Bah, this is a silly conversation.
Skeezix voted to kill Septimus on day two. Shadowfacts did not.
Septimus voted in SF’s favor toward the end of day two. Skeezix did not.
vote: ShadowFacts
This isn’t lynch or lose where we need to worry about marginal possibilities. Follow the bouncing ball.
This is a silly conversation:
Let’s say Shadow is scum. Why did he announce a successful block after a no-kill Night and put Red in the frame?
Scenario 1: Red is Town.
Scum have narrowly avoided a lynch of both septimus and Shadow on D3. They have, somehow, failed to kill on N3. This is not good for them. So rather than being circumspect, Shadow brings further attention to himself by framing Red. Astonishingly, Red turns out indeed to be a Vig and to have targeted Shadow. Could Shadow have known this? I can buy having protection, just about. But that the protection would also involve revealing the identity of the attacker? That seems highly unlikely. Do Scum also have an investigator? If so, we’re looking at a scum team consisting of: Godfather (septimus), Role-stealer (Shadow), Blocker (probably), Doc, Investigator. Really? Even if we subtract the Blocker, that’s a lot. But that’s what you need to have Shadow know that Red is a Vig.
But let’s say that scum did know Red was the Vig, somehow. That means they know he’ll claim. And the precise claim (“Yes, I was blocked. Yes, I am a killer.”) that will have the best chance of neutralising Shadow’s accusation. Why is this a good plan? There’s no certainty of getting Red lynched under these conditions, and it draws further attention to Shadow.
Even if we assume that Shadow didn’t know Red was a Vig, and got lucky in his accusation of a random townie, what was the point? Framing someone works well right up until they die, and the frame becomes obvious. What was Shadow going to do at that point - “Heh, heh, oops.”? To have already avoided the lynch and then put yourself in a position where you’d be directly responsible for the death of a town power role is a crazy stupid risk. There’s no cred to be gained here for anyone. At best, Red dies, then Shadow dies, then septimus dies.
Certainly, the pile up of votes on septimus strongly suggests that they changed their minds. But if they wanted a big bandwagon on septimus, they just had to do nothing.
Scenario 2: Red is scum.
This scenario makes marginally more sense, in that Red’s death would actually gain Shadow some credibility. Except consider again the circumstances. Scum have two players exposed from D3. A no kill on N3. Red is flying more or less below the radar, except for a little suspicion from Normal, and more from Shadow. He’s not really in any danger of being lynched. Unlike, say, septimus. So Scum decide to throw Red to the wolves, when otherwise he’d have been good for at least a few more Days. Why?
If they wanted a distraction from Shadow, they had septimus ready to go. And even if they’d got Red lynched first (which they failed to do by a wide margin) septimus would still have been on the hook. So rather than a plan which costs 2 scum, you’ve got a plan that costs… 2 scum. I can see that, with powers, Shadow might be more valuable to Scum than Red. But again, why bring Red into it? If Shadow’s going to bluff a successful block, why not pin it on septimus? It’s just as easy to put his name in your claim as Red’s; he’s already under suspicion and this would nail it down. Easy credit for Shadow, and Red gets to stay out of the spotlight. Again, why does Red fight it? If the plan is to sacrifice himself for Shadow, why make the Vig claim? Once he sees that it’s working, why not deliberately screw up or throw himself on the sword? If the whole plan was for Red to swing to prove Shadow’s bona fides, why is Red still alive?
None of this makes sense . What does make sense is: Shadow blocked Red and there was no scum-kill. Ergo Red is scum. Once we kill Red, we can decide if we think this is a crazy gambit by a scum Shadow, or just a Town player who hit what he was aiming at.
Oh yeah - the conclusion to that:
vote Red Skeezix
OK first I think that any vote today other than on Red Skeezix or Shadowfacts is pointless. I agree with Pizza on this. Unless someone wants to step forward right now with contradictory information, it is 50-50 on them and there is no point in dragging it out any further. I want a scum Shadowfacts gone by endgame much more than I want a town vig alive (much as I like vigs), so dragging this out any further is not a good idea, I don’t think.
Evidence for 50-50.
I think we can dispense with the idea of a paranoid doc. Three nights in a row with no free nights for Lightfoot equals scum blocker, to me. I know if it was me I would have left the ____ night open. (Not giving away my thought process for future reference, but just saying, there would have been at least one open night.)
So assume one of the roleblockers is a standard scum type. The other, of course, is ShadowFacts. There’s no sign of any others.
Last night two roleblocks were reported, one on Lightfoot and one on Red Skeezix. Shadowfacts says he blocked neither one, but rather Pizza (and I have more to say about that later, but first things first). This cannot all be true. Either Red Skeezix is lying about being blocked (Red is scum), or ShadowFacts is lying about not blocking him (Shadow is scum). I don’t see any other solution.
Counter-argument to Stanislaus (not a rebuttal exactly, but I think he’s arguing from the wrong night as the most indicative one) in the next post.
