought about Searching. My main goal was to try to help out town in an unconvetional way Night 0, and I figured since I'm of no help to town, then I might as well get rid of my vote, but still post and contribute.

You never thought about searching? I simply don't believe you - Percy was even nice enough to list what actions you could do on N0.

[iLord]

Sarnath'd

@Seacore: How do Cultists gain Insanities Night 0?

[iLord]

@Slysly: Okay, so then what action could Ani possibly be covering up?

I did read it, several days before I sent in my action. When I thought about sending in my action, I only somewhat remebered Launder, and I had somewhat of a strategy in my head, so I used it. When I got a PM back telling me I needed to send in an Insanity, I was shocked, so I sent in Avolition.

Uh-huh. Just a few posts before, you stated that you purposely garnered an insanity, and now its a "shocking" surprise.

I don't see what Ani could be covering for, but there's no way he's telling to truth :/

[iLord]

[quote=Ani]@iLord:

Apparently the way I wanted it to sound didn't sound how I wanted it to.

Help town in an unconventional way -> do nothing special
Get rid of my vote -> A bit of my strategy which came in after I got a PM forom Percy telling me to gain an insanity[/quote]

How does "do nothing special" link to "help town in an unconventional way" in your mind?

I don't know about Ani prepping for future insanities. If we is a Cultist, he wouldn't have acted without the influence of the other Cultists, and I doubt they'd have let him come out with such a poor excuse.

[iLord]

I can't sum up my reaction any better than this. vote Animo

I can't imagine why, considering that the post you quoted gives no mention of an actually valid explanation of how Ani could be Cultist.

[iLord]

doing nothing special -> because I thought someone was going to stalk me -> I'd hear noise -> tell town I heard noise -> I thought that was going to be unconventional -> I was wrong.

Don't you want to be stalked? How could you think that telling town you heard noise is: a) Unusual or b) Helpful, considering the many other explanations for noise?

Not to mention that your supposed thought process is unrealistically twisted.

He could have gotten the insanity from Laundering as he says, which has to the worst possible night one play for either faction. Percy even advises against using this as an action for night zero in the Q&A section.

That's another good point. Ani claims to have read this and then forgotten, but he'll be hard pressed to launder when the mod explicitly advises against doing so. Completely inconsistent with the fact that he seemed to have remembered that he cannot submit no action.

He could have gotten it from stalking, which means that he currently HAS to be town, since psychopathy cannot be taken as a first insanity. If this is the case he is likely being honest about his current insanity choice. He may be considering or planning to go murderer.

Or he could be fabricating this as to allow for an explanation of a future planned insanity gain as cult.

You list simply possibilities - which do you think is likely true?

[iLord]

I saw similar stuff from Ani in LotA mafia too. Sigh. Well there is one way to get use out of this:

Animorpherv, I have a proposition for you, because your insanity has already gone up and it will likely be hard to insanity count verify you:

You said you wanted to untraditionally help town? Town needs a dedicated Grave Robber.

This action is the only thing that reveals the lynched and slain's alignments. Its a free action (changed from SA 1), but it causes an insanity gain.

We will need to assign 1 person to robbing grave duties every day for the lynch (and perhaps more if we need to know more than just the lynched alignment). Sometimes insanity counts are good clues and point to a scum alignment, but more often then not a rob grave will be necessary.

Its not good to take volunteers for it, as its a very easy way to explain high insanity counts.

Its not good to let it go randomly...because either it will not get robbed, thus depriving us of information, or it will get claimed robbed by multiple people which is a great excuse for insanity gains. My aim is to take away the possibility for faking in this area.

Therefore I ask will you be up for grave robbing the lynch every day? Your probably will not be allowed to make it to end game while doing this (you would be quite indistinguishable from a murderer due to high insanity counts, and would probably have to be policy vigged or lynched before day 6), but its an action that would strongly help.

Your a good choice for it because unlike some lurkers who may fail to submit, I think you are on enough to make sure you rob every day.

Do you agree to this task, Ani?

And @all the policy voters- Do you agree this is a great way to handle this? I was planning on saving this for the first wagon to go higher but I think this is a perfect fit.

This man is credit to team.

[iLord]

Query: Can Rob Grave be used multiple times a night?

[iLord]

@Seacore: How likely do you feel that the Cultists would've let scumAni come out like he did with such a poorly planned excuse?

[iLord]

I thought it was unusual because I thought most everyone was going to search. I thought it was helpful for the same reason.

Had this been a normal game, no one would be able to shake my faith that you're a Jester at this point.

You thought most everyone was going to Search, huh? Yet you forgot that you yourself could search?

You still didn't answer why you don't want to be stalked.

If he is covering up a future insanity, that could be validated if someone has Occult Books and used them on Ani.

On Night 0?

Cue obligatory "That was awfully convenient..." @ Ani/Sajin. O_O

[iLord]

I find three unlikely, as potential murderers would not want to draw this sort of attention to themselves. Four is unlikely because I can't imagine that cult wouldn't discuss each of their night actions prior to doing them.

Would 1 not be just as unlikely as 4, considering the excuse that Ani used?

I've seen Day 1 scum do stupid claims before.

Cults of Darkness and Shadow anybody? One scum came out and invented a role even though it was a semi-open set up with all roles detailed.

Did the scum have nighttalk before Day 1?

[iLord]

No, N1. If the OB user has 0 insanity, as should be the case right now, and Ani is lying, the results would be negative as Ani would have 0 insanity as well

Ah okay, I thought Commune happened after Insanity gained from Ritual.

I give up. I stalked Adel.

Reasoning:

Adel is a good player -> What if he's cult -> If he is we're all screwed.

Such poor reasoning, although scumAni would've had to have similarly poor reasoning to attempt to pull this in the first place.

Needless to say, this is just as difficult to believe. What happened to helping the town through passivity? Why would you hide the fact that you stalked?

[iLord]

Damn, you guys type too fast.

Yes, the scum did have nighttalk

You can't underestimate poor action choice, and other scum overlooking their decision making capabilities.

Obviously I'm not well acquainted with that level of scum ineptitude. Regardless, what are your thoughts on having Ani be the Grave Robber and garner insanities versus another sane townie?

[iLord]

As I stated before, I would rather lynch scum than a later potential murderer. Ani is not a murderer yet and may not become one. Ani voters, start scum hunting.

You believe him?

[iLord]

I thought it was helping,although it wasn't as passive as I wanted, by getting rid of what I thought would be a big threat if he's cult. I hid it because of that I was afraid what was going to happen (what happened to me when I hid it up).

What happened to your lack of faith in your scumhunting ability?

How is it possible that you believe it's optimal play to vig all good analysts as soon as possible?

[iLord]

No. I would expect cult to discuss/coordinate their actions each night, but not necessarily to discuss all the plays/posts they make in game.

Case in point, Percy's last game. Daytalking scum made a boneheaded move and didn't consult their scumbuddy in their quicktopic prior to making it.

Hmm. That's actually quite valid. Do you believe that Ani is crafty enough to preemptively excuse insanities? Cause from what I see, I'd be quite surprised that CultAni held off on claiming cultist .

I believe that it is essential to lynch ani at this point. Riculaulsly anti-town play requires dicipline and punishment by lynch.

Giving people a pass for being "too scummy to be scum" isn't going to help us win.

[iLord]

I believe he didn't Launder and that he stalked.

Why?

[iLord]

Anyone who's against lynching Ani is crazy.

Sajin?

[iLord]

I guess it's of no use that I've chasnged my plan to search tomorrow?

You still didn't answer my question - why did you decide to stalk Adel even though you said that you have no faith in your scumhunting abilities?

[iLord]

I so totaly missed it. Becuas ei wasn't willing to take a risk.

You do realize that you are taking just as big of a risk by attempting to kill him? That is, unless you can explain how an analyst is somehow more dangerous as scum than beneficial as town. Especially notable is just how influential scumAdel would have proven to be given his influence in the game thread so far.

In other news, I think it's silly to lynch anyone other than Ani today. While I understand where Sajin is coming from with the grave robbing, I really would like to refrain from giving such an anti-town and outright scummy player a free ride into D5 or 6, as it would give him far too much time to murder/ritualize if he were so inclined.

Obviously Ani has to agree to not go murderer or murder Adel first - if he's town, he will listen because its in the best interests of the town, and if he's scum, he can't murder anyway.

If he's a cultist, he will give them another body to use the Ritual with, though, and it's still exceedingly obvious to me that Ani's lying his ass off. Seacore also brings up Ani's inherent unreliability, which sadly is a factor even if he's town. It doesn't appear that Sajin thinks Ani is likely scum, but I may have to disagree with him here.

@Sajin: Thoughts on Ani providing a body for Cultists and possibly not robbing a grave even as town? He's already proven to be exceptionally irrational.

[iLord]

If a person's stalk fails due to ward, would they be notified?

It would seem weird otherwise since they would have to know whether or not they are able to attempt to murder the following night.

[iLord]

I thought it said somewhere in the rules that all failed actions are not notified, but still take an insanity.

That's what I thought, but then it occurred to me that someone would've have to know whether or not their Stalk was successful before they could proceed to attempting to Murder, else they could attempt to use Murder when it would be an illegal action (Illegal in that Percy did no list Murder among the available actions on N0, but listed the even more pointless Launder).

[iLord]

Baltar, there's one thing. The OP states that if you Stalk, you will be told if it works out or not right away. There's nothing from ani's post to make me believe it did not go through. Ani, want to speak up on this?

In any case, one of three possibilities come up: VP is lying, Ani is lying again (even MORE stupidly since his stalking wouldn't have worked), or VP got warded.

Ah, okay. For some reason, I had the opposite impression. If anyone warded Baltar, they should probably say so now. Otherwise, Ani's shown once more to be a filthy liar.

@SlySly: You're stretching. Adel's behavior's in no way indicative of scum. From what I see, he's simply terse and confident.

[iLord]

I'm currently taking it as evidence of pseudo-scumhunting, but I can fully compensate for my OMGUS reaction to what I consider overly wordy and poorly thought out posting that trys to implicate me as scummy.

I really don't think that it is sincere.

It does not appear that SlySly is good at scumhunting. I see no indication that it isn't sincere, however.

He has an insanity. I don't really see why scum would at this point.

Personal question, here. Would you consider Ani rational?

Have him test it on himself, on Sly sly gives him a different perspective. If he does it on himself, I believe it gives him a lot more pressure to tell the truth. If he's not lying, he's got nothing to worry about, but not on SlySly.

This is good.

---------------------------

3. I want to play the game in the spirit that Percy had in mind when he created it. I seriously doubt that what is happening right now is not how he envisioned it.

I daresay that he would not necessarily oppose it in good faith. He stated in the signup thread that part of the point of the setup was that it offered multiple strategies for players to utilize. What Adel is attempting to do right now qualifies as such a strategy.

In designing such a complex setup, Percy, as the mod, is opening a challenge to the town to find the optimal use of night actions to win (And since it is very unlikely that players can find an absolute solution, scumhunting is typically used in conjunction with night actions). He obviously would not be satisfied with this result because it means in a sense that the players have proven that his setup is broken, but that is no more reason to not do it than it is to beat another runner in a race just because he'll be "disappointed" in the result.

On the plan itself, yeah, we're going to be sure that it actually works, but Adel's idea here seems like a good basis. It's ridiculous that a player would willingly handicap himself for the "spirit of the game." The spirit of this game here is to find the optimal use of night actions to facilitate scumhunting. Since the latter is inherently unreliable, it would logically entail that we should attempt to garner a large of an advantage as possible with the former, if possible.

---------------------------

No! Adel, don't go!

I don't blame you on replacing out though. Some other players have been most uncooperative.

