[Mafia game] The Realm of Phere

[Normal Phase]

I'm sure, but please don't get too hung up on either "blue" or "good". We have four categories of alignment. All of them have colors attached, and game alignment has never been unambiguously revealed for a dead player.

I'd guess we can trust that the people who died by means of Lord Phere were not scum at the time of their deaths. That's all.

[Suburban Plankton]

Originally Posted by Weedy

I'm not going to vote choie.

Think I will go with

vote MHaye for now.

Cool.

Any particular reason for that vote, other than "He's not choie"?

I'm sure you probably gave one at some point, but with almost 2000 posts to go through, it might help if you gave a quick summation of your case, updated to include any new pertinent info.

[Visorslash]

Story, I read somewhere recently, and it is my opinion, that scum use that tactic. (The delaying tactic, etc)

The way he worded it, I don't particularly like. Zombies are not good, they can die. They're zombies, by default they're evil.

[Visorslash]

*In general knowledge anyway, but considering we're all alive...

*It's the whole, wait and see approach which reeks of scum to me.

[Suburban Plankton]

Originally Posted by fubbleskag

editing is editing.

And???

I don't recall seeing a rule against editing in this game, so what's the problem?

If you think that editing posts is a Scum tell, then vote for him. If you don't think that editing posts is a Scum tell, then there's no reason for you to bring it up.

[Tanaer]

Whilst I get that we have multi-dimensional alignment factors - there's still this for me - I find it hard to believe that a good person would be a threat to the town.

That said, the Phere-raised zombie bothers me. It bothers me for this possible reason: Phere sacrifices a night kill to raise a zombie - why? How about the zombie can add a night to his kill-stable every night thereafter. Shall we wait for him to add another? Or take three kills tonight?

I say we deal with this unnatural beast now.

vote Mosier

[Tanaer]

Hm it occurs to me that whilst I do find it hard to believe a good person would be a threat to the town (other than being a formerly good zombie), all we know about those who died is that they looked like they were good. Or were dressed like a good solider.. so that belief is totally undermined in practice

[gnarlycharlie]

Originally Posted by Tanaer

Whilst I get that we have multi-dimensional alignment factors - there's still this for me - I find it hard to believe that a good person would be a threat to the town.

That said, the Phere-raised zombie bothers me. It bothers me for this possible reason: Phere sacrifices a night kill to raise a zombie - why? How about the zombie can add a night to his kill-stable every night thereafter. Shall we wait for him to add another? Or take three kills tonight?

I say we deal with this unnatural beast now.

vote Mosier

i'm not sure your vote counts since it's not in bold.

anyway, is a vote for a zombie legal? if yes, can they actually be lynched?

[Suburban Plankton]

Originally Posted by Tanaer

Whilst I get that we have multi-dimensional alignment factors - there's still this for me - I find it hard to believe that a good person would be a threat to the town.

That said, the Phere-raised zombie bothers me. It bothers me for this possible reason: Phere sacrifices a night kill to raise a zombie - why? How about the zombie can add a night to his kill-stable every night thereafter. Shall we wait for him to add another? Or take three kills tonight?

I say we deal with this unnatural beast now.

vote Mosier

I think that a "Good" person is that and just that; he is for the side of "good" and against the side of "Evil". That means he's not on Lord Phere's side (as the Demon Lord is unquestionably "Evil"), but it doesn't imply that he is on the Town's side.

If we assume that there are multiple factions involved in the game (which is implied by the color, but is by no means certain), then each faction could be 'out for themselves', with the common goal of defeating Lord Phere.

The more I think about it, I think the 'Traitor', who appears to be aligned with LP, is not 'Scum' as we normally think about it in a Mafia sense, but rather more like a PFK. That is, a single player who if he wins, everybody else loses. And 'Everybody else' is probably: a large 'Town' faction, and several smaller 'non-Town' factions whose Win Conditions may or may not be compatible with the Town's.

There's nothing in my PM that indicates that 'Town' must be the sole survivors in order to win the game, only that we must eliminate all of the 'Bad Guys'.




As for Zombie Mosier, I don't think there's any need to use up a lynch on him at this point. I wouldn't put is past LP to have raised him just to mess with us, and to deflect attention from the 'real' threat. Until we have more to go on, I have no problem keeping him around. He amuses me.

[Astral Rejection]

I'm baffled why we'd want to lynch somebody we already lynched before. What additional info do you expect to come from such a lynch? Build a real case on someone so the vote record can show suspicions and shed more light on the game.

