Mafia 61: No Theme - Game over!

[Skruffs]

CHING!
Jalyn you impress me yet again.

[spectrumvoid]

I will be away from now till Friday because of exams. Then on holiday till August.

[Kison]

No, he couldn't use his role. My point is that his obit can't be wrong because he would still know what his true original role was.

You bring up a good point. DGB, what did you mean when you said the obituaries could be tampered with? I read it as a slight comical remark, but I could've been wrong there.

Skruffs - I must ask, why'd you single me out with the question of who I "targeted" last night?

[theopor_COD]

Okay to answer some of the accusations thrown at me.

Vote:Theo

. Your logic is bad. I claimed a roll

few have ever heard of

and yet I claimed it

before

anyone else did.

Rand first, so far this game you have produced no content, you have done very little in the terms of pro-town play from what I can see. You claimed supposed role at "lynch -4" I don't like supposed power roles claiming so early, also why I'm not happy Skruffs claimed. The second thing bothering me about you is this . . .

Battle Mage (Criminologist, shot night 1)

A role few have ever heard of and yet we have two of them . . . amazing.

AC1983 -

vote:theo

.
idiot.
rand claimed first, it would have taken a crapload of effort jsut to pull that role out of his ass. there could have been two... and lalm lied. scum do that.

Blatant bandwaggoning here, he didn't have to claim when he did a more logical route would have been to get himself out of the early day one shit without claiming. I cannot believe there would be two of these roles. BM1 is dead proved criminologist. Plus I didn't replace into the game to be called an idiot for what everyone seems to think is fine.

Skruffs -

Theo - if the role is 'complete rubbish' - than why is it so unlikeley to be in a game? would you be skeptical if there was a second roleblocker? You rae digging a hole very quickly or yourself. It's a lot more likely, looking at the situation from outside my own perspective, to be wary of claimed power roles, but everything makes sense if you look at it. as for my defense of rand/tcs, that's fine. I'm not ashamed of defending pro-town players.

The role is in the game, BM1 was it and is dead!

Yes I'd be sceptical if there was two role-blockers. 2 of anything aside from vanillas I'd be sceptical off. Pls point out where Rand and TCS are pro-town? As for roles we've got a tracker, 2 criminologists and a vig according to Rand already, how powerful does everyone think this town is!!!

As for the obituaries being tampered with, if BM1 wasn't a criminologist then I'll believe Rand otherwise I don't end of story.

[Kison]

Theopor, I think a good question to ask yourself is this : don't you think it's more likely that there are two Criminologists, a not-so-common role, in the same game, rather than the coincidental fact that Rand claimed a rare role that Battle Mage Sr. also happened to have?

[theopor_COD]

Skruffs seperately stop discussing possible ways that Alex was killed . . . tomorrow our good friend the

criminolgist

will then be able to say oh yeh Alex was killed by a Vig. And how are we going to prove anything eh!

You could also point out where you think I'd find it insane to only have three power roles. I never said that but I do think having two of the same crappiest roles imaginable is insane!

[theopor_COD]

Theopor, I think a good question to ask yourself is this : don't you think it's more likely that there are two Criminologists, a not-so-common role, in the same game, rather than the coincidental fact that Rand claimed a rare role that Battle Mage Sr. also happened to have?

I don't know maybe I'm going a little overboard with it and should slow down . . . it really concerns me as you can tell. I don't see really how helpful one of these criminologist guys is let alone two! The fact that Battle Mage the First had the same role was pretty unbelieveable especially as regards the claims. It's flustered me, even more so that everyone seems fine with it. Kison what do you make of Skruffs claiming when he did?

Maybe I should get back to re-reading. BM can you elaborate your case on Scotmany and Kison. Only asking as both from interactions with Lalm seem good to me - Lalm doesn't strike me as a particularly clever player hence I think his attack at Scotmany makes Scot much more likely to be a good guy.

[Skruffs]

I tracked someone, but not to Alex. No help there.
(to BM)
WHy are you now sad that Rand proved that there's a vig? We know there's a mafia, and now a vig rather than an sk. A vig is good for town, regardless of what you said yestserday.
FOCUS ON HUNTING THE EFFING MAFIA.

1 + 1 = ?
Theopor, you are not an idiot, you are a healthily suspicious townie, but, BUT, you need to stop trying to discredit power roles.
Why do you think I'm willing to trust Rand?

Kison - It's a powerplay. You didn't fall for it. I'm not intimidating enough.

[theopor_COD]

Skruffs - I just can't believe we have two of these criminologist fellas . . . look I don't think your scum, Kison is or Scotmany from the interactions with Lalm.