Yeah, I noticed that too.

Good point.

Vote: Nicodemus

Uh-huh.

[iLord]

Yes. He tried something but it failed miserably. That doesn't make him irrational.

Eh, let me revise my question. Do you believe that Ani is logical enough to listen to what the town says?

Technically, but do you really think it is now in the best interests of ani to go murderer? Ani's best chance for a win is definitely to stay investigator, he knows it, I know it, you know it, and everyone else knows it. His every step in this game will be tracked and he will be dealt with swiftly upon murderous deviations.

Judging from his play so far, I daresay that Ani does not allow any specters of potential consequences to influence his play. Regardless, I agree that it is unlikely that he will go murderer at this point.

Not done catching up, but it looks like people want to know who I warded. Yes, I used my ward ability on VP.

Humor me - why?

You know there is 6 cultists?

I expected better of you?

----------------------------------

Unvote Ani

[iLord]

Logic aside, I think ani knows that any renegade activity from him going forward will result in his lynch. The recent ani/saber bet debacle has given me a certain opinion of him. I don't see why he wasn't banned along with saber, but I am in no way pushing that issue and have no personal problem with ani.

Eh, I guess so. The only other game I've seen Ani in he didn't seem to act nearly as bizzarely, but his behavior so far makes me hesitant to agree with arguments that entail him making any logical/obvious decisions.

[iLord]

Don't see the attack against Chaco at all.

[iLord]

SlySly should replace out right now for his own sake .

Ell's plan gives us 8-11 lynches (As opposed to 2). I do not see how that's not in our favor.

How are we going to decide the Stalkers/Stalked?

[iLord]

Okay, finally, thread's stop going and I can reread it. Scumhunting time (This post will be big). I disagree strongly that making a list helps the scum, as I'm sure they can figure out who the town thinks is town easily enough without the benefit of such lists.

-------------------------------------------------------

Amished:

#46: Votes Dramonic, noting that it seems like "the best person to vote so far." Scummy - voting to wagon, as he indicates he has no plans to serious consider a lynch, and thusly would generate no pressure (Not to mention the uselessness of pressure on a wagon of predominantly meta base).
#416: Jumped on evilsnail attack. Opportunistic.

animorpherv1:

#74: Claims Laundered Night 0 on purpose to limit himself.
#85: Claims forgot about Searching.
#93: Claims to be surprised about gaining an Insanity from laundering.
#102: Claims convoluted thought process.
#128: Claims to have stalked Adel, but in hindsight, it's extremely obvious what's going on here. Ani planned to go Murderer as soon as possible (He evidently has no faith in his scumhunting abilities (Legit, I believe, based on his comment about his other posts), and by extension does not enjoy playing town). He attempted to cover for this by playing dumb, failed, and is trying to salvage the situation. With Sajin's plan, he's found something useful for him to do as town, and I doubt he'll sacrifice his life to go murderer and kill Adel, so I'm thinking he's probably going to stay town for now.
#256: Maintains that stalk was successful despite evidence seemingly pointing to the contrary.
#265: A believable claim at last, now proven true.

Chaco:

#131: LaL is not confident and forced.
#283,293: Best bet for wannabe murderer with Avolition.
#305: Constantly emphasizes how little he trusts Ani. Townie concern.
#476: Sort of convoluted thought process. Can't decide town or scum.

dramonic:

#432: Crazy theory. Townie conclusion. Probably not cultist.

DrippingGoofball:

#517: DGB is unreadable. DGB brings up a good point here.
#527: Don't get DGB's attack here anymore.

Ellibereth:

#491: Townie defense of Sly.
#499: Incredibly townie action, along with townie caution.
#515: Insistence on plan is good.
#553: Same as above.
#571: Claims to have stalked. Believably did not read the rules. My guess is that he planned on going Murderer before realizing its folly when reading the rules.

elvis_knits:

#17-19: Flood of ideas is typically townie response to structured setup. Again, she's played enough games to be able to fake this reaction, and its inherently difficult to discern the difference.
#76: Ani attack in hindsight still positive - natural response to ridiculous action.
#442: Don't agree that Ani's smart enough to lie and claim a different target (Not to mention the confidence and detail with which Ani was able to provide in regards to his stalk target). Attempt to analysis positive.
#512: Hostility towards Stalk reads genuine.

evilsnail:

#402,404: Initially appears to be barning Phate, later comment makes clear he actually believes this is a tell. Slightly townie as this could be scum trying to jump backed by legit reason.
#691: Don't like how he doesn't get into any specific reasons and how he uses "starting."

Faraday:

#49: Odd vote on Dramonic, giving no explanation but a joke.
#399: Explains #49, solid reads on players, townie.
#449: Votes Elli without explanation again (Specifically as opposed to the other players on Ani wagon).

Hayker (Adel):

#53,55: Disagreement with claiming seems legit and appropriate. Refusing to comply on Day 2 is a high risk, low rewards action for Cultists at this point.
#357: Overall, this whole business with trying to break the game is very townie, and the concern over getting the town to agree is similarly indicative of town.

Iecerint:

#118: Hints Ani/Sajin plan convenient. Town response.
#326: Just one example of a trend. A lot of his posts then to be "content," in that they discuss whatever mechanical issue is at hand and allows the validity of the contents to be independent of alignment. Really explains for my lack of read on his posts.
#361: Support's Adel's plan
#504: Does not even bat an eye at VP's vote?
#544: Initiates Nico wagon. Fresh topic is good.
#689: Panics after VP seriously calls for lynch. Not good.

Nicodemus:

#78: Horrible post - suggested that it might not be worth it to test Ani's insanity, hedged around the tell of Ani's claim, attacked "appeal to badness," and used soft language with whether his action was pro-town.
#153: Horrible post again, second side of equal does not balance with first, which indicates that he's telling the truth about stalking. Forced jump onto Ani wagon.
#185: Argues logically against Ani.
#368: Poor agreement here - no indication that he wants others to check the plan or intent whether or not he's actually going to give his plan. Not that scummy though, more lazy and trying to seem active and contributing.
#678: Feels like he has to explain why he's unvoting Ani - scummy.

Phate:

#10,14: Immediately calls of insanity explanation, and then 'realizes' that there's no action that could give insanity. If genuine, the latter means that he did not stalk and the former indicates that he believes Cultists could gain insanities Night 0 and that he's not a Cultist. Easily fakeable, but reads legit in this case.
#585: I don't like how he jumps on Elli here, when Ani is guilty of the same crime. Elli's insanity is not confirmed, Phate's not calling Elli cultist here.

Sajin:

#39: Started push on Dramonic. Legit, but neutral.
#162: Biased towards his plan, neutral.
#699: Don't agree with push here on Iecerint. Amusingly, though, still a neutral tell.

Sarag:

#651: Don't like how he says that he'd agree to either Ani lynch or Ani grave robber - it really isn't saying much, since at that point, those were probably the only two options.

Seacore:

#87-88: Confident this is genuine. It means that Seacore did not stalk and is not cult.
#96: Same as above - the persistence of argument means he did not consider the initial a fallacy. Most definitely town.
#226: Genuine concern over formulating effective strategies.
#248: Belligerent attitude towards Adel - townie.
#313: Townie concern over Ani as well.

semioldguy:

#48: Fence-sits on the Dramonic wagon, declines to vote, but mentions that we should still keep eye on him.
#64: No Investigating tonight. Pro-town action, but tell depends on how likely this would've been brought up anyway.
#126: Annoyance at people not reading rules is pretty townie - scum natural reaction would be eagerness to be seen as helpful.
#384: Genuinely does not approve of breaking the game, though at this point this tell is growing increasingly null.

SlySly:

#60: Calls Dramonic wagon. Personality indicates that this is town tell.
#84: Calls Ani wagon. Hindsight indicates that this is town tell.
#140: Accurately analyzes Ani's action.
#179: SlySly's confidence in Ani now makes sense.
#196: Attacks Adel - he just wants to find scum.
#564: Refuses to comply with Elli's plan.

startransmission:

#156: Don't like this post at all - refuses to acknowledge that townies can be persuaded not to go murderer and calls Icerint's obviously speculative argument reaching.

vikingfan:

#100: Blatantly scummy post - Barns a post factually incorrect on many fronts.
#125: Indicates that he's not reading, but the gesture is townie.
#228: Second time he's jumped in the clarify rules issue. Scum trying to appear contributing.
#389: Attempts to analyze setup - townie. Does indicate he has no ideal of Craft Fetish works and he does not appear crafty enough to falsify this. Probably townie.
#444: Eh, does the trying to appear helpful thing again. Considering #389, I'm concluding its a personality thing.
#684: Townie cautioning that activity =/= townie.

VP Baltar:

#31: Surprise at amount of warding, townie response.
#190: Warded Adel, now all but proven. Town.
#500: Why vote Iecerint?

Wickedestjr:

#71: Noted that other players (Really only SlySly) pointed out the flaw with EK's attack on SS. Didn't actually read attack, so trying to seem town. Initiated Adel attack, which is unusual.
#438: Reads forced attack against Adel.
#452: Warded VP Baltar. Interesting to know why, but not too relevant in hindsight. Does mean that he's town, probably.
#652: I would almost say that this is faked at this point, but the fact that he warded VP makes it too obvious that he's town.


Amished and Nicodemus my best bets for scum. Blue names I feel fairly strongly are town.

Vote: Nicodemus

---------------------------------------------------------------

See, this is a MASSIVE problem with Elli's plan. Scum can day talk. Under no circumstance should be the town be hand selecting people to participate in this. It'd be massively easy for the scum to manipulate a town suicide with this.

I disagree completely. Unless your assuming all the influential players are Cultists, the town on average has about four times the influence of the scum on this. People always run this argument on stuff like this (Like in Kingmaker), but it doesn't really make any sense.

Scumbag, seriously. DGB, you should back me up on this. Remember CT III and how the scum were awesomely manipulating the town into bad decisions thanks to their daytalking. You getting shades of that at all here?

Ah, this shows why you're convinced of the daytalking scum's scary mind-bending powers. The scum won't be able to sway the entire town. They can't magically make people change their minds any more than you or I can. It's like saying that we shouldn't lynch because the daytalking scum could convince us to lynch a townie.

It's the scummiest plan I've heard in this game. Allowing six cult members plus however many people want to go murderer dictate a large list of likely Investigators to die on night 1 is an idea that would only come from scum.

As above, scum've got no more say than any townies.

The plan is flawed. Cult simply has to protect someone with a rez kit. Or claim that cult protected someone vig target. Additionally cult will likely remove someone who is to vig later on. If all the matchups were perfect, it would be slightly in town's benefit. If even 1 or 2 were not (cultist assigned as a shooter, cult assigned to shoot a cultist) it creates a siuation that benefits cult. Additionally all or most all of the town could not vig again unless they became murderers....which would likely happen if the game was rolling downhill.

You will end up with a situation that will likely lead to a individual murderer or a cultist win following this plan. Just because you avoid chaos does not mean it will create a favorable game state.

If you disagree with this please point out where you addressed cultists using multiple rez kits in the formation of your plan.

Lets play this game how it was meant to be played.

Vote: Startransmission

That is a good point. I can't think of how we could cope with this.

He wanted to stop discussion of the plan by saying anyone who disagrees or says they don't understand are scum.

I doubt that scumIecerint would be trying to push a plan he finds a fault with so heavily, especially after a serious hole's been pointed out.

Reason number 48 why Iecerint is scum: He tried to shovel mud on SlySly over the modkills before they would have happened and before any reveal had been made. Not to mention he said earlier that he could see Adel as scum!

This is a valid point.