If you really want Mosier dead again, we should use our attacks for that.

[Normal Phase]

Quite.

[fubbleskag]

Originally Posted by Suburban Plankton

And???

I don't recall seeing a rule against editing in this game, so what's the problem?

If you think that editing posts is a Scum tell, then vote for him. If you don't think that editing posts is a Scum tell, then there's no reason for you to bring it up.

And???

I don't recall seeing a rule against being against editing in this game, so what's the problem?

If you think that being against editing is a Scum tell, then vote for me. If you don't think that being against editing is a Scum tell, then there's no reason for you to bring it up.

Originally Posted by Astral Rejection

I'm baffled why we'd want to lynch somebody we already lynched before. What additional info do you expect to come from such a lynch? Build a real case on someone so the vote record can show suspicions and shed more light on the game.

If you really want Mosier dead again, we should use our attacks for that.

you and your common sense can just go to hell!

[Normal Phase]

Amusing. We're cool, fubs.

[LightFoot]

Originally Posted by Suburban Plankton

Ah, I had missed ToeJam's denial (I just went back and found the post now). That does seem to answer the question, though I'd still like to see a final corrected Item Vote Count.



Visorslash, will you either confirm or deny that you are a Double-Voter?

I don't recall seeing this addressed?

I checked This is the sum total of Visorslash's posts.

I don't see a bunch of substance, and the avoidance of a simple question is suspect to me.

[LightFoot]

Originally Posted by Normal Phase

His was the attack on me at the end of day two, when he was lynched. I look up to the sky and shield myself from it, taking no damage. He tried to perforate me with an arrow, presumably.

So we see that you are a double voter, and have some kind of Day protection.


nice package

[choie]

Weedy, that's okay. Just because I felt attacked doesn't mean you were actually attacking me. My feelings are all over the place really, so it had nothing to do with you.

Pre-warning to Visorslash: there are many screennames mentioned below, which means a lot of bolding. You may want to avert your gaze.

Originally Posted by Tanaer

That said, the Phere-raised zombie bothers me. It bothers me for this possible reason: Phere sacrifices a night kill to raise a zombie - why?

Wait, I'm confused. (I should just have that on a macro.) Why do you think Phere sacrificed a night kill? Guiri was killed by Phere last Night. Have I missed a rule where we know Phere has two kills every Night?

Anyway... if y'all start suspecting fubbles because he's not Town... I'll--I'll--well, I'm not sure what I'll do, but it'll be annoyingly smug. Heh. I'm not against attacking him, obviously, I've never trusted him fully, but most people said earlier that killing third party folks isn't the best strategy rather than seeing out-and-out Scum.

So to that end, I'm thinking back to that long ago Day (well, it seems long in out-of-game time) when we had a horse race between Astral Rejection and Gadarene. That was the day when everyone was voting AR but to our surprise Mosier got the lynch.

The next Night/Day I think we were arguing about whether Mosier was killed to spare Astral or Gadarene. That's basically one of the reasons Astral seemed suspicious. Well, he was lynched and it appears, at least on the surface if we're assuming Good sorta leans Town at least, that he was likely Town, or at least Not Scum. Which (I think) indicates that the Mosier lynch wasn't intended to benefit Astral. So... my suspicions are turning to Gadarene, who's been unusually silent this round. I've said he felt Townish to me, but there's that Mosier lynch, and his near-hysteria the following Day, and now his sudden lack of activity, and for me that feels wrong, and not like Gadarene at all. It's like he wants to stay out of sight lest we remember that Astral wasn't the only beneficiary of that Mosier lynch. (NOTE: If I've forgotten a post where he said he wouldn't be active due to some real life stuff, this is null and void.)

After Astral flipped... well, possibly town, I guess we still don't know for sure, which sucks, but I think the fact that Phere didn't raise him does indicate a Town (or at least a non-alliance with Phere) role, I did say I'd go after Normal, whose behavior the Day Astral was killed was all over the map and remains odd to me, though her explanations are persuasive.

I guess I just want that first Day lynch, seemingly ripped out of our hands, to make sense, dammit.

So I'll just FOS Normal and vote Gadarene for now. (The lighter blue color is to indicate my tentativeness, because he did seem Townish, but as I said... I wanna know what happened that first Day!)

(I also really really want to hear from the lurkers. It seems crazy and hella anti-Town to be so silent this far in the game. People like Lilflower make me very nervous.)

