# Evil Dead Mafia II - Teaser and Sign-Ups \[Game On!\] **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [September 29, 2010, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493 "2010-09-29T17:35:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 79
**Author:** ![Idle\_Thoughts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/838e76/32.png) [@Idle\_Thoughts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Idle_Thoughts)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1561 "2010-10-14T21:30:25Z")
> [@GuiriEnEspana](#): > > > [@Idle\_Thoughts](#): > > > > I no longer think NAF is as scummy or suspicious as I did before **since he doesn’t have the book anymore**. > > @ **Idle** , you stated as a fact that **NAF** no longer had the book. I specifically bolded that section of you post when I quoted it as the only way you could have been sure of that fact, after all your suspicions of **NAF** previously, was that you either had taken the book or knew that **NAF** no longer had the book because one of your fellow scum had taken it. My initial question was about this statement and your apparent confidence. You accused me of fishing in this post when in fact I was poking you. I’ve already addressed this about five times. I’m not going to address it again. If you wish to know my explanation of it, just go back and read the times that I addressed it when OAOW brought it up and, later, when Special Ed brought it up again. I will add, however: 1. I still saw you as fishing in that post. 2. Even taking that away, I was already suspicious of you due to the Romantic flip flop yesterDay. Look, if you’re Town and I touch you, you have nothing to worry about. A lot of you seem to be making a big fuss over me being suspicious of you, right now. All that that’s going to result in is being touched. So far two of you still seem you’re trying to convince me why I shouldn’t touch you. ---
**Author:** ![USCDiver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/uscdiver/32/354_2.png) [@USCDiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/USCDiver)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1562 "2010-10-14T22:10:35Z")
> [@Total\_Lost](#): > > Is anyone keeping up with who has said this and who hasn’t? Here’s what I’ve got: [ul] [li]NAF1138 #1177[/li][li]Mahaloth #1225[/li][li]Nanook of the North Shore #1227[/li][li]Idle Thoughts #1232 and #1506[/li][li]Suburban Plankton #1233[/li][li]special ed #1234[/li][li]Drain Bead #1235[/li][li]Normal Phase #1239[/li][li]brewha #1250[/li][li]USCDiver #1260[/li][li]ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies #1261[/li][li]OneAndOnlyWanderers #1263[/li][li]Mrs. McGinty #1264[/li][li]Stanislaus #1274[/li][li]NatLaw #1276[/li][li]GuiriEnEspana #1277[/li][li]Total Lost #1278[/li][li]peekercpa #1373[/li][/ul] That means here are those who haven’t: [ul] [li]Oy![/li][li]Telecontar[/li][li]Omi no Kami[/li][li]TexCat[/li][li]Rysto[/li][li]Hal Briston[/li][li]lilflower[/li][li]Astral Rejection[/li][/ul] If I missed anyone or something let me know, I searched by keyword ‘book’ since NAF1138 made his claim at #1177 and there were a LOT of hits! ---
**Author:** ![Idle\_Thoughts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/838e76/32.png) [@Idle\_Thoughts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Idle_Thoughts)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1563 "2010-10-14T22:17:54Z")
My second “I don’t have the book” was a reply to Telconar’s post right before it, for the record, in which he said something along the lines of “Idle could have the book”. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1564 "2010-10-14T22:38:32Z")
I don’t have the book. I believe Idle’s claim. It makes a great deal of sense out of what was otherwise a bizarre reversal in opinion on Idle’s part. In light of Idle’s investigation, **Unvote peeker**. I said before that the case against peeker looks much stronger if NAF is scum. And the more that I think of it, the less the case against peeker just falls apart with the knowledge that NAF is town. NAF did not lose the book until Dawn. I can’t see how peeker could reasonably have known that NAF was **definitely** going to lose the book at Dawn. He might have known that a scum player was going to try to steal it, but powers can always been interfered with. And furthermore, it makes absolutely no sense for peeker to have made the mistake of thinking that NAF had lost the book before NAF could have lost the book. peeker’s actions since them have been rather inexplicable. But I’m having a really hard time seeing them on their own as having scum motivation. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1565 "2010-10-14T22:42:12Z")
Also, we should discuss how Idle can best use his claimed powers. Idle, I sense that you really want to go down in a blaze of glory, confirming a scum player along the way. I don’t think that it’s the best play. The primary role of a cop is to confirm townies, not find scum. This is especially true of your role, which can only out one scum but can find many townies. I’d really think that we’d be much better off if you used your role to confirm those who you believe to be Town. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1566 "2010-10-14T22:52:41Z")
Non-committal about the book: - Oy! \* Telecontar \* Omi no Kami \* TexCat \* Hal Briston \* lilflower \* Astral Rejection **Do any of you have the book?** ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1567 "2010-10-14T22:53:14Z")
> [@Rysto](#): > > I don’t have the book. > I believe Idle’s claim. It makes a great deal of sense out of what was otherwise a bizarre reversal in opinion on Idle’s part. > > In light of Idle’s investigation, **Unvote peeker**. . So none of the rest of what anyone has been talking about wrt peeker was ever part of your vote? You only ever voted for him based on the slip? Just looking to be clear. The seemingly obviousness of his non vanilla status the bizzare reaction to the heat he got for his slip the refusal to fully claim when it is clear he is the lynch leader the back and forth with Mrs McGinty The (admitadly metagamy) display of his best known scum tell All of that together isn’t persuasive? I can understand if you say no, but I want to be sure you are clear about the case against peek. I hope no one is voting for him based solely on the slip. Not this late in the Day. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1568 "2010-10-14T22:59:25Z")