Players who want to win with the town would NOT have chosen stalk last night. They are either planning to become murderers or they are cultists trying to convince us they aren't cult.

This is true, but your missing something important. Yes, people that stalked probably intended to go Murderer if they're telling the truth. However, due to a variety of possible reasons, that may no longer be true. In Ani's case, the town's made it clear he's dead if he goes Murderer. In Elli's case, he's claimed that he didn't read the rules. Especially with all the talk that's explained how unlikely it is for Murderer's to win, I seriously doubt many players will go down that path, regardless of their thoughts prior to the game.

That being said, you can argue that Elli was lying, which is possible, but I daresay that Elli holds now no longer holds any intentions of going Murderer.

[iLord]

The rez pack issue can be dealt with. Picking up rez packs does not cause insanity. Neither does resuscitating someone. On the other hand, both stalking and murdering cause insanity. So we will be able to judge which cult players resuscitated by forcing all town players to choose confirmable insanities. This subverts the implicit intent of insanity, because LACK of insanity becomes a scumtell.

Basically, with Rez packs in the picture, this plan is no longer as clean as 6-8 extra lynches. I'll need to think about confirming insanities for a bit.

Sly calling for modkills is just Sly being Sly. Null tell.

[iLord]

Aversion, Distraction, Paranoid, Twitchy, and Sadism are all relatively easy to prove through Insanity Infractions. Stalking then Murdering will then give two Insanity Infractions. Scum can gain an insanity each night through the Ritual Resolving and still search for and use Res kits. I don't think we can try and account for kills through Insanities.

[iLord]

Iecerint, did you misunderstand me? The big point in my post was that while Insanities can be checked, Scum can easily gain Insanities along with townies all the while searching for rez kits and rez'ing players, because of the Ritual.

[iLord]

All of the cultists don't need to be the influential players. It actually doesn't take that many influential players to muck up the plan. You only need one or two cultists who can logically get the list needed across and the you have the other mopes come in and go "I agree with so and so". I don't know why you think it would be difficult, especially early in a large game. People have a strong tendency to sheep in large games, particularly when they have a breakneck pace like this.

My point is that on the flip side, only one or two influential town players would be able to balance the effect of the influential cultists. And chances are, there's more influential town than cult players. Yes, there's probably a lot of sheep, but they're just as apt to listen to town leaders as they are to cultist leaders.

Killing half the player list =/= lynching one player. I don't know why you would even draw that comparison. Seriously though, if you don't believe me look at that game for evidence. DGB, Thok and Mighty Orbots (Zorblag/Papa Zito hydra) were scum in that game who could day talk. In the On Stage portion of that game, the town would have to make a decision every day that would have a good, bad or neutral outcome. Despite only having a few scum members On Stage at any given time, they effectively influenced the town toward the negative or neutral choices in almost every single scene. It does not take much effort for scum to influence these kinds of decisions and plans.

The comparison is valid - influential scum could lead town just as effectively towards 11 simultaneous lynches as towards a single lynch. I believe you that scum were probably very successful in influencing the town in the game you're referencing and I can see how that is affecting your judgement. Logically however, we cannot take just the result of one game to prove such a generality.

Nevertheless, this argument's pretty null, since Rez Kits very effectively ruin the plan.

I really do not think Iec would push the plan like this as a cultist. So I would prefer to lynch one of the people attacking Ani as an easy lynch.

unvote

Vote: Startransmission

Nicodemus?

[iLord]

Unvote; Vote: Iecerint

Iecerint is a better lynch than Nico, actually. I was the one that started the Nico wagon, but I don't trust how fast it's growing. Iecerint, on the other hand, is obvscum. Look at how he continues to deliberately post in an anti-town manner. This doesn't sync with my prior experience of Iecerint

It's ture that Iecerint attacking SC is bad. I don't see why you believe he's deliberately posting in an anti-town manner though, or why Cultists would want to act in such a manner.

At this point, the Nico case is far stronger.

[iLord]

Don't get me wrong - Nico is scummy. But look at Iecerint's posts for the last ~5 pages. He's posting like he's intentionally trying to make the post-count explode - baiting SlySly (from whom I get the sense that he feels the need to respond to everything that could be directed at him; unlike Iecerint, who appears to just respond to everything and invent things if there's nothing), lots of ebwops, lots of pointless posts, lots of responding to things that don't need responses, etc. And all this while people are screaming to slow down, to let them catch up.

You think Iecerint might be baiting SlySly or trying to force other people to not read the thread? Doesn't that sound a little far-fetched (And what would the scum motivation for the former be? SlySly's pretty obviously town in a lot of player's books)?

Phate is a party-pooper.

I can't even tell if you're on your own side - these types of posts are exactly what Phate is accusing you of, and I see his point.

-----------------------------------

Case against Nicodemus, through notable posts:

*raises eyebrows at ani*

That seems like a really strange strategy to me, and it doesn't strike me as all that pro-town either. Are there any actions that cult could take night one that would gain them an insanity besides launder that ani could be covering up for? I don't care for your appeal to "badness" either.

Would it be worth testing Ani's claim to ask him to try to hammer at the end of today?
_________________
Ythan, on my play: "Scummy and bad are not the same. Some players manage to keep them separate, though I applaud how masterfully you blend them."

The first portion kicks off with tentative language - Ani had just claimed to have laundered and Nico states that it "seems like a strange strategy," as if it were only slightly unconventional. See E_K's post #76 to see what a townie reaction would look like - a townie would be like "Oh, what you did there was kind of weird," but rather more along the lines of "What the hell were you thinking?"

The next portion with trying to figure out why possibly Ani could be lying is appropriate, but his reluctance to call Ani scummy is most suspect.

His final question is scummy as well - a townie would most definitely believe that it is completely necessary to test Ani's claim. I can't imagine a townie thinking "Wow, this guy's probably lying. Should we test his claim?"

Lying about your night actions + preparing to murder a player N1 = murderer in the making/cultist fake claiming night actions ~ Vote: animorpherv1

At this point, Nico has decided that its safe to jump on the Ani wagon. His stated reasoning, however, betrays his insecurity. The two items on the left side of the equal sign very neatly indicates that Ani was probably a murder in the making, but nowhere does he indicate the reasons why Ani could be a cultist false claiming. In fact, Nico does not even make mention of the debate on whether a Cultist could be trying to explain future insanities, nor the debate on whether a daytalking Cultist group would let Ani give such a poor excuse (Admittedly, this could be excused by the speed the thread was growing and the fact he probably didn't check the thread during that debate, but this post was not too late to voice his thoughts on its likelihood). He is blatantly just throwing that part into there.

What this all means is that Nico is compiling reasons to jump on the Ani wagon, but he does not actually believe/follow the used reasons.

If Adel's strategy is going to increase our chances of winning significantly, then I support it, although to be honest I have no idea what the strategy actually is

The problem with this post was pointed out by a lot of other players - not only does it indicate the obvious (Barring SlySly arguments), it also indicates no intention to actually understand the plan (Or a statement that he is not going to attempt it). Actually, this is really more laziness however, than scumminess, since I'd reckon that the Cultists would be pretty interested in figuring out this plan that supposedly screws them over.

Unvote: ani

My biggest concern with ani was that he was lying about his insanity to allow him to participate in the ritual tonight with no apparent change in insanity count. Now that this has been alleviated I see no reason to vote him as he is verified town.

@Nicodemus

-- what did you think was the point of claiming noises? (Since you didn't seem to understand what exactly makes noise and what does not).

To see who was warded/stalked/fetish'd last night. I just didn't remember that warding causes noise for yourself as well as your target.

I still support any strategy that will increase town's chance of winning. I also support the town/not town list that Elli has submitted (with one obvious exception ).

@Elli: why isn't sly on your list?

The first part of this post is fairly strong evidence that Nico is scum. Not only does he feel the need to excuse his jumping off of Ani's wagon, he also states that his biggest worry is that Ani was faking his Insanity in order to preemptively excuse future insanities.

If you've been reading this case, you'll see that this is inconsistent on two fronts. First of all, as pointed out in the analysis of #153, Nico did not even participate in the discussions, nor mention it in his post accusing Ani of being either a wannabe Murderer or a Cultist. Suddenly here it has became his primary worry - he's just using this argument to formulate an excuse he believes is necessary to cover his dropping off the wagon.

Second of all, he noted here that his concern was alleviated by testing Ani's claim. Yet, as we noted in the first analyzed post, Nicodemus's attitude towards testing Ani was most peculiar -

Nico earlier stated that he was not even sure whether or not the test that he now claims to have mitigated his concerns was necessary!

To finish this analysis, Nico continues to avoid discussing any specifics on the plan, although this time its proven not be just laziness as he follows this statement with one voicing agreement with the lists proposed by Elli. In order to agree to the lists, Nico must've understood the plan (Which was basically one list alive, another dead), and is purposely avoiding discussing specifics, preferring to voice general, safe agreement.

Nico's probably scum.

[iLord]

Phate's grandfatherly calls for fewer posts remind me of DDD's play in my first game on the site. He was scum. At present, I'm experiencing terrible deja vu, and I have a secret scumtell on Phate to match.

I agree with you about Nicky. Phate is probably his scumfriend.

Again, I echo Phate here - most of the contents of this post could've been placed in your previous post. The only part reflecting new content is your agreement with my case, which you didn't elaborate on at all (And if you plan on doing so, strive to be concise and thorough rather than spread it over 5-7 posts).

In the interests of preserving the brevity that I'm arguing for, I won't bring this up again, but for the sake of those that are 10-20 pages behind, think before you post.

[iLord]

Elli, you're in the same boat as Ani if CSL dies from a murder tonight. As long as you promise not to go Murderer (And based on your prior attitude, I seriously doubt that you will still attempt to go Murderer) and take confirmable insanities from now on out, you just as confirmed town as he is.

[iLord]

Are you TRYING to antagonize me in a fashion that cannot in any fashion be interpreted as pro-town?

What E_K is saying there is completely true. How else do you expect us to treat your "secret tells?" In fact, there's very little point in babbling about it until you can actually talk about it. Quite frankly, the rest of us just don't care.

[iLord]

Yes. Explain to me how you will not rob the grave as a free action to take the murderer insanity? If you can explain that one to me, then your welcome to it.

Yeah, I'm proven wrong again .

Regardless, why do you believe that Elli still will want to go Murderer? He's not dumb - he knows if he goes Murderer he's probably going to lose.

As it stands, I don't believe Elli's position is any different from any other player's. Him stalking last night merely indicated that he had intended originally to go Murderer, but I daresay that now he has definitely reconsidered going down that path.

I agree that no more people should take Stalk unless the town agrees to it, but I see no point in not taking advantage of Elli's stalk to kill lurkerCSL.

[iLord]

I'm a going to answer Nico when I get home.

For those interested, he's still scum.

[iLord]

You're right, I was tentative, because I wasn't sure if laundering was a smart action for town to make, or not. This is by far the most complex game of mafia I've ever played (or even heard of) and I was struggling, as evidenced by my later posts and current state of mind, to wrap my head around all the intricacies of the set-up. Just because someone admitted to laundering N0 does not put him anywhere close to being scum in my book, it only opens the possibility that he could be.

This doesn't really touch my point - your reaction was that Ani's action was "kind of weird." Night 0 laundering, even if you are not used to complex games, should elicit a far stronger reaction of either disbelief or outrage that a townie would waste his action like that. You didn't necessarily have to call him scum, but to just limit your accusation to "weird" is just scummily cautious.

I guess I did phrase this wrong, but only because I didn't want to be accused of being "too eager" or anything like that. I know some people can lead town effortlessly (VP, DGB, Adel, etc.) but I am definitely not one of them, and it always makes me feel more confident when I get some backing for my ideas. Once again, I was throwing the idea out there as a possibility, but trying to stay away from being too overconfident in my reads and ideas.