[Silver Jan]

I think Gnarly could be on the right track with there not being many scum, that's perhaps why I am having a problem with my vote toDay. I wouldn't think that all the people that Town have lynched would come back as scum though, that would be too easy to figure out, there has to be a twist somewhere.

[Silver Jan]

Choie, I thought Gaderene was the lynch leader on D1 and Astral was second.

[Astral Rejection]

Originally Posted by LightFoot

So we see that you are a double voter, and have some kind of Day protection.


nice package

Normal's day protection makes sense to me. If you remember from my full claim, I have an item that blocks 25 hit points of damage. Normal having a similar item that blocks at least 50 HP damage does not seem hard to believe. I think I remember her saying she has such an item.

The armor is likely unrelated to her class, is what I'm saying. Not really a package deal.

[Normal Phase]

I have too many suspects, not too few.

NAF -- very careful to stay away from being auto-killed thus far, but hasn't said a thing. there's busy and then there's "Here I am! There I go."
Red Skeezix -- same thing more or less, two quick votes on day two and otherwise not to be found.
Storyteller, turning up again on the same day he would have been autokilled. Gets a pass as long as he keeps talking.

Not actually lilflower at the moment, unless she reappears before Pizza kills her (which should be tomorrow I think).

Realitytrip and PetW, both of whom have disappeared off the face of the earth since getting some public suspicion.

MHaye, carry-over from day one and wasn't a huge fan of his casual agreement with choie on my PetW unvote either.

I probably shouldn't even get started on the people I'm just paranoid about. But I don't like Weedy's case on choie much. Astral's got me all worried about Silver Jan all of a sudden, who I've been more or less accepting as town since she failed to get freaked out by a challenge on day one. And of course Astral himself. And Believerer, who I think could sell me the Brooklyn Bridge.

Am I forgetting anyone?

[Astral Rejection]

Originally Posted by Normal Phase

And of course Astral himself.

That wink is too tiny for my intended comic reply. Oh well.

Normal, your reads seem honest to me, and I'm on board with your suspicions. Keep this up, and I'll downgrade my suspicions of you to "thermonuclear."

[Normal Phase]

Haha. Salute, Astral.

[storyteller0910]

Originally Posted by fubbleskag

I have the standard Town win condition just like the rest(?) of you. I'm not going to apologize for wanting to explore the open aspects of this game for my own enjoyment as I stated early on.

No apology requested or expected, at least not from me; it's a game, and whatever's fun for you is fine by me in an out of game sense.

But in an in game sense, we have a problem. Because I also intend to play the game in a way that's fun for me, and that means trying to identify the Bad Guys. Now, I'll stipulate that it's possible that you're Town and just "exploring the open aspects of this game." But your exploration, currently, involves doing something that is not consistent with a Town win condition. From my perspective, the case where you're actually Town but behaving as if you're not is not distinguishable from the case where you're not Town. On the whole, this makes me want to hit you with a handy piece of spiked metal or a fireball or a Fezzik-style rock until you're not in the game anymore.

On top of that, what you're offering - trading information about items for unspecified services rendered, presumably on an individual basis and in private - is a crappy deal for Town as a whole. As far as I can tell, you don't have the leverage to offer such a bad deal. Exactly how to handle this, I'm not sure yet, but I'd suggest that if you plan to play negotiator, you should be prepared to actually negotiate. If that's not an option for you at all... well, then we have a really big problem.

[storyteller0910]

Originally Posted by Astral Rejection

I'm baffled why we'd want to lynch somebody we already lynched before. What additional info do you expect to come from such a lynch? Build a real case on someone so the vote record can show suspicions and shed more light on the game.

If you really want Mosier dead again, we should use our attacks for that.

Well... OK... normally I'd agree. Except - what information did we actually get from the first time? Normally it's pretty straightforward: "Bob and Suzie voted for Steve, Steve died and was Town, what do we make of this?" But we don't even know the alignments of the returned players.

Actually, on some level, and given this, I would think that any player who voted to lynch someone and then didn't vote to lynch them again upon their return from the dead, with no additional information since the first time, ought to have a damn good explanation for it. If (s)he was Scummy enough to vote for previously, and now is back and nothing has changed, why is (s)he no longer worth a vote?

[Astral Rejection]

That's a crutch.

"I voted for Mosier before. Now he's alive again, but I still want him dead."