> [@NAF1138](#): > > You only ever voted for him based on the slip? I voted for him based on the slip and what looked like lying to cover the slip. Given that the slip just couldn’t have happened the “it was idle no it was NAF” thing is a null tell IMO. > [@](#): > > The seemingly obviousness of his non vanilla status Not obvious to me. > [@](#): > > the bizzare reaction to the heat he got for his slip If you’re talking about the “it was idle no it was NAF” thing, I’ve covered that. > [@](#): > > the refusal to fully claim when it is clear he is the lynch leader Very weird, but this is peeker we are talking about. Anybody else and I’d say that it’s scummy, but… > [@](#): > > the back and forth with Mrs McGinty > [@](#): > > The (admitadly metagamy) display of his best known scum tell The back-and-forth with McGinty struck me as classic peeker, so I’m not convinced on this point. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1569 "2010-10-14T23:00:23Z")
Like I said, fair enough. I just wanted to be sure. ---
**Author:** ![Astral\_Rejection](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/258eb7/32.png) [@Astral\_Rejection](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Astral_Rejection)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1570 "2010-10-14T23:15:49Z")
I don’t have the book. Honestly, I don’t expect anyone else in that list to claim to have the book, either. There’s been plenty of opportunities, so I’m fairly certain whoever has it is keeping silent for their own reasons, which might not necessarily coincide with town’s goals. Given that (IIRC; I couldn’t find the post in question) Story has said interested parties are watching for the book at night, I wonder if there’s a win condition based on holding the book for a certain amount of time? Today’s events have shaken my belief that Peeker is scum. His waffly (not to mention stubborn) behavior is disconcerting and scummy-looking, but his posting style frustrates me in general and I’ll admit I’ve skimmed his posts more than I maybe should have. I think I was burnt out trying to follow him in LOTR (and that’s saying something, since I was scum), and I believe it’s affected my ability (and willingness) to follow him in this game. I’m not unvoting him. I still currently think he’s more scummy than not. But when I get some free time I want to do a reread of Peeker and Idle’s reveal. What time does the day end tomorrow? ---
**Author:** ![Astral\_Rejection](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/258eb7/32.png) [@Astral\_Rejection](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Astral_Rejection)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1571 "2010-10-14T23:18:46Z")
NETA: > [@](#): > > Given that (IIRC; I couldn’t find the post in question) Story has said interested parties are watching for the book at night, I wonder if there’s a win condition based on holding the book for a certain amount of time? I accidentally edited out one of my other thoughts on this. Add “or perhaps using certain powers?” to the end of the sentence. I want my entire hypothetical out there for consumption. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2010, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1572 "2010-10-14T23:38:14Z")
> [@NAF1138](#): > > > [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#): > > > > Peeker, your stubbornness is misplaced if you’re town, and I just can’t understand why you needed so many people to point out that a Vanilla PM had already been posted in the game before you would even acknowledge it. . > > Three now, if you count story’s sample PM. It seems like there have been more people alluding to it than that, but I don’t have post numbers to back that up. Maybe I’ve been miscounting during re-reads, but I don’t think it is worth the effort to go back and confirm them myself so I’ll take your word for it. Once should be enough, but since he’s still thinking that claiming will give the scum too much even though they already have access to one it seems that he doesn’t find that line of thought compelling. ---
**Author:** ![TexCat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/texcat/32/9041_2.png) [@TexCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TexCat)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1573 "2010-10-15T00:05:16Z")
I don’t have the book. **Unvote NAF** I’m inclined to believe Idle. I’m not seeing a vote on peeker. I think his slip only makes sense if NAF is scum. peeker did say he thought NAF _said_ he no longer had the book, not just that NAF no longer had it. I need to take a closer look at Idle’s suspect list. ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1574 "2010-10-15T00:20:48Z")
> [@Rysto](#): > > Also, we should discuss how Idle can best use his claimed powers. Idle, I sense that you really want to go down in a blaze of glory, confirming a scum player along the way. I don’t think that it’s the best play. The primary role of a cop is to confirm townies, not find scum. This is especially true of your role, which can only out one scum but can find many townies. I’d really think that we’d be much better off if you used your role to confirm those who you believe to be Town. Really? Idle’s days would seem to be numbered, so this isn’t a matter of optimal cop strategy anymore. I think maybe there should be some discussion of whether or not he should name his intended target a minute or so before Dawn\*, but I don’t think there’s any logical reason to say that he should not go after his best suspects. - I’m leaning towards not, since a dead Idle and no marking showing up is not definitive of towniness if there’s a roleblocker or other preventive role around. But I’m not sure. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1575 "2010-10-15T00:24:25Z")