The first sentence concedes exactly what I'm attacking you for - your reactions in this thread so far have not been natural. Why are you afraid of being accused "too eager?" You can throw out ideas and reads as you have them - that has no bearing on overconfidence. Here you're not trying to avoid being arrogant - you're trying to avoid being definitive.

*Sigh* I guess I'm just going to have to chalk this up to my usual obscure posting style. I'm trying to get better at posting snappy, simple statements that are easily read and understood, but I'm nowhere close to that right now. The "lying about your night actions" was supposed to cover the cult aspect of my accusation as well - If he admitted to lying about laundering, who's to say he's not lying now about stalking - but obviously it didn't come out that way. I was now confident in voting for Ani because he had admitted to lying, and I am of the school that liars = scum, as townies have nothing to hide. I wasn't ready to lynch Ani when I thought he had laundered - it was stupid, and anti-town, but not scummy - but when he came out with the lie I saw the course of action clearly.

Yeah, I missed that interpretation. I'll concede that, but something in this response doesn't sit well with me - you say that you believe all liars are scum because townies have nothing to hide. Not only do townies lie all the time (Especially prevalent on this site), you assert that you believe townies should not attempt to hide anything.

Yet, as shown from your last response, you consciously phrase your words so that you would not be seen as scummy. That's exactly the type of stuff scum do and that's what analysts hunt for. You saying that you believe townies don't have anything to hide must be completely false when you yourself indulge in such behavior.

I am always in favor of strategies that increase the town's chance of winning. At that point Adel was only asking for a support/don't support post, and so I wanted to get my stance out there. I figured that there would be plenty of discussion about the details of the strategy after we decided to implement it, and I would be able to figure out what was going on then.

Funny how you say that you're afraid of being "overconfident," yet you feel it is okay to voice your agreement to a plan you know no specifics about (Judging from the degree of comprehension you're implying, you really don't even have a vague idea of the plan at this point).

Once again, *sigh*. I knew that making an explanation post could be viewed as scummy, but I thought that if I unvoted with no explanation at all then I would get called out for that. In the end I just decided that more information = good, so I went ahead and put my justification for unvoting. And yes, Ani faking an insanity was my biggest concern. The fact that Ani had already proved himself capable of lying made me very suspicious of the possibility of him lying again to cover for future insanity gains. And, if he wasn't cult, then we were still getting rid of a lying, would-be murderer. When it was proved that he did have the insanity, and he was looking less and less likely to go murderer, however, I unvoted.

First portion emphasizes point attacked directly above. It seems I was perfectly correct that this behavior was not natural.

Mostly answered above. I just wanted to get my general support of breaking/advantage-bringing strategies out there, so that if we decided to move forward with them I could then start to understand the specifics. This time, though, I did understand the bare bones of the plan (have the town group stalk and kill the questionable group), so I felt confident in voicing my agreement with those lists as well.

Uh-huh.

What suddenly enlightened you about the "bare bones" of the plan?

Still scum.

As between the two, I actually took more notice of Adel's trying to throw a wrench in town trying to organize information. It's one thing to be cautious about town giving out info before a consensus is reached on what info will be given and how, but Adel's reaction to people claiming noise seemed possibly designed to scare town out of getting organized and trying to share info to make a plan. Even his initial reluctance I could accept but this sequence of posts bothers me:

Reread the posts where Adel's trying to break the game. The man is legit.

How is basically trailing behind a player known to have a pretty anti-town behaviour all around worth qualifying scumhunting in any way ?

You just don't understand

true

art, hmph.

People I Think Are Scum
- Icerint. It started with #504, where Ice agrees with Ellibereth's kill list while noting that it's more open for scum manipulation. Icerint also mildly defends Ellibereth in #541. The reaction when the reasons for the mass killing not working don't ring true to me. When dramonic brings this up in #791, Icerint doesn't even fight it, but makes it a joke. Just rubs me the wrong way.
- Ellibereth: Claiming the stalk is just weird. Saying, "Lynch me tomorrow, I just want to kill CSL tonight" is weird. I was very surprised that, compared to all the brouhaha when animorph claimed his stalk about how he could be a cultist trying to drive his claimed insanity up, there's been very little directed against Ellibereth. The Taboo: Launder thing also strikes as the sort of thing that only someone who doesn't think ahead would take. Yet this is contrasted with Ellibereth taking a very proactive role in trying to direct town strategy. These two thoughts don't mesh for me. The only faction I can think of as saying "It's ok to kill me tomorrow, but not today" is cult.
- evilsnail: My predecessor voted him, and upon the read, I have to agree. It's a lack of content, a going along with the flow, "I guess we can do that..." Post #691/694 really seals it for me, though.
- DrippingGoofBall: Not as strong as the others, but I've heard a lot of good things about DGB. Then I read DGB's #666. Between DGB, Seacore's #645, and Nicodemus' #368, I feel sad and alone.

I don't see Nicodemus.

You're probably scum, but in the event that you're not, get the fuck out this game, please.

Unvote, Vote: Katy

Reread early Seacore. She's probably town. You're probably scum. I can't remember anymore.

Given that scum can daytalk and they probably have at least 1 veteran of SA1, I would not be surprised if players' reaction to Elli's plan were indicative of something. Scum probably have guidance from at least 1 player who has insight into how the game might be structured and into what kinds of strategies may or may not be effective for town and/or scum.

*cough*

Sajinscum

*cough*

Katy isn't scum. I cannot wait any longer for CSL, my newly found spiritual leader.

For now I'll

unvote, vote: startramission

Come here, young one, and I'll show you the light of salvation. In my Holy presence you will be cleansed of your purities!

Hey! More scum! I found another one!

I think he's town

Hey Startransmission made a bunch of defensive posts and "I will catch up" posts!

@Star- Who do you think is scum?

I don't like you anymore.

I know that I was in the lynch Ani camp as well, so obviously this wouldn't be as powerful as if someone else had brought it up, but...How would Ani's claim not be verifiable by any stretch of the imagination? Verifying if a vote counts or not is a very simple thing to do, and I find it hard to believe that Adel of all people missed this. His eagerness to lynch Ani here could very well have been scum motivated.

This is reaching and the first part of your comment shows that you realize it.

I would be okay with this if Drench had provided some reasoning for his decision, but all he seems to say is "I'm opposed because I don't want the game to end quickly." Others had concrete reasoning for opposing the plan, but Drench just smears the plan ("shitty journey") and opposes it.

"I opposed the plan if it helps us win" is so much more concrete.

Except that VP just brought this up in his post right above yours. Seriously, viking has done next to nothing in this game besides lurk and throw out useless information. Can we lynch him now please?

Vote: Vikingfan

Looks like trying not to be "overconfident" just got flushed down the toilet.

The last line was so forced it made me cry a little bit on the inside.

iLord promised to answer Nicodemus in #939; waiting for that.

Nag nag nag.

And yes, I am very aware of what I'm saying, and I'm doing my utmost not to look suspicious. It doesn't help the town at all if I get lynched today for giving false scumslips just because I was lazy or obscure in my posting, so I try to make them as clear and honest as possible. I still have not found the best way to post as town for me, and until I do I'm trying to watch what I say so that I'm not giving any false scumtells for opportunistic scum or overeager town to latch on to.

If you're town, what you're trying to do here with your posts is what I'm trying to find and attack, so not helpful at all.

Fortunately, I don't believe this at all. Link to game where you were town?

[iLord]

Elli needs to kill CSL.

[iLord]

Ani, what are you doing tonight?

[iLord]

Btw, its EXTREMELY anti-town to over hammer. Its a method of Hiding insanities related to voting. By the visual that is L+1. Why the hell did you do that CSL? Explain now.

Catching up.

Worry not, citizen, we're killing CSL tonight.

[iLord]

Thanks for telling us the ritual target.

Whoops

DGB's going to kill me.

[iLord]

Oh, is she cultist too?

I'm not authorized to answer that. She's probably giving me 50 lashes already - I'm not hurtin' for anymore.

@Slysly- That is a horrible read. iLord is obviously referring to sanctioning eli's murder tonight.

Humor me - Why did you feel inclined to say this?

[iLord]

I use first-person plural all the time to communicate group plans, even if I'm not personally an agent involved in them. The fact that you were apparently serious about his "scumslip" is troubling. I thought you were joking.

SlySly's just being SlySly. I'm a lot more worried about Sajin's behavior here.

[iLord]

IN DANGER:
Adel - Heard noise. No ward.(VP failed ward/Ani stalked)
Amished - Heard noise. No ward.
Col. Cathart - Heard noise. No ward.
dramonic - Heard noise. No ward. (Chaco warded)
DrippingGoofball - Heard noise. No ward. (elvis warded)
Ellibereth - Heard noise. No ward.
Iecerint - Heard noise. No ward.
iLord - Heard noise. No ward.
Phate - Heard noise. No ward.
Sajin - Heard noise. No ward.
Sarag - Heard noise. No ward.
Seacore - Heard noise. No ward.
vikingfan - Heard noise. No ward.


Safe:

animorpherv1 - No noise. No ward.
Drench - No noise. No ward.
evilsnail - No noise. No ward.
Faraday - No noise. No ward.
Nicodemus - No noise. No ward.
semioldguy - No noise. No ward.
SlySly - No noise. No ward.
startransmission - No noise. No ward.
VP - Heard noise. Ward Adel (failed). Warded by Wicked.
Dram - heard noise, warded by chaco
DGB - heard noise, warded by elvis


Unknown:

Chaco - Heard noise. Warded Dram.
elvis_knits - Heard noise. Used ward. DGB
Wickedestjr - Heard noise. Used ward. VP

[iLord]

@iLord- because I think the point is a bad point. Would you not have me point out the bad argument?

Query: Did you see my own response before posting?

[iLord]

Whoever rezzed Phate should claim.

I need to look at SlySly again - I was almost positive he was town yesterday.

It's a pity Katy died - she was almost definitely town.

I was actually quite suspicious of Sajin, so it's good that he's dead.

CSL, verify whether or not you actually have twitchy.

[iLord]

If someone did rez CSL, they should probably claim.

Okay, quick glance through what I had on SlySly showed nothing really tangible. What you're saying there with Nico makes a lot of sense. It's true he wasn't under a lot of suspicion at that point, but I'll have to look back to check if there's inconsistencies between Elli's reads and the proposed lists that Nico could be referencing.

Yeah, SlySly's going to flip out.

Wicked's town remember? He warded VP Night 0.

On CSL L+1'ing: The difference between L and his L+1 was 2 minutes. I would say that it's feasible that CSL simply didn't see Nico's self-hammer. Makes it more a null-tell more than anything.

He acknowledged seeing the hammer in his voting post, I believe.

I'm going to go iso Nico to see if I can pull anything Phate missed.

[iLord]

Nico #2: Reads like Sajin's town

Bad news for Phate - Thread #671: The list Nico was probably referring to. SlySly's not on the list entirely. Still weird that he's so particular about SlySly's name (I doubt he would've counted to see there were only 24 names and SlySly's name was missing - more likely he was looking for SlySly's name and didn't find it), but it's now far from damning.

Nico #14+16: viking, semi, Drench, evilsnail, E_K. At least one is probably distancing on the way out - it feels remarkably unnatural for scum to list all townies on such a list.

That's really it actually. While we clear up some stuff last night, I'm going to try and see if there's any remaining targets from yesterday.

Oh, and whoever did the Iec Murder probably does not intend on going Murderer, so you should claim. The others are free to follow suit if they so wish .