What can you now surmise from the player? It's a meaningless, informationless vote. It requires no additional case making. And further, early lynches are overwhelmingly likely to be town players, so Mosier is likely town.

It's like repeating a day, when there are other tools available to us to deal with Mosier if we so choose.

[fubbleskag]

Originally Posted by storyteller0910

No apology requested or expected, at least not from me; it's a game, and whatever's fun for you is fine by me in an out of game sense.

But in an in game sense, we have a problem. Because I also intend to play the game in a way that's fun for me, and that means trying to identify the Bad Guys. Now, I'll stipulate that it's possible that you're Town and just "exploring the open aspects of this game." But your exploration, currently, involves doing something that is not consistent with a Town win condition. From my perspective, the case where you're actually Town but behaving as if you're not is not distinguishable from the case where you're not Town. On the whole, this makes me want to hit you with a handy piece of spiked metal or a fireball or a Fezzik-style rock until you're not in the game anymore.

On top of that, what you're offering - trading information about items for unspecified services rendered, presumably on an individual basis and in private - is a crappy deal for Town as a whole. As far as I can tell, you don't have the leverage to offer such a bad deal. Exactly how to handle this, I'm not sure yet, but I'd suggest that if you plan to play negotiator, you should be prepared to actually negotiate. If that's not an option for you at all... well, then we have a really big problem.

I can understand your position on everything you said, but I don't understand the last bit about negotiating - can you clarify?

[Normal Phase]

Originally Posted by storyteller0910

Actually, on some level, and given this, I would think that any player who voted to lynch someone and then didn't vote to lynch them again upon their return from the dead, with no additional information since the first time, ought to have a damn good explanation for it. If (s)he was Scummy enough to vote for previously, and now is back and nothing has changed, why is (s)he no longer worth a vote?

You may have missed Mosier's means of death, which came directly from the head baddy himself. That does suggest VERY strongly, IMO, that he was not scum at the time of his death.

[storyteller0910]

Originally Posted by Normal Phase

You may have missed Mosier's means of death, which came directly from the head baddy himself. That does suggest VERY strongly, IMO, that he was not scum at the time of his death.

I think this might be putting a lot more stock in what is, in the end, color, than I'm comfortable doing at this point.

[Normal Phase]

Then where do you think the triple votes come from? They're clearly not town.

[septimus]

With no strong Scum candidates among active players, but several inactive players (en route to Mod-kill?) and semi-lurkers (trying to sail between Scylla and Charybdis?), that latter group seems the place to Lynch:

Unvote; Vote: RealityTrip

Originally Posted by ToeJam

Vote Pendant to Zombie Mosier...
... That said, I don't trust Zombies, and feel like we've got a Necromancer now finally in our ranks. Hopefully a "Townie" necro, but to me, it does feel like the obvious "3rd Party Mad Bomber" win condition- create an army of Zombies and take out the Town.

Why give a present to someone you "don't trust"?

[Believerer]

Originally Posted by Normal Phase

And Believerer, who I think could sell me the Brooklyn Bridge.

Am I forgetting anyone?

I've done it before, and I'll do it again!

http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/n...to_the_states/

[Normal Phase]

Originally Posted by septimus

Why give a present to someone you "don't trust"?

Right, him too.

[LightFoot]

And I took a look at gnarly charlie
D1 contributions, - I’ve included the link since I didn’t quote the whole post/every post. The bits that got me are the ones I included here.
Speculation on number of scum
Doesn’t like the votes on Visorslash
Posts player gender list
Posts 3 methods to contact him privately
http://cites D1 votes being usually ... Votes mosier.
N1+ D2
the AWESOME post at the beginning of Night 1
I still read that as a wrong board post
But he excused it away here

wonders if there could be one Scum.
fubbles could be neutral or 3rd party
supports private messaging among players
his PIS theory
States that a vig may have been responsible for one of the kills
unvotes PetW ( for sounding honest) and reminds us that story and mahaloth have access issues
votes Weedy sounds self protective
the one Scum theorie again.
fubbles won’t be lynched anytime soon. Calls choie’s vote a waste
notes landslide on Astral, asks if Astral has claimed. Does not think we should be attacking Lord Phere

SPOILER:

Originally Posted by gnarlycharlie

hey! i didn't say vote for a wagon. you assumed that because i said a vote on fubbles was likely a waste. i meant he likely wasn't going to get lynched. he has been discussed but there wasn't a serious attempt to lynch him. you can build a case on someone else or agree with some other case and voted for that player.





do you mean the current loss of hit points? i don't think we can tally hit points as they are not public knowledge.



so what else is new with my play? i'm diesel, a slow starter. by the way, that wasn't a claim.

i'm usually even more quiet. but as i said earlier i have more time now and people have been calling me out for being quiet.





right. i remember that. somehow i thought was someone else.

back pedals on what I read as a call to vote a wagon @ choie’s vote.
Well, yes loss of hit points are publicly posted.
The last bit is where he was told what Astral had claimed.