As far as Rand proving there was a Vig, let me ask you if you were mafia or serial killer would BM be a good kill choice . . . hell no. It didn't take a genius to work that one out.

However being as I'm fighting a battle against the odds today. I'll turn my attentions elsewhere.

unvote

Skruffs what do you make of AC1983's vote?

[Battle Mage]

thats exactly my point. ill allow you to make your own mind up. Suffice to say that my reading was that both were cutting their losses, and bussing a crap scumbuddy. Lalm cant have been that stupid. He was amazingly good at allowing BM1 to defend him, before dying.

@Skruffs-if you were in my shoes, you'd be saying the exact same thing about DGB.

Theopor, I think a good question to ask yourself is this : don't you think it's more likely that there are two Criminologists, a not-so-common role, in the same game, rather than the coincidental fact that Rand claimed a rare role that Battle Mage Sr. also happened to have?

I don't know maybe I'm going a little overboard with it and should slow down . . . it really concerns me as you can tell. I don't see really how helpful one of these criminologist guys is let alone two! The fact that Battle Mage the First had the same role was pretty unbelieveable especially as regards the claims. It's flustered me, even more so that everyone seems fine with it. Kison what do you make of Skruffs claiming when he did?

Maybe I should get back to re-reading. BM can you elaborate your case on Scotmany and Kison. Only asking as both from interactions with Lalm seem good to me - Lalm doesn't strike me as a particularly clever player hence I think his attack at Scotmany makes Scot much more likely to be a good guy.

[theopor_COD]

BM it did make me laugh how you defended Lalm . . .

[Battle Mage]

yeh, that was embarrassing. still, i did exactly the same with Jah and i was right, so i spose 1/2 isnt so bad. :p

[theopor_COD]

Nope indeed . . .

Question for Rand.

How did you feel when Battle Mage the First was revealed criminologist?

[DrippingGoofball]

DGB - what leads you to think that there was any tampering in the first place?

Meadow of Sorrow rings a bell???

Rand claimed first. A rare role, really. Not one I'd expect to see in duplicate in a game. What were the changes that he'd be counterclaimed... I am rather inclined to think that one is scum, and not a Criminologist at all...

I am with theo on that one.

[Jalyn]

Theo - If you reread the start of day 2, I think you'll note a lot of "WTF?" reactions when BM1 came up as a criminologist. I do think that it is all but impossible for BM1 to have not been a criminologist - if the obit was "faked" BM2 would have to be the "faker" - it's the only way that he wouldn't have extra information based on his first role. I suppose that this isn't completely outside the realm of possibility, but I'm marking it as rather low on my list of possibilities.
(For goodness sake, BM, before you go off on that, realize that I am NOT claiming that you or your former self are/were scum and back off )

As to Rand - I think one of the operative words in "fighting a battle against the odds today" is

today

. I don't think Rand is cleared and I have no idea how to take the multiple criminologists thing that we have going here, I just don't think we need to handle it right now.

Now...

vote:theo.
idiot.
rand claimed first, it would have taken a crapload of effort jsut to pull that role out of his ass. there could have been two... and lalm lied. scum do that.

Lalm

may

have lied. He may have also peppered his lies with truths. Scum do that.

This does bring me back to "ac1983fan reacted oddly to Rand's claim from the very beginning."

Unvote. Vote ac1983fan

[Kison]

Kison what do you make of Skruffs claiming when he did?

I don't think it was the smartest move, as nothing truly beneficial or conclusive resulted in it. I was fine with it until he asked me the last question he did... I can see how lying about the role could be a pretty useful scum tactic if it is used to identify players with roles with the threatening, "I

may

know where you went last night, so tell me who's home you went to" being held over their head. Obviously, people answering with a player's name are guaranteed to have a role, which brings me to my follow-up question.

Kison - It's a powerplay. You didn't fall for it. I'm not intimidating enough.

What were you hoping my answer would be?

A general note to Theopor : I think most people agree with you that Rand is hardly confirmed. I think most people

disagree

with your unwillingness to accept the

possibility

that there are indeed two Criminologists. Yes, it is not a very helpful role, but if there is one, I would not find it too difficult to believe that there are two.

[theopor_COD]

I disagree, see one I could believe, two I can't.
I have a problem believing two Docs, two Role Blockers, two Trackers, two Vigs etc. It's not like they are both cops and have different sanities. BM1 and Rand are essentially the same pretty useless role and what to make of Lalmstreek claiming it aswell . . . baffling. What I will say is we shouldn't discard the possibility Rand's lieing which is why AC1983's post is scummy especially as Jalyn points out his original reaction to Rand's claim.