[iLord]

CSL, I don't think you understand what I mean by verifying you have twitchy.

In your next post, vote a player and do not *twitch* in that post. That way, if you actually have twitchy, Percy'll give you an infraction.

To make sure, you did get rezzed last night, correct?

[iLord]

Okay, assuming that CSL does actually have twtichy, whoever rezzed CSL should definitely claim.

[iLord]

Phate, we should wait to see if anyone claims to have rezzed CSL first.

I definitely don't like that Elli doesn't want to be lynched anymore.

[iLord]

Because it's impossible for me to be a murderer right now. Earliest tomorrow.

Contrary to popular belief, it is not impossible.

[iLord]

Elli, I'll give you a chance to figure this out.

[iLord]

I think Ellibereth is almost certainly murderer. I don't see town resuscitating CSL, so there's one of two possibilities. 1) CSL is scum who got resuscitated, or 2) Ellibereth lied about the target. #2 seems more likely to me than #1. Ellibereth's surprise at CSL being resuscitated also rings false.

2) is not pertinent, since CSL has claimed to be rezzed. A better alternative would be that both CSL and Elli are Cultist. In that scenario, I'm inclined to just ignore them for now and wait for one of them to die - just like the reason why scum mason claims don't usually work, if they're both Cultists they're putting too much on the line.

I already proved I took twitchy today, so the only possibilty for me to be a murderer now is if I were retarded enough to take Psycopathy N0 then claim stalker out of the blue.

Vote: Start
*twitch*

Eh, I can't tell whether or not you're faking. The answer was that you could've Robbed Nico's Grave along with Ani to take another Insanity with a free action.

CSL not dying is well....irritating. Either the cult tried to set up Ellibereth last night by rezing CSL, CSL is cult, or Elli is cult who participated in the ritual.

I don't understand how the last scenario is an explanation.

*twitches*

I was murdered last night, but obviously saved as well. Looks like animorv decided to try to kill me...

Seriously, what the heck.

Whoever rezzed Hayker needs to claim now too.

Do you really think cult would waste a rez kit on CSL if he wasn't cult?

If it means that we mislynch Elli for it, it's a valid scum move.

------------------------

Right now, we just gotta sit tight and wait for everyone who rezzed to claim. Especially the player who rezzed Hayker/Phate - they're both likely town. If CSL's rezzer does not claim, than we can assume it was done by scum and that Elli would probably not be a good lynch today.

Who has not posted yet?

[iLord]

Or that Elli lied about his stalk target, which is also likely.

Someone attempted to kill CSL last not, did they not? Elli said that he was attempting to kill CSL. Who else would then attempt to kill him?

This is pretty bad reasoning.

The first half or the second half?

[iLord]

ie Ellibereth is cult who never had any intention of killing CSL, but said so yesterday to explain his insanity today.

I must be missing something. If Elli is cult and therefore can't kill CSL, then how was he rezzed?

Because we have to lynch Elli at one point or another, he's a potential murderer and CSL, whatever he flips, doesnt tell us anything about Elli's alignment, while the opposite has potential to be indicative.

Everyone is a potential murderer, including you. I don't see how either flip is more information than the other.

[iLord]

CSL can flip scum, town, murderer, doesnt tell us anything about Elli.
Meanwhile, if Elli flips scum, we know he couldnt have killed CSL and therefore know CSL is also scum since he'd be lying about the rez.

Okay, I get it.

start, Chaco, plum, semi, sly, vikingfan, and wicked.

Those are the people I think who still need to confirm who they rezzed, if anyone.

[iLord]

Can't remember if I said this already, but for GRing, we'd have two people - ani and someone else (Someone who likely is or going to go Murderer). Both of them would rob two graves, with both of them overlapping on Sajin. That way, neither of them can perform any Stalks/Murders and if one of them tries to duck out of his graverobbing duties, we'll know by either not learning the assigned body's alignment or by the other player receiving an item from Sajin's body (If two people target a body, neither gets the item).

[iLord]

I didn't rez CSL either. I think the scenario under which scum rezzes CSL to set up a mislynch is kinda unlikely. That rez kit could also go to saving a scum later, making the trade-off not really worth it, even if you were somehow assured the mislynch is going to happen. In contrast, rezzing a cultist CSL is totally worth it for cult

How is rezzing cultCSL totally worth it?

[iLord]

Hmm, to SlySly's probable disdain, I think I found something.

Percy, if a Cultist accrues 3 Insanity Infractions, will he lose his ability to participate in the ritual that night? Additionally, would you consider purposely going for a modkill in this game blacklistable (Like going for a modkill in any other games?)

[iLord]

Ani stalked on N0. Cult can't stalk. How many times do we have to rehash this particular point?

This doesn't have to do with Ani.

[iLord]

Well, I mean, it does in a way because by ani screwing up his Insanity, Percy brought this to my attention.

[iLord]

iLord, does what you are talking about in any way infer that you believe Ani is cult and that I was asking about Ani's night action being lost because you think I was worried he had lost his ability to participate in the ritual?

Nope, Ani's town.

I'll say more after Percy responds, because: 1). it may or may not be relevant anymore, 2). I may find a hole in my thought process, and 3). I don't feel like initiating an argument with you yet .

[iLord]

you guys should stop trying to break the setup and start trying to play the game the way it was meant to be played. WITHOUT modkills.

That's why I'm asking Percy first. I'm kind of confused as to what Percy's attitude towards this would be, since he seems to be okay with announcing Insanity Infractions in thread, even if they are purposely initiated.

[iLord]

Wait what? LAUNDER???

You know at this point, for some reason, I didn't even bat an eye.

[iLord]

Whoever rezzed Phate still needs to claim, because you're probably confirmed town. If no one claims, we're going to have to assume that it was one of the people that died last night .

[iLord]

CSL: Explain why you laundered?

[iLord]

@CSL: Why did you opt not to use any action?

[iLord]

start, Chaco, plum, semi, and wicked still need to say if they rezzed anyone. They day ain't ending before they do.

[iLord]

I see what your point is there SlySly, but CSL being scum is the simplest and most likely explanation for why he got rezzed and why he suddenly reveals he got another insanity.

Even if he didn't read the game, I'd assume that CSL read enough of the first post to know that he had night actions he could use last night.

[iLord]

I don't see how revealing this is a scum tell at all. This is the main thing that makes me think we are back in ani-land all over again. I don't see how revealing a bloodless, launder, especially after the ani debacle over the same topic would be pro-town or pro-scum. Convince me that this is a pro-scum and you have my vote.

Ani admitted that he was lying about auto-laundering. I'm getting the same sense here that CSL's lying as well.

CSL has just confirmed that he has read at least a good portion of the game. I do not believe that any player scum or town would forget at that point to turn in a night action. It's simply not a natural response after investing such time into the game. Just as in Ani's case, CSL is likely lying to cover up something else, in this case, probably the ritual.

[iLord]

Also though, we all got pm's telling us the night actions available as well as the deadline for night actions. Try again.

That's actually another good point - I had entirely forgotten about that.

[iLord]

Yes to both questions. Note also that a modkill may end the Day at my discretion; for example, forcing a player to receive a modkill due to Insanity Infractions will end the day as though a Lynch had occured.

Prods going out to Chaco, Plum, semioldguy and Wickedestjr.

Okay, then, it looks like we get 2 nights.

What do you guys think about everyone grave robbing Iec and taking an insanity tonight, then everyone getting 3 infractions tomorrow and the day after? Cultists can't ritual, Murderer's can't stalk, but town can still lynch.

Alternatively, people we're positive are town (Like Phate), can be excluded from this.

[iLord]

From the OP: If this occurs for a second time, or gains 8 Insanity Infractions over the course of the game, they will be modkilled.

This might work, but it will only work ONCE and Percy already said it was blacklistable (and people like Ani can't do it).

Hmm, didn't see that. Regardless, I see no sense in not using what we have. Elli needs to max out Insanity infractions at the very least, to dissuade him from going murderer/stop him from stalking.

Also in that case, I don't think we need to lynch CSL anymore - we just get him to max out his II's and he'll be useless to the Cultists tonight if he is one. Rather, we should lynch someone who doesn't have an insanity to max out today.

Assuming wicked didn't res anyone, the people left are startransmission and Chaco. Waiting for them.

Who else is scummy and has an insanity?

[iLord]

Does Drench have an insanity?

[iLord]

He's kinda cocky... he doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling. And then no one seems to want to take responsibility for rezzing him.

There was no cultist kill - Phate's confirmed really early on that the kill failed on him. Whoever rezzed him is almost definitely town. We just need that person to claim. It could be one of the dead people, but we need to get start and Chaco here to confirm whether or not they did it.

[iLord]

There's 2 ways to get someone modkilled here...getting 8 IL's OR doing it twice. I have no idea how many infractions Elli has but he's done enough that I'm not sure that doing 3 in a row right now wouldn't put him over the top.

Also, people are human and fallible...do we want to necessarily lose a grave robber in case Elli screws up accidentally later? just food for thought.

Anyone can be a grave robber - we're basically using it as a second lynch, since that player can't do anything that night. We can't "lose" a grave robber.

I disagree. If you think he is scum, you should want to lynch him. Town doesn't win by making scum not have a night action, we win when they are all dead. Also I don't think we should be aiming to lynch players with no insanities. Players with insanities would be more likely to flip scum than those without I'd think.

We can lynch him tomorrow - the only difference is that we now have an additional chance to stop a murderer/cultist from performing their night action.

We're not necessarily going after players with no insanities today, just those without day-infractable insanities.

Warning:
I will not agree with any plan that include putting people in modkill territory on purpose. It's not anti-town, it's anti-game.

Quite honestly, this goes pretty close to going against the spirit of the game, but I see no reason to pass it up. If Percy doesn't want us to do this, he'll speak up and change the rules/tell us to stop, but until then, this is our running plan.

It helps that you don't actually have to agree to it - really at this point the plan has just devolved into making suspicious people who have infractable insanities lose their night action.

[iLord]

Didn't vote CSL at the beginning of the day because I was the possibility that he was being settup for the mislynch kept coming to me. Then we get to his beautfil auto-launder post.
The whole infract thing, I'm too tired/lazy to think about right now. Not sure what it completely is yet, but I'll be willing to go one step away from the modkill if need be.

It's not actually as close as VF made it out to be. You've already had one II today, correct? All you have to do is get two more II's and then you'll have no night action tonight. You're still 3 more accidental infractions away from a modkill.

[iLord]

@semi:

We lynch CSL. He loses night action. Scummy Player A still gets night action.

CSL gains 3 II's. He loses night action. We lynch Scummy Player A. He loses his night action as well. You see what I'm saying?

Why should I place a vote?

[iLord]

I do agree with this. CSL should be the lynch today if he's your main suspect. Crippling players should be reserved for secondary scum targets if we go that route.

Ordinarily that would make sense, but we don't have a limit on how many Insane players we can cripple. We also have non-insane players that we can't cripple - the lynch should be saved for those.

[iLord]

Okay, there goes that. Nevermind, then.

[iLord]

Why shouldn't you vote? Do you feel that voting is in some way anti-town? If so, in what way? Is there a reason you are not voting? Do you have any insanities?

Voting is completely pointless right now in regards to the lynch. If you fear I have insanities, just tell me who to vote.

[iLord]

Vote iLord

Unvote

Vote semioldguy

unvote

[iLord]

Why would we want to be lynching non-insane players? Seems to me like they would be the least likely to be scum. As SOG said, we don't win by nullifying scum night actions. We win by killing them.

It's not relevant any more, since Percy told us no, but non-insane =/= necessarily no insanity in the context of my post, just those without infractable/confirmable ones. The other ones we could've just made them lose their night actions.