D3

Originally Posted by gnarlycharlie

so Astral and Mosier are back in the game? although use of powers aren't necessary to win, they sure may things more complicated.

Not sure how to read this?

SPOILER:

Originally Posted by gnarlycharlie

Quote:

i'd like to think we keep learning whether we've played two or 3,494,745,939,755 games. to elaborate on the discussion about fubbles, third party doesn't mean against town. i believe you made comment to that effect. they can win with town or scum.

anyway, i felt your vote would be more productive elsewhere as he had been discussed but most felt he was harmless and wouldn't be lynched.

i saw a reply to being questioned for this. can you elaborate? did you have restrictions or were you prohibited by lack of time?

interesting observation.

i think a lot of us are unfamiliar so we're just as confused as you are. i have played D&D and i'm still a bit lost.

does this mean you have abilities at Night? can you speak straight at Night?

are there rules for pressure voting that i'm unaware of? when was this again? D1, right? was i the only one with a weak vote?

Again with choie and the D1 vote.
Apparently missed believerer’s explanation about joining us late.
Questions Mosier.

Originally Posted by gnarlycharlie

i stand corrected about the Day. it still doesn't make pressure votes wrong. it also doesn't make "me too" votes wrong either. if you agree with a case, why shouldn't one place a vote in as well? isn't that the point of making cases? you want people to agree with you. "me too" votes in themselves are neither townie or scummy.

what do you think of Suburban Plankton's pressure vote?

Originally Posted by gnarlycharlie

i still can't shake the feeling that based on color and powers, there's only one scum. blue points to town. indigo and teal are neutral and red scum. scum gets a multitude of powers like triple votes and zombie creation. i think like his game in another board, we'll see a ton of townie and neutral deaths before we're done.

This is the third mention of “ only one Scum” What is charlie trying to accomplish with that?
Remember D1 when he speculated 5 or 6?

I did this for me, and since I went to the trouble I'm sharing it here.
I kept coming back to the one Scum theory and decided to peek harder.

[Gadarene]

Originally Posted by Normal Phase

Then where do you think the triple votes come from? They're clearly not town.

I still don't think this is necessarily clear.

[LightFoot]

Originally Posted by Astral Rejection

Normal's day protection makes sense to me. If you remember from my full claim, I have an item that blocks 25 hit points of damage. Normal having a similar item that blocks at least 50 HP damage does not seem hard to believe. I think I remember her saying she has such an item.

The armor is likely unrelated to her class, is what I'm saying. Not really a package deal.

I missed the mention of the item, but I was thinking it was item related. my ' package' reference was just that. a nice combination of features

[Astral Rejection]

Sorry, I misunderstood you then.

[LightFoot]

Separate post for possibly clarity

RE: gnarly charlie

Multiple runs at a theory that is not holding any water.

Multiple ‘dings’ at choie for the “ vote that’s not going to kill anyone ”

Apparent backpedalling and saying “I didn’t tell you to vote a wagon”

Now, combine this with the “ awesome” post N1

And his eagerness to share all his PrivateMessage contact information to all. D1

It just smells funny to me.
Vote gnarly charlie

[Weedy]

If we have a one person Scum team, then this isn't really a Mafia game. Which I am willing to believe is the case, but how on earth are we supposed to catch a single Scum? What kind of traces would they leave in their posts, what kind of strategy would they have?

If there is a multi-person 'neutral' team with an anti-Town wincon, then they are the Scum team, and the 'lone Scum' is a PFK.

[ToeJam]

Originally Posted by septimus

Why give a present to someone you "don't trust"?

Why do I do anything?
Because I wanted to see what'd happen.

Who says I'm giving him the present anyways?
I can still unvote if it's coming down to one vote.

SPOILER:

Elaboration for the squares:
Because I don't expect anyone to vote along with it. It's pretty much the equivalent of a self-vote of the item (I doubt anyone's going to give me things).