[theopor_COD]

The other annoying thing regards the Rand claim, is that the initial reactions to BM also being a criminologist seem to have been lost in the April crash.

[ac1983fan]

Theo - If you reread the start of day 2, I think you'll note a lot of "WTF?" reactions when BM1 came up as a criminologist. I do think that it is all but impossible for BM1 to have not been a criminologist - if the obit was "faked" BM2 would have to be the "faker" - it's the only way that he wouldn't have extra information based on his first role. I suppose that this isn't completely outside the realm of possibility, but I'm marking it as rather low on my list of possibilities.
(For goodness sake, BM, before you go off on that, realize that I am NOT claiming that you or your former self are/were scum and back off )

As to Rand - I think one of the operative words in "fighting a battle against the odds today" is

today

. I don't think Rand is cleared and I have no idea how to take the multiple criminologists thing that we have going here, I just don't think we need to handle it right now.

Now...

vote:theo.
idiot.
rand claimed first, it would have taken a crapload of effort jsut to pull that role out of his ass. there could have been two... and lalm lied. scum do that.

Lalm

may

have lied. He may have also peppered his lies with truths. Scum do that.

This does bring me back to "ac1983fan reacted oddly to Rand's claim from the very beginning."

Unvote. Vote ac1983fan

How is not having heard of the role reacting oddly? It's not even on mikeburnfire's flash site, and the forensic investigator sounds slightly different.
And anyway, the only time I can ever think of a safe claim being given to scum AND being a role is in say a bastard mod game. USE YOUR FRIKKIN BRAIN!

[theopor_COD]

So AC1983 you'd expect there to be two of em?

[Skruffs]

I don't see 1983 as very scummy, Theo, not at this point in time. It's possible, but I read through his posts and he seems to not be afraid to state his opinion.

We have no idea if it was given to Lalms as a safe-claim or not. Only mafia would know if they were given safe claims. And there's no reason to think that there cuoldn't be two duplicates of a role that basically's only use is to see wether someone who killed someone claimed correctly or not. Two doctors would be bad. Plenty of games have multiple RBers , cops of varying insanities, etc.

DGB _ Ooooh, yeah, that game. WEll, this game doesn't have a theme. Hopefully there's not a clean up artist.

[theopor_COD]

I have no idea why Lalm claimed criminologist aswell it's hardly a safe claim if BM1 was one!! Maybe he was just confused heck knows.

[Mastermind of Sin]

vote:theo

.
idiot.
rand claimed first, it would have taken a crapload of effort jsut to pull that role out of his ass. there could have been two... and lalm lied. scum do that.

This is a horrible post. It looks like ac1983fan is just trying to put pressure on people and follow the flow of the game, without actually being proactive.

unvote, vote: ac1983fan

I would feel better about Theo if he had actually conceded that he was wrong about Rand, but he kept fighting it until he decided to agree to disagree, which is still bad.

Rand is right that criminologist is a rare role, so I doubt he's lying. Also, if Lalm was telling the truth about criminologist being a safe claim (and I suspect he was, since it sounded like he was mad that it didn't work out for him), that implies that it was supposed to be a safe claim because there would be multiples of them. If he wasn't telling the truth about having a safe claim, then it doesn't help us, but it doesn't make it much less likely that we have multiple criminologists.

Also, criminologist is a good role, because if someone claims vig and claims their kills, the criminologist can check them and see if it was actually an SK or mafia that made the kill. However, it's limited use means that I could see having more than one criminologist, because if one dies, we still have another weak power role to take up the mantle.

This is a large game, don't be overawed by the number of power roles we have. 3 power roles is nothing, I'd guess that at least a third, if not more, of the town players have power roles. Just a rough estimation, but my point is, don't try to discredit him because you think we have too many power roles.

[theopor_COD]

MoS I'm not trying to discredit Rand on the role itself or however many power roles we have - not that I even brought that up, it's just the fact that we're all supposing there's two of the same pro-town criminologists out there.

Still I've been made to look stupid by even suggesting such nonsense, of course we'd have two of a role practically no-ones ever heard of, Rand included.

[LFBProd]

I think you also forget again that mods have a tendency to do things like this to discredit mass roleclaims, or making assumptoins. I don't think we should put it into the far relm of impossibility. We also shouldn't assume that it is entirely possible. What I'm trying to get at is that the argument of thinking Rand is lying simply because he claimed a rare role is not really going to get us anywhere. It's a hard case to argue for or against.