If we can nullfiy night actions, scum can't kill. It's basically extra lynches for us.

[iLord]

How so? (as in could you explain your reasoning behind this?)

We're lynching CSL. I'm okay with this. Therefore, there's no point in voting really until we're ready to end the day.

[iLord]

The above reason isn't applicable here, as you were arguing for the crippling of CSL at this point rather than his lynch.

Up until that point, we were still going to lynch CSL - it was only in the past few hours that I pointed out that we shouldn't be lynching him.

[iLord]

@Magua: I didn't realize twice results in a modkill - I was under the impression that 8 II's was the only limit.

I think it's quite possible that Sajin is cult - he's definitely not any obvious rez target for the cult, especially not over someone that they knew was definitely going to get shot at.

You do have a good point about waiting tomorrow to rob graves, though. CSL's basically been caught lying though - he claimed to have forgotten to do a night action and auto-laundered, and when it was pointed out that Percy reminded us to tell us about night actions, he replaced out.

[iLord]

The post I am inquiring about happened after you pointed out that you didn't think we should lynch CSL and before the Mod clarified the insanity infraction rules.

I didn't vote for the past few hours?

[iLord]

You said "Why should I place a vote?"

What was your reasoning for not placing a vote? Why weren't you voting?

I didn't have anyone to vote yet?

It was a few hours and I was busy trying explaining the II-NoNightAction thing. There's nothing wrong with not looking for a second suspect yet.

[iLord]

Would that have been so difficult to say the first time instead of dancing around the question several times?

I didn't get what you were going at until you bolded "past few hours," and I thought #1365 was enough to get my point across.

[iLord]

start, no one has claimed yet to have rezzed Phate. Whoever rezzed Phate is pretty likely town. We're not sure if it's you or one of the three people killed last night. Did you rez Phate?

[iLord]

Eh, waiting three days probably isn't worth it.

I rezzed Phate last night. I tried goading a Cultist into taking credit for it for a counterclaim, but no one bit.

I looks like there's at least four murderer's out there (If we believe ani then), since no one claimed any murders. Even whoever murdered Sajin didn't say anything.

For grave-robbing, I'm thinking we listen to Magua and let the body's go today so we can stop murders tommorrow night.

Anything else we need to work through before we end the day?

[iLord]

@dramonic: Grave-robbing tonight ain't stopping any cult kills either...

[iLord]

On the contrary, I think it can slow down our kills significantly. For each three bodies, we can roughly lock down three people (A robs X and Y, B robs Y and Z, C robs X and Z, we pray to god that no Murderer/Cultist is ballsy enough to not rob on the chance that the body has no items).

We can expect around four murders on Night 3 at this point - that's a lot of murderers we can use grave robbing to check.

[iLord]

@Ani: Yeah, no grave-robbing tonight. We'll just have to trust that whoever wants to go Murderer has already done so.

Ani, you go murderer tonight and somebody'll head to your house and stab out your heart with a spork. Yes, this is a threat .

@VikingFan: Regardless, they're not going to attempt any murders tonight. You're correct in that they could wait a day to begin stalking/murdering, and we're perfectly happy if they do so - they're giving us an extra day.

[iLord]

I'm inclined to think Chaco's not a murderer, given that the he must've decided to convert after Day 1 and not many people would do so after getting a good idea how difficult such a path is.

Correct me if I'm missing something, but isn't Drench's replacement likely murderer? She's already admitted that Drench tracked/attempted to murder Adel before she replaced in. That's two insanities - enough for Drench to choose Psychopathy if she wanted (Which Stalking Adel N0 would suggest).

I don't believe noise claims help at this stage, as the scum probably aren't crafting fetishes anymore and we don't want them to know who was likely stalked.

Vote: kunkstar

[iLord]

I chose twitchy for my second insanity instead of Psychopathy. In effect, I was murderer, but not now.

I'm afraid I don't get what you're saying here - Percy let you unchoose an insanity?

No, I was not passsed a fetish. I had to select an Insanity from not doing anything.

I think I got stalked.

vote:VPBaltar

Why didn't you do anything?

[iLord]

@ani: Ah, okay, I forgot.

@e_k: What do you mean by "active scum?" Does that include murderers?

[iLord]

kunkstar7: There's precedence for the claim that Percy would allow someone to change Psychopathy for something else (SlySly did exactly this when he replaced into SA 1). It explains the rescusitate on Hayker with Animorph being not bloody. I am inclined to believe the claim that Drench stalked/attempted-to-murder-Adel. I'm undecided on whether kunkstar7 is a murderer or not.

Wait, Percy let people change their insanities last game? Kunkstar7 wasn't in last game was he?

If this is true, I'm thinking kunkstar's in the clear - there's little point for him to go out and claim the situation if he wanted to stay murderer. Especially in this game, I'm inclined to think that scum would rather just stay quiet rather than risk making up stuff in this game unless they have to.

I'll agree with dramonic and Ellibereth. I don't think kunkstar should be one though, but I'm not sure who would replace him.

Good point on Ani:

Percy, if a player loses his night action due to three Insanity Infractions, does that player gain an insanity automatically that night?

[iLord]

Not gonna work. We have to cross-rob: If Elli or kunk (or myself I guess) are cult, we can have our teammates rob a grave for us so that we have our night action.

We don't care if Cultist's help each other grave rob - either way, the Cult is losing one night action.

[iLord]

Unvote kunkstar7

[iLord]

VP, I'll admit I don't understand your kunkstar vote.

[iLord]

robbing a single grave won't cost them their action.

Good point.

[iLord]

@VP: I'm thinking that Kunkstar coming out with the choice he was offered is plus townie points for him. I'm pretty sure that he was offered the choice, and although I'm less sure as to which option he chose, I'm inclined to lean town on him right now.

I am reconsidering giving him a night action tonight though - I keep on overestimating how unattractive it is to go murderer, and it'd probably be for the best for us to deny him an action.

I don't see how DGB's play is unusual.

I have no idea who we should lynch - I need to go back and figure out who's likely town first.

[iLord]

iLord...consider this also as a factor toward my heavy suspicion toward DGB (this would also apply toward kunk as well). SOMEBODY opted to graverob Sajin when we all said specifically not to so that we could block kills (especially murderers) tonight. So some scum decided to rob one grave in addition to another action so that he/she could wreck town's plan. It didn't work out, but the INTENT was still there.

This, to me, is one of our strongest leads right now.

I don't see why this makes DGB suspicious.

re:kunkstar - Take a second and consider what options he would have if drench took psychopathy on night 2...what other option would he have but to claim that? I mean, drench was under heat already for being potential scum and it didn't let up today. Also, if drench was going to go murderer, why would he wait until night 3 to do it? It seems to me that the key to winning as murderer is to kill as quickly as possible. I mean, I guess you don't technically have to be a murderer until your second kill to win as it, but taking psychopathy early if you're going down that route seems optimal since it's an insanity that would cause no harm to your eventual goal.

I think I see what you're saying there - it would've made more sense for murderer Drench to turn on Night 1 rather than Night 2, and you don't think Percy would allow a replacement to retcon that decision one day afterwards.

@Percy, I don't know if you can answer this, but if a player were to replace on Night X a player an investigator who took Psychopathy Night (X-1), would you permit that player to switch out that insanity?

I'm sort of confused with the whole Kunkstar voting thing - did he just get an infraction because he didn't have asterisks or something?

[iLord]

Yes, except Drench would have turned Night 2 and kunk replaced Night 3. What I am saying is that if drench sent an insanity choice of psychopathy and then replaced out the same night, I could see Percy letting kunk change it. But if drench was intent on going murderer from the start of the game he would have likely taken psychopathy night 2. To me this means that kunk is either trying to conceal that he's murderer (why claim in this case?) or he's cult who's trying to hide insanities and/or blood from rezzing his buddies.

Well, technically we haven't gotten to Night 3 yet .

Otherwise, I see what you're saying.

[iLord]

@Elli: Why not a rez kit?

[iLord]

I heard noise last night.

[iLord]

Hayker, Wicked's pretty much confirmed to have warded VP Night 0.

Why did you launder?

[iLord]

0 Insanities.

[iLord]

Assuming that the cultist's crafted a fetish of me Night 0, the only thing that would've made me hear noise last night is rex, investigate, ward, or stalk.

If someone did any of the first three, assuming I am town, they are likely town as well, correct?

Same goes for vikingfan and semioldguy?

[iLord]

So, should anyone who did so claim?

[iLord]

Do we have a list of rez-worthy players?

Magua, iLord, VikingFan, Semi.

I'm going to have time to reread the thread later today. More thoughts will come.

[iLord]

SlySly's lying. If he decided to come clean, he should've done so Day 1, like when he supposedly decided so, especially once he saw ani/Elli not being lynched.

Vote: SlySly

Rereading thread right now, but SlySly's the lynch here.

[iLord]

Seriously though, if anyone commits a murder, I will lynch you.

E_K, why are you not after Chaco?

Ell was pushing a game breaking scheme. Do I need to repeat my feeling about game breaking schemes?

This is entirely irrelevant.

[iLord]

Before we lynch, though, we should figure out who are our graverobbers for tonight.

Working on this - don't lynch until I'm done with the reread.

[iLord]

I believe Sly. He definitely isn't cult. Probably isn't murderer.

Well, you sort of

have to

believe him, do you not agree?

Done with reread, posting next.

[iLord]

I would rather not elaborate on too much on town behavioral tells, but will do specific ones if needed to convince people. A very abbreviated list:

Mostly through process of elimination (

Cultist

,

CultistorMurderer

,

NotCultistMaybeMurderer

,

LikelyTown

,

StrongNonMurdererTown

):

dramonic

DrippingGoofball

Fetish

Magua (Amished)

semioldguy

Ellibereth

Day 2 Behavior shift

SlySly

Claim

Chaco

Warding + Behavior

kunkstar7 (Drench)

Percy Choice

evilsnail

Investigating

elvis_knits

Behavior

Plum (Sarag)

Rezzing

animorpherv1

Confirmed

vikingfan

Behavior

Hayker (Adel)

Adel Behavior

Wickedestjr

Warding

VP Baltar

Warding + Behavior

rewq455 (Faraday)

Behavior

--------------------

Our grave robbers should be Dramonic, DGB, Magua, semi, Elli, and Chaco/kunkstar.

SlySly's the lynch.

[iLord]

Why does the fetish make be cult?

Passing out insanities really doesn't mechanically harm the town that much. The primary reason Cult would be doing it is to make other townies seems like InsaneHidingCult. Doing so also provides the opportunity for cult to claim receiving a fetish as well, as that gives them a easy way to excuse insanities. Since I believe the other fetish targets are non cult, it stands to reason that you receiving a fetish is a scumtell.

It's certainly not enough to peg you as Cultist, but it's mostly process of elimination at work here.

I love how you think it's a tell since I warded Dramonic. It's really funny actually.

That's a town tell. Do you not agree?

DGB votes me cause I seem town and iLord wants to lynch his 5th top suspect.

This list is not sorted in order of scumminess. You are my top target for scum.

[iLord]

Bodies will be:

Iecerint (Town)
Katy (Town)
Phate (Town)
startransmission (Scum)
SlySly (Scum)
CSL (Scum)

Robbing:

Semi robs CSL + Iec
Elli robs Iec + Katy.
DGB robs Katy + Phate.
Dramonic robs Phate + Start
Magua robs Start + Sly
Chaco/kunkstar robs Sly + CSL

Or other people if we choose, but I'm supporting these 6.

In case it isn't clear, if you are ultimately selected to graverob and you are proven to not have,

you will be automatically lynched

.