SPOILER:

And I wanted to see what'd happen if I voted an item to him in terms of the other players' reactions.

SPOILER:

Yes, I'm spoiling this because I believe many players don't actually like clicking through spoilers and reading them.

SPOILER:

Everyone knows skimming is a scum tell

SPOILER:

But i expect scummy players to click here.

SPOILER:

Wave to the camera.

SPOILER:

Gotcha, Scum!

[ToeJam]

Originally Posted by Normal Phase

So you think zombie Mosier is a bad guy, or the tool of one, but you want him to have the pendant? And you think maybe we should get around to trying to start killing zombies when it gets to 4 or 5, but 1 or 2's not so bad?.

Story's pretty much summed up my thoughts on that matter. 1 doesn't tell me anything, 2 okay, 3 we start to worry.
But a single data point isn't enough information.

Off the top of my head:
-Zombies are evil
-Zombies are Mad Bomber types by a single 3rd party/PFK group
-Zombies are fuel for a Necromancers, and more of them equals more power for the necromancer with unknown alignment of said necromancer.
-Zombies can be purified by white magic and turned into Pro-Town good guys/ Town confirmed players
-Zombies can be used up/sacrificed by another type
-Zombies can be investigative roles with alignments similar to every other player
-Zombies can be normal players, just having the Zombie Post Restriction during the Day
-Mosier could be making up the whole Zombie bullshit for fun.

All of those are just possibilities I've come up with in the last 3 mins sitting here. Can I say which of those is true at this point?
Nope.
If you can, feel free to share with the rest of us.
Until then, having more data points isn't a bad thing. Hell if the second zombie shows up and points out Mosier is a liar and he has no post restriction or anything like that, then voila instant info.

-I personally believe lynching the Zombies isn't really gaining much. If you're anti-Zombies, just kill them. Apparently, Astral's got 50% of his HP I believe he's said. No reason yet to suspect that the Zombie moiser doesn't have the same thing.

So again, I advocate for moderation, because I expect 2-3 players don't listen to a fuck I say, and are going to hack that bastard up for pieces. Either way I get my own thoughts across, and I get more data from what happens. Win-win.

[Normal Phase]

"just kill them" isn't the impression I got from your first post, though. "Let's let them live a while" is the impression I got.

[Gadarene]

Originally Posted by Weedy

If we have a one person Scum team, then this isn't really a Mafia game. Which I am willing to believe is the case, but how on earth are we supposed to catch a single Scum? What kind of traces would they leave in their posts, what kind of strategy would they have?

If there is a multi-person 'neutral' team with an anti-Town wincon, then they are the Scum team, and the 'lone Scum' is a PFK.

Agree with all of this.

[LightFoot]

Originally Posted by Gadarene

Agree with all of this.

And since no further threats to Town
is the win con for many of us.

The non-Town will all eventually be considered a threat.

[ToeJam]

Originally Posted by Weedy

I have been thinking about the mechanics a little bit. If Scum have all the powers the demon seems to have, Town is doomed. He can triple vote, brink back lynched players, and can kill 2 people per night. Something doesn't add up and I don't understand what's going on.

I wonder if "Evil" players can use the Demon Lord for their own nightly activities. How much is Flavor vs. how much is game mechanic?
I'm not sure if all those mechanics are all the work of a single player or group. Though it is interesting to note one less kill, one Zombie instead.

Originally Posted by Visorslash

Story, I read somewhere recently, and it is my opinion, that scum use that tactic. (The delaying tactic, etc)

The way he worded it, I don't particularly like. Zombies are not good, they can die. They're zombies, by default they're evil.

Watch this:
Visor, I read somewhere recently, but it's not my opinion, that scum use the hurrying tactic. They place quick votes, agitate the townies, and try to bully around the town and in general try to speed up things rather than talk things out and slow things down.

So you met a Scum that delayed. I've seen scum delay, and I've seen scum hurry up, hammer lynches, go absent and not talk, and I've seen Storyteller as Detective.
In the end it comes down to one thing- if you think of absolutes, you WILL get burned.
If you want my personal Mafia Playing Opinion:
Only Sith deal in Absolutes. Scum will do anything and everything that isn't expected of them or assumed to be that "scum would never do that" and use that to their advantage.

Then again, I've not played in a while, and I'm only used to the scum from the Doper boards. If we have off-board players who are scum, they might play with your "absolute" view points and may be more simpler minded and foolish.