Some thoughts upon re-reading the Day’s events from my actual laptop and not an iPhone underneath a tablecloth surreptitiously during the boring portions of a two-day CLE. 1. I’m still voting **peeker**. I will continue to do this until I get a valid explanation for why he fears giving a blueprint to the Scum that they’ve already had since yesterDay. As **NAF** mentioned, it’s not necessary that **NAF** be Scum to make the mistake he did (although it sure is the easiest explanation), and I’m not necessarily willing to give him a pass for peeker-being-peeker reasons. Not to mention that even if **Idle** is telling the truth (which looks like the most obvious explanation), it doesn’t necessarily mean that **NAF** isn’t Scum… **Idle** ’s own PM says that not all our enemies are Deadites. 2. Idle has mentioned being suspicious of me twice toDay, but has failed to provide reasons both times. I feel as if I’m being smudged somehow. It’s okay if you’re suspicious of me, but I’d prefer hearing something that I can actually attempt to refute, not just my name on a list. And feel free to investigate me. I have nothing to fear there, as I’m not a Deadite and I don’t have the book. 3. If both **NAF** and **Idle** are telling the truth, there’s another investigator out there. The reason being, of course, the fact that the book will make people appear to be Scum, but that doesn’t trip up **Idle** at all. So it appears, based on **Idle** ’s role PM and what we might know about the book, that each investigator has at least one thing that will result in a mistaken result– **Idle** our non-Deadite enemies, and the other investigator the owner of the book. So if a Townie has the book now (I gather this is not the case, but it’s worth a shot), it might be best to claim. That way our other investigator, whoever they are, can look elsewhere…but **Idle** , who is not tripped up by the Book, can investigate you. 4. This is just an aside, and means nothing in the grand scheme of things, but there’s a whole lot of OMGUS going on in this game, seemingly more than usual. We need to calm down and remember that just because someone makes a case against you, it doesn’t make them Scum. Point out the scummy things people do, sure, but part of this game is mistaken cases. You can point out why someone is mistaken (especially as it gets later in the game, and cases are based less on hunch) without voting them in response. I’m not sure why this is bothering me so much in this game, but it is. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1576 "2010-10-15T00:26:34Z")
Oh, and that reminds me of the one (admittedly minor) question I have about **Idle** ’s claim. You claimed that you were doing the same thing I was–trying to get the book by PMing a request to steal it from everyone in the game. Seeing as you trust **NAF** , and therefore trust what he has to say about the book, why would you try to take it given that in order to use it, you would have to give up your rather important power? ---
**Author:** ![Idle\_Thoughts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/838e76/32.png) [@Idle\_Thoughts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Idle_Thoughts)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1577 "2010-10-15T00:49:37Z")
My suspicions of you (DB) still stem from your posts and actions on Day 0 and 1. To be fair, you’re the least suspicious of all I’ve named, in my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1578 "2010-10-15T00:56:58Z")
So Night Zero I begged the Scum not to recruit me. Is that pretty much it? Because I don’t remember anything on Day One other than you immediately voting me for that, and me taking umbrage with your timing of bringing it up Night Zero, when we had the potential to end up on the same team either way unless you already knew we weren’t and wouldn’t be. Not to mention that I pointed out several times that I’ve been begging inside and outside of this thread for a Town role because I was sick as hell of being Scum. But you know, you have a perfectly fine tool at your disposal to ease those suspicions, so I’m not sure why I’m arguing with you. And although I mostly believe your claim, I’d still like to hear your response about my issue regarding the Book, because that’s the one thing causing me to use the word “mostly” in regard to believing your claim. ---
**Author:** ![Idle\_Thoughts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/838e76/32.png) [@Idle\_Thoughts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Idle_Thoughts)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1579 "2010-10-15T01:30:20Z")
My response is…I’m guessing nobody is going to admit to having the book if nobody has by now. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/1580 "2010-10-15T01:45:02Z")
Dude, are you **peeker**? Let me rephrase the question. Why did you try to do what I did and send multiple PMs to **story** to try to steal the book? If you trust **NAF** , which you clearly do or you wouldn’t have outed yourself in such a spectacular fashion, then you also trust what he says about the book. And one of the things he said is that you can’t use your powers while you have the book. You’re an investigator–you should want to stay as far away from the damn thing as possible so you can use your very useful power–but instead you actually tried to nab the book until you heard that I was doing the same thing. It’s the only thing about your claim that doesn’t quite fit with all the rest, so I’m curious what you were thinking and what your reasoning was. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493.md?page=78) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493.md?page=80)