------------------------------

I would think a Cultist would be higher on a scum list than a CultistOrMurderer.

Not necessarily. All I have against the people in the Cultist group really is that the other people are town/murderer and I have found no behavioral/claim evidence that they're town/murderer.

We have pretty solid evidence you're either Cultist or Murderer. Therefore, you are the scummiest.

[iLord]

Why woud Slyscum or Slymurderer claim out of the blue like that? He's town.

He has to explain his insanities.

Also, apparently to you, doing so clears him. That's pretty powerful.

Why do I need to grave rob exactly? Just asking.

Good point. Kunkstar it is, then.

[iLord]

We should finish insanity claims.

What do you think of the six robbers? If you are chosen by the town, do you agree to oblige?

[iLord]

Magua, Dramonic, Elli, VP, DGB, and wicked still need to claim insanities?

[iLord]

Your scumlist is too small.

Evidently. If everyone I picked is scum, I'll be thrilled enough. We can worry about the players less likely to be scum after flips/the scummier ones are dead.

[iLord]

It does seem a little funny for people to be pushing a lynch because someone did a pro-town thing, while under absolutely no pressure, in revealing insanities that could have easily been lied about to help with a pro-town chart.

What you did is protown in the same sense that cultist claiming cultist is beneficial to the town.

[iLord]

This makes absolutely no sense. My insanity reveals were pro-town in a purely pro-town sense.

Can you tell me how my reveals were pro-scum in any way?

You reveals were not pro-scum in any way. In fact, they were actively anti-scum because in doing so you outed yourself as scum to be lynched.

Like in my example - if a cultist claims and we lynch him, is what he did better for the town or for the scum?

[iLord]

DGB is probtown. Scum would not have forgotten that their Ritual target got Rezzed and claimed it and asked for his lynch Day 2, and it didn't look faked.

I looked back and to me it doesn't seem like DGB forgot the cult targeted Phate. The exchange went something like this on Page 54:

DGB: Let's lynch Phate tommorrow!
E_K: Why?
DGB: He doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling. Plus, no one wants to take responsibility for rezzing him.
iLord: What about dead people?
DGB: Oh, that's right. Forgot about them.

[iLord]

It is nice to see that you are not totally braindead.

Obviously I meant to say "your" there, instead of "you."

[iLord]

I did, now stop playing text deaf.

Which portion of your response is he ignoring?

[iLord]

EBWODP: or she rather.

[iLord]

I definitely agree that EK's chart should be fully filled in before the day ends and I would unvote to make sure that happens.

Now, iLord, I've claimed my insanities twice actually, but I'll go again.

Sorry, I didn't actually look through the thread - I just scanned over E_K's chart on Page 66, which appears to be missing that information.

[iLord]

I want to have one probable scum combined with one nonscum for our bodies. The reason for this is that in the case of say, star, he's got 3 insanities. He's quite likely going to have nothing on him. Therefore, we should not have a robber assigned to rob both him and say CSL (or SlySly). Too easy to duck out and commit a murder/cult action and not be able to check it. Unless I'm missing something, I'm recommending changing the combinations.

It doesn't really matter if we're double robbing since whichever two people are robbing the scum can both risk not robbing, no matter the order. So really, there's no real difference between a player who's robbing two scum and robbing one scum. Don't forget that scum might very well have rez kits, as well. The only way to absolutely discourage scum is to make them rob two townies, which I have done with Elli and DGB.

I'll modify it to, so that a maybemurderer alternates with the maybecultists. This way, if both tried to duck out, then start/Sly's body would be unrobbed and we would've caught two scum:

Semi robs CSL + Iec
Elli robs Iec + Katy.
DGB robs Katy + Phate.
Dramonic robs Phate + Start
kunkstar robs Start + Sly
Magua robs Sly + CSL

Do those that have played with me before actually believe that I would plant things this far ahead only to reveal them and put myself under fire when being under no pressure at all?

If you believe that, why didn't I point all of these things out immediately when the crosshairs got locked on me?

Occum's Razor.

I can't speak for playing with you, but your primary argument for yourself is that no scum in their right mind would do what you've done. That in its very definition is WIFOM and makes a fine reason why you revealed yourself - you felt that the town would believe that you're town simply from the unlikeliness of the situation.

Just a question, if he chose not to lynch you and for you to grave rob two people, would you do so?

[iLord]

I can rob two graves? Aren't I better rezzing someone?

That's really up to the town to collectively decide, but if it was up to me, you're supposed to rob two graves.

[iLord]

I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but why are we doubling up on the graves? It seems like that makes it easier for people to not rob a grave without us knowing, especially if they're cult.

Eh, that's arguable actually, since we seem to have quite a few scum in the dead bodies.

With doubling up, we have a chance of stopping up to 6 people. Without doubling, we almost guarantee stopping 3 people.

After thinking about it, I actually prefer the guarantee of single robbing. If we choose that, my choice would be:

Elli robs Iec + Katy
DGB robs Phate + Start
Dramonic robs Sly + CSL

[iLord]

Magua, Dramonic, and Elli are the only ones left to claim insanities?

[iLord]

So if two people rob one grave, nobody gets equipment?

What if the person didn't have equipment anyway? We can't us that as a check. For instance, Startransmission prob doesn't have equipment. In order for him to get 3 insanities, he was doing evil things instead of searching.

Good point about start - I tried to make it so that it was one possible murderer and one possible cultist on him so neither would want to break it for fear of the other would and then both of them would be outed, but there's too many variables at play here to make it worth the extra 3 blocks.

You can go ahead and post your town/scum list - we need to pick our top 3 suspects after SlySly to grave rob anyway.

[iLord]

Plum thinks SlySly is scum, I believe. Elli's saying SlySly's town because he's a similar position - calling him scum would mean in essence calling himself scum, so he's

forced

to say he thinks SlySly's town.

Otherwise, you're cool with Dram/DGB/Elli robbing, right?

[iLord]

Hey, Dramonic, if you're chosen to rob two graves, you will oblige, correct?

How'd you get your insanity?

[iLord]

Commune, got a town result. Should I claim on who?

Eh, for the benefit of anyone else Communing tonight, I'm inclined to say yes.

Also, I'll oblige if graverobbing is required of me, although I still think it'd be more efficient to dual rob, at least on the people we think are town.

That's actually a better idea. Once more with feeling:

Elli robs Iec + Katy
semi robs Katy + Phate
DGB robs Phate + Start
Dramonic robs Sly + CSL

With Katy and Phate assumed to have a decent chance of having equipment.

[iLord]

Magua, I don't know if you've already posted something to this effect, but what do you think about people revealing their Night 1 action targets?

[iLord]

I am pro-claiming actions. I believe the benefits of truthful information the town gets outweighs the penalties of false information that scum give.

What did you do Night 1 (If you've said it, I couldn't find it)?

[iLord]

I hadn't said it. n0, I got a resuscitation kit. n1, I resuscitated elvis_knits.

Why hadn't you claimed this before?

[iLord]

*I* rezzed elvis.

This is a disturbing coincidence/overlap. Could Magua be hiding behind my previously claimed actions?

Elvis already got a fetish, so no. It looks like you'll probably be chosen as a grave robber - you understand which graves you have to rob?

[iLord]

Taboo Launder and Twitchy.
Know who I'm robbing. (Yerk and Katy, right?)

Correct.

[iLord]

Um. Why would I claim? We weren't doing a mass claim, and it provided no evidence of innocence or guilt on anyone.

I'm not thinking.

I'd like to see past targets, HOWEVER, let's consider this caveat before we do. People who rescuscitate can be killed the same night no matter how much they themselves are protected. What I'm wondering is if we are letting scum know who has rez kits and who don't whether we'll be tipping them off who are good targets to go after (in terms of not being rezzed). Or am I worrying about nothing?

You are correct. Let's end the day.

[iLord]

I don't understand this comment.

iLord, are you making a dig at DGB saying she gave me the fetish?

Nah, I'm saying that the fetish made it so that you heard noise regardless of anything else, so it's not likely that Magua's trying hide behind DGB stating she rezzed you.

[iLord]

Chaco, did you finish your reread?

[iLord]

I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to tell cult from murderers. And I'm not sure exactly how to do it because I can see them behaving in more than one way. There are so many variables to consider. I am particularly interested in all the "reformed murderers." Another thing I was thinking is that murderers will have the highest insanities. They get one each night. Cultists, iirc, only gain insanities from ritual, not crafting or passing fetishes. So it will be easier for them to blend in count-wise, especially if only certain members of the cult are doing ritual.

Yeah, Cult should be able to be caught behaviorally wise, whereas for murderers, we'll probably have to rely on inconsistencies in night actions.

[iLord]

It seems like he could be trying to get credit for being on the bandwagon. I think VP looks the worst when taking interactions into account. Scum


In fact, VP's play here seems different from his play in previous games I've played. He seemed more serious in previous games I played with him, but I haven't verified this yet. I do suspect him the most now. Vote: VP Baltar

Why did cultVP ward N0?

[iLord]

These are the two possibilities I'm thinking of:

1. He wanted to look like a townie.

2. In addition to ward preventing anybody from doing anything to Adel, it also causes Adel's night action to be unsuccessful. Maybe cultVP wanted to roleblock a good player.

2. Warding only stops other warding. He's effectively trading one town ward for another possibly town ward - not a good trade on the scum's part.

VP, what did you do last Night?

[iLord]

collected equipment.

Okay, then. What did you do Night 1, then?

[iLord]

Your action will fail if someone targets you with Ward, and you will not be notified of the failure.

That's only in regards to your Ward action failing.

[iLord]

Same

Thought process?

[iLord]

I won't reveal the specifics of what I got and how they fit into my plan, but the gist of it is that gathering equipment on early nights is going to 1)keep my insanities at 0 while the scum rack up theirs (separate the curd from the whey basically) 2) gives me the tools to catch those scum on later nights and 3)if I happen to die I have the potential to give a bonus to a town member who robs my grave or help to out scum who decide not to rob my grave if so ordered.

Do you think this is a good strategy for town members?

[iLord]

Personally, I don't think every town member should engage in the same strategy. Obviously if everyone spent the early nights gathering equipment it could make the town vulnerable in the sense that no one would be rezzing or warding or whatever.

However, I'm a long game type of player and I personally believe that some people should be doing work to secure a better Day 4, 5, 6, etc. for the town.

Do you think it's a bad strategy for town members?

I'm not saying it's a bad strategy - it makes some sense.

So do you believe that only one town member should do this?

How does being a long-term player and collecting equipment mesh with Warding N0?

[iLord]

Elli robs Iec + Katy
semi robs Katy + Phate
DGB robs Phate + Start
Dramonic robs Sly + CSL

I'd much prefer semi over Kunkstar, but I'd live with him or Magua.

Regardless, we have to get this sorted out, else scum can just say they weren't sure what the consensus was.

[iLord]

If you sub Elli for Kunkstar, I'd be fine with that list iLord.

Eh, I'd rather sub semi for Kunkstar.

[iLord]

Elli robs Iec + Katy
Kunk robs Katy + Phate
DGB robs Phate + Start
Dramonic robs Sly + CSL

Confirming that this seems to be the consensus. No excuses for the above to screw up graverobbing.

I don't get what Kunk was upset about - was he upset that he had accidentally "lynched" SlySly?

[iLord]

Wait, E_K gave me another idea. We got something else to talk about before the day ends.