Forget two nights ago, Stanislaus, think about last night. All the scum have to do to make a kill is avoid the obvious targets (Pizza, Lightfoot, arguably Red if he’s town) and go doctor-hunting. They had no kill the previous night, you’d think that having one last night would be a rather high priority. They cannot win if things continue like this, I don’t care how much WIFOM is being thrown at us or how many blind alleys we might go down in the meantime. They have to kill.
Furthermore, ShadowFacts says he did not block Red Skeezix. So that’s not the explanation for no scum kill. (If SF town and Red scum, scum Red (as well as any other scum) could have gotten a kill in. If SF scum and Red town, then he DID block Red Skeezix, etc.)
So why was there none?
The scum killer, whoever it was, didn’t get blocked.
The scum would have had strong motive not to risk a second no-kill, to go doctor-hunting instead of confirmed/dangerous townie-hunting. It is possible, if not optimal on their part, that they did play and lose a WIFOM game with the town doc.
Now assume Red as scum last night. If he is scum, he cannot produce that second kill that we want to see from him. It’s impossible. So he has to claim he was roleblocked a second time. So far so good – what we see today is consistent with Red as scum.
However.
Go back to the no-kill. No scum killer was blocked. If doctor-hunting, scum should have gotten a kill off. If not doctor hunting, they could only reasonably have been targeting Lightfoot, Pizza, or Red. And if Red is scum, then they can’t attack the last, and lack motive to attack the second. (Pizza being a big Red defender.) The only way they could have failed is to attack a protected Lightfoot.
Why on earth would the mafia do that?
Now let’s see the other case, Shadow as scum.
Again, the scum killer wasn’t blocked (though the vig was). Again I can’t envision much motive not to go doctor hunting and ensure a kill. No kill only works as strategy if you’re framing someone in the process, and you can’t do that to Red the same way this time, since no one would buy him being designated as the scum killer this time around. So you block him and claim to have blocked someone who can’t confirm you’ve done it. The scum should have gone doctor hunting and gotten a kill off. They didn’t.
They must have shot at Lightfoot, Pizza, or Red.
Shooting at Lightfoot is just as likely to fail in this scenario as in the last, hence just as unlikely. However, shooting at Red? Maybe. It would all but seal Shadow’s doom, but so would letting Red Skeezix live to the next night, given his stated suspicions and Shadow being out of extra roleblocks. What about shooting at Pizza? That makes a lot of sense, and is my best guess for what actually happened. The scum went shooting at ShadowFacts’ biggest and most confirmed detractor, and they lost.
The lack of deaths last night makes more sense in the context of scum-Shadowfacts motivations than scum-Red motivations.
Garbage. You do if you want to block Red (to keep him from putting a cap in your hind end and so you can wave that “NO KILLS IN FOUR NIGHTS” factoid around) and make it look like you didn’t. And you need to make very VERY sure you don’t accidentally “block” a power role who can come in the next day and contradict you.
You have not remotely justified this “50-50 chance”. A townie in your position does not block someone they don’t honestly suspect; they just don’t. They don’t get paranoid about hitting the doctor, if they have a true suspect in that pool – the odds of it being hurtful are next to nothing. And forget the unlikelihood of you honestly rating ATPG as “most likely to be scum” of everyone, potential doctors included – what about rating him as “most likely to be scum” of the two claimed vanillas? You block him and not me? NO WAY.
I have nailed so many scums on the basis of illogical claimed actions that all I can say to people like Hirka and Stanislaus who are accepting SF’s story right now is that, if town, you’d better hope you’re right. I’m baffled.
there might still be a paranoid doctor. doc protects Red and scum targets Red. Red fails to vig pedescribe and Red survives the NK.
if there is a paranoid doc, i do think claiming could clear up a lot of this.
furthermore, it’s clear that either Shadowfacts or Red is scum. i think that we should vote either of the two. but if one already has a very big lead, it might be productive to vote for who you also think might be scum.
I really have no idea what you are talking about. Not a clue. You’re going to have to re-state what you’re talking about if you want me to respond substantively.
You’re arguing that 4 nights without a vig kill is damning evidence against Red Skeezix, yet one of those nights, you blocked him yourself. (Personally I think it’s twice, but anyway.)
(And another of those nights was arguably consistent with Septimus’ role as revealed, though since they could conceivably have cooked that up between them I can’t consider it as very strong evidence either way. I do question why Red would have included the “he was protected” line if that was a scum ploy, though – whatever the hypothetical intent, it only caused trouble since both you and I have seized on it as an inconsistency, and it wasn’t necessary to sell the story.)
I’ve explained my actions and reasoning, and the fact that you don’t believe me makes all the difference to me as a fart in a windstorm. I could have chosen to block Satan, Hitler, or Donald Trump’s hair and you still would have found a way to paint it scummy, as you have been doing all game long.
PS. The thing you are missing in your “evaluation,” in case it was not obvious to everyone else, is that in choosing who to block, one must take into consideration not only who might be scum, but also who scum thinks I will choose. It’s not just a matter of picking scum, it’s picking the scum killer. It’s a fun WIFOMy game of chicken. The reason, therefore, that I chose not to block you (as I’ve stated more than once already) is that you would be too obvious a choice, since you’ve been riding my ass all game, and I’ve stated outright that I think you are scum. YES WAY! <- with exclamation point, so I win.
unvote Red Skeezix
Thinking about it a bit more, I think the lack of deaths can be easily explained. The Scum targeted the Doc, who self-protected.