Originally Posted by Tanaer

I say we deal with this unnatural beast now.

Then kill it with your hands, don't waste a lynch on it in my opinion.

I'm still curious to know if the thing can VOTE. Or do anything other than shuffle about during the Day vs. what does it do at Night (though there is the risk it could gain a NK during the Night, and again alignments and all are unknown, so it's all WiFoM), when placed with that dilemma, I am of the wait and see mind, rather than the kill it with fire one. Because if the scum DID NOT create said Zombie, I'm sure they'd be just as worried about that unknown thing for them as would Townies, if not worried of a PFK/Win Stealer.

So it's always nice to note peoples' reactions to the unknown mechanisms and compare them to your own.

Originally Posted by storyteller0910

Actually, on some level, and given this, I would think that any player who voted to lynch someone and then didn't vote to lynch them again upon their return from the dead, with no additional information since the first time, ought to have a damn good explanation for it. If (s)he was Scummy enough to vote for previously, and now is back and nothing has changed, why is (s)he no longer worth a vote?

Gotta disagree with you here, Story, though I do note that you added the addendum of "with no additional information since the first time". When they die, we do know their morality and their role, which although not indicative of alignment, is still another data point. The roles do appear to be trackable slightly through the damage they can do and so forth, so when the role is revealed, we can try to muse through what their previous actions MAY have been vs. ruling out which ones are unlikely to be theirs. So will i suppose I'd agree with the whole "if no info was gained, then yeah a re-voting is likely", but at the same time, you ARE gaining info from the deaths, and you're gaining further info by seeing the Night kills and actions and all- did less people attack during the night, did a different style of attack appear, etc.
So we are not fully without info each and every time.
Again, YMMV though.

Originally Posted by Normal Phase

You may have missed Mosier's means of death, which came directly from the head baddy himself. That does suggest VERY strongly, IMO, that he was not scum at the time of his death.

Again, more WIFOM, but it's my thoughts, I wonder if getting triple voted and lynched may lead to a Zombification later on down the road?

Again, more data points needed. But I wonder if they demon killing the players will force them to be resurrected, but that we won't know until we see more players start to pop up... and in what order.

Originally Posted by Weedy

If we have a one person Scum team, then this isn't really a Mafia game. Which I am willing to believe is the case, but how on earth are we supposed to catch a single Scum? What kind of traces would they leave in their posts, what kind of strategy would they have?

If there is a multi-person 'neutral' team with an anti-Town wincon, then they are the Scum team, and the 'lone Scum' is a PFK.

I agree with this line of reasoning. I don't know if it's the case, but I am willing to believe that a PFK player may be a "traitor" controlling the demon lord.
Hence the whole "multiple people may be using the demon lord" sorta deal.

[ToeJam]

Originally Posted by Normal Phase

"just kill them" isn't the impression I got from your first post, though. "Let's let them live a while" is the impression I got.

Because I full expect it to be killed. But I'm for letting them live a while.
:shrug:

I don't assume myself the King of you people, but I like sharing my thoughts.
If you wanted clarification, well, asked and received.

I personally like poking things with sticks and examining them to figure out what's going on. Hypothesize and test. But some people just like to use the Bunsen burners to torch the whole thing to the ground.

Either way, Data's gained.

[ToeJam]

Also, not "them" more like "it". If we start to get MORE of the buggers, then obviously my opinions will change as well if we notice an uptick in attacks or night kills.

Then nuke the little bastards from orbit. No offense, ZoMose.

[ToeJam]

Actually. A good Q.

ZoMosier:
1) What would YOU like that we do with you? Poke you with sticks? Put you out of your misery with Magic? Are you a good lil' Zombie or a fucking liar scum zombie who deserves to burn in hell?

2)Can You Vote?

[Normal Phase]

NK is what worries me, ToeJam; that plus the lure of potentially getting a different death reveal from him this time, which may shed light on things. I'm not eager to lynch him; under the circumstances it seems less than likely to be informative about anyone else in the game, but I am worried about him and would prefer him dead(er). Which hopefully a vig could even do if he is a zombie, but failure is still information.

[Normal Phase]

I have to get started on actually looking at people's posts; expect that to begin after kiddo is in bed.

[ToeJam]

Do you actually think there is a "vig" in the sense of the word? Because technically we can all be "Vigs" to some degree. If you're worried. You know what to do about it.