Cultists can't get Aversion on another target. How about we all pick up Aversion tonight for the next player in the userlist:

So like:

animorpherv1
Chaco
DrippingGoofball
Ellibereth
elvis_knits
evilsnail
Hayker
iLord
kunkstar7
dramonic
Magua
Plum
rewq455
semioldguy
SlySly
vikingfan
VP Baltar
Wickedestjr

This is just the userlist with Magua moved so that he's behind dramonic. How about we each take aversion for the name below us, and Wicked takes Aversion to ani. That way, we'll catch any two cultists next to each other, and whenever a cultist dies, we'll be able to clear both the player that had an Aversion to him and the player he has an Aversion for.

We can do the grave robbing plan with this too:

Dramonic robs Sly + Iec
Elli robs Iec + Katy
Kunk robs Katy + Phate
DGB robs Phate + Start

Everyone else who needs a way to gain an insanity robs CSL.

Just make sure everyone takes up Aversion from their GraveRobbing.

I don't see any pitfall here. Thoughts?

[iLord]

The second line should be that Cultists can't get Aversion to another Cultist.

And we can always modify the list so that all the suspected Cultists are bunched together. For example, an alternative list would be:

VP Baltar
semioldguy
dramonic
Magua
DrippingGoofball
Ellibereth
vikingfan
evilsnail
animorpherv1
Chaco
elvis_knits
Hayker
iLord
kunkstar7
rewq455
Wickedestjr
Plum

[iLord]

I don't think I can move my aversion vote off Elvis until/unless she dies. I'm on board with it though whenever that happens.

That's fine, we'll just move you in front of Elvis.

Wait a minute, iLord. How are you going to make sure that scum doesn't just commit murder/the ritual and take aversion as an easy insanity that's explanable?

We don't. We'd be trading the scum a free insanity for multiple conclusions on alignment.

I completely forgot about the scum ritual too, but the scum can't nightkill each other to avoid having to get aversion on each other. The murderer's will be murderering tonight too, but I see no way for them to use their kill to effectively help the Cultists.

I also missed that you have to choose a new player when your old Aversion target dies. That's even better as we're getting multiple results out of each player with Aversion. And, if your aversion target dies, you can just change your Aversion to the next name down on the list. Modified list:

VP Baltar
semioldguy
dramonic
Magua
DrippingGoofball
Ellibereth
evilsnail
animorpherv1
Chaco
vikingfan
elvis_knits
Hayker
iLord
kunkstar7
rewq455
Wickedestjr
Plum

No one else has Aversion, right? I'll check E_K's chart in a sec.

[iLord]

I approve this plan.

Woot! I didn't screw up one of these for once.

Thoughts on list order?

[iLord]

VP Baltar
semioldguy
Ellibereth
DrippingGoofball
dramonic
Magua
evilsnail
rewq455
animorpherv1
Chaco
vikingfan
elvis_knits
Plum
Hayker
iLord
kunkstar7
Wickedestjr

I'm not sure if there's any other changes we want to make, looking at E_K's chart, since scum can lie about rezzing people. The only change I could find would be to move dramonic so that he's taking Aversion to Magua.

[iLord]

@Dramonic: Paranoid?

[iLord]

I already have aversion to him, I've proven it :S

Brainfart.

VP Baltar
semioldguy
dramonic
Magua
DrippingGoofball
Ellibereth
evilsnail
rewq455
animorpherv1
Chaco
vikingfan
elvis_knits
Plum
Hayker
iLord
kunkstar7
Wickedestjr

[iLord]

And here's the other thing...we've got a max of 8 insanity infractions total. If we're going to prove each day that we've got an aversion to a new person I could see somebody skyrocketing to the point where we can't ask them to test their insanities anymore. This is particularly true for ani who has a bunch already. This won't be true for tomorrow but in the days to come, this could be an issue.

This is Ani and Elli I believe?

I'm slightly concerned with scum hiding night actions better since EVERYONE is gaining an insanity. They can be like "yeah my insanity is from graverobbing!" when it's totally from murdering or ritual.

But I guess it's worth it if we find cult that can't take aversion on another member. If this works even a little bit, we get two cultists (one that couldn't take aversion on the other). And catching two cultists would be huge.

What are the odds of having no cult next to each other? Because that would suck balls.

Or maybe even that might help us in some way? If you're a math person perhaps there's something we could figure out with sets?

You have to remember that people get to move their aversions after their original targets die, which give us even more chances of clearing town.

We are walking on tricky territory as VF pointed out, as it costs 1 Insanity infraction to prove your aversion each time. I don't believe that we should hit 7-8 for a few nights though.

I might put up some math later if I have the time.

[iLord]

Wait... I didn't think the plan was for everyone to gain an insanity intentionally, just that if we do gain an insanity to choose aversion and refer to the list as an additional source to eliminate pairings.

That's actually a better idea, as scum would only be only able to go so long without revealing their insanities. It takes away to disadvatage of scum being able to hide behind this, and eventually everyone's likely going to get an insanity one way or another. If we do this, we'll be using the old grave robbing plan then.

[iLord]

I'm completely lost with the plans and whatnot. I know who I'm supposed to graverob and what insanities to take. Is that all I need to understand for now? X_X

Yes. Back to this list:

Elli robs Iec + Katy
Kunk robs Katy + Phate
DGB robs Phate + Start
Dramonic robs Sly + CSL

[iLord]

It seems that you guys have brought up a plan for night actions after skimming the last few pages. What's the plan and what should I be doing tonight?

If you're planning on getting an Insanity tonight, get aversion to VP Baltar.

[iLord]

I would like to hear people's thoughts on VP.

Behaviorally, I see no scumtells. I have a gut feeling he's scum, but I was wrong about Sajin, so eh.

We'll see eventually, but for now I no longer have him in my confirmed category. Warding N0 is not as guaranteed townie as I had initially considered.

[iLord]

My main response to it is 1) see my sig. Frankly, I don't have a lot of time to play mafia right now because I'm very busy at work lately and lack the time to put in lots of reading. 2) Games where I go full on scumhunting and start really pushing people around usually result in me dying very quickly.

Ironically, 1) would be very nicely solved if the end result of 2) became true .

And what is the real benefit for scum to take that action? What gain would I have garnered by claiming to Ward? Do you think I was trying to get a mislynch?

I for one can say that you warding gave you a lot of town cred in my eyes.

[iLord]

1) I think me staying alive in this game is a net benefit to the town at this time.

It was a joke. I was just saying that ironically, if you got killed for pushing too hard, you could dedicate more time for work.

[iLord]

With the proposed "everyone gains aversion to the player below them on the list" plan, Lylo would effectively be 7 players when there are 2 cult if everyone has aversion or 9 and 3, 11 and 4, etc. Since if we mislynch at 7 players, the cult kills someone and then it's 3 vs 2, only the cult can refuse to vote each other and the town is unable to lynch either of them due to each cult member having a player with aversion on him/her. Furthermore, in the 7players/2cult scenario. If scum avoid voting for each other, it takes every other player to vote one of the scum to get a successful lynch.

The more I think about it, the worse I see giving everyone aversion, since it isn't something that can be gotten rid of and will really hurt the longer the game goes.

I think it gives the best chance for a murderer to win, followed by cult and then town the least likely chance to win.

This is true, we'll scrap the mass-Aversion plan.

We can still use the basic concept though, it'll just have to be more selective. I'm not sure how much would be too deleterious to the town, and conclusions like these will be better made tomorrow after the graverobbing, so tonight, let's just stick with the grave-robbing plan.

[iLord]

We dont' have to achieve the full majority to lynch. Only foreseeable problem, imo, is bad distribution of aversions requiring town to vote quicker than scum. That might be enough to make me not want to do it, but I think I should just point out that the required majority to lynch doesn't mean much.

5 Player Endgame:

Town A
Town B
Cultist C
Town D
Cultist E

Each player would have aversion to the player under it. Cultists both will vote B and Town can only get two votes on either C or E. It's just a speed race to see who makes it first, but that's not something that I'm willing to take, especially since we can get much the same benefit from selectively forcing certain pairs to take Aversion.

[iLord]

So yeah, in case it wasn't clear, no one else takes Aversion until the town agrees for you to and decides your target.

[iLord]

I do want to take time to look at players who have more or less blindly been supporting each plan or if there even are any players fit that description; since each plan proposed thus far has been shown to actually not help town and I think that this would have been easier to notice how it helps cult/murderers if a person belongs to that faction and they could easily go along with something when they see the advantage to themselves.

This is extremely unreliable. How do you differentiate mistaken town (like yourself) and scum?

[iLord]

Analysis.

Elaborate on what behavioral differences you'd be looking for.

[iLord]

If I had been going along with the first few plans, I'd at least question plans before going along with the next after I trusted the first couple which turned out to be bad. Also I don't think town repeatedly blindly would follow plans for the same reason. I'd also look for how easy they let go of the plans when something bad is pointed out.

Eh, I guess both scenarios could be indicative, but even then it depends largely on playstyle. Most people in this game appear to just don't care/like to check plans and like to just leave it up to other people to perfect/find mistakes. For our game, the only people that are still alive would be me, Magua, Plum, you, and VP.

Incidentally, we don't need to argue about this in the conditional (or whatever) tense, as it really is kind of pointless. What tells did you find?

[iLord]

Ah, the Adel sheeple philosophy. Probably true. Out of curiosity, why is Plum on your list? Seems to me she's doing a pretty good job of saying a whole lotta nothing.

I was under the impression that Plum was one of the people that actually considered the last plan. I could be mistaken.

[iLord]

Yeah, Plum was one of the people who was discussing the Aversion Plan.

[iLord]

I'm back from floodingnfallingtrees land and in desperate need of a short summary of all the important stuff that happened (yes I know my graverobbing stuff, and I think the whole aversion thing that I didn't get was dropped?).

We dropped it. Graverobbing's the only thing we got.

You guys are too much into breaking the game and not enough into playing it <_<

Really, there wasn't much else to talk about in this day other than finding a way to maximize night actions.

I don't think we have any other outstanding issues before we finally go to night. Anyone else need anything clarified?

[iLord]

You or Dramonic.

Neither appeal as much as Sly.

Happy Birthday!

[iLord]

*headdesk*

Why?

[iLord]

DGB should take something confirmable?

I'd rather have semi, but Magua's fine.

[iLord]

Percy's forbade intentionally doing something like this, but DGB losing her night action is invariably protown, since that's the whole point of putting her on the grave robbing list anyway. We just got to block another person thanks to DGB.

[iLord]

Wrong, you just got to take scum off the list of accountability while sticking someone else on the list that can no longer help the town during the night. Just what DGscum wanted. Losing her action means nothing to her, the ritual doesn't require her participation to go through.

Lol, you can stop talking now.

I don't need scum on the chopping block to explain to me why scum autoblocking herself is not good for the town.

[iLord]

On that note, is everyone ok with the last posted graverobbing plan? I'm ready to hammer and move on.

I'm fine with the Magua one you've posted. The end of this day is long overdue.

[iLord]

Just got back.

I have twitchy now - I Communed with VP and he's clean.

The VF's situation is pretty easily resolved (Rezzing does come before Investigating). Whoever rezzed him needs to claim.

I'll figure out other stuff in a sec - going to look back through the thread.

[iLord]

Vote: DGB

For twitchy.

Insanity Infraction

[iLord]

you should've twitched with that. It would've worked to.

How would that prove I have twitchy?

So, rezzing doesn't make you bloody until after the killing action and vikingfan was bloody before being rezzed.

Therefore, vikingfan is lying scum.

That looks legitimate.

Can Percy confirm that the rez target becomes bloody during the "Murder/Ritual Phase" and not the "Rez Phase."

[iLord]

I wonder if snail even investigated me at all. it'd be easy for scum (particularly cult) to throw out an investigation and hope it sticks. I find it amazing that someone like rewq is so quick to believe him without considering all the facts.

Oh lol.

You've already conceded that you're bloody. What is this about?