Assume for the moment that Red Skeezix is Town and **ShadowFacts **is Scum
There are two ‘known’ Town Powers: **LightFoot **and Red. The Scum block both of them and shoot for the Doc. The Doc, sensing he has been outed overNight, self-protects and is saved, and there is no Scum kill.
Now let’s assume **Red **is Scum and **Shadow **is Town.
Here there is only one known Town Power, and only one Scum roleblocker. They block LightFoot and try to kill the Doc, who self-protects. The question here is: why did Shadow block Askthepizzaguy? Why didn’t he simply save his one remaining block?
It’s also possible that **Red **and Shadow are both Scum, and that **Shadow **blocked **Pizza **thinking he might be a Town Power of some sort.
So, ShadowFacts: Why exactly did you decide to use your one remaining block against Askthepizzaguy? Why didn’t you save it?
I didn’t save it because I thought it likely I would be dead soon, one way or another.
**Special Ed **was killed Night 2. **Ed’s **alignment was not revealed to the Town until Night 3, but if the Scum have a Janitor they would have known at the beginning of Day 3.
**ShadowFacts **claimed to have inherited **Ed’s **power on Day 3. If we assume that **Shadow **was Scum with a ‘Power Stealer’ role, that means that either
a) The Scum knew Ed’s role *before *he was killed, so that Shadow could use his power during Night 2, before Ed’s role was revealed to anyone, and indeed before Ed’s death was certain.
b) Shadow took a chance that Ed would not only die, but also have a power, and issues his action before Ed’s death was revealed to anyone.
c) Shadow’s power was such that he *automatically *received the abilities of the first Town power to die.
d) Shadow’s power was a Day action, with immediate effect.
e) Shadow does not have Ed’s powers at all. He is simply a Roleblocker, and the Scum have another player with the ability to send messages to other players.
The only one of these that really makes any sense to me is c). I dismissed it as ‘not bloody likely’ back on Day 3, but recent events have me less married to that idea than I was before.
Red Skeezix claimed to have attempted to kill **Septimus **on Night 2, but that **Septimus **was ‘protected’. Septimus was subsequently revealed to have been a Godfather. So, is this inconsistent with **Red’s **claim that he was protected? I originally thought so, but looking back at what Astral eventually told us about Septimus:
The phrase “adept at staying alive” could indicate some sort of self-protective ability, which would explain **Red’s **claim.
Red Skeezix, why didn’t you try to kill **ShadowFacts **last Night? You thought he was Scum, and you certainly couldn’t have expected the Doc to have protected him, so why didn’t you take a shot at him?
Normal,
I can’t “forget” about last night. (I know it’s a just an expression but…) Those things happened. If it didn’t makes sense for scum-Shadow to have framed Red at the end of Day Four, it still doesn’t make sense now. Cases based on what happened on Night Four have to take into account everything that happened beforehand as well.
Explanations for no-kill: a) Scum did go Doc hunting and hit a self-protecting Doc. b) Scum gain some additional power by surrendering a kill. (A bonus kill? An investigation? Resurrection???) c) Red is scum, scum did go after pedescribe and he’s bulletproof/Scotsman but of course wouldn’t tell us anything about it because that’s not how he rolls.
None of these qualify as very likely. But the most likely thing is that scum would kill, and they didn’t. So unlikely explanations are what’s needed. The question we need to ask is, “Is this more or less likely than scum-Shadow framing Red?”.
Well I think a frame on night three does make sense, but I’ll have to tackle that later. I don’t think you hit the essence of my arguments regarding night four, anyway.
@ SP – Red has argued over and over that he believes that Septimus was protected by a scum doctor. In that context, him targeting Shadowfacts would make no sense, as Red’s top suspect. You might argue that you’d have been a better choice than Pedescribe, but I think you know quite well what happened to Red last night, anyway.
I do have to say that if you two are scum, hats off to you. I don’t know that I could fight this hard, in your position.
Where has **Red **ever stated he thought **Septimus **was protected by a Scum Doctor? He mentions in Post 1295 that he thought Septimus was being protected “because of his claim”, and in Post 1494 that he might possess “some passive protection” or “was protected from a non passive source (possibly himself)”. I don’t see where anyone other than **Askthepizzaguy **is talking about the possibility of Scum Doctors.
Non-passive source implies scum doctor. He only said that he also thought Septimus might be it, but by last night that much clearly wasn’t true.
Whatever else Red is or isn’t, he consistent on this point.
You are consistent as well: at over-stating your evidence.
Note for next time: If you say “Red has argued over and over that he believes that Septimus was protected by a scum doctor,” one might expect you to back that assertion up with more than one post that “implies” scum doctor.
Whatever **Red **may or may not have said, and whatever his alignment might be, I’d still like to get an answer to my question from **Red